CANOD.pdfCity of Edmonds
Critical Area Notice of Decision
Applicant:5
V, 1'�' n g r �': ,I
Property Owner:
'V,-n�,^ 1, fe A
Critical Area File #:
J
U 4a 0 --1 0 0
Permit Number:
Site Location:
q cf
Parcel Number:
Project Description:
C , 1 1,
6 �
0( Zoo cl
,,C,onditional Waiver. No critical area report is required for the prcje�clZes'cribed above.
1. There will be no alteration of a,Critical Area or its required buffer.
1 4— 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.
7 Erosion Hazard. Project is within erosion hazard area. Applicant must prepare an erosion and
sediment control plan in compliance with ECDC 18.30.
7 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:
I The proposal minimizes 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.
I'll
❑ 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 23.40.160 and
0
the provisions of the City of Edmonds critical area regulations. See attached findings of
noncompliance,
E.JFavorable Critical Area Decision. The proposed project as described above and as shown on the
attached site plan meets or is exempt from the criteria ih 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).
Reviewer Signature
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
Richard Svangren
9209 Olympic View Drive
Edmonds, Washington 98020
Subject.- Geotechnical Engineering Study
Proposed Residence Remodel and Deck Addition
9209 Olympic View Drive
Edmonds, Washington
Dear Mr. Svangren.-
13256 Northeast 20th Street. Suite 16
Bellevue, Washington 98005
(425) 747-5618 FAX (425) 747-8561
July 10, 2009
JN 09154
We are pleased to present this geotechnical engineering report for the proposed residence and
deck addition project in Edmonds, Washington. The scope of our services consisted of exploring
site surface and subsurface conditions, and then developing this report to provide conclusions and
recommendations regarding the geotechnical engineering aspects of the project. We observed two
test holes in order to determine the subsurface conditions.
Based on our conversations with you, we understand that the roofline of your residence will be
changed, but no addition to the residence will be done. Also, a deck will be constructed on the
northern (project north) side of the residence. We understand that the northern side of the
residence is approximately 60 feet from the top of an existing steep slope, while the deck will be
located approximately 50 feet from the slope. Conventional footings are proposed for support of
the deck.
if the scope of the project changes from what we have described above, we should be provided
with revised plans in order to determine if modifications to the recommendations and conclusions of
this report are warranted.
The Svangren property is located on a private driveway that extends north of Olympic View Drive.
The property is located on the western (project west) side of the driveway. The existing residence
is located on the eastern side of the property near the driveway. The main floor of the residence is
near the driveway grade, while a basement level daylights to the west. An existing main floor deck
extends off the northwestern portion of the residence.
Most of the property slopes down to the west at a moderate inclination (estimated to be in the
range of 25 percent). However, near the western edge of the site is a very steep slope that is over
50 feet tall. The residence is located approximately 60 feet from the steep slope. The area
between the residence and steep slope is landscaped and Contains a wood shed. The steep slope
is heavily vegetated. Some large evergreen trees are located at the top of the steep slope. This
slope is defined as a landslide hazard area per Section 23.80.020 of the Edmonds Municipal Code
due to its steepness. We did not observe indications of soil instability near the top of the slope.
We were not able to traverse and observe the middle and base of the tracks. However, we are
a WIT1011, '7 71
Richard Svangren
July 10, 2009
JN 09154
Page 2
aware that at the base of this slope are twin railroad tracks belonging to the Burlington Northern
Railway. Beyond these tracks is Puget Sound.
Two hand -excavated test holes were excavated on the site on July 3, 2008. One hole was located
near the northwestern corner of the proposed deck, while the other was near the southwestern
corner. The southwestern test hole revealed approximately 18 inches of loose, native sand that
then became medium -dense. At a depth of approximately 4.5 feet, the sand became gravelly and
dense. In the northwestern test boring, approximately 3 feet of loose fill was revealed overlying the
loose native sand. This sand became medium -dense at approximately 4 feet and dense around 6
feet. Our firm observed the drilling of some deep test borings near a similarly sloped area about
one-half mile south of the site; similar dense soils were found as the core soils on that site.
CtT�1�:7_�1
THIS SECTION CONTAINS A SUMMARY OF OUR STUDY AND FINDINGS FOR THE PURPOSES OF A
GENERAL OVERVIEW ONLY. MORE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS ARE
CONTAINED IN THE REMAINDER OF THIS REPORT. ANY PARTY RELYING ON THIS REPORT SHOULD
READ THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT.
