Loading...
1112 DALEY PL.PDF11111111111111 10706 1112 DALEY PL TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: b7 ldobOtt bo BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STR6CTURE):"4� V✓I �1�`/F COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR:�%Q��Z� ( L CRITICAL AREAS:i DETERMINATION: ❑ Conditional Waiver ❑ Study Required ❑ Waiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S: GU' (Ol ' QO DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: "'74 1,91 V PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED: EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR: PERMITS (OTHER): PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED: l0 I ?%� q V SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED: 6)4440 SEWER LID FEE $: LID SHORT PLAT FILE:A "ills LOT: BLOCK: SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: ql o f q SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #: U 24 GEOTECH REPORT DATED: (o -% / ! D STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: i Z.oIq OTHER: L:\TEMP\DSTs\Forms\Street File Checklist.doc -15- District Pd. 3oE,� City of = Edmo"rids = WatevtD artniient IAP -CARD Read_ ing: Date 0 3/2-0/mil A No. No: Meter 3 Tap Size. Size Mfgrs. No. 3 Op 7 Style Purchaser: Serv. Add. Remarks 0o--D�� r;hv3 op— -smoP s=zs— ► .cam":" OUTGOING., Index Reg. Route Bk. - Stencil -Card - INCOMING, Index 'Reg. ' Route ' 'U.-Stencil Card r n ROUTING `SLIP NEW SERVICE INSTALLATION ADDRESS: It 121 �G:QQ-tit P 10.,CAJ DATE: o3/1 ci DIAL A DIG # P.U.D. TELEPHONE CABLE T.V. FOREMAN FGAS STO M SEWER, STREET FILE OTHER FUTURE SERVICE INSTL: CD NO BORE: CUT: LOCK CREW DATE: INITIAL: UNLOCK DATE:3-22-%/ INITIAL METER SHOP ACCOUNT -NUMBER: SUPPLIER: SRA- OwtTT TREATMENT PLANT FOREMAN B L T FOREMAN INITIAL: DATE: TAP CARD METER SHEET APPLICATION / UTILITY DISPATCH BILLING of -LEGAL DESCRIPTION COTS / AA/0 -7H4RBOR N/LL5, ACLOROIk TO THE RAT TNE.PEOF RECORDED IN ✓OL UMf 49 ' eF RATS AaGfS Af3 7NR000N 27 /NCC USI✓E ,�'ECOROS OF SA1740M/SW COUNTY, wASNiUGTOAl. BENCHMARK ,all Al .lO,vu.✓E.vl YN "$,F lOLOTED AT LFN/E.� !lam !u!-4E• S.00, LlglfY Pt.00f ElFv pti 41 D470Al: CITY OF fOMONDS LEGEND O FYifT (gffD GLLVC. MONUMENT O f7/f7 /,eqN P/N tv�/IAST/l LA'P NO O. 909( CUT Jr FILL G4LCULOTJON 7074L CUT • 860 CU YDS. TOTAL FILL, 4q2 CU. YDS. LtJ Q 4 JS MN. , To/ T_ /LJ N• o rPYe'�� 3 � •Y 234 236 234 232 t y - �t �Nit ; j�' •...''. ,'!' • \' •' %..';'•:; y uDe t �V/StC7ATlON Rpm'uec PiNp Y (ppLi'Mf TO BE RAC6(pTyp EENE lIN1 LNEpOTfE`qAAE4 I PER C,4y OE ` `' • 000 Va )L REFygT JO&,L, N• 4 a b l / ryi N •ttl�, 9w•At I II{I Ijl tl III \}t Zp I t 2 t�1� illl\ III � III � i�W�.� � �� VNAiEFF. EFOd� NOTES: 1f PC aS T,C CW I A? BE PLACED OVER ALL iC JS �R CAS CODE GEOTECUNKAC R`PORT L) es ORE to B_-LACEDe E6 PAVED EUR•ACES A5 ••/EC""ec, u+CA5C40E .�\4 GEOTECUNICAL REPORT. roc I( �` %'��' �� CEONS7RlKTIONxC-N�'RAyCE I I 6ORodE I MAX. f.FI L• II TOP f0J. 09 _TN_ _ V HI I 1 12 1Ne fat 04 ^,/, I C� ►yS({(r 1p to, ! IC V1rIVrkff4V 1 / A6EE i cObaaGdNae/N , \ Qt 4NlVllt111' Z { I IZ E, •y�T. j t�,t�i/b a,'. i G'PV[�IGUTL/NE 11p l { I �/ ,{ y i./�•" j F'-R P " G ORA/N '1w �a • \ Y040ORAI fq9. s•F j 0� °� yo ' ,rt/ CONNECT TO FX /I NOTET I 1 s /n•r I.e /fr OL�J J •15 ,HT6/ `h' ;si��t�' ROOF ORA/N 67UB PRIOA FRENCuTO DRAINS 70 Be CO UC•iFp \` T• \:.ytf1 O� j / RryY P{,4CENEN, 'OF LON O' \ THE LOWER RECOMMENDED IT N OP Ri 6,T ..AAS 1 h'\ t�•JS fwr II REC ASCADEED.O SOILS gqEPO,a RROV D \ &V CASCADE 6EOTECUN/CAL ✓OB•bg, N 0 N }W� W W PRO OSLED FIN RADE — EX. GR UNO • PROPOS D MOUSE 64RAGE F 232.Ct7 0 40 90 DRIVEWAY PROFILE ,wy TOP It7.7� 1 -1 /Nr. T/7 f7 (d ivtJ TOP f//. 07 IV' 7077/(f) /pp I. Iy Tv/54REA 76 BC SrR,PPCD /� �) Of vEOETATION Pry,OR An CO../67Rue IONS F,. O� F CL.OR -LAC. MEN7 8 W, TOO T07 of (J t10 cn =p6 J\J APL E WOOD T15 COM,NN4 CO9 wOt< i /tTE6/Gn' Br OruCRS) � • il% —$-ALL DRAINAGE SwALE �- ROCKERY d'AIAX t? y CTYP,CAL I CLl � l 1 1 CCE4PING LI•!.•�s (TfP) .t� TOf Tof It •TATY � % � /f'JgA! 1tI✓t!lJMT. � t \\ j/! .•A%t! JD'fiAw lrGd. ee, r eeuft to ,J 1 t - gtp T17t 1 t\ ti p h \' tA�PUD i .. H •„ � h A, sNo. to. ttteT rfoNi, d AnT,Eieuriov 13 •�{ ... .... .... � It fJMr. Y J L L A G E JNJ :J 4 �, �- `/ I � A_ i �' �� � NOTE: SVP•SC4B t?RaIN LOL4TION1 A/47 SAACIAd MOT DETERAINJEO BY 801L8 ENG//J". 4/E7GUT CALCULDPERMIT „- SOE P 14 1990 T /ON • NF MR,vER 238.9 , 6' , "0 • Nw CORNER !I(�'•t S' • Sr CORNER 29q,7 • Sw CORNER .e/5.1 _44 4 Z, t4%70 AVG. GROUND ELEV. 22'7.7 ,'TV 7190 MAX. &LOG NE/CHT • 25.0 O90 MAX. BLOC. ELEV. 252.7 ACTUAL BLOC ELEV. �� • N/GNEST -DINT • 244A.B S niy T. T4 •, NOTE: ELEVATIONS a BLOG. ENVELOP �t •�.�TI :,F/' CORNERS TO &E vER/F/ED PRAOR TO CONSTRUCT/ON. �: • ���•••••• ':' 'A } .. ANY CL/ANCE /N ECEV4 T/ON MUST BE APPROVED a PLANNING DIVISION PRIOR^ TO CONSTRUCTION. ' ••��`1 •{. II•/1.89 'y°t'1• d- REV PER CI N RE1•*ILv' Jm•y�•«"eS q �q� MM DRNEWAY PROFILE A,•7•RO Af•J DRAINAGE, GRADING AND T.E.8, S.C. PLAN FOR MARK MCNAUGHTO_N N E 1/4" SECTION 24, T. 27 N., R.3 E., W.M. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON L. ADDED sus. Sue om'd/NS 5•2q•90 AIM I ADOEO AtEIGUT Cdtea 4•19•RO t = Lovell•Sauerland & Associates, Inc. i CpQlneen/ Surveyors! Planners ! Development Consultant. IWOp and Avenue w. Sulte 7.:10 • Lynnvlxxf K'A oFnb • C.*:)!n T7!, 162 • r/pn7.1Ap n0.x) rA.IM CnKttD, DA?% is YAL[ ru e0 MM RS,/ 2-Is•ao sf•J,P.7 2355 CITY OF EDMONDS 8g0.19 a� Address of Construction: Property Legal Description (Include all easements): at x SIDE. ,SEWER, PERMIT PERMIT iN12 8268 a• Owner and/or Contractor: I I %uu►'16 wr I i I" Ur rr. DYtaY.. ► : State License No. + "0965C* k Q1 66 Building Permit No. Single Family ❑ Multi -Family (No. of Units ) ❑ Commercial ❑ Public Invasion into.City Right-of-Way:*No ❑ Yes RW Construction Permit No. Cross other Private Property: 9410 ❑ Yes _ +: V-t D Attach legal description and copy of recorded easement r• OCT 301990 I certigthat I ve read and shall comply with all city requirements as indicated IQRIhe back of the Permit Card. PUBLIC WORKS Date CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-424-5555) BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION OFFICE USE ONLY * FOR INSPECTION CALL 771-3202, PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. Permit Fee: Jy' V� Issued By Trunk Charge: �.' 6D Date Issued: Assessment Fee: Receipt No.: Lid No.: z(a f Partial Inspection: Date Initial Comments Reason Rejected: Date -Initial - Final Inspection Approved: Date -6 ( Initialf ** PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE ** White Copy: File Green Copy: Inspector Buff Copy: Applicant Revised 3!90 a b 9 1 0 NOTICE: NO WARRANW OF ACCURACY. The information shown on the attancod map =3 compiled for us^ by tho City of Edmcc&; i; ano consuitants. The City of Edmonds does not %,aarrLn,' the; of anysizing se folh or., tk- map. Any persat or entity a c;:P,y shca'� cm Cvt i asp Inquiry regw-."r.g the the mcu: incl !!pit g, bei not Ilmited to, the locfA:inn of anysve°j-stun Svt l msy or may no'i a)dst and mayor may nct el the lou�ativ;; Neityiar the City of Edmend:; ncr Its errpleyerc or officers sha.'1 bci Iiaale for t►he iri'l(w fadon given on this map, nor for any orH repres€ivatie!6 pre;idad band upon said map 0 d d 0 z i' rn ,� z o N D --I PERMIT COUNTER C0 � HARBOR HILLS LOT 2 GEOTECHNICAL DECLARATION EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 30B NO 9001-26G RECEIVED JUN 111990 SDA, INC. CHNICAL INC. CASCADE Gf0 , 12919 WE 126TH PLAU (206) 8215080 KIRKLANO.WASHINUIUN960s4 FAX: (206)623.7203 June lit 1990 Job No. 0001-26G Homestyle construction 221 James $t, Suite 100 Edmonds, Washington 98020 Attention: Mark McNaughton Reference: Harbor Hills Lot 2 Geotechnical Declaration Edmonds, Washington Dear Mark: As requested, we have prepared this letter in accordance with the City of Edmonds specifications Ordinance f2661 (Meadowdale Notebook). This letter summarizes our review of the final plans and provides the required declaration as modified for the Harbor Hills Plat. As we discussed with Dick Mumma of the City of Edmonds Planning Department and Scott Snyder, the City of Edmonds attorney, it is our conclusion that a Landslide Hazard Map with an assessment of risk based on percent probability is not necessary or appropriate for the Harbor Hills Development. The Landslide Hazard Map that was prepared for the Meadowdale area is specific to that site based on an analysis done a number of years ago by other firms. Such an analysis is not appropriate for the Harbor Hills development. We completed a Phase T subsurface soils study of the Harbor Hills development dated December 5, 1984, for site preparation, utility placement and access road construction. The analysis was based on CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL June 11, 1990 Homestyie construction Job No. 9001-26G Page 2 air photograph interpretation, a review of geologic maps and test pits excavated on the site. The city of Edmonds accepted our report and issued permits for the Phase I work. Additional subsurface study and laboratory work was done on the site during the Phase YClite work. A Hydrologic Analysis was done in 1986 by GeoEngineers Incorporated, test ,borings were done by our firm with laboratory analysis in 1987, a vibration testing study was done by Sigmund Schwartz in 1989, and periodic monitoring of the site work, drain installation and site excavation was done by our firm during all of the phase I work. After completion of the Phase I site work, additional test pits were excavated to observe the subsurface conditions on each of the individual lots. This study was summarized in our report dated May 23, 1989 and provided preliminary recommendations for each site with generalized recommendations for foundation design and drainage based on overall site conditions. we completed a detailed soils report based on previous and recent subsurface information (for Lot 2 dated February 28, 1990) that was prepared in accordance with the Meadowdale Notebook Specifications as modified for Harbor Hills and our understanding of the preliminary building design that was submitted to us. We believe that all necessary information for the modified Meadowdale Notebook is included in the reports we have provided. It is our conclusion that we have sufficient information to delineate the subsurface conditions of the site and the slope stability. We do not feel that additional test borings are necessary to further investigate the subsurface conditions of the cite. CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL June 11, 1990 Romestyie Construction Job No. 9001-26G Page 3 Although topographic evidence suggests the possibility of ancient movement, we noticed no sign of deep seated slope instability within the Harbor Hills development. During excavation for the cul de sac on the upper portion of the plat, near lot 4, there was some surf icial movement within saturated organic soils. The failure was within the upper two (2) to three (3) feet of material and was buttressed immediately with quarry spalls and fill. This area was not located within Lot 2. We reviewed Sheets 1 through 9 of the design plans prepared by Design Consultants, dated 12/6/89 and revised 5/25/90, that were stamped by Structural Design Associates, and the Drainage, Grading and T.E. and S.C. Plan prepared by Love ll-Sauerland and Associates, Inc. dated 2/15/90. The plans we reviewed show a two (2)*story wood framed house with an attached garage. The lower floor will be a slab on grade daylight basement with partial crawl space at floor elevation of 22111, the second story will be at elevation 2300. The garage slab will be at elevation 