The URL can be used to link to this page

16119 73RD PL W.PDF111111111111 5806 16119 73RD PL W ESU-/�1 ADDRESS: 0 l� ` 19 7 3,,-d //- !mow TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: 00 ZZ96)2- 000-CO /-7-00 BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE): Zl ! S —02 e COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR: //ca 11,os<1 �SS # 47-3` z C 00/7- 5Z CRITICAL AREAS: �? 1? / DETERMINATION: FCCConditional Waiver ❑ Study Required ❑ Waiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S:_ V r DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: 4-�/�j PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED: EASEMENT(S) RECORDED PERMITS (OTHER): �26o/-0! 6 4Add �'3�pzaoo 117&idAl . PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED: SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED:G ` r <�/ / / /-0l r 7——03--13 SEWER LID FEE $: LID #: 216) SHORT PLAT FILE: I'aaw GII�� LOT: BLOCK: SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #: GEOTECH REPORT DATED: STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #: FOR: WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: Tom- LATEMP\DSTs\Forms\.Street File Checklist.doc P14 4�-ro PF.A19 po * c. c ra VIA MFA fzcj 5� 5 6�2 enes r A /10 eep� r b loo. T 36, it 7�0 M�_o ye .re� PL..AKI f r-- LOT 7 pe 04 5. CS 7-4-014 tvict F"si 20& Poo,!,; APPROVED BY PLANNING 41q. GUTTERS/DOWNSPOUTS Ave lrQde - >!��i 75 TO CONNECT TO EXIST 11 Ov RS IVF*a APPROVED AS � ,Q�f �� ; l6y � BY E E:ERINNIG SE? 11 1g. 75 OZN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES GTR. CITY COPY CITY OF EDMONDS # z ool—btl j � z W cn 0 o ci W a W cc LL. a POT er4T I AL ! C l�4Zd 2G E�CIGT W/I 100' 8Q OF LOT 't �h h DATUM as A cB Top t5b,24 Ison5 INV 149.-74 AD 15a T POAG tG' �— MAP SOT % Lnz.lcni WOODS P2D / . �, GDMoN- IW-S- I - cj'Told I5L 0 T ABC AG6rUr T F'e2o E:. NO : 1904 -000. Dos- 000 S / N; 1 -I I R i 3 °A PL W, App2E4'. /7 LoT St le 47,5.* a„F. Apfee✓. A ELEVATION Cl;: gxtST• PEATJ¢E$ AND 150 ToPo4ftAP++lc DATP TAIc.rN DIBEtTLY / a FZ-aM oowL e.lGr,Nae�wc� GCN}T2LLTION ,. °� GYKUMCN'rS Fo 4- Lo 21AN W000C I // J� LOT'7 GIM EN SIGN �i AND hoor4D01L`1 �iZAK.INCTS FItGM Low -,AN WoppS '40 PPLo ` PLAT- mo• M°IMToSW PL.-IC" MdPte cuh t s �N 4.b laa,a It` 1 -1 D N �I1-PINC7 4L-!GNT GA,LC.SGAI.C. , N!, C=021-1E2 A 150.-75 l j G•02N ER. �j 1 31. q�i ROP Low C.,f>2NEZ. G I5, 2S 1q4� Co 2N EMIL 4 1c-�.;�p 5G1.95 r 4 � I q0.'� 4 dVr.�6RD PlLIX�. PpC`✓ATE LeT�"L!-. I 140,74 t 25'= M6>L FSL pCT HTz 1 Co5,74. _'YL penis: ExIST ea aQ�• �� corn, P• '%L+50 — H _v y p0 np h \ems 14, I-P GO T V I'ip•24 / / `N� —---- / I; INV IZ4—_4 / 7 +� �•S, •34•W / ✓ / ��pq'11 •'N �r,.00' /� L•-mot 7Ido.Y1 / 'ioT�iTtP c.Aa?+4E hc<-q IN. /�/FJ 14�1.5 l 1" .,fig r i�ra f � Irs,•45 .: � 1 i 9,' Dwelt 6�.I ��tti I 0 I 1 v r eLr�y I�i>5.15 V 0, > Z c I �rt,bd PioT FTT¢ cl/a q �\ L�114 — / ter-_ V Ib9•G1 IN �� ✓ � SL•. OI ouT Q Gh TOP14o,g5 INv 1 4.30 IAl, PAVE�e�n1T t3�_4E / o � N kA 01 zpLil I �N3O'o7'35" B �PZOC fGd. �. .UW C -Wb< �a"ppee�oo uO- i L�QC �. OZ Ni i I l 14a�9 \ ro . DATUM A� sL3 •D� C P&ra r_ B/ (53,st �. ISO. � / V 4 -- - --- 13l .9 S I N 149 .� � Pt •-- �------- - -- G6 Tot' �o INV IZ4,' 164, p /� I , %` �GoR. '.SOT fre-r -• P17.OP Go¢- i- Z A P I `+ MAP ��J �i• T. Ste• 1...11 1" : • I cp' A keY/5e,D 41Z4��3�of F . tiesa A Fs t, V. - .14 .5 • °O b ' r Lo-r I.Ct A N Woe :o S P2o / mDMa� IZ-I-4Ds WAs41 N TaN z � a -c• Ft � ��'� N'� -TAx A460U IAT Pp.t2.c E<_ No ;; . 15 / i� 14.3 • . 3 �) FTC-r, ,e4T I o NS Av I ' �%qo4 •DOo�aG7• oot�'y N hot �. EN 0_&I WD 3.0' Per." I f� 119 '7 *%5 lr-' ?6 - Val, APPRZAPts / M I,Gr++'T Y pa. ItaN G Lo-T .6s1Lr: 43'S4 evif. / I.Ovoetz Gt - U. 1 • " RLEVI�-t"l0?4 of 6xtST, - , P ebi'T'oREs ANA 150 l�r N ..• DoT �� ' 13 . • 4$ � V Q TvPow f� P+1 Ic b�.TA -t-Alr.°N 1 tz.ecTk-Y a N.�N �1" Z lm 11- VMZ6 l DoWL 1=NG1N�s+ErciNCT coNsTrttx.TtbN -_ \ / p - 1 Sisw et. J _ �1 �i•5y ? - V C�xuN►EKTS pOIZ. t.orr-1oN Vfaays ,, Qv I-oT -1 VIMENSIorlti 4ND gouNbetL•! / '� �U d •o d :;. pj�Q21N�S {rRt�M �.oltI0N �Na�ovS—oo A} t34.b 1. , 00 0 > >' • i - OT przo PLA Ti IV MO. MOI NTOS44 PISS cL-uSTCJ4 I� ti � � qr Fes, oo z it 0 VoV ail , P� 9�► 040• A1ei+N aW -- ..._ r0 �II.bING. 44L.IGTNT Cy4LG5 -z �--T- �, \ � lu o _ • �Iz-N E Iz � 13 I • 'q S - /.. PR'oP. co � i ' 4r_102N E P_ G co 2N a AL P -1-o't•�a tS m �. - - r1 I . t rL�,o. ,yJ (�• ?, M 135. 7& 5!0?.95 -f-�{• _ I 40.�4 dVcT,c�rRa P�t,.rx�: p�.o �� u _ 3 � .: 1 74 -I- zS' - MA)k Py1• 1► T= dvS 74 X' - 12ATu EMAIST GIB Ac> 5Dt- Go • (44- N81'V P,IIWJB CdP�i.67v ' + ELECT A4,c 1. Zoo ®G ep R• . �Av�M>✓N-t 5Dl-�1^i TW-APA o iE VP 139•z �� W DINE c5 ToPI i•61 ,� a' 41-1 OI OUT �Q 0Y G m - ....r-- ToP 140.95 rA ♦ �- STofldtn AL/A ril a" Urt_e ERED ' ch TOP14o..g5 / EC I NV I 4:30 14'�• `i S ATEOFW HINGTON ' J CITY OF EDMONDS..:.. USE ERMIT ZONE %UMBER 9 3VsS.6 CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION JOB �r �� sul E/APTa ADDRESS OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS aK 850 rD� LEGAI DESCRIPTION C/HECK SUBDIVISION NO. LID NO. w , / V!G /V a MAILING ADDRESS a'�/ y#A 115 < 1. 0 O PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP. TESCP Approved O CITY ZIP TELEPHONE D�� NUMBER .... 500 4 EXISTING REQUIRED DEDICATION RW Permit Required Street Use Permit Req'd D Inspection Required . • "` PROPOSED Il/./_G.' Sidewalk Required O t7 NAME �C.-7E'{1��.(/' •. T7 / �/�•r'� W REMARKS IT� I�r 5�7W1 I'' .:. I X-Uf' .� r W //J� ADDRESS �G- J ,52,E 7 5 •,f/d�/Y I ( I%a {% %. j�41(itV? Ivtjj� ul z , Z tuj CITY ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER 1,�J 1% PP4V_�{ 'Z"'57"W" � z j p 82� 33/ ' 35-Q ' f / G-•"nivlK�l ((fir �r NAME%I%,t 1 IV ENGINEERING MEMO DATED REVIEW BY f O ADDRESS, r j !L1/ G f✓ METERS E BUILDING JVPPLY SIZE NO. OF FIXTURES U C ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER Z w Z z �^ (ZA 7� S REMARK 1 V a 3 s, STATE LICENSE NUMBffR.' EX P RATIO DATE w f G `� I �i g 103 Y q 1 �► SIGN AREA SEPA REVIEW ADB NO. ,Legal Description of Property - include all easements ALLOWED PROPOSED COMPLETE EXEMPT �O? 7 40R16AJ A/000 SHORELINEa o EX F• a VARIANCE OR CU PL NIN EVIEW BY S /� 0 a SETBACKS —FEET '. HEIGHy LOT OVERA ' i Z Z U w. Property Tax Account /� �,�"M OU Da0 FRONT SIDE ;: REAR eo a REMARKS Parcel No. NEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING ADDITION El COMMERCIAL MECHANICAL /9 aREMODEL APT. BLDG.SIGN Xe5/r 0N N FENCE^ ® TYPE OF CONSTRUC ON CODE �y 1 REPAIR , CYDS. ( X (I, FHEIGHT ,. SWIM POOLUI DEMOLISH INSERTTOVE aTUB/SPAAD HOT S CTOR AREA OCCUPANCY GROUP CUPANT . GARAGE. RETAINING WALL/ ROCKERY El RENEWAL REMARK O (TYPE OF USE, BUSINESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN: PROGRE I CTIONS PER UBC 305 s r5 NUMBER OF new Pew W-5 6- 47 " V1 • '''� w NUMBER OF STORIES DWELLING ONE UNITS �d� O � r zs DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN) '�� -5 / /Q +p I-NACUWECTION REQUIRED �4,er'/�/pJ / � �/^ I�CT /FfC.S�CI� ^"'•" Q, `u�J�'l� / PIC FEE ^+ r'^ i o-1voijairdy 7M AKIIMC. VALUATION PLAN CHECK FEE S BUILDING 0 z/ 0,M AIVA 7- HEAT SOURCE: C//�� '' / `' 4'5 Ike 1V16?RW A GLAZING /�� D/0 PLUMBING •dV �/ '• Plan Check NO. / ( MECHANICAL This Permit covers work/too be done on private property ONLY, 0RADINGIFILL Any construction on the public domain (curls, sidewalks, driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission. STATE SURCHARGE So Permit Application: 180 Days Permit Limit: 1 Year - Provided Work is Started Within 180 Days STORM DRAINAGE FEE FEE 2 C� "Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse,, halts, assigns and ENO; INSPECTION successors in interest, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold w harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials, QQ �°.�Ie�� 10 R&DLWV led m employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of_, cr whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the issuance- '• of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to PLAN ChIECK DEPOSIT modify, waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance S i nor limit in any way the ty's ability to enforce any orl�inagce MOUNT DUE provision," I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application; that the ATTENTION APPLICATION APPROVAL.-,., information given is correct; and that I am the owner, or the duly authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with city and THIS' PERMIT This ap; I(catiori' is not a permit until` F state laws regulating construction; and in doing the work authoriz• ed thereby, no pef..son will be employed in violation of the Labor AUTHORIZES ONLY THE', signed by the Building Official or.his/her Code of the S,tate'of Washington relating to Workmen's Compensa• WORK NOTED Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is acknowledged in space provided. ti n Ins r nc .i:. INSPECTION �� DATE,, SIGNED SIGNATURE (OWNER OR AGENT).-'<;>:.�4;.•: -.. ,, .. ,;;_+:F ,.DEPARTMENT _ L _ ATf ` \. CITY OF EDMONDS �• r ATTENTION .•ALL FOR INSP,EGTIt7N1-' ftlAt,�e DATE IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE 771-0220 UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR ORIGINAL — File YELLOW — Inspector A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC CHAPTER 3. PINK —'Owner GOLD — Assessor to9A7 •' . 25.2006=12 .030ENW.2�MMWMMM� 1: P 1 j NOTICE: NO WARRAN 1Y OF ACCURACY. The information shown an tho attached map was compiled for use by the Clty of Edmonds, its employees �nd,h4nsultants, The City of Edmonds does not warrant the accuracy of t' set forth Qfl 1ths flap. person or enti fequpsung a copy '?+ flthd4 • AAtr��y� �p1 f •p 11' should conduct an independent fnqufry rggerdinp the InfaTnmtlop sE`oWn no the mP, including, but not Iimlted to. the locaclpn of any "6ow4r sjuu r ;' shown, Such sewer stubs may or may not exist and, may or may not exist 31 the location shown. Nelther the City of Edmonds nor its employe '•l� officers shall be liable for the information given on this map. nor for any U(: repre:ontation provided based upon said map. rJ L r r 1 Q ' 1 � i 1 o I o I � r i B J I i ' r I i� G I G i o v W i f I _;! O I .n I " Q � m � � o 1�; OI � • � � vtiu I t �' r�� a 1 ' yry It i �r i D l ••, t;``r.� '••%,r,, f .:fit• y v.; �; A 1,: ryC'.' i! I''� 4 s �j'�;: ',fir,.. uN `.'i!' p,,M N ''r�, \ Y : •t•1 r,�.L,• r1• '�. .1. '•''�r�? .E4�L, � ••w,, t1 � ., �,'• b.'nn�•• •, ,.5, 'a',; 1'>'f 1t�;�.',•..' 'p, I1•.i..1 ''•.. �� y•Ui.: ''fir :. .`J•I � i�1� 1•% , "'.'J •'��I +r :.`.i �,•+y...�J••... w•i'lrl� .�••�111� ��i• •I!' .%I''I•.i �r' y'��.}f .I,'. Sh I I B90_199- City of Edmonds Critical Areas Checklist The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form -is to be filed out by any person preparing a Development Permit - Application for the City of Edmonds prior to his/her submittal of a developmentpermit to the City. The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to determine whether any potential Critical Areas am 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). RECEIVED FEB 0.3 1993 PERMIT COUNTER An applicant, or his/her represcxitative, must fill out the checklist, sign and date it, 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 of the parcel with enough detail that City staff can find and identify the -subject. parcel(s). In addition, the applicant is encouraged to include any other pertinent information or studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assist staff 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: r k. W,0- Name PWA-)E 204 74¢ " Title 4%�rlc.� 2/e /l0 7G Street Address City, State, ZIP Phone Applicant Representative: Name Pi&A)c- h�i�G�1ZEGT Title Street Address ZIP /- _\ Phone Signature Date Signature Date Coical Areas Checklist 0 Site Information MAAY Ili&6,0/,UfT ProjectName: Permit Number. Site Locatioq//AZAU-1 r%3'p�Property Tax Account Number. 79D�--000--0a7�-000v l.,OAA N/Gd05 � �.oT w -7, ��e: .�TT4Gweo Approximate Site Size acres orsquare feet): K Have you filled out a Critical Areas Checklist for a project on this site before? /L/6 General Site Conditions yFS ,67- 71'UG 1. Has the site been cleared or logged? of APAC, Date of most recent action: l� Soils / Topography L wosr-YOB 6 F��rset s 2. In the Snohomish County Soil Survey, what is the mapped soil type(s)? 51L7Y -5,6AJD 3C� T��2� ATT•�a<M 6►�S T 3. 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 66 feet.) Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% ( a vertical rise of 10 feet of horizontal distance.) Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site. CommentsAeFek TD 71F.,oe� A RAT ,,e=4e A45rAA10 � ,40RI 00o05 P)e-Z> pieo.!e<=,z- T—,S4;c)-1 Hydrology/Vegetation 4. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: No 5. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water. Approx. Depth: 6. Site is in the floodway floodplain / JO of a water course. / . 7. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface?y flows are year-round? Flows are seasonal? 5'./�r' ltieTee .O.eG�it1 Ep _ off i3Y Gi TY � Y S 7gM 8. Site is primarily: forested : meadow X- ; shrubs X ; mixed _ 9. Obvious wetland is present on site: A)6) 10. Wetland inventory or map indicates wetland present on site: 11... Critical Areas ikiventory �or map indicates an Critical Area on site: �5 : /5 i t) UA)DOWD ,4YAz.AReo5• • oe 1; ROwG ��er 4CZ1AJZb1AYs .OA 2G �o7-eWT/Ac_ xev3I27/92 TERRA ASSOCIATES Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences CY't' Y GOPY Richard H. Rhydes Whidbey Island Architects 5247 South Highway 525 Freeland, Washington.98249 Subject: Neering Residence Lot 7, Lorian Woods References: Geotechnical Report, Projectl-840-1 Meadowdale Beach, Lots 54 to 57 Working Drawings for the Mary Neering Residence by Whidbey Island Architects, Dear Mr. Rhydes: RECEIVED FEB 0.1 1993 PERMIT COUNTER Project T-840-6 September 24, 1992 We have examined the referenced drawings you provided us. We understand the residence will have a basement floor that daylights on the south, and a garage on the second level extending into the slope at the northeast corner of the lot. The attached Figure 1 shows the approximate grades expected on. the bottom of the excavation. The three -level cut will, reach depths of about nine feet below present grades. The lowest level at the south side provides for a lap pool. As explained in the referenced geotechnical report, the soil at Lorian Woods is landslide debris and may provide relatively poor bearing conditions for conventional footings. To explore subsurface soil and groundwater conditions on Lot 7, we excavated three test pits to depths below the proposed footing bearing grades. Figure 1 shows the approximate test pit locations and the residence's ground floor footprint. Logs of the test pits are reported on the attached Table A. i 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 0 Phone (206) 821-7777 Whidbey Island Architects • • Project T-840-6 . September24, 1992 Page 2 As expected, the test pits encountered landslide debris, mostly silty sand. It contains buried topsoil, chunks of clay and till, and some wood and other organics. Test Pit 1 encountered groundwater and the pit walls caved after only a short time. PVC,standpipes were installed in Test Pits 1 and 2 so that groundwater levels could be observed over a longer period. At the present time, groundwater at Test Pit 1 is about eight feet below the ground surface, approximately Elev 143. The standpipe in Test Pit 2 is dry at approximately Elev 125. Based on the water levels in the standpipes, it appears that groundwater may be encountered a foot or two above the bottom of the excavation. Of course, working conditions in the excavation would be best during the dry summer season. If the excavation bottom is wet, it may be too soft to support construction traffic. To provide a satisfactory working mat, we recommend.overexcavating wet areas about one foot and backfilling quarry spalls., During construction, provisions should be made to collect all free water and discharge it at the open south end of the excavation. In addition, groundwater conditions may affect the stability of the excavation slopes. The contractor should be prepared to lay the slopes back at 1 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter, as necessary to avoid collapse. If seepage occurs at the toe of excavation slopes, a french drain about two feet deep along the toe would help control the seepage and stabilize the slope. The excavation also will undercut the 12-inch drain line adjacent the lot, on the east side, especially near the garage cut. This line carries water continually and would flood the excavation if broken. Provisions should be made either to support the line or re-route it around the excavation during construction. The. soil conditions observed in the test pits are generally satisfactory for conventional spread foundations. However, bearing conditions worse than those observed may be present at locations not explored, or may result from rainfall or adverse groundwater conditions. To reduce the risk of foundation settlements due to possible uneven bearing conditions, we recommend proportioning the footings for a maximum bearing stress of 1200 pounds per square foot. Extra steel reinforcement should be placed in the footings and the foundation walls. In addition, we recommend combining interior footings into strips and connecting them to nearby foundation wall footings. The building excavation should be examined before footing forms are constructed. Unsuitable materials, if present, should be removed to firm ground. The overexcavations should be backfilled with quarry spalls, washed gravel, or compacted pit -run gravel. Basement walls that cantilever from their foundations may be designed for an equivalent fluid weight of 40 pounds per cubic foot. Walls supported at the top by framing should be designed for the above equivalent fluid weight, plus a uniform load of 100 pounds per square foot. Since the basement floor will be a living space, requirements for drainage and damp -proofing should be carefully considered. Foundation drains should be installed outside all basement perimeter walls. Drain inverts should be at .least four inches lower than the bottom side of basement floor slabs. Backfill against perimeter walls should be free -draining gravel at least one foot wide. The floor slab should be underlain by a vapor barrier over at least four inches of pea gravel. Provisions should be included to drain the under -slab pea gravel. • .yr` • Whidbey Island Architects September 24, 1992 • Project T-840-6 Page 3 We appreciate the opportunity to examine your preliminary plans. We expect the City will require that our firm review the final plans submitted for permit, and then issue the geotechnical declaration described in section 19.05.040 of Ordinance 2661. In addition, the City will probably require that a completed Environmental Checklist be included with the submittal package. The checklist can be filled out by yourself and the Neerings. Please call if you have any, questions concerning the checklist's few geotechnical items. Sincerely, TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. William Bailey Project Manager IaUf Theodore J. Schep 7er .!PIKES 6/18/93 Principal Engineer. WB/mp encl: Table A, Test Pit Logs Figure 1, Test Pit Location Plan cc: Mary Neering, M.D. TABLE A TEST PIT LOGS TEST PIT NO. 1 Depth, ft Description 04 Tan silty fine sand, dry to moist. 4-12 Grey silty fine sand, wet; with clay, wood debris, -and silty topsoil. Some seepage and caving below 6 feet. PVC standpipe to bottom of pit. Water at depth 8.3 ft on 9/16/92. TEST PIT NO.2 Depth, ft Description 0-3 Tan 'silty fine sand, dry to moist. 3-6 Tan/grey silty fine to medium sand with'5-15% gravel, moist; grey and wet below 6 feet. i No seepage observed; no caving. PVC standpipe to bottom of pit. Standpipe dry on 9/16/92. TEST PIT NO.3 Depth, ft Description 0-2 Brown silty fine sand with organics, dry to moist. 2-10 Tan/brown silty sand with 5-15% gravel and scattered chunks of grey till; becomes grey and wet at 9 feet. No seepage observed; no caving. Note: Test Pits Excavated on August 13, 1992. Neering Residence Project T-840-6 !y� • • 15L 7b i T7 / Iyb 141 a 3 -on 132 -'— 1� TP-2 Test Pit Location 132 Approx Excavation Grade :.,;..,. TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Consultants i 6 / N � n / /LOT 6 N Approx Scale: 1 in = 20 ft TEST PIT LOCATION PLAN NEERING RESIDENCE LOT 7, LORIAN WOODS Proj. No. 840-6 Date SEPT 92 1 Figure 1 Exhibit 6 `+ TERRA ASSOCIATES Inc. .' • • • Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences ORY, Project T-840-1 June 6, 1989 Robert and Joann Anderson 7370 North Meadowdale Road Edmonds, Washington 98020 Subject: Geotechnical. Report Meadowdale Beach, Lots 54 to 57 Edmonds, Washington Dear Dr: and Mrs. Anderson: We have completed the geotechnica . studies you authorized for your property in ,.the Meadowdale area of Edmonds. The site location is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The tract, referred to herein as the Anderson property, includes Lots 54, 55 and 56 of the Plat of Meadowdale Beach and most of Lot 57. We understand that you intend to subdivide this property into approximately ten lots for single-family residences. A final plat has not been developed at this time. The purpose of the present study is to assess landslide hazards on the property and provide general recommendations for site improvements, and for grading, drainage and foundations for residential construction. The work completed includes 1) a review of soil reports and other information in City files, 2) examination of air, photos of the site vicinity, 3) a visual examination of the property, including shallow soil explorations made by hand, and 4) exploration of subsurface conditions using test borings and test pits. This report describes our findings and summarizes our recommendations. After the property has been subdivided, the City may require a geotechnical evaluation of the. construction proposed for each individual lot. Such work is not within the scope of the present study. SUMMARY The existing site topography. and a possible plat with ten lots is shown on Figure 2. The property slopes downward from east to west. The central portion of the site includes a relatively flat bench. The steep slopes at the east side extend beyond the property line. A lower bench occupied by several residences lies beyond the west property line. 15301 N.E. 90th Street • Redmond, Washington 98052 • Phone (206) 881-5570 • FAX No. 869-9173 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 3338 • Redmond, Washington 98073 Robert and Joann Andersoo • Project T 840-1 June 6,1989 Page 2 The Anderson property, is part of a large ancient landslide. The area that failed extends along 75th Place West from Meadowdale County Park southward to about the 165th block and from the bluff on the east to the shoreline. The original landslide probably occurred several thousand years. ago. Parts of this landslide have been active into recent times and possibly are still active.. The records indicate that landslides occurred in Meadowdale during the winters of 1946-47, 1955-56 and during the 1960s and 1970s. Local residents report that no detectable earth movements and no building damage occurred on the Anderson property during any of these events. In 1979, the 40-year record of landslide events in the Meadowdale area was studied by Roger Lowe Associates Inc and the landslide hazards were evaluated. Several possible landslide categories were identified, based largely on topographic features existing at the time of the study. A map that identified the landslide hazards and estimated failure probabilities was developed for the entire Meadowdale area. The Lowe study identified three categories of potential landslides on the Anderson property, as summarized on Figure 3. Most of the property where the subsoils are believed to be ancient landslide debris was classified as previously failed material susceptible to renewed landslide movements. On the central bench, the probability that landslides of this type (4A) might occur within 25-year periods was estimated at 25 percent, the lowest rating given any area believed to be located on the old slump material. This relatively low rating was given because no landslides have occurred on the bench during historic times. The western slopes below the bench were rated at 35 percent, only slightly higher than the 25-percent rating given the bench. Because areas on the Anderson property at the northwest and the southwest corners were believed to have been affected by three major landslides since the 1940s, The Lowe report assigned these areas a rating of 90 percent. However, because residents on property adjacent these comers of the Anderson property report that no damage to buildings and no perceptible earth movements occurred during these events, the rating of 90 percent assigned these areas likely was unwarranted. The steep slope east of the bench was mapped as generally undisturbed materials susceptible- to shallow debris slides (3B) and to avalanches from further up the slope (2C). A relatively low probability of occurrence was assigned to landslide events of these types. The Lowe report recommended groundwater control as likely the most economical .measure for landslide risk . reduction. Consequently, in 1980 through 1985, sanitary sewers, storm sewers, and subsurface interceptor drains were installed around and within the Meadowdale landslide. Interceptor Drains 1A and 1B were installed on the Anderson property at the locations shown, on Figure 2. Since that time, a lowering of the groundwater table throughout the landslide mass has been documented. Robert and Joann Anderson• June 6, 1989 • Project T-840-1 Page 3 In 1985, GeoEngineers, Inc evaluated the effects of the improved surface and subsurface drainage and concluded that the probability of landslide occurrence had been reduced in much of the area believed to be most susceptible to failure. On the Anderson property, the estimated probability that the old slump material might move again within a 25-year period was reduced by a factor of about three. Based on our test pits and borings and other available information, we conclude that all the Anderson property below the bluff is underlain by landslide debris, mostly loose sands mixed with silts, clays and buried vegetation, including trees. The depth of the debris probably. exceeds 60 feet under the central bench and.likely is in the range of 30 to 40 feet at the west property line. Figure 4 summarizes. our conclusions concerning generalized subsurface conditions on the site. Figure 4. also illustrates ground water conditions on the site observed during our field work, which was performed during winter months. The water table appears to be about five to six feet below the ground surface along the west property line but near the ground surface on the slopes to the east. On the bluff, springs were observed where sandy soils outcrop above fine-grained materials. Based on these observations and our professional judgment, we agree generally with the landslide hazards assessment in the Lowe report. Figure 5 summarizes our assessment of present landslide hazards on the Anderson property and shows landslide occurrence probabilities consistent, with the latest evaluation by GeoEngineers, Inc. In our opinion, Figure 5 is not adequate for assessing risk at individual residential lots. Firstly, the probabilities appear to apply only to the large-scale slumps that were the Lowe report's primary concern. In our opinion, while the low probabilities presented for the areas on the eastern slopes are believed to be suitable for large-scale slumps, they may underestimate the average occurrence intervals of the small-scale slides and avalanches that -typically occur on steep ground. Secondly, available evidence suggests that most of the residences within areas supposedly affected by the landslides of record withstood those events with little or no damage. Consequently, probabilities of landslide occurrence, as presented in the Lowe report, probably exaggerate the risk of landslide damage to individual residences. Figure 6 presents a risk assessment that we believe is applicable to individual residential lots on the Anderson property. The probabilities presented are intended as measures of the risk :of landslide damage rather than landslide occurrence. On Figure 6, the 30-percent ratings on Figure 5 at the northwest and the southwest corners have been reduced, reflecting the reports of local residents that the landslides responsible for the 30-percent ratings caused no perceptible earth movements on the Anderson property and no damage to residences adjacent these areas. Robert and Joann Anderson June 6,1989 Project T-840-1 Page 4 In our opinion, the present risk is low enough to justify development of the Anderson property, provided the design and construction procedures used do not impair the present stability, and provided also that future property owners are properly informed of the landslide hazards that exist, as required by the City's Ordinance 2661, and accept full responsibility for them. In order to develop the property without increasing the risk of landslide damage on adjacent property, and without unreasonable risk to the proposed residences, we recommend that certain measures be incorporated in the construction proposed for each lot. These include: 1) Homes should be adapted to the present topography, using split- and multi -level construction where suitable. 2) Where slopes are steeper. than 15 degrees, fill should not be placed under the building footprints. Ground floors above the present grade should be framed over crawl spaces. 3) Slab -on -grade ground floors may be used in cuts, and on fills placed on slopes flatter than 15 degrees. 4) Basement cuts should not exceed about eight feet in height. If deeper cuts are required on steep slopes, the basement should be stepped and the excavation terraced. 5) Basement walls and perimeter foundation walls should be designed for lateral soil stresses suitable for the backslope angles. 6) Because landslide debris may provide relatively uneven support for foundations, buildings should have conventional wood -framed construction supported on reinforced concrete foundations. Concrete masonry is not recommended and brick veneer should be used only in small panels. 7) In general, conventional spread foundations may be used.. Home sites where landslide debris is expected to provide poor bearing conditions should be explored with test pits before final plans are prepared. 8) Setbacks from both ascending slopes and descending slopes should comply with the requirements in the Uniform Building Code. 9) Pile and pier foundations may be considered as a means for improving foundation performance where soils are poor, and to satisfy setback requirements. 10) Landscaping should preserve the existing topography to the extent practical. Fills should not be placed on slopes steeper than 20 degrees. Fill slopes should be graded not steeper than 25 degrees. Robert and Joann Andersoe Project T-840-1 June 6, 1989 Page 5 11) Cots should be limited to heights of about eight feet. Cuts up to four feet may be supported by rockeries. Higher cuts should be supported with reinforced concrete retaining walls. 12) Site drainage should be improved by installing drain rock bedding and perforated drain pipe in the trenches with all new storm sewers, as was done in the LID 210 storm sewers. 13) Home owners should improve drainage on their lots by diverting surface water into the storm water system. Perforated drain pipes tightlined to the storm sewers should be provided around all perimeter foundation walls and basement walls and behind all retaining walls. Rain gutters should discharge to the storm sewers in tightlines different from those used for the foundation drains. The following sections of this report discuss our findings and present our conclusions and recommendations in greater detail. Our report has been prepared specifically for this project. It is intended for the exclusive use of yourselves and your representatives. Our work has used methods and procedures consistent with local foundation engineering practices. We provide no other warranty, expressed or implied.. We do not guarantee project performance in any respect, only that our work meets normal standards of professional care. SITE SURFACE CONDITIONS The project site is located south of North Meadowdale Road and 'east of the 74th Place West right-of-way in the Meadowdale area of Edmonds, Washington. The Anderson property includes Lots 54, 55 and 56 of the Plat of Meadowdale Beach and part of Lot 57. In plan it measures about 350 feet by 650 feet and includes approximately 5.3 acres. The Anderson residence is located on Lot 55 in the west center of the site. As shown on Figures 2 and 4, the eastern third of the property is a slope that gradually steepens toward the east. The upper slope climbs steeply to. a bluff with its crest near Elev 250 to 300 off the site to the east. At the time our study was performed, two small surface sloughs were noted on these steep eastern slopes. The central area of the property is a bench about 100 to 120 feet wide covered with grass, ivy and scattered trees. Grades on the bench vary from about Elev 120 in the north to Elev 150 in the south. The Anderson residence and a shed to the south are located on this bench. Several firs up to 47 inches in diameter and other large trees, straight-trunked and vertical, are located just south of the house. To the west the bench slopes down to the 74th Place West right-of-way. The grade change from the bench to the west property line ranges from ten feet at the north to about 50 feet at the south. Typical slope inclinations are in the range of 20 to 25 degrees with local areas as steep as 45 degrees. Robert and Joann Anderson . June 6, 1989 Project T-840-1 Page 6 In 1984, as part of the LID 210 work completed by the City, Interceptor Drains 1A and 1B were installed on the Anderson property, approximately as shown on Figure 2. At the time of our study, many areas of the property, especially the east slopes, were wet from snow melt, rainfall, seepage and springs. Surface water not collected by the interceptors descends to the bench, runs downslope in watercourses around the Anderson home, then continues onto. catch basins and other drainage features. The central bench on the Anderson property extends off the site to the north, where it is occupied by single-family residences. Other residences are located on a lower bench west and south of the Anderson property. All of these structures are supported on the slide debris that is part of the Meadowdale landslide complex. We understand that prior to the construction of the Anderson residence in 1965, six cabins and a house had been present on the Anderson property for many years. When these buildings were demolished in 1963, none are reported to have showed any evidence of landslide damage. REVIEW OF RECENT LANDSLIDE ACTIVITY The original landslides in the Meadowdale area are believed to have occurred several thousand years ago. The area involved extended from the bluff to the shoreline and from Meadowdale County Park on the north southward to about the 165th block. Landslide activity in this area has continued during historic time. The most .readily accessible records describe the landslide activity during only the most recent 40 years. The records may not be complete. The landslide records indicate that much of the ancient landslide south of the present Wharf was active in the winter of 1946-47. The same area is believed to have been active again in the 1960s. The area affected extended more than 400 feet east of the railroad. These events explain the 4A90 hazard rating the Lowe report gave the southwest comer of the Anderson property, as shown on Figure 3. However, residents near the Anderson property during these landslides report that no damage occurred on their property or on the Anderson property during either event. During the same winter of 1946-47, a slide that blocked North Meadowdale Road did occur in the road cut on the Anderson property about 70 feet east of the present driveway. This slide probably was not related to the other landslide activity that occurred that winter. In the winter of 1955-56, landslides were reported at two locations north of North Meadowdale Road. The Lowe report concludes that during that winter the active area probably extended over most of the ancient landslide north of the wharf. These slides explain the Lowe report's 4A90 hazard rating shown on Figure 3 for the northwest corner of the Anderson property. However, residents near the Anderson property report that no damage occurred on their property or on the Anderson property during that winter. Robert and Joann Anderson June 6,1989 MProject T-840-1 Page 7 Numerous other smaller landslides have occurred within the past 40 years, most of them at the toe of the slope near the railroad. At least two larger slides were reported. In 1970, a slide just north of the wharf crossed to the east side of 75th Place West, causing minor pavement disruption, which recurs periodically. In 1973, a slide near the 158th block adjacent the railroad extended upslope to the west edge of 75th Place West. On the Anderson property, the ancient landslide mass has not undergone perceptible movements during the 40-year period of record. In addition, only minor sloughing has been observed on the eastern slopes since the Anderson home was constructed in 1965. Since that time, no avalanche debris has reached the toe of the slope at the east side of the bench. We reviewed stereoscopic air photos that show the property vicinity during the years 1947, 1955 and 1970. Pavement disruption on 75th Place West west of the property, due probably to the 1970 slide noted above, can be seen on the 1970 photos. The 1955 photos show bare soil on the eastern slope above Lot 57 off the Anderson property. This scar probably was part of the residential construction going on at that time above the slope crest. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Our field work on the Anderson property was performed on February 14 through 17, 1989. Subsurface conditions were explored by drilling two standard penetration test borings to depths 50 and 69 feet below existing grades. In addition, six test pits were dug with a backboe to depths that ranged from 12 to 19 feet below existing grades. The borings were made by Drilling Unlimited Inc of Olympia. A skid -mounted drill rig was used for one boring and a truck -mounted rig for the second. Continuous flight, hollow -stem augers were used to advance and support the boreholes. The test borings and pits were located by measuring from site features shown on the survey plan provided us. The approximate locations explored are shown on Figure 2. Ground surface elevations reported for the locations explored were estimated by interpolating contour lines shown on the survey plan. The field exploration was continuously monitored by an engineering geologist from our firm. A log was prepared for each boring and test pit. The soils observed were classified in general accordance with the system described on Figure 7. Logs of the borings and pits are presented on Figures 8 through 15. These logs report our interpretation of the field logs and reflect the results of laboratory examination and testing of the field samples. In each boring, standard penetration tests were performed at selected intervals by driving a sampler with a two-inch outside diameter using a 140-pound hammer falling 30,inches. The results of these tests are the N-values reported on the boring logs. Robert and Joann Anders* Project T-840-1 June 6, 1989 Page 8 Representative soil samples were placed in closed containers and taken to our laboratory where they were again examined. The field moisture content of each sample was measured. Field visual classifications were ,checked by running Atterberg tests and sieve analyses on selected samples. All the test results are recorded on the boring logs. Ground water observation wells were installed in both borings. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The locations explored on the Anderson property are shown on Figure 2. The following discussion is general in nature. For more specific information regarding conditions observed at the locations explored, refer to the logs of borings and test pits, Figures 8 through 15. Boring 1 at the south end of the central bench was drilled to a depth 50 feet below existing grade. The soils observed are mostly loose silty fine to medium sands mixed with clays and silts. Based on the relatively low N-values in Boring 1, as reported on the log, and the mixed appearance of the material, we believe that all the soil is landslide debris derived from the Esperance and Whidbey formations exposed on the bluff to the east. The base of the ancient landslide is at an undetermined depth below the bottom of the boring. Boring 2 at the north end of the central bench encountered about 30 feet of loose sandy soil with chunks of clay and wood debris, similar to the soils recovered in Boring 1. Below the 30-foot depth, silts and clays were encountered, generally very stiff but becoming hard within the final eight feet of the borehole. Subsurface conditions in Boring 2 are similar to conditions reported by Lowe for a borehole about 150 feet northwest of Boring 2. The upper 30 to 50 feet is slide debris. The deeper clays and silts are believed to be part of the Whidbey formation and may or may not be part of the ancient landslide. All the test pits on the Anderson property encountered slide debris: loose silty sands with chunks of stiff to hard clays and silts. Trees buried in slide debris were uncovered in Test Pits 2 and 4. No stratification similar to that in the undisturbed Esperance sands near the top of the bluff was observed in any of the pits. Test Pits 2 and 4 through 6, which were excavated on the, eastern slope, encountered ground water at shallow depths well above the toe of the slope. The sidewalls in Test Pits 2 and 4 collapsed as the pits were being dug. A ground water observation well installed years ago by the City is located near the southwest comer of the property. A log of the borehole is not available. We understand from discussions with the geologist who installed the well that the depth of the boring is in the range of 24 feet and all the material drilled was landslide debris. At the present time, the water level in this well is five to six feet below the ground surface. Robert and Joann AndersO June 6,1989 Project T 840-1 Page 9 With the possible exception of the Whidbey hard clays in the bottom of Boring 2, intact native soils were observed on this site only at fresh exposures on the bluff at the east margins of the property. Figure 4 shows a generalized profile of the native soils and the overlying landslide materials. Near the toe of the bluff, both native soils and ancient landslide debris are covered with slope wash and avalanche debris deposited since the original landslide. As noted above, in Test Pits 2 and 4, trees were observed buried in debris. The Whidbey formation is exposed on the bluff above the debris. In some areas near Elevs 170 to 190, the Whidbey soils are pebbly silts and sands. Further up the bluff, the Whidbey soils are finer, mostly silts and clays with seams of fine sand. The Esperance sands of the Vashon glaciation He above about Elev 220 to 230. There are springs at the contact between the Esperance sands and the underlying Whidbeyclays. PRESENT LANDSLIDE HAZARDS The Anderson property lies within the boundaries of the Meadowdale landslide studied in 1979 by Roger Lowe Associates, Inc. The purpose of that study was to assess the various landslide hazards present in different areas and evaluate the risk that a landslide event might occur, The Lowe report classified three categories of possible landslides -on the Anderson property, as summarized on Figure 3: ' 1) avalanches of debris from the steep slope at the east side of the site (2C); 2) landslides on the east slope in material that has never before failed (3B); and 3) renewed movements of the ancient landslide materials beneath the central bench and the western slopes (4A). The first two categories were considered to have relatively low risk, only a two to five percent chance of occurrence within a period of 25 years. The possibility that a failure in the third category would occur within 25 years was estimated to be about 25 percent on the central bench and 35 percent on the western slopes.