Loading...
18416 OLYMPIC VIEW DR.PDF18416 OLYMPIC VIEW DR ADDRESS: 411 TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: (�D 55�Y ('�� (��t / BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE): (A+ COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR - CRITICAL AREAS: ;�n77rnc,T DETERMINATION: ❑ Conditional Waiver RqStudy Required ❑ Waiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT '#'S: DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED: EASEMENT(S) RECORDED PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED: 101/01r) 7 w P-5 SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED: ]�/�/(��% SEWER LID FEE $: LID #: SHORT PLAT FILE: SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: 7/ SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #: _39h (f GEOTECH REPORT DATED: STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: OTHER: LOT: BLOCK: L\TEMP\DSTs\Forms\Street File Checklist_doc t- J tlati t� J { Lit r• - - p(Jn 4 r \ i, •�f 3 POSTED ON KROLL MAP NO ' PERMIT ^ 4},Cpl'SYj"I� +t N-JMIER . 700361 ; _ . J BUILDING DEPARTMENT ( nppuoaDtiTut r e , PERMIT APPLICATIONIn Inside Heavy Lines JOB ADDRESS NAME R NAME O BUBLN e) '� Ij' /- BETBA C I"REAR�ARD BE SIDE YARD BETtlACx STREET ACx Z p' { mp aU�ZICADDRE:C A:B/1 Z O /• (/ �� USE JZONE LOT AfiEA I VACANT 81TID _ � � I .tP �, CI T PHONE NUMBER yS� G� I,E� 0 NO - < I r 7P "t}� HEIGHT BUILDIIi6 AREA VARIANCE NUMBER L ..'.r �r.t' k 1L NAME ?. 1 T _ v 4 PLOT PW I YP VED 6 a" w RESSSTRzz G, EXIBTT, O/BTREF.TDEFICIENCY TH18 PROPERTY 3TY TE PHONE NUMBER fi COP. PLAN ST. t If /.I/Lfa//✓ 1'iT� tX ���/ REMARKS DI- E x NAME Driveway slopes not to exceed those in- ii dicated on Standard Drawing #103 1� m ADD �sy 10F, /�t� (/� -\ CITY TE - �HUNE/NUMBER _ f0 1 M' : Df/{y S METFR 817.E SERVICE SIZE CLEARANCE CHECKED BY STATE LSCENBE NUMBER C Y LICErISE NUMBER / I m rfr �: 000o -O 3 o/ ysLIEL ! Ll PR 1 nesfu , REMARH W�y� �- vi Legal Deatllptlon f Property (Shot Below r Attach Four. Copies) TYPE OONNECTION I O VERIFIED�B(]'7 •� �t � S�1/� ✓ ►� �T ! a VM S " ZZ� / PERC. TEAT PERMIT NUM )R1 y. fj Up pl k I2EMwIixa m "? FIRE ZONE 'TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION STREET IMPROVED ❑ YES O l y- —:20J SPECIAL INSPECTOR REQUIRED OCCUPANCY OROIIP ❑ YES ® RESIDENTIAL - O CAB LIIi£ PLAN CHECKED BY NEW r 1 ? 4 NON-RESIDENTIAL ❑ 6IGN ADDAINNG RET WALL REMA_C8 a { }' DEMOLISH FE CAVATNGE ALTER EX O Subject to final subdivision approval. .I PP "4 ❑ OR FILL (........_>.._.. ...Ft) f REPAIR PRE -MOVE 8R•IM _ El ," t-.: - 1 INSP. POOL NUMBER OF 8T0''..ES NUMBER OF + DWELLING I - I7NIT9 .:ATURE OF WORK/PTO BE DONE Valuation Fee Recelpt Lo .Plan Chock No.... __._ r /' 3 J; " CCiC.. BUILDING a o — 7 •% PROPOSED USE--� PLUMBING, --- - G ' •, PLOT PLAN (ndleate Building setbacks, abutting street,) HEAT & GAS LINE -- 1 .: ) FENCE _ _ } r I..l `4 •.� �;;.. SIGN J RETAINING WALL l N i SWIMMING POOL - —_ t i DEMOLITION 1 . f PRE -MOVE INSPECTION t EXCAVATION OR FILL , TOTAL AMOUNT DUE I ' I hereby aekuowl,dge that I have read this application; that Me in- formation given is correct: and that I em the owner, or the duly author- I.ed agent of the owner. I agree to compl, with city and .let. law. ngn- ATTENTION APPLICATION APPROVAL bating eon.tntetlon; and In doing the work ruthorlsed thereby, no person ' will be employed In violation or the Labor Code of the State of Washington THIS PERMIT This application is not a pernilt until j reciting to Workmen'. Compensation Inourence. AUTHORIZES Signed by the Building Official or his Dep- (VOTE: Permit Limit One Year (Except BEMOLITIONS which ONLY TI1E WORK NOTED uty; and fees are paid, and receipt Is ac- r shall be completed In ninety days; 31OVED-IN BUILDINOS shall be win. knowledged in space provided. Dleted In six months.)- I39 E IAWN ER A ENT DAT£ S16NED INSPECTION DIRECTOR'S 6NA / i -� - / DEPARTMENT ' CITY OF - � ED1111 DATE -- I NOTE: Applicant Ss c1 to Pla i Cheek Ter �a�— jD rrt d-uoI This Permit coven work to 71e done on private Pnpe:ty ONLY.Any mo.lruetlon on the public dnmaln (curb,, sidewalks, drlvew►y,, FILE merduees. etc.) will repm1. separate perm1.0on. hE i - CITY O MONDS 100 7 t :ON F, /t J_•� -` NUM t�L yl BUILDING PEf,�(i�f1T APPLICATION ,ol, K t J `ti' NAME (OR NAME or BUSINESS) Ar—F.SS �j �A f(NS R1/ �' I _ rti LEGAL DESCRIh'iION SV BUIVlSIO SHORT S W MAILING ADDRESS CITY TELEPHONE NU,•,BER PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP G r1D'vt Ol.l DS '77_ _2/Z, - EXISTING -- O NAME PROPOSED + F W ij ll,: I"It:,rLNEY O,- RIGHT D!' LVAY a(t , z F ADOq ESS — ,I =' SEE ENGINEERING MEMO DATED--.--- z " _ W `ICITY TE LEPMCNE NVMBER NAME `�� 'I'j. �•JtiC-T�C�N �Ci�l__I�L ,l t�`� r i-T C— `�TLC Q ADDRESS METL'R SIDE Ifl0oLDrNG SUPPLYSr2E FIXTURE UNITS < !9/17 01,yoplc ✓fEcv t7ti• W C CITY TELEPH ONC NVMflEH HFI.lARK1 Q o F7�.vt o �tj e) _ 7 7 / - VY'6 3 s =TI `�i i N (> (STATE Ll-EN5E NUMBER CITY LICENSE NUMBER SIGN AREA ENV. REVIEW AVfl NO. W /-.L -of- / ,92 A ALLOWED PROPOSEp COMPLETE EXEMPT Legal Of. ption of Property (Show Bcicw or Attach Four Copies) .; slioREurvE a I i"J R �- - VARIANCE U11 CU PLANK REVIEIY flV DATE 0 —f C _� VAFt DS/ LOT COVERAGE O ! 1 U 2H FRONT /D SIOC Z� REAR �✓ s/��i Z I W REMARKS —� z t J J r W 1 ❑ NEW �J RESIDENTIAL ❑ PLUMBING , CHECK Ell BY TYPE OF CONSTRVCTION CODE HEIGHT , ❑ NO N•R ESINTIAL ❑MECHANICAL 1 ADD OE - rJ a OEMOI_I5H ❑SIGN SPECIAL INSPECTOR AREA OCCUPANCY OCCUPANT . ! ❑ REQUIRED GROUP ..� ` LOAD ALTER a EXCAVATE FENCE " YES C� NO �LJ✓ I Ol` FILL ( ,t Fi) REMARKS O z ❑ REPAIR COMPLIvE INSP./INS SWIM ` r, /- r �( CO MPLIA NCE INSP. OPOOL•7 rrt�r�s C�•� JI z NUMBER OF STORIES NJM BER OF >I ' 0 wOEITLLIS NG pl f VN� R NATURE OF WORK TO BE DONE (AT-rACH PLOT PLAN) C V El - 0 Q PLAN CF!ECK FEE I 1 VALUATION FEE ' BUILDING —_-- 2C. ^ / 7 1 ! PLUMBING ✓L�/ •'i MECHANICAL This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY. Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks, driveways, FENCC marquees, etc.) will require separate permission, - Permit Application: 160 Days SIGN � E a Permit Limit: 1 Year •Provided Work Is Started Within 120 Days RETAINING WALL jm "Applicant. can behalf of his or her spoon, heirs. assigns :cod swIMMINs root i sucecssun in interest, agrees to indemnify, defend and [told harntlCs> I• ` i the City of Edmonds, tfaahiP.eton, its officials, entplOL•cCs, and I a age Itis from any :Ind aG daimo for dantaccs of whatever nature•, ( i ! - arisine directly or indirecth• from the issuance of this Permit. Issu- 0 :mrC Of this permit hall be l,rdinancr nor limiin any -y the be deevtrJ to modif v, kv;!ice or reduce TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 2 00 0 any requirement or any city r J t J f - City''s ability to a•nfiln•C :rny Onlinann , ;uL'isical." 1 ATTENTION APPLICATION APPROVAL i 1 hereby ekn a;ta'IcJge plat I have read this application; that the ill - for I 1 mation given is cmrcet: anti that 1 :Rn the na'ner, or the duly author. THIS PERMIT I This application IS IIUI a pCfI11 i gent of the owner., ized a, I agree to comply Lvith city" and slat,' la", rcg- AD-rHORrzr5 until signed by II)e Building Official (,it l toting construction; and in doing t'u• u•orY. authnritrd thereby. no pc;sO❑ ONLY rHe 1 f will be employCJ in violation of the Lobar Cody n(thc SL'Iis �)1 0.'ashin •ion IIIS peplll)'; and Ices are paid, and + f g WORK NO'r F.O receipt is acknulrledged in space pre)- ,! rvilI be W Workmen's in vi lotion fConirensation Insurance. 51GNiTLR I•. (OWNER Ot, AGENTf OAT SIGHED INSPECTION tided. F1� } / DEPARTMENT DIRECTQR�S1 SIGNATURE /� ((,•rj� CITY OF I �Il.✓L��-C.` �^il_�V,�^ EDMONOS rOATE - THIS SITE IS LOCATED IN THE CITY I , OF EDMONDS. LOCAL SALES TAX 775-2525 SHOULD BE CODED 31.04. ATTENTION ORIGINAL - Fill! YELLOW "- :napectcr f j IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE PINK - O_oe, UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPF.OVAL OH DEC 1 4 REco GOLD -Assessor A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC 304, 30(1. I e2-7e i ' r'— \�• �-- --- — - � —"� DEC 1 S ?`•^.7 I %, \�j• 'I lV ��. - ` nG'dK. ,QS.^..I QSTL'%UtCGY`J i ,/ l fo of J 1 Dr �rp • 1 � : - ': , t ♦PP(i5•E6 Dc-:IL LS{Ei 77 — 10 I - y 1 1 \ 111.i so T1L1f fIX-TIG,J L-VTI 'J�7; P.ilX1..2, t:�l r1 j $U•!��~%i' ,�.::L1Z7?I t•J:^ iD %I.A'(• PLc�C'SDIN k qLD IJlflh 'T IlZ �E. w4aJ7K DF ',L'T 3' ,Y .. S• i . 1/'•Jt,�j •T' ?.f; If po t 'P_Cv:f s,q c�.vs o- ur g ce- 'if2b°i2..' •}ilr t'J-AlA'•U'- 0. U.N 4 •f}.f"11=G 5 !•?'.'4;-•:_ N. La Dr = I v.'f�r^-:�.�t ili�.l Or i/,?G �. ; J tVI lHf 14'LT. mod. it' a Nj ,n t cnn4; .Iva.xe SV. nP cct 1� r w To u: u:,= cP rors 4 Ayo. 7fE OF n GJR E fi rf, LFl Fi ✓trG H "f 4`2i •'Z• :,rJ •:,'G i AQ CofJ`.tkNJb A .CaITY-A.- ; `��� T11b ;SIN, : of M'!' I,I.21'To cr' rs�rsr•li crIYiNJulh pt.7NCo T115. Et-T U1:E. or 4AIp wr '... g7.li ' -V i • DEC 14 RE-n CITY 0: Ec :ADS r:.PT . -" CoNoluosk, PLW-T O.WER-u-K;ns It SF0 R JD LZ PjR:A:T NO.. 62 ------ ---- - n4AT FiX-TI00 LZq" -- q p.qo AzLiznN-- iP KA n ;,;26CA, rOU—NV5 AT II of17Zl 5ALOti. Ldt45 rt�0 WITH lHf, 14 Ly L"Ir- I of 4 ) TI-1C jN,, cx4e_ -7,6 -ro tie c,,�PZF- CIF Wr 4-; " e"L'Y' ;AID t4j_y. LjtZ r!, -,' J� -OPZ T-0 11- zFr Wl)lt.*AA r L.�(. L41J6 Cp 4 , Atip.'llie. lim, of A CM %zr� j!.ApjJ5 of 1",z &V MD. (,LJAkluj6, A. c9M-,f-V- AQC<Z c 1!1.21 To THE ivjt4r, of T74I(pwi,-r, i1GrLC6 Iv 51-01 w !,, ?7.11 , ro T-pe, Fr CF Of `AID lar i PLANNING DATA SINGLE FAMILY RESIOENTIAL :FiL;�-] Name- Date: � -a�/gig------- ------ --- --- Site Address: p Plan Check //:.a, Project Description: CR_ e4rer,' "A\ "'d Reduced Site Plan Provided NO) Zoning Map Page: Corner Lot: (YES (YES.- Flag l-ot Critical Areas Detertnination Study Required ?(Ar"-ZIA.� ke E:CZC- _23.qO.-A-AD, C_ Z El Waiver c. *n t, fr. eosed remdej , t, \c>,_�ec( a SEPA Determination: )4 Exempt El Needed (for over 500 cubic yards of grading) 0 Fee C1 Checklist 0 APO List with notarized form RequIred Setbacks Street: Side- Side. - Actual Setbacks Street., Side: Sid Rear: L11-id" No �e--- max; .�; 1��� El �J Detached Structures: N0,e.U>C__)r%. Rockeries: c-\r-e r%',--s ❑ Fences/Trellises: El Bay Windows/Projecting Modulation. No,e_ SX'.-0-\. Stairs/Deck: not CNN V3 Datum Point: I Datum Elevation: N /A Maximum Height Allowed- Actual Height: _'D M 10 CNN Oder Parking Required: 9L Parking Provided: No Lot Area: J, Maximum Lot Coverage: posed - Zu, tis� ko� Zft War )-2-or"t Lot Coverage Calculation ADU Created: (YES Subdivision: Legal Nonconforming Land Use Determination Issued: (YES Ag) _6xnfnents Plan Review 6 PW"airwi Data Form 04 -t 1 06 doc 0 • PLANNING DATA SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STREET FILE Name: ' o V LQ ri(- Site Address: Date:okq Plan Check #: aOO- _C) 541 Project Description: De,,o ex�g��+� �o� 1Po0lakCk, a -no( C-0n3 Reduced Site Plan Provided: ( ES NO) Zoning: Map Page: Corner Lot: (YES / NO) Flag Lot: (YES NO Critical Areas Determination #: C_P,&- acab-4-ooc�y Study Required -> L---;-�Uide, Wb=-W-d -'-'ci Eres'%on Nazarc� Are / Geoeat c� e^o(M byb�ne_ Ga.�l� Grot„p o%--ke,d ❑ Waiver o SEPA Determination: EKzn,Vt Exempt — �a.ns A-t--ke, CIO Cy -artk ❑ Needed (for over 500 cubic yards of grading) ❑ Fee ❑ Checklist ❑ APO List with notarized form Required Setbacks Street: E 5 Side: I o z Side: l ©' Rear: , Actual Setbacks Street: E�� Side:(Al I Side: S ,O TRear- El Detached Structures: None %\,c zc\. X Rockeries: Pr-gcmer/ re �.�� � } exceecal 3' ;., �,el;G�1,.� over or. ��aj c a.d� v�,ere �, ❑ Fences/Trellises: None. shoCZ)C-N, ❑ Bay Windows/Projecting Modulation: None,��. JR Stairs/Deck: prc,?ceed N BuI . Height Datum Point: WA Datum Elevation: Maximum Height Allowed: �oc No Chi. ex;s % Actual Height: Las' ` ex Other Parking Required: a S Parking Provided: No 2 Lot Area: roe _ _ p �, D. Maximum Lot Coverage: 35% roposed: 3 e Lot Coverage Calculations: E"'P�`^�"= 3, WO TOW = 31-M04 ; 16' oy cat _ oZ ADU Created: (YES 10 Subdivision: �— Legal Nonconforming Land Use Determination Issued: (YES Comments Plan Review By: Planning Data form 04-1t-06.doc • #PZU City, of Edmonds Development Services Department Planning Division Phone: 425.771.0220 Fax: 425.771.0221 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 of the application to the City. 