The URL can be used to link to this page

111 MAIN ST.PDFIIIIIIIIIIIIII 11928 111 MAIN ST '0 40' ADDRESS: =SZLt—� TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER:bCMEDICD[tb,DffZ2RCCI-,Zd-,=. 2-09. 2-04 BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE):IRPU20 cAive -qftrDjq0j4j COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR: CRITICAL AREAS:— qa; DETERMINATION: 0 Conditional Waiver 0 Study Required kZ'Waiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S: UM151 DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: 4-2b-qLe PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED: EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR: 111111ilin 111111 f f , iuw A 99 slN M, 21 1 Elk of 61 1 1pi 11 11 G ''1' 0 , 4 11 11 MIT 4-1- qi 1� I 11110-1m, I &I I mil 71; 11 NO 5felcm-P PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED: SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED: 4, i�)- o5 SEWER LID FEE $: LID SHORT PLAT FILE: LOT: BLOCK: SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: t- 2�- qLp SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #: &-H2— GEOTECH REPORT DATED: STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT A515 FOR: imn icb -Anck .N,j - WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: 3a 1 - to, Tp OTHER: RDW %'25T (watw) LATEMP\DS'Ps\FonTis\Street File Checklist.doc EL-lits EL- 104.0 BTM EL- 1 0.0 TOP "A" 120-00' ob 9, 7 7', W-0 W-0 18" Z-0 RESIDENCE 204 SUNSET AVENUE z TOP OF FTG = EL. 100.5' TOP OF SLAB EL. 101.0' MAIN F 1`10.02' rcr I", LOOR EL 9 C4m PATIO 4"Atelll�" IS LNnu.- 9 - OF MkDOM WAJ. 24"DIAx 32"-0* DETENTION PIPE EL= 1010 STM 109.0 'o EL= lio.0 TOP 9 FLOT FLAN 1"= 20'-0" HEIGHT CALCULATIONS' LEGAL DESCRIPTION "A" mo ELL 5ME& LOT 12 BLOCK I I EDMONDS PLAT OF RECORDS "B" ilo.w OF SNOHOMISH COUNTYNASHINGTON. VOL 1, PAGE 2e "C" TAX NUMBER 004M401101200 "D" iii.v LOT SIZE AVERAGE GRADE 111.3' MANHOLEBENCHMARK 7,196 SO FT ELEV=100.73 MAX HT ALLOWED 1136.3' LOT COVERAGE ACUTAL MAX HT 135.885' 2,613.25 SO FT , 34.92 % ZONING RS-6 OWNER N ALAN YOUNG � I il J i MAI N kSTT RE E—T — #201 EDMONDS, WA 98020 425-670-2256 , &-; � R*A.. i i I P I I N01465- FLAN i--=2o--o-- *APPROX 12"TO BE REMOVED FROM SITE + AREA FOR GARAGE/SLAB = 296 CUYARDS *EXCAVATE FOR FULL BSMT 1900 S X V-0", = 6113 CQYARDS TOTAL SOIL TO BE REMOVED FROM SITE 929 CU,YARDS RECEIVED APR 13 2005 PERMIT COUNTER 0 Critical Areas Checklist Site Information Project Name: Permit Number. Site Location: PrODertV Tax Account Number. �113W Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): Have you filled out a Critical Areas awklist for a project on this site before? General Site Conditions do 1. Has the site been cleared oir logged? VZ3 Date of most recent action: Soils / Topography 2. In the Snohomish County Soil Survey, what is the mapped soil type(s)? 3. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply. V" jqat less than 5 feet elevation change over entire site. Rolling: slopes on site generally less flian 15% (a vertical rise of 10 fed over a horizontal distance of 66 feet.) MIT. slopes present on site of 'more than 15% and less than 30% ( a vertical rise of 10 feet of hor izontal distance.) .; Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site. Comments Hydrology/Vegetation 4. Site contains areas of year-round standing water �fc 5. 6. 7. ,8. Site is primarily: forested meadow ;shrubs 9. Obvious wetland is present on site: 10. Wetland inventory or map indicates wetland present on site: del 11. Critical Areas inventory or map indicates any Critical Area on site: /JC> r-r-it'r-9. Only STr-NTT FILE —Mc Site contains areas of seasonal standing water. dc-) Approx. Deptic Site is in the floodway floodplain----A & of a water course. 1— Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? t4 Q flows are vear ound? Flows are seasonal? ; mixed .. .. .... .. City of Edmonds 0 - Critical Areas Checklist The Critical Azeas 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 a development permit 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 sub ect property. The information needed to complete the Checklist should be easily available fiom observations of the site or data available at City Hall (Critical Areas inventories, maps, or soil surveys). An applicant, or his/her repre=tative, must fill out the checldist, sign and date it, and submit it to the City. Ike City will review the ched1dist, make a Precursory site visit, and make a determination of the subsequent steps necessary to completea development permit application. With a signed copy of this form, the applicant should also submit a vicinity map of the parcel with enough detail that City staff can find and identify the subject parcel(s). In addition, the applicant is encouraged to include any other pertinent information or studies ' in conjunction with this Checklist to assist staff in completing their preliminary assessment of the site. I have completed the attached Critical Area Checklist and attest that the answers provided are factual, to the best of my knowledge (fill out the appropriate column below). Owner / Applicant: Name Title Street Address City, State, ZIP Phone Signature Date Applicant Representative- Nwne _Z - JOOJ�� .4 1AX7 Title I 1_/ / ,31 6f A_U,-7r AIVIC- Street Address 961Z1 city, ZIP Phone SigRW"e-. Applied Geotechnology Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Geology & Hydrogeology i A report prepared for P&L Enterprises post office Box 38 Mountlake Terrace, Washington 98043 GEOTECHNICAL ENGIN M ING STUDY PROPOSED TWO-STORY KI)(ED USE BUILDING EDMONDS, WASHINGTON AGI Project No. 15,546.001 by ,Wesley eK otZ staff ngineer 9. 41Ail Garry—H. Squires, P.E. Project Engineer APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC. 300 120th Avenue N.E., Building 4, Suite 215 Bellevue, Washington 98005 206/453-8383 December 27p 1990 �4 VL S�4 �- �WA 0.-. � WAQ Applied GeotechnologY Inc. INTRODUCTION Project Description Applied Geotechnology Inc. This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering study for a proposed residential/commercial building to be constructed at your -site in Edmonds, Washington. The project area is shown on the Site Plan, Figure We understand you propose to construct a two-story structure which will incorporate offices and luxury condominiums on the first and second floors, respectively. In addition, one level of below grade parking, with concrete slab -on grade floor, is proposed. Based on a review of preliminary plans provided by your architect, Mr. Ronald D. Johnson, maximum cuts of approxi- mately It feet below current site grade will be required to establish final subgradeo elevation for below grade parking. Finish floor grad ' e f or the parking area is proposed at about Elevation 32.5 feet (Elevations in this report a.re.based on plans entitled "Proposed Condo/Office Bldg.," Ronald D. Johnson, Architect, dated November 17, 1990). We understand structural loads on interior columns and perimeter strip footings will not exceed 60 kips and 4-kips per lineal foot, respectively.. Scope of Services We performed our geotechnical engineering study in accordance with our October 9, 1990 proposal. Ou r scope of services included field geotechnical laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and .exploration, preparation of our final report containing the study results. Specifically, our scope of services comprised the following: 0 Site exploration by 2 borings drilled in the range of 18 to 23 feet below current site grades. 