The URL can be used to link to this page

S-12-21 Staff Report with Attachments.pdfProject: File Number: CITY OFEDMONDS 121 5th AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 ® (425) 771-0220 ® FAX (425) 771-0221 www,edmondswa.gov DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Ritter Short Plat PLN20120021 Date of Report: January 23, 2013 Reviewed By: .,.,. °ennifer Machuga, Associate Planner Owner: William Ritter Applicant: Carl Clapp DAVE EARLING MAYOR In ,°.,rprorcrfed AtigtAsl 11, 1890 Sister City - Hekinan, Japan Section Page I. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................2 A. Application........................................................................................................................................2 B. Decision on Subdivision....................................................................................................................2 II. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS...................................................................4 A. Compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance....................................................................................4 B. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan........................................................................................7 C. Compliance with the Zoning Code....................................................................................................9 D. Compliance with the Flood Plain Management Provisions...............................................................9 E. Environmental Assessment................................................................................................................9 F. Critical Areas Review......................................................................................................................10 G. Comments........................................................................................................................................11 III. APPEAL.................:................................................................:.........................................12 IV. LAPSE OF APPROVAL...................................................................................................12 V. NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR................................................................................12 VI. ATTACHMENTS..............................................................................................................12 VII. PARTIES OF RECORD....................................................................................................13 In ,°.,rprorcrfed AtigtAsl 11, 1890 Sister City - Hekinan, Japan William Ritter File No. PLN20120021 Page 2 of 13 The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 56,009 square foot lot addressed 8364 Olympic View Drive into three lots (Attachment 1). The site is located in a Single -Family Residential (RS -12) zone that allows lots with a minimum area of 12,000 square feet. See the Zoning and Vicinity Map for reference (Attachment 2). The proposed lot layout is shown on the preliminary subdivision map (Attachment 3) as well as the preliminary development plan (Attachment 4). The applicant has indicated plans to retain the existing residence and garage on Lot C. The existing residence will continue to be accessed via the existing shared access drive adjacent to the eastern side of the site. Lots A and B are proposed to be accessed directly off of Olympic View Drive via a shared vehicular access easement running through Lot A. The proposed short plat is very similar to a three -lot short plat on the same site that received preliminary approval in 2007 under File No. PLN200600044. The preliminary approval for the previous short plat was valid for five years and expired on March 14, 2012. One of the main differences between the previous short plat proposal and the current proposal is that under the current proposal, Lot B will gain access via a shared access easement across Lot A instead of gaining access via the existing access drive adjacent to the eastern side of the site. A. Application 1. Owner: William Ritter 2. Applicant: Carl Clapp 3, Site Location: 8364 Olympic View Drive 4. Request: To divide one lot with a total area of 56,009 square feet into three lots in a Single -Family Residential (RS -12) zone. 5. Review Process: Short plats are Type II permits pursuant to ECDC 20.01.003. Following a public comment period, the Director (or designee) makes an administrative decision. 6. Major Issues: a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 16.20.030, site development standards for the RS -12 zone. b. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Title 18, public works requirements. c. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 20.01, development permit review requirements. d. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 20.75, subdivision requirements. e. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapters 23.40 and 23.80, environmentally critical areas and geologically hazardous areas. f. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 23.90.040.C, native vegetation requirements. Note: All code sections referenced in this report can be viewed via the City's website, located at www.edmondswa.uov. B. Decision on Subdivision Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and Attachments submitted with the application and during the comment period, the following is the decision of the City of Edmonds Planning Division: The subdivision as proposed is APPROVED with the following conditions: 1. Follow the recommendations of the geotechnical report prepared for the subject property by Liu and Associates dated September 26, 2005 as well as the addendums and supplemental letters prepared by Liu and Associates, dated April 14, 2006, July 27, 2012, and November 26, 2012 (Attachments 7 and 17). Additionally, the recommendations of any subsequently approved geotechnical reports must also be followed. William Ritter File No. PLN20120021 Page 3 of 13 Any tree cutting on the site must be consistent with the requirements of ECDC 18.45 and the 30% native vegetation requirements of ECDC 23.90.040.C. A tree cutting plan shall be submitted and approved with the civil plans for removal of trees impacted by the subdivision improvements. Any tree cutting proposed on the site that is not a hazardous situation and/or not necessary as part of the subdivision improvements shall be reviewed at the time of building permit application review or through the appropriate land use permit application and review. All trees that are to be retained during the development process must be protected according to the performance standards found in ECDC 18.45.050.H. If during construction it is realized that certain trees that were planned to be retained will be damaged due to the construction activities, replacement at a one-to-one ratio will be required per ECDC 18.45.050.F. 3. Prior to recording, the applicant must complete the following requirements: a) Civil plans must be approved prior to recording. In completing the civil plans, you must address the following: (1) Complete the Engineering Division conditions listed "Required as a Condition of Subdivision" on Attachment 22. (2) The applicant must submit a plan that shows how the project complies with the 30% native vegetation requirement of ECDC 23.90.040.C. For further direction, see section II.F of this report. (3) Retaining walls located within minimum required setback areas shall not exceed three feet in height over original grade. b) Make the following revisions to the plat: (1) Indicate the locations of all new easements, and provide easement descriptions and maintenance provisions for all new easements. (2) Include a statement on the face of the plat stating the following: "The site is subject to the 30% native vegetation requirements of ECDC 23.90.040.C. All lots shall retain and/or establish native vegetation as detailed in the native vegetation plan approved by the City of Edmonds. This plan may be modified by the property owner(s) with approval by the Planning Division." (3) Indicate the gross and net areas of each lot on the final plat. The net areas of all lots shall be a minimum of 12,000 square feet. (4) If setbacks are to be included on the plat, confirm that setbacks are shown consistently with Section II.A.4 of this report and add the following statement to the face of the plat: "Setbacks shown are for reference only and vest no right." (5) Add to the face of the plat: "Conditions of approval must be met and can be found in the approval for the short subdivision located in File No. PLN20120021 in the City of Edmonds Planning Division." (6) Include on the plat all required information, including owner's certification, hold harmless agreement, and Planning Division and Engineering Division staff s approval blocks. c) Make sure all documents to be recorded meet the Snohomish County Auditor's requirements for recording. d) Submit an updated copy of the title report (short plat certificate) with the documents proposed to be recorded. The title report must be prepared within 30 days of submittal for final review. e) Submit two copies of the documents to be recorded for the Planning Division and Engineering Division's approval. Once approved, the documents must be recorded with the Snohomish County Auditor's office. 4. After recording the plat, the applicant must complete the following: a) Provide the City Planning Division with three copies of the recorded plat, with the recording number written on them. The City will not consider the subdivision to have been completed until this is done. b) Complete the Engineering Division conditions listed "Required as a Condition of Building Permit" on Attachment 22. William Ritter File No. PLN20120021 Page 4 of 13 A. Compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance 1. Introduction a. Setting: The subject property at 8364 Olympic View Drive is located in the Single -Family Residential (RS -12) zone (Attachment 2). The adjacent properties to the east and west and the immediately adjacent properties to the south are also located within the RS -12 zone. Further south are properties located within the RS -10 zone. All of the surrounding properties to the east, west, and south are developed with single-family residences. Snohomish County Park, which is located within the Public Use (P) zone, is located to the north of the subject site and across Olympic View Drive. b. Topography and Vegetation: Refer to the preliminary subdivision map (Attachment 3) and preliminary site development plan (Attachment 4) for depiction of the topography of the subject site and locations of existing trees. The site slopes downwards generally from south to north, while the portion of the site surrounding the existing residence is relatively level. A portion of the existing slope on/adjacent to the site is over 40% and is, therefore, considered a Landslide Hazard Area. Additional analysis of the Landslide Hazard Area is contained within Section II.F.1 of this report. Vegetation surrounding the existing residence consists of typical residential landscaping, including grass, shrubs, and trees. Vegetation on the northern approximate half of the site and along the southern property line is left in a natural state and consists of numerous large trees. Refer to Sections II.A.2.a and II.F.2 of this report for additional analysis of the vegetation on the site. C. Lot Lam: The proposed lot layout is shown on the preliminary subdivision map (Attachment 3). Lot A will be created on the northwestern approximate quarter of the site, Lot B will be created on the northeastern approximate quarter of the site, and Lot C will be created on the southern approximate half of the site. The existing residence and garage are proposed to be retained on Lot C. Lots A and B are proposed to be accessed directly off of Olympic View Drive via a shared access easement through Lot A, while Lot C is proposed to retain the current access route located adjacent to the eastern side of the property. The preliminary development plan is included for reference as Attachment 4. The current proposal for Lots A and B to utilize shared access through Lot A differs from the applicant's original request, which was for Lot B to be accessed from the east via the existing shared access drive that serves the existing residence and three neighboring homes. The original access proposal was altered to the current proposal for Lot B to share access with Lot A directly off of Olympic View Drive in response to review comments provided to the applicant on October 24, 2012 (Attachment 15). 2. Environmental Resources a. The subdivision chapter, ECDC 20.75.085, states that a proposed subdivision should be designed to minimize significant adverse impacts where environmental resources exist (such as trees, streams, ravines, or wildlife habitats). There are numerous existing trees located on the subject site, particularly on the northern approximate half of the site (throughout proposed Lots A and B) and near the southern property line. The existing trees on the site are considered to be environmental resources. These trees are depicted on the preliminary subdivision map (Attachment 3) as well as the preliminary development plan (Attachment 4). William Ritter File No. PLN20120021 Page 5 of 13 The trees located along the southern property line and those located within close proximity to the existing house will most likely be able to be retained during development of the site, particularly because the existing house is proposed to be retained and no major improvements related to the subdivision will be necessary on the southern approximate half of the site. Several of the existing trees located on proposed Lots A and B, however, will need to be removed for the future development of these lots. The City promotes the retention of as many trees as practicable and encourages the location of building areas with the goal of retaining as many of the trees as possible. Any trees retained must be protected during development in accordance with the performance standards in ECDC 18.45.050.H. A condition has been added to this decision limiting tree cutting at the time of the civil improvements only to those trees which will be impacted by the civil improvements and requiring the owner to wait until the time building permits are approved for the lots prior to cutting any trees on the site that are not hazardous and/or not directly impacted by the civil improvements unless the appropriate tree cutting permit is first obtained. In addition to the tree protection measures discussed above, ECDC 23.90.040.0 requires all subdividable properties that are zoned RS -12 and RS -20 to retain or create an area of native vegetation equal to 30% of the total area of the site. See Section II.17.2 of this report for further discussion on this topic. b. The site is not located in an identified flood plain nor within the North Edmonds Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area. C. The subject property contains a Landslide Hazard Area as defined by ECDC Chapters 23.40 and 23.80. No other hazardous conditions are known to exist at this site. Although development will occur within a portion of the steeper slope on Lot A, the proposed building plans for Lot A (Attachment 12) indicate that the residence is designed with staggered floor levels in order to take the existing topography into account without the need for excessive grading. Additionally, Lot B will take access via a shared access easement across Lot A. These design features will help to limit the amount of total potential grading during development of the site. House plans have not yet been developed for Lot B; however, a potential footprint is indicated on the preliminary development plan (Attachment 4). The preliminary development plan indicates proposed grading quantities of 444 cubic yards of cut and 211 cubic yards of fill Refer to Section II.F.1 of this report for additional review of the steep slopes on the site, which have been identified as Landslide Hazard Areas and are subject to the critical areas requirements of ECDC 23.40 and 23.80. d. The proposed development must be designed to meet current code and minimize stormwater impacts. All new impervious surfaces must be connected to an onsite storm system as required by the engineering requirements (Attachment 22). e. As with all single-family construction, the maximum height for a new house is 25 feet from average original grade, which serves to minimize the negative impact to existing views in the vicinity. Aside from the height limits, the Edmonds Community Development Code does not contain specific regulations regarding private view protection within single-family zones. 3. Lot and Street Layout a. This criterion requires staff to find that the proposed subdivision is consistent with the dimensional requirements of the zoning ordinance and that the lots would ultimately be buildable. Based on a review of the project and the analysis in this section, staff agrees that a three -lot short plat is a reasonable use of the property. William Ritter File No. PLN20120021 Page 6 of 13 b. Lot sizes and dimensions: Lot Area: Required Lot Area Proposed Gross sq. ft Proposed Nets . ft Lot A 12,000 13,618 12,128 Lot B 12,000 14,914 13,644 Lot C 12,000 27,476 26,467 Lot Width: The required lot width in the RS -12 zone is 80 feet. All three of the proposed lots meet this requirement. C. Safe walk provisions: The subject parcel is primarily served by three area schools: Seaview Elementary, Meadowdale Middle School, and Meadowdale High School. According to information that is made available on the Edmonds School District website (http://webquery.edmonds.wednet.edu/edulog/webquery/, accessed on October 23, 2012), bus service is not available to Seaview Elementary School since the school is within walking distance of the subject site, but nearby bus stops exist at the intersection of Olympic View Dr. and 85th Pl. W for service to Meadowdale Middle School and at the intersection of Olympic View Dr. and 86th Pl. W for service to Meadowdale High School (Attachment 18). The subject site is approximately 700 feet from the intersection of Olympic View Dr. and 85th Pl. W and approximately 1,000 feet from the intersection of Olympic View Dr. and 86`h Pl. W. There are existing sidewalks along the northern side of Olympic View Dr. between the subject site and both of these intersections. 4. Setbacks and Lot Coverage a. In order to approve a subdivision, the proposal must meet all requirements of the zoning ordinance, or a modification must be approved. Based on the development standards for the RS -12 zone, setbacks for the lots should be as follows: Lot A: Street Setback (25 feet): Side Setbacks (10 feet): Rear Setback (25 feet) Lot B: Side Setbacks (10 feet) Lot C: Side Setbacks (10 feet): From the north property line.* From the east and west property lines and from the southern boundary of the vehicular access easement running along the north property line.* From the south property line. From all property lines and from the western boundary of the access easement running along the east property line.* From all property lines and from the western boundary of the access easement running along the east property line.* *Note: Pursuant to ECDC 21.90.020, a setback is "the minimum distance that buildings/structures or uses must be set back from a lot line, excluding up to 30 inches of eaves." ECDC 21.55.040 defines a lot line as "any line enclosing the lot area." Lot area is defined in ECDC 21.55.020 as "the total horizontal area within the boundary lines of a lot. Lot area shall normally exclude any street rights-of-way and access easements..." As such, when a vehicular access easement projects onto a lot, setbacks must also be measured from the boundary of the access easement that projects onto the lot. For proposed Lot A, a 25 -foot street setback is required from the portion of the northern property line adjacent to the Olympic View Drive right-of-way. An additional street setback would not be taken from the southern boundary of the vehicular access easement running along the northern portion of Lot A because this easement does not meet the definition of William Ritter File No. PLN20120021 Page 7 of 13 street pursuant to ECDC 21.90.120, which is defined as "the public or private right-of-way or access easement which provides vehicle access to five or more lots." Therefore, the boundary of the access easement would qualify as a side lot line, which is defined by ECDC 21.90.040 as "any lot line that is not a street or rear lot line." As such, a 10 -foot side setback would be required from the southern boundary of this access easement. The 15 -foot wide access easement plus 10 -foot side setback from the southern boundary of the access easement overlaps with the 25 -foot street setback required from the northern property line of Lot A. Wherever these setbacks overlap, the minimum required setback on the northern portion of Lot A will be the more restrictive of a 25 -foot street setback from the northern property line and a 10 -foot side setback from the southern boundary of the access easement. For proposed Lots B and C, this means that the 10 -foot eastern side setbacks for Lots B and C will be measured from the westernmost boundary of the ingress/egress easement that projects onto these lots. b. Existing Structures / Encroachments: The existing residence and garage are proposed to be retained on Lot C. As indicated on the preliminary subdivision map (Attachment 3), the house and garage meet the minimum required setbacks from the proposed property lines; therefore, the house and garage may be retained in their current locations. The preliminary subdivision map indicates two existing sheds to be removed. Upon inspecting the subject site, staff found that these sheds have since been removed. Any new construction on any of the proposed lots must comply with the setbacks in effect at the time of development. C. Corner Lots: None of the proposed lots are considered corner lots. d. Flag or Interior Lot Determination: Lots B and C are considered flag lots. C. Lot Coverage of Existing Buildings on Proposed Lots: 1.) 35% maximum structural lot coverage is allowed in the RS -12 zone. 2.) According to Snohomish County Assessor's records, the existing house covers 2,388 square feet and the garage covers 660 square feet. Both existing sheds indicated on the preliminary plans have since been removed. This results in a lot coverage for Lot C of approximately 3,048 square feet, which is equivalent to 11.5% of the proposed net area for Lot C (26,467 square feet). This is well below the maximum allowed lot coverage of 35%. There are no existing structures on proposed Lots A and B, so both lots will have a zero percent lot coverage. Pursuant to ECDC 16.20.030, any future buildings or structures on either of the proposed lots may cover no more than 35% of the net area of each lot. 5. Dedications None required, per Engineering Division requirements (Attachment 22). 6. Improvements a. See Engineering Requirements (Attachment 22). 7. Flood Plain Management a. This project is not in a FEMA -designated flood plain. B. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies: The Comprehensive Plan has the following stated goals and policies for Residential Development that apply to this project. William Ritter File No. PLN20120021 Page 8 of 13 Residential Development B. Goal. High quality residential development which is appropriate to the diverse lifestyle of Edmonds residents should be maintained and promoted. The options available to the City to influence the quality of housing for all citizens should be approached realistically in balancing economic and aesthetic consideration, in accordance with the following policies: B.1. Encourage those building custom homes to design and construct homes with architectural lines which enable them to harmonize with the surroundings, adding to the community identity and desirability. B.3. Minimize encroachment on view of existing homes by new construction or additions to existing structures. B.4. Support retention and rehabilitation of older housing within Edmonds whenever it is economically feasible. B. 5. Protect residential areas from incompatible land uses through the careful control of other types of development and expansion based upon the following principles: B.5.d. Private property must be protected from adverse environmental impacts of development including noise, drainage, traffic, slides, etc. B.6. Require that new residential development be compatible with the natural constraints of slopes, soils, geology, vegetation and drainage. Soils and Topography B. Goal. Future development in areas of steep slope and potentially hazardous soil conditions should be based on site development which preserves the natural site characteristics in accordance with the following policies: B.1. Large lots or flexible subdivision procedures, such as PRD's, should be used in these areas to preserve the site and reduce impervious surfaces, cuts and fills. B.2. Streets and access ways should be designed to conform to the natural topography, reduce runoff and minimize grading of the hillside. C. Goal. Development on steep slopes or hazardous soil conditions should preserve the natural features of the site, in accordance with the following policies: C.1. Grading and Filling. C.1.a. Grading, filling, and tree cutting shall be restricted to building pads, driveways, access ways and other impervious surfaces. C.1.b. Grading shall not jeopardize the stability of any slope, or of an adjacent property. C.1.c. Only minimal amounts of cut and fill on hillsides exceeding 15% slope should be permitted so that the natural topography can be preserved. Fill shall not be used to create a yard on steeply sloped property. C.1.d. Fill and excavated dirt shall not be pushed down the slope. C.2. Building Construction. C.2.a. Buildings on slopes of 15% or greater shall be designed to cause minimum disruption to the natural topography. C.2.b. Retaining walls are discouraged on steep slopes. If they are used they should be small and should not support construction of improvements which do not conform to the topography. C.2.c. Water detention devices shall be used to maintain the velocity of runoff at predevelopment levels. C.3. Erosion Control. C.3.a. Temporary measures shall be taken to reduce erosion during construction. William Ritter File No. PLN20120021 Page 9 of 13 C.3.b. Natural vegetation should be preserved wherever possible to reduce erosion and stabilize slopes, particularly on the downhill property line. C.3.c. Slopes should be stabilized with deep rooted vegetation and mulch, or other materials to prevent erosion and siltation of drainage ways. Vegetation and Wildlife B. Goal. The city should ensure that its woodlands, marshes and other areas containing natural vegetation are preserved, in accordance with the following policies: B.2. The removal of trees should be minimized particularly when they are located on steep slopes or hazardous soils. Subdivision layouts, buildings and roads should be designed so that existing trees are preserved. B.3. Trees that are diseased, damaged, or unstable should be removed. B.4. Grading should be restricted to building pads and roads only. Vegetation outside these areas should be preserved. 