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 properly. The. 'informatiom needed to complete the Checklist .should be easily available from observations of the site or data available at City Hall (Critical areas inventories, maps, or soil surveys). Date Received: •7— 5;7 [0- (__ City Receipt #: 0 _ Critical Areas File #: GAF-2C07�`f Critical Areas Checklist Fee: $135.00 Date Mailed to Applicant: A property owner, or his/her authorized representative, must fill out the checklist,sign and date it, and submit it to the City. The City will review the checklist, make a precursory site visit, and make a determination of the subsequent steps necessary to complete a development permit application. Pleasesulimit a vicinity,.map'i.:along with,' -the -signed. copy of this form to assist City staff in fmding and locating the specific piece of property described on this form. In addition, the applicant. shall include other pertinent information .(e.g. site plan, topography map, etc.) or studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assistant staff in completing their preliminary assessment of the site. The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, 'in consideration on the processing of the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading,inaccurate or incomplete information finmished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees. By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that I am authorized to file • applic 'on on be f of the owner as listed below. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT DATE O Property Owner's Authorization By my signature, I certify that I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application, and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purposes of inspection and postin�ttenrjant toj}is appJiV ion SIGNA DATE TURE OF OWNER 46100,0/ 1- /t ��417-1 PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY Owner/Applicant: gowia tv a brs Name ' Street Address 2o . City State Zip Telephone:�� Email address (optional): h h bi4ey 0— . Veri zd . /I•Gcr Applicant Representative: Name - - Z Street Address City State Zip Telephon Email ddress (optional): • Critrc81 Areas Checklist Site Information.,(soils/=topography%hydrology/vegetation)' CA File No.' 1 1. -Site Address/Location:I'2V 2. 'Properly'Tax AccountNumber: 3. Approximate Site Size (acres or squar feet): 4. Is this site currently developed? ✓yes; ,., no. If yes; how is site developed? SIn, 0�1G 5. Describe the general site topography.,,1a 'all that apply. Flat:, less than 5-feet: elevation change over.entire site: Rolling: slopes 'on'site "generally ,less than -15% (4' vertical rise of .10-feet over a horizontal distance of G6-feet)': IHilly: slopes present on,site of�more than 15% and less than 30% (a vertical rise of 104eet over a Horizontal>distanee of 33 to 66-feet). `/ S �r/�•! 37 a� olrri SlxallAiey Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distanee,of less�than 33-feet). 'Other (please describe): 6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water:.D' ; Approx: Depth: 7. Site contains areas of -seasonal standing water: ;'Approx.- Depth: What season(s) of the year? 8. Site is in the floodway I/ ` floodplain �� of a water course: across the grounds surface? Flows are year-round? 9. Site contains a reek or an area where watter flo s Flows are seasonal. t tune of` ears ..., (� . y. 10. Site is primarily: forested ; meadow ; shrub mixed ~: urban landscaped (lawn, shrubs etc) 11. Obvious wetland is present on, site: ity Staff Use Only 1. Plan Check Number, if a] 2. Site is Zoned? Q S - 3. SCS mapped soil type(s)? 4. Critical Areas inventory C.A. ma indicates Critical Area on site? S r e Q1 0- (al La Zcv 5. Site within designated earth subsidence landslide hazard area? /UO Graz fjo 51JA IA 44ETERMINATION STUDY REQVIRED WAIVER Reviewed bv: /)I . Z \ > - -7 v / . Date: S. % /0 -7 CITY OF EDMONDS CRITICAL AREAS RECONNAISSANCE REPORT Site Location: 18406 Olympic View Drive Tax Acct. Number: 00565600200301 Determination: Study Required Determination #: CRA-2007-0064 Applicant: Howard Bobry Owner: Howard Bobry CRITICAL AREAS RECONNAISSANCE REPORT: STUDY REQUIRED During review and inspection of the subject site, it was found that the site may either contain or be adjacent to critical areas, including Landslide Hazard and Erosion Hazard Areas, pursuant to Chapters 23.40 and 23.80 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). GENERAL CRITICAL AREAS REPORT REQUIREMENTS Critical Areas Reports identify, classify, and delineate any areas on or adjacent to the subject property that may qualify as critical areas. They also assess these areas and identify any potential impacts resulting from your specific development proposal. If a specific development proposal results in an alteration to a critical area, the critical areas report will also contain a mitigation plan. You have the option of completing the portion of the study that classifies and delineates the critical areas and waiting until you have a specific development proposal to complete the study. You may also choose to submit the entire study with your specific development application. • Please review the minimum report requirements for all types of Critical Areas that are listed in ECDC 23.40.090.D. There are additional report requirements for different types of critical areas (see below). • Note that it is important for the report to be prepared by a qualified professional as defined in the ordinance. There are options on how to complete a critical areas study, and there is an approved list of consultants that you may choose from. You may contact the Planning Division for more information. • General Mitigation Requirements for all Critical Areas are discussed in ECDC 23.40.110 through 23.40.140. STUDY REQUIREMENT — LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREA It appears that this property contains or is adjacent to a Landslide Hazard Area. • A Landslide Hazard Area is any area with a slope of forty percent (40%) or steeper and with a vertical relief of ten (10) or more feet (except areas composed of consolidated bedrock). • Landslide Hazard Areas are further defined and illustrated in ECDC 23.80.020.B. • In addition to the general requirements for Critical Areas reports referenced above, specific Critical Area report requirements for Landslide Hazard Areas are provided in ECDC 23.80.050. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ASSOCIATED WITH LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREAS Development is restricted within a Landslide Hazard Area and its buffer. • Projects that will intrude into these areas will require a report by a licensed Geotechnical Engineer. The criteria that are applied depend on the amount that the buffer is reduced. • The buffer can be reduced to a minimum of ten (10) feet (with an additional 15' building setback per ECDC 23.40.280) if a report is prepared that meets the standards listed in ECDC 23.80.050. The alteration must also meet the requirements listed in ECDC 23.80.060. • In addition, proposals to reduce the buffer to less than ten (10) feet must comply with the design standards listed in ECDC 23.80.070.A.3. STUDY REQUIREMENT — EROSION HAZARD AREA It appears that this property contains or is adjacent to an Erosion Hazard Area. Erosion Hazard Areas . include: • Those areas with Alderwood and Everett series soils on slopes of 15 percent or greater. • Any area with slopes of 15 percent or greater and impermeable soils interbedded with granular soils and springs or ground water seepage. • Areas with significant visible evidence of ground water seepage, and which also include existing landslide deposits regardless of slope. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ASSOCIATED WITH EROSION HAZARD AREAS Development within an Erosion Hazard Area must meet additional criteria. • For erosion hazard areas with suitable slope stability, the only critical area study needed is an erosion and sediment control plan prepared in compliance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.30 ECDC as part of the construction documents. This option is at the director's discretion, per Edmonds Community Development Code section 20.80.050.G. • In areas where the slope stability is not suitable, projects within Erosion Hazard Areas will require a. report by a licensed Geotechnical Engineer or other qualified professional. Note that it is important for the report to be prepared by a qualified professional as defined in the ordinance. • Report requirements are given in ECDC 23.80.050, and more generally in ECDC 23.40.090.D. • Development standards are given in ECDC 23.80.060 and 23.80.070. ALLOWED ACTIVITIES Certain activities are allowed in or near critical area buffers as specified in ECDC 23.40.20. If you have any questions about whether your proposed development qualifies as an allowed activity, please contact a Planner for more information. EXEMPT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS Certain development proposals may be exempt from Critical Areas Requirements (ECDC 23.40.230). If you think that a specific development proposal may be exempt, contact a Planner for more information. Name Signature Date NOTE: Cited sections of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) can be found on the City of Edmonds website at www.ci.edmonds.wa.us. 0) J f"3`1f >: M"s+r.'aiM- ..^err"��--:�' -r ;c _ ,�_✓-.ol V �a : {+t 1� t .«ir n a�i..ri"Et _ tic 4, r � £� � ti .mixer k a � YS t i yC ;J 7 nc• O S� , ,,•, �" ^i tf .{tY �>ti�'r• �p � x it '.�i � nc "� i' �, (O � �`� VIE. .. ,,.c§ kk') � ny„ , sC�.•K: t n t tey` ,,,. +a er ri3 -t. �%Y� ��r�� �ak�� �+�iri� r h r • tS � S w L � �... ", � ,: `� { n.'�'y •b."`�Y?'� ��x,r 7�'L"'il#�,`�"�rih ` ..�"� � tw,.x r � y°! � �' �✓r��,�1{ ,' y �yt �� '�=Sr ,t [ }% y .. � �+..' .7 Y'n rt"'t� _ f`y�' '�"1✓``+f, � F��f� +,�j n} t r � ln+ , t*X� „� cv� h"�a��k' �r �� ���„i i,$ t;•&�t t6 .�1^�.'Tr �y��„a� � . ,}c _ ry u �i c ��i 43. a� t" .!Yu'.i *i �.` 1 r'° �A'"� f��� .i F���Thi�'�' i"'� a9 ¢• �,.,ct fi �,��t{,. �p f ��.;r ,�«.� �!t't�jY• h t'a+kti�' ��rtr 4[ODt}�`�� �'�� x*`"r'� y.�iG�, �y. y _ v 4y k! I� i!')M - � _a },. r •y � +r4.Jt r`' t <��� W T t� 5 � SO� r `' +ip f. OO ��- h;,z �"� �'�s '. }ter' :�.G ¢ s,.:i..� .. r F:� ii". s-� ,Y. i,e �%. � f: (i.•, t!� wl A I F +a � �eNt�:': � i FE�e• ,a „tiar.7m 1 rc;''Y " - v n, MAN!,.* �. mig Z s - - .. .. .� 17905 - t- St?%17922 x - - us - - gf 9217 at?7,7 17910 rd+-... .... W .... 0 3 180029219 S - - 9231 p 18004 R ..... .. .. °' 0233 �C g♦Rv . . 9225 9305 Q� 9110 91 9309 10 gJ♦.� ♦ ♦1 ti 9202 °1 9118 S. al0ar 18226 9302 - - - �• 18228 9314 9304 18226 182 1a230 9210 18230 18J08 L.,9316 yV�.4 9221 9215 fd �•f 18312 18319 18JIJ _^ 9A,,%% g SP 'P m 18312 - .. 18324 9000 yam`-s� e, 18319 9228 9125 9105 $ 18330 ' f 18404 16401 18401 9134 j /84/ 0 O¢ 18415 I[ 18404 a 9010 p'f 18420 3 4-i 15415 10403 I8411 18416 a 18419 I- �. - - 18418 18418 V ti 16ez3 1e425 N CD .."`tl ♦+4� 18500 teaJO 18427 O 184t8 r IB425 t ... t84J1 18429 fi¢ 18504 f m 1BS1B 18515 }' ��L� m o ♦ ,gists 7�19 ,8599 q Park 1851HPlSW T{7 - 10529 _ / ♦ 04? m m m - ,860G ♦Qe_ $ o m 18612 18610 1B6o8 ,8807 18620 � 16619 t 186TH PL 1 18614 ,88Y� 18827 18625 te824 De 129 9209 ^ + � 18703 18626 g 18702 •187iH $T $yy . y o 0 J ,• ` 18712 �. 1 .LP y :., 3 ♦ S� ISM1B707 ♦O,♦O 0 188JL 1562B 18701 18704 = m c t ;t' ..0� ♦B,♦O !� 18715 18711 m ��j - 18717 18709 18719 N 18716 ,2 ffVV IB717 - c • a� 1B7J2 z: ♦ ♦ g�?0 �i cfi° 9" 18717 18719 18716 18730 16725 10730 10728 Q 9125 o 0 ..... r.. 9602r g - 10.3 88........,. 