2321. The east, northeast, and southeast Walls of the lower floor have been designed as rigid retaining walls. The east wall of the garage has been designed as a flexible retaining wall. A flexible retaining wall extends to the north from the east side of the garage and will be independent of the garage wall. The design parameters we supplied for design of the foundation and the flexible retaining walls are shown on the plans we reviewed. The design parameters for the rigid walls are not shown on the plans. We understand from discussions with Structural Design Associates that the parameters we supplied were used for the foundation and retaining wall design. CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL June lit 1990 Homestyle construction Job No. 9001-26G Page 4 we understand that the contractor will slope all construction cuts at a 2H:1V grade. If caving or seepage is noted during the excavation, alternative recommendations may be necessary. It may be necessary to cut temporary excavations at a grade less then 2H:1V or to use shoring. If seepage is noted from the cut faces, it will be necessary to place horizontal drains into the slope. Horizontal drains may be hand driven if sufficient penetration can be obtained. A drill rig may be required if it is to difficult to hand drive the well points. The horizontal drain pipes should be place at locations of seepage ana be tightlined away from the excavation. we should be engaged to provided recommendations during the installation of the horizontal drains if they are necessary. The plans we reviewed showed details for subslab capillary break and drains. No plot, view of the subolab drainage system with tightlines was shown on the plans. We recommend that the plans, I show the drain line locations prior to construction. F It may be necessary to overexcavate the footing trench on the west site of the proposed building. If overexcavation is necessary to Pw Ift '' tA reach suitable bearing soil, an imported fill may be necessary. 5e We should be engaged to observe the excavation to confirm suitable S'��;� soil conditions. The extreme north end of the retaining wall proposed on the east side of the driveway and the driveway subgrade may encounter difficult soil conditions. if organic, wet soil conditions are noted during excavation, it may be necessary to overexcavate this area and place a suitable free draining fill. we should observe this area once the site is cleared and we have access with a: backhoe to investigate the subsurface conditions prior to beginning CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL June lit 1990 Homestyle construction Job No. 9001-26G Page 5 any construction. Based on our analytAib and experience on this alto and in the area, it is our conclusion that there is less than a 30% chance of movement on lot 2 within a 20 year period. It is our judgment that the plans and specifications we reviewed Conform to the recommendations in our soils/geotechnical report prepared for the Harbor Hills development and this lot. The risk of damage to the proposed development, or to adjacent properties, from soil instability will lie minimal, subject to the conditions set forth in our reports. The proposed development will not increase the potential for soil movement if our recommendations are followed. We trust that this provides sufficient information for your needs. Should you have additional questions, feel free to contact us at any time. Sincerely$ CASCADE GEOTECHNIC • r N P P� inci 1 EnginSSGrst���G�su -- �pNn� Peter J Ott Engkn. ring Geologist PJ:pg CC: SDA; Attn: Robert Hughes jo 11 J I H-4NICA L PE "OTTE AAV. LOT 2 OF HARBOR HILLS SUBDIVISION EDMONDS, WASHINGTON JOB NO. 9001-26G TABLE OF CONTENTS Scope Project Description Subsurface Conditions Conclusions Recommendations Site Preparation Grading Foundation Design Parameters Lateral Pressures Drainage Environmental Checklist Construction Monitoring General Appendix A Appendix B Page 1 Page 2 L Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 6 Page 6 Page 7 Page 9 Page 10 Page it Page 11 Page 12 Test Pit Location Map Test Pig Logs CASCADE GECHNICAL A DIVISION OF CAS TESTING LABORATORY, INC. 12919 N.E. 126TH PLACE KIRKLAND, WASHINGTON 98034 (206) 821-5080 FAX: (206) 823-2203 February 28, 1990 Job No. 9001-26G Homestyle Construction 221 James Street, Suite 100 Edmonds, Washington 98020 Attention: Mark McNaughton Reference: Lot 2 of Harbor Hills Subdivision Edmonds, Washington Dear Mark: At your request, we have completed a soils report which conforms to the Geotechnical Report Guidelines set forth in the City of Edmonds Ordinance #2661 (The Meadowdale Notebook). The purpose of this report is to summarize our subsurface investigation and to provide conclusions and recommendations for the proposed construction. SCOPE This report provides conclusions and recommendations which �= specifically address the development of lot 2 for a single family residence. This report provides a discussion of the slope stability for before, during and after construction, a history of the development completed prior to this date, and specific recommendations for site preparation, foundation design, lateral pressures, drainage, and construction monitoring requirements. 1 • CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL ' Fhbruary 28, 1990 i,. Job No. 9001-26G Homestyle Construction Page 2 1: PROJECT DESCRIPTION We completed Phase I and II reports for the Harbor Hills Subdivision prior to this report. The Phase I report discussed the feasibility of developing the site and provided specific recommendations for utility placement and road construction. The Phase II soils report provides general design recommendations for each lot based on past and recent subsurface -investigations. The recommendations provided here are based on the subsurface information obtained for the previous two reports. We have been provided the topographic survey prepared by .Lovell- Sauerland dated 2/15/90, and building plans prepared by Design Consultants dated 12/6/89. The plans we reviewed were only preliminary. We have discussed proposed design changes with Mark McNaughton that will be incorporated into the final design. We should be engaged to review the final plans to conform to the City of Edmonds requirements. '. The sanitary sewer, storm sewer and roadway were constructed at the i site in accordance with the design plans and our recommendations. I We were present at the site periodically to monitor the construction of the roadway and utility placement to provide i recommendations during construction for Phase I. There was no evidence of deep seated slope instability.within the Harbor Hills Subdivision as noted in our Phase I and II reports. During the excavation for the cul de sac on the upper portion of the plat, there was some surficial movement within saturated organic soils. The failure was within the upper two (2) to three (3) feet of material and was buttressed immediately with quarry spalls and fill. This area was not located within lot 2. ` CASCADE GE&ECHNICAL February 28, 1990 Job No. 9001-26G Homestyle Construction Page 3 Lot 2 consists of a west facing, moderately steep'slope, at an average grade of 35%. The Power portion of the lot is relatively flat, and had saturated, soft surface conditions at the time of our studies and recent visit to the site. The proposed house will be built on the sloped portion of the site shown on the Drainage, Grading and T.E. and S.C. plan prepared by Lovell-Sauerland and Associates, Inc. dated 2/15/90. Lot 2 had trees and brush on the slope face with water -tolerant plants on the lower portion of the site. There was standing water i on the lower portion of the site at the time of our recent visit. } No significant alteration of the site was done during the Phase I development of the site. Some fill was placed on the northeast edge of the property and surface run-off was redirected to rock lined swales on the north side of the property adjacent to the road. We have reviewed sheets 1 ,through 9 of the preliminary building plans prepared by Design Consultants dated 12/6/89 that propose the construction of a wood framed, two (2) story house supported on a spread footing foundation. The grading plan provided to us show fill proposed on the west, north and south sides of the house 'in the yard areas. Rockeries were shown on the slopes east of the house and on the north and south sides of the building. The rockeries will be no more than four (4) feet high. We understand that the lower floor will be a slab on grade at elevation 222.51. The floor steps down to elevation 221' which be designed as a crawl space. The second floor and garage -floor slab will be at elevation 2321. 0. CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL February 28, 1990 Job No. 9001-26G Homestyle Construction Page 4 It appears that a basement/retaining wall will be required for the east side of the house between the house and garage. The east side of the garage will be a retaining wall as well. The basement/retaining wall will be about ten (10) feet high and the garage/retaining wall on the east side of the garage will be about eight (8) feet high, according to the plans we were provided. The entry driveway will require a cut into the slope face that will be supported with a structural retaining wall on the uphill side. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The surface of the site sloped at about a 35% grade with a short portion as steep as 50%. The surface of the sloped area was firm and dry and covered with alder and brush. The western, flat portion of the site was soft with standing water at the time of our recent visit. The proposed house site is located above this flat wet area. Test pits were excavated on the site in November 1984 prior to any site work. Additional test pits were excavated on the site in July 1989, after completion of the Phase I site work. The test pits excavated on the site in November 1984, done on the upper portion ( of the site, showed a loose to medium dense sand underlying a layer of peat, which is about 2 feet thick. The test pit excavated on the lower, wet portion of the site showed a sandy silt overlying a layer of peat at about five (5) feet. Underlying the peat was a silty sand with some gravel which was dense and wet. The test ( pits excavated in July, 1989 were done about midsection on the l slope face and showed silty sand to sand which was medium dense and wet. The test pit locations are shown on the test pit location map in Appendix A. Test pit logs and detailed soil descriptions are located in Appendix B. Elevations discussed in this report are from I the surface elevation at the time of our study. • CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL February 28, 1990 Job No. 9001-26G Homestyle Construction Page 5 There is an extensive and complex ground water system underlying the Harbor Hills Subdivision. Substantial subsurface drainage and rechanneling of surface runoff was done during the Phase I construction. At the time of the test pits, no subsurface seepage was observed. We have noted extensive surface water on this lot while making observations made during construction, and in previous and subsequent visits to the site. The subsurface conditions were wet at the time of our investigations. CONCLUSIONS It is our conclusion that Lot 2 is presently stable and presents little risk of slope failure. It appears that significant cuts will be necessary during construction for the proposed building on the east side of the site in the steep bank. Specific and detailed recommendations for the proposed cuts are provided in this report to minimize the