- Because major landslides that occurred in 1946-47 and in 1955-56 were believed to have extended onto the Anderson property, small areas at the northwest comer and the southwest corner were assigned a 90 percent chance of failure within periods of 25 years. The Lowe report concluded that a reduction of ground water levels in the landslide complex likely was the most effective means of reducing the risk of additional landslides. Consequently, during the early 1980's, the City installed sanitary sewers, storm sewers, and subsurface interceptor drains at various locations on and around the Meadowdale landslide. Interceptor Drains 1A and 1B were installed on the Anderson property at the locations shown on Figure 2. Robert and Joann Anderson Project T-840-1 June 6, 1989 Page 10 In 1985, GeoEngineers Inc evaluated the effects of these new drainage facilities and concluded that the landslide hazard had been significantly reduced in many areas that had high risk. Landslide occurrence probabilities of 90 percent in 25 years were reduced to 30 percent in 25 years. Similarly, ratings of 25 and 35 percent in 25 years were reduced to 10 percent in 25 years. Our explorations on the Anderson property disclosed subsurface conditions generally consistent with the landslide categories described in the Lowe report (see Figure 3). However, when applied to more. localized areas, these categories are not always descriptive of the landslide processes actually occurring or most likely to occur. For example, in the steep areas on the bluff where undisturbed soils occur, the Lowe report distinguishes between slumps (3A) and more shallow slides (313). However, on the old landslide.debris west of the bluff, all the recent and the anticipated landslide activity was classified as renewed slump movements (4A) although much of the recent activity was recognized as having characteristics of relatively shallow earthflows or debris slides. Figure 5 presents a, landslide hazard ' map for the Anderson property that we believe better describes the slope movements that could occur. It retains the general features of the Lowe report map but has been adjusted to better fit local geology, topography and drainage conditions. On the steep bluff at the east margin of the property, the Lowe report indicates that slumps (3A) may occur in the exposed Esperance sands, but are unlikely.. The probability of such failures is low because the springs on the bluff provide much better drainage for the sands than existed at the time the ancient landslide occurred. Nevertheless, the overly steep face of the bluff is constantly being loosened by weathering and plant growth. Shallow surface slides result from these processes. They usually are small in area and of little consequence for construction further down the slope since downslope movement of the debris commonly is hindered by vegetation on the lower slopes. On Figure 5, to distinguish these shallow slides from more massive slumps (3A), we have used the Lowe report category 3B, debris slides in material that has not previously failed. As shown on Figure 4, the . Whidbey lormation is exposed on the steep eastern slope below the Esperance sands. On Figure. 5, this area is the second zone west of the east property line. The Lowe report indicates that shallow debris slides (313) .are expected as weathering and plant growth gradually loosen this material. This zone is also at risk due to avalanches of debris from the Esperance sands above (2Q. A massive slump (3A) is also` possible. However, for the present drainage conditions and bluff topography, a slump would likely, be confined to the overlying Esperance sands. The third zone from the east property line is below the zones where undisturbed native soils are exposed, but upslope from the ancient landslide debris (4A). The near -surface soils are colluvium from the bluff (see Figure 4). Due to surface water from the springs on the bluff, the ground water table is near the ground surface. The landslide hazards in this area are shallow slides in steeper; wetter zones of colluvium (413) and avalanches from slides occurring higher up the slope (2Q. Robert and Joann Anderson June 6,1989 Project T 840-1 Page 11 The fourth zone from the east property line on Figure 5 is the lower slope at the east side of the central bench. This zone and the remainder of the property to the west are underlain by ancient landslide debris. The east boundary of this zone approximates the trace of the old failure plane on the present ground surface (see Figure 4). The landslide hazards include avalanches off the slopes to the east (2C) and renewed activity of the old slump debris (4A). There is an additional risk of shallow slides in the old. slump debris or in colluvium that has accumulated since the ancient landslide occurred (413). These latter failures are most likely to occur on the steeper slopes to the north during unusually wet winters. The remainder of the site includes the central bench and the slopes to the west. The major landslide hazard in this area is renewed activity in old slump debris (4A). In addition, the east side of the bench may receive avalanches from the slope to the east (2C). There is little chance such an avalanche would carry across the bench and down the western slopes. However, the west side of the property has locally steep debris slopes where shallow slides (4B) may occur during unusually wet weather. The west corners of the site are classified in the Lowe report as having the highest landslide risk on the Anderson property. These areas also have risks due to landslide hazards other than renewed slumps, as shown on Figure 5. A numerical probability of occurrence is presented on Figure 5 for the multiple hazards in each of the various areas. The probabilities shown are consistent with those in the Lowe report, as modified by the 1984 assessment by GeoEngineers, Inc. In our opinion, the landslide occurrence probabilities shown on Figure 5 for the central portion of the property are reasonable considering the historical record of fairly large-scale landslide events. The 10-percent rating has been assigned arbitrarily to areas where renewed movements of the old slump material have not been reported and are not believed to have occurred within historic times. The bench on the Anderson property is such an area. Applying the conclusions of the Lowe report elsewhere on the Anderson property presents some difficulties. Firstly, the 30-percent rating was given the west comers of the Anderson property because these areas were believed in the Lowe report to have been affected by landslides in the 40-year record. However, downslope neighbors. of the Anderson property who lived through those events report that no perceptible slope movements occurred on their property or on the Anderson property during any landslide of record. Consequently, the original 90-percent ratings, and the current 30-percent ratings, probably are too conservative, based on the available evidence. Secondly, with regard to the eastern slopes, landslide occurrence probabilities in the range of only two to five percent, as assigned by the Lowe report (see Figure 3), are understandable .only as estimates of the chance that a large-scale event in the native, undisturbed bluff soils might occur. We agree that the'probability of large-scale slumps of Robert and Joann Anderson June 6,1989 Project T-840-1 0 Page 12 the bluff is low, as predicted by Figure 3. .However, we believe these low probabilities underestimate the frequency of small-scale landslide events in overly steep ground caused by weathering, erosion, and excessive ground water Such events, although small in scale, could cause significant hazards for residences located on the slide area or in the path of an avalanche. A third difficulty in .applying the Lowe report to residential residenceis that s, which is the babilities of landslide occurrence may not represent the risk of damage to primary concern of home owners. The historical record at haat ve occurred. wdalid all the few homes have actually been damaged by the landslide within a defined landslide area were not damaged bhatnhe landslides iesthat occurred, landslide probability of residential damage must be less t probability occurrence. Unfortunately, the relationship between landslide dmae and landslide occurrence cannot easily be evaluated and vanes from p place. probability that a landslide will damage homes dsill increaseide will occur reas madensity of homes increases, even though the probability that the es wn on A qualitative risk assessment that incorporates the ntial lots on the considerations Anderson property.oIn our Figure 6. We recommend its use for reside . I noun opinion, the risk is lowest on the centrals of c record. Following hch we do not e believe argument above, we any landslide activity during the 40 y believe the probability of landslide damage likely is less than five Figure 5 ercent n 25 years, base on a landslide occurrence probability of ten percent, shown On the western slopes, the risk is higher than on the bench, due primarily to the influence of locally steep slopes, and to the proximity of downslope areas with higher landslide occurrence probabilities. The risk at the toe of the eastern slopes, in our opinion, is also and higher avalanches than on the offbench , due to the threat of small slides of overly wet slope deb rissteeper slopes to the east. Slides in the debris on the lower slopes recent drai age impPovementsarently aand to not occurred during the 40 years of .record. Due to th the additional drainage improvements that will be effecteddicbrease. rSlidehome s off the upper frequency of occurrence of such slides �s not expect occurringare with slopes that might cause avalanches on the lower slopsl r zneaa d t hindrance by the average return period of ten to 20 years. Due to their heavily vegetated lower slopes, no avalanches have reached the lower slopes during the past 30 years. In our opinion, residences located on the upper slopes would be closer to potential small-scale landslide activity and thus would experience be segrcted eater riskhome case these areas are comparatively inaccessible, they are unlikely Robert and Joann AndersonM June 6, 1989 DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General Project T-840-1 Page 13 Figures 5 and 6 and the preceeding pages describe the landslide hazards and risks present on various sections of the. Anderson property. The hazards can be separated into two general groups: 1) large-scale, relatively deep-seated slope movements caused by renewed activity off the ancient landslide; and 2) small-scale, comparatively shallow slides. These latter slides may be avalanches off the oversteepened bluff at the east margins of the site, or slides in colluvium that have accumulated below the bluff. Within the past 40-odd years, large-scale activity has not affected the Anderson property. Moreover, the drainage system installed by the City under LID 210 has improved the large-scale stability and reduced the risk that a future large-scale event will affect the property. At the present time, the probability of occurrence of a large-scale event is believed to be less than 30 percent in 25 years everywhere on the property, and in the range of 10 percent in 25 years on the central bench, the western slopes and the lower eastern slopes. In our opinion, the probability of landslide damage is significantly smaller than these estimated probabilities of landslide occurrence, as illustrated by Figure 6. The risk of a landslide activity, both large-scale and small-scale, is now low enough to justify development of the Anderson property. This applies to all the lots shown on Figure 2. Some lots have higher risk than others, but on all lots, the risk is small, enough to warrant development. On all lots, residual risks exist that cannot be eliminated. As required by the City's Ordinance 2661, future lot owners should be fully informed regarding the residual landslide risks, both large-scale and small-scale, and their purchase agreements should require them to accept full responsibility for these risks. While efforts to further reduce the risk of large-scale landslides, in our opinion, are not warranted, the risk from small-scale slides may be either increased or decreased, depending on the construction on the individual lots. Lot owners should be held to construction and maintenance standards that will reduce their risk as much as practical. The paragraphs below in this section of the report describe recommended measures to reduce the risk of small-scale landslides. These measures, however, will neither entirely remove the hazard nor eliminate the risk. Residences constructed most everywhere on the Anderson property will be supported on old landslide debris. In general, conventional spread foundations may be used. However, our test pits indicate that on some building sites bearing conditions on the debris may be relatively poor. Building supported on such material should be expected to experience small settlements. Consequently, in our opinion, the Anderson property is best suited for wood -framed construction with stiff exterior wall sheathing. Concrete masonry walls, which can develop cosmetic damage with only small settlements, are not recommended. Brick veneer should be used sparingly. , Lot owners who wish to reduce the risk of cosmetic damage caused by settlement may consider supporting their homes on pile or pier foundations. Robert and Joann Andersol 0 Project T-840-1 June 6, 1989 Page 14 Working conditions on the Anderson property may be excessively wet during the winter months, especially on the eastern slopes. We recommend scheduling all site work for the drier months from April to October. Site Improvements In order to subdivide the Anderson property, only limited site improvements are necessary. To provide access to the interior lots, the existing driveway must be extended, approximately as shown on Figure 2. Either concrete or asphaltic pavement may be supported on the landslide debris on the Anderson property. In either case, the subgrade should be proofrolled to assure it is firm and unyielding. The uppermost twelve inches of the subgrade should be compacted to 95 percent of its ASTM D 1557 maximum dry density. Site soils may be too wet to achieve this level of compaction. In that case, a clean bank -run gravel or crushed rock should be imported and a subbase constructed at least twelve inches thick. Asphalt pavement should have a base course of crushed rock at least four inches thick and a surface course of asphaltic concrete at least two inches thick. Concrete pavement should be at least five inches thick. It may be placed directly on the subgrade, provided the work is done in dry.weather. A base course of crushed rock a few inches thick may be needed in wet weather. We recommend extending the storm sewers to the end of the new driveway. This will. provide an opportunity to install additional drainage at the toe of the east slopes and provide a place where lot owners can discharge their foundation drains and roof gutters. The storm sewers should be tightlined. To pick up ground water seepage intercepted by the trench, drain rock bedding and perforated drain pipe should be installed in the excavations, as was done with the. LID 210 storm sewers. The drain pipe should be placed at the lowest invert practical. The trench should be lined with filter cloth and backfilled with pea gravel, except within two feet of the surface. Other utilities should be bedded and backfilled in accordance with AWPA standards. All utility trench backfill should be at least moderately compacted. Under pavement, backfill in utility excavations should satisfy the proofrolling and compaction recommendations above. Cuts and Fills Residences and landscaping should be designed to fit the existing topography. Homes on the relatively flat central bench may be conventional construction. If desired, fills up to about three feet in depth may be used to raise grades. Foundations and slab -on -grade ground floors may be supported on properly compacted fills. Robert and Joann Anderso"O June 6, 1989 Project T-840-1 • Page 15 Homes built on sloping ground should be multi- or split-level, as suited to the present topography. Basement cuts into the slope should not exceed eight feet in height. Deeper basements should be terraced. Fills should not be placed under homes on slopes steeper than about 15 degrees. Ground floors above present grades should be framed over crawl spaces. Cuts and fills in -landscaped areas should be minimized. Cuts up to four feet high may be supported by rockeries, provided high maintenance and a risk of failure is acceptable. For higher cuts or where better performance is desired, reinforced concrete retaining walls should be used. All retaining structures should have backfill drains near their footings connected with tight lines to the storm water system. Foundations In general, wood -framed residential construction may be supported on conventional spread foundations. However, because most of the property is underlain by landslide debris, bearing conditions at some building sites may be relatively poor, especially on the lower eastern slopes, where our test pits uncovered trees and other vegetation buried within the debris. Preliminary building plans, once prepared, should be reviewed to evaluate likely foundation requirements. Following the review, exploration of the building site with test pits may be recommended. Where needed, the pits should extend several feet below the intended footing bearing grades. To provide suitable bearing for footings, unsuitable materials, if found, should be removed to depths at least two feet below the footings and replaced with compacted gravel or rock fill. Where buildings overhang slopes or are located close to slope crests, the foundations should be stepped down to bear well below present grades. Setback requirements, as described below, should be satisfied. Where conventional foundations for such applications are not practical, pier or pile foundations should be considered. Since these piles likely will be supported entirely in debris, careful attention should be paid to estimating design capacity. Buildings supported on landslide debris may experience settlement due to the excessive and variable compressibility of the debris. 'Home owners who wish to reduce the risk of poor foundation performance may consider using pile or pier foundations to support their residences. The use of these deep foundations will reduce the risk of damage caused by settlements due to unsuitable bearing materials present at shallow depths. However, deep foundations likely will not reduce the property damage if a future y landslide occurred on the site. Consequently, deep foundations should not be viewed b rope owners as a means of reducing their risk of landslide damage. Robert and Joann Anders Project T-840-1 June 6, 1989 Page 16 Setbacks From Ascending Slopes In order to provide protection from slope drainage, erosion, and shallow failures, the Uniform Building Code requires that buildings be set back from ascending slopes. Residences constructed on the central bench well away from the steep eastern slopes will be exposed to very little risk of this type. However, building sites on the eastern slopes may have only minimal setbacks and thus higher risks of damage caused by these potential small-scale failures. UBC requires a minimum setback of 15 feet. On slopes not overly steep, this requirement can be satisfied by excavating a bench behind the residence and supporting the iow.cut with a retaining wall. On steeper slopes, the code's intent can be satisfied, in our opinion, by constructing the foundation wall adjacent the slope to a -height where the top of the wall is 15 feet from the face of the slope. Since these small setbacks are catchment areas for debris sliding off the slopes above these homes, where the setbacks meet only the minimum UBC requirements, the rear wails of the buildings, in ouropinion, should be designed to withstand debris impacts. Setbacks from Descending Slopes For setbacks from descending slopes steeper than 18 degrees, we recommend complying with the. UBC requirement of 40 feet or; one-third the height of the slope, whichever is less. The slope height may be measured to the next lower bench of significant width. Where it is desired to construct within the normal setback zone, the intent of the code, in our opinion, can be satisfied by lowering the foundations. Where the slopes are high, pile or pier foundations may be necessary. Basement and Foundation Walls Because homes on the Anderson property will be supported on old landslide debris, foundation bearing conditions may be relatively poor. Building settlements that vary from - . place to place should be expected. In order to reduce the risk of poor foundation performance that may result from these variable settlements, we recommend using only cast -in -place concrete foundation walls and basement walls, properly reinforced. In general, residences on sloping sites should be stepped to fit the present topography. Basements are recommended since they will assure that many of the foundations will bear well below finish outside grades. We recommend limiting basement cuts to a maximum of eight feet. If a two -level basement is desired on a steep site, the basement should be stepped to fit the slope so that a terraced cut can be made with each terrace not more than eight feet high. Robert and Joann Anders June 6, 1989 Project T-840-1 Page 17 All basement walls and foundation walls should be provided with - perimeter footing drains. The drains should consist of. a perforated pipe within an envelope of washed stone, all enclosed by filter fabric. The walls should be treated with dampproofmg. A drainage course should be placed outside the wall and connected to the footing drain. This wall drain may be either free -draining gravel backfill or a manufactured drain attached to the wall after the dampproofing has been applied. Soil lateral stresses for structural design of foundation walls and basement walls .will depend on the steepness of the backslopes and other factors and should be selected specifically for each building site. Site Drainage At the present time, surface runoff, rainfall and seepage from the bluff and near -surface . ground water are collected on the eastern slopes by Interceptor Drains 1A and 1B. These recent improvements have significantly dried up the Anderson property. Some water undoubtedly passes under the drains and reaches the ground water. Since the water table presently is well below the ground surface at the west property line, the present large-scale stability of the Anderson property, in our judgment, is adequate to justify subdivision of the property. However, measures to improve site drainage can be obtained at little premium cost by incorporating them into any storm sewer extensions that may be needed, as discussed in the Site Improvements section above. To reduce the risk of local, small-scale sloughing of steep slopes due to excessive surface water and high ground water, other drainage measures should be installed as part each lot owner's construction. Each lot should be landscaped so that all surface water is collected and conveyed into catch basins connected to the storm sewer system. All basement, foundation, and retaining walls should be provided with perforated footing drains, as described above. The drains should connect to the storm water system with tight lines. Cleanouts should be provided. Rain gutters should be connected to the storm water system using tight lines separate from those used for basement drains. Stability During Construction The present stability of sloping sites will be disturbed by construction activities on the individual lots and the risk of slope failures will be highest at that time. The risk is mainly to builder's operations close to the disturbed area. Builders can minimize their risk by using good construction practices. Surface water should be diverted into catch basins and the site dried up prior to making any excavations. Excavation sidewalls should be sloped back at safe angles or supported with temporary shoring. Where excavations encounter ground water, perimeter ditches should be constructed to control the water. Robert.and Joann Anderson* June b, 1989 Project T-840-1 Page 18 Excavations on the individual lots may create hazards on adjacent lots, depending on how the buildings are sited and on the construction sequence for adjacent buildings. Problems of this type are unlikely, but should be considered on a lot -by -lot basis. Since a slope failure in landslide debris initiated by an excavation on the Anderson property would not progress upslope into native, undisturbed material, temporary excavations will cause no risk for neighbors of the Anderson property. Excavated materials stockpiled on steep slopes would place neighbors downhill at risk. Excavated material for use as backfill should be stockpiled on gentle slopes where adjacent property is not endangered. Surplus material should immediately be hauled off the site. Post -Construction Stability In our opinion, the development of residential construction on the Anderson property will not have adverse impacts on the landslide hazards that affect the Anderson property and the neighboring property. Implementation of the drainage measures recommended herein will lower the groundwater table and reduce the current risk of landslides on the Anderson property and on the property downslope. Construction on the Anderson property will not affect the stability of the bluff and thus will not adversely affect neighboring property to the east. Slope Vegetation Maintaining healthy vegetation on slopes is important for controlling erosion and reducing the risk . from small-scale landslides. The existing vegetation on steeper slopes outside construction areas should be preserved to the extent practical. Trees that might topple onto the buildings should be trimmed back but not removed. Catch basins and storm drain lines should be kept clear of debris and free -flowing. During construction, stripped soils should be covered with straw or otherwise protected to reduce erosion. All landscaping around the residences should be installed as soon as practical after the buildings have been completed. CLOSURE The analyses and recommendations submitted herein are based on data obtained from test borings, test pits and visual observations of soil exposures. However, subsurface conditions elsewhere on the site may differ from those observed at the locations explored. The nature and extent of any such variations may not become evident before construction. If variations are observed during construction, Terra Associates, Inc. should be requested to evaluate the actual site conditions and review the recommendations in this report prior to proceeding with the construction. Robert and Joann Ander,'O June 6, 1989 The following figures are included and complete this report: Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figures 8 through 15 Project T-840-1 Page 19 Vicinity Map Exploration Location Plan Landslide Hazards from Lowe Report 1979 Generalized Geologic Cross -Section Landslide Hazard Map Residential Risk Map Legend for Test Pits and Borings Logs of Test Borings and Test Pits We appreciate the opportunity to provide these services. Please contact us whenever we may be able to assist you, and please call if you have any questions concerning our report. 'Respectfully submitted, TERIZAASSO TES, INC Charles R. Lie Engineering Geologist g U T William Bailey �,.''�� w A s,,qi� Project Manager Anil Butail, PE Z N � � W 1 F �e� $ T S�`�,�` President = SS, o N A 1 Up i` °1!I!'f III'— f aaaF �:�::�.' '• � , / •��,� —rzL '�.,1 •1 � I I I \� .. .::�}'"� .. , 0 1H 0 .Dove �-s.ss• '.kil' + � tx � � � r �•. :ill 11%'1'!��'� h (.7� \\\\ \A; c6 1 15 ;1 M is � •zp,/ //i._•..��IIII I I I 1 it'll V/A/ , -�_ 1I /� : 1 ` q� I I It 1/111 jfflj-(,- IIIA, CY IT, J % Iv dw I C9 CO -F7 'ON 31vQmQGv3V4 7N Iq CL t; 12 0 LANDSLIDE HAZARDS I ,� 1, ; i 7 " qA Renewed movements in old slump material Q Qt L;� - •'; ;' � I I • •{ l' 1 I`•� 2C Avalanches of encroaching landslide material �•.� .� .. `, �, I � � � . s ; • �� : � /� r I � 3B Debris slides in materials that have not previously failed The two trailing digits indicate the estimated probability 3 02' � of occurrence, in percent, during a 25-year period 35 :i r - 4�2s �• 1 `\ This figure copied from Figure 5 in 1 �� \\ q 2 ''= I► 4 the final report on the Meadowdale' Area Landslide Hazards Investigation { by Roger Lowe Associates Inc,1979 / 2' � I �' '•I .` l _ � i � = ll. � • I ly :. Ali r { '2 .3 2 A p I 3802 4A 3 r , rI1Vf �l r 2C /V YL/U1�7V1 r NDIMS N 4 A 2 A25 4 r 4 .v �. 4 ••,� N Scale: 1 ~_= 300' i JAgo / 3802 N LANDSLIDE HAZARDS FROM LOWE REPORT TERRA ANDERSON PROPERTY W ASSOCIATES MEADODALE BEACH EDMONDS Geotechnical. Consultants Proj. No. 84o--1 Date 3/89 Figure 3 320 r 280 240 200 ISO Approximate present ground water table !}1 (offset) 120 city Plez (offset) ' ---'Slump debris from ancient landslide 80 40 This figure is for illustrative purposes only. The subsurface conditions shown are an interpretation of the conditions observed in test borings and pits, and other available information. Variations may exist between actual conditions and the conditions shown. Probable ancientfailure plane Grand lost since the ancient landslide Present grand surface r VASHON DRIFT Spring line � Sands .— ..- ay Clays WHIDBEY FORMATION I. Pebbly sands and sins - Possible seepage zone buried under colluvlum colluvium with burled trees (avalanche & slide debris) W TERRA GENrJ1PJJC -s %=VL %: ANDERSONF ASSOCIATES MEADOWDALE BEA( loceotechnical Consultants Proj. No. 840-1 Date 3/1 ;• - _ a Scale. 60 If LOt -.r - -tti- -^'--" s�,• .\ ...cC •J �f CY'14 ... •.- d '♦ ' ' I..;,,,� � ♦� �► \ i� \ \ ": -err \ \� � -� r,� ` '' /. �`- LU w A,b LOT \ . \ �� LOT 3 4.4 \ '� LOT ,/ r li ? I `'41, z ' \\ r!" ,' '� �'� �`°... LOT 4-` �` �'• a •.,,.-. '� •'\�j�, p,� `:� l ...:�,. �_ � ---1: , .::c%' 1' � G�•��-may// ' = -� '- - -_ _ _- = �'�� i.ANDSLIDE HAZARDS 3A Slumps in materials that have not previously failed 3B Shallow landslides in oversteepened slopes that have not previously failed 2C Avalanches of encroaching landslide material 4A Renewed movements of old slump material 4B Shallow landslides in previously -failed material The trailing digits indicate the estimated combined probability of occurrence, in percent, during 25-year periods Site Survey by Group four, Inc Job No 88-8020 \ \ �•!�/` " '�jQ_ �_ l`\�'-� T --� •fir •, 1, T .30 TERRA AN06ii N NoGeotechnical MEADOWDALE B ASSOCIATES Consultants proj. NO SZO-1 Date;, 9:9: Co co tr O 0 TO 7t c 0 0 z 0 01 ol O 0 n o D --I V) m ^ Vf X p ;Q na n 7 c m N N v o• 3 v q �zm D O fp d FnnCO ZmZ f71 Dwo z D � r7 � r OD =ON Ie; fiiLl N. MEAWWDALF Rn , lum h R7' •�w ,/��/,'// / ' 1 \ SOIL CLASSIFICATION 4V.TFM LETTER MAJOR DIVI SIONS SYMBOL GRAPH SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION GRAVELS Clean GW Q Well -graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, to .J Gravels =:�:'' little or no fines. GP Poorly=graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures. O - a, More than 50% of (less tha�� coarse fraction 5% fines). little or no fines. Graver GM[Affl Silty gravels, gravel -sand -silt mixtures, b N is larger than W a� en � No. 4 sieve. No. fines. non -plastic fines. GC Clayey gravels, gravel -sand -clay mixtures. Plastic fines. (� o N SANDS Clean SW Well -graded sands, gravelly sands, to o Sands little or no fines. t o More than 50% of (less than SP Poorly -graded sands or gravelly sands, 5% fines). little or no fines. Q c O o coarse fraction SM Silty sands, sand -silt mixtures, t U � " is smaller than Sands non -plastic fines. SCV Cla e Y Y sands, sand -clay mixtures, No. 4 sieve. with fines. 11 Plastic fines. J SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silt or claye fine sands or clayey silts wit" 0 e`, � �.0 Liquid limit is less than 50%. CL Inorganic clays of lqw to.medium plasticity, �avelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean Q E 04 ays- OL �iIii1i�i�i . Organic silts and organic clays of low W -.R O Z o z �,�,� plasticity. Q c SILTS AND CLAYS MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceou's cc N fine'sandy or silty soils, elastic. V ' N N a, > Liquid Gmit, is greater than 50%. CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity; fad clays. W o N OH i i Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, N organic sits. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS - PT A�-h- � Peat and other highly'organic soils. - DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS I 2" OUTER DIAMETER SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER C TORVANE READING,1sf JI 2.4" INNER DIAMETER RING SAMPLER OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER qU PENETROMETER READING, tsf P SAMPLER PUSHED W MOISTURE, percent of dry weight �C SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED PCf DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot Q. WATER LEVEL (DATE) LL LIQUID LIMIT,percent WATER OBSERVATION WELL PI, PLASTIC INDEX N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot TERRA 47 f:. ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Consultants LEGEND FOR BORING & TEST PIT LOGS ANDERSON PROPERTY MEADOINDALE BEACH EDMONDS Proj. No. 840-1' Date 3/89 1 Figure 7 - BORING NO. I Logged By CRL Date 2/14/89. ELEV. 1421 Graph CS Soil Description �n )h Sample Blows (�) Qu.. tsf Ft. Ivy ground cover, 18" duff & topsoil SSp Grey fine SAND, some silt 5 I 8 4 sm Grey silty fine to medium SAND with 10 11 15 silt zones, some orange stain _1__ Same, less silt 15 = 3 22 ml Grey non -plastic SILT 20 I 14 35 3/15/89 sm Grey silty fine SAND 25 = 8 32 ml Grey clayey SILT with thin sand lenses 30 = 21 33 2.0 to 4.5+ ml/ Mixed grey SILT Pc silty fine SAND 35 9 29 Same 40Z 24 25 ml cl Grey clayey SILT 45 10 33 2.5 to 3.5 Boring terminated at depth 50 feet Ground water observation well installed BORING LOG TERRA ANDERSON PROPERTY -..t. - ASSOCIATES MEADOWDALE BEACH EDMONDS Proj. No. 840-1 Date 3/89 Figure 8 Geotechnical Consultants go r-1 Map - BORING NO. 2 Logged By CRL Date 2/16/89 ELEV. 120± Graph CS Soil Description n Depth Sample N Blows (%) qu tsf Ft. Concrete slab ml/ Grey silty fine SAND and clayey SILT, = 4 26 sm some orange stain 5 Grey silty fine SAND with clay 5 33 10 3/15/89 Same, with some .organics I 5 24 15 Same, with hard clay chunks & wood = .1.3 46 20 sm Grey silty fine to medium SAND = 10 19 25 No recovery = 21 30 ml Grey sandy,SILT = 12 31 35 Grey SILT = 22 31 40 ml/ cl Grey clayey SILT with sandy zones = 17 37 2.5 45 Same I 31 24 3.5 50 ch Grey CLAY = 24 38 3.5 55 Same = 25 36 2.5 60 Grey CLAY, thin bedding _ 35 35 4.5 65 CH Same LL=75; PI=4 = 95/9" 23 4.5+ BORING LOG = - ! 7 TERRA ANDERSON PROPEIITY ASSOCIATES MEADOWDALE BEACH EDMONDS Proj. Na. 840-1 Date 3/89 Tigure 9 Geotechnical Consultants Logged By CRL Date 2/14/89 Depth (ft.) USCS 0 5 10 15 20 TEST PIT NO. 2 Soil Description Elev. 1471 W (0/0) cl 9" duff and topsoil Mixed brown and grey sand, silt and clay Grades to CLAY chunks, soft to hard, with numerous logs 38 sm Grades to gray silty SAND with organics 33 Test pit completed at depth 14 feet Ground water seepage at depth 4 feet and below Sidewalls collapsed • �� TERRA ASSOCIATES . Geotechnical Consultants TEST PIT LOGS ANDERSON PROPERTY MEADOWDALE BEACH EDMONDS Proj. No. 840-1 Date 3/89 Figure 11 Logged By CRL Date 2/15/89 Depth (ft.) USCS 0 5 10 15 20 TEST PIT NO. 3 Elev. 139± W Soil Description 12" duff and topsoil sm Brown silty fine SAND 21 ml Grey brown non -plastic SILT 26 Tan clayey. SILT, chunks of hard clay 41 qu-2.0 to 4.Otsf sm. Brown silty fine -to medium SAND 15 cl Grey CLAY 34 qu=4.Otsf Test pit completed at depth 19 feet No -round water observed TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Consultants TEST PIT LOGS ANDERSON PROPERTY MEADOWDALE BEACH EDMONDS Proj. No. 840-1 1 Date 3/89 1 Figure 12 0 Logged By CRL Date 2/15/89 Depth (ft.) USCS 0 5 10 is gil TEST PIT NO. 4 Elev. 153± W Soil Description (%) 18" duff and topsoil, 43 Grey silty fine SAND with numerous sm trees, loose 33 Test pit completed at depth 12 feet Ground water seepage at depth 3 feet and below Sidewalls collapsed t TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Consultants TEST PIT LOGS ANDERSON PROPERTY MEADOWDALE BEACH EDMONDS Proj. No. 840-1 Date . 3189 Figure 13 1-1 U-- i -aLCZ' -:.VV v�i I I 1 t1N1 eJ J.i IZ)-40 IAU.UUO V-.U1 . TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and l' CEIVED Envl1irronmental Earth SScience\s MV t1 19 93 April 29, 1993 Project No. •T-840-6 Mr. Richard Rh_ydes Whidbey Island Architects 5247 South Highway 525 Freeland, Washington 98249 Subject: Response Comments to Landau Associates, Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Review, Dated April 2, 1993 Nccring Residence Lot 7, Lorian Woods Edmonds, Washington References: Terra Associates letter, Geotechnical Engineers Declaration ,dated January 28, 1993. Terra Associates report, Nccring Residence, Lot 7, Lorian Woods, dated September 24, 1992. Terra Associates Geotechnical Repon, Mcadowdale Beach, Lots 54 to 57, dated June 6; 1989. Dear Mr, Rhydes: As requested, we have reviewed the above subject letter by Landau Associates, Inc. and offer the following responses pertaining to gcotechnical concerns in the order the comments were given. As we understand, a variance was recently obtained which will allow for raising construction grades three feet above current design elevations. This variance will eliminate many of the concerns expressed by Landau Associates in the subject letter. Comment No. I We have reviewed the environmental checklist and find it to be satisfactory from a geotechnical engineering stand point. 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 9 Phone (206) 821-7777 I-� • 4-10 14U . VUO .V . V.) Mr. Richard Rhydes April 29, 1993 Comment No. 3I3 Even with building elevations raised three feet from that currently planned, excavations required will unload the building site to some degree. With foundation design as recommended, foundation 'settlemcnts as a result of building stresses applied would in our opinion be negligible. However, what is uncertain and not possible to determine is the magnitude of settlement which may occur as a result of continued creep movements of tltc landslide debris. 77te foundation for the structure will consist of conventional spread footings tied together in a grid pattern with interior grade beams. In our opinion, a rigid foundation system of this nature should prevent building settlements which may be structurally damaging. However, there would still be a slight to moderate risk of cosmetic damage in the form of drv_ wall cracking and possible misalignment of doors and windows caused by post construction movements. Comment No. 3C The amount of ovcrcxcavation required to remove unsuitable foundation soils %vill be dependent upo;i conditions encountered at the time of construction. We would recommend eliminating Note No. 3-from the proicct drawings. Comment No. 3D Willi building elevations raised three feet this comment is no longer applicable. We would also point out that the drawing prepared by Doi+l Engineering dated January 21, 1991 shows the contour at the northeast corner of the building at Elevation 148, not 150. Willi unrcvised building elevations, the cut depth would be a maximum of eight feet in accordance with recommendations presented in the June 6, 1989 report. _ Comment No. 4 With building elevations raised three feet, unloading at the slope toe will be less severe. Nevertheless, stability analysis was undertaken assuming excavation levels as originally planned. Based on soil information obtained. conservatively we assume strength parameters as follows: Soil Unit Weight 120 pcf (pounds per cubic foot) Soil Cohesion 100 psf.(pounds per square foot) Internal friction Angle 28 degrees Project No. T-840-6 Page No. 2 ICII�d HS�UI 1dLCj ItL•GUt;-pLl-i f i r H1)r- LJ J:1 Mr. Richard Rhvdcs April 29. 1993 I b : 41 t 110 ..UUti 11 U4 In our analysis, the excavation was modeled using a side slope gradient of IH:I V (Horizontal:Vertical). Groundwater was modeled at a height of Iwo feet above the base of the excavation with a hydraulic gradient equivalent to the slope grade. Results of the analysis indicate minimum factors of safety against instability in the range of 1.1 i to 1.3. With building elevations raised three feet. these factors of safety would increase and we would consider them to be satisfactory on a temporary excavation basis. Comment No. 5 We understand that we will be retained to provide gcotechnical consultation and observation during construction of the residence. An agreement between Terra Associates and Dr. Necring will be submitted for signature when required. Comment No. 7 The slope gradient perpendicular to the walls in question will be relatively flat. Also, eve understand that, the swimming pool has been eliminated. Accordingly, in our opinion, recommendations for wall design' as presented in our September 24, 1992 report would be satisfactory. Comment No. 10 The Washington State Departmclu of Ecology, if it chose to do so, likely has authority to apply WAC 173-160 to groundwater observation veils of the type installed in Test Pits I and 2. However, where groundwater resources can not adversely be affected, which is the case with these wells, our understanding is that DOE is disinterested in regulating temporary observation wells installed in shallow test pits. The excavation necessary to complete the proposed construction likely will remove the wells completely. • if not, any part of the standpipe Icfi in the ground may be cut offbelow the final ground surface and the remaining pipe scaled at the top with a plastic cap cemented in place. A licensed well driller, in our opinion, need not be employed to do this. We appreciate the opportunity to respond to these matters. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please call. Sincerely yours. TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. ,.j Tltcodore J. Schep cr. Principal Engineer..** ' .txplAcs 6/18/93 . ►r T1S:tm cc: Mary Neering, MI) Project No. T-840-6 Page No. 3 9812100170 COVENANT OF NOTIFICATION AND INDEMNIFICATION/HOLD HARMLESS Under the review procedures established pursuant to the State Building Code, incorporating amendments promulgated by the City of Edmonds, and as a prerequisite to the issuance of a building permit for the construction of a residential structure and attendant facilities, the undersigned OWNERS of property do hereby covenant, stipulate and promise as follows: 1. Description cf Subject Property. 1..1J coverian.. of notification and indemnification/hold harmless.relates to a tract of land at the street address of f 6 1I9 13 f`1 A (insert street address), Edmonds, Snohomish County, Washington and legally described as: N Lo-F Lcr i�n �cops �f�D L�h nc' to /1 Pe.r 10+ 1 , 1ea � ►� (,l,>, 3i 94-1 4 2s' Snoborn Co, �q CV accorc-1,14 C(rCe_� -tt oy- 0C)0 —oopex>S . 2. Notification and. Covenant of Notification. The above referenced site (hereinafter "subject site") lies within an area which has been identified by the City of Edmonds as having a potential for earth subsidence or landslide hazard. The risks associated with development of the site have been evaluated by technical consultants and engineers engaged by the applicant as a part of the -process to obtain a building permit for the subject site. The results of the consultant's reports and evaluations of. WSS52079A/0006.040.034 -1- RECEIVED � I•7SS/klt 02/08/90 DEC; 0 1593 '1 a PERMIT COUNTER BUILDING FEB 9 - logo the risks associatedwithdevelopment are contained in building permit file number / 3V�_( insert number) on file with the City of Edmonds Building Department. Conditions, limitations, or' prohibitions on development may have been imposed in accordance with the recommendations of the consultants in the course of permit issuance.- The conditions, limitations, or prohibitions may require ongoing maintenance on the part of any owner or lessee or may require modifications to the structures and earth stabilization matters in order to address future or anticipated. changes in soil or other site conditions. The statements and. conditions proposed by the OWNERS' geotechnical engineer, geologist, architect and/or structural engineer are hereby incorporated by reference from the contents of the file as fully as if herein set forth. Any future purchaser, lessee, lender or any other person acquiring or seeking to acquire an interest. in - the property is put on notice of the existence of the content of the file and the City urges review of its contents. The file may be reviewed during normal business hours or copies obtained at. the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, 505 Bell Street, Edmonds, Washington 9802v. 3. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. The undersigned OWNERS hereby waive any and all liability associated with - development, stating that they have fully informed themselves of all risks.' associated with development of the property and do'' therefore waive and relinquish any and all causes of action against the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and employees WSS52079A/0006.040.034 -2- WSS/klt 02/08/90 • arising from and out of such development. In addition, the OWNERS on behalf of themselves, their successors in interest, heirs and assignees, do hereby promise. to indemnify and hold harmless the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and employees from any loss, claim, liability or damage of any kind or nature to persons or property either on or off the site resulting from or out of .earth subsidence or landslide hazard, arising from or out of the issuance of any permit(s) authorizing development of the site, or occurring or arising out of any false, misleading, or inaccurate information provided by the OWNERS, their employees, or professional consultants in the course of issuance of the building permit. 4. Insurance Requirement.. In addition to any bonding which may be required during the course of development, the Community Services Director has/hXs i(t (strike one) specifically required. the maintenance of an// \\insurance policy -for public liability coverage in the amount and for the time set forth below in -order to provide for the financial responsibilities established through the indemnification and hold harmless agreement above: (insert insurance requirements.and time period, if any --if no insurance required, so state.) WSS52079A/0006.040.034 -3- WSS/klt 02/08/90 J 5. Covenant to Touch and Concern the. Land. This covenant of notification and indemnification/hold harmless touches and concerns the subject tract and shall run with the land, binding, obligating and/or inuring to the benefit of future owners, heirs; successors and interests or any other person or entity acquiring an interest in property, as. their interest may appear. This provision shall not be interpreted to require a mortgagor or lender to indemnify the City,except to the extent of their loss nor to obligate such persons to maintain the insurance above required. DONE this day of Fa-h rt"L 199_ y OWNERS) By: !?� , ` 1eI-�:_2_e - f� By: By: STATE OF WASHINGTON ss: COUNTY OF I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that liT LP,r-f.-If signed this instrument and acknowledged' WSS52079A/0006.040.034 -4- WSS/klt 02/08/90 it to be (his/her) free and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned in this instrument., DATED this day of f u 19qj!�. CNOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: STATE OF WASHINGTON ss: COUNTY OF ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be (his/her) free and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this day of , 199_. NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss: COUNTY OF ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that signed this instrument, on oath stated that (he/she) was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the (title) of (name of party on behalf of whom instrument was executed)- to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. r DATED this day of 199_. NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: WSS52079A/0006.040.034 -5- WSS/klt 02/08/90 ` 89p-19y- CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation • Engineering May 21, 1993 LAURA M. HALL MAYOR Richard H. Rhydes 5247 South Highway 525 Freeland, WA 98249 Re: Drainage distance waiver at 16119 - 73rd P1 W Dear Mr. Rhydes, We have reviewed your request for subject waiver dated May 8, 1993 and the letter from Dowl Engineers dated April 20, 1993. We will grant you the waiver of 3 feet from the 10.feet minimum required setback from a closed drainage system per City Code 18.30.040G as long as all conditions outlined in both letters are met. The location of the house shall be no closer than 7 feet 'to the existing 12 inch storm drain pipe. Any damage to the existing system due to construction shall be repaired by the contractor immediately. If you have any questions, please call Lyle Chrisman, 771-0220, extension 324. Sincerely, ROBERT J. ALBERTS, P.E. City Engineer ALC/RJA/sdt c: Sharon Nolan, Permit Coordinator RHYDES.2/TXTST530 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan LANDAU • ASSOCIATES, INC. Environmental and Geotechnical Services City of Edmonds 250 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Attn: Ms. Sharon Nolan • MAY 2 1 1993 PERMIT COUNTER I May 21,1993 RE: GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW OF RESUBMITTAL PROPOSED NEERING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOT 7 LORIAN WOODS EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Dear Sharon: In accordance with your request, we have completed a review of the resubmittal package concerning the above noted proposed residence. The review is intended to evaluate compliance of the project documents with the requirements of Ordinance 2661 and the Uniform Building Code. A list of the resubmittal documents reviewed is included as Attachment 1. Our review of the documents indicates that the majority of the issues raised in our April 2, 1993 Preliminary Geotechnical Review have been adequately addressed, provided that the building height variance is granted for this structure. Specific discussion of the individual issues as numbered in our April 2 letter follows: 1. The Geotechnical Consultant has now reviewed the Environmental Checklist. 2. No further comment. 3. The Lead Design Professional acknowledges review of previous geotechnical reports concerning the property. a.. The Lead Design Professional states that the Lorian Woods CC&Ws allow the proposed location of the residence. We agree that the design is protective of human life in that a typically non -occupied portion of the structure faces the slope. b. A stiffened foundation is proposed to mitigate differential settlement concerns, also the Geotechnical Engineer correctly points out the potential for cosmetic damage to the structure exists with this scheme. Provided the owner is aware of potential maintenance. and cost issues dealing with such cosmetic damage, no further action on this subject appears warranted at ,this time. c. No further comment. d. Plan revisions eliminate this contradiction. e. Filter fabric has been added where appropriate. RO BOX 1029 • EDMONDS, WA 08020-9129 • (206) 773-0907 • FAX (206) 778-6109 SPOKANE- (itl91 327 Q737 • FAX ISl1Qh 327-601 /TACOMA: (21iw 92h 24(13. FAX 1 '06) 026-2531 4. The Geotechnical Engineer has addressed stability during excavation, but failed to assess longer term stability with calculations, as requested. The factor of safety indicated to be 1.15 to 1.3, while 'appropriate for short-term conditions, may be inappropriate for long-term conditions. However, since the owner has been advised that the home is on a potentially active landslide, and the Geotechnical Engineer has previously addressed slope stability (as a percentage of risk), this subject has probably now been adequately addressed. 5. No further comment. 6. The roles of the design professionals have been clarified by the Lead Design Professional and each appears to be practicing in 'their area of competence. 7. The requested earth pressure coefficients considering surcharges have not been provided. However, . the Geotechnical Engineer states that the previous wall design recommendations are satisfactory. 8. Excavation quantities based on the revised plans have been made considering the factors pointed out in our initial review. The City should decide if storage of soil on the adjacent property is acceptable. Landau Associates is aware of planned construction on at least one of the adjacent lots. 9. Drainage concerns have been corrected by the addition of drains adjacent to the base of each footing. 10. No further comment. 11. Weepholes have been provided to facilitate drainage through the foundation walls. The location of the weepholes should be at or near the base of the underslab drainage material to best facilitate drainage. ; 12. Rockeries have been deleted from the plans. 13. Construction of a pool is no longer proposed, although the building area remains on design drawings. If construction is proposed in the future, the comments of our Preliminary Geotechnical Review would still apply. 14. No comments on the pavement design have been provided by the Geotechnical Engineer. Although reinforcement of the concrete pavement section is proposed, we believe that a 4-inch concrete section may provide poor service and a review by the Geotechnical Engineer may be appropriate. 15. Plans now show a concrete floor in the mechanical area. The April20, 1993 Dowl Engineering letter in paragraph 2, line 7 states that augercast piles will be placed at the northwest corner of the building. We assume that the correct location is the northeast corner. Q5/21/93 JAEDWND6\NEERINrR.WP 2 LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. Depending on the City's evaluation of the above items, the documents may require additional action by the lead design professional. Please contact the undersigned should you have any questions concerning this review. LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. DMW / WDE/ fas No. 74044.10 Attachment 05/21 /93 . JAEDM0NDs\NMt1NGR.WVP 3 By: Dean M. White, P.E. Project Manager and William D. Evans, CPG Senior Geologist LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. ATTACHMENT 1 1. Response Comments to Landau Associates, Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Review, letter dated April 29, 1993, signed by Theodore Schepper, Terra Associates, Inc. 2. Sheets 1 through 10, stapled set of Revised Plans for New Mary Neering Residence, dated April 29, 1993, Whidbey Island Architects, prepared by Richard H. Rhydes. 3. Neering Residence Building Permit Lorian Woods Plat, letter dated April 20,1993, signed by John E. Paulson, Dowl Engineers. 4. Preliminary Geotechnical Review, Proposed Neering Single -Family Residence at Lot 7, Lorian Woods, Landau Associates,, Inc., letter report dated April 2, 1993, with handwritten comments dated April 30, 1993 and signed by Richard H. Rhydes May 3, 1993. 05/21/93 jAWMONDs\NEEMGMP LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. r� W H I D B E Y A R C H I R I C H A R D H May 8, 1993 Addison L. Chrisman IV Engineering Inspector Engineering Department City of Edmonds 250 - 5th Avenue N. Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Neering Residence Lorian Woods Dear Mr. Chrisman: • B111,O! N0 I SL A N D �'' T E C T S 99� R H Y D E S �y i 1993 �NGIl�E`�?lAyC' ;CITY_COY On behalf of my client, Mary K. Neering, M.D., I would like to request a Distance Waiver between the existing storm water drainage system and the proposed Neering Residence on Lot 7 in Lorian Woods PRD. Lorian Woods is a 10 unit PRD designed with relatively small (4300 s. f. to 5700 s. f. ) building sites surrounded by generous common open space. Except where adjacent lots abut and share a common property line, there are no set back restrictions. The covenants allow the homes to build to the property limits. Lot 7 has an area of 4359 s.f. (one of the smallest in the PRD). It also has a common property line with Lot 6 which requires a 10' set back. This reduces the buildable area of Lot 7 to 3811 s. f. The Neering residence covers 3037 s. f. of this lot which is 79 % coverage (after set back) for house and decks. It has been a real challenge to provide 3 car garages and adequate access to same and fit the house onto the site. Along the East boundary of Lot 7 there exists a 12" storm drain line. The proposed plan of the Neering residence places the garage within 7 or 8 feet (varies) along the 23' of the garage. Approximately 7' of the proposed residence is also less than 10' away from the existing storm line (7' to 10" away). See attached site plan. To insure that the drainage systems remain intact during and after construction, I propose the following: 5 2 4 7 SO. HIGHWAY 52 5. F R E E L A N D, WA 9 8 2 4 9 (2 0 6) 33 1- 3 5 0 3 Addison L. Chrisman IV May 8, 1993 Page Two 1. That the 1.2" drain line be stabilized during construction by a method designed by a civil engineer from the firm of Dowl Engineers, Redmond, WA. The Dowl people designed the road and utilities for Lorian Woods and are familiar with the drain system. This to be done with design approval by City Engineer. 2. That the. 12" drain line be inspected at regular intervals throughout the construction process. 3. That the cost for stabilization and inspections shall be born by Mary K. Neering, M.D. 4. .That there will be no additional fill over the 12" drain line. 5. That, due to final grading around the Neering Residence, there will be no valley or ditch topography on or adjacent to the 12" drain line that would prohibit normal maintenance access to ;the line. My client is very willing to work with, the' City to resolve this situation to the benefit of both parties. Please call this office if more information is required. r, Richard H. Rhydes RHR/mb Attachment �_l CITE COPY WL ENGINEERS A Division of DOWL, Incorporated April 20, 1993 W.O.# S 11429-01 B Mr. Lyle Chrissman City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Avenue N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Subject: Neering Residence Building Permit Lorian Woods Plat Dear Lyle: This letter is a follow-up to the meeting with you on -site on Marcl}�23, 1993 regarding construction methods to protect the existing storm drain line during foundatio excavation. There has been one site change since we last discussed this in th field. As you are probably aware, it has been decided to request a variance to raise the building 3' This lessens the area of impact of the foundation excavation on the adjacent storm drain line. Its my understanding the City would not require special measures to be taken to further protect the djacent storm drain line, if the back slopes can be kept no steeper than 3:1. With the building raise 3', only the northeast corner of the structure would require a cut too deep to maintain 3:1 slop ntractor, Design Works Construction, is proposing to install 11 auger -cast piles at t northwe corner of the building at approximately the location shown on the attached drawing, T would be 18" in diameter and be installed on 48" centers. The length of the piles would be 15' with approximately 5' exposed to retain the cut bank and approximately 10' embedded below the bottom of foundation excavation. In order to investigate the soil and moisture condition that might be experienced on the cut face supported by the piles, I had the contractor 'excavate a test hole in the general vicinity of the northeast corner of the garage on April 6, 1993. The nature of the soil was consistent with the reports of the previous investigation by Terra Associates. I didn't observe any moisture seeping out of the excavation. The hole was allowed to stand open and was observed again on Saturday, April 10, 1993. The walls of the test pit were stable and there was no standing water in the pit. Based upon the conditions observed, it appears that there wouldn't- be any problem with the cut bank remaining stable during the period of time that it was reinforced by the auger -cast piles. I feel that the auger -cast pile support plan proposed by the contractor will be an effective way to provide additional stability to the cut slope in those areas where the excavation can't be laid back to a 3:1 slope. Based on the conditions that I observed, this should be an adequate method to protect the storm drain .line in this area. The owner has authorized me to provide any. required City inspections during the time these support piles are in service. I will advise, you if I. observe any 8320 954th Avenue NE 0 REDMOND, WASHINGTON 98052 0 206 - 869-2670 9 FAX 206 - 869-2679 Mr. Lyle Chrissman • • City of Edmonds April 20, 1993 Page 2 conditions that deviate from the plan proposed in this letter. On this basis, I recommend that the City of Edmonds approve the contractor's proposed construction methods for the. Neering residence. Vea-KIPvours. _ 1(h E. Paulson, P.E. Enclosure JEP:lf cc: Richard H. Rhydes, Whidbey Island Architects Bruce ONeill, Design Works Construction g. PA U� �0� 5cE7i;,' fit►, EXPIRES n4,critCOPY CITY OF EDMONDS LAURA M. HALL _ .250 — 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 MAYOR f sari O 890 IC) HEARING EXAMINER FINDINGS AND DECISION. OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS PzCZ/ V MAY °3 PIA 19 ter. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FILE: V-93-57 OF DR. MARY NEERING FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE DECISION: The variance is granted subject to conditions listed.. INTRODUCTION. Dr. Mary Neering, 21616 - 76th Avenue West, Edmonds, Washington (hereinafter referred to as applicant), requested approval of a variance to increase the maximum permitted height of a proposed detached single family residence on property located at 16119 - 73rd Place, Edmonds, Washington. The specific request is for the structure to be twenty-eight feet in height, an increase of three feet from the maximum -permitted height. A hearing on therequestwas held before the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds, Washington, on April 22, 1993. At the hearing the following presented testimony and evidence: JEFFREY S. WILSON RICHARD RHYDES Planning Dept. 5247 South Highway 525 City of Edmonds Freeland, WA 98249 Edmonds, WA 98020 At the hearing the following exhibits were submitted and were admitted as part of the official record of this proceeding: Exhibit 1 - Staff Report with the following attachments: A. Vicinity/Zoning Map B. Plat of "Lorian Woods" C. Application D. Site Plan E. Proposed. Building Elevation G. Letter of Explanation from the Applicant H. Ordinance 2798 Approving the Planned Residential Development/Plat (File Nos. PRD-1-89/P-5-89) of "Lorian Woods" (approved 10/2/90) 0 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan HEARING EXAMINER DECISION RE: V-93-57 4/30/93 Page 2 I. Letter from Applicant's Agent to the City of Edmonds Engineering Division Requesting a Driveway Slope Waiver J. Letter from Engineering Division Responding. to Driveway Slope Waiver Request K. Memo from Lyle Chrisman (Engineering Inspector) Regarding Revised Grading Calculations for CUG-93-42 L. Memo to File No. CUG-93-42 Regarding Withdrawal of Conditional Use PErmit for Grading M. Environmental Checklist N. Geotechnical Report Prepared by Terra Associates O. Staff Environmental Review Memorandum P. Environmental Determination - (DNS) Determination of Nonsignificance Q. Critical Areas Checklist R. Declarations of Applicant re: Variance Application After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Applicant, and evidence elicited during the public hearing, the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. FINDINGS OF FACTS 1. The applicant requested approval of variance to exceed the maximum permitted height of a proposed detached single family residence on property located at 16119 - 73rd Place West; lot 7 of Lorian Woods, Edmonds, Washington. The request is to allow a twenty-eight foot structure on the lot. 2. The subject property is zoned RS-20. Properties in an RS-20 zone have.a height limit of twenty-five feet. The applicant seeks a variance from this standard. 3. The subject property is part of a planned residential development (PRD) of Lorian Woods. The PRD was developed to preserve open space, and, as a result, the lots on the site are significantly smaller than the standard RS-20 zoned single family residence lots. 4. The subject property is 4,358 square foot parcel of land that is currently undeveloped. The property slopes downward from BEARING EXAMINER DECISION RE: V-93-57 4/30/93 Page 3 northwest to the south at an approximate 24% grade. Because of the grade, significant limits are placed on the site. 5. Because the applicant wanted to have a driveway slope at 20% for a third car garage, she applied to the City of Edmonds Engineering Division for a waiver of the maximum permitted driveway slope of 14%. The Engineering Division submitted that the applicant should comply with the slope standards and that the Division would support a. height variance in order to reduce the driveway slope. 6. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds, the criteria of ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied.. These criteria include: A. Because of the special circumstances relating to the property, the 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. B. 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. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. D. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located.. E. 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 same zone. F. The requested variance is the owner the rights enjoyed vicinity with the same zoning. (ECDC) the minimum necessary to allow by other properties in the 7. The severe slope of the site and the limitations of development of the small lot of the PRD creates special circumstances that warrant the grant of the variance. 8. The City indicated that should the variance be granted, the applicant will not have to excavate more than 500 cubic yards of a _0 HEARING EXAMINER DECISION RE: V-93-57 4/30/93 Page 4 earth material. The City indicated the possibility that if the actual -site grading exceeds 500 cubic yards of earth material, a conditional use permit must be obtained. 9. The grant of the variance will not be a grant of a special privilege to the applicant. It will allow the property to be developed in a manner consistent with other properties in the area and will not create any additional cutting or grading that could be detrimental to other properties. 10. The requested variance is consistent with the RS=20 zone and its standards and the PRD conditions that were approved for the property. 11. The requested variance is consistent with the provisions of the low -density residential designation in the Comprehensive Plan. It will result in the development of a single family residence consistent with the Plan. 12. The requested variance appears to be a. minimum variance request. 13. No adverse testimony was received at the public hearing. 14. The Planning Department, of the City of Edmonds recommended approval of the variance subject to conditions set forth in the Staff Report. CONCLUSIONS 1. The applicant requested approval of variance to exceed the maximum permitted height of a proposed detached single family residence on property located at 16119 - 73rd Place West; lot 7 of Lorian Woods, Edmonds, Washington. The request is to allow a twenty-eight foot structure on the lot. 2. The requested variance is for an additional three foot height on the structure. Because of lot size, terrain restrictions, and the lot being part of a PRD, special circumstances exist for.the grant of a variance. 3. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds,.the criteria of ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. These criteria have been satisfied and the manner is addressed in the Findings. The Findings are hereby adopted as part of the conclusions of this matter. HEARING EXAMINER DECISION RE: V-93-57 4/30/93 Page 5 4. The Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds has jurisdictional authority to hold a hearing and to issue a decision based on the authority granted in ECDC 20.100.010(b). 5. The requested variance will not be detrimental to other properties in the.area. DECISION Based upon the preceding Findings of Facts and Conclusions, the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing, and upon the impressions of the Hearing Examiner at a site view, it is hereby ordered that the requested variance to increase the permitted height of a new single family residence on property located at 16119'- 73rd Place West, Edmonds, Washington is granted subject to the following conditions: 1. 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. 2. A building permit must be obtained prior to the commencement of any work on the subject property. 3. Should it be determined by either City personnel or the applicant that actual site grading has exceeded 500 cubic yards, grading on the site shall cease until the applicant obtains a conditional use permit. This condition shall be waived if the City amends Section 18.30 to eliminate the requirement for conditional use permits for grading in excess of 500 cubic yards. 4. The maximum height of the single family residence shall not exceed twenty-eight feet. Entered this 30th day of April, 1993, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City ofpnds. MES M. DRISCOL aring Examiner i HEARING EXAMINER DECISION RE: V-93-57 4/30/93 Page 6 NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds., Washington 98020, within fourteen (14) days .of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter any appeal must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on May 17, 1993. U CIT)OC PY WL ENGINEERS A Division of DOWL, Incorporated April 20, 1993 W.O.# S11429-01B Mr. Lyle Chrissman City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Avenue N. Edmonds, WA 98020 RECEIVED APR 2 2 1993 ENG1NEE,` NG Subject: Neering Residence Building Permit Lorian Woods Plat Y;144t f ,�S�lpu�d Dear Lyle: PA� 141ZX&A57L This letter is a follow-up to the meeting with you on -site on Marc 23, 1993 regarding construction methods to protect the existing storm drain line during foundation xcavation. There has been one site change since we last discussed this in T e eld. As you are probably aware, it has been decided to request a variance to raise the building . This lessens the area of impact of the foundation excavation on the adjacent storm drain line. It'd my understanding the City would not require special measures to be taken to further protect the a jacent storm drain line, if the back slopes can be kept no steeper than 3:1. With the building raised ', only the northeast corner of the structure would require a cut too deep to maintain 3:1 slope ntractor, Design Works Construction, is proposing to install 11 auger -cast piles at th northwes corner of the building at approximately the location shown on the attached drawing. T would be 18" in diameter and be installed on 48" centers. The length of the piles would be 15' with approximately 5' exposed to retain the cut bank and approximately 10' embedded below the bottom of foundation excavation. In order to investigate the soil and moisture condition that might be experienced on the cut face supported by the piles, I had the contractor excavate a test hole in the general vicinity of the northeast corner of the garage on April 6, 199j. The nature of the soil wasl consistent with the reports of the previous investigation by Terra Associates. I didn't observe any moisture seeping out of the excavation. The hole was allowed to. stand open and was observed again on Saturday, April 10, 1993. The walls of the test pit were stable and there was no standing water in the pit. Based upon the conditions observed, it appears that there wouldn't be any problem with the cut bank remaining stable during the period of time that it was reinforced by the auger -cast piles. I feel that the auger -cast pile support plan proposed by the contractor will be an effective way to provide additional stability to the cut slope in those areas where the excavation can't be laid back to a 3:1 slope. Based on the conditions that I observed, this should be an adequate method to protect the storm drain line. in this area. The owner has authorized me to provide any required City inspections during the time these support piles are in service. I will advise you if I observe any 8320 154th Avenue NE 0 REDMOND, WASHINGTON 98052 0 206 - 869-2670 0 FAX 206 - 869-2679 Mr. Lyle Chrissman City of Edmonds April 20, 1993 Page 2 conditions that deviate from the plan proposed in this letter. On this basis, I recommend that the City of Edmonds approve the contractor's proposed construction methods for the Neering residence. Veu-t—ruTvvours. I _ d M _ Jplfn E. Paulson, P.E. Enclosure JEP:lf 1 cc: Richard H. Rhydes, Whidbey Island Architects Bruce O'Neill, Design Works Construction ti P'`1 U �o.Y, �oF wnsk��sO �� •rCZ'i �. ^-tom M - EXPIRES 4/29/y Ar 1E�0�'.r i t�lV 4L _��:��1;] .i- 2TXr !�,L\ • iY N � + � �� C� ' 2G crCt��; :�lr� IC.'' ��i Cr LC-; A 'j /� ! DATUM COkr:flE tZ ! � =7`•'��-, 2 Fj' - tp.• i4.'-O�' '. �" , � ,G021-1 E tiB / � -� �1= �4 -� _ ' . SG.o.�.a✓ j" = ice' cc�� '�,��. � � '� \?✓AS+4 J t�i �-('c r�i �Z/ Q;t i R;C# F tdr. �G..;•tin i Q.6. ?GEt,.�T� A '1904 • ova - ca7- � - ? i % 3 t� Q �. • �l� A V P t2 ev 4r / i / j hcT r� �� .4 I j ; �. A L. co'f g t r-P- 4 �= 4 00 o EFt_EVh•; i0fA bF EA,��T. IxF-4-7OLLE5, ,CtyD 151 ��, t� / ! d - i a / `r P o c� rt�. +� , c tJATP TA 1r�N D t Jz r�� t_Y - - ~i � a �- - '. ' • , N 0 i � � �+ i : N- 0 ; P F2_DM �=MEN'rS �ctz Lutzi�rc Woavt _ i � S � � � � - _ -' 4S'v , _%�•�� " " '� �T 7 C7WENS1vNZ GND S,U�'` ILN . i>✓GJZlN�S �RdM �OIZ.1l�� YGCo S � O ,y } , 13'�-To� � � � - - i \ P r2. J:> pt_ a -1 - W I-10 . M G I N 7GS+•I P t-h MbPr r: G� uS�erz- �/ C - J� o T 4- \ 0 � - �� yi—� F;�• \ 0z_ z O t 31 . P'c ai <- ' r_.•Caw� i f Go. 1r Qi r� ; j. 0 V d Q/ > \ p - - D � - � � .. h , L 40 _ \ _ tu a 71 144-,'74- E. Tom' � �- 5 �• 2. q � , _ ��y cam,. \ �co •`� �32 , 40• �t� + 25' = Ms.n PSc, C��, i}Ts 110�•74 t Z n11 \ \ \ G��.T��i.A >i=xt> Y � � Ate - -�' T � G __ M---_--Y-- �� -- _-F* Thu-- ,,/+-� ,•� -�y � -_ �� \ IAA- c��, •r s`t. _ = - fJLyrPE , G3-+7i4.cTilCA �p �� %• � ..: ,,yam � - �' -{ � � N _ � l Tom- 4t Z 9' ,� MEMORANDA DATE: March 22, 1993 TO: John Bissell, Planning Department FROM: Sharon Nolan, Permit Coordinator SUBJECT: NEERING LAP POOL Dr Neering has a proposed lap pool shown in their single family plans. Landau has questions (verbally)' if that would be allowed in the Lorian Woods subdivision. Is there something in the plat file or in the Hearing Examiner's decision? I need to know about the pool and, also, whether an irrigation system(s) is allowed. Please respond with a memo to me at your earliest convenience.. Thanks. i ,r Y89p i9°)v CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. EDMONDS, WA 98020 (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering C11' � r f Y. Y February 10, 1993 Richard Rhydes 5247 S. Highway 525 Freeland, WA 98247 Re: Engineering requirements for 16119 - 73rd P1. W. Dear Mr. Rhydes, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR Enclosed is an application for a conditional use permit and the calculation sheets on excavation quantities per your request. The City Code requires a ten foot separation between structures and an enclosed drainage channel. Since the twelve inch storm drain line is within ten feet of the house, one or two options are available based on the conditions at the site. One option is to relocate the storm line as we discussed. The other option is to ask for a distance waiver between the structure and drainage system. Any waiver request must contain sufficient justification in order to render a decision. In addition to the above, a driveway slope waiver is required for driveway No. 2. If you have any questions, please call me at 771-0220, extension 324. Sincerely, 'X'-211A ADDISON L. CHRISMAN IV Engineering Inspector ALC/sdt 0 Enclosures: Conditional Use Application Earthwork Quantities c: Sharon Nolan, Permit Coordinator 16119REQ/TXTST530 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan CITY (.SPY LAND CLEARING TREE CUTTING PLAN FOR NEERING RESIDENCE LOT 7, LORIAN WOODS PRD EDMONDS, WASHINGTON RECEIVED FEB 031993 PERMIT COUNTER . At present no trees are in existence on Lot 7. The ground cover consists of low shrubs -and grass. General grubbing and ground.cover clearing will occur prior to excavation. Refer to attached site plan which shows all of the site to be cleared. Landscaping will consist of re -seeding with a mix of 30% Rye and 70% Fescue and rip/rap rockeries where shown. There are no wetlands, streams or water courses on site. Mature trees adjacent lot shall be protected with baled straw barriers at drip lines. See plan. TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inca a " " Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology _.-. and CITY COPY Environmental Earth Sciences Mr. Mark Putzke Chandler Homes 945 — 207th Place NE Sammamish, Washington 98074 Subject: Proposed Garage Addition Neering Residence. 16119 = 73rd Place West Edmonds, Washington July 31, 2001 RECEIVED Project No.T-840-8 AUG 0 12001 PERMIT COUNTER Reference: Letter Report,, Neering Residence, Lot 7, Lorian Woods, prepared by Terra Associates; Inc., Project No. T-840-6, dated September 24, 1992 Dear Mr. Putzke: As requested, we have reviewed drawings detailing the proposed addition to, the north side of the existing garage at the Neering Residence in Edmonds, Washington. We previously prepared the referenced geotechnical report for design and construction of the original residence. We also provided geotechnical engineering observations and testing services during construction of the residence in June 1993. The purpose of our review was to verify that the design of the proposed addition is consistent with .our geotechnical engineering recommendations. We reviewed three sheets of plans titled Proposed Four -Foot by Twenty -Two -Foot Addition to Garage for Mary K. Neering, M.D. The plans did not indicate by whom they were prepared, nor did -they include a plan date. Sheets 2 and 3 of the plans include a structural review stamp, dated July 13, 2001, by Reed and Associates. We . also received revised structural calculations and foundation design from Reed and Associates by facsimile transmission on July 27, 2001. Our review of these design documents indicates the addition will be on the north side of the existing garage and require excavation depths of approximately five feet to the east, tapering to approximately two feet to the west. The revised structural design calculations indicate that the foundation has been dimensioned for an allowable bearing capacity of 1,200 pounds per square foot (psf). Based on our review, with the revised foundation design, the plans are consistent with. our geotechnical engineering recommendations. 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 PhnnP (d?;1 R91-7777 • Fax (4)5) R?1-4't-14 • tarri(a)tPrra-atcn(-.iatPe.com i Mr. Mark Putzke July 31, 2001 We expect that foundation soils exposed at the excavation level will be soft and easily .disturbed. During construction of the original Neering Residence, the foundation subgrades were .overexcavated to depths of 12 to 24 inches and grade restored using 2- to 6-inch size crushed rock. The contractor should be prepared to implement similar stabilization in order to establish suitable support for the new garage addition foundations. We trust the information .presented is sufficient for your current needs. If- you have any questions or require additionatinforination, please call. "LL (ASS1,CIATyyE'$; INC. e9dore,T.'S he�pex ' Project No. T-840-8 Page No. 2 04/12/2001 09:29 FAX 425 640 4884 SOUND WMNS CARE 10001 F I L E lhc.18q'.' CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS. WA 96020 - (425) 771.0220 - FAX (425) 771.0221 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning- Building. Engineering Ms. Mary Neering 16119 7P Place West Edmonds, Washington 98026 RE: Slope Investigation Dear Ms. Neering, GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR March 23, 2001 Please be advised, it has been reported -to nlc as Building- Official for the City of Edmonds that the recent earthquake triggered earth movement on or near property you own at 16119 73rd Place West, Edmonds. The City was provided a report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc., as retained by NIT. Phil Lehn, that states, "...the risk of landslide activity affecting the existing homes located at the toe of the slope is also considered to be extremely high." A copy of the report is enclosed for your information. The City does not endorse nor dispute the findings or conclusions made in the report, but under Urlifonrl BuildiDg Code and statutory provisions, as Building Offlcia], I am obligated to investigate the hatter. Therefore, pursuant to City Ordinance #2661 which regulates the Meadowdale Earth Subsidence Landslid'e`Hazard'Area and Uniform•Building Code Section 102 and 104.2.3; the City and it's consultants, request pen-nission to enter upon land you own at 16119 73rd Place West, to investigate the,noted slope failure. Our inspection will not involve any intrusive action. Pending the result of this investigation the Building Official may be forced to require further investigation and slope mitigation to ascertain temporary and pen-nanent slope protection and habitability of your residence. If you choose to grant City Officials access to conduct this investigation please sib the following statement and return it to me as soon as possible. I Mary Neering, property owner at 16119 73rd Pi W, hereby grant permission for City Officials and their agents and consultants to enter my property as described in this letter. Thank you, Mary Zeering Date Jeannine L.,Gra Buildih'g Official. Cc: Duane Bowman, Development Services Director 20�1 Dave Gebert, City Engineer Incorporated August 11, 1890 Sister City - Hekinan, Japan 1nc.189v April 26, 2001 STREET FILE CITY OF E D M O N D S GARY HAAKENSON 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771.0221 MAYOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning • Building • Engineering Phillip & Miriam Lehn Green Tara Incorporated . 16202 72nd Avenue West Edmonds, Washington 98026 RE: Slope Stability Consultation Dear Mr. & Mrs:. Lehr, In response to your Associated Earth Sciences report dated 3/15/01 regarding a landslide that occurred on or near property you own at 16202 72nd Avenue West; City consultants have investigated the noted slope failure and a copy of the Landau Associates report dated 4/19/0.1 is attached. After reviewing this report and the information you previously supplied me, it is my determination as Building Official, that no further investigation or mandatory slope mitigation (including temporary or permanent slope protection) appear to be warranted at this time and therefore will not be imposed by me for any of the upslope or downslope properties. Meadowdale property owners have a general awareness of landslide hazards and risks associated with steep slope property. Property owners generally understand the landslide hazard risks inherent with private property in or near this area. It continues to be important for such properties to take measures to best manage such risks, including but not limited to, utilizing professional geoteclihical expertise to further investigate and evaluate the landslide risks, monitoring. slope movement, implementing slope and/or drainage improvements, developing recommendations for site specific mitigating measures, etc. Should there be a change in the future conditions or any new information develops I would welcome the impute and will review the matter in light of any new information provided me. Thank you, 4f (/ Jeannine L. Graf V Building Official Cc: Duane Bowman, Development Services Director Dave Gebert, City Engineer Carol Walker, Property Owner @ 16209 75" Place West . Mary Neering, Property. Owner.