CANOD.pdfCity of Edmonds
Critical Area Notice of Decision
Applicant:/
WIA �, M _(�. r
Property Owner:
/7
/&"-
Critical Area File
004`7
Permit Number:
2, yo-/
Site Location:
S/ t- (0
Parcel Number:
1/ 0 Oo e) 6
Project Description:
.. . ... ...... —1 .. . ..... ...
d e4,Yro 6/ilv"
....... ------ . . ..... ... . ..... . .....
c4t o,(,(),,e
0 Conditional Waiver. No critical area report is required for the project described above
(J
1. There will be no alteration of a -Critical Area or its required buffer. / �'
1 76',-
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.
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;
Any alterations permitted to the critical area axe mitigated in accordance with ECDC
23,40.110, Mitigation requirements.
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
—7 Z" The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards,
E] 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
the provisions of the City of Edmonds critical area regulations, See attached findings of
noncompliance.
I
-.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,
E] Conditions. Critical Area specific condition(s) have been applied to the permit number referenced
above. See referenced permit number for specific condition(s).
lh C�ry
't�L I
C'fl
Reviewer
Signature
Date
Appeals: Any decision to approve, condition, or deny a developnient proposal or other activity based on the
requirements of critical area regulations inay be appealed according to, and as part of, the appeal procedure, if any,
for the permit or approval involved.
Revised 12/16/2.010
Larry Rothmier
8534 — 210`x' PI SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
Subject: Critical Areas Report and Geotechnical Recommendations
Proposed Patio hoof and Deck
8534 — 210t" Place SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
Dear Larry:
July 10, 2014
Project 1767-1
n,u
2014
Sf.1NK,',1("
At your request we visited the above residence to evaluate the existing soil conditions. We
understand that the proposed project will not enlarge the footprint of the existing residence but
will include construction of a new roof over the existing concrete patio and a new deck over the
existing concrete walkway. The patio roof will likely be post -supported and cover the existing
concrete patio on the west side of the house. The existing site has been identified as located
within or near a geologic hazard area due to potential landslide and erosion hazard. Because of
this a Critical Areas Report is required along with geotechnical recommendations for mitigation
of the hazard during construction. The purpose of our site visit was to evaluate the soil
conditions in the vicinity of the proposed improvements and to provide recommendations for
foundation support and mitigation of geologic hazards associated with the site.
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project is located on the west facing slope west of 210r" Place and east of Pioneer Way (see
Figure 1, Vicinity Map). The slope descends from the relatively :flat portion of the back of the
lot approximately 30 to 35 feet at a declination estimated at 50 percent toward the homes along
Pioneer Way below. The top of the slope is located about 36 feet from the existing residence and
about 24 feet from the existing concrete patio.
The proposed patio roof will cover the existing concrete patio and result in minimal increased
impervious area. The stormwater runoff from the roof will be tied into the existing stormwater
503418th Avenue NF, Seattle, WA 98105 Phone: 206.525.5097 Fax; 206.525.5091
Geotechnical Site Reconnaissance & Critical Areas Report
Rothmier Residence
8534 210"' Place SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
collection system. The proposed deck and roof covering will be supported on conventional
spread footing pads with post and pier construction.
The slope itself is densely vegetated with brush, ivy, and blackberries, and supports mature
Douglas Fir, Cedar, and Big Leaf Maple. There will be no change planned for the slope or for
the lawn area in the back yard. The proposed improvements would be supported on foundations
located approximately 25 to 26 feet away from the top of the slope at their closest point.
Because the site has been designated as located within a geologic hazard, construction of the
proposed deck might require a reduced buffer. In the report that follows we have supplied
observations and an assessment that concludes that the proposed project will not adversely
impact the slope or adjacent properties and that a reduced buffer of twenty feet would be
permissible without increasing risk to the stability of the slope or slope system.
2.0 SITE CONDITIONS
No EKIIJ Ill W..Xu Wei ; : 30
A geotechnical engineer from The Galli Group visited the site on July 8, 2014, to provide a site
reconnaissance. Observations from our site visit are provided below.
