Loading...
16320 75TH PL W.PDFlill 11 lill 11 6075 16320 75TH PL W Ift--6-2114 ADDRESS TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: 00-6 45 /06000 ZL90 BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE): COVENANTS (RECORDED) CRITICAL AREAS: 13 DETERMINATION: onditional Waiver ❑ Study Required ❑Waiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S: GU Z 7 DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED: EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR: PERMITS (OTHER): / Wb GbS1 kydfkw; O ZZ0 , 76Y-;O�O . PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED: SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED: SEWER LID FEE $: LID #: SHORT PLAT FILE: LOT: BLOCK: SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: � SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #: 6� SOILS REPORT DATED:' �,� ,3,�2, fZ& ! q 2 STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #: FOR: WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: pxq3-ibOO ,caw&o„ L:\TEMP\DSTs\Fotms\Street File Checklist.doc IT G,Z 5-0 S"` R v c M 5:47W GJBoZo /&3_30 05-17-1993 09:SeAM FROM Geatech Ccnsultant� Inc TO 12067'710221 P.01 et -it", brand tax transmittal memo 7671 Iacf ps 3 t ttom�-- L \ ey�GV�1� l inQ �v� Fuan tJl1 L�-:. (i GIEOTJECH CONSULTANTS, INC. -7 13256 V.F 20th St. (Northup way), Suite 16 � '71 - 0--7 2 ( —may 17, 1993 Helleeue, WA 9KA).5 (206) 741-5618 FAX747�562 �`�fC' T F� JN 88163 p ��j Peter Pierides �19 16320 75th Place West 9� Edmonds, Washington 980 Subject: Additional Geotechnical Engineering Recommendations Existing Driveway, Rockery, and Retaining Wall 16320 75th Place west Edmonds,' Washington Dear Mr. Pierides: At your request, we are presenting this letter providing additional recommendations and conclusions regarding the recently constructed driveway, rockery, and retaining wall located on your property at 16320 75th Place West in Edmonds, Washington. The additional work is in response to two letters from the City of Edmonds, dated April 6 and April 19, 1993, which requested additional clarification on 11 items. This letter addresses Items 5,. 6, and 8 from the two letters in addition to discussing potential settlements in the existing driveway. Based on our telephone conversations with you, it is our understanding. that items 1 through 4,. 7, and 9 through 11 will be addressed by Max Meyring and Associates, the lead design professional. We were provided with a plan entitled "As Built Drawings," prepared by Max Meyring and Associates and dated April 12, 1993, and with a letter by AAA Gardening, dated May 6, 1993, documenting the presence of a 4-inch perforated drain behind the existing rockery far the preparation of ibis letter. with regard to the originally proposed retaining wall east of the driveway O tem 5) , it 7 9 our opinion that the existing rockery is a suitable alternative to a gravity retaining wall, due to the limited height of the cut slope above the driveway. The rockery alternative was discussed in our report dated January 2, 1992. With regard to the existing rockery along a portion of the east side of the driveway (item 6), we have reviewed the documentation provided by AAA Gardening -that a 4-inch perforated drain was placed behind the rockery in accordance with our recommendations. we agree with the City -of ',Edmonds that a portion of the rockery is'grea'ter than our recommended maximum height of 4 feet. However, since this portion of the rockery is nearly parallel to the existing slope, along the southern property line, it is our opinion that the rockery is equate in its present configuration. 05-17-1993 09:59AM FROM Geotech Consultants ,Inc TO 12067710221 P.02 Peter Pierides JN 88163 May 17, 1993 Page 2 In our letter dated- March 31, 1993, we presented two alternatives to correct the potential slope instability from the construction of the masonry retaining wall west of the residence (Item 8). As a third alternative, the existing slope could be graded back to its origi"l condition (i.e. a continuous slope between the top of the railroad bulkhead wall and the concrete patio at the top of the slope). The existing retaining wall would be left in place. This would involve filling in front (to the west) of the retaining wall end removing the fill placed above the railroad bulkhead wall. The fill placed above the northern portion of the retaining wall would still need to be removed. $�ncce the southern portion.of the slope behind the wail is essentially at, the inclination it was prior to the placement of the well, this area could be left undisturbed. A backhoe would need to be used to perform the grading operations and would need -to access the site from the adjacent properties to the south or north. Prior to backfilling in front of the wall, additional weep holes should be drilled in the face of the wall at a height of 2 feet from the base to provide additional drainage: Backfiil placed against the front of the well should consist of compacted 2- to 4-inch quarry spat l s to provide a suitable, free -draining, buttress in front of the wall. It is our opinion that if this alternative is performed according to our recommendations and under our direction, the existing slope west of the patio and deck would be at least as stable as it was prior to the construction of the wall and the slope grading. As was stated in our letter dated March 31, 1993, it is our opinion that if the wall.and slope are left in their current configuration, failure of the wall is possible, which could result in damage to adjacent structures. The most likely structures which could be impacted by failure of the wall would be the patio and deck east of the elope and the railroad bulkhead west of the well. Damage to adjacent residences to the north and south is, in our opinion, unlikely due to the distance between the wall and the adjacent houses. it is our opinion that the driveway is adequately constructed and that the drainage installed under the driveway and behind the rockery are acting as cutoff trenches upslope from the fill placed under the driveway_ Therefore, the originally proposed cutoff trench above the driveway was not required. As was stated in the March 31, 1993 letter', the on -site silty sails were used as backfill under the driveway. Consequently, settlement of the fill over time is possible which could cause cracking in the concrete pavement that would require periodic maintenance and repair. Since rebar reinforcement was placed GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. -V05-17-1993 10:00AM FROM Qeotech Consultants Inc TO 12067?10221 P.03 a Peter Pierides JN 88163 May 17, 1993 Page 3 in the concrete driveway, it is our opinion that these settlements and resulting cracking should be relatively minor. Maintenance and repair would, we anticipate, be limited to filling the cracks with a sealant as they appear and the possible replacement of isolated areas'of canerete pavement. We do not anticipate the distress will reduce the serviceability of the driveway significantly. We understand that the lower portion of the driveway is at an inclination of ZZ percent. Construction of this portion of the driveway at a steeper-theh-Zb-percent inclination was done to reduce the inclination of the fill slope needed on the downslope side of the driveway. Lowering the driveway would require steepening the fill slope, which would reduce its stability. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact us. Respectively submitted, GEOTECH COi5ULTANT9, INC. xPIAES .7/7M Burton R. Holt, P.E. Geotechnical Engineer games R. Finley, Jr., P.E. Pri nci pal cc: city of Edmonds A,ttn* Jeanine Graf Meyring & Associates, Inc. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. TOTAL P.03 ., • STREET FILE y. sters EyRINq & , Fore ASSOCIATES, INC. 23423 Highway 99 Edmonds, WA 98020 (206) 778-3101 P.O. Box 32 Lynnwood, WA 98036 May 14, 199.3 NG City of Edmonds Building & Engineering Departments 205 5th Avenue North Edmonds, Wash.' 98020 Re: Drainage Installation - 16320 75th Plpce West Peter Pierides - Owner After reviewing the pictures of the As Built of the West area of the Pierides construction, it was obvious to me that the detention tank was larger than depicted on the As Built drawing as previously submitted. I made a personal inspection of the installation and found that the tank as installed is a 30 inch diameter CMP.by 10 LF in length connected to a T-1 CB at each end with a 12 inch diameter CMP 1.0 feet at the North end and 1.5 feet at the South end. The PC device has not been installed, however, I have contacted Dixieland Dozing, Walt Moody, to complete the installation and masonry requirements attached to the total system. The As Built submitted has been amended to reflect this observation and the calculations indicating that the total volume is met for the new roadway installation which comprises 2400 square feet of surface area. The roof drainage system will be directed back to the pre development status. I apologize for having to amend the As Built which causes some concern regarding the overall accuracy of the first submittal. Respectfully, M. B. Meyring, P.E. At.. ,Ex/v/B/T TO BE DV —M4L. WAG A1L'W.c-1DEt> A-45 3411c-7- PiE2/IFS 7-Ir E# PG 5W C U/n'lO�t!?7S W.4 cGo�c'� pET�"�rlTro�c1 Pi�F � Z' � o • 5 .e 12" q" pv C5 - -7--/ G,4 7=-,44 c / 7-`f-'� Al Z-CB-T--/ 6)99 = /9.7eo r 7D.7& V INC. pfsi6.vG�m�ry aysrikt' s 24Oa � IQ • Ir.- � q x ery Q I . AWA4155vcc X02W-V7Y, /iv;P .O s �ieil.�0l1'if T = T.IMAE Ga' 7/zw 7S 16`PZ avm/."'!5;v L-" o C 0.9 C o.o6) = ear .taew" " aenew emeer cnwyrcw Z yr' r s -AFf 270 6 Qo AQW,10 WK-7 _ -zst V06 0.08 -3$'S = y. = &ar,—,f a ee' /'fYr ee C •c..- vA,'ZL-K ,vp,f.4 •C .. • "P Gbr •• rs c c = 2 3'7 =j /0 73..G Ks = 4-3 7-9 -40 ( 0,68) C Ve,-S ) ( ) ; z4s = Ys x A x L��JlLx� C Y = (136S C Az ocowpAaid c wglec) • 1.30.5 fr/.t. 0.5 18� /.767 3S 4,9 / _ /4.3 GF 13 .z 9. c? vIrr. A%W- AFMOW v4� r�i o iAIA-dU'r Gi�GY/1LET Pion COW.W.) _ ,arm ;F s cv3- _ ;% rev �GrP�P I RECEIVED �rs�.c �;accr or, r J U N 4 1993 Rice ENGINEERING i Mary c�ry ,v. �o r6pc,e�7�,ev IlR�piALSt/tY k1l �Xis/�/eUrt/l.�l� Q : ery p �av A s iViei/�•Rl�s T = 4, : ,ktPWAM6 /4'OWIQ:fW To = /o ♦ rho >/a(vu, _ /0,4 �►it/. q, _ r Co,ZS I y = s7ar m;e/, nee- sy r ) -40( Arfr:3 aef/per a C = AZ (x4wp•Fa*.6 cnaFicE) vvL�v,o,PE.q► •C " •` •9 r x h = - v4otr.' A%W-. 49W7A ri'F,N® IAIX' r GY o = cr O, ZS� • �� 2% r� STREET FILE On .lowm] I CA3 146 v A. -Ao Y,6QCA VVAWAftV4Wcr Q. reaw Arw"sc rell3 ) r� ^ J U N 4 1993 A�v32 D %s ENGINEERING A A;f o c- ,E,ris� r�� Urt/L�l� .giPF/P L'', Q (O. / 3 r = AWAOOLL X*,VW..V7Y� lW.IA .. T = T.��E C1� 1/G�✓ 46 s AU OWAWW ~N/Zi�rAW fA) <APra.f F r, r I ys s . —a—el %E� I iy r - •OfD GAT T•+ rs IKs= [ ) -40( �/1DT.iY = Vs x� x L�i�lll,XL=C) crw/ficE C AZ C-<Owp4A4d CiwF/CE) 4' A1DX/.A-F - . 47Q !/.f/L�K �o.PE.q •C .. A {/6t1. Lam. 49F-71�r� -W~M 0► Z*-' 21AUC 1AIMU'l qK, .it a•s 7,�� d=� e.03/=o,zofr. 2%Xv 1 STREET FILE A BURL114GTON AdMONORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY OCCUPANCY PERMIT NO. PX93-16199 THIS AGREEMENT made this 19th day of August. 1993, between BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROA COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, hereinafter called "Burlington" whose post office address is 2000 First Intersta- Center, S99 Third Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98104-1105, and Peter Pierides, a property owner whose post office address is: 16320 - 7Sth Place West Edmonds, Washington 98020 hereinafter called "Permittee." WITNESSETH: Burlington, for and in consideration of the fee herein provided to be paid to it by Permittee and of th covenants and promises hereinafter made to be observed and performed by Permittee, does hereby grant t Permittee license and permission to excavate for, construct, maintain, and operate a longitudinal underground four (4) inch PVC storm water pipeline entering the right-of-way a Station,1221 +80 running parallel to and approximately seven (7) feet from the easterly right -of way line to a rock spalls outlet at Station 1220+30. Top of pipeline to be buried approximatel-_ one (1) foot below ground surface. Note> Existing piping systems over bulkhead to be removed. hereinafter referred to as the "Facility," upon the right-of-way of Burlington or underneath the surface thereof e Burlingtcn's track, as the case may be, at or near Edmonds, in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington, to be located as follows, to wit: Line Segment: 0050 Survey Station: 1220 + 30 to 1221 + 80 Milepost: 21.15 - 21.18. Permittee in consideration of such license and permission hereby covenants and promises as follows: 1. Permittee will pay in advance to Burlington for this permit the sum of THREE HUNDRED DOLLAR ($300.00) for the first TEN (10) year period hereof and ONE HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS (Si S0.00) for each subsequen TEN (10) year period that this Permit remains in effect and Permittee will also pay or reimburse Burlington for ai taxes and assessments that maybe levied or assessed against said Facility. Burlington reserves the right to change th, fee on future Permits at anytime without notice. This provision shall in no way affect Burlington's right to terminat. said Permit pursuant to Paragraph 10 hereof. Either party hereto may assign any receivables due them under thi. Agreement, provided, however, such assignments shall not relieve the assignor of any of its rights or obligation - under this Agreement. 08. 19 91 16:54 FAX =06 296 3818 HULL-kYD MERICA r . .. .. Zoos 2. Permittee, at Permittee's sole cost and expense, shall excavate for, construct. reconstruct maintain and repair said Facility, placing same in accordance with the specifications provided in application dated 7/19193. heretofore approved by Burlington's Division Engineer. Permittee shall fill in the excavation and restore the surface of the ground upon which the Facility is located to its previous condition subject to the approval of the Division Roadmaster of Burlington upon which the Facility is located. Said General Manager shall have the right at any time when in his judgment it becomes necessary or advisable to require any material used in the work to be replaced with like material or with material of a more permanent character; also to require additional work or change of location of said Facility as a matter of safety and/or appearance, or on account of additional tracks being laid, change of grade thereof, construction of a building, or for any other reason whether or not connected with the operation, maintenance, or improvement of Burlington, all of which shall.be done at the expense of Permittee in the manner herein provided. 3. Permittee shall give to the Division Roadmaster at least two (2) days advance notice of any work to be done by Permittee in the excavation for, construction, reconstruction, maintenance, repair, change of location, or removal of said Facility, and shall conduct said work in such a manner as not to interfere with the maintenance and operation of Burlington. 4. In the event that Burlington, at the request of Permittee or any agent or contractor of Permittee, or for the protection of its property and operations, performs any work, furnishes any material or flagging service, or incurs any expense whatsoever on account of the excavation for, construction, reconstruction, maintenance, repair, change of location, removal of the Facility, or otherwise, Permittee shall reimburse Burlington for the cost thereof within twenty (20) days after bills are rendered therefor. If the excavation for construction, any reconstruction, maintenance, repair, change of location, or removal of the Facility requires any or all of the following work: removal and replacement of track, bridging, protection of track or other Burlington facilities by work or flagging, engineering, and/or supervision, such work is to be performed by Burlington employees and the cost borne by Permittee. 5. (a) Fiber optic cable systems may be buried on Burlington's property. Permittee shall telephone Burlington's Communications Network Control Center at 1-800-533-2891 (a 24 hour number) to determine if fiber optic cable is buried anywhere on Burlington's property to be used by Permittee. The Communications Network Control Center will contact the appropriate personnel to have cables located and make arrangements with Permittee as to the protective measures that must be adhered to prior to the commencement of any work on Burlington's property. In addition to the liability terms elsewhere in this Agreement, Permittee shall indemnify and hold Burlington harmless against and from all cost, liability, and expense whatsoever (including, without limitation, attorney's fees and court costs and expenses) arising out of or in any way contributed to by any act or omission of Permittee, its contractor, agents and/or employees, that cause or in any way or degree contribute to (1) any damage to or destruction of any telecommunications system by Permittee, and/or its contractor, agents and/or employees, on Burlington's property, (2) any injury to or death of any person employed by or on behalf of any telecommunications company, and/or its contractor, agents and/or employees, on Burlington's property, and/or (3) any claim or cause of action for alleged loss of profits or revenue by, or loss of service by a customer or user of such telecommunication company(ies). E. in the event any cathodic electrolysis or other electrical grounding system is installed in connection with the Facility which, in the opinion of Burlington, interferes with train signals in any way, telephone or telegraph lines, or other facilities of Burlington, Permittee, upon being informed by Burlington of such interference, shall forthwith discontinue operation of and remove said grounding system, or take such steps as may be necessary to avoid and eliminate all such interference. Permirtee further agrees to indemnify and save harmless Burlington from and against any damages, claims, losses, suits, or expenses in any manner arising from or growing out of interference with the signals, telephone, or telegraph lines of Burlington by the operation, use, or existence of any such grounding system. U8.19.91 16:54 FAX 206 298 1818 • HOLL-kND A)IERIr:a (a uU6 7. Permittee shall and hereby releases and discharges Burlington of and from any and all liability for damage to or destruction of said Facility, and any other property of Permittee located on or near Burlington's premises, and shali and hereby assumes any and all liability for injury to or death of any and all persons whomsoever, including officers, employees, and agents of the parties hereto, and loss of or damage to property to whomsoever belonging, including property owned by, leased to, or in the care, custody, and control of the parties hereto, in any manner a-ising from or during the excavation for, construction, reconstruction, use, maintenance, repair, or removal of said Facility, however such injury, death, loss, damage, or destruction aforesaid may occur or be caused, and shall and hereby does indemnify and save harmless Burlington of and from any and all claims, demands, suits, actions, damages, recoveries, judgments, costs, or expenses arising or growing out of or in connection with any such injury, death, loss, damage, or destruction aforesaid. Permittee further agrees to appear and defend in the name of Burlington any suits or actions at law brought against Burlington on account of any such personal injury or death, and loss and damage to or destruction of property, and to pay and satisfy any final judgment that may be rendered against Burlington in any such suit or action. THE LIABILITY ASSUMED BY PERMITEE SHALL NOT BE AFFECTED BY THE FACT, IF IT IS A FACT, THAT THE LOSS. DAMAGE, DEATH, OR INJURY WAS OCCASIONED BY OR CONTRIBUTED TO BY THE NEGLIGENCE OF BURLINGTON, ITS AGENTS, SERVANTS, EMPLOYEES, OR OTHERWISE TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPUCA13LE LAW; PROVIDED,. HOWEVER, THAT PERMITTEE SHALL HAVE NO OBLIGATION TO ASSUME SUCH' LIABILITY TO THE EXTENT CAUSED BY THE NEGLIGENCE OF BURLINGTON OR ITS EMPLOYEES OR AGENTS WHERE ASSUMPTION OF SUCH LIABILITY WOULD VIOLATE WASHINGTON LAW (RCW 4.24.115), OREGON, IDAHO. OR THE PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA LAWS. 8. Permittee shall not transfer or assign this Agreement without the written consent of Burlington. 9. Nothing herein contained shall imply or import a covenant on the part of Burlington for quiet enjoyment. 10. It is expressly understood and agreed that Burlington may at any time cancel and terminate this license and permission by giving to Permittee thirty (30) days written notice of its intention to cancel the same and at the expiration of such notice this license and permission shall terminate. Upon receipt of such notice and before the expiration thereof, Permittee, under the supervision and direction of the said General Manager, or his authorized representative, shall remove said Facility from the right-of-way of Burlington and restore the right-of-way and premises of Burlington in a manner and to such condition as shall be satisfactory to said General Manager, if Permittee fails to remove the Facility and restore said right-of-way to such condition within said thirty (30) day period, Burlington at its option may remove same and restore said right-of-way to its previous condition, and Permittee shall pay TO Burlington the cost and expense thereof. 11. Upon any failure of Permittee to punctually and strictly observe and perform the covenants and promises made herein by Permittee to be kept and performed. Burlington may terminate this Agreement on ten (10) days notice to Permittee, remove said Facility, and restore said right-of-way to its previous condition at the cost and expense of Permittee. - 12. In the event of Permittee's removal of the Facility from Burlington's premises, Permittee agrees to terminate said Agreement by notifying Burlington's Permit Services Department in Seattle in writing of Permittee's removal of Facility and termination of said Agreement within thirty (30) days from date of removal of said Facility from Burlington's premises. Any notices given under the provisions of this Agreement shall be good if deposited postpaid in a United States post office addressed to Permittee at Permittee's post office address above stated or as otherwise directed by Permittee. 05/ 19" 99 16:55 FAX 206 :03518 HOLLAND MERICA 0 r,, 13. Any notice given under the provisions of this Agreement shall be good if. deposited with the United States Postal Service addressed to Permittee at Permittee's post office address above stated or as otherwise directed by Permittee. 14. The license and permission herein granted is subject to permits, leases, and licenses, if any, heretofore granted by Burlington affecting the premises upon which said Facility is located. Subject to the foregoing provisions, this Agreement and all of the covenants and promises thereof, shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto, their respective executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement in duplicate as of the day and year first hereinabove written. BURUNGTON NORTHERN RAILROAO COMPANY (�p (� --I- DLO For: Title: Assistant Vice President Network Services Peter Pierides (Pe—cwtj By g-' $ - 93 iWimtn► (Witnes) aMWqMV BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD 0 ADDENDUM TO BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY PERMIT NO. PX 93-16199 DATED August 19,1993 The Permittee and contractors must at their own expense obtain and maintain in force during construction the following insurance: 1. Commercial General Liability Insurance, including contractual liability and products completed/operations, against claims arising out of bodily injury, illness and death and from damage to or destruction of property of others, including loss or use thereof, and including liability of Burlington Northern Railroad Company, with minimum limits for bodily injury and property damage of $1,000,000 for each occurrence, with an aggregate of $2,000,000. This policy shall contain a 'Waiver of Transfer Rights" endorsement to waive any right of recovery that the insurance company may have against Burlington Northern Railroad Company because of payments made for bodily injuries and property damage. 2. Business Automobile Policy Insurance, including owned, non -owned, and hired vehicles with minimum limits for bodily injury and property damage of $1,000,000 per occurrence, on all vehicles that the Permittee or any of its agents or employees may use at any time in connection with the performance of this Agreement. 