Loading...
7425 OLYMPIC VIEW DR.PDFiiiiii I iiiiiiii 12704 7425 OLYMPIC VIEW DR WA GEOSCIENCES INC. otechnical & Pavement Engineering • Hydrogeology • Geoenvironmental • Planning & Permitting • Inspection & 'Testing >.1, 2012 HWA Project No. 2012-000-21 Task 4 Mr. David Clobes 7425 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington 98026 Subject: GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Deck Construction 7425 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington Dear Mr. Clobes; STREET FILE sec-el%j BAR 07 2012 DE\fELOPCOUNTERRVICES APPROVED BY PLANNING �s7n S If�(t Z This report addresses the applicable requirements of the ECDC with regard to the removal (demolition) or salvaging a portion of a new deck which we understand was constructed within the western portion of your property located at 7425 Olympic View Drive (See Figure 1) without a permit review or approval by the City of Edmonds. Communications from the City of Edmonds indicate that the deck was constructed within the minimum required setback from a Landslide Hazard Area, within an Erosion Hazard Area, and extends into the 25-foot setback from the western property line. The purpose of this report is to investigate whether the new deck was founded on suitable bearing soils, and conclude to what degree the existing deck (or proposed modified version thereof) or its removal, will impact local slope stability and the potential for site erosion consistent with the requirements of the ECDC. Our work included a site reconnaissance, limited subsurface exploration, ECDC code review, and writing this report. PREVIOUS WORK In 2003, HWA prepared a geotechnical report for you entitled "Geotechnical Report -Proposed Extension to Residence: 7425 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, Washington, 98026" for the purpose of designing and permitting an extension to the existing residential structure. At the time of this current study, the extension has not been constructed. The geologic information contained in our previous report was used supplement our location specific assessment. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Currently, an elevated wooden deck is attached to the northwestern side of the residential structure. The deck is approximately 28 feet long and extends outwards from the residence to the northwest about 17.5 feet, as shown on Figure 2. Deck floor elevations apparently match those of your upper floor. The deck structure is supported by two rows of three, 21312 30th Drive SE 6-inch by 6-inch, wooden posts spaced approximately 7 to 8 feet apart. Within the Suite 110 rows, the posts are spaced 12 to 13 feet apart. Near the ground, the posts are set on Bothell, WA 98021.7010 Tel: 425.774.0,106 Fax: 425.774 27T' W www.hwageoco�m; February 21, 2012 HWA Project No. 2012-000-21 Task 4 12-inch diameter cast -in place concrete piers and are secured by bolts into steel brackets that were embedded in the concrete at the time they were cast (See Photo 1). The concrete piers extend into the ground to slightly varying depths and rest on individual 4-foot by 4-foot concrete footings. As it is currently situated, the deck extends 10 feet into the setback buffer area for the western property line. In addition, the deck is situated within the minimum required set back for An Erosion and Landslide hazard area, as defined in ECDC Section 23.80.070.A.1a. SITE DESCRIPTION AND OBSERVATIONS The lot has approximate dimensions of 160 feet by 90 feet and is located on the northeast side of the intersection of Olympic View Drive and Homeview Drive (Figure 2). Residential lots border the north and east sides of the property. A steep slope area is located along the north property line. The ground surface slopes southwards at about 56% declination, but is locally as steep as 109% near the northeast property line. The top of the slope is at about El. 330 feet which is about 26 feet above the lower floor elevation (El. 304 feet). There are no signs of previous slope instability, or evidence of slope creep that might be inferred from trees with bent trunks. Slope vegetation consists mainly of ivy with several large coniferous trees. No slope vegetation that is typically indicative of seepage or very moist conditions was noted. A rockery is located about 10 feet from the northern side of the house to provide a private deck. The deck is at El. 313 feet and the rockery is about 7 feet high. The rockery shows no signs of instability, or seepage through the wall. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS The soil conditions supporting the new deck foundations were explored by means of one hand auger boring (designated HH-5) and supplemented with hand probing utilizing a 6-foot long, 1/2- inch diameter, steel rod. It should be noted that the soil and ground water conditions described are only for the specific dates and locations reported and, therefore, are not necessarily representative of other locations and times. It is anticipated that water conditions will vary depending on seasonal precipitation, local subsurface conditions and other factors. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS According to the geologic map by Minard, J.P (1983), "Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Part of the Edmonds West Quadrangles ", the slope consists of advance outwash comprising mostly clean, pebbly, sand with fine-grained sand and silt common in the lower part of the unit. Glacial till is present at the top of the slope. Undisturbed advance outwash is typically dense to very dense. Slopes in glacial outwash; typically slough to the angle of repose of the sand of around 300 to 330. When slope instability occurs in glacial outwash, it is mainly confined to loose surficial layers, but deep-seated slides can occur near the contact with less permeable glacial silts and clay near the base of the deposit. Within the area of the new deck, soil conditions explored are as follows: 0-0.33 feet: Dense crushed rock (Crushed rock -Fill). Report 2 HWA GeoSciences Inc. February 21, 2012 HWA Project No. 2012-000-21 Task 4 0.33-1.25 feet: Medium dense, brown gravelly, silty fine -medium SAND (Fill). 1.25 —.5.0 feet: loose to Medium dense, brown to brownish gray, gravelly, silty fine -medium SAND (Fill). 5.0-5.5 feet: Medium dense, olive gray, coarse to medium SAND with silt (Weathered Outwash). 5.5 to 6.0 feet: Dense, gray, fine -medium SAND (Advance Outwash). Auger boring terminated at 6.0 feet due to refusal on dense soils. No indication of seepage was observed while conducting this hand boring. PB-1 Hand probing adjacent to the northernmost deck footing situated along the row nearest the existing residence indicated that dense soils are present a somewhat shallower depth than what was found at the location of HH-5. Our hand probe met with refusal at an approximate depth of 4.0 feet below the existing grade. We expect that the pocket of loose material encountered at HH-5 thins to the north (as inferred from PB-1) and is likely dumped material from the original house construction. PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS We understand that currently you are considering two alternatives with regard to the disposition of the deck: 1) Remove the deck which requires a demolition permit from the City of Edmonds, or; 2) Reduce the footprint of the deck so it no longer encroaches into the property line buffer and obtain a building permit post -construction. M_7 C_ •Z�' LLIM-1 I Removal of the deck and restoration of the disturbed area should be conducted in accordance with the minimum performance standards described in ECDC Section 23.40.240.0 which states that: a. The hazard shall be reduced to a level equal to, or less than, the predevelopment hazard; b. Any risk of personal injury resulting from the alteration shall be eliminated or minimized; and c. The hazard area and buffers shall be replanted with native vegetation sufficient to minimize the hazard. Currently, the deck foundations are situated within a relatively level side yard located along the western side of the existing residential structure (See Figure 2 and Figure 3). The alteration of the site ground surface to construct the deck required the installation of 6 cast -in -place concrete piers and associated below grade footing slabs. These would be the only portions of the deck structure for which demolition/removal would require additional disturbance of the potentially Report 3 HWA GeoSciences Inc. February 21, 2012 HWA Project No. 2012-000-21 Task 4 critical area. Clearly, the above ground portions of the foundation system should be removed to eliminate the potential nuisance created by projecting concrete piers. However, in our opinion the excavation and removal of the entire subsurface portions of the deck foundation system will not serve to reduce the potential hazard. Indeed, additional subsurface disturbance in this area can only serve to increase the potential for erosion. Therefore, we recommend that the concrete piers be demolished in -place to a depth of at least 6-inches below grade and then restoration of the ground surface should consist of placement of a layer of crushed rock to match local grade. In this way, we believe the hazard is reduced to a level equal to the predevelopment hazard and that the finished ground surface is protected from erosion. Deck Reduction We understand that consideration is being given to submit a request for approval for a development permit for a deck of reduced size to eliminate encroachment into the western property line setback buffer. This would involve reducing the existing deck width by 10 feet retaining only a strip 7.5 feet wide (about 