The site is mapped as underlain by glacial till possibly feathering out farther down the slope
into advance outwash (Geologic Alap of the Edmonds East and pant of the Edfnonds Rlrest
quadrangles, Washington, Minard, 1983). Glacial till generally consists of unsorted mixtures
of silt, sand, clay and gravel pushed over the existing topography thousands of years ago by
the advancing glacier. It was subsequently compacted by tons of ice and is notable for its
very dense consistency, relative impermeability, and ability to stand unsupported in near
vertical relief. Glacial till slopes generally remain quite stable.
Advance outwash consists of sorted layers and lenses or braided layers of sand and gravel
deposited in meltwater environments in front of the advancing glacier. The sediment was
subsequently overridden by ice and generally appears dense below the upper weathered zone.
Advance outwash tends to readily convey water through the unit and toward daylight on
steep slope exposures. Where underlain by impermeable units such as Lawton Clay the
outwash steep slopes are somewhat notorious for shallow colluvial landslides. Native slopes
protected by vegetation often appear inclined as steep as 80 percent in the region. On flatter
slopes the landslide and erosion risks are primarily related to concentrated discharge of
stormwater runoff and other human causes.
® The site appears to descend from the rear yard westerly a total vertical distance of about 30 to
35 feet in a horizontal distance of 70 feet or at a declination estimated at about 50 percent. A
1767 rothmier recon rpt.doc 2 The Galli Group
Geotechnical Site Reconnaissance & Critical Areas Report
Rothmier Residence
8534 210"' Place SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
rockery approximately 4 feet high is located inside the property line and at the top of the
steep slope. We identified the rockery as the top of the steep slope in Figure 2, Site Features.
The lot appears relatively flat, elevated slightly above street grade and then grades gradually
toward the west property line. The rear yard is relatively flat from the house to the top of a
slope that descends westerly. The rockery was comprised of 2 -man and 3 -man rock, and
appeared in good condition.
The rear yard consists primarily of lawn with perimeter planting beds. The west facing slope
supported numerous mature Douglas Fir, Big Leaf Maple, and a couple Cedar trees. The
understory consisted of blackberries, forest debris, and some ivy. We did not observe any
indications of erosion on site or the slope. The rockery appeared to be in good condition with
no evidence of seepage, or rotation. The slope appeared in stable condition at the time of our
site visit with no evidence of erosion, sloughing, springs or seepage. The trees appeared to
be straight and the young trees did not evidence much surficial creep.
A geotechnical engineer from The Galli Group visited the site on July 8, to conduct a site
reconnaissance and to advance a hand hole and probe in several locations in order to identify the
near surface soil conditions. We advanced one hand hole to a depth of 4 feet at the location
shown on Figure 2, Site Features. We probed with a T -probe to determine the depth to native,
dense soil in several locations shown on Figure 2. We found native glacial till soils (silty SAND
with trace of gravel and occasional cobbles) west of the house at the top of the slope in HH -1.
The soil was loose to a depth of about 3 feet near the top of the slope (HH -1) and to depths
varying from about 4 feet to 18 inches on the face of the slope (see Figure 3, Site Section). The
hillside appeared comprised of medium dense to dense silty SAND with gravel, which we
interpreted as glacial till.
We did not observe any indications of seepage or perched water in the hand hole which remained
open for about 30 minutes. The silty SAND appeared blanketed by about 18 inches of fill near
the western edge of the lawn, but otherwise it appeared that dense soil was within 2 to 3 feet of
the existing grade. Based upon original topography some of the excavated material might have
been pushed toward the northwesterly corner of the lot. However, that portion of the lot is the
most remote from the proposed patio roof and will be unaffected by the proposed improvements.
Detailed logs of the exploratory hole and results of the probing are shown on Figure 3, Site
Section.
