The URL can be used to link to this page

17003 77TH PL W.PDFIIIIIIIIIIIIII15170 17003 77TH PL W 7: i ADDRESS: / ?DD ,J 72 �4Z`12 TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: 7f�D1 O BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE): COVENANTS (RECORDED) CRITICAL AREAS : :(t _ DETERMINATION: ❑ Conditional Waiver (Study Required ❑ Waiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S: DRAINAGE PLAN DA' PARKING AGREEMENTS'DATED: EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR: PERMITS (OTHER): PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED: SCALED PLOT PLAN DA SEWER LID FEE SHORT PLAT FILE: SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) GEOTECH REPORT DA' STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR: LID #: LOT: BLOCK: WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: q1 1-0-11�7 / 0 LATEMP\DSTs\Fomis\Street Fite Checklist.doc DATE RECEIVED /.r PERM IT EXPIRES L/Z.A/d / .CITY OF EDMONDS 10ERMIT NUMBER CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION JOB SUITE/APT# ADDRESS { ,\ 3 -7 1P /,r IP I IV{ ' it ' �� ' /J OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS ` !'� /• ' iP\,l_iFJ 1 ^.•r^t�4C �lC-�-, U V\ l C;VYl %L/6l 4 11i . PLAT NAME/SUBDIVISION NO. LOT NOr LID NO. MAILING ADDRESS 1 J t, , 1' jat ') C 0vjP.1-S I LID FEE$ (� ^-•1 ,,J C�, 3' t PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP TESCP Approved O RW Pe -I, Requ'ved C] C] •i� ,yam, ••! CITY ZIP TELEPHONE EXISTING PROPOSED street Use Pennil Required Inspection Required O 13 �,V f G REQUIRED DEDICATION FT Sidewalk Required underground O 0 Wirequired Wiring NAME METER SIZE d / r LINE SIZE / 1 / 1 NO. OFrFIXTURES / / (/ PRV REQUIRED YES NO O ? Ix �rJ W ADDRESS h REMARKS Lu OWNER/CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROL/DRAINAGEe 'a) - CITY ZIP TELEPHONE f 4 i D /+ f /QrtV..1 ►01/ 2JYf'1L•LW. ">{ NAME .`•"'. '.t-,• CBL# I t ( In V) ;-I'-(- j, A VV1400 J -1t1 Cl.� { r�G t! �� `I��"�V !�� ( r NEERING REVIEWED BY DATE ADDRESS V CIJ� MA-t'2 i'W,BCI h ARE REVIEWED BY DATE w CITY ZIP le re TELEPHONE z LL STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE CHECKED BY G VARIANCE OR Cu ,-°� SHORELINE ORADB# INSPECTION b Y SE ED NO COMPLETED EXEMPT ' % ? �� CI`IQO �� ,J/�--1055 t ZONE SIGN�AREAES HEIGHT/2{\ PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL NO. ! �/} n r 0 i f(!'U f � D WAIVER O O Epp r P—D _ 7,00 ALLOWED PROPOSED ALLOWED PROPOSED p ; STUDY 131 NEW a RESIDENTIALpLUMBING / MECH / LOT COVERAGE t L? jED PROPOSED REQUIRED SETBACKS (FT.) PROPOSED ERONTN $$ R�� RONTN SETBACKS (FT.) ViSI E �REA — ❑ ADDITION ❑ COMMERCIAL COMPLIANCE OR ❑ CHANGE OF USE 0 ( L� +0 Wf W / 7-14 QPS ZS _ s1-, �� _ REMODEL MIXED USE MULTIFAMILY ❑ SIGN PARKING REEO'D PROVIDED LOTAREA If PLANNING REVIEWED BY DATE g ❑ REPAIR ® GtRADIN'G CYDS ❑ FENCE / X FT.) R M RKS It IAS f(:A10W �P/1/�� 1iYi'S �✓ OTHER ❑ DEMOLISH ❑ TANK ❑ � � 1 , n I � � pY� ! (��A �^ r� �t ❑_rCARPORT ❑ IERY NING WALL ❑ RE SPRINKLER ROCKERY KGARAGE FIRE ALARM (TYPE OF USE, BUSINESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN: t' I - TYPE OF C ONSITRUG3TION C DE OCCUPANT GROUP J NUMBER SOF TORIES , NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS SPECIAL INSPECTION REQUIRED CONSULTANT (} �T1t OCCUPANT LOAD DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE ,6-.YES REMARKS L9 z t Grj�t�LtC�' C.t�r� CtYti\,I� LAY' BYOTCHREPO,T m Dta 1tst�� STRUCTURAL DESIGN BY: Y/�- O�� V f �j h 1 l OK 2• �' �'-1 I d 1 1 �! .- VALUATION �D _-'al W Description FEE Description FEE Plan Check State Surcharge 21 HEAT SOURCE ,` LOT SLOPE% VESTED DATE Building Permit City Surcharge r PLAN CHECK NO: ,1. Plumbing C O' Base Fee f Mechanical "' -� NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBIC Grading DONMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE SEPARATE PERMISSION. Engr. Review PERMIT APPLICATION: SEE ECDC 19.00,005(A)(5) PERMIT LIMIT: SEE ECDC 19.00.005(A)(6) Engf. Inspectionw SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT EOOR MORE INFORMATION •APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HIS OR ER SPOUSE, HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESSORS Fire Review Flan Chk. Deposit 1' " -IN,INTEREST; AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF EDMIONDS�`iWHINGTON, ITS OFFICIA1iSIEMPL-OYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND Fire Inspection Receipt # % � ALL' C•LA`IMS`FOR'DAMAGES OF WHATEVEi,NAtURE, ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY % • FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE \DEENIE6krblMdDIFY, WAIVE OR REDUCE'ANY\REQUIREMENT OF ANY CITY ORDINANCE NOR•LIMIT•IN`ANY WAY THE CITY't`XSM ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION.- Landscape Insp. Total Amt. Due yr °T • , `*TQEt7FORCE Recording Fee Receipt# `` \\\c`` 1 HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT 1•HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION; THAT THE INFORMATION GIVEN IS CORRECT; AND THAT I AM THE OWNER, OR THE DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT OF APPLICATION APPROVAL T9E,OWNER?IrAGREE TO COMPLY WITH-,CIT-Y�AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC- TION; AND,,IN•DDING THE WORK AUTHORIZEQ�,MEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED CALL This application is not a permit until signed by the Building Official or his/her Deputy: and Fees are paid, and IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE\STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO FOR INSPECTION receipt is acknowledged in space provided. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION'INSURANCE AND RCW 18:27. (425) OFFICIALS SIGNATURE DATE n „l¢ , !=f✓�/ SIGNATURE (OWNERTOR AGENT): DATE SIGNED 771-0220 RELEASE ATTIf, NTtfON EXT. 1333 IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY\A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL / 1, Qf lI AL�INS'P`ECTION HAS"BEEN,rMADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTI- FICATE\OF OCCUPANCY HA§<BEEN'GIkMTED. UBC109 / IBC110 / IRC110. '°/°° PRESS �HARD - YOU ARE MAKING 4 COPIES BY ORIGINAL -FILE YELLOW -INSPECTOR PINK -OWNER GOLD - ASSESSOR 0 PLANNING DATA sT ET1A Name: l-f-111GVZtoh GDVtIE '1 ,-h" Company, I Kl �,. Date: 11•2q • 200 5 Site Address: l-• U o'a �'�' "Tl-1 Place W e e t'• C U**5� Plan Check #: 05. 5 7:7~(4p Project Description: NeW 6 F? - - Reduced Site Plan Provided: ES NO) « G b14 v 104-+.C' Zoning: P p.p • y 0 0 �- • I p v, a r d.Qivi ,s Map Page: L;. 5 (p Corner Lot: (YES NO) Flag Lot: (YES NO) Critical Areas Determination #: (�,A . tiDD1 •On Cj q 0 Study Required "r ovy%Vlc-ILLot 03 VILCdh iD •fpII DW thf- ❑ Waiver •QY15)*E SEPA Determination: ❑ Needed (for 500 cubic yards of grading or site within 200 feet of Puget Sound or Lake Ballinger). ❑ Fee - El Checklist ❑ APO List with notarized form M Exempt I S&J GU b17i a rd 5 Of aradrnyo 5 e d Re uired Setbacks Street: }-n+�W� ID/ Side: W S' Side: 5) 5' Rear: 1 G 2- Actual Setbacks Street: 1-ti-► (w) �-'� Side: 1 W 5 Side: I (y) 5Jclvc- Rear: 1 I &ro 2� 25 ❑ Detached Structures: n1 oV1.e. oVk 0w (I aY► roil p l a VIL . ❑ Rockeries: D� El Fence Ties: lises: Ind 4d &aM +i1 Wt-y' ABay Window Projecting Modulation: Y4�Y1rV6V>rd 6y) ra E Po^-✓'�1SY1 Q Stairs/Deck:✓ 5'b" Parking Required: Z Parking Provided: 3 Lot Area: (p q (y Lot Coverage: ZIdf Io+ 12•/• of PR-D> Lot Coverage Calculations: L} s5 p 1# ooVeXa 9 z m a Kpe-y lot ::22, of P P-Pho �owh Ci -PBui/din Hei ght Datum Point: -4 Datum Elevation: Maximum Height: 261 vp1, • g y5� Actual Height: Zt'i. , q L ik 0 ADU Created: (YES NO Ong V41-c*io*1 c; li p wyV. Subdivision: P•?i0u�}•q PP-D•2c�D�i•• 10 �- l.trl-5 °' ��U�• ICI St SW) Legal Nonconforming Land Use Determination Issued: (YES / O) Other A- l-'1' • 60 G l �-a • 5D ►•1• 81 26 AVVr4 9C, (a ra Q-e- d' 1�'S•�U +25' = ZOti• $ lti5 Max 1+mv 5 •t' (Ar-N 20051D,4521+9 Plan Review By: •: C71 j V1 p W (,U OL :• APPROVED AS NOTED vV1'; �L{G i' !'i t.7 IiL-JRU(YJIOI_E POR EROSION CONTROL AND DRAINAGE SITE PLAN, LOT #' Owner: Hillcrest Construction Co., Inc. 4003 Nassau Place Everett, WA 98201 Tax Parcel Number: Site Address: A V ata:164�- Lot Coverage Impervious area House SF:E.s?-'t46,:; S.F. House SF: 1467 Lot SF::;' 6} :. S.F. Overhangs 212 r35% Allowed: 2437.4 S.F. Drive/Walk 575 r Under/Over -970.4 S.F. Total 2254 Bench Mark- Top of sewer manhole @ SW corner of project = 191.26' Height Calcs A p: .1+77 56 B `_®® :1.76t25- Pump size ca Units Quan Totals C `, ° 0 . ; :1,79 Bathtubs 4 1 4 Comb Tub/SI 4 1 4 JV� D 17$:00, Total 711.25 Clothes Wast 1 1 1 Dishwasher 1.5 1 1.5 �� Average 177.81 Lavatory 1 4 4 25' Allowed 25.00 Kitchen sink 1.5 1 1.5 Laundry sink 1.5 1 1.5 Max.Ht.Allowed 202.81 Shower �-2 1 2 V Main Floor Elev. _'fit • � : Water closet 1 %5 3 7 / Bldg. Height ,°a .25:Q Demand-vPnn rrr hart Actual Height 202.75 0 _, Z �:- o-1 LADING CALCS. oting Elev. _ 1�-74�75` Cut Area = � I ((A+B)/2)-Footing Elev. 2.125 cc C U WlA ((B+D)/2)-Footing Elev. 2.375 Z _ a ,El ((D+C)/2)-Footing Elev. 4 00 a N ((C+A)/2)-Footing Elev. 3.75 Q W Average Cut = 3.0625 H Volume 4287.5 S C LL_Cubic � �8' Yds. 1 .8 0 O C =. APPROVED BY PLANNING a: INZI/tyl 017 [l (e ( V (P X- vA W eJ -V -fD t LD W MW VA V Yl,?i1/1 OL (41 of gW kt LM VU' C a l r�P o r� , I$ �srM OVt 1�1 `� - Tl• � �- S`1`�` 01'. II w d � � � I� 6 r c� I® 7 co L / — J �I CI 24 HR. NOTICE REQ. FOR INSPECTION �o rin l ' -T 134' 79.3 0 6- 11. 6` Downspouts will be connected to storm stub. Footing drains will also be con- nected to storm stub if grade allows, and connection will be no less than .75' below invert of footing drain line. If grade precludes such connection, then a sump will be provided. ESM B "� s MAR - 71 06 h11LDING DEPAR TMEIN CITY OF EDMO DS 9L; I IONS REQ'D -771-0220 EXT.1326 2 � :O 2 f ZI E o � '- �i1 to lO a ►�s ao y Z z • � 4) �' o a� ' �wcnA4Ox N SCALE 1INCH = 20 FT MRE AND Ala ADDRESS SIGN REQUIRED Citykf Edmonds Development Services Department _ Planning Division Phone: 425.771.0220 /4c. 1 goo Fax: 425.771.0221 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 the application to the City. The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to determine whether any potential Critical Areas are, or may be, present on the subject property. The information needed to complete the Checklist should be easily available from observations of the site or data available at City Hall (Critical areas inventories, maps, or soil surveys). RECEIV.ED Date 'received: APR 2 5 2001 City Receipt #: Critical Areas File #: PERMIT CMNTER— Critical Areas Checklist Fee: $45.00 Date Mailed to Applicant: A property owner, or his/her authorized representative, 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. Please submit a vicinity map, along with the signed copy of this form to assist City staff in finding and locating the specific piece of property described on this form. In addition, the applicant shall include other pertinent information (e.g. site plan, topography map, etc.) or studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assistant staff in completing their preliminary assessment of the site. The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agret to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonabl attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate c incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees. By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of rr knowledge and that I am authorized to file this application on the behalf of the owner as listed below. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANVAGENT DATE V Property Owner's Authorization By my signature, I certify that I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application, and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purposes of inspection and posting attendant to this application. , SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE y i Owner/Applicant: Name //// Street Address S C' y State Zip Telephone: �� Email address (optional): Applicant Representative: Name Street Address City State Zip Telephone: Email Address (optional): Critical Areas Checklist.doc/3.19.2001 11 V Critical Areas Checklist CA File No: Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation) Site Address/Location: 1,5 j c 2. Property Tax Account Number: —7 / 3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): l 4. Is this site currently developed? yes; no. If yes; how is site developed? l ' 5. 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 over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet). Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of less than 33-feet). Other (please describe): 48 It 1, / .S / O 107 /1", S / lf,.� /) P p ,o i7 Irv. le 6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: /�; Approx. Depth: Site contains areas of seasonal standing water:_ ; Approx. Depth: What season(s) of the year? 8. Site is in the floodway A% floodplain of a water course. 9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year-round? _4a Flows are seasonal? ( at time of year? ). 10. Site is primarily: forested ; meadow shrubs mixed urban landscaped (lawn,shrubs etc) 1/ 11. Obviops wetland is�resent on site: (� '� T T� ►Z� ,��J� 21 `�� s Ivy Li C > I— f:C'�*7 G -'c- ,-x I % Sibe within designated earth c DETERhUNATION STUDY REQUIRED WAIVER Reviewed:by; � . t) Date:. l c5 / cn , Critical Areas Checklist.doc/3.19.2001 0 . City of Edmonds Critical Areas Determination Applicant: Sue Thomas Determination #: CA-01-59 Project Name: Permit Number: Site Location: 77071715` SW Property Tax Acct #: 0727 041 004 00 Project Description: Non -Project Specific Determination: Study Required: During review and inspection of the subject site, it was found that the site appears to contain critical areas, including a Steep Slope Hazard Area and a Stream pursuant to Chapter 20.15B of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). Based on these findings, prior to submission of any development permit, you will be required satisfy the requirements of ECDC 20.15B by completing a Critical Areas Study consisting of the following: Steep Slope Hazard Area Delineation Requirements: To determine if a Steep Slope Hazard Area does exist, a topographic survey prepared by a Licensed Land Surveyor delineating Steep Slope Hazard Areas must be completed. Any slope of 40% or more with at least 20 feet of rise will be classified as a Steep Slope Hazard Area. A 50- foot buffer is required from both the top and toe of the slope. A 15-foot building setback is required from the 50-foot buffer. For development of any kind which is proposed within the critical area, 50-foot buffer or 15-foot buffer setback, it must be shown that the development will not adversely impact the Critical Area or its buffer, by doing one or possibly both of the following depending on the outcome of the study: 1. For development proposals which will occur within the 50-foot buffer, but no closer than 10 feet from the top or toe of the slope, the 50-foot buffer requirement may be reduced to 10 feet if a study is completed by a licensed geologist or geotechnical engineer which clearly demonstrates that the proposed buffer alteration will have no adverse impact upon the site, the public or any private party. 2. If development must occur within the critical area, buffer, and/or buffer setback, and is. not identified as exempt per ECDC Chapter 20.15B, a Reasonable Use Exception and Variance must be obtained pursuant to ECDC 20.15B.170A and 20.1513.040C. Stream Based on the above findings, a Critical Areas Study is required to determine the hydrology of the area and to delineate the approximate boundaries of the stream and identify its buffers. The required qualified critical areas consultant needed to perform the study shall be a specialist in botany, fisheries, wetland biology, and/or hydrology with a minimum of two years' field experience with wetlands and/or streams in the Pacific Northwest. This critical areas study shall be perfon-ned as a three party agreement with the city selecting the consultant and the property owner or applicant paying the fees. The qualified critical areas consultant shall perform the following: 1. Classification of the stream pursuant to the criteria established in ECDC Section 20.15B.060(A)(4) and (5). 2. Delineate the edge of the stream on the site. 3. State any mitigating measures appropriate to preserving and protecting the stream. The qualified critical areas consultant shall enter into a three party contract with the applicant and the City of Edmonds as required in ECDC 20.15B.140(D), where the applicant pays for the study. The applicant may suggest qualified professionals for the City's approval. After the qualified critical areas consultant has delineated the stream boundary, a surveyor licensed by the State of Washington must perform the following: 1. Delineate the required buffer (see ECDC 20.15B.120.(A) and 20.15B.130.(C)). 2. Delineate the required building setback from the buffer (required setback is 15 feet). 3. Create a map showing the buffer and the building setback. If the results of the Critical Areas Study determine that the lot may not be developed, the applicant may apply for a Reasonable Use Exception and Variance pursuant to ECDC 20.15B.170(A) and 20.15B.040(C)). If the property owner wishes to apply for a specific development permit which they feel would not impact the Critical Areas located on the site, they may submit their proposal to the Planning Department for review. If the Planning Department finds that the proposed development permit will not adversely impact a Critical Areas or its buffers, a conditional waiver may be issued on a project by project basis. Please call me at (425) 771-0220 if you have any questions. Star Campbell May 10 2001 Name Signature Date • Cited sections of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) can be found on the City of Edmonds website at www.ci.edmonds.wa.us. 2 p,PPR'OVED AS NOTED OWN,; i CL'iti ! HAL i Ok IS HcI3RDN8.bLz FOR EROSION CONTROL AND DRAINAGE SITE PLAN, LOT # §K71 Owner: Hillcrest Construction Co., Inc. 4003 Nassau Place Everett, WA 98201 Tax Parcel Number N27040700J00.4D0 x` Y. e otte.G der�s,SE114,N1,/,4 Se8.7;Tw Site Address: '�.700377tt�t?IaceWesty Ti 112- Lot Coverage Impervious area House SF: " ` 46 8 S.F. House SF: 1467 Lot SF: a; 6964 S.F. Overhangs 212 35% Allowed: 2437.4 S.F. Drive/Walk 575 NW Under/Over -970.4 S.F. Total 2254 Bench Mark- Top of sewer manhole @ SW corner of project = 191.2EgA � Height Calcs V � J o ANglifiM.10BC Total 711.25 Average 177.81 25' Allowed 25.00 Max.Ht.Allowed 202.81 Main Floor Elev. :`?177.:75? ' Bldg. Height '° `25.'0.01 Actual Height 202.75 Footing Elev. = 1r7'4.7i5 ((A+B)/2)-Footing Elev. ((B+D)/2)-Footing Elev. ((D+C)/2)-Footing Elev. ((C+A)/2)-Footing Elev. Average Cut = Volume Cubic Yds.1 �� ti ZOO J A Cut Area � — � i'1q 2.125 CC uM U 2. 3 n C. N O E. 3. v 3.062625 W ~ z 1 80 158 85 Lt- 0 ssr�l * APPROVED BY PLANNING U A- M vt0- -Po l l o w Y t " m wt,,n of (ti i0-vi bf g"J-r,C,V✓«ca L r"oY;U- - I� l/ Ro �\ C U 10 24 HR. NOTICE REQ. V MAR - 7 20116 FOR INSPECTIOAI WILDING DEPAFr NEI CITY OF EDMO DS 03 get oc oc c+ o— co04) � II II _J �I ,I 79.34' 1J Downspouts will be connected to storm stub. Footing drains will also be con- nected to storm stub if grade allows, and connection will be no less than .75' below invert of footing drain line. If grade precludes such connection, then a sump will be provided. REE FIL E co/' M f-A BITER & SEWER NSPECTIONS REQ'D v7425-771-0220 E*XT.132C VY 11 � I� E J U > 3 Lba z Z cc N v��0''LO SCALE 1INCH = 20 FT Fi RE N!D 2,�G oaaaVILE 4003 NASSAU PL EVERETT WA 98201 DECLARATION OF PRIVATE DRAINAGE EASEMENT AGREEMENT For and in consideration of the mutual benefits derived herein and other good and valuable consideration, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, the following Party Flillcrest Construction Company, INC., being the owner of lots 5, 6 and Tract 997, Charlotte Gardens, according to the plat recorded under Snohomish County Auditor's file number 200510145249, hereby conveys and quit claims to the current and future owners, successors and or assigns of said lot 5, of the above described property, a non-exclusive easement for private drainage facilities, including the right of reasonable ingress and egress to maintain and repair said drainage facilities over under and across the following described land of said parties herein: The northeasterly 25 feet of lot 6 and Tract 997, running parallel with the southwest boundary of Tract 999, and lying southeasterly of the catch basin as currently located and depicted within Tract 997, Charlotte Gardens, according to the plat thereof recorded under Snohomish County Auditor's file number 200510145249, records of Snohomish County Washington. Tax Parcel: _ 010372-000-005-00; 010372-000-006-00; 010372-000-996-00 This easement is appurtenant to the following described land owned by said parties herein and the easement and covenants contained herein shall run with and burden the property described herein. Said parties herein their successors and or assigns shall have the right to maintain and repair said drainage pipe line, provided however that the parties and their successors shall use reasonable care to restore the surface of the land and to replace the landscaping, plantings, lawn, personal property, and any other improvements, to original or better condition. The doctrine of merger shall not apply with regard to the extinguishing of said easement herein. In W'tness Whereof, this easement is executed this 7 day of , 2006. Hillcrest Construction Company, Inc. 1 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF On this Z.- day of -S� r 2006, before me the undersigned, a notary public In and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, Personally appeared-hodf KVv./-I�) , the �%.fs; — f' , Of Hillcrest Construction Company, Inc., to me proved with satisfactory evidence to be The of Hillcrest Construction Company, Inc., who executed the within instrument Acknowledged that k -e signed and sealed the same as their free and voluntary act and Deed, for the uses and purposes , n mentioned Printed name of notary�\eS1011�+A►,F' My appointment expires: 7 -2 y a i - • - y Residing at: CI:;TY, GFt ED: i ''WASHIN`G'TON O. 1 /20 REBAR de CAP 270407-001-021-00 LS RM 17672 25.32'E X ?70407 001 013'00 12 0.32'N OF' NW PROP. COR.. ,.,.,,. 2-21-05 :211 9T t ED N90-00000-W 211.9T. t is ------- ---------- --------- 61.00' 4' HOGYIARE 150.9T 11 v! FENCE N yes c ENO 4'' HOGWIRE a, ��s: FENCE 81 SE -001-048-00 '% OF NW .PROP CORNER- 1.2'W► •fc TRACT 997 (- 10 STQRM DRAIN EAScMENT INLINK FENCE 8.006 S.F.• I -- N86'38'3TE` a114:29' OPEN SPACEI ------------- ivlb I ".TROT 999 \ i g 21;.110 S.F. ' #WA \ � 1.1'E I zI � pst . W � 1.4.E •` � � `` , o . o- 5.. S:lFj �S O r a�ao WETLAND O h OHO �� r zM 2.5'E / iv r . '4 !� TR T 98� N- A 2.5'E 7.153 .F 9 No N06'49 4 'Wry = Fo 1.9.12:.:.2.�i r \ 3.1'E . io i r . : 0.4 MOORY S r SME. N90, OO'E o �i.. .9" S :.: i M 98.000OTAL ` _ to co 31.00' r. a w r � w - 3.1'E 81.00 17 r 4' HOGWIRE FENCE { �u 6 68' . g o' { + Epp 3 WE pp1 8 X : •62.14 - Iw . r 1� N9 0'00 7 pp• 3 N O OJ 13 Y 8.7E Z 90 O'000W M r .1.5E 6 4.887 S..F. ryp. • r °O 'P 5 gyp, q hry �• 4,553 S:F: W • i r o 1 to 3 CHAINLINK FENCE ' .4'E .�•>> :'N90ti0'OQ"E 90:19'. 