The URL can be used to link to this page

16008 75TH PL W (4).PDF1111111111116064 16008 75TH PL W ADDRESS: TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: 069-57 3/0s-e-1 ad 300 BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE): ! O COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR: &0%lj / 6 4" 4f CRITICAL AREAS: Wo - DETERMINATION: ❑ Conditional Waiver ❑ Study Required XWaiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S: DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: PARKING AGREEMENTS DA' EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR: ahll/T&Ln'(f PERMITS (OTHER): PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED: `! 14 /O SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED: .3 SEWER LID FEE $: LID #: 12 0 SHORT PLAT FILE: LOT: BLOCK: SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #: lOy� GEOTECH REPORT DATED: L of L96 STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #: FOR: �T�II/✓�L/ (/(/� WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: 7/,U ,ff600 -ZV LATEMP\DST's\Forms\Street File Checklist.doc ✓)24 /�� ; cJf�1`i,' ..: S//Ic�•�?-'4/s'ii /a9C 1' j 0 CITY OF EDMONDS q_ ZONE pvr b PERMIT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATIONNUMBER OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS JOB 14�0 ADDRESS G7 �5 jlr.j �,j R �� SSE/APTp V . �� 1 '+• +)' T`c.; e C.. I/ ),!` /4 1-" j i � ` LEGAL,DESCRIPTION CHECK SUBDIVISION NO. LID NO, Z MAILING ADDRESS �. Z. Vic) . (i • •k" ;�/ '«' CITY ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET �M/AP. f V e_ TESCP Approved r ^ RW Permit Required%L��5 ®" 7 EXISTING REQUIRED DEDICATION Street Use Permit Req'dA/V NAME 4•f r r.1 �'\C.- PROPOSED Inspection Required X'5 8'' Sidewalk Required4r? ❑ r w 1 l •-� 3. t^ �i ..-, y f` ,_ G cyr }1 �_ l" :;: 1 ADDRESS METER $�E�r LINEtSIZE NO. OF FIX URES PRV REQUIRED ¢ Fw- 3 •77/ YES NO ❑ _ U .: �•� tTti '� _"� REMARKS Z < CITY ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER %%��F C % O:L/ F i m w G �j?i(�vuN 1^1S � ��2 �)�Z.., F .'f'p w z . .• NAM f3 rL;.14 i/✓. �� L-? Z w . Z,,.. AD?7 1 S�%E me's TIC✓ p pG i s ¢ U / ENGINEEf11NG MEMO DATED VV I C LLLJJ�� R D BY L C / f 1 ( \ c rr� TELEPHONE NUMBER FIRE MEMO DATED Q .. i REVIEWED BY U. A E I�ENS BEfri EX RAT ON T % �lJ w ¢ tL ADB N SHORELINE afi Legal Description of Property - include all easements 1r p r �r C? I -� `� ;� , ;t :J n 41 nt SEPA REVIEW COMPLETE EXEMPT SIGN AREA ALLOWED PROPOSED H I FIT ALLOWED PROPOSED U A.11(? . ` -• .'. j — � t•' EXPZ/Z" I 30 r W o LOT COVERAGE ALLOWED PROPOSED REQUIRED SETBACKS (Fr.) FRONT SIDE REAR PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT.) FRONT UR SIDE REAR J W a•%G 19(7, 2-5' ? a' Z 5 ' z�r Z 5 ' ' 4Z Z z J Property a /' I / •, -.. � Tax Account) .. y { jl /^, Parcel No. ��P ,,.f U LOT AREA d NING REVIEW BY ,�U DATE a. ../ � � ® NEW ® RESIDENTIAL ® PLUMBING/MECH REMARKS %- 6, 7 ata kp- !c ,• I, yryl,y. i� ADDITION COMMERCIAL COMPLIANCE OR . �'a^.t fh4kI,4 CHANGE OF USE G�'/+1 Le Lt,v'-; 4" k'"j f'%q REMODEL APT. BLDG. ❑ SQL I�d^CI l„(jan %,T+F� ,;,y„/{i�,,� '�,T ❑® G I F �G_ REPAIR CYDS. ]' ' C}i�CK aY 'Lf1� j�G�- TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION COQf�, (,j� ,I OCCUP!A GROW -41 DEMOLISH WOODSTOVE INSERT SWIM POOL HOT TUB/SPAENING SPECIAL INSPECTOR REQUIRED � -.�' pCCUPANT LOAD ZGARAGE RETAINING WALL/ CARPORT... El YES 1 ROCk -ERY RENEWAL REMARKS Z 0 (TYPE OF USE, BUSINESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN, PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 108 0 rVllf =S` J � p �/Sy/rear Avr ` oe) W Si '5 m w O m0 NUMBER OF NUMBER OF DWELLING CRITIC I 1 t t- r r STORIES UNITS NUMBER DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN) . ,y , H - .C�T�Gr►I; �� f',r(i/��, Qa f�F�', y,s� NEV,1 FINAL INSPECTION REQUIRED- 10 J. to /24 k a® VALUATION FEE '4�,/I � j . 3�+_'-y i !1 1/f PLAN CHECK FEE 1 C HEAT SOURCE: Ca �� GLAZING l � i f 0`, BUILDING. 115125 2� 7 , PLUMBING 2 ? 3 f �,qa• Plan Check No. (6 - MECHANICAL ` Ian/ �i' This Permit covers work to be done on priyate property ONLY. GRADING/FILL Any construction on the public domain (Curbs, sidewalks, f driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission. STATE SURCHARGE ' Permit Application: 180 Days Permit Limit: 1 Year - Provided Work is Started Within 180 Days _ STORM DRAINAGE FEE "Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns and ENG. INSPECTION FEE 3c> ,n W successors in interest, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, Its officials, ,po �"} r Qemployees, and agents from any and all claims for damages Hof = whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the issuance of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT r "� omodify, waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance x nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordine,nce provision." TOTAL AMOUNT DUE r ,� 1 *^��°to .5- " I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application; that the - information given is correct; and that I am the owner, or the duly ATTENTION APPLICATION APPROVAL authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with Oty and state laws regulating construction; and in doing the work a.uthoriz- THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES This application is not a permit until ed thereby, no person will be employed in violation of thie Labor ONLY THE signed by the Building Official or his/her Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's COlmpensa- WORK NOTED Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is tion Insura, Q RCW 18.27. INSPECTION acknowledged in space provided. ' SIGNATURE AGENT) DATE SIGNED DEPARTMENT nOFt CITY OF ZOFIAS TURE DATE rEDMONDS ® ATTENTION CALL FOR RELEP,$Et) IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE INSPECTION UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR .A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEfcN GRANTED. UBC 771 ORIGINAL — File YELLOW — Inspector ®��O SECTION 109 Owner GOLD PINK - -- Assessor DATE RECEIVED ✓'�_, � 101I PERMIT EXPIREUSE CITY OF EDMONDS PERMIT ZONE P5 - 1 L NUMBER2/GU j f CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION AQB ��d S�ITE/APTH U I T E/ ADDRESS A OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS PLAT NAME/SUBDIVISION NO. LOT NO. I LID NO. A -'\ S oN ; A Wm MAILING ADDRESS LID FEE $ PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP TESCP Approved 0 .RW Permit Required 0 O Gr1 V tj ('� Q ^ \ �. `� C®� Y1 _. Sv'" J Street Uee Permlt Req'd . 0 CITY ZIP TELEPHONE EXISTING PROPOSED Inspection Required 0 Js �0��% L42S %7 �". cY p REQUIRED DEDICATION FT Sidewalk Required 0 ! Wirring required NAME METER SIZE LINE SIZE NO. OF FIXTURES PRV REQUIRED It YES ❑ NO ❑ C7 Z w Uj ADDRESS REMARKS z V Z L lC SA N. E" OWNER/CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROUDRAINAGE ho Gx�(�UA�C1Y� oh h c�q o✓S �-2 W goy 4%\MA 00 S CITY ZIP TEhEPHONE "b of, Ib tn c TVA i ("A fy'\ A yo SN 4 8Co'l/ v o- €el 8 x iNAME K ! ! h C. ✓ ' lG�- �✓ ( �" 1 ✓' r ENGINEERING REVIEWED/DA j V 7 ADDRE „ ie / t O �y3 c /f 0 FIRE PEYIEWED BY DATE W CITY �f { y� �/ZZII}P //4,t.tX ( G TELEPHONE �31-7-1gs WV1J zo U wµ r / cc Ol! VA IANCE OR J RELINE . D .,y IN PEC 6 REQ'D BOND POSTED f •. . STAT LICENSM,NUMBER ""'" �' EXPIRATION DATE i ( `� f r ll VI ,: r`. IGa AREA HE G T ` j PjQp R Y T ACCOUNT EL NO. COMPL T EMPT ALLOW D"` PROPOSE A L WED P O4 SED I 0 Ji�3 1 0 EXP V ❑ NEW; RESIDENTIAL ❑ PLUMBING / MECH LOT COVERAGE ALLOWED PROPOSED REQUIRED SETBACKS (FT.) FRONT SIDE REAR PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT.) FRONT UR SIDE REAR AUDITION COMMERCIAL COMPLIANCE OR ❑ ❑ ❑ NG Z c) l O ' Z; 0 © r > I , ,�2 CHANGE OF USE ❑ REMODEL ❑ APARTMENT ❑ SIGN Z REO'D PARKING PROVIDED AREA PLANNING REVIEWED BY GATE N(_ L__- V 2lUr GRADING FENCE ❑ REPAIR ❑ CYDS ❑ ( X FT) RFJAARKS ❑ DEMOLISH ❑ TANK ❑ OTHER d I OV-1 z ❑GARAGE RETAINING WALL CARPORT ❑ RENEWAL ,.,. '�+d t®.11(� "�^!.�' j h^r� So, I r a(TYPE OF USE, BUSINESS A�EXPLAIN: CHECKED BY jTYp, OF CONSTR CTI 1 C OCCUPAN GROUP Mr y AllY � / /��//t/J� w m NUMBER OF N� NUMBER OF DWELLING CRITICA /�� 1g AREAS / Cog SPECIAL INSPECTOR OCCUPANT to STORIES • II UNITS NUMBE l,/�,/ VVV JAREA REQUIRED YES LOAD DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE' REMARKS PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 108/FINAL INSPECTION REQ'D J % 4 L m 1 �IL•TJ/q�" � �� n/�1 ✓ ' + E. We, 9S� "• ` VALUATION FEE PLAN CHECK FEE HEAT SOURCE GLAZING % LOT SLOPE % BUILDING 7(/ PLAN CHECK NO- O j VESTED DATE PLUMBING // — - . � MECHANICAL THIS PERMIT AUTH IZE9.ONLY THE WD. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO BE DONE ON PR VATE PROPERTY ONLt AbW CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC GRADING/FILL DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVE S, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE H_ SEPARATE PERMISSION. 2 STATE SURCHARGE .�• / �` m PERMIT APPLICATION: 180 DAYS w n PERMIT LIMIT: 1 YEAR - PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN 180 DAYS ENG. REVIEW FEES SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION N "APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE, HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESORS ENG. INSPECTION FEE W IN INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF LANDSCAPING 2 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND INSPECTION FEE cc Q ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY RECEIPT = FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT DEEMED TO MODIFY, WAIVE ORREDUUfEANY REQUIREMENT OFANY CITY ORDINANCE = NORL1MITINANYWAYTHECITY'S?ILITYTOENFORCEANYORDINANCEPROVISION." RECE T "'' TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 53 I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION; THAT THE INFORMATION APPLICATION GIVEN IS CORRECT; AND THAT I AM THE OWNER, OR THE DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT OF APPROVAL THE OWNER. I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC- CALL This application is not a permit until signed by the TION; AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED Building Official or his/her Deputy: and Fees are paid, and IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO FOR INSPECTION receipt is acknowledged in spaceprovided. WORKMEN'S COMP SATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18.27. SIGNATURE NE R GENT) DATE SIGNED (425 D ATURE 7 TE 771-0220 RE Y DATE ATTENTION EXT 1333 .1-7IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL 771-0221 A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTIFI- ORIGINAL FILE X - - YELLOW - INSPECTOR CATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC SECTION 109 FAX PINK - OWNER - GOLD -ASSESSOR 5/98 04/01 4 05 34 5U3. LASHEK HULLAML IBIUU7 TYPE I CATCH 8 a' PEFfURar(0—� �Yrj11►�� Pw + Sf100 PME Al YOf. Of rrG O(AIREB 8 / 05 /�Z I6- ��'"� coHHttr lu rouHnntpOH i••1 \ RiAN(F wr000NINQE C.B. ' 8 • Z `�� L-u.0' txft i CATCH 6=. 60-. r---- -----( SEE DEIAAL TON irNOC ME �" =s62 620 — 51-1 dL[/°�. r NE Ir )6. OEIEH — �• SC ^Irr'1—r i SO �----' uru I 1 1 . tom. `+Wy ` Hlo a- S0. poll I All' .' cEPr9NA1E0 —.` I >:'Cn. p'L'C PM'( Flom NOQIEIiv COrwcl IN(HCH (rrt+CaU (r pP ) ` G �o /AIX 6e Xi M'E I CATCH NA$ro Pu . 66.A3 p.0 .6,SO ```'- 77 E cW lie, sl� h PL4ce Ro SuPew" A &W& ONINNVld AS (33AORddV ` to 'Art'"% APPROVED BY .PLANNING VED I�ECEI all- JUL 19 2001 PERMIT COUNTER WT?OL)IW,l � ll)'A M COY elWimeAlo"" l.GivG�pS.� /4 eeo(A4 + r )Ai )AS tom` 4 /s X Mee fly evemoem CITY COPY P.re C a �'tj t'71'ror� 8 Ole -._... - �. e y oE��'IGDVDS I L7�T I o�eco�d«! Gh�r �/L�✓!e s GSA .,� -----e,:GG:. GI�P'L 1 ¢ �JkiG►�e Pic W46HIAJ C;rcw • y. , owl G� I r i �i �� l I c "tea Q pry. � �_.. =►-. . _ . _;_ _ j r I ``...... �_ ETIGHTLINE MATERIAL ACCEPTABI � M-A•v� REvrrw�b ors nrzawrnrU -- _ __`- -�;..::.: ::r;::�,. N-12 ADS AWL) WAVF, PFT8ANI,'JFD Mt, )*1,L04J1nlA Z, a ' � ; ;';; ;;, SCh 40 PVC , i rrm6 Mu6-r �e AvnRF.65g0 Tb Go1,lkw to 7N� C4" WVilf"01-LV DE71fjN z. "If.1'IpS' 1 F^ SDR 35 (ASTM D3034 -SHOW AREA- OP N00 rNPMVrouS CALCAlATIaJ N oTe THAT 5 r rr, lhas uo L-o4aW TP-A1W plow rk/ ' grow Ncw v6rw-nov 5;y5TEM, S/Ze: . 5HBw j�x11,vtJ& 6"gm rp4tN5 PRor-N.e, or NFto ytorm ppz4rnf5 . `sUdW PctjtJP -TroN W-41NA•4rE '5014MM EXPIRES DRAINAGE PLAN APP� EO AS � u AUICDIAN DEC 12 1997 MEADO ALE 100 150 PA FARE HYI ej?Z MP dFimH "U ki3O 'fir a A ,� I s � 5 /M// �� o I /�� ° U. b1 I 1 Y � /� � , / l) � j • ' - ° cis. � &''° ' P dliX 01 ass �j r �q � z\,0 w ¢_ / l1/ 73 AREA: 0.97 A ' 42,42 w ZONE: RS 12 m 11W BASIS OF BEARI 0 0 _ Q. i? ROS-V.18/PP 10" :Z.n �0 1 J I I �► Ii �I,, ONTOURS: PER AE a W �25. SURVEY 3/16/85 i I I b, UTILITIES: PER AERI, SURVEY & CITY OF � J 1'1 EDMONDS UTILITY A: `ba�vew�.4e Q PA � �sE \ 3 /� \ � 1 DRAWINGS O \ BL \ OTE: CORNERS TO BE N8T35'43, Q� ' AFTER SHORT PLAT 4> II 1a8.1 �j \ ! 1 �t, APPROVAL lsu,' I I q� �SBIO \11 1 1 '� t� ss s�c� Rogo\ I / �� \2F' �,e % / I BSBL=BUILDING SET BACK L 1 I 13,204 F / I P Q \ /BSBL %� �4N Zucc --- 5 y / NI T35'4 "W 3 Q l / 0 vJ J / I \ / tl %/ / 769 �o SS 3 I / �• CITY OF EDMONDS • b i p� 9 3O� 'ant SHORT PLAT S-23-90 $' ROGER & ARDETH McCORK Q / yO' a� G.L.4, Sec. 5, T. 27N., R. 4 E.,W.M GROUP .F'OUR,Inc. 46030 Juanita- Woodinville -Way NE 101 Bothell, Washington'98011 (206)775-4581 • (206)362-4244 . • FAX(206)362 SURVEYING ENGINEERING PLANNING MANAC DRAWN BY RC 3/1B/91 • CIBSCKED BY JZ 3/19/91 APPROVED 01 PP SAMTARY SEWER —0 �,,_, MOON FlRE YMAS' SOUTH & T EAST OF CB �a�r°"yt-d`+!'A+orsv..nr""^-,v�5'uv't'" "`'�" �"t:.l �.,A.t1�. iiftnr+.-rv'Jhv+yv.ry'�iit'".'.�jt*,��16M'�rv.�,,.�,r•.-..r••✓:.�.«ryawn.r„-, ,....tr,.-.aA-•.,-,�.�i•v.c.;r •)'�-..tK».:�n-w.i+('�wf`�.•w^ � it-�ri S"'uif'?•+-^�'�f�91.-- �FX Pi 'ES 90 - CITY OF EDMONDS SIDE SEWER PERMIT ,89p ° PERMIT�o®�% Address of Construction I � V Property Legal Description (Include all easements): Owner and/or Contractor: State License No P Single Famil ❑ Multi -Family I(No. of Units ) ❑ Commercial ❑ Public n c-.X-5, P iL, CI fn r LYNNWOOD LINE Invasion into City Right -of -Way: ❑ No L`7 Yes RW Construction Permit o. Cross other Private Property: No ❑ Yes Attach legal description and copy of recorded easement l o —`z —7 — / 1 I certify that I have read'and shall comply with all city requirements Date as indicated on the back of the Permit Card. * CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-424-5555) BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION OFFICE USE ONLY * FOR'INSPECTION CALL 771- 2, PUBLIC WORKS D PT. Permit Fee: O _ Issued 13,11-aw "(0 fl f kk— V Trunk Charge: Date Issued: � Assessment Fee: Receipt No.: 142 2 S:7 Lid No.: Partial I nspection: Date Initial Comments Reason Rejected: Date —Initial — Final Inspection Approved: DateInitial ** PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE ** White Copy: File Green Copy: Inspector. Buff Copy: Applicant Revised 3!90 t tz) r) CD bn Li I o AU-1 MIT to A113w 6 1ps 'UI 044 LO -i"Auiv SO Lo t10 > 0 0 Z > o n A CL 0 7 JAN C 6 199a ti _ - i PLOT PLANL20-, --_` oo, .•� — — � _ � of �- �� Shor- /v/a} cv/- oil 94 APPWdED BY, PLANNING .. .. 11 �I • ,^ IlNSPECTION CHECKLIST During the Mobilization and Erosion Control inspection, a site meeting with the Developer / Builder will include a review of the following. At this time, any concerns regarding site development and construction may be addressed by either or both parties. Upon completion of the site meeting, the Developer / Builder will be asked to sign the Inspection Checklist confirming that the review has been understood. /1. General Inspection of Permitted Work Conduct inspections of: (See Site Inspection Record & Engineering Inspection Handout). Posting of Notices, Site Inspection Record & Engineering requirements (location for postings on site). ,'--2. Construction hours Construction may be performed only during the following hours: Weekdays — 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM. Weekends: 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM. Construction work shall not be performed within the right-of-way during the hours of darkness without written permission by the City Engineer. 3. Permits Cc>rr1-c<4-f n4�e--AT 4%. o64�.-1 1Z/w +. A separate Right -of -Way Construction Permit is required for all work performed on public property. / 4. Staging of materials, job shack and equipment A street use permit is required for the staging of materials, job shack and equipment within the right-of-way. w/5. Erosion control Builder/Owner is responsible for containing all temporary runoff and erosion control on site. The roadway is to be kept clean and clear of all debris and materials. Require erosion control per the approved plan and per general requirements. Ensure that the erosion control practices are maintained as needed during the course of the construction activities and until vegetation is established. Properly install and maintain erosion control fences per theapproved plan and where directed by the City Engineer. Properly install and maintain stabilization methods of exposed areas. No work shall be performed within 15 feet of any stream without approval of the City Engineer. -"'-6. Rock entrance Require installation and maintenance of the rock construction entrance per the approved plan and standard detail. e"7'. Pedestrian safety Require pedestrian safety measures per approved plan, per construction practice or as directed by the City Engineer. �. Traffic control Require traffic control per approved plan and per general requirements. ,`�9. Truck route Require trucking operations be conducted per the approved truck route plan. /10. Job Site The Contractor shall at all times keep the right-of-way clean of trash, debris, dirt, mud and any other materials which constitute an unsightly and disorderly mess. /--I L Site Hazards/ Public notification Check for sight distance hazards when adjacent to City street. Signage & striping, as well as Fire/Aid address sign and traffic control, installed per approved plan. 12. Drainage Engineering inspections are required on storm drainage systems, tightlines and catch basin installations. Inspections are required prior to backfilling. Require that all footing drains not be connected to the detention system. Materials: Detention Pipe (See Drainage Handout for materials allowed.) Tightline (See Drainage Handout for materials allowed.) e4-- 13. Concrete structures Require that all concrete structures be built per approved plans and per the City of Edmonds Standard Details. Inspections are required prior to pouring of concrete: • Curbs (require full length replacement) • Gutters • Approaches • Sidewalks (require full width replacement) • Curb ramps • Require a clear sealer • Require a construction joint at the property line when applicable .c— 14. Grading yDxWev,raX slope shall not exceed 14% without a waiver. Every attempt should be made to keep the slope below 14%. Ng/driveway grades are to exceed 20%. Require driveway slope, width and cross section per approved plan. Require all stockpiled graded materials to be covered. `L 15. Paving On all non curb and guttered streets, require acp paving appro 20' froDcd a of pavement or to the right-of-way line, whichever is greater. Driveway entrance to be installed per approved plan and not to exceed legal width per City code. Driveway turn -around to be installed per approved plan. Require cast iron cover over sanitary sewer cleanout when in hard surface. td 16. Final Inspection Repair or replace all defective existing curb, gutter and sidewalk adjacent to the property. Restoration of right-of-way shall be performed by the contractor. Storm drainage system to be cleaned of any and all debris. A TV recording of the sanitary sewer system may be required prior to acceptance. The TV inspection Is to be performed prior to paving. All Engineering requirements must be met. Permit No. �� 2'" Site AddressPc- �5,��1 Developer/Builder Signature Date G.\ENGR\ROYIEQSPEC\information\INSPECHY-DOC 2 s+Ot l- U.0'f �o�2a1�i7 �l�CS /9J' Su-tNeYed Cow . C 1 1 1 "I REIN ROOIf•11Y 1 G �o .lox x A/X. II, 1 � X TYPE 1 CAIC11 8 �" PERiORATlO —••� Pw + 56.0f1 PM`E AI Wf. a !IC tE. +SS 00 (ITP.) CONNECT ILL WtAT10N i p1AW6 w10 C.D. _ _ TYPE 2 CAICI+ BASw, 67"� r---� _I 16 SEE OEIA% FOR CONIROE STRXCtyRE 1 Rim • 67.20 •� "� .. tN, NE STR 3. oEtENrol NN1 ----- RECEIVED �• CONhTO E.1 ION(. r*m . .'. so.14" n". '°` J U L 19 2001 (f rhC+U DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR. CITY OF EDMONDS M' E( . l•603' 6' SD (PSG) , C l CATCA 84-N !E r63 SO AS NOTE PLACe -141 v � not Ise r�sv fi`N► 3-q about w►D`' c fw► eA a,tw.,t APPROVE© BY PLANNING L RECEIVE®., J U L 19 2001 PERMIT COUNTER RX O WASH,,, 6956' ` �oc� Fcsr�E° �,� IONAL � EXPIRESLI.--? — 4 y EOM HOWE ENGINEERING 4. HOWE ENGINEERING CONSULTING ENGINEERS :r f 2807 E. LK. SAMMAMISH N.E. SAMMAMISH, WA 98074 i PHONE NO. : 425 881 1830 May. 08 2001 08:57AM P2 SUAIECT 90tZ-rtl hY Z-;b( SHE F.T,bO OF 5 a ),%fn 3-='Sr PERMN �pUNTER r v IS 30436 _ 8~Zl�a bY-- C�znu� TYPE I CATCH B ' r PCRrORATrn —• Rut - s0.00 rxt Al BDr. Di rrC .r. -5700 (tTv.) raHxtcT 1u roulmnra, 0RA04 R+10 C.B. TTrt :coon e•sw, e7. r---- $tt Ot1A1. foa CONTROL $TRUCtURC 16 I ®®� mN•17.70 r� Q. •Sian, txR:. v:sd NE l sO�(rr7 lun WTAI v) tj� W*.b —1 CATCH B AyN r R" C r! 50�� ►.�qi/''�� _ (/N W O . Lj- r` wreur A WMOA /3v %He— t/� AS 110i 76rn PLACE 3 l4w, 0%.c ONINWld AS adn®idddV 8e&"'` ``"4 � � b r• APPROVED DY .PLANNING RECEIVED , J U L 19 2001 PERMIT COUNTER m� d� �z3la� EOM HOWE E�IG I h1EE`R I NG PHONE N0. 425 881 1830 May. 08 2001 08: 57AM P2 HOWE ENGINEERING SUa1E(.T 5Qurt1 J4441-1- CONSULTING ENGINEERS 2807 E. LK. SAMMAMISH N.E. JOl3.:r,t1L' v i 3 iz I SAMMAMISH, WA 98074 SHF.f,T,4'U. <1F r jlf 1(j 0 ,U a 5 9 ) ,%,f n sl*Er ;k4 weep Ao lei �o A oov eel ogvd w' ►/ G�t,*w �p eotkk ibAtPV Af- sW C��v►tI� o,(- Aow& C ,1V.® ��' TO 19 2 pevol, coNiER 0 0 0 C� i 1 0 m v 00 ODD Z O �M� JOO -mo Z m® z �' q `\ 94 PERMIT COUNTER PLOT PLANL20 i IQ 70 7-7 -15 lal Ilk '^`'h�N'�o .iba�'� 24�8 ,�ccc.ols �," I .. � _ •�' _ � � �—� S'1�GHl]�/.5!/ Gaw'It1/i l . I .. �- - .... �•�..,,'C� /�= �+" �,,,u� _ -��- S �` it ,1.�.� r - � �� • �1�. i� .�._r.._.... ,' �. _ .. o_ r .. _ N..T._ `/ •',v • rya APPOVED BY....PLANNIN.6 W R #RMIT APPLICATION REQUIREMENT E To: Applicant FILE From: Gov Nyo�,' D�/�coPML�'� a�✓/CtT$ ENG/n/E�� Owner: Ads,*2 / PlanCheck No: % 7- 3 8 4 Address: /& oo 8 . 7 STs< Rz • w . Date: '/• s .a. yv After review of the subject permit application, the following requirements must be met: ✓1. Construction hours are: WEEKDAYS — 7:00 A.M: 10:00 P.M.;WEEKENDS/HOLIDAYS--10:00 A.M: 6:00 P.M. ✓2. A separate RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT is required for all work on public property. (ECDC 18.60) &aA 7?X ne Truck haul route plan must be submitted and approved prior to permit issuance. ✓4. Builder/owner is responsible for containing all temporary runoff and erosion control on site (ECDC 18.30.030d). Ae,41A1,q 6- PLAitf [VS 4Z95/ co n-J7.e'UL -T.' NO WORK SHALL BE DONE WITHIN 15 FEET OF STREAMS OR 10 FEET FROM ANY CLOSED DRAINAGE FACILITY. BUILDER/OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR IDENTIFYING CONDITIONS ON THE DRAWING. (ECDC 18.30.50G) —6. FILTER FABRIC FENCE SHALL BE INSTALLED AND INSPECTED PRIOR TO CLEARING AND CONSTRUCTION. (ECDC 18.30) D 2A/Nsr6 e- PC-A� J Hv'" e'7ZOs i o .✓ CDnJT�—'OL L: INSPECTIONS ARE REQUIRED ON STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, TIGHTLINES AND CATCH BASIN INSTALLATION. INSPECTIONS ARE REQUIRED PRIOR TO BACKFILLING. (ECDC 18.30) --8- Repair or replace all defective existing curb, gutter and sidewalk adjacent to the property. If an intersection is involved, a handicap ramp may be required. Contractor shall meet with the City Engineering staff to determine the extent of repair prior to issuance of the permit. (ECDC 18.90) uJ f1 c it w,4 Y --T Driveway slope shall not exceed 14% without a waiver. Every attempt should be made to keep the slope below 14%. Waiver granted to (ECDC 18.80.060D) -M.. Driveways must be paved from property line to City RIGHT-OF-WAY. A separate permit is required. (ECDC 18.80.060C) ACP oNcy le. o• 40 INSPECTIONS ARE REQUIRED ON DRIVEWAYS AND SIDEWALKS PRIOR TO AND AFTER POURING. (ECDC 18.30) -12. No burning of construction refuse without a permit from the Fire Department. —43. Connection to City water system is required. There is a separate charge for the water meter (ECDC 7.20). --44. Aback water valve is required if downstairs plumbing is below the elevation of upstream manhole. (ECDC 7.20) --3: Water and sewer main lines should be separated by 10 feet minimum. (ECDC 18.10) -r6. Connection to the City sanitary system is required. A separate permit is required. LID# a ro Fees paid: Yes No Charge s5 PEr-,, (ECDC 18.10) N L y "t7. Underground wiring is required on all new construction, and for additions, alterations, and repairs that exceed 50% of the total assessed value of the structure. (ECDC 18.90) `fill. A FINAL ENGINEERING INSPECTION IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO THE BUILDING DIVISION GRANTING OCCUPANCY OF THE BUILDING OR STRUCTURE. (ECDC 18.90) PRMTAPP.dot PLANNING DATA NAME: ,419,&�owt AviSan' SITE ADDRESS: DATE: ) / 14-/9 ? ZONING: 2.5 - 1 7- P_' f - 7G) PLAN CHK#: 97—,38+ PROJECT DESCRIPTION: /Uew S (R- CORNER LOT 40 (Yes/No) FLAG LOT <lla (Yes/No) jVQ- SETBACKS: Required Setbacks: Front: 25' Left Side: to ` Right Side: 1G ` Rear: 25' Actual Setbacks: Front: Z5 Left Side: 23 Right Side: 1 0' Rear: 'qZ Street map checked for additional setback required? AID- sue► o? (Yes/No) LEGAL NONCONFORMING LAND USE DETERMINATION ISSUED N (Y/N) LOT COVERAGE: 274? Maximum Allowed: 35 02o Actual: �� " " r 9 % BUILDING HEIGHT: 30' pu V- 97- 6,7 Q �,�,, Maximum Allowed: Actual Height: �30' _� �'+{- PL^ Datum Point: bA, Se,.ry ^-4 -Datum Elevation: 98, &G 'c4`' eu_v„� A.D.U. CREATED?: 011 wy, l/,�' _ v�M• ell ,�et��n � E. U�c (� 4��" STD.,- �i�,. �r . <�o,,..�+ sr�;� aA�,.�- ,�vcs �� a�K��#. 5 ac oL I euSG rS � ��fS }�'� .� CSI� b JaS� GonGwrvAl bQ✓ w.[ (:a a rFra, v b no iWu S^F �qic. SUBDIVISION: 5 23 - Jo —Le4a-r Ski 1e+ , �%•� /one B9�/ nc�,� .C�✓ CRITICAL AREAS #: ql - 9 - w�Ncr - 60w h M4-ewA "soda- t-jarA Ate) SEPA DETERMINATION: fe4- -u3-lo) (Ne.�,41We) Z14 (5b c.. lt� Lxc�d Pc, :17 P , sj9& LOT AREA: 739 m Ali 01ki I. be w.l ' Plan Review By: Z- 61 "'tom hP-1--t) � /A4\,, 1,A4 3 (-?N - cArdeApenni d^plundaGdoc CA FILE NO. eitical Areas Checklist Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation) 1. Site Address/Location: 7 Y- -1-- /02. 2. Property Tax Account Number: -G 13 l — n z3 q _ a o 3 - do 3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): L'L , Feat 4. Is this site currently developed? yes; ✓no. If yes; how is site developed? S. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply. Flat: less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site. Rolling. slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of 664eet). Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% ( a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet). Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertiF,al rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of less than 33-feet). Other (please describe): 6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water. WO ; Approx. Depth: 7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: Aeo ; Approx. Depth: What season(s) of the year? 8. Site is in the floodway 06 floodplain of a water course. 9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year- round? Flows are seasonal? (What time of year? ). 10. Site is primarily: forested ; meadow ; shrubs ; mixed , urban landscaped (lawn,shrubs etc) .o 11. Obvious wetland is present on site: Wo P-V OUouq. • City of Edmonds Critical Areas Checklist The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is to be filled out by any person preparing a Development Permit Application for the City of Edmonds prior to his/her submittal of a development permit to the City. The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to determine whether any potential Critical Areas are or may be present on the subject property. The information needed to complete the Checklist should be easily available from observations of the site or data available at City Hall (Critical Areas inventories, maps, or soil surveys). An applicant, or his/her representative, must fill out the checklist, sign and date it, RECEIVED JAN - 9 1y96 COMMUNITY 6i�t VKAS and submit it to the City. The City will review the checklist, make a precursory site visit, and make a determination of the subsequent steps necessary to complete a development permit application. With a signed copy of this form, the applicant should also submit a vicinity map or plot plan for individual lots of the parcel with enough detail that City staff can find and identify the subject parnel(s). 1n addition, the applicant shall include other pertinent information (e.g. site plan, topography map, etc-) or studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assist stair in completing their preliminary assessment of the site. I have completed the attached Critical Area Checklist and attest that the answers provided are factual, to the best of my knowledge (fill out the appropriate column below). Owner / Applicant: --41 AWAR 1 afo At. Moo4RR6s1 Name 9 3e y A M* 0 Street Address f-_A me1q S, t,,�a 4go2 0 -775'—loll City, State, ZI Phone 1-9— q Signature Date Applicant Representative: Name 93 o - Street Address " d --oA(% S, "1 4 91h 2-c City, State, ZIP — & -1-2 Signature "7P� —io V Phone l- —�(40 Date I • • n W�CL L z h t � N f eTM AK W gLN� m M 3nr H�St L "b N\ Api �2JY loCDIll DEC 1 `Z '►bi I Z � 06 L / %� O N i ~ Q Q U _ a_ }- 1 O p Z O N ('4 U O v) J f-r Z Q a- O O O 00 n = Z tL V) :D O Q Q LLI Q Z cif x O O O � U U p w w wIxcy— DA Zone _A_ S.W. 1/4, SEC. 5 T.27N., RA E.W.M. 507 - - .9 1S"3 COUNTY . , PARK 07 " �UIC6IRI 15518 I ♦ O o a Is516 Iss►S n I DEC 12 1997 fSS2op ISSIS 5 S=eg ^ ^ ^ p . Is IS605 �I IS6o2 � n fi � IS600 1S601 1 N ISfio4 Sf.14 $ O n 13621 � or 9420 166r5 156i0 =+ ^ + c n 15691 /S?