potential for slope failure during construction. The site will be stable after completion of the project if the plans we reviewed and our recommendations are followed. It is our conclusion that peat which was noted at depth on the lower portion of the site is not suitable for the support of a structural load if significant differential settlement is to be avoided. All structural loads should be transferred down through the organic soils to the underlying silty sand/sand. Detailed recommendations for the proposed development are provided below. • CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL February 28, 1990 Job No. 9001-26G Homestyle Construction Page 6 RECOMMENDATIONS Site Preparation We recommend that the earthwork be done during an extended period of dry weather. The fine grained soils, steep slope and wet subsurface conditions may cause significant additional construction costs due to adverse affects of wet weather construction. Should wet weather construction be unavoidable additional recommendations with on -site monitoring will be necessary. We recommend that erosion control be placed prior to any excavation. Erosion control may consist of a silt fence with hay bales along the western edge of the site. It will be necessary to place plastic sheets over any cuts made on the site during construction. The grading plan provided by Lovell-Sauerland shows erosion and siltation control details that conform to our recommendations. Grading It appears from our review of the grading plan and discussions with the builder that less than 500 yards of imported fill will be used on site. Imported fill will be select, free stat draining material for wall backfill only. It may also be necessary to import some quarry spalls for support of the foundation on the lower portion of the site. We understand that the soils excavated from the building area will be used as fill in the yard areas below the house or removed from the site. We recommend that the topsoil be separated from the other material and stockpiled for use as planting soils or removed entirely from the site. • CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL February 28, 1990 Job No. 9001-26G Homestyle Construction Page 7 We understand that the material excavated from the upper portion of the site will be used to fill in the lower portion of the site. We recommend that the vegetation be removed from the lower portion of the site before the material is placed. The fill should be placed against the toe of the slope to lessen the angle at the toe. Drainage, as discussed below, should be installed before the fill is placed. It appears that quarry spalls may be used to support structural loads on the lower portion of the building as discussed below. No fills will be placed on the slope face for support of the building. We noted that rockeries are proposed on the east, south and north sides of the house in the landscaped areas. Rockeries will be no more than four (4) feet high and will consist of two (2) rows of four man rocks. It appears that construction cuts will be made for the proposed building in the sloped area of the site. We recommend that all cuts be sloped at a 1.5H:lV temporary construction grade and be protected from erosion with plastic sheets. No cut should be left unprotected. If caving is noted from the cut faces, it may be necessary to slope the cuts at a 2H:1V grade or provide shoring. Drainage, and/or temporary support may be required to permit the excavation to proceed. We should be engaged to monitor the excavation to verify that our recommendations are followed. Foundation Design Parameters It appears from our subsurface analysis that the underlying sandy soils noted on the slope face will be suitable for support of a spread footing foundation. The organic soils noted on the lower portion of the site are unsuitable for support of a spread footing • CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL f February 28, 1990 Job No. 9001-26G Homestyle Construction Page 8 foundation. All structural loads should be supported on the undisturbed native soil noted below the organic soils in this area:: We have discussed alternative recommendations with you for support of the building on the lower portion of the site if unsuitable material underlies the footing location. We recommend that the lower portion of the house be supported on native silty sand. If organic soils are located under the footing, the unsuitable material should be removed and replaced 'with a suitable fill material. Due to the potential for subsurface seepage, we recommend using 2 to 4 inch diameter quarry spalls for the fill. The width of the trench necessary and extent of the excavation will depend on the exact location of the footing and the amount of organic soils noted. The layer of quarry spalls should be no more then five (5) feet thick, and should extend three (3) feet horizontally on either side of the footing. We should be engaged to observe the excavation to provide immediate and detailed on -site recommendations. Footings should be seated at least eighteen (18) inches below outside finished grade for frost protection. All foundation excavations should be free of standing water, loose soils, or organic material at the time the concrete is place. We should be engaged to observe the excavations to confirm suitable soil conditions. We understand that slab -on -grade floors are proposed for the garage and the lower floor of the house at elevation 222.51. It appears from the plans we reviewed that the lower floor of the house will be seated on a cut and the garage will be seated partially on cut and partially on backfill for the retaining wall. • CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL February 28, 1990 Job No. 9001-26G Homestyle Construction Page 9 The undisturbed native sand is well suited for a slab subgrade if it is free of standing water, loose material or organic debris. The retaining wall backfill that will support the garage slab should be placed as discussed in the lateral forces section of the report. We recommend placing a subslab drain under the slab in the living room of the house. The subslab drain should consist of four (4) inch diameter, rigid, perforated pipes that are bedded and backfilled in at least eighteen (18) inches of pea gravel. The pipe should be below the capillary break material. We recommend placing at least three (3) pipes that trend east -west, parallel with the dip of the slope. We recommend placing at least eight (8) inches of a clean free draining sand, pea gravel, or crushed rock under the lower floor slab to act as a capillary break. The free draining material should be covered with a plastic vapor barrier. We should be supplied with a sample of the free draining material to confirm that it meets specifications. Lateral Pressures We understand that a retaining/basement wall is anticipated for the house between the garage and lower floor. It appears that the wall will be about ten (10) feet high and will be designed as a rigid wall. A retaining wall is proposed on the east side of the garage and adjacent to the driveway that will be about eight ( 8 ) feet high and will be designed as a flexible wall with a 2H:lV backslope. We recommend the following design parameters for the retaining walls: { • CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL 0 February 28, 1990 Job No. 9001-26G Homestyle Construction Page 10 Active Earth Pressure (flexible wall 2H:1V backslope) 50 pcf (east side of garage & driveway) At Rest (rigid wall, horizontal backslope) 55 pcf Passive Earth Pressure 200 pcf Bearing Value 2000 psf For the above values to be adequate, we recommend that a drain be placed at the base of the footing and that the wall be backfilled with a clean, free draining material. The backfill may consist of a pea gravel, washed rock or a clean coarse sand that has less then %5 passing the #200 sieve based on the percent passing the #4 sieve. It appears that the floor slab for the garage will be supported on the backfill for the downhill retaining wall. We recommend that the backfill be placed in twelve (12) inch loose lifts and compacted to 95% of the ASTM D-1557 maximum dry density. Care should be used to avoid damaging the wall during placement. We should be engaged to observe the placement of the wall backfill to confirm adequate compaction. This fill is expected to contribute to the passive resistance for the retaining wall upslope. Drainage We recommend placing a four (4) inch diameter rigid perforated pipe that is bedded and backfilled in at least eighteen (18) inches of pea gravel at the base of all perimeter footings. The footing drains should be tightlined away from the foundation to the storm sewer system. All roof drains should be tightlined to the storm system separately from the footing drains to avoid backflow. . CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL • February 28, 1990 Job No. 9001-26G Homestyle Construction Page 11 All paved surfaces should be curbed and graded to direct all surface runoff to a suitable catch basin. Additional drainage will be necessary in the landscaped areas. Yard drains will be necessary on the west side of the house to avoid a wet backyard. Yard drains should consist of four (4) inch 'diameter rigid perforated pipes that are bedded in at least eighteen (18) inches of pea gravel. We recommend placing the pipes as shown on the grading plans we reviewed. The pipes should be placed after the vegetation has been removed from the area. The drains are shown on the grading plans we recommend. Environmental Checklist We have reviewed the Environmental Checklist and have addressed the significant issues with regards to Earth section within the text of this report. Construction Monitoring We should be engaged to observe the excavation for the building and placement of the erosion control to confirm that construction is done in accordance with the approved plans. We should be engaged to observe the foundation excavation to confirm suitable soil conditions. The placement of the drainlines and backfill should be observed by our office to confirm proper materials and placement. The rockery construction should be monitored by our office. r . CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL February 28, 1990 Job No. 9001-26G Homestyle Construction Page 12 General A detailed review of the final plans is required by the City of Edmonds specifications. Once final plans are available, we will provide a detailed review with any additional or alternate recommendations' that may be necessary. As discussed with Dwayne Bowman of the City of Edmonds, we did not provide a statistical probability of earth movement as there is no landslide hazard map with landslide percentage values for this area. We expect the on -site conditions to reflect our findings; however, variations may occur. Should soil conditions be encountered that cause concern and/or are not discussed herein, we should be contacted immediately to determine if additional or alternate recommendations are required. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Homestyle Construction for specific application to Lot 2 of Harbor Hills Subdivision•in Edmonds, Washington in accordance with generally accepted soils and foundation engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied is made. Thank you for this opportunity to work with you on this project. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact us at any time. Sincerely, CASCADE GEOTECHNIC, 4Gee�E. amb, Principal Engineer (:: PJ:P9 Pete ewett En 1leering Geologist APPENDIX A HARBOR HILLS LOT 2 TEST PIT LOCATION MAP STUB AS STUB I TU � 2� ®T.P.13 ELECTRICAL STUB ; I PROPOSED HOUSE uu I SANITARY SEWER STUBLr, L- ®T.P.19 � - -J STORM STUB IL I % 1 Ln TEST PITS 5 & 13 (11 / 13/84) N TEST PIT 19 (07/06/89) IJ N c N N FROM TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY LOVELL-SAUERLAND & ASSOCIATES INC. Job No. SCALE : 1" = 30' CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL 901 - 26G A DIVISION OF CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY, INC. LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE 12919 N.E. 126TH PLACE KIRKLAND, WASHINGTON 98034 Dal* Own. Y End - o KIRKLAND: (206) 821-5080 SEATTLE: (206) 525-6700 02/21 /90 HLA o APPENDIX B • E T.P. — 5 Soil Description and Classification TP. — 13 Soil Description and Classification 0 0 - 2'ORGANIC'SILT & PEAT; DARK 0 0 - 1'PEAT; DARK BROWN, LOOSE, .►-:- FBI BROWN, LOOSE, SATURATED.(OL-PT) " " SATURATED. (PT) t1 I- 4.5'SANDY SILT; BLUE GRAY, WITH �. 2'- 8'SILTY SAND; BLUE GRAY, FINE TO SOME ROUNDED GRAVEL, LOOSE, MEDIUM GRAINED, SOME GRAVEL, SATURATED. (ML) OCCASIONAL ORGANIC POCKETS, LOOSE, SATURATED. (SM) _- 4.5'- 5.5'PEAT; DARK BROWN, ROOTS, -5 'S ___'` ORGANICS, SATURATED. (PT) -5.5'- 10'SILTY SAND; BROWN, FINE TO COARSE GRAINED,.SOME ROUNDED GRAVEL, MEDIUM TO DENSE, WET. (SM) 8'- 13'SILTY SAND; GRAY BROWN, FINE TO COARSE GRAINEDSOME R3UNDEE GRAVEL, DENSE, MOIST. (SM -10 -10 T.D. = 10.0' T.D. = 13.0' TEST PIT DUG (11/13/84) Notes: TEST PIT DUG (11/13/84) Notes T.P. —19 Soil Description and Classification ti T.P. — Soil Description and Classification 0 0 - 2' TOPSOIL 0 �.J; -, • M wr.. ••. 2'- 8'SILTY SAND SAND; BROWN, MEDIUM DENSE, WET. SM-SP) T.D. = 8.0' -10 -10 Notes: TEST PIT DUG i 07/06/89) Notes: TEST PIT LOG CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL HARBOR HILLS LOT 2 A DIVISION Of CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY, INC. Date 02/21/90 J ob 901 - 26G own. By HLA Goo / Eng. (T/ 10 SIBEE ot COVENANT.OF'NOTIFICATION AND INDEMNIFICATION/HOLD HARMLESS Under the review procedures established pursuant to the State Building Code, incorporating amendments promulgated by the E City of Edmonds, and as a prerequisite to the issuance of a building permit for the construction of a residential structure and attendant facilities, the undersigned OWNERS of property do hereby covenant, stipulate and promise as follows: 1. Description of Subiect Property. This covenant of notification and indemnification/hold harmless relates to a tract of land at the street address of 1112 Daley Street, Edmonds, Snohomish County, Washington and legally described as: Lot 2 of Harbor Hills, Records of Snohomish County, City of Edmonds, State of Washington 2. Notification and Covenant of Notification. The above referenced site (hereinafter "subject site") lies within an area which has been identified by the City of Edmonds as having a potential for earth subsidence or landslide hazard. The risks associated with development of the site have been evaluated by technical consultants and engineers engaged by the applicant as a part of the process to obtain a building -permit for the subject site. The results of the consultant's reports and evaluations of the risks associated with development are contained in building permit file number 000751 on file with the City of Edmonds 1 443 Building Department. Conditions, limitations, or prohibitions on development may have been imposed in accordance with the recommendations of the consultants in the course of permit issuance. The conditions, limitations, or prohibitions may require ongoing maintenance on the part of any owner or lessee or may require modifications to the structures and earth stabilization matters in order to address future or anticipated changes in soil or other site conditions. The statements and conditions proposed by the OWNERS' geotechnical engineer, geologist, architect and/or structural engineer are hereby incorporated by reference from the contents of the file as fully as if herein set forth. Any future purchaser, lessee, lender or any other person acquiring or seeking to acquire an interest in the property is put on notice of the existence of the content of the file and the City urges review of its contents. The file may be reviewed during normal business hours or copies obtained at the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, 505 Bell Street, Edmonds, Washington 98020. 3. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. The undersigned OWNERS hereby waive any and all liability associated with development, stating that they have fully informed themselves of all risks associated with development of the property and do therefore waive and relinquish any and all causes of action against the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and employees arising from and out of such development. In addition, the OWNERS on behalf of themselves, their successors in interest, 2 M 0-6 09 heirs and assignees, do hereby promise to indemnify and hold harmless,the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and employees from any loss, claim, liability or damage of any kind or nature to persons or property either on or off the site resulting from or out of earth subsidence or landslide hazard, arising from or out of the issuance of any permit(s) authorizing development of the site, or occurring or arising out of any false, misleading, or inaccurate information provided by the OWNERS, their employees, or professional consultants in the course of issuance of the building permit. 4. Insurance Requirement. Pursuant to Chapter 19.05 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, the Community Services Director has specifically exempted the Subject Property from any insurance requirement relating to maintenance of public liability coverage. 5. Covenant to Touch and Concern the Land. This covenant of notification and indemnification/hold harmless touches and concerns the subject tract and shall run with the land, binding, obligating and/or inuring to the benefit of future owners, heirs, successors in interest or any other person or entity acquiring an interest in property, as their interest may appear. This provision shall not be interpreted to require a mortgagor or lender to indemnify the City (except to the extent of their loss should they ever commence a lawsuit against the City). 3 211. VOL E 0 na T 1 DONE this r day of 1991• '92 JAIL 10 P2:35 OWNERS) 5'AN V. �ii:1 IEPUTY/— -I By: - Leslie R. Orton : BY Raymond A. Horton I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that .Leslie R. Horton signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be her free and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this day of �� , 1991. DEBBIE M. BAKER / NOTARY PUBLIC / THE STATE OF TEXAS / COMMISSION EXPIRES J NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: , l/I � f I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Raymond A. Horton signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his free and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this day of C Q_ , 1991. / RY P�4 ,% `ate = DEBBIE M. BAKER j NOTARY PUBLIC / THE STATE OF TEXAS / / °•.,T fir: COMMISSION EXPIRES / J NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: 4 4 2 Vol. U'PAGE�.�a��� .0 CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-3202 COMMUNITY SERVICES: 1wC) Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering 890 '9 t September 13, 1990 Mark A. McNaughton Homestyle Construction 221 James Street, Suite 100 Edmonds, WA 98020 Mr. McNaughton: TARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR The Building and Planning departments have reviewed your letter of August 17, 1990, and considered your claim that a change in policy was having an impact on your Lot 2, Harbor Hills, construction that may not have occurred before the recent interpretation was released. Grading is a shared responsibility between the Building and Planning departments. The Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, addresses grading and so does Title 18 of the Edmonds Community Development Code. In your case, Title 18 of the Edmonds Community Development Code is more restrictive and is the section that requires the Conditional Use permit that you are questioning. Duane Bowman, Assistant City Planner, and myself, discussed your situation and agreed to apply Duane's commonly used interpretation to your situation. It appears that the application of that interpretation does not change the requirement for a Conditional Use permit in your case. In other words, whichever method is applied in your case nets the same result -- the yardage is in. excess of 500 cubic yards, and a Conditional Use permit would be required. The end result is that you still must provide a Conditional Use permit for grading on Lot 2 of the u- -1- --- 1,1„ - ---1-1 es `-RICHARD R. MUMMA Building Official RMM/sfn cc: Duane Bowman • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan August 17, 1990 Dick Mumma City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, Washington 98020 Dear Dick: Pursuant .to our conversation I -am responding to your request for a letter regarding grading and method -of calculating total yardage for grading. As you are aware, the permit for Lot 2 of Harbor Hills was applied for in June of 1990. The City has been accepting grading calculations and issuing permits for applications that applied UBC Section 7003 when calculating total yardage. The question of how yardage was calculated became an issue when Landau asked how our calculations for Lot 2 were figured. Upon analysis, the Building Department issued'a memorandum on August 14, 1990 that the City would no longer be able to apply UBC Section 7003. This decision was made 2 months after our application making us vested and able to calculate total yardage by applying UBC section 7003. Examples of past permits issued with these calculations are: 1) 215 7th Avenue S. This home would have needed a Conditional Use Permit had UBC Section 7003 not been applied. That permit was issued in June of 1990. 