The URL can be used to link to this page

1141 SEA VISTA PL.PDF11111111111111 12998 1141 SEA VISTA PL • • ADDRESS: y 1, A TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE): COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR: CRITICAL AREAS: —06 tQ I 6 1 DETERMINATION: ❑ Conditional Waiver x Study Required ❑ Waiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT # S: DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: PARKING AGREEMENTS DATEI EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR: PERMITS (On 47"-5- PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED: SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED://�7} SEWER LID FEE $: LID #: SHORT PLAT FILE: LOT: BLOCK: SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #: SOILS REPORT DATED: STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #: FOR: WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: OTHER L:\TEMP\DSTs\Forcns\Surd File Checklistdoc 1 MEW /I/PER A?�ac+ La0'VEW.fY - 9S7 sr C� AEli1J Lr EX AY171£gr AT ALV HF7:1wPrYLA r - .s IV '7 A7 -05M LLcC1V - J/3 9'' eV AWAA'l I PAAO - ?Q5 ,9r EX AVOW?Y OV AM PER7Y M RE, ;r /r i'AVOMSM ROaXPr } ! (2.9' MAx ATM � .zs'sRav P/L,1 I MeDvcr oA9mgo'w LY.999wav mvaV PER am ONGS� E I I I S' SO PER I aNL am" { I I I dl i fi! Jv_ - 'aa IUAOV I Tt PEA aNl ONGS s �t 8� 8 SJA!/C7lAPAL Q7�£1PAGL 7L7TAL OEO1' - !IO .Si AMY &A9 - JS75 9� TOTAL AREA - 4315.9r TOTAL LOT Aa£A - 1Z -M Sr Q7YDPAOr - .TQ9J.t' PLOT PLAN I M I EucH 0. _ TlEm AND AssociATEs II J.oa' I 1 jSEA VISTA ij 517- BENQYM79 /1 PLACE ! I� raIN,0 Z 1/2 0 t BRASS MMUNDW �. r4llil, LN P/i�£ADOWEX cum a?7DPAND WALA( ArEXLbP/i�£WAji! AA® AZM4t'ZW/ NE7o� CUM a/77DP AND WALK PDP am ONES LEGAL DESctavnaN: LOT 1, SEA VISTA, AIG TO THE PLAT �! THEREOF FILED IN VOLUME 18 PLATS, PAGE 147. RECORDS OF SNOHMtISH COUNTY, WA WMCT TO ANY AND Ad EASEMENTS. cowNANTs, AND RESTRIcnONS of RECORD. F ANY. ' ? INXONG WLL/ME3 . I s&L - Lar CY air - mi cr II EX rm EZE'Y. a 3149 NEA►FTC0--w I � ilk o 6 SO LXJkN.G°I'. r . d . a a \ ,�.� �t 3 j'R ": rz -a•�\,. �.� ::; �"�`�` �,, f a"i A7 CYXLEC7m P OldaJ/ \ a PL%! Lo' AP AV WERr g t, y E%RL/Om a/RB 0P `ti L1'sRrN1 vY2 II j ` a� 'd A!/OYENm EDGEPE7P ' I it i 4 ' vp GIN RIN I Ate, = :ate; °"��Rir�EW r�' w W Awfor BP£.4Y .' .e \ e I- IIW ., OMGS AT Lg . 95e S saiO Q i -� r r' .ns •[L;is a a716/ d r I{ALK (APIPQV/ ' ar Az�Pr Lk7Q'/T CA[a4AALM(S /BA.SY:D 0v G8'QNAL QPALIF) ; e A: 3? M' S .tt..s �: Se ..l'.x'1' : 3.3t:; o+ B - J711a 1 S �\ 3 O J.ZM-V' = &r MEAN 4z?Cz s e' 70' F1iP t GARALi it 15' ♦ L W suNWT a Aswkr EX cxow 07 EX a" & � Q .i�L26J',YAX s:aNWT � A'EUOL£ EX aA89 L4P EX aoPB 4 ['T1r7DP rO' AMWVV NOW NEW cAntVAY 7La' A7A r - T•LSZO' ELEY a1T mu BE Lof.A)m.. Aw 1fRT am LTP NOTE ALL U1010FO LM1 6E aJr AM (/F H� 47 MOW AEM OR'HrWAY ' \ CVM G W77DP 7O AWOV ZUSANC LNSTALLED LAYOER0PWA22 a? & 17L6rAM ADD tD LYABi 0P ( JE7PNLl� t c 7N raw PER 004 _ SPOti�GC'M CaVZ G L7 AM >a A,A7L7/ E 91JVO - — - — - — - ----�---------Q�V0IAQV,S'Pt7P a!1 GV(6S----- MOM I LiN1DPUNE MOVWlE1VTAA0V RE7/Ot£ EX MIEIYAY aom a/T B RE IVa W/ YMXAL MW 6,47W 3 '' 70977 NOT FWNO BY s7APYEYOP f1.O 'Ae�r' AC7a'1H 0VLv7.gYS .9i17W ALAT ALE APPMPENT YERAC.IL aaPB AS ACR/ALLY A LTL49 A4C7 S" BEN . HOLT — OWNER a1rm? w/Aswacro►D�Ar ro ;w aow FALL M9W acve AW L7177ER 4V QPAH1C SCALE BEOYMM LED MW70V D99MVC aM+LVAOW AME40 0FA 10MCAL 0-M ai- E7ENV -J AV .A 1141 SEA VISTA PL, EDMONDS, WA 98020 v PD, ate DOW �E�rAe �a�r-- w 0 o PARCEL #: 00568300000100— ►� P� � I WIM Q'A a%ZWr AMM se'An I ,1n o v/L 10 za' o Ne•MAtxx�Rr 1+ AZWT Or E1' RCO%Rr A L- ACV MtFL P1Y LAC - 4.Y AMW AVPff Or RLM'E1PY 70 29, S5r7L^i.GO k W ! S L/ EXPOSED EXPOSED OECf( AREA — ,31,3 SF PA 770 — 205 SF TOTAL DECK AREA — 440 SF t' �Y - rAr si1A= a evAmav5 ARE ' 97HO ELEY4AOV,9 AS NOW Mil NEW RW%V?r sr AE 1N NVA1 AJ£ DagnVc AWtVPY 0 A/E P/L aEVAMV Or A1E A/EW ROOtERY IS "MM r YD? BMW AT D9W M4W AW 5 a LESS PROPOSED HOUSE 1141 ndiA1APE�P SEA VISTA PLACE ayc ONGS BLOG , •••.• I , rr RD? am �•� .� AYaV ROOF •:•:o; LOWER••- • MAIN FLOOR ELEV. = 327.0 :.. AW MU AWW •• SEA l9STA VOL. 18, P, 47 I LOT 1 aw UP "NmT YARD scpE NLY mm MALL - np mv mar IMP 203 SF NEW 1-1/I' X47D? �.SOPNCE W � :a I c Zone R-5.10 T `Comer V1 Flag Setbac :,� R r :_-" Actual Front Sides 10 �J O W 25 25 Odw 5 25 25 Hei t 25 25 00 I • PLANNING DATA is SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IFStreet File Name: i 11H 15 C A V 1* G," P I Review Date: Site Address: D" J-t-o 1"t Permit Number: Project Description: D 0 DN/ s— Zoning: Comp Plan: S — IAV-10G(M -12 Corner Lot: OEI/ NO) Flag Lot: (YES ON Small Site Plan: E / NO) ADU Created: (YES / 0) LLA: CUP: / Variance: Shoreline: �. Subdivision/Legal/Recording Number: l Legal Nonconforming Land Use Determination Issued: (YES Critical Areas Determination #: ® Study Required ❑ Waiver NYC �/✓� �V SEPA Determination: d y c,LA,5t- Re uired Setbacks Street: ,y Side: j� Side: Re Actual Setbacks Street: �� Side: 1 o Side: 25 Rear: 2r7, • Rockeries Retainin Wal • Fences/Trellises/Arbors Bay Windows/Projecting Modulation •s39=-Stairs •Covered Deck/Porch • > 30" Eaves Chimney/Fireplace • Uncovered Unenclosed < 30" Deck/Porch/Patio 2 •a ' (A� -M.L s-v1'ea c..4,- a rc c, PLA(-a.,, - Parking Required: 2 Parking Provided: Coverage Required: 35% Coverage Provided: 3l } p,2$ ac, �yV10ca) Lot Area: 1 ZI ;5 -7 I Lot CoverageCLkCI_ ar4-0 �XA/>t J 3 5-115 Calculations: �---- '� 31'!� B ilding Height Datum Point: - (c h y d raMt t0O (t Datum Elevation: 5,2 5. �L L - Maximum Height: 25' 2 'jy-cj, �O Actual Height: 34 5. - ',+ 5 O 1/1,81.5 324.7 0 3Z3• l03 315.�5 3 � 8 LA C-- 6 i vt,v� 1252.52 Ji 3 2 :u 'M ANI 1 3ry, -3 Plan Review By: Gina Coccia, Associate Planner 0 City of Edmonds • Critical Area Notice of Decision Applicant: 0Inn ftV It Property Owner: E5Cwl -tt--DI+ Critical Area File #: ,y p (p ( Permit Number: g I-P 2- Ol 2. _ O 2lo 4i l.D Site Location: 141 9 A U p( Parcel Number: Project Description: New 15?R- V(f pool ❑ Conditional Waiver. No critical area report is required for the project described above. 1. There will be no alteration of a Critical Area or its required buffer. 2. The proposal is an allowed activity pursuant to ECDC 23.40.220, 23.50.220, and/or 23.80.040. 3. The proposal is exempt pursuant to ECDC 23.40.230. Erosion Hazard. Project is within erosion hazard area. Applicant must prepare an erosion and sediment control plan in compliance with ECDC 18.30. ❑ Critical Area Report Required. The proposed project is within a critical area and/or a critical area buffer and a critical area report is required. A critical area report has been submitted and evaluated for compliance with the following criteria pursuant to ECDC 23.40.160: 1. The proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas in accordance with ECDC 23.40.120, Mitigation sequencing; 2. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare on or off the development proposal site; 3. The proposal is consistent with the general purposes of this title and the public interest; 4. Any alterations permitted to the critical area are mitigated in accordance with ECDC 23.40.110, Mitigation requirements. 5. The proposal protects the critical area functions and values consistent with the best available science and results in no net loss of critical functions and values; and 6. The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards. ❑ Unfavorable Critical Area Decision. The proposed project is not exempt or does not adequately mitigate its impacts on critical areas and/or does not comply with the criteria in ECDC 23.40.160 and the provisions of the City of Edmonds critical area regulations. See attached findings of noncompliance. ❑ Favorable Critical Area Decision. The proposed project as described above and as shown on the attached site plan meets or is exempt from the criteria in ECDC 23.40.160, Review Criteria, and complies with the applicable provisions of the City of Edmonds critical area regulations. Any subsequent changes to the proposal shall void this decision pending re -review of the proposal. ❑ Conditions. Critical Area specific condition(s) have been applied to the permit number referenced above. See referenced permit number for specific condition(s). G IA COt a.-- Reviewer Signature 05'�21/201� Date Appeals: Any decision to approve, condition, or deny a development proposal or other activity based on the requirements of critical area regulations may be appealed according to, and as part of, the appeal procedure, if any, for the permit or approval involved. Revised 12/16/2010 16 PLANNING DATA STREET FILE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL --------- - Name: l p I l D'Ite Site Address: � ress:------- -- -� - --- Plan -Check # �1 ------- G�OOr% p O -- �`�' ------ 5=--------- -� - - -- -- - - --- - -- Project Description: 5(__4 ,4- devL-0 Q X� S (q Reduced Site Plan Provided: ('0/ NO) Zoning: Map Page: 3 Corner Lot: Y / NO) J Flag Lot: (YES /CO) Critical Areas Determination ff o / %Study Required & ro it o n 11A Z �►- 5 `� r O CK� y `�� r �� ❑ Waiver _ SEPA Determination: tSS v ccJ� '5/z. ❑ Exempt Needed (for over S 0 cubic yards of grading) w4'milt_ - hecklist Z_ S� I Sider) 10 Street: rW Z 5' Side: ❑ Detached Structures: ❑ Rockeries: ❑ Fences/Trellises: ❑ Bay Windows/Projecting Modulation. - El Stairs/Deck- Datum Point: Maximum Height Allowed: -1 Parking Required: Z_ -0--A-PO List with notarized form e uired Setbacks Rear:( Actual Setbacks Side: ___ ZS_ Z� Datum Elevation: 3 Z 5 - 7 q z 5 Actual Height: 3 Z Y g Y S 2 Other Parking Provided: f Lot Area: ( I t9 l f� / Lot Coverage Calculations::" Aptw ADU Created: (YES / Subdivision: N,% Maximum Lot Coverage: 35% Proposed: 3y, 9 X Legal Nonconforming Land Use Determination Issued: (YES / f ) � Comments ely ca.(c s A — 32q.S 3zq 31D.3T! 4-av5 (atI Z 5= 3 y s. 3 7 S �►aG,,� Plan Review By: Pldru" NO form 04-I I OG.doc �el ? f I- o t ('�,m ySkawwtiaf's wda�,� z 767, r-,// F t S�U��oj (0V-tra� -f- e re lug 7r T`' U� 1 --:-> S- f�414 c /f\C(VC& ri m L L t rL (t- c(.d op En,y �y CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS,WA 98020 PHONE: (425) 771-0220 - FAX: (425) 771-0221 STATUS: ISSUED 10/24/2008 Permit #: BLD20071100 BUILDING' Expiration Date: 10/24/2009 Project Address: 1141 SEA VISTA PL, EDMONDS Parcel No: 00568300000100 PROPERTVONVNER APPLICANT CONTRACTOR BEN HOLT BEN HOLT HOMEOWNER EXEMPTION TAKEN 22508 76TH AVE W 22508 76TH AVE W EDMONDS, WA 98026 EDMONDS, WA 98026 425-775-4616 425-775-4616 LICENSE #: EXP: C DESCRIPTION SFR VALUATION: $568,569 PERMIT TYPE: Residential PERMIT GROUP: 64 - Single Family Residence New GRADING: Y CYDS: 767 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: VB RETAININGWALL ROCKERY: N OCCUPANT GROUP: R3 OCCUPANT LOAD: FENCE: N ( 0 X 0 FT.) CODE: 2006 OTHER: N------- OTHER DESC: ZONE: RS-10 NUMBER OF STORIES: 2 VESTED DATE: NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS: I BASEMENT: 0 1 ST FLOOR: 0 2ND FLOOR: 0 PROPOSED BASEMENT: 2267 1 ST FLOOR: 3736 2ND FLOOR: 0 3RD FLOOR: 0 GARAGE: 0 DECK: 0 OTHER: 0 13RD FLOOR: 0 GARAGE: 1519 DECK: 578 OTHER: 0 FRONTSETBACK SIDESETBACK REQUIRED: 25 E PROPOSED: 25 REQUIRED: 10 N PROPOSED: 10 REQUIRED: 25 S PROPOSED: 26 HEIGHT ALLOWED:25 PROPOSED:24.8 REQUIRED: 25 W PROPOSED: 35 SETBACK NOTES: APPROVAL I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUCTION AND IN DOINGTHE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATINGTO WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18:27. THIS APPLICATION IS NOT A PERMIT UNTIL SIGNED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL OR HIS/HER DEPUTY AND ALL FEES ARE PAID. Signature Print Name Date Released By Date ATTENTION IT IS UNLA WFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUC-LURE UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC109/ IBC'I 10/ IRCI 10. = ARCHIVE = APPLICANT = ASSESSOR = OTHER E STATUS: ISSUED BLD20071100 CONDITIONS REQUIRED SPECIAL INSPECTIONS FOR THIS PROJECT: 1) SOIL CUTS 2) "TEMPORARY ECO BLOCK SHORING 3) FOUNDATION SUB -GRADE VERIFICATION 4) RETA IN ING WA LUROCKERY PLA CEM ENT 5) PLACEMENT OF FILL AND COMPACTION (INCLUDING SWIMMING POOL) 6) SUBSURFA CE DRA INA G13 INSTA LLATION 7) TEMPORA RY AND PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL • Lit line stakes must be in place at the time of foundation/setback inspection. • A II new. extended, re -built or relocated electrical utility and/or service shall be placed underground. • Installation. use and maintenance of equipment and components shall be per manufacturer's specifications, installation instructions, and applicable state codes. Provide manufacture's installation instructions on site for Building Inspector. • Approval of this foundation design is conditional subject to inspection of existing site soil conditions. Retaining Walls must be designed and constructed to resist the lateral pressure of the retained material. Provisions must be made for the control and drainage ofsut ace water around buildings. • Installer shall provide the manufacturer's installation, operating instructions, and a whole house ventilation system operation description. A label shall be affixed to the whole house timer control that reads "Whole House Ventilation" (see operating instructions). • Maximum Height 25 feet. Measured from average elevation of undisturbed soil at comers of extended building rectangle. Subject to field check by building department. • Special inspections have been called foron this project and are noted on the approved construction plans and building permit. It is the owner and/or contractors responsibility to assure that reports are provided to the City on a weekly basis. Be advised -- if special inspection reports are not forthcoming, the Building Official may issue a "Stop Work" and no City inspections will be provided until such time as the reporting agency has complied and reports are reviewed and approved by the City. • Hose Bibbs (exterior faucets) are required to have a permanently affixed anti -siphon device installed. • In addition to the required pressure/reliefvalve, an approved listed expansion tank shall be installed on all hot water tanks. Per UPC 608. • "Type 13 or L vent connectors required on fuel -burning appliances passing through unheated spaces. Per IMC 803.2 • Obtain Electrical Permit from State Department of Labor & Industries. 425-290-1309 • Pursuant to UPC 603.2 a water service shutoff shall be installed on the water line as it enters the building. • Gas pipe test must be observed by City Building Inspector, affidavits shall not be accepted. • City approved plastic piping may be used in water service piping provided that where metal water service piping is used for electrical grounding purposes, replacement piping shall be of like materials (UPC 604.8). A state electrical pen -nit and inspection is required if electrical grounding is altered. removed, improved. or added. Contact State Dept. of Labor & Industries Electrical Division at 425-290-1309. • Submit all special inspection reports to the City Building Inspector on a weekly basis. • Final approval on a project or final occupancy approval must be °ranted by the Building Official prior to use or occupancy of the building or structure. Check thejob card for all required City inspections including final project approval and final occupancy inspections. • Any request for alternate design, modification, variance or other administrative deviation (hereinafter "variance") from adopted codes, ordinances or policies must be specifically requested in writing and be called out and identified. Processing fees for such request shall be established by Council and shall be paid upon submittal and are non-refundable. Approval of any plat or plan containing provisions which do not comply with city code and for which a variance has not been specifically identified, requested and considered by the appropriate city official in accordance with the appropriate provision of city code or state law does not approve any items not to code specification. • Pursuant to UPC 608 a pressure regulator valve (PRV) shall be installed near the water shutoff: • Sound/Noise originating from temporary construction sites as a result ofconstruction activity are exempt from the noise limits of ECC Chapter 5.30 only during the hours of 7:00am to 6:00pm on weekdays and 10:00am and 6:00pm on Saturdays, excluding Sundays and Federal Holidays. At all othertimes the noise originating fi-omconstruction sites/activates must comply with the noise limits of Chapter 5.30, unless a variance has been granted pursuant to ECC 5.30.120. • Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns, and successors in interests, agrees to indemnify defend and hold harmless the City of lidmonds. Washington, its officials, employees. and agents from any and all claims for damages of whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly fi•om the issuance Ib this permit. Issuance of this pen -nit shall not be deemed to modily, waive or reduce any requirements of any City ordinance not limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance provision. • Installation, use and maintenance of equipment and components shall be per manufacturer's specifications, installation instructions, and applicable state codes. Provide ranutacture's installation instructions on site for Building Inspector. THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE SEPARATE PERMISSION. PERMIT TIME LIMIT: SEE ECDC 19.00.005(A)(6) BUILDING (425) 771-02201-DiT. 1333 1 ENGINEERING (425) 771-0220 EXT. 1326 1 FIRE (425) 771-0215 PUBLIC WORKS (425) 771-0235 1 PRETREATMENT (425) 672-5755 1 RECYCLING (425) 273-4801 When calling for an inspection please leave the following information: Permit Number, Job Site Address, Type of Inspection being requested, Contact Name and Phone Number, Date Prefereed, and whether you prefer morning or afternoon. • GG-osion Control/Mobilization • GStonnTightline • Glntiltration System 1---Footing Drywell • GFooting Drain TL Conveyance • GWater Seivice Line • GEngineering Final • B-Setbacks • B-Footings • B-Foundation Wall o B-Isolated Footings/Piers • B-Retaining! Wall • B-Slab Insulation • B-Plumb Ground Work • B-First Floor Framing • B-Plumb Rough In • B-Gas Test/Pipe • B-Equipment-Mech • B-Exterior Sheathing • B-Shear Nailing • B-Height Verification • B-Framing • B-Walllnsulation/Caulk • B-Floor Insulation/Caulk • B-Ceilin_ Insulation/Caulk • B-Sheetrock Nail • B-Building Final ffrLU City. Edmonds Development Services Department Planning Division Phone: 425.771.0220 Fax: 425.771.0221 The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is to be filled out by any person preparing a Development Permit Application for the City of Edmonds prior to his/her submittal of the application to the City. The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to determine whether any potential Critical Areas are, or may be, present on the subject property. The information needed to complete the Checklist should be easily available from observations of the site or data available at 1 � 1 Date ReclWed: 17 IOU City Receipt #: Qnr) �/,3 8 Critical Areas File M GP -A 200 (o- Of 01 Critical Areas Checklist Fee: $135.00 Date Mailed to Applicant:l4 Z— Z00 (�. A property owner, or his/her authorized representative, must fill out the checklist,sign and date it, and submit it . to the City. The City will review the checklist, make a precursory site visit, and make a determination of the subsequent steps necessary to complete a development permit application. Please submitaa vicinity map, along with the signed copy of this form to assist City staff in finding and locating the specific piece of property described on this form. In addition, the applicant shall include other pertinent information (e.g. site plan, topography map, etc.) or studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assistant staff in completing their preliminary assessment of the site. The undersigned..applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City .of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees. By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that I am authorized to file .'supplication on the behalf of the owner as listed below. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT W. DATE D Property. Owner's Authorization By my signature, I certify that I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application, and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purposes of inspection and posting a dan . to th' application. SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE1 1 —7/ C� Owner/Applicant: Name TL Street Address !2s UU 2�D City State �) Zip Telephone: i T J "I uo u Email address (optional): Applicant Representative: Name Street Address City State Zip Telephone: Email Address (optional): W 10 #r2o f Critical Areas Checklist IT CA File No: -tv• (pl 0 Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation) 1. Site Address/Location 2. Property Tax Account Number: 00 %23 Opp 00 1 DO 3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): _ 4. _ Is this site currently developed? yes; no. If yes; how is, site developed? 5. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply. Flat: less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site. Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of 66-feet). Hilly: slopes present on site of more than' ,15%,pan !! less tl a �30°,� `(a veitic`al, rise 10-feet" over a horizontal distance of 33 to Meet): "7� " '•� `f Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on sit (a vortical ris flbAet ov r a horizontall distance of less than 33-feet). Other (please describe): 6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: 0 ; Approx. Depth: 7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: 1_ ; Approx. Depth: What season(s) of the year? 8. Site is in the floodway — / �11 floodplain of a water course. 9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year-round? Flows are seasonal? (What time of year? ). 10. Site is primarily: forested ; meadow • shrubs mixed urban landscaped (lawn, shrubs etc)J 11. Obvious wetland is present on site: 1. 2. 3. 4. For City Staff Use Only Plan Check Number, if applicable? D L D . ?2 00 (D - O $ 4- 9 Site is Zoned? a- S —10 SCS mapped soil type(s)? fQ ( a ( cttyw D o cl U ✓y a v► I a ✓i d Co Sri p IeX 8 - 15 /• 51 �pe5 & 6 ( 0L(6P.vw00d lAv a,'V1 land C,0M 1eX 2-8/• Critical Areas inventory or C.A. map indicates Critical Area on site? t- ► DA IL- 1M A p i Vi d (C, 0 tC 5 oilopey of M 1- aC,whg lot btA - So•!• .b (od•f• On Wf* g(de ( rucl-erY >10 5. Site within designated earth subsidence landslide hazard area? N 0 . DETERMINATION STUDY REQUIRED Reviewed bv:_ G I Vl CU CIO CC I r- gl+ 11,00(o WAIVER CITY OF EDMONDS CRITICAL AREAS RECONNAISSANCE REPORT Site Location: 1141 Sea Vista Place Tax Acct. Number: 00568300000100 Determination: Study Required Determination #: CRA-2006-0101 Applicant: Ben Holt Owner: Ben Holt CRITICAL AREAS RECONNAISSANCE REPORT: STUDY REQUIRED (CRA-2006-0101) During review and inspection of the subject site, it was found that the site may contain or be adjacent to critical areas, including a Landslide Hazard Area and Erosion Hazard Area, pursuant to Chapter 23.40 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). The LIDAR map (attached) indicates erosion and landslide hazard potential, as the site slopes down from east to west. The general slope is approximately 15%, however there is a rockery along the west side that supports a slope of approximately 100%. The top and toe of the contours as measured on the LIDAR map are approximately 41 % to 57%. GENERAL CRITICAL AREAS REPORT REQUIREMENTS Critical Areas Reports identify, classify and delineate any areas on or adjacent to the subject property that may qualify as critical areas. They also assess these areas and identify any potential impacts resulting from your specific development proposal. If a specific development proposal results in an alteration to a critical area the critical areas report will also contain a mitigation plan. You have the option of completing the portion of the study that classifies and delineates the critical areas and waiting until you have a specific development proposal to complete the study. You may also choose submit the entire study with your specific development application. • Please review the minimum report requirements for all types of Critical Areas which are listed in ECDC 23.40.090.D. There are additional report requirements for different types of critical areas (see below). • Note that it is important for the report to be prepared by a qualified professional as defined in the ordinance. There are options on how to complete a critical areas study and an approved list of consultants that you may choose from. You may contact the Planning Division for more information. • General Mitigation Requirements for all Critical Areas are discussed in ECDC 23.40.110 through 23.40.140. STUDY REQUIREMENT — EROSION HAZARD AREA It appears that this property contains or is adjacent to an Erosion Hazard Area. • Erosion Hazard areas include Alderwood and Everett series soils on slopes of 15 percent or greater. among others. • Landslide Hazard Areas are further defined in ECDC 23.80.020.A. • In addition to the general requirements for Critical Areas reports referenced above, specific Critical Area report requirements for Erosion Hazard Areas (which are one of the Geologically Hazardous Areas) are provided in ECDC 23.80.050. • Note that Stable Erosion Hazard Areas may have limited report requirements at the director's discretion. At a minimum an erosion and sediment control plan prepared in compliance with the requirements in ECDC Chapter 18.30 shall be required. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ASSOCIATED WITH EROSION HAZARD AREAS Development is restricted within an Erosion Hazard Area and must meet additional criteria. • For erosion hazard areas with suitable slope stability, an erosion and sediment control plan prepared in compliance ECDC 18.30 will be considered to meet the Critical Areas "Study Required" determination. The determination of "suitable slope stability" will be made by both the Planning and Engineering divisions of the City of Edmonds. • In areas where the slope stability is not suitable, projects within Erosion Hazard Areas will require a report by a licensed Geotechnical Engineer or other qualified professional. • Note that it is important for the report to be prepared by a qualified professional as defined in the ordinance. • Report requirements are given in ECDC 23.80.050, and more generally in ECDC 23.40.090.D • Development standards are given in ECDC 23.80.060 and 23.80.070. STUDY REQUIREMENT — LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREA It appears that this property contains or is adjacent to a Landslide Hazard Area. • A Landslide Hazard Area is any area with a slope of forty percent (40%) or steeper and with a vertical relief of ten (10) or more feet (except areas composed of consolidated bedrock). • Landslide Hazard Areas are further defined and illustrated in ECDC 23.80.020.B. • In addition to the general requirements for Critical Areas reports referenced above, specific Critical Area report requirements for Landslide Hazard Areas are provided in ECDC 23.80.050. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ASSOCIATED WITH LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREAS Development is restricted within a Landslide Hazard Area and its buffer. • Projects that will intrude into these areas will require a report by a licensed Geotechnical Engineer. • The criteria that are applied depend on the amount that the buffer is reduced. • The buffer can be reduced to a minimum of ten (10) feet (with an additional 15' building setback per ECDC 23.40.280) if a report is prepared that meets the standards listed in ECDC 23.80.050). The alteration must also meet the requirements listed ECDC 23.80.060. • In addition, proposals to reduce the buffer to less than ten (10) feet must comply with the design standards listed in ECDC 23.80.070.A.3. ALLOWED ACTIVITIES Certain activities are allowed in or near critical area buffers as specified in ECDC 23.40.20. If you have any questions about whether your proposed development qualifies as an allowed activity, please contact a Planner for more information. EXEMPT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS Certain development proposals may be exempt from Critical Areas Requirements (ECDC 23.40.230). If you think that a specific development proposal may be exempt, contact a Planner for more information. Gina Coccia, Planner W66Vb August 1, 2006 Name, Title U Signature Date NOTE: Cited sections of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) can be found on the City of Edmonds website at www.ci.edmonds.wa.us. 2 •- POSTED ON XROL,L ]fAP NO.: pERMIT v J ' BUILDING D E P A R T PVi Flu WTApplicant PERMIT APPLICATHInside H:avy Idnes JOB ADL`R3SS �a- NAME (OP. NAME OF .' USINE b) L- / /7 f:S 1/ LNZ��:�..