�oO . 16625 t" ��► �:° b" w � Islas 15705 � o �. 1S7ofi 5 ssl ISc10 r5702 15709 m �. 157/s 1e - 7.n 1S7f4• 15721 1 I57t 1i 572; ISM/� _13j To22 1?7t9 15711 0°4v Is711 1 Ism 0 Wram 15730 147s2 15120 I57:7 j � �SSog Iseoo 1see9 /5fo IS6/o I ISBO t0 v /50 ��QQ Js1tep 15,v t4 15812. 15805 720' 19117 15826 q 15920 11W�el ISAZS W�9 15624 l5-8a IS 1 a 15909 1592a 15910 c� 1"04 151et - Owl 5966 15110 159r7 1s9/7 1"15 ,Xo e „ 19gte ISMc ~ � " ISl20 : I ISg26 t � 3 k 16000 IQ IS931 ICO 6 MOIVM 0 16012 �� 160►` ° 4024 Rp�e N ^tie 16119 16115. I6C20 °S 16031 G d � o � 1603A , I6105' O14/Oq s O MlltoeralLLfm 1410.¢0 /6/// Ip- \�\ 06W AIltMA g ,rl !` , .D •eta e/ •I61K R' b119 16fi2 ? 100 16,Zoq 14�15 is !31 N 12 t- i 1 3 16116 A L217 6209 6216 16202 6211 �4 l N 16221 16209 16206 ) 6215 ,. OL 0 /6219 N b 6Z2o 6223 FL 16310 Ism d ' o I63io 16311 � 6306 -' � 16317 2 li!!e 16315s 8 r • 6316 6315 6320 /63l9 - /6� v J! o' v 67t3 IonO l63z► z N PL 16411 ry IW 11A v � • N �0 N � - v � \le . • STREET FILE Telephone: (206) 284 2410 Neil H. Twelker and Associates, Inc. Consulting Geotechnical Engineers 610 Wheeler St., No. 404 Seattle, Wa. 98109 April 22, 1998 Al Ansari 9304 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98020 s1HWINe MAY -1 1998 Re: Proposed SFR Construction at 16008 75th Place W., Edmonds, WA Dear Mr. Ansari: We are in receipt of a communication from the City of Edmonds containing a review of our Geotech- nical Report dated�October 7, 1996. The letter from the reviewer (Landau Tacoma) has addressed a number of items which were felt to be insufficiently covered in our report, as well as a number of comments and suggestions which we believe merit further discussion. We are pleased to supply the requested information in the following paragraphs, in the same order as presented in the Landau report. Groundwater Levels The Landau report recommends that the site be "analyzed" using "seasonal high groundwater levels to be consistent with other projects in the Meadowdale Slide Area." In preparing our report, we did not presume to perform an analysis of the entire Meadowdale Slide Area. Our concern with groundwater has to do only with its influence on the project operations. Further comment on global stability is given in a number of subsequent paragraphs. Site Earthwork Structural fill should be free of objectionable quantities of deleterious materials, particles larger than 4 inches, and within 2 percentage points of optimum. It should be spread in uniform lifts not exceeding 6 inches loose thickness, and compacted by repeated coverages of moderate to heavy construction equipment or by approved compaction devices. The degree of compaction sought is 95 per cent of maximum density as determined by AASHO laboratory Test D-698; however, we do not anticipate that the circumstances under which structural fills are to be used will warrant field density measurements. All fills to be placed on slopes must be underlain with a drainage mat of pervious material (e.g., washed sand or clean pit nun gravel). General site fill may be of any material deemed acceptable at the time of construction and should be placed in lifts not over 12 inches loose thickness and "semi compacted." Retaining wall backfill (covered in ¶8, page 4, of our report) should be semi -compacted only. Full compaction of retaining wall backfill can result in the development of unwanted stresses in the wall. Where settlement -critical 0 0 Al Ansari April 22 1998 Page 2 structures are to be supported on retaining wall backfill, we recommend that the critical portion of the backfill be made using washed pea gravel. The same general provisions will apply for the backfill of utility trenches. (Our concern in not wishing to engage in heavy compaction of backfill of utility trenches is based mainly on economic and safety concerns.) Drainage fills under concrete slabs should consist of clean (not necessarily washed) granular material. Backfill of Overexcavated Foundation Locations The degree to which this emergency must be dealt with is not known at this time; however, we do not expect it to constitute a serious problem. We ordinarily deal with this problem by backfilling with Control Density Fill, lean mix concrete, or washed pea gravel. Although some Geotechnical Engineers recommend crushed rock for this purpose, we prefer to avoid this material on the grounds that it is (1) a high stress material because its structure is derived from the contacts of needle points and razor edges, (2) deteri- oration of the contact points over time will allow settlement, and (3) some rock types, having been subjected to hydrothermnal alteration, look very good when delivered to the site but disintegrate rapidly. Washed pea gravel, which should only be used in areas where no subsequent excavations are to be made) consists entirely of long-lived particles, and does not require compaction. We point out that the preparation of any foundation requires some adhoc procedures, including steps which cannot be spelled out in advance; we expect to be on hand to assist in the resolution of unforeseen difficulties at the time of construction. Walls Free to Rotate We agree with the reviewer that conventional retaining wall theory does require that the wall be able to yield by an amount sufficient to allow shearing stresses to develop within the backfill. For a wall 8 feet in height, a displacement of 0.2 per cent will be two tenths of an inch. Where semi -compacted backfill is used this small amount of yield occurs within the backfill itself, thereby removing the need for concern of this vexing theoretical problem. In any event, it has been our practice to avoid the use of higher values ("at rest" pressure) for retaining wall design. Even where fully compacted backfill is placed against an absolutely rigid wall; this can be accomplished by placing a layer (one half to one inch thick) of soft Styrofoam beadboard against the wall prior to placing the backfill. The compression of the beadboard takes the place of rotation of the wall, and allows the backfill resistance to become mobilized. In the project at hand we see no particular need for this step, although we are willing to employ it should appear to be desirable. Coefficient of Friction (Ultimate) The misunderstanding here seems to be in the meaning of the word "ultimate." This was intended to refer to the value of base friction at the point at which failure takes place'and lateral movement ensues. The value can be easily determined (and we have done it scores of times over the past 50+ years) by placing a piece of concrete on an earth slope and measuring the declivity of the slope. We usually do it by placing the troweled surface (if it has one) against the slope. This is a very conservative step in itself, since concrete poured against a prepared subgrade does not have a steel -troweled surface. We performed this test again just a few months ago on a construction site, on sandy silt. We happened to visit that site very recently and we observed that the fragment is still in place on the slope where we left it. Our measurement of the slope on which the concrete fragment rests showed it to have a declivity of 40 degrees. This corresponds to a Coefficient of Friction of 0.84 (but it is still not the ultimate, because the fragment hasn't moved). We have watched the "recommended value for friction" go down, down, down, for several decades, and have wondered many times just why that is so. One possible reason might be that the value of 0.3 to 0.35 referred to is not meant to be an ultimate value, but rather, a working value (i.e., one in which a safety factor is included). The trouble with the use of values like this in calculations of Safety Factor is that they can include a mixed bag of input parameters, some of which are working values, while others are ultimate. Al Ansari April 22, 1998 Page 3 Calculations performed in this manner cannot produce a clear-cut value for Factor of Safety. In any event, we must point out that the Coefficient of Friction is a fact of nature, not an arbitrary number which is produced by administrative fiat. Discharge of Subdrains The reviewer strongly recommends against discharging any water to the surface." Any water? Any water at all? This is a matter on which reasonable minds may differ. In the first place, the amount of water discharged by the ordinary subdrain is so minuscule that it seldom if ever can even be detected. If a storm sewer is conveniently located nearby, we have no objection to routing the subdrain discharge in that direction, provided the cost is not excessive. If the discharge is made to daylight, It may be a good idea to provide a screen at the exit of the subdrain to prevent burrowing animals from entering. Temporary Excavations The reviewer mentions that WAC-29G-155-G57-2d allows the Geotechnical Engineer to "specify temporary excavation slopes at configurations which the engineer has determined to be safe." We intend to do that; however, the site conditions (as well as the varying heights of the temporary cuts) are such that it does not make sense to develop a detailed plan in advance of construction. We propose to handle this matter in the way that it is customarily done by practitioners in residential construction everywhere: that is, to look at the soil conditions as the excavation unfolds and use engineering judgment to decide on slopes and/or retention methods. Permanent Cut Slopes The reviewer states that the "standard of practice in the Northwest is to limit permanent cuts in cohesive soil to 3H to 1 V or flatter." (emphasis added) We find this to be an astounding statement for several reasons: (1) In more than 50 years of hillside construction, nearly all of it in the Northwest, we have never encountered a hillside project where a 3H to 1 V slope of any real extent was even feasible, (2) the safety factor of a 3H to 1 V slope in over - consolidated cohesive material would be far above any reasonable goal, and (3) the use of the term "standard of practice" suggests an agreed upon or broadly accepted custom, which is simply not the case here in the Pacific Northwest. Cut slopes in overconsolidated silt/clays or glacial till are sometimes made near -vertical for heights of as much as 10 feet.. Many sea cliffs are stable (although retreating slowly under the attack of frontal weathering) at heights of more than 100 feet Nearly all soils possess a modicum of cohesive strength. This allows them to stand at steep slopes (up to 1 H to 1 V) to heights of 3 to 5 feet. They will remain stable if given a good vegetative cover, although with a low factor of safety (not an important consideration in minor landscaping features). Construction of Landscape Fills As the reviewer points out, it is advisable when placing fills on sloping ground to bench into the original grade and to provide underdrainage for any water bearing layers which may be present. We customarily deal with these matters when construction is underway. Reactivation of the Meadowdale Slide We are very sorry to report that we have no real scientific basis for our "estimate" of the risk level of a recurrence of a rotational slide. Technical information is simply too sketchy for reliable statistical studies (even though "experts" in some quarters seem to be willing to make them). Our estimate was made on the basis of engineering judgment. The performance of the area during the past two rainy seasons is very reassuring. We point out, however, that the steps which have been taken thus far to correct (or at least improve) the stability of the Meadowdale area have involved local storm water management, but have largely ignored the possible influence of groundwater from distant recharge areas, where a substantial time delay may very well be involved. Al Ansari April 22 1998 Page 4 Piling The piling details to which the reviewer refers are simply pin piles to support the decks. They are 2-inch diameter pipes, customarily driven to a penetration of one inch or less per minute with a 90 lb jackhammer, for an allowable vertical bearing of 4000 lbs. "Jacking Slab" vs Pile Foundations The reviewer appears to be in some confusion as to the purpose and layout of the releveling system incorporated in the project drawings, even to the point that he suggests that the cost of the system be reviewed vis a vis the cost of a "pile supported foundation." Rather than attempt to re -explain this whole thing, we suggest (by copy of this letter) that the reviewer read 13 and 1[4, page 3 of our Geotechnical report of Oct. 7, 1996. We trust that the information supplied in this rather lengthy treatise will be sufficient to answer the questions raised by the reviewer. Should this information be considered insufficient or should further questions arise, it might be well if all of the concerned parties could meet in person to discuss them. Very truly yours, NEIL H. TWELKER AND ASSOC., INC. Neil H. Twelker, Pres. exaiaes 31131 NHT:nt cc: General and Marine Construction, Inc. Arco Al A n S a c kb ob Ss '7SA QIo.to W EA"%DDdS,wA To ; f- y g%, vurm � 5 w b•�� a V.�- I'p VA �a,,.�n2 L, Q .�.(� �, A �p� Q Q�Q1c'��• 6 �.t�u'7.a�1 ��sv✓k lri�-� Ara:..a�rAh^��n/Ci4'�"�"' C�cn."'"C�nb� n V-1-1 AN A,r, � � t DRAINAGE ANALYSIS/ DETENTION EXEMPTION FOR THE ANSARI RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 16008 - 75TH PLACE WEST IN EDMONDS, WASHINGTON DECEMBER 17, 1999 PREPARED BY: PITTMAN ENGINEERING 15118 S.E. 43RD STREET BELLEVUE, WA. 98006 (425) 562-7226 NARRATIVE: The following report is an analysis of the drainage basin, in which a single family residence is proposed. The new home is located on a -parcel of land which is approximately 0.44 acres in size and is situated along the west side of 75th Place West, south of 160th Street S.W., in Edmonds, Washington. Specifically, this parcel is part of a 24-acre drainage basin, that is tributary to a 36 inch culvert, which flows beneath a set of railroad tracks and discharges to the beach on the south side of the entrance to Laebugton Wharf. The site is located toward the lower end of the drainage basin, less than one -quarter of a mile from the above noted 36 inch pipe. In April, 1998, Burlington Northern Santa Fe, approved a Hydrology Report for Lakeside Seawood Group, which was prepared by Group Four, Inc., for the 0.62 acre site located immediately to the north of the Ansari residence. This analysis showed a stormwater increase for the 100-year, 24 hour storm event, to the City of Edmonds drainage system, which was approved without a detention system. Included in this report -are. the relevant portions of this prior analysis, which address the overall drainage basin. The development of this single family residence actually increases the capacity of the drainage system, for the 100-year, 24 hour storm event, of 0.09 cfs, which is 1.70% of the total flow in the drainage basin.' Therefore, it is,. . anticipated that this site will similarly be allowed to increase the City's system without providing detention. (ex.X -)ru 6r, I � \ Ex, B' OWDE 41 — 25• \ \ \ / LJ aDR.o.W. \F <1 --------------- F _ _______________ - \ - - 1-0 NEW RESIDENCE F -------- \ ---�------------ ------------ — \ \ O / —9 --------------------- \ i 8 6 ------------- - \ --------- -=-- /------------- H. 0 —FF 7� _ — — — — — — I ---------- 25's[ra+c1` ` FF\ \ O ----- O \ \ _ -- - 71 _ ----- - - I ` 10 —76 76 : Q I � 8 \ - -- - 50 \ 75rr,r I P�a L_ CE WLT7'M 44-2, C--0-3 F) &-,,i -Fx b 'k � � %. � � S k S o A-o %—OA 0 L46) 7/z) I rl- C, (- e-,:=t �c RCP� = C) .09 mcs(.Gt�b q l y l � t TXF� - lA RAINFALL DIy TRIBi,TI'IQN ENTER:' FREQ(YEAR), DURATION(HOUR), PRECIP(INCHES) 100,24,3.0 ----------- ---------------------------------------------------------- ******************** S.C.S. TYPE-lA DISTRIBUTION ******************** ********* 100-YEAR 24-HOUR STORM **** 3.00" TOTAL PRECIP: ********* ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ENTER: A(PERV), CN(PERV), A(IMPERV), CN(IMPERV), TC FOR BASIN NO. 1 0.44,81,0,0,6.3 AREA(ACRES) PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS TC(MINUTES). A CN A CN .4 .4 81.0 .0 .0 6.3 PEAK- S) T-PEAK(HRS) VOL(CU-FT) 14 7.83 2097 ENTER [d:][path]filename[.ext] FOR STORAGE OF COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH: ans.x100 46- S.C.S. TYPE-lA RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION ENTER: FREQ(YEAR), DURATION(HOUR), PRECIP(INCHES) 100,24,3.0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ******************** S.C.S. TYPE-lA DISTRIBUTION ******************** ********* 100-YEAR 24-HOUR STORM **** 3.00" TOTAL PRECIP. ********* ----------- ---------------------------------------------------------- ENTER: A(PERV), CN(PERV), A(IMPERV), CN(IMPERV), TC FOR BASIN NO. 1 0.31,86,0.13,98,6.3 DATA PRINT-OUT: AREA(ACRES) PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS TC(MINUTES) A CN A CN .4 .3 86.0 .1 98.0 6.3 PEAK- S) T-PEAK(HRS) VOL(CU-FT) 4a:> 7.83 3176 ENTER . [d: ] [path] filename [ . ext] FOR STORAGE OF COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH: ansd100 4" 0" i dO Y STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN 124 123 122 121 49 _,S 4 60 s WAD- 5 I EL �� •. 46 '"� . o tam s � 3' 40 ,�•i ' GA ' . f ( 55 QA FRIG-Y MAR 80P p \ - Q C t O 0 ORI 11ANL' m r 0Z5 Q 330 5 .75 1 2751. 1i ,\ 4 8I , 1 � I , 15 80 . r c 1D — 0 900•\ j ' s A7' S 1 VC .4 �40 fi61so s 6000 5 r 6 55. L 3 47� ABE6bE N ff-Mt- 65 160 (\ so r iP 2 705 ''r 1 R L m 60. 2 IN 22 YAK 0 �J I 6 7t1'' '•T 0 S J 65 60 550 w �0 ' ADAM' 30 25- 46 8 \ ^ WASHINGTON ' 4D CKLI L/ _N E 10 '0 10 20 30 40 (_ - _ , MILES 40� sssow �m Figure 30 NOAA ATLAS 2. I 45 �! 55 60 65 Volume IX 50 pared by U.S. Dertment of C ! PrepaI coerce ISOPLUVIALS F 100-YR 24•HR PRECIPITATION Not ionelOceanic and Atmosp�cAtIministration ! IN TENTHS OF N INCH National Weather Service. Office oflHydrology PreoareC for U.S. Department of A i Soil Conservation Service. Engineerroe Division 124 123 122 12'i III-1-46 FEBRUARY, 1992 14P J , STORHWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN ' i + s• Table III-1.3 SCS Western Washington Runoff•Curve Numbers.' (Published by SCS in 1982) Runoff curve numbers for selected agricultural,' _ suburban and urban land use for Type lA rainfall distribution, 24-hour storm duration. ' LAND USE DESCRIPTION CURVE.NUMDERS BY HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP A B C D Cultivated land 1 : -winter condition 86 91 94 95 Mountain open areas: low growing brush & grasslands 74 82 89 92 Meadow or pasture: 65 78 85 89 Wood or forest land: undisturbed' 42 64 76 81 Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush 55 72 81 86 Orchard: with cover crop 81 88 92 94 Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf coureee, cemeteries, landscaping. .• • Good condition: grass cover on t75i of the 68 80 86 90 area Fair condition: grass cover on 50-75% of 77 85 90 92 the area Gravel roads & parking lots: .76 85 89-• 91 Dirt roads &parking lots: 72 82 87 89 Impervious surfaces, pavement, roofs etc. 98 98 V 98 open water bodies: lakeo, wetlands, ponds etc. 100 100 100 100 Sing Is family reeidential(2): -Dwelling Unit/Gross Acre tlmporviouo(3) Separate curve number 1.0 DU/GA 15 shall be selected -for 1.5 DU/GA 20 pervious & impervious 2.0 DU/GA 25 portiona of the site 2.5•.DU/GA 30 or basin 3.0 DU/GA 34 3.5• DU/GA 38 -12 4.5.DU/GA 46 5.0 DU/GA 48 5.5 DU/GA 50 ; 6.0 DU/GA 52 6.5 DU/GA 54 7.0 DU/GA' 56 PUD's, condos, apartments, ♦impervious commercial businesses & must be induetrial.areae computed (1) For a more detailed description of agricultural land use curve numbers refer' to National Engineering Handbook, Sec. 4, Hydrology, Chapter 9, August 1972. (2) Assumes roof and driveway runoff ,is directed into street/storm system. (3), The remaining pervious areas (lawn) are considered to be in good condition for these curve numbers. III-1-12 FEBRUARY.,, 1952,' . I�+ FILE Hydrology Report f'7 IV C) DEC 0 9 1997 0 Meadowd afle City of Edmonds, Washington GROUP FOUR JOB No. 96-3 03 6 GROUP FOUR, Inc. 16030 Juanita -Woodinville Way NE - Bothell, WA 98011 FAX (206) 362-3819 (206) 775-4581 # (206) 362-4244 �1 Hydrology Report Meadowdale City of Edmonds, Washington z s� G/sTEa��C��' ONAL EOUM June 3, 1997 Prepared For: Lakeside Seawood Group 7500 212th S.W. Edmonds, WA 98020 (206) 672-4702 Prepared By: Group Four, Inc. 16030 Juanita -Woodinville Way N.E. Bothell, WA 98011 (206) 362-4244 P PM r � S Lk 1. PF April 2, 1998 (iARY A GRAY Field Englneer Jon Vanier, P.E. Group lour, Inc.. 16030 Juanita -Woodinville Way NE Bothell, Washington 98011 04/04/98 Burlington Northern Santa Fe 2454 Occidental Avcnuc South. Suite 1-A Seattle, WA 98134-101 (206).625-6189 (206) 625-6115 (FAX) RE: Meadowdale - Group Four Project #96-3036 I 08:02 5 :01/02 N0:18 De �LnrYoVN u,)q(, l)'�) l Dear Mr. Vanier: After review of your design plans and hydrological report and discussions with you, your requested Stormwater increase in the city of Edmond's drainage system is approved. roved. If there are any changes that may cause an increase in drainage flows from this development in the future, a review by BNSF Railway will be required. Any other development in the area that would cause an increase in flow thru the city's 36 inch pipe will also need to be reviewed by BNSF Railway. Would you pleatie provide a copy ol'this letter to the city of Edmonds. /G%A. ray . t Meadowdale • Hydrology Report ' Job No. 96-3036 1 S y t PROJECT: LOCATION: SOIL TYPE: SITE AREA: EXISTING LAND USE: PROPOSED DEVELOPED LAND USE: EXISTING DRAINAGE Meadowdale Meadowdale Beach area in City of Edmonds, 75th Place W., near intersection with North Meadowdale Road #3, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam; #4, Alderwood-Everett gravelly sandy loam, Sheet 50, Snohomish County Soil Survey, 1983 Approximately 0.62 acre (26,860 S.F.) to be disturbed Vacant; scattered brush with a few maple trees. An 8' wide asphalt recreational path runs through the western third of the site. One single family residence The general slope of the site is to the west at 30%. Runoff from about half of the site sheet flows to the west, entering Puget Sound by a ditch/culvert system in the Burlington Northern R.O.W. The asphalt recreational path traversing through the western third of the site directs the remaining runoff to the south. This runoff is collected and conveyed in a closed system that outfalls to the beach by the entrance to Laebugton Wharf. The site receives a negligible amount of off -site drainage. PROPOSED DRAINAGE Drainage from the site will be directed into the closed storm system that passes through the site and empties into the Sound by a 36" concrete pipe near Laebugton Wharf (see Downstream Analysis). The upstream/downstream systems have been analyzed using the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Method for the 100-yr/24-hr design storm (see attached analysis). There is an approximate 0.35% flow increase in the 100-yr/24-hr peak rate due to the proposed development. Due to this small flow increase, it is concluded that this development will have a neglibible impact on the downstream conveyance systems. Since the proposed drainage will not enter the Burlington Northern R.O.W. (i.e. the ditch), and the negligible increase in flow due to the proposed development, no detention for the site is proposed. An exemption from detention is being sought from the City of Edmonds. Group Four, Inc. 16030 Juanita -Woodinville Way, N.E. Bothell, WA 98011 (206) 362-4244 Meadowdale 0 Hydrology Report • Job No. 96-3036 DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS alt path in the western third of the site essentially creates a split line for ream. The site ma d into a "north" and "south" basin for the d analysis. The north basin sheetflows directly to raveling past roperty line for 35' down a 50% sloped brushy bank, and enters a ditch W. (2' wide graveUmud base, 1H:1V side slopes, 2.5' d�eepith a t�8'-'concrete ope of 1%). The is a maximum of 70' in this ditch beforean 1culvert which passes under the ia' ks, and outfalls SrfE The "ot-h is created by the turning to the southwest/south by the existing asphalt path. The path is sloped such that runoff stays on the east side of the path, although there is no ditch present. Runoff from the site does not enter the catch basin in the bike path just south of the site. Instead, runoff travels to the south via overland flow, staying on the east side of the bike path. At the time of the downstream visit (June 2, 1997) a new house with a piped drainage system was under construction in the lot to the south of the site. There are two new catch basins about 10- 15' feet east of the bike path, which is the detention system for the new house according to Lyle Chrisman.at the City'ofEdmonds. In the current partially -complete state of this.house, some runoff from the site enter;the two new catch basins. Otherwise, runoff continues to flow overland over hard pack rock and dirt of the construction entrance to this house (slope —_ 8-10%): The water travels another 150' or so and reaches the access road to Laebugton Wharf. Here the runoff enters a catch basin which is about 320' (scaled) to the south of the site. There may be intermediate catch basins between this catch and the first catch just south of the property, but none were found at the time of the downstream inspection, due to the condition of the path/road in the vicinity of the rnew house. This last catch basin also receives piped inflow from other directions. This final catch basin has a 36" concrete pipe that outfalls in about 100' to the beach on the south side of the entrance to Laebugton Wharf. In summary, the downstream path from the south portion of the site is not well defined, due to the lack'of an obvious drainage course such as a ditch. Since runoff from the developed site will enter the closed drainage system that passes through the site, it will clearly outfall through the 36" culvert and bypass the B.N. ditch. Group Four, Inc. 16030 Juanita -Woodinville Way, N.E. Bothell, WA 98011 (206) 3624244 Meadowdale Hydrology Report Job No. 96-3036 VICINITY MAP MEADOWDALE s BEACH PARK PUCET SOUND SITE 4f7�0 1f cP�e x 3 \ �r N n� NTS. MEADOWDALE PLAYFIELDS 16arrt ST sw Vicinity Map Figure 1 Not to Scale Group Four, Inc. 16030 Juanita -Woodinville Way, N.E. Bothell, WA 98011 (206)362-4244 f r , 1 Figure Downstream Map scale: 1" = lob' i �I a fD � 8 X 140 it , — cc �rTlj�uO ��I •� 40 f o w y 120 ;core• zp�' �iTE ak IIJ 3 E E g' I C. %�:� 0ty 6 � r S Ncrr hews 6 �'• 1 '� cr] ^hd er lei tiJ 1- 1 New � n►, . 0 0 go nizres%f' _ 3 -Pi r a•nul � ,�� r 10 90 I O to ; � / t� • ;; I l W I 162ND AV/E. W. ,% �Meado%ydale • Hydrology Report !-r • Job No. 96-3036 Basin Map I h� 5�� I Meadowd?Lle.i I I Figure 2 Scale: 1" = 2000' USGS Edmonds East,1981 Group Four, Inc. 16030 Juanita -Woodinville Way, N.E. Bothell, WA 98011 (206)362-4244 Meadowdale • Hydrology Report • Job No. 96-3036 i ou ow r1EI G A6 I;k R. Soils Map #3, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, #41 Alderwood-Everett gravelly sandy loam Y- q.. fir''! 5 V#TION .. t e r; 7 !rzT 78 -4 L3 Figure 3 Scale: I"= 2000' Shoh. Cty- . Soil Arvey, Sheet #50, 1983 Group Four, Inc. 16030 Juanita -Woodinville Way, N.E. Bothell, WA 98011 (206) 3624244 0 l98 • : /a- r �� So'�kh, 2 9� G 117 '/TGr To fa� C'I �b 3 6 �' �rl.�. G f L�r� �ouy�vr Gt/hu r•� �! •! . 7i, 'if • ead• wda . ;. ( •' r Meadowd le. loin+ o� .��c cs � � r •., .., •� i , r• \ � ; • '��..''�. � ��-^.1 G w*I N r + , �. • .+/.,• mot- C __ ,.��: ;. �� I 1 •�;� `:,�\ ` \ �\ o�"Fct a cow. %•I'• i •', :.'�:; '^�.� Y "': �'! --'.tip •"�_ / �.••.. /� \ 1 'fir � i• �: ` .•`•�'Jt .•• / •�j. 1 i •� �_'�. Meadt-w ale • .� •. �Ji ; ; :�� ;� 1 �� - �, it ' i• � na�v ^t r / /'1� ...• _ • . • • • • • 11 .11 � t � • • • tN t - J 1 630 000 r1 F I (Joins sheet 44) • ��:�;�.;:�tv�'•i:.``�i{:�::•,�1'�i,t'� r: t?I�;•..1 .r'•. r t ; '.. .. ,1 r')ti (r�r;il :r•;r'f '::�i..•v ; '''•�R ..II'11'). .., .1:; (• Y eti ` h'• 1 ,' r 1`,•', ,i.l �i: \; '.a - :i,.i'. �!1 i�!' •1,�,•..r N'�j'� :,'!. '•il' Jr , .'. 6 !•• ,1 +f,,•`r :fl.� :°(7:.i;•'V,a'1;••i r �/jV 73 !.. ,r°f: �. r•`s'. •�'ar r`.vll .1.�•, -f.. i�rrl�`' ' �1 •r, i .:J •i' �:�'.' VIS i' •-. il••r.. :,..: .'� r ,I•: r ti ,, j• J.. I •1 i' '!•y''',•gl:,•��'♦'.YrLV:vty�1(:, r i1!•:• �,' �11••1 ,.�,•,j .(', "•• :� '� r '� � ,� �•:! ••t'•'� .41i•''�•,'• •5ri,/Y` 'li �f•' .Iqr I 0 2. ,f 'r 1 `• , i'• rt' '� �I.i• :'•: r,ll .J•A•ti ��w �•, �' •`:: 5. '..w. •i -f, r,l�; �/ r Yl' � i • • ' r�. � 1�•' ' ` i ,• n � N i a 'r �i�'�:;�,`1�l�iti�+',�� '�J' t{r� ►�'?T')}�.�` kJ � �-� .. t.'.s�•�•'f:/,•t ;�y •r ti,f,'i'h \' �.� t.'�•�j?� ••�`.. •,.tn'�rr'', +� I.:S•}1'1 lr•'( ,�+'4yr•i• —r .•r�•,: r° � t f ;/:...�`•f ; i.T . r� • ',r :'\ 'rJl} �' f.�.� :., / �� "' , t r rl• �, , •' , 1 , .. 5• - , • J fR. t • ,,,. .t�!', r, ;k•;,�� .y tx . j��l.>r�},Zu,-y�ilt�'%''` ,i..� � . }�..•; ,i," rM..' � •! I,' ,,; 1 \ f . ' ! 1, • t } '�': , . �, �' \.Yy. r:a�',• , ,: 'f 1,a''`�►�.1�1''•�y`Ja �:�'�"��•iJhK.i{r t � � _ ,1 1•t � I rl •i II .1' •.,: •j .+ ,' , Jly !IJ�;�•�f�,' I '?•N.,'1.1'+, ,,•• (/ �;'�1..,1 �'. J}t' 1 )'i. f I 1 1 .! r, t' 1_�1..►y>�'rh�:.� . •,Iti') `. ', ��. � r r.l l4 ,J � � .r �i '../'''� .( j �.nw,.• .:;, •i!• �''�k.�•ili S Ir �t;. 'I j� 'r '`• f '�• ri'. ,':.1/•'.�'rf�i\G'1 1`.'ly. f r1 j4•'' /•1r1�1i Z • � � ., .�.f n'lfila ''� l:� '-,'', ��: '�I;•':\ r W f• , '�;, •,.r ^l�'!' ,�?�, 1.. 1 •� 1• •f`� � '•.:�\ :.. � •i .:';71. •/Z Alcdcl ri .. .f •tr ..r,h• :: �l'i�j1 .� f it+! '� ', ;�,JF..' rr..:Vi'.�';'�i.�:ly,�,1 �_y}'.a. .� 'rf'tf r 'i .5'•f•• ,,� �. _,. �`•' J•. sir'.l'.}•`?a:l'I`i)irt•;0'j„It��.'}.1(, ;All1' '1 'ti �i, %1•..1, •�.}i.• t't'' ,. :• ,y ••i.iJ '.1 •,,.i• ':•t• Mead Wd mot•!. ��,�. I:•r •'•.' •`t �! t, \•�y •f�••i r:�',. 1~•'r'''•'r.T. .: ;. 'i � ].J �'.:^; •:,• 1�' •'�'1'��Y •F,I�i .. r, f!i' � � % .� '' �• : yt '�.+ ,jlr• ': ram' 1•;1(: • -i.1 .,ti•r•:I�i•^.it`,N �,� �., ��:•!A: `� , • 1� ` 1 '.1:•��t .- i �,• , • ( . ti. 7. . .:.i#t i,}, L. '. �t •(X •i•.� �..� � •.1!••I. � ..ytt. •Ir',� r : ,'}'-�: ►', .ip• r.M1{. •: ii.