0.5 feet beyond the innermost line of piers) and the demolition of the remaining structure. Construction of the deck is considered an alteration within an erosion and landslide hazard buffer area by the ECDC. In accordance with ECDC Section 23.80.060, alterations of geologically hazardous areas or associated buffers may only occur for activities that. 1. Will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent properties beyond predevelopment conditions; 2. Will not adversely impact other critical areas; 3. Are designed so that the hazard to the project is eliminated or mitigated to a level equal to or less than predevelopment conditions; and 4. Are certified as safe as designed and under anticipated conditions by a qualified engineer or geologist, licensed in the state of Washington. In addition, in accordance with ECDC Section 23.80.070.A.2, alterations of an erosion hazard or landslide hazard area and/or buffer may only occur for activities for which a hazards analysis is submitted and certifies that: a. The development will not increase surface water discharge or sedimentation to adjacent properties beyond predevelopment conditions; b. The development will not decrease slope stability on adjacent properties; and c. Such alterations will not adversely impact other critical areas; Report 4 HWA GeoSciences Inc. February 21, 2012 HWA Project No. 2012-000-21 Task 4 The geologic map, our past site experience and our current explorations show that the project area is underlain by advance outwash. The excavations to accommodate the deck foundation appear to have been extended through fill. soils down to dense native advance outwash soils. These soils consist of dense, granular, well drained, sand that are typically not subject to global or deep rotational failure. The most significant risk posed by development in this portion of the site is likely a temporary increased potential for erosion during construction. This potential hazard appears to have been mitigated by post construction regrading and replacement of the crushed rock surface covering. The deck itself has been installed in an area that did not require modification of the steep portion of the existing hill slope and does not extend any closer into the geologically sensitive area than the existing residential structure. In our opinion, the deck, in its reduced configuration will have a minimal impact on site slopes or adjacent properties and will not increase the hazard level associated with occurrences of shallow landslides, as foundation loads have been transferred down to deeper competent native (advance outwash) soils below the shallow existing fill. We conclude that the constructed improvements will not impair local stability to any significant degree and should be permitted as allowed under the provisions specified in ECDC Sections 23.80.060 and 23.80.070.A.2. Abandoned footing piers should be demolished and the surface areas restored as described in the previous report section. CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS We have prepared this letter report for use by David Clobes and his designated agents for use in permitting the demolition of, or obtaining a permit (post construction) for the construction of a deck of reduced size along the west side of the existing single-family residence on the property. Experience has shown that soil and ground water conditions can vary significantly over small distances. Inconsistent conditions can occur between explorations and may not be detected by a geotechnical study of this nature. If, during future site operations, subsurface conditions are encountered which vary appreciably from those described herein, HWA should be notified for review of the recommendations of this letter report, and revision of such if necessary. The scope of work did not include environmental assessments or evaluations regarding the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous substances in the soil, surface water, or ground water at this site. HWA does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering, and construction safety considerations are the responsibility of the Contractor or property owner. O.O Report 5 HWA GeoSciences Inc. February 21, 2012 HWA Project No. 2012-000-21 Task 4 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. Steven E. Greene, L.G., L.E.G. Senior Engineering Geologist Attachments: Figure 1 Site Location and Vicinity map Figure 2 Site Exploration Plan Figure 3 Photograph of existing Deck and Foundation Configuration Report 6 HWA GeoSciences Inc. ME DECK CONSTRUCTION HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. CLOBES, RESIDENCE 7425 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE FIGURE NO. 1 PROJECT NO. 2012-000, Task 4 O 0 p 0 E X X O f1 Q' o b c � 0 0 .Eb WJ Y > Cd 0.0 1 1 C's Y cd W` 0 W 0� Up D p_ W_ co \ W Z d 0w� U 00 } 000 W ( i U-) CVO z U, w w Un Ow Nf- PLANNING DATA STREET FILE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Name: -e_. S %roc �o oo�(�-z 6c�a�dr ate:---3 - --� (�-- Site Address: t-(Z(4 All Y\- - D� Plan Check >* : Project Description: (I-e� aj( A �,_ �„ e Xr p ��i �.rn ryM q ,� n �/t Q /� � r r/ Reduced Site Plan Provided: (0/ NO) rZoning: 112S- (Z Map Page: - Corner Lot: S NO} _- Flag Lot: (YES / No Critical Areas Determination 9: _ 3 Study Required fro s� do ��Gvd j Il ❑ Waiver SEP4 Determination: K-Exempt ❑ Needed (for over 500 cubic yards of grading) ❑ Fee ❑ Checklist ❑ APO List with notarized form Required Setbacks�c42 6 Street: -Z Side: (O Si e : Actua/ Setbacks Street: ZS + Side: d f Side: I .6Tr: Z Detached Structures: - `` °� kO" SL ❑ Rockeries: 9-Fences/-Trellises: ❑ Bay Windows/Projecting Modulation: ❑ Stairs/Deck: Building Height Datum Point: Datum Elevation: Maximum Height Allowed: .2 Actual Height: r Z Other Parking Required: Z- Parking Provided: Z -f- Lot Area: (31 U Q Maximum Lot Coverage: 35% Proposed: Lot Coverage Calculations: It. 5 ��L15� . cJA�, e ti a ADU Created: (YES / NO) Subdivision. Legal Nonconforming Land Use Determination Issued: (YES NO Comments o �O�QcCC /26 Coin a Plan Review By: S-(f (Z Plar" Data Form 04-11-06.doc City of Edmonds Critical Area Notice of Decision Applicant: ' Q C I o U he-S Owuu Property Owner: Davy o �S Critical Area File #: Z003-00q,3 Permit Number: Site Location: � US- O(M (c Vliw Parcel Number: ©0 q 776 000 05 30 0 Project Description: TO Si — CC^' 41 0C- `f 4A _/^ c ❑ Conditional Waiver. No critical area report is required for the project described above. 1. There will be no alteration of a Critical Area or its required buffer. 2. The proposal is an allowed activity pursuant to ECDC 23.40.220, 23.50.220, and/or 23.80.040. 3. The proposal is exempt pursuant to ECDC 23.40.230. ❑ Erosion Hazard. Project is within erosion hazard area. Applicant must prepare an erosion and sediment control plan in compliance with ECDC 18.30. ;9—Critical Area Report Required: The proposed project is within a critical area and/or a critical area buffer and a critical area report is required. A critical area report has been submitted and evaluated for compliance with the following criteria pursuant to ECDC 23.40.160: 1. —G The proposalminimizes the impact on critical areas in accordance with ECDC 23.40:120, Mitigation sequencing; 2. , The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare on or off the development proposal site; 3. The proposal is consistent with the general purposes of this title and the public interest; 4. _� Any alterations permitted to the critical area are mitigated in accordance with ECDC 23.40.110, Mitigation requirements. 5. The proposal protects the critical area functions and values consistent with the best available science and results in no net loss of critical functions and values; and 6. The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards. ❑ Unfavorable Critical Area Decision. The proposed project is not exempt or does not adequately mitigate its impacts on critical areas and/or does not comply with the criteria in ECDC 23.40.1.60 and the provisions of the City of Edmonds critical area regulations. See attached findings of noncompliance. Favorable Critical Area Decision. The proposed project as described above and as shown on the attached site plan meets or is exempt from the criteria in ECDC 23.40.160, Review Criteria, and complies with the applicable provisions of the City of Edmonds critical area regulations. Any subsequent changes to the proposal shall void this decision pending re -review of the proposal. ❑ Conditions. Critical Area specific condition(s) have been applied to the permit number referenced above. See referenced permit number for specific condition(s). Af�-I/-11 Reviewer :5-- /� 4 2- Date Appeals: Any decision to approve, condition, or deny a development proposal or other activity based on the requirements of critical area regulations may be appealed according to, and as part of, the appeal procedure, if any, for the permit or approval involved. Revised 12/16/2010 _J CITY OF-EDMONDS 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds.WA 98020 Phone:•425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION 'no. 189%) Critical Areas Reconnaissance Report Update Criticdl A`r`eas File Number CRA20030043 }` •.. . ._ •. _ _ct. .__e ._ a . ... __ . _. - ._ ... _._. _ T ] .. .ea ._L 5.._. Z_� .5.1 .._r ..?� :..._�.]].. �....5 ... ,v-. i�LRS+ Determination Study Required S�te'Locgtcon ti View Drive; 74?5'Olympic .,r :a��.w.'.,�. Tax Account Number ` 00477600005300 `A'f, :; Property Owner :; David ,'.. .e..:a: Applicant Some Critical Areas Present Q Geologrcdlly Hazardous Areas �tti.� �,: �, ' ` " 'Y Q-Land0deLFlazard a f.. .-P-.._�1 .