Loading...
155 3RD AVE S.PDF1111111111114955 155 3RD AVE S ADDRESS: TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE): COVENANTS(RECORDED)FOR: CRITICAL AREAS:— DETERMINATION: ❑ Conditional Waiver ❑ Study Required Waiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S: DRAINAGE PLAN DATED:_(_' I g • (g _ (n• 1' Ls 1_e_2_& PARKING AGREEMENTS DA EASEMENT(S) RECORDED PERMITS lq%m(,�kabo) PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED: yy�� SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED: 21 Q SEWER LID FEE $: LID #: SHORT PLAT SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: SIDE SEWER PERMITS) #: ,�jj GEOTECH REPORT DATED: 4. STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #: / WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: 'n OTHER- -ttAA) _R2 �1 • /1LI LOT: BLOCK: r LATEMPIDST's\Forms\Street File Checklist.doc PLANNING DATA New Commercial / MultiFamily Proiects SITE ADDRESS: S��• ZONING: USES) PROPOSED:�Xe� Ube O'C�`�(e I�eS. ALLOWED?: Yef LEGAL NONCONFORMING LAND USE DETERMINATION ISSUED No (YIN) CUP File: To Allow What Uses?: ADB FILE #: 0�—�1a1Std on qld oy PARKING: I Use: No. Spaces Required: X (floor area, # employees, etc.) _ Use: ice No. Spaces Required: `600 X (floor area, # employees, etc.) = S Use: No. Spaces Required: X (floor area, # employees, etc.) _ Use: No. Spaces Required: X (floor area, # employees, etc.) _ Total Required: Q Actual Provided: 9 SETBACKS: Required Setbacks: Front: O LeftSide: o Right Side: Rear: 0 Actual Setbacks: Front: Left Side: 0 Right Side: O Rear:_ Street map checked for additional setback required? (Yes/No) MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA: 1 Maximum Allowed: �S00 3 Actual: g�o`RD 13,5010 YJ BUILDING HEIGHT: + o Maximum Allowed: r� S + 5Actual Height: � ?6 o`lQ • G, ;L Modulation Allowed?: Yes Mudulati Datum Point: MW SI Datum Elevation: 47. o�, N Elevator Penthouse > 3 feet over height limit? If so,VAR# z I o 7` si'rte; �i'2- ��7if {i c1t6 f/ �- LANDSCAPING: 9 "'" / c a z a Matches ADB approved Cd (f&rTdv\ llt? e d °w Bid Provided? /V0 Bond Amount (100% bid): z CRITICAL AREAS #: Vc (Ve 1l G � " D z SEPA DETERMINATION: 0 /V% 0 b/ 15 0 x SHORELINE REQUIRED?: Continued ... LOG ITEM # I:Uibrary\^PlandatNewComm.doc STREET FILE DATE: 611110 -/ PLAN CHK#: NAME OF BUILDING PERMIT APPLICANT: qaw� (�rev-� �✓�°U �( Coy PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ADB FILE #: D 3� OR DATE WAIVED: PLANS MATCH APPROVED PLAN: SUBDIVISION: LOT AGGREGATION REQUIRED?: REDUCED SITE PLAN (8.5X11) PROVIDED FOR STREET FILE? Yef OTHER: ' Plan Review By:(14.ceck Steve. R,&,( �fp � Y O (l1- C'iv� IM i CYO- � � -fir I O O✓ 1: \I i brary\^P I an d atN ewComm. d oc • . MUNK NOV 2 0 '1998 RECEIVED. ��'REETFILE AN - 2 2004 RLE5T� PERMITCOUNTER Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Office 'Building .'- 3' Avenue South and Day ton Street Edmonds, Washington Prepared for: Marine Business International: Seattle, Was.hington. 55E -0 Wr'L-1vvW4V1TTU Lt�-� F:igam qb1fN z1fl?m3zFIF- �A?�7 ��� f cif :5E�-zuc--Mav— fvom 91 gvpw4mr- VAivx> 011.11)4 June 9,1998 Project No. 6G-980.5013 ILES ENGINEERING (:)SSOCIATESi INC. 0 GILES'o ENGINEERING (::)SSOCIATES, INC. •Atlanta, GA GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS • Dallas, TX • Los Angeles, CA • Madison, WI • Milwaukee, WI • Seattle, WA June 9, 1998 • Washington, D:C. Marine Business International Blanchard Plaza 2201 - 61 Avenue, Suite 1301 Seattle, Washington 98121 Attention: Mr. Dennis LaPorte, Vice President Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Office Building 3' Avenue South and Dayton Street Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Dear Mr. LaPorte: In accordance with your request and authorization, we have conducted a Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis for the above -referenced project. The conclusions and .recommendations developed from the analysis are discussed in detail in the accompanying report. We appreciate the opportunity to have been of service on this project. If there are any .questions or if we may be of fiu-ther service, please do not hesitate to call at any time. Respectfully submitted, GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Richard Hyland,. Staff Engineer g erIAA� x John E. Zipper, P.E. off, Regional Manager IE 9 RES t / 24 11807 North Creek Parkway South • Suite 102 • Bothell, WA 98011 425/482-2020 • Fax 425/482-6300 • E-Mail seattle®gilesengr.com TABLE "OF CONTENTS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EXPLORATION AND ANALYSIS PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING 3"DAVENUE SOUTH AND DAYTON STREET EDMONDS, WASHINGTON PROJECT NO.6G-9805013 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................... ....:.... .. 1 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES .......................................:........... 2 3.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................... 3 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .................... ......................... : 3 4.1 Soil Conditions .................................................4 4.2 Groundwater Conditions ............................................ 4 4.3 Seismic Conditions................................................5 5.0. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................. 5 5.1 Site Preparation Recommendations .... . ......................... 5 5.2 Structural Fill ............ ........................ 8 ........... . 5.3 Temporary Excavations, Construction Dewatering, and Permanent Slopes .... 11 5.4 Utility Installation ....................... .................... . 12 5.5 Foundation Design Parameters ...................................... 13 5.6 Slab -on -Grade Design Parameters .................................... 15 5.7 Retaining Wall Design Parameters ................................... 15 5.8 Pavement Design Recommendations .................................. 17 5.9 Conclusion..:...................................................18 APPENDICES -Appendix A -General Comments -Appendix B-Figures -Appendix C-Field Procedures and Exploration Logs -Appendix D-Laboratory Procedures 0 Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. 1998 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EXPLORATION AND ANALYSIS ' PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING 3'D AVENUE SOUTH AND DAYTON STREET . EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ' PROJECT NO.6G-9805013 ' 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following is a brief summary outline of the geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendations. This summary should be read in complete context with the accompanying report for proper. interpretation. ' . Subsurface Conditions . • The subsurface exploration program performed for this study consisted of excavating two trackhoe test pits on May 21, 1998. Test pit.TP-1 extended to, depth of 4 feet and TP-2 extended to a depth of 12. feet below the existing ground surface. • The test pits revealed the site to be underlain by firm to very dense, unweathered native glacial till deposits. A loose, weathered silty sand mantles the upper 1 %z to 2 feet of the site. • No groundwater seepage was encountered in the explorations. A perched ' groundwater condition could develop above the dense glacial till horizon during the winter and spring months.. ' Site Preparation and Development Recommendations • The site should be stripped of vegetation, organic material, and deleterious materials '. including existing fills below planned developments. Subgrades should be stripped to reveal firm native deposits or soils capable of being compacted to a firm, non - yielding condition and a minimum compaction level of 90 percent of ASTM:D-1557. ' • Moisture sensitivity of site soils during -wet weather or wet site conditions should be expected due to the high fines (silt/clay) content. During wet weather,.removal of ' additional material may become necessary to achieve a firm subgrade. 0 Native soils are suitable for reuse as structural fill material during dry weather conditions. However, during wet weather their use may be limited due to moisture ' sensitivity. • Backfilled walls should be designed using equivalent fluid pressures of 35 and 55 pcf for active and at -rest loading conditions respectively. I• Caving of the site soils should be anticipated in excavations which extend through loose surficial native soils or through seepage zones. In dense, unweathered glacial till, caving is not anticipated and temporary sloped cuts up to 1 H:1 V are tentatively thought to be feasible. Cuts should meet the requirements of federal, state, and local ordinances, such as OSHA and WISHA.. Use of temporary bracing, "trench boxes" and/or sloped cuts. may be necessary. ' ::,,,Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 2 ' • Excavation along the east property line for construction of the below -grade parking structure may be on the order of 8 to 13 feet in height. To make these cuts feasible, shoring and/or temporary excavation easements into adjacent property to allow ' sloped cuts will be required. If shoring is required for the project, additional engineering and/or field exploration will be required. • We understand footings along the north property line will be constructed adjacent to ' and/or underneath existing foundation elements. If the new foundation elements are constructed underneath existing foundation elements, it will likely be necessary to temporarily support the existing foundations. Building Foundations and Floors • Foundations should bear on at least firm native deposits at depths of at least 2 feet below existing grades. • Conventional spread and strip footings should be designed with a maximum net allowable soil bearing capacity of 2,000 psf for firm native soils or compacted fill and 4,000 psf for very dense unweathered glacial till at depths generally greater than ' 2 feet. • Slab -on -grade should be founded on structural fill or native soils compacted to at least 92 percent of the modified Proctor. A capillary break layer is recommended for ' moisture protection. 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of services erformed for this phase of the,project included a visual site P P P P J reconnaissance, a subsurface exploration program consisting of test pit explorations, geotechnical ' engineering analyses, and preparation of this report. These services were generally performed as described in our Proposal for Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis (6GP-980506). The purpose of this study was to establish general subsurface conditions from which conclusions and ' recommendations regarding foundation design and earthwork construction could be formulated. This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical design practice for the exclusive use of Marine Business. International, and their agents for specific application to this project. This report has not been prepared to serve as the plans and specifications ' for actual construction without the appropriate interpretation by the project architect, structural engineer, and/or civil engineer. This report and our field services were based on assumed conditions/characteristics of the proposed development where specific information was not available. Available project information at the time of this report preparation included a preliminary building layout and site and parking details of adjacent building. Finished floor elevations and grading plans t GELES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 ' Page 3 were not available. We recommend that the architect, civil engineer and structural engineer, along ' with any other design professionals involved in this project, carefully review our assumptions to determine whether they are consistent with the actual planned development. When discrepancies ' exist, they should be brought to our attention to determine their effect on the conclusions and recommendations provided herein. The project plans and specifications should be submitted to our firm for review to verify that the recommendations provided herein have been correctly interpreted ' and are incorporated into the design. Reproduction and distribution of this report must be authorized by the client and Giles. ' 3.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 The site is located at the northeast corner of 3' Avenue South and Dayton Street in Edmonds, Washington. The site consists of a rectangular parcel that measures approximately 60 by 75 feet overall and is bounded by sidewalks to the south and west, an adjacent building to the north and asphalt parking to the east. An existing restaurant was demolished. Site topography slopes downward from east to west across the proposed office building area with a maximum topographic relief of approximately 10 feet. The project as proposed will consist of constructing a three -level combined living and office space with first level parking. The proposed building will cover the entire 60 by 75-foot parcel. We anticipate that a temporary excavations on the order of 8 to 13 feet in height would be required along the east property line to construct the street level parking area. Due to the proximity of the property line and adjacent asphalt parking, a temporary excavation easement and/or shoring will be required to make this excavation feasible. No grading plan was available at the time of this report preparation. The interior column total loads are 138 kips and exterior column total loads are 65 kips. The site conditions were evaluated for this study on May 21, 1998. Surface, subsurface soil, groundwater; and seismic response conditions are discussed below. The subsurface explorations performed for this study consisted of advancing two trackhoe-excavated test pits extending to depths of 4 and 12 feet. The explorations were advanced using a trackhoe operated by owner's demolition contractor. The explorations were located and logged by a geotechnical engineer from our office. Exploration locations were established based on the preliminary layout of the proposed development and under the constraints of topography and access. The approximate exploration locations are indicated on the Site and Exploration Plan (Figure 1) enclosed in Appendix B. The subsurface conditions described below have been simplified for ease of report interpretation. Copies of the GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 ' Page 4. ' exploration logs and a description of field procedures are enclosed in Appendix C and should be consulted for a more detailed description of the conditions encountered. Laboratory testing information is enclosed in Appendix D. 4.1 Soil Conditions ' Our test pit explorations generally revealed weathered, loose silty fine sand to a depth of 1 to 2 feet. Firm to very dense glacially -consolidated soil, consisting of grey sand with variable amounts of silts and gravel, was typically encountered at depths of 2 feet below the ground surface. These materials are interpreted to be unweathered glacial till. Glacial till consists of a compact mixture of silt, sand, and gravel deposited below glacial ice. In the Puget Sound region, the glacial till and stratigraphically deeper soils were overridden and consolidated by the weight of thick glacial ' ice sheets. (up to several thousand feet. thick) and .therefore these soils exhibit characteristics including low compressibility and high relative density. The glacial till underlying the site consists primarily of silt and sand with low to moderate gravel content. Grain -size distribution curves ' generated by our laboratory for selected soil samples are' included in Appendix D for soil classification purposes. ' The USDA Soil Conservation Service SCS Soil Surve or Snohomish County,Washington maps native soils in the project vicinity as belonging to the group known as Alderwood Urban Land ' Complex. The origins of this soil are as glacial till deposits according to the SCS. Alderwood Urban Land Complexsoils are described by the SCS as having the following characteristics in an undisturbed condition. • Low shrink -swell potential; • pH range of 5.1 to 6.0; ' Negligible permeability below the cemented layer beginning below about 2 feet; Designated in Hydrologic Soil Group C indicating slow infiltration rates; Unified Soil Classification System designation of GM; • Potential for perched water at 2.5 to 3 feet; • Cemented layer beginning at 20 to 40 inches below the surface; ' Moderate risk of corrosion to uncoated steel and concrete. 4.2 Groundwater Conditions ' Groundwater was not encountered in the explorations performed for this study. Moisture contents were typically judged to be moist or slightly above optimum within the upper weathered soils and moist within the dense, unweathered soils. The highest moisture contents would typically GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES,. INC. 0 ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 ' Page 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I be associated with surface soils, due to precipitation, and soils directly above the contact with the dense, unweathered till due to groundwater perching. However, a perched groundwater condition was not observed in the explorations. Perched groundwater may be present where a relatively impermeable soil layer, such as unweathered glacial till, impedes infiltration of water causing it to buildup and saturate overlying more permeable _soil horizons. Groundwater perching would be most likely encountered following significant precipitation and during the winter and spring months. Soil moisture and groundwater conditions should be expected to fluctuate with season, precipitation amounts, and other on- and off -site factors including site utilization. The moisture content of soils. as determined by our laboratory is shown for selected samples on the exploration logs. 4.3 Seismic Conditions According to the Seismic Zone Map of the United States contained in the 1994 Uniform Building Code, the project site lies within seismic risk zone 3. Based on native soil conditions encountered at the site, the subsurface site conditions are interpreted to correspond to a seismic soil profile type S2 as defined by Table 16-J of the 1994 Uniform Building Code. Soil profile type S2 applies to a profile consisting predominantly of dense or medium dense/medium stiff soil where soil depth exceeds 200 feet. We interpret native site soils as falling under the Sc seismic soil profile of the 1997 UBC. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The conditions imposed by the proposed development have been evaluated on the basis of the assumed development plan, the engineering characteristics of the subsurface materials encountered in the explorations, and the anticipated soil behavior both during and after construction. Based on the information obtained from our subsurface exploration program, the project appears feasible with respect to soil and groundwater conditions encountered at the site. The conclusions and recommendations for foundation, slab -on -grade, along with site development recommendations and considerations, are discussed in the following sections of this report. 5.1 Site Preparation Recommendations Based upon the subsurface conditions encountered during exploration, the following site preparation procedures have been developed and include recommendations regarding site drainage, stripping, subgrade protection, proofrolling and subgrade compaction. Site preparation effort is expected to be dependent upon prevalent weather conditions during the earthwork phase of the project. Therefore, bids for site preparation, earthwork, and paving operations should be based upon GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. • Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 8 used as fill may be necessary during dry weather conditions to achieve a moisture content adequately close to optimum to allow required compaction. When moisture is to be added to soil, it must be thoroughly blended throughout the lift to achieve uniform moisture distribution. Dust control measures may also be necessary during dry weather grading. Wet Weather Construction Subgrade stability problems should be expected if site development and grading activities are conducted during wet weather due to the. sensitivity of these soils to moisture and disturbance. In the event .the subgrade is exposed to significant increases in moisture and subgrade stability problems develop, additional undercutting or stabilization techniques should be expected to achieve a stable subgrade due to the moisture -sensitive nature of the fine-grained site soils. If undercutting or stabilization is necessary, the actual depth of undercutting or the appropriate stabilization methods should be determined by a qualified geotechnical representative during construction. Overexcavation/Stabilization Construction during extended wet weather periods could create the need to overexcavate exposed soils if they become disturbed and cannot be recompacted due to elevated moisture content and or weather conditions. The need for overexcavation should be confirmed through continuous monitoring and testing by a Giles representative. Selective drying and recompaction of unsuitable subgrades may be accomplished by scarifying or windrowing surficial material during extended periods of dry and warm weather, generally only occurring during summer months in the Puget ' Sound. region. During winter months, special techniques may be required to achieve stable subgrades and could include 1) overexcavation and replacement with select, granular fill or crushed rock, 2) use of geotextile fabrics, and 3) chemical stabilization with additives such as flyash or cement. We recommend that contingencies for stabilization alternatives be included within the project documents if construction will occur during winter months. We can assist in developing contingency plans once grading plans and construction scheduled have been developed. Frozen Subgrades If earthwork takes place during freezing conditions, all exposed subgrades should be allowed to thaw and then be recompacted prior to placing subsequent lifts of structural fill or foundation �. components. Alternatively, the frozen material could be stripped from the subgrade to reveal unfrozen soil prior to placing subsequent lifts of fill or foundation components. The frozen soil should not be reused as structural fill until. allowed to thaw and adjusted to the proper moisture ' content, which may not be possible during winter months. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Proposed Office Building EZinonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 9 5.2 Structural Fill . All structural fill should be placed in accordance with the recommendations presented herein for structural fill. Prior to the placement of structural fill, all surfaces to receive fill . should be prepared as previously recommended. Structural fill includes any fill material placed under footings, pavements, or other permanent structures or facilities. The use of on -site soils for structural fill should be limited as described in this report. Materials typically used for import structural. fill include clean, well -graded sand and gravel ("pit -run"); clean sand; various mixtures of gravel; crushed rock; controlled -density fill (CDF); and lean -mix concrete. Recycled concrete derived from crushed parent material is also useful for structural fill provided the material is thoroughly crushed to a size deemed appropriate by the geotechnical engineer (usually less than 2 inches). Structural f.11 materials should be free of deleterious, organic, or frozen matter and should contain no chemicals that may result in the material being classified as "contaminated". Structural fill for raising site grades can consist of a combination of "common" and "select ' granular" material. Select granular fill should contain less than 5 percent by weight passing the U.S. No. 200' sieve, based on the fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve. Select granular fill is recommended for use in wet weather conditions and wet site and subgrade conditions, as discussed ' in the pertinent sections of this report. Common structural fill should consist of predominantly .granular soil, free of organics and deleterious materials, which is compactable to a firm and unyielding condition at the specified compaction levels. Common structural fill should meet the ' requirements of specification 9-03.14(3), "Common Borrow" in the 1996 WSDOT/APWA Standard Specificationsfor Road Bridge, and Municipal Construction. Select structural fill should meet the minimum requirements of specification 9-03.14(2) "Select Borrow" except that the percent passing ' the No. 200 sieve should be reduced to 5 percent maximum. ' The suitability of soils used for structural fill depends primarily on the gradation and moisture content of the soil when it is placed. As the fines content (that portion passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) of a soil increases, it becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and I adequate compaction becomes more difficult or impossible to achieve. Soils containing more than about 5 percent fines by weight cannot be consistently compacted to the recommended degree when the moisture content is more than about 2 percent above or below optimum. Drying of the soils may Ionly be accomplished during favorable dry weather by methods such as scarifying and windrowing. It should be noted that the placement of structural fill is in many cases weather -dependent and delays due to inclement weather are common even when using select granular fill. I� GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 10 ' When moisture conditioning of the soils is required to increase moisture content of dry -of - optimum soils, we recommend that the soils be uniformly blended with the added moisture to provide a uniform moisture content throughout the affected soils. Use of tillers or thorough blending ' using excavators or repeated windrowing with bladed equipment is recommended. Simply spraying the top of individual lifts with water does not adequately moisture condition the soil. ' Structural fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. Individual lifts should be compacted such that a minimum density of at least 90 percent of the modified Proctor ' maximum dry density is achieved (ASTM:D-1557). Higher compaction levels should be achieved where called for -in the project specifications or the local development standards or elsewhere in this report. We recommended that a geotechnical engineering representative be present during the ' placement of structural fill to observe the work and perform a representative number of in -place density tests. In this way, the adequacy of earthwork may be evaluated, as grading progresses. ' Reuse of On -Site Soil Reuse of the native glacial till soils for structural fill is considered feasible provided soils are ' free of organic matter and moisture content can be adjusted to achieve proper compaction levels. The native soils should be considered highly moisture -sensitive due to their higkfines (silt and clay) content and generally fine granular fraction. During wet weather, elevated moisture content would ' preclude use of on -site soils for fill unless they are adequately protected from excessive moisture and/or can be dried back during favorable weather. Therefore, for planning purposes, we recommend that wet season construction include contingencies for use of imported select granular ' fill for all structural fill applications in the event that elevated moisture and weather conditions preclude reuse of on -site soils. ' Recommended Compaction Levels ' The following table summarizes the recommended compaction levels based on ASTM:D- 1557 (modified Proctor) for various locations of the proposed project and may be incorporated into the project specifications. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 1 1 n 1 1 1 r 1 n Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 11 Recommended Minimum Compaction Levels Location Depth Compaction (6/9) Below Building All 92 Pavement (Asphalt or Concrete) Below 1 foot 90 Top foot of subgrade 95 Utilities Location controls 90 - 95 Retaining Wall Backftll All 90 (with hand -operated equipment) Landsca a All 85 - 90 final use controls) 5.3 Temporary Excavations. Construction Dewatering. and Permanent Slopes Some excavation bank stability problems for foundation and utility construction may occur where excavations extend into loose cohesionless soil, undocumented fill, or saturated zones. Generally, only the upper 2 feet of the site soils were considered to be in a loose condition. Caving of the test pit walls was not observed. Temporary slope stability is a function of many factors including the presence and abundance of groundwater, the type and density of the various soil strata, the depth of excavation, surcharge loadings adjacent to the excavation, and the length of time and weather conditions while the excavation remains open. It is exceedingly difficult under these variable circumstances to preestablish a safe and"maintenance free" temporary excavation. slope angle. Therefore, it should be the responsibility of the contractor to maintain safe slope configurations since the contractor is continuously at the job site, able to control some of the factors, and able to observe and alter the nature and condition of the cut slopes. We recommend. that excavations be adequately sloped or braced to prevent injury of workmen from local sloughing and spalling. All excavations including utilities should conform to applicable sloping or shoring standards for worker access such as WISHA and OSHA. Temporary slope angles of 1H:1V are tentatively recommended for excavations in dense, unweathered glacial till where groundwater is not present. We anticipate that these soils would fall into a Type A classification according to WAC Chapter 296-155, Part N, "Excavation, Trenching, and Shoring". The upper weathered soils would fall under a Type C classification and temporary slope angles of 1.5H:1 V are tentatively recommended. Excavations adjacent to the east, south; and west property line can be sloped, provided that ' temporary easements can be obtained. The top of the cuts should be protected with asphalt berms, sandbags, or other means to prevent sheet flow runoff from entering the site. If easements cannot GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 1 Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 12 be obtained, temporary shoring may be required. Design of temporary shoring is beyond our authorized scope of services. If temporary shoring is required, it is possible that cantilever soldier piles can be used. Additional field exploration and engineering analysis is recommended, if shoring is required: ' We recommend that any excavations which extend below a 2H:1 V plan subtended down from existing footings from the adjacent building be reviewed by our firm. Slot cut underpinning may be required for excavations below the level of the existing footings. Construction Dewatering Groundwater was not encountered in the explorations. Slight seepage due to groundwater perching above the dense glacial till contact may be possible during wet weather. It is likely that any accumulated water in excavations could be removed with sump pumps placed directly in the. excavation. Permanent Slopes We generally recommend all permanent slopes be designed at a 211:1 V (Horizontal:Vertical) inclination or flatter. With slopes steeper than about 2H:1V, topsoil erodes readily and it is more difficult and time consuming to establish vegetation for slope protection. Some sluffing of surficial soils should be expected during wet weather until vegetation has become established. The 1996 Standard Specificationsfor Roa4 Bridge, and Municipal Construction provides guidelines under "Placing Jute Matting, Erosion Control Blanket, or Clear Plastic Covering." which may be incorporated for protection of slopes. ■ 5.4 Utility Installation ' All utility subgrades should be firm and unyielding, and free of all soils which are loose, disturbed, or pumping. Such soils should be removed and replaced, if necessary. All structural fill used to replace overexcavated soils should be compacted as specified and as recommended in this ' report. Trenching and shoring should conform to applicable regulations such as WISHA and OSHA. Pipe bedding and cover should be placed according to utility manufacturer's ' recommendations and local ordinances. Generally, we recommend that a minimum of 6 inches of bedding material be placed in the trench bottom. Bedding material for rigid and flexible pipe should conform with Sections 9-03.15 and 9-03.16, respectively, of the 1996 WSDOT/APWA Standard m GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Proposed. Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 13 Specifications for Roag Bridge, and Municipal Construction. Native, on -site soils are not suited for use as bedding material. All excavations should be wide enough to allow for compaction around the haunches of pipes. Otherwise, materials such as controlled density fill or pea gravel ' could be used to reduce the compactive effort required. ' Backfilling for the remainder of the trenches could be completed utilizing common fill or select granular fill, depending on soil moisture and weather conditions. Compaction of backfill material should be accomplished with soils within f2 percent of their optimum moisture content in ' order to achieve the minimum. specified compaction levels set forth in this report and project specifications. However, initial lift thickness could be increased to levels recommended by the manufacture to protect utilities from damage by compacting equipment. It may be necessary to ' separate soils as they are excavated according to their suitability for reuse. Soils which are to be reused should be protected while stockpiled. 5.5 Foundation Design Parameters The proposed new building may be supported by conventional spread footings founded on at least firm native soils (moderately weathered or unweathered glacial till), or on properly compacted new structural fill placed above suitably prepared subgrades per the recommendations in this report. The depth to suitable bearing deposits for conventional foundations disclosed in the test pits is at least 2 feet below existing grades. Structural fill used to raise site grades below buildings should be compacted to a minimum of 92 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. A minimum embedment depth of not less than 18 inches for exterior footings, and not less than 12 inches for interior footings should be maintained for frost protection. We recommend a minimum footing width of 18 inches for continuous footings and 24 inches for isolated footings. Foundations should not be set in or above loose or disturbed soils or any existing uncontrolled fill. As some of the site soils are silty, site work in the presence of water or. -during wet weather could disturb the bearing strata.. The contractor should avoid disturbance of these soils and limit traffic across the building pad or foundation area during wet weather. To minimize disturbance associated with foundation form work and reinforcement bar placement, the use of a lean concrete "mud mat" may be required during very wet site conditions.. Considering the provided structural loads, the foundations could be designed with allowable soil bearing pressures of 2,000 pounds per square foot for foundations placed on at least firm native soils or on structural fill constructed as described above. A bearing pressure of up to 4,000 psf may be used for foundation bearing on undisturbed native unweathered glacial till generally encountered GELES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. � s • ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds; Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 14 ' at least 2 feet below existing grades. These allowable bearing pressures may be increased by up to one-third to accommodate transient seismic and wind loads. Ultimate passive resistance values for the fill and native'glacial till'soilsinay be assumed to be 250 pounds per cubic feet expressed as ' equivalent fluid weights beginning at a depth 1 foot below finished grade. An ultimate base friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used for concrete foundations cast neatly against undisturbed native soils or properly compacted structural fill. Estimated Settlement ' Assuming the foundation elements are founded on the prescribed bearing strata, we anticipate the total settlement would be essentially elastic in nature and should_ be less than % inch, with ' differential settlement on the order, of one-half of the total. If disturbed or soft materials are left within the footing area prior to concrete placement, future settlements may be greatly increased. For this reason, the condition of the footing subgrade should be closely monitored by a qualified ' geotechnical representative prior to concrete placement to confirm that the condition of the bearing soils are consistent with those assumed during design. ! Foundation Construction Considerations ' Currently, the depth and condition of the existing foundation elements for the adjacent building, is unknown. We recommend excavations for new footings, do not extend below adjacent existing footings. If construction of new footings extends below existing foundation elements, ' additional engineering will be required. Slot -cut underpinning may be required for footings constructed below existing adjacent foundations. erimeter Drainage We recommend that the building be provided with a perimeter footing drain system -to collect free water. Footing drains with cleanouts should consist of at least 4-inch diameter, perforated, PVC pipe fully enveloped in pea gravel or washed rock and be placed at the footing subgrade elevation around the outside perimeter of the foundation. The pea gravel envelope should be wrapped on the ' top and sides with a non -woven geotextile fabric to prevent the migration of fine-grained soils into the drain rock. All drainage systems should be sloped to drain by gravity to a storm sewer or other suitable discharge location. ' Water from dow nspouts and surface water should be independently collected and routed to a storm sewer. This water must not be allowed to enter the footing drain system. Additionally, it ' is recommended that the finished grades around the building be designed to route surface water away from the building. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 � • ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No..6G-9805013 Page 15 ' Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage from the building areas at all times. Water must not be allowed to pond or to collect adjacent to foundations or within the immediate building area. It is recommended that a. gradient of at least 3 percent for a minimum ' distance of 10 feet from the building perimeter be provided, except in paved locations. In paved locations, a minimum gradient of 1 percent should be provided unless provisions are included for collection and disposal of surface water adjacent to the structure. 5.6 Slab -on -Grade Design Parameters ' Slab -on -grade floor support would be feasible provided subgrades are as previously prepared P Y discussed for I foundations. Floor slab subgrade should consist of at least firm native soil or fill ' compacted to a minimum of 92 percent of modified Proctor maximum dry density. Moisture Protection: To minimize moisture infiltration, we recommend that slab -on -grade ' floors be underlain by the following layers (top to bottom): ► Curing Course - A 2-inch thick layer of clean sand to allow proper curing of the ' concrete. slab and to protect the vapor barrier; ► Vapor Barrier - A layer of plastic sheeting (such as Crosstuffg) to prevent the upward migration of ground moisture vapors; ' ► Capil a Break -A nominal 4-inch thickness of washed crushed rock or pea gravel containing. less than 3 percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve, based on that soil ' fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve with at least 30 percent retained on the U.S. No. 4 sieve. Any holes or punctures in the vapor barrier membrane should be repaired prior to the placement of the floor slab concrete. 5.7 Retaininta Wall Design Paramete ' The following general wall design parameters are offered. Walls may be designed as a "restrained" retaining wall based on "at rest" earth pressure, plus any surcharge on top of the wall as described below, if the wall is attached to the building and/or movement is not acceptable. The ' wall could also be designed based on "active" earth pressure, if the wall is not part of the building and some movement of the retaining wall is acceptable. We anticipate. that this lateral movement could equal at least ''/< inch or 0.2 percent of the wall height, whichever is greater. Subgrades should be compacted to at least 92 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM:D- 155 7) and may require select pit run or crushed rock base below footings if subgrade conditions cannot be compacted to this minimum level. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. • Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 16 The, following table, Wall Design Criteria, presents the recommended soil related design parameters for cantilever retaining walls with level backfill behind the wall. Giles should be contacted for alternate recommendations if sloped backfill surfaces are planned. Design of the wall should incorporate an adequate factor -of -safety against both overturning (FS=2.0) and sliding (FS=1.5). The overturning resultant should also fall within the center third (kern) of the retaining walls footing for stability, or the design must be rechecked with a limited bearing surface area. Wall*Design Criteria "At -Rest" Conditions 55 psf/ foot of depth,.z "Active" Conditions 35 psf/ foot of depth,., Passive Earth Pressure on Low Side of Wall (Allowable) Neglect upper 1 foot; then 200 psf/lineal foot of depth Soil Parameters (Compacted Select Backfill) y=130 pcf.. (�=35 degrees Soil -Footing Coefficient of Sliding Friction (ultimate) 0.40 Traffic Surcharge 250 psf (for car loads) 500 psf (for truck loads) Recommended Backfill Compaction 90 percent (ASTM D-1557 1. For -granular bacictill y=130 pcf 2. At compaction levels of approximately 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum To minimize the lateral earth pressure and prevent buildup of water pressure against the walls, it is recommended that continuous footing drains (with cleanouts) be provided at the base of the walls. The footing drains should consist of perforated pipe, sloped to drain, with perforations placed down and enveloped by 6 inches of pea gravel in all directions. The backfill adjacent to and extending a lateral distance behind the walls a minimum of 2 feet should consist of free -draining granular material. All free draining backfill should contain less than 3 percent fines (passing U.S. No. 200 sieve) based upon the fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve with at least 30 percent retained on the U.S. No. 4 sieve. Native soils are not suitable for this use. It should be realized that the primary purpose of the free -draining material is reduction of hydrostatic pressure. Some potential for moisture to contact the back face of the wall may exist, even with this treatment, which may require that more extensive waterproofing be specified for walls which require interior moisture - sensitive finishes. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington. ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 17 Compaction of the backfill is recommended to achieve a density of 90 percent of the modified Proctor density. Soil compactors place transient surcharges on the backfill. Consequently, only light hand -operated equipment is recommended within 3 feet of walls_ so that excessive stress ' is imposed on the walls. ' 5.8. Pavement Design Recommendations.. It must be recognized that pavement design is a compromise between high initial cost and little maintenance on one side and low initial cost. coupled with the need for periodic repairs. As a ' result, the owner will need to take part in the development of an appropriate pavement section. Critical features which govern the. durability of the surface include the stability of the subgrade soils, the traffic volume, and the frequency of use by heavy vehicles. Subgrade Pavement subgrades should be adequately stripped per the preceding recommendations of this report to expose a subgrade capable of being compacted to the recommended level of 95 percent in the upper 1 foot and 90 percent below 1-foot depth (ASTM:D-1557). Subgrades should be evaluated in thepresence of a qualified geotechnical representative to detect any soft and yielding areas which may need to be overexcavated prior to paving. Subgrade evaluation could consist of ' proofrolling with a fully loaded dump truck in the presence of a qualified geotechnical representative. In the case of wet weather construction, the prepared subgrade could be protected ' with Asphalt -Treated Base (ATB) during construction with final Class B paving scheduled for the end of construction. Existing pavements could temporarily be left in place to protect subgrades outside of the new building area during construction. In general, compaction of subgrades and fills ' below pavement areas should conform to WSDOT Standard Specification 2-03.3(1)C Method B except that the reference maximum dry density should be based upon the modified Proctor test (ASTM:D-1557 or AASHTO T-180). Asphaltic Concrete Pavement ' Specifications for pavements and crushed base/top course should conform to those presented in the 1996 Washington State Department of Transportation, Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction. In lieu of crushed gravel base/top course, asphalt treated base ' (ATB) can be substituted. The ATB would provide a more durable wearing surface if the pavement GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. ' Proposed, Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 ' Page 18 subgrade areas will be exposed to construction traffic prior to final paving with Class B asphalt. Some degradation of the ATB should be expected if it is subjected to concentrated construction traffic. Repair of degraded areas would be required prior to final Class B paving. Recommended PavementSections Use Asphalt Thickness :: ' Base course ATB* Substitute'.. ' (inches) ' .''