Loading...
PLN20120047 - 49 Staff report attachments 5-14.pdfCity of I Edmonds DEC 21 Land Use Application DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ARCHITF,CTUR.AL. DESIGN REVIEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT U�j ry CONDITIONAL USE. PERMIT FiLE # 46 q-I LONE I HOME OCCUPATION DlATE '- --X1" ( REC'D By 6d d�GG� FORMAL SUBDIVISION �j p SHORT SUBDIVISION 17J, 13 t-1 6 REC'EiPT # 1 LOT LiNE ADJUSTMENT HEARING DATE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMFNDMENT FIF STAFF PB ADB CC ! J STREET VACATION REZONE -' SHORELINE PERMIT VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION OTHER: ER: • PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL INFORAIA77ON CONTAINED WITFIIN THE APPLICATION IS A PUBLIC RECORD a PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LOCATION ®O % -��OL G(J EDMD/VDS� f f/�, 9�dar.. PROJECT NAME (IF APPLICABLE) cle-lr N PROPERTY OWNER 1//I 0150e iJL� PHONE # 'T�`9S 337 ST%51-'O ADDRESS SyB /OLN9 �G,G�2�� �j8Z08' E-MAILC 1/ 0 re"? a 4amiar74 %I e Z FAX # 'CAX ACCOUNT # O�.�ja eaw'®!03 SEC. os TwP. Z7/V RNG. _4C- DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED USE (ATTACH COVER LETTER AS NECESSARY) r iyi id;►igc ' Plicg)0ri ccr�e z ry—A'Sri DESCRIBE HOW THE PROJECT MEETS APPLICABLE CODES (ATTACH COVER LETTER AS NECESSARY) --01041:ca�iar � /rRrlanc�� tlewra1:jyp- a died APPLICANT IgMer`7' iA6W,9,r, Z?1A 1*Cr _PHONE# ,/S=�Z+rySy—tJ6G/ ADDRESS ZZP-,r F^l/LC/ZLT%4%5 E-MAIL �' 7/�;PM{.i @ Q��i � i/ �_� eLFAX # CONTACT PERSON/AGENT cE4!i C aX i7kye- PHONE# ADDRESS E-MAIL. FAX # The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on 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 part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees. By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that I am authorized to file this application on the behalf of the owner as listed below. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/SENT DATE. Propertypwner's Authori tion e1 1, _ y v; cI t o [So r . certify under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the following is a true and correct statement: i have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the Subject land use application, and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purposes of nspecnon and postin ttendant to this application. SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE Questions? Call (425) 771-0220. Attachm ant 5a Revised on82212 R- LundHveApplicalion PLN20120047, PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 RECEIVED C 21 2012 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ASSOCIATES, PS 12-17-2012 City of Edmonds Community Development 121 5th Ave.N, Edmonds, WA. 98020 Project Name: Olson Variance Narrative Criteria for an extension of the Main Floor 3'-0" into the North Side setback APPLICATION # 3 Plan Check No. BLD20120858 Dear Sir or Ms., Pursuant to our 12-17-2012 applications for 3 separate variances concerning the property at 15500 75th PI W., Edmonds, WA. 98026, Please find below the Narrative for each of the required Criteria for this third variance request. 1. Special Circumstances. Exn/ain how special circumstances related to the orooerty would deorive the owner of the rlahts and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity. What soec/al circumstances such as lot size, shaoe ,t0000raahv, stream location, wetland location or other unusual problem are causing an which would Require a variance? This property is located within the North Edmonds Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Zone. Slopes within the site are steep to moderately sloped. The majority of the lot is also subject to Shoreline Master Program and a 200' setback from the ordinary high water mark. It is the intent of this residential development to seek a minimum impact concerning the placement of the house on the site by staying within the minimum impact building area of Figure (3) 1. as much as possible. This development is predicated on our efforts to maintain a low impact design footprint well away from the slope. We have designed a narrow house, 25' wide, to stay within the minimum impact area between the front setback and the 200' shoreline setback. We have done this at the expense of reducing the desired first floor area the Owner desired. Although this is a privilege not necessarily permitted to other owners in therea, the Special Circumstance that makes this variance viable is the neighbor to the north. The neighbor to the north, where this variance is directed is the county park which also lies well upslope from this requested variance. The residence after the variance will remain 22' from the north property line. Attachment 5b 2221EVERETTAVENUE SUITE #201 - EVERETT,WA98201 PLN20120047, PLN20120048 Phone: (425) 259-0661 - Fax: (425) 252-6911 - www.arch-des & PLN20120049 Therefore, we feel it is the special circumstances of the slope and the lack of impact to the county park to the north that creates a variance that is unique to this property in this neighborhood as this is the last property on the end of the public accessed road. There is a gate at the end of 75th PI W that is closed to the public at night as delineated on the attached site plan. 2. Special Privilege. Explain why the proposal is not a grant of special privilege, is the proposal something that is allowed to other property owners in the vicinity, but would be disallowed on your property? if the variance is denied? This proposal is a modest request of 3' into the side setback to the north. Since no other properties in the neighborhood have this particular circumstance we do not feel this is a special privilege or know if this would necessarily be allowed on lots with a similar RS-20 zoning regulations. This request for variance is a reasonable attempt to mitigate further intrusion of the residence into the shoreline setback area to the west, which is allowed but not part of our minimum impact approach to the site planning for this proposed residence. 3. Comprehensive Plan Explain how the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designation is residential -resource. This proposed development meets the historic development patterns used to formulate the basis for the City of Edmonds first Comprehensive Plan of 1995. Since that time, the City has developed a comprehensive plan that included the addition of regulations governing development in critical areas such as and including this property within the Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area and the Shoreline Master Program. At this time, we have submitted an application for building permit which is currently under review after being deemed complete by the City of Edmonds and Landau and Associates. We are currently revising our plans and reports per the comments and corrections required by the City of Edmonds. We have completed and have submitted plans and reports that also address the Comprehensive Plan Goal for high quality residential development as follows: B.1.1. This is a custom home similar to other custom homes in the neighborhood. B.2. This custom home is compatible to existing buildings B.3. Since this development lies next to the county park and is mostly well below the the road level as well as fact that there is only one neighbor to the south and a portion of a neighbor view across the street. B.4. NA B.S. This proposed residential development and subsequent variance approvals maintains privcy, does not affect traffic other than that of 1 added SFR, maintains stable property values by not aversely affecting view, traffic or land use encroachments as is argued in the body of each variance. B.S. As part of our building department submittal, proper Geotechnical, Civil engineering ( drainage, erosion control) reports have been done and reviewed. We are currently working on a re -submittal addressing comments from the City of Edmonds. We do not feel any added noise or traffic beyond a normal SFR will be encountered other than normal construction activities once building begins. 