3. Worker's Compensation Insurance or coverage as required under the Worker's Compensation Act of the applicable state. The policy should include occupational disease to required statutory limits, employer's liability of $1,000,000 to include FELA, if appropriate, and an "all states"endorsement. Evidence of the above insurance (certificate of insurance) must be provided prior to commencement of work and BN shall not be named insured under the above policies. 4. A Railroad Protective Liability Insurance policy issued in the name of Burlington Northern Railroad Company with limits of $2,000,000 for bodily injury and property damage per occurrence, with an aggregate of $6,000,000 must be provided when construction work will be within 50 (Fifty) feet of our tracks. The policy will remain in force during the construction phase of this project and must be provided prior to BN signing the permit or contract. OPTION Instead of No. 4 above, participation in Burlington Northern Railroad Company's BLANKET RAILROAD PROTECTIVE LIABILITY INSURANCE POLICY is available to Permittees and contractors. The limits of coverage are the same as above and are in force during the construction phase of the Permit. The amount is $368.00 referencing Permit No. PX93-16199 for this insurance package. CONTRACTOR: Address City, State = Zip Project Engineers Name SUBCONTRACTOR: Address City, State Zip Project Engineers Name If more than one Subcontractor is involved, attach additional information to this Addendum, together with Insurance required. NEITHER PERMITTEE, CONTRACTOR, OR ANY SUBCONTRACTOR SHALL BEGIN ANY WORK ON BURLINGTON S PROPERTY AND/OR RIGHT-OF-WAY UNTIL ALL NECESSARY EVIDENCE OF Questions or clarifications of insurance requirements may be directed to: Ms. Judith Harris Risk Management Analyst BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY 777 Main Street Fort Worth, TX 76102 Phone: 817-878-2374 FAX: 817-878-7032 REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTRACTORS & SUBCONTRACTOR WORKING ON BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY In order to protect BN's investment in its right-of-way and for the safety of persons coming onto BN property, BN has established certain requirements. The following constitute minimum requirements for all persons coming on or near BN right-of- way. Contractors are encouraged to develop their own safety rules that meet or exceed the following requirements. Contractors will not be allowed to occupy or work on Burlington Northern RR right-of-way prior to signing and dating this document and returning it to the Burlington Northern contact person shown on page 2. 1. All permits and agreements must be in effect, required payments made, and insurance certificates received and approved prior to Contractor entering Railroad right-of-way. Insurance must remain in effect during the entire project. 2. Any dewatering utilizing drains or ditches on BN property must be approved by a BN Engineer or Roadmaster. 3. Contractor must have BN approved "Construction Plans" prior to commencing work on a project. No change will be made to "Construction Plans" without approval by all parties involved. Approved revised plan will be furnished to all parties prior to implementation of changes. 4. Road Authority or Contractor will incur all costs for track work, including flagging, etc., made necessary due to their construction operation. 5. Pursuant to Federal Regulation, flagging protection is always required when equipment crosses or is working within 25 feet of center of any live track. When deemed necessary by local BN officers, a flagman may be required at all times while working on BN right-of-way in high density rail traffic areas. 6. Crossing of any Railroad tracks must be done at approved locations and must be over full depth timbers, rubber, etc. Any equipment with steel wheels, lugs, or tracks must not cross steel rails without aid of rubber tires or other approved protection. 7. All temporary construction crossings must be covered by a Private Roadway & Crossing Agreement, and must be barricaded when not in use. 8. Contractor must furnish details on how he will perform work that may affect existing drainage and/or possible fouling of track ballast as well as removal of overhead bridges/structures. (Structures and bridge spans over tracks must be removed intact.) 9. Absolutely no piling of construction materials or any other material, including dirt, sand, etc., within 15 feet of center of any secondary track (25 feet of Main Line and siding tracks) or on property of the Railroad not covered by Construction Easement, permit, lease or agreement. A 10' clear area on both sides of a main track must remain unobstructed at all times to allow for stopped train inspection. 10. No construction will be allowed within 15 feet of center of any track unless authorized by Burlington Northern Railroad General Roadmaster and as shown on Plan approved by the Railroad. This includes any excavation, slope encroachment and driving of sheet piles. 11. No vehicles or machines shall remain unattended within 15 feet of a secondary track or within 25 feet of a Main Line track. 12. IMPORTANT: Disregard of any of these items will result in Contractor being shut down for a minimum of 48 hours on Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way while infraction is investigated. Based on findings of the investigation, it will be determined if the Contractor will be allowed to work on BN RR right-of-way in the future. 13. Contractor safety rules, including rules regarding Personal Safety Equipment, must not conflict with BN safety policies or rules. 14. Articles included in Agreement should complement this document or exceed its contents. CONTRACTOR'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT: COMPANY 0 TITLE DATE SUBCONTRACTOR'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT: COMPANY TITLE DATE WORK SITE LOCATION: Town: State: Project: BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY CONTACT PERSON: NAME; BARB SYLVESTER, Permit Coordinator PHONE: 206-467-3241 (1-800-676-014s) ADDRESS: Burlington Northern RR Co. 2000 First Interstate Center 999 Third Avenue Seattle WA 98104-1105 (Form 4129193) Permit Number: PX93-16199 Date: August 19, 1993 2 c OEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 1:3256 N.E. 20th St. (Northup Way). Suite 16 Bellevue. WA 98005 (206) 747-5618 FAX 747-8561 BY101NG RA Y 18 1993 May 17, 1993 JN 88163 Peter Pi eri des 16320 75th Place West �(!�%` 751 Edmonds, Washington 980 Subject: Additional Geotechnical Engineering Recommendations Existing Driveway, Rockery, and Retaining Wall 16320 75th Place West Edmonds, Washington Dear Mr. Pierides: At your request, we are presenting this letter providing additional recommendations and conclusions regarding the recently constructed driveway, rockery, and retaining wall located on your property at 16320 75th Place West in Edmonds, Washington. The additional work is in response to two letters from the city of Edmonds, dated April 6 and April 19, 1993, which requested additional clarification on 11 items. This letter addresses Items 5, 6, and 8 from the two letters in addition to discussing potential settlements in the existing driveway. Based on our telephone conversations with you, it is our understanding that Items 1 through 4, 7, and 9 through 11 will be addressed by Max Meyring and Associates, the lead design professional. We were provided with a plan entitled "As Built Drawings," prepared by Max Meyring and Associates and dated April 12, 1993, and with a letter by AAA Gardening, dated May 6, 1993, documenting the presence of a 4-inch perforated drain behind the existing rockery for the preparation of this letter. With regard to the originally proposed retaining wall east of the driveway (Item 5), it is our opinion that the existing rockery is a suitable alternative to a gravity retaining wall, due to the limited height of the cut slope above the driveway. The rockery alternative was discussed in our report dated January 2, 1992. With regard to the existing rockery along a portion of the east side of the driveway (Item 6), we have reviewed the documentation provided by AAA Gardening that a 4-inch perforated drain was placed behind the rockery in accordance with our recommendations. We agree with the City of Edmonds that a portion of the rockery is greater than our recommended maximum height of 4 feet. However, since this portion of the rockery is nearly parallel to the existing slope along the southern property line, it is our opinion that the rockery is equate in its present configuration. ti • • Peter Pierides May 17, 1993 JN 88163 Page 2 In our. letter dated March 31, 1993, we presented two alternatives to correct the potential slope instability from the construction of the masonry retaining wall west of the residence (Item 8). As a third alternative, the existing slope could be graded back to its original condition (i.e. a continuous slope between the top.of the railroad bulkhead wall and the concrete patio at the top of the slope). The existing retaining wall would be left i-n place. This would involve filling in front (to the west) of the retaining wall and removing the fill placed above the railroad bulkhead wall. The fill placed above the northern portion of the retaining wall would still need to be removed. Since the southern portion of the slope behind the wall is essentially at the inclination it was prior to the placement of the wall, this area could be left undisturbed. A backhoe would need to be used to perform the grading operations and would need to access the site from the adjacent properties to the south or north. Prior to backfilling in front of the wall, additional weep holes should be drilled in the face of the wall at a height of 2 feet from the base to provide additional drainage. Backfill placed against the front of the wall should consist of compacted 2- to 4-inch quarry spalls to provide a suitable, free -draining, buttress in front of the wall. It is our opinion that if this alternative is performed according to our recommendations and under our direction, the existing slope west of the patio and deck would be at least as stable as it was prior to the construction of the wall and the slope grading. As was stated in our letter dated March 31, 1993, it is our opinion that if the wall and slope are left in their current configuration, failure of the wall is possible, which could result in damage to adjacent structures. The most likely structures which could be impacted by failure of the wall would be the patio and deck east of the slope and the railroad bulkhead west of the wall. Damage to adjacent residences to the north and south is, in our opinion, unlikely due to the distance between the wall and the adjacent houses. It is our opinion that the driveway is adequately constructed and that the drainage installed under the driveway and behind the rockery are acting as cutoff trenches upslope from the fill placed under the driveway. Therefore, the originally proposed cutoff trench above the driveway was not required. As was stated in the March 31, 1993 letter, the on -site silty soils were used as backfill under the driveway. Consequently_ settlement of the fill over time is possible which could cause cracking in the concrete pavement that would require periodic maintenance and repair. Since rebar reinforcement was placed GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Peter Pierides JN 88163 May 17, 1993 Page 3 in the concrete driveway, it is our opinion that these settlements and resulting cracking should be relatively minor. Maintenance and repair would, we anticipate, be limited to filling the cracks with a sealant as they appear and the possible replacement of isolated areas of concrete pavement. We do not anticipate the distress will reduce the serviceability of the driveway significantly. We understand that the lower portion of the driveway is at an inclination of 22 percent. Construction of this portion of the driveway at a steeper-then-20-percent inclination was done to reduce the inclination of the fill slope needed on the downslope side of the driveway. Lowering the driveway would require steepening the fill slope, which would reduce its stability. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact us. Respectively submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Ot R• 4.-0� WAskl��' TE�� `} �S6l�NAL ECG EXPIRES 7 / 07 l 9y , Burton R. Holt, P.E. Geotechnical Engineer James R. Finley, Jr., P.E. Principal cc: City of Edmonds Attn: Jeanine Graf Meyring & Associates, Inc. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. C.EOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 13256 N.E. 20th St. (Northup Way), Suite 16 Bellevue, WA 98005 (206) 747-5618 FAX 747-8561 03 April 30, 1993 JN 88163 City of Edmonds Community Services Department 250 - 5th Avenue North Edmonds, Washington 98020 Attention: Jeannine L. Graf Subject: Response to Letters Dated April 6, 1993, and April 19, 1993 Pierides Residence 16320 75th Place West Edmonds, Washington Dear Ms. Graf: On April 7, 1993, and on April 21, 1993, we received two letters from the City of Edmonds concerning the Pierides residence at 16320 75th Place West in Edmonds, Washington. The letter dated April 6, 1993, acknowledged receipt of our "Site Observations and Geotechnical Engineering Recommendations" letter dated March 31, 1993, and requested additional clarification on 11 items, one of which was that the City of Edmonds considers us the lead design professional on the project. The letter dated April 19, 1993, was a followuo to the earlier letter and detailed the still outstanding required information. Our involvement in this project began on December 19, 1991, when we visited the site to prepare a letter, dated January 2, 1992, providing geotechnical recommendations concerning the construction of a new driveway east of the residence. We have neither been asked by Mr. Pierides to perform as the lead design professional on this project nor have we ever acted in this capacity. In a telephone conversation with Mr. Pierides on April 23, 1993, he indicated that Max Meyring was the lead design professional on this project and is continuing to act in this capacity. • • City of Edmonds April 30, 1993 JN 88163 Page 2 We are prepared to'provide additional geotechnical consulting services on this project, with regard to the information required in the two letters referenced above, when we receive authorization from Mr. Pierides to proceed. At this time, we have not yet received that authorization. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact us. 0 cc: Peter Pierides Meyring & Associates, Inc. Respectively submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Burton R. Holt, P.E. Geotechnical Engineer FI of WA'S4 c° '�?' UN A L F.N/31903 EXPIRES 8 / 17 / y3 James R. Finley, Jr., P.E. Principal GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. to-31-1993 04:05PM 1 TO 12067710221 P.01 FROM Geotech Consultants Inc 0 GEOTECH CONSULTANTS. INC. 132!0N.F. 2 Y,h St, (Northup wv, Stine I6 Hulleyue. WA 9tiU G 120G) 747 5618 f?.': 747.8561 Peter Pierides 16320 75th Place West Edmonds, Washington 98026 Post -It" brand fax transmittal memo 76n F of pages P. To Crom . a Dept. Pho'Y Fax R x Y -4.0 1 %. 11 1 , 1 ✓ ✓ J BUILDING -MAR 31 1993 JN 88163 Subject: Site observations and Geotechnical Engineering Recommendations Existing Driveway, Rockery, and Retaining Wall 16320 75th Place West Edmonds, Washington, Dear Mr. Pierides: At your request, on March 10,' 1993, an engineer from Geotech Consultants, Inc. visited the site of the recently constructed driveway, rockery, and retaining wall located on your property at 16320 75th Place West in Edmonds, Washington. The site visit was in response to a letter by the City of Edmonds dated March 1, 1993, requiring that Geotech Consultants, Inc. visit the site and prepare a geotechnical report regarding the compliance of the driveway, rockery, and retaining wall eonctruotion with our "Geotechnical Engineering Recommendations" report dated January 2, 1993, and to recommendations by I-andau and Associates, who are consultants to the City of Edmonds. The City of Edmond's letter also requested that the report include grading volumes, verification of driveway slope, a survey, and a detailed explanation on the drainage system installed. No subsurface explorations were conducted on the site for the preparation of this report. Based on a telephone conversation with Mr. Max Mcyring of Meyring and Associates, we understand an as_ built survey is currently being prepared on driveway, rockery, and retaining wall construction. Since the as -built survey should include grading volumes, a verification of the driveway slope, and a detailed explanation of the drainage system installed, the conclusions and recommendations in this report are limited to the compliance of the recent construction to our previous recommendations and the recommendations contained in the Landau Associates, inc. "Initial Geotechnical Review" report dated May 20, 1992. Following the preparation of our above sA , 03-31-1993 04:05PM FROM Geotech Consultants Inc TO 12067710221 P.02 Peter Pierides March 31. 1993 JN 88163 Page 2 referenced report on January 2, 1992, we were not asked to review the final plans nor were we retained to perform on -site observation and testing during construction of the driveway, rockery, and retaining wall. For the preparation of this report, we were provided with the following: 1) City of Edmonds' letter dated March 1, 199, 2) "Initial deotechnical Review," Landau and Associates, May 20, 1992. 3) Grading, Drainage; T.E.S.C., and Driveway Profile Plan, Neyring and Associates, September 3, 1991. 4) Cut Sheet Driveway Plan, Meyring and Associates, February 1992. 5) Photographs of the retaining wall construction and driveway concrete placement. 6) Assorted copies of proposals, contracts, and receipts concerning the construction and materials of the driveway, rockery, and retaining wall. Existing Site Conditions The site is located at 16320 75th Place west in Edmonds, Washington. The existing residence is situated in the western portion of the property on a slope above the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks. The.reeently constructed driveway and rockery are located in the eastern portion of the property while the retaining wall is located on the slope to the west of the residence above the railroad. The concrete paved driveway enters the northeastern corner of the site, traverses ,across the site from north to south, and curves west at the southern property line to the parking area south of the residence_ The lower two-thirds of the driveway is bordered on the uphill side by a rockery varying in height from 1 to 5 feet which is placed against the driveway cut slope. A small storm drain extends under the driveway with several inlets to collect stormwater runoff from the surface of the driveway. We observed that approximately 3 to 4 feet of fill has been placed to the north and west of the driveway as part of the driveway construction. The fill- slope below the driveway appears to be at a 2:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) inclination_ Photographs taken by the concrete contractor +ndicate that approximately 4 to 6 inches of gravel was placed under the GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 03-31-1993 04:06PM FROM Geotech Consultants Inc TO 12067710221 P.03 I] Peter Pi eri des JN 88153 March 31, 1993 Page 3 r steel reinforced concrete driveway. We did not observe any tension cracks, settlements, or other indication of slope instability associated with the driveway construction or fill placement during our site visit. The rockery along the -uphill side of the driveway variesin height from'l to 5 feet and is constructed with 4-man rocks at the base, then reducing to 2-'man rocks at the top. It appears that the bottom course of rocks was keyed into the underlying soils and that 8 to 12 inches of drain rock was placed behind the rockery. we were unable to observe if a perforated drain was placed at the base of the rockery. The existing retaining wall west of the residence is approximately 1.20 feet long, 4 feet high, and constructed of CMU blocks. Photographs taken during wall construction indicate the vertical and horizontal rebar was placed between the courses of the masonry units, and that the wall has a concrete spread footing foundation. Weep holes were drilled at a spacing of 3 feet on -center along the length of the wall approximately 1 foot above the base. The wall appears to have been backfilled with on -site soils. A 10 -foot-high 50 percent slope extends above the wall to the existing concrete patio and wood deck. Above the northern portion of the wall below the existing wood deck, we observed that fill was placed on the existing slope. We were unable to determine the depth of the fill. A stormwater detention pipe was placed behind the southern portion of the well to provide controlled release of stormwater runoff into the drainage ditch along the eastern side of the railroad tracks at the base of the railroad tie wall. We observed tension cracks in the fill placed above the northern portion of the wall and in the fill placed to the west of the wall above the railroad tie well. We also observed settlement of the backfili behind the wall. The slope above the retaining wall is covered with erosion control netting and planted with ivy. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS with regard to the driveway, based on our observations and the information we reviewed, it is.our opinion that the driveway is adequately constructed and the fill slope below the driveway is at the recommended 2:1 (H;V) inclination. However, since the on -site silty soils were used as backfill under the driveway, settlement of the fill over time is possible which could cause cracking in the concrete pavement necessitating periodic maintenance and repair. It is further GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 03731-1993 04;06PM FROMWotech Consultants Inc TO 0 12067710221 P.04 Peter Pierides March 31, 1993 JN 88163 Page 4 our opinion that the construction of the driveway has not reduced the slope safety factor against sliding from what existed prior to the development. With regard to the rockery located east and south of the driveway, we were unable to determine if a perforated drain was placed at 'the base of the rockery in accordance with our recommendations. Since the long-term stability of the rockery is dependant on adequate drainage behind the rockery, the existence of the drain must be verified. It is recommended that wee be provided with written documentation from the rockery contractor that the drain was placed. in the. absence of this documentation, fi'ei d verification of the drain would need to be provided. if the drain was placed according to our recommendations, it is our opinion that the rockery was constructed adequately and substantially in accordance with our recommendations. If the drain was not placed, it is our opinion that the rockery should be removed, the drain installed according to our recommendations. and the rockery reconstructed along the. face of the cut slope. The existing gravity retaining wall west of the residence was not in our scope of work for the report issued on January 2. 1993, and we were not aware that the wall was to be constructed at the time the report was prepared. Landau Associates' recommendations in their review letter include that we be allowed to review the submitted plans and that a separate geotechnical study be required for the proposed retaining wall. These recommendations were not met. Based on our observations on the site and the photographs of the wail construction, it is our opinion that the gravity retaining wall on the slope, which is retaining colluvium Soils, is inadequate to support the lateral loads imposed. It is also our opinion that the failure of the wall is possible, which could result in instability of the existing slope and damage to the adjacent structures. Therefore, we recommend the wall and fill placed behind the wall be removed and the slope graded back to its original condition. As an alternative, the wall may be supported with soldier piles placed in front of the wail. we can provide you with a proposal to perform a geotechnical study with design criteria for the soldier piles upon request. This study would have to include at least one boring near the base of the existing wall. (iZOTECk CONSULTANT'S, iNC. .03.-31-1993 04:07PM PRODilwr'eotech Consultants Inc TO 0 12067710221 P.05 Peter Pi eri des March 31, 1993 JN 88163 Page S 4 If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact us. ' Respectively submitted. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS. INC. Burton R. Holt, P.E. Geotechnical Engineer Vs�c�h nry �.;: 3t31 exP►�N s 8117 l 9.3 James R. Finley, Jr., P.E. Pri nci pal cc: City of Edmonds, Attn: Jeanine Graf. Meyrina & Associates, Inc. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. TOTAL P.05 OEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 13256 N.E. 20th St. (Northup Way), Suite 16 Bellevue, WA 98005 (206) 747-5618 (206) 343-7959 STREET F oui� IMP 2 31992 January 2, 1992 JN 88163 InAX AY111*17 27s-,3,'o/ Peter Pierides c/o Meyring & Associates, Inc. 23423 Highway 99 Edmonds, Washington 98020 Attention: Chad Miller Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Recommendations Proposed Pierides Driveway 16320 75th Place West Edmonds, Washington Gentlemen: At your request, on December 19, 1991, an engineer from Geotech Consultants, Inc. visited the site of the proposed driveway to be constructed east of the existing Pierides residence in Edmonds, Washington. The purpose of our visit was to observe existing site conditions and to develop geotechnical recommendations regarding the design and construction of the proposed driveway. Based on preliminary cross sections furnished to us, prepared by Meyring & Associates and dated. November 6, 1991, we anticipate the proposed development will consist of the construction of a driveway to the east of the existing residence to access 75th Place West.. The preliminary cross sections indicate cuts and fills of up to 5 feet and rockeries up to 4 feet in height associated with the proposed construction. We were not furnished with a complete site plan. The cross -sections will need to be revised to comply with the recommendations in this report. Surface The site is located at Washington. The existing portion of the property Northern Railroad tracks. Z­ 1A 16320 75th Place West in Edmonds, residence is situated in the western on a slope above the Burlington The eastern portion of the existing STREET FILE. Peter Pierides January 2, 1992 JN 881.63 Page 2 residence was destroyed by fire and rebuilt in May of 1988. A wood deck extends to the north and west of the residence. To the west of the residence, the property slopes steeply to the west at approximately'40 to 50 percent down to the railroad tracks. The eastern portion of the site also slopes to the west with an overall slope of approximately 30 percent. A driveway extends along the southern property boundary from 75th Place West to the.existing residence. The surface of the eastern portion of the site has been altered by an apparent abandoned roadway cut running parallel to the slope and extending from the northern property line to the existing driveway. The cut slope is currently at approximately 1.5:1 (Horizontal:Vertical). The eastern portion of the site is currently covered with native grasses and weeds, and four 12- inch-diameter fir trees located along the top of the abandoned roadway cut. Surface water in the surrounding area drains to the west toward Puget Sound. Subsurface The subsurface conditions of the site in the area of the proposed driveway were explored with two hand auger holes excavated during our site visit to a maximum depth of approximately 5 feet. The explorations encountered soft to medium -stiff, fractured silts and loose, sandy silts. These soils have been disturbed and are considered to be colluvium resulting from downslope debris flows. On May 9, 1988, we issued a letter entitled Footing and Drainage Recommendations for the rebuild of the eastern portion of the existing residence. In this letter we described the soils observed in the footing trenches as soft clay or silt soils which were easily probed to depths of.more than 1 foot. Standing water was also noted in the footing trenches. Water was not encountered in our hand auger holes, however, the colluvial soils encountered were wet. We anticipate perched groundwater could be encountered near the existing ground surface especially during the wet, winter months. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS {It is our opinion that the proposed development is feasible ::from a geotechnical engineering standpoint.. However, the site is located in the Meadowdale slide area and is designated in the GeoEngineers' Landslide Hazard Map, dated January 1986, as 4A30. This designation means that hazards from ground failure, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Peter Pierides January 2, 1992 JN 88163 Page 3 in the form of soil slumps, in previously failed material have a 30 percent probability of occurring during a 25-year period. Our explorations and field observations indicated that the site is underlain by colluvial soils, and we noted some evidence of downslope soil movements in the form of bowed trees, separation of the concrete slabs for the driveway and the patio, and settlements of the concrete slabs. If the proposed driveway is constructed in accordance with our recommendations, we expect the slope in the eastern portion of ,the lot to have approximately the same factor of safety as currently exists. The Meadowdale area is a landslide area, and there is a risk involved in construction in this neighborhood. The risk has been recognized by the city when the ordinances covering development in the Meadowdale area were passed. The owner must also acknowledge this risk. Preliminary cross sections indicate proposed roadway cuts and fills of ulp to five (5) feet in depth. In no case should excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, state, and national government safety regulations. Temporary cuts up to a height of four (4) feet deep in unsaturated soils may be made vertical. For temporary cuts having a height greater than four (4) feet, the cut should have an inclination no steeper than 2:1 (Horizontal :Vertical) from the top' of the, s 1 ope to the bottom of the excavation. All permanent cuts into native soils should be inclined no steeper than 3:1 (H:V). Fill slopes consisting of imported granular fill should be benched into the underlying native soils and should not exceed 2:1 (H:V). Fill should be compacted to a minimum density equal to 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D-1557-78 (Modified Proctor). See the attached plate for further details on fill placement on slopes. Due to their.high.si1t.content, ,on -site (soils are not suitable for.use as structural fill, Water should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of any temporary or permanent slope. All permanently exposed slopes , should be seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve stability of the surficial layer of soil. We anticipate that rockeries will be used in the site development. A rockery is not intended to function as an engineered structure to resist lateral earth pressures, as a retaining wall would do. The primary function of a rockery is to cover the exposed excavated surface and thereby retard the erosion process. We recommend that rockeries be limited to a height of four (4) feet and that -they be constructed using minimum 4-man sized rocks. In areas where soft or yielding GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 0 Deter Pierides January 2, 1992 JN 88163 Page 4 soils are encountered at the base of the rockeries, a mat of quarry spalls should.be placed under the rockery to stabilize the subgrade. Should vertical slopes greater than four (4) feet in height be required, we recommend that the slopes be retained with soldier pile walls. We can provide design criteria for these piles if required, but such criteria' is outside the scope of our current work. Tiered rockeries may be used; however, the tiers should be spaced apart so that the effective slope inclination does not exceed 2:1 (H:V). Thus, there is little to be gained -by constructing tiered rockeries. The construction of rockeries is to a large extent an art not entirely controllable by engineering methods and standards. It is imperative that rockeries, if used, be constructed with care and in a proper manner by an experienced contractor with proven ability in rockery construction. The rockeries should be constructed with hard, sound, and durable rock in accordance with accepted local practice and King County Standards. Provisions for maintenance, such as access to the rockery, should be considered in the design. We recommend.the use of drains at the base of all rockeries. In areas where rockeries are not placed on the upslope side of the proposed driveway, we recommend a cut -.off trench be installed above the driveway at a minimum elevation of one (1) foot below the elevation of the driveway. The gravel -filled cut-off trench would be installed with a perforated pipe similar to a rockery drain. The rockery drains should be surrounded by at least six(6) inches of one -inch -minus washed rock wrapped in non -woven geotextile filter fabric (Mirafi 140N, Supac 4NP, or similar material). At the highest point, the perforated pipe invert should be at least as low as the bottom of the rockeries and it should be sloped for drainage. No groundwater was observed during our field work. However, seepage into excavations is possible, and if encountered should be drained away from the site by use of drainage ditches, perforated pipe, French drains, or by pumping from sumps interconnected by shallow connector trenches at the bottom of the excavation. Any exposed slopes should be covered with plastic to minimize. -erosion until permanent erosion - control measures are established. The analyses, conclusions and recommendations contained in this letter are based on site conditions as they existed at the time of our explorations and observations and assume that the soils encountered or observed are representative of the subsurface conditions of the site. If, during construction, subsurface conditions are found which are significantly GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Peter Pierides January 2, 1992 JN 88163 Page 5 different from those observed in the explorations, we should be advised at once so that we can review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered on construction sites. Such unexpected conditions frequently require that additional expenditures be made to attain a properly constructed project. It is recommended that the owner consider providing a contingency fund to accommodate such potential extra costs and risks. This letter has been prepared for the exclusive use of Peter Pierides and his representatives for specific application to this project and site. Our recommendations and conclusions are based on the site materials observed, and engineering analyses. The conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in accordance with current standards of practice within the scope of our services and within budget and time constraints. No warranty is expressed or implied. The scope of our services does not include services related to construction safety precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. We recommend that this letter, in its entirety, be included in the project contract documents for the information of the contractor. It is recommended that Geotech Consultants, Inc. provide a general review of the geotechnical aspects of the final design and specifications to verify that the our recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in the design and project specifications. It is also recommended that Geotech Consultants, Inc. be retained to provide geotechnical consultation, testing, and observation services during construction. This is to confirm that subsurface conditions are consistent with those indicated by our exploration, to evaluate whether construction activities comply with the intent of contract plans and specifications, and to provide recommendations for design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. However, our work will not include supervision or direction of the actual work of the contractor, his employees or agents. Also, job and site safety, and dimensional measurements, will be the responsibility of the contractor. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Pi eri des -y 2, 1992 JN 88163 Page 6 The following plates are attached and complete this report: Plate 1 Fill Placement on Slope Plate 2 Rockery Detail Respectively submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. &.. /I e /ram Burton R. Holt, P.E. Geotechnical Engineer EXPIRES 8 / 1 ] / James R. Finley, Jr., P.E. Principal Attachments cc: Structural Design Associates Meyring & Associates, Inc..' GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. r, TOP OF NATIVE SOIL GEOTECH CONSULTANTS 4 • 1 FILL PLACEMENT ON -SLOPE .lob No. + Dolt: Pole BSIlo3 I JHN 1992 1 ROCKERY DETAI4 For flat backslope, surface should 2 or tiotle'r be impervious & sloped 'to drain. 1 • A 1102 e 0 o n e 6 o e e .e e e e e e A e e e e e . • ... Irvin: 12" .' • • :' m undisturbed soll� " diam eft. 1 e min. 17.E Firm, Min. 4 p P P i continuous slope to outlet% Pipe War cut face lined with filter fabric (Mlrofl or equivalent). GENERAL NOTES 1. Rock shall be sound and have minimum density of 160 pounds per cubic foot. 2. The long dimension of all rocks shall be placed perpendicular to the wall. Each rock should bear on two rocks in the tier below. 3, Improved walking surfaces above and adjacent to rockeries over 30" in height shall be pro- tected by a guardrail conforming to UBC 1711. 4. Rockeries are erosion -control structures, not retaining walls. The on -site material must be stable and free-standing in cut face. S. Any deviation in design or in placement of adjacent structures must be submitted with the seal of a civil Engineer currently licensed in the State of Washington. 6. Rockeries shall be made from minimum 4-man sized rocks Free -draining backfill (ma:. S% fines) min. 13" wide layer of 2"- 4" quarry spalis adjacent 10 rockery. Stable cut face 1" (or less) diameter washed grovel; min. 6" cover over pipe., min. 20 gravel under pipe. Filter fabric No roadways or parking lots In this area. i 'tr •�•' '• �0;' tt •' ' �' ., 1 "�.- No footings of structures (Including other ro:►eriesl may bear In stippled areet IPLACEMENT OF ADJACENT' STRUCTURES PLATE Z 0 STREET FILE.r n uulumma MAR 2 3 1992 DRAINAGE NARRATIVE FOR PETER PIERIDES SEC. 5, TWP. 27N. , RGE. 4, EAST, W. M. ----------- ---- - -------- M. LR. Meyrin P. E #'621 Bate B. �Fl .r 7 Jots 91-052 TRn ET FILE NARRATIVE & DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS FOR PETER PIERIDES - #91-052 PURPOSE The purpose of this project is to enhance the safety of the Pierides family by reducing the driveway grade. The redesign includes the widening of the parking entrance to the end of the house and driveway. The entire concept is to help prevent autos from sliding around tight corners during uncooperative weather. The steepest grade proposed is 15 percent as opposed to a constant 30 percent straight up or down along the south line. SITE The site is located in Block,60 of the Meadowdale Peach area in the Southwest Quarter of Section 5, Township 27 North, Range 4 East, W. M. in Edmonds, Washington. The South portion of Lot 7, Lot 8 and the northern portion of Lot 9 has a multitude of slopes beginning from 75th Place West at 20 percent for approximately 1/3 of the property to the house being fairly level until the end.of the decks and parking. The final 1/3 of the lot has a 35% slope or greater. This last portion runs to the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way. bulkhead. DRAINAGE Currently the drainage flows from the top of the property to the base freely with the exception of the house and decks. This runoff flows through several 4" velcro tubing to the lower slopes of the estate and outfalls freely onto the ground. This is creating natural wash outs and erosion problems which need to be controlled. Our proposal is to terrace this lower portion and run the planned rockery drains north and west to outfall onto the railroad's existing drainage ditch with teed pipe ends. The new driveway and accompanying support rockeries will have a consolidated 16" CMP detention pipe of 15.5 linear feet with a 13/32nd orifice to regulate the drainage. This will run south and westerly over the same railroad bulkhead with teed pipe ends. DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS ------------------- The property drains southwest to the Great Northern right-of-way. Upon flowing over the railway's bulkhead, this drainage flows southerly in an open ditch for approximately 80 feet into'a catch basin then turns west inside an 18" CMP for 60 feet to Puget Sound. CONSTRUCTION The construction, will be taking place in two phases. Phase I will consist of installation of TESC devices, siltation fencing, lower rockeries and detention system. Then the upper portion will be Phase II at which time the'old driveway will be removed and grading will take place. Thence the rockery will be implaced along with the drainage system and final driveway formed and poured. DRAINAGE SPECIFICATIONS Total Storage required - 72.06 cubic feet Detention Pipe - 18" CMP 15.5 LF Type 1 Catch Basin with Oil Restrictor Orifice - 4" Sharp Edged Machine Drilled NOTE: Drainage Calculations accompany this document. LiHRG�/L4i�G4'GG!'.4Tit?t/r 1-'E7N i'►r2i�Cc AW/ISW d2v12S A*7 ,4. /O Y6�.tr7t/.e�/ f?l�iALS�L�Y Exrsriur eafzyyzwS Q Q � �CGOK�.�R/LG#�ll4�CE -G� C s Clf�YG/F_,l/l - A s AAW.oIMW T Y2W 4U a &lOJVAWA9 ~WZ,,4rt"' 4'- CAa)CZ.•z iC loCn) a i70c� 7 e (A) (A &FC c C ,(oCa i i �, z — 11S - •8 ; AMMOAtxo " 4:2WocvW dnaV:Er cLwe VIA-W T • -�f � ;�� qo = 30, is Q. O S ,•icz AS - q3z — 4rO a7- �,oSx .9) + (•fir , zS�(z I x .5) = 7'-o rs /Ylrafe G z Ks = 4521 c 30, l4 -40 � � -A L'/.. i3C�,ig % ♦ Ar/07.4,41,00gr.3 4 = Ju �- ci fT �rC7Z d s _..77 ,38 = ��Z ,rr E TOWNSHIP 27 N., RANGE 4 NORTHWEST QUARTER 1990 9 > SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASH IN GT( o N I=LM RO 8T' IJORM♦ DE. H J i O \ y y ie ADC 41 42 4 og Y tu �I+ ,� c� 4y k Z• t pALE h u nS !a r r+ i Q�0 ��J`y A711LW� �� 3 PARK r /RO& °`Rµ.2 E Sa 3 WESTWDOD 2( vER- i� k`-'W y/N[ n 4b F t b o HIL LS pE REE1515T T. S.Y/. 5 Q 15 x 1 [ NE 2 < is S2, j 5s 49 K N JI'1 ro i Si 11 l0 9 68 65 A MloE 'vN° 5 �v 12 l Y� V \ PROP. I �/ PLAT , DC I ss s4 5s 14 IS Ib 53 3 Aca 54 ; EALE F A ul V..2 PROP t2 20 19 16 17 Q 52 ADD Ne'i T/ME �. \ E rz RID( O 0, N. l% i 8. • 5t5•w. r , ► In NO. sT O V S7 1) 99 4° 41 41 42 O; J Q I N Z So ��**--�� r, s4Q\, a5 e1e Coo I G 4o 59 2 �a O It 0-ti "*l ui 49 42 ha 4E > W 44 51 ; SI 47 Q pl •C RA Q �' F I A wRfN GL N 1 C/ HEA i' e7 0 d�.� t h z e, r ,� 0:31 76 77 �J9 34 `S 3S z 41^ d O>,� 1- AO a n44 QWt ENO o IQ °• W J EADOW LE NAINES = Q Ott w; a t��,. V/LLAGE K E5 WMARi a 0 � ,P , Z �r� °' 7e 11 0 7 81 90 2 \.� eB. B7 R170 �Q • 3 IJs+aR I�0 ` MEj10prvDALE �pQvo°�p�yy. o y WEST pj �0\ a(6 105 ; 3 107 IoB FI l09 MEADOWDALE F W M n8 Q 113 f • ° 4 v, v1EADOW- �, I17 24 L WQ MERE �T r QW�N s I° ec� � I Gy�� tO� - LN �Y NA7 ' l� J�\ Ito i i z �p� �+ 15° 17 ��l! r 1 lit t91yY 26 � y A p��� �V.\ tiPm w7 5T. gvr. 2Wl 1 2N — S.W. ALE , Q I N�D[AN ��D�GLEN ° „ pR5 A'A 0, 9 p`� St 00 (L V a n MEAOOw ono GTS FSTS'Z :� 0� J\�� �Bfl 1 t� [j: / °1 c V _ I E9TA7ES u P' II 9 ♦ 3 •• l3< wJN < ID2 �+ h \, R a A a Bc N: `�o �, 1• � � eP Ie 139 s -/ IL ,s\1o\t9 eI 13 V/E ss Gl �V ii = 4. apN O p0 �vl 147 14D 149 9 jO a �� OR8 EOEaIcK PL F !EW 'AJItR n it j45 l�aPpv �Z R.BMSoN `W T y M it f m n u TI t T67N ST. b ,°• L p � SEA LAvrn ;� L 1 L•T.Ir• . P i - PERTY MGMT PARK5/ �' q E t ACRES i=I ACRES 3\,0�° i' �o I IS• i rea n•z k 0 , 14 p OUND > C'NERRY QF �_'z - I DELAN D5 ""E"°°w°A` 7 EADOW/EWTR3. HALL 1sa e� ' SGU/R LANE °I W F ° _ �. NOknO Q�G(}y,•rlrw000 ••y [2 ALN•J /Y� Dl V. Z Iil AK� • e r 6 M91r T[Rlali1 Z W 4 3 ! r 2 ILS p ,r/RST ADP. To EDMONDS ' 11 .AYIfY<NYi. VA(. MOTH 5T. 5•' F/RS 10 � MaK� I V T. wooDsr 1I ��- Z � Q (n ^ O ly D� R S 2 , \ V lF����--��' CJC W' � � 1 i � • <.�.: s rJ - V. `r{ °z r� r , cc cc y���` f� r• •� . WFjr,^ i NA r . 08© �M. +:'. .ai •y� / • i - _ � fir•`, ` all J Af •.1 � -' "ems � - � ;.hrw; It 'Nor A� 7ss MeadoW49le • SAEET FILE, City of Edmonds Critical Areas Determination Applicant: Pierdes Determination #: CA-93-139 Project Name: Permit Number: Site Location: 16320 75th Pl. W. Property Tax Acct #: 5131-060-007-00 Project Description: Waiver Criteria (all criteria must be found to apply): XX There will be no alteration of the Critical Area or its required buffers; XX The development proposal will not impact the Critical Area in a manner contrary to the goals, purposes, objectives and requirements of the Critical Areas ordinance; XX The development proposal meets the minimum standards of the Critical Areas ordinance; XX The above findings are based on the following conditions of approval: 1. The applicant must comply with the Steep Slope, Landslide Hazard Ordinance (ECDC 19.05) to the extent required by the Building Official. 2. The Applicant must comply with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and submit a completed Environmental Checklist to the City with a building permit application. 3. The applicant must comply with all City Ordinances in connection with any development work on the site. This includes bulk Zoning standards, Building Codes, Grading standards and drainage standards. Based on the above findings and conditions, the requirement for a Critical Areas Study associated with this development permit is hereby Waived, as authorized by Chapter 20.15B.150 (B) of the Edmonds Community Development Code. 5 /zj/y3 Name -Signature Date CGS ? 1 4�4iiv k.si WZcti:li Ie o 90 199 City of Edmonds Critical Areas'Checklist The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is to be filled out by any person Preparing a Development permit Application for the City of Edmonds prior to his/her submittal ofa, development permit to the (Sty. The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to determine whether any potential Critical Areas are or may be present on the subject pmPaty. The information neoded to complete the Checklist should be easily a 'fable from observations of the site or data available at City Hall (Critical Areas inventories, maps, or soil surveys). An applicant, or his/her representative, must fill out the checidist, sign and date it, and submit it to the City_ The (Sty will, review the checidist, make a precursorysite visit, and make a determination of the subsequent steps necessary to complete a development permit application. With a signed copy of this form, the applicant should also submit a vicinity map of the parcel with enough debu7 that (Sty staff can find and identify the subject par el(s). In addition, the applicant is encouraged to include any other pertinent information or studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assist staff in completing their preliminary assessment of the site. I have completed the attached Critical Area Checklist and attest that the answers provided are factual, to the best of my knowledge (fill out the appropriate column below). Owner/ Applicant: Name O - Tide Street Address Applicant Representative: Name 50 el-e— Title U 064-8 3 99 -Street Address City, State, ZIP Phone City, State, ZIP Phone Signature Date Signature Date Critical Areas Checklist' Site Informatio Project Name: Permit Number: fUrlh�2 Site Location: /410.3 ZD -751105-aLCd Property Tax Account Number. /3/OQ7— do Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): o Have you filled out a Critical Areas Checklist for a project on this site before? Alec General Site Conditions 1. Has the site been cleared or logged? Daze of most recent action: i 9 9 Z— Soils / Topography 2.. In,the Snohomish County Soil Survey, -what is the mapped soil typc(s)? 0 STREET FILE 0 Critical Areas Checklist - Site Informatio Project Name: Permit Number. Site Location: /1,73 Z 0 -7-�I''' G� Property Tax Account Number.._5 /3/ -Q60 - O07_ Cj0 f Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): Z�Q O Have you filled out a Critical Areas Checidist for a project on this site before? General Site Conditions 1. Has the site been cleared or logged? Date of most recent action: i 9 119 Z- Soils / Topography 2. In the Snohomish County Soil Survey, what is the mapped soil type(s)? 3_ Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply. Flat: _ aoverntir�site. ,ell�' iL Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10 feet over a horizontal distance of 66 feet.) �C. I 13r.. slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30%p ( a vertical rise of 10 feet of horizontal distance.) X Steep: Comments of greeter than 3.0% present on site. HydrologyNegetation. 4. Site contains areas of year-round standing water. _1A6- 5. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water. Iyle Approx. Depth: 6. Site is in the floodway floodplain Ale of a water course. 7. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? flows are year-round? Flows are seasonal? 