Loading...
17003 TALBOT RD.PDF11111111111111 13421 17003 TALBOT RD ADDRESS: / &O -IR1-el) TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE): /o %25&y0/) COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR: CRITICAL AREAS:- 05' Z3 DETERMINATION: ❑ Conditional Waiver`] Study Waiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S: DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED: EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR: PERMITS (OTHER): �q%�� � � ZO�`7- q( D� I� �c39� �&r amoaQ PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED: SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED: I UUZ"U(�t j �(Dlb( 4i SEWER LID FEE $: LID #: SHORT PLAT FILE: LOT: BLOCK: SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED:I I Igo SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #:.: qqk � SOILS REPORT DATED: STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #: FOR: WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: L:\TEMP\DST's\Forms\Street File Checklist.doc PLANNING DATA SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STREET FILE Name: x Date: 3 Plan Check #: c6 Site Address: 17CO3 TbA 6A 9d Project Description: RercJ 4 v-e3'%de ci/e ec,�,gar�;ge.. a�so� ;�sia�\ a nec� wiRo%WS Reduced Site Plan Provided: ES NO) Zoning: _ Map Page: J% - Corner Lot: E NO) Flag Lot: (YES Critical Areas Determination #: CA -Q006 -OaZ / 5ba c�e,� �o �d +;b 15' Study Required S\ y Comp\e.�e. co o r �loc o�• ❑ Waiver W �1 e' SEPA Determination: Exgn*� Exempt ❑ Needed (for 500 cubic yards of grading or site within 200 feet of Puget Sound or Lake Ballinger) ❑ Fee ❑ Checklist ❑ APO List with notarized form Required Setba`•cks Street (Wmk) a5 S , S : Cso as Side: ���� I o �: �. o' Actual Setbacks . * Foc- Street: , Wes IO stcr: soa GO' Side - Does street map require additional setbacks? (YES / NO DNA Detached Structures: Oe�a Jwc( �ac�e, sown on P1�•s. ❑ Rockeries: No,\G o, �latiq, v ❑ Fences/Trellises: Alone. s`wwN on ev,�%. ❑ Bay Windows/Projecting Modulation: Nof%er Stairs/Deck: Deck sl\oL.a" on \a - Buildin )9ei ht Datum Point: a s' �'"' o\e' cover °" Datum Elevation: 1C)C) Maximum Height Allowed: Actual Height: t{, g i 110. c�/ her. Parking Required: Parking Provided: a �- Lot Area: oZ3 a q. aY -i- Maximum Allowed Lot Coverage: 35% Proposed: Lot Coverage Calculations: No J e. 4 kcA ve.c e_ c44 4�. ca IQ ADU Created: (YES NO Subdivision: Legal Nonconforming Land Use Determination Issued: (YES 0 Comments EC-M `Z3.40.220. C.3 es A%.e, fo16 as --, aAoweo/ u-. ',vi " Pe.rftAkeod a k.-A C12skCIA.6d eke ca eacts�i..� w/�e� a�ec2�rtea.� astir.l_oc \our - kl -doe ner4 inecea�e. -FocslFpci cs4' ko *fie, CciT:c� �reb.. or \=A ec $ cce. �s ..o :ncCp c%e\q }0 1:�a oc Qcoperky � � ce-�c�li� ai Ao Qco �•.mq�� f'taa�rion or c-epl�e �.�e+�} " i�,e Qco L11 0 ►nccea8� w� ace�+se.\�e.. aF L. ;a Plan Review 6,X-;ex-. Planning Data Form 2-7-06.doc ` #P20 ZP, ®= - i File No:. " �✓ A Site Information (soils/topography/hvrlrnlnorU/vPVPtafinnl 1. Site Address/Location:.� `-vc 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Critical Areas Checklist Property Tax Account Number: Z`) O Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): Is this site currently developed? yes; if yes; how is site developed? or%Q- n-S Describe the general site topography. Check Flat: less than 5-feet elevatiori 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): Site contains areas of year-round standing water: ; Approx. Depth: 7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: ; Approx. Depth: What season(s) of the year? 8. Site is in the floodway floodplain of a water course. 9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year-round? Flows are seasonal? (What time of year? ): 10. Site is primarily: forested ; meadow ; shrubs ; mixed urban landscaped (lawn, shrubs etc) 11. Obvious wetland is present on site: t'AWAY.(,OrApSee. Ac.p-M For City Staff Use Only 3 CAG,ih l -f Y tivt 1 i 1. Plan Check Number, if applicable? A 4-7 PL, G (+C D d w i q ' 2. Site is Zoned? 3. SCS mapped soil type(s)? 1� 1 _Pa 1- c,„ .L.,— 4. Critical Areas inventory or C.A. map indicates Critical Area on site? O -� within designated earth subsidence landslide hazard area? No d J DETERMINATION. r WAIVER Reviewed by: Date: -- O ` OS #P2U City. 04 11dmonds Development Seivices Department Planning Division Phone: 425.771.0220 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). Date Received: '*-7/ Y/cs2QQ6 City Receipt #:'9 a2 3 Critical Areas File #: s2 r 0— 3 Critical Areas Checklist Fee: $135.00 Date Mailed to Applicant: —a d 5' A property owner, or his/her authorized representative, musf 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 agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or. 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 my knowledge and that I am authorized to file this application on the behalf of the owner as listed below. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT DATE 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 �fm ublic officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purposes of inspection d postinj attendant.tgthis application. SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE �aI Jos PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY Owner/Applicant:'Applicant Representative: . Name. ?A Name i Street Address Street Address C `c )o Z-� City State Zip City State Zip Telephone:: Telephone: Email address (optional): Email Address (optional): _ r � r AC Roth ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES June 27, 2005 Gina Coccia, Planner Edmonds Community Services Department 121 5th Avenue N. Edmonds, WA 98020 115 North 49"' Street - Seattle, Washington 98103 206.784.4755 - FAX 206.789.0664 tonyroth@comcast.net Ref: Wetlands Rating Reclassification, 7701 171' Street SW, Edmonds Dear Ms. Coccia: This letter is to supplement the May 2003 critical areas study for Talbot Park Estates. On April 5, 2005 1 met with Paul Dent on the above -referenced site to re-evaluate the classification of the wetlands associated with Talbot Park, using the City of Edmonds Wetland Field Data Form (attached). My analysis supports the determination that the associated wetland should be rated as a Category III wetland, with 50 foot buffers, consistent with Edmonds Community Development Code. From a discussion today with Mr. Dent, his project has been re -designed to avoid intrusion into any critical area buffer. Please contact me with any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, AC Roth Environmental Services Tony Roth Senior Biologist SEL_'f�;'FILE Attachment: City of Edmonds Wetland Field Data Form c: Paul Dent Biological Evaluation Wetland Assessment, Endangered Species Act Documentation Environmental Planning, Documentation, and Permitting City of Edmonds Wetland Field Data Form Name of wetland (if known) Pm ., L Location: SEC TWNSH�P 22-1RNGE 0* (attach map of wetland to form] See Persons Rating/ Wetland: f � . �� & t t co-Q /fir � 9UJ Affiliation: kc, RO-flt 11 vrp, C S Project Name/Description: 16t (�Q, AN Date of Site Visit: Apnr- 51 200 Category Based on Combined Total Score for Functions Assessments I II III HIV Total Score for Water Quality Functions Assessment — 2:7 Total Score for Hydrologic Functions Assessment Total Score for Habitat Functions Assessment Combined Total Score for Functions Assessment/ Determine wetland hydrogeomorphic class based upon criteria provided on page 2. Complete water quality, hydrologic and habitat functions assessment as directed for the class of wetland being rated and enter scdres as indicated above -Final wetland category, is based upon a total (combined) score for functions assessment per the score criteria provided above. or Category I or II Based on Criteria in ECDC 20.50.0.10(B) I II Specific Criteria wetland field data form.doc/rev.2004.12.20 Pagel Wetland Hydrogeomorphic Class Determine the hydrogeomorphic class of the wetland being rated based upon the criteria provided below. Water quality and hydrologic functions assessments are based upon the specific hydrogeomorphic class of a wetland. 