7023 174TH ST SW.PDFiiiiiiii lill
1054
7023 174TH ST SW
ADDRESS: 7qM S-f
TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: �513 10001-5 3 0707
-7
BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE): 6 a)
COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR:
CRITICAL AREAS:- DETERMf NATION: 0 Conditional Waiver tudy Required Erwaiver
XS
DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S:
DRAINAGE PLAN DA
PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED:
EASEMENT(S) RECORDED
PERMITS
PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED -
SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED: /& r&v
SEWER LID FEE $:
SHORT PLAT FILE:
SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED:
SIDE SEWER PERMIT(s, 4�4,3
SOILS REPORT DATED:
STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
FOR:
LID #:
LOT: BLOCK:
LATEMP\DS'rs\Fomis\Street File Checklist.doc
0
wiwim FIE I a-n*A5-twiLT Pumm izELATivE
DUILDIN6 PERMIT APPLICATION AT 7023 174TH
I N G I TY OF EVIlMONCro WA5H I N6TON
c
,ler, - oa, T6*iP IF 27 NOM, RAN612-14
DEG R 121 2004
cOGAJ .. C: I a =40 0 1
VA
Zone N,:;� Comer Flag —
Setback Required Actual
Front
Sides
C)Q
%o"4
Other
Hei&t
I xv- 0 01*
""-�L�Axo *' �
EXPIRES: 4/7/2006
1 -2- 1 1 -5 1 -2-vo 4-
01
2
3
A'PPRO VtD,8 014
TO
5TREET W
EA5T j W. M.
q8* 06, 2 q W Z
.X.
N
VERTICAL DATUM: ASSUMED
BENCH . MARK Ifto 7-404
HELD ASSUMED ELEVATION OF 100.00 FEET ON TOP
OF SAN. SEWER MH AT INTERSECTION OF 174TH ST.
AND 71ST AVE. W.
a 12
SCALE: I" = 20'
P:m R 1 1 1 1 1 ==::z:==l
N- 0 20 40
�, i
4.
105.5
..42
77-
7010
REV I c2l ON DATE: DEC. 12, 2004
HE16HT CALGULATION5
5W COK. - 105.5
5E COK. - 105.5
NW COK. - 105.5
NE COK. - 105.5
422.0
AVERAGE GRAVE -105.5
ACTUAL HEIGHT -130.5
MAXIMUM HEIGHT-25.0'
06
6RAD 1116 aJANT I TY - 450 GU
MEA[)OW[)ALE dEAGH
122. qcl,
N 5q 06 2q
05.5
A V
FIN 1 105
FL .5
F06FT=Lj 106 5
MA)( ELEV-102-5
OLD HT. . 130.5
7023 . F 1-0 5
7.
3
1
A
DFOGKMAN FAFK
YD5.
2
02
05
701 1
I
I
RECEIvED
DEC 1 � 3 20,014
PERMIT COUNTER
ATE RE
CEIVEDU
olog PERMIT EXPIRES
USE PERMIT
CITY OF EDMONDS ZONE NUMBER 0 7 5 0
JOB SUITE/APT#
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION ADDRESS
OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS WZ3
I 'A, Z2 Z-9 4 PLAT NAME/SUBDIVISION NO. LOT NO. LID NO.
I 1 cc
11, MAILING ADDRESS
CITY W.�,,,.JJ�ELEPHONE
NAME
ADDRESS
Cl!ypu
\1 ZIP TELEPHONE
NAME jCBL#
ADDRESS
CITY 1\ ZIP I TELEPHONE
STATE LICENSE NUMBER . I
PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL NO.
1�6 NEW
RESIDENTIAL
13 ADDITION
COM MERCIAL
REMODEL
13 MULTIFAMILY
'REPAIR
9 CYDS
DEM OLISH
13 TANK
GARAGE
RETAINING WALL
1:1
CARPORT
ROCKERY
(TYPE OF USE. BUSINESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN:
Al-,46/ty,
NUMBER
NUMBER OF
OF
DWELLING
STORIES
UNITS
DESCaIBE ftRK TO BE DONE
LID FEE $
PUBLIC -RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP
TESCP Approved
RW Permit Required
Street Use Permit Req'd
EXISTING — PROPOSED
inspection Required
Sidewalk Required
REQUIRED DEDICATION— FT
Underground
Wiring required
METER SIZE
LINE SIZE
NO. OF FIXTURES
PRV REQUIRED
2-
YE NO 13
SX
3
x
LU
—
REMARKS
z
z
OWNER/CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROUDRAINAGE
/MS ? F r
NEERING REVIEWED BY
1-k I
FIRE REVIEWED By
11FILM
DATE I u0c, I
11RATION DATE
CHECKED BY
VARIANCE OR CU
SHORELINE OR ADB11
I INSPECTION
a REQT)
PBOND
OSTED
Y&YES
$
SEPA REVIEW
SIGN AREA
COMPLETE EXEMPT,:',
OWED PROPOSED
ALLOWED; P ROROSI�Pj
EXP
PLUMBING MECH
LOT COVERAGE
REQUIAED SETBACKS (FT)
PROPOSED SETIhIACKS (FT)
VL-N
COMPLIANCE OR
ALLOWED PROPOSE
5 "Xo 6 `76
FRO�j SIDE, REAR
to �37
FROqT L/A �DE �IEAR
�5 1 16 101
g
CHANGE OF USE
.15
'46 11 4
z
z
PARKING I
REO'D PROVIDED
LOT AREA
G
DAT5
10/0
13 SIGN
13
FENCE
REMARKS 1AV0 —r(eie Cjeqf'fqj, 6,r A/-
IWC43
X FT)
OTHER
E]
L"r-1101 61 feWd, Ile\ �fae(AA�,-rd 4hodl-,
1 FIRE SPRINKLER
3 FIRE ALARM
V5A /
CHECKED BY
15mz,
TYPE Qf"4TRUCTION
1 _]WN
PftDE-
M
OCCUPANT
GROUP
CRITICAL
P ECIAL IN�PECTION
JAREA
i
OCCUPANT
AREAS
NUMBER
n1,57REMARKS
REQUIRED
&YES
_F
LOAD
P
PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 1108/11FINAL INSPECTION R07D
01,
9
eNGINi N 6r
6 VH, N. LFHTIWM24i�
Un N4 A I
Fj� *_35 21!
NVAA lq-3q� 0
VALUATION
V-(L 1315
C91
Deiscription,
FEE
Descripillon
FEE
2��, ��- 4P 19 9f
Plan Check
-70 -7
State Surcharge
HEAT SOURCE
GLAZING %
LOT SLOPE%
Building Permit
1_00
City Surcharge
PLAN CHECK NO:
VEST D DAT�
ul
Plumbing
Base Fee
M , echanical
//0
—
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PCR�rr COVERS WORK TO
a
13 E DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC
D OMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE
Grading
30
W
SEPARATE PERMISSION.
Engr. Review
;5P
Vfl�l kCk
ZX�—
uj
IL
PERMIT APPLICATI'
ON: 180 DAYS
PERMIT LIMIT I YEAR - PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN 180 DAYS
SEE
Engr. Inspecti on
Y
R40 ft*:g
BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION
-5 J-A--/-
'APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE, HEIRS, ASSiGNS AND SUCCESORS
Fire Review
Plan Chk. Deposit I-10Z
IN INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY: DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF
2 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND
cc .
4 ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
Fire Inspection
Receipt #
X FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE
9 DEEMED TO MODIFX WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENT OF ANY CITY ORDINANCE
Landscapeinsp.
Total Amt. Due
0 NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAY THE C17YS ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION
x.1
.-
Recording Fee
Receipt.# .4
I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ 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
This application Is not a permit until signed by the
CALL Building Official or his/her Deputy: and Fees are paid, and
IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18.27.
FOR'IN . SPECTION
receipt Is acknowledged In space provided.
SIGN U (OWNER R AU DATE SIGNED
IC
(425)., 7A..,
L.S SIGN DATE.
F
rq 64-
771-0220
TIO
A ENTION
REL
EXT 1333
Y_
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL,
91
A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR, A CERTIFI-
WE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBCSECTION109
ORIGINAL - FILE - YELLOW - INSPEITOR
09/03 PRESS HARD -YOU AR
E MAKING A noptrts
PINK Ow
- NER - GO LO-ASSESSOR
STANDAW DRAINAGEDETEN70N SYSTEM
WORKSHEET
CATIC lay:
ADDPMS 2_t)c� C.5 Lk2_S-_a,35-kZ02_
t_y
ve-4iEOS.�. I 0j S 2.Si3 DATE: 4,
"DESIGN DATA
IMPERVIOUS AREA PIPE DIA PIPE LG ORIFICE
000 2-4 3 Z
WTENTION PIPE LENGTH L ING LIS
rims"ED V.(T ICAL)
MINIMUM
WTUNRIRCM&MP Or
TIGHTL -------- COW DOX OR RISER
t TO IZ SLOPE
RECtjV5D
OUTLET CONTROL
Him.
JUL,�4_2004
UPPER CATCH BASIN ORWICE
PERMIT CoUNTER CONTROL CATCH BASIN
SYSTEM CROSS SECTION
in
S'Ev' FILE
2'XZ'X6,.DEEP, 4-6' SPALLS OR EOUAL
FR13M CO14TROL CB ZX n 31 DEEP. 3/4' CRUSHED ROCK
FROM CONTROL
I
'Z_0tJTFLOW TRENCH, WX IV 1.64
L5. Z;IPE TO UMUEA
IPE W
TR AL�� L NY V TH A16 F=
TRIM W WNR
Npw ounzr PRW j Q
RUNOFF SPREADER. TRENCH
FOOTING DR"NS $HALL NOT -BE COAWECMD TO DETENTION S=M
NOTES.-
1. Call En&eering Division (771-0220) for a tightline, and detention system inspection
befbre backfilling and for final inspections. APPROVED BY
2, Responsibility for operation and maintenance of drainage system on private property is dw
ibility of the property owner. Material accumulated in the. storage pipe must be flushed
responsi
out and removed from the catch basins to allow proper operation. 71= outlet control orifice DA-M
PLANNING DATA
NAME: DATE: Y01(40
SITE ADDRESS: '7015 17qW-
. Ttv PLAN CHK#: Q'i
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:- Ale L-,- 5 F R
REDUCED SITE PLAN PROVIDED?:&-/± PO
MAP PAGE: q07, CORNERLOT I FLAG LOT: QLO�s
ZONING: 0-� CRITICAL AREAS DrETERMINATION #: 00 - 13'0
ALStudy equired; , /
8 0-40- - —
UWalver . � V*-.� , .
d J�t'� "ect
Ll Conditional Waver r aao, 5
ew Cl'i-tic let
? SEPA DETERMINATION:
fee
c4l')'66
r V
Z rT �-�
U Fee
I'd le5) 74, 9c1d Cy Or� �IrJ(-ex
7? U Checklist
.'a, 1. two 7 ? LIAPo list w/ notarized form
Na
U (Needed for 500 cubic yards of irading, Shoreline Area- site within 200 ft. of Puget Sound or Lake Ballinger)
Exempt
SETBACKS:
Required Setbacks: 10
Street- '2� 5 Left Side:_ Right Side: - Rear:
Actual Setbacks: i loq/
Street: Left Side: Right Side: Rear:
Street map chocked for additional setback required? UG NoIDNA)
I&DETACHED STRUCTURES:
LJ ROCKERIES:
aFENCES/TRELLISES:
BAY WINDOWS I PROJECTING MODULATION:
STAIRS / DECKS:
Ac
PARKING: Required: tual:. 0 -
LOT AREA. 3 � 17 q
LOT COVEiftk:� - a,oqo�
Calculations: 6 %
T30 BUILDING HEIGHT:
It Datum Poir
Fri -,A( Maximum)
cr/- PIA^) f A-D.U.CREATED?4
SUBDIVISION. T) ov-,ew"'o
LEGAL,� 0 'V
�NC NFORMING LAND USE DETERMINATION ISSUED:
sAN 6
.=,Y
f
Plan Review Bv. 1�o
,ff /-1- 14
ad- a,
Elevation: 0 0 CY
Height: X5'
NewBPPIanningDataFonrLD0C
W4W 132-0
Critical Areas Checklist
--------------------------------------------------------------
Site Information (soil s/topography/hydrology/vegetat,ion)
1'. Site Address/Location: 702-) 7 7--
/?
2. Property Tax Account Number: -1-.'/ 2 06.n
3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): 2- zi- (3<_-) eD
4. Is this site currently developed? yes; — no.
If yes; how is site developed?
5.1 Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply.
Flat: less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site.
Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a
horizontal distance of 66-feet).
Hilly: slopes ' present.on site of more than 15% and less than 30% ( a vertical rise of
I 0-feet over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet).
���Steep: grades of greater than 30% present, on site (a vertical rise of I 0-feet over a
horizontal distance of less than 33-feet).
Other (please describe):
6.. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: A/0 Approx.,Depth:
7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: /*("/40_; Approx. Depth:
What season(s) of the year?
8. Site is in the floodway floodplain of a water course.
9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year-
round? Flows are se onal? (What time of year?
10. Site is primarily: forested meadow shrubs mixed
urban landscaped (lawn,shrubs etc)
11. Obvious wetland is pr eisent on site:
.. ... I ... ......... � ... .
DETERMINATION:��:
STUDYU ITIONALM Al
0 D V
N
AIIVIEJ��,
:.XI: F:
Critical Areas File #:
City of Edmonds Critical Areas Checklist Fee: $45.00
Date Received by Dev. Sery pt: 54 /00
Development Services Department De
Planning Division City Receipt No: I Sf2 I
Phone: 425.771.0220 Date Mailed to Applicant:
Fax: 425.771.0221
-1 1 s4ri
C.
CRITICAL ARVIEJAS CHECKLIST
The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is
t o be filled out by any person preparing a
Development Permit Application for the City of
Edmonds Prior to his/her submittal of a development
permit to the City.
The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to
determine whether any potential Critical Areas are, or
may be, present on the subject property. The
information needed to complete the Checklist should
be easily available from observations of the site or
data available at City Hall (Critical areas inventories,
maps, or soil surveys).
An applicant, or his/her representative, must fill out
the checklist, sign and date it, and submit it to the
City. The City will review the checklist, make a
precursory site visit, and make a determination of the
subsequent steps necessary to complete a development
permit application.
Please submit a vicinity map, along with the signed
copy of this form to assist City staff in finding and
locating the specific piece of property described on
this form. In addition, the applicant shall include
other pertinent information (e.g., site plan, topography
map, etc.) or studies in conjunction with this Checklist
to assist staff in completing their preliminary
assessment of the site.
I have completed the attached Critical Areas Checklist and attest that the answers provided are factual, to the
best of my knowledge (fil I out the appropriate column below)..
I PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY
Owner/Applicant:
P
Name
_7023
Street Address'..
1.ty State 2-c,-( 11
Ti-I-Anne
e�)
Applicant Representative:
I Name
J �ireet Address
S77 f-
City State Zip
Telephone
Signature
Date Date
d:reception/janatCACLH.andout.doC
Revised 4110/2000
JkJVA 0 zztk ..........................................
CUSTOMER - EUC
CONTACT
E U CEdmod Uffies Consda form
A coordinated utility environment which maximizesjoint utility opportunities to provide quality servicefor the citizens ofEdmonds
...........................................................................................................................................................................
. YOU WILL BE GIVEN -A CONFIRMATION NUMBER BY EACH
UTILITY ONCE YOU HAVE INFORMED THEM OF YOUR PROJECT.
SITE ADDRESS:
# DDD -,;E62
Bob Kakaley - 425-670-3214
You will need to provide PUD with a site plan and -a completed
New Service Questionnaire.
PUGET
SOUND
# 3�2
ENERGY,
New Customer Construction
Department - 1-888-321-7�79
Call to verify gas availability and to coordinate service install.
You will need to provide parcel number,. contact phone number
and mailing address.
# 06variza".:
Dow Brandley - 425-710-4118
You will need to provide Verizon with the location of your
project, total line requirement, and the date in which service is
required. A copy of your development plan may be required.
#
-,comcast
You will need to proved Comcasl %,/th(ei1`oca&n of your
877-824-2288
project, a copy of your development and site plan (digital copy
if available.) The date in which service is required and a list of
contact names, phone numbers & mailii)g addresses.
/with
4S
Steve Dunphy -425-774-7769
For customers in Olympic View Service Area
e OVWS
You will need to provid Aith the survey map of your
tl
site and complete a development inforinulti
J %
THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETED AND GIVEN TO DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES STAFF AT THE TIME OF PERMIT SUBMITTAL
0
11 1 A
15 T
_*VF
Oo -0 0 0
000 10
1000 Q.
a. CIO 10
0
.0000* Oa-
0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 40 0 010
40.
.SWMVW'40; 0 40. 0 0 0 0.
Jk.o-o Z 0 0 0 1
oo�o 00 0 0 Oo 40.0 40 4
0 -- O&t. - g
00 o 0 4p 00, 0 00 o o o 0 ..r
0 0 0 0 0 40 0 4 0 40 -n
0 4W 10 IP 10 0
Oloo.
400 4b 0,
000 0 0
4w 0 41 0,0
'400, 'o
0
4b 00 ob 0 4.
Op
00 0 . . . . . .. . . . . .
040 4. 41P.
Lou
41,
0 0
0 *0
G) Lrl 11
00
0 ----
R qwp 0
rn
0 0 kp
rn
.............. *a
7 . 7'
I
ff
rk*
4WD
J.a
fie
e X
E M
0
rn
Lri
cm m
P13 Ko�
9
"ITY OF EDMONDS
lC
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
WORK
APP—R��Ps
V,,lN E R
APPROV 2314't
bFFICIAL
imum
--Pr=R
le
7y�l
t7
, 14
-1-m-e-CEIVE:D
lo"
JUN 25-�;
P9110ING I)EpT.
EASEMENT No . .......................... ...............
CONTRACTOR.......... ................................................................ ...................... PERMIT No,/-P
. ..........
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT No . ...... ....................................... BLOCK No... .................. .......................
NAME OF ADDITION .........................
T
APPLICATION
for
ihe City of Edmonds SEDE SEWER PERMIT
Aw4TR,EE,T FILE
NEW CONSTRUCTION REPAIRS E]
OWNER Ic4aj�f& x�. �-- L-----� .......................
ADDREss ... .. --?, .......... ..... ..............
I
k "'Ann—
Pion&i'National- A-1964
lrrifle:16tirance Co
mpany REAL ESTATE CONTRA
CT Ka MATE
WASH04GTO4 TITLE DIVISION
A&WNT f "AM =TLM 0
THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into this 30th day of August, 1971
M SEP 8 1971
be , twee I n EDWIN J. ORNER and ELLEN JANE ORNER., his w ife
VM
V
�!i' hereinafter called the "sellers and M'kRLAN K. BELL and MAUREEN ANN BELL, his ife
wi e
er me tha. rchasevir
WITNESSETH: That the seller agrees to sell
, � 11 � 1, 1 1.. : to the purchaser and the purchaser agrees to purchase. from the seller the following
described'real estate 'with. the appurtenances, in Snohomish
County, State of Washington:
ThAt Pqrti, 'of _�.Tr�, n138-_ �14eadowdale Beach, -according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 5
retor s of Snohomish ourity, Washington, de.`scrib�ed as follows:
,�.page�,;38i d
-Beginning. at," the :SOuthwest corner of Tract 138, MC—d0w6ale Beach; thence East along the
South line 248 feet; the to the West line of said Tract to -a
nce North para e
point 230
'feet'"South of the North' line of said Tract; thence'east 91 feet to the true point of beginning;
thence.,Con-tinue,East 24 feet;
thence North 30 feet; thence East 129.22 fpet�to the West line
of the';Ea.ster17'15O feet o27 said Tract; therice South to the So'
uth line of said tract; thence
West along Ple 5ofth line to a point South'2008'06" East of the true Point -of beginning;
�thence
N6rth_.Z%8�.%�,West to the true point of I beginning.
(Seller warrantg.tl
'Property iat this
&ss than 20,000 square feet).
SUBJECT'TCr--easjerdentp,,,i t6strictions'"'
and reservations now of record, if any.
%
P�., W,*4904Pvf, f Als 'contract are as follows: The purchase
w
price is
SEVE?
YIVE HUNDRED AND NO/10OTHS- - - - 4$ 17,500.00 Dollars, of which
NO DOL
- - - - --- - - - - - - - - - ($00.00 Dollars have
been paid, the receipt whereof Is hereby acknowledged, and the balance of add purchase price shall be paid as follows:
ONE-HUNDRED�TWENTY FIVE AND,N01100THS - - - - - - - -
or more at p'u6chi'mr's option, on or,before the 0 ($ 125.00 Dotlars,
and ONE - HUNDRk 15th day f September 19 71,
4.12- a'TWENTY FIVE AND N01 100THS - - - - - - - - ---
($ 125.00 Dollars,
or more.at purchaser's option, on or before the
15th day of each succeeding calendar month until the e
t ahc T of said
base price, shall have" beezi'fuIly -paid. Me purchaser further agrees to pay interest on the diminishing balance of said pu
; , - rchase price
19
V
N
4� -
0
qx, en.� 7-7?1 APPLI. =C OMEX CONZT. G&AIT
702S 17APST S-W EUMOND W.U.4 164
OWNEK; AAKLAW K-.MJU MtAWIFV6H A. ML ulrwTgl"T
V
lw
va
U. 402.6
04
SUM: V/a
bTA. 0+49A*1
(is
,J3
lr
6rA. L)
DVA. 0,p G
cr
brA. 0+44.$
CA
"N
A. 0#25
0 A. C
STA. 0+00
-%
Ln
NOTICE:
No warranty of accuracy.
The information shown on the attached map(s)
was compiled for use by the City of Edmonds,
its Employees and Consultants. The City of
Edmonds does not warrant the accuracy of
anything set forth on these map(s). Any person
or entity requesting a copy should conduct an
independent inquiry regarding the information
shown on the map(s), including, but not limited
to, the location of any sewer stub shown. Such
sewer stubs may or may not exist and may or
may not exist at the location shown. Neither
the City. of Edmonds nor its employees or
officers shall be liable for the information given
on map(s), nor for any one representation
provided based upon said map(s).
CITY OF EDMONDS - SIDE SEWER PERMIT
WATER -SEWER DEPARTMENT
PERMIT
Call 7,76-1107 for side sewer inspections BEFORE covering any Portion of the construction,)
Inspection will be provided within 24.hours after request. NO Sat., sun., or holiday inspections.
ADDRESS LOCATION OF CONSTRUCTION ......................
................................ I .......................................................................................
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION ......... * -- ------- - �� - ": -
.....................................................................................................................................................................
---------------------- ........................................................ ----------------- * ----------- I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ..................................................
---------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER AND/OR BUIj.DER__
.......................................................................... . .......................................................
70 2
,CONTRACTOR'S NAME & ADDRESS...
C --------- -----------------------
------------------------------------------ ............ ......................................
Permission Is gTanted ------------ f ......................... 19T for repair and/or connection of a side sewer to the city sanitary
system in accordance with City of Edmonds ordinanecs. sewer
DkTTENTION IS CALLED TO THE FOLLOWING:
N'OTE No. I —The owners of the property may obtain a permit to construct sewer inside Property line. A licensed Side Sewer Contractor must be employed to construct
NOTE No. side sewer in street area. Do not cover any Portion of sewer before it has been inspected.
2—All work Performed in city right-of-way requires an Invasion of Right -of -Way Permit obtainable from the City Engineer's office.
NOTE No. 3—Obtain full information regarding Ordinance 11.16.030 and Regulations governing side sewers when you get permit.
NOTE No. 4—Top of side sewer must have at least 30 inches coverage at property line and 12 inches inside property line; minimum grade of 2%. No bends in grade
shaxper than 'A will be permitted.
NOTE No. 5--Trenches in street must be water settled and surface of street restored to original condition, Contractors shall be resPonsible for failure due to improper
work which may develop within one year of completion.
NOTE No. 6—It is unlawful to alter or do any other work than is provided for in the Permit, or to do any work on the main sewer or its appurtenances except to in-
sert the pipe into the wye.
DISAPPROVED E) Date ... . ................................... By ................ D .... ....... By . ......
APPROVED Date.. . ........ i 4;_ ----------- Date .................................... By ................
------------------ ...........
........ ..... ........ :,; . ......
z 7 . .... ....... . --------------------------------
Remarks: ......... ......
...............................................
.............................................................................. ................................. ------------------------------------------
------------------------- I ------------------------------------------- . ........... ..................... ................................................................................ .............................................................
BOTH Permit Copies MUST Be Si �y Owner of Firm Performing Construction PRIOR To Request For Inspection
1,
--- --- ir. i.W6,o,nstr,u_-etio . n .... hereby certify that the side sewer installation constructed under this permit
r �O �*r IW &- __eti*n� *�ix.
7as installed in accordance with all governing ordinances of the City of Edmonds.
Dated this --- k --------------------- day of ... g�
.... .. ... .
Check BEFORE You dig for: Water [3, Gas E], Telephone [], Power Ej, Sewe r Ej 0 th e
17
DA ZoneA
S.W. 1/4, SEC. 8
T27N., RA E.W.M.
407
1,10V 1708 71, r
17C it
1700
170JZ 17001
17470
17C
0
17019 6 cit
70 5
17015
17020
17017*
170 17
17029
,Oia
f, 0-6,
7CIC
x
7, 09
109
11167
17011 17101
I -Tom
/7/18 17 103
j
110+
17111
1719f
'712 1-71
r* In
A
)7117
7
17
f7l to 171 z
z
71
)7/27
Sr
1�
War
40 2 0
17101
Dt ;
17215
17200
44 17723
ck
17229 to
I fA
17503 0
173 3'
C2, 020
RAEMT- J.