@ 16119 73nd Piace West Steven & Joan Johnson, Property Owners @1612174"' Place West Chun Pak, Property Owner @ 16109 73'd Place West • Incorporated August 11, 1890 Sister Citv - Hekinan. Japan Landau Associates Environmental and Geotechnical Services City of Edmonds Development Services Department 121 5 h Avenue N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Attn: Jeannine Graf Building Official RE: SLOPE STABILITY CONSULTATION 16202 72ND AVENUE WEST EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Dear Ms.. Graf April 19, 2001 APR 3 aryftaCie ISDM0, -MSNT At your request, we conducted a limited review of slope stability and risk issues at 16202 72nd Avenue West (subject property) and several properties to the west of this property, including the Walker property and the southernmost property within the Lorian Woods subdivision. As part of our review, we visited the site on April 4, 2001. and looked at a letter to Phillip Lehn (owner of the subject property) prepared .by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI), dated March 15, 2001, and a letter to the City of Edmonds prepared by AESI, dated March 16, 2001. We did not review the March 6, 2001 digital images referenced in the letter to Mr. Lehn or the results of a March 12, 2001 reconnaissance reportedly conducted by Adapt Engineering, as mentioned in AESI's March 15, 2001 letter. During our site visit, we observed the area of the February 13, 1998 landslide referenced in the AESI March 15, 2001 letter. We also reviewed letters prepared by Landau Associates in 1998 for the City of Edmonds pertaining to this landslide. The 1998 landslide area remains largely overgrown. A a near -vertical exposure of sandy soil is present near the headscarp area as present in 1998 and noted in the March 15, 2001 AESI letter. In addition, we noticed a zone of hard, gray, fractured, silt and clay exposed further downslope below the zone of exposed sandy soil. Large chunks of silt and clay (cobble to boulder size) have spalled off of this near -vertical soil exposure. This silt and clay exposure is evident from the property below, but is not visible from the subject property at the top of the slope. At the top of the west -facing slope near the west side of the subject property, we observed a small ground crack in sandy soil north of the 1998 landslide area. The crack appeared to be relatively recent (probably within the last several months). We suspect that the crack may have been more evident when observed by others in February, as it was partially obscured at the time of our visit (probably due to weather and rain influence on the sandy soil). The observed ground crack was within or adjacent to the top of the headscarp of the overall slope. This headscarp could have been associated with older 130 2nd AVENUE SOUTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 778-0907 - Fax: (425) 778-6409 - Toll Free: (800) 552-5957 • E-mail: info@landauinc.com Seattle (Edmonds) Tacoma Portland (Lake Oswego) Spokane movement at this location rather than recent movement associated with the small ground crack. Vegetation obscured the extent of ground cracking or movement, if any, on the property immediately to the north of the subject property. The 24- to 36-inch headscarp located to the south of the observed ground crack referenced in the AESI letter was not as obvious to us. We agree that similar topographical and geological factors that were involved with the 1998 landslide are likely present in the area of recently observed movement and ground cracking. In fact, similar conditions likely exist along most of this bluff extending to the north and south of this property, and not specifically just at the observed location. We agree that there is risk of future landsliding on this bluff. This risk existed before the observed ground cracking. In our opinion, the observed ground cracking occurring near the location of an existing landslide headscarp does not necessarily represent a new risk. The ground cracking is simply the current, visible evidence of a long-term slope risk that is present at this locaticn. We would expect to see various indications of slope Movement at -different locations along this slope over time. Because there is currently visible evidence of some movement at this particular location, that could imply that this location may be more likely to be involved in future slope movement than adjacent areas where no movement is currently evident. We concur that it is appropriate to share the information regarding recently observed slope conditions with the neighboring residents. By AESI copying the March 16, 2001 letter to a number of surrounding residents, this notification may have already occurred. We understand that the toe of the February 13, 1998 landslide came onto property owned by Mrs. Walker. It is not clear to us whether this property was included in the notification of nearby residents, but probably should be. Since the subject property and properties. to the west are all within the City of Edmonds' "Meadowdale Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area" as defined in Ordinance #2661, we assume that all of the, affected residents are -.fully. aware of the landslide. risk inherent with:the propertyin this -area: - - -•—.: In particular, property that has been developed since the "Meadowdale-Ordinance" has been in effect have all required specific geotechnical studies and the identification of landslide hazard and risk as a part of the permitting and development process for newer residences. We are aware that geotechnical studies associated with the development within the Lorian Woods subdivision at the toe of the subject slope have identified this slope as a landslide hazard. In our opinion, it is difficult to determine whether the ground crack present near the existing, oversteepened headscarp location would progress to result in only localized sloughing and slope movement at this location, or progress to a larger slope movement similar to the 1998 landslide. The recent notification of current conditions by AESI to the neighboring property owners and the general awareness of landslide hazards and risks that have been previously communicated to the property owners is important. Since the slope is located on private property, it would appear that it is the responsibility of OV19101 S:\WPROC\074\092\16202-72nd—Itr.&c tANDAu ASSOCIATES 2 the individual property owners to understand the landslide risks inherent with property in this area and take measures to best manage these risks. Measures that could be taken by the property owners include, but are not limited to, monitoring slope movement, implementing slope and/or drainage improvements, and retaining a consultant to further investigate and evaluate the landslide risks and develop recommendations for site -specific mitigating measures that could be implemented. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to the City of Edmonds. Please call us if you have any questions regarding this letter or if we may of further assistance. LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. By: Dennis R. Stettler, P.E. Principal and E;� �0 Steven R. Wright, P.E. Senior Engineer DRS/SRW/jzs 04/19/01 S:%WPROC\074\092%16202-72nd_Itr.doc LANDAU ASSOCIATES 3 Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Mq ® ® ' March 15, 2001 AESI Project No. BE01022A Green Terra, Inc. 16202 72nd Avenue West MAR I y 2nal Edmonds,, Washington 98026 Buitt+;N c ,_=.z, Cl TY h ,r MENT Eumows Attention: Mr. Phillip Lehn Subject: Limited Slope Reconnaissance .16202 72nd Avenue West Edmonds, Washington Dear Mr. Lehn: At your request, we are providing the following summary of a limited slope reconnaissance of your property at 16202 72nd Avenue West in Edmonds, Washington. Our slope reconnaissance was performed on February 13, 2001. The subject property consisted of 'approximately 1.56 acres of developed residential property bordered by a steeply sloping hillside, to the west. The existing Lehn residence is located in the northern portion of the site. The steep hillside sloped down, toward the west, at an average slope inclination on the order of 1H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical). Total vertical relief of the slope was approximately 120 feet. A surficial' landslide, which involved- the entire height of the slope, was reported to have occurred on February 13, 1998. The slide occurred below the southwest comer of the subject property and consisted of rapidly moving mud, and debris. The slide debris moved over the entire height of the hill and caused damage to the private property below. 'Damage to the upslope property consisted of loss of a portion of the upper slope and damage to a former gazebo. During our slope reconnaissance, we noted that the majority of the slide debris had been overgrown with dense ground cover with the exception of the headscarp-area, which consisted of near vertical, bare sandy soils. _ During our reconnaissance, we also noted the presence of an approximately 40-foot-long; 24- to 36-inch headscarp below the northwestern corner of the subject property. This headscarp was approximately 70 feet north of the 1998 landslide area. The crack was visible on the subject property (Lehn property) through landscaped areas west of an existing rockery. The scarp was . Corporate Office - 911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 - Kirkland, WA 98033 - Phone 425 827-7701 - Fax 425 827-5424 West Sound Office - 179 Madrone Lane North - Bainbridge Island, WA 98110 - Phone 206 780-9370 - Fax 206 780-9438 Phillip Lehn AESI Project No. BE01022A March 15, 2001 Page 2 inferred to' continue onto the neighboring property .to the north but was obscured by heavy ground cover. The scarp appeared to be the result of recent earth movement on the slope. Following our site visit, we also reviewed a total of seven digital images recorded by Mr. Lehn on March 6, 2001. These images illustrate conditions at the site shortly after the February 28, 2001, magnitude 6.8 earthquake experienced by the Puget Sound region. The pre-existing scarp appeared to have lengthened to the south by approximately 10 feet and has increased to approximately 48 inches. The scarp, previously located west of and outside the footprint of the existing rockery on the Lehn property; has extended approximately 7 .feet. uphi11 and to the east, and is now within the rockery footprint. Displacement of the rockery has occurred west of the new scarp location. The earth movement activity, as evidenced by the February 1998 landside, the pre-existing scarp observed during our February 2001 reconnaissance, and apparent reactivation of the pre-existing scarp during the February 28, 2001 earthquake represents an extremely high risk of imminent landsliding in this area. Based on the topographic and inferred geologic conditions at the site, the same topographical, geological and hydrogeological factors, which precipitated the 1998 landslide, are likely present in the area of the currently observed movement. Therefore, the risk of landslide activity affecting the existing homes located at the toe of the slope.is alsoconsidered to be extremely high, Future significant earth movement will have additional adverse impact to your property. Since a significant increase in rainfall could reinitiate the earth movement at any time, we recommend this area be closely monitored for signs of recurring movement. We further recommend that the downslope residents be notified immediately of the high risk of landslide activity on the slope. Further study and mitigation for the area to reduce the risk of future landslide activity should be performed immediately. We recommend that this .information be shared with the downslope.residents. 'It is- our understanding that the geotechnical consultant (Adapt Engineering), representing one of the downslope residents performed a post -earthquake reconnaissance of the site on March . 12, 2001. Information gathered during this field visit and any other previous field visits made by Adapt Engineering, or- any other consultant, should be evaluated immediately to help determine the appropriate course of action to reduce the landslide hazard to your property and the downslope residents. Phillip Lehn AESI Project No. BE01022A _ March 15, 2001 Page 3 If you have any questions or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. West Sound Office 'DV..._ o� EXPIRES 6/22 1 • Robert F. Cousins, P.G. John L. Peterson, P.E. Project Geologist Senior Geotechnical Engineer cc: Stephan Fjelstad, Law Offices of Karen A. Willie W:\GEOTECH\Lehn Property BE01022\BE01022A Lehn Crack Letter.doc W s -1 vy nj Eil n'� j rA 11,W IM nIV 1:4:�. i OcJ N I /\K\ 0 1 i-q /0�, a -I a -t� N, 1 c-4-1 1 n ;.4 3':d Ala WIS =I.A Cj, "E)LGIEI zi aa N i v Qt!i VG G3A OUddV �J C? I cn-I 1 (7 e-� N I 83NMO -.5 C *7-1 -LDNMv*2iA Nv---O' %1N -1 V^1 "417 --i 1�;p `Zj C, Ire. p 'S �Sawdav 0o' Sr ;f�:14tp ,j LIP 4;>%vyq iv-ej cl *q ol N :1 1N'L JCI �j Vill UV.d3a, ON i I n Ej W, SCINOUV03 do 'ki 4 IM J. 5 t!� LA a.? 1::� m v S M OIDNINSVIA 10 IVIS VH u TV 'il A ipv, "j" ldh C. i,k. kly Z t4 I 1� -a *a s itL A (V 'Pp -4 54 a tfj- -a -.p r? <I s-7 �+.L' 1(,41 k'T A L A� 7t, T C N n VJ qV1 4 IWNI m N WIV. Y-4 =3' t4 M17),114 0210k4 7VAJ-1f+:.;>Z,7 r4 fig. "Il %7 Y. 4� 'VP 1 - � 'L 1��v Q *10 OA T; . it, % j ;1 "j 0 0 valdv G(j 4F� cn IshoH i-sunp 44�-� I N3 3 2 OD --- 7, -IWIvnivi 00% 1A Q NOISING -C)3 ans 7 joglacl.03 US NOW Vjvm3als pl, 6;71 H013H Maims -g0VU3A0D1G1 o+- Zz�l I Wm vii J v loll e7 lu y N ID 24 % , , 92 119 KRAI�111- 0 000 ;P4.v L as CP Z. 1p Qtq 4*1 0 1 IR-4 ,U 3 1: 7N o4: i an Z rl 'IV k Vq 1 wcl. ym a O.L I�HT ti4 '-4 ......... � N La -27 JL r---.- L fly 77- t Z? W�a 77V Off ae S V *7k"0Z1010* A2A,1Ve&7;V,9 a-e WVW 0WAV —AAAVM46;" 4?f ; �q 0 v cq I-k;-> C1 IQ —J(:;) 0 nnv, . ........ XQ 4 VAOWatai Q NV t-�4c?l LVAvD a y T _4 ::I 'a 01 1v ..1 ss,:= tp N -.0 -4 .4 -BI I:= I IN cvt Le - �-Cj. =ts- 'A ery w IV 0 S N c? IVA V":)'Xa vt;, t 'ji 1. "1 6 N 61 O�L 0, "tit OR i; vv 0 OH/Z77/(V Wr? W/ -1A 4 4 W- j 9A (2 \.� � I < - � 0 4 HI N I ED G� "o 4" ��:e4, V., 01 N lj� 'A �4 :Zlo 41%Nrv� Is, , 74V -P -Z, A 77 f Ur vle + .4 N �7AP= .. � J7 174 1 L ff 0 1 L 14 #21"o 6, J.e 7-- 1 WWI, ,)T. 7 -- (?Qi 14;� 'p I �3 N i.2A 'AINa N r rq a V NI't -�7 1,x 0 4�p 1"Ala o N 10A 0 43 IPQ IVY -4 kgl, . 0 L\ t4'�j Ign --',W�AD vvir-L V Hp Pq I lei s je, 0OWS 1� L4 Hop J�) -H 54 -VA W t) Q,� M I e2ea 'J,":�PIX-9, ACV C7 1 -LVA P it 09 x ID -2 1 Sp L=-j: -7- 4,4 r— T N7 "'Of li:'o CP 4 st r�l 4 IZI 33 C11 C7NV 51- IONN i:n "I'M -L-1 05, 11, 21 -4 J�:) 1 :1 1 a lip ir j!, Ap ijjkq— �10 lip 4Nkq-7 T1141d N�L L-4 Q4. v cl I iim;4 .7 AA T. U,114 A, T- - IN ' '1:1 11 I,, M z VI; sm, zi aa�. �Nj cp Zvi Vvy C)J- IS GLL V V-,?JL �4 01V 1 "?t 4 n7 �6 si,::3 6 n p" 0o )< At' 49' J�, '54-ATS-Iji 24 C 1-15� cz vqvi -m U t4 sL oj d� 4, 11111111111111 14997 16119 73RD PL W TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: vV -796V-00M9 �WO BUILDING PERMIT (NEW COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR: 3—OZ8 � CRITICAL AREAS: q� DETERMINATION: DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S: rK 6 ! -3-42— DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: J Z-/-13 PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED: EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR: PERMITS (OTHER): -,4- -d 7D1 �� 13 —0288 C(7A4We,5 ) PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DA SCALED PLOT PLAN DA SEWER LID FEE S: YJ 510) L3/Z/6r)/ Conditional Waiver ❑ Study Required ❑ Waiver -5-7 LID #: 2 /D SHORT PLAT FILE: �'">,�•�r✓G�/"! LOT: BLOCK: SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #: t1 / <O ' GEOTECH REPORT DATED: % Z7 —� 2 ` � STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR: QQ WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: �1�6 /�l vi�co,✓�1t1 Fin L:\TEMP\DST's\Forms\Street File Checklist.doc / CITY OF EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS �� Y ,�. A)�et�.� c tit rp- W MAILING ADDRESS CITY ZIP TELEPF pN�D�ID 7� NAME 7 W, k� Yves tu ADDRESS < CITY ZIP ITELEPH /2Jv 8Z 33 NAME r FADDRESS AZIPTELEF TE LICENSE NUMBER DE Sf- al Description of Property - include all e o T 7 Loem ill Aloo 05 -5002� ONE NUMBER t-35-a� Property / Tax Account h,/ _ -O00 r Ov 7 — 00 O 6' Parcel No. (/i NEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING ADDITION r 1 COMMERCIAL MECHANICAL APT' BLDG. REMODEL L_J SIGN • . REPAIR ERCYDS. FEE_ x _Fn DEMOLISH ❑ INSERTTOVE SWIM POOL HOT TUBSPA GARS RETAINING WALL/ 11 ROCKERY RENEWAL Z 0 (TYPE OF USE, BUSINESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN: E CA Z Z LS NUMBER OF STORIES NUMBER OF DWELLING ON6F ' CG /T UNITS DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN) XUf7 ,V.516,1 AV AW 4 06 i4U.6,477-✓O, PE ioNE .ps_ yam/ UM13ER 9,3 C). JOB ADDRESS �I�? ""_ / I� SUI E/APT a .EGAL DESCRIPTION CHECK SUBDIVISION NO. LID NO. PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP. TESCP Approved ❑ RW Permit Required ❑ EXISTING REQUIRED DEDICATION Street Use Permit Req'd ❑ Inspection Required PROPOSED 1� 11.//C')` Sidewalk Required ❑ L REMARKS LT 1 7' <j'p7 wt U' .l I , (" E Lu may/` J , Y I f W Z „ W ENGINEERING MEMO DATED REVIEW BV METER SIZE // BUILDING jyPPLY SIZE NO. OF FIXTURES 3 Z W REMARKP Iq 1 f SIGN AREA SEPA REVIEW ADS NO. IIIIIIIII ALLOWED PROPOSED COMPLETE EXEMPT SHORELINE M EX VARIANCE OR CU P NIN�'a.aEVIEW BY v / i -5 -s 7 / SETBACKS,/ — FEET / HEIGHTLOT OVEF FRONT (/ SIDECj .�.''. �'10 t REMARKS q / -S% X -W /✓% x HEIGHT SPECIAL INSPECTOR AREA OCCUPANCY OCCUPANT REQUIRED GROUP LOAD REMARKS PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 305 W.sEtr 0 VlA FINAL INSPECTION REQUIRED PLAN CHECK FEE / C L�T.S6-Off / o BUILDING HEAT SOURCE: .GLAZING PLUMBING Plan Check No. �� MECHANICAL This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY. GRADING/FILL Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks, STATE SURCHARGE driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission. 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 ti successors in interest, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold W harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials, S employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of s whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the Issuance of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to omodify, waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance x nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance provision." Q & 6096 /` DL0 PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 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 authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with city and state laws regulating construction; and in doing the work authoriz• ad thereby, no person will be employed in violation of the Labor Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's Compensa- THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED tl n Insurance. SIGNATURE (OWNER OR AGENT) DATE SIGNED INSPECTION DEPARTMENT a 3- 9 CITY EOMONDS ATTENTION SPEC FOR INSPECTION IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR. 771-0220 A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC CHAPTER 3. 104.87 'S` e. - ni ,A APPLICATION APPROVAL This application is not a permit until signed by the Building Official or his/her Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is acknowledged in space provided. OFF CIAL'S SIIGGNN-AT RE DATE -1-1-�n_ - 9, REL ED V.�6 DATE ORIGINAL — File YELLOW — Inspector PINK — Owner GOLD — Assessor _ZZ\ :I:m• rir e Lisl 7. 23S,Doo j{ 1 4 _ \ - Sy` \ - - - 1^\ %/'., - i•-. \ %. '. ,1 Y.w ' A.n.4 "-�•\ ,� �4./ = K •� % / ,'�/ 1 65, FLAW VIEW- i : � � .• e'er:. a°`.<e r . - F,e ��\��//,�//'�' \ `,.� � 61 DFTAII• LOG RISERS N.T.S.<>o `~ ••• `-\ Fa-�E, .�E L�AT,N LflRiAf�f" WOODS LANDSCAPING ROBL & )DANN "ANDERSON �EDMONDS, WA. r: DEVIL - LOQIAAI DRIVE RpTA1tJIAlG WAIL WHIDBEY IS. ARCHITECTS R.-SHOPE os �' Azd. (Z cx�, : -4 A too, S F.a - Op: !_OT. �J `j �N ��: - �^n. m o . DATUM INS 134.z4 2 1 T - cP� .oP l53.24 •:r,so.76 - - .� ?.5 Ott., ��, 14-0 . . �•�, � co2nlEgB INyV 14'1.�4 �� ---- -- I31.'9S G!3 -roP mz,4G IVA t tip'I Le - - 30T Frei Goy 4. 3 '�? 2aP !.o fL1, 0 3 � 2. o % G PO 2A n� ��2.�4 / �/ r 7 fr t 14- 1. 5' LoT '7 �.nr�tv.4'J Vfo�p�► pet:;) ; -25 /i OC D N�.ta t,1 CAS , �/As+-� 11-t c�To N .140 CoV99 F rcr F— TALC A,Gl/�()r*-T '�% �j U 4 • l.�l?O. 0 0 7 O c�C� 7 ,� N , 17oT � � ; = q -7 � p� w. A p p re�e+ FEB 0 Lco•T S►LE 4334 ep,F. Apf Rc)A ! �Le->�w4'Es. t w PERMfiLATER Ci 01 EFLEV�TrUN OF �X1��T� Ed"YI�RE� l�r`iA I�� 1� nl / ��T For ° - F F' -Tc,POCT (t.AP441C V,&-Tp TAd'-N D1Qt✓G7L`f' : __ i i" �Vd'' rt, a 1•z a$ 1!1 N_' z 0, ; Z = DocuMt�I�Ts.�rz t.ortto►t veoat7t // fJ �+ OfzGM DowL. aNCTIrlBere.INCT G`N-'-m-u✓TICH Sr�Jv I-oT 7 A •Q , C �cVcE(oz�-4Qf�23.r•:1IpNir. LC,-�Tl.�S Ta,�• �K�bM°�M ,►.hI�JM_mo�IoCvoIRrN..�.� 1��5o�N«S� fC�l�olPG. b4>S MdP��1-4y 80o0w0 S/r z. �ilr\ �-' r �/,- -_ ��} - �f►ti:a�oT� q- °\ �-...-.'\ I \t. oo `�0N \�w=`Z0 3►,b Q V> Z��\ju `V�_\i� Cid►D Ail W � awaIL I E! w� Z � Q 1t- - G�i154aoo�02"2r• t94 � t5+E- �Z�- G•�P '=Avl �4�(1A C.S'17Iti �4s4-;-Sf5Z..•.1moZq`~rV�oS•C:o� �-� ,GiR�i�T"~� ,P� �,I cl..�rrxJ�SlAO�.�-r7o TP�4�_�t� LINE�o1-t4�4-4 1t YGS13bTo.�p- i-1 -rNI•!! / ...i• .:73;.4_�d,'��'\��r! `2iL.AErGvso o.I'_ P -r-i-�. �--o-�-'-3-5" E - - - Z13.q•4Z' �: i!.W I35. 710ry o" C-to Lu + 25' MAY, �G I I O20Lu0� C2tu ViovT ZQCQC- C O-roP 14o.95 9' }. �- V� r1 --� STa +znti flr3..dtri .4e Ma ob TOP �pJ.tt►"tA� I Nv . i 4.30 \ �/ id'�• 9 M _ 0-- - - � N D•�T E \�Z � N cp D tKyN y° M imp` ,�►iv -lop �� 4 CDT P 36 Z DATUM m m�. A t3 -o" 134.24 �-4 G�7TOP 161b z5�'10�� / 14'•O" �:�" ` Got�n1E�B I NY 149 ,74 1 S o,-l5 !fir -- - - --- - — -T, ---- - ---- - 131.'9 S . . �O IN v Gq►1 • .Q,� Z 7.3� , / 34 143, Apw T POCIZAPP IC MAP -R.pP GoR- 14 , 33 PDT fro coe- P 2.7 1 4 �Y T. ♦ Fi t, d. .14 .5 s , oo i l.oT -7 I. I i4r4 Woe>t>S P2D Is Tdf . �•DN`tal�tO� SDI h! orl o . TAA Ae-eoUf4T PA.t..ct-t_ Na :. i� 144. 3 ° I ♦ FTcT• trL ,raTloNs A41= 11,904 • 000, Ao7 • oon. 5 N hoT �.. EN �I wp Peg- s ' fc 11 °I '7'3 Pi.. �tl, ht�PizE�s�s / M I'Ger4+-T Y P•IAt4 G �I •: ° ° � .'I ELc Isi6.l5 tt � �LEv4TIvN of 6y-15T. P��'T(1RES. AN1A 160 1�r N barFTC 13 .. a $ �► N � 0 • Te>PbgttAr+11C t7,&TA -rAIrt DIV-t✓GTLY a t4rawe� . s FR6?A DowL >`rICT1NFsa±rc.INC� GoNST�LCTIt�N - \ / °� : % Sa�V -0 1 , Z.� W CocuMt:NTs 1Z.. t-orzloN Wao�s , •� -N ! �S . _ 7 •� -, � v I-oT � DIMEr141oNti dN1� P�o��N belt`i � �� '� .0 � d � N- P�4QI�IN�S FRbM �ols.lON �No�o�S - —oo ,.. -�}� I�,o.b t. .o0 0 �> > _- PIzcv PI_ATo `V Mp. MCI NTos�l Pt h cwSTe► �1D fn T 4' - 2 J . Vow ail , Pc� 9�►. ��o�o�a1��+� oo. 1480 �r � i F � 10 �- I co Ne �b Jxgl1-hlNg 44M.ICTNT Cy4LG5 1 '0 cot�llrrZ A I �0,75 % � �v-N E tZ- V 13 I. S / o \ ' cofLN Ei� G 1 =5: ZS PREPAA� 11 -_�.�.i. I Q2QNL ALP 1 S•oo 1A.0 -7 N�b'o7'35l� PIl:DP .. _ 3 � � .:.'7's. 40 � . I,Z,,o. � .y) l �. Q, N 135.7Gs t �d t Z 5' - MAX. PSI, per. 14T: I !oS • 74, p�.Tuul :lsT c lam) • f �� M GO R. �,, ��+VtrM�N-T !✓Pl-� i �� NE1V P�WJB CdP�t,6TY EL�G'( IGoL ZD�'®4e- R .. T�N.s- c � �b 139 • Z 44 �.lA Y t3b.�q IN civ I5. of OUT pt., w. 114 I � G TpP 140.95 / r16.- V�N� 'STo � tors,�lrl bo Mein.e , ` . Vy5 cow TOP140 .g5 / a I NV 134:30 14�• q - , "r•�:�+'.�«:5a•�.+�..;yr''y�`�':fll"rr�A�rk{`�'/�;��>'�„•'ti'>f'a%'f�-r)+i�'�^YN`,it.�-t-`t ,n".,,.i�.Y>yrY''�v'�ft�1 - r ... JU�fk".rbFw:4yui"�(i�l�'i�r'bf+'�E"�'Zeta"�SjE.�..�f"'<`rr"r+.rryg'1 ' r "s +" '�J�F✓ rG STD ET FIL �- CITY OFDMONDS:::, `Jul- 0 E SEWER PERMIT P.�rC _ T. PERMIT 8490 Address cf Construction: ! w • •, Property Legal Description (Include all easements): GOP Owner and/or Contractor: State License No. 12F,'-:; V CA �,h% t" L Building Permit No. q50 P>:�?_ t ,O�ingle Family ❑ Multi -Family (No. of Units ) ❑ Commercial ❑ Public Invasion into City Right-of-Way.)WZo t ❑ Yes RW Construction Permit No. Cross other Private Proper lra No ❑ Yes Attach legal description and copy of recorded easement I certify that I haveA ead aNd-shall comply with all city requirements as indicated on the back of the Permit Card. -7/0 Date * CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-424-5555) BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION OFFICE USE ONLY * FOR INSPECTION CALL , PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. 3 o 77/ -oad B Permit Fee: Trunk Charge: Date Issued: 7� 8� 91—T Assessment Fee: �J�� Receipt No.: Acn %8% Lid No.: Partial Inspection: Date —Initial — Comments Reason Rejected: Date Initial Final Inspection Approved: Dat Initia -frr i "P ul� P_ a 6 � � \ � �, w-vLB In ** PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE ** White Copy: File Green Copy: Inspector Buff Copy: Applicant Revised 3190 Side Sewer Drawing The City of Edmonds EASEMENT NO_ ____________________________________________ i NEW CONSTRUCTION REPAIRS ❑ LID NO_ __________________ ASMT. NO. -.-._-__-___-___-_ OWNER---------------------------•----------------------------------------••-------------------------- CONTRACTOR--------•-------------••----------•-•-------•-••----•----------------•-••----------- PERMIT NO. 9 Tff JOB ADDRESS _4` .�..� E• - 2 •-?L--------V4...------ LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO. --------•-•-----••-•--------•--------- BLOCK NO. ---•-----------•--•-•---------•----. C t 4 , PWW-0001-11/75 (REV.11/78) NAME OF ADDITION-------------------•-----•--------------•-----------•------------------•------------- (.11 Rv-c 7'Der C+p 1' El t� 1�GaOS�C�� ❑ �OWaiL V a UL.-r- Approv(edd / DATE-------------------------•-------- �i, ,s ?ci{c-4' by s a,� 1001 -So OF LOT -1 DATUM C,& 70f' 6S '24 ir4v 149.74 'B� -7 T PO 6'PO G 2- . 4 �az-'4-pplc MAP Lo7 StLe 47,1>4 e,,f:. Apre,_-^ ELL-V,4T,edrA OF T 56 F'2.-6PA DOWN Cv:--Mem-s- Lx—. 17101MFENI.10�4-, F';e'tlr- NaTs. Fwzlh" Loptl&N wc'GC.S Pl;'-C> PLOT- IVMC. MalWrOS44 PL,,'y ?%:l 40 14t, twUILIDINC7 4EICTA7 C-A-Le—":zp t z5l. gs ,=Ora N s 7- C- ?5. sS 144,-7 Cx, 74 E r-' r-> t4S + 1 &-S.74. L?A.T-ukA'- F-Kt-5T c--M- AZ-3- lAA- %60 0 .0 0 -TOfl 4 INII I,)+ Z4 o.srB Tor M& 95, u -045 Pvm&.C'our / -7 140.95 174.+0 L& 4, r-b T qr IT '140 4.30 MEN .w Z!�-- - _ N. M£AOOWDALE RO. _ TO 1 FDE ATED H•i CITY 0 ' : ." F.n we '� t-H1e• K !'. 70 so so M I . F • ', I j- V 3 8 " • e»Ja 8- P r aq00 012 a« J� I mil)All f .a0 7 v� ti 2 e9e7 SF 'd r)S C_ 01..a.. S.J • H 4 '•� 1174 1F w H 1 OJI w« S 0 •)OYe7• • TRACT .'•8"33.601 A. ;. o e• ...« n PRIVATE DRIVE I, TRACT "A" A• COMMON AREA / rv5v>t 6 • l •�NI•' _ J •.'p'1 •• • 1M•I /Qv Lei n un 1. t i IM•1M N'ei W E TRACT . "A" COMMON AREA b 1eNW ya«n. 5 ! 7e C a' ale: sr. - r r 1 i.7. 7je1 Y a, �• O .. er+•0r • .� �y+�s + doh 10 It G ! a 0,11 «rr ••f F _ 8 ,e eiiooe•.r \ 8 0.11 40 �l -:�1 r� i' I• • 4'P .>e9of 11 e.00e » ti 1 / 017 8 I f •f� a001 » It 800 ••0•+ 44 J1 �•t4.34 a �1Y 1 A Lw EIFrFOL� City of Edmonds Critical Areas Determination Applicant: Neering, Mary Determination #: CA-92-249 . Project Name: Permit Number: Site Location: 16119 73rd PI W Property Tax Acct #: 7904-000-007 Project Description: New Home Waiver Criteria (all criteria must be found to apply): XX There will be no alteration of the Critical Area or its required buffers; XX The development proposal will not impact'the Critical Area in a manner contrary to the goals, purposes, objectives and requirements of the Critical Areas ordinance; XX The development proposal meets the minimum standards of the Critical Areas ordinance; XX The above findings are based on the following conditions of approval: 1. The applicant must comply with any requirements the Building Official might call for because of construction on steep slopes (ECDC title 19.05, 19.00-UBC chapter 70). 2. The applicant must follow the requirements of the Engineering Division for erosion control (ECDC title 18). Based on the above findings and conditions, the requirement for a Critical Areas Study associated with this development permit is hereby Waived, as authorized by Chapter 20.15B.150 (B) of the Edmonds Communi Development Code. Stephen F. Bullock 5/&' Name Sig ture Jatw/ aya.194- 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. I 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, and , •._ submit it to the City. The City will reviews 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 of the parcel with enough detail that City staff can find and identify the -subject parcel(s). In addition, the -applicant is encouraged to include any other pertinent information or studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assist staff 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: �lerzr k, X&MZIA)g?- Ai Z>. Name /cw, es Title 4? C'Vr Street Address )EOXMA)os , City, State, ZIP Phone Signature Date Applicant Representative: Name �i�CJ�l7'EGT Title Street Address ity, , ZIP Phone �2�G 9Z Signature Date Arltical Areas Checklist. Site Information KY A)ff6Z xU L7- Project Name:%5_10VZ>etJC4E:Permit Number: Site Locatiory�GC1!� 7'4 ej �. i�E'SiProperty Tax Account Number. V44 ^DOD7.DDo5* ADPMI OS �, L.oT W rj, �c .oTr4ewev Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): 43�.t1 S.F. 4BP_0,K Have you filled out a Critical Areas Checklist for a project on this site before? /moo General Site Conditions Yes 6r 7�iA4,w 1. Has the site been cleared or logged? AF Date of most recent action: lMAOQbvLA4MuT Soils / Topography LdAuvs4--'0g D�rs,ers 2. In the Snohomish County Soil Survey, what is the mapped soil type(s)? 5/G7Y a6AJ,0 r -seer 7�'iWA AT%� `GVIM6�,5T 3. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply. r- a ik:, —r�, Flat: less than 5 feet elevation change over entire site. A'O". Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10 feet over a. horizontal distance of 66 feet.) k/ Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% ( a vertical rise of 10 feet of horizontal distance.) Steep: grades of greater than 30"/o present on site. Comments Hydrology/Vegetation 4. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: Na 5. Site contains areas of seasonal standing pwater: k)o Aprox. Depth: ,, ff 6. Site is in the floodway A)O floodplain No of a water course. / . 7. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? k flows are year-round? Flows are seasonal? F-c=W 8. Site is primarily: forested : meadow � ;shrubs X ; mixed /V_ IY 9. Obvious wetland is present on site: �) 10. Wetland inventory or map indicates wetland present on site: ND 11. Critical Areas i vento�or ma indicates an Critical Area on site: 5 . /5 1A) L�S�tlotLi/� ,yeza*_os �' ryLowe R&we7' cPAJ7,b AJS 4-A MA);rlAe_ CO N0lTlONAt..WAlVER Critical.areas study: not required �f specified conditions satisfied. Rev W27/92 0 PLANNING DATA NAME: I DATE: c'/ / & / Zpw f SITE ADDRESS: /& I I q 7: y' r PI I^/ I PLAN PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Addy-, REDUCED SITE PLAN PROVIDED? es No MAP PAGE: 5�0-ORNER LOT: (Yes / FLAG LOT: Yes o ZONING: " *PeR11T1'CALAREASDETERMINATION IN #: C!2—Z'1'9 ❑ Studv Required: ❑ Waiver gConditional Waiver SEPA DETERMINATION: _--- ❑ Fee ❑ Checklist ❑ APO list w/ notarized form ❑ (Needed for 50//0 cubic yards of grading, Shoreline Area- site within 200 ft. of Puget Sound or Lake Ballinger) Exempt (� O7'1 t/� YGC O� 1 . ��. �l�J4' "S SETBACKS: Required Setbacks - Street: eft Side: Right Side:_ Rear:- 6� Actual Setbacks - Street: ! Left Side: Right Side:_ Rear: Street map checked for additional setback required? (Yes / No kEN-- ,kf,�DETACHED STRUCTURES: h� ❑ ROCKERIES: ❑ FENCES/TRELLISES: �n ❑ BAY WINDOWS / PROJECTING MODULATION: "IrFiats ❑ STAIRS / DECKS: PARKING: Required: Z Actual: LOT AREA: `i 33LI 1 LOT COVERAGE.1 0 / A 1 A., A BUILDING HEIGHT: a e-i—v e: h' Datum Point:_ G IrOWS I k1 i OP Datum Elevation: 1573. 7-q i Maximum Allowed: ZS Actual Height: A.D.U. CREATED?? o Yes SUBDIVISION: T P'D — I — qq LEGAL NONCONFORMING LAND USE DETERMINATION ISSUED: Yes o OTHER: NewBPP1anningDataForm.D0C FOLK .0 t4&' 4:4 14& Akiewye.- am p4ef A;vix 144- / I'S L alt. MrAl q , r IA9 t J- / L6 -- --- �;e -I, �,4do stpoo a Ir ( A14 lz . e� r — = W I C) F, L-AQ 7 /Je Iva Nay/ m pm 2-0 D 6,f OMALCW, su'), 1 ma DEVELOPMENTSERVICES CTR- GUTTERS/DOWNSp0UT6-----CITY OF _[)Motql)S -_TO.-CONNECT-TO EXIST. SYST. lecleft,el) AUG 0200, E APPROVED AS NOTED S"KET L FERMI r cOujvT,, BY ENGIN RING APPROVED BY PI Date: I ONG ' TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology ° and Environmental Earth Sciences STREET FILE Richard H. Rhydes Whidbey Island Architects 5247 South Highway 525 Freeland, Washington 98249 Subject: Neering Residence Lot 7, Lorian Woods References: Geotechnical Report, Project T-840-1 Meadowdale Beach, Lots 54 to 57 Working Drawings for the Mary Neering Residence by Whidbey Island Architects Dear Mr. Rhydes: RECEIVED FEB 011993 PERMIT COUNTER Project T-840-6 September 24, 1992 We have examined the referenced drawings you provided us. We understand the residence will have a basement floor that daylights on the south, and a garage on the second level extending into the slope at the northeast corner of the lot. The attached Figure 1 shows the approximate grades expected on. the bottom of the excavation. The three -level cut will. reach depths of about nine feet below present grades. The lowest level at the south side provides for a lap pool. As explained in the referenced geotechnical report, the soil at Lorian Woods is landslide debris and may provide relatively poor bearing conditions for conventional footings. To explore subsurface soil and groundwater conditions on Lot 7, we excavated three test pits to depths below the proposed footing bearing grades. Figure 1 shows the approximate test pit locations and the residence's ground floor footprint. Logs of the test pits are reported on the attached Table A. 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 • Phone (206) 821-7777 Whidbey Island Architects September 24, 1992 • Project T-840-6 Page 2 As expected, the test pits encountered landslide debris, mostly silty sand. It contains buried topsoil, chunks of clay and till, and some wood and other organics. Test Pit 1 encountered groundwater and the pit walls caved after only a short time. PVC standpipes were installed in Test Pits 1 and 2 so that groundwater levels could be observed over a longer period. At the present time, groundwater at Test Pit 1 is about eight feet below the ground surface, approximately Elev 143. The standpipe in Test Pit 2 is dry at approximately Elev 125. Based on the water levels in the standpipes, it appears that groundwater may be encountered a foot or two above the bottom of the excavation. Of course, working conditions in the excavation would be best during the dry summer season. If the excavation bottom is wet, it may be too soft to support construction traffic. To provide a satisfactory working mat, we recommend overexcavating wet areas about one foot and backfilling quarry spalls., During construction, provisions should be made to collect all free water and discharge it at the open south end of the excavation. In addition, groundwater conditions may affect the stability of the excavation slopes. The contractor should be prepared to lay the slopes back at 1 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter, as necessary to avoid collapse. If seepage occurs at the toe of excavation slopes, a french drain about two feet deep along the toe would help control the seepage and stabilize the slope. The excavation also will undercut the 12-inch drain line adjacent the lot. on the east side, especially near the garage cut. This line carries water continually and would flood the excavation if broken. Provisions should be made either to support the line or re-route it around the excavation during construction. The. soil conditions observed in the test pits are generally satisfactory' for conventional spread foundations. However, bearing conditions worse than those observed may be present at locations not explored, or may result from rainfall or adverse groundwater conditions. To reduce the risk of foundation settlements due to possible uneven bearing conditions, we recommend proportioning the footings for a maximum bearing stress of 1200 pounds per square foot. Extra steel reinforcement should be placed in the footings and the foundation walls. In addition, we recommend combining interior footings into strips and connecting them to nearby foundation wall footings. The building excavation should be examined before footing forms are constructed. Unsuitable materials, if present, should be removed to firm ground. The overexcavations should be backfilled with quarry spalls, washed gravel, or compacted pit -run gravel. Basement walls that cantilever from their foundations may be designed for an equivalent fluid weight of 40 pounds per cubic foot. Walls supported at the top by framing should be designed for the above equivalent fluid weight, plus a uniform load of 100 pounds per square foot. Since the basement floor will be a living space, requirements for drainage and damp -proofing should be carefully considered. Foundation drains should be installed outside all basement perimeter walls. Drain inverts should be at least four inches lower than the bottom side of basement floor slabs. Backfill against perimeter walls should be free -draining gravel at least one foot wide. The floor slab should be underlain by a vapor barrier over at least four inches of pea gravel. Provisions should be included to drain the under -slab pea gravel. . Whidbey Island Architects Project T-840-6 September 24, 1992 Page 3 We appreciate the opportunity to examine your preliminary plans. We expect the City will require that our firm review the final plans submitted for permit, and then issue the geotechnical declaration described in section 19.05.040 of Ordinance 2661. In addition, the City will probably require that a completed Environmental Checklist be included with the submittal package. The checklist can be filled out by yourself and the Neerings. Please call if you have any questions concerning the checklist's few geotechnical items. Sincerely, TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC William Bailey Project Manager Y Theodore J. Schep er "PIKES 6/18/93�—� .Principal Engineer UM- encl: Table A, Test Pit Logs Figure 1, Test Pit Location Plan cc: Mary Neering, M.D. TABLE A TEST PIT LOGS TEST PIT NO. 1 Depth, ft Description 0-4 Tan silty fine sand, dry to moist. 4-12 Grey silty fine sand, wet; with clay, wood debris, and silty topsoil. Some seepage and caving below 6 feet. PVC standpipe to bottom of pit. Water at depth 8.3 ft on 9/16/92. TEST PIT NO.2 Depth, ft Description 0-3 Tan silty fine sand, dry to moist. 3-6 Tan/grey silty fine to medium sand with 5-15% gravel, moist; grey and wet below 6 feet. No seepage observed; no caving. PVC standpipe to bottom of pit. Standpipe dry on 9/16/92. TEST PIT NO.3 Depth, ft Description 0-2 Brown silty fine sand with organics, dry to moist. 2-10 Tan/brown silty sand with 5-15% gravel and scattered chunks of grey till; becomes grey and wet at 9 feet. No seepage observed; no caving. Note: Test Pits Excavated on August 13, 1992. Neering Residence Project T-840-6 Is b -•- -... ...._ -.___ ._.�.__, - Est �Fr6 rOr7 ,� / ,. - - ..._ - 141 ' s 132; ti /. Resia ce to tpnnt �- V TP-3 �s •L o \ 1 TP-2 Test Pit Location P-32-j Approx. Excavation Grade TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Consultants N Approx Scale: 1 in = 20 ft TEST PIT LOCATION PLAN NEERING RESIDENCE LOT 7, LORIAN WOODS Proj. No. 840-6T Date SEPT 92 1 Figure 1 \ I PRD-1- LORIAN woods PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT REPLAT OF LOTS 54. 55. 56. AND 57. OF THE PLAT MEADOWDALE BEACH CITY OF EDMONDS'. SNOHOMISH COUNTY. WASHINGTON SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP E �REV�RSE 4 EAST. W.M. , �� FOR CONDITIONS L I LILT UFADaNVALE Ra • m n.e• n•!� r----------- I Ulm •p « 1!l !'------------J ` / I LEGEND . .•7 •or r. cv / / ! � ~---��------ • •Q war cs[ _ I f • •a.. ua� !�r � � ., .avo .L ------------7 ; .cm,•p�n..00 •.w •tmo s sw..� 1 h / .n ai o •...•7z.c «.mom s sod... W..:L .•M'•l.a u0G b •OvilRG0. / • /� / •J _ I l I1, I /--�---------�f / _ / ;r viIQ . I / 162nd Sr S W_ DOWL J • .aw N • i . A / • 4ti - L t j6 pl:b ; TRACT -r •�� t .+ "'—' f. TRACT w.