2) Lovell Sauerland has always calculated the total number of cubic yards by applying UBC Section 7003 and the City has been accepting these numbers as accurate and issuing permits. We understand the new policy and agree with the definition of future calculations, however, applying the new policy retroactively to our permit is inappropriate, arbitrary and capricious and violates the Vested Rights Doctrine. Therefore our permit should not be withheld pending a Conditional Use Permit as requested by the City. Time is. of the essence and your Immediate response is requested. Sincerely, ,1_1 Mark A. McNaught,on, Authorized Agent Homestyle Construction MAM/sg 221. Jame: S:.. Sure !CO =.... crc,..?vA �30Z0 _'C6f ' 7 3-6=66 19400 33rd Ave. W.. Suite 200 Lovell-Sauerland Lynnwood Washington 98036 & Associates, Tnc. Seattle: (206) 3400830 Engineers/ Surveyors/Planners/ Development Consucants FAX (206) 672.7998 August 17, 1990 Dick Mumma City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Ave. N. Edmonds, Washington 98020 Re: Memorandum dated August 14, 1990, concerning grading permits, calculating yardage. Dear Dick, It is my understanding that a new interpretation of the uniform building code grading section has been put forth and is now being implemented. This new interpretation, I believe, is contrary to the way things have been done in the past by our off ice and by your department. In the past, we have not included in our cut -fill calculations the possibility of bad soil under -footings and the material removed for retaining wall construction that would be placed back when. wall construction was complete. We have, in the past, followed the uniform building code with our calculations and have received approvals of our work. To now subject Mr. McNaughton's application to this memorandum creates a hardship on him because he is under contract to complete his client's house by a certain date. If he is subjected to the conditional use process, his client may seek damages. It is not our wish to circumvent the rules and we will certainly comply with them in the future for, I assure you, we completely believed we were acting according to rules and, because of past approvals, never dreamed we were acting wrongly all along. RSJ:cc LANDAU A ASSOCIATES, INC. Geoenvironmental Engineering and Technologies Mr. Dick Mumma City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Ave. North Edmonds, WA 98020 pERM11 GOUAW RE: SUPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW PROPOSED RESIDENCE AT 1112 DALEY PLACE LOT 2, HARBOR HILLS SUBDIVISION EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 00 September 11, 1990 This letter contains supplemental comments related to a geotechnical review of resubmitted plans and other documents concerning the above -noted proposed residence. Our review was performed using Edmonds City Ordinance No. 2661 as the standard for comparison. A listing of reviewed documents is contained in Attachment 1. A response to all of the comments contained in our July 25, 1990 letter has been provided by Cascade Geotechnical, Inc. (Cascade) and Structural Design Associates, Inc. (Structural Design). In general, the items noted in our July 25,1990 letter have been adequately addressed; however, there are two exceptions that require further attention. These are summarized below: • It appears that there is differing interpretations regarding the definitions. of "cut" and "fill," and that the final interpretation will determine if a conditional use permit is required. This subject deals with City policy; Landau Associates, Inc. can provide consultation if requested. • As presently shown on Sheet 1 of the Grading and Drainage Plans, the french drains on the west side of the residence are to be constructed after site stripping. It is not clearly stated that these drains are to be constructed prior to placing yard fill (as noted by Cascade). Clarification as to the proper sequence of construction for these drains is needed. A revised declaration by Cascade or the owner was not submitted for review. It is suggested that the City review the entire submittal for completeness and compliance with Ordinance No. 2661 requirements prior to permit issuance. These above items can probably be P.O. BOX 1029 • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020-9129 • (206) 778-0907 • FAX (206) 778-6409 addressed directly by the City's engineering department. If additional review services are needed, please do not hesitate to call. WDE/DRS/tmc No. 74-15.10 3 copies submitted EDMONDSUM20910.LET Very truly yours, LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. By: pie/' 1R. S T e William D. Evans, CPG and F �( / s T EPA 0 g`4` Dennis R. Stettler, P.E. amass/ O N A L 00,,II,y//�y J Technical Reviewer 4 LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. ATTACHMENT 1 • Sheets 1-4, 5a, 5b, 7-9 (of 9), and separate Sheet 10 of the Project Plans, Design Consultants, initially undated, revised May 25, 1990. (Note: several of these drawings were apparently revised in late July or early August 1990; however, a revision date has not been added) • Response to Review, Harbor Hills Lot 2, Cascade Geotechnical, Inc., August 8, 1990 • Revised Declaration Statement, Structural Design Associates, Inc., August 14, 1990 • Response to Review Comments, Structural Design Associates, Inc., August 13, 1990. EDMON DS \ LOT20910. LET LANDAU -0 A ASSOCIATES, INC. Geoenvironmental Engineering and Technologies BUILDING • JUL 2 61990 1141y 25,1990 Mr. Dick Mumma City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW PROPOSED RESIDENCE AT 1112 DALEY PLACE LOT 2, HARBOR HILLS SUBDIVISION EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Per your request, we have reviewed geotechnical reports, the proposed building plans, and other documents related to construction of the above -noted proposed single-family residence. The review was conducted using City Ordinance No. 2661 as the standard for comparison. The "Meadowdale" permit process was adopted primarily to regulate sites where risks of earth subsidence and landslide hazard exist. However, requirements of Ordinance 2661. can also be imposed on sites that are within environmentally sensitive areas, or which are adjacent to a known hazard area. The City's decision to use Ordinance 2661 for Lot 2 indicates that t e City considers this lot to be located within one of these areas. We concur with the Citvs decision to require the Meadowdale process for all lots within this subdivision. Information required by Ordinance 2661 includes, but is not limited to: 1) a landslide hazard vicinity map (not required for Harbor Hills); 2) owner's liability statement; 3) environmental checklist; 4) topographic map; 5) geotechnical report; 6) site development plan; 7) drainage plan; 8) structural drawings; and 9) disclosures, declarations, covenants, and waivers. In addition, the City may require the installation of piezometers and an assessment of landslide potential based on seasonal ground water changes. A listing of documents that we reviewed is included as Attachment A. In Cascade Geotechnical's (Cascade) December 5, 1984 Phase I report, a main interceptor drain and series of individual lot drains were recommended. Subsequent to that report, the responsibility for lot drainage was apparently passed to individual lot owners. We understand that this shifting of responsibility has been tentatively approved by the City of Edmonds. P.O. BOX 1029 • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020.1029 • (206)778-0907 • FAX (206)778-6409 Previous correspondence by Landau Associates (Landau Associates 1990) contains additional information on this subject. The February 28, 1990 geotechnical report for Lot 2 prepared by Cascade meets the technical requirements of Ordinance 2661 and provides recommendations that appear to be in general accordance with standard geotechnical engineering practice. However, we have several comments and concerns regarding this project, particularly with regard to the lead design professionals' interpretation of the geotechnical report. Our comments and concerns are summarized as follows: • The cut and fill quantities estimated by Lovell-Sauerland and Associates, Inc. and Cascade are not dear. The grading plan prepared by Lovell-Sauerland notes that total "cut" will amount to 460 cubic yards, and total "fill" 84 cubic yards. Cascade makes no mention of cut quantities but notes that less than 500 cubic yards of imported fill will be used for wall backfill, and that some imported quarry spalls may be necessary for foundation support on the lower portion of the lot. Cascade indicates that this onsite material will be placed on the lower portion of the lot to raise site grades. Based on the above, it appears that total cut may be about 500 cubic yards and that total fill volume will approach 1,000 cubic yards. It is suggested that the lead design professional reevaluate total cut and fill volumes to determine if a conditional use permit is required. • Cascade's February 1990 report recommends temporary construction slopes no steeper than 1.5H to M and that temporary shoring or additional drainage may be necessary if slope problems are encountered: A 1.5:1 slope projected from the toe of the garage retaining wall footing will intercept the property line approximately 5-10 feet below existing site grade. In order to "daylight" this cut, it will be necessary to make a cut steeper than 1:1; thus, the contractor should anticipate the use of temporary shoring and drainage. Part N of Chapter 296-155 WAC (Excavation, Trenching, and Shoring) should be consulted wherever slopes steeper than those recommended by the geotechnical engineer are required. • Cascade's February 1990 report notes that the lower floor of the residence will be seated in cut. However, the present ground surface throughout the southwest one-third of this area is presently below the finish floor elevation of 222.5. Assuming a stripping depth of 1 foot, it appears that 3-4 feet of compacted backfill or quarry spalls may required to support the floor slab throughout this area. Cascade's May 23, 1989 Phase II report notes that placing such compacted fills may not be feasible; thus Cascade should provide specific recommendations concerning this fill. The Foundation Plan (sheet 3 of 9) shows a subslab drainage system under the "media room." Cascade's February 28 report recommends that a subslab drainage system be installed under the "living room." (The living room is on the second floor.) Due to the anticipated wet soil conditions on this lot, we interpret Cascade's recommendation to apply to the entire area under the LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. lower floor (rather than one limited area). Cascade should be consulted for clarification. • Cascade's June 11,1990 Declaration states that the subslab capillary break and the above -noted subslab drainage system should be shown on the project plans. We concur with this recommendation; additionally, the tightline system, which will be necessary to remove accumulated water from the subslab drainage system, should be shown. • Cascade's February 1990 report states that the french drains to the west of the proposed residence are to be installed after the area has been stripped, but prior to placement of fill to raise yard grades. It is suggested that this sequence be noted on the Grading Plan. • Sheet 5 of the Project Plans shows a section through the proposed residence. The basement retaining wall shown on this section does not have provisions for a footing drain. This is also true for the short foundation wall near the west end of the proposed residence (see Section A -A). It is our opinion that each of these walls should have a footing drain and be backfilled with free - draining select material. (Section H-H on Sheet 5A shows a footing drain with no gravel; neither this Section nor the one on Sheet 5 shows a provision for free -draining backfill.) • Typical retaining wall design calls for the surface of the wall backfill to slope away from the structure and for the select backfill to be capped with approximately 1 foot of fine-grained soil. It is our opinion that these features are especially critical on a wet lot and suggest that the drawings be modified to reflect these items. In addition, a shallow ditch or drainage swale is often recommended on the uphill side of retaining walls to minimize the amount of surface runoff entering wall backfill. • Although one of the notes on Sheet 5B (and the basement wall section on the unnumbered Project Plan) indicate that a capillary break is to be used under concrete slabs, details on Sheets 5 and 5A do not reflect this information. Also, it is not clear from the Project Plans if the garage is to have a capillary break It is suggested that Cascade reevaluate and comment on the present plans. • To reach undisturbed native soil, the porch piers on the west and south sides of the proposed residence may have to penetrate several feet of newly placed uncompacted yard fill or soft/loose native soil. Consideration should be given to extending the quarry spalls in this vicinity to accommodate the porch piers. In summary, it appears that the recommendations contained in Cascade's February 28 report meet the requirements of Ordinance 2661. However, the Project Plans as presently drawn do not accurately reflect Cascade's conclusions and recommendations. 