17319 )7309
1712
17320
17316 JU24
I 7,g-47 17336 17315
174- S
0� an
17411 174
P S. W.
7OW ob
r- CD
C2 Moo %muk
)7425' 17S > PL
+ 17422
in % 175-0,q
17fOl 75*01 17564
r, /7.lrzo 9 1
175-06
tn in 7671 11SIO 75-0.,r
1-76 TO w j Z2
vp i,- 9 . - %
179 Sr S. W, 176 rmf '.
UT S. W. S. W.
1A606
A7604
tz Q
11(020 17610 176 K
cu — 46 7627 '("0' 17616 11617
IL613 2 ""'
17629 4 QD 5— — 'Z�
N 1711.V. 2� M22
17629 17631 J 7763, 426
CL
17707. —/7,132
is
poll 7)�; 9 '01 177,,4 1770
a
P- 7715 it a p 17709
%D
177 7
P, 7706
17727 NP q
7% 7127 77Z9
?q S/ 176U
17730 Q 0 amp
In In - - -
'417 /7966 IV 7805 Ln I-10C4
o, > — 8 17-506
dr I ,.V a rN, f7ell I/ r t- 179m
W. 179 3- IPA 78
M
17 0 zo 17 L3 1 cl
zu
P. 14 clov
A ro I .07)q 0 Q I'79ZG 1'78LS
1791"m r t- r, r.
4 f"oo 11 q Of* 6-N 1,1902. ICK 1'7 701
17!P/3 ma ,
;4� 1'790e 1-7q (f)
17916 17 S' 17919 t. �c7 (r
;t
!e Z. 1'79 Z4. j1cjjq %ib N 0
I ID U,
7.914 171)22 41 11.1 3
r- 1 117990 Igo TOO S7-
ST Ifthrm R 7 a ul
I
17207
'A'
172)7
17ZIl Ii ru-1
z
0
0
*9 T
p
1720
17216
18003 18004" 7eo—es- `lsoo
18007
I i I I ,u I -., ,
18014 r r,
let J
TW= -I c -VrF ler uplfc-',
14C. I S9-
Address of
City of Fdmon'ds
SIDE SEWER PERMIT
MWER
PERMIT NO: .9879
PERMIT EXPIRES 65
Property Tax Account Parcel No. 61 '51 --�&l Olt) 9
Attach copies of all access and utility easem
Owner and/or Contractor:
Contractor License #:
Single Family
F-1 Multi -Family (No.of Units
.Verified and Approved by
ilding Permit �'00q- 07
Invasion into City *Right -of Way: [:1 Yes - XNO
*RW Construction Permit #
Commercial (No. of Units Cross other "Private Property: Yes No
Public **Attach.legal description and copy of recorded easement.
��/Contractor 16101,04
Ownerfi/cohtraPor signature and acknowledgement statement: Date(
By sigKng 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.
W CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-42,MiT-6555) BE�ORE ANY EXCAVATION W
W FOR INSPECTION CALL 425-771-0220 extensio
24 HOUR NOTICE REOUIRED FOR ALL INSPECTION REOUESTS
...... FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
.... . ....... ..
Permit Fee $ SO Repair Fee $ Issued ;ry._
Trunk Charge $ Date Issued
Assessment Fee S
w .
. T
City Permit Surcharge Fee
Receipt No: U
Total Fees Paid $
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: r%5 O"Wf EgL4jTj kg�(" - -2 11 A/lid 4-, R 4-ate: Initial: �rI4
Partial Inspection: &S
e), L'-T jA&jd2!#e..,A/_Date: 1-0157�4 Initial:
FINAL INSPECTION APPROVED: Date: 7 s-built to Street File:
Initial: 79- A
1�, PERMIT MUST 9EPOSTED ON JOB SITE 1,�
White Copy: File Green Copy: Inspector Buff Copy: Applicant
L;temp,bldg,forms,ssperTniijig4/00
� 0
- - - - - - - - --
B-PA,
N ADDRESS
VIA
HOMEOWNER
iDATE
DRAWN
BY
I
a�d
him—,
YVA
CONTRACTOR SCALE
9
4e,�i cL
�3:
LLJ
ED *
0
CITY OF EDMONDS SIDE SEWER AS- BUILT I
1 ADDRESS
7023 - 174 ST SW
HOMEOWNER I CONTRACTOR ISCALE
LARRY DEISHER
DATE ' JIRIWN
&t. 1890 12-13-2004 BY SIBREL
PERMIT
NO, 9879
NTS
NOTICE:
No warranty of accuracy. I
The information shown on the attached map(s)
was compiled for use by the City of Edmonds,
its Employees and Consultants. The City of
Edmonds does not warrant the accuracy of
anything set forth on these map(s). Any person
or entity requesting a copy should conduct an
independent inquiry regarding the information
shown on the map(s), including, but not limited
to, the location of any sewer stub shown. Such
sewer stubs may or may not exist and may or
may not exist at the location shown. Neither
the City of Edmonds nor its employees or
officers shall be liable for the information given
on map(s), nor for any one representation
provided based upon said map(s).
Dr
LLI
. 11 () F E.Dto,_
CITY OF EDMONDS SIDE SEWER AS- BUILT
ADDRESS
7023 - 174 ST SW
HOMEOWNER CONT ACTOR SCALE
LARRY DEISHER NTS
DATE �IRIWN PERMIT
12-13-2004 BY SIBREL NO. 9879-
0 0
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 - 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020
PLANNING DIVISION
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND DECISION
To: File S-04-52
From:
Meg Vruwell, AICP
Senior Planner
Date: August 9, 2004
Applicant: Larry D. and Susan C. Delsher
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
Page
1.
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................
2
A. Application .......................................................................................................................................
2
B. Decision ............................................................................................................................................
2
111.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................
3
A. Compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance ....................................................................................
3
B. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan ........................................................................................
5
C. Compliance with the Zoning Code .....................................................................................................
5
D. Compliance with the Flood Plain Management Provisions
............................................................... 5
E. Environmental Assessment: ...............................................................................................................
6
F. Critical Areas Review: ......................................................................................................................
6
G. Comments: ........................................................................................................................................
6
III.
RECONSIDERATIONS AND APPEALS ..........................................................................
6
A. Request for Reconsideration .............................................................................................................
6
B. Appeals ................ ............................................................................................................................
6
C. Time Limits for Reconsideration and Appeals ...................................................................................
6
IV.
LAPSE OF APPROVAL ..................
V.
NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR .........................................................
o ........................ 7
VI.
ATTACHMENTS ...................................................... : .........................................................
7
VH.
PARTIES OF RECORD ......................................................................................................
7
S-04-52.doc / July 12, 2004/ Staff Report
Larry and Susan Deisher
File No. S-04-52
Page 2 of 7
1. INTRODUCTION
A. Application
1. Applicant: Larry D. and Susan C. Deisher (see Attachment 2)
2. Site Location: 7023 and 7025 — 174 th Street SW (intersection of 71" Avenue and 174 th
Street) (see Attachment 1)
3. Request: To divide one lot with a total area of approximately 0.76 acres (33,299
square feet) into two lots (see Attachments 2 and 3.)
4. Review Process: Following the Comment Period, Planning Staff makes an administrative
decision.
5. Maior Issues:
a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section
16.20.030, site development standards for the RS-8 zone.
b. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Title 18, public
works requirements.
c. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 20.15B,
Critical Areas.
d. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 20.75,
subdivision requirements.
e. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 20.95,
staff review requirements.
Note: All code sections referenced in this report can be viewed via the City's website
www.ci.ednionds.wa.us.
6. Historv: This site was the subject of a rezone application file R-04-18 which
approved a rezone from Single -Family Residential RS-20 to RS-12, effective June 11,
2004.
B. Decision
Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, Attachments and Exhibits submitted with
the application and during the comment period, the following is the decision of the City of
Edmonds Planning Division:
The Subdivision is APPROVED with the following conditions:
1. Prior to recording the applicant must complete the following requirements:
a) The rock retaining wall should be removed from the plat drawings prior to
recording. The Geotechnical Engineer's report (see Attachment 6) seems to be
in conflict in both approving the rockery, yet not allowing fill, grading or
vegetation removal on the slope. Until this is resolved, the rock retaining wall
should not be shown.
b) Civil plans must be approved prior to recording. In completing the civil plans
you must address the following:
(1) Complete the Engineering Division conditions listed "Required prior to
Recording" on Attachment 4.
c) During subdivision improvements, retain the trees shown on Attachment 5 as to
"Trees noted saving..." as well as trees on the slope to the north. Trees on the
north slope on either lot may be removed if an International Society of
Arboriculture certified arborist states that the trees are a danger to life or
S-04-52.doc/ August 10, 2004/ Staff Report
rry and Susan Dcisher
File No. S-04-52
0 0 Page 3 of 7
property, or are sick or diseased. The trees may also be removed if the
Geotechnical Engineer modifies their recommendation for slope protection to
allow grading and tree removal within the slope area. The trees to remain shall
be protected with hay bales or rope barriers to prevent excavating or compacting
near the tree roots, per ECDC 18.45.050.H.
d) If setbacks are to be included in the plat, add to the face of the Plat "Setbacks
shown are for reference only and vest no fight."
e) Add to the face of the Plat "Conditions of approval must be met and can be
found in the final approval for the short subdivision and attachments thereto
located in File S-2004-52 in the City of Edmonds Planning Division."
f) Include on the plat all required information, including owner's certification, hold
harmless agreement, and staff s approval block.
g) Make sure all documents to be recorded meet the Snohomish County Auditor's
requirements for recording.
h) Submit copies of the documents to be recorded for the Planning Division and
Engineering Division's approval. Once approved, the applicant must record the
documents with Snohomish County Auditor's office.
i) Submit an updated copy of the title report (short plat certificate) with the
documents proposed to be recorded.
2. After recording the plat, the applicant must complete the following:
a) Provide the City Planning Division with two copies of the recorded plat, with the
recording number written on them. The City will not consider the subdivision to
have been completed until this is done
b) Complete the Engineering Division conditions listed "Required with Building
Permit" on Attachment 4.
11. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
A. Compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance
1. Environmental Resources
a. The environmental conditions on this site include trees and a drop in topography at the
back of the site. The applicants show on the site plan a six foot retaining wall at the
north end of the site. This retaining wall is only proposed, and is not existing. In the
building permit for the house that will be on lot 2, the applicants have changed the
retaining wall to three feet because they were notified that retaining walls taller than
three feet could not be located within the setbacks. The applicants have also shown their
proposed grading for proposed lot 2 (see Attachment 5). This site plan also shows all
the trees they propose to take out "based on safety and disease." It is interesting to note
that in the Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation for the Deisher Short Plat by Nelson
Geotechnical Associates, dated May 26, 2004, on page 6 (see Attachment 6) regarding
slope protection, it states "Specifically, we recommend that the setback area and top of
slope not be disturbed or modified through placement of any fill 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.
They also have reviewed the proposed retaining wall and provided guidelines for
its safe construction, so it did not appear to be a safety hazard to the Geotechnical
Engineers. The reason for the retaining wall to the north is not explained. Moving it to
where the northernmost line of grading is shown on Attachment 5 would appear to
optimize the leveling of the yard, without requiring as many trees to be removed. On my
S-04-52.doc/ August 10, 2004/ Staff Report
Larry and Susan Deisher
File No. S-04-52
Page 4 of 7
field visit, there appeared to be trees in the northwest comer of proposed lot 2 that were
not shown on the site plan. Though not all of the trees on the lot were healthy, it would
be beneficial to preserve a good number of the trees to preserve the character of the area,
as well as enhance privacy. Also as the Geotechnical report states, the trees would
provide some slope protection.
b. The area where the building pads are proposed is fairly near road level, with the site
dropping off behind. Most of the grading proposed so far is for yard purposes. The
driveways and house locations are well suited to the existing topography.
C. No hazardous conditions exist at this site.
d. The proposal includes on -site detention and will connect to the public storm sewer
system, which should minimize off -site impacts on drainage. Views in the immediate
vicinity appear to only be local. The proposal should have minimum impact on views.
2. Lot and Street Layout
a. This criteria requires staff to find that the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
dimensional requirements of the zoning ordinance and also that the lots would ultimately
be buildable. Based on a review of the project and the analysis in this section staff
agrees that a two -lot short -plat is a reasonable use of the property.
b. Lot sizes and dimensions:
Require Propose Proposed Reg. Lot Meets Lot Width
Lot Area Net sq. ft Gross sq. Width Requirement?
ft
Lot 1 12,000 14,743 14,743 80' Yes
Lot 2 12,000 18,556 18,556 80' Yes
C. Setbacks: Setbacks should be as follows:
Lot I Street Setbacks (25 Feet) From the south property line (I 74th Street SW)
Side Setbacks (10 Feet) From the east and west property lines
Rear Setback (25 Feet) From the north property line
Lot 2 Street Setbacks (25 Feet) From the south property line (I 74d' Street SW)
Side Setbacks (10 Feet) From the east and west property lines
Rear Setback (25 Feet) From the north property line
Note: The Engineering Division requires garage doors to be set back 18 feet
from an easement, private road, or street property line
d. Comer Lots: None of the lots are considered to be a comer lot.
e. Flag or Interior lot determination: None of the lots are considered to be flag lots.
f. Lot Coverage of Existing Buildings on Proposed Lots:
1.) 35% maximum lot coverage is allowed.
2.) The existing house on proposed lot 2 has already been demolished, which results in
a zero percent lot coverage for both lots. The building permit application for
proposed lot 2 shows 2,042 square feet of roof impervious surface, which would
result in approximately eleven percent lot coverage for proposed lot 2.
3. Dedications
a. See City Engineer's Report (Attachment 4).
S-04-52.doc/ August 10, 2004/ Staff Report
Larry and Susan Deisher
File No. S-04-52
Page 5 of 7
4. Improvements
a. See City Engineer's Report (Attachment 4).
5. Flood Plain Management
a. This project is not in a FEMA designated Flood Plain.
B. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan has the following stated goals and policies for Residential Development.
Residential Development
B. Goal. High quality residential development which is appropriate to the diverse
lifestyle of Edmonds residents should be maintained and promoted. The options
available to the City to influence the quality of housing for all citizens should be
approached realistically in balancing economic and aesthetic considerations, in
accordance with the following policies:
B.3. Minimize encroachment on view of existing homes by new construction or
additions to existing structures.
B.4. Support retention and rehabilitation of older housing within Edmonds
whenever it is economically feasible.
B.5. Protect residential areas from incompatible land uses through the careful
control of other types of development and expansion based upon the
following principles:
B.5.c. Stable property values must not be threatened by view, traffic or
land use encroachments.
B.5.d. Private property must be protected from adverse environmental
impacts of development including noise, drainage, traffic, slides,
etc.
B.6. Require that new residential development be compatible with the natural
constraints of slopes, soils, geology, vegetation and drainage.
Compliance with the Residential Development goals and policies: The proposal will not retain the
existing housing stock, and a number of trees will have to be removed. The proposed two new
houses will be compatible with new houses in the area and the natural constraints of slopes, soils,
geology and drainage. The proposed two lots will be larger than required, which should enhance
privacy. Vegetation is proposed to be removed and a slope regraded for yard purposes. If the
proposed yard could be replanned to minimize filling and grading, and retain existing trees, it
would be in better compliance with the natural constraints of slopes and vegetation. In general, the
proposed development meets the Comprehensive Plan policies.
C. Compliance with the Zoning Code
Staff finds this project to comply with the provisions of the Zoning Code as demonstrated in
section II.A.2.b.
D. Compliance with the Flood Plain Management Provisions
The proposed project is not in a Flood Plain.
S-04-52.doc/ August 10, 2004/ Staff Report
Larry and Susan Deisher
File No. S-04-52
Page 6 of 7
2.
E. Environmental Assessment:
Is this site identified on the City's Environmentally Sensitive Areas Map (Shoreline area
only)? No.
Is an Environmental Checklist Required for this application? No.
F. Critical Areas Review:
Critical Areas Review numbers: CA-1999-0019 and CA-2000-0130
2. Results of Critical Areas Review: Critical areas determinationCA-1999-0019, for 7025 — 174'
Street SW (the westernmost lot) determined that the property does not appear to contain any
critical areas as defiried by ECDC 20.15B. As a result, a waiver from the requirement to complete
a study was issued. Critical area determination CA-2000-0130 found that the site appeared to be
on or adjacent to a steep slope, and a survey was required. That survey has been submitted with as
the plat site development plan, which shows that the site does not have any slopes that qualify as
steep slopes per ECDC 20.15B. Therefore, no critical areas regulations apply to this subdivision.
G. Comments:
No conunent letters have been received.
111. RECONSIDERATIONS AND APPEALS
The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing reconsiderations and appeals.
Any person wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should contact the Planning
Department for further procedural information.
A. Request for Reconsideration
Section 20. 100.010.G allows for City staff to reconsider their decision if a written request is
filed within ten (10) working days of the posting of the notice required by this section. The
reconsideration request must cite specific references to the findings and/or the criteria
contained in the ordinances governing the type of application being reviewed.
B. Appeals
Section 20.105.040 and 20.105.020 describes how appeals of a staff decision shall be made.
The appeal shall be made in writing, and shall include the decision being appealed along with
the name of the project and the date of the decision, the name of the individual or group
appealing the decision, their interest in the matter, and reasons why the appellant believes the
decision to be wrong. The appeal must be filed with the Community Development Director
within fourteen (14) calendar days after the date of the decision being appealed.
C. Time Limits for Reconsideration and Appeals
The time limits for Reconsiderations and Appeals run concurrently. If a request for a
reconsideration is filed before the time limit for filing an appeal has expired, the time "clock"
for filing an appeal is stopped until a decision on the reconsideration request is completed.
Once the staff has issued his/her decision on the reconsideration request, the time clock for
filing an appeal continued from the point it was stopped. For example, if a request is filed on
day 5 of the appeal period, an individual would have 9 more days in which to file an appeal
after the staff issues their decision on the reconsideration request.
S-04-52.doc/ August 10, 2004/ Staff Report
Larry and Susan Deisher
File No. S-04-52
Page 7 of 7
IV. LAPSE OF APPROVAL
Section 20.075. 100 states, "Approval of a preliminary plat or preliminary short plat shall expire and
have no further validity at the end of five years, unless the applicant has acquired final plat or final
short plat approval within the five-year period."
V. NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR
The property owner may as a result of the decision rendered by the staff request a change in the
valuation of the property by the Snohomish County Assessor's Office.
VI. ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity / Zoning Map
2. Application
3. Plat Map
4. Engineering Requirements
5. Portion of Site Plan from Building Permit Application, Plan Check #04-0222
6. Excerpt from Nelson Geotechnical Associates Geotechnical Report for Deisher Short Plat, dated
May 26, 2004
VII. PARTIES OF RECORD
Larry D. and Susan C. Deisher Planning Division Engineering Division
11209 — 94' St. NE
Lake Stevens, WA 98258
S-04-52.doc/ August 10, 2004/ Staff Report
OF N-%**, Vicinity and Zoning Map
ATTACHMENT 1
File No. R-04-18
city of edmonds
land use a
. pplication
C3 ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
Q COMP PLAN AMENDMENT
0 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Ell HOME OCCUPATION
EI FORMAL SUBDIVISI*qe,�5 - C'
V SHORT SUBDIVISION 0-0
C3 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT t 66 - - C7-C)
E3 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL U&ILOPMENT
(3 OFFICIAL STREET MAP AeENDMENT /
STREET VACATION -on
REZONE .
Q SHORELINE PERMIT
El VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE
EXCEPTION,
E3 OTHER
Applicant
Address
FILE# ZONE -2—
DATE'5 41�00 REC'D BY!!��
F E E 1. 1 R EC E I PT# -aC4 oco C1
HEARING DATE
El HE STAFF El PB El ADB Q CC
ACTION TAKEN:
El APPROVED El DENIED El APPEALED
APPEAL#
Larry D. & Susan C. Deisher Phone -425-339-1302
11209 94th St. NE
Lake Stevens, Wa.
98258
Property Address or Location Inter- section of 71st Ave. & 174th. Street
PropertyOwner Larry & ' Susan Deisehr Phone 425-339-1302
Address 11209 94th St. NE Lake Stevens, Wa.. 98258
I Aaent Same as Owner
lAddress
Phone
Tax Acc # 5131 000 138 07 & 5131 000 13809 Sec. 8 Twp. 2 7 Rng.. 4
Legal Description - See attached Exhibit 'A'
Details of Project or Proposed Use Two (2) lot Short subdivision
The undersigned applicant, and his/ her/ its heirs, and assigns, in consideration of the processing of. the
application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all
damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or in part upon
false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the. applicant, his/ her/ its agents or
employees.
The undersigned applicant grants his/ her/ its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to
enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and postina attendant to this application.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/ OWNER/ AGENT
ATTACHMEN
I
r 2
PF I EF -'�)HOWT FL. -AT
FKELIMINAKY c2HOFT 5UDPIV15ION
IN GITY OF EDIVIOND5., WAc_-)HIN6,TON
5EG. 08, TOWN15HIF 27 NOKTH, KAN6E 4 E45T W.M.
01 3
04
70.27
TKAGKIN6 NO.
MEADOWPAL-ff IDEACH
06.
02,
04I "�
"
w
III-Ymmoop
, 22
2cl, V/'
VIGINITY MAF
'>GAL.E-. I' - 1,000'
6A
301pr
bo
NOTES
: ;_,o_ bb
6' ROCK
U�LJTIIM MCIM "*W10CIrl'S *CC. Kkl E)aST UM0UtMJM C.
AAE'NOT MIELE. MY NDT BE 9-M" CIN THIS IVP
-
RETA I N I N6
WALL
bl
Z INS PROPERTY CWTAM 3a2M Sa FT. OR 0,76 N��
AA-
FIN. Tor EL.,
bq
VERTICAL DATUM: ASSUMED
OF
.0
DA
IL
C�_
I
V __9
Zq,
F 14'D
I -pF OvOF
110
IO'PF
Q
r
BENCHMARK
FELD ASSUMED ELEVAT I ON OF 100. 00 FEET ON TOP
OF SAN.- SEWER MH AT INTERSECTION OF 174TH ST .
AND IST AVE W
AO
Awek 4�DF
4
1 6 50 2' K-j DEVELOFMENT INFOKMATION
'4O.OF AA
C ci TOTAL- LAND AREA : 33,299 50.fT. .74 AG.)
AG AREA Of ROADWAY: NONE
22'PF TOTAL- ROAD L-EMTH: NONE
10 -0- �K
PRO' 5ED 51=p DECK r \00 NET DffVEL_OPMffNT AREA: 33,299 r2Q.fT.(O.7( AG.)
AV. p j 22'PF F R AREA Of LOT5: 33 2qq 50 FT
p 2'DF I N, FL9. \01.
FIN.r-L -qq.0 PERCENT RD. TO TOfAL_ ARE4: 6.0
t �420' 7'PF �OA
PpOpO5 0 AV. EX15TIN&ZONIN6: K-I-Z
LEGE 'DF 'q 05
1, CIZ8 R *102.0 lo(. PFOPO5ff_DjZONIN6: 9-12
0 F1,0 MCIN IN CASE T. I z -R.-I 'Ob POWER 5UPPL-Y: 5NOIHOM115H COUNTY P.U.P. NO 1
WATEK 5UrPLY: CITY Off EDMOND5
0 SANITARY SENM W 01fo w: :-A - !7 - 5TINC \0 1512WER5EKVICE: CITYOPEONIONID5 (5AN. 15EWER)
702 51 (5LE GRO55 DEV. C�EN5 I TY: 2. 63 V. U. '15/AGRE
91 POWEIR TRMSF� A NET DEV. , DEN:� I TY:
B 26 OF I Ly 2 5 D. U. 'c, / AGIZE
CABLE RISER TER 17 23 1 . 2 . v AVERA6E I-OT 51ZE: 14,650 50. ff.
0 %AALL�ff-15T L-OT 51ZE: 14,745 50. FT.
2 TEE 'PF
CABLE JLWTION BM
0 TELEPHME MSM TOTAL. AFPZ, A 6PEN 5PACE: -0-
TOTAL AREA OPEN '7rACE: -0-
-0, unLm PCLE ::::7 �O
... 5CHooL_ Pic>TFICT: EDMOND15 No.
_5 701 1
FIRE D15TRICT: '"HOMI'5H GOLNTY P15T. No,
............
CLlY AN>M w
............... PROP101515p L-AND U15E: 5IN6L_E FAMIL.Y RE'51PENTIAL_
KATM PETER .. .....
.............................. ...... (PETAGHEP)
"zc Hyawn
........... ... .........
KkTM VALVE
. ........... C
... ......... ......
...... ....... ......... . ....... ......... PEf F I FT I ON:
MB Lf 6AL
KAL BM ... .... .. ...... .......
............
..............
.... ..... ............... THAT rOWTION OF TRACT 150, LEAWODALE DEACH N6 To
0 CATCH BASN 1 3 ............
THE FLAT TI-CREOF, RECOPPIED IN VM. 5; OF rL rAfiE 56,
_AT;,ACCoRpj
XECOKM Of '+JOHOMI%i C4WrY. WAAlIN670N, DE'7GKIDED A5 FOU-01-5:
ss —_ SAN[TWY SEWM DEOINNINO AT THE '501.1711AC-tT C4KNEK OF TRACT 156, MEADOWDALE PEACH;
THENCE FA-T ALONO THE "MOTH OF TI-C LINE 248 FEET TO THE IDINT OF MOM"IM;
—so-- sTcFal D%VN 7404 THENCE NxTm mg..La TO THE WE'JT LINE OF tAIP TRACT 70 A fOINT
Z30 FEET '0VTH OF THE NORTH LINE Of -AIP TRACT; THENCE C4NTIMZ
KATER LPE PAINT KAR EA15T 14 FEET; TH34GE NORTH '�O FEET; THENCE EA5T 124.22 FEET TO THE
WE'lT LINE OF TI-E EA57EMY 150 FEET Of 5AIP TRACT; TH!tt� 5CUTH To
THE -0)TH LINE OF '>AID TRACT; THENCE WE-57 AL4N6 THE '50UTH LINE To
T TI2LEPH[)NE PAINT PA" 70 10 THE TRUE ro N7 c i F twwwmo.