..Thickness (Inches) (Inches) _. . Heavy Trucks/Buses 3 6 4 ' Light Traffic/Parkin i t L g 3 4 3 *Asphalt Treated Base; may, be substituted for Crushed Base/Top Course beneath Class B Asphalt Base course should meet the requirements for crushed surfacing in Section 9-03.9(3) of the ' Standard Specifications. Asphalt concrete pavement should be Class B as addressed in Sections 5- 04 and.9-03.8 of the Standard Specifications. Asphalt -Treated Base (ATB) may be substituted for the granular base. Sections 4-06.3, 5-04, and 9-03.6 of the WSDOT Standard Specifications apply ' to the use of ATB... Subbase material should meet the recommendations for select granular fill contained elsewhere in this report. Recommended pavement sections are based on assumed traffic loadings. Pavement design recommendations assume proper drainage and construction monitoring and are based on AASHTO ' Design parameters are for a 20-year design period. However, continual flexible pavement maintenance along with a major rehabilitation after about ±8 to 10 years should be expected to obtain a 20-year service :life. . 5.9 Conclusion ' The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based, in part, on the explorations, accomplished for this study. The number, location, and depth of the explorations were completed within the constraints of budget and site access so as to yield the information to formulate ' the recommendations. Project plans were in the preliminary stage at the time of this report preparation. We therefore recommend that we be provided the opportunity for general review of the project plans and specifications when they become vailable in order to confirm that the ' recommendations and design considerations presented in this report have been properly interpreted and implemented into the project design package. I GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 19 The integrity of earthwork, structural fill placement, and foundation and pavement performance depend greatly on proper site preparation and construction procedures. We recommend that we be retained to provide. geotechnical engineering services during the earthwork and foundation construction phases of the project. If variations in the subsurface conditions are observed at that time, we Would be able: to provide additional geotechnical engineering recommendations to the contractor and design team in a timely manner as the project construction progresses. Giles EngineeringAssociates, Inc. appreciates the opportunity to have been of service on this ' project and would be pleased to discuss the contents of this report or other aspects of this project with you at your convenience. If you have any.questions, please do not hesitate to call. I• GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. A r- • w 441 � t� W C� GENERAL COMMENTS The soil samples obtained during the subsurface exploration will be retained for a period of ' thirty days. If no instructions are.received, they will be disposed.of at that time. ' This report has been prepared exclusively for the client in order to aid in the evaluation of this property and to assist the architects and engineers in the design and preparation of the project plans and specifications. Copies of this report may be provided to contractor(s), with contract documents, toscose information relative to this project. The report, however, has not been prepared to serve as the plans and -specifications for actual construction without the appropriate interpretation by the project. architect, structural engineer,. and/or civil engineer. Reproduction and distribution of this ' report must be authorized by the client and Giles. This report has been based on assumed conditions/characteristics of the proposed ' development where specific information was not available. It is recommended that the architect, civil engineer and structural engineer along with any other design professionals involved in this project carefully review these assumptions to ensure they are consistent with the actual planned development. ' When discrepancies exist, they should be brought to our attention to ensure they do not affect the conclusions and.recommendations provided herein. The project plans and specifications may also be ' submitted to Giles for review to ensure that the geotechnical related conclusions and. recommendations provided herein have been correctly interpreted. ' The analysis of this site was based on a subsoil profile interpolated from a limited subsurface exploration. If the actual conditions encountered during construction vary from those indicated by the borings, Giles must be contacted immediately to determine if the conditions alter the ' recommendations contained herein. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report have been promulgated in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practice in the field of geotechnical engineering. No other warranty is either expressed or implied. 17 APPENDIX B FIGURES The Site and Exploration Plan contained herein was prepared based upon information supplied by Giles' client, or others, along with Giles' field measurements and observations. The diagram is presented for conceptual purposes only and is intended to assist the reader in report interpretation. Other figures are presented to aid in interpretation of the report. Sources of the figures are as indicated. DAYTON STREET " TEST PIT LOCATION RELATIVE TO EXISTING BUILDING PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING 1 3RD AVENUE SOUTH AND DAYTON 1f STREET EDMONDS, WASHINGTON SITE EXPLORATION PLAN ' FIGURE 1 Job No. 6G-9805013 Design: RNH Drawn: I RNH Date: JUNE 2,1998 Scale: 1" = 20' PARII A G 3ANK) W GILES ENGINEERING t ►SSOCIATES, INC. 1-07 APPENDIX C FIELD PROCEDURES AND EXPLORATIONL0GS I The field operations were conducted in general accordance with the procedures ' recommended by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASYM designation D 420 entitled "Standard Guide for Sampling Soil and Rock" andlor other relevant specifications. Soil samples were preserved and transported to Giles' laboratory in general accordance with the, procedures recommended by ASTM designation D-4220 entitled "standard practice for preserving and transporting soil samples. " Brief descriptions of _the sampling, testing and field procedures commonly performed by Giles are provided herein. I The Exploration Logs and related information enclosed herein depict the subsurface (soil and water) conditions encountered at the specific exploration locations on the date that the • exploration was performed. Subsurface conditions may differ between exploration locations and within areas of the site that were not explored. The subsurface conditions may also change at the exploration locations over the passage of time. I 11 T • GENERAL FIELD PROCEDURES Test Pit Locations The test pits were located on -site by pacing from existing site features and/or apparent property lines using information on the site map provided to Giles. Test pit locations shown on the Site and Exploration Plan are approximate and based on locations as estimated in the field. Test Pit Exploration Procedures The field. exploration phase of this project consisted of excavating test pits using a rubber - tired backhoe operated by a local excavating contractor working under subcontract to Giles. The test pits permitted a detailed evaluation of the character of the shallow subsurface soils underlying the proposed. development. Each testpit was continually logged and observed by an experienced staff level geotechnical engineer. In situ strength and quality attributes of materials encountered were estimated by our field observer based on experience with similar soils and the difficulty incurred during excavation. Relative density estimates are presented on the test pit logs; however, the densities are not based on actual SPT blow counts. Density of the soils was estimated using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer methods, as described in ASTM Special Publication No. 399. The Dynamic Cone Penetrometer blowcount is labeled Nc on the enclosed test pit logs. Representative samples of the soils in the test pits were retrieved, classified in the field and transported to our laboratory for a detailed evaluation and classification as deemed necessary. The test pit logs are presented subsequently and the soil descriptions are based on the inspection of the samples secured, field logs and laboratory testing. Test Pit Backfill Procedures Following completion of the test pit exploration, the excavations were loosely backftlled with the excavated soils. A limited degree of compaction was performed with the backhoe bucket. However, if test .pits will be located under new foundations, they should be reexcavated and compacted to comply with project specifications. GILES SGINEERING ASSOCIA , INC. 11807 North Creek Par y South, Suite 102, Bothell, Washington (425) 482-2020, 25) 482-6300 (FAX) RECORD OF TEST PIT EXPLORATIONS Test Pit TP-1 Location: See Site and Exploration Plan Approximate ground surface -elevation (ft): Not established Project:. 3rd Avenue So..& Dayton Street Project No: 6G-9805013 Date Excavated: May 21, 1998 Depth (ft) Material Description NC Sample Testing 1 Very dense, moist, grey, gravelly SAND with little silt (Unweathered Glacial Till) Very dense, moist, grey, gravelly SAND with little silt, trace cobbles 1 2 2 48 S-1 W=10 3 3 4 4 5011" S-2. ... w=10 5 Test pit terminated at 4'-01' w=moisture content 5 6 6 7. 7 8 8 9 9 10. 1 10 No seepage observed No caving observed GILES TGINEERING ASSOCIAT S, INC. ' 11807 North Creek ParSouth, Suite 102, Bothell, Washington (425) 482-20205) 482-6300 RECORD OF TEST PIT EXPLORATIONS - Test Pit TP-2 Project: 3rd Avenue So. &Dayton Street Location! See Site and Exploration Plan Project No: 6G-9805013 . ' Approximate ground surface elevation (ft): Not established Date Excavated: May 21, 1998 Depth Material Description Nc Sample Testing ' (ft) 1 Loose, moist, dark brown, fine to medium SAND with trace to little 1 7 S-1 w=12 silt, little gravel 2 Very dense, moist, grey, gravelly SAND with little silt (Unweathered 2 501111. S-2 w=11 ' Glacial Till) 3 3 ' 4 Very dense, moist, grey, gravelly SAND with little silt, trace cobbles 4 501.1 S-3 w=9 5 .5 Grades to little cobbles 6 6 7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8 Firm, moist, grey, fine to medium SAND with trace silt, trace gravel, 8 26 S-4 w=8 trace cobbles 9 9 --------- Very dense, moist, grey, fine to medium SAND with little silt, little 10 gravel 10 5011" S-5 w=11 11 11 ' I12 Very dense, moist, grey, gravelly, silty SAND 12 5011" S-6 w=14 w=moisture content No seepage observed No caving observed I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I APPENDIX D LABORATORY TESTING AND SOIL CLASSIFICATION Laboratory testing was conducted under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer in general accordance with the procedures recommended by the American Societyfor Testing and Materials (ASTM and/or other relevant specifications. Brief descriptions of laboratory procedures, testing results, and soil classifications are included herein. Moisture Content (MC) (ASTM.�D-221¢) Moisture content is defined as the ratio of the weight of water contained within a soil sample to the weight of the dry solids within the sample.. Moisture content is expressed as a percentage. Particle Size Distribution (ASTM.-D421. D-422. D-1140) This test is performed. to determine the distribution of specific particle sizes (diameters) within a soil sample. The distribution of coarse -grained soil particles (sand.. and: gravel) is determined from a 'Sieve analysis', which is conducted by passing the sample through a series of . nested.sieves. The distribution of fine grained soil particles (silt and clay) is determined from an hydrometer analysis', which is based on the sedimentation of particles suspended in water. Classifccation ofSam,I21es Each soil sample was visually -manually classfied, based on texture and plasticity, in general accordance with the Unified Soil.Classification System (ASTM.-D-2488-75). The classifications are reported on'the exploration logs. J GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Atlanta, GA (770) 458-3399 (770) 45$-3998 (Fax No.) , Dallas, TX (214) 358-5885 (214) 358-5884 (Fax No.) Los Angeles, CA (714) 779-0052 (714) 779-0068 (Fax No.) Madison, WI (608) 838-9708 (608) 838-3194 (Fax No.) Milwaukee, WI (414) 544-0118 (414) 549-5868 (Fax No.) . Seattle; WA (425) 481-2020 (425) 482-6300 (Fax No.) Washington, D.C. (410)312-9950 (410) 312-9955 (Fax No.) GILES ENGINEERING ()SSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS f, . n Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 6 ' the time of year that construction .will proceed. We recommend that a representative of our firm observe the soil conditions prior to and during site preparation activities to evaluate. the suitability of stripped subgrades prior to placement of fill, foundation elements, and paving. ' Site ina e d ra g ur Surface Water Control ' Adequate temporary and permanent control of surface water runoff and subsurface seepage will be required in order to allow site access, grading, and construction of underground utilities to proceed. Excavation, filling, subgrade and grade preparation should be performed in a manner and sequence that will provide drainage at all times and proper control of erosion. Surface water should be pumped or drained to provide a suitable working platform. Successful drainage of local saturated ' zones due to accumulations of surface water runoff could be accomplished by localized ditching and/or the installation of cut-off trenches, berms, or french drains.. Groundwater from upgradient sources could be intercepted with cutoff trenches or french drains and routed around the work area. Sump pumps could be required for foundation (and other) excavations during wet season construction. Standing water and loose, saturated soils ("mud") should be removed from subgrades prior to placement of fill or structural concrete. The soil should be provided with temporary drainage and siltation control as required by local standards. Site S pig learing " ' Preparation of the p site should include the removal of any vegetation, topsoil, fill, debris or any other deleterious materials which may, exist at the time of development. Based on the condition t of the site at the time of exploration, site clearing activities are anticipated to be accomplished during the demolition phase of work. Subarade Preparation Once the site has been stripped to reveal a non -organic subgrade, we recommend that the stripped subgrade be evaluated by a representative of our firm prior to placement of structural fill or concrete. Methods for subgrade evaluation could include probing and/or proofrolling with appropriate heavy, wheeled construction equipment. to detect any soft or yielding areas which may need to be removed and replaced. However, the need for subgrade evaluation methods such as proofrolling are best determined during construction by the geotechnical engineer and would be dependent on factors such as weather and subgrade conditions. Following site stripping and subgrade evaluation, the subgrades should be scarified as deemed necessary by the geotechnical engineer, moisture conditioned and recompacted to at least 90 percent of the modified Proctor (ASTM:D-1557-91) maximum density. During wet weather or GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 7 wet site conditions, a stable subgrade may be difficult to achieve. due to the moisture sensitivity of the site soils and could require additional stripping or other subgrade stabilization methods if exposed subgrade soils become saturated and are disturbed. .Appropriate subgrade protection ' measures, as outlined subsequently, should be employed.: Following subgrade preparation, structural fill may be placed in lifts with suitable compacted structural fill material. The selection, placement and compaction of structural fill should be performed in accordance with the project specifications iand the recommendations contained in this report. Subgrade Protec i . Soils exposed by subgrade preparation operations are anticipated to consist of silty sand (unweathered glacial till - see "Soil Gradation Curves" in Appendix D). Given the relatively high fines content (silt/clay), the site soils are considered highly moisture -sensitive. Moisture -sensitive soils are prone to softening when disturbed in the presence of excess moisture. Therefore, site preparation and initial construction activities, particularly site stripping, should be planned to minimize disturbance to .the existing ground surface particularly during extended wet weather periods and the wet season (typically October through May) in order to reduce possible export soil volumes.. Ideally, initial earthwork would be planned for the drier summer season. Subgrade protection measures could include but are not limited to the following: ' A working drainage system (as outlined above) which must be implemented into the construction sequence to protect the subgrade from excessive amounts of water. • Use of dedicated traffic areas to limit to lateral extent of subgrade disturbance. t During wet site conditions, concentrated equipment traffic should not be allowed on exposed subgrade areas. • Placement of fill off an advancing pad so as not to traffic exposed, moisture -sensitive site soils. • "Sealing" of subgrades with a smooth drum roller and sloping subgrades.to drain, if possible, before wet weather leads to their. deterioration. Preparation of a stable subgrade will be dependent in part on the contractor's ability to implement ' a well -planned grading sequence which incorporates adequate subgrade protection measures. Dry Weather Grading During dry weather and site conditions, extensive undercutting or overexcavation- is not anticipated to be required. However, if loose fill or previously disturbed soils are encountered, some localized overexcavation may be necessary. Moisture conditioning of the site soils which are to be GALES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Drainage Report for the 3rd & Dayton Mixed -Use Building , '\ . 90(' �A S U�0 Prepared for: Cliarles Greenberg Triad Law Group 128 3 rd Avenue South Edmonds, WA 98020 Prepared by: Mark Davis Reviewed by: RECEIVED Jim Kresge, P.E. 10/o APR - 2. 2004 January 20, 2004 COUNTER STREET FILE 0-1 -L- rIT L, ffr FdW'v HI "A- BURKHOLDER ASSOCIATES, L LC LAND USE PLANNING / CIVIL ENGINEERING Drainage Report for the 3Id & Dayton Mixed -Use Building �E,CE:" PERMIT CoUr.i" -' RECEIVED APR - 2 2004 PERMIT COUNTER Prepared for: Charles Greenberg Triad Law Group 128 3`d Avenue South Edmonds, WA 98020 Prepared by: Mark Davis Reviewed by: Jim Kresge, P.E. January 20, 2004 hEET FILE r, v �M EXPIRES 3 Drainage Report for the 3rd & Dayton Mixed -Use Building Prepared for: Charles Greenberg Triad Law Group 128 3rd Avenue South Edmonds, WA 98020 Prepared by: Mark Davis Reviewed by: Jim Kresge, P.E. January 20, 2004 CONTENTS Introduction 1 Existing Conditions - 1 Developed Conditions 2 Downstream Drainage Analysis 3 Upstream Drainage Analysis 3 Erosion Risk Assessment 3 Appendix 4 Summary of Results Basin Summary Runoff Curve Number & Time of Concentration Drainage calculations Pump Specifications Ih INTRODUCTION The proposed project will include the development of a three-story, 4500 square foot mixed -use building and construction of a driveway access through existing frontage. The proposed development is located on the corner of 3rd Avenue South and Dayton Street in the City of Edmonds, Washington. Runoff from building will be handled by an underground pipe and pumped to the existing storm -drainage system within 3rd Avenue. EXISTING CONDITIONS The 4500 sq. ft. site has no existing structures, except for several railroad tie bulkheads located around the perimeter of the site. The site slopes to the southwest at a 9% grade and is covered with patches of grass. The site is bounded to the north and east by developed commercial lots and to the south by Dayton Street and to the west by 3rd Avenue South. The existing frontage along 3rd Avenue and Dayton Street consist of curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscape strip. The SCS Snohomish County Soil Survey identifies the predominant soil type throughout the site as Alderwood Urban Land Complex. DEVELOPED CONDITIONS The proposed project will include the construction of a three-story, mixed -use building that will occupy 94% of the site. The frontage along P Avenue will be reconstructed to facilitate a proposed high -traffic driveway access for the building. An underground stormwater detention pipe will be constructed to handle roof runoff from the building. Discharge from the detention pipe will be directed west to a type 2 catch basin, which is equipped with a Mnrs S25 or equivalent storm drain pump, to force water into the existing pipe conveyance system along 3` Avenue South. The City of Edmonds Municipal Code Section 18.30.060(1)(c) requires that stormwater be released from new developments at peak rates not exceeding pre - development rates as calculated for 24-hour storms with 10-year and 100-year recurrence frequencies. A streambank erosion criterion, based on the 2-year, 24 hour storm peak discharge rate, does not apply to this project because it discharges directly to a pipe system rather than an open channel. The detention pipes will be sized per City of Edmonds guidelines to provide storage for runoff from the 10- and 100-year, 24-hour design storm over the entire building area. Outlet structures will release stormwater at rates not to exceed the current runoff rates for the 10-year and 100-year 24-hour design storms. Per City of Edmonds staff, no volume correction factor has been used in the design of the detention pipes. The 30" detention pipe will be approximately 36-ft long. The downstream catch basin will include a 12" restrictor with orifice for flow control. The maximum live storage water depth will be approximately 2.06 feet. Water quality is not required because roof runoff is only being detained and requires no water quality treatment. The "Waterworks" program with the Santa Barbara Unit Hydrograph (SBUH) method and Type lA rainfall distribution was used in the design of the proposed detention facilities. DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS Runoff from the site will be conveyed to the existing storm drainage system along 3�d Avenue South. The drainage system continues south and west until it eventually discharges into Puget Sound approximately 2000 feet west of the site. Because peak stormwater discharges from the developed site will not be increased from existing rates, no significant impact on downstream conveyances is anticipated. UPSTREAM ANALYSIS The site is surrounded by existing buildings and frontage structures that do not contribute any runoff to the site, thus there will be no adverse impacts to any upstream drainage areas. EROSION RISK ASSESSMENT & PROPOSED CONTROL METHODS Due to the following site characteristics, the erosion risk category for this site will be LOW: • Less than 5 acres will be disturbed. • The Alderwood soil has a slight erosion hazard when worked and exposed to rain. • There are no critical areas or buffers located down slope. and within 1/4 mile down stream of the stormwater discharge point. Temporary erosion control measures preliminarily recommended at this time include silt fences, a gravel construction entrance to prevent tracking debris onto the public road and temporary inlet protection for all proposed catch basins. • • APPENDIX Summary of Results Basin Summary Runoff Curve Number and Time of Concentration Soils Map Drainage Calculations SUMMARY OF RESULTS PROPOSED DETENTION POND TotalArea of Site: .............................................................................................................. 