18812 r Qy � p� 18811 _�•�� e.... 18814 TMI8810� �..,..> ». �18805 18809 ... .....�.�, - 187J2 18802p a IBB09 18812 Isom g)♦ .�,; ♦� O -. •'g 18823 18824 5 m o p � 18823 18B1B 18818 18822 18821 t0B25 18808 3' IBB15 18816 � gam♦ ♦ `Sqy v q, ••(•:'• 18821 18817 > .V S o Oaf 0 1882J 18829 18810 1881x 18829 m ' ♦ggie 18902 18904 18906 a, ♦� 18831 18829 18901 18909 18906 18902 -- c ♦O 18912 18910 18908 J m m a ,8920 .';- 18909 18831 18908 m m -Snohomish County Online ohomish Countv Online P Information Page 1 of 1 isclaimer: nohomish County disclaims any warranty of merchantability or warranty of ness of this data for any particular purpose, either express or implied. No :presentation or warranty is made concerning the accuracy, currency, )mpleteness or quality of data depicted. Any user of this data assumes all isponsibility for use thereof, and further agrees to hold Snohomish County armless from and against any damage, loss, or liability arising from any ;e of this data. on: 4/25/2007 v j t Legend Street Names lilies Unr Praeedc—fly n•b! c. dY k UlSi Tax Pawals RUfat Mijes Township/Range Grid Section Grid Majot Watetbodies rT �.r�il 8erys a:Li' fLft tam► Like Cr pted tv,d aurrneded by i Wf a War & itarxmadm rea'qua 9u S:rd. (QQrw ioCOW WMW .0 http://gis.co.snohomish.wa.us/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=Overview&ClientVe... 4/25/07 #P20 Critical Areas Checklist CA File No: 1 Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation) 1. Site Address/ Location: I''> v 2. Property Tax Account Number: 1p le D 3. Approximate Site Size (acres or sguaarr� feet): o. �Xywv e'Ii- 4. Is this site currently developed? ✓yes; no. If yes; how is. site developed? S1f?djl,G�yJr 5. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply. Flat: less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site. Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of 66-feet). Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than30% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet). `1 S Vdr' frr,I 377.0 afi oirc, strallarer. Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of less than 33-feet). Other (please describe): 6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: Ad ; Approx. Depth: 7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: �� ; Approx. Depth: What season(s) of the year? —� 8. Site is in the floodway floodplain A161 of a water course. 9. Site contains a oreek or an area where water flo s across the grounds surface? Flows are year-round? Flows are seasonal? (What time of year? ). 10. Site is primarily: forested ; meadow ;shrub ; mixed urban landscaped (lawn, shrubs etc) 11. Obvious wetland is present on site: 1. Plan Check Number, if applicable? 2. Site is Zoned? 3. SCS mapped soil type(s)? City Staff Use Only roj /j-ZS% slave 4. Critical Areas inventory C.A. ma indicates Critical Area on site? Zad 0/1 5. Site within designated earth subsidence landslide hazard area? NO �� 5(� '�'L�RMINATION WAIVER Reviewed bv: >' I SIG 0 #.P20 'tic. 1 %9" City. of Edmonds Development Services Department Planning Division Phone: 425.771.0220 Fax: 425.771.0221 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 of the application to the City. 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 Checklist .should be easily available from observations of the site or data available at City Hall (Critical areas inventories, maps, or soil surveys). Date Received: 7­12 City Receipt #: G 421f 1 —7 6._ _ Critical Areas File #: M`—20)7Cl�'�e Critical Areas Checklist Fee: $135.00 Date Mailed to Applicant A property owner, or his/her authorized representative, must fill out the checklist, sign and date it, and submit it to the City. The City will review the checklist, make a precursory site visit, and make a determination of the subsequent steps necessary to complete a development permit application. Please submit a vicinity map, along with the signed copy of this form to assist City staff in finding and locating the specific piece of property described on this form. In addition, the applicant. shall include other pertinent information .(e.g. site plan, topography map, etc.) or studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assistant staff in completing their preliminary assessment of the site. The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or. part upon false, misleading,inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees. By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and convect to the best of my knowledge and that I am authorized to file ' applic 'on on be f of the owner as listed below. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT DATE O Property Owner's Authorization By my signature, I certify that I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application, and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purposes of inspection and posting4tten�ant to Ibis appjieVtiqp.- SIGNATURE OF OWN13R DATE Ogv PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY Owner/Applicant.- go W i;, V goes Name Street ddress rr�-v� s fir/ City State u y�. Zip Telephone:�� Email address (optional): h h b0Y Vei'i zd , rt•GT- Applicant Representative: Name Street Address City on State Zip Teleph Email dress (optional): • . Page 1 of 2 Snohomishftllne Government information & Services CountyAA& Washington Structure Information Close Window General Description Parcel Number 00565600200301 (R01 ) Structure Class Dwelling Structure Type 1 Story wBasement Year Built 1970 Exterior Features Foundation Conc or CB Exterior Siding -Lap ROOF Type: Gable Pitch Medium Cover Composition Interior Features Bedrooms 3 Full or 3/4 Baths 3 1/2 Baths 1 Floor Area Heat Hot Water Fireplace Masonry 2s stacked fireplace Floor 1 Base SF 2304 Finished SF 2304 Floor B Base SF 1440 Finished SF 1440 Garage(s) & Carport(s) Attached Garage SF 818 Other Features http://198.238.192.103/propsys/Asr-Tr-PropInqlPropInfoO5-StructData.asp?parcel=O0565... 9/28/2007 Page 2 of 2 wose wmaow http:// 198.23 8.192.103/propsys/Asr-Tr-PropInglPropInfoO5-StructData. asp?parcel=00565... 9/28/2007 ~ RE:CEIVE® SEP 2 0 2007 DEVE Can CTR. OF EDMONDS • MF t' 1 s W S Geotechnical Report Bobry Residence 18416 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington Project 1474-01 July 31, 2007 Prepared for: Howard Bobry 18416 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98020 Prepared by: The Galli Group 5034 18 h Avenue NE Seattle, Washington 98105 206-525-5097 Table of Contents SECTION PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION.......................................................................................I 3.0 SITE FEATURES.............:.......................................................................................2 3.1 CRITICAL AREAS AND CODE REQUIREMENTS......................................2 3.1.1 Erosion Hazard Areas ..............................................................................2 3.1.2 Landslide Hazard Areas ...........................................................................2 3.1.3 Seismic Hazard Area...............................................................................2 3.2 SURFACE CONDITIONS................................................................................3 3.3 GEOLOGY........................................................................................................4 3.4 SITE SOIL AND GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS......................................4 3.5 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS.................................................................4 3.6 STABILITY ANALYSES.................................................................................5 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................7 4.1 SITE GRADING AND EARTHWORK...........................................................7 4.1.1 Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control......................................7 4.1.2 Seasonal Grading Restrictions.................................................................8 4.2 TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS AND RETAINING ELEMENTS ...............8 4.3 SLOPE MITIGATION MEASURES................................................................8 4.4 FOUNDATIONS............................................................:..................................9 4.4.1 Conventional Spread Footings on Structural Fill....................................10 4.4.2 Pile Supported Deck Footings.................................................................10 4.5 SLABS-ON-GRADE.........................................................................................11 4.6 DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING POOL.....................................................12 4.7 BACKFILL AND COMPACTION...................................................................13 4.8 DRAINAGE RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................13 4.9 PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL.............................................................13 4.10 ASSESSMENT OF RISK TO CRITICAL AREAS........................................13 5.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES AND LIMITATIONS..................................................14 5.1 ADDITIONAL SERVICES...............................................................................14 5.2 LIMITATIONS..................................................................................................14 LIST OF FIGURES: Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Site Features Figure 3 Generalized Soil Stratigraphy A -A' Figure 4 , Generalized Soil Stratigraphy B-B' Figure 5 Slope Stability Analyses Section A -A' Figure 6 Slope Stability Analyses Section B-B' Figure 7 Pile Supported Deck Footings 099MR130 Geotechnical Report Bobry Residence 18416 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington July 31, 2007 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Galli Group performed a geotechnical investigation on the property located at 18416 Olympic View Drive in Edmonds, Washington. The purpose of our investigation was to identify the subsurface soil conditions on the site and to provide recommendations for site development and foundation support. This geotechnical report or critical areas report summarizes observations from our research and subsurface exploration performed for the above referenced property. It also presents our recommendations for the geotechnical design elements of the project. 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is located on the west side of Olympic View Drive on the upper portion of a west -facing slope that descends toward Puget Sound below (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). The existing site contains a two story single-family residence with daylight basement, exterior patio, and pool on the west side of the house. A shared asphalt drive encircles the property on the west, north and east sides and serves the project site and three adjoining lots. The slope descends westerly from the pool deck to the drive below at greater than 40 percent. Site features and topography are provided on Figure 2, Site Features. The. owner plans to decommission the existing pool by breaking up the base of the pool and backfilling the area. The sides of the pool will remain in place to help stabilize the upper portion of the steep slope. Additional plans for a remodel possibly include an elevated deck Bobry Residence --IR416 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds July 31, 2007 that would extend from the upper floor out over a portion of the rear yard previously covered by the pool decking. Final plans for the remodel and deck were not available at the time of this report. 