2221 EVERETT AVENUE SUITE #201 - EVERETT, WA98201. Phone: (425) 259-0661 - Fax: (425) 252-6911 - www.arch-design net 8.6. As previous explained in paragraphs above, this development has at it's core concept to build within the minimum impact building area and with all required standards as set forth in the policy and review requirements of the City of Edmonds ESLHA procedures. Included in the building application, an arborist report and plan drawings have been completed pursuant to ECDC 18.45.050 B to properly address the requirements of the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan B.2. removal of trees and subsequent review of ECDC 23.40.220.C.7.b. 4. Zoning Ordinance Explain how the proposal is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance with the Zone District in which the property is located. Residential development is allowed on this as a Permitted Primary Use per ECDC 16.20.010. The property is zoned RS-20 and the proposed residence meets the development standards as per ECDC Table 16.20.030 except for the variances for which we are currently submitting. This application for variance is to allow a 3'-0" encroachment into the required side setback of 25'-0". The proposed north side setback would now 22'. We feel this a substantial setback at 22' and would not preclude the intent or implementation of other factors, primarily tree preservation and re -vegetation efforts See Figures (3) 3 & (3) 4. Under separate applications, we are also applying for 1. An elevated driveway and entry stairs be allowed within the front 25' setback. 2. A variance to allow a 3'-0" Increase of the height limit to El. 122.0' 5. Not Detrimental Explain how the proposal is not detrimental. Will the portion of your proposal for which you seek a variance cause a loss of property value, scenic view or use of the surrounding properties? W/ll The port/on of the project for which you seek a variance be physically injurious or harmful to any person on your property or surround/ng properties ? This proposed variance will cause no harm or be detrimental to either the people or property. As shown in Figures (3) 5 & (3) 6 the requested 3'-0" encroachment variance into the north setback is not detrimental to the adjacent neighbor, the county park. The setback would now be 22'-0" over twice the allowed setback to the residential neighbor to the south. Since this encroachment is well down slope from any scenic view corridor there is no detriment to the view. The granting of this variance will add to this property's value and to the overall value of the comparative properties in the neighborhood and would not be detrimental in that regard either. 6. Minimum Variance Explain how the proposed variance /s the min/mum needed to accommodate the proposed project, or why there is no alternative other than a variance in order to complete this project. This proposed modest variance to encroach 3'-0" into the side setback is the minimum required to provide overhead skylights into the sewing room for which this variance is sought. The purposeful placement of north and east light is to allow 2221 EVERETT AVENUE SUITE #201 - EVERETT, WA 98201 Phone: (425) 259-0661 - Fax: (425) 252-6911 - www.arch-design.net the non glaring light from above to lay over a work table when the western light must be shaded from glare. This encroachment will be cantilevered, that is to say, the floor will be built such that a foundation will not be required for this construction. There will no additional cut or grading required to help minimize this encroachment's impact on the nature soils surrounding beyond what was originally designed prior to this request for variance. It seems to this office the impact of this X-0" proposed encroachment is a minimum variance for one floor only. We did not seek to increase the upper floor area as well or extend even further into the setback but rather request a modest encroachment in an effort to recover a small amount for necessary floor area for the artful activities of the Owner that we removed from the plan to maintain as much setback from the slope as possible with the minimum impact. Respectfully submitted, James A. Thomas, Architect Architectural Design Associates, PS 2221 Everett Ave # 101, Everett , WA. 98201 0:425-259-0661 C:425-681-7731 2221 EVERETT AVENUE SUITE #201 - EVERETT, WA 98201 Phone: (425) 259-0661 - Fax: (425) 252-6911 - www.arch-design.net a. FIGURE 3 1 0`,. V1 I N Nil il; i, I J �v 410 N M IS A5 -71 A. 04, 11 Li i mul RECEIVED J DEC 21 2012 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES el s ra Attachment 5c PLN20120047, PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 Yid -3US 9DN3(31(3�� NOSIO RECEIVED ®c212M VELOPMENT SERVICE��§�3 g �4 HUH j E3 90, 7 eo, 7- Ila IiIj OV K 9 R29 0 g R . ...... ... ........ C, 'po 40 -- .... ....... cc NO j, R N Attachment 5d PLN20120047, PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 L7-- as (hJ) LfG-SOS (Oif) fISO-[[LN YR 7N.kO11 � :f i�J COLS-M (90t) 41S F09 )JtJJO ISOd N it-L� J OOt 119<-t8[ (09L) Pot Nf '% 8 Wfl Y(91 L(oi-rl-e mra a IrS :� wV S1J3lIHObY 3d'/3SO HYI ^ StlINXVId � SMOA3Atl(IS ^ SM33NI�N3 ILF :Je 'xra ONI 83,LVIOOSSV )8 N3SWHVH o A HOI Nan NI 3381 1 NVOUINDIS 90E96 'VM ,SONOW03 'M 3OV7d H19L 00691 a iq� =aa»oaga5ooroo �9 o°k '21 b}$�zoSmpamQ Mn s" z a a cq s ,aa n3EI § odor A(y ;f Spa$ aa1�a.tti tiSbh 5 A�?ax �la�r��'�"r3rr4 rrN� �x7a�r�aa<„srl�rry f ar. ,38r ik:Sjy AA�$z p4aaa 3 s s,}i�a5�8 � ��sas�pv � 3s ��` tYt4 k kC 59 4:. 5 v,E k i� C _ gg i 3.'41 .@�3a.:koz.,. Ava�a?��a��T?p.��'9�&4�,�e P i � d c J i!dill��z&Sl&aaRal4a9aaiiaRaQ3n4aiaARRgRiaAAARRzi49iiglE36 A Attachment 5e PLN20120047, PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 NVId NOUVOI11W 332i1 u.J) zczo-cw (mq 33w-utw of •us.,w. fOLL-M (402) 91S %69 IXJM JSod '15 3ro 3a r i Hn ONV N01171303i1-38 Q � cil-LI -/ Pof 3lP<-i9G (tr9t) KI �S rt bill I(L31 90Z96 'VM 'SQNOW03 - Cs7 SI3ZSY UVOSQNY7-S83NWd-sao..0,-s ,M.3 tw.oar aMs6vrl A 30V7d H1SL OOSS! Y„ ONI SSLd]OOSSd NRSTK2IdH pJS:. n vPis 3ON301538 NOSIO o x I �l (° q a t o w-� 1 HI �x m IN_ Y.n w �38_a --------------- IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIi111111111111111111In11111111111111111I1111n11111111111 u nwunmmu nmunn nmm�uummamnnnml nnunn 1-1 2� a,Wss's AMP `IsvYb � cEg=a7��a XN i�< mgWQ zoa�g�w<g db „ogm ;ipv, AaWa$"s7�g$igg8YaW3§yYiWz F3aa W d3gwW6age NW&gig,- glu Attachment 5f PLN20120047,PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 �+nur�u iunos � � M M (Tk 10 U OTC 4:11 CD LLJ C4 C/3 W C= a LLA JO to a Attachment 5g PLN20120047,PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 I I I I I I I i I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I W _U W �d C/) Au C'N W a 0 w 0 C6 got p I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i _ _ _ Attachment 5h -T PLN20120047, PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 Site Location: 15500 75`h Place West Tax Acct. Number: 00500900000103 Determination: Study Required Determination #: CRA20110001 Owner: George & Ginger Olson Applicant: James Thomas, Architect CRITICAL AREAS RECONNAISSANCE REPORT: STUDY REQUIRED During review and inspection of the subject site, it was found that the site contains and/or is adjacent to critical areas, including Geologically Hazardous Areas, pursuant to Chapters 23.40 and 23.80 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). The subject property is located west of 75'h Place West and just south of Meadowdale Beach County Park. The terrain surrounding the subject property generally slopes to the west. The subject site slopes down to the west from 75'11 PI W at approximate 46% to a more gently sloping area before a bluff with approximately 70% slopes drops down to the railroad right-of-way and Puget Sound. The subject property is also located within the north Edmonds Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area. The steepness of the slopes and location with the Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area qualifies the site as a possible landslide hazard. Soils on the property are identified as the Alderwood/Everett series with 25 to 75% slopes, which also classifies the site as a potential erosion hazard. This review applies to the entire subject parcel. Depending on the location and type of project proposed relative to the identified critical areas, certain studies and reports may be required. ALLOWED ACTIVITIES AND EXEMPT DEVELOPMENT 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. GENERAL CRITICAL AREAS 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 to submit the entire study with your specific development application. Please review the minimum report requirements for all types of Critical Areas that 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 opt* ns on how to complete a critical areas study, and there is 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. STUDY REQUIREMENT — EROSION HAZARD AREA It appears that this property contains or is adjacent to an Erosion Hazard Area. Erosion Hazard Areas include: Attachment 6 PLN20120047, PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 • Those areas with Alderwood and Everett series soils on slopes of 15 percent or greater, • Any area with slopes of 15 percent or greater and impermeable soils interbedded with granular soils and springs or ground water seepage. • Areas with significant visible evidence of ground water seepage, and which also include existing landslide deposits regardless of slope. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ASSOCIATED WITH EROSION HAZARD AREAS Development within an Erosion Hazard Area must meet additional criteria. 0 For erosion hazard areas with suitable slope stability, the only critical area study needed is an erosion and sediment control plan prepared in compliance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.30 ECDC as part of the construction documents. This option is at the director's discretion, pet - Edmonds Community Development Code section 20.80.050.G. ❑ 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. STUDY REQUIREMENT — LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREA It appears that this property contains or is adjacent to a Landslide Hazard Area. • A Landslide Hazard Area is any area with a slope of forty percent (40%) or steeper and with a vertical relief of ten (10) or more feet (except areas composed of consolidated bedrock). • Landslide Hazard Areas are further defined and illustrated in ECDC 23.80.020.13. • In addition to the general requirements for Critical Areas reports referenced above, specific Critical Area report requirements for Landslide Hazard Areas are provided in ECDC 23.80.050. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ASSOCIATED WITH 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. • 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 pet- 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 in 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. nen Lien, Associate Planner t January 6 2011 Name Date NOTE: Cited sections of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) can be found on the City of Edmonds website at www.ci.edmonds.wa.us. 2 ED`y�0 Critical Areas Map File Number: CRA20110001 15500 75th Place 10 20 40 60 80 Feet LANDAU LA ASSOCIATES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM RAEIGEOTEMM4 I E QLMRESV_ME5 TO: Leonard Yarberry, Building Official City of Edmonds Development Services Department, Building Division 651-11— (:�12, r,_. FROM: Chad T. McMullen P.E. and Dennis R. Stettler, P.E. DATE: November 19, 2012 RE: GEOTECHNICAL PEER REVIEW EARTH SUBSIDENCE AND LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREA - PRE2012 - 0032 OLSON SFR —15500 75Ta PLACE WEST EDMONDS, WASHINGTON This technical memorandum provides our geotechnical peer review for the permit submittal package that was submitted to the City of Edmonds (City) for the proposed referenced development within the Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area (ESLHA) of North Edmonds. The submittal consists of a two document packets —one stamped "Received August 23, 2012" and one stamped "Received October 1, 2012." The former packet was submitted for completeness review by the City; the latter packet contains a replacement set of architectural -structural drawings, an updated structural calculations packet, and an executed agreement with BNSF for stormwater tightline construction and discharge onto the railroad's right-of-way. For the purpose of this peer review, We reference the more recent architectural and structural documents. We previously performed a geotechnical completeness review (summarized in a technical memorandum to the City, dated August 30, 2012) of the August 23, 2012 submittal documents. The purpose of the current geotechnical peer review is to review portions of the submittal package and assess its compliance with City development and building permit requirements as contained in Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapters 19.10 and 23.80. This geotechnical peer review was accomplished in accordance with Task Order No. 12-03 of Landau Associates' On -Call Geotechnical Engineering Services Agreement with the City. We have received the following information forwarded by the City for review: August 23, 2012 Submittal Documents: • Architectural/Structural Plan Set (14 Sheets, including architectural and structural plans, elevations, and details) prepared by Architectural Design Associates, dated August 20, 2012. Includes geotechnical/landslide risk statements signed and sealed by geotechnical and structural engineers on Title Sheet T1.0. • Site Plan (Shee4P1.0) listed in sheet index of Architectural Plan Set (above) but not bound; encountered loose in submittal packet. Dated July 11, 2011. • Landscape Plan Set and Tree Hazard Evaluation packet, including Re -vegetation and Tree Mitigation Plan (drawing L1.0), Significant Tree Inventory and Tree Preservation Plait 130 2nd Avenue South ® Edmonds, WA 98020 • (425) 778-0907 . fax (425) 778-64( Attachment 7 PLN20120047, PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 (drawing L2.0). Harmsen & Associates. Plans dated August 13, 2012. Packet data sheets (16 total) dated August 4, 2012. • Civil Plan Set (6 Sheets, including TESC plan, SWPP plan, road and storm drainage plan and details, and sewer/water plan) prepared by J.C. McDonnell Engineering, PC. Issued August 10, 2012. • Storm Drainage Study for George Olson SFR. J.C. McDonnell & Associates. August 8, 2012 revision date. • Olson Property Geotechnical Hazard Assessment. Letter from J.C. McDonnell Engineering, PC to City of Edmonds Building Department deferring geotechnical risk statement to Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. (geotechnical risk statement is made and sealed by NGA on Title Sheet [T1.0] of Architectural Plan Set, above). Dated August 20, 2012. • Revised Geotechnical Engineering Report, 15500 75"' Place West, Edmonds, Washington, Prepared for Mr. George Olson. Report prepared by Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc., dated July 15, 2011. • Covenant of Notification and Indemnification/Hold Harmless. Assessor's Tax Parcel ID 00500900000103 signed by George M. Olson and Virginia A. Olson, dated August 17, 2012, • North Edmonds Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Areas Map (with property location noted and signed certification as to property location), by James Thomas, Project Architect, dated August 17, 2012. • Engineering Survey for George Olson, prepared by Metron and Associates, dated December, 2010. • Completed City of Edmonds Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet. Undated. • Gravity Calculations, #2011-26, George and Ginger Olson. Architectural Design Associates. Dated August 27, 2011. • Structural Calculation Packets by Mitchell Engineering, Inc., including soldier pile/lagging design calculations (packet date: March 10, 2011) and foundation, slab, shearwall, and other structural design calculations (packet date June 30, 2011). Signed and sealed. • Applicant/Owner liability and landslide risk acknowledgement signed by George M. Olson and Virginia A. Olson, dated August 17, 2012, with notarized attachment dated August 21, 2012. • Affidavit of Earth Subsidence Landslide Hazard Area Permit Posting. Dated and notarized August 21, 2012. October 23, 2012 Submittal Documents: • Resubmitted Architectural/Structural Plan Set (14 Sheets, including architectural and structural plans, elevations, and details) prepared by Architectural Design Associates, revised date September 26, 2012. Includes geotechnical/landslide risk statements signed and sealed (photocoR*s) by geotechnical and structural engineers on Title Sheet T1.0 • Resubmitted Gravity Calculation and Structural Calculation packets by Architectural Design Associates (ADA) and Mitchell Engineering, Inc., respectively. With ADA coversheet dated September 26, 2012. 