---G T P C — JXCMMT LITILMITY PA"DO T06ETHEK WITH THAT FOrTICIN OF VACATED 174TH5TREET 5W At, VACATED rw
C-CA& T-TELEP140NE ORDINANCE ND. 2014 AM- FILED MVER '14*40MI-51-1 CMM KEU)MINO NLNMC5
P+OklR C-CABLE 4 81051001LO AND 61020'.SM7.1 ThkT WILL ATTACH VY OrEKATIoN oF LAw.
ALW THAT FCKTICN OF TRACT 143, FLAT
DFOGKKIIA FAKK THMOF KE00IMEP IN VOLME 5 OF F
t�", Vql� "T A-5 tl. 5TRe"'ll
—0— T 6PLY'N' NDKTH OF 174TH 15TKEET '>W.
OVEF*fAD POIER Lk E rOCOMN rARK, AccORDINE. To THE rLAT THEREm
KFC,=EP IN VOLU& 57 OF n.AT,5, rA6e I 1q. KEWKV> OF 'AAID 00t�:
— —EDGE OF GPAVEL �1`7 -lE EA'
EXCI 7) IT 450.00 FEET; AM EXCErT THE WE-,T 3150.00 FEET Or- ',AID
TRACT 14!1;
PROPERTY ADORE 70Z3 174TH 15TRE T W. TowTHm WITH THAT romoN or vAcATrp 174TH tTp=rT -m A-.� vuwrm py
OKDINANCE No. 2014 AND
NOTE2: EPMOND5, WA5H I N6T 116020 FILED IJINDER %VHCIMIjH GaWry KEC49DINO NL&4>E"
61051001&0 MID 610205027.5 THAT VILA- ATTAC#j PY OrERAT14N OF LAW,
I. AL-L 5L:Of'E5 APE L.Ec)05 THAN '2uRVEYOK:_ J 9 ANDE5 4 A55OCIATE5 4 51TVATE IN THE CIOLWrY OF 'AWHMI-Al, .',TATE Or- WA"INOTON.
I 5x ExcEPT A15 NOTED ON P"],,b 1523 TENTH 5TREET TAX AGCT. NO, 5131-000-:06-07
2. THERE ARE NO CRITICAL- AREA5 MAKY5VILLE, WA. `18270 5 3 -000- 0.5_Oq NOTE: 711115 . LFUL. Cal5lWATE5 THE RECORD DE -A I FT I ON FOR DRAW I N5 5FACe.
SCALE' I* - 2ff A5 PEF I NED f>Y EMG 340-4541-44.3q THE LE6AL DE5,9irTll0N FILE WITH THE MA-17M rEIDAIT AfrLIClATIZLAWAI"5
THE ENT IRE REC4RD -'
3. 51TE 115 LOCATED IN51DE PLANNER LA14D PLANNING NOFTHOE5T APPLICANT/
20 0 20 40 EX15TIN6 UdA DOUNPARY (EDMOND15) ENG I NEER: THE* JAY 69our, INC. L_A9J;Y D. PEIl*iER OWNER: L_ARR�Y -,UcAN DE 15HER RECEIVEP
TH '5TKEET . I .. . -..:. . .-.. . -_ .:_ .
-4. NO PLMEXE-5, rROPO5E-D. IqZ7 5 1523 TENTH 15TREET IIZOq 94TH 5TREET NE
5TEVEN-2, WA-,Fi. C1625a
418770_ MARY5V I L�LE MAY':G: 3 K-24
CONTOU912 2 FT. INTERVAL, 5- TWO CAR 6ARA6El>-OF`F-2TREET PARKIN6 MARY5VILLE, WA5H. WA5H. 98Z70. L-K.
FOR TVO CAR<> MIN. rEr LOT.: 3(0-(5q-815q t42.503CI-1302
m Ir
ZLu
Q,
lice
156'Cl
1. OF I
PERMIT COUNTER
ATTACHMENT 3
Ibr* 60 t0m` dhbt
3Re W,i 1��,
_q z - 5
W
R - Id- IMI
'",
1:11, WIT
IT
quad-tir
r-1.
IN
.
......... .........
; "Rii Y-OW. C.st
x
'y qmo�Lsi ;ti s. ofhei uif�do�);
Provide all easements as needed.
x
'vd h curb and i
P it
Curbing not required since sidewalks are not required per #5
below.
roun
N/A
Not required per COE Comprehensive Walkway plan
x
V
N/A
-J ;LIAk-
N/A
#!��(p]Oefifies,-flre h PTPP
tc.
Provide service to each lot.
x
Connect to public water systern.
x
x
!*rly: 'i�'iiineDiS (Pio.61166ti
r iok�hbiilthl'district, etc.): VWSb
Provide new service to each lot
x
Connect to public sewer system
x
x
s
4 Dis OIP-6 lifie" j pump
MEOW
Provide storm sewer service to all proposed lots.
x
Construct storm detention system sized to provide adequate
x
capacity for proposed single family dwellings and access
improvements in accordance with ECDC 18.30.
Connect to Public Storm system
x
-Iii d 1"i id;401
� I F-fiihio '14IR pg-r
_6b
-.1 . �
Connect all new impervious surfaces to detention system.
x
x
Undergr-MR910 _po 1347):
Required for all new services
x
x
Submit a grading plan as part of engineered site plan.
x
x
N/A
A u 6it ii�ii,(per OirA, �ediou 12.10.1;0):
� ryu m9puffi
N/A
x
V:\dvr.,&p\deishcr 04-52pit-doc
ATTACHMENT 4:
f 5.
n
Required for all utility construction.
x
x
uireme
N/A
gLnpe qw
a) -Storm drainage connection charge per lot ($428)
x
b) Sewer connection charge/LID fees to be paid in full.
x
c) Plat inspection fee: 2.2% of improvement costs $
x
d) Plan review fee: $860 $ 860
x
e) Traffic mitigation: $200 per pm peak trip $
N/A
17-
ENGINEERING PROGRAM MANAGER, CITY OF EDMONDS
ing� riq*(kreMentq,,#ave been. gqMp(g(e4 #n4 i4e subdivision can be, recorded.
Authorized for recording by: Date:
.01 $4
kTE
VAdvrwksp\deisher 04-52p]tdoc
Op-
0 q-
bo- \Y/
o*PF
62
3 41 43, bo
bA - ----------
54---
66 TAININ6
- N I.
WA
--------- — F IN. TOP EL
e�A
O�
b [2F
'40
L-)kF= bb
H
pr 12 0
0 GG c�
24 OF
2 4 AL-DEp 4 GHEpj;�y
DE
�z L 5PIZEAL p p
TK o�A
ENGH
5'xI 5 -
0 40 pf= 0,40
\<
GONTKQL� O�b
m- 100. 0
- q7. 0
-5 NOTED c2AVIN6 I (IN) !17- 1-7
olk TIZEE \00
TED
IE(OLJT)
DA-J-EP ON 50 1 L- 5TKLJGTURE
L-OGATION ANP PROTEC
KEW I REMENT5.
FROM 6P-4P I N6
\0
TREEC2 NOTED FOR KOVIOVAL
FETY ANP 'o 14'
( 'OF LWJEP ON '5A X IL o(o
D i,;EAc.)E.
..............
Pf�OF>05ff 12
0e)
R Im- 100. 71�00F I
V"i
12 5F
IE-q7.0 v
AV,FIN.6f�-
10.4
.0
F IN, FLJ�. cm
105, 0
...... FOOT I N6
Olt- lip lu
7025 102,
6A
C)4.
. .................... . , O'DF
'o"'o
..(9� OF
12
1 05
85 X0
Xo, 7023
C. 0,
............
...........
.......... .... . .....
... �; ............
..........
..........
......................
........... . . . . . . . . . ..... ............
------- --- � ... -----
........... I ---- A'- ... .....
.............. ....... . .........
.......... ......... ...... ...........
.. .... ........... ...
........ v * ............. ....... ........
. ........... ...... .. .............
ELU
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
ATTACHMENT 5'
.... ......
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26,2004 -
Page 6
deeper loose material or undocumented fill could be encountered in unexplored portions of the site.
Slabs -on -grade should also be supported on native medium dense or better soils or structura I fill
extending to these soils.
The proposed structure locations with respect to the site slopes are adequate based on our observations
and explorations. The proposed building setback of 35 feet from the top of the steep slope on the western
lot could be reduced to 25 feet, if desired, without impacting slope stability.
The planned detention and dispersal system should be adequate provided the area downhill of the
dispersal trench be, vegetated and vegetation maintained to reduce erosion potential.
The on -site soils are considered hi2hlv moisture -sensitive and will easily disturb when wet. We
recommend that construction take place during the drier summer months. However, if construction takes
place during the wet season, additional expenses and delays may be expected due -to the wet conditions.
Additional expenses could include the need for placing a blanket of rock spalls on exposed subgrades,
construction traffic areas, and pavement areas prior to placing structural fill or hard surfaces. The on -site
soils may be used as structural fill provided they could be compacted to specifications. NGA should be
retained to determine if the on -site soils could be used as structural fill material during construction.
Slope Protection
Protection of the 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
fill 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 and routed into a permanent d ischarge system.
Under no circumstances should water be allowed to concentrate or flow over, the slopes.
Erosion'Control Measures
The erosion hazard for the on -site soils is listed as moderate, but actual erosion potential will depend on
how the site is graded and where water is allowed to concentrate. Best Management Practices (BMPs)
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
ATTACHMENT 6
03/03/2005 08:45 3606536852 LPNW PAGE 02
FIELD REPORT
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Field Repod 0 1
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 s Kirkland, Washinjton 98033
425-827-7701 e FAX 425-827-5424
TO: �AkLsVvzr-
ATTN:.
AS REQUESTED BY:
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
Page I of I
Date
912-1051
Projed Name
Project Number
Location
q-0 -z -2
Weather
pfi �t shnItf
Municipality
- - f --A ft-o�
-
bidg. Permit Number
Engineer/Architect
Client/Ownur
Lcirr!4
General UntractorlSuporintendent
EarthWork Contractor/Superintandent
Assec—txa-44 &w-h-% !&<-Lxnc4-4 Ins. (4esll 144S kll-VL--�
+/Lt- a ,JD A11,51 4LtJ - (!sr-kt4t-LL-0
r-C IL, f �-O� 42i g,.4--j 12^4-1
S3q0)4- zelaq
DmzoAAJ lau Assc>cA-e'Jr-S - Ue- -Hu
�- L*4- -of- +tc, 51,ur4-
-+q kAa-,� oft Vq -K-U, vt4;�tL�'e-
4%L1 Sc.*kk 4�lk 15'1 C�q- ZV-. LiLe- AfY-JF�4� -rV1L oe-)n
^ Orc� /\A1/kj0L'-J 0-f-'
4�+ -4�
RECEIVED
FIELD COMPACTION EQUIPMENT UTILIZED: MAR. 0; 3 2004
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR.
AREAS OF ADDITIONAL CONCERN: CITy n
ADDITIONAL TESTS REQUIRED: 17YES F]NO
WHERE?
COPIES TO: FIELD REP:
DATE MAILED: *PROJECT MGR:
ac,A
'Field Report subject to review by AESI Project Manager
DEMOLITION FEFMIT '�)ITE DEVELOFIVIENT FLAN
FOF: LAFI�Y E :�Ul�)AN DE I c-)HEF
oo5 1 31000 13L )7
702 7
oo�� 1 31000
62
6 005 13 1000 1 z4315
bA
bo
- ----------------
�,A ----
W�FG 010
ALDEp
'/P '00 701 1
20,026 50.FT,
'AL to
z 13 2'
Nc,
'T
7025 JCILTE'
I �4C
ICIL-,E
to �4kj I L"r
o 0�
ok:) F]T
,0(,
`5T
AFFL- I GANT: L-AFF'�, �)Ul:�AN PE I ��Hf=F
I 120q q,4TH `�T, NE
L-AKE '�)TEVEN:---) ) WA, q6258
(360)65(5-7152
Vy/
30
(--,/A L — ff— I
CONTOLJFc-): 2 FT. I [',ITEI�VAL-
PATUM: N.6.V.1) IqZq
FFOFff FTY
7025 8 7023 1 7-4TH c:)T, 'W
E1)M0NPc-?, WA'�)H I NGTON q602 6
A-T
ASBESTO-TEST, INC.
ASBESTOS SURVEY
7023 174hST. SW, Edmonds, WA 98026
Page I of 5
IN#240430
April 22, 2004
Larry Deisher
1523 10'h St
Marysville, WA 98270
Ph: 425-339-1302 fax: 360-659-7718
RECEIVED
SEP 13 *4
PERMIT COUNTER
On April 19, 2004, Asbesto-Test personnel conducted an Asbestos survey (per
U.S.E.P.A./A.H.E.&A. guidelines as designated and specified by Puget Sound Clean Air
Agency and Washington State) of the house & shed 6D 7023 1 74h St. SW, Edmonds,
Snohomish County, Washinzion 98026. This survey purpose is to identify any Asbestos
Containing Materials that may be present and will require professional reniovalprior to
dentolition or renovation.
NARRATIVE OF FINDINGS
BASIC CONSTRUCTION: The house is one story wood frame. The exterior siding is wood.
The wood siding vapor barrier was sampled. The composition roofing was also sampled.
INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION, FINISHES, AND FLOORINGS: The interior of the
house is drywall and wood. The drywall/taping materials were uniformly sampled. Tile flooring
materials with relating backings and mastics were sampled per each located homogenous area.
The larninant mastic was sampled from the kitchen. The masonry tile with relating mortar/mastic
is homogenous in the kitchen/bath/hall and was sampled.
INSULATION: There was no visible suspect ACM located.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM: The electrical wiring insulation is not of the kind to be ACM and
was not sampled. Any suspect electrical wiring insulation or any suspect 7NI (Thermal System
Insulation) found in, around, or behind any locatedfuse or breaker boxes should be considered
to be ACM (Asbestos Containing Material), unless determined otherwise by laboratory analysis.
CONTINUE TO PAGE 2
1429 Ave. D. PMB #187, Snohomish, WA 98290 ph: 206-914-5500 fax: 360-563-2469 page: 206-540-2401
Page 2 of 5
IN#240430
April 22, 2004
Asbesto-Test, Inc. (206) 914-5500
house & shed (i� 7023 1 7e St. SW, Edmonds, Snohomish County, Washington 9802
HEATING AND VENTILATION SYSTEM: Heating throughout is baseboard/wall electric.
There was no visible suspect ACM located associated with any of the electric heating units. Note:
It was not possible to dismantle the electric heating units to locate andlor evaluate any
additional suspect A CM which may be concealed, inside the units, or associated in
hidden areas. It is our opinion anyfurther handling of the heating units should be
coordinated by the project manager andlor abatement contractor. If any additional
relating suspect materials are located prior to andlor during any demolition or
renovation, any and all additional related suspect materials should be considered to be
ACM (Asbestos Containing Material), unless determined to be otherwise by laboratory
analysis. There was no visible suspect ACM located associated with the fireplace insert system.
Misc.: None.
ADDITIONAL STRUCTURES ON SITE INCLUDED IN SURVEY: There is a shed
behind the house. The shed is all wood. The window glazing and composition roofing materials
were sampled.
# of structures included in survey: 2- house & shed
Requested by: Larry Deisher
?ftnfiffid6d, B.Sc.
or, certified A.H.E.R.A.
d.#CLAY 5327 (Expires S/ 12/04)
A-T
continue to Paze 3
Page 3of 5
IN#240430
April 22, 2004
Asbesto-Test, Inc. (206) 914-5500
house & shed (a) 7023 174* St. S W, fftmdg, Shohondsh County, WashiWon 9802
ANALYSIS 11D ASBESTOS//TYPEHQUANTITY OTHER MATERIAL
Any and all materials identified as ACM or PACM in this report (and/or additional materials
associated with the structure that may be discovered and later identified as ACM or PACM), must
be professionally abated prior to demolition. ASSESSMENT AND QUANTIFICATION OF ACM
FOR ABATEMENT PURPOSES AND/OR PRICING FOR REMOVAL SHOULD BE
DETERMINED BY ON SITE EVALUATION, AS LISTED QUANTITIES ARE NOT
GUARANTEED AND ARE AN APPROXIMATION ONLY.
SAMPLE #142 AREASBESTOS COATAIA7NG MA TERIALS,
except the mastielbacking as listed in sanwle 2 1.
ANALYSIS ED ASBESTOS/f1rYPE//OUANTITY OTHER MATERIAL
1.0) FLOOR TILE yes H chrysotile H 2-5% non -fibrous materials
study off living room 9"x 9" floor tile -color: light brown
ACM
1.1) BLACK MASTIC yes H chrysotile H 2-5% adhesive, cellulose
MASTIC AND TILE IS NON -FRIABLE ACM
APPROX. 240 SQ. 17117. ON WOOD
2.0) LINOLEUM FLOOR TILE yes H chrysotile H 2-5% non -fibrous materials
ACM cellulose, tar
living room & under masonry floor tile in fireplace area-9" x 9" tile -color: green
TILE IS NON-FRIABLE-APPROX. 120 SQ. FT. ON WOOD
Note: The asbestos is in the hard tile surface material.
2.1) MASTIC/BACKING NAD adhesive, cellulose, tar
THERE WAS NO ASBESTOS DETECTED IN ANY OF THE REMAINING SAMPLES
3.0) drywall
3.1) drywall taping compounds
SAMPLED PER AHERA PROTOCOL
3.2) surface paint (homogenous throughout)
4.0) laminant mastic
ldtchen countertop
5.0) masonry tile
5.1) mortar/mastic
ldtchen/bathroom/hall-homogenous
NAD non -fibrous materials
cellulose, fiberglass,
NAD non -fibrous materials,
cellulose, fiberglass
NAD paint, cellulose
NAD
adhesive, cellulose
NAD non -fibrous materials
NAD adhesive, cellulose,
non -fibrous materials
A-T
continue to page 4
Page 4 of 5
April 22, 2004
IN#240430
Asbesto-Test, Ina (206) 914-5500
house & shed (a) 7023 1 74h St S W. Ednwnds, Snohomish County, Washin2lon 98026
ANALYSIS IID ASBESTOS/f]rYPE//OUANTITY
OTHER MATERUL
6.0) wood siding vapor barrier NAD
cellulose, tar
material beneath wood siding on house exterior
7.0) composition roofing NAD
cellulose, tar, fiberglass,
& underlying materials -house
non -fibrous materials
8.0) window gla2ing NAD
non -fibrous materials,
shed
cellulose
9.0) composition roofing NAD
cellulose, tar, fiberglass,
& underlying materials -shed
non -fibrous materials
H=HOUSE, S--SHED
NOT TO SCALE
F 7s
U
174h ST. SW
..................................................
A-T
continue to page 5
Page 5 of 5
IN#240430
April 22, 2004
Asbesto-Test, Ina (206) 914-5500
house & shed (d) 7023 1 74h St. SW, Ednwnds, Snohomish County, Washington 98026
Some sample analyses listed may be a representative analysis of individual and separate samplings and analysis of homogenous
materials, as prescribed by A.H.E.R.A. protocol.
Samples taken are listed with their corresponding analyses. Ifasbestos is detected, those samples containing asbestos are listedfirst
and noted with the initials "ACM".
If during demolition or renovation, any additional hidden or covered suspect materials similar to those identified in the survey are
located [may include but not limited to: sheet viny1flooring, tileflooring, wall or ceiling texturings orpaints, concrete siding or
skirting, cementpipes, cement wallboard, electrical cloth, electrical wiring insulation, thermalpaper, wallboard, joint compounds,
vinyl wall coverings, spackling compounds, or any other suspect TSI (Thermal System Insulation)], they should be treated as Asbestos
Containing Materials unless determined to be non -asbestos by laboratory analysis.
Note: Asbesto-Test, Inc. does not guarantee approximations of quantities of ACM, which may be listed with the analyses. It is
therefore recommended professional abatement price and/or disposal quotes be obtained by inquiring as to fees per area of
specific ACM material (i.e. square or linear foot, etc.), or by on site assessment
Any and all materials Identified as A CM in this report nuist be abatedprior to ACM disturbance, renovadoY4 or dernoWom All
materials Idendfled as ACM must beprofessionally abated by a licensed asbestos abatement contractorprior to any disturbance.
Analytical test method: USEPA 600/R93/116** (PLM); WAC 296-62-07753 App. J
Key: ACM signifies "Asbestos Containing Material"
PACM signifies "Presumed Asbestos Containing Material"
CAB signifies "Concrete Asbestos Board"
< signifies "less than"
TSI signifies "Thermal System Insulation"
HVAC signifies "Heating Ventilating Air -Conditioning"
NAD signifies "No Asbestos Detected"
"One percent is the USEPA regulatory limit for asbestos in bulk samples.
PLM has been known to miss asbestos in small percentages of some samples, which contain asbestos, thus negative PLM results cannot be
guaranteed. F119aritiles and wipes should be tested with SEM or TEM, to insure analytical accuracy when reported in small percentages.
Asbesto-T3KInc. flaims responsibility for sample content only.
END OF REPORT
licti? Chemist,
proficient
F; &A
08/04/2004 -.11:10 14254812510
�a, iff 'a
NGA��
17311-13eAVWMNE,A-M0
WOOOMBe, WA SO=
(425) 4WIG59 a (4M F=481-MIO
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL PAGE 01/03
NELS'ON GwTF-cHNICAL
ASSOCIATES9 INC.
GEUMCHNICAL ENGINEERS & GxroLoGtSTS
Facsimile Transmittal
To: Larry Delsher
Company:
Phone:
Fax., 360-653-6852
SnOofffth Cou* (4M 3311-I&M
WwMdwQVM*M (50) n-S-2758
From: Alison Jackson/Khaled Shawish
Company: Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc.
17311-13e Ave. NE, A-500
Woodinville, WA 98072
Phone: 425-486-1669
Fax: 425-481-2510
Date:. 8-4-04
Pages Including Cover Page: 3
NGA File #:
CC:
Special inspection and Testing Agreement attached. Thank you.
88/04/2004 11:10
14254812510
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
PAGE 02/03
V f(* "V6 Qw0w* Qt%b--T,-MA '..
W!
WAC
at
aff OF IMMONW
SPECUL 1114SPEMON AM TK9MG AGRMIM
ffr-*%� —A "At--
MW MIMMCM wwor ftwe am UBC I
of sp*dal joqmfions is iiiWodii d3k docuniint
A PERMM CM B2 ISSM: JU qw= md codbadw and dull
QMVIC�o d3b 4nd OW oftebCd Muchwd twqq) =d in"odow =Miomod= the
OF VZaAL EN W70RB' FA9b "oW mpectu dmB be myed by dw
Pff ftes of Wo6dow IbCb spedd uAlou"M " $W=il
im..'a'd qu""d-ow tD dic offlum Rw xavkw. 54w" ino� ow & y
1*6 IfiMTA R1,11, WIL SO" Mopoodw =d tutmg aban
%x"Mmiia ad tto WOW
1. Obsem Wwk
JU qpodid &Vocbw da obw" the dw wo* for embm3we wilh dw qw- 4
P Pow 0 of 41W.
mW be oW a* as = aid tn irapachm—
Cr M-1=obe an a 6adiom bWw4Wu=09 lbd ft
P at to
hiff
peow" an she at AD
C!;"-bwJ r Plan
W&Wod aid qyiov by Me OWWOffidd ad So or:=
3L RAPwtNoM-CowAw 4 —itovo$
id ft-WGCW- bft nonconfizmbg umn I* dw- inowAide sUentim of 6*
I-Ar ondnift alai 8whMm iadw-"- , Any h= " rnolved im a tW*
ut am DOW do a
nower"beinwndho of do -O'Oftofkw of fts
lift IWuuM =w, &"p at Z=7 shelf Ww be to "y of dw Wedd k*ectw IN
Pont* =I* ft oruchiML
CAmpb* DWbr RqMb
Ewh special m-WvCW shall comphft =d sign budi the NPOW f NOR ad to.
fiw ea& daf o m—
" ft= qxchoL WM records dwH The jawte wilt *fM
COMMUM" AM &,wvnww by to City BW]ftg Umpeew.
4L Vmrmkb WoMy RRM-6
tab
=dffi*Wd—onL The �cMmoworxcbboctondotouiu be
ICUPW MIL.W topmu wwr thchdo *a 6u6wug;
fngo P f Is, I, I =4 voW me& wbh 411cable localim
BE ffiru.-U-OLNUMUMMIS Luano
now (Molved or unmolved
1. if ot kcbm in
CbanM adhMized by The. AMMCM ED&= Ed QW
n M nofa---- item
FkmM ftd Coustmetka Rqpn
JU hupedbor or
y dM obmit a fiW d9RW nVort to to MY
the wi—onis- wd tw* wav fWww am v%mft& AA to die
beat of ad is M, 0003xvnme with b 9; d pbm ond
abd the qn)hodblo *Ovid&" d dw
DR in CZ of uuroq*bmd 16cm or UW diacfflq�w im hurcubim
1.11:, 111tilill1w inawbum TI:,dL,13& m-ecdon whcu ooutim� %qwfiois wao
t&V
X%M
or-) dM be vocfficolly Wir"M fn t
08/04/2004 11:10 14254812510 NELSON GEOTECHNICAL PAGE 03/03
1. No* the Spa" Inspeder
It is ft duty of die coftmW, Im no" &a spedd mWwtw wbin wmt is rawly for spedd
mqmcUoL Note, to h= Wed on dw mmm*W whW* nd as noted on da qwvod
phm md Vmficahm am requirW to hm VecW mpecdom degge mdee AsU be
Foyiftd by the m*sd" so 6* tbr, qmcW W*mW hu *m to bmirm *ft 9W
projecL
7. ftuvide Amen to Approved Pim
7be acuumbo is x*qmmWe (w Vzovuhme dw spommJ nwqmctw weam to sma. ph= at
diaJobsitc.