3.0 SITE FEATURES 3.1 CRITICAL AREAS AND CODE REQUIREMENTS A review ,of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) indicates that site might be governed by Critical Areas regulations. Below we have discussed the elements that apply to the project site with reference to ECDC code requirements. 3.1.1 Erosion Hazard Areas The ECDC defines Erosion Hazard Areas as areas possessing steep slopes in excess of 40 percent (see below.) Erosion hazard areas include: "areas of the city of Edmonds that may experience severe to very severe erosion hazard. This group of soils includes, but is not limited to, the following when they occur on slopes of 15 percent or greater: a. Alderwood soils (15 to 25 percent slopes); b. Alderwood/Everett series (25 to 70 percent slopes); c. Everett series (15 to 25 percent slopes)." (ECDC 23.80.020 A(1) The slopes on the west side of the house are inclined from about 45 to 70 percent. Soil Conservation Service maps the area as underlain by Alderwood gravelly sandy loam. Because of these topographic and mapping conditions the project site would be designated an Erosion Hazard Area. 3.1.2 Landslide Hazard Areas The inclination of the slope at the west side of the residence and steepest portion of the slope appears to Abe on the order of about 70 percent. The slope has a rockery at the toe that defines the lower limits of the slope. Section 23.80.020B defines "Landslide Hazard Areas" as follows: Landslide hazard areas are areas potentially subject to landslides based on a combination of geologic, topographic, and hydrologic factors. Within the city of Edmonds landslide hazard areas specifically include: "any area with a slope of 40 percent or steeper and with a vertical relief of, 10 or more feet except areas composed of consolidated rock." (ECDC 23.80.020B(2). The project site qualifies for designation of "Landslide Hazard Area" due to topographic features. 3.1.3 Seismic Hazard Area "Seismic hazard areas" are areas subject to severe risk of damage as a result of earthquake- induced,ground shaking, slope failure, settlement, soil liquefaction, lateral spreading, or surface faulting." (ECDC 23.80.020C) 1474 Bobry RPT 2 The Galli Group Bobry Residence -- 18416 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds July 31, 2007 The project site appears underlain by dense glacially consolidated soil, or glacial outwash. This dense material does not present a risk of deep-seated slope movement, seismic liquefaction, lateral spreading, or surface rupture. Provided the new foundations are supported on native undisturbed soil, the risk of seismic -induced settlement is not significant. As shown in our slope stability analyses, the risk of slope failure due to seismic ground shaking is limited to shallow slumps in the loose surficial soil rather than deep-seated slope failures or failures that would impact the residence or planned improvements. In our opinion the site does not represent a severe risk of damage due to seismic induced ground shaking. In the report sections that follow we have described the site soil conditions and the subsurface geologic conditions. The site appears. underlain by dense glacially consolidated sediment. The project site contains steep slopes and presents risks of a significant risk of seismic liquefaction, slope erosion. In our opinion it does not present movement, or erosion if conventional Best Management Practices are followed during site development, and our recommendations are followed during project development. 3.2 SURFACE CONDITIONS The project site is located west of Olympic View Drive on the upper portion of awest-facing slope that descends toward Puget Sound below. The slope declines westerly at an overall declination on the order of 25 percent for about 160 feet and then declines steeply to Puget Sound below. The toe of the slope appears located more than 250 feet away and is protected from wave action by BNSF railroad tracks. The slope immediately west of the house descends at approximately 70 percent to the driveway below. The driveway serves three lots on the topographic bench below the subject lot. The toe of the steep slope on the lot is formed by an eight -foot rockery adjacent to the driveway (see Figures 2 and 3.) The slope surface is fairly well vegetated with bamboo, small shrubs, and a few deciduous trees. The top of the slope is defined by decking that surrounded the existing pool. The decking appeared to be timber framed with anchor cables attached to the pool retaining walls. The timber deck also appeared to have been topped with concrete. The decking has been removed leaving some of the wooden vertical posts, some concrete rubble, and the exposed slope surface below. The pool was empty and not utilized. Downspouts appear to routed toward a tightline collection system that descends the slope westerly toward the asphalt concrete driveway below. There is a single catch basin below that appears to collect water from the driveway and the downspouts, but we do not know the specific route of the drainpipes. The downspout at the southwest comer of the. existing residence appears to discharge directly onto the slope face about 10 feet from the house. We did not notice any significant signs of erosion on the site due to stormwater runoff or springs, or seepage. No wet conditions were evident on the slope face. 1474 Bobry RPT 3 The Galli Group Bobry Residence -- 18416 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds July 31, 2007 3.3 GEOLOGY Geologic; maps of the area indicate that the vicinity is likely underlain by a complex sequence of glacial outwash and pre-Vashon and interglacial sediments such as the Whidbey formation and lacustrine clays and silts (Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Part of the Edmonds West Quadrangles, James P. Minard, 1983.) Glacial outwash tends to consist of granular soil deposited in fluvial environments in front of the most recent glacial advance thousands of years ago'. The deposit can appear braided with the sorting dependent upon the energy of the depositional environment. It can often contain beds or seams of varying material but tends to consist mostly of sand and pebbly gravel. The advance outwash unit is. often underlain by the Whidbey formation or other transitional beds that were either deposited during previous glacial periods or in between glacial advances. These units have all been consolidated by tons of ice. The older units tend to exhibit more advanced weathering. The contact between the advance outwash and an underlying unit of fractured clay or silt tends to be notorious for slope stability problems due to intrusion of groundwater and underlying layers that inhibit downward infiltration of ground water. Based upon our site reconnaissance and subsurface investigation it appears that the project site is underlain by dense advance outwash soil. 3.4 SITE SOIL AND GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS During our subsurface investigation on June 19, 2007, we advanced borings at the locations shown on Figure 2, Site Features. We encountered dense silty SAND with gravel at about 6 feet in B-1 at the top of the slope. We encountered dense silty SAND at the ground surface below the rockery in B-2. Blanketing the dense silty SAND in B-1 we encountered loose silty SAND. This material might represent soil excavated during construction of the pool. Based upon the results of our subsurface investigation, the site appears underlain by very dense silty, SAND with gravel. We interpreted this unit as advance outwash. The very dense unit was blanketed with a unit of loose silty SAND near the top of the slope. We interpreted the upper unit as undocumented fill. No groundwater was observed in our borings. 3.5 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS The site appears underlain by glacially consolidated silty SAND blanketed by a unit of loose silty SAND and loose fill. Geologic maps show the site as underlain by advance outwash and other glacially consolidated sediments. No groundwater was evident in our borings. Based upon these site factors seismic liquefaction does not appear to be a significant concern. The risk of seismically induced slope movement is not significantly increased with the proposed demolition of the pool and does not represent a significant threat to the project site. The upper fill unit might be more prone to seismic induced settlement or minor downslope 1474 Bobry RPT 4 The Galli Group • :7 Bobry Residence -- 18416 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds July 31, 2007 creep than the core of the hillside, but this would not adversely affect the proposed improvements or adjacent properties. Based upon the latitude and longitude of the site we consulted the USGS Seismic Hazards Maps and estimated the site coefficients for an event with 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years (corresponding to a 500-year seismic event. In conformance with the 2003 International Building Code the following design parameters should be used for the project site: TABLE 1 Seismic Site Coefficients S t Ss Site Spectral F„ Spectral Acceleration F a Class Acceleration Site Coefficient (0.2 second Site Coefficient (1 second period) period C 0.462 1.34 1.3 1.0 3.6 STABILITY ANALYSES The site appears underlain by very dense silty SAND with gravel or glacially consolidated material that we interpreted as glacial outwash. This material is generally stable provided that it is protected against erosion and provided that it is not underlain by seepage zones along the contact with interglacial units or lacustrine clay. We did not observe any seepage zones within or immediately adjacent to the property that might tend to compromise the stability of the slope. We conducted slope stability analyses on the two cross sections A -A' and B-B' as shown on Figure 5 and Figure 6 respectively. In order to arrive at apparent soil values to use in the analyses, we assumed a slope stability of unity for seismic conditions similar to those recorded during the Nisqually quake of 2001. The owner indicated that he observed no apparent movement of the slope during that event. We then back calculated using the slope stability program XSTABL to determine the apparent soil parameters for the slope. The following parameters were utilized to identify the critical failure surfaces on the slopes for various conditions: TABLE 2 Slope Stability Design Model Parameters Soil Unit Internal Apparent Cohesion Lateral acceleration Type Weight Friction �' due to seismic cf , degrees Psf event Loose silty SAND 115 34 0 0.28 1474 Bobry RPT 5 The Galli Group • Bobry Residence July 31, 2007 -- 18416 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds Dense silty SAND 125 38 100 0.28 Compacted Fill 120 34 0 0.28g We modeled the slope for existing conditions for both the upper (near the existing pool) and lower (near the rockery at the toe) slopes of Section A -A'. We also modeled the slope B-B' in the vicinity of the proposed elevated deck. The results of our analyses are provided in Table 3, below. TABLE 3 Slope Stability Analyses Results Critical Failure Surface Description Factor of Safety* (FOS) Reference File Static Seismic . XSTABL Files Model Existing Slope Condition — 1.05** 1474R2D Section A -A' Upper Slope 1.6 0.98 1474RN2S; 1474RN2D Section A -A' Lower Slope 1.8 1.275 1474RN3S; 1474RN3D Section A -A' plus 10 foot buffer 2A 1.23 1474RN4S; 1474RN4D Section B-B' 1.95 1.1 1474R1S; 1474R1D Section B-B' plus 10 foot buffer -- 1.28 1474R3S; 1474R3D - ru5 described as median value of 10 most critical theoretical failure surfaces in results ** Used to model slope conditions based upon measured representative PGA values during 2001 Nisqually Quake and owner observations of no movement during event. (PGA = 0.18g) It appears:from our analyses that the most likely form of slope movement on the project site would be a shallow colluvial slide involving the loose surficial soils on the site during seismic induced ground shaking. These failures appear unlikely to exceed a few feet in depth and more than about 10 feet in length. These types of failures do not pose significant risk to the site, the adjacent sites or to nearby structures. For elements located more than 10 feet back from the top of the slope the FOS for seismic conditions exceeds 1.2 and the FOS for static conditions easily exceeds 1.5. The critical . failure surfaces are likely to progress back toward the existing pool since the dense soil likely intersects the pool wall at that point. For this reason we recommend retaining the pool wall after demolition of the pool bottom. Our analyses indicate that the proposed deck footings would be situated near the top of the potential failure surface for our seismic analyses with a FOS of 1.2. The static FOS would be 1474 Bobry RPT 6 The Galli Group Bobry Residence -- 18416 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds July 31, 2007 greater than 1.5 for the new deck footings. Therefore we have recommended pile -supported foundations for the proposed deck footings with battered piles or earth anchors to provide additional lateral resistance. This would protect the deck footings from rotating outward in the event of surficial ground movement. or erosion. 