2. Compliance with the Residential Development goals and policies: The proposal will retain the existing house that was constructed in 1967 (according to Snohomish County Assessor's records) and will allow for construction of two new residences. The overall proposal should not cause any adverse impacts and appears to be consistent with the residential development goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Compliance with the Soils and Topography goals and policies: The proposal minimizes grading by utilizing a shared access drive directly off of Olympic View Drive for Lots A and B and by retaining access to the existing residence on Lot C via the existing access drive. As shown in the preliminary floor plans (Attachment 12), the future residence on Lot A has been designed to take the existing topography into account by staggering the floors of the residence and building it into the hillside. The native vegetation requirements of ECDC 23.90.040.0 (discussed in Section II.F.2 of this report) will not only assist in providing native habitat on site, but will also assist in stabilizing the slopes on the property. 4. Compliance with the Vegetation and Wildlife goals and policies: In order for the proposal to be consistent with the Vegetation and Wildlife goals and policies, the applicant should retain as many trees as possible on the subject site, particularly those trees located outside of the proposed building and driveway footprints. ECDC Chapter 23.90.040.0 provides the actual requirement for native vegetation retention/establishment on the subject property, which is further discussed in Section II.F.2 of this report. Additionally, the applicant should limit grading to the building pads and driveways in order to further comply with the Vegetation and Wildlife goals and policies. C. Compliance with the Zoning Code The proposed subdivision complies with the provisions of the Zoning Code. See sections II.A.3 and ILA.4 of this document. D. Compliance with the Flood Plain Management Provisions 1. The proposed project is not located in a Flood Plain. E. Environmental Assessment 1. Is this site within a shoreline area (within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of the Puget Sound)? No. William Ritter File No. PLN20120021 Page 10 of 13 2. Is an Environmental Checklist required for this application? Not at this time. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(6), the approval of short plats is exempt from SEPA review, except upon lands covered by water. F. Critical Areas Review 1. Critical Areas Review Number: CRA19950033. Results of Critical Areas Review: During review and inspection of the subject site, it was found that the site contains critical areas, including Geologically Hazardous Areas (Landslide Hazard Area and Erosion Hazard Area), pursuant to ECDC 23.40 and 23.80. As indicated on the preliminary subdivision map and preliminary development plans (Attachments 3 and 4 respectively), a steep slope is located on the site, sloping downwards to the north to Olympic View Drive. This slope exceeds 40%, and is, therefore, considered a Landslide Hazard Area. The applicant submitted a geotechnical report prepared by Liu & Associates, Inc. dated September 26, 2005 and addendum dated April 14, 2006 as part of a substantially similar three -lot short plat application on the subject site, which was reviewed under File No. PLN200600044 (the preliminary approval issued under the previous application has since expired). Both of these reports are included as Attachment 7. In response to staff's July 11, 2012 and October 24, 2012 requests for additional information, the applicant submitted a letter by Liu & Associates, Inc. dated July 27, 2012 and an addendum by Liu & Associates, Inc. dated November 26, 2012 (Attachment 17). Together, all of the reports by Liu & Associates, Inc. address the applicable requirements of ECDC 23.40 and 23.80 related to Erosion and Landslide Hazard Areas, including the standards of ECDC 23.80.060 and 23.80.070 that are specific to development within a Landslide Hazard Area. The reports provide several recommendations for development of the site and conclude that the proposed subdivision is feasible as long as the recommendations of the reports are followed. A condition has been added to this approval requiring the applicant to follow the recommendations of the referenced reports by Liu & Associates, Inc. and any subsequent reports. Additional critical areas study may be required at the time of civil plan review and/or future building permit review to show further compliance with the requirements of ECDC 23.40 and 23.80. 2. ECDC 23.90 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas: ECDC 23.90.040.0 requires all subdividable properties in the RS -12 and RS -20 zones to retain or create an area of native vegetation equal to 30% of the total area of the lot. The goal of the 30% native vegetation requirement can be met through maintaining existing native vegetation, establishing native vegetation, or a combination of both. This is meant to provide additional protection for fish and wildlife habitat throughout Edmonds; however, the intent is not to set aside areas that cannot be used and enjoyed by the owner. The vegetation management plan could include a combination of retaining existing native trees and vegetation and/or new landscaping consisting of native plants. Any native species will be acceptable provided that a lawn may not count towards the 30% area. The plan must show where the 30% native vegetation area will be located on the site (it does not need to be provided in one contiguous location), specify the native species that will be retained and/or planted within the area, specify any nonnative vegetation that will be removed, and establish ongoing maintenance activities for the vegetation management area. Note that the plan need not preclude use of the property, such as part of a garden or other landscaped area, but that all vegetation within the 30% area must be of native varieties. The vegetation management plan must be approved by the Planning Division prior to final approval of the subdivision; however, this plan can be modified over time with subsequent approvals by the Planning Division. The applicant has indicated where the 30% native vegetation area could be provided for on the preliminary development plan (Attachment 4) and provided a preliminary vegetation management plan (Attachment 14). This plan, however, will be reviewed and approved as part of the civil review process in case any changes are necessary at that time due to required civil improvements. As a condition of this decision, the applicant must submit a vegetation management plan showing how the requirements of ECDC 23.90.040.0 will be met to be reviewed as part of the civil review. William Ritter File No. PLN20120021 Page 11 of 13 G. Comments 1. Departmental Comment: This project was reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Department, Public Works Department, Snohomish County Fire District 1, and the Engineering Division. The Parks and Recreation Department and Public Works Department both stated the proposed preliminary short plat does not affect their departments at this time (Attachments 19 and 20). The Public Works Department provided a few comments on the plans which are not applicable to preliminary short plat review, but are instead related to the Engineering Division's future civil plan review. The Engineering Division will consult with the Public Works Department at the time of civil review in order to ensure that any of the Public Work's Department's comments related to civil review are accounted for at that time. Snohomish County Fire District 1 stated that the proposal would not affect their department, but commented that street standards per ECDC 18.80.010 would apply (Attachment 21). The Engineering Requirements (Attachment 22) establish compliance standards pursuant to ECDC 18.80.010. The Engineering Division provided initial comments in the form of a memorandum dated June 5, 2012, which were included as part of staff's request for additional information dated July 11, 2012 (Attachment 8). The applicant submitted a response to staff's comments on September 6, 2012, which included cover letters to the Planning and Engineering Divisions (Attachment 9), revised preliminary plans, a letter from the land surveyor (Attachment 10), a letter from Mercado & Hartung, PLLC (Attachment 11), proposed house plans for Lot A (Attachment 12), a renewal of the Snohomish County Special Use Permit (Attachment 13), a preliminary vegetation management plan (Attachment 14), and a geotechnical letter dated July 27, 2012 (Attachment 17). Following review of this additional information provided by the applicant, the Planning and Engineering Divisions issued another request for additional information on October 24, 2012 (Attachment 15). In response, the applicant submitted additional information on January 17, 2013 including a cover letter (Attachment 16), revised preliminary subdivision map (Attachment 3), revised preliminary development plans (Attachment 4), and geotechnical report addendum dated November 26, 2012 (Attachment 17). As part of the applicant's January 17, 2013 response, the proposed access point for Lot B was changed from utilizing the existing access drive along the eastern side of the site to utilizing a shared access drive through Lot A. The applicant's January 17, 2013 resubmittal was not required to include additional information regarding the Special Use Easement issued by Snohomish County nor an analysis by the applicant's attorney regarding the easements adjacent to the eastern side of the site since the applicant is no longer proposing to make any changes to the existing access drive along the eastern side of the site. Upon reviewing the applicant's revised plans, the Engineering Division issued comments in the form of a memorandum and Engineering Requirements for the short plat (Attachment 22). 2. Public Comment: ECDC 20.03 provides the City's regulations for public notice of development applications. A "Notice of Application and Comment Period" dated June 19, 2012 with a comment period running through July 3, 2012 (Attachment 23) was posted at the subject site, Public Safety Complex, Development Services Department, and Library on June 19, 2012. The notice was published in the Herald Newspaper on June 19, 2012. This notice was also mailed to residents within 300 feet of the site on June 19, 2012 using a mailing list provided by the applicant (Attachment 24). Declarations of posting and mailing are provided as Attachments 25 and 26, and an affidavit of publication is included as Attachment 27. One public comment letter was received via email during review of the proposal and is included as Attachment 28. Eric Falk addressed his concerns related to access and commented that the applicant does not have the permission to utilize the ingress/egress easement adjacent to the eastern side of the site for access to the proposed lots. Staff Response: The preliminary subdivision map (Attachment 3) and preliminary site development plan (Attachment 4) indicate that access to proposed Lots A and B will be from the north directly off of Olympic View Drive via a shared access easement running through Lot A. Lot C, which contains the existing residence, will continue to be accessed via the ingress/egress William Ritter File No. PLN20120021 Page 12 of 13 easement located on/adjacent to the eastern side of the subject site. These access proposals will not alter the existing access to the existing house and will not add any additional residences to be accessed via the existing ingress/egress easement running on/adjacent to the eastern side of the site. III. APPEAL Pursuant to ECDC 20.07.004, a party of record may submit a written appeal of a Type II decision within 14 days after the date of issuance of the decision. The appeal would be heard at an open record public hearing before the Hearing Examiner according to the requirements of ECDC Chapter 20.06 and Section 20.07.004. Section 20.75. 100 states, "Approval of a preliminary plat or preliminary short plat shall expire and have no further validity at the end of five years, unless the applicant has acquired final plat or final short plat approval within the five-year period." V. NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR The property owner may, as a result of the decision rendered by the staff, request a change in the valuation of the property by the Snohomish County Assessor's Office. VI. ATTACHMENTS 1. Land Use Application 2. Zoning and Vicinity Map 3. Preliminary Short Plat Map, received January 17, 2013 4. Preliminary Site Development Plan, received January 17, 2013 5. Applicant's Cover Letter, received May 8, 2012 6. Snohomish County Parks and Recreation Special Use Permit #072704-0001 7. Geotechnical Report dated September 26, 2005 prepared by Liu & Associates, Inc. and Geotechnical Addendum dated April 14, 2006 8. Staff's Request for Additional Information, dated July 11, 2012 9. Applicant's Response Letters to Planning and Engineering Divisions, received September 6, 2012 10. Surveyor's Response Letter, received September 6, 2012 11. Letter from Attorney Christopher Mercado with Exhibits A through C, received September 6, 2012 12. Proposed House Plans for Lot A 13. Renewal of Snohomish County Special Use Permit #072704-0001 14. Preliminary Vegetation Management Plan prepared by Wetland Resources Inc., dated July 24, 2009 15. Staff s Request for Additional Information, dated October 24, 2012 16. Applicant's Response Letter, received January 17, 2013 17. Geotechnical Letter prepared by Liu & Associates, Inc., dated July 27, 2012 and Geotechnical Addendum No. 2 dated November 26, 2012 18. Edmonds School District Transportation Web Query 19. Parks & Recreation Department Comment Form 20. Public Works Department Comment Form 21. Snohomish County Fire District 1 Comment Form 22. Engineering Division Memorandum and Requirements 23. Notice of Application and Comment Period with Vicinity Map 24. Adjacent Property Owners List 25. Declaration of Posting 26. Declaration of Mailing 27. Affidavit of Publication 28. Comment Email from Eric Falk Planning Division Mr. William Ritter 8364 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98026 Mr. Eric Falk 8310 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98026 Engineering Division Mr. Carl Clapp 8415 —192nd St. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Mr. Erich Tietze 1714 NW 200`h Lane Shoreline, WA 98177 William Ritter File No. PLN20120021 Page 13 of 13 City of Edmonds Land Use Application RECEIVED MAY 0 0 2012 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ❑ ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW • ' • • ❑ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (7 y, ,J 11 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FILE # l l-P40�VC't}) ZONE — rJ ❑ HOME OCCUPATION DATE 0-- REC'D BY O r,,�A VN ❑FORMAL SUBDIVISION K SHORT SUBDIVISION FEE ` 13l ` RECEIPT # ❑ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT HEARING DATE ❑ PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ❑ OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT ❑ HE '>�STAFF ❑ PB ❑ ADB ❑ CC ❑ STREET VACATION ❑ REZONE ❑ SHORELINE PERMIT ❑ VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION ❑ OTHER: /� ( PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LOCATION 05 6 4 �: i,� lv �Jt 2 t,'q h d i "e PROJECT NAME (IF APPLICABLE) AA > * , + �} PROPERTY OWNER t I J I da r" t �' j2 gg�� PHONE # �(� ! 7 Z Z! 2 i ADDRESS kA tJ(v y� is it 2w t> 'Vl/p E-MAIL FAX # TAX ACCOUNT # Z �' /� c o() 161 b n L2 SEC.. TWP. --7 RNG. !- DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED USE (ATTACH COVER LETTER AS NECfESARY) c v L, cA 9- !J -e- I o4- r w -� 7'yle` C2 DESCRIBE HO THE PROJECT MEETS APPLICABLE CODES (A ACH COVER LETTER AS NECESSARY) 0^I& -y-nS b - C5. I Lt e GO 6 APPLICANT} L i 0- PHONE # ADDRESS SSE+ _t1l'Ode W 2 (n)0Z6 E-MAIL FAX # CONTACT PERSON/AGENT Cel F _ pGC PHONE #-2-� -;7111- ADDRESS ;7l7'ADDRESS %� ` r'/ S L d4 Az l &MAIL �j , G �, J C C C7�"i � ; f , �e 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 h b hal 2 owner as listed below. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT DATE Property Owner's Authorization I, 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 pur=of'c� n a stt"e t to this application. SIGNATURE OF OWNERZ DATE O Questions? Call (425) 771-0220. Revised on 9/14/10 B - Land Use Application Page I of I Zoning and Vicinity Map ` 0 87.5 175 350 File No. PLN20120021 Feet i„pa° ,iA,p:'<rc,I Cl11111! �5 IN HIP14441 NV -1d 1N3Wd013A30 311S U 10 x i �o d r N a e �� ►a R �� za j � � quo ��, `�HIS �� ■ �` � A�,, �, � �i�a '� A"--L.---A. A it 4��4 A ' �e 21 CO r N a e �� ►a R �� za j � � quo ��, `�HIS �� ■ �` � A�,, �, � �i�a '� A"--L.---A. A ERICH O. TIETZE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Engineers and Consultants 1714 NW 200`t' Lane Shoreline, WA 98177 (206) 542-2065 eota@clearwire.net RECEIVED City of Edmonds MAY 0 8 2012 April 27, 2012 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Subject: Short Plat Application for 3 -Lot Short Plat for Bill Fitter at 8364 Olympic View Drive (Previously submitted as City #200600044) Attached with this cover letter is an application for a 3 -lot short plat at 8364 Olympic View Drive. This project was previously submitted under City #200600044, but the application has expired. The project consists of subdividing an existing 56,009 SF lot into three parcels. An existing single family house, garage and drives will be kept and will become Lot C — 27,855 SF. Lot A will be 13,306 SF and Lot B will be 14,808 SF. The site is zoned R12. Lot C is relatively flat: while Lots A and B are steep, having slopes in excess of 30 percent. Except for the existing development on future Lot C, the site is forested with second growth trees. The site is located in an area that requires at least 30 percent of each lot to be kept in NGPA. This requirement will be met. Grading will be kept to a minimum to reduce the amount of grading and to save as many trees as possible. Access to Lots C and B will be by way of an existing easement access road that serves the site and several other existing homes. The access road crosses property currently owned by the Connie and Eric Falk. The existing access is permitted under county easement #910125 0053. The city will require this access road to be widened to 20 feet plus asphalt taper. To accomplish this, a portion of the widened road will cross Snohomish County Parks Department property (County Property Management). A permit for access across its property was obtained from the county as included with these application documents. The permit number is 072704-0001. The remainder of the widened road will be located on existing easement on the subject property. Access to Lot A will be from Olympic View Drive and will consist of a driveway approach from Olympic View Drive. Other frontage improvements on Olympic View Drive such as curb, gutter, and sidewalk, are not proposed since such improvements are not consistent with the city's sidewalk improvement plan. In addition, construction of a sidewalk would severely impact the native growth in the right-of-way and would also impact grading and existing trees on Lot A. The site has been classified as a Small Project Category 2 for drainage purposes. The existing development on the site was all constructed in 1967 as part of the construction of the house on proposed Lot C. The existing impervious area totals 12,765 SF of building, asphalt drive, gravel UIT areas and concrete walk. Since all of these areas were constructed prior to 1977, they are not subject to drainage mitigation. Any new construction on Lots A and B will be subject to drainage mitigation. Lot A is proposed for development of a single family house. Lot B is currently not proposed for development. Since drainage of a short plat must be mitigated as part of the short plat process, presumed impervious area coverage for Lot B estimated to be 2,506 SF of roof coverage and 1,422 SF of drive coverage. The impervious areas for Lot A were based on the proposed house and drive for the lot and consists of 1,984 SF of roof, 192 SF of patio and walks and 1,631 SF of drive. It is proposed that drainage on Lots A and B will be mitigated by conventional detention systems — one on each lot. Since the impervious drive area for both lots is less than 5,000 SF, no water quality control is required. If you should have any questions, please feel free to call. Very truly yours, ERICH O. TIETZE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. C.. Erich O. Tietze, PE President Jam+] 2$,2009 02:55P C C CCN: `""'UMUN i f RECEIVED MAY 0 0 2012 CONFORMED cuvv ��NO�9 S17 10 P IIOM11 ,90: SN COUViV1YamWRSNI�NGTONGS DEVELOPMENT SERVICE§NOH ISH COUNTY PARKS D RECREATION SPECIAL.. USE PERMIT coy, L PERMIT NUMBER' 072704 - 0001 Date: July 2 l , 2006 II. Permittee: William A. Ritter Address :' •8364 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98026 x• Day Phone: 425-578-7302 Cellular Phone: III. Purpose: To provide residential access to Tax Account No. 27041800101000 by permitting a 10' wide road crossing adjacent to the west edge of an existing private drive, in compliance with the City of Edmonds requirements, allowing ingress and egress over a portion of S W County Park. This permit assumes all proper and necessary conditions are met in respect to the public road connection. The obligation to require compliance remains with the permittee. iv- Promises Subject To This Permit Legal Description' Permitted area located on the attached Exhibit A, which is incorporated herein by reference. County Park Property Tax Parcel Number: Ptn. 27040700403500 ydyu Z. Section NE'/4 QTR Sec. 07 Twp. 27N Rge_ 04 EVM Situate County of Snohomish, State of Washington z V. Administrative Fee, $ Land Use Fee: $ 125.00 Other Fee: $ Total Permit Fee: $ 125.00 Vl. Permittee MUST notify Snohomish County in the event of a change of address at 1 E7 JAN2$,2009 02.5!)Y C C CON.Y'-"ul --L-LVV t.cAyX'- , Department of Barks and Recreation 5705 Puget Park Drive Snohomish, Washington 88296 Phone: {425) 366-6622 -jmm a!J*L*JL'I1h111• Snohomish County (the "County" hereinafter) hereby licenses Permittee as designated on page 1, paragraph 11 above to use the property described on page 1, paragraph IV above for the purposes set forth on page 1, paragraph III above. This permit is subject to the following terms and conditions: A. Duration. 1. This permit shall remain in effect as long as the property described on page 1, paragraph IV is owned by Snohomish County and remains as part of S W. County Park (Park) and as long as thy: permit is used in conformity with the purposes stated on page 1, paragraph III and these remain compatible with the primary purposes of the park, and as long as all fees continue to be paid and terms and conditions of this permit are met. 1n the event of a change in the conditions stated above, or if Permittee fails to keep and perform any of the terms and conditions of this permit, County shall have the right to terminate this permit at any time upon giving the Permittee thirty (30) days written notice of its intention to do so. Said notice shall be good if served upon Permittee or posted upon the premises or deposited post-paid in the United States Post Office, addressed to Permittee at Permittee's post office address above stated. No portion of any payments made hereunder will be refunded upon termination of this permit. 