1. Are the water levels in the wetland usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during dN go to 2 YES — Tidal Fringe %s If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES — Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO — Estuarine Wetland Estuarine wetlands meet Criteria for Category I or II.wetlands regardless of total score for functions assessment per ECDC 23.50.010(B). 2. Is the topography within the wetland flat and precipitation the only source (>90%) of water to it OR the wetland in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to ace, at some time of the year.? NO — go to Depressional 3. Does the wetland meet both of the following criteria? The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of open water (without any vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8 ha) are. permanently inundated (ponded or flooded), At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m)? NO - go to 4 YES -Lake Fringe 4. Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria? The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks. The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NO - go to 5 YES — Slope. 5. Is the wetland in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank stream flooding? (The flooding should occur at least once every two years, on the average and -the wetland can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding.) NO - go to 6 YES — Riverilne Hydrogeomor h' class of wetland based on above: Depressional Riverine/Freshwater Tidal Fringe Lake Fringe Slope Class I or II Wetland Based Upon Other Criteria wetland field data form.doc/rev.2004.12.20 page 2 Water Quality Functions Assessment Complete section 1 below for the hydrogeomorphic class of the wetland to be rated only by circling points under each question. If the answer to section 2 is YES, then multiply the combined number of points from section I by 2 and enter this value as the. total score for water qualityfunctions assessment on page 1. 1. Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? Depressional Wetlands D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland:. y Wetland is a depression with no surface water outlet Points = 3 % ; II Wetland has an intermittently flowing, or highly constricted, -outlet Points = 2 '- Wetland has an unconstricted surface outlet Points = 1 Wetland is flat and has no obvious outlet, or outlet is a ditch.Poin D 1.2 The 2 inches below soil the surface is clay, organic, or smells (hydrogen e or rotten eggs). ES oints = 4 NO Points = 0 D 1. Characteristics of persistent vegetation (emergent, shrub, and/or forest class): Wetland has persistent vegetation > = 95% of area Points Wetland has persistent vegetation > _ IJ2 of area Points Wetland has -persistent vegetation > = 1/10 of area Points =1 Wetland has persistent vegetation <1/10,ofarea Points = 0 D 1.4 Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation: This is the area of the wetland that is ponded for at least 2 months, but dries out sometime during the year. Do not count the area that is permanently ponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out of 10 yrs. Z Area seasonally ponded is >'/z total area of wetland Points = 4. 'Area seasonally ponded is >'A total area of wetland Points 1 Area seasonally ponded "is < `/a total area of wetland Points Score section 1. for Depressional Wetlan Riverine and Freshwater Tidal Fringe Wetlands R 1.1 Area of surface depressions within the riverine wetland that can trap sediments during a flooding event: Depressions cover >3/4 area of wetland Points = 8 Depressions cover > 1/2 area of wetland Points = 4 Depressions present but cover < 1/2 area of wetland Points = 2 No depressions present Points = 0 .. R 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland: Forest or shrub > 2/3 the area of the wetland Points.= 8 Forest or shrub > 1/3 area of the wetland Points = 6 Emergent plants > 2/3 area of wetland Points = 6 Emergent plants > 1/3 area of wetland Points = 3 Forest, shrub, and emergent < 1/3 area of,wedand Points = 0 Score section 1 for Riverine and Freshwater Tidal fringe Wetlands wetland field data form.doc/rev.2004.12.20 - Page 3 09 Lake Fringe Wetlands L 1.1 Average width of vegetation along the lakeshore Vegetation is more than 33ft (10m) wide Points = 6 Vegetation is more than 16 (5m) wide and <33ft Points = 3 Vegetation is more than 6ft (2m) wide and <16 ft Points = 1 Vegetation is less than 6 ft (2m) wide Points = 0 L 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland: Choose the appropriate description that results in the highest points and do not include any open water in your estimate of coverage. In this case the herbaceous plants can be either the dominant form (called emergent class) or an understory in a shrub or forest community. Herbaceous plants cover >90% of the vegetated area Points = 6 .Herbaceous plants cover >2/3 of the vegetated area Points = 4 Herbaceous plants cover >1/3 of the vegetated area Points = 3 Other vegetation that is not aquatic bed in > 2/3 vegetated area Points = 3 Other vegetation that is not aquatic bed in > 1/3 vegetated area Points = 1 Aquatic bed cover > 2/3 of the vegetated area Points = 0 Score section 1 for Lake. Fringe Wetlands Slope Wetlands S 1.1 Characteristics of average slope of wetland: Slope is 1 % or less Points = 3 Slope is 1% - 2% Points = 2 Slope is 2% - 5% Points =1 Slope is greater than 5% Points = 0 S 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface is clay; organic, or smells anoxic (hydrogen sulfide or rotten eggs).. YES Points=3 NO Points=0 S 1.3 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland.that trap sediments and pollutants: Choose the points appropriate for the description that best f is the vegetation in the wetland. Dense vegetation means you have trouble seeing the soil surface. Dense, ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation > 90% of the wetland area Points = 6 Dense, ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation > 1/2 of area Points— 3 Dense, woody, vegetation > ,% of area -Points =. 