((//1/'''` SIDE YARD 11-11 ICI STREET SETBAC.Y REAR YARD BETBACX -7 x r y- �'l �,J I ;\I DSAILiNG AUDAEt;9 �/ L,�� / %// �2 Z USS/�E ZONE LOT AREA VACANT SITE x : O `/ / i TELEPHONE NUMBY:R CITY 0 YES NO �% %/� _ /�/�'� / /i l i HEIEILGRT I SULLDING AREA I VARIANCE NUMBER I NAME YLO ' P AI' AF OVE:D i ADDRESS S '1tEE t/lV L•XIS G BTAF.ET R/W ............FT. DEFICIEI:CY THIS PROPERTY j CITY 'fELEYHONE NUMEEIL < � COMP. PLAN ST. R/SV ............FT. ......_..FT. � p i REMARKS G K NAME � Z G: AD SS CHECKED BY Z i N i .-� -e _Q� I CI Y TELE:YIIONN, NUMBER METER SIZE SERVICE SIZE CLEARANCE CHECKED BY I I �,(y/ CI STATE LICENSE NUMBEIL CITY LICENSE NUMBER 1j REMARKS O. K, to connect st sanitary sewers, Legal Description of Property (Snow Below or Attach Four copies) •G'- n 211. but with no larger line than r TYPE CONNECTION VERIFIED BY 2 r �(J ctJ NS /�•7 / \ PERC. TEST I PERMIT NUMBER W —Im n REMARKS < Z FIRE ZONE TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION STREET IMPROVED LT z ae ❑ NO SPEINSPECTORRREQUIRED OCCUPANCY GROUP i ❑ YES �.NO GAS O RESIDENTIAL LINE PLAN C ECKED BY NEW t NON-RESIDENTIAL ❑ SICN ❑ ADD ❑ DEMOLISH O WALL REMARK NCE ALTER AVATE El F ❑ OACFILL (E....`C.E..........Ft.) REPAIR PRE -MOVE 92YIM INSP. POOL NUMBER OF STORIES NUMBER OF DNELLINC UNITS TO BE DONE//'f Valuation Fee Receipt No. NATURE OF WORK p GC_(. / N) . Plan Cheek No .... ....... ........ BUILDING r, � � — PROPOSED USE PLUMBING I PLOT PLAN (Indlcate Building setbacks, abutting streets) HEAT k GAS LINE ` p FENCE t'IGN I RETAINING WALL i N / 9MMMIN6 POOL ^� 0 00 — DEMOLITION PRE -MOVE INSPECTIOI. EXCAVATION OR FILL —I i TOTAL AMOUNT DUE I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application; that the In- r pll formation given is correct; and that I am the owner, or the dull author- Ised agent of the owner. i agree to comply with city and state laws rega- ATTENTIONAPPLICATION APPROVAL 'ting construction; And In doing the work authorized thereby, no person : In violation of the Labor Code of the State of Washington THUS PER313T This application is not a permit until will be employed rslating to Workmen's Compensation Insurance. AUTHORIZES signed by the Building Official or his Dep- ONLY TILE uty; and fees are laid, and receipt is ac- NQ'FE: Permit Limit One Year (Eacspt DEMOLITIc' ` t:hi,h WORK NOTED ah 1t completed In ninety days; MOVED-11 nULL17LNOS sh com- knoWledgcd in space provided. pi ed In six months. INSPECTION B10NA'rU S1 N TUFilI (OWi AC "vT) DATE Sit,- J DIRECT:) DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDIIONDS DATE / �]OTE: Appllrant Subject to Plan Check Fee J l(� PR 6-1107 Permit covers work to be done on prlvat- property ONLY. Any censtructloA on the public domain (eurbs, sidewalks, drivow"a, pR,E nmrquees, etc.) wIB require separate per oinlon. 1 I City of Edmonds Plan. Check No. KID 2012265 I. f This engineering. report presents the results of additional drainage and geo#echnical investigation with regard to onsite. infiltration at. the proposed new residence. REFERENCES: • Drainage report by Erich d: Tletze, dated "March.19; 2012 • Geotechnical Reports by-Q. Bruce,:P.E..dated Ogtober 3.1:;:200fi and November 20; 2006 • Site photographs . BACKGRO ND::.` .. As stated in ;the previous geotechnical reports, the property at i 141 S.ea Vis#a . Place is, underlined; by consistent native relatively clean sands. The projectscivil plans call for on=site infiltration, as indicated .on .Sheet C-2. (by Tietze). Note from the drawing. C-2,• that theinfiltration.trench will be five sfeet (5.0') wide by three, feet (3.01 .deep by sixty-five .feet (65.0') ong, and consistt of washed gravel (see infiltration trench detail and cross-section). SOILS. • FOUNDATIONS� SITEDEVELOPMENT • INSPECTION DRAINAGE DESIGN. & PERMIT ! LEGAL Of P.O. Box 55502 - Shoreline, WA 98155 (206) 546-9217 - 2 I i City,of Edmonds Re: Holt, 1141 Sea Vista Place July 1.0 2012 . Page 2 ADDITIONAL "INVESTIGATIONS:. The City of Edmonds requested (May 14 20:12- , additionalinvestigation. to. verify s.u.. b9radesoils withx ga.nd to the proposed: infiltration.. ADDITIONAL TEST PITS: This engineer observed two additional soil test pits dug. on June 124, 2012; in the vicinity of the proposed infiltration trench. Each test pit was approximately three: . feet wide by approximately -seven feet deep, (3' x 7'). 1 The bottom of each test pit*was below the proposed bottom elevation.of the infiltration trench. Infiltration trench base elevation is designed at 306.00. Test Pit -Logs: 0" - 6" 1 Grasses, organics, roots &" - 6.5' depth Relatively clean native: sands, with occasional: gravels . . No _groundwater was. observed in either of the two test'pits. Test pit: walls. remained vertical and stable, with no sloughing or caving., i s SOIL ANALYSIS: Based an this.engineer's 38 years experience,.the 'subgrade soil; is clearly SW (well -graded sands,with occasional gravels). A lab sieve analysis was.:performed on multiple samples of the soil. - The sieve analysis verifies the designation .of %SW. Less than 50% (by weight) of the soil was retained on the No. 200 Sieve. Thus., the remainder of the soil (well -graded sands with occasional gravels)' verified the designation). ff there are any questions, do not hesitate to call. )ennis M:. B.ruce, ;P.-E. aeotechnicai l;Civil Engineer Pni. Be, .E.DenM -------- Geotechnical /civil Engineer M.S.C.E., M.B.A. to (A� �N . 1p LA6� C SEA SEA - \Jks (1 1. r 7r 11Up(,,L-rkA--rto,okj as r, 1E F Er- ro.-C 63 i 9L006 tj 0 V. & 2,10-06 9-610 �-T rR . L) L�y I o ii 'T w t -T-66 �Ii row AV -CA �� 1TNc �©-r S W CL�,rgd� � �� s � � R N"�Ea t L LS CLASS (r (S FLOW 5-6 AT LEUEL cc WAT '4. �s-��S�E:� s�-�N�/0 7' 14 al �� oU�. �t� p t+�i A i \JOL0 t OA5 �r WAS ) X-1rt4 tj -r 0 7" L \j EF o ee) s 15 s-rA&& -T 6 A U�DSE.) t:1 A-L- WA .40 lei, k-T µtu. ......... pk 15 W405 'P Alga -14- it -rJOA) o 'V vs rr 5 Leo A) Fkr-wetf 91-01A) (' L /t46 LEGAL INSPECTION - DRAINAGE DESIGN & PERMIT FOUNDATIONS 5ITE DEVELOPMENT SOILS 06) 546-9217 rrccr%o..k �(zzhnrpdinp. WA 8155 (2 E., M. Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. October 31, 2006 BUILDING DEPARTMENT .. CRY OF EDMONDS ill City of Edmonds APR 12 2012 cto Ben Holt STREET FILE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 1141 Sea Vista PI. COUNTER Edmonds, WA 98026 Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation — Foundation Recommendations Proposed New Residence 1141 Sea Vista Pl., Edmonds, Washington City of Edmonds Project No. 2006 - 0849 This engineering report presents the results of a geotechnical evaluation of the Holt property at 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, Washington. This evaluation was required due to owner / contractor concerns, as well as City of Edmonds requirements. REFERENCES: • Property Survey by ABA dated December 20, 2004 • Grading Plan for new residence by ABA dated July 31, 2006 • Site photographs BACKGROUND: The overall property at 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, Washinpgton is approximately rectangular in shape with 100 feet of frontage along 9 Ave. S and approximately 128 feet of depth along Sea Vista PI. (see property survey). Currently, the property contains the existing Holt residence that is centrally located on the lot with a detached in -ground swimming pool, as indicated on the December 20, 2004 survey. The overall property contains moderate slopes with approximately 15 feet of overall elevation differential from the high point (northeast comer) to the low point (northwest corner). It is understood that Ben Holt desires to demolish the existing residence, remove the in -ground pool, and construct a new residence as indicated on the July 31, 2006 SOILS • FOUNDA77ONS • SrrE DEVELOPMENT • INSPECTION • DRA/NAGE • DESIGN & PERMIT • LEGAL P.O. Box 55502 • Shoreline, WA 98155 • (206) 546-9217 - FAX (206) 546-8442 City of Edmonds • c% Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 2 grading plan. Additionally, the current driveway location would be changed, as indicated, to accommodate access to the new residence. Obviously, the existing swimming pool would be removed and filled in accordance with geotechnical recommendations and City of Edmonds permit requirements. Visual evaluation of the existing residence and overall Holt property reveals no evidence of any geotechnical distress: no evidence of any slides, no soil tension cracks, nor any evidence of erosional degradation. The proposed new residence will be in the approximate same footprint location as the existing house with the slightly enlarged footprint extending more westerly than the current house (see site plan). EVALUATION: In order to augment the existing site geotechnical information, 3 soil test holes were hand -dug by this engineer on September 21, 2006. All 3 test holes revealed similar sub -grade conditions, namely: 0" to 6" Lawn, organics, roots, and organic silt 6" to 14" Slightly silty sands — medium dense 14" to 38" (bottom of test holes) Increasingly dense slightly silty sands No water was encountered in any of the 3 test holes. All test hole walls remained vertical and stable. No sloughing or caving occurred. CONCLUSIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS: Based on the findings of this investigation, and experience with similar sites in the area, the Holt property at 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, Washington is 9eotechnically approved for the proposed new residence, subject to the following: • Standard reinforced continuous and spread footings. Allowable bearing pressure: 2,000 p.s.f. • Equivalent fluid pressure of 35 p.c.f. is recommended for any retaining wall design provided drainage zone is inspected and verified by this engineer. • For retaining wall design, use friction factor of 0.55 and passive pressure of 350 p.c.f. City of Edmonds • c% Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 3 Geotechnical inspections by this engineer prior to any foundation concrete placement. The proposed structure can be supported on conventional continuous and spread footings bearing on undisturbed native soils or on structural fill placed above native soils. See the later sub -section entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill for structural fill placement and compaction recommendations. Continuous and individual spread footings should have minimum widths of eighteen (18) and twenty-four (24) inches, respectively, and should be bottomed at least eighteen (18) inches below the lower adjacent finish ground surface. Depending on the final site grades, some over -excavation may be required below footings to expose competent native soils. Unless lean concrete is used to fill the over excavated hole, the width of the over -excavation at the bottom must be at least as wide as the sum of two times the depth of the over -excavation and the footing width. For example, an over -excavation extending two feet below the bottom of a three-foot wide footing must be at least seven feet wide at the base of the excavation. Footings constructed according to the above recommendations may be..designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of two thousand (2,000) pounds per square foot (p.s.f.). A one-third increase in this design bearing pressure may be..used when considering short-term wind or seismic loads. For the above design criteria, it is anticipated that total post -construction settlement of footings founded on competent, native soils (or on structural fill up to five (5) feet in thickness) will be about one-half inch, with differential settlements on the order of one -quarter inch. NOTE: The bearing capacity of 3,000 p.s.f. applies to over -excavated and backfill conditions. Footings placed on native soils may be designed for 2,000 p.s.f. Lateral loads due to wind or seismic forces may be resisted by friction between the foundations and the bearing soils, or by passive earth pressure acting on the vertical, embedded portions of the foundations. For the latter condition, the foundations must either be poured directly against undisturbed soil or the backfill placed around the outside of the foundation must be level structural fill. We recommend the following design values be used for the foundation's resistance to lateral loading: Parameter Design Value Coefficient of Friction 0.55 Passive Earth Pressure 350 p.c.f. City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 4 Where: (1) p.c.f. is pounds per cubic foot. (2) Passive earth pressure is computed using the equivalent fluid density. We recommend that a safety factor of at least 1.5 be used for design of the foundation's resistance to lateral loading. SLABS -ON -GRADE: Slab -on -grade floors may be supported on undisturbed, competent native soils or on structural fill. The slabs may be supported on the existing soils provided these soils can be re -compacted prior to placement of the free -draining sand or gravel underneath the slab. This sand and gravel layer should be a minimum of four (4) inches thick. We also recommend using a vapor barrier such as 6-mil. plastic membrane beneath the slab with minimum overlaps of 12 inches for sealing purposes. PERMANENT FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS: Retaining walls backfilled on one side only should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures imposed by the soils retained by these structures. The following recommended design parameters are for walls less than twelve (12) feet in height, which restrain level backfill: Parameter Design Value Active Earth Pressure* 35 p.c.f. Passive Earth Pressure 350 p.c.f. Coefficient of Friction 0.55 Soil Unit Weight 125 p.c.f. Where: (1) p.c.f. is pounds per cubic foot (2) Active and passive earth.pressures are computed using equivalent fluid densities. For restrained walls which cannot deflect at least 0.002 times the wall height, a uniform lateral pressure of one hundred (100 p.s.f. should be added to the active equivalent fluid pressure). City of Edmonds • c% Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 5 The values given above are to be used for design of permanent foundation and retaining walls only. An appropriate safety factor should be applied when designing the walls. We recommend using a safety factor of at least 1.5 for overturning and sliding. The above design values do not include the effects of any hydrostatic pressures behind the walls and assume that no surcharge slopes or loads will be placed above the walls. If these conditions exist, then those pressures should be added to the above lateral pressures. Also, if sloping backfill is desired behind the walls, then we will need to be given the wall dimensions and slope of the backfill in order to provide the appropriate design earth pressures. Heavy construction equipment should not be operated behind retaining and foundation walls within a distance equal to the height of the wall, unless the walls are designed for the additional lateral pressures resulting from the equipment. Placement and compaction of retaining wall backfill should be accomplished with hand -operated equipment. Retaining Wall Backfill Backfill placed within eighteen (18) inches of any retaining or foundation walls should be free -draining structural fill containing no organics. This backfill should contain no more than five (5) percent silt or clay particles and have no particles greater than four (4) inches in diameter. The percentage of particles passing the No. 4 sieve should be between twenty-five (25) and seventy (70) percent. Due to their high silt content, if the native soils are used as backfill, a drainage composite, such as Mirafi and Enkadrain, should be placed against the retaining walls. The drainage composites should be hydraulically connected to the foundation drain system. The purpose of these backfill requirements is to assure that the design criteria for the retaining wall is not exceeded because of a build-up of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. The subsection entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill contains recommendations regarding placement and compaction of structural fill behind retaining and foundation walls. EXCAVATION AND SLOPES: At the time of this investigation and report, it appears that the maximum soil cut will be approximately 7 — 8 feet deep in the northeast corner of the new residence. This excavation may require temporary Eco-Block shoring in order to avoid a wide 1:1 cut. No vertical excavation should occur deeper than 4.0 feet. In no case should excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, state and national government safety regulations. Temporary cuts up to a height of City of Edmonds • c% Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 6 four (4) feet deep in unsaturated soils may be vertical. For temporary cuts having a height greater than four (4) feet, the cut should have an inclination no steeper than 1:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) from the top of the slope to the bottom of the excavation. Under specific recommendations by the geotechnical engineer, excavation cuts may be modified for site conditions. All permanent cuts into native soils should be inclined no steeper than 2:1 (H:V). Fill slopes should not exceed 2HI V. It is important to note that sands do cave suddenly, and without warning. The contractors should be made aware of this potential hazard. Water should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of any temporary or permanent slope. All permanently exposed slopes should be seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve stability of the surficial layer of soil. DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS: Footing drains are recommended at the base of all footings and retaining walls. These drains should be surrounded by at least six (6) inches of one -inch -minus washed rock wrapped in non -woven geotextile filter fabric (Mirafi 140N, Supac 4NP, or similar material). At the highest point, the perforated pipe invert should be at least as low as the bottom of the footing and it should be sloped for drainage. All roof and surface water drains must be kept separate from the foundation drain system. No groundwater was observed in any of the 3 test holes during the fieldwork. Seepage into the planned excavation is possible, and likely if excavation occurs during winter months, and if encountered should be drained away from the site by use of drainage ditches, perforated pipe, French drains, or by pumping from sumps interconnected by shallow connector trenches at the bottom of the excavation. The excavation of the site should be graded so that surface water is directed off the site and away from the tops of slopes. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where foundations, slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Any exposed slopes to be covered with plastic to minimize erosion. Final site grading in areas adjacent to buildings should be sloped at least two (2) percent away from the building, except where the area adjacent to the building is paved. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND STRUCTURAL FILL: The proposed building and pavement areas should be stripped and cleared of all surface vegetation, all organic matter, and other deleterious material. The stripped or removed materials should not be mixed with any materials to be used as structural fill. City of Edmonds • c/o Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 7 Structural fill is defined as any fill placed under the building, behind permanent retaining or foundation walls, or in other areas where the underlying soils needs to support loads. This engineer should observe site conditions during and after excavation prior to placement of any structural fill. All structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts with a moisture content at or near the optimum moisture content. The optimum moisture content is that moisture content which results in the greatest compacted dry density. The moisture content of fill soils is very important and must be closely controlled during the filling and compaction process. The allowable thickness of the fill lift will depend on the material type, compaction equipment, and the number of passes made to compact the lift. In no case should the lifts exceed twelve (12) inches in loose thickness. The following table presents recommended relative compaction for structural fill: Location of Fill Placement Beneath footings, slabs or walkways Behind retaining walls Beneath pavements Minimum Relative Compaction 95% 90% 95% for upper 12 inches of Sub -grade, 90% below that level Where: Minimum relative compaction is the ratio, expressed in percentages, of the compacted dry density to the maximum dry density, as determined in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D-1557-78 (Modified Proctor). Use of On -Site Soils If grading activities take place during wet weather, or when the sandy, on -site soils are very wet, site preparation costs may be higher because of delays due to rains and the potential need to import granular fill. The on -site soils are generally sandy and thus are not highly moisture sensitive. Grading operations will be difficult when the moisture content of these soils greatly exceeds the optimum moisture content. Moisture sensitive soils will also be susceptible to excessive softening and "pumping" from construction equipment traffic when the moisture content is greater than the optimum moisture content. City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 8 Ideally, structural fill, which is to be placed in wet weather, should consist of a granular soil having no more than five (5) percent silt or clay particles. The percentage of particles passing the No. 200 sieve should be measured from that portion of the soil passing the three -quarter -inch sieve. The use of "some" on -site soils for fill material may be acceptable if the upper organic materials are segregated and moisture contents are monitored by engineering inspection. DRAINAGE CONTROLS: No drainage problems were evident with the existing Holt residence and property at 1141 Sea Vista PI. The sandy sub -grade soils would allow for on -site infiltration, subject to an infiltration rate provided by additional geotechnical investigation. If desired, this engineer can provide a recommended on -site infiltration rate. It is essential that no storm water discharge occur on the steeper westerly slopes. This engineer has recommended a maximum steepness of 3H:1V for the final grade of the western portion of the site (see grading plan). No direct discharge of storm water onto the western slopes should occur. CONCRETE: All foundation concrete (footings, stem walls, slabs, any retaining walls, etc.) shall have a minimum cement content of 5-1/2 sacks per cubic yard of concrete mix. REMOVAL OF EXISTING POOL: As stated, currently the site contains an in -ground swimming pool. It is understood this pool is to be removed in order to accommodate the new house footprint. Thus, it is essential that the pool removal, structural fill placement and bearing capacity in the area of the pool be inspected and verified by a qualified geotechnical engineer. ROCKERIES: As indicated on the July 31, 2006 grading plan, the existing westerly rockeries are to be artiall removed in order to accommodate the proposed 3H:1 V sloped landscaped area. The existing rockeries reveal no evidence of any geotechnical City of Edmonds c% Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 9 distress. Thus, the partial removal of the existing rockeries is geotechnically approved, subject to on -site inspections. Approximately one-half of the westerly rockery will remain (see site plan). Additional landscaping rockeries are proposed in the southeast portion of the site. The proposed rockeries will have a maximum height of 4 feet and should comply with the City of Edmonds standard rockery design, and have geotechnical inspections during construction of the rockeries. TEMPORARY SHORING: As stated, this engineer understands that a maximum soil cut of up to 8 feet is proposed in the northeast corner of the new foundation. Experience in the sub -grade sands strongly recommends that the excavation contractor utilize 2-high or 3-high Eco-Blocks as temporary shoring. It is possible to incorporate a 1:1 slope for the proposed excavation. However, erosional sloughing will occur and create foundation formwork problems. Additionally, this engineer recommends a minimum of ground disturbance for the excavation, and thus the temporary Eco-Blocks should be considered. Additional geotechnical criteria, Eco-Block shoring designs and on -site inspections are required. INSPECTIONS: The recommendations of this report are only valid when key geotechnical aspects are inspected by this engineer during construction: • Soil cuts • Temporary Eco-Block shoring, as required • Foundation sub -grade verification • Any retaining wall • Rockery placement • Any fill placement, including swimming pool zone • Subsurface drainage installation • Temporary and permanent erosion control measures • On -site storm water infiltration, if desired City of Edmonds cto Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 10 SUMMARY: The proposed new Holt residence at 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, Washington is geotechnically viable when constructed in accordance with the recommendations herein, compliance with City of Edmonds approved plans and requirements, and key geotechnical inspections during construction. GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW OF FINAL PLANS: At the time of this investigation and report, final house plans were not available for review. As stated in this report, the new Holt residence may be supported on conventional, reinforced, concrete footings, in accordance with the criteria herein. Prior to final permit issuance, this engineer should review the final house plans to verify actual proposed excavation, make final recommendations for any temporary shoring required, and finalize the structural fill requirements for the swimming pool void, as well as to verify compliance with the recommendations of this report. Upon satisfactory review, a "Statement of Minimal Risk" will be issued. CLOSURE: The findings and recommendations of this report were prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering principles and practice. No other warranty, either express or implied, is made. The conclusions are based on the results of the field exploration and interpolation of subsurface conditions between explored locations. If conditions are encountered during construction that appear to be different than those described in this report, this engineer should be notified to observe the situation and review and verify or modify the recommendations. If there are any questions, do not hesitate to call. Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. Geotechnical / Civil Engineer DMB:abj 3ve.J. :S90I00'00."•w. '128.62: :�ti�' .30.00. I.. a j "�' WOOD'`FENCE 1 r. CYCLONE FENCE I O - ! HOUSE �+ gry . cps; j.' .� I NU' r .'�.'.' :'::: ...:: ' •::':.. "� SEA O •tt� , VISTA;: PLACE �n' M i •• " :./6.0 rye. 30 1827,• c'O r. i 308._UPPER i•.; LEVEL s. slDEW r CbNCi7E t• °'DRIVE :..,r''':x L'(541�ER FLOOR-.ELEV. — .3.16.4 1 o' :.;'• :, {?OOP• RIDGE ELEV = 3 41' h e y� ui X ? 3 Z 24 O ys " ' 313.0 � •• '• ,VERTICAL. CURB' LEAD ' .I.D. WASHER.. �. NUMBER `Jt409 !. :{ IN. SIDEWALK:..' .. :j- EA . VIS W F... ILI\IJ 111\V 1\VVI\LI\1 IV 1\LI\I1111\ I U Z I j PROPOSED ROCKERY } LiF 1% AS REQ'D. uj S90'00'00"W 0 W 3 0� x rr xm x x— Z m 0 318— o o p W O i0 O j Z Ir f 3:1 MAX II I � I �I O I Lo00 m W 0cr � z F= ; W ; 1 �O REMOVE/RLPLACE I ' FENCE AS REQUIRED 0 � ryti v 128.62 �ti6 3000. —x x x x — — 00 — — — — — — — .