5717 CADY RD 2016-01-01 MF Import

I . , 3. The proposed method of construction will reduce erosion potential, landslide and seismic hazard potential, and will improve or not adversely affect the stabiliry of slopes; and 4. The proposal uses construction techniques which minimize disruption of existing topography and natural vegetation; and 5. The proposal is consistent with the purposes and provisions of this Ordfnance; and 6. The proposal mitigates all impacts identified in the geotechnical report; and 7. All utilities and access roads or driveways to and within the site be located so as to require the minimum amount of modification to slopes, vegetation or geologically hazardous areas. The Planning Director's conclusions are as follows: 1. The proposed development wlll not create a hazard to the subject properry, surrounding propertles or r/ghts-o%way, erosion or sedlmentation to of/-sJfe properfies or bodles o/water. The new lawn area atop the retained backfill behind the wall will act to slow down stormwater flows across the previously sloping area, allowing sediment to settle out and be retained onsite. The reclaimed area will also help to intercept stormwater that previously flowed over the face of the slope at this location, lhereby improving stability cond(Hons in the bluft soils and reducing the likelihood of sediment transport offsite (BEK Engineering 9/12/01). The retaining wall which was erected on site, runs along the top of bank on the rear of the property, away from other properties and right-oF-ways. 2. The proposa/addresses the exlsting geologlcal constraints of the slte, inc/uding an assessment o/solls and hydrology. This project was evaluated by a geotechnical consultant after it was built. Therefore, the evaluatlon is made from the review o(photos of the project under constructfon, experience with similar projects, knowledge o(area geology, and a visit to the sfte. P�o subsuriace explorations were performed on site, nor observation of the construction periormed on site (BEK Engineering 9/12/01). The geological constraints to site development appear to be related to the proximity o(the adjacent slope. The retaining wall takes into account the nearby slope by providing tieback anchors on the support posts, so that less lateral pressure is applied to the soils making up the slope. The glacially- overconsolidated native soils present in the South Everett area are generally suitable for bearing support of the loads applied by a 2 to 4-foot high wall and associat�d backfill. Near-surface hydrology of the immediate area would be controlled by the change in elevation through the axis of the adjacent wooded swale,which we understand does not support standing or running water. The retaining wall should not change the local hydrology, other than to slow local �