3. Retak Spada Imp"don ma"Oh
The oonftftis MPOAVe to TcWM a *010bgitr, OR sm"I secd-uncoub
by te qmW bqmdor. Thm recarch am to be pmvkkxfto to bdlftg hopcoWr opm
c C& of,
1. A or a age**$
A'-M—qN- =-'&-M
2. me"W opt" hmpe" Md qvrvm W"* reporb
4 md 60 --- A- -
WQ* J"QVmW 9-ccad hmocbm of "Cial immeakom " be
madtared by am. MY DR julpaqw. d me be oNabW &W to
- ffft d Vpw - --r-
phweemw of comet P. ar odur shm 23mtmiuW&"fA*d0f&@ 4, i 1 iWWW"u.
3. bMCntW=ft*(0ee"MY
mm WOW - aCmdfimb of lDcaqmcy aft SO Weakly R"d hqm*=
IF In I Ike mpumbuvcbvm=bmWAaadmc"&
IL umomwasandum "--
Mm "ad 0W= or &e m*tm at ambiW of mard actms a to owneft agm dmM food
IL gadmu or Anbbdd.. I
MW tvsbmw cc ambited of d�W- mh& WmW =Vaodm raqwmao on &a ph= md
ACKNOWLEDGEWNTS *
Ihowradmdwmtocmply**hL4wmmmdwndWmofAbavvmxw-
SPCCW hmpecw
City BWdiu&
— 4.(.- a 4
Glarrm* -
'70-2-5 _5V sw
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
GROUP
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GROUPNAME
SYMBOL
CLEAN
GW
WELL-GF;LADED, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL
COARSE-
GRAVEL
GRAVEL
GP
POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL
GRAINED
MORE THAN 50 %
GRAVEL
GM
SILTY GRAVEL
OF COARSE FRACTION
RETAINED ON
SOILS
NO. 4 SIEVE
WITH FINES
GC
CLAYEY GRAVEL
SAND
CLEAN
SW
WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND
SAND
SP
POORLY GRADED SAND
MORE THAN 50 %
RETAINED ON
MORE THAN 50 %
NO. 200 SIEVE
OF COARSE FRACTION
SAND
Sm
SILTY SAND
PASSES NO. 4 SIEVE
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:
I ) Field classification is 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 Moist - Damp, but no visible water.
is based on ASTM D 2488-93.
3) Descriptions of soil density or Wet - Visible free water or saturated,
consistency are based on usually soil is obtained from
interpretation of blowcount data, below water table
visual appearance of soils, and/or
test data.
Project Number
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
No.
Date
Revision
By
CK
393604
Deisher Short Plat
Soil Classification Chart
---_�NGA ASSOCIATES, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
1
5/11/04
Original
ADJ
KMS
Figure 5
17311-135th A- NF A—%O Sna"h Cw* (425) 337-1669
W od WA 90072 W-dd..)ChW- (509) 75�2755
1425) =.Zll F. 481.2510 —d—V.0�
9
4
LOG OF EXPLORATION
DEPTH(FEET) Usc SOIL DESCRIPTION
TEST PIT ONE
.0.0-2.0
SM
ORANGE -BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND IRON -OXIDE
STAINING (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST)
2.0-5.5
sm
GRAY, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 2.0 AND 4.0 FEET
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 5.5 FEET ON 5/7/04
TEST PIT TWO
0.0-0.3
WOOD CHIPS WITH 5/8-INCH MINUS CRUSHED ROCK (ELLJL
0.3-1.5
sm
ORANGE -BROWN TO GRAY, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, MOIST)
(ELJL
1.5-1.9
BURIED TOPSOIL
1.9-4.0
sm
ORANGE -BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND IRON -OXIDE
STAINING (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST)
4.0-6.5
SP-SM
GRAY, FINE SAND WITH SILT (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST)
6.5-7.0
sm
GRAY, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 1.4,2.5, AND 5.0 FEET
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 7.0 FEET ON 517/04
TEST PIT THREE
0.0-0.3 SOD/TOPSOIL
0.3-3.0 DARK BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL, CONCRETE, AND TOPSOIL
(LOOSE, MOIST) (ELLL)
3.0-5.5 Sm GRAY, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST)
SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AT 5.0 FEET
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 5.5 FEET ON 5/7/04
TEST PIT FOUR
0.0-0.5 TOPSOIL WITH 518-INCH MINUS CRUSHED ROCK (ELLJL
0.5-1.0 sm ORANGE -BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST)
1.0-2.5 sm GRAY, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (VERY DENSE, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE NOT COLLECTED
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 2.5 FEET ON 5/7/04
ADJ NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
FILE NO 393604
FIGURE 6
LOG OF EXPLORATION
DEPTH(FEET) use SOIL DESCRIPTION
TEST PIT FIVE
0.0-0.3 TOPSOIL/SOD (LOOSE, MOIST) (ELLL)
0.3-2.0 sm ORANGE -BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST)
2.0-3.5 sm GRAY, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE TO VERY DENSE, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 1.0 AND 3.5 FEET
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 3.5 FEET ON 5/7/04
ADJ NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
FILE NO 393604
FIGURE 7
CA)
0) Z
CD 0
.o. 41,
0 0
CD.
CD
CD
0
0
a) T
South
r-160
140
1#1
Planned
House
Z —120
7
> 174th Street SW
Z
m TP-3
> r
o W (Projected 1 Oft
0 0 100 TP-4 to the west)
0 Z Y Fill
20 — — ?
> m I— — —.
1 0 Till
m -4
W m
n 80
n
r
Z
p
L60
0
co (D
9' i
a Scale: 1 inch =20 feet (Horizontal and Vertical)
0
>
2_
X 0
A X Reference: Cross Section is based on an untitled, undated, electronic file provi(
12 AutoCAD\393604 DeisheA393604x-sedon.dwa
Existing
B1
North
160-1
140
120
100
-1
6.1 'N
�F
L^
by Larry Deisher.
NGA
17311 — 13Vh Avenue NE, A-500
Woodinville, WA 98072
(425) 486-1669 - (425) Fax 481-2510
DATE:
TO
CC:
August 18, 2004
Larry Deischer
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
AssoCIATES, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
MEMORANDUM
Ross Beckley — City of Edmonds
FROM: Khaled Shawish, PE \Jj^"
RE: Slope Protection
17023-174 th Street SW, Edmonds, WA
NGA File No. 3936BO4
Snohomish County (425) 337-1669
Wenatchee/Chelan (509) 784-2756
AUG 2
PERMIT CoU,11TEI;
We have provided a geotechnical evaluation, dated May 26, 2004, for the planned two -lot short plat
development at 7023-174th Street SW in Edmonds, Washington. The northern portion of the site consists
of gentle to steep north facing slope. Slope inclinations up to 43 percent are indicated on the western lot.
The slopes on the eastern lot are more moderate to gentle. In the slope protection section of our report,
we recommended that the slope and setback area at the top of the slope -should not be disturbed or
modified through the placement of fill or removal of the existing vegetation. This recommendation was
intended for the steep slope on the western lot of this project.
During a telephone conversation you informed us that you plan to clear vegetation and place up to 4 feet
of fill on the slope on the eastern lot of the project. We have prepared this memo to address the concerns
raised by the City of Edmonds based on the slope protection recommendations in our report. In our
opinion, the planned clearing and grading of the slope on the east lot is feasible. We recommend that the
areas of planned fill placement be stripped of organic materials and loose soils. The fill subgrade should
be cut to form level benches, at least eight feet in width. The slope fill should consist of granular materials
placed as structural fill as described in our previous report for this project. Any areas of disturbed
vegetation on the slope should be planted and maintained until the vegetation is re-established. The filled
areas should also be vegetated. Final fill slope inclinations should not exceed 2H: 1V.
1-4
Memorandum
Deisher Short Plat, Edmonds
August 18, 2004
NGA File No. 3936BO4
Page 2
We trust this memo should satisfy your needs at this time, please contact us if you have questions
regarding this memo or if we can be of further assistance to you.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
M
Neighboring House
all
I I of Spreader Trench
TO-3
Appr te Location
of Detention Pipe
Planned House
IF
IRO,
"Voi
Site olan hqqpd nn an untitled. undated. electronic file provided by Larry Deisher.
— - — - — - — - — - —
0-
J , c
ec
_c - . *
7PIanned� *Houser
SW I A
CO
N
>
0
0
z
_j
Planned Rockery
U
0
U
0
Z
j
-��V
CO
U
W U)
0
W
00
-6
C;
11- w
PS
'0 I
0
w
U)
ti
w
Z 0
W
0 U)
Z
U)
0
z
J
w
w
z
-1
U
_,,ZA
<
Z
zil
U
<
w
0
CO ia
W
� C4
LEGEND
0 M
U)
TP-1
Number and Approximate
Location of Test Pit
(D
A Approximate Location
of Cross- Sect ion
Property Lines
a)
.0
0 30 60
E
z
C)
(D
t5
(D
CD
S6ale: 1 inch 30 feet
'7o 7-
-n W 'i-D'
CA)
0) Z
C
0 0
a CD.
W (n
CD
I
CD W
=r
0
>
0
South
r-160
Planned House
140 Demolished House
Z —120
174th Street SW
>
Z
TP-1
M TP-5
> r
U) 0 (Projected 1 Oft
U) 0 100 to the east)
0 Z Till
20
> M
4 0
M -4
U) M
0
0 —80
n
r
Z
i; L-60
0
. ;a
Q. M
Scale: 1 inch =20 feet (Horizontal and Vertical)
0
0
X Reference: Cross Section is based on an untitled, undated, electronic file provided by Larry Deisher.
Approximate Location
of Planned Fill Rockery
A'
North
160-,
140-
120-
100-
1.112
NO
CQ 1V4
LI
cl cl
e>o-
2q w
52
cm� DF
30' DF e)o
U
6
_Q 13 Y ROGK
13
WAL_
Nj
e)b
A I N I N6
tu O�
WAIA_ FIN. TOF EL
o o'
WVE��:/EA -5 Z bA
-4-
DF
of= e)b
12 cc)
-ro
0 0 F
'04"tNo OF
4 ff
H
z 14 of
O.G
c_
QE�
lz'.4 Ck
q-&ALE)Eg "WGHCFKy 2,4'[)Fz
0
o�A
6 c�
-p FE 40'E)F
110 12. E)F Welf-5 NOT[_=D,;AVIr_6 \00
DA" ON, W L
"&'T'Tf")' I LL
L-00AT ION AND P ec'T _c F
X FKOM GRAPIM REaj 1 9Bv(NT'2. . . . 15F ol
Q1
: I \OA
TfZEC_, NOTED FOR RENIOVA
DA5W ON '2AFfTY. AND
fl-
opo
C451 \ob
5 C-- _' 7
'K00F
0,42
'4V I oq.0- \0
NJ, ffL
riN
-25 13
70
FOOTIN6 5. o
FKOP. T
ELEV. 102
.6A KIM qq. 85 .0
I E ( IN) ��q
I f- (Ov�pl A6.04
F
z
ja I
112 �5 L_f= (5, 05
Im-lo
op, .7023
0.0 If(IN C. 0
. ...... .. ...... .
IOU-,
... ........
EX. CID
KIM C16,23
If- (IN) q5.75
RECEIVE
IE (OLJT) q5,73
IE (NOKTH) c15_75 AUG 5 2004
PERMIT COUNT
APPROVED AS NOTED
I FE TO `5OUTH
BY ENGINEERING A
70 10
We-
Kklv
<
Li
Z_ Olt
10,
S�rs Lo
'76 5k s V,
I A
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
EVALUATION
DEISHER SHORT PLAT
7023174 TH STREET SW
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
PREPARED FOR
MR. LARRY DEISHER
Ng fGa-w A
17311 — 135'h Avenue NE, A-500
Woodinville, WA 98072
(425) 486-1669 * (425) Fax 481-2510
May 26, 2004
Mr. Larry Deisher
1523- IO'h Street
Marysville, Washington 98270
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
AssoaATEs. INC.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
Dear Mr. Deisher:
Snohomish County (425) 337-1669
Wenatchee/Chelan (509) 784-2756
We are pleased to submit this report titled, "Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation — Deisher Short Plat —
7023- 174"' Street SW — Edmonds, Washington." This report documents our surficial observations and
subsurface explorations within the site and provides recommendations for site development. Our services
were completed in general accordance with our Services Agreement signed by you on May 9, 2004.
The site is planned to be divided into two lots, each with a planned residence, access to the residence, and
associated utilities. The stormwater of both residences will be diverted to one stormwater detention pipe,
and then into a dispersal trench.
We monitored the excavation of five test pits in the areas of the two planned residences and stormwater
detention pipe. We have concluded that the site is generally compatible with the proposed development.
Our explorations within the site indicated that native glacial till primarily underlies the site and should be
encountered approximately 1.0 to 4.0 feet below the existing ground surface based on our explorations.
In the attached report, we have provided recommendations for foundation, slabs -on -grade, pavement
subgrade preparation, and retaining wall and rockery construction.
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 services.
Sincerely,
NELSON T HNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC
Kbkh Shawish, PE
Principal
Three Copies Submitted
I , I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................... 1
SCOPE......................................................................................................................................................... 2
SITECONDITIONS .................................................................................................................................. 2
SurfaceConditions ..................................................................................................................................... 2
SubsurfaceConditions .............................................................................................................................. 3
HydrologicConditions .............................................................................................................................. 4
SENSITIVEAREA EVALUATION ......................................................................................................... 5
SeismicHazard ......................................................................................................................................... 5
ErosionHazard .......................................................................................................................................... 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................... 5
General...................................................................................................................................................... 5
SlopeProtection ........................................................................................................................................ 6
ErosionControl Measures ......................................................................................................................... 6
SitePreparation and Grading .................................................................................................................... 7
StructuralFill ............................................................................................................................................ 8
Foundations............................................................................................................................................... 9
Slabs -on -Grade ....................................................................................................................................... 10
RetainingWalls ....................................................................................................................................... 10
SiteDrainage ........................................................................................................................................... I I
RockeryConstruction ............................................................................................................................. 12
USEOF THIS REPORT .......................................................................................................................... 14
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure I - Vicinity Map
Figure 2 - Site Plan
Figures 3 & 4 - Cross -Sections A -A' and B-13'
Figure 5 - Soil Classification Chart
Figures 6 & 7 - Test Pit Logs
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW
Edmonds, Washington
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering investigation and evaluation at the
planned Deisher Short Plat in Snohomish County, Washington. The site is located at 7023- 174'h Street
SW in Edmonds, Washington, as shown on the Vicinity Map in Figure 1. The purpose of this study is to
explore the subsurface conditions within the site and provide geotechnical engineering recommendations
for the proposed site development. For our use in preparing this report, we have been provided with an
untitled, undated, electronic site plan showing site layout, existing topography, an existing structure,
planned lot boundaries, planned structures, and a planned rockery.
Development within this site is proposed to consist of two residential lots along with associated access
driveways and utilities, as shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. An existing residence in the eastern lot is
currently being demolished, and the future residence in this lot will be a two-story, wood -framed structure
with a daylight basement and a slab -on -grade. This residence will be constructed on an existing gentle to
moderate slope. The eastern lot will be accessed from the south off of 174'h Street SW. The planned
residence, on the western lot, will consist of a two-story, wood framed structure underlain by a crawl
space. This residence is shown to be setback 35 feet away from the top of an existing steep slope. The
western lot will be accessed from the south end of an existing asphalt driveway that comes off of 174 1h
Street SW and runs along the west side of the site. Final grading plans were not available at the time this
study was completed. However, we do not anticipate that major grading will result from the new
improvements.
It is our understanding that stormwater collected within the site will be directed into a detention pipe to be
constructed within the central portion of the site. This 24-inch diameter corrugated ADS pipe will be
approximately 35 feet long, and will be buried approximately two feet below the existing ground surface.
Runoff will then be routed to a planned 20-feet long infiltration spreader trench, located perpendicularly
and 15 feet north of the detention pipe.
We have been informed that a rockery is planned at the toe of a north -facing slope that occupies the
northern portion of the site. The total length of the rockery is planned to be approximately 135 feet long
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 2
and will range from approximately 3 feet to 6 feet in height. The western 50 feet, or so, of the rockery
will be in a cut while the remainder of the rockery will be in a fill.
SCOPE
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the site subsurface soils and hydrologic conditions, and provide
recommendations for site development. Specifically, our scope of services includes the following:
Review available geologic and soils maps of the area.
2. Explore the site subsurface soil and groundwater conditions with trackboe-excavated test
pits. Trackboe was supplied by our client.
3. Explore the existing conditions of the sloping areas of the site.
4. Perform cross -sections with an inclinometer and a measuring tape.
5. Provide recommendations for site preparation and grading.
6. Provide recommendations for foundation support and slabs -on -grade subgrade.
7. Provide recommendations for site drainage and erosion control.
8. Document the results of our explorations, findings, conclusions and recommendations in
a written geotecbrucal engineering report.
SITE CONDITIONS
Surface Conditions
The site is an irregular -shaped parcel covering approximately 0.76 acres and is divided into two lots. The
western lot covers 0.33 acres and the eastern lot covers 0.43 acres. The site is bordered to the south by
174'h Street SW, and to the north, west, and east by existing residential lots. An existing asphalt driveway
branches off 174b Street SW at the southwest comer of the site and runs along the western side and a
portion of the northern side of the site. The site is mostly level within the southern portion and then
slopes moderately to steeply down along the north towards the northern side of the property. The site
layout is shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2.
The existing structure on the eastern lot is currently being demolished. The slope to the north of the
planned building area is covered with deciduous and evergreen trees of varying maturity, and brush.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 3
Cross Section A -A', in Figure 3, shows the site geometry through the steep slope near the planned
residence. The slope to the north of this planned residence has been designated as a 22.5% descending
slope and therefore a specific building setback from the top of the slope is not required by the City of
Edmonds for this residence.
The planned building area on the western lot is relatively flat and covered with grass. The slope to the
north of this area is covered with deciduous and evergreen trees of varying maturity and brush. Cross
Section B-B' in Figure 4 shows the site geometry through the steep slope near the planned residence.
This slope has been designated as a 43% descending slope, however, since the slope has less than 18 feet
in vertical relief, a specific building setback from the top of the slope is not required by the City for this
residence. We did not observe sloughing or seeping water on the slopes or within the development areas
at the time of our visit on May 7, 2004.
Subsurface Conditions
Geology: The geologic units for this area are shown on the Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Part
of the Edmonds West Quadrangles, Washington by James P. Minard, et al. (USGS, 1983). The site is
mapped as Till (Qvt). This unit is described as a non -sorted mixture of clay, silt, sand, pebbles, cobbles,
and boulders, in variable amounts. Our explorations generally encountered dense, brown to gray, silty
fine to medium sand with gravel, which is consistent with the description of the Till.
Explorations: The subsurface conditions within the site were explored on May 7, 2004 by excavating
five test pits, using a trackhoe. The test pits were excavated to depths of 2.5 to 7.0 feet below the existing
ground surface. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. A
geologist from Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. (NGA), was present during the explorations,
obtained samples of the different soil types, and maintained a log of the explorations.
The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System,
presented in Figure 5. The detailed exploration logs are attached to this report and are presented as
Figures 6 and 7. We present a brief summary of the subsurface conditions in the following paragraphs.
For a detailed description of the subsurface conditions, the logs of the test pits should be reviewed.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174th Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 4
In Test Pit 1, we encountered 2.0 feet of loose to medium dense, orange -brown, silty fine to medium sand
with gravel and iron -oxide staining. We interpreted this material to be native weathered till. Underlying
the weathered till, we encountered dense, gray, silty fine to medium sand with gravel, which we
interpreted to be native unweathered till. Test Pit I was ten-ninated in this material.
In Test Pit 2, we encountered 0.3 feet of wood chips and 5/8-inch mmus crushed rock, which we
interpreted to be fill. Below this fill, we encountered 1.2 feet of loose, orange -brown, silty fine to
medium sand with gravel and roots. We interpreted this layer to be fill. From 1.5 to 1.9 feet below the
existing ground surface, we encountered loose, dark brown, silty sand with roots, which we interpreted to
be a buried topsoil layer. We then encountered 2.1 feet of loose to medium dense, orange -brown, silty
fine to medium sand with gravel, which we interpreted to be weathered till. Below the weathered till, we
encountered 2.5 feet of medium dense, gray fine sand with silt. We interpreted this material to be a sandy
zone within the till. Test Pit 2, was terriiinated at 7.0 feet below the existing ground surface, in dense,
gray, silty fine to medium sand with gravel, which we interpreted to be native unweathered till.
In Test Pit 3, we encountered 0.3 feet of topsoil. Below this topsoil layer, we encountered 2.7 feet of dark
gray, silty fine to medium sand with gravel and concrete chunks, which we interpreted to be fill.
Underlying the topsoil and fill, we encountered dense, gray, silty fine to medium sand with gravel, which
we interpreted to be native unweathered till. Test Pit 3, was terminated in this material at 5.5 feet.
In Test Pits 4 and 5, we encountered 0.3 to 0.5 feet of topsoil. Below this topsoil, we encountered 0.5 to
2.0 feet of loose to medium dense, orange -brown, silty fine to medium sand with gravel and iron -oxide
staining. We interpreted this material to be native weathered till. Underlying the weathered till, we
encountered dense, gray, silty fine to medium sand with gravel, which we interpreted to be native
unweathered till. Test Pits 4 and 5 were terminated in this material.
Hydrologic Conditions
Groundwater seepage was not encountered within any of the explorations. However, it is our opinion that
a perched groundwater condition could develop on this site during the wetter time of the year. Perched
water occurs when surface water infiltrates through less dense, more pen-neable soils and accumulates on
top of a relatively impermeable material such as the underlying unweathered till. The more permeable
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 5
soils consist of the topsoil, fill, and weathered till. Perched water does not represent a regional
groundwater "table" within the upper soil horizons. Perched water tends to vary spatially and is
dependent upon the amount of rainfall. We would expect the amount of groundwater to decrease during
drier times of the year and increase during wetter periods.
SENSITIVE AREA EVALUATION
Seismic Hazard
The project is located within Zone 3 of the Seismic Zone Map of the 1997 Uniform Building Code
(UBC). This corresponds to a Seismic Zone Factor, Z, of 0.30. We recommend that the subsurface soils
be considered Soil Profile Type Sc, as described in the UBC.
Hazards associated with seismic activity include liquefaction potential and amplification of ground
motion due to soft, saturated soil. The glacial till soils interpreted to underlie this site does not have a
significant potential for liquefaction or amplification of ground motion.
Erosion Hazard
The criteria used for evaluation of erosion hazards include soil type, slope gradient, vegetation cover, and
groundwater conditions. The surface soil types (group classification) are related to the underlying
geologic soil units. The Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area, Washington, by the Soil Conservation
Service (SCS), was reviewed to evaluate the erosion hazard of the on -site soils.
The surface soils at the site were mapped by the SCS, as Alderwood-Everett gravelly sandy loams, 25 to
70 percent slopes. The erosion hazard for these soils is listed as moderate. It is our opinion that the
erosion hazard for site soils should be low in areas where vegetation is not disturbed.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
It is our opinion that, from a geotechnical standpoint, the site is compatible with the planned
development. Our explorations within the site indicated that the site is underlain by competent glacial till.
This material should provide adequate support for the planned structures and paved areas. Footings
should extend through any loose surficial soil and fill, and be founded on the underlying medium dense or
better native soils, or structural fill extending to these soils. Medium dense or better soils should typically
be encountered between one to four feet below the existing surface, based on our explorations. Areas of
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 6
deeper loose material or undocumented fill could be encountered in unexplored portions of the site.
Slabs -on -grade should also be supported on native medium dense or better soils or structural fill
extending to these soils.
The proposed structure locations with respect to the site slopes are adequate based on our observations
and explorations. The proposed building setback of 35 feet from the top of the steep slope on the western
lot could be reduced to 25 feet, if desired, without impacting slope stability.
The planned detention and dispersal system should be adequate provided the area downhill of the
dispersal trench be vegetated and vegetation maintained to reduce erosion potential.
The on -site soils are considered highly moisture -sensitive and will easily disturb when wet. We
recommend that construction take place during the drier summer months. However, if construction takes
place during the wet season, additional expenses and delays may be expected due to the wet conditions.
Additional expenses could include the need for placing a blanket of rock spalls on exposed subgrades,
construction traffic areas, and pavement areas prior to placing structural fill or hard surfaces. The on -site
soils may be used as structural fill provided they could be compacted to specifications, NGA should be
retained to determine if the on -site soils could be used as structural fill material during construction.
Slope Protection
�'e
Protection of the slope areas should be performed as required by the City of Edmonds. Specifically, we
e
recommend that the setback area and top of slope not be disturbed or modified through placement of any
ny
be
fill or removal of the existing vegetation. No material of any kind should be placed on the slope or be
memo
allowed to reach the slope, and trees should not be cut down or removed from the slope. Any propose
teow
development within the setback areas, other than light decks or patios, should be the subject of a specifi
TkTi
geotechnical evaluation. Runoff should be collected and routed into a pen-nanent discharge system
�CCT�o /I
Under no circumstances should water be allowed to concentrate or flow over the slopes.