8. Site is primarily: forested : meadow ; shrubs ; mixed 9. Obvious wetland is present on site: - 10. Wetland inventory or map indicates wetland present on site: 11. Critical Areas inventory or map indicates any Critical Area on site: for-.City Use Only Rev 3127/92 ZFt:i:l G011-;' d f City of Edmonds Critical Areas Chec* klrst The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is to be filled out by any person Pig a Development Permit Application for the City of Edmonds prior to his/her submittal of a development permit to the (Sty. The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to determine whether any potential Critical Areas are or may be present on the subject property. The information needed to complete the Checiist should be easily available from observations of the site or data available at City Hall (Critical Areas inventories, maps, or soil surveys). An applicant, or his/her representative, must fill out the.checldist, sign and date it, and submit it to the City. The City will review the checidist, make a precursory site visit, and make a dete minafion of the subsequent steps nocassary to complete a development Permit application. With a signed copy of this form, the applicant should also submit a vicinity map of the parcel with enough detail that (Sty staff can find and identify the subject parcei(s). In addition, the applicant is encouraged to include any other pertinent information or studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assist staff in completing their preliminary assessment of the site. I have completed the attached Critical Area Checklist and attest that the answers provided�re factual, to the best of my knowledge (fill out the appropriate column below). Owner / Applicant: Name Title Applicant Representative: Name Title U Street Address � - Street Address City, State. ZIP Phone City, State, ZIP Phone i Signature Date Signature Date City of Edmonds Critical Areas Determination Applicant: I. Pierdes Determination #: CA-93-139 Project Name:I I F Permit Number: Site Location: 16320 75th Pl. W. Property Tax Acct #: 5131-060-007-00 Project Description: Waiver Criteria (all criteria must be found to apply): XX There will be no alteration of the Critical Area or its required buffers; XX The development proposal will not impact the Critical Area in a manner contrary to the goals, purposes, objectives and requirements of the Critical Areas ordinance; XX The development proposal meets the minimum standards of the Critical Areas ordinance; XX The above findings are based on the following conditions of approval: 1. The applicant must comply with the Steep Slope, Landslide Hazard Ordinance (ECDC 19.05) to the extent required by the Building Official. 2. The Applicant must comply with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and submit a completed Environmental Checklist to the, City with a building permit application. 3. The applicant must comply with all City Ordinances in connection with any development work on the site. This includes bulk Zoning standards, Building Codes, Grading standards and drainage standards. Based on the above findings and conditions, the requirement for a Critical Areas Study associated with this development permit is hereby Waived, as authorized by Chapter 20.15B.150 (B) of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Name �� Signature Dates e tntarn'ta�ion shaa�� � ,°, �r ., rj a_J + -, t; o"Edmatds, i*_ e � not warrant to �� �r WiP, ©I iav� �, tir,Iv s: r entity ... st, Co- cfiPP bo no:((ryry° . t , 0 CITY OF EDMONDS w' PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMEO FOR INSPECTION CALL -7_7 5-- 2-5=2-5 Ext. 2 2-0 SIDE SEWER PERMIT �IVI-'4V_ 17. aen� L 6. Wermit a14® . Issue Date PERMIT MUST 'BE POSTED ON JOB SITE=Aft� LYNNWOOD !! Address of Construction Property Legal Description (include all, easements) 1 Single Family Residence Multi -Family No. of Units Commercial Owner and/or Builder / c. Contractor & License No. Invasion into City Right -of -Way: No �� Yes (If Yes Right-of- way Construction Permit Required - Call Dial Dig (�,4�2�-,'S'3,4,4/)/ before excavation) . 1-800-454-5555 7. Cross other private property: attach legal description and READ THE FOLLOWING AND SIGN: Yes No r Easement required - county easement number. a. Property owners must obtain a permit to install side sewers on their property. A licensed side sewer contractor must be employed to construct side sewers in the'public right-of-way. b. The side sewer contractor assumes full reponsibility for each installation for one year. C. Commercial establishment requires a minimum of a six inch (6") side sewer line. d. Side sewers may not be installed closer than thirty inches (30") to any structure. e. Side sewer lines must be laid at a minimum grade, of 2% (1.150) and maximum grade of 100% (450). f. No turn in side sewer greater than 450 (1/81bend) is0allowed between cleanout. All 90 turns must be constructed of a 45 (1/•8 bend) and wye with removable cap. g. No down spouts, footing drains or floor drains can be connected to side sewer system. h. Pea gravel is required for bedding when installing sewer lines through other than granular soil. i. Cleanouts are required at 30"-60" from each plumbing exit line and at minimum intervals of 100' along sewer line run. j. Trenches within City right-of-way must be restored to original conditions. Contractors shall be responsible for right-of-way failure due to poor compaction of fill. k.. Side sewer must be left uncovered until inspected and approved by the City. 1. Inspection during normal working hours only. Two (2) working days notice required. DATE: DATE : I certify that I have read and shall comply with the above PERMIT FEE: , 30, n e) DISAPPROVED BY: Date: ~B Date: O ] CONNECTION :FEE : APPROVED By • Date • A/ 84 * � * PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE�� 1 I l9tii,G7`77Tr771 t S eu►t+` ou�c�l 6 < lw 14 . --"" ^•ill/ / ' . - .(,� J. xrl� uco p a:'^ '` a :.fig • • `� j` • rii x 6irt { r.� 1 f �t�'.?' do-.. , `� ..� •f�; p. �`� ra .,�' ?41f„ wr 1 �� a,.i" }`ri ; �� A:+��� •�'' �r'.b^- r"I'lyh Mew , ti `.t t .r `�fi:n� �� �{ ♦ . 3i'' f4 y�.^'F ! �1 tt � i J ' f,.• IS t�{ li�l r, ^.f �^t v{ p,, �y ". - - •' "'c^?4ff'r%}��, , $i aT� �'rku�. n � {.+�r-a�-.,rti§yi�t � � - + �� : -%'. � c . .` 3s r �� .• ;3 yyFFF t t�� e {•?.rd� � { 1';.� q .� , j�s b\ �.. 1' \�' . �(�(�b�(tyf�,ti !. tL (r.� G�g'tl 4 �, � - iTY��•.p�jt `. r • � `�. �7�riFtl_i�+ i M�,{ J� t Y.f �1 wf #'/f `�•`�1-lr..,�"1�)�.il'.�i��"+k: tilY '.�:��t3•ii,�„ >toO7 J 1b � ui a3tl' u41 '04 ilr7alillt( GU ,12;;tl M=''bfnlzlk. � fr��: s;fiDuf {U2�L?ilmuW ra a t,U310 Uostad A ` # pu stltl $ W rl.il .s f' •{ `.r�u� +. h}it � Nk P 2y1 al.� rs;1c '� n'.:owP �R cc Oro ,r.• .r ; � _ •� °�tl S. c. :.y:{ � ,�„ 110 i � J� Q BSII.:Q; n�1��173 SEAI"�U G:y;;3�jZ � o" >•Z xY,` t .. . � .. ,_ �. . • .. '_1. ELM`. ski �1 �. • , 1 SEP 211993 a Windermere Real Estate STPEE'T FILE Northwest September 17,1993 City of Edmonds Building Department 250 5th Ave N. Edmonds, Wa. 98020 Re: Notification of Violation.- 16320 75t& Pl. V, As requested by Mr. Paul Mar, the.purpose.of this letter is,to reference "Acknowledgment by Mortgagor" as not applicable, Mr. & Mrs'. Pierides signed papers for the sale of the property prior to closing and the loan - was paid in full. The new -owners -do not have a loan on the property. Pat Kapp Windermere R,E./Northwes-t 14824 Westminster Way N. Seattle, Wa. 98133 Windermere Real Estate/Northwest, Inc. 14824 Westminster Way North Seattle, Washington 98133 Telephone 367-4720 STREET FOLD July 1, 1VYJ City of Edmunds Building Department 250 5th Avenue North Edmonds, Washington 913020 Rea: P i er• i des. Grad i n q Plan - 16320 %St h Place West 091EDIKa SEP 211993 tag.: the applicant/owner, we hereby agree that the accuracy of all Permit submittal information is warranted by.us in a form which relieves the City and its staft from any liability associated with reliance on such permit application Submittals. While an al.rl icat ion may reference the rop'nrts of prior public consultants to the City, all conclusions shall be those of the ans,licant /uwi,er arid our design professionals. Also as the aFplicant/owner, we hereby state that we relieve the City of Edmonds and its staff from any liability associated with reel iance on such permit information submittals to the City regarding a Grading Plan to improve the access for the driveway to the above stated address that WV understand and accept the ri•iks of grading in an area with r.1-otential unstable soils and that we ,hall advise in writing any potential purchasers or IC-Gsees of Structures on the Site cat the slide potential of the ar Ca. S1(4'i E OF WASH 1 NGTON ) County.af Snohomish) Signed and witnessed by me a NOTAkY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington this C-Ltc"-day ofj�T--`-__� 1993. .Qm1oJ1Mm,T7k�':fl!.YMK'... . .. .. "'rtM7,^lr... .. ,• �a.- . y:�^.w+�.�.«rwrw�n.+.+�•+.�ewr...w.. . STREET I LE .� u�,l�e�sl Iv ►cE�B' V TERN TrrL.0 JOLDINO qg lb I a ` 033 SEP 2 :v tbvENANT OF NOTZPZCATZON AND ZNDE14tZfZC71SZON/BOLD . B�►RHLE88 r:::•: Under the review, procedures established pursuant to the State Building Code,. incorporating amendments promulgated by the City• ti of Edmonds, and as a prerequisite to the issuance of a building ..- •1, t ••I permit for the construction of a residential structure and j'"y attendant facilities, the undersigned OWNERS of property do hereby covenant-, stipulate and promise as. follows: ,f:i 1• ^esc-=a•ic� o• This c� enant o: _..a •; Get i.::. 4 :) r"4 notification and indemnification/hold harmless relates to a tract 1 16320 73th Place West. Edmonds (insert •.,:� of land at the street address of 00 attest address), Edmonds, Snohomish County, Washington and " r": Nt>' legally described as: Legal Description attached hereto as�T►ibitt"A" %�•y �' and bP this reference incorporated heirein. iA tt�� n'1 sc. .{ 0121 , 1_ a 'o a M - G .I 2. ]notification and covenant of Notification. The above, referenced site '(hereinafter "subject site") lies within an area which has been identified by .the City of Edmonds as having a potential for earth subsidence ,or landslide' hazard. The risks associated with development of the site have been,'evaluated by. technical consultants and engineers engaged by the applicant as a part of the:process to obtain a building permit for the subject site. The results of the consultant's reports and evaluations of WSS52079A/0006_040.034 -1- BUILDING WSS/klt 02/08/9000 FEB 9 - 1,. YOI. 2 7 i� 4 PAGE U 411 1• •: - H :5.� iy. as•• ;y• W. .;' :�'. � • j •� :ram � i:i 1 •+7. t ., i �„•� '•, t _<S1 0, the risks associated with development are contained in building permit file number 970S10 (insert number) on file with the City of Edmonds Building Department. conditions, limitations, or. prohibitions on development may have been imposed in accordance with the recommendations of the consultants in the course of permit issuance. The conditions, limitations, or prghibitions 4 may require ongoing maintenance on the part of any owner or i lessee or may require modifications to the structures and earth :3 -' stabilization matters in order to address future or anticipated changes in soil or other site conditions_ The statements and conditions proposed by the OWNERS' geotechnical engineer, geologist, architect and/or structural engineer are hereby • incorporated by reference from,the contents of the file as fully as if herein set forth. Any future purchaser# lessee, lender or any other person acquiring or seeking to acquire an fnterest.in the property is put on notice of the -existence of the content of the file and the City urges review of its contents. The file may J - be reviewed during normal business hours or copies obtained at. 0 the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, 505 Bell Street, Edmonds, Washington 98020. 3. Indemnification and Hold -Harmless_ The undersigned OWNERS hereby waive any and all liability associated with - development, stating that they have fully informed themselves of all risks associated with development of the property and do" i i therefore waive and. relinquish any and all causes of action against the City of Edmonds, its officers, agentt and employees WSS52079A/0006.040.034 -2- tvSS/klt• 02/08/90 q3 08311.29T Yot.2784PAGE 0412 ;� •�- — _ •I. ,••�. ire ,� 041 F" Y i w�. arising from and out of such development. In addition, the OWNERS on behalf of themselves, their successors in interest, heirs and assignees, do hereby promise to indemnify and hold harmless the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and employees T; from any loss, claim, liability or damage of any kind or nature to persons or property either on or off the site resulting from or out of earth subsidence or landslide hazard, arising from or A out of the issuance of any permit(s) authorizing development of the site, or occurring or arising out of any false* misleading, or inaccurate Information provided by the OWNERS, their employees, or professional consultants in the course of issuance of the building permit_ N 4. Insurance Recmirement*..i In addition to any bonding which may be required during the course of development] the Community -Services Director XAM/has not (strike one) specifically required the maintenance of an insurance policy -for public liability coverage in the amount and for the time set forth below in -order to provide for the financial responsibilities established through :A the indemnification and hold harmless agreement above.: no insurance required tit (insert insurance requirements and time period, if any --if no insurance required, so state.) ti • :2 WSt52079A/0006-040.034 -3- WSS/klt_ 02/08/90 00831129T Y1 A t, Li A n ir M.. A -p% '17 A y. r 114 tq �. - to Touch d concern the Land. This covenant S. g2ven4nt of notification and indemnification/hold harmless tOucties and concerns the subject tract and shall run with the land, binding, obligating and/or inuring to the benefit of future owners, heirs, I other person or entity acquirin successors and interests or any g n interest in property, as their interest may appear. This of provision shall not be interpreted to require a mortgagor or lender to indemnify the City except to the extent of their loss tA maintain the insurance above to obligate such. persons to maint nor required. Dome this day Of 199 Xh OWNER (S) BY: By: 09-.7 7 43 By: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss: COUNTY OF rL?�_ ) I certify that I, know or have satisfactory I evidence, that signed this instrument and acknowledged WSS52079A/0006.040-034 -4- wsS/klt 02/08/90 YoU-27834PAGE0414 L. x f I W % to 4:. N 4" • E it to be is/ er) free and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this �' day of`A—WW S'r , 19& My commission expires: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) � )ss: COUNTY OF ��) I certify A that Q� I know or have satisfactory evidence that �Rk-b nrrk 11 1P �rS.sigried this instrument and acknowledged it to be (his er) tree and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this ( day of to , . 19Z, Hy commission expires! STATE OF WASHING -TOM ) )•ss: COUNTY OF ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory 'evidence that signed this instrument, on oath stated that (he/she) was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the (title) of (name of party on behalf of whom instrument was executed)- to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this _ day of < 199_• Hy commission expires:. WSS52079A/0006.040.034 -5- WSS/kit 02/08/90 = q�08�X�291. rat- 27 8 4 PLGE U 415 ` ::; - `• -::: ,;. '.�"'. •,tw• a.' �,� . .r .%� t .� • i •.`fir • }? ;T P< '- `�7 4PAGE 041G A 110 Y., .r� x t L=AL DBSCR1Fn0M EXHIBIT "A" i North of that certain i All of Lots 7 and a and that portion of Lot !• lying Court Case No. :�rboundary line established by Snohomish County Survey >" recorded in volume e1-2-04386-9 and delineated on the face Of that carts— 1• of surveys. on Pages 102 and 103. undez Recording No. 8310205001• and .revised by Survey rys. ded in Volume 22 of Surveys. Pages 2!0 and 2l1, under Recording No. 8 survey5, all in Block 60� PLAT of IMADOWDALT 3ZpXM. •according to the Plat 3e, records of Snohomish County. thereof recorded in Volume 5 of Plate, pa g/ : Nashingtoni Edmonds by Dead CXCSPT the T.ast 10 feet of Lots 7 and s conveyed to the City of recorded under Recording No. 8708210229. h 10 feet of Lot 70ii Block ' TOf6THIER WITH the South 10 feet of Lot'14, and thePort there recorded in• Volume A, PLAT Of WADOMDALS TID:LANDS, according tPlat there 6 of Plats, page 28, records of Snohomish County. Situate in the County of. Snohomish. State of Washington. i� n •T� �r r• 93 0.831129T 0 ST.REETqJILE BUILDING Xym t Ile U4 W3 C11/01 ER N T LZ NOTICE OF VIOLATION, CORRECTION AND HOLD HARMLESS AND IND04NMCATION Whereas, the undersigned property owners have been cited for violation of the development codes of the City of Edmonds. Washington relating to the construction of a driveway, a portion of which exceeds twenty permit (200A) grade and failure to obtain administrative approval for grades in, excess of fourteen percent (14Y*); and Whereas. development regulations in the City or Edmonds does not permit construction of driveways whose grades am in excess of twenty percent t (20*/*) and requires administrative approval to exceed fourteen percent (141/o); and Whereas, the portion of the driveway in question is a relatively minor portion of the driveway, the proposed purchaser of the property has been informed of the existence of the violation, and in this agreement the owners acknowledge the violation and agree to plead guilty to a civil infraction for violation of the City's ordinance, and Whereas, the parties have entered in this settlement agreement in order to provide notice of defect to future purchasers and to set forth the timing and conditions under which such defects shall be corrected, now, therefore. The undersigned Property Owner (hereinafter "Property Owner) and the City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation (hereinafter "City) does hereby acknowledge, stipulate and agree as follows: 1. Existence of Mi.latio., 1.1. - Property Owner. The Property Owner hereby stipulates and admitf pursuant to the issuance of building permit no. 930519 the Property Owner applied for a permit to construct various improvements on a piece of property located at 16320 75th Place West, Edmonds, Washington and legally described as shown on the Attached Exhibit A. This property is referred to in the balance of this agreement: as the 'Subject Site." One of the improvements permitted was the reconstruction of a driveway. That driveway was shown on plans as having various grades throughout its length, none of which exceeded on said plan drawings a grade of twenty percent (2T/e). Section 18.80.060(d) requires the authorization of the Public Works Director in order for any driveway slope to exceed fourteen percent (14%) and prohibits authorization of driveways which exceed twenty percent (20%). No application to exceed fourteen percent (14%) was submitted and no approval granted. C3 cm X-4 ld vv C-) ) .ICJ Cl ca -0 M ED U LAC, YUL. VS 4 P45E 0 4 0 6 K 7 p: 1.2. The as -built drawings submitted upon request for issuance of final building permit indicated that a small portion of the driveway of approximately six (6) feet in length and located near the garage of the dwelling on the subject site had a grade of approximately twenty-two percent (=/@). As part of the agreement to forbear from civil action as set forth in this agreement on behalf of the City. the Property Owner stipulates. acknowledges and agrees that the existing driveway is in violation of City ordinance and agrees to plead no contest to a civil infraction for violation of the City's Community Development Code and agrees to pay a fine of one hundred dollar (SiOO.00). . 2. Notification to Future Purchasers. The undersigned Property Owners agree to notify any purchaser of the property of the defect and to record a copy of this document in the chain of title to the property in order to notify future Property Owners both of the defect and of their obligation to correct the violation as provided in Paragraph 7, hold harmless and indemnify the City of Edmonds as set forth in Paragraph 3 and waive and release it from liability as provided in Paragraph 4. 3. Hold Harmless and indemnification. The Property Owners, their heirs, successor, and assigns and all future owner of the subject site hereby promise to hold harmless and indemnify the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents, and employees from any and all liability of any kind or nature arising from or out of the City's forbearance from suit or other administrative, civil, or criminal action to correct the above noted defect or any damage to persons or property arising therefrom, including, but not limited to any accident, injury, or damage caused by the excessive grade of the noted driveway slope. This promise to indemnify and hold harmless includes the reasonable costs of defense by counsel of the City's choosing. 4. Waiver and Release. The Property Owner on behalf of themselves, their heir. successor, and assigns and any and all future owner of the Subject Site hereby waive and release the City from any claim, loss, or liability of any kind relating to the City's forbearance from suit or other civil, administrative, or criminal action necessary to correct the above noted defect pursuant to the terns of this agreement 5. Tpuch and Concern the Land Run with the Land. This agreement is stipulated by the parties to touch and concern the subject site described on the attached Exhibit A and shall run with the land, binding arty future owner of the property. vnt. `? 7 h0 4 0 7 93 089112.90 •tip ;,j.. ^- .i;•. :':.-1�,;� •+ , 't •«n.l �� 1. ,+•�.. � .�;_ '.Yes •t•.1 •t•.•t its' :y'�: •;. .,`� :y x.• r y ••i 6. Forbearance from Suite. in consideration of the promises of the Property '.� Owner and their heirs, successors, and assigns, including aand all future awners ny of the property, as set forth in this agreement. the City agrees to forbear from civil, criminal, or administrative action which may be at its disposal to correct the above noted defect. So long as the terms of this agreement are complied with and the repair provisions of the following paragraph have not been triggered, the City agrees that it wt11 not institute civil, criminal action, or administrative action to bring about correction of the defect beyond the notice of violation and agreed upon civil penalty above referenced. Nothing herein shall limit the discretion of the City to exercise its full criminal and civil enforcement authority -�` with respect to- any other condition or defect on the property, known or unknown, �.' whether now existing or arising in the future 7. Rc2air of Defective Condition. The Property Owner on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors, and assigns including future owners of the property, agrees to repair the noted condition in conjunction with any of the following construction activities on the site; 7.1. Future Construction or Reconstruction of the Driveway. In the event that any portion of the driveway on the Subject Site is constructed or reconstructed, the grade of the driveway shall be brought within the twenty percent (200%) maximum stipulated by City Code as a part of said construction or reconstruction. The term construction or reconstruction does not include minor repairs to the driveway such as fixing cracks caused by settlement, excess loads, etc. 7.2. Remodel or Reconstruction of the Home. In the event that any repair, remodel, or reconstruction of the home located on the subject site is initiated and the value of said repair exceeds twenty-five percent (25%) of the value ( at the time of repair, remodel, or reconstruction) of the structure, whether or not the proposed improvement, reconstruction, or remodel of the dwelling involves the driveway, the above noted defect in the driveway shall be corrected as a part of said remodel or reconstruction. For purposes of this subparagraph, if the percentage of value cannot be determined in accordance with the value tables established by the Uniform Building Code such relative values shall be determined by appraisal by an appraiser jointly ielected by thi< partiet 7.3. Corrections. All such corrections shall be undertaken in conformance with applicable provisions of the City Code and the State Building Code, provided, however, that in the event that the City Code shall hereafter be amended to permit driveways in excess of twenty percent (201/6), Property Owners shall be free to exercise any legal remedy available to it to obtain approval of such driveway grade. Upon such approval, this agreement shall terminate and be at an end. Upon correction of the defect in the driveway by reconstruction of the defective grade, this agreement may be terminated by the filing of a copy of the final building permit noting cones ion of the grade at the cost of the Property owner with the Snohomish County Auditor. 93 08311290 • �• _ . _fix: •! • '-} � �'\• dry. it — c- A„ 01. 