Based upon surfrcial characteristics, probing, and hand holes, we think that the site likely
contains good bearing soil within the upper 2 feet in the vicinity of the proposed deck and patio
cover footings. The depth to dense material on the slope appeared to be on the order of 3 or 4
feet at most. The overall inclination of the slope system (50 percent) does not appear steep
1767 rothmier recon rpt.doc 3 The Galli Group
Geotechnical Site Reconnaissance & Critical Areas Report
Rothmier Residence
8534 210"' Place SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
enough to warrant concern about slope movement provided stormwater drainage is adequately
provided.
3.0 CRITICAL AREAS DISCUSSION
A review of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) indicates that site might be
governed by Critical Areas regulations. Below we have discussed the elements that apply to the
project site with reference to ECDC code requirements.
3.1.1 Erosion hazard Areas
The ECDC defines Erosion Hazard Areas as areas possessing steep slopes in excess of 40
percent (see below.)
Erosion hazard areas include: "areas of the city of Edmonds that may experience severe to very
severe erosion hazard. This group of soils includes, but is not limited to, the following when they
occur on slopes of 15 percent or greater:
a. Alderwood soils (15 to 25 percent slopes);
b. Alderwood/Everett series (25 to 70 percent slopes);
c. Everett series (15 to 25 percent slopes)." (ECDC 23.80.020 A(1)
The slope on the west side of the house is inclined at about 50 percent below the rockery. The
Soil Conservation Service maps the area as underlain by Alderwood gravelly sandy loam.
Because of these topographic and mapping conditions the project site would be designated an
Erosion Hazard Area.
3.1.2 Landslide hazard Areas
The inclination of the slope at the west side of the residence and steepest portion of the slope
exceeds 40 percent for a height of about 25 to 30 feet. The slope has a 4 -foot high rockery at the
top that defines the upper limits of the slope.
Section 23.80.020B defines "Landslide Hazard Areas" as follows:
Landslide hazard areas are areas potentially subject to landslides based on a combination of
geologic, topographic, and hydrologic factors. Within the city of Edmonds landslide hazard areas
specifically 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." (ECDC 23.80.020B(2).
The western portion of the project site qualifies for designation as "Landslide Hazard Area"
due to topographic features.
1767 rothrrier recon rpt.doc 4 The Galli Group
Geotechnical Site Reconnaissance & Critical Areas Report
Rothmier Residence
8534 210`x' Place SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
3.1.3 Seismic Hazard Area
"Seismic hazard areas" are areas subject to severe risk of damage as a result of earthquake -
induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement, soil liquefaction, lateral spreading, or surface
faulting." (ECDC 23.80.020C)
The project site appears underlain by dense glacially consolidated soil, or glacial outwash at
depth. This dense material does not present a risk of deep-seated slope movement, seismic
liquefaction, lateral spreading, or surface rupture. Provided the new foundations are supported
on native undisturbed soil, the risk of seismic -induced settlement is not significant. Our slope
stability assessment concluded that the risk of slope failure due to seismic ground shaking is
likely limited to shallow slumps in the loose surficial soil rather than deep-seated slope failures
or failures that would impact the residence or planned improvements. In our opinion the site
does not represent a severe risk of damage due to seismic induced ground shaking.
In the report sections that follow we have described the site soil conditions and the
subsurface geologic conditions. The site appears underlain by dense glacially consolidated
sediment that appeared stable in its current condition. The project site contains slopes in
excess of 40 percent that are well vegetated but still present risks of erosion if drainage is not
properly maintained. In our opinion it does not present a significant risk of seismic
liquefaction, landslides, or erosion if conventional Best Management Practices are followed
during site improvements, and our recommendations are followed during project
development.
The existing residence is located about 36 feet away from the top of the steep slope (see Figure
3, Section A -A'). The existing patio is currently located 24 feet from the top of the slope and
within the recommended minimum buffer plus building setback (ECDC 23.80.070 A(la and lb).