2. Permittee shall have the right to appeal such termination by filing a request for review with the Snohomish County Department of Parks and Recreation within ten (10) days of receipt of notice. The marks Department Director may refer the appeal to the Parks Advisory Board for a recommendation. The Parks Department Director shall issue a final determination within ninety (90) days of the receipt of the notice of appeal. B. Permit Fee. A Land Use t=ee, as well as other necessary charges as described on page 1, paragraph V, will be charged every five (5) years for continuance of permit privileges within the Park. The fee of $126.00 represents the initial land use fee for the first five year period for the uses permitted under this permit. C. Five Year Reassessment Period. Every five (5) years the permit shall be reexamined to determine the continuing compatibility of the permitted use with the policies and objectives of the Park. The five'year reassessment will M JAN 28, 2009 02:55P G C CONT 'RUCTION also be used to establish the ]_and Use Fee for continued use under the permit for the subsequent five year period. D. Hold Harmless. The Permittee agrees: 1. To hold harmless, indemnify and defend the County, its elected and appointed officers, officials, employees and agents from and against any loss or claim -for damages of any nature whatsoever arising out of the use permitted pursuant to this permit or out of the operations of the Permittee on or about the premises subject -to this permit, or resulting from the termination of this permit; PROVIDED, that the indemnification obligation undertaken by the Permittee shalt be inapplicable to the extent that such claims for damages arise from any willful or negligent act or omission of the County, its employees or agents and in the event of concurrent negligence, shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of the negligence of the Permittee; 2. That the County shall not be held liable for any claims for damage to Permitee's property, facilities, or appurtenances constructed or placed in the Park by Permiftee except to the extent such damage arises from the willful or negligent act or omission of the County, and 3. That Permittee specifically and expressly agrees that these indemnity provisions shall apply to -claims from which Permittee would otherwise be male to claim immunity under industrial insurance Title 51 RM and acknowledges that this provision was mutually negotiated by the parties_ r E. Insurance .Covera e. The Permittee agrees to obtain and maintain continuously for the term of this permit liability insurance. The minimum limit of such coverage shall be $250,000.00 each occurrence. - ruyG . The Permittee agrees to annually provide the County with proof of t insurance in a form acceptable to the County's Risk Manager. F, Assignment. Permittee may assign, or transfer this permit to another party or parties under the following conditions: 1. Such transfer or assignment shall be made only in conjunction with sale or transfer of the property to which this permit grants access, and may not be assigned or transferred separately for any purpose; and 2. Permittee shall promptly notify the County in the event Permittee sells or otherwise transfers his or her interest in the property to which this permit grants access; and JM 28, 2009 02 : !)bY C U curls '►ll.iuri 3. That the assignee shall be bound to all terms and -conditions of this permit upon assignment of same; and 4. Assignee shall provide proof of insurance per this permit to County within 5 days of assignment. G. Nonexclusive Permit. This license and permit shall not be deemed or construed to be an exclusive right. It does not prohibit the County from granting other permits or rights of like nature to other public or private entities, nor shall it prevent the County from using any of its roads, streets, and public places for any and all public use, or affect its jurisdiction over any part of them. H. Not a Property interest. Permittee agrees that he/she does not ,. and shall not claim at any time any interest or estate of any kind or extent whatsoever in the premises. by virtue of this permit or his or her occupancy or use hereunder. In authorizing this permit, County makes no representations, express or implied, concerning the County's rights in real property, or the Permittee's access rights to open, constructed county road systems, .1. Assessments. Permittee shall be required to pay any general or ' 4 special assessments incurred by the County which are directly attributable to or arising from any actions, occupancy, and usage authorized herein. J. Permit Conditions Must Conform to Law. Snohomish County may at any time change, amend, modify, amplify or terminate any of the conditions herein enumerated, so as to conform to any applicable local, state, or federal law or regulation pertaining to the protection of the environment, or the public health, safety and welfare, as presently exists or may hereinafter be enacted, adopted, or amended. Snohomish County may terminate this permit if Permittee fails to comply with any such changes. t K. Condition of Premises. After construction, installation, or removal of facilities or equipment, Permittee shall restore, at Permittee's sole expense, the promises to a condition which is equivalent in. .all respects to the condition they were in before starting work except as expressly stated herein. Permittee shall not disturb or damage the premises in the course of operating or maintaining a facility without prier written approval from the Department of Parks and Recreation of the County, L. Damage. In the event that any damage of any kind is caused by Permittee in the course of performing work authorized by this permit, Permittee will repair the damage at its expense. Repair work shall begin without delay and continue without interruption at a rate acceptable to the County until completed. 11 ruyy UAN U,ZUU! Ub:Obr t. U 4 -VV: --Iu4ttviv M. County Work. The county may at any time do, order, or have done any and all work considered necessary to restore to a safe condition any real or personal property left by Permittee on premises in a condition that appears dangerous to life or property and upon demand Permittee shall pay to the County all costs of such work, including materials and other expenses. N. Compliance with Terms and Conditions. Permittee agrees to comply with all terms and conditions of this permit. Permittee shall respect and protect all property, contracts, persons and attendant rights that might be affected by the work or use authorized herein. O. Removal. of Vegetation. Permittee will not remove from premises any standing, dead, down, or diseased trees or brush without first receiving specific written approval from the Department of Parks and Recreation of the County, unless such trees or brush pose an immediate hazard to persons or property. Non -emergency removal of vegetation may be approved after the Department of Parks and Recreation and Permittee have met on site, and tagged the vegetation to be retained and/or removed. The Department of Parks and Recreation may require replacement, at the Permitee's expense, of any vegetation removed by Permittee. P. Removal of Debris. Permittee, at Permittee's expense, will be responsible for the removal and disposal of all debris associated with the permitted activity as required by the Department of Parks and Recreation. Q. Removal Upon Revocation or Termination, Upon revocation or termination of this permit, Permittee shall remove at Permittee's expense all facilities placed on the premises by Permittee and shall restore the premises to a condition which is equivalent in all respects to the condition existing prior to installation of the facilities or to a condition which is satisfactory to the County. if Permittee has not accomplished removal and restoration at the end of a ninety- day inetyday period following the effective date of revocation or termination, the County may perform the work and charge all of the costs to Permittee, which costs shall be paid by Permittee upon demand. R. Change of Grade. When the county deems it advisable to change the alignment of grade of any real property or structure by grading, regrading, paving, improving, altering or repairing same, Permittee, upon written notice by the County, will at Permittee's sole cost and expense, raise, lower, move, change or reconstruct its facilities to conform with the plans of work contemplated or ordered by the County according to a time schedule contained in the written notice. S. Other Persons and Pro a Permittee agrees to obtain information from other operators of facilities on or about the premises regarding the location and current status of their installations before starting work. Private M property owners and other persons in proximity to the premises shall be notified when such persons or property is exposed to the possibility of injury or damage through performance of work on the facility authorized br this permit. personscanis ee shall make all advance arrangements necessary p or property form injury or damage. T. Other Reg ire ments. The granting of this permit dries not in any way relieve Permittee of any obligation under applicable law, including any obligation arising out of other County permit requirements, relating to performance of the work authorized by this permit, U. Access #o griokslRecords. The County may, at reasonable times, inspect the books and records of the Permittee relating to this permit. V. Gam Banco with Laws. The Permittee shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, rules, and regulations relating to its activities under this permit, including, but not limited to laws against discrimination. W. Conflicts ttween Attachment and Text. Should any conflicts 3 exist between any attached exhibit and the text of this pormit, the text shall prevail. X. Governin Laws and Sti uiation of Venue. This permit shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington and the parties stipulate that any lawsua regarding this contract must be brought in Snohomish C,ounty, t Washington. (The remainder of this page intentionally left blank) 2 OMAN AOVZUU7 Ut:Jur b ,Viva VV1.Lvil VII_ Permittee agrees to the terms and conditions contained herein, DATED this ` day of - - , 2006, SNOHOMISH COUNTY PERMITTEE ;; , �ai•y Weikel, director William Ritter 53 Parks and Recreation Approved as to form; Cor on STvely, Dep Prosecuting Attorney Review ,8C: f- iT approved i) other County Risk Management ' 4 XaT 7 Ulm 1J'0007 vi..��t v v v.. ��.....��..-• INGRESSIEGRESS EASEMENT FOR ACCESS PURPOSES ONI.X THE EAST 10 FEET OF THF: FOLLOWING DESCRIBED STRIP OF LAND; THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THF. SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN LYING SOUTFI OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE; AND LYING WEST OF TRE, FOLLOWING DESCRIBED STRIP OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED, RECORDING N0.8805030211, AS FOLLOWS; THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF '['HE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTH ONE: -QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7; THENCE NORTH 88°574T' EAST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION -� 7, A DISTANCE OF 278.27 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 88°57'47" EAST, 20.10 FEET; THENCE NORTH 04°4623" EAST, 48.78 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF OLYMPIC: VIEW DRIVE, BEING A POINT ON A NONTANGENT CURVE, AT WHICH POINT THE RADIAL CENTER BEARS NORTH 19050'26" WEST, DISTANT 223.60 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY, ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLLv OF ()5031119"1 AN ARC DISTANCE OF 21.55 FEET TO A POINT FROM WHICH THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING BEARS SOUTH 04°46'23" WEST; THENCE SOUTTi 04046'23" WEST, 42:79 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SITUATE IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. LAND USE PERMIT AREA CONTAINING 417 SQUARE FLET MORE -OR -LESS. JAN 15, ZUU! U1 :J lY G 1, uv)-- ucv'.11viv SW U, SW 114, SE I/4 SEC 7, T. 27N., R. 4F., W.U. SNOHHOA�ISI SH COUNTY WASH NGTON 1 0 TAX PARCEL N0, 27040700404200 t 1 r. �- r1 _�eql(34*8)r — L6 L4 A! � I � I LENGTH BEARING 0 (h CURVE TABLE CURVE LE7NGTN RADIUS DELTA C7 21.55 22360 C2 9.01 22J.60 2'18:12' LINE TABLE UNE LENGTH BEARING Ll 48.78 N0446 2.1 L2 42.79 1 504.46' "W C3 20.10 1 N 57'47'x' L4 40.61 1 S-04 -4 6 '23 V L51 70.05 NRA -4747t LS 1 1.49 1 N7T59' 8Z CURVE TABLE CURVE LE7NGTN RADIUS DELTA C7 21.55 22360 C2 9.01 22J.60 2'18:12' � IN I 1 I ,I y I I GRAPHIC QCAI,V I 0 20 40 80 I PACINCGEOMATXCSER PTCCES, )Nr- "' LAND SURVEYING A MAPPM, S> RVICES IN FEET QUALITY 5ERVICE-CR,EATIVE30LUTIoNS 608 1 ktCh - 40 !t. 6216TH STREE SW, STB_ 304 MOUNTLAKE TERRACE, WA 9x043 PHONE:(425) 779.5620 FAX -(425) 775-2649 IN WEB: www.PacGeolnceam CLIENT NAME: BILL RITTER LOCATION: EDMONDS, WA DESCRIPTION: EASEMENT EXHIBIT DRAWN BY: RWP SCALE: 1 "=40' DA'I'F,: 06-11-07 JOB NUMBER 05-117-01 C=HECKED BY: KDB SHEET INGRCSSAWRESS EASEMEW � IN I 1 I ,I y I I GRAPHIC QCAI,V I 0 20 40 80 I PACINCGEOMATXCSER PTCCES, )Nr- "' LAND SURVEYING A MAPPM, S> RVICES IN FEET QUALITY 5ERVICE-CR,EATIVE30LUTIoNS 608 1 ktCh - 40 !t. 6216TH STREE SW, STB_ 304 MOUNTLAKE TERRACE, WA 9x043 PHONE:(425) 779.5620 FAX -(425) 775-2649 IN WEB: www.PacGeolnceam CLIENT NAME: BILL RITTER LOCATION: EDMONDS, WA DESCRIPTION: EASEMENT EXHIBIT DRAWN BY: RWP SCALE: 1 "=40' DA'I'F,: 06-11-07 JOB NUMBER 05-117-01 C=HECKED BY: KDB SHEET Geotechnical Engineering Engineering Geology Earth Science September 26, 2005 Mr. Bill Ritter 8364 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98026 Dear Mr. Ritter: Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Study Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat 8364 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington L&A Job No. 5A112 INTRODUCTION We have completed a geotechnical engineering study for the subject plat site, located at the above address in Edmonds, Washington. The general location of the project site is shown on Plate 1 — Vicinity Map. We understand that the proposed development for the site is to plat it into three single-family residential building lots. The purpose of this study is to characterize the subsurface conditions of the site and provide geotechnical recommendations for grading, slope stabilization, erosion mitigation, surface and ground water drainage control, foundation design and construction, etc., for the proposed development. Presented in this report are our findings and recommendations. PROJECT DESCRIPTION For our use in this study, we were provided with an undated plat plan of the proposed development for the site. According to this plan, the proposed development for the site is to plat it into three single-family residential lots. The existing house on the new Southern Lot will remain, and a new residence will be constructed on each of the two remaining new lots (the Northeast and Northwest lots). The Northeast and Northwest Lots are on a moderate to steep 19213 Kenlake Place 80 Phone 483-9134 • 486-2746 i September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 2 hillside. Although design plans for the new residences to be constructed on these lots are not yet available, we anticipate the buildings will be wood -framed structures supported on concrete - walled basement and interior bearing walls, columns and footing foundations. The footprint excavation for these buildings will probably require cuts from a couple to 15 feet deep and possibly less significant fill. SCOPE OF SERVICES Our scope of services for this study comprises specifically the following: I Review the geologic and soil conditions at the site based on a published geologic map. 2. Explore the site for subsurface conditions with backhoe test pits to a firm bearing soil stratum or to the maximum depth (about 12 feet) capable by the backhoe used for excavating the test pits, whichever occurs first. 3. Perform necessary geotechnical analyses, and provide geotechnical recommendations for site grading, erosion abatement, slope stabilization, surface and ground water control, and foundation design and construction, based on subsurface conditions encountered in the test pits and results of our geotechnical analyses. 4. Prepare a written report to present our findings, conclusions, and recommendations. SITE CONDITIONS SURFACE CONDITIONS The site is an irregularly -shaped tract of land. It is bounded by Olympic View Drive and an undeveloped city park land to the north, and adjoined by residential developments to the south, east and west. The site is situated on the mid -slope of a broad, moderate to steep, northwesterly - declining hillside. The southern portion of the site where the new South Lot is located has been previously graded into a relatively level bench. The terrain within the new Northeast and September 26, 2005 .Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 3 Northwest Lots of the site generally slopes down northerly to northwesterly at about 15 to 83 percent grade. The steeper portions are mostly along the south sides of these two lots and the eastern half of the Northwest lot. The existing residence on the South Lot is accessed by a paved driveway along the east side of the site. The unpaved area around this existing residence is mostly landscaped with shrubs. The area of the Northeast and Northwest Lots is heavily wooded, dotted by tall, mature evergreen and deciduous trees and covered by dense underbrush. GEOLOGIC SETTING The Geologic Map of the Eastern Half and Part of the Western Half Quadrangles, Washington, by James P. Minard, published by U. S. Geological Survey in 1983, was referenced for the geologic and soil conditions of the lot. According to this publication, the surficial soil units at and in the vicinity of the lot are mapped as Vashon Till (Qvt) underlain by Advance Outwash (Qva)• > The geology of the Puget Sound Lowland has been modified by the advance and retreat of several glaciers in the past and subsequent deposits and erosion. The latest glacier advanced to the Puget Sound Lowland is referred to as the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation, which has occurred during the later stages of the Pleistocene Epoch and retreated from the region some 14,500 years ago. The Vashon till soil unit is a very dense mixture of unsorted clay, silt, sand, gravel, and scattered cobbles and boulders, often referred to as "hard pan". The Vashon till over the top two to four feet is normally weathered to a medium -dense state, and is moderately permeable and compressible. The underlying fresh till is very dense and practically impervious to stormwater §111:1 milhil''�11 September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 4 infiltration. The Vashon till soil unit, however, was not encountered by the test pits excavated on the site. The advance outwash soil unit underlying the Vashon till is composed of stratified sand and gravel with minor amounts of silt and clay, deposited by the meltwater of advancing glacial ice. Due to its generally granular composition, the advance outwash is of moderate permeability and generally drains well. The advance outwash is glacially overridden and is generally dense to very dense in its natural, undisturbed state, except the top 3 to 5 feet where exposed on slopes which may be eroded and weathered to a loose to medium -dense state. The advance outwash deposits can stand in steep cuts or natural slopes for extended period of time when undisturbed. Where exposed on slopes of poor vegetation cover and subjected to storm runoff, the advance outwash deposits can be gradually eroded and may slough to a flatter inclination. The advance outwash deposits in their native, undisturbed state can provide very good foundation support with little settlement expected for light to moderate residential structures. SOIL CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions of the subject site were explored on September 6, 2005, with six test pits. The test pits were excavated with a track -mounted backhoe to depths from 8.0 to 10.0 feet. The approximate locations of the test pits are shown on Plate 2 - Site and Exploration Location Plan. The test pits were located with either a tape measure or by visual reference to existing topographic features in the field and on the topographic survey map, and their locations should be considered only accurate to the measuring method used. A geotechnical engineer from our office was present during subsurface exploration, who examined the soil and geologic conditions encountered and completed the logs of test pits. Soil samples obtained from each soil unit in the test pits were visually classified in general September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A 112 Page 5 accordance with United Soil Classification System, a copy of which is presented on Plate 3. Detailed descriptions of soil units encountered during site exploration are presented in the test pit logs on Plates 4 through 6. The test pits revealed that the site is mantled by a layer of loose, organic topsoil, from 0.8 to 2.7 feet thick. The topsoil is underlain by a layer of weathered soils of light -brown, loose to medium -dense, silty fine sand with a trace of gravel, from 1.6 to 3.5 feet thick. Underlying this layer of weathered soils is a brown -gray to light -brown to light -gray advance outwash deposit of medium -dense, gravelly, clean to slightly silty, fine to medium sand with occasional cobble, from 1.8 to 3.2 feet thick. This medium -dense advance outwash deposit is underlain to the depths explored by a light -gray advance outwash deposit of dense, gravelly, fine to coarse sand. GROUNDWATER CONDITION Groundwater was not encountered in any of the test pits. The advance outwash deposits underlying the site are of moderately high permeability, and would allow stormwater to seep through. Stormwater infiltrating into the advance outwash deposits would perch and accumulate over an underlying impervious silt and clay layer at greater depth. We expect little impact on the proposed development by this deeper groundwater. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL Based on the soil conditions encountered in our subsurface explorations, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed development from the geotechnical engineering viewpoint, provided that the recommendations in this report are fully implemented and observed during construction. The topsoil, loose weathered soils and soils in the root zone should be completely stripped within the driveways, the building pads and where the subgrade soils are to support September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 6 structural or traffic load. The medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils are of fair to moderately high shear strength and can provide good foundation support to the driveways and the new buildings to constructed on the site. Conventional footing foundations placed on or into the underlying medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils may be used for supporting the new buildings to be constructed on the site. Structural fill, if required for site grading, should be constructed over the underlying medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils following the stripping of surficial unsuitable soils. GRADING SEASON Due to the sensitive nature of the steep slopes within the site, we recommend that grading and foundation construction work for the residence be carried out and completed in the dryer period from April 1 to October 30 of the year. The site should be stabilized with proper drainage and erosion control measures in place beyond this dry season grading period. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND REMEDIATION Landslide Hazards The subject site is underlain at shallow depth by medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils of fair to moderately -high shear strength. The advance outwash deposits are quite permeable, and the impervious silty soils normally underlying the advance outwash soil unit is not exposed within the site. Therefore, seepage of groundwater out of slopes from the interface of the advance outwash deposits and the underlying silty soil unit should not occur within the site. The competent advance outwash soils underlying the site and little potential of groundwater seepage within the site would make it unlikely for deep-seated landslide to occur within the site. September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 7 Erosion Hazard The surficial topsoil and loose weathered soils over the steeper portion of the site can be easily eroded when stripped of vegetation cover and overly saturated. Prolonged erosion can lead to soil sloughing and shallow, skin -type mudflows on the steeper portion of the site. To mitigate erosion potential, the vegetation cover outside of construction limits should not be disturbed. Concentrated stormwater should not be discharged onto the ground anywhere within the site. Spoil soils and yardwaste should not be disposed of within the site. Storm runoff over impervious surfaces, such as roofs and paved driveways, should be captured with underground drain line systems tied to roof downspouts and by catch basins installed in driveways, and should be tightlined to discharge collected water into a storm sewer or a suitable stormwater disposal facility. Unpaved, disturbed ground within the site should be re -vegetated as soon as possible to provide erosion protection. Once the drainage control measures for the roadway and houses are in place after the completion of the proposed development, the amount of surface runoff and near -surface groundwater flow will be reduced, which would further reduce soil erosion and enhance site stability. Seismic Hazard The Puget Sound region is in an active seismic zone. The lot is underlain by medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils of fair to moderately high shear strength. There is a lack of continuous, extensive, static groundwater table at shallow depth under the lot. Therefore the potential for seismic hazards, such as deep-seated landslides, liquefaction, lateral soil spreading, to occur on the site should be minimal. The proposed building, however, should be designed for seismic forces induced by strong earthquakes. Based on the soil conditions encountered by the test pits, it is our opinion that Seismic Use Group I and Site Class D should be used in the seismic design of the proposed residences in accordance with the 2003 international Building Code (IBC). L IIh1�:�.Y:Z�Z� September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 8 SITE PREPARATION AND GENERAL GRADING Site preparation for the proposed development should include clearing and grubbing within construction limits. Topsoil, loose weathered soils, and unsuitable soils in the root zone should be completely stripped within the driveways, the building pads of the proposed buildings and in other areas subject to traffic and structural loads. The exposed soils should be compacted to a non -yielding state with a vibratory compactor and proof -rolled with a piece of heavy earthwork equipment operated on the site. The on-site soils contain a high percentage of fines and are sensitive to moisture. A layer of clean quarry spalls should be placed over excavated areas and areas of frequent traffic, as required, to protect the subgrade soils from disturbance by construction traffic. Silt fences should be erected along the downslope boundaries of the site to prevent sediments being transported by storm runoff onto adjoining properties or the street. The bottom edge of the silt fence should be embedded in a trench and ballasted with crushed rock or gravel. EXCAVATION AND FILL SLOPES Under no circumstance should excavation slopes be steeper than the limits specified by local, state and federal safety regulations if workers have to perform construction work in excavated areas. Unsupported temporary cuts greater than 4 feet in height should be no steeper than 1- 1/4H:1V in the surficial topsoil and loose weathered soils, and no steeper than 1H:1V in the underlying medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils. Permanent cuts should be no steeper than 21/2H:1 V in the surficial topsoil and loose weathered soils, and no steeper than 2H:1 V in the underlying medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils. The soil units and the stability of cut slopes should be observed and verified by a geotechnical engineer during excavation. September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 9 Permanent fill embankments required to support structural or traffic loads should be constructed with compacted structural fill placed over proof -rolled, undisturbed, medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils after the unsuitable surficial soils are stripped. Permanent fill to be placed on slopes steeper than 20 percent grade should be retained structurally. Sloping ground exceeding 15 percent grade over which fill is to be placed should be benched with vertical steps no more than 4 feet high after stripping of unsuitable surficial soils. The slope of permanent fill embankments should be no steeper than 2H:1 V. Upon completion, the sloping face of permanent fill embankments should be thoroughly compacted to a non -yielding state with a hoe -pack. The above recommended cut and fill slopes are under the assumption that groundwater seepage will not be encountered during construction. If encountered, the construction work should be immediately halted and the slope stability re-evaluated. The slopes may have to be flattened and other measures taken to stabilize the slopes. Storm runoff should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of cut or fill slopes. Permanent cut slopes or fill embankments should be seeded and vegetated as soon as possible for erosion protection and long-term stability, and should be covered with clear plastic sheets, as required, to protect them from erosion by stormwater until the vegetation is fully established. STRUCTURAL FILL Structural fill is the fill that supports structural or traffic load. Structural fill should consist of clean soils free of organic and other deleterious substances and with particles not larger than four inches. Structural fill should have a moisture content within one percent of its optimum moisture content at the time of placement. The optimum moisture content is the water content in the soils that enable the soils to be compacted to the highest dry density for a given compaction effort. September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 10 The on-site advance outwash soils contain a high percentage of fines, and may be used as structural fill only under fair weather condition when their moisture content can be controlled to close to optimum moisture content. Imported material for structural fill should be clean, free - draining, granular soils containing no more than 5% by weight finer than the No. 200 sieve based on the fraction of the material passing No. 4 sieve, and should have individual particles not larger than four inches. Imported structural fill should be stockpiled and covered separately from the on-site soils. Structural fill should be placed in lifts no more than 10 inches thick in loose state, with each lift compacted to a minimum percentage of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D1557 (Modified Proctor Method) as follows: Application Within building pads Roadway/driveway subgrade Retaining wall backfill Utility trench backfill BUILDING SETBACK % of Maximum Dry Density 95% 95% for top 2 feet and 90% below 90% 95% for top 4 feet and 90% below The purpose of building setback from the top or toe or an overly steep portion of a slope is to establish a safe buffer such that if a slope failure should occur the stability of the structure can be maintained and damages to the structure minimized. To maintain stability of the buildings to be construction on the new Northeast and Northwest Lots, we recommend that the buildings be set back at least 20 feet from the crest or toe or any portion of 40% or steeper slopes. Reinforced concrete or soldier pile retaining walls may be used to regrade the ground and enhance stability September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5Ai 12 Page l I of 40% or steeper slopes. If retaining walls are used, the proposed building should be set back no less than 10 feet from the retaining walls. The buildings should be. also be set back sufficiently such that an imaginary plane drawing from the edge of the footing foundations to the toe of slopes 40% or steeper should be no steeper than. 3H:1 V. Also, the footing foundations within 30 feet of the toe or top or any portion of 40% or steeper slopes should be embedded at least 1.5 foot into the medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils. The footprint bearing soils should be verified by a geotechnical engineer after the excavation of the building footprints are completed. DEBRIS WALLS If retaining walls are not constructed to enhance the stability of the steep slopes uphill of the proposed new buildings, we recommend that the uphill -side basement walls of the buildings be extended at least 3 feet above their adjacent finish grade to serve as debris blocking walls in case a mudflow should occur on the uphill steep slope. The combined basement/debris walls should be designed in accordance with the recommendations in the BASEMENT AND RETAINING WALLS section of this report. BUILDING FOUNDATIONS Conventional footing foundations may be used for supporting the buildings to be constructed on the site. The footing foundations should be placed on or into the underlying, medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils, or on structural fill constructed over these undisturbed competent basal soils. Water should not be allowed to accumulate in excavated footing trenches. Disturbed soils in footing trenches should be completely removed down to firm native soils prior to pouring concrete for the footings. The sandy advance outwash soils can be easily disturbed by construction traffic. To protect the footing bearing soils, a 6 -inch -minimum layer of 2 -inch - minus compacted crushed rock should be placed over the bearing soils. The footing foundations may then be poured over the crushed rock base. September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 12 If the above recommendations are followed, our recommended design criteria for footing foundations are as follows: ® The allowable soil bearing pressure for footing foundations, including dead and live loads, should be no greater than 2,500 psf if supported on undisturbed medium -dense to dense native soils and no greater than 2,000 psf if supported on structural fill placed over firm undisturbed soils. The footing bearing soils should be verified on-site by a geotechnical engineer after the footing trenches are excavated and before the footings poured. ® The minimum depth to bottom of perimeter footings below adjacent final exterior grade should be no less than 18 inches. The minimum depth to bottom of the interior footings below top of floor slab should be no less than 12 inches. ® The minimum width should be no less than 16 inches for continuous footings, and no less than 24 inches for individual footings. A one-third increase in the above recommended allowable soil bearing pressure may be used when considering short-term, transitory, wind or seismic loads. For footing foundations designed and constructed per recommendations above, we estimate that the maximum total post - construction settlement of the buildings should be 3/4 inch or less and the differential settlement across building width should be 1/2 inch or less. Lateral loads on buildings can be resisted by the friction force between the foundations and the subgrade soils or the passive earth pressure acting on the below -grade portion of the foundations. For the latter, the foundations must be poured "neat" against undisturbed soils or backfilled with a clean, free -draining, compacted structural fill. We recommend that an equivalent fluid density (EFD) of 300 pcf (pounds per cubic foot) for the passive earth pressure be used for lateral resistance. The above passive pressure assumes that the backfill is level or inclines upward away September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 13 from the foundations for a horizontal distance at least twice the depth of the foundations below the final grade. A coefficient of friction of 0.60 between the foundations and the subgrade soils may be used. The above soil parameters are unfactored values, and a proper factor of safety should be used in calculating the resisting forces against lateral loads on the buildings. BASEMENT AND RETAINING WALLS Basement walls restrained horizontally at the top are considered unyielding and should be designed for a lateral soil pressure under the at -rest condition; while retaining walls free to move at the top should be designed for active lateral soil pressure. We recommend that a lateral soil pressure of 45 and 70 pcf EFD be used for the design of foundation walls with level/descending backslope and rising backslope, respectively; and 35 and 55 pcf EFD for retaining walls with level/descending backslope and rising backslope, respectively. To counter the active soil or at - rest pressure, a passive lateral soil pressure of 350 pcf EFD may be used, except that the passive pressure within the top 12 inches of the finish subgrade should be ignored. The above passive pressure assumes that the backfill is level or inclines upward away from the walls. The above lateral soil pressures are under the assumption that groundwater behind the walls is fully drained. To resist against sliding, the friction force between the footings and the subgrade soils may be calculated based on a coefficient of friction of 0.60. The above soil parameters are ultimate values, and proper factors of safety should be used in the design of the basement and retaining walls against sliding and overturning failures. Basement walls or retaining walls may be supported on footing foundations seated on or into the underlying very -dense fresh till or very - hard transitional beds soils, with an allowable soil bearing pressure not to exceed 3,000 psf. A vertical drainage blanket consisting of at least 12 -inch -thick free -draining pea gravel or washed gravel should be placed against foundation and retaining walls to prevent accumulation of groundwater behind and buildup of hydrostatic pressure against the walls. The remaining September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 14 backfill should consist of structural fill constructed per recommendations in the STRUCTURAL FILL section of this report. The top 12 inches of backfill should consist of compacted, clean, on- site soils. The backfill material for the foundation and retaining walls should be compacted with a hand -operated compactor. Heavy compaction equipment should not be allowed closer to the walls than a horizontal distance equal to the wall heights. A footing drain, as recommended in the DRAINAGE CONTROL section of this report, should also be provided for foundation and retaining walls. SLAB -ON -GRADE FLOORS Slab -on -grade floors, if used, should be placed on firm subgrade prepared as outlined in the SITE PREPARATION AND GENERAL EARTHWORK and the STRUCTURAL FILL sections of this report. Where moisture control is critical, the slab -on -grade floors should be placed on a capillary break which is in turn placed on the compacted subgrade. The capillary break should consist of a minimum four -inch -thick layer of clean, free -draining, 7/8 -inch crushed rock, containing no more than 5 percent by weight passing the No. 4 sieve. A vapor barrier, such as a 6 -mil plastic membrane, may be placed over the capillary break, as required, to keep moisture from migrating upwards. PAVED DRIVEWAYS Performance of paved driveways is critically related to the conditions of the underlying subgrade soils. We recommend that the subgrade soils within the driveways be treated and prepared as described in the SITE PREPARATION AND GENERAL EARTHWORK section of this report. Prior to placing base material, the subgrade soils should be compacted to a non -yielding state with a vibratory roller compactor and proof -rolled with a piece of heavy construction equipment, such as a fully -loaded dump truck. Any areas with excessive weaving or deflection should be over -excavated and re -compacted or replaced with a structural fill or crushed rock placed and September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 15 compacted in accordance with the recommendations provided in the STRUCTURAL FILL section of this report. We recommend that an 4 -inch -thick minimum, compacted, crushed rock base (CRB), consisting of 7/8 -inch -minus crushed rock, be used for the roadways. The crushed rock or subgrade base should be topped with 2 -inch asphalt treated base (ATB) topped by 1 -1/2 -inch -thick Class B asphalt concrete (AC). DRAINAGE CONTROL Building Footprint Excavation Groundwater is not expected within depth of excavation for the construction of the proposed buildings. If encountered, the bottom of building footprint excavation should be sloped and ditches excavated along the bases of the cut banks to direct runoff and groundwater into a sump pit from which water can be pumped into a nearby storm sewer. The inlet of the storm sewer should be covered by a filter sack to keep sediments from entering the storm sewer system. A layer of 2 -inch crushed rock should be placed over undisturbed subgrade soils supporting footings and on -grade slabs, as required, to protect the soils from disturbance by construction traffic. Surface Drainage Water should not be allowed to stand in any areas where footings, slabs, or pavement is to be constructed. Final site grades should allow storm runoff to flow away from the building. We recommend the finish ground be sloped at a gradient of 3 percent minimum for a distance of at least 10 feet away from the building, except in the areas to be paved. September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 16 Runoff over Impervious Surfaces Storm runoff over impervious surfaces, such as roofs and paved driveways, should be collected by underground drain line systems connected to downspouts and by catch basins installed in the driveways. Stormwater thus collected should be tightlined to discharge into a storm sewer or a suitable stormwater disposal facility. Sufficient numbers of cleanouts at strategic locations should be provided to the underground drain line systems to allow for periodical cleaning of the drain lines. Footing Drains A subdrain should be installed around the perimeter footings of the proposed houses and along the base of retaining walls. The subdrains should consist of a 4 -inch -minimum -diameter, perforated, rigid, drain pipe, laid a few inches below bottom of the building perimeter footings or retaining wall footings. The trenches and the drain lines should have a sufficient gradient to generate flow by gravity. The drain lines should be embedded in washed gravel completely wrapped in non -woven filter fabric to within about 12 inches of finish grade. The remaining trenches may be backfilled with clean on-site soils. Sufficient numbers of cleanouts at strategic locations should be provided to the footing drain lines to allow for their periodical cleaning and maintenance. Water collected by the footing drains should be tightlined, separately from the roof and surface stormwater drain systems, to discharge into a storm sewer. The site is underlain by medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils at shallow depth. These soils are of fair to moderately -high shear strength and have good resistance against deep-seated slope failures. The key to maintain stability of the site is to maintain stable temporary cut slopes and to have proper and adequate erosion and drainage control during and after construction. It is our opinion that if the recommendations in the report are fully implemented and observed during construction and after the completion of the development, the areas disturbed by construction September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 17 will remain stable and will not increase the potential for soil movement. In our opinion, the risk of damage to the proposed development and from the development to adjacent properties from soil instability should be minimal. LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared for the specific application to this project for the exclusive use by Mr. Bill Ritter, and his associates, representatives, consultants and contractors. We recommend that this report, in its entirety, be included in the project contract documents for the information of the prospective contractors for their estimating and bidding purposes. The conclusions and interpretations in this report, however, should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. The scope of this study does not include services related to construction safety precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in this report for design considerations. Our recommendations and conclusions are based on the geologic and soil conditions encountered in the test borings, and our experience and engineering judgment. The conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. The actual subsurface conditions of the site may vary from those encountered by the test pits. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until construction starts. If variations appear then, we should be retained to re-evaluate the recommendations of this report, and to verify or modify them in writing prior to proceeding further with the construction. September 26, 2005 Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 18 We are pleased to be of service to you on this project. Please feel free to call us if you have any questions regarding this report or need further consultation. }; 27583 E',(PMES 7/17/l-00'7 A Six plates attached Yours very truly, LIU & ASS^OCIATES, INC. J. S. (Julian) Liu, Ph.D., P.E. Consulting Geotechnical Engineer U & ASSOCIATES, ICo Geotechnical Engineering - — - — -- — -- Engineering Geology April 14, 2006 Nr. Bill Ritter 8364 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98026 Dear Mr. Ritter: Subject: addendum No. I to 9;26.%2005 Geotechnical Report On -Site Storinwater infiltration "Trenches Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat 8364 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington L&A Job No. SA 112 ?� Earth Science �r Six test pits were excavated on the sta�ject plat site. The test pits encountered 0.8 to 2.7 feet of loose organic topsoil underlain by a layer of weather: d soils of light -brown. loose to medium - dense, silty fine sand with a trace of gravel, from 1.6 to 3.5 feet thick. Underlying this layer of weathered soils are advance outwasl; sand deposits of' brown -gray to light -brown to light -gray medium -dense, gravelly, clean to slightly silty, fine to medium sand with occasional cobble, from 1.8 to 3.2 feel thick, and light -gray advance outwash deposit of dense, gravelly, fine to coarse sand. Groundwater was not encountered by any of the test pits excavated up to 10 feet deep. Ine advance 1-1twash deposit of clean, tine to coarse sand, with various arnownt of gravc:.l, underlying the site at depths !i•oin 3.2 to 6.0 feet below existing ground surface is of high permeability. The Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area of Washington. published.by in U. S. Department of Agriculture in cooperation with Washington State Department of Natural Resources and Washington State University Agriculture Research Center, was also referenced for the surficial soil unit at the subject site. According to this publication, the advance outwash sand deposit at the subject site is also classified as Everett Gravelly Sandy Loam with the Soil 19213 Kenlake Place NE - Kenmore, ngton .. Phone028 483-9134 - Fax (425) 486-2746 April 14, 2006 Addendum No. I to 9;26/2005 Geotechnical Report Proposed -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A 112 Page ? Conservation Services (SCS) Classification System. Table 14 of the above publication lists the permeability of this soil unit at a depth from 6 to 60 inches below grade to be from 6 to 20 ]ph (inches per hour). Our experience of this soil unit- in the neighborhood of the subject site indicates its in-situ infiltration rate to be in the range from 20 to 40 'ph. It is, therefore, feasible to use infiltration trenches to dispose stormwater into the ground on site. We recommend a design infiltration rate of 5.0 iph (including a factor of safety of at least 4.0) be used for the design of infiltration trenches. Infiltration trenches should be located on the downhill of the houses to be constructed on the lots. They should be setback at least 10 feet fi-oni the houses and 5 feet from property lines. Our recommendations For design and construction of the infiltration trenches are shown on Plate I attached hereto. The bottom of infiltration trenches should be excavated at least 6 inches into the underlying_ clean, light -brown to light -gray, advance outwash sand deposit. The soils at bottom of' infiltration trenches should be verified by a geotechnical engineer. The side walls of the trenches should be lined with a layer of non-Nvoven tilter fabric, and the trenches backfilled with clean washed gravel to within about 12 inches of the finished grade. A 4 -inch perforated PVC pipe through which stormwater is to be dispersed into the ,round should be set level in the gravel fill of each infiltration trench. The perforated PVC pipes should be as high as possible in the trenches to have maximurr► separation from the winter high groundwater table, but should have at least 18 inches of soil/gravel cover over the perforated pipes. The top of the gravel fill should also be covered with filter fabric. The remaining trenches may be backfilled with on-site clean soils. We are pleased to be of service to you on this project. Please feel free to call us if you have any questions regarding this report or need furtler consultation. April 14, 2006 Addendum No to 9/26/2005 Geotechnical Report Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A .loh No. 5A 1 I Page 3 One plate attached Yours very truly, LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC. I. S. (Julian) Liu, Ph.D., P.E. Consulting Geotechnical Engineer LII & ASSOCIATES, INC. +11vI •Niw ,t81 5a1-0VA Geotechnical Engineering - Engineering Geology - Earth Science 71 W 4' Q vj >- Z. 111 0 43 -Z -Z i- Z Q\.A _ • - �r _ o ;e Q e n one • � o °Oo 0 00 0 ° . _ .''"•J° . 0 moo• v �o lie z z ' .0 • ° � hIL 4 Io I .0 0-0 90 ro nQ,a+P� a ^a e "Qjo 0:09-. o o� o !t 0 rel ll 111 "11 it ti;u +11vI •Niw ,t81 5a1-0VA Geotechnical Engineering - Engineering Geology - Earth Science 71 W 4 z -w z v <,° ) z -J LL (1 0 117 Q 0 pW YPICAL SECTION - INFILTRATION TRENCHES BILL RITTER 3 -LOT SHORT PLAT 8364 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE EDMONDS, WASHINGTON JOB NO. 5A112 DATE 4/14/2006 PLATE 1 Q Z. 4 z -w z v <,° ) z -J LL (1 0 117 Q 0 pW YPICAL SECTION - INFILTRATION TRENCHES BILL RITTER 3 -LOT SHORT PLAT 8364 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE EDMONDS, WASHINGTON JOB NO. 5A112 DATE 4/14/2006 PLATE 1 Inc. 1 B91 July 11, 2012 121 5th AVENUE NORTH Y EDMONDS, WA 98020 ® (425) 771-0220 a FAX (425) 771-0221 www.edmondswa.gov DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Mr. Carl Cladpp 8415 —192II St. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 DAVE EARLING MAYOR SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR PROPOSED SHORT PLAT FILE NO. PLN20120021 Dear Mr. Clapp: Your land use application for a three -lot subdivision located at 8364 Olympic View Drive, File No. PLN20120021 became complete on June 5, 2012; however, it was determined that additional information/clarification is necessary. Please provide responses to the following items at your earliest convenience so that staff s review of the proposal can continue: 1. Refer to the enclosed memorandum from Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager, dated June 5, 2012. The items listed in Ms. McConnell's memo will need to be addressed before review by the Engineering Division can continue. 