2 a ra OP` fell 10, 0 F EDhr� 17001 CITY OF EDMONDS WATERLINE AS -BUILT ADDRESS: WATERLINE NO. 17003 77TH PL W BLD20060332 CONTRACTOR: HOMEOWNER: SCALE: HILLCREST KVERNMO NTS DATE INSPECTED: INSPECTED BY: DATE DRAWN: DRAWN BY: 6/15/06 ES 6/15/06 BRONDER 10106 Airport Way Suite #A Snohomish, WA. 98296 Phor": (425) 4W5958 / (360) 56"958 Fwdp (360) 5W7506 0 H.B. Jaeger Co., LLC Jon @ Hillcrest Const. Fes; John Scott Fax.- 425-25"799 - 12 (INCLUDING COINER) Phone.- tlWea 1-17-06 Re: Edmonds grinder email - johns@hbjaeger.00m ❑ Urgent X For Review 0 Please Comment ❑ Please Reply11 Please Recycle Jon, Here are the "spec sheets" for the Hydromatic grinder pump. There is probably more than th®y need tx,t it is everything they faxed to me. The local authorized repair facirity is: Pump Tech Nffevue, WA 425-644-8501 Mike Dunn , 4AP U /5- , T -d 90S1.-899 (179E) E$U JAN 19 2006 BUILDING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDMONDS oO ..ia2ae,e ON eI"11 90 LT vet `01/I6/2005 15:50 4257439244 UNITED PIPE PAGE 02/13 Seciran GARM Ragc 302 Dated K=Rt 2000 5uMesdes MAY- 2W MODEL- HpGR- tOndard Grinder Pumps lim"ZI R TYPE ---,_.___ MOTOR DESIGN NEMA TYPE: GENERAL INSULATION CLASS STATOR WINDING CLASS F MAXIMUM STATOR TEMPERATURE VOLTAGE TOLERANCE gnp v HvolmO 1EATIC O Zd 9OSG- 89S fO9E) .3450 OIL COOLED INDUCTION, CAp START A (lo) 8 F 130'C - ----- *10% 90 G T uer 01/16/2006 15:50 4257429244 UNITED PIPE PAGE 86/Ia C-d Section GRLUQ page 02 Dated MY 2M SupeMsdes *AT 2M AA ML* HR6R Standard GAnldler Rumps �Ph"---iml— ��: DISCHARGE SIZE IMPELLER TYPE CABLE LENGTH MAXIMUM LIQUID M4XIMUM STATOR OIL FLASH POINT HEAT SENSOR Open: Closed: rechnicw Dolo: POWER CORD TYPE "DrOR HOUSIIJG CASING Z IMPELLER 00 CUTTERS #O�uC � S1al7a�ery. F- Upper (Axiei). �cc Lower MDTOR SHAFT HARDWARE "0" RINGS MECHANICAL SEALS Standard: UPPER BEARING -- LOtR1 -R SEARING MIN.— B-aQ SEARING LIFE Qnp °HP®R01W/ 71C. ;• NPT SEMI -OPEN 61/ANE IT STANDARD PAINTED AFTER ASSEMBLY. DARK GREEN, ENAMEL, ONE COAT AIR DRIED, 140°F 266OF 390"F 257•F MAX_/239°F MIN, 194°F MAX./149°F MIN. SOW/SOW-A WATER RESISTANT 600V, 8D0C CAST IRON ASTM A-48 CLASS 30 -- CAST IRON ASTM A 48 G q�, 30 RED BRASS #85-5-5.{ AS1V BS84,&WVAL0X 420 SEO WITH BRONZE INSERT 440C STAINLESS STEEL HARDENED TO SS sD ROCKWELL C 440C STAINLESS STEEL HARnfNW TO ,r�� ROCMVELL C 44pC STAINLESS STEEL HARDENED TOAD RU[`KWEI� C 416 STAINLESS STEEL 300 SERIES STAINLESS STEEL, SUNA N SINGLE CARBONC�Mle'A NA-N -----------__.._.._---------�._� TYPE 21 (RADIALy SMtlaLE ROW BALL 5203 THRUST) _STj SINGLE ROW BALL 63Q6 908G-•89S 109C) 03 aa2aeC HH eTT=TT 90 GT ueT- 01/16/2006 15:50 4257439244 UNITED PIPE PAGE 03/I3 .Section QRINOR rage 102 [dated MAY 2000 Superesdes XW 19" PRPM: formance � Curve 500 Discharge.- 1-1141 v —� ractor of 1.2. O ---- —v WUI; exceeding fun 1 Cu Gmtt Periprme,� cure Peratiotl is recommended in the bounded are trail (Name} ever. es ar�r based or? acxual lasts w th dear water at 70° F, and 9 80 feet s IO W1htn the �� HYDAOMATIC (.ondttionq of service: PaPIN: _-__ TOM b •d 90S�.-t39S loge) 47 �a�lael^ Hti * I I= I 1 90 G I uer 01/17/2006 09.39 4257439244 LNITED PIPE PAGE 02/08 G'd AKINDUSTRIjES.�n,s�raloll=,c�u.1rf��lwr;:� :_,��-g—WWMMMMas-r;�� 24"' RSE'RGL ASS PASINS um so ��NQI GB 24 X024-100 GB-24 X030.100 GS-24XOW1go (3B-24 Xo42106 G8-24X04&iW +� C43-24 X O64.100 G8-24X080.100 G&24X 066-too f Bn ^HEB.-�LM �, eft-�NO GB-24XO?4.200 GB-74 X 030 200 GB-24X036.2W (38-24 X 042.2W GB-24 X 054 QW GS-24XOeo-2oo Yk ax0i2100 c&?AX0SSQW G&z4 Xa7e-10D GB-24xo72-200 �► G8-24 X078 ?p0 GB 24 X 084.16p,..��: CiBf24 X 08d-2dl �o- 4B- G&24X098-200 G&24x10 -Mo GD-04X 1cia,2oo 68-24 X 114-MO GS-24 X 120-200 GB-24 X 1,"() 69-24 X 132-2W GB-24 X 138-200 G8-24 X 144,M GB24X 150-2W 08-24 X 156.200 G13-24 X 162-200 Ci 3-24X 188-200 GS-24 X 174-2W GD-24X 180.200 G-24 X 186-� GO-94 X 192 2W G824 X 198-M GS-24 X 204-200 G&20210,2W GB-24 X 216.2W GB,24 X222 200 GB-24 X 22B-2o0 GB-24X2U.top G13-24 X 240-2(0 BNKWI GE .24 X(L24-= GS-24X0WaW Q&24Xo36-3W G&24XOQ,Wo Q"M48-3w GB-24 XG54.3Qp G&24 X oea.eao 0e-24 x oes-300 G&24 )f 07-A.= G"4XOM,Vo GB-24 X 090,O0 G&24 X o98-300 G&24 X 102-Mo M24X 108.30G QS-24X11420U GS-24 X 12t1.3M GS-24 X 129-3W M-24 X 132,300 6824 X 13MM G8-24 X 14"M GB24X 1S0-a0D GB-24X IWSM a"4X162-300 Q"4Xi6&3W GS-24X 174-300 G9-24X 160,1M GW24X IW3p0 GB24X 1812.3W M-24X198-3W M,NX204.3p0 GB 24X210 30q GB,24X2164W QB-24X222,900 GB-24X228,3W GB-24XP,W,90p GB 24X24o300 p OPTIONS SMUD(MUM � srocX ITEMS BE' sH FPED tiM1/lTfilN 48 HpUR6 �iC?nll gED�yt MOF oenMoenSABINS W� AN11- A111 FONT RANGE M 16 LaS To WEX, GE ADD 551 BHTHT sort-BgS roge) 47 GAL 59 GAL 71 GA!_ 62 GAL 94 GAL 1(16 GAL 118 GAL 129 GAL 141 GAL. 159 GAL 165 GAL 176 GAL 180 GAL, 200 GAL 212 GAL 229 GAL 285 GAL 247 GAL, W9 GAL 270 GAL 2822 GAL 294 GAL 306 GAL 317 GAl. a29 GAL 341 GAL 333 GAL 364 GAL . 376 GAL 388 GAL 400 GAL 411 GAL 423 GAL 435 GAL 447 GAL 458 GAL 470 GAL 12LOS 15LBS IS LOS 21LOS 24LBS 27LBS 30 LBS 33LBS 38 LBS 39LBS 63M Be Las 7eLEIS 77LBG 81LBS 86LBS t 80LSS 05 Las 99LOS 104LBS 108LBS 150LB6 1SSLBS 162LBS lagL$$ 174M 16otas 186jBS 192m looL.9$ ax L8S 210LAS 216LBS zmws 218 LBS 2i4 LBS j MLSS a °a ,�aXaef HH e'2 T � T T 90 L. T ueL- 1. DWELLING PROPERTY OWNER PUBLIC RIGHT—OF—WAY PUMP CONTROL PROPERTY LINE PANEL LOCKING LAMPHOLE COVER FINISHED GRADE 3' MIN COVER — 12" PVC SLEEVE 6" RISER 6' WYE AND 45' AND 1/8 BEND 5' MIN �Z`ill----11 2• �-- I I ( TYPICAL SIDE SEWER SEE DETAIL 'A' FOR CONNECTION GRAVITY FLOW IN THIS AREA FROM DWELLING FORCE MAIN 2' IPS POLY HI-MOL PIPE (200 PSI) GRINDER PUMP ASSEMBLY GRINDER PUMP SERVICE LINE NOTES - JAN 19 2006 �uCI�T,Y�of E VAO 0Sr1Y ROADWAY GRAVITY SEWER MAIN I PROPERTY OWNER I PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY GLUED MAINORCE—\ �- 6' SDR 35 PIPE 1. WRAP AND TAPE 12 GAUGE TRACER WIRE EVERY 101 TO THE FORCE MAIN. 2. THE LOCATION OF THE STUB SERVICE TERMINATION SHALL BE MARKED BY THE CONTRACTOR WITH 2' X 4' TIMBER EXTENDED VERTICALLY FROM THE PLUG END TO A MINIMUM OF 3' ABOVE THE GROUND SURFACE. A 12-GAUGE GALVANIZED WIRE SHALL BE ATTACHED TO THE TIMBER FROM END TO END. NEITHER THE WIRE NOR THE 2' X 4' SHALL BE ATTACHED TO THE SEWER PIPE OR PLUG, THE EXPOSED PORTION OF THE 2' X 4' SHALL BE PRE -PAINTED TRAFFIC WHITE WITH THE WORDS 'GRINDER PUMP SEWER CONNECTION' STENCILED ON WITH BLACK PAINT. THE END OF THE 2' X 4' SHALL BE PRE -MARKED IN PERMANENT INK WITH THE LENGTH OF THE TIMBER INSTALLED. 3. GRINDER PUMP VENTILATION SHALL BE CONNECTED TO THE HOUSE SEWER VENTING SYSTEM, PER NFPA CODE. Ia90-199v 6' SDR 35 SPIGOT (W/ 6' GASKET) X 4' SCH 40 HUB 44' X 2' SCH 80 SLIP X THREAD BUSHING 2' BRASS MIP X IPS COMPRESSION FITTING WITH STAINLESS STEEL INSERT DETAIL 'A' CITY INSPECTI❑N REQUIRED PRI❑R TO BACKFILL REVISIONS STANDARDADETAIL APPROVED BY DATE D. cESERT 6/16/03 GRINDER PUMP SERVICE CONNECTION TO GRAVITY SEWER MAIN a cESErtT U2V03 DATE 5/9/02 SCALE NTS DWG NO. EG.9 �s Mar-08-06 08:34A ROBERT N. PARNELL, PE 425/641-5095 P.02 i v PRE -DESIGN REPORT SANITARY SEWER GRINDER PUMP CHARLOTTE GARDENS EDMONDS, WA FOR RECEIVED JON KVERNMO HILLCREST CONSTRUCTION CO., INC MAR - 9 2006 P.O. BOX 3121 EVERETT, WA 98123 BUILDING DEPT, 425 259-2775 BY ROBERT N. PARNELL,PE RN PARNELL CO 4422187T" PLACE SE ISSAQUAH, WA 98027 (425) 643-3560 MARCH 7, 2006 STREET FILE Mar-08-06 08:35A ROBERT N. PARNELL, PE 425/641-5095 P_03 PRE DESIGN REPORT CHECK LIST SINGLE FAMILY ualifications of Engineer: Robert N_ Parnell, PE is a civil engineer registered in the State of Washington, license # 19775. He has designed simplex and duplex sanitary sewer pump stations with force main conveyances as well as gravity sanitary systems_ 1. Designs include a duplex sanitary sewer and force main for an office building serving 100 people for Weyerhaeuser Company, Enumclaw; several individual single family residences serviced by a 2" PVC force main collector line discharging into a gravity line within the Sammamish Plateau Water and Sewer District; an EPA grant design for simplex grinder pump and force main collector serving multiple single family residences due to failed septic systems along Puget Sound within the Ronald Sewer District, and a duplex grinder pump 2" PVC force main system that discharged into a 8" DIP main line sanitary sewer force main for the Washington State Patrol Station, Marysville, WA Experience includes design for domestic and fire water, sanitary sewer, and storm water systems for single family, multifamily, commercial, and industrial use. Topographic Services Area Map: Topographical limits of pump station service area. The attached map provided by Hillcrest Construction Company, _Inc. illustrates the residential lots to be served by the grinder pumps, force mains to serve lots, and the location of the gravity system. Each grinder pump lot, Lots #3, 4, 5, & 6 have individual 2" HDPE force mains that discharge into the 8" gravity sanitary sewer. Length of force main varies from 36 feet to 155 feet. Property boundaries. Each lot with property boundary is shown on the map. 160 Year Flood Plain line. The site is outside the 100-year flood plain line Location of nearest sewage collection system piping. Location of 8" gravity sewer main is shown on the map and is the manhole located within the 5-foot wide utility sewer easement on lot #3. Location of sewer stub that the force main will connect to. This location is the manhole located within the 5-foot wide utility sewer easement on lot #3 and then discharges into SSMH#2 Location of water service to the house(s). Water meter locations are shown on the map. Sanitary sewer force mains (2" dia_ HDPE) will be under the water meters and home service lines. Location of house(s) with water service lines and side sewers to be provided by contractor. Separation of water and sanitary sewer lines to meet health department codes such as 10-foot horizontal separation and sanitary sewer line to be under the water line by at least 18" when crossing. RECEIVE® MAR - 9 2006 BUILDING DEPT. Mar-08-06 08:35A ROBERT N. PARNELL, *PE 425/641-5095 P_04 Design Calculations Present, design, and ultimate water fixture counts and their associated flows. Each new single family home is assumed to have three bathrooms totaling three toilets, four bathroom sinks, three showers/tubs; kitchen with sink, dishwasher, garbage disposal, and laundry room with clothes washer..Outside hose bibs will not be connected to sanitary sewer system. Associated flows indicate bathroom units are 8 gpm, kitchen sink with food grinder is 3 gpm, dishwasher is 2 gpm, cloth washer 2 gpm. Maximum peak sanitary sewer flow is estimated at 3 x 8+3+2+2 = 31 gpm. Average daily flow from a typical residential dwelling is about 50 gals/capita/day. For a family of four, an estimate of volume is 200 gallons/day per residence. Proposed grinder pump curve and system curve. Hydromatic curve for HPGR is attached. Pump station hydraulic computations: (see attached calculations) Pump cycle time ( minimum twice daily) Wet well capacity (165 gallons) Flushing velocity (2:5 ft/sec min) Force main hydraulic losses (various based on static head and FM losses) Minor Hydraulic losses due to valve and fittings (Assume 2 foot head loss) Net positive suction head (Yes vacuum not created) Sump basin anti -flotation calculations Provided by manufacture Soil Bearing pressure: Assume 2000 psf Electrical Power Requirements 230 volt single phase 15 Amp dedicated circuit Other applicable calculations (Provided as requested) Additional Submittal Requirements checklist Manufactures data, drawings and details for preassembled grinder pump station and instrumentation clearly indicating compliance with all specified requirements. (Catalog cut sheet attached) Documentation of source of supply and or repair located within 24 hour delivery time. ( Supplier name ) Drawing showing location of pump station, discharge line, connection to sewer main, cleanouts, fittings, and alarm panel (audio and visual) etc. (see attached site map provided by developer/contractor) Grinder pump to be located at least 5 feet away from structure and within 15.feet of a home hose bib. Alarm panel to be located outside of home along side of home visible from street. Power from home electrical box on dedicated 120 volt 20 amp circuit with buried line located in non-metallic casing. There will be a 4" clean out between home sewer line and the grinder pump. The 2" HDPE force main is already in place and is shown on the site map adjacent to the road within a 5 foot sanitary sewer easement. MAR — 9 2006 BUILDING DEPT., Mar-08-06 08:35A ROBERT N. PARNELL*' PE 425/641-5095 P.05 /oe Jr _ � ircc: i�/.a Pr'tr-r!Lr 'y r ho %v /S /7o S � ,g 413 r i %7vh: ol..1.jmw- %� � o�v Cam . :(Q' .EGEIVED MAR _ �i :S'q 2)C7T3 BUILDING DEPT; �l,=T /- 9 7 a�� /wS i 1�I-F--V - COM PL-V7 F C DA I r-oe Mar-08-06�08:35A ROBERT�N- PARNELL, PE `v 425/641-5095 ..,.� P.06 INSTALL. Sput RAIL FENCE (2 RAILS) \ • /l%I�i/i� 1• � 7 � \ J C8 2 \ \ 21A STALL 6" CAP MQ THRUST BLOCK \ Is FM f I 1 t f ! 1 FD IE=174.00 , ! ?°'' 1,90110'0D"E I A 62.140 i 14 ; I FM t I r jSq r.z:.a180.0D � I 1 t t 1 I r _ f — — • Ia3� --r--.....�� •'r 1 ! 1 ' i SSMK #7 / S` CONC. �, ��ra•� S WALKWm t I DRIVEWAY CUY —'` E226rn 1 1 1` jb .b - err, \ `Y SSM�JL200 � ( \ ® R MAR - 9 2006 f BUILDING DEPT. i Mar=08-06 08:36A ROBERT N. PARNELL, PE 425/641-5095 P_07 UNITED PIPE P46E 03/L3 t)1/).5/RAG 15:90 4257439244 Seckm affim F&P M4 Cted )M 2W SLversdes IN 1"t mow: 3300 Cwwgr1.1/40 m Pao+pc"mMm a Cho"C SO I o+f.z i. rsoo 'WMkd 0 tro uotmdee eras.lh opot MW11 pant WM* Vw� dnve �! R!rlp�gnpt d1nr� an bases an a m0 tan; W" ON? water at 7ir F. and 12W oftatwt ilia �ao��• RECEIVED TW MAR - 9 2006 BUILDING DEPT. b-01 90Sl-g95 (09E) az? ..a2®er HH "T : t l 90 LT uer Mar-08-06 08:-36A ROBERT�N- PARNELL, PE425/641-5095 P.08 01/17/2086 69:34 42574392a4 LNiTED P2PE PAGE 02/09 AMDUSTRICS 24p RBBRGLASS BASINS c, - d I- c�-24xa2�.pan c�.z4XQ24-too (�4X03o�1eb (ipl�4 x 000+20D GBaaXWe-tfl0 # C3B-8+dX096��00 00-24XO42-100 G94aX•042400 G&M040-io0 a: [E24X0484 0 0 (3&pAX0W()0 GB, )tDs4.g00 GB-24MG-100 QB-24xae0aoo X Ge2dXoWtae 08�24XQ ll-zw C&24X9iZ = V 88,8aX072-WO aM GGI X 870.100 aff44 X07SM �a4xoeo�oo G8�4Xff96,2o0 � t�8,adxlo¢�oa 0e,24X 1p&M, WNX 1 u-mb Mftxiewo ' Gd9,24X72B,20D 08.24X 132,aD0 0W24 X t384aa 68-NX 144 m GB•24X 1904M GO-24X 150 M (;O-PA X I62�m Q"4x 18e.2oo G844 X 174-W0 G�8,7a X 1ApS000 G"4X ISB,= G044 X 1-%Lxo Go" ' X19112= W-24aosaaa W-24xilo 0G? (3444X210-zoo G&24x222-m aw axm.m m7.4)(291t-m GH,24X240.200 mm AB nBj-W L1&MOO M 'aG 12Las G8-z4X03DaW 69 GAL IslBS G OMMM n GOAL 18M G7G.9sxQQ- 00 92 M 21 LES GaNX04saw 94GAL abt8s OD24XOS44M IN GAL Z?Lw 0"A x 06 aw i18 GAL auLas M249006%100 12DGAL 33L9S G944XOn rm 141 GAL 365.00< W-24X070400 Ise w 39LBS 0944xms w is cm mum 0"I xowm 178 GAL SeLas ap 24 x 098 = 199 Gib r21BB G3 0e x iae- o 2M GAL 77LBS GNSX t Ism 212 GSM. 81 LIB (dB,4MU-§W M GAL SOLOS GWX120-m 2m ML sam Q9e4 X 1211-= 747 Qk SOM t39N x 12NM Q99 GAL 99LOO 08-&X 1311-M 2m CAL 104LUS W24X 14WW 219 G& 108L88 00624xff#000 2NGAL iseta GO-N x t50.3w N8 OAL 156LBS G844X 16Raoa 317 QkL 162 LN 00-94XIS84M aa9 a& "BLAB M-24X174= 941 G& 174Ue es-04ifiss- 00 333 GAL 18DLBS GB24XIS63M 44 GAL 16Bim awx19kLm 9T6 GAL 19i tm 9" X 19E-0o .''fie GAL Ma Gi4-Wx2D4= 400 OAL MUSS G M)(2.10-MO 411 Oft 21CLOB G"X216900 43lift 219LOS cBoxam4m 4m s =LOS GNMX229�80o 447 GAL =LB6 0"x234am 488GAL 234LBS Go^- X?40.140 1 470 GAL zy m !' ETC= ffEMS CAN W S40"D %VM N 48 F CKft FMM 1iEWff 00F DFIpM MOM W*V ANT)-; AT FLANW AM t5 LBS To HmamT & MM %"MM W1-FLOiRT RANG* AM SS LBSTO Moff SOSL-899 G09E1 EI W E® 8 MAR - 9 2006 BUILDING DEPT. 0.1 BH eZi = I I .9() f I YeC Mar-08-06�08:36A ROBERT,N. PARNELL, PE425/641-5095 _ P.09 emst2M tS:58 4257439244 \ UNITED PIPE WAGE 82/13 SeCt1Of GOW raw' El�e#!eq! Omd 01mm 21do SL"M ft W- me � OWEL' HM—§Mndard Grinder Pumps R.P.M. ?450 MOTOR TYPE ENCLOSM. OIL COOLEDRT STA MOTOR DES1WN NEMATYPE _MOUCIP4,CAP A(1s) (3MEM WSULAnoN CLASS B STATOR WIMING CLASS F T3D7; MAP" STATOR TEMPERATwE VOLTi10E TOLERANCE f107G 4, 1 *o* 4 f �i F o7, 8D 1 J 1.111.913-271 �r M1/DROMATIQ • Z-cd SUSG-ass; 10981 00 -aft2owc RH l RECEIVED MAR - 9 2006 BUILDING DEPT 01-T :" gD L.i uec Mar-08-06 08:36A ROBERT N. PARNELL, PE 425/641-5095 ^M` P . 10 etli6lzeab I9:58 c7�743924a Sedon fad P�ge.H2 Dated ANY Sao UNITED PIPE MOM H1OR -- StarAderA Grinder Pumps Ph"ied Daft OISCHARGC- SQE 1'/.• NpT IMPBLI.ER TYpE OEWOM 6 VANE CABUE LEN" IS' STANDARD PAINT PANITM AFTER A$S-ABLY. DARN ENAloft- ONE CoAT,, A1R BRIM. MAXIMUM MUM 14VF MAXIMUM STATon �•F ( OIL FLASH POfIr �p^p "CAT SENSOR OPom 25T'F MAX./23rIr MIN. Ciased; 136•F MAXdlWF NIR). POMR CORD TYPE Ww/90w-A wATE1R ►tESWTA rr 6wY. 80'C MOTOR HCVSWG CAST IRM ASTMI A-4B CLASS 30 CASM CAST IRON AMU A-A8 CLASS 3p - T o WFAAMt AST M B5B4.93AALOX 420 JMO yIII N ORONW `n cuTTEitS :BRAISSXWS-&S fttEqr slal)O"W 440CWS STM, yARD�ENw Tl) won LL C VOW (A*OX "X AINLESS 9TFAL HARDENED?O ss4o ROCKWEtLC g Lower (I OCbfr 440C STAINLESS MM HARDENED TO 55-8o f brxu Et,L C v M011DR SHA" 4%6 STAINLESS STE EL HARDWARE 300 SERIES STMNLM BTEK w W RUA N MECHAN)CAL SEALS Stnderc� SM IF CAR$ONfCERAMICAlft, -N. TYP6. 21 UPPER BEARING (RADIAL) SPALE ROW BALL SM LOUR BEI1RW, (iTOLM) SINGLE RQW BALL B9f]B MIN. fs-10 Bbtftwo LIFE in; uk, ILOM fir WIMMON471W Ed 9o$G-g9S ID9E) a, aavaer $H PAGE 86/13 i RECEIVED MAR - 9 2006 BUILDING DEPT. eTi=Ti 90 /T ueC Consulting Robert M. Pride, Inc. Engineer February io, 20o6 Mr. Jon Kvernmo Hillcrest Construction Company P. O. Box 3121 Everett, WA 98213 Re: Geotechnical Review Proposed Residences 1700110 17009 771h Place West Edmonds, Washington Plan Check #05-566, 67, 73, 76, 77 Dear Mr. Kvernmo, FEB 15 2006 BUILDING OF DMOD As requested by the City of Edmonds I have reviewed my prior reports prepared for the five proposed residences on Lots 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7 in this subdivision located along 77th Place West in Edmonds. Our geotechnical investigation performed on Lots 2 through 7 was summarized in the December 15th report, which will be submitted along with the plans and specifications for obtaining residential permits on these lots. The plans for the residential structures on each of the five lots were previously reviewed and they were found to comply with the recommendations made in our geotechnical report. Although Nelson Geotechnical was involved in the original platting of this - subdivision, we will be acting as the geotechnical engineer of record during construction of the residences. Any field inspections that are required during site excavation/grading and during foundation installations will be performed, and field memos will be submitted for City review. Individual Agreement Forms for each lot will be signed and submitted along with this final review letter. Please call me if there are any questions. Respectfully, Robert•M. Pride, P. E. Principal Geotechnical Engineer dist: (1) addressee rmp: HillcrestRes4 EXPIRES 117 7u-- 13203 Holmes Point Drive NE Kirkland, WA 98034 Phone: 425-814-3970 - 1 - 672 FREY` 15 05'07:53p ROBERT M PRIDE INC i Robert M. Pride, Inc. 'December 15, 2005 Mr. Jon Kvernmo Hillcrest Ctmslruction P. O. Box 3121 Everett, WA 98213-1121 Re: GcotechnicalInves-ftalion Proposed Residences — Lots 2 and 4-7 17007 77LI` Place West Edmonds, Washington RMP Projtx:t No. 05-352-01 Dear Mr. Kvernmo, 425 814 5672 p.1 Consulting Engineer FEB 15 2006 BUILDING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDMONDS This report presents the results of our site exploration and gcotechnical evaluation for five single fwnily residences in the Charlotte Carden development in Edmonds. The property is situated adjacent to ?7th Place and just norill of 17pl Street SW. It is understood that single family residences will be constructed on these lots. The purpose of this investigation was to establish the nature of 1-hesubsurface soil conditions that will provide support to the stnictures, and to provide recontnnendations' for the design and construction of the foundations. Preliminary plans for these houses show that minor site grading will be required to establish building pad grades. USGS mapping for this area of Edmonds was used as a reference for this investigation. Site Conditions Previous clearing and grading have been performed on this site in connection -with the overall six lot development. The access street has been paved and utilities have been installed to serve the residential lots. Observations of the,ground conditions indicate that fill has been placed over most of the lots to create the existing grades that slope generally toward the nurtheasL. A steep slope descends down toward the easterly side of this development and there is a designated wetland west of Lot #6. T9ie slope on the easterly side of the plat is heavily covered with vines and native shrubs, and there are some mature trees located on this native 1v211:1V slope. Observationsof this slope showed no evidence of gross failures or instability` that would affect the proposcd construction. According to Minard (USGS —1983) this area of Edmonds is underlain by glacial till (Qvt) and advanced outwash deposits (Qva). Seven exploratory trenches were dug in the area of the proposed residences to confirm the presence of fill soils and to classify — 13203 I•lolmes point Dhve NE Kiiklend, WA 99034 Fax: 425-814-5672 Phone: 425-814-3970 bee 15 05 07:53p ROBERT M PRIDE INC 425 814 5672 p.2 l _1)ecemher 15, 2005 Mr. Jon Kveinmo Page 2 the underlying native soils. The lest pits encountered soft fill soils and organics to depths of two feet and there was obvious construction debris and tree remnants that were buried in the fill. Below the fill were topsoil and medium dense silty sands that were categorized as weathered till. A majority of the fill material on this plat is located on Lots 6 and 7 that are on the westerly side: of the property. Up to seven feet of soft and loose fill with organics and debris were encountered on IAA #y. Lots 2 through 6 had fill and disturbed soils that ranged from 1 to as much as 4 feel as disclosed by [he test pits. �Groundwatcr seepage was not encountered in any of the exploratory test pits. Summary logs of these test pits are shown on Appendix A and their locations are shown on Drawing No. 1. C.eotechnical Recommendation,, On the basis of our site inspection and subsurface exploration, the proposed residence foundations for Lots z through 6 must extend through the fill tend bear on the medium dense to dense native silty sands. 1,00tix)g depths are c;xpected to range from to as much as 5 feet to bear on the undisturbed native soils. An allowable soil bearing value of 2000 psf may be used in the design of these footings that should have a minimum depth of 18 inches below final exterior ,grade. This value may he increased by 1/3 to account for temporary seismic or wind loadings. A passive earth pressure of 200 pcf may be used to resist lateral forces. Where fill soils exceed a depth of about five feet on Lot #7, it is recommended that the bearing wall footings lie supported on driven pipe piles either 3 or 4 inches in diameter. Thesc piles should be Schedule 80 galvanized pipe that are driven to refusal into the native till soils. Refusal is defined as less than one inch of penetration over a period of 3o and 15 seconds, respectively using a 450it or 850# pneumatic: bainnrer. Bach pile may be loaded up to 8 and 20 tons, respectively for working capacity. Where pipe piles are used for foundation support they should be connected with concrete grade beams that also provide- support for the concrete slabs. If the upper fill soils are compacted with a vibratory roller to a depth of two feet, tht: floor slabs can be poured on the compacted fill. Some interior slab settlement can be expected where the depth of fill exceeds illree feet. Some excavation wilt be required to establish the building pad for the residence foundations. 