11/19/2012 P:\074\171\FileRooinW\Pee Re iew_nn.dmc 2 LANDAU ASSOCIATES ® Executed Pipeline License between BNSF Railway Company and George and Virginia Olson. Jones Land LaSalle Brokerage. Cover letter dated August 22, 2012, with transmittal sheet by ADA, dated September 26, 2012. The documents submitted appear to meet the minimum required application submittals identified in Section 19.10.030 of the Development Code. The following sections provide our specific geotechnical peer review comments. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT The geotechnical report provides a reasonably comprehensive evaluation and discussion of site conditions and risks, and provides geotechnical recommendations for design. The report appears to adequately document existing site conditions based upon field reconnaissance and subsurface explorations, and acknowledges the occurrence of landsliding within the ELSHA and the risk potential for future landsliding at and in the vicinity of the subject parcel. However, the report contains the following language (page 6): This site and the overall site vicinity lies within an ancient landslide area. The site and vicinity have been relatively stable for a very long period of time, and development in the area has taken place in the fora: of single-family residences and roadways. Although the likelihood of the ancient slide to become active in the foreseeable future is very low, extreme environmental conditions coupled with inadequate human practices could re -activate the ancient landslide. Such external factors could include severe and elongated weather events and/or significant seismic activity. We are concerned that the above paragraph understates the risk posed by the site. The statement that "the site and vicinity have been relatively stable for a very long period of time .. ," ignores the recent landslide that has occurred on the site and the history of multiple landslides within the North Edmonds ESLHA that have occurred within the last 70+ years (some relatively close to this site). The above quotation appears to convey a reduced level of risk that is contrary to what historical experience within the ELSHA would suggest. We recommend that NGA revisit the landslide risk conditions at this site and also provide a clear statement of risk and their assessment of the stability of the site and whether it is their professional opinion that the site meets the criteria for "Stable" as defined in ECDC I9.I0.020.0.(irtcludng the estiruated probability of earth movement) as restated below: 11/192012 P:\074\171\ritcR...IRNPttmRe,icm tm.dce. LANDAU ASSOCIATES 3 "Stable" shall mean that the risk of damage to the proposed development, or to adjacent properties, from soil instability is minimal subject to the conditions set forth in the reports developed under the requirements of ECDC 19.10.030 and the proposed development will not increase the potential for soil movement. In the event that any site has an underlying risk of movement based upon deep-seated earth movement or large-scale earth failure which is not susceptible to correction by on -site improvements, such hazard shall not render a site proposed for single-family residences to be presumed unstable for the purpose of this provision if the geotechnical engineer of record and recommendation of any peer reviewer confirm the risk of probability of earth movement is 30 percent or less within a 25-year period. in order to meet the definition of "stable" the geotechnical report shall include identified hazards for the property and the mitigation measures proposed to reduce or correct the hazards along with measures taken to mitigate potential impacts from the remaining hazards, including all on - and off -site measures taken to correct or reduce the risk. These shall be fully disclosed to the applicant and future owners, heirs and assigns in the covenant required to be executed in accordance with provisions of this chapter, in which case the defined risk may be.approved as an acceptable condition. Landslide debris consisting of loose to medium dense colluvium is reported as extending up to about 15 ft below existing grades on the site. The footprint of the proposed structure is located in the uppermost third of the slide debris extents, and the current site layout appears to be similar to the layout contemplated at the time of the geotechnical report preparation. The proposed design would excavate a portion of the slide mass to create a level grade within the building footprint and would transmit structure loads (via deep foundations) to competent soil underlying the slide mass. These appear to be reasonable design strategies. Deep foundations consisting of about 25-ft long, 16 to 24-inch diameter drilled piers are recommended in the report; 25-ft long, 18-inch diameter augercast piles are indicated on the project drawings for support of building loads. Smaller, isolated column loads (fiorn exterior decks and stairways) are supported primarily by pin -pile groups. The lowest building floor consists of a structural slab supported by augercast piles connected by grade -beams. Recommendations for site and roof drainage include collection and conveyance to the base of the steep slope, along the BNSF right-of-way. 11119t2012 PA07411717ileRoomWPee Re i— hn.dm., I7 LANDAU ASSOCIATES CIVIL PLANS AND STORM DRAINAGE STUDY Inspection, maintenance, and regular reporting of TESC measures by the Geotechnical Engineer of Record are required [see the City ESLHA Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESL) Requirements]. The pre -construction meeting needs to include the Geotechnical Engineer of Record (see City ESLHA TESC Requirements). On Sheet Cl, subheading "Construction Sequence," the Geotechnical Engineer of Record is identified as Nelson Geotechnical Inc (NGA). However, in the subheading `Engineer's Notes," Cornerstone Geotechnical Inc. is identified as providing geotechnical engineering for the project. We reconnnend that the notes be revised appropriately. Alternatively, if a different geotechnical engineer is retained for the construction phase (i.e., other than NGA), the new geotechnical engineer must submit stateinents of agreement or disagreement [and recommended changes] to the project design, in accordance ivith 19.10.080(B). On Sheet Cl, the circled symbol "IT" is shown on the Site TESC & Grading Plan and on the TESC Legend, though "IT" is not defined (Interceptor Trench?) and its dimensions/extents are not apparent. A Temporary Interceptor Trench Section is included on this sheet. Please clarify the intent of these plan itents. On Sheet Cl, a stockpile is noted between the top of the steep slope and the residence footprint. From the geotechnical design report, pp. 11: Site preparation should also consist of stripping any organic topsoil and/or loose/soft soils in areas that will support foundations, slabs -on -grade, pavement, or structural fill. The stripped material should not be stockpiled in any area between the top of the slope and the residence footprint. The stockpile location does not satisfy the reconunendations of the geotechnical report. The location of stockpiling should be rnodifted to accommodate the geotechnical recommendations. A statement of adequacy of the proposed TESC and grading designs, as required by 19.10.040(C), is signed and sealed by NGA on the Architectural Plan Set, STRUCTURAL DESIGN Plan Sheet SP1.0 shows the location of a replacement wall for a failing wall near the northeast property line and structural 41culation sheets for a soldier pile and lagging wall are provided. However, a structural detail is not provided in the structural plan set that we reviewed. We reconanend that the plans include the location and structural details for the soldier pile retaining wall. 11/191201? P:\0?4V711PileRoomUiWeerRevienw hn.dax 5 LANDAU ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE DESIGN Harmsen & Associates conducted a tree inventory and condition survey for the project and prepared landscaping plans which appear to be in general accordance with ECDC 23.40. Reported conditions include numerous downhill -leaning trees with overweighted trunks due to ivy loads or poor growth habit. Twenty-one trees will be removed within the construction footprint of the residence; an additional eleven trees were identified as hazard trees and will be removed. The code specifies that trees removed within critical areas be replaced at a rate of two -to -one. On the Re -vegetation and Tree Mitigation Plan (Sheet L1.0), only 21 replacement trees are shown. One additional tree is necessary to mitigate removal of eleven hazard trees located outside of the construction footprint. Replacement tree species include vine maple, servicebeiTy, pacific dogwood, douglas fir, and excelsa cedar. Some of these species are identified by the Department of Ecology as well -suited for erosion control and slope stabilization; we must defer to the landscape architect's expertise concerning the suitability of the other selected species for these design functions. A drought -tolerant grass seed blend is specified for long-term erosion control around the developed portion of the parcel. Automatic sprinklers or other irrigation systems are not specified on the landscaping plans. REQUIRED STATEMENTS AND DECLARATIONS We reviewed the submittal package and confirmed that the statements and declarations from the design professional as required by the City for development within the ESLHA are included in the following documents: • Covenant of Notification and Indemnification/Hold Harmless. Assessor's Tax Parcel ID 00500900000103 signed by George M. Olson and Virginia A. Olson, dated August 17, 2012. • Structural engineer declaration stating awareness and understanding of landslide risks is made, signed, and sealed on the Architectural/Structural plan set by Mitchell Engineering. • Geotechnical hazard acknowledgement, mitigation, minimal risk statement, and declared review and approval of the project's structural and civil design elements, is made, signed, and sealed on the Architectural/Structural plan set by NGA. • A signed and stamped risk statement is not made by the project civil engineer, J.C. McDonnell Engineering. In the Olson Property Geotechnical Hazard Assessment letter to the City, J.C. McDonnell argues that such a risk statement would be outside his scope of expertise and is more appropriately made by the geotechnical engineer. J.C. McDonnell Engineering does state that the development of the civil and drainage plans has followed the recommendations of the Project Geotechnical Engineer and those plans have been reviewed by Nelson Geotechnical. In our opinion, this statement adequately addresses the required statement from the Civil Engineer as contained in ECDC 19.10.040.C. 11/19/2012 P;\074\171\FileRoom\R\PmRc imv_tm.do x LANDAU ASSOCIATES • Applicant/Owner liability and landslide risk acknowledgement signed by George M. Olson and Virginia A. Olson, dated August 17, 2012, with notarized attachment dated August 21, 2012. • Affidavit of Earth Subsidence Landslide Hazard Area Permit Posting. Dated and notarized August 21, 2012. In general, the statements and declarations have been appropriately addressed, although the City should consider whether the deferred statement of risk approach proposed by the civil engineer is acceptable. This technical memorandum has been prepared for use by the City of Edmonds in evaluating the adequacy of permit submittal documents related to the proposed Olson single family residence at 15500 75`h Place West. The focus of this review was the geotechnical aspects of the application. The purpose of the review was to assess the adequacy of the application documents for compliance with City requirements contained in ECDC 23.80 and ECDC 19.10 and conformance with conventionally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. This geotechnical peer review by Landau Associates does not lessen the requirements for the applicant's geotechnical consultant and other design professionals to prepare an appropriate design for the site conditions. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to the City. Please contact us if you have any questions or if we may be of further service. CTM/DRS/rgm I 11/19/2012 PA074\171\Fi1eRoom\R\PmRe iav_tm.dmx 7 LANDAU ASSOCIATES DEC12 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ASSOCIATES, PS 12-21-2012 City of Edmonds Community Development 121 5th Ave.N, Edmonds, WA. 98020 Project Name: Olson Variance COVER LETTER Plan Check No. BLD20120858 Dear Sir or Ms., This letter is written as a cover letter for the application(s) for variance and a response to ECDC 23.40.120 Mitigation Sequencing demonstrating how this current design progressed including a overview of our consultants efforts to mitigate the impacts imposed on this critical area. In addition, as described in each separate applications, we have taken a low impact approach to the site planning and the building placement on this most sensitive lot which is zoned for residential development as RS-20, the primary use on this property. We are applying for 3 separate variances, applications for each enclosed. Application # 1 . Entry Drive Structure and Stairs in the front setback. Application # 2 . Height limit increased by 3'-0" Application # 3 . 3'-0" 1-story floor area in the north side setback. Each of the applications explains the rationale for the sequencing and mitoigation in the criteria narratives for each requested action and should be considered an expanded explanation of our efforts To comply with ECDC 23.40.120 Geotechnical , Civil Engineering and a Landscape mitigation plan have be completed, submitted and reviewed. We are currently revising plans per those review comments and corrections by the City of Edmonds and their required peer review process. 1. A voiding the impact altogether by not taking certain action or parts of an action. Application # 1 This variance proposes an action that provides a lower impact than a code compliant curving driveway with significant cut and fill. A no variance attempt, as described in the variance criteria narrative, was taken first. The current design has less impact than not taking this variance action. Application # 2 This variance has no increased impact than the compliant roof height and Wtherefore essentially the same as taking no action. Application # 3 This variance provides a solution that has close to no action as the Floor is cantilevered requiring no cut or fill. 2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps, such as project redesign, relocation, or timing to avoid or reduce impacts. 2221 EVERETT AVENUE SUITE #201 • EVERETT,098201 Attachment 8 Phone: (425) 259-0661 - Fax: (425) 252-6911 - www.arch-de: PLN201 20047, PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 All applications: As described in the text of the Criteria narratives; A redesign was done already to establish a minimal building impact zone. Additionally, we removed all retaining walls and landscape walls over 2' to avoid excessive cut and fill under directions from the Geotechnical and Structural Engineers. We chose to elevate the driveway which also avoids unnecessary cut and fill. 3. Rectifying the impact, to wetlands, frequently flooded areas and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas by repairing, rehabilitating or restoring the affected environment to the historical conditions or the conditions existing at the initiation of the project. All applications: In an effort to rectify the impacts to the potential landslide hazard associated with this property we have initiated the following as part of our building permit application. : 1. Establishing a minimal impact zone for structure building activities. 2. Completing and revising a Geotechnical report completed with deep test borings for relative soils sampling. 3. Repairing, per the specifications of the Geotechnical Engineer, a Small slide area identified in the original soils report. This slide was caused by runoff from 75th PI. W onto the subject property. A catch basin was installed and a solid flexible 6" pipe attached to convey this storm water runoff down to the toe of the slope before further damage was incurred. 