Erosion Control Measures
The erosion hazard for the on -site soils is listed as moderate, but actual erosion potential will depend on
how the site is graded and where water is allowed to concentrate. Best Management Practices (BMPs)
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 7
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 and/or
straw bales should be erected to prevent muddy water from leaving the site. Disturbed areas should be
planted with vegetation at the end of construction. The vegetation should be maintained until established.
The erosion potential of areas not stripped of vegetation should be low.
Site Preparation and Grading
The first step of site preparation within the planned building and pavement areas should be to strip any
fill, topsoil, and loose soils to expose medium dense or better native soils. The stripped material should
be removed from the site or stockpiled for later use as landscaping fill. The exposed subgrade should be
compacted to a non -yielding condition and then proof -rolled with a heavy rubber -tired piece of
equipment. Areas observed to pump or weave during the proof -roll test should be reworked to structural
fill specifications, or over -excavated and replaced with 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. Cut-off or
interceptor/curtain drains may need to be installed to control surface and groundwater. If wet conditions
are encountered, the site should be stripped and graded using large excavators equipped with wide tracks
and smooth buckets. In this case, the exposed subgrade should not be compacted, as compacting a wet
subgrade may only result in further disturbance to the sensitive soils, instead, a layer of crushed rock or
all-weather material may be placed over the prepared areas to protect them from further disturbance.
As mentioned earlier, the site soils are considered moisture sensitive and will disturb when wet. We
therefore recommend that construction take place in the summer during periods of extended dry weather,
and suspended during periods of rainfall. If work takes place during the wetter part of the year, care
should be taken during site preparation not to disturb the native soils. Construction traffic should not be
allowed on the exposed subgrade. A blanket of rock spalls should be used in construction access areas.
The thickness of this layer should be based on subgrade performance at the time of construction. For
planning purposes, we recommend a minimum 1 -foot thick layer of rock spalls in the construction access
areas.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 8
Structural Fill
General: Fills placed beneath foundations, pavements, other settlement -sensitive structures, or behind
retaining walls should be placed as structural fill.
Structural fill, by definition, is placed in accordance with prescribed methods and standards and is
monitored by an experienced geotechnical professional or soils technician. Field monitoring procedures
would include the performance of a representative number of in -place density tests to document the
attainment of the desired degree of relative compaction. The area to receive the fill should be prepared as
outlined in the Site Preparation and Grading subsection of this report.
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 on site soils consist mostly of moisture -sensitive silty materials. The ability to use the native soils as
structural fill will be dependent on moisture content control. Some drying of the soils may be necessary
in order to achieve compaction. We expect that compaction of most of, the native soils to structural fill
specifications would be difficult, if not impossible, during wet weather. We should be retained to
evaluate the suitability of using the on-s ite soils as structural fill at the time of construction.
Fill Placement: Following subgrade preparation, placement of structural fill may proceed. All
backfilling should be accomplished in uniform lifts up to ten inches thick. Each lift should be spread
evenly and be thoroughly compacted prior to placement of subsequent lifts. All structural fill should be
compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the material's maximum dry density. Maximum dry density, in
this report, refers to that density as determined by the ASTM D-1557 Compaction Test procedure. The
moisture content of the soils to be compacted should be within about 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 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.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174'h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 9
Foundations
Conventional shallow spread foundations should be placed on undisturbed medium dense or better native
soils, or be supported on structural fill or rock spalls extending to those soils, with the exception of the
downhill footing lines on the eastern lot which should be casi directly on the native material. Where less -
dense soils are encountered at footing bearing elevations, the subgrade should be over -excavated to
expose suitable bearing soil. The over -excavation may be filled with structural fill or concrete, or the
footing may be extended to the bearing native soils. If footings are supported on structural fill, the fill
zone should extend outside the edges of the footing a distance equal to one-half of the depth of over -
excavation below the finished subgrade.
Footings should extend at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finished ground surface for frost
protection and bearing capacity considerations with the exception of the downhill footing line for the
eastern residence. This footing line should be embedded a minimum of 36 inches into the native
competent material. Minimum foundation widths of 18 and 24 inches should be used for continuous and
isolated spread footings, respectively. Standing water should not be allowed to accumulate in footing
trenches. All loose or disturbed soil should be removed from the foundation excavation prior to placing
concrete.
For foundations constructed as outlined above, we recommend an allowable design bearing pressure of no
more than 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be used for designing footings founded on the native
medium dense or better soils or structural fill extending to the native soils. We should be consulted if
higher bearing pressures are needed. Current Uniform Building Code 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 residential 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
triangular equivalent fluid pressure distribution. An equivalent fluid density of 200 pounds per cubic foot
(pcf) should be used for passive resistance design for a level ground surface adjacent to the footing. This
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174'h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 10
level surface should extend horizontally a distance equal to at least three times the depth of the footing.
These recommended values incorporate safety factors of 1.5 and 2.0 applied to the estimated ultimate
values for frictional and passive resistance, respectively. To achieve this value of passive resistance, the
foundations should be poured "neat" against the native medium dense or better soils or compacted fill
should be used as backfill against the footing. We recommend that the upper foot of soil be neglected
when calculating the passive resistance.
Slabs -on -Grade
Slabs -on -grade should be supported on subgrade soils prepared as described in the Site Preparation and
Grading subsection of this report. We recommend that all floor slabs be underlain by at least 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-n-ffl minimum), should be placed over the capillary break
material. An additional two-inch thick sand blanket may be used to cover the vapor barrier. This sand
blanket is intended to protect the vapor barrier membrane and to aid in curing the concrete.
Retaining Walls
A daylight basement is planned for the residence located on the eastern lot. We recommend that the
basement wall be designed as a retaining wall.
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 65 pcf for non -yielding (at -rest condition) walls.
These recommended lateral earth pressures are for a level backfill and do not account for surcharges.
Additional lateral earth pressures should be considered for surcharge loads acting adjacent to subsurface
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Delsher Short Plat
7023-174'h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page I I
walls and within a distance equal to the subsurface height of the wall. This would include the effects of
traffic loads, floor slab loads, slopes, or other surface loads. These additional surcharge loads should be
evaluated on a case by case basis as the design evolves.
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
wall backfill. This can be accomplished by placing wall backfill in eight -inch loose lifts and compacting
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.
Permanent 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.
Site Drainage
Surface Drainage: The finished ground surface should be graded such that stormwater is directed to an
appropriate stormwater collection system. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where
footings, slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Final site grades should allow for drainage away from
the structures.
Stormwater for both residences is planned to be collected into a 24-inch diameter corrugated ADS
detention pipe, approximately 35 feet long, located in the center of the site, shown on the Site Plan in
Figure 2. Runoff will then be tightlined to a planned 20-feet long infiltration spreader trench, located
perpendicularly and 15 feet north of the detention pipe. Clean outs should be installed in the tightline
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174'h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 12
pipe as necessary for maintenance of the system. The excavation of the spreader trench should be level.
A 4-inch diameter rigid perforated PVC pipe should be placed in the trench and the trench should be
backfilled with washed rock. A level pressure treated 2 x 6-inch board should be installed on the
downslope edge of the trench. This level surface is intended to provide uniform sheet flow from the
trench if/when the storage space within the trench should overflow. When stormwater enters the trench,
the perforated pipe and washed rock trench will provide some temporary storage volume and allow some
of the storrnwater to infiltrate into the native soils. If the stormwater volume overfills the trench,
sheetflow over the backyard will disperse the water. The area down -slope (north) of the trench should be
expected to be wet during and after periods of water flow out of the dispersal trench. This area should be
covered with suitable vegetation to reduce the potential for erosion.
Subsurface Drainage*: We recommend the use of footing drains around the planned residences. Footing
drains should be installed at least one foot below planned finished floor slabs. The drains should consist
of a minimum four -inch -diameter, rigid, slotted or perforated, PVC pipe surrounded by free -draining
material wrapped in 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 the wall.
Pea gravel Is an acceptable drain material or drainage composite may be used instead. The free -draining
material should extend up the wall to one foot below the finished surface. The top foot of soil should
consist of impermeable soil placed over plastic sheeting or building paper to minirnize surface water or
fines rnigration 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.
Rockery Construction
We recommend that the rockery, planned along the north side of the property at the toe of the north -
facing slope, be constructed in accordance with the current Associated Rockery Contractors (ARC)
guidelines and appropriate local standards. Both cut and fill portions of the rockery should bear on native
medium dense to dense glacial till subgrade. Soils disturbed during subgrade preparation or due to
weather conditions should be compacted to a non -yielding condition or over -excavated and replaced with
rock spalls or crushed rock.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 th Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 13
The total height of the planned rockery will be approximately three to six feet, including a minimum
planned embedment of one foot. We recommend that the rockery be placed against native dense glacial
till or a maximum of four feet of granular fill material compacted to 95 percent of the ASTM- D1557
maximum dry density. Any retained fill should be placed and compacted prior to rockery construction
and then cut back to desired geometry at the time the rockery is constructed. We also recommend that the
base row of rocks measure at least one-third of the total height of the rockery including embedment, in the
direction perpendicular to the protected face. Each successive rock shall bear on at least two rocks in the
preceding row. The rockery should have a minimum embedment of one foot below final grade in front of
the rockery. The face of the rockery should be sloped at a batter of approximately I Horizontal to 6
Vertical (I H: 6V) back toward the cut.
The ground surface above and in front of the rockery should be graded such thLsurface runoff is routed
away from the rockery and is not allowed to flow over the rockery c(�ond in the vicinity of tj� rockery.
This could be accomplished by designing appropriate yard drains or drainage ditches strategically placed
to collect and route storm runoff into the storm system.
A drainage blanket 12 to 18 inches in width consisting of two- to four -inch rock spalls should be placed
between the rockery and the cut, as shown on the detail. A minimum four -inch diameter, rigid,
perforated, PVC drainpipe embedded in a minimum of one foot of pea gravel or washed rock and
wrapped in filter fabric should be placed at the bottom of the drainage blanket. This pipe should be
sloped to drain under gravity and outlet into a permanent discharge system. Surface water should not be
allowed to reach this drain by sealing the drainage layer. This could be accomplished by replacing the
upper 12 inches of the drainage layer with low pen-neability compacted till soil.
We should be retained to review final rockery location and plans, and provide construction monitoring
services during rockery construction, to evaluate subgrade conditions, cut conditions, fill compaction,
provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions differ from anticipated, and to
evaluate whether rockery construction complies with the design and spedifications.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174'h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 14
USE OF THIS REPORT
This report has been prepared for Mr. Larry Deisher and his agents for use in planning and budgeting for
the planned short plat residential development at 7023- 174 1h Street SW in Edmonds, Washington 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 for consideration in design. There are possible
variations in subsurface conditions between the explorations and also with time. Our report, conclusions,
and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of subsurface conditions. A contingency for
unanticipated conditions should be included in the budget and schedule. We should be contacted a
minimum of one week prior to construction activities and could attend a pre -construction meetings, as
requested.
NGA should be retained to provide monitoring and consultation services during construction to confirm
that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide
recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those
anticipated, and to evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation activities comply with
contract plans and specifications.
All people who own or occupy homes on hillsides should realize that landslide movements are always a
possibility. 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 discharge
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. I
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 15
Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been performed in accordance
with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in effect in this area at the time this report was
prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Our observations, findings, and opinions are
a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner.
MISM
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174"' Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 16
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.
A-�
Alison Jackson
Staff Geologist
- '36r
0
Khaled Shawish, PE
Principal
ADJ:KMS:1am
Seven Figures Attached
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
OVE RVI EW MAP Not to Scale
F—
V
3
-T�
"oth St SUP tMoth t 9w
2.d Is it
P -7—
J
too Sw
at
43,
it
99th P1 $
it Oil
002. SW
w 4t.
micro"so Au'—to—m"ap Str eets lus '01
DETAIL MAP Not to Scale
Project Number NELSON GEOTECHNICAL No. I Date I Revision By CK
ASSOCIATES, INC.
393604 Deisher Short Plat --�- �NGA 1 5111,04 Oi,irW ADI KMS
r
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
Vicinity Map e
Figure 1 17311-135th A— NE. A-5DO S-�� C—�y (425� 337-160 a
W-d-&, WA 9OD72 W—W—r-Ndm (5W 78�2756 <
(425) 486- 1669 / F. 481-2510 —ndwraeohKi— I F-
107,-s tjj"�
bo -
bA
INJ -
b 3 KOGK
ep
JE AiNING
V WAL
-5 L
O�
14' D
OF
q,()F
14-OF 12
_T'T
-zo - c,,-cg
G_'
70-
1,3 IE ,.,rkL_Oee f4'rHEpgy
IZ � 11,4
2,4' OF
-2— (Zfflcro e 47- 40*OF cl
C_
TI t47RP "AVI?,r
12. OF DA3r=D ON,WIL- �TUKE U_
L4XATja4 AW rVOTE6TED IF ZVOF Kc
FfXU GRAP I M KEW I K&ANr5
APPROVED AS NOTEU
q 0
TKCl NITCD 109 MVV*:.�
DA5W a,[ WETY."
WR 35 7010
SCH 40
N-12 DKOGKM/\N FAKK
ANCOR
4r
F810 H �A
Mill
— bq-
-WALA- FIN. TOF EL.
56.0, -
A 7cee
10
o�Aqqq(
_�O�G —W
Ole) I fa
\00 lc(ftl —I d
A01
�OA
�O
ed 8,// 1 ?/6
ke sc=z
--F—bkl &12-A f KAQ en
66-
A'�
OF
20
1-0
'20'CFIE
2 'q
14, r-HEPRY
-40 L)F-
L-f6EN[):' CONTROL
'5TiZt)rTLJI
NOTED ��vl�6
VA'" ON WIL 5TKMTWE
I-OGATI
i '0N.ANPjFll 51,
TKEE5 NOTED FOK K15AWAL
DA4" ON'5AFETY AND
c I -le
Le Ge t-yD 1 kp
C-'OCAST. I Ii, A
C. &S- %r e*o
R E C& E ID
J U L ZI 2004
i I - - - . - PERMIT COYAqT&F
c;)URVEYOR: 0 K ANDEc? $ A55OG
1523 TENTH 5TREET
MARY5VII-I-E, WA. q5270
360-65q-6(0q
I�ANGE
APPROVED AS NOTED
�Y ENGINEERING(
Date:
lVlE/AL)U\A/L)AL-L: L)LAGH
122 qq,
— &T
-WALL FIN. TOP
&A ' 66 - 0,
No —jr-te
Cjecv,^� 0r-
AL/A"e$
0,16 Temac',,^�
\00L/CoLltu
-\Oq_ , rior
\0
0(. /V C-4
ob
A \
&fr-v
dal-ed
L-) Prr %3 m !
'E�G t4Ci4'4--AQj4 G
�4
I WEKV I OU5 5UKFAGF- CAL-GULAT I ON5:..
HE I 6HT CALGULAT I ON5 PFOPO'2ED MD6. GOVERA6E - 2,oq2,5F
PKOPO'?ED DRIVEWAY COVF-RA6E 1,402 c?F
rROF05ED EXTERIOR '�I-41315 220 5f
W GOK� - j04�0
';-E GOR. - 105.0 rROPO5ED EXTERIOR DECK5 120 5F
NW Gog. - qq.0
TOTAL IMFERVIOU5 5UIZFACF-15 3,7&4 cf=
NE GOR. - 103.0
4)i.o
AVEKA6E GK APE -102
.7�
AGTUAL HE16HT -127.7� LOT GOVEFA6E' 1 &.6 PERGENT
M4XIM)M HE16HT-127.7'
LOT AREA: 33,Zqq ',0,FT,
LOT 5LOPE: 2 PEFGENT IN Dt-Db. ENVELOPE
22 FUGENT ON -�LOPE AREA
06 FlNlc*l 69ADE LINE-,
6RAPIN6 QUANTITY . 150 GU. Yp5.
VED BY PLANNING
,p,PROVE
PROPERTY APPREIT /702*3 17,qTH ciTIZEET �-.W,
1EDN/IOND6,'WA5HIN6T0 618020
t' 1pk
TAX AGGT. NO. 5131-000-105-07
5131-000-108-oq'
PLANNER: LAW PLANNING NOKTH%E-?T AFPLIGANT/
LARRY P. PEI';,HER OWNER:
1523 TENTH 5TREET
KA4RY),`V I L-I-E, WA12H. qe3270
(425)33q-1302
LARRY 6 '�05AN PE 1`51-IER
11209 q4TH 5TREET NE
LK. 5TEVEN5, WA--)H. q5Z56
3GO-655-7152
Zone Comer IV Flag IV
Set R - AcuW
Front X 5
Sides to, -
Rear d, 5 16q
Other
Heip
,ht
LA)
STANDARD DRAINAGE DETENTION SYSTEM
WORKSHEET
OwNm L 712 vs iE7 P, CALC BY:
ADDPMS W E_ PHONE: 2,3a - k Zo 2-
DAIT:
"DESIGN DATA
IMPERVIOUS AREA PIPE DIA PIPE LG ORIFICE
7/s
4000 2-4
RECEIVED
JUL 2004
WTENT113N PIPE LENGT14
FINISHED
TIGHTL
ZZ TO 1% SLOPE
UPPER CATCH BASIN
NG LID
'ICAL)
MFMAN4% or
COMC BOX OR RISER
OUTLET
OUTLET CONTROL
HIM.
CONTROL CATCH BASIN
PERMIT COUNTER
SYSTEM CROSS SECTION
A. JL
CITY COPV
2'XZ'X6'.DEEP, 4-6- SPALLS OR EGUAL
FROM CONTR13L CB 27 21 3, DEEP, 3/4' CRUSHED R13CK TING GRADE
;��WASHD R2
J=FROM CO?ffROL OUTLET
I
x -7 TRENW
�OUTMIPE TO LENVIE LM
PERF PIPE V/ END CAPS
T DR
PR OA
RWTMAC&LJV VWATSH4N IAIN
Jump OUTLZT
RUNOFF SPREADER -TRENCH
FOOTING DRAINS $HALL NOT -BE CONNECIED TO DETENTION SYMEM
NOTES:
1. Call Engineering Division MI -MO) for. a tightline and detention syste= inspection
before backfilling and for final inspections. APPROVED BY
2, Responsibility fbr operation and maintenance of drainage systems on private property is the
responsibility of the property owner. Material accurnulated in the -storage pipe must be flushed 6 AV -�C,_
out and removed from the catch basins to allow proper operation. 11m oudet control orifice DA�W
CA—
Zone 25= ip , Comer Flag_
Selback Reguired Actual
Front
Sides
Rear 10CA
Other
Height
R.
�dj 11
EXPIRES: 4/7/2006
I -L I I I ( -'a'004-
I W I NG HE I Wr A5-DU I LT PRAW I N6 RELAT I VE TO
DW LD I N6 FEIN I T AFFL I GAT I ON AT 7023 -.174TH 15TREET 15W
I N G I TY OF EDWA72 WA5H I N6TON
5EG. 08,0 :fj*SFP I F 27 NORTH, RAME 4 EA5T J, W. M.
DEGEWER 121 2004
%AL..E: I - 40' 1
02
a
2
N
AP,080V
j 014
FDq),
F,
N. q.5'06' 2q' w
Z
115. 0'
IL IV
ele—
T
-x
LxL1
-i` ... .
REV11510N DATE: DEC. 12, 2004
HE16HT GAI—GULATION5
W GOK. - 105.5
'5E GOK. - 105.5
NW GOR. - 105.5
NE GOK. - 105.5
422.0
AVERAGE GK4,PE -105.5
AGTUAI— HEIGHT -130.5
MAXIMUM HE16HT-25.0'
06
6RADIN63 QUX-frITY - 450 CU. YD15.
MEAPOV/1)AL-E HEACH - --
122 . qC1
N 01 U6 Z"
t 05*5 —
V TL2
I tl gEy�
A rq
VERTICAL DATUM: ASSUMED
BENCHMARK 7,40,4
HELD ASSUMED ELEVATION OF 100.00 FEET ON TOP
OF SAN. SEWER MH AT INTERSECTION OF 174TH ST. 70 10
AND 71ST AVE. W.
G DI�OGKMAN
SCALE: 1* = Zff
20 0 ?0 40
I Ric
CN
z
05
3 4
FW;�K
z5mi��pwl
RtCEIVED
DEC 1: �", K01
PERMIT COUNTER
7��� /-/Msta)
goo
5 1 REET F iLE
I .
I
I
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
EVALUATION
DEISHER SHORT PLAT
7023174 TH STREET SW
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
PREPARED FOR
MR. LARRY DEISHER
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
N S, I A AssociATEs, INC.
GA GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
17311 — 13e Avenue NE, A-500 Snohomish County (425) 337-1669
Woodinville, WA 98072 ,
(425) 486-1669 - (425) Fax 481-2510 Wenatchee/Chelan (509) 784-2756
May 26, 2004
Mr. Larry Deisher
1523- 1 01h Street
Marysville, Washington 98270
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
Dear Mr. Deisher:
We are pleased to submit this report titled, "Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation — Deisher Short Plat —
7023- 174"' Street SW — Edmonds, Washington." This report documents our surficial observations and
subsurface explorations within the site and provides recommendations for site development. Our services
were completed in general accordance with our Services Agreement signed by you on May 9, 2004.
The site is planned to be divided into two lots, each with a planned residence, access to the residence, and
associated utilities. The storrnwater of both residences will be diverted to one stormwater detention pipe,
and then into a dispersal trench.
We monitored the excavation of five test pits in the areas of the two planned residences and stormwater
detention pipe. We have concluded that the site is generally compatible with the proposed development.
Our explorations within the site indicated that native glacial till primarily underlies the site and should be
encountered approximately 1.0 to 4.0 feet below the existing ground surface based on our explorations.
In the attached report, we have provided recommendations for foundation, slabs -on -grade, pavement
subgrade preparation, and retaining wall and rockery construction.
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 services.
Sincerely,
NELSON T HNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
P
Kh Shawish. PE
Principal
Three Copies Submitted
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ....................................
SCOPE ...................
.......................................... 1
........................................................... 2
SITECONDITIONS .................................................................................................................................. 2
SurfaceConditions .................................................................................................................................... 2
SubsurfaceConditions ..............................................................................................................................
3
HydrologicConditions ..............................................................................................................................
4
SENSITIVEAREA EVALUATION ......................................................................................................... 5
SeismicHazard .........................................................................................................................................
5
ErosionHazard ..........................................................................................................................................
5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................... 5
General......................................................................................................................................................
5
SlopeProtection ........................................................................................................................................
6
Erosion Control Measures .........................................................................................................................
6
Site Preparation and Grading ....................................................................................................................
7
StructuralFill ............................................................................................................................................
8
Foundations...............................................................................................................................................
9
Slabs -on -Grade .......................................................................................................................................
10
RetainingWalls .......................................................................................................................................
10
SiteDrainage ...........................................................................................................................................
I I
RockeryConstruction .............................................................................................................................
12
USEOF THIS REPORT ..........................................................................................................................
14
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure I - Vicinity Map
Figure 2 - Site Plan
Figures 3 & 4 - Cross -Sections A -A' and B-B'
Figure 5 - Soil Classification Chart
Figures 6 & 7 - Test Pit Logs
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
7
L
I
I
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW
Edmonds, Washington
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering investigation and evaluation at the
planned Deisher Short Plat in Snohomish County, Washington. The site is located at 7023- 174 1h Street
SW in Edmonds, Washington, as shown on the Vicinity Map in Figure 1. The purpose of this study is to
explore the subsurface conditions within the site and provide geotechnical engineering recommendations
for the proposed site development. For our use in preparing this report, we have been provided with an
untitled, undated, electronic site plan showing site layout, existing topography, an existing structure,
planned lot boundaries, planned structures, and a planned rockery.
Development within this site is proposed to consist of two residential lots along with associated access
driveways and utilities, as shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. An existing residence in the eastern lot is
currently being demolished, and the future residence in this lot will be a two -!story, wood -framed structure
with a daylight basement and a slab -on -grade. This residence will be constructed on an existing gentle to
moderate slope. The eastern lot will be accessed from the south off of 174 1h Street SW. The planned
residence, on the western lot, will consist of a two-story, wood framed structure underlain by a crawl
space. This residence is shown to be setback 35 feet away from the top of an existing steep slope. The
western lot will be accessed from the south end of an existing asphalt driveway that comes off of 174 th
Street SW and runs along the west side of the site. Final grading plans were not available at the time this
study was completed. However, we do not anticipate that major grading will result from the new
improvements.
It is our understanding that stormwater collected within the site will be directed into a detention pipe to be
constructed within the central portion of the site. This 24-inch diameter corrugated ADS pipe will be
approximately 35 feet long, and will be buried approximately two feet below the existing ground surface.
Runoff will then be routed to a planned 20-feet long infiltration spreader trench, located perpendicularly
and 15 feet north of the detention pipe.
We have been informed that a rockery is planned at the toe of a north -facing slope that occupies the
northern portion of the site. The total length of the rockery is planned to be approximately 135 feet long
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
Y i
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 th Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 2
and will range from approximately 3 feet to 6 feet in height. The western 50 feet, or so, of the rockery
will be in a cut while the remainder of the rockery will be in a fill.
SCOPE
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the site subsurface soils and hydrologic conditions, and provide
recommendations for site development. Specifically, our scope of services includes the following:
I . Review available geologic and soils maps of the area.
2. Explore the site subsurface soil and groundwater conditions with trackhoe-excavated test
pits. Trackhoe was supplied by our client.