'excavated soils should not be used for structural fill under the residence, but may be placed in landscape areas or hauled offsite. Normal erosion control procedures should be in place for construction of this residence in the coming winter months. Site drainage improvements will i nc:l ude the installation of footing sit bd roc i ns, a rea 13203 Holmes Point Drive NE Kirkland, WA 98034 Fax: 425-814-5672 Phone: 42" 14-3970 r, Dec 15 05 07:53p ROHERT,M PRIDE INC 425 814 5672 p.3 17 December 15,'2005. Mr_ .Ton Kvernmo Page 3 drains and roof down drains. Discharge of these drains should 1.x- into the existing storm water system installed as part of the street improvements. Summary Construction monitoring and consultation services should also be provided to verify that subsurface conditions are similar to those described in this report. Should conditions be revealrcl during construction that vary from the anticipated subsurface profile, we will evaluate those conditions and provide alternative recommendation's where appropriate. 'fhc conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on i) our interpretation and evaluation of soil conditions on this site, 2) confirmation of the actual subsurface conditions encountered during construction, and 3) the assumption that sufficient observation and testing will be performed during the appropriate pleases of the work. Our findings and recommendations in this report were prepared in accordance wish generally accepted principles of geotechnical engineering as practiced in the Puget Sound aren at the time our work was performed. Wo make no warranty, either express or implied. please call me if there are any questions or you wish to discuss this report in greater detail. •pectfully, Robert M. Pride, P. E. Principal Ccotechnical Engi dirt: (2) Addressee rrnp: 'H Platt 13203 Holmes Point Drive NJ: Kirkland, WA 98034 Fax: 425-814-5672 Phone, 425-314-3970 Dee 15 05 07:53p ROBERT M PRIDE INC 425 814 5672 APPENDIX A Summary Logs of Test Pits Test Pit No. 1 —Lot 7 0.0 — 4.Oft FILL: Silty sand; gray brown, soft, very moist; with organics- 4-0 — 5.0 ft NATIVE SOIL: Silty sand and sandy silt; brown, moist, medium dense; Test Pit No_ 2 —Lot 7 0.0 — 6.0ft FILL: Silty sand and sandy silt; gray brown, soft, very moist; with organics and concrete debris; buried tree branch and roots; 6.0 — 7.0ft NATIVE SOIL: Silty sand; brown, moist, medium dense to dense; Test Pit No. 3 — Lot 7 0.0 — 7.Oft FILL: Silty sand and Sandy silt; gray brown, very moist, soft; with` organics and roots; 7.0 — 7.5ft NATIVE SOIL: Silty 'sand; brown, moist, medium dense; no groundwater; Test Pit No. 4 — Lot 2 0.0 —1-Oft FILL: Topsoil; Silty sand and sandy silt; brown, very moist, soft; 1.0 — 4.Oft NATIVE SOIL: Silty sand; brown moist, medium dense; no groundwater; Test Pit No 5 — Lot 3 0.0 —.2.0ft FILL: Silty sand: brown, very moist, soft and loose; 2.0 — 3.Oft NATIVE SOIL: Silty sand; brown, moist, medium dense: no groundwater; Test Pit No. 6 — Lot 4 0.0 —1.0ft FILL: silty sand; brown, moist, loose; 1.0 — 2.5ft NATIVE SOIL: Silty sand; brown, moist, medium'dense: Test Pit No. 7 — Lot 6. 0.0 — 3.Oft FILL: Silty sand; gray brown, very moist, loose; 3.0 — 4.0ft NATIVE SOIL: Silty sand; brown, moist, medium dense; Test Pit No. 8 — Lot 6 0.0 — 4,0ft FILL: silty sand; brown, very moist, loose; 4.0 — 5-oft NATIVE SOIL: Silty sand; brown, moist, medium dense; M. 13203 Holmes Point Drive NF Kirkland, WA 98034 Fax: 425 814 5672 Phone: 425-814-3970 p.4 rf Dec 15 05 07:54p ROBERT M�PRIDE ING 425 614 5672 p.5 2"AW CAW Ref: Plat Map for Charlotte Gardens SITE PLAN Proposed Charlotte Garden 77t" Place SW and 171d Street Edmonds. Washington Robert W. Frick Inc. Project No. 05-352-01 Drawing No. 1 0 Dec 20 05 05:1.Sp ROBERT M PRIDE INN 425 814 5672 p'e Robert M. Pride, Inc. December 28, 20 -5 Mr. Jon Kvcrnrno Hillcrc tit Construction P. (). Box 3121 Everett, WA 98213-1121 Re: Geotechnic81 11nvcstig2tion Proposed Residences — Lots 3 - 6 77th Place West rk1monck, Washington RMP Project No. 05-352-0 I Dear Mr. Kvernmo, Consulting Engineer At your request 1 have reviewed the plans for the proposcxl single family residences. to be constructed on In. is 3 through 6 in the Charlotte Gardens plat on 77LI- Place West in Edmonds. These residences have been sifted within the building setback limits as shown on the drawings by Home Design. Based on my site inspmtions and geoteclanical evaluation .as discussed in my December 2„d and t5"h reports, these slluctm-es can be constructed at Lheir proposed lrx:ations without any impact on the adjacent steep slope areas. Minimum slope setback distances from the face of the slope to the exterior foundation walls is at )cast 15 feet on Lot 3, 30 feet on Lot 4, 35 feet on Lot 5 and 35 feet on Lot 6. in my opinion these setback distances are satisfactory for the site. and subsurface conditions on these properties, and they will satisfy the requirements of ECDC #23.8o and 23.4o. Please call me if there are. any questions regarding this submittal. R(-fxxtfully, Robe M. P P. rt ride, (. Principal Geotechnical dirt: (,,) Address rmp: H0lcrcrtP1at2 rxritissD � JAN 19 2006 BUILDING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDMONDS 13203 HOIm� es 6n - NE Nrkiand WA 980 - Phone: 425-814-3870 .w Fax: 42165-814-5672 STREET FILE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EVALUATION TALBOT PARK ESTATES EDMONDS, WASHINGTON PREPARED FOR CITY OF EDMONDS STREET FILE 1 C E I T ED SEP 112003 Western Engineers, t NELSON GEOTECHNICAL Ik 19 A NASSOCIATES, INCGA. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS 17311 —135'" Avenue NE, A-500 Snohomish County (425) 337-1669 Woodinville, WA 98072 (425) 486-1669 • Fax (425) 481-2510 Wenatchee/Chelan (509) 784-2756 February 14, 2003 City of Edmonds Development Services Department 121 — 5 h Avenue North Edmonds, Washington 98020 Attn: Mr. Steve Bullock Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates Edmonds, Washington NGA File No. 360902 Dear Mr. Bullock: We are pleased to submit this report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation — Talbot Park Estates, Edmonds, Washington." This report summarizes the existing surface and subsurface conditions on the site and contains geotechnical recommendations for specific aspects of this development. Our services were completed in general accordance with the contract signed by you on December 11, 2002. It has been a pleasure to provide service to you on this project. Please contact us if you have any questions regarding this report or require further information. Sincerely, NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Khaled M. Shawish, PE Senior Engineer Five copies submitted - � � � / TABLE OF CONTENTS � SURFACECONDITIONS ............................................................................................................................................... 2 GEOLOGY � EXPLORATIONS.......................................................................................................................................................... 3 SENSITIVE AREA 5 SEISMICHAZARD ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 _ EROSION HAZARD ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 %�u«m�oos 8om» oInr--------------.-------.----------_-------.------'----_-..- 5 GENERAL................................................................................................................................................................... 7 EROSIONCONTROL MEASURES .................................................................................................................................. 8 STEEPSLOPE SETBACK .............................................................................................................................................. 8 SLOPE AND SETBACK PROTECTION ............................................................................................................................ 9 SITEPREPARATION AND GRADING ............................................................................................................................. 9 TampoRAarEXCAVATIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 10 SzRnczlomALFILL .................................................................................................................................................... I I FOUNDATIONS.......................................................................................................................................................... 12 .... 13 SITE -------'-_--__.'-'_'-'-13 NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. v Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates Edmonds, Washington INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the results of our Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation on Talbot Park Estates located in Edmonds, Washington. The site is located at 7707 — 1715L Street SW in Edmonds as shown on the Vicinity Map in Figure 1. A single-family residence is currently located on the site. The developer, plans to construct an access road near the western property line and divide the site into seven residential lots. We understand that the existing residence will remain and will occupy one of the lots. We have been retained to explore the subsurface conditions within the site, observe and map the slope surficial conditions, and provide geotechnical engineering recommendations for foundations and residence setback For the purpose of completing this study, we have been provided with a site plan prepared by Lovell-Sauerland Associates, Inc. titled, "Preliminary Plat for Talbot Park Estates," dated October 22, 2002. The site plan shows the planned lot layout and access road alignment, and has - topographic information. We have also been provided with a copy of a preliminary geotechnical evaluation report for the site, dated September 12, 2001, prepared by Liu & Associates, Inc. In your letter to us dated October 17, 2002, the City stated that the pertinent sections of the Edmonds Community Development Code for this project are 20.15B.I IO.A & D and 19.05. SCOPE The purpose of this study is to evaluate the site subsurface soils and hydrologic conditions and provide recommendations for site development. Specifically, our scope of services includes the following: 1. Review available geologic and soils maps of the area, and the provided geotechnical report for the site. 2. Explore the site subsurface soil and ground water conditions using a subcontracted backhoe. 3. Perform field mapping and develop cross sections on the steep slope at selected locations. 4. Evaluate slope stability on the site, and complete slope stability analysis. 5. Provide a recommended setback/buffer from the top of slope for building siting. 6. Provide recommendations for site grading and earthwork, including structural fill. r i r Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates Edmonds, Washington February 14, 2003 NGA File No. 360902 Page 2 7. Provide recommendations for foundations and slabs -on -grade. 8. Provide recommendations for site drainage and erosion control. 9. Document our explorations, findings, and conclusions and recommendations in a written geotechnical report. The report to address the pertinent sections of the ECDC. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions The site is a semi -rectangular -shaped parcel covering approximately 2.1 acres. The site is bordered by 171" Street SW to the south and a residential lot to the west. A ravine borders the site on the eastem and northern sides. A stream was flowing at the bottom of the ravine at the time of our field reconnaissance on December 18, 2002 and February 3, 2003. The site features are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. A residence with some outbuildings is situated in the southern portion of the site. This area is vegetated with a grass lawn and young to mature deciduous and evergreen trees. The northern portion of the site is undeveloped, and is vegetated with blackberry bushes brush, and young to mature deciduous and op g �' h, Y g evergreen trees. The main portion of the site slopes gently down toward the south. The ravine on the eastem side of the site slopes moderately to steeply down toward the east. The steep ravine slope is covered with fems, blackberry bushes, and young to mature deciduous and evergreen trees. Old growth stumps were observed on the slopes. We measured Cross -Sections A -A', B-B', and C-C' using a 100-foot tape. measure and a hand-held clinometer. The cross -sections are presented as Figures 3, 4, and 5. The portion of the steep slope at Cross -Section A -A', which has an approximate east -west orientation, has a total relief of approximately 30 feet. This portion of the ravine slopes toward the east with inclinations as steep as 27 degrees. The portion of the steep slope at Cross -Section BB', which has an approximate southwest -northeast orientation, has a total relief of approximately 60 feet. This portion of the ravine slopes down toward the northeast with inclinations as steep as 40 degrees. The portion of the steep slope at Cross -Section C-C', which has an approximate east -west orientation, has a total relief of approximately 25 feet; and slopes down toward the east with inclinations as steep as 38 degrees. NELSON GEOTECHN/CAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates k Edmonds, Washington February 14, 2003 NGA File No. 360902 Page 3 Subsurface Conditions Geology Most of the Puget Sound region was affected by past intrusion of continental glaciation. The last period of glaciation, the Vashon Stade, ended approximately 10,000 to 11,000 years ago. Many of the geomorphic features seen today are a result of scouring and overriding by glacial ice. During the Vashon Stade, the Puget Sound region was overridden by over 3,000 feet of ice. Soil layers overridden by the ice sheet were compacted to a much greater extent than those that were not. The geologic units for this area are shown on the Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Part of the Edmonds West Quadrangles, Washington, by James P. Minard (US Geological Survey, 1983). The site is mapped as till, which is described as an unsorted mixture of silt, sand, and gravel. Drift is a similar unit to till but has some sorting. Advance outwash and transitional bed materials are mapped a short distance r from the site. Advance outwash is described as sand with varying amounts of gravel. Transitional bed 1 material consists of bedded clay, silt, and fine sand. Our explorations encountered material consistent with the descriptions of drift and advance outwash, and we observed transitional bed material in the northeast section of the site, near the bottom of the ravine. Explorations The subsurface conditions within the site were explored on December 18, 2002 by excavating two hand auger explorations, and on February 3, 2003 by excavating nine test pits with a backhoe. The hand auger explorations extended to depths of 2.8 to 3.4 feet below the ground surface, and the test pits were excavated to depths of 4.0 to 7.0 feet below the ground surface. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. A representative of Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc., (NGA) was present during the explorations, examined the soils and geologic conditions encountered, obtained samples of the different soil types, and maintained logs of the hand augers and test pits. The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System, presented in Figure 7. The soil logs are attached to this report and are presented as Figures 8 through 11. We present a brief summary of the subsurface conditions in the following paragraphs. For a detailed description of the subsurface conditions, the logs should be reviewed. Our two hand auger explorations were located on the slope of the ravine feature. These, explorations NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates Edmonds, Washington February 14, 2003 NGA File No. 360902 Page 4 encountered 0.6 to 1.5 feet'of surficial topsoil material. Underlying the topsoil, we encountered silty fine to medium sand with gravel to fine to medium sand with silt and gravel. These soils extended to the bottom of the hand auger explorations, 2.8 to 3.4 feet below the ground surface. Test Pit 6, located near the north end of the planned access road, encountered 1.5 feet of loose surficial fill material composed of silty fine sand with roots and pieces of concrete. Our other eight test pit explorations encountered a surficial layer of topsoil 1.0 to 2.8 feet thick. Test Pits 3 and 4, located in the northern portion of the site, encountered material generally consisting of sand with silt below the surficial topsoil and extending to the bottom of the explorations. We interpret this material as outwash. The remaining seven test pit explorations encountered silty sand with gravel beneath the topsoil and fill. This material extended to the depth explored in these test pits, and was interpreted as glacial drift. Fine to medium sand seams were observed within this material in Test Pits 5, 6, and 7. _., We observed silt and clay material in several shallow hand excavations in the northeastern portion of the site, on the slopes near the bottom of the ravine. We interpreted this silt and clay material as part of the Transitional bed unit. Hydrologic Conditions Ground water seepage was not observed in any of our subsurface explorations or on the steep slope, however, a perched ground water condition could possibly develop above the low permeability soils found underlying the site. Perched water occurs when surface water infiltrates through less dense, more permeable soils and accumulates on top of the underlying, less permeable silts or flow into the joints found in the silt. The more permeable soils, in this case, consist of topsoil and fill. The less permeable soils consist of the underlying silty sand and silt. Perched water does not represent a regional ground water table within the upper soil horizons. Perched water tends to vary spatially and is dependent upon the amount of rainfall. We would expect the amount of ground water to decrease during drier times of the year and increase during wetter periods. Also, groundwater seepage could outcrop on the face of the steep slope during the wetter periods of the year. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates Edmonds, Washington February 14, 2003 NGA File No. 360902 Page 5 SENSITIVE AREA EVALUATION Seismic Hazard The project is located within Zone 3 of the Seismic Zone Map shown as Figure 16-2 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code (LTBC). This corresponds to a Seismic Zone Factor, Z, of 0.30. We recommend that the subsurface soils be considered Soil Profile Type SD, as described in the UBC. Hazards associated with seismic activity include liquefaction and amplification of ground motion due to soft soil. The glacially compacted soils inferred to underlie this site do not have a significant potential for liquefaction or amplification of ground motion. Erosion Hazard The criteria used for evaluation of erosion hazards include soil type, slope gradient, vegetation cover and groundwater conditions. The surface soil types (group classification) are related to the underlying geologic soil units. The Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area, Washington, by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS), was reviewed to evaluate the erosion hazard of the on -site soils. The surface soils at the site were mapped by the SCS and classified as Alderwood-Urban land complex (8 to 15 percent slopes). The erosion hazard for these soils is listed as slight. The slopes on the site have inclinations steeper than 15 percent in some areas. The erosion hazard for the steeper areas of the site is considered moderate to high. Landslide Hazard/Slope Stability The steeply sloping portion of the site has inclinations as steep as 40 degrees as measured in the field. We estimate that there is a change in elevation of up to 60 feet across the steep slopes along the eastern side of the site. The native soils that form the core of the slope are inferred to consist of competent glacially -compacted soils. We observed small scarps on the slope that appeared to be the result of shallow failures. A neighbor informed us that a failure occurred last year on a steep slope on the eastern side of the creek. We observed the scarp resulting from that failure, and some of the failed material near the bottom of the slope. This failure is interpreted to have been a shallow surface failure, and may have been the result of saturated slope conditions. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates Edmonds, Washington February 14, 2003 NGA File No. 360902 Page 6 We did not observe seepage on the steep slopes. We did observe several bowed mature deciduous and evergreen trees on the steep slopes. This is likely the result of soil creep. Based on the competent soils that are believed to form the core of the slope, the absence of indications of past deep-seated slope movement, and the absence of water seepage on the slope, we consider the slope to be stable with respect to deep-seated movements. However, we did observe indications that the slope has experienced shallow failures and gradual slope movement. We would expect that such events to continue in the future. There is a significant potential for shallow sloughing events to occur within the steeper portions of the site due to the steep inclination of the slopes. The potential for sloughing may be reduced by routing surface water away from the top of slope, maintaining vegetation on the slope, and repairing any areas disturbed during construction. Periodic monitoring of the site steep slopes is also recommended. With the recommended setback, these sloughing events should not adversely impact the planned structures. Slope Stability We analyzed global stability of the steep slope using a computer program titled XSTABL, version 5.2. XSTABL is a two-dimensional, limit -equilibrium, slope stability program. XSTABL generates random potential failure surfaces and determines their corresponding factors of safety with respect to failure. The factor of safety is defined as the ratio of the internal soil strength divided by the gravity driving forces that cause failure. By generating a large number of random surfaces, the factor of safety can be obtained as the lowest number calculated. The geometry of Cross -Section B-B' was used for the slope stability analysis. The factor of safety against slope failures affecting the ground surface 35 feet beyond the top of the steep slope was found to be above 1.5. The parameters and results for this analysis are shown in Figure 6. This analysis along with our field observations is the basis for establishing the recommended building setbacks. The shallow explorations within the upper portion of the cross-section B-B' encountered glacially consolidated sandy soil. We observed transitional bed material consisting of silt and clay in the lower section of the northern portion of the steep slope at cross-section B-B'. We did not perform laboratory shear testing of the onsite materials. We established design strengths based on visual evaluation and classification of the soils and our experience with similar conditions. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates Edmonds, Washington February 14, 2003 NGA File No. 360902 Page 7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMAMNDATIONS General It is our opinion that the planned development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. It is also our opinion that the soils that underlie the site and form the core of the site slopes should be stable with respect to deep-seated earth movements, due to their inherent strength and slope geometry. These soils should provide adequate support to standard shallow foundations. There is a potential for shallow sloughing and erosion events to occur on the steeper portions of the slope. We have provided recommendations to reduce the potential of such events and a slope setback distances to reduce the risk of adverse impacts to the residences should such events occur. This is further discussed in the Steep Slope Setback subsection of this report. The residences could be supported on conventional spread footings, provided that the foundation excavations are advanced through any surficial fill, topsoil, or loose material and extended into medium - dense or better native soils. Overexcavated material should be replaced with rock spalls or structural fill. The downhill footing lines, however, should be cast on native material. Surface water runoff and water from roof downspouts and yard areas should be collected and directed into appropriate drainage systems to reduce the amount of water flowing onto the steep slopes. It will be important to maintain the vegetation on the slope to reduce the erosion potential. The occurrence of sloughing on the slope can be reduced by routing storm run-off into appropriate water lines away from the slope or piping storm water to the base of the slope. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to flow over or concentrate on the site slopes, both during construction and after construction has been completed. The soils likely to be exposed during construction are considered moisture -sensitive and will disturb and erode easily when wet. We recommend that construction take place during the drier summer months, if possible. If construction takes place during the wet season, additional expenses and delays should be expected due to the wet conditions. Additional expenses could include the need to export on -site soil, the import of clean, granular soil for fill, and the need to place a blanket of rock spalls or crushed rock in the construction traffic areas and exposed subgrades prior to placing structural fill or structural elements. We do not recommend the use of on -site soils as structural fill in wet weather. After grading, the exposed NELSON GEOTECHNICAL .ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates Edmonds, Washington February 14, 2003 NGA File No. 360902 Page 8 subgrade should be protected from construction traffic and surface runoff. Erosion Control Measures The erosion hazard for the on -site soils site is considered moderate to high, depending on how the site is graded and water is allowed to concentrate. Best Management Practices (BMPs) should be used to control erosion. Areas disturbed during construction should be protected from erosion. Measures taken may include diverting surface water away from the stripped areas and from flowing over the slope. Silt fences and/or straw bales should be erected to prevent muddy water from leaving the site or flowing over the top of the slope. Disturbed areas should be planted with vegetation at the end of construction. The vegetation should be maintained until established. The erosion potential of areas not stripped of vegetation should be low. Steep Slope Setback Uncertainties related to building along steep slopes are typically addressed by the use of building setbacks. The purpose of a setback is to establish a buffer zone between a structure and the slope margin, so that ample room is allowed for normal slope surface regression or a minor slope failure. This setback also protects the slope from the impacts of the development. From a geological standpoint, a reasonable setback is based on the slope's physical characteristics; e.g., slope height, surface angle, material composition, hydrology, etc. Other factors such as historical slope activity, rate of regression and earthwork activity along the toe of slope, are important considerations as well. Based on our slope evaluation and observations, we recommend a minimum horizontal setback distance of 25 feet between the top of the steep slope and the planned residences on Lots 2, 3, and 4. The slope in the northern portion of the site is higher and has a steeper inclination. In addition, we observed silt and clay material in the lower portion of the slope in this area. Silt and clay usually have lower strengths than sand and gravel. For these reasons, and also based on our numerical slope stability analysis, we recommend a minimum horizontal setback distance of 35 feet between the top of the steep slope and the planned residences on Lots 5, 6, and 7. The 35-foot setback for Lots 5, 6, and 7 could be reduced to 25 feet if the downhill foundation lines for these residences are suitably deepened. For these lots, we recommend that the downhill foundation lines NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates Edmonds, Washington February 14, 2003 NGA File No. 360902 Page 9 be advanced a minimum of 7 feet below the existing ground surface if a 25-foot setback is desired. We should be retained to evaluate the residence foundation subgrade and setback distances prior to placing foundation forms. The existing residence on this site is located within 15 feet from the top of the steep slope. We do not know the depth of this residence's foundations, and have not evaluated the suitability of the residence setback from the steep slope. Slope and Setback Protection Protection of the setback and steep slope areas should be performed as required by the City of Edmonds. Specifically, we recommend that the setback areas not be used for placement or storage of fill materials, including temporary excavation spoils from building area preparation and excavation. Also, water should not be allowed to pond in the setback area or flow onto the face of the slope. It should be understood that the closer site soil disturbance and development are to the slope, the more risk there, is of decreasing slope stability. Care should be taken to minimize disturbance to the slope and setback surficial soils and vegetative cover both during and after construction. Of great importance to the long-term stability of the slope is the control of surface and near -surface water, and erosion protection. We recommend that all drains, including roof and yard drains, be directed away from the top of slope and routed into a permanent discharge system.. Surface drainage over the slope should not be permitted. Site Preparation and Grading The first step of site preparation should be to strip any topsoil and loose soils to expose medium dense or better native soils in foundation, slab, and pavement areas. The stripped material should be removed from the site or stockpiled for later use as landscaping fill. The exposed subgrade should be compacted to a non -yielding condition. If wet conditions are encountered, alternative site stripping and grading techniques might be necessary. These could include using a large excavator equipped with wide tracks and a smooth bucket to complete site grading and covering exposed subgrades with a layer of crushed rock for protection. If wet conditions are encountered, the subgrade should not be compacted as this NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates Edmonds, Washington February 14, 2003 NGA File No. 360902 Page 10 could cause subgrade disturbance. The prepared subgrades should be protected from construction traffic and surface water should be diverted around prepared subgrades. The on -site soils likely to be exposed during construction are considered highly moisture -sensitive and will disturb easily when wet. These soils become very difficult to compact when wet of optimum moisture content. This often results in extra excavation and the need for importing all-weather material for fill, which could significantly raise costs. We recommend that earthwork be conducted during the drier summer months, if possible. Temporary Excavations Temporary excavation stability is a function of many factors, such as the type and consistency of soils, depth of the cut, surcharge loads adjacent to the excavation, length of time a cut remains open, and the presence of surface or ground water. It is exceedingly difficult under these variable conditions to estimate a stable, temporary, cut -slope geometry. Therefore, it should be the responsibility of the contractor to maintain safe slope configurations, since the contractor is continuously at the job site, able to observe the nature and condition of the cut slopes, and able to monitor the subsurface materials and ground water conditions encountered. The following information is provided solely for the benefit of the owner and other design consultants and should not be construed to imply that Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc., assumes responsibility for job site safety. Job site safety is the sole responsibility of the project contractor. For planning purposes, we recommend that temporary cuts in the upper loose soils be no steeper than 2 Horizontal : 1 Vertical (2H:1 V). Cuts in the underlying medium. dense to dense native materials may stand at an inclination as steep as 1H:IV. If ground water seepage is encountered or construction traffic planned near the top of the cuts, flatter inclinations may be necessary. We recommend that cut slopes be protected from erosion. Measures taken may include covering cut slopes with plastic sheeting and diverting surface runoff away from the top of cut slopes. We do not recommend vertical slopes for cuts deeper than 4 feet if worker access is necessary. We recommend that cut slope heights and inclinations conform to W1SHA/0SHA standards. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates y Edmonds, Washington February 14, 2003 NGA File No. 360902 Page 11 Structural Fill General: We do not anticipate significant amounts of structural fill for the planned development. However, any fills placed beneath foundations, pavements, other settlement -sensitive structures, behind retaining walls, or on steep slopes should be placed as structural fill. Structural fill, by definition, is placed in accordance with prescribed methods and standards and is monitored by an experienced geotechnical professional or soils technician. Field monitoring procedures would include the performance of a representative number of in -place density tests to document the attainment of the desired degree of relative compaction. The area to receive the fill should be prepared as outlined in the Site Preparation and Grading subsection of this report. Level benches should be excavated into slopes with greater than 20 percent inclination that will receive fill to key the new fill into the slope. These benches typically have a nominal width of approximately 4 to 8 feet, and are separated vertically by about 1 to 4 feet. Materials: Imported structural fill should consist of a good quality, free -draining, granular soil, free of organics and other deleterious material and be well -graded to a maximum size of about 3 inches. Imported all-weather fill should contain no more than about five percent fines (soil finer than U.S. No. 200 sieve, based on that fraction passing the U.S. 3/4-inch sieve). The use of the native on -site soils as structural fill would be dependent on the nature of the material encountered and moisture content control. Some drying of the soils may be necessary in order to achieve compaction. We expect that compaction of most of the native soils to structural fill specifications would be difficult, if not impossible, during wet weather. We should be retained to evaluate the suitability of using the on -site soils as structural fill at the time of construction. Fill Placement: Following subgrade preparation, placement of structural fill may proceed. All backfilling should be accomplished in uniform lifts up to 10 inches thick. Each lift should be spread evenly and be thoroughly compacted prior to placement of subsequent lifts. All structural fill should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the material's maximum dry density. Maximum dry density, in this report, refers to that density as determined by the ASTM D-1557 Compaction Test procedure. The moisture content of the soils to be compacted should be within about 2 percent of optimum so that a NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates Edmonds, Washington 1 February 14, 2003 NGA File No. 360902 Page 12 readily -compactible condition exists. It may be necessary to overexcavate and remove wet soils in cases where drying to a compactable condition is not feasible. All compaction should be accomplished by equipment of a type and size sufficient to attain the desired degree of compaction. Foundations Conventional shallow spread foundations should be placed on undisturbed medium dense or better native soils or be supported on structural fill or rock spalls extending to those soils, with the exception of the downhill footing lines which should be cast on the native material. Where less -dense soils are encountered at footing bearing elevations, the subgrade should be overexcavated to expose suitable bearing soil. The overexcavation may be filled with structural fill or concrete, or the footing may be extended to the bearing native soils. If footings are supported on structural fill, the fill zone should extend outside the edges of the footing a distance equal to one-half of the depth of overexcavation below the finished subgrade. Both perimeter and interior footings should extend at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finished ground surface for frost protection and bearing capacity considerations. Minimum foundation widths of 16 and 24 inches should be used for continuous and isolated spread footings, respectively, for two-story structures and 18 and 24 inches for continuous and isolated footings, respectively, for three-story structures. Standing water should not be allowed to accumulate in footing trenches. All loose or disturbed soil should be removed from the foundation excavation prior to placing concrete. For foundations constructed as outlined above, we recommend an allowable design bearing pressure of no more than 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be used for designing footings founded on the native medium dense soils or structural fill extending to the silt. The foundation bearing soil should be evaluated by NGA at the time of construction. We should be consulted if higher bearing pressures are needed. Current Uniform Building Code (UBC) guidelines should be used when considering increased allowable bearing pressure for short-term transitory wind or seismic loads. Potential foundation settlement using the recommended allowable bearing pressure is estimated to be less than 1 inch total and 1/2 inch differential between adjacent footings or across a distance of about 30 feet, based on our experience with similar residential projects. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates :) Edmonds, Washington February 14, 2003 NGA File No. 360902 Page 13 Lateral loads may be resisted by friction on the base of the footing and passive resistance against the subsurface portions of the foundation. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used to calculate the base friction and should be applied to the vertical dead load only. Passive resistance may be calculated as a triangular equivalent fluid pressure distribution. An equivalent fluid density of 200 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) should be used for passive resistance design for a level ground surface adjacent to the footing. This level surface should extend horizontally a distance equal to at least three times the depth of the footing. These recommended values incorporate safety factors of 1.5 and 2.0 applied to the estimated ultimate values for frictional and passive resistance, respectively. To achieve this value of passive resistance, the foundations should be poured "neat" against the native medium dense soils or compacted fill should be used as backfill against the footing. We recommend that the upper foot of soil be neglected when calculating the passive resistance. Slabs -on -Grade Slabs -on -grade should be supported on subgrade soils prepared as described in the Site Preparation and Grading subsection of this report. We recommend that all floor slabs be underlain by at least 6 inches of free -draining sand or gravel for use as a capillary break. We recommend that the capillary break be hydraulically connected to the footing drain system to allow free drainage from under the slab. A suitable vapor barrier, such as heavy plastic sheeting (6-mil minimum), should be placed over the capillary break material. An additional 2-inch-thick sand blanket may be used to cover the vapor barrier. This sand blanket is to protect the vapor barrier membrane and to aid in curing the concrete. Site Drainage Surface Drainage: The finished ground surface should be graded such that storm water is directed to an appropriate storm water collection system. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where footings, slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Final site grades should allow for drainage away from the residence and the steep slope. We suggest that the finished ground be sloped at a minimum gradient of 33 percent for a distance of at least 10 feet away from the improvements. Under no circumstances should surface water be allowed to concentrate or flow over the site slopes. Subsurface Drainage: We recommend the use of footing drains around the residences and behind any subsurface walls. Footing drains should be installed at least 1 foot below planned finished floor slabs. The drains should consist of minimum 4-inch-diameter, rigid, slotted or perforated, PVC pipe surrounded NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates Edmonds, Washington February 14, 2003 NGA File No. 360902 Page 14 by free -draining material wrapped in a filter fabric. We recommend that the free -draining material consist of an 18-inch-wide zone of clean (less than 3 percent fines), granular material placed along the back of the wall. Pea gravel is an acceptable drain material or drainage composite may be used. instead. The free - draining material should extend up the wall to 1 foot below the finished surface. The top foot of soil should consist of impermeable soil placed over plastic sheeting or building paper to minimize surface water or fines migration into the footing drain. Footing drains should discharge into tightlines leading to an appropriate collection and discharge point with convenient cleanouts to prolong the useful life of the drains. Roof drains should not be connected to wall or footing drains. USE OF THIS REPORT This report is the property of Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. and has been prepared for the City of Edmonds for use in the review and permitting of this project on this site only. The scope of our work does not include services related to construction safety precautions and our recommendations are not w. intended to direct the contractors' methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions between the explorations and also with time. Our report, conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of subsurface conditions. A contingency for unanticipated conditions should be included in the budget and schedule. NGA should be retained to provide monitoring and consultation services during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation activities comply with contract plans and specifications. All people who own or occupy homes on hillsides should realize that landslide movements are always a possibility, although the likelihood that such an event will actually occur may be low. The hillside should remainstable during normal environmental conditions; however, inherent to steep slope areas is the risk of movement due to extreme environmental conditions such as severe earthquakes and storms. Because of the existing sloping conditions, the area should be periodically inspected by the landowner, especially after winter storms. If distress is evident, we should be retained to provide advice on remedial/ NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Talbot Park Estates Edmonds, Washington ' February 14, 2003 NGA File No. 360902 Page 15 preventative measures. The probability that landsliding will occur is substantially reduced by the proper maintenance of drainage measures at the site. Therefore, the homeowner should recognize the responsibility for performing such maintenance. Consequently, we recommend that a copy of our report oe provided to any future homeowners of the property. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been performed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in effect in this area at the time this report was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Our observations, findings, and opinions are a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner. It has beena pleasure to provide service to you on this project. If you have any questions or require further. information, please call. Sincerely, kEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. stensen, PE Project Engineer p N►- Sy z �jo Vd EXPIRES O3 Khaled Shawish, PE Senior Engineer TRC:KMS:kmn Eleven Figures NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. L yes R Y � ■ 6N m: AHTH 5T SY . II j II Lr67N te»N IBM ST rL sY Is?Tx ST 18Bt}i . s ST SW a LOGIN` S - nar sr Project - Site z a- t T s � 172m STD ►� t/,sokea tr r for �:! L2•m- SI a SY '_}gym ST SY ! n - R 4 � A m� e r Sr f. Sr w _ i 1■01■ fT Sj 1 S -, Jim I• y FL IN obw b T PL S1t� �r wLeOi 9d �� l., 10 0 P • +.i 'J € Y2000 Thomas Bros. maps 8 Not to Scale N O IECTNUMBER NELSON GEOTECHNICAL No. Date Revision By CK ssoso2 Talbot Park Estates A AssociATEs, INC. N G , tiaos� nw JcL GEaMCHNICAL ENGINEERS & GE01Amsm Figure 1 Vicinity Map 17]11-1]3th ME. ♦-500 9rwn*ur Ct,(.75) 377 tte.ew.