0 Laboratory testing to assess certain engineering characteristics of the soils encountered. Testing included gradation analysis and moisture -density tests. 0 Recommendations regarding inclination and protection of temporary excavation slopes. 0 Recommendations for design of temporary excavation retention and permanent subsurface walls, including parameters for active and passive lateral earth pressures. 0 Recommendations for temporary and permanent drainage control. 0 Evaluation of the suitability of on -site soils for use as fill, gradation criteria for imported fill materials, and placement/ compaction criteria for on -site and imported structura . 1 fill mate- rials. I Existing Nova Tech Plaza Building E 3 9.6 Property Line . .......... .............. ... K-�:- *i:- --i*ii:ii. ...................... ............ .. ... . . X............. .. ....... . .... ......... .... . ............. .... ........... .. ....... ........ .. . ..... . . ...... ....... ............ .......... ... X. X ...... E 4 2.3 Below Grade Parking FF @ E 32.5 z W B-2 A '**, E 3 4.4 Main Street E 4 0.8 LEGEND B-2 Boring number and approximate IN' Iodation A A'. Cross Section Location 0 10 20 Scale in Fe Elevation, based on plans referenced Reference: Drawing titled Tasement Floor Plan' provided by Ronald Johnson. It '42S In text Architect, dated 11/17/90. Applied Geolechnology Inc. Site Plan FIGURE Geotechnical Engineering P&L Enterprises/ Edmonds S.I. Geology & Hydrogeology Edmonds, Washington JOB NUMBER DRAWN APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE 15,546.001 DFF 27 Dec. 90 -2- 0 9 Applied Geotechnology Inc. 0 Recommendations for foundation support of the proposed structure, including allowable soil bearing pressures, minimum width and depth requirements, and estimates of settlement for conventional shallow foundations. 0 A final written report containing our findings, conclusions, and recommendations. SITE CONDITIONS Surface The project site, currently used by the U.S. Postal Service for vehicle parking, is situated northwest of the intersection of Second Avenue North and Main Street as shown -on the Site Plan, Figure 1. The project area is bordered by Second Avenue North to the east, by an alley to the west, and by Main Street to the south. Nova -Tech Plaza, a four-story commercial building, is situated adjacent to the north property boundary. Topographic relief across the site, which slopes down to the west, is on the order of 8 feet. Current site surfacing comprises gravel and asphalt. A railroad tie retaining wall, approximately 3 feet high and landscaping extends along the south property boundary. Landscaping also borders the property on the north and east. Subsurface We explored subsurface conditions at the project site by drilling two borings, located as shown on the Site Plan, to a maximum depth of 23 feet below current site grade. Boring I encountered Fill overlying glacial Outwash sand which in turn is underlain by glacial Till. Boring 2 encoun- tered only the glacial Till. We characterized the soils encountered and developed the general stratigraphic profile described below, and illus- trated on Cross Section, Figure 2. Fill: We encountered loose Fill to a depth of 2 feet in Borl ' ng 1. Fill is described as fine-grained silty sand with a trace of gravel and is charac- terized by low strength and moderate compressibility. Because of its generally fine grained. texture, this material is moderately moisture -sensi- tive. Outvash: Underlying the Fill in Boring 1, we encountered 7 feet of medium dense Outwash, comprised of fine grained sand with silt. Outwash is characterized by moderate strength, low compressibility, and generally low to moderate moisture sensitivity. MCC L__J 6--J A 45-1 P S P Z I .S 0 0 LU 30 Exiating Ground Surface . i - B-1 A' 0 0 A 0 Ronald Johnson. Architect, datflol 'It z01vu- FIGURE Applied Geotechnology Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Cross Section A -A' P&L Enterprises/ Edmonds S.I. 2 TM Cross @*own Is a dIsWamm'ft i'"Wetation of subsurface condl- Geology & Hydrogeology �6 I Edmonds, Washington done based on interpolation and extyapotation of data fTorn b . orings. Achad ow4tions we wbalandapy more complex than depicted and vvill APPROVED DATE REVISED . DATE vary bet -'so bofts. AGI does not represent the conditions Musuated as exact. but re 009nize JOB NUMBER DRAWN 27 09c.90 . to varied" exist. .15,546.001 DFF 0 Applied Geotechnology Inc. Till: Till, comprising dense to very dense fine to medium grained silty sand with some gravel and occasional cobbles, underlies the Outwash in Bor- ing 1. We encountered Till at ground surface in Boring 2. When undis- turbed, Till exhibits high strength and low incompressibility. However, it is highly moisture sensitive and will become difficult to handle when wet. Table I summarizes the descriptions and geotechnical characteristics of the units encountered. More detailed descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered at individual exploration locations and a description of field equipment and sampling procedures are presented in Appendix A. Groundwater We did not* encounter an established water table within the depths explored by our bo'rings. However, we encountered a small amount of perched ground water, in the form of seepage, in Boring I at approximately 9 feet below existing grade. The seepage depth corresponds to the contact between Outwash and underlying Till. We expect other zones of seepage may be present within more granular layers of the Till. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOHHENDATIONS General, Based on the results of our exploration and laboratory testing, it is our opinion site development can proceed generally as planned. Construction of the below grade portions of the structure will require temporary excavation retention with the exception of the north wall which can be constructed using cut slope methods. Adequate foundation support can be provided by a shallow spread foundation system. Design recommendations for these and other aspects of the project are presented below. Site Excavation and Earthwork Excavation for the below grade parking level of the proposed building will require maximum cuts at the northeast corner of about 11 feet below exist- ing grade. We expect excavation to planned basement grade will encounter Fill, Outwash, and terminate in dense to very dense Till. A 16-foot set- back for the proposed excavation is planned along the north property line, adjacent to the.Nova-Tech Plaza building. Accordingly, it should be possi- ble to accomplish excavation along the north side using a cut slope. However, excavation along the east, south, and west property lines will require temporary retention to protect adjace I nt streets and rights -of -way. -5- Table I- SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL UNITS DGnsity/ConsistGncy Value as a Suitability Approximate and Suitability Subgrade When Not Subject to for Foundation Descriptive Depth to soil Moisture Condition Soil Moisture as Sensitivity on -site Fill Frost Action Support Name Top (feet) Description of Fill 0.0 Dark brown silty sand; Loose; moist Moderate Adequate when Unsuitable Unsuitable fine-grained. with moisture trace . gravel conditioned Adequate when Adequate when gray. sand. fine Medium denses moist LOW to Adequate when Outwash .2.0 Brown moderate moisture recompacted recompacted grained with silt conditioned Till 0.0 9.0 Gray silty sand, fine Dense to very dense; High Adequate when Suitable Suitable to medium grained with moist to wet moisture some gravel and conditioned occasional cobbles Applied GeotechnologY Inc.. Localized zones of groundwater seepage may be encountered during excavation and must be controlled during construction. This may be accomplished by pumping from sumps interconnected by shallow connector trenches at the base of the excavation. It is . our opinion . that site excavation can be accomplished using normal excavation . procedures. However, the Till is moisture sensitive, and may become difficult or impossible to work if excavation is performed during wet weather conditions. Fu . rthermore, it may be necessary to use a ripper to expedite excavation of the Till. In our opinion, Fill, Outwash, and Till are suitable, for use as On -site Fill, with the exception of directly adjacent to subsurface walls, provided they can.