4500 sq.ft 10 YEAR STORM Peak Discharge for Pre Developed Conditions (Retained Area),Qe?C:...................................0.02 cfs Allowable Release Rate From Detention System, Q, = QeX................................................ 0.02 cfs Peak Inflow to Detention Pond: ............................................................................................ 0.04 cfs ProposedRelease Rate: ............................. : ........................................................................... 0.02 cfs Design Water Surface Elevation: .............................................................................................. 42.95 Approximate Volume of Storage Required (Design Volume): ........................................... 69.68 cf 100 YEAR STORM Peak Discharge for Pre Developed Conditions (Retained Area),QeX:................................... 0.04 cfs Allowable Release Rate From Detention System, Qr = Qe..:................................................ 0.04 cfs Peak Inflow to Detention Pond: ............................................................................................ 0.07 cfs ProposedRelease Rate: ......................................................................................................... 0.03 cfs Design Water Surface Elevation: .............................................................................................. 43.88 Approximate Volume of Storage Required (Design Volume): ......................................... 148.80 cf • BASIN SUMMARIES C]l 3RD & DAYTON BASIN SUMMARIES EXISTING CONDITIONS BASIN ID: EX-10 NAME: EXISTING 10YR STORM SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: 0.10 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE....: TYPEIA PERV IMP PRECIPITATION....: 2.20 inches AREA..: 0.10 Acres 0.00 Acres TIME INTERVAL....: 10.00 min CN.... : 86.00 0.00 TC.... : 6.56 min 0.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 0.02 cfs VOL: 0.01 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: EX-100 NAME: EXISTING 100YR STORM SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: 0.10 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE....: TYPEIA PERV IMP PRECIPITATION....: 3.40 inches AREA..: 0.10 Acres 0.00 Acres TIME INTERVAL....: 10.00 min CN.... : 86.00 0.00 TC.... : 6.56 min 0.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 0.04 cfs VOL: 0.02 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min • • 3RD & DAYTON BASIN SUMMARIES DEVELOPEDCONDITIONS BASIN ID: DV-10 NAME: DEVELOPED 10YR STORM SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: 0.10 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE....: TYPEIA PERV IMP PRECIPITATION....: 2.20 inches AREA..: 0.00 Acres 0.10 Acres TIME INTERVAL....: 10.00 min CN.... : 0.00 98.00 TC.... : 0.00 min 6.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 0.04 cfs VOL: 0.02 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: DV-100 NAME: DEVELOPED 100YR STORM SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: 0.10 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE....: TYPEIA PERV IMP PRECIPITATION....: 3.40 inches AREA..: 0.00 Acres 0.10 Acres TIME INTERVAL....: 10.00 min CN.... : 0.00 98.00 TC.... : 0.00 min 6.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 0.07 cfs VOL: 0.03 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min • • i'\ RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER TIME OF CONCENTRATION • GREENBERG - 3RD & DAYTON BUILDING RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER CALCULATIONS PRE DEVELOPED CONDITIONS ON -SITE BASIN - PERVIOUS AREA Total Retained Area (Acres):........................................................................... 0.100 Soil Name and Hydrologic Soil Group Cover Description Runoff Curve Number RCN Area (Acres) A RCN x A Name HSG Alderwood C Grasses 86 0.100 8.600 0.000 0.000 Totalsi 0.100 8.600 Runoff Curve Number = (RCN x A) / A: ...................................................................................................... 86.00 Runoff Curve Number Used in Basin Calculations........................................................................................ 86.00 GBERGDetCalc.xls 1/20/2004 ,'N GREENBERG - 3RD & DAYTON BUILDING RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER CALCULATIONS POST DEVELOPED CONDITIONS ON -SITE BASIN IMPERVIOUS AREAS Total Retained Area (Acres): ........................................................................... 0.100 Impervious Area Per Lot (Square Feet): ............................................................................... Number of Lots Tributary to Detention Basin: ....................................................................... 0 Soil Name and Hydrologic Soil Group Cover Description Runoff Curve Number RCN Area (Acres) A RCN x A Name HSG Alderwood C Roof Area 98 0.100 9.800 0.000 Totals 0.100 9.800 RunoffCurve Number = (RCN x A) / A: ...................................................................................................... 98.00 Runoff Curve Number Used in Basin Calculations........................................................................................ 98.00 GBERGDetCalc.xls 1 /20/2004 0 • GREENBERG - 3RD & DAYTON BUILDING TIME OF CONCENTRATION PRE DEVELOPED CONDITIONS ON -SITE BASIN Sheet Flow (ADDlicable to Tc only) Surface Description Grass Manning's Roughness Coefficient, nsheet 0.150 Flow Length (L<=300'), Lsheet 80 feet 2-Year, 24-Hour Rainfall, P2 1.50 inches Land Slope, Ssheet 0.090 ft/ft Tt Sheet 0.109 hours 16.559 Tt Sheet minutes Shallow Concentrated Flow (See DOE SWM Manual. Paae 111-1-14) Surface Description Grass Flow Length, Lshallow 0 ft Watercourse Slope, So 0.190 ft/ft Time of Concentration Velocity Factor, k 11.00 Average Velocity, Vshallow = k x So^0.5 4.79 fps Tt Shallow 0.000 hours Tt Shallow 0.000 minutes Channel Flow (See DOE SWM Manual. Paaes 111-1-15. 111-1-16) Type of Channel Ditch Flow Length, Lchannel 0 ft Watercourse Slope, So 0.020 ft/ft Time of Concentration Velocity Factor, kc 17.00 Average Velocity, Vchannel = k x So^0.5 2.40 fps Tt Channel 0.000 hours Tt Channel 0.000 minutes Results: Watershed or Subarea Tc or Tt Total Tc or Tt 0.109 hours Total Tc or Tt 1 6.559 minutes Note: 1. Worksheet based on time equations from Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin, Chapter III GBERGDetCaic.xls 1 /20/2004 0 SOILS MAP SCALE: F' = 2,000' Reference: Soil Survey of Snohomish County Sheet Number 56 Soil Type: Symbol 5-Alderwood-Urban Land Complex, Hydrologic Soil Group C DESIGN DATA DETENTION PIPE STAGE STORAGE TABLE CUSTOM STORAGE ID No. STO-1 Description: DETENTION PIPE STAGE < ---- STORAGE ---- > STAGE <---- STORAGE ---- > STAGE <---- STORAGE ---- > STAGE <---- STORAGE---- > (ft)---cf-----Ac-Ft- (ft)---cf-----Ac-Ft- (ft)---cf-----Ac-Ft- (ft)---cf-----Ac-Ft- 41.80 0.0000 0.0000 42.60 50.200 0.0012 43.40 133.40 0.0031 44.20 203.80 0.0047 41.90 4.4000 0.0001 42.70 59.600 0.0014 43.50 143.80 0.0033 44.30 211.00 0.0048 42.00 8.8000 0.0002 42.80 69.000 0.0016 43.60 154.20 0.0035 44.40 213.50 0.0049 42.10 13.200 0.0003 42.90 79.800 0.0018 43.70 164.60 0.0038 44.50 216.00 0.0050 42.20 17.600 0.0004 43.00 90.600 0.0021 43.80 175.00 0.0040 44.50 216.00 0.0050 42.30 22.000 0.0005 43.10 101.40 0.0023 43.90 182.20 0.0042 42.40 31.400 0.0007 43.20 112.20 0.0026 44.00 189.40 0.0043 42.50 40.800 0.0009 43.30 123.00 0.0028 44.10 196.60 0.0045 2 10 COMBINATION DISCHARGE Description: COMBINATION Structure: OR-1 Structure: Structure: RIS-1 Structure: Structure: STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE ID No. CMB-1 STAGE -DISCHARGE --- > STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE --- > STAGE <--DISCHARGE --- > (ft) ---cfs --------- (ft) ---cfS --------- (ft) --- cfs--------- (ft) ---cfs --------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 41.82 0.0000 42.50 0.0171 43.20 0.0244 43.90 0.0300 41.90 0.0059 42.60 0.0183 43.30 0.0253 44.00 0.3387 42.00 0.0088 42.70 0.0195 43.40 0.0261 44.10 0.9025 42.10 0.0110 42.80 0.0206 43.50 0.0269 44.20 1.6323 42.20 0.0128 42.90 0.0216 43.60 0.0277 44.30 2.4965 42.30 0.0144 43.00 0.0226 43.70 0.0285 44.40 2.7077 42.40 0.0158 43.10 0.0235 43.80 0.0292 44.50 2.9635 MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. OR-1 • Description: ORIFICE Outlet Elev: 41.82 Elev: 39.82 ft Orifice Diameter: 0.8750 in. STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE -DISCHARGE --- > (ft) --- cfs--------- (ft) --- cfs--------- 41.82 0.0000 42.50 0.0171 41.90 0.0059 42.60 0.0183 42.00 0.0088 42.70 0.0195 42.10 0.0110 42.80 0.0206 42.20 0.0128 42.90 0.0216 42.30 0.0144 43.00 0.0226 42.40 0.0158 43.10 0.0235 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE --- > (ft) --- cfs--------- (ft) --- cfs--------- ---------------------------------------------------- 43.20 0.0244 43.90 0.0300 43.30 0.0253 44.00 0.0307 43.40 0.0261 44.10 0.0314 43.50 0.0269 44.20 0.0321 43.60 0.0277 44.30 0.0327 43.70 0.0285 44.40 0.0334 43.80 0.0292 44.50 0.0340 RISER DISCHARGE ID No. RIS-1 Description: RISER Riser Diameter (in): 12.00 elev: 43.90 ft Weir Coefficient...: 9.739 height: 44.50 ft Orif Coefficient...: 3.782 increm: 0.10 ft STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE -DISCHARGE --- > STAGE -DISCHARGE --- > STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---cfs --------- (ft) --- cfs--------- (ft) ---cfs --------- (ft) ---cfs --------- 43.90 0.0000 44.10 0.8711 44.40 2.6743 44.50 2.9295 43.90 0.0000 44.20 1.6003 44.50 2.9295 44.00 0.3080 44.30 2.4638 44.50 2.9295 3 LEVEL POOL ROUTING LPOOL 2 H10YR STORM" EX-10 DV-10 PIPE OR-1 2 . Description MatchQ PeakQ Sto Dis PkStg OutQ hyd Volume 10YR STORM 0.02 0.04 PIPE OR-1 42.95 0.02 2 " 69.68 cf. LPOOL 3 11100YR STORM" EX-100 DV-100 PIPE OR-1 3 Description MatchQ PeakQ Sto Dis PkStg OutQ hyd Volume 100YR STORM 0.04 0.07 PIPE OR-1 43.88 0.03 3 148.80 cf 4 • • GREENBERG - 3RD & DAYTON BUILDING DETENTION PIPE - LIVE STORAGE Water Surface Elevation Catch Basin Live Volume (CF) 12" CMP Live Volume (CF) 30" CMP Total Volume (CF) Total Live Volume (CF) Design` r:< Volume (CF) 41.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 :0.06... 42.30 0.00 0.00 17.87 18.00 18.00 42.80 0.00 0.00 56.50 57.00 57.00:"' 43.30 0.00 0.00 100.90 101.00 101.00 43.80 0.00 0.00 143.16 143.00 141'00:: , 44.30 0.00 0.00 173.29 173.00 173.00 44.50 0.00 0.00 176.72 177.00 177.00 DETENTION PIPE Length of Detention Pipe, Lp (Feet): ....................................................... ................. 36.00 Number of Detention Pipes, Np:............................................................................... 1.00 Diameter of Detention Pipe, Dp (Feet): .................................................................... 2.50 Invert of Detention Pipe at Downstream Catch Basin: ............................................. 41.75 Slope of Detention Pipe, Sp(ft/ft):............................................................................ 0.0050 Diameter of Catch Basin, Db (Feet): ......................................................................... 4.00 Number of Catch Basins, Nb:................................................................................... 0.00 s • 0 STORM DRAIN PUMP REQUIREMENTS 100 YEAR STORM STORAGE 188.58 CIF MATCH Q 0.04 CFS CFS TO GAL/MIN GAL/MIN = CUIFT/SEC X IMIN/60SEC X 7.47GAL/CF REQD G/M = 0.04 X 60 X 7.48 = ' 17.952 GAL/MIN PUMP Myers S25 or equivalent Pump must pump 18gal/min at 9ft head. sump depth = 4.0ft POWER AND FLOAT CORDS Quick -connect, water- tight fittings are Inter- changeable, replaceable 1/4 HP MOTOR from pump exterior, Oil -filled for best heat / \ transfer and bearing and seal lubrication. Built-in overload protection. MOTOR HOUSING - _ Cast iron for efficient heat transfer. MERCURY -FREE MECHANICAL FLOAT SWITCH (S25A1 and S25AIC ,a o 11111111 El a' Q S25P-1 and S25PC-1) 90 degree operation, OR VERTICAL MECHANICAL ® SWITCH (S25V1 and S25VIC) allows installation in small sumps. , i ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑a MECHANICAL SHAFT SEAL Carbon and ceramic faces. K3141 11/97 Printed in U.S.A. III�TF01111N ® INK RECESSED IMPELLER Operates out of volute passage, allowing maxi- mum flow of liquids and solids. S25 1/4 Horsepower Submersible Sump Pump DIMENSIONS S25A1 and S25AIC S2513-1 and S25PC-1 S25 with mercury -free Mechanical Float Switch a - S25V1 and S25VIC S25 with Vertical Mechanical Switch M• S25AI S25AIC S25VI S25VIC Turn On 101/2" 267 mm 53A'* 146 mm Turn Off 31/2" 89 mm 11/8" 41 mm Draw Down Range 7" 178 mm 41/8" 107 mm PERFORMANCE CURVE CAPACITY LITERS PER MINUTE 15 30 45 60 75 90 10 F 20 4 0 5 10 15 20 25 CAPACITY GALLONS PER MINUTE 6 N cc W 5 W z 4 Q W 3 S J 2 ~O F 1 F. E. Myers, 1101 Myers Parkway, Ashland, Ohio 44805-1969 Aftas ® 419/289-1144, FAX: 419/289-6658, www.femyers.com Myers (Canada), 269 Trillium Drive, Kitchener, Ontario N2G 4W5 519/748-5470, FAX: 519/748-2553 S57',tbl * USL THE F. E. MYERS 1/4 HP S25 SUBMERSIBLE SUMP PUMP BUILDS ON THE MYERS TRADITION OF INNOVATION AND QUALITY WITH FEATURES LIKE OUR INTERCHANGE- ABLE, POSITIVE SEALING SOCKET DESIGN FOR EASY REPLACEMENT OF BOTH POWER AND MERCURY -FREE MECHANICAL FLOAT AND VERTICAL SWITCH CORDS, AND OUR RECESSED IMPELLER. This 1/4 hp pump achieves a shut-off head of 24 feet and a maximum flow of 28 gpm. Its 3000 rpm oil -filled motor provides superior heat dissipation and built-in overload protection. Accurate shaft alignment and easy serviceability are assured by this self-contained motor, which is protected from water damage by a carbon -ceramic mechanical shaft seal. The operating mode is easily switched from automatic to manual, without removing the motor cap, by inserting a shunt plug. The S25 is also available with a vertical mechanical switch. In this configuration, the S25 can be installed in a 101/2" diameter sump. For more information about the S25 and Myers complete line of residential wastewater pumps, please talk to your Myers representative or call 419/289-1144. S25 1/4 Horsepower Submersible Sump Pump ADVANTAGES BY DESIGN DURABLE MOTOR WILL DELIVER MANY YEARS OF RELIABLE SERVICE ■ Oil -filled motor for maximum heat dissipation and continuous bearing lubrication. ■ Shaded pole motor eliminates starting switches. ■ Recessed vortex impeller operates completely out of volute. Provides free flow through pas- sage for solids and liquid, and has minimal radial loading for long bearing life. THE S25 IS ENGINEERED FOR MANY YEARS OF MAINTENANCE -FREE OPERATION. ■ If service is ever necessary, positive sealing, quick -disconnect power and switch cords make replacement simple. ■ Choice of wide-angle mercury -free mechanical float switch for maximum drawdown (built-in or piggyback), or vertical mechanical switch which allows installation in small 101/2" sumps. PRODUCT CAPABILITIES Capacities To 28 gpm 105 Ipm Heads To 23 ft. 7 m Pump Down Range Float Switch Vertical Switch 7 in. 4-1/8 in. 178 mm 107 mm Solids Handling Capacity 1/4 in. 6.4 mm Liquids Handling drain water Intermittent Liquid Temp. up to 140'F up to 60oC Motor 1/4 HP shaded pole 3000 RPM Electrical 115V 9 amps, I ph, 60 Hz. Acceptable pH Range 6-9 Discharge, NPT 1-1/2 in. 38.1 mm Min. Sump Diameter Float Switch Vertical Switch 18 in. 10-1/2 in. 457 mm 254 mm Construction Materials Motor Housing cast iron Motor Cap flame retardant thermoplastic Volute Case thermoplastic Impeller recessed, thermoplastic Power Cord 10 ft. 16/3 SJTW/SJTW-A or 20 ft. 16/3 SJTW/SJTW-A Mechanical Seal carbon and ceramic WHERE INNOVATION MEETS TRADITION Myws ISO 9001 Certified Company OEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Triad Law Group 126 — 3rd Avenue South, #101 Edmonds, Washington 98020 Attention: Chuck Greenberg u17V COPY STREET RE Subject: Excavation Considerations Proposed 3-Level Building Dayton Street and South 3rd Avenue Edmonds, Washington Dear Mr. Greenberg: 13256 Northeast 20th Street, Suite 16 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (425) 747-5618 FAX (425) 747-8561 May 19, 2004 JN 04213 RECEIVED SEP - 3 2004 BUILDING DEPT. via facsimile: (425) 672-7867 On May 13, 2004, the undersigned Principal of Geotech Consultants, Inc. visited your project site in Edmonds. We understand that you propose to construct a new building on the site as shown on the plans we received (Sheets 1 — 4, prepared by Higa-Burkholder Associates, LLC). The bottom level of the building will be at elevation 46.5 feet and cover much of the property. The purpose of this visit was to observe the existing site conditions and to review a previous geotechnical engineering study for the site (Giles Engineering dated June 9, 1998), and to develop opinions regarding the excavation consideration of your project. The recommendations and conclusions presented in this report are professional opinions based on the visual observations of the site, the soil information provided in the study, and on previous experience in the Puget Sound area. No deep subsurface explorations were completed as part of our scope of work. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions The site is located at the northeastern corner of Dayton Street and 3rd Avenue South in Edmonds. It is currently undeveloped and covered with grass. The site has a moderate slope to the west, with the east side near elevation 54 feet and the west side near elevation 47 feet. A building with a basement level estimated to be 48 feet is located 1.6 to 2 feet north of the northern property line. A paved parking lot is located on the property..to the east; the edge of the pavement is about 4 feet from the eastern property line. Subsurface Conditions The geotechnical engineering study done by Giles Engineering indicates that two test pits were previously excavated on the site. One was excavated to a depth of 12 feet. The soil generally found in the test pits was glacial till, which is comprised of gravelly, silty sand. The glacial till was dense to very dense within approximately 2 feet of the ground surface. We were involved in a project two blocks from the site, and glacial till was also found there at a shallow depth. Glacial till is quite common in the Puget Sound area. LOG ITEM # GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Triad Law Group JN 04213 May 19, 2004 Page 2 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General Excavation slopes should not exceed the limits specified in local, state, and national government safety regulations. Temporary cuts to a depth of about 4 feet may be attempted vertically in unsaturated soil, if there are no indications of slope instability. Based upon Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 296, Part N, the glacial till soil at the subject site would generally be classified as Type A. Therefore, temporary cut slopes greater than 4 feet in height cannot generally be excavated at an inclination steeper than 0.75:1 (Horizontal:Vertical), extending continuously between the top and the bottom of a cut. However, it is our professional opinion that the glacial till soil is suitable for a temporary excavation, where the cut exceeds 4 feet, of 0.5:1 (H:V). The slopes excavated to this steep inclination should be covered with plastic once the excavation is completed. Even with this steep, temporary inclination, it is not possible to keep the excavation sides within the property lines near the northern, southern, and eastern sides of the site. However, the excavation could be adequately sloped if an easement can be obtained from the neighboring property owners on those three sides. If easement cannot be obtained, temporary shoring would be the next alternative. On the southern and eastern sides, the temporary excavation would likely necessitate closing the existing sidewalk and some parking stalls, respectively. On the northern side, the excavation would have to expose the southern foundation wall of the northern adjacent building. This excavation would not destabilize the foundation wall because the footing depth of this wall and the new northern wall on the subject site will only be about 18 inches apart vertically and about 18 to 24 inches apart horizontally. However, the downspout line that extends along that side of the northern building would have to be removed at the time of excavation and rebuilt when the foundation wall of the new building is backfilled. LIMITATIONS The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions, as they existed at the time of our site visit. If the subsurface conditions encountered during construction are significantly different from those anticipated, we should be advised at once so that we can review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered on construction sites. Such unexpected conditions frequently require making additional expenditures to attain a properly constructed project. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the Triad Law Group and its representatives for specific application to this project and site. Our recommendations and conclusions are based on the site materials observed and on previous experience with sites that have similar observed conditions. The conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in accordance with current standards of practice within the limited scope of our services. No warranty is expressed or implied. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. ITEM # C� Triad Law Group �� • JN 04213 May 19, 2004 Page 3 We trust that this report meets your immediate needs for the proposed development. Please contact us if we can be of further service. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. y. .1 r, 0,,'. . ` Ilh .p D. Robert Ward, P.E. Principal cc: Shawn Roten via facsimile: (425) 347-0479 DRW: esn LOG ITEM # LQL • GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. ZZA * Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. Geotechnical and Environmental Consulting J-1856 April 7, 2004 Triad Law Group Lff *COPY 126 3`d Avenue South Cj� • Edmonds, Washington 98020 RECEIVED Attention: Mr. Charles Greenberg STREET FLE MAY 19 2004 Subject: Geotechnical Review BUILDING DEPT. 3`d and Dayton (155 3`d Avenue South) Edmonds, Washington Dear Mr. Greenberg: On April 7, 2004 Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. (ZZA) agreed to provide a geotechnical review of plans and the Giles Engineering geotechnical report for the subject property at your request. The purpose of the evaluation is to satisfy a City building department requirement. The scope of work is limited to review of plans provided by you, for conformance with the applicable engineering recommendations of the Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. geotechnical report for the project dated June 9, 1998. INFORMATION REVIEWED The following information was reviewed for this project: 1. City of Edmonds, Plan Review Corrections dated 4/2/04; 2. Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. geotechnical report dated June 9, 1998; 3. Construction Plans, sheets 1 through 4, by Higa-Burkholder dated 1/21/04; 4. Architectural plans, sheets cover, 1 through 7, dated 12/1/03 by Shelter Form, Inc. 5. Structural plans, sheets S- I through S-10, dated 10/23/03, by Chris Covington, P.E. CONCLUSION I have reviewed the Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. geotechnical report dated June 9, 1998 (for which the undersigned was the responsible professional engineer) and conclude that all recommendations of the report are still valid for the planned construction. The plans reviewed are consistent with the recommendations of the referenced Giles report. Any information contained in the referenced Giles report which is not specifically noted on the plans should be reviewed by the owner, architect, engineer and contractor and implemented during construction if applicable to the site conditions and planned construction. OGtTEM#� 18905 33rd Avenue West #1 17, Lynnwood, WA 98036 (425) 771-3304 Fax: (425) 771-3549 ZZA3rd anayton, Edmonds, Washington 3-1856 April 7, 2004 Page 2 CLOSURE We appreciate the opportunity to provide these services. If you have any questions, please call. Respectfully submitted, ZIPPER ZEMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. John E. Zipper, P. President Cc: Shelter Form Construction Services 1620 Washington Avenue Mukilteo, WA 98275 Attention: Jack Hicks LOG ITEM #.� I�s t i 24 i pS J-1856,040704,report S r a S N '+43 c t;j .dt• Lf(p��. ),F�u.`� � �%,S �a at �slf � ''°'`�'`'"-� Mai iK�i`" i *1 � J ''"' •-'�, a'S:td; •� � : + , :" Eel �4h �.yy�ig; � �t,� ��t�� N.ILP�•.. .. �.. J 'r.6 . `_.... t'e.., ; � !.... �`;tl; A...... a ...a. i:.,�..-rib,.-4 y �A1 Rt iCa V O O a a 11 At: 155 3rd Ave. S. Edmonds Occupancy established by this ce First level parking (S2) & 2"d level 7 iri e w �s"lam �pEPARTMENT`OFSBUILDINGS •- AEI" 1t1�". X {�`.'{II 111�.���1'J�f y1 I,.t t• ; tL A LS SL. tL - 4 L. t ..•. ��A VI �,;-,-,STREET FILE PER. International Building Code Section 11'1� Building,R�er�mit'#: BLD20080790. Cate: Dwelling Units: N/A �A No. Stories_: 2 ce (B) only • •:gType-,Construction: VA Basement: Yes Maximum Occupanf L'oatl f k'L' evelsMiah 2 .61*" . _•: (Per IBC 1004) s Room rapacity signs; �wtie'n required, mustrema�n posted atall times. Building Owner: Shaw Elevator Co. LLCiOwner}A: d THE levels 1 and 2 HAVE- 6EEN1INSPECTED-AI OF THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE'A'i �OP�iED Bl WHICH THE PROPOSED OCCUPANCY IS CLASSIFIED; :9 ASSISTANT BUILDING OFFICIAL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE 2006 EDITION /ISION OF OCCUPANCY AND THE USE FOR 1 ' BY: This certificate shall be posted in a conspicuous public area and shall not be removed, mulllal d or obs red and shall be maintained In legible condition at all limes: Any change of occupancy or use requires a building permit and a new Certificate of Occupancy. Issued by the City of Edmonds Building Official. - a �1;';; �•�AU J�a��•�} ;�1,s't,}� -: �11,; ��� �� ' ® VYW'. VW!/ 1—1C1Y/� 0 'V>�/ ' \VY6i �'S�VW/ V / s SVI�= t11Y1� of EDAto Oo, Alvc- i goo tilly P ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #:,� BUILDING PERMIT RECORDING #: 20o 5'0 9 3 n 13 4 ENCROACHMENT PERMIT APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER NAME:ASR- to S NCko�il &! ev-;Aeb; .42s-7;,y-L113& PROPERTY OWNER MAILING ADDRESS: a 6 - 3 /,A .Arc . 5 • ; �i�on� s. .� 9 W2t) BUSINESS NAME (for Commercial applications): BUSINESS OWNER NAME:(ur-i t, , M . G-P-fe&) ',eo_l;,- Phone 4 25 - 7> IV- (b l Z 9 j4%e""-PK 2 . a �.C`c-c�- rarZrnJ ADDRESS OF PUBLIC ENCROACHMENT: 9Q S -r>(r N tQPJ Sfi.,. �bltilDti o like---- i-Wwei-soievoiiiivivos----- I ----- o------ siiOsiiwsi--------- W----------- ice --------- Permanent structures encroaching upon any portion of public space, City right-of-way or easement area shall meet all Code Requirements as set forth in the following chapter of the Edmonds Community 1 Development Code. 18.70 STREET USE AND ENCROACHMENT PERMITS PERMIT ISSUANCE An Encroachment Permit may be issued, at the discretion of the Development Services Director, City Engineer or their respective designee, for permanent structures encroaching upon any portion of public space, City right-of-way or easement area, if the structures are placed in compliance with the above referenced Code Section and the following criteria are met: 1. It has been concluded that the proposal will not adversely impact public space open to vehicular or pedestrian travel; 2. Architectural Design Board approval has been granted or the process has been administratively approved; 3. The proposal will not unreasonably interfere with the rights of the public; and 4. The proposal benefits the public interest, safety or convenience. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ENCROACHMENT: (include total square footage of encroachment and give r specific location such as, 5' west of face of curb and 10' south of c/l of driveway entrance) A Re4, I� a�.S.� at x 13' Rnin 2` south o+ cP. I�ND�,S�F�4s��-wE�S}-� AAYro�) 5�- fuMkice ' aeu At z = 3os• V . L' a'xi s-' d Nn 1 ' w1.4 o4 4,4c A NO 7 Sj Newt-H 47—k N of bRiueW4V e,vtrz atice i-s.-swwi---w-----ww-------------------- -w---- ------ --w-------i-------- ----- SAEngrTorms\Encroachment Application.doc Revised 2/6/04 APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN NOTE: The issuance of this permit is understood by the applicant to be of a temporary nature, revocable by the City per ECDC 18.70.040 and that no vested right is granted. INDEMNITY: The applicant understands and by his/her 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 but not limited to the defense of any legal proceedings including defense costs, court costs, and attorney fees by reason of granting this permit. In addition, the applicant understands that he/she shall provide and continually maintain during the term of the permit a certificate of insurance naming the city as an additional insured, with respect to liability, and providing that it shall be primary as to any other policy of insurance. CODE APPLICATION: By signing the application below the applicant warrants that s/he has read or had the opportunity to read Chapter 18.70 of the Edmonds Community Development Code and s/he understands that all terms of the adopted ordinance are incorporated herein as if set forth in full and this application and permits therefore are subject to the terms of those Chapters. SIGNATURE 1 DATE roperty Owner ******* DEPARTMENT APPROVALS ***** FOR CITY'USE ONLY ******* Planning Division Approved by: ADB# Date Remarks: Public Works Approved by: Date Remarks: Engineering Division Approved Date 7,v� Remarks: Certificate of Insurance verified by• Date Encroachment Agreement sent to City Clerk for recording: Date . P-'! dies - S� .oa �i �1i4 QCpf ft 2-710( Receipt No: �h /, i�l{- 24d°— f5at� 51kycG4"J —VCVT 4?-7t6q Issued By: Issue Date: SAEngr\Fonns\Encroachment Apptication.doc Revised 2/6/04 1 J. LEGAL DFSCIgIP' MW_, C-om rflencing t` re NE corner bf P-and Dayton streets in the city of Edmonds SnohoyY, nilsh Washin ..:-: grand b6ng In the northeast quaruer of the south— gr�arter of or 2; township. 2-7, north range 3 eastW.M:, thence horfi along east, boundary: line cif said 3 street, 60 €eet; thence easber ly along a Me POW With the -south boundary line of [ands formerlyz7. . feet: di -Ince-south to a paintort the north line of Dayton street; wtv is 75 feet east of the point f beginning;. thence west along the north line of iaajhn staeet 75 feet tq tfie -point' oil=-k eglnntng. i When recorded mail to: City Clerk City of Edmonds 121 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 CONFORMED COPY 200508301346 5 PGS 08-30-2005 03:47pm $36.00 SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON SPACE ABOVE THE LINE FOR RECORDERS USE Assessor's Parcel No.:a703.:� 3 00 JQ.0 r&00 Applicant: C Oes M . 6kF! 1B$a2Cr ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT This ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT (`.`Agreement") is entered into between the C= OF EDMONDS ("City") and0,&+i s M . 6e-ee+,loeio kt, J NQv<_;L fi .Z . Dicro0 sR.eembeA, ("Owner[s]"), in accordance with. Chapter 18.70 of the Edmonds Community Development Code. S'a. %a?'%, 1. The Property. Owner is the owner of that certain real property located at -?03 within the City of Edmonds, Washington, Assessor's Parcel Number 00 D D and more particularly described as follows Se-e EXft-t g & j1A [Oj as described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 2. The Easement. The City right-of-way adjac nt to owner's property or an existing easement used for (strike those that don't apply stree oad, alley, trail, sidewalk, bikepath, pedestrian easement, sanitary sewer, water, storm, of er 1: 3.. The Encroachment. The City hereby covenants and agrees and grants its permission to Owner to allo tt 'tv OVeRDAC p q to remain in a portion of the City right -of way/easement. A partial site plan, scaled t'-'=20 showing the location of the encroachment is attached. as Exhibit `B" and incorporated by reference. This Agreement is subject to the following terms and conditions: -lof3 a. The encroachment shall be installed and maintained in a safe and sanitary condition at the sole cost, risk, and responsibility of the owner and its successors in interest. b. The Owner shall agree at all times to indemnify and hold the City free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, losses, damages or expenses resulting from the construction, maintenance, use, repair, or removal of the structure installed hereunder, including any loss, damage or expense arising out of (1) loss or damages to property and (2) injury to or death of persons. c. The Owner must remove or relocate any part of the encroachment within ten (10) days or such other time, as specified in the notice after receipt. of it from the City Engineer, or the City Engineer may cause. such work to be done and the reasonable cost thereof shall constitute a lien upon the property. d. Whatever rights and obligations were acquired by the City with respect to the easement shall remain and continue in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected by City's grant of permission to construct and maintain the encroachment structure C. The property owner is required to provide and continually maintain during the term of the permit a certificate of insurance naming the City as.an additional - insured, with respect to liability, and providing that it shall be primary as to any, other policy of insurance. A copy of the insurance certificate shall be provided to the City at the beginning - of each calendar year, no later than the 20 day of January. 4. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties. with respect to• the subject matter hereof and supersedes and replaces all other agreements, oral or written, between the parties with respect to the subject matter. 5. Notices. Any notice which i.s required or may be given. pursuant to this Agreement shall be .sent in writing. by United States mail, first class, postage pre -paid, registered or certified with return receipt: requested, or by other comparable commercial means and addressed as follows: If to the City: ff to the Owner. City. Engineer City of Edmonds 121 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 which addresses. may be changed ,from time.to time by providing notice to the other party in the manner described above. -2of3 6. Waiver. City's consent -to or approval of any act or omission by Owner shall not constitute a waiver of any other default by Owner and shall not be deemed a waiver or render unnecessary City's consent for approval to any subsequent act by Owner. Any waiver by City.. of any default must be in writing and shall not be a waiver of any other default. concerning the same or any other provision of the Agreement. 7. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective legal representatives, successors, and assigns. Owner agrees to incorporate this agreement by reference in any subsequent deeds to the property- but any failure to do so does not invalidate this provision. 8. Capacity. Each party represents that the person(s)` executing this Agreement on behalf of such party has the authority to execute this Agreement and by such signature(s) thereby bind such party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on this day of 20o `�� OWNER(S) By: : BYt�(�1A �; ��re✓ww. STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH This day,.personally appeared before me, /%iU/�S ?` D.`�'oco - ('s,QeP.�1_8 to me known to be the person(s) who executed the within and foregoing document and that.. (he/she/they) AR signed the same as (his/her/iheir) free and voluntary act and deed for the useTLd purposes therein mentioned: J. otary.Public t,�0TaR y Av.IXA - * = T ed or Printed.Name N,:ya AV �. h: � -. My Commission expires: BER CITY OF EDMQNDS'4•,8 �WASN�,�e� By: ENGINEERING DNLSION\ 3of3- . yy X UI IN / ,1 dEy KIr: i7 ��t 17 gzS RODKEA% i ae:iaf: L . Ex ao' a — -- — — I "N8S•8S'T3"E. 73.00 55,20 R/W' I :j rt7u a '�i1 BNGLcS71KE" S .. _ NYgK!?I DIK1Si:fS'�OI`k5� " . d . W GARAGE FLOOR ►LAM I / 27i13231?CLq.17�;5CNi DIRr SEE (,CKITECTUAL PLAN, �. US BANK CORD ". W SHEET A OF 7 FOR'- DETAILS EX. I - I / PARKING a i •.S • 3 gTyP) .AREA - 4A00'S0. E .m % LOT P. - BIKE RACK $ / PROP STAGING ' - � a IIT-^ z j AREA PER TEMP. :1! EASEMENT W/OWNER BEk&HMAkK 77 / -TOP ksnRLT TIE I . - 8OLT.ON FIRE MOUNT S' TiLEV. - 4ese / DATUM r MLLw •.O�H4. L . -I " . / .dY•l 90 1. 'k.... r. ' N-89soy3'.� a .x.S;DOs�:;.�• - //�j • I _ .. .� ... — --• ... _. _. a • EX 'EDGES OF4SIOEWALK * '• !EX. 30' .. � PARKING' ... " R/W , ,LANE sEr Ti+ a.00 NO.--� DAYTON STREET �'. VATREET INTERSEQTCON... � .. .__._...,.._.___�. _.._.. :AT 8091TON Of P.RfNOUSIP 'RECORDED 8)IASS'.DISC " '.SURFACE MOM. BASED ON — -- - T -- -- - _ . •'. - -- _ _ __ _. ......2' R.P. NAICSN'.B9'S8'15' .E . -._ .. • ACQflD CERTIFICATE F LIABILITY INSURANC CSR JR DATE(MM/DD/YYYY) GRECH-2 08 19 05 PRODUCQR • ' . THIS CERTIFICATE IS Is D AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE Hall -Conway -Jackson, Inc. HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR P O Box 8010 ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. Creek WA 98082-8010 ie:425-368-1200 Fax:425-368-1290 Charles Greenberg Marsha I. Dickow-Greenberg Triad Law Group 126 Third Avenue Edmonds WA 98020 COVERAGES INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE INSURER A: First Specialty Ins. INSURER B: INSURER C: INSURER D: INSURER E: THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. AGGREGATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. NAIC # IN"LTR NSR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER DATEYMM/DD/TYY) PDATE OUCY EXPIRATION I0YY LIMITS A X GENERAL LIABILITY X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS MADE a OCCUR FGL 229004868000 08/18/05 08/18/06 EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1,000,000 PREMISES(Eaoccurence) $ 100, 000 MED EXP (Any one person) $ 5,000 PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ 1,000,000 GENERAL AGGREGATE s2,000,000 GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: X POLICY JEPRO- CT LOC PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $ 2,000,000 AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY ANY AUTO ALL OWNED AUTOS SCHEDULED AUTOS HIRED AUTOS NON -OWNED AUTOS COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT (Ea accident) $ BODILY INJURY (Per person) $ BODILY INJURY (Per accident) $ PROPERTY DAMAGE (Per accident) $ GARAGE LIABILITY ANY AUTO AUTO ONLY - EA ACCIDENT $ OTHER THAN EA ACC AUTO ONLY: AGG $ $ EXCESS/UMBRELLA LIABILITY OCCUR El CLAIMS MADE DEDUCTIBLE RETENTION $ EACH OCCURRENCE $ AGGREGATE $ $ J $ $ WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ANY PROPRIETORIPARTNER/EXECUTIVE OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? If yes, describe under SPECIAL PROVISIONS below TORY LIMITS ER E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $ E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $ E.L. DISEASE -POLICY LIMIT $ OTHER DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES / EXCLUSIONS ADDED BY ENDORSEMENT I SPECIAL PROVISIONS It is understood and agreed that the city of Edmonds is named as an additional insured. Revised to correct policy number 8-19-05. CERTIFICATE HOLDER L;ANL:tLLAI IVN City of Edmonds Building Division ATTN: Jeanne 121 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds WA 98020 CITYEDM SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATIO DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING INSURER WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL 45 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATEHOLDERNAMED TO THE LEFT, BUT FAILURE TO DO SO SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY OF ANY KIND UPON THE INSURER, ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE 5 Richard L Ni ACORD 25 (2001/08) © ACORD CORPORATION 198 08/10/2005 14:51 4256727E TRIADLAWGROUP PAGE 02/05 TRIAD LAW GROUP 126 Third Avenue S., Suite 101 Edmonds, WA 98020-8402 (425) 774-0138 Fax (425) 672-7867 !+,-mail: t•isdnPdmnndslaw_com. `ST, r, tz = 155-- 3rA ales,-, Ralph E. Crear Charles NL Greenberg August 10, 2005 RE: Attn: Lyle Chrisman Planning Comments Dated July 8, 2005 Plan Check Number: 04-388A Project: Greenberg Mixed Use Building Project Address: 155 Third Avenue South Lyle, It is my understanding that following our recent conversation, all information that you have requested regarding this project will be complete once you have received adequate details showing a proposed design for a telephone pole that would resolve the guy wire issue of the same pole such that the guy wire is not in violation of applicable City codes. If this is not correct, please contact me at the phone and/or fax number listed above as soon as possible and inform me of any additional. information .required. Please be aware that Marie Harrison of the City of Edmonds has informed me that a deadline to complete the submittal process regarding this project is August 20, 2005. Therefore, time is of the essence. Please finalize your review process in a timely mamner so that the imposed deadline can be met. As a final matter based in part on the imposed deadline, Mr. Greenberg and myself would like to meet with you sometime on Thursday, August 1 l , 2005 (preferably during the morning) in an effort to bring some finality to the civil is,ues that you have raised over these past few months. Your cooperation is appreciated. Please feel free to call with any questions or concerns. Yours Very Truly Ralph Crear ...�r�,,n,�,�,,,„ (ONTACT "P/*V\ Edmonds UtIfies CoLso1fin FORM 61 E UU .........................................: A coordinated utility environment which maximizes joint utility opportunities to provide quality service for the citizeEdmonds YOU WILL BE GIVEN A CONFIRMATION NUMBER BY EACH UTILITY ONCE YOU HAVE INFORMED THEM OF YOUR PROJECT. SITE ADDRESS: -50 3 26::J- o T-4 # 0 0 Bob Kakaley - 425-670-3214 You will need to provide PUD with a site plan and a completed New Service Questionnaire. PUGET SOUND # ENERGY New Customer Construction Call to verify gas availability and to coordinate service install. Department-.1-888-321-7779 You will need to provide parcel number, contact phone number and mailing address. �.� # ^7 3 veriZ20 Dow Brandley - 425-710-4118 You will need to provide Verizon with the location of your project, total line requirement, and the date in which service is required. A copy of your development plan may be required. c # IVO-( 877-824-2288 You will need to proved Comcast with the location of your project, a copy of your development and site plan (digital copy pod -771- if available.) The date in which service is required and a list of contact names hone numbers & mailing addresses. �yMPIC Vip�Y _ # NIA - 9� a .Is Steve Dunphy - 425-774-7769 You will need to provide OVWSD with the survey map of your For customers in Olympic View Service Area site and complete a development information form. THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETED AND GIVEN TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF AT THE TIME OF PERMIT SUBMITTAL Inc.1B913 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA98020 • (425) 771-MO • FAX (425) 771-0221 Website: wwaci.edmonds.wa.us DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning • Building • Engineering July 7, 2005 Applicant Address MEMO TO: Puget Sound Energy Verizon Northwest SNOCOM Police and Fire Dispatch SNOPAC Snohomish County E911 U.S. Post Office Snohomish County Assessor's Office Snohomish County Information Services Snohomish County P.U.D. Edmonds Fire Department Edmonds Police Department Edmonds Utility Billing Edmonds Public Works Edmonds Building/Street File Edmonds Address Files Lynnwood Disposal Comcast Cable GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR This letter is to inform you of an address change. We apologize for the inconvenience this may cause you and greatly appreciate your cooperation. Old Address 303_Dayton-Street, New Address r155 3rd Avenue S, Edmonds, WA Occupancy: Mixed Use Tax ID Number: 27032300405600 Subdivision: See attached legal description If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at 425-771-0220 or HarrisonLci.edmonds.wa.us. Please contact me if you wish to be removed from this list. Respectfully, M.Iie 9L ilon Senior Permit Coordinator Edmonds Building Department ".1 J� ° / 2 °0s 27 Qlc/ is � y a�x> doss �0 Coop 10, drL 'J4 , "0 ,,s ''!( °s 7'7 2� 09 w �7 ,� 6F a7, 2 Q, /Cj� q S 2'0 ✓ \ ��°'/Pry\\�y� 0 SkppeeS • o QO /" S Cb P �, aw 10 co 7 , G r _t �� a 110 �id�_ 2B 1; Af1120 2. P ,, El Cap tan "O�i 122 ® ty 200 Bank 126 115 W 5003 Edmonds leo 130 127 n 1 Stloppping Center 14s 110 �/ izz =' `ey 124 O� h DAYTON ST /9 ,20 m 400 v mm POM,I � 190% • Y2 N �+ c om D ( /1 110 "c C 270 209 202 p 201 Q0 W� 0 y 221 216 � 215 n o 0 Zx2 w 29 210 R ft o lso C� O Q 223 9 221 D or Sq .� �\✓` tlJ N N O Jasper 225 = 225 - 1,5\ 30 ), ,� o O N Sundowner Alder cc 229 . 232J v 229 234 CC 230 �� 160 N� N �_, m �� 217 219 3-239 A303 .. .. .. / 86 U A 233 242 306 247 30 Athlet4: 130 O Sunset 314 250 315 0 99 / 42 3oq n o 318 317 251 32 402 'f 324 _ 260 263 410 W 325 ����//;; 328 267 420 405 '.. y 156 154 ildlife 335 272 w - Becks 338 337 > 27, Refuge 34, 5 z75 Bak 43 404 ao� WALNUI"S I" -3 318 320 0 504 0 414 412 410 408 505 409 404 o ¢ .. - _ 400 512 ,. .. •. .. 