17802 VISTA DEL MAR DR.PDFiiiiiiii lill 11
13573
17802 VISTA DEL
MAR DR
11-2c. 103
0 0
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - 425-771-0220 - FAX 425-771-0221
Website: www.d.edmonds.wa.us
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Engineering Division
February 8, 2010
Michael Hosterman
PO Box 864
Edmonds, WA 98020
MEMO TO:
Puget Sound Energy
Verizon Northwest
SNOCOM Police and Fire Dispatch
SNOPAC
Snohomish County E911
US Post Office
Snohomish County Assessor's Office
Snohomish County Information Services
Snohomish County PUD
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
S THEE T 'FILE
Fire District No. I
Edmonds Police Department
Edmonds Utility Billing
Edmonds Public Works
Edmonds Building/Street File
Edmonds Address Files
Edmonds Information Services
Allied Waste
Comcast
This letter is to inform you of a street name change affecting several properties in the City of
Edmonds. On February 2, 2010 Edmonds City Council passed Ordinance No. 3782, approving
the renaming of Kairez Drive to Vista del Mar Drive. Please update your records to reflect the
following:
Previous Address
New Address
Tax ID Number
17802 Kairez Drive
17802 Vista del Mar Drive
00914200000700
17804 Kairez Drive
17804 Vista del Mar Drive
00914200000800
17901 Kairez Drive
17901 Vista del Mar Drive
00914200001100
17903 Kairez Drive
17903 Vista del Mar Drive
00914200000900
17905 Kairez Drive
17905 Vista del Mar Drive
00914200001000
17907 Kairez Drive
17907 Vista del Mar Drive
00914200000600
17909 Kairez Drive
17909 Vista del Mat Drive
00914200000500
147910 Kairez Drive
179 10 Vista del Mar Drive
00914200000400
18002 Kairez Drive
18002 Vista del Mar Drive
00914200000300
18004 Kairez Drive
18004 Vista del Mar Drive
00914200000200
18006 Kairez Drive
18006 Vista del Mar Drive
00914200000100
18007 Kairez Drive
18007 Vista del Mar Drive
00914200001200
All of the properties noted above are single-family residential properties recorded as part of the
subdivision Vista del Mar. A vicinity map highlighting each of the affected properties in yellow
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
0
0
has been attached for your reference. In addition, please find attached copies of the Snohomish
County Assessor Parcel Data for each of the properties.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at 425.771.0220 x 1338 or by
e-mail at mcconnellaci.edmonds.wa.us.
Respectfully,
(� W
Je�aniAeMcCo
Engineering Program Manager
Albk
EDA
Vista Del Mar Properties
ADDRESSED OFF 178TH PL SW
ADDRESSED OFF KAIREZ DR
0 100 200 Feet
I I I I I I I
By. GC101.13.2010
Snohomish County, WA Asse 0 Parcel Data Page I of 2
Snohomishonline Government information & Services
County4*
Washington
* R E A L * Property Information
CouM Home Assessor Home Treasurer Home Information on which Department to contact
Please view Disclaimer If you have questions, comments or suggestions, please Contact Us.
Date/Time:2/8/2010 1:10:32 PM Answers to Frequently Asked Questions about Parcel Data (opens as new window)
Return to Propedy Information Ent[y pagge
Parcel Number 00914200000700 Prev Parcel Reference
1 1
11 View Map of this parcel (opens as new window)
General Information
Taxpayer Name 11 Address (contact the Treasurer if you have questions)
HOSTERMAN MICHAEL 11 PO BOX 864 - - - EDMONDS, WA 98020
If the above mailing address is incorrect and you want to make a change, see the infonnation on Name and
Address Changes
Owner Name 11 Address (contact the Assessor if you have questions)
HOSTERMAN MICHAEL P & LYNNE 11343 3RD S --- EDMONDS, WA 98020
If the above name and address is incorrect due to a recent sale, please see the information on Name and
Address Changes After a Sale
Street (Situs) Address (contact the Assessor if you have questions)
17802 KAIREZ DR - - - EDMONDS, WA 98026
Parcel Legal Description
Section 18 Township 27 Range 04 Quarter NW VISTA DEL MR BLK 000 D-00 - LOT 7 TGW EQ &
UND INT IN KAIREZ DR ALSO TGW EQ & UND INT IN TR B
Go to top of pgge
Treasurer's Tax Information
Taxes For answers to questions about Taxes, please contact the Treasurer's office (opens as
new window)
2010 Taxes for this parcel $7,991.45
(Taxes may in . clude Surface Water Management and/or State Forest Fire Patrol fees and any fees related to late
payments. LID charges, if any, are not included.)
To obtain a duplicate tax statement, either download our Tax Statement Request form or call 425-388-3366 to request it
by phone.
Go to top of ppqe
Assessor's Property Data Characteristics and Value Data below are for 2010 tax year.
Please contact the Treasurers office for answers to questions about Taxes (opens as new window)
For questions ONLY about property characteristics or property values (NOT taxes),
please contact the Assessor's Office
Property Values do not reflect adjustments made due to an exemption, such as a senior or disabled persons
Values exemption.
http://web5.co.snohomish.wa.us/propsys/asr-tr-propinq/Prpinq02-ParcelData.asp?PN=0091 ... 2/8/2010
Snohomish County, WA Asse Parcel Data Page 2 of 2
. . 1 1. 0 0
Reductions for exemptions are made on the property tax bill.
TaxYear 2010 Market Land $525,000 Market Improvement $387,1001 Market Total $912,100J
Go to top of page
Valuation, Payment, and Property Tax History
View Histo[y (opens as new window)
Go to top of page
Property Characteristics
Tax Code Area (TCA) 00217 View Taxing Districts for this Parcel (opens as new window)
UseCode 111,Single Family Residence -Detached
SizeBasis ACRE Size 0.34 (Size may include undivided interest in common tracts and road parcels)
Go to top of pAe
Property Structures
Type Yr.Built Structure Description
Dwelling 2005 1 Story w/Basement View Structure Data (opens as new window)
Go to toi) of r)aqe
Property Sales since 7/31/1999
Explanation of Sales Information (opens as new window)
Sales data is based solely upon excise affidavits processed by the Assessor.
Transfer Receipt Sales Excise Deed Grantor (Seller) Grantee (Buyer) Other
Date Date Price Number Type Parcels
2/11/2004 2/19/2004 $450,000 380849 W VISTA DEL MAR HOSTERMAN MICHAEL P & No
LLC LYNNE
3/9/2001 3/12/2001 $0 262930 QC GEORGE KAIREZ VISTA DEL MAR LLC No
Go to top of pgge
Property Maps Township/Range/Section/Quarter, links to maps
Neighborhood 1504000 Explanation of Neighborhood Code (opens as new window)
Township 27 Range 04 Section 07 Quarter SW Find parcel maps for this Township/Range/Section
W)
View Mgp of this parcel (opens as new windo�]
http://web5.co.snohomish.wa.uslpropsyslasr-tr-propinqlPrpinqO2-ParcelData.asp?PN=0091... 2/8/2010
jr ,
14 C. 1 wq 11
0 40"
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 * FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: wwwdedmondsmams
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
August 24, 2005
Robin Kearsley
Kearsley Homes, Inc.
6631 Norma Beach Road
Edmonds, WA 98026
RE: Hosterman residence - 17802 Kairez Drive, Edmonds, WA 98026
Dear Mr. Kearsley,
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
This letter is being sent in response to your request, dated May 5, 2005, to exceed the previously
approved driveway slope of 16%. It is understood that this request is being made in order to
reduce the slope of the driveway at the entry to the garage to allow for a better parking and
walking area. As previously noted in your letter dated August 23, 2004, the elevation of the
house has already been raised to the maximum allowable height to reduce the driveway slope.
This request is found reasonable and therefore a driveway slope up to a maximum of 20% is
approved for this project.
The City has also reviewed your request to place concrete * panels in the driveway instead of
paving the upper portion of the driveway with asphalt as required by the approved plans. The
City agrees to allow the construction of concrete panels within the easement area,provided the
panets' are no larger than 5' x 5' and provided the enclosed agreement which gives authorization
for the property owners to install a concrete driveway in the public easement, is signed by the
property owners and recorded against the property.
Please return an original, signed copy of the enclosed agreement -and submit payment for
recording fees to the Development Services Department. *Prior to pouring the concrete driveway,
you will be required to call the Engineering Inspection line at 425-771-0220, ext. 1326, to
schedule your driveway forin inspection. If you have any questions regarding these requirements
please feel free to contact Jeanie McConnell at 425-771-0220, ext. 1338.
Thank Ay
VI T. P
VID K. GEBERT, P.E.
City Engineer
-'X-Ilstreet file
permit file
Incorporated August 11, 1890 0
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
AUTHORIZATION TO USE PUBLIC EASEMENT
FOR CONCRETE DRIVEWAY AT 17802 KAIREZ DRIVE
TAX PARCEL: 00914200000700
WHEREAS,, the City of Edmonds (City) owns and operates water and sewer utilities, and
WHEREAS, Michael P. Hosterman and Lynne Hosterman (Property Owners) are the. owners of
certain property located at 17802 Kairez Drive, Edmonds, Washington, and
WHEREAS, the City owns and operates.a water line within an easement across the property at
17802 Kairez Drive as shown on Exhibit A, and
WHEREAS, the City has established certain public works policies and requirements regarding
public utility improvements construction, ownership, maintenance, and repair; and
WHEREAS, the City has established certain policies and requirements regarding private
improvements within public utility easements, including that private driveway surfaces within public
utility easements shall be constructed of asphalt, and
WHEREAS, these policies also include that, when City utility work disturbs or damages portions
of private driveways within a City easement, repairs to the driveways will generally be made using
asphalt material, and
WHEREAS, these City policies and requirements also include that permission must be granted to
a private property owner to construct a concrete driveway over a City easement, and that the private
property owner shall be responsible for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of the portion of the
driveway within the easement area, and
WHEREAS, the Property Owners desire to construct a concrete driveway within the public
easement as shown on Exhibit A, and
WHEREAS, the Property Owners agree to be responsible for the maintenance, repair, and
replacement of the portion of the concrete driveway located in the easement, and to do so at their own
expense and that of their successors in title in perpetuity, NOW, THEREFORE
. 1 0 0
The City of Edmonds, Washington, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City") and Michael P.
Hosterman and Lynne Hosterman (hereinafter "Property Owners") have entered into this agreement in
consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived and the promises contained herein.
I . Statement of Pulpose: The purpose of this agreement is to grant approval for the Property
Owners to construct a concrete driveway surface within the public utility easement across the property at
17802 Kairez Drive as shown on Exhibit A, and to delineate the Property Owners' re 'onsibilities for the
SP
maintenance, repair and replacement of said driveway surface.
2. Undertakings of City.
2.1 Authorization to Utilize -Public Easement. In consideration of the Property
Owners' promise to maintain, repair and replace those portions of the concrete dniveway located in the
public easement, made on behalf of themselves as well as all successors in interest to the Property, the
City authorizes the utilization of the public easement to maintain said concrete driveway within the City
easement sbown on Exhibit A in accordance with established City s tandards and the terms and conditions
of this Agreement.
.2.2 Whenever possible, if City utilities work within the easement requires removal of
or damage to the concrete driveway, advance notification will be given to the Property Owners to remove
those portions of the concrete driveway located within the easement area that interfere with the utility
work, so that the Property Owners can remove those portions of the concrete driveway from within the
easement area that interfere with the City utility work. If the portions of the concrete surface that
interfere with the utility work are not timely removed by the Property Owners, they shall be removed by
the City at the expense of the Property Owners.
2.3 Nothing herein shall be interpreted to limit the City's authority as a public utility
to establish standards for service, to charge appropriate fees and costs and, in its sole discretion, to order
maintenance or removal of the concrete driveway in the event that said concrete driveway negatively
impacts or damages the City's easement and underlying utility systems or violates any condition of
service adopted by tfie City.
3. Undertakings of Propei1y Owners.
3.1 On behalf of themselves, their successors and assigns, the Property Owners
promise to maintain, repair, remove and/or replace the concrete driveway located in the easement at their
sole expense to the standards established by the City in its capacity as a public utility and under its'police
power regulation. All such maintenance, repair, removal and/or replacement shall be conducted solely at
the Property Owners' expense.
3.2 The Property Owners, on behalf of themselves and their successors and assigns,
acknowledge that the City had no obligation to approve the concrete driveway within the easement for the
sole benefit of the Property Owners, and that the agreements as contained herein, provide sufficient
consideration for the Property Owners and their successors and assigns to maintain repair, remove and/or
replace said concrete driveway located in the easement at their sole expense in perpetuity.
3.3 In the event that the City water line located within the easement should require
maintenance, repair or replacement by the City, or otherwise require work necessitating removal of
portions or the concrete driveway within the easement, the Property Owners shall, at the request of the
0 0
City, promptly remove, repair, reconstruct, and/or replace the concrete driveway at the Property Owners'
sole expense. Upon receipt of notification from the City that utility work within the easement requires
removal of portions of the concrete driveway from within the easement, the Property Owners will
promptly remove those portions of the concrete driveway from within the easement area that interfere
with the City utility work at their sole expense. If the portions of the concrete surface that interfere with
the utility work are not timely removed by the Property Owners, they shall be removed by the City at the
expense of the Property Owners, and the Property Owners shall reimburse the City for the costs of
removal of the concrete driveway and disposal of materials as well as for any incr eased construction costs
or consequential damages incurred by the City due to the Property Owners' delay. In the event that
portions of the concrete driveway, must be removed to facilitate utility work by the City within the
easement, the Property Owners shall be solely responsible for replacement of the concrete driveway at
their expense upon completion of the utility work by the City.
3.4 The Property Owners promise to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its
officers, agents and employees from any loss, claim or liability of any kind or nature arising from or out
of its promises contained within this agreement, including any damage that may be caused to the concrete
driveway by the City's operation, maintenance, repair, replacement or other work related to the water line
within the easement. This promise to hold harmless and indemnify includes defense by counsel of the
City's choosing, the payment of reasonable attorney's fees and court costs. Nothing herein, however,
shall be interpreted to require the Property Owners to indemnify the City from the negligence or
intentional tortious act of its employees, officers, or agents.
4. Touch and Concern the Land; Subiect Property. This agreement touches and concerns
the subject Property herein below described, and shall run with said property binding all future property
owners, as well as their successors, mortgagees and assigns, and any other party acquiring an interest in
the subject Property. The Subject Property is described as follows:
Section 18 Township 27 Range 04 Quarter NW VISTA DEL MAR BLK 000 D-00 — Lot
7 TGW EQ & UND TNT IN KAIREZ DR ALSO TGW EQ & UND TNT IN TR B
This agreement shall be recorded by the City at the expense of the Property Owners. In
addition, the Property Owners promise to notify all offerers, purchasers, or any other party acquiring any
interest whatsoever in the Property of the obligations imposed by this agreement.
5. Termination of Agreement. In addition to any other remedy provided for by law, the City
reserves the right to terminate this agreement in the event that the concrete driveway negatively impacts
or damages the City's easement and underlying utility systems or violates any condition of service
adopted by the City, at Its sole discretion, as may be necessary to prevent damage to the City's water
utility system, or any other public facility which may be impacted by the Property Owners' failure to
properly use the utility easement.
6. Entire Affeemen . This is the entire agreement between the parties. Any prior
understanding or representation, written or oral, made by any party, shall be deemed merged with its
provisions. This agreement may not be amended except in writing in a document filed of record with the
auditor of Snohomish County, Washington.
DONE this _ day of � 2005.
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
W. Scott Snyder
CITY OF EDMONDS
By:
Mayor Gary Haakenson
PROPERTY OWNERS
Michael P. Hosterman
Lynne Hosterman
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF
On this day, personally appeared before me and declared that
he/she/they signed this instrument as his/her/their free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and
purposes therein mentioned.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this day of 2005.
NOTARY
Print Name
My Commission expires:
EXHIBIT A
��J/ c� La
0
J
------------
N9901
L 5590--- 7.1
Rz�-20.0
'LOT 13 0 L=31 4
20167 0 0 1 1
I , 0
A, N9 'oo,o(IlE 6 32!0'0
1 12.0
N89*59*28"
E
96.19 6,
20,
42. F 48.00 L=,�, (3
A 02
LOT 14 N '59'39"E 9--
14483 SF
fb/ '3(
Xv, , r 644
24-91
1.9,9�
78,>
7.3 LP N90*00,
li CD
24--192 1 ':)
C�
-4
0
LOT 1 7 1 1 4,
15016 SF
llgo2 KAIRC2 DQ,
C-)
>
72-�-
6.
Ai Ln
0
LOT 8
14272 SF LU;
A, OD I
c! co 0
z
s
;�5 20.00
20.1 S891 4-E
66� 6 7
6 Ln
C,
LOT 9 C)
to
47061 SF
Cv/,? Iq
T ACT "B"
it
R 20*0 COMMON
L 1 42 1 z
0 ,
63 0. 0 qWNERNSHIP
OT q WITH LOTS
-4)
5. 6. 7, 8
U L4 m
0) iq
A D LOT 9,
E UALLY
0
T 0
;q . . 9 1 1
May 5, 2005 fll-�
To: Dave GerbeM City Engineer, City of Edmonds RECEIVED
121 5'h Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 980'20
From: Robin Kearsley, (applicant's representative) Et4G1tjEERJNG
Kearsley Homes, Inc.
6631 Norma Beach Road
Edmonds, WA 98026
Regarding: Hosterman project� 17802 Kairez; Drive, Edmonds, WA 98026, permit #2004-0783
Dear Mr. Gerbert,
I am requesting an increase in the driveway slope from 16% to approximately 19%, (under 20%
slope maximum) and to be allowed to place concrete in the driveway for the following reasons:
The existing gravel driveway is approximately i 9% to 20% slope, joining into a minimum sloped
area in front of the garage and entry door. Since the upper driveway section is steeper at 19%
slope, this allows for the lower section to have a minimum sloped area in front of the garage and
entry door. At present, a car can be parked in front of the garage. It isa. comfortable slope to
park on and also to walk on. If the driveway is 16% slope the area in front of the garage door and
entry will increase in slope and be steeper to park and walk on.
The plans as approved, call for asphalt in the upper section of the driveway because of the 10'
water main easement in the east side of the upper driveway. Mike & Lynne Hosterman would
like to pour concrete in the driveway instead of placing asphalt. Over time, the concrete will last
longer, be much safe and less slippery to walk on. The concrete would be broom finished for
additional traction and would look more aesthically pleasing for the type of house that is being
constructed. We are proposing that the concrete would be placed in sections, so that if the water
main has to be uncovered in the, future, the concrete could be removed without damaging the
entire driveway. Mike & Lynne Hosterman realize that if portions of the upper concrete
driveway have to be removed, then the expense is incurred by them. The attached sheet, taken
from the site plan, shows a possible divided concrete pattern.
For the above reasons, I request your approval for a slope less than 20% on the driveway and to
be allowed to use concrete for the proposed driveway. If you have any questions, or would like to
meet at the site, please call me at 425-7424888 office or 425-478-6380 mobile.
Thank you for your consideration.
IiSinc re
0
obi Pearsley
Kearsley Homes, ke.
EX15TING GRADE
.FINAL GRADE
PROVIDE 5TABILIZED
CON5TKUCTION
ENTRANCE 15'x 50'WITH
4"-8" QUARRY 5PALL5
Lo
5"- 12" DEEP
RETAINING WALL TO
HOLD DIRT UNDER.
NEW DKIVEWAY 5EE
5TR.UCTUR.AL 5HEET
FOR. WALL DETAIL
ELEVATION Of TH15 POINT
Of DKIVEWAY = 154' (TH15
ALLOW5 FOR. APPROX I G%
GRADE FROM END Of KAIRE7_
b
DRIVE AT ELEVATION I GG)
b
C\j
PROVIDE 3G" RAILING
AT EDGE Of
Dp,ivEwAy AT 30"
ABOVE GRADE
I G5' I I
I G4' x
FINAL
I G2'
FINAL
AREA: 20')
47.08'
-Alt
I G4'fINAL
zV I G2'f(NAL_
1 GO,
x
FINAL
I GO I GO' f INAL
158' 1
FINAL 15UMNAL
155'
FIP x
155'
FINAL
152.75LI
FINAL I
15 01Y,
145'
0
Pq�
4
.1 M
As
4
DKIVEWAY WIT�
TURN AKOUN
10, PpKlOPu4;\-
rpovl�
fINAL-C
DplivE\&
,--�5LOFE'
f0K AC
,,,�ARO UN
11---"
ELEVATION
V,-\
156 04
N 11
Ip
EW CONCRETE
DKIVEWAY
FF _4" D"N TROUGH W1 GKATF --------
I 'flN
5 0' fI NAL
PPOPO5ED GARAGE 773 FT2
11, C. 1 B913
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 * FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: wwwdeamondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
September 15, 2004
Robin Kearsley
Kearsley Homes, Inc.
6631 Norma Beach Road
Edmonds, WA 98026
RE: Hosterman residence
17802 Kairez Drive
Edmonds, WA 98026
Dear Mr. Kearsley,
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
This letter is being sent in response to your request to exceed the maximum allowed
driveway slope of 14%. Review of the submitted letter and site plan indicate that site
constraints prevent you from obtaining a 14% slope for the driveway. It is understood
that adjustments to the house and driveway have already been made in order to reduce the
driveway slope below 20%. For these reasons, it is found reasonable to allow a
maximum driveway slope of 16% for at this location.
Please call the Engineering Inspection line at 425-771-0220, ext. 1326, to schedule your
driveway form inspection, prior to pour. If you have any questions regarding these
requirements please feel free to contact Jeanie McConnell at 425-771-0220, ext. 1338.
Thank you
X,
DAVID K. GEBERT, P.E.
City Engineer
Jm
t,�s`treet file
permit file
0 Incorporated August 11, 1890
cl:-.. T T -I -!.- - - T- -- - -
.4,
KEARSLEN, HOMES, INC.
DESIGN & C.ONS : T K U C T 1 0 N
I . ! August 23, 2004
To: Dave Gerbert, City Engineer, City of Edmonds
-121. 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
From: Robin Kearsley, (applicant's representative)
Koarsley Homes, Inc.
6631 Norma Beach Road
Edmonds, WA 98026
RECEIVED
AUG 3 0 2004
BUILDING DEPT.'
Regarding: Hosterman project, 17802 Kairez Drive, Edmonds, WA 98026, plan check #04-299
Dear Mr. Gerbert, .