*_be properly moisture conditioned for. compaction. The site soils are moderately to highly moisture sensitive and may become difficult or impossible to work or compact during wet weather. Within 2 feet horizontally of subsurface walls,gravel backfill conforming to WDOT Stan- dard Specifications, section 9-03.12(2) should be should be used to provide adequate drainage. Alternatively, Select . Fill comprising free draining sand and gravel with less that 5 percent fines .(silt and clay size particles). passing the No. 200 sieve may. be used as backfill behind subsurface walls and. for utility trenches. We recommend all backfill be placed in maximum 8-inch-thick. lifts, properly moisture conditioned, and compacted to at least 95 percent compaction (ASTM D-1557-78, Modified Proctor). slopes Construction of the northern wall of the. parking garage will necessitate construction of a temporary slope. We recommend that both cut and fill temporary slopes by inclined at a maximum of 1-1/2:1 (horizontal:vertical). These recommendations are not intended to direct construction means, meth- ods, techniques, sequencesp or procedures. They I are to be used only f or design and not construction guidance. The contractor should be made responsible for construction site safety and I compliance with local, I stat . e, .and federal requirements. All temporary slopes should be protected from the elements by covering with a protective membrane consisting of visqueen sheeting or some other similar impermeable material. All sheeting should overlap by at least 12 inches. Temporary Ex ratiori Retention General However# A variety of shoring systems are feasible for use at this site. based on our experience we recommend a system comprising . cantilever soldier piles. Because of the granular and cohesionless nature of the Outwash overlying the Till, horizontal lagging will be required between piles to prevent ravelling of soil and loss of ground.. Recommendations for design parameters are presented below. :W1C I Applied Geotechnology Inc. Lateral Active Earth Pressures Based on our subsurface exploration, the soils to be retained comprise Fill, Outwash, and Till. We suggest that a triangular lateral active earth pressure be used to simplify the shoring design and construction. The rec- ommended temporary shoring design soil pressures are shown on Figure 3. We recommend an additional uniform lateral pressure of 25 psf, correspond- ing to construction traffic loading, be included in design, as shown on Figure 3. This additional lateral pressure should be included in design of temporary walls adjacent to areas where vertical loading is anticipated. Soldier Pile Embedment Lateral movement of the portion of the shoring piles embedded below the excavation base will be resisted by passive soil pressures. We recommend the minimum embedment length of the piles be 8 feet below the lowest adja- cent excavation level. A horizontal spacing of 8 feet on center or less should be used in design for soldier piles. Our recommendations regarding lateral passive pressure for soldier pile design are presented on Figure 3. Installation Installation of temporary soldier pile and lagging retention systems gener- ally involves several steps. First, a pile hole is drilled at a predeter- mined elevation. A soldier pile, usually a vertical steel 11H11 beam, is then positioned in the hole, which is * then backfilled with lean mix con- crete. Finally as excavation proceeds timber lagging, generally comprising pressure treated timber planking, is installed between soldier piles. The contractor or subcontractor responsible for construction of the tempo- rary shoring system should also be responsible for the system's design. He should be experienced in similar work and qualified to install temporary shoring as outlined in the plans and specifications. The contractor's work should be performed under the full time observation of a geotechnical engi- neer. If all or part of the constructed shoring does not meet the require- ments or tolerances outlined in the plans and specifications, the contrac- tor should, at his own cost, remove and replace any portion of the tempo- rary shoring that the engineer considers defective. Subsurface Walls The below grade portions of the parking garage walls need to be designed as retaining walls. our recommendations for design lateral pressures are pre- sented below. In order to reduce the potential for build up of hydrostatic pressures, we recommend a permanent wall drainage system be included in design. -8- KI I .1 I I C I I I I I I -1 SCHEMATIC ONLY - NOT TO SCALE NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING 300 (Z-d) psf B ---0' 1*---*# Passive 25 ppf Active 48ter-al: traffic load (Where Applicable) Bm diameter of soldier pile d- depth below base Of ex cavation required for construction of footings within 2Z from shoring wall Z- depth from base of excavation to tip of soldier pile, Z-d - 8 foot minimum H- height of shoring above base of excavation Notes: 1. Passive pressures assumed to act over three times soldier pile diameter B or pile spacing. whichever Is.less. Values are In pounds per square foot. 2. Active pressures above excavation base should be assumed to act over pile spacing. Active pressures below excavation base should be assumed to act over the pile diameter (B). 3. Diagrams are Illustrative 'only. No relation to a specific portion of the proposed -excavation Is Intended. Refer to text for additional discussion. 