4. Completing and submitting to the City of Edmonds a Significant Tree Inventory and Tree Preservation Plan completed by Harmsen and Using a Landscape Architect and Certified Arborist. 4. Minimizing or eliminating the hazard by restoring or stabilizing the hazard area through Engineering or other methods. All applications : Although the hazard posed by the historic landslide activity in this area cannot be eliminated entirely, much effort has been employed to reduce this risk. We have taken the following steps to that end: 1. Moving the residence upslope as possible to increase the distance from the establish top of the steep slope. 2. Designing a concrete pier and grade beam foundation system with Deep piers ( 25') using a Structural Engineer -as directed by The Geotechnical Engineer of record and subsequent instructions of the City of Edmonds peer review comments. 3. Designing, using a Civil Engineer, a storm water detention and controlled release system to current DOE standards as approved by the City of Edmonds and their peer review specific to this Site. We have also obtained approval from BNSF railroad, after their review of our proposal for this storm water to released over and onto BNSF Right of Way to the west. 4. Designing, using a Civil Engineer, a Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and Grading Plan to prevent and control the impact during construction activities on this site. 5. Minimizing or eliminati the impactor hazard over time by preservation and maintenance operations over the life of the action. All applications: 1. Included in the Geotechnical report is a recommendation that Nelson Geotechnical Associates, the Geotech of record be retained To provide monitoring and Consultation throughout the review process as well as for monitoring and consultation during construction, particularly observation during pier excavations. The Owner has assured this office, Nelson Geotechnical Associates will continue to be retained for all services recommended in their 2221 EVERETT AVENUE SUITE #201 . EVERETT, WA 99201 Phone: (425) 259-0661 - Fax: (425) 252-6911 - www.arch-design.net report. 2. The Civil Engineer has included on his plans requirements directing the Geotechnical Engineer and Contractor to assure proper monitoring and inspection during construction activities related to grading, erosion control methods, responsibilities, liability and implementation of the approved methods for each item. 3. The Civil Engineer has included on his plans Construction Sequencing requirements. 4. A preservation and re -vegetation plan has been completed by Harmsen and Associates Landscape Architect and Certified Arborist to assure an approved method of preservation of the landscape integrity through restoration and replanting methods. 6. Compensation for the impact to wet/ands, frequently flooded areas and fish and wildlife conservation area by replacing, enhancing or providing substitute resources or environments. All applications: 1. A minimum impact zone was established to locate the proposed residence at the location that made the least impact on the fish and wildlife habitats by placing the residence as far away from the top of the steep slope and outside the 20W shoreline setback, even though we are not required to do so. It is our feeling this building placement amounts to a mitigating feature of this current design and variance requests. 2. A Re -vegetation and Mitigation Plan has been completed and submitted to the City of Edmonds to compensate for the change to the site created by the construction and the elimination of hazardous trees and the trees removed to allow for construction of this residence. 3. An water quality and storm water release system has been designed to a current Department of Ecology standards as regulated by the City of Edmonds, Respectfully submitted, J es A. Thomas, Architect itectural Design Associates, PS 2221 Everett Ave # 101, Everett , WA. 98201 0:425-259-0661 C425-681-7731 2221 EVERETT AVENUE SUITE #201 - EVERETT, WA 98201 Phone: (425) 259-0661 - Fax: (425) 252-6911 - www.arch-design.net 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 rnc. 1 Sg� January 17, 2013 James Thomas, Architect 2221 Everett Ave. #101 Everett, WA 98201 Subject: COMPLETE APPLICATION — OLSON VARIANCES AT 15500 75T" PLACE WEST (PLN20120047, PLN20120048 & PLN20120049) Dear Mr. Thomas: Thank you for submitting the required documentation and application fees for the above - referenced permits; the applications are complete according to ECDC 20.02.003. The City will.proceed with the requirement of issuing public notification of the project and selecting a hearing date. At this point, February 14, 2013 is available so I will tentatively schedule that date for the hearing. In about two weeks, I will issue a Notice of Application and Public Hearing which will, officially set the date.. I will then provide a copy of my staff report approximately one week before the hearing. If you have any questions, please contact me at (425) 771-0220. Otherwise, expect confirmation of the hearing date in about two weeks. �Sincerely, K' v Mike Clugston, AICP Associate Planner Cc: George and Ginger Olson 3528 102" d Place Everett, WA 98208 Attachment 9 PLN20120047, PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 Notice of Application and Public H earing NAME OF APPLICANT: James Thomas, Architect (representing George and Ginger Olson) DATE OF APPLICATION: December 21, 2012 DATE OF COMPLETENESS: January 17, 2013 DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: January 31, 2013 PROJECT LOCATION: 15500 75th Place West, Edmonds WA Tax Parcel Number 00500900000103 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: In association with a building permit to build a single family residence at the above ad- dress (BLD20120858), the Applicant is requesting three variances - a setback variance to reduce the regularly required 25-foot setback from the street property line to allow the construction of an entry drive and front steps (PLN20120047); a height vari- ance to allow the proposed house to extend 3 feet above the regularly required 25 foot height limit (PLN20120048); and a sec- ond setback variance to reduce the regularly required 25-foot side setback from the north property line to allow a 3-foot en- croachment of the first floor of the proposed -house (PLN20120049). The subject lot is currently vacant and is located within the North Edmonds Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area. The parcel is zoned RS-20, single-family residential, 20,000 square foot minimum lot area. REQUESTED PERMITS: Three variances (Type III-B decisions by the Hearing Examiner) OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: Building permit REQUIRED STUDIES: Geotechnical report (associated with building permit) EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS: Critical area checklist (CRA201 1000 1) PUBLIC COMMENTS DUE: February 14, 2013 Any person has the right to comment on this application during thepublic comment period, receive notice and participate in any hearings, and request a copy of the decision on the application. The City may accept public comments at any time prior to the closing of the record of an open record predecision hearing, if any, or, if no open record predecision hearing is provided, prior to the decision on the project permit. Only parties of record as defined in ECDC 20.07.003 have standing to initiate an administrative appeal. Information on this development application can be viewed or obtained at the City of Edmonds Planning Division between the City of Edmonds Development Services Department !Planning Division 121 Sth Avenue North Project Planner: Mike Clugston michael.clugston@edmondswa.gov 425.771.0220 -l�F EDt�O �aOlson Variances 15500 75th Place VV Zoning and Vicinty Map PLN20120047, PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 1 inch = 250 feet . t sN Attach this notarized declaration to the adjacent property owners list. On my oath, I certify that the names and addresses provided represent all properties located within 300 feet of the subject property. Signapdfe/bf Applicant or A15'plicant's Representative Subscribed and swornYobefore me this 2 t day of � �2em- 1 2-ot`Z nh. "9,. A�— to t Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at�� W Notary Public State of Wushingtou ANGILA T WATSON My COMMISSION EXPIRES June 05, 2016 Revised on 9130111 P2 - Adjacent Property Owners List Page 2 of 2 . .. �.. >? ^« « ±* BOX 252 D N S WA.fi*?