I am requesting a driveway slope of 16% for the above project instead.of the standard 14%.
standard slope for driveways in Edmonds for the following reasons: I
At pricisent, the.existing slope in the proposed driveway area exceeds 20%. Because of this grade,
the intent for the new driveway was to reduce- the slope as close tb 14% as possible to allow a 20-
foot parking area in front of thegarage at a minimum slope towards the garage door so that when
driving into the garage, there would be a minimum slope change at the garage door opening.
The proposed roof elevation of the garage & house are at the maximum allowed height of 166.6'.
This elevation is only 1.6' higher than the elevation of 165'of the starting point of the driveway at
the edge of th ' e street.
The roof.pitch of the garage roof has been reduced to a 3.25/12 pitch instead of a 4/12 or greater
which would have been more desirable. If the slope of the driveway were to become 14%, the
garage roof would have less pitch and affect the esthetics of the garage roof to the main house and
also create more steps into the proposed house, which would be undesirable. A higher garage
would also create a situation requiring more fill material for the driveway and an increase in
height to the proposed driveway retaining wall which is already approximately 9' high where it
meets the proposed garage in order to achieve the 16% slope -
For the above reasons, I request your approval for a 161/6 slope for the proposed driveway. If you
have any questions, please call me at 425-742-5888 office or 425-478-6380 mobile.
Thank you for your consideratiQn.
1 c ely,
b peartsley
Kearsley Homes, In]c
66', 1 NOWMA BEACH ROAD - EDINIONDS. WA 980-26 - TELTAX (425) 742-5888
Wa Staie Contrictors No. KEARSIIIOO�NFI
Q
A -A
l
0
I. -ftn__ -f
140d
U)-T 7
4�-
�PL
loe.
" -2sV,
TCAk
9
YZ—
PPE
QN
to
C-J,JDDdA C)OT
0 0
E,D,ie_
CITY OF EDMONDS WATERLINE AS -BUILT
ADDRESS
- 17802 KAIREZ DR
CONTRACTOR
DATE DRAV&
02/28/05 BY SIBREL
HOMEOWNER
-HOSTERMAN
SCALE
NTS
PERMJT
NO. 2004-0783
7
Q
D?
CITY OF EDMONDS SnlEMWill
AS -BUILT
ADDRESS
z Z�5
p
PERMIT
NUMBER --;>
HOMEOWNER
CONTRACTOR
DATE
DRAWN
BY
I V
. .�V'
PLANNING DATA
NAME: DATE: C? fiqC4
PLAN C.HK#:
SITE ADDRESS: t -1 12 a.' Y- e
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: V-Aq
REDUCED SITE PLAN PROVIDED?: (Yes/ No,,--. tzj-
I'V
E4 T: ae-S -1 FLAG LOT:j9j / No)
MAP PAG CORNERLO
C::�
ZONING: PE;)- / P- CRITICAL AREAS DETERMINATION #:
USt,dv Reauired:
El Walyer
L3 Conditional Waiver
=:- ��a:;> V-CLULD
SEPA DETERMINATION:
UlFee
L3 Checklist
L3APo Ust wl notarized form -0
V-nc- C'D1 L,:- +- K��
LJ (Needed for 500 cubic yards of grading, Shoreline Area- site within 2dO ft. of Puget Sound or Lal"allinger) Q_k_t_,o, C;b
Exempt q s e)
%A
SETBACKS:
C56 CA ec),=_ �q
Required Setbacks:
4-YLP_�� F loo
Street: 10 ' Left Side: 10 Right Side:
Re:ir:
Actual Setbacks:
Street: 10 ' Left Side: 10 Right Side:
10 Re r:'-f-
Street map checked for additional setbackrequired? (Yes No DNA)
DETACHED STRUCTURES:
L3 ROCKERIES: — 1::70 POT � Vv
0 FENCEsrrRELLISES: 00t.-
aVUA_C'V-- Lot
,&BAY WINDOWS/ PROJECTING MODULATION:
- e
k-
r%
STAIRS / DECKS:
PARKING: Required: Actual:—
IQ
-7S
LOT AREA- 11A
LOT COVE
Calculatit a.) L4, L 0
T. '-L 0 C'
BUI LDING HEIGHT: 1(4 1 ILI
Point F. '1- 5. pt�
Datum _ALCk.)_"j_ Datum
Elevation:
Cc-Zk-,3 141
M ax I m u m AJ I ok)Nd (.0 V 'J- Actual Height:
A.D.U. CREATEI!of"�/ Yes)
'SUBDIVISION-�Lc,;r- -k- -p— C1
A
0" =t 4 -AVOL"Dy-w
1oF'PCLr'
LEGAL NONCONFORMINGO-ISE RETE,_ I AT SWED: es
5VD rim of
TIM
�-q� _4
Lj�,
ot__� q =0 i e,
,OTHEO:�
-1- Onk &+n
e A
ji e '0 - ef 1'V I r�'4 Ll->cl
; Q; ev n�P
C, .4-n �_
t
e
j
S'.de 05Z e-' (=-+
hev'le;
t; t-
-,
Z-a f, " 0 6
P I a- n" w B y* 4L&= a ax 4G -V- e-� e,)6 0 --e- gt_A �;�' i" N
eh k t 411,- - L-'aj P
ok
NewBPPIanningDataForrrLD0C "Sh� iv
'?
c, cje_ C�v,
:;i, j< n
I O'cl
/ It, / /.1
tZo ----7
-n
jo 01i
Ul
0
4 lu
NY/
It A LF
0
IS
rn
r1a
m
It 0
oD
to
..... .. 2o')
/*
It
0(b /*
0 v
Ol
P
00
41
y
12 2
'T 3" 62 vv
DO,
A/
0, Z.;.-
QD i>
-7- 71%
T
IM I
!4
to—
V.
v
0
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
---'--NGA ASSOCIATES9 INC.
GEOTF—CHNICAL ENGINF-ERS & GF-OLOGISTS
17311 — 135" Avenue NE, A-50D
Woodinville, WA 9a072
(425)488-1669 - Fax(425)481-;2510
MEMORANDUM
DATE: Apffl 23, 2004
TO: Michael Hosterman
CC: Robin Kearsley — Kearsley Homes
FROM: Khaled Shawish, PE V%%o'3,
Bala Dodoye-Alah
RE; Lot 7 Vista Del Mar — Structures in Setback Area
NGA File No. 3767BO4
Snohomish County (425) 337-1869
Wenatchee/Chelan (509) 784-2756
BU11DING
JUN 3 0 2004
STREET FILE
Your builder, Robin Kearslcy, requested that we provide our opinion regarding structures planned in the
setback area, We provided a geotechnical report titled, "Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation — Lot 7
Vista Del Mar — Edmonds, Washington," dated March 24, 2004. 1ri that report, we recommended a 35-
foot building setback from the top of slope. Ho has requested a memo addressing the placement of a deck
within the setback area. Afr. Kearsley informed us that he would like to place a light deck within the
setback area with deck supports extended out approximately 4 feet into the setback along the westem side
of the residence. He requested our opinion regarding the suitability of this plan.
Based on our evaluation and observations, it is our opinion that the planned deck foundations should not
impact the stability of the slope, if the work is completed in accordance with the recommendations found
in our geotechnical report and this memo. We recommend that only minimal grading be performed for
placement of the deck in the setback area. Loose material should not be allowed to accumulate near the
top of slope. We recommend ihat the deck be placed on 12-inch diameter sonitubea or drilled pien
extending approximately six feet below the ground surface. These piers can be installed during the
installation of the drilled piers for the residence., We should be retained to observe the installation of
these elements.
We trust this memorandum should satisfy your needs at this time. If you have any questions conceming
this memorandum or if you require additional services, please call.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
---�NGA AssociATEs, INC.
A
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEoLoGisTs
17311 — 135h Avenue NE, A-500 Snohomish County (425) 337-1669
Woodinville, WA 98072
(425) 486-1669 9 (425) Fax 481-2510 Wenatchee/Chelan (509) 784-2756
July 23, 2004
Mr. Michael Hosterman
7139 Beach Drive SW
Seattle, Washington 98136
Plan Review Letter
Hosterman Residence
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 37671304
Dear Mr. Hosterman:
s7m: FILE
I IL.,.ET
RECEIVED
JUL 2 7 2004
PERMIT COUNTER
This letter presents the results of our geotechnical engineering review of the plans for your residence
planned on Lot 7 of the Vista Del Mar development, as requested by your builder Robin Kearsley of
Kearsley Homes.
We have previously prepared a geotechnical engineering report for this site titled, "Geotechnical
Engineering Evaluation — Lot 7 Vista Del Mar — Edmonds, Washington," dated March 24, 2004. We also
prepared a supplemental memo regarding the structure setback from the top of the existing steep slope dated
April 23, 2004. For our use in preparing this letter, Robin Kearsley has provided' us with plans titled,
"Hosterman Residence, 17802 Kairez Drive, Edmonds, Washington," prepared by Kearsley Homes, Inc.,"
dated May 8, 2004 and June 16, 2004. The plans included sheets A 1.0 through A 10.0. Robin Kearsley has
requested that we review the geotechnical "aspects of the provided plans, and prepare this letter documenting
our opinions regarding plan compliance with our previous report and memorandum.
We reviewed the provided plans as well as, our previous report. We found that the plans are in general
compliance with the.�rec.o.mmendations provided in the report. This includes the recommended setback
distances and soil bearing pressures. The plans should be revised to include the following items:
Plan Review Letter
Hosterman Residence
July 23, 2004
NGA File No. 37671304
Page 2
Sheet A 2.0:
- For the 12-inch diameter sonitubes or drilled piers, please specify that those supports are for the
deck only so that there is no confusion. Also, the memo regarding the deck piers was dated
April 23, 2004 instead of May 23, 2004 as indicated on the plans.
- 'A note indicating that all drains including footing drains, downspouts, and yard drains should be
routed into a permanent discharge system and that water should not be allowed to flow towards
or over the slope should be added.
In the Foundation Notes section, a note indicating that all earthwork and foundation preparation
should be completed in accordance with the geotechnical report by Nelson Geotechnical
associates dated March 24, 2004 should be added.,
Sheet A 8.0 & 9.0:
- Add a note indicating that all concrete walls should be backfilled, and backfill compacted as
recommended in the geotechnical report.
mWe
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Plan Review Letter
Hosterman Residence
July 23, 2004
NGA File No. 37671304
Page 3
It has been a pleasure to provide service to you on this project. Please contact us if you have any questions
regarding this letter or require further information.
Sincerely,
NEL SON GEO TECHNICA L A SSOCIA TES, INC.
Bala Dodoye-Alali
Project Geologist
0
E s
Khaled A Shawish, PE
Principal
BD:KMS:Iam
One Copy Submitted
cc: Robin Kearsley — Kearsley Homes (Two Copies)
NEL soN GEO TECHNICA L A SSOCIA TES, INC.
STREET FILE
JUN 3 0 2004
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
EVALUATION
LOT 7 VISTA DEL MAR
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
PREPARED FOR
MR. MICHAEL HOSTERMAN
I
I
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
AssociATEs, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
17311 — 1351h Avenue NE, A-500
Woodinville, WA 98072
(425) 486-1669 * (425) Fax 481-2510
March 24, 2004
Mr. Michael Hosterman
7139 Beach Drive SW
Seattle, WA 98136
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 3767BO4
I
Dear Mr. Hosterman:
Snohomish County (425) 337-1669
Wenatchee/Chelan (509) 784-2756
We are pleased to submit the attached report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation — Lot 7 Vista
Del Mar — Edmonds, Washington." This report documents our subsurface explorations within the site
and presents our opinion and recommendations for the proposed site grading and building setback from
the top of a steep slope. Our services have been completed in general accordance with the Services
Agreement signed by you on February 24, 2004.
We monitored the excavation of four test pits in the project area. In general, our explorations encountered
sand with varying amounts of silt and gravel. Fill was encountered on the southeastern side of the site.
We also observed the conditions on the adjacent steep slope and observed signs of relatively recent
shallow failures.
From a geotechnical standpoint, we have concluded that the planned development is feasible. However,
due to the close proximity of the structure to the steep slope, we have recommended that the residence be
supported, at least partially, on drilled piers extending down into the slope to provide a minimum
effective foundation setback distance of 50 feet from the face of the slope. Specific recommendations for
design and installation of the drilled piers are included in the attached report. General site grading and
drainage recommendations have also been included in this report.
0 0
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
NGA File No. 3767BO4
March 24, 2004
Summary - Page 2
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,
K e VNELSON EOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
M. Shawish, PE
Principal
Two Copies Submitted
cc: Robin Kearsley — Kearsley Homes (three copies)
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................... 1
SCOPE......................................................................................................................................................... I
SITECONDITIONS .................................................................................................................................. 2
SurfaceConditions .................................................................................................................................... 2
SubsurfaceConditions .............................................................................................................................. 3
HydrologicConditions .............................................................................................................................. 3
SENSITIVEAREA EVALUATION ......................................................................................................... 4
SeismicHazard ......................................................................................................................................... 4
ErosionHazard .......................................................................................................................................... 4
Landslide Hazard/Slope Stability .............................................................................................................. 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................ I ................................... 5
General...................................................................................................................................................... 5
SlopeProtection ........................................................................................................................................ 6
ErosionControl ......................................................................................................................................... 7
StructureSetbacks ..................................................................................................................................... 7
SitePreparation and Grading .................................................................................................................... 8
FoundationSupport ................................................................................................................................... 8
StructuralFill ..........................................................................................................................................
10
RetainingWalls .......................................................................................................................................
11
Slab -on Grade ..........................................................................................................................................
12
SiteDrainage ........................................................................................................................................... 12
USEOF THIS REPORT .......................................................................................................................... 13
List of Figures
Figure I — Vicinity Map
Figure 2 — Site Plan
Figure 3 — Cross -Section A -A'
Figure 4 — Soil Classification Chart
Figure 5 — Test Pit Logs
Figure 6 — Drilled Piers and Setback Detail
I
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, Washington
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering investigation and evaluation for the
proposed single-family residence on Lot 7 of the Vista Del Mar plat in Edmonds, Washington, as shown
on the Vicinity Map in Figure 1. The purpose of this study is to explore and characterize the site's
surface and subsurface conditions, and to provide geotechnical recommendations for site development.
For our use in preparing this report, we have been provided with undated, untitled plans showing existing
site conditions, and the proposed location of the residence with respect to the steep slope.
Development within this property is proposed to consist of an approximate 3000- to- 4000 square -foot,
two-story residence with a crawl space and associated paved driveway and utilities. The development
will be accessed from Kairez Drive on the southern side of the property. Steep slopes exist on the western
side of the property. An existing sewer casement is located near the top of the slope. The planned
residence location will result in a setback distance of approximately 35 feet from the top of the steep
slope. Stormwater collection has been detem-iined to be directed to an existing stormwater collection
system that has been installed in the western side of the upper portion of the lot. A retaining wall is
planned for a portion of the eastern side of the lot to provide support for fill to be placed in the
driveway/turnaround area.
SCOPE
The purpose of this study is to explore and characterize the site subsurface -conditions, and provide
general recommendations for site development and slope setback. Specifically, our scope of services
includes the following:
1. Review available geologic, slope stability, and soils maps of the area, and the prior
geotechnical report dated April 26, 1993.
2. Perform a walk-through inspection of existing geologic and relative stability conditions at
the site, including steep slopes.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 3767BO4
March 24, 2004
Page 2
3. Perform backhoe excavated test pits within the property to evaluate existing surface and
subsurface soils and groundwater conditions. Backhoe was supplied by the owner.
4. Provide recommendations for building setbacks from steep slope.
5. Provide recommendations for earthwork, including cuts and fills.
6. Provide recommendations for foundation placement and slabs -on -grade.
7. Provide general recommendations for lateral support and foundation retaining walls.
8. Provide recommendations for drainage and erosion control.
9. Prepare a written geotechnical/engineering geologic evaluation report discussing our
findings, opinions, and recommendations for planned development within this site.
SITE CONDITIONS
Surface Conditions
The project site is an approximate one -acre, irregular -shaped parcel. The site layout is shown on the Site
Plan in Figure 2. A residential property is located to the south and east of the project site, an undeveloped
parcel is located to the north, and a steep west -facing slope is located to the west. The site has a moderate
slope to the north with a steep west -facing slope that slopes down steeply for approximately 100 feet
towards the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad easement. Puget Sound borders the railroad tracks to
the west. The inclination of the slope was measured to be approximately 50 degrees, or 120 percent. The
slope profile is shown in Cross-section A -A' presented as Figure 3.
The upper portion of the site is mainly covered with grasses and some blackberry bushes. The top of the
slope is vegetated with large fir trees, some of which have been undermined by previous shallow debris
flows. The steeply sloping portion below the top of slope is mainly covered with deciduous trees and
debris from trees that were cut and not removed from the slope. Two old shallow landslides were
observed on the slope. We did not observe surface water on the upper portion of the site and seepage was
not observed on the slope during our site visit on March 1, 2004. A 10-foot sewer easement and a 10-foot
drainage easement are located above the top of slope, and a 10-foot waterline easement is located along
the eastern footing line.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 3767BO4
March 24, 2004
Page 3
Subsurface Conditions
Geology: The Geologic ME of the Edmonds East and Part of the Edmonds West Quadrangles,
t Washington, by James P. Minard (U.S.G.S., 1983) was referenced for the geologic conditions at the site.
The site is mapped as Recessional Outwash (Qvr). The unit is described as a poorly- to moderately -sorted
mixture of sand and gravel with minor amounts of silt and clay. Our explorations generally encountered
sand with silt and gravel consistent with the description of Recessional Outwash.
Explorations: The subsurface conditions within the site were explored on March 1, 2004 by excavating
FI
four test pits to depths ranging from 8.0 to 9.5 feet below the existing surface using a backhoe. The
approximate locations of our explorations are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. A geologist from
Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. (NGA) was present during the explorations, examined the soils and
geologic conditions encountered, obtained samples of the soil, and maintained logs of the test pits.
The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System,
presented as Figure 4. The logs of the test pits are attached. to this report and are presented as Figure 5.
We present a brief summary of the subsurface conditions in the following paragraphs. For a detailed
description of the subsurface conditions, the test pit logs should be reviewed.
We encountered approximately 2.0 feet of medium dense, grayish -brown, silty sand with gravel in the
upper portion of Test Pits I and 4. This soil was interpreted as fill. Below the fill in Test Pit 1, we
encountered dense, brownish -gray, fine. to medium sand with silt and trace gravel. This material was
interpreted to be outwash. Below the fill in Test Pit 4, we encountered approximately 0.6 feet of buried
topsoil underlain by material interpreted to be outwash sand.
At the surface of Test Pits 2 and 3, we encountered approximately 1.3 to 3.0 feet of topsoil. The topsoil
was underlain by �fense, orangish-brown, fine to medium sand with silt and trace gravel. This material
was interpreted as outwash. All of the test pits were terminated in the outwash material.
Hydrologic Conditions
Groundwater was not encountered in the test pits. However, perched water could occur when surface
water infiltrates through less dense, more permeable soils and accumulates on top of the underlying, less
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Ruation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 3767BO4
March 24, 2004
Page 4
permeable soils. The more permeable soils consist of the fill and the sand with silt. Less permeable soils
would consist of the siltier soil layers within the outwash. Perched water does not represent a regional
ground water table within the upper soil horizons. Perched water tends to vary spatially and is dependent
Fi 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. If perched water is encountered in planned cuts or
exposed subgrade, it should be controlled with open ditches or sump pumps. This is further discussed in
the Drainage subsection of this report.
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 (UBC). This corresponds to a Seismic Zone Factor, Z, of 0.3. Since medium dense to
dense outwash soils were encountered underlying the site, the site conditions best fit the UBC description
for Soil Profile Type Sc.
Hazards associated with seismic activity include liquefaction potential and amplification of ground
motion. Liquefaction is caused by a rise in pore pressures in.a loose, fine sand deposit beneath the
groundwater table. The dense outwash soils interpreted to underlie the site have a low potential for
liquefaction or amplification of ground motion.
Erosion Hazard
The erosion hazard criteria used for determination of affected areas includes soil type, slope gradient,
vegetation cover, and groundwater conditions. The erosion sensitivity is related to vegetative cover and
the specific surface soil types, which are related to the underlying geologic soil units. The Soil Survey,
Snohomish County Area, Washington, by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) was reviewed to
determine the erosion hazard of the on -site soils. The site surface soils were classified using the SCS
classification system as Alderwood-Everett gravelly sand loams, 25 to 70 percent slopes. Alderwood
soils are listed as having a high erosion hazard if the soils are exposed.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
q 0
Geotechnical Engineering E luation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 37671304
March 24, 2004
Page 5
Landslide Hazard/Slope Stability
An evaluation of landslide hazard was performed for the steep slopes at the site. This evaluation includes
our interpretation of the slope stability based on soil type, slope gradient, slope height, groundwater
conditions, and vegetation cover.
The landslide hazard is listed as high by the SCS based on slope steepness, length, shape, and the surficial
soils present. The site slopes are inferred to generally consist of sandy material. Slopes with a gradient of
up to approximately 50 degrees exist in the western side of the property. The height of the steep slopes is
approximately 100 feet. We did not observe signs of deep-seated slope failures, but surficial slumps were
observed on the slope. Accordingly, it is our opinion that there is not a significant potential for deep-
seated slope instability within the development portion of this site. However, steep slopes are naturally
prone to surface sloughing over time. Surface sloughing can occur from weathering conditions and
seasonal surface saturation, especially after large storm events. The potential for these events could be
reduced by proper erosion and drainage control. The direct impact of the sloughing events on the
proposed development should be low if the building setback, site grading, surface water management, and
long-term slope maintenance are established as recommended in this report. It is our understanding the
structure will be setback approximately 35 feet from the top of the steep slope. This setback in distance
should be adequate providing all the recommendations for site development and slope protection found in
this report are incorporated in the design and implemented during construction.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMAMNDATIONS
General
It is our opinion, from a geotechnical standpoint, that the site is generally compatible with the planned
development. Our explorations within the site indicate that the site is generally underlain by sand with
silt and gravel, and areas of shallow fill. The residence is planned in close proximity to the steep slope
within the western portion of the lot. This slope is stable with respect to deep-seated failures, but shallow
surficial failures on the slope are possible.
To protect the structure against potential failures on the slope, we recommend that the western foundation
line be supported on drilled piers. The piers should extend a minimum of 20 feet below existing grade to
provide an effective setback of at least 50 feet between the bottom of the piers and the face of the slope as
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 3767BO4
March 24, 2004
Page 6
indicated by the detail in Figure 6. The piers should consist of a minimum of 16-inch diameter cast -in
place reinforced concrete. Recommendations for design and installation of the piers are presented in the
Drilled Piers subsection of this repprt.