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The site contains steep slopes comprised of very dense silty sand or glacial outwash blanketed by loose sand or fill near the top of the slope. The loose soils represent a significant risk of erosion if left unprotected or exposed to concentrated discharges from downspouts or other runoff. No groundwater or seepage was evident during our site visit or subsurface exploration. Planned improvements appear confined to areas that are disturbed or developed by. the pool deck and pool area. No new development is planned beyond the existing pool deck. The following geotechnical issues should be addressed in the proposed development of the site: ■ The pool retaining walls should be preserved to help maintain stability at the top of the slope. The demolition of the pool should take place according to our recommendations in the report. ■ All stormwater runoff should be captured and directed toward the existing storm drain. No downspouts or area drains should discharge onto the slope. ■ The elevated deck should be supported on piles augmented by lateral support to prevent rotation. We recommend pin piles in order to minimize slope disturbance. ■ All structural members should either be situated at least 10 feet back from the top of the slope or supported on the underlying native dense, soil and designed with additional lateral support. ■ Best Management Practices should be followed during site development to prevent erosion of the site soils. The sections below address these geotechnical issues and other aspects of site development for the proposed project. Provided the recommendations supplied in this report are followed during design and construction of the residence, development of the site to include an elevated deck and demolition of the existing swimming pool and patio may proceed safely under appropriate geotechnical supervision. 4.1 SITE GRADING AND EARTHWORK 4.1.1 Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control The site contains silty SAND soils that represent severe erosion potential if left unprotected from concentrated discharges during construction. Best Management Practices commonly observed should be employed during construction. We anticipate these will include the following: 1474 Bobry RPT 7 The Galli Group Bobry Residence -- 18416 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds July 31, 2007 1. Maintain vegetation on the slope area between the construction activity and the toe of the slope to help reduce siltation and retard site runoff. 2. Maintain the street and driveway free of sediment during excavation and hauling and when mobilizing equipment to and from the site. Mud and silt tracked from the site should be removed or cleaned by the contractor. 3. The existing drainage system should be protected from sedimentation by placing a silt sack in the existing catch basin grate and placing straw wattles where runoff from the construction area might leave the site. Wattles can be move during construction activity to allow foot traffic and equipment in and out of the site. 4. From October through April we recommend mulching exposed soils with straw or other fertile mulch until permanent landscaping is installed. In areas planned for future flatwork such as patios, clean crushed gravel may be substituted for mulch to stabilize the soil. 4.1.2 Seasonal Grading Restrictions Due to the erosion potential of the site we recommend confining grading activities including excavation, utility installation, backfill and compaction to the drier summer months. Construction activity such as flatwork, framing, and above grade activity can continue after October 1st provided the site is stabilized against erosion by means mentioned in the section above. The geotechnical engineer should evaluate the erosion control measures to verify that the site appears stabilized for wet season construction activity. 4.2 TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS AND RETAINING ELEMENTS The proposed improvements require minimal excavation. We anticipate activity will be limited to shallow excavations for pile caps for the deck footings. We recommend conducting the excavation by hand on slope areas to avoid damaging surficial vegetation as much as possible. The proposed site development does not incorporate retaining elements except for the existing swimming pool wall which we recommend keeping in place. We have recommended the use of pile supported deck footings in order to limit the amount of disturbance to the area. 4.3 SLOPE MITIGATION MEASURES The existing swimming pool and partially demolished pool deck appear situated within ten feet of the top of the steep slope on the project site. These existing elements are all within the recommended minimum buffer or building setbacks (ECDC 28/.80.070 A(la and lb). The proposed improvements are confined to previously developed area and include the following: ■ Break up the pool bottom and backfill the pool with imported structural fill soil. ■ Construct an elevated deck over the previously -existing pool deck. ■ Possible construction of a patio area in place of the abandoned pool.] 1474 Bobry, RPT 8 The Galli Group Bobry Residence -- 18416 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds July 31, 2007 Alterations to areas within buffers or steep slope areas must meet the following requirements . in order to be permitted: 1. "The development will not increase the surface water discharge or sedimentation to the adjacent properties beyond predevelopment conditions." (ECDC 23.80.070 2a). Previous runoff occurred as sheet flow from the pool deck and concentrated discharge from one downspout at the southwest corner of the residence. We recommend the following mitigation measures to satisfy this requirement: ■ The downspout runoff must be directed via a tightline pipe to the existing downspout collection system near the north end of the pool. ■ All disturbed slope areas should be seeded and covered with erosion control mats prior to the wet season. 2. "The development will not decrease the slope stability on adjacent properties." (ECDC 23.80.070 2b) Our slope stability analyses indicate that the proposed improvements will not significantly alter the slope stability of the site or adjacent sites. We recommend the following measures to help maintain slope stability: ■ The perimeter wall of the pool area should be maintained intact. It can be cut below grade to allow placement of backfill, but we recommend maintaining the outboard edge as a retaining feature in order to preserve the slope stability and avoid erosion. ■ The rubble from the demolished pool deck should be removed and the area stabilized with erosion control mats and vegetation as described above. ■ Proposed deck footings must be pile supported and provide lateral resistance through either battered piles or earth anchors as describe din Section 4.4 below. ■ We recommend isolated deck footings instead of a retaining wall or grade beam to limit disturbance to the top of the slope. Lateral support for the deck can be provided by above grade bracing or driven pile elements. 3. "Such alterations will not adversely impact other critical areas." (ECDC 23.80.070 2c) The project site is circumscribed on three sides by the existing asphalt driveway. The proposed improvements will not impact other critical areas. No additional mitigation measures beyond those described above are'needed to protect adjacent sites or critical areas. 4.4 FOUNDATIONS We anticipate that the proposed deck will be supported on pile -supported foundations within the area currently covered by the deteriorated pool decking. Once the pool is backfilled the owner might elect to construct landscape features such as planters or possibly additional 1474 Bobry RPT 9 The Galli Group • Bobry Residence -- July 31, 2l007 18416 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds support for a future addition within the building footprint. Some of the footings could be supported, on the structural fill provided they are situated sufficiently behind the top of the slope. Below we have provided recommendations for conventional footings and pile - supported. footings. 4.4.1. Conventional Spread Footings on Structural Fill Column or wall loads within the backfilled pool area and more than 15 feet away from the top of the slope may be supported on conventional spread footings. For spread footings we recommend the following: 1. An allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf may be used for footings bearing on undisturbed glacial soil or properly compacted structural fill. This may be increased by,1/3 for temporary loads such as wind loads or seismic loads. 2. Minimum footing size for isolated column footings should be•24 inches square. Strip footings should be at least 16 inches in width. 3. The footing area must be free from loose or wet soil prior to placing reinforcing or pouring concrete. The geotechnical engineer should verify the bearing. 4.4.2 Pile Supported Deck Footings The proposed elevated deck is approximately 12 feet by 10 feet and situated near the southwest;corner of the existing residence as shown on Figure 2. The wood -framed deck should be supported on small diameter pipe piles with either batter piles or earth anchors as . needed for additional lateral support. A structural engineer should analyze the deck to determine the lateral resistance needed at the foundation for the deck. The structural engineer should also design the pile cap. We anticipate that a group of battered piles can provide the needed lateral resistance, but this should be confirmed by the structural engineer's analysis. We recommend the following for installation of the pile supported deck footings. 1. Install 2-inch diameter galvanized steel pipe piles at the locations determined by the structural engineer and shown on the plans. Each 2-inch pile may be considered to have an axial capacity of 4,000 pounds (includes a FOS of 2.0). The spacing for the pin piles is dependent upon the loads of the deck and should be determined by the structural engineer. 2. Pile caps for the post support will require pile groupings of two or three piles driven at a batter to provide the needed lateral resistance. We recommend that battered piles be no flatter than 4V:1 H. 3. The piles should be driven to nominal refusal. Refusal for a 2-inch pile is defined as the pile advancing less than 1 inch in 60 seconds when driven with a 90-pound hammer. If a 140-lb hammer is used to install the pipe, the contractor shall be prepared to verify the refusal criteria with a 90-lb hammer at the request of the geotechnical engineer. 