4. The factor of safety for passive pressures I Illustrated Above Is approximately 1.5.. Applied Geotechnology Inc. Lateral . Earth Pressure Distribut.lo.ni FIGURE Geolechnical Engineering P&L Enterprises/ Edmonds S.I. Geology & Hydrogeology 3 Edmonds, -Washington DATE REVISED DATE JOB NUMBER DRAWN APPROVED 15,546.001 DFF 12 Dec. 90 Applied Geotec nology In - Design Lateral Pressu-es (reinforced concrete walls) Wall free to rotate at top: 35 pcf equivalent fluid weight Wall fixed at top: 55 pcf equivalent fluid weight Traffic surcharge: 25 psf applied as uniform lateral pressure Lateral pressures exerted on subsurface walls due to floor or other verti- cal structural loads should be added to the above soil pressures for design. We recommend a lateral earth pressure coefficient of 0.35 be used when considering such loads. I Building Foundati2H_P*P_0_rt We recommend the building be supported on conventional spread footings bearing in the undisturbed Till or Recompacted Outwash. our recommended design parameters are presented below: Minimum Depth of Embedment Perimeter F ootings: Interior Footings: Minimum Lateral Dimension Isolated Column Footings: Continuous Footings: Allowable Soil Bearing Pressure Undisturbed Till or Recompacted Outwash: settlement Total settlement: Differential Settlement: Time Rate: Lateral Loads Minimum 2 feet below adjacent final grade 16 inches below top Of floor slab 2 f Get iS inches 3,000 psf for all dead and live loads less than 3/4 inch less than 1/2 inch over 50 feet approximately 90% during construction Lateral loads transferred to footing elements can be resisted by a combina- tion of passive res . istance against below gradb portions of the structure and frictional resistance between foundation elements and the underlying subgrade. Our recommended design parameters are presented below: Passive Resistance: 300 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) equivalent fluid density coefficient of Friction: .0.4 _10- Applied Geotechnology Inc. Slab -on -Grade Floors The lower parking level floor slab may be soil supported at planned grades. All On -site or Select Fill placed beneath floor slabs should be compacted to 95 Percent Compaction (ASTM D�1557-78). Recommendations for design are presented below: Subarade: Undisturbed Till, recompacted Outwash, compacted On -Site Fill, or Select Fill. Capillary Break: Minimum of 4 inches of free-draihing sand and gravel con- taining less than 5 percent f ines based on fraction passing the 3/4-inch sieve. Vapor Barrier: In areas where moisture would be detrimental to equipment, floor coverings, or furnishings inside the proposed building, a vapor barrier should be placed beneath the concrete floor slab. Reinforced plas- tic sheeting is satisfactory for this purpose. Protection Measures: A layer of sand, approximately 2 inches thick, may be placed over the ' membrane to protect it f rom damage, to act as an aid in curing of the concrete slab, and also to help prevent cement paste bleeding down into the underlying capillary break. Site Drainaae Footina Excavation Drain: In the event that groundwater seeps into footing excavations, it should be possible -to remove it by gently sloping the base of excavation to one or more shallow sump pits and pumping the water from there to a positive permanent discharge system. Subsurface Wall Drains: These drains should be incorporated into design to mitigate seepage and build up of hydrostatic forces. A geotextile fabric drain is typically used for walls constructed in conjunction with temporary retention systems. For subsurface walls constructed using cut slope meth- ods, such as the north parking garage wall, a typical drainage detail is presented on Figure 4, Typical Wall Drain. Wall drains should be indepen- dent from any other drains and drainage should be directed to a positive permanent discharge system. LIMITATIONS AND ADDITIONAL SERVICES This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of P&L Enterprises, and their other consultants for this project only. The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations in this report are based on conditions encountered at the time of our field investigation, design information you provided, and our experience and engineering judgement'. AGI cannot be responsible for the interpretation of the data contained herein by others. SCHEMATIC ONLY'— NOT TO SCALE NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING Slope to drain minimum ...... ....... ............... ............... .................... ................... ......... .... ................... ................... .:::::e .................. ................... .................. .................... 4 Inch minimum diameter ..................... ......................... ........... lffils . . . .............. . 2 Inch minimum 4 inch maximum LEGEND Surf ace seal. native soil or other low permeabi lity material Gravel Backfill for walls; 03.12(2) WDOT Standard Specifications, Section 97 0 Drain Pipe; Perforated.or slotted rigid PVC. concrete. corrugated metal or aluminum pipe (with perforations or slots facing downward): tight jointed; with a positive gradient. Do not use flexible co I rrugated plastic pipe. Do not tie building downspout drains Into wall drain. FIGURE �6Applied Geotechnology Inc. TYPICAL WALL wtwri ur- iiKiL. Geotechnical Engineering P & L Enterprises/ Edmonds S.I. Geology & Hydrogeology 4 Edmonds, Washington JOB NUMBER DRAWN APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE 15,546.001 MCT 27 Dec. 90 -12- 9 Applied Geotechnology Inc. Our services have been performed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the area. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. We must presume the conditions encountered are representative of the entire property. However, you should be aware that subsurface conditions may vary between exploration locations and with time, and unanticipated conditions can and often do occur. If differing conditions are exposed during con- struction, or the design is modified, we should be requested to reevaluate our recommendations and to provide a written confirmation or modification, as necessary. We cannot be responsible for the applicability of our recom- mendation . s if not afforded this opportunity. To allow for these eventuali- ties, a contingency should be provided in both your construction budget and schedule. We recommend -you retain us to review final project plans and specifications to verify that the intent of our recommendations has been properly inter- preted and included. In addition, to provide a measure of continuity, we also recommend we be retained to provide construction monitoring services during the geotechnical phases of project construction. This will allow us to verify subsurface conditions are as anticipated, and to observe and test the Contractor's work as your representative. -13- N 0 APPENDIX A Site Exploration Applied Geotechnology Inc. We explored subsurface conditions beneath the site on November 12, 19901by drilling 2 borings in the range of 18 to 23 feet below existing grade. Borings were advanced using a truck -mounted, Mobile B-61 hollow -stem auger drill. Possible exploration locations were limited by existing overhead utility lines, and site topography. Boring locations, as shown on the Site Plan, were established in the field by taping from the northeast property corner. Borin . g elevations were interpolated to the ' nearest f oot based on an untitled undated topographic survey of the site provided by Ronald D. Johnson, architect for PtL Enterprises. Elevation datum is unknown. We used a split barrel sampler with a larger diameter than the standard SPT split spoon in our borings for this project, to obtain better quality soil samples for laboratory testing purposes.. The sampler was driven 18 inches in 3 consecutive 6 inch intervals with a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive over the last 12 inches is reported on the boring logs. For engineering analyses, it is necessary to correct the number of blows per foot obtained with the modified sampler to obtain an equivalent 'IN -value.." The number of blows per foot actually recorded with the modified assembly, however, are the values shown at the appropriate sample depth on the. boring logs. Representative soil samples were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System which is presented, with a key to the Boring Logs, on the Soil Classifica- tion/Legend, Plate