The proposed improvements are confined to previously developed flat areas on the site but are
close to being located within the standard 10 -foot minimum hazard buffer plus 15 foot building
setback. And the total setback is less than the height of the slope. Therefore a reduced buffer
will be necessary. The proposed improvements will be located 25 feet away from the top of the
steep slope. Because of the dense underlying stable soil it is our professional opinion that the
standard buffer may be reduced to accommodate the proposed deck and patio roof.
Alterations to areas within buffers or steep slope areas must meet the following requirements in
order to be permitted:
1. "The development will not increase the surface water discharge or sedimentation to the adjacent
properties beyond predevelopment conditions." (ECDC 23.80.070 2a). Construction of the
deck will not increase the rate of runoff from the site provided the deck is not finished
with an impervious deck surface. If the deck is constructed with an impervious deck
1767 rothmier recon rpt.doc 5 The Galli Group
Geotechnical Site Reconnaissance & Critical Areas Report
Rothmier Residence
8534 210"' Place SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
surface all runoff must be captured in a gutter system and connected to the existing storm
drain. The patio roof will not significantly increase the amount of impervious area on the
site and would actually decrease the amount of runoff added to the soil above the top of
the steep slope. We recommend the following mitigation measures:
The collected stormwater runoff from the patio roof must be directed via a
tightline pipe to the existing storm drain so that collected runoff does not
contribute to the slope system.
® Where areas under the proposed deck will not be existing concrete, we
recommend keeping the area thickly mulched to avoid forming rivulets or erosion.
® All disturbed areas during construction should be mulched and replanted prior to
the wet season (October 1).
2. "The development will not decrease the slope stability on adjacent properties." (ECDC 23.80.070
2b) Our assessment indicates that the lightly loaded deck footings supported in the dense
underlying soil will have no adverse impact on the slope or adjacent sites. We
recommend the following measures to help maintain slope stability:
® All disturbed areas must be mulched and/or blanketed with mulch prior to the wet
season. Permanent erosion control should consist of amending the disturbed soil
and replanting the area within the combined vegetated buffer and building
setback.
3. "Such alterations will not adversely impact other critical areas." (ECDC 23.80.070 2c) The
proposed deck will be supported on native, undisturbed, medium dense to dense outwash
soils about 25 feet from the top of the slope. The proposed improvements will not impact
other critical areas. No additional mitigation measures beyond those described above are
needed to protect adjacent sites or critical areas.
19IZOL119re Ilii reliz1
Based upon our geotechnical reconnaissance and limited subsurface exploration, it appears the
existing house is supported on native, undisturbed, dense glacial till. We described the hillside
as comprised of medium dense to dense silty SAND and interpreted the material as glacial till.
In areas planned for the new foundations, the underlying soil was described as medium dense to
dense silty SAND within the upper 2 feet of soil. The existing soil will provide excellent
foundation support for conventional spread footings. Reducing the landslide hazard buffer to 10
feet would allow the proposed improvements to be safely constructed outside of the landslide
hazard buffer plus building setback (total of 25 feet). The building foundation would remain in
its existing condition.
1767 rothrrier recon rpt.doc 6 The Galli Group
Geotechnical Site Reconnaissance & Critical Areas Report
Rothmier Residence
8534 210"' Place SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
Best Management Practices commonly observed should be employed during construction. We
don't anticipate a lot of export or import of materials for the project. We anticipate these will
include the following:
1. Maintain the street free of sediment during excavation and hauling and when mobilizing
equipment to and from the site. Mud and silt tracked from the site should be removed or
cleaned by the contractor daily or more often if needed.
2. Maintain the vegetation between the patio and the fence during construction. A
minimum of 15 feet of lawn area should be maintained to capture sediment from exposed
soil and to help attenuate surface water runoff in the unlikely event of a summer
downpour.
3. Disturbed soils on the site should be protected with mulch once the excavation and
backfill are completed. Mulching may be used until vegetation is established.
4. Excavated soil must not be deposited on the slope or within the 10 -foot hazard buffer.
5. Stockpiles must not remain uncovered for more than 2 days during the wet season.
The table below provides soil parameters used in the analyses for this project.