•� •',. 1. 'i p:,.•,l'il;:. .r,R}' © I �'•► !' • 'I !•,'i ..�' �� ! •. i• � +.„',.i'!i+ .• ..-;'y• .t.y'"+•.•' •t!';'. '( ~u';:.�ll.;ly+y,µ ..r ,.�•, .a! � , t': si,t' •',r:� •i;r`�'•;�t. h,+��51 .l �:!; ; ltl,'t � Q' i ! �• a r'i•'! �.• � �r . ,i � 1 •��'♦��,�! it�',r'��;!v::'f•' /r�v'1^'�ti7� J .r �l�,a�^i ': ,. .�•'••y• ;:r '• fir• . f� � y. , �'' it � �.•�:• , � • ; •, ,..,4 .•,. •• �r:f•i:ji:•<i .,1,-. ,r'::��•. ,. 'r�' � 4 t 1 •�r1;.. 1 i'•. ,,•'� :, ' i• • �'',1M' (�',l �'.� •' •h••�•• 1, , ('' t( �� i { I.+t• a 1• ., 4 rl:.t'l ,'r 1 , 1�! •.,"t'� - •k iic''• }. t � •� '' a 11.s.f.r l 1, i. (� sr 7i'\r'� 1,'-;± �-I,.,� ,i .. F`�ti. • .•^�r '�`i' '� �S�I�VATION ! �a•k�i•1t* �.1�ry} • } • } • 1 i r 1 • �' 'r ,\• C� ,. f, r � . . Ii�l`>'.Ai \' i f r :lr� !', ir.•,;! �.(lr... I.:1,,,{{{,��tttI,S Y l ! -•!1 rti��►r'� 6 �•.,'f! i� r'•I . )1 - j; ; is , ,• J Y'JC. 1' ' .,. I r:: jJ �! rM. J ,•� j. ,r: �J �.i. 15��' j1` a1lw�jy� . '.' l: ,a i. N-17'`y.r' p j -- r -,: 7 t•�' •f'� �,. .6 •C ;!.{ .(•: `i •1 {J:a�•.1 J4,':u�� 1r.•'� � 6i . a• •\�' a.+.. '.p ' NO Sous Fvi? $ A A-- C ' A-(d-� _ �OZ 4 c A-W aI LAio o'd 93•Ac, �0 V? 12,zsAc Aga.. �.?°�'� Meadowdale • Hydrology Report • Job No. 96-3036 The 100 year/24 hour peak rates of runoff are summarized here: 1 Offsite. North Basin 20.63 cfs 2 Offsite,South Basin 5.0 cfs 3 Site, Existing 0.09 cfs 4 Site, Developed 0.29 cfs Total 100 year/24 hour peak rates at point of interest: Existing 25.48 cfs 1+2+3 Developed 25.57 cfs Z L 1+2+4 There is an approximate 0.35% increase in the 100 year/ 24 hour peak rate due to the proposed development. Due to this small flow increase, it is concluded that this development will have a neglibible impact on the downstream conveyance systems. Consequently, a detention system is not proposed as part of this project. Group Four, Inc. 16030 Juanita -Woodinville Way, N.E. Bothell, WA 98011 (206) 3624244 . r A 6'/1.2/97 • GROUP FOUR, Inc. page 1 Meadowdale 96-3036 City of Edmonds File: ww31\data\96-3036\offsite.* trib areas to 36in. beach culvert at Laebugton Wharf --------------------------------------------------------------------- BASIN SUMMARY ID: 100n ScS M OLOGY TOTAL RAINFALL TYPE... PRECIPITATION....: TIME INTERVAL....: TIME OF CONC.....: ABSTRACTION COEFFi NAME: 100yr offsite north 93.00 Acres BASEFLOWS• 0-.00 cfs TYPElA PERV AREA >.20 nches EA..: 71.00 Acres CN..... 76.00 1 IMPERVIOUS AREA AREA..: .22.00 Acres ..... .98.00 TcReach - eet L: 300.00 ns:0.1500 p2 ' .50 s:0.0333 TcRe - Shallow L: 600.00 ks:11.00 s:0.0333 T ch - Channel L•:3200.00 kc:42.00 s:0.1300 AK RATE: 20.63 cfs VOL: 9.92 Ac-ft TIME: 520 min BASIN ID: 100s NAME: 100yr offsite south SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: 24.00 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE....: TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION....: 3.00 inches AREA..: 18.60.Acres TIME INTERVAL....: 10.00 min CN....: 74.00 TIME OF CONC.....: 25.16.min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 AREA..: 5.40 Acres CN....: 98.00 TcReach - Sheet L: 300.00 ns:0:1500 p2yr: 1.50 s:0.1300 TcReach - Shallow L: 800.00 ks:5.00 s:0.1500 TcReach - Channel L: 400.00 kc:10.00 s:0.3000 TcReach - Channel L: 600.00 kc:42.00 s:0.1000 PEAK RATE: 5.00 cfs VOL: 2.34 Ac-ft TIME: 510 min. -Meadowdale • Hydrology Report • Job No. 96-3036 fs� Mite South Basin Input Parameters Precipitation: 100yr-24hr 3.011 Soils/Hyd. Group Area, Ac. Alderwood (C) 12.25 Alderwood/Everett (C) 4.5 Alderwood/Everett (A) 4.5 Everett (A) 2.75 Area Total 24 Ac Inspection of the aerial photo with the soils map reveals that the forested ravines are the Hydrologic Group A soils. For the remaining areas, a density of 2.7 DU/GA (32% impervious) is used, based on a field inspection and Kroll maps. Description Area, Ac. CN Pervious Forested Ravine 7.2 55 Pervious Lawns (conservative) 11.4 86 Pervious total 18.6 74 Impervious Roofs, roads Time of Concentration: 5.4 98 Segment Type Condition Length (ft) Slope (%) Factor 1 sheet lawn 300 13 n, 0.15 2 shallow 'forest 800 15 k. 5 3 channel ravine 400 30 k. 10 4 channel pipe 600 10 k, 42 T, 25.2 min. Group Four, Inc. . 16030 Juanita -Woodinville Way, N.E. Bothell, WA 98011 (206) 3624244 6-/ 1,2 / 97 • GROUP FOUR, Inc. ' page 1 Meadowdale 96-3036 City of Edmonds. File: ww31\data\96-3036\offsite.* site basins BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: 100ds NAME: 100yr developed site SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: 0.59 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE....: TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION....: 3.00 inches AREA..: 0.36 Acres TIME INTERVAL....: 10.00 min CN....: 86.00 TIME OF CONC.....: 5.62 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 AREA..: 0.23 Acres CN..... 98.00 TcReach - Sheet L: 110.00 ns:0.1500 p2yr: 1.50 s:0.2500 PEAK RATE: 0.29 cfs VOL: 0.10 Ac-ft TIME: 500 min BASIN ID: 100es SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA........ RAINFALL TYPE....: PRECIPITATION....: TIME INTERVAL....: TIME OF CONC.....: ABSTRACTION COEFF: TcReach - Sheet L: TcReach - Shallow L: PEAK RATE: 0.09 cfs NAME: 100yr existing site 0.32 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA 3.00 inches AREA..: 0.30 Acres 10.00 min CN....: 81.00 6.28 min IMPERVIOUS AREA 0.20 AREA..: 0.02 Acres. CN..... 98.00 110.00 ns:0.1500 p2yr: 1.50 s:0.2500 90.00 ks:5.00 s:0.2100 VOL: 0.04 Ac-ft TIME: 500 min 9"4k- 4%1$A of is•SAwl•-4� -Meadow&le • Hydrology Report ' Job No. 96-3036 Developed Site Conditions Input Parameters Precipitation: 100yr-24hr 3.0" Soils/Hyd. Group Area, Ac. Alderwood/Everett (C) 0.59 Description Area, Ac. CN Pervious Lawn, landscaping 0.36 86 Impervious House, patios, walkways, asphalt, rockeries, 0.23 98 bike path Area Total 0.59 Time of Concentration: Segment Type Condition Length (ft) Slope (%) Factor 1 sheet lawn, landscaping 110 25 n. 0.15 T. 5.62 min. 4 Group Four, Inc. 16030 Juanita -Woodinville Way, N.E. Bothell, WA 98011 (206)362-4244 'Meadowdale Hydrology Report ' Job No. 96-3036 Existing Site Conditions Input Parameters (Includes the portion of the basin tributary to the point of interest.) Precipitation: 100yr-24hr 3.011 Soils/Hyd. Group Area, Ac. Alderwood/Everett (C) 0.32 Description Area, Ac. CN Pervious brush 0.3 81 Impervious bike path 0.02 98 Area Total 0.32 Time of Concentration: Segment Type Condition Length (ft) Slope (%) Factor 1 sheet brush 110 25 n.0.15 2 shallow/channel brush 90 21 k.5 T, 6.28 min. Group Four, Inc. 16030 Juanita -Woodinville Way, N.E. Bothell, WA 98011 (206) 3624244 r -j FAX TRANSMITTAL RECORD 0 DATE:___-S=2 o - q I FROM: F O S T E R CONSULTING ENGINEERS PAGES (INCL. COVER SHEET):= PROJECT TITLE:__ IQnr i TO: 12dqg v_z � PROJECT NUMBER FAX NUMBER: 4.2 4 A-ZSW PHONE NUMBER: MESSAGE: VoLuwr� 1VAP v4Eo 1A) i9pPRdvf�p 3' Op 3V #f q,,,rof oA/a~ Vow a n� px� V IOU N (-V�- ) 2 2 2. FOSTER CONSULTING E114 GINEBR3 Douglas Foster, P.E., Civil Engineer 4369 243rd Ave. S.E. Issaquah, WA 98029 O.K. 401 �je.Sv LMRES • r� ,o� = 217 c- hone: (425) 557-5527 Fax: (425) 837-3555 Email: fsst 0 Ti '1 .r lee i t u l 1�s.. 1 ! � i Q 22:25 4255575527 DOUG FOSTER PAGE 05 U fill Aw S919 -s (aNd� aS •9 -�-- —T - -- •Itsv 0 410, a C3 b ` '; l CL ; oil .a J i FAX TRANS TTAL RECORD a' FOSTER CONSULTING. ENGINEERS DATE:_ -15 .2 0 - q '1 PAGES (INCL. COVER SHEET): FROM; '! PROJE T TITLE. C i ItILu � 14n�' TO: 1Z,R�CjGE� PROJECT NUMBER FAX NUMBER. 4.2 -ZSW PHONE NUMBER: MESSAGE: ` 3' 0 3(v" piP E 4,,I.o( oN� Go" Gt7r.�0 �95i�1, ir 3 > 22 J, S C F, v 5j p� cam' fCpA% .' Coe 3G'' �w Tajo r: J :e C . 27 2 5 'Y T ZZI-15 cr O.K. . L� F J �oF w co� .. �O ,pFo 30948R�p FOSTER CONSULTING ENGINEERS = Douglas Foster, r.E., Civil Engineer EXPIRES s' i7 Phone: (425) 557-5527 4369 243rd Ave. S.E. Fax: (425) 837-3555 Issaquah, WA 98029 �� OD dog / kp fie /orb o z22:25 4255575527 DOUG FOSTER RAGE 05 �311 Li I r/' 1 � � l n lz /Cl ti �o �_ •mow � I � � �� 3 l, �: z 1 0 • W x - vp v NLLJ 1 W Lai ql I I — ► Kr' Q Zo MCI be o l 11Z elk* 1I L41 1 1 as• 1 �• c+� 1 1 41 4'SD � El in 06/05/4998 12:04 2066823519 IN&OUT COPY PAGE 02 EEr F 'LE ANSARI RESIDENCE SY IRMWATER REPORT APRIL 26o I 8 lftVb d 6/4M) PMPARM BY: DOUGLAS FOSTER, P.E. (425) 557.5527 4-4-46 h � 1 1� 30948 IOIVAL� CEX�-S 6 j Z3 c. F 2 C6s 6oaa ,or -?' o, c% sD P((P-c P,6/05/1998 12:04 2066823519 INSOUT COPY • PAGE 03 WMIQMWji321 9-61 QY IU atoratwater deftwou system was designed using tlac King Coutity Hyd propun, a Sam Baftm Uem hydmpo Model. Detention criteria used: Postdevelopment runofffor the 10 year and 100 year 24 hour storm events scull mach predevalapment runoff for the same events. Impervious area post development — 5847 squam feet or 0.13 acre Curve xtm to for pervious VMS equals 86 for Soil Class C The results of the Hyd catalysis are as follows: £st+mat bodsmalaped_P fed Rsle= man DM�ereM 10 yr 0.03 cfs 0.07 efe 0.02 cb 0.01 aft lass 100 yr 0.06 oft 0.10 cfs 0.06 cfs Sam v Volume Required 217 tic fleet L 'facie Volume provided: 23 If x (3 diameter f x414 -162 of Catch Basin Volume provided: 3 if x (5' diam- 58 cf ToW —162 + 58 — 220 of > 217 of O.K. t/ Required Ovifwe size ftm Hyd Program — 0.80 " , use 7/8" drilled oniftee plate A 7/8 onficc diameterwill be provided on the carol structutt. The results of this model ate attached. 06/06/1999 12:04 2066923519 INSOUT COPY PAGE 04 3*7 V mpufm-0.13AM M N I'm . A A �� J. 91., 06/05/1998 12:04 206682�9 IN&OUT COPY • PAGE 05 STANDARD DRAINAG 5 DETENTION SYSTEM WORKS'NEET 4 i A L. OR) CAT c ills ADDR= . ••••�DESIQNAATA••••• IMPERVIOUS AREA PIPE DIA PIPE LC ORIFICE / .5"l 7/fig, At Af. U4.W 5'0 CATM rpj Iwmwsr raw um" wis loan --C �.. �o11&.6 v 9 aftte motes U CN CATCH WIN R! WNTRM CATCH BASIN SYSTd'm CROSS SZCTION i- AtlAIF _W474WMM UWWi6 RUNOFF SPASADa'R, TAI NCH FUMING DRAINS SHALL NOT BE CONNEMP 70 DETENTION SYS73M MOM 1. Catl SmsWowbg DWA= M 14M idr ok d0fts aW d@Wo t rraosa iarpaotian bW a bmkFAW a" fbbr &d i■ p o fto. "MOM Dr 2. --Nh tlq fbr opal" and mdefto s of &deeps ovum = p&mb p omm is ft oa of 60 pror" owsm •aemmided !a an pips mwt be oae aed r•sorod ft= &s a">w" % aDow PWW •Pse*tWL 7W wj t m l ml- l l F IN i I��$ 06/05/1998 12:04 a 2065823519 • IM&OUT COPY • PAGE 06 KZNO COUM DRPART1M Of PUBLIC VORKS Surfscs Wator Mnaqi�nt Division_ M MRWUAPH PRW2AMS vosrion 4.218 1 - IK1O ON THIS PROGRAM 3 - SRUN" 3 - MODIlI20 $�7HYD 4 - ROUTE 5 r ROUTE 2 6 - AntWD 7 - SASEFLOW 8 - PLOTwo 9 - DATA 16 -- RDRAC 11 - RETURN TO DOS 06/05/1998 12:04 2066823519 IN&OUT COPY • N SZO�t OPTZONBi ' a -- 7-DAY 052ION STOW 3 - 8T0111t DATA tZL! 8*ECIlY BTORM! OPTION: 1 PAGE 07 S.C.B. TYPE -IA RAINFALL DISTRISUTIOM =T A: FRM(YZAR), DURATION(X0UR), PRECIP(INCRES) 10 34 2.1 - - - r - - - - - -- - - -- - w - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - --- - -- - - - - - - -- - --- *««««a*«***�►««rt«««*« S.C.S. TYPE -ill DISTRIBUTION +�**�►*+�**«�+� �'�*�►+►««« ***+►*+��*« 10-Y$AR, 24-HOUR STORM **** 2.10" TOTAL PRNCIP. **««««««« ------------- ----- —ter icy- '?xlfA- Z-----------------------w------- INT12: A(PRRV), CM(PLW), A(IMPERV), CN(IMPERV), TC FOR RUIN NO. 1 O A6 0.1% as a a DATA PRINT-OUTi AREA(ACRBS) PERVIOUS 11WERVIOUS A CN A CN .i .0 86.0 .1 98.0 PSAK-Q(CFS) T-P3AK(HR5) .07 7.67 ENTZX (d:][Path]tilan=s[.ezt] FILE ALREAVY XZZST; OMRWRZU Y VOL(cv-FT) 884 1'C (MINUTES ) 6.3 FOR STORAOR OF COM1°1UT&D WOROGR H -. (Y or N) 7 S.C.8. TYPE-1A RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION Zl!"R : FREQ ( TZAR) , DURAT I OAP ( HOUR) , PREC I P (I NCIMS ) 10 34 2.1 --------------------------------------------------------------------- *w* a rr «per**r►�r�w B.C.B. TYPZ—lA DISTRIBVTIOTI 10-YEAR 24-HOUR STORM **** 2.10" TOTAL PRECIP. --------------- --------------------------------- 81ilTER: A(PERV), CM(PBRV), A(IMPZRV), CN(IMPERV), TC FOR RABID NO. 1 .13 06 0 98 6.3 DATA PRINT-OUT: ARZA(ACRZS) PBRVIOUG IMPERVIOUS TC(MINUTZS) A CM A CN .1 .l 86.0 .0 98.0 6.5 PRALK-O(CPs) T-PT.AK (RRS) VOL (CU-PT ) .03 7.83 436 EN'TBI [d:][Feth)fi1en=e[.ext] FOR STORAGE OF COMPUTED NYDROGRAPN: al 06/05/1998 12:04 2066823519 IN&OUT COPY • PAGE 08 S SpUK/aC8 I�TYCD 1'OA Cm=l.11G wUNOFI, HYDROGRAPR OTOl1l1 OPTIONS-* B.C. s. TYP1i-1A 3 - 7-DAY D=SIGN STORK 3 - STORM DATA FILE SPECIFY STORM OPTION: 1 S.C.S. TYpB-lA RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION ENTER: FRBQ(YLAR), DURA'ION(HOUR), PRSCIP(IMMS) 100 24 3.0 !l--w w..r w--l-++liyw.. alwr---- wr!!-LJ4.+yy`y+ arlgrr----a!!!-rla-rrl lrrr!!-r!!+-r S.C,q. aw+wlr Ja,-- TXPB-IA DISTRIBUTION #a�**+�+►�► 100-MBAR Z4-il= STORM +�"a� TOTAL PRRCIP. ��t-r �_3jt.00" .Cfi �r F .�i�_ ----w----------r-r-------- ..-a!l+rr!l a------! w-3+�-i1F ENTER : A ( DERV) , CM(PSRV) , A (IMPRRV) , CN (IMPZRV) , TC FOR BASIN NO. 1 0 96 0.13 95 5.5 DATA FR I NT-OUT : AREA(ACRZS) lBRVlous IMPERVIOUG Tt! (MINU'TES ) A CM A CN .1 .0 66.0 .i 08.0 615 pl"-Q(CFS) T-PEAK(MRS) V0L(CU-FT) .10 7.67 1306 ENTER [d:}(Path)ii1anaw[.*et] FOR STORAGE OF COMPUTED BYDRROGRAPH: cxl FILE ALRBXDY =19T ; OVRMMIITZ (Y or N) �? Y BPSCIFY= C - CON'8I M, N - NAG STORM, P - PRINT, B - STOP • 06/05/1998 12:04 2066823519 IN&OUT COPY PAGE 09 2 SSUK/BCS MBTKOD FOR COMMUTING RUNOFF HYDROGRAPH STORM OPTIONS: I - B.C.Q. TYPE -IA 2 - 7-DAY DUIM STORM 3 - STOiIl1 DATA FILZ SPECIFY STORM OPTION: I B.C.S. TYPE-2A RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION ENTER: FREQ(YSAR), DURATION(XMR), PRBCIP(INCHES) 100 14 3.0 w.rr.ir�r-------------------r------------------------- --------ter---------- *,t* **r►k**w+►�*****k* S.C.$, TYFE-1A DISTRIBUTION ******w* 100-YEAR 24-gi" STORM **** 3.00" TOTAL PRECIP. ---------------------e.� Q.�11��i.1--------------------------- ENTER1 A(PZRV), CN(PERV), A(SMPZRV), CN(IMPERV), TC FOR RUIN NO. 1 0.22 86 0 98 6.b DATA PRINT-OUT: AREA (A.CRBS) PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS TC (MIMMES ) A CN A CN .1 .1 86.0 .dl 48.Q 6.5 PEAK-O(CFS) T-PEAK(M92) VOL(CU-PT) .06 7.83 784 ENTER [ d :) [ path ] f i I ena [ . act) FOR STORAGE OF COMPUTKD Ii Mp%RAM ; cl SPECIFY: C - CONTIMM, N - NffiMSTORM, P - PRINT, S - BTOfl • 06/06/1999 12:04 2066923519 IN&OUT COPY PAGE 10 Oman or 11fPM Evne 1) TYPE Of FACT LI" a TAM Z) TAM 01AXWE !(ft) , S'POMaR DBPTN(ft) : 3.00, 3.00 3) v%"lCAL PMMWILITY(min/in) : .00 4) PRIMARY DESIGN MROGRAPH FILENAME; bb2 (10 br Po64-dfd#l&pssjim+, 5) PRiNARY RILIARK RATE(cfs): .03 6) NU R OF TEST HYDROGRRAPE8: 1 'ZEST HYD 1 FILENAME: ccl (too4r poOdfo) TARGET, RELIASN(cfs) : .06 7) N M ZR-OF-ORIFICES, RISER-MEAD(ft), RISER-DIAN(in): 10 3.00, 6 9) ITUATIOR DISPLAY: YES ENTER ITEM! W"ZR TO HE REVISED (ENTER ZERO IF NO REVISIONS ARE REQUIRED): 0 INITIAL STORAGE VALUE FOR ITERATION PURPOSES: 336 CU-rT ITZRAIrlO# CON PUTATIObi noI148.. . TRIiL TANK -LENGTH STOR-AVAIL STOR-USED FX-$TAG$ PK-OUTFLOW 1 47.5 336 142 1.32 .02 2 33.9 239 129 2.60 .02 3 26.1 184 120 1.86 .02 4 21.6 152 113 2.09 .03 5 18.8 132 108 2.29 .03 6 27.2 220 105 2.45 .03- 7 16.0 113 103 2.58 .03 8 15.3 108 101 2.67 .03 9 14.8 104 100 2.76 .03 10 14.5 102 99 2.83 .03 11 14.3 101 99 2.88 .03 12 14.2 100 98 2.22 .03 13 14.2 99 98 2.94 .03 14 14.0 98 98 2.96 .03 15 14.0 98 -98 Zs97 .03 15 13.9 98 98 2.98 .03 17 13.9 98 97 Z.98 .03 18 -13.9 98 97 2.99 .03 19 13.9 97 97 2.99 .03 20 13.9 97 97 2.99 .03 MFORMANC3: INnOM HYD:1v.)or .07 TARGET -OUTFLOW ACTUAL -OUTFLOW Plr-STAGE STORAGE TWT RYD 10 106+2r .10 .03 .06 .03. , le : 2.99 97 3. Q3 90 BPXCIFY: D - Doct=XT, It - 1tEYIsEl A ADJUST ORIF, E - XNLARGE, 8 - STOP 05/05/1998 12.04 2066823519 IN&OUT COPY PAGE 11 min:,w rr union: ALLOWS FOR YMMMABING STORMS AT A MCIFIND BTAGiE IMIGHT v TO PROVIDE A FACTOR OF SAFETY. ENTER: STORAGE-INCURASS(9)i 8TACE-REIGBT(!t) so z.e PERrORHANCE: INFLOW TARMT-OUTFLOW ACTUAL -OUTFLOW PK-STAGE STORAGE DESIGN EYD: .07 .03 .03 2.19 ill ?EST M 1: .10 .06 .09 3.03 140 SPECIFY: D - DOCUMENT, R - MISS, A - ADJUST ORIP, E - ENLARGE, S - STOP • OPTION: ALLOWS FOR INCREASING STORAGE AT A SPECIFIED STAGN HNIGHT, TO PROVIDE A FACTOR OF SAF STY. ZWM*. STORAGE-INCRISASM(l), STAGE-HEIGHTut) 50 2.8 PBRFOA "C8: INFLOW TARGET-OMFLOW ACTUAL -OUTFLOW PK-STAGE STORACN DESIGN HYD: 10+y .07 .03 .02 1.69 -225 TEST MM 1: IM y .10 .06 .06 3.01 210 SPECIFY: D - DOCMUNT, R - REVISE, A -- ADJUST ORIF, E - S�LARGE, S - STOP d - ,- PER101ouu Ca: TXIrZAM TARGET-OMIFEON ACTUAL.-C=FMM . Fx-STAGE 57VRAG19 DaBION !rm. fosr .07 .03 .02 1.69 126 .228i HYD 1: (o+•�'' .20 .06 .06 3.01 210 GTRUCTURS DATA: R/D TANK (FLAT GRADS) RYSYR-M= TANK-DIAM STOR-MTR TANK -LENGTH STORAGE-VoLums 3.00 FT 3.00 FT 3.00 FT 30.8 FT 217 CU-FT SINGLE ORIFICE 1129TRICTOR: DIAS .90" M T IXG DATA-. STAG* M DISCHARGE(CFS). STORACE(CU-PT) PRRN-AREA(BO-FT) .00 .00 .0 .0 .30 .01 11.3 .0 .60 .01 31.0 .0 .90 .02 54.9 .0 1.20 .02 81.3 .0 1.30 .02 108.8 .0 2.00 .02 136.3 :0 2.10 .03 162.7 .0 2.40 .03 196.6 .0 2.70 .03 206.2 .0 3.00 .03 217.6 .0 3.10 .24 217.6 .0 3.20 .61 217.6 .0 3.30 .95 217.6 .0 3.40 1.10 217.6 .0 3.50 1.22 217.6 .0 AVERAGE VERTICAL PERM$ABILITY: .0 MIMJTE8/INCH SPSCIFTI Y - FILE, N NMJOBj P - PRINT IF/OFF R REVISE, 3 - STOP P INFUM/OUTPLOM AXALYSIQ., Q6/05/1998 12:04 2066823519 IN&OUT COPY PAGE 12 • .ut .Vs y,1, INITIAL-8?kGX(FT ) TilfB-OF-PRUMS ) PSAKOOBTAGR-ELBV(FT ) .00 8.23 1.69 pZ" 8TOR11R! 227 CU-FT jmvLcw/0UTlLON DATA PRINT-OUT: T(HR8) 01(CFS) Q0(CF5) $L(FT) T(HRS) QI(CFS) 90(C!6) 8G(FT) .00 .00 .00 12.33 .01 .01 .58 .00 .17 .00 .00 .00 12.50 .01 .01 .55 .00 .00 .00 12.67 .01 .01 .53 .33 .00 .00 .00 12.53 .01 .01 .SO .50 .67 .00 .00 .00 13.00 .01 .01 .49 .83 .00 .00 .00 13.17 .01 .01 .47 1.00 .00' .00 .00 13.33 .01 Al .45 1.17 .00 .00 .00 13.50 .01 .01 .44 1.33 .00 .00 .00 13.67 .02 .01 .43 1.50 .00 .o0 .00 13.53 .01 .01 .42 1.67 .00 .00 .00 14.00 .01 .01 .41 1.83 .00 .00 .00 14.17 .01 .01 .40 2.00 .00 .00 .00 14.33 .01 .01 .40 2.17 .00 .00 .00 14.50 .01 .01 .39 2.33 .00 .00 .00 14.57 .01 .01 .30 2.50 .00 .00 .00 14.83 .01. .01 .39 2.61 .01 .00 .06 15.00 .01 .01 .37 2.83 .02 .01 .17 15.17 .01 .01 .37 3.00 .01 .01 .23 15.33 .01 .01 .37 3.17 .01 .01 .26 15.50 .01 .01 .36 3.33 .01 .01 .20 15.67 .01 .01 .36 3.50 .01 .01 .30 15.83 .01 .01 .36 3.67 .01 .01 .30 16.00 .01 .01 .36 3.83 .01 .01 .31 16.17 .01 .01 .35 4.00 .02 .01 .31 16.33 .01 .01 .35 4.17 .01 .01 .31 16.50 Al .01 .35 4.33 .01 .01 .32 16.67 .01 .01 .35 4.60 .01 .01 .32 16.83' .01 .02 .35 4.67 .02 .01 .32 17.00 .01 .01 .35 4.93 .01 .01 .32 27.17 .01 .01 .35 6.00 .02 .01 .33 17.33 .01 .01 .35 5.17 .O1 .01 .33 17.50 .01 .02 .34 5.33 .01 .01 .33 17.67 .01 .01 .34 5.50 .01 .01 .33 17.83 .01 .01 .34 5.67 .01 .01 .33 18.00 .01 .01 .34 5.93 .01 .01 .33 18.17 .01 .01 .34 6.00 .02 .01 .33` 18.33 .01 .01 .34 6.17 .01 .01 .33 18.5o .01 .01 .34 .6.33 .01 .01 .33 18.67 .01 :01 .34 6.50 .01 .01 .33 18.83 .01 .01 .34 6.67 .02 .01 .36 19.00 .01 .01 .34 6.83 .02 .01 .46 19.27 .01 .01 .34 7.00 .02 .01 .53 19.33 .01 .01 .34 7.17 .02 .01 .50 19.50 .01 .01 .34 7.33 .03 .01 .68 19.67 .01 .01 .34 7.50 .04 .02 .83 19.83 .01 .01 .34 7.67 .07 .02 1.10 20.00 .01 .01 .34 7.63 .06 .02 1.40 20.17 .01 .01 .34 8.00 .04 .02 1.59 20.33 .01 .01 .34 5.17 .03 .02 1.67 20.50 .01 .01 .34 8.33 .02 .02 1.69 20.67 .01 .01 .34 0.50 .02 .02 1.66 20.03 .01 .01 .34 8.67 .02 .02 1.66 21.00 .01 .01 .34 06/05/1998 12:04 2066823519 IN&OUT COPY FACSIMILE CORRESPONDENCE OATS G -5'-4$ TIME AM PM TO: tbhj r-! Ng- PHONE #: FAX #: 4 240" 111-61.21 COVER SHEET PLUS Vi, (l PAGES FWM: 1N & OUT COPY 800 Fourth Avenue, Suits 660 Seaft, WA W$4 Phone: (2W M-M Fax: (208) 682-W19 COMMENTS: C 4t.C,k L4-TI 0 M FXZ N rr, A-01 teZ,51 PFW�E . 1K6 YN91 IJ-� � ✓ 1 •i/�l `�` � � rryr rrr..�. PAGE 01 STREE7r.4r—LE <n� co Z-67 I 5�,: UTILITY AND ACCESS EASEMENT -7/1/aG O l IN CONSIDERATION of mutual benefits, the undersigned, hereafter referred to as "Grantors", hereby grant to the City of Edmonds, Washington, a permanent easement for the installation, operation and maintenance of utilities and for public access and/or a pedestrian walkway over, across, through and below the following described property and the further right to remove trees, bushes, undergrowth and other obstructions interfering with the location, construction and maintenance of said utility or utilities (together with the right of access to said easement at any time for the above stated purposes) and the right to improve said property for a pedestrian walkway and/or other public access. Grantor shall not construct any permanent structure on or over said easement. The easement and right-of-way herein granted is located in the City of Edmonds, Snohomish County, Washington, and is more particularly described as set forth on Exhibit "A attached hereto and incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. DATED this day of C: cl� 19 80 . RECEIVED MAY 2 3 1980 Edmonds City Clerk v l 80052901 b -1 Vol! 1 G7I PacN 2745 STATE OF WASHINGTON s s . COUNTY OF On this day personally appeared before me,_-_ to me known to be the individual describ d in sL, and who ex cuted the within and foregoing instrument, and acknow- ledged that signed the same as 16� free and voluntary act and deed foi the uses and purposes therein mentioned. GIVEN under my hand and official seal this day of .�� ;.toi�•E�'.1. %,�o�Sa.'� , 1980. NOTARY PUBLIC in and f r t e i. �'•,°� State of Washington, residing at / OF . ....... STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. •COUNTY OF � ) On this day personally appeared before men<<,.? to me known to be the individual described in and who xecuted the within and foregoing instrument, and acknow- ledged that ✓'/ signed the same as__�/ free and voluntary :act ,, .•+�• �.�•and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. �4, GIVEN under my hand and official seal this ,=- / day of '• �� 0" NOTARY PUBLIC in and for e ' State of Washington, resi ing at STATE OF WASHINGTON ) . ) ss . COUNTY OF_ �-e_ ) On this day personally appeared before me �1�y,', GAI;0111v , to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknow- ledged that _411e signed the same as o� free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes.therein mentioned. RECEIVEr.) MAY 2 3 1980 Nmonds City Clerk 8005290186 -z- vn! 1 F7n o" . GIVEN under my hand and official seal this ,¢tz , 1980. `� .fSTA�E SN�'•WASHiNGTON ) Cr2S ss . T;Y �OF, ) . S' day of &e O e5?-, NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of.Washington, residing at On this day personally appeared before me to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknow- ledged that signed the same as __X4.4— free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. GIVEN under my hand and official seal this 7;2 day of ` 1980. ,• = RECEWEn .o.. ,Y`1I' • 1 ;/ u. Boa " Lionds City Cterh NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at O b �f*, z C�X� 1 U 5T i i.•l -G r cfl p C � T c 0 in CD •• co VOLs 80041529018 6 -3- 1 - EXHIBIT "A" The easement and right-of-way hereby granted is located in the County of Snohomish, State of..Washington, and is more particularly described as follows: All that portion of 75th Avenue -Wiest and North Meadowdale Road northerly and westerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point 15 feet southerly, when measured at a right angle to the northerly boundary of North Meadowdale. Road, of the intersection of the northerly, boundary of north Meadowdale Road and the westerly boundary 'of 75th Place [.Test,'', thence southwesterly parallel to and 15 feet from the northerly boundary of said North Meadowdale Road to the intersection of the easterly boundary of 75th Avenue -West -,'thence continuing southwesterly, parallel to the northerly boundary of North Meadowdale Road extended southwesterly, to a point 15 feet easterly of the westerly boundary of 75th Avenue I -lest, when , measured at a right angle to the westerly.boundary of said avenue, thence southerly parallel to and 15 feet easterly of the westerly boundary of said 75th Avenue West.to an intersection of a -line beginning at"the most southwesterly corner�of Lot 7, Block 59, Plat of Meadowdale Beach, thence northwesterly to a point of intersection of the westerly extension of the lot line common to said lots 6 and 7 with the westerly boundary of said 75th Avenue West, which is the end of this description. RECEIVED MAY 2 3 1980 Edmonds City Clerk 00529018 6 VOL i670 AGE27.48 • : G . MEADO ALE 100 150 pp F RE HYC 0 O � p I " J J 9� ^ 30 �� S � 5 /ro � p � lil 0'0 0 Iry 1 / / 1 P /N173 " Of/ Bj#3.5'2' ki I A//2 z �0 U. S Ill 73 I� 1 - �/ AREA: 0.97 A( III I �� I O 42,42: w ZONE — L �-1-� J o I Q 4 . RS 12 W � BASIS OF BEARII n. C I o /9 _ 4 k ROS-V.18/PP 102 o W -f +C Z.CaI% I I ti I I$ I -1-I 2s. 1„�, ONTOURS: PER, AE a W �, I J Q. I �/ I SURVEY 3/16/85 b, UTILITIES: PER AERIE I I I �m� b I� SURVEY & CITY OF J �p q EDMONDS UTILITY // / f ' c1► / �RIVEW8Y% XSE \ /\ \ / . I DRAWINGS M / I, � `` � PA / 3 \ c `2 /� ) v �� j_ BL � Q \ \ iN I OTE: CORNERS TO BE . I i s 1 AFTER SHORT PLAT 148.1 I \ SBd .�X APPROVAL L 0 ' �CRCgD\ BSBL=BUILDING SET BACK LI 1 I 1 13,204 F / / r/ Q III P zuc a BSBL _ � S�4N C N8i35'4 "W I � 76o 9 aoa t Y 110 3 1 / �• CITY OF EDMONDS • �b i p�J 3°� 30• SHORT PLAT S-23-90 op 1 ROGER & ARDETH McCORKI Q' I 10,4 �+ y G.L.4, Sec. 5, T. 27N., R. 4 E.,W.M. GROUP FOUR, Inc. A� 16030 Juanita- Woodinville -Way NE 11 1r�l Bothell, Washington'98011 iJ (206)775-4581 Is(206)362-4244 . • FAX(206)362-. � SURVEYING ENGINEERING' PLANNING MANAGE DRAWN BY RC 3/18/91 • CHECKED BY .1Z 3/19/91 APPROVED BY P�� SAMTARY SEWER - -, MON,XCASE1S9435 FlRE YD./15' SOUTH & T EAST OF CB 'J Telemr Nei I K Twelker and Associates, Inc. Consulting Soils Engineers RECIE ED OCT 2 5 1996 610 Wheeler St., No. 404 PERMIT COUNTER Seattle, Washington 98199 October 7, 1996 BUlCD1N� DEC 1 '►9�l Al Ansari 9304 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington 98020 Re: Proposed SFR Construction at 16008 75th Place W., Edmonds, WA. Dear Mr. Ansari: At your request we have investigated the circumstances of proposed SFR at 16008 75th Place W., in Edmonds, Washington. We present herewith a report of our findings, conclusions and recommendations. Site Description The property is a parallelogram -shaped tract having a frontage on 75th Place W of 100 feet, and a depth of approximately 155 feet. It is bounded on the west by a vacated street right-of-way, beyond which lies the right-of-way of the Burlington Northern Railroad, and on the north and south by private property. The site slopes with moderate declivity from east to west, through a topographic relief of 40 feet. The site is presently undeveloped, and covered with native brush. Soil exposures are of random dumped fill and colluvium consisting of silt and silty sand. Subsurface Exploration In order to ascertain the nature of the soil units which comprise the site, we conducted a subsurface exploration consisting of two borings made with a hollow -stem power auger, at the locations shown on Fig. 1, attached. Samples of the soils encountered were taken at intervals of 5 feet, using the Standard Penetration Test, in which a 2-inch OD split - spoon sampler is driven into the undisturbed formation at the bottom of the boring with repeated ;z BUILDING lyy/ Al Ansad October 7 1996 DEC 1 z P blows of a 140-lb hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the . sampler a given distances provides an indication of the consisten cy of the soil. Soil Conditions The logs of the test borings have been combined with topographic information to produce a geologic cross-section through the site, also shown in Figure 1, attached. Input from a number of explorations performed previously in the immediate vicinity by other engineers has also been reviewed, although not reproduced here. Six soil units have been identified from the exploratory effort which has been performed: these are described as (1) an upper unit of more or less discontinuous, miscellaneous fill having a thickness of 3 to 6 feet; (2) an underlying unit of loose fine sand (found only at the top of the hill) having a thickness of approximately 7 feet; (3) a unit of firm dark gray silt with a thickness of approximately eet; (4) a unit of dense coarse sand with a thickness of 7 feet; (5) a unit of hard slt/ lay with fa known thickness of 10 feet (at the downhill side of the site, but not entirely penetrated at the uphill side); and (6) a lowermost unit very dense fine to medium sand, with a thickness in excess of 25 feet at the downhill side. Groundwater Table The test borings at the site (which were performed in July of 1994) encountered the groundwater table at Elev. 48t (at the upper end of the site) and Elev. 2 (at the lower end). Proaosed onstruction We understand that the site is be developed with a three-story, split level, single family residential structure having a footprint of approximately 3000 s building will be centered between the side property lines, and located near the upper q ft. The lot. The building site is to be prepared with moderate excavations of up to seven oe eight feet the below existing grade. The Meadowdale "Slide Area" Information on the geologic and recent history of the Meadowdale area, as well as prognostications for the continued stability of the various parts of the area, is available in a report prepared by Roger Lowe and Associates, Inc., for the City of Edmonds, dated Oct. 16, 1979. The slide area has a length variously estimated at 2100 to 3400 feet (depending on topographic interpretations), and a width of 400 to 600 feet. The project is located near the southerly quarter point of the slide area, a short distance from the lower (westerly) margin. The history as related in the Lowe report refers to principal episodes of slide activity in the winter of 1946-47, and the winter of 1955-56. Minor or local episodes are also reported from 1948, the 1960's, and in the winter of 1970-71. Failure modes described in the Lowe report consist of (1) slumps, (2) debris slides, (3) debris avalanches, and (4) debris flows. A "slump" is defined (usually) as a mass of material which moves downward on a slope, with a backward rotation. A more common term for this phenomenon is "rotational slip" (or slide). The failure modes to which the term "debris" has been applied involve (presumably) masses of earth which have been loosened by previous slumping way). Most of the "debris" events have taken place onthe steep slope (nerable which forms the head scarp of the slide area, located several hundred from the subject property. The Lowe report expresses the opinion that the slide was precipitated initially by shoreline erosion and reactivated from time to time by the infiltration of surface water. We are inclined to the opinion that subsurface hydrostatic pressures (which could be fed from distant recharge areas) may also contribute heavily to deep-seated failures. The Lowe report predicts the area a r_1 DEC 12 W7 Of this vcroper 7 1 96 Project to have a 95 per cent chance of material" within a pa e 3 material" is twenty five year going taken to period. under "ground failure in Previous mean movement of The expression " previous) occasions (i,e, a mass of material ground failure in s failed reactivation of a rotational slide) which has previously failed Conclusions an moved on one or more con Recommendations ruction at this site On the basis of o we draw the followingour review of the circumstances 1. Pro' principal Of of although s excavations gh some will probably extend to below the will exists that the the overconsolidated Which can prepared bearing surface. preferred bearing native soil units, be identified as fill Where bearin 9 units ma has been re , we re. g surfaces are Y 11e several feet or on structural removed. (reasonably recommend that the prepared in would then excavation co material IY clean sand be constructed on ntinue .until the fill 2. , gravellythe underlying native soil Contact pressures sand, or sandy gravel). footings should have a of 1000 psf ma All the making minimum Width ay be of used in the design 9 of the excavation will 16 inches. u h spread foundations, d vertical support will be greatly exceed the Inasmuch as the weight assured. weight of the house ght removed in 3• Possibilit ,excellent Will °f eneWed ide Provide adequate vertical Activit Although located on a mass of e rtical support for the the soils which means that the earth which could conceivably structures will be that htered house could be ructure, the fact that the site is mea s in surface displaced from Y shift its water m a level Position at some future date effective s management and subsurtace Position. number preventing a recurrence of drainage have appar te that improve - of severe water ground move apparently At this point it is Years (including the onejust The area Y been At this sliding difficult to say whether or just past has survived a are able tog or block sliding) not further)without significant damage. state that slides the immediate area could ground move mage• location. the debris or movement (i.e., rota - avalanche t ccur. On the other hand type are extremely unlikely ' we s 4• Pre ca tions q ainst Ground Y at this ment has been known Movement ably off -level. to occur m the On a number of occasions rotational move The relevelin Meadowdale area, leaving operation; however g °f a large house can houses tilt ve minimize the ' a number of inexpensive be a Ve tilted and notice difficulty and ex pensive provisions at very awkward and expensive Peripheral foundations be pense of the corrective effort. time Of construction can reaction for the jacking provided with a rt. We recommend that the columns can h racks edorces needed to relevel the footin g, whose purpose is to column from the footing, by the provision of house. The interior inde Provide a Additional g, followed b a simple detail to allow pendent precautions Y reconnection after the adjustment Connection of the would consist of flexible � the peripheral foundation walls, utility occur here Y connections and has been made. the entire structure We should point out that if block strengthening single entity; cons e 'together with its fours 9thening of Presence of re, no benefit would accrue from elements sVement were to Prese c a Piling foundation would m the use of Would move . a g the structure. ► on the other hand a pile foundation. ' greatly complicate the task of The . • BUILRI�48 *DEC 12 1997 Al Ansad October 7 1996 Vaae 4 5. Springs or seeps encountered during the site preparation should be provided with positive drainage exits. These may be constructed by digging directly into the discharge area as far as possible, and inserting a filter -wrapped perforated pipe, followed by the backfilling of the annular space with coarse washed sand (not open -void gravel). 