All grading operations and drainage improvements planned as part of this development should be planned
and completed in a matter that enhances the stability of the steep slope, not reduces it. Excavation spoils
should not be stockpiled near the slope or be allowed to encroach on the slope. Also, runoff generated
within the site should be collected and routed into a permanent discharge system and not be allowed to
flow over the slope. Future vegetation management on the slope should be the subject of a specific
evaluation and a plan approved by the city. The slope should be monitored on an on -going basis,
especially during the wet season, for any signs of instability, and corrective actions promptly taken should
any signs of instability be observed. Lawn clipping and any other household trash or debris should not be
cast over the slope.
The surficial soils encountered on this site are considered moisture -sensitive and will disturb easily when
wet. To lessen the potential impacts of construction on the slope and to reduce cost overruns and delays,
we recommend that construction take place during the drier summer months. If construction takes place
during the rainy months, additional expenses and delays should be expected. Additional expenses could
include the need for placing erosion control and temporary drainage measures to protect the slope, -the
need for placing a blanket of rock spalls on exposed subgrades, construction traffic areas, and paved areas
prior to placing structural fill, and the need for importing all-weather material for structural fill.
Slope 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 area and top of slope not be disturbed or modified through
placement of any fii - I or removal of the existing vegetation. No material of any kind should be placed on
the slope or be allowed to reach the slope, and trees should not be cut down or removed from the slope.
Any proposed development within the setback areas, other than light decks or patios, should be the
subject of a specific geotechnical evaluation. Runoff should be collected in permanent catch basins or
yard drains and should be routed into a permanent discharge system. Under no circumstances should
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Itation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 3767BO4
March 24, 2004
Page 7
water be allowed to concentrate or flow over the slopes. We recommend that the tree debris on the slope
be removed.
Erosion Control
The on -site soils can have a high erosion potential, depending on how the site is graded and how 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. Silt fences or straw bales should be erected to prevent muddy
water from flowing over the site slopes or into the existing storm system. Disturbed areas should be
replanted with vegetation at the end of construction. The vegetation should be maintained until
established. Final grading should incorporate appropriate erosion control measures to route stormwater
runoff away from the top of slopes and to appropriate discharge locations.
Structure Setbacks
Uncertainties related to building along the top of steep slopes are typically addressed by the use of
building setbacks. The purpose of the setback is to establish a "buffer zone" between the structure and
the top of the slope so that ample room is allowed for normal slope recession during a reasonable life span
"J of the structure. In a general sense, the greater the setback, the lower the risk of slope failures to impact
the structure. From a geological standpoint, the setback dimension is based on the slope's physical
characteristics, such as slope height, slope gradient, soil type, and groundwater conditions. Other factors
such as historical slope activity, rate of regression, and the type and desired life span of the development
are important considerations as well.
Based upon the conditions described above, it is our opinion that the potential for shallow sloughing -type
failures exist on the steep slopes. This condition is exacerbated where water is present or where the
slopes become locally very steep. Backwasting through sloughing of steep slopes can occur up the slope,
such that a loss of ground could occur. The planned residence will be setback approximately 35 feet from
the top of the slope. To reduce the risk of potential slope failures of affecting the structure, the structure
should be on drilled piers extending at least 20 feet below the existing ground surface. Loose material
should not be stockpiled in any area between the top of the slope and the setback line.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 37671304
March 24, 2004
Page 8
Site Preparation and Grading
Site preparation should consist of stripping any topsoil, undocumented fill, or loose soils to expose
medium dense or better native material in planned slab, foundation and pavement areas. The stripped
material should be hauled off site or stockpiled for later use as landscaping fill. The stripped material
should not be stockpiled in the setback area or be used for structural fills. If the ground surface, after
stripping, should appear to be loose, it should be compacted to a non -yielding condition. Areas observed
to pump or weave during compaction should be reworked to structural fill specifications or over -
excavated and replaced with properly compacted structural fill or rock spalls. If significant surface water
flow is encountered during construction, this flow should be diverted around areas to be developed and
the exposed subgrade maintained in a semi -dry condition.
Slab -on -grade subgrade should be stripped of any fill or loose material and the slab should be supported
on competent native soils or structural fill extending to these soils, if any future settlement or cracking of
the slab can not be tolerated. If some slab settlement and future maintenance can be tolerated, we
recommend that at a minimum two feet of the loose material/fill that may exist in the slab area be over -
excavated and replaced with a blanket of rock spalls. The exposed subgrade should be thoroughly
compacted prior to placement of the rock spall layer. The slab should be additionally reinforced to reduce
settlement -related distress.
Foundation Support
Drilled Piers: We recommend that the western foundation line be supported on 16- to 24-inch reinforced
concrete piers, extending a minimum of 20 feet below existing ground surface. The remainder of the
foundations should be supported on native, competent material or structural fill extending to that material.
An open hole drilling method will likely be feasible based on our field observations, however, if caving
conditions are encountered, pile casing will be required. The holes should be cleaned of any slough or
water prior to pouring concrete. We recommend that the concrete be readily available on site at the time
of drilling. The holes should not be left open for any extended period of time, as sloughing debris and/or
groundwater seepage into the excavations may hamper pier installation.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
is
Geotechnical Engineering Eluation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 3767BO4
March 24, 2004
Page 9
For piers installed successfully as described above, we recommend using, a design axial compression
capacity of 20 and 30 tons for 16- and 24-inch piers, respectively. Lateral resistance on the piers could be
calculated based on an equivalent fluid density of 250 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) applied to two pile
diameters. The existing fill should be neglected for the purpose of calculating the lateral resistance.
Shallow Foundations: For the portion of the building supported on shallow spread footings, these
footings should be placed on native medium dense or better soils, or structural fill extending to these
soils. The foundation subgrade should be prepared as described in the Site Preparation and Grading
subsection. If footings are supported on structural fill, the fill zone should extend outside the edges of the
footings a distance equal to one-half of the depth of the over -excavation below the bottom of the footings.
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 18 and 24 inches should
C D be used for continuous and isolated spread footings, respectively, but footings should also be sized based
on anticipated loads and allowable soil bearing pressure. 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
not more than 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be used for the footing design for footings founded on
_31
the medium dense or better glacial soils or structural fill extending to the native competent material. The
foundation bearing soil should be evaluated by a representative of NGA. 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 one inch total"and 1/2 inch differential between adjacent footings or across a distance of about 30
feet, based on our experience with similar projects.
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
LJ
triangular equivalent fluid pressure distribution. An equivalent fluid density of 250 pcf should be used for
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Efluation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 37671304
March 24, 2004
Page 10
passive resistance design for a level ground surface adjacent to the footing. This level surface should
extend a distance equal to at least three times the footing depth. 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 front of the footing.
We recommend that the upper one -foot of soil be neglected when calculating the passive resistance.
Frictional resistance should be neglected for footings supported on drilled piers.
Structural Fill
General: Fill placed beneath slabs, pavement, or other settlement -sensitive structures 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 suitably prepared as described in the Site Preparation and Grading and Slab -on -Grade
subsections prior to beginning fill placement.
Materials: Structural fill should consist of a good quality, granular soil, free of organics and other
deleterious material, and be well graded to a maximum size of about three inches. All-weather fill should
contain no more than 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 on -site soils as structural fill should generally be feasible, but we
should be retained to evaluate proposed structural fill material prior to construction.
Fill Placement: Following subgrade preparation, placement of structural fill may proceed. All
backfilling should be accomplished in uniform lifts up to eight inches thick. Each lift should be spread
evenly and be thor�ughly compacted prior to placement of subsequent lifts. All structural fill should be
compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its 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
Lai content of the soils to be compacted should be within about two percent of optimum so that a readily
compactable condition exists. It may be necessary to over -excavate and remove wet soils in cases where
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
t"i
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 3767BO4
March 24, 2004
Page I I
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.
Retaining Walls
A retaining wall is planned on the eastern side of the driveway along the water easement. This wall will
retain up to 8 feet of fill planned in this area to create a level pad for garage access. The lateral pressure
acting on subsurface retaining walls is dependent on the nature and density of the soil behind the wall, the
amount of lateral wall movement which can occur as backfill is placed, wall drainage conditions, and the
inclination of the backfill. For walls that are free to yield at the top at least one thousandth of the height
of the wall (active condition), soil pressures will be less than if movement is limited by such factors as
wall stiffness or bracing (at -rest condition). We recommend that walls supporting horizontal backfill and
.not subjected to hydrostatic forces be designed using a triangular earth pressure distribution equivalent to
that exerted by a fluid with a density of 35 pcf for yielding (active condition) walls, and 60 pcf for non -
yielding (at -rest condition) walls.
il...� These recommended lateral earth pressures for a drained backfill are based on the assumption of a
horizontal ground surface behind the wall for a distance of at least the subsurface height of the wall, and
do not account for surcharge loads. Additional lateral earth pressures should be considered for surcharge
loads acting adjacent to subsurface walls and within a distance equal to the subsurface height of the wall.
This would include the effects of surcharges such as traffic loads, floor slab loads, slopes, or other surface
loads. We could consult with you and your structural engineer regarding additional loads on retaining
walls during final design, if needed.
The lateral pressures on walls may be resisted by friction between the foundation and subgrade soil, and
by passive resistance acting on the below -grade portion of the foundation. Recommendations for
frictional and passive resistance to lateral loads are presented in the Foundations subsection of this
report.
All wall backfill should be well compacted as outlined in the Structural Fill subsection of this report.
Care should be taken to prevent the buildup of excess lateral soil pressures, due to over -compaction of the
LJ wall backfill. This can be accomplished by placing wall backfill in eight -inch loose lifts and compacting
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Ruation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
F-7 Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 3767BO4
March 24, 2004
Page 12
it with small, hand -operated compactors within a distance behind the wall equal to at least one-half the
height of the wall. The thickness of the loose lifts should be lessened to accommodate the lower
compactive energy of the hand -operated equipment. The recommended level of compaction should still
be maintained.
Pen-nanent drainage systems should be installed for retaining walls. Recommendations for these systems
are found in the Subsurface Drainage subsection of this report. We recommend that we be retained to
evaluate the proposed wall drain backfill material and drainage systems.
If a reinforced earthwall is desired instead of a concrete retaining wall, this type of wall should be
specifically designed. We are available to provide a specific design for a reinforced earthwall, if
requested.
Slab -on Grade
The slab subgrade should be prepared as discussed in the Site Preparation and Grading subsection. We
recommend that all floor slabs be.underlain by at least six 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. A two-inch layer of damp
sand could be placed over the vapor barrier to aid in curing the concrete.
Site Drainage
Surface Drainage: Final site grades should allow for drainage away from the top of the steep slope and
the structure. We suggest that the finished ground be sloped at a gradient of three -percent minimum for a
distance of at least 10 feet away from slope and the residence. Runoff generated on this site should be
collected and rout�d into a permanent discharge system. Under no circumstances should water be
allowed to flow uncontrolled over the slopes.
Subsurface Drainage: If groundwater is encountered during construction, we recommend that the
contractor slope the bottom of the excavation and collect the water into ditches and small sump pits where
the water can be pum ped out and routed into a permanent storm drain. Chronic water seepage conditions
e)
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 3767BO4
March 24, 2004
Page 13
may be controlled through the use of cut-off or "French" type drains. The need, extent, and actual design
of such systems will depend on prevailing conditions. This can be evaluated at the time of construction.
We recommend the use of footing drains around structures. Footing drains should be installed at least one
foot below planned finished floor elevation. The drains should consist of a minimum four -inch -diameter,
rigid, slotted or perforated, PVC pipe surrounded 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 three -
percent fines), granular material placed along the back of walls. Pea gravel is an acceptable drain
material or drainage composite may also be used instead. The free -draining material should extend up the
wall to one 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
NGA has prepared this report for Mr. Michael Hosterman, and his agents, for use in planning of the
grading operations described above on this site only. The scope of our work does not include services
related to construction safety precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the
contractors' methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described in our report.
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.
We recommend that NGA 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
C,
work differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether or not earthwork activities comply with
contract plans and specifications. We should be contacted a minimum of one week prior to construction
activities and could attend pre -construction meetings, if requested.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
4 Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 3767BO4
March 24, 2004
Page 14
All people who own or occupy homes on hillsides should realize that landslide movements are always a
possibility. The landowner should periodically inspect the slope, especially after a winter storm. If
distress is evident, a geotechnical engineer should be contacted for advice on remedial/preventative
measures. The probability that landsliding will occur is substantially reduced by the proper maintenance
of drainage control measures at the site (the runoff from the roofs should be led to an approved dischar e
9
point). Therefore, the homeowner should take responsibility for performing such maintenance.
Consequently, we recommend that a copy of our report be provided to any future homeowners of the
property if the home is sold.
f -'�
f
d
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 mea ns to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner.
RM
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 3767BO4
March 24, 2004
Page 15
It has been a pleasure to provide service to you on this project. If you have any questions or require
further information, please call.
Sincerely,
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Bala Dodoye-Alali V
Project Geologist
David L. Nelson, PG
President
C M -
rQ1 0
PIRES 0,_Q5 J
Khaled M. Shawish, PE
Principal
BD:KMS:lam
Six Figures Attached
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
4
455
- P DEP I
A,
Project
'SA
Site
179TH PL'
P4
S W
M
I
174TH_
',_.l 75TH ST
U J rf.:'..
FL SW
INSET 00 O"r '1�1ST
690 0 �:� . I jet PL SLI
A ',- --I PL Sid
f ;'4 '2ND
D11 ��21N E" Te 754-0--�'
sw �K2141)
c S w .1
V) 3C PL SU
J L
e3RD
ST SW
200
Q) 184TH ST SW
4YIEW
< 185TH
MY
178TH
7600
181ST Pl-
LO
co INTH LP—LSW
--I
Q P I-
K5TH 1&9TH Sw
M
PL SW PL Sill ��J < 1,
HU7T M Al, 486, 91, --.ST SW
Pk 186TH PL SVJ 187TH 166TH ST SW <
<
187TH ST S14 —J Go
P L SW Q- r— -
ST SW 2000 Thomas Bros. Ma
OP, I L-TH Pt 6 O'�.
Not to Scale
Project Number
37671304 Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL No. Date I Revision By I CK
ASSOCIATES, INC.
1 3/3/04 Original ADJ BAD
GEOTFCHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
17311-13ft A— NE. A-500 Srh.,,lh C—ty (425) 337-160
W�Z-'WA 98072 W-.td..Ch*l- (W9) 784-2756
(425) 48& 1669 1 Fa 481-2510 _W—g-lwh—
'-ft
0
4�
LEGEND
TP-11
Number and Approximate
Location of Test Pit
— , — Property Line
A A' Approximate Location
t t of Cross-section
0 20 40
loon —
Approximate Scale: 1 inch 20 feet
0
Surficial Slumps
Debris
4�_
Sewer
Manhole
10-ft Drain Easement
Approximate Location of Drain
Top of Steep Slope
Lot 8
0
Lot 14
nitary Sewer Line
N
1 O-ft Sanitary Sewer Easement
Ex I isting Drain-,
_�_TP-3
Existing Water Line
-4
Approximate Planned-
Pacirlant-in Pnnf rin+
Reference: Site plan based on an untitled, undated, drawing prepared by Kearsley Homes, Inc.
TP-2
Lot 7
J
.......... .......... .......... ......... ........ ...... ......
Existing Fill Area'
<
Kairez Drive
2n
'ffi
>
0
W
0
z
J
U_
z
U.
(T3
o
z
U
Ow
00
W
0
ll-
W
E
0
1-
0
=
0
W
1<
lz
W
Z
0
W
0
z
j
z
W
W
z
Z
Z.<
u
ID 3:
()r
L
W
11-
2z
0
W
cli
(9
3t
Co
.4-
CO)
>
0
_j
E 04
z IM
t5
cr) LE
a.
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP GROUPNAME
SYMBOL
F. I -,
I
CLEAN
GW
WELL -GRADED, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL
GRAVEL
GRAVEL
GRAVEL
GP
POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL
GRAINED
MORE THAN 50 %
OF COARSE FRACTION
GRAVEL
GM
SILTY GRAVEL
RETAINED ON
SOILS
NO. 4 SIEVE
WITH FINES
GC
CLAYEY GRAVEL
SAND
CLEAN
SW
WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND
1-7
SAND
SP
POORLY GRADED SAND
MORE THAN 50 %
RETAINED ON
MORE THAN 50 %
NO. 200 SIEVE
OF COARSE FRACTION
PASSES NO. 4 SIEVE
SAND
SM
SILTY SAND
WITH FINES
Sc
CLAYEY SAND
FINE-
SILT AND CLAY
ML
SILT
INORGANIC
GRAINED
LIQUID LIMIT
CL
CLAY
LESS THAN 50 %
SOILS
ORGANIC
OL
ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY
SILT AND CLAY
MH
SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT
INORGANIC
MORE THAN 50 %
PASSES
LIQUID LIMIT
CH
CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FLAT CLAY
NO. 200 SIEVE
50 % OR MORE
ORGANIC
OH
ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT
HIGHLY ORGANIC -SOILS
PT
PEAT
NOTES:
1) Field classification i§ based on visual SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS:
examination of soil in general
accordance with ASTM D 2488-93. Dry - Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to
the touch
2) Soil classification using laboratory tests
is based on ASTM D 2488-93. Moist - Damp, but no visible water.
3) Descriptions of soil density or Wet - Visible free water or saturated, C
consistency are based on usually soil is obtained from
interpretation of blowcount data, below water table
visual appearance of soils, and/or
test data. <
N
,Project Number
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
No.
Date
Revision
By
I =
CK 15
k_4
1 37671304
Lot 7 Vista Del Mar
ASSOCIATES, INC.
-_'�NGA
a
','a,
1
3rX04
Odginal
ADJ
BAD
Soil Classification Chart
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
S
Lo
Figure 4
17311-135th A.. NF_ A -SW Smhoftlh C�ty (425) 337-16%
Wood��. WA BOD72 W-.bd..rA.W- (509) 70�2756
0
<
(425)4a6.16691F=4ai-2510
CD
z
Hosterman Residence
LOG OF EXPLORATION
DEPTH(FEET) USC SOIL DESCRIPTION
TEST PIT ONE
0.0-0.7
TOPSOIL WITH ROOTS
0.7-2.2
Sm GRAY, SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST) (fLlLJL
2.2-9.5
SP-SM BROWNISH -GRAY, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH SILT AND TRACE GRAVEL (DENSE,
MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 4.0 AND 9.5 FEET
GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 9.5 FEET ON 3/1/04
TEST PIT TWO
0.0-1.3 TOPSOIL WITH ROOTS
1.3-2.3 SP-SM ORANGISH-BROWN, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH SILT AND TRACE GRAVEL AND
ROOTS (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST)
2.3-8.0 SP-SM BROWNISH -GRAY, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH SILT AND TRACE IRON -OXIDE
STAINING (DENSE, MOIST)
SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AT 8.5 FEET
GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
MODERATE TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED BETWEEN 2.3 AND 5.5 FEET
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 8.0 FEET ON 31/04
TEST PIT THREE
0.0-3.0 TOPSOIL WITH ROOTS AND STUMPS
3.0-9.2 SP-SM ORANGISH-BROWN GRADING INTO BROWNISH -GRAY, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH
SILT AND TRACE GRAVEL AND ROOTS (DENSE, MOIST)
SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED 9.2 FEET
GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
MODERATE TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 9.2 FEET ON 3/1/04
TEST PIT FOUR
0.0-0.6
Sm GRAY, SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST) TLLL
j
0.6-1.2
BURIED TOPSOIL WITH ROOTS
1.2-3.0
SP-SM ORANGISH-BROWN, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH SILT AND GRAVEL (DENSE,
MOIST)
3.0-8.0
SP-SM BROWNISH -GRAY, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH SILT, GRAVEL, AND TRACE IRON -
OXIDE STAINING TO APPROXIMATELY 4.0 FEET (DENSE, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 4.0 AND 8.0 FEET
GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
MODERATE TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED BETWEEN 0.0 AND 7.0 FEET
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 8.0 FEET ON 3/1/04
BD NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
FILE NO 37671304
FIGURE 5
------------
T
;U
CA) 0
-n —4 M
(B* -M 9
--4
CO Z
C) C
M
;U
Cn
r-
0
West
CD
Ei
CD
-4
150
0-
CL
<
0
FD-
(D
a)
COD
CL
�-120
q
a In
z)
90
Z
M
> F
(a M
00
0 Z
0 G) —
> M 60
1 0
M -i
0
r 30
Z
0
M
a —0
0
Approximate Scale: 1 inch = 30 feet (Horizontal and Vertical)
0
;K
Reference: Cross -Section is based on an untitled, undated site plan provided by Robin Kersley.
Hosterman\3767BO4 HostemianFigure 6.dwg
AV
East
150--1 1
120
Me
Ell
El
/4-C7109-9 z
0
City of Edmond.s PERMIT NO: 1071
PERMIT EXPIRES UJ
SIDE SEWER PERMIT
Address of Construction: k -1 goL 1,4A I p_iE Z. �X OE LID #
Property Tax Account Parcel No
Attach copies of all access and utility
Owner and/or(Contra,
Contractor License #:
JgSingle Family
F-1 Multi -Family (No. of Units
Fj Commercial (No. of Units
El Public
N&
Verified and Approved b
Iding Permit #Zoo4 - 0183
Invasion into City *Right -of Way: El Yes R] No,
*RW Construction Permit #
Cross other "Private Property: 9.Yes [:1 No
"Attach legal description and copy of recorded easement.
�..4(S IOJC Owner/C�ntract�r)
Owner'or c'oltractor si ur and acknowfedgemfent statement: Date
By signing for this permit I certify that I have read the City's public handout entitled
ide Sewer Specifications, and shall comply with all City requirements outlined therein.
10
2 CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-4144-5555) BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION 2
19FOR INSPECTION CALL 425-771-0220 extension ryla
24 HOUR NOTICE REOUIRED FOR ALL INSPECTION REQUESTS
............ .......
................
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
. . ....... . .........
.................... . ..... . ..