±5_.z'?..::i.y :1'•.t.: __. -.. _. }.. �... T. ... .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .... - v _.. ._ _. t ._i'i.. THIS PARCEL WAS PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED AS A'STUDY REQUIRED' FOR STEEP SLOPES IN 2003. HOWEVER, THE CRITICAL AREAS CODE U PDATE OF 2005 REQU I RES REASSESSMENT OF THE ORIGINAL DETERMINATION. Site Description During review and inspection of the subject site, it was found that the site may contain (or be adjacent to) critical areas, including Geologically Hazardous Areas (Erosion and/or Landslide Hazard Areas), pursuant to Chapters,, 23.40 and 23.80 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). Geologically hazardous areas include areas susceptible to erosion, land sliding, earthquake, or other geological events. They pose a threat to the health and safety of citizens when incompatible development is sited in areas of significant hazard. Such incompatible. development may not only place itself at risk, but also may increase the hazard to surrounding development and use. Cited sections of the Edmonds Community Development Code can be found on the City of Edmonds website at www.edmondswa.gov. The associated LiDAR map indicates that the parcel slopes gradually from northeast to southwest toward Olympic View Drive. The steepest portion of parcel is at the northeast corner where slopes exceed 50%. Soils on the property are identified as Alderwood Gravelly sandy loam (15% - 25% slope). As a result, the slopes in excess of 15% are classified as a potential erosion hazards and the portion that exceeds 40% is a potential landslide hazard area. Allowed Activities & Exempt Proposals Certain activities are allowed in or near critical area buffers as specified in ECDC 23.40.220. Similarly, certain development proposals may be exempt from Critical Areas requirements (ECDC 23.40.230). If you have any questions about whether your proposed development qualifies as an allowed or exempt activity, please contact a Planner for more information. v General Report Requirements Critical Areas Reports identify, classify and delineate any areas on or adjacent to the subject property that may qualify as critical areas. They also assess these areas and identify any potential impacts resulting from your specific development proposal. If a specific development proposal results in an alteration to a critical area the critical areas report will also contain a mitigation plan. You have the option of completing the portion of the study that classifies and delineates the critical areas and waiting until you have a specific development proposal,to complete the study. You may also choose submit the entire study with your specific development application. Please review the minimum report requirements for all types of Critical Areas which are listed in ECDC 23.40.090.D. There are additional report requirements for different types of critical areas (see below)., Note that it is important for the report to be prepared by a qualified professional as defined in the ordinance: There are options on how to complete a critical areas study and an approved list of consultants that you may choose from. You may contact the Planning Division for more information: General Mitigation Requirements for all Critical Areas are discussed in ECDC 23.40.110 through 23.40.140. Erosion Hazard Areas Erosion Hazard areas include Alderwood and Everett series soils on slopes of 15 percent.or greater, among others. Landslide Hazard Areas are further defined in ECDC 23.80:020.A. In addition to the general requirements for Critical Areas reports referenced above, specific Critical Area report requirements for Erosion Hazard Areas (which are one of the Geologically Hazardous Areas) are provided in ECDC 23.80.050. Note that Stable Erosion Hazard Areas'may have limited report requirements at the director's discretion. At a minimum an erosion and sediment control plan prepared in compliance with the requirements in ECDC Chapter 18.30 shall be required. 1 Development is restricted within an Erosion Hazard Area and must meet additional criteria. For erosion hazard areas with suitable slope stability, an erosion and sediment control plan prepared in compliance ECDC 18.30 will be considered to meet the Critical Areas "Study Required" determination. The determination of "suitable slope stability" will be made by both the Planning and Engineering divisions of the City of Edmonds. In areas where the slope stability is not suitable, projects within Erosion Hazard Areas will require a report by a licensed Geotechnical Engineer or other qualified professional. Note that it is important for the report to be prepared by a qualified professional as defined in the ordinance. Report requirements are given in ECDC 23.80.050, and more. generally in ECDC 23.40.090.D. Development standards are given in ECDC 23.80.060 