1 11 yam... 0 0 S. Specific Enrorcenm . In addition to any other remedies which may be available to either party, the parties stipulate and agree that a noted defect involves the ' property and entails's risk, however minimal, to members of the public, and therefore the terms of this agreement shall be specifically enforceable by either party. 9. Sole Agreement- Merger. This is the sole agreement between the parties. Any other agreement, written or oral, is deemed merged with the provisions of this agreement and extinguished by the exaction thereof. This agreement shall not be amended except in writing with the express written consent of the parties hereto. DATED this�day or AAq utsr— , 1993. COT OF EDMONDS PROPERTY OWNERS ATTESTIAUTHENTICATED APPROVED AS TO FORM 53 f r� Peter Pierides ACKNOWLEDGMENT 1Y I Mortgagor 3 9308311290 7. . i' •� .�: ��• rim- ••,. '� �c t'-Yol: 2 7 8 4 PAGE 0 4 0 9 331�• _�. � Tom',•. 'i✓ JY j•»t. "_y ?Y.••..,J.`L.ta• , fit`•-�'`11: rw:::..: 0' STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH) On this -2 _fttlay of -Au � V 5T-, 1993. Wore me personally appeared Peter Pierides, to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing Notice of Violation and acknowledged that he signed the same as his free and voluntary act and deed. for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereto, set my hand and affixed by official seal the day and year first above written. .A MQTARY PUBLIC in and for the A= 2 9t State OfLwThinwresiding at )7t My Coninission expirds: STATE OF WASHTNGTON COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH) On this r�_^H_ay of f-A LL-1571—• 1993, before me personally appeared Becky Pierides,.to me known to bete individual described in and who executed the foregoing Notice of Violation and acknowledged that she signed the same as her free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereto set my hand and affixed by official seal &day and year first above written. V'NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the i State of Washington, residing 4y Coni6ssion expires: 9308311290 -VOL. 278APAGE 0410 r.- • STAET F ILE y- EyRINC� gt , F o�es�ets SSOCIATES, INC. 23423 Highway 99 Edmonds, yVA 98020 (206) 778-3101 P.O. Box 32 Lynnwood, WA 98036 July 1, 1993 City of Edmonds Building Dept. 250 5th Avenue North Edmonds,'Wash. 99020 RECEIVE® JUL - 1. 1993 PERMIT COUNTER Re: Peter P.ierides Grading Plan - 16320 75th Place West In accordance to ECDC 19.05.040B, I as the Lead Design Professional do hereby state that I have coordinated. with and incorporated recommendations of other licensed Professionals in the design and construction of the grading plans on the above stated site; that I have reviewed the Geotechnical reports, understand their recommendations and have incorporated into the designs the measures to reduce potential risk of injury or damage from any earth movement, if any, predicted in the report and that I have advised to applicant/owner of the risks involved from this project. Meyring b Associates will continue to monitor the project to determine any future risk that may occur from any earth movement. Respectfully, f M.B. Meyring, . E. 21 MM/jn 3 I mm a 9/93 I 890.19y CITY OF EDMONDS LAURA M. HALL 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation Engineering June 23, 1993 Mr. Peter Pierides 16320 75th Place West Edmonds, Washington 98026 RE: Driveway, Rockery and Bulkhead work C � �� D U N Z 1993 On June 21 st, 1993 I received a copy of your letter dated 6/14/93. In response to that letter I have the following comments: ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 1. The driveway slope covenant shall be executed at the approval of Mr. Paul Mar, City of Edmonds Community Services Director. Please be advised, the maximum slope of a driveway is determined by Chapter 18.80 of the Edmonds Community Development Code. It is not a building code standard or requirement. 2. Regarding the Burlington Northern, (BNRR) easement: I understand from previous correspondence that you have made the proper application to BNRR. My concern is that. BNRR has not granted the easement. What alternative proposal have you formulated if the easement is not granted? The City cannot grant a permit for a plan that discharges water onto adjacent properties unless the proper easenlents are obtained and properly recorded. The payment of fees and the filing of documents with BNRR is not sufficient documentation for the City to issue a permit. 3. Regarding the engineering correction notice dated 2/5/93: As I stated to you in our telephone conversation on 6/3/93, I have never discussed any item with you on this Engineering Correction notice. Mr. Lyle Chrisman in the City Engineering Department has exclusively been the contact person with you, Mr. Meyring, and all contractors in the field, in resolving these issues. As of this date Mr. Chrisman has informed me that item #11 is still outstanding, please contact him directly to resolve this issue. • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • iistor CitiaS International — Hekinan. Janan C i Mr. Peter Pierides June 23, 1993 Page Two BUILDING DIVISION 1. The owner liability statement and Covenant to Notify are not new items. These documents are minimum requirements for all permits issued under the Earth Subsidence ordinance. If your lead design professional failed to outline all ordinance requirements to you at the time of application submittal in March of 1992, that is a concern that you should have with him. 2. Mr. Max Meyring must provide a lead design professional statement. This statement is a minimum requirement of the Earth Subsidence ordinance and may not be waived. Mr. Meyring as a professional engineer accepted the responsibility of coordinating the geotechnical recommendations and by his design should have established measures to reduce the potential risk of injury or damage that might be caused by earth movement on the property. This statement is required to substantiate the burden of landslide risk and development as warranted by the owner. Furthermore, the City will not issue a waiver to Meyring Associates on that portion of the driveway that exceeds 20%. The Edmonds Community Development Code does not permit driveway slopes in excess of 20%, therefore, Meyrings request cannot be considered. The covenant that will be signed is a disclosure that a City code violation exists on the subject property. Without Mr. Meyring's statement, your application would not be complete and a permit could not be issued. You should have him reconsider. The City receives many complaint forms which formally notify departments of possible code violations. If Mr. Meyring wishes to notify the Engineering Department of existing driveway slope violations, all completed complaint forms will be investigated. 3. As stated in my letter of 5/6/93 and as discussed with you in a telephone conversation on May 17th, once all submittal items are received by the City and all violation requirements are completed, the City will issue the building permit. As you know, by ordinance, professional consultant fees will be charged and those fees from Landau Associates total $791.00, (copies of invoices attached). Permit and City plan review fees are also due in the amount of $159.50. Double permit -fees of $122.00 will be charged as a penalty for starting work without a permit, unless waived by Mr. Mar. The violation covenant has never been expressed to you as a replacement of the required building. permit, nor does the covenant relieve you of minimum permit requirements of the ordinance.. The permit will. be issued once all permit and violation requirements are completed as required by ordinance and by Mr. Mar. a Mr. Peter Pierides June 23, 1993 Page Three 4. Regarding the Chad Miller field reports: As required by the ordinance, professional inspection of earth subsidence permits is required. Since Mr. Miller is a licensed engineer, copies of his field reports would have fulfilled this requirement. If Mr. Meyring has exhausted all efforts to locate Mr. Miller and procure these reports and has failed,. the City is forced to accept that this requirement cannot be met. 5. The City received a letter on 6/21/93 written by Mr. Neil Twelker, P.E., to Mr. Dan , Morrison dated 5/29/93 which addresses the site work completed at your property. The City was not copied by Mr. Twelker, nor did the City request or suggest that a second engineer's letter would resolve the bulkhead issue. The City remains firm that. the Geotechnical Engineer of record is Mr. Burton Holt of Geotech Consultants. Mr. Holt has proposed, several options to you for resolution on the bulkhead, any of these options are acceptable to the City. If none of these ideas are acceptable to you, Mr. Holt would need to draft another proposal, (he could utilize other professional opinions, including Twelkers), and based on sound engineering practices and with full acknowledgement of landslide hazards submit for City review. As permitted by the Earth Subsidence ordinance, if a change of engineers is made; the new engineer of record shall review all previously submitted data, provide a letter directly to the City stating whether or not they agree with the recommendations of the original engineer and submit their new proposal or recommendations which will then be forwarded to Landau Associates, the City's professional consultants for review and comment. All earth subsidence design criteria shall be imposed on the new design, proposal or recommendation. The other issue with regard to the bulkhead is the determination of setback distances. As discussed in a meeting with Mr. Meyring on February 19, 1993 it appears that the bulkhead may be constructed within the 25 foot setback of the property line and a variance would need to be obtained if the wall exceeds three feet in height. Thank you, Jeannine L: Graf Acting Building Official cc: Paul Mar, Community Services Director Bob Alberts, City Engineer Burton Holt, P.E., Geotech Consultants Max Meyring, Meyring Associates • STRELOr RLE CITY OF EDMONDS LAURA M. HALL 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT I, C� p Public Works • .Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering 8g0-lg LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Date: June 9, 1993 To: Department of Ecology BUILDING JUN 101993 Environmental Review Section P.O. Box 47703 Olympia;.WA 98504-7703 Subject: 16320 75th Pl. W., Edmonds 9 Transmitting: Determination of Nonsi gni fi cance For your information: XXX As you requested: For your file: Comment and return: Note attachments: Comments: cc: Pete Pierides M.B. Meyeri ng Planning -Division • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan i �• CITY OF EDMONDS 250 STH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98024 (206) 771-3202 RCW 197-11-970 Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of proposal: Regrade the site and install a new drivewy on a steep slope Proponent: Pete Pieredes Location of proposal, including street address if any: 16320 75th Pl. W. Lead agency: CITY OF EDMONDS The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement is not required under RCW 43.21.030(2)(c).. This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public o11 request. XX There is no comment period for this DNS. This DNS is issued under 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act oil this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by , 1992. . Responsible Official: Jeffrey S. Wilson Position/Title: . Current Planning Supervisor, Department of Community Services - Planning Division Phone: 771-0220 Address: City of Edmonds, 250 5th Avenue North, Ed WA 98020 Date: �QS Signatur..'.—� XX You may appeal this determination to obert qChave, Planning Manager, at 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020, no later than / 1993, by filing a .written appeal citing the. reasons. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Jeffrey S. Wilson to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. L XX Posted on ��� 1992, at the Edmonds Public Library. Edmonds Community Services Build A. and the Edmonds Post Office. XX Distribute to "Checked" Agencies along with a copy of the Checklist. Mailed to the following along with the Environmental Checklist: XX Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section P.O. Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 XX Pete Pierides 16320 75th PI.,,W. Edmonds, WA 98026 XX M.B. Meyering 23423 Highway 99 Edmonds, WA 98026 PC: Building Plan Check # 606 SEPA Notebook Paul Mar, Conununity Services Director. Robert Chave, Planning Manager Page 1 f _. A606DNS.DOC 06/02/93 .SEPA MEMORANDUM CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING DIVISION 250 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 TO: BUILDING PLAN CHECK #606 FROM: John Bissell, Code Enforcement Tech. Jeffrey S. Wilson, AICP Responsible Official DATE: DUNE 2, 1993 SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION FOR PETE PIERIDES DRIVEWAY FILE NO. PLAN CHECK # 606 I have had the opportunity to visit the site, review the environmental checklist, and grading plan and critical areas mitigations, a copy of which are filed in the official file for this permit. Based on my review of all .available information and adopted policies of the City, I recommend that a determination of nonsignificance be issued. -------------------------------- 7--------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------- Review by Current Planning Supervisor: I concur I do not concur Comments: Jeffrey S. Wilson Date Responsible Official Attachments. PC: Building Plan Check #606 Robert Chave, Planning Manager Page 2 of 2 #606DNS.DOC 06/02/93 .SEPA � STREET FILE • RECEIVED MAY 2 1993 GOW1UNITY SERVICES Foresters EyRINC� 8t., DIRECTOR SSOCIATES, INC. 23423 Highway 99 Edmonds, WA 98020 (206) 778-3101 P.O. Box 32 Lynnwood, WA 98036 RECEIVED fl"!"AY 2 1993 May 24, 1993 LNGINEEMN City of Edmonds Administrator 250 5th Avenue North Edmonds, Wash. 98020 Re: Waiver of Private Driveway Slope - 16320-`75th P1. West Please find.attached a copy of a letter to Mr. Robert J. Alberts, City Engineer, requesting waiver of a 22% slope for a distance of 20 feet and a longer grade of 19% on a newly constructed private driveway 160 feet in length. The subject driveway relocates .a previous driveway (which had a slope of 30%) located along the South line of the subject property as stated in the attached letter.. In the letter from Mr. Holt, May 17,1993, page 3, explains the reason significantly for the increased driveway slope. Also it is my opinion and rightly so that a precedence was created in accepting a grade of 24% on a recently installed driveway to serve the new residence 2 lots South at 16406 75t h P 1. SW. Please give this request for a waiver of greater than slope your consideration as soon as possible. Thank you. Respectfully, M. B. Meyr i n�P.E. MM/jn encl cc: Peter Pierides Randy Boyer, Atty. fW 7�^'"' 4°'"f`A'W-1 vp - NOW y slers EYR I NCB SSOCIATES, INC. 23423 Highway 99 Edmonds, WA 98020 (206) 778-3101 P.O. Box 32 Lynnwood, WA 98036 May 12, 199-s Robert J. Alberts, P. E. Community Services Dept. Engineering Division 250 5th Avenue North Edmonds, Wash. 98020 Re: New Private Driveway Slopes Peter Pierides (M.B. Meyring, agent) Dear Mr. Alberts: In communications with the Building Dept., I have been advised to submit to you a.request for waivers of those portions of to Peter Pierides new concrete. driveway that exceed 14%. An As -Built drawing of the site has been submitted to the Building Dept. for review. The As Built shows grades in excess of 14% as follows: Sta 0+00 to 0+25 - 22.8 Sta 0+so to 1+20 POVC - 19.4% the reason for relocating the access driveway was to obtain a lesser slope of 304 which existed on the original driveway along the south line. The newly constructed driveway lends a more reasonable access, adds aesthetics to the site and is compatible to other adjoining properties whose access is comparable. The property immediately to the south has an approach slope of 25% in the first 30 feet from 75th Place West. The newly constructed driveway for the new residence at 16406 has an approved concrete access having a slope of 24% from 75th Place West. Please consider the facts and data as submitted for a waiver of the greater than slopes. Respectfully submitted, !` M.B. Meyrin9, P.E. C _ 0 s .Y - rtj•-c}..,.�.. ' 1.w':�Mar,..[, tii4.. p S. a y 1� l ``s 'n t.1 4 w; k: r - k"�F+ ?� A'•�:,. .�r . � -.. ,.ti'., :,.;r„ l ..CW fa?•%+�jfV�-"i'� L(�-G.-:,.y`�':%`r�f�Ya.y� i.vr �.�i>\.* k4 •114i'T V'Ib^�U•�'l a- MMS`��{N�w J•� .Y^' 1 fi R :\y. V �71- � • t'hfV�rh •.^J,7..' ��r .J A , —im— 890.19°� 0 City of Edmon HT -OF -WAY CONST CTION PERMIT STREET FILE A. Address or, Vicinity of Construction: 16320 B. Type of Work (be specific): Install New C. Contractor: Washington NAtural Gas Company Mailing Address: 815 Mercer Street, State License #: Seattle, WA 98111 D. 'Building Permit # (if applicable): Permit Number. _ _ Issue Date /0 ' - 93 75 Place West 9326521 Service Contact: Frank Swan Phone: 224-2278 Liability Insurance: Bond: $ Side Sewer Permit # (if applicable):' E. ❑ Commercial ❑ Subdivision ❑ City Project. RR Utility (PUD, GTE, WNG, CABLE, WATER) ❑ Multi -Family ❑ Single Family ❑ Other INSPECTOR: INSPECTOR: F. Pavement or Concrete Cut: ❑ Yes kkio G. Size of Cut: x H. Charge $ APPLICANT TO READ ANDSIGN INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees t o' the City of Edmonds harmlJ.f,�,-)nijideDa?,ea gcs, oclaims of any kind or description u+hatsoeuer, foreseen or unforeseen, that may be gains[ the City ofEdmondsrf nts or employees, including or not limited to the defense of any legalproceedings including defe se costs, and attorney fees by reason ofgrantis is, THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR 't+OLLOWI G THE FINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK. ESTIMATED RESTORATION FEF,4 WILL BE HELD UNTIL TIDE FINAL STREET PATCH IS COMPLETED BY CITY FORCES, AT WHICH TIME A DEBIT OR CREDIT WILL 4P,_#PpW- 'SSF,D FOR ISSUANCE. t,04ItiAPP21CANT. Construction drawing of proposed work required with permit application. A 24 hour notice is required for inspection; Please call the Engineering Division, 771-0220. Work and material is to be inspected during progress and at completion. Restoration is to be in accordance with City Codes. Street shall be kept clean at all times. Traffic Control and Public Safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City Engineer. All street cut ditches shall be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to the end.of the working day; NO EXCEPTIONS. I have read the above statements and understand the permit requirements and thepink copy of thepermit will be available on site at all t�,��_Z_ inspectio purposes. Signature: Date: September 28, 1993 (Contractor or Agent) CALL DIAL -A -DIG PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK FOR CITY USE ONLY APPROVED BY: AA-0 6 5 4 I TIME AUTHORIZED: VOID AFTER 'DAYS SPECIAL CONDITIONS: N COMMENTS: RIGHT OF WAY DEPOSIT DISRUPTION FEE/FUND Ill: RESTORATION FEE: PERMIT FEE: TOTAL FEE: 30 • RECEIPT FEE: DATE: ISSUED BY: NO WORK SHALL BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE Engrg. Div. 1991 A Corm" Addendum to : City of Edmonds Right of Way Permit Application Submitted by: Guyls. Connors Engineering Aide Washington Natural Gas 521-5248 N1,pp WNG to window M�A Water main depth unknown Z " gas main 1 JL� {.-D 1 11 Key: -w- water -g- gas -ss- sewer $ water hydrant O water valve 815 Macs St. (P.O. Box 1869). Scank, WA 98111 (206) 622-6767 STREET FA "ILD LNG JAY2 't 693 Foresters EyRINq & , ASSOCIATES, INC. 23423 Highway 99 Edmonds, WA 98020 (206) 778-3101 P.O. Box 32 Lynnwood, WA 98036 May 24, 1993 Building & Engineering Depts. City of Edmonds 250.5th Avenue North Edmonds, Wash. 98020 Re:,Letter of May 14, 1993 - Pierid - 16320 75th P1. West In response to.the list of items stated in the abo coned letter, the following comments are hereby submitted outlining the follow up activity: 1. Burlington Northern Railroad's easement will be approved by a Rita Shaw, Agent, shortly. 2. Pierides' responsibility 3. Pierides' responsibility 4. Lead Design statement forthcoming dependent on waiver of excess driveway grades. 5. Mr. Miller has taken his log diary with him. He left us no forwarding address so it's impossible for us to tract him down_ What is the importance of this log field data' 6. Response from Burton Holt has been received. On page 2, he Points out that'the areas on the West side have been graded. A great misunderstanding of the original earth form exists asnoted, maybe not explicity, but nevertheless there is apparently an assumption that the plateau exists due to grading. This assumption is not true as theplateau was -in existence prior to Pierides' involvement. The topographic exhibit submitted initially for the grading plan shows two stairways located along the.West slope. The upper stairway provided access to the existing plateau which coursed North and South across the property. As depicted in the outfall detail the slope adjoining the'Burl.ington Northern Railroad bulkhead was and still is continuous and no filling behind the bulkhead was installed. Af. i i ski • Minor grading took place at the toe of the slope below the concrete patio, which is now a Sports Court, ,in order to install the concrete wall. Fill material was placed behind the wall from the driveway grading.' Since clearing and construction of the wall revegetation has been installed in combination with burlap to mitigate erosion possibilities. The West slopes were initially measured as 1:1 and presently exist at 1:1. Zerox copies of pictures taken prior to clearing are attached. The detention system has been resolved. Respectfully, M. B. Meyr i n g, P.E. MM/ jn encl cc: Peter Pierides Burton Holt,_Geotech Randy Boyer, Ptty. a Peter Pierides JN 88163 May 17, 1993 Page 2 In our letter dated March 31, 1993, we presented two alternatives to correct the potential slope instability from the construction of the masonry retaining wall west of the residence (Item 8). As a third alternative, the existing slope could be graded back to its original condition (i.e. a continuous slope between the top of the railroad bulkhead wall and the concrete patio at the top of the slope). The existing retaining wall would be left in place. This would involve filling in front (to the west) of the retaining wall and removing the fill placed above the railroad bulkhead wall. The fill placed above the northern portion of.the retaining wall would still need to be removed. Since the southern portion of the slope behind the wall is essentially at the inclination it was prior to the placement of the wall, this area could be left undisturbed. A backhoe would need to be used to perform the grading operations and would need to access the site from - the adjacent properties to the south or north. Prior to backfilling in front of the wall, additional weep holes should be drilled in the face of the wall at a height of 2 feet from the base to provide additional drainage. Backfill placed against the front of the wall should consist of compacted 2- to 4-inch-quarry spalls to provide a suitable, free -draining, buttress in front of the wall. It is our opinion that if this alternative is performed according to our recommendations and under our direction, the existing slope.west of the patio and deck would be at least as stable as it was prior to the construction of the wall and the slope grading. As was stated in our letter dated March 31, 1993, it is our opinion that if the wall and slope are left in their current configuration, failure of the wall is possible, which could result in damage to adjacent structures. The most likely structures which could be impacted by failure of the wall would be the patio and deck east of the slope and the railroad bulkhead west of the wall. Damage to adjacent residences to the north and south is, in our opinion, unlikely due to the distance between the wall and the adjacent houses. It is our opinion that the driveway is adequately constructed and that the drainage installed under the driveway and behind the rockery are acting as cutoff trenches upslope from the fill placed under the driveway. Therefore, the originally proposed cutoff trench above the driveway was not required. As. was stated in the March 31, 1993 letter, the on -site silty soils were used as backfill under the driveway. Consequently, settlement of the fill over time is possible which could.cause cracking in the concrete pavement .that would require periodic maintenance and repair. Since rebar reinforcement was. .placed GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. • is Peter*Pierides May 17, 1993: JN 88163 Page 3 in the concrete driveway, it is our opinion that these settlements and resulting cracking should be relatively minor. Maintenance and repair would, we anticipate, be limited to filling the. cracks with a sealant as they appear and the possible replacement of isolated areas of concrete pavement. We do not anticipate the distress will reduce the serviceability of the driveway significantly. We understand that the lower portion of the driveway is at an inclination"of 22 percent. Construction of this portion of the driveway at a "steeper-then-20-percent inclination was done to reduce the inclination of the fill slope needed on the downslope side of the driveway. Lowering the driveway would require steepening the fill slope, which would reduce its stability. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact us. cc: Respectively submitted,. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. `t0 �• wnskl c 3 m„ MAL ECG, EXPIRES 7107 Burton R. Holt, P.E. Geotechnical Engineer James R. Finley, Jr.,-P.E. Principal City of Edmonds Attn: Jeanine Graf Meyring & Associates, Inc. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Elm mw WbNmi6 • a<.oNec u - 5/1-7-,grl4oC/ fE.UIE AETA/L rv�s Q K r• - Z, I W � 00 � l4 Vlil � /S. S t f �a ••�,..J? , �1 w�L T Y�E Z /il,t/ . .... .................................................w/t.Q4 !/Gi..L/D....................................................... GtcJ.T. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... ............. ry ......... TE,� f/�,� S� ........ . . . . . . . . . �o ...... : . . . . . . . . . � \i �� : .7.'�.glf.0 ALE.✓.E�. VFde. L'S[lGC .... ................................... :.......................................................�q...-... .. ..... ................... .......-........... ....... ::::::: ::: — ...... ........... . .: 1� �4 Wt GtIQED.T.o. . 0 ic16.1 . ....:.TOE:: ...C�r1T..�FALG........................:...................................:.................. . :. � r.�a i �................. ... otJr'FRLZ..:...:...:...:...:...:..._............:.... . i �t�N/nFeuS ('svRvaj �lic�c 8E us�o .—Op- .EhC7�r- ............ , ..... ..:�•� 7� .:PL:'c.:T.....P�i.�'E. ........IG.-: •�,EN'7"'E�• :�•�"�: G�"•fTTE.�..,.......�►9eQ� � ..;5� i..�u9;vrS:.......................a 2. J.7P,git/ESE' UVE OA.<Co ,-,Was A_) : 3 To S : €''°'' : to �' :C�'�1E�2.:....... ............................... '�.. I<?!/bDoDF,c/Lt�pc! i�'U�CaI�'lE�tvE. .P-EF,�C/:�IZ•�1LEi4� :Q'��'E.V7�.�: : %. rs .......... ......... ......... ......... � ........ , S w s mopo 1-0 1890-19q_ CITY OF EDMONDS LAURA M. HALL 250 - 5TH AVE. N. EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation Engineering Mailed 5/18/93 May 17, 1993 Max Meyring Meyring & Association, Inc. 23423 Highway 99 Edmonds, WA 98020 . Re: Driveway slope.waiver at Mr. Pierides residence at 16320 - 75th P1. W. Dear Max, We have reviewed the request for a driveway slope waiver at the subject address, and based on the existing condition, cannot grant a waiver at this time. The portion of the driveway that exceeds twenty percent (20;) must be corrected to bring the slope within the limits of the . City Code. Once the driveway is in compliance, we will approve a waiver up to twenty percent (200). If you have any questions, feel free to.call. Sincerely, ADDISON L. CHRISMAN IV Engineering Inspector Al er is �. ALC/sdt c: Pete Pierides Jeannine Graf, Acting Building Official PIERIDES/TXTST530. 0 Incorporated August 11, 1890 0 Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan • �j . - ­;z, 1- �1 I.-s fir/ Y.4 Y �:] y: EyRINC� 8t . PERMIT COUNTER Forestefs SSOCIATES, INC. 23423 Highway 99 Edmonds, WA 98020 (206) 778-3101 P.O. Box 32 Lynnwood, WA 98036 May 12, 199.3 kobert J. Alberts, P.E. Community Services Dept. Engineering Division 250 5th Avenue North Edmonds, Wash. 98020 Re: New Private Driveway Slopes Peter Pierides (M.B. Meyring, agent) Dear Mr. Alberts: In communications with the Building Dept., I have been advised to submit to you a request for waivers of those portions of to Peter Pierides new concrete driveway that exceed 14%. An As -Built drawing of the site has been submitted to the Building Lept. for review. The As Built shows grades in excess of 14% as follows: St a 0+00 to 0+25 - 22. (i Sta 0+50 to 1+20 POVC - 19.4X 'Ihe reason for relocating the access driveway was to obtain a lesser slope of 304 which existed on the original driveway along the south line. The newly constructed driveway lends a more reasonable access, adds aesthetics to the site and is compatible to other adjoining properties whose access is comparable. The property immediately to the south has an approach slope of 2b% in the first 30 feet from 75th Place West.' The newly constructed driveway for the new residence at 16406 has an approved concrete access having a slope of 24% from 75th Place West. Please consider the facts and data as submitted for a waiver of the greater than slopes. Respectfully submitted, M.B. Meyr i n g, �P-E- AG. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................... 4 t ........... ....................................... ....................................... ... ... .......... ........ .. ... ............. ..................................... .... ............ ................. .. ...... ......... ......... ....................................... . . .......................... ............... ......... . ......... ...... ....... ........ ...... ... .. ...... ... ......... ..................... .......... .001" .. . .. . ..................................... ...... ........................... . . . . . . . ... . ............ . ........ . ..... \ ............................................ ........... .......... ........................... ........... ........... .......... .................................... ....................... .......... ........... . .................... .... ............ ....... To ................ ................. .......... .......... ......... i LO ...... .................... .... * ........... .......... ......... I 7 .... .......... ......... ................... ................... ............. ............................... ...................................... ............. ....... ..r I8 9 p 19 C5 May 11, 1993 0 STREET FILE CITY OF EDMONDS OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY �V ce�� 447-7000 FAX: 447-2015 to mAy 1 3 1993 ENGINEERING Mr. Randy M. �Boye Suite 202 7009 - 2P, S.W. Edr>-on- s, WA 98026 Re: Mr. and Mrs. Peter Pierides 16320 - 75th Place West, Edmonds, WA Dear Mr. Boyer: LAURA M. HALL MAYOR I am in receipt of your letter of May' 5, 1993. It appears to have crossed in the mail with a summary from the City's Planning Department. While the checklists appear to be very similar, there is more detail in the City's letter and I suggest that you deal with them directly regarding that detail, copying me with your letters. I called you last week regarding the detention system and asked the City in their communication to stress the issue of the detention system. My initial impression reflected in your letter was that the detention system was adequate to handle the runoff from the driveway but inadequate to handle the additional runoff from the roof. Lyle Chrisman informed me after the meeting that his review of Mr. Meyring's calculation indicates that the system is undersized for the new impervious surfaces on site, regardless of where runoff from the house is directed. I would appreciate a copy of the letter you had which Chad Miller supposedly directed to the City and which Ms. Graf did not locate in City files. What struck me about the letter was Mr. Miller's approach of telling the City his client would proceed if the City did not act. Since the letter never got to the City, the issue may be moot. As you know, an applicant's remedy is to seek a writ of mandamus compelling issuance of a building permit, not proceeding with the work. We would like a copy of the letter for our file; frankly I would not recommend that the City approve an engineering lead professional who would consider violation of the Building Code and City ordinance a proper remedy for delay. 2100 Westlake Center Tower, 1601 Fifth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101-1686 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan Mr. Randy M. Boyer May 11, 1993 Page 2 I will assume that this matter can be handled at the staff level from this time forward. If my involvement is required I am sure the City will advise me. Very truly yours, OGDEN MURPHY WALLACE �V. Scott Sn er WSS:are cc: Rob Chave J e Graf e Chrisman W&S46M. I u000b.oao.os7 f N I�_ (206) 778-3101 0. REET IATES, INC: 0 FILE 23423 Highway 99 ` .IVED ', 12 I PERMIT COUNTER Edmonds, WA 98020 P.O. Box 32 Lynnwood, WA 98036 V May 12, 1993 City of Edmonds Building Dept. 250 5th Avenue North Edmonds, Wash. 98020 Re: Peter Pierides` Driveway, Rockery and Bulkhead 16320 75th Place West In regards to certain items per the letter dated May 6, 1993 from Jeannine Graf, Acting Building Official, the following items have been submitted or are in working status to complete: Engineering Dept. 1. A letter to Robert Alberts, Uity Engineer, has been submitted requesting waiver of slopes exceeding 14%. 2. N meeting was held with Lyle Uhrisman regarding the sizing of the detention system. A review of the roof structure shows a small portion of to roof slopes southerly to the south downspouts leading to the new system. 3. We are in contact with Rita Shaw of Burlington Northern Railroad regarding the drainage easement. 4. Peter Pierides has informed us that the rockery installer has submitted a statement regarding the installation of a rockery drain. 5.. Peter Pierides has stated that in order to comply he would remove the excess height of the rockery to conform to the 4 foot high limit. 6. We have not received the correction list as stated, however a meeting with Chrisman was held as stated above. Planning Dept. .1. A revised SEPA Checklist has been submitted. 2. Attached is a copy of the yardage computation's as calculated based on the relationship between the original topographic exhibit and the As Built. A cross section exhibit was submitted with the As Built. Lhrisman•s request for reconsideration was regarding the inclusion of the earth behind the rockery. Lonfirmation.ot his inquiry was made At the above stated meeting. That yes the figures as submitted did include the. overall excavation for the rockeries. r Building Dept. ent is under consideration by r. 1. A Hold Harmless Agreem Pierides. 2. This Declaration is being prepared. 3. A stamped As Built rfmstheRegistered op-i�ai1exhibit been Landsubmitted. Surveyor. Mr..Ted Schneider of ou 4. Attempts have been made in the past to obtain a Grading Permit and are still in the try stage. �. Mr. Chad Miller has taken his log book with him to Savannah, Georgia. Attempts to retrieve the log are Still being made. 6. Question the statement regarding adjacent structures. the wall varies i rom 2. 5 i eet to 4 feet at the east tide ut a wide Riiroad bench of land overlooking the Burlington Northern R tracks. The wall is reinforced and in my opinion could Possibly move minimally under force but certainly not sufficient enough to cause damage to other properties. Respectfully, M.B. Meyring, P. MM/jn cc: Randy Boyer, P.S. t A.. Job No.. ei �+(2.r RQrid2cs Calc by -Ted S. Ear�-nwork Quan+i+ics r Dri v� vva� . FERf,li COUNTER [�JL�_NM! ILWM�m i • 0 20 115 105 (20 O • �a ,a 50 S.G 52 4g- F/-\L . -511, B.a8 L. SC _ �lJ w 9i Pp,3�i CV. I S o� wnsy z c 021 9FGIS7E��o J� TONAL E� N 5 8A 2--. 4 ANAL Lp ° _ �EMaEs BUILDING DIVISION TELEPHONE/VISIT RECORD DATE /0 AV-q y3 TIME /6 Z/U _ ) PERSON CALLED 197�--Ie- COMPANY 3Z�' �. �F'� �✓ TELEPHONE # z91 0617 PROJECT U RE1220-1,YXI /,�Lr,.,./Z-1 ��[yltiatc7L' Z' Ld Cl f�Lz.��Lry'- if acA/ x/a �Gt if //Ldl(f GGu L/LOFi�� d2GLl x c �' �Gl J ^ �_I� d «.c'Z" FILE COMMENTS:— ✓^Lt�6 Ll�Ftc v�/v b�l( or �` Ole , cc /�?z Lr/z,�,�: �� .�✓rro �?rzEuxGi //✓6-��i-G: � h't.�� Lr7 /. c.l-iw G �� / ,J uc l % ✓ u' Ctn'c /Z�•7a� /dt. J�" G/j �j�fjLC:✓ f9r• `/`r/ref ¢•i' /GP-.t�`J �G'/ r�,.. �/.S• /� .�-� as I/`r� !lam Gc��c� id �.�<.cr� � `dam ✓v> t �f �� c/ 9L�r/r� g: s`�r. 77� lC lc /s oc f 74'/,/7-- /GEGt c l7iL 2fc, A/%S' fLGcGa .17 i✓.,v .C«�Ga7cf.( GPILr L / x ii�t . .lLe�r �/r / vv �'`U� Li=+�_/ ic%u �7`L, G•FGLtI� 1leG�HJ /�-ci,-� Ot ��ac�' G Jf �'"L•c L�-� � � f�w �c.�.�p . f? ,� p CALL TAKENt BY:_L -? VISIT DATE TIME /3-OD LOCATION PROJECT WHOM/COMPANY SUBJECT Z?�/��,�Td>7 5� �� �iL'�<� l ���>i h ; G� jG.� =0 7`,5; �lf.C.-yia / „l�a,i?' � �'-�� ' � 0���,u.'-� �� GGGc%{.O Fi'-Gc L� G�C�E�i ✓� �l �-%GL� ,v`� �J`GccUff2-c7r� , lall-o IAMWW ,�� G' �" 1/Zc./ .��72d--L �i07.iL/i� �-7-j "%7l< oa—y /`�'�` G�/%oL'�/i>l� �GJ��ai�•.., CITY REPRESENTATIVE:- `�'6'�'� 'lrl �•v �c It —a uGi7GG��✓ Y890-199 CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE..N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation • Engineering May 14, 1993 Mr. Randy Boyer, Inc. P.S. Attorney At Law 7009 212th Street Southwest, Suite 202 Edmonds, Washington 98026 RE: Peter Pierides @ 16320 75th Place West LAURA M. HALL MAYOR Per your request, this letter is a brief outline of City requirements for the Pierides property, I have restated the items that are still outstanding from the 5/6/93 City letter. Please submit the following information: 1. A copy of the recorded Burlington Northern Easement. 2. The owners liability statement. 3. The Notify and Hold Harmless covenant, (executed by the owner). 4. The lead design professional statement, (Max Meyring). 5. Field reports by Chad Miller of Meyring Associates. 6.. A response from Burton Holt on rockery drainage, rockery height and the bulkhead. Please resolve the following: 1. The driveway slope issue. 2. The detention system issue. A revised plan was received today, but the review is not complete. 3. Correct items from the Engineering Department, correction notice dated 2/5/93, (copy attached). Please be advised, permits will eventually be issued and professional review fees, permit fees and possibly violation fees will need to be collected. . If there are any questions please feel free to call me at 771-0220. Thank you, eannine L. Graf , _ Acting Building Official 4 0 jnrr•:rn:-)r„4n-.4 Ai,,r7,jci 11 0 w �890.19()v • 8 Trolv�x� I F0 /Y4F CITY OF EDMONDS -- 250 - 5TH AVE. N. - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771-0220 - FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation . Engineering May 6, 1993 Mr. Peter Pierides f6320 75th Place West Edmonds, Washington 98026 RE: Driveway, Rockery and Bulkhead Work @ 16320 75th Place West )P" LAURA M. HALL MAYOR The purpose of this letter is to clarify issues presented in the May 4th meeting and to address other items that were not specifically mentioned. Please note, these are not "added" issues. Some requirements were discovered during the initial plan check and have never been adequately answered by your lead design professional and some are now a concern due to the project being completed without an approved permit or professional field inspection. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 1. A review of the as -built plans indicates that the driveway slope exceeds 14% (22% appears to be the maximum slope of the driveway). Slopes in excess of 14% are required to obtain a waiver by the City Engineer, the maximum slope waiver is 20%. There is no administrative process for slopes exceeding 20%. Note, the original plan showed the. maximum slope to be 15%, which probably would have been a viable request for waiver. The City will need a written proposal from you on how you intend to resolve this problem. 2. We discussed removal of the house from the new detention drainage system, but Mr. Chrisman's review of Mr. Meyring's calculations indicates that the system may be undersized for the new driveway and other new impervious surfaces on -site. Mr. Meyring needs to recalculate all new impervious surface and meet with Lyle Chrisman to make a final determination if the as -built system is adequate to handle drainage from the house. This item shall be further discussed under separate cover by Mr. Chrisman. 3. The City is in receipt of a Burlington Northern easement for drainage, however, the City requires a recorded copy of this agreement. If drainage changes are necessary, and impact Burlington Northern drainage ditches, another agreement may be required. 0 Incorporated August 11, 1890 0 Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan Mr. Pierides May 6, 1993 Page Two 4. Mr. Holt's report states that he is unable to determine if drainage was placed behind the rockeries, but in his opinion, long term stability is directly related to those drains being properly sized and placed. Mr. Holt has recommended that the rockery contractor provide written verification of installation or produce field verification of the drain lines. Regardless of how the problem -is resolved between the applicant and Mr. Holt, what the City needs is a written conclusion about the rockeries, drainage and stability of the site. 5. The original GC soils report dated 1/2/92, limited rockeries to 4 feet in height. The as - built indicates that rockeries exceed this height. Mr. Holt shall state whether the rockeries are adequate as -built or if changes are required (eg. remove one rock layer, regrading or rockeries changed out to engineered retaining walls etc.) 6. Due to the length of the meeting, the City was unable to provide you with an Engineering Department inspection correction list. This list was created on 2/5/93, the day the violation was brought to the attention of the City. These items are directly related to the as -built work on the site. It shall be the responsibility of Mr. Meyring to coordinate the repair work or site alterations with Lyle Chrisman of the Engineering Department. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1. The City is required by State law to process an Environmental Checklist (SEPA), Determination since your site is located in a designated Environmentally Sensitive Area. Per Max Meyring, he will revise the current checklist on file with the City to reflect the finished work on the site. Note: the City must have Mr. Holt's letter on the outstanding issues before the SERA process can be concluded. 2. The as -built drawings show that grading exceeds 500 cubic yards. As you know by Code, a Conditional Use permit is required for grading over 500 cubic yards. At the suggestion of the City Attorney, Mr. Meyring will meet with Lyle Chrisman and determine a final grading amount: Mr. Chrisman reminded Mr. Meyring to include yardage behind the rockeries and the west slope work. If the yardage exceeds 500cyds, a fine shall be assessed through the City's civil penalties process due to the applicants failure to have obtained the required permit. • Mr. Pierides May 6, 1993 Page Three BUILDING These requirements are imposed by the City Earth Subsidence Ordinance on all new, improvements in the designated Meadowdale area and have not yet been completed from the intial review. 1. The owner is required to provide a written statement that warrants the accuracy of all permit submittal information by the owner in a form which relieves the City and its staff from any liability associated with reliance on such permit application submittals and subsequent issuance of any building permits, and further state', that all conclusions are those of the owner and his/her design professionals. This statement shall also include language that the owner understands and accepts the risk of developing in an area with potential unstable soils and they will advise, in writing, any prospective purchasers of the site, or any prospective lessees of the structure or portions of the structure on the site, of the slide potential of the area as well as any outstanding code violations and/or construction that was completed without City approval or permits. A separate Covenant to Notify.and Hold Harmless agreement is attached which also needs to be signed by the owners, notarized, and submitted to the City. 2. As lead design professional, Mr. Meyring is required to submit a declaration that he read and understands the goetechnical report, and that he incorporated design measures from this report to reduce the potential risk of injury or damage from any earth movement indicated by the geotechnical report. The declaration must also state that the risk of damage to the development or to adjacent properties from soil instability will be minimal, subject to the conditions set forth in the report, and that the finished work will not increase the potential for soil movement on or adjacent to the site. 3. A topographic map stamped by a State of Washington licensed land surveyor is required. 4. A building permit is required per Uniform Building Code 301 for the grading, rockeries, driveway and bulkhead work completed on the site. Investigation fees equaling the amount of the assessed permit fees shall be imposed since the work was completed without a permit. The applicant should understand that so long as a "good faith" effort to resolve the problems continues, the City has the ability to consider waiving these double fees. Contractor information and standard permit and plan review fees shall be paid. Please be advised, from the original plan review, professional consultant fees $509.50 are also due. A copy of the bill is enclosed. 5. Mr. Meyring is required to provide copies of field reports by Chad Miller of-Meyring Associates for all on -site inspections. Mr. Pierides May 6, 1993 Page Four 6. Based on information provided in the GC report dated 3/31/93, the gravity retaining wall (bulkhead, west side) may fail and damage to adjacent structures is possible. If a revised report is not submitted, Mr. Pierides shall notify the City what action he will take to mitigate the problem, how the work will be accomplished, and a schedule of completion. A timely reply from all your design professionals will be a determining factor in resolving, these issues by your closing date. If there are any questions please feel free to contact the Building Division at 771-0220. . Thank you, Jeannine L. Graf Acting Building Official cc: City Attorney Lyle Chrisman Randy Boyer Rob Chave Max Meyring ��b w a LJJ � , P: a CM3 0 a 04 z 0 � a � U CD Za E-4 a 0 > U ❑ O E] r 3 0 x rA � Z3 m o3 0 oI 000u �A e0 ppccd 3� Z. Ho oa3. Zw°� 00 F3 a3 00. O �orn �. z IQ ° a0 96 of zim z a. 8 z 0 a � z w N z 0 w oz w a as Q ❑ A a z w M a z ao �Q as p0 zw a e° 3 ❑ ❑ ❑ z A 0 z 3 w ci ~ _fir w' A P. ►a Ica cy Iftm a w` ❑A o a ^ I o� ti , pQwa F O U i cai z z o a w i 0ozz oG Ix19 0 in O w 04a oQ o �? p :2 a G �c E- f U [� z A HcS w z 3 w Q a A a A a €, .❑❑❑ a3g �a C o pq n ! Q N Q L y z C z�� CF w zap a o w F c c 0 8 &a a C x Q O o Q �a00 H^ �6-4A z�Uw 89p-199 0 STREET FILE 0 CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N.. EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation . Engineering May 6, 1993 Peter Pieredes 16320 - 75th P1. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 Re:. Storm drainage requirements at t1�6k321U - 7�Sth P1 . W; Mr. Pieredes, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR s�77f93 This letter is to further clarify the storm drainage requirements on your property as discussed with you in the meeting May 4, 1993. Regarding the length of the detention pipe, the current length is insufficient to meet the storage requirements for the new driveway and must be corrected. As far as connecting the house to the detention system, the City Hydraulics Engineer stated the house can remain connected (preferred), but the orifice size must be resized to by-pass the house. Calculating the correct orifice size can be accomplished by having your lead engineer use the by-pass method established by Snohomish County Storm Drainage Y & B Method. Your design engineer must submit his calculations for review and approval. If he has any questions, he can contact Don Fiene, City Hydraulics Engineer. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to call. Sincerely,. ADDISON L. CHRISMAN IV Engineering Inspector ALC/sdt c: Jeannine Graf, Acting Building Official PIEREDES/TXTST530 o4(, , - Alberts • Incorporated August 11, 1896 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan s GEOTEcm- CONSULTANTS, INC. 13256 N.E. 24th St. (Northup Way), Suite 16 Bellevue, WA 98005 (206) 7475618 FAX 747-8561 0`E TIE. R LE April 30, 1993 JN 88163 City of Edmonds Community Services Department 250 - Sth Avenue North Edmonds, Washington 98020 Attention: Jeannine L. Graf Subject: Response.to Letters Dated April 6, 1993, and April 19, 1993 Pierides Residence 16320 75th Place West Edmonds, Washington Dear Ms. Graf: On April 7, 1993, and on April 21, 1993, we received. two letters from the City of Edmonds concerning the Pierides residence at 16320 75th Place West i-n Edmonds, Washington. The letter dated April 6, 1993; acknowledged receipt of our "Site Observations and Geotechnical Engineering Recommendations" letter dated March 31, 1993, and requested additional clarification on 11 items, one of which was that the City of Edmonds considers us the lead design professional on the project. The letter dated April 19, 1993, was a followup to the earlier letter and detailed the still outstanding.required information. Our involvement in this project began on December 19, 1991, when we visited' the site to prepare a letter, dated January 2, 1992, providing geotechnical recommendations concerning the construction of a new driveway east of the residence. We have neither been asked by Mr. Pierides to perform as the lead design professional on this project nor have we ever acted in this capacity. In a telephone conversation with Mr. Pierides on April 23, 1993, he indicated that Max Meyring was the lead design professional on this project and is continuing to act in this capacity_ City of Edmonds April 30, 1993 JN 88163 Page 2 We are prepared to provide additional geotechnical consulting services on this project,, with regard to the information required in the two letters referenced above, when we receive authorization from Mr. Pierides.to proceed. At this time, we have not yet received that authorization. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact us. Respectively submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Burton R. Holt, P.E. Geotechnical Engineer ►�' g. FI* ISTS ONAL EXPIRES 8 / 17 / y3 James R. Finley, Jr., P.E. Principal cc: Peter Pierides Meyring &Associates, Inc. GEO.TECH CONSULTANTS,. INC Jo b No. el -0542� 4 -� 5 -� Fb-�-Qr Rc-> ridQs ���P Caic b� /Ced S . EaHjnwork Quan+i+i(2s RECEIV Dr Drivcwa� MAY 031! PERMIT COUD 1 0400 90 C o+2O 1-70 Z �o 3+GO 40 1-7 3+60 5 D+ O AL o+� O O+(Eo 20 4-60 115 14 00 35 14-20 105 1 +40 1 W 14w O 311. cu .Y . Kof CQ-s -) 2--s4 Vo I 50 S.G 5z 28 $.,§ Cu.Y s cC TEaE'"-- �ONAI E�x EX?(RES REST FILE NOTICE AND ORDER TO ABATE UNSAFE CONDITION Issued to: Peter Pierides 16320 75th Place West Edmonds, Washington 98020 As owner/agent, lessee or other person occupying or having charge or control of the building, lot or premises at: 16320 75th Place West, and Legally Described on the rolls of the Snohomish County Assessor: All of Lots 7 and 8 and that portion of Lot 9, lying north of that certain boundry line established by Snohomish County Superior Court Case No. 91-2-04386-9 and delineated on the face of that certain survey recorded in Volume 18 of Surveys, on page 102 and 103, under Recording Number 8310205001, and revised by Survey recorded in Volume 22 of Surveys, on pages 290 and 291, under Recording Number 8606045005, all in Block 60, Plat of Meadowdale Beach, according to the Plat thereof recorded in Volume 5 of Plats, page 38, in Snohomish County, Washington. EXCEPT the east ten feet of Lots 7 and 8, conveyed to the City of Edmonds by Deed under Recording Number 8708210299; TOGETHER WITH the south 10 feet of Lot 19 and the north 10 feet of Lot 20, Block A. Plat of Meadowdale Tidelands, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 6 of Plats, page 28, in Snohomish County, Washington. In accordance with prior notice, the Acting Building Official of the City of Edmonds, Jeannine Graf, hereby finds work including a bulkhead, rockery(s), driveway, and grading completed on the premises in violation of the Edmonds Community Development Code and the 1991 Uniform Building Code. Despite notice to correct the violations, no action by the owner has been taken to suspend this notice. The Building Official therefore finds: 1. The bulkhead, rockery(s) and grading work constitute a hazardous embankment within the meaning of Section 7004 of the 1991 Uniform Building Code and further constitute an unsafe condition potentially threatening the structural integrity of the dwelling and, therefore, a potential hazard to the safety of occupants of the structure. 2. The bulkhead, driveway, stairs, and rockery(s) were constructed in violation of Section 301 of the Uniform Building Code and Chapter. 19.05 of the Edmonds Community Development Code. 3. Grading has been done in violation of Chapter 19.05 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, Chapter 70 of the 1991 Uniform Building Code and in violation of State Environmental Protection Act law. 4. Drainage detention may or may not have been installed in violation of Chapter 18.30 of the Edmonds Community Development Code. The Acting Building Official has determined the previous condition(s) exist on the subject property and as described in Section 302 of the Uniform Code for Abatement of Dangerous Buildings the following notice is ordered for action or repair of the conditions pursuant to Section 401 of the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, as adopted in Chapter 19 of the Edmonds Community Development Code. The following deadlines must be met with regard to these actions: 1. Submit the required information per City letter dated 3/1193 by April 9, 1993. 2. Acquire permit(s) and commence any required work or restoration by April 30, 1993. 3. Work to be completed for final inspection by May 28, 1993. This schedule supersedes building permit expiration as defined in Section 303(d) of the Uniform Building Code. Failure of the City to enforce any of the deadlines above shall not waive the City's right to enforce subsequent noncompliance. Failure to comply with any of the above conditions may cause the building to be vacated, secured, restored, repaired or demolished by June 15, 1993 to the extent necessary to correct the conditions. The costs incurred will be charged as a personal judgment or a lien against the property. Any person having record, title or legal interest in this property may appeal this order by filing a written notice with the Building Official of the City of Edmonds within thirty (30) days date of this notice. Failure to appeal will constitute a waiver of all rights to an administrative hearing and determination of that matter. DATED S GNED JEANNINE G 17 ACTING BUILDING OFFICIAL CASE # 0 1] CITY OF EDMONDS CON 4TJNITY SEVICES DEPARTMENT 250 5th Ave. N., Edmonds, WA 98020 Location of Violation (Address and/or description of location): 16320 75th Place West, Edmonds, WA Issued to: Peter Pi eri des Address of person Order is issued to: 16320 75th Place West, Edmonds, WA 98020. Code section violated: Uniform Building Code Sections 301, 7004 and Chapter 19.05 ECDC and Chapter 18.30 ECDC Description of Violation: A bulkhead, rockery (s) , driveway, stairs and grading work was completed without the required permits and approvals from the ty of Edmonds. Corrective Action Required: OBTAIN ALL REQUIRED CITY PERMITS AND SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING: #1. Submit a revised soils report to the City for review; #2. Make all required corrections as imposed by the City. #3. Obtain a drainage easement from Burlington Northern Railroad. A. Amend the SEPA checklist. A. Provide driveway slope profiles and drainage detention per City code.. Correction is required by: 5 : 00 p.m. (time) April 30th . 1993 (date) If correction is not made by the date and time specified in this Order, a Notice of Civil Violation may be issued. The nice of Civil Violation will assess fines of $100.00 per day, or portion of a day, during which the violation continues. Date Posted March 29, 1993 Date Mailed 3/29/93 Date Served 3/29/93 Issuing Party; Signature: . Graf Title: Acting Building Official `890-199 El L' CITY OF EDMONDS AURA M. HALL 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering nL February 9, 1993 Mr. Peter Pierides 16320 75th Place West Edmonds, Washington 98026 RE: Building Permit Application #606 for Driveway, Grading, Rockeries The Building Division has been notified that the work under the subject application has been completed without issuance of a permit. This is a violation of Section 301 and Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code as well as Ordinance #2661 of the City of Edmonds. The seriousness of this act is further compounded by the fact that your site is located in a known landslide hazard area. It is hereby requested that you grant access to a team consisting of City Officials and consultants to make a site inspection on your property in order to videotape the existing situation. Right of entry is requested per Section 202c of the Uniform Building Code, section enclosed. Please advise the Building Division in writing by February 16th, 1993 if right of entry is granted. You will be informed under separate cover from the City Attorney's office as to the course of action required in order to resolve this violation. Thank you, Jeannine L. Graf Acting Building Official cc: City Attorney 0 Incorporated August 11, 1890 0 Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan V 0 0 1991 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 201-202 Chapter 2 ORGANIZATION AND ENFORCEMENT Creation of Enforcement Agency Sec. 201. There is hereby established in this jurisdiction a code enforcement agency which shall be under the administrative and operational control of the building official.. Powers and Duties of Building Official Sec. 202. (a) General. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to enforce all the provisions of this code. For such purposes, the building official shall have the powers of a law enforcement officer. The building official shall have the power to render interpretations of this code and to adopt and enforce rules and supplemental regulations in order to clarify the application of its provisions. Such interpretations, rules and regulations shall be in conformance with the intent and of this code . purpose (b) Deputies. In accordance. with prescribed procedures and with the approval of the appointing authority, the building official may appoint such number of tech- nical officers and inspectors and other employees as shall be authorized from time to time. The building official may deputize such inspectors or employees as may be necessary to carry out the functions of the code enforcement agency. (c) Right of Entry. Whewit is necessary to make an inspection to enforce the provisions of this code, or when the building official has reasonable cause to be- lieve that there exists in a building or upon a premises a condition which is contrary to or in violation of this code which makes the building or premises unsafe, danger- ous or hazardous, the building official may enter the building or premises at reason- able times to inspect or to perform the duties imposed by this code, provided that if such building or premises be occupied that credentials be presented to the occupant and entry requested. If such building or premises be unoccupied, the building offs- cial shall first make a reasonable effort to locate the owner or other person having charge or control of the building or premises and request entry. If entry is refused, the building official shall have recourse to the remedies provided by law to secure entry. (d) Stop Orders. Whenever any work is being done contrary to the provisions of this code, or other pertinent laws or ordinances implemented through the enforce- ment of this code, the building official may order the work stopped by notice in writing served on any persons engaged in the doing or causing such work to be done, and any such persons shall forthwith stop such work until authorized by the building official to proceed with the work. (e) Occupancy Violations. Whenever any building or structure or equipment therein regulated by this code is being used contrary to the provisions of this code, the building official may order such use discontinued and the structure, or portion thereof, vacated by notice served on any person causing such use to be continued. Such person shall discontinue the use within the time prescribed by the building LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. Geoenvironmental Engineering and Technologies City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Avenue N Edmonds, WA 98020 Attention: Ms. Sharon Nolan STREET ALE RECEIVED MAY 2 1 1992 May 20, 1992 PERMIT COUNTER RE: INITIAL GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW PROPOSED PIERIDES DRIVEWAY, ROCKERY, AND RETAINING WALL PROJECT 16320 75TH PLACE WEST EDMONDS, WASHINGTON At your request, we have completed an initial review of plans and other documents concerning the above -noted proposed project. Table 1 (attached) provides a summary of the documents which we reviewed. Based on submitted documents, the proposed project will consist of several elements, including, but not limited.to: 1) construction of a new driveway (involving cutting and filling, 2) construction of a gravity -type retaining wall adjacent to the driveway, 3) reconfiguration of the existing rockery between the home and the driveway, 4) installation of 'a short section of cutoff drain, 5) installation of a storm drain detention system, 6) construction' of two gravity - type retaining walls along the west slope, 7) placement of native soil behind the two retaining walls along the west slope, and 8) installation of temporary erosion control measures. These features are generally shown on Sheet 1 of the Project Plans; however, the plans are not entirely clear as to existing and proposed- features. Geotech Consultants, Inc. January 2, 1992, report is limited to investigation/report. submittal for the proposed driveway and rockeries -east of the existing residence only. As such, the retaining walls, detention system, erosion control measures, etc., proposed west of the house have not been assessed by the geotechnical consultant. Also, it is our understanding that Geotech Consultants, Inc. performed their study based on preliminary cross sections only and have not been given the opportunity to review the present design. Ordinance No. 2661 requires Prl R(1'C I(lN • EI)M )NI ,, VVAH!NIGD )N 1,8u211-,4! 21, . 2r;nr 7%;,-iigi'7 . I:A., , ir,r 77x-r;4(I.r that the geotechnical evaluation address all critical components of proposed construction.; hence, Geotech Consultants, Inc. should review and comment on the current plans. Other specific comments are as follows: 1. Based on the present submittal, it is not clear who is acting as the project's lead design professional. For the purposes of our review, we have assumed that Mr. Chad Miller of Meyring & Associates, Inc. is v acting in that capacity. The City should confirm that Mr. Miller has the qualifications to act as the lead design professional. 2. No declarations were provided for Landau Associates' review. Besides being located within the mapped limits of the Meadowdale landslide, the existing dwelling lies near the center of a slide mass which reportedly moved in 1947 (Dames & Moore, September 23, 1968). Because of the site's landslide history, we recommend that the City obtain declarations to confirm that the owner is clearly aware of this landslide history,'and that the proposed construction could have an impact on slope stability. 3. Cut and fill volumes shown on Sheet 1 appear to be based on the cross sections shown on Sheet 2 of the Project Plans. Slope configurations shown on the cross sections do not comply with Geotech Consultants, Inc. recommendations; therefore, it is probable that final cut and fill volumes will be substantially greater than those presently shown. Recalculated/ quantities may result in a requirement for a conditional use permit. 4. Current plans call for relocating a section of existing rockery, yet a detail showing rockery construction is not provided. Such a detail should be provided, primarily to address drainage. Concerns are: 1) connection of the westernmost yard drain 115 ft east of the detention system (near proposed Elevation 66), with the drain from the toe of the lowermost rockery (at approximate Elevation 57), and 2) rockery' internal. drain details. 5. The proposed gravity retaining wall along the driveway appears to assume certain soil bearing characteristics, yet retaining wall design parameters have not been provided by the geotechnical engineer. Geotech Consultants, Inc. should review the wall design (including currently proposed backfill/drainage details) with respect to their knowledge of the site. Close attention should be paid to the soft, loose soil materials identified in their explorations and sloping surcharge loads. Also, shoring requirements and/or a slope easement on the neighboring property may be required where the wall approaches the south property line. 6. Temporary erosion control measures call for excavating an approximate 2-ft deep ditch with 2:1 sideslopes along the toe of the west slope. Geotech Consultants, Inc. should comment on the proposed erosion control details (i.e., where will spoil from the ditch go and what effect Will this ditch have on slope stability). 05/20/92 EDMONDSWOUDES.RPT 2 LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. • 7. The applicant cites a permit from Burlington Northern (for storm water discharge?). The City should verify permit conditions and confirm that the permit allows discharges at two locations. 8. The restrictor/pollution control device/catch basin -detail shown on Sheet 1 of the Project Plans calls for a Type 2 catch basin, or larger. Elsewhere on the plans a Type 1 catch basin is called out. This discrepancy should be resolved. 9. The notes on Sheet 2 of the Project Plans indicate that the keying and benching of structural fill must extend for approximately 30 ft. Based on projected final slope configuration, the keying and benching may have to extend past this 30 ft length. 10. The drawings currently show a cutoff trench extending in an east/west direction near the upper portion of the driveway. The purpose of this drain at the noted location is unclear since it is running approximately perpendicular to existing and proposed contours. The geotechnical engineer should comment on the present design and on the need to extend this cutoff trench along the entire length of the uphill side of the driveway. 11. The two storm drain lines extending down the west slope are shown as buried pipelines. There may be stability and erosion concerns regarding equipment excavating trenches on this hillside, particularly if there is excess site disturbance or if backfill is improperly placed. For construction of the proposed driveway, the abutting retaining wall, and relocating the existing rockery, the form of the present submittal is probably adequate. However, construction of retaining walls, the detention system, erosion control measures, and placement of fill along the west slope will present a very challenging construction project. If the walls. are not adequately designed and constructed, and/or if excess disturbance occurs and/or if fill is improperly placed, there is the potential for destabilizing the hillside, possibly affecting both the existing residence and 8-inch City sanitary sewer line. For that reason, we recommend that the City require a complete Ordinance No. 2661 submittal for improvements proposed west of the house. That form of submittal will require a separate topographic map, grading plan, tree cutting plan (if appropriate), and geotechnical study. Landau Associates attempted to address most of the critical geotechnical elements of the proposed project; however, the lead design professional and other design team members should 0 carefully check project details for compliance with City requirements. 05/20/92 FDMONDSWIFRIDrS.RPT 3 1..:1NDAU ASSOCfA"fES. INC. We trust that this letter provides the information you require. Please note that Landau Associates, Inc. has not reviewed structural elements of the proposed design, nor the drainage calculations. Please call with questions or when additional review services are needed. LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. WDE/sg No. 74037.10 attachment 05/20/92 EDMONDSWIERIDES.Rff 4 By: William D. Evans, CPG Project Manager LANDAU ASSOCIATES. INC. TABLE 1 REVIEW DOCUMENTS PROPOSED PIERIDES PROJECT • Sheets 1 and 2 of 2 of the Project Plans. The Plans were prepared by Meyring & Associates, Inc. Dated September 1, 1991; Revision 1, March 31, 1992. • Geotechnical report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc. entitled "Geotechnical Engineering Recommendations, Proposed Pierides Driveway," dated January 2, 1992. • Environmental Checklist signed by Chad Miller (of Meyring & Associates, Inc.), dated March 23, 1992. • Drainage Narrative by Maxwell B. Meyring dated March 3, 1992. (A review of drainage calculations was not performed during Landau Associates review.) 05/20/92 EDMONDS\ PIERI DES.RPT LANDAU :ASSOCI A1 FS. WC_ • s, STREET FILE File No. 01.1.12 Street File MEMO FOR RECORD SUBJECT: 16320-75TH PL. W. On inspection of the waterline repair site and concerned property of 16320-75th P1. W., Archie Brena and myself could find no directly related cause for the damages implied by the homeowner. The course of any leak related water would have followed the route of roof and ground water drainage in the vicinity of the house foundation. As there is apparently no true drainage system for ground or roof water around the foundation, it would seem that any leak related water may have followed an already established route under the foundation. The fact that the homeowner did not notify the City of the second water line break until Saturday morning, did - not help to reduce the possibility of any ensuing damage. 4AC HIE BRENA Water/Sewer Division Supervisor SCOTT HOGHLAND Water/Sewer Leadperson SH/ml A06-VIV � MILLS DT M CH DT - SWEET' FILE tlq� RECEIVED . .,APR 1.9 :19.9 Right -of -Way Occupancy Pi 06000UNTED Permit No. PX92-16019 THIS AGREEMENT, made this 2nd day of March, 1992, between BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, hereinafter called "Burlington" whose post office address is 2000 First Interstate Center, 999 Third Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98104-1105, and PETER PIERIDES, a property owner, whose post office address is: 16320 - 75th Place W. Edmonds, Washington hereinafter called "Permittee," WITNESSETH: Burlington, for and in consideration of the fee herein provided to be paid by Permittee to Burlington, and of the covenants and promises hereinafter made to be observed and performed by Permittee, does hereby grant to Permittee license and permission to excavate for, construct, maintain and operate a 4-inch PVC Storm Water Pipe System. This System will be a continuation of the Meyring & Associates, Inc.'s submitted plan of "Grading, Drainage, TESC and Driveway Profile for Peter Pierides" of 9/3/91. The Storm Water System continues down an approximate 30-foot embankment, entering the Burlington's Easterly,R/W line at approximately Survey Station 1221.80, continuing down the embankment to and over and attached to an existing Timber Bulkhead. The Piping' System is to have a minimum of 1.0-feet of cover until it reaches the bulkhead area. It:is to be secured to the bulkhead and 'teed' at an approximate Top of Rail elevation, diverting the water longitudinally along the Burlington's ditch, NOTE:' APPLICANT WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY MAINTENENCE OF THE PIPING FACILITY AND/OR ANY DAMAGE TO ANY BURLINGTON'S FACILITY CAUSED BY ANY STORM WATER DRAINAGE FROM THIS PIPING FACILITY IN EXCESS OF THE "Drainage Narrative for Peter Pierides, Sec. 5, Twp. 27N, Rge. 4 East, W.M." DATED 10/31/91. PERMITTEE SHALL PAY SPECIAL HEED TO PARAGRAPH 3 OF THIS PERMIT. hereinafter referred to as "Facility" upon, along or across the right-of-way of Burlington, underneath the surface thereof, and under the tracks of Burlington, as the case may be, at or near Station EDMONDS , in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington, to be located as follows, to -wit: Crossing at Line Segment 0050 - Survey Station 1221+80 - Milepost 21.18. Permittee in consideration of such license and permission hereby covenants and promises as follows: 1. Permittee will pay in advance to Burlington for this Permit the sum of Three Hundred Dollars ($300) for the first Ten (10) year period hereof and One Hundred Fifty Dollars ($150) for each subsequent Ten (10) year period that this Permit remains in effect and Permittee will also pay or reimburse Burlington for all taxes and assessments that may be levied or assessed against said Facility. Burlington reserves the right to change the fee on future Permits at any time without notice. This provision shall in no way affect Burlington's right to terminate this Permit pursuant to Paragraph 10 hereof. Burlington may assign any receivables due them under -this Agreement, provided, however, such assignments shall not relieve the assignor of any of its rights or obligations under this Agreement. Permittee (or his contractor) shall at Permittee's expense obtain and furnish to Burlington a Railroad Protective Liability Insurance, or Certificate of Self -Insurance, in accordance with and subject to the terms of the Addendum attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. Permittee, at Permittee's sole cost construct, reconstruct, maintain and repair and expense, shall excavate for, said Facility placinamn6ame in feb1292r104 9 accordance with the specifications provided in application dated 11/18/91, heretofore approved by Burlington. Permittee shall fill in the excavationand restore the surface of the ground upon which the Facility is located to its previous condition subject to the Division Roadmaster's approval. Said Roadmaster shall have the right at any time when in his/her, judgment it becomes necessary or advisable to require any material used in the work to be replaced with like material or with material of a more permanent character, also to require additional work or change of location of said Facility as a matter of safety and/or appearance, or on account of additional tracks being laid, change of grade thereof, construction of a building, or for any other reason whether or not connected with the operation, maintenance, or improvement of Burlington's railroad, all of which shall be done at the expense of Permittee in the manner herein provided. 