3. Explore the existing conditions of the sloping areas of the site.
4. Perforrn cross -sections with an inclinometer and a measuring tape.
5. Provide recommendations for site preparation and grading.
6. Provide recommendations for foundation support and slabs -on -grade subgrade.
7. Provide recommendations for site drainage and erosion control.
8. Document the results of our explorations, findings, conclusions and recommendations in
a written geotechnical engineering report.
SITE CONDITIONS
Surface, Conditions
The site is an irregular -shaped parcel covering approximately 0.76 acres and is divided into two lots. The
western lot covers 0.33 acres and the eastern lot covers 0.43 acres. The site is bordered to the south by
174'h Street SW, and to the north, west, and east by existing residential lots. An existing asphalt driveway
branches off 174h Street SW at the southwest comer of the site and runs along the western side and a
portion of the northern side of the site. The site is mostly level within the southern portion and then
slopes moderately to steeply down along the north towards the northern side of the property. The site
layout is shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2.
The existing structure on the eastern lot is currently being demolished. The slope to the north of the
planned building area is covered with deciduous and evergreen trees of varying maturity, and brush.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174" Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 3
Cross Section A -A', in Figure 3, shows the site geometry through the steep slope near the planned
residence. The slope to the north of this planned residence has been designated as a 22.5% descending
slope and therefore a specific building setback from the top of the slope is not required by the City of
Edmonds for this residence.
The planned building area on the western lot is relatively flat and covered with grass. The slope to the
north of this area is covered with deciduous and evergreen trees of varying maturity and brush. Cross
Section 13-13' in Figure 4 shows the site geometry through the steep slope near the planned residence.
This slope has been designated as a 43% descending slope, however, since the slope has less than 18 feet
in vertical relief, a specific building setback from the top of the slope is not required by the City for this
residence. We did not observe sloughing or seeping water on the slopes or within the development areas
at the time of our visit on May 7, 2004.
Subsurface Conditions
Geology: The geologic units for this area are shown on the Geologic MaI2 of the Edmonds East and Part
of the Edmonds West Quadrangles, Washington by James P. Minard, et al. (USGS, 1983). The site is
mapped as Till (Qvt). This unit is described as a non -sorted mixture of clay, silt, sand, pebbles, cobbles,
and boulders, in variable amounts. Our explorations generally encountered dense, brown to gray, silty
fine to medium sand with gravel, which is consistent with the description of the Till.
Explorations: The subsurface conditions within the site were explored on May 7, 2004 by excavating
five test pits, using a trackhoe. The test pits were excavated to depths of 2.5 to 7.0 feet below the existing
ground surface. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. A
geologist from Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. (NGA), was present during the explorations,
obtained samples of the different soil types, and maintained a log of the explorations.
The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification Sy stem,
presented in Figure 5. The detailed exploration logs are attached to this report and are presented as
Figures 6 and 7. We present a brief summary of the subsurface conditions in the following paragraphs.
For a detailed description of the subsurface conditions, the logs of the test pits should be reviewed.
INELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 4
In Test Pit 1, we encountered 2.0 feet of loose to medium dense, orange -brown, silty fine to medium sand
with gravel and iron -oxide staining. We interpreted this material to be native weathered till. Underlying
the weathered till, we encountered dense, gray, silty fine to medium sand with gravel, which we
interpreted to be native unweathered till. Test Pit I was terminated in this material.
In Test Pit 2, we encountered 0.3 feet of wood chips and 5/8-inch minus crushed rock, which we
interpreted to be fill. Below this fill, we encountered 1.2 feet of loose, orange -brown, silty fine to
medium sand with gravel and roots. We interpreted this layer to be fill. From 1.5 to 1.9 feet below the
existing ground surface, we encountered loose, dark brown, silty sand with roots, which we interpreted to
be a buried topsoil layer. We then encountered 2.1 feet of loose to medium dense, orange -brown, silty
fine to medium sand with gravel, which we interpreted to be weathered till. Below the weathered till, we
encountered 2.5 feet of medium dense, gray fine sand with silt. We interpreted this material to be a sandy
zone within the till. Test Pit 2, was terminated at 7.0 feet below the existing ground surface, in dense,
gray, silty fine to medium sand with gravel, which we interpreted to be native unweathered till.
In Test Pit 3, we encountered 0.3 feet of topsoil. Below this topsoil layer, we encountered 2.7 feet of dark
gray, silty fine to medium sand with gravel and concrete chunks, which we interpreted to be fill.
Underlying the topsoil and fill, we encountered dense, gray, silty fine to medium sand with gravel, which
we interpreted to be native unweathered till. Test Pit 3, was terminated in this materialat 5.5 feet.
In Test Pits 4 and 5, we encountered 0.3 to 0.5 feet of topsoil. Below this topsoil, we encountered 0.5 to
2.0 feet of loose to medium dense, orange -brown, silty fine to medium sand with gravel and iron -oxide
staining. We interpreted this material to be native weathered till. Underlying the weathered till, we
encountered dense, gray, silty fine to medium sand with gravel, which we interpreted to be native
unweathered till. Test Pits 4 and 5 were terminated in this material.
Hydrologic Conditions
Groundwater seepage was not encountered within any of the explorations. However, it is our opinion that
a perched groundwater condition could develop on this site during the wetter time of the year. Perched
water occurs when surface water infiltrates through less dense, more permeable soils and accumulates on
top of a relatively impermeable material such as the underlying unweathered till. The more permeable
NELSON GEOTECHNICALASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 th Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 5
soils consist of the topsoil, fill, and weathered till. Perched water does not represent a regional
groundwater "table" within the upper soil horizons. Perched water tends to vary spatially and is
dependent upon the amount of rainfall. We would expect the amount of groundwater to decrease during
drier times of the year and increase during wetter periods.
SENSITIVE AREA EVALUATION
Seismic Hazard
The project is located within Zone 3 of the Seismic Zone Map of the 1997 Uniform Building Code
(UBC). This corresponds to a Seismic Zone Factor, Z, of 0.30. We recommend that the subsurface soils
be considered Soil Profile Type Sc, as described in the UBC.
Hazards associated with seismic activity include liquefaction potential and amplification of ground
motion due to soft, saturated soil. The glacial till soils interpreted to underlie this site does not have a
significant potential for liquefaction or amplification of ground motion.
Erosion Hazard
The criteria used for evaluation of erosion hazards include soil type, slope gradient, vegetation cover, and
groundwater conditions. The surface soil types (group classification) are related to the underlying
geologic soil units. The Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area, Washington, by the Soil Conservation
Service (SCS), was reviewed to evaluate the erosion hazard of the on -site soils.
The surface soils at the site were mapped by the SCS, as Alderwood-Everett gravelly sandy loams, 25 to
70 percent slopes. The erosion hazard for these soils is listed as moderate. It is our opinion that the
erosion hazard for site soils should be low in areas where vegetation is not disturbed.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
It is our opinion that, from a geotechnical standpoint, the site is compatible with the planned
development. Our explorations within the site indicated that the site is underlain by competent glacial till.
This material should provide adequate support for the planned structures and paved areas. Footings
should extend through any loose surficial soil and fill, and be founded on the underlying medium dense or
better native soils, or structural fill extending to these soils. Medium dense or better soils should typically
be encountered between one to four feet below the existing surface, based on our explorations. Areas of
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 6
deeper loose material or undocumented fill could be encountered in unexplored portions of the site.
Slabs -on -grade should also be supported on native medium dense or better soils or structural fill
extending to these soils.
The proposed structure locations with respect to the site slopes are adequate based on our observations
and explorations. The proposed building setback of 35 feet from the top of the steep slope on the western
lot could be reduced to 25 feet, if desired, without impacting slope stability.
The planned detention and dispersal system should be adequate provided the area downhill of the
dispersal trench be vegetated and vegetation maintained to reduce erosion potential.
The on -site soils are considered highly moisture -sensitive and will easily disturb when wet. We
recommend that construction take place during the drier summer months. However, if construction takes
place during the wet season, additional expenses and delays may be expected due to the wet conditions.
Additional expenses could include the need for placing a blanket of rock spalls on exposed subgrades,
construction traffic areas, and pavement areas prior to placing structural fill or hard surfaces. The on -site
soils may be used as structural fill provided they could be compacted to specifications. NGA should be
retained to determine if the on -site soils could be used as structural fill material during construction.
Slope Protection
�"e
we
Protection of the 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
ny
be
fill or removal of the existing vegetation. No material of any kind should be placed on the slope or be
memo
allowed to reach the slope, and trees should not be cut down or removed from the slope. Any propose
I (ev-N
development within the setback areas, other than light decks or patios, should be the subject of a specifi
geotechnical evaluation. Runoff should be collected and routed into a permanent discharge system
�fa�d /I
Under no circumstances should water be allowed to concentrate or flow over the slopes.
Erosion Control Measures
The erosion hazard for the on -site soils is listed as moderate, but actual erosion potential will depend on
how the site is graded and where water is allowed to concentrate. Best Management Practices (BMPs)
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 th Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 7
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 and/or
straw bales should be erected to prevent muddy water from leaving the site. Disturbed areas should be
planted with vegetation at the end of construction. The vegetation should be maintained until established.
The erosion potential of areas not stripped of vegetation should be low.
Site Preparation and Grading
The first step of site preparation within the planned building and pavement areas should be to strip any
fill, topsoil, and loose soils to expose medium dense or better native soils. The stripped material should
be removed from the site or stockpiled for later use as landscaping fill. The exposed subgrade should be
compacted to a non -yielding condition and then proof -rolled with a heavy rubber -tired piece of
equipment. Areas observed to pump or weave during the proof -roll test should be reworked to structural
fill specifications, or over -excavated and replaced with 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. Cut-off or
interceptor/curtain drains may need to be installed to control surface and groundwater. If wet conditions
are encountered, the site should be stripped and graded using large excavators equipped with wide tracks
and smooth buckets. In this case, the exposed subgrade should not be compacted, as compacting a wet
subgrade may only result in further disturbance to the sensitive soils, instead, a layer of crushed rock or
all-weather material may be placed over the prepared areas to protect them from further disturbance.
As mentioned earlier, the site soils are considered moisture sensitive and will disturb when wet. We
therefore recommend that construction take place in the summer during periods of extended dry weather,
and suspended during periods of rainfall. If work takes place during the wetter part of the year, care
should be taken during site preparation not to disturb the native soils. Construction traffic should not be
allowed on the exposed subgrade. A blanket of rock spalls should be used in construction access areas.
The thickness of this layer should be based on subgrade performance at the time of construction. For
planning purposes, we recommend a minimum 1-foot thick layer of rock spalls in the construction access
areas.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 8
Structural Fill
General: Fills placed beneath foundations, pavements, other settlement -sensitive structures, or behind
retaining walls should be placed as structural fill.
Structural fill, by definition, is placed in accordance with prescribed methods and standards and is
monitored by an experienced geotechnical professional or soils technician. Field monitoring procedures
would include the performance of a representative number of in -place density tests to document the
attainment of the desired degree of relative compaction. The area to receive the fill should be prepared as
outlined in the Site Preparation and Grading subsection of this report.
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 on site soils consist mostly of moisture -sensitive silty materials. The ability to use the native soils as
structural fill will be dependent on moisture content control. Some drying of the soils may be necessary
in order to achieve compaction. We expect that compaction of most of, the native soils to structural fill
specifications would be difficult, if not impossible, during wet weather. We should be retained to
evaluate the suitability of using the on -site soils as structural fill at the time of construction.
Fill Placement: Following subgrade preparation, placement of structural fill may proceed. All
backfilling should be accomplished in uniform lifts up to ten inches thick. Each lift should be spread
evenly and be thoroughly compacted prior to placement of subsequent lifts. All structural fill should be
compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the material's maximum dry density. Maximum dry density, in
this report,' refers to that density as determined by the ASTM D-1557 Compaction Test procedure. The
moisture content of the soils to be compacted should be within about 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 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.
I
. I NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
F-1 I
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 9
Foundations
Conventional shallow spread foundations should be placed on undisturbed medium dense or better native
soils, or be supported on structural fill or rock spalls extending to those soils, with the exception of the
downhill footing lines on the eastern lot which should be cast directly on the native material. Where less -
dense soils are encountered at footing bearing elevations, the subgrade should be over -excavated to
expose suitable bearing soil. The over -excavation may be filled with structural fill or concrete, or the
footing may be extended to the bearing native soils. If footings are supported on structural fill, the fill
zone should extend outside the edges of the footing a distance equal to one-half of the depth of over -
excavation below the finished subgrade.
Footings should extend at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finished ground surface for frost
protection and bearing capacity considerations with the exception of the downhill footing line for the
eastern residence. This footing line should be embedded a minimum of 36 inches into the native
competent material. Minimum foundation widths of 18 and 24 inches should be used for continuous and
isolated spread footings, respectively. Standing water should not be allowed to accumulate in footing
trenches. All loose or disturbed soil should be removed from the foundation excavation prior to placing
concrete.
For foundations constructed as outlined above, we recommend an allowable design bearing pressure of no
more than 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be used for designing footings founded on the native
medium dense or better soils or structural fill extending to the native soils. We should be consulted if
higher bearing pressures are needed. Current Uniform Building Code guidelines should be used when
considering increased allowable bearing pressure for short-terin transitory wind or seisn-fic 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 residential 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
triangular equivalent fluid pressure distribution. An equivalent fluid density of 200 pounds per cubic foot
(pcf) should be used for passive resistance design for a level ground surface adjacent to the footing. This
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7623-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 10
level surface should extend horizontally a distance equal to at least three times the depth of the footing.
These recommended values incorporate safety factors of 1.5 and 2.0 applied to the estimated ultimate
values for frictional and passive resistance, respectively. To achieve this value of passive resistance, the
foundations should be poured "neat" against the native medium dense or better soils or compacted fill
should be used as backfill against the footing. We recommend that the upper foot of soil be neglected
when calculating the passive resistance.
Slabs -on -Grade
Slabs -on -grade should be supported on subgrade soils prepared as described in the Site Preparation and
Grading subsection of this report. We recommend that all floor slabs be underlain by at least 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. An additional two-inch thick sand blanket may be used to cover the vapor barrier. This sand
blanket is intended to protect the vapor barrier membrane and to aid in curing the concrete.
Retaining Walls
A daylight basement is planned for the residence located on the eastern lot. We recommend that the
basement wall be designed as a retaining wall.
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 65 pcf for non -yielding (at -rest condition) walls.
These recommended lateral earth pressures are for a level backfill and do not account for surcharges.
Additional lateral earth pressures should be considered for surcharge loads acting adjacent to subsurface
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Delsher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page I I
walls and within a distance equal to the subsurface height of the wall. This would include the effects of
traffic loads, floor slab loads, slopes, or other surface loads. These additional surcharge loads should be
evaluated on a case by case basis as the design evolves.
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 lat eral 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
wall backfill. This can be accomplished by placing wall backfill in eight -inch loose lifts and compacting
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.
Permanent 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.
Site Drainage
Surface Drainage: The finished ground surface should be graded such that stormwater is directed to an
appropriate stormwater collection system. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where
footings, slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Final site grades should allow for drainage away from
Ithe structures.
.1
Stormwater for both residences is planned to be collected into a 24-inch diameter corrugated ADS
detention pipe, approximately 35 feet long, located in the center of the site, shown on the Site Plan in
Figure 2. Runoff will then be tightlined to a planned 20-feet long infiltration spreader trench, located
perpendicularly and 1'5 feet north of the detention pipe. Clean outs should be installed inthe tightline
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 12
pipe as necessary for maintenance of the system. The excavation of the spreader trench should be level.
A 4-inch diameter rigid perforated PVC pipe should be placed in the trench and the trench should be
backfilled with washed rock. A level pressure treated 2 x 6-inch board should be installed on the
downslope edge of the trench. This level surface is intended to provide uniform sheet flow from the
trench if/when the storage space within the trench should overflow. When stormwater enters the trench,
the perforated pipe and washed rock trench will provide some temporary storage volume and allow some
of the stormwater to infiltrate into the native soils. ' If the stormwater volume overfills the trench,
sheetflow over the backyard will disperse the water. The area down -slope (north) of the trench should be
expected to be wet during and after periods of water flow out of the dispersal trench. This area should be
covered with suitable vegetation to reduce the potential for erosion.
Subsurface Drainag�: We recommend the use of footing drains around the planned residences. Footing
drains should be installed at least one foot below planned finished floor slabs. The drains should consist
of a minimum four -inch -diameter, rigid, slotted or perforated, PVC pipe surrounded by free -draining
material wrapped in 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 the wall.
Pea gravel is an acceptable drain material or drainage composite may be used instead. The free -draining
material should extend up the wall to 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.
Rockery Construction
We recommend that the rockery, planned along the north side of the property at the toe of the north -
facing slope, be constructed in accordance with the current Associated Rockery Contractors (ARC)
guidelines and appropriate local standards. Both cut and fill portions of the rockery should bear on native
medium dense to dense glacial till subgrade. Soils disturbed during subgrade preparation or due to
weather conditions should be compacted to a non -yielding condition or over -excavated and replaced with
rock spalls or crushed rock.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 13
The total height of the planned rockery will be approximately three to six feet, including a minimum
planned embedment of one foot. We recommend that the rockery be placed against native dense glacial
till or a maximum of four feet of granular fill material compacted to 95 percent of the ASTM- D1557
maximum dry density. Any retained fill should be placed and compacted prior to rockery construction
and then cut back to desired geometry at the time the rockery is constructed. We also recommend that the
base row of rocks measure at least one-third of the total height of the rockery including embedment, in the
direction perpendicular to the protected face. Each successive rock shall bear on at least two rocks in the
preceding row. The rockery should have a minimum embedment of one foot below final grade in front of
the rockery. The face of the rockery should be sloped at a batter of approximately I Horizontal to 6
Vertical (I H: 6V) back toward the cut. ;�'
The ground surface above and in front of the rockery should be graded such th surface runoff is routed
ond in the vic t
away from the rockery and is not allowed to flow over the rockery Z;* inity of i rockery.
This could be accomplished by designing appropriate yard drains or drainage ditches strategically placed
to collect and route storm runoff into the storrn system.
A drainage blanket 12 to 18 inches in width consisting of two- to four -inch rock spalls should be placed
between the rockery and the cut, as shown on the detail. A minimum four -inch diameter, rigid,
perforated, PVC drainpipe embedded in a minimum of one foot of pea gravel or washed rock and
wrapped in filter fabric should be placed at the bottom of the drainage blanket. This pipe should be
sloped to drain under gravity and outlet into a permanent discharge system. Surface water should not be
allowed to reach this drain by sealing the drainage layer. This could be accomplished by replacing the
upper 12 inches of the drainage layer with low permeability compacted till soil.
We should be retained to review final rockery location and plans, and provide construction monitoring
services during rockery construction, to evaluate subgrade conditions, cut conditions, fill compaction,
provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions differ from anticipated, and to
evaluate whether rockery construction complies with the design and specifications.
INELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 14
USE OF THIS REPORT
This report has been prepared for Mr. Larry Deisher and his agents for use in planning and budgeting for
the planned short plat residential development at 7023- 174 1h Street SW in Edmonds, Washington 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 for consideration in design. There are possible
variations in subsurface conditions between the explorations and also with time. Our report, conclusions,
and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of subsurface conditions. A contingency for
unanticipated conditions should be included in the budget and schedule. We should be contacted a
minimum of one week prior to construction activities and could attend a pre -construction meetings, as
requested.
NGA should be retained to provide monitoring and consultation services during construction to confirm
that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide
recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those
anticipated, and to evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation activities comply with
contract plans and specifications.
All people who own or occupy homes on hillsides should realize that landslide movements are always a
possibility. 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 discharge
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.
I
INELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 15
Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been performed in accordance
with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in effect in this area at the time this report was
prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Our observations, findings, and opinions are
a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner.
rozolre
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Deisher Short Plat
7023-174'h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 393604
May 26, 2004
Page 16
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.
Alison Jackson
Staff Geologist
Khaled Shawish, PE
Principal
ADJ:KMS:Iam
Seven Figures Attached
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
1\
OVE RVI EW MAP Not to Scale
-7-T] 114� 1 -1 71 --71-T
st
Sw
W�
DETAIL MAP Not to Scale
U
ii Stree6 Plus"@997 ' ' I
Project Number NELSON GEOTECHNICAL No. I Date I Revision By ICK 5
ASSOCIATES, INC.
393604 Deisher Short Plat -----N�GA
1 5/11/04 Original ADJ KMS
GiEoTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS F
Vicinity Map 17311-135th A.. W- A�5W SnW—ih C—ty J425 337-ISM 9
Figure 1 W w.&M—r4w. (509)) 7a4-2?W
166,WADS072 10
(425) 1 F. 481-25 1 6
, --Jz
bo-
52
3 0 - L)F
0 DF
vu.
e)o
13
56— 3
ROGK
...... AININ6
bq-
z.
V/
x-T
V/ WALA- FIN. TOF EL-
0,1 8G. 0'
I L s o c-S F eA
0,
14 D Fl
-e— -)F
q'L
o H
' - '- ' /' "-- — � . �- :� ---- �c� K
16
ID kfF= Of= e)b
14
F
& -ro
B "F! :!,-Zo, GHEIZ 1-11110
(--)
Qi�
--t -T -v\ \ 0 y— 'q ALOE)z 'q' G-HERRy 24'OF
22OF.
6
-qo' OF 04
z \00
2 Of= DM2� §TWF"'1'1f4'VT'R"L6*TLJR
"Z2'OF
UXATION NO FROTEGTw Ix. A01L
FROM GRADING REQUIREM31M2 \OA
EMOVAJ,
E-17 NOTED FOR 9
TRE NF
D415ED ON '?AFETY_"
10 — /. , D It: c 14'
D I 5EA' ;,F-,. OG
OF
C-Dl
\ob
AV
ON F IN. ff -105
FIN (5 :2
-)Q, FT. 1<00F I ml-� I
33, Zqq c '014 5F (o
\0
.7025
C, TR
.0
FKOF.GD 3 T K L J CC T 'd IK frzz-
LEV- 102
6A KIM qq.85 0
IE ( IN -)w
j
I E (o OF
(It Of= '�E
55 L-f= 51 Z- 05
Im i o 7023 X0
. . .... ...... GMFO 0. 0
IE(IN
. .........
...........
...... .. ..........
............ ......
... .....
............... .. . ... .......
V
..... .......
t:
IL
cu.............
EX. GE5
KIM q8,23
IF- (IN) q5.75 RECEIVE
IE (OUT) q5,73
52004
IE (NOKTH).q5.75 AUG
14
APPROVED AS NOTED PERMIT COUNT
FIrE TO c5OUTH
BY ENGINEERING
70 10 '4
Li
Date:
D F 0 Cl KMAN F//A\ F K
%Vk
oring House
Neighb 77--1
Reference: Site plan based on an untitled, undated, electronic file provided by Larry Deisher.
tIN
0
M
wo
>
G
0
C;
z
J
<
I--
tockery
U_
!02
U.
z
0
X z
J
U
o
0 0
w U)
w
0
C-;
w
'9_5
0 P
0
00,6
w
U)
w
Z 0
W
0 U)
z
U) U)
0
z
_j
w
w
z
J
<
U
UZ,
u
0 L
W
2
z
0
W
c'I
IL
LEGEND t: C
0 cc
FL
TP-1
Number and Approximate U)
(D
Location of Test Pit 0
A A' Approximate Location
of Cross- Section
Property Lines
(D
-0
E
= C)
0 30 60 z CD
M
t5 CD
AD M U_
Scal6: 1 inch = 30 feet
C.0
CD
W
3
South
0 160
LD.
co
CD%
CD
0 CQ
0 0 Planned House
=3 ;� 140
>
Demolished House
I
Ito
I
SI ;
Z —120
7
M 174th Street SW
>
Z
3 1 TP-1
M TP-5
> r
W 0 (Projected 1 Oft
Le 0 —100 to the east)
0 Z Till
20
> M
10
M -1
M
0
0 —80
0
r
Z
P
L-60
0.
<
Scale: 1 inch =20 feet (Horizontal and Vertical)
0
2
0
X A Reference: Cross Section is based on an untitled, undated, electronic file provided by Larry Deisher.
3 20G4IAutoGAD%3936D4 DeisherN3936Nx-secuon.dwo
Approximate Location
of Planned Fill Rockery
North
160-1
140
120
1
I -El
M-I
I
I -n I
C.0 m
(0 0
Z
3
CT
CD
0 0
(D.
=r
CD
CD
0
0 0
ca T
gr
I
t
South
r-160
140
Planned
House
Z —120
7
> 174th Street SW
Z
m TP-3
> r
0 0 (Projected 1 Oft
LQ 0 —100 TP-4 to the west)
0 Z
2 C)
> m
4 0 Till
M -1
W m
0
n —80
n
r
Z
p
a
W
L60
0
X
Scale: 1 inch =20 feet (Horizontal and Vertical)
0
>
X 0
x Reference: Cross Section is based on an untitled, undated, electronic file provided by Larry Deisher.
1
3 2004\AutoCAD\393604 Deishe63936G4x---Uon.dwa
Existing
a
North
160-n
140
120
100
We
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
GROUP
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GROUPNAME
SYMBOL
CLEAN
GW
WELL -GRADED, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL
COARSE-
GRAVEL
GRAVEL
GP
POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL
GRAINED
MORE THAN 50 %
GRAVEL
GM
SILTY GRAVEL
OF COARSE FRACTION
RETAINED ON
SOILS
NO. 4 SIEVE
WITH FINES
GC
CLAYEY GRAVEL
SAND
CLEAN
SW
WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND
SAND
SID
POORLY GRADED SAND
MORE THAN 50 %
RETAINED ON
MORE THAN 50 %
NO. 200 SIEVE
OF COARSE FRACTION
SAND
Sm
SILTY SAND
PASSES NO. 4 SIEVE
SC
SAND
WITH FINES
CLAYEY
FINE-
SILT AND CLAY
ML
SILT
INORGANIC
GR . AINED
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 is 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 Moist - Damp, but no visible water.
is based on ASTM D 2488-93.