2 Dense, ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation > 1/4 of area Points- 1 Does not meet any of the criteria above for vegetation Points = 0 S .1.3 Characteristics of the vegetation.in the wetland that trap sediments and pollutants: Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fits the vegetation in t>�e wetland. Dense vegetation means you have trouble. seeing the ,soil surface.. Dense, ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation > 90% of the wetland area Points = 6 Dense, ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation > 1/2 of area Points = 3 Dense, woody, vegetation > %z of area Points = 2 Dense, ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation > 1/4 of area Points.- 1 Does not meet any of the criteria above for vegetation Points. = 0 Score section 1 for.,Slope Wetlands wetland field data form.doc/rev,2004.12.20 Page 4 2. Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the' wetland? Indicate which of the following conditions provide the sources ofpollutants. Untreated siormwater discharges to wetland: A strearti/culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas or roads. / Residential or urban areas are within 150 ft of wetland. The stream linked to a riverine wetland. has a contributing basin where human activities have raised levels of sediment, toxic compounds or nutrients in the river water above standards for water quality. A lake fringe wetland is along the shores of a lake or reservoir that does not meet water quality standards or supports gasoline or diesel power boats. Other If answer to section 2 is YES multiply score from section 1_ by 2 for total score water quality functions assessment. Otherwise enter score from section 1 as total. Total Score Water Quality Functions Assessment% wetland field data form.doc/rev. M4.12.20 Page 5 Hydrologic Functions Assessment Complete section I below for the hydrogeomorphic class of the wetland to be rated only . by circling points under each question. If the answer to section 2 is YES, then multiply the combined number of points from section I by 2 and enter this value as the total score for hydrologic functions assessment on page 1. 1. Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? Depressional Wetlands D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows. out of4he wetland: Wetland has no surface water outlet Points Wetland has an intermittently flowing, or hig y constricted, outlet Points = 2 Wetland has an unconstricted surface outlet Points = 0 Wetland is flat and drains by surface flow or a ditch Points = 0 D 1.2 Depth of storage/ponding during wet periods: Marks of ponding are at least 3 f1 above the surface Points = 7 The wetland is a "headwater" wetland" Points = 5 Marks are at least 2 ft fr surface Points =41face 5 Marks are at least 6 in. ftom surface Point Wetland is flat but has small depressions on that trapwater Points = 1 No marks of ponding above 6 in., or wetland has only saturated soils Points = 0 D 3.3 Contribution of wetland to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland itself. , The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of wetland Points = 5 The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the wetland Points = 3 The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area,of the wetland Points 0 Score section 1 for Depressional Wetlands2 Riverine and Freshwater Tidal Fringe Wetlands R 1.1 Characteristics of the overbank storage the wetland provides: Estimate the average' width of the wetland perpendicular to the direction of the flow and the width of the stream or river channel (distance between banks). Calculate the ratio: (width of wetland)/(width of stream). If the ratio is more than 20 Points = 9 If the ratio is between 10 — 20 Points = 6 If the ratio is 5- <10 Points = 4 If the ratio is 1- <5 Points = 2 If the ratio is < 1 Points = 1 R 1.2 Characteristics of vegetation that slow down water velocities during floods: Treat large woody debris as `forest or shrub Choose the points appropriate for the best description. Forest or shrub for >1/3 area OR Emergent plants > 2/3 area Points = 7 Forest or shrub for > 1/10 area OR Emergent plants > 1/3 area Points = 4 Vegetation does not meet above criteria Points = 0 Score section 1 for Riverine and Freshwater Tidal fringe Wetlands wetland field data form.doclrev.2004.12.20 Page 6 J Lake Fringe Wetlands L 1.1 Average width and characteristics of vegetation along the lakeshore (do not include aquatic bed): Choose the highest scoring description that matches conditions in the wetland. >'/4 of fringe vegetation is shrubs or trees at least 33 ft (10m) wide Points = 6 >'/4 of fringe vegetation is shrubs or trees at least 6 ft. (2 m) wide Points = 4 > '/4 of fringe vegetation is shrubs or trees at least 33 ft (10m) wide Points = 4 Fringe vegetation is at least 6 ft (2m) wide Points = 2 Fringe vegetation is less than 6 ft (2m) wide Points = 0 Score section 1 for Lake Fringe Wetlands Slope Wetlands S. 1.1 Characteristics of vegetation that reduce the velocity of surface flows during storms: Choose the points appropriate. for the description that best fit conditions in the wetland. Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation covets > 90% of the area of the wetland. (stems of plants should be thick enough (usually > 1/81n), or dense enough, to remain erect during surface flows) points = 6 Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation > 1/2 area of wetland Points = 3 Dense, uncut, rigid vegetation > 1/4 area Points =1 More than 1/4 of area is grazed, mowed, tilled or vegetation is not rigid Points = 0 S 1.2 Characteristics of slope wetlands that hold back small amounts of flood flows: The slope wetland has small surface depressions that can retain water over at least 10% of its area. YES Points = 2 NO Points = 0 Score section 1.for Slope Wetlands 2. Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? Answer YES if the wetland provides flood storage or reduction in water velocity to protect downstream or shoreline property and aquatic resources from flooding and/or erosion. Note which of the following conditions apply. Wetland is in a headwater of a stream that has flooding problems. Wetland drains to a stream that has flooding problems. , Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a stream that has flooding problems. - Structures, facilities or natural resources exist downstream or along the shoreline (for lake fringe wetlands) that can be damaged by flooding. Other If answer to section 2 is YES multiply score from section 1 by 2 for total score hydrologic functions assessment. Otherwise enter score from section 1 as total. Total Score Hydrologic Functions Assessment Q wetland field data form.doc/rev.2004.12.20 Page 7 Habitat Functions Assessment All hydrogeomorphic wetland classes. Complete section .1 and 2 by circling points under each question. Total score habitat functions assessment is the combined (additive) total of sections land 2. 1. Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for wildlife species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure: Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin) if the class covers more than 10% of the area of the wetland or %, acre. Aquatic bed ✓Emergent plants Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) Forested areas have 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub -canopy, shrubs; herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. if you have: 4 types or more Points = 4 3 types Points = 2 2 types Points 1 type Points — H 1.2. Hydroperiods: Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or'/, acre to count. 4ermanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present Points = 3 Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present Points -= 2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present Point =1 Saturated only Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent.to, the wetland H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species: Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft2. (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle If you counted: > 19 species Points = 2 5 - 19 species Points < 5 species Points = 0 , H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats: Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between types of vegetation (described in H 1.1), or vegetation types and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mud, flats) is high, medium, low, or none. None Points--0 Low Points=l Moderate Poin 2' wetland field data form.doc/rev.2004.12.20 Page $ 0 U1 CJ N011C .-.. it 116111> 1.f. "v -:..I po:ffit t�y J.r jmr <in banded diantiels] �3f)'1�1.' 1'1'�'��U Ilct:t 1t�Ur ��I' mt?rC.: c�t'tittic�ll i� O<:* , r Ihrcc l t+ riati�rn c4°PCs mid open�..itti:r thK i itiu ! is aa;xFa4s "hizh". H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: Check -the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number ofpoints you put into the next column. Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4in. diameter and 6 ft long). Standing snags (diameter at the bottom > 4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft (lm) over a stream for at least 33 ft (10m) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present At least 1/a acre of thin -stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inuiidated.(structures for egg - lay in y amphibians) Invasive plants cover less than 25% of.the wetland area in each stratum of plants Point = Score section 1 for all hydrogeomorphic wetland classes H 2. Does the wetland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H2.1 Existing Buffers: Choose the description that best represents the condition of the natural buffer existing around the wetland. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. 100 in (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas; rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No developed areas within undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no -grazing) Points = 5 100 in (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference. Points = 4 50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas; rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference. Points = 4 100 in (330f}) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 25% circumference. Points = 3 wetland field data form.doc/reu2004.12.20 Page 9 50 in (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for > 50% circumference. Points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25. in (80ft) of wetland > 9501(ircumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 VNo paved areas or buildings within 50m of lan >50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Poin = 2 Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ft) or hea i y grazed for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland).Points = 0. H 2.2 Corridors and Connections: Choose the description that best represents connections from the wetland to other natural areas and wildlife habitat. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. The wetland is part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size. Points=4. The wetland is part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size. OR a Lake -fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above. Points--2. The wetland is:., within 5 mi of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 mi of a largAeld or pasture (>40 acres) OR within 1 mi of a lake greater than 20 acres? Points=l. If none of the above conditions are met. Points H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW: Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (100m) of the wetland? _Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic 'and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 in (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. _Mature forests: Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover maybe less that 100%; crown cover maybe less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than: that found in old -growth; 80 - 200 years old west of the Cascade crest. _Urban Natural Open Space: A priority species resides within or is adjacent to the open space and uses it for breeding and/or regular feeding; and/or the open space functions as a corridor connecting other priority habitats, especially those that would otherwise be isolated; and/or the open space is an isolated remnant of wetland field data form.doc/rev.2004.12.20 Page.10 0 natural habitat larger than 4 ha (10 acres) and is surrounded by urban development. Estuary/Estuary-like: Deepwater tidal habitats. and adjacent tidal wetlands, usually semi -enclosed by land but with open, partly obstructed or sporadic access to the open ocean, and in which ocean water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater runoff from the land. The salinity may be periodically increased above that of the open ocean by evaporation. Along some low -energy coastlines there is appreciable dilution of sea water. Estuarine habitat extends upstream and landward to where ocean -derived salts measure less than 0.5% during the period of average annual low flow. Includes both estuaries and lagoons. _Marine/Estuarine, Shorelines: Shorelines include the intertidal and subtidal zones of beaches, and may also include the backshore and adjacent components of the terrestrial landscape (e.g., cliffs, snags, mature trees, dunes, meadows) that are important to shoreline associated fish and wildlife and that contribute to shoreline function (e.g., sand/rock/log recruitment, nutrient contribution, erosion control). If wetland has 3 or more priority, habitats Points=4 If wetland has 2 priority habitats Points=3 If wetland has l .priority habitat Point­-1 No habitats Points--0 H 2.4 Wetland Landscape: Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best f ts. There are at least 3 other wetlands within %2 mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development. Points = 5 The wetland is Lake -fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake ���/// fringe wetlands within '/z mile Points= 5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed Points = 3 The wetland is Lake -fringe on a lake with disturbance and there. are 3 other lake - fringe wetland within %2 nine Points = 3 There is at least 1 wetland within'%2 mile. Points = 2 There are no wetlands within'/2 mile. Points = 0 Score section 2 for all