20140625151627566.pdfI
i
i
i
!I
i
K R A N N I T Z
G E H L
I
A R C H I T E C T S
,I
I
City of Edmonds
Planning Department
121 5t' Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
June 24, 2014
Attention: Mike Clugston
Regarding: Plan Check # 2014-0415 Plan Review Comments
Mike,
Enclosed for your review and approval are revised plans and updated plans for the
above referenced project. The revisions address comments outlined in your June 12,
2014 Plan review comments notice, which are also included here for reference. Each
added note or new information on the drawings has been clouded and has revision
symbol I placed by the cloud.
1. Datum point: On the Plot Plan, please label the datum point used as the basis for
the height calculations and show its elevation, whether actual or assumed..
The datum point is the existing and permanent storm drain manhole rim near the
entrance driveway and has been labeled "TBM=44.60' (NA VD 88/91) ", including
the elevation as established by the surveyor.
2. Height rectangle: Please verify the elevation of Point C. Its elevation is shown as
42.86' on the Plot Plan but it wouldappear to be slightly more than that given its
position relative to the 43contour line.
The elevation of Point C of the height rectangle is 42.86'. The drawings appear to
have confused the elevation when we showed the 43' contour line as a new contour
but did not leave the original contour line in place. The drawing has been updated to
_
show the existing _43' contour as: established by thesurveyorand omits the previous
43' contour adjustment.
3. Setbacks: Please show applicable geotechnical buffer/setback lines or zoning
property setback lines on all TOC, Al, A4, A5, and A6 sheets.
- 765 N.E. Northlake Way
Seattle, Washington 98105
Tt206.547.8233 F:206.547.8219
krannitzgehl.com
Buffer and setback lines have been added to each drawing as requested. Per our
discussions of projections into the setback, uncovered rafter tails may not project
farther than the allowed 30" setbacks, and, footings and diagonal struts supporting
the eaves may project past the setback line.
We have pulled back roof eaves and eave rafter tails that previously projected past
the setback.
4. Geotechnical Report: Please have Geospectrum Consutants update the project
geotechnical report to include discussion of the 'low stone wall' and rockeries within
the recommended buffer/setback areas west of the at -grade terrace/patio.
The low stone wall and rocks have been omitted per the owner.
4. Geotech note on Plot Plan: Please revise the geotech buffer/setback note on the
Plot Plan to read "Combined steep slope buffer and building setback per
Geospectrum Consultants reports for project 13-133-01".
The geotech buffer/setback note has been updated as requested.
5. Hanna Park Access: The plot plan shows a 20' dashed rectangle which encompasses
a portion Hanna Park Road. Please label that dashed rectangle. If it happens that any
portion of that feature is an access easement, property line setbacks must be taken
from that. Please also label the linear feature to the east of the auto court. Low
wall?
The rectangle you reference is indeed part of the utility/access easement and was
labeled farther south down Hanna Park Road. We have adjusted the 25 ' front yard
setback to be taken from the easement rather than property line.
The linear feature is a curb and is now labeled as such.
6. Tree Cutting/retention/native vegetation: The Plot Plan indicates that a number of
existing trees are to be retained while Sheet C2 shows the site to be completely
cleared. It should be noted, however, that this parcel is subject to the vegetation
retention requirements of ECDC 23.90.040.C:
The clearing limits as well as trees to be removed have been updated. Per our discussion
regarding what to show on a native vegetation retention plan, we are providing a new
Landscape plan the shows the combined areas of native vegetation meeting the 30%
requirement. Actual plants and each plant location does not need to be shown. There are not
saved trees within or close to the clearing area so large saved trees at the_ far eastern corner_ _
do not need to show drip lines or adhere to ECDC 18.45.050.H subsections (1) — (6) as we
discussed when I showed you the landscape plan. We have included a list of native plants to
be used, but once the landscape architect is involved, additional or substituted plants may be
used. Any additional or substituted plants will be selected as found and listed in the "King
-County Native Plant Guide' , found at https:11green. kingcounty.gov/GoNative/Plant. aspx
I appreciate the opportunity to present the enclosed revisions. Should you have any questions
or require additional information please do not hesitate to call or email me at:
206 547 8233
bryan ,krannitzgehl. com
Sincerely,
Bryan Krannitz, r
Krannitz Gehl Ar
Enclosures