Permit Fee $ 0 Repair Fee $ Issued By: YA�'h
-2
Trunk Charge $ C) Date Issued: Q zz] D14 -
Assessment Fee $ Receipt No:
.City Permit Surcharge Fee $,5,W Total Fees Paid $ 77 7�,
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: PQA� I -vLujjo r7y&2� V, c#-j6, Date: V5,Z40!!i� initial,
P
Partial Inspection:: Date: Initial:
_�m4rd,
U initial: As -built to Street File: E]
FINAL INSPECTION APPROVED: Date: 101t,711 05
1,� PERMIT MUST BE POSTED, ON JOB SITEt,
,White Copy: File Green Copy: Inspector Buff Copy: Applicant
L;tcmp;bl d1gforms;sspermitj I g4/00
ATE REC ff.--%
'EIV9
4
57
PERMIT EX PIRES
CITY OF EDMONDS
USE PERMIT
ZONE 3
NUMBER
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
Jos
ADD. RESS
SUITE/A PT#
OWNER NAME/NAME
OF BUSINESS
.
PLAT NAME/SUBDIVISION NO.
I
LOT No.
LID NO.
MAILING ADDRESS
'VIS T41 rwL-
LID FEE $
-50�t k�jc Gcx5il
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL ST . REET MAP
TESCP Approved
RW Permit Required
CITY ZIP
TELEPHONE
EXISTING PROPOSED
Street Use Permit Req'd
Inspection Required
1+25
--7 71�
REQUIRED DEDICATION— FT
Sidewalk Required
Underground
wiring
NAME
METER SIZE
LINE SIZE
NO. OF FIXTURES
required
P I RED
3i,\J
J�b f
'314
SkREQU
YE NO 13
t
ADDRESS
REMARKS
Lu
:W0131 M0
OWNER/CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROL/DRAINAGE
�'CITY ZIP
TELEPHO . NE
Z
��6rylvji qeate
74,Z -:5766g
'16 eLA ME
NAME
CBL#
k�2 /2.,s (f)
lid
to lita
0
.
ADDRESS
GINEERING
REVIEWED BY DATE
k,,;� I
CITY ZIP _rTELEPHONE
FIRE REVIEWED BY DATE
0
0
F& _V, DV
�f _q61 _0 14
_e_1 0
; +16
LL
STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE
Y
VARIANCE OR CU,
SHORELINEORADB#
BOND
L—/j— I't
3z
J.,INSPECTION
— . ,
Y REQ kD
ES 0
POSTED
s
4-
0
PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL NO.
$EPA REVIEW
COMPLETE EXEMPT
SIGN AREA
ALLOWED PROPOSED
HEIGHT
ALLOWED PROPOS(D
9 It 4- C) C> 0 Cx:) C) C>
EXP ,
7_��
0 e�> I ,
NEW
RESIDENTIAL
J01
PLUMBING / MECH
10
LOT COVERAGE
ALLOWED
REQUIRED SETBACKS'(FT)
PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT.)
PROPOSED
FRONT SIDE REAR
FRONT L/R SIDE;il
ADDITION
1:1 COMMERCIAL
COMPLIANCE OR
1:1 CHANGE OF USE
'5
0 a5V
�* t . # I -
1<:D, 10
A I SOAR I
10, 10 Ci
z
REMODEL
MULTIFAMILY
SIGN
PARKING
REQ,b PROVIDED
LOT AREA 1
LANNING REVIEWED BY
)l
IL
.
q
G I DING FENCE
REPAIR CYDS
IRO"
X FT)
DEMOLISH TANK OTHER
ARKS
, L2LA rn, 1.14
GARAGE RETAINING WALL FIRE SPRINKLER
CARPORT ROCKERY FIRE ALARM
A 1,)
0
(rYPE OF BUSINESS OR ACTiVn�jixp
9x
CHECKED By
Typt"bF PONISTRUCTION
�4V
V
OCCUPA:
GROUP L)
��34
NUMBER NUMBER CRITICAL
0
OF
STORIES
DWELLING
AREAS
SPECIAL INSP CTIION,
AREA
2
UNITS
NUMBER
REQUIRE D YES
4yr=—;f
LOAD
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE
REMARKS
PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 108/IBC109/ IRC109 FINAL INSPECTION REO'D
z
—
9
New F*fA I Ke� i I\E�A cc
ai/
rhy
VALUA
TION
dimvip A_L_. ay-.r
Ah V
77 3 "r r=
c I on
FEE�
Description,
FEE
Plan Check
-, 0 —
State Surcharge
HEAT SOURCE
GLAZING %
LOT SLOPE
Building Permit
City Surcharge
PLAN CHECK NO:
n'q
YESTED DATE , 1.
/ .
Plumbing
"lip
7j
Base Fee
�j
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZE�S.ONJLY THE WORKWOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO
Mechanic al
I=
BE DONE ON PRIVATE 'PROPERTY, ONLX ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC
3
DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES; ETC.) WILL REQUIRE
SEPARATE PERMISSION.
PERMIT APPLICATION: 160 DAYS
Engr. Review
Z4 7�
IC
IL
PERMIT LIMIT I YEAR - PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN ISO DAYS
SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION
Engr. Inspection
_C2
'APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE, HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESOAS
IN INTEREST, -to
Fire Review
Plan Chk. Deposit
AGREES INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF
EDMONDS WASHINGTON, ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES,r AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND
ALL CLAIMiFOR DAMAGES OFWHATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
Fire Inspection
Receipt #
q
FROM THE ISSUANCE, OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE
DEEMED TO
0
MODIFY, WAIVE OR REDUCEANY REOUIREMENfOF ANY CITY ORDINANCE
Landscapelnsp.
Total Amt. Due
NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAY THE.CITYS ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION,
Recording Fee
Receipt #
I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVEAEAD THIS APPLICATION: THAT THE INFORMATION
GIVEN IS CORRECT, AND THAT I AM THE OWNER, OR THE DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT OF
APPLICATION
APPROVAL
THE OWNER. I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC-
TION; AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED. THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED
CALL
This application is not a permit until signed by the
IN VIOLATION OF THE LAB9KtQDE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO
WORKMEN'S COMPENSAF7WNSU)�NCE AND RCW 18.2-7.
�OR INSPECTION
Building Official or his/her Deputy: and Fees are paid, and
irecelpt Is acknowledged in space provided.
SIGN URq PWNER64 E
DATE SIGNED,
(425)
714LSSIGNATURE DATE
T7, . V //I,
1501 C)jr
771-0220
AtTIENfl ' N
EXT 1333
RELEASED ATE'
7i '7' J,)
ITISUNLAVVFIULTCUSE R CCUPYA BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTILA FINAL
7ADE
I -/
I�SPECTION HAS BEE AND APPROVAL ORA CERTIFICATE OF OCCU-
,
PANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC109/IBC110/iRC110,
OR�GINA.L��LE 'YELLOW. IWSPECTOIR
P
NK GOLD -ASSESSOR
loc. 18 9,�j
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH , EDMONDS. WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: www.dedmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
October 11, 2005
Mr. Steven Conroy
Vista Del Mar Homeowners Association
19303 44h Avenue West
Lynnwood, WA 98036
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
RE: Vista Del Mar, Agreement for Relocation and Ownership of Utility Lines
Dear Mr. Conroy:
The relocation of the water and stormwater utility lines, and conversion of the previously
existing water line to a stormwater line covered by the,subject agreement was completed
on September 30, 2005. Enclosed for your information and files is a copy of the as -built
drawing for the work completed.
Please provide *your written acceptance of the relocated stormwater line. Upon receipt -of
your written acceptance of the relocated stormwater line, We will provide a chattel deed
to quit claim the City's rights and interest in the new/relocated stormwater line to the
Homeowners Association. We will also provide a chattel deed for your execution to quit
claim the Homeowners Association's rights and interest in the previously existing
stormwater line to the City.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to give me a call at 425 7710220.
Sincerely—
VID V, GEBERT, PE
City Engineer
Incorporated August 11, 1890
.0Mz5,—;a;
W
U
.1 - TYPE 1 CATCH BASIN
10' Water
Easement
:,--\ L 7 r
ImIts
2 - 45*8 INCH BENDS
�F M Future
Concrete
TYPE 1 CATCH BASIN f _Ell�m Driveway
RETAINING WALL
cl
L3
Gas
Meter
ALL DIP WATERMAIN FITTINGS MEGA -LUGGED/ W THRUST BLOCKS
WATERMAIN LOCATE WIRE CONNECTED TO� 450BENDS
ALL ABANDONED PIPE PLUGGED OR CAPPED
r
Lot 14
1 'YPE I CATCH BASIN
10' Water
Easement
Limits
EX; 12 INCH CMP STORM
160 ' 8 INCH HDPE WATERMAIN 123'
SLEEVED THROUGH 12 INCH CMP
r----------------
VERTICAL THRUS
T
BLOCK=
VERTICAL THRUST
BLOCK /10'WaLter
Easement—
Llmlts
x
W
WATERMAIN SLEEVED THROUGH 12 INCH CMP AND HDPE QUIT CLAIMED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS BY VISTA DEL MAR HOA
ANNULAR SPACE OF 12 INCH CMP FILLED W/DRY SAND
I - TYPE I CATCH BASIN
7' 12 INCH N-12 STORM COUPLED TO EXISTING
I
_4 CH BEND
5' 8 IN
111-1
1 - 22.5* 8 INCH BEND
Z=
.R(D
0
<Z
L6J
C-4-
CL
(F OEM
E4JA
0,
MEMORANDUM STREET FILE
11602.14hrae7-- I>F—
Date: November 22, Z005
To: Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Cc: Noel Miller, Public Works Director
From: Dave Gebert, City Engineer
Subject: Vista Del Mar Chattel Deeds for Water and Stormwater Utility Lines
Attached for your files is an original of the accepted chattel deed quit claiming the City's rights
and interest in the new/relocated stormwater line (previously water line) in the Vista Del Mar
development to the Homeowners Association. I will send the duplicate original of the chattel
deed to Steve Conroy, Manager of the Vista'Del Mar Homeowners Association.
Also attached for your files is the original of the chattel deed quit claiming the Homeowners
Association's rights and interest in the previously existing stormwater line to the City. I will
prepare a consent agenda memo for the City Council to accept this chattel deed. I will also send
a copy of this chattel deed to Mr. Conroy.
Per Scott Snyder, these documents do not need to be recorded.
City of Edmonds
Development Services Department
Engineering Division
CHATTEL DEED
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds, Washington, the undersigned Grantor, (hereinafter
"City") owns and operates a water and sewer utility; and
WHEREAS, pursuant —to a written agreement with the Vista Del Mar Homeowners'
Association (hereinafter "HOA"), the parties agreed to the transfer of their respective ownership
interest in certain chattels described below; NOW, THEREFORE
In ful.fillment of the City's obligation under the agreement, the City of Edmonds,
Washington, a municipal corporation, does hereby grant and quit claim to the Vista Del Mar
Homeowners' Association all right and ownership interest in a former water line shown on the
attached Exhibit A which is incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth. This
grant is in consideration of the contemporaneous grant by the Homeowners' Association of its
interest in a storm water pipeline, owned by the Homeowners' Association and located within
the same utility easement.
DONE this 146 /A day of A10Xeh4&.*- 2005.
CITY OF EDMONDS
By:
Mayor Oa-ry Haakenson
ATTEST/AUTHENTICAWD:
By: dgm� W. CAsa,,—
Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk
APPROVEDJSFO�
By:
W. Scott Snyder, City At&&ey
VISTA DEL MAR HOMEOWNERS'ASSN
ACCEPTED:
0
Del Mar LLC
(WSS616222.DOC;1/00006.900000/)
- I -
I - TYPE I CATCH BASIN
10' Water
LdSement
Units
mwm -
I - TYPE I CATCH BASIN r�-M:;.
EX 12 INCH CMP SMRM !'!�
L 1 - 171 1
34'
r
m
X VERTICAL
zo
Futur*
corbcret&
Driveway
RETAINM WALL
2
Lot 14
I - TYPE I CATCH BASIN
10' Water
Easemer,7
Gas lid. Limits
10,
--- - - .-.. ..-. - - — — — I
SLEEVED THROUGH 12 INCH CMP 3L --- J
VERTICAL HRUSPX
—tH
BLOCK
UnIts
er
STORMWATER LINE (FORMER WATERLINE) AND CATCH BASINS QUIT CLAIMED TO VISTA DEL MAR HOA BY CITY [IF EDMONDS
I - TYPE I CATCH BASIN
7' 12 INCH N-12 STORM
COUPLED TO E)aSTING
m
CHATTEL DEED ,
WHEREAS, the Vista Del Mar Homeowners' Association (HOA) is a homeowners'
association which owns and manages certain private infrastructure within a development known
as Vista Del Mar, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of a document entitled Agreement for Relocation of
Ownership of Utility Lines, the HOA and the City of Edmonds agreed to transfer their ownership
interest in certain private infrastructure in consideration of the benefits set forth in such
agreement, and
WHEREAS, this chattel deed is granted in fulfillment of the HOA's obligations under the
aforementioned agreement and in consideration of the benefits which it derived, NOW,
THEREFORE
The Vista Del Mar Homeowners' Association by the signature of its authorized
representative below does hereby quit claim and grant to the City of Edmonds, Washington all
right and ownership interest in a utility line structure formerly owned and operated by the HOA
as a storm water pipeline and shown on the attached drawing Exhibit A, incorporated by this
reference as fully as if herein set forth.
DONE this day of
2005.
VISTA DEL MAR
By:
Its:
STATE OF WASHINGTON)
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH)
On this day appeared before me the /wq
of VISTA DEL MAR HOMEOWNERS'ASSOCIATI and stateA that he/she is Lthorized to
execute this document on behalf of said corporation for the uses and purpos—ed herein mentioned.
DATEL]36'\��!
0
TA
NCWARf PU13LIC
Printed Name: L I'VIDA-
"I �X .9
fill, 0 ... ... My Commission expires:
A. —
(WSS616231 MQU00006.9WOM)
I - TYPE I CATCH BASIN
10' Vater
Ecisement
Units N,
Future
f Concrete
Drivevay
12
TYPE 1 CATCH BASIN
RETA114ING WN-L
EX.
'1 1 17' 1 160 ' 8 INCH HDPE WATERMAIN
15 SLEEVED THROUGH 12 INCH Cmr-
r r- 34'
VERTIj&L KJHRUST
CK
z
4
CU Lot 14
YPE I CATCH BASIN
Units
V
BLOCK
LWts
or
12 INCH CNP AND HDPE PIPE (FORMER STORKWATER LINE) QUIT CLAIMED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS BY VISTA DEL MAR HOA
1 - TYPE I CATCH BASIN
7' 12 INCH N-12 STORM
COUPLED TO EXISTING
m
It? C. is 9 13
CITY OF EDMONDS STREET FILEYHAAKENSON
1215TH AVENUE NORTH -EDMONDS, WA98020,- (425) 771-0220 *FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: wmdedmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning* Building* Engineering
November 22, 2005
Mr. Steven Conroy
Vista Del Mar Homeowners Association
19303 44th Avenue West .
Lynnwood, WA 98036
RE: Vista Del Mar, Agreement for Relocation and Ownership of Utility Lines
Dear Mr. Conroy:
The subject agreement provided for the conversion and transfer of ownership of the water
and stormwater utility lines within the easement at 17802 Kairez Drive and 9110 178h
Place SW.
Enclosed for your files is a duplicate original of the chattel deed quit claiming the City's
rights and interest in the new/relocated stormwater line (previously water line) to the
Homeowners Association.
Also enclosed for your files is a copy of the chattel deed quit claiming the Homeowners
Association'.s rights and interest in the previously existing stormwater line to the City.
Thank you for your assistance in resolving this matter to the mutual benefit of all parties.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to give me a call at 425 7710220.
Sincerely'
VID IC GERVRT., PIE
City Engineer
cc: Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Incorporated August 11, 1890
CHATTELDEED
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds, Washington, the undersigned Grantor, (hereinafter
"City") owns and operates a water and sewer utility; and
WHEREAS, pursuant'to a written agreement with the Vista Del Mar Homeowners'
Association (hereinafter "HOA"), the parties agreed to the transfer of their respective ownership
interest in certain chattels described below; NOW, THEREFORE
In fulfillment of the City's obligation under the agreement, the City of Edmonds,
Washington, a municipal corporation, does hereby grant and quit claim to the Vista Del Mar
Homeowners' Association all right and ownership interest in a former water line shown on the
attached Exhibit A which is incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth. This
grant is in consideration of the contemporaneous grant by the Homeowners' Association of its
interest in a storrn water pipeline, owned by the Homeowners' Association and located within
the same utility easement.
DONEthis 149 dayof 2005.
CITY OF-EDMONDS VISTA DEL MAR HOMEOWNERSASSN
ACCEPTED -
By: By:
M��or Vry f4aa.kenson h oy
t&age;Pis'ta Del Mar LLC
ATTES /AVTHENTICATE�:
BY: w. L",� t
'*,andra S_ Chase, City Clerk
APPROVE1 FO
By: 5;§
W. Scott Snyder, City AAAey
(WSS616222.DOC;1/00006.900000/)
I TYPE I CATCH BASIN
10' Water
LQsenent
TYPE I CATCH BASIN
- X.
171 j
VERTICAL
I TYPE I CATCH BASIN
10' Water
i Easement
Llmits
160 ' 8 INCH HDPE WATERKAIN ,
SLEEVED THROUGH 12 INCH CMP 3"---J VERTICAL THRUST/Z
BLOCK
LWts
er
STORMWATER LINE (FORMER WATERLINE) AND CATCH BASINS QUIT CLAIMED TO VISTA DEL MAR HOA BY CITY OF ED14ONDS
I - TYPE 1 CATCH BASIN
7' 12 INCH N-1.2 STORM
COUPLED TO EMSTING
M
x
bd
CHATTEL DEED �
WHEREAS, the Vista Del Mar Homeowners' Association (HOA) is a homeowners'
association which owns and manages certain private infrastructure within a development known
as Vista Del Mar, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of a document entitled Agreement for Relocation of
Ownership of Utility Lines, the HOA and the City of Edmonds agreed to transfer their ownership
interest in certain private infrastructure in consideration of the benefits set forth in such
agreement, and
WHEREAS, this chattel deed is granted in fulfillment of the HOA's obligations under the
aforementioned agreement and in consideration of the benefits which it derived, NOW,
THEREFORE
The Vista Del Mar Homeowners' Association by the signature of its authorized
representative below does hereby quit claim and grant to the City of Edmonds, Washington all
ri ' ght and ownership interest in a utility line structure formerly owned and operated by the HOA
as a storm water pipeline and shown on the attached drawing Exhibit A, incorporated by this
reference as fully as if herein set forth.
_5;7
DONE this day of 200�.
VIS'.
AS
By:
Its:
STATE OF WASHINGTON)
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH)
On this day appeared before me :Slell)ely the
dZ9-&14
of VISTA DEL MAR HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION and stated that he/she is L-thorized to
execute this document on behalf of said corporation for the uses and purpos'ed herein mentioned.
DAJ
DATEle
1 5 NMAR* PUBLIC
%T4*.
Ro S-5
Printed Name: IL /V
My Commission expires:
(WSS616231.DOC;1/00006.900000/)
- I -
I TYPE I CATCH BASIN
10' WQter
E.asemeAt
Limits
Future
con�eze
Driveway
I - TYPE I CATCH BASIN
RETANONG WALL
EX
CD
U
I - TYPE I CATCH BASIN x
7' 12 INCH N-12 S
TOM
COUPLED TO EnsTING
bd
171 160 ' 8 INCH HDPE WA ERMAIN
SLEEVED THR13UGH 12 INCH CMP
34'
V
BLOCK
VERTI&KIHRPST loh
IR' Wate,
10' W t
.c.
Tasemen 1�
Limits 'A.
Lot 14
�YPE 1 CATCH BASIN
i 10' Water
Easement
Uml-ts
12 INCH CMP AND HDPE PIPE (FORMER STORNWATER LINE) QUIT CLAIMED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS BY VISTA DEL MAR HOA
ME
fit..RETURN NAME & ADDRESS
I-) 000L itaiv e -3 Or
City of Edmonds
..City Clerk's. Office.
121 5th Avenue N. CONFORMED COPY
Edmonds, WA 68020 200509211492 .6 PGS
09-21-2005, 04:'%32pM $37.00
NGTON
SNOHOMISH COUNTY� WASHI
-Please,print neatiy.or.type information
QOcument Title(s)
4V.
Reference. N:urnbe.r(s) of related documents:
Additional Reference Ws on page
Grantof(s) (Last, First, and Middle Initial)
ryl 0 ^lp:!5>
Additional Gra
Ptors. on page
Grahtee(S) (Last, First, and Middle Initial)
K'"r"ha-e-1 P.1'-H0G+&-1e�Md-&J. CLND� bllm tve,
Additional Grantees on page
Legal. Description (abbreviated form: i.e. lot, block, plat or section, towns ip range,
hi
cluarter/qVarter)
L
Al W Vi.��-6 -20- maz-B I k 6bo
�'D
Complete legal on
page
Assessor'.s Property Tax Pa'rcel/Account* Number
�;t 0000700
Ad.ditional parcel Ws on page.
The Auditor/Recorder will. rely..on the information provided on this ..form-. The
resporisibility for the accuracy,of the indexing information is t4-
at of the document
m
preparer.
AUTHORIZATION TO USE PUBLIC EASEMENT
FOR CONCRETE DRIVEWAY AT 17802 KAIREZ DRIVE
TAX PARCEL: 00914200000700
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds (City) owns and operates water and sewer utilities, and
WHEREAS, Michael P. Hosterman and Lynne Hosterman (Property Owners) are the owners of
certain property located at 17802 Kairez Drive, Edmonds, Washington, and
WHEREAS, the City owns and operates a water line within an easement across the property at
17802 Kairez Drive as shown on Exhibit A, and
WHEREAS, the City has established certain public works policies and requirements regarding
public utility improvements construction, ownership, maintenance., and repair; and
WHEREAS, the City has established certain policies and requirements regarding private
improVerhents within public utility easements, including that private driveway surfaces. within public
utility easements shall be constructed of asphalt, and
. . WHEREAS, these policies also include that, when City utility work disturbs or damages portions
of private driveways within a City easement, repairs to the driveways will generally be made using
asphalt material, and
WHEREAS, these City policies and requirements also include that permission must be granted to
a private property owner to construct a concrete driveway over a City easement, and that the private
property owner shall be responsible for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of the portion of the
driveway within the easement area, and
WHEREAS, the Property Owners desire to construct a concrete driveway within the public
easement as shown.on Exhibit A, and
WHEREAS, the Property Owners agree to be responsible for the maintenance, repair, and
replacement of the portion of the concrete driveway located in the easement, and to do so at their own
expense. and that of their successors in title in perpetuity, NOW, THEREFORE
The City of Edmonds, Washington, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City") and Michael P.