6. Structures which are to support lateral earth pressures may be designed to support an equivalent fluid having a density of 35 pcf for level backfill. 7. Base friction may be calculated from a Coefficient of Friction of 0.6 (ultimate). 8. Backfill of earth -retaining structures should be made with reasonably clean granular material, except for the top two feet, which may be made with native impervious materials. 9. All below grade spaces (including retaining walls) should be provided with seepage protection in the form of filter -wrapped perforated pipes. The amount of water to be collected in the subdrainage system will be very small; it may be allowed to discharge at any convenient surface location. 10. All surface water (roof, driveway, patios, etc.) should be led to an approved point of discharge; under no circumstances should surface water be led into foundation drains, infiltration pits or dry wells. 11. We anticipate that the necessary excavations can be made with near -vertical slopes. They should, however, be backfilled as soon as possible. Permanent cuts should be no steeper than 1 vertical to 1 horizontal, up to a height of 5 feet. Cuts greater than 5 feet in height should be made 1 vertical to 1.75 horizontal. 12. Fills should be dressed to a permanent slope of 1 vertical to 2 horizontal. We have reviewed the design drawing prepared by Howe Engineering and find them to be in con - formalness with the recommendations contained herein. We believe that the project shown in the Contract Drawings can be accomplished in accordance with the recommendations set forth in this report, subject to the conditions contained herein, with minimal risk of instability on this site or on adjacent properties. The precautions recommended in the foregoing paragraphs are intended to minimize the cost of releveling in the event of a major earth slip of the kind which has been known to occur in this area. These precautions (which consist primarily of an extra set of spread footings) can have no adverse influence whatever on the stability of this or other properties. We also point out that the features of this project which relate to work to be done in the siting or in substructure construction (e.g., regrading, earth retainage, landscaping, surface water management, etc.) will be of distinct benefit to local stability. Nothing which can be done locally, however, can be guaranteed (or even expected) to prevent the kind of major earth slip which the Meadowdale area has been known to have experienced. We are aware that many or most of the recommendations for the improvement of stability which were presented in the Roger Lowe report have been executed, thereby greatly reducing the possibility of a Al Ansad October 7 1996 Page 5 recurrence of large scale earth movement. The evaluation of the current statistical probability for site stability is therefore an extremely difficult matter; however, we estimate that the chances of significant rotational disturbance of the site within a 25-year period would be considerably less that 10 per cent. We shall be pleased to provide such additional information or advice as you may request in the balance of the design phase of this project, and to assist in the resolution of unforeseen difficulties at the time of construction. Incl: Fig.1 NHT:nt a r] N. T by r� of w„s; 757 0,�, �FC13TE�� EXPIRES ,3n31 / 9 q e,. Very truly yours. NEIL H. TWELKER AND ASSOC.. INC. b Neil H. Twelker, Pres. 801IM"'d DEC 1,4 wi i 0 P L O -T- SCea.LE 8 -2 SAAu &P-cl y S/L7' 1412 rd s t /hl J-A ND DeHse SA/U,0 i � 1 ! l �• i� O / I/Y i � 1 -7 O SANO Dark - ..._._ _. ...._.-. 71 f (O 1.. Q - --_— - �� - - _ 1 - Q. - w. e 2 - _ ...... CLAY 30 C L-.....� s,9T S f-4t7dQr-d Qehe frc� fior� T sf e k S e i rf e �-o ✓� 4e d i v m /Vo, o b /o, w.:r o� 140 lb Jar- , . y bloc% �F41 30" to • � spoof-� s�o rr�p/er i h �i -w1. • ih crem en :r ANSNR'lj EOMONDS WA i .4s' �a �' 8or� n9 GEOLOGIC CR OSS S�C�IOi�I A -A PRoPoSEo s,v7R Corjs-7RuCTIo1V SITE II VIES-71GA-'f ON ws, L 4A, WWE. KER Z- ASSOC-INc. T� • BUILDING DEC 1 x 19y1 �xf s ring A Kph \ TP-S o \ �GC- ` ' .r �• �j t t)AILY REPORT ZUBSURFACE EXPLORATION MWL H. TWELKEJe MID h $0,(- TE5 "Jo f\L AN SA0. CONTRACT NO. LOGAT 10 N DATE-7./2) 9q sHIFT opy I NSPF-C.TL7R--�— DRILL GO. i�CL�LL6�1.S vNt.f�+nrT�p F'OREM ►.N QI co 4 " _ 1 Q i�►vC�ECL `_ METHOD OF SAMPLIN4 T—. P-LEV. 8it) coop DeP'TH S LI -1 WRINGNo. a - SHEET !/3 FIELD L.OG► QAo :s RrnPiC ( F It 1. c :L:;) BUILDING DEC 1 Z 'ojI •Tr�N Can-ra��)S� S�mC CA > oP.N Gay S Ly u HTLy rno )ST -SJ z-7— Q 1- s 4, s)LT c, Ay >Mo) Cl, pA 1 LY RE RT T,6- ELV.�3V ZUBSURFACE UPWRATION coovjz,6 NVUL H. TWELKER A140 A6$04—IATE5 O�PTH boRINGNo. SHEET Z/3 FIELD L.00> �rO LT' Cpj4TRACT NO. LCC,A.TI 0 N DATE 2 l c SHIFT �� L DEC 1 x 1y�� INSPECTOR DR LL CO. FOREM ►.N R1� METKOD OF SI.MPLING V �Y rn.o) T (IV 1' C.;,cvay sArvo ►�Np SlN' r , �EMARILS 3-0 112 v 'TAO ' y W e-i c PNsE s l 7 Py ►N i--�Cu 19 35 7 Z-L 59 O 'QUA i LY RESORT E� 6V. ev I&OR ING No. V , nUB3URFAC.E EXPWRA�TION cooea SHEET 3/� NdIL H. TWELKEM A.1,W ASSoGIATE> DP -PT FI E LD L_Ov TO A L A N AD- GONTRAcT NO. 9 k, LOGA.TI O N Ay DATE-7)Ac a SHIFT I N S P EECT*O lz Ei Lx__. DR I L L- C.O. FOREM �.N RIG. DEC 12 by METHOD OF S^-MPL.IN4 REMARKS DAILY REIWR'T SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION IMdlL N. TWE.LKER "4D A6$0C1ATE5 a is COIVTRAc-r No. LOGAT 10 N ATE 7 �)2�j SHIFT INSPECTOR 12:�, } s-ic-E!J DRILL C.O. P),124CAS VeV1.),-n1 FOREM ANj Lj/E METHOD OF SAMPLING Z J" -k'L) i- E MARKS ,sv tYN y -t L� r✓7 11�, C,,C> "' —. ELay. cooam DePTH .5 �\-D ,46 60RING No. '-?- SHEET lz lb Zlb 3s F I E L D ILOc:v DEC 1 z 'W/ f-� I L -r y S -�►vD fAivo (1-- v� S Pt N p CC �j tt A U@ V e0� -tvP � F warn PLE PtNJ '1' Lj @fit � bM-� r ,nm CIL A//.S > LT ArT" T) F L; L� 5 ZO y 0-7 1 L 1(D /-r Goad yy SZ) VEc\y F!N E SiAN w Y7 .9n•� DAILY REP R'T T- eugv. Ho SUBSURFACE EX N RATION coowm NlUL H. TWELKM "tD A6$ CXWTES pePTH CONTRACT ND. LoGA.T1 O N O ATE 7) Z )) y SH 1 FT . FOREM kV4 R1C-:, METHOD OF SAMPUNCA 2 .mot rr REMAeKs zs 5 30 J6 7 43 r � WRING No. SHEET 2Z FIELD %-CXv UUIEDIN DEC 121997 L)6h i� G L elhN Co (Z 0" y G LC^.P.tN GOA% u M Ca NJ DA tLY RE%)RT F-LEV. qfD SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION coomm • HIUL H. TWELKER "AD-A6-5OGW►TEj peP'TH JAL A(V3n24 GONTRJA,cT" NO. LOC,A.T 10 N ATE % SH1 FT INSPECTOR (�j )-)to DIZI L.L C.O. F'OREM A-N R1� METHOD OF SA-MPLING EMARKS loosziNG No. SHEET F I E L D LOC-s H.X SD GUIEDING DEC 1 Z W/ ►F� (-L6Av I�VAAY rnc�)uvj G S �No 0 0 t(N)G I:llgilx'('IS Novemher 22, 1989 Mr. Roger C. McCorkle Hawley 6 McCorkle 2121 Northeast Perkin• WAy Seattle, Washington 98155 Dent Mr. McCorkle: ROIC6IRI DEC 121997 f.w.nith� 1;ml" heh nl ►Eileen• and Report Ceotechnlcal Consultation Froposed Short Plot Block 59 of Meadovdale Bench Edmonds, Washington File 1411- 001-802 INTRODUCTION This report presents our findings attd opinions relative to residential development of your property located in the 16000 and 16100 blocks of 75th Place West, in the Meadowdale area of Edmonds, Washington. The property includes existing Lots 1 through 10 of Block 29 of the Plat of MendowdAle Beach, and is shown in the attached Site. Plan and Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The subject property Is located vest of 75th Plate Went, between time street and tho Burlington Northern Railroad right of way vhirh porallelx the shoreline of Puget Sound. The site extends northward from 162nd Street West to the (vacated) westward extension of North McAdowdale Road. We understand that you propose to shnrt plat the property as four lots in place of tite existing 10 lots, possibly excluding the southernmost portion of the property, and that you require information on site conditions that may affect residential development. The purpose of our services is to provide you with information regarding geotechnical conditions at the site relative to residential development of the property. Specifically, our scope of services includes: 1. Exploration of subsurface soils and ground water conditions at the site by means of one boring and six test W4-t- Gnpromnrt7a, hr !WAIxuhAlf HI,4�NrIK Ihihir. RA emnt Fib sr I;f 151 "of, t:+n I.n 141.1 M. VIA voi. 2 4 3 G PAGE 24'1F 4 9105U;&US26 AUTHORIZED FOR RECORDING CITY OF EDMONDS 8Y �� PAGE -It , OF BUILDifl� . DEC 12 1997 t co l:ln ititY'tc Hawley 6 McCorkle November 22, 1989 Page 2 2. Review of information regarding past landslides that may be relevant to residential development of the property. 3. Evaluation of the stability of the soils at the site with respect to the criteria required by the City of Edmonds. Our present scope of services does not include specific recommendations for site grading, foundation support, site drainage and erosion controls. However, at your request this report does Ine•l.ede ieneral recommendations for site development and foundation design. SITE CONDITIONS The existing ground surface within the property slopes moderately downward to the vest, ranging from approximately Elevation 80 feet near its northeast corner to approximately Elevation 30 feet near Its -southwest corner. There are no buildings or other Improvements on the site at this time, \ but concrete foundation remnants of a previous structure are located within the southern portion of the site. The site is vegetated primarily by brush, with a few evergreen and deciduous trees mainly in the northern portion of the property. The southwestern part of the site is vegetated mainly by grass, with some areas of bare soil. We observed no areas of seepage or surface water runoff within the site. Subsurface conditions at the site were explored by means of six test pits and one boring located as shown on Figure 1. A description of the subsurface exploration program, and the logs of the test pits and the boring, are presented in the Appendix. Subsurface conditions at the site generally consist of 6 to 14 feet of brown silty sand overlying stiff gray silt. The upper 2 to 6 feet of the 4 silty sand is generally loose and the laver portion of that material is generally medium dense. The underlying gray silt increases in hardness with depth. In the southern portion of the site, primarily in the area of existing Lots number 7 through 10, three to five overlying the native soils. The fill material' sandy silt, and Includes wood debris. vni. "211.1G,nu24"a 9105020326 Isis ofll�i f T ��D FORVVR-0-000R`DDING C17Y OF EDMONDS BY i'15 PA13E4v Cf 3= 0 ...- oz.•.r.•-rr.�.,. s1 Y LJ • Gco 10 Filgilm" Hawley 6 McCorkle Vivember 22, 1989 Page 7 me DEC 12 1997 Cround water seepage was not observed in any of the test pits vithin the northern portion of the site, but ground water was •neountered in the southern part of the site at depths of 10 and 11 feet in test pits 1 and 2, respectively. HISTORY The site is located within the Meadowdale landslide complex, an area in which numerous large and small earth movements have hedl, dOCUmented fnr over 40 years, and in which movement has undoubtedly occurred for many centuries. A general description of landslide conditions in this area is provided in a landslide hazards report by Roger Love Associates, Inc. (RLAI) in their "Final Report, Landslide Hazards Investigation, `feadowdale Area, Edmonds, Washington," dated October 16. 1979. The site that is the subject of this consultation is located in an area classified in the 1979 R1AI report as "4A90". This classification designates a landslide hazard from movement of previously failed material, indicates that the failure would likely include a considerable depth of material, and estimates that there wns a 90 percent probability of such a failure occurring during a 25-year period. Portions of the subject site have experienced ground movements within the past 20 years. During the winter of 1970-71. a landslide occurred in the southeastern portion of the site, with the head scarp of the slide extending 50 feet east of 75th Place West. This slide area reportedly experienced 3 more inches of ground movement during the 5-year period between 1971 and 1976. and pavement cracks indicate that within the past few years the embankment which supports 75th Place West has experienced a small amount of additional ground movement. During 1973-74, another landslide occurred in the northwestern part of the site, mainly within the area of the " vacated 75th Avenue West (Seaside Avenue) right of way. The 1979 landslide hazards map was developed on the basis of conditions that existed prior to construction of the Meadow w drainage project. The relative landslide hazard vas eevalustd ATd/Aif�tZE D our fires and we concluded that the conditions which axis F[hditV �fRLC�gDIN Q hazardous, due primarily to a declining water abI se�(ylly(-Ezom - ON Dw7 �.Ii i T OF to vm BY 9105 0 2 0 3 2 f PAC3E?1OF 3-_ .11 i7 0 DEC 12 19V ui.► QAcIIgh1i'rfC Hawley 6 McCorkle November 22, 1989 Page 4 installation of storm and sanitary severs. However, some risk of landsliding still exists. We concluded that me of 1985. the risk of land• sliding as evaluated and classified in the RLAI report had been reduced to approximately 30 percent probability of failure in a 25-year period. Observations of ground water levels in nearly monitoring wells during the course of this consultation confirm that the water table In the vicinity of the site has declined to levels commensurate with this lover risk. CONCLUSIONS ARD RECOMMENDATIONS In our opinion, the property is suitable for residential development provided adequate care and practice in the design and construction of drainage, earthwork, structural walls and foundations are employed. These measures will make the lots within this property more expensive to develop than similar houses on lots without the conditions and history of ground movements that occur within this area. However, it is possible to develop lots within this property for residential use in a manner that will not reduce the stability of the site, or adjacent areas, during or following site development. The material that underlies tits site has previously been involved in landaliding. The risk of reoccurrence of such a landslide has been reduced by the declining water table in the area. This water table decline has been caused, at least in part, by Implementation of a storm and sanitary sever sysren. The risk reduction will remain as long as the overall storm end sanitary drainage system is functioning effectively. The risk level may further decline as development progresses, if that development includes more efficient drainage measures. The general recommendations in this report are directed t•jward avoiding localized slope stability problems and minimizing damage to residences within the tits in the event that significant movements occur. Large excavations or fills placed within the Rite could cnnceivahly reduce the stability of the site or adjacent areas. in orart Lo tt�lQRv ^l� effects, the net result of any site grading show d min1mAUT4.L7LecD change from the existing ground surface elevat ons, FOB, A fiCdQ RP1N G analyses demonstrate that no reduction in stabiliti wi CITY10F ED M O N D Y01.2/D6PAGE 24J4 8Y E1S PAGE Ze OF 12. • uuieu�� DEC z 1997 Hawley 6 NeCorkle November 22, 1989 Page S We recommend that structural design of foundations consider the possibility that future ground movement may occur. This movement could consist of differential settlement and/or irregular downslope movement. The risk of damage from ground movement to a structure at this site could be minimized by designing the entire house and foundation system ax a rigid unit. This design concept would peimit snme rotation or displacement of'the entire structure without sustainYng major structural damage. This technique would require substantial bracing and stiffening of _the structure, and in our opinion may not be cost eff-ctive. To accommodate some possible ground movement, we recommend that continuous spread footings be sufficiently stiff to accommodate complete loss of support beneath a substantial length of the footing, and that the foundation design be able to accommodate complete loss of support at any one isolated spread footing. The design should provide for re -leveling of the structure if necessary. We recommend that structures in the northern portion of the property (approximately existing Lots 1 - 6) be supported on spread footings founded on the native, medium dense silty send or stiff gray silt that underlies the property, or on structural fill supported by that native material. because of the thickness of fill in the southern portion of the property (mpprox- imately existing Lets 7 - 10), foundation support in that area may locally require grade beams supported by drilled pier footings extending through the fill material. Construction excavation within the southern portion of the property may encounter significant groundwater seepage and may require special subsurface drainage measures. The existing fill embankment along the vest side of 73th Place West has experienced recent settlement, possibry related to the declining water table, and that settlement Is likely to continue for at least several more years. i.tcavations near the toe of that embankment would require apeeisl provisions for shoring, and subsurface walls adjacent to that embankment would resist high lateral loads. vat. 24 34a5 91050:&0326 e to AUTHMFLED FOR RECORDING CITY OF EDMOND'S BY CTS PAGE 2_ OFF_ _ BUILD - DEC 12 1997 - Hawley 6 McCorkle November 22. 1989 Page 6 LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for your use in planning for possible short -platting and residential development of this site. Specific lot boundaries of the proposed short plat and design details of the residences were not available at the time this report va• prepared. There are possible variations and subsurface conditions from those observed in the explorations, and also with time. We recommend that additional site specific investigations be performed to provide a basis for specific foundation recommendations for each of the lots. We recommend that we be retained to review the final site development Plans to confirm that our opinions have been properly interpreted. Within the limitatiot. of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with generally accepted practices in this area at the time the report was prepared. No other conditions, express or implied, should be understood. • 0 0 0 - e . We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. / If there are any questions concerning this report or if we can provide additional services, please call. Yours very truly. CecEngineers, Inc. Donald W. Tubbs Senior Principal ?: Three copies submitted AUTHORIZED FOR `J, RECORDING 9 Copyright a 1989 CooEngineers. Inc., All Rights Resery d CITY OF • I c 0. El n J''`�+rff,* M�yyujy((��ry y�;�y,', t . 4.�y,,• ..tl.h •�y�t• ��'6lltt ��µ! /(• r [+it'r✓�`r. �;�r�. _Y'J}*�.'y''+t~1, ��':•. g4li�• 4�I�i� l�?�,'� .'�i� ��j�y'+'t��A•� ' ..� �� .� �" ��f'�.G.-•1'S.•.;F}%�p''•��i1.1� ' r �7'r l�1: e,l.:;. .�c .•s. ,Q-' x3� 1 `... 1 Y r.:. Yt y ,.`4-:• kip• �,.S� it' } "�� ,,�: �(.r,;� i�:f :� ;�.�•�.��,y��!,.+.firl �I i lfA�:t•: �1�-1 �la.:).if�r�rY��` r 1, 1�',.fJ�' .� 1 r"':�4�� f,.� � r.,r'L �►,� ;} � r ,�y i17 '(% I tY 1 it �� !�''4•i�•�'•'i�• �11. t �.� F IG't?� ♦;'7 Z..f �Y,1 P+. �• t�A. �l' �.. r L 'J tr"1 Y'r � �•�'f � i �� • �•i � iQi ..1;:;.; '{.1:;r� J!w.:.k=`. • �}'b. W' • t• r'•, :•. '�+:I.s rJc;r�.r 1••�': ; ti 6�� m ' , ' t 1, a: 1 ; E»ay ti �t'�, +�,�a; pCi' . �... �- .tr , . r �(�r''•, fj fix; 1.. F.1 t'• -0 1�, r '.� J'..� j.�. �t� •,�. .''i:} i yr . �y.. L. •, �+��•'�t 1• •. 1� '}''� �(•',:. >•y J. � l� r: :a:�~. :tr•• % � '•y'•f � �i c �,a •i! {y,`,, �`C'l �.�%r�....:rs��•.h;':`k:. i�t.. �i�, r,,r: j.,.:� ..'�1 .I;�.1: i,�Tt��'i•j��i�1�i,''�.�'MY'1'��I,A�1�!�•�`!,�i!�I'�t{j )''�1/�.�{�,•+.i.l•,,1, �r'�'r�:1'i'• 1�•�)��'A ti�� .•{�\•I �'��. �Y .A r• 0 so 100 SCALE IN FEET -p-Eoperlty Line II TP-2 TP— i - - ? DEC 12 1997 177. I INC.. KIFADU T LZ Ell V'CPOTV MAP No 60 FA - AUTHORlZF:iD FOR RECOR-i�NG CITY OF EDMONDS by PAGE_2_lL_•r ci PIP%, 9105020326 2 d 3 9 pAct 2 o AA 1W I �iiRDIR� DEC 12 1997 _ I. TP-S TP-a 1 PLA� IY ` 40 I TP-� ` I �TP-3 ` � • � � SFASn,.. E xrLAtIAT 1014: 9 1+ BORING. LOCATION AND NUMBER \ TP-'-$TEST r I T LOCATION AND NVI48ERFA HORIZED ECORDING F EDMONDS- RErERENCE: LOWER MEAOOWOALE OEACt1 rLATis MAPBT GROUP roVR, INC., DATED S U5020326 - Ls �G `f'"r tt%t'yv',°!,." ,.LS. � : 'r � '+ f '4;,,r., •�, �;..,.� y�";;: , � : , o.•; :; �� i; - - r re• .��.,,.... ,� �l,{ir ! ;i r1yt�{ /r�•'f. t, i ,j�:'. rr,",1n,'•1w r .4 ' {tf,�3¢F (rt:••'�.,•.`,�1. ....:,�i��..�.l.t ,�f��t�.? . ' •�1`. �.�'y3/t1",T"i ;i •S 1k : ` 'h �, '. �; �! �� f iv1 f'1rkt+'e�)�! ;.•�e��ir y r � i i �1�" �•( Haan :, BR _... _ BUILDING DEC 1 x .iyy t A P P E N D I X SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION FROcRm Subsurface conditions at the site were explored by means of six test pits and one boring. The test pits were excavated on August le, 1988 to depths of 11 to 17 feet using a tractor -mounted backhoe. The boring was drilled on August 23. 1988 to a depth of 39 feet using a hollow -stem auger drill rig. The explorations were continuously logged in the field by nn engineering geologist or geotechnical engineer from our firm. The soils encountered were classified in accordance with the system described in Figure A-1. A key to the boring log symbols is presented in Figure A-2. The logs of the test pits are shown in Figures A-3 and A-4, and the boring log is presented in Figure A-S. The exploration logs are based on our interpretations of the field observations and indicate the various types of soils encountered. They also indicate the depths at which these soils or their characteristics change, although the change might actually be gradual. AUTHORIZED FOR RECORDING CITY OF EDMONDS BY PAGE 27 OFF1- ri rot. 24 3 �. , 6PIGE2409 (.... 0 • S O 0 LABORATORY TESTS: AL Atterberg limits CP Compaction CS Consolidation DS Direct shear GS Grain -size analysis HA Hydrometer analysis K Permeablllly M Moisture content MD Moisture and density SP Swelling pressure TX Trlaalsl compression UC Unconfined Compression CA Chemical Analysis BUILDING DEC 1 z �yyl SOIL GRAPH: OM Soil Group Symbol (See Note 1) Distinct contact between ML Soil Strata Gradual Change between 8P- Soil Strata SM Waler Level Bottom of Boring BLOW-COUNT/SAMPLE DATA: Blows ieaulred to dive Dames 8 Moors sampler inches or .1120 Location of relatively orher Indicated distances using undisturbed sample Pound hammer falling 120 Location of disturbed sample Inches. 'P' Indicates sampler pushed with P ❑ Location of sampling attempt weight of hammer or hydraulics with no recovery of drill rig. 1012 Location of samole attempt using Standard Penetration Test procedures 40 0 Location of relatively undisturbed sample using 140 pound hammer falling 90 Inches. NOTES: I. Soil Classification system IL summarized In Figure A-1. 2. The reader must refer to the discussion In the report text as well as the explorallon logs lot a prop of subsurface conditions. AUTHORIZED FOR RECORDING CITY OF EDMONDF BY- -------- PAGE -2S \(I/ Geo Engineers nears KEY TO BORING LOG SYMBOLS lsAz El FIGURE A-2 U 2 AGE Y 0 , . r} �,• i �1 Z s . .'sa1a� E-1 801CD1a DEC 12 1997 LOO OF TEST PIT DErm saaw sm OnOu► GROIJto SU VACE CtASSFICATION OfET1 symixx DESUNPt7ON 0.0 - 3.0 SM TZST PIT TP-1 GRATISR IROWH SIL1T SAND WITH CtArtL• WOOD DEIRIS AND RDOTS (LOOSE. DAMP 3.0 - 6.0 ML RROWNTSM CRAT SANOT SILT WITS GRAVEL. WOOD D/IRIS AND ROOTS (SO/T, MISTI 6.0 - 0.0 ML CUT SAMDT SILT WITH ROOTS (TOUT. MOIST) 9.0 - 11.0 SN CRATISW RROWW SILTT SAND WITR CIUAPEL (MEDIUM DKOSE. MOIST) Tt3T PIT CDMMCTta AT 11.0 TEST MINOR SWAGS DISIMVED AT 10.0 /EET 0.0 - 0.3 ML Tt2r nr tr-: DARK INOWN SANDT SILT WITS ROOTS (SO/T. DAMP) 0.3 - 3.3 SM CRAT AND IROWN SILTT SAND WITH ROOTS ANO W000 OtIR1S (LOOSt. DAMP) 3.3 - 3.0 ML MMOTTLED CUT APO $*OWN SANOT SILT WITH ROOTS (SO/T. DAMP) 3.0 - 7.0 ML CRAT SANOT SILT (STI►/. MOTSTI 7.e - 0.0 Sm CRAT SILTY SAND (MEDIUM CCRSt. MIST) 0.0 - 11.0 SP CHAT SAND (MQDIIM DtHtt. YET) 71.0 - lT.O ML CRAY SILT (PERT STt/►. MOIST) 11.0 - 11.0 ML CUT LILT (PtRY STI" TO BARD. MIST) TtST PIT COP rTn AT IS.I ►tt? StE►ACt OISERVED AT 11.0 IttT 0.0 - 3.0 SM T7(St PIT TP-3 OUTISR IN" SILTY SANG WITH CHAnL AND ROOTS (LOOSE. DAMP) 3.0 - 1.0 SM RtD^1SH BROWN AND CUT SILT? SAND WITH ROOTS (LOOSE. DAMP) 0.0 - 6.0 ML CUT SAWN SILT (KITT. MOIST) 0.0 - 13.0 SM SROMIISM CUT SILTT SAND (MEDIUM DENSt. MOIST) 11.0 - 14.0 HL CLAY SAN" IILT (ST1// is Val IIIff. HUM 14.9 10.6 IN OUT SILT? SANG (IRt011" OCR 2. MIST TD WCT) TEST PIT COM►LtTEO AT 16.0 rM 1b IEtPACt OI1EtVEF AUTHORIZED OR RECORDING Y OF EDMONDS TRt Ot/"I OR Tot TEST PIT LOOS. ALTMOUCR SHOWN TO 8.1 ►OOT. M AYMACS M MLASI MC071 ACROSS TUC TEST ►IT AND SNOIMLD I1 CMIIDCRID ACCVRATt TO 0.3 ►OOT. Ife GcQ� Etl�;l PiU c4 - pnn': ,t FIGURE A- Il('CI'ti CJ ill Vol. ' . Perr2dhf V0 Uz 0 .4> 4 t� s v JL 3 0 - ,. i ~y, • DEPTH BELOW SOIL Crl" OnOUro SUniACE CLASSMAT1OM MET) ST14oOL • I � I I II J o ES�ji IMI BUILDING DEC .14 1997. LOCI OF TEST PIT TIST I'll, "-R 0.0 - 4.0 SM LROWN AND 120WISP CUT LILTT LARD win etLL AY. WOOD CEBRIL AND ROOTS (LOOSt TO MEDIUM DENSE, DA)P) 4.0 - 10.0 SM. CRAT AND NNOWNISM CRAY SILTY SAND VITM CIARL AND ROOTS (MEDIUM D►.NSE. HOIST$ 10.0 - 14.0 ML CRAY SILT AND SILYT CLAY (BARD, DAMP) TEST PIT COMPLETED At 14.0 ►t9t RO St9PACI OBSENYED 0.0 - 2.0 SM TEXT PIT TP-S BROWN SILTY SAND WITS GRAVEL, WOOD DEBRIS ARM ROOTS (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, DAMP) 2.0 - 6.0 BP REOCISX BLOWN SARO VITA ROOTS (MEDIUM DEPSc. DRY) 4.0 - 6.0 ML CRAT SILT MITI ROOTS M'.'IT STIR. DAMP) 6.0 - 0.0 B► BROY11IfR OUT SAND WITS ROOTS (DENSI, DRY) 0.0 - 12.0 ML CRAY SILT (KIA TO SLOT STI►►. DAMP) 1J.0 - 16.0 MR. CRAY SILT (IIARD. DAMP) TEST TIT COMPLETED AT 14.0 ►EET RO SEXPACC 0119ERM 0.0 - 4.0 SM TEST PIT tP-0 TEDIUM SPOWN SILTY LAND WITS CRAVtL AND ROOTS (LOOSE. DRY) 4.0 - 8.0 S)1 UMISR }ROWN AND COAT SILTY SAND WITS GRAVEL AND ROOTS (MEDIUM DENSE. DAMP) 0.0 - 14.0 Sol BROWNISH CRAY SILTT LARD WITS GRAVEL (MED29M DTNfc, DAMP) I4.0 - 11.0 ML CRAY SILT AND SILTY CLAT (VIRT LTI►P TO IUUW. MM0221) TEST PIT COMPLETED AT 11.9 ►eel PO Scc►ACt OOBta AUTHORIZED FOR RECORDING CITY OF EDMOND'' BY E PAGE ri Q' 31 TRS orms ON TIES felt PIT L(CS. %M BMW TO 0.1 root, ARt LARD an AN AVERAOc 0r ItABUAma"I ACROR in TSST ►IT AM SOW" It CONSIOCRtD ACCVRATS t0 O.f FOOT. -•-• i M LOO OF TEST PIT Geo Engineers FIGURE -a '1 Y 9-LO502 U 3 2 6 voi. PAG[ 4 62 Am x \ r- ILDINIR �,. DEC 1 z 1997 T=DATA BORING B-1 Y • 7C ✓ • �Y _ �Sryi• � � 0. O ~ SywMd I)IS('RIPIION SafateF.kwletw: • J LY o iJ mu � Sr Gea rwesand r eM+ne.