-, I \� —PROPOSED CONTOUR LINE I i 1 PROPOSED HOUSE ' NUMBER SEA VISTA PLACE I I LOWER FLOOR ELEV. = 317.0 I O MAIN FLOOR ELEV. = 327.0 O PROPOSED SPOT `r O O' O ELEVATION, TYP.� aoacH r.� �—EXISTING CONTOUR LINE s PROP. SIDEWALK I EXISTING ROCKERY TO BE REMOVED cf) I AS REQUIRED I L— - 'go �� s oo, j No oR, � T'�Rn�wgYFk/S S OO O 4fq �cti 0�4 QNG rg44 PROPOSED ROCKERIES w MAX. 4' HIGH TYP. I L O % 1 WALL ABOVE,w I O O 32.4' Q M Lo -PROPOSED DRIVEWAY Y I CU 79.54 2 324\ — 42'/ - REMO r.IIRa INSTALL STD. DRIVEWAY CURB CUT I S90'00'00"W 109 77' - I II SEA VISTA PLACE NOTE: CENTERLINE MONUMENTATION NOT FOUND 4.0 t .'tom - •� 1::.,• Fj c �nar . J , .ip-,�w.•� + �i � _ . e . � .. � t'kT" 1 J* - �V �, `�. 'Sn _.,.,ems �:i` 'S. :�'��c, �' ��- tdi� t� tr •,-c. � ��.�'�•�.�� s. :c ..';`�:d YT 4['^Y r;y'v� n}p �� i wr +;,: � � u f�•r?t�l d F'1' r� �� 1, � 4 �� ,g� �- � �. - 4� _ �Ylrb,.C..�., � �� i �t' } � r I .:'d�.�tF iS' 'i�,?t:'"• �rs ��ia.��, 1 t �;;)�.�': a 2 7 .� �� S �•:. WE_. �`'�:.._;.�i}•t�� a .. �•... �.s_, r .. .:�=> r�c:, if.i3�'�`.f'.�...,,i ...t.__. ..''d'''�' i .w( Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. M.S.C.E., M.B.A. Geotechnical/Civil Engineer October 17, 2007 City of Edmonds o Ben Holt � FLE 11Sea ea Vista PI. F Edmonds, WA 98026 Subject: Geotechnical Review of Plans — New Holt Residence 1141 Sea Vista Pl. Edmonds, Washington Plan Check No. 2006 - 0849 APR 12 2012 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COUNTER This engineering report presents the results of a geotechnical review of the plans for the new Ben Holt residence at 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, Washington. As previously discussed, it is understood that Mr. Holt proposes to demolish the existing residence at the site and construct a new one in a similar (slightly expanded) footprint (see plans). REFERENCES: • Project Plans by Charles Lee revised September 13, 2007 • Geotechnical Report by D. Bruce, P.E. dated October 31, 2006 • Drainage / Infiltration Criteria by D. Bruce, P.E. dated November 20, 2006 • City of Edmonds plan review comments dated February 13, 2007 BACKGROUND: As stated in the October 31, 2006 geotechnical report, the new (expanded) Holt residence will occupy a similar footprint location to the existing one (see site plan). The site is underlain with extremely dense native sands, which will allow for excellent construction conditions. The majority of the excavation for the new home will be less than 5 feet in depth and may be performed with no temporary shoring. This engineer understands that a small portion of the site (at the northwest corner) will require excavations up to 9 feet in depth — maximum. The building setback of 10 horizontal feet would allow for an excavation to be "open cut' at shallower.. than SOILS • FOUNDATIONS • SITE DEVELOPMENT • INSPECTION DRAINAGE DESIGN &PERMIT LEGAL P.O. Box 55502 • Shoreline, WA 98155 • (206) 546-9217 FAX (206) 546-8442 • :City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt October 17, 2007 Page 2 1 HA V. This "open cut" is geotechnically viable and maybe chosen by the owner and his contractor. However, based on this engineer's extensive experience in sandy soils, the use of 2 or 3 high Eco-Block temporary shoring is recommended as a practical measure. This is a contractor choice, not geotechnically required. The attached typical Eco-Block sketch indicates 2-block high with a 1:1 slope beyond. CITY OF EDMONDS COMMENTS (FEBRUARY 13, 2007): 1) Top and bottom elevations for rockeries: The attached site plan (furnished by designer, Charles Lee — undated) indicates top and bottom elevations for the landscaping rockeries. Note that the rockeries are a maximum of 3 feet in height. These rockeries are not geotechnically significant (provided nominal inspections verify their construction in compliance with City of Edmonds standard rockery design requirements). 2) Datum point — Provided by designer. 3) Showers: Response by designer. 4) Eco-Blocks: As discussed above, Eco-Block shoring is not -geotechnically required. As a construction expedient, this engineer recommends a minimum 2-block high wall to allow for a "cleaner foundation zone" in the northwest corner of the project (see attached typical sketch). Geotechnical inspections are required to verify base block embedment, linkage, batter and "blending in" with the 1:1 (maximum steepness) excavation slope above. 5) Revised footing widths: This engineer notes a revised Detail E on Sheet 1 of 5 indicating the minimum 18-inch footing recommended in the geotechnical report. Apparently, Sheets 2 through 5 have not incorporated this change. These different detail dimensions could lead to confusion on the job site with the foundation contractor. This engineer agrees with the City of Edmonds that the plans should be consistent and reflect the geotechnically required footing dimensions. 'City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt October 17, 2007 Page 3 6) Special inspections: This engineer agrees with City of Edmonds that special geotechnical inspections should be performed as required on the February 13, 2007 comment sheet. It is understood that D. Bruce, P.E. will perform these inspections. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT — COMMENTS: As stated in the October 31, 2006 Geotechnical Report, the existing Holt residence and property are stable with no evidence of geotechnical distress. The proposed new home will not endanger the Holt slope or adjacent slope. The site contains no landslide hazard. Geotechnically, the construction of the new Holt residence is straightforward and simple — with minor excavation requirements, as previously discussed. The previously submitted 10-foot setback distance (from the north property line) is more than sufficient for geotechnical purposes (subject to geotechnical inspections during the excavation and foundation work). Additionally, the underlying sand allows for on -site infiltration of storm water. The construction of the new Holt residence will not increase surface water discharge or sedimentation to adjacent properties beyond pre -development condition. (NOTE: Pre - development conditions consist of the existing Holt residence. Development conditions will consist of a new Holt residence). Construction of the new Holt residence (subject to geotechnical inspections) will not decrease slope stability on adjacent properties and the new Holt residence will not adversely impact other critical areas. Plan Review: This engineer has reviewed the project plans prepared by Charles Lee and approves of the proposed excavation, rockeries and grading. As discussed above, this engineer recommends that the designer clarify all footing dimensions to be consistent with the recommendations of the geotechnical report. SUMMARY: • The plans for the new Holt residence are geotechnically approved (subject to consistent footing dimension clarification). • ` ' City of Edmonds • • c/o Ben Holt October 17, 2007 Page 4 • The proposed Holt residence plans are approved, subject to geotechnical inspections by D. Bruce, P.E. If there are any questions, do not hesitate to call. �xwREs 12123J TO DMB:abj r Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. Geotechnical / Civil Engineer ERICH O. TIETZE AND ASSOCIATES Engineers and Consultants 1714 NW 200`h Lane, Shoreline, WA 98177 (206) 542-2065 eota@cIearwire.net RECEIVED City of Edmonds March 19, 2012 Engineering Division �� APR 12 �012 121 5`h Avenue North L-, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Edmonds, WA 98020 �DU COUNTER Subject: Drainage Report for the Ben Holt Residence at 1141 Sea Vista Place The site at 1141 Sea Vista Place currently has a single family residence located on the lot. This house will be removed and replaced with a new house. This project was previously submitted to the city for review in 2007 and was revised several times as late as 2009. The project has expired since its original submittal and so is being resubmitted as a new project. The footprint of the building and the site plan itself has not changed since the original submittal. Three copies of the civil engineering drawings are submitted with this drainage report which has been updated to reflect the current standards that the city is using. Geotechnical reports by Dennis Bruce will be submitted by the applicant. The proposed impervious area for the site is 6,112 SF which is more than 5,000 SF. Therefore, using Figure 2-1 of Exhibit A: Stormwater Code Supplement to Edmonds Community Development Code chapter 18.30, it was determined that the project qualifies as a Category 2 Small Project. The Pollution -Generating Impervious Surface area (PGIS) is 951 SF (driveway). There is no Pollution -Generating Pervious Surface area (PGPS) on the site. The following items must be addressed unless specifically exempt as indicated: Small Site Minimum Requirement #1— Preparation of Stormwater Site Plan Small Site Minimum Requirement #2 — Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Small Site Minimum Requirement #3 — Source Control of Pollutants (not required for single family residential sites) Small Site Minimum Requirement #4 — Preservation of Natural Drainage Systems and Outfalls Small Site Minimum Requirement #5 — Onsite Stormwater Management Small Site Minimum Requirement #6 — Runoff Treatment (not required if PGIS is less 5,000 SF and PGPS is less than 3/4 acre — not applicable to this site) Small Site Minimum Requirement #7 — Flow Control (may be waived under certain circumstances) Small Site Minimum Requirement #8 — Wetland Protection (if wetlands are on the site or the site drains to certain wetlands — not applicable to this site) Small Site Minimum Requirement #9 — Operation and Maintenance (if a structural BMP is installed) Small Site Minimum Requirement #10 — Offsite Analysis and Mitigation (not required by the City Engineering Division for this site) Small Site Minimum Requirement #11— Financial Liability (for single family residential sites, applies only to stormwater systems constructed in or adjacent to Critical Areas or Critical Area buffers — not applicable to this site). The following discussion addresses each of the minimum requirements listed above unless not required. Minimum Requirement #1— Preparation of a Stormwater Plan: This requirement has been met by this Drainage Report and the civil engineering construction drawings — specifically Sheet C-1 TESC Plan; Sheet C-2 Grading/Drainage/Street Plan; and Sheet C-3 Details. Minimum Requirement # 2 — Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: This requirement is met by Sheet C-1 which shows the Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) features which are proposed. Minimum Requirement #3 — Source Control of Pollutants: Not required. Minimum Requirement #4 — Preservation of Natural Drainage Systems and Outfalls: The site currently discharges runoff as sheet flow to Sea Vista Place. All runoff from the developed site up to and including the 100-year storm will be infiltrated on site; therefore there will be no runoff from the site through the 100-year storm. Any runoff above the 100-year storm will be discharged from the site to Sea Vista Place by means of an on -site level spreader from the infiltration trench overflow. The net runoff from the developed site will be less than from the existing site. Minimum Requirement #5 — Onsite stormwater Management: LID Techniques other than infiltration are not suitable for this site due to the topography of the site and the limited area available for construction of such facilities. The project will utilize the LID technique of infiltration. 0 Minimum Requirement #6 — Runoff Treatment: The site has less than 5,000 SF total of pollution generating impervious surface (PGIS), i.e. pavement, and has no pollution generating pervious surface (PGPS). The total amount of paving (PGIS) is 951 SF. Minimum Requirement #7 — Flow Control: The project will control runoff from the site by means of an infiltration system capable of infiltrating all runoff through the 100-year storm. The Department of Ecology WWHM3 program was used to the size the infiltration trench. Those calculations are attached at the end of this report Soil tests by Dennis Bruce, PE were conducted on the site and in his report of November 20, 2006, which is attached to this report, reported the slowest observed infiltration rate was 16 inches/hour. His report recommended a design infiltration rate of 10 inches/hour. However, the city's Low Impact development (LID) Stormwater Best management Practices (BMPs) Simplified Sizing recommends a maximum of 2 inches/hour as a design rate. For purposes of design of the infiltration system a design infiltration rate of 2 inches/hour was used. The simplified sizing handout was not used for design of the infiltration system, but its rate of 2 inches/hour was used. It should be noted that this design rate is significantly lower than the "slowest" rate of 16 inches/hour noted in the Bruce report and also lower than his recommended design rate of 10 inches/hour. The Department of Ecology WWHM3 was used to design the infiltration system. Minimum Requirement #8 — Wetland Protection: Not required for this site. Minimum Requirement #9 — Operation and Maintenance: The operation and maintenance requirements are attached to the end of the drainage report. Minimum Requirement #10 — Offsite Analysis and Mitigation: The City Engineering Division has not required such an analysis for this site. Minimum Requirement #11— Financial Responsibility: Not required for this site. This Drainage Report and the civil construction drawings satisfy the requirements of the City Engineering Division with regard to drainage and erosion control. Sincerely, ERICH O. TIE APPENDIX A MSTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW COtWL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO.2 - INFILTRATION FACILITIES Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance Is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance Is Performed Infiltration Pond Trash & Debris See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 Poisonous Vegetation See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 General or Noxious Weeds Contaminants and See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 Pollution Unmowed See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 Grass/Ground Cover Rodent Holes See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 Insects See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 Infiltration Pond Erosion See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 Side Slopes Infiltration Pond Tree Growth See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 Emergency Overflow Spillway and Berms over 4 feet in height. Infiltration Pond Rock Missing See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 Emergency Overflow Spillway Infiltration Facility Sediment A percolation test pit (ponds) or test of facility Sediment is removed and/or facility Storage Area indicates facility is only working at 90% of its is cleaned so that infiltration system designed capabilities. If two inches or more works according to design. Ponds sediment is present, remove. are reseeded if necessary to control erosion. Infiltration Facility Sediment and Debris By visual inspection, little or no water flows Replaced gravel in rock filter. Rock Filters through filter during heavy rain storms. (If Applicable) Infiltration Facility Sump Filled with Any sediment and debris filling vault to 10% of Clean out sump to design depth. Sump Sediment and Debris depth from sump bottom to bottom of outlet pipe (If Applicable) or obstructing flow into the connector pipe. Infiltration Facility Filled with Sediment Sediment and debris fill bag more than'/Z full. Replaced filter bag or redesign Filter Bags and Debris system. (If Applicable) Infiltration Facility Sediment Remove when 6" or more. Sediment cleaned out to designed pond shape and depth or sediment Pre -settling Ponds is removed from vault. Ponds are and Vaults reseeded if necessary to control erosion. Note: Sediment accumulation of more than 0.25 inches per year may indicate excessive erosion is occurring upstream of the facility or that conveyance systems are not being properly maintained. The contributing drainage area should be checked for erosion problems or inadequate maintenance of conveyance systems if excessive sedimentation is noted in an infiltration facility. Check twice a year during first 2 years of operation; once a year thereafter. Clean manholes/catch basins, repair damaged inlets/outlets, clean trash racks. 2005 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A A-3 1/24/2005 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCEOUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYAJ AND WQ FACILITIES NO.5 - CATCH BASINS Maintenance Component Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is performed General Trash & Debris (Includes Sediment) Trash or debris of more than M. cubic foot which is located immediately in front of the catch basin opening or is blocking capacity of the basin by No Trash or debris located immediately in front of catch basin opening. more than 10%. Trash or debris (in the basin) that exceeds'/3 the No trash or debris in the catch depth from the bottom of basin to invert the basin. lowest pipe into or out of the basin. Trash or debris in any inlet or outlet pipe blocking Inlet and outlet pipes free of trash or more than of its height. debris. Dead animals or vegetation that could generate odors that could cause complaints or dangerous No dead animals or vegetation present within the catch basin. gases (e.g., methane). Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in volume. No condition present which would attract or support the breeding of insects or rodents. Structure Damage to Frame and/or Top Comer of frame extends more than % inch past curb face into the street (If applicable). Frame is even with curb. Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or cracks wider than '% inch (intent is to make Top slab is free of holes and cracks. Slab sure all material is running into basin). Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e., Frame is sitting flush on top slab. separation of more than'/. inch of the frame from the top slab. Cracks in Basin Walls/Bottom Cracks wider than '/: inch and longer than 3 feet, any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks, or maintenance person Basin replaced or repaired to design standards. judges that structure is unsound. Cracks wider than''/: inch and longer than 1 foot at the joint of any inlet/outlet pipe or any No cracks more than inch wide at the joint of inlet/outlet pipe. evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks. Settlement/ Misalignment Basin has settled more than 1 inch or has rotated more than 2 inches out of alignment. Basin replaced or repaired to design standards. Fire Hazard Presence of chemicals such as natural gas, oil No flammable chemicals present. and gasoline. Vegetation Vegetation growing across and blocking more than 10% of the basin opening. No vegetation blocking opening to basin. Vegetation growing in inlet/outlet pipe joints that is more than 6 inches tall and less than 6 inches No vegetation or root growth present. apart. Pollution Nonflammable chemicals of more than '/2 cubic foot per three feet of basin length. No pollution present other than surface film. Catch Basin Cover Cover Not in Place Cover is missing or only partially in place. Any open catch basin requires maintenance. Catch basin cover is closed Locking Mechanism Not Working Mechanism cannot be opened by on maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts into frame have less than inch of thread. Mechanism opens with proper tools. Cover Difficult to Remove One maintenance person cannot remove lid after applying 80 lbs. of lift; intent is keep cover from sealing off access to maintenance. Cover can be removed by one maintenance person. Ladder Ladder Rungs Unsafe Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs, misalignment, rust, cracks, or sharp edges. Ladder meets design standards and allows maintenance person safe access. .-1 1/24/2005 2005 Surtace Water vesrgn manual - Pippenaix A A-6 APPENDIX A M*NANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CON' .., CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO.5 - CATCH BASINS Maintenance Component Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is performed Metal Grates (If Applicable) Unsafe Grate Opening Grate with opening wider than 7/8inch. Grate opening meets design standards. Trash and Debris Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20% Grate free of trash and debris. of grate surface. Damaged or Missing. Grate missing or broken member(s) of the grate. Grate is in place and meets design standards. APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO.10 - CONVEYANCE PIPES AND DITCHES Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed Pipes Sediment & Debris Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the Pipe cleaned of all sediment and diameter of the pipe. debris. Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of water All vegetation removed so water through pipes. flows freely through pipes. Damaged Protective coating is damaged; rust is causing Pipe repaired or replaced. more than 50% deterioration to any part of pipe. Any dent that decreases the cross section area Pipe repaired or replaced. of pipe by more than 20%. Open Ditches Trash & Debris Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1,000 Trash and debris cleared from square feet of ditch and slopes. ditches. Sediment Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the Ditch cleaned/flushed of all design depth. sediment and debris so that it matches design. Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of water Water flows freely through ditches. through ditches. Erosion Damage to See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 See "Detention Ponds" Table No. 1 Slopes Rock Lining Out of Maintenance person can see native soil beneath Replace rocks to design standards. Place or Missing (If the rock lining. Applicable). aBA •'7 � � M - � t' i.+r sse- •� -—�-COtBC�� `'® si � oo ..� C t-,; Y ;kfeg S-v a7�cT A.t.A. PLA,Us PROP.; �vrUEY •�tiQUC�� /Jiv Aj /Avp-jy-rte� -rr� S�'�G �� MC67 �S o t t.—(EST c-.A xTOt EM-% S � �C?k -r I�JAt71UF E eA\1i IN N -s KovS� A WJ S7T t J bE-"6j'jcp- tjrC�(t- f�Sc�d� xpEk{esC L ® D0 SITS geT" eA11 c A L L�l�3TI� (� 0,0 Q • Od,c t { 0MAIL EMI nRES 1=1 O � i .�ena..u....� SOILS FOUNDATIONS 1 • SITE DEVELOPMENT • INSPECTtON • DRAINAGE C I SIGjb & PERIbtIT • LEGAL P.Q. Box 55502 • Shoreline, WA 98155 ° (206) 546-9217 • FAX (206) 546-8442 1 1 O Use DDT data E ❑ 2;9i6, J, Irmi1mbirifts m1m Imi"M I ZSL;tNAMU5 i Mitigated — — Run Scenario I 111 � I -I i I � I Move Elements i Save Subbasin Name TotalUe Surface Interllow Groundwater Flows To Area in Basin r StwwO*Selected Available Pervious Available Impervious I- A/B, Forest, Fiat j 0 r ROADS/FIAT 110 r AB,Forest. Mod r ROADS/MOD j ri A B. Forest, S— (" ROADS/STEEP I0 ir AB, Pasture, Flat r ROOF TOPS FLAT r A/B, Pasture, Mod 10 r DRIVEWAYS/FLAT 110 I r AB, Pasture, Steep 0 r DRIVEWAYS/MOD 0 r A/B, Lawn, Flat r D ES/STEEP r A/B, Lawn, Mod 0 r SIDEWALKS FLAT 0 rJ A B. Lawn, Steep 0 r SIDEWALKS/MOD 0 i r C,Forest,Flat r SIDEWALKSISTEEP 1 0 r C, Forest, Mod 1 0 r PARKING/FLAT � I r C. Forest 0 MODSteep r PARKING MOD or— i r Pastme—� C, r PARKING/STEEP r C,.Pasture, Mod r POND 0 ir C, Pasture, Steep r C, Lawn, Flat 0 I r C, Lawn, Mod 0 . r C. Lawn, Steep J0 PetviousTotal 283999 Acres Impervious Total 0� Acres Basin Total 283999 Aaes • 03-22-2012 8:34 AM BEN HOLT RESIDENCE n ❑ G; 12 .Zl. WIMMUL%l MEN IMAM 0 J r Predeveloped - Move Subbasin Name basin 1 1 r Designate as Bypass for POC: Surface lnterf[GW Groundwater Flows To : lGravel Trench Bed 1 Area in Basin f Show Only Selected Available Pervious Available Im ervious r AM, Forest, Flat j 0 r ROADS/FIAT 10 r A/8, Forest Mod r ROADSIMOD r A B, Forest, Steep 0 r ROADS/STEEP 0 r A/B, Pasture, Rat j 0 r' ROOF TOPS FLAT .101928 r A/B, Pasture, Mod L0 J r DRIVEWAYS/FLAT t J r A/8, Pasture, Steep 0 r DRIVEWAYS/MOD 0 r AM, Lawn, Flat 0 r DRIVEWAYS/STEEP 0 r A/8, Lawn, Mod P SIDEWALKS FLAT O16552 * A B, Lawn, Steep 143687 r SIDEW"S/MDD 0 r C, Forest, Flat— i L J r SIDEWALKS/STEEP r C, Forest, Mod r PARKING r C, Forest, Steep 110 r' MOD PARKING MOD .021832 Pasture, Flat r PARKING/STEEP rC, C, Pasture, Mod 0 POND 0 r C, Pasture, Steep 0 r C. Lawn, Flat 10 r C, Lawn, Mod 0 r C. Lawn, Steep PervbusTotal 143687 Acres Impervious Total 140312 Acres Baser Total 283999 Acres •, ❑cm�&0! It Gila IrNimbliml MVAUNINV-*�- 0 SL&NAHIUS _ r Predevebped LIPi- I Run Scenario I FIAA FFMTS - r ----i _ I � t -Move Elements 4 Save xy Load xy Facility Name I Gravel Trench Bed 1 Outlet 1 Outlet 2 Outlet 3 Downstream Connection 0 0 NG, Facility Type vel Trench/Bed r Precipitation Applied to Facility Quick Trench r Evaporation Applied to Faciky Facility Bottom Elevation (ft) 1306 Facility Dimensions Trench Length Outlet Structure Trench Bottom Width 5 Riser Height (ft) 3 -fl Effective Total Depth 3 Riser Diameter(in) Bottom slope of Trench 0.01 Riser Type Flat -{ Left Side Slope 0 Notch Type Right Side Slope p Material Layers for Layer 1 Thickness (ft) 1 Orifice Diameter Height QMax Layer 1 porosity 0.33 Number (In) (Ft) (CIS) Layer 2 Thickness (ft) 1 1 F6--; j F3—�--,'4 0.09455 Layer 2 porosity 0.33 2 Fo —. _. r--&j 0 • Layer 3 Thickness (ft) 1 3 r•--H r-- 7j 0 Layer 3 porosity 0.33 Infiltration YES ^-� Trench Volume at Riser Head (acre-ft) .014 Measured Infiltration Rate (in/hr) F27 -, Pond Increment 0.10 -1-1 Infiltration Reduction Factor 0.99 -� Show Pond Table Open Table - ,-;- Use Wetted Surface Area (sidewalk) Total Volume Infiltrated(acre-ft) 12.536 Total Volume Through Facility(aae4t) 12.536 Total Volume Through Rker(acre-ft) 0 Percent Infiltrated 100 Western Washington Hydrology Model PROJECT REPORT Project Name: Ben Holt Residence Site Address: 1141 Sea Vista Place City: Edmonds Report Date: 3/18/2012 Gage: Everett Data Start: 1948/10/01 Data End: 1997/09/30 Precipitation Scale: 0.80 WWHM3 Version: 1.0 PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name: Total Site Bypass: No Ground Water: No Pervious Land Use a b' r•oresz, Sleep Impervious Land Use Element Flows To: Surface DEVELOPED LAND USE Acres 0.283999 Acres Interflow Name: Basin 1 (Total Site) Bypass: No Ground Water: No Pervious Land Use Acres A B, Lawn, Steep 0.143687 Impervious Land Use Acres ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.101928 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.016552 PARKING MOD 0.021832 MITIGATED ELEMENT FLOWS TO: Groundwater Surface Interflow Groundwater GRAVEL TRENCH BED 1 Name: GRAVEL TRENCH BED 1 Bottom Length: 63 ft. Bottom Width: 5 ft. Trench bottom slope 1: 0.01 To 1 Trench Left side slope 0: 0 To 1 Trench right side slope 2: 0 To 1 Material thickness of first layer: 1 ft Pour Space of material for first layer: 0.33 Material thickness of second layer: 1 ft Pour Space of material for second layer: 0.33 Material thickness of third layer: 1 ft Pour Space of material for third layer: 0.33 Infiltration On Infiltration rate: 2 in/hr Infiltration safety factor: 0.99 Discharge Structure Riser Height: 3 ft. flat Riser Diameter: 6 in. Orifice 1 Diameter: 6 in. Elevation: 3 ft. Gravel Trench Bed Hydraulic Table Stage (ft) Area (ac) Vol . (ac-ft) Dschrg (cfs) Infilt (cfs) 306.0 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.000 306.0 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.014 306.1 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.014 306.1 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.014 306.1 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.014 306.2 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.014 306.2 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.014 306.2 0.007 0.001 0.000 0.014 306.3 0.007 0.001 0.000 0.014 306.3 0.007 0.001 0.000 0.014 306.3 0.007 0.001 0.000 0.014 306.4 0.007 0.001 0.000 0.014 306.4 0.007 0.001 0.000 0.014 306.4 0.007 0.001 0.000 0.014 306.5 0.007 0.001 0.000 0.014 306.5 0.007 0.001 0.000 0.014 306.5 0.007 0.001 0.000 0.014 306.6 0.007 0.001 0.000 0.014 306.6 0.007 0.001 0.000 0.014 Gravel Trench Bed Hydraulic Table (continued) Stage (ft) Area (ac) Vol. (ac-ft) Dschrg (cfs) Infilt (cfs) 306.6 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.014 306.7 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.014 306.7 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.014 306.7 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.014 306.8 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.014 306.8 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.014 306.8 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.014 306.9 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.014 306.9 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.014 306.9 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.014 307.0 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.014 307.0 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.014 307.0 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.014 307.1 0.007 0.003 0.000 0.014 307.1 0.007 0.003 0.000 0.014 307.1 0.007 0.003 0.000 0.014 307.2 0.007 0.003 0.000 0.014 307.2 0.007 0.003 0.000 0.014 307.2 0.007 0.003 0.000 0.014 307.3 0.007 0.003 0.000 0.014 307.3 0.007 0.003 0.000 0.014 307.3 0.007 0.003 0.000 0.014 307.4 0.007 0.003 0.000 0.014 307.4 0.007 0.003 0.000 0.014 307.4 0.007 0.003 0.000 0.014 307.5 0.007 0.004 0.000 0.014 307.5 0.007 0.004 0.000 0.014 307.5 0.007 0.004 0.000 0.014 307.6 0.007 0.004 0.000 0.014 307.6 0.007 0.004 0.000 0.014 307.6 0.007 0.004 0.000 0.014 307.7 0.007 0.004 0.000 0.014 307.7 0.007 0.004 0.000 0.014 307.7 0.007 0.004 0.000 0.014 307.8 0.007 0.004 0.000 0.014 307.8 0.007 0.004 0.000 0.014 307.8 0.007 0.004 0.000 0.014 307.9 0.007 0.004 0.000 0.014 307.9 0.007 0.005 0.000 0.014 307.9 0.007 0.005 0.000 0.014 308.0 0.007 0.005 0.000 0.014 308.0 0.007 0.005 0.000 0.014 308.0 0.007 0.005 0.000 0.014 Gravel Trench Bed Hydraulic Table (continued) Stage (ft) Area (ac) Vol . (ac-ft) Dschrg (cfs) Infilt (cfs) 308.1 0.007 0.005 0.000 0.014 308.1 0.007 0.005 0.000 0.014 308.1 0.007 0.005 0.000 0.014 308.2 0.007 0.005 0.000 0.014 308.2 0.007 0.005 0.000 0.014 308.2 0.007 0.005 0.000 0.014 308.3 0.007 0.005 0.000 0.014 308.3 0.007 0.005 0.000 0.014 308.3 0.007 0.006 0.000 0.014 308.4 0.007 0.006 0.000 0.014 308.4 0.007 0.006 0.000 0.014 308.4 0.007 0.006 0.000 0.014 308.5 0.007 0.006 0.000 0.014 308.5 0.007 0.006 0.000 0.014 308.5 0.007 0.006 0.000 0.014 308.6 0.007 0.006 0.000 0.014 308.6 0.007 0.006 0.000 0.014 308.6 0.007 0.006 0.000 0.014 308.7 0.007 0.006 0.000 0.014 308.7 0.007 0.006 0.000 0.014 308.7 0.007 0.007 0.000 0.014 308.8 0.007 0.007 0.000 0.014 308.8 0.007 0.007 0.000 0.014 308.8 0.007 0.007 0.000 0.014 308.9 0.007 0.007 0.000 0.014 308.9 0.007 0.007 0.000 0.014 308.9 0.007 0.007 0.000 0.014 309.0 0.007 0.007 0.000 0.014 309.0 0.007 0.007 0.000 0.014 MITIGATED LAND USE ANALYSIS RESULTS Flow Frequency Return Periods for PREDEVELOPED. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.000051 5 year 0.000058 10 year 0.000061 25 year 0.000063 50 year 0.000065 100 year 0.000066 Flow Frequency Return Periods for MITAGATED to Gravel Trench Bed. POC #1 Return Period Inflow(cfs) Discharge(cfs) 2 year 0.030237 0.000000 5 year 0.040854 0.000000 10 year 0.048452 0.000000 25 year 0.058716 0.000000 50 year 0.066858 0.000000 100 year 0.075434 0.000000 Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. M.S.C.E., M.B.A. October 17, 2007 City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt 1141 Sea Vista PI. Edmonds, WA 98026 Geotechnical/Civil Engineer Subject: Geotechnical Review of Plans — New Holt Residence 1141 Sea Vista PI. Edmonds, Washington Plan Check No. 2006 - 0849 RECEIVED MAR 13 2008 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTF. CITY OF EDMONDS This engineering report presents the results of a geotechnical review of the plans for the new Ben Holt residence at 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, Washington. As previously discussed, it is understood that Mr. Holt proposes to demolish the existing residence at the site and construct a new one in a similar (slightly expanded) footprint (see plans). REFERENCES: • Project Plans by Charles Lee revised September 13, 2007 • Geotechnical Report by D. Bruce, P.E. dated October 31, 2006 • Drainage / Infiltration Criteria by D. Bruce, P.E. dated November 20, 2006 • City of Edmonds plan review comments dated February 13, 2007 BACKGROUND: As stated in the October 31, 2006 geotechnical report, the new (expanded) Holt residence will occupy a similar footprint location to the existing one (see site plan). The site is underlain with extremely dense native sands, which will allow for excellent construction conditions. The majority of the excavation for the new home will be less than 5 feet in depth and may be performed with no temporary shoring. This engineer understands that a small portion of the site (at the northwest corner) will require excavations up to 9 feet in depth — maximum. The building setback of 10 horizontal feet would allow for an excavation .to be "open cut" at shallower,,than A9. SOILS • FOUNDATIONS SITE DEVELOPMENT • INSPECTION • DRAINAGE • DESIGN & PERMIT • LEGAL P.O. Box 55502 Shoreline, WA 98155 • (206) 546-9217 • FAX (206) 546-8442 :City of Edmonds • c/o Ben Holt October 17, 2007 Page 2 1HIV. This "open cut" is geotechnically viable and maybe chosen by the owner and his contractor. However, based on this engineer's extensive experience in sandy soils, the use of 2 or 3 high Eco-Block temporary shoring is recommended as a practical measure. This is a contractor choice, not geotechnically required. The attached typical Eco-Block sketch indicates 2-block high with a 1:1 slope beyond. CITY OF EDMONDS COMMENTS (FEBRUARY 13, 2007): 1) Top and bottom elevations for rockeries: The attached site plan (furnished by designer, Charles Lee — undated) indicates top and bottom elevations for the landscaping rockeries. Note that the rockeries are a maximum of 3 feet in height. These rockeries are not geotechnically significant (provided nominal inspections verify their construction in compliance with City of Edmonds standard rockery design requirements). 2) Datum point — Provided by designer. 3) Showers: Response by designer. 4) Eco-Blocks: As discussed above, Eco-Block shoring is not geotechnically required. As a construction expedient, this engineer recommends a minimum 2-block high wall to allow for a "cleaner foundation zone" in the northwest corner of the project (see attached typical sketch). Geotechnical inspections are required to verify base block embedment, linkage, batter and "blending in" with the 1:1 (maximum steepness) excavation slope above. 5) Revised footing widths: This engineer notes a revised Detail E on Sheet 1 of 5 indicating the minimum 18-inch footing recommended in the geotechnical report. Apparently, Sheets 2 through 5 have not incorporated this change. These different detail dimensions could lead to confusion on the job site with the foundation contractor. This engineer agrees with the City of Edmonds that the plans should be consistent and reflect the geotechnically required footing dimensions. 'City of Edmonds • c/o Ben Holt October 17, 2007 Page 3 6) Special inspections: This engineer agrees with City of Edmonds that special geotechnical inspections should be performed as required on the February 13, 2007 comment sheet. It is understood that D. Bruce, P.E. will perform these inspections. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT — COMMENTS: As stated in the October 31, 2006 Geotechnical Report, the existing Holt residence and property are stable with no evidence of geotechnical distress. The proposed new home will not endanger the Holt slope or adjacent slope. The site contains no landslide hazard. Geotechnically, the construction of the new Holt residence is straightforward and simple — with minor excavation requirements, as previously discussed. The previously submitted 10-foot setback distance (from the north property line) is more than sufficient for geotechnical purposes (subject to geotechnical inspections during the excavation and foundation work). Additionally, the underlying sand allows for on -site infiltration of storm water. The construction of the new Holt residence will not increase surface water discharge or sedimentation to adjacent properties beyond pre -development condition. (NOTE: Pre - development conditions consist of the existing Holt residence. Development conditions will consist of a new Holt residence). Construction of the new Holt residence (subject to geotechnical inspections) will not decrease slope stability on adjacent properties and the new Holt residence will not adversely impact other critical areas. Plan Review: This engineer has reviewed the project plans prepared by Charles Lee and approves of the proposed excavation, rockeries and grading. As discussed above, this engineer recommends that the designer clarify all footing dimensions to be consistent with the recommendations of the geotechnical report. SUMMARY: • The plans for the new Holt residence are geotechnically approved (subject to consistent footing dimension clarification). City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt October 17, 2007 Page 4 0 • The proposed Holt residence plans are approved, subject to geotechnical inspections by D. Bruce, P.E. If there are any questions, do not hesitate to call. ,�xwaEs lv_z�r�0 DMB:abj r , Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. Geotechnical / Civil Engineer L Dennis M. Bruce, ' P.E. M.S.C.E., M.B.A. Geotechnical/Civil Engineer ARU9 October 31, 2006 MAY 06 2008 EL ofO&M�ORIDS City of Edmonds001�'"- c/o Ben Holt - 1141 Sea Vista PI. Edmonds, WA 98026 Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation — Foundation Recommendations Proposed New Residence 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, Washington City of Edmonds Project No. 2006 - 0849 This engineering report presents the results of a geotechnical evaluation of the Holt property at 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, Washington. This evaluation was required due to owner / contractor concerns, as well as City of Edmonds requirements. REFERENCES: • Property Survey by ABA dated December 20, 2004 • Grading Plan for new residence by ABA dated July 31, 2006 • Site photographs BACKGROUND: L- The overall property at 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, Washington is approximately rectangular in shape with 100 feet of frontage along 9t Ave. S and approximately 128 feet of depth along Sea Vista PI. (see property survey). Currently, the property contains the existing Holt residence that is centrally located on the lot with a detached in -ground swimming pool, as indicated on the December 20, 2004 survey. The overall property contains moderate slopes with approximately 15 feet of overall elevation differential from the high point (northeast corner) to the low point (northwest corner). It is understood that Ben Holt desires to demolish the existing residence, remove the in -ground pool, and construct a new residence as indicated on the July 31, 2006 SOILS • FOUNDATIONS • SITE DEVELOPMENT • INSPECTION • DRAINAGE • DESIGN & PERMIT • LEGAL P.O. Box 55502 • Shoreline, WA 98155 • (206) 546-9217 • FAX (206) 546-8442 City of Edmonds • • c/o Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 2 grading plan. Additionally, the current driveway location would be changed, as indicated, to accommodate access to the new residence. Obviously, the existing swimming pool would be removed and filled in accordance with geotechnical recommendations and City of Edmonds permit requirements. Visual evaluation of the existing residence and overall Holt property reveals no evidence of any geotechnical distress: no evidence of any slides, no soil tension cracks, nor any evidence of erosional degradation. The proposed new residence will be in the approximate same footprint location as the existing house with the slightly enlarged footprint extending more westerly than the current house (see site plan). EVALUATION: In order to augment the existing site geotechnical information, 3 soil test holes were hand -dug by this engineer on September 21, 2006. All 3 test holes revealed similar sub -grade conditions, namely: 0" to 6" 6" to 14" 14" to 38" (bottom of test holes) Lawn, organics, roots, and organic silt Slightly silty sands — medium dense Increasingly dense slightly silty sands No water was encountered in any of the 3 test holes. All test hole walls remained vertical and stable. No sloughing or caving occurred. CONCLUSIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS: Based on the findings of this investigation, and experience with similar sites in the area, the Holt property at 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, Washington is aeotechnically approved for the proposed new residence, subject to the following: • Standard reinforced continuous and spread footings. Allowable bearing pressure: 2,000 p.s.f. • Equivalent fluid pressure of 35 p.c.f. is recommended for any retaining wall design provided drainage zone is inspected and verified by this engineer. • For retaining wall design, use friction factor of 0.55 nd passive pressure of 350 p.c.f. City of Edmonds • c/o Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 3 • Geotechnical inspections by this engineer prior to any foundation concrete placement. The proposed structure can be supported on conventional continuous and spread footings bearing on undisturbed native soils or on structural fill placed above native soils. See the later sub -section entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill for structural fill placement and compaction recommendations. Continuous and individual spread footings should have minimum widths of eighteen (18) an enty-fou inches, respectively, and should be bottomed at least eighteen (18) me a ow the lower adjacent finish ground surface. Depending on the final site grades, some over -excavation may be required below footings to expose competent native soils. Unless lean concrete is used to fill the over excavated hole, the width of the over -excavation at the bottom must be at least as wide as the sum of two times the depth of the over -excavation and the footing width. For example, an over -excavation extending two feet below the bottom of a three-foot wide footing must be at least seven feet wide at the base of the excavation. Footings constructed according to the above recommendations may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of two thousand (2,000) pounds per square foot (p.s.f.). A one-third increase in this design bearing pressure may be used when considering short-term wind or seismic loads. For the above design criteria, it is anticipated that total post -construction settlement of footings founded on competent, native soils (or on structural fill up to five (5) feet in thickness) will be about one-half inch, with differential settlements on the order of one -quarter inch. NOTE: The bearing capacity of 3,000 p.s.f. applies to over -excavated and backfill conditions. Footings placed on native soils may be designed for 2,000 p.s.f. Lateral loads due to wind or seismic forces may be resisted by friction between the foundations and the bearing soils, or by passive earth pressure acting on the vertical, embedded portions of the foundations. For the latter condition, the foundations must either be poured directly against undisturbed soil or the backfill placed around the outside of the foundation must be level structural fill. We recommend the following design values be used for the foundation's resistance to lateral loading: Parameter Design Value Coefficient of Friction 0.55 Passive Earth Pressure 350 p.c.f. City of Edmonds • • c/o Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 4 Where: (1) p.c.f. is pounds per cubic foot. (2) Passive earth pressure is computed using the equivalent fluid density. We recommend that a safety factor of at least 1.5 be used for design of the foundation's resistance to lateral loading. SLABS -ON -GRADE: Slab -on -grade floors may be supported on undisturbed, competent native soils or on structural fill. The slabs may be supported on the existing soils provided these soils can be re -compacted prior to placement of the free -draining sand or gravel underneath the slab. This sand and gravel layer should be a minimum of four (4) inches thick. We also recommend using a vapor barrier such as 6-mil. plastic membrane beneath the slab with minimum overlaps of 12 inches for sealing purposes. PERMANENT FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS: Retaining walls backfilled on one side only should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures imposed by the soils retained by these structures. The following recommended design parameters are for walls less than twelve (12) feet in height, which restrain level backfill: Parameter Active Earth Pressure* Passive Earth Pressure Coefficient of Friction Soil Unit Weight Where: Design Value 35 p.c.f. 350 p.c.f. 0.55 125 p.c.f. (1) p.c.f. is pounds per cubic foot (2) Active and passive earth pressures are computed using equivalent fluid densities. For restrained walls which cannot deflect at least 0.002 times the wall height, a uniform lateral pressure of one hundred (100 p.s.f. should be added to the active equivalent fluid pressure). City of Edmonds cto Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 5 The values given above are to be used for design of permanent foundation and retaining walls only. An appropriate safety factor should be applied when designing the walls. We recommend using a safety factor of at least 1.5 for overturning and sliding. The above design values do not include the effects of any hydrostatic pressures behind the walls and assume that no surcharge slopes or loads will be placed above the walls. If these conditions exist, then those pressures should be added to the above lateral pressures. Also, if sloping backfill is desired behind the walls, then we will need to be given the wall dimensions and slope of the backfill in order to provide the appropriate design earth pressures. Heavy construction equipment should not be operated behind retaining and foundation walls within a distance equal to the height of the wall, unless the walls are designed for the additional lateral pressures resulting from the equipment. Placement and compaction of retaining wall backfill should be accomplished with hand -operated equipment. Retaining Wall Backfill Backfill placed within eighteen (18) inches of any retaining or foundation walls should be free -draining structural fill containing no organics. This backfill should contain no more than five (5) percent silt or clay particles and have no particles greater than four (4) inches in diameter. The percentage of particles passing the No. 4 sieve should be between twenty-five (25) and seventy (70) percent. Due to their high silt content, if the native soils are used as backfill, a drainage composite, such as Mirafi and Enkadrain, should be placed against the retaining walls. The drainage composites should be hydraulically connected to the foundation drain system. The purpose of these backfill requirements is to assure that the design criteria for the retaining wall is not exceeded because of a build-up of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. The subsection entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill contains recommendations regarding placement and compaction of structural fill behind retaining and foundation walls. EXCAVATION AND SLOPES: At the time of this investigation and report, it appears that the maximum soil cut will be approximately 7 — 8 feet deep in the northeast corner of the new residence. This excavation may require temporary Eco-Block shoring in order to avoid a wide 1:1 cut. No vertical excavation should occur deeper than 4.0 feet. In no case should excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, state and national government safety regulations. Temporary cuts up to a height of City of Edmonds • • c/o Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 6 four (4) feet deep in unsaturated soils may be vertical. For temporary cuts having a height greater than four (4) feet, the cut should have an inclination no steeper than 1:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) from the top of the slope to the bottom of the excavation. Under specific recommendations by the geotechnical engineer, excavation cuts may be modified for site conditions. All permanent cuts into native soils should be inclined no steeper than 2:1 (H:V). Fill slopes should not exceed 2H:1 V. It is important to note that sands do cave suddenly, and without warning. The contractors should be made aware of this potential hazard. Water should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of any temporary or permanent slope. All permanently exposed slopes should be seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve stability of the surficial layer of soil. DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS: Footing drains are recommended at the base of all footings and retaining walls. These drains should be surrounded by at least six (6) inches of one -inch -minus washed rock wrapped in non -woven geotextile filter fabric (Mirafi 140N, Supac 4NP, or similar material). At the highest point, the perforated pipe invert should be at least as low as the bottom of the footing and it should be sloped for drainage. All roof and surface water drains must be kept separate from the foundation drain system. No groundwater was observed in any of the 3 test holes during the fieldwork. Seepage into the planned excavation is possible, and likely if excavation occurs during winter months, and if encountered should be drained away from the site by use of drainage ditches, perforated pipe, French drains, or by pumping from sumps interconnected by shallow connector trenches at the bottom of the excavation. The excavation of the site should be graded so that surface water is directed off the site and away from the tops of slopes. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where foundations, slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Any exposed slopes to be covered with plastic to minimize erosion. Final site grading in areas adjacent to buildings should be sloped at least two (2) percent away from the building, except where the area adjacent to the building is paved. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND STRUCTURAL FILL: The proposed building and pavement areas should be stripped and cleared of all surface vegetation, all organic matter, and other deleterious material. The stripped or removed materials should not be mixed with any materials to be used as structural fill. 9 City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 7 0 Structural fill is defined as any fill placed under the building, behind permanent retaining or foundation walls, or in other areas where the underlying soils needs to supportloads. Thi§%engineer shoal&obrs�sW6- conditions, during. and after excavation prior to placement ofanystructural fill. All structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts with a moisture content at or near the optimum moisture content. The optimum moisture content is that moisture content which results in the greatest compacted dry density. The moisture content of fill soils is very important and must be closely controlled during the filling and compaction process. The allowable thickness of the fill lift will depend on the material type, compaction equipment, and the number of passes made to compact the lift. In no case should the lifts exceed twelve (12) inches in loose thickness. The following table presents recommended relative compaction for structural fill: Location of Fill Placement Beneath footings, slabs or walkways Behind retaining walls Beneath pavements Minimum Relative Compaction 95% 90% 95% for upper 12 inches of Sub -grade, 90% below that level Where: Minimum relative compaction is the ratio, expressed in percentages, of the compacted dry density to the maximum dry density, as determined in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D-1557-78 (Modified Proctor). Use of On -Site Soils If grading activities take place during wet weather, or when the sandy, on -site soils are very wet, site preparation costs may be higher because of delays due to rains and the potential need to import granular fill. The on -site soils are generally sandy and thus are not highly moisture sensitive. Grading operations will be difficult when the moisture content of these soils greatly exceeds the optimum moisture content. Moisture sensitive soils will also be susceptible to excessive softening and "pumping" from construction equipment traffic when the moisture content is greater than the optimum moisture content. City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 8 Ideally, structural fill, which is to be placed in wet weather, should consist of a granular soil having no more than five (5) percent silt or clay particles. The percentage of particles passing the No. 200 sieve should be measured from that portion of the soil passing the three -quarter -inch sieve. The use of "some" on -site soils for fill material may be acceptable if the upper organic materials are segregated and moisture contents are monitored by engineering inspection. DRAINAGE CONTROLS: No drainage problems were evident with the existing Holt residence and property at 1141 Sea Vista PI. The sandy sub -grade soils would allow for on -site infiltration, subject to an infiltration rate provided by additional geotechnical investigation. If desired, this engineer can provide a recommended on -site infiltration rate. It is essential that no storm water discharge occur on the steeper westerly slopes. This engineer has recommended a maximum steepness of 3H:1 V for the final grade of the western portion of the site (see grading plan). No direct discharge of storm water onto the western slopes should occur. CONCRETE: All foundation concrete (footings, stem walls, slabs, any retaining walls, etc.) shall have a minimum cement content of 5-1/2 sacks per cubic yard of concrete mix. REMOVAL OF EXISTING POOL: As stated, currently the site contains an in -ground swimming pool. It is understood this pool is to be removed in order to accommodate the new house footprint. Thus, it is essential that the pool removal, structural fill placement and bearin ;/capacity in the area of the pool be inspected and verified by a qualified geotechnical engineer. ROCKERIES: As indicated on the July 31, 2006 grading plan, the existing westerly rockeries are to be partially removed in order to accommodate the proposed 3H:1 V sloped landscaped area. The existing rockeries reveal no evidence of any geotechnical 0 . • City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 9 distress. Thus, the partial removal of the existing rockeries is geotechnically approved, subject to on -site inspections. Approximately one-half of the westerly rockery will remain (see site plan). Additional landscaping rockeries are proposed in the southeast portion of the site. The proposed rockeries will have a maximum height of 4 feet and should comply with the City of Edmonds standard rockery design, and have geotechnical inspections during construction of the rockeries. TEMPORARY SHORING: As stated, this engineer understands that a maximum soil cut of up to 8 feet is proposed in the northeast corner of the new foundation. Experience in the sub -grade sands strongly recommends that the excavation contractor utilize 2-high or 3-high Eco-Blocks as temporary shoring. It is possible to incorporate a 1:1 slope for the proposed excavation. However, erosional sloughing will occur and create foundation formwork problems. Additionally, this engineer recommends a minimum of ground disturbance for the excavation, and thus the temporary Eco-Blocks should be considered. Additional geotechnical criteria, Eco-Block shoring designs and on -site inspections are required. INSPECTIONS: The recommendations of this report are only valid when key geotechnical aspects are inspected by this engineer during construction: • Soil cuts • Temporary Eco-Block shoring, as required • Foundation sub -grade verification • Any retaining wall • Rockery placement • Any fill placement, including swimming pool zone • Subsurface drainage installation • Temporary and permanent erosion control measures • On -site storm water infiltration, if desired City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 10 SUMMARY: The proposed new Holt residence at 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, Washington is geotechnically viable when constructed in accordance with the recommendations herein, compliance with City of Edmonds approved plans and requirements, and key geotechnical inspections during construction. GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW OF FINAL PLANS: At the time of this investigation and report, final house plans were not available for review. As stated in this report, the new Holt residence may be supported on conventional, reinforced, concrete footings, in accordance with the criteria herein. Prior to final permit issuance, this engineer should review the final house plans to verify actual proposed excavation, make final recommendations for any temporary shoring required, and finalize the structural fill requirements for the swimming pool void, as well as to verify compliance with the recommendations of this report. Upon satisfactory review, a "Statement of Minimal Risk" will be issued. CLOSURE: The findings and recommendations of this report were prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering principles and practice. No other warranty, either express or implied, is made. The conclusions are based on the results of the field exploration and interpolation of subsurface conditions between explored locations. If conditions are encountered during construction that appear to be different than those described in this report, this engineer should be notified to observe the situation and review and verify or modify the recommendations. If there are any questions, do not hesitate to call. DMB:abj EXPIRES 121231 00 0010 Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. Geotechnical / Civil Engineer I W cr — I UZ 1 cyo Xa¢ J W 3 M x w O z 23 oI O Ni•�o SOw�w z } 1Lj Y� U O W cD cr Z W co w12 ILINJ IILV 1\VVI\LI\ I . V "L-m^4111 I PROPOSED ROCKERY �,a ! AS REQ'D. 1p S90100'00"W n n - X— .718— [�3I•�) U REMOVE/REPLACE — FENCE AS REQUIRED o n, � �N /128.62/. — — — -- PROPOSED CONTOUR LINE PROPOSED HOUSE SEA VISTA PLACE LOWER FLOOR ELEV. = 317.0 MAIN FLOOR ELEV. = 327.0 PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION, TYP. aOOCH, �__EXISTING CONTOUR LINE 614 --EXISTING ROCKERY TO BE REMOVED AS REQUIRED PROPOSED ROCKERIES—. < < MAX. 4' HIGH TYP. WALL ABOVE <l\ �90. S O, • FMO 'P 6 '� oRi`F ��j k�q yFkis S OO C(/rNSTq INSTALI 44 o� / r ! I S90'00'00"W O O 0 O PROP. I SIDEWALK or 32.4' SEA VISTA PLACE NOTE: CENTERLINE MONUMENTAT10N NOT FOUND V) LLJ z �I LLJ 0 N Q � Sri Y rn I �4\ 0 U I I 109.77' \ I t It A 7xT *4- Wt. 4VIi,4 V ---�3coccc. ey',i57ki C' &f L. . ��j 401,T _ � t SSA UtST� -P,p 'k p L, -s A-rr a �J 1� � � �' L � EXEC fl • l �► v �.