Hosten-nan and Lynne Hosterman (hereinafter "Property Owners") have entered into this agreement in
consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived and the promises contained herein.
I . Statement of Purpose: The purpose of this agreement is to grant approval for the Property
Owners to construct a concrete driveway surface within the public utility easement across the property at
17802 Kairez Drive as shown on Exhibit A, and to delineate the Property Owners' responsibilities for the
maintenance, repair and replacement of said driv eway surface.
Undertakings of City.
2.1 Authorization to Utilize Public Easement. In. consideration of the Property
Owners' promise to maintain, repair and replace those portions of the concrete driveway located in the
public easement, made on behalf of themselves as well as all successors in interest to the Property, the
City authorizes the utilization of the public easement to maintain said concrete driveway within the.City
easement shown on Exhibit A in accordance with established City standards and the terms and conditions
of this Agreement.
2.2 Whenever possible, if City utilities work within the easement requires removal of
or damage to the concrete driveway, advance notification will be given to the, Property Owners to remove
those portions of the concrete driveway located within the easement area that interfere with the utility
work, so that the Property Owners can remove those portions of the concrete driveway from within the
easement area that interfere with the City utility work. If the portions of the concrete surface *that
interfere with the utility work are not timely removed by the Property Owners, they shall be removed by
.the City at the expense of the Property Owners.
2.3 Nothing herein shall be i ' nterpreted to limit the City's authority as a public utility
to establish standards for service, to charge appropriate fees and costs and, in its sole discretion, to order
maintenance or removal of the concrete driveway in the event that said concrete driveway negatively
impacts or damages the City's easement and underlying utility systems or violates any condition of
service adopted by the City.
Undertakings of Propegy Owners.
3.1 On behalf of themselves, their successors and assigns, the Property Owners
promise to maintain, repair, remove and/or replace the co ' ncrete driveway located in the easement at their
sole expense to the standards established by the City in its capacity as a public utility and under its police
.power regulation. All such maintenance, repair, removal an d/or replacement shall be conducted solely at
,the Property Owners' expense.
3.2 The Property Owners, on behalf of themselves and their successors and assigns,
acknowledge that the City had no obligation to approve the concrete driveway within the easement for the
sole benefit of the Property Owners, and that the agreements as contained herein, provide sufficient
consideration for the Property Owners and their successors and assigns to maintain, repair, remove and/or
replace said concrete driveway located in the easement at their sole expense in perpetuity.
3.3 In the event that the City water line located within the easement should require
maintenance, repair or replacement by the City, or otherwise require work necessitating removal of
portions or the concrete driveway within the easement, the Property Owners shall, at the request of the
City, promptly remove, repair, reconstruct, and/or replace the concrete driveway at the, Property Owners'
sole expense. Upon receipt of notification from the City that utility work within the easement requires
removal of portions of the concrete driveway from within the easement, the Property Owners will
promptly remove those portions of the concrete driveway from within the easement area that interfere
with the City utility work at their sole expense. If the portions of the concrete surface that interfere with
the utility work are not timely removed by the Property Owners, they shall be removed by the City at the
expense of the Property Owners, and the Property Owners shall reimburse the City for the costs of
removal of the concrete driveway and disposal of materials as well as for any increased construction costs
or conse quential damages incurred by the City due to the Property Owners' delay. In the event that
portions of the concrete driveway must be removed to facilitate utility work by the City within the
easement, the Property Owners shall be solely responsible for replacement of the concrete driveway at
their expense upon completion of the utility work by the City.
3.4 The Property Owners promise to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its
officers, agents and employees from any loss, claim or liability of any kind or nature arising from or out
of its promises contained within this agreement, including any damage that may be caused to the concrete
driveway by the City's operation, maintenance, repair, replacement or other work related to the water line
within -the easement. This promise to hold harmless and indemnify includes defense by counsel of the
City's choosing, the payment of reasonable attorney's fees and court costs, Nothing herein,'however,
shall. be interpreted to require the Property Owners to indemnify the City from the negligence or
,intentional tortious act of its employees, officers, or agents.
. 4. Touch and Concern the Land; Subject Prope]:ty. This agreement touches and concerns
the subject Property herein below described, and shall run with said property binding all future property
owners, as well as their successors, mortgagees and assigns, and any other party acquiring an interest in
-the subject Property. The Subject Property is described as follows:
Section 18 Township 27 Range 04 Quarter NW VISTA DEL MAR BLK 000 D-00 — Lot
7 TGW EQ & UND INT IN KAIREZ DR ALSO TGW EQ & UND INT IN TR B
This agreement shall be recorded by the City at the expense of the Property Owners. In
addition, the Property Owners promise to notify 411 offerers, purchasers, or any other party acquiring any
interest whatsoever in the Property of the obligations imposed by this agreement.
1 5. Termination of Agreement. In addition to any other remedy provided for by law, the City
reserves the right to terminate this agreement in the, event that the ' concrete driveway negatively impacts
or damages the City's easement and underlying utility systems or violates any condition of service
adopted by the City, at its sole discretion, as may be necessary to prevent damage to the City's water
utility system, or any other public facility which may be impacted by the Property Owners' failure to
properly use the utility easement.
6. Entire Ajueement. This is the entire agreement between the parties. Any prior
understanding or representation, written or oral, made by any party, shall be deemed merged with its
provisions. This agreement may not be amended except in writing in a document filed of record with the
auditor of Snohomish County, Washington.
DONE this day of 2005.
CITY OF EDMONDS
By:
Maydr Gapakenson
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
25/. L
"Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE ��Y ��Y:
OQ
W. Scott Snyder
PROPERTY OWNE
Michael P. Hosterman
qLe�ost�ennan
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF&k
-On t I his day, personally appeared before me V1 461�%)�md �declared that
he/sh t e signed this instrument as his/he4Ee
purpoOseserein mentioned. )i free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this day ofjg6!!� �,5.
7 CONSTANCE M. CURTIS
RT
0
N0TA:RY PUBLIC
T 0 NOW�Zj
STAT:EOF WASHI:NGTON a4
COMMISSION EXPIRES] Print Name 't4 /
-W-W414 � w .0 My Commission expires: 6 /0'/
EXHIBIT A
— — — — — — — — — —
N990i
L ---55.90--= 7.1
CO) �-) R=20.0
LOT 13 6 0 L=31.4
20167 �%q 0 0 11
A, 6 321do
OCr E C)
: ::� 1 12.0
N89'5
9*26*E S C,
N 96.1 :1 1111 -26-
148.00
. I
LOT 14 02
N
14*483 S
OfWt
cb/
�Y, V, f',l . 44
0 50� r
,Z., F, cm, . � �i w I ,
4(Z� 19 4.
.9�
iPs 19.
43.1 138.
0j
0r) (D N9900'
-i C>
0 Ln
ro
4�'
L
.41
ts./ 15016
SF
17 go 2
0,
4k
>
57,
72., 1-9
6 * q.; i� I I
V)
0
4CI
C�j LOT 8
4, L;
o. 14272 SF OD I I
0
co
CM
rn
41 5
s;;,
20.0
SOTO 'I 4"E
.0
, /, 615�
p
LOT
fd 47061 ..SF
Af T ACT 'B"
14L R 2 0 1
1, COMMON'
4r L 3 1
qWNERNSHIP
A., 1.42
0010cr
WITH LOTS
to 5. 6. 7. a
N ca 6 ID
m tq. P A D LOT 9.
ISX
G UALLY
--CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: wwwxi.edmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
mom.., Planning - Building - Engineering
C. 1 o",
November 22, 2005
Mr. Steven Conroy
Vista Del Mar Homeowners Association
1930344 1h Avenue West
Lynnwood, WA 98036
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
RE: Vista Del Mar, Agreement for Relocation and Ownership of Utility Lines
Dear Mr. Conroy:
The subject agreement provided for the conversion and transfer of ownership of the water
and stormwater utility lines within the easement at 17802 Kairez Drive and 9110 178'h
Place SW.
Enclosed for your files is a duplicate original of the chattel deed quit claiming the City's
rights and interest in the new/relocated stormwater line (previously water line) to the
Homeowners Association.
Also enclosed for your files is a copy of the chattel deed quit claiming the Homeowners
Association's rights and interest in the previously existing stormwater line to the City.
Thank you for your assistance in resolving this matter to the mutual benefit of all parties.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to give me a call at 425 7710220.
Sincerely,
AVID K GEBERT., IPE
City Engineer
cc: Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Incorporated August 11, 1890
1;ister Citv - Hp.kinan. Janan
4
CHATTELDEED
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds, Washington, the undersigned Grantor, (hereinafter
"City") owns and operates a water and sewer utility; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to a written agreement with the Vista Del Mar Homeowners'
Association (hereinafter "HOA"), the parties agreed to the transfer of their respective ownership
interest in certain chattels described below; NOW, THEREFORE
In fulfillment of the City's obligation under the agreement, the City of Edmonds,
Washington, a municipal corporation, does hereby grant and quit claim to the Vista Del Mar
Homeowners' Association all right and ownership interest in a former water line shown on the
attached Exhibit A which is incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth. This
grant is in consideration of the contemporaneous grant by the Homeowners' Association of its
interest in a storm water pipeline, owned by the Homeowners' Association and located within
the same utility easement.
DONE this 146 41 day of lvan��&k, 2005.
CITY OF EDMONDS VISTA DEL MAR HOMEOWNERS'ASSN
ACCEPTED:
By: By:
M;&r Vry 11aakenson h oy
oy
4age5ista rDel�Mar LLIC
- I -
ATTEST/AVTHENTICATEQ:
By: Add� a/.
gandra S. Chase, City Clerk
APPROVEIW FO
By: — 5;§
W. Scott Snyder, City Attl4ey
(WSS616222.D0Q1/00006.900000/)
I TYPE I CATCH BASIN
10' Water
Lasement
Units I
TYPE I CATCH BASIN
.-X. LE CMP
17'
34'
VERTICAL
ELM
N. —7 4—
I TYPE 1 CATCH BASIN
10' Water
i Easement
1� Limits 7
160 ' 8 INCH HDPE WATERMAIN
SLEEVED THROUGH 12 INCH CMP 3L--J VERTICAL THRUSTX
BLOCK
/101 Water
Lasement
Units
STORMWATER LINE (FORMER WATERLINE) AND CATCH BASINS QUIT CLAIMED TO VISTA BEL MAR HOA BY CITY OF EDMONDS
I - TYPE I CATCH BASIN
7' 12 INCH N-12 STORM
COUPLED TO EXISTING
M
'i
CHATTEL DEED
WHEREAS, the Vista Del Mar Homeowners' Association (HOA) is a homeowners'
association which owns and manages certain private infrastructure within a development known
as Vista Del Mar, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of a document entitled Agreement for Relocation of
Ownership of Utility Lines, the HOA and the City of Edmonds agreed to transfer their ownership
interest in certain private infrastructure in consideration of the benefits set forth in such
agreement, and
WHEREAS, this chattel deed is granted in fulfillment of the HOA's obligations under the
aforementioned agreement and in consideration of the benefits which it derived, NOW,
THEREFORE
The Vista Del Mar Homeowners' Association by the signature of its authorized
representative below does hereby quit claim and grant to the City of Edmonds, Washington all
right and ownership interest in a utility line structure formerly owned and operated by the HOA
as a storm water pipeline and shown on the attached drawing Exhibit A, incorporated by this
reference as fully as if herein set forth.
DONE this -�� day of 2005.
VIS1.
AS
By:
Its:
STATE OF WASHINGTON)
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH)
On this day appeared before me :5 le-z)l) if /V /- - eLY4�0 , the &14 g&A-
of VISTA DEL MAR HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATI and stated that he/she is Lthorized to
execute this document on behalf of said corporation for the uses and purpos—ed herein mentioned.
tWTA)v
rn
PUBLIC
NCWAR
POSLIG
Printed Name: DA-
..'7 /0,
My Commission expires:
16
(WSS616231.DOC;1/00006.900000/)
WE
10' Water I - TYPE 1 CATCH BASIN
Easement
LIMIts
EBWM
I - TYPE I CATCH BASIN f—=.
EX.
CD
CA
Future
conu—et�
RETAIN114G WALL
r
x 1 171 160 ' 8 INCH HDPE WATERMAIN
SLEEVED THROUGH 12 INCH CMP
34'—
[—VERTICAL THRUST
BLOCK
Lot 14
>i
La
I CATCH BASIN
10' Water
Easement
Llmlts
VER C
BLOCK
Llml-ts
I - TYPE I CATCH BASIN
x
' 'NCl
71 12 INCH N-12 STORM
C �LED
COUPLED TO EXISTING
td
47�
1>
er
12 INCH CMP AND HDPE PIPE (FORMER STORMWATER LINE� QUIT CLAIMED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS BY VISTA DEL MAR HOA
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 22, 2005
To: Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Cc: Noel Miller, Public Works Director
From: Dave Gebert, City Engineer
4�1
Subject: Vista Del Mar Chattel Deeds for Water and Stormwater Utility Lines
Attached for your files is an original of the accepted chattel deed quit claiming the City's rights
and interest in the new/relocated stormwater line (previously water line) in the Vista Del Mar
development to the Homeowners Association. I will send the duplicate original of the chattel
deed to Steve Conroy, Manager of the Vista Del Mar Homeowners Association.
Also attached for your files is the original of the chattel deed quit claiming the Homeowners
Association's rights and interest in the previously existing stormwater line to the City. I will
prepare a consent agenda memo for the City Council to accept this chattel deed. I will also send
a copy of this chattel deed to Mr. Conroy.
Per Scott Snyder, these documents do not need to be recorded.
City of Edmonds
Development Services Department
Engineering Division
CHATTEL DEED
AIHEREAS, the City of Edmonds, Washington, the undersigned Grantor, (hereinafter
"City") owns and operates a water and sewer utility; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to a written agreement with the Vista Del Mar Homeowners'
Association (hereinafter "HOA"), the parties agreed to the transfer of their respective ownership
interest in certain chattels described below; NOW, THEREFORE
In fulfillment of the City's obligation under the agreement, the City of Edmonds,
Washington, a municipal corporation, does hereby grant and quit claim to the Vista Del Mar
Homeowners' Association all right and ownership interest in a former water line shown on the
attached Exhibit A which is incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth. This
grant is in consideration of the contemporaneous grant by the Homeowners' Association of its
interest in a storm water pipeline, owned by the Homeowners' Association and located within
the same utility easement.
DONE this 14 A day of /1/0 2005.
CITY OF EDMONDS VISTA DEL MAR HOMEOWNERS'ASSN
By:
Nfayor Oary Haakenson
ATTEST/AUTHENTICAT&-]?:
By: 1W. c4s4tle-,
Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk
APPROVEV F015
By: - 5W
W. Scott Snyder, City Att'i4ey
ACCEPTED:
0
Del Mar LLC
(WSS616222.DOC;1/00006.900000/)
- I -
I - TYPE I CATCH BASIN
10' Water
Lasement
Limits
Future
concr,-ta
E3wm Driveway
TYPE 1 CATCH BASIN
RETAINM WALL
EX.
171
34'
VERTICAL
BLOC
U
4
A=11, Mp
Ilk
C�s
x
—7 4—
Lot 14
I TYPE I CATCH BASIN
10' Water
Easement
7
Limits
160 ' 8 INCH HDPE WATERMAIN 31
SLEEVED THROUGH 12 INCH CMP
VERTICAL THRUS
I lo' Water
/ . L�em e n
BLOCK
0' Water
Limits
STORMWATER LINE (FORMER WATERLINE) AND CATCH BASINS QUIT CLAIMED TO VISTA BEL MAR HOA BY CITY [IF EDMONDS
I - TYPE 1 CATCH BASIN
7' 12 INCH N�12 STORM
COUPLED TO EXISTING
M
x
bd
1>
CHATTEL DEED ,
WHEREAS, the Vista Del Mar Homeowners' Association (HOA) is a homeowners'
association which owns and manages certain private infrastructure within a development known
as Vista Del Mar, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of a document entitled Agreement for Relocation of
Ownership of Utility Lines, the HOA and the City of Edmonds agreed to transfer their ownership
interest in certain private infrastructure in consideration of the benefits set forth in such
agreement, and
WHEREAS, this chattel deed is granted in fulfillment of the HOA's obligations under the
aforementioned agreement and in consideration of the benefits which it derived, NOW,
THEREFORE
The Vista Del Mar Homeowners' Association by the signature of its authorized
representative below does hereby quit claim and grant to the City of Edmonds, Washington all
right and ownership interest in a utility line structure formerly owned and operated by the HOA
as a storm water pipeline and shown on the attached drawing Exhibit A, incorporated by this
reference as fully as if herein set forth.
DONE this —,o< dayof.4'
�1' 2005.
VISTA DEL MAR
ASSOCIATION!ir
By:
Its:
STATE OF WASHINGTON)
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH)
On this day appeared before me :5L40,6eAt geP-
Y, th(
of VISTA DEL MAR HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION and stated that he/she is authorized to
execute this document on behalf of said corporation for the uses and purposed herein mentioned.
DATEW \Y�.
:'0
/w/&
CD N PUBLIC
A OBLIC,
-.0 .0- Printed Name: L11V,,QA �j-.
0 " ......... C> My Commission expires:
P tv
f WSS61623 LDOC; 1 /00006.900000/)
I — TYPE I CATCH BASIN
10' Water
Easement
ater
m en
Llmlts
Futu,c
camcm t�
EEP-'14 D'I.evay
1 TYPE 1 CATCH BASIN
7R,m RErAMM V4LL
EX.
M
1�
C2
(A
17' 8 INCH HDPE WATERMAIN
SLEEVED THROUGH 12 INCH CMP
r-- 3 4' -- I
wi 1 160
w I
VERTICAL THRUST
BLOCK
Lot 14
1 — TYPE I CATCH BASIN
Llmlts
VERTICA R�US/
10
BLOCK
110, W. ter
0'
Llmlts
12 INCH CMP AND HDPE PIPE (FORMER STORMWATER LINE) QUIT CLAIMED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS BY VISTA DEL MAR HOA
I — TYPE I CATCH BASIN
7' 12 INCH N-12 STORM
COUPLED TO EXISTING
M
x
bd
1>
:k
Item #:
Originator: Engineering Division For Action: X For Information:
Subject:
Agenda Time:
Agenda Date:
COUNCIL ACCEPTANCE OF CHATTEL DEED QUIT CLAIMING TO THE CITY
OF EDMONDS OWNERSHIP OF A STORMWATER LINE BY THE VISTA DEL
MAR HOMEOWNERS'ASSOCIATION
Exhibits Attached:
1. ChattelDeed
2.
3.
Consent
December 6, 2005
Clearances: Department/initials
Admin Svcs/Finance
City Attorney_
City Clerk
Court
Personnel
Fire
Police
DvIpmnt Svcs
Community Svcs,
Engineering
Parks & Rec-'
Planning
Public Works
Treatment Plant
City Council
Mayor
Reviewed by Council Finance
Committee: Community Services_
Public Safety
Approved for Consent Agenda:
Recommend Review by Full Council.
Expenditure Amount Appropriation
Required: $ NA Budgeted: $ NA Required: $ NA
Funding Source: NA
Previous Council Action: On September 6, 2005, Council authorized the Mayor to sign an
Agreement for Relocation and Ownership of Utility Lines with the Vista Del Mar Homeowners'
Association.
Narrative: During the constru ' ction of the site utilities for the Vista Del Mar subdivision, a water
main and a storm water line were constructed by the developer within a utility easement along
the edge of one of the lots of the subdivision. Upon completion of construction, the water main
was dedicated to the City as part of the City's water utility. The storm water line remained a
part of the private drainage system, owned by the Vista Del Mar Homeowners' Association.
During construction of the private residence on the lot over which the utility easement runs, it
was discovered that, due to site constraints, the City water main, which was constructed near
the edge of the utility easement, was located within inches of the foundation for the private
residence. The private storm water line was located on the opposite side of the easement,
away from the private residence. It was determined to be in the best interest of the City and the
private property owner to trade and transfer ownership and use of the water pipe and the storm
drain pipe in order for the water main to be located as far as reasonably possible from the
foundation of the private residence and minimize the risk in the event of a future failure of the
water main. By so doing, the existing stormwater pipe would be used as a casing for
installation of a new City water line, and the existing water line would be converted to a
stormwater line.
On September 6, 2005, Council authorized the Mayor to sign an Agreement for Relocation and
Ownership of Utility Lines implementing this transfer of ownership of the water pipe and storm
water pipe between the City and the homeowners' association. Included in the agreement is a
provision that, upon completion of the construction to relocate the water line and stormwater
line, ownership of these utility lines would be transferred by chattel deed.
The construction to relocate the water and stormwater lines has been completed. Exhibit 1 is
the chattel deed quit claiming ownership of the previous stormwatee line from the Vista Del Mar
Homeowners' Association to the City for use as a casing for the relocated City water line.
Recommended Action: Council accept the chattel deed (Exhibit 1) from the Vista Del Mar,
Homeowners' Association.
Council Action:
i
CHATTEL DEED
WHEREAS, the Vista Del Mar Homeowners' Association (HOA) is a homeowners'
association which owns and manages certain private infrastructure within a development known
as Vista Del Mar, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of a document entitled Agreement for Relocation of
Ownership of Utility Lines, the HOA and the City of Edmonds agreed to transfer their ownership
interest in certain private infrastructure 'in consideration of the benefits set forth in such
agreement, and
WHEREAS, this chattel deed is granted in fulfillment of the HOA's obligations under the
aforementioned agreement and in , consideration of the benefits which it derived, NOW,
THEREFORE
The Vista Del Mar Homeowners' Association by the signature of its authorized
representative below does hereby quit -claim and grant to the City of Edmonds, Washington all
right and ownership interest in a utility line structure fon-nerly owned and operated by the HOA
as a storm water pipeline and shown on the attached drawing Exhibit A, incorporated by this
reference as fully as if herein set forth.
DONE this -�� day of 2005.
VISTA DEL MAR HO
ASSOCIATJOhls��,
By:
Its:
STATE OF WASHINGTON)
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH)
On this day appeared before me 5/�Co/)jf/v /-- 6�1yeql the 177,4 g�fp—
of VISTA DEL MAR HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION and stated that he/she is authorized to
execute this document on behalf of said corporation for the uses and purpo�e—d herein mentioned.