42U 5144. ; 511 - .Sound View : 515 424 417 f Edmonds Park 44007 530 405 540 Snohomish County, WA Assessor Parcel Data Page 1 of 2 Snohomishftlino Government information & Services County,40 Washington R E A. L x Property Information CountyQuick Info Directory Departments Employment Calendar Questions Search County Home links: CommonAssessorHome Treasurer Home Information on which Department to contact links: Please view Disclaimer If you have questions, comments or suggestions, please Contact Us. Date/Time:7/7/2005 3:33:54 PM Answers to Frequently Asked Questions about Parcel Data (opens as new window) Return to Propq Information Entry page Parcel Number 27032300405600 Prev Parcel Reference 23270340560004 View Map of this parcel (opens as new window) :Links to property information below • General Information Names & Addresses, Property Legal Description • Treasurer's Tax Information Total Current Year's Taxes, and other information • Assessor's Property Values Market Values, Current Use Values (if any) • Assessor's Property Characteristics Tax Code Area, Use Code, Parcel Size • Assessor's Structure(s) Data Data related to the structures on a parcel • Assessor's Property Sales Sales recorded since 7/31/1999 • Assessor's Mapping Information Traditional and Interactive maps, Neighborhood General Information Taxpayer Name II Address (contact the Treasurer if you have questions) GREENBERG CHARLES & MARSHA 1121612 CHINOOK RD - - - EDMONDS, WA 98020 If the above mailing address is incorrect and you want to make a change, see the information on Name and Address Changes Owner Name II Address (contact the Assessor if you have questions) GREENBERG CHARLES & MARSHA 1121612 CHINOOK RD - - - EDMONDS, WA 98020 Street (Situs) Address (contact the Assessor if you have questions) 303 DAYTON ST - - - EDMONDS, WA 98020 Parcel Legal Description SEC 23 TWP 27 RGE 03 RT-74) BEG NE COR 3RD & DAYTON STS EDMONDS TH N 60FT TH E 75FT TH S 60FT TON LN DAYTON ST TH W 75FT TO POB Go to top of page Treasurer's Tax Information Taxes For answers to questions about Taxes, please contact the Treasurer's office (opens as http://web5.co. snohomish.wa. us/propsys/asr-tr-propinglPrpIngO2-ParcelD ata. asp?PN=2703... 7/7/2005 Snohomish County, WA Assessor Parcel Data Page 2 of 2 new window) 2005 Taxes for this parcel $2,466.43 _ (Taxes may include Surface Water Management and/or State Forest Fire Patrol fees. LID charges, if any, are not included.) To obtain a duplicate tax statement, either download our Tax Statement Request form or call 425-388-3366 to request it by phone. Go to top of page Assessor's Property Data Characteristics and Value Data below are for 2005 tax year. Please contact the Treasurer's office for answers to questions about Taxes (opens as new window) For questions ONLY about property characteristics or property values (NOT taxes), please contact the Assessor's Office (opens as new window) Property Values do not reflect adjustments made due to an exemption, such as a senior or disabled persons Values exemption. Reductions for exemptions are made on the property tax bill. Tax Year 2005 Market Land $225,000 Market Improvement $01 Market Total $225,000 Tax Year 2006 Market Land $270,0001 Market Improvement $01 Market Total $270,000 Go to top of page Property Characteristics Tax Code Area (TCA) 00210 View Taxing Districts for this Parcel (opens as new window) Use Code 910 Undeveloped (Vacant), Land Size Basis ACRE Size 0.10 Go to top of page Property Structures No structures found for this parcel Go to top of page Property Sales since 7/31/1999 Explanation of Sales Information (opens as new window) Sales data is based solely upon excise affidavits processed by the Assessor. Transfer Receipt Sales Excise Deed Grantor (Seller) Grantee (Buyer) Other Date Date Price Number Type Parcels 12/23/2002 1/2/2003 $429,000 175194 W NGUYEN DANIELLE GREENBERG CHARLES No & MARSHA 2/19/2002 2/22/2002 $300,000 462779 W PUGET SOUND INVESTMENT NGUYEN DANIELLE No INTERNATIONAL Go to top of page Property Maps Township/Range/Section/Quarter, links to maps Neighborhood 5601000 Explanation of Neighborhood Code (opens as new window) Township 27 Range 03 Section 23 Quarter SE Find parcel maps for this Township/Range/Section View Map of this parcel (opens as new window) http://web5. co. snohomish. wa.us/propsys/asr-tr-propinglPrpIngO2-ParcelData. asp?PN=2703 ... 7/7/2005 Rug 19 05 12:56p Ctasc-II RTSS EagleGroup 404-46H-Je7e p. 98/19/2005 09.32 1425454 PAGE 02 d W.rTMh LW9-% AUG 19 2005 ENGINEERING DIVISION (y MVd,Dfrr wWXED ED � ttse ual�rNc swo, Psi 120 Vbr OH F—d Flaw wW T�w.rwww.r DAYWIV STREET LEGEND EXWMG FRE HYGRW EUST WO 2V CLASS 2 WOOD POLE O 90TFOR COMNUNCATIOMS AND CITY C OF MMONDS TRAFFK SIGNAL METER OEXISTWO ROJARV POWER PM-- P POOH VOLTAQE) SNOIIOMH PUP —8WO--j 6QEV4ALKGUVAss6MSLV —Ci—C-- a, COMMUNICATIOWELEPHDIE rJWAKM _—. off ELECTRIC SERVICE CONDLIC'M" —_ 12QV1DLT(FONTAAFM 31rWAL SYSTEM) PROJECT SCOPE: GMr ERAL NOTES: 1) Pre -Construction job walk through required prior to construction. 2) Underground locates required prior to any site exceyation. 3) Any changes or revisions to this design requires Engineer prior -approval before construction. SPECIFIC NOTES: P01 Existing 30' Class 2 Wood Pole (Fr) Approximate Age = 20 years Pole has been butt treated and appears sound & plumb Replace existing %" Steel down guy and porcelain strain insulator with new )" steel down guy sidewalk assembly to location SWG2 8WG11 Abandon existing y4" steel anchor rod and aa..+ existing vertical down guy assembly to be cut at ground level PLAN VIEW Abandon existing bataw ground anchor rod in -place SCALE: 1 " = 40' SWG2 Install new 6' square plate anchor (see detail) Vertical 3/07 steel down portion to be adjacent Anchor Eye to East side of new T sidewalk and to have New 7' Sidewalk installed a new plastic 'yellow" guy guard cover (6' Mkt. length) Anchor rod attachment eye to extend no more than 3" above finished backedge of new i;' steel sidewalk Galvanized 8' SPECIFIC SPAN NOTES: 6' x 6" Plete Anchor Minium compaction to be 90% in the beckfill POt to SWGI Remove existing sidewalk guy (SWG1) area over the plate anchor BackM assembly (10') materiel can be Native. P01 to SWG2 DETAIL ELEVATION VIEW • SWG2 Lao" Nord+INT31 Remove existing IV sidewalk down guy assembly that is at the East side of the exlsting 4' sidewalk and rrp1we with now 14' sidewalk down guy assembly that will be directly adjacent to the new T sidewalk on the east side. Install new sidewalk guy assembly SWG2 (14') Maintain 10' vertical clearance to horizontal rod from surface of sidewalk PLAN 6 PROFKE VIEW ALn.v-v_w6 a;LI yrr" i aF —A_ North5ky —""' 3rd & DAYTON Commun icotions MIXED USE BUILDING A Ousnta3eMaLC PVMr ISM 1 Htl As 91 V W."..a �� wo o1Q 1POWT"� NECwnaror3rdAVE UES0A SAnw., WA ,IIMI DAYTON STREET, EDAMMS. WA M6ee (Q5W AsaL ►i. Iml ��� SNOHOWSM COUNTY 9B057 APPROVED AS NOTED DZ51dinJ Tpg F ftNCtFa?i . —TO BY ENGIN ING 8� R UCIRT A-T 3 /Dft%j7onJ Date: Rug 19 05 12:56p Ctasc-II RTSS EaCleGrouP 404-469-3272 08/19/2005 09:32 1425454 YAC*- 11.3 p.3 Distribution Sidewalk Guys :z PIPE 6RA& MA] MM CENG M' S Pti/ 1111101 ;:. � � In lhad 0-5000 16 5001-75M is 7501-10,000 14 10,001-12.500 13 12.501-15,000 12 15,001-17.500 11, 17.501-20.000 10 20.001-22.500 9 22501-25.000 a 25,001-27.500 6 27.501-30.000 5 '* The Horizontal Rod on this Proposed Design will be 14' 6' K 6" Plate Anchor Minium oompaclion to be 90% in the badM area over the plate anchor. Baddil material can be Native. FI FVATION VIEW P01 TO NOT TO SCALE LOOKMO NORTH MATERIAL ITEMS 01 TO TO SE PRO VIDED AT A LATER DATE TO CONTRACTOR. Figure I Single guy installation PLAN B PROF&E VIEW Inc.ALTNF.ALA'GEAL sMr• 1 of .1_ North Sky """°"" 3rd d DAYTON Communications MIXED USE BUILDING R� �T ISO IIb AR!![ - 5Ws- t 11. wrr�c NE (:a'fR7 al :kd RVENUE SO d s. wA sIw DAYION STREET. EDMOAM WA s.. I- Las) lSLJ1}t SNONDJWSHCOUNTy GKJ 1451 M�vrS 11 OEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC_ E Triad Law Group 126 — 3rd Avenue South, #101 Edmonds, Washington 98020 Attention: Chuck Greenberg 40 13256 Northeast 20th Street, Suite 16 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (425) 747-5618 FAX (425) 747-8561 STREET FILE Subject: Excavation Considerations Proposed 3-Level Building Dayton Street and South 3rd Avenue Edmonds, Washington Dear Mr. Greenberg: May 19, 2004 JN 04213 RECEIVED SEP - 3 2004 BUILDING DEPT. via facsimile: (425) 672-7867 On May 13, 2004, the undersigned Principal of Geotech Consultants, Inc. visited your project site in Edmonds. We understand that you propose to construct a new building on the site as shown on the plans we received (Sheets 1 — 4, prepared by Higa-Burkholder Associates, LLC). The bottom level of the building will be at elevation 46.5 feet and cover much of the property. The purpose of this visit was to observe the existing site . conditions and to review a previous geotechnical engineering study for the site (Giles Engineering dated June 9, 1998), and to develop opinions regarding the excavation consideration of your project. The recommendations and conclusions presented in this report are professional opinions based on the visual observations of the site, the soil information provided in the study, and on previous experience in the Puget Sound area. No deep subsurface explorations were completed as part of our scope of work. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions The site is located at the northeastern corner of Dayton Street and 3rd Avenue South in Edmonds. It is currently undeveloped and covered with grass. The site has a moderate slope to the west, with the east side near elevation 54 feet and the west side near elevation 47 feet. A building with a basement level estimated to be 48 feet is located 1.5 to 2 feet north of the northern property line. A paved parking lot is located on the property to the east; the edge of the pavement is about 4 feet from the eastern property line. Subsurface Conditions The geotechnical engineering study done by Giles Engineering indicates that two test pits were previously excavated on the site. One was excavated to a depth of 12 feet. The soil generally found in the test pits was glacial till, which is comprised of gravelly, silty sand. The glacial till was dense to very dense within approximately 2 feet of the ground surface. We were involved in a project two blocks from the site, and glacial till was also found there at a shallow depth. Glacial till is quite common in the Puget Sound area. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Triad Law Group , JN 04213 May 19, 2004 Page 2 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General Excavation slopes should not exceed the limits specified in local, state, and national government safety regulations. Temporary cuts to a depth of about 4 feet may be attempted vertically in unsaturated soil, if there are no indications of slope instability. Based upon Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 296, Part N, the glacial till soil at the subject site would generally be classified as Type A. Therefore, temporary cut slopes greater than 4 feet in height cannot generally be excavated at an inclination steeper than 0.75:1 (Horizontal: Vertical), extending continuously between the top and the bottom of a cut. However, it is our professional opinion that the glacial till soil is suitable for a temporary excavation, where the cut exceeds 4 feet, of 0.5:1 (H:V). The slopes excavated to this steep inclination should be covered with plastic once the excavation is completed. Even with this steep, temporary inclination, it is not possible to keep the excavation sides within the property lines near the northern, southern, and eastern sides of the site. However, the excavation could be adequately sloped if an easement can be obtained from the neighboring property owners on those three sides. If easement cannot be obtained, temporary shoring would be the next alternative. On the southern and eastern sides, the temporary excavation would likely necessitate closing the existing sidewalk and some parking stalls, respectively. On the northern side, the excavation would have to expose the southern foundation wall of the northern adjacent building. This excavation would not destabilize the foundation wall because the footing depth of this wall and the new northern wall on the subject site will only be about 18 inches apart vertically and about 18 to 24 inches apart horizontally. However, the downspout line that extends along that side of the northern building would have to be removed at the time of excavation and rebuilt when the foundation wall of the new building is backfilled. LIMITATIONS The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions, as they existed at the time of our site visit. If the subsurface conditions encountered during construction are significantly different from those anticipated, we should be advised at once so that we can review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered on construction sites. Such unexpected conditions frequently require making additional expenditures to attain a properly constructed project. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the Triad Law Group and its representatives for specific application to this project and site. Our recommendations and conclusions are based on the site materials observed and on previous experience with sites that have similar observed conditions. The conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in accordance with current standards of practice within the limited scope of our services. No warranty is expressed or implied. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. ~Triad Law Group May 19, 2004 • JN 04213 Page 3 We trust that this report meets your immediate needs for the proposed development. Please contact us if we can be of further service. cc: Shawn Roten via facsimile: (425) 347-0479 DRW: esn Respectfully submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. D. Robert Ward, P.E. Principal GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 0 0 Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. Geotechnical and Environmental Consulting Triad Law Group 126 3`d Avenue South Edmonds, Washington 98020 STREET FILE Attention: Mr. Charles Greenberg, Subject: Geotechnical Review 3`d and Dayton (155 3rd Avenue South) Edmonds, Washington Dear Mr. Greenberg: J-1856 April 7, 2004 DECEIVED MAY 19 2004 BUILDING DEPT. On April 7, 2004 Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. (ZZA) agreed to provide a geotechnical review of plans and the Giles Engineering geotechnical report for the subject property at your request. The purpose of the evaluation is to satisfy a City building department requirement. The scope of work is limited to review of plans provided by you, for conformance with the applicable engineering recommendations of the Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. geotechnical report for the project dated June 9, 1998. INFORMATION REVIEWED The following information was reviewed for this project: 1. City of Edmonds, Plan Review Corrections dated 4/2/04; 2. Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. geotechnical report dated June 9, 1998; 3. Construction Plans, sheets 1 through 4, by Higa-Burkholder dated 1/21/04; 4. Architectural plans, sheets cover, 1 through 7, dated 12/1/03 by Shelter Form, Inc. 5. Structural plans, sheets S-1 through S-10, dated 10/23/03, by Chris Covington, P.E. CONCLUSION I have reviewed the Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. geotechnical report dated June 9, 1998 (for which the undersigned was the responsible professional engineer) and conclude that all recommendations of the report are still valid for the planned construction. The plans reviewed are consistent with the recommendations of the referenced Giles report. Any information contained in the referenced Giles report which is not specifically noted on the plans should be reviewed by the owner, architect, engineer and contractor and implemented during construction if applicable to the site conditions and planned construction. 18905 33rd Avenue West #1 17, Lynnwood, WA 98036 (425) 771-3304 Fax: (425) 771-3549 . ZZA • 3rd anMyton, Edmonds, Washington - 856 '�` • a April 7, 2004 004 ` A Page 2 CLOSURE We appreciate the opportunity to provide these services. If you have any questions, please call. Respectfully submitted, ZIPPER ZEMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 John E. Zipper, P.E. President Cc: Shelter Form Construction Services 1620 Washington Avenue Mukilteo, WA 98275 Attention: Jack Hicks i 'RE3 1/24/OS J-t 856,040704,report 111c.18Wv CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771.0220 • FAX (425) 771-0221 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning • Building • Engineering August 10, 1999 Mr. Alan Aramaki, PE Aramaki, Borden and Associates 6141 NE Bothell Way Seattle, WA 98155 SUBJECT: Proposed Mixed Use Building at303 Dayton Street (ADB-98-91) (Plan Check 98-393) Dear Mr. Aramaki: BARBARA FAHEY MAYOR The City Engineer discovered discrepancies between the civil site plans and the architectural plans that preclude authorizing construction. I am returning, for your use, the original plans that you submitted for the City Engineer's approval. I recommend that you coordinate with the project architect to have the plans match. Your sheet 1 shows the building stairway at the southeast corner of the building, whereas the architectural design shows the stair entrance at the middle of the south wall. There is also confusion as to how the sidewalks on Dayton Street will be constructed. Are there street trees? Where? Is there a planter, or is the sidewalk to be constructed from the back of curb to the building wall? Per my phone discussion with Don Quackenbush on January 5, 1999, we agreed that architectural sheets 1.1 and 2.1 could be referenced on the civil plans, but that the architect's plans would need to be stamped by a professional engineer as well. The datum for the architectural drawings and the civil drawings are not the same. It appears that there is a difference of 53.30 feet. This should be referenced on one or both of the plan sets. Assuming this conversion is correct, it appears that there is a 10%.grade down into the stairwell at the northwest corner of the building. Please confirm the accuracy of the elevations between the two sets of plans. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me at (425) 775-7744. When the information is provided, please submit the mylars or other originals to the.Development Services Technicians for the City Engineer's signature. Sing ely, GORDON C. HYDE Development Services Engineer GCH/cmc c: DST Mr. Shane Hager; Scott Huntley Architects; 2019 — 3'd Avenue NE, #200; Seattle, WA 98121 G:\ENGR\GORDY\809Ib.doc Incorporated August 11, 1890 Sister City - Hekinan, Japan Alk 1 W W W WYi W TSS LnaV) 000 Ln 0 0 N aN a a_a N N N N N N CIVIL ENGINEERS PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS �_— aramakl bonlen .��& �Oles INCORPORATED 6141 N.E. BOTHELL WAY SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98155 (")48&9711 EXPIRES 4-20-� 9 0,49 let/, �� G. TY o1- t;1�f�1� Nt�S WY4 1,2 2/L-2 Vf 0 to H H H W W W W W W xxx 0 Vf {A O O O w O O N aov CI <V M N N C �ga a ,_ D � T E NTI O t..l � �Y S-'(">✓ c'1 A til A l,'f S I S � v� �� I C� t�.l i rYt p er m e.O—b l 2 ozre. 0- �F Cr [0W 25)(i ).Vpool + j00 - 110.2 CC 7/,3 D e-+e A4- O r'L (J (� 2 d e s t Q ►�. Y`o�le1 ' due 4-a 4,;!, Anac,w'Aw Tee. � i Z i Y1 c� � "` � f �r iv � 3 eA = ,'J YYl t VI l,L��' S ` V1'T E `� I '1 LkVyV ,i Q =. GY A O. 28 CAS For pipes rL= o, ot2 @ P'E r-A g GC3 I� c +3 O2 OVET�FLo�,J ��"MIN = x x 4A',vi �- 0 0 0 a a v N N N Mlnl. jgfiW Q,e �-UP 0 Tr.G kr,.o c(c -cL& b� svr op 0 45 C. FRIDAY HAREOR .PORT SrANL Y 0... 5 — c �0 8t / 3 30� 5 5 c 6 8075 2 oC sok5045 403530� 2 L 1\ 3 45 55 eo C —10 1 i 2 s0" V� 3 4 s �. G!PM49P 7 - 3 5 � `�� %� v RErT 55 I � 4s� 2, 3 — 6 90 7 ' 3. rra s 9 90 ss 50 45 / 8g 5 s 40 ° io � `4 VILL 80 � 2 1 I I I^ 5 fi C S AT.L 7 ., 1 � ,. 3 4/ 1 40 65 P sl 50 I J 2 5� 00 I 4 85 590 T COMA 3 3 30 25 55� 5 0 E r:5 so • ABA `so I 65 6 r 0..' jo s 1 2 2 3 .2 S\ 60 s� 70 4 �Er rR'L;. 70 15 q 2 YAK 90 60 65 as 22 v 22— 7 100 55 6 �r �, c 6 4 S 45 60 70.s � 4 20� 5 a 0 `7 }P� 55 80 ` 5 5 40 2 I 55 " 65 ' T 9 ' 1�80 7 I AD M 25 65 —60 55� � • Lor�..., :v 1 10 9 8 $ 30 6 z --- — s — 4 / I 50 40 tCKL ON, 40 10(o 7 P T EN E 2 2 40 ' 9b3 HMO - 60 55 so 4535 _ ,65 30 � ALS OF 100-YR 24-HR PRECIPITI TION 45 50 55 60 65 iS OF AN INCH ,lv '�.4 123 122 121 5"- 1 CO- 9 e6lY S-{6VvV\ 6-32 HANDBOOI{ OF HYDRAULICS Table 6-2. Diameters of Pipes in Inches, from the Manni Formula, n = 0.012 (Continued) Discharge In cubic a - 1 = drop in hydraulic gradient per foot feet Per second 0001 I .0002 .0004 .0006 .0008 .001 .0012 .0014 .0016.0018 .002 7.2 6.3 5.8 5.2 4.9 4.7 4.5 4:4 4.3 4.2 4.1 .1 2 .3 9.4 10.9 8.2 9.8 7.2 8.4 6.7 7.8 6.3 7.4 6.1 7.1 5.9 6.9 5.7 6.7 5.6 6.5 5.5 6.4 5.4 6:2 .4 5 12.2 13.2 .10.7 11.6 9.4 10.2 8.7 9.5 8.2 9.0 7.9 8.8 7.8 8.3 7.4 8.1 7.2 7.9 7.1 7.7 6.9 7.5 .6 14.2 15.0 12.4 13.2 10.9 11.6 10.1 10.7 9.6 10.2 9.2 9.7 8.9 9.4 8.6 9.1 8.4 8.9 8.2 8.7 8.1 8.6 .7 .8 9 15.8 16.5 13.9 14.5 .12.2 12.7 11.3 11.8 10.7 11.2 10.2 10.7 9.9 10.3 9.6 10.1 9.4 9.8 9.2 9.8 9.0 9.4 1.0 17.1 15.1 13.2 12.3 11.6 11.1 10.8 10.5 10.2 10.0 9.8 1.2 18.4 16:1 14.2 13.1 12.4 11.9 11.5 11.2 10.9 10.7 10.5 1.4 19.5 17.1 15.0 13.9 13.2 12.6 12.2 11.9 11.6 11.3 11.1 1.6 20.5 18.0 15.8 14.0 13.9 13.3 12.8 12.5 12.2 11.9 11.7 1.8 21.4 18.8 10.5 15.3 14.5 13.9 13.4 13.0 .12.7 12:4 12.2 2.0 22.2 19.5 17.1 15.9 15.1 14.5 14.0 13.6 13.2 12.9 12.7 2.5 24.2 21.2 18.6 17.3 10.4 15.7 15.2 14.8 14.4 14.1 13.8 3.0 25.9 22.7 20.0 18.5 17.5 16.8 16.2 15.8 15.4 15.1 14.8 3.5 27.4 24.1 21.2 19.6 18.6 17.8 17.2 10.7 16.3 16.0 15.6 4.0 28.8 25.3 22.2 20.6 19.5 18.7 18.1 17.6 17.1 16.8 16.4 4.5 30.1 26.5 23.2 21.5 20.4 19.6 18.9 18A 18.0 17.6 17.2 5 31.4 27.5 24.2 22.4 21.2 20.4 19.7 19.1 18.6 18.2 17.9 6 33.6 29.5 25.9 24.0 22.7 21.8 21.1 20.5 20.0 19.5 19.1 7 35.6 31.2 27.4 25.4 24.1 23.1 22.3 21.7 21.2 20.7 20.3 8 37.4 32.8 28.8 26.7 25.3 24.3 23.5 22.8 22.2 21.S 21.3 9 39.1 34.3 30.1 27.9 26.5 25.4 24.5 23.8 23.2 .22.7 22.3 10 40.7 35.7 31.4 29.1 27.5 26.4 25.6 24.8 24.2 23.7 23.2 12 43.5 38.2 33.6 31.1 29.5 28.3 27.3 26.5 25.9 25.3 24.8 14 48.1 40.5 35.6 33.0 31.2 30.0 29.0 28.1 27.4 26.8 20.3 16 48.5 42.6 37.4 34.7 32.8 31.5 30.4 29.6 28.8 28.2 27.7 18 50.7 44.5 39.1 36.2 34.3 32.9 31.8 30.9 30.1 29.5 28.9 20 52.7 46.3 40.7 3L7 35.7 34.2 33.1 32.2 31.4 30.7 30.1 25 57.3 50.4 44.2 41.0 38.8 37.2 36.0 35.0 34.1 33.4 32.7 30 61.4 53.9 47.3 43.9 41.6 39.9 38.5 37.4 36.5 35.7 35.0 35 65.1 57.1 50.2 46.5 44.1 42.2 40.8 39.7 38.7 37.8 37.1 . 