'3) Descriptions of soil density or Wet - Visible free water or saturated,
consistency are based on usually soil is obtained from
interpretation of blowcount data, below water table
visual appearance of soils, and/or
test data.
Project Number
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
No.
Date
Revision
By
CK
393604
Deisher Short Plat
ASSOCIATES, INC.
N A
1
5/11/04
Original
ACU
KMS
Soil Classification Chart
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
Figure 5
17311-13ft A- NF A-5W Sn&-*.hC—*y(425 337460
W Wen4Wh@WChWm (5091) 7a4-2?W
=
1
(4 25) /WFA.9405DI7225 10
LOG OF EXPLORATION
DEPTH(FEET) Usc SOIL DESCRIPTION
TEST PIT ONE
0.0-2.0 sm ORANGE -BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND IRON -OXIDE
STAINING (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST)
2.0-5.5 SM GRAY, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 2.0 AND 4.0 FEET
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 5.5 FEET ON 5/7/04
TEST PIT TWO
0.0-0.3 WOOD CHIPS WITH 5/8-INCH MINUS CRUSHED ROCK ffLLL
0.3-1.5 SM ORANGE -BROWN TO GRAY, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, MOIST)
(ELLAW
1.5-1.9 BURIED TOPSOIL
1.9-4.0 SM ORANGE -BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND IRON -OXIDE
STAINING (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST)
4.0-6.5 SP-SM GRAY, FINE SAND WITH SILT (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST)
6.5-7.0 SM GRAY, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 1.4, 2.5, AND 5.0 FEET
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 7.0 FEET ON 5t7/04
TEST PIT THREE
0.0-0.3 SOD/TOPSOIL
0.3-3.0 DARK BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL, CONCRETE, AND TOPSOIL
(LOOSE, MOIST) (ELLJL
3.0-5.5 SM GRAY, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST)
SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AT 5.0 FEET
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 5.5 FEET ON 5/7/04
TEST PIT FOUR
0.0-0.5 TOPSOIL WITH 5/8-INCH MINUS CRUSHED ROCK (ELLL
0.5-1.0 SM ORANGE -BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST)
1.0-2.5 SM GRAY, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (VERY DENSE, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE NOT COLLECTED
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 2.5 FEET ON 5/7104
ADJ NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
FILE NO 393604
FIGURE 6
LOG OF EXPLORATION
DEPTH(FEET) Usc SOIL DESCRIPTION
TEST PIT FIVE
0.0-0.3 TOPSOIUSOD (LOOSE, MOIST) (ELLJL
0.3-2.0 SM ORANGE -BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST)
2.0-3.5 SM GRAY, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE TO VERY DENSE, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 1.0 AND 3.5 FEET
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 3.5 FEET ON 5/7/04
ADJ NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
FILE NO 393604
FIGURE 7
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
ASSOCIATES, INC.
NGA GIF-WECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
17311 — 135h Avenue NE, A-500 Snohomish County (425) 337-1669
Woodinville, WA 98072
(425) 486-1669 * (425) Fax 481-2510 Wenatchee/Chelan (509) 784-2756
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 18, 2004 REcpsVeo
AUG 2 o r,�nj,
TO: Larry Deischer PERMIT CoU., TEr
CC: Ross Beckley — City of Edmonds N
FROM: Khaled Shavvish, PE \qj^"
RE: Slope Protection
7023-174 1h Street SW, Edmonds, WA
NGA File No. 3936BO4
We have provided a geotechnical evaluation, dated May 26, 2004, for the planned two -lot short plat
development at 7023-174h Street SW in Edmonds, Washington. The northern portion of the site consists
of gentle to steep north facing slope. Slope inclinations up to 43 percent are indicated on the western lot.
The slopes on the eastern lot are more moderate to gentle. In the slope protection section of our report,
we recommended that the slope and setback area at the top of the slope should not be disturbed or
modified through the placement of fill or removal of the existing vegetation. This recommendation was
intended for the steep slope on the western lot of this project.
During a telephone conversation you informed us that you plan to clear vegetation and place up to 4 feet
of fill on the slope on the eastern lot of the project. We have prepared this memo to address the concerns
raised by the City of Edmonds based on the slope protection recommendations in our report. In our
opinion, the planned clearing and grading of the slope on the east lot is feasible. We recommend that the
areas of planned fill placement be stripped of organic materials and loose soils. The fill subgrade should
be cut to form level benches at least eight feet in width. The slope fill should consist of granular materials
placed as structural fill as described in our previous report for this project. Any areas of disturbed
vegetation on the slope should be planted and maintained until the vegetation is re-established. The filled
areas should also be vegetated. Final fill slope inclinations should not exceed 2H: IV.
4V
Memorandum
Deisher Short Plat, Edmonds
August 18, 2004
NGA File No. 3936BO4
Page 2
We trust this memo should satisfy your needs at this time, please contact us if you have questions
regarding this memo or if we can be of further assistance to you.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
look,
IM t:n"nKlInc
I I %_1
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
OWNER NAME NAME OF BUSINESS
M Nk%VG_'DAWSo4J M69,W
MAILING ADDRESS
Z
51 -) 7 Iry
JOB
AUUHt5S
PERMIT
NUMBER
i57-6),21 NIAPT #
-RIPTION CHECKI SUBDIVISION NO I LID No
0 L.C,
LL --T—TELE—PHONE
PUBLIC RIGH T OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP
-
CITY
ZIP
NUMBER
EXISTING REQUIRED DEDICATION
PROPOSED
I
NAME
METER SIZE
LINE SIZE
NO. OF FIXTUI
-!ADDRESS
y
I
TELEPHONE NUMBER
NAME
t\-A,V_Q_ ZAw-saQ s-Q-Lr'-
M ADDRESS
0
i 2-,l 7- /4 19
0
4
a: CITY ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER
ZI SZ/(,, ILI 21
0 33 1
0 1 STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE
I Description of Property - include all easements
4 4-k-, Scl4t"D01,12 A -
Ta X Account
P.rcel No. S oo 0 13 --0-/ 0 `5
NEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING
ADDITION COMMERCIAL MECHANICAL
0 REMODEL APT.BLDG. SIGN
GRADING FF49E
OREPAIR E] — CYDS. I__j_L_ x 1—Fn
DEMOLISH WOODSTOVE SWIMP60L
INSERT HOT TUB/SPA
GARAGE RETAINING WALL/
CARPORT ROCKERY RENEWAL
(TKE OF USE. BUSINESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN:
askof-0-HAt- (!14-aAL6e
NUMBER NUMBER OF CRITICAL
OF DWELLING REAS
STORIES UNITS UMBER
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DOt,1E (ATTACH PLOT PLAN)
RV_=�5iDFtj4liniL GAe-A6C
rze- S It 0 G. 7- Roo -F-=4
ENGINEERING MEMO DATED
SIGN
ALLOWED
SIDE
'HECKED BY
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION
I -V- ____ —A/
SPECIAL INSPECTOR AREA
REQUIRED 13 YES I
TESCP Approved
AW Permit Required
Street Use Permit Re
inspect: . on Requ
Sidewa k Requ r�y
0 NO 0
13
0
0
0
cc
— uj
I Z
Cr
uj
uj
Z
0
�,
REVIEWED BY
REVIEWED BY
Uj
REVIEW
ADB NO.
Rk IEXEMPT
SHORELINE 0
DATE
EIGHT
LOT COVERAGE
PI I
Z
�j
Z
5
—
PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 305
FINAL INSPE-CTION-REOUIRED
VALUATION
I . f �C,
PLAN CHECK FEE
NC-J _0coR_&jjFy_S14iAj,v &ILDtvJ(-
BUILDING
HEAT SOURCE: ' I
GLA21NG
NON)
%
PLUMBING
Plan Check No.
MECHANICAL
This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY.
GAIAGOANPIPer-
Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewpiks,
driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission.
STATE SURCHARGE
7-
Permit Application: 180 Days
Permit Limit: I Year - Provided Work Is Started Within 180 Days
STORM DRAINAGE FEE
ENG. INSPECTION FEE
"Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns and
successors in interest, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials
m employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages oi
Cc
< whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the issuance
of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to
PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT
modify, waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance
nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance
[TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
provision."
I hereb lacknowledge that I have read this applicatiom that the
"M
FIE
2.-�S
jqlylo
OCCUPANT
LOAD
y
information given is correct; and that I am the owner, or the duly ATTENTION APPLICATION APPROVAL
authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with city and THIS PERMIT
state laws regulating construction; and in doing the work authoriz- AUTHORIZES T . his application is not a permit until
ed thereby, no person will be employed in Violation of the Labor ONLY THE signed by the Building Official or his/her
Code of the State of Washin n relating to Workmen's Compensa- WORK NOTED Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is
tion Insurance and PCW 18 7 NSPECTION acknowledged in space provided. 100
SIGNATURE 11 ER 0 71, tj EPARIMEN,
1-- CITY OF. OFFICIAL S SIGNATURE
IDAI, 514o,N
AIA 0 / 51 1;
EDMONDS
CALL FOR RELEASED BY:
ATTENTION INSr� ':CTION
IT IS UNLAW�UL t6 U�t OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE
Wtll� 0 APPROVAL OR
U - A FINAL MPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AN ORIGIN'
A 0601riPICATI! OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GR� -D. UBC 77 0220
CHXPTER 3.
1162!6 i _..0
�111sipecto r
G 0 L D Assessor.
0
Z
TELEPHONE/COUNTER
CONVERSATION RECORD
DATE: TIME: 2- 0 9//y FILE: ,�9WSPAI
1(�Iulcwd 61'9 �VSOW-S c- All :
TELEPHONE/CO'UNTER
CONVERSATION RECORD
DATE: 5--17:;?y TIME: FILE:
hv Iverl- Wa'k
9
6
SOLD TO VWakAj
SHIPPED TO
STREET & NO.
STREET & NO.
1-7
'S'T-
CITY
STATE
ZIP
CITY STATE I ZIP
rS
'D
Vi M
c;)- 2- Co-,
/00
1 _ _ 1
LLI
u
0
z
7L 706/
01706
CUSTOMER'S ORDER
SALESMAN
TERMS
DATE
A� %. (L L_A
Q- \Aj
lz(ac
(3c)
o--
Q00-
1�
EXEMPTION FROM CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION
VERIFICATION FORM
The undersigned property owner or contractor has applied for a building permit from the
City of Edmonds and claims that he/she/it are exempt from providing contractor registration in
accordance with the provisions of RCW 18.27. The property owner, by their signature below
hereby verifies to the City of Edmonds that:
Value of work under $500.00. The aggregate contract price of labor and
materials and all other items required for the project is less than $500.00 and
is not part of,a larger operation to be unde ' rtaken on the property. The
person employed to do this work has. not advertised nor otherwise put
himself forward to the permittee to be a contractor or qualified to engage in
the business of a contract, RCW 11,27*011,1),
Work performed personally on own properiy. The undersigned verifies
that all work done under this permit will be done by the permittee personally
on his/her own property and that the improvements constructed on the
property are not being undertaken with the intention and purpose of selling
the improved property.
Commercial property exemption. The permittee is the owner of
commercial property and the owner's own employees will perform all
maintenance, repair and alteration work on the property. No work will be
done by contract under the permit. RCW` 18.27.090(13).
Licensed architect, engineer, electrician or plumber. All work performed
under this permit will be performed by an architect, civil or professional
engineer, licensed electrician or licensed plumber operating within the scope
of his or her license. RCW` 18.27.090(14).
THE UNDERSIGNED PROPERTY OWNER HEREBY VERIFIES THAT ALL
INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS FORM IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST
OF HIS OR HER KNOWLEDGE AND ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IF ANY OF THE
INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS FORM IS FALSE, HE OR SHE UNDERSTANDS
THAT THE BUILDING PERMIT WILL BE IMMEDIATELY REVOKED AND ALL FEES
PAID FORFEITED.
DATED this 2-- day of 11101leAll6el-- , 1993.
PROPERTY R
/PERMITTEE
WITNESS:
Print: LT. 1!�44,47-
rJ
WESTERN TITLE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON
3500 i88th Street SW -#300
Lynnwood, Washington j8037
771-3031 / 527-1432 Fax No. (206) 774-9200
TO: Premier.Escrow
19101 36th Avenue West
Lynnwood Wa 98036
Your Number : Dawson
Reference Name: DAWSON
TITLE ORDER NUMBER: 132997
UNIT: Jeanne Mendes,
Senior Title Officer
Barbara O'Neill,
Title Assistant
A.L.T.A. COMMITMENT
SCHEDULE A
Commitment Effective Date: August 17, 1993 at 8-00 A.M.
1. - Policy or Policies to be Issued:
ALTA Owners Policy
- 4/6/90
Amount:
$53,000.00
Standard
Premium:
$380.00
Sales Tax:
$31.16
Proposed Insured: MICHAEL E. DAWSON and DIANE C.
DAWSON, husband
and wife
- Policy or Policies
to be Issued:
ALTA Loan Policy -
4/6/90
Amount:
$45,000.00
Standard
Premium:
$100.00
Simultaneous Rate
Sales Tax:
$8.20
Proposed Insured: EDWIN
J. ORNER and JANE ORNER,
husband and wife
2. The estate or interest in the land described herein and which is covered by
this Commitment is &.fee simple.
3. The estate or interest referred to herein is at Date of Commitment vested in:
EDWIN J. ORNER and JANE ORNER, husband and wife
4. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of
Snohomish, State of Washington, and is described as follows:
See legal description described in "Schedule A", Page 2, attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
WESTERN TITLE C014PANY OF WASHINGTON
ALTA Commitment, Page 2
Order No. 132997
SCHEDULE A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
That portion of Tract 138 mEADOWDALE BEACH TRACTS, according to the plat thereof
recorded in volume 5 of Plats, Page 38, described as followst
Beginning at the Southwest corner of said tract;
THENCE East along the South line 248 feet to the true point of beginning;
THENCE North parallel to the West line of said tract to 6 point 230 feet South of
the North line of said tract;
THENCE East 91 feet;
THENCE South 02008106" to the South line of said tract;
THENCE West along the South line to the point of beginnihg;
EXCEPT the South 15 feet of said tract for County Road,
TOGETHER WITH that portion of vacated 174th Street Sou�hwest as vacated in City
of.Edmonds Ordinance #2014 and recorded under Recording Nos. 8102050273 and
8103100160.
WESTERN TITLE COMPANY OV WAS9INGTON
ALTA Commitment, Page 3
Order No. 132997
SCHED'ULE b
I. The following are the requirements to be complied with:
A. Instruments necessary to create the estate or interest to be insured must
be properly executed, delivered.and duly filed for record.
B. Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full
consideration for the estate or interest to be insured.
II. Schedule B of the Policy or Policies to be issued (as set forth in Schedule
A) will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are
disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company.
A. Defects, liens, -encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any
created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the
effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires for
value of record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this
Commitment.
B. GENERAL EXCEPTIONS
1. Taxes or assessments which are not.shown as existing liens by the records
of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by
the public records.
Proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or
notices of such proceedings, whether ox not shown by the records of such agency
or by the public records.
2. Any facts, -.rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the public
recordo but which could be ascertained by 'an inspection of the land or which
may be asserted by persons in possession thereof.
3. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, which are not shown by
the public records. 1
4. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments
or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not
shown by the public records.
5. .(a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or
in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to
water, whether or not the.matters excepted under (a), (6) or (c) are shown by
the public records.
6. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or materials theretofore
or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records.
7. Any service, installation, connection,,maintenance or construction' charges
for sewer, water, electricity or garbage removal.
WESTERN TITLE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON
ALTA Commitment, Page 4
Order No. 132997
C. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS
1. Lien of any real estate excise sales tax upon any sale of said property if
unpaid. The subject property is located in 'the City of Edmonds.. The
excise tax rate is 1.53t,' as of January 1, 1992.
2. GENERAL TAXES PAYABLE AFTER FEBRUARY iSTH: THE FIRST HALF TAXES ARE DUE
PRIOR TO MAY 1ST; THE SECOND HALF TAXES ARE DUE PRIOR TO NOVEMBER 1ST:
Year: 199i
Amount Billed: $256.07
Amount Paid: $128.04
Amount Due: $128.03
Tax Account No.: 5131-060-138-0709
Levy Code- 0232
Value of Land: $22,000.00
Value of Improvements: $1,000.00
NOTE 1: Examination of the recoids discloses no judgments or other
matters pending. against the name(s) of Michael Dawson and Diane C. Dawson,
husband and wife, the proposed insured.
HJ/mb
cc.* Premier Escr�,w
n
N
C 0
924262
Quit CIcArn D6*4
4*37 pia40--'9
TH E C RA-%-T'O" XDWDI L- MIER, -M
cam-ry and quit dalm to J.'aUER' jAX CRMM his idle
the lofk-ing dcwa-awd fwl CP(Atc. situated 6 tb� C,,..,y
State of Walhinpoo: Trs4t 138 U—dowdiLle Se4wh trectal
-Js of —ld count
plat thereoft "cor 0 ikecordlmC to tl�s rvc*rde.A
jyj LE:ss the %efft =8 feet r f, aM
MSS the Uart, 334 feet of &aid bract, 23a.
Dated th6 5th day cif sky 49.
STATE Or
County of sDobol
On This day pemo�ajjy ppeurd belom M Ldvih L- Orner, &M S&rab L Or -Der, him wife
10 " k"n" 10 be the irbdJ;%-;duaJi dealbed in aM who cmwrd the withi M loreroi.,X 11 r 1_ &M
in a, un,.,
ackno-ledrrd tbal . t-sey si� the W'W as the Ir doed. f., the
PurP— therris ft-c t;w%ed,
-Y hand am 0MCW tki, 5th
day Of N^Jr 1949
A* -a,-,
4
R —W-r� AUG IS!9
3*17 j-M-R&q**0 to Or-,er
P E Eftsho.&I. Co. Wa&h
BUILDING PERMITS
DATE 1 NUMBER I AMOUNT
I CONSTRUCTION DATA -
DATE
FINISHED
DATE
- ' I- � � s/
PER CENT
UNFINISHED.
DATE
REMODELED
DATE
muvtu z
VALUATION
BLDG !INIT--F
ACRES OR_ LAND IAL, DATE
LOT NUMBEFTj
2- cl PA-] 7.1—
J—�
.14
7
CUC
C A-t
IT72-
-----------------
SALES DATA
RECEIPT
SALE DATE' I INSTRUMENT1 NUMBER
. 1 �/-;V",-v I
-5, ",5 ------
fl- --------------
DWELLING
DATE CONDITION
EFFECTIVE PER CENT
AGE DEPRECIATIOf,
OTHE
TYPE
DATE
CONST.
FLOO71
ROOF
1DIME
BUILT
4_
. ....... . ..
513 1 CC I I F C7 C 12 S7�CPI.2
J
t721(
CIPC.2C
S r F C 17, L/Jr, I S 11; 1 f T 15
ELK C(t [-(,7
11 U, C I P I P j TV I-. �LC S I- LI\ �4ef`l
I C T I I- N P,, t I IA LN 51" TP TC F*T 2?ffl
(7 r I N Sy' I V T I-: F � 1. f. T T F r
I C. S L 1\ TO T14 lo. ALE SI: LN' I f- 1 1, F-
T I- r. t F r- I C V r I-EP �17E
217/1 Ic Y
6Wtk+
A
a
�v
HERE:
TAPE....*: PUCTURE
'5131-C(-C-138-0709 4/04/61 L81056G
BUILDING PERMITS
DATE
NUMBER
AMOUN
-------
CPNEP VDInIN J
1721f 12NO WEST
ECKNUS �A 98020
CONSTRUCTION DATA
DATE
L/C C2�2 SCHCCL DISTRICT 15
FINISHED
DATE
MEADC�LALE BEACH
PER CENT
OLK COC U-07 -
UNFINISHED.
BEG S� CCR TR 138 TH E ALG SO S LN 248FI
DATE
REMODELED
TO 7P6 1H N PLT W LN SO TR TO PT 230FT
DATE
S OF N LN SO TR TH E 91FT T14 S02*08 06E-
MOVED
TO S LN SO TR TH � ALG SO S LN TO TPB
VALUATION
LESS S 15FT THOF F(R CO RD PER OCO
ACRES OR
LAND BLDG
INITIAL! DATE
277/ItS TGti VAC S 15FT CIF Tit 138
LOT NUMBER
LY ELY UF N LN 71ST AVE PROJ
a o o 2
V A : 7,-
NLY ALO FILE NC 2078769 6 WLY OF
IV
�A j
E LN PLAT OF CHERFN CREST CIENTMENT TO
A8V CESC PRTY AKA FTN OF VAC 174TH
/3 LT-07
S7 S� CRC 2014 AUC FILE NC
NC 8IC-11CC160 VOL 17C2 PG 43
SALES DATA
RECEIPT
SALE DATE JNSTRUMENT��
NUMBER
'3,)
7
DAT E CONDITION EFFFc rIVE PER CENT
DEPRECIATION
tv
V6, C-- "t,
HIGHEST AND BEST USE VALUE
—IMPROVED UNIMPROVED TIMBER! TOTAL'
ACR ES VALUE ACRES VALUE ACRES VALUE ACRES:
,,7?r
p
TOTAI
AV
OTHER CONSTRUCTION
TYPE DATE S.F NET
CONST.: FLOOR ROOF �:DIMENSION CONDITION FACTOR!! VALUE
BUILT AREA DEP. VALUE
/J
Is
* -------------------------- : MetroScan/Snohomish
Owner :BELL HARLAN K
CoOwner
Site Addr:7023 174TH ST SW EDMONDS 98026
Mail Addr:7023 174TH ST SW EDMONDS WA 98026
Rec Date Deed :
Price Loan :
Aud Fee #: Ln Amt:
ActualUsez Lender:
Vest Type: IntTyp:
Land Use :11101 RES,SGL FAMILY RES,DETACHED,1
NbrhdCode:520
zoning :RS-20000 ZoningRest:
Sub/Plat :MEADOWDALE BEACH
Legal :BLK-000 D-09 - THAT PTN TR 138 DAF
---------------------------
RTSQ :04E-27N-0�-SW
APN:5131 000 138 09 07
Struct:$53,000
Land :$55,000
Total :$108,000
LevyCd:00232
1993Tx:$1,202.42
Phone :206-743-7432
%owned:
UNIT Vol:5 Page:38
Easement:
--Census--
Tract:502.00
Block:2
..........
Bedrooms
:3
........
Bldg
SF:1,313
........
LotAcre:
.........
Year Blt:1951
Bath F3H
:1
1st
SF:1,313
LotSqFt:
EffYrBlt:
Stories,
:1
2nd
SF:
Heating:BASEBRD
Quality :FAIR
Fireplace:1
3rd
SF:
Roof :COMPOSITIONBldgCond:GOOD
Spa
Ath
SF:
View
Wtr Srce:PUBLIC
Units
:1
BsmntSF:
WtFront:
Sewer :SEWER
C .
The Information Provided Is Deemed Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed.
0"NOMPIP-MIT
USE
ZONE -NUMOER
Applicant Fill
. . . . . . BUMPING DIVISION nsids He&vV Litm
DO 7777:,
ADDPFSS
'17 'AFFUCATION
PEW
-1()2-,s 174— e-..PT
-7
14A 111010 No.
5 i
1411,100 "AMB OF GUSINKSSI
IN.
HIS AIRP
ST*96TIAAF
OF WAV p4ga OFFIC�AL
PUBLIC NIGHT
Mv 9XISTING
14 07 If oppoi-OSED
64T.OF WAV
DaF0CIKNCv OF RIG
"S,
ago L-j
-t.? �v
SLIC 11APROWgUg"S *gQU1 FR-�rl
0
jtjfRao
,11NAGg jMp*OV9N16NTS 064
0
NV*A99W MAINAG11 PLAN MCQU&OSO
LCP140NE
- a .. .
CITY 16160 0
W6*1140 agau
Nogna"ou"o
W90
OHNKCTION To SALNITAVY Sg
"^a4a
0
901AIT 1060*0
IgPTIC TANIA 0
k4t;
ON ogr ppopgavir C001011L.R11 0
LWVATI
a FOOTINGS 0190*0
Numea"
Sgg C@4Gj"ggRj"Q MIK00 OATSI,
j
CNCCKKO ey
'CITV LICK"St PIUMBUR
size
OpWW Sftw aelgWor A h Four Cooiftl
�7
1k?
ADD POO.
V. navlaw
SIGN ANSA
9X9*AVT
COMPLaT
ALAAY*FltD
POOPOSIM
X.
10
DATR
toia waview ev ",j
VAMIANCZ OR CU
CDVMA",
FRONT
AS 00016
or
110liw le.._�. ly� , ,
1116118096IT'IAL C1 -L Ma
p@o" DSPITIA SIGN 131-
ANWA
WALL.L
ogasous"
aw"" tA-
0
0 0 "0
T
Og�Ajvzn SXCAVATIK X or" L IN
on FILL
-1 :F "I
0 OF EDMOND& L 1. SALE X
SHOULD BE to 21-04.
swim
.9PA
0 P"84save P00L
0 ARMS I
"Ijaiss" OF
of, ;;z"Iffe is
ALI-- 1: Nw �2
z .......
4/6fj�j e
00149
�A.Tuftg OF "SK TO JA25-
CK rag VALUATION put
V.2
PLOT PLA
SUMP'"*
14
111o**
UNIIING 31
9CHANIC^L
9"C
a
'a -to
Ion
bb of spouse. heirs. aSlif[FIS a I-,." YP
-Applicant, on behalf Of
mnify, defend and hold harmless
RKTAINI"O WALL.
rAccesson in interest, arm to inde
s, employees. and
ads. Washington, its Official
a the City of Edmo. whatever nature.