'Therefore, it is recommended that the submitted documents be returned to the applicant for revisions and re- 3 LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. • • review by the involved design professionals. Additionally, the declarations that have been provided should be updated to reflect revisions to the project plans and documents. Please note that Landau Associates did not review the structural calculations provided by Structural Design Associates, Inc. Please call if you have questions or if resubmitted documents need additional review. WDE/sg No. 74-15.10 3 copies submitted attachment 4 Very truly yours, LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. M 2�-- e. &-� William D. Evans, CPG LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. ATTACHMENT A LOT 2, HARBOR HILLS SUBDIVISION • Sheets 1-9, 5A, 5B of the Project Plans, and an untitled sheet showing typical wall sections, drawn by Design Consultants (Mukilteo, WA) and stamped by Cornelius D. Vander Ende (of Structural Design Associates, Inc.), May 5,1990. • Geotechnical Report, Cascade Geotechnical, February 28,1990. • Geotechnical Report, Cascade Testing Laboratories, Inc., December 5, 1984. • Geotechnical Report, Cascade Geotechnical, May 23, 1989. • Geotechnical Declaration, Cascade Geotechnical, June 11, 1990. • Sheets 1 and 2, Drainage and Grading Plan, Lovell-Sauerland and Associates, Inc., February 15, 1990 (revisions added April 13, May 25, and June 7, 1990). • Structural calculations, Structural Design Associates, Inc., March 28 and June 6, 1990. • Structural Engineers Declaration, Structural Design Associates, Inc., June 12, 1990. • Environmental checklist, signed by Robert J. Hughes of Structural Design Associates, Inc., June 5, 1990. • Letter Concerning Geotechnical Issues, Harbor Hills Subdivision, Landau Associates, Inc., July 6, 1990. 5 LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. h L� -- ` ASSET CITY �F EDMONDS FORMATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 775-2525 SHEET r890.19�0 b J 3 4 ASSET NO. BATCH DATE ACTION: X-1 NEW ❑ ADD ❑ TRANSFER, ❑ RETIRE CATEGORY CODE: _H_ SERIAL NO. A S DESCRIPTION: W—QI..I JC Jam[ 1%C,_C_e. "4e S. E T N LOCATION: F O / * "L" -LOCATION CODE: �r I `i R _ ACCOUNT NO. M A DEPRECIATION CODE: iKY ❑ N LIFE OF ASSET: Z YEARS T I O WARRANT/PROJECT: N NO. DATE: 4S13_l/_9_I_ COST t� $ INITIATED BY Jlu-LL APPROVED BY R ACCOUNTING USE ONLY E T RETIREMENT DATE I R RETIREMENT METHOD E M RECEIPT NO. TOTAL DEPRECIATION $ E T GAIN (LOSS) DEPARTMENT FILE PREVIOUS 0 REPORT NO. No. CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 12911 N.E. 126TH PLACE (206) 821-5080 KIRKLAND, WASHINGTON 98034 FAX: (206) 823-2203 n THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED: ix 1 I I^ TI L C f,��i ryf 7 �/1 � i_ u 1 I 11 1, DATE JOB NO. Mou � �i -, PROJECT 1 7 C.� CATION BLDG. PERMIT NO. WEAT TEMP. AT AM 1►` "7 (-' AT PM ENGINEER ARCHITECT ONTRACTOR G L I J c.�' I c 1 'I COPIES TO: lCV -Iy I i'� } r GEOTECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE FIELD REPORT REVIEWED BY: CASCADE GEOTEC*'lC*AL, INC. 12911 N.E. 126TH PLACE (20 821-5080 KIRKLAND, WASHINGTON 98034 FAX: ( ;%3-2203 „1s] 96OZO THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED: Z'. PREVIOUS REPORT No. No. DATE IM 2 JOB NO. PROJEC offOCATiON G. PERMIT NO. p WEATHER '5-—f) ✓1 w TEMP. AT AM AT PM ENGINEER ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR o'C,-1.cA O _ cj I i, 4 : I i V +-, I V-7 c 14 I C V cam, ML.Q, — � -f�k Q GEOTECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE COPIESTO: � �► FIELD R t REVIEWED BY: CITY OF EDMONDS USE PERMIT ZONENUMBER CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION josSUITE!APTa y ✓�/�/� `. i OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS / pe LEGAL DESCRIPTION CHECK SUBDIVISION NO. LID NCO, ZMAILINGOADDRESS O PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP. TESCP APPROVED BY CITY ZIP - TELEPHONE NUMBER '�ao Wei1T r EXISTING REQUIRED DEDICATION PROPOSED _ O 2 NAME A. i / RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT REQUIRED STREET USE PERMIT REQUIRED 0 w Z J < r ,n n .0_ 'l wo ADDRESS } v r GI i / SEE ENGINEERING MEMO DATED REVIEW BY w a CITY ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER r REMARKS � G-/7r�g NAME . _F, ,74W (P�o ✓ ADDRESS ' S METER S E BUILDING SUPPLY SIZE FIXTURE UNITS Q CITY ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER r RKS t� l / /0„ J V /",` /� Q 3 STATE LICENSE NUMBER SIGN AREA ALLOWED PROPOSED ENV. REVIEW COMPLETE EXEMPT ADB NO, Legal Description of Property - include all easements (show below or attach two copies) SHORELINE a z n /� 22ar / VARIANCE OR CU PLANNING REVIEW_.BY,. / _Qf . i SETBACKS —FEET HEIGHT LOT COVERAGE. Z FRONT E SIDE ! REAR .` " /' ` `- - _ c _'' Z Tax Account Parcel No.� REMARKS , IAnev�7�40/Nh J a UfiV d hard ays LA NEW ADD/ALTER REPAIR DEMOLISH REMODEL ® RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL APT. BLDG. EXCAVATE, FILL R OR GRADE GARAGET LJ PLUMBING MECHANICAL SIGN FENCE El ( x_FT) ❑ SWIM POOL I� Cf��Fy�/�Y�,pyYg �irr1" TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION �1,V� CODE` HEIGHT SPECIAL INSPECTOR RE UIRED YES `'NO AREA OCCUPANCY GROUP �� OCCUPANT LOAD ❑ WOO INSERT RETAINING ROCKERY WALL/ ❑ RENEWAL REMARKS PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 305 0 (TYPE OF USE, BUSINESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN: A/ , f b �O m (- NUMBER OF" TORIES 4UM13ER OF DWELLING [UNITS NATURE OF WPRK TO B qON �A�rA�y,P�,OT SDILS [DKT r (/iSGI`� l` l�v TFClyiIfIZA4. . .Tir 17,FINAL s/r PV d '^ls COO )L5Ad AlZ1Q INSPECTION REQUIRED n •. r VALUATION J PLAN CHECK FEE 135 BUILDING Sf;Z �I/L �]og 1;;vr71.4 PPIL /��Y/►L�Ci� �� PLUMBING IFEEO 37 Plan Check NO. /� MECHANICA This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY. GRADINGIFILL Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks, STATE SURCHARGE AN driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission. Permit Application: 180 Days Permit Limit: 1 Year- Provided WorK is Started Within 180 Days N "Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns and successors in interest, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold w 3 w i M harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials, employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the issuance of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to modify,. waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance provision." LT a PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT ._.2J / S722 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE I wo P's I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application; that the information given is correct; and that 1 am the owner, or the duly ATTENTION APPLICATION APPROVAL authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with city and THIS PERMIT state laws regulating construction; and in doing the work authoriz- AUTHORIZES This application is not a permit until ed thereby, no person will be employed in violation of the Labor ONLY THE signed by the Building Official or his Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's Compensa- WORK NOTED Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is tion Insurance. INSPECTION acknowledged in space provided. SIGNATURE IOW ER OR AGENT) // DATE SIGNED DEPARTMENT j1+. P �e �C!^' V r ^ 0/ ,C OFFI L'S"'Sl N URE % CITY OF i %3 -! EDMONDS ATTENTION CALL FORS As D BY: DATE INSPECTION IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE T%1-3ZOZ UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR ORIGINAL — File YELLOW — Inspector A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC CHAPTER 3. PINK — Owner GOLD — Assessor 102.87 r ROJDCT REVIEW CMIaM rRaBCT Nk��: S� D/�%b�y/ p PROJECT ADDRESS. /2 • t,Y OaI4c, APPLICATION RECEIPT DATE. CCX+MlF m FIRE .BUILDING SINGLE FAM3:LY/KMTIPLE/CMtM CiAL - (Circle One) PLANNING Reviewed by: initial date) WM/SWR , STREET I ENQMNG SETBACKS CHECKED - Planning VARIANCE/SETBACK ADJ.. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, //// / 2 ADB REQUIREI4FNI5 `(HDCI®. :. 11177 ////// ///////// //////// ////////// 3 OTHER ZONING REQUIREMENTS /f//%/ ///////// //////// ////////// 4 ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES. / 7 777 ////// ///////// //////// 5 ACCESS SLOPE &.VEHICLE ACCESS DRAINAGE PLAN (On Site) ////// ///////// ///////I/ //////// 7 STREET FILE ////// ///////// ///////// //////// 8 LEGAL DESCRIPTION VERIFICATION ////// ///////// ///////// //////// 9 QUIT CLAIM/DEDICATIONS ////// ///////// ///////// //////// 10 EASEMENT - PUBLIC/PRIVATE CALCULATE SEWER CONNECTION IF NO LIDS ////// ///////// ///////// //////// 12 PLAT/SUBDMSION IRMfNTS ////// / /////// //////'/I/ 13 RIGIT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT READ ////// /////// / ///////// V 14 BOND READ FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ////// ///////// ///////// //////// 15 SOILS CONDITIONS & GROUND WATER FIETD CHECKED ////// ///////// /////////.///// / — 16 STREET PAVING REQUIRED ////// ///////// 777777 ///////// 17 CURB AND GAFFER REQUIRED ////// ///////// ///////// ////////// 18 SIDEWALK REQUIRED ////// ///////// ///////// 19 CURB CUP FOR DRIVEWAY REQD /// // //////// ///////// ////////// 20 STREET NAME SIGN REQD ///////// /////// / ////////// 21 OTHER SIGNING REQD ///////// ///////// ////////// 22 SIDE SEWER. AVAILABILITY. III 23 EXISTING WATER MAIN SIZE ////// 71-777777 / /////// //////// ////////// 24 WATER METER SIZE ////// /// ///// //////// 777777/77 ////////// 25 SERVICE LINE SIZE. ////// ///////// //////// ////////// 26 HYDRANT REQUIRED ///////// // //// //////// ////////// 27 HYDRANT SIZE EXISTIldG // // / ////. // /// //// ////////// 28 CROSS CONNECl`ICN INSPECTION.I2DQD 77777 / // / / // /////// / //////// 29 WATER METER CHARGE REQD.. -. 30 FIRE LINE CHARGE READ - SPRINKLER ///////// //////// 1111111171 ////////// 31 STREET CUT ////// f///'///// ////////// 32 OPEN DITCH EXISTING ////// ///////// /// ///// 33 READ///, 34 CULVERT RDQO ////// ///////// ///////// 35 SIZE ////// /////////.///////// 36 CATCH BASIN REQD ////// ///////// ///////// 37 INDICATED ON SITE PLAN ////// ///////// ///////// 38 SHOULDER DRAINAGE MAINTAIN SHALE.OPEN RUNOFF - //////.//////// ///////// 39 MISC: ///////// 777777777 ///////// 40 E Aug PUBLIC WORKS MGR. PUBLIC Wil-S -Wo 121836 _LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOTS / AND 2, h'AROOR hVLIS, ACCORDING TO TyE PGA T TNEREOF- RECOR050 1A/ VOL l/ME 49 OF PZ.4 TS PAGES /65 7-1-1R0I/6A1 167l /ic/CL l/S/VE- RECOROS OF 6N01/0MI311 COUNTY W4SI14(16720A./. 036 03(o 234 032 BENCHMARK TDP /// CASE LDL',QTEp AT GEwrEk' DF CUL-DE- SAC, DALEy PL 4CE ELE1! 229. 4.5 D•9711,V : C/Ty OF S,01W QAW 6 LEGEND O EX/5r. C.95ED CONC. M"UWlVr o E.V.47. I-MV P/N 1111PLAS7-1C CAP Mz O. 9B 9/ CUT E FILL CALCULATION TOTAL CUT = 660 CO. YOS. TOTAL FILL= 4qZ CU. YOS. NOTES: I) O OVER AILI- CUTE PER TO 8 5CADE p 6E0T6O?NNI04L REPORT. Z) CURBS ARE TO 8E PLACEQ �? EDGE OF PAVED SURFACE'S AS SPECIFIED IN CASCADE TE1riPORA9'ir ROCI-{ - 06NSTRUC7/01\1 EN'j`1RANCE �z y4 't P DRAIN TO BE FIELD SET Law Po/NT IN DRIVEWAY. Zkh RETUNING (DESIGN BY OMERS) legs , z1i DRALL INAGE SWALE ROCKER @ 4 ' MAX. Ica C TYPICAL _ C� /NV. 209 D4 /�Vv.2D2./4 J✓ ,("NEr ` 10 09' ? °#' 2 ©PtVATE VC 7iGuTU�ti2©RAlVA66 CO % ES T. I FOR i RAIN i Q 'vsFP q i h� Q„ PVC 2T16NTLINE� J \ \ % N. FOR AbO�N(TDRAIN W G.B. Q ,�, QQ�Qa` ,` 2s- YghC,) OR4IJV O P V a / l NOTE �' AA- 204,49 �� q 15 �, 9��p5 SfdB CO/4NECT TO EX. / I ��R� \ \\ Q /N✓. /97, 46(5) �ry �` ZOZ- �� D3- ROOF DRAIN STUB FRENC14 DR�IINS TO BE CON 00-EP � � �' � CLEARING LIMITS (T),P) /NY. /97.74(NE.) �' ,1� a\�2�2'Sfee� / PRIOR TOA Y PLACEMENT,OF LL ON sr�re / T14E LOWE PORTION OF TOE 5/T S \ \ �• sg, r / I RECOMME1UOED IN SO/L5 R8•PO T P VI p `ill / py t / // 6Y CA6( OE GEOTECUNICA,L J08 g0 GAG. ! I .