1474 Bobry RPT 10 The Galli Group BobryResidence -- 18416 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds July 31, 2007 4. For planning purposes the pile lengths may be estimated at 15 to 20 feet, however the refusal criteria in the field determines the length of the pipe. The 2-inch piles may not exceed 30 feet in length. The 2-inch piles shall be Schedule 80 extra strong steel pipe. 5. The pipe sections shall be connected with a ring coupler assembled in the shop by a certified welder: No more than three sections shall be permitted for the pile if it is less than 20 feet. No more than four pile sections or three couplers shall be used if the pile is between 20 feet and 30 feet. 6. If the refusal criteria cannot be met within the 30-foot limit, the geotechnical engineer might require testing of the piles to determine the installed capacity. At least 3 percent of the non -conforming piles shall be tested. The contractor shall supply the equipment to test the piles. The Galli Group will monitor the load test and verify the allowable capacity of the driven pile. If the piles appear inadequate, The Galli Group will make recommendations for changes in consultation with the structural engineer. 7. A geotechni cal engineer from The Galli Group should monitor the pile installation to verify that field conditions are similar to those anticipated in our design recommendations. A licensed structural engineer familiar with the installation and performance of pin piles shall provide the pile layout and design of the pile caps. The Galli Group must review the structural engineer's design prior to plan submittal. A schematic of the pile -supported deck footing is provided in Figure 7. 4.5 SLABS -ON -GRADE Reinforced concrete slabs can be placed on properly prepared subgrade soils or structural fill. For slabs on grade, we recommend that granular import be placed as soon as the subgrade is prepared to protect the subgrade soil.. The following additional recommendations are provided for construction of patios, slabs, or continuous paves: ■ We recommend that the contractor use deformed reinforcing steel for slab reinforcement rather than welded wire fabric. A minimum reinforcement scheme would be #3 or # 4 bars, 18 inches on center, both ways. Fibermesh may be used to help decrease drying shrinkage cracks, however it is not a replacement for structural reinforcing. ■ The slab should not extend beyond the existing outboard edge of the pool wall or beyond the existing pool deck area beneath the proposed elevated deck. ■ If the impervious area of the patio slab or pavers exceeds 250 square feet, we recommend capturing the runoff in area drains and routing them toward the existing storm drainage system. ■ For slabs orpatios less than 250 square feet the runoff should leave the slab as sheet flow. Concentrated runoff from impervious areas should be avoided. 1474 Bobry RPT 11 The Galli Group 0 Bobry Residence -- July 31, 2007 18416 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds 4.6 DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING POOL The proposed project includes demolition of the existing pool. The limits of the existing pool are shown on Figure 2 and related cross sections. The general plan is to break up the base of the pool into small chunks, remove long pieces of rebar, preserve the perimeter of the pool walls but cut them off at or below grade, backfill the pool with structural fill, and compact the backfill. We recommend keeping the perimeter walls of the pool in order to maintain the stability of the upper reaches of the slope. This will also promote better compaction of the backfill. We recommend the following.for the demolition of the pool: l . Break up the base of the pool by putting holes into the bottom of the pool and breaking up the concrete into rubble. All chunks of concrete shall be no larger than 12 inches in the longest dimension. Where long strands of rebar or mesh are exposed they should be removed from the site. The concrete chunks may be buried within the backfill provided they are surrounded by granular backfill and no voids are left in the backfill area. 2. No broken concrete shall be used as fill on the existing slope outside the perimeter of the pool walls. No organic matter such as wood, lumber, posts, or organic -rich soil shall be used as backfill. 3. All pool piping must be removed as well as mechanical' equipment. 4. The drain for the pool should be scoped with a camera to identify the discharge point. The drain may not be abandoned in place without first closing off the discharge point and filling the drain with cementitious grout. 5. The perimeter pool wall shall be left intact to help maintain stability at the top of the slope and to promote compaction during backfill. The top of the pool wall may be cut off no more than 18 inches below grade in order to allow for a new patio surface. 6. The top of the pool wall currently extends about 1 foot above grade at the outboard edge of the pool. This may either be left as a small retaining wall or the wall may be cut off at grade. No new patio surface or improvements shall extend beyond the outboard edge of the pool as shown on Section A -A'. 7. Much of the pool area will remain covered by the roof overhang (see Figure 2). The net impervious area from the alterations is expected to decrease. Drainage from pavers or patios will runoff as sheet flow similar to pre-existing conditions and the net amount of infiltration will be minimal in the area of the abandoned pool. Provided relatively clean backfill is used we do not see any need for additional drainage behind the walls left in place. 8. Backfill for the pool shall consist of well=graded sand and gravel with a maximum particle size no greater than 4 inches and no more than 7 percent passing the number 200 sieve. For the first few lifts we recommend using sand asbackfill in order to fill. 1474 Bobry RPT 12 The Galli Group Bobry Residence -- 18416 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds July 31, 2007 the voids between the broken concrete rubble. Compaction shall be achieved by mechanical methods.. 9. A representative from The Galli Group should monitor the demolition of the pool and placement and compaction of the backfill. 4.7 BACKFILL AND COMPACTION Imported fill soil used as backfill behind walls and under slabs should be moisture conditioned to within 3 percent of optimum moisture content, placed in loose, horizontal lifts less than 8 inches in thickness, and compacted to at least 92 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined using ASTM D1557 (Modified Proctor). The 92 percent compaction criteria should apply to any material intended to support pavement or intended as backfill behind walls. If structures are supported on the structural fill the compaction criteria should be 95 percent of the Modified Proctor. In areas not constructed as fill slopes or not intended to support pavement or structures, fill material should be placed in loose lifts less than 12 inches in thickness and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density. 4.8 DRAINAGE RECOMMENDATIONS As indicated in previous sections, the existing downspouts appear to collect in a tightline system that drains downslope into the catch basin in the driveway below. We recommend verifying this as well as the pool drain location prior to commencing demolition and constructing new improvements. No downspout discharge shall be permitted onto the slope ng general recommendations are provided for the or within 20 feet of the slope. The followi drainage: 1. Impervious areas shall direct runoff as sheet flow. For patios larger than 250 square feet the area shall direct runoff toward an area drain that is tied into the existing storm drain as discussed above. 2. No concentrated runoff shall be permitted onto the slope face. 3. The owner should remain vigilant about maintenance of the downspouts and area drains on site in order to prevent overflow that might create erosion on the site. 4.9 PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL Following backfill of the swimming pool, installation of the foundation system, utilities and drainage system, and completion of the flat work, the site must be permanently stabilized. All exposed soils on site must either be covered with a thick layer of mulch (3 — 4 inches) that is incorporated into the final landscaping plan or vegetated with other groundcover. It is highly recommended that the site vegetation be established prior to October 15. 4.10 ASSESSMENT OF RISK TO CRITICAL AREAS plus re - The proposed deck improvement and demolition with backfilling of the pool, p development of the backfill area with pavers, patio or other landscaping meet the following requirements accordin to ECDC 23.80.060: 1474 Bobry RPT 13 The Galli Group • Bobry Residence -- July 31, 2007 18416 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds ■ The improvements will not increase the threate of the -geologic hazard to adjacnet properties beyond predevelopment conditions; ■ The improvements will not adversely impact other critical areas; ■ The improvments are or will be designed so that the, hazard to the project is mitigated to a level equal to or less than predevelopment conditions; and ■ The improvements, provided they are designed and constructed in accordance with our recommendations, are safe under anticipated conditions according to our professional engineering judgment. 5.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES AND LIMITATIONS 5.1 ADDITIONAL SERVICES Additional services by the geotechnical engineer are important to help insure that report recommendations are correctly interpreted in final project design and to help verify. compliance with project specifications during the construction process. For this project we anticipate, additional services might include the following: 1. Coordinate with the architect and structural engineer to clarify design specifics and alternatives for the deck footings. 2. Review final design and construction drawings for conformance with geotechnical recommendations. x 3. Monitor demolition of the pool including backfill and compaction of structural fill. 4. Monitor the installation of the pile -supported deck footings and anchors (if needed.) 5. Provide periodic construction field reports, as requested by the client and required by the City. We would provide these additional services on a time -and -expense basis in accordance with our Standard Fee Schedule and General Conditions already in place for this project. If our firm is not utilized to provide these services or if the contractor fails to notify us and request construction monitoring we cannot be held responsible for performance of the geotechnical design elements. 