�'T � G eS� '/ O /Ai �'rLTRA Sbt�. TEST flLF5 T�� K-r0zfJAFLY /k --rv� �tiJ S �olJ atTtO� NAVY.©ofv 1 !� tatK-s j Kovk S L A W ♦a � Ct1 � TRAc nee f+0Uit �o j��IL f d p lT�aTij le A L_ � � G �oAJLjTl0N L 4 • PL Ei4-S E C A-L L IR rn i AL L� BUILDING DRART1dIEi ItKOMES 1 MY OF EDM,'ONDS SOILS • FOUNDATIONS :• St7E DEVELOPMENT • INSPECTtON - DRAINAGE DESIGN & PERMIT - LEGAL. P.O. Box 55502 • Shoreline. WA 98155 • (206) 546-9217 , FAX: ;206} 546-8442 Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. NO .1 B�,�_ M.S.C.E., M.B.A. October 17, 2007 City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt 1141 Sea Vista PI. Edmonds, WA 98026 Geotechnical /Civil Subject: Geotechnical Review of Plans — New Holt Residence 1141 Sea Vista PI. Edmonds, Washington Plan Check No. 2006 - 0849 This engineering report presents the results of a geotechnical review of the plans for the new Ben Holt residence at 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, Washington. As previously discussed, it is understood that Mr. Holt proposes to demolish the existing residence at the site and construct a new one in a similar (slightly expanded) footprint (see plans). REFERENCES: • Project Plans by Charles Lee revised September 13, 2007 • Geotechnical Report by D. Bruce, P.E. dated October 31, 2006 • Drainage / Infiltration Criteria by D. Bruce, P.E. dated November 20, 2006 • City of Edmonds plan review comments dated February 13, 2007 BACKGROUND: As stated in the October 31, 2006 geotechnical report, the new (expanded) Holt residence will occupy a similar footprint location to the existing one (see site plan). The site is underlain with extremely dense native sands, which will allow for excellent construction conditions. The majority of the excavation for the new home will be less than 5 feet in depth and may be performed with no temporary shoring. This engineer understands that a small portion of the site (at the northwest corner) will require excavations up to 9 feet in depth — maximum. The building setback of 10 horizontal feet would allow for an excavation to be "open cut' at shallower than SOILS • FOUNDATIONS • SITE DEVELOPMENT • INSPECTION • DRAINAGE • DESIGN & PERMIT • LEGAL P.O. Box 55502 - Shoreline, WA 98155 • (206) 546-9217 • FAX (206) 546-8442 'City of Edmonds • c/o Ben Holt October 17, 2007 Page 2 1 HIV. This "open cut" is geotechnically viable and may be chosen by the owner and his contractor. However, based on this engineer's extensive experience in sandy soils, the use of 2 or 3 high Eco-Block temporary shoring is recommended as a practical measure. This is a contractor choice, not geotechnically required. The attached typical Eco-Block sketch indicates 2-block high with a 1:1 slope beyond. CITY OF EDMONDS COMMENTS (FEBRUARY 13, 2007): 1) Top and bottom elevations for rockeries: The attached site plan (furnished by designer, Charles Lee — undated) indicates top and bottom elevations for the landscaping rockeries. Note that the rockeries are a maximum of 3 feet in height. These rockeries are not geotechnically significant (provided nominal inspections verify their construction in compliance with City of Edmonds standard rockery design requirements). 2) Datum point — Provided by designer. 3) Showers: Response by designer. 4) Eco-Blocks: As discussed above, Eco-Block shoring is not geotechnically required. As a construction expedient, this engineer recommends a minimum 2-block high wall to allow for a "cleaner foundation zone" in the northwest corner of the project (see attached typical sketch). Geotechnical inspections are required to verify base block embedment, linkage, batter and "blending in" with the 1:1 (maximum steepness) excavation slope above. 5) Revised footing widths: This engineer notes a revised Detail E on Sheet 1 of 5 indicating the minimum 18-inch footing recommended in the geotechnical report. Apparently, Sheets 2 through 5 have not incorporated this change. These different detail dimensions could lead to confusion on the job site with the foundation contractor. This engineer agrees with the City of Edmonds that the plans should be consistent and reflect the geotechnically required footing dimensions. City of Edmonds • c/o Ben Holt October 17, 2007 Page 3 6) Special inspections: This engineer agrees with City of Edmonds that special geotechnical inspections should be performed as required on the February 13, 2007 comment sheet. It is understood that D. Bruce, P.E. will perform these inspections. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT — COMMENTS: As stated in the October 31, 2006 Geotechnical Report, the existing Holt residence and property are stable with no evidence of geotechnical distress. The proposed new home will not endanger the Holt slope or adjacent slope. The site contains no landslide hazard. Geotechnically, the construction of the new Holt residence is straightforward and simple — with minor excavation requirements, as previously discussed. The previously submitted 10-foot setback distance (from the north property line) is more than sufficient for geotechnical purposes (subject to geotechnical inspections during the excavation and foundation work). Additionally, the underlying sand allows for on -site infiltration of storm water. The construction of the new Holt residence will not increase surface water discharge or sedimentation to adjacent properties beyond pre -development condition. (NOTE: Pre - development conditions consist of the existing Holt residence. Development conditions will consist of a new Holt residence). Construction of the new Holt residence (subject to geotechnical inspections) will not decrease slope stability on adjacent properties and the new Holt residence will not adversely impact other critical areas. Plan Review: This engineer has reviewed the project plans prepared by Charles Lee and approves of the proposed excavation, rockeries and grading. As discussed above, this engineer recommends that the designer clarify all footing dimensions to be consistent with the recommendations of the geotechnical report. SUMMARY: • The plans for the new Holt residence are geotechnically approved (subject to consistent footing dimension clarification). 'City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt October 17, 2007 Page 4 • The proposed Holt residence plans are approved, subject to geotechnical inspections by D. Bruce, P.E. If there are any questions, do not hesitate to call. J.EXPWES-- 12iZ3/ DMB:abj Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. Geotechnical / Civil Engineer rj Y ERICH O. TIETZE Engineers and Consultants 0 AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 1714 NW 200t" Lane, Shoreline, WA 98177 (206) 542-1777 (206) 542-5222 FAX eota@clearwire.net Ed Sibrel (' April 18 2008 Development Services Department .-" City of Edmonds `fo C is 121 5`b Avenue North SL'J Edmonds, WA 98020 `S Subject: Civil Engineering Plans for Ben Holt Residence at 1141 Sea Vi to Place 6 2 0071% 0t7 g g Please find enclosed with this letter calculations to support our contention that the proposed infiltration bed has more than a Factor of Safety of 2. This letter is in response to the Drainage Plan Review Corrections from you dated April 15, 2008. I have included your calculation mark ups for information purposes. As indicated in the Dennis Bruce soils report that was previously submitted, a minimum percolation rate of 16.0 inches/hour was observed. Using a Factor of Safety of 2, a design percolation of rate 8.0 inches/hour results. As previously shown in our original submittal, a percolation rate of 7.2 inches per hour was used which provides a Factor of Safety greater than 2. The value of 7.2 was obtained by adjusting the observed infiltration rate of 16.0 inches per hour by the appropriate factors required by the King County Surface Water design Manual. All of this was previously submitted for review. The King County Runoff Time Series program was used to size the infiltration bed. This program takes into account the infiltration into the ground and storage within the bed. Since the KCRTS program uses infiltration expressed in min/inch rather than inches per hour, the rate of 7.2 inches per hour was converted to 8.3 minutes per inch and was used in the calculations that are attached and which were previously submitted. In addition, the calculations that were previously submitted were based on a total impervious area of 6,449 SF. The site has been revised since the original submittal so that the total impervious area for the roof and driveway is now 5,789 SF. The size of the infiltration bed was not reduced to reflect this smaller footprint size. The actual Factor of Safety is therefore approximately = (16.0/7.2) x (6449/5789) = 2.5. (observed perc rate/ design perc rate) x (original impervious area/ actual impervious area) Therefore we request approval of the design drawings as originally submitted without the need for modification of the previous submittal. Please make additional copies of the previously submitted drawings as needed at a cost of $5 per print. If you should have any questions, please call at your earliest convenience. Respectfully submitted, ERICH O. TIETZE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. REST FLE Erich O. Tietze P.E. President APG C ° 0 Retention/Detention Facility Pew-& Type of Facility: Facility Length: Gravel Infiltration Trench 65.00 ft Facility Width: 5.00 ft Effective FacilityArea: Storage Depth: 325. 3.00 s . ft ft f Stage 0 Elevation: Storage Volume: 0.00 2 ft ft cu. Vertical Permeability: 8.30 in/in Permeable Surfaces: Riser Head: Bottom 3.00 ft l P Riser Diameter: 6.00 inches Top Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve: None Stage Elevation Storage Discharge rcolation (ft) (ft) (cu. ft) (ac-ft) (cfs) ( fs) 0.00 0.00 0. 0.000 0.000 0 00 0.03 0.03 3 . 0.000 0.000 0 . 5 0.13 0.13 13. 0.000 0.000 0. 0.23 0.23 22. 0.001 0.000 0.0 0.33 0.33 32. 0.001 0.000 0.05 0.43 0.43 42. 0.001 0.000 0.05 a 0.53 0.53 52. 0.001 0.000 0.05 l9 0.63 0.73 0.63 0.73 61. 71. 0.001 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.05 0.05 `0--? L 0.83 0.83 81. 0.002 0.000 0.05 0.93 0.93 91. 0.002 0.000 0.05 1.03 1.03 100. 0.002 0.000 0.05 1.13 1.13 110. 0.003 0.000 0.05 a 1.23 1.23 120. 0.003 0.000 0.05 l 1.33 1.33 130. 0.003 0.0•00 0.05 1.43 1.43 139. 0.003 0.000 0.05 1.53 1.53 149. 0.003 0.000 0.05 1.63 1.63 159. 0.004 0.000 0.05 1.73 1.73 169. 0.004 0.000 0.05 &L 1.83 1.83 178. 0.004 0.000 0.05 1.93 1.93 188. 0.004 0.000 0.05 2.03 2.03 198. 0.005 0.000 0.05 �( 2.13 2.13 208. 0.005 0.000 0.05 2.23 2.23 217. 0.005 0.000 0.05 _ 2.33 2.33 227. 0.005 0.000 0.05 2.43 2.43 237. 0.005 0.000 0.05 tRg 2.53 2.53 247. 0.006 0.000 0.05 2.63 2.63 256. 0.006 0.000 0.05 2.73 2.73 266. 0.006 0.000 0.05 2.83 2.83 276. 0.006 0.000 0.05 y► Q dtrj 2.93 2.93 286. 0.007 0.000 0.05 3.00 3.00 293. 0.007 0.000 0.05 3.10 3.10 293. 0.007 0.154 0.05( 3.20 3.20 293. 0.007 0.423 0.05 3.30 3.30 293. 0.007 0.518 0.05 3.40 3.40 293. 0.007 0.598 0.05 4),r r, c 3.50 3.50 293. 0.007 0.669 0.05 3.60 3.60 293. 0.007 0.732 0.05 3.70 3.70 293. 0.007 0.791 0.05 3.80 3.80 293. 0.007 0.846 0.05 3.90 3.90 293. 0.007 0.897 0.05 4.00 4.00 293. 0.007 0.945 0.05 4.10 4.10 293. 0.007 0.992 0.05 4.20 4.20 293. 0.007 1.040 0.05 4.30 4.30 293. 0.007 1.080 0.05 4.40 4.40 293. 0.007 1.120 0.05 4.50 4.50 293. 0.007 1.160 0.05 4.60 4.60 293. 0.007 1.200 0.05 4.70 4.70 293. 0.007 1.230 0.05 4.80 4.80 293. 0.007 1.270 0.05 4.90 4.90 293. 0.007 1.300 0.05 5.00 5.00 293. 0.007 1.340 0.05 Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Target Calc Stage Elev (Cu-Ft) (Ac-Ft) 1 0.08 0.00 0.00 2.93 2.93 286. 0.007 2 0.06 ******* 0.00 0.03 0.03 3. 0.000 3 0.05 ******* 0.00 0.03 0.03 3. 0.000 4 0.05 ******* 0.00 0.02 0.02 2. 0.000 5 0.04 ******* 0.00 0.02 0.02 2. 0.000 6 0.04 ******* 0.00 0.02 0.02 2. 0.000 7 0.04 ******* 0.00 0.02 0.02 2. 0.000 8 0.03 ******* 0.00 0.02 0.02 2. 0.000 city of edmonds -� development information Infiltration Facility Sizing In select cases, the City of Edmonds will allow infiltration of drainage for proposed developments or redevelopments. In all cases, properties proposing to install infiltration facilities must be located close to Type A soils as indicated on the SCS Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area Washington, and percolation tests performed on the property must indicate a minimum infiltration rate of 0.0333 inches/minute. In all cases, the final decision to allow infiltration will rest with the City Engineer. In cases where infiltration has been allowed, the City of Edmonds allows infiltration facility sizing based on the following formula: e r L C f -e-V 6,P.V-, tol t.s _ _ (0.054PIoo'Qr) c� V where: A,, = Area required for infiltration (ft); PW =100-year, 24-hour design storm total precipitation (3.0 inches in City of Edmonds); 1®(®' 2k6 7) A, = Tributary area served by infiltration facility(ft); 1D = Design infiltration rate determined by percolation tests (inhnin — cannot exceed 0.333 in/min). infiltration facilities must be designed to provide the area required for infiltration, as determined by the above formula. 2-d PI-0 ✓ 9E06-2L9-SZV saxj%snpNI aioH U89 I&I :35! SF °S cl o e", vo o� C CM j C bed . °o Yi 0+ eE0 =01 �0 91 -+dW ERICH O. TIETZE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Enqineers and Consultants 18530 76th Avenue West, Suite B Edmonds, WA 98026 425-771-6212 FAX 425-775-0236 City of Edmonds IRF—C" [o October 31, 2007 121 5`h Avenue North NOV 0 12007 Edmonds, WA 98020 BUILDING D ARTA9ERIT GTY OF MONDS Subject: Civil Engineering Plans for Ben Holt Residence at 1141 Sea Vista Place Design drawings for the grading, drainage, street improvements and TESC plans for this project are included with this letter. Also included are the design calculations for the proposed infiltration trench, a soils engineering report by Dennis Bruce dated October 31, 2006, percolation test results by Dennis Bruce dated November 20, 2006 and a table of grading quantity calculations. According to Dennis Bruce, PE, the soils on the site are suitable for infiltration of site runoff from impervious areas. According to the percolation tests he performed, the "slowest" percolation rate was 16 inches per hour. He recommended a design percolation rate of 10 inches per hour. The King County Runoff Time series was used for design of the infiltration system. According to the King County Surface Water Design Manual, the observed percolation rate must be modified to reflect the type of test used the geometry of the trench and plugging potential. The modification procedure resulted in a design percolation rate of 7.2 inches per hour which is more conservative than the rate recommended by Dennis Bruce. The infiltration trench was designed so that no runoff will occur for the 100-year storm. An emergency overflow and dispersion trench has been provided to sheet flow any runoff that may occur during storms greater than the 100-year storm. If you should have any questions, please call at your earliest convenience. Respectfully submitted, ERICH O. TIETZE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. " HLE ti C r 0 ��✓�� PC r (PL') L57 YLA-)P\ 5"2-e-- DI 47 , (-// Y /0 �- / /' aP sr�cF p!E'Rbl = AAKSA — .5922 Sr (a IM ACk OV ALDUGE — o u, LA/VVSL^� M — 5 9M 9r Sr (Li MIS AC%• QV — 88 NEW WS — �.W S r (QWO ACC HEOV — 98 ACW DICKS — 2W Sig' (Q G1V A* OV — W !►i'iY AWbf — f OW Sig' (Q OW AQk OV — 98 fi,mV-2jj©un0\ua8 '1IoH\5I3]rDdd\PTH OV3©lnV\'3 -1 1XI Area ?I Till Forest 0.00 acres - -- - — Till Pasture 0.00 acres Till Grass 0.00 acres Outwash Forest 0.00 acres 1 Outwash Pasture 0.00 acres Outwash Grass 0.14 acres - Wetland 0.00 acres'" Impervious 0.15 acres (� g Total c 0.28 acres F Scale Factor : 1.05 Hourly Reduced Time Series: IDeveloped >> r Compute Time Series Modify User Input i File for computed Time Series [.TSF] i I 9 Flow Frequency Analysis -----w-------------------------------------------------- Time Series File:developed,tsf project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--- -----Flow Frequency Analysis------- FlowRate Rank Time of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob CFS) P 0.042 5 2i09i01 2 : 0 0 0.0 1 00.00 0.990 0.033 8 1/OSi02 16:00 0.056 2 .00 0.960 0 052 3 2/27/03 7:00 0.052 3 10.00 0.900 0.039 7 8/26/04 2:00 0.046 4 5.00 0.800 0.046 4 10/28/04 16:00 0.042 5 3.00 0.667 0,041 6 1/18/06 16:00 0,041 6 2,00 0.500 0,056 2 10/26/06 0:00 0.039 7 1.30 0,231 0,084 1 1/09/08 6:00 0.033 8 1.10 0.091 • Computed Peaks 0.075 S0.00 0.980 C - Primary Design Hydrograph: 11 ? S Hyd:1 Peak flow on 1109108 Target Discharge: 0.00 Hyd:2 Peak flow on 10126106 Target Discharge: 1 --------�� Hyd:3 Peak flow on 2127103 Target Discharge: HydA Peak flow on 10128104 Target Discharge: C � 4-o' Hyd:5 Peak flow on 2109101 Target Discharge: Hyd:6 Peak flow on 1118106 Target Discharge: Hyd:7 Peak flow on 8126104 Target Discharge: Hyd:8 Peak flow on 1105102 Target Discharge: Return to Size Retention/Detention Facility Screen Enter Target StagelDischarge. Return Period:100.0 0 ?)EditR/D Facifity.GRAVEL TRENCHAED _ _ _ __ .._ _...._ ...__._..... j J Bottom Length (Ft) 65 J Bottom Width (Ft) 5.0 Bottom Area (Sq Ft) ******** Effective Storage Depth before Overflow (Ft) 13.000 • Elevation at 0 Stage (Ft) 0.000 Vertical Perm eability(Minjin) 8.300 Riser Head (Ft) Riser Diameter (In) 16.000 _j Number of Orifices 10 - __� Top of Riser r Notched C: Flat e01NT of Compliance Setup Edit Test )jYDROGRAPH Parameters Define QISER Orifices and Notch .aAVE to Holt.rdf If width is *, Bottom Area is used ,I- 0M Retention/Detention.jFacility Type of fa1lity: Gravel Infiltration Trench Facility Ligth: 65.00 ft Facility 1�6dth- 5.00 ft Facility, acilit rea: 325. sq. ft Effective Storage Bepth: 3.00 ft / Stage 0 Elevation: 0.00 ft / Storage V`lume: 293. cu. ft Vertical Permeability: 8.30 min/in n Permeable Surflaces: Bottom Riser.jHead: 3.00 ft 1Q.� Riser Diameter: 6.00 inches ( fI Top Notch -heir: None 7 J Outflow Rating Ourve: None Stage Eleva�ion Storage Discharge Percolation Lft3 (ft, (cu. ft) (ac-ft) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0. 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.03 0.(3 3. 0.000 0.000 0.05 0.13 0.13 13. 0.000 0_000 0.05 r 0.23 0.:.3 22. 0.001 0.000 0.05 0.33 0.33 32. 0.001 0.000 0.05 0.43 0. 3 42. 0. 002 0.000 0.05� 0.53 0.13 52. 0.001 0.000 0.05 r 0.63 0. 3 61. 0.001 0.000 0.05 ^ (� 0.73 0 _ 3 71. 0.002 0.000 0.05 0.83 0.83 81. 0.002 0.000 0.05 0.93 0.43 91. 0.002 0.000 0.05 1.03 1. 3 100. 0.002 0.000 0.05 1.13 1. 3 110. 0.003 0.000 0.05 1.23 1.}3 120. 0.003 0.000 0.05 V < 1.33 1_3 130. 0.003 0.000 0.05 v 1.43 1.43 139_ 0.003 0.000 0.05 1.53 1.1 149. 0.003 0.000 0.05 1.63 1.$3 159. 0.004 0.000 0.05 1.73 1.13 169. 0.004 0.000 0.05 1 A3 1.63 178. 0.004 0.000 0.05 1.93 1.43 188_ 0.004 0.000 0.05 2.03 2.63 198. 0.005 0.000 0.�5 2.13 2.3 208. 0.005 0.000 0.05 I 2.23 2.,3 217. 0.005 0.000 0.05 2.33 2.$3. 227. 0.005 0.000 0.05 2.43 2.43 237. 0.005 0.000 0.05 2.53 2.$3 247_ 0.006 0.000 0.05 2.63 2.�3 256. 0.006 0.000 0.05 2.73 2_13 266_ 0.006 0.000 0.0` 2.83 2.t3 276. 0.006 0.000 0.05 2.93 2. 3 286_ 0.007 0.000 0.05 3.00 3.?0 293. 0.007 0.000 0.05 3.10 3.0 293. 0.007 0.154 0.05 3.20 3.?0 293. 0.003 0.423 0.05 293. 0.007 0.518 0.05 3.30 3.80 3.40 3.�0 293_ 0.00-70.598 0.05 0 3.50 3.90 293. 3.60 3.60 293. 3.70 3.710 293. 3.80 3.60 293. 3.90 3.10 293. 4.00 4.00 293. 4.10 4.10 293. 4.20 4.20 293. 4.30 4.30 293. 4.40 4.40 293. 4.50 4.50 293. 4.60 4.60 293_ 4.70 4.70 293. 4.80 4.$0 293. 4.90 4.90 293. 5.00 5.60 293. 0.007 0.669 0.05 0.007 0.732 0.05 0.007 0.791 0.05 0.001 0.846 0.05 0.007 0.897 0.05 , 0.007 0.945 0.05 j 0.007 0.992 0.05 0.007 1.040 0.05 0.007 1.080 (11.05 0.007 1.120 0.05 0.007 1.160 0.05 0.007 1.200 0.05 0.007 1.230 0.05 0.007 1.270 0.05 0.007 1.300 0.05 0.007 1.340 0.05 Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Target; Calc Stage Elea 1 0.08 0.00, 0.00 2.93 2.93 2 0.06 *******` 0.00 0.03 0.03 3 0.05****** 0.00 0.03 0.03 4 0.05 ******* 0.00 0.02 0.02 5 0.04 *******. 0.00 0.02 0.02 6 0.04 ******* 0.00 0.02 0.02 7 0.04 *}***** 0.00 0.02 0.02 8 0.03 ******* 0.00 0.02 0.02 Storage ,Cu-Ft) (Ac-Ft}! 286. 0.00ri 3. 0.o0b 3. O.0010 2. 0.0010 2. 0.000 2. 0.0010 2. 0.00ic 2. 0.0010 Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. M.S.C.E., M.B.A. eotechnic al/Civil Engineer October 31, 2006 City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, WA 98026 Subject: Geolechnical Evaluation — Foundation Recommendations Proposed New Residence 11411,Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, Washington City Of Edmonds Project No. 2006 - 0849 This engineering report presents the results of a geotechnical evaluation of the Holt property at 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, Washington. This evaluation was required due to owner / contractor concerns, as well as City of Edrrkonds requirements. REFERENCES: • Property Survey by ABA dated December 20, 2004 • Grading Plan for new residence by ABA dated July 31, 2006 • Site photogrfaphs BACKGROUND: The overall property at 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edmonds, Washihq�ton is approximately rectangular in shape with 100 feet of frontage along 0 Ave. S and approximately 128 feet of depth along Sea Vista Pl. (see property srvey). Currently, tho property contains the existing Holt residence that is centrally located on the lot with a detached in -ground swimming pool, as indicated on the December 20, 2004 survey. The overall property contains moderate slopes with approximately 15 feet of overall elevation di4erential from the high point (northeast comer) td the low point (northwest comer). It is understgod that Ben Holt desires to demolish the existin ' residence, remove the in -ground pool, end construct a new residence as indicated on t o July 31, 2006 SOILS • FOUMDATItMI¢ 9 SITE OsE1IR-oPMEW • IMSPECTM • DRAMAW & bk-mN a PERMIT • LEQAL P.O. Box 55502 • Shoreline, WA 98155 • (206) 546-9217 • FAQ( (206) 546-8442 City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt `-- October 31, 2006 Page 4 Where: (1) p.c.f. is pounds per cubic foot. (2) Passive earth pressure is computed using the equivalent fluid density. We recomlmend that a safety factor of at least 1.5 be used for design of the foundation's resistance to lateral loading. SLABS -ON -GRADE: Slab -on -glade floors may be supported on undisturbed, competent native soils or on structural fill. The slabs may be supported on the existing soil provided these soils can be re-compaFted prior to placement of the free -draining sand( or gravel underneath the slab. This sand and gravel layer should be a minimum of foul (4) inches thick. We also recommend ?using a vapor barrier such as 6-mil. plastic merr>ibrane beneath the slab with minimum overlaps of 12 inches for sealing purposes. PERMANENT FQUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS: Retaining alls backfilled on one side only should be desig� ed to resist lateral earth pressures imposed by the soils retained by these structures The following recommended deign parameters are for walls less than twelve (12) feet in height, which restrain lev'l backfill: Parameter Design Value Active Earth Pressure* 35 p.c.f. Passive Earth Pressure 350 p.c.f. Coefficient Of Friction 0.55 Soil Unit Weight 125 p.c.f. Where: (1) p.c.t is pounds per cubic foot i (2) Active and passive earth pressures are computed using equivalent fluid densities. For restrained walls which cannot deflect at least 0.002 times the wall height, a uniform lateral pressure of one hundred (106 p.s.f. should be added to the active equivalent fluid pressure). M ORM city of Edmonds clo Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 6 four (4) feet deep in unsaturated soils may be vertical. For tempor height greater than four (4) feet, the cut should have an inclination (Horizontal:Verticall) from the top of the slope to the bottom of the specific recommendations by the geotechnical engineer, exa modified for site conditions. All permanent cuts into native soils st steeper than 2:1 (M:V). Fill slopes should not exceed 2H:1V. It is sands do cave suddenly, and without warning. The contractors st f th' tentiai ha¢ard cuts having a steeper than 1:1 3vation. Under ion cuts may be d be inclined no �ortant to note that d be made aware o is po Water should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the tdp of any temporary or permanent slope. All permanently exposed slopes should be seeded with an appropriate specids of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve stability of the surficial layer of soil. DRAINAGE_ CONtIDERATIONS: Footing drains are recommended at the base of all footings land retaining walls. These drains shodid be surrounded by at least six (6) inches of on -inch-minus washed rock wrapped in nbn-woven geotextile filter fabric (Mirafi 140N, Suoac 4NP, or similar material). At the highest point, the perforated pipe invert should b6 at least as low as the bottom of the fboting and it should be sloped for drainage. All �oof and surface water drains must ibe kept separate from the foundation drain cyst m. No groundwater was observed in any of the 3 test holes du ng the fieldwork. Seepage into the planned excavation is possible, and likely if exca tion occurs during winter months, and if encountered should be drained away from th' site by use of drainage ditches, perforated pipe, French drains, or by pumping fr:m sumps interconnected by shallow connector trenches at the bottom of the jexcavation. The excavation of the site should be graded so that surface Water is directed off the site and away from the tops of slopes. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where foundations, slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Any exposed slopes to be covered with plastic to minimize erosion. Final site grading in areas adjacent to buildings should be sloped at least two (2) percent await' from the building, except where the area adjacent to the building is paved. GENERAL EART4kWORK AND STRUCTURAL_ FILL: The proposed building and pavement areas should be stripped and cleared of all surface vegetation; all organic matter, and other deleterious material. The stripped or removed materials should not be mixed with any materials to be usled as structural fill. • • City of Edmonds do Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 7 Structural fit is defined as any fill placed under the building, ?behind permanent retaining or foundotion walls, or in other areas where the undertyino soils needs to support loads. This engineer should observe site conditions during and after excavation prior to placement bf any structural fill. All structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts with a moisture content at or near the optimum moisture content. The optimum moisture content is that moisture content which results in the greatest compacted dry density. The moisture content of fill soils is very important and must be closely controlled during the filling and compaction process. The allowable thickness of the fill lift will depend on the mat&vial type, compaction equipment, and the number of passes made to compact the lift. ins no case should the lifts exceed twelve(12) inches in loose thickness. The following table presents recommended reldtive compaction for structural fill: Location of Fill Placement Beneath footings, slabs or walkways Behind retaining walls Beneath pavements Minimum Relative Compaction 95% 90% 95% for upper 12 inches of Sub -grade, 90% below that level Where: Minimum relative compaction is the ratio, expressed in percentages, of the compacted dry density to the maximum dry density, as determined in accordance=with ASTM Test Designation D-1557-78 (Modified Proctor). Use of On-$ite Soils If grading adtivities take place during wet weather, or when the sandy, on -site soils are very wet, site preparation costs may be higher because of1delays due to rains and the potential need to import granular fill. The on -site soils are generally sandy and thus are not highly moisture sensitive. Grading operations will be difficult when the moisture content of these soils greatly exceeds the optimum moisture content. Moisture sensitive soils will also be susceptible to excessive softening and "pumping" from construction equipment traffic when the moisture content is greater than the optimum moisture contenL City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 8 Ideally, structural fill, which is to be placed in wet weather, should consist of a granular soil having no more than fire (5) percent sift or clay particles. The percentage of particles passingi the No. 200 sieve should be measured from that portion of the soil passing the three-gLarter-inch sieve. The use of "some" on -site soils for fill material may a acce6bble if the upper organic materials ale segregated and moisture contents are monitdred by engineering inspection. DRAINAGE CONTROLS: No drainageproblems were evident with the existing Holt residence and property at 1141 Sea Vista PI. The sandy sub -grade soils would allow for on -site infiltration,! subject to an infiltration rate provided by additional geotechnical investigation. If desired, this engineer can provide a recommended on -site infiltration rate. It is essential that no storm water discharge occur on the steeper westerly slopes. This engineer has recommended a maximum steepness of 3H:1V for the final grade of the western portion of the site (see grading plan). No direct discharge of storm water onto the western slopes should occur. CONCRETE: All foundation concrete (footings, stem walls, slabs, any retaining walls, etc.) shall have a minim m cement content of 5-1/2 sacks per cubic yardiof concrete mix. REMOVAL OF EXISTING POOL: As stated, cu,rrentty the site contains an in -ground swimming pool. It is understood this pool is to be removed in order to accommodate the new house footprint. Thus, it is essential that the pool removal, structural fill placement and bearing capacity in the area'of the pool be inspected and verified by a qualified geotechnical engineer. ROCKERIES: As indicated on the July 31, 2006 grading plan, the existing westerly rockeries are to be partially removed in order to accommodate the proposed 3HAV sloped landscaped area. The existing rockeries reveal no evidence of any §eotechnical City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 9 distress. Thus, thepartial removal of the existing rockeries is geotdchnically approved, subject to on -site irispections. Approximatdly one-half of the westerly rockery will remain (see site plan). Additional landscaping rockeries are proposed in the southegst portion of the site. The proposed; rockeries will have a maximum height of 4 feet and should comply with the City of Edmonds standard rockery design, and have geotedhnical inspections during construction`of the rockeries. TEMPORARY SHORING: As stated, this engineer understands that a maximum soil cut of up to 8 feet is proposed in the northeast comer of the new foundation. Experience in the sub -grade sands strongly recommends that the excavation contractor utilize 2-high or 3-high Eco-Blocks as temporary shoring. It is possible ito incorporate a 1:1 slope for the proposed excavation. However, erosional sloughingwill occur and create foundation formwork problems. Additionally, this engineer recommends a minimum of ground disturbance for the excavation, and thus the temporary Eco-Blocks should be considered. Additional geotechnical criteria, Eco-Block shoring designs at►d on -site inspections are required. INSPECTIONS: The recommendations of this report are only valid when key`geotechnical aspects are inspected by this engineer during construction: • Soil lots • Temporary taco -Block shoring, as required • Foundation sub -grade verification • Any retaining wall • Rockery placement • Any fill placement, including swimming pool zone • Subsurface drainage installation • Temporary and permanent erosion control measures • On -site storm water infiltration, if desired City of Edmonds c/o Ben Holt October 31, 2006 Page 10 SUMMARY: The proposes! new Holt residence at 1141 Sea Vista PI., Edrinonds, Washington is geotechnically iiable when constructed in accordance with the !recommendations herein, compliancewith City of Edmonds approved plans and requirements, and key geotechnical inspections dungy construction. GEOTECHNICAL gUIEW OF FINAL PLANS: At the time cif this investigation and report, final house plans ►were not available for review. As stated in this report, the new Holt residence may be suppbrted on conventional, reinfdreed, concrete footings, in accordance with the t;riteria herein. Prior to final !permit issuance, this engineer should review the final house plans to verify actual proposers excavation, make final recommendations for" any temporary shoring required, and finalize the structural fill requirements for the Swimming pool void, as well as to verffy1compliance with the recommendations of this relport. Upon satisfaptory review, a "Statement of Minimal Risk" will be issued. CLOSURE: The findings land recommendations of this report were prepated in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering principles and practice. No other warranty, either express or implied, is made. The conclusions are based on the results of the field exploration and interpolation of subsurface conditions between explored locations. if conditions are encountered during construction that appear to be different than those described in this report, this engineer should be notified to observe the situation and review and verify or modify the recommendations. If there are any questions, do not hesitate to call. Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. Geotechnical / Civil Engineer 25 25 ,os S90'00 00. W• il"a. 62. �`� 30.00. ' � � • � .. 3. • . �'''X x.• --x '�,' ' x' . .. x CYCLtNE •FENCE • ..X' � ,_ I' WOOD�NCE�� POOL; ; , NUMBER • 1.141: :1:: SEA V �.' ,? • C 20' ',, IS7Aj f�l ACE 6.0 : 30 . doe. _.0 PE.R '`� • . �. LEVFL Y CONCR'ETE'; COI+�ER FLOOR ,ELEV. � :316.4 _ ; a ROOF' RIDGE ELEV im'• 141:3 x' o . N. .46 313.0 SET . TACK.-dN, 'LEAD, A.D. WASHEO NUMBER ' 28..409 90100oo+w SEA. VI:STA' .:PLACE . ciE- /�.......� ,... ,.� �..,,, REMOYL/KLNLACE I x AS REQ'D �,a PROPOSED ROCKERY FENCE AS REQUIRED ramOf O I S90'00'00"W 128.62 SP 30.00 W O:xO: X X X X X X X '- � t O z zQz 378 / i 1 :) W ° P W Z I PROPOSED CONTOUR LINE kl POSED HOUSE�I ISEA VISTA PLACE Yd LOWEFf FLOOR ELEV, 317.0Am MAIN FLOOR ELEV, 327.033a w I PROPOSED SPOT0 owe �. z I ELEVATION, TYP. N � r P O RC H W o I o---EXISTING CONTOUR LINE PROP. SIDEWALK I .------EXISTING ROCKERY (/) TO BE REMOVED AS REQUIRED •' W i PROPOSED ROCKERIES L 0 T 7 LJ -y2 MAX. 4' HIGH TYP. ABOz p WALL VE _ _ � c ML1-00 RFM • 4� M,q ray c�,�ee ��r i 1 32.4' it -~""PROPOSED DRIVEWAY------ I 79.54 4 I INSTALL STD. DRIVEWAY CURB CUT t S90.0010o W - 109.77' 1� SEA VISTA PLACE 1NOTE: CENTERLINE MONUMENTATION NOT FOUND N e�'tr��o M- sruva . C t`C Y i (� �t . -r i46L-r �tg�a tL to L /M Pit T • �cnTEfK� R El kr 31, e;004, 0,T, � 7E S T L F S `-rF 1 V— X`rdt it M F-i 'TNT SUE �R At � ( XOO& �t� S �olJ i�cT��'� joefft--S 4fout E45AVY r1 'k�► OIC I LL. . v — A -fir©N 'PRAcTtC� tucKESovt� � r . 01C,#j i t AL s c T N e C'o explRES SOILS • FOUNDATIONS StTE DEVELOPMENT • IrVSPECT tOR` o DRAINAGE • OESiGfv & PERMIT - LEGAL P.O. Sox 55502 - Shoreiine, WA 98155 • (206) 546-9217 - FAX (206) 546-8442 DATE REVIEW PERMIT TRAX APPLICATION #: (d 2Gc�'7 f PROJECT NAME & ADDRESS: TYPE OF PROJECT: S� STORM WATER ENGINEER REVIEW U TRAFFIC ENGINEER REVIEW 13 PLANNING DIVISION REVIEW Documents Attached. / ,r— Notes to Reviewer: THIS PERMIT IS TRACKED BY PERMIT TRAX - Please remember to do the following: 1) UNDER REVIEWS: a) Select your review b) Add time it took to complete the review c) Check the "Complete" box if signing off and approving the permit d) Add notes as follows: - "Signed off' OR - "Comments 1 provided to Engr. Reviewer" OR - "Comments 1 e-mailed" e) Click "Add New" 2) If providing comments to Engr. Reviewer then "Assign" your review back to that person 3) Add Conditions or Inspections that need to show on the permit document 4) Add a Message if you need to notify other reviewers of a specific project issue/concern RETURN THIS PACKET OF INFORMATION TO PROJECT REVIEWER: SAENGRTORMS-Form LetterARoutingEngr Routing.doc Revised 12/18/2007 MREED & ASSOC IATESO.S Civil & Structural Engineering 8311 212th St. SW, Edmonds, WA 98026 Office (425) 778-2793 Fax (425) 775-2073 �' 4/28/08 Design Consultants Attn: Peter Manusos PO Box 1306 Mukilteo, WA 98275 Re: R&A Job#08-168 Ben Holt Residence EECE# EDM 07-59 (2) Plan Review# 2007-1100 To Whom It May Concern: F�aFW M. 041" a0 4t': •n Y Ettpt�s 03/Q1/ The following is in response to the plan review letter from Eagle Eye Consulting Engineers referenced above: 4/29/08 2. The surcharge is the result of a concrete slab. 3. A 9' stud height was done. See sheet 11 attached. The number 69 refers to the total width of the building from which I calculated the tributary lateral load per stud. No revision is required. 5. There are no holdowns required at the corners of the library. 6. There are no interior shear walls at the main floor. 7. By others. 8. Add hooks to rebar as required by plan reviewer. 9. See attached revised calculations for 2.5" cover on Details B and C. No revision required on details. 10. Attached red marks are correct. Verify all marks on plans. 12. All joists and beams are top flush. 13. The only beam pocket shown on the plan is for a 3-1/8 x 11-7/8 PSL. Make connection to concrete using HGLBA3-1/4". 14. A35 each side at cantilevered beam connection to beam below. 15. See attached ledger design. This was included in the most recent submittal package. 16: DBL 2x6 posts shall be used at all unmarked posts. 17. The beams in the garage have been designed for the worst case. The point loads from the cantilevered beams are smaller than the uniform design load. No revision is required. 18. These connections have been designed for uplift. The hangers specified are adequate. 19. The method of design for beam 9 is very conservative. The 32# maximum uplift can be neglected. Standard construction methods will account for this loading. 20. No (3)-2x12 exists on this plan. 08-168 (amg) Letter 080421 21. The 24" dia*er footing should be removed and *laced by a 24" x 60" footing as 8 shown on the attached floor plan. 23. Specify hook bars as required by the plan reviewer. 25. City of Edmonds allows 2500 psi concrete for residential construction. 26. Studs at truss supporting walls at upper and lower floors must be 12" o.c. Note on plans that splices to be at studs only (not between studs). 27. By others. 28. The cantilevered basement walls have been revised to show 1 Y2" clear. No revision to the original design is required. See attached calculations. Should there be any questions or comments please contact our office. Sincerely, 119 rf"-- Andrew Gahan, PE 08-168 (amg) Letter 080421 C-� CO Q E 0 r U CO L- t,- o> M CD CD c m zw t7L�i wA w/4;5>5 , •i r 2[7,0!�6 PROF 4sc'�S�(�E. �..11r4Ds 5�r��, C' e A . S-t u R P> �►. 4- PLC PO - 4450 (1. 33) loon p�� .107.9(1,31300 171-F 4.0 416 N1%ovJ Iwo t � 1360At n 45 16, t *kta t6 z �� S . -- Zo`f' I � h •Ito soy ZY�� 2cti. R 4o:5 — o' 9.8 G- 1-0 Z'`61 2 1ep0•c,, t • Title : Holt Resico Job # 08-168 Dsgnr: amg Date: 10:53AM, 21 APR 08 Description : (2)-story SFR Scope : Structural Design Rev: 580016 Code Ref: ACI 318-02, 1997 UBC, 2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000 User. 3-2 03 ENE , ver5.8.0, 1 Engineering 03 So Restrained Retaining Wall Design Page 1 (c)1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software Description Top Restrained (Front Wall Only) 08-168 (amg) gravity.ecw:Calculations Criteria Retained Height = 9.50 ft Wall height above soil = 0.50ft Total Wall Height = 10.00 ft Top Support Height = 10.00 ft Slope Behind Wall = 0.00: 1 Height of Soil over Toe = 0.00 in Soil Density • = 110.00 pcf Wind on Stem = 0.0 psf Surcharge Loads Surcharge Over Heel = 0.0 psf > -Used To Resist Sliding & Overturning Surcharge Over Toe = 50.0 psf Used for Sliding & Overturning Axial Load Applied to Stem Axial Dead Load = 162.0 Ibs Axial Live Load = 152.0 Ibs Axial Load Eccentricity = 0.0 in Design Summary Total Bearing Load = 2,252 Ibs ...resultant ecc. = 2.36 in Soil Pressure @ Toe = 463 psf OK Soil Pressure @ Heel = 1,790 psf OK Allowable = 2,000 psf Soil Pressure Less Than Allowable ACI Factored @ Toe = 657 psf ACI Factored @ Heel = 2,542 psf Footing Shear @ Toe = 0.8 psi OK Footing Shear @ Heel = 14.0 psi OK Allowable = 85.0 psi Reaction at Top = 500.1 Ibs Reaction at Bottom = 1,368.5 Ibs Sliding Calcs Slab Resists All Sliding. 1 Lateral Sliding Force = 1,368.5 Ibs Footing Design Results Factored Pressure = oe 657 eel 2,542 psf Mu': Upward = 193 0 ft-# Mu': Downward = 54 364 ft-# Mu: Design = 138 364 ft-# Actual 1-Way Shear = 0.76 14.00 psi Allow 1-Way Shear = 85.00 85.00 psi Soil Data Allow Soil Bearing = 2,000.0 psf Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method Heel Active Pressure = 35.0 Toe Active Pressure = 0.0 Passive Pressure = 310.0 FootingllSoil Friction = 0.300 Soil height to ignore for passive pressure = 0.00 in Uniform Lateral Load Applied to Stem Lateral Load = 0.0 #/ft ...Height to Top = 0.00 ft ...Height to Bottom = 0.00 ft %0VII rrerve aiem uonstruetion Thickness = 8.00 in Fy = Wall Weight = 96.7 pcf fc = Stem is FREE to rotate at top of footing Footing Strengths & Dimensions fc = 2,500 psi Fy = 40,000 psi Min. As % = 0.0014 Toe Width = 0.67 ft Heel Width = 1.33 Total Footing Width = 2.00 Footing Thickness = 10.00 in Key Width = 0.00 in Key Depth = 0.00 in Key Distance from Toe = 0.00 ft Cover @ Top = 3.00 in @ Btm.= 3.00 in Adjacent Footing Load Adjacent Footing Load = 0.0 Ibs Footing Width = 0.00 ft Eccentricity = 0.00 in Wall to Ftg CL Dist = 0.00 ft Footing Type Line Base Above/Below Soil at Back of Wall = 0.0 ft 40,000 psi 2,500 psi Mmax Between @ Top Support Top & Base @ Base of Wall Design height = Stem OK 10.00 ft Stem OK 4.14 ft Stem OK Rebar Size = # 4 # 4 0.00 ft # 4 Rebar Spacing = 15.00 in 15.00 in 16.00 in Rebar Placed at = Edge Edge Center Rebar Depth 'd' = 5.00 in 7.50 in 4.00 in Design Data fb/FB + fa/Fa = 0.000 0.976 0.000 Mu .... Actual = 0.0 ft-# 3,455.3ft-# 0.0ft-# Mn' Phi..... Allowable = 2,339.6 ft-# 3,539.6 ft-# 1,746.9ft-# Shear Force @ this height = 850.2 Ibs 1,834.7lbs Shear..... Actual = 14.17 psi 38.22 psi Shear..... Allowable = 85.00 psi 85.00 psi Rebar Lap Required = 12.48 in 12.48 in Rebar embedment into footing = 6.00 in Other Acceptable Sizes & Spacings: Toe: None Spec'd -or- Not req'd, Mu < S " Fr Heel: None Spec'd -or- #4@ 22.00 in, #5@ 34.25 in, #6@ 48.25 in, #7@ 48 Key: No key defined -or- No key defined 4I . Title : Holt Reside Job # 08-168 Dsgnr: amg Date: 10:53AM, 21 APR 08 Description : (2)-story SFR Scope : Structural Design Code Ref: ACI 318-02, 1997 UBC, 2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000 LRev: 580018 (0198 -2003E ERCAr5.8.g,inDec-2003 Restrained Retaining Wall Design Page 2 (c)1983 2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software g g 08-168 (amg) gravity.ecw:Calculations Description Top Restrained (Front Wall Only) Summary of Forces on Footing : Slab RESISTS sliding, stem is PINNED at footing Forces acting on footing soil pressure t>aKing moments about front of footing to find eccentricity) Surcharge Over Heel = Ibs ft ft-# Axial Dead Load on Stem = 314.0lbs 1.00 ft 314.Oft-# Soil Over Toe = Ibs ft ft-# Surcharge Over Toe = 33.3lbs 0.33 ft 11.1 ft-# Stem Weight = 966.71bs 1.00 ft 966.7ft-# Soil Over Heel = 696.7lbs 1.67 ft 1,461.1 ft-# Footing Weight = 241.71bs 1.00 ft 241.7ft-# Total Vertical Force = 2,252.3lbs Moment = 2,694.6ft-# Net Moment Used For Soil Pressure Calculations -442.2 ft-# • Title: Holt Reside Job # 08-168 Dsgnr: amg Date: 10:53AM, 21 APR 08 Description : (2)-story SFR Scope : Structural Design Code Ref: ACI 318-02, 1997 UBC, 2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000 Ver5.6n Engineering Restrained Retaining Wall Design CALC Engineering Software g Description Top Restrained (Side Walls) rCriteria Retained Height = 9.50 ft Wall height above soil = 0.50 ft Total Wall Height = 10.00ft Top Support Height = 10.00 ft Slope Behind Wall = 0.00: 1 Height of Soil over Toe = 0.00 in Soil Density = 110.00 pcf Wind on Stem = 0.0 psf Surcharge Loads Surcharge Over Heel = 0.0 psf -Used To Resist Sliding & Overturning Surcharge Over Toe = 50.0 psf Used for Sliding & Overturning Axial Load Applied to Stem Axial Dead Load = 750.0 Ibs Axial Live Load = 1,130.0 Ibs Axial Load Eccentricity = 0.0 in Design Summary Total Bearing Load = 4,653 Ibs ...resultant ecc. = 1.64 in Soil Pressure @ Toe = 1,126 psf OK Soil Pressure @ Heel = 1,975 psf OK Allowable = 2,000 psf Soil Pressure Less Than Allowable ACI Factored @ Toe = 1,659 psf ACI Factored @ Heel = 2,909 psf Footing Shear @ Toe = 8.9 psi OK Footing Shear @ Heel = 28.0 psi OK Allowable = 85.0 psi Reaction at Top = 500.1 Ibs Reaction at Bottom = 1,368.5 Ibs Sliding Calcs Slab Resists All Sliding ! Lateral Sliding Force = 1,368.5 Ibs Footing Design Results Factored Pressure = oe 1,659 I eel 2,909 psf Mu': Upward = 899 0 ft-# Mu': Downward = 123 1,456 ft-# Mu: Design = 776 1,456 ft-# Actual 1-Way Shear = 8.87 28.00 psi Allow 1-Way Shear = 85.00 85.00 psi Soil Data Allow Soil Bearing = 2,000.0 psf Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method Heel Active Pressure = 35.0 Toe Active Pressure = 0.0 Passive Pressure = 310.0 FootingllSoil Friction = 0.300 Soil height to ignore for passive pressure = 0.00 in Uniform Lateral Load Applied to Stem Lateral Load = 0.0 #/ft ...Height to Top = 0.00 ft ...Height to Bottom = 0.00 ft Concrete Stem Construction Thickness = 8.00 in Fy Wall Weight = 96.7 pcf fc Stem is FREE to rotate at top of footing Design height Rebar Size Rebar Spacing Rebar Placed at Rebar Depth 'd' Design Data fb/FB + fa/Fa Mu .... Actual Mn ` Phi..... Allowable Shear Force @ this height Shear..... Actual Shear..... Allowable Page 1 08-166 (amg) gravity.ecmCalaulations Footing Strengths & Dimensions fc = 2,500 psi Fy = 40,000 psi Min. As % = 0.0014 Toe Width = 1.00 ft Heel Width = 2.00 Total Footing Width = 3.00 Footing Thickness = 10.00 in Key Width = 0.00 in Key Depth = 0.00 in Key Distance from Toe = 0.00 ft Cover @ Top = 3.00 in @ Btm.= 3.00 in Adjacent Footing Load Adjacent Footing Load = 0.0 Ibs Footing Width = 0.00 ft Eccentricity = 0.00 in Wall to Ftg CL Dist = 0.00 ft Footing Type Line Base Above/Below Soil at Back of Wall = 0.0 ft 40,000 psi 2,500 psi TopSu p Support Mmax Between Top & Base @ Base of Wall Stem OK Stem OK Stem OK = 10.00 ft 4.14ft 0.00 ft # 4 # 4 # 4 = 15.00 in 15.00 in 16.00 in = Edge Edge Center = 5.00 in 7.50 in 4.00 in Rebar Lap Required = Rebar embedment into footing 0.000 0.0 ft-# 2,339.6 ft-# 850.2 Ibs 14.17 psi 85.00 psi 12.48 in 0.976 3,455.3 ft-# 3,539.6 ft-# 12.48 in 0.000 0.0 ft-# 1,746.9 ft-# 1,834.7lbs 38.22 psi 85.00 psi 6.00 in Other Acceptable Sizes & Spacings: Toe: None Spec'd -or- Not req'd, Mu < S ' Fr Heel: None Spec'd -or- #4@ 22.00 in, #5@ 34.25 in, #6@ 48.25 in, #7@ 48 Key: No key defined -or- No key defined • Title: Holt Resid. Job # 08-168 Dsgnr: amg Date: 10:53AM, 21 APR 08 Description : (2)-story SFR Scope: Structural Design Rev: 580018 Code Ref: ACI 318-02, 1997 UBC, 2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000 User:3-203ENE;VeLCEn,1eering o Restrained Retaining Wall Design Page 2 (c)1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Sotlware g 08-168 am ( g) gravity.ecw:Calculations Description Top Restrained (Side Walls) LSummary of Forces on Footing : Slab RESISTS sliding, stem is PINNED at footing Forces acting on footing soil pressure ttaKing moments about front of footing to find eccentricity) Surcharge Over Heel Ibs ft ft # Axial Dead Load on Stem = 1,880.Olbs 1.33 ft 2,506.7ft-# Soil Over Toe = Ibs ft ft-# Surcharge Over Toe = 50.Olbs 0.50 ft 25.0ft-# Stem Weight = 966.7lbs 1.33 ft 1,288.9ft-# Soil Over Heel = 1,393.3lbs 2.33 ft 3,251.1 ft-# Footing Weight = 362.5lbs 1.50 ft 543.8ft-# Total Vertical Force = 4,652.5lbs Moment = 7,615.04 Net Moment Used For Soil Pressure Calculations -636.7 ft-# LJ iCk L_J mb) L • NH © 4) 0 r �F o � ©%_ wadi yKU q 0 05-fib v T o --p co f aw'. Flvi 1-1 t-t IR T- T'1u 'Ti t4 N N LN sr 0 0 E ` Title : Holt Reside Job # 08-168 Dsgnr: amg Date: 10:30AM, 28 FEB 08 Description : (2)-story SFR Scope : Structural Design User: KW-0603603, Ver5.8.0, 1-Dec-2003 Timber Ledger Design Page 1 (c)1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software g 9 08-168 (amg) gravity.ecw:Celwlatior Description Typical Ledger General Information Code Ref: 1997/2001 NDS, 2000/2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000. Base allowables are user defined Ledger Width 1.500in Uniform Load... Point Load... Ledger Depth 7.250in Dead Load 50.00#/ft Dead Load 0.00lbs Live Load 200.00#/ft Live Load 0.00lbs Bolt Diameter 1/2" Spacing 0.00 ft Bolt Spacing 6.000 in Horizontal Shear 0.00#/ft Offset 0.00 in Load Duration Factors... Hem Fir, No.2 Live Load 1.250 Fb Allowable 850.0 psi Short Term 1.330 Fv Allowable 150.0 psi Ledger Stresses Load Combination : DL + LL DL + ST DL + LL + ST Maximum Moment 62.50 in-# 12.50 in-# 62.50 in k Bending Stress 4.76 psi 0.95 psi 4.76 psi Stress Ratio 0.004 0.001 0.004 MaximumShear 74.87 Ibs 14.97 Ibs 74.87 Ibs Shear Stress 6.88 psi 1.38 psi 6.88 psi Stress Ratio 0.037 0.007 0.035 Bolt Loading Note: Bolt Design Value from NDS 8.21 UBC 23 Using :Hem -Fir Stress Summary DL + LL DL + ST DL+LL+ST Max. Vertical Load 125.00 Ibs 25.00 Ibs 125.00 Ibs Allow Vertical Load 3,187.50 Ibs 3,391.50 Ibs 3,391.50 Ibs Max. Horizontal Load 0.00 Ibs 0.00 Ibs 0.00 Ibs Allow Horizontal Load 6,000.00 Ibs 6,384.00 Ibs 6,384.00 Ibs Angle of Resultant 90.0 degrees 90.0 degrees 90.0 degrees Diagonal Component 125.00 Ibs 25.00 Ibs 125.00 Ibs Allow Diagonal Force 333.01 Ibs 346.78 Ibs 346.78 Ibs Final Stress Ratio 0.375 : 1.00 0.072 : 1.00 0.360 : 1.00 Stress Summary DL + LL Wood Bending Stress Ratio 0.004 : 1.00 Wood Shear Stress Ratio 0.037 : 1.00 Bolt Stress Ratio 0.375 : 1.00 DL+ST 0.001 : 1.00 0.007 : 1.00 0.072 : 1.00 Wood Stress & Bolts OK DL+LL+ST 0.004 : 1.00 0.035 : 1.00 0.360 : 1.00 • Title: Holt ResiAs Job # 08-168 Dsgnr: amg Date: 2:39PM, 21 APR 08 Description : (2)-story SFR Scope : Structural Design Rev: 580004 User. KW-3-203ENE,ver5.En Engineering (c)1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software General Timber Beam Page 1 nw 08-168 (amg) gravity.ecw:Calculations Description Check Top Plate General Information Code Ref: 1997/2001 NDS, 2000/2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000. Base allowables are user defined Section Name 2x6 Center Span 1.00 ft Lu 0.00 ft Beam Width 5.500 in Left Cantilever ft ...Lu 0.00 ft Beam Depth 3.000 in Right Cantilever ft Lu 0.00 ft Member Type Sawn Douglas Fir - Larch, No.2 Fb Base Allow 900.0 psi Load Dur. Factor 1.320 Fv Allow 180.0 psi Beam End Fixity Pin -Pin Fc Allow 625.0 psi E 1,600.0 ksi Point Loads Dead Load 960.0I3somm Ibs Ibs Ibs Ibs Ibs Ibs Live Load 1,600.0 Ibs Ibs Ibs Ibs Ibs Ibs Ibs ...distance 0.667 ft 0.000 ft 0.000 ft 0.000 ft 0.000 ft 0.000 ft 0.000 ft Summary Beam Design OK Span= 1.00ft, Beam Width = 5.500in x Depth = 3.in, Ends are Pin -Pin Max Stress Ratio 0.694 : 1 Maximum Moment 0.6 k-ft Maximum Shear ` 1.5 2.6 k Allowable 0.8 k-ft Allowable 3.9 k Max. Positive Moment 0.57 k-ft at 0.668 It Shear: @ Left 0.85 k Max. Negative Moment 0.00 k-ft at 1.000 It @ Right 1.71 k Max @ Left Support 0.00 k-ft Camber: @ Left 0.000in Max @ Right Support 0.00 k-ft @ Center 0.002 in Max. M allow 0.82 Reactions... @ Right 0.000 in fb 824.58 psi fv 155.23 psi Left DL 0.32 k Max 0.85 k Fb 1,188.00 psi Fv 237.60 psi Right DL 0.64 k Max 1.71 k Deflections Center Span... Dead Load MEMO Total Load Left Cantilever... Dead Load Total Load Deflection -0.002 in -0.004 in Deflection 0.000 in 0.000 in ...Location 0.544 ft 0.544 It Length/Deft 0.0 0.0 ...Length/Deft 7,997.8 2,999.17 Right Cantilever... Camber ( using 1.5 * D.L. DO ) ... Deflection 0.000 in 0.000 in @ Center 0.002 in ...Length/Deft 0.0 0.0 @ Left 0.000 in @ Right 0.000 in • • Title : Holt Reside Job # 08-168 Dsgnr: amg Date: 2:4313M, 21 APR 08 Description : (2)-story SFR Scope : Structural Design Code Ref: ACI 318-02, 1997 UBC, 2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000 User., KW-W03603, Ver 5.8.0, 1-Dec-2003 Cantilevered Retaining Wall Design Page 1 (c)1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software 08-168 (amp) aravitv.ecw Calculations Description 6' Cantilevered Criteria Retained Height = 5.50 ft Wall height above soil = 0.50 ft Slope Behind Wall = 0.00: 1 Height of Soil over Toe = 0.00 in Soil Density = 110.00 pcf Wind on Stem = 0.0 psf Surcharge Loads Surcharge Over Heel = 0.0 psf Used To Resist Sliding & Overturning Surcharge Over Toe = 50.0 psf Used for Sliding & Overturning Design Summa Total Bearing Load = 3,430 Ibs ...resultant ecc. = 1.02 in Soil Pressure @ Toe = 1,651 psf OK Soil Pressure @ Heel = 1,093 psf OK Allowable = 2,000 psf Soil Pressure Less Than Allowable ACI Factored @ Toe = 2,343 psf ACI Factored @ Heel = 1,550 p§f Footing Shear @ Toe = 16.0 psi OK Footing Shear @ Heel = 13.0 psi OK Allowable = 85.0 psi Wall Stability Ratios Overturning = 2.55 OK Sliding = N/A Sliding Calcs Slab Resists All Sliding ! Lateral Sliding Force = 701.9 Ibs Soil Data Allow Soil Bearing = 2,000.0 psf Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method Heel Active Pressure = 35.0 psf/ft Toe Active Pressure = 0.0 psf/ft Passive Pressure = 310.0 psf/ft Water height over heel = 0.0 ft FootingllSoil Friction = 0.300 Soil height to ignore for passive pressure = 0.00 in Footing Design Results Toe Heel Factored Pressure = 2,343 1,550 psf Mu': Upward = 1,511 0 ft-# Mu': Downward = 167 448 ft-# Mu: Design = 1,345 448ft-# Actual 1-Way Shear = 16.02 12.99 psi Allow 1-Way Shear = 85.00 85.00 psi Toe Reinforcing = None Spec'd Heel Reinforcing = None Spec'd Key Reinforcing = None Spec'd Lateral Load Applied to Stem Lateral Load = 0.0 #/ft ...Height to Top = 0.00 ft ...Height to Bottom = 0.00 ft Stem Construction Design height ft= Wall Material Above "Ht" _ Thickness = Rebar Size = Reber Spacing = Rebar Placed at = Design Data fb/FB + fa/Fa = Total Force @ Section Ibs = Moment.... Actual ft-# = Moment..... Allowable = Shear..... Actual psi = Shear..... Allowable psi = Footing Strengths & Dimensions fc = 2,500 psi Fy = 40,000 psi Min. As % = 0.0014 Toe Width = 1.17 ft Heel Width = 1.33 Total Footing Width =� Footing Thickness = 10.00 in Key Width = 0.00 in Key Depth = 0.00 in Key Distance from Toe = 0.00 ft Cover @ Top = 3.00 in @ Btm.