and 23.80.070. Page 12. Landslide Hazard Areas Development is restricted within a Landslide Hazard Area and its buffer. Projects that will intrude into these areas will require a report by a licensed Geotechnical Engineer. Geologically hazardous areas include areas susceptible to erosion, land sliding, earthquake, or other geological events. They pose a threat to the health arid safety of citizens when incompatible development is sited in areas of significant hazard. Such incompatible development may not only place itself at risk, but also may increase the hazard to surrounding development and use. The criteria that are applied depend on the amount that the buffer is reduced. The buffer can be reduced to a minimum of ten (10) feet (with an additional 15' building setback per ECDC 23.40.280) if a report is prepared that meets the standards listed in ECDC 23.80.050). The alteration must also meet the requirements listed ECDC 23.80.060. In addition, proposals to reduce the buffer to less than ten (10) feet must comply with the design standards listed in ECDC 23.80.070.A.3. Development is restricted within a Landslide Hazard Area and its buffer. Projects that will intrude into these areas will require a report by a licensed Geotechnical Engineer. Determination.: Study Required This review applies to the entire subject parcel. Depending on the location and project proposed relative to the identified critical areas, certain studies and reports may be required. Please contact the Planning Division at 425.771.0220 if and when you have a specific development proposal for this site in order to discuss the various permits that will be required. Mike Clugston, Associate Planner U May 18, 2012 Name, Title Signature ' Date Page 13 Property Summary Page 1 of 3 Sn o h o m i s h online Government In 8. Services County4* Washington Printable Version Home - Other Property Data Help Property Search > Search Results > Property Summary Property Account Summary Parcel Number 100477600005300 1 Property Address 118431 HOMEVIEW DR , EDMONDS, WA 98026-5539 Parties - For chan es use 'Other Property Data' menu Role Percent Name IMailing Address Taxpayer 100 CLOBES DAVID M 118431 HOMEVIEW DR, EDMONDS, WA 98026-5539 United States Owner 106 CLOBES DAVID M 118431 HOMEVIEW DR, EDMONDS, WA 98026-5539 United States General Information HOMEVIEW ADD NO 2 BLK 000 D-00 - LOT 53 EXC TH PTN LY NLY OF FDL - BEG NELY COR LOT Property 53 TH S26*44 37W ALG ELY LN SD LOT LOFT TPB TH IN NWLY DIR IN STRT LN TO NWLY COR SD Description LOT & TERM SD LN Property Land and.Improvements Category Status lActive, Locally Assessed Tax Code Area 100220 Property Characteristics Use Code 111 Single Family Residence - Detached Unit of Measure Acre(s) Size (gross) 0.34 Related Properties No Values Found No Exemptions Found If you wish to pay`your property taxes on-line now, select one of the following options and press the button "Add To Payment List". If this property is noted as "Delinquency" in the General Information Status field, additional costs may be added monthly. At certain dates within the delinquency process, all outstanding taxes, assessments, interest, penalties, and costs are due in certified funds. Make Check or Money Order to "Snohomish County Treasurer". Send to Snohomish County Treasurer, 3000 Rockefeller Ave, M/S 501, Everett, WA 98201 ` i Installments Payable Tax Year Installment Due Date Principal Interest, Penalties and Costs Total Due Cumulative Due Select to Pay 2012 2 10/31/2012 1,301.91 0.00 1,301.91 1,301.91 View Detailed Statement Detailed information about taxes and all other charges displayed above. Calculate Future Pavoff Taxes, interest and penalty due on a specific future date. https://www.snoco.org/proptax/(Oa041tivyvffnwjOtgr3ge45)/result.aspx 5/18/2012 Property Summary Page 2 of 3 Statement of Payable/Paid For Tax Year: 2012 Distribution of Current Taxes District Rate Amount CITY OF EDMONDS 2.160792 518.37 EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT NO 15 4.703291 1,128.32 PUB HOSP #2 0.107668 25.83 SNO-ISLE INTERCOUNTY RURAL LIBRARY 0.499955 119.94 SNOHOMISH COUNTY-CNT 0.982332 235.66 STATE 2.378822 570.68 SNOHOMISH CONSERVATION DISTRICT 5.02 TOTALS 10.832861 2,603.82 Property Values Value Type Tax Year 2012 Tax Year 2011 Tax Year 2010 Tax Year 2009 Tax Year 2008 Taxable Value Regular 239,900 266,500 266,500 304,800 346,300 Exemption Amount Regular Market Total 239,900 266,500 266,500 304,800 346;300 Assessed Value 239,900 266,500 266,500 304,800 346,300 Market Land 120,700 153,000 153,000 181,800 191,900 Market Improvement 119,200 113,500 113,500 123,000 154,400 Personal Property Levy Rate History Tax Year Total Levy Rate 2011 9.804602 2010 8.625343 2009 7.990956 Real Property Structures Description IType I Year Built More Information 1 Story w/Basement IDwelling I 1955 View Detailed Structure Information Property Sales since 7/31/1999 Transfer Date IReceipt Date I Sales Price Excise Number IDeed Type IGrantor (Seiler) IGrantee (Buyer) Other Parcels Property Maps Neighborhood Code ITownship Range ISection lQuarter Iparcel Map 1504000 127 104 117 JNW IView Parcel maps for this Township/Range/Se. tion Receipts Date Receipt No. Amount Applied 04/06/2012 00:00 64,81661 1,301.91 10/06/2011 00:00 6212003 1,308.98 04/19/2011 00:00 5971268 1,308.97 10/22/2010 00:00 5733427 1,151.84 04/22/2010 00:00 5453417 1,151.83 10/21/2009 00:00 5186403. 