2. The legal description of the subject site as provided on the survey, site development plan, and within the title report references three "parcels"; however, two of these "parcels" appear to be access easements located on/adjacent to the eastern side of the subject site. Please explain why these easements are referred to as "parcels", and why the legal description gives the impression that these easements are located on property owned by Mr. Ritter in their entirety, while the survey map gives the impression that one of these easements is located on property owned by Mr. and Mrs. Falk and the other easement is only in part located on the subject site owned by Mr. Ritter. A letter was received during the public comment period for the proposed short plat indicating that permission has not been granted for the new lots to utilize the existing access easements. Access to Lot A is proposed to be directly from Olympic View Drive; however, access to Lot B is proposed to be via the existing access easements near the eastern side 'of the project site. As such, please submit sufficient evidence that proposed Lot B will have legal rights to utilize the existing access easements or that a new easement has been granted for the benefit of Lot B. 4. Due to the presence of slopes that are steep enough to. qualify as a Landslide Hazard Area on and adjacent to the subject site, a geotechnical report is required. Although a geotechnical report was provided as part of the application for the preliminary approval that recently expired for the subject site (File No. PLN20060044), one will need to be provided for the current application taking into account any changes in the development plans that have been made between the original. proposal and now. Additionally, the geotechnical report will need to be updated to ensure that all current code requirements are addressed. As such, please submit a geotechnical report prepared by a qualified geotechnical engineer addressing the current proposal's compliance with all applicable requirements of the critical areas code contained within Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapters 23.40 and 23.80. As part of addressing the critical areas code requirements, particular attention must be paid in the geotechnical report to ECDC Incorporated August 11, 1890 Sister City - Hekinan, Japan Section 23.80.070. As part of your response, please provide sufficient evidence as to how the design standards of ECDC 23.80.070.A.3 will be met through the proposal, or if an alternative design would be more compliant with these requirements. Design alternatives to consider include, but are not limited to, lot layout, vehicular access (i.e. potential shared access for Lots A and B), future building location, etc. The building envelope indicated on proposed Lot A based on applicable setback requirements is very narrow. Although the preliminary development plans indicate the footprint of a potential home on Lot A, this footprint is not in compliance with the 25 -foot street setback. As such, please provide evidence that a home can reasonably be constructed on proposed Lot A while complying with the applicable setback requirements. Additionally, in addressing this item, please include a review of how the proposed home locations on both Lots A and B take into account the existing topography and how the design of the subdivision and placement of the future homes meets the design standards of ECDC 23.80.070.A.3 discussed above. 6. The Special Use Permit issued by Snohomish County (AFN200607310183) states that the permit is to be reexamined every five years. The Special Use Permit is dated July 31, 2006, so there should have been a five year reexamination in July of 2011. Please submit the results from the County's reexamination of this permit. In looking at the design and access to proposed Lots A and B as discussed above, did you consider contacting Snohomish County regarding potentially purchasing the small triangle of property that they own adjacent to the northeast corner of the site in order to have more flexibility with access and . avoiding impact to the slopes? 7. Please have your surveyor make the following corrections to the preliminary short plat map as well as to the preliminary development plan (where applicable), and submit two large -format copies and one reduced ,copy (no larger than 11" by 17") of all revised sheets: a. The surveyor's notes state that the survey is based on the legal description from the bargain and sale deed (AFN 200305200351) and that no other title search has been conducted. Since the survey must accurately show all encumbrances on the property, please provide your surveyor with the current title report and request that your surveyor update the preliminary short plat plans as necessary to reflect all encumbrances on the property. b. Indicate all existing and proposed easements. c. One of the proposed legal descriptions includes several question marks in it. Verify that the legal descriptions as indicated on the preliminary plans are correct and make any necessary corrections to accurately reflect the existing and proposed legal descriptions. d. The preliminary plans include a summary of proposed lot areas; however, the areas listed within the. summary conflict with those stated in each lot. Revise all inconsistencies in the lot areas listed on the plans. e. The gross areas of the proposed lotsare indicated on the preliminary plans; however, net area is also required in order to determine if the proposed lots comply with the minimum lot size requirements applicable to the RS -12 zone. Provide net areas for each of the proposed lots. Net area is equivalent to the gross area excluding the area of any.vehicular access easements. f. Label all existing structures, including the existing garage and the objects located on the northern and eastern sides of the residence. Additionally, show the existing shed located near the western side of proposed Lot C on the survey and any other existing structures that are not already indicated on the preliminary plans. It must be shown that all existing structures and improvements comply with the . minimum required setbacks from the proposed property lines. g. Correct the location of the street setbacks indicated on Lots B and C to be 25 feet from the western boundary of the vehicular access easement. Page 2 of 3 h. The Special Use Permit does not authorize the placement of any utilities within the easement, which is intended for ingress and egress purposes only. As such, no utilities will be permitted within this easement. Correct the label on the preliminary plans to indicate that this easement is for ingress/egress purposes only. L The existing easement (AFN 1614380) makes reference to a Parcel A. It appears this may be an original parcel that has since been subdivided. Please confirm location of this easement by indicating the boundaries of the referenced Parcel A. This information could be provided on a separate sheet or in a separate detail in order to avoid confusion with the preliminary short plat map. 8. ECDC 23.90.040.0 requires retention and/or establishment of 30 percent of native vegetation on subdividable properties located within the RS -12 and RS -20 zones, which includes the requirement for submittal of a vegetation management plan. Please submit a plan to satisfy this requirement, including an indication of which portions of the site will be retained/established as native vegetation to account for the 30 percent area requirement and plans for how this area will be established and maintained in accordance with the requirements of ECDC 23.90.040.C.. This area is not required to be set aside as a Native Growth Protection Area (NGPA), so please change the label on your preliminary development plan if you do not intend for this area to be set aside as an NGPA. Additionally, measures must be taken to try to retain as many existing trees as possible located both within and outside of the proposed native vegetation area._ Please indicate those trees that would be impacted by the installation of the subdivision improvements and indicate how the trees to be retained will be protected during development in accordance with ECDC 18.45.050. It should be noted that any trees located within future building footprint areas that would not be impacted by the installation of the subdivision improvements would not be able to be removed until the time of building permit application review and approval for future structures on the site, unless the trees are found to be hazardous or if removal is found to be consistent with the requirements of ECDC 18.45.050. Please submit the above information as soon as possible, so that staff may continue processing your application. Please keep in "mind that a complete response to this information request must be received within 90 days or the application will lapse for lack of information (ECDC 20.02.003.D). Thus, your application will expire if the requested information is not received by October 9, 2012. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me at (425) 771-0220, extension 1224. I look forward to working with you on this project. Sincerely, Development Services Department Planning Division Jen Machuga Associate Planner Enclosure: Memorandum from Jeanie McConnell dated June 5, 2012 Cc: File No. PLN20120021 Mr. William Ritter 8364 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98026 Page 3 of 3 Date: To: From: Subject: June 5, 2012 Jen Machuga, Plann(r Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager PLN20120021, 3 lot Short Plat 8364 Olympic View Drive The comments provided below are based upon review of the preliminary plans & documents for the subject short plat. Additional information is requested from the applicant at this time I n order to continue review of the application and provide preliminary approval of the short plat. Please ask the applicant to revise and resubmit plans addressing each of the comments below. Please also note, after receiving preliminary short plat approval from the Planning Division, the applicant will be required to submit a complete set of civil engineering plans to the City Engineering Division for review and approval prior to recording. 1. A preliminary drainage proposal has been provided showing individual on-site detention systems with connection to the City storm system: Please provide invert elevations to the extent necessary to confirm.discharge to the City storm system is possible. 2. If the city storm main is to be extended within the city right-of-way and parallel to Olympic View Drive it shall be placed in the flow line and shall be 12" diameter pipe. Please revise plans to show this layout revise to show this portion of the system on private property. 3. Please revise plans to show the city watermain within Olympic View Drive and connection of the water services to this main. 4. Please confirm how many lots (currently and proposed) will be taking access off the private drive. Private drive shall be widened along county property (within easement area) and adjacent to the subject development asTollows: ® Where 5 or more homes take access the access road will need to be paved to 20 - feet in width. ® At the point where only 3-4 homes are accessing the drive then the pavement can be reduced to 16 -feet in width. A minimum 12 -feet of pavement width is required for anything less than that. Please revise plans as needed and clearly show number of homes taking access. Thank you. City of Edmonds i ERICH 0. rTIETZE AND ASSOCIATES Engineers and Consultants 1714 NW 200`' Lane Shoreline, WA 98177 (206) 542-2065 eota(d',,clearwire.net Jen Machuga, Planner August 22, 2012 City of Edmonds RECEIVED 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 SEP 0 6 2012 Subject: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR P E SERV1t;�S RT PLAT FOR BILL RITTER, FILE NO. PLN20120021 Dear Jen: We are responding to your request for additional information in your letter to Carl Clap dated July 11, 2012. 1. We have responded under separate cover to the Memo from Jeanie McConnell to you dated June 5, 2012. All issues in her memo have been addressed. 2. This item has been addressed by the surveyor Kerrel Bell of Pacific Geomatic Services. Please refer to his letter for clarification of this issue. Additional information to clarify the confusion has been added to his survey and the site development plan. 3. This issue has been addressed by Christopher J. Mercado, Attorney at Law in a letter to the city dated July 26, 2012 in which he discusses the legal access that the Ritter short plat has across these easements. A copy of his letter is attached. 4. This item is addressed in a, letter from Liu & Associates to Bill Ritter dated July 27, 2012. A copy of that letter is attached. 5. The footprint provided on the previous Site Development Plan is actually the edge of the roof of a proposed hose that has been designed for this lot. The building application will be submitted after Short Plat approval has been received. Copies of the proposed house elevations, roof plan and main and upper floor plan are attached to this letter to show that the proposed house will fit within the setback and Native Vegetation Areas, 6. This Special Use Permit was renewed with the County on 7/19/2011. A copy of the renewal is attached to this letter. 7. A copy of the current Title Report is attached to this letter. a. The surveyor has been provided with the report and has revised his preliminary short plat drawing accordingly. His revisions are submitted separately from this letter. b. All proposed and existing easements have been added to the survey drawing and the Site Development Plan. c. The legal descriptions have been changed on the survey drawing and the Site Development Plan. d. The inconsistencies have been correct on the have been corrected on the survey drawing and the Site Development Plan. e. Net areas for each lot have been calculated by subtracting the access easement area from the gross lot area for each lot. This information has been added to the Site Development Plan. f. The existing structures have all been added to the survey drawing and the Site Development,Plan to reflect actual conditions. The two sheds shown on the drawings will be removed. The shed on the south lot line is actually a gazebo. g. The 25 setback distance from the access easement has been corrected on the survey drawing. h. The Special Use Permit label on the survey drawing and the Site Development Plan has been corrected so that only access is permitted (no utilities). i. Parcel A is indeed an original parcel. Its location has been added to the survey drawing and the Site Development Plan. 8. Native Vegetation Areas to remain have been added to the Site Development Plan and will not be designated as Native Growth Protection Areas. The square footage of the native vegetation areas is shown for each lot and the percentage of the lot area is also shown. A note has been added to the plan that any trees located within future building footprint areas that are not impacted by the installation of short plat improvements are not permitted to be removed until the time of building permit application and approval. A Vegetation Management Plan was prepared for this project by Wetland Resources, Inc and is dated November 2, 2011 for revision #l. The plan addresses the requirements of ECDC23.90.00.C. When initially prepared, the project was planning on desi patron the Native Vegetation Areas g..w�u-b as NGPA. As noted above, these areas will NOT be noted as NGPA so reference in the Vegetation Management Plan to NGPA should be considered as Native Vegetation Areas. A copy of the report is attached to this letter. If you should have any questions, please feel free to call. Very truly yours, ERICH O. TIETZE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Erich O. Tietze, PE ERICH O. TIETZE AND ASSOCIATES Engineers and Consultants 1714 NW 200`' Lane Shoreline, WA 98177 (206) 542-2065 eotagclearwire net Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager August 22, 2012 City of Edmonds 1215 th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Subject: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR PROPOSED SHORT PLAT FOR BILL RITTER, FILE NO. PLN20120021 Dear Jeanie: We are responding to your request for additional information in your Memo to Jen Machuga dated June 5, 2012. 1. Invert elevations have been added to the Site Development Plan to show how the private system will connect to the city system. 2. Discharge from the private drainage system will now cross Olympic View Drive to the edge of pavement on the north side. A new catch basin will be installed and will connect to an existing catch basin located to the west with a new 12 -inch storm drain. 3. The city water main has been added and the location of private connection has been shown. 4. Additional callouts have been added to the drawing to indicate the extent of widening needed for the access road. There will be a total of 5 lots served by the access road when the proposed short plat is subdivided. There are currently four lots served by the road, including the Ritter site. When Lots B and C of the short plat take access from the access road, a total of five lots will be served. This will require widening to 20 feet. The road will be widened to 20 feet from Olympic View Drive to the entrance to the Falk property. At that point, only four lots will be served which will only require widening to 16 feet. The road will be widened to 16 feet from the Falk entrance to the entrance to Lot B of the shrt plat. At that point, only 3 lots will be served by the remainder of the access road. Service to 3 lots only requires a 12 -foot road. Since the existing road is currently 12 feet wide, no additional widening is required beyond the entrance to Lot B of the short plat. RECEIVED SEP 0 6 2017 DEVELOP ENT SERVICES COUNTER If you should have any questions, please feel free to call. Very truly yours, ERICH O. TIETZE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Erich O. Tietze, PE -141%, Pf.-,p ow� PGS, Inc. i Quality Service X Creative Solutions August 22, 2012 Re: City o, Edmonds — Bill Ritter Short Review Comments The following text is in response to the questions raised by City of Edmonds Development Services Department per their respective review of the initial submittal of the Preliminary Short Plat. Comment No. 2. Parcels B and C shown in Exhibit A of the title report are easement corridors as delineated in the vesting deed — Bargain and Sale Deed AFN 200305200351. First American Title Company called out the easements as parcels in their legal description because the vesting deed called them out as parcels. These two easements were created with instruments recorded under AFN 1614380 filed in May of 1963 (Parcel B in title report and Bargain and Sale Deed) and AFN 9101250053 filed in January 1991 (Parcel C in title report and Bargain and Sale Deed). Each easement was filed at the time to provide access and utility corridors to properties located on all sides of the easement corridors. Comment No. 7(i) Line work and text has been added to delineate the limits of Parcel A denoted in document filed under AFN 1614380. Sincerely, Pacific Geomatic Services, Inc., Kerrel Bell, P.L.S. SEP 0 6 2012 y x Pacific Geomatic Services, Inc. 6608 216'' St. SW, Suite 304, Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043 (425) 778-5620 9709 31d avenue NE, Suite 450 • :Seattle, Washington 98115 www. —onm d o -h a rtu n a. com July 26, 2012 City of Edmonds Development Services Department 1215' Ave N Edmonds, WA 98020 RF: File # PLN20120021 To Whom It May Concern, This law firm has been retained by William Ritter in the above mentioned matter. I am in receipt of your request for additional information for the proposed short plat. By way of background, I am in-house counsel practicing real estate law for Skyline properties, Inc. and a partner of Mercado & Hartung, PLLC, a law firm whose focus is primarily real estate. I am very well versed in easements, and I want to address your concerns issued in a memorandum and request for information to my client: Please submit sufficient evidence that proposed Lot 8 will have legal rights to utilize the existing access easements or that a new easement has been granted for the benefit of tot 8 Easement 91012500053 (Exhibit B) Please review the map marked Exhibit A confirming the location of Easement 91012500053. Further, please review Exhibit B to confirm the easement granting "ingress, egress and utilities, over a strip of land..." to my client. As a result, sufficient evidence exists that Lot B will have proper in and out access to Lot B. Easement AFN 1614380- Please confirm location of this easement by indicating the boundaries of the referenced Parcel A Easement AFN 1614380 (Exhibit C,1 Please review the map marked Exhibit A confirming the boundaries for Parcel A and location of Easement AFN 1614980, Moreover, please review Exhibit C for a detailed description of the boundaries and confirmation of the easement location. L` 9h•y: lni 1� I Also note, the easement grants ingress, egress and for installation and maintenance of utilities thereon,..." Thus, in and out access to Parcel A is also granted to my client with Easement AFN 1614380. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me directly. Thank you in advance. Sincerely, Christopherl Mercado Attorney at Law Page 2 of 2 WCUMp11'i` No ne rp �,,6ttfeTb, •• . MMS the vadersigw Sven ttelieren aro Rath ;truer. hudmd and wife, 8igve Eetleren and Lem w1exen, husband'aad wife, Jan H41aren, a aingle .. pe�rst I.aiX fietleren, a single person; hereinafter zefbrred to as "1Rta are the omloco of the MMM dw4riba9 Aggemm Tract, to wits �! • - 'that po=och Of the SOut$tWes'k Vad= of the Sout!imt quarter of ea southeast quarte" of Section 7, 2bwnsMp 27 Mtth, usage 4 East. Wi3lsrLta mridiant • � s7esatibed as follottss - .- Corcaencing at the south one quarter. Corner of said section 7. tttemce N 880 57" 47" V. aling t1m south LUM of said 004t4m 7, a distme of 278.19 feet to the TWO Point 'vi' Beginning f aontirwing N 800 571 47" E,.20.10 feet, ' M 040 464 '1310, 48.78 feet to a point- on the south tight ok say lige of OlmAa View ;"rive, being a point on a eontangenh curve, at Ubloh point the radial Center bears N 190 504 2014, AistanL 223.60 fast•1 %mMs westerwo along said curve to tile right, through at central angle of Oso 314 190, an aro d&tmwe of 21.55 €eat to a point: from which the True Point of Beginning bears 8 040.45' 23" vi 5 040 461 23" qtr 41.79 fseb to the TWO Point of Regituting; situate in Saobomish County, Nobington. 8#>F7 WtiBiM2 the uadersisaid 6tmlw A. tQfic UO we Rita wiklund, his wife, Robert A. t k and Sam&a L. Settaak, his wife, Demme A. P'xoland and Sarah F. -froland, his wife, C=tis n. Wth and 0010res H. WEb, his wife, m1a "Tice mUmens" axe the owners of the folloving desarthed benefited traots to sit: Ail. of the North 227. feet Of Northwest quartar of Northwest quarter of Northeast quarter of fttkn 19, 2uwnship 27 Mrth, Range 4 East NX., lying West• of the fol1a&9 described line: Beginning at a poittt on North line of said NorUmb quarber of Rortbmt Vi ter of Mctheaut guartetC, South 890 5151 Etat 290 feet from Northwest corner thereof; thence South 100 feet; thence South 260 Heat for log felt; theme South 140 261 39" East to South line of ihrth 221 feet of Said mhJLvisioat= E{C6PL' that Portion, If any, lying within the &evaily !lark Mmnam Road, RM eaaet nt rose, egrehs aad Utilities, t over a strip of land 20 feet in Width, the ranter Und of which to described as £ohms; aeglMing at a point on -North line a said Northaash quarter of 'NarOmeaft quarter int Mrtb(lazt cf-sub=, South 890 5V East 290 feet from North - waist Cosner •thereotj #tense Couth .100 feet; thowe South 20o S•;eut: 100 feat, thence south -loo 264 30" Bast to south line of North 221•feet of said Subdivision. SituA e* d in Snohwaish County, Hashingtan. ' No FXCISr TAX ty 03 L1 nT..In • lYY'acx.ia �li�t� - $bat Qoxiion of tIm VOrthwest garter of the Northeast quarter, of Section IN Tow„abig 27 North, itange 4 ;mast, W. M.p described as follow: Eegianing at the Hathnst corner of said Northeast quarter, Northeast qusrt€r; thence 9 00 11' 8.1 721.0 feat, along the StWt line of said itthwest quarter, irbrtheaat quarters 'thence M 850 $6, s, Wa11el to the V Brae of adA subiivisien, 120 feet to the trams s4int of be9imingi thence 8 iso no g, 230 feet; thwaae N mp s5' 8, 97.37 feet, to the canter -line of the easwMA. rcadj thMe N 430 B, 16.80 feet; the = 1;16o 04' nor S, .77 feat; thenen N 140 26' 36" P1, to a point wbich is ti go SS' $ Prom the true point of P.ueginniugj situate in Couhty of StnohaaiRia, nkat$ of • • Orashingtani . Together vith-att easement for ingress and egress WA ft the installation and arxintenaRCe of utilities as described in that =tetra document entitW De=UMtion of Zdaugent, MA.fIW in the Aaditor#s-Cffiae of Snohdmish- County, State of Nashingtan, wader Auditnts F0,' rding No, 3fii4480,.w4 sa3mm to tiro COV(Taft fn'AMW Declaration of i ssement. iRtAUMD T1finc>` M that portion of the Northwest Grauer of the Northeast Q2arter of section 18, TOW'shig 27 ftth, ;rause 4 East W, M., desacibed as £olloWs: Fegianing 221 beet South of the ttortin..est foxier Of said SWaBivigionj thence South 210 feet; thence Bust 13o f"tf thence North 214 feet; tbence neat 120 -E04E to point of baginningt TOMM With aur easement for ingxess end ogress and utilities over and opal a strip of lard 20 feet in width, the center line of wWcb is described as follows: Osginning at a glint on the North line o£ the Northwest quarter of the Nsrtheast cl=tec of Siation 10, Teamship 27 Nortta, mange 4 Past of the 14.M.1 200 feet: Masterly fram the NorU*est corner 0E said Northwest q=t= of the Northaask guactert thane South 100 feet? thane &oath 240 not 100 feet; thane South 200 East 2AD feet; thence South 200 50' Wtgt 140 feet; thence WAW -Cly paralie" with the North line of Section 1,90 feet, more or leas. to the Mat lim of the west 120 feet of North 431 feet of said Narumat quarter of the Northeast 9=tor. AUMI All that Mtion of Nocthwesk Waetar of Northeast yuauater oP Section 8, Takabip 27 North, ;range 4 ;hist, W.M., (IeaoriW as follows, All of vacated Block 6, first atMitaion to the City of EUuaonds, according to plat thereof recorded in 'Volume 2 of pldte, page 31, records of Snohomish CmAty, WaehingtCo; Tfmpther with South half of vacatea Ashland Avenue, North halt of vacabed 8e VMt Avenue, West halt of vuictated Exeter Street adjacent to sail Block 6, am) alley in aid Bleak 61 WMT the East 15 feet of the south 225 feet thereof; and U MMT 4AY portico lXing within the North 431 feet (,as measnrea along the Crest live) of the said Northwest quarter of Noxttteaet quiarter, and lying Neeterly of tha- center The of that certain Declaration of Saserent recorded under Auditor's File No. 1614380, re=ds of Sr*Zdah county. VoL2449PAU040 91012 5 010 5 3 a MR TMMEEM "Ze Selletene* fat consifleration of trmtut 1. benefits, do hereby grant WA convey unto the above amvd owners of the benefited traata, their hwev, vwxessors and' aaa4gns, an easment fou infirm, egress ma atmues over the above deaoriw msemmt Tcwv, A& easga is' gCeated as an apinirter,wzce to the bensiuza treats and is W tlsn uritis the I=dl AFW lb is furtbr mutually agreed that the uaderaiVed omrj%,of,ene tbe bfited tracts WiU participate egaslly, each an to a 'de a Attri gorCion, ;tn ft cast of maiatetcanoe and Whop of the roadway within the zwifi nt Traal:. A 12dority of the mars of the bmai: W trots grill. determine kM neoeseAl and the extent - ;F futurs deintenuica required in Sam Bassaent Tract. IN 4i2' UW.4 MMW, tle parties hereto We exe beg this instant brie �dAL day o$ OmniW s C A RITA M=M, big wife MWPA L. jW=; his wife Fl40LA3,+a1 1SKM F. , his wife 6204A. - t' am D. smm DULOM M. &IIlm, bis wife sty OM HMEMM, his wife mdW tt, his wife Url HUUMW, a single person i LSF i, a mingl.B IRMOn .