hydrogeomorphic wetland classes Add score for section 1 and section 2 for total score habitat functions assessment. Total Score Habitat Functions Assessment wetland field data form.doc/rev.2004.12.20 Page 11 1*1 CITY OF EDMONDS CRITICAL AREAS RECONNAISANCE REPORT Site Location: 17003 Talbot Rd. Tax Acct. Number: 2704 0700 1047 00 Reconnaissance Report: Study Required Reconnaissance #: CA-05-23 Owner I Applicant: Frank Gibler CRITICAL AREAS RECONNAISANCE REPORT: CRITICAL AREAS REPORT REQUIRED (CA-05-23) During review and inspection of the subject site, it was found that the site is adjacent to a Wetland and that a portion of the wetland's buffer is located on the property. A wetland is a type of Critical Area pursuant to Chapter 23.40 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). I have attached a copy of the critical areas study that was done for this property, located at 7701 171s` St. SW. This study however, was done in accordance with Critical Areas regulations that have. recently been revised. Under the regulations that are now in effect, wetlands are classified differently and have significantly different buffers. In consideration of this, a new study will need to be done that establishes the wetland class and buffer. The study that was previously done though, should provide useful information in completing the current requirements. Please refer to the information below. Also note that the entire critical areas ordinance can be found on the City's website at www.ci.edmonds.wa.us. GENERAL CRITICAL AREAS REPORT REQUIREMENTS Critical Areas Reports identify, classify and delineate any areas on or adjacent to the subject property. They also asses these areas and identify any potential impacts resulting from your specific development proposal. If a specific development proposal results in an alteration to a critical area, thecritical areas report will also contain a mitigation plan. • You have the option of completing the portion of the study that classifies and delineates the critical areas and waiting until you have a specific development proposal to complete the study. • You may also choose submit the entire study with your.specific development application. • Please review the minimum report requirements for all types of Critical Areas are listed 23.40.090.D. There are additional report requirements for different types of critical areas (see below). • Note that it is important for the report to be prepared by a qualified professional as defined in the ordinance. There are options on how to complete a critical areas study and an approved list of consultants that you may choose from. You may contact the Planning Division for more information. • General Mitigation Requirements for all'Critical Areas are discussed in 23.40.110 through 23.40.140. REPORT REQUIREMENTS — WETLANDS The site investigation has shown that the site is adjacent to a wetland and that the buffer to the wetland is located on the property. Wetlands are areas inundated or saturated by ground or surface water that supports, under normal circumstances, vegetation adapted for life in saturated soil. • Wetlands are generally rated according to their size, condition, function, and vegetation types into four (4) different categories described in 23.50.010 and by use of the "City of Edmonds Wetland Field Data Form" by the critical areas consultant. • Buffer widths for wetlands vary depending on the category of the wetland as listed in 23.50.040. F. • In addition to the general requirements for Critical Areas reports referenced above, there are specific Critical Areas report requirements for wetlands that are provided in 23.50.030. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ASSOCIATED WITH WETLANDS Development proposals that encroach into wetlands or their buffers or building setbacks may be allowed through the approval of certain processes. • The width of a wetland buffer may be reduced through buffer enhancement if the criteria described in 23.50.040.F.3 can be met. The maximum amount that a buffer can be reduced through buffer enhancement is 50%. • A buffer may also be modified through a process called buffer averaging. The criteria applied to buffer averaging are listed in 23.50.040.F.4. The maximum amount that the buffer width can be reduced at any single location through buffer averaging is 50%. • Development proposals that proposed encroachments into buffers beyond what is allowed through the above methods require a Critical Areas Variance, or a Reasonable Use Exception. If you think that you have a proposal that may require one of these processes, please contact a Planner for more information. • Any time a development proposal requires an alteration to a wetland, a mitigation plan is required as part of the Critical Areas report. In addition to the General Mitigation requirements referenced above, mitigation requirements specific to wetlands are provided in 23.50.050. • NOTE: There are specific performance standards for the subdivision of lands in wetlands and wetland buffers. These are listed in 23.50.060. PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONAL WAIVERS 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 Area or, its buffers, a conditional waiver may be issued on a project by project basis. EXEMPT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS Certain development proposals may be exempt from Critical Areas Requirements (ECDC 20.1513.040). If you think that a specific development proposal,may be exempt, contact a Planner for more information. Star Cam bell �c 1� .J March 30 2005 Name 8iqnature Date 2 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 .��♦Ian 4 f. O N Hai Ire J"'A May 5, 2003_f LET* FILE, AC ROTH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES - 115 NORTH 49- STREEr SEAT MEE WA%WCTON 98103 206.784.4755 Table of Contents Table of Contents Preface.................................................................................................. It 1. Introduction .........................................• --.---------•--.........I.....------..----_•_ 1- 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...................................................................................I1 3. Bibliography..................................................................................12 List of Figures 1. Vicinity Map.....................................................................................2 2. Site Map.......................................................•----------.----.....................4 3. Emergent Wetland at west boundary, looking into the property fromthe west ....................................................................--....8 4. Another view looking east into the property ....................................9 5. Looking northwest on the adjacent property ....................................9 List of Tables 1. USFWS Plant Indicator Status..........................................................6 2. Wetland Functions and Values.........................................................7 Critical Areas Study Talbot Park Estates • • Preface Preface 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 ici<formation 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. Critical Areas Study Talbot Park Estates Introduction I-; -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 fora 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 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 § 20.15R 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 Clear. 