■., to 9W72 WW t&—ICtren z■ 76a-2756 5 LEGEND TP-1 Number and Approximate Location of Test Pit HA-1 Number and Approximate Location of Hand Auger '—N Approximate Location of Cross Section Property Line ----- . Top of 4O% Slope —••— Setback Line 0 50 100 Approximate Scale: 1 inch = 50 feet uedand a cn U Z w o W In c OW z(A 0(0) 54 z W Z a� 'Q = g N U � A z 8 a W PROJECT NUMBER 360902 Figure 2 O O O C W N � A 0--I West o 220 v iw . o m N DCl) 200 y Z n i Z180 a I£ r 3 o Z DG "U)o Z �, z go to 160 it -01 =Z A i5 n r 140 p Z O m Scale: 1 inch = 20 feet (Horizontal and Vertical) a Elevations are Approximate s East 220 200 Stream 180 160 140 Reference: Cross section based on field measurements using a hand held clinometer and 100 foot tape. .n w m c m N � R AV n � aCr N O0 m 0) a � y W N . CO) R z a e�r Z i� F m a� (Ao o ! m n Z 5 n a ICE r � d � s w Southwest e -170 -150 -130 �-110 Scale: 1 inch = 20 feet (Horizontal and Vertical) Elevations are Approximate Northeast 190 170 150 -Stream 130 s 110 Reference: Cross section based on field measurements using a hand held clinometer and 100 foot tape. C b Z � N . n West East 0 220 220 to -v CD v 0 FL m I n � 200 Top of Steep Slope 200 o Z P-1 70 Stream 180 D. 180 27° / - m Silty Sand with Trace Gravel Z >� z0z 0 G) 0 160 rn :a n Z 140 Scale: 1 inch = 20 feet (Horizontal and Vertical) 2 P Elevations are Approximate w 0 160 140 Reference: Cross section based on field measurements using a hand held clinometer and too foot tape. 4 m Z E� Z y m ° Az 6) M G 0 Z r z 0 � o � m N O 7 Ci 180 160 a 140 m V X Q 120 100 W CROSS SECTION B—B' 10 most critical surfaces, MINIMUM BISHOP FOS = 1.505 10 30 50 70 90 110 X—AXIS (feet) 130 150 170 11 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM GROUP MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP NAME SYMBOL CLEAN GW WELL -GRADED, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL GRAVEL GRAVEL GRAVEL GP POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL GRAINED MORE THAN 50 % GRAVEL GM SILTY GRAVEL OF COARSE FRACTION SOILS RETAINED ON NO.4 SIEVE WITH FINES GC CLAYEY GRAVEL SAND CLEAN SW WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND SAND SP POORLY GRADED SAND ORE THAN 50 % MORE THAN 50 RETAINED ON R RETAIN SIEVE NO. 200 OF COARSE FRACTION SAND SM SILTY SAND PASSES NO.4 SIEVE Sc CLAYEY SAND WITH FINES FINE- SILT AND CLAY ML SILT INORGANIC CL CLAY GRAINED LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50 % ORGANIC OL ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CIA SOILS SILT AND CLAY MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT INORGANIC ORE THAN 50 % PASSES CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FLATCLAY LIQUID LIMIT NO. 200 SIEVE 50 % OR MORE ORGANIC OH ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT NOTES: 1) Field classification is based on visual SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS: examination of soil in general pry _ Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to accordance with ASTM D 248&93. the touch 2) Soil classification using labratory tests Moist -Damp, but no visible water. is based on ASTM D 2488-93. Wet -Visible free water or saturated, 3) Descriptions of soil density or fined from consistency are based on be� water tabs interpretation of blowcount data, visual appearance of soils, and/or test data. 'ECT NUMBER NELSON GEOTECHNICAL No. Date Revision By CK 360902 Talbot Park Estates NGA AssocIATES, INC. 1 2112M 1da,nai AW M GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS Figure 7 Soil Classification 1711-135„, Aw W- A-500 S-." -h C—lyJ( ~` DEPTH (FEET) HAND AUGER ONE 0.0 - 0.6 0.6 - 1.6 1.6 - 2.8 HAND AUGER TWO 0.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 2.0 2.0 - 3.4 LOG OF EXPLORATION USC SOIL DESCRIPTION TOPSOIL SM LIGHT BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH TRACE GRAVEL (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED DRIFT) SM RUST -BROWN MOTTLED LIGHT GRAY TO LIGHT BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED DRIFT) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 1.5, 1.8, AND 2.8 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER WAS COMPLETED AT 2.8 FEET ON 12/18/02 TOPSOIL SP-SM LIGHT BROWN TO BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH SILT AND GRAVEL (LOOSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED DRIFT) SM RUST -BROWN MOTTLED LIGHT GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH TRACE GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED DRIFT) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 1.0, 2.0, 2.8, AND 3.4 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER WAS COMPLETED AT 3.4 FEET ON 12/18/02 JGL:MDR NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. FILE NO 360902 FIGURE 8 T DEPTH (FEET) TEST PIT ONE 0.0 - 1.0 1.0 - 3.5 3.5 - 7.0 TEST PIT TWO 0.0 -1.0 1.0 - 4.0 4.0 - 7.0 TEST PIT THREE 0.0 - 1.0 1.0 - 3.0 3.0 - 6.0 TEST PIT FOUR 0.0 -1.0 1.0 - 3.0 3.0 - 7.0 LOG OF EXPLORATION USC SOIL DESCRIPTION TOPSOIL SM BROWN SILTY FINE SAND WITH TRACE FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (WEATHERED DRIFT) SM GRAY SILTY FINE SAND WITH FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST) (DRIFT) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 2.0. 5.0, AND 6.5 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 7.0 FEET ON 213/03 TOPSOIL SM BROWN SILTY FINE SAND (MEDIUM DENSE, WET) (WEATHERED DRIFT) SM GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, WET) (DRIFT) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.0, 5.0, AND 7.0 FEET MODERATE GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS ENCOUNTERED AT 3.0 FEET SLIGHT TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED FROM 0.0 TO 7.0 FEET TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 7.0 FEET ON 2/3103 TOPSOIL SP BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH TRACE SILT (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED OUTWASH) SP-SM GRAY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL AND SILT (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (OUTWASH) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 2.5 AND 4.5 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 6.0 FEET ON 2/3/03 TOPSOIL SP BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH SILT (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED OUTWASH) SP/SM RUST -BROWN MOTTLED BROWN -GRAY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND AND SILT SEAMS (DENSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED OUTWASH) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 2.0, 4.0, AND 7.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 7.0 FEET ON 2/3/03 JGL NELSON GEOTECHN/CAL ASSOCIATES, INC. FILE NO 360902 FIGURE 9 LOG OF EXPLORATION DEPTH (FEET) USC SOIL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT FIVE 0.0 - 2.8 TOPSOIL 2.8-4.5 SM BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH TRACE FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL AND SILT (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED DRIFT) 4.5-7.0 SM/Sp GRAY SILTY FINE SAND WITH FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL AND FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SEAMS (DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (DRIFT) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.5, 4.5, AND 6.5 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 7.0 FEET ON 2/3103 TEST PIT SIX 0.0-1.5 SM DARK GRAY SILTY FINE SAND WITH CONCRETE CHUNKS AND ORGANICS (LOOSE, MOIST TO WET) F( ILL1 1.5-3.0 SM BROWN SILTY FINE SAND WITH TRACE FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, WET) (WEATHERED DRIFT) 3.0 - 7.0 SM/Sp RUST -BROWN MOTTLED GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL AND FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SEAMS (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, WET) (WEATHERED DRIFT) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 1.0, 2.0. AND 6.0 FEET MODERATE GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS ENCOUNTERED AT 3.0 FEET SLIGHT TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED FROM 0.0 TO 7.0 FEET TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 7.0 FEET ON 2/3103 TEST PIT SEVEN 0.0 -1.0 TOPSOIL 1.0 - 3.5 SM BROWN SILTY FINE SAND WITH TRACE FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED DRIFT) 3.5-6.0 SM/Sp GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL AND FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SEAMS (DENSE TO VERY DENSE, MOIST) (DRIFT) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 2.0, 4.0, AND 6.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 6.0 FEET ON 2/3/03 TEST PIT EIGHT 0.0 -1.0 TOPSOIL 1.0-4.0 SP-SM BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH SILT AND TRACE FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (WEATHERED DRIFT) 4.0-5.0 SP-SM BROWN -GRAY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH SILT AND FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, WET) (DRIFT) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 10 AND 4.5 FEET - GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 5.0 FEET ON 2/3/03 JGL NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. FILE NO 360902 FIGURE 10 DEPTH (FEET) TEST PIT NINE 0.0 -1.0 1.0 - 3.5 3.5 - 4.0 LOG OF EXPLORATION USC SOIL DESCRIPTION TOPSOIL SM BROWN SILTY FINE SAND WITH FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED DRIFT) SM GRAY SILTY FINE SAND WITH FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL (DENSE TO VERY DENSE, MOIST) (DRIFT) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.0 AND 4.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 4.0 FEET ON 2/3103 JGL NELSON GEOTECHN/CAL ASSOCIATES, INC. FILE NO 360902 FIGURE 11 City * of Edmonds . SIDE SEWER PERMIT. Property Tax Account Parcel No. PERMIT NO: . PERMIT EXPIRES, 2-11WIZ27' Attach copies of all access and utility easements Verified and Approved by. Owner and/or Contras Contractor License #: �(Single Family El multi -Family (No. of Units, ❑ Commercial (No. of Units —) Public Invasion into City *Right -of Way: [:1 Yes 0 *RW Construction Permit Cross other. "Private Property: ❑ Yes. ,Q-N6 **Attach legal description and copy of recorded easement. Owner or contractor signature and acknowledgement statement.: By signing for this permit I certify that I have read the -City's public handout entitled Side Sewer Specifications, and shall comply with all City requirements outlined therein. p m Date CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-42ff-�5555) BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION 9 .9 FOR INSPECTION CALL 425-771-0220 extensionA�Yra 24 HOUR NOTICE REQUIRED FOR ALL INSPECTION REQUESTS NOTE: IF JOB SITE IS NOT ' READY FOR INSPECTION WHEN INSPECTOR ARRIVES A $45. RE -INSPECTION FEE WILL BE. CHARGED. Job ..Site, Ready YES NO Date: Initial: Partial Inspection: -Date. Initial: Partial Inspection: Date: Initial: FINAL INSPECTION APPROVED: Date: Initial. As -built to Street File: `� PERMIT MUST 'BE'POSTED ON JOB SITE� White Copy: File Green Copy: Inspector Buff Copy: Applicant L;temp;bldg,forms;sspertnitjlg4/00 GRINDE ., 0 F ED.10,_ E ti t� MM CITY OF EDMONDS SIDE SEWER AS- BUILT r d ADDRESS: PERMIT 17003 77TH PL W NO: 10141 CONTRACTOR: HOMEOWNER: SCALE: HILLCREST CONST HILLCREST CONST NTS DATE INSPECTED1 INSPECTED BY: DATE DRAWN: DRAWN BY: 6/14/06 1 J. HAWKINS 6/29/06 J. BRONDER Deccio Engineering 17217 7th Avenue West Bothell, WA. 98012 (206) 390-6370 Fax: (425)741-6214 RECEIVED JAN 2 3 2004 pLp,NNING DEPT. Charlotte Gardens Level 1 Downstream Drainage Report p A. Y 1`P"o� WA Prepared for Mr. Gary Trunkhill Site Location: 7707 17119 Street SW Edmonds, Washington 98026 Dated January 18, 2004 259693 aISTE.��'�`y sONAL 9/22/05 By Richard Deccio PE STREET FILE. Deccio Engineering - 17217 7th Avenue West Bothell, WA. 98012 (206)390-8370 Fax: (425) 741-8214 Charlotte Gardens Level 1 Downstream Drainage Report PLO a WA 'W t 2g� c C MAILE l 2/22/0! Prepared for Mr. Gary Trunkhill Site. Location: 7707 171" Street SW Edmonds, Washington 98026 Dated January 18, 2004 CHARLOTTE GARDENS LEVEL 1 DRAINAGE ANALYSIS REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction........................................................... . 1 Task 1: Project Overview & Study Area Definition ........................... 1. Task 2: Review of Available Information on Study Area ....................... 1 Task 3: Field Inspection & Description of Drainage System ....... ......... 3 UpstreamDrainage Analysis .................................................. 3 On -Site Considerations....:................................................. 3 Downstream Drainage Analysis ................................................ 3 Task 4: Conclusions and Proposed Mitigation ............................... 4 Level 1 Analysis Conclusions ............:.................................... 4 List of Figures: Figure 1: Site Location & Vicinity Map Figure 2: Developed Site Conditions Figure 3: Soils Map Figure 4: USGS Downstream Analysis Map INTRODUCTION This report has been prepared at the request of Mr. Gary Trunkhill in support of 6-lot subdivision. The subject property is located at 7707 171' Street, S.W. Edmonds, Washington. This report addresses the "Level V Downstream Analysis submittal requirements of the City's adopted Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin (SWM) of the Washington State Department of Ecology per the City of Edmonds Community. Development Code, Chapter 18.30. We have prepared this report using Chapters I through III of the Puget Sound SWM Manual. TASK I: PROJECT OVERVIEW & STUDY AREA DEFINITION The subject property is located on the north side of the intersection of Sea Land Drive and 171' Street SW. in the City of Edmonds. The site is also adjacent to the City of Lynnwood City limits, which is located on the north side of the property. The current site is 2.10 acres in size, contains an existing single family dwelling and landscaping. The site is bordered by a steep ravine located on the north and east sides of the property. The discharge point of this drainage course is located within the Lynnwood City limits. The site address is 7707 17 1' Street, S.W. Edmonds, Washington, (Parcel No: 27040700100400). The site and surrounding area is zoned RS-12. (Figure 1: Site Location & Vicinity Map) A Level 1 drainage analysis was preformed for the site on January 18, 2004, the weather was overcast and dry. The on -site soils have been identified as Alderwood Series, Everett Series, Kitsap Series and Vashon Series according to SCS Soil Survey for Snohomish County, which is Type "C" in SCS hydrologic soil groups. TASK 2: REVIEW OF AVAILABLE INFORMATION ON STUDY AREA Resource Review: The following is a description of the resources that were reviewed for the preparation of this Level 1 Drainage Study: A. Basin Recognizance Summary Reports: Enclosed within are downstream and upstream basin area map which clearly define the flow pass and the drainage basins related to this project. (Figure 4 "USGS Downstream Analysis Map") Evidence of Existing and Predicted Problems Lack of capacity or constrictions in the existing drainage system. ■ On -site: No evidence of any problem. ■ Off -site: Ravine Section; None Noted. ■ Off -site: 12-inch culvert Sections; None Noted. Charlotte Gardens Level 1 Downstream Analysis Report January 18, 2004 Page 1 Overtopping, Scouring, Bank, Sloughing of Sedimentation ■ On -site: No evidence of any problem. ■ Off -site: Ravine section. Some erosion/scouring of steam channel noted.. Flooding etc. ■ On -site: No evidence of any problem. ■ Off -site: Ravine section. None noted. Significant Destruction of Aquatic Habitat or Organisms ■ On -site: No evidence of any problem. ■ Off -site: None noted. B. Adopted Basin Plans: None Known C. Critical Drainage Map: Not Known D. Floodplain/Floodway (FEMA Maps): None on upper part of site. East side of site contains a steep ravine with natural drainage channel. E. Other Off -Site Analysis Reports: None Known F. Sensitive Area Folio: Each one of the sensitive area folio associated with this area was reviewed. Sensitive Areas Folio ■ Wetlands Property: Property is affected on west property line. ■ 100-Year Floodplain and Streams: Property contains stream channel on east side. i Erosion Hazard Areas: Property contains steep slopes. ■ Landslide Hazard Areas: Property contains steep slopes. ■ Seismic Hazard Area: Property not affected. G. City Division Drainage Investigation Problems: The drainage discharge point is located within the City ofLynnwood's drainage basin, where a previous agreement was reached for direct discharge into the City's drainage basin without detention. H. Soils Survey: Included Alderwood Series, Everett Series, Kitsap Series and Vashon Series per SCS Soils Survey for Snohomish County which is a type C soils. Charlotte Gardens Level 1 Downstream Analysis Report January 18, 2004 Page 2 TASK 3: FIELD.INSPECTION AND DESCRIPTION OF DRAINAGE SYSTEM WITH EXISTING AND PREDICTED PROBLEMS A field inspection of the property, surrounding area and downstream conditions was performed by the engineer on January 18, 2004. The weather was overcast and dry. The total distance covered was 900 feet downstream from the site to Puget Sound. Upstream Drainage Analysis: The site is bordered by 171' Street SW to the south which intercepts any upstream runoff from the south side of the property. To the north and east is the ravine which intercepts any upstream runoff from the north and east. The site slopes from north to south which eliminates any runofffrom entering the site from the west side of the property. Therefore, there is no upstream, offsite runoff entering the site and the runoff is limited to the 2.10 acres itself.. (See Figure 4 "Downstream Drainage Analysis Map") On -site Drainage Considerations: The site is 2.10 acres in size and contains a single family dwelling and landscaping. The top half or west side of the site contains gentle slopes of approximately 6-percent, which run south to north- west. Along the east and north sides of the site are steep slopes containing a ravine which drains north-west. Along the west side of the property is a small wetland which straddles the west property line. All runoff from the site drains north east into the steep ravine. This ravine is located with in the City ofLynnwood City limits and based on the contour information there is little if any upstream area draining onto the site. Downstream Drainage Analysis: Segment 1: Ravine; From on -site to two 12-inch culverts (0' to 400') Drainage leaves the site along the north property line where it flows down the steep slopes into the ravine containing a natural drainage channel This ravine is located just south of and follows Bertola Drive and is located in the City of Lynnwood drainage basin. The runoff flows northwest where the drainage from the stream channel is intercepted by two 12-inch diameter CW culverts located just west of the City of Lynnwood treatment plant. ► The storm drainage on along this segment consisted of a natural drainage channel located in the ravine. The slope of the channel was approximately 2 to 4-percent. There were no indications of overtopping, or capacity problems. There were indications of scouring along this section which is typical of stream channels with super critical flows. Segment 2: Pipe Flow; From Ravine to outfall into Puget Sound. (400' to 900') Drainage from the ravine is intercepted by two 12-inch diameter cmp pipes. These pipes intercept the flow from the stream channel direct it through the ravine along the south side of the City of Lynnwood Treatment Plant where it flows under the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks and discharges into the Puget sound. The storm drainage from the ravine to the sound consisted of two 12-inch diameter cmp storm Charlotte Gardens Level 1 Downstream Analysis Report January 18, 2004 Page 3 pipes. There were no indications of problems at the time ofthe inspection including, overtopping, capacity, erosion or scouring along this section. The pipes were clean and the creek channel was at the same level as the invert of the pipes. A limited inspection of the outlets of the pipes indicated no problems at the outfall. This concludes the downstream description. A total distance 900 feet was covered to Puget Sound. TASK 4: CONCLUSIONS AND PROPOSED MITIGATION Level 1 Analysis Conclusions: The total distance covered was 900 feet from the site to the Puget Sound. The Level 1 Analysis indicates that there is_ little in the way of drainage capacity problems. There were some indications of scouring of the stream channel which is typical of streams with super critical flows. The proposed sub -division is only 2.10 acres in size of which only 1.4 acres will be developed. The total drainage basin, draining to this ravine is 344 acres in size, which makes the site less than 0.6 percent of the total contributing drainage area. The project proposes to mitigate the potential erosion to the steep slopes by tight -lining the un- detained drainage down the steep slopes into the, ravine. In addition , the drainage discharge point is located within the City of Lynnwood's drainage basin, where a previous agreement was reached for direct discharge into the City's drainage basin without detention. Water quality treatment will be provide through the use of a "Stormfilter" water quality vault which will treat the runoff prior to discharge from the site. Therefore, the proposed development should have little if any impact on downstream conditions. Charlotte Gardens Level 1 Downstream Analysis Report January 18, 2004 Page 4 LIST OF FIGURES: Figure 1: Site Location & Vicinity Map Figure 2: Developed Site Plan Figure 3: Soils Map Figure 4: USGS Downstream Drainage Analysis Map Charlotte Gardens Level 1 Downstream Analysis Report January 18, 2004 Page 5 FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION & �rrrnviTV MAP 70' DRAINAGE ` 2"'�_ \ /yL._t� w�✓/'.