Soil design parameters used in determination of lateral earth pressures
Soil
Unit
Allowable
Passive
Active
Type
Weight
Searing
Resistance
Earth
Y, pcf
Capacity
(EFW)
Pressure
(psf)
(EFW)
m. dense silty
SAND or SAND
120
2000
350pcf
35 pcf
w/silt
Dense, silty SAND
125
3500
350 pcf
35 pcf
Compacted
125
2000
350 pcf
35 pcf
Fill
(EFW) = Equivalent Fluid unit Weight in pounds per cubic foot
Excavation for the proposed footings must be at least 24 inches below the existing grade.
Footings must bear on the native undisturbed silty SAND as observed in our test holes at about 2
1767 rothmier recon rpt.doc 7 The Galli Group
Geotechnical Site Reconnaissance & Critical Areas Report
Rothmier Residence
8534 210t" Place SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
feet below existing ground surface. We recommend using an allowable bearing capacity of 2000
psf for design of footings supported on the medium dense to dense silty SAND. Lateral
resistance for the footings should be ignored in the uppermost 12 inches of embedment.
Foundations for the deck and patio roof will consist of spread footings supported on the
undisturbed silty SAND unit. We anticipate that this unit will be encountered at depths on the
order of 2 to 21/2 feet from existing grade in the vicinity of the proposed deck, and at about 2 feet
below grade near the existing patio.
5.4.1 Seismic Design Parameters
The site is underlain by glacially consolidated silty SAND. Based upon the density of the
underlying soil we do not think seismic liquefaction or lateral spreading will be a significant
risk factor to site development. We recommend using site Class D for this project site.
Lateral acceleration of backfill against walls may be estimated as a uniform horizontal force
acting against the wall equivalent to 8H where H is the height of the retained soil.
5.4.2 Spread Footings
For spread footings supporting the proposed deck we recommend the following:
1. An allowable bearing pressure of 2000 psf may be used for footings bearing on
undisturbed SAND with silt. This may be increased by 1/3 for temporary loads such as
wind loads or seismic loads.
2. The passive resistance for the footings may be calculated at 350 pcf in the native
undisturbed soil. The contribution of the upper 12 inches should be ignored.
3. A coefficient of friction of 0.4 may be used for the interface between the bottom of the
footing and the soil.
4. The footing area must be free from loose, organic -rich, or wet soil prior to placing
reinforcing or pouring concrete.
5. Deck or porch footings should bear on native undisturbed soils to avoid settlement.
These can be provided by overexcavating, pouring a footing, and extending the support to
grade using a concrete pier.
The site appears underlain by glacial till soils consisting of silty fine to medium SAND with a
trace of gravel. Generally, provided the soils remain vegetated and concentrated runoff is
avoided, the soils will remain stable and erosion can be avoided. Construction erosion control
measures were discussed in section 5.1 above
the following:
For permanent erosion control we recommend
1767 rothmier recon rpt.doc 8 The Galli Group
Geotechnical Site Reconnaissance & Critical Areas Report
Rothmier Residence
8534 210'1' Place SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
All water collected from the patio roof should be routed to the existing downspout
collection system where it is conveyed to the storm drain. Although the 150 square foot
area is minimal, we recommend avoiding the use of splash blocks in the event that
concentrated discharges begin to make their way toward the slope. No infiltration of
storm water runoff should be permitted near the top of the slope.
2. Avoid deposition of yard debris over the fence and onto the face of the steep slope. This
material can become saturated and begin to translate down slope during the winter.
We recommend use of isolated paving stones or gravel instead of concrete for pathways
topographically above the steep slope area. The intent is to avoid increasing impervious
area above the slope.