� 94t. 24 0.9RDE0 06 910125005 1 41 P V• • • .7�LOg+d�Y •X/i�.K�L`Jjgµyyy� Ce> t#£y that I know at haus aas£aos ti�► evi:2erae tiieE 'g a W3k1�v48 '� K►ta t4-.��E�hje urE n ,m�K ty sanaca r, x;�-..� a v■ hfs ti. i� Y . 0n [add 11 iwDV4n=t tw4 aaa "94d it 6o be iiiefg from anti volur4 try Acte .for the does ad �Vjrpos�z Amk ed in the instrtt mt. ignature of tdt,tr�sy 1+u6Zio Meal or stsV) 1�ta,c1. l�Sblt �atl{rMi4i.. y.I Vy apointment a3vires &P-1- LM ]: certify that x know or have satisfAct% evidei�e that ® Hal gre_�_ 0*0 this instrument, an oath and stated that (Waho aas authoeiae8 to OxOmte the instrument mrd a*uowlWged it. as the nrtarR�>Y�� -t�eeE of to be the free and voluntary act of suoh party for the ' uses aw purP�ea mentioned to the instrumt. Signature of Notaey Publio (Seal ca• Ste) Mtacy Pdblic •�•��LLrattr,.��•••. � ap�s0ihttQeRt e�tpf>:ts$ �� CIA ty �_trt 1�•4�i� t� l.2409PAun a7 0125 53 ; . a r FROM FAX M. , • jun. 13 2005 02: iE�F'M - P3 Sk ..' • • .•. ,. 1, I '' ' L • , .. f a , •• •. • ,,, . • •__ 1•~,' • • ' " / V NO SA KNOW AM MW 151f TMSil 'ppar"3MO" ' ' •7-' ,, ` -,•' ,}.• •', *•••• fra•`' •p. ••• • aMyB�► , •SSR • , r ,' ,. • • , ' • •..S, t 1,'' •' • • ' ' • ' a 1 1 i ��`,/.M f. Ile � •• _ . • • • '` �' • ' Gi �-} pyo fes' �+�� • {RSA , t Etw iiA%AUX anA VIS A. W QlC *WO ami V isoa3a to arts cavta ttbon dimarjbed MCaiy413owe a A he LT10fteR h4m- Stcc�te of watstang CA�Y1�3ile3d Rs Ilda1 iti ' • a %fies lu�osc 070,00 tete$ of the Worth 990 �®00 nfy tate Sao. 2@,"' o afi tctsorae au aaeab�td • �i7oetko 5i and 15, togilther "Uh vac"" ert<r+setia a aux a p�,ae a� �?sxat AdtUt;An to Mond"; R� tstte3 &lesfr f ,i10 toot a� tm 84+Ath 21i .00 feat or . the Nalrth �F��f.�0 .toot% � �iaovs dasckr3bsd ti2`lAaw`.a , . Ifa7L.i . • " ' ' 4t yr hiesYa raatl Ud+teeX'ibsdl�tite�re3ctetCt:*r" hmd Its %b degaribrd. x dsee trable A0 0=14 nCtata fain aa� d roeae be tea a MA"*r QS tYbid n , art4+soxd: .r ' Nair, MMROOMP VVML"k rt. >IiarABk and teArlLL tcmau herohy step r®, PlAbAilik and-creaba Im a4aottmnte Ora Toad hr 3,rcgty Sm orad � •...--= across, acrd tar the %Wab%3A&bjan and MIAUMnco Qj utM'bl ea bhar�nn, bver acid tsgon bho nortAdm btrip at Una 171"S 10 Knob on eanh $Lft x t or. the f,011.10WA.na dookaritiad .aet►bttr 1 .-ImI 79 ,tsxtt�ks� of p aicsb on the North lute or th IW -1I4, X,V.631. 280.GRI sw sautA%$..>j00.gL's�am > an>�{ot �:� ta�r��l�•, N�•�J�F , tg{en�Yer 0 Vt.;tshlofte S. 20' t�„ 100.00 ft.s ' 'Cltuxu=e 6 1 ' 6f u} F�. 7.04 Mt thence s' id '54151" W, �r3&.aj"�' >:'tt.9 -WIAC* S w a, 3x7'7.75 I;t . to a ,poldt Of aSiZ'1►tE� t lte=C S0Ut[basly. ft3mTi& the ar* CC A Cttx'Ya Ivt7 Ctre3 loft, IMVIT15 a tae31124 or 190.00 fit., an arra 410ttapm of •75"013 Pisa to points of 'livA%C t;l thence Snub 83.17 . to pojLgtton the wwAtur ltm � 71aimnnU Ave, tvanatedjam, Plitt r. ' 311 .P-.L�eM JIM�P ..�i� •��t•�a . y , . . . O h• C uVY.et;iia'LjU to and for tilts Liam it 'Cf .,.j.�r�•�H� •�VYo--Id{MPw�'� ,.�ir��.�- f ....u...n+wa at, their hw,rit, dmCcanaa�a aA aoa38r►a', and Sa to be CDLIC�J'tl8t� s~ a. ,aavano t. r"nninis with the 3.Wtd. ' se' srndafraflcad that al af'the ,aonsrs of the aa,4 ' .:; knruel uhm1% a °IA ova And asaigMa eir hm� xa,, autanane,l equally ,3.tt tSisC c4ets or ropa91w %u4 mainf on7amin at khe road bud a 8M.4 , ear- Sae4 •art Bal* vowIn 001dand ts04MA aouUtup and utt' az ,dsa!Wmm J�7, w d.ttt of f3 been t15 �eata. t o, hC dAtohad an e,itt;er o rtroth oUko.•the Alta ;'+lap CT �ICI,/t tmom LU 4 ..-- �•.•••.•w�=� ;servrr �n �u qtr Ga. i, Baa rz:Br eSt192tEtf9t} 20n 02:17PM P4 ' FAX t;ta. .. • ', ... , or WAST .' ''. :. . tl • . • 1 . e. •� r • a, .. 1, + ' ..•.C.'�s•'M.IS.�:T.:C � airCi••f!d y •e • • ' • ' • ' y , 1 a , • ,, • 4 W,tf. }j.�t ,•1� . ,.Y•..I_Pf • • '" • . r .j ♦ ` 1 • `'F y.. . ' . , ' f',i • . • • .. .' . . 1 1.. : wd+�+•:.(9 ., .i',r:•.,r •f' r• , ; + . Ctt�i�'3% .fid • { � ir' •^►f` ,, ' ...• � �7'MA�ii: H �iizi�7lCE� i1�1tS t - .. f, Gri'tih $tty �p-,»grllyr ripp*n� I g , ,(tt, t3A�isactR. �+ m� klir c tio.i2e the y, t•wd.dcs�slu tfer�una 44 3n '. • t+e A �{rja eM MOKI the wA•'ewhl', and ,5'nr*saw ina�lmaed G attd Acts�rM�- edged that bha'J �� t,nad' the game mt+ �ktelr �a n�td ya�isri'�a� `nob , y,•.rj axa" I purpures therein Ment onod. And dr_'ed, �'a tlse ttaAd seal �113� L"`��ir'' •`s • �1•j1iLPi gn{lttr flt�T ' � ry,. � n r .+f_ay • ,� ' ey_ � � � ' . til' �tshlt�8troa► ��r�1ti!& il'$fie .• �rpm cls • . y • ` fry • • •i•'r'i'. 1, , '.. • • f, A .•3 . • . •v, * • r• ' +i•., �; '. 1 ' q•, , • �j • • r. Iter ',t, 50 • r {, 'Y'r. -. ' •y~T• +L '� `,' 1. ,.�' .`L •a _{• .�••, ,•1,T� `� •: .. F. •. ® �v +•••.''t. v4•_ ,H '• + r •.. ' ` •�J 1 ,l �T •� , '�{I .�, •,,. •• .� •ter, ••` • {• `6 +ra �•r,� •r .1 1, P' , 7[!1 6�. r,• p j, tr 'r v •'wt.- ,, r . • . r • '!y: ,rt• '* . •N 1 .t, ', ;r T,• •1. �+• Ir. 41i'` �'- •y '•�, t . J • ••f1 ..A , m `•t_ , •/�, •, .1yi •• ' • • .'" ''' '�iM ,i} W '� .1 ' � • \ •,1 f• • jai• 1 •., •� � iU ll,,,*****��ee. a ' • Niv L• • • T • •' • � , ,. •I t • �, 4 j•,• 1 • � •� 10' • , .t ly .,, ,' .• •: 1, . •+•� '_•. •. •♦ •` r rr'i' , • • r 4,a , '•• � O�+,F{•�yy7, •g •®erg ' • T• f ,i ,M • ,• t `f .' ra�� '',r• +• T/` YR6$1 • , ..••r •`r ,,L .; •, r. •••If f•,'•A,•r.t • n +w•"•4 w, ..r • .•,i. •, , r -• • r ' ..-a<•I .e.w ®.. !', ..�� T�w. �w..'e. �-._i .o...a �, •t.e.._ `,'. ._ • - r e, �• ;. �, r .. ®_ ... •,.a.w rsn 00-70- Wf! ! nl7h 8'p.T 01!YrT OAn7. /4i'/fltS Y FAX HO. .euro. 13 2M 02: iGPM PI FMM C AN 9 INC 4 224 ao M t®EH�4�t aae6 , s am H TO 194 4W--- oeuu 9'fpt JWVAgXAVV ® 'f'W, AND MAN INSR or' IL �tify am Los4v�+a ' '1WoommmaylaNsa "'Tw- tat yunnom elWn TO xts ift" PF to *We 14AYFMWMZ dr Naito ft 1460to. r>tweMu+ 111*4 '►'Nk Tf a ifi Y'9k is fiti "-a COMY NO" vApfaff, STAT9 OF WAMINOST)NO 1Q irftlGt 91[IIR 1 /' Gk * VQWNG X #%N or T pl{> clOotb i:llli7 t} gtiltt �Ati N 4rffl1lT 1�1 Y . . � R 4 iL W044, Tllg eg I�M�.Y •� Ji 51"WI L� � � w POW` vvo of a�1t T � Aifa to roti CAST ar aAfA M.20 "M W OW Y31f' off Yfa� RAOT 3D V410 it 84in W Y Me,fAaWis 7fe t/!le Maf�WK Rai fps al' TO llQp y 4 OM TiR 'lWAST IAP aM '1Nk 0010"M*Ir 1 A,. smoircm 19r 'I" ;� R, � # , U. Acs $3�� [�i�% Via'+• s U�, 4A/fe'-w Y'��'E Afd7• ro'60 �?t$ did PaWrfax Note 7871 pnta Irws W its. -7+5 • STAU Ot WASHUMN coum A� or {ISS AWQ '14 1� R M ti ri ! 1t1i11 Y teJt7jAt .il� iMR Wei /fi r juts ff1f: r Ahb Aa 1,1� Lclsdry pe:lSQRfA f ID fkq VftMTARY ACT Arca 10CL'd 0' M Lt 4 a T OMq M "M Aulftii Af ANtl Pel ftrs In 'Rd K ffoo o- UIVM fiMtjM Mx HAMA AidO orrsiclA4 AL. TWO AARP ri/' Ff ��aag '�• ;fpr � s. � •'•p. 61`x". i ei gm a AIM M " T 1 VAMIOWMP /ft/i10 iltf 1 a� ,t•' a NO C 4 E D 1967 fgf&To%vrao ►STS♦•O r i• s jun. 13 02t 16Pf" 1 F2 FAX NO A 9 141EN T yM `+ c,,- t if FILM . s'4 1 pTa�isi �aArea� OY or _ �ttiOTi • r6T t1r Or A uta 4YaYRMJ tl� ' . # ANMMat, 'p'M'�AT!#t#i A Milt A SCA# H"r K t #d s +4�4N'iXtuN AN A tUtili�aRY AND/�tM O�qs ANIS Mrd • IIOT" 1 hi IN UMM loop Am ,"rpu.0ll AND, atNR ®CVpt WNC * �otAatr AND nY�l olxa'ti�o►>14titla ti Mawr toMi trta au►t4 or�ra . .n ii,r vi �0 ixo K;a 6"� Cautr>rr ormAmmar am atm to LoaAUa rk Ort !� 7 1 R 7 Oz#RRIDMI At t:llit OF .°' • 'j'tAt WC9rt'(Q ►f:r±T or :HG SAM 3© rrCT of vACAht1Ca 1147t1 AV€ UC 1tt"T ' AOJA49W( 'tg '1t1: FAt.4eY" orgaH99t'O "Cii TY= $MINA Axa POS RM rill rill 1 w j" i t In NoA eHrtc®'r conNCra OF p1aR ija� or ra>F kioA7ttcA$T 1/4Y aNC�'eC Souta aili rcev; o vIice $A*V 180 itesi ats ltoAFµ Zia rCCr1 rttRNeK Wt`aY t7A a i sa �No 'CMUtC POililt aT �4trKttrQ14 . �`Z p• M Amm • . I fir+. � � "'• . YN•Y 49 or'"t To .199WV� W.9Y7A i �B7VA MND As An 4A 0, M AtIMb ?w Ytayy, qAI r Apo IRIt"A lm a 9AWLUMMS s zNE ,, 'ISWIIR ttlGrttrs AR #1a7p4o? •HMA- 004 �Cr}ti9�+GRw� AMY Avttri up" a" pull tot Yil� p1�Y or s�IYA'("Pow A cow _... . 1. *A iwfs Pow "Mearfamf ca tl1tR mg. A llam' 'i'+ N. f1Np1W 'i'o 08 R81ft�t,3uAa, a to #Np lagsE V C Yl11C tlt/i O fAprtiro wrt}Yaiy a its sC�4.tpG5p I"T tsm-M s Y.f: e� A¢ r kt Aga VOLUNTARY .act *Ai pVA0 ro# .111f. two Alio imtlN:ttt "C"VIMA, WiMq tgaLl, W'MooAka 13*r:atAre. ftAL T14 "q 4w • ►� . 'N Ara Ir or "`- itis rtt~setiiNQ xt NO SALE 'y:• sun X igs7 ICIAL y PACS ... ,� .. ..YB„r .... ab�a t ► aim vvd Y.7.: tri Q0(jz /I*T/A4 Z Z Q J CL Of O O J LL - I co z Q J a_ O O J LL W a_ n D �z,I 'I L '' � I i I / x I I I \ I I \ ;! k I\ n D I I \ X I \� I I z Q J a_ O O J LL W a_ n D �z,I 'I L '' / I I ;! n D I I ONO � I I c x� I I J � I a i I k � I t � k O SNOHC ISH COUNTY PARD " 6705 Puget Pari Snohomish, WA 98 9 Telephone: (425) *V50j4v�/ NO � R JL G e.� RITTER, WILLIAM A IN 8364 OLYMPIC VIEFir DRIVE EDMONDS WA 98026 IN DU CONTACT: CB I N V O I C E SPECIAL USE PERMIT CROSSING PERMIT #072704-0001 SW COUNTY PARK RES ACCESS 5 YEAR RENEWA13LE JULY 31, 2011 - JULY 31, 2016 FAX { 28 5) 388-66415 $125-0( dianne.bailey@snoco.org Adrnrn strarypq 6705 Puget Park Dr. Snohomish, WA 98296 MAW ..QM search: Prnks SNOHOMISH-5 :^r <t w3 6 ` Parks 1vision Date Received'From l"r''`. _ %Y,/ Address] Amount !{ sj.•%>�a' .��. •! r'(! �'�' ./f_ �r7 ��, <<'r% c `> For_ f= ❑ Cash r f' Received By -check , ❑ Money Order Department ` -! Ate, 4 _ PK500 SEND CHECK PAYABLE TO: > Snohomish County Parks & Recreation 6705 Puget Park :Drive CUSTOMER NO. P=26 Snohomish, j/ A 98296-4214 INVOICE NO: IOOOZ72956 AMOUNT DUE: $125.00 M ,26"WtR)� N�9 50 L6- c SW 1/4, SW 1/4, SE 1/4 SEC. 7, T. 27N., R. 4 E., W.M. SNOHOMISH COUNTY WASHINGTON TAX PARCEL NO. 27040700404200 _ I L1 �'_'-I. nl J--------�— —\\N a�au JIB ' LINE TABLE L tl w cv d, BEARING L 1 z'R� I ^ I LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING L 1 48.76 N04'46'23 E L2 42.79 S0446 23'W L3 20.10 N88'57 47'E L4 LS 40.61 10.05 SO4'46 23'W N8857'47'£ L6 1.49 N7T59'28E n I INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT \ I C4 o \ Iro GRAPHIC SCALE I 0 20 40 80 CURVE TABLE CURVE LENGTH RADIUS DELTA UO _ 21.55 223.60 5'31 '79" C2 9.01 223.60 1 2'18'32" CLIENT NAME: DRAWN BY: RWP CHECKED BY: KDB �o I n I INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT \ I C4 o \ Iro GRAPHIC SCALE I 0 20 40 80 CURVE TABLE CURVE LENGTH RADIUS DELTA C 1 _ 21.55 223.60 5'31 '79" C2 9.01 223.60 1 2'18'32" n I INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT \ I C4 o \ Iro GRAPHIC SCALE I 0 20 40 80 ( N (I I PACIFIC GEOMATic SERVICES, INC. ^ LAND SURVEYING & MAPPING SERVICES ( IN FEET) 1 inch = 40 ft. QUALITY SERVICE- CREATIVE SOLUTIONS 6608 216TH STREET SW, STE. 304 MOUNTLAKE TERRACE, WA 98043 PGS INCi PHONE:(425) 778-5620 FAX:(425) 775.2849 WEB: www.PacGeoinc.com CLIENT NAME: DRAWN BY: RWP CHECKED BY: KDB BILL RITTER LOCATION: EDMONDS, WA SCALE: I "=40' 1 DATE: 06-11-0.7 SHEET DESCRIPTION: EASEMENT EXHIBIT 05-117-01 1 1 OF 1 E �" BILL RITTER SHORT PLAT (FILE No. S-06-44) Wetland Resources, Inc. Project #09094 Prepared By: Wetland Resources, Inc. 9505 19th Ave. SE Suite 106 Everett, WA 98208 (425) 337-3174 For: Bill Ritter C/O: Carl Clapp, CC Construction 8415192 nd St. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 July 24, 2009 Revision #1, November 2, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS SITE DESCRIPTION 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ECDC 23.90.040 COMPLIANCE 1 POTENTIAL TREE IMPACTS AND CONCEPTUAL NGPA MITIGATION PLAN 2 TREE PROTECTION MEASURES 2 GRASS SEEDING 3 INVASIVE SPECIES CONTROL 4 PLANTING NOTES 4 POTENTIAL BONDS 5 PROJECT MONITORING PROGRAM 5 MAINTENANCE 6 PERFORMANCE GOALS 6 CONTINGENCY PLAN 6 TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT FENCING 7 USE OF THIS REPORT 7 REFERENCES 8 PHOTOS 9 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN MAP 1/1 SITE DESCRIPTION In July 2009 Wetland Resources, Inc. conducted a site investigation to assess existing on-site native vegetation on the 1.37 -acre subject property located at 8364 Olympic View Drive in the City of Edmonds, Washington. The site is further located as a portion of Section 18, Township 27N, Range 4E, W.M. This site is irregularly shaped, and topography displays a southern aspect to Olympic View Drive. An existing single-family residence with associated infrastructure and parking is located in the south central portion of the properly. Access is gained via a common drive off of Olympic View Drive from the northeast. Surrounding land use is comprised of single-family residences to the east, west, and south, and Southwest County Park across Olympic View Drive to the north. No wetlands or streams are located on or adjacent to the subject property. Typical native vegetation on the subject property is represented by Western red cedar (Thuja plicata), Western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), cascara (Rhamnus purshiana), red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), vine maple (Acer circinatum), Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), Salal (Gaultherin shallon), Rhododendron (Rhododendron, sp), dewberry (Rubus ursinus), and sword fern (Polystichum munitum). Typical non-native or invasive species that are present on the subject property includes cherry laurel (Prunus laurocerasus), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), and English ivy (Hedera helix), PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ECDC 23.90.040 COMPLIANCE The applicant is proposing a 3 -lot short plat for the subject property, currently zoned RS -12. In the City of Edmonds, subdividable properties in the RS -12 zones are required to retain or create an area of native protection equal to 30% of the total lot area of their lot, per ECDC 23.90.040.C. These areas shall be designated .as Native Growth Protection Areas (NGPA), which are meant to provide additional protection for fish and wildlife habitat throughout Edmonds. The goal of 30 percent native vegetation can be met through maintaining existing native vegetation, controlling invasive species, establishing native vegetation, or a combination of all three. The applicant should retain as many trees as possible, particularly those located outside of the building and driveway footprint. Vegetation outside of these areas should be preserved. The removal of trees should be minimized particularly when they are located on steep slopes. Trees that are dieing, damaged, or unstable should be removed. Tree topping is prohibited, but pruning to remove hazardous branches is permitted. No impervious surfaces are allowed in the NGPA areas without the consultation of a certified arborist to ensure that the trees are being protected to the greatest extent possible. Vegetation Management Plan 1 WRI#: 09094 Ritter Short Plat R1: 11.02.2011 Currently the NGPA areas on the subject property are comprised of an established canopy and understory dominated by native vegetation (see attached photos). Patchy areas of non-native or invasive species exist throughout the on-site NGPA areas. These will be controlled through this plan. Depending on the amount of earthwork necessary to reach the desired topographic condition of the site, it is estimated that seven conifers located within the on-site NGPA areas could potentially be impacted through activities associated with this project. Care shall be taken to retain the trees within and close to the NGPA boundaries to the maximum extent possible. Mitigation for tree impacts within the on-site NGPA areas will be provided at a 2:1 mitigation ratio as required by Edmonds Code. POTENTIAL TREE IMPACTS AND CONCEPTUAL NGPA MITIGATION PLAN Based on the tree survey provided, WRI estimates that seven conifers could potentially be impacted from proposed activities on the subject property. The trees are located on the edges of the NGPA areas, adjacent to the proposed building areas on Lots A and B. The trees lie wholly or partially within the NGPA areas, and range in size from 8 to 28 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh). If any or all of the trees identified on the attached map or any other trees located within the on-site NGPA areas are impacted during clearing or grading activities, then mitigation shall be provided at a 2:1 replacement ratio. Mitigation within the on-site NGPA areas will consist of removing any invasive species while taking care not to disturb the existing native species, and interplanting the areas with conifers. Common Name Latin Name Size Spacinq Quantity Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 6' Variable TBD Western red cedar Thuja plicata 6' Variable TBD Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla 6' Variable TBD Any disturbance to the subject NGPA areas caused by future work on utility lines or other construction activities not related to this short plat shall be mitigated according to a plan designed to address that impact and approved by the City. If trees or vegetation are removed from the NGPA areas in the future, all applicable City codes shall be followed. TREE PROTECTION MEASURES Pursuant to EMC 18.45.050H: When tree cutting or land clearing will occur pursuant to a building permit, protection measures should apply for all trees which are to be retained in areas immediately subject to construction. The requirements listed may be modified individually or severally by the City if the developer demonstrates them to be inapplicable to the specific on-site conditions or if the intent of the regulations will be implemented by another means with the same result. Where the drip line of a tree overlaps a construction line, this shall be indicated on the survey and the following tree protection measures shall be employed: Vegetation Management Plan 2 WRI#: 09094 Ritter Short Plat R1: 11.02.2011 1. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 2. The applicant shall erect and maintain rope barriers on the drip line or place bales of hay to protect roots. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. 3. If the grade level adjoining a retaining tree is to be raised or lowered, the applicant shall construct a dry rock wall or rock well around the tree. The diameter of this wall or well must be equal to the tree's drip line. 4. The applicant may not install ground level impervious surface material within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 5. The grade level around any tree to be retained may not be lowered within the greater of the following areas: (a) the area defined by the drip line of the tree, or (b) an area around the tree equal to one foot in diameter for each one inch of tree caliper. 6. The applicant may prune branches and roots, fertilize and water as horticulturally appropriate for any trees and ground cover which are to be retained. The planning division manager or his/her designee may approve the use of alternative tree protection techniques if those techniques provide an equal or greater degree of protection than the techniques listed above. [Ord. 3646 § 1, 2007]. GRASS SEEDING All disturbed ground located outside of the NGPA areas shall be seeded to the recommended, certified grass seed mixtures below. Fertilizer shall only be used when absolutely necessary due to potential runoff into sensitive stream and wetland systems. If deemed absolutely necessary by the consulting biologist and/or the City Biologist, a fertilizer such as 16-16-16 shall be applied at 100 pounds per acre. Grass Seed Mixture Common Name Latin Name lbs./1,000 s.f. Colonial bentgrass Agrostis tenuis 0.6 Annual ryegrass Lolium multiflorum 0.3 White clover Trifolium repens 0.2 Vegetation Management Plan 3 WRI#: 09094 Ritter Short Plat R1: 11.02.2011 INVASIVE SPECIES REMOVAL In an effort to meet the 30% native vegetation requirement on this site, Himalayan blackberry, English ivy, and cherry laurel shall be removed within the NGPA areas. The removal program will commence in the late fall to early winter, during the plants' dormant period. The undesirable species will be identified, removed, and exported off- site. Removal method will include the use of a hand tools to remove the vines and shrubs, while taking care not to impact native species. Due to the presence of established trees and shrubs, removal of invasive species is not anticipated to create large areas of open ground. However, to reduce the potential for erosion and discourage re -colonization by invasive species, areas where invasive species are removed shall be sheet mulched and planted with one -gallon Salal (Gaultherin shallop) on approximate five-foot centers. Ongoing removal of the invasive species will continue in the following growing season. The plan will include cutting and removing the invasive plants periodically during the spring and summer of each year for the three-year monitoring period. PLANTING NOTES Projects of this nature where planting areas are irregular in shape with boundaries that are not clear are typically more complex to construct than can be described in plans. Careful monitoring by the contracted biologist or other qualified professional is strongly recommended for all portions of this project. Plant in the early spring or late fall. Order plants from a reputable nursery. Care and handling of plant materials is extremely important to the overall success of the project. All plant materials recommended in this plan should be available from local and regional sources, depending on seasonal demand. Some limited species substitution may be allowed, only with the agreement of the consulting professional or the City of Edmonds. The plants shall be arranged with the appropriate numbers, sizes, species, and distribution to achieve the required vegetation coverage. The actual placement of individual plants shall mimic natural, asymmetric vegetation patterns found on similar undisturbed sites in the area. Three-foot by two-inch by 1/4 -inch lath, or other approved marking device, shall be placed next to each planted tree and shrub to assist in locating the plants while removing the competing non-native vegetation and to assist in monitoring the plantings. Wood chips or other suitable material shall be used for mulching in the planting areas. Any existing vegetation is to be removed from a two -foot diameter area at each planting site. Mulch is to be placed in this two -foot diameter area at a depth of three to four inches. A four -inch diameter ring around the base of each plant shall be kept free of mulch. In addition, areas which are left bare by extensive removal of invasive vegetation should be sheet mulched. Vegetation Management Plan 4 WRI#: 09094 Ritter Short Plat R1: 11.02.2011 POTENTIAL BONDS If trees within the NGPA areas are damaged or removed a maintenance bond for the mitigation plantings may be required by the City of Edmonds. Any bond requirements will be established by the City. PROJECT MONITORING PROGRAM Requirements for monitoring project: 1. Initial compliance report 2. Annual site inspections (in the spring or fall) for three years 3. Provide recommendations based on annual site visits to ensure that mitigation plantings (if necessary) are meeting performance standards, and/or invasive species are being controlled within NGPA's. Purpose of Monitoring The purpose of monitoring this project is to evaluate the success of the tree mitigation plantings and/or to ensure that invasive species will be controlled within the on-site NGPA areas. Success will be determined if monitoring shows that at the end of three years the performance standards are being met and that habitat values in the enhancement areas are equivalent to similar ecosystems in the immediate area. Inspection Schedule An inspection shall occur upon completion of the civil improvements for both of the new lots. During this inspection vegetation impacts will be assessed and the necessary mitigation will be determined. It is assumed that all impacts to vegetation will occur during the civil improvements phase of this project. However, if any additional impacts to vegetation occur during construction of the new homes on Lots A and B, another site visit should be conducted by the contracted biologist to determine additional impacts and required mitigation. Following instillation of any necessary mitigation an inspection by the contracted biologist or other qualified professional will be made to determine plan compliance. After the inspection this person will also prepare a compliance report that will be supplied to the City of Edmonds regarding the completeness of the project. Condition monitoring of the plantings will be done by the contracted biologist or other qualified professional in the spring or fall annually for the three-year monitoring period. Annual reports will not be provided, however following recommendations based on the annual monitoring visits regarding invasive species removal and the condition of the mitigation plantings is recommended. Final inspection will occur three years after completion of the project. The contracted professional will prepare a final report to be submitted to the City as to the success of the project. Vegetation Management Plan 5 WRW 09094 Ritter Short Plat R1: 11.02.2011 