(�%��i�j ,Y��I'.:�� >Crii. LYNNWOOD 148-000i� X/ ��, / /� I '% i , •1 'lL k./l , t PIPE SYSiI CIVO wM X 5F ON St. 999 — — 73,538 SF i NOTE -OPEN SPACECITY ACRE Rom' an DISCI WITH 710 G.P LE�/ 16,666 SF / \ CBP \ QUAc 1,� EV„tlJC�1 J//�jy c ,^ \� Z ;. c 5 F°Ek L —J/ / 5,878 SF I a :E /� 1�' I� . { 1 /`�✓� I � ASV j /.7 1 I . �� — fiag a B1R� W dq p18�80 �0 R �, 4,015 SF \ I 65 � � � \ I / --• C8 /1 \ SEPTIC 7 PUMPas e' -- 7Y 7 I '� LINES �� \ / 4, 868 SF'�' -I—iss--- / ry50 ED12 / \ 87 LF 8.0 / % N /2 SDR 35 PVC_ 1190--7�7 --- 88, I/ 1;_7 5,376SF SSYH � zoo— — > \. ti iR > 7II \ \ 'cop - NEW I \ \ LOT 2 SEA —LAWN TERRACE DIV A pp 005660-000-002-00_ 4 —p— FIGURE 2. DEVELOPED SITE CONDITIONS U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE SNOHOMI SOIL LEGEND SYMBOL NAME 1 Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes 2 Alderwood gravelly sandy loam; 8 to 15 percent slopes 3 Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes 4 Alderwood-Everett gravelly sandy looms, 25 to 70 percent slopes —y 5 Alderwood-Urban land complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes ----7w 6 Alderwood-Urban land complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes 7 Bellingham silty clay loam 8 Bellingham Variant mucky silty clay loam 9 Cathcart loam, 3 to 15 percent slopes 10 Cathcart loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes 11 Cathcart loam, 25 to 50 percent slopes 12 Cryohemists, nearly level 13 Custer fine sandy loam 14 Elwell silt loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes 15 Elwell-Olomount complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes 16 Elwell-Olomount-Rock outcrop complex, 30 to 60 percent slopes 17 Everett gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes 18 Everett gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 19 Everett gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes 20 F.luvaquents, tidal 21 Getchell silt loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes 22 Getchell-Oso complex, 16 to 30 percent slopes 23 Getchell-Oso-Rock outcrop complex, 30 to 65 percent slopes 24 Greenwater loamy sand 25 Hartnit-Potchub Rock outcrop complex, 65 to 90 percent slopes 26 Indianola loamy sand, 15 to 25 percent slopes 27 Kitsap silt loam 0 to 8 percent slopes 28 Kitsap silt loam; 8 to 25 percent slopes 29 Kitsap silt loam, 25 to 50 percent slopes 30 Lynnwood loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes 31 Lynnwood-Nargar complex, 65 to 90 percent slopes 32 McKenna gravelly silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes 33 Menzel silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 34 Mukilteo muck 35 Nargar fine sandy loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes 36 Nargar fine sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes 37 Nargar-_ Lynnwood complex, 30 to 65 percent slopes 38 - Nargar Variant sandy loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes 39 Norma loam 40 Norms Variant loam 41 Ogarty-Tokul-Rock outcrop complex, 65 to 90 percent slopes 42 Olomount gravelly loam, 3 to 15 percent slopes 43 Olomount-Elwell-Rock outcrop complex, 65 to 90 percent slopes 44 Orcas peat 45 Oso gravelly loam, 3 to 15 percent slopes 46 Oso-Getchell-Rock outcrop complex, 65 to 90 percent slopes 47 Pastik silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes 48 Pastik silt loam, 8 to 25 percent slopes 49 Pastik silt loam, 25 to 50 percent slopes 50 Pilchuck loamy sand 51 Pits 52 Potchub silt loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes 53 Potchub-Hartnit complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes 54 Potchub-Hartnit-Rock outcrop complex, 30 to 65 percent slopes 55 Puget silty clay loam 56 Puyallup fine sandy loam 57 Ragnar fine sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes 58 Ragnar fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 59 Riverwash 60 Rober silt loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes 61 Rober silt loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes 62 Rober silt loam, 30 to 65 percent slopes 63 Skykomish gravelly loam, 0 to 30 percent slopes 64 Snohomish silt loam 65 Sulsover gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes 66 Sultan silt loam - 67 Sultan Variant silt loam 68 Sumas silt loam 69 Terric Medisaprists, nearly level 70 Tokul silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes 71 Tokul silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 72 Tokul gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes 73 Tokul gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 74 Tokul gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes 75 Tokul-Ogarty-Rock outcrop complex, 0 to 25 percent slopes 76 Tokul-Ogarty-Rock outcrop complex, 25 to 65 percent slopes 77 Tokul-Winston gravelly looms, 25 to 65 percent slopes 78 Urban land 79 Vedot mucky silt loam, 3 to 25 percent slopes 80 Winston gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 81 Winston gravelly loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes 82 Xerorthents, nearly level J Sewer Grinder Pump Design. Calculations To: Jaime Hawkins, Engineering From: Jon Kvernmo CC: Date: 2/14/06 Re: Plan review comments — Charlotte Gardens Mr. Hawkins, This is in reference to the requested design calculations as outlined in the City of Edmonds grinder pump checklist. Design Calculations 1. Fixture count — Item Units Quantity Totals Bathtub 4 1 4 Combined Tub/Shower4 1 4 Clothes Washer 1 1 1' Dishwasher 1.5 1 1.5 Lavatory 1 4 4 Kitchen sink 1.5 1 1.5 Laundry sink 1.5 1 1.5 Shower 2 1 2 Water closet 2.5 3 7.5 Total units 27 GPM - 40 2. Grinder pump and system curve — see attached chart 3. Hydraulic computations • Page 1 Pump cycling time — assuming a 75 gallon functional capacity (on -float and off -float switches activation distance 38.257 apart), the net elapsed time from pump "on" to pump "on" is approximately 9.76 minutes, resulting in 6.14 cycles per hour at 40 GPM inflow (from the house) and 49.5 GPM system capacity. See attached chart. Wet well capacity -175 Gal. Flushing velocity — 4.1 feet per second RESUB Force main hydraulic losses — 5.2 ft. of head FEB 14 '2006 BUILDING CITY OF EDMO DSDEPARTMENT, � STREET FILE Minor hydraulic losses due to valves and fittings — negligible Net positive suction head - none 4. Sump basin anti flotation — Maximum possible flotation —1278 lbs. Equivalent to 1/3 cubic yard of concrete. Provide. cast -in -place concrete counterweight minimum 1' deep x 3.5' wide x 3.5' long around base of sump, insuring that sump flange is at or near bottom of concrete slab. 5. Soil bearing pressure _ soil bearing capacity greater than 2000 PSF. Total assembly load less than 500 PSF. 6. Electrical power requirements — 230v. single phase 7. Other applicable calculations — N/A Respectfully, Jon Kvemmo 0 Page 2 9 Ott -to i LHITED PIPE 01/16/2006 15:50 4257439244 PAGE 03/13 P.i%P Cvr ve Section GRINDER Page 102 Dated MAY 2W Superesdes AN 19" p-RPM'*rM WiW 1 Curve 3soo Discharge: 1-1/4^ The curves reflect maximum peiformence characteristics without exceeding full load (Nameplate) horsepower, Al Pompe have a service factor of 1.2. Operation is recommended in the bounded area with operational point wkhfn the curve Ilmit. Performance curves are based on actual tests with clear water at 70° F. and 1280 feet site elevation. ge-11 I Conditions of Service; iir HYD ROUATIC' GPM: `f ��S TD H: i 6 `. - C C ✓e E-d 909G-899 t09E) 03 er OH dSO:ZT 90 OT qaA r 10105 Airport Way Suite #A Snohomish, WA. 98296 Phone#: (425) 488-59501(360) 568.5958 H.B.Jaeger • Fad: (360) 568-7506 t To: Jon @ Hillcrest Const Roe- John Sant Fax: 425-259-0799 Pages: 12 (INCLUDING COVER) Phone: ` Date: 1-17-06 Re: Edmonds grinder e-mail johns@hbjaeger.00m ❑ Urgent • X For Review El Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ❑ Please Recycle Jon, Here are the "spec sheets° for the Hydromabc grinder pump. There is probably more than they need but it is everything they faxed to me. The local authorized repair facility is: Pump Tech Bellevue, WA 425-644 3501 Mike Duren T'd 90SG-69S (096) 00 J92aer HH ell:TT 90 LT uer r 01/16/2006 15:50 4257439244 Section GMIM Page W2 Dated OCiDispt Y000 Superesdes MU "00 UNITED PIPE PAGE 02/13 Elee�leal � data MODEL HPGR—Standard Grinder Pumps R.P.M, 3450 MOTOR TYPE ENCLOSED, OIL COOLED INDUCTION, CAP START MOTOR DESIGN NEMA TYPIE A (1o) GENERAL INSULATION CLASS g STATOR WINDING CLASS F MAXIMUM STATOR TEMPERATURE 130T VOLTAGE TOLERANCE *10% 4P �* 2 1 230 1 1 J I l.Vl 15. nr HYDROMATIC �-°I 909L-99S (09E) 09 aa�aer HH e,T T : T I 90 Li Uer .d 01/16/2006 15:50 4257439244 UNITED PIPE PAGE 06/13 Section GRIMM Page 402 Dated ALLY I006 Superesdes MAT 200 Te►cnieal Data MODIEL HPGR — Standard Grinder Pumps Phpical Data: DISCHARGE SIZE 1VV NPT IMPELLER TYPE Sap -OPEN 6 VANE CABLE LENGTH 15 STANDARD PAINT PAINTED AFTER ASSEMBLY. DARK GREEN, ENAMEL, ONE COAT, AIR DRIED. Temperature: MAXIMUM LIQUR) 14D°F MAXIMUM STATOR OIL FLASH POINT 390°F HEAT SENSOR Open: 257 F MAX_/239°F MIN. Closed: 194°F MAX./149°F MIN. Techn" pain: �� HYDROAlYATIC g-d 90SG-89S (09C) 03 ja2aer HH eTT=TI 90 LT uer r/ i 01/17/2006 09.39 4257439244 UNITU PIPE PAGE 02/08 KINSUSTRAES arc �1u�� 2a�► tnr tQ�,'� Fs` ;_ ;��- s- 24" FIBERGLASS BASINS Fl_ @ERGLASSBASIN BE, L&W.�W 0MMQL&%% M STANDARDS T GO-24 X 024-100 G8-24 X024-2W GB-24 X024-WO 47 GAL 12 LOS G13-24 X 030.100 GS-74 X 03D-200 GB-24X 090-3W 59 GAL 151RS GB24 X 03B"100 * GB-24 X 036-20D GO-24 X 036-300 71 GAL IsLas 0&24 X 042-100 GS-24 X O42-200 GB-24 X 042-300 82 GAL 21 LIDS GB-24 X048-100 * GO-24 X 04&200 * GR24 X048-= 94 CAL 24 LBS G&24 X 054.100 GB-24 X 054-200 GS-24 XG54MO 106 GAL 27Les GB-24 X O60.100 * G8-24 X G60.2W * 0&24 X 06D4M 118 GAL 30 LBS G8.24 X 066-100 GB-24 X066 200 GB-24 X 066-300 129 GAL 33 LBS GB-24=2-10o * GB-24 X 072200 * GB-24XUMM 141 GAL 36LBS GS-24 X 078-100 GB-24 X 078-200 GB-24X OM-3 0 153 GAL 39 Las GB-24 X -�- Ge24 X 084-200 _ GD-24 X 0B4-3W 166 GAL 63 US 0&24 X090-200 GB-24 X 090.300 176 GAL Was Ge24X098-200 * GB24 X 098-300 188 GAL 72WS GB-24 X 102-2DD GB-24 X 102.300 200 GAL 77 LOS GS-24X 10B-2D0 M 24X 108-= 212 GAL 81 LBS GB-24 X 114.2W GR24X 114-300 223 GAL 86 LOS GO-24 X 120-200 Ga-24 X 12a-3M 239 GAL DoLes GO-24 X 126-200 GS 24 X 1263W 247 GAL. 95 LOS 68-24 X 132-200 GB24 X 132-M 259 GAL 99 LBS GB-24 X 138-200 GB-24 X 1383W 270 GAL 104 LBS GB-24 X 144-2D0 08-24 X 144 M 282 GAL toollig GB-24X 150-200 GIB-24X 150-3W 294 GAL 150LBG G13-24 X 158.200 GB-24 X 1W300 306 GAL 156 LBS GS-24 X 162-200 GO-24X 162-M 317 GAL 162LBS G8-24 X 188-200 G"4X i68-800 329 GAL 188Las G&24 X 17+Wo G&24 X 174300 341 GAL 174 LM G5-24X 180-200 G&24X 180300 353 GAL 16pL8S GS-24 X 186-200 GB-24XIW300 364 GAL 186LBS G&2dX 192-2 GD"X192-m 376 GAL 192LBS GB-24X 198-M 08-24X 198300 Me GAL 19OLDS G&24 X 204-2W Ga24 X 204.M 40D GAL 204 LSS GB-24 X 210-200 G&24 X 216-200 G8-24 X210.3W 411 GAL 21OLBS GB-24 X 222 200 GB24 X2'164W G8.20222,900 423 GAL 435 GAL 21 B LDS GS-24 X 228-200 G824X 228300 447 GAL 222 LBS 228 LBS GB-24X234-200 09-24X234-3W 450 GAL 234tBS GB-24 X 24 D-200 G&24X 2400M 470 GAL 240 in OMMS a d as * STOCK ITEMS CAN BE SHPPED WITHIN 48 HOURS F!F"" NEC67PT' OFCRDM BASINS W eEFtGLASS ANT'-P-OAT PLANCiE ADD 15 L9S TO WEIGHT BANS Wei MEL ANn-FLOAT RANG: ADD 55 LEIS TO Wng4T 8 -°r 90SL-89S (09E) 00 aa2aer OH e2l:TT 90 LI Uer Critical Areas Study Talbot Park Estates Edmonds, Washington Prepared for: The City of Edmonds Development Services Department 121 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Prepared by: Anthony Roth May 5, 2003 STREET FILE AC ROTH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 115 NORTH 4r STREET 0 SEATME, WASHINGfON 98103 206.784.4755 Table of Contents Table of Contents Preface.................................................................................:................ 1. Introduction...................................................................................... I 2., Water Resources Evaluation............................................................3 2.1 Introduction ..................: 3 .......................................................... 2.2 Wetlands.................................................................................3 2.2.1 Methodology.......................:..........................................3 2.2.2 Investigation Results ........................ :.............................. 6 2.3 Stream................................................................................... I I 3. Bibliography ...................... List of Figures 1. Vicinity Map......................................................................................2 2. Site Map............................................................................................4 3. Emergent Wetland at west boundary, looking into the property from the west. ..:.:........:.. ....................................... ""'.:............ 8 4. Another view looking east into the property....................................9 5. Looking northwest on the adjacent property ....................................9 List of Tables L . USFWS Plant Indicator Status..........................................................6 2. Wetland Functions and Values.........................................................7 Critical Areas Study i Talbot Paris Estates i Y � Preface Preface Critical Areas Study Talbot Park Estates At the request of the City of Edmonds (City), this report has been prepared as a third -party wetlands and creek evaluation of the subject property, the proposed plat of Talbot Park Estates. In preparing this report, AC Roth Environmental Consultants (RES) has used site information and survey mapping of RES wetland flag locations provided by Lovell-Sauerland and Associates, as referenced herein. Findings reported herein are based on information gathered in the field at the time of investigation by RES, RES's understanding of 1997 Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Ecology 1997), and RES's understanding of federal, state and.local regulations governing wetland and stream areas. Prior to preliminary and final design or any construction, all appropriate regulatory agencies should be contacted to verify the findings of this report, and to obtain appropriate approvals and permits. The wetland boundary, wetland, and stream classification and recommended buffers are RES's best professional opinion based on the circumstances and site conditions at the time of its study. The final wetland boundary determination, classification of wetlands and streams, and the required buffers and setbacks are subject to change by the appropriate federal, state, and .local jurisdiction. � f � Introduction 1. Introduction The subject property is an approximate 2 acre site located at 7701 171" Street SW, Edmonds, Washington, near the intersection of 171" Street and Sea Lawn Drive. From discussion with the City, the applicant proposes to develop the site.for a single family residential development. The purpose of this report is to present a third -party analysis of site water resources, consistent with the requirements of the City of Edmonds Critical Areas (Edmonds Municipal Code [EMC] §20.15B). A series of consultants have evaluated this and a property to the west. A May 31, 2002 Wetland Evaluation was prepared by Terra Associates for a property located at 17015 Talbot Road (Attachment A). This property's easterly boundary forms the westerly segment of the subject property's northwestern corner. Terra Associates found a wetland which was indicated to extend easterly onto the subject property, but the offsite wetland area was unsurveyed. A June 3, 2002 Critical Area Reconnaissance Report (Attachment B) was prepared by Wetland Resources, Inc. evaluated the "potential presence of jurisdictional wetlands" on the subject property. This "forested and scrub -shrub wetland" was sketched as approximately 1800 square feet in area. It does not appear that a survey of this evaluation was performed. In February of 2003, Pentec Environmental prepared a report entitled Third -Party Review of Critical Areas Study of the Talbot Park Estates (Attachment C), on behalf of the City. In the absence of a prior formal delineation of wetlands on the subject property, Pentec Environmental conducted a "preliminary wetland delineation of the onsite portion of the wetland". Using GPS survey methods to establish approximate location of delineated wetland boundaries, .the conclusion of this last report was that the onsite and offsite portions of the wetland appear to total 2,700 square feet, but that more careful delineation and complete survey of the wetland boundary would need to be conducted. Critical Areas Study Talbot Park Estates Introduction Figure 1 Vicinity Map Critical Areas Study Talbot Park Estates 2 Introduction 2. Water Resources Evaluation 2.1 Introduction On April 2, 2003, RES staff performed on -site investigations to determine the presence, type and extent of water resources on the subject property. The primary objectives of the site evaluations were: 1) the identification of any streams and wetlands under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps); and 2) the delineation of all water resources subject. to land use review and regulation by EMC § 20.15B. On -site water resources include approximately 1,374 SF of scrub -shrub and emergent wetlands located in the northwest corner of the Taylor Park site and extending to the west (Figure 3). The total size of the wetland is approximately 4,485 SF. A stream enters the site at its southeast corner and flows in a northerly direction near the east property boundary. Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the ACOE has jurisdiction over the waters of the United States, including streams, lakes, ponds and wetlands. If no fill of water resources is anticipated, direct contact with ACOE is not required and the City of Edmonds would be the lead regulatory agency for site permitting. 2.2 Wetlands 2.2.1 Methodology Prior to conducting field evaluation, a number of sources were consulted. The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) has evaluated wetlands throughout the Stanwood area, using the system described in Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin 1979). The NWI mapping, as portrayed at http://www.nwi.fws.gov/,.fails to identify any wetlands or streams on or in the vicinity of the subject site. Soils on the site have been mapped as the Alderwood-Everett gravelly sandy loam and Alderwood-Urban land series by the USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS).. Neither of these is listed as a hydric soil on the Official Hydric Soils List for Snohomish County (SCS, 1994). To perform the wetland delineation for the site, the 1997 Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Ecology 1997) was used. Critical Areas Study Talbot Park Estates f Introduction a)Y OF L11N WM \ 8ALAVA 1 OUM W270"_m&_Om 021 c i 07210+-1--" am Room & WAM 0727O1-1-018-000 �-TOP OF siriJW ewe( (ONDVAY NIMH re11ER Logo 'fE•t a„ �.,.. gnaw OF \ \ a V1 j a a aB01Fa IWAL ENOIIETR r " \ -CATEGORY 0 STREAM cr 072704-1-005-OM AN01OE oA110 4 / _ MEP OF sWM 8NK (OWN AW HM WAWA MATE) "':� � J'-G1EOalY N 3DlEAY � NNE. ROB4t► [ ! dUNE 072704-1-•OJO-•M 1 \/ ; •'� �----...t F-::✓ y aNmowNGi. opt Is ` ++\ / •a; ,. fir? ,.rt., i., :..: +`� • 1 f •, ( �. `a'�,-•.c: 07270/-1-033-OW7 000-00O-OOM000N / 7 . • ` y _ `` 1 ¢ \ - tea. WOO-000-Got-0Nm Figure 2. Side Map Critical Areas Study 4 Talbot Paris Estates r Water Resources Evaluation The methodology in this manual recognizes that the three parameters of hydrology and wetland plants are generally found in wetlands and that these parameters are important in the establishment and maintenance of wetland. communities. Within the methodology, indicators are evaluated in the field to determine satisfaction of each of the three parameters for establishment of wetland boundaries: Hydrophytic Plants - The US Fish and Wildlife Service (Reed, 1988 and 1993) has established a rating system which has been applied to commonly occurring plant species on the basis of their frequency of occurrence in wetlands. Species indicator status .expresses the range that plants may occur in wetlands and non -wetlands (uplands). Within the State and federal methodology, satisfaction of the hydrophytic plant community criterion occurs when the plant community is comprised of 50 percent or more of the dominant species which are adapted to or tolerant of saturated soil conditions: an indicator status of facultative (FAQ, facultative wetland (FACW), or obligate (OBL) wetland (Table 1). Modifiers are used with the indicator categories to more specifically define the frequency of occurrence. A positive (+) sign indicates plants are more frequently found in wetlands than the category indicates, whereas a negative (-) sign indicates plants are less frequently found in wetlands than the indicator signifies. A status of FAC- does not meet the hydrophytic plant community criterion. 2. Hydrology - Evidence of permanent or periodic inundation, or (at least) soil saturation to within 12 inches of the surface for one week or more during the growing season (soil temperatures above 41 °F); indicators other than standing water or soil saturation include stained leaves, soil surficial cracking or water -borne litter. 3. Hydric soils - Soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper soil horizons, or to. the depth of 12 to 18 inches; indicators include high organic content, low soil chroma (Munsell 1 matrix chroma of 2 with mottles or less than 2 without mottles) or gleying. ' Munsell Soil Color Charts, Kollmorgan Instruments Corporation, Baltimore, Maryland Critical Areas Study 5 Talbot Park Estates Water Resources Evaluation Table 1. USFWS Plant Indicator Status Obligate Upland UPL Occur rarely in wetlands (less than 99. percent) and almost always in uplands (greater than 99 percent) .Facultative Upland FACU Occur rarely in wetlands (less than 99 percent) and almost always in uplands (greater than 99 percent) Facultative FAC Equal likelihood in uplands and wetlands (33 to 67 percent) Facultative Wetland FACW Occur sometimes in wetlands (I to <33 percent), but more likely in uplands (>67 to 99 percent) Obligate Wetland OBL Occur rarely in uplands (less than 99 percent) and almost always in wetlands (greater than 99 percent) Not Listed NL Not listed in USFWS National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands For the analysis of this site, the presence of dominant hydrophytic vegetation was used for the principal delineator of the boundary between wetland and upland areas, supplemented on a case -by -case basis, with organic content or soil color evaluation to verify presence of hydric soils and.in the absenmof a positive indicator of wetland hydrology, use of professional judgement. At. several locations which supported uniform or homogeneous plant cover within the delineated wetland areas, sample plots (Appendix.A) were established for recording of wetland characteristics and for an assessment of wetland. functions, including those described in Table 2. 2.2.2 Investigation Results RES conducted a site. visit in April 2003, concurrent with surveyors . from Lovell-Sauerland and Associates, to determine the presence, type and extent of critical areas (wetlands and streams) on the subject property. Sample plots were established in areas of homogeneous vegetation within the wetland areas evaluated. For each habitat type, the dominant vegetation (in addition to the common and infrequently - Critical Areas Study 6 Talbot Park Estates Water Resources Evaluation Table 2 Wetland Functions and Values Wetiartd�nction Den►bon _ , ' Y<, Highest value eowest value Hydrologic support provision of water for biological productivity and permanently saturated or inundated systems groundwater recharge temporarily inundated or saturated hydrologically isolated depressions Streambase flow contribution potential the wetland's potential and ability to contribute to stream location in the upper segment of the basin and low located in the lower basin and and ability base flow based on its location within the basin and its recharge rate Q( either of the following: connected either high recharge rate, without surface water connection with a stream wetland or with permanent outlet to stream ADd permanent outlet or not connected one of the following: permanently flooded, outflow to a stream greater than inflow or topography favoring discharge Shoreline stabilization presence of wetland plants along the stream shoreline in a Woody vegetation at least 200 yards. in width submergent vegetation less than configuration which serves to dissipate periodic increased 100 yards wide flow or current . Water quality improvement, Including toxicant retention is related to soil type; sediment retention organic soils = toxicant retention; areas of reduced fast -flowing streambed composed sediment and toxicant retention, and nutrient uptake/conversion are related to presence.of water velocity containing vigorous plant growth = of mineral soils, with minimal plant nutrient uptake or conversion and macrophytes In the subject waters for biofiltration; pollution sediment retention and nutrient uptake/conversion; growth and no pollutant inputs pollution reduction reduction Is related to the opportunity for pollutant inflow to . point or non -point sources of pollution = pollutant the wetland removal opportunity Storm/floodwater management based on the location and of the wetland within the basin wetland with impermeable or slowly permeable less than 5 acres and the wetland's physical features soils comprising <5 percent of the upslope watershed. and either no permanent outlet or constricted outlet with unconstricted inlet or evidence of floodplain or expansive flooding within one year; wetland of more than ten acres Groundwater recharge variables Include periodicity and rate of flow, wetland size year-round, open water wetlands greater In size small, topographic low areas which and depth, surface topography and underlying soils and than 10 acres with water depths greater then 10 are only seasonally inundated geology feet Wildlife habitat and biological based on habitat characteristics and biological process high community diversity, valuable species support, absence of or limited manifestation functions values, including: habitat type, diversity, size and value can provide relatively equal proportions of open of community diversity, valuable within wetlands and adjacent uplands; food quality and water and vegetative cover and have refuge species support, relatively equal diversity; biological community diversity and structure; plant potential proportions of open water and productivity and support for and presence of game; vegetative cover and refuge commercially.important or unique species; and potential opportunities for refuge and provision of surrounding vegetation with potential to reduce visual and noise disturbance Critical Areas Study Talbot Park Estates Water Resources Evaluation occurring species) was recorded for each vegetation layer and the soil type/soil color and depth of soil saturation recorded (See representative data sheets in Appendix A). The on -site water resource is a 0.032 acre portion (Figures. 