= 3.00 in Axial Load Applied to Stem Axial Dead Load = 750.0 Ibs Axial Live Load = 1,130.0 Ibs Axial Load Eccentricity = 0.0 in )p Stem Stem OK 0.00 Concrete 8.00 # 4 18.00 Edge 0.645 899.9 1,649.9 2,558.0 11.5 85.0 Bar Develop ABOVE Ht. in = 12.48 Bar Lap/Hook BELOW Ht. in = 6.00 Wall Weight = 96.7 Rebar Depth 'd' in = 6.50 Masonry Data f m psi = Fs psi = Solid Grouting = Special Inspection = Modular Ratio'n' _ Short Term Factor = Equiv. Solid Thick. _ Masonry Block Type = Normal Weight Concrete Data fc psi = 2,500.0 Fy psi = 40,000.0 Other Acceptable Sizes & Spacings Toe: #4@ 11.75 in, #5@ 18.25 in, #6@ 25.75 in, #7@ 35.25 in, #8@ 46.25 in, #9@ 4 Heel: Not req'd, Mu < S " Fr Key: No key defined TV," . 1#79 Title : Holt Resoe Job # 08-168 Dsgnr: amg Date: 2:43PM, 21 APR 08 Description : (2)_story SFR Scope : Structural Design Rev: 580018 Code Ref: ACI 318-02, 1997 UBC, 2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000 Ueser: KW 0603603, Ver5.8.0, 1-Dee-2003 Cantilevered Retaining Wall Design ( )1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software Page 2 08-168 (amg) gravity.ecwCatculations Description 6' Cantilevered Summa of Overturning & Resistin Forces & Moments .....OVERTURNING..... Force Distance Moment RESISTING..... Item Ibs ft ft-# Force Distance Moment Heel Active Pressure = 701.9 2.11 1,481.9 Soil Over Heel = Ibs ft ft-# 403.1 2.17 873.5 Toe Active Pressure = Sloped Soil Over Heel = Surcharge Over Toe = 0.42 Surcharge Over Heel = Adjacent Footing Load = Adjacent Footing Load = Added Lateral Load = Axial Dead Load on Stem = 750.0 1.50 1,125.3 Load @ Stem Above Soil = Soil Over Toe = . Seismici-oad = Surcharge Over Toe = 58.4 0.58 34.0 Total = 701.9 O.T.M. = 1,481.9 Stem Weight(s) = Earth @ Stem Transitions= 580.0 1.50 870.2 Resisting/Overturning Ratio = 2.65 Footing Weight = 312.5 1.25 390.6 Vertical Loads used for Soil Pressure = 3,429.6 Ibs Key Weight = Vertical component of active pressure used for soil pressure Vert. Component = 195.6 2.50 489.1 Total = 2,299.6 Ibs R.M.= 3,782.7 ., • Title : Holt Resio Job # 08-168 Dsgnr: amg Date: 2:43PM, 21 APR 08 Description : (2)-story SFR Scope: Structural Design Code Ref: ACI 318-02, 1997 UBC, 2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000 User. K-2003E E CALCVer n 1-Dec-2003 Cantilevered Retaining Wall Design Page 1 l (c)1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software g 08-168 (amg) gravity ecwCalculations Description 8' Cantilevered Criteria Retained Height = 7.50 ft Wall height above soil = 0.50 ft Slope Behind Wall = 0.00: 1 Height of Soil over Toe = 0.00 in Soil Density = 110.00 pcf Wind on Stem = 0.0 psf Surcharge Loads Surcharge Over Heel = 0.0 psf Used To Resist Sliding & Overturning Surcharge Over Toe = 50.0 psf Used for Sliding & Overturning Design Summary Total Bearing Load = 4,000 Ibs ...resultant ecc. = 2.86 in Soil Pressure @ Toe = 1,970 psf OK Soil Pressure @ Heel = 697 psf OK Allowable = 2,000 psf Soil Pressure Less Than Allowable ACI Factored @ Toe = 2,691 psf ACI Factored @ Heel = 952 psf Footing Shear @ Toe = 30.6 psi OK Footing Shear @ Heel = 18.7 psi OK Allowable = 85.0 psi Wall Stability Ratios Overturning = 1.83 OK Sliding = N/A Sliding Calcs Slab Resists All Sliding ! Lateral Sliding Force = 1,215.3 Ibs Soil Data Allow Soil Bearing = 2,000.0 psf Equivalent Fluid Pressure Method Heel Active Pressure = 35.0 psf/ft Toe Active Pressure = 0.0 psf/ft Passive Pressure = 310.0 psf/ft Water height over heel = 0.0 ft Footing Design Results Toe Heel Factored Pressure = 2,691 952 psf Mu': Upward = 3,291 0 ft-# Mu': Downward = 340 679 ft-# Mu: Design = 2,951 679 ft-# Actual 1-Way Shear = 30.58 18.74 psi Allow 1-Way Shear = 85.00 85.00 psi Toe Reinforcing = None Spec'd Heel Reinforcing = None Spec'd Key Reinforcing = None Spec'd FootingllSoil Friction = 0.300 Soil height to ignore for passive pressure = 0.00 in Lateral Load Applied to Stem Lateral Load = 0.0 #/ft ...Height to Top = 0.00 ft ...Height to Bottom = 0.00 ft Stem Construction Design height ft= Wall Material Above "Ht" _ Thickness = Rebar Size = Rebar Spacing = Rebar Placed at = Design Data fb/FB + fa/Fa = Total Force @ Section Ibs= Moment.... Actual ft-# _ Moment..... Allowable = Shear..... Actual psi = Shear..... Allowable psi = Footing Strengths & Dimensions fc = 2,500 psi Fy = 40,000 psi Min. As % = 0.0014 Toe Width = 1.67 ft Heel Width = 1.33 Total Footing Width =0- Footing Thickness = 10.00 in Key Width = 0.00 in Key Depth = 0.00 in Key Distance from Toe = 0.00 ft Cover @ Top = 3.00 in @ Btm.= 3.00 in Axial Load Applied to Stem Axial Dead Load = 750.0 Ibs Axial Live Load = 1,130.0 Ibs Axial Load Eccentricity = 0.0 in Stem Stem OK 0.00 Concrete 8.00 # 4 7.00 Edge 0.653 1,673.4 4,183.6 6,408.3 21.5 85.0 Bar Develop ABOVE Ht. in = 12.48 Bar Lap/Hook BELOW Ht. in = 6.00 Wall Weight = 96.7 Rebar Depth 'd' in = 6.50 Masonry Data fm psi = Fs psi = Solid Grouting = Special Inspection = Modular Ratio'n' _ Short Term Factor = Equiv. Solid Thick. _ Masonry Block Type = Normal Weight Concrete Data fc psi = 2,500.0 Fy psi = 40,000.0 Other Acceptable Sizes & Spacings Toe: #4@ 11.75 in, #5@ 18.25 in, #6@ 25.75 in, #7@ 35.25 in, #8@ 46.25 in, #9@ 4 Heel: Not req'd, Mu < S " Fr Key: No key defined ` • Title : Holt Resit: Job # 08-168 Dsgnr: amg Date: 2:43PM, 21 APR 08 Description : (2)-story SFR Scope : Structural Design Code Ref: ACI 318-02, 1997 UBC, 2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000 Rev: 18 203603. User. 3-203ENE CALCEngin EngineeringCantilevered Retaining Wall Design (c)1963-2003 ENERCAIC Engineering Software g Page 2 08-168 am ( g) gravity.ecw:Calculations Description 8' Cantilevered Summary of Overturning & Resisting Forces & Moments .....OVERTURNING..... Force Distance Moment Item .....RESISTING..... Force Distance Moment Ibs ft ft-# Ibs ft ft-# Heel Active Pressure = 1,215.3 2.78 3,375.8 Soil Over Heel = 549.7 2.67 1,466.0 Toe Active Pressure = Sloped Soil Over Heel = Surcharge Over Toe = 0.42 Surcharge Over Heel = Adjacent Footing Load = Adjacent Footing Load = Added Lateral Load = Axial Dead Load on Stem= 750.0 2.00 1,500.3 Load @ Stem Above Soil = Soil Over Toe = SeismicLoad = Surcharge Over Toe = 83.4 0.83 69.5 Total = 1,215.3 O.T.M. = 3,375.8 Stem Weight(s) = Earth @ Stem Transitions= 773.3 2.00 1,546.9 Resisting/Overturning Ratio = 1.83 Footing Weight = 375.0 1.50 562.5 Vertical Loads used for Soil Pressure = 4,000.1 Ibs Key Weight = Vertical component of active pressure used for soil pressure Vert. Component = 338.7 3.00 1,016.1 Total = 2,870.1 Ibs R.M.= 6,161.3 ;A� -.11-11--io, 7. 1W CITY OF EDMONDS PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, ENGINEERING DIV T N ET APPLICATION FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT THIS PERMIT MUST BE AVAILABLE AT THE JOB SITE FOR INSPECTION PURPOSES Applicant to Complete Parts A and B A, Permit to be issued to: Snohomish County P.U.I. #1 For Work at :(address or vicinity) � 4r \\ -� G' � U �.) q %0 (, Type= of Work to be done: �)'3- DyzL - U vi ,o L,-YL ,(attach drawing when applicable) Time Required -- Start: 1-day Finish: Owner: Snohomish County P.U.D. #1 Name 21018 Hwy 99 Mailing Address - Lynnwood, WA 98036 774-2112 City State Zip Telephone Number Contractor: same as above Name State License Number Mailing Address r City State Zip Telephone Number B. INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees to hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any injuries, damages, or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, foreseen or unforeseen, that may be made against the applicant or 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, court costs, and attorney fees by reason of granting this permit. Upon issuance of this permit, the contractor is responsible for workmanship and materials for a period of one year following the final inspection and acceptance of the restoration by the Engineering Division. Funds held from the Security Deposit (estimated restoration fee) will be held until the final street patch is completed, at which time a debit or credit will be processed for issuance to the applicant. Work is subject to inspection and restoration in accordance with City Code. A 24-hour notice is required for inspection by Engineering. Call 775-2525, ext. 220. I understand that this permit must be ava able at the job site for inspection purposes at all times. Signat e: Date: Own r or Agent C, TO BE COMPLETED BY ISSUING AGENCY: Date Issued: � Permit No. --z :_79 /3.S Fee: /J Security Bond: Time Authorized:;�c APPROVED BY Date: So. �yw.t sY 1018 P C LITY DISTRICT No.1 of Snoho h C ty AREA Rev.10/77 Location r �_� � � S C. A U 1 Date - C1 W.O. No. N 1/4 2 J S _� T 3 R Revision — Scale (" 1 D 0 Reason for work \ ti c L4:1 P• `� ` `� >> a ` S V-q 4 _ Engineer tin A L- As Built -- �� l \7 f U \:;" U 1_ 11-1 S . U.G. File No. _ 30 Kw u7 E Approvals /7111 PERMI REQUIRED REIGN CONTACTS EASEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Type L \� t� S Company Exempt under District SEPA IRN.No. procedures Section III -A Date Granted Grantor Paragraph, Item \ b -L Fees required Yes® No❑ Date Granted Date � ' 18 gy � D S S log Posted Inventor Type U S V C Transf.Cord Pole Dept. Date0 - a Z. Amou \� `� Interpretation Referred To Map Pas" Circuit Ma Date Released For Construction Date By Date Work Completed By _ Foreman Circuit Number \ - 4 U ¢ Substation W Z T-t-� �'� T O.H. U.S. Cond KV Add Ckt Ft PM Remv Ckt Ft PH Net Ckt Ft Water Sewer Gas Backhoe 1 ' 59 K%j u' j -Z PV C_ 3O, �P.^cSN- \4255-7 S C 1 R+ P. t_. ►mot 0. t-1 A to G\ 14 ? V S T\-:Z\C-T v-4D. T- - X SrR1.A� �t0. v D L_r A ., (= �= UF. 30 Ati�PS �Tt L �f u SELL 3J, 3'' PULL \D, A A t--t. S LF-T ID L S i rl K r 7 �1 z i W.O. No. p Z 6qV 1111111111111111111119 1111111111 01,14ENA CITY CLERK "d iErosBT, 'ixViwm,G 121 STH AVENUE NO. �ry ky toMwNce. wAewo STATEMENT ON ,ACCESSORY DIIIELLING UNITS Property Address: I Z '�-[ s6(isr4- Re - Edmonds, Washington Legal 1 i 1: n•g78 sZIAT- 1-1-R ` r - ` Ly y Assessor's Parcel Number: 0 0 S(o 8 3 00 0 OD 1 00 I have read the requirements for accessory dwelling units contained in Chapter 20.21 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) and understand that an accessory dwelling unit as defined in ECDC Section 21.05.015 is prohibited until an Accessory Dwelling Unit Permit is approved. I also understand that an Accessory Dwelling Unit Permit cannot be approved unless all the criteria in Chapter 20.21 are met, and all the necessary items are submitted, including an affidavit of occupancy and a covenant to be filed with the Snohomish County regarding the regulations imposed on Accessory Dwelling Units. Property Owner Signature: 4 - Property Owner Name (printed): �j QjU & Lz-- Date: & 2 D STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 18 e" L� signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. Notary's pressmust be smudged. Dated: ��-� /0 jro\SS �Signature of N Fks'� Notary Public: PUBLIC 2 N� 12-g-2011 ,t0 OF WAs�x�� Residing at: My Appointment Expires: E j en-f-:- ' T- 1•1-S-Z01/ THIS DOCUMENT MUST BE RECORDED WITH THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY AUDITOR. NOTE.• ONE EX 08 IS LOCA7EO IN CVL DE -SAD PROTECT EX OR PER STD PLN Ef J,, SHT C--3 I 1 I i 25' 25' ! t SE T C1/.2 " ,�'L Z�?t,11? N',W CAP NOTE.- PR07F6'T CB ON t9-5T S/DE OF CUL -DE--SAC 316 L_ O T 2 SEA VISTA VOL. 79 P. 47 NOTE ALL DISTURBED AREAS' ON -SITE AND OFF -SITE SHALL BE COMPOST AMENDED TO MEET REQU/REAIDWS OF BA P T5. IJ IN THE STORiY &A TER MANUAL, kU V CHAPTER 5. STAB/L/ZA 77ON OF EXPOSED AREAS ALL SOILS' EXPOSED BY LAND DISTURBING AC)714F/ES SHALL BE STABILIZED BY SUITABLE APPLICA770N OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS), INCL UDING BUT NOT L/MI1FD TO SOD, HYDROSEED/NO, OR OTHER IlEGETATION, PLASTIC COPERING, OR MUL CHING. THE EXPOSED SOIL S SHALL BE STABILIZED ACCORDING TO AN APPROVED /1METABLE. (7)RICALL Y, NO SOILS SHALL REMAIN EXPOSED FOR MORE 711AN 7WO (2) DAYS FROM OCTOBER 1 THROUGH APRIL 90 AND NO MORE THAN SEVEN (7) DA YS FROM MAY 1 711ROU011 SEPTEMBER 30.) 1'c5'nC 1 C YCL ONE ,' FENCE NOTE L06A77ON OF" -WACIK MA7FRIALS �' � � ,") STORAGc� E CONS7RUCAON FENCING SUB�CT •� � I xTy 70 CHANGE 8Y CON7RAC70R XRV PRIOR APPROVAL 8Y C/7Y OF EDMONDS /. t '. I / YA7FRIALS I n� SI2X'AGE REMOVE SHADED PORTION I 7 ;{ �'iOL j ,; 1141 OF E ROCKERY .. ' ... .... Sf,4 W, 4 PL. JOB -HACK NOTE- REMOVE ALL ZX- FEATURES i l " ' ON S/7F /NCL UD/NG WALffS, POOL & ROCh'L�RY AS SHOWN. HOUSE CONSMV0770N "�.�\.. ` ENTRANCE �y NOTE.• ALL UALI77£S df9LL 8E REMOVE EX. Off VEWAY CUR8 CUT OR /F RELO COMMONS SNOW THAT THE , ` INSTALLED ZINVEROROMMO APPARENT PER77CAL CURB IS AC7V,4LL Y A CURB AND GUTTER W/ ASPH OVERLA Y, REMOVE CUR8 ANO 6U77ER. SAMC117 AND REMOVE EX ASPHAL T 2 FT FROM FACE OF MRACAL CURB OR 04V77ER. - - NORTY GRAPHIC SCALE 0 10 20 40 70" = 20' CONS7Rl./0770N SEOl1 NCE 1 SCHEDULE AND ATIFNO PRECONSTRUCTION MEE77NG WITH CITY OF EDMONDS, ENGINEERING ,01W510N, 425-771-0220 EXT 1326 PRIOR TO START OF WORK. 2. REWE-W ESC NO=.. 3. INSTALL CONS7RU0770N ENTRANCE 4. INSTALL SIL T FENCE 5. PROVIDE CB PROTECTION. 6. 7ESC MEASURES MUST BE IN PLACE & APPROVED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCT/UN OR CLEARING 7. MAINTAIN DUST CONTROL 8. CLEAR AND GRADE LOT. 9. INSTALL UTILITIES 10. INSTALL PAVING; CURB, WALK 11 INSTALL PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL MEASURES. 12. CLEAN UP AND REMOVE TEMPORARY FACILITIES TEMPURAR r GRA 1/EL CONSTRUCT/ON ENTRANCE INSTALLATION..• THE AREA OF THE ENTRANCE SHOULD BE CLEARED OF ALL VEGETA770N, ROOTS & 07HER OBJECTIONABLE MATERIAL. 7HE ORA I/EL SHALL BE PLACED TO THE SPECIFIED DIMENSIONS. ANY DRAINAGE FACILIT/ES REOUIREO BECAUSE OF WASHING SHOULD BE CON57RUCTEO ACCORD/NO TO SPECIF/CA 77ONS /N 77IE PLAN. IF WASH RACKS ARE USED, THEY SHOULD BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO MANUFAC7URER'S SPECIF/CA770NS. AGGREGATE 4" TD 8" CRUSHED BALLAST ROCK. ENTRANCE DIMENSIONS.• 7HE AGGREGATF LAYER MUST BE AT LEAST 12 INCHES THICK. /T MUST EXTEND 1T/E FULL WIDTH OF /NE VEHICULAR INGRESS AND EGRESS AREA. 17-IE OF LENGTH THE ENTRANCE MUST BE AT LEAST 100 FEET. WASHING' /F 00NDIl70N5 ON THE Sl7F ARE SUCH TVA MOST OF THE MUD IS NOT REMOVED FROM VEHICLE TIRES BY CONTACT WITH 771E GRAVEL, THEN THE 77RES MUST BE WASHED BEFORE VEH/CLES EN7FR A PURL/C ROAD. WASHWA7FR MUST BE CARRIED AWAY FROM 7HE ENTRANCE TO A 5E77ZING AREA TO REMOVE SEDIMENT. A WASH RACK MAY ALSO BE USED TO MAKE WASHING MORE CON1/EN/ENT AND EFFEC77VE. MAINTENANCE THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A 4CON0I770N NHICH WILL PREVENT TRACKING OR FLOW OF MUD ONTO PUBLIC RIGHTS -OF -WAY. THIS MAY REQU/RE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING W717-/ 2" STONE, AS CON0I77ONS DEMAND, AND REPAIR AND/OR CLEAN OUT OF ANY S1RUC77/RES USED TO TRAP SEDIMENT. ALL MA7FR/ALS SPILLED, DROPPED, WASHED OR 1 ?ACKED FROM VEHICLES ONTO ROADWAY OR INTO STORM DRAINS MUST BE REMOVED LEGAL OESCR/PT/ON.• L OT 1, SEA VISTA, ACCORD/NG TO THE PLA T THEREOF F/LED /N VOL UME 18 PLA TS, PAGE 47, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON SUBJECT TO ANY AND ALL EASEMENTS COVENANTS COVENANTS, AND RESTR/C71ONS OF RECORD, /F ANY. MONUMENTS LOCATED BY FIELD SURVEY ON 9-13--04. t 11L1:RWAL DATUM- NAVD 88 i BENCHMARK.• FOUND NGS 410 BRASS MOUNUMENT I 'R-458" SET /N TOP OF CURB AT THE SE CORNER f APPROVED FO/,? CO/VST/?UC7/O/V 1007H A li£ W & 220117 ST. SW El-FOA TION = 729 -70 SITE 13ENCN/rtA/ri�' ('`SE:F �l%��TEj S/TE BENCHMARK.• TOP OF BRASS MONUMENT AT ELEV.A TlCjiV = 32 79 INTERSECT/ON OF 971 / A VE. S AND SEA VISTA PL. CITY ENG//DEER/NG DIVISION DA TLC (TO EAST - SEE PLAN) L OT AREA = 12,, 371 SO. FT. tV.` •ate l 1 r ' IrOUND 2 112 4� 6�?A55 ;5EA VI;5TA PLACE (� I r�9C7fV`v�9E%VT i' r�r'/�E C;4 Tr,'%vzY 0. �® WA c� AFROS/ON AND 2AGD/h1ENT CONTROL NOTES.• ` 0 NO7F.• AN ASSESSMENT OF TfLE �! � COND/77ON OF THE EXISTING CURB 1. CON57R00TI0N ACCESS ROU7F - CONSTRUCT/ON VEHICLE ACCESS SHALL BE, AND SIDEWALK ON 9771 AVENUE HEST t :5 V�5 i�T WHENEPER PRACTICAL, LIM17FD TO ONE ROUTE. ACCESS POINTS SHALL BE 15569St ®O �3k " > • WZL BE MADE ON S/7E'8Y 7HE STABILIZE? WITH QUARRY SPALLS OR CRUSHED ROCK TO MINIMIZE THE TRACK/NG {. ENGINEERING INSPE070R. CURB OR OF SEG'/MENT ONTO PUBLIC ROADS. IF SEDIMENT /S TRANSPORTED ONTO A ROAD Ra SIDEWALK IN POOR ONO/AON OR SURFACE, THE ROADS SHALL BE CLEANED THOROUCHL Y AT THE END OF EACH DAY. EXPIRES 3-1s-i 4 DAMAGED DURING CONSM41070N SED/MENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM ROADS BY SHOVELING OR SWEEPING AND BE t, AC77Y177ES SHALL BE REPLACED. TRANSPORTED TO A CONTROLLED SEDIMENT DISPOSAL AREA GYITHIN TWENTY-FOUR (24) HOURS. STREET WASH/NG SHALL BE ALL OWED ONL Y AFTER SED/MENT !S REMOVE EX. CURB, GUTTER AND WALK AT rY, REMOVED /N THIS MANNER. r EX. DRMEWAY CUT. SA#V417 AND REMOVE �3 EX ASPHALT 2' FROM EDGE OF 04177ER. i ACT/ ES SHALL X BE STAB/�/ZED BY SU/TABLE APPL/CAON OF gyps, NOL UD/NG NG \ K{err4 �' �f BUT NOT LIMITED 70, SOD, HYDROSEED/NG, OR OTHER VEGE7A77ON, PLAS77C O O 30' COVERING OR MULCHING. ALL BMPS SHALL BE SELECTED, DESIGNED, AND I . i MA/NTA/NED /N ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUAL. THE EXPOSED SOILS SHALL BE STAB/LIZED ACCORD/NO TO AN APPROVED TIMETABLE. (TYPICALL Y, NO SOILS SHALL / I REMAIN EXPOSED FOR MORE THAN TWO (2) DAYS FROM OCTOBER I THROUGH APR/L / I 90 AND NO MORE THAN SEVEN (7) DAYS FROM MAY 1 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30� r I 3. PROTECTION OF ADJACENT PRUPER17ES - AD✓ACENT PROPERTIES SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM SEDIMENT DEPOSITION BY APPROPRIATE USE OF VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS, SED/MENT BARRIERS OF F/L TERS, DIKES OR MULCHING, OR BY A _ •- - I COMB/NATION OF THESE MEASURES AND OTHER APPROPRIATE BMPS 5}�'� ��' ► 4. MAINTENANCE - ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS SHALL BE REGULARLY INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED BY THE OWNER TO ENSURE CONT/HUED w PERFORMANCE OF THE/R INTENDED FUNCTION. ALL MAINTENANCE AND REPA/R Z SHALL BE CUNDUC7F0 /N ACCORDANCE N7H THE MANUAL. "' J `J � 5. OTHER BMP S - AS REQUIRED BY THE C/TY, OTHER APPROPRIATE BMPS TD w M7T7(,A TF THE FFFF/'TS' nF 1AInw-,d t'�n Q/ wlu-r- can / / oc w ani icn -1 I-lrYUh' iU LtA III/VG /HE S/7F STORM WATER RUNOFF `"�' � v f= '? sM (etv .�. .''R n,-. 5,r.{:'};$w .x;Mjtp . •dY ,a.i :i 7�`-'tn^s.-r•<d a y _ Rs`hg'�,r�-,n ,� r ,,A ��; :: - �' SHALL PASS THRD o cn UGH ASED/MENT POND OR SED/MENT TRAP, OR OTHER Q d:.';'ss. £'�';.3.-v:�,-..,•.<W;��4x '�{�� ;t{�"4�- {� APPROPR/ATE BMPS SED/MENT PONDS AND TRAPS, PER/METER DIKES, SED/MENT ,2 O `t o 13 BARRIERS, AND OTHER BMPS INTENDED TO TRAP SED/MENT ON -SITE SHALL BE SAW YJT & RENOW EX. CURB OR £X. CUR8 CONSTRUC7F0 AS A F/RST STEP /N GRADING. THESE BMPS SHALL BE FUNCTIONAL ,■ , z - & W77ER (IF PRESENT) & S,4W11T & BEFORE DISTURBING A0770T/ES TAKE PLACE. EARTHEN STRUC7URES, SUCH AS �.�..1 Z REMOVE EX. PA 14NO 2' ,%W FACE OF J1 APPRO OpES, AND D/VERSIONS SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED ACCORDING TO AN w W TIMETABLE. ? CUR8 (OR GUTTER IF PRESENT) NVZR- i` NEW - Off Y£WAY CVT ls?LL BE LOCATED. SET TACK IN LEAG' 10. CUT AND F/LL SLOPES - CUT AND F/LL SLOPES SHALL BE DES/GNED AND _-`' r WA ��,�%r'? /`JUA✓1f..7E/i 2840cI /N 51OZ t41ALh' I >/ CDNSTRUC7F0 /N A MANNER THAT WILL M/N/M/ZE ERGS/ON /N ADD/770N SL OPES �^� �-7/� /p/ - --�- - - - - - - % SHALL BE STAB/L/ZED /N ACCORDANCE WITH ESC REQUIREMENT NO. 2. �l p 220 D20-" ' - - -� f' y/') '7' - / 9 7J /F 11. 0 'DEEP 11. CO/✓TROLLING OFF-S/7F EPOS/ON - PROPERTIES AND WATER WA YS 00NV5IREAM FROM DEVELOPMENT S/TES SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM EROSION DUE REMOW EX. DRIVEWAY CURB CUT. IF FIELD C6WOMONS SNOW MAT THE � �^ -� �� TO INCREASES IN THE VOL UME, VEL OC/TY, AND PEAK FLOW RA7F OF STORM WATER � APPARENT WRACAL CUR8 IS AMALL Y A CURB AND GV77£7 W/ ASPH RUNOFF FROM THE PROJECT S/7L: EI�GIN -+ EE OVERLAY, REMOVE CURB AND 491177ER SAWZIT AND REMOVE EX ASPHALT OV 2 FT FROM FACE OF VLRTICAL CUR8 OR GUTTER. 12 STA&I-IZA 17ON OF TEMPORARY CONVEYANCE CHANNEL S AND OUTLETS -ALL w TEMPORARY ON -SITE CONVEYANCE CHANNELS SHALL BE DES/GNED, CONSTRUCTED 00 AND STABILIZED TO PRE1,ENT EROSION FROM THE EXPECTED VEL OC/TY OF FLOW FROM A TWO- YEAR, TWENTY-FOUR HOUR FREQUENCY STORM FOR 17/E DEVELOPED a o5EA T.4 PLA CE CON0190N. STAB/L/ZA77ON ADEQUATE TD PREVENT EROSION OF OUTLETS, O AD✓AGENT S77,'EAM BANKS, SL OPES AND DOWNSTREAM REACHES SHALL BE H r1%OTE.' CEiVTfR/INL ,'!�G/✓IJI./E7i>TAT7(?N 'VOT FOUAIL) B Y SU%?GF'YOR PROVIDED AT THE OUTLETS OF ALL CONVEYANCE SY57FM5 �+ w o z 13. STORM GRAIN INLET 10R01F0770N - ALL STORM ORA/N INLETS MADE OPERABLE w ~ 0 DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PROTECTED SO THAT STORM WATER RUNOFF SHALL NOT ENTER 7NE CONVEYANCE SYSTEM WITHOUT F/RST BEING F/L TERED OR O = o S/TE GRADING AND ERGS/ON CONTROL NOTES I l OTHERWISE TREATED TO REMOVE SEDIMENT. 14. REMOVAL OF TEMPORARY BMP S - ALL TEMPORARY EPOS/ON AND SEDIMENT w 0 LCL v 1FSC MEASURES SHALL 8E INSTALLED PR/OR TO ANY S/7F WORK (SEE PLAN) PURL/C STREETS ARE TO BE KEPT CLEAR OF D/RT & DEBRIS DURING EXCA VATION I CONTROL BMP S SHALL SE REMOVED W7111N THIRTY (30) DA YS AFTER FINAL S/TE m AND FILL OPERATIONS. I STAB/L/ZAT/ON /S ACH/EYED OR AFTER 171E TEMPORARY BMPS ARE NO LONGER 5; THE TEMPORARY ERGS/ON/SED/MENTAT/ON CONTROL fAC/L/7/ES SHALL BE CON- SIRUC7F0 NEEDED. TRAPPED SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED OR STASIL/ZED ON S/TE w PRIOR TO ANY GRAD/NG OR EXTENSIVE LAAZ2 CLEAR/NG /N ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED TEMPORARY EROSION1�SEDIMENTAT/ON CONTROL PLAN. THESE D1S7ZIRBEO SOIL AREAS RESUL 77NO FROM REMOVAL SHALL BE PERMANEN7L Y Q FAC/L/TIES MUST 8E SATIFACTORIL Y MAINMINEO UNTIL CON7RUCTION & LAND- STABILIZED. 1-4d SCAP/NG ARE 00MPLE7F0 &THE POTENTIAL FOR ON -SITE ERGS/ON HAS PASSED. U) NON-COMPLIANCE W/TH THE ERGS/ON CONTROL REQU/REMENTS, WA7FR QUALITY 15. DEWATER/NG CON57RU0770N SITES - OEWAIFR/NG SYSTEMS SHALL DISCHARGE wINTO DOCZZARING l 170N OF LANAPPRO ASED/MENT TRAP OR SEDIMENT POND. PRO✓ECT/AL AND BOND FORECL OSURES.CA PERM TS, ENGINEERING DIVISION CON5 RVC77ON ACCEPTANCE WZL BE SUB✓ECT TO A WELL ESTABLISHED GROUND PR O E AS NOTED 16. CONTROL OF POLLUTANTS OTHER /VAN SED/MENT ON CONS IRUC17ON S/TES - COVER THAT FULFILLS THE REQUIREMENT OF NE APPROVED 61ONSTRU0770N PLANS. : �_ � Date ALL POLLUTANTS 0711ER THAN SED/MENT 17IAT OCCUR ON SITE DURING /MMED/ATEL Y FOLLOWING FINISH GRADING, PERMANENT VEGETA77ON (SEE LANDSCAPE CON57RU017ON SHALL SE HANDLED AND DISPOSED OF IN A MANNER THAT DOES PLANS) WLL BE PLANTED. NOT CAUSE CON)AM/NA77ON OF STORM WATER. STOCKPILES ARE TO BE L OCA7F0 /N SAFE AREAS AND ADEQUATEL Y PROTEC TO PREVENT ERGS/ON. rib,TED 17. F/NANC/AL LIABILITY - PERFORMANCE BONDING, OR OTHER APPROPRIAT�i` FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS, SHALL BE REQU/RED FOR ALL PRO✓ECTS TO ENSU/ C OMPLIANCE W/TH 1HE APPROVED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN //' CR.-F Y '� '�K S 1 mm � � U . opl( AU G` - 3 2012 NOTE ONE EX CB /S LOCATED /N CUL - OE- SAC. PROTECT EX CB PER STD PLN El.3, SHT C-3 I 7 1 I t� 25' ?� SET //-n- ;oE-g,4 .' CAP i 2,5400 - T.YPIrAl /VOTE.• PROTECT CB ON WEST SIDE OF CUL -DE--SAC LOT 2 SEA V157A VOL. i8 P. 47 NOTE ALL DISTURBED AREAS ON -SITE AND OFF -SITE SHALL RE COMPOST AMENDED TO MEET REOMIREM£NTS OF BMP T5. >3 /N THE STORY&ATER MANUAL, VOL V CHAPTER 5. J o varJ t.!C, ':lid NOTE LOCATION OF JOB SHACK, MAMR/ALS S70RACE & CONSTRUCTION FENCING SUBECT I I TO CHANGE BY CONTRACTOR Hf1W PRIOR i APPROVAL BY CITY OF EDMONOS , f� MATERIALS ( / Aj S70RA6E . REMOVE SHADED PORTION E , , P-0 z i I .......... OFI Ei ROCKERY JOB SHACK LO^AT/ON i < i CONSTRUCAON ENTRANCE PER S7D PLN E1.2, SHT 0--3 PROTECTa4LL NEW CB S AND EX. DOWNSTREAM CBS PER STD PLN4E13, SHT C-3 ° S �4\ Q EX SSMH 72-1165 � r?z 5/0 7 f 1E :(1.3.=f - _ REMOVE EX. DRIVEWAY CURB CUT OR /F FIELD CONA9177ONS SHOW THAT 7HE APPARENT VERTICAL CURB /S AC77/ALL Y A CURB AND OL177ER W/ ASPIY OVERLA Y, REMOW CURB AND GU77ER. SAMVIIT AND. REMOVE EX ASPHAL T 2 FT FROM FACE OF VERACAL CURB OR GUTTER NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE O 70 20 40 I" = 20' CONSTRUCTION SEOUENCE 1 SCHEDULE ANO ATTEND PRECONSI-RUCTION MEET/NG WTH CITY OF EDMONDS, ENGINEERING ,01W510N, 425-771-0220 EXT IJ26, PR/OR TO START OF WORK. 2. REVIEW ESC NO7FS. 3. INSTALL CDNSTR6/C770N ENTRANCE 4. INSTALL SIL T FENCE 5. PROVIDE CB PROTECTION. 6. 7FS0 MEASURES MUST BE IN PLACE & APPROVED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OR CLEARING 7. MAINTAIN DUST CONTROL B. CLEAR AND GRADE LOT. 9. INSTALL 077L/17ES 10. INSTALL PA WNG CURB, WALK 11. INSTALL PERMANENT ERGS/ON CONTROL MEASURES. 12. CLEAN UP AND REMOVE TEMPORARY FACIE/17ES ........ .... S STAB/L/ZA TION OF EXPOSED AREAS ALL SOILS EXPOSED BYLAND DISTURBING AC77W71ES SHALL BE STAB/LIZED BY SU/TABLE APPLICATION OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS), /NCLUD/NG BUT NOT L/M/TED TO SOD, 110ROSEED/NG, OR OTHER 0E6ET,4770N, PLASTIC COVER/NG, OR MULCH/NG. THE EXPOSED SOILS SHALL BE STAB/L/ZED ACCORDING TO AN APPROVED 77MET.4BLE. (TYPICALLY, NO SOILS SHALL --REMAIN EXPOSED FOR MORE THAN RY0 (2) DAYS FROM OCTOBER 1 THROUGH APR/L JO AND NO MORE THAN SEl/EN (7) DAYS FROM )VA' Y 1 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 90.) C I•CG Omr 1 c�n� � ( I T1 1 i 41 - 5j�A V 5 TA P' /VOTE.• RE&LIOI/E ALL EX FEA TURFS ON S/TE /NCL UD/NO WALKS, DRIVE, HOUSE, POOL & ROCKERY AS SHOWN. NOTE.• ALL UTILITIES NU BE INSTALLED UNDERGROUND. TEMPORARY ORA VRK CONSTRUCT/ON ENTRANCE INSTALLATION.- 771E AREA OF 771E ENTRANCE SHOULD BE CLEARED OF ALL t/EGETA770N, ROOTS & 07HER ORISC//ONABLE IVATER/AL. 7HE GRA VEL SHALL BE PLACED TO THE SPEC/FIED DIMENSIONS. ANY DRAINAGE FACILITIES REQU/RED BECAUSE OF X45H/NG SHOULD BE CONSTRUCTED ACCORDING TO SPECIFICA77ONS /N THE PLAN. /F WASH RACKS ARE USED, THEY SHOULD BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO M4NUFAC7URER S SPEC/F/CA /70NS. AGGREGATE.• 4" TO 8"CRUSHED BALLAST ROCK. ENTRANCE DIMENSIONS. THE AGGREGATE LAYER MUST BE AT LEAST 12 INCHES THICK. IT MUST EXTEND THE FULL W0771 OF 7H'E VEHICULAR INGRESS AND EGRESS AREA. 7HE OF LENGTH THE ENTRANCE MUST BE AT LEAST 100 FEET. WASH/NG.• /F CONDITIONS ON 711E S/1F ARE SUCH THAT MOST OF 771E MUD /S NOT REMOVED FROM VEHICLE TIRES BY CONTACT NTH THE GRAVEL, THEN THE TIRES MUST BE WASHED BEFORE VEH/CLES ENTER A RUM /C ROAD. GYASHRIATER MUST BE CARRIED AW4 IV FROM 171E EN7RANCE TO A SETTLING AREA TO REMOVE SED/MENT. A W45H RACK MAY ALSO SE USED TO MAKE WASHING MORE CONI/ENIENT AND EFFEC77VE. MAINTENANCE• THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CON0177ON W101-1 XZZ PREVENT )R401 /NG OR FLOW OF MUD ONTO PUBLIC R/GHTS-OF-WA Y. 7HIS MAY REOURRE PER/ODIC TOP DRESS/NG WTH 2" STONE, AS COND/77ONS DEMAND, AND REPAIR AND/OR CLEAN OUT OF ANY STRUCTURES USED TO /RAP SED/MENT. ALL MA7ERIALS SPILLED, DROPPED, WASHED OR TRACKED FROM VEHICLES ONTO ROADWAY OR INTO STORM DRAINS MUST BE REMOVED LOT / MONUMENTS LOCATED BY FIELD SURVEY ON 9-13--04. VERTICAL DATUM- NAVD 88 t I " BENCHMARK.- FOUND NOS 410 BRASS MOUNUMENT I 'R-459" SET IN TOP OF CURB AT THE SE CORNER SITE ��Er /CI! fATrrj (SE.E NOTE) f 100TH A VE GY & 220t17 ST. SW ELEI/A71ON = 929. 30 SITE BENCHMARK.• TOP OF BRASS MONUMENT AT ELEVA 7; 01V = 725 7.9 -� INTERSECTION OF 9T1 / A VE. S AND SEA VISTA PL. (TO EAST - SEE PLAN) L OT AREA = 12,, 371 SO. FT. LEGAL OESCRIPT/ON.• L OT 1, SEA WSTA, ACCORD/NG TO THE PLA T THEREOF F/LED IN VOL UME 18 PLA TS, PAGE 47, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SUBJECT TO ANY AND ALL EASEMENTS, COVENANTS COVENANTS, AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD, IF ANY. APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCT/ON CITY ENGINEERING DIVISION DA TE ^� To 00 2 112A0 S?A-55 EA VIP5 1 ;5 TA PLACE ` 11 IV,,2 1411f9EVT 1,V P1FE i:AS TiNO• :EROS/ON AND SED/MENT CONT E NO%E.