5.2. LIMITATIONS This geotechnical investigation was planned and conducted in accordance with generally accepted engineering standards practiced presently within this geographic area. Geotechnical investigations performed by these standards reveal with reasonable regularity soils that are representative of subsurface conditions throughout the site under consideration. Recommendations contained in this report are based upon the assumption that soil conditions encountered in explorations are representative of actual conditions throughout the building site. However, inconsistent conditions can occur between exploratory borings or test pits and 1474 Bobry RPT 14 The Galli Group Bobry Residence -- 18416 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds July 31, 2007 not be detected by a geotechnical study. If, during construction or subsequent exploration, subsurface or slope conditions are encountered which differ from those anticipated based upon results of this investigation, The Galli Group should be notified so that we can review and revise our recommendations where necessary. if falteaour recommendarions s change prior to if necessary. osed construction, we should be consulted so that w y This report is prepared for the exclusive use of the owner or the owner's consultants for specific application on this project at this particular site. Copies of this report should be made available to the design team, and should be included with the contract drawings issued to the contractor. Our report, conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions on the site and should not be applied to neighboring sites. No warranty, expressed or implied is made. We recommend that geotechnical observation and testing be provided during the construction phases to verify that the recommendations provided in this report are incorporated into the actual construction. If our firm is not utilized to provide these services or if the contractor fails to notify us or request construction monitoring we cannot be, held responsible for performance of the geotechnical design elements. Respectfully submitted, G P l Paul L. Stoltenberg, P.E. Project Geotechnical Engineer 1474 Bobry RPT 15 The Galli Group Vicinity Map M N 0 � H19L ~ * 11 2 H16L r -l�Jy G I 1Sl9 9 m ONZB i a3AoMNV Mica _ k w W Hlh9 r 0 � w H1S8 H199 W LL m 10 H 8 H169 13SNf1S H106 � = SW = to rn ao m ON U IH H146 c y 10L, O Alo O m K W Q. Oo sC yO 20 + : �r LL _. .... LL M N s ey► •saa9 sewoyl L6660 (L3N35 z1 n U 3lVIA LVM j0 TWL1 9Z'i6t-NFL O 31ONNVn NIVLO MnIS 3.10ro V S.ZO.O .696ZZ. L3NSVM /M IIVN ONn(m 11 j1 I 11 llljli`1�/1 jl r 11 11 1 � 1 dVO OOL 11331E *Z YOW x ,/e%s IM t �p z oF' C9 J j M 31=NW V N.ZO.O .69=. IQ'aw LV9311 ONOO! til=-M d3L .Zl AM y !-. -3 d Zi AM -N d3dO AM -m FO1VO X3" -ww NVLO 3wnD5 .Zt 4 6Z'19Z-MS .9 AM 6Z'19Z-3N .9 AM 9Zro9z-nw 310HNVn L3VX S.Zo•9 dVO ONV OYMU ON11O1 � w v' f•F th Z tii Co (.4 b v m o C o cc n a m 0 w S, - c c oo WN O w D D_ w CD CD N CD r C1 m80 =o u `O fn J Q /A �VI w n C W rl We • o c 0 O coN I m 1j a c a> W LL L.. C 00 A o N m .V � -2 E - (0 � fn p C (D E W w Lr, Zo 2 cy) OC) aS so ca F-Locn IF a Z m wN O We .0 0 0 OD O N L LL � CD O O \ N NN Co \ O O .0 O 1 7 O O o1 L c 0-8 N C U- c � C t�A m U m p'� CA Za -v p� Co 2 Cfl p uc2� �W 9= U Nco O AR.O N O O N p �a c _ II� cn•=;QQ L O0 c� c CD a u� w Z o 2 w N N LoCD N N N M cc � U) Compacted 3/4" Pile Supported Deck Footings rBackfill Steel Plate .......... 20 degrees Undisturbed soil Pipe Pile driven to refusal i Batter Pile as needed for lateral support. Drive at no steeper than 1 HAV and weld with plate to vertical pile. Space and direction as req'd by structural engineer. , / 4 i Length as req'd Note: For Illustrative purposes only. Details shall be provided by structural engineer in consultation with geotechnical engineer for contract drawings. Ignore PassiveResistance 4" Min. Manta Ray Anchor if needed (Minimum length shall be 7 feet, see report text for details) Project 1474-01 Howard Bobry 18416 Olympic View Dr. Edmonds, Washington Figure 7 Appendix Logs of Exploratory Borings Appendix A: Logs of Exploratory Borings and Test Pits Unified Soil Classification System; from American Society for Testing and Materials,1985 FOR SAND AND GRAVELS STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE DENSITY (SPT) BLOWS/FT. VERY LOOSE 0-4 LOOSE -E 4 —10 MEDIUM DENSE DENSE 30 — 50 VERY DENSE > 50 FOR SILTS AND CLAYS STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE CONSISTENCY (SPT) BLOWSIFT. VERY SOFT 0-2 SOFT 2-4 MEDIUM STIFF 4-8— STIFF 8 -16 VERY STIFF 16 — 32 HARD > 32 Figure A-1 The Galli Group i prai'ect 1474 - 01 Boring Log B-1 Elevation _ 98.5 fee Soil Description Loose, dark brown, silty sand w/ trace small gravel (FILL) Brown, silty fine SAND w/ trace fine gravel, v moist Dense, verysilty SAND w/ trace fine gravel, wet in top 2" (GLACIAL OUTWASH) Brown, silty SAND w/ trace gravel m Mer added at 12' --------------------------------- Very dense, brown, silty SAND w/ trace gravel, moist N R gni ince on rock Bottom of boring at 15.5' depth No water encountered in boring Boring located 5' west of pool at top of bank • 5' 10, 15' 25' 39 35' 40' I12-23-23 I18-21-22 = 50 / 5.5" _ 1 50+ 6-25-2007 The Galli Group Geotechnical Consulting 18416 Olympic View Dr. Fi ure A-2 5034 -18th Avenue NE Edmonds, Washington g Prefect 1474 - 01 Boring Log B-2 6-25-2007 The Galli Group 18416 Olympic View Dr. Geotechnical Consulting Figure A-3 5034 - 18th Avenue NE Edmonds, Washington c-olia %A14 9R1 n5 • THE GALII GROUP Geotechnical Consulting To: City of Edmonds 121 51h Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Subject: Response to Review Comments Bobry Patio and Deck 18416 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington Plan Check #2007-0954 Project: 1474-2 Date: October 24, 2007 Attention: Jen Machuga • Report Addendum Response to Review Comments The following notes address items in review notices submitted by Jen Machuga (Planning Division, October 10, 2007); Jenny Readwin (Building Division, October 19, 2007); and Jaime Hawkins (Engineering Division, October 2, 2007) for the above referenced site. The items are numbered to correspond with the numbered items in the correction notice. Planning Division Review, October 10, 2007 Item 3: Geotechnical Report Subsequent to the submittal of our geotechnical report dated July 31, 2007, Mr. Bobry arranged to have a site survey performed and arranged for engineering drawings for the proposed improvements. A portion of the site survey is attached to this addendum. The Galli Group has reviewed the plan documents provided by CG Engineering for the proposed improvements. After reviewing these documents we have provided the following additional comments or recommendations: The proposed improvements are located within the footprint of the previous deck or pool improvements (shown by the deck posts on the attached site plan.) Part of the slope in this area appears comprised of rubble from the concrete decking that was demo VEtEIVED The intent of the proposed deck addition is to improve that portion of the lot thas N 0 V - 1 2007 5034 18`h Avenue NE, Seattle, WA 98105 M-t - F 65-5091 BUILDING DE". I Plan Check 2007-0954 18416 Olympic View Drive Page 2 of 4 beneath the old decking and pool walkway. The proposed wall will be pile -supported and anchored to the hillside, thus improving the stability of the lot at the top of the slope. The elevated deck is also located within the same previously developed or disturbed portion of the lot. 2. The top of the slope is depicted on the attached site plan. The line represents the outer edge of the concrete rubble from the previous deck or a noticeable grade break in the field. As you can see the top of slope line is within a few feet of the existing pool, the existing deck, and existing residence. And as shown, the 10-foot minimum setback would project into the building footprint and into existing site features. Therefore the project will require development within the critical area as defined by ECDC. 3. By providing the proposed retaining wall as designed, maintaining the existing pool wall, and decommissioning the pool the stability of the upper portion of the slope will be improved. We have confined improvements to portions previously developed. The wall and existing edge wall of the pool will form a barrier allowing the slope below these improvements to remain relatively undisturbed. At the same time the drainage at the SW corner of the house will be captured and directed to the existing storm drain, also improving the slope conditions in that area. 4. As stated in our original report these alterations meet the requirements put forth is Section 23.80.060 regarding development standards. Engineering Division Review, October 2, 2007 Item 1: Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan The attached figure shows the recommended erosion and sedimentation control measures or BMPs as recommended in Section 4.1.1 of our original report. In addition to the items in our report we recommend erecting a silt fence approximately 7 feet from the proposed improvements on the downhill side. The silt fence should have the steel mesh backing rather than just the fabric alone. See attached detail. The attached plan also includes our recommendation regarding permanent site stabilization. 1474 Report Addendum —Corrections 2 The Galli Group Plan Check 2007-0954 18416 Olympic View Drive Page 3 of 4 Building Division Review, October 19, 2007 Item ]:Site Plan Information See revised plan. Minimal limits of wall to be retained are shown on the attached site plan. Item 2: Plan review letter (See attached) Sincerely, THE GALLI GROUP Paul L. Stoltenberg, P.E. Project Geotechnical Engineer Attached: Silt Fence Detail TESC Plan/Site Plan Review Letter 1474 Report Addendum —Corrections 3 The Galli Group Plan Check 2007-0954 18416 Olympic View Drive Page 4 of 4 Filter fabric material in continuous rolls: Use staples or wire rings to attach fabric to wire Wire mash support fence /- for slit film fabrics � 1 0 i ; 1 1 (V I 1 1 1 :.�ar'u0(/% u�� 11„r.�11111 �n tu�./11�,1 iiri f1 1 1 Bury bottom of filter material 1 i 1 ' 1 in 8' by 12' trench---------------------------------- N �! 1 l I 6' Max. +1+---= 2' by 2' wood posts, standard or better i t_. or equivalent Wire mesh support fence for alit film fabrics Filter fabric material Provide washed gravel backfill or compacted native soil as directed by local government Bury bottom of filter material in 8- by 12' trench 2' by 2- wood posts, standard or better or equivalent SILT FENCE DETAIL 1474 Report Addendum —Corrections 4 The Galli Group i all exposed soils and/or through SC 150 erosion :)I mats per geotechnical eer recommendations U 0 SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT ITESC PLAN 'Z SITE PLAN 'J SCALE 1"=1O' 011, / N / I ( I l :�/ f / F °N / / I /l / / :�� i / s EX. P ,4 P D C%C. PA110 ; N \\ \EX. FOOL\TO DEMOLI ECIr. \ �� \�X. 0�01-\�ALL\\TO REMA� \ \\ \\ \\ \\TOW\�2 .5\ \ \ \ \ B 7 °' \ \\ \\ \ �fi�EbF EX\QEC\K\ \\TOV 2�0.5\ • 28Qc' ide Rock or hog fuel over .i 50OX geotextile to protect from construction traffic. ove prior to final site lization. 10' TOP OF SLOPE 5 Q1 SETBACK n existing pool wall for ity. Cutoff no more 12" below final grade. 