•�:•u 0 S SM Gray rme uMy uwd (k~. nr W) $ Sp 10 - 10 r- 1j Ml. (:ray sandy rih (re;rf. me.a) iS W 16 ■ ML Gny yin (miff. nw,m CL 20 10 \ O, O 17 ■ n M 25 25 u AUTHORIZED 30 FOR RECORDING -" ' CITY OF EDMOND 26 ■ e • . 3s BY - 1S n PAGE -, OF.%I I 0 a ■ Gnder M.e,y.l;rt -- - F% g erwr t ",at m o fm On t/2.va • •" b No. .01e, exewolned riexw 4" iartaned 10 der1A of 21 Ire 1 ~ No1r See Fryet A•2 fa etplawN{00 trf ayenM+lr y Leo p Engineers Log of Boring Figure A-5 vol.21136PAGF240 ? LOG OF TEST PIT : ;.;• DEPTH BELOW anon O SUF FACE ?EET) sm anoup CL ASSFIZAT10N SyLam OESCrWrIO" i rm PIT TP-A BM SROWW AND 1110001111 CRAY SILTY BARD WITE CRAYE., w000 tLSRts AND i` ROOT$ (LOOS[ TO MEDIUM DENIS. DAMP) 10.0 tM CUT AND BNOWNISN CRAP SILTY BARD WiYN cRAYtL AND ROOTS (MEDIUM DEMSE. MOISTI ML CRAT SILT APO SILTY CLAY 4WD, DAMr) Tt1T PIT CeMPLtTED AT 14.0 rE1I NO SEErAcE OBSERVED ' Tcrr ►1T TT-] BM IROYN SILTY BARD WITH CRAYTL. WOOD Until AND ROOTS (LOOIS TD Mn11M DENIS. DAM►I E.0 - 4.0 IF REODISN BROWN BARD WITS! ROOT/ (MEDIUM DENSE. DRY) 4.0 - 6.0 ML CRAY SILT SPITE ROOTS ('.!VET stir►. DAM?) 6.0 - 4.0 IF /ROYNtSN GNAT RAND WITS ROOTS (DENSE, DRY) . 6.0 - 1t.$ ML CRAT SILT (OTIPY TO Yt" ,TITS. DAMP) 1 1:.0 - 14.6 IB. CRAT SILT (RARD. DAMP) "It Pit COMPLETED AT 1A.0 ►tst NO SUPACt OBSERVED , 0.0 - 4.6 pl TM PIT TF-S MEDIUM BROWN SILTT -AND Win CRAYEL AND ROOTS (UMt. OR?) 4.0 - 1.0 IN R=tSN BROWN AWD CRAY SILTY BARD WITH CRAvrL AND ROOT/ (MEDIUM DENSE, DAMP) 0.0 - 14.0 ,M BNOWRISII CRAT SILTY SAND Win CRAYEL (MEOIOM DENIS. DAMP) 14./ - 11.0 ML CRAT SILT AND SILTT (LT (ITLRT STtrr To RAVED, MOIST) •'� TEST PIT COMPLETED AT 1I.6 rat • ! NO SUPACE 009 AUTHORIZED FOR RECORDING CITY OF EDMOND!' BY • I I11T DEPT" 00 1" TEST AGE --[ ' PIT LOCI. ALT110UR0 IN" to I.I TOOT. A� BASED J r� IRS TS/t PIT AND $00" BE COMSIDIA" ACCURATR OR AN AT�t 01 MEA,VRbERT B�ACROSS TO O.S ►OUT, 1 1 M LOG OF TEST PITGeoRpEnginecrs W FIGURE A-S f+ G G 3 2 0^ Vol. 6 PAGE 4 62 .' - 10 f{ r•L . � 1 a M �1 D u 1 1 I • e 1 M • A /I N • � a DEC 1 z w7 n=DATA BORING B-1 -1 nl:scr(IrnoM yfti C`• S-f—F�I+HiO�. 0 sr Gray fhle MOW (kmw...nial) 0 S 5 SM Cny rwe.Ilwy sand (k we. nw o) Sh IMlr.lw ►ine and (Mrwl, Inl:.t) 10 10 F 15 M1• Gray sandy sill (.1iff, nw W) iS su 1u a ~ 16 ■ MI. Cray w•N (.lift, wnoial) IL 6 8 20 I0 17 ■ 1 251 1 11 1 11 F- 25 1 ■ AUTHORIZED 30 FOR RECORDING '0 CITY OF EDMOND x ■ 35 BY - n-5 as PAGE �I cow" in stiff f4win(anlhlelell al to ferl Owl y •. No /mald wMM ewllllwrlwlelwd 40fiewror/er Inablled le dgwh d 24 fee( L M Maw` See Rpn A•2 for c W lms/ion d synlbcM . •V Log of Boring Ge0 �Engi�1eers Fi uro A-S � g yet. 211.19 PArr 9 J i"; jadO67 El f74 �-t y !sa,091 '6" 7d L14- SG , V',rC t� fCri:I C, t,: 'I:iii AnbIj L r. t' .,.r .1;( t tU t; iL;: s C, L - Lu tt IL �� mdy @„�rf;:: err.,-. Y a 4i1I4 J Si : ; D:> i'Cu a fo, the a city of nCIG. nc. I,o C..:,,::, _ v c 4:i uselis4o„ providi;U ti, ��r,�m2"c� . this nor for , or: O z M 7� 1— O a d d PO t*i N I z M O z 0 z IN a O m fL 0 N a f/f M a z 0 ODD- O/ 0 b When recorded mail to: City Clerk . City of Edmonds 121 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 IVtlI�h�MlzWfIMIM1WIo�V�WIIiW nohomish Bso ohs E�oaoEo Countv RECORDER'S NOTE: PORTIONS OF THIS DOCUMENT ARE POOR QUALITY FOR SCANNING. SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE Assessor's Parcel No. mSl CaSq tro3 trrso� Project No. & Name: Right -of -Way Permit No. OrD — D i ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT This ENCROACHMENT AGREEM>NT ("Agrement") is entered into between the CITY OF EDMONDS ("City") and ( 1 �_� ..1 "S- . ,c ("Owner"), in accordance with Chapter 18.70 of the Edmonds Community Development Code. 1.pcM. Owner is the owner of that certain real property located at, Z� r 7Sty..'�Lw within the City of Edmonds, Washington, Assessor's Parcel Numbed I a I ��l so 3 �yo y , and more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, 2. The Easement. City currently owns an existing easement over, under, and across Owner's property for which easement is described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated by reference. 3. The Encroachment. City hereby covenants and agrees and grants its permission to Owner to allow Z- u S e f aY a o y e : w e_kk s. to remain in a portion of the easement. A plat showing the location of the encroachment is attached as Exhibit "C" attached hereto and incorporated by reference. This Agreement is subject to the following terms and conditions: a. The encroachment shall be installed and maintained in a safe and sanitary condition at the sole cost, risk, and responsibility of the owner and its successors in interest. . b. The Owner shall agree at all times to indemnify and hold the City free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, losses, damages or expenses resulting from the construction, maintenance, use, repair or removal of the structure installed hereunder, including -L- r EM any loss, damage or expense arising out of (1) loss or damages to property and (2) injury to or death of persons. C. The Owner must remove or relocate any part of the encroachment within ten (10) days or such other time as specified in the notice after receipt of it from the City Engineer, or the City Engineer may cause such work to be done and the reasonable cost thereof shall constitute a lien upon the property. d. Whatever, rights and obligations were acquired by the City with respect to the easement shall remain and continue in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected by city's grant of permission to construct and maintain the encroachment structure. 4. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes and replaces all other agreements, oral or written, between the parties with respect to the subject matter. 5. Notices. Any notice which is required or may be given pursuant to this Agreement shall be sent in writing by United States mail, first class, postage pre -paid, registered or certified with return receipt requested, or by other comparable commercial means and addressed as follows: City Engineer City of Edmonds 121 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 which addresses may be changed from time to time by providing notice to the other party in the manner described above. 6. Waiver. City's consent to or approval of any act or omission by Owner shall not constitute a waiver of any other default by Owner and shall not be deemed a waiver or render unnecessary City's consent for approval to any subsequent act by Owner. Any waiver by City of any default must be in.writing and shall not be a waiver of any other default concerning the same or any other provision of the Agreement. 7. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding and inure to the benefit of the parties* hereto and their _respective legal representatives, successors, and assigns. Owner agrees to incorporate this agreement by reference in any subsequent deeds to , the property, but any failure to do so does not invalidate this provision. 8. capacity. Each party represents that the person(s) executing this Agreement on behalf of such party has the authority to execute this Agreement and by such signature(s) thereby bind such party. IN S WHERE the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on this day of �� 20 OWNER: By: STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH CITY OF EDMONDS By: e . ames C. Walker, "PE City Engineer This day, personally appeared before me,Z:r" / ., to me known to be the person who executed the within and foregoing document and that signed the same as hL� free and voluntary act and deed for the .uses: and purposes therein mentioned. _ P CONSTANCE M. CURTIS Notary Public. NOTARY PUBLICCayzlv�ct- 11/1- - Typed or Printed Name STATE IS ION EXPIRESTON My Commission expires: 16q l0 COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 0. 2003 QWy Doaunrnts\Enp-T0RMST=mw*Agw.&c - 3 - 156 URN ADDRESS: of Edmonds, City Clerk ..J 11-5-th Avenue North 'Ed m.bjWs, WA 98020 9901191119 01/19/99 15:01 1111111111 p.0007 Recorded Snohomish County i -''COVENANT "* OF NOTIFICATION, A NO MDE CATION/HOLD HARMLESS Reference #: 7 7.!13 q-810 q 12 Grantor(s): (1) (2)AAMULAA151441 Additional on pg._ I Grantee(s): ou of-Cdnwiids . . ...... ... .. ... Legal Description (abbr"'teO);."•Sec' Ott.- Lqf. A` Block �� Plat Z 3 9 0 Assessor's Tax Parcel ID#(s): (I)—' at 1 7...65 q 003 - coo! (2 �-�ssessor:ps.Tax Pairrel ID# not yet assigned ---------- --- CITY Of EDMONDS APPROVED FOR.REC.ORDNG. BY: JZ6 DATE: :PAGE OF Under the review procedures established pursuaht. td...1 . he %,Stiitid_--.Building Code, incorporating amendments promulgated by the City: -of E monds, and as a prerequisite to the Issuance of a building permit for the c6usti4ction . '9f -it'-residential structure and attendant facilities, the undersigned OWNER84i.pir'opply dd.. hereby covenant, stipulate and promise ....... follows: •4 APPROVED FOR RECORDING: BY: DATE: PAGE '� OF adon of Suhicct Property, This covenant of notification an d indefnnifltatid"old Harmless relates to a tract of land at the street address of /(v40 i�/�3Ce %1�eST' (insert street address',-Ednronds•Snobomish County, Washington and legally described as: ,.. ..See-ihe. attached paper for the legal de3cgptions'"of the property } 2. Notification and Covenant of Notiflea The above referenced site (hereinafter "subject site') lies within an are•.a which has been identified by the City of Edmonds as having a potential for earth iindslide hazard. The risks associated with development of the site have been ••evaluated by technical consultants and engineers engaged by the applicadt••as'•,a•'part•"o.t, the process to obtain a building permit for the subject site. The resulti• of the consultant's reports and evaluations of the risks associated with development ire .ebntained'ln. building permit file number ) (insert number) on fife. witit -4he -'City of Edmonds Building Department. Conditions, limitations, or.-grohibitious on development may have been imposed in accordance with the reconimMd"a"tlons iif 9901191 119 . ... .... A P PROVED FOR RECO BY.DATE: PAGE R. EDJ2 1Ir OF `.be eongtiltaat,S`in::the course of permit issuance. The conditions, limitations, or prvlfibitidnsjnay rpquire ongoing maintenance on the part of any owner or lessee or may require inddifim0pris to the structures and earth stabilization matters in order to a,ddr'eS-s..,fut-u-rP,-,b`r-- anticipated changes in soil or other site conditions. The statements 0--,ati 4..-' conditions proposed by the 0VVMRS1 geotechnical engineer, geologist, archj-teci.giy&ar•st-u"stu al engineer are hereby incorporated by reference from the conten&-.-of`-(h6'flte---4*s fully as if herein set forth. Any future purchaser, lessee, leader or ank-.othiir-persoa 4cquiring or seeking to acquire an Interest in the property is put on noti- of -�).te Ole. content of the file and the City urges review of its contents. ThQ file -. wiy bt-reviewed during normal business hours or copies obtained at the ' Building.-Department,-'City.of Edmonds, 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, Washington 98020. 3. Indemnification -and Hold HhrmleM..---*,The----. undersigned OWNERS hereby waive any and all liability associated' withiJevp:lop ment, stating that they have fully informed themselves of all risI6..iol6ciOd--With development of the property and do therefore waive and relinquish any*iand'119 can % ses of action against the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and empIoY:ees:--arisitij5rdm and out of such development. In addition, the OWNERS on behalf o'f"ilij"m*'-s"e*lvjes*,'"their successors in Interest, heirs and assignees, do hereby promise to indeninify:*i.d.... A01.0-b*rmless the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and employees from any 1ptim, . li0flity or damage of any kind or nature to persons or property eithe'3r.-4c.-ii off ific site . : 2 resulting from or out of earth subsidence or landslide hazard, ariilpg*irvf� or. but of the issuance of any permit(s) authorizing development of the site, 6T 9901191119 • 4L 0 . APPROVED FOR REC ING• BY: DATE: o $ PAGE OF arising .oat of;. ai1j..lalse, misleading, or inaccurate information provided by the 0N1;,ItS, tjieir employees, or professional consultants in the course of issuance of the building,pirTuit:". . 4• In addition to any. bonding which may be required duri4g 'the course-•,bf. development, the Community Services Director As/has not (strike'oe}`sp�eificaally required the maintenance of an insurance policy for public liability cby'q`age'iii the amount and for the time set forth below in order to provide for the finalicial..Kesponsfbilities. ..established through the indemnification and hold harmless agreenten%-above: 5. Covenant to Touch and C`nnrarn r �atid.; This covenant of notification and indemnification/hold harmless'"'touches•••aud concerns the subject tract and shall run with the land, binding, obligating and'/oi^ inuring to the benefit of future owners, heirs, successors and interests `or ''airy other~ '-person or entity acquiring an interest in property, as their interest may.appear:-Tlhis-provision shall not be interpreted to require a mortgagor or lender to iuhde.th iify thi'City except to the extent of their loss nor to obligate such persons to main'taiti .theinsaraiwe above required. 9901 191119 . ...... ...... APPROVED FOR RECORPIN.G. BY: DATE PAGE OF DO�!,E,tkk day of 199 OWNER(S). . .. .. ......... By: By: By STATE OFWASIUNGTON"..- ss: COUNTY OF K,�A , zz� I certify that I know or have satfsfac06 evidence : that 4&z i`\- s!gied this Instrument and . .. acknowledged it to be (his/her) free and act for the purposes mentioned in this Instrument. j.r ...'-,,DATED this t 1 day of 1997. .. .......... v CS OTARY Pt My commission expires: LATEMPMUELDINGUHRADOVACOVENANT 9901191119 % ........ 1' " EED FOR RECORDING: DATE •/o OF DON. this day of-•^-4-- ,199 q OWNER(S) By. . By STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF S'�i �= �1 �rYli•s 6 ) ss: I certify that I know or have satisfR.GtoryeVidence that`-�-�-- �'�2i �- signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be (his er free and volftptary_act^for the purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this 10 day of -- — 9199 7k, „P� -- 'a�'0�O" MAIM NOTARY PUBI:,IC'' E*APPCZh*llrMU"Md'r J0• 7D01 My commission expires; • ` o o U ....... L:NTENMOUI .DINGMEADOMCOVENANT 9901191 119 EXHIBIT A ' That••'portion'•.of Lots 3 and 4, Block 59, Meadowdale Beach, ac;=�dinq--- o--the plat thereof recorded in Volume 5 of Plats, page 38-; recoz:hs .of• -Snohomish County, Washington, '. EXCtPT 0-hat pogtilon conveyed to the City of Edmonds for 75th .Placa..Qest bj deeds recorded under Recording Nos. 7906190311 through ,.79b�1A0]1,5 j TOGETHER WITW-*hportion of abutting 75th Avenue West as vacated by Ordinance No. 2073, recorded June 19, 1979 under'•Recdxrding No:,7906190310, and a portion of 75th Place West as vacaied'under,Drdinance No. 2799, recorded December 7, 1990 under Recording N+o. ;9012O7'Q096, the whole being more particularly described ad folloW.d: Commencing`*aL..the..Northeast corner of Lot 3; THENCE North 87•,!351434 West along the North line thereof 10.33 'feet to the We'ster3y line CC the Easterly 10 feet of said block and the WesterV*.jgar''§I-q.*f TSth Place West, as established by said Ordinance No..'.' 27.99;%,peirig the -.point of beginning; THENCE South 16.5.9'b'7".West•Along slid Westerly line and road margin 100.49 feet•;,_ THENCE North 87.3514_3" West; parallel with the line common to said lots, 149.88 feeet'•to-'•intefsect the Westerly margin of said vacated portion of 75th..Avenfie West at ,a:.point on the arc of a curve from which the center lies North 74'1!29139" West 5258.80 feet distant; THENCE Northerly along said Westerly !AaYgin'and curve to the left through a central angle of 1905''0811.an arc length of 99.64 feet to intersect the Westerly prolongot ion..cf the North line of said Lot 3; THENCE South 87035143" East along laid pYolongation and said North line a total distance of '•153.5j...f'�et••to the point of (ALSO KNOWN AS Parcel 1 of City of $dmolids;5hoxt Plat No. 5-23-90 recorded under Recording No. 9105026326.)•..••' TOGETHER WITH an easement for ingress•'and-egfess over and across that portion of abutting Lot 2 in said B1o6k 59,""deitribed as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of the 8•bovedescribea- parcel; THENCE. North 87•35143" West along the line 'Cwwn m-io said parcel and said Lot 2 a distance of 15.00 feet; THENCE North 16059117" East, parallel with the.Nesterly margin of 75th Place West, a distance of 15.00 feet; '. THENCB South 87.35143" East, parallel with said`Mmmorv'lirrb, 15.00 feet to said road margin; • " THENCE South 16.59?17" West along said road margiri•1,:'00:fe'dt td the point of beginning. Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washing --top':' 9901191119 �GROUPFOUA Inc. i 16030 Juanita -Woodinville Way NE Bothell, Washington 98011 FAX (206) 362-3819 (425) 775-4581 - (206) 362.4244 o-mail.• Info@grp4.com Jeannine Graft Building Official City of Edmonds 121 5'h Avenue N. Edmonds, Washington, 98020 To Whom it May Concern; A �AA. ciryNFSF9 10of vOi �soNosscr9. This letter is in response of your request for the South wall on Al Ansari property, at 9304 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, Washington. On September 14, 2001 Group Four, 111c. Surveyed the wall in question, and found that it did not encroach on the property to the South of Mr. Ansari. S'ncerely yours, John C. ,Knapp, P.L.S. LS No. 30435 w;\G4PR01\01-303UUi r•cdmonds I00401. doc 0 SURVEYING F.NGINL RING PLANNING MANAGEMENT ZOO/Z00Z SHIN,LSd11 ONI H110ti d1102t9 99LC ZOr SZr XVI 80:ST NOR TOOZ/ZZ/OT • FAX TRANSMITTAL ... li • �1� • TOTAL PAGES (Includes Cover Page) 7— • (31 GROUP F0Un .roc. 16030 Juauila-Woodinville Wiy NE Bothcll, WA 98011 Office fax (206) 362-3819 Survey/Engineering Fax (425) 402-3766 (206) 362-4244 + (425) 775-4581 e-mail: info(iagrp4.com DATE: Ii�-ZZ- Q I_ JOB NO. �_- TIME RE: IF ALL PAGES ARE NOT RECEIVED PLEASE CALL (206) 362A244 or (425) 775A581 THESE ARE TRANSMITTED: 0 For Your Use 6�As Requested For Review and Comment REMARKS Copy to SURVEYING ENGINEERING Sig 0 For your Approval I'LANNING MANAGEMENT W:1FORMS\G4 Imern.a1 F000ffixCover khmd.doe Z00/T00[ SHIN.LSda 3XI Uaoj daodq 99LC ZOi' SZr XVd 80:ST 011 TOOZ/ZZ/OT Telephone: (206) 284 5042 (206) 769 5823 IV So Neil H. Twelker and Associates, Int. APR 2 4 2001 Consulting Geotechnicai Engineers PUkt T 0NZ�� 610 Wheeler St., No. 404 Seattle, Wa. 98109 April 12, 2001 City of Edmonds 171 5th Ave. N. Edmonds WA 98020 Re: Ansari Residence, 16008 75th Place W., Edmonds WA Permit No. 981902 Ladies and Gentlemen: For the past two years we�have taken part in the geotechnical aspects of the construction of a single family residential structure at 16008 75th Place W. in Edmonds. In the following paragraphs we present a report" of theoutcomeof this work. Soils encountered in the excavations were primarily overconsolidated granular deposits of glacial origin. All soils exposed in the actual foundation preparation were considered to be easily capable of the bearing pressures which had been called out in the original design. The Meadowdale Slide Because this project is located.in an area which is known to have been subjected to large-scale earth movement, we believe that some discussion of the possibility of renewed activity and of the steps which have been taken in this project for the remediation of landslide. damage, is in order at this point. Information on the geologic and recent history of the Meadowdale area, as well as prognostications for the continued stability of the various parts of the area, is available in a report prepared by Roger Lowe and Associates, Inc., for the City of Edmonds, dated Oct. 16, 1979. The slide area has a length variously estimated at 2100 to 3400 feet (depending on topographic interpretations), and a width of 400 to 600 feet. The project is located near the southerly quarter point of the slide area, a short distance from the lower (westerly) margin. The history as related in the Lowe report refers to principal episodes of slide activity. in the winter of 1946-47, and the winter of 1955- 56, Minor or local episodes are also reported from 1948, the 1960's, and the winter of 1970/71. The Lowe report expresses the opinion that the slide was precipitated initially by shore -line erosion and reactivatedfrom time to time by the infiltration of surface water. We are"inclined City -of Edmonds April 12 2001 PagE to the opinion that subsurface hydrostatic pressures (which could be fed from distant recharge areas) may also contribute heavily to deep-seated failures. The Lowe report predicts the area of this project to have a 95 per cent chance of undergoing "ground failure in previously failed material" within a twenty five year period. The expression "ground failure in previously failed material" is taken to mean movement of a mass of material which has moved on one or more previous occasions (i.e., reactivation of a rotational slide). As far as we know, the "Meadowdale Slide Area" area did not undergo significant episodes of earth movement during the periods of heavy precipitation of the recent decade. Although the regulations of the City of Edmonds do not appear to require that new construction should include steps to repair the damages which could occur in the event of recurrence of earth movement, it was our belief that a project of this importance should contain some provisions for the restoration of the structure, should this ever be required. We have pointed out in earlier correspondence that piling foundations would not be capable of preventing the rotation of the large block of soil which would be involved in a repeat occurrence of landslide activity. As a matter of fact, piles would constitute a major encumbrance to a releveling effort. The original design of this structure included a support system which could be releveled as needed, in the event of a rotational disturbance. Modifications were made to the releveling system during the course of construction. All foundation elements are underlain by redundant elements which were placed on firm over - consolidated soil. The redundant elements are not structurally connected to the upper foundations nor to the superstructure of the building; they serve simply as jacking points in the event releveling of the house should ever be required. The remainder of the construction steps for the substructure and its peripheral features (e.g., drainage, backfill, and erosion protection, etc.) were completed without difficulty. Although the landscaping part of the project was still in progress at the time of our final inspection (April 3, 2001), we observed that the remaining barren soil areas were bounded at their.lower margins by retaining walls which would prevent the escape of any soil particles which might be displaced by surface runoff. In summary, it is our conclusion that the geotechnical aspects of the project have been executed very well, and that this house is far better equipped than most to survive a reactivation of the Meadowdale Slide, should such an event ever take place. NHT:nt cc: AI Ansari OF WA S/t7 •p ��' • f � o ' z %'� •emu' 5757 40FGISIEr� ... S�ONAL EXPIAEs 31131 0 2 Very truly yours, NEIL H. TWELKER AND ASSOC., INC. by % /1 Neil H. Twelker, Pres. 111c.1So)v • 10 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771-0221 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning • Building • Engineering ANSARI HEIGHT CHECK 4/12/01 16008 75" PLACE WEST PERMIT #980912 TOP OF MANHOLE COVER RIM TO TRANSIT = 6'-0" GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR MANHOLE COVER ELEVATION PER SITE PLAN: 88.66' +6.00' 94.66' Actual Height 94.75' Maximum Allowed - ok Verified by City Staff: Snook and Bullis • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • .qictor Citu - Holrinan .lanan • 0 0 CHENOWETH & ASSOCIATES, INC., P.S. o Land Surveyors & Planners 18130 Midvale Ave. N., Suite A Seattle, Washington 98133 (206) 542-2188 206) 672. 333 November 6, 2000�';L ?5 RECEIVED r. flado Milosavljevic NOV 2 2 2000 AN `�L ENTERPRISES 4GINEERING DIVISION 8428 NE 203rd St. Bothell, WA 98011 RE: New House Construction: Cole/Merritt Project At 18006 75th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA Dear Milo: At your request I am writing this letter to describe the surveying services that Chenoweth & Associates, Inc., P.S., has provided on your project at the above -referenced property, being known as Lot 1 of Edmonds Segregation S24-90, recorded under Auditor's File Number 9012280448. The following are the services performed: In June 1999 you requested that we stake the location for the 90+ pilings that were needed for your foundation. The piling locations and building location were positioned per the plot plan as shown on the approved plan that you provided. The vertical control was established for height from the same datum as shown on the plot plan. The basis was the top of a manhole with an elevation of 50.17. The horizontal control was based on found property corners set by G-4 Surveyors for the original segregation. 2.) In December 1999 we were again called to the site to check the height of the roof trusses to verify their conformance to the approved plan height for peak. 3.) In June 2000 we were called to the site to perform an as -built survey of your project (as requested by the City of Edmonds). Our survey denoted two -foot contours over the entire site. Also, the exhibit depicted the exact location of the house under construction and various improvements on site. The exhibit also denoted floor elevations and peak of roof elevation at this time. The horizontal and vertical control for this as -built were again based upon the original staking and the original datum as mentioned before. Various exhibits pertaining to the aforementioned work performed are attached. • • Sincerely, Albert W. Chenoweth, P.L.S. #9567 CHENOWETH & ASSOCIATES, INC., P.S. AC:cc • • Item COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEMO Committee: Community Services / Development Services Meeting Date: October 10, 2000 Subject: Discussion on Right -of -Way Use Near 16008-75' Place West F From: Don Fien ,P.E., Acting City Engineer Mayor: Comments: Development of a property at 16008-75h Place West has raised issues regarding the use of the right-of-way in the area. Sidewalks on the west side of 75`h Place West are part of the long range walkway plan. As expressed by citizens in the area, pedestrian safety problems have long been a concern. A recent petition signed by over 30 residents supports the walkways primarily for this reason. The current. owners (Ansari/ Modarress), along with other owners in the area, have paid into a fund to construct the walkway improvements. A neighbor on the east side of 75' Place West has raised an issue regarding his right to park in the right-of-way. This owner (Ebert at 16031-75" Place West) has parked adjacent to the property at 16008-75' Place West .for many years. Continuing to do so would not allow for sidewalks to be constructed as currently planned on 75t . Place West. In 1990, the issue of parking problems exaceberated by the development of the right-of-way on 75`h Place West was raised by the Eberts. In reaction to this concern, the City Council directed staff to initiate the request for a street use permit for parking for Mr. Ebert on the east side of 75th Place West. However, there is not a current street use permit at this location. It also should be noted that street use permits are not irrevocable. In any event, it appears that the right-of-way has been used for ten plus years without a permit. Staff would like to discuss the issue in detail with Council and ask for direction regarding the. future use of the right-of-way. City of Edmonds uu Ir-Uj-000U Uy ; C i Hn Y i I I MhN tN I LKVK 1 6L. 4'L 644 . (U Q JOHN J. PITTMAN, P.E. PITTMAN ENTERPRISPS, INC. 15118 SE 43rd street Bellevue, WA §8006 Phone: (425) 562-7226 Fax: (425) 644-7072 FAX COVER DATE: 70z �lllt6lg�� 0 C : 3 - 2000 SHEET TIME: _ (7 . 2-0 4vl{ TO: c�Pct "'U-P _ PHONE: 2�'- f -02.2 O COMPANY: C_.r4 RE: t CC: COMPANY: PHONE: FAX: Number of pages including cover sheet: 2- The contents of this facsimile transmission are confidential. If you receive this transmission in error, please destroy the contents and advise the sender. OCT-03-2000 09:22 AM PITTMAN ENTERPRISES 425 644 7072 P.02 PITTMAN ENGINEERING Civil Engineering and Consulting MEMORANDUM D u 1 L D I eN D 0 C 1 3 - 20H Date: October 3, 2000 To: Ms. Jeannine Graf City of Edmonds, Building Official From: John J. Pittman, P.E. RE: Ansari Residence Site Visit 16008 — 75`h Place West; Edmonds, WA. On October 2, 2000, 1 visited the above property. "Che construction of.the block walls is complete. Some minor backfill material is recommended behind the lower west wall and at the upper east wall; however, the walls are stable and solid at this time. The interlocking of the blocks appears to be good. The overall construction looks good. The maximum height of wall is four feet. Where visible, the footing drains appear to be installed correctly. 