1,217.83 04/28/2009 00:00 5035845 1,217.82 10/28/2008 00:00 4785869 1,350.85 04/28/2008 00:00 _ 4523542 1,350.85 10/25/2007 00:00 4222959 1,382.49 04/26/2007 00:00 4010601 1,382.49 Events https://www.snoco.org/proptax/(OaO4ltivyvffnwjOtgr3ge45)/result.aspx 5/18/2012 Property Summary Effective Date No Events Found P Date -Time Printable Version Developed by Manatron, Inc. @2005-2010 All rights reserved. Version 1.0.4043.25450 Remarks Page 3 of 3 0 https://www. snoco.org/proptax/(OaO4ltivyvffnwj Otgr3 ge45)/result.aspx 5/18/2012 Page 1 of 2 Snohomishftllne Government Information 11 Services County4i* Washington Structure Information Close Window General Description Parcel Number 00477600005300 (R01) Structure Class Dwelling '- Structure Type 1 Story wBasement Year Built 1955 Exterior Features Foundation Conc or CB Exterior Hardboard ROOF Type: Gable Pitch Medium Interior Features Bedrooms 3 Full or 3/4 Baths 3 1/2 Baths 0 Heat Forced Hot Air - Gas Fireplace 1 Story pre-fab fireplace Floor Area Floor 1 Floor B Garage(s) & Carport(s) Attached Garage SF 529 Other Features Cover Composition . Base SF 1276 Finished SF. 1276 Base SF 943 Finished SF 943 G http://www. snoco.org/app2/propsysIPropInfoO5-StructData.asp?parcel=00477600005300... 5/18/2012 ,v a ,�jf « � .i 1`va r at` � AJ /• 'w +,kit t tt Ad lk �� .j Y�` i1 � 4�q ��.• �` A"" Fes. I, y ', � �.+ga� I •4.Iw F �. �. -tom « �. 4 A }LAY i_ x • �i/ . — m. •vet i AV _y tom'"- � �•; j'ie`«,$ } 7 �.�, �� �,���- _ ' Gay Jt � a-C MCI- t` x'al"/•: If\I .�.i•'�"` . a -ice- {j n u+' " ��_ _, T s .�M ` �' maw ✓ s .y :. � � � ...: �, Y na. m # � Gwner Plan Check # /-M Project Address J o V� Date Buildinz Valuation & Fees USE AREA VALUE PER SQ. FT VALUATION SFR COM Basement Semi -Finished 69.30 $ Basement Unfinished 23.10 Garage/Carport 24.30/16.60 $ First Floor 92.40 $ Second Floor 92.40 $ Unheated/Storage 23.10 $ Deck 17.00 $ Unheated Sunroom 25.00 $ TOTAL VALUATION $ Pluriib'n .3�, BaseFee , $34'r' FEES Permit Fee $ Vil , ,; Plan Check Fee $ M,�f�M „a, „ ` .. Base Fee $85 " 1� x State Surcharge $4.50 wx ., �n � CitySurchar a $15 ' TotaPluniXi�n G �$ Investigation Fee ($205 min or double) $ Plumbing$ 77 Mechanical , 4 WE RIMS �3:;,;n ��� Mechanical $ Base -Fee N $30 Grading [Yardage $ ' , % � _& n' a�is '«- x •',. G%.Ve ND, �� .. MIN x-p ^Fri'^' 23 ('Ag b '. iia�.." �t� bl,. �$a' ..as -ram �, ;TotalVlechanieal Total $ Fees Calculated by: Checked by: Planninz Fees 1% Inspection Fee $65 minimum Bond Amount $ $ SEPA $420 up to 5 hours More than 5 hour Charge $ $ Recording fee Base $ + #Pa es $ ADB Administrative Approval $100 Critical Areas $135 $ Other Total $ Fees Calculated by: L:\TEW\BUILDING\HANDOUT\fee sheet itemized fomi doc04/25/03 Microfilmed / / Engineerinz Fees COST X # OF INSPECTIONS Storm Drainage Review SFR >5000 s .ft. $50 $ SFR Inspections $50x $ Commercial/MF Inspections 2.2% Bond Amount $ $ Right of Way Base $160 + $15 Surcharge $ Right of Way Inspections $50x Street Cut Fee $ Water Meter Fee Size $ Water Connection Fee $ Side Sewer Connection Fee $ Side Sewer Permit Fee $30 SFR, $100 Com/MF $ Alley Disruption Fee Base $140 Parking Disruption Fee Base $140 Sidewalk Disruption Fee Base $140 Storm System Development Charge $428 New SFR Only) Traffic Mitigation Fee $ Development Project Peer Review Fee $50 Plus Actual Cost In Lieu Sidewalk Fee LF $ Fee $ $ Other Total $ Fees Calculated b Fire Fees Plan Review Fee $50 per hour Number of Hours $ Inspection Fee $50 x Number of Inspections $ Fire Connection $345 $ Total Fees Calculated b Miscellaneous Description Department Total $ Total Fees Building $ Planning $ Engineering $ Fire $ Investigation Fee $ Miscellaneous $ 4t Review $170 St Review $170 6t Review $170 Grand Total $ L:\TEMP\BUILDING\HANDOUTTee sheet itemized form.doc04/25/03 Microfilmed / / t �� All' 5 90 DIAyS CITY OF EDMONDS SIDE SEWER PERMIT 1890 .10o � � � � .�. � - .. � PERMIT N2 05.4 . Address of Construction: vM, dic V,E X1,Af V Property Legal Description (Include all easements): t,/�1/��/�'tl JV2 Owner and/or Contractor:- State License No. C) /V �, 3 Building Permit No. ng)e Family r ❑ Multi -Family (No:'.of Units ) ❑ Commercial ❑ Public fion�_ Invasion inCity Right -of -Way: ❑. No Xes nstruction Permit No. f An a %y Cross other Private Property: ❑ No. .