The development of the proposed residence remodel and the deck addition is very suitable from a
geotechnical engineering standpoint in our opinion. Medium -dense or denser, native sand soil was
revealed in test holes at depths ranging from about 1.5 to 4 feet. The deck addition can be
founded on conventional footings as planned, provided they bear on the competent sand soil. A
bearing capacity of 2000 pounds per square foot can be used for the footings. We found that the
area near the deck and at the top of the slope appeared to be stable, and founding the deck
footings on the competent soil will have no negative affect on stability of the adjacent area or the
slope.
Section 23.80.020B of the Edmonds Municipal Code (the Code) defines a landslide hazard area to
include any area "... with a slope of 40 percent or steeper and with a vertical relief of 10 or more
feet except areas composed of consolidated rock". As noted earlier, the steep slope on the
western of the property is considered to be a landslide hazard area per the Code.
A minimum building setback of 15 feet is required from the edges of all critical area buffers, per
Section 23.40.280 of the Code. A minimum buffer of 50 feet is generally recommended per
Section 23.80.070A of the Code. However, this section of the Code also states that the buffer
width can be reduced to a minimum of 10 feet "... when a qualified professional demonstrates ...
that the reduction will adequately protect the proposed development, adjacent developments and
uses and the subject critical area". Based on our site explorations and our nearby explorations, it is
apparent that the core of the steep slope west of the subject property is comprised of very
competent, native glacially -compacted sand soils. In addition, we did not observe indications of soil
instability near the top of the slope during our site visit. Because of these reasons, it is our opinion
that the buffer can be reduced to 30 feet, resulting in a total minimum building setback of 45 feet
from the top of the western slope. The residence is located well outside this buffer and total
setback distance, and the proposed deck is well outside this recommended buffer. Therefore, it is
Richard Svangren
July 10, 2009
JN 09154
Page 3
our opinion that the project can be constructed as planned provided the recommendations
contained in this report are followed.
We recommend including this report, in its entirety, in the project contract documents. This report
should also be provided to any future property owners so they will be aware of our findings and
recommendations.
LIMITATIONS
The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions as
they existed at the time of our exploration and assume that the soil and groundwater conditions
encountered in the test pits are representative of subsurface conditions on the site. If the
subsurface conditions encountered during construction are significantly different from those
observed in our explorations, we should be advised at once so that we can review these conditions
and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. Unanticipated soil conditions are
commonly encountered on construction sites and cannot be fully anticipated by merely taking soil
samples in test pits. Subsurface conditions can also vary between exploration locations. Such
unexpected conditions frequently require making additional expenditures to attain a properly
constructed project. It is recommended that the owner consider providing a contingency fund to
accommodate such potential extra costs and risks. This is a standard recommendation for all
projects.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the Svangren family and their
representatives for specific application to this project and site. Our recommendations and
conclusions are based on observed site materials and engineering analyses. Our conclusions and
recommendations are professional opinions derived in accordance with current standards of
practice within the scope of our services and within budget and time constraints. No warranty is
expressed or implied. The scope of our services does not include services related to construction
safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods,
techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for
consideration in design. Our services also do not include assessing or minimizing the potential for
biological hazards, such as mold, bacteria, mildew and fungi in either the existing or proposed site
development.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of
may be of further service, please do not
M
DRW: jyb
ce on this project. If you have any questions, or if we
tate to contact us.
Respectfully submitted,
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
D. Robert Ward, P.E.
Principal
m
oil
``--- ------------------------
m
C 040),
U)
10
s,4
Z�CE
ILAU
T
a?.
o
its
Q
m
C 040),
U)
10
s,4
Z�CE
ILAU
T
m
C 040),
1�'v1fq4,uwjp5uo) jopA�-n-KrA)
Aq JM,IIAW)-J�04
LO-0119 adOjl� 40 da4.
L'U"� --4-)Pq42G 91 * v4pq ae -Y
U)
s,4
Z�CE
ILAU
T
1�'v1fq4,uwjp5uo) jopA�-n-KrA)
Aq JM,IIAW)-J�04
LO-0119 adOjl� 40 da4.
L'U"� --4-)Pq42G 91 * v4pq ae -Y
s,4
21
o
C-
Q
o
C-
Q