This geotechnical investigation was planned and conducted in accordance with generally
accepted engineering standards practiced presently within this geographic area for a site report
with limited scope. Geotechnical investigations performed by these standards reveal with
reasonable regularity soils that are representative of subsurface conditions throughout the site
under consideration. Recommendations contained in this report are based upon the assumption
that soil conditions encountered in explorations are representative of actual conditions
throughout the building site. However, inconsistent conditions can occur between exploratory
borings or test pits and not be detected by a geotechnical study. If, during construction or
subsequent exploration, subsurface or slope conditions are encountered which differ from those
anticipated based upon results of this investigation, The Galli Group should be notified so that
we can review and revise our recommendations where necessary. If conditions change prior to
the proposed construction, we should be consulted so that we may alter our recommendations if
necessary.
This report is prepared for the exclusive use of the owner or the owner's consultants for specific
application on this project at this particular site. Copies of this report should be made available
to the design team, and should be included with the contract drawings issued to the contractor.
Our report, conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of the
subsurface conditions on the site and should not be applied to neighboring sites. No warranty,
expressed or implied is made. The report was prepared anticipating geotechnical observation
and testing provided during the construction phases to verify that the recommendations provided
in this report are incorporated into the actual construction.
1767 rothmier recon rpt.doc 9 The Galli Group
Geotechnical Site Reconnaissance & Critical Areas Report
Rothmier Residence
8534 210th Place SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
We trust that this helps you move forward. Please contact the undersigned if you have any
questions about our assessment.
Regards,
THE GALLI GROUP
Paul L. Stoltenberg, P.E.
Geotechnical Engineer
Attached: Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Site Features
Figure 3 Section A -A'
7-10-2014
1767 rothmier recon rpt.doc 10 The Galli .Group
5
M AV Jjjoj
k/) � 11 1 1, (7114
AV
M Id
AV ON L
m
M AV Jjjoj
k/) � 11 1 1, (7114
AV
M Id
AV ON L
hl Id
M
AV HIH
co
JI Id Hjg/ V�
E3
to 1
011 0 T7.
m
AV HR
3 -
Q),
in V)
Id
2 n -Id 11M
119i m
m Id 10,'
hg c H -WL
id
m
C-31 M AV 11-6L
"DAV
H151
m
AV
H
AV
M AV Me
CL
Id
7r
M AV
E, OV P-
M F—
V) =
ISTR
m
M AV aNe
AV WR
d W8
AV
MVd
89TH, AV W(ad
Mndi N)
M
INVIOOCII4
Id
idM I d HigS :'r'l
C3 M Id H199
Ni imns
M Id
M
ct-
M 77'd H192192
AV HIL9
";o
M
AV
H192
M
Id H199 m
(K aOOM3ldV(711 W) c`-
Alf
Id
Id IST6
IS3th
�31-. 16�
-2"
AV
H106
co r
—41
C\j
IN 1--j Cie
k y
d13 IN 11 ANS
WIS V:
M
AV
dp
Q)
M Id
v7 os.
GK6
Id
S
x r -L
C11
QLZ m AV
Lr)
ZL-
_j
C\1
Lo
M AV
DIdWA10
m ]d
H] 'IF
Ls :::t AV.
-j
M Ai,4 it, rr
7mlmr--
Md"
��VMA
co
M 0') 00
0 Lo 0')
r'-
(D b <
co
X
(D 0
0 Q)
IL U)
(n 04
2
CD
LL
2
U)
l9
z
uj
CN
.0
OL
(3) VQU
cc
---------------
-
- --
---------------
------
-
j; E
Fo
Mom
SID
s
ai
---------------------
------ --
-----
--
-------------
,s ----------- L --------------
23
- 2
---------------
z -65
---�doj
adolS da�S 1,
Ln C5
-H -H
:3
asnOH
61
A
0
AC3
0-
ip J:
-v:
0
oizm
LL
CCq
NI
:3
-RD
cin
03T,
- ----
Q. ----- _..__.._--_-
AC3
ip J:
-v:
0
-RD
cin
03T,
- ----
Q. ----- _..__.._--_-
AC3
03T,
®
AC3
ip J:
-v:
<
0 Ld-
I