•••o. Mtw s 1 1 j L V m Q O Q Q 4 1 1 1 �x` l 1 1 g�� 1 EA D O W D WA V o / SvAce , or z Ih 8 9 January 16, 2003 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771-0221 Website: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning • Building • Engineering Ms. Mary Neering 16119 73rd Place West Edmonds, Washington 98026 RE: Localized slide Dear Ms. Neen'ng: GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR In response to a localized slide, City officials conducted a site inspection on December 20, 2002 and observed a slope failure on private property to the east of your residence at 16119 73rd Place West in Edmonds. Accompanying City officials were representatives of Landau Associates, a professional geotechnical consultant of the City. Landau Associates conducted a site reconnaissance and subsequently prepared a report (copy enclosed) that describes the observed slide. The report states that the loose/soft deposits associated with the landslide are present on private property in the landslide path and can easily move downhill particularly during wet weather conditions. Although the report also states that the existing landslide does not pose an imminent risk to nearly residences or to the general public, property owners in the vicinity of the landslide should be alerted to the condition of the slope. The purpose of this letter and copy of the Landau Associates report satisfies this notification. Further, as . a potentially affected residence to further sliding you may want to consider hiring a State licensed Geotechnical Engineer to prepare an independent assessment of the slope and to provide recommendations about the possible future impacts of landsliding. Sincerely, Jeannine L. Graf Building Official, C.B.O. • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sictor r.itw - Hokinan .TAnan City of Edmonds, Development Services Department 121 5'b Avenue North. Edmonds, Washington 98020 RECEIVED Attn: Mr. Dave Gebert JAN 10 2003 RE: LANDSLIDE EVALUATION ENGINEERING DIVISION MEADOWDALE AREA — SOUTH LORIAN WOODS EDMONDS9 WASHINGTON Dear Mr. Gebert: This letter summarizes our observations and recommendations related to a landslide that occurred on the steep slope, east of 73°d Place West, in the southeastern part of the Lorian Woods plat. At the request of the City of Edmonds (City), Deborah Ladd and Dennis Stettler of Landau Associates visited the site on December 20, 2001,along with City of Edmonds personnel Dave Gebert, Don Fiene, Anne Bullock, and Jim Kammerer. The purpose of our visit, was to assess site conditions and identify any imminent hazard to City -owned facilities, the residents, and the general public. Our services were provided under Task Order No. 18 of our on -call .Geotechnical Engineering Services Agreement withthe City. BACKGROUND AND OBSERVATIONS The landslide is located in the southeast part of the Lorain Woods subdivision, on the slope above the residence at 16119 73rd Place West. The landslide crosses the City's interceptor drainage system "1B" and lies immediately south of catch basin CB #17 in this system. Theapproximate approximate location of the landslide, along with a schematic showing the City's drainage system is shown on the attached site map, Figure 1. We understand that the landslide occurred sometime between December 13 and December 20, 2002 (between regular site visits by the City maintenance personnel). At the time of our .visit, we accessed parts of the slide using paths originating on the north side of the residence at 16109 73°d Place West and the north and south sides of the residence at 16119 73°d Place West. The landslide occurred during a period of moderate rainfall (2.3 inches of precipitation was recorded at Sea-Tac.Airport between December 13 and December 19, 2002 and a maximum 24-hr precipitation amount of 1.31 inches was ENVIRONMENTAL I GEOTECHNICAL I NATURAL RESOURCES 130 2nd Avenue South • Edmonds, WA 98020 • (425) 778.0907 • fax (425) 778-6409 www.landauinc.com SEATTLE • SPOKANE • TACOMA • PORTLAND recorded on December 14). Overall rainfall for the water year beginning in October 2002 has been considerably below normal. The landslide has mudflow characteristics, with an estimated width of about'15 ft and a total length of 40 ft or greater. The landslide initiated. about 20 to 30 ft (vertical distance) above the City's interceptor drainage system 1B and slightly south of CB #17 in this system. The landslide debris extended about 10 ft below (west) of CB #17. The estimated elevation of the top of the slide is at about 200 to 210 ft elevation, an elevation similar to approximate groundwater seepage elevations observed in a glacial sand unit within the bluff. The failed soil zone is estimated to be about 3 to 4 ft thick (measured perpendicular to the slope face). Below the landslide scarp (at the top of the slide), the landslide appears to involve the surficial layer of soil on the slope along with small to medium-sized trees and other surficial vegetation. The mudflow and vegetative material is currently resting on small benches near (above and below) CB #17. . The landslide occurred on. private property, did not. extend to. public facilities other than the City's interceptor drainage system, and did not impact any residences. Silty water, along with some fine sand and silt had flowed into small ,drainages in and near the backyard of the residence at 16119 73'd Place i West. Soil conditions exposed near the top of the slide area appear to be glacial in origin and consist of outwash sand and gravel overlying fine-grained, silty and clayey deposits. These, conditions are similar to soils exposed in other parts of the Meadowdale area at similar elevations. The exposed soil after sliding was standing near vertical with a bench visible about 10 ft below the slide scarp. At the time of our visit, defined seepage paths had not yet developed and seepage was observed generally flowing over the mud accumulation at the base of the slide zone. Groundwater seepage was also observed from other locations on the hillside. At the time of our visit, no seepage was observed flowing into CB #17, although Mr. Kammerer (City Public Works) reported that seepage had previously flowed into CB #17 and Landau Associates' personnel observed a flow rate of about 1.5 gpm in January 2002 at that location. CAUSE OF SLIDING The bluff in the Meadowdale area is a.known landslide hazard zone. The observed landslide is consistent with other naturally -occurring landslides that occur along , the Meadowdale bluff, typically during or following an intense rainfall event during the wet winter season. There was no evidence of construction or other human activities that would lead to landsliding. It is our opinion that the landslide originated in native granular soil above a seepage zone on the steep part of the upper slope. Although the specific cause of the observed landsliding is not known, seepage occurring near the contact between 01/08/03 NEdffms%wpmL%074%1091Meadowda1e Slide - Dec 2002.doc 2 LANDAU ASSOCIATES granular sand and gravel deposits and underlying fine-grained deposits isa typical and. significant . contributing factor to slope failures in the Puget Sound area. As discussed in Landau Associates' Drainage Evaluation Lorain Woods/Meadowdale Area report (July 25, 2002),. the City's interceptor drainage systems capture surface water that would otherwise infiltrate into the large-scale Meadowdale Slide. -below the interceptor drainage. system. The interceptor drainage systems do not reduce groundwater levels in the slopes above the systems. .The observed landslide was likely caused by natural groundwater seepage an.estimated 10 to 20 ft above the City's interceptor drainage system 1B and CB #17. Accordingly, it is our opinion that the observed landslide was not caused by or related to the City's interceptor drainage system. RISK TO CITY OF EDMONDS FACILITIES OR STRUCTURES The landslide may have damaged a small part of a City -owned interceptor drainage system. Specifically,,based on the lack of observed flow into CB #17, the trench drain associated with CB #17 may have been clogged or damaged. We recommend that the City continue regular observations near CB #17 to determine and document the routing of seepage in this vicinity.' The existing landslide does not appear to pose a risk to any other City -owned facilities. However, there is a large accumulation of soft soil above CB #17 that could move downhill, particularly if the soil in this area becomes saturated.Accordingly, City maintenance personnel shouldexercise care when working in this area. OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS Loose/soft soil deposits associated with the landslide are present on private property in the landslide path both above and below CB #17.. These deposits of soil can easily move downhill, particularly during wet weather. Although the existing landslide does not pose an imminent risk to the nearby residences or to the general public, property owners in the vicinity of the landslide (particularly the residence at 16119 734 Place West) should be alerted to the condition of the slope. The potentially affected residences should consider an independent assessment of the slope and the possible future impacts of landsliding. 011C 03 %Tdrmas%wpvd074%i0%Me2dowdale Slide • Dec 2002.doc 3 LANDAU ASSOCIATES This letter was prepared for the exclusive use of the. City of Edmonds. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice. No other warranty, express or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this report. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to the City of Edmonds. Please.call if you have. any questions or if we may be of further service. LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. Deborah Ladd, P.E. Senior Engineer 1JL/ No. 074109.011 Attachment: Figure 1, Site Map 01/08/03 %%Ed=as%wpvM74%1091Meadowdale Slide -Dec 2002.doc 4 L_ANDAU AssoclATEs r If V ,DRAINAGE SYSTEM 1A,, •/. - t% ,Q ^7^•. mod- '/: ,'' i i` r -}� I " ' ice• - , X., -J t f f r I / I • , _ ,. i - '' f l •''''' / i ' Via.'• _� .- •'/- { t r i/, ; 1 1,a. V. I}+,tr:y s LORIAN •. — .i;ft;, jrri:Tt rrt, — -- .. i it �- t it, I -`SEQUOIA it t- ,i� r �••, i, i�� •r•;1:�.:1,; j ,:: ��r..rtG,;�r, ,fir,, .+;• - --- --- .\\• DRAINAGE SYSTEM 1B '°-i'r ! _ �' ' •!''i� �!:�\ \\ �-;: 1r! � j ; ��!� �!I! �� tlt -'fit j 1t- 9 I•'r( 1 �,; - -- .' - i � !• / I,�11"'• �,\`,;�� .. Ir l�1llll1ltftiff�;!•��iir I(',h':: , ,��r .,__ ;;;;•_ ,�t•'��\��\�'�rg�-' ;�, 1, ;�;; .t,,,;��►iI� Ih t,•u, ::ta'il ; ': ,-, , i. r � r' f, _ t ; ! ' � \ \ � I \; / i t r / i' r %t : � i 't•F � t , i ?dry. � / , i • , r 1• a.� � ' } ',+, / :' • ;},• ' h r t Ufa, - _ j r 1 1t: / •i jr i i J`t i 1 / i ••/' ; _ :�• ��',//.•;'•ref,!.•.' i%' q�,,:•t3`,��[�.j�. ., i�t :;' (p.{ - J� R.:�\ti - D'J�? is , ; /:r::�. r /.. {(, tit r' ::r;::z?...: ra- - t I i ••i i 0 100 200 Scale in Feet Adapted from: R.W. Beck 2000 i Drainage Evaluation f Lorian Woods/Meadowdale I Edmonds, Washington - I • i 71 COVENANT OF NOTIFICATION AND INDEMNIFICATION/HOLD HARMLESS Under � e iell edures established pursuant to the State Building e, incorporating -amendments promulgated by the City• of Edmonds, and as a prerequisite to the issuance of a building permit for the construction of a residential structure and attendant facilities, the undersigned OWNERS of property do hereby covenant-, stipulate and promise as follows: 1. Description cf Subject T::is covenant ai notification and indemnification/hold harmless relates to a tract of land at the street address of 1 to I��`1 A • (.c�• (insert street address), Edmonds, 'Snohomish County, Washington and legally described as: L O T -7 1 LG t� I c� r� (.t�UO l�`> P&L5 L Cc m e •Jr\01.S e r 1 a`i- t= ed , ►� (,L 1. 3 i �� 9</ •t 2 s' Sn o h o m S 4 Co, Oq GEC Q C C o CC nT � ;: c r C V_J? -tom j y O h/ - Goo _ cc �r 2. Notification and. covenant of Notification. The above referenced site (hereinafter "subject site") lies within an area which has been identified by the City of Edmonds as having a potential for earth subsidence or landslide' hazard. The risks associated with development of the site have been•evaluated by - technical consultants and engineers engaged by the applicant as a part of the process to obtain a building permit for the subject site. The results of the consultant's reports and evaluations of WSS52079A/0006.040.034 I.7SS/klt 02/08/90 -1- RECEiVED BUILDING DEC; 0 M3 FEB 9 10Q0 PERMIT COUNTER the risks associated with development are contained in building permit file. number / 30C;Z(insert number) on file with the City of Edmonds Building Department.* Conditions, limitations, or: prohibitions on development may have been imposed in accordance with the recommendations of the consultants in the course of permit issuance. The conditions, limitations, or prohibitions may require ongoing maintenance on the part of any owner or lessee or may require modifications to the structures and earth stabilization matters in order to address future or anticipated changes in soil or other site conditions. The statements and. conditions proposed by the OWNERS' geotechnical engineer, geologist, architect and/or structural engineer are hereby incorporated by reference from the contents of the file as fully as if herein set forth. Any future purchaser, lessee, lender or any other person acquiring or seeking to acquire an interest. in.. the property is put on notice of the existence of the content of the file and the City urges review of its contents. The file may be reviewed during normal business hours or copies obtained at. the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, 505 Bell Street, Edmonds, Washington 9802:,. 3. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. The undersigned OWNERS hereby waive any and all liability associated with - development, stating that they have fully informed themselves of all risks. associated with development of the property and do' therefore waive and relinquish any and all causes of action against the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and employees WSS52079A/0006.040.034 -2- WSS/kit 02/08/90 arising from and out of such development. In addition, the OWNERS on behalf of themselves, their successors in interest, heirs and assignees, do hereby promise to indemnify and hold harmless the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents.and employees from any loss, claim, liability .or damage of any kind or nature to persons or property either on or off the site resulting from or out of earth subsidence or landslide hazard, arising from or out of the issuance of any permit(s) authorizing development of the site, or occurring or arising out of any false, misleading, or inaccurate information provided by the OWNERS, their employees, or professional consultants in the course of,. issuance of the building permit. 4. Insurance Requirement.. In addition to any bonding which may be required during the course of development, the Community Services Director has/hXs kKt (strike one) specifically required . the maintenance of an/ `insurance policy -for public liability coverage in the amount and for the time set forth below in -order to provide for the financial responsibilities established through the indemnification and hold harmless agreement above: [insert insurance requirements and time period, if any --if no insurance required, so state.] WSS52079A/0006.040.034 -3- WSS/klt 02/08/90 S. Covenant to Touch and Concern the Land. This covenant of notification and indemnification/hold harmless touches and concerns the subject tract and shall run with the land,. binding, obligating and/or inuring to the benefit of future owners, heirs, successors and interests or any other person or entity acquiring an interest in property, as their interest may appear. This provision shall not be interpreted to require a mortgagor or lender to indemnify the City except to the extent of their loss nor to obligate such persons to maintain the insurance above required.' DONE this day of F- h r�.t �.�.�_ 199_ . OWNERS) By: By: STATE OF WASHINGTON ss: COUNTY OF ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 1t1, rw 1L ep-_,Cr r1 CP signed this instrument and acknowledged WSS52079A/0006.040.034 -4- WSS/klt 02/08/90 it to be (his/her) free and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned in this instrument.' DATED this day of e" . f rc 195, Z NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss: . COUNTY'OF ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence. that ..signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be (his/her) free and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this day of , 199 . NOTARY.PUBLIC My commission expires: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF ss: ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that signed this instrument, on oath stated that (he/she) was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the (title) of (name of party on behalf of whom instrument was executed)- to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this day of 199. NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: WSS52079A/0006.040.034 -5- WSS/klt 02/08/90 0 03 9-4 Sri-+ - I z 0 I jo W10 1� +&y 0 . /7 � 0 - AS + "x4a 34 STREET FILE 142- 'al X2 Z5 X �';� 45 X4 54' g y X 46raj A,5 a 421 14 S 7 REET, RLE 133 i' �. 13S 24r Su — � 39 . 1 13� A /D G /03 1-7 �n t� y PM _ .. ; • ,.;: QO. , N'rl �l;`� t:�}S D 51:.1 D,>r : F4 �Z 11'.. ... .., , � .. �:. .w . .. _ .... - --- . -'- . - - -- - - - - _..... _ _ • •. • '1� .. .. . � t�75. �" Ih N .0.. 'mqp.- MAP ... ----- - ----- - - ---. M _ti p.� �`�•- Wit• _ �' � � � \i � . � � ' - A7, .. tskl is; b ►ri::4roNTt2.fic'r LTo .:s1f'Pa.'T Tie 1��. �Y i i Z / ltl 2 5 - ► t , • to r`(a AA- 1 W7,5 O.To 4-.f'T TX" 4a1LTY FINE 4A1*4D vim, -,w �1s1 2 1 ' � N % ,1�►• $a � �' — I t i -Z� - ----- - 4 Go ---- -- --i 11rTo {2 F7 .T2e,('51L-t-( pIN>; t Ufs'T;�YITN GLAY rJO % G �fj I �I O > Q 3:_ �. ' ` EIVI -� f31=fZ¢JSANO 1 � ► %!1 y�.t=j. l SLE 1JG�L 1:2,3 I� EC --t ` I .-fY To tA iL-. E,E 14-Z,o0 of � I rL 3 PERMIT COON' LLJ All Z 1.XGaya:T+�dN-7'j. >- 1O 2 �o----sa /� -�Q!4+ 1.2.5 +-TOTA�I► �I1..L Za 4 GU.�'p�,^� -Tx" a L SY 5 t_-T � F i N t= -TO ),A a t� . � V , O <jp.n:l] W/Gj-iGi7o C{2Cv4C:.t MPIST & - - 7 cif-' nN a .Ut7 �tLv�v �Y, w V I) Sa GZ' l 0 I F� ' v ! ?` I = v !�Qi�i - V w�.T r;' o 5+ _ N � �Z C.)� ' � W j — !trxl�s?I GrfLsaci✓ I f+xt5 I I �L/j; ToP---- �'CGr G St:Cb �AVEM lf1 lT 140.5 � �.70 .__... � _ 4b - i1�p i 8" NlDS 1600 NVG I ".O r ell C> ONE F�C1 u 1 Al �.` S►_U7 r�i�alr�.yic%�1`lc-� 14.t,(ol_ to Zo 7io mod. 50 60o..... 7v Md T cN Eitl�,T r ,,� /\m S CT DN 7 V Zo , I FOVEMEN'� �l�GrIF�; I: coN.;. :. ro L4:1 IaXCA-\,A&7coN SL.of'E s�T- AT- I : i -+', •To VF-=T A,.: NEGESSo►cam;. TOP } O.gFj . I: - ' Z: PF VtoE FS�NGN: 172htN 2': PSlF-rabT.,Top- of SLOP' 4 _�• ' - a7.' v.VEQ EKG�.�/L�'t.E ' bNY. \1J ET lsiz �a oN E MAOT A M> N `TaP Iqo • 9 5 b ► i• . J' :EKA►�I�i Nam: �ooTt Nc� . W<CA� Y`4-j' 10 S 4 N C� IZ@MGu� ,y -. _ 9 - - - - - P-. A'L.;uN1sut A*;L..1=. MA �tztal.., O Q--� i T "G2va.wz-r_a,.�t_s of��vAs�o..�tz.av>�t✓ TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering,, Geology °"• and Environmental Earth j,cie July 31,.2001 Project No. T-840-8 Mr. Mark Putzke Chandler Homes 'RECEIVED 945 = 207th PlaceNE Sammamish, Washington 98074 •AUG 0 1 '01 Subject: Proposed Garage -Addition PERMIT .COUNTER Neering Residence,, .16119 - 73rd Place West Edmonds, Was Reference: Letter -Report, Veering Residence, Lot 7,�Lorian Woods, prepared by Terra Associates,: Inc., - Project No. T-840-6, dated September 24, 1992 . Dear Mr. Putzke: As re uested • we have reviewed drawings detailing the.pro' ose'd addition to the north side of the existin garage, q g g p P- g g g at the Neenng Residence iri Edmonds, Washington. We previously ,'prepared ;the referenced geotechnical report for design and construction of the original residence. We also provided geotechnical.:engineering,observations and, testing'.services during construction of the residence in June 1993. The purpose'of our review was to verify ,that the design of the proposed addition is consistent with our geotechnical engineering recommendations. We -reviewed three "sheets of plans titled Proposed Four -Foot by Twenty -Two -Foot Addition to Garage for Mary K. Neering, M.D. The plans "did not indicate" by. whom they 'were prepared, nor did they include a plan date. Sheets 2 and 3. of the plans include a -structural review. starrip; dated July ,13, 2001, by Reed and Associates. We also received revised structural calculations and foundation'; design from Reed . and Associates by, facsimile transmission on July,' 27, 2001., ; Our review of these design documents indicates the addition will,be Vom the north side of•the,'ekisting' garage and require dx* cavation depths. of approximately five feet to'the east; tapering'to approximately two feet -to the west. The revised structural design 'calculations' indicate, that the foundation has .been, dimensioned. for an allowable bearing capacity of 1,200 pounds per'square foot (psf). Based on our review, with, the revised foundation design, the plans are.'consistent with our geotechnical engineering recommendations. 12525 Willows Road, Suite,101, Kirkland, Wash ington'98034 Phone (425) 821-7777 i Fax.(425) 821-4334•* terra@.terra-associates.com t 1hc.189v April 26, 2001 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771.0221 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning - Building • Engineering Phillip & Miriam Lehn Green Tara Incorporated 16202 72°d Avenue West Edmonds, Washington 98026 RE: Slope Stability Consultation Dear Mr. & Mrs. Lehr, GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR In response to your Associated Earth Sciences report dated 3/15/01 regarding a landslide that occurred on or near property you own at 16202 72"d Avenue West; City consultants have investigated the noted slope failure and a -copy of the Landau Associates report dated 4/19/01 is attached. After reviewing this report and the information you previously supplied me, it is my determination as Building Official, that no further investigation or mandatory slope mitigation (including temporary or permanent slope protection) appear to be warranted at this time and therefore will not be imposed by me for any of the upslope or downslope properties. Meadowdale property owners have a general awareness of landslide hazards and risks associated with steep slope property. Property owners generally understand the landslide hazard risks inherent with private property in or near this area. It continues to be important for such properties to take measures to best manage such risks, including but not limited to, utilizing professional geoteclHdal—expertise- -t6'-f ifther-" investigate arid evaluate the landslide risks, monitoring slope. movement,._ implementing slope and/or drainage improvements, developing recommendations for site specific mitigating measures, etc. Should there be a change in the future conditions or any new information develops I would welcome the impute and will review the matter in light of any new information provided me. Thank you, 2 Jeannine L. Graf Building Official Cc: Duane Bowman, Development Services Director Dave Gebert, City Engineer Carol Walker, Property Owner @ 16209 75'h Place West Mary Neering, Property, Owner @ 16119 73"d Place West Steven & Joan Johnson, Property Owners @16121 746 Place West Chun Pak, Property Owner @ 16109 73nd Place West • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Citv - Hekinan. Japan 0 Landau Associates Environmental and Geotechnical Services City of Edmonds Development Services Department 121 5`h Avenue N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Attn: Jeannine Graf Building Official RE: SLOPE STABILITY CONSULTATION 16202 72ND AVENUE WEST EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Dear Ms. Graf: April 19, 2001 1tcz� APR ? �VAe® c�'ry�Nc aFP ?a A� F5:0, Mr pT At your request, we conducted a limited review of slope stability and risk issues at 16202 72nd Avenue West (subject property) and several properties to the west of this property, including the Walker property and the southernmost property within the Lorian Woods subdivision. As part of our review, we visited the site on April 4, 2001 and looked at a letter to Phillip Lehn (owner of the subject property) prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI), dated March 15, 2001, and a letter to the City of Edmonds prepared by AESI, dated March 16, 2001. We did not review the March 6, 2001 digital images referenced in the letter to Mr. Lehn or the results of a March 12, 2001 reconnaissance reportedly conducted by Adapt Engineering, as mentioned in AESI's March 15, 2001 letter. During our site visit, we observed the area of the February 13, 1998 landslide referenced in the AESI March 15, 2001 letter. We also reviewed letters prepared by Landau Associates in 1998 for the s - ~City of Edmonds pertaining'to this landslide. The 1998 landslide area rem ains'largely-overgrown. A near -vertical exposure of sandy soil is present near the headscarp area as present in 1998 and noted in the March 15, 2001 AESI letter. In addition, we noticed a zone of hard, gray, fractured, silt and clay exposed further downslope below the zone of exposed sandy soil. Large chunks of silt and clay (cobble to boulder size) have spalled off of this near -vertical soil exposure. This silt and clay exposure is evident from the property below, but is not visible from the subject property at the top of the slope. At the top of the west -facing slope near the west side of the subject property, we observed a small ground crack in sandy soil north of the 1998 landslide area. The crack appeared to be relatively recent (probably within the last several months). We suspect that the crack may have been more evident when observed by others in February, as it was partially obscured at the time of our visit (probably due to weather and rain influence on the sandy soil). The observed ground crack was within or adjacent to the top of the headscarp of the overall slope. This headscarp could have been associated with older 130 2nd AVENUE SOUTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 778-0907 - Fax: (425) 778-6409 - Toll Free: (800) 552-5957 - E-mail: info@landauinc.com Seattle (Edmonds) Tacoma Portland (Lake Oswego) Spokane movement at this location rather than recent movement associated with the small ground crack. Vegetation obscured the extent of ground cracking or movement, if any, on the property immediately to the north of the subject property. The 24- to 36-inch headscarp located to the south of the observed ground crack referenced in the AESI letter was not as obvious to us. We agree that similar topographical and geological factors that were involved with the 1998 landslide are likely present in the area of recently observed movement and ground cracking. In fact, similar conditions likely exist along most of this bluff extending to the north and south of this property, and not specifically just at the observed location. We agree that there is risk of future landsliding on this bluff. This risk existed before the observed ground cracking. In our opinion, the observed ground cracking occurring near the location of an existing landslide headscarp does not necessarily represent a new risk. The ground cracking is simply the current, visible evidence of a long-term slope risk that is - --present-at thinlocation. We would expect to see various indications of slope movement at'different—'- ` locations along this slope over time. Because there is currently visible evidence of some movement at this particular location, that could imply that this location may be more likely to be involved in future slope movement than adjacent areas where no movement is currently evident. We concur that it is appropriate to share the information regarding recently observed slope conditions with the neighboring residents. By AESI copying the March 16, 2001 letter to a number of surrounding residents, this notification may have already occurred. We understand that the toe of the February 13, 1998 landslide came onto property owned by Mrs. Walker. It is not clear to us whether this property was included in the notification of nearby residents, but probably should be. Since the subject property and properties. to the west are , all within the City of Edmonds' "Meadowdale Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area" as defined in Ordinance #2661, we assume that all of the affected residents are fully aware of the landslide risk-inherent,with„the,property in-this.area: - _ In particular,_property_that has been developed since the "Meadowdale Ordinance" has been in effect have all required specific geotechnical studies and the identification of landslide hazard and risk as a part of the permitting and development process for newer residences. We are aware that geotechnical studies associated with the development within the Lorian Woods subdivision at the toe of the subject slope have identified this slope as a landslide hazard. In our opinion, it is difficult to determine whether the ground crack present near the existing, oversteepened headscarp location would progress to result in only localized sloughing and slope movement at this location, or progress to a larger slope movement similar to the 1998 landslide. The recent notification of current conditions by AESI to the neighboring property owners and the general awareness of landslide hazards and risks that have been previously communicated to the property owners is important. Since the slope is located on private property, it would appear that it is the responsibility of 04/19/01 S:\WPROG1074\092\16202-72nd_Itrdx t.ANDAu AssociATEs 2 9 the individual property owners to understand the landslide risks inherent with property in this area and take measures to best manage these risks. Measures that could be taken by the property owners include, but are not limited to, monitoring slope movement, implementing slope and/or drainage improvements, and retaining a consultant to further investigate and evaluate the landslide risks and develop recommendations for site -specific mitigating measures that could be implemented. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to the City of Edmonds. Please call us if you have any questions regarding this letter or if we may of further assistance. LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. By: Dennis R. Stettler, P.E. Principal and W Steven R. Wright, P.E. Senior Engineer DRS/SRW/jzs 04/19/01 S:\WPROC\074\092\16202-72nd—itr.doc tANDAu AssoclATEs Z PHONE No. : 74-d 5000 .fan.04 1994 9:25AM P02 rq �*, From MARY NEERING, M.D. • • _ 0 Mary K, Nee ft 15119 73rd Place West N.dmonds, WA 99026 Aeoomber 30,1993 City of Edmonds Attn: Sharon Nolan 1 am recluesting a waiver to the requirement for land 2lidc insurance . Nfi Stf to Pat -ill insurance Agent, Cary, A"rs, hae informed mo that uiotlior stat.c Farm of any other insumnco agent will vnitc a policy including; the city as an insured. He P-0-, my personal umbrella policy would insure me adequately, Sincerely. Mary K. Neering �i� �h &/�� TO: ' Permit Coordinator, Building Division FROM: Lyle Chrisman, Engineering Inspector OWNER10~1►!5 ADDRESS: 16j1 q After review of the subject permit application, the following requirements mustbe met. PLAN cK # 9 3- 7 DATE: ��Qy 1. Construction hours are: WEEKDAYS .......... 7:00 A.M.-10:00 P.M. WEEKENDSMOLIDAYS..... 10:00 A.M.-6:00 P.M. 2. A separate RIGHT-OF-WAY- Construction Permit is required for all work on Publicproperty. (ECDC 18.60) 3. 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) S. NO WORICSHAM BB DONE WITHIN IS FEET OF STWUMS OR 10 FEET FROMANY CLOSED DWNAGE FACIL . ITY. BUILDER/OWNER IS REPSONSIBLE FOR IDENTIFYING CONDITIONS ON THE DRAWING. (ECDC 18.30.S0G) 6. FILTER FABRIC FENCE SHALL BE INSTALLED AND INSPECTB'D PRIOR TO CLEARING AND CONSTRUCTION. (ECDC 18.30) 7. INSPECTIONS ARE REQUIRED ON STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, TIGHTLINE,S, FOUNDATION DRAINS, AND CATCH BASIN INSTALLATION. INSPECTIONS ARE REQUIRED PRIOR TO BACKFILLING. (ECDC 18.30) S. Repair or replace all defective existing crab, 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) 9. Driveway slope shall not exceed 14 % without a waiver. Every attempt should be made to keep the slope below 14 4O. Waiver granted to __�. (ECDC 18.80.060D) 10. Drivewayi must be paved from property line to City RIGHT-OF-WAY.. A separate permit is required. (ECDC 18.80.060C) 11. 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. 13. Connection to City water system is required. There is a separate charge for the water meter. (ECDC 7.30) 14. A back water valve is required if downstairs plumbing is below the elevation of upstream manhole. (ECDC 7.20) 15. Water and sewer mainlines should be separated by 10 feet minimum. (ECDC 18.10) 16. Connection to the City sanitary system is required. A separate permit.is required. LID# -Z(D Fees paid: Yes No Charge (ECDC 18.10) 17. 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 18.05.010) 18. A FINAL ENGINEERING INSPECTION IS REQUIRED PRIOR To 777B BUILDING DIVISION GRANTING OCCU- PANC��Y��O��F TILE BUILDING ORSTRUCTURE. (ECDC 18.90) 19. t!5/-G Liirg /6�Fc 'ryDivr�1't/ fir' 20. STREET FILE 890-199 Ff,l CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering May 21, 1993 Richard H. Rhydes 5247 South Highway 525 Freeland, WA 98249 Re: Drainage distance waiver at 16119 - 73rd P1 W Dear Mr. Rhydes, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR Ll We have reviewed your request for subject waiver dated May 8, 1993 and the letter from Dowl Engineers dated April 20, 1993. We will grant you the waiver of 3 feet from the 10 feet minimum required setback from a closed drainage system per City Code 18.30.040G as long as all conditions outlined in both letters are met. The location of the house shall be no closer than 7 feet to the existing 12 inch storm drain pipe. Any damage to the existing system due to construction shall be repaired by the contractor immediately. If you have any questions, please call Lyle Chrisman; 771-0220, extension 324.. Sincerely, Pobez 7 J. ,6rt�,el. Jv qi�� r5 ROBERT J. ALBERTS, P.E. City Engineer ALC/RJA/sdt c: Sharon Nolan, Permit Coordinator RHYDES.2/TXTST530 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan. Jaoan LANDAU A ASSOCIATES, INC. Environmental and Geotechnical Services RECEI0D MAY 2 1 1993 PERMIT COUNTER May 21, 1993 City of Edmonds 250 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Attn: Ms. Sharon Nolan RE: GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW OF RESUBMITTAL PROPOSED NEERING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOT 7 LORIAN WOODS EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Dear Sharon: In accordance with your request, we have completed a review of the resubmittal package concerning the above noted proposed residence. The review is intended to evaluate compliance of the project documents with the requirements of Ordinance 2661 and the Uniform Building Code. A list of the resubmittal documents reviewed is included as Attachment 1. Our review of the documents indicates that the majority of the issues raised in our April 2, 1993 Preliminary Geotechnical Review have been adequately addressed, provided that the building height variance is granted for this structure. Specific discussion of the individual issues as numbered in our April 2 letter follows: 1. The Geotechnical Consultant has now reviewed the Environmental Checklist. 2. No further comment. 3. The Lead Design Professional acknowledges review of previous geotechnical reports concerning the property. a. The Lead Design Professional -states that the Lorian Woods CC&R's allow the proposed location of the residence. We agree that the design is protective of human life in that a typically non -occupied portion of the structure faces the slope. b. A stiffened foundation is proposed to mitigate differential settlement concerns, also the Geotechnical Engineer correctly points out the potential for cosmetic damage to the structure exists with this scheme. Provided the owner is aware of potential maintenance and cost issues dealing with such cosmetic damage, no further action on this subject appears warranted at this time. c. No further comment. d. Plan revisions eliminate this contradiction. e. Filter fabric has been added where appropriate. P.O. BOY 1029 • EDMONDS, WA 98020-9129 • (206) 778-0907 • FAX (206) 778-6409 SPOKANE: (509) 327-9737 • FAX (509) 327-0691 /TACOMA• (206) 926-2403 • FAX (206) 926-2531 it. The Geotechnical Engineer has addressed stability during excavation, but failed to assess longer term stability with calculations, as requested. The factor of safety indicated to be 1.15 to 1.3, while appropriate for short-term conditions, may be inappropriate for long-term conditions. However, since the owner has been advised that the home is on a potentially active landslide, and the Geotechnical Engineer has previously addressed slope stability (as a percentage of risk), this subject has probably now been adequately addressed. 5. No further comment. 6. The roles of the design professionals have been clarified by the Lead Design Professional and each appears to be practicing in their area of competence. 7. The requested earth pressure coefficients considering surcharges have not been provided. However, the Geotechnical Engineer states that the previous wall design recommendations are satisfactory. 8. Excavation quantities based on the revised plans have been made considering the factors pointed out in our initial review. The City should decide if storage of soil on the adjacent property is acceptable. Landau Associates is aware of planned construction on at least one of the adjacent lots. 9. Drainage concerns have been corrected by the addition of drains adjacent to the base of each footing. 10. No further comment. 11. Weepholes have been provided to facilitate drainage through the foundation walls. The location of the weepholes should be at or near the base of the underslab drainage material to best facilitate drainage. 12. Rockeries have been deleted from the plans. 13. Construction of a pool is no longer proposed, although the building area remains on design drawings. If construction is proposed in the future, the comments of our Preliminary Geotechnical Review would still apply. 14. No comments on the pavement design have been provided by the Geotechnical Engineer. Although reinforcement of the concrete pavement section is proposed, we believe that a 4-inch concrete section may provide poor service and a review by the Geotechnical Engineer may be appropriate. 15. Plans now show a concrete floor in the mechanical area. The April 20, 1993 Dowl Engineering letter in paragraph 2, line 7 states that augercast piles will be placed at the northwest corner of the building. We assume that the correct location is the northeast corner.. 05/21/93 JAEDMONDS\NFERINGR.WP 2 LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. Depending on the City's evaluation of the above items, the documents may require additional action by the lead design professional. Please contact the undersigned should you have any questions concerning this review. LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. DMW/WDE/fas No. 74044.10 Attachment 05/21/93 JAEDMONMNEM UNGIMP 3 By: Dean M. White, P.E. Project Manager and W-- � - &,�� William D. Evans, CPG Senior Geologist LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. ATTACHMENT 1 1. Response Comments to landau Associates, Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Review, letter dated April 29, 1993, signed by Theodore Schepper, Terra Associates, Inc. 2. Sheets 1 through 10, stapled set of Revised Plans for New Mary Neering Residence, dated April 29, 1993, Whidbey Island Architects, prepared by Richard H. Rhydes. 3. Neering Residence Building Permit Lorian Woods Plat, letter dated April 20,1993, signed by John E. Paulson, Dowl Engineers. . 4. Preliminary Geotechnical Review, Proposed Neering Single -Family Residence at Lot 7, Lorian Woods, Landau Associates, Inc., letter report dated April 2, 1993, with handwritten comments dated April 30, 1993 and signed by Richard H. Rhydes May 3, 1993. 05/21/93 JAEDMONDSWEPIMC .WP LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. J � ET FILE • CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 •. FAX (206)'771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT I p Public Works'* Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering 890_lq Mailed 5/21/93 May 21, 1993 Richard H. Rhydes 5247 South Highway 525 Freeland, WA 98249 Re: Drainage distance waiver at 16119 - 73rd P1 W Dear Mr. Rhydes, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR We have reviewed your request for subject waiver dated May 8, 1993 and the letter from Dowl Engineers dated April 20, 1993. We will grant you the waiver of 3 feet from the 10 feet minimum required setback from a closed drainage system per City Code 18.30.040G as long.as all conditions outlined in both letters are met. The location of the house shall be no closer than 7 feet to the existing 12 inch storm drain pipe. Any damage to the existing system due to construction shall be repaired by the contractor immediately. If you have any questions, please call Lyle Chrisman, 771-0220, extension 324. Sincerely, IyL , Ile•-7. S. n�tt/3Y1�� . vVa/L A 11� e is ROBERT J. ALBERTS, P.E. City Engineer ALC/RJA/sdt c: Sharon Nolan, Permit Coordinator RHYDES.2/TXTST530 TlbertT 0 Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan y S�AE�j o "� May.8, 1993 Addison L. Chrisman IV Engineering Inspector Engineering Department City of Edmonds 250 - 5th Avenue N. Edmonds, WA 98020 • As WHIDBE'Y ISLAND A R C H I T E C T S R I C H A R D H R H Y DBE S RE: Neering Residence Lorian Woods Dear Mr. Chrisman: �I eU/1,01NG 1993 53 �NCIl�E`�i��G On behalf of my client, Mary K. Neering, M.D., I would like to request a Distance Waiver between the existing storm water drainage system and the proposed Neering Residence on Lot 7 in Lorian Woods PRD. Lorian Woods is a 10 unit PRD designed ' with relatively small (4300 s. f. to 5700 s. f. ) building sites, surrounded by generous common open space. Except where adjacent lots abut and share a common property line, there are no set back restrictions. The covenants allow the homes to build to the property limits. Lot 7 has an area of 4359 s.f. (one of the smallest in the PRD). It also has a common property line with Lot 6 which requires a 10' set back. This reduces the buildable area of Lot 7 to 3811 s. f. The Neering residence covers 3037 s. f. of this lot which is 79 % coverage (after set back) for house and decks. It has been a real challenge to provide 3 car garages and adequate access to same and fit the house onto the site. Along the East boundary of Lot 7 there exists a 12" storm drain line. The proposed plan of the Neering residence places the garage within 7 or 8 feet (varies) along the 23' of the garage. Approximately 7' of the proposed residence is also less than 10' away from the existing storm line (7' to 10" away). See attached site plan. To insure that the drainage systems remain 'intact during and after construction, I propose the following: 5 2 4 7 SO. HIGHWAY 52 5.. F R E E L A N D, WA 9 8 2 4 9 ( 2 0 6) 3 3 1- 3 5 0 3 Addison L. Chrisman IV May 8, 1993 Page Two 1. That the 12" drain line be stabilized during construction by a method designed by a civil engineer from the firm of Dowl Engineers, Redmond, WA. The Dowl people designed the road and utilities for Lorian Woods and are familiar with the drain system. This to be done with design approval by City Engineer. 2. That the 12" drain line be inspected at regular 'intervals throughout the construction process. 3. That the cost for stabilization and inspections shall be born by Mary K. Neering, M.D. 4. That there will be no additional.fill over the 12" drain line. 5. That, due to final grading around the Neering Residence, there will be no valley or, ditch topography on or adjacent to the 12" drain line that would prohibit normal maintenance access to the line. My client is very willing to work with the City to resolve this situation to the benefit of both parties. Please call this office if more information is required. re , Richard H. Rhydes RHR/mb Attachment 0 ET * E 0 111/, 0461 WHIDBEY ISLAND 1993 A R C H I T E C T S R.,..I _C. H A ..R D -H.-- R H. Y P.E S,._. May 8, 1993 Addison L. Chrisman IV Engineering Inspector Engineering Department City of Edmonds 250 - 5th Avenue N. Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Neering Residence Lorian Woods Dear Mr. Chrisman: RECEIVED MAY 1 1 1993 ENGINEeplIVG On behalf of my client, Mary K. Neering, M.D., I would like to request a Distance Waiver between the existing storm water drainage system and the proposed Neering Residence on Lot 7 in Lorian Woods PRD. Lorian Woods is a 10 unit PRD designed with relatively small (4300 s. f. to 5700 s. f.) building sites surrounded by generous common open space. Except where adjacent lots abut and share a common property line, there are no set back restrictions. The covenants allow the homes to build to the property limits. Lot 7 has an area of 4359 s.f. (one of the smallest in the PRD). It also has a common property line with Lot 6 which requires a 10' set back. This reduces the buiidable area of Lot 7 to 3811 s. f. The Neering residence covers 3037 s. f. of this lot which is 79 % coverage (after set back) for house and decks. It has been a real challenge to provide 3 car garages and adequate access to same and fit the house onto the site. Along the East boundary of Lot 7 there exists a 12" storm drain line. The proposed plan of the Neering residence places the garage within 7 or 8 feet (varies) along the 23' of the garage. Approximately 7' of the proposed residence is also less than 10' away from the existing storm line (7' to 10" away). See attached site plan. To insure that the drainage systems remain intact during and after construction, I propose the following: 5247 SO. HIGHWAY 52 5 FREELAND, WA 98249 (206) 33 1 -3 503 ILI} h_. 1 _ c Addison L. Chrisman IV May 8, 1993 Page Two 1. That the 12" drain line be stabilized during construction by a method designed by a civil engineer from the firm of Dowl Engineers, Redmond, WA. The Dowl people designed the road and utilities for Lorian Woods and are familiar with the drain system. This to be done with design approval by City Engineer. 2. That the 12" drain line be inspected at regular intervals throughout the construction process. 3. That the cost for stabilization and inspections shall be born by Mary K. Neering, M.D. 4. That there will be no additional fill over the 12" drain line. 5. That, due to final grading around the Neering Residence, there will be no valley or ditch topography on or adjacent to the 12" drain line that would prohibit normal maintenance access to the line. My client is very willing to work with the City to resolve this situation to the benefit of both parties. Please call this office if more information is required. ere , Richard H. Rhydes RHR/mb Attachment ��i•��.ct �L Vv i ! i i rillJ.i 1a•4b I'4U.VUv h .U� !� TER RA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and RCFEIVE ) Environmental Earth Sciences Ma 3 . T3 April 29, 1993 Project No.7-840-6 Mr. Richard Rhydes Whidbey Island Architects 5247 South Highway 525 Freeland, Washington 98249 Subject: Response Comments to Landau Associates, Inc. Preliminary Gcotcchnical Review, Dated April 2, 1993 Necring Residence Lot 7. Lorian Woods Edmonds, Washington References: Terra Associates letter, Gcotcchnical Engineers Declaration ,dated January 28, 1993. Terra Associates report, Necring Residence, Lot 7, Lorian Woods, dated September 24, 1992. Terra Associates Geotechnical Report, Mcadowdale Beach, Lots 54 to 57, dated June 6; 1989. Dear Mr. Rhydes: As requested, we have reviewed the above subject letter by Landau Associates, Inc. and offer the following responses pertaining to gcotechnical concerns in the order the comments were given. As we understand, a variance was recently obtained which will allow for raising construction grades three feet above current design elevations. This variance will eliminate many of the concerns expressed by Landau Associates in the subject letter. Comment No. 1 We have reviewed the environmental checklist and find it to be satisfactory from a geotechnical engineering stand point. 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 • Phone (206) 821-7777 do V'_ a U '. L �• 1 4'•� .. �. 1 1 1 1. 111J I _!J 1 J �0 11 U 1..1V PI Mr. Richard Rhydcs April 29, 1993 Comment No. 311 Even with building elevations raised three. feet - from that currently planned, excavations required will unload the building site to some degree. With foundation design as recommended, foundation 'settlemcnts as a result of building stresses applied would in our opinion be negligible. However, what is uncertain and not possible to determine is the magnitude of settlement which may occur as a result of continued creep movements of the landslide debris. The foundation for the structure will consist of conventional spread footings tied together in a grid pattern with interior grade beams. In our opinion, a rigid foundation system of this nature should prevent building settlements which may be structurally damaging. However, there would still be a slight to moderate risk of cosmetic damage in the form of drvwall cracking and possible misalignment of doors and windows caused by post construction movements. Comment No. 3C The amount of ovcrcxcavation required to remove unsuitable foundation soils will be dependent upoii conditions encountered at the time of constriction. We would recommend eliminating Note No. 3 Irom the prciect drawings. Comment No. 3D With building elevations raised three feet this comment is no longer applicable. We would also point out that the drawing prepared by Dowl Engineering dated January 21, 1991 shows the contour at the northeast corner of the building at Elevation 148, not 150. With unrevised building elevations, the cut depth would be a maximum of eight feet in accordance with recommendations presented in the June 6, 1989 report. , Comment No. 4 With building elevations raised three feet, unloading at the slope toe will be less severe. Nevertheless, stability analysis %%as undertaken assuming excavation levels as originally planned. Based on soil information obtained, conservatively eve assume strength parameters as follows: Soil Unit Weight 120 pcf (pounds per cubic foot) Soil Cohesion 100 psf (pounds per square foot) Internal friction Angle 28 degrees Project No. T-840-6 Page No. 2 It�Ua-UGl-i f i r HlJt' 6 JJ 1%10._UUt5 11.U4 l t dLCS Mr. Richard Rhvdcs April 29, 1993 In our analysis, the excavation was modeled using a side slope gradient of Ili: 1 V (Horizontal:Vertical). Groundwater was modeled at a height of two feet above the base, of the excavation with a hydraulic gradient equivalent to the slope grade. Results of the analysis indicate minimum factors of safety against instability in thc.range of 1.1 j to 1.3. With building elevations raised three feet, these factors of safety would increase and we would consider them to be satisfactory on a temporary excavation basis. Comment No. 5 We understand that we will be retained to provide gcotechnical consultation and observation during construction of the residence. An agreement between Terra Associates and Dr. Nccring will be submitted for signature when required. Comment No. 7 The slope gradient perpendicular to the walls in question will be relatively flat. Also, we understand that•' the swimming pool has been eliminated. Accordingly, in our opinion, recommendations for wail design as presented in our September 24, 1992 report would be satisfactory. Comment No. 10 The Washington State Department of Ecology, if it chose to do so, likely has authority to apply WAC 173-160 to groundwater observation wells of the type installed in Tcst Pits 1 and 2. However, where groundwater resources can not adversely be affected, which .is the case with these wells, our understanding is that DOE is disinterested in regulating temporary observation wells installed in shallow test pits. The excavation necessary to complete the proposed construction likely.will remove the wells completely. -If not, any part of the standpipe Icfl in the ground may be cut ofibelow the final ground surface and the 'rcmaining pipe scaled at the top with a plastic cap cemented in place. A licensed well driller, in our opinion, aced not be employed to do this. We appreciate the opportunih, to respond to these matters. Should you have any questions. or require additional information, please call. Sincerely. yours. TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. Theodore J. Schep er. Principal Engineer .. .txmm 6118193 - 4 T1S:tm cc: Mary Neering, MI) Proiect No. T-840-6 Page No. 3 FILE On L ENGINEERS A Division of DOWL, Incorporated April 20, 1993 W.O.# S11429-0IB Mr. Lyle Chrissman City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Avenue N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Subject: Neering Residence Building Permit Lorian Woods Plat Dear Lyle: • RECEIVED APR 2 2 1993 ENGINEE - This letter is a follow-up to the meeting with you on -site on March 23, 1993 regarding construction methods to protect the existing storm drain line during foundation excavation. There has been one site change since we last discussed this in the field. As you are probably aware, it has been decided to request a variance to raise, the building 3'. This lessens the area of impact of the foundation excavation on the adjacent. storm drain line. It's my understanding the City would not require special measures to be taken to further protect the adjacent storm drain line, if the back slopes can be kept no steeper than 3:1. With the building raised 3', only the northeast corner of the structure would require a cut too deep to maintain 3:1 slopes. The contractor, Design Works Construction, is proposing to install 11 auger -cast piles at the northwest corner of the building at approximately the location shown on the attached drawing. The piles would be 18" in diameter and be installed on 48" centers. The length of the piles would be 15' with approximately 5' exposed to retain the cut bank and approximately 10' embedded below the bottom of foundation excavation. In order to investigate the soil and moisture condition that might be experienced on the cut face supported by the piles, I had the contractor excavate a test hole in the general vicinity of the northeast corner of the garage on April 6, 1993. The nature of the soil was consistent with the reports of the previous investigation by Terra Associates. I didn't observe any moisture seeping out of the excavation. The hole was allowed to stand open and was observed again on Saturday, April 10, 1993. The walls of the test pit were stable and there was no standing water in the pit. Based upon the conditions observed, it appears that there wouldn't be any problem with the cut bank remaining stable during the period of time that it was reinforced by the auger -cast piles. I feel that the auger=cast pile support plan proposed by the contractor will be an effective way to provide additional stability to the cut slope in those areas where the excavation can't be laid back to a 3:1 slope. Based on the conditions that I observed, this should be an adequate method to protect the storm drain line in this area. The owner has authorized me to provide any required City inspections during the time these support piles are in service. I will advise you if I observe any 8320 154th Avenue NE • REDMOND, WABMINGTON 98052 0 20B - BB9-2B70 0 FAX 20B - BB9-2B79 Mr. Lyle Chrissman City of Edmonds April 20, 1993 Page 2 conditions that deviate from the plan proposed in this letter. On this basis, I recommend that the City of Edmonds approve the contractor's proposed construction methods for the Neering residence. Venyours, E. Paulson, P.E. Enclosure JEP:lf cc: Richard H. Rhydes, Whidbey Island Architects Bruce O'Neill, Design Works Construction E• PAU y� 0 I EXPIRES 4/29/ y* i E-- r-1 7- 4 L- C. 4, =4, P-- r- .4 A lyp eel -7, C, a c i�l DATUM z 4 ep— A it "'(::�0a 0 5.7, 's E cp I N V i:FA, 9 Z �21 _IA U 1413. 1F. tl1;;�19- 00 AP PO C-7 ZA MAj' j r 1 4 CD SST ' f / 1 i'a L-r-v 144'S 's Tf*' 1 1;'", - 4-5 ra- 1. K 0 1. 14 ft 3 6 7 - 0 �r, C- S i I Ftej i it 1 -7'25 Le>wev- LjaGL- o EF L-EVA, 6Pt� � / -- .lf �T'f�� '� I'�G�,+ i>1 N_`�: 4-- �' -Tc>?OcfiZ ff+41C z jqD V- 195 IRS NV ILA Pic F,7er\ 71 LAO % R-C- \ 0L S!�� Ak- Z INCSFvA N \\e IA 1O Plop PL&T- W tA(. MINTcS4 FL,5 A4pL.-- F� \ >>I f0l TW I Fd 10 kb Lr, D Ne 14 S. 40! F- CT 1.; 7 C.A. 111C 4�:p ul 0 rp 2-r az. 474 4- 2- -!,(Po F' W 11 I 4-C>, 4 AVC:r C79-D f 3Zki 1,11-7 -1 r \ +n \ gr I AA- ............. ............ ............. Ci _L � \ liv lj�,L. C, C.W-:T t e J.. `fi 14-1, Z I r4,v ; 12: C, b 1 140, -iss-A a-14? copy rl WL E N G IN E E R S A Division of DOWL, incorporated April 20, 1993 W.O.# S11429-OIB Mr. Lyle Chrissman City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Avenue N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Subject: Neering Residence Building Permit Lorian Woods Plat Dear Lyle: RECEIVED APR 2 2 1993 ENGINEERING .-/ 4_,2_5 3 J701 ✓ /MLSo,J This letter is a follow-up to the meeting with you on -site on March 3, 1993 regarding construction methods to protect the existing storm drain line during foundation qkcavation. . There has been one site change since we last discussed this in the beld. As you are probably aware, it has been decided to request a variance to raise the building 3'. his lessens the area of impact of the foundation excavation on the adjacent storm drain line. It's my understanding the City would not require special measures to be taken to further protect the a 'acent storm drain line, if the back slopes can be kept no steeper than 3:1. With the building raised only the northeast corner of the structure would require a cut too deep to maintain 3:1 slopes contractor, Design Works Construction, is proposing to install 11 auger -cast piles at the n rthwe corner of the building at approximately the location shown on the attached drawing. The ' would be 18" in diameter and be installed on 48" centers. The length of the piles would be 15' with approximately 5' exposed to retain the cut bank and approximately 10' embedded below the bottom of foundation excavation. In order to investigate the soil and moisture condition that might be experienced on the cut face supported by the piles, I .had the contractor excavate a test hole in the general vicinity of the northeast corner of the garage on April 6, 1993. The nature of the soil wasconsistent with the reports of the previous investigation by Terra Associates. I didn't observe any moisture seeping out of the excavation. The hole was allowed to stand open and was observed again on Saturday, April 10, 1993. The walls of the test pit were stable and there was no standing water in the pit. Based upon the conditions observed, it. appears that there wouldn't be any problem with the cut bank remaining stable during the period of time that it was reinforced by the auger -cast piles. I . feel that the auger -cast pile support plan proposed by the contractor will be an effective way to provide additional stability to the cut slope in those areas where the excavation can't be laid back to a 3:1 slope. Based on the conditions that I observed, this should be an adequate method to protect the storm drain line in this area. The owner has authorized me to provide any required City inspections during the time these support piles are in service. I will advise you if I observe .any 8320 154th Avenue NE 0 REDMOND, WASHINGTON 98052 0 206 - 869-2670 0 FAX 206 - 869-2679 i Mr. Lyle Chrissman City of Edmonds April 20, 1993 Page 2 conditions that deviate from the plan proposed in this letter. On this basis, I recommend that the City of Edmonds 'approve the contractor's proposed construction methods for the Neering residence. �n E. Paulson, P.E. Enclosure JEP:lf cc: Richard H. Rhydes, Whidbey Island Architects Bruce O'Neill, Design Works Construction E • P-4 O� tio� wAsk��c s0 q is E7ii� �Y 4Q M EXPIRES 4/29// AA �o ZG 1E,-, ; �V�1 iG�' {�F CF LC. �y N t1� M M \rn \nI^ DATUM A r '�,; �� _ :N J 3�.24 -� r Pj -1;� .53.G4 CDF:Nem! ��!'��- 2�-10• 14'-�„ �,•�, ��. :rIV ;1i.74 / I.3o.76 L_ lit 1771A %tSe. �. 64, .". Q2pP Got / �� 14q.5'S PzoF T PO C� ZA F ► � �^A� 1�i2.�4 ©�i sfi-.I; �, ;, 130• 1"� IF ins -7 LC>�.GN WOGS P-D 11 MU No -Z-1:, jTc t1 +••41 h1 I GI�Z • ` ' 1 : F,-T FTar ' 0, oi 7go4 - o .007- oc- s , N, ; •i3 ..: iv,;q 73 Pam. Ott. AaPR-ser4 1 0 � I ..�r�, oQ Sc1aRi C L t'�• t �a , �t EEL-EVQ , IUPi pF CA;-,T. pEts-vrzes &rug IS° 1 , �' G ToPoc�iL4P++tc t7pTp TAKEN DI�r.G'LY / a i -�' tiE�v4" Y,.vf1• 0. � ¢__ 20M Do�Vt. l:N�,r1>Gt:,e iN� GLros:r�[XTtoN ' °� 11' SI-s�Y \ 4 \ ZO' a-'4=M>c►�+Ts. Fort t.-vtz!GI�t woo�t � �y r Q �' _. \.� + � � � �N ?iC&R-INKS FROM I-OWL.AiV ��lCOpS -pO / }� i�}rod ' �\ 1"4.� P2� pr.AT• vlrip. M�tN'jaS+•1 ?I/i M!W,---60 S^rrz- �'q - FioT }�q- �1 F,4 \ �0 02 JpV 9j' . P'c� ai 4 -- ►.)c.Sv • � � . -� Go. � 148 • o \ �'`� cot+-11:2 D v Afj _ Tx t �� to i� 14rs. r lLD1N'' =ram �x147 GA.:,.GS N ` "' �� 1 ,,� i d1 °�\ �` ►34 2s a�N l=tL v� 1 31, 97 �me>r GOB 2- 144. 4 ' C. *__._-27 _I_ _ ___ u ..• y \ ``. \. � 2 p To- c c► 5td•2.g3 N�iO°o7'35" E AV (39-D �JCrT�2A1� 3: obi j3 r� _ c2 0- \ rl•.Za �� PedP +40•'74' 25'= >< PSt,p�hiT� I &S•74 t Mj. i = NJ Den�►.a • Ex1<� Y c is [� - T � G_ _ r- � - ---F* r r.s `. IJEriYlKv�E of TY T Ali 139, z .f ,' V-p zb/�� VII�: _� -1 �7�GfLM fl(2d11� �S'fI.GVLI'. S. ...., t t _ s I Li.. WL ENGINEERS A Division of DOWL, Incorporated April 20, 1993 W.O.# S11429-01B Mr. Lyle Chrissman City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Avenue N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Subject: Neering Residence Building Permit Lorian Woods Plat Dear Lyle: RECEIVED APR 2 1993 ENGINEERING This letter is a follow-up to the meeting with you on -site on March 23, 1993 regarding construction methods to protect the existing storm drain line during foundation excavation. There has been one site change since we last discussed this in the field. As you are probably aware, it has been decided to request a variance to raise the building 3. This lessens the area of impact of the foundation excavation on the adjacent storm drain line. It's my understanding the City would not require special measures to be taken to further protect the adjacent storm drain line, if the back slopes can be kept no steeper than 3:1. With the building raised T, only the northeast corner of the structure would require a cut too deep to maintain 3:1 slopes. The contractor, Design Works Construction, is proposing to install 11 auger -cast piles at the northwest corner of the building at approximately the location shown on the attached drawing. The piles would be 18" in diameter and be installed on 48" centers. The length of the piles would be 15' with approximately 5' exposed to retain the cut bank and approximately 10' embedded below the bottom of foundation excavation. In order to investigate the soil and moisture condition that might be experienced on the cut face supported by the piles, I had the contractor excavate a test hole in the general vicinity of the northeast corner of the garage on April 6, 1993. The nature of the soil wasconsistent with the reports of the previous investigation by Terra Associates. I didn't observe any moisture seeping out of the excavation. The hole was allowed to stand open and was observed again on Saturday, April 10, 1993. The walls of the test pit were stable and there was no standing water in the pit. Based upon the conditions observed, it appears that there wouldn't be any problem with the cut bank remaining stable during the period of time. that it was reinforced by the auger -cast piles. I feel that the auger -cast pile support plan proposed by the contractor will be an effective way to provide additional stability to the cut slope in those areas where the excavation can't be laid back to a 3:1 slope. Based on the conditions that I observed, this should be an adequate method to protect the storm drain line in this area. The owner has authorized me to provide any required City inspections during the time these support piles are in service. I will advise you if I observe any 8320 154th Avenue NE 0 REDMOND, WASHINGTON 98052 0 206 - 869-2670 0 FAX 206 - 869-2679 Mr. Lyle Chrissman City of Edmonds Apri120, 1993 Page 2 conditions that deviate from the plan proposed in this letter. On this basis, I recommend that the City of Edmonds approve the contractor's proposed construction methods for the Neering residence. Vemlf-uN vours. _ -M-- J91fh E. Paulson, P.E. Enclosure JEP:lf cc: Richard H. Rhydes, Whidbey Island Architects Bruce O'Neill, Design Works Construction ti• PAU yr Z'� �'l74J;r. EXPIRES 4/29/y RECEIVED APRd i 1993 MEMORANDUM tNG1NEE MNG CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING DIVISION 250 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 TO: FILE NO. CUG-93-42 BUILDING FROM: — APR 0 8 1993 Jeffrey S. Wilson, AICP Current Planning Supervisor SUBJECT: WITHDRAWAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR GRADING SUBMITTED BY MARY NEERING FOR A RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 16119 73RD PLACE WEST; FILE NO. CUG-93-42 DATE: April 7, 1993 The applicant has submitted a variance application to allow an increase in the maximum permitted building height, which would result in the reduction of the proposed grading below the 500 cubic yard threshold established for the requirement of a Conditional Use Permit. This revised proposal was reviewed by Lyle Chrisman of the Engineering Division to verify that the requested site grading would fall below the 500 cubic yard threshold. Mr. Chrisman provided a memo dated April 6th, verifying the reduction of grading below 500 cubic yards. These findings where then discussed with the applicant's Architect for his confirmation. Mr. Rhydes was also informed, that should any additional grading be determined necessary during actual site work which causesthe total site grading to exceed 500 cubic yards, the project would be required to stop until a Conditional Use Permit is obtained. The applicant's Architect, Richard Rhydes, has provided a formal request to withdraw his clients Conditional Use Permit application, based on their revised grading proposal. Therefore, based on the information provided by Mr. Chrisman and Mr. Rhydes, the Conditional Use Permit is hereby determined to not be required. /pc: Lyle Chrisman 93-42WD/4.7-91CORRESN EMOS CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT j p Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering 890 19 April 7, 1993 RECEIVED APR - 7 1993 ENGiNEEAING Mary K. Neering; M.D. m-4:!�> 21616 76th Avenue West, #209 Edmonds, WA 98026 Dear Ms. Neering: LAURA M. HALL MAYOR BU101li . APR o 81993 Subject: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF PERMIT WITHDRAWAL FOR REQUESTED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR GRADING; FILE NO. CUG-93-42 Thank you for your letter of withdrawal regarding your permit application for a Conditional Use Permit for Grading, related to your proposed residence at 16119 73rd Place West. • Based on your revised application which a seeks a variance for building height to allow less grading on you site, Lyle Chrisman has informed me, and your Architect has confirmed that your site grading will be less than 500 cubic yards. With the reduction in your site grading, your request to withdraw your Conditional Use Permit can be granted. However, please realize, should you encounter the need to grade additional material which causes your total site grading to. exceed 500 cubic yards, you will be required to obtain a Conditional Use Permit prior to any further work. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 771-0220. Sincerely, Community Services Department - Planning Division. lq�� _�° Jeffrey S. Wilson, AICP Current Planning Supervisor PC: File No. CUG-93-42 4/Lyle Chrisman, Engineering Inspector Richard Rhydes, Architect; 5247 South Highway 525; Freeland, WA 98249 93-571I/4-7-93.CORRI:S\I_EITEI(S 0 Incorporated August 11, 1890 0 . Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan , 890-199 April 7, 1993 0 . STRE FILE CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation . Engineering Mary K. Neering, M.D. 21616 76th Avenue West, #209 Edmonds, WA 98026 Dear Ms. Neering: Subject: ASSIGNMENT OF HEARING DATE LAURA M. HALL MAYOR RECE6VE'D APR v 7 1993 ENGINEERING APR 0 81993 Your application is now complete and has been scheduled for public hearing at the time and place listed below. However, should an appeal of the Environmental Determination for your proposal be filed in a timely fashion, the hearing on your permit application will be continued to a future dated to allow for the resolution of the SEPA appeal. Action: Variance File No. Assigned: V-93-57 Date of Hearing: April 22nd, 1993 Time: 9:00 A.M. , or as soon thereafter as possible. Place: Plaza Room, Edmonds Library 650 Main Street Hearing Body: Hearing Examiner Please be aware that your presence at the hearing is highly advisable. If an applicant or his representative is not present, the item may be moved to the end of the agenda. Items not reached by the end of the hearing will be continued to the following month's agenda. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 771-0220. 93-5711/4-7-93.CORREMLEITERS • Incorporoted August 11, 1890 • Sincerely, Community Services Department - Planning Division Jeffrey S. Wilson, AICP Current Planning Supervisor PC: File No. CUG-93-42 /Lyle Chrisman, Engineering Inspector Richard Rhydes; Architect; 5247 South Highway 525; Freeland, WA 98249 93.57IU4.7.93.CORRM- LEITGRS --97 LET FLE OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N.. EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT I C� O Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation . Engineering ByQ.�g April 2, 1993 LAURA M. HALL MAYOR m<„Q� `f12- 193 Mary Neering 21616 - 76th Ave. W. ##209 Edmonds, WA 98026 Re: Site restoration bond for`16119 73r&sP1 '-W., Edmonds Dear Ms. Neering, Because of the slide potential in the subject area, a site restoration bond will be required. This bond is to cover the repair of damaged utilities and pavement surfaces should a slide occur as a result of constructing a house at the subject address. An estimate of $18,600 has been determined to cover the total restoration of said utilities and pavement surfaces. If you have any questions, please call me. Sincerely, ADDISON L. CHRISMAN IV Engineering Inspector .Alberts ALC/sdt c: Sharon Nolan, Permit Coordinator NEERING/TXTFORMS o Incorporated August 11, 1890 0 Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan i RICHARD H. RHYDES �TREE ARCHITECT 5247 S Hwy 525 Freeland, Washington ,February 24; 1993 Addison L. Chrisman IV Engineering Inspector Engineering Department City of Edmonds 250 5th Ave N Edmonds, WA 98020 Re: Neering Residence Lorian Woods Dear Mr. Chrisman: bn behalf of my client, Mary K. Neering M.D., I would like to request a Slope Waiver for driveway No. 2'of the proposed Neering residence on Lot,7 of the Lorian Woods PRD in Edmonds. The covenants require garage parking for three vehicles. Because the site is very small (4359 s.f.), two vehicles are parked in an on -grade garage adjacent to the residence. Space for the third vehicle is provided in the lower level of the residence. The driveway to this lower level has grades of 20% for 10' and 17% for 301. The third car requirement becomes a hardship on a lot this size and is accomplished only to satisfy the requirements of the CC & R's. The 2 car on -grade garage and its drive provide all the parking needed especially with guest parking for the PRD adjacent to Lot 7. The garage in the lower level would receive limited use and for this reason we ask that the slope waiver be granted for driveway #2, Lot 7, Lorian Woods. We appreciate your consideration of this request. ince ly, l `Richard H. Rhyde r. 4-'-m�4-/ 50A"4 `I3 • 9 � F IL .�, CITY OF EDMONDS LAURA M. HALL MAYOR 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT I p Public Works Planning . Parks and Recreation • Engineering 890 - i 9°t Mailed 2/11/93 February 10, 1993 Richard Rhydes 5247 S. Highway 525 Freeland, WA 98247 Y Re: Engineering requirements for 16119 - 73rd P1. W. Dear Mr. Rhydes, Enclosed is an application for a conditional.use permit and the calculation sheets on excavation quantities per your request. The City Code requires a ten foot separation between structures and an enclosed drainage channel. Since the twelve inch storm drain line is within ten feet of the house, one or two options are available based on the conditions at the site. One option is to relocate the storm line as we discussed. The other option is to ask for a distance waiver between the structure and drainage system. Any waiver request must contain sufficient justification in order to render a decision. In addition to the above, a driveway slope waiver is required for driveway No. 2. If you have any questions, please call me at 771-0220, extension 324. Sincerely, ADDISON L. CHRISMAN IV Engineering Inspector ALC/sdt Enclosures: Conditional Use Application Earthwork Quantities c: Sharon Nolan, Permit Coordinator 16119REQ/TXTST530 Alberts • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan *STRE-ETFiP[,[oL f,.. TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Receiv . ' Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and FEB 0 3 1993 Environmental Earth Sciences PERMIT COUNTER Richard H. Rhydes Whidbey Island Architects 5247 South Highway 525 Freeland, Washington 98249 Subject: References: Dear Mr. Rhydes: Neering Residence, Lot 7, Lorian Woods Geotechnical Engineer's Declaration 1) Geotechnical Report, Project T-840-1 Meadowdale Beach, Lots 54 to 57, June 6,1989 2) Letter, Project T-840-6, Lorian Woods, September 24, 1992 Project T-840-6 January 28, 1993 We have examined the drawing set for the Neering Residence delivered to our office on January 21, 1993. We understand these drawings are the same as those that will be submitted to the City of Edmonds for a construction permit. In our judgment, these plans are consistent with the recommendations in the referenced report and letter. The geotechnical report discusses landslide hazards at the Lorian Woods development. In summary, in our opinion, the probability of earth movement on Lot 6 within a period of 25 years is most likely less than ten percent. The lot therefore is suitable for residential use, as provided in Ordinance 2661. The risk of damage to the Neering Residence and to adjacent properties from soil movement will be minimal, subject to the conditions set forth in the report. Some mitigation of the landslide risk will occur due to the residence's foundation drains, which should improve subsurface drainage, and to the basement excavation, which will remove a weight of soil greater than the weight of the residence. 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 0 Phone (206) 821-7777 Whidbey Island Architects • Project T-840-6 January 28,1993 Page 2 This residence will be constructed in an area of known landslide hazards. The risk of landslide cannot be eliminated. Property owners assume all residual risks. The geotechnical recommendations and declarations associated with the project do not provide a warranty, either expressed or implied, against loss or damage to persons or property. We appreciate the opportunity to examine the drawings. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC William Bailey Project Manager � j, -Ze -?3 / FIR Theodore J. Schepper ,�x es G/!i/�3 Principal Engineer WB/mp . cc: Dr. Mary Neering, M.D. ITREET RLE NEERING RESIDENCE LEAD DESIGN PROFESSIONAL DESIGNATION AND ARCHITECTURAL DECLARATION TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON I, Richard H. Rhydes, a licensed architect in the State of Washington, and architect for Mary K. Neering, M.D.,. hereby state that I am the design professional responsible for coordinating and incorporating recommendations of the other design professionals and further that I have reviewed the geotechnical report prepared by Terra Associates (Project T- 840-6 dated 9/24/92), that I understand its recommendations and have incorporated into the design the established measures, structural and otherwise, to reduce the potential risk of injury or damage from any earth movement predicted in the report. N, 4984 cuwYE'Lh A RHSTATE OFWASHIj J RECEIVED FEB 0 3 1993 PERMIT COUNTER dve Jzf �ir/93 .L. NI� 6, N w�IvS� ' . tad 710. "vl� 2l.v H� „ :1`►1'V"1 cJ :: 'J.V 01i..ep'al I ' ro N VI J N 1 wvz 1� �? I.,va Ntn Lc2 N 1y "►d , 'v'ty w° 14 i~ 41 N i c:�' 't� 61'QYv t d' 4� cz�1:;....j :..:: �s t MIN U N1O. -ufr '/� O off✓ p, U 3bINQUA N Y�NtH M 30 ibLS, / D •J/t �lb�135.• { � fC n �. g 3NOZ � u JECT, REVIEW CHECKLIST PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: PLAN CHECK #: RECEIPT DATE: REVIEW D BY: In li ate PLAN. WATER COMMENTS' -- . .1 FIRE BLDG. SEWER STREET ENG.— Setbacks/Variance/Setback Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... Conditional Use Permit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AD13 Requirements .......... .............. . . . . . . Other Zoning Requirements Underground Wiring Required .-6 Lot Slope 16% - 6 SEPA Environmental Checklist/Hydraulics Permit Tree Cutting Plan Plat/Subdivision Requirements Legal Description Verification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ...... Quit Claim/Street Dedications- - -------------------- Easements - Public/Private 12 ----------- ----- - - - - - - - Engineering Storm Drain Review Fee ............... - - - - - - - ............... . 3 Engineering 2.2 Inspection Fee x . ....... :A4., Drainage Plan (On -Site) • Setback - To of Bank, Stream, Water Courses M. Setback - Storm Drain Line --------- ------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Open Ditch - Existing .18 Culvert Required- :. . . . . . . . . . Culvert Size '% Shoulder Drainage/Shale Open Runoff ...... ..... Catch Basin Required . . . . . .............. -22---,--** Driveway Slope & Vehicle Access ------------- Sidewalk Required' FOR 24- Curb & Gutter Required 26 ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Curb Cut For Driveway Required . . . . . .2 Street Paving Required . - - - - - ....... Right -Of -Way Construction Permit Required ........... 28 Street Name Sign Required Other Signing Required Bond Required For Public Improvements FEMA Map Check/Water Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................... - . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . Side Sewer Availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Calculate Sewer Connection Fee If No* LID # ........... 34 Create Street File 35 Existing Water Main Size Water Meter Size Service Line Size38 Water Meter Charge Required ... ... ....... -::39 Hydrant Required 40' Hydrant Size Existing ..41 Fire Line Charge Required - Sprinkler :=42� ,Street Cut IMiscellaneous 4,4 17,'l5f;WW— .............. . . .... -71'�+�cw.rri.e IVJW_ Reviewed By: FIRE PLANNING ENGINEERING PJ13LIC WORKS STREETFILE, PIJ�� s�,�o.J �� r. i STREET FILE LAND CLEARING TREE CUTTING PLAN FOR NEERING RESIDENCE LOT 7, LORIAN WOODS PRD EDMONDS, WASHINGTON REcz1vto FEB 0 3 1993 PERMIT COUNTER At present no trees are in existence on Lot 7. The ground cover consists of low shrubs and grass. General grubbing and ground cover clearing will occur prior to excavation. Refer to attached site plan which shows all of the site to be cleared. Landscaping will consist of re -seeding with a mix of 30% Rye and 70% Fescue and rip/rap rockeries where shown. There are no wetlands, streams or water courses on site. Mature trees adjacent lot shall be protected with baled straw barriers at drip lines. See plan. P'x-j - 9 �- �= � �. `•`. -�'L'G I:k14�'C 1 'Coo':'S�;.: 01�.LCT•7=� -• � � 1 °`'• � h . : �JCG1s�l�Tt t�N M�•�c- � �j tJ [� � � X G{2'� ._•>zts=lz•�T'::I:.iN�°. i?` �I.r4=,�c-o�t� Mom? 1�p O.To 4-FT Tx-+61u-r-r FIKa c,ANp a / 14,f O ( t --- - - I \YtsT \CITM GLG'TI N'. VE��S LINE - —+ S t t.TY ` 40 ►p SG 14ep/o l F;2STJ FL. Et_EV 142,00 LU i 4w 4-1 0 v. t ► 4;1. s / -To T t. �a XcUb.-T itv N 4- 7 �, �O G • �t7� > }. 141.25 -TO T�- Za 4 Gu. s� r� �o o ) 4 Z , p J 141 • o , � � Z � � O T � L- Y `f F I t-4 tr 'TC I A E. t i \ y, � f' � an w \ i \ W (� fig �' GJ �Fi -iGi�o �2Cvk'l-,. /✓alSi k� t LU % Il Q v c.�ztY AN o \� Y �c a v ter. 1 ; : z 14G.45`' �, \ ` (•�J U C) 51✓.GT 10 ti N c� I 'r � 1 "= 2 d' �+C)�. - U � P-T ,� ', ' S _ a _ i N > > L.LJ Z d x 2.Ln U= = — Iex15•-tt nrW-ACG l±xtS". > 40 5 ' —� r 7Q — 1 �•corllG S`Lab 'rA\fEtitF-N7 / ! J ' — - — _ �_ i / 1 I j I ! jJZ . Fj\ ` { �i?i • o / \ i �2 LLJ Ln -- — -- -- QtaC+.t�.b".1..'I. NEw Gym -�--- �--- _ hh j.. ;` I -- -- ----- x 18 LU N oS 1800 —1 Go" p yG' J .. / i i 14ja , 0 \.� a �3 L.LJ O F Z �/ c — GJ Cti-THR-c_) DtZ1\,'F-\\/4-r C>NE 4't=So (40.3 - i34,o �� r)LU U i �i 10 « - tZaryt >:.rtc. 4 col `� r--- r: I {g1.75 Inr�ZO - Iv Zo 300 5o coo.7v %3 P r �?✓ I'8• co S�C7lDN �T'► Rr� l�fzl�l\V WO1�=20' MA`"c_�f �cI�,Y ��_,� �� 0 �. \p�A.tt, a 5-� �:.Nr�7c� �r' %�R.il� :'GoN Ira o _ 38,a C CoN'T► Nuo� F'-•.TO '�J<Ci�/ 'S(orJ St.��Gy ¢AcIL t4o•o �' Q AT: { ..1: e,a z To V FAT .a.s' tJ EG ESSG tz.-��;: Tor D. R Fj /� �� ' .. _ O = • 1 ( Isz N T I Z;� GDht "j` 2:u �' I rd �. '+o, P6 Os' > • i. St_OP'� .� � 02 .r.. sue. �;c;� occ v �S: ; . - �5: ovE>z- t=xcp.�P-r aN: w eT �doY ! % ':%'� -r• T s s'rM AS 1 N A�N,Y ��✓Zti bF�EA• oNE HNa ty i •r_. tS , a Y , TH .4Ut�4�R`(..SQid►..�.5,.. � "TaQ Ico . 9 5 ¢' �KAMINS. �o'rINC EXCAyca,'TIONS ONt7'IZeMO�/� r \ l ' g: ¢�� .u►,iSutTA,c..�. Ma'(Eiztat.,Pt:�+.G� 1. O # G-�� Gj RSzY. �a.LLS olZ\VL�S•r��'f2adV1�V� T , 0 STREET#LE OWNER'S LIABILITY LANDSLIDE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DECLARATION TO THE.CITY OF EDMONDS, WA Recelveo .FED U 3 1993 PERMIT COUNTER Whereas Richard H. Rhydes, Architect licensed in the State of Washington, has been retained by Mary K. Neering, M.D. to provide construction documents for a residence located on Lot 7, Lorian Woods'PRD, Edmonds, WA; Whereas the said property is located in an area designated "Earth Subsidence/Landslide Hazard Areal by the City of Edmonds, Washington; Whereas Architect Rhydes and his consultants have prepared drawings and designed the residence in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington and the ordinances of the City of Edmonds; and certain Earth Subsidence maps and reports required and provided by the City of Edmonds and private geotechnical consultants; Now therefore Mary K. Neering does hereby acknowledge and declare: That Architect Rhydes and his consultants have drawn their own conclusions regarding information contained in the Earth Subsidence/Landslide Hazard reports and maps provided by the City of Edmonds; That the accuracy of all permit submittal information is warranted by Mary K. Neering and does herebyrelieve the City of Edmonds and City Staff individuals from any liability associated with reliance on such permit application submittals; That Mary K. Neering understands and accepts the risk of building a residence in an area with unstable soils and that she will advise, in writing, any prospective purchasers of the site, or any prospective lessees of structures or portions of a structure on the site, of the slide potential of the area. Signed Mary K. Neering M.D. Subsc ibed and sworn before me this day of 1993. _ Notary Public in and for the State Qf Wash�Lngt�esiding at �r%v�E11C �,- T� I I — — — — -— — — a --- ! —' Vi_ - — I I - ----'— 1 -- --- '-`----- - 1 1 --�-- -'--- -- I _� -'I__r—.---+---I�-__f-- i-�-__--" ! _ .s 7-Ib iN�tV�--r SM MY 60 I FREEL/1MD. WA 98249 f e. ow i Gt.T_ I I I I I _ AtiI CA-) S'' --+- - I r-y---}-�- r - -+- -- j-i-----a - �--- -- f 44 pow IN , -i , I I , I• , , I i -- _ C , , 1- - t- - -- -� —�--� I _ l_ I � , , -i I---- -.. _._' _+ 1. �-- -- -__i- i- - F --I•-- --;• +---'----1.------ - � I '---'---- - - 1 , I j , 10. If deemed necessary by the City, the Applicant shall provide traffic control during removal of the grading material. 11. Development of individual lots shall be subject to environ- mental review and compliance pursuant to Chapter 19.05 of the ECDC. All permits and any geotechnical reports attendant to the permit, shall be subject to review by the City of Edmonds Consulting Soils Engineer. 12. The entrance road to the site shall be moved 10 feet to the west o provide adequate sight distances to the east onto . Meadowdale Road. 13. The issue of the allowance of open pools on site shall be reviewed by the Engineering Department. If it is determined that the soils are adequate to provide for such a system, it is recom- mended -that they be approved. All open pools and the pool and trail s stems shall be subject to Architectural Design Board review. 14. All trails on site shall be hand -cleared to minimize disruption of vegetation. 15. The Applicants and the City shall cooperate in determining what vegetation on site may be removed. The final authority on the removal of vegetation and landscaping for the site shall belong to the Architectural Design Board. The final plat shall include language ensuring the preservation of the common open space area. 16. All exposed slopes shall be revegetated upon completion of grading. This shall be done immediately. 17. The development shall conform to the recommendations foun the report of Terra Associates, Inc., dated 6/6/89, and any rec mendations of the City Soils Engineer, Landau Associates. 18. The Applicants shall dedicate right-of-way along N. Meadowdale Road, pursuant to ordinance 18.53: This dedication shall be re- quired with the final recording of the PRD/subdivision. 