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 o. f the United States (Cowardin 1979). The NWI mapping, as portrayed at httpJ/www.nwi.fws.izov_/,.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 - - 3 Talbot Park Estates 0 L Introduction an OF LVNNWM SLALAW 1"aml%s any*41.-*-Gt6-m 071704-4-421-OW1 GUAM ROOM & W4090M%rr I- cA 07270"-446-WO F V. 4-we 1W OF OLNE-' DAWN OF V1 -2.4 ANOW DAM 4 0727404-1-846-0000 4W SISCAM OMNC wwv mm WAM UNO —CATEGORY 8 STREAM ZoLat" ARUN G72m"-4OG-Gm ,--lMP OF STWM WM (OURAW im w1m UNO CREV Room E • AM 074704-1-419-m R I - \ 1 r . .... . ... . . . ... W HM 900K 072704-11-00-0007 SKAH"m U10my /� 0000Q�-0�-0000 G\� _ g Lm w Figure 2. S-61 Map Criti6al Areas Study 4. Talbot Park Estates meter 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 (Munsell1 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 • Rater 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: 1. 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 4 PF); 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' matrix chroma of 2 with mottles or less than 2 without mottles) or gleying. Munsell Sod Color Charts, Kollmorgan Instruments Corporation, Baltimore, Maryland Critical, Areas Study 5 Talbot Park Estates r: Jar Resources Evaluation : Table 1. USFWS Plant Indicator Status Pact lndicator'Stadu� Indicator Status Category. K. Abbrernat�on Defintban (Probability of Occurrence) 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 Facultative Wetland FACW Obligate Wetland OBL Not Listed NL Equal likelihood in uplands and wetlands (33 to 67 percent) Occur sometimes in wetlands (1 to <33 percent)_ , but -more likely in, -uplands (>67 to 99 percent) Occur rarely in uplands (less than 99 percent) and almost always in wetlands (greater than 99 percent) - 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 absence of 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 g Talbot Park Estates Water Resources Evaluation Table 2- Wetland Functions and Values Wetla%id Funrijoll. �5ef[ti ,a ` 9 5 H h t ig., Lowest 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 gt either of the following: connected either high recharge rate, without surface water connection with a stream wetland or with permanent outlet to stream ao� 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 poAution - 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 than 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 Paris Estates 9 'Pater 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. (1.979). The wetland is found in a shallow depression on the northeast corner of the subject property and extends to the west, onto an adjacent 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 I to 2 inches deep at the time of evaluation, was dominated by Pacific water parsley Critical Areas Study Talbot Park Estates '� e � �� x a-� r g� r �� .. .. �: a,. � � �. �v p '..: � .., Y - _� ' ! _ , 5� � `�,,. 1 7 � _" � . � � S, ram.. � � f ' � 2 � � \ � ,i/ i � � � \ t 1....� \ 1_ � ` l \ � _ - \ _ `- ��. . � . Oter Resources Evaluation (Oenanthe sarmentosa, OBL). The predominance of the vegetation supports the hydric vegetation criterion. Surface soils range from very dark grayish brown (IOYR 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 IOYR 3/3 and IOYR 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 cyclinglutilization, 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. 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/OB S-79/3 1. 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 Wildl. 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 NAME: POW t1?rrlt SITE ADDRESS: I TOO PROJECT DESCRIPTION: PLANNING DATA DATE: 0101 1 10 /2005' wad PLAN CHK#: 05. ZX 5 REDUCED SITE PLAN PROVIDED?: es No) MAP PAGE: 45 (0 CORNER LOT: es / No) FLAG LOT: (Yes / o) ZONING: R 5'�I CRITICAL AREAS DETERMINATION #:_013, 011 j ® Study Required: 11 &hAd)f R*VlAi0 %o"l�--�c'xc tAAFped WC,-Kand on Pro?"-•-t ❑ Waiver ❑ Conditional Waiver 0(01 i-t/ oft DYy IaC 1Ne*l a" � 0510 61 2-0 0 3 e Y W/ F o --(-vo+ IOu f f e..r' AC, R-1)1-h --v r SEPADETERMINATION: 6-�ewp+ (A•G F•0-wi Wti'1A1d ne, 3Y►e0r 0-t ❑ Fee rc,0 a 6 r, I fl• c ovh• On ❑ Checklist 2fj 0 p • aI 12 4 fIRD'1a� ❑ APO list w/ notarized form ❑ (Needed for 500 cubic yards of grading, Shoreline Area- site within 200 ft. of Puget Sound or Lake Ballinger) ® Exempt G 50 (✓tAlpj yaYGiy 0f- 9Ytj 611Y1q SETBACKS: 1,5�♦� . 5 SjYP,ef'� ) ) Required Setbacks: l V q rG qq "vee�baft Sid, R+gl i fe< (D Bear 2,15p rc poep Q�dlit Oh� Actual Setbacks: 1 1 2 (to e A i G ti n c Street: V3,11 Left Side: %irJ Right Side: 41*S4 Rear: �I' 2% gGtrage Street map checked for additional setback required? ® DETACHED STRUCTURES: (oJ ara g e (ex j 5tl n L3)- pre, ex i yt n °5' dO-e G- npt rne�+ ❑ ROCKERIES: n OOne,, SY1 O Wrl OY1 s i -fL p 1 a h ryar setbaLv-. ❑ FENCES/TRELLISES: Y OVI e— -5410" oY1 y i tr_ Play, - ❑ BAY WINDOWS / PROJECTING MODULATION: ex 15tn rest dense-. i r:? ® STAIRS / DECKS: CICZ-V­ IpOrthl e9f IFP 9ara 9e . (01(A � PARKING: Required: 2 Actual: 7,t p'rot'oped addifion . $10. 5:t rp 3(0(01.0a Proposed dtrcra. _ (000. ry-•tp tot caverQge LOT AREA: . y4 p rU�v�Cd pc,rc v, : s� • �} la LOT COVE Calculations: 5 •�' /' BUILDING HEIGHT: Datum Point: " I•D'D 0f r6 M q fiOV'Cil('p3 -It alum Elevation: + • 00 CIO. 5 Maximum Allowed: 1 !i k ( Actual Height: 55 121 •q q CJ -15 1 A.D.U. CREATED?: o Yes) 10r)e, I_;ttYleAl 5hDWyl • 9 5• Z-I SUBDIVISION: / 3 �� +I l LEGAL NONCONFORMING LAND USE DETERMINATION ISSUED: ()Les No) q 3rJ 1 OTHER: WETI/ii%Iri��� ANC/YLI L,2/ Cara d e. Plan Review By: a vvkj (Xg4k4 I Ili f}aWtl I�'d�eliY)e IZI•q' NewBPPlanningDataForm,ppC '" q 35 ArceA 2 5T • 16320 ,6330 164014 41 ,6340 ; /-- / 16414 / 16420 t �!! / 16508 � 16510 m7 0 WWI m m 1661 j Brook gym. A �66, F' cres � g,� a 16711 / 16711 77 = o �! �t we Fit ®i t t ®f \ nt t 16721 ♦- i-ltlFs nnwood 16852 AWN Treatm ant16827 17000 Vy \ ® ,g838 16801 t \6656 / 5900 - 16905 1690 16858 16833 ® 1gg07 7 16911 I 16907 \ �7? 17020 16900 (( , 17041 16917 //, 17015 \` ? o •)( o? .1 16931 16925 17003 7707 17 170187921 •� o 17011 / \ O \/� % f` f� �gg\�'/`s 77024 17020 17029 /7931 %/ \` .` .(tom ,\ 7619 7817 ^' �\ e011 \ �QO� . 17107 Y '2, 17tSTSTSW S 17 8015 \ f p \\ � \�. t7ns`moo\\ •' 11101 7624 7614 17114 •i 17 / 8017 \ j A \ \ 8007 \11(�' 7126 01 17131 \. / \ \ \ 'N •` '9 \ 17130 \. 10 / -- .8119 .\ 8125 \\ � s �sF\ 17201 >o\17170 f., \ nzlo 17211 F n i </< ��', u127 /a\ ` y /77x, J �' �\ ,�� .._�, •i T7207 8008// t720x A J` 17161 17214 > .17215 1721 l 17232 o n 17217 '7 8124 \ 7605 g m nag 17217 8219 '.•�o,� Po \ / 0 17212 17222 \ ^ 228 7501 17231 8200 \< 8025 N 7925 73RO 8235 82x9 tiP ^' Cf 7923 7802 1529 7515 / m A� Tho City of Edmonds It APPLICATION for SIDE SEWER PERMIT NEW CONSTRUCTION El REPAIRS cl 2w PLar EASEMENT No ........................................... -/o /6 4 Acj -\ OWNER ........0..G:................ SO.A..J................................. CONTRACTOR ..... hL.... ......50.V ......... . PERMIT No . ...... . . ------I--,'..... ADDRESS ....... 3 ........... T,41bc,4.........f 2 ................... LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT No. ........ BLOCK No........`... ................................. NAMEOF ADDITION ............................................................................................................ ............................ 4w 11 APPROVED MAY 10 1970 . ......... OM 0 T lVW a3AOHddV Approved: DATE..... ... . ..... . .............................. By .. . ................ ..................... RT t — ee ,N ,?47 .E /¢ c o,e s fl Sec 77' 4,0 L n/ o-� 50 Sec. Al I ° /! � l s � . 7�10 � /8 Th e AVc e/ �. 7/0 , �8 /Th e�vcc o�v A, c tcL cO0.rs % G 04 S 7 " r_� 0 A I '- CITY OF EDMONDS Call CIVIC- CkNTER - WATER -SEWER DEPARTMENT Is readdyy for _ for inspect8-1107 when work ion. (No inspec- tions Saturday, Sunday or. holidays.) N 20 3695 SIDE SEWER PERMIT ADDRESS:...................1700 3.Jalbo:t.._ROaa..............................•....................................,......................................................7........... OWNER ......................... D...... G.....ThorZak.son.......................... CONTRACTOR ..... Hyatt ... Son.'.S.i... ail.C................ ........... Pellnission is granted ......May... ........:...:............. 19.��... for .........................days to REPAIR or CONNECT a side sewer with City Sewers in accordance with application on file and governing ordinances. ATTENTION IS CALLED TO.THE FOLLOWING: •� E No. 1—The owners of the property may obtain' a permit to construct sewer inside property line. A licensed Side Sewer Contractor must be employed to construct side sewer in street area. Do not cover any portion of sewer before it has been inspected. No. 2—Obtain full Information regarding Ordinance 11.16.030 and Regulations governing side sewers when you get permit. No. 3—Top of side sewer must have at least 30 inches coverage at property line and 12 inches inside property line; minimum grade of 2%.. No bends in grade sharper than % will be permitted. NOTE No. 4—Trenches in street must be water settled and surface of street restored to original condition. Contractors shall be responsible for failure due to improper work which may develop within one year of completion. _ NOT-F No. 5—It is unlawful to alter or do any other work than is provided for in the permit, or to do any work on the main sewer or its appur- tenances except to insert the pipe into the wye. J Dave Timbrook Certified Arborist . ISA Certified #PN-1199A - = 359 NE 195th Street Shoreline, WA 98155-2138 (425) 343-2248 ' treed ave@comcast. net Gary Haakenson 17003 Talbot.Road Edmonds, WA 98020 Gary, At your request I visited your property on Talbot Road to do a tree assessment on November 17, 2012. _ The trees I evaluated are located on the SE edge of your lot and are growing in a "Native Growth Protection Area". They are aligned in a SW to NE'direction growing over a 25-foot distance. All the trees are relatively healthy with heights from 60 to 70 feet. Trees 1-6 (Right to Left) The trees range in diameter from 14 to 22 inches Dbh (Diameter breast high) with tree #4 being the largest. Canopy width varie' from 25 to.35 feet. Most trees have the majority of their.branches growing on one side of the trunk. The site is in a fairly moist area.but the ground isn't saturated. A very small creek is present some 15 feet from where to trees are growing. Trees 1,4 and 6 have 15. to 20 degree leans in the direction of two separate targets. Tree 1 leans towards your garage and trees 4 and 6 lean towards the neighbor's residence. Tree 5 also has a lean to it but the target area is the wooded area behind. While all the trees appear health there are a few problems I do see. Trees 1 and 2 are growing together at the base to the point they are in serious competition for space. Since Alder trees grow more rapidly than many other trees this could become problematic in the future. When trees have a more rapid growth rate the have a tendency to be somewhat weaker and shed branches. There are a number of broken branches from these trees on the ground below them. . Trees l and 2 Trees 2-6 .} There doesn't seem to be any disease or insect problems present and the root area and trunk flares are adequate for the trees. This is a very common habitat for Alder with normal NW under story plants present. The one glaring problem I see is the excessive end weight on the leaning trees (1, 4 and 6). This could lead to more branch failure with some impact on your garage and the neighboring house. Removal of up to 20% of the end weight will also help alleviate some of the lean weight and prolong the life of the trees. As previously stated trees 1 and 2 are in heavy competition at the root flare and eventually failure would result unless some action is taken. I could see the need for removal of one of these trees in the future. l Tree 1 (end weight problems) All trees have the potential for failure and some of the risks can be reduced if steps are taken in a timely manner. The steps taken -will never eliminate all the risk, as some are unseen. I try through observations and education to give a reliable evaluation of all risks present. Only the homeowner knows what levels of risk they are willing to accept when it comes to their trees. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions regarding this report or its findings. Dave Timbrook ISA cert # PN1199A 17003 TALBOT EDMONDS WA - Google Maps Page 1 of 1 GOagle maps Address http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2005-06,GGLD:en&hl=en&t... 10/8/2009 17003 TALBOT EDMONDS WA - Google Maps Page 1 of 1 Google maps Address A ,AA m�i 4 \ �.. _ � _. _,, r �{ tOq_ - _ @ CH / 1 • !� � fig ' • s "T"i r 8 , � � 6u } http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2005-06,GGLD:en&hl=en&t... 10/8/2009 ir V I 4-6 1�� 0"1 a LA �� � it � : _.�___ �_ �_---�---- �;J :1 't 164, Alf, CpOF cli is l � � i. � i i .i i_i_ ���i i_Ll i i_,i 92 90 WEST 'REFERENCE }SINE / r- - - 94 - - - - - - - _ - - - - -1 f - - - M - 1 90 I A 0 I se +99.5' 101 DATUM PT. +100' \ 1 / TOP OF SS MANHOLE COVER PROPERTY OWNER: PAUL DENT PROPERTY ADDRESS: 17003 TALBOT PARK ROAD TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL #: 27040700104700 Oj'- S At, C`aO� 02 / RECTA LE \ � I 92j, !�/ 7.5 s 1 .a,n `V/ PROS ECK ^� I 600.57 SQ. FT. . ' N�' \ 11 S� \ / 12.3 SLOTTED WOOD U / DECK / O s.0 cv EXISTING f �s J w 94 �. PROPOSED RESIDENCE \ ADDITION 1549f SQ. F N Iw 810.57t SO. FT. �� �I�* +10 .2' \ .7\ \ l o ,� I i cli �\ O / \ \ SILT) \ \ FENCE \ m +95.2' I 5- 3- S - 5-d S 5-\ / INE OF VV V / 1� A. 68 +96., PROPOSED N N ADDITION 11.0 to ABV GARAGE ENTRY 134.44f SQ. 100 FT. \ PROPOSED PORCH EX'G DRIVEWAY 85.46t SO. 1528.6t SF. FT. \\ \ \ \98 �9C \ F \ GARAGE SQ. FT. W EW H +95.6' > I ?