,%%N%
A %
,to - -.1
DATEV
:(0 it�OT/l
4M.—MP U)
N(IWAR*'PUBLIC
A UBLIC I
PrintedName: Z-1A1'.1QA �T.
.0
4* -9-07 .,'A,
My Commission expires:
0
WAS
(WSS61623 LDOC;] /00006.900000/)
- I -
EXHIBIT I
10' Water 1 TYPE I CATCH BASIN / A-j
asement
Limits
IF
I TYPE I CATCH BASIN
1 8 INCH DIP STORM
EX. 12 W;H CM-P STURM
160 ' 8 INCH HDPE WATERMAIN
171 SLEEVED THROUGH 12 INCH CMP
34
VERTIC
& THRUST
LOCW
-74
L-it 14
A
I - TYPE I CATCH BASIN
Limits
V RTC T;jP
BLOCK
Limits
12 INCH CMP AND HDPE PIPE (FORMER STORMWATER LINE) QUIT CLAIMED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS BY VISTA DEL MAR HOA
I - TYPE I CATCH BASIN
7' 2 INCH N-12 ST13RM
COUPLED TO EXISTING
71\
M
V VFLJ
PGS ILE
'1'0'1'25"1R00F'10:48am 49.00
SNOHOMISH COUNTY, W SHINGTON
After recording return to:
John P. Winbauer
Ladirop, Winbauer, Harrel & Slothower L.L.P.
PO Box 1088
Ellensburg, WA 98926
DOCUMENT TITLE: EASEMEENT AGREEMENT
NO EXCISE TAX
REQUIRED -
OCT 2 � 2007
808 DANTINI, Snohon�sh County IjeaSuie!
8j----jj0B L)ANTINI
GRANTORS: DP Miller Homes, LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company -
GRANTEES: West Bank Properties, LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company;
DP Miller Homes, LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company;
James R. Wegner and Marilyn Wegner, husband and wife; Frontier Bank
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A tract of land for ingress egress purposes which lies within the plat of Vista
Del Mar, recorded under Auditor's File No. 20010195002, in the NW 'A
NW '/4, Sec. 18 and SW 1/4 SW 'A Sec. 7 all in Twn 27 N, R 4 E, W.M..
ASSESSOR'S TAX PARCEL NO.: 009140-000-003-00; 009140-000-004-00; 009140-000-005-00 &
009140-000-006-00
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS EASEMENT AGREEMENT (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreemenf') is made this ;Z10.
day of :J�Ljn q- -� 2007, by and between James R. Wegner and Marilyn E. Wegner, husband
and wife; DP Miller Homes, LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company; West Bank Properties, a
Washington Limited Liability Company; and Frontier Bank of Edmonds.
WHEREAS, James R. Wegner and Marilyn E. Wegner, husband and wife, own fee title to the real
property located in Snohomish County, Washington legally described as follows ("Lot 6"):
Lot 6, Windsor Estates Division 2, as per plat recorded under Recording No. 200010185006,
records of Snohomish County Auditor.
Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington.
Easement Agreement
'IN
WHEREAS, DP Wier Homes, LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company, owns fee title to the
real property located.in Snohomish County, Washington legally described as follows ("Lot 4")
Lot 4 and the South 1.46 feet of Lot 5, Windsor Estates Division 2, according to the plat
thereof recorded under Snohomish County Auditor's File Number 200010185006, records of
Snohomish County, Washington;
(pursuant to boundary line adjustment recorded under Auditor's File Number
200206260136, records of Snohomish County, Washington).
Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington.
WHEREAS, DP Miller Homes, LLC owns fee title to the real property located in Snohomish County
legally described as follows ("Lot 5"):
Lot 5, Windsor Estates Division 2, according to the Plat thereof recorded under Snohomish
County Auditor's File No. 200010185006, records of Snohomish County, Washington.
EXCEPT the South 1.46 feet thereof.
Also known as Lot 5, of Snohomish County Boundary Line Adjustment 02-105134,
recorded under Auditor's File No. 2002062601363.
Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington.
WHEREAS, West Bank Properties, LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company, owns fee title
to the real property located in Snohomish County legally described as follows ("Lot Y):
Lot 3, Windsor Estates Division No. 2, according to the plat thereof recorded under
Snohomish County Auditor's File Number 200010185006, records of Snohomish County,
Washington.
Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington.
WHEREAS, Frontier Bank of Edmonds, Washington has an interest in Lots 4 and 5 legally described
hereinabove; and
WHEREAS, DP Miller Homes, LLC is the owner of the tract of land upon which the parties hereto
wish to establish an easement as further described herein; and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to create certain easements as set forth herein and to establish the
property benefited bi the Easements, burdened by the Easements, and establish terms and conditions for the
use and maintenance of the Easements.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits contained and derived hereunder, the parties,
for and on behalf of themselves and their respective successors in interest and assigns, does hereby grant,
declare, convey and establish the following easements and further declares that all of the Property shall be
Easement Agreement
held, sold and conveyed together with and subject to the following restrictions, covenants, conditions,
reservations, easements, assessments and lien rights, all of which are for the purpose of enhancing and
protecting the value, desirability, and attractiveness of the Property.
1. Easements.
1. 1. Easement. A non-exclusive easement is hereby created and is described as follows: ,
A tract of land for ingress egress purposes which lies within the plat of Vista Del Mar,
recorded under Auditor's File No. 20010195002, records of Snohomish County, State of
Washington, in the Northwest 1/4of the Northwest %4of Section 18 and the Southwest 1/4 of
the Southwest Y4of Section 7 all in Township 27 North, Range 4 East, W.M.; described as
follows:
Beginning at the Southwest comer of Lot 6, of said Plat of Vista Del Mar; thence South
27'10'08" West, 26-34 feet; thence North 62049'52" West, 20.00 feet; thence North
270 10'08" East, 18.53 feet; thence North 15029'11 " West 114.60 feet; thence North
59054'08" East, 20.67 feet; thence South 15029'11 " East, 127.62 feet to the point of
beginning.
Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington.
1. 1. 1. Use:
1. 1. 1. 1. Private road for ingress and egress, together with, but not limited to, the
right to reconstruct, replace, repair, maintain and use said road; and
1.1.1.2. Underground utilities, including, but not limited to, power, telephone,
cable and natural gas, together with, but not limited to, the right to install, replace, repair, maintain and use
said utilities; and
1.1.1.3. Underground irrigation pipeline(s), together with, but not limited to, the
right to install, replace, repair, maintain and use said pipeline(s).
1.1.2. Lots Burdened: Lot 5.
1. 1. 3. Lots Benefited: Lots 3, 4, 5 and 6.
1. 1.4. Restrictions on use: The area of Easement shall not be used for long term
parking, storage, staging of construction (except construction required for Easement) or any other use that
would unreasonably interfere with its intended purpose.
2. Use and Maintenance. All decisions concerning the use, repair, replacement, maintenance or
reconstruction of the easement improvements, including, but not limited to the roads, utilities and/or pipelines
("Improvements"), shall be agreed upon by a majority vote of the owners of the Lots benefited by the
Easement or Improvement in question. For purposes of this Agreement, each lot shall have one vote. Only
Lots having a beneficial use of the Easement or Improvement in question ("Affected Lots") shall be entitled
Easement Agreement
to vote on matters related thereto. For purposes of this paragraph, "beneficial use" of a roadway shall be
deemed to begin upon commencement of construction of a residence, garage, shop or other approved
outbuilding on the Lot.
2.1. In the event the Affected Lot Owners shall determine by majority vote that an Improvement
is in need of repair, replacement, maintenance or reconstruction (hereinafter collectively "Maintenance"), the
Affected Lot Owners shall share equally in the cost of such Maintenance, based upon the number of votes as
provided hereinabove. Each vote shall equate to a share in said cost. When a decision is made to provide
Maintenance to an Improvement the Affected Lot Owners shall establish an account for said purpose. The
account shall by managed by a Lot Owner or a designated management company, as agreed upon by a
majority of votes by the Affected Lot Owners. Each Affected Lot Owner shall pay its share of the estimated
cost of the work into said account within thirty (30) days of written request. In the event the amount paid into
the account is not enough to pay the actual cost of the approved Maintenance, each Affected Lot Owner shall
pay its share of any shortage into the account. If any Affected Lot Owner fails to pay its share of tfi6c'ost of
Maintenance when due, the remaining Affected Lot Owners, individually or collectively, may pay the
defaulting Lot Owner's share and may record a lien against the defaulting Lot Owner's real property in favor
of the Lot Owner(s) who advanced the payment. Said lien may be enforced pursuant to the law ofthe State of
Washington. The lien does not have to be foreclosed or otherwise enforced within any specific time period.
2.2. In the event any Lot Owner or Lot Owners desire to upgrade or provide Maintenance on the
Improvements without majority approval by Affected Lot Owners, then the Lot Owner(s) desiring to make
such upgrade or perform such Maintenance shall do so at their sole cost and expense; provided, however, any
such work shall not interfere with the use of the Improvements by the other Lot Owners.
2.3. In the event any Lot Owner or Lot Owners disturb the surface of any Easement area set forth
herein during the installation of utilities, storm water drainage or other improvements for the benefit of their
own Lot(s), or through excessive wear and tear, or for any reason damage the Improvements, the Lot
Owner(s) responsible for such damage shall be responsible for repairing and restoring such damaged
Improvement to its prior condition, at that Lot Owner(s)' sole cost and expense.
3. Hold Harmless and Indemnification.
3.1. Each Lot Owner shall defend, indemnify and hold the all other Lot Owners harmless from
any and all claims and causes of action which may accrue to or besuffered by any Lot Owner by reason of,
arising out of, or resulting from the use by any of the Lot Owners of the Improvements or the Easement Area
or the use by that Lot Owner's successors, assigns, employees, agents, lessees, licensees, invitees and guests,
unless the claim or cause of action is caused by or results from the sole negligence of the owner of the
burdened Lot or its agents, tenant invitees or employees. In the event of concurrent negligence of the Lot
Owners or their agents, tenants, invitees or employees, each such Lot Owners shall be responsible only to the
extent of its own negligence and that of its agents, tenants, invitees and employees.
4. Eminent Domain. If the Easement described herein, or any part thereof, is taken by any
governmental agency in the exercise of its power of eminent domain, the award granted under such
proceedings, or any settlement in lieu thereof, for the taking of such property shall be payable to the fee
owner of the portion of the Easement area which is taken. If all or any part ofthe Easement area is taken, this
Agreement shall terminate with respect to the portion so taken and the obligations hereunder of the then
owners of the Easement area shall automatically cease and terminate when possession is transferred to the
condemning agency with respect to any portion of the Easement area so condemned; provided, however, that
Easement Agreement
nothing herein prevents the owner�s) of the property benefited by the Easement from seeking compensation
from the condemning agency, only, for loss of the Easement.
5. Easements and License Runs with the Land. The Easements and License granted and the
restrictions and covenants established herein shall run with and shall bind and be obligatory upon the
properties described herein; provided that, anything herein to the contrary notwithstanding, no rights in or to
the general public are created hereby.
6. Legal Expenses. If any party is required to bring or maintain any action (including assertion of any
counterclaim or cross -claim, or claim in any proceedings in bankruptcy, receivership, or any other proceeding
instituted by a party hereto or by others), or otherwise refers this Agreement to an attorney for the
enforcement of any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement the prevailing party in such action shall, in
addition to all other payments required, receive from the other all the costs incurred by the prevailing party,
including reasonable attorney fees and such costs and reasonable attorney fees which the prevailing party may
incur on any appeal.
7. Binding Effect This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties
hereto and their respective heirs, successors, assigns and legal representatives.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first
above written.
JAMES R. WEGNER
Printed Name:
Title:
DP Miller Homes, LLC — Owner Lot 5
Printed Name:,
Title:
Frontier Bank
-�_K ��� 2�_ -)r
MARILYN E4>EGNER
n�, Q LV�Q!:'n i N N
JgFrRf'f WHITNEY, Mern'ber
West Bank Properties, LLC
Printed Name:
Title:
DP Miller Homes, LLC - Owner Lot 4
Easement Agreement
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
)ss.
County of Snohomish
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that James P- Wegner and Marilyn E. Wegner,
husband and wife are the individuals who appeared before me, and said individuals acknowledged that they
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes
mentioned in the instrument.
GIVEN under my hand and official seal this I �- day of Tc- n t � 2007.
t%%%jIIIIj Iloilo,
pV E
Ito U
to,*. Allot
22120.X
�;IIIZWASI%
—1
IlIfIIIIII0
STATE OF WASHINGTON
ss.
County of Snohomish
,---Pr'int Name: Z>
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
My commission expires:_ J!e�'
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Jeffrey Whitney is the person who appeared
before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized
to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as a Member of West Bank Properties, LLC the company that
executed this instrument as the free and voluntary act of corporation for the uses and purposes mentioned in
the instrument.
GIVEN under my hand and official seal this -1-,9--daY of 2007.
LIND,4
I
Printed Name:
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
410
r- My commission expires: -,7
>
U)
C,
on
�(9
�-,/NGTOt-�
3 -
Easement Agreement
nothing herein prevents the owner(s) of the property benefited by tile Easement from seeking compensation
from the conderrining agency, only, for loss of the Easement.
5. Easements and License Runs with the Land. The Easements and License granted and the
restrictions and covenants established herein shall run with and shall bind and be obligatory upon the
properties described herein; provided that, anything herein to the contrary notwithstanding, no rights in or to
the general public are created hereby.
6. Legal Expenses. If any party is required to bring or maintain any action (including assertion of any
counterclaim or cross -claim, or claim in any proceedings in bankruptcy, receivership, or any other proceeding
instituted by a party hereto or by others), or otherwise refiers this Agreement to an attorney for the
enforcement of any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action shall, in
addition to all other payments required, receive from the other all the costs incurred by the prevailing party,
including reasonable attorney fees and such costs and reasonable attorney fees which the prevailing party may
incur on any appeal.
7. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties
hereto and their respective heirs, successors, assigns and legal representatives.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first
above written.
JAMES R.
Printed Namk:
Title:_It o�—
DP Millek HorrZs, LLC — Owner Lot 5
rromier t5anK
MARILYN E. WEGNER
JErFAL'� WkITNEY, Me'Tb—er
West Bank Properties, LLC
Printed Ijame:
Titlo':
DPi �471,er Homes, LLC - Owner Lot 4
Easelnew Agreeinew
STATE OF WASHINGTON
ss.
County of Snohomish
'% -"L—
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 3>oL1(—'S / 'L-L-L is the person who
appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he/she signed this instrument, on oath stated that
he/she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the M of DP
Miller Homes, LLC, the company that executed this instrument as the free and voluntary act of corporation
for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
GIVEN under my hand and official seal th'3 Z 3"day of /I L4 6 Lt
2007.
J.
SION
PrintedName:
C) Notary Public in and Or the State of Washington
6 AOTAFR?y 0 My commission expires: / )�- - :;-�- Z-00 ?
P IIB
_5 LC
-2007
0
STATE OF WASHINGTON
ss.
County of Snohomish
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that -6 12- L- S 7-c,-� is the person who
appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he/she signed this instrument, on oath stated that
he/she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the 'S. . of
)R U. (-�� f9lL--e -'�
Frontier Bank, the corporation that executed this instrument as the free and voluntary act of corporation for
the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
Easement AgreeinCW
GIVEN under rny hand and official seal this .1 �,-'�day of /3 U b )2007.
J.
ION
Printed Name: -r- 1-kzv--�.�—.4
Q) TA
XA RY Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
Mv commission expires:
PUBLIC z
1 -5-2007 A0
(0) wp,.B,\",
Easement Agreement
I
EASEMENT EXHIBIT
A PORTION OF THE PLAT OF
VISTA DEL MAR
L-1 17.79'
L=12.S4'
R-75.00
R-6.75
89'59'06"
106026'34"
L=39.38'
R=45.00 S89'0 I'l 5"E S89001'15"E
50008'25" 4.17' 18.10,
L-437.65'
R=25.00 L=25.67
86044'45" Y-
R=X00 :.q
;5,
73-32-21" 3 6
LOT 6
L=34,96'
R=120.00
16*4 1'32"
LOT 4
POB
0108"E
SW COR. LOT6
18.53"
N82'55'55-W
S99001'15"E
61.35'
109-60'
w
00
-'N So
cs
N62*49'52"W
20.00'
LOT 3
N
LOT 5
lq8l'42'531,
(n
�- - W
.
131.11 ----------------
—
L-58.35'
R=158.90
2 ["02'27"
0 30 60 120
IN FE-E-1-
I INCH — 60 FEE-7
BASIS OF BEARfNG
PLAT OF VISTA DLL MAR
. I
I&
1.--30.05'
R-158.90
10*50'20"
I
IST!��-r,
IL C4��
03/05/09
CITY OF EDMONDS
1215 1h Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 - Fax: 425.771.0221 - Web: w-ww.edmondswa.wv
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT - PLANNING DIVISION
"Qc. I sqv
June 20, 2013
Mary Mulva
17802 Vista Del Mar
Edmonds, WA 98026
Subject: Hazard Tree Removal and Slope Stabilization
Dear Ms. Mulva,
The City of Edmonds received has reviewed the request to potential remove up to three hazard trees
located on a landslide hazard area or its associated buffer in conjunction with some slope stability work.
Slopes of greater than 40% are considered critical areas pursuant to Edmonds Community Development
Code (ECDC) 23.40 and ECDC 23.80. Generally the removal of trees, or any vegetation, within a critical
area or critical area buffer is not an allowed activity, unless, pursuant to ECDC 23.40.220.C.7, it involves
the removal of invasive species or hazard trees. Additionally, an alteration of a landslide hazard may only
be approved within an associated critical area report.
Tree hazard evaluation forms filled out by certified arborist Sue Nicol identified three Douglas fir
(Pseudotsuga menziesii) trees with a hazard rating of 9. According to the Pacific Northwest International
Socity of Arboriculture Tree Risk Assessment method, a hazard rating of 9 places the tree in a high risk
category. These trees are hazard trees and may be removed consistent with ECDC 23.40.220.C.7.b,
which requires that each tree removed by replace at a ratio of two trees for every tree removed. The
documentation provided indicate the replacement trees would be planted on the slope near the location of
tree 3.
The removal of the hazard trees is occurring in conjunction with the installation of an engineered system
consisting of Teccomat and erosion control matting attached to the slope with grouted anchors. A
geotechnical report prepared by nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. consistent with the requirements -of
ECDC 23.80.050 and addressed ECDC 23.80.060.A. I — 4 and ECDC 23.80.070.A.2.a — c has been
provided to the City of Edmonds.
Staff finds that the proposed hazard tree removal and proposed slope stability work is consistent with the
City's critical area regulations and review criteria established in ECDC 23.40.160.A.
The tree hazard removal and slope stability work is approved with the following conditions:
1. Only the three Douglas fir trees identified as hazard trees by certified arborist Sue Nicol may be
removed.
2. Any tree removed must be replaced at a ratio of 2:1 consistent with ECDC 23.40.220.C.7.b.iv.
3. Replacement trees should be planted in the generally vicinity of tree number three or elsewhere
on'the slope or near the top of the slope.
4. Pursuant to ECDC 23.40.220.C.7.b.iv, replacement trees shall be a minimum of one inch
diameter at breast height for deciduous trees and a minimum of six feet in height for evergreen
trees as measured from the top of the root ball.
5. Recommendations of the Geotechnical Report dated May 9, 2013 prepared by nelson
Geotechnical Associates, Inc. must be implemented.
Feel free to contact me if you have any questions, 425-771-0220.
Sin rely,
ernen Lien
Senior Planner
Encl: Email from Mary Mulva dated May 16,2013
Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. Geotechnical Report dated May 9, 2013
Tree Hazard Evaluation Form s
Site Plans
Cc: Robin Kearsley
i Print Page I of I
From: r@kearsleyhomes.com (r@kearsleyhomes.com)
To: marymulva@sbcglobal.net;
Date: Thu, May 16,2013 10:22:12 AM RECEIVED
Cc:
Subject: 17804 Vista Del Mar Drive, Trees mAy 17 2013
To the City of Edmonds, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
COUNTER
As part of the hillside work concerning removal of trees and the hill stabilization work by Terra
Firma application for the above address, I request the following:
4 would like to remove tree #3 located approximately 70'below the top of the slope. This tree was
rated a 9 on the arborist's report.
-1 would like to apply for the hillside work permit with the intent of removing tree #I and tree #2
which were both rated as 9's.
-1 will be in Edmonds at the end of May and will make the fmal decision then and may elect to keep
trees #1 and #2. However, it is important to get the permit application started so that work can begin
before any heavy rains do more damage to the hillside.
-1 also realize that in the event that either tree #1 or tree #2 are removed, there will be 2 trees re-
planted for each tree taken down.
-1 will plant 2 new trees in the area of tree #3 after it is removed.
Thank you for your consideration,
1047 � �� - 110�tl I � f
r Maq Mulva Dated
Owner
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
N1 A
Main Office
17311 — 135h Avenue NE, A-500
Woodinvifle, WA 98072
(425) 486-1669 FAX (425) 481-2510
(425) 337-1669 Snohomish County
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
AssociATES, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
Engineering -Geology Branch
437 East Penny Road
Wenatchee, WA 98801
(509) 665-7696 FAX (509) 665-7692
MEMORANDUM
RECEIVED
DATE: May 9, 2013 mAy 17, 2013
TO: Pat and Mary Mulva
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
COUNTER
CC: Robin Kearsley — Kearsley Homes
FROM: Khaled M. Shawish, PE
Lee S. Bellah, LG
RE: Supplemental Mitigation Reconu-nendations
Mulva Residence Landslide Issues
17802 Vista Del Mar Drive
Edmonds, Washing on
NGA File No. 8397B 13
Introduction
e-ID. Vt'
0.
1 3
5215
4-V
We understand that a landslide had recently occurred on the steep west -facing bluff slope on your
property. We prepared a memorandum dated February 15, 2013 discussing surficial repair
recommendations for the landslide. We understand that you wish to install an engineercd system
consisting of Teccomat and erosion control matting attached'to the slope with grouted anchors. For our
use in preparing this memorandum, we have been provided with a construction quote/estimate dated
March 29, 2013 prepared by Terra Firma Drilling describing the extent of the Teccomat installation.
Prior to the recent work, we previously provided our' opinions. and recommendations to the previous
homeowners for a landslide that occurred on the steep slope within the northern portion of the property
that extended onto the property to the north, We provided these recommendations in a memorandum
titled "Mitigation Recommendations — Hosterman Residence Landslide and Drainage Issues," dated
March 23, 2011. We had previously prepared a geotechnical engineering evaluation for the property
titled "Lot 7 Vista Del Mar — Edmonds, Washington," dated March 24, 2004.
ro
Geotechnical Recommendations
Updated Mulva Landslide Repair Recommendations
Edmonds, Washington
Recent Observations
NGA File No. 8397B 13
May 9, 2013
Page 2
We visited the site on Thursday April 11, 2013 to observe the existing site conditions in the vicinity of
the recent slide. The surface conditions appear to be relatively unchanged since our previous site visit in
February 2013. As we discussed in our previous memorandum, we observed that a landslide appeared to
have occurred only on your- property. The recent landslide is approximately 30 feet wide and located
within the central. portion of the property approximately 15 feet from both the northern and southern
property lines, as shown on the attached Schematic Site plan on Figure 1. The landslide extended
approximately 115 feet down the slope and deposited debris near the toe of the slope. The landslide
debris did not reach the railroad tracks below. The landslide appears to have been localized within the
upper loose surficial soils and was not a deep-seated ]an dslide. A large evergreen tree appeared to have
been downed as a result of the landslide and was deposited in the lands lide debris. The northern extents
of the recent landslide borders the previously repaired landslide area and erosion control matting placed
on the steep slope. We observed an approximately 50-foot high by 15-foot wide loose soil area along the
top of the slope immediately to the south of the recent landslide. This loose area extended to the
southern property line.
We observed two large evergreen trees (trees #1 & #2) along the top of slope within the central portion
of the recent landslide that have had their roots exposed as a result of the recent landslide. The slope
de scends from a relatively level backyard area down to the railroad tracks at gradients in the range of
roughly 38 to 60 degrees (78 to 173 percent) as shown in Cross Section A -A' in Figure 2. The upper
portion of the slope generally exposed sand with gravel soils interpreted to be recessional outwash,
underlain by very dense silty sand with gravel soils interpreted to be glacial till. The lower portion of the
slope below the glacial till exposed fine to medium sand with gravel and silt soils interpreted to be
advance outwash and transitional bed deposits, respectively. We did not observe groundwater seepage
emitting from the slope during our site visit. The erosion control matting and vegetation placed within
the previous landslide area appeared to be functionincy as intended and did'not appear to have been
affected by the recent landslide activity.
Plan Review
Based on our review of the construction quote/e.stimate provided by Terra Firma Drilling, we understand
that the extents of the Teccomat will be approximate 70 feet wide, which incorporates the entire width of
the lot, and extend approximately 40 feet below the top of the slope. The Teccomat wilt be underlain by
an erosion control material consisting of Tenax Multimat. The Teccomat and erosion control material
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES,'INC,
Geotechnical Recommendations NGA File No. 8397B 13
Updated Mulva Landslide Repair Recommendations May 9, 2013
Edmonds, Washington Page 3
will be attached to the slope utilizing 6-inch diameter grouted anchors extending a minimum of 15-feet
into the slope and spike plates at the surface. The grouted anchors are proposed to be placed at 12-feet
on center both horizontally and vertically in a staggered pattern. The anchors will also have a minimum
10 foot bonded length and 5 foot unbounded length. A minimum design pull-out resistance load of 12
kips for each anchor was provided by the contractor.
Slope Stability Analysis I -
The site slope and the Teccomat repair alternative utilizing installation recornmendations provided in this
memo were analyzed for stability along Cross Sections A -A', using the computer program Slope/W, by
Geo-Slope International. Slope/W is a two-dimensional, limit equilibrium slope stability program that
genera tes random potential failure surfaces or specific failure surfaces and determines their corresponding
factors of safety with respect to failu re. By generating a large number of random surfaces, a critical failure
surface with the minimum factor of safety can be identified.
We performed our stability analyses using infori-nation gathered from our field observations and have back -
calculated some soil properties based on the slide conditions to more accurately reflect their engineering
characteristics. Stability analyses were performed localized to the areas of observed rho vement and for the
proposed Teccomat and grouted anchor repair option along the cross section. Stability analyses were
performed for non -seismic conditions for the area of observed movement. Stability analyses were
perfon-ned for both non -seismic and seismic conditions for the Teccomat repair option. The soil parameters
used in our analyses, along with the results of the analyses, are presented in Figure 3 through 5.,
Our slope stability analyses of the area of observed movement indicated that the existing landslide area is
unstable under static conditions with a factor of safety slightly less than one. This is consistent with our site
observations within these areas. We have also analyzed slope stability of the proposed Teccomat and
grouted anchor repair within the landslide area. A point load of 12,000 pounds was used in the analyses to
represent point loads from the grouted anchors on the slope and Teccomat intended to stabilize the. slide.
These analyses indicated stable global slope conditions under both static and seismic loading. These
analyses also achieved appropriate minimum factors of safety for both static and seismic loading conditions.
Opinions and Recommendations
In our opinion, based on our observations and analyses, repairing the landslide area with Teccomat
attached to the slope with grouted anchors should be feasible as described in the construction
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Recommendations
Updated Mulva Landslide Repair Recommendations
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 8397B 13
May 9, 2013
Page 4
quote/estimate provided by Terra Firma. However, we recommend that the Teecomat material and
grouted anchors be extended to an approximate distance. of 75-feet down the surface of the slope as
shown on the attached Schematic Repair Site Plan in Figure 6. The grouted anchor spacing should also
be reduced from 124cet to 10-feet.
It is also our opinion that the proposed plans should not adversely impact the steep slope areas or
neighboring properties, and should be in compliance with the City of Edmonds Codes 23.80.060.A. 1-4
and 23.80.070.A.2.a-c if our recommendations are incorporated into the proposed plans and
construction.
Prior ta placing the erosion control matting or the Teccomat, we recommend that any areas of loose soils
be removed to expose dense native soil. The slope face should be graded to maintain as level of a face
as possible. At a minimum, the loose soil observed immediately to the south of the recent landslide
should be removed along with a mounded area along the top of the slope that had been previously
covered by past repairs. These areas are also shown on the Schematic Repair Site Plan in Figure 6. The
extent of removal of loose soils should be directed by NGA in the field during the repairs. Cone shaped
excavations should then be carved around each n ail location to allow the Teccomat to be tightened
against the slope face.
There is also an evergreen tree (tree 3) located within the landslide and proposed repair area. In our
opinion this tree appears to be unstable and could pose future problems to the proposed repairs if.this
tree is not removed. We recommend t.hat this tree be cut down' near the ground surface and its stump left
in place. Care should also be taken to not impact slope stability conditions during tree removal. The
Teccomat could then be placed and attached to the slope around the remaining stump.
After the loose soils and the unstable tree is removed, the grouted anchors and Teccomat can be
installed. The Teccomat should be installed in accordance to the manufactures recommendations. NGA
should be on site on a full-time basis to observe and document the installation of the grouted anchors and
Teccomat.
We should note that compacted glacial till and outwash deposits will be encountered during drilling,
including the potential for cobbles and small boulders. Drilling through'these materials can be difficult
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Recommendations NGA File No. 83 97B 13
Updated Mulva Landslide Repair Recommendations May 9, 2013
Edmonds, Washington Page 5
and slow. The contractor should include ample contingencies in budget and schedule for dealing with
such conditions.
The soil nails should be tested after installation to ensure adequate performance. We can discusg soil
nail test procedure with the contractor at the time of construction. After the soil nails are installed and
tested,, the face of the slope should be covered with the erosion control matting embedded with grass
seeds.. The Tecco mesh should be placed on top of the erosion control matting. The caps can then be
placed on the soil nail locations and locked off to tighten the mesh to the slope face.
The remaining portion of the landslide area below the Tecco mesh should be covered with erosion
control material as discussed in our previous memorandum. All other recommendations provided in our
previous memorandum should also be followed. We recommend the proposed repair systems should
also be inspected periodically and promptly repaired should any signs of distress be observed.
We will be in contact with Terra Firt-na and Robin Kearsley during the repairs and will be on -site on a
full-time basis to observe an.d'evaluate the slope repairs.
Attachment: Figure I - Mulva Residence Landslide Site Plan
Figure 2 — Cross -Section 'A -A'
Figures 3 through 5 — Slope Stability Analyses
Figure 6 — Schematic Repair Site Plan
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
_n
(n
Q
0
a
4
0-4
M
M
1*- o
;I --- -1
mn
I
N.
r
M
z
a
z
0
r
0
0
U)
0,
CD
z
C
3
a -
CD
*Ii
CD
z
z
> r
0
0 Z
20
> M
-1 0
M -1
n
0 z
0
r
z
0
0
A
A'
East
West
150
T_ 150
120--
Yr
0
Tree on slope
not to scale
(to be removed) J,
38*
Vt
90
%
__90
K0
.2
?
>
Qva
(D
41
W
60
60
z
Railroad ;.1,
3 0
t
45
'o
j
0 t
__0
0 30 60 90 120 150
Distance (feet)
1)
2)
X 0
a X Reference: Cross Section is based on field measurements using a hand-held clinometer and IOD-ft tape measure.
NOTES:
Stratigraphic conditions are interpolated between
the explorations. Actual conditions may vary.
Elevations are arbitrary
_n 00
0
-4 1-#-
z
C
c-) 3
Cr
CD
0
a-
Ch
Ln Ch C:
0
CD 0
at
Cn 0 CD
a) z W.
Cr > CL
CD
0
> M CD
.< =3
W CD
E; CD
0
0,
rn
> 'D
J;� En w
,0
a 0 =3
a 0
0 C)
!a. 0
CD
0
zr
0 :3
0
192
z
0
X
(D
0
2013M
S�ope Stabfflfty Ana�ysis-Crqss SecUlon A -A' Ex�sftg Staft Conddons
Bishop most critical surface with minimum FOS = 0.942
0,942
Recessiona u
glr2sh
Internal Frictio .3F
Moist Unit Weight 120 pd
Cohesion: 0 psf
Critical Slip Surface
140
—
140
130
Existing Ground Surface
—
1�0
120
120
110
110
Glacial Till
100
Internal FMtion Angi
100
Molst Unit Weight: 130 pd
Cohesion: 150 psf
90
90
NLL
Advance Outwash
Internal Friction Angle: 36*
80
0
Moist Unit Weight: 130 pcf
80
Cohesion: 0 psf
70
70
60
Transitional Beds
60
cc
I=
Internal Friction Angle: 30*
50
Moist Unit Weight: 120 pcf
Cohesion: 100 Psf
so
40
40
30
3 . 0
20
20
10D
10
0
0 10
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 go 100 110 120 130 140
1;0 116"0
Distance* (Feet)
NOTES: Not to scale
Elevations are Approximate
Mulva ResidenceLandslidekslooe stBViray.dwo
Co —
21 W CID
(a co 0
-4
Z
3
Cr
CD
0
a
(n
U)
cn C
0 (D 'C
-0 am
CD 0 ;a
CD
rr
M
Iz . - =3 .
> CD
:3
0) 0
19 ca CL
CD
CL
Cf) (D
w
ct
0
09:
0
z
Alin
a to
z
>
J;� C,)
Co 0
C) o
a 0
.0
0—
. 8- IOD
to I-
- $0 CD
0
=r
tz o
0
P
0
X 0
A ;K
4GA Drafting 3
Mope St8bflfty Ana�ys�s-Cross SecUon A=A' Proposed Stat �c Cond"Moons
Bishop most critical surfaces with minimum FOS = 4.19
Recessional Outwash
Internal Friction Angle: 36*
Moist Unit Weight 120 pcf
Cohesion: 0 psf
140
— Critical Slip Surface
140
130
—
12,000 lb point load used in analysis
130
for subsurface grouted anchor forces
120
Existing Ground Surface
120
110
110
Glaci I Till
100
Internal Friction A
100
Moist Unit Weight: 130 Pcf
Cohesion: '150 psf
90
90
LL
Advance Outwash
C
Internal Friction Angle: 36*
0
80
Moist Unit Weight: 130 pef
80
Cohesion: 0 psf
8
D
70
70
60
— Transitional Beds
60
Internal Friction Angle: 30*
Moist Unit Weight 120 prf
50
— Cohesion: 100 psf
50
40
—
— 40
30
—
— 30
20
—
20
10D
— 1 0
0
0
j
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
0
160
Distance (Feet) -
NOTES: Not to scale
. Elevations are Approximate
I Mulva Residence LandslideAslooe stabfldv.da
-n
S�opa Stabflfty
A.na�ysis-Cross Secdon A -A'
Proposed SMsm�c Condffilons
ca,
C
0
Bishop most critical surfaces with minimum FOS 3.44
a
Cn
z
with a seismic coefficient of ground acceleration 0.1 5g
C4
Recessional Outwash
Internal Friction Angle: 36*
Moist Unit Weight 120 pcf
0
Cohesion: 0 psf
LD (n
140
Critical Slip Surface
140
0 (n
CD co
CA (D
5; cn 9
CD 0
130
12,000 lb point load used in analysis
130
Cr :3 CD
for subsurface grouted anchor forces
Iz 3
Z5- >
120
Existing Ground Surface
120
Z3
-0 CL
110
110
0
CD CD
Glacial Till
CL
100
Internal Friction Angle: 36*
100
Moist Unit Weight 130 pcf
Cohesion: 150 psf
a 0
Q
U_
90
90
C:
Advance Outyvash
Internal Friction Angle: 36*
a
0
80
Moist Unit Weight: 130 pd
80
:;;,I
, >
e.
W
Cohesion: 0 psf
Z;j rn
a
>
70
70
CD z
W > (D
60
Transitional Beds
60
0 CD
W 0
CU
L_
Internal Friction Angle: 30*
D 0 :3
a 0
0 —.0
:t=!
.0
50
Moist Unit Weight 120 pd
Cohesion: 100 psf
50
0 (D
'e. o
(D
0
40
40
0
Jim
30
30
20
20
z
P
lop
10
0
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
0
120 130 140 150 160
0.
(Feet)
-
0
NOTES: Not to scale
Elevations are Approximate
0
I
I
A
C
.
0
;R
0
51�
Approx. Extents of Erosion Control Matting
and Previously Repaired Landslide Area
Landslide Debris
Extents.of Recent Landslide
Trees on slope (to be removed)
Approximate Extents of Loose Soils on Slope
LEGEND
Property Line
A A' Approximate Location
of Cross-section
0 20 40
Approximate Scale: I inch = 20 feet
I
Reference: Site plan based on an untitled, undated, drawing prepared by Kearsley Homes, Inc.
I
NN.
A,
0
V1
b b
0
C,
Large trees to be CL
and stumps left in p
LEGEND
Property Line Approximate extent of Teccomesh repair
Approximate extent of erosion control material repair
0 20 40
I I I i Approximate extent of loose soil areas to be remove(
Approximate Scale: 1 inch = 20 feet
Reference: Site plan based on an untitled, undated, drawing prepared by Kearsley Homes, Inc.
A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees.in Urban Areas
TREE HAZARD EVA L UA TION FORM2nd Edition
Site/Address: 'b'd - -MLT--
Map/Locaffion: 74Y
Owner� publi private ",Ik7now othe
Date: 4,
L9 Inspector:
Date of last inspection:
HAZARD RATING:
__q_ + !) +
Failure + Size + Target
Potential of pan Rating
Hazard
Rating
immediate action neBded
Needs further inspection
Dead tree
TREE CHARACTERISTICS I I I
Tree t species:
DOW # of trunks: Height Spread:
Form: ngenerally symmetric 'I minor asymmetry r-, major asymmetry f7stumpsprout 7 stag -headed
Crown clan: r__1 dominant Fj co -dominant 11 intermediate 1�14uppressed
I RECEIVED
Live crown ratio: — % Age claw. � I young "I semi-meure Xmature -I over-maturelsenescent
Pruning history: -�j crown cleaned U excessively thinned��pped :J crown raised LJ pollarded i_ crown reduced L, fIuNAYtsWJQRraced
none D mulfiple pruning events Approx. dates: - --�.----.[)EVELOPME*T--SERV*EC--
Special Value: C3 specimen n heritagethistoric 71 wildlife F_- unusual 71 street tree 71 screen 7 shade F] indigenous FI "W436ov. agency
TREE HEALTH
Foliagecolot:' Dnormal
Elchlorotic
Enecrotic Epicormics? Y N
Growth obstructions:
Follage densItT. U normal
U sparse
Leaf size: 0 normal L small
Ej stakes --- wirelties D signs L_'J1 cables
Annual shoot growth: f-excellent �Javerage --',poor TwigBieback? Y N
'_Javerage
LJ curb/pavement J guards
6*00Le_�_J' 1A1rk.91,SZ1.
Woundwood development:
L excellent
i.._! poor 1_'; none
Xiother
Vigor class: '"excellent
Laverage
Lfair U poor
Major pesbldiseases:
SITE COWITIONS
Site Character. Xesidence U commercial L industrial L'_* park �i open space L natural L Woodlancuorest
`_1 wind break
Landscape type, '—! parkway L raised bed Li container mound ;_ lawn EJ shrub border
Irrigation: �P_4one '_ adequate D inadequate 6x0essive I' :trunk wettled
Receint she disturbance? @ N 11 construefion X soil disturbance .. :grade change 1 .1 line clearing site clearing 1_211M SrUJ7_0-
% dripline paved: 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N
% dripline w/ fill soil: 0*110 10-25u!� 25-50% 50-75% (7-5-100',—'-
% dripline grade lowered. 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100%
Soil problems: 7 drainage Fl shailow 171 compacted F1 droughty -71 saline 7 alkaline __ acidic C small volume r_7 disease center Kistory of fail
"clay ':-Imansive Xslope (Ccl- aspect:
obstiruclions: 'llights 1.1sigriage "lline-of-sight FIview '—overheadlines Fluildergroundutilities 't-33traffic -.71 adjacent vag.
Exposure to wind: 'P'�ingle tree Fbelowcanopy nabovecanopy n recently exposed -]windward, canopy edge -1 atea prone towindthrow
Prevailing wind direction- S \A/ Occurrence of snowfte storms never 0 seldom >(regularly
TARGET
L
raffic I .'pedestrian I 'recreation >41��ndscape ><Iardscape :_:.smallfeatures '.A utility lines
Use Under Tree: I I building parking Y,
/7:zlk
Cantarobernoved? Y(jN Can use be resiricled? Y
Occupancy: -Koccasional use L'.' intermittent use .7 frequent use 17 constant use
The Intemational Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form.
TREE DEFECTS
ROOT DEFECTS:
Suspect root rot Y CN) Mushroom/con0racket present: Y
N�o
-I I rnnrlarnta lAim Undermined: W-sevem "' moderate ' I low
UPON, 11JUIS. OUTU V /-I-
Root pruned: distance from trunk
Root area aftled, _0*
Butilress wounded: Y N
When:
Restricted root area: �4vere I . moderate
I low Potential for root failure: >4-evere E moderate
low
deg. from vertical E: natural
unnatural 77. self-carrected
N )
Soil heaving: Y C
Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken
Y N Soil craddng: CY I N
F:'�-
C�vdivet 4,
Compounding factors:
eln- severl1r. I
severe moderate L low
tROWAt DEFECTS. Indicate mr.sence of individual
defects and nate their severi4i (s severe. in = moderate. I = lavi)
DEFECT ROOT CROWN
Poorlaper
Included bark
Excessive and
Wounds/scam
Decay
CavqL__.
Conksi'mushroornsibracket
Sleeding!sap flow
Looselcrackad bark
Nesting_hole!bee hive
Deadwoodi'stubs
9orers1termite&iants
P �Wl 0 -u's'* -fa, i I u*'"r-e
HAZARD RATING - --7—
Tree part most likel,, to tail:
J
mspection period: ------- -- �� annual._— biannual — other
Failure Poteutiai + size uf Pail + Target Rating Hazard Rating
HAZARD ABATEMENT
TRUNK
Pailtife polentiali 1 - low: 2 - n1ediu1T(3,- high- sffv.ere
Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm): 2 -
Q -_2:22�05-75 CM)-. 4 - >30" (75 cm)
Targel rating, 1 use; 2 intermittent use:
��3 - Irequent u-s-e-.4 - qonstallt use,
t .-I crown reiluce 17. restructure 171shape
Prune: remove defective Part L rcduc� end weight Ucrownciean E"thin Eraisecanow
Cable/Brace: Inspectfurther Lrootcrown Udecay . aerial .�Jmonitor
Remove tree: e N Replace?,( 7Y)N Move target., Y C) Other.,
Effect on adjacent trees. 171 none Xevaluate
Notification: )�vmer —manager Lgoverning agency Date:
0&
COMMENTS I'&- IF
P
V
P— n-L V
�j)e_ mur" V mic. 4 k ty
11') ck)
f� pn-y-
CA iec-_e, !;ftv_�K
A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas
TREE HMARD EVAL UA TION FORM2nd Edition
SiteJAddress: 1-7 i� 0 2- 11) r2� t)P_( )V�
HAZARD RATING:
Map/Localion: Ed w A 3;)
ay
3 -->
_, > + C�
Failure + Size + Target Hazard
'
Owner: public private qnknown other
)/C, h
Potential of part Rating Rating
Immediate action needed
Date: Inspector
/ -
Date of last inspection.- 6,tnj;
Needs further Inspection
V
Dead tree
TREE CHA"CTERIMCS
? Specl'� jL�l V-,14A&7��V-62
Tree zv
DON: #of trunks: floigtvL,._'1 Spread:
Form: n generally symmetric >�minor asymmetry r_- major asymmetry 1`7 stump sprout
7, stag -headed
Crown class: )COminani F I co -dominant F-I intermediate suppressed
Live crown ratio: % Age class: : I young . I semi -mature I/Vature � J over-matura/senascent
Pruning history: cleaned U excessively thinned U topped
Xrown raised LJ pollarded crovin reduced Ei flush cuts UJ cabled/braced
none :1 multiple pruning events Approx. dates:
speciall value: n specimen 171 heritage/historic 0 wildlife E-l'unusual -1 street tree -] screen .7 shade Xvigenous E] protected by gov. agency
TREE HEALTH
Foliage color >�Wrmal
El chlorotic
—necrofic. Epicormics?ON
Growth obstfuctlons:
Foliage denstty: P4rm*al
U sparse
Leaf size: >:�ormal L small
U stakes '—i vArellies, U signs __] cables
Annual shoot growth., L excellent
Xverage __�, poor Twig Dieback? Y
0 curb/pavement -73 guards
Woundwood development
'---! excellent
average LJ poor knone rC:
'�4ther �Sepe_-_
Vigor clam _1 excellent
��erage
L fair U poor vz-bN-m'-,
M vwyvg
Malorpesuldiseases: —
SITE COMMONS
Site Character: Xesidence
L-,i commercial L industrial ILpark �J open space L natural L woodlanflorest 64wff
Landscape type: parkway
L raised bed _.J1 container L mound �_'Iavin ><s hrub i- . _: w'Vnd� reaj�
,*er VV(( i% i,
Irrigation: L none >�adequate U inadequate . E.- excessive F* trunk wettled
Recent site disturbance? nv N
Pepnstruction ''J'soil disturbance :' gradechange (J line clearing /,TWe clearing
* dripline paved:
0% 110-25%., (2:5-530 50-75110 75-100% Pavement lifted?. Y
* dripline w/ fill 3oll;
I'll 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100%
* dripline grade lowered:
S0.1-111, 10-25% 25-500S 50-75% 75-100%
Soilproblems: 'idrainage FIshanow nrompacted I-idroughly 7-1saline —alkaline --Acidic Csmallvolume i--disease center Dhistoryof fail
clay . J expansive XSlope L-C-1 � aspect:
Obstructions: lights I I s4jnage - _11ine-cf-sight Flvie.v,, 7overheadlines; l7iundergroundutilitiffi 7itraffic '.7adjacentvag.
Exposure to wind: %ingle tree
17.7belowcanopy nabovecanopy' nreceiftexposed 71windward, canopy edge 71 area prone towindthrow,
Prevailing
wind direction-
Occurrence of snowfice storms .�never Oseldom Oregularly
TARGET
Use Under Tree: Y<building
parking traffic I.. pedestrian 1. ' recreation Miandscape K, hardscape small features J utility lines
Can target be moved? Y 0�1
Can use be restricted? Y T
Occupancir. VA occasional use
7. hilerinittent use 7. frequent use Peconslani use 4we, UVIN-%k� rV-J�
The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendatons derived from use of this form.
k
TREE DEFECTS
ROOT DEFECTS:
Suspect tool rot: Y N Mushroom/conk/bracket Present: Y N ID, .......
low
-1 severe moderate .'low Undermined: I_* severe moderate J
Exposed roots: i
Root pruned: . ....... distance from trunk Root area affe.cled: Buttress wounded: Y N When:
Restricted root area: 1 severe I .,- moderate i low Potential for root failure: _'. severe C moaerate low
LEAN: deg. from vertical E natural C unnatural 7 self -corrected Soil heaving: Y N
Decay in plane of loan; Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N
rl W-60
TrN V_r t' severe low
Compounding factors. +— Lean severitr. I U moderate
rRaWN nFFFCTS- Indicate twesence of iidividual defects and rate their severibi -'s = severe. m = moderate, I = low)
DEFECT ROOT CROWN.—
Poor taper
Bow, sweep
TRUNK
SCAFFOLDS
BRANCHES
Godominants/forks
Multiole attachments
Included bark
Excessiveendweight
Cracks/splits
Hangers
Girdling
Wounds/seam
Decay
Cavity
Conksimushrooms,I)racket
BleedinElsap flow_
Loose.1cracked bark
Nestin holelbee hive
Dea&ood/stuhs
Borers/termitesiants
Cankers�lg4t��buos
rp �;"- _iol is f a i I i i r6
HAZARD RATING M--,"
Tree part most likely to fail: 7t N-LAIYI?-- FailLiro poICTItiA. I - 101M 2 - Mediunl"'j-
Inspection period: annual X__ biannuai — Other size of part: 1 - <6" oll-) cm): 2 - 6-18, (fs-45 cill):
(Da-30' (45-75 - I 3(Y' (75 cm)
failure Potential + Size ol Part + Target Rating Hazard Rating Target rating: 1 - occasionai uq�R t'te ittent use;'
3 - frequent use. 4 - constant use
HAZARD ABATEMENT thin E, raise canopy '!-I rrown reduce 7 . restructure nshaPe
Prune: remove defective Van [_'reduce end weigm Ucrownc;ean
Cablel8race: Inspectfurther Lrootcrown Udecal/ I monitor
Remove tree: G) N Replace? CY) N Movetarget: Y Other
Eff ect on adjacent tram 171 norte >�evaluate
Notification: Xcwner. .—manager Ugoverpirg agency Date:
VVY-) fA 6t-4 0,C =VA
COMMENTS L/ A _`_ -�D P ot,) Q_Q
21� -eW
YW
DYI,/ - �_f
A Photographid Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas
TREE HjUARD EVAL UA TION FORM2nd Edition
)L )frl(,),V- I)V, . HAZARD RATING:
Site/Address: ) V6, —
Map/Location: + 3 +
Failure + Size + Target Hazard
Owner: pul;ilic private X� lqso%pjn other Potential of part Rating Rating
kW_ -_ — Immediate action needed
Date: Inspector: Mw_ a, Needs further inspecition
Date of fast inspection.- tc-,
f Dead free
TREE CHARA FAIMCS -1
(pwp 'A -vy V1 zle
Tree SW s:
OBH: #of trunks: Height Spread:
Form:
)4nerallysymmatric 1-1 minor asymmetry 1711 major asymmetry r.-stumpsprout stag -headed
Crown ellm; n dominant I') co -dominant Anierrinediale suppressed
Live crown ratio: % Ageclass: .''Iyoung J'Isemi-mature >Gature 71over-maturetsenescent
Pruning history: cro,,,jn c leaned U excessively thinned )-,,."Wpped *own raised �J polkiMed L crown reduced L, flush cuts caoj, braced
none D multiple pruning events Approx. date�
J
SpecialValue: 0specimen 0heritagafhistoric L-7.1wildlife Flunusual --istreettree 71scmen 7shade Xindigienous 71prolected bygov. agency
TREE HEALTH
Foliagecolor: Onormal Ochlorolic —necrotic lipicormics?CY "IN Growth obstructions:
Foliage density: 19normai U sparse Leat size: *ormal L small U stakes '_1 wirelties U signs L� cables
Annual shoot growth: E excellent Xaveraoe -_'j poor Twig Dieback? Y CN) curbipavement D guards
Woundwood development- :""excellent — average poor X--- Pone er L^_C, -t-,
'__'j excellent * Nverage L fair U poor
Vigor class., t. tN
Major pests/dIseases:
WE CONDMONS
Sillacharacter ;!!�esidence Lcommercial Lindustrial Lpark �Jopenspace Unatural L woGdIancNarest'
F MoUn
Landscape type: '—,I parlavay L raised bed �J container " d lawn b4hrub Oorder L] wind break
Irrigation: L none Yadequate UJ inadequate [--. excessive F ** trunk wrettled
Recent she disturbance? YON ��onstrurcton .' Isoil disturbance "'.1. grade change I line clearing clearing
• dripline paved: 0%. 10-25% (2�5-50 50-75% 75-100% Pavementiffled? Y Tsfoyy pev-y-c.
• dripline wl fill soil: .0% 10-25% 25-50% 50450,10 75-100%
• dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50%, 50-75%) 75-100%
Soilproblems: 1—ishallow Flcompacted l"'Aroughly 11saline _7111kaline acidic C small volume UZ disease center islory a
y 90f f 11
clay expansive ><slope k__0 - -aspect: 4. 01 vwy_
Obsuucllons; ' ilights I Isignage _11ine-of-sight Rview L—overheadlines, 7! underground utilities i7trafic .7 adjacent veg.
Exposure to wind: :5�.' gle tree [7 below canopy n above canopy F1 recently exposed n windward, canopy edge .7 area prone t i dtl�frow
win; C
YC
Prevailing wind direction: -S Occurrence of snowficestornris --never 0 seldom )<regularly —
tu"tae, � V-) -N
TARM
Use Under Tree: >(building 1
Can target be moved? Y (9
Occupancy: I I occasional use
X,hardscape '':small features lutilitylines
parking :-.'traffic [ pedestrian I 'recreation /*<landscape
Can use be restricted? Y
interniftlent use 7 frequent use P(Constant use cN1W_ C",Vis- M)CNIP—
TPe International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form,
TREE DEFECTS
ROUT VEFEVS.'
Suspect root rot Y Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y ON
Exposedroots: -�Isevere X�oderate low Undermined:
ID: —
-4evere
moderate __J low
Root pruned: __ distance from trunk Root area affected: _% Buttress wounded: Y N When:
Restricted root area: Nevem I 'maderate iow Potential for root failure: k. severe 17- moderate low
LEAN.,_____ deg. from verticai Cnatural unnatural 7 self-corf ected Soil heaving: Y h
Decay in plane of lean; Y /L"�101-,' Roots broken Yt& Soil cracidng:cyw-
Compounding factors: im I',-, o� 4AW'_ J moderate L lwv
Lean severitir I severe F
CRDWN DEFECrS. Indicate iwesanca of individual defects and rate Itheir severity (s = severe. m moderate, I = lav;)
DEFECT ROOT CROWN
_�O_or taper
Bow, svCep
TRUNK
SCAFFOLDS
BRANCHES
rn
CDdoml�avtsAorkb
Multiple attachments
Included bark
Ucessive endweight
Cracksisplits
Hanaers
Girdling
Wounds/scam
N'cay
Cavity
Con ksimush too ms/bracket
..... ..
Bleeding!sap flow
.............
Looswacked bark
Nestiag_qqlp4l�� hive
Deadwoodistubs
Borersitermitesiants
QanLe��gpllslburls
Previous failure
HAZARD RATING P�71_1 igh,A - severe
Tree part most likely to fail: Failure pol�:Itial: 1 - low; 2 - meditino
Inspection period: ___x annual -_ biannual — otlier Size of part. 1 - <6" it*15 cm): 2 - 6-18" (15-45 .rrf):
Failure Potential 4 Size of Part Target Rating Hazard Rating IZZ3- �la-3OV" 45-75 cm): 4 - >30r'(.75 cm)
Target rating: occasionai use; 2 intermittent use�
+ frequent use.C- Eonitni
HAZARD ABATEMENT
Prune: remove defective pa-' L* reduce end *wcight LJ crown c:ean :_' tbin E- raise canopy -I crown feauce 7, restructure n shape
Cable/Brace,
Remove tree: 0 N
Effect on adjacent frees:
Notification: Xoriner
'T
COMMENTS 2
Replace? ON Move target: Y 0 Other
n none -kevaliate W_ 'TV-4—c 2-
manager Li governing aqenc� Date: G *
I i C' - -a I* ml�i'*_ !�Q
nap
w1w
V,
A40
�W'4tyy
16
Inspectfurther: Lrootcrown Udecay ...:aerial i monittor
1. P, % I.. It
n will
0-
4z
Tree to be Jdoi
stump left in plarA
LEGEND
- Property Line
0
Approximate extent of Teccomesh repair
Approximate extent of erosion control material repair
0 20 40
Approximate extent of loose soil areas to be removed
Approximate Scale: 1 inch = 20 feet
Reference: She plan based on an untitled, undated, dravving prepared by Kearsley Homes, Inc.
,r-- -4F L'&--
Slope
Large Evergreen Trees
Undermined at Top of Slope
Approximate aisting
Residence Foqtprint
LOt
RECEIVEL�
I
MAY 17 2013
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
COUNTER
N
ca
0
0
U)
U
U
z
0
0
U
w
w
w
01--
w
w
Z 0
W
0
z
<
0
z
j
w
w
z
U
w
z
11-
0
1
C:
CL
E
>
75
(D
-5
2
co
E
z M
0)
00
a_
—ia
0
4z
Annmx- FyfAntq nf Prn--inn r-nnfre%l hAn++;^^
Landslide Debris
Extents of Recent Landslide
Tree on slope (to be removed)
Approximate Extents of Loose Soils on Slope
LEGEND
— Property Line
A A' Approximate Location
of Cross-section
0 20 40
Approximate Scale: I inch = 20 feet
Reference: Site plan based on an untitled, undated, drawing prepared by Kearsley Homes, Inc,
Top of Steep Slope
Large Evergreen Trees
Undermined at Top of Slope
Approximate E xisting
A
Residence Footorint
Lot 7
RECEIVED
MAY 17 2013
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
COUNTER
V)
:K
to
W
11
C
.2
0
Cq
z
<
U
z
Z
0
0
X
—
j
q
W
o'
W
0
j.-
W
<
W
z
99.
0
W
0
U)
z
0
.J
U)
0
z
W
W
z
U
Qjw
Z
X
Z.0 g
0�!E
k n
< 0 .0,
2 z
0
W
m (L
C
M
E
C
M
>
E M
= T-
Z
CD
Co
BENCHMARK: EA5T 51DE Of
POWER POLE NUMBER 27>4)/-
ON TAL130T ROAD,
ELEVATION = 1 1 1.7
EX15TING CURB CUT
IMPERVIOU5 5URFACE CALC5:
KAIREZ DRIVE PROP05ED HOU51! ROOF OUTLINE: 3038 FT2
CUL-DE-5AC PROP05ED GARAGE ROOF OUTLINE: 545 FT2
cotnerFlag _�L TOTAL BUILDING ROOF OUTLINE: 3983 fT2
1w,
170' Actual PROP05ED HOU5E MAIN FLOOR: 23 10 FT2
EX5TING WATER METER pfalit 101 PROP05ED GARAGE: 773 FT2
to RO
E30X F'OR LOT 7 Sideg t `9 Q0 P05ED DR.IVEWAY- 1740 FT2
11 G5' E,
P05ED DECK: 484 FT2 (MAIN fLOOR)
INGRE55 4� EGRE55 EA5EMENT (),her
PROP05ED PATIO: 484 I`T2 (LOWER fLOOR)
F r, LU I ffu
AKEA: 20'x 43'x 24.92 X
PROF`O5ED ENTRY WALKWAY: 93 f T2
EX15TING GRADE
I G5'
I G4'
X
0
47.08'
f1NAL
M&_TU2.,
LOT ARfA = 14,8 10 fT2
f I NAL GRADE
I G4'fINAL
-Th---"0St5. FfLOQ106 rc&�I&Lc
LOT COVERAGE: 3660 fT2/14,81 0 FT2 = (25%)
DkVEWAY
I
_&2 _U9Z _Q�WMT
&AC P&
.
��
I G2'
I GO'
LOT 5LOPE 20% FROM ACCE55 5TREET TO TOP Of 5TEEP 5LOPE
FINAL
WATER & SEWER
INSPECTIONS REO'D.
LOT 5LOP fRom P F E P 5LOPE TO RAILROAD RIGHTOF WAY
PROVIDE STAE31LIZED
I G2'FINAL
CALL 425-771-0220 EXT. 1326
CON5TRUCTION
H HT CALCULATION:
ENTRANCE 15'x 50'WITH
M 4 COKNER5 Of 5OX 5UKKOUNDI G HOU51f GAKAGE:
4"-(5" QUARRY 5PALL5 Ln
I GO
fINAL
X
F KOV I D E f I LL' M ATE RI AL A5 F E R
ELEVATION A = 15?_+
8"- 12" DEEP
13 = 141.5
1 GO,
IGO f INAL
f INAL CONTOUR LINE5 fOR NEW
C = 13?-.(;p
DRIVEWAY TO RA15E EX15TING
D = 13%v-&
1581
HOPE TO AFFROX I G% GRADE
A+fi+C+D/4 = 14 12 = AVERAGE GRAD
f INAL'
I 55'f[NA
-
fOR ACCE55 TO NEW TURN
14 1.9 + 25'= 1 GG.7- � MAXIMUM HEIG T OF RIDGE
LOWE5T FOOTING EI FVATION = APP 132'FOR 5PREAD FOOTING
k fi k_1 Z�re_ [YI A I �1 .51-0,2 rA b &kl 0
AROUND AND NEW-GARAG
LOWE5T PILING FOOTING 15 DETE D BY 501 L5 ENGI NEER AT 51TE
x&_16r F_415_1t*11�
p o- op w, �j (j,5
115�
q 1%we . ,
155'
"A-rit-W 11A I i
(5EE 5011_5 REPORT BY,NE ON GEOTECHNICAL A55CCIATE5, INC.
. VI X s-
jg�Aac4ww4k wzrco 155, 0
r
1 41
y I Se -9. 154'fl
_T
FINAL
152.75'fINA
150- .3
RETAIN ING WALL TO 15 f1NAL
HOLD DIRT UNDER 148'fINAL
NEW DRIVEWAY 5EE 152 75' 1 1 DRIVEWAY WIT� 1471 fIN
PLL ?-coF- a =-4A1-1&-1; 4- 610711Z- , tf\A-41_Af(\UA(\
'2� W ITH 6Y-,(_ty TkOg D(-- rq X-k E-fA" FZC��
-7-r-- L-_-\VkT1-oM 4IZW1- 9MM 6A+_1(L-
STRUCTURAL SHEETAG-u TURN AROUND
'OPEF6-y\
r-109 ^Ld'467- 10, Pp
fOR WALL DETAIL4-//,#1 FINAL jo! 6L2_-T?�YXCI4_ ArZ:E-
5ET15ACK/'LINE 145
rDp Or ---
ELEVATION OF TH15 POINT
Of DRIVEWAY = 154' (TH15 X %L_ 44-.5 /0/ 0"
ALLOW5 FOP, APPROX I G%
GRADE f ROM END Of KAIRE7 NEW CONCRETE 14- IJAL 10"
DRIVE AT ELEVATION I GG') 2'ROOf OVERHANG 0
145' /DRIVEWAY /0/
0.,
N
L
0 DRAIN TROUGH W1 GPATE
PROVIDE 3G` RAILING ENTRY WALKWAY 93 F�12 140-1
Ln
AT EDGE OF
21-
WEE
DRIVEWAY AT 30" -ir- __vA PROP05ED RE51DENCE
ABOVE GRADE 150'flN MAIN FLOOR 23 10 fT2
LOWER f LOOP, 2250 fT2 (I G40 f IN!5HED + G I
X
UNFIN15HED)
ELEVATIO TY 14 1'.
LOWE5T FOOTING ELEVATION 140.5'
140' PROP05ED GARAGE 773 fT2 LOWER f LOOP, ELEVATION = 141.25' 13
ELEVATI ON "D" LOWER GARAGE 5TORAGE 890ff 2, MAIN f LOOP, ELEVATION = 150.25' /X
UNHEATED
LOWE5T FOOTING ELEVATION 134'
LOWER fIN15HED 5LAB ELEVATION 141.25' LOWER f LOOK PATIO 454 F`T2
LOWER PATIO LOWE5T FOOTING 133.5'
GARAGE fLOOR ELEVATION 152.75'. LOWER DECK ELEVATION 14 1'
MAIN f LOOP, DECK ELEVATION 150'
-PROVIDE CONTINUOU5 MAIN fLOOR DECK 454 fT2 0",
POLL f ILTER FABRIC FENCE
WITH 2X2 5TAKE5 * 14 .5 &W oi- ST�� ov 'D f-
GAGE WIRE FABRIC OR 135'
EQUAL 0/,
-PLACE 3/4" - 1.5" WA5HED /X
GRAVEL IN THE TRENCH
ON BOTH SIDE5 Of THE
fILTER FABRIC fENCE ON ALL EXPOSED URFACES TO 6
BE COVERED WITHIN 2 DAYS— — X1
THE 5URfACF
-BURY BOTTOM Of f ILTER K,
MATERIAL 8" TO 12"
-5PACE 2X2 5TAKE5 AT G'
�X 0
OC AND BURY 5TAKE5 INTO X`
CTOR W111 E_
GROUND 2'-G" OWNER/CONT
r- 0 R E r 0 0 N c In- L5 1 "1 -F, r,,*)! A N D P1,;
EXCAVATION DETAIL5:
CUT $ EXCAVATION: 4x25x7O/27 + 3x50x3O/27 + 20OLfx3/27 447fT3 -X_
FILL: 5x4Ox5O/27 + 20xGOx2/27 = 458fT3 � ELEVATION 132j; qb
61 z m f- 1 y400).�_ Z'
APPROVED 5TORM DRAI CONNECTION LOCATION FOR L T 7
By PLANNING CATCH DA51N NU BE 0, TYPE, 1 /3
0/0 _t, 5EWER C ECTION fOR LOT 7
cjb4i�IDQ T 7[RE. Ek6rC or -
APPROVED AS NOTED
BY _ENGINEERtNG 51TE PLAN
Date: 5CALE: I 10-011 NORTH
LEGAL DE5CRIPTION:
5ECTION 18 TOWN5HIP 27 RANGE 0 QUARTER, NW V15TA DELMAR BLK 000 D-00-LOT 7 TGW EQ � LIND INT
IN KAIREZ DR. AL50 TGW EQ � LIND INT IN TR 5
TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER 00914200000700
LOT 7
14�8 10 fT2
ih.
RF-015 FOR 6ROUP R
OCCUPANC'Y' - CL I MATE ZONE I
%0 �q
00
tj
Cn
6 mod
PLq 11::4
01-1
00
00
00
cl) L?
OD
cn
4A9K1_-T'- C1ZCq2
w
cc
W-�_ ell
(5LAZIN6
AREA: %
OF FLOOR
6LAZIN(5 U-FA( TOR
DOOR
U-FACTOR
GEILINC7
NALL
ABO\/E
6RADE
HALL INT
E3ELOV4
6RADE
HALL EXT
BELON
67RADE
I
FLOOR
5LA5
ON -
6RAVE
\/ERTIrAL
OVERHEAP
UNLIMITED
6ROUP R-5
0.40
N/A
0.20
R-55
R-21
R-21
R-10
R-50
R-10
Or,CUPANG"r
ONLY
0
FA
\/1(f,1N1T`r MAF
NO 15rALE
4WD)
W
0
1�4 -TALBOT r-OAf.�,
jLY3 To W.-h-1
5110A-M A115 /
(3
X
LU
C%
LU
C)
Eagle Eye Consulting Engineers LU
P 0. Box 523
01alla, 1AA 98359 - (206) 356-7790
13y. APPROVE >
........ .. . ............. ... ............. 9� tC;4: r-) j ki� LA Kjoe;? D PAWN BY: DAM
DATE: 3 20 R.K. 6116104
APPROVED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHALL NOT BE CHANGED, RECIEIVED REVISED W. DATE, 2L
MODIFIED, OR ALTERED WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION FROM THE BUILD ING 0q
OFFICIAL, AND ALL WORK SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH
APPROVED PLANS
ITEMS APPROVE'I;' 14n� SEP 17 2004 REVISED BY. DAm A,
114
'lop PERMIT COUNTER REVISED BY; DATE'
CLIENTPROJECT#:
REVISED BY, DATE. A�
K - C7�! qL� -5�91F-4C4147L,
RECEIVED
ON AUG 3 0 2004 A
BUILDING DEPT. 1.0