3. Permittee shall give to the Division Roadmaster at least 48 hours advance notice of any work to be done by Permittee in the excavation for, construction, reconstruction, maintenance, repair, change of location or removal of said Facility, and shall conduct said work in such a manner as not to interfere with the maintenance and operation of Burlington's railroad. 4. In the event that Burlington performs any work, furnishes any material or flagging service, or incurs any expense whatsoever on account of the excavation for, construction, reconstruction, maintenance, repair, change. of location, removal of the Facility, or otherwise, Permittee shall reimburse Burlington for the cost thereof within twenty (20) days after bills are rendered therefor. If the excavation for, construction, reconstruction, maintenance, repair, change of location, or removal of the Facility, requires any or all of the following work: removal and replacement of track, bridging, protection of track, 'or other railroad facilities by work or flagging, engineering, and/or supervision, such work is to be performed by Burlington employees and the cost borne by Permittee. 5. PERMITTEE IS PLACED ON NOTICE THAT FIBER OPTIC, COMMUNICATIONS, CONTROL SYSTEMS, AND OTHER TYPES OF CABLES MAY BE BURIED ON BURLINGTON's PROPERTY. Before beginning work, Permittee shall telephone Burlington's Communications Network Control Center at 1-800-533-2891 (a 24-hour number) to determine if cable systems are buried on Burlington's property to be.used by Permittee. The Communications Network Control Center will contact the appropriate personnel to have cables located and make arrangements with Permittee as to the protective measures that must be adhered to prior to the commencement of any work on Burlington's property. In addition to the liability terms elsewhere in this Agreement, Permittee shall indemnify and hold Burlington harmless against and from all cost, liability, and expense whatsoever (including, without limitation, attorney's fees and court costs and expenses) arising out of or in any way contributed to by any act or omission of Permittee, its contractor, agents and/or employees, that cause or in any way or degree contribute to (1) any damage to or destruction of any telecommunications system by Permittee, and/or its contractor, agents and/or employees, on Burlington's property, (2) any injury to or death of any person employed by or on behalf of any telecommunications company, and/or its contractor, agents and/or employees, on Burlington's property, and/or (3) any claim or cause of action for alleged loss of profits or revenue by, or loss of service by a customer or user of such telecommunication company(ies). 6. In the event any cathodic electrolysis or other electrical grounding system is installed in connection with the Facility which, in the opinion of Burlington, interferes with train signals in any way, telephone or telegraph lines, or other facilities of Burlington, Permittee, upon being informed by Burlington of such interference, shall forthwith discontinue operation of and remove said grounding system, or take such steps as may be necessary to avoid and eliminate all such interference. Permittee further agrees to indemnify and save harmless Burlington from and against any damages, claims losses, suits, or expenses in any manner arising from or growing out of interference with the signals, telephone, or telegraph lines of Burlington by the operation, use, or existence of any such grounding system. 7. Permittee shall and hereby releases and discharges Burlington of and from any and all liability for damage to or destruction of said Facility, and any other property of Permittee located on or near Burlington's premises, and shall and hereby assumes any and all liability for injury to or death of any and all persons whomsoever, including officers, employees and agents of the parties hereto, and loss of or damage to property to whomsoever belonging, including feb1292r104 W property owned by, leased to, or in the care, custody and control of the parties hereto, in any manner arising from or during the excavation for, construction, reconstruction, use, maintenance, repair or removal of said Facility, however such injury, death, loss, damage or destruction aforesaid may occur or be caused, and shall and hereby does indemnify and save harmless Burlington of and from all claims, demands, suits, actions, damages, recoveries, judgment, costs, or expenses arising or growing out of or in connection with any such injury, death, loss, damage, or destruction aforesaid. Permittee further agrees to appear and defend in the name of Burlington any suits or actions at law brought against Burlington on account of any such personal injury or death, and loss and damage to or destruction of property, and to pay and satisfy any final judgment that may be rendered against Burlington in any such suit or action. THE LIABILITY ASSUMED BY PERMITTEE SHALL NOT BE AFFECTED BY THE FACT, IF IT IS A FACT, THAT THE LOSS, DAMAGE, DEATH, OR INJURY WAS OCCASIONED BY OR CONTRIBUTED TO BY THE NEGLIGENCE OF BURLINGTON, ITS AGENTS, SERVANTS, EMPLOYEES, OR OTHERWISE, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT PERMITTEE SHALL HAVE NO OBLIGATION TO ASSUME SUCH LIABILITY TO THE EXTENT CAUSED BY THE NEGLIGENCE OF BURLINGTON OR ITS EMPLOYEES OR AGENTS WHERE ASSUMPTION OF SUCH LIABILITY WOULD VIOLATE WASHINGTON LAW (RCW 4.24.115), OREGON, IDAHO OR THE PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA LAWS. 8. Permittee shall not transfer or assign this Agreement without the written consent of Burlington. 9. Nothing herein contained shall imply or import a covenant on the part of Burlington for quiet enjoyment. 10. It is expressly understood and agreed that Burlington may at any time cancel a,nd terminate this license and permission by giving to Permittee thirty (30) days' written notice of its intention to cancel the same and at the expiration of such notice this license and permission shall terminate. Upon receipt .of' such notice and before the expiration thereof, Permittee, under the supervision and direction of said General Manager, or his authorized repre- sentative, shall remove said Facility from the right-of-way of Burlington and restore the `right-of-way and premises of Burlington in a manner and to such condition as shall be satisfactory to said General Manager. If Permittee fails to remove the Facility and restore said right-of-way to such condition within said thirty (30) day period, Burlington at its option may remove same and restore said right-of-way to its previous condition, and Permittee shall pay to Burlington the cost and expense thereof. 11. Upon any failure of Permittee to punctually and strictly observe and perform the covenants and promises made herein by Permittee to be kept and performed, Burlington may terminate this Agreement on ten (10) days notice to Permittee, remove said Facility, and restore the right-of-way to its previous condition at the cost and expense of Permittee. 12. In the event of Permittee's desire to remove or abandon in place said Facility, Permittee agrees to notify Burlington's General Manager in writing,, within thirty (30) days prior to such action, requesting termination of said Agreement. 13. Any notices given under the provisions of this Agreement shall be good if properly deposited with the United States (or other appropriate) Postal Service addressed to Permittee at Permittee's post office address above stated or as otherwise directed by Permittee. 14. The license and permission herein granted is subject to permits, leases and licenses, if any, heretofore granted by Burlington affecting the premises upon which said Facility is located. Subject to the foregoing provisions, this covenants and promises thereof, shall inure to the upon the parties hereto, their respective executors and assigns. Agreement and all of the benefit of and be binding administrators, successors u feb1292r104 ADDENDUM TO BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY PERMIT NO. PX92-16019 DATED March 2, 1992 The Permittee or his contractor(s) shall procure and maintain in full force and effect during the construction period and all future maintenance or reconstruction periods, which require the use of h�eavv machinery or excavation of soil upon BURLINGTON's Right-of-way or within FIFTY (50) FEET of BURLINGTON's tracks the following insurance: (1) Commercial General Liability (including contractual liability) against all claims arising out of bodily" injury, illness and death and from damage to or destruction of our property or to property of others, including loss or use thereof, and including liability of Burlington, with minimum limits for bodily injury and property damage of $1,000,000 for each occurrence and (2) Railroad Protective Liability Insurance for bodily injury and property damage, covering all acts of the Permittee or his contractor during construction of Permit Number PX92-16019, with standard limits of $2,000,000 per occurrence, with an aggregate limit of $6,000,000. The BURLINGTON will be the named insured on the Railroad Protective Liability Policy. This Policy and the Certificate of Insurance for General Liability must be submitted with this Permit. The Railroad Protective Liability coverage may be provided by exercising one of the two following alternatives: (a) Permittee or his contractor(s) purchase a policy on the open market or (b) Permittee shall have the option to participate in the Burlington Blanket Railroad Protective Liability program by paying to Burlington in check, prior to the commencement of any work or access under this Permit, the amount of $250.00 referencing Permit No. PX92-6019. Prior to commencement of any work to be performed" under this agreement, Permittee shall submit to Burlington the ORIGINAL INSURANCE POLICY AS DESCRIBED IN (A) ABOVE, WITH the Permit No. PX92-16019 shown on the declarations page. It, is_understood that said insurance policy shall be so written that no insurance company shall have any recourse against Burlington, by way of subrogation or otherwise, for any loss covered by or paid or payable under said policies. ? ��� 2�e: � ��� S- Contractor Address City, State, Zip, Phone Number 7$Z - Z©7o Project En neer Name -7 7c!5? Subcontractor Address City, State, Zip, Phone Number 1�,2 1�5 Project Engine r s NVKe If more than one Subcontractor is involved, attach additional information to this Addendum, together with Insurance required. NEITHER PERMITTEE, CONTRACTOR OR ANY SUBCONTRACTOR SHALL BEGIN ANY WORK ON BURL G S PRUPERTY AND/OR RIGHT_OF_-WAY UNTIL ALL NECESSARY INSURANCE -HAS BEEN FURNISHED AND APPROVED BY BURLINGTON, A ROADMASTEW NOTIFIED 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE. uestions or clarifications of insurance requirements may be directed to: Ms. Judith Harris Risk Management Analyst BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY 777 Main Street Fort Worth, TX 76102 Phone: 817-878-2374 FAX: 817-878-2377 C� feb1292r105 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Burlington and Permittee have executed this Agreement in duplicate as of the day and.year first hereinabove written. Witnesses in presence of: Wi ess fitness BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY By: Title: Manager Engineering PETER PIERIDES By' Title: r _ EPeter or Becky Pierides 7522 WDL PIERIP478D9 PIERIRA465QW 16320 - 75th Pl W 742-2070 Edmonds, WA 98026 �� 13 — l9y3 1s•y�25o r 1 1vw �.J N� r•� �AiU�'Y> Co • I O 1• l y !a ' 1�1 a Ct'a— 7 s DOLLARS s r�sre4vII Cr- Aurt7r0 Branch •005300 1 ,� a ~• .,• . 10310 Aurora Ave. fJ " Seattle, -W-``A `981'3�\3 .�j,I�._ �T, __ . `�.r�•: "95.50 ? 2'01!' `..: ,?-5 2 2 , - ' npn svo r.rxn u feb1292r'104 E)WY4 bcction 5 T27N. R.4 E.. W.M. . . .. . _m . _& +I [0 j,' k 0 R ew, o ves: G/4/E Sv,€>r,E�• + — (I) ' ✓ IDE ti!> Clly/T y'' Z%-7 A;=► 57 E (y G- 4 z'.vc Fourx� Rcz-bar' d C j • Pre e xis) i"qr 'v / _ `5'' /� O C --- 4 d PI✓C ( - /.s. 2a7. S LOB Li n k i I (� �� n� "v/C°P ��Jr� or - ___ Zf/- - W CW0 oaoo( OWU U . L_j .. I - e 14 . 1 I r --- 0 0 0 0 woad cx�o o�°° / / '7P - T L =_____ - - _ /� Jacuz'i 12x12 R•R-T(ca BuikhoAd t ' / O , _-, . D. L 1 9 L,o,w 0 •II .- c1,a,.� . Porch N r a a �. - y t, . � /b Down 2, : � t �� yb Down , N / �' c`,- Pout A ' , • A 0 ' �J Or I G j 4 Q L�lj d y ' 1 4 �, �. i' I PLAn/ S GA -LE ' . z L {� j f l rr 2� FT Q► ,,�J N U >, • . JJ (� L Ex\ / 1� . C�i s+I nc� Q ,i ..1. I � . O U � N a ,� x� RQsi d ence o y � i : � - I �S � 51h,• m/ �� t P Q f 4`Ti- 0 �, ., Q w%' U nQ VV I t 'k tv Q Ds . __ O ,' i 1.. . f. - 4 01 . . - � '. iQ / , D \p _ Q U '` �. C� LQ r w 09f• 2° gym$ QO // ��: �, �' j' � / �t l 1� o L1ar I Fbr�h SU/ �.% k i - - - ._ _ - : - - l . U t / ,�e � C , I I*_1 - I I f 0 :, V I I T. , CRo S s , ' URc7Fy , ! ' ia2,*,la / r I V� , /� ��+400 _ rZ . " ,w� �, _ d � , I ,, "T may" c T _ - n.�.awor I b, �y �s' �� . �;v %an ol¢ d 243 4F I . —r=-- --- _ IzXiz. i9 in� Chain LIn{��¢n�¢� •n - ,Ea.6,e,wew-� QPp/, �' 41- . y, o X � d �>` o - N o u nd Re- lea = r . I� 2Z.3,v cr� k co co co ca !" NN � �W�Ca N7,q I -0 p , N � . ..... .........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................I........ : �:.....................................:....................... ...:.......................................:.......................................:.......................................:......................................................................................................................................................... ..... ................................................................... . `:: .o.. : X. QO1., :l , /o:.........:.........:.........:......... ... ........ ......... ..... .. ...... ..... ........ ........ ........ ..... .. ........ ......... ... t�1 1 D �}-. .. .. ......... ..... ... r �/� ......... ......... -f• 1. y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .i; ` . . . . . . . . . �. . . . . r.>^i 1� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i ; ; : �• ✓ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t1 E . . . . . -•� ; : ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,^,^ y.� . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . , k . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . Win.. r..... - L-I�...M.. . ......................................................................> .............................................. ...................................................................................... .. ............ ...............;:.................... ... .....,W.d... :... ......... ... >'> : d .... .... ..................................... �..:. : : .. : ...... ; : ........ .. f ..:.. .1 . ; ..... .. ......... ......... .........:..... .... N....:......'............................................'... © CQr�crt.. E . ... .... ... .. ... 2... QO... .... . f�. �'�(? y. w W 11 ........ . ........ ......... .... ... ......... ...... ........ f �' - ' n ..... t Y ;Y O �. .... Q. .. .... ......... ......... ...... ........i X.X. ... .... ur: y .. ......... ......... Il' �• ..... D. i Ql O► :U b: .... Y d �" - ..... t n¢ n �:. o si�:i.. ...... ... .. ... ... ....... .. w :d .........:.........:.........: -".:.. +...:.....a .. ..... ... :.. :... ....... ... .. : W .........:..................: ti ..... :.........:...:: .........:... . . ,� :... 4.F--........:..................--............:.................................:.......................................`�...................: S .. . :......................................:..........................................................................................................:.................................I.....: :�' f,r ..... . :......... ......... ......... ......... ......... .........;. .. r 4:;............ i 1.......:.........:.......:......... .............. :.................. ti ..... .. : � ;" .................................... .... .. .. . ....... .. ... . .. �r. / �: : CUT"'\I� : .. ....... ........ . .CJ •Co'is • in ± I� : �: .:.........:..................:..................:.........:.........:.........:.. :. ! :.........:.............:�' .... .................. �: /� o 0 4. (� !i . . ......... .....•... ......... ......... X/Z.. �./. .. 0.. .... ......I ....... ........ ......... ......... �3, i / ....... ... , .... .-ig ..... . !, �.... ..... ,� ..... : �:. t:..:..........•........:..... _. .:.........:...... :. ....;.........;.........;...... .. C�`. ... — ,,. �� ; ; ; ; ; o ; : :.. ..... ......... .. rn �? coy,: N . / : • . ; ; ......................:...:...................................:.................................:.............. . ......... ......... ...... ........ d-)...........................;..........................................................................................................:.......... ......... ......... ......... ......... .. ..... ......... — ..:...:...:...:...;...:...;...:...: ......... ......... ......... ...... .. ......... ......... .... ......... .. ......... �i f �Q' • / W .... �I -� ... ... ... ..... . ._._E �........ ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ly. W — .. : : : ; S `7' .— _f ; tom. . . . I •1 } . . . . . . .......:.........:......... 1J .. ...... .:........ . : ......... :.........:. ...... ..... ; ; : v ; ; ......... :....... ..:...... .. ...... .. : -gip ............ � . S . �-... I.��4li� l: . P/:dam .:/ ' s7� z� ...Gb�G av ; ' i . t�•� � , .. ram. ......:.........:. ......... :...... ...:.........:.......... .�......:.........:. : . .. ..:.........:.........:.........:.........:.........:.........:.........:... �4 s- ,�i :.........:.........:......... y.�......:........� ? f�ut.. :/..........:.........:.........:.........: ; .. .......N.:.. ...,� .... ...... ... ...... :..........:.........:.........:.........:.........:.........:.........:... .... :....... r ; :... ... . ..v..,..c....... ... : „ . ......... ..... ......... ........ rn tJUL.-. �33 :......... . .......................................:.................................................................:.............. ; ; ; ; .:.. ..... J ............................................................................................................................................ Q : �.....,..........................:......................................... ..�, �.................... Y:.......................................:.......................................:.......................................:............................................................................................................................. :.........:....... . : ,r,................................. ...:.........:............................. ...3-ka,......;.........;................................................................I. .................. : : � ... �::.........:.........:..................:.........:.........:.........:.........:.........:.........:..........................................................::..:............................................ ..........:.........:.........:.........:.........:....../...:...... A':�,:.........:.........:.........:.........:.........;.........;.........,;.........:.........:... : #..:.......... :.........:.........:.........:.........:. ......... .. .... : x :�.........:.....•....;.........:.........:.........:......... .........;......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......PER;..MIT ..... �.:........ : ... :. :... .........'..............................�:....... :...� . ... : �Q:� .. ........ . ......... u ....... :......... ..f...... .:... �:.................... .•.— a :.........:.........:.........:.. E• r/MA7zz> ..G7G�i hl.7.1.7l S ; .........:......... ; : ...... ... :.. ,....... ... ....... :: - �... tr . : ......... ......... ..... ..... \: . . .. .... .� :Z f. .. l C� FILE: : STIR - ET .� =� ..........................................................................................:.. �' _ ; X�.....a.P ......................... y�.:.:..�...............:.......................................:............Y.............................................................................................................................:.......................................3.........................:.................................u..:...................:...........:..................................... :.... :.........:................... : ......... : .... ;.........:............................. ; ; © �o......................................:.......................................;.......................................;.......................................;.....................................:................. .. . t ........................................:................ . Z :.........:.........:.........:......... ........ .. ......... ......... .... ..... ...... ......... ......... ........ �. ........ ......... ........ x ,,. ,p csa . '+. ^�4 ... C.l: . N . . i� 9 ....... ......... ......... ......... ......... ...... ......... -. .. ......... ,fig }. . �y 2 ^, > . y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q'O 'V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 'e+.. .•i,11 ">..•.: a <C vc' , ......... ......... O......... I ;i ....... ......... ......... ........ ...... _ ' .:..:... ............... ...... k .. ......I...... ... .... ............... .......... Q................... ...� .... .... ..................................... ...... . �... N.o.-:: ........ ......... ... ...... ... �.:r..........:..P........................................... .... :.1. i.c').cZ................................................. r ti -t .... ......... ...... ......... ......... ........ ....... .... 11 .... ......... .I................ ......... ......... ....... .. ::.. ........ .. ....;r... . �..... ........ .. . ... 9 . d��;, .d,f�ti 1.1 .... ` .. .. I. , �. r l ¢. -i o :I OI. .... "F' . . . . . ..... l\! ' i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :1, !� / i ' `1 ... ......E �� N:G.- .. I C?t:Jrl!' ... ......... ......... ......... ......... _ .� �.9..`�' '...... .. ......... .. �'�" •' Q r.-i-; . ..... . ....... ... �.. .. ... ......... ......... ,... ......... ,E .. ..' Y Stir' ✓ ... .� y ..: /.V. . , ......... ......... ......... '2/'1.1, ........ ... „..::wIv ......... ... . ;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,,,,;,,,;,,,;;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, :.........................................................I......................................................................................................................................::...:...:...:...:...:...:...:...::...:...:...:...:...:...:...:...::...:...:...:...:...:...:...:...::...:...:...:...:...:...:...:...::...:...:...:...:...:...:...:...::...:...:...:...:...:...:...:...::...:...:...:...:...:...:...:...::...:...:...:...:...:...:...:...::...:...:...:...:...:...:...:... E . :i x. r... ......... ......... ........ .. 8-i .. ,.......: I......:: :. ........ ....... ......... ......... o.. ..... ......... ......... N o .... . ...... ....... ........ o : . ......... ......... ......... .... .. .....I... ........+........ ........ ........ ........ ....... ........ ......... ......... ....... ....... + + ... ........ ......... : . . . ? ......... :e : # \I: ........ ......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :r,r�.i"+'ft�`;• Cry'' . . 11111=i �1* 206 778-3101 d' Mailing i , �Y�'93 �%7 d� ... , y AS BUILT DRP\W 1 NDesigned Approved 23423 Highway 99 e `ZP.O. Box 32 /�` Sheet Edmonds,WA98020 ,` aos L nnwood, WA 98046�"� , C�RPADING DRA►NACCE -T C, nao -TH I, 7�IDrawn - � .ZScaleVtZr�t-, f -- 5 Date - 2 , �J • 5 PfT�. 4 I `�3 moncIs,WA c7tc,42-�C7 z0 "W �. �EyRINq P.NCD DRivEWA\ �ROFI LEy .* Foresters Job No. I -�J� F.B.p. L. I No. Revisions Date 6y Checked M B M Datum .Ci �,Ejmond5 SSOCIATES, INC. �Or CPET E.P, PI ERi D ES � 4