+ L+S # b +S. WA.f802# . . .>� ..,. a.» +!: . «* w + 9 # ». « ± w802>.34#< ..� . KO NNE SSAN H LL«f+ L+ S + 6DS,W ± 98026 ©»±IS 7 KAREN UTr>r>+9+ 5605 TH PL D ONDS, WA 90826 CHEUNG SHORELINE, WA. 98133 »+»Gf Errs+»9f?K29G L+7+«+S «fi ...W<Y 2i««t:; 2+f*L+ w+=»r»«,:,»& 2$ S # S #S.WA. 98026-401 - 22*.f S:3«2f OC2O6 S»+9+d)SGC+. ©���-©�--� � ���� +f::*cf«yMANAGEMENT <2+<+2°'fL?E. PROPERTY 3000 OC EEL »f+<:**+* 2»LfE«©. WA.fi2+$ <2f2»x.' + 9I2*1 On the 31 st day of January, 2013, the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance and in any event where applicable on or near the subject property. I, Michael D. Clugston, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 31 st day of January, 2013, at Edmonds, Washington. Signed: FILE NO.: PLN20120047, 48 & 49 APPLICANT: - OLSON On the 31 st day of January 2013, the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed by the City to property owners within 300 feet of the property that is the subject of the above -referenced application. The names of which were provided by the applicant. I, Diane Cunningham, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing 'is true and correct this 31 st day of January, 2013 at Edmonds, Washington. Signed: .) {BFP747887.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH Account Name: City of Edmonds Affidavit Publication I S.S. The undersigned, being first duly swom on oath deposes and says that she is Principal Clerk of THE HERALD, a daily newspaper printed and published in the City of Everett, County of Snohomish, and State of Washington; that said newspaper is a newspaper of general circulation in said County and State; that said newspaper has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of Snohomish County and that the notice Notice of Application and Public Hearing James Thomas, Architect File No.: PLN20120047 a printed copy of which is hereunto attached, was published in said newspaper proper and not in supplement form, in the regular and entire edition of said paper on the following days and times, namely: January 31, 2013 and that said newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of said period. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of January, 2013 Notary Public in and for the State of `County. Account Number: 101416 31st NOTARY jJ! •.� �7-201 \Zop WAS Order Number: 0001808633 Thomas J. Degan 15520 75th Place West Edmonds, WA 98026 January 27, 2013_w City of Edmonds JAN 3 1 013 Planning Department �� RAJ s 121St 5th Avenue N DE1— Edmonds, WA 98020 Attention: Development Services Dear Sirs: I am writing in regard to a building permit applied for 15500 75th Place West. As a neighbor, I have three concerns. First there is a property line dispute at this time, as the survey by the homeowner encroaches on the property which has been adjoined for nearly twenty years and council has been obtained with regard to possibly proceedings for adverse discussion of the southern end of this parcel. Please be advised that the property lines for this permit are in legal dispute at this time. Secondly, I am not able to see what the plans are; however it has come to my attention that apparently a soldier wall, with regard to the west end of the property, has not been required. Our property is immediately south and a soldier wall was placed after a number of slides in the early to mid -nineties, from the bank area. We placed a soldier wall which has alleviated the slide problem, in the area of the soldier wall. However, the area remains unstable. The zillow .photograph would appear to show sliding on the lot in question. There have certainly been slides this winter along the road on the other side of the street going into Meadowdale Beach Park and the soils in the area are clay and quite prone to sliding. The Fong property two lots south of the 15500 property have attempted to be developed by Dr. and Mrs. Fong and that property was required to have a soldier wall prior to property development, because of sliding in this area as well. Apparently, property development has not occurred because the soldier wall has not been built. I would have concerns with regard to any type of major slide, of the property in question, causing loss of soils which might cause pulling soil from around out property, while it appears to been planned in the past, properties along this area including ours would be in need of a soldier wall to prevent slide of the unstable soils. This would certainly be appropriate for the 15500 property as well, prior to allowing development of the parcel. Lastly, since we have acquired the property, there has been a problem with run-off from 75th Place West, which has not been addressed by the city. Initially, when we moved in, there was plan for measurement of water run-off from the street. This consisted of plans for a catch basin next to the gate at the park to control water from 75th Place West. However, the elevation is some three feet higher than at the juncture of 15500 and 15520. In any event, completion of that project was never done. There has been a problem with run-off in this area ever Rince. This has been attempted to be brought to the city's attention on several occasions. There has been an increase in water with paving, which was done on 155`h Southwest, east of 75th Place West, between those two houses and the area that used to be gravel is now blacktop, increasing run-off. Somebody had placed a catch basin last year. It appears it was the new property owner. We had tried to trench the areas in the past and again it appears there may have been a slide down below. It think that a plan from the city for surface water containment and diversion needs to be accomplished prior to development, as this has been an ongoing issue for at least two decades. Attachment 10 PLN20120047, PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 In summary, prior to further proceedings there is a property boundary dispute which needs to be resolved. We feel there is significant risk of slide and a soldier wall, which we have raised and which was required for the properties south of us, is also an appropriate requirement prior to development of a home site. Lastly, management of surface water from 75`h Place West needs to be addressed, in terms of a surface water management plan for the area. I would be happy to discuss these issues with members of the planning board and look forward to notification to any relevant meetings, discussions, etc. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Home 425,742-0146 Work 425-774-2637 Cell 425-478-5260 Project Number: PLN20120047 PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 Applicant's Name: James Thomas Architect Property Location: 15500 75fh Place West. Date of Application: 12/21 /2012 Date Form Routed: 12/26/2012 Zoning: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-20) Project Description: One height and two setback variances fora proposed SFR (BLD20120858) *A!l:COMMENTS-MUST BESUBMITi'ED.:�VITN.[fV..75 DAYS.