$: NOTE.• 1E AN ASSESSMENT OF 71 COND/77ON OF TXE EXISTING CURB 1. CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ROUTE - CONSTRUCTION VEH/CLE ACCESS SHALL BE, AND SIDEWALK ON 979VAVENUE WST WHENE/EFR PRAC770AL, LIMITED TO ONE ROUTE. ACCESS POINTS SHALL BE {y/LL BE MADE ON SITE BY THE STAB/L/ZED W/7N QUARRY SPACES OR CRUSHED ROCK TO M/N/M/ZE THE TRACK/NG i ENGINEERING INSPECTOR. CURB OR ; OF SED/MENT ONTO PUBLIC ROADS. /F SED/MENT /S TRANSPORTED ONTO A ROAD ' SIDEWALK /N POOR OND/77ON OR SURFACE, THE ROADS SHALL BE CLEANED 7HOROU01-IL Y AT THE END OF EACH DAY. DAMAGED DURING CONSIR410770N SED/MENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM ROADS BY SHOVELING OR SWEEP/No AND BE ACT7V/T7ES SHALL BE REPLACED. TRANSPORTED TO A CONTROLLED SED/MENT DISPOSAL AREA GLI771IN TWENTY-FOUR a (24) HOURS. STREET WASHING SHALL BE ALLOWED ONLY AFTER SED/MENT IS REMOVE EX. CURB, 0417?ER AND WALK AT REMOVED IN THIS MANNER. 1 EX. OR/1/EWAY CUT. SA MIT AND REMOVE # ' EX ASPHALT 2' FROM EDGE OF G4177ER. 2 57AB/LIZA17ON OF EXPOSED AREAS - ALL SO/LS EXPOSED 9Y LAND 9/S7ZIRMNO A077WTIE5 SHALL BE STABILIZED BY SUITABLE APPLICATION OF BMPS, INCLUDING BUT NOT L/M/TED TO, SOD, HYDROSEED/NG, OR OTHER 1/EGETAT/O/V, PLASTIC 3 ` COVERING OR MULCHINO ALL BMP S SHALL BE SELECTED, DES/GNED, AND { ' MA/NTA/NED IN ACCORDANCE GY/TH THE MANUAL. THE EXPOSED SOILS SHALL BE j i II STABILIZED ACCORDING TO AN APPROVED TIMETABLE. (T)P/CALL Y, NO SOILS SHALL REMAIN EXPOSED FOR MORE THAN TWO (2) DAYS FROM OCTOBER 1 7HRO410H APR/L 70 AND NO MORE THAN SEVEN (7) DAYS FROM MAY 1 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30) ` J , PROTECT/ON OF AD✓ACENT PROPERTIES - ADJACENT PROPERTIES SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM SEDIMENT DEPOSITION SY APPROPRIATE USE OF VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS, SED/MENT BARRIERS OF FIL TERS, DIKES OR MULCHING, OR BY A COM29/NA77ON OF THESE MEASURES AND OTHER APPROPRIATE BMP S i 4. MAINTENANCE - ALL EROSION AND SED/MENT CONTROL BMPS SHALL SE REGULARLY IN5PEC7FD AND MAINTAINED BY 7HE OWNEI,' TO ENSURE CONTINUED PERFORMANCE OF 171E/R INTENDED FIINC77ON. ALL MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE 619771 7HE MANUAL. try ? 5. OTHER BMPS - AS REQUIRED SY 7HE C/TY, OTHER APPROPRIATE BMPS TO I MITIGATE /7-/f - EFFECTS OF INCREASED RUNOFF SHALL BE APPLIED. � t� I Ql C' ' 6. UNDERGROUND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION - 7HE CONS7RI10170N OF UNDERGROUND U77L/TY LINES SHALL SPECIFICALL Y ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING.• A. EROSION CONTROL FOR EXCAVATED AND STOCK-P/LED MATERIALS. B. THE PLACEMENT OF EXCAVA7E0 MA IFRIAL WHERE CON5157ENT wTH SAFETY i j I AND SPACE CONS/DERA17ONS SHALL BE PLACED ON THE UPHILL SIDE OF TRENCHES. i C. TRENCH OEWA7FR1NG SYSIFMS (MUST DISCHARGE INTO SED/MENT /RAPS, t� SED/MENT PONDS, OR OTHER ACCEPTABLE MEANS) D. TRAC ffING AND SPILLING OF MATERIALS ON S17?EETS DUE TO HAULING. E. DAILY CLEANUP AND STREET MA/NTENANCE. �7. REQU/REMENTS FOR LARGER DEI/ELOPMEN75' - ALL NEw DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT THAT /NCL ODES LAND DISTURBING A077W17ES OF GREATER 7HAN, rp OR EQUAL TD, ONE ACRE IN ADDI7/ON TO MEE77NG THE MIN/MUM REQU/REMEN1-S l I ; SET FORTH ABOVE SHALL COMPLY W fiV ESC REQUIREMENTS LI57EO BELOW. i / PROTECT EX CB PER �' 8. DEL/NEATE CLEARING AND EASEMENT L/M/75 - IN 7H,- FIELD, MARK CLEARING STD PLN E1.3, SHT C-3 LIMITS AND/OR ANY EASEMENTS, SE78ACKS, SENS/17VE/CR/IICAL AREAS AND 7/IE BUFFERS, 7R= AND DRAINAGE COURSES. 9. SEDIMENT TRAPPING - PR/OR TO LEAVING 7NE S/7F STORM GRATER RUNOFF SHALL PASS 7HROUGH A SED/MENT POND OR SED/MENT TRAP, OR 0171ER APPROPRIA7F BMPS SED/MENT PONDS AND TRAPS, PER/METER O/KES, SED/MENT ` 3 BARRIERS, AND OTHER BMPS INTENDED TO TRAP SED/MENT ON-5/7F SHALL BE I CONST?U07ED AS A FIRST STEP IN GRAD1NO INESE BMPS SHALL BE FUNC77ONAL & GU7T & REMOVE EX. CURB OR EX. CURB i BEFORE D/S7URB/NO AC771477ES TAKE PLACE. EARTHSAI 57R,YC77/RES, SUCH AS - R GOITER (/F PRESENT' & SA AOf- &r DAMS D/KES AND 0/VERSIONS SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED ACCORD/NG TO AN � REMOVE EX. PAVING 2' FROM FACE OF � APPRDI/ED TIMETABLE. CURB (OR GOITER IFPRESENT) l�/ERE NEW SET TA:,%f IN LEAD /. D I DRIVEWAY CUT t�1LL BE LOCATED. - ~- rbfq cHE-� I,��111BER �4 4OY ! 10. CUT AND FILL SLOPES - CUT AND FILL SLOPES SHALL BE DES/GNED AND -` IN SIC} IfALh' I 1 CONS7RUCTED /N A MANNER THAT !yILL MINIMIZE EROS/ON. /N ADDITION, SLOPES - - - - - - SHALL BE STAB/L/ZED IN ACCORDANCE NT71 ESC REQUIREMENT NO. 2. - - - -- 19000001l}ly S 70c�" �^A�AY2 F.' SS,t °2-185A CONTROLLING OFF-SI7F EROSION - PROPERT/ES AND GYATER NAYS ~ N ) DOWNST7?EAM FROM DEVEL OPMENT SITES SHALL BE PRO7ECTED FROM EROSION DUE REMOVE EX. DRIVEWAY CURB CUT. IF FIELD CORD/T/ONS SHOW THAT THE I S ----,., 4" `� TO INCREASES IN THE VOL UME, VEL OCITY, AND PEAK FL OW RATE OF STORM W47FR APPARENT VER77CAL CURB /S A07VALL Y A CURB AND 49V77ER W/ ASPH ENGINEERING DIVISION RUNOFF FROM THE PROJECT S/7F OVERLAY, REMOVE CURB AND GV77£R. F,4WCYT AND REMOVE EX ASPHAL T q D AS NOTE I 12. STAB/LIZA17ON OF TEMPORARY CONVEYANCE CHANNELS AND OUTLE7.�' - ALL 2 FT FROM FACE OF !/£R77CAL CURB OR GOITER. Date: l 3 TEMPORARY ON -SITE CONVEYANCE CHANNELS SHALL BE DESIGNED, 00N5TR/01F0 AND STAB/LIZED TO PREVENT EROSION FROM THE EXPECTED VELOCITY OF FLOW FROM A TWO- YEAR, TWENTY --FOUR HOUR FREQUENCY STORM FOR 77IE DEI/EL OPED jui 1. .1 A rii2q L/ Z NOFF Cz-Ylv7ERL11vz- 1110,11vtlildEllITAi70;lV f^JUT FOU/0, Y S/TE GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL NOTES I -50 MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED FRIOAl TO ANY 5/7E MORK (SEE PLAN) PUBLIC 577?EET5 ARE TO BE KEPT CZEAR OF DIRT & DEBRIS DURING EXCAVA77ON AND FILL OPZ-RA77ONS. 771E TEMPORARY EROS/ON/SED/MENTAT/ON CONTROL FACILITIES SHALL BE 00N- ST?1,101FD PR/OR TO ANY GRADING OR EX7ENS/VE LAND CLEAR/NO /N ACCORDANCE NTH 771E APPROVED TEMPORARY ERGS/ON SED/MENTA770N CONTROL PLAN. THESE FAC/LI77ES MUST SE SA77FACTOR/L Y MAIN A/NED UNTIL 001VTRUCT/ON & LAND- SCAPING ARE COMPLETED & THE P07FN77AL FOR ON-S/TF EROSION HAS PASSED. NON-CO/VIPLIANCE WI7H THE EROSION CONTROL REQU/REMENTS, WATER QUALITY REQU/REMENTS AND/OR CLEARING LIMITS MAY RESUL T IN REVOCA 77ON OF PROJECT PERMITS, PLAN APPROVAL AND BOVD FORECL OSURES. CON5TRUOPON ACCEPTANCE WILL BE SUBJECT TO A WELL ESTABLISHED GROUND COVR THAT FULFILLS THE REQUIREMENT OF 7HE APPROVED CON57RIIC77ON PLANS. /MMED/A7EL Y FOLLONNG FINISH GRAD/NG, PERMANENT VEGETA77ON (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS) WILL BE PLAN7FD. STOCKPILES ARE TO BE LOCATED /N SAFE AREAS AND A0E011ATEL Y PR07FCIFO TO PREVENT EROS/ON COND/77ON. STAB/L/ZA770N ADEQUA7E TO PREVENT EROSION OF OU7ETS, AOdACENT STREAM BANKS, SLOPES AND D0NVSTREAM REACHES SHALL BE PROVIDED AT THE OUTLETS OF ALL CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS. % 13. STORM DRAIN INLET PRO7FCI70N - ALL STORM ORA/N INLE7,5 MADE OPERABLE DURING CONSTR007ION SHALL BE PROI507F0 SO 7HAT STORM W41FR RUNOFF SHALL NOT ENTER PIE CONVEYANCE SY57EM WTHOUT FIRST BEING F/L 7FRED OR OTIAERWISE 77?EA7E0 TO REMOVE SED/MENT. I 14. REMOVAL OF 1EMPORARY BMP S - ALL 7EMPORARY EROSION AND SED/MENT CONTROL BMP S SHALL BE REMOVED WITHIN THIRTY (90) DA YS AF7FR FINAL S/7E 5TAB1LIZA77ON /S ACH/EYED OR AFTER 77-/E TEMPORARY 8MP S ARE NO L ONGER NEEDED. TRAPPED SED/MENT SHALL BE REMOVED OR STABIL/ZED ON S/7F • 01S7URBE0 SOIL AREAS RESUL 77NG FROM REMOVAL SHALL BE PERMANEN7z Y STABILIZED. 15. DZ-XA7FR11VG CON57RUC77ON S/TES - Of -WATERING SYSTEMS SHALL DISCHARGE INTO A SED/MENT TRAP OR SED/MENT POND. 16. CONTROL OF POLLUTANTS 0171,ER THAN SED/MENT ON CON57RUCPON 5/7ES - ALL POLLUTANTS 0171ER THAN SEDIMENT THAT OCCUR ON SITE DURING CON57RUCT/ON SHALL BE HANDLED AND DISPOSED OF /N A MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE CONTAYINA77ON OF STORM WA7FR. 17. FINANCIAL LIAR/LITY - PERFORMANCE BOND/NG, OR OTHER APPROPRIATE FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS, SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR ALL PRO✓ECTS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE MTH THE APPROVED EROS/ON AND SED/MENT CON77?OL PLAN ter/ ' issss F C, 1 �QVAL �re® EXPIRES 3-15-14 w z w Q w J V 0 � w <`� w J o N I z - U� N . � V h w w z w CN+ Q o w J � Z Z W /1/► p w L,(,� W c� 0 �Q Co ma ::]�u w 3: W rWr�� fy-4 3 Vl ww N zo W N O 00 w o z w J 0 Pr F�1 O w aZ O � = U LLJ Z E-+ m t; ►-� Z > w L Q :- w C.1 GROUND SURFACE 6YASHEO ROCK 1-1/2„ - 3/4" 2' WRAP GRA VEL ENTIREL Y W1TY FIL TER FABRIC 2' 0000 O�po o OpopgO oo op $�� , y 1' 0 . p�poo 040 °Qo°Doo o 40 0 0o40 44 L 0-0 -A 6" R/G/D PVC �000 0 0 ooc� 0 �4�� A oQ 0- PERFORATED P/PE, /E 307. 5 pOQ p QoogOQo £M£RGE/VCY OI�£RFL 06Y VISR4FRSION TRENCH S£CT/ON NO SCALE <_ v ----------- EX.t RC/fERY ------------------- --------------------------- �� r I?, MOVE t _ - - CB 3 ,` EX. GRADE 1. 0' MIN. 9 ��-_--- EX. GRADE RE 9/0. 0 EX. ROCKERY C „ 5 LF, 6 SD, S - 30.09' � �� EMERGENCY OVERFLOGY '�� 0VERFL0H// C/L TOP OF BEO REMOVE ---- � ----- ____ t D/SPERS/ON TRENCH -- ; CLEANOUT - EL 309.00 NEdY GRADE-`"`------ - TOP EL 308. 5 (NO CAPS 315 LF, 6 RIGID PVC C'B 412 315 LF, 6 R/G/D PVC TOP OF BED "`--- �> -- c'' EL. 309. 0 NEGY GRADE PERF P/PE, S-FLAT RE 310 o PERF P/PE, S-FLAT - EL 909. 00 65 If -709.0 --� �.a� - EX. CURB _ & GUTTER -- -"" - --._------------ r.+ HEIGHT OF EX ROCKERY AT AD,/ PROPERTY LINE - 5.6' (70 REMAIN) EX. ROCKERY ON ADJ PROPERRTY TO REMA//V "1-IE 907. 50 EL 305. 5 NOTE.• ALL DISTURBED AREAS ON S/TE AND OFF -SITE SHALL BE COMPOST AMENDED TO MEET REQUIREMENTS OF 9YR T5.13 IN THE STORMWA TER MANUAL, 110L Y, CHAPTER 5. REMOVE EX. `PATER �' % r /E 309.00 (6" OUTS EXPOSED DECK AREA - �.313 SF ME7FR AND SERVICE tri 3. 1 SLOPE /E 307.50 ('6" 0VERFLOGY, 6" RKRY :/4,1?A/N) 205 SF^�TOTAL DECK ARFA - 440SF TOP OF 0VERFL 0w 309. 0 ;� + - 1r1/ - it i_j5-00100'DO "�V- i 28 62 f s ! ` /`/` 6„ PERF to \ PROPOSED ROCKERY i;1c' 1 ROCKERY GRAIN \ NEW SL HER C/O (29 MAX. H/GH, J5 FROM P/1) 12. 6 ,t; /E MATCH EX P/PE INSTALL 6" C/O TO EX S/DE SERER AT P,2 AV112" LOCK/NG C/ `3Oqff L MPHOLE COVER. IE YOO2°E VERIFY MIN 2.OX SLOPE I� `�/�,3'09�.I � irl"'i= �rw?r �K DR - 30f�I5 't :� �1 �� 316.60 ) I; 325. 8or R_ v£RIF Y .4. y r EMERGENCY OVERFL OILY 7rIP I } 3 ?,n NEW ROCKERY - 711E SHADED ELEt/A770NS ARE DISPERS/ON TRENCH, TOP EL 308. 5 O9 '3'S ''<; G_ EX/S17NG 1ZEYAAONS AS NO7FO TILE NEIy ROCKERY 5' L ONO x 2' GY/DE x 2' DEEP CLEANOUTS 95 2 5 1 SL ORE MUST 77E /N Hf;9V 711E EXISI7NO ROCKERY 0 7W P14 /E 307.50� I , l ' �,, THE ELEVATION OF 711E NEIY ROCKERY /S 3 875 S'F 1-1/2 TO 3/4 Gt/ASHED GRA VEL ti 1 I , 316.60 ( LOT , CONNECT F70' DRAIN 77GHRIMN AND 5 LF, 6" SD, S - 30. 09 ENT/REL Y LO6lFR T11AN THE EX/S/TNG GRADE. IN17L 7RA VON 7RENC1/ OU7ZET P/PE TO IX-RGENCYOV£RZ0W PROPOSED HOUSE DISPERS/ON 7RENCH /E 307.50 0 ! ` i " ROOF o ` 308.15 I, I I 2 LF, 6 SD (FTG DRAIN NUMBER 1141 O I /III I 77GH7ZINE), S-22. OX CONNECT �, 440 .SF I;;I .,.� TO I RGENCr 0P RI-Z0N SEA VISTA PLACE _ 2.Oq' SLOPE I `I' 4.• 1 SL OPE I DISPERSION BENCH. FROM TOP SE £X. PVC S/DE SEIR (i/£R/FY MA TERIAL). PROPERTY OWfR- MUST I NEI�Y IMPERMOUS AREAS.• DRIkFWA Y - 951 SF HIALK - 203 SF EXPOSED DECK' - 313 SF EXPOSED PATIO - 2C15 SF NIV ROOF - 4, 440 SF TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA - 6,112 SF STRUCTURAL COVERAGE TOTAL DECK - 440 SF NZ-WSL00 - 3, 875 SF TOTAL AREA - 4, 315 SF TOTAL LOT AREA - 12, 371 SF COVERAGE - 34.93.E /E 309.00 -' /E .307.50 EL 905. 5 /E 30750 (O/I" TRENCH PERF PIPE% IE 307.50 (/NAIL 7RENCH OU7ZET R/PE) IE 307.50 (FTG ORA/N AGH)Z/NE) 3.O' BOT. OF BEOJ \_NRAP TOP, BOTTOM AND SIDES - EL 906. 00 OF TRENCH WIF/L TER FABRIC /NIZ MA MON TRENCH A OF/LE SCALE>"- 5' TAPER EX ROCKERY fROM LOT 2 55' HI ® P/1 TO 1 / 2.9' ®NEtY ROCKERY SLSA VISTA 101011T OF EX ADJ PROPERTY LINE 6..3' !/ OL . 7U, P. 47 REDUCE HE/Gf/T OF ROKERY EXPOSED TO 29' RE 3 O(OOE PROFILE ABOVE% A PA TIO OF CURB VE COND/AON FROM P/1 TO HOUSE ADR/F/ED AND PROVIDE A REPORT TO 325.5 f I TO P/L -TYP 511, 711E PURL/C MVRKS DEPT. TINE CDND/7TON OF )WL/NE FROM Ti/E C/TY I �? t i i ( + RE- 3 O DO /E 307. 50 r 3�65 4 f>>f hill, ` MAIN TO THE PROPERTY LINE MUST BE 1�£RIt7E0 BY TINE PUBLIC XVRKS I DEPT. CONTACT EDMONOS SZ-WR DIWS/ON ® 425-771-02J6. /F MUST BE REPLACED, USE PVC, SDR 35,, AS7Y D 3034 0 2x MIN SLOPE. PORCH I NEVI/ S/DEGI/AL_ 4.•1 SLOPE 31.5 LF, 6 R/0/'9-._.. ----LOWER FLOOR ELEV. _ - 317.0 ' 309 310 8� PVC PERF P/PE 3270 203 SF j I 309.0 MAIN FLOOR ELEV. = 327.0 ` FTG ELEV. - 3149 ` II I 1141 SEA VISTA PL 325.5 /NF/L TRA T/ON TRENCH 1 I c 3' DEEP x 5' GY/DE x 65' L ONO GRA VEL BED GY/1-1/2" - 3/4 " WASHED ROCK R,4DIN FILL - 88 CY CUT - 767 CY EX. F70' ELEV = 314.9 I' NEW FTO ELEV = 314.9 r NOTE.• AN A�£NT OF THE -71cue V 1ume Results OrigInd Surface Model Ol rginol final Surface Mode% Future at Co ,p1. tC a ,9F1:E I a0b00o0 CB ,fl RE 314.15 EX. GRADE 6" CLEANOUT---------------- ---- GY/TH-CAR '------- -__--- - ---_ `_ -__ --- ---_-_ NEW GRADE 34 LF, 6" PVC T/GHTLINE, S - 10. 79' /E 31115 Oewtion /nterw/ at Area Ri Grt t�C✓ume IVY) f,7/ Areo ft 2 "/ kb/ume CY Cumu/otire Cut CY Cumulalive F4/ CY ,306.51 - M7.51 a00 000 0.00 am a00 am J07.51 - J0851 am a am am QO0 am "..51 - J09.51 a01 000 aa3 am am a00 JO.9.51 - J1a51 M57 1.43 a82 aa3 1.43 aaJ J10.51 - J11.51 .381.64 141J 1.9J 0.07 1556 0.J0 3J1.51 - 3J2.5J 76617 28-V i 14 0.I2 4U. 94 0.22 J12.51 - .31.l51 1008JJ .i7.34 22.26 0.82 81.29 1.04 JI51 - 31451 1167.2E 4694 52874 19.58 12822 20.63 31451 - 315.51 169a6i 62.62 599.4E 22.20 J9084 42.8i J1551 - JI651 2927.81 1047J 527.52 19.54 29.557 67.37 J16.51 - J17.51 4"..05 149..i0 1877 0.70 444.87 6J06 JI7.51 - 31851 3714.19 1J7.9.i 1861 069 582.80 6-175 JI8.51 - J19.51 158458 5869 51.20 I.90 $41.49 65.65 J19.51 - J20.51 1064.29 J9.42 J2.65 1.21 680.91 $6.66 J20.51 - J21.51 72J46 26.79 2680 0.99 707.70 67.85 J21.51 - J22.51 "..21 18.82 4.98 0.18 726.5J 68 04 32751 - J2�51 44d16 15..60 6.J4 a2J 74 IJ $827 J2i51 - J24.51 332J5 12.31 8J.1J J08 75.E 43 71.35 J24.51 - J2'z51 18i.92 681 427.05 1582 762.25 87.17 J25.51 - 326.51 121.76 451 1842 a 66 766.76' 87, 85 CONDI17ON OF THE EX/SANG 4C�1RB FG?G/i1iD �? BrrASS AND S/DEMAI LK ON 97H Ai2rNUE !f'FST l�klLL BE MADE ON S/ BY�'ONUiL'F/J% i�il r/)" ,24571410 `7HE ENGINEERING INSPECTOR. TB I CUR OR SYDEALK IN POOR - - - GWD/770N OR DAMAGED DURIA CONSTRUC770N A07W77FS SH LLTA BE REPLACED. 1 REMO►/E EX. CURB, G1177£R AND !WALK AT EX. ORIkEwAY r CUT AND REPLACE 6Y/ NEW CURB, GI/7?ER AND 01ALK PER STD PLNS AND E2.13. (SEE SHT 0-3) � au (Y r SITE BENCHMARK SEE NOTE) ELEI/A T/ON = 925. 79 FOUND 2 112'� BRASS MONUMENT I/V P/PE CAST1 i NEW GRADE NZ-W GRADE 4. 1 SL OPE 1 ' M/N. NEGY GRADE 5.0' 29 SL OPE 15 EX C[1,4B � GLITTER 3O' 6" RIGID PVC PERF P/PE, /f 307. 5, S-FLA T INIZ MA AON TRENCH X-SECi/ON SCALES"- 5' SEE SURVEY FOR BLOG HEIGHT C.4L CUL.4TIONS zt SURVEY NOTES (ABA INC.) MONUMENTS LOCATED BY FIELD SURVEY ON 9-13-04. Q O � � I VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88 O BENCHMARK: FOUND NGS 4" 0 BRASS MOUNUMENT "R-458" C\ SET IN TOP OF CURB AT THE SE CORNER OF 100th AVE. W AND 220th ST. SW. ELEVATION = 329.30 Q SI TE TE BENCHMARK: T m 1 OP OF BRASS MONUMENT AT INTERSECTION I OF 9th AVE. S AND SEA VISTA PL. (TO EAST - SEE PLAN) ELEVATION = 325.79 21 LF, 6 SD I "`� ` FROM FACE OF CURB (OR GUTTER /F PRESENT% ADD• VERT CURB \ DOGYNSPDUT - \ 6� " �` - 61 +'' $ • 3 °l ''1� Ghh I i NElW 1 "METER O (STD a,F S \ Nf W OR/VEIYA Y APRON IWG E2.1D, SHT C-3) OR CURB &GUTTER (STD 061� £2.8, S - 16.49 n�� _ {_ STD OGYG E2.26 SHT C-3) t �y 34 tF, NEW 1-1/4" SHT C-3) TD MATCH EX/S/77NG COND/170NS. -� $ •3° `' - ,�O' FOR 3-CAR GARAGE 61' 37.45' IYATER S£RV/CE Z �qo SA VT & REMOl�' £X. CURB OR EX CURB & I TYPE X" SFT COPPER NOTE: ALL 1177L/77ES MLL BE 6VI77ER (IF PRE&WV IWERE NE/y DR1kE-AVAY CUT SET TACK /IV ZD110 I'D. ` INSTALLED IINOZROROLINR H&L BE LOCA7E0 (S7D OW E2.26, SHT C-3j & 414511E, I�yIG;�A E,� 28400 _E - _ S4#W7* & REM0kf` EX. PAWA(0 2 FROM FACE OF - _._. - - - 3 S O <%O OO "1�1 -►i /E-AV lfFR77CAL CURB (07 6V77FR IF NEEDED) ADD - -- �, _ r i, - E.Y` .SS,1h' 12 --185A NORTH YFRT CURB (SM ,0W E2.10, SHT C--3) OR CURB & �,�z G1EEf' NOTE.' CEI`VTEFrL/NE. 1v1�?4JU/t1EA'TAPON G!/77FR (STD PW E2.4 SHT C--3) TO MATCH ��{'vt�csl�%I � �'-4n�Yv�-�,tT1'� . �I pr - � �► �► NOT FC2l it/D NY S'!iR tEYOR EXIS/ANG CONDITONS: �� an I GRAPHIC SCALE CONNECT DONVSPOUTS AS /ND/GATED ON PLANS. REVOE 1 _ KEX. ORIWWAY CURB CUT & REPLOf f/ l�£R77CAL CURB 1 N�I N�iD : ISI __ Y:i`i'' (S7D OW E2.10, SHT C--3% /F FIELD COND/AONS SHOiY 7HAT 7HE- t r �V S OTED O 5 10 20 00XV5100UT COLLECTOR P/PE & OTHER DRAINAGE PIPE SHALL BE APPARENT A!RACAL CURB /S A07VALL Y A CURB AND 6U77FR AVX AR ' I PVC, SDR 35, ASTM D-9094 OR HOPE, N--12 OR EQUAL, UNLESS ASPHAL T Ol�EIPL4Y TO 711E CURB FACE, THEN CURB AND GUTTER a I OTHERIy/SE NOTED. FOOT/NG DRAINS AND PERF. P/PE SHALL BE (S7lJ OW E2.B, SHT C-3) IWLL B£ INSTALLED 70 MA7C11ZA7SANG AL S7ORZ A APTFR, PVC, ASTM D-2729. CONDITIONS /NSTFAD 6F A kERACAL CURB. SA1X'UT 2' FROG! CURB OR 01177FR. ON S NOT ALREADY PRESENT CBS SHALL BE TYPE 1. ;5EA TA PLACE ,�VY'3 ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE TO APPLICABLE CODES & STANDARDS. ' A COPY OF THESE APPROVED FLAN5 MUST BE ON THE JOB S/TE S/TE BENCHMARK „12 ' WHENEVER CONSTRUCTION /S IN PROGRESS. ELEV4 T/ON = 325.24 TOP EAST HEADBOL T o F/RE HYDRANT 5141 CORNER ' h nn/ ini r�,Qcc-� rind 5'619DEx3' , ,�I� I 1 EDMONDS, WA 98020 NEB,-,/4"�A>FR �� DEEP x 65 L ONO,, (, ( , I SERVICE „ „ p;I I FTG DRAIN - TYP 1-1/2 - 3/4 `� 316.60 PROPOSED ROCKERIES I WASHED GRA VEL MAX. 32 H/GH TYP. I DOWSPOUT fWALL ABOYf w '` COLLECTOR - TYP 4Y 316.10 GARAGE EZ J16.10 316.10 5. 5 � f y, v"9.9. , l \ i 312.7 o Nf OR/VE t; 311.9 i AE ALL DOd>GNSPOU73' 34 LF, 6 SD ��i �� 2. 1 1.OI H/ ROCKERY c\ \ ,, S - 10. 79 c. 77� COLL£C7L�R HERE. r'J` Q d CURB (STD D1416 E2. 7, SHT C--T) OR t 1.1 FROM P/1 TH/CKEDNEO EDGE STD DI�YG E2. >O, SHT C-3� I I \� CLEANOUT r ` :/E 307.50 l 3>2.25 ` w �'' OR/VZWA r '6+4.5 23.5 =`a- PROMDE BREAK RE 314.15 � ` �J1 a ° b \ 22.5 5'S,l9H 1�% 1r35 \ IN CURB AT CB / 11.15 • '79 , 4 �j� \ x 3 350 0 \ d 319.51 . �a 315.02 314..66 d 318.12 ROCKERY ---� ar 5 IYALK, (APRON) 1.3' FROM P/1 CURB AT EX/S/7NG OR1kF91AY CUT OR EX. CURB & GU77ER (IF PRESENT) & SAOCUT & REMOVE EX PAVING 2 \ `` "'' .: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 1, SEA VISTA, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF FILED IN VOLUME 18 PLATS, PAGE 47, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SUBJECT TO ANY AND ALL EASEMENTS, COVENANTS COVENANTS, AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD, IF ANY. APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCT/ON CITY' E/VG//DEER/NG DIVISION DATE EXPIRES 3-15-14 AUG ` 3 ?.012 BUILDING DEPARTMENT pl��at4 t-ps";�C)Pv'f3S F/L 7FR FABRIC SECURED TO 2" X 2" 14 GA. WIRE FABRIC EQUAL 2" .Y 2' WOO OR o EOU/1/ALENT N 8'- 12' Iu 8' I PLACE 3/4"--1.5" WASHED 49RAVEL /N 711£ 7R£NCH AND ON BOTH SIDES OF 17L TER FABRIC FENCE 6W THE SURFACE. FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL IN CONTINOUS ROLLS. USE STAPLES OR WIRE RINGS TO ATTACH FABRIC TO WIRE. V MESH SUPPORT FE E iuUPPORT FILTER FABRIC. II :D I - N BURY BOTTOM OF FILTER MATERIAL 8' TO 12' 6' MAX, 2' X 2' WOOD POSTS OR EQUIVALENT CONTRACTOR/DEVELOPER SHALL MAINTAIN AND REPLACE STRAW BALES TO INSURE PROPER EROSION CONTROL. CITY INSPECTION REQUIRED ON ALL EROSI❑N CONTROL METHODS BEFORE OTHER WORK CAN BEGIN. C .1ffRY '.. ' .:« ... E-D fi� 0 N: .. ". IONS STANDARDDETAIL I MN FILTER FABRIC FENCE FILTRATION SYSTEM 7890-19g0 DATE 7/24/01 SCALE NTS orro NO. E1.1 10*- 2 I1Z 5- PLACE SCORE MARKS EVERY 10' 1" MAX. 1 SLOPE: 1:12 .. • . : ... ... : ♦ •41 n e d e. .a. DRIVEWAY WING OR CURB RAMP SLOPE L 'L CONCRETE CURB SHALL BE NO LESS THAN 3" IN HEIGHT CONSTRUCT OUT OF ACP PAVEMENT NOTE.• NOT TO BE USED IN R.O. W EXCEPT TO REPAIR o EX/SANG fX7R10Z0 CURB/NG. EXTEND PAVEMENT 1.3' FROM THE FACE CURB IF NECESSARY TO SUPPORT ACP PAVEMENT %�1 EXTRUDED CURB 6" COMPACTED :STC BELOW ACP �. .: REVISIONS STANDARD DETAIL MPROVEB BY I DATE A GEBERT 06/29/03 CONC. EXTRUDED CURB .nnn OATS SCALE 7/24/01 NTS IDWO NO. E2.7 J RESIDENCE aw Ocr z CLEANOUT WITH 45' CL BEND AND CAP 0_ C.O. w U) :ED 100 BETWEEN ' 1404"x6" CONCRETE CLEANOUT(WYE WITH CAP COLLAR AND LOCKING LAMPHOLE COVER) LEVELING COLLAR & CONCRETE LEVELING COLLAR 12 z /L 2r ININ LAMPHOLE COVER :3 iYA7FR ACHT CAP RISER 7CON PAD 12" PVC SLEEVE 6" RISER 4" OR 6" S70E SEW GENERAL CLEANOUT DETAIL s" WYF A D 45' ANO 1, BENDY STUB 4" OR 6" SIDE SE{fER ASPHALT SURFACE CLEAN OUT DETAIL AT PROPERTY LINE 12" LOCKING LAMPHOLE COVER (EAST JORDAN IRON WORKS CO.) s" RISER 12" PVC SLEEVE (MODEL #: 00366108) PVC CAP e°° eg:° TYPICAL CL NOUT UNDER ASPHALT NOTE OR CONCRETE SIDE SEWER JOINTS SHALL BE GASKETED Nv REVISIONS I STANDARD DETAIL MPRWED NY DA7C D. GEBERT /16/03 SEWER CLEANOUT DETAILS D. GEBERT 01/06/05 DATE 1890-1990 D. GEBERT 4/2/07 7/24/01 scAtF NTS N0 E6.2 yeti f �'ftiyjti O�AO`rF•d r'S'GcF•O PROVIDE FULL WIDTH OF INGRESS/ EGRESS AREA CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN TEMPORARY C❑NSTRUCTION ENTRANCE DURING THE C❑NSTRUCTION PERIOD. CITY INSPECTI❑N REQUIRED ON ALL EROSION CONTRO MEASURES BEFORE WORK CAN BEGIN. REVISIONS STANDARD DETAIL BY "m D. GEBERT 10/6/03 STABLMCONSTRUCTIONENTRANCE 789Q-1990 DATE 7/24/01 SOME NTS I-=. E1.2 mommommmmmmmm mommomommm CITY INSPECTION REQUIRED ON FORM WORK PRIOR TO POUR 5-1/2" •�1" R e 1" BATTER d 1"R e' d nn 0.05 FT/FT N d' d 4 4 4. d d: 6" A. 4Q 41 18" STANDARD 24" ARTERIAL 5/8' MINUS CSTC NOTES: 1. FORMS SHALL BE TRUE TO LINE AND GRADE AND SECURELY STAKED. 2. EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL BE PLACED ADJACENT TO CATCH BASINS. 3- EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL BE EVERY 10 FEET AND DUMMY (CONSTRUCTION) JOINTS EVERY 5 FEET. 4. EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL HAVE 1/2" TO 5/8" WIDE PREMOLDED JOINT FILLER. 5. CONCRETE SHALL BE CLASS 3- 3000PSi. 6. FINISH SHALL BE LIGHT BROOM. 7. CURB SHALL BE SPRAYED WITH CLEAR CURING COMPOUND OR SHALL BE COVERED AND KEPT MOIST FOR 72 HOURS. 8. ALL SIDEWALKS POURED BEHIND CURB IN DRIVEWAY AREAS SHALL BE 6" THICK OVER 2" OF CSTC WITH SUBGRADE COMPACTED TO 95% MAXIMUM DENSITY. REVISIONS STANDARD DETAIL APPROVED BY DATE A GEBERT 4/27/05 STANDARD TYPE "A" CURB/GUTTER DETAIL A GEBERT 4/2/07 ES1 18901 DATE 7/24/01 SCALE NTS owD No. E2.8 z CASTIRON LOCKING LID -' LAMPHOLE COVER (EAST JORDAN IRON WORKS CO.) wD_ (MODEL #: 00366108) 0 o: a w z _Z J `ol a 6" WYE AND 45• BEND Of/� 6" LATERAL RUN TO HAVE / SLOPE OF 2% MIN. TO a 50% MAX. RUBBER JOINT BISCUIT PLUG OR OTHER APPROVED WATERTIGHT PLUG NOTE: 22.5' OR 1. WHEN TAPPING INTO EXISTING MAIN 45' BEND AN INSERTA-TEE SHALL BE USED. PLACEMENT OF TEE SHALL DEPEND ON DEPTH OF SEWER MAIN. AS A MINIMUM, THE TEE SHALL BE PLACED AT A 45 DEGREE ANGLE. 2. IF CONNECTING SIDE SEWER TO EXIST CONCRETE LATERAL, A CONCRETE/PVC ADAPTER SHALL BE USED AND SECURED PER MFGR'S INSTRUCTIONS. 6" TEE POSSIBLE r SEWER MAIN LOCATION CONNECTION AT MAIN SHALL BE AT 45' ANGLE OR GREATER POSSIBLE - SEWER MAIN LOCATION REVISIONS STANDARD DETAIL APPROVED BY DATE A GEBERT 01/28/04 -TYPICAL SEWER LATERAL A GEBERT 05/06/05 1890-1990 A GEBERT 4/2/07 DATE7/24/01 1 SCALE NTS o" No. E6.4 IN CITY INSPECTION REQUIRED ON ALL EROSI❑N CONTROL MEASURES BEFORE WORK CAN BEGIN. REVISIONS STANDARD DETAIL D. GEBERT 00/1 /05 TEMPORARYSEDIIENTTRAPFORCATCHBAiM D. GEBERT OS/I9/OS 7890-1990 D. GEBERT 05/05/06 DATE 7/24/01 SCALE NTS °MO N0' E1.3 18' THICKNESS - NOTE, IF A THICKENED EDGE IS ADDED TO EXISTING PAVEMENT OR APPLIED AFTER NEW PAVEMENT IS PLACED, THE ASPHALT SURFACE SHALL BE THOROUGHLY TACKED *0_1 .: ��, i TREVISIONS STANDARD DETAIL APPROVED BY AD. GEBERT 04/2/07 ASPHALT THICKENED EDGE 89990 DAZE 7/24/01 SCALE NTS °W0 Ne E211 CITY INSPECTION REQUIRED ON FORM I WORK PRIOR TO POUR EXPANSION JOINT 10' DUMMY JOINT d. . •' • ♦ . A A + t •4000 C ' ♦ •• ♦. d •': , �d • ' • d� -.d ♦ I • •• •.. .. ♦ - • • L :4.: t'•• • A. • • I t 4 • d, • • . 4. 41 -MIN . 10' O.C. 5' O.0 SAW CUT ACP A MIN. PLAN GUTTER.FROM EDGE OF FULL DEPTH 1/2" EXPANSION JOINT MATERIAL ---\ 74 UNDISTURBED EARTH OR SECTION COMPACTED NATIVE MATERIAL 2' MIN. UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED SAW CUT BY ENGINEER 2"- 5/8" MINUS CSTC NOTE: 1. CONCRETE SHALL BE CLASS 3- 3000PSI 2. CONCRETE SHALL BE BROOM FINISHED 3. SIDEWALK THICKNESS SHALL BE 5-1/2". 4. SIDEWALK THICKNESS AT DRIVEWAYS SHALL BE 6" THICK. 5. CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE POURED SEPARATELY FROM SIDEWALK 6. CONCRETE SHALL BE SPRAYED WITH CLEAR CURING COMPOUND OR SHALL BE COVERED AND KEPT MOIST FOR 72 HOURS. 7. SAW CUT AND REMOVE ACP PAVEMENT A MIN. OF 2' FROM GUTTER FACE TO INSURE ADEQUATE COMPACTION OF ACP AND GUTTER SUBGRADE REv151oNs STANDARD DETAIL D. GEBERT 4/27/05 CONCRETE SIDEWALK D. GEBERT 04/2/07 agoOATS 7/24/01 SCALE NTS OIVO N0. E2.13 NOTE: 1. IF DRIVEWAY WIDTH EXCEEDS 15'. INSTALL A FULL DEPTH EXPANSION JOINT. 2. DRIVEWAY APRON SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 6" THICK AND SHALL BE PLACED ON 2" OF 5/8" CSTC AND COMPACTED GRADE. CONCRETE SHALL BE CLASS 3- 3000PSI 1/2" UP CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE POURED SEPARATELY FROM THE SIDEWALK. CITY INSPECTION REQUIRED ON FORM WORK PRIOR TO POUR. OR 16" VERTICAL CURB (TO MATCH EXIST. ONLY) EXPANSION JOINT w 1 �1;; i / 6" CURB DRIVEWAY CURB TRANSITIONAL DETAIL FOR CURB AND GUTTER OR VERTICAL CURBS /1/2" X 4" EXPANSION JOINT MATERIAL e•' d Q PAVEMENT • v . .e e • CSTC a d 10" NOTES: \ 2 - 5/8" MINUS CSTC 1. FORMS SHALL BE TRUE TO LINE AND GRADE AND SECURELY STAKED. 2 EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL BE PLACED ADJACENT TO CATCH BASINS. 3. EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL BE EVERY 10 FEET AND DUMMY JOINTS EVERY 5 FEET. 4. EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL HAVE 1/2" TO 5/8" WIDE PREMOLDED JOINT FILLER. 5. CONCRETE SHALL BE CLASS 3- 3000PSI. 6. FINISH SHALL BE LIGHT BROOM. 7. CURB SHALL BE SPRAYED WITH CLEAR CURING COMPOUND OR SHALL BE COVERED AND KEPT MOIST FOR 72 HOURS. 8. ALL SIDEWALKS POURED BEHIND CURB IN DRIVEWAY AREAS SHALL BE 6" THICK OVER 2" OF CSTC WITH SUBGRADE COMPACTED TO 95% MAXIMUM DENSITY. THIS TYPE OF CURB SHALL ONLY BE USED TO REPLACE EXISTING VERTICAL CURBING REVISIONS STANDARD DETAIL APPPDVED BY DATE D. GEBERT 4/27/05 CONC, VERTICAL CURB A GEBERT 5/18/06 fst. 1890 DATE 7/24/01 SCALE NTS E NO. E2.10 O INSTALL CHECK VALVE ON METER INSTALLATIONS FOR NEW �ROPERTY BUILDING CONSTRUCTION ONLY. DELETE CHECK VALVE FOR R.O.W. LINE METERS INSTALLED WITH REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING WATER MAINS. __..__... �01 METER INSTALLED BY CITY VEO Cl CHECK VALVE w w C3 U z f 0 I co O OD FOR VACANT LOT (FUTURE USE) CURB STOP SHALL BE PLACED AT PROPERTY LINE AND LOCATION MARKED WITH PAINTED 2' X 4' WITH 'WATER' STENCILED ON IT. SHALL BE INSTALLED IF EXISTING YOKE HAS NO CURB STOP. DEPTH SHALL BE 18'. MATERIAL. LIST OA ALL 3/4' DR 1' SERVICE TO BE TYPE 'K' SOFT COPPER TUBING. CEMENT LINED. D.I. © BRONZE CORP. STOP WITH CC THREAD INLET AND COPPER (CTS) GRIP OUTLET. WATERMAIN WITH (FORD OR MUELLER) 'K' T❑N TYPE JOINT© TYPE SOFT COPPER TUBING OR HIGH MOLECULAR POLY PIPE (160 PSI). TRACER WIRE SHALL BE WRAPPED AND TAPED TO POLY PIPE. A D E BRONZE CURB STOP WITH EIP THREAD. 3/4' METER SETTER EQUAL TO A.Y.M. McDONALD AY20212WCDD3 THIN WITH ANGLE BALL VALVE WITH LOCK WINGS, CHECK VALVE, 12' TALL .Y STEEL INLET AND OUTLETt HORIZONTAL WITH DUAL PURPOSE CONNECTIONS ® (� DOUBLE STRAP SADDLE REQUIRED WHEN TAPPING THIN STEEL O MID -STATES PLASTIC METER BOX ( MS 11 X 18 X 12) WITH F MS 1148 DUCTILE LID WITH 9'x61D2' READER Q BRASS COMPRESSION FITTING [� PAINTED 2 X 4' WITH 'WATER' STENCILED ON IT O 1' WATER SERVICE TO HOUSE O MIPT X CTS GRIP © 14GA. WIRE TRACER (TAPED NOTE, PVC PIPE SHALL NOT BE USED FOR WATER SERVICES TO POLY PIPE EVERY 10') It .*-- ...: D: :.: CC. IONS STANDARD DETAIL DATE APPRolu BY DATE STANDARD DETAIL 10/6/03 STANDARD DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE D. GEBERT 6/16/03 314"and 1"WATER SERVICE INSTALLATION 04/2/07 D. GEBERT 6/19/03 1890 DATE 7/24/01 sCJIC NTS OWO N0. E 90-1 D. GEBERT 4/2/07 DATE 7/24/01 �O NTSrwG NO. E7.6 NO TE- THE REQU//�ED PA 1/EMENT SA HICUT FOR CURzg RZ-PL A CZ-1VZ-N7- /S 2 FEET. EXPIRES 3-15-14 3 2012 t?U1LDtl+tO DEPAf�TI�iE1�4�011Y OF EDmOI,IDS