Al. All samples were sealed to limit moisture loss, labeled, and returned to our laboratory for further examination and testing. The boring logs, modi- fied to reflect the results of laboratory examination and testing, are pre- sented on Plates A2 and A3. The stratification lines, shown on the individual logs, represent the approximate boundaries between soil types; actual transitions may be either more gradual or more severe. The condi- tions depicted are for the date and locations indicated only, and.it should not necessarily be expected that they are representative of conditions at other locations and times. -15- 0 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS TYPICAL NAMES I 1-5�wpj WELL GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND MLXTURES COARSE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN HALF IS LARGER THAN . NO. 200 SIEVE FINE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN HALF IS SMALLER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE GRAVELS MORE THAN HALF OCARSEFRACTION is LARGER THAN NO. 4 SIEVE SIZE SANDS MORE THAN HALF COARSEFRACTION IS SMALLER THAN NO. 4 SiEVE SIZE CLEAN GRAVELS WTtH LESS THAN 5% FINES GRAVELS WITH OVER 12% FINES GW GP GM GC SW CLEM SANDS WITH LESS THAN 50% FINES SANDSWITH OVER 12% FINES SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50 SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID umrr GREATER THAN 50 SP POORLY GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND M0=RES SILTY GRAVELS. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL -SAND -SILT MIXTLIRES CLAYEY GRAVELS, POORLY GRADED GRAVEL -SAND - CLAY M1XrURES WELL GRADED SANDS. GRAVELLY SANDS POORLY GRADED SANDS. GRAVELLY SANDS ' 'L Fa� SILTY SANDS. POORLY GRADED SANDISILT MD(TURIES SM !M CLAYEY SANDS. POORLY GRADED SANDX-UY Sc MIXTLIRES [NoRaANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS. ROCK ML FLOUR. SILTY oR CLAYEY FINE SAND% OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY INORGANIC CLAYS OF Low TO MEDIUM PLASITICITY, CL GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS' LEAN CLAYS ORGANIC CLAYS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOIA LA Y L OL Y PLASTICITY L S INORGANIC SILTS. MICACEOLIS OR DIATOMACIOUS IC S IL MH FINE SANDY OR SILTY SOIL% ELASTIC SILTS I DY 0 WORWANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY- FAT CLAYS CHI ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY. 2 0 1 Lr = C OH ORGANIC SILTS EAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS P p T DT� HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS I PT SAMPLE "Undisturbed" Bulk/Grab [DNot Recovered 11M Recovered, Not Retained LEGEND CONTACT BETWEEN UNITS Well Defined Change Gradational Change Obscure Change End of Exploration BLOWS/FOOT Hammer is 140 pounds with 304nch drop, unless otherwise noted S - SPT Sampler (2.0-Inch O.D.) T - Thin Wall Sampler (2.8-Inch Sample) H - Split Barrel Sampler (2.4-Inch Sample) MOISTURE DESCRIPTION ction Dry Considerably less than optimum for compa Moist Near optimum moisture content wet Over optimum moisture content Saturated Below water table, in capillary zone, or in perched groundwater LABORATORY TESTS Consol - Consolidation LL - Liquid Limit PL - Plastic Limit Gs - Specific Gravity SA - Size Analysis TxS - Triaxial Shear TxP - Triaxial Permeability Perm - Permeability P0 - Porosity MD Moisture/Density DS Direct Shear VS Vane Shear Comp Compaction UU Unconsolidated, Undrained CU Consolidated, Undrained CD Consolidated, Drained F-5 anp-nd PLATE Applied Geotechnology Inc. W%094 Geotechnical Engineering P&L Enterprises/Edmonds Sl Al Geology & Hydrogeology Edmonds, Washington JOB NUMBER DRAWN APPP40VED DATE REVISED DATE 15,546.001 SES 0'� 13 Dec 90 0 0. os -6 CL E M0 0 MD,IVIA 18.9. 102 24 5 MD 8.1 117 43 M 10.1 78 10 50/5' 15 50/50 20 50/5- 25 30 35 40 Equipment Mobile B-61 Land Surface 42 feet* Date 11/12/90 Elevation DARK BROWN SILTY SAND (SM) loose, moist; fine grained, trace gravel (Fill). BROWN SAND (SP-SM) medium dense, moist; fine grained, with silt (Outwash). GRAY SAND (SP) medium dense,moist; fine grained, with a trace of silt (Outwash). GRAY SILTY SAND (SM) dense, wet; fine to medium grained, with some gravel, and occa- sional cobbles (Till). Becomes very dense and moist. No recovery. Perched water encountered at 9 foot depth. *Dat.um: Undated, untitled topographic survey provided by Ronald Johnson, Architect, 11/25/90 Applied Geotechnology Inc. Log of Boring 1 KATE Geotechnical Engineering P&L Enterprises/Edmonds Sl Geology & Hydrogeology Edmonds, Washington A2 JOB NUMBER DRAWN APPROVED DATE REMSED DATE 15,546.001 SES 1413--1 26 November go -1'7- Equipment Mobile B-61 0 2 CL CL E Land Surface 38 feet Date 11/12/90 A Elevation 0 GRAY BROWN SILTY SAND (SIVI) very dense, moist; fine to medium grained, with some gravel, and occasional cobbles (rill). IVID 1.7 129 50/6' 5 50/5- 10 IVID 10.6 123 50/6- 15 50/5' 20 25 30 35 40 A 'Tied Geotechnology Inc. W �'� G,,technical Engineering Geology & Hydrogeology No recovery. No groundwater encountered. Log of Boring 2 P&L Enterprises/Edmonds SI Edmonds, Washington MA I r- JOB NUMBER DRAWN DATE REMSED DATE 15,546.001 SES 26 November 90 0 General APPENDIX B Laboratory Testing Applied Geotechnology Inc. We conducted laboratory tests on several representative soil samples 'to better assess the soil classification of soil units encountered and to evaluate the material's general physical properties and engineering charac- teristics. A brief description of the tests performed for this study is provided below. The results of laboratory tests performed on specific sam- ples are provided at the appropriate sample depth on the individual boring log or in -this appendix. However, it is important to note that these test results may not accurately represent in -situ soil conditions. All of our recommendations are based on our interpretation of these test results and their use in guiding our engineering judgement. AGI cannot be responsible for the interpretation of these data by others. In general accordance with our General Conditions, the soil samples for this project will be discarded after a period of 30 days following comple- tion of this report unless we are otherwise directed in writing.. Soil Classification As mentioned earlier, all soil samples are visually examined in the field by our representative at the time they are obtained. They are subsequently packaged and returned to our laboratory where they are reexamined and the original description is checked and verified or modified. With the help'of information obtained from the other classification tests, described below, the samples are described in general accordance with the Unified Classifi- cation System, ASTM Test Method D-2487-83. The resulting descriptions are provided at the appropriate sample location on the individual boring log and are qualitative only. The attached Soil Classification/ Legend, Plate Al, provides pictorial symbols that match the written descriptions. Particle Size Analysis A detailed grain size analysis was conducted on a sample of the Outwash material to evaluate its suitability for use as On -site Fill. The informa- tion gained from this analysis allows us to sification of the in -place materials. The BI and classification symbols are provided a vidual sample description on Boring Log A2. provide a description and 61as- results are presented on Plate s part of the appropriate indi- OVIC Applied Geatechnology Inc. Moisture—Densit Moisture content and dry density tests were performed on several samples obtained I from the borings. The purpose of these tests is to approximately ascertain the in -place moisture content and the associated dry unit weight (dry*density) of the soil sample tested. The moisture content is estimated in general accordance with.th 1 6 ASTM Test Method D-2216-80 and the dry unit weight is computed on the basis of this result and the volume of the sample container. The information obtained assists- us by providing qualitative information regarding soil strength and compressibility. The results of these tests are presented at the appropriate sample, depth on the boring logs. -20- -1, eve -S[z h M ... ... . . iiay.0 Ll ber 5 .. . .. - ""' a 01 !8 `4, 00 ?00,.. 