0 1 PAVED DRIVEWAY ` Silt Fence (TYP) \ \ \ \ \ \ 274.0 TOW' o \\ \\ \ROW� \\ \\ \\ \\ PRR 04& CO\NiOUR \FOtLOW'RkT. WkLL 10 IN EX. CK 2 STORY DECK /— PROPOSED D STORY E All T}fl� GALLI GROUP Geotechnical Consulting To: City of Edmonds 121 5" Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Subject: Plan Review Bobry Patio and Deck 18416 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington Plan Check #2007-0954 Project: 1474-2 Date: October 24, 2007 Attention: Jen Machuga October 25, 2007 Project 1474-03 The Galli Group has reviewed the revised plans for the above project as prepared by CG Engineering. These plans are in substantial conformance with the recommendations provided in our geotechnical report for this project. The proposed improvements will not adversely impact the slope or. adjacent properties provided the improvements are constructed in accordance with the permit documents. Sincerely, Paul L. Stoltenberg, P.E. Project Geotechnical Engineer Si L T, 41- �._ 2933s�"�'' �6.2 �• �T 503418`h Avenue NE, Seattle, Washington 98105 • Phone 206.525.5097 • Fax 206.525.5091 Nr 0 o � e i�z �b 1 rn, � C1 o z � 7 III � 0 � c d � � Z z 02 Cl- s 4 id 6 0 LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR: ROBERT DELONG PARCEL A September 14, 1970 File No. 3845A That portion of Lots 3 and 4, Block 2, Seahurst, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 9 of Plats, on page 90, records of Snohomish County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Lot 3; thence N 86°12140"W, along the South line of said Lot 3, a distance of 140.95 feet; thence N 17022122"E, a distance of 166.48 feet to an intersection with the Northerly line of said Lot 4; thence S 74°42'00"E, along sa,bd Northerly line, a distance of 137.63 feet to the Northeast corner of said Lot 4; thence Southerly, along the Easterly line of said Lots 4 and 3 and the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 1462.69 feet and consuming a central angle of 4*21122", an arc distance of 111.21 feet to the point of tangency; thence S 15°51100"W, and continuing along the Easterly line of said Lot 3,_a distance of 27.19 feet to the Point of Beginning. V SUBJECT TO AND TOGETHER.. WITH an easement for ingress, egress and utilities ovet, under, across, through and upon that portion of Lots 3 and 4, Block 2, Seahurst, accord- ing to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 9 of Plats, on page 90, records of Snohomish County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Lot 3; thence N 15°51100"E, along the East line of said Lot 3, a distance of 27.19 feet to the point of curve of a curve to the right having a radius of 1462.69 feet; thence Northeasterly, along the arc of said curve to the right and consuming a centralangle of 4*21122", an arc distance of 111.21 feet to the Northeast corner of said Lot 4; thence N 74°42100"W, along the North line of said Lot 4, a distance of 162.65 feet; thence S 17°22'22"W, a distance of 171.62 feet to an intersection with the South line of said Lot 3; thence S 86012'40"E, along said South line, -a distance of 25.72 feet to an intersection with a curve having a radius of 20.00 feet; from which intersection the radius point of said curve bears S 72°37138"E; thence Northeasterly, along the arc of said curve, being a curve to the right and consuming a central angle of 90°00'00", an arc distance of 31.42 feet; thence N 17°22'22"E, a distance of 20.00 feet to an intersection with a curve having a radius of 20.00 feet, from which intersection the radius point of said curve bears N 17°22122"E; thence Westerly, along the arc of the latter said curve, being a curve -to the right and consuming a central angle of 90°00100", an arc distance of 31.42 feet; thence N 17°22122"E, a distance of 62.17 feet to the point of curve of a curve to the right having a radius of 20.00 feet; thence North- easterly, along the arc of said curve to the right and consuming a central angle of 8705513811, a distance of 30.69 feet; thence S 74°42'00"E, a distance of 55.33 feet to the point of curve of a curve to the right having a radius of 20.00 feet; thence Southeasterly, along the arc of said curve to the right and consuming a central angle of 82*0411I", a distance of 28.65 feet; thence'S 7022111"W, a distance of 101.96 feet to an intersection with the South line of said Lot 3; thence S 86°12140"E, along said South line, a distance of 25.00 feet to the Point of Beginning. REIN, MIDDLETON & ASSOCIATES Consulting Engineers e Land Surveyors 324 MAID! ST. EDMONDS, WASH, CITY "OF. EDMONDS CIVIC CENTER — WATER -SEWER DEPARTMENT SIDE SEWER PERMIT Call. PRospect 0-1107 when work is ready for inspectlon. . (No!Inspr) 0 .3904 tions Saturday, Sunday or holidays.) 1� ADDRESS ........................................18416- OLYMPIC-•VIEW-•DRIVE OWNER.... ROBERT...DE LONG ... CONTRACTOR -..BOB AKLIN BACKHOE SERVICE ...• ..... ......•...............-..................-......-.....-....... Permission is granted . FEBRVARY...22-------------- 19.31, for .......-................days to REPAIR or CONNECT a side sewer With City Sewers In accordance with application on file and governing ordinances. ATTENTION IS CALLED TO THE FOLLOWING: NOTE No. 1—The owners of the property may obtain a permit to construct sewer inside property line. A licensed Side Sewer Contractor must be employed to construct side sewer in street area. Do not cover any portion of sewer before it has been inspected. NOTE No. 2—Obtain full Information regarding Ordinance 11.16.030 and Regulations governing side sewers when you get permit. P^ No. 3—Top of side sewer must have at least 30 inches coverage at property line and 12 inches inside property line; minimum grade of 2%. _ No•bends in grade sharper than % will be permitted. - OTE No. 4—Trenches in street must be water settled and surface of street restored to original condition. Contractors shall be responsible for failure due to improper work which may develop within one year of completion. Vo. 5—It is unlawful to alter or do any other work than is provided for In the permit, or to do any work on the main sewer or Its appur- tenances except to insert the pipe into the wye. ONDS WA 9'0'4"000"60:, , OWNER/APPLICANT HOWARD BOBRY 18416 OLYMPIC VIEW DR EDMONDS, WA 98020 LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONSULTANTS CIVIL/STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CG ENGINEERING 2504TH AVE. S., SUITE 200 EDMONDS, WA 98020 425.778.8500 FAX 778.5536 CONTACT: DENNIS TITUS SEAHURST PLAT OF BLK 002 D-01 — TH PTN LTS 3 & 4 DAF BEG SE COR SD LT 3 TH N86*12 40W ALG S LN SD LT 140.95FT TH N17*22 22E 166.48FT TO ANINT WITH NLY LN OF SD LT 4 TH S74*42 OOE ALG NLY LN 137.63FT TO NE COR SD LT 4 TH SLY ALG ELY LN OF LTS 4 & 3 THE ARC OF A CRV TO L HAVG RAD OF 1462.69FT & CONS CENT ANG OF 4*21 22 AN ARC DIST OF 111.21 FT TO PT OF TANG TH S15*51 OOW & CONT ALG ELY LN SD LT 3 FOR 27.19FT TPB SUBJ ESE TO EDMONDS IF ANY & SUBJ ESE PUD TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER 00565600200301 SCOPE OF WORK —REMODEL EXISTING SUNROOM LOT AREA GROSS LOT AREA 20806 SF NET LOT AREA 16104 SF LOT COVERAGE BUILDING FOOTPRINT 3595 SF UNCOVERED DECK 125 SF NET LOT COVERAGE 3720 SF (237o) IMPERVIOUS AREA EX. BUILDING FOOTPRINT 3595 SF (1971) EX. DRIVEWAY 5699 SF (1971) EX. UNCOVERED PATIO 1346 SF GROSS IMPERVIOUS 10340 SF (497) GROSS PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS 10340 SF (497) 0 a ACC to S wwa_ frw Other ---- Hei ,t ppY PLANNING //e iGs�1✓ 6 (GS SITE PLAN SCALE: 1" = 11 V t `t� it ! , , s r i \ 4 \or r ' r-_ Y : 1 i \� 9 r t F , rr: Jj i ' E S - . -SHARD , 1 r � ACCES EASEMENT \ �i ,� s .1 _ \ E eP F 1 1 _ _ r y � , i Au PAVED _ } I t DRIVEWAY , `.TOW''= 280.5' PeP j BOW = ) 276' 0 h = , _ 'r • S .4•, I11A1 r , i a 0 r 10 "Nothing in this permit approval process shall be interpreted as allowing -or permitting the J r maintenance of any currently existing illegal, nonconforming or unpermitted building, structure or site condition which is outside the scope of the UT application, regardless of whether such building, structure or condition is shown on the site plan or drawing. Such building, structure or condition may be the subject of a separate enforcement action." F?ECE►V ED J U N - 9 2008 BUILDING DEPT. J O� ... N C:) W ��,► W V � w � t, W 0 Z W T- 0 m d' M 0 00 0 m T— W SH EET: Z Q J M W V) 39 ai 0 a' e- Z E CJ ca OWNER/APPLICANT HOWARD BOBRY 18416 OLYMPIC VIEW DR EDMONDS, WA 98020 LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONSULTANTS CIVIL/STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CG ENGINEERING 2504TH AVE. S., SUITE 200 EDMONDS, WA 98020 425.778.8500 FAX 778.5536 CONTACT: DENNIS TITUS SEAHURST PLAT OF BL.K 002 D-01 — TH PTN LTS 3 & 4 DAF BEG SE COR SD LT 3 TH N86*12 40W ALG S LN SD LT 140.95FT TH N17*22 22E 166.48FT TO ANINT WITH NLY LN OF SD LT 4 TH S74*42 OOE ALG NLY LN 137.63FT TO NE COR SD LT 4 TH SLY ALG ELY LN OF LTS 4 & 3 THE ARC OF A CRV TO L HAVG RAD OF 1462.69FT & CONS CENT ANG OF 4*21 22 AN ARC DIST. OF 111.21FT TO PT OF TANG TH S15*51 OOW & CONT ALG ELY LN SD LT 3 FOR 27.19FT TPB SUBJ ESE TO EDMONDS IF ANY & SUBJ ESE PUD TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER 005565606200301 SCOPE OF WORK -DEMO POOL -ADD RETAINING WALL -ADD ON TO EXISTING DECK LOT SS O GROSS T AREA 20806 SF NET LOT AREA 16104 SF Q LOT COVERAGE BUILDING FOOTPRINT 3595 SF EX. DECK UNDER EX ROOF LINE DECK ADDITION 125 SF NET LOT COVERAGE 3720 SF (237o) IMPERVIOUS AREA EX. BUILDING FOOTPRINT 3595 SF (1971) EX. DRIVEWAY 5699 SF (1971) EX. UNCOVERED PATIO 1298 SF (1971) PROPOSED PATIO ADDITION .48 SF EX. PATIO TO BE REMOVED --300 SF (1971) GROSS EX. IMPERVIOUS 10592 SF (50%) GROSS PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS 10340 SF (49%) GRADING PA110 .5 CY (FILL) POOL 85 CY (FILL) 4CINITY MAP PROJECT SITE NTS I� I I ► \ \\ II I Ih C\/l I0o I I I I 00 I� I00 100 Ov (-V r / , SHARED ACCESS �A \ EASEMENT ! try / / rp� i LCH ALL E�OSED SOILS / i 00 \�` \ I I I I I o w / A PLANT THROUGH! SC150 SyO ONTR& MATS/ PER GEOTE L , ° ,2 /r M B \NGIN R RECOMGENDATfON MB (O _ FMB / r' l/ I :i �� / / FILTER FABRIC j � � •' / � ZI I I I I � o I w �'/ // I FENCE. / / .j / PROVIDE ROCK OR HOG FUEL OVER / ,<-" I I 1 I �, / FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL --� N ! / 1 / :• / .MIRAFI 50OX GEOTEXILE TO PROTECT �- I I I I ► ' WIRE MESH SUPPORT °cv !/ / / 1 / / / SOILS FROM CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC. �; I I I I I , / FENCE FOR SLIT FILM / REMOVE PRIOR TO FINAL SITE I I I I I '� D FABRICS STABILIZATION. / :`/ - ► I I I / BACKFILL AND // �' COMPACTED I I EX TOP OF SLOP : % ; Tye ,, I 10 TOP OF SLOPE NEWLY GRADED OR SETBACK-> Eka"c d to Per �,y , - I \ ! l I ►j / / / / / :% ;: e��4► <�poc-�s b 'C%•c �t�, - \ \ \ 1 DISTURBED SIDE SLOPE / It/ / / / EX. HOUSE PROVIDE 3/4"-1.5" PROPOSED I - I WASHED GRAVEL BACKFILL // EN. PO�SL T // ` �ONC. PATIO.' ---_ __ � ; - - _ - � • I I I / IN TRENCH AND ON BOTH I SIDES OF FILTER FENCE / BE DEMOLIISH FABRIC ON THE ' SURFACE \ \ \ I '� EX. CK 2 STORY DECK , / STEEL POSTS 6 OFF CENTER• \\ \\ \RETA�N EIXISIING POOL \ I � \ , I / / WAL . FOR1,S BIUfi'. ••\� I 288 CU1\ OFF N0 ORE THAN \\ " \ \ "h\1 \ \ • �� \ ti ' i BELOW\ FINI,�. GRADE. \ PROPOSED D STORY DEC �, PAVED ; I / I o d \ \ \ \ DRIVEWAY � l \ \ \TOW \= 280.5' \��� � \ IN ND OF \ \ \ \ OOL WALL REMAIN 276�\0 � F. ` I \ \ \ O EDGE OF PROPOSED , 1 , RETAINING WALL 1 \ \ N. EX. D CK \ �� �6'� \ \TOV \ 2%0.5'\ .� \` � .. TOW = 280.5 0 0)/ o / 274,0' \ �•: , ` BOW done �Z�- to Comer L/c. Flag.SHARED ACCESS � � � � � � � � \ � � •. � � � _ '1_"�- � � / R �, EASEMENT �, �� � \ � \ \ \ , �� � � � ___ ', \ � � � ! N• Set_, baok_s a aired AcFar Desk. TOW = \280.5` �' \ / s Front c a55'•I• \ OWI� — 2�1 0' .•,. \ \ \ i 1 / r Sides W_s _.. i c2' Rear W 25' Other Height 'dS • Ferr Ec9c. 1G.�;jO.O,,YYO� ' io n�'e� P�1ee-Ar i�1n- Scu tin s ice; se.'tba..o 6y 3.3 toss 4,�.l, 30ue% cAv�� APPRO D BY PLANNING ° SITE & EROSION 1 SCALE: 1 "=10' \ PR6POS6, CONTOURS X'• -` i \\ \ \ \\ �� -'0a FOLLOW 'RAT. FALL bs, k/lam 95 3� Intg1. `we.r or` tea.` c-a.o{e_ r,.>4.cne. V CONTROL PLAN "Nothing in this per approval roval Process shall be interpreted as 911ow►ng -or permitting the maintenance of any currently existing illegal, nonconforming or unpermitted building, structure lure or site condition which outs of the scope f thO germit application, regardless ch condition is shown on building, structure orSuchbuilding structurelor site plan or drawing. condition maybe the subject of a separate enforcement action." PPROVIED AS NOTED BY ENGINEERING Date: 6" 1 2'_6" MIN. I 5'-0" 2'-6" MIN. MIN FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL MIRAFI 10OX OR EQUIVALENT - 2"x4"x14 GAUGE WELDED WIRE FABRIC OR EQUAL i I L J J -BURY-BOTTOM OF FILTER MATERIAL IN 8"x12" TRENCH STEEL POSTS 6' OFF CENTER FILTER FABRIC FENCE SCALE: 1 /2" = 1'-0 RECEIVED N 0 V - 1 2007 BUILDING DEPT. En AM 250 4TH AVE. S., SUITE 200 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 .PHONE (425) 778-8500 FAX (425) 778-5536 �EVy Cam _ Pq)v/ w � O TEg�9 Cs EXPIRES: 7/6/2008 w Q oCn O N o Y f_ C� L DESIGN: DMT DRAWN: MGV CHECK: CCC JOB NO: 07190.10 DATE: 09/05/07 Z 0 W W 0 Jd 0 M .0 N W 0 0 a) 0 0ICL, N Q V) W 0 o n- W � 0 W M -4t W m T� (!) SHEET: a i cn 8 ril �1 r (� II� = 1' \