15118 SE 43rd St. • Bellevue, WA 9800C • (425) 582-7229 AUG-30.-2000 08:32 AM PITTMAN ENTERPRISES 425 644 7072 P.OI i JOHN J. PITTMAN, P.E. PITTMA.N ENTERPRISE89 INC. 15118 SE 43rd Street Bellevue, WA 98006 Phone: (425) 562-7226 Fax: (425) 644-7072 FAX COVER WIRING AU U 3 0 2000 SHEET DATE:cc� TIME: j TO: v E? q v1 COMPANY: C (•;�_ 5--- RE: 1 ' �• S c. GLY N o A-,(,'`'` PHONE. - FAX: We!moty f CC: PHONE: COMPANY: _ - FAX: Number of pages in .luding cover sheet: 3 The contents of thi facsimile transmission are confidential. If you receive this transmission in error, please destroy the contents and advise the sender. AUG-30-2000 08:32 AM PITTMAN ENTERPRISES 425 644 7072 PITTMAN ENGINEERING Civil Engineering and Consulting MEMORANDUM Date: July 26, 2000 To: Ms. Jeannine Graf City of Edmonds, Building Official From: John J. Pittman, P.E. RE: Ansari Residence Site Visit 16008 — 75"' Place West; Edmonds, WA. On July 25, 2000, _l visited the above property. The lower portion of the block wall at the east side (entry) of the house was installed. This portion of the wall still needs to be extended along the driveway up to the main road. The upper portion of the wall was rough graded but no blocks had been installed. Overall, the installation was good. In addition, the portion of the wall along the south side of the driveway was installed. This wall was staggered so that it is six blocks high. However, the back of the wall had not yet been completely backfilled. The footing drain pipe was visible, and looked good. Overall, this portion of the wall is good. DOLLING AUG 3 0 2000 15118 SE 43rd st. • Bellevue, WA 960o6 • (425) 562-7226 AUG-30-2000 08:33 AM PITTMAN ENTERPRISES 425 644 7072 P.03 PITTMAN ENGINEERING Civil Engineering end.Conoulting MEMORANDUM Date: August 23, 2000 To: Ms. Jeannine Graf City of Edmonds, Building Official From: John J. Pittman, P.E. fi�2 RE: Ansari Residence Site Visit 16008 — 75'" Place West; Edmonds, WA. On August 22, 2000, I visited the above property. The majority of the wall construction is complete. The exception is that a few blocks are still needed at the ends in some areas. Also, the backfll material for the uppermost east wall needs to be installed. Walls have been built along both sides of the driveway (and along the south property line adjacent to the garage), along the lower west side of the property (next to the path), and along the front of the house. The wall along the front of the house is a two-tier. The overall construction looks good. The maximum height of wall is four feet. Where visible, the footing drains appear to be installed correctly. BUILDING AU 3 0 2000 15118 SE 43rd St. • Bellevue, WA 98006 9 (425) 562-7226 MAY. 4. 2000^ 9:03AM- 0 NANM' O ARENCE jOHNSO v Fuld Ear Al Arlsari 9304 — 0lympic View Drive Edmonds, Wa 98020 Mr Ansari, 'tks Boring= Nonheta • pad Santa Fe Rad"Y CouTmY 24S4 Oc6kjM l Avg,= Solidi. suite 1•A Seattle. WA 980134 City, Sta- Zip M6 .625.6147 Fax 62S411S E.=a cb&,Wg.ichnson@BNSF.com NO. 0213 F. 1 4Af ;/,1, sF0 7 s4-(n p 1 W fHEET FILE Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. has no objections to you connecting your drainage at 16008 — 75" Place West to the,eMting City of Edmonds storm sewer system along the westerly edge of the Property r` k h f v clAffL UPOZ y�ro \Aed. P e i S O� Clarence ohnsoiz r he Ccv j:e Field Eugima Y-few• -f h 5 4-r c, L1 z (S b,2 n 0� -�L -�r C 'D e -(a-,4, v, ve -C BNSF,,01 CITY OF EDMOND BARBARA FAHEY I 1 J MAYOR 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771.0221 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning • Building • Engineering January 6, 2000 Mr. Al Ansari 16008-75'hPlace West Edmonds, WA 98026 SUBJECT: Detention Waiver Requested for 16008-75`h Place West Dear Mr. Ansari, The Assistant City Engineer, Don.Fiene, reviewed your request. He authorized approval of the waiver request contingent upon approval by BNRR / Santa Fe. When you receive their permission, please submit that to Mr. Fiene for his final approval. Thank. you. If you have any questions do not hesitate to contact me at (425) 775-7744. Sincerely, 12ORDON HYDE Development Services Engineer GCH/cmc c: Ray Miller, Development Services Director GAENGR\GORDY\ansari.DOC ' Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister City - Hekinan, Japan • • MEMORANDUM Date: January 3, 2000 To: Don Fiene, PE; Assistant City Engineer From: Gordy Hyde, Development Services Engineerqq4 Subject: Proposed drainage detention waiver.. Attached is a request for waiver of detention for the Ansari home on 75"' Pl. W. Please let me know if it can be approved. Thank you. J 0 City of Edmonds Development Services Department • RECE1VED NOV 19 1999 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR. CITY OF EDMONDS Mr. Abdelhossein Ansari 9304 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington 98020 Dear Mr. Ansari, • L== ENGINEERS / SURVEYORS / PLANNERS / DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS November 1, 1999 File No. 99-4049 On September 30, 1999 we dispatched a survey crew to your new residence to determine the finished floor elevation. We found the elevation of the basement floor to be 61.55 and the main floor elevation to be 69.54, based upon the previous topographic of the site complete by others. If necessary, we could obtain any other elevational data you may need. Should you have any questions, please call me. Sincerely, Jeffrey T. Treiber P.L.S. Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc. 19400 33rd Ave. W.. Suite 200. Lynnwood, WA 98036 800-775-7663 42S-775-1591 42S-672-7998 fax F7 L-A Graf, Jeannine 1 �NS�i✓ From: Whitcutt, Roy Sent: Monday, November.15, 1999 10:46 AM To: Graf, Jeannine; Chrisman, Lyle Cc: Fiene, Don Subject: Ansari 16008 75th PL W. Today I performed a site inspection of the project. Erosion measures have been installed on the property including plastic sheeting, filter fences and straw. At this time all work may officially continue. Thanks for your assistance Jeannine. Roy S. Whitcutt Capital Improvement Projects Specialist Edmonds Utilities Consortium Representative phone: 425-771=0220 ext. 329 e-mail whitcutt@ci.edmonds.wa.us �Q Telephone (206) 284 2410 OCR 21100 �o�N-�� Neil H. Twelker and Associates, Inc. VOWConsulting Geotechnical Engineers G10 Wheeler St., No. 404 Seattle WA. 98109 October 21,1999 City of Edmonds, Development Services Dept. 121 5th Ave. N. Edmonds WA 98020 Attn: Jeannine L. Graf, Building Official Re: Ansad Residence Permit No. 980912 Ladies and Gentlemen: We have been advised that our approval is required for the surface drainage work at this project to be under the exclusive control of the contractor. It is our understanding that the conduits for the disposal of surface water will not require excavations of more than 3 feet in depth; consequently, we conclude that this work will have no significant influence on the geotechnical aspects of the project. We therefore give our approval. We take this opportunity to advise all concerned that surface water is not to be allowed to enter foundation drains, dry wells, or infiltration pits. NHT:nt cc: Al Ansan General & Marine Howe Engineering H. T wE(; s _k �o of WAS& F,p 5757, �FCISItiR� t, SIONAL' � E CPIRE 3J1�t'lG. 2apl7 Very truly yours, Neil H. Twelker & Assoc., Inc. c bv 21' j�e�' Neil H. Twelker, Pres. CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771.0221 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning • Building • Engineering October 15, 1999 Mr. Al Ansari 9304 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington 98020 RE: Single Family Residence @ 16008 751h Place West, Permit #980912 Dear Mr. Ansari, BARBARAFAHEY MAYOR It has come to my attention that changes have been made to your residence in conflict with the approved plans and without City approval. Be advised, under State Engineers and Architects law no person other than the design professionals themselves, have the authority to alter or change stamped/signed plans. To resolve this matter a framing and foundation as -built plan must be submitted to the City (stamped and signed by the architect and structural engineer of record) for City review and approval. Additional plan review fees shall be charged and framing approval shall not be granted until the plans are reviewed and approved by the City. As general contractor of record it is your responsibility to follow the approved set of plans and further deviations without prior City approval may result in a `STOP WORK' order being issued. On a sidenote, please have the structural engineer of record inform the City in writing where the structural details for the retaining wall and stair (to the east of the residence) is located on the approved plans. If this item was a deferred submittal please indicate when plans will.be provided. Also, regarding the height variance, the City shall require a first floor elevation check on height compliance and then a final height check once the roof is installed. Also, please be advised the permit expires 12/23/99 and must be renewed prior to that date for one half fees ($1224.00). If you allow the permit to expire full fees and compliance to the current 1997 codes shall be required. If there are any questions please feel free to contact me at 425-771-0220. Thank you, Jeannine L. Graf Building Official Cc: Gerald Howe, PE M. Mohande, AIA Incorporated August 11, 1890 Sister City - Hekinan, Japan 1hC.189v • 0 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771.0221 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning • Building • Engineering August 3; 1999 Mr. Al Ansari 9304 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Ansari Residence, Permit #980912 BARBARAFAHEY MAYOR On August 2, 1999 the City received a letter dated June 10, 1999 from Neil Twelker, geotechnical engineer for the subject project, stating that changes have been made to the project without first obtaining approval from the City of Edmonds. Please submit two sets of stamped revisions to the approved plans including applicable letters and reports and we will immediately forward these revisions to the outside geotechnical and structural consultants that originally reviewed your project. You will be billed for this outside review and additional City plan review fees. Since these revisions have not been approved by the City, continued work on this project is at the owner's risk. Thank you, 6At , Jeannine L. Graf Building Official Cc: Neil Twelker, Geotechnical Engineer. Gerald R. Howe, Structural Engineer Incorporated August 11, 1890 Sister City. - Hekinan, Japan oEyO. AUG `' ? ,y`9 GTy OF FOA,�N Telephone: (206) 284 2410 or ZS� 50�2 Neil H. Twelker and Associates, Inc. Consulting Geotechnical Engineers 610 Wheeler St., No. 404 Seattle, WA. 98109 June 10, 1999 Al Ansari 9304 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98020 Re: SFR Construction at 16008 75th Place W., Edmonds, WA Dear Mr. Ansari: In the past two days we have made two visits to the site of your current single family residential project at 16008 75th Place W. in Edmonds, Washington. During the course of these two visits we were able to examine recently created soil exposures and to review with other project personnel the steps which are to be taken in the construction of this unusual undertaking. We present herewith a report of our observations and conclusions. Background As discussed in our original geotechnical report of October 7, 1996, the site. is located within the Meadowdale slide area, an area with a north -south length of approximately half a mile, and width of 400 to 600 feet. On a number of occasions In the past several decades, improvements have been made in the management of surface water in this area, leading to the conclusion on the part of the regulating agencies and their geotechnical consultants that the area is now safe for residential developments. Our review of the circumstances of this location and the prospects of its continued stability led. us to conclude that the possibility of renewed earth movement, although greatly diminished, was nevertheless great enough to warrant the inclusion of some features in the foundation construction which would facilitate releveling of the house, should that ever become necessary. The method of releveling devised by the structural engineer included a very ingenious scheme by which all three floors of the building could be releveled. Proposed Modification of Reeevelina Method . Inasmuch as the lower floor is occupied by mechanical rooms, storerooms, and garage space, it appears that a considerable economy of construction can be achieved by constructing the lower level as a slab on grade, thereby eliminating the structural steel assembly and the crawl space in which it was to be placed. The size and location of the jacking pits throughout the peripheral foundation, and the steps which would be taken to implement releveling, would remain unchanged. The single difference between the original system and the proposed system is that the process of releveling the peripheral foundation Al AnsariJune 10, 1999 Page 2 would probably result in damage to the concrete floor of the basement and garage. The change of design is therefore a trade-off between present construction economies and possible future costs of repair. Interior independent columns would be releveled in the same manner as previously proposed. The simplest way to accomplish this would be the addition of a detail to allow a separation of the column and the introduction of a jack. Observations of Soil Exposures Our observations of the excavation being performed at the site disclosed the soil units to be as anticipated: an upper layer of fill, a thin layer of moderately loose sand, and an underlying layer of overconsolidated silt. Excellent bearing will be found in either the sand or the silt. The circumstances of the foundation are such that we now recommend that spread footings for the interior column footings be designed for 2000 psf (instead of the 1000 psf previously recommended). The overconsolidated silt may be assigned allowable bearing pressures of 6000 psf. We shall be pleased to continue to provide assistance and advice as requested for the balance of this project. �� . WAS �F�P V y �`{ � Yr^�S✓ Z 5757 SIONAL EXP�aES 3031 2 NHT.nt cc: General and Marine Construction, Inc. Howe Engineering Djanguir Darvish Very truly yours, NEIL H. TWELKER AND ASSOC., INC. Neil H. Twelker, Pres. 1nc._.lg9v City of Edmon* RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT permit Number: q C) I S UsuueeD-atte: A. Address or Vicinity of Construction: B. Type of Work (be 'specific):.SF4 Ur/c 17y to,✓,ar c771/.✓l C. Contractor:_( Mailing Address: 431)q &I ,, 0"y� p w State License #: g e C O 7_7_ J Z Contact: !Q SnY 4 A Phone: T1 T _ 2011 Liability Insurance: Bond: $ jail 4 g;.qrA— D. Building Permit # (if applicable): 9 9 b 2, Side Sewer Permit # (if applicable): E. ❑ Commercial ubdivision City Project Utility (PUD, GTE, WNG, CABLE, WATER) ❑ Multi -Family Si ❑ ❑ Single Family ❑ Other INSPECTOR: INSPECTOR: F. Pavement or Concrete Cut : ❑ Yes o IG. Size of Cut: x H: Charge $ APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and'by his signature to this application io hold the City of Edmonds harmless from injuries, damages, or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, foreseen or unforeseen, that may be made against the City of Edmonds, or any of its departments or employees, including or not limited to the defense of any legal proceedings including defense costs and attorney fees by reason of granting this permit. f THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPEC- TION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK. ESTIMATED RESTORATION FEES WILL BE HELD UNTIL THE FINAL STREET PATCH IS COMPLETED BY CITY FORCES, AT WHICH TIME A DEBIT OR CREDIT WILL BE PROCESSED FOR ISSUANCE TO THE APPLICANT. Two sets of construction drawings of proposed work required with permit application. A 24 hour notice'is required for inspection. Please call the Engineering Division, 771-0220. Work and material is to be inspected during progress and at completion. Restoration is to be in accordance with City Codes. Street shall be kept clean at all times. Traffic Control and Public Safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City .Engineer. All street cut trench work shall be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to the end of the working day; NO EXCEPTIONS. ;1`have read the above statements and understand the permit requirements and the pink copy of the permit will be -'available on site at all times for ins Ln purposes., Signature: �-� Date: s/I11?9 (Contrac or or Agent) CALL DIAL -A -DIG PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK _ l FOR CITY USE ONLY APPROVED BY: RIGHT OF WAY FEE: TIME AUTHORIZED: VOID AFTER 0 DAYS DISRUPTION FEEIFUND I 1 I: SPECIAL CONDITIONS: RESTORATION FEE: r T OTAL FEE: RECEIPT NO.: ISSUED BY NO WORK SHALL BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE Eng. Div 1997 • FIELD INSPECTION NOTES (Fund 111 - Route copy to Street Dept.) I Comments Diagram CONTRACTOR CALLED FOR INSPECTION ❑ YES ❑ NO Partial Work Inspection by P.W.: Work Disapproved By: Date: FINAL APPROVAL BY: Date: A O` 6Un�0 C.) �N k C Y OF EDMONDS Fsr I g90 121- 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220 RCW 197-11-970 Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of proposal: Grading of 711 cubic yards of material in conjunction with the construction of a single- family residence (City of Edmonds File PC-97-384). Note that the construction of the single-family residence was formerly issued a Determination of Nonsignificance on February 11, 1998. The new determination is only because the grading calculations have been revised. Proponent: Al and Batoul Ansari Location of proposal, including street address if any: Lot 1 of Short Plat S-23-90 which has been issued the address 16008 - 75th Place W., Edmonds, Washington Lead agency: CITY OF EDMONDS The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement is not required under RCW 43.21.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. There is no comment period for this DNS. X This DNS is issued under 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by _ 7 /31 l V Responsible Official: Jeffrey S. Wilson Position/Title: Planning Supervisor, Department of Community Services - Planning Division Phone: (425) 771-0220 Address: City of Edmonds, 121 - 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020 Date: 7 t' C / Y 9- XX You may appeal this determination to Robert Chave, Planning Manager, at 121 - 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020, no later than ell 4/9s by filing a written appeal citing the reasons. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Jeffrey S. Wilson to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. XX Posted on 7/ 1 % ,/9k , at the Edmonds Public Library, Edmonds Community Services Building, and the Edmonds Post Office. XX Distribute to "Checked" Agencies on the reverse side of this form, along with a copy of the Checklist. Page 1 of 2 PC97384DIDOC 7/I6/98.SEPA Mailed to the following along with the Environmental Checklist: XX Environmental Review Section Department of Ecology P.O. Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 XX Department of Fisheries 115 General Administration Building Olympia, WA 98504-8711 XX Applicant: Al Ansari 9304 Olympic View Dr. Edmonds, WA 98020 pc: File No. PC-97-384 SEPA Notebook Page 2 of 2 PC97384DIDOC 7/I6/98.SEPA FROM HOME ENGINEERING PHONE NO. 425 881 1830 May. 11 1998 10:12AM P2 H OWE ENGINEERING CONSULTING ENGINEERS 2S35 1 52NO AVENUE N.E., SUITE B-1 , REOMOND, WA 98052 • (425) BB1-B1 B2 -1E IRE. May P. 1998 MAY 1 1:.1998 - City of Edmonds Community Services 121 - 5th. Ave. N Edmonds, WA 98020 .. - .Subject: Ansari residence; 16008 - 75th. Place W; Edmonds, Washington Gentlemen We have reviewed the geotechnical reports, understand its recommendations, have explained to the owner the risk of loss due to slides on the site and have. incorporated into the' design the recommendations of the report. In addition, we have established measures to reduce the potential risk of injury or damage caused by any earth movement predicted in the report., 'We wdl-acceptithe responsibility for coordinating-all;buildir g departrnentl 'conespondence-=�. Very Truly Yours,' Howe Engineering Gerald R. Howe . • .. : Vw�sy,,y�d► . Principal EX➢RE5Lf -.r "00 t Telephone: (206) 284 2410 Neil H. Twelker and Associates, Inc. Consulting Geotechnical Engineers 610 Wheeler St., No. 404 Seattle, Wa. 98109 April 22, 1998 UUI.CRIlIU Al Ansari MAY - 1 19198 9304 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98020 Re: Proposed SFR Construction at 16008 75th Place W., Edmonds, WA Dear Mr. Ansari: We are in receipt of a communication from the City of Edmonds containing a review of our Geotech- nical Report dated October 7, 1996. The letter from the reviewer (Landau Tacoma) has addressed a number of items which were felt to be insufficiently covered in our report, as well as a number of comments and suggestions which we believe merit further discussion. We are pleased to supply the requested information in the following paragraphs, in the same order as presented in the Landau report. Groundwater Levels The Landau report recommends that the site be "analyzed" using "seasonal high groundwater levels to be consistent with other projects in the Meadowdale Slide Area." In preparing our report, we did not presume to perform an analysis of the entire Meadowdale Slide Area. Our concern with groundwater has to do only with its influence on the project operations. Further comment on global stability is given in a number of subsequent paragraphs. Site Earthwork Structural fill should be free of objectionable quantities of deleterious materials, particles larger than 4 inches, and within 2 percentage points of optimum. It should be spread in uniform lifts not exceeding 6 inches loose thickness, and compacted by repeated coverages of moderate to heavy construction equipment or by approved compaction devices. The degree of compaction sought is 95 per cent of maximum density as determined by AASHO laboratory Test D-698; however, we do not anticipate that the circumstances under which structural fills are to be used will warrant field density measurements. All fills to be placed on slopes must be underlain with a drainage mat of pervious material (e.g., washed sand or clean pit run gravel). General site fill may be of any material deemed acceptable at the time of construction and should be placed in lifts not over 12 inches loose thickness and "semi compacted." Retaining wall backfill (covered in 118, page 4, of our report) should be semi -compacted only. Full compaction of retaining wall backfill can result in the development of unwanted stresses in the wall. Where settlement -critical Al Ansad Agril 22 1998 Paae 2 structures are to be supported on retaining wall backfill, we recommend that the critical portion of the backfill be made using washed pea gravel. The same general provisions will apply for the backfill of utility trenches. (Our concern in not wishing to engage in heavy compaction of backfill of utility trenches is based mainly on economic and safety concerns.) Drainage fills under concrete slabs should consist of clean (not necessarily washed) granular material. Backfill of Overexcavated Foundation Locations The degree to which this emergency must be dealt with is not known at this time; however, we do not expect it to constitute a serious problem. We ordinarily deal with this problem by backfilling with Control Density Fill, lean mix concrete, or washed pea gravel. Although some Geotechnical Engineers recommend crushed rock for this purpose, we prefer to avoid this material on the grounds that it is ( 1 ) a high stress material because its structure is derived from the contacts of needle points and razor edges, (2) deteri- oration of the contact points over time will allow settlement, and (3) some rock types, having been subjected to hydrothermnal alteration, look very good when delivered to the site but disintegrate rapidly. Washed pea gravel, which should only be used in areas where no subsequent excavations are to be made) consists entirely of long-lived particles, and does not require compaction. We point out that the preparation of any foundation requires some ad hoc procedures, including steps which cannot be spelled out in advance; we expect to be on hand to assist in the resolution of unforeseen difficulties at the time of construction. Walls Free to Rotate We agree with the reviewer that conventional retaining wall theory does require that the wall be able to yield by an amount sufficient to allow shearing stresses to develop within the backfill. For a wall 8 feet in height, a displacement of 0.2 per cent will be two tenths of an inch. Where semi -compacted backfill is used this small amount of yield occurs within the backfill itself, thereby removing the need for concern of this vexing theoretical problem. In any event, it has been our practice to avoid the use of higher values ("at rest" pressure) for retaining wall design. Even where fully compacted backfill is placed against an absolutely rigid wall; this can be accomplished by placing a layer (one half to one inch thick) of soft Styrofoam beadboard against the wall prior to placing the backfill. The compression of the beadboard takes the place of rotation of the wall, and allows the backfill resistance to become mobilized. In the project at hand we see no particular need for this step, although we are willing to employ it should appear to be desirable. Coefficient of Friction (Ultimate) The misunderstanding here seems to be in the meaning of the word "ultimate." This was intended to refer to the value of base friction at the point at which failure takes place and lateral movement ensues. The value can be easily determined (and we have done it scores of times over the past 50+ years) by placing a piece of concrete on an earth slope and measuring the declivity of the slope. We usually do it by placing the troweled surface (if it has one) against the slope. This is a very conservative step in itself, since concrete poured against a prepared subgrade does not have a steel -troweled surface. We performed this test again just a few months ago on a construction site, on sandy silt. We happened to visit that site very recently and we observed that the fragment is still in place on the slope where we left it. Our measurement of the slope on which the concrete fragment rests showed it to have a declivity of 40 degrees. This corresponds to a Coefficient of Friction of 0.84 (but it is still not the ultimate, because the fragment hasn't moved). We have watched the "recommended value for friction" go down, down, down, for several decades, and have wondered many times just why that is so. One possible reason might be that the value of 0.3 to 0.35 referred to is not meant to be an ultimate value, but rather, a working value (i.e., one in which a safety factor is included). The trouble with the use of values like this in calculations of Safety Factor is that they can include a mixed bag of input parameters, some of which are working values, while others are ultimate. • Al Ansari aril 22. 1998 Page 3 Calculations performed in this manner cannot produce a clear-cut value for Factor of Safety. In any event, we must point out that the Coefficient of Friction is a fact of nature, not an arbitrary number which is produced by administrative fiat. Discharge of Subdrains The reviewer strongly recommends against "discharging any water to the surface." Any water? Any water at all? This is a matter on which reasonable minds may differ. In the first place, the amount of water discharged by the ordinary subdrain is so minuscule that it seldom if ever can even be detected. If a storm sewer is conveniently located nearby, we have no objection to routing the subdrain discharge in that direction, provided the cost is not excessive. If the discharge is made to daylight, It may be a good idea to provide a screen at the exit of the subdrain to prevent burrowing animals from entering. Temporary Excavations The reviewer mentions that WAC-296-155-657-2d allows the Geotechnical Engineer to "specify temporary excavation slopes at configurations which the engineer has determined to be safe." We intend to do that; however, the site conditions (as well as the varying heights of the temporary cuts) are such that it does not make sense to develop a detailed plan in advance of construction. We propose to handle this matter in the way that it is customarily done by practitioners in residential construction everywhere: that is, to look at the soil conditions as the excavation unfolds and use engineering judgment to decide on slopes and/or retention methods. Permanent Cut Slopes The reviewer states that the "standard of practice in the Northwest is to limit permanent cuts in cohesive soil to 3H to 1 V or flatter." (emphasis added) We find this to be an astounding statement for several reasons: (1) In more than 50 years of hillside construction, nearly all of it in the Northwest, we have never encountered a hillside project where a 3H to 1 V slope of any real extent was even feasible, (2) the safety factor of a 3H to 1 V slope in over - consolidated cohesive material would be far above any reasonable goal, and (3) the use of the term "standard of practice" suggests an agreed upon or broadly accepted custom, which is simply not the case here in the Pacific Northwest. Cut slopes in overconsolidated silt/clays or glacial till are sometimes made near -vertical for heights of as much as 10 feet.. Many sea cliffs are stable (although retreating slowly under the attack of frontal weathering) at heights of more than 100 feet. Nearly all soils possess a modicum of cohesive strength. This allows them to stand at steep slopes (up to 1 H to 1 V) to heights of 3 to 5 feet. They will remain stable if given a good vegetative cover, although with a low factor of safety (not an important consideration in minor landscaping features). Construction of Landscape Fills As the reviewer points out, it is advisable when placing fills on sloping ground to bench into the original grade and to provide underdrainage for any water bearing layers which may be present. We customarily deal with these matters when construction is underway. Reactivation of the Meadowdale Slide We are very sorry to report that we have no real scientific basis for our "estimate" of the risk level of a recurrence of a rotational slide. Technical information is simply too sketchy for reliable statistical studies (even though "experts" in some quarters seem to be willing to make them). Our estimate was made on the basis of engineering judgment. The performance of the area during the past two rainy seasons is very reassuring. We point out, however, that the steps which have been taken thus far to correct (or at least improve) the stability of the Meadowdale area have involved local storm water management, but have largely ignored the possible influence of groundwater from distant recharge areas, where a substantial time delay may very well be involved. Al Ansari April 22 1998 Paae 4 Piling The piling details to which the reviewer refers are simply pin piles to support the decks. They are 2-inch diameter pipes, customarily driven to a penetration of one inch or less per minute with a 90 lb jackhammer, for an allowable vertical bearing of 4000 lbs. "Jacking Slab" vs Pile Foundations The reviewer appears to be in some confusion as to the purpose and layout of the releveling system incorporated in the project drawings, even to the point that he suggests that the cost of the system be reviewed vis a vis the cost of a "pile supported foundation." Rather than attempt to re -explain this whole thing, we suggest (by copy of this letter) that the reviewer read 113 and 14, page 3 of our Geotechnical report of Oct. 7, 1996. We trust that the information supplied in this rather lengthy treatise will be sufficient to answer the questions raised by the reviewer. Should this information be considered insufficient or should further questions arise, it might be well if all of the concerned parties could meet in person to discuss them. Very truly yours, WA SF' . .