0.0 1 1 0.5 0.1 0. 0.01 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS CO*ARS*E FINE C'� ..... . M'EDIUM. FINE SAND 5iLT or CLAY'. Lmple Source Classification S . and (sp-sm) fine grained, with silt I PLATE Applied GeotechnologY Inc. Panicle Size Analysis Geotechnical Engineering P&L Enterprises /Edmonds S.I. B 1 Geology & Hydrogeology Edmonds, Washington JOB NUMBER ORAWN APPROVED DATE. REVISED DATE 15,546.001 DIFF 12 Doc 90 Applied Geotechnology Inc. DISTRIBUTION 3 Copies P&L Enterprises Post office Box 38 Mountlake Terrace, Washington 98043 Attention: Mr. Lee Stycket Quality Assurance/Technical.Review by:. #J s B. Harakas. P.E. Pnsipal WD/JBH/tag RF-CSIVED APR 2 6 1996 COMMUNITY bthyilur-o THE TYNES BUILDING STORM DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS for TRENCH DRAIN FLOW CALCULATIONS Prepared By John W. Mellor, P.E. Apo, I I ze.1 /-9f (. R F r%* F I v ao A PR 2 6 1996 "ft/NEERNG C) �' THE TYNES BUILDING STORM DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS - TRENCH DRAIN Due to an under ground obstruction (telephone cable)it became necessary to replace the catch basin - pipe system with an above ground system. A trench drain was chosen as the most appropriate alternative. The dimensions of the channel used as a drain for runoff are bottom width 0.35', a height of 0.40', and sideslopes of 1:6. Calculations The area of the Main Street which drains to the subject trench drain system has dimensions of 30'wide by an average of 90' long for an area of 2,700 sq ft or 0.062 acres. A flow quantity is obtained with the equation Q = CIA where 0 = flow in cfs C = runoff ceff icient for asphalt = 0.90 1100 = 2.9 inch/hr(using concentration time of 10 min.) A = 0.062 ac 0 = 0. 1618 cfs This runoff will be directed to an open channel with a bottom width of 0.35', sides with 1:6 grade, an n value of 0.018(for straight smooth earth channels, a conservative value for asphalt surfaces), and a slope of 0.0717. Using an HP 41 CX calculator with Manning's equation the following results were obtained: depth of flow = 0. 114' velocity of flow = 3.84 fps As can be seen the capacity of the channel is more than adequate. If the channel becomes blocked the blockage is easily found and removed. This channel also empties directly into the 24" high capacity gutter at its west end. I found this gutter/channel type runoff conduit to be satisfactory for the use intended. 0 i 24" * I 11/16" 1/2 " :�/4 '3/4 .'7 i'�N APPROX. WEIGHT OLYMPIC FOUNDRY (1984) INC. GRATE - 29 LBS. SEATTLE, WASH. 8" x 24" x 1" TRENCH GRATE RATING - H-20 I PART NO. T824C-1 3/4 1/2 1/2 L k co Li J Li Li Li Li Li U Li Li Li -36" APPROX. WEIGHT 77 LBS. 11/2 " OLYMPIC FOUNDRY (1984) INC. SEATTLE, WASH. I 83/4" x 36" x 11/2" TRENCH GRATE RATING - H-20 I PART NO. T836E 9 0 CITY OF EDMONDS Address of Construction: 'f 77 go -yw V,5 SIDE'SEWER PERMIT PERMIT N2 '8 7 4 2 z/ 7 Z/V -e�qlz' - Property Legal Description (Include all'easements): -7 -.) i co " Owner and/or Contractor: "'�x State License No.'44�� 64,_'9 No. E3 Single Family -Family (No. of Uni,� P"Multi X-Commercial Public 7 Invasion into City Right -of -Way: 0 No 6-Y--es RW Construction Permit No. .—Cross othelt"*pPerty: 6-<o E] Yes Oach lejal,�gription and copy of recorded easement 3N% I Vil DEPI I certify that I have �ead and srall comply with all city requirements as indicated on the back of the Permit Card. 1_1(!59 _;�� Date * CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-424-5555) BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION * 0010E:� USE 0 FOR INSPECTION CALL 771-301M, PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. 11 - .40 Permit Fee: Issued By Trunk Charge: ZOO Date Issued: 1-10-9& Assessment Fee: Receipt No.: C�?n78Z Lid No.: Partial Inspection: Comments Date —Initial Reason Rejected: 4 Date —Initial Final Inspection Approved: Date W�Al4 Initialq_ 1;1 PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE White Copy:,File Green Copy: inspector Buff Copy: Applicant Revised 3!90 -4 The City of Edmonds Side Sewer Drawing #0 I EASEMENT NO. -- . ..................................... NEW CONSTRUCTION P/ REPAIRS El LID NO . .................. . ASMT. NO - ------------------ OWNER................................................. JOB ADDRESS ... (Ij ........ ��l a—�- �j k .................................. ....................... --��Y/,— (7- PWW-0001 -11/75 (REV. 11/78) CONTRACTOR.................................................................................... PERMIT NO. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO . ...................................... BLOCK NO . .................................... .................................................................................................................................................................. NAME OF ADDITION : do I C L zt-V () A-vE. \� . Approved: 'ZI DATE / .............. ............. B .... ...... ......................................... The City of Edmonds Water Service Drawing EASEMENTNO . ............................................ NEW CONSTRUCTION REPAIRS LID NO . .................. ASMT. NO . .................. OWNER................................................................................................ CONTRACTOR .................................................................................... PERMIT NO . ..... .............. JOB ADDRESS ....... I .... I .... I ............. M ..... Alqi-�4 . ..... $T� ............................ LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO . ...................................... BLOCK NO . ................. .............. z PWW-0001 -11175 (REV. 11/78) �AME OF ADDITION ..: SOTM 4�'D-l- FiRXE-LINE 11/2."cappek *W'coppem 4*D.L CZ Me W ALW, Approved: .. ................ DATE ..... By ............... OV3HV M (optional) 1/3 L 4 A _+ SHOILDER Odom CLOSED AHEAD _j _j _j A NOTE: 1. FLASHING BEACON SHALL BE INSTALLED R AD AT EACH SIGN FOR NIGHT-TIME USE. M. —L 0 WORK 2. DISTANCES MAY VARY AS APPROVED AHEAD BY THE ENGINEER. < > 3. FLAGGERS REQUIRED TD CONTROL TRAFFIC WHENEVER THE CONTRACTOR MUST INTERRUPT TRAFFIC FLOW TO ACCESS THE WORK SITE WITH MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT. CHANNELIZING DEVICE SPACING (FT) MPH TAPER TANGENT CHANNELIZING DEVICE SPACING (FT) 50/65 40 80 35/45 30 60 MPH TAPER TANGENT 1 25/30 20 40 50/65 �_o 80 35/45 30 60 25/30 20 40 TABLE L TABLE A MIMNIMUM TAPER LENGTH (L) IN FEET SIGN SPACING X LANE Posted Speed (mph) FREEWAYS & 1500' WIDTH 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 65 35/55 MPH (OR AS PER EXPRESSWAYS MUTCO) (feet) RURAL ROADS 45/55 MPH 500'± 10 105 150 205 URBAN ARTERIALS 35/40 MPH 350' ± 11 115 165 225 N/A URBAN STREETS — RESIDENTIAL & 25/30 MPH 200' ± L_L2 _L25 180 245 BUSINESS DISTRICTS VA 0 on i FAIJ 15 TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN I LANE CLOSURE ON MINOR STREET GTE NW, INC. 2312C W. CASINO RD, EVERETT, WA. 98204-1400 Af FAM It7c. iS9 Q RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT Permit Number. 