19. A- public walkway shall be constructed along the N. Meadowdale Road right-of-way in a manner acceptable to the City. 20. Permanent open space shall be designated on the face of the final plat. r BYLAWS OF LORIAN WOODS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION A NON-PROFIT CORPORATION FORMED PURSUANT TO RCW CHAPTER 24.03 ARTICLE I NAME AND LOCATION The name of the corporation is Lorian Woods Homeowners Association (hereinafter referred to as the "Association"). The principal office of the corporation shall be located at 7370 North Meadowdale Road, Edmonds, Washington 98026, but meetings of Members and directors may be held at such places within the State of Washington, County of Snohomish, as may be designated by the Board of Directors. ARTICLE II DEFINITIONS Section 1. Association shall mean and refer to Lorian Woods Homeowners Association, its successors, and assigns. Section 2. Property shall mean and refer to that certain real property described in the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions recorded in the office of the Snohomish County Auditor and such additions thereto as may hereafter be brought within the jurisdiction of the Association. Section 3. Common Area shall mean all real property owned by the Association for the common use and enjoyment of the Owners. Section 4. jot shall mean and refer to any plot of land shown upon any recorded subdivision map of the Property with the exception of.the Common Area. Section 5. Owner shall mean and refer to the record owner, whether one or more persons or entities, of a fee simple title to any Lot which is a part of the Property, and contract purchasers, excluding those having such interest merely as a security for performance of an obligation and excluding contract sellers. "Owner" shall also include one or more persons or entities holding a leasehold interest in any Lot. Section 6. Declaration shall mean and refer to the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions applicable to the Property as recorded in the office of the Snohomish.County Auditor, Everett, Washington, as it now exists or is hereafter amended. Section 7. Member shall mean every owner of a Lot which is subject to assessment by the Association. ARTICLE III MEETING OF MEMBERS Section 1. Annual Meetings. The first annual meeting of the Members shall be held on the second Wednesday in October 1991 and each subsequent regular annual meeting of the Members shall be held on the second Wednesday in October during each year thereafter, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. Unless stated otherwise, the meeting shall be held at the registered office of the Association. If the day for the annual meeting of the Members is a legal holiday, the meeting shall be held at the same hour on the first day following which is not a legal holiday. Section 2. Special -Meeting . Special meetings of the Members may be called at any time by the president or by a majority of the Board of Directors, or upon written request of the Members who are entitled to vote one-fourth (1/4) of all the votes. Section 3. Notice of Meetings. Written notice of each meeting of the Members shall be given by, or at the direction of, the secretary or person authorized to call the meeting by mailing a copy of such notice by first class mail, postage prepaid, to each Member not less than fifteen (15) days nor more than fifty (50) days in advance of the meeting. Notice sent in this manner shall be considered delivered three (3) business days following deposit in the U. S. mail. Such notice shall be addressed to the Member's address last appearing on the books of the Association, or supplied by such Member to the Association for the purpose of notice. Such notice shall specify the place, day, and hour of the meeting, and in the case of a special meeting, the purpose of the meeting. Section 4. Ouorum. The presence at the meeting of Members entitled to cast, or of proxies entitled to cast, twenty percent (20%) of the votes of the membership shall constitute a quorum for any action except as otherwise provided in the Articles of Incorporation, the Declaration, or these Bylaws now in effect or hereafter amended. If the required quorum is not present, another meeting may be called subject to the same notice requirements, and the required quorum at the subsequent meeting shall be one-half (1/2) of the required quorum at the preceding meeting. If a third meeting or additional meetings must be BYLAWS - Page 2 scheduled in order to attempt to have a quorum present, such third or additional meeting shall not be held more than fifty (50) days following the preceding meeting. Section 5. Proxies. At all meetings of Members, each Member may vote in person or by proxy. All proxies shall be in writing and filed with the secretary prior to the commencement of any meeting for which the proxy is in effect. Every proxy shall be revocable and shall automatically cease upon conveyance by the Member of his lot. Section 6. Voting Rights. An owner shall have one (1) vote for his lot, whether improved or not: PROVIDED, however, that if an owner owns more than one (1) lot he shall nevertheless have only one (1) total vote. When more than one (1) person is an owner of a lot, all such owners shall be Members. The vote for each lot shall be exercised as the owners, between or among themselves, for any purpose, determine. In no event shall more than (1) vote be cast with respect to any lot. In the event that the majority of owners of any lot disagree between or among themselves as to how the one (1) vote for the lot shall be exercised with respect to a pending matter, any one of the owners of such lot may deliver written notice of such dispute to the - president or secretary of the Association and the vote for that lot shall then be disregarded completely with respect to the matter or matters before the Association at that meeting. The right to vote may not be severed or separated from any lot, and any sale, transfer, or conveyance of said property interest to a new owner or owners shall operate the transfer of the appurtenant vote without the requirement of any express reference thereto. ARTICLE IV BOARD OF DIRECTORS: SELECTION; TERM OF OFFICE Section 1. dumber. The affairs of the Association shall be initially managed by a Board of two (2) directors who need not be Members of the Association. At the first annual meeting of the Association the number of directors shall be five (5) and that number shall continue until changed by the Board of Directors or the Members. No reduction in the number of directors shall serve to reduce the term of any director otherwise elected or appointed, but this provision shall not preclude removal pursuant to Article IV, Section 4, of these Bylaws.. Section 2. Term of Office. At the first annual meeting the Members shall elect two (2) directors for a term of two (2) years and three (3) directors for a term of three (3) years. The length of the term of each director shall be determined by drawing lots. Beginning at the third annual meeting and each annual meeting thereafter, the Members shall elect directors for BYLAWS - Page 3 • three-year terms in such number as necessary to fill the positions of the Board. Section 3. Vacancies. If at any time a vacancy in the Board of Directors shall occur, the Board of Directors.shall fill the position and the new director shall remain a director for the remaining term of the director who is replaced, unless such director is removed, resigns, or is unable to complete a term for which elected. Section 4. Removal. (aj Ar. di rector n,av be removed from the Board, with or without cause, by a majority vote of the Members of the Association. (b) No removal shall be valid unless the director so removed is given prior written notice that such director's removal is an item of business at either the annual meeting or a special meeting. The notice shall be given along with the notice of the meeting as specified in Article III, Section 3, of these Bylaws. Section 5. Compensation. No director shall receive compensation for any service he may render to the Association; however, any director may be reimbursed for the director's actual expenses incurred in the performance of the director's duties. ARTICLE V NOMINATION AND ELECTION OF DIRECTORS Section 1. Nomination. Nomination for election to the Board of Directors shall be made by a Nominating Committee. Nominations shall also be accepted from the floor at the annual meeting. The Nominating Committee shall consist of a chairman, who shall be a member of the Board of Directors, and two (2) or more Members of the Association. The Nominating Committee shall be appointed by the Board of Directors at least sixty (60) days prior to the annual meeting and shall serve until a successor Nominating Committee is appointed at least sixty (60) days prior to each ensuing annual meeting. The Nominating Committee shall make as many nominations for election to the Board of Directors as it shall in its discretion determine but not less than the number of vacancies that are to be filled. Section 2. E eection. Election to the Board of Directors shall be by secret written ballot. 'At such election the Members or their proxies may cast in respect to each vacancy as many votes as they are entitled to exercise pursuant to these Bylaws but cumulative voting is not permitted. BYLAWS - Page 4 ARTICLE VI MEETING OF DIRECTORS Section 1. Regular -Meeting . Regular meetings of the Board of Directors shall be held without notice at such place and hour as may be fixed from time to time by resolution of the Board. Should said meeting fall upon a legal holiday, then that meeting shall be held at the same time of the next day which is not a legal holiday. Section 2. Special Meetinas. Special meetings of the Board of Directors shall be held when called by the president of the Association or by any two (2) directors after not less than three (3) days notice to each director. Section 3. ouorum. A majority of the number of directors shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Every act or decision done or made by a majority of the directors present at a duly held meeting at which a quorum is present shall be regarded as the act of the Board. Section 4. Action Taken Without a Meeting. The directors shall have the right to take any action in the absence of a meeting which they could take at a meeting by obtaining the written approval of all the directors. Any action so approved shall have the same effect as though taken at a meeting of the directors. Section 5. Meetings by Telephone. The Board shall have the right to meet by telephonic communication under conditions such that each board member is able to hear all discussion being offered by every other member of the Board participating in the meeting. This provision shall not eliminate the requirement for a quorum of the Board. ARTICLE VII POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS Section 1. Powers. The Board of Directors shall have the power to: (a) do all things necessary and proper for carrying into execution the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions of the Declaration; (b) adopt and publish rules and regulations governing the use of the Common Area and facilities, and the personal conduct of the Members and their guests thereon, and to establish penalties for infractions thereof; BYLAWS - Page 5 0 (c) suspend voting rights and the right to use the Common Area or facilities during any period in which such Member shall be in default in the payment of any annual assessment, special assessment, or charge established by the Association, or of any Member or person to whom the use is delegated when such Member or person is found to be violating any of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions of the Declaration or of any rule published by the Board of Directors and when such suspension would not be contrary to the provisions of the Declaration. Such rights shall not be suspended except after a hearing and such suspension shall not remain in effect after the board determines the Member's conduct is in compliance with all Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions of the Declaration and published rules; PROVIDED, no hearing shall be necessary because of a Member's failure to timely pay any annual assessment, special assessment, or charge. (d) exercise for the Association all powers, duties, and authority vested in or delegated to the Association and the Board and not reserved to the Members by any other provision of these Bylaws, the Articles of Incorporation, or the Declaration; (e) declare the office of a member of the Board of Directors to be vacant in the event such member shall be absent from three (3) consecutive regular meetings of the Board of Directors; and (f) elect such officers as are prescribed by these Bylaws or as established by the Board of Directors pursuant to these Bylaws; (g) employ or hire such employees or engage such contractors as the Board deems necessary and prescribe their duties on terms that the Board shall determine. Such employees may include a manager, landscape gardener, and maintenance persons. Section 2. Duties. It shall be the duty of the Board of Directors to: (a) cause to be kept a complete record of all the acts of the Board and the Association's affairs and present a statement thereof to the Members at the annual meeting of the Members or at any special meeting of the Members which is called for the purpose of receiving such a report; (b) supervise all officers, employees, contractors, and agents of the Association and see that their duties are properly performed; (c) as more fully provided in the Declaration, to: BYLAWS - Page 6 0 (1) fix the amount of the annual assessment against each lot at least forty five (45) days in advance of each annual assessment period; (2) send written notice of each assessment to every owner subject thereto at least thirty (30) days in advance of the date each annual assessment, special assessment, or charge is due; (3) to foreclose any lien against the property for which any assessment or charge has not been paid within thirty (30) days after the due date or bring an action at law or equity against the owner personally obligated to pay the same; (4) to bring an action at law or in equity to enforce any of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions of the Declaration when such Declaration requires such action or if such action is discretionary to exercise its discretion and take appropriate action. (d) issue or cause an appropriate officer to issue upon demand by any person, a certificate setting forth whether or not any assessment has been paid. A reasonable charge may be made by the Board of Directors for the issuance of these certificates. If a certificate states an assessment has been paid, such certificate shall be presumed to be final evidence of payment; (e) procure and maintain adequate liability and hazard insurance on property owned by the Association; (f) cause all officers or employees having fiscal responsibilities to be bonded, as it may deem appropriate; (g) cause the Common Area to be maintained; and (h) do all things required of the Board by the Declaration. ARTICLE VIII OFFICERS AND THEIR DUTIES Section 1. Enumeration of Officers. The officers of this Association shall be a president and vice-president who shall at all times be members of the Board of Directors, a secretary, a treasurer, and such other officers as the Board may from time to time by resolution create. BYLAWS - Page 7 0 Section 2. election of Officers. The election of officers shall take place at the first meeting of the Board of Directors following each annual meeting of the Members. Section 3. Term. The officers of this Association shall be elected annually by the Board and each shall hold office for one (1) year unless he shall sooner resign, shall be removed, or otherwise disqualified to serve. Section 4. Snecial Appointments. The Board may elect such other officers as the affairs of the Association may require, each of whom shall hold office for such period, have such authority, and perform such duties as the Board may from time to time decide. Section 5. Resignation and Removal. Any officer may be removed from office with or without cause.by,the Board. Any officer may resign at any time by giving written notice to the Board, the president, or the secretary. Such resignation shall take effect on the date of receipt of such notice or at any later time specified therein, and unless otherwise specified therein, the acceptance of such resignation shall not be necessary to make it .effective. Section 6. Vacancies. A vacancy in any office may be filled by election by the Board. The officer elected to such vacancy shall serve for the remainder of the term of the officer he replaces. Section 7. Multiple Offices. The offices of secretary and treasurer may be held by the same person. No person shall simultaneously hold more than one of any of the other offices except in the case of special offices created pursuant to Section 4 of this Article. Section 8. Duties. The duties of the officers are as follows: PRESIDENT (a) The President shall preside at all meetings of the Board of Directors and Members; shall see that orders and resolutions of the Board are carried out; shall sign all leases, mortgages, deeds, and other written instruments, and shall co-sign all - checks and promissory notes. VICE-PRESIDENT (b) The vice-president shall act in the place and stead of the president in the event of his absence, inability, or refusal BYLAWS - Page 8 to act and shall exercise and discharge such other duties as may be required of 'him by the Board. SECRETARY (c) The secretary shall record the votes and keep the minutes of all meetings and proceedings of the Board and of the Members; keep the corporate seal of the Association if the Board determines a seal should be obtained and affix such seal to all papers requiring said seal; mail notice of meetings of the Board and of the Members; keep appropriate current records showing the Members of the Association together with their addresses; and perform such other duties as required by the Board. TREASURER (d) The treasurer shall receive and deposit in appropriate bank accounts all monies of the Association and shall disburse such funds as directed by resolution of the Board of Directors; shall sign all checks and promissory notes of the Association; keep proper books of account; cause an annual audit of the Association's books to be made by a public accountant at the completion of each fiscal year; and shall prepare an annual budget and a statement of income and expenditures to be presented to the membership at its regular annual meeting and deliver a copy of each to the Members. ARTICLE IX COMMITTEES The Association shall appoint an Architectural Control Committee, as provided in the Declaration, and a Nominating Committee, as provided in these Bylaws. In addition, the Board of Directors shall appoint other committees as deemed appropriate in carrying out its purpose. ARTICLE X BOOKS AND RECORDS The books, records, and papers of the Association shall at all times during reasonable business hours be subject to inspection by any Member. The Declaration, the Articles of Incorpration, and the Bylaws of the Association shall be available for inspection by any Member at the principal office of the Association where copies may be purchased at a reasonable cost. BYLAWS - Page 9 0 ARTICLE XI ASSESSMENTS As more fully provided in the Declaration, each Member is obligated to pay to the Association annual and special assessments which are secured by a continuing lien against the property on which the assessment is made. Any assessment which is not paid when due shall be delinquent. If the assessment is not paid within thirty (30) days after the due date, the Board shall decide the collection measures to be taken pursuant to these Bylaws, the Articles of Incorporation, and the Declaration which action may include foreclosure of the lien, an action at law, and/or the suspension of voting privileges and the privilege of using the Common Area. The non-use of any of the Common Area or abandonment of a lot shall not excuse any owner from liability for such assessments or charges. ARTICLE XII CORPORATE SEAL If the Board of Directors determines a corporate seal is necessary, such seal shall be in a circular form having within its circumference the words: Lorian Woods Homeowners Association. ARTICLE XIII AMENDMENT Section 1. These Bylaws may be amended by the Board of Directors or by the Members at a regular or special meeting of the Members by a vote of a majority of a quorum of the Members present in person or by proxy. No change in the Bylaws by the Members shall be valid unless notice of the proposed change is included in the notice of the regular meeting or special meeting at which the proposed amendment is to be considered. Section 2. In the case of any conflict between the Articles of Incorporation and these Bylaws, the Articles shall control to the extent allowed by law. In the case of any conflict between the Declaration and the Articles of Incorporation, the Declaration shall control to the extent allowed by law. In case of any conflict between the Declaration and these Bylaws, the Declaration shall control to the extent allowed by law. BYLAWS - Page 10 ARTICLE XIV FISCAL YEAR The fiscal year of the Association shall begin on the first day of January and end of the 31st day of December of every year, except that the first fiscal year shall begin on the date of incorporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we, being all the directors of Lorian Wopgls Homeowners c ation have hereunto set our hands this -� day of __ _-------� 1990. 1 ---------- ---------- ----------------- J ann M. Anderson bert A. Anderson BYLAWS - Page 11 �ibert A• /30QaM M . hL UIPS64. '� Viva do..r da 6rd �.♦,,� ds , WA 4 8e 44 DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR THE PLAT OF LORIAN WOODS, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 0 THIS DECLARATION is made on the date hereinafter set forth by Robert A. Anderson and Joann M. Anderson, husband and wife, the owners of all that certain real property contained within the Plat of Lorian Woods, Edmonds, CrJ Washington, whicfxplat has been recorded in Volume 5:1 of Plats, pages �.gthrough , records of Snohomish County, Washington, (sometimes referred to hereinafter as "the Property"). 9010165006 Declarants hereby declare that all of the Property shall be held, sold and ^� conveyed subject . to the following easements, restrictions, covenants, conditions, r..l reservations, charges, and liens (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Covenants"), ..� all of which are for the purpose of enhancing and protecting the value, desirability and attractiveness of the Property. The covenants shall run with and burden the Property and shall be binding upon all of the parties having or acquiring any right, title, or interest in the Property or any part thereof and shall be binding upon their heirs, successors, and assigns, and shall inure to the benefit of each owner thereof. ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS 1.1 "Association" shall mean and refer to Lorian Homeowners' Association, a non-profit corporation organized under the laws of the State of Washington, its successors and assigns, organized and established to preserve and maintain the private drive, common areas and lots within the Property and to promote the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the Property. The term, Lorian, will refer to Lorian Woods. 1.2 "Declarants" shall mean Robert A. Anderson and Joann M. Anderson, his wife, and their heirs. 1.3 "Owner" shall mean and refer to the record owner, whether one or more persons or entities, of a fee simple title to any lot which is a part of the Property, and contract purchasers, excluding those having such interest merely as a security for performance of an obligation and excluding contract sellers. "Owner" shall also include any person or persons or entities holding a leasehold interest in any lot. 1.4 "Properties" and "Property" shall mean and refer to all that certain real property located within the Plat of Lorian. 1.5 "Common area" shall mean any and all real property owned by the Association for the common use and enjoyment of the Owners, including the lawn and gardens (Tract A of the Plat of Lorian), private drive (Tract B of the Plat of Lorian other than any streets or other areas hereafter dedicated to public use), walkways, greenbelts, and reserve areas. The common areas to be owned by the Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 1 9U 10 x60 3 5 6 Vol.. Z��SWAGEI��0-1 Association at the time of conveyance of the first properties are described in Exhibit "A" which is attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if fully set forth. 1.6 "Lot" shall mean and refer to any plot of land shown upon the recorded Plat of Lorian recorded with the _Snohomish County Auditor, and any additions thereto as may hereinafter be brought within the jurisdiction of the Association, excluding the common areas. Each separate platted lot counts as one Lot, even if it is combined with others under one ownership. 1.7 "Member" shall mean any person or entity holding membership in the Association and as further defined in Section 3.1. 1.8 "Development period" shall mean that period Declarants need to sell or assign nine (9) of the lots depicted on the Plat, or any shorter period as determined by Declarants, but no longer period than that ending December 31, 1995. 1.9 "Plat" shall mean the Plat of Lorian, as recorded with the Snohomish County Auditor. 1.10 Use of the singular herein shall include reference to the plural, and vice versa, and use of the masculine gender shall include reference to the feminine. ARTICLE II RESTRICTIONS ON USE OF PROPERTY BY OCCUPANTS 2.1 Permitted Uses. No lot within Lorian shall be used for any purpose except as hereafter permitted in this Section 2.1. No building or structure shall be erected, altered, placed, or permitted to remain on Lots 1 through 10 inclusively other than one detached single-family dwelling per lot, one (1) accessory building of not more than one hundred (100) square feet in area, per lot, and a private garage for not more than three cars per lot. All building designs are subject to approval of the Architectural Control Committee. 2.2 No Temporary Dwellings or Buildings. No trailer, basement, camper, tent, shack, garage, barn, other outbuilding, mobile home, recreational vehicle, or any other structure of a temporary character shall be used on any lot as either a temporary or permanent residence or for any other use. 2.3 Nuisance. No noxious or offensive activity or noise shall be carried on upon any lot or other portion of the Property, nor shall anything be done thereon which is or may become an annoyance or nuisance. No industrial or commercial use shall be conducted on or in any lot. 2.4 Derogation of Laws. No owner shall carry on any activity of any nature whatsoever on the Property that is in derogation or violation of the laws or Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 2 tit► 01 S0 PAGEO005 0 . 0 statutes of the State of Washington, Snohomish County, the City of Edmonds, or other applicable governmental body. 2.5 Construction. All structures shall be of new construction (except used brick, siding, or similar decorative materials may be used), and construction thereon shall not be commenced until a building permit from the appropriate public agency is obtained, together with architectural control approval as provided in Article VII. No prefabricated dwellings shall be permitted. 2.6 Dates of Completion of Construction and Landscaping. The work of construction of all building and structures shall be prosecuted diligently and continuously from commencement of construction until the structures are fully completed and painted. Unless an extension of time is granted in writing by the Architectural Control Committee (see Article 7.1) for good cause shown, all structures shall be completed in external appearance, including finishing, painting, or staining, within two hundred seventy (270) days from the date of commencement of construction, except concrete foundations or posts, piers or other supports, provided they are screened from view. Landscaping, as required under Article VII hereof, shall be completed within six (6) months of the date of completion of construction of an owner's dwelling. 2.7 Debris Control. All lots shall be maintained in a reasonably presentable condition. Debris, weeds, or other waste material ("debris") shall be removed or controlled on all lots, whether vacant or improved. If any owner does not remove or control debris within thirty (30) days after written notice to such owner from the Association, the Association shall have the right to enter onto the lot and remove or control the debris. The Association's costs of such removal or control shall be charged to the owner and shall be a continuing lien upon the lot, as well as the personal obligation of the owner, and such lien may be foreclosed in accordance with Article IV hereof. 2.8 Garbage. No garbage, refuse, or rubbish shall be deposited or kept on any lot except in suitable covered containers which shall be secured, fastened and protected from animals and screened or obscured from view by public and neighboring lots and shall be regularly hauled by or for the owner to a public or other suitable dump site, not within the Property. This does not apply to compost containers. All equipment for the storage or disposal of trash, garbage, or other waste shall be kept in a clean and sanitary condition. 2.9 Animals. No animals, livestock or poultry of any kind shall be raised, bred or kept on any lot. Except that a maximum of three (3) dogs, cats or other conventional household pets is allowed per lot, provided they are not kept, bred or maintained for any commercial purposes. The owner shall observe and obey all laws applicable to a resident of Snohomish County and City of Edmonds, Washington, pertaining to the care, control, and husbandry of animals and pets. 2.10 Parking Restrictions. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Association, at no time after completion of construction of the owner's dwelling shall an owner keep or permit to be kept on any property or lot any house trailer, truck, camper, mobile home, boat trailer, boat, or any other motor vehicle unless Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 3 `� VOL. �386FAGEOJ 36 housed within a garage or screened from view from streets, parking areas, and surrounding properties. See provisions for automobile parking in Article 2.15. 2.11 Clothesline. All exterior clotheslines shall be obscured from public view, and no article of clothing, or household linen, towels, or similar items, shall be permitted to hang on balconies, fences, or in view from the streets, parking areas, and other lots in the plat. 2.12 Guests. All owners are responsible at all times for the conduct of their guests, and the Association shall have the right to adopt rules and regulations with respect to the use of the Property, including common areas, by guests. 2.13 Noisy Vehicles. Motorcycles, motor bikes, trail bikes, or similar vehicles, are prohibited on all walkways and paths of the Property, whether licensed or unlicensed. Non -muffled motor vehicles of any type are prohibited. 2.14 Signs. No sign of any kind shall be displayed to public view or the view from the other lots on the Property except for the following: 2.14.1 A sign, no larger than five (5) square feet, advertising the lot or unit for sale or rent; or 2.14.2 The signs used by a builder or builders to advertise the lot or unit during construction and sales periods; or 2.14.3 Such signs as may be required by law or by any legal proceeding. 2.14.4 A sign, no larger than five (5) square feet, showing the owners' name and/or street number. 2.15 Parkine. Each lot owner shall provide sufficient parking for at least one automobile for each bedroom by one of the following means: 2.15.1 A garage, either attached to or detached from the main structure; 2.15.2 A paved exterior parking area. 2.16 Antennae. As long as cable television service is provided, no radio or television antennae shall be allowed. If cable TV is not available, the following provisions will be in effect. No radio or television antennae or transmitters shall exceed ten (10) feet above the roof ridge line of a dwelling, and no separate towers for such antennae or transmitters shall be permitted; provided, however, that the Architectural Control Committee may further restrict or forbid the erection of any antennae if it detracts from any of the lots or common area. No satellite dishes will be permitted at any time. The ten (10) foot height is permissible only if it is not within the view of any other house on the property. 2.17 Fires. There shall be no exterior fires whatsoever except barbecue and as controlled by the applicable governmental authority; provided, however, that exterior fires may be permitted during the construction of a dwelling on a lot by written permission of the Architectural Control Committee and the City of Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 4 Edmonds. Fireplaces or stoves within houses or other permitted buildings shall not be used to burn trash, debris or discarded materials except wood which has not been treated with chemicals of any kind. 2.18 Automobile Repair and Maintenance. There shall be no major overhaul repair performed on automobiles or other vehicles. Any automobile or other vehicle deemed to be in an inoperative condition in excess of three days and which causes an undesirable effect on the Property may be removed by action of the Association at the cost of the owner. 2.19 Oil and Mining Operations. No oil drilling, oil development operations, oil refining, quarry or mining operations of any kind shall be permitted on or in any of the Property, nor shall oil wells, tunnels, mineral excavations or shafts be permitted on or in any of the Property. 2.20 Easements. There is reserved to the Declarants and to the Board of Directors of the Association, their agents and employees, an easement in gross over each and every lot (all of which lots shall constitute the servient tenement) for entry and access at reasonable times and places for maintenance and construction of common areas, and for the performance generally of all their rights and duties as provided in this Declaration. 2.21 Exterior Maintenance. Each owner shall be obligated to provide exterior maintenance, including maintenance of landscaping and vegetation, of his lot. Such maintenance shall include that area from the edge of the paving of the street serving the lot to the opposite lot line, and shall further include the planting and maintaining of grass and/or approved landscape plants in the area between the side lot lines and extending from the edge of the paving of the street serving the lot to the opposite lot line. In the event an owner shall fail to maintain his lot and improvements situated thereon in a manner satisfactory to the Board of Directors of the Association, after approval of a two-thirds majority vote by the Board of Directors, the Association shall have the right, through its agents and employees, to enter upon said lot to repair, maintain and/or restore the property and the exterior of the buildings and any improvements erected thereon. The cost of such work shall be added to and be a part of the assessment to which the lot is subject, and, if unpaid, shall become a lien pursuant to Article IV which may be enforced according to Section 9.1. 2.22 Weapons. No firearms of any kind or nature including bows, slingshots, BB guns, air rifles, slings, traps, or any other like weapon shall be used within the Property except by appropriate governmental officials. 2.23 Protection of Views. No shrubs, trees, or bushes shall be planted nor shall any existing shrubs, trees, or bushes be allowed to grow to a height or structure installed which impairs the view of the waters of Puget Sound, the Kitsap Peninsula, Whidbey Island, and the Olympic Mountains from any property within the plat. Neither will any structure be allowed to be built which impairs the view, of the waters of Puget Sound, the Kitsap Peninsula, Whidbey Island, and the Olympic Mountains from any property within the plat. Pruning and selective tree removal on individual lots may be permitted by the Board of Directors if the Board of Directors decides such removal does not impact the general appearance of any individual lot. Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 5 � 63 VOL. `i Wj PAGE � � � Procedures for pruning or selective tree removal are described in the following section. The common areas shall be used as green belts and for recreational purposes. The common areas shall tie maintained in a controlled natural state subject to recommended wood lot management practices. Main trails through common areas will be developed and maintained for access to the common areas. Replanting of trees and shrubs may be made to enhance the nature of the common areas and will emphasize native plants which have controlled growth patterns. 2.24 Tree Cutting and Limbing; Procedures. The following procedures shall apply to both common areas and individual lots. Owners will contact all other property owners and inform them of their plans. Owners shall obtain a tree cutting or limbing permit from the Board of Directors. Owners shall mark trees with surveyors ribbon approximately six feet above the ground. Surveyor's ribbon will be supplied by Board of Directors at time of application. . Owners shall inform the Directors and other owners of the following: a. Number of trees to be cut and reasons for cutting. b. Numbers of trees to be limbed and reasons for limbing. c. Type of trees involved. d. Location of trees involved. e. Proposed method of cutting or thinning. f. Ongoing maintenance plan for thinned trees. Owners shall make copies of a map available for other owners showing the locations of trees to be cut or limbed in relation to streets, lot boundaries, houses, and other amenities. If the City of Edmonds has a tree ordinance, owners shall also comply with the provisions of that ordinance. The Board of Directors may require a deposit for tree cutting or limbing, but shall inform all owners before doing so. Such deposit would ensure proper tree removal, cutting of branches, painting of cut trees (if desired), and clean up, and would be refunded when these tasks are completed. The permits will be valid for six (6) months and may be extended for three (3) months by the Board of Directors. No cut material shall be left in the common areas unless authorized by the Board of Directors. (See also Article II, Section 2.7 on Debris Control.) The owner agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Lorian Board of Directors, and any person serving at the request of the Board from any and all actions, claims, damages, liabilities, and other expenses caused by or related to any activity incident to the permission granted under the permit. Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 6 #tII()"I4�(IR-C�f C. 38 VOL. UPAuEUJ.3y ARTICLE III THE ASSOCIATION 3.1 Membership. Every owner of a lot which is subject to assessment by the Association shall be a member of the Association. 3.2 Voting Rights. An owner shall have one (1) vote for his lot, whether improved or not; provided, however, that if an owner owns more than one lot, he shall nevertheless have only one (1) total vote. When more than one person is an owner of a lot, all such owners shall be members. The vote for each lot shall be exercised as the owners, among themselves, for any purpose, determine. In no event shall more than one vote be cast with respect to any lot. In the event that the owners of any lot disagree among themselves as to how the one vote for the lot shall be exercised with respect to a pending matter, any such person may deliver written notice of such dispute to the president or secretary of the Association, and the vote for that lot shall then be disregarded completely with respect to the matter or matters before the Association at that meeting. The right to vote may not be severed or separated from any lot, and any sale, transfer, or conveyance of said property interest to a new owner or owners shall operate to transfer the appurtenant vote without the requirement of any express reference thereto. ARTICLE IV ASSESSMENTS AND LIENS 4.1 Purpose of Assessments. A financially healthy Association, funded to provide a growth and income to match community needs and progress, is essential for continued enjoyment of the community lifestyle and for the protection of the owners' investment. The assessment levied by the Association shall be used exclusively to promote the recreation, health, safety, enjoyment, and welfare of the owners and for the improvement and maintenance of the common areas and like properties and insurance and taxes thereon. Assessments shall also include any additional charges determined by the Board of Directors to be owing by an owner because of action taken by the Board of Directors to enforce these covenants, conditions, and restrictions. 4.2 Duration of Lien and Personal Obligation of Assessment. Each owner of a lot with the Property hereby covenants, and each owner of any lot, by acceptance of a deed therefor or execution of a contract to purchase or a lease agreement or like document for a lot, whether or not it shall be so expressed in such document, is deemed to covenant and agree to pay to the Association annual assessments, special assessments, together with interest, and any cost and reasonable attorney's fees which may be a charge upon a lot, against which each assessment is made. Each assessment, together with interest, and any costs and reasonable attorney's fees which may be incurred to collect said assessments, shall be a continuing lien against the lot assessed and shall also be the personal obligation of Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 7 `.1.61)356 VOL. Z 2 8 6 PAGE 0;) 0 the person who is the owner of such property at the time when the assessment fell due. 4.3 Annual Assessment. 4.3.1 Lots. For one year following the date of this Declaration, the maximum assessment shall be determined within one month after common space landscaping is complete. In that time estimates will be obtained for maintenance and upkeep of the common spaces and each owner will be assessed one ninth of that amount, except Declarants. Assessments will be payable in advance, and thereafter as set forth in Section 4.3.2. 4.3.2 Maximum Assessment Rates. The assessment rate for owners of lots shall not be increased or decreased by the Board of Directors of the Association in excess of ten percent (10%) in any one year, except such rate may be increased or decreased in a greater amount by a two-thirds vote of a quorum of the owners whether voting in person or by proxy at a meeting called for that purpose. Any additional charges added to the lot by the Board of Directors for the purpose of enforcing these covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall not be considered part of such ten percent (10%) limitation. 4.3.3 The Board of Directors of the Association may fix the annual assessment in an amount not to exceed the maximum of the assessment rate set forth in Section 4.3.2. above. 4.4 Notice and Quorum for Any Action Authorized Noted Above Under Section 4.3. Written notice of any meeting called for the purpose of taking any action authorized under Section 4.3 shall be sent to all owners not less than fifteen (15) days nor more than fifty (50) days in advance of the meeting. Written notice shall be considered delivered three (3) business days following deposit in the U.S. mail by first class mail, postage prepaid. At the first meeting called, the presence of owners or their proxies entitled to cast twenty percent (20%) of all votes of the ownership shall constitute a quorum. If the required quorum is not present, another meeting may be called subject to the same notice requirements, and the required quorum at the subsequent meeting shall be one-half of the required quorum at the preceding meeting. If a third meeting or additional meeting must be scheduled in order to attempt to have a quorum present, such third or additional meeting shall not be held more than fifty (50) days following the preceding meeting. 4.5 Uniform Rate of Assessment. Annual assessments shall be fixed at a uniform rate for all lots and may be� collected on a monthly or quarterly basis as determined in advance by the Board of Directors of the Association. 