Definition of Success / Performance Standards If trees within the on-site NGPA areas are impacted and mitigation is provided in the form of native plantings within the on-site NGPA areas, then said plantings shall support at least 80% survivorship, by the end of three years. The species mix should resemble that proposed by the planting plans, but strict adherence to obtaining all of the species shall not be a criterion for success. If a given area contains more than 10% areal coverage of invasive, non-native species within the planting areas, the enhancement shall not be considered successful for that area. MAINTENANCE The potential plantings installed as mitigation for damaged trees and the invasive species removal areas will require periodic maintenance during the monitoring period. If mitigation is necessary the plantings will be maintained at least once a year for each of the three monitored years, or as needed to assure the success of the mitigation project. Maintenance may include, but will not be limited to, removal of invasive vegetation (by hand), replacement of plant mortality, and/or the replacement of mulch for a period long enough to meet performance goals. PERFORMANCE GOALS The goal of this conceptual mitigation plan is to mitigate for potential loss or impact to existing trees and control invasive species within the NGPA areas on the subject property. The enhancement planting will increase species diversity and maintain the presence a coniferous forest canopy. The on-site forested NGPA area will remain connected to the large forested corridor (Southwest County Park) located across Olympic View Drive, and help to support an overall complex natural forested environment. CONTINGENCY PLAN If mitigation is necessary and more than 20% of the plants are severely stressed during any of the inspections, or it appears more than 20% may not survive, additional plantings of the same species or, if necessary, alternative species may be added to the mitigation areas. If this situation persists into the next inspection, a meeting with a representative for the city of Edmonds, and or the project consultant, and the property owner will be scheduled to decide upon contingency plans. Elements of the contingency plan may include, but will not be limited to more aggressive weed control, supplemental irrigation, plant mortality replacement, species substitution, fertilization, and/or soil amendments. , Vegetation Management Plan 6 WRI#: 09094 Ritter Short Plat R1: 11.02.2011 TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT FENCING A chain link construction fence shall be set up to demarcate the on-site NGPA areas prior to disturbance activities. The construction fencing shall be placed as far away as possible from the trees that are being retained. -As a general rule, the fence shall be located a radius of 1 -foot away from the trunk for each 1 -inch of tree trunk diameter. If that is not possible and damage to the individual tree root systems cannot be avoided then tree removal shall take place, and mitigation provided. Upon completion of construction activities associated with this project a split -rail fence will be constructed along the boundary of the NGPA areas. The permanent fencing will function to demarcate the NGPA boundaries and discourage human intrusion into the NGPA areas in the future. Breaks or gaps in the split rail fence shall be allowed for limited passage into the NGPA areas for enjoying the natural setting provided by these areas. USE OF THIS REPORT This Vegetation Management Plan is supplied to Bill Ritter as a means of describing jurisdictional wetland conditions, as required by the City of Edmonds during the permitting process. This report is based largely on readily observable conditions and to a lesser extent, on readily ascertainable conditions. No attempt has been made to determine hidden or concealed conditions. Reports may be adversely affected due to the physical condition of the site and the difficulty of access which may lead to observation or probing difficulties. The laws applicable to wetlands are subject to varying interpretations and may be changed at any time by the courts or legislative bodies. This report is intended to provide information deemed relevant in the applicant's attempt to comply with the laws now in effect. The work for this report has conformed to the standard of care employed by wetland ecologists. No other representation or warranty is made concerning the work or this report and any implied representation or warranty is disclaimed. Wetland Resources, Inc. /_S-� Lt�� Louis Emenhiser Senior Wetland Ecologist Professional Wetland Scientist #1680 Vegetation Management Plan 7 WRI#: 09094 Ritter Short Plat R1: 11.02.2011 REFERENCES City of Edmonds Environmentally Critical Areas Title Chapter 23 Environmentally Critical Areas. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS- 79/31. December 1979. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual 1987. Technical Report Y-87-1. Environmental Laboratory. U.S. Army Engineer Waterway Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS. Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area Washington United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service (1978). National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands, Northwest Region. 1996. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #96-94. March 1997. Washington State Wetlands Rating System. Washington State Department of Ecology. Western Washington, Ecology Publications #93-74 August 1993 and #04-06-025 August 2004. Vegetation Management Plan 8 WRI#: 09094 Ritter Short Plat R1: 11.02.2011 1 " / � �� % � i ;i/i��/ � /, � ✓� / �// s, �/ `/�� %/!ii/ / //�/i �%/ ///%Ilii �„,// / //��`��'�//�� ill/o `s°„f o;��1, ��»��/ter �9` ' ”"`� ,�i✓�aJ� //� /hili 1 tt m a k � 1 111 I I I ldl;! �II / r / w � \ § j\�/ 3��2 $§E% z X: §f E/ §I%» P&(} §��§ \ \ § § \ (L /\ ` ) \ _ R - ) / \ D0 2 p® � W, ` zw w\k zw , §�! ;f. !!!! /\/\ _ ) S'/ + o ° \(\ E ° ( %\\\ /\ ` ) \ AS ' R \ as . ; E S if ! R ;f. !!!! /\/\ ) \ƒf( ! n - E \\\\\\ CITY OF EDMONDS • 1215" AVENUE NORTH* EDMONDS, WA 98020 PHONE: 425.771.0220 • FAX: 425.771.0221 ® WEB: www.edmondswa.gov DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT: PLANNING • BUILDING DATE: October 24, 2012 TO: Mr. Carl Clap 8415 —192" St SW Edmonds, WA 98026 FROM: Jennifer Machuga, Associate Planner — Development Services Department Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager — Public Works Department RE: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR PROPOSED SHORT PLAT FILE NO. PLN20120021 Dear Mr. Clapp, Thank you for your September 6t" resubmittal in response to staff's request for additional information for your land use application for a three -lot subdivision located at 8364 Olympic View Drive (File No. PLN20120021). During staff's review of your resubmittal items, it was found that additional information/clarification is necessary. Please provide responses to the following items at your earliest convenience so that staff's review of the proposal can continue: October 24, 2012 — Thank you for responding to the items noted in Jeanie McConnell's memorandum. Additional clarifying comments are provided throughout this letter. Please respond to the items below and resubmit the preliminary site development plan with revisions as necessary. 7/11/12 comment - Refer to the enclosed memorandum from Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager, dated June 5, 2012. The items listed in Ms. McConnell's memo will need to be addressed before review by the Engineering Division can continue. 2. October 24, 2012 — Thank you for providing clarification from your surveyor. 7/11/12 comment — The legal description of the subject site as provided on the survey, site development plan, and within the title report references three "parcels"; however, two of these "parcels" appear to be access easements located on/adjacent to the eastern side of the subject site. Please explain why these easements are referred to as "parcels", and why the legal description gives the impression that these easements are located on property owned by Mr. Ritter in their entirety, while the survey map gives the impression that one of these easements is located on property owned by Mr. and Mrs. Falk and the other easement is only in part located on the subject site owned by Mr. Ritter. 3. October 24, 2012 — A response letter was prepared by Mercado & Hartung, PLLC on July 26, 2012 and submitted to the City on September 6, 2012. The letter attempts to provide clarification of the legal access rights to certain easements for Lot B. Reference to a 20 -foot wide easement per AFN #91012500053 is made, with a comment in review of the easement stating: "sufficient evidence exists that Lot B will have proper in and out access to Lot B". However, the limits of the southern line of this easement end in alignment with the northeastern corner of Lot B. Therefore, the referenced easement provides access up to the northeastern corner of Lot B, but not adjacent to the eastern Aftachment 15 boundary of Lot B, which would be needed to provide proper access to the lot. There is an additional easement (AFN #1614380) that may or may not benefit Lot B with regards to access, but the legal access rights provided by this easement were not discussed in Mr. Mercado's letter. Please have Mr. Mercado provide sufficient evidence that access to Lot B as depicted in the preliminary site development plan can legally be provided, unless the proposed access to Lot B is revised such that access via these easements is not necessary. 7/11/12 comment - A letter was received during the public comment period for the proposed short plat indicating that permission has not been granted for the new lots to utilize the existing access easements. Access to Lot A is proposed to be directly from Olympic View Drive; however, access to Lot B is proposed to be via the existing access easements near the eastern side of the project site. As such, please submit sufficient evidence that proposed Lot B will have legal rights to utilize the existing access easements or that a new easement has been granted for the benefit of Lot B. 4. October 24, 2012 — Thank you for submitting a letter from Liu & Associates dated July 27, 2012. Mr. Liu's letter references the September 26, 2005 geotechnical report that he prepared for the expired short plat on the subject site (File No. PLN20060044). That report will be added to the file for the current short plat proposal; however, that report did not reference how the proposal complies specifically with the development standards of ECDC 23.80.070. Therefore, please have Mr. Liu prepare an addendum to his September 26, 2005 report providing sufficient evidence as to how the design standards of ECDC 23.80.070.A.3 will be met through the proposal, or if an alternative design would be more compliant with these requirements. Design alternatives to consider include, but are not limited to, lot layout, vehicular access (i.e. potential shared access for Lots A and B), future building location, etc. 7/11/12 comment - Due to the presence of slopes that are steep enough to qualify as a Landslide Hazard Area on and adjacent to the subject site, a geotechnical report is required. Although a geotechnical report was provided as part of the application for the preliminary approval that recently expired for the subject site (File No. PLN20060044), one will need to be provided for the current application taking into account any changes in the development plans that have been made between the original proposal and now. Additionally, the geotechnical report will need to be updated to ensure that all current code requirements are addressed. As such, please submit a geotechnical report prepared by a qualified geotechnical engineer addressing the current proposal's compliance with all applicable requirements of the critical areas code contained within Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapters 23.40 and 23.80. As part of addressing the critical areas code requirements, particular attention must be paid in the geotechnical report to ECDC Section 23.80.070. As part of your response, please provide sufficient evidence as to how the design standards of ECDC 23.80.070.A.3 will be met through the proposal, or if an alternative design would be more compliant with these requirements. Design alternatives to consider include, but are not limited to, lot layout, vehicular access (i.e. potential shared access for Lots A and B), future building location, etc. 21 Page 5. October 24, 2012 — Thank you for submitting your preliminary house plans for Lot A. As requested in the July 11, 2012 comment below, please also submit a review of how the proposed home locations on both Lots A and B take into account the existing topography and how the design of the subdivision and placement of the future homes meets the design standards of ECDC 23.80.070.A.3. 7/11/12 comment - The building envelope indicated on proposed Lot A based on applicable setback requirements is very narrow. Although the preliminary development plans indicate the footprint of a potential home on Lot A, this footprint is not in compliance with the 25 - foot street setback. As such, please provide evidence that a home can reasonably be constructed on proposed Lot A while complying with the applicable setback requirements. Additionally, in addressing this item, please include a review of how the proposed home locations on both Lots A and B take into account the existing topography and how the design of the subdivision and placement of the future homes meets the design standards of ECDC 23.80.070.A.3 discussed above. 6. October 24, 2012 — A copy of the Special Use Permit invoice was submitted on September 6, 2012 noting the permit is now in effect until July 31, 2016. In a closer read of the General Terms and Conditions of the Special Use Permit, it has become unclear how a renewable permit satisfies the need for permanent access for the subject development. The County requires the Special Use Permit to be reexamined during the "Five Year Reassessment Period" to determine the continuing compatibility of the permitted use with the policies and objectives of the Park, etc. At any point in time (with 30 days notice), the County could terminate the permit. As noted in the City's July 11, 2012 comment below, obtaining ownership of the Snohomish County property (Parcel No. 27040700403500) would provide better options for site development. The. City would be happy to participate in any conversations you may have with the County to gain feedback on the possibility of the County transferring ownership of this parcel to you. If this option is not viable, then you will need to explore other options of gaining a permanent easement or options for an alternate access configuration for Lot B, such as a shared access easement to Lot B via the proposed access drive on Lot A. 7/11/12 comment - The Special Use Permit issued by Snohomish County (AFN200607310183) states that the permit is to be reexamined every five years. The Special Use Permit is dated July 31, 2006, so there should have been a five year reexamination in July of 2011. Please submit the results from the County's reexamination of this permit. In looking at the design and access to proposed Lots A and B as discussed above, did you consider contacting Snohomish County regarding potentially purchasing the small triangle of property that they own adjacent to the northeast corner of the site in order to have more flexibility with access and avoiding impact to the slopes? 7. October 24, 2012 — Thank you for providing a revised preliminary short plat map and site development plan to address the corrections in this item. 7/11/12 comment - Please have your surveyor make the following corrections to the preliminary short plat map as well as to the preliminary development plan (where applicable), and submit two large -format copies and one reduced copy (no larger than 11" by 17") of all revised sheets: (Items 7. a through 7. i have been removed from this letter since all were addressed with the September 6, 2012 resubmittal) 31 Page 8. October 24, 2012 — Thank you for submitting a Vegetation Management Plan prepared by Wetland Resources, Inc. with a revision date of November 2, 2011 and for indicating the proposed native vegetation areas on the preliminary site development plan. If any changes to the proposed lot layout/development are made in response to the comments above, please modify the locations of the native vegetation areas as necessary. As part of the preliminary short plat review process, it needs to be shown that the requirement of ECDC 23.90.040.0 can be met; however, the Vegetation Management Plan will be reviewed and approved as part of the civil review process. 7/11/12 comment - ECDC 23.90.040.0 requires retention and/or establishment of 30 percent of native vegetation on subdividable properties located within the RS -12 and RS -20 zones, which includes the requirement for submittal of a vegetation management plan. Please submit a plan to satisfy this requirement, including an indication of which portions of the site will be retained/established as native vegetation to account for the 30 percent area requirement and plans for how this area will be established and maintained in accordance with the requirements of ECDC 23.90.040.C. This area is not required to be set aside as a Native Growth Protection Area (NGPA), so please change the label on your preliminary development plan if you do not intend for this area to be set aside as an NGPA. Additionally, measures must be taken to try to retain as many existing trees as possible located both within and outside of the proposed native vegetation area. Please indicate those trees that would be impacted by the installation of the subdivision improvements and indicate how the trees to be retained will be protected during development in accordance with ECDC 18.45.050. It should be noted that any trees located within future building footprint areas that would not be impacted by the installation of the subdivision improvements would not be able to be removed until the time of building permit application review and approval for future structures on the site, unless the trees are found to be hazardous or if removal is found to be consistent with the requirements of ECDC 18.45.050. Please submit the above information to a Planner, Monday through Friday between 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM. Please keep in mind that a complete response to this information request must be received within 90 days or the application will lapse for lack of information (ECDC 20.02.003.D). Thus, your application will expire if the requested information is not received by January 22, 2013. Feel free to contact Jennifer Machuga or Jeanie McConnell at 425-771-0220 or by e-mail at Jen.machugagedmondswa.gov or Jeanie.mcconnellgedmondswa.gov if you have specific questions regarding the above requested information. Cc: File No. PLN20120021 Mr. William Ritter 8364 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98026 Mr. Erich Tietze 1714 NW 200th Lane Shoreline, WA 98177 41 Page ERICH 0. TIETZE AND ASSOCIATES Engineers and Consultants 1714 NW 200`h Lane Shoreline, WA 98177 (206) 542-2065 eo-ta.4Dclearwire,net Jen Machuga, Associate Planner January 17, 2013 Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Director ,Y,I City of Edmonds �k%A TO �iG� 121 5th Avenue North G� I Edmonds, WA 98020 Subject: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR PROPOSED SHORT PLAT FOR BILL RITTER, FILE NO. PLN20120021 Dear Jen: We are responding to your request for additional information in your letter to Carl Clap dated October 24, 2012... 1. We have previously responded to the Memo from Jeanie McConnell to you dated June 5, 2012. However, based on the comments in Ms. Machuga's letter of October 24, 2012, we have modified the location of the driveway on Lot A slightly to fit within the new 15 -foot access/utility easement on Lot A. In addition, the drive on Lot A now serves Lot B. The grading for the drive has been changed slightly so that the wall to the north of the drive will be no higher than 3 feet above the existing grade. The hypothetical future building and drive location for Lot B has changed to reflect access from Lot A. The native vegetation areas have also been revised for Lot B to reflect the new drive and house locations. No improvements will be required on the access road to the east of the Ritter site that currently serves 4 houses. 2. This item has been addressed satisfactorily in previous correspondence. 3. This issue is no longer relevant since access to Lot B will be from Lot A and no changes to the conditions of use to the access road will be made by this submittal. 4. This item is addressed in a revision to the report by Liu & Associates to Bill Ritter dated November 26, 2012. A copy of that report is attached. 5. Some of the items in the design standards in ECDC 23.80.070.A.3 as they relate to geotechnical considerations are addressed in the attached Liu & Associates report. With regard to Item b of ECDC 23.80.070.A.3, the hypothetical location of the house and drive on Lot B are located outside of the Landslide Hazard Area (see attached Sheet C -X). A portion of the drive for Lot A is also located outside of the Landslide Hazard area. A portion of the drive and the house on Lot A are located in the Landslide Hazard area, but this is addressed by appropriate retaining walls and in the case of the house, tiered foundations as required by item c of ECDC 23.80.070.A.3 (see also Liu report). r With regard to Item d of ECDC 23.80.070.A.3, the proposed improvements are located in order to minimize the impact on native vegetation and to minimize impacts on the most critical areas f the site. With regard to Item e of ECDC 23.80.070.A.3, no buffers will be required on adjacent property. With regard to Item f of ECDC 23.80.070.A.3, retaining walls are proposed to maintain the existing natural slope and vegetation. With regard to Item g of ECDC 23.80.070.A.3, the proposed house locations will result in the shortest drive length and area that can properly serve the houses. 6. Since access to Lot B will be from Lot A, this concern is no longer applicable. 7. A revised preliminary short plat is attached with this letter that reflects the change in setback requirements for Lots B and C an d the change of the utility easement on Lot A to an access/utility easement for access to Lot B. Net areas are also provided. 8. The Vegetation Management Plan prepared by Wetland Resources, Inc dated November 2, 2011 is still applicable. The location of the Native Growth Areas on Lot B has been revised on the attached Site Development Plan to reflect the new location of the house on Lot B. If you should have any questions, please feel free to call. Very truly yours, ERICH O. TIETZE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. C/� a, X'�P— Erich O. Tietze, PE MTfMMAI i Geotechnical Engineering Engineering Geology Earth Science July 27, 2012 Mr. Bill Ritter 8364 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98026 Dear Mr. Ritter: Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Study Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat 8364 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington L&A Job No. 5Al 12 We performed a geotechnical engineering study in 2005 on the development of a three -lot plat for the subject property located at the above address in Edmonds, Washington. Our findings of surface and subsurface conditions of the site and geotechnical recommendations for the proposed development were presented in a report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Study, Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat, .8364 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, Washington," dated September 26, 2005. We understand the topographic features of the site has remained unchanged since completion of our geotechnical engineering study. Therefore, it is our opinion that our 9/26/2005 geotechnical report is still valid for the development of the site under its current conditions. Please contact us if you have questions. Yours very truly, LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC. J�A/ Liu, Ph.D., P.E. Consulting Geotechnical Engineer Place19213 Kenlake Kenmore,• •98028 486-2746 ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Engineering Geology November 26, 2012 Mir, Bill Ritter Earth science 8364 Olympic View Drive ��+ Edmonds; ``UA 98026 Dear TMr. Ritter: �`; � oo ��o Subject: Addendum No. 2 to 9/261'2005 Geotechnical Report Critical Areas Report 3 -Lot Short Plat 8364 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington L&A Job No. 5A112 This addendum to our 9/26/2005 geotechnical report for the subject project presents our critical areas report in accordance with Edmonds Community Development Code ECDC 23.80.070. The subject property is to be platted into three single-family building lots. Dots A and R are located in the northern (downhill) half of the property and Lot C is located in the southern (uphill) half of the property. We understand the existing residence on Lot C will remain and a new residence is to be developed oil each of Lots A and R. According to Drawing C -X - Landslide and. Erosion Areas, prepared by Erich O. Tietze and Associates, Inc., the terrain within Lot C is mostly under 15% grade. The ground in about the diagonal middle half of Lot A, trending from its southeast towards its northwest, is of slope 40% grade or steeper, with the remaining area mostly of slope rrom 15% to 40% grade except a couple of smaller areas at the northeast corner and in the middle of the west side of the lot which are also of 40% and steeper grade. The terrain of Lot B is generally of grade between 15% and 40%. with smaller areas at its southwest corner and along its north side which are of 44% or steeper grade. 