❑ Yes Attach legal. description and copy of recorded @asementl..` I certify that'I have read and shallcomply with all city requirements as. indicated on the back of the Permit Card. Date * CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-424-5555) BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION ** PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE ** White Copy: File Green Copy: Inspector Buff Copy: Applicant Revised 3190 CITY of LYNNWOOD _. PUBLIC WORKS PERMI 19100 44th Avenue W., Lynnwood WA 98036 Permit No 99ROW0171 (425) 775-1971 Inspections .(425) 670-8337 RIGHT OF WAY USE PERMIT' Address: StatUbi ISSUED. Location: NE CORNER OF OLYMPIC VIEW DR AND HOME VIEW DR Applied:,08/05/1999 Parcel No: Issued: Expires: APPLICANT B-& M CONTRACTOR-THOMAS C BELT Phone: 425-778-0247 .21400 HWY. 99, EDMONDS 98046 OWNER DAVID GLOBES Phone: 42.5-175-9076 7425 OLYMPIC VIEW DR., EDMONDS INSTALL SIDE SEWER ON OVD- CITY,OF ED. SEWER SEWER CONTRACTOR TO USE SAME APPROVED TRAFFIC CONT ROL AS PRECISION EARTH WORK WHILE OVD IS CLOSED Lineal Feet: 50 Bond Required?: YES Bond Amount: 3,258.00 Bonds, guarantee accounts, and cash dAposits will be reduced by 90% at construction approval. The remaining 10% will be released aftera successsful one year maintenance period. *** ******************** **** FEE SUMMARY Permit Fee: 150.00 Total Permit Fee: 150.00 No open cutting of fully improved streets without prior approval from the City of Lynnwood Engineering Department. Applicant is liable for damage to the City of Lynnwood's property, I.E. pavement, sidewalks, walkways, utilities, etc. Call "ONE CALL" 1-800-424-5555 two days prior to excavation. Permission is hereby given to commence the above described work, according to the conditions hereon and in accordance with the approved plans and specifications pertaining thereto, subject to.compliance with City of Lynnwoc ordinances and laws of the State of Washington-. Permit Issued: By: E---z IV ME ,j 0 1� STREET BILE Zz. t:jq ap 0 LL. � �'A _ C� ; r... AA CDCJI v l� If 04 If CD �Q �• /' � - �% �-i �. Alf , / -{ ....� �- ,. Jr Ol jr excl IV 0 AF �00 ems•. , \ f Aj CC 0o m Z O j f O Y w w � fz Isis � Zul $ �� Is r Ifi r y •ii • W - _ � v Z N 0 'csi 15 1 v SINGLE FAMILY ROUTING FORM ***FOR INTEROFFICE USE ONLY*** [4 . ************************************************************************************************* PLANNING RESUB #1 To. On Back --ADD? Days Mail/Fax RESUB #2 . _ To On Back ADD? Days Mail/fax RESUB #3 . To On Back ADD? Days Mail/Fax 1. C.A.# Determination 2. Zone, Corner /Flag 3. Street Map Width Dedication? 4. VAR. CU . SM LLA 5. SEPA Expires 6. Building Pad: Existing _Proposed 7. Lot Area, Lot Coverage_ _. 8. Height Calcs: Datum Ave Grade Max Actual 9. keq'd Parking. 2 . Provided_ COMMENTS/NOTES BUILDING Heat Source .. Window Schedule_ Glazing % FEMA Map Grading Yds .... _ Soils Report Lot Slope VIAQ Worksheets . IN-HOUSE TO n Back AOD? navc Mail/PAY RESUB # 1_ _ . _ -. To . On Back ADD? Days Mail/Fax RESUB #2 . , .TO. On Back ADD? Days Mail/Fax RESUB #1 To On Back ADDS Days Mail/Fax RESUB #2 . To On Back ADD? Days Mail/Fax CONSULTANT Mailed To Back ADDS Days Mail/Fax RESUB #1 Mailed. To. Back _ADD? ....Days .. Mail/Fax Request SQ Received SQ Approve SQ Agreement RE COMMENTS/NOTES LATEMADST'sTormAkouting SM JEANNINE'S routing.doc04/25/03 ENGINEERING RESU13 #1 To On Back ADD? Days Mail/Fax RESUB #2 To On Back ADD? Days Mail/Fax 1. Drainage Plan & Calcs OK 2. Grading Plan/CYD's SEPA?. 3. Driveway Slope % OK Waiver Apprv'd? 4. Street Dedication Req'd? FT 5. Easement Type 6. Proposed Impervious 7. Existing Impervious (Pre 1977) (Post 1977) 8.State Hydraulics Permit 9.Check Plat Requirements 10.Sidewalk Required 1 LEUC Form COMMENTS/NOTES *REVIEWERS: PLEASE CALCULATE BUSINESS DAYS* PLANNING REVIEW TIME TOTAL DAYS **** ENG REVIEW TIME TOTAL DAYS PW REVIEW -DAYS*** *BUILDING: In -House Outside TOTAL DAYS RTG DAYS PERMIT # ISSUE DATE *CONTACT PERSON STATEMENT* BY SIGNING THIS FORM I UNDERSTAND THAT I AM THE ACKNOWLEDGED CONTACT PERSON FOR THIS PROJECT. IT IS MY RESPONSIBILITY TO COORDINATE ALL SUBMITTALS WITH THE CITY AND ONLY I CAN MAKE INQUIRIES ON THE STATUS OF THE PERMIT. I UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS MY RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE IN ADVANCE OF PERMIT SUBMITTAL ANY DISCRETIONARY PERMITS THAT MAY BE APPLICABLE TO THIS PROJECT. I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY I HAVE SUBMITTED ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTATION IN ORDER TO MAKE A COMPLETE APPLICATION. �.-1171� Signe Date �1.�� �� D �- Phone C,;? 0,CJ 73 7-9- Contact Person (Print Clearly) CORRECTIONS: Fax to2O6� �_K o� 7 Mail to: E-mail Items required prior to permit issuance: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. LATEMPOST'AFormARouting SFR JEANNINE'S routing.doc04/25/03