� G 1 W E +94.74• --I �► I S f y SCALE: 1 " = 20' 601 &Atr I 0 0 10 20- 1 1 �• ti eP( pX«•,�ti, Q. �' C �-• RESIDENCE HEIGHT CALCS A = 95.2' I I B = 102.2' 1 C = 96.5' I 1 1 D = 95.5' I 1 I AVE. GRADE = 97.4' ACTUAL HT. = 121.8' 1 MAX. HT. = 122.4' I 1 f BASEMENT SLAB ELEV. = 95.7' 1 f I BOTTOM OF FOOTINGS: ADDITION & PORCH = 100.7' I GARAGE (ATTACHED) = 95.0' I 1 DETACHED GARAGE HEIGHT CALCS: E=96.4 fsr \ \ 1 f F=95.8 \ G = 94.7 H=95.6 \ \ \ I AVE. GRADE = 95.6 \ J ACTUAL HT = 110.4 \ MAX. HT. ALLOWED: = 110.6 \ \ If SLAB ELEV. = 95.5 \ f GRADING: \ \ 38.47 CU. YDS. OF CUT TO BE \ \ STORED ON SITE AND USED AS \ FILL. EXCESS TO BE REMOVED. \ ff \ \ IMPERVIOUS SURFACE CALCS \ 96 BUILDING ROOF OUTLINE \ APPRO�p Y NNIN EXISTING RESIDENCE EXISTING DRIVEWAY +ss.0' EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE PROPOSED RESIDENCE ADDITION \ PROPOSED DECK \ PROPOSED COVERED PORCH LOT COVERAGE 3196 SQ. FT (16.287.) LOT AREA zone Rom- a--- Corilf:t' lag 23314.24 SQ. FT. S4tbCk5 Re Uired Ctll �"� -�� LOT SLOPE: 5.3% ~ Front w Sides--100L F� WATER SERVICE Rear AL Z6----�- SANITARY SEWER Other Noke,: Ec.Dc-a3.Yo.;kao.c•3 a.11wxs 4o ire e, avers V,0� �i is iac-4� c.�t�8c k�e" c��ion� 1ST $S4L ca o +o inaceb.8fr Qcin� !4 .garage ,Cr -} e .��ce.�,� cis ���ra..c.�•. V V 3181.51 SF. 1549.00 SF. 1528.8f SF. 616.00 SF. 810.57 SF. 600.57 SF. 85.46 SF. -w w - -S S - RECEIVED MAR 10 zoos BUILDING DEPT. 5""" Tfl E E .. r FILE V� 0o rr W z U z Q J n o I L0 � N � v 0 O z z Q m �(J J OCR Z) 3:: VU � 06 v W LLJ n O _ W U) 0 W z W o � J o < v 0 3 ry W LL N U m N LiJ 0 z n toz z Q (If Lf) N z_ LL L 0 0_ 0 z �o w0 Uz z N Q =� J W fy- w o z_ (-- N OW z = J 0 z c� aw 00 I F?EECEIVED MAR 10 2006 BUILDING DEPT. o"TREET FILE I I/:U-r -rn AAA-r1'U nAI Unl Kr- CAAt P05f PETAL I in tWo permit approval process shall be W as allowing or permitting the mrA 8f any ct> rently sxistin� illegal, rtnir�g or unpermitt: �d building, structure Inditidn tw'h is :�utaide the scope of the ypheation, reg,.mE;� a of whether such structure or condition is shown on the or drawing. Such building, structure or I may be the subject of a separate � t 44tiou,t L. I CA 0 -r I t- C� A., q -cam v Yt z,-: E'er E • psi e tz..t-t I NP, D APPROVED BY PLANNING N P=,G W G,0 I> L+7-4 0rf cs ot_D w1?01 16Nr VnKl r- rKirr C-xT I 0 L U `>' K-EJI ,�p Au% � hoff,b\ UhIitr1s wwb� W OWNERICONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROL AND DRAINAGE vJ You ��ti isIt,--e� L ef�2 M A,U.- C'I'I" 4sa C,0 te-L \V`.,t OVED AS NOTED RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCT' AND INSPECTION REQ 3 5t&L Zone Setback Corner-X ,t~ta Front W- Re aired,.. Sides Rear ' �y 10, � Other`-- 0--' '-o W F-., R- Fc� L F... uifc90 r� 5, W>z�t and = 15D b�f -� 15' Scale: 1" =10' �wNkn �wh00\C) kn �4 (Z) vA""pa 4� A I m 0 N 0.0 .(n m 0 W P �� ca zw• W , .q Lu • UJ CL z r { .00 Fm- z COD 3: RIESUB OCT 15 2009 BUILDING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDMONDS �OF1 4 -a I RESUB OCT 1 .5 2009 BUILDINGS DEPARTMENT GITY OF EDMONDS 4"'TmEET FILE 6N q/ 98 / +99.5' 101 1 � � / DATUM PT. +100' �\A rA � TOP OF SS MANHOLE COVER 1�� OWNER/CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CON I ROL AND DRAINAGE 0 C� PROPERTY OWNER: PAUL DENT PROPERTY ADDRESS: 17003 TALBOT PARK ROAD TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL #: 27040700104700 0"- Silo +�k4t4kOCV M {tom ►sTIv& t I W 'E S SCALE: 1 " = 20' 0 5 10 10 lr-� 4!!:-: * Frz11c4 mcFA bs located oo priva tc property. ® Fmpertp ow2er rpousibk for daftrmlaing P"Pirty It IS& Q genft sh&tt not cackwA or pmvcut seem to any City l610dtutied otilfflu. Aoor >X!c-nv4-e, 161 R-EyjS PENCE -HEMS CALCS A = 95.2' B = 102.2' C = 96.5' `1 D = 95.5' AVE. GRADE = 97.4' it ACTUAL HT. = 121.8' MAX. HT. = 122.4' BASEMENT SLAB ELEV. = 95.7' BOTTOM OF FOOTINGS: ADDITION & PORCH = 100.7' GARAGE (ATTACHED) - 95.0' 1NC1FdIC /—�/lf�� � DETACHED GARAGE HEIGHT CALCS: fan, ���% E = 9.4 5 Cl/�'{' 8 �Z ' G=94.7 H = 95.6 BI IBC, OFFICIAI. y AVE. GRADE = 95.6 rj�Bilk �k d;k ACTUAL HT = 110.4 MAX. ALLOWED: = 110.6 EL SLAB ELEV. = 95.5 L,u to w°-e APPROVED BY PLANNING GRADING 38.47 CU. YDS. OF CUT TO BE STORED ON SITE AND USED AS FILL. EXCESS TO BE REMOVED. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE CALCS BUILDING ROOF OUTLINE EXISTING RESIDENCE EXISTING DRIVEWAY EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE PROPOSED RESIDENCE ADDITION PROPOSED DECK PROPOSED COVERED PORCH >nOuftN*2W 3796 SQ. FT (16.28%) LOT AREA 23314.24 SQ. FT. LOT SLOPE: 5.3% 3181.51 SF. 1549.00 SF. 1528.8t SF. 616.00 SF. 810.57 SF. 600.57 SF. 85.46 SF. WATER SERVICE — w w — City of Edmonds Building Department SANITARY SEWER — s S APPRO RECEIVED MAR 10 2006 BUILDING DEPT.. CL o W I Z U `O N .. OF-1 g a� Z N Q rn LJV J 0 LO m w ^n 06 U W> w A � I I- E co W W W O V) N oLO 3 U CF) o 0 � a0 i o Q M mLd W - N- 1 - ®- Qf o m N '44- Y M z C✓ N LL. d- z_ LL- LL_ o o' z �o wo wz__ Z Qz ~2 3 J w Iw W o z o- vi ©w z (� = J �z rW 00 i / r/ 96 / +99.5' 101 DATUM PT. +100'` 100 / TOP OF SS MANHOLE COVER 92 139.00' WEST- - - �- - - / ---�' REFERE!i-c-7 NE -----\ i--- ------ 7 94 / r� J2 / s� 7 96 a \ �37 / E y / s INE SOFSM RECTA LE s �\ / 7.5 j/ PROPOS ECK ^� \ / 600.57 SO. FT. , / -1 N / I /X sy / 1'2.3 SLOTTED WOOD N O �� DECK yQr ?1 r 9.2 9 p ' s O ) +95.5' EXISTING / PROPOSED `� \\ RESIDENCE \ ` ADDITION 1549f SO. FT.\ / is A 810.57t SQ. FT. +10 2' \\ \ B \ +102.8' / \ \ \` O \ SILT, / \ \ FENCE ` 100 \ so \ \ 1, \ O ^/, Aso 1-1.0- <` I o O �y O N PROPOSED v PORCH 85.46t SO. / FT. 1 ! Ij I C',94 to ►� I� y N r ��o r 4.22 r 1 I �I ! I r I r I I I I I I I I 1 r I r 1 1 I \ J ` r \ 96 +96.0' Zone • �'� CorneryetiFlag0 Setbacks Required Actual Mye 5 - s APPROVED BY PLANNING SOO Fei � l0� I� 1 • t PROPERTY OWNER: PAIII nFMT PROPERTY ADDRESS: 17003 TALROT PARK ROAn TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL #: 27040700104700 'pOo C O 0 EXISTING GARAGE �O� SQ. FT. PROPOSED ??� GARAGE •O ADDITION 134.44t SQ. FT. EX'G DRIVEWAY 1528.8t SF. ?s \ �Op \ s` \ \ \ APPROVED AS NOTED BY EN INEERING bath......._... GUTTERS/DOWNSPOUTS TO CONNECT TO EXIST. SYST. 01'1fPJCFd/%C.�I� I I{��''t: r1�la� s J RESPONSIBLE =OR E130SIONiC i ' E, I'L AND DAM►AG- W E s SCALE: 1" = 20' 0 - 8 10 20 HEIGHT CALCS A = 102.2' C = 96.5' D = 95.5' E = 95.2' AVE. GRADE = '9�3�- q * • 4 ACTUAL HT. _ MAX. HT. _ 6�- 02. w 4p:� ' BASEMENT SLAB ELEV. = 95.7' BOTTOM OF FOOTINGS: ADDITION & PORCH = 100.7' GARAGE = 95.0' GRADING: 38.47 CU. YDS. OF CUT TO BE STORED ON SITE AND USED AS FILL. EXCESS TO BE REMOVED. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE CALCS BUILDING ROOF OUTLINE EXISTING RESIDENCE EXISTING DRIVEWAY EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE PROPOSED RESIDENCE ADDITION PROPOSED DECK PROPOSED COVERED PORCH 3796 SQ. FT (16.28%) LOT AREA 23314.24 SQ. FT. LOT SLOPE: 5.3% WATER SERVICE - w SANITARY SEWER -s 3181.51 SF. 1549.00 SF. 1528.8f SF. 616.00 SF. 810.57 SF. 600.57 SF. 85.46 SF. w - s RESUB JUN 2 2 2005 BUILDING DEPARTMENT r- o W I nn r) Z (vj�U U `"I z N d- OO Q 11 �C Z_ N 00 `J✓ J 00 j V� w 06 C G O _ E ai W O a� M O LO i O O 0 0 0 9 �: o m Ld a o Ld ry L.IJ ry N U m 00 z ft: N v S Cl() z_ LL- OQf z �o w0 wz Q c� _ _j n%� J wLL1 IW W 0 O Z � (n pw z lJ J J 0 z n-� 0m U is At STREE7 FILE RESUB JUN 2 2 2005 BUILDING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDMONDS