21103 SHELL VALLEY RD.PDFIIIIIIIIIIIIII
14408
21103 SHELL VALLEY RD
ADDRESS:
TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER:
BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE):
COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR:
CRITICAL AREAS: DETERMINATION: 0 Conditional Waiver F] Study Required E] Waiver
DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S:
DRAINAGE PLAN DATED:
PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED:
EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR:
PERMITS (OTHER):
PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED:
SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED:
SEWER LID FEE $: LID #:
SHORT PLAT FILE: LOT: BLOCK:
SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED:
SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #:
GEOTECH REPORT DATED:
STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #:
FOR:
WATER METER TAP CARD DATED:
LATEMP\DS'Ps\Forms\Street File Checklist.doc
tCATC.�A ISA'Slk:
X-115 -I no (0 k
WOUAL)
30(0"
UA L
TANDAF�D DRAINAGE PLAN
A"TRELT FIL-E 'SLTRATION SYSTEM
PAGE I OF Z
TOK NC W L&C "a-rH
i>
"TACNCH cov"
...... T-0i
Ar U IN4 K LCvri— TXCNrjq
-'�FEXF PIPC CAY
TrzF-� w/ 4Low. Lac;s
SYSTEM CROSS—SECTION
T -5
0 Is - LAYED e
W4"—=)��ff [) Ko--K
'TP,EW—VA COVER
G RAY E I
4-01Am FEPF P
of
TRENCH CR-OSS—SECTIO�
for
T�ft �Iion
plan by
phone
da te
pAr
DESIGN DATA
Trench, Perc LF per
Number Rate 1000 sq. t.
Imperm Trench
Area
V
Req
i2-w
,
1118 7
I&S 1.
NOTES
1. call Engineering Division (771-3202)
for prebackfill and final inspections.
2. Responsibility for operation and
maintenance of drainage systems on
private property is the responsibility
of the property owner(s). Preventive
maintenance consists of preventing
soil and other materials from entering
trench during construction as well as
after construction. Catch basins should
be cleaned of floating material and
sediment at regular intervals (at le!st
twice per year).
7
CITY OF EOMONOS
r
CITY OF EDMONDS
CIVIC CENTER * EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98MO M) 775-2525
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
May 9, 19 80
Robert Hovde
20427 86th Pi. W.
Edmonds, Washington
SUBJECT:
Dear Sir:
aQn,)n
40 STREET FILE
HARVE H. HARRISON
MAYOR
11 Unit PRD at 2 Shell Valley Rd.
��9
This department is in possession of plans and associated paper
work for a project you were contemplating. They have been on
file for a period in excess of 180 days during which time no
action has been taken.
Section 303(c) of the Uniform Building Code 1973 Edition Drovides
for the expiration by limitation of a permit application a-fter
this time. The plans may be returned or destroyed.
Please provide for picking up the plans within ten working days
from the date of this letter. Because of limited storage space,
unless they are retrieved by you or your agent they will be
destroyed.
Very truly yours,
EDMONDS BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Harold Reeves
Building Official
HR/rm
The fee for plan check services performed by the City amounts tot468.00.
If you wish to renew your application please remit this amount within
10 days.
1976 EDITION 302-303
The issuance of a nermit based on Ians and s —ifi—tions sh 11 # I
11 11 V . -
prevent the Building Official from thereafter requiring the correction of
errors in said plans and specifications or from preventing building opera-
tions being carried on thereunder when in violation of this Code or of any
other ordinance of the city.
(d) Expiration. Every permit issued by the Building Official under the
provisions of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and
void, if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced
within 120 days from the date of such permit, or if the building or work
authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned at any time after the
work is commenced for a period of 120 days. Before such work can be
recommenced a new permit shall be first obtained so to do, and the fee
therefor shall be one-half the amount required for a new permit for such
work, provided no changes have been made or will be made in the original
plans and specifications for such work; and provided, further, that such
suspension or abandonment has not exceeded one year.
(c) Suspension or Revocation. The Building Official may, in writing,
suspend or revoke a permit issued under provisions of this Code whenever
the permit is issued in error or on the basis of incorrect information sup-
plied, or in violation of any ordinance or regulation or any of the provi-
sions of this Code.
Fees
Sec. 303. (a) Building Permit Fees. A fee for each building permit shall
be paid to the Building Official as set forth in Table No. 3-A.
The determination of value or valuation under any of the provisions of
this Code shall be made by the Building Official. The valuation to be used
in computing the permit and plan -check fees shall be the total value of all
construction work for which the permit is issued, as well as all finish work,
painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air conditioning,
elevators, fire -extinguishing systems and any other permanent work or
permanent equipment.
Where work for which a permit is required by this Code is started or
proceeded with prior to obtaining said permit, the fees specified in Table
No. 3-A shall be doubled, but the payment of such double fee shall not
relieve any persons from fully complying with the requirements of this
Code in the execution of the work nor from any other penalties prescribed
herein.
(b) Plan -checking Fees. When the valuation of the proposed construe-
tion exceeds $1,000.00 and a plan is required to be submitted by subsec-
tion (c) of Section 301,. a plan -checking fee shall be paid to the Building
Official at the time of submitting. plans and specifications for checking.
Said plan -checking fees for buildings of Groups R, Division 3 and M
Occupancies shall be one-half of the building permit fees. Plan -checking
fees for all other buildings shall be 65 percent of the building permit fees as
set forth in Table No. 3-A.
31
00
CITY OF EDMONDS
CIVIC CENTER - EDMONDS. WASHINGTON 98020 (205) 775-2525
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: October 12, 1979_
TO Robert Hovde
20427 86th Place West
Edmonds, WA 98020
" STREL"T FILE
HARVE H. HARRISON
MAYOR
TRANSMITTING: Fire Department Memo
dated 10-9-79
RE: Building permit for PRD in Shell Valley
AS YOU REQUESTED:
FOR YOUR INFORMATION-XX
AS WE DISCUSSED:
FOR APPROVAL:
FOR YOUR FILE:
REVIEW AND COMMENT .... .. .
COMMENT AND RETURN
MINUTES OF MEETING .......
REMARKS:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
F Ese j '��qp -4- 0,909
vnr7-
99V av
31IJ
Ll
cavo-)�3,S,
0
0
E
V/
nternational Conference of Building Officials
0 RESEARCH COMMITTEE REPORT
40
0
COMPRESSION PERPENDICULAR TO THE GRAIN
FOR GLUED -LAMINATED LUMBER
AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF TIMBER CONSTRUCTION
333 W. HAMPDEN AVENUE
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO 80110
1 1. Subject: Allowable compression perpendicular to grain stress
F,_Q for structural glued -laminated hem -fir with Douglas fir or
arch outer laminations.
II. Description: This report establishes allowable co pression
perpendicular to grain stress (F,J-) for visually gaded mstructural
Flu�d-laminated hem -fir members with Douglas r or larch outer
lammations at points of bearing. When at least two 11/2-inch-thick
outer laminations of Douglas fir or larch of the same visual grade
are substituted for the hem -fir grades required the allowable com-
pression stress perpendicular to grain (FcJ-) o? Douglas fir may be
used as follows:
Dense Douglas fir or larch — FcJ- = 450 psi
Close -grain Douglas fir or larch — Fc-L = 410 psi
Medium Grain Douglas fir or larch — F,-L = 385 psi
Permissible grade combinations remain as required in Table No.
25-11-A of U.B.C. Standards. Allowable unit stresses other than
compression perpendicular to grain (F,-L) remain as shown in Table
No. 25-C-1 of the Uniform Budding Code.
Report No. 3311
February, 1978
III. Evidence Submitted: A discussion on perpendicular to grain
stress is submitted.
Findings
IV. Findings: That allowable compression perpendicular to
grain stress (F,-L) for visually graded structural glued-larninated
hem -fir members with Douglas fir and larch outer laminations be
as set forth in this report subject to the following:
1. At least two Douglas fir or larch IY2-inch-thick outer lam-
inations of the same visual grade as required for hem -fir in
Table No. 25-11-A of the U.B.C. Standards are substituted
for the hem -fir laminations at bearing locations.
2. Where the increased bearing strength is needed on only one
face (top or bottom), the Douglas fir or larch is needed on
that face only.
3. Where Douglas fir or larch laminations are placed only at
points of bearing, the minimum length of the laminations
shall be 2 feet. Also, these laminations shall extend at least
1 foot beyond the edge of the support. Drawings of the
beam shall clearly show bearing locations and the length of
the two outer laminations. End joint spacings shall be main-
tained where required.
4. The certificate shall clearly show where Douglas fir or larch
is substituted so that field verification is possible.
This report is subject to annual re-examination.
Page I of I
0
r-]
CITY OF EDMONDS
CIVIC CENTER - EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 * (206) 775-2525
COMMUNITY DIEVIELOPMIENT D9PARTM9NT
DATE:. September 27, 1979
TO: Robert Hovde
20427 86th Place West
Edmonds, WA 98020
%STFiELT NLE
TRANSMITTING: Engineering Memo regarding PRD at
21103-09-13-17-23-27 Shell Valley Road
AS YOU REQUESTED:
FOR YOUR INFORMATION: XX
AS WE DISCUSSED:
FOR APPROVAL:
FOR YOUR FILE:
REVIEW AND COMMENT:
C0114ENT AND RETURN:
MINUTES OF MEETING:
REMARKS:
HARVE H. HARRISON
MAYOR
�Al-- v---"
TO
SUBJECT:
TUWAY MESSAG�j STREL-T FILE
-CEIVED
FROM
ll..'% -At-- �c� - i L NATE i tu� CL - -7 0
Iota-
m
r-A -Al"mvnb�cc,
E
LIT% oc;�
T's O.Q.
C 2.-, jo 1. (3 C,'3"
s
—
s
A
—
im.vam
4,��qx&ss es
G
A-
/
E
Ct- a %a 49
c
8 ft3 ncns dLcr- rl.,
--
&N" IL bzk
c- -I-k C-, ,3
%--
s I G N E D
R
E
p
L
y
DATE:
,,, I
SIGNED
CASCADEG Ll-C2375 PRINTED IN U.S.A. -... - - - -A
& 0
DATE:
f -:)- - n -� � - -7-'-: 7�
11 1,�:
f,o P i ml
Development.'. DeplirrmellL
n(,e r J i, v) s i nil
i c Depar t-men
1) C, r 111 C 'I L i k, C,
f j c w
r r,� _9,,Z�
DATE:
1,FFMO TO: Building Division
Community Development Department
FROM; Engineering Division
Public Works Department
SUBJECT:
After review of the subject building permit application, we have
the following comments:
M�
ft.
nA Eqo-=r- ill 14 NVI)o
11 111CA
`)SE (2 t S icr=cs� 4—� cA,\,+.
:T!EaA)4--(2 M Lx�\ AA,S=
C-A 4
0 *
4 0-0
PUBLIC WORKS DEPART4E:NT CHEdcusT
E�11 _�FVRIV106503127R
6 * -
h-4FAMM WWI
VA , 6 -
.601 - 1� I I _ !� IV R-t NE am-
0
Street Right -of -Way Existing����OL
Z
_FEQD
Access Easements Exist1ng__paa__2,g.._� REQD
cd
Utility Easement Existi
Lot Per Subdivision Assessor Map__
Site Plan Checked for Accura
Underground W`iring Reqd.
40&M--
Check Accuracy of Legal Descrip"tion_ —
Z
Review by. Date
6__Q_Va_ :z;t
.0 -NOW _24
Existing Water Main Size
Water Main Required NIA
Service Line Required
Hydrant Size Exist
Cd
Hydrant Reqd Per Fire Code Size
Detector Check Meter Reqd. 1YI14
Cross Connection Inspection__0
Fire Department Comments
Water 1-bter Char Re d
Review by
Septic Tank Design Approved Date
Septic Tank Permit Reqd. Permit No.' --
Sanitary Sewer Availability_gxz_,__�� Proi Ir
Drawing No. 4-w— File No.. Uoe
Side Sewer Availability___O*e�����
Sanitary Sewer Connection Fee Reqd. ^V
:3:
Review by, Agrw� Date
W
Open Ditch Exist* C4"-4 Le I e �; ell, Reqd.
S
Culvert Reqd. '00" ize, Ap
04
Catch Basin Reqd. 1j. -Indicate an Site Plan
0
Shoulder drainage maintain collection an swale open runoff 0
Manhole reqd. &,the- Indicate on* Site Plan
Soil Conditions and Ground Water Field Checked
Review by
10�
Revised: IvIO-1977
Page 2
Street Paving Reqd. 4?Jar
Curb and Cutter Reqd. &2je-
Sidewalk Reqd. &0 C.,.;,Zo-o, 1,2
Curb Cut' for Driveway Reqd.
pd Right -of -Way Construction Permit Reqd.
Bond Reqd. for Public Inprovements
Street Nam Sign Reqd.
Other Signing Reqd.
P, Pre Permit Site Inspection made on
z
0
0 F4 BY: S94ER
WATER
H z STREET
ENGINEERING
Special Requirements listed in mem to CommLmity DevelopTwnt Department,
Building Division
BY -
Date
c) All items filled in on Building Permit Application
P4 BY Date
P' Drawings Stamped and Notations Made
BY Date
Approved by Public Works Department
Revised: 1v 10-1977
CITY OF EDMONDS sill
L`-T FILE
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Apartment & Commercial Plan Review Checklist
PROJECT ? R'D - �Fm. Ao,4 Ds
DATE RECEIVED 8 - 30 - -7 9 - PRELIMINARY FINAL PLAN -
ADDRESS V\03— V127 '546L VALL ROAD
OWNER Wwr.>E
ARCHITECT K t>E lLf:A-TVA;,:p PHONE- -77!5, c73c](7
USE Co tj t> o CODE lq76
FIRE ZONE OCCUPANCY (501) TL— I NO. STORIES
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION --sr-g OCCUPANT LOAD
1. AREAS & VALUATION
BASE14ENT
G906,
SQ.FT.@,
\0.10
—SQ.FT.=
$
Gq 0 -7 -3c3
lst FLOOR
11 /86-3 SQ.FT.@
k(o 15
-SQ.FT.=
$
'415, 455
2nd FLOOR
853-7
SQ.FT.@
10,
SQ.FT.=
$
85 37o
GAVLAGS
-FtOM
2141- -
SQ.FT.@
5,76
SQ.FT.=
$
1 z) '31 G
OTHER--t;,T--ck6 1-7(,q.
SQ.FT.@
3
—SQ.FT.=
$
TOTAL:
s
PER14IT FEE
$ -72-c
PLAN CHECK
FEE $ 468
2. PLUMBING
f v�lp I z 5 - - - f '3,1 co 00
NO. FIXTURES 4-3 FIXTURE UNITS ' 1-7 3
DISTANCE TO METER
BUILDING SUPPLY SIZE
MATERIAL A55 P tlL m qrez5
I
METER SIZE
PER[4IT FEE $ 2- 8q
/77 asd
i�uinonu_ building Department
Apartment & Commercial
Plan Review Checklist 10
40
3. -MECHANICAL
HEATING SYSTEM
OTHER APPLICANCES
PERMIT FEE $ REMARKS
4.
5.
1.1
BASIC ALLOWABLE AREA (Table 5-c)
(All floors) (505b)
SEPARATION ON SIDES NEAREST DISTANCE (506)
% ALLOWABLE INCREASE (506)
TOTAL ALLOWABLE AREA (all floors) Sq. Ft..
AREA SEPARATIONS (505d)
OCCUPANCY SEPARATIONS (503)
EXIT FACILITIES (Chapter 33)
NO. REQUIRED EXITS (3302a) WIDTH (3302b)_
ARRANGEMENT & DISTANCE (3302c,d)
EXIT DOORS (3303)
CORRIDORS (3304)
STAIRWAYS & RAMPS.(3305,3306)
EXIT ENCLOSURES (.3308)
EXIT SIGNS (3312) ILLUMINATION
OTHER COURTS)
LIGHT, VENTILATION & SANITATION (Chap.6,7,9,10,11,12,13,14)
WINDOW SIZE
SANITATION —YARDS & COURTS
CEILING HEIGHT
OTHER
7. FIRE ZONE RESTRICTIONS (Chapter 16)
ROOF COVERING
OTHER
(1603) (4307)
-2-
tdm6riu ; iwildin'g Deipartment
'kpartment & Commercial
Plan Review Checklist 40
DIAPHRAGMS
CRAW SPACE (2517)
PLATES, SILLS POSTS
FOUNDATION VENTILATION
EXTERIOR WALL COVERINGS
GIRDERS JOISTS
I
WALL FRAMING
BRACING
ROOF FRAMING
NAILING
13. CONCRETE
mix
STRENGTH
REINFORCEMENT
ADMIXTURES
TESTS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
COVER
DESIGN CALC'S
14. STEEL & IRON (Chap.
SPECS
CONNECTIONS
SPECIAL INSPECTION
COLUMN BASES
WELDER QUALIFICATIONS
15. EXCAVATIONS, FOUNDATIONS
AND RETAINING WALLS (Chap.29)
SOILS REPORTS
TESTS
SOIL PRESSURE
FOOTINGS
WALLS
PLATES AND SILLS
OTHERS
-.4-
Edmonds Building Department
Apartment & Commercial
Plan Review Checklist 40
40
8. REQUIREMENTS BASED ON TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION (Chap..17)
ELEVATORS (1706) WEATHER PROTECTION (1707
PARAPETS (1709 PROJECTIONS (1710)
TOILET FACILITIES (1711)
GUARDRAILS (1716) BLDG.CLASSIFICATION(1701)
OTHER
9. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
PROVISION FOR ACCESS BY HANDICAPPED
SOUND TRANSMISSION CONTROL (Chap.35 Appendix)
STAIR CONSTRUCTION
10.
11.
12.
ROOFS
GENERAL DESIGN REQUIREMENTS (Chap.23)
LOADS (2302)
DEFLECTION (2307)
WALLS & STRUCTURAL FRAMING
SPECIAL LOADS (Table 23-0
ENGINEERING CALCIS
ENGINEERING DESIGN
MASONRY (Chap.24)
REINFORCEMENT
MORTAR
GROUTING
WOOD (Chap. 25)
STRESSES
IDENTIFICATION
BEAM DESIGN
COLUMNS CONNECTIONS
ANCHORAGE
LATERAL SUPPORT
-3-
Edmonds building Department.-
-Apartment & Commercial
Plan Review Checklist
40
16.
ROOFS
ROOF COVERING
SHEATHING
ATTIC ACCESS
AREA SEPARATIONS
SCUPPERS
NAILING
VENTILATION
DRAINS
SOFFITS
17. FIRE EXTINGUISHING SYSTEMS (Chap.38)
SPRINKLERS STANDPIPES
MISCELLANEOUS
a) INTERIOR WALL & CEILING FINISH (Chap. 42)
b) FIRE -RESISTIVE STANDARDS (Chap. 43)
b. 1 PROTECTION OF STRUCTURAL MEEMBERS
b. 2 CEILINGS
b. 3 WALLS & PARTITIONS
b. 4 FLOOR -CEILINGS
b. 5 OPENINGS*
b. 6 DAMPERS
c) MARQUES, AWNINGS (Chap.45)
d) GYPSUM 14ALLBOARD
e) PLASTICS (Chap.47)
f) GLASS & GLAZING (Chap.53,State Code)
g) SOUND TRANSMISSION CONTROL
h) FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS
/77 asd
S T FILE
TREE
6AMA&C
W q
817 14
67 -77L
WJH A
tAV
VJ) bAv
ICTAL
(oo3 G AILAE)e
LAV 1(
q4o
67 lQK
T
0
International Conference of Building Officials
RESEARCH COMMITTEE, REPORT
PATIO COVERS AND ROOF STRUCTURES
T. H. LIKEN & SONS, INC.
3700 EAST 7TH STREET
LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90804
1. Subject: T. H. Liken & Sons, Inc., Patio Covers and Roof
Structures.
Il. Description: The T. H. Liken & Sons, Inc., Patio Covers
and Roof Structures are designed for 10- and 20-pound-per-square-
foot live loads. The 10-pound-per-s uare-foot patio covers are de-
signed for a wind load of 10 pounas per square foot and a wind
uplift force of 10 pounds per square foot. The 20-pound-per-
square-foot live load roof structures are designed for a horizontal
Report No. 3326P
March, 1978
wind load of 15 pounds per square foot and a wind uplift force
of 18.75 pounds per square foot.
Identification: Each structure formed from these components
should be provided with a permanent decal or identification tag
fving the design loads and the name and address of the manu-
a'cturer.
III. Evidence Submitted: Details, plans and calculations are
submitted.
Findings
IV. Findings: The subject report complies with the Uniform
Building Code.
This report is subject to annual re-examination.
1 0
Page 1 of I
C, r,
Z) 0 TA S S I 1E N T
E11V I RO,'1.1 1E'-NTAL
PROJE CT Planned -Residential
eMlupmen� fur Robert Muvd-e
DATE SURTITED August 16, 1978
U 10% ff
REP T F11 1:
VIr. Of Public NV
In order to meet the requirements' of Ves State Environmental Policy Act of 1971,
the responsible of1ficial must make a declaration of environmental impact as early
as possible in the process of evaluating a project.
The information in Viis form .,J11 be used to determine whether it will be necess-
ary to rejui re an en J ronci�,nta I ii-.ioact s taterient If -ar) impact statement is
not required, a Statement of Negative i will be placed in the file.
If an impact statement is required, a draft statement must be filed with th i s
office, public notice g'iven and a revia..-i period of 30 days allowed. The final
statemen't and comments must be filed with the D'apartment of Ecology, Office of
tile Governor and t:ie Ecological Commission. .1
The Edmonds Planning Staff will assist you in any way vie can in accumulating
th*is information and .,/e would apprec i ate your cooper'ation.
I. Land:
Area in acres 2.72 Acres
Alderwood gravelly loam None for house foundations
Soil s type sand and gravel- mixture Limitations and roal construction
Description of topography ('/'I slope) Property slopes aenerally to the west at
approximately 6 to 12% gradient. There is a drainage swale on the westerly por-
tion of the property which will be relocated to accommodate site grading.
Grading: estimated cubic /ds. 750 cy - 800 cy I
NOTE: If grading or f-',Iling
wi IT exceed . 00 Cubic yards
Filling: estimated cubic yds . 750 to 800 cy a grading and:' filling plaij
2. Water: must be submitted .-Jith the
application.
�Stream - estimated flot.: (Cubic feet per second) N/A
Will strear,,i be altered?' N/A
To What degree? N/A
Impact on storm drainage (increase in run-off) Minimql. On.,iL
Q_drain2�wi�ll
be controlled within the roject by, storm drains and directed into holA-.--g ponds
J_
located within the City park.
Estimated area to be pave.d 0.40 acros % 14 ercent
Estfinated a'rea in open space 1.76 acres % 65 i)ercent
Shorelines: within 200.ft. of 11ean llig;ie.r High Water NIA
Adjacent to shorelines ione N/A
Environmental Assessment, page 2
3. Vegetation:
Type of trees fir, a Ider and som e-maple % to be remo-ve.d. 40 percent
Minimum diameter of trees to remain 8 inches
Ground cover gialal, forest litter. -some % to be removed 50 percent
brush
Proposed landscaping, if any Lawns and ornamental shrubs will be planted pur-
suant to construction.
4.- Existing Land*Use within 300 ft. radius of proposed development:
Single
Mu I ti -
Vacant
Family
Fami 1 y
Comm.
Other
North
X
South
X
X
P.R.D.
East
X
Wes t
Park
5. 'Circulation:
Estimated increase in auto trips daily 14 D. U. I s X 4 ATD I s = 50 ATD I s
F.stimated dep,,,nd for public trans portati OP 14 additional family units
Degree of change on adjacent streets moder ate; adjacent 'streets are capable
of accommodating increased traffic volume3.
6. A'rea of imnact:
neighbo-hood —Significant, as. to adjoining properties
cityw-wide In -sign ficant
regional Non6
7. Effect on air quality: Insignificant
8. thanges in noise generation: Minor
I I I
T
ENVIRONMENTAI, CHECKLIST FORM
Introduction: The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter
�_3 , RCW, requires all state and local governmental agencies
to consider environmental values both for their own actions and
when licensing private proposals. The Act also requires that an
EIS be prepared for all major actions significantly affecting the
quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to
help the agencies involved to determine whether or not a proposal
is such a major action.
Please.answer the following questions as completely as you can with
the information presently available to youi Wherel.explanations of
your answers are required, or where you believe an explanation would
be helpful to government decision makers, include your explanation
in the space provided, or use' additional pages if necessary. You
should include references to any reports or stucles of which you
are aware and which are 'relevant to the answers you provide. Com-
plete answers to those questions now will help all agencies involved
with your proposal. to undertake the reouired environmental review
without unnecessary delay.
The following questions apply to your total proposal, not just to
the permit for which'you'are currently app.lying or the proposal for
which approval is sought. Your answers should include the impacts
which will be caused by your proposal when it is, completed, even
though completion may not occur until. sometime in the future.. This
will. allow all of.' the agencies which will be involved to complete
their environmental review now, without duplicating paperwork in
the future.
NOT E : This i-s a standard form being
agencies in the State -of Washington
Many of the questions may not apply
does not apply, just answer it "not
on to the next qUEStions.
A. BACKGROUND
used by all. states and local
for various types
to your proposal.
applicable" (n/a)
of proposals.
If.a question
and continue
1. Name of Proponent Robert Hovde
2.' AddrLlss and Phone Number of Proponent
.20427 - 86th Place W., Edmondg, Wa. 98020
Ar-,ents l,ovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc
23106 - 100th Ave. W., Edmonds, Wa. 98020 Tel.: 775-1593
3. Date Checklist Submitted Aui_�ust 17, 1978
4 . Agency Requiring Checklistcity of f-.dinonds
5. Name of Proposal, if applicable:
A planned residential development for Robert Hovde
6. Nature ancI Brief Description of the Proposal (including but
not limited to its size, general design elements, and other
factors tha ' t will given an accurate undE,rstanding of its
scope and nature:
The proposed action involves subdivision of a 2.72 acre tract utiliz-
ing the Planned Resi�ential Development concept and will incorporate
Ili dwelling tinits situated in both single and multiple d elling unit buildings.
7. Location of Proposal (describe the physical setting of
the proposal, as -well as the extent of the land area
affected by any environmental impacts, including any
other information needed to give an accurate understand-
ing of thE environmental setting of the proposal):
This projec is situated on a wooded hillside in Shell Valley on the
north side and at thc westerly terminus of Shell Valley oad. The
aLolperty is located northof Sihell Park, a plan ed! residential develop-
ment, and easterly of Yost City Park.
-1-
Estimated Date -for Completion of the Proposal:
June 1979.
9. List of all Permits, Licenses or Government Approvals
Required for all Proposal (federal, state and local --
including rezones):
1. Approv.1 of P.R.D. and final subdivision approval by City of
Edmonds.
2 Issuance of residential building permits by City of' Edmonds.
10. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansions,
or further activity related -to or connected with this
proposal? If yes, explaln:
No
ll.. Do you know oT any plans by others' which may arfect the
p.�,operty covered by your proposal? If yes, explain:
No
12. Attach any other application form that has been com-
pleted r6garding the proposal; if none has been com-
plated,.but is expected to be filed at some future
date, describe the nature of such applIcation form:
See attached Subdivision Application and Environmental Assessment.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of afl "yes" and "maybe" ahswers are -required).
YES MAYBE NO
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. 'Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures:
b. Disruptions, displacements, com-
paction or overcovering of the soil? X
C. Change in topography or ground
surface relief features? X
d. The!destruction, covering or
modification of any unique geologic
or physical features? X_
e. Any increase in wind or water
erosion of soils, either on or off
the site?
f. Changes in deposition or ero-
sion of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify.the channel of a
river or*stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X.
Explanation: Cradinp, and fillinE win occun in connection with-coad
construction and in preparation of building sites and attendant
d r �, yes
4
-2-
2. Air. Will the proposal result in:
Yes Maybe No
a. Air emissions or deterioration
of' ambient air quality?
X
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
X
C. Alteration of air Imovement,
moisture or temperature,. or.a.ny
change in clim6te, either locall�
.,or regionally?
X
Explanation: - Duri ne, cons trurtion ohjPrtionahIp
encountered at the time of street and
oriors may he
-driveway
3. Water. Will the proposal result:in:
paying-
a. Changes in currents, or the
course or direction of water move-
ments, in either marine or fresh.
waters?
X
b. Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate and
amount of surface water runoff?
X
C. Alterations to the course or
flow of f000d waters?
X
d; Change in the amount of sur-'
face water in any water body?
X
e. Discharge into surface waters.,
or in any alteration of surface
water quality, including but not
limited to temperature., dissolved
oxygen.or turbidity?
X
f. 'Alteration of the direction
or rate of flow of ground waters?
X
g. Change in the quantity of
ground waters, either through
dire-ct additions or withdrawals,
or through interception of an
aquifer by cuts or excavations?
X
h. Deterioration in ground water
quality,.either through direct in-
jection, or through the seepage of
leachate, pho.sphates, detergents,
,waterborne virus or bacteria, or
other substances into the ground
waters?
X
i. Reduction in the amount of
water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
X
Explanation: Drainage pattern and run-off
_c3`Fs_E_ru7_JT
r9te will be minimally
impacted by the on of streets, drivew-a-y—s-7-nd 'buildings.
Storm water run-off-w-1-11 be-cont—ro-TI—ed within
th� project by an
interior storm drainage system and directed into holding ponds located
within the City park
-3-
0 0
Flora. Will the proposa!L in-.
Yes Maybe No
a . Change in the diversity of
species, or numbers of any species
of flora (including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, microflora and
aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of
any unique, rare or endangered
species of flora? X
C. Introduction of new species
of flora into an area, or in a
barrier to the normal replenish-
ment of existing species9 X
d. Reduction in acreage of any
agricultural crop? X
Explanation: Lands*caping around dWE!llings and open spaces will intro-
duce new species -of 1'lora in addit—lon to the existing natural vegeta ion.
Fauna.- Will the proposa.-, result in:
a. Changes in the diverc-,.ty of
species,.or numbers of any species
of fauna (birds, land animals
includi.ng reptiles, fish and shell-
fish,'benthic organisms, insects or
micro'fauna)? X
b. Reduction of the numbers of
any unique, rare or endangered
species of fauna?
X
C. Introduction of new species
of fauna into an area, or result
in a barrier to the migration or'
movement of fauna? _X
d. Deterioration to existing
fish or wildlife habitat? X
Explanation: Res ident fauna will be displaced in developed areas and
existing feed an-d —cove-F-aecreaned in quantity-7
Noise. 'Will the proposal increase
exis.ting noise levels? X
Explanation: Noise level�-,-will increase minimally as would be 'normal
to a residential7-park-H—Ousing '14 family units.
Light and Glare. Will the pro-
posal produce new light o-.:,
glare?
Explanation: New light ancJ glare will be produced by house,
street and yard iliumInation.
0
�7�
Yes Maybe No
8. Land Use. Will the proposal
result in the alteration of the
present or planned land use of
an area? _X
Explanation: The site is Presently -undeveloped. The -Proposal
will not conflict with the comprehensive pla;i for this area,
9. Natural Resources. Will the pro-.
posal result in:
a. Increase in the rate of use
of any.natural resources.? X
b. Depletion of any nonrenewable
natural resource? X
Explanation: Home construction will�increase use of materials
and energy of the Puget Sound area. Domestic water and electricity
will be consumed by the inhabitants.
10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal
involve a risk'of an explosion or
release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to,
oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of an
accident or upset conditions? X
Explanation: Limited to potential construction accidents.
11. Population. Will the T)roposal
alter the location, distribution,
density, or, growth rate of the
human population of an area? X
Explanation: Resulting alteration will be limited to the
immediate neighbor -hood.
12.. Housing. Will the proposal
affect existing housing, or
create a demand for additional.
housing? X
Explanation: Upon completion, 14 new living units will be available
for habitation.
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will-
the.proppsal result in:.
a. Generation of Additional
vehicular movement?
b. Effects on existing'parking
ZD
facilities, or demand for new
parking?
c. -Impact upon existing transpor-
tation systems? .
d. Alterations to present
patterns of circulation o:, move-
ment of people and/or goois?
X
X
X
X
Yes Maybe No
e. Alterations to waterborne,
rail or air traff"c? X
f. Increase in traffic hazards
to motor vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians?
Explanation: Newly generated traffic and related added hazard will be
limited to the neighborhood streets.
14. Public ServIces Will the'pro-
posal have an effect upon, or
result in a need for new o r
alvered governmental services
in -any of the following areas?
a. Fire protection?
X
b. Police protection'?
X
c. Schools?
X
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities?
X
e. Maintenance of public facill.-
ties, including roads?
X
f. Other governmental services?
�xplanation: Existing services have the capacity to
absorb the
increased need.
15. Energy. Will the proposal resull. in:
a. Use of substantial amounts o'L"
fuel or energy?
b. Demand upon existing sources
of energy, or require the develop-
ment of new sources of ehergy? _X
Explanation: Electrical energy wi be u,
11 ged for heating and
illumination
suUplied -via existing.-di-s-trihiltion nf nmpio
capacity.
16. Utilities. Will the proposal
result in a need for new systems
or alterations,to the following
utilities:
X
a. Power or natural gas?
X
b. Commiinicati-ons system.3?
X
c. Water?
X
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
X
e. Storm water drainage?
X
f. Solid waste and disposal?
X
Existing utilities have ample capacity to serve the completed
subdivision.
The development will necessitate only those minor alterations
to the
existing Utility system as are required to serve this subdivision.
-6-
Explanation:
17. Human Health. Will the proposal
result in the creation of any
health hazard or potential health
hazard (excluding mental health)?
Explanation:
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal
result in the obstruction of any
scenic vista*br view open to the
public, or will the proposal re-,
sult in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open
to public view?
Explanation:
Yes Maybe No
X_
19. Recreation. Will the proposal
result in -an impact upon the
quality of quantity of' existing
recreational opportunities? X
Explanation:
20. Archeological/Historical. Will the
proposal result in an alteration of
a significant archeological or his-
torical site, structure,, object or
buildin.g? X
Explanation:
C. SIGNATURE
I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge
the above information is true and complete. It is understood
that the lead. agency may withdraw any declaration of non -signi-
ficance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist
should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of'
full disclosure on my part.
Proponent:
0
M
.0 I TY
0 F
E D M 0 N 0 S
TO:
rot k VL ee"'(1
Lu
0
SUSPENSE DATE:
MAYOR
As We Discussed
Investigate
and report
Take Appropriate
Action x
Prepare Letter/Memo fc�r
My Signature'
Mayor's Signature
Previously Ref'd
Status of Action?
For your Information
Note & File
Return to:
MAYOR'S ADMIN. ASS'T.
CHIEF of POLICE
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY CLERK
COMMUN. DEVELOP. DIR.
FINANCE DIRECTOR
FIRE CHIEF
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
COMMENTS: P I
mm
if6 for',
FROM:2U�
DATE: T-S-79,
;*HE P I -;111110d
e
U0.7TED_Aujr,us,t j(), 19'(8
SPIEL` T F I L E
onmental Policy Nct of 1971,
envi�ronmental impact as early
ne whether it will be necess-
?�aTF17P..T,l�t—s—ta-�LL,ir,ent—is -
11 be placed in the file.
t MLISt be filed win t;lis
) days allm,.,ed- The 'final
lient of Ecology, Office of
j
, vie can in accumulating
Ition.
None for, house foundations
OnS and road cOnstr'uCtion
at
�ge 3Wale on t-he westerly por-
omiodate site pr6ding.
OTE: If grading or f4lling
I IT exceed D-00 cubi c yards
orading and fill-hir, ol,111
St 'JC� JLlbilli tted �.ji Ul the
ppl ication.
N/A
iiinal.. Onsi (-,
.L_�ArairjjLiLre will
I directed into'h Mini . ponds
llljk� �;_LLy P'11.1(.- - . --:L
i ma t L I aroa U) b0- paved �,o
Es t
)crcen t
Lstilnated a'rea in 0j)en space I - 76 65 percen t
ShOrcl illOS Within .200 Jt. of '1(�, t e r N/A
r High Ila,,
Adjacent to Shorel i lies Z*0111?
J` thc en vi. r-onmen t a.]. s e t- t -1 ng o f t he propos a I
'LLi i L;__j _LLituated on a wooded hillside in Shell Valley on the
north ,,ide mid at thc we!-fter]v ter-rlli nll:,,, or. Sholl Val.ley 1-oad. 'Phe
L!L�J)(..-I-ty i:i locat.ed not-1,11 0.1 ;hull Park, a plarned*re.,ii(I(iitial duvelop-
uictit, and easter,ly of' Yost City Parl<.
-I-