WIIAMING POOL
Writ, from any and all claims for damages of
�ly of indirectly from the issuance of this permit. Issu
aridna direct
an" of this permit shall not be deetned to modify, waive or reduce
fty city ordinance nor limit in any way the
nt of a j
any requtreaw
enforce ary ordinance provision."
City's ability to
TOTAL. AMOUNT DLM
hanft acknowkdr that i have read this application; that the in- e9—
the duly author -
Correct; and that I am the owner, of
is
0 comply with city and ^t8te laws tegu- ATTIMITION APPLICATION APPROVAL
hsd Wit of the owner. I agree I work authorized thereby, no Person
omtritedon; vid in doing the
state of Washington THIS PSNUIT. This application is not & pern*
vioution of the Labor Code (If the
be employed to AUTMONIZUS until signed by the Building OMCW
6 Compeimton tnsut3nce.
tin to WO*MW
ONLV T"a his Deputy; and fees aft Paid, and
OLITIONS and FILL
'JgW(Except DEM t is acknowledged in space pm
FE08TS without conditiond um permit, which shall be completed in 90 WOOK "OT60 recelp
six months.) vided.
in INSIDGICTION -
MOVED4N BOLDINGS diA be cO p — .-- 9
so OUPAOTMeNT
OWN
ENTI
Ogg
CITY or
EDMONDS
"a IV UNLT-
775-2525
W11
T" 1 .0
NWA 09M A 4wo
ORIGINAL - File YELLOW - Insontov
LD Ammor
ON Owner 00
a 04 OCCU"
A SUILDING Oft STIII
IT IS LWLAW%NrTQ US
,NOW
TION."All MEN MADE AND APPROVAL 08
ALIS 2 9 00'
UgN a"NT§D. UW 301k 30.
UI A FINAL
A
c98TIPWAT600 06"OAWY
AC
�iZ
IN TIMS
�,4
777r-7
Retilrdn
g
Garap. 6arpwt
pLUMBING
undergu6nd ij l
ftoughin
A
water wmce
H aTING SYSTEM
FRAMING:
WALLBOARb
q FINAL
r 1,;
-f777 -T �W-TAJT
The inforwaWn P'Aaed is Deemed Reliablef /--l- it is Not Guaranteed. IJ
= M E T R 0 S C Fi N P R 0 F E R T Y P-R C1 F I L E =
Snoihoriiish Couni-w
>>> OWNERSHIP INFORMATION <Q-.:
Parcel Numbeft ;5131 000 1Z8 07 09 RTSQ:04E-Z7N-08-SW
Bidgid Number ;1
Record Type :PLATTED Development Type!RES-
Owner/Taxpager:ORNER EDWIN i
CoOwner
Site Address j*N0 SITE ADDRESS*
Mail Address :17216 72ND AVE W EDMONDS WA 98026
1 ephone
;>> SALES hND LOAN !NFORMAT10N <<<
Recording Dnte:08/00/7i Lc-ar, Amount:
Huditors Fee 0; Lender
Sale Price ;S17,5nj Loan Type
Deed Typt ;RE CONTRACT
>>> ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATION
Land ;$zz,000 Levy Code :00232
Structure :$1,000 1913 Taxes :$256,07
Total :$23,000 Senior Tax If
% Improved;4 School Dist :015
Excise No :8021 Exemption A
>>> PROPERTY DESCRIPTION <<<
Easement
Map Grid
Census Kract Block
Nbi-h.-K-ode: 520
Zoning :RS-20000 Zoning Rest:
RctualUse:MISC STRUCTURE
Land Use :19301 RES,NON-RESIDENTIRL STRUCTURE
Sub/Flat WEADOWDALE BEACH
Legal :BLK 000 D-07 - BEG SW COR TR 138 TH
:E ALG SD S LN 246FT TO TFB TH N PLT Vol :5 Paye:38
.:W LN SD TR TO PT 23OFT S OF N LN...
Profile -Page I o-P 2
. The informalion Fro4joed is Deemea Reiiablet Lot is Not Guaranteea,
=METROSCAN PROFERTY PROFILE=
Snohomish County
Parcel 05111 000 118 07
>>> PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS <<--.-..
Bedrooms
Ist Floor SqFt:
Lot A.: res
'Bath Full:
2nd Floor SqFt:
Lot SqFt
Bath 3/4 :
3rd Floor SqFt:
Yesr Bui-It :1949
Eath !/2 :
4th Floor SqFt:
Eff YearBlt:
BathTotal:
AboveGrnd SqFt:
Bldg Type
Flooring +.
Bsmnt Fin SqFt:
Roof Type
Fireplace:
Bsmnt UnFin SF:
Roof Shape
Heat Type:
Bsmnt Total SF:
Siding
Garage
Loft SqFt
Foundation
Units :1
Building SqFt
Constructn
Sat_jn7zj
Balcony SqFt
Bldg Qlty
Spa
Deck SqFt
Bldg Cond
Stories
Patio SqFt
Bsrcint Type
Porch SqFt
I-:isrfint Grade:
Garage SqFt
BUILT INS
UTILITIES
4 * 4 'k # # # 4 # 4
.
* 4 4 4 # * # # 4 0 .
ange/Oven:
.
Elec ' t Svc IPOLE
Hood/Fan 4.
Wtr Source*+PUDLIC
Dishwasher:
Sewer Type:SEWER
Vacuum
Microwave
Grbge Disp:
intercom :
OTHER
INFORMATION
----------------------
0 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 " 4 4 4 4
0 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 0 4 4
Elevator,
Waterfront Type:
Fire, Sprinklers
Waterfront Qlty:
Street Type
:BLAC11TOP
Lo�llands
Street Access
:YES
Tidelands
Sidewalk
Topogr-aphy
Ground Cover
:CLEARED
Topography Prob:
View Quality
Profile -Page 2 of 2
CITY OF EDMONDS
250 - 5TH AVE. N. - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771-0220 - FAX (206) 771-0221
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT -
Public Works * Planning * Parks and Recreation * Engineering
890 95
May 9, 1994
Mr. Mike Dawson
1222 North 185th
Seattle, Washington 98133
RE: Garage Application @ 7025 174th Stre et Southwest
LAURA M. HALL
MAYOR
It has come to the attention of the Building Division that the subject structure is open and
accessible to persons as well as from unwanted animal entry. Section 100 1 of the Uniform
Housing Code requires that structures be protected from the infestation of insects, vermin
or rodents and further, buildings that are an attractive nuisance be adequately secured
from trespassers. Pursuant to this code section please satisfactorily board up all openings
within 15 days date of this letter.
If there are extenuating circumstances as to why you cannot complete this work within the
given time immediately notify the City in writing. Failure to comply to this order of the
Building Official may result in the penalties as outlined in the Edmonds Community
Development Code.
Please feel free to contact me at 771-0220 if there are any questions.
Thank you,
' f ^W
eannine L. Graf
Acting Building Official
cc: Code Enforcement Officer
Incorporated August 11, 1890 0
Otie-, Intp.mational — Hekinan. Janan
W'�
890 -
a
November 9, 1993
Mike Dawson
1222 N 185th
Seattle, WA 98133
CITY OF EDMONDS
250 - 5TH AVE. N. - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771-0220 - FAX (206) 771-0221
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Public Works * Planning * Parks and Recreation o Engineering
RE: Building Permit Applicationat 7025 174111 St. S.W.
Dear Mr. Dawson:
LAURA M. HALL
MAYOR
I have reviewed a building permit application for (lie remodel of a garage on a lot located at 7025 174th St. SW. I
see two problenis with the proposed work. First. there is no evidence that this lot was legally created. In order for
this lot to be a legal building lot. a City approved subdivision would have been required any time after the City
adopted its subdivision ordinance in 1964. The City has no record of a legal subdivision for this property, and
therefore, we require evidence that this property was legally divided prior to 1964. The title information that you
have provided appears to indicate that the property was divided and sold in 1971 without a City approved
subdivision. Therefore. the City cannot approve any permils on this site until the legal status of the lot is resolved.
Secondly, the site plan that you provided indicates that the garage does not conform to the required setbacks on this
site. Section 17.40.020(F) of the Ednionds Community Development Code states that a nonconforming building
that has been daniaged in excess of 50% of its value. may only be restored in conformance with the Ednionds
Community Development Code. The work described in your permit application appears to be restoration of a
dilapidated building. The work proposed to restore this building is proposed at $4,160, and the setbacks do not
conform to the Ednionds Community Development Code. The Snolioniisli Counly Assessor values the existing
structure at $ 1,000. Thereforc. the proposed work would exceed 50% of the value of the building, so that if you
could prove a legal subdivision. this renovation could not be allowed.
Because of these two factors. the Planning and Building Divisions of tlic� City of Edmonds find that your building
permit application must be denied.
If you have any question.. please do not hesitate to con(act this office. -
Sincerely,
John Bissell, AICP
Associate Planner
Planning Division
C. -feannine Graf. Acting Building Official
Sharon Nolan. Permit Coordinator
DAWSO KDOC Incorporated'August 11,'1890
Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan
BUILD.ING DIVISION TELEPHONE/VISIT RECORD
DATE
PERSON CALLED
TELEPHONE #
RE:
FILE COMMENTS:
CALL TAKEN BY:
COMPANY
PROJECT
TIME
VISIT DATE TIME ?6---LOCATION.
PROJECT_70,?S- /71/ 5'7-Sk/-WHOM/COMPANY
SUBJECT_ 1,(CkdUb'
2-)
4 —
601vi /; tc_- rvrf-- -, 4/06/ pt�e At�c--f
2
FILE COM14ENT
� �
CITY REPRESENTATIVE:
A/
VIOLATION REPOR ORM
VIOLATION #
Comnlete to the best of vour abilitv
PROPERTY LOCATION OF COMPLAINT:
DATE OF COMPLAINT:
I AP12, �A7 3.
PROPERTY OWNER NAME:
PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS:
Ph.
rNANT NAM:
17"7-16 -7,2�vd,,A� W -
TENANT ADDRESS:
-
Ph.
I
NATURE OF COMPLAINT (INFORMATION FKOVWEI) HY COMFLAINANI
I /X/4Py-,C' IA-111-110e-f 71-� -
The name of the person filing the complaint must be provided. The name of the person making the complaint cannot be
revealed unless subpoenaed by court according to Wasthdi on -State Law.
COAMAINANT NAME: COMPLAINANT ADDRESS: Ph.
THE FOLLOWING is FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
CODE SECTIONS VIOLATED:
VIOLATION:
SURROUNDING LAND USE:
APPLICABLE PERMITS AND FILES:
ZONE DISTRICT:
ATN:
RF-PORT-4FORSTAFF USE ONLY)
A400 11XIIA0 -�z &W49
Z AS - z
,�qw M/s z4e lw�,
4ky- /29
A" lv-a a"I rlle- "V/V/,v Ixe-
eye
/Z,t / P. A) w,�<
engbAgg
3 a- v
�w fh a � /W- A f r (e
45M
ACTION:
REPORTING OFFICIAL
;f�-
jmpQgTANT MESSAGEj'.
FOR A.M.
P.M.
DATE- AQ-C�- TIME
M Z2
OF
-7
PHONE-��
AREA CODE NUMBER EXTENSION
TELEPHONED Ep �:�E CALL�.
CAME TO SEE YOU
WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU
iUSH
RETURNED YOUR CALL
SPECIAL ATTENTION
MESSAGE
v-
'7�
SIGNED
NATUM's
SAVER.
'2-5�
0 'mr - 0 ""�35255 "00875"" 4
S.P. RiChards, Co., Atlanta, GA
0,
.,By order of the Bu . . . . . . . . . . .
City,of Edmond'
e
All Persons Are Order'd to
Pursuant to Section 202(d) of the Uniform Building Code the Building Officiat'-foi.the
City of Edmonds hereby orders all work to STOP at the site listed below.
Address:
W
For the following reason(s).
WARNING
Posted this day of The failure to stop work, or the
resuming of work without permis-
at Z/.. a pm sion from the Building Official,
or the removal, mutilation, or
0
concealment of this notice is
punishable by fine and imprison-
VBuilding Official ment.
50 -
2- q
52 mm=i Ing
...... 30, PF
FOG
AININ6
..........
VA Ou j� 's IE�-c
WAL-
W-3
0\1 VIAL-L- F IN. TOF Ifl-,
66, O'� -
01,
LL5- -i2-L
C) 41 —1 1 T51 cfeL 10
..... . gc.
No I
ot 12 Pffl
HF S7 -7
Q5
IDF or -u ('q
14 [)F 12.
A
10
�','20 R
I �on
eq (6(
-T
-c�
OF
"R
FOO /L7 ctlect
71le
TING DRAINS NCO)
00-
TO! BE TIED INTO 2 r) 0
k —2— 14 E
x DETENTION SyVrEM -Alvr-z4-
40 4
OF c�
4N <-7-1 I Q)
L- F-
A
J'r, 4e
4-L\X4::I-
-AVIN6 ......
TIZEE5 NOTED
APPROVED AS NOTED .. DA':,EP ON.WIL- 5TRUOTURE SDIJ 35
L-OCATION AW PIZOTECTED LL SCH 40 \00
�Rl
"y r-KOM GRAD I M REQU I KEWEW5, F= N-12
BY ENGINE NG
04 O'�
lEMOVAL-
ljj �' . � . I ".
TY ANP
NE
TPF-Fzl:) NOTED FOR k
DA5r--D ON 'WE
P15EA5E— 0
Date:
140
...... . 040
OF 12
\Ob
3 3, 2 q q '�)Q, FT, MFE
N 2l'; 52 IE-97,1 . � -�; '
c� Q
OWNER/CO TRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR Z -uj
0-42
EROSION CONTRm AND- DRAINAGE N, aj� \0
-7025
GONTIZ FIN FL I O-q 0
FF�OF CID nTIN-
15TKLJGTKF 105. o'
6A KIM qq.8
102 "-0
A0
IN)
1 4. ------
.. . ...... ... rpz
11-2
Ll /9
I E 0 q6'04
......... RIM 10
GIVIl"() 0,0 POP, \1 05
i 91 IE(IN -0 704
C-0,
U ) . 1 �. .. -
T, RMIKAIE
Q IE(o
e . .. I 4SPE N.
NS
...........
......... F?EQD
EXT. 6
...........
.7 7-7
. .. ... ........ .
....................
QNS
-:w .. ...... .. .....
........... ......
.... ...... .......
ALt
co 8URFACES
TO
..... ....... . .. .... ....... ---------
EX cl D DAYS
.. .... fi� I M q(5, 23
I Iff ( IM c15. 75
I f= (O,IJT) C15, 73
RECEIVED
IE. (NOKTH) 95,75
AUG 5 2004
....... ..5E\X/FK F'I FE TO 50UTH PERMIT &NTER
:rl
-A
70 10
D 0 G KM4�IWNI F K 7L:
E:
C
1�lj
I N' G I TY Of EPMONP5. WA4.)H I N6TON
c-
.Al 1/4; 15EG
02
LEGEN
05 TOW`Nc.�H I F 2 7 NOKTH KAN6
EA15T p
NINTH
MEAD(9\VDALE IDEAC/H
70''2'7 0(0 5TEVEN M I L_E5
LLj A T(f e Cf'eCAA- 6/1'
1 00513100013502
C)
6dj_7 J�(
Ex �)FF 6KE60KY H I t'XLE
0051310001M T-erfK c(-eA-,f-ej- P�n III c"4
VICTOK KKAAM!\�O I doa.,J
00513100013610
3
bo-
-f+ �34 2 Iq W
30, PF
6' I`Z0GK
56—
..... IZETA I N I N6
WALA_
WAL-L- f IN. Top EL_'
.........
6q, 0'
A
&A
-:elk 'Z' i%N
I CHAiZ[) FEI�FZ
I f
............
00513100013805
(0
610" 1 LY-1 14" -1 v 2 0)
24
vow
04 .0t&' :"-,* O"f--I-j f -
7 . ^s' 0 1
. f El FIU:
-4 CHE)?I�y __7 / Lu
2 -4 5� (0 0
OF
r_ nF O�E
o' I
PAN I EL MUNKO
0. Of= O\A
14) 743 c-50. f T, C,
00513100013504 1 L
WR 0�b
z
Av. 40
F I N, 0 \00
I N 00, 0 .1
�11ANQgfi A01.
NtV
7 \OA
Opo5ep 5F,�
5Q,FT 05
< \0(,
F 11\j
\0e)
Pf /� J ...
0 F t\ t -Io4
FND MON. IN CASE
-/05 Ole' 0
SANITARY SEWER MH .............. 0
.... 21 z
OP 1. _'.: . _� _-;,
N aq 04,05 IT 11 '�� \-"Z :Q: - - , : I
0 1. 1.. � I.%, x ' ' 7 -q2 5Q FT,
KY'
—POWER TRANSFORMER
173MM
7025,1
CABLE RISER
%I A
LAND
EXPIRES: 4 7 /Zoo 6
ff
CABLE JUNCTION BOX ------ ...... 1�
. ............ ... ...
TELEPHONE RISER
.................. ..
UTILITY POLE ............ .... 701 1
............... ........... ... .. ..... . ......
. . . ....................
........ ......
. .................................
..............
O�
E— GUY ANCHOR ............. ....... . .....
............. ......
......... .
.......... ......
EB WATER METER ........ ..... ......... ................
. ................ ......
........ ......
FIRE HYDRANT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A
TV
62w
F
'Z� 4INNWOOD
t-Y
541
5T -
P MOK
VIGINITY MAF
15GAI-E'. I I - 2, 000'
� -,, 10 T 'I:-: - F
1) UTILITH7 S AND/OR IMPROVEMENTS WHICH MAY EXIST UNDERGROUND OR
ARE NOT VISIBLE. MAY NOT BE SHOWN ON THIS MAP.
2) THIS PROPERTY CONTAINS 33.299 SO. FT. OR.O.76 ACRES.
VERTICAL DATUM: ASSUMED
BENCI--IMARK
HELD ASSUMED ELEVATION OF 100.00 FEET 01\1 TOP
OF SAN. SENER MH AT INTERSECTION OF 174TH ST.
AND 71S-I"- AVE. W,'..
[)EVEL,OFMENT I NFOI�MAT I ON
TOTALLAND AKEA: 33.,2clq c-50, FT, .76 AG.
AKEA Of KOAPWAY: NONE
TOTAL KOAP 1__EN6TH: NONF
NET PEVE[_OFM`_NT AKEA: 33
t- ,2qq 50.fT,(0.76 AG,)
AKEA OF L-0-i "':); 35-3,201ci -")().ffT.
FEKGENT [�D. —110 TOTAL AKEA: 0,0
EX15TING ZONIN6; 1�5-12
FKOFOc�tl) ZONIN6: K5-12
FOWEK c_?UFF[_Y:15NOHOM15H GOUNTY F,U.P, No I
\XIATFK 5UFFLY: GITY Of F-C)MON[)cg
5EV/EK c.?EKV1,"-,E: GITY Of EDMOND5 (5AN. 5EWEK)
6KO55 PEV QEN51TY: 2.63 Q,U-'5/AGKE
NET DEV. bff\15ITY' � .( 0 1). U, '5 / AGKE
AVEKA6E LOT 51ZE: l6j650 50. FT.
c
)MAL-L-E5T L-011- c_-) I ZE: 1,4) 7-43 '50. FT,
NO, OF UN I Tr-�/ I`KOI`Oc_?EP: 2
TOTAL AKFA 19FEN '5FAGE: -0-
% TOTAL AI�EA OPEN 15FACE, -0-
156HOOL- P 115TR I GT': EI)MON015 NO.
flf�E 015TKIGT: 5NOHOM15H COUNTY P15T, No,
FK0F0'5E1) LAND LJ5E: 5 1 N6LE f AM I LY KE5 I DENT I AL
...... I FT I ON
..... ..........
WATER VALVE I . .. .. .... I.. . -, .'7 L_ E 6 AL_ L) f,
.......... ...... .......
..... ..... ......... .......
.. ........
............ I ......
..........
MB MAIL BOX THAT PORTION Of TRACT 13.5, MEAPOWPALE DEAGH, ACCORDING TO
........... ........
THE PLAT THEREOF KECORDE0 IN VOL., 5 OF MAT5, PAGE 36J.
REGORD5 OF c9NOHOMIc)H COUNTY, WA5HIN6TON, DE5GRIDEP A5 FOLLOWc-7;
X.
CATCH BASIN
136, MEADOWDALE 15EAGH;
DE61NNIN6 AT THE 1�ouTHWEc_7T CORNER Of TRAGT
t 5OUTH Of THE [_ I NE 248 FEET TO THE PO I NT OF DEG I NN I N6;
ss SANITARY SEWER THENCE EA5T AL-ONG TH"
THENCE NORTH-PARAL-LE- TO THE WEc.)T L I NE Of 5A I D TRACT TO A PO I NT
STORM DRAIN 7 zi 0 -z4 230 f EET c5OUTH Of TI-t NORTH L. I Nff OF 15A I I) TRACT; THENCE GONT I NUE
SD EA5T Z4 FEET; THENCE NORTH 30 FEET; THENCE EA5T 12q.22 FEFT TO THE
WE5T LINE Of THE EA5TEKLY 150 FEET OF 5AID TRACT; THENCE 5OUTH TO
THE 5OUTH LINE Of 5AIP TRACT; THENCE TE5T ALONG THE 50LJTH LINE TO
W ... ....
WATER LINE PAINT MARK 7 n i n THE TRUE POINT OF DE�iINNIN6.
I tLErmjNE PAN I MARK
T
_G T P C JOINT UTILITY PAINT Mffil<
G=GAS. T=TELEPHONE.
P=POWER.C=CABLE
0 G K m
WOOD FENCE
OHP OVERHEAD POWER LIL
EDGE OF GRAVEL
FKOFf_I`ZTY A
NOTF5:
-4,
5.
ALL, 5LOFEI� AKE Lff95 THAN 50KVEYOK: d K ANDE5 � A550CIATE5
15% EXGEFT Acq NOTED ON FLAN5 1523 TENTH 5TKEET
THEKE AKE NO GKITIGAL.- AKFAc-) MAKY5VILLE, WA. q5270
AC, nPP I MPn RV FkAr ' ::� n - 1/- 0 - (_ (_ I-)
T06ETHER WITH THAT FORTION Of VAGATEP 174TH 5TREET 5W A5 VACATED DY
ORDINANCE NO. 2014 AND FILED UNDER 5NOHOM15H COUNTY RECORDING NUMDER5
8103100160 AND, 8102050273 THAT WILL ATTACH DY OPERATION OF LAW,
AL50 THAT PORTION Of TRACT 143, MEAPOWDALE DEACH, ACCORDING TO THE FLAT
N04: DOUNDAKY FEK L-5A, IN THEREOF RECORDED IN "VOLUME 5 OF PLAT5, PAGE 38, REGORD5 OF 5NOHOM15H
INN, TOF06KAFHY AND FHY51 GAL COUNTY, WA5HIN6TON, J_YIN6 NORTH Of 174TH 5TKEET 5W, A5 5AID 5TREET 15
5HOWN ON THE FLAT OF: ROGKMAN PARK, ACCORDING TO THE FLAT THEREOF
FEATUKE INFOKMATION FEK DDID RECORDED I N VOLUME 3 7 -Of FLAT15, PAGE 1 19,
KECOKP'5 Of 5A I P COUNTY;
LVID c:AJKVEY I N6, I NG /OWNEK EXCEPT THE EA5T 150.00 FEET; AND EXCEPT THE WE5T 330,00 FEET Of 5AID
TRACT 143;
�)TKEET w . TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF VAGATED.174TH c5TREET 5W A5 VACATEP DY
K174T: 702 3 174TH c-
EDIVIOND5, WA5HIN6T0p q8020 ORD I NANCE NO 1 2014 AND F I LED UNDER 5NOHOM I 5H COUNTY RECORD I N6 NUMD129,15
8103100160 AND 8102050273 THAT Wit -I.- ATTACH DY OPERATION Of LAW.
C,ITHATP IM TWP rnHKI-rV /);= irK11%_V�AA1 c_-r
A 11 �A I L_ V1 WA Jn 1114U I V114.
TAX AGG'T. NO, 5131 000-105-07
5131-000-106-oq NOTE: TH15 LEGAL GON�)OI-DATE5 THE REGORD'DE5RIPTION FOR DRAWING '5PAGE.
THE LEGAL PE5GK I FT I ON f I LE W I TH THE MA5TEK PERM I T APPL I CAT I ON GONTA I N5
THE ENITIFF L-FrOk-D OFarPIPTIMI
51TE 15 LOGATEP IN51DE
FLANNEK:
LAND
FLAM I N6 NOKTH\Y/E,5T APFL_ I GANT/
OWNEK:
� 5U5AN
EX15TIN6 U6A DOUNDAKY (EDMONDc-)) EN6 I NEEK:
THE �JAY 6KOW, I NG.
I C127 5TH '�-?TKEET
LAKRY
1523
P. DE15HEK
TENJH 5TFEET
LAKKY PE I'5HEK
I I 20q q4TH c��T[�EET NE RECEIVED
NO DUFLEXE5 FF0FOc--)E0
TWO GAK 6AKA6E5+Of f-15-17KEET f'AKK I Na
MAKY5VI[_L_E, WA5H, q5270
360-65q-815q
MAKY5VIUE,
(42 5)13
WA5H. q5270
3 q - 1302
L_K,c5TEVEN5, WA5H. q5255 J U N 15 2004
360-658-7152
fOK TWO GAKc-) MIN. FEF-, LOT.
6
vs
1111