19213 Kenlake Place NE - Kenmore,Washington 98028 Phone - 483-9134 (425) 486-2746 November 26, 2012 Addendum No. 2 to 9/26/2005 Geotechnical Report Proposed 3-I of Short Plat LRA Job No. 5A 1 l 2 Page 2 Cross sections presented in the above referenced drawing also show that the nein residences to be developed on Lots A and B are to be founded on level benches step -cut below the surface of the slopes. This would have most of the sufflicial weaker soils removed and the steep slopes within the building pads of the houses eliminated and, thus, reduce the erosion and slide hazards of the site under the developed condition. The basement/foundation walls on the back of the houses, however, should be adequately designed to resist lateral soil pressure to achieve required factors of safety against sliding and overturning failures. Six test pits were excavated on the subject site for our geotechnical engineering study of the property. These test pits encountered 0.8 to 2.7 feet of loose organic topsoil underlain by a layer of weathered soils of light -broom, loose to medium -dense, silty tine sand with a trace of gravel, from 1.6 to 3.5 feet thick. Underlying this layer of weathered soil are advance outwash sand deposits of brown -gray to light -gray, medium -dense, gravelly, clean to slightly silty, fine to medium sand with occasional cobble, from 1.8 to 3.2 feet thick, and light -gray, dense, gravelly, fine to coarse sand to the depths explored. Groundwater was not encountered by any of the test pits excavated on site up to 10 feet deep. Thesandy deposits underlying the site are of moderately high to high permeability and would allow stormwater to seep through easily. Therefore, erosion hazard of the site should be minimal if the recommendations in our 9/26/2005 geotechnical report for grading, erosion mitigation, drainage control and re -vegetation are fully implemented and observed during and following completion of construction. Geologically, where a sandy deposit is underlain by a fine-grained impervious soil layer, stormwater infiltrating into the sandy soil would perch on the surface of the underlying fine- grained deposit. The perched groundwater would flov,- laterally do,,vn-gradient along the surface of the underlying fine-grained deposit. Groundwater would emerge out of slopes or cut hanks November 26, 2012 Addendum No. 2 to 9/26/2005 Geotechnical Report Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 3 where the underlying fine-grained deposit is exposed. The perched groundwater would accumulate and rise and build up seepagepressure substantially in the wet winter months. Progressive groundwater seepage would erode soil in and the above the seepage cone. When the erosion gets to the point the soil mass in and above the seepage zone can no longer sustain its weight, sloughing and slide would occur. This is how most slides occur in the coastal and steep sloped areas in the Puget Sound region. Since the test pits was excavated to 10 feet deep and did not encountered any fine-grained soil, groundwater seepage should not occur within the property and slide hazard of the property should be minimal. Under the developed condition stormwater over impervious surfaces will be collected and drained away with storm sewer systems which would reduce stormwater seeping into the ground and recharging groundwater under the site. Therefore, stability of the lots should be enhanced under the developed condition. The Puget Sound region is in an active seismic zone. 'I'he lots are underlain at shallow depth by medium -dense to dense advance outwash deposits of moderately high to high shear strength with high resistance against. slope failures. Therefore, seismic hazards, such as landslides and lateral soil spreading, should be minimal as long as the site the grading, erosion mitigation, drainage control and re -vegetation measures recommended in our 9/26/2005 ,geotechnical report are fully implemented and observed during and following completion of construction. Liquefaction is another form of seismic hazard. The type of soil most susceptible to liquefaction during a strong earthquake is saturated, loose, fine sand to silty fine sand deposits under a high groundwater condition. Such loose, deposits, when subjected to strong ground shaking, can be densified and decrease in volume. if groundwater in such November 26, 2012 Addendum No. 2 to 9/26/2005 Geotechnical Report Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A 112 Page 4 deposits is unable to drain quickly, pore water pressure in would increase. When pore water pressure continues to build up by prolonged ground shaking, a "quick" condition will be reached when the pore water pressure equals the effective overburden soil pressure at some depths. Under this condition, the sand deposit will turn into a liquid state and lose its load bearing capacity. The sandy advance outwash deposits underlying the site, however, are of high permeability. Water can drain quickly in these deposits and buildup of pore water pressure will unlikely to occur in these deposits. Also, there is the absence of an extensive groundwater stable under the site at shallow depth. Therefore, the liquefaction hazard of the site should also be minimal Based on the above discussion, it is our opinion that: 1. Minimum buffer does not apply as the houses to be developed on Lots A and B would be founded on level benches step -cut below the steep slopes and with the steep slopes eliminated within the house building pads. The houses should be able to maintain stability as long as the basement/foundations walls on the back and the houses themselves are designed with adequate factors of safety against sliding and overturning failures. 2. Alteration of the erosion or landslide hazard areas from the proposed development will not increase surface water discharge or sediment to adjacent properties beyond pre - developed conditions. NNUI not decrease slope stability on adjacent properties, and will not adversely impact other critical areas as long as the recommendations in our 9/26/2005 geotechnical report are fully implemented and observed during and following completion of construction. 3. Based on our review of the civil design plans, development of this project should comply with design standards. 4. Removal and re -vegetation in erosion and slide hazard areas should be in compliance with the recommendations in our 3/26/2005 geotechnical report. November 26, 2012 Addendum No. 2 to 9/26/2005 Geotechnical Report Proposed 3 -Lot Short Plat L&A Job No. 5A112 Page 5 5. Clearing, grading and foundation construction should be carried out and completed from May 1' to October 1" of each year. The erosion mitigation and drainage control recommendations in our 9/26/2005 geotechnical report should be complied ,vitli and in place under operating conditions beyond the above grading season. 6. Point discharge of stortnwater should not be allowed within the property. Stornitivater collected over impervious surfaces of the development should be tightlined to discharge into an existing storm server or into infiltration trenches installed in the gently sloped areas at the base of the slope. 'We are pleased to be of service to you on this project. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions regarding this report or need further consultation. Yours very truly. LTU SOCIAT .1NC. I� J. S. (Julian) Liu. Ph.D., P.E. Consulting Geotechnical Engineer Edulog's Web Query Page 1 of 1 Street Address 8364 OLYMPIC VIEW DR Grade All Grades *Program *Middle School Activities Go RESET Glick a School [dame to see detailed wool information. Challenge, Madrona, and Maplewood schools - Edmonds School District Home Page enrollment is by application only. Please contact your local elementary school. INNEWRIT. School Code School Name Transportation Eligibility Grades Within walk distance of 01, 02, 03, 04, 105 SEAVIEW ELEM school 05, 06, K2, KA, KP MAPLEWOOD COOP - 01, 02, 03, 04, 540 CHOICE Eligible 05, 06, 07, 08, K2, KA 483 MEADOWDALE HIGH Eligible 09, 10, 11, 12 364 MEADOWDALE MIDDLE Eligible 07,08 01, 02, 03, 04, 539 MADRONA SCHOOL - Eligible 05, 06, 07, 08, CHOICE K2, KA, P, P1, P2, P3 541 CHALLENGE PROGRAM Eligible 01, 02, 03, 04, 05,06 For a map of the student,' school, and stops, click the View the Map button. II�� • ` IVI'I li'i MEADOWDALE MIDDLE View the map R] Number Stop Time Stop Description Bus Number Stop ID 1 7:33 AM OLYMPIC VIEW DR & 85TH PL W 71 364.014 2 2:43 PM OLYMPIC VIEW DR & 85TH PL W 71 364.014 Edmonds School District Home Page Edulog's Web Query Page 1 of I Street Address 8364 OLYMPIC VIEW DR Grade All Grades *Program *Middle School Activities School Code 105 540 483 364 539 541 Go RESET Glick a School Name to see detailed school information. Challenge, Madrona, and Maplewood schools - enrollment is by application only. Please contact your local elementary school. School Name Transportation Grades Eligibility Within walk distance of 01, 02, 03, 04, SEAVIEW ELEM school 05, 06, K2, KA, KP MAPLEWOOD COOP - 01, 02, 03, 04, CHOICE Eligible 05, 06, 07, 08, K2, KA MEADOWDALE HIGH Eligible 09, 10, I1, 12 MEADOWDALE MIDDLE Eligible 07,08 01, 02, 03, 04, MADRONA SCHOOL - Eligible 05, 06, 07, 08, CHOICE K2, KA, P, P1, P2, P3 CHALLENGE PROGRAM Eligible 01, 02, 03, 04, 05,06 For a map of the student, school, and stops, click the View the Map button. MEADOWDALE HIGH I View the map. Number Stop Time Stop Description Bus Number Stop ID 1 6:50 AM OLYMPIC VIEW DR & 86TH PL W 67 483.018 2 2:15 PM OLYMPIC VIEW DR & 86TH PL W 64 483.018 Edmonds School District Home Page C111 i F ED OIC D -_� PINNING ENT FORM El Economic R ` : Parks Maintenance Project Number: PLN20120021 Applicant's Name: WILLIAM RITTER Property Location: 3364 OLYMPIC VIEW DR. Date of Application: 5/03/12 Date Form Routed: 5/09/12 Zoning: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS -20) Project Description: 3 -LOT SHORT SUBDIVISION (ORIGINAL APPLICATION PLN20060044 EXPIRED)_ **PER ECDC 20.02.005 ALL COMMENTS MUST BE SUBMITTED WITHIN 15 DAYS OF THE DATE THIS FORM WAS R• = BY 5/30/2012 If you have any questions or need clarification on this project, please contact: Responsible Staff: JEN MACHUGA Ext. 1224 Name of Individual Submitting Comments: vd Title: 1 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 DEPARTMENT, 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: �� Signaturk Phone/E-mail: Cily OF ED NDS ® PLANNING IV]S,JN COMMENT FORM PW -Engineering Fire PW - Maintenance 0 Parks & Rec. 11 Building Economic Dev. El Parks Maintenance Project Number: PLN20120021 Applicant's Name: WILLIAM RITTER Property Location: 3364 OLYMPIC VIEW DR. Date of Application: 5/03/12 Date Form Routed: 5/09/12 Zoning: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS -20) Project Description: 3 -LOT SHORT SUBDIVISION (ORIGINAL APPLICATION PLN20060044 EXPIRED) "PER ECDC 20.02.005 ALL COMMENTS MUST BE SUBMITTED WITHIN 15 DAYS OF THE DATE THIS FORM WAS ROUTED: DUE BY 5/30/2012 If you have any questions or need clarification on this project, please contact: Responsible Staff: JEN MACHUGA Ext. 1224 Name of Individual Submitting Comments: c I h) 1, i t ✓'�+� Title: --�L,) t- U� 1:)-v ,r- 1 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. 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. Comments (please attach memo if additional space is needed): iii `'_""L10 VV 0 R KL`0 E a. i 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 Signc Phone/E-mail: CI) i OF ED ONDS -PLANNING DIVIS� _jN COMMENT FORA El PW -Engineering AFire 11 PW - Maintenance El Parks & Rec. Building Economic Dev. Parks Maintenance Project Number: PLN20120021 Applicant's Name: WILLIAM RITTER Property Location: 3364 OLYMPIC VIEW DR. Date of Application: 5/03/12 Date Form Routed: 5/09/12 Zoning: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS 201 1 'L - Project Description: 340T SNORT SUBDIVISION (ORIGINAL APPLICATION PLN20060044 EXPIRED)- "PER XPIRED)_ "P ECDC 20.02.005 ALL COMMENTS THIS FORM WAS ROUTED:5/30/2012 If you have any questions or need clarification on this project, please contact: Responsible Staff: JEN MACHUGA Ext. 1224 Name of Individual Submitting Comments: Title: F-7 A`i�7 ® 1 have reviewed this land use proposal for my department and have concluded that IT WOULD NOT AFFECT MY DEP,4RTA19ENT, 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 ave reviewed this land use proposal for my department and have concluded that IT WOULD AFFECT MY DEPARTMEIVT, 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 comr requirements of this department (please attach memo if additional space is nee John J. Westfall Fire Marshal jwestfallQafiredistrictl.org 12425 Meridian Ave. Everett WA 98208 phone: 425-551-1200 fax: 425-551-1249 Date: To: From: Subject: January 22, 2013 Jennifer Machuga, Associate Planner Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager PLN20120021, 3 -lot Short Plat 8364 Olympic View Drive Engineering has reviewed and approved the preliminary short plat application for the Ritter property at 8364 Olympic View Drive. Preliminary approval shall not be interpreted to mean approval of the improvements as shown on the preliminary plans. Please find attached the Engineering Requirements for the subject development. The applicant will be required to satisfy these requirements as a condition of short plat approval. Once the Planning Division has approved the preliminary short plat, the applicant will be required to submit civil engineering plans addressing all short plat conditions. Plans are to be submitted to the Engineering Division. A civil plan review fee is to be paid at the time of submittal. At this time, the review fee is $1000. Thank you. City of Edmonds CITY OF EDMONDS 121 - 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - ENGINEERING DIVISION REQUIREMENTS FOR SHORT PLATS To: Planning Division File Number: PLN20120021 From: Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager Engineering Division Date: January 22, 2013 Project: Ritter - 3 lot Short Plat Address: 8364 Olympic View Drive Required as a Required as a Requirement Condition of Condition of Already Subdivision Building Permit Satisfied 1. Right -of Way -Dedication for Public Streets: N/A 2. Public Street Improvements & Access,.- a) ccess:a) Lots A and B shall share a private access road with access from Olympic X View Drive. Lot C shall take access from existing private drive. L Driveway access point for Lots A & B shall be constructed to meet City standards. fl. Driveway access point for Lots A & B shall meet sight distance requirements set forth by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). a) Lots A and B shall share a private access road. X L Private access road shall be paved to 12 -feet in width. ii. Slope of private access road and driveways shall not exceed 14% and shall be noted as such on the civil construction plans. iii. Cross slope of private access road shall not exceed 2%. ) a) Provide on-site turnaround for Lots A & B to City Standards. I X a) Provide all easements as required -access, utility, etc. I X b) Private access road easement for Lots A and B shall be 15 -feet in width. I X N/A a) Public hydrant spacing shall meet requirements of ECDC 19.25. X b) Provide water service stub to each Lot X pin20120021-Ritter-Engr-Rgmnts.x1s 1 of 3 form revised 07.19.11 printed 1/22/2013 Required as a Required as a Requirement Condition of Condition of Already Subdivision Building Permit Satisfied c) Connect to public water system. X X d) Install storz adapter on existing fire hydrant, as required. X a) Provide new 6" service lateral from City's sanitary sewer main to development with 6" cleanout at the edge of right-of-way. X X I. Provide new 4" side sewer to individual lots. H. Where sewer lateral is shared by more than one lot, it shall be 6". b) Connect to public sewer system. X X a) Provide a Stormwater Management Report and Site Plan that shows compliance with ECDC 18.30, Stormwater Supplement and 2005 X Department of Ecology Stormwater Manual. b) Construct privately owned and maintained storm drainage system sized to provide adequate capacity for proposed future single family dwellings, and associated impervious areas in accordance with ECDC 18.30. X X I. Stormwater system to be located on private property. ii. Construction of storm facility may be deferred to coincide with construction of a single family residence on Lots A and B if the required short plat improvements create less than 2000sf of impervious area and the land disturbing activity effects less than one acre. c) Connect all new impervious surfaces to storm system as required. X X d) Provide storm sewer stub to all proposed lots. X e) Connect to public storm system or manage stormwater on site if soils allow. X 11. Under round Wiring (per Ord. 1387 a) Required for all new services. X X a) Submit a grading plan as part of engineered site plan. IX X b) Submit grading plan for foundations with building permit. I X a) Provide fire and aid address signage. I X N/A a) Provide an as -built drawing of all street and utility improvements. ( X I X ( ) a) Plat showing lots, easements, legals, survey information X X b) Legal documents for each lot X c) Field stake lot corners (by professional surveyor) X d) Field stake utility stubs at property lines X e) Clustered mailbox location per Postmaster X f) Maintenance agreements X pin20120021-Ritter-Engr-Rgmnts.xls 2 of 3 form revised 07.19.11 printed 1/22/2013 pin20120021-Ritter-Engr-Rqmnts.xls 3 of 3 form revised 07.19.11 printed 1/22/2013 Required as a Condition of Subdivision Required as a Requirement Condition of Already Building Permit Satisfied g) Traffic Impact Analysis X 17. Engineering` Fees:' a) Storm system development charge X b) Sewer connection fee (each new lot) X c) Water connection fee (each new lot) X d) Water meter fee X e) Traffic mitigation fee per each new SFR x f) Short Plat review fee X g) Right -of -Way Construction Permit x h) Inspection fees X pin20120021-Ritter-Engr-Rqmnts.xls 3 of 3 form revised 07.19.11 printed 1/22/2013 Notice of A"lication and Comment Period NAME OF APPLICANT: DATE OF APPLICATION: DATE OF COMPLETENESS: DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: PROJECT LOCATION: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Carl Clapp on behalf of William Ritter May 8, 2012 June 5, 2012 June 19, 2012 8364 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, WA Tax Parcel Number 27041800101000 Land use application to subdivide one lot into three lots Single -Family Residential (RS -12) zone. REQUESTED PERMITS: Short Subdivision (Type II decision). OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: I Unknown. REQUIRED STUDIES: Geotechnical Report. EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL , DOCUMENTS: Critical Areas Checklist. PUBLIC COMMENTS DUE: July 3, 2012 The site is located within the Any person has the right to comment on this application during the public 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 hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday or online through the city's website at www.edmondswa.gov through Online Permits link. Search for permit PLN20120021. City of Edmonds Development Services Department Planning Division Project Planner: Jen Machuga machuga@ci.edmonds.wa.us 425.771.0220 x 1224 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 www.edmondswa.gov f OF EDAf loc. 1 s90 File No. PLN20120021 o 87.5 175 sso Feet nk ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS LIST j, of-eeli y . Y Attach this notarized declaration to the adjacent property owners list. kf On my oath, I certify that the names and addresses provided represent all properties located within 300 feet of the subject property. Signature of Applicant orlicant's Representative Subscribed and sworn to before me this t5?' - day of 5,' p,,.®�'�^h4 OTA to t# ublic in and the State of Washington 0 11 SOP J -Z 1 � 11110F " a � id i n at 1019 - Revised 19 - Revised on 9/22/10 P2 — Adjacent Property Owners List Attachment 24 00434600000103 00434600000106 THOMAS B & LOUISE BERRY TERRY.A & CHERI J NEIL 367 NORMAL AVE PO BOX 366 ASHLAND, OR 97520 EDMONDS, WA 98020 27041800106000 27041800107500 ERIC M FALK ROBERT A HAMACK PO BOX 661 558 4TH AVE S EDMONDS, WA 98020 EDMONDS, WA 98020-4110 00434600000105 00434600000108 PAUL W & S COCH RAN DENNIS & CARLA O'LEARY PO BO 66 18122 84TH AVE W ED,VONDS , WA 98026 EDMONDS, WA 98026 27040700404200 27041800101200 WILLIAM E JONES ALLEN C & KATHERINE A PENNY 8310 OLYMPIC VIEW DR 8316 OLYMPIC VIEW DR EDMONDS, WA 98026 EDMONDS, WA 98026 27041800101400 00434600000104 27041800107700 STEPHEN J & JILL R MILLET WAYNE K & DARLA J PUMPHREY 18114 ANDOVER ST EDMONDS, WA 98026-5427 8412 OLYMPIC VIEW DR 18104 ANDOVER ST EDMONDS, WA 98026-5316 EDMONDS, WA 98026 BRIAN S BENTCOVER 27041800105400 27041800108400 MARY STILL BERNICE M PARKER 18010 ANDOVER ST 18012 ANDOVER ST EDMONDS, WA 98026-5426 EDMONDS, WA 98026-5426 27041800101400 27041800108000 ROBERT DENHAM RICHARD H MCINTOSH 18106 ANDOVER ST 18114 ANDOVER ST EDMONDS, WA 98026-5427 EDMONDS, WA 98026-5427 27041800108500 27041800108600 ORLO V & L LORENE FULLER BRIAN S BENTCOVER 18101 84TH AVE W 18103 84TH AVE W EDMONDS, WA 98026-5717 EDMONDS, WA 98026-5717 27040700300300 27040700403500 SNOHOMISH CO PROP MGMT SNOHOMISH CO PROP MGMT 3000 ROCKEFELLER AVE # 404 3000 ROCKEFELLER AVE # 404 EVERETT, WA 98201 EVERETT, WA 98201 27041800101000 WILLIAM A RITTER 8364 OLYMPIC VIEW DR EDMONDS , WA 98020 00434600000101 PAUL W & SUE M COCHRAN PO BOX 6066 EDMONDS, WA 98026 004346000001 DENNIS & LA O'LEARY 1812 4TH AVE W EDMONDS, WA 98026 27041800107400 VICTOR & JACQUELINE SCHEIBERT 18014 ANDOVER ST EDMONDS, WA 98026 27041800104700 SNAPP/ZIFF 18000 ANDOVER ST EDMONDS, WA 98026-5426 27041800101300 GANG YANG & SHI YAJUN 18116 ANDOVER ST EDMONDS, WA 98026-5427 27041800101100 DAVID KARL ECKBERG 8324 OLYMPIC VIEW DR EDMONDS, WA 98026-5435 00434600000107 ROBIN W & KAREN MICHEL 7907 212TH ST SW U NIT 102 EDMONDS, WA 98026-7571 Carl Clapp 8415 192nd St. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 On the 19th day of June, 2012, the attached Notice of Application and Comment Period was posted as prescribed by Ordinance and in any event where applicable on or near the subject property. I, Jennifer Machuga, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct this 19th day of June, 2012, at Edmonds, Washington. Signed: {BFP747892.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } FILE NO.: PLN20120021 Applicant: RITTER On the 19th day of June, 2012, the attached Notice of Application and Comment Period 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 19th day of June, 2012 at Edmonds, Washington. Signed:��l�il`� {BFP747887.D0C;1\00006.900000\ } y STATE OF WASHINGTON, I COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH CITY OF EDMONDS, NOTICE OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NAME OF APPLICANT: Carl Clapp on behalf of William Ritter DATE OF APPLICATION: 5/6/2012 DATE OF COMPLETENESS: 6/5/2012 DATE OF NOTICE: 6/19/2012 FILE NO.: PLN20120021 PROJECT LOCATION: 8364 OlymPic View Dr., Edmonds, WA PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Application to subdivide one lot Into three lots. The site is zoned Single -Family Residential (RS -12). REQUESTED PERMIT: Short Subdivision. Information on this application can be viewed at the City of Edmonds Develop- ment Services Dept., 121 5th Ave. N, Edmonds, WA 98020. OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: Unknown. REQUIRED STUDIES: Geotechnical Report. EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS: Critical Areas Checklist. COMMENT PERIOD: Comments due by July 3, 2012. Any person has the right to comment during the public comment period, receive notice, and request a copy of the decision on the application. Only parties of record as defined in ECDC 20.07.003 have standing to initiate an appeal. CITY CONTACT: Jen Machuga, Associate Planner (425)771-0220 _ Published: June 19, 2012. Account Name: City of Edmonds 11 11 11111 � 1 Ift l n L11 t v' J 11 1 11 U The undersigned, being first duly sworn 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 Development Application Carl Clapp on behalf of William Ritter File No.: PLN20120021 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: June 19, 2012 and that said newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of said period. T— f Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of, June, 2012 19th — Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Evc'reu, Snohomist County. ' Account Number: 101416 Order Number: 0001783837 ra?eioii Machuga, Jen From: Eric Falk [emf1367@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, July 02, 2012 8:40 PM To: Machuga, Jen; Planning Subject: RE: File # PLN20120021 RE: File # PLN20120021 I write in regards to the listed application for a subdivision located at 8364 Olympic View Drive. The application was filed by Carl Clapp on behalf of William Ritter. I live at 8310 Olympic View Drive which is adjacent to 8364 Olympic View Drive. I have concerns about the subdivision in regards to ingress/egress access of the additional two properties that would be established by the subdivision. I don't know if the City requires this to be established prior to granting the subdivision but I think in this location it should be. Currently there isn't an existing access to either of the properties that would be established by the subdivision. I suggest he gain access from the west side of his property byway of and extension of 84th Ave W. from its existing termination point northward to Olympic View Dr. I am in ownership of the existing private drive that currently serves 4 established residences, by way of ingress/egress easements, which includes 8364 Olympic View Drive. I have not granted an easement to Mr. Ritter for either of the new properties that would be established and reserve the right at this time. He has yet to consult with me about his intentions in regards to the subdivision or future building on said properties. Please keep me apprised of the status of this subdivision and the City's consideration for access to the properties. Thank you, Eric Falk '710001'? Cil Cnt 2