�E;TFiE.DATE_THIS.:FORMV V ..AS-::: RouT� . If you have any questions or need clarification on this project, please contact: Responsible Staff: Mike Clugston Ext. 1330 Name of Individual Submitting Comments: �tiJC, V1Y) - ✓+0 Title: C ft t Y1 torI, VA� 1 �' C� ' C rd I have reviewed this land use proposal El for my department and have concluded that IT WOULD NOT AFFECT MY DEPARTMENT, so I have no comments. My department may also review this project during the building permit process (if applicable) and reserves the right to provide additional comments at that time. Comments (please attach memo if additional space is needed): !have reviewed this land use proposal for my department and have concluded that IT WOULD AFFECT MY DEPARTMENT, so I have provided comments or conditions below or attached. The following conditions should be attached to this permit to ensure compliance with the requirements of this department (please attach memo if additional space is needed): Date Sign I o 0=11 ature: e/E-mail ! ( - oz o 9 0aVIOe- Kd Lhvf e VY�:� cr,wo Attachment 11 PLN20120047,PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 Project Number: PLN20120047 PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 Applicant's Name: James Thomas Architect Property Location: 15500 75th Place West Date of Application: 12/21 /2012 Date Form Routed: 12/2612012 Zoning: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-201 Project Description: One height and two setback variances for a proposed SFR (BLD20120858) *ALL COMMENTS MUST BE_SUBMITTED 1NlTH.IN 15 DAYS OF THE DATE THIS.FORM WAS ROUTED' "DUE BY 1 /i 1 /2013 If you have any questions or need clarification on this project, please contact: Responsible Staff: Mike Clugston Ext. 1330 r Name of Individual Submitting Comments: -- Title: e'A-6 � ❑ I have reviewed this land use proposal 1 have reviewed this land use proposal for my department and have for my department and have concluded that IT WOULD NOT AFFECT concluded that IT WOULD AFFECT MY MY DEPARTMENT, so I have no DEPARTME►VT, so I have provided comments. My department may also comments or conditions below or review this project during the building attached. permit process (if applicable) and reserves the right to provide additional comments at that time. Comments (please attach memo if additional space is needed): - �S e li SNOHOMI6H CO l� U The following conditions should be attached to this permit to ensure com�j requirements of this department (please attach memo if additional space is nee Wo CC)MD G'�L Date: i f I t Signature: Phone/E-mail: John J. Westfall Fire Marshaj jwestfallgal,edistri t1.or . 12425 Meridian Ave. Everett WA 98208 phone: 425-551-1200 fax: 425-551-1249 www.firedistrictl.org PW-Engineering_-._[] Fire Economic J ParksMaintenanc Rec:..LJ Buil Project Number: PLN20120047, PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 �+® Applicant's Name: James Thomas Architect Property Location: 15500 75th Place West Date of Application: 12/21 /2012 Date Form Routed: 12/26/2012 Zoning: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-20) Project Description: One height and two setback variances for a proposed SFR (BLD20120858) *.* ALL.COMMENTS MUST BE SUBMITTED WITHIN 15 DAYS'OF THE DATE THIS -,FORM WAS ROUTED' 'DUE B3 /i 1 /2013 If you have any questions or need clarification on this project, please contact: Responsible Staff: Mike Clugston Ext. 1330 Name of Individual Submitting Co Title: ❑ I have reviewed this land use proposal ❑ I have reviewed this land use proposal for my department and have for my department and have concluded that IT WOULD NOT AFFECT concluded that IT WOULD AFFECT MY MY DEPARTMENT, so I have no DEPARTMENT, so I have provided comments. My department may also comments or conditions below or review this project during the building attached. permit process (if applicable) and reserves the right to provide additional comments at that time. Comments (please attach me 7o if addi ional space is neZed): The following conditions should be attached to this permit to ensure compliance with the requirements of this department (please attach memo if additional space is needed): Date: I' — ' Signature:_ Phone/E-mail: Project Number: PLN20120047 PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 Applicant's Name: James Thomas Architect Property Location: 15500 75th Place West Date of Application: 12/21 /2012 Date Form Routed: 12/26/2012 Zoning: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-20) Project Description: One height and two setback variances for a proposed SFR (BLD20120858) ** ALL COMMENTS MUST BE SUBMITTED VITHIN 15 DAYS OF THE DATE THIS FORM WAS, ROUTED' � DUE BY 1111112013 If you have any questions or need clarification on this project, please contact: Responsible Staff: Mike Clugston Ext. 1330 Name of Individual Submitting Comments: &,47 Title: I have reviewed this land use proposal for my department and have concluded that IT WOULD NOT AFFECT MY DEPARTMENT, so I have no comments. My department may also review this project during the building permit process (if applicable) and reserves the right to provide additional comments at that time. ❑ I have reviewed this land use proposal for my department and have concluded that IT WOULD AFFECT MY DEPARTflAENT, so I have provided comments or conditions below or attached. Comments (please attach memo if additional space is needed): The following conditions should be attached to this permit to ensure compliance with the requirements of this department (please attach memo if additional space is needed): Date:—� Signature: Phone/E-mail:_ Project Number: PLN20120047 PLN20120048 & PLN20120049 Applicant's Name: James Thomas Architect Property Location: 15500 75th Place West Date of Application: 12/21 /2012 Date Form Routed: 12/26/2012 Zoning: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-20) Project Description: One height and two setback variances for a proposed SFR (BLD20120858) ** ALL 1�UST BE SUBMITTED WITHIN.15 DAYS OF THE.DATE. THIS .FORM WAS. ROUTED' '®UE 6Y 1 /11 /2013 If you have any questions or need clarification on this project, please contact: Responsible Staff: Mike Clugston Ext. 1330 Name of Individual Submitting Comments: l-iC Al P ULj Title: t J S X'4-M I Ai L`-- ❑ I have reviewed this land use proposal for my department and have concluded that IT WOULD NOT AFFECT MY DEPARTMENT, so I have no comments. My department may also review this project during the building I have reviewed this land use proposal for my department and have concluded that IT WOULD AFFECT MY DEPARTMENT, so I have provided comments or conditions below or attached. permit process (if applicable) and reserves the right to provide additional comments at that time. Comments (please attach memo if additional space is needed): The following conditions should be attached to this permit to ensure compliance with the requirements of this department (please attach memo if additional space is needed): Date: ff� Signature Gfe Phone/E-mail: 2 77I' � Z 9 131Y dz . _Me lle'- Pce4nr ��' �� 9�i �_,6V City of Edmonds Land Use Comments BUILDING DIVISION DATE IDecember 26, 2012 STAFF: - Chuck Miller, Plans Examiner RE: Project Address: 15500 75t" Place W Project: Olson height (1) and setback (2) variances PLN20120047, PLN20120048, PLN20120049 A review was done with the land use materials provided and we have the following comments having to do with the building permit and inspections. We have no land use comments. PLN20120047 — Variance for entry drive structure and stairs in front setback — This proposal is as was originally submitted for review by the Building Division under permit BLD2012-0858. Except for the response to comments made as part of the earlier review, no additional documentation is required. PLN20120048 — Variance for additional 3'-0" maximum height — In addition to the response to comments made as part of the earlier review, the Building Division requires a resubmittal of the proposed roof construction for proper review, construction, and inspection. PLN20120049 — Variance for 3'-0" cantilever into north side setback - In addition to the response to comments made as part of the earlier review, the Building Division requires a resubmittal of the proposed cantilevered floor construction for proper review, construction, and inspection. Chuck Miller City of Edmonds Plans Examiner chuck.miller@edmondswa.gov 425-771-0220 x 1314 I el_• X'T MWARGiN OF 5NSF Mt pjGN­QF- 0 AS BUILT) (O ER W , W/O— 9111E AT ECGE OF RNL IMPROVEMENTS zE 6i 0 z 6. 36 z % MX5 i N M19'53' W 264.E1 (M(Rl) 75TH PLACE WEST % ;p IT R >CWD DE S. z 'z wALL Top, NQ­ -EDDE uNE. gh .5 � H w a 6 4-/6. �Le TREES �! .' :J. N - - M MONKS, DO < 2z­t3� , NO— OF UNE. Hs' iV­ '- '�!!M I 1 ­4 1 M;HL . 5 9 ��1�64233"V' g z�m Pgohv'�4 HER .E9 3 F5 ITH H 0 E5 w ul, nAod < < <( -jo < C, pz C- o R �zl cl I < :f5F. so 3 U� 78 71 7.- 74 71 *03 C',Q�dTV� N�3HiLdON HCl':N,—NJ')F OD 'IT C) cs - c C5 E -0 ,kHdVaDOcIOJ, lOrl C "T Z -i NDI ja (riaigagi-Efla eq 0 a- 06 CL Ln CL < t"