97_.Qj�o LssueDate: lrv�)'Alorl A. Address or Vicinity of Construction: ALLFY 99)9)A.)b Ill AAAIAJ:5r B. Type of Work (be specific): US TALL U&bFA& .111 66AIDMIT --ro SE&VE 101 MAJAL ST, C. Contractor: Contact: JqVbEg,�Q A) Mailing Address: ;T Phone: 77TT77 156 L4 StateLicense#: _SUPLC�-&i 161 L2,4 Liability Insurance: Bond: $ D. Building Permit # (if applicable): Side Sewer Permit # (if applicable): E. E] Commercial E] Subdivision. E] City Project 3"'Utility (PUD, GTE, WNG,JeA_BLU,4ATER) rJ Multi -Family E] Single Family E] Other INSPECTOR: INSPECTOR: F. Pavement or Concrete Cut fqdves [:]No G. Size of Cut: x APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application to hold the Cit ' Y of Edmonds harmlessfrom injuries, damages, or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, foreseen or unforeseen, that may be made against the City of Edmonds, or any of its departments or employees, including or not limited to the defense of any legal proceedings including defense costs and attorneyftes by reason of granting this permit. THE CONTRA CTOR IS RESPOAISIBL E FOR WORKMA NSHIP A ND MA TERIA LS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEA R FOLLO WING THE FINA L INSPEC- TION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK. ESTIMATED RESTORATION FEES WILL BE HELD UNTIL THE FINAL STREET PATCH IS COMPLETED BY CITY FORCES, AT WHICH TIME A DEBIT OR CREDIT WILL BE PROCESSED FOR ISSUANCE TO THE APPLICANT Two sets of construction drawings of proposed work required with permit applicatiom A 24 hour notice is required for inspection. Please call the Engineering Division, 771-0220. Work aiid material is to be inspected during progress and at completion. Restoration is to be in accordance with City Codes. Street shall be kept clean at all times. Traffic Control and Public Safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City Engineer. All street cut trench work shall be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to the end of the working day; NO EXCEPTIONS. I have read the above statements and understand the permit requirements and the pink copy of the permit will be available on sit tall timesfi r ' spection purposes. Signature. Date: I'OA�kz ; yw_4 ( g - woniract67-76K,4�ent) CALL DIAL -A -DIG PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK FOR CITY USE ONLY ISSUED B)': E ,olc2p l0q MA)u -ST .;- JqEFL-A,6�,IEA)7 LLJ 1 LIJ Q NEW \)VINDNAI-S V V"-4"L-"7- P6WEC VALIL7 Z�l FIVL \"Oj N'cl-� WiUDDIA/ NO Ld z —i NEW Y\.//NP-t)VV >11 Uj �31V-49L'VAULT /17c. 1S9Q City of Edtnon& RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT P . ermit Number. q7- Lssue Date: A. Address or Vicinity of Construction: 4 ALLEY &WIAIb /// Ih'fqJAJ -Sr B. Type of Work (be specific): hr—PAlk b—=AMMM5 aleAYF Zal.Dek "4447� C. Contractor: L41h4MgE)?SJ5JJPL1V_0JP Contact: 'TOM Y%L)EZWA) Mailing Address: S.33 AAIAI _=r- Phone: 1'%V_S/41& State License#: —SUPr—f-e- e- /0/6).4 Liability Insurance: Bond: $ D. Building Permit # (if applicable): E. 0 Commercial EJ Multi -Family 4 1 INSPECTOR: E] Subdivision Single Family F. Pavement or Concrete Cut : - LM Yes Side Sewer Permit # (if applicable): El City Project E] Utility (PUD, GTE, WN Other INSPECTOR: lZr*4 J_' A, ..4 r—_ []No G. Size of Cut: x H. Chargq�,$ APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN A -MR) INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application to hold the City of Edmonds harmlessfrqm injuries, damages, or claims ofany kind or description whatsoever, foreseen or unforeseen, that may be made against the City of Edmonds, or any of its departments or-,,--,. employees, including or not limited to the defense of any legal proceedings including defense costs and attorneyfees by reason of granting this permit. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FORA PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPEC- TION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK. ES TIMA TED RESTORA TION FEES WIL L BE HEL D UNTIL THE FINA L STREET PA TCH IS COMPLETED BY CITY FORCES; A T WHICH TIME A DEBIT OR CREDIT WII L BE PROCESSED FOR ISSUA NCE TO THE A PPLICANT Two sets of construction drawings of proposed work required with permit application. A 24 hour notice is required for inspection. Please call the Engineering Division, 771-0220. Work and material is to be inspected during progress and at completion. Restoration is to be in, accordance with City Codes. Street shall be kept clean at all times. Traffic Control and Public Safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as requiied by the City Engineer. All street cuttrench work shall be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to the end of the working day; NO EXCEPTIONS. I have read the above statements and understand the permit requirements and the pink copy of the permit will be, fi . t. available on site_oi--all times or^pec ion purposes. I Signature.- A4 I Date: (Contractor or Agent) CALL DIAL -A -DIG PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK FOR CITY USE ONL�' APPROVED BN'. + RIGHT OF WAY FEE:, I C-1 TIM,E AUTHORIZED: VOID AFTER �YS DISRUPTION FEF/FU`ND I 11: x46&11_A_ 300 SPECIAL CONDITIONS: RESTORATION FEE: eAvf— r) T OTALTEE: .100 ALLaY le115' RECEIPT NO.: I AX ISSUED.B.y: 9 1� / / I AAAI M _(_ 'I L- A 7 zlyLi' wmwvv -m LOLA79 -4- -TV --FO -SUMSE7 -Fb ZND AVE MAIM 'E-r rw ren X"A R ZOEIVF-D AIJ3 0 1 1996 p,ERMIT.COUNTER IVA IAJ STREET FILIj &k:mo-% jj%eA*,:F-5- [Vglmgk M�5 PARKINCAPLAN 11%okilie-ro-, 11 of " r7 I RECEIVED JUL 1 1 1996 PERMIT COUNTER "5uls # 106 b1c, %f goo F'� Cray F, f, F to 5,UIT 4102 ww or a Orr Fa Noff; 1. X4 � OHM A-'; ff R If MANI, ATWNW WW�4 DWCJ�r, 2, Al WK 9ML Pe PER " 199A VM 9111176 M. —a TG—O o w, I F— fitCH /11 r_, 0 &fcH M�5 PULPIN6 - offlc� F00plf, 1, , 5 MAN 5TMf F�AZA I I I MAN 5TM,r MONP5, WA5H, 51ITF %lt # 102 2(X)7 -,r ffWK Lm'y 0 0 f- /I P6 PROJECT ..I � .................. PROJ. # . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CONTRACTOR .......................................... DATEA5—.(�P.�.?-� ................ WORKERS ON SITE ......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE ....................................................................... ......... �f .............................................................................. WEATHER lgf-.f� ..................... TEMPERATURE ............ o ................. o DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ................................... o ... o ..................... ................ Vt Cb �61v - ot"- C, yot cnnai� i- wat oe)- wau .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . o o . . . . . . . . . . . o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A4&.. . o 4c� — 'r 'ry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "(wl4w 4 16 f— ......................... .... o o. .��PAO L,54- ............. t'.44- V90 AA VWj g— y .............. o .... o ..... I ................ . . ..................... ..... . COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW—UP TESTING ....................................................................... ....................... CITY REPRESENTATIVE .............. DATE/TIME. ....... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS 0 0 PROJECT .................... PROJ. # j4 CONTRACTOR .......................... DATE .................. WORKERSON SITE ......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE ....................................................................... ................ . WEATHER DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ............................................................. 4� Uw'�/- U4,Ar r7Y— PO -4 ........................ ........ ............................. to oy!L?�-. p.ee- aV.e ea& ......... ............ ... ........... a.4 I--. o o k7 f-LW W.dVlt dot .................... o o .. ........... ... o....................... -Lis tip "tc ��4. o ... o... o new P.uvw uro .............. ..................... o ................. &b 4nMA ... 4. Aq . Ajt�� WWA. A. of 0 ... ......... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS)piee �o�o o ..... 1. ..4 .... o. o. .......... o.. AS frn& -f� Lv6* W2 f5-L t. w., g— A ....... .......... ............. o ................ ............. V�4 .4. - r .. v '_tg'uj ky6wlj o. . . .................................... o .............. _K J. . k�K'% . o 4. .6�U6 ... roeL e. Tf. .... It. �o ....... o ................................. o . . o o o o .................... o.. FOLLOW—UP TESTING ....................................................................... .................................................................................. o ... o. CITY REPRESENTATIVE .... 4�� .. ............. DATE/TIME. ........ PROJLOG/TXTFORMS 1_1� PROJECT ft;tol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PROJ. # W ................................ CONTRACTOR .......................................... D A T E � 4 19 W. qA.7. . e.�� .......... WORKERSON SITE ......................................................................... EQUIPMENTON SITE ....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ............................................................. c� e� 4f. J�� 4r�� ... .. ....... kA V41 we -� de)- *****""*Y*l - - ................... ........ tftu. b.t. - . T. t"A. 54. �A LV8M(lq IfaJ& (A. Mk ........ .. ............. .............. C..t'.5 3.� .9m _. q.v., "e-. ................ .......... ... .. .............. .. .... 4�. .............. ........... cy "kn% c A�. M4A 4A ............... ..... ............................. .............................................. 6) ............. .. ... PeA li� lid - COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ... ........ A4. f ��U_plelt4"a. .. . ....... u CX-w . . . .... �&v . +.. . �?% A. u7na txy" eA :rf zwu d'o a.. b'ct..a.,A mu %q .......................... ............. .......... ... ...... . . ...... ... aqcg!5. . ... ...... .... FOLLOW-UP TEST I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o al . . P4- ......... CITY REPRESENTATIVE ............ DATE/TIME.��. PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT PROJ. # ........................ CONTRACTOR K)900 ........................ DATE ......... WORKERS ON SITE ......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE ....................................................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . WEATHER TEMPERATURE ... o..00 ........ oo .... 000.o ....... 000 DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ............................................................. ^6.0 .......................................... o .................................... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ ll� !�* ... ... a. t.. - t-1 - _S k;L . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w .......... ................. (.".q ........... ��V.3 o MW XA k6t- MAAVt ................ . .................................................. FOLLOW—UP TESTING ....................................................................... ........................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE ... ............ DAT E / T I M E ........ PROJLOG/TXTFORMS 9 0 PROJECT PfPjE�l.P:9?cl ................... PROJ. # C19 r4 ............................... ................. CONTRACTOR .............................. DATE ...... WORKERSON SITE ......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE ....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ............................................................. 4A ............................. .. .......... tlll��weh'AA 6M Ma �M �4� o .............. n)v6,m ............. .. .......... ... OPt. 4.pt4,i4.. -41" ......... ............................ t��: ............... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING ....................................................................... ........................................................................................ �p CITY REPRESENTATIVE ................. DATE/TIMEAJ!�W._. T� ........... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS C. M __7 City. of.E(IM.9,14'Al. RIGHT-OF-WAY' CONSTRUCTION A PERMIT Permit Numbe r- Issue.Date: A. Address or Vicinity of Construction: 9 0 JLYF-- 0 k— spec ci 77c>-� t: Contractor: 7' Mailing Address:,-?/F S' 'zT 410�. Phone: Za6 StateLicense#_ Liability Insurance: Bond: $ Building Permit # (if applicable): Side Sewer Permit # (if applicable): E. E3 Subdivision El City Project E] Utility (PUD, GTE, WNG, CABLE, WATER) �Commercial Multi -Family EJ Single Family E) Other 1KJQ1DE:r-MV TM4zPr:r-rnT? F. Pavement or Concrete Cut: )4Yes ONo G. Size of Cut:- --!5;- x 2 F ___ - . �r - 1< APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN H. ChargEL,$ -323 �-13(.=q-57 INDEMNITY. 'Applicant understands and by his,signatu�etc�.this�ppplication, agrees to hold the City ofEdmonds harmless from injuries, damages, or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, f6reseen or,u'nfores'een,-ihat may be made against the City of Edmonds, or any Of its departments or employees, including or not limited to the defense ofany legalproceeding8 including defense Costs, and attorney fees by reason ofgranting thispermit. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP -AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK ESTIMATED RESTORATION FEES WILL BE HELD UNTIL THE FINAL STREET PATCH IS COMPLETED BY CITY FORCES, AT WHICH TIME A DEBIT OR CREDIT WILL BE PROCESSED FOR ISSUANCE TO THEAPPLICANT. Construction drawing of proposed work required with permit application. A 24 hour notice is required for inspection; Please call the Engineering Division, 771-0220. Work and material is to be inspected during progress and at completion. Restoration is to be in accordance with City Codes. Street shall be kept clean at all times. '1�-affic Control and Public Safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City Engineer. Allstreet cut ditches shall be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to the end of the working day; NO EXCEPTIONS. Ihave read the above stateme5J_tond underst9nd thepermit requirements and thepink copy of thepermit will be available on site at 'f�or �in;sp;,Io urposes. Signature- ___1 Date:Z �-7-5'� (Con6r-a'ctor o7�'�ent) CALL DIAL -A -DIG PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK FOR CITY U APPROVED BY: TIME AUTHORIZED: VOID AFTER, DAYS SPECIAL CONDITIONS: COMMENTS: DATE: SE ONLY RIG HT OF WAY DEPOS DISRUPTION FEE/FUNDAII. ,RXSTORATION FEE--J�4_5'1' PERMIT FEE - TOTAL FE;��T REcEilpt,;FEE: ISSUED, BY:_ NO WORK SHALL BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANC.E.*.� I Eng. Div. 1994