3, 4, and 5) of a larger (0.10 acre) scrub -shrub and emergent,. seasonally flooded/saturated wetland, as classified by Cowardin, et al. (1979). The wetland is found in a shallow depression on the northeast corner of the subject property and extends to the west, onto anadjacent property. Figure 3. Emergent Wetland at west boundary, looking into the property from the west.. Note emergent zone and standing water. The wetland on the site has no overstory and the shrub layer is principally comprised of Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis, FACW), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis, FAC+), and red alder (Alnus rubra, FAQ, with some Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor, FACU) cover entering the wetland area. Other than sparse creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens, FACW) and occasional (Juncus effusus, FACW), the herb layer throughout the majority of the fringing scrub -shrub zone is absent. The vegetation in the more central emergent area, in which standing water was 1 to 2 inches deep at the time of evaluation, was dominated by Pacific water parsley Critical Areas Study Talbot Park Estates •'` / -! \ 1. \..{ 7� � � � I Water Resources Evaluation (Oenanthe sarmentosa, OBL)..The predominance of the vegetation supports the hydric vegetation criterion. Surface soils range from very dark grayish brown (lOYR 3/2) silt to silt loam with dark yellowish brown (IOYR 4/6) mottles in the upper 12 to 18 inches at the wetland boundary, to black (IOYR 2/1) very organic loam in the interior of the wetland. Similar to the findings of Pentec, distinct change in soil color and change in topography separated wetlands from uplands, with soil colors of dark yellowish brown 10YR 3/3 and 10YR 3/4. Soil colors support satisfaction of the hydric soils criterion. Hydrologic support for the wetland are shallow subsurface flows. At the time of April 2003 sampling, the soil saturation at the wetland boundary was at a depth of 8 inches; standing water in the more central portions of the wetland was between 2 and 3 inches. Satisfaction of the hydrology criterion for these locations was based on soil saturation and presence of standing water. Therefore; all criteria are met for consideration of the delineated area as a wetland, satisfying the conditions of EDC §20.15B.130B. No wildlife associated with this resource, other than typical songbirds, was noted,at the time of site investigation. Due to. its small size and location in an urbanized area, the wetland area on the site serves limited functions for hydrologic, water quality, and wildlife support, including habitat. Limited hydrologic support functions include stream baseflow contribution. In terms of water quality functions, values are low for sediment/shoreline stabilization and low for. retention/transformation of sediments, nutrients, or toxicants. Natural biological functions are similarly low in value, including primary productivity, detrital transport, nutrient cyclinglutiIization, and food chain support. Habitat functions are low for all species but amphibians and insects. Socioeconomic functions are limited to aesthetic; which are judged to be low, largely based on size and location of the wetland. . Since the wetland is greater than 2,500 square feet in area, it is regulated by the City (EMC §20.15B.020.TT). The wetland is. classified as a Category 3 wetland (EMC §20.15B.060), since it is equal to or less than 1 acre and greater than 2,500 square feet and that has one wetland class. Under EMC §20.15B.130C, 25 foot buffers are required. Critical Areas Study 10 Talbot Park Estates Water Resources Evaluation 2.3 Stream A stream locally referred to as Outfall Creek (Terra Associates 2002) enters the site at its southeast corner and flows in a northerly direction near the east property boundary. The approximate stream bank boundaries and the centerline are found in Figure 2 and documents submitted by LSA in May 2002. In agreement with Pentec's findings, the stream should be classified as a Category 2 stream under EMC 20.15B.060. Due to barriers, this stream is not used by salmonids and would therefore be buffered on either side by 25 foot buffers (EMC 20.15B.120). In April 2003, RES measured the width of the stream at various locations along its course, and is in agreement with Pentec's estimate that the. average width is 30 inches, yielding an average width west of centerline of 15 inches. A Critical Areas. Study 11 Talbot Park Estates Bibliography 3. Bibliography Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, FWS/OBS-79/31. Reed, P., Jr. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 88(26.9). Reed, P., Jr., et al. 1993. 1993 Supplement to List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S. Dept. Interior Fish Wild]. Serv. December 1993 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1983. Soil Survey of Snohomish County, Washington. Prepared in cooperation with the Washington Agricultural Experiment Station. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Publication No. 96-94. March 1997. Critical Areas Study 12 Talbot Park Estates ATTACHMENT A TERRA ASSOCIATES REPORT •. TERRA ASSOCIATES,. Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences May 31, 2002 Project No. T-5149 Mr. Tom Sullivan 17041 Talbot Road Edmonds, Washington 98026 Subject: Wetland Evaluation Talbot Road Property Edmonds, Washington Dear Mr. Sullivan: We have conducted an evaluation .of the Talbot Road Property located- at 17015 Talbot Road in Edmonds, Washington figure 1). The property is located in the northeast quarter of Section 7, Township 27 North, and Range 4 East. The site is roughly rectangular and approximately 0.21 acres (Figure 2). Talbot Road borders the site to the west. Properties to the north and south, as well as most of the neighborhood, are developed with single- family residences.. The property to the east is undeveloped and forested. The subject property is developed with a single-family residence. The house, driveway, and residential landscaping are located on the northern half of the property. The southern half is undeveloped. The southern area appears to be a tributary drainage that likely flows towards an unnamed creek to the east (this creek is unofficially named "Outfall Creek" on the Snohomish County orthophotographs for this section). - METHODS For the purpose of this study, we used the wetland definition adopted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)' and the Army Corps of Engineers (COE) for administering Section 404 of the.1977 Clean Water Act. According to this'definition, wetlands are: Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. (33 CFR 328.3(b); 1984) 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 Phone (425) 821-7777 • Fax (425) 821-4334 0 terra@terra-associates.cnm • Mr. Tom Sullivan May 31, 2002 All of the test pits contained a gravelly sandy soil with a topsoil layer between five to eight inches deep. The topsoil layer was highly organic in nature with a matrix, color of IOYR 2/1. Soils below the topsoil were mostly lacking in organic material. Matrix colors ranged from 10YR 3/1 (Test Pit TP-1) to 7.5 YR 4/6 (Test Pit TP-4). Soils with a low chroma value (/1 or /2 if redoxymorphic features are :present) are generally considered to be hydric. . Redoxymorphic features (iron masses, nodules, reductions, or depletions) were present in Test Pits.TP-1, TP-2, and TP=3, and absent in Test Pit TP4. Redoxymorphic features develop when soils _are saturated long enough .'during the growing season for iron and manganese to biologically transform from an oxidized form to a reduced form. Soils in Test Pits TP-1, TP-2, and TP-3 satisfied the hydric soils criteria. Surface, water was not present at the time of our site. visit. However, there was ample evidence of recent standing water. Organic topsoil was exposed over part of subject site. No evidence of leaf litter existed in the area of exposed topsoil. We observed watermarks on a downed big -leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) tree and .brightly colored rust on the bottom two inches of the wire fence and fence posts that delineate the eastern border of the subject property. We also observed free water in Test Pits TP-1 and TP-3, but not in Test Pits TP-2 or TP4. Primary and secondary evidence indicates the presence of wetland hydrology at Test. Pits TP-1 and TP-3. VEGETATION Vegetation on the subject property forms three distinct communities. The vegetation community on the northern half of the property is urban landscape: The southern half of the property is mostly second -growth forest and scrub -shrub. This forested portion is dominated by big -leaf maple, red alder (Alnus rubra), and black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), suggesting an upland habitat. The third community in the southeast corner of the property is. dominated by salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), Scouler's willow (Salix scouleriana), Pacific willow(Salix lasiandra), and red alder, suggesting a wetland habitat. Other common shrub species present -in the area include Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), common hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna), red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), English holly (Ilex aguifolium); and English laurel (Prunus 7aurocerasus). Herb species included cleavers (Gallium appraise), lady fern (Athyrium filLx femina), sword fern (Polystichum munitum), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens), fringecup (Tellima grandiflora), and herb Robert (Geranium robertianum). WETLAND DETERMINATION An area of wetland conditions exists in the southeast corner of the, subject .property (Figure 3). Wetland conditions continue off -site to the east.. The approximate area of this wetland on the subjecu property is 1,600 square feet., The detemvnation of wetland conditions was based on patterns of vegetation,soil conditions, and field hydrology. The: size of this wetland was estimated by plotting distance and bearing measurements taken in the field. Property boundaries were estimated based on in -field. measurements. ,The flagged wetland boundary and property boundary should be'professionally surveyed for accuracy. Project No. T-5149 .Page No. 3 I RIVER If 2 GRATM 3 GRANITE 4 FIELDST 18157, 182tib I M..; I" IL I 185T 147 _P1 I 1891W ST Re f: - The Thomas Guide, King County, 2001 Edition, Page 455. f. Terra VICINITY MAP TALBOT ROAD PROPERTY EDMONDS,. WASHINGTON Associates, Inc. Geotechnical and Proj. No. T-5149 Date MAY 2002 F Environmental Consultants Figure 1 Approximate Location of Property Line -- Wetland -Area Wetland off -site not Approximate Location • surveyed: Datap int 2' of Property Line - -- --_- Wetland Area 1,600 square feet on property. Datapoint 4 DISCLAIMER: Wetland boundary mapped by distance and bearing measurements taken in -field: Property boundary is estimated based upon on -site measurements. Site needs to be professionally surveyed for accuracy. . ✓r NOT TO SCALE ;> Terra WETLAND LOCATION SKETCH,MAP TALBOT ROAD PROPERTY Associates, Inc. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON OG.Otechnical and Environmental Consultants Proj.No. T-5149 Date MAY 2002 Figure 3 FIELD DATA SHEET WETLANDS DELINEATION Field Investigators: David R. Teesdale Date: May 24, 2002 Site ID Talbot Road Property State: WA County: Snohomish Applicant/Owner: Sample Plot ID: # 4 Normal environmental conditions at plant Community? Normal conditions" exist. Vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology significantly disturbed? No VEGETATION DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES: Scientific Name Common Name Stratum Indicator %.Cover *Alnus rubra Red alder T FAC 20% *Ater macrophyllum Big -leaf maple T FACU 10% *Crataegus monogyna Common hawthorn S FAC- 15% .Rubus ursinus Trailing blackberry S FACU 2% Prunus laurocerasus English laurel S Ni 2% Rubus spectabilis Salmonberry S. FAC 2% Ilex aquifolium English holly S FACU 2% Polystichum munituin Sword fern H FACU 5% *Galium aparine Cleavers H FACU 15% Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: T-50%, S-0%,H-0% Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? NO SOILS SERIES/PHASE: Alderwood-Urban Complex [s the soil on hydric soils list? ❑ Is the.soil a Histosol? ❑ Histic epipedon present? ❑ Mottled? (Redox). ❑ Gleyed? ❑ Depth Matrix Soil Texture Color - Redox Color Redox Features : Redox Size and Abundance Pore Linings. 0-5" 10YR 2/1 Sand loam 5"-10" 7.5YR 4/6 Sandy gravellyloam El !s hydric soil criterion met? NO HYDROLOGY .s ground surface inundated? ❑ Surface. Water depth: S the soil saturated? ❑ Depth to free-standing water in soil probe hole: >20-inches Ast other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: None s wetland hydrology criterion met? NO JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION s the plant community a wetland? NO- :OMMENTS: do evidence of wetland vegetation, soils, or field hydrology. Field Investigators: Site ID: Applicant/Owner: FIELD DATA SHEET WETLANDS DELINEATION David R. Teesdale' Date: May 24, 2002 Talbot Road Property State: `NA County: Snohomish Sample Plot ID: # 2 . Normal environmental conditions at plant Community? Normal conditions exist Vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology significantly disturbed? No VEGETATION DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES: Scientific Name Common Name *Crataegus monogyna Common hawthorn *Prunus lourocerasus English laurel *Oemleria cerasiformis Indian plum Ilex aguafolium English holly Rubus discolor Himalayan blackberry Stratum Indicator %Cover S FAC- 50% S NI 10% S FACU 10% S FACU 2% S FACU 2% Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: T-001o, S-0%,.H-0% Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? NO SOILS SERIES/PHASE: Alderwood-Urban Complex Is the soil on hydric soils list? ❑ Is the soil a Histosol? ❑ Histic epipedon present?. ❑ Mottled? (Redox) ® Gleyed?- ❑ Depth . Matrix Color Soil Texture Redox Color Redox Features Redox Size and Abundance Pore Linings'. 0-Y 10YR 3/2 Sandy gravellyloam El Y-17" 10YR 3/4 Sand gravellyloam 10YR 4/5 Iron masses few fine El Is hydric soil criterion met? NO HYDROLOGY Is ground surface inundated? ❑ Surface Water depth: Is the soil saturated? ❑ Depth to free=standing water in soil probe hole: List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: No other signs of field wetland hydrology. Is wetland hydrology criterion met? NO JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION' Is the plant community a wetland? NO COMMENTS: Soils at datapoint were very dry and sandy. No evidence of wetland vegetation, soils, or hydrology. ATTACHMENT R WETLAND RESOURCES REPORT I W. WetlalfdWown%o, /#r Delineation / Mitigation / Restoration / Habitat creation / Permit Assistance June 3, 2002 Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc. Attn: Mike Smith 19400 — 33rd Ave. W.,-Suite 200 Lynnwood, WA 98036 Tr-1 n [fir`, 1UN 0 4 2002 ------- ""- 9505 19th Avenue S.E. Suite 106 Everett, Washington 98208 (425) 337-3174 Fax (425) 337-3045 CRITICAL AREA RECONNAISSANCE -REPORT TALBOT PARK ESTATES CITY OF EDMONDS - SNOHOMISH COUNTY,' WA E C E I V E'M Wetland Resources, Inc., completed a site investigation on June 3, 2002 to evaluate the potential presence of jurisdictional wetlands on an approximate 2 acre site located immediately north of the intersection of Sea Lawn Drive and 171" St. SW in the city of Edmonds, WA. The site lies as a portion of Sec. 7, Twp. 27N, Rge. 4E, WM. The Washington State Department of Ecology Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (March 1997) was used to evaluate site conditions. Critical area protection regulations were obtained using the City of Edmonds Ordinance Chapter 20.15B Critical Areas. Site Description The subject property is bounded to the south by 171" St. SW, to the west and north by single family residences and on the east by a forested slope. The south one -quarter of the property contains an existing single family residence with associated out buildings. The central portion -of the property is a mix of grassland and forest. The north end of the property is forested with immature red alder. The topography of the site is sloping to the north and east. Wetlands One small forested and scrub/shrub wetland was located along the western property boundary. The on -site portion of the wetland is approximately 500 square feet in size. The off -site portion of the wetland is approximately 1,200 square feet in size. The total area of the entire wetland is approximately 1,700 square feet. Wetlands less than 2,500 square feet in size are not regulated in the city of Edmonds (EMC 20.15B.020 TT). Wetland boundaries were reasonably distinct based on soil color and dominance of wetland vegetation. The off -site portion of the wetland was estimated by observation done while looking over the existing property fence. The off -site portion of the wetland boundary appears to have been flagged in the recent past. Dominant wetland vegetation contained in this wetland includes twinberry, creeping buttercup, and salmonberry. Wetland Resources, Inc. t / Talbot Park Estates June 3, 2002 r''`' CJ WRI02118 EXH101 i FILE NO. 00 — — — — — •- � � � \60� \ �65 //0\ --------_ H1HON 13 CREEK/\\0' / ,' ,' 4! to k- IN �. � 3—' /� `' 1.t� � \ 2Q / 11 °\ I '�•i ',�:'` , / tip,.of �\ 1 o f I a / x 33N3! 3avn x x x x \ ON! 'Ml 'HO ,9 30N3! 3 .96.091 H180N 71 5 O CRITICAL AREA RECONNAISSANCE MAP \/ ' uJ=pcn 10 For: I . to Z N Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc. PAT MAP L j Site Location: 171" St. SW y TALBOT PARK ESTATES '1 Edmonds, WA 98294 H IN SE1/4,NE1/4 OF SECTION 7;T.27 N.,R,4 E.,W. CITY OF EDMONDS Ci By: SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON Wetland Resources, Inc. 9505 — 19"' Ave. NE #106 Lorell-S�uerl�nd rs Anoel�tei, lnc. _� Everett, WA 98208 WRI #02118 LER 425-337-3174 June 3, 2002 Iwu a-3-o: 11 r. 94_D. 1 ATTACHMENT C PENTEC REPORT AW www.pentecenv.com PENTE-C~RONMENTA. L Delivering smarter solutions February 28, 2003 anchorage Mr. Steve Bullock Senior Planner City of Edmonds Development Services Department Boston 121 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Re: Third -Party Review of Critical Areas Study of the. -Talbot Park Estates Pentec #12130-15 Chicago Dear Steve: At the request of the City of Edmonds, Pentec conducted a third -party review of the Critical Denver Areas Study of the proposed Talbot Park Estates.at 7707 - 171" Street SW, Edmonds, Washington. This review includes a review.of wetland boundaries and the measurement of the width of the stream along the east property boundary. I reviewed the Critical Area Reconnaissance report (CAR) prepared for the property by Wetland Resources, Inc., dated June 3, 2002, and a wetland report for the adjacent property to the west. I also reviewed a Fairbanks Wetland Evaluation (WE) report dated May 31, 2002, prepared for the adjacent property to the northwest by Terra Associates, Inc. also In addition, I conducted a site inspection on January 29, 2003. WETLAND Jersey City The 2-acre site contains a portion of a small wetland toward the northwest corner. The wetland is bisected by the site's west property boundary. Although there are a few small trees in the wetland it classifies as a palustrine scrub -shrub wetland following the U.S. Fish Juneau and Wildlife Services' Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al 1979). Dominant plants in the wetland include salmonberry (Rubus spectabi/is), Sitka willow (Salixs#chenis), red alder (A/nus rubra), ladyfern (Athyrium fi/ix-femina), and creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens). See attached photos of wetland. Long Beach WETLAND BOUNDARY On the day of the site inspection only a single piece of pink "wetland delineation" flagging was located. The flagging was toward the center of the wetland.and did not have anything written on it. Two pieces of orange flagging (also without writing) were located on the west Portland property fence. These two flags were close to the wetland edge, and it is assumed that they were tied by Wetland Resources during the site reconnaissance. A large maple tree had A Division of Hart Crowser, Inc. Seattle 120 Third Avenue South, Suite 110 Edmonds, Washington 98020-8411 Fax 425.778.9417 Tel 425.775.4682 City of Edmonds 12130-15 February 28, 2003 Page 3 Based on the 2,700-sf estimate, this wetland is larger than the 2,500-sf threshold in Section 20.45B.20 of the Edmonds Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) and would be a regulated feature. Based on Section 20.15B.060 of the CAO the wetland is classified as a Category3 wetland because it is less than 1 acre and has only one vegetation class. STREAM A stream runs through the northeast corner of the site and near the east property boundary. The centerline of the stream is shown on the CAR map and the Preliminary Plat drawing (Lovell-Sauerland & Associates 4294-0-01 May 29, 2002). Based on Pentec's site visit it is assumed the stream is perennial and would therefore be classified as a.Category 2 stream by the CAO (20.15B.060).. A 25-foot buffer is required on both sides of Category 2 streams without salrnonids and a 50-foot buffer is required on both sides of a Category 2 stream with salmonids. The CAO (20.15B.120) specifies stream buffers to be measured outward from the top of bank. Pentec measured the width of the stream (between stream banks) at five locations along the stream. These measurements were made to provide the City with a means of evaluating the stream setback requirements relative to the stream centerline shown on the Preliminary Plat drawing. On the reach of the stream east of the site the width between the banks is on average 30 inches. 'Based on this estimate the west bank of the stream is on average 15 inches from the stream centerline. We hope this report meets your needs. if you have any questions, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, PENTEC ENVIRONMENTAL MICHAEL MUSCARI Wetland Ecologist michael.muscari@pentecenv.com Attachments: Wetland Boundary Sketch Photographs of Wetland 001301Q t SUbotparW eview.doc 4~ M-140MC1131m, DATA SHEETS rW-->vvC I Lp%o-4LJ UCLIIVC/111VIV Li/11I1 rvrlwl riut vou. ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Transact ID Weather: -^ - Cowardin Project/Site: Dater Field Invesh for Size(Ac):`0- 1 1-2 2-5 >5 �- Normal Conds Y• Disturbance?. e-u.. A- 0) w _-._......_ Cover Class 1. 0.54 2.5 2.5.25415 3. 25-50+37.5 4. 50. 75•111,62.5 5. 75.95. 95 6. >954 97.5 W/L Dominant Plant Spp Cvr CIs Indloalcr.. ,..., $tattle . Stratum W/L UP Dominant Plant Species Cvr CIS Indicator Statue Stratum u ray n i .nurn u -16 porn ,wr yrgan.p• .u.y�, - m.,J • a�.y u • . .. yw•• .......... %O8L. FACW or'FAC =? herb ♦ _ shrub ♦ _tree ■ _ total Hydrophylle Vp Y. N Rstlonalle: '0>50% O<50%(OBL. FACW or FAC (no FAC•)) O rther HYDROLOG • ;. Inund? Y uA H2O depth: ' SaIA12' (6' In sandy soils)'f�'.' N 'Depth of free H20 In Poole: Other t• hors: O water marks O drift lines O sediment deposit d)NA. drainage patterns Other field evidence of surface Inundation or soil saturation Secondary Indicators: O oxidized root channelsAl2' O water -stained leaves O local soil survey data DFAC•Neutral Test (In vague hydrol) O other Recorded Deta: O t am• lake or tide gauge O aerial photo O other O none Growing Season?ised on to O obev rowM D soil limp A 19.T >41•i O Wetland hydrology Ralbn c� t�newut_rj ! tom+ .SOILS to at least 16- SeriewPhase: Taxonomy Drainage Class Confirm Mapg Y N DeM Matrix Color' Mottle?/Color Gleyj Texture Ae YN YN &Iza LOMA Y N_) Y N Y N Y N Y N Y N 'below A h000n or 10' ichem shallower) ..1 PHtyyddrrbb SON hodlaators Hlstosol lstio spipsdon O SuNkilo Odor O'Apulo Moisture Regime 70'Reducing conditions D GleyedlLow Chrome O High Surface Organic Content In Sandy Soils / O Concretions O Organic Streaking In Sandy Soils Hydrie Soils List: OLocal ON al Dither w her hydrit Indiators: Hydrlc Solt?( YnN Rationale: /,�j'7') R "A DETERMINATION DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Wetland?14-1 I Rational all pare veg no Bolls no hydrol Semple point within wetland? Y N Other irdormallon /Remerks. y d r • FUNCTIONS AND VALUES HYDROLOGIC SUPPORT Groundwater recharge (H M L Is Groundwater discharge (H / Stream basellow contributiI/A) M N/Al Floodwater attenuation (H N/Al Floodwater detention (H M/A) • Floodwater retention (H M • Floodwater desynchronization (H M L /A1 WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS ..Sediment/shoreline stabilization (H M L A Retention of sediments, nutrients or toxicants L• A•1_ Transformation of nutrients or toxi R(s (H Ml/ Wastewater treatment (H M L too Y NATURAL BIOLOGICAL FU TI S. • Primary productivity (H M Al • Organic accumulation N/AP- Decomposition A)Organic export (H M (H M WAl Detrital transport (H L Nut6int cycling and utilizatio (H Food chain support (H M', IAl HABITAT FUNCTIONS Invertebrates (H M : A) Amphibians ,(H M • WA) Fisheries (H M L Mammals (H A) Birds (H M�WA • Sanctuary and refuge (H M L A) SOCIO-ECONOMIC FUNCTIO S Non•consumptivo valu Recreational (H. L / Aesthetic (H M - Historical (H M L Archeological (H M L - Consumptive vai Fisheries (H M L N/ Renewable resources(�H M L f Y' Agricultural (H M L yWAU Wildlife Data Plot Location Sketch RESWCTLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM Plot No. Z ROUTINE ONSITE DETE INATION METHOD Transect ID Weather: S �_ Cowar in Project/Site: taS2: te: q' z' o Field Investigato Size(ac): <0 <1' 1-2 2-5>5. Normal.Conds? Disturbance? Problem Area? Cover Class 11- 0.54 2.S 2.5.2S+15 3. 25 •50-037.5 4. 50. 7S-►82.5 5. 75-'95485 8. >954 97.5 j WA. IDeminant Plan{t�Spp Cvr Cis Indicator I Status Stratum WIL UP Dominant Plant Specks Cvr Cis Indicator Status Stratum t tJ 5 t 5 16 L; rsc'n'I Icnowl ❑ WA- elnt list O ehva/raor adapt ❑ march adapt O tech IIt O W/L oiani data base %OBL. FACiW or FAC herb + shrub'+ _tree . _ total Hydrophytic V*( I Ratlonalle: 0>50% 0<50%(08L, FACW or FAC (no FAC•)) O clher HYDRO.LOG lnund7 Y N Surf H2O depth: ' SatAl2' (8' In sandy soils)? Depth of free H2O in pit/hole: Other I Indlatom: (3 weer marks O drift Thee. O sedlm . smartXWL drainage patterns Other field evidenos of surface Inundation or sell saturation ' Secondary Indicators: O oxidized root channelgAl2* ❑ water -stained leaves O local soil survey data . OFAC-Neutral Test On vague hydrol) Oaths Recorded Data: am, Inks or tide gauge O aerial photo O other O none Growing Season Based on: O date O obsv rowdh O sell t mp O /9.7' "1•F O Welland hydroltl itatlonab: OILS to of least 1fl- SerlealPhase: Taxonomy Oralnegs Class Confirm Mapg Y N ._ Metric color* Mottle?/Color QW Texture 0 IO.i/Y N / Y N S/ . —(s y Q �% Zi&N (O �,Tz QT L, Y N 13 r Y N Y. N YN YN 'below A horizon or IV lonaver shallower) Mydr� Sell Ind)-ostem: O Histosol tistlo epipedon O SuMidle Odor Aqulo Moisture Regime t Cq Reducing eondnlons P*y &ow Chrwna O High Surface O41nie Content In Sandy Sops ` LY Coratitlons O Orgsmii Streaking in Sandy Sees Hydric Soils Lint: 'OLocal ONatn 1 al t'Ie' Othei hydric sell instors: Hydrfe too? I Platlonsiv JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE WePand N RatkxtaF3:..glt pe/�mino veg no soils no hydrol Sample point within wetland? Y N .� 0Other IM atloMrsmarks: \_J FUNCTIONS AND VALUES HYDROLOGIC SUPPORT�..t.t� Groundwater recharge (H M L N/A) Groundwater discharge (H M L N/A) Stre.. ?. hsageow contribution (H M L N/Al • Floodwater a ten.: t= (H M L N/A) • Floodwater detention (H. M L N/A) Floodwater retention (H M -L N/Al Floodwater attenuation (H M L N/Al Floodwater desynchronization (H M L N/A) WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS Sediment/shoreline stabilization (H M L N/A) Retention of sediments, nutrientt or toxicants (H. M L N/Aj_ Transformation of nutrients or toxicants (H M L N/A1 Wastewater treatment (H M L N/Al NATURAL BIOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS • Primary productivity (H M L WA) • Organic accumulation (H M L N/Al • Organic export (H M L N/A) Decomposition (H M L .N/Al Detrital transport (H M L MAI _ Nutrient cycling and utilization (H M L N/Al - - Food chain support (H M L N/Al HABITAT FUNCTIONS Invertebrates (H M L N/A) Amphibians (H M L N/Al Fisheries (H M L N/Al . Mammals (H M L N/Al Birds (H M L WA) Sanctuary and refuge (H M L N/A) SOCIO-ECONOMIC FUNCTIONS • Non -consumptive value Recreational (H M L N/Al Aesthetic (H M L N/Al Historical (H M L WA) Archeological (H M L N/A) • Consumptive value Fisheries (H M L N/Al Renewable resources (H _ M L N/Al Agricultural (H M L N/A) WUdlife Data Plot Location Sketch .. .. .. -Ns`' � � • .- 't � .r" ,' R.s � �.. t "i.� �'`i"'-i r• `:'ate � ` -�� . i City of Edmonds ? Permit-NoL RIGHT-OF—WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT % Issue}Date. A. Address or Vicinity of Construction: B. Type of Work (be specific): 4Q7'/L/T/6S 49W oincm ril i f i C. Contractor ` Confact , 441w, /,-il"U Mailing Addiessi •` - owe- SLicense*# / �� 5r /AP Z, , City Business'License4,Y+ /ZI�y D. Building Permit #.(if applicable): I �"�� E. ❑ Commercial ❑ Subdivision 50 A Multi -Family Single Family , + INSPECTOR: F. PAVEMENT CUT: ❑ YES ❑ NO CONCRETE CUT: ❑ YES ❑ NO Liabilitytlnsurance%M� Bond: $� T Side Sewer Permit # (if applicable): (/ r ❑ City Project. ❑ EUC (PUD, VERIZON, PSE, COMCAST, OVWSD) ❑ Other ,Lr— r G. SIZE OF CUT X G. ❑ Mail Approved Permit ❑ Call for Pickup "APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN INDEMNITY. • Applicant understands by his/her signature to this application he/she holds the City of Edmonds harmless from injuries, damages or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, foreseen or unforeseen, that may be made against the City of Edmonds or any of its departments or emplovees, including but not limited to the defense of anv legal proceedings including defense costs and attorney fees by reason ofgranting this permit. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK. ESTIMATED RESTORATION FEES WILL BE HELD UNTIL THE FINAL STREET PATCH IS COMPLETED BY CITY FORCES, AT WHICH TIME A DEBIT OR CREDIT WILL BE PROCESSED FOR ISSUANCE TO THE APPLICANT. ♦ Traffic control and public safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City Engineer. Every flagger must be trained as required by (WAC) 296-155-305 and must have certification verifying completion of the required training in their possession. ♦ Restoration is to be in accordance with City codes. All street -cut trench work shall be patched with asphalt or City - approved material prior to the end of the workday - NO EXCEPTIONS. ♦ Three sets of construction drawings of proposed work are required with the permit application. CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-424-5555) PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK I HAVE READ T E ABOVE STATEMENTS AND UNDERSTAND THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND ACKNOWLED6E THAT I MUST14 KE THE I COPY OF THE PERMIT AVAILABLE ON SITE AT ALL TIMES FOR INSPECTIONS Signature: Date: (Contractor or Agent) FOR CITY USE ONLY Approved by: Right-of-way,Fee: . /bD i /J� Time Authorized: Void After % •/ Disruption Fee%Euud.111: Special Conditions:. 1 Inspection Fee: u /"- i�z.t....•sp9Tro,�s`.: Total Fee: Z�.S✓/. l f Receipt No: Issued by: Wf REQUIRED INSPECTIONS: �� -t ► a,[ I� Call 425-771-0220, Ext. 1326 for a 24-hour.voice-recorded inspection request linegly lbp FINAL APPROVAL OF PERMITTED WORK: S►LV(ie Farm! -l'rlei` 4, DATE: nspeetor's Signature 1 WORK SHALL BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT CADocuments and Settings\CurtisNy Documents\Forms\Engnmg\ROWpermit_ doc Revised 10/01/03 CZZ� �EIb�I[�!/lGJ STREET FILE Cert' ' ate ofOccupancy DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS PER INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE. SECTION R110 AT: 17003 77th Place W Building Permit M 2006-0332 Occupancy established by this certificate: R3 Dwelling Units:. 1 No. Stories: 2 Basement: NIA Type of Construction: VB Owner of building: Hlllcrest` Constcuctto'n �Co The Single Family Residence at 17003 77 PIki% * :has been .ins,`pected and:"approved complying with the requirements of the 2003 edition of the International Residential Code as adiipted!by tF e:CitthW group and division of occupancy and the use for which the proposed occupancy is classified. Issued this 3`d day of July, 2007 Chief Building Official By: Any change of occupancy or use requires a building permit and a new Certificate of Occupancy issued by the City of Edmonds Building Official. MOISN tH.MT F.WIYkIW After Recording Return To: HILLCREST CONSTRUCTION 4003 NASSAU PL EVERETT WA 98201 DECLARATION OF PRIVATE DRAINAGE EASEMENT AGREEMENT For and in consideration of the mutual benefits derived herein and other good and valuable consideration, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, the following early Hillcrest Construction Company, INC., being the owner of lots 5, 6 and Tract 997, Charlotte Gardens, according to the plat recorded under Snohomish County Auditor's file number 200510145249, hereby conveys and quit claims to the current and future owners, successors and or assigns of said lot 5, of the above described property, a non-exclusive easement for private drainage facilities, including the right of reasonable ingress and egress to maintain and repair said drainage facilities over under and across the following described land of said parties herein: The northeasterly 25 feet of lot 6 and Tract 997, running parallel with the southwest boundary of Tract 999, and lying southeasterly of the catch basin as currently located and depicted within Tract 997, Charlotte Gardens, according to the plat thereof recorded under Snohomish County Auditor's file number 200510145249, records of Snohomish County Washington. Tax Parcel: 010372-000-005-00; 010372-000-006-00; 010372-000-996-00 C� C� This easement is appurtenant to the following described land owned by said parties herein and the easement and covenants contained herein shall run with and burden the property described herein. Said parties herein their successors and or assigns shall have the right to maintain and repair said drainage pipe line, provided however that the parties and their successors shall use reasonable care to restore the surface of the land and to replace the landscaping, plantings, lawn, personal property, and any other improvements, to original or better condition. The doctrine of merger shall not apply with regard to the extinguishing of said easement herein. In Wtness Whereof, this easement is executed this 7 day of ,O2006. Hillcrest Construction Company, Inc. STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF - `S On this z-7 %- day of Sr�o �`" ' 2006, before me the undersigned, a notary public In and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, Personally appeared J n� %y,t ✓ w� J , the Of Hillcrest Construction Company, Inc., to me proved with satisfactory evidence to be The of Hillcrest Construction Company, Inc., who executed the within instrument Acknowledged that kk -e signed and sealed the same as their free and voluntary act and Deed, for the uses and purposes n mentioned I `� Printed name of notary _ g1011,�,�►tiF s i U�rpSAq� My appointment expires: % `2 y y - - • - y Residing at: AV81.�G �'C_ l�fr l"�� vr ��i�j''►,,�-29-�9=� Ct:' Y t)F ESQp', l S, `WA�SHING'T:ON 270407-00>-01>-00 P12- $1, D. 1/2" REBAR do CAP:: 'RM 17672 25.32'E X170407-001-01.y-=00 12 32 N OF: NW PROP. COR.. .21�-05211 9T OmN9o'0O'OO�W 211.9T:-CALC 6100' 4' HOGVNRE y 15O.9NFENCE 4HOGNARE FENCE_`81.3'E:'X.2 6S-001-048-00 ' OF NW PROP 1.2'WTRACT 997 10' ' STSOR DRAW EAScMENT 1NLINK FENCE 8.006 S.F. I N86�3$'37'E #114.29'OPEN SPACEI 10¢�• I N ti .TR .T 999 OS.F iZ. t�CPA1.1'E �o4XEt \ � _ . '•° � 5.32� &F.-pcboo WETLANDBcop!i M 2.5ETRAAC�T'• a'AQ5E 74153 .F. _N06'449 2pW5 ' STREAM,. : 2N90•��E : ; i 8100 17.4' HOGWIRE FENCE6.68' g0•i 3.0'EI a 9.34 W. 8 x ;62,�W 7 go N g i Z-------- J 13r 1.5'E '� .t 78. o 1 7 M r1 o� 6 4.887'SF.$ . "r z 1.O'E, r` �Q 3 ' a 5 . ,0, .. �e�` 3' CHAINUNK o°f GF V v FENCE 4 N :4 E !j N90�00 00 E-- 90J9 2 l 1�• � � •�� < �'• < ins OF- A 2 � h GF, �' ��---------- 14',1890 0 9 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 99M • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771-0221 Website: www.d.edmonds.wa.us DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning • Building • Engineering November 9, 2005 MEMO TO: Puget Sound Energy Verizon Northwest SNOCOM Police and Fire Dispatch SNOPAC Snohomish County E911 U.S. Post Office Snohomish County Assessor's Office Snohomish County Information Services Snohomish County P.U.D. Edmonds Fire Department . Edmonds Police Department Edmonds, Utility Billing Edmonds Public Works Edmonds Building/Street File Edmonds Address Files Lynnwood Disposal Comcast Cable GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR Please be advised that the following addresses have been added to the Edmonds address system: Occupancy: Residential Subdivision: PO4-09 Lot 1 is 76211715' Street SW Lot 2 is 17009 771h Place W Lot 3 is 17007 771h Place W Lot 4 is 17005 771h Place W Lot 5 is 17003 771h Place W Lot 6 is 17001771h Place W Lot 7 is 17008 771h Place W Tax ID Number: 27040700100400 Lot #: 1 through 7 If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at 425-771-0220 or Harrison@ci.edmonds.wa.us. Please contact me if you wish to be removed from this list. Res Fectfully, arie �arrison Senior Permit Coordinator Edmonds Building Department a olJ�3o bo" f 12111974 6' C14AINLINK W. & 2.3' S. ' ?OP. CORNER )ol-o4a-oo997 N. 'NLINK & 3' HOG : ; _ 8,005 S \ \ ;E INTERSECTION, OPEN SPACE �21' 70 tA OF PROP. LINE \ \ \ \ Y Y Y Y Y 56 X, 154 SF P' S, 320 S/ I \ Y C\G ^ ! \ ' \ \ A \ a , 914 SF O to I Q� =^� FREE$ fG BE _ 74' * f p c RflNOVED (TW) Os Q'F Q O of OA # PARKIN'p .3' CHAINLINK 1• ::� ".� 4' FENCE. 2.3' E. ::� — 6 OF PROP. LINE ' - 74 � (f CHAINLINK 4.778 F�• o � .. j t, FENCE 0.7' E. go - 3' CHAINLINK �' �1 - - - - 63' - :: ;,; FENCE 0.4' W `�\X. � 5 09 > ":. _ , h •; , _rid,, - 9,552 SFT \1Yn �OpSa's`-s 163, 16320 16330 16340 F--�'i6404 p n, / 16414 t6azo 1 +sloe 1 16510 rm m 1661 Wa Brook m a 31 Acres '6616 �. 76 nc 16621 BnOge _ 40K Lb Umd o 16711 3 16117 7735 �1 ®11231 tit®r of 1® ®i i Ir®Im4� � ts7z1 Lynnwood As 6052 � o s® Treatment Plant 17000 1685-4 16827 ® 168.38 \\ 16801 O 16856 16900 16905 16900 16858 1 { 16833 ® 1g902 . JJ l69j2 17020 18911 18907 17041 ; 16917 0`' \ 16931 16925 1 , !p i• J� 17003 1701. 17017 10 \\7931`., / //V\J 7619 7617 m (7 J 17107 t7ST ST SW o n , \ 8017 \t5 •\� •\ q/P\�,/ \ �`\ ram •. J°'p\ Jo 17101 7624 7614 11114 s 17 8007 \, / J 1712+ ♦♦\ / O, ` \yam/ Py�N DQ ♦ ,\ �' SW t \ \ /17131 °., /Ji \vo 17130 17126 ~ /\ 8119 8125 ^�—^�`°,s ...-.< . .... \', \%�\'•'�8,\, \e ,-o\9\- \ r�\: \'9\�1ti72011J ,17,7717210 17211 72 17206 8,27` - 117207 t7,6121 \•\ \B4 1�7202 17214 > 17215 1721e 8215\ a d7217 \ \ 17232 nos 17zt7 8219 4 805 t7228 , l 1723, \75—\� 07 P e2oo `73RD 83ez\eozs Ters- J 7802 o 77 7529 7515 3. m 7923 .. .n. .. I. n CHARLOTTE _ GARDENS A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SE1/41 NE1/4, SEC. 7, TWP. 27 N., RGE. 4 E., W.M. P-2004-9 & PRO 2004-70 CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON EASEMENT PROVISIONS AN EASEMENT IS HEREBY RESERVED FOR AND GRANTED TO ALL UTILITIES SERVING SUBJECT PLAT AND THEIR RESPECTIVE SUCCESSORS.AND ASSIGNS, UNDER AND UPON THE EXTERIOR 10 FEET PARALLEL WITH AND ADJOINING THE STREET FRONTAGE OF ALL LOTS, TRACTS AND COMMON AREAS IN WHICH TO INSTALL, LAY, CONSTRUCT, RENEW, OPERATE AND MAINTAIN UNDERGROUND CONDUITS, CABLES, PIPE, AND WIRES WITH NECESSARY FACILITIES AND OTHER EQUIPMEN*i FOR THE PURPOSE OF SERVING THIS SUBDIVISION AND OTHER PROPERTY WITH ELECTRIC, TELEPHONE, GAS, TELEVISION CABLE AND OTHER UTILITY SERVICES TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT TO ENTER UPON THE LOTS, TRACTS AND COMMON AREAS AT ALL TIMES FOR THE PURPOSES HEREIN STATED. DRAINAGE EASEMENTS DESIGNATED ON THE PLAT ARE HEREBY RESERVED FOR AND GRANTED TO CITY OF EDMONDS, EXCEPT THOSE DESIGNATED ON THE PLAT AS PRIVATE EASEMENTS, TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT OF INGRESS. AND EGRESS AND THE RIGHT TO EXCAVATE, CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, MAINTAIN, REPAIR AND/OR REBUILD AN ENCLOSED OR OPEN CHANNEL STORM WATER CONVEYANCE SYSTEM AND/OR OTHER DRAINAGE FACILITIES, UNDER, UPON OR THROUGH THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT. PRIVATE EASEMENT PROVISIONS RESTRICTIONS i. NO FURTHER DIVISION OF ANY LOT ISALLOWED WITHOUT SUBMITTING FOR NEW SUBDIVISION. 2. ALL SITE DEVELOPMENT AND FUTURE ACTIVITY SHALL COMPLY WITH THE APPROVED PRD OFFICIAL SITE :PLAN ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF EDMONDS DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELPPMENT SERVICES OR THEIR SUCCESSOR AGENCY. 3. THE SETBACKS SHOWN ON THE PLAT ARE WSTED UNDER THE PRD/FORMAL PLAT. NO EU I LD'. NGS VV I LL BE AU.OwED I N TPE ': , 0 ! CATER SETBACK AREAS W I THOUT- A VARIANCE BEING APPROVED. 4. SUBJECT TO COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 968364 5. SUBJECT TO COVENANTS, CONDITIONS .AND RESTRICTIONS RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 61 GIGO UJP r u UIti', Inc. SURV LING • ENGINEERING • PLANNING • MANAGEMENT 16030 JUANITA-WOODINVILLE WAY NE JOB NO.: 05 - 8007 DATE: 08/24/05 SHEET: 2 OF 3 AUDITOR'S FILE NO.: 270407-001-021-00 i FND. 1/2" REBAR & CAP 1D FND. 1" O.D. IRON LS# RM 17672 25.32'E X 270407-001-018.00 PIPE 1.28'S X 1.24'W 12 i 0.3VN OF NW PROP. COR. OF SW PROP. COR. 2-21-05 211.97' DEED 2-21-05 i i_ N90'00'00'W 211.97' CALC ' CHAINUNK 270407-001-046-00 i 6' CHAINLINK FENCE --------------I-------- �- 0 / 1 it lJ 1, I• - 1 O Ufa 1 p� \ o coo rn ri o 1 ` - zcow 1 270407-001-047-00 I \ _ i \ 1 I 1 1 _ t 4' HOGWIRE FENCE- 1 � rl g (81 1 ° 0 ti / �� Rss . , oJ� 13 \�\ r?" �SJ�' AOD; ! 6 \�� 5 \ 3' CHAINLINK FND. 1/2" REBAR & CAP \ FENCE LS# MEYRING 2621 ON. 0.3' IN ASPHALT HOLE 0 `\ - INT. TALBOT RD. & 171ST ST 2-14-05 �\ 3 / / � 2 / / / / i sue, -9� 0 / / / / / S CALE 1 " = 40' 61.00' f 4' HOGWIREJ Sn FENCE o c i+� io 0 TRACT 997 F -\ 8.006 S.F. OPEN SPACE I r �I Ns�74, I NI o M ZI o-+- -1.4 r 2.5'E �cu TRAPA 9a 25'E 7,153 .F. 1 ) N 2 �I 3.1'E +� N90ro0'00"E_ ,h`�. x ai 0 i I l 6 allo � o 3 N 4,553 S.F. w 1 N qa N 1'E - 81 150.97' ------ O S. END 3 FENCE 0.6 S X O W `E. END 4' HOGWIRE OF SW PROP. CORNER FENCE 81.3'E X 26'S O3 3' CHAINLINK FENCE OF NW PROP. CORNER CROSSES PROPERTY ` _ _ STORM DRAIN EASEI,IENT LINE 19.2N OF SW PROPERTY CORNER 10' _ N86'38'37"E 114.29' O N. END 3' CHAINLINK FENCE 49.1'N X 0.6'W OF SW PROP. CORNER TRACT 999 \ `Sp O S. END 3' CHAINLINK FENCE 56.6'N X 0.7'E •s , �• 21,110 S.F. Ssp`S!y NGPA \ OF SW PROP. CORNER N90'00'00"E 56.2,V \ O CROSOF ASPHALT SES PROPERTY 8 ---' 70 �\N �s. LINE 78.8 N OF SW PROPERTY CORNER 6 �`, ��s \ O N. END 3' CHAINLINK FENCE 5,320 S.F. 90, In j 0 & S. END 4' HOGWIRE FENCE 105.3'N X 23'E OF SW PROP. 0 Epp, .� CORNER `\\ EDGE OF ASPHALT CROSSES PROPERTY ry �`� LINE 115.6'N OF SW C3 PROPERTY CORNER N06'49'49'W �`� ^, 19.12' / 6ATEGDRI' // O 4' HOGWIRE FENCE � 5 1 n ; STREAM CROSSES PROPERTY i 6.964 i �' S.F. I M in � / LINE 70.1'S OF NW PROPERTY CORNER .68'y o1 3.0'E MI NGOMO'OC_E� 62.14' i 1.8'E N90'00'000E ASPHAL T0, M 101 •-6.7'E c 1.5'E 7 `n 50 4.887 S.F. -N'. 1.0'E p�`"'�h VL cp o "0•G 0 N v�J -z a .00, 3.4'E �j100. --' 1 (c � ' v o 1100 6' CHAINLINK FENCE RUNS N. & ' c0 ¢ w 6 W. & 4' HOGWIRE FENCE RUNS S. 17.00' o �! Q' O / 60.2'S X 0.8'W OF NW PROPERTY o M CORNER N --- 1 N90'00 00'r .w 'o m Ui ai 11 6' CHAINLINK FENCE RUNS N.. W. & 4' HOGWIRE FENCE to '_� � j' S. & __79.34 40 RUNS E 1.8'S X 1.7'W OF NW m 10' UE ry - PROPERTY CORNER o i o / 12 4' HOGWIRE FENCE w o 4 I CROSSES PROPERTY 00to to 4,197 S.F. pPROPERTY LINE 1.7'S OF NW � � o CORNER a i 3 Z 13 ANGLE POINT HOUSE ' ---N90'00'00'W a M - -------------IS 1.61' WEST OF----------- LINE d• �78.02 _ >n , PROPERTY ,O,li 2 5,046 S.F. / i \ 9,668 S.F. ' I LOr 2 SR S-27-66 270407-001-070-00 =.0 0 �� STREAM ►� W \ to CU rnL,:,o \ ar�W n L 0- \`� 4 C`�6425 + V s, C �260, 2g 0" n=8'07'10" S ` �j`\ \ R-69, 7' oo 2980.29�i) o `\\ T� � 36'�� 0.68' 1 M 2`r © /O "\ M o -� SEE DETAIL A �� i I i I DETAIL. "A" O� O 0.68' ro O M I 312.28' TO BOUNDARY N89'51'26'E 312.96' CALC TO PC N 00'00'00' E 312.91(P) Y7 INSTRUMENT DATA: FICA . TCR 703 AUTO BASIS OF BEARINGS AND SUED 1 V I S l ON : (I -DIRECT READING THEODr-i,TE Wl'TH-E.D.M)--- PER RECORD OF SURVEY RECORDED UNDER _- 1 niin i Tno c-�_�_c ��_oo i ��s��nn _cCrnGnC . DDCf'ICI(1ni _(1�_COAI'TT?!11_ i &%I Crr_IC_AT Wlr-%{-IPR LOT A SO S-41-76 270407-001-0.3-7- 00 _31_2.28' TO BOUNDARY N89'51'26"E 312.96' CALC TO PC N 00'00'00" E 312.91(P) LEGEND RGE RANGE SP SHORT PLAT SEC. SECTION SE,NE. SOUTHEAST. NORTHEAST, NWW,SW NORTHWEST, SOUTHWEST S..N.,E„W,, SOUTH, NORTH, EAST. WEST S.F. SQUARE FEET TWP. TOWNSHIP UE UTILITY EASEMENT W.M. WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN + goods SUBDIVISION CORNER / FOUND ® EXISTING MONUMENT AS NOTED EXISTING REBAR OR IRON PIPE AS NOTED ® ® SET STANDARD CITY OF EDMONDS MONUMENT/CASE & BRASS CAP W/ PUNCH MARK LS NO. 30450 0 SET 1 /2" X 24' REBAR WITH PLASTIC CAP, LS NO. 30450 (P) PLAT OF SEA LAWN TERRACE DIV. A CALC. CALCULATED DISTANCE `FND. 40X4" CONC. MON. / WITH 2" BRASS DISK W/ 'X" ON. 0.6' IN CASE 2-14-05 CO ao 1 cd N 1 t JF� ND. 4'X4" CONC. MON. 2" BRASS DISK W/ X" DN. 0.6' IN CASE 1 0.24' EAST OF SECTION LINE 2-14-05 I ai N n1 f t I 11 u'n��0W OW �Iv F M�r°ni in - -� -COOL' n ,- o Q I w`'Wz n t- r U I too w zZ I I 270407-001-00.3--00 1 270407-001-002-00 I I I I I I 0 FND. 4"X4' CONC. MON. N WITH 2" BRASS DISK W/ 1 "X" DN. 0.6' IN CASE 2-14-05 1