� �T : r NEIL H. TWELKER AND ASSOC., INC. h .. ,o 5 5 71, stpNALNeil H. Twelker, Pres. EXPIRES 31131 '2 O d b NHT.nt cc: General and Marine Construction, Inc. FE -2HB- FR1 16;45 LANDAU TACOMA LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. Environmental and Gectechnicai Services City of Edmonds Community Services Department 121 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, Washington 98020 Attn: Ms. Jeannine Graf FAX NO, 2060262531 P, 02 RLr: GEOTECHNICAL RL'VIPW PROPOSED ANSAItI SINGLE )FAMILY Ms+IDENCE 16008 75TH PLACE WF,ST EDMONDS, WASUNCTON Dear Ms. Gmf; $IREETFILE February 20, 1999 VIA FAX AND U.S. MAIL As requested, Landau Associates, Inc. (Landau Associates) has completed an initial review of the geowzhnical-related aspects of construction plans and other dcwuntents submitted Lo the City of Edmonds (City) as part of the application for the subject proposed Single family residence. The following ducum(mis were provided by the City for our review: • Geotcchnic-al report prepared for the project by Neil H. Twelker and Associates, hie., dated October 7, 1996 • Topographic Survey, Sheet 1, prepared by Group Four, Inc. dated January 30, 1997 • Structural Drawings, Sheets S-1 through S-9, prepared by Howe Enbineed rig, dated June 9, 1995 • Grading and Architectural Plans, Sheets 1 through 7, prepared by Mitra Mohandessi, dated December 28, 1997 • Stn,etural Calwlationc for Ansari Residence, l:dinonds, Washington, by Howe Engineering, dated February 1995 • An undated "revicwcd" Grading Plan and Drainage Plan with notes by Douglas F. Foster, P.E. • Crrading Calculations dated Novembor 3, 1997, preparer unknown • City of rdtnonds Environmental Checklist for [lie proposed residence, dated August 1996, WnRATO CREEK PLACE 4210- 20TH STRI77 F. • SU11'F. F • 1AC'OMA. WA 1IR424.101 (lit) 9?,G•��V3_ • , - l'7x; (]5_3)9�r;-25z1 _ E-M'01 iidu(il Liml'ill nc•.uffill (;tiptinnds itK�t:n1C ...—14olnla . ,FEB-20-98 FR1 16:45 LANDAU TACOMA FAX NO, 2069262531 P,03 GENERAL Based on review or utc documents provided, we understand that the subject property is ioc:atcd Mouth of the intersection of 75th Place West and North Meadowdale Road. The Parcel is within the mapped Meadowdale Slide Area (Roger Lowe and Associates I979); therefore, our review is in accordance with the rcquircmenLc of City Ordinance 2661,Earth Subsidence and L:rndslidc Hazard Areas, Thu subject cite is bounded on the east by 75th Place West, on the fiouth by an existing single family residence, on (.hc west by the Burlington Northem Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way, and on the north by an undcvclu17 d parcel_ We understand that the sit-, is currently undeveloped. As shown on the Topographic Survey, the parcel slopes generally downward to the west. Slopes on the propetly appear to be tlboul 30 to 35 percent. Subsurface eonditions repot-ted in boring B-1 cornpleted by Neil Twelke:r and A..aw;stcs (Twelker) in the east portion of the site (approximate ground surface elevation 79 ft) consist of a sequence of about 5 ft of medium dense silty sand fill; about 7 ft of loose to medium dense fine wand; about 17 ft of medium to stiff silt and sandy silt; about 7 ft of dense sand; and hard clay to the bottom of the boring at a depth of about 44 ft. Subsurface conditions reported in boring B-2 (approximate ground surface elcvaliun 42 fl) consist of a sequence of about A ft of medium dense silty sand till; N(si)ut 10 ft of hard silt; and very dense silty rand to the bottom of the boring at a depth of about 4Gt/z ft. Groundwater levels in July 1994 were rcported at a depth of about 30 rt (elevation 49 ft) in boring B-1, and ;it a depth of about 40 ft (elevation 2 t) in boring B-2. The report does not indicate if piezometers were installed in the borings for subsequent groundwater monitoring. GI OTi:CHNICAL REPORT Though we generally concur with the appro wh enritained in Tweiker's October 7. 1996 geotechnical report, the following provides our specific comments and/or questions on the report: • Croundwat-cr levels were measured in July 1994 and likely represent ncar•,wsonal lows. The report dogs not stare what groundwater levels were assurned/used in analyzing the Nitc_ We recommend that the City require the site analysis be performed using seasonal high groundwater levels, to be consistent with other projects in the Meadowdale Slide Area, The report does not provide geotechnical engineering recommendations far site earthwork. We recornrnend that the geotechnical engineer provide recotnrnendations for fill placement and compaction; and recommended gradations for general site fill, wall hxckfi!I, utility backfill, undcrshab rill, etc. • The report recommends dint where fill is encountered at lsltuined foundation bearing eleva(ions, the unsuitable; fill be overexcavatcd to cxpkmc undisturbed native soil, No rcuomTnerid ations are provided forbacicfilling and compacting of overexcavations. Excavatinns to reach suitable bearing soil for foundations may need to penetrate up to 7 ft below existing situ.: gr 0cs. In addition, 2 LANDAU ASSOCIATES FE9-20-98 FRI 16:46 LANDAU TACOMA FAX NO, 2069262531 P,04 substantial cuts into the hillside will be rcquircd to construct portions of the l . low-grade foundations and basement walls_ No consideration is given in the gcotcchnical report for chest excavations or to the potential impacts to slabs and other footings that may be within the areas of excavation. We recommend that the geotechnical engineer review the foundation constriction plans and provide appropriate recommendations for excavation and overexcavation for foundations. • The lateral cirth pressure given in the geotechnical report for retaining walls is appropriate for walls that are free to rotate at least 0.2 percent of their height during placement and compaction of bac:kfill. This assumption is not stated in the report . No lateral earth pressure:: arc provided for rigid wall conditions (wall fixed against rotation). We recommend the stiuctural engineer verify that all reti►ining walls are free to rotate, and if not, =ornmcnded lateral etuth pressures for rigid walls should be provided by the geotechnical engineer. • The report recommends an ultimate coefficient. of friction of 0.60. This value i.s generally above the normal recommended value of 0.30 to 035 for a sandy silt, which appears to be the likely foundation soil. We recommend that thc. geotechnical engineer either provide supporting data for the high coefficient of friction or provide a lower value more appropriate for a sandy silt. • The gCcxechnical report allows far water from retaining wall drains to be "discharged at any convenient surface: location." We strongly recornmend against discharg;i:ig any water to the surface. Collected water from retaining wall drains should be discharged to the. silt: scorer drainage syst4m. • The report fndieates diartemporauy excavations can be trade at ncur-vvrtiL;al slopes. Nenr-vertical excavations higher than 4 Pt typically cio not conform to local, stale, and federal regulations regrading sloped excavations (WAC 295-155, Part N). As a licensed prui'essionxl engiriCer, WAC 296-155-657-2d allows the engineer (Mr. Twelker) to specify temporary excavation slopes at configurations that the engineer has determined to be safe. Considering dhe soil types that will likely be exposed by the excavation (fill, previously disturbed material, saintly silt), it is our opinion that near -vertical slopes may not be safe. The City should require the enginccr (Mr. Twelker) to submit a design in accordance with die requirements of WAC: 296-155-657-2d. The report also reconunends 1 horizontal to i vertical (1 HA V) slopes for permanent cuts of less than 5 ft, and 1,7514; IV slopes For permanent cuts greater than S ft. The standard of pruct.ire in the Northwest is to generally limit permanent cuts in cohesive soil to 31-1;1 V, 7r flattor_ Permanent cut slope at 1H:t V in any soil type are stecpt r thaii the standard of prectice in the Northwest. We recommend that the. geotechnical engineer reevaluate: and/or provide supporting documcntmion for permanent cut slopes. The geotechnical report recommends that fill slopes should be graded to 2I1:1 V. This angle is typically adequate for structural fills, and fills placed on relatively level ground, For "sidveast" fills of native soil, especially those placed oti sloping ground, this 2H.I V final C011figuration may not be adequate. We recommend the geotechnical engineer address the issues of till composition, compaction and/or any need for keying and henching. • The geotechnical reps+rt suites that. the chance of significant rotational disturhance of the Fite within a 25-year period is considerably Ir,5s than 10 percent, but offcti no supporting; citu:u,nclttation on how this level risk was determined. We rccommcnd that the geotechnical migincc:r l7rovidc t.ANDAu AeSOCYATER .FEB-20-98 FRI 16t47 LANDAU TACOMA FAX NO, 2060262631 P,06 supporting documentation in determining the risk level at the site. The GeoEngineers study from 1985 and the 1969 Dames and Moore geologic mapping should be reviewul in the context of this issue. Particular none should be made that Dames and Moore mapped diree post- I950s slides at diesite (1955-56; 1970-71; and 1973-74). Clarification should be provided that the discussion on rotational slides in the geotechnical report is consistent with the: type of slides which occurred at the site in the 1950s and 1970s. 03NI STRUCTIO'd DRAWCNGS The following presents Landau Associates' review comments on the Structural Plates, Sheets S-1 dirough S-9; and the Architmtural Drawings, Sheets I through 7, • Shmi S•1, Structural Notes. We recommend gelding that prepared foundation gearing surfaces be approved by the geoteehnical engineer. • Details 4, and S on Sheet S-1 are provided for alternate pile foundations. The g,comchnical report prepared for the projwt floes not provide recommendations fear pile foundations, In ad0hicm, dtcre are several inconsistencies regarding bile diameters on the details. ff pile foundations are. to be used, we recommend that the geotechnical engineer review the proposed design and provide appropriate design parameters, such as pile: type; and size, acceptance criinria, minimurn embedment depth, etc:. • Sheet S-2, Detail 2 shows a "lacking Slab" detail. It is not clear if the .lacking slab is to be installed beneath all foundations. The ck uail recommends backfilling in wmpsc;ted layers, but no specifics rCSarLbrig backf;ll material, layer thickness, or percent compaction required are provided on the detail or in the gcotechnical report. Also, there+ arc; no requirements (density k:sting, observation by the soil engineer, c(c.) to verify that bacM111 beneath foundations was appropriately placed and compacted. These issues need to be addressed by the sirvulurst engineer and geotecltnical engineer. We should point out that if the jacking slabs need to be utilized to releve:l the house, the floor slabs will need to be cut out to access the foundation, especially in the basement area. Whist is the required spacing of jacks along the foundation to prevent a structural failure of the footing tarring jacking? The structural engineer should provide this information on the drawings. We also suggest the applicant review the cost of this system versus a pile supported fc.)undation (err anoffier alternative). Factors such as added soil excavation, backfill volume, cost of die jacking slab. added laborlextende:d Qonstructiun window, and any temponuv shoring which may bc- nacdc:d chic to the deepened excavation should be considered in the evaluation. • The Driveway Transversal Sections on Sheet 1 show near-vcrtieai cuts of up to 4 ft. Without some form of support (rockeries, Keystone wall, etc.), these slopes could be prone to erasion and/or localized slumping, Protection of these slopes should be addressed on the drawings. • The wall detail in the bottom left comer of Sheet 6 shows the foundation drainage system. We recommend that the individual components of the foundation drainage system, such as the type and size of perforated drain pipe (assume(! 6-inch diameter per Section A -A), the type of geotnxtile, and the Smadation requirements of the drain gravel around the perforated pipe, be 4 LANDAu Assooixy-ce •FEB-20-98 FRI 16:48 LANDAU TACOMA FAX NO. 2069262631 P106 letbcicd. Also, no specification is provided for the moisture barrier (thickness, type. etc.). We recommend that then; be added to tho drawing. EXCAVATION CALCULATIONS Tlic excavation calculations arc difficult to follow, and do not appear to be aorroct. The excavation calculations may understate the amount of excavation at the site. In addition, the section where the calculation is made is not referenced. As an example, to Construct the basement Ievel, an excavation of at least 6 11 is required along the back side (cast). Nona of the calculations have an excavation duptli.of 6 ft. The maximum depth of the excavation shown on the calculation sheets is 1.25 ft. In addition, the calculations slate that the average end areas method is u edL On pages 2/3, the calculation does not account for the averaga length, and on pages 313, ilia calculation does not account for the average width. The calculations do not appear to inclu(lc the driveway excavation. We recommend that the excavation calculations be reviewed by the preparer for accuracy. DRAINAGE PLAN AND GRADING PLAN The Drainage and Grading Plans reviewed by us appear to have been pmviousfy reviewed by Douglas V. Focter, F.E., whose comments are written on the copy of the plans provided to us, We: generally concur with his comments and recommendations. It is unclear as to who is the design civil engin=r ror the project, rind who is responsible f0T etddressing Mr. Foster's comments. We reconunend that this iNcuc 15c, clarified by the owner or architect. OTHER Declaration Stawinettrs by the architect, civil znginccr, and geotechnical en�inccr, as required by the provisions of Cit; Ordinance 2661, Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Areas, were not stihrnitted with the information provided to us by the City. CLOSURE We recommend the City require that the applicant address the comments in this letter and resubmit the construction drawings and any liequircd supplemental information to the City prior to issuing the building permit. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our geotechnical review of documents submitted to the City of Edmonds for the proposed Ansari single family residence was completed in accordaricc with 5 LANDAu ASSOCIATES .FEB,20-98 FRI 16:48 LANDAU TACOMA FAX N0, 2069262631 P,07 generally accepted professional engineering principles and practices in this area at the time this letter was prcparc1d. We make no other warranty either express or implied. Please direct any questions concerning this letter to one of the undersigned at (206) 6224113 or (253) 926-2493. Thank you for dte opportunity to he of service to the City of Edmonds on this project. LANDAU ASSOCIATES. INC. By: and Willitim D. Evans, CPG Associate Wi)E,Jlltdjs No. 074073.10 07RONS IAMOJEL7rC74XD73.10\SFR1WOS.ftVW LANDAU ASSOCIATES ,FE8720-08 FR1 16:44 LANDAU TACOMA FAX NO, 2069262631 P,Ot LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. FAX MEMO Envtranmenlal and Geftchnical $ervices (Please deliver upon reoelob To Jeannine Graf Company City of Edmongs. Community Services Dept. Phone No. 425-771.0220 Fax No. 425-771-0221 From , lull Evans Date Febru=, 20, 1998 _ Project No. 074073.1ft Number of Pages (including this sheet) 7 If ypu do not receive all a es, telephone immedlatel . The information contained within this fax should be considered coniddentlal and is intended onty for the person(s) to whom It is aodressed. Should you receive this transmission in error, please notify Landau Associates tmmedlatstyand destroy the copy recelvea, Message: Jeannine: BUILDING FEB 2 0 1998 Attaehcd is die Ansari geotechnic:al review. An original copy will follow in today's mitil, If you have any quo9tions, pleam feel free to give me or Ed a call. Bill Evans Wapato Creek Place 4 4210 - 20th Street East, Suite F + Tacoma, WA M24.1823 6 (253) 926-2493 0 FAX (253) 926-2531 STREET FTIE TO: City of Fdmon4s From: Al Ansari 16 008 75th Place Edmonds, WA Subject: Land Cleaning/Tree Cutting Plan BUIEDINQ DEC 12 19y1 Here by I declare that all of the trees to be removed from the above property in order to build a single family residence are less than six inches in diameter. The other vegetation to be removed consists of berry vines and other shrubs indigenous to the area. This cleaning will not be within the 25 feet buffer around any creeks or streams or any wetlands. APPROVED BY PLANNING 0 PLOT JPL/- A N 04 I.J - 0 SP REET FILE HO V V C ENGI1 V CERING CONSUL-TiNG ENGINEERS • 2535 152NO AVENUE N.E., SUITE 6-1 , REOMOND, WA AeO52 - (425) 661-t3162 • 0. December 8, 1997 City of Edmonds Community Services 121 - 5th. Ave. N Edmonds, WA 98020 Subject: Ansad residence; 16008 - 75th. Place W; Edmonds, Washington Gentlemen: We have reviewed the geotechnical reports, understand its recommendations, have explained to the owner the risk of loss due to slides on the site, and have Incorporated Into the design the recommendations of the report and established measures to reduce the potential risk of injury or damage that might be caused by any earth movement predicted in the report. Very Truly Yours H Englneering erald R. Howe Principal � 6y56 JARED1A11 DEC 12 1997 Qt ��i ECoc_ 19.05'o�.a JZf ;,/z3�9g DEC 1 z M I City of Edmonds 121 5`h Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: APPLICANT/OWNER LIABILITY & LANDSLIDE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LOCATION: 16008 751h Place W, Edmonds, WA. This letter is to accompany my plans for a new residence to be built on lot 1. I, Al Ansari the owner of the lot in the above address declare the following points: a) The accuracy of all permit submittal information is warranted by the owner in a form which relieves the City and its staff from any liability associated with reliance on such permit application submittals. While an application may reference the reports of prior public consultants to the City, all conclusions shall be those of the owner and his design professionals. b) The owner understands and accepts the risk of developing in an area with potential unstable soils and that they will advise, in writing, any prospective • purchasers of the site, or any prospective lessees of structures on the site, of the slide potential of the area. Al Ansari, 9304 Olympic View Dr. Edmonds,_WA 98 .20. INDIVIDUAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of SS. County of On this the day of the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared A A w I 1, before me, p personally known to me proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence subscribed to the to be the person(s) whose name(s) executed it. within instrument, and acknowledged that j my hand and official seal.ignature ,JANET M. MITCHELL STREET FILE CITY OF EDMONDS BARBARA FAHEY MAYOR 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 FAX (425) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning/Building • Parks and Recreation • Engineering • Wastewater Treatment Plant CITY OF EDMONDS COMMUNITY SERVICES DATE: Received of:1fl� L �/ Address: l �j` i' if Phone: 11 . Project Location: f�� 1,7 �f AD Check No `Cash Total Received Water Meter Size: Amount Water Connection Fee Sewer Permit/Repair Trunk Charge Sewer Connection/LID Fee R/W Construction Permit Fee Street Cut/Restoration Fee 620 Fund Street Disruption Fee 111 Fund Engineering 2.2% Inspection Fee Engineering Specs & Plans Fee Storm Drainage Fee Street Use Permit Building Permit Fee - Type Plan Check Fee State Surcharge 622 Fund) Zoning Application Fee - Type Shoreline Permit Fee SEPA Review Fee 41 22 W Recording Fee Maps/Books Photocopies Traffic Mitigation Fee Sidewalk Contribution o Received by:' Permit No. • RECEIVED 0 August 5, 1997 Mr. Jim Walker, PE Engineering department City of Edmonds 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 AUG 0 5 1997 COMMUNITY SERVICES Owners: Al & Batoul Ansari Site address: 16008 75th Place W. Edmonds WA 98020 Ref.: Entrance to the property from the SE corner Dear Mr. Walker: Al & Batoul Ansari 9304 Olympic View'Drive Edmonds, WA 98020 vn l RECEIVED AUG - 6 1997 ENGINEERING We are requesting to change the current entrance to the above property from the NE corner to the SE corner (please see the attached site map). The site has a 25% slope down the center of the lot. The reason for my request is to have less than 14% slope which we can obtain from the SE corner of the lot. I have had extensive discussions with Jamal Mahmoud, engineering inspector, who has told us that the city will not permit driveways to exceed 14% slope without the city engineer approval, max. Slope is 20%. Thank you for your attention to our request to change the location of our driveway. Sincerely, Al & Batoul Ansari " cwwd [+,k s 0 a/ eat LS 0 10 X 40'AAII 0. 1A r lo fs SCALE In.50, W AIXVIA'y f80*5 4, L d ir II 26 V,5 _1�, AREA: t47 AC.-/- air 63,918 SF • BASIS OF BEARINGS: ///� Il I� `r�I I I /� ` 1 Q' ROS - V. IS/PP 102-103 I / / t ; I _ \ 1�`I; Q� �' 1ry / CONTOURS PER.AEMAL 5 SURVEY 3/16/85 UTXJTMS PER AEMAL SURVEY & CITY OF If EDMONoS UTXjTy j�)DRAWPOG-s N% ACC PAACM- pl, F-- ZONE: RS12 16,089 SFJ L ( l "I iBULDM EWMACK LM 7 pp cozi r8(-35' 3^W V%6 zlice VAS C F a lak ro co tbo TA G6L4, Sec. 5, T. 27 N., P, 4 E., c. F R F- F MCCORKLE I ? UF -LOT AGGREGATION .0 W01 If C . IP FOUR, Inc. JUAntla. W00,11,V111. W-1 Afr p WAMAAnglaft pfiolf .'a2,7019 !Z-!t, 111110— "AX(20aP r iA9-e3WU'z "'"0 jz Al A c, rp rx, r .4000 0 I D 0 • STREE FILE CITY OF EDMONDS BARBARA FAHEY MAYOR 250 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • 12061 771.0220 • FAX 12061 771-0221 HEARING EXAMINER Cst. 199v FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF EDMONDS APPLICANT: Al and Batoul Ansari CASE NO.: V 97-67 LOCATION: 16008 - 75th Place W. APPLICATION: A variance to increase the maximum permitted height for a single- family residence from 25-feet to 30-feet to allow the construction of a new two-story single-family residence (see Exhibit A, Attachments 2 through 4). REVIEW PROCESS: Variance: Hearing Examiner conducts public hearing and makes final decision. MAJOR ISSUES: a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 16.20.030 (SINGLE-FAMMY RESIDENTIAL - Site Development Standards). b. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 20.85 (VARIAINCES). SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION AND DECISION: Staff Recommendation: Deny Hearing Examiner Decision: Approve with conditions PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the official file which included the Planning Division Staff Advisory Report; and after visiting the site, the Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing on the application. The hearing on the application was opened at 9:19 a.m., July 3, 1997, in the Plaza Room, Edmonds Library, Edmonds, Washington, and closed at 9:28 a.m. Participants at the public hearing and the exhibits offered and entered are listed in this report. A verbatim recording of the hearing is available in the Planning Division. HEARING COMMENTS: The following is a summary of the comments offered at the public hearing. • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • • IRlearing Examiner Decision Case No. V 97-67 Page 2 • From the City: Meg Gruwell, Project Planner, reviewed the staff report and recommended denial of the application. Staff believes the request is not for the minimum variance necessary to allow the owner rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity. From the Applicant: Jim Jameson, Attorney for the Applicant, said: • The applicants have made a substantial effort to reduce the height. • The home will be located in an area of mostly two story homes. • The proposal is for a flat roof house which will only be approximately 10 feet higher than the street level. • Several other height variances have been approved in the area. • A separate garage would create additional expense and many other homes in the area have attached garages. • Several neighbors objected to the previous variance, but no neighbors attended • this public hearing and no neighbors submitted letters regarding this variance. From the Community: No one from the general public spoke at the public hearing. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS A. SITE DESCRIPTION 1. Site Development And Zoning: a. Facts: 1) Size: The subject property is 14,738 square feet, with 100.5 feet of frontage along 75th Place W. (see Exhibit A, Attachment 4). 2) Land Use: The subject property is undeveloped. 3) Zoning: The subject property is zoned Single -Family Residential (RS- 12) (see Exhibit A, Attachment 1.). 4) Terrain and Vegetation: The subject site slopes from east to west with the greatest slope closest to the west property line. Vegetation consists of several trees and native grasses (see Exhibit A, Attachment 4). 2. Neighboring Development And Zoning: a. Facts: 1) The property to the north is zoned Single -Family Residential (RS-12) and is undeveloped (see Exhibit A, Attachment 1). A variance was • gearing Examiner Decision Case No. V 97-67 Page 3 • recently approved which will allow a home 30 feet in height to be constructed on the lot. 2) The property to the south is zoned Single -Family Residential (RS-12) and is developed with a single-family home (see Exhibit A, Attachment 1). 3) The properties to the east are zoned Single -Family Residential (RS-20) and are developed with single-family homes (see Exhibit A, Attachment 1). 4) To the west is the Burlington Northern Railroad right of way and further west of that is an area zoned Commercial Waterfront (CW) which is undeveloped (see Exhibit A, Attachment 1). B. HISTORY In 1996, the owner applied for a variance (File V-96-119) to allow the height to be increased from 25 feet to 37 feet for the construction of a single-family residence. That variance was denied. As part of the testimony for that variance, the adjacent property owner at 16010 - 75th Place W. stated that they had constructed their home without a variance. That property had the advantage of being able to gain access from the southwest corner of their lot, while the lot in question gains access only from 75th Place • W. Several other property owners in the area stated that the proposed residence would be in their viewshed and that the proposed variance would be detrimental to their view. The Hearing Examiner's decision on that case is included as Exhibit A, Attachment 6. C. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) 1. Fact: Variances granted based on special circumstances are exempt from SEPA review (WAC 197-11-800(6)(b) and ECDC 20.15A.080). D. EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) COMPLIANCE 1. Critical Areas Compliance a. Facts: 1) This proposal is subject to review under ECDC Chapter 20.15.B (Critical Areas Ordinance). 2) The applicant has submitted a Critical Areas Checklist (CA-96-8) and a waiver was granted to the critical areas study requirement. b. Conclusion: The applicant has complied with the requirements of the City's Critical Areas Ordinance. 