4.6 Effect of Nonpayment of Assessments Special Assessment or Additional Charges --Remedies of the Association. Any assessment, special assessment, or charges established by the Board of Directors for failure of an owner to comply with these covenants, conditions, and restrictions not paid within thirty (30) days after the due date shall bear interest from the due date at the rate of Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 8 9U101.61. 356 VOL.238PAGE05�1 twelve percent (12%) per annum or at such other rate permitted by law which is established by the Board of Directors of the Association. The Association may bring an action at law or in equity against the owner personally obligated to pay the same or foreclose the lien against the lot and such charges, interests, costs, and reasonable attorney fees of such action shall be added to the amount of such assessment, special assessment, or additional- charges. Such lien may be foreclosed pursuant to RCW Chapter 60.12 or a non judicial foreclosure pursuant to RCW Chapter 61.24. 4.7 Establishment of Lien. Such amount as established pursuant to Section 4.6 shall constitute a lien against the property of the owner upon a notice of such lien being recorded with the Snohomish County Auditor. Such lien shall continue in effect until foreclosed upon or upon the expiration of the period for which a judgment lien is valid in the State of Washington, whichever is sooner. 4.8 Suspension. The Board of Directors of the Association shall have the power to suspend the voting rights and the right to use the common areas of any owner or persons to whom the owner has delegated use pursuant to Section 5.2 for any period during which an assessment, special assessment, or charge established pursuant to Section 4.6 remains unpaid or during any period in which the owner is in violation of any of these covenants, conditions, and restrictions or any published rule or regulation of the Association. 4.9 Exempt Property. The following property under this Declaration shall be exempt from assessments created herein: (a) all common area properties; (b) all Declarants' property, which shall include any unsold lots and lot 4. ARTICLE V PROPERTY RIGHTS 5.1 Owner's Easements of Enjoyment. Every owner shall have a right and non-exclusive easement of enjoyment in and to the common areas which shall be appurtenant to and shall pass with the title to every lot subject to the following provisions: 5.1.1 The right of the Association to suspend the voting rights and right to use of the common areas by an owner for a period as set forth herein; 5.1.2 The right of the Association to dedicate or transfer all or any part of the common areas to any public agency, authority or utility for such purposes and subject to such conditions as may be agreed to by the members. No such dedication or transfer shall be effective unless an instrument signed by two-thirds (2/3) of the owners agreeing to such Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 9 VOL. '238GPG0Ei1JL:2 ��1G()R51 dedication or transfers has been recorded with the Snohomish County Auditor; 5.1.3 The right of the Association to limit the number of guests of owners; 5.1.4 The Association may borrow money for the purpose of improving or maintaining the common areas and all the owners' property may be used to secure repayment of such money only with the written consent of two-thirds (2/3) of the owners. 5.1.5 The use of Community Paths shall be prohibited until adequate and safe access allowing ingress and egress is completed. Determination of completion shall be by Declarants. 5.2 Delegation of Use. Any owner of any lot may delegate, in accordance with the By-laws, his right of enjoyment to the common area and facilities to the members of his family or his tenants, guests or invitees, subject to the limitations herein and in the Articles of Incorporation, By-laws and rules and regulations of the Association. ARTICLE VI RESERVE PROPERTY AND EASEMENT 6.1 Utility Easement. Declarants reserve unto themselves the right to transfer title or to contract thereof or to lease or grant that property upon which utilities or drainage easements are located or are to be located (hereinafter "reserved common areas") or to grant, contract, or lease easements, rights or permits for utility service to any utility district, utility company, or public body for purposes of installation, maintenance, replacement or extension of utility services useful to the Property. Title to the reserved common areas is reserved to Declarants, to their heirs, successors, and assigns, until transferred to the Association or public body. Use or enjoyment of the reserved common areas for any purpose or uses by or for the owners is permissive only, and no rights by prescription or adverse possession as to the reserved common areas or any part thereof shall accrue in favor of any owner. ARTICLE VII ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL COMMITTEE 7.1 Establishment. An Architectural Control Committee of three persons shall be established by the Board of Directors of the Association. One member may be an architect who is not an owner, one of the two Declarants shall be a second member and the third member shall be from the Board. The Board member shall serve as chair of the Committee. Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 10 90 101.60 3 5 VOL. ` 6bPACE00 3 7.2 Structures. No building, fence, wall, pole, or structure of any kind shall be erected, placed, or altered on any lot, building site, or common area, within the Property until the plans, specifications, and plot plans thereof are submitted by the owner or his representative to the Architectural Control Committee and approved by the Committee. If such plans and specifications are disapproved (or, if conditionally approved, unless the conditions thereof be complied with) the project construction shall not be undertaken, or if undertaken, a violation hereof may be abated by legal proceedings by any party having an interest in the enforcement hereof irrespective of the time of completion thereof. Laches, estoppel, and the statute of limitations shall not be a defense to an action taken for the enforcement of any violation. The Architectural Control Committee shall in no way confirm or guarantee any assumed geological conditions, safety, or structural standards or construction methods. The Architectural Control Committee shall, in good faith, exercise discretionary approval or disapproval on the basis of minimizing. interference with enjoyment of adjacent properties, protecting property values, and enforcing improvement use and occupancy in a pleasing but not sterile or uniform combination. 7.3 Landscaping Plan. At the time of submittal of the plans and specifications required by section 7.2, an owner shall also submit a detailed landscaping plan for the subject lot showing the location and common name of all proposed plantings. Owners of lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 shall have the option of choosing the landscape plan for the strip of land between their lot and Lorian Drive. Owners of lots 8, 9, and 10 shall have the option of choosing the landscape plan for the strip of land between their lot and their access drives. (See Section 2.21, Exterior Maintenance.) Such landscaping shall be in accordance with the overall landscape plans of the surrounding common areas. If individual owners do not exercise this option, the Declarants will landscape these areas in accordance with the overall landscape plan of the common areas surrounding these strips. No landscaping shall be installed except in accordance with the landscaping plan approved by the Architectural Design Board of the City of Edmonds and the Lorian Woods Architectural Control Committee. Said Committee shall approve or disapprove said plan in the same manner as it decides on plans and specifications for structures pursuant to section 7.2 and the time periods and procedures of that section shall also apply to landscaping plans. (See Article II, Section 2.24 Tree Cutting and Limbing and Article VIII, Section 8.6 Land Clearing.) 7.4 Rules and Costs. The Architectural Control Committee shall consider and act upon all matters properly submitted to it. In furtherance of this function, the Architectural Control Committee may, by unanimous vote, from time to time and in its sole discretion, adopt, amend, and repeal rules and regulations to be known as the Architectural Control Committee Rules establishing its operating procedures and interpreting, detailing, and implementing the provisions of the instruments pursuant to which it is charged with responsibility. The Architectural Control Committee may establish a reasonable fee to be paid to it to cover its costs incurred in considering and acting upon matters submitted to it; the initial fee shall be Fifty (50) Dollars. Such fee shall be paid to the Association. A current copy of the Architectural Control Committee Rules shall be kept on file at the principal Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 11 a4�d .�� VOL. PAGEC�J 4 • office of the Association at all times. Such rules shall have the same force and effect as if set forth herein. Consent by the Architectural Control Committee to any matter proposed to it or within its jurisdiction shall not be deemed to constitute a precedent or waiver impairing its right to withhold or grant approval as to any similar matter thereafter proposed or submitted to it for its consent. 7.5 Standards and Criteria. The Architectural Control Committee shall employ the following standards and criteria in approving or rejecting the plans submitted to it: 7.5.1 No single-family dwelling of fewer than three thousand (3000) square feet of area on the main floors (exclusive of garages, porches, decks or other exterior features) shall be constructed on any lot. Each home shall have at least three bedrooms, living room, dining room, family room, kitchen, two and half bathrooms, and a three car garage -- attached or separate. 7.5.2 Master bedrooms shall be at least 16 feet x 20 feet exclusive of closet and dressing areas. Master bath shall be at least 8 feet x 16 feet (or 128 square feet) and contain at least five fixtures. 7.5.3 Additional bedrooms shall be at least 11 feet x 12 feet excluding closet space. 7.5.4 Living rooms shall be at least 15 feet x 20 feet or 300 square feet. 7.5.5 No building shall be located outside any building envelope or nearer than ten feet to an adjacent lot line as marked on the Plat Map. For purposes of this subsection (7.5), eaves, steps, and porches shall be considered part of a building. 7.5.6 The following additional criteria shall be used by the Architectural Control Committee in evaluating proposals to maintain the very special and precious quality of this Planned Residential Development: (a) The harmony of the external design, color, and appearance of the proposal on the lot in regard to site. This will include slopes, soil conditions, existing trees, view, vegetation, roads and services. The P.R.D. has been designed to allow maximum use of each lot without restrictions due to other buildings. The City of Edmonds Architectural Design board has ruled that exteriors shall be cedar or redwood, roofs shall be shake or dark tile, and stone or brick work be decorative only and minimal. (b) Siting is imperative. Design plans will need to be made for each lot --not superimposed from some other plan or location. Design criteria shall include the following: (1) Generous windows and skylights. Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 12 '"J1016 in 356; VOL. 2386PGGE6"LA" J (2) Buildings should "float" off the side of the hills (an architect will understand this) and be visually attached to the ground by the use of decks and terraces as much as possible. (3) Foundations can be a combination of concrete walls and post -and -beam construction. (4) Plans with the following exterior design factors will be rejected: French provincial; post modernism; colonial columns; white paint. (c) Other effects of the proposal on surrounding property, including the view of the waters of Puget Sound, the Kitsap Peninsula, Whidbey Island, and the Olympic Mountains. (d) The compliance of the proposal with the spirit, intent, and provisions of the relevant ordinances of the City of Edmonds, Washington. 7.5.7 The Architectural Control Committee may grant a variance from the strict provisions of the standards and criteria contained in this section 7.5 upon a showing by an owner that a) strict enforcement of the standards and criteria would work an undue hardship upon the owner, b) such a variance will not substantially diminish the enjoyment of their Property by other owners, and c) such a variance is in accord with the City of Edmonds approval of this plat. The applicant for a variance shall have the burden of proof. Any such variance granted shall be no greater than necessary, in the reasonable opinion of the Architectural Control Committee, to eliminate the hardship. The Architectural Control Committee shall be the sole judge of the necessity of a variance, and its decision shall be final. The failure of the Architectural Control Committee to reach a decision shall be considered a denial of the request for a variance. 7.6 Land Clearing. No native trees or significant ground cover with trunks or boles of eight (8) inches in diameter or greater, measured four (4) feet above ground level, shall .be cut, removed, or limbed without the approval of the Architectural Control Committee. Any person wishing to cut, remove or limb such trees or significant ground cover shall submit a plan showing the location of the trees or ground cover to be cut, removed, or destroyed, along with the location of the existing trees or ground cover to be retained. The applicant shall also submit a brief statement of the reasons supporting his request to cut, remove, or limb such trees or ground cover. This shall apply to both individual lots and common areas.(See Article II, Section 2.24. Tree Cutting and Limbing.) 7.7 Term. The Architectural Control Committee shall continue in existence until the last lot (except lot 4) within the Property has been sold or transferred by Declarants, at which time the committee shall be succeeded by the Design Review Committee as set forth in Section 7.9 hereafter. Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 13 90101_69356 V0L. GE0ra4s 7.8 No Liability. The members of the Architectural Control Committee shall have no personal liability for any action by or decision of the Committee. By acceptance of a deed or execution of a contract to purchase or a lease agreement or like document for any lot, the owner of that lot agrees and covenants not to maintain any action against the Association or any member of the Architectural Control Committee which seeks to hold the Association or that member personally or individually liable for damages relating to or caused by any action of or decision by the Committee. 7.9 Design Review Committee. Upon the termination of the Architectural Control Committee, the Board of Directors shall have the right to appoint by majority vote a Design Review Committee to fulfill the continuing obligations imposed upon the Architectural Control Committee by the terms of this Declaration. The Design Review Committee shall be composed of three members who shall be owners within or residents of the Property. The Design Review Committee shall have all the power and authority granted to the Architectural . Control Committee under the terms of this Declaration, and any reference to the Architectural Control Committee in this Declaration shall also refer to the Design Review Committee unless otherwise clearly stated or unless clearly indicated by the context of the reference. ARTICLE VIII UTILITIES AND ROADWAYS 8.1 Underground Utilities. All permanent utility systems, including water, gas, electric, sanitary and storm sewer, cable television, and telephone, shall be underground exclusively. All owners shall be required to connect their lots or units to electric, water, sanitary sewer, and other utility lines as they become available to the Property. 8.2 Right to Connect. There is reserved to the utility district or utility company providing utility service, the exclusive right to connect improvements upon the properties within the utility service lines, for which service the owner shall pay the then prevailing price.for such connections as charged by such utility district or company. 8.3 Water System. When in operation, so long as Edmonds municipal water system service is available, no private wells or individual water sources shall be created or used for the Property. 8.4 Sewage Disposal. All sewage disposal shall be by means of the sanitary sewer system owned by the City of Edmonds, Washington, or any succeeding entity which owns the sewer system. 8.5 Roadways. The private drive on the Property (depicted as Tract B on the Plat) has been conveyed by Declarants to the Association, which shall own it as a private drive and common area for all owners and shall maintain it to City of Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 14 Edmonds standards for; public roads 'so long as the Association',owns it. Each owner is hereby granted a:non'-exclusive easement of ingress and egress,over and across this private drive on: the Property (Tract -B).': Maintenance of such roadways shall be provided for as necessary or proper in the,annual assessment or, special assessments established by the Association. 8.6 Common Areas. Common areas on the Property (depicted as Tract A) have been conveyed by the Declarants to the Association, which shall own them as common areas for alf owners and shall maintain them in their natural state so long as the Association owns them'. :,Except as prohibited by Article 5.1.5 and while under suspension pursuant to Section.4.8,ieach owner is granted,abon-exclusive pedestrian easement, of ingress and 'egress :over and across the common areas of the property (Tract A). Maintenance of such common areas shall be provided for as necessary or proper; in the annual assessment or special assessments established by the Association' The Associatiogshall;cause quarterly (each three months) inspection to be made of the common areas by maintenance landscapers to determine what maintenance, if any, is required. ARTICLE IX GENERAL PROVISIONS 9.1 Enforcement. The Association, the Declarants, and each owner of a -lot subject to this Declaration, shall have the right to enforce, by any proceedings at law or in equity, all Covenants now or hereafter imposed by the provisions of this Declaration; provided, however, that the Declarants' right to enforce the Covenants in the Declaration shall terminate at such time as Declarants shall cease to be the owner of a lot subject to this Declaration. Failure of the Association or an owner or Declarants to enforce any Covenant herein contained shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right of the Association, an owner, or Declarant to do so thereafter. 9.2 Severability. Invalidation of any one of these Covenants by judgment or court order shall in no way affect any other Covenants which shall remain in full force and effect. 9.3 Amendment. The Covenants of this Declaration shall run with the land for a term of twenty-five (25) years from the date this Declaration is recorded, after which time it shall be automatically extended for successive periods of ten (10) years. This Declaration may be amended during those first twenty-five (25) years by an instrument signed by not less than ninety percent (90%) of the owners of all lots and thereafter by an instrument signed by not less than eighty percent (80%) of the owners of all lots. Any instrument amending the covenants, conditions, and restrictions of this Declaration shall be recorded with the Snohomish County Auditor. In no event shall any amendment require more onerous restrictions than those herein as to any existing structure or lot, unless the same be unanimously approved by all owners. Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 15 9010160356 VOL. 4�8bPAGEU0'$ ANIL- 9.4 Edmonds City Ordinance No ' 2661. All property,,owners are advised that Edmonds City, Ordinance No: ,2661.(effective date March 1t "'4988) pertaining to the management:of soils in the Meadowdale area should be read and understood. A copy of the ordinance is attachedand'made a; part of this declaration for advisory purposes only.:., Owners, are particularly advi§ed:to review the'sections in the ,ordinance requiring that .owners. may be,r'.esponsible for repairing damage; that in _':Section 19.05.040,:thelsite,is..declaced to be ipotential slide area; that the risk ' associated with develo;pment of;the'site;is set forth in a file with he,City of Edmonds Building Department; ,that"certain conditions or prohibitions on development may haveebeen imposed byihe,City in the course of permit issuance; that. references to the,features in the,designwill'require maintenance or modifications to address anticipated oil. changes. The covenants may incorporate by reference the statements and,conditions in the form proposedy,,the Declarants' geotechnical engineer, geologist; arclutectYand/or structural engi, bneer, if any, as approved by the City of.Edmonds A 660of a report by Terra ssociates { eotechnical en ineer's "si ned=br i William Baile P.E., will be'-I'made available to (g . g ); g Yi, Y� r any owner so requesting an opportunity t6'review the same. According to Ordinance Section;19.05.050 bonds and public liability insurance. may be required of the owner, the owner'scontractor, and failure to provide such insurance may allow the City of Edmonds to; revoke the certificate of occupancy and the vacation of the structure in accordance with the laws of the City of Edmonds. Owners are advised to.fully review the said Ordinance 2661. 9.4.1 The Declarants, after consulting a geologist in the early 1960s, have observed that the following guidelines seem to have prevented any material erosion or sliding on the property: (a) Control all surface water. (b) Maintain vegetation. (c) Avoid cuts at the base of any slopes. (d) Avoid fills of more than two feet every two. or three years. That is, if an area. needs a three-foot fill, two feet could be added in one year, a period of three years should be observed while the two -foot fill settles and at,the end of the three-year period another foot of fill could be, added. dab The foregoing is not intended to set forth all guidelines for effective erosion control in',the,futur'e'and,does not imply that following these guidelines',will prevent'all erosion: ; . 9.4.2 The,City>of(Edmonds Ordinance N6':`2661 only,requires,that surface ; •: ater be controlled and vegetation be maintainedi�*�Iteri s w(c) and (d) A} under 9 441:are not induded� LNevertheless, owners should be advised _r to consider. items (c) and (d),, d'any other practices°which might be recommended hereafter by, geologists, soil engineers; or others with exper Declaration of Covenants Conditions; and Restrictions Page 16 VOL'23386PAGEC�icy i t j F s-y'� j 7 4 E�d,a �,�t�r� � r\ 6 • ` 4 •Fa'S��I :xal:. ' 9.4.3 The Loriari Woods' design considers all four of the above guidelines according to the Terra Associates' report. Review of the'report.should be made by each owner. 9.5 Attorney's Fees. In the event the Association or Declarants shall bring any suit or action to enforce any provision contained in this Declaration or to collect any money due it hereunder or to foreclose a lien, the prevailing party in such suit or action shall be paid by the other party, all costs and expenses that said prevailing party shall incur in connection with such suit or action, including title reports and attorneys' fees in such amounts as the court may deem to be reasonable therein, and including attorney's fees incurred in connection with any appeal from a decision of the trial court or any intermediate appellate court. DATED this % rk day of C r 119 0. �..:, ER A. ANDE SON J ANN M. ANDERSON StXTE op t. HINGTON ) Ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH On this'day, before me, the. undersigned, a NotarytPi blic in and for ,, ersonally appeared • . the. above County and,,State, duly,,commisstoned and sworn, p ROBERT A. AND J,OANN M: ANDERSON;'to be known to tie the individuals , . described in and who�executed the within and foregoing instrument; and acknowledged to me 'that he and she. signed, such instrument as their, free and voluntary act and deed; for the' uses and purposes therein mentioned.: Given under ` my ' hand and . official seal iG,-this .day Of'An4i� , 19 rt� _ tr,� I, I +". •• a.S�',.' �-; .. ..fir .••�'� ..Jf NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at Declaration of Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions Page 17 VOL. �iPAGEOJ • ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF LORIAN WOODS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION FILED STATE OF WASHINGTON GCi 12 1C-2" RALPH MUM40 SECRETARY OF $Tg The undersigned, ROBERT A. ANDERSON and JOANN M. ANDERSON, acting as the incorporators of a corporation under the provisions of the Washington Non -Profit Corporation Act (Revised Code of Washington, Chapter 24.03), adopt the following Articles of Incorporation for such corporation. ARTICLE I - Name. The name of the corporation shall be LORIAN WOODS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. This corporation shall have perpetual existence. The place in this state where the principal office of the corporation is to be located is 7370 North Meadowdale Road, Edmonds, Washington 98026. The registered office of the corporation shall be 7370 North Meadowdale Road, Edmonds, Washington 98026. The registered agent of the corporation shall be Robert A. Anderson at 7370 North Meadowdale Road, Edmonds, Washington 98026. :W_ .NNIZIM The purposes for which this corporation is organized are to provide an organization for the implementation and execution of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Plat of Lorian Woods, Edmonds, Washington, and to provide an organization for the administration of all rights, responsibilities, duties, and liabilities of the owners of property in the Plat of Lorian Woods which rights, responsibilities, duties, and liabilities now exist or are hereafter established. The corporation shall have one class of members who shall be the owners of lots in the Plat of Lorian Woods as that term is defined in the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions recorded with the Auditor of Snohomish County, Washington, as it now exists or is hereafter amended. ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION - Page 1 a. Number of Directors. The number of directors constituting the initial Board of Directors of the corporation shall be two (2) directors. The names and addresses of the persons who are to serve as the initial directors of the corporation are as follows: Joann M. Anderson Robert A. Anderson b. Term of Directors. 7370 North Meadowdale Road Edmonds, Washington 98026 7370 North Meadowdale Road Edmonds, Washington 98026 The term of the initial directors shall be until the first annual meeting of the members or until their successors are elected and qualified, unless removed in accordance with the provisions of the Bylaws. Hereafter the number and the terms of the directors and the procedures therefor shall be as set forth in the Bylaws of the corporation. V;_ • C193 W-A• The names and addresses of the incorporators of the corporation, both of whom are over the age of eighteen (18) years, are as follows: Joann M. Anderson Robert A. Anderson 7370 North Meadowdale Road Edmonds, Washington 98026 7370 North Meadowdale Road Edmonds, Washington 98026 a. (i) No director shall be personally liable to the corporation or its members for monetary damages for conduct as a director except for acts or omissions that involve intentional misconduct by a director, for a knowing violation of law by a director, for conduct violating RCW 23A.08.450, or for any transaction from which the director will personally receive a benefit in money, property, or services to which the director is not legally entitled. (ii) DISCLOSURE. The initial directors, Robert A. Anderson and Joann M. Anderson, herewith disclose to all members ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION - Page 2 that they are the owners of all of the property constituting the Plat of Lorian Woods, that it is their intention to sell all or part of the lots constituting the said plat to persons who will be eligible to become members of this corporation; that certain property owned by Robert A. Anderson and Joann M. Anderson will become property owned by this corporation on behalf of the members of this corporation; that transactions involving purchase by members and the sale by declarants, Robert A. Anderson and Joann M. Anderson, for acquisition of property by this corporation from Robert A. Anderson and Joann M. Anderson shall not be considered a violation of RCW 23A.08.435 whether serving as the initial directors or if either or both are hereafter elected to the Board of Directors by the members. b. This corporation shall not be restricted from reimbursing any person for reasonable expenses incurred by such person in any proceeding brought against such person because such person is or was a director of this corporation. Such reimbursement shall include expenses, judgments, penalties, fines, settlements in the full amount permitted by law, and for any situation for..which such reimbursement is permitted by law. c. Reasonable expenses incurred by a director or former director who is a party to a proceeding may be paid or reimbursed by the corporation in advance of the final disposition upon receipt by the corporation of a written undertaking by or on behalf of the director or former director to repay such amount if it shall ultimately determine that the director or former director has not met the standard of conduct necessary for indemnification as provided by law. d. This corporation shall have the authority to provide any indemnity pursuant to RCW 24.03.035(14) to the extent provided in RCW 23A.08.025 as it now exists or is hereafter amended, including the advancement of expenses, pursuant to this article whenever a majority of a quorum of the Board of Directors shall vote in favor of such indemnity, payment of expenses, or advancement of such expenses. A director shall not be disqualified from voting on such a matter because he is a party to any proceeding or is likely to become a party to any proceeding. e. Indemnity of a director for the purposes of this article shall include a director, former director, or such director or former director's heirs and personal representatives. ARTICLE TX - No Cumulative _Votina. At anv election for directors, every member entitled to vote at such election has the right to vote in person or by proxy for as ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION - Page 3 many persons as there are directors to be elected. No cumulative voting for directors shall be permitted. The Board of Directors shall have the power to adopt, amend, or repeal the Bylaws or adopt new Bylaws. Nothing herein shall deny the concurrent power of the members to adopt, alter, amend, or repeal the Bylaws. This corporation reserves the right to amend or repeal any provisions contained in these Articles of Incorporation, in any manner now or hereafter permitted by law, and all rights and powers conferred herein on the members and directors of this corporation are subject to this reserved power. The power to' amend these Articles of Incorporation shall reside with the directors and members as set forth in the Bylaws as the Bylaws are established and amended from time to time. To the extent RCW 23.08.425 should apply to this corporation, this corporation elects to not be covered by such law concerning transactions with interested members as therein defined, whether or not this corporation may at any time have fewer than three hundred (300) members of record. Upon the dissolution of the corporation, the Board of Directors shall, after paying or making provisions for the payment of all liabilities of the corporation, dispose of all the assets of the corporation by distributing such assets equally to all owners of lots of the Plat of Lorian Woods as that term is defined in the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions of the Plat of Lorian Woods. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have hereunto set their hands Yert icate this _�� day of October, 1990. A. Anderson oann M. Anderson orporator Incorporator ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION - Page 4 CONSENT TO SERVE AS REGISTERED AGENT I, ROBERT A. ANDERSON------------------- , hereby consent to serve as Registered Agent, in the state of Washington, for the following corporation, LORIAN WOODS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION -------------------------------------. I understand that as agent for the corporation, it will be my responsibility to re- ceive service of process in the name of the corporation; to forward all mail to the corporation; and to immediately notify the office of the Secretary of State in the event of my resignation, or of any changes in the registered office address of the corporation for which I am agent. 10/ is /90 (date) n Tsrgnature of agent) 737. North Meadowdale Road Edmonds, Washington 98026 (registered office address) TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. RECEIVED Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and F E 6 011993 Environmental Earth Sciences PERMIT COUNTER STREET FILE Richard H. Rhydes Whidbey Island Architects 5247 South Highway 525 Freeland, Washington 98249 Subject: Neering Residence Lot 7, Lorian Woods References: Geotechnical Report, Project T-840-1 Meadowdale Beach, Lots 54 to 57 Working Drawings for the Mary Neering Residence by Whidbey Island Architects Dear Mr. Rhydes: Project T-840-6 September 24, 1992 We have examined the referenced drawings you provided us. We understand the residence will have a basement floor that daylights on the south, and a garage on the second level extending into the slope at the northeast corner of the lot. The attached Figure 1 shows the. approximate grades expected on.the bottom of the excavation. The three -level cut will. reach depths of about nine feet below present grades. The lowest level at the south side provides for a lap pool. As explained in the referenced geotechnical report, the soil at Lorian Woods is landslide debris and may provide relatively poor bearing conditions for conventional footings. To explore subsurface soil and groundwater conditions on Lot 7, we excavated three test pits to depths below the proposed footing bearing grades. Figure 1 shows the approximate test pit locations and the residence's ground floor footprint. Logs of the test pits are reported on the attached Table A. 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 • Phone (206) 821-7777 Whidbey Island Architects Project T-840-6 September 24,1992 Page 2 As expected, the test pits encountered landslide debris, mostly silty sand. It contains buried topsoil, chunks of clay and till, and some wood and other organics. Test Pit 1 encountered groundwater and the pit walls caved after only a short time. PVC standpipes were installed in Test Pits 1 and 2 so that groundwater levels could be observed over a longer period. At the present time, groundwater at Test Pit 1 is about eight feet below the ground surface, approximately Elev 143. The standpipe in Test Pit 2 is dry at approximately Elev 125. Based on the water levels in the standpipes, it appears that groundwater may be encountered a foot or two above the bottom of the excavation. Of course, working conditions in the excavation would be best during the dry summer season. If the excavation bottom is wet, it may be too soft to support construction traffic. To provide a satisfactory working mat, we recommend overexcavating wet areas about one foot and backfilling quarry spalls., During construction, provisions should be made to collect all free water and discharge it at the open south end of the excavation. In addition, groundwater conditions may affect the stability of the excavation slopes. The contractor should be prepared to lay the slopes back at 1 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter, as necessary to avoid collapse. If seepage occurs at the toe of excavation slopes, a french drain about two feet deep along the toe would help control the seepage and stabilize the slope. The excavation also will undercut the 12-inch drain line adjacent the lot. on the east side, especially near the garage cut. This line carries water continually and would flood the excavation if broken. Provisions should be made either to support the line or re-route it around the excavation during construction. The soil conditions observed in the test pits are generally satisfactory for conventional spread foundations. However, bearing conditions worse than those observed may be present at locations not explored, or may result from rainfall or adverse groundwater conditions. To reduce the risk of foundation settlements due to possible uneven bearing conditions, we recommend proportioning the footings for a maximum bearing stress of 1200 pounds per square foot. Extra steel reinforcement should be placed in the footings and the foundation walls. In addition, we recommend combining interior footings into strips and connecting them to nearby foundation wall footings. The building excavation should be examined before footing forms are constructed. Unsuitable materials, if present, should be removed to firm ground. The overexcavations should be backfilled with quarry spalls; washed gravel, or compacted pit -run gravel. Basement walls that cantilever from their foundations may be designed for an equivalent fluid weight of 40 pounds per cubic foot. Walls supported at the top by framing should be designed for the above equivalent fluid weight, plus a uniform load of 100 pounds per square foot. Since the basement floor will be a living space, requirements for drainage and damp -proofing should be carefully considered. Foundation drains should be installed outside all basement perimeter walls. Drain inverts should be at least four inches lower than the bottom side of basement floor slabs. Backfill against perimeter walls should be free -draining gravel at least one foot wide. The floor slab should be underlain by a vapor barrier over at least four inches of pea gravel. Provisions should be included to drain the under -slab pea gravel. Whidbey Island Architects September 24, 1992 Project T-840-6 Page 3 We appreciate the opportunity to examine your preliminary plans. We expect the City will require that our firm review the final plans submitted for permit, and then issue the geotechnical declaration described in section 19.05.040 of Ordinance 2661. In addition, the City will probably require that a completed Environmental Checklist be included with the submittal package. The checklist can be filled out by yourself and the Neerings. Please call if you have any questions concerning the checklist's few geotechnical items. Sincerely, TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC William Bailey Project Manager Theodore J. Schep r '""1E8 6/18/93 Principal Engineer WB/mp encl: Table A, Test Pit Logs Figure 1, Test Pit Location Plan cc: Mary Neering, M.D. TABLE A TEST PIT LOGS TEST PIT NO. 1 Depth, ft Description 0-4 Tan silty fine sand, dry to moist. 4-12 Grey silty fine sand, wet; with clay, wood debris, and silty topsoil. Some seepage and caving below 6 feet. PVC standpipe to bottom of pit. Water at depth 8.3 ft on 9/16/92. TEST PIT NO.2 Depth, ft Description 0-3 Tan silty fine sand, dry to moist. 3-6 Tan/grey silty fine to medium sand with 5-15% gravel, moist; grey and wet below 6 feet. No seepage observed; no caving. PVC standpipe to bottom of pit. Standpipe dry on 9/16/92. TEST PIT NO.3 Death, ft Description 0-2 Brown silty fine sand with organics, dry to moist. 2-10 Tan/brown silty sandwith 5-15% gravel and scattered chunks of grey till; becomes grey and wet at 9 feet. No seepage observed; no caving. Note: Test Pits Excavated on August 13, 1992. Neering Residence Project T-840-6 141 S s •00 132, 444.74 ResidI ce fo tpnnt - F 1 / N TP_3 L c TP-2 Test Pit Location r-13-2-1 Approx Excavation Grade TERRA ASSOCIATES Geotechnical Consultants /LoT b N Approx Scale: 1 in = 20 ft TEST PIT LOCATION PLAN NEERING RESIDENCE LOT 7, LORIAN WOODS Proj. No. 840-6 Date SEPT 92 1 Figure 1 0 W s -1 vy nj Eil n'� j rA 11,W IM nIV 1:4:�. i OcJ N I /\K\ 0 1 i-q /0�, a -I a -t� N, 1 c-4-1 1 n ;.4 3':d Ala WIS =I.A Cj, "E)LGIEI zi aa N i v Qt!i VG G3A OUddV �J C? I cn-I 1 (7 e-� N I 83NMO -.5 C *7-1 -LDNMv*2iA Nv---O' %1N -1 V^1 "417 --i 1�;p `Zj C, Ire. p 'S �Sawdav 0o' Sr ;f�:14tp ,j LIP 4;>%vyq iv-ej cl *q ol N :1 1N'L JCI �j Vill UV.d3a, ON i I n Ej W, SCINOUV03 do 'ki 4 IM J. 5 t!� LA a.? 1::� m v S M OIDNINSVIA 10 IVIS VH u TV 'il A ipv, "j" ldh C. i,k. kly Z t4 I 1� -a *a s itL A (V 'Pp -4 54 a tfj- -a -.p r? <I s-7 �+.L' 1(,41 k'T A L A� 7t, T C N n VJ qV1 4 IWNI m N WIV. Y-4 =3' t4 M17),114 0210k4 7VAJ-1f+:.;>Z,7 r4 fig. "Il %7 Y. 4� 'VP 1 - � 'L 1��v Q *10 OA T; . it, % j ;1 "j 0 0 valdv G(j 4F� cn IshoH i-sunp 44�-� I N3 3 2 OD --- 7, -IWIvnivi 00% 1A Q NOISING -C)3 ans 7 joglacl.03 US NOW Vjvm3als pl, 6;71 H013H Maims -g0VU3A0D1G1 o+- Zz�l I Wm vii J v loll e7 lu y N ID 24 % , , 92 119 KRAI�111- 0 000 ;P4.v L as CP Z. 1p Qtq 4*1 0 1 IR-4 ,U 3 1: 7N o4: i an Z rl 'IV k Vq 1 wcl. ym a O.L I�HT ti4 '-4 ......... � N La -27 JL r---.- L fly 77- t Z? W�a 77V Off ae S V *7k"0Z1010* A2A,1Ve&7;V,9 a-e WVW 0WAV —AAAVM46;" 4?f ; �q 0 v cq I-k;-> C1 IQ —J(:;) 0 nnv, . ........ XQ 4 VAOWatai Q NV t-�4c?l LVAvD a y T _4 ::I 'a 01 1v ..1 ss,:= tp N -.0 -4 .4 -BI I:= I IN cvt Le - �-Cj. =ts- 'A ery w IV 0 S N c? IVA V":)'Xa vt;, t 'ji 1. "1 6 N 61 O�L 0, "tit OR i; vv 0 OH/Z77/(V Wr? W/ -1A 4 4 W- j 9A (2 \.� � I < - � 0 4 HI N I ED G� "o 4" ��:e4, V., 01 N lj� 'A �4 :Zlo 41%Nrv� Is, , 74V -P -Z, A 77 f Ur vle + .4 N �7AP= .. � J7 174 1 L ff 0 1 L 14 #21"o 6, J.e 7-- 1 WWI, ,)T. 7 -- (?Qi 14;� 'p I �3 N i.2A 'AINa N r rq a V NI't -�7 1,x 0 4�p 1"Ala o N 10A 0 43 IPQ IVY -4 kgl, . 0 L\ t4'�j Ign --',W�AD vvir-L V Hp Pq I lei s je, 0OWS 1� L4 Hop J�) -H 54 -VA W t) Q,� M I e2ea 'J,":�PIX-9, ACV C7 1 -LVA P it 09 x ID -2 1 Sp L=-j: -7- 4,4 r— T N7 "'Of li:'o CP 4 st r�l 4 IZI 33 C11 C7NV 51- IONN i:n "I'M -L-1 05, 11, 21 -4 J�:) 1 :1 1 a lip ir j!, Ap ijjkq— �10 lip 4Nkq-7 T1141d N�L L-4 Q4. v cl I iim;4 .7 AA T. U,114 A, T- - IN ' '1:1 11 I,, M z VI; sm, zi aa�. �Nj cp Zvi Vvy C)J- IS GLL V V-,?JL �4 01V 1 "?t 4 n7 �6 si,::3 6 n p" 0o )< At' 49' J�, '54-ATS-Iji 24 C 1-15� cz vqvi -m U t4 sL oj d� 4,