�� �� as `\� ,Q©� �-������• . ST'RE� BILE V��"�Ttor� w2�7' ,�.,�02� ✓,f/K2/4.GG�Bsr�r> w�% ,,,,.�"� °: ,o d� `3Ti�Aa�n D►.rC'«, \` ' .- R,OdW- A4ECK DAM W/5/CXQTIOIV OA0eTVP.) -� 1.,.,�..r.1,►�'�x_.,+Ly.7 `\, 1 �,,„,- (P©l.�'E`7-NELENE LlN/NG TO BE'PLACZC(7 EIN:',i7E� PONp AREA PER CASC'AiJE \ G r'l GEt4yE A'W CAL REPORT J08#�30 ' TOP 2//. 87G041- (oG.) IAIV ao77/(E) 2/7-- k% tii •.,��� �, s 64-.I'- To'Q cf, 5ra �- / i ,«fir \ a i TUIS AREA TO BE STRIPPED . Z10 _ . .Z ^ •�'= 43, OD- / J' I, *L A OF VEGETATION R F'F�I©TO G / /'' ' ---- 2� f2 / CONSTRUCTIONOFF93ENC14 Qy !` y��' y�% •� �- '�" 1 / I .� DRAINS OR PLACEMENT �� , y1 ` r 4 / OF ,SILL. I q p� ,Q - N $ Z2D_ / 03 SwAL--' L� 2�,• � I I I I I\ ZaS� I\ 2 �0 +/�+�4�I1 III ItI q LO E ( }2 I °' c7, 1� 4 caw+ i \' x. R ER + �s 4�� p�� / � (� tI III FLaaq k1 gymSo �{ ROCK CNECIS DAM Q? o I f IL14X FF EL - I IL 4. 1 t w/siLTA71 Po� D `� of x t '`� i ez/.00 SAME AS ABOVE Q I I I I I !11 ( 1 ( fI GQRAc E I I ( ROPOSE�O 1 MAX. F.F. EL. TDP 707.43 i TD,a ?45, 09 ?DS - I 2 0 1 a- roP /98, 2/ /9/ GI (E') /9/. S9 (w) I}' �L' � I! /98. G / /5'SAN. BEY✓� P Z- 107'19171 \ O pDD/5 I G� Z0D$ YZG /ir / S,,SAl/V. �t s '�TDPPD3, `Zg swac.E +� IAIl INV. /9B,53 f3E.)9B49�w� I- ,{j89aso -o 4'3�1�V c�GO.G©� j �'' J - i ___�_ 0 � ' �. TOP /99.54 LU a � � W 0 PRO OSED FIN BADE w N EX. GR UN0 ' PROPOS D 146 USE GARAGE F.. 232.00 O 40 8© ORI VENAY PROPL E IM-APL E \jVJJD VI L L A(2) r NO /-I EIG14T CALCULAT/ON 0 NE CORNER 038.3 w NW CORNER E 17.8 * SE CORNER E39.7 * S W CORNER 15.1: I _ - o + N ELECT. Y,P.S�.V.d, .,�' D/ST,Pl�UT/DrV ESN/T. 1% NOTE: SUS- SLAB ©RAIN LOC,4TION S AND SPACING TORE OETER"INED SEP 14 19930 BY SO//-S ENGINEER. PERMIT COUNTER DRAINAGE, GRADING -AND T.E,&S.C.PLAN FOR q10.' 4 MARKMCNIAUGHTOON' Z /(mot `�C� . AVG. GROUND ELE/. 227. ! ��9v R N E I/4 SECT ION 24 T 27 N. , R . y 3 E. W. M k'Et/ �3,9D c�SJ MAX. BLDG I-IE16HT + 25.0 G �� �©^ E D M 0 N D S, WAS H I NGTON MAX. 03 06. ELEV. 052.? RECEIVED 0. 4D060 SUt3-SLAB OR411vS 5-29-90 MM ACTUAL SLOG ELEv. SEP 13 �gg0 I A00E0 14EIGAIT C.4LCS. 4-13 -90 MM C 1.1113NEST POINT = c?4(o.3 , SDA4 INC. ,• ' � Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc. NOTE: ELEVATIONS � BLOC. ENVELOA `� : r�kR '�,• `� loom CORNERS TO BE VERIFIEt7 :`4�4� !: `• ' PRIOR TO CONSTRUCT/ON. ` ;. Engineers /Surveyors / Planners I Development Consultants ANY CI-IAN6E IN ELEVATION 19400 33rd Avenue W., Suite 200 • Lynnwopd, WA 98036 • (206) 775.1591 • (206) 340.0830 j MUST BEAPPROVE0 BY ; PLANNING DIVISION PRIOR ', ^ ' `' t� .•' '` ,2r1 •EW TO CONSTRUCTION. ••••••,•` § d' DRAWN CHECKED DATE F.B. SCALE FILE No, 4. REPER C17Y REVIEW It?p q� � �-14 1909 V. MM 13. DRIVEWAY PROt=105 - � -9© MM MM RSJ 7_ - f5 - 90 J4�1$P.4i10 HE:ET I OF 118442 4 ,)k, NOTE ROCKEWY DGTAI Lr N.T.5. Materials (1) Size categories shall include: ROCKS I E S TO BE 8UI LT ACCORDING' TO SOIL S REPORT PROVIDED BY CASCADE 6E07-E'0,t11VIC4L J08 4 Q00 I - 26 G. Gm ?-P_RF. rVG Two -man rocks (300 to 600 pounds), 13" in least dimension, Three-man rocks (800 to 1200 pounds), 16" in least di- mension; and Four -man rocks (1500 to 2200 pounds), 18" in least di- mension. Four -man rocks shall be used for bottom course rock in all rock retaining walls over 6' in height. (2) The rock material shall be as nearly rectangular as possible. No stone shall be used which does not extend through the wall. The rock material shall be hard, sound, durable and free from weathered portions, seams, cracks, other defects. The rock density shall be a minimum of 160 pounds per cubic foot. The retaining wall shall be started by excavating a trench, not less than six (6) inches or more than one (1) foot in depth below subgrade in excavation sections or below the existing ground level in embankment sections. Rock selection and placement shall be such that there will be minimum voids and, in the exposed face of the wall, no open voids over six (6) inches across in any direction. The final course shall have a continuous appearance and be placed to minimize erosion of the backfill material. The larger rocks shall be placed at the base of the rockery so that the wall will be stable and have a stable appearance. The rocks shall be placed in a manner such that longitudinal axis of the rock shall be at right angles or perpen- dicular to the rockery face. The rocks shall have all inclining faces sloping to the back of the rockery. Each course of rocks shall be seated as tightly and evenly as possible on the course beneath. After setting each course of rock, all voids between the rocks shall be chinked on the back with quarry rock to eli- minate any void sufficient to pass a 2-inch square'probe. The wall backfill shall consist of quarry spalls with a maximum size of four (4) inches and a minimum size of two (2) inches. This material shall be placed to an eight (8) inch minimum thickness between the entire wall and the cut or fill material. The backfill material shall be placed in lifts to an elevation approximately six (6) inches below the top of each course of rocks as they are placed, until the uppermost course is placed. Any backfill material an the bearing surface of one rock course shall be removed before setting the next course. When a sidewalk is to be built over a rock retaining wall, the top of the wall shall be sealed and leveled with a cap constructed of cement concrete, Class "C" in accordance with the applicable provisions of Section 6-02 of the Standard Specifications, but with reduced water content resulting in slump of not over two (2) inches. :.� �;'.,�t' 4"CD.vL'. SLAB �•���.•� .yg1%F.P/AL a a, P/PE - N - SUB -!BLAB it/l. S. 2 "EPEE DRA/.f! M q r rR/.9L IB~Ff'EE D,e,0/A/11_/6 BAGCF/CL /7�fDL/.t/D ,P/PE' SUe- GRADE DFCOrtlP9LTcrD F/U Ole V,9T/Vr SD/L .gS-GO�S/=/Z"MccD //V THE FIELD /3Y xMr SD/t5- EW6l.G�l-ESE'. DRAIN 1. Set the stakes. J i � Flow 2. Excavate ae"x12"trench upslope along the line of stakes. kill- 3. Staple filter material to 4. BRCKFILC WITH 3/q"710 1 yz- WASNEO stakes and extend it into GRAVEL 64CKFILL IN T the trench. RENCiJ . f11 x� Rairl CONSTRUCTION OF A FILTER BARRIER Filter Barrier: This sediment barrier may be constructed using standard strength synthetic filter fabric. It is designed for low or moderate flows not exceeding 1 cfs. 1. The height of a filter barrier shall be a minimum of 15 inches and shall not exceed 18 inches. 2. standard strength synthetic filter fabric shall be purchased In a continuous roll and cut to the length of the barrier to avoid the use of joints (and thus improve the strength and efficiency of the barrier). 3. The stakes shall be spaced a maximum of 3 feet apart at the barrier location and driven securely Into the ground (minimum of%a- nches). 4. A trench shall be excavated approximately O"inches wide and IZ inches deep along the line of stakes and upslope from the barrier. 5. The filter material shall be stapled to the wooden stakes, and ZO " inches of the fabric shall be extended into the trench. Heavy duty wire staples at least 1/2-inch long shall be used. Filter material Shall not be stapled to existing trees. 6. The trench shall be backfilled WIFN 3I4 TO T%z" ln/A5l4EOGRAVEL BACFfFILL OVER 7NE FILTER MATERIAL. 7. if a filter barrier is to be constructed across a ditch line or Swale, the barrier shall be of sufficient length to eliminate end flow, and the plan configuration shall resemble an arc or horseshoe with the ends oriented upslope 8. Filter barriers shall be removed when they have served their useful purpose, but not before the upslope area has been permanently stabi- lized. Maintenance 1. Silt fences and filter barriers shall be inspected immediately after each rainfall and at least daily during prolonged rainfall. Any required repairs shall be made immediately. 2. Should the fabric on a silt fence or filter barrier decompose or become Ineffective prior to the end of the expected usable life and the barrier still be necessary, the fabric shall be replited promptly. 3. Sediment deposits should be removed after each storm event. They . mast be removed when deposits reach approximately one-half the height of the barrier. 4. Any sediment deposits remaining In place after the silt fence or filter barrier is no longer required shall be dressed to conform with the existing grade, prepared and seeded. 0 SM,4LL, ORA/NAGE SWAL E IV.T.S• f34CKFit( {cavPACT To 95 i of MAx OENBI T y UP TO NEW FINISLJED GRODE, WWI 50OX FABRIC oR wulVELENr PEA GRAVEL. b• 4 " PERF. PVC PIPE fe" I FRENCU UR41N N.T.S. •Zwf� i� fs•� l�i�,a��-iw �� •f �.rl. ROCK CHECK DAM NO SCALE 1Z0 ASh, $l, +:ori" �SIU'4At. �� X>ti 1'- 6' ovARRr SPALLS ROCK- LINED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE NOT TO SCALE CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE 1. ATTEND PRE -CONSTRUCTION MEETING 2. FLAG PROPERTY LINES AND CLEARING LIMITS 3. INSTALL ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE CLEAR AND GRUB SITE A.`� ERECT FILTER FENCE AS REQUIRED 6. INSTALL SUBSURFACE AND SURFACE DRAINS AND OUTLETS Gj>, CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE AND SILTATION PONDING AREA 8. EXCAVATE UPPER,ROCKERY CUT AND INSTALL INTERCEPTOR DRAINS AS REQUIRED TO OUTFALL 9. EXCAVATE UPPER CUT OF FOUNDATION FOR GARAGE 10. INSTALL UPPER SHELF HORIZONTAL DRAINS (IF NESC.) AND FOOTING DRAINS TO OUTFALL AS REQUIRED BY SOILS ENGINEER 11. EXCAVATE LOWER FLOOR CUT FOR FOUNDATION 12. INSTALL LOWER SHELF HORIZONTAL DRAINS (IF NESC.) AND FOOTING DRAINS TO OUTFALL AS REQUIRED BY SOILS ENGINEER 13. COVER EXCAVATED SLOPES AS REQUIRED BY SOILS ENGINEER 14. POUR FOUNDATION FOOTING 15. POUR FOUNDATION WALLS 16. SPRAY ALL FOUNDATION DAMPPROOFING 17. INSTALL ALL PERIMETER FOOTING DRAINS 18. BACKFILL ALL INTERIOR AND PARTIAL EXTERIOR FOUNDATIONS 19. INSTALL ALL NECESSARY ROCKERIES AS SHOWN 20. INSTALL ALL UNDERSLAB PLUMBING AND DRAINAGE AS REQUIRED 21. POUR AND FINISH ALL INTERIOR CONCRETE SLABS 22. INSTALL ALL DOWNSPOUT PERIMETER DRAINAGE 23. COMPLETE BACKFILL OF EXTERIOR WALLS 24. INSTALL ALL OTHER UTILITIES: SANITARY SEWERS, WATER LINES, POWER CONDUIT. 25. FINAL GRADE AND PAVE 26. UPON COMPLETION OF LANDSCAPING, REMOVE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL AND CLEAN UP ON SITE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM. aG c'a /-uo2W DRAINAGE, GRADING AND T.E. & S.C. DETAILS irr MARK McNAUGHTON. N E 1 /4 SECT 10 N 24, T• 27 N. , R.3 E•, W.M. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Z REV PER C 1 TY REVIEW 9 - 14 - 90 I ADDED 508-6-4E DRAIN DETAIL 5-zq-90 MM MM Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc. Engineers / Surveyors / Planners / Development Consultants 19400 33rd Avenue W., Suite 200 - Lynnwood, WA 98037 - (206) 775.1591 - (206) 340-0830 SHEET 2 OF 2 12183s _LEGAL DESCRIPTION , LOTS / ANO 2.1 AIAR60R HILLS, ACCORDAi IG TO TYE- IOZ-A7- THEREOF RECOROEO IAA V0Z_ UME 49 OF PL,A7-5 PAGES /65 7X/R01,/6AI 167� rNCLUS/I/E, RECORDS OF 5AI0110MIS,z/ CDUrV TY, WASH1,VGTD�t I. BENCHMARK TDP OF �D,VU,tOEs/)- /N CASE LDC9TEp A7T CEit/TEiP DF CUL -DE -SAC, D.9LEY PL.gG'E ELEV. 229.4-5 0,971.11W: e171 of E,O1t9DN05 LEGEND O EXIST. C.9jED CONC. MD�U�f9ENT o E,'/S7. /RDN P/N 7yC 49P NO D. 98 9/ NOTES: 1) PLASTIC P TO OV LL CUTS PER CD ASCADE R A GEOTECUN104L REPORT. Z) CURBS ARE TO BE PLACEO 8 EDGE OF PAVED SURFACES AS, S SPEC I FI ED /N CASCADE GEOTEe9NIC' L REPORT. TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCj'/ON EN7-RANC�' . T/I/S AREA TO BE STR/pPEO 21 � - S - o .1 1 a YQ "ICJ f7RQtN j OF VEGETATION PRIOR TO �� / 3 /'- + �. -- �,r tZ' -1 4 - G�¢ !