2. Compliance with RS-6 Zoning Standards a. Fact: The fundamental site development standards pertaining to Residential development in the RS-12 zone are set forth in Chapter 16.20.030. These include the following for locating structures: 1) Street Setback: 25 feet 'earing Examiner Decision Case No. V 97-67 Page 4 2) Rear Setback: 25 feet (5 feet for detached structures < 600 sq . ft.) 3) Side Setbacks: 10 feet 4) Maximum Height:25 feet 5) Lot Coverage: 35% b. Conclusion: The proposal complies with the requirements of the zoning ordinance except for the portion for which the variance is applied for. 3. Compliance with Requirements for a Variance a. Facts: 1) Chapter 20.85 of the ECDC sets forth the mechanism whereby a provision of the Code may be varied on a case -by -case basis if the application of the provision would result in an unusual and unreasonable hardship. The criteria are as follows: a) Special Circumstances: That because of special circumstances relating to the property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the property, strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. Special circumstances should not be predicated upon any factor personal to the owner such as age or disability, extra expense which may be necessary to comply with the zoning ordinance, the ability to secure a scenic view, the ability to make more profitable use of the property, not any factor resulting from the action of the owner or any past owner of the same property. b) Special Privilege: That the approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. c) Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance: That the approval of the variance will be consistent with the intent of the comprehensive plan, the zoning ordinance, and the zoning district in which the property is located. d) Not Detrimental: That the variance, as approved or conditionally approved, will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and the same zone. e) Minimum Variance: That the approved variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner rights enjoyed by other • properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. 2) The applicant has submitted declarations with their submittal which address the decisional criteria as follows (see Exhibit A, Attachment 3): • 4kearing Examiner Decision Case No. V 97-67 Page 5 • a) The applicants point to the slope of the site, which is approximately 25 percent slope, and the availability of access only from 75th Place W. as the need for the variance. The applicants state they have changed their earlier application to lower the height of the house by shortening the deck, placing the home deeper into the slope and lowering the ceiling height. The applicants also point out that the house will be less than 10 feet above street level as proposed. b) The proposal is for a two-story home (with garage below) which the applicants submit is normal for this region. They feel that the proposal follows the topography of the site. The design concept is relatively common, with the upper floor providing the bedrooms, the main floor with the living areas, and a basement with the garage. They also point out the numerous variances in the area as reasons why this request will not be a grant of special privilege. c) The applicants state that the proposal complies with the comprehensive plan in that it is a single-family residence, and the revised proposal minimizes any view encroachment. d) The applicants give several reasons why they feel their proposal meets the zoning ordinance, except for the requested • variance. e) The applicants state that their proposal will not be detrimental as the height of the house above the street is less than 10 feet and the home is set back from the side property lines more than is required. f) The applicants believe this is the minimum variance needed, as they have already lowered the main floor of the home and lowered the ceiling heights and have a flat roof instead of a pitched roof. They feel the proposal is the minimum necessary to have a home similar to ones in the area, many of which received variances. b. Conclusions: 1) The site is unique in the slope from the street down to railroad right-of- way. 2) Several height variances have been granted along 75th Place W., so granting the variance would not constitute a special privilege. However, many of these variances have been granted for lots which are only 45 feet in width, while the subject parcel has 100 feet of frontage along 75th Place W. 3) Approval of the proposed variance would allow for the continued • development of the site in a manner consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan designation, but it would not be in accordance with the comprehensive plan policies (see also Section F below). • kearing Examiner Decision Case No. V 97-67 Page 6 • 4) The proposed house will be visible to most of the neighbors, and in that respect it will impact their view. However, the owner has a right to construct a house on the property within the allowed development standards, even if it affect views. 5) The earlier variance (File V-96-119) was determined not to be a minimum variance since the applicant had not explored the possibilities of relocating the garage, reducing the height of the residence, or moving the house further west and constructing a detached garage. The applicants have lowered the height of the ceilings and set the house slightly more into the hillside with this proposal, which drops the height of the proposed house approximately 6 or 7 feet more than was proposed in the original variance application. Therefore, it is believed a substantial attempt has been made to comply with the regulations and it is further believed the request represents the minimum variance necessary. E. TECHNICAL COMMITTEE 1. Review by City Departments a. Fact: The variance application has been reviewed and evaluated by the Fire Department, Public Works Division, Engineering Division, and the • Parks and Recreation Division. The only comments received were from the Engineering Division, and those comments are included as Exhibit A, Attachment 5. b. Conclusion: The applicant will need to comply with the terms of any future permits, as required by the Engineering Division. F. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (ECDC) 1. Comprehensive Plan Designation a. Fact: The subject property is designated as "Single Family Residential." b. .Conclusion: The proposed development is consistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation for the site. 2. Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies a. Facts: The Comprehensive Plan, Residential Development section, identifies goals and policies which relate to "Residential Development" in the City. Specific goals and policies are discussed in detail below. 1) Section B states as a goal of the City that: "High quality residential development which is appropriate to the diverse lifestyle of Edmonds residents should be maintained and promoted...." 2) Policy B.3. states: "Minimize encroachment on view of existing homes by new construction or additions to existing structures." • • n • 'Rearing Examiner Decision _ Case No. V 97-67 Page 7 3) Page 31, subsection B.S.0 states, "Stable property values must not be threatened by view, traffic, or land use encroachments." b. Conclusion: The proposed development is consistent with the above adopted goals and policies of the City except for the height variance, which slightly encroaches on the view of existing homes. DECISION Based upon the foregoing findings and conclusions, the request for a variance is approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. The height of the residence shall be no taller than 30 feet above average grade, as shown in the building elevations and on the site plan height calculations (see Exhibit A, Attachment 4). 2. This application is subject to the applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds Community Development Code. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance with the various provisions contained in these ordinances. 3. The applicant must obtain a building permit prior to any construction. 4. The applicant will need to comply with all the terms of any future permits. 5. The permit is transferable. Entered this 9th day of July, 1997, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearings Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds. Ron McConnell Hearing Examiner RECONSIDERATION'S AND APPEALS The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing reconsideration's and appeals. Any person wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should contact the Planning Department for further procedural information. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Section 20.100.010.G allows for the Hearing Examiner to reconsider his decision or recommendation if a written request is filed within ten (10) working days of the date of the initial decision by any person who attends the public hearing and signs �J U kearing Examiner Decision Case No. V 97-67 Page 8 the attendance register and/or presents testimony or by any person holding an ownership interest in a tract of land which is the subject of such decision or recommendation. The reconsideration request must cite specific references to the findings and/or the criteria contained in the ordinances governing the type of application being reviewed. APPEALS Section 20.105.020.A & B describe how appeals of a Hearing Examiner decision or recommendation shall be made. The appeal shall be made in writing, and shall include the decision being appealed along with the name of the project applicant and the date of the decision, the name and address of the individual or group appealing the decision, their interest in the matter, and reasons why the appellant believes the decision to be wrong. The appeal must be filed with the Community Development Director within fourteen (14) calendar days after the date of the decision being appealed. LAPSE OF APPROVAL Section 20.85.020.0 states "The approved variance must be acted on by the owner within one year from the date of approval or the variance shall expire and be null and void, unless the owner files an application for an extension of the time before the expiration and the city approves the application." NOTICE TO THE COUNTY ASSESSOR The property owner may as a result of the decision rendered by the Hearing Examiner request a change in the valuation of the property by the Snohomish County Assessors Office. EXHIBIT: The following exhibit was offered and entered into the record. A. Planning Division Advisory Report PARTIES of RECORD: Al and Batoul Ansari 9304 Olympic View Dr. Edmonds, WA 98020 Jim Jameson 19707 44`h Ave. W, Suite 219 Lynnwood, WA 98036 Edmonds Planning Division Edmonds Engineering Division `\ \ STREE"i �ILE T \ .2 -3 3 yvl �, �� :s _ 11- . --- ...�.�_ it -.., e`f �� •�js. . l 20 Lal 1 C'r oEl'IGDt/DS // S I L'� 6ujW' 'Re O�eco�dcc,l u�a/er l%/L�e s -•'1 .�, -,' -- 1• ._• J 1 He e 2458 �eeaTls F a ? ok�.. Sc h 4c, pvc- 1. W46H/n) G rcw • { • ' ' � ,Z �IA Y�G1-y � . •. %' ._ _ ... .� T _ �. ; , / � � I �\.ice • �pOS��N 2�w I Jz7� T ffAv� REVIGW�b 17115 PIZARN Ia MfV N4WF, t7FTFkM1NFD THf, FOLLoto/atj 1rrm6 MUST Pjc A•pppw;fep" G&jL(k 1 to M6 UtY OFtiDMonh75 P6yl6AI X'"jPOP5: 5H,,w Aged} -or Atw/MPmVtou6 CAt."t-4rtmj N mT f, THAT 51 M #*-1, A10 COMCGNTFAIW Flew pa•Tt! • hNoW NEw DGt�/TIoN Sy5T1✓M� 5/Z� . Sir�W �}'IST/NC+ 5?"B�jN pfZA/NS • PRo�11.� or% N�tJ yT"� b/zA•rN5 . gHew �ouND<!-Tton! aK��NA-6•� y/yT�A� p,s Not' *How 10 C,9o99c,7AJ& 7b 55 i"CgCAhf, FlPE 517f-, r-go/n CA N P.#�#JS DRAINAGE PLAN _0 y T - c (ocrh j► - �a: 4...-fk-_...1 . ACCEPTAELE TIGHTLINE MATERIAL - —__ , :.. N912 ADS . Sch 40 PVC SDR 35 (ASTM D3034) ,,.�••'Z'"-a7 � C T.• EXPIRES APPROVED AS N�OEU BI01[DtltI DEC 12 15s; GL4 SEC. 5 ITWP. f27 �RGE- Mic E_ ALE n- D. 0- E tj _0_ V) 01 L7 Ill R Joe 11?o cy R AND CX '04 5- 0450 (7) 'F) ��- IB' PAC , ,� ; � ./ •.;"`� , , , l ��....��.v...:�..:...._rw,.W,vs c; 7 17 0)" 17 . CA A'rl Pmzz p LEGEND EB WATER METER FIRE HYDRANI M WATER VALVE 0 GAS VALVE OP POWER VAULT -0- UTILITY POLE UTILITY ANCHOR E3 TELEPHONE RISER YARD LIGHT BLOW OFF MAIL BOX JUNCTION BOX 0 BOLLARD viN1`7 MAP MEADOADALE BEACH PARK I 15, PUGET SOUND SITE MEADOWDALE PLAYFIELDS 1050TH ST SW LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 1 OF CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT S-23-90, AS RECORED UNDER VOLUME 2436, PAGE 2458. RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUN TY, WASHINGTON. [--4 Z er IE=71.99 /9" CONC N. -380, =7 _ �7 9j 16 r(.9NC S.' 9 .1 T Ile _u..9�7 5 24 Clj(P 5' SITE AREA-14,754 4n- %_ r SCALE: 1" -20' ZONING AS-12 M I N LOT AREA 12,000 s -f 1 )o 0 20 40 F7-1 M I N LOT W I DTH 8 r) f f "M M I N STREET SETBACK _25 Ou f t BASIS OF BEARINGS: PLAT OF MEADOWDALE BEACH M I N S I DE SE16ACI, 1 `f DATUM: CITY OF EDMONDS BENCHMARK: TOP * OF SANITARY MANHOLE N. M,I N REAR SETBAC!',, 2 5 0 f t OF INT. N. MEADOWDALE BEACH RD. AND 75TH PL. W. jl MAX. H I EIGHT 25 . 00 f t ELEV.75.90 MAX COVERAGE 35% h MIN, PARKING SPACES I 4< (al -&-7 3 26 THEO 1500 MIC JOB N 0: 9 74 0 0 GL4 ,SEC. 5 JWP. 27 ,RGE. 4 ,W.M. - - - - �� • / ?gyp. 1 I �,, I , r \C. � i / �r � , ., � , • � � / / /'� h�,, II cio- L . `��r(� /�� \`\ ++1 11 11 1 `V / \ r /, / / ' , / , �1 , , / , / ` , , / ; Illy• , I I ��,/C �' IIF o IF l 7 k// 1 I! /rl l � I I �/ / � 1�� / �! Ir l r►' /l /// r kE8AR1r4N0 dWP TCi�=43 �� '' I - i "l' / l , i E� ..✓ ?�l• `I �- _ -, I, , i ' , ,.�` �- 1 It .''�1~� t / 1 jl' I /111 (Q 1 1 / • , ' Q / � 1 I I � a 1 y YY t1 • I ' �� / / � I i ; / ;'/ , r' r / , ', ' II I 1 I ' i rol • � 0� � 1Sl• / O / .1 ,1a� ti s / ,I / / / /•.. � �' Q� �� 1 , 1 y ! i 1 � `' I I , I I / ' �= I I 1 I I i / 'I,j; 10 ' / / / , r / /li'q�' f• � — / Q! ' I � � � I L_1_J 1 , � /� / / � �Q I � 1 ' 1 \ ','�.' .� �, \ \ .�l I i -T� IC C•r„ II =; � I � � t , I � I � ,r ;'r..•' -r- I .j IF l It l „?CCK CT ERI' / ` O \ \ '\ • I a I C�I� �� 1 I I I \ / I 1 \ 4 1 of 1� / 1 \ •;:,.+ I. — 0 1I Itr 01', 6� /CI,.- 19 rJ 10 I / / •�� I ; I ya .•tom i tl't' / r ►�4•a" \\ ` A��\i' �� ab7 � � I I ' , � / � �f, ••.�,T l l / • ,, l � a ' �, , l , � ROCKERY' ,� �-r. �,,� �• i 1 I � . it / / ,' ,' � �" 1 /` � _ l I ,�'• ��` � 1A \ � � ' • - / / / \' �' � �\ pry �` _ - / J�A7 eo 1 i; f"+' SSM/y -10)-73 04 15W MIC IF-77.98 18" CCWC N. A -77.9J le, awc, .S EX• !?' RCP. lr--m 6 12, CG1/C. S.,, r LEGEND ® WATER METER M FIRE HYDRANT C4 WATER VALVE GAS VALVE © POWER VAULT {)- UTILITY POLE E- UTILITY ANCHOR M TELEPHONE RISER f� YARD LIGHT p BLOW OFF MAIL BOX m JUNCTION BOX 0 BOLLARD VICINITY MAP MEADOWDALE BEACH PARR PUGET s SOUND SITE Q" \ , N , t WEADOWDALE PLAYFIELDS 168TH ST sw LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 1 OF CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT S-23-90, AS RECORED UNDER VOLUME 2436, PAGE 2458. RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON SITE AREA=14;754 SF., � /1 �1► I I ®I ,I.1 � n a n MIN. LOT AREA 12,000 sq. ft. MIN. LOT -WIDTH 80.00 f t . MIN. STREET SETBACK 25.00 it. MIN. SIDE SETBACK 10.00 ft. MIN. REAR SETBACK 25.00 ft. MAX. HIEGHT 25.00 ft. MAX. COVERAGE 35% MIN. PARKING SPACES FILENAME' H•\97-4004\/MGS20\ST010.LS21,v1 UPDATED, FED 12 1"7 13-03.15 1=1 • F a• 1 .a '"' 0.� w G� r `• I Q ;IG 01 m c� a w w H •Lx;-7 4 V •� O O � � M YZ � � � w Ems-•' Z J E•� z c w ko ,) in CA \ m 2 y ;< SHT 1 OF 1 JOB NO:97-4004 i / ►fj �j � ' / uj ba Q" J u, 00, T a �► 1 1 _ i oc Q .,•, / I i / I , / I , I I_ oll loll . � let r 1 I r 4 I + AllV. _ 1 �1� lJ'1 1 \ 1 1► ( 1 1 L I N. `ly l T 1 I I I t 1 ► 1 / 41f , L-11 ol '- so LQ •L I rf r ' r. r' r 1 I ' f , / r r i/ r L� r 'I / I I / - - i qj I t/QJ ' ' .ate-11✓ • _ {� 1L. 44- •'•. \;__;_ :- — —w --� �',— -� I „-` �•� ° � •�t In N � � � t��. ►� "� � r O � � \ �? err - of Q\o =r'v Nj V,v 1 6 �\. QQj t ' l ki to v' A Im LLA lE"'*'z.C'l'.; i�5 IF 32 34 36 4 \ \ \ \ EX. 8 WIDE SERVICE\ `\ `— 42 — \ \ \ \ ` �' \ \ 34 2.5' SET \ \ \ J � El N, 40 It 42 EX. HOLISE OLD R O.W LINE FF / v) i \ \ \ 44 U <\ \ / m \ \ \ \ \E i 11011-- 1 \ \ ( -- \ \ 00 NEW RESIDENCE FF r \ --------- \ \ \ -5 ' \ - ---- - ------ - - - - --------------------- --- -- / O \ \ Q Q \ \ O6 �� I _----- - - - --- \ \ \� / 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -------------- NIGH WATB�CK FROM \ \ \ _ 6 6 Q - F$ F F Q o , , 25 ' se regc \ \ — _- 6a 76 74 c( >:, s ------- 76 1. 111 her 6''si E 00 r C, 7 R E - 7.�x4e, // / // \\\ \\ �� NORTH /Z k rj' .� GEOTEXTILE FILTER FABRIC MIRAFI IOOX OR EQUAL 2"x 2" WOOD POST OR METAL POST 8'-0" ON CENTER WASHED GRAVEL 1 FILTER FABRIC FENCE NO SCALE STANDARD SILT FENCE NOTES A. THE FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE PURCHASED IN A CONTINUOUS ROLL CUT TO THE LENGTH OF THE BARRIER TO AVOID USE OF JOINTS. WHEN JOINTS ARE NECESSARY, FILTER CLOTH SHALL BE SPLICED TOGETHER ONLY AT A SUPPORT POST, WITH A MINIMUM 6" OVERLAP, AND BOTH ENDS SECURELY FASTENED TO THE POST. B. POSTS SHALL BE SPACED A MAXIMUM OF 6' APART AND DRIVEN SECURELY INTO THE GROUND A MINIMUM OF 30 INCHES (WHERE PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE). C. A TRENCH SHALL BE EXCAVATED APPROXIMATELY 8" WIDE AND 12" DEEP ALONG THE LINE OF POSTS AND UPSLOPE FROM THE BARRIER. THE TRENCH SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED TO FOLLOW THE CONTOUR. D. WHEN SLIT FILM FILTER FABRIC IS USED, WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE SHALL BE FASTENED SECURELY TO THE UPSLOPE SIDE OF THE POSTS USING HEAVY-DUTY WIRE STAPLES AT LEAST I" LONG, TIE WIRES OR HOG RINGS. THE WIRE SHALL EXTEND INTO THE TRENCH A MINIMUM OF 4" AND SHALL NOT EXTEND MORE THAN 36" ABOVE THE ORIGINAL GROUND SURFArE E. SLIT FILM FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE WIRED TO THE FENCE, AND 20" OF THE FABRIC SHALL EXTEND INTO THE TRENCH. THE FABRIC SHALL NOT EXTEND MORE THAN 36" ABOVE THE ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE. FILTER FABRIC SHALL NOT BE STAPLED TO EXISTING TREES. OTHER TYPES OF FABRIC MAY BE STAPLED TO THE FENCE. F. WHEN EXTRA -STRENGTH OR MONOFILAMENT FABRIC AND CLOSER POST SPACING ARE USED, THE WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE MAY BE ELIMINATED. IN SUCH A CASE, THE FILTER FABRIC IS STAPLED OR WIRED DIRECTLY TO THE POSTS WITH ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF STANDARD NOTE "E" APPLYING. EXTRA CARE SHOULD BE USED WHEN JOINING OR OVERLAPPING THESE STIFFER FABRICS. MAINTENANCE INSPECT IMMEDIATELY AFTER EACH RAINFALL, AND AT LEAST DAILY DURING' PROLONGED RAINFALL. REPAIR AS NECESSARY. SEDIMENT MUST BE REMOVED WHEN IT REACHES APPROXIMATELY ONE-THIRD THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE, ESPECIALLY IF HEAVY RAINS ARE EXPECTED. ANY SEDIMENT DEPOSITS REMAINING IN PLACE AFTER THE FILTER FENCE IS NO LONGER REQUIRED SHALL BE SPREAD TO CONFORM WITH THE EXISTING GRADE, PREPARED AND SEEDED. ALL TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE REMOVED 30 DAYS AFTER FINAL SITE STABILIZATION IS ACHIEVED OR AFTER THE TEMPORARY BMP'S ARE NO LONGEP_-NEEDED. TRAPPED S'D!!="'IT SHij�_L G': REMOVED OR STABILIZED ON SITE. DISTURBED SOIL AREAS RESULTING FRUi,: REMOVAL SHALL BE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED. --qL�-- EXISTING 10' CONTOUR -- gg -- EXISTING 2' CONTOUR —106 — NEW CONTOUR 111.65 TC NEW SPOT ELEVATION 112.15 TP TW TOP OF CONCRETE WALL E`<. E`iIS TING Fr. FINISHED GRAPE Ft FV A II('N II- INVERT ELEVAHON RINI RIM ELEVATION TIC TOP OF CURB ELEVATION TP TOP OF PAVEMENT ELEVATI)^, 2:1 SLOPE AT 2 FIOR'%ONTAL T; ! '/Er-TI';o SLOPE O NEW AREA DRAIN 0 NEW CLEANOUT (Q EXISTING MANHOLE C4 EXISTING WATER VALVE -6- EXISTING FIRE HYDRAIIT ® EXISTING WATER METEP EXIS TING POWER. POLE & '='_I r. 0--+ EXISTING STREET LIGuT — — FF—*— NEW FILTER FABPI� FFI Ii E —SO — NEW STORM DRAIN LINE --PP - - NEW PERFORATED PIKE TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION & EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF EDY01,11D'; NEOUIREMENTS ANT THE CODE SECTION 7013. 2. THIS PROJECT WILL CONSTRUCT 6060 SQUARE FEET OF DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE AND WILL INVOLVE EXCAVATION OF APPROXIMATELY 771 CUBIC YARDS OF EXCAVATION INCIDENTAL TO CONSTRUCTION. THEREBY REOl1 RING• A GRADING PERMIT. 3. PLAN AND IMPLEMENT PROPER CLEARING AND GRADING OF THE SITE. CLEAR ONLY AREAS NEEDED FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIPTY. PHASE CLEARING SO THAT ONLY THOSE AREAS THAT ARE ACTIVELY BEING WORKED ARE UNCOVEPED. 4. ALL MATERIAL EXCAVATED FROM THE SITE SHALL BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY FROM THE PROJECT SITE, EXCEPT FOR SMAL_ �!ANTITIE; MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR FILL. DO NOT STOCKPILE MATERIAL ON SITE. 5. ALL AREAS STRIPPED OF VEGETATIVE COVER, OR COVERED W/ SOIL SHALL BL SUBJEC I 10 EROSION & SEDIMEN' ATION C,)N I1\ft kQ 'l PERMANENT MEASURES SHALL CONSIST OF SEEDING, FERTILIZING AND MULCHING, OR PLACEMENT 0" LANDSCAPE MATERIALS AS SOWN ,I: THE DRAWINGS. SEEDING SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED PRIOR TO OCTOBER 1 UNLESS AUTHORIZATION IS OBTAINED FROM THE EN,IN_EP. ltI WHICH CASE SEEDING SHALL BE NO LATER THEN NOVEMBER 1. 6. TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE IMPLEMENTED IN THE EVENT THAT SEEDING WAS NOT ACCOMPLISHED BY THE REQUIRED DATES, OR DURING PERIODS OF INCLEMENT WEATHER. TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATII_I�1 CONTROL MEASURES SHALL CONSIST OF PLACEMENT OF CLEAR PLASTIC SHEETING, SODDING, STRAW MULCHING OR EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS AS NECESSARY TO STABILIZE THE SLOPES. AT ALL TIMES, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE AVAILABLE ON SITE, SI_'c_FII_IF^IT 7: ='IT ' OF THESE MATERIALS TO BE APPLIED TO EXPOSED SLOPES IN THE EVENT OF INCLEMENT WEATHER. 7. IN THE EVENT THAT THE PROJECT SITE REMAINS INACTIVE FOR 15 DAYS OR MORE, ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CCNTP'IL MEASURES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR A MINIMUM OF ONCE EVERY 15 DAYS. AT ALL TIMES, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT AND MAINTAIN ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES WITHIN 24 HOURS OF A ST0174.4 E;'ENT THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DESIGNATE A CONTACT PERSON TO BE AVAILABLE AT ALL TIMES TO ENSURE THAT REQUIREMENTS t�F TNI_ ARE IMPLEMENTED AND COMPLIED WITH. !`r 18. TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF SOIL ADHERING TO TIRES OF CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES, APPLY GRAVEL OR CRUSHED ROCK T-1 THE CONSTRUCTION DRIVEWAY AREA AND RESTRICT TRUCK TRAFFIC TO THIS ONE ROUTE. DRIVEWAY QAVING CAN BE INSTALLED DIREC-L" C",E[; THE GRAVEL. THE ACCESS SHOULD BE PERIODICALLY INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED BY WASHIN3. TOP DRESSING WITH Annnot!&L STONE AS NECESSARY, REWORKING AND COMPACTION. 9. PROVIDE FOR PERIODIC STREET CLEANING TO REMOVE ANY SEDIMENT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN TRACKED OUT. SEDIMENT SHOULL' BE REMOVED BY SHOVELING OR SWEEPING AND CAREFULLY REMOVED TO A SUITABLE DISPOSAL AREA WHEPE IT WILL NOT ED'�DE pGArt 10, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CLEAN ALL STORM DRAINAGE PIPING; TO BE EPEE FRAM ;ILT TO SITE ;TASILIZAT!Ofi CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION (ONTROL MEA;UPE) ',UBSEOUEIIT TO ;ITE ;TABILIZATIOII. 11. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHOWN ARE A MINIMUM; ADDITIONAL MEASURES MAf BE P,EOUIRED AS CONDITIONS WAP,PANT. Z'' (k / ' % / � � \ \ _ EROSION CONTROL PLAN 82 SCALE: 1 10.0 — — — —64 141 APP 0 ED A5 NOTE 88 CONTACT: PROPERTY ADDRESS: ADDRESS: 75th PLACE, WEST TELEPHONE: EDMONDS, WASHINGTON LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 1 OF CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT 5-23-90, AS AS RECORDED UNDER VOLUME 2436, PAGE 2458 RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WA .REVISIONS BY �Q 'WAS yitic J, _ F �S70NAL c�.-�'G CXPIRES DOU%AS FOSTER, P.E. 0 z 0 J O U rr z o �- U) Lu U z c o � ccvJ � rr� o � cc W l<f� :h�At C1 REVISIONS I BY 32 \ 34` 36 8i WIDE SERVICE RO,q \ ` 34 `5 SETggCK 36 J \ \ � 38 42 E\ H; LI'5E i \ �a �� ` � �' `•8.50 RIM i Z. \ \ 54 F0 % \ I .3 / `2 G _ � J r RC, KERI , 3' / EE=IN MAX. HEIGHT �ERTI� AL CURB 6" ASPHALT ExTRUDED CURB 'HALT 'AVEMEIJT :USHED AG,:REC,R T- ACTED SUBGR�&E i,95 C) 75 J / th �PLA Ce \ 1 N \ \ '� \ 44 \ \ \ -- --- \ 16 uj SO S 4 .----- ` 60.00 FIG NEW RESIDENCE - F.F. ELEV. 71.33_---_---_ --__ _ ..(MAI1't fLOOR) F.F. ELEV. 63.25 \ \ \ (UPPER BASEMENT) \ \ � \ F.F. ELEV. 6D.W — — I \ - {tOWER BASEMENT) � \ 62 \ \ 69.50 FIG \ TP -`- ^71.30 \ \ HICy' S�TBgCK WAT R OM 70.83 FG Ll \TIP% 70.50 RIM 71.10 T 25' \ \ \ \ \ — 68 �0 TW SE TgAC I \ \ D5 TIP W,— P.—�� 74 )I 7 — — — — \' � 1 CONC. RETAINING WALL \ \ •_ & STAIRWAY, SEE ARCH. & STRUCT. TW 8 80 \ NORTH \ \ GRADING PLAN SCALE: 1 - 10.0 86 1 --90-- EXISTING 10' CONTOUR - - 98 -- EXISTING ?' CONTOUR —106 — NEW CONTOUR 111.65 TC NEW SPOT ELEVATION 1 12.15 TP TW TOP OF CONCRETE WALL EX. EXISTING FG FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION IE INVERT ELEVATION RIM RIM ELEVATION TC TOP OF CURB ELEVATION TP TOP OF PAVEMENT ELEVATION 2:1 SLOPE AT 2 HORIZONTAL TO 1 VERTIC 1.3% SLOPE O NEW AREA DRAIN 0 NEW CLEANOUT EXISTING MANHOLE D4 EXISTING WATER VALVE EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT ® EXISTING WATER METER E—a EXISTING POWER POLE & GUY 0-0 EXISTING STREET LIGHT -I FF-H-. NEW FILTER FABRIC FENCE —SD — NEW STORM DRAIN LINE --PP - - NEW PERFORATED PIPE ESTIMATED CUA 71 C1._UBIC Y ESTIMATED FILL:'I CU �-zp .rye w�O Ir Oa• i1z I.:W113,11 EXPIRES f ( DWGLAS FOSTER, Pa (425) 557-5527 z ....., 0 LLI Z Ifil uj W . k.e »,.. ,... W Ljj 0 CC (L Ir : .LO ., Dote 4/19/98 Scale AS SHOWN Drown DF Job Sheet C2 of SheetS REVISIONS Bti EXISTING 10' CONTOUR -- 98 -- EXISTING 2' CONTOUR -106 - NEW CONTOUR 111.65 TC 112.15 TP NEW SPOT ELEVATION TW TOP OF CONCRETE WALL. EX. EXISTING FG FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION IE INVERT ELEVATION RIM RIM ELEVATION TC TOP OF CURB ELEVATION TP TOP OF PAVEMENT ELEVATION 2:1 SLOPE AT 2 HORIZONTAL TO 1 VEPTI(�A 1.3 o SLOPE ❑ NEW AREA DRAIN O NEW CLEANOUT L0 EXISTING MANHOLE N EXISTING WATER VALVE -6- EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT ® EXISTING WATER METER EXISTING POWER. POLE & GUY �'--L EXISTING STREET LIGHT --- FF-X- NEW FILTER FABRIC FENCE — SP — NEW STORM DRAIN LINE --PP - - NEW PERFORATED PI°E INAGE PLAN I" = 10.0' PROPERTY ADDRESS: 75th PLACE, WEST EDMONDS, WASHING TON _OT 1 OF CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT 5-23-90, AS VOLUME 2436, PAGE 2458 RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WA 11- it -,.i 5; DOUGLAS FOSTER, P.E. z . .. CIO Z. de w U4 .J Z CL Q. ", f- EXISTING GRADE RE"S10NS I I 62 60 58 56 54 52 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 82 80 78 76 74 72 70 68 66 64 62 60 58 56 86 84 82 80 7e 76 74 72 70 68 66 64 62 60 58 56 54 52 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 �6POUT . _ . _.._...- -- PROYIDE-SLEE —.. -- --� - - .1.--'--- THROUGH F TG. ' GRADE -- — - - —j I 1_--- -- - - -- -- - — A. -E ROAD I I.E. ONNEdION 1N.T =38:60t (FI _.Ex_S LD VER ER___ FY) SEWER PROFILE SCALE: 1 " = 10.0' 62 60 58 56 54 52 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 AlN co vt tuA'r 7� -- - - - SCALE: I" = 10.0' Ir m11 111 50 ,.. lio I- -- --- — - 149: M X, SLOPE - - - -' I 1 ROAD G'ENTERt1�4E TOP PAVE ENT fEX15TING' GRADE . . _ .. 1 _ ... _ a _. ) .. , . _ (FINISH; -GRADE --'----- -•' --• -- - - - CU _. _....-- --' �---------_.. .. _.1....... ..... �._. -- - I ._.... _ ........ .. _ ._..... . .. . ... .._.:. . _.... _. . _.. __. I I i CONCH TE WALL __ . .. _ . _ - --- 1 --- - --..------'- - - - __ -- -- -- -- -------�---i ---� -- - ---- --- - - -- - ---- . _ I FILL I I j SCALE: I" = 10.0' 56 Cb ui -- I --- --- -�------------ -- � -! --- -. _ .--- 1CF- z - CL CL -- -CUT_._. - --- ---- --... - - -STAIffGONG. WACL— 11G_ 0KA E ---- I � 4 ----- - -- --- FINIS FLOOR 'ELEV. 72.50 __.. - -- -- PAR ING PAO CRAWL - — I UTfttdlSH t0f}R- L'Etr-6 8E}-' ---- — - --- -'-- --- -- ----'------ ----- —._... ---........ ---- ------ FILL - - -- - --1 -- - - - - -1----...- - ' - 1- I • 1 ' I i I 1 I .. � i - -- - -- --- --- - - -- --- — I--1---- DVS FIN RAD -- - '� --S -- -- SEWER- - - - - I , DRAIN UHAIN 0 NE STORIA I � SITE CROSS SECTION SC ALL I" �-! 10.0' 62 60 58 56 54 52 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 GRATE ELEVATION _ H DEVICE SHALL Bit LOCATED SO THAT 80% OF OV'EPlLOM PIPE IS 7ISIRLE FROM OPENING. /— TYPE II CATCH BASIN ELEVATION- 12" MIN 46 D.E. OVRRFLOW ELEVATION SET TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE OIL SEPARATION PROTECTION. II MIN. 6" (RECOMMZZMED 8" ) INLET PIPE (SIZE TO FIT STORAGE DESIGN) OWLET PIPE MIN. SLOPEu 4 MINIMUM SLOPE- 0 I... 7 I �;, Z MIN vR1FACE I PIPE SUPPORTS SHEAR GATE 3" X 0.090 BOLTS OR EMBEDDED 2' IN WALL. �1 ADJUSTABT A HOOK Non I. -ALL METAL. PARTS AND SURFACE MUST BE MADE OF CORROSION ni•sISTANT MATERIAL OR GALVANIZED. I -FILL CATCH BASIN TO INVERT LEVEL OF /�% OUTFLOW PIPE TO PREVENT ANY OIL ESCAPING. 11lL� 1.SHFM GATE SHALL BEt A. CAST IRON BODY AND GATE. OLYMPIC FDY, STD, OR ZQUAL. g. ALUMINUM, DRAINAGE SPECIALTIES (SAVANNA, GA) STD. OR EQUAL. GATE SHALL BE 8" DIAM, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 3.BATS SHALL BE JOINED TO TEE SECTION BY BOLTING - (THROUGH FLAMOE), WELDING, OR OTHER SECURE MEANS. CONTROL 4.LIFT RODt AS SPECIFIED BY MANUFACTURER WITH HANDLE S D� R E I1YG TO WITHINOtt1' FOOT AN OF COVER D ADJUSTABLE paox LOCH FAf4Tzm TO FRAMII<_OR UPPER 11iA2tD I=. TO „R;, S• -J orcK 6: SLOP:-' - AT g" V.;ti V H I FILTER FABRIC 8' MAX , . ;' MIRAFI Iq 0 S CR E OUAL APPROVED 6" PERF PVC DRAINLINE TIE TO PUBLIC STORM SYSTEM MUST BE INSPECTED BY PUBLIC WORKS ♦ r I 4,_ O" ROCKERY MUST BE INSTALLED BY LICENSED ROCKERY CON T HRC T 7R •a,r,^gym Apck 2 feet 3 inches 2•n-or" 1•mpn !eet 6 inches 3--cm 2-mcr. 5 feet 9 inches. 4-rr.n 2-r,_r. 8 'eet •2 ,n:nes 5-.r:n 2-r^_ IF ROCKERY HEIGHT EXCEEDS 81, IT MUST BE DESIGNED BY A PRACTICING GEOTECHNICAL, CIVIL ENGINEER LICENSED IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON . ROCKERY DETAIL m DOUM.AS FOSTEF (425) 557 -552 7 - 0 Ill - Co C n' C6 qv 0 w L4 cc as z 111 t x C6 W ,h.. , o C,,. Via. F_ ,. w Z U-) (1) < N Date 4/1Q/Q3 Scale .AS SHOWN Dawn DF Job Cheer U4 7r Sh�►t3 i G'S