�2 1 � &23B- TO BE FIELD SET CONSTRUCT/ON OF FRENCH Q 2�� y$ • D - . 72 0, l j / e LOW PO /N T /N DRAINS OR PLACEMENT '` �� t yi `1' tQ / 22 / r0 ! DRIVEWAY. (� OF F'/LL. / $ _A �1 ZZD_ / p p ``� i� x s SwA�RGE.- - I RETAININGWALL -Q ` 4 Z► { ! ` .. °/ (DESIGN 8Y.07 14ERS) ) _ �' +' `I' 14 v owER FLOOr� , (lug- / ` V I LOWEF�I �h�,lAX. F.F. EL. _ + }} t/� SMALL �\! Q,� I 1 (+ II F"O 1\ i ^. � SO I DRAINAGE 1 7 ROCf� CHECK DAM �-► ,. - ` A 4 MAX. F, EL - I Q ( 1 ( SWALE W/ S/LTAT/OA �O� D < Zdi9 (I �l 1 2 (SAME A, ASOVE r' f �. I i `, � 12 OHO " Et�t `i/6+1/t I �. I I I 11 64R4 E XL==rra POSEV �i MAX. F.F. -L. TDP Zd7.4S i �... A40uSE ��� 23z.O /,vt! 2d3,25(,J, I98.84(s) ,. ' ....._ I - I 1 2z , : I TYCKERY @ 4 "MAX"dVT I 47 /NV. 202.04 - p� o /� $A-~ 3Q5' _'� t3�1 C../ J(' Zoe _ IO P 1VATE' 1 4"PVC ricuTuNE CO -✓ DRAINAGE I f/e M!N" J Q� ES T I FOR R RUIN I, C� Al 4"PVC 7-1614TLINU �/ ���, �► p�. �� i / FOR 2)TING. BRAIN W G.B. P Q�1 Q� '_ Y4AO f)RA/N O / �- , Pf b 1 / NOTE: 1 �� > 7, 200, 9 0 I \ \ �!' � 15 �+ 9i��5 grd8 COJVNECT TO EX. / < /iv✓. /97, e6(S� �ti �` Za2� �y�' �Zo3- RdOF ©RAIN STUB FRENC14 DR�1Ns .To BE CON UCTED \ CLEAR/NG L/n�1T5 �r Rj /NV /97. 74 (NE.) �'� ,1� ,\ �ZA2� 5%4.ehl / PRIOR TO A Y PLACEMENT OF L(- ON G� T14E LOWS PORTION OF PNE SIT S \ RECOMMEI CEO IN SOILS R�'PORT P Vl 0 BY CAS( 4bE GEOTECUNICA\L JO8- q0 GAG. bLP � /g/. G/ (E) 11 .41 , 10� � / ,I`o .:-- ,dp 2os 8 • / I _. 1 ; -� ` . �, " _ ; _ /9/ s9 <wJ d' 1z' �, I , vc! /98 / /5'sgv SEt-✓ce �ssvT G 0 Q \\�140�5 �p`I \ * 2008 Z7jh�-- /G5. s S �., __...... �a ..S. A- H. -� � 8"/'vC 99� '--'�"TDPzd3. s� ,' / x2l9 C- --I- -►-- / o n --3 ; 036 0369 2-94 0130 CUT E FILL CALCULATION TOTAL CUT = 880 CU. YDS. TOTAL FK. L. = 49 Z C U. YDS. 221.7°, STREET FILE /Nv. 2/7. 87 (8 IIX) ROCW ;C'I"I ECK DAM � SAY SILTAT]ON AoNyo(iYP, TdnD sT �a 1 �'f?OL�}'ETUELENE uNING TO sEPLAet '. SU M UM(- Y Tc7 ,,,UND R POND AREA PER C45C'AVc- L, q/1��C�C REPORT JOBI TOP 2//. 87 /// /,012475d(S.) ,F} `7 ©{ �� , G �05�I'� � 1/�,,,'� r �T'4,t� f 4 1/1 zrG-�{r• 2�'�' r22a- GA6 / +y�4i f J / 4. b 0/9B- Tux -- + INV. /98,'5389°50'3¢Gti GD. GD' ` \ P, t-- - 269 o N � W p PRO OSEO ,FIN. RARE EX. GR 9 UN49 ° PROPOS 0 I40 USE GARAGE F.. z32.00 0 40 e0 OR/ VE'WAY PROFI L E �,� �1 N N.. ELECT. T,P.9NS, .� D/ST,E'IgUTIDN N , N ESif9T. I A iM r- F1 r \i\J J J D V 1 L L r1% r r 1\1 J 4NOTE: sue-sLAa 17Rq/N cocAT10Ns AND SPACING TO SE DETERMINED 1UElGl-IT CALCULAT/Ot * NE CORNER Z38.3 W NW CORNER Z 17.8 * SE CORNER 239.7 * SW CORNER 410.9�:. BY 50/1- S E/VGINEER- C_Z ,49e�, /Icy *-C- '711,Flyd. wwI�90 A?, AVG. GROUND ELEV. 007.7/gDr�jJ MAX. BLOC 14EI614T MAX, 83 06. ELEV. 252.7 {: RECEIVED ACTN UGNEBT POINT V = 046.3 ± 1' ` S E P 13 1990 , "I V a Lj . 5 14 13311 PERMIT COUNTER DRA I NAGE, GRADI NG AN D T.E. & S.C. PLAN FOR MARK MC'1h)JAUGHT0'LN' N E. 1/4 SECTI ON 241 T 27 N., R.3 E«,W.M. EDMONDS, WASH INGTON Z. .400E© SUB- SLAB DRAINS S.-c29 - 90 MM 1 40060 IIEI697- CALCS. 4- I3 -90 MM � f;••n`kl�fk',«..'t� Lovell-Saue�riand & Associates, Inc. NOTE: ELEVATIONS e B-OG. ENVELo>� _.. _ .,,, SPA, INC. CORNERS TO BE VEF?1A1F : ��'�i Engineers /Surveyors /Planners/ Development Consultants{ PR/OR TO CONSTRUCT/© ' ANY C"41V 'E IN ELEVATION M UST BE APPROVED $Y ; PLANNING 01VISIONPRIOf TO CONSTRUCTION.- 4., REV. PER 01r>' REVIew, B. DRIVEWAY PROF105 u •".:ftiy 02-12- J39 F4&22969 9-14 -c'O to - -7 -90 19400 33rd Avenue W., Suite 200 • Lynnwood, WA 98036 (206) 775-1591 • (206) 340.0830 i DRAWN CHECKED, DATE F.H. SCALE Fii.E NO, rr�� MM MM RSJ ?-15-90 ,343��?47 i� %' G.3 91-10%HEET I OF.. 2 1 NOTE K0GKF_1gY VGTAI L N.T.5. Materials (1) Size categories shall include: ROCKERIES TO BE BUILT ACCORDING' TO SOILS REPORT PROVIDED SY CASCADE 660 7-EC41 JV ICAL J08 4 000I - 0& G. Two -man rocks (300 to 600 pounds), 13" in least dimension; Three-man rocks (800 to 1200 pounds), 16" in least di- mension; and Four -man rocks (1500 to 2200 pounds), 18" in least di- mension. Four -man ;ocks shall be used for bottom course rock in all rock retaining walls over 6' in height. (2) The rock material shall be as nearly rectangular as possible. No stone shall be used which does not extend through the wall. The rock material shall be hard, sound, durable and free from weathered portions, seams, cracks, other defects. The rock density shall be a minimum of 160'pounds per cubic foot., The retaining wall shall be started by excavating a trench, not less than six (6) inches or more than one (1) foot in depth below subgrade its excavation sections or below the existing ground level in embankment sections. Rock selection and placement shall be such that there will be minimum voids and, in the exposed face of the wall, no open voids over six (6) inches across in any direction. The final course shall have a continuous appearance and be placed to minimize erosion of the backfill material. The larger rocks shall be placed at the bea of the rockery so that the wall will be stable and have a stable appearance. The rocks shall be placed in a manner such that longitudinal axis of the rock shall be at right angles or perpen- dicular to the rockery face. The rocks shall have all Inclining faces sloping to the back of the rockery. Each course of rocks shall be seated as tightly and evenly as possible on the course beneath. After setting.each course of rock, all voida between the rocks shall, be chinked on the back with quarry rock to -eli- minate"any void sufficient to pass a 2-inch square probe. The well backfill shall consist of quarry spells with a maximum size of four (4) inches and a minimum size of two (2) inches. This material shall be placed to an eight (8), Snch minimum thickness between the entire wall and the cut or.fill material. The backfill material shall be placed in lifts to an elevation approximately six (6) inches below the top of each course of rocks as they are placed, until the uppermost course is placed. Any backfill material on the bearing surface of one rock course shall be removed before setting the next course. When a sidewalk is to be built over a rock retaining wall, the top of the wall shall be sealed and 'leveled with a cap constructed of cement concrete, Class "C" in accordance with the applicable provisions of Section 6-02 of the'Standard Specifications, but with reduced water content resulting in slump of not over two (1) inches. •4'COWL. 516PAS :. J.• •. �• .. • ► • a A�/iiiF!�/ri7'L • � • P/PE •, •a • r ' Jm�XDL/ND Ip/lax ZIAlexE DRA//! M11g1r 'R/.9L 1. Set the stakes, Flow 2. Excavate 3B"Al2"trench., upslope along the line of stakes. 3. Staple filter material to 4, BACKFILC WITH 3/q"TO 1�/Z" WRSNED stakes and extend 1t into L !N T theGRAVEL BgCKP/L trench, RENC14 CONSTRUCTION OF A FILTER BARRIER Filter Barrier: Thissedimentbarrier may be constructed using standard strength synthetic filter fabric. It is designed for low or moderate flows not exceeding 1 cfs. L. The height of a filter barrier shall be a minimum of 15 inches and shall not exceed 18 inches. 2. standard strength synthetic filter fabric shall be purchased In a continuous roll and cut to the length of the barrier to avoid the use of joints (and thus improve the strength and efficiency of the barrier). 3. The stakes shall be spaced a maximum of 3 feet apart at the barrier location and driven securely into the ground (minimum offs inches). 4. A trench shall be excavated approximately 8" inches wide and 1Z inches deep along the line of stakes and upslope from the barrier. 5. The filter material shall be stapled to the wooden stakes, and ZO " inches of the fabric shall be extended into the trench. Heavy duty wire staples at least 1/2-inch long shall be used. Filter material snail not be stapled to existing trees. 6. The trench shall be backfilled WITH 3/4"-r6 lYa" WaSl1EOGRRVEL BQCIJFILL OVEFR 714E FiL76R A,1ATEFfI4L. 7. If a filter barrier Is to be constructed across a ditch linear Swale, the barrier shall be of sufficient length to eliminat2 end flow, and the plan configuration shall resemble in arc or horseshoe with the ends oriented upslope 8. Filter barriers shall be removed when they have served their useful purpose, but not before the upslope area has been permanently stabi- lized. Maintenance 1. Silt fences and filter barriers shall be inspected immediately after each rainfall and at least daily during prolonged rainfall. Any required repairs shall be made immediately. 2.. Should the fabric on a silt fence or filter barrier decoigose or become ineffective prior to the end of the expected usable life and the barrier still be necessary, the fabric shall be replaced promptly. 3. Sediment deposits.should be removed after, each storm event. They . must be removed when deposits reach approximately one-half the height of the barrier. 4. Any sediment deposits remaining in place after the silt fence or filter barrier is no longer required shall be,dressed to conform with the existing grade, prepared and seeded. 0 SMALL DRAINAGE SMILE N. T S. el.c></L Y.Q�G� B.c.�rR/ ,t+ e4civrxe � com-lxT ro 45% of MAx. cENSIry UP rO NEW FIN151460 GRIWE. --__ �rrl�v S//aa!- bRo9,0E' 4/ce44 Pr9E7E© f14 -*L 40.0 .VRr/vF' Sd /L AS- ee1VX1.e1W4Lr4 /.V iHW SUB -BLAB DRAM M/RAFI 56OX FABRIC oR E'QUIVELENr r � --- PEA GRAVEL. 4" PERF. PVC PIPE ���f�i+i �®t/ile!i'fi�i j'.•fw+wi ROCK CHECK DAM NO SCALE ®�RI 1019* S. 4p 1, shI or /ANAL E�pfl 8 " AIIAt - 4*-S' OVARRr SOALLS ROCK- LINED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE NOT TO SCALE CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCe 1. ATTEND PRE -CONSTRUCTION MEETING 2. FLAG PROPERTY LINES AND CLEARING LIMITS 3. INSTALL ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE -7.--4, CLEAR AND GRUB SITE ERECT FILTER FENCE AS REQUIRED 6. INSTALL SUBSURFACE AND SURFACE DRAINS AND OUTLETS �. CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE AND SILTATION PONDINd AREA 8. EXCAVATE UPPER ROCKERY CUT AND INSTALL INTERCEPTOR DRAINS AS REQUIRED TO OUTFALL 9. EXCAVATE UPPER CUT OF FOUNDATION FOR GARAGE 10. INSTALL UPPER SHELF HORIZONTAL DRAINS (IF NESC.),AND FOOTING DRAINS TO OUTFALL AS REQUIRED BY SOILS ENGINEER 11. EXCAVATE LOWER FLOOR CUT FOR FOUNDATION 12. INSTALL LOWER SHELF HORIZONTAL DRAINS (IF NESC.) AND FOOTING DRAINS TO OUTFALL AS REQUIRED BY SOILS ENGINEER 13. COVER EXCAVATED SLOPES AS REQUIRED BY SOILS ENGINEER 14 . - POt`FR'FOUNDATION, FOOTING 15. POUR FOUNDATIOR WALLS 16. SPRAY ALL FOUNDATION DAMPPROOFING 17. INSTALL ALL PERIMETER FOOTING DRAINS 18. BACKFILL ALL INTERIOR AND PARTIAL EXTERIOR FOUNDATIONS 19. INSTALL ALL NECESSARY ROCKERIES AS SHOWN 20. INSTALL ALL UNDER,SLAB PLUMBING'AND DRAINAGE AS REQUIRED 21. POUR AND FINISH ALL INTERIOR CONCRETE SLABS 22. INSTALL ALL DOWNSPOUT PERIMETER DRAINAGE 23. COMPLETE BACKFILL OF EXTERIOR WALLS 24. INSTALL ALL OTHER UTILITIES: SANITARY SEWERS, WATERLINES, POWER CONDUIT. 25. FINAL GRADE AND PAVE 26. UPON COMPLETION OF LANDSCAPING, REMOVE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL AND CLEAN UP ON SITE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM. DRAINAGE, GRADING AND T.E• & S.C. DETAILS FOR MARK Mc NAUGHTON N E I f4 SECT 10 N 24, T. 27 N. , R.3 E., W.M. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Z REV PER C i 7 Y REVIEW 9 -14 - 9O MM I ADDED SU8-SLAB DRAIN DE'TR/L 5-Zq-90 MM Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc. MIM Engineers / Surveyors / Planners/ Development Consultants FRENCH-! ORQ 11V 19400 33rd Avenue W., Suite 200 • Lynnwood, WA 98037 • (206) 775-1591 • (206) 340-0830 Mrs, DRAWN CHECKED DATE F.B. SCALE I FILE NO. MM RSJ 21-15 -90 843 NONE 2355 SHEET 2 OF '2 �1