40 68.4 60.1 52.7 48.9 46.3 44.4 42:9 41.7 40.7 39.8 39.0 45 71.5 62.8 55.1 51.1 48.4 46.4 44.9 43.6 42.5 41.6 40.8 50 74.4 65.3 57.3 53.1 50.4 48.3 46.7 45.3 44.2 43.3 42.4 55 77.1 67.7 69.4 55.1 52.2 50.0 48.4 47.0 45.8 44.8 44.0 60 79.6 69.9 61.4 56.0 53.9 51.7 50.0 48.5 47.3 46.3 45.4 65 82.1 72.1 63.3 58.6 55.6 53.3 51.5 50.0 48.8 47.7 40.8 70 84.4 74.1 65.1 60.3 57.1 54.8 52.9 51.4 50.2 49.1 48.1 75 86.6 76.0 66.8 61.9 58.6 56.2 54.3 52.8 51.5 50.4 49.4 80 88.7 77.9 68.4 63.4 60.1 57.6 55.7 54.1 52.7 51.6 50.6 85 90.7 79.7 70.0 64.8 61.4 58.9 56.9 55.3 54.0 52.8 51.7 90 92.7 81.4 71.5 66.3 62.8 60.2 53.2 56.5 55.1 53.9 52.0 100 96.4 84.7 74.4 68.9 65.3 62.6 00.5 58.8 57.3 56.1 55.0 110 09.9 87.8 77.1 71.4 67.7 64.9 62.7 60.9 59.4 53.1 57.0 120 103 90.7 79.6 73.8 69.9 67.1 64.8 63.0 61.4 60.1 58.0 130 106 93.4 82.1 76.0 72.1 69.1 66.8 64.9 63.3 61.9 60.7 140 109 06.1 94.4 78.2 74.1 71.0 68.7 06.7 65.1 03.6 62.4 6-33 e Manning 15 I .03 I .04 .6 2.5 2.4 .3 3.2 3.0 .9 3.7 3.5 .3 4.2 4.0 .7 4.5 4.3 .0 4.9 4.6 .3 5.1 4.9 .6 5.4 5.1 .9 5.7 5.4 .1 5.9 5.6 .5 6.3 .9 6.7 6.0 -6.3 .3 7.0 6.7 .6 7.3 7.0 .9 7.8 7.2 .6 8.3 7.9 .2 8.9 8.4 .7 9.4 8.9 .2 9.9 9.4 .7 10.3 9.8 .1 10.8 10.2 .9 11.5 10.9 .6 12.2 11.8 .3 12.3 12.2 .9 13.4 12.7 .4 13.9 13.2 1.5 14.9 14.2 V.4 15.8 15.0 '.2 16.6 15.8 1.0 17.4 16.5 1.7 18.1 17.1 ).4 19.7 18.6 l.S 21.1 20.0 S.1 22.3 21.2 i.3 23.5 22.2 i.4 24.5 23.2 3.4 25.5 24.2 i.4 26.5 25.1 3.3 27.3 25.9 ).1 28.2 26.7 ).0 29.0 27.4 ).7 29.7 28.2 1.5 30.4 28.8 2.2 31.1 29.5 2.9 31.7 30.1 1.2 33.1 31.4 5.5 34.3 32.5 6.7 35.4 33.6 7.8 36.5 34.6 8.9 37.5 35.6 • • � R\ cJ GILES* ENGINEERING l 1SOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL 8c CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS -Atlanta, GA •Dallas, TX ' • Los Angeles, CA • Madison, WI • Milwaukee, WI • Seattle, WA June 9 1998 ' • Washington, D.C. Marine Business International ' Blanchard Plaza 2201 - 6' Avenue, Suite 1301 Seattle, Washington 98121 Attention: Mr. Dennis LaPorte, Vice President ' Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Office Building ' 31 Avenue South and Dayton Street Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 ' Dear Mr. LaPorte: ' In accordance with your request and authorization, we have conducted a Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis for the above -referenced project. The conclusions and recommendations developed from the analysis are discussed in detail in the accompanying report. We appreciate the opportunity to have been of service on this project. If there are any questions or if we may be of further service, please do not hesitate to call at any time. Respectfully submitted, 1 1 GILES 'ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Richard Hyland. ZIA Staff �--Engineer x John E. Zipper, P Regional Manage RE , , :� �99 ' 11807 North Creek Parkway South • Suite 102 • Bothell, WA 98011 425/482-2020 • Fax 425/482-6300 • E-Mail seattle@gilesengr.com TABLE OF CONTENTS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EXPLORATION AND ANALYSIS PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING 3RDAVENUE SOUTH AND DAYTON STREET EDMONDS, WASHINGTON PROJECT NO.6G-9805013 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................ 1 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES ................................................... 2 3.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................... 3 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ............................................. 3 4.1 Soil Conditions...................................................4 4.2 Groundwater Conditions ............................................. 4 4.3 Seismic Conditions ................................................. 5 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................. 5 5.1 Site Preparation Recommendations ..................................... 5 5.2 Structural Fill ..................................................... 8 5.3 Temporary Excavations, Construction Dewatering, and Permanent Slopes .... 11 5.4 Utility Installation ................................................ 12 5.5 Foundation Design Parameters ...................................... 13 5.6 Slab -on -Grade Design Parameters .................................... 15 5.7 Retaining Wall Design Parameters ................................... 15 5.8 Pavement Design Recommendations .................................. 17 5.9 Conclusion......................................................18 APPENDICES -Appendix A -General Comments -Appendix B-Figures -Appendix C-Field Procedures and Exploration Logs -Appendix D-Laboratory Procedures 0 Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. 1998 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EXPLORATION AND ANALYSIS ' PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING 3'D AVENUE SOUTH AND DAYTON STREET EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ' PROJECT NO.6G-9805013 ' 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following is a brief summary outline of the geotechnical engineering conclusions and ' recommendations. This summary should be read in complete context with the accompanying report for proper interpretation. ' Subsurface Conditions • The subsurface exploration program performed for this study consisted of excavating two trackhoe test pits on May 21, 1998. Test pit TP-1 extended to a depth of 4 feet and TP-2 extended to a depth of 12 feet below the existing ground surface. • The test pits revealed the site to be underlain by firm to very dense, unweathered native glacial till deposits. A loose, weathered silty sand mantles the upper 1 %Z to 2 feet of the site. • No groundwater seepage was encountered in the explorations. A perched groundwater condition could develop above the dense glacial till horizon during the winter and spring months.. ' Site Preparation and Development Recommendations • The site should be stripped of vegetation, organic material, and deleterious materials ' including existing fills below planned developments. Subgrades should be stripped to reveal firm native deposits or soils capable of being compacted to a firm, non - yielding condition and a minimum compaction level of 90 percent of ASTM:D-1557. • Moisture sensitivity of site soils during -wet weather or wet site conditions should be expected due to the high fines (silt/clay) content. During wet weather,. -removal of additional material may become necessary to achieve a firm subgrade. • Native soils are suitable for reuse as structural fill material during dry weather conditions. However, during wet weather their use may be limited due to moisture sensitivity. • Backfilled walls should be designed using equivalent fluid pressures of 35 and 55 pcf for active and at -rest loading conditions respectively. ' • Caving of the site soils should be anticipated in excavations which extend through loose surficial native soils or through seepage zones. In dense, unweathered glacial till, caving is not anticipated and temporary sloped cuts up to 1 H:1 V are tentatively thought to be feasible. Cuts should meet the requirements of federal, state, and local ordinances, such as OSHA and WISHA. Use of temporary bracing, "trench boxes" ' and/or sloped cuts may be necessary. L 11 Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 2 • Excavation along the east property line for construction of the below -grade parking structure may be on the order of 8 to 13 feet in height. To make these cuts feasible, shoring and/or temporary excavation easements into adjacent property to allow sloped cuts will be required. If shoring is required for the project, additional engineering and/or field exploration will be required. • We understand footings along the north property line will be constructed adjacent to and/or underneath existing foundation elements. If the new foundation elements are constructed underneath existing foundation elements, it will likely be necessary to temporarily support the existing foundations. Building Foundations and Floors ' • Foundations should bear on at least firm native deposits at depths of at least 2 feet below existing grades. • Conventional spread and strip footings should be designed with a maximum net allowable soil bearing capacity of 2,000 psf for firm native soils or compacted fill and 4,000 psf for very dense unweathered glacial till at depths generally greater than ' 2 feet. • Slab -on -grade should be founded on structural fill or native soils compacted to at least 92 percent of the modified Proctor. A capillary break layer is recommended for ' moisture protection. 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES ' The scope of services performed for this phase of the project included a visual site P P P P J ' reconnaissance, a subsurface exploration program consisting of test pit explorations, geotechnical engineering analyses, and preparation of this report. These services were generally performed as described in our Proposal for Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis (6GP-980506). The purpose of this study was to establish general subsurface conditions from which conclusions and recommendations regarding foundation design and earthwork construction could be formulated. This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical design practice for the exclusive use of Marine Business. International, and their agents for specific application to this project. This report has not been prepared to serve as the plans and specifications ' for actual construction without the appropriate interpretation by the project architect, structural engineer, and/or civil engineer. This report and our field services were based on assumed conditions/characteristics of the proposed development where specific information was not available. Available project information at the time of this report preparation included a preliminary building layout and site and parking details of adjacent building. Finished floor elevations and grading plans GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES INC. Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 3 were not available. We recommend that the architect, civil engineer and structural engineer, along with any other design professionals involved in this project, carefully review our assumptions to determine whether they are consistent with the actual planned development. When discrepancies exist, they should be brought to our attention to determine their effect on the conclusions and recommendations provided herein. The project plans and specifications should be submitted to our firm for review to verify that the recommendations provided herein have been correctly interpreted 1 and are incorporated into the design. Reproduction and distribution of this report must be authorized by the client and Giles. . ' 3.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The site is located at the northeast corner of Yd Avenue South and Dayton Street in Edmonds, iWashington. The site consists of a rectangular parcel that measures approximately 60 by 75 feet overall and is bounded by sidewalks to the south and west, an adjacent building to the north and asphalt parking to the east. An existing restaurant was demolished. Site topography slopes ' downward from east to west across the proposed office building area with a maximum topographic relief of approximately 10 feet. tThe project as proposed will consist of constructing a three -level combined living and office space with first level parking. The proposed building will cover the entire 60 by 75-foot parcel. We ' anticipate that a temporary excavations on the order of 8 to 13 feet in height would be required along the east property line to construct the street level parking area. Due to the proximity of the property line and adjacent asphalt parking, a temporary excavation easement and/or shoring will be required to make this excavation feasible. No grading plan was available at the time of this report preparation. The interior column total loads are 138 kips and exterior column total loads are 65 kips. ' 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The site conditions were evaluated for this study on May 21, 1998. Surface, subsurface soil, groundwater, and seismic response conditions are discussed below. The subsurface explorations performed for this study consisted of advancing two trackhoe-excavated test pits extending to depths of 4 and 12 feet. The explorations were advanced using a trackhoe operated by owner's demolition contractor. The explorations were located and logged by a geotechnical engineer from our office. Exploration locations were established based on the preliminary layout of the proposed development and under the constraints of topography and access. The approximate exploration locations are indicated on the Site and Exploration Plan (Figure 1) enclosed in Appendix B. The subsurface conditions described below have been simplified for ease of report interpretation. Copies of the �) GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 4 ' exploration logs and a description of field procedures are enclosed in Appendix C and should be consulted for a more detailed description of the conditions encountered. Laboratory testing information is enclosed in Appendix D. 4.1 Soil Conditions ' Our test pit explorations generally revealed weathered, loose silty fine sand to a depth of 1 to 2 feet. Firm to very dense glacially -consolidated soil, consisting of grey sand with variable amounts of silts and gravel, was typically encountered at depths of 2 feet below the ground surface. ' These materials are interpreted to be unweathered glacial till. Glacial till consists of a compact mixture of silt, sand, and gravel deposited below glacial ice. In the Puget Sound region, the glacial till and stratigraphically deeper soils were overridden and consolidated by the weight of thick glacial ice sheets (up to several thousand feet thick) and therefore these soils exhibit characteristics including low compressibility and high relative density. The glacial till underlying the site consists primarily of silt and sand with low to moderate gravel content. Grain -size distribution curves generated by our laboratory for selected soil samples are included in Appendix D for soil classification purposes. The USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Soil Survey for Snohomish County, Washington maps native soils in the project vicinity as belonging to the group known as Alderwood Urban Land ' Complex. The origins of this soil are as glacial till deposits according to the SCS. Alderwood Urban Land Complex soils are described by the SCSas having the following characteristics in an undisturbed condition. Low shrink -swell potential; ' pH range of 5.1 to 6.0; • Negligible permeability below the cemented layer beginning below about 2 feet; • Designated in Hydrologic Soil Group C indicating slow infiltration rates; • Unified Soil Classification System designation of GM; ' Potential for perched water at 2.5 to 3 feet; • Cemented layer beginning at 20 to 40 inches below the surface; • Moderate risk of corrosion to uncoated steel and concrete. 4.2 Groundwater Conditions Groundwater was not encountered in the explorations performed for this study. Moisture contents were typically judged to be moist or slightly above optimum within the upper weathered soils and moist within the dense, unweathered soils. The highest moisture contents would typically GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 0 0' --* 0 .- Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 5 be associated with surface soils, due to precipitation, and soils directly above the contact with the dense, unweathered till due to groundwater perching. However, a perched groundwater condition was not observed in the explorations. Perched groundwater may be present where a relatively impermeable soil layer, such as unweathered glacial till, impedes infiltration of water causing it to buildup and saturate overlying more permeable soil horizons. Groundwater perching would be most likely encountered following significant precipitation and during the winter and spring months. Soil moisture and groundwater conditions should be expected to fluctuate with season, precipitation amounts, and other on- and off -site factors including site utilization. The moisture content of soils as determined by our laboratory is shown for selected samples on the exploration logs. 4.3 Seismic Conditions According to the Seismic Zone Map of the United States contained in the 1994 Uniform Building Code, the project site lies within seismic risk zone 3. Based on native soil conditions encountered at the site, the subsurface site conditions are interpreted to correspond to a seismic soil profile type S2 asdefined by Table 16-J of the 1994 Uniform Building Code. Soil profile type S2 applies to a profile consisting predominantly of dense or medium dense/medium stiff soil where soil depth exceeds 200 feet. We interpret native site soils as falling under the Sc seismic soil profile of the 1997 UBC. ' 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The conditions imposed by the proposed development have been evaluated on the basis of the assumed development plan, the engineering characteristics of the subsurface materials encountered in the explorations, and the anticipated soil behavior both during and after construction. Based on the information obtained from our subsurface exploration program, the project appears feasible with respect to soil and groundwater conditions encountered at the site. The conclusions and recommendations for foundation, slab -on -grade, along with site development recommendation. and considerations, are discussed in the following sections of this report. 5.1 Site Preparation Recommendations Based upon the subsurface conditions encountered during exploration, the following site preparation procedures have been developed and include recommendations regarding site drainage, stripping, subgrade protection, proofrolling and subgrade compaction. Site preparation effort is expected to be dependent upon prevalent weather conditions during the earthwork phase of the project. Therefore, bids for site preparation, earthwork, and paving operations should be based upon e. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 1 iu �I 7 L Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 6 the time of year that construction will proceed. We recommend that a representative of our firm observe the soil conditions prior to and during site preparation activities to evaluate the suitability of stripped subgrades prior to placement of fill, foundation elements, and paving. Site Drainage and Surface Water Control Adequate temporary and permanent control of surface water runoff and subsurface seepage will be required in order to allow site access, grading, and construction of underground utilities to proceed. Excavation, filling, subgrade and grade preparation should be performed in a manner and sequence that will provide drainage at all times and proper control of erosion. Surface water should be pumped or drained to provide a suitable working platform. Successful drainage of local saturated zones due to accumulations of surface water runoff could be accomplished by localized ditching and/or the installation of cut-off trenches, berms, or french drains. Groundwater from upgradient sources could be intercepted with cutoff trenches or french drains and routed around the work area. Sump pumps could be required for foundation (and other) excavations during wet season construction. Standing water and loose, saturated soils ("mud") should be removed from subgrades prior to placement of fill or structural concrete. The soil should be provided with temporary drainage and siltation control as required by local standards. Site Stripping/Clearing Preparation of the site should include the removal of any vegetation, topsoil, fill, debris or any other deleterious materials which may exist at the time of development. Based on the condition of the site at the time of exploration, site clearing activities are anticipated to be accomplished during the demolition phase of work. Subgrade Preparation Once the site has been stripped to reveal a non -organic subgrade, we recommend. that the stripped subgrade be evaluated by a representative of our firm prior to placement of structural fill or concrete. Methods for subgrade evaluation could include probing and/or proofrolling with appropriate heavy, wheeled construction equipment to detect any soft or yielding areas which may need to be removed and replaced. However, the need for subgrade evaluation methods such as proofrolling are best determined during construction by the geotechnical engineer and would be dependent on factors such as weather and subgrade conditions. Following site stripping and subgrade evaluation, the subgrades should be scarified as deemed necessary by the geotechnical engineer, moisture conditioned and recompacted to at least 90 percent of the modified Proctor (ASTM:D-1557-91) maximum density. During wet weather or GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 7 1 wet site conditions, a stable subgrade may be difficult to achieve due to the moisture sensitivity of the site soils and could require additional stripping or other subgrade stabilization methods if exposed subgrade soils become saturated and are disturbed. Appropriate subgrade protection measures, as outlined subsequently, should be employed. Following subgrade preparation, structural fill may be placed in lifts with suitable compacted structural fill material. The selection, placement and compaction of structural fill should be performed in accordance with the project specifications ' and the recommendations contained in this report. ISubgrade Protection Soils exposed by subgrade preparation operations are anticipated to consist of silty sand (unweathered glacial till - see "Soil Gradation Curves in Appendix D). Given the relatively high fines content (silt/clay), the site soils are considered highly moisture -sensitive. Moisture -sensitive soils are prone to softening when disturbed in the presence .of excess moisture. Therefore, site preparation and initial construction activities, particularly site stripping, should be planned to minimize disturbance to the existing ground surface particularly during extended wet weather periods and the wet season (typically October through May) in order to reduce possible export soil volumes. Ideally, initial earthwork would be planned for the drier summer season. Subgrade protection measures could include but are not limited to the following: '0 A working drainage system (as outlined above) which must be implemented into the construction sequence to protect the subgrade from excessive amounts of water. • Use of dedicated traffic areas to limit to lateral extent of subgrade disturbance. tDuring wet site conditions, concentrated equipment traffic should not be allowed on exposed subgrade areas. • Placement of fill off an advancing pad so as not to traffic exposed, moisture -sensitive site soils. • "Sealing" of subgrades with a smooth drum roller and sloping subgrades.to drain, ' if possible, before wet weather leads to their deterioration. Preparation of a stable subgrade will be dependent in part on the contractor's ability to implement a well -planned grading sequence which incorporates adequate subgrade protection measures. Dry Weather Grading During dry weather and site conditions, extensive undercutting or overexcavation is not anticipated to be required. However, if loose fill or previously disturbed soils are encountered, some localized overexcavation may be necessary. Moisture conditioning of the site soils which are to be GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 8 used as fill may be necessary during dry weather conditions to achieve a moisture content adequately close to optimum to allow required compaction. When moisture is to be added to soil, it must be thoroughly blended throughout the lift to achieve uniform moisture distribution. Dust control measures may also be necessary during dry weather grading. Wet Weather Construction Subgrade stability problems should be expected if site development and grading activities are conducted during wet weather due to the sensitivity of these soils to moisture and disturbance. In the event the subgrade is exposed to significant increases in moisture and subgrade stability problems develop, additional undercutting or stabilization techniques should be expected to achieve a stable subgrade due to the moisture -sensitive nature of the fine-grained site soils. If undercutting or stabilization is necessary, the actual depth of undercutting or the appropriate stabilization methods should be determined by a qualified geotechnical representative during construction. Overexcavation/Stabilization Construction during extended wet weather periods could create the need to overexcavate exposed soils if they become disturbed and cannot be recompacted due to elevated moisture content and or weather conditions. The need for overexcavation should be confirmed through continuous monitoring and testing by a Giles representative. Selective drying and recompaction of unsuitable subgrades may be accomplished by scarifying or windrowing surficial material during extended periods of dry and warm weather, generally only occurring during summer months in the Puget Sound. region. During winter months, special techniques may be required to achieve stable subgrades and could include 1) overexcavation and replacement with select, granular fill or crushed rock, 2) use of geotextile fabrics, and 3) chemical stabilization with additives such as flyash or cement. We recommend that contingencies for stabilization alternatives be included within the project documents if construction will occur during winter months. We can assist in developing contingency plans once grading plans and construction scheduled have been developed. Frozen Sub rg ades If earthwork takes place during freezing conditions, all exposed subgrades should be allowed to thaw and then be recompacted prior to placing subsequent lifts of structural fill or foundation components. Alternatively, the frozen material could be stripped from the subgrade to reveal unfrozen soil prior to placing subsequent lifts of fill or foundation components. The frozen soil should not be reused as structural fill until allowed to thaw and adjusted to the proper moisture content, which may not be possible during winter months. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 9 ' 5.2 Structural Fill All structural fill should be placed in accordance with the recommendations presented herein ' for structural fill. Prior to the placement of structural fill, all surfaces to receive fill should be prepared as previously recommended. ' Structural fill includes any fill material placed under footings, pavements, or other permanent structures or facilities. The use of on -site soils for structural fill should be limited as described in this report. Materials typically used for import structural fill include clean, well -graded sand and gravel ("pit -run"); clean sand; various mixtures of gravel; crushed rock; controlled -density fill (CDF); and lean -mix concrete. Recycled concrete derived from crushed parent material is also ' useful for structural fill provided the material is thoroughly crushed to a size deemed appropriate by the geotechnical engineer (usually less than 2 inches). Structural fill materials should be free of deleterious, organic, or frozen matter and should contain no chemicals that may result in the material I being classified as "contaminated". Structural fill for raising site grades can consist of a combination of "common" and "select ' granular" material. Select granular fill should contain less than 5 percent by weight passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve, based on the fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve. Select granular fill is recommended for use in wet weather conditions and wet site and subgrade conditions, as discussed ' in the pertinent sections of this report. Common structural fill should consist of predominantly granular soil, free of organics and deleterious materials, which is compactable to a firm and ' unyielding condition at the specified compaction levels. Common structural fill should meet the requirements of specification 9-03.14(3), "Common Borrow" in the 1996 WSDOT/APWA Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction. Select structural fill should meet the ' minimum requirements of specification 9-03.14(2) "Select Borrow" except that the percent passing the No. 200 sieve should be reduced to 5 percent maximum. 1 1 1 1 1 1 The suitability of soils used for structural fill depends primarily on the gradation and moisture content of the soil when it is placed. As the fines content (that portion passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) of a soil increases, it becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more difficult or impossible to achieve. Soils containing more than about 5 percent fines by weight cannot be consistently compacted to the recommended degree when the moisture content is more than about 2 percent above or below optimum. Drying of the soils may only be accomplished during favorable dry weather by methods such as scarifying and windrowing. It should be noted that the placement of structural fill is in many cases weather -dependent and delays due to inclement weather are common even when using select granular fill. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 10 ' When moisture conditioning of the soils is required to increase moisture content of dry -of - optimum soils, we recommend that the soils be uniformly blended with the added moisture to provide a uniform moisture content throughout the affected soils. Use of tillers or thorough blending ' using excavators or repeated windrowing with bladed equipment is recommended. Simply spraying the top of individual lifts with water does not adequately moisture condition the soil. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Structural fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. Individual lifts should be compacted such that a minimum density of at least 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density is achieved (ASTM:D-1557). Higher compaction levels should be achieved where called for in the project specifications or the local development standards or elsewhere in this report. We recommended that a geotechnical engineering representative be present during the placement of structural fill to observe the work and perform a representative number of in -place density tests. In this way, the adequacy of earthwork may be evaluated as grading progresses. Reuse of On -Site Soil Reuse of the native glacial till soils for structural fill is considered feasible provided soils are free of organic matter and moisture content can be adjusted to achieve proper compaction levels. The native soils should be considered highly moisture -sensitive due to their high fines (silt and clay) content and generally fine granular fraction. During wet weather, elevated moisture content would preclude use of on -site soils for fill unless they are adequately protected from excessive moisture and/or can be dried back during favorable weather. Therefore, for planning purposes, we recommend that wet season construction include contingencies for use of imported select granular fill for all structural fill applications in the event that elevated moisture and weather conditions preclude reuse of on -site soils. Recommended Compaction Levels The following table summarizes the recommended compaction levels based on ASTM:D- 1557 (modified Proctor) for various locations of the proposed project and may be incorporated into the project specifications. e, GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 11 _. Recommended Minimum Compaction Levels Location Depth Compaction (%) Below Building All 92 Pavement (Asphalt or Concrete) Below 1 foot 90 Top foot of subgrade 95 Utilities Location controls 90 - 95 Retaining Wall Backfill All 90 (with hand -operated equipment) Landscape All 85 - 90 final use controls) 5.3 Temporary Excavations, Construction Dewatering, and Permanent Slopes Some excavation bank stability problems for foundation and utility construction may occur where excavations extend into loose cohesionless soil, undocumented fill, or saturated zones. Generally, only the upper 2 feet of the site soils were considered to be in a loose condition. Caving of the test pit walls was not observed. Temporary slope stability is a function of many factors including the presence and abundance of groundwater, the type and density of the various soil strata, the depth of excavation, surcharge loadings adjacent to the excavation, and the length of time and weather conditions while the excavation remains open. It is exceedingly difficult under these variable circumstances to preestablish a safe and "maintenance free" temporary excavation slope angle. Therefore, it should be the responsibility of the contractor to maintain safe slope configurations since the contractor is continuously at the job site, able to control some of the factors, and able to observe and alter the nature and condition of the cut slopes. We recommend that excavations be adequately sloped or braced to prevent injury of workmen from local sloughing and spalling. All excavations including utilities should conform to applicable sloping or shoring standards for worker access such as WISHA and OSHA. Temporary slope angles of 1H:1V are tentatively recommended for excavations in dense, unweathered glacial till where groundwater is not present. We anticipate that these soils would fall into a Type A classification according to WAC Chapter 296-155, Part N, "Excavation, Trenching, and Shoring". The upper weathered soils would fall under a Type C classification and temporary slope angles of 1.5H:1 V are tentatively recommended. ' Excavations adjacent to the east, south, and west property line can be sloped, provided that temporary easements can be obtained. The top of the cuts should be protected with asphalt berms, sandbags, or other means to prevent sheet flow runoff from entering the site. If easements cannot 1 GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 12 ' be obtained, temporary shoring may be required. Design of temporary shoring is beyond our authorized scope of services. If temporary shoring is required, it is possible that cantilever soldier piles can be used. Additional field exploration and engineering analysis is recommended, if shoring ' is required. ' We recommend that any excavations which extend below a 21-1:1 V plan subtended down from existing footings from the adjacent building be reviewed by our firm. Slot cut underpinning may be required for excavations below the level of the existing footings. ' Construction Dewaterine 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Groundwater was not encountered in the explorations. Slight seepage due to groundwater perching above the dense glacial till contact may be possible during wet weather. It is likely that any accumulated water in excavations could be removed with sump pumps placed directly in the excavation. Permanent Slopes We generally recommend all permanent slopes be designed at a 21-1:1 V (Horizontal:Vertical) inclination or flatter. With slopes steeper than about 2H:1 V, topsoil erodes readily and it is more difficult and time consuming to establish vegetation for slope protection. Some sluffing of surficial soils should be expected during wet weather until vegetation has become established. The 1996 Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction provides guidelines under "Placing Jute Matting, Erosion Control Blanket, or Clear Plastic Covering" which may be incorporated for protection of slopes. 5.4 Utility Installation All utility subgrades should be firm and unyielding, and free of all soils which are loose, disturbed, or pumping. Such soils should be removed and replaced, if necessary. All structural fill used to replace overexcavated soils should be compacted as specified and as recommended in this report. Trenching and shoring should conform to applicable regulations such as WISHA and OSHA. Pipe bedding and cover should be placed according to utility manufacturer's recommendations and local ordinances. Generally, we recommend that a minimum of 6 inches of bedding material be placed in the trench bottom. Bedding material for rigid and flexible pipe should conform with Sections 9-03.15 and 9-03.16, respectively, of the 1996 WSDOT/APWA Standard GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 13 Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction. Native, on -site soils are not suited for use as bedding material. All excavations should be wide enough to allow for compaction around the haunches of pipes: Otherwise, materials such as controlled density fill or pea gravel ' could be used to reduce the compactive effort required. ' Backfilling for the remainder of the trenches could be completed utilizing common fill or select granular fill, depending on soil moisture and weather conditions. Compaction of backfill material should be accomplished with soils within f2 percent of their optimum moisture content in ' order to achieve the minimum specified compaction levels set forth in this report and project specifications. However, initial lift thickness could be increased to levels recommended by the manufacture to protect utilities from damage by compacting equipment. It may be necessary to ' separate soils as they are excavated according to their suitability for reuse. Soils which are to be reused should be protected while stockpiled. ' 5.5 Foundation Design Parameters The proposed new building may be supported by conventional spread footings founded on ' at least firm native soils (moderately weathered or unweathered glacial till), or on properly compacted new structural fill placed above suitably prepared subgrades per the recommendations in this report. The depth to suitable bearing deposits for conventional foundations disclosed in the ' test pits is at least 2 feet below existing grades. Structural fill used to raise site grades below buildings should be compacted to a minimum of 92 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. A minimum embedment depth of not less than 18 inches for exterior footings, and not less than 12 inches for interior footings should be maintained for frost protection. We recommend a minimum footing width of 18 inches for continuous footings and 24 inches for isolated footings. Foundations should not be set in or above loose or disturbed soils or any existing uncontrolled fill. As some of the site soils are silty, site work in the presence of water or during wet weather could disturb the bearing strata. The contractor should avoid disturbance of these soils and limit traffic across the building pad or foundation area during wet weather. To minimize disturbance associated with foundation form work and reinforcement bar placement, the use of a lean concrete "mud mat" may be required during very wet site conditions. Considering the provided structural loads, the foundations could be designed with allowable soil bearing pressures of 2,000 pounds per square foot for foundations placed on at least firm native soils or on structural fill constructed as described above. A bearing pressure of up to 4,000 psf may be used for foundation bearing on undisturbed native unweathered glacial till generally encountered GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. H 1 Proposed Office Building .Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 14 at least 2 feet below existing grades. These allowable bearing pressures may be increased by up to one-third to accommodate transient seismic and wind loads. Ultimate passive resistance values for the fill and native glacial till soils may be assumed to be 250 pounds per cubic feet expressed as equivalent fluid weights beginning at a depth 1 foot below finished grade. An ultimate base friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used for concrete foundations cast neatly against undisturbed native soils or properly compacted structural fill. Estimated Settlement ' Assuming the foundation elements are founded on the prescribed bearing strata, we anticipate the total settlement would be essentially elastic in nature and should be less than3/4 inch, with differential settlement on the order of one-half of the total. If disturbed or soft materials are left within the footing area prior to concrete placement, future settlements may be greatly increased. For this reason, the condition of the footing subgrade should be closely monitored by a qualified ' geotechnical representative prior to concrete placement to confirm that the condition of the bearing soils are consistent with those assumed during design. ' Foundation Construction Considerations ' Currently, the depth and condition of the existing foundation elements for the adjacent building, is unknown. We recommend excavations for new footings do not extend below adjacent existing footings. If construction of new footings extends below existing foundation elements, ' additional engineering will be required. Slot -cut underpinning may be required for footings constructed below existing adjacent foundations. Perimeter Drainage We recommend that the building be provided with a perimeter footing drain system to collect free water. Footing drains with cleanouts should consist of at least 4-inch diameter, perforated, PVC pipe fully enveloped in pea gravel or washed rock and be placed at the footing subgrade elevation around the outside perimeter of the foundation. The pea gravel envelope should be wrapped on the top and sides with a non -woven geotextile fabric to prevent the migration of fine-grained soils into the drain rock. All drainage systems should be sloped to drain by gravity to a storm sewer or other suitable discharge location. Water from downspouts and surface water should be independently collected and routed to a storm sewer. This water must not be allowed to enter the footing drain system. Additionally, it is recommended that the finished grades around the building be designed to route surface water away from the building. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 15 Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage from the building areas at all times. Water must not be allowed to pond or to collect adjacent to foundations or within the immediate building area. It is recommended that a gradient of at least 3 percent for a minimum distance of 10 feet from the building perimeter be provided, except in paved locations. In paved locations, a minimum gradient of 1 percent should be provided unless provisions are included for collection and disposal of surface water adjacent to the structure. 5.6 Slab -on -Grade Design Parameters ' Slab -on -grade floor support would be feasible provided subgrades are prepared as previously discussed for foundations. Floor slab subgrade should consist of at least firm native soil or fill ' compacted to a minimum of 92 percent of modified Proctor maximum dry density. Moisture Protection: To minimize moisture infiltration, we recommend that slab -on -grade ' floors be underlain by the following layers (top to bottom): ► Curing Course - A 2-inch thick layer of clean sand to allow proper curing of the ' concrete slab and to protect the vapor barrier; ► Vapor Barrier - A layer of plastic sheeting (such as Crosstuff®) to prevent the upward migration of ground moisture vapors; ► Capillary Break - A nominal 4-inch thickness of washed crushed rock or pea gravel containing less than 3 percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve, based on that soil ' fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve with at least 30 percent retained on the U.S. No. 4 sieve. Any holes or punctures in the vapor barrier membrane should be repaired prior to the placement of the floor slab concrete. ' 5.7 Retaining Wall Design Parameters The following general wall design parameters are offered. Walls may be designed as a "restrained" retaining wall based on "at rest" earth pressure, plus any surcharge on top of the wall as described below, if the wall is attached to the building and/or movement is not acceptable. The wall could also be designed based on "active" earth pressure, if the wall is not part of the building and some movement of the retaining wall is acceptable. We anticipate that this lateral movement could equal at least'/4 inch or 0.2 percent of the wall height, whichever is greater. Subgrades should be compacted to at least 92 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM:D-1557) and may require select pit run or crushed rock base below footings if subgrade conditions cannot be compacted to this minimum level. nim GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 16 ' The following table, Wall Design Criteria, presents the recommended soil related design parameters for cantilever retaining walls with level backfill behind the wall. Giles should be ' contacted for alternate recommendations if sloped backfill surfaces are planned. Design of the wall should incorporate an adequate factor -of -safety against both overturning (FS=2.0) and sliding (FS=1.5). The overturning resultant should also fall within the center third (kern) of the retaining 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 walls footing for stability, or the design must be rechecked with a limited bearing surface area. Wall Design Criteria "At -Rest" Conditions 55 psf/ foot of depth,,, "Active" Conditions 35 psf/ foot of depth„ Passive Earth Pressure on Low Side of Wall (Allowable) Neglect upper 1 foot; then 200 psf/lineal foot of depth Soil Parameters (Compacted Select Backfill) y=130 pcf �=35 degrees Soil -Footing Coefficient of Sliding Friction (ultimate) 0.40 Traffic Surcharge 250 psf (for car loads) 500 psf (for truck loads) Recommended Backfill Compaction 90 percent (ASTM D-1557 I. For granular backfill y=130 pcf 2. At compaction levels of approximately 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum To minimize the lateral earth pressure and prevent buildup of water pressure against the walls, it is recommended that continuous footing drains (with cleanouts) be provided at the base of the walls. The footing drains should consist of perforated pipe, sloped to drain, with perforations placed down and enveloped by 6 inches of pea gravel in all directions. The backfill adjacent to and extending a lateral distance behind the walls a minimum of 2 feet should consist of free_draining granular material. All free draining backfill should contain less than 3 percent fines (passing U.S. No. 200 sieve) based upon the fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve with at least 30 percent retained on the U.S. No. 4 sieve. Native soils are not suitable for this use. It should be realized that the primary purpose of the free -draining material is reduction of hydrostatic pressure. Some potential for moisture to contact the back face of the wall may exist, even with this treatment, which may require that more extensive waterproofing be specified for walls which require interior moisture - sensitive finishes. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 17 ' Compaction of the backfill is recommended to achieve a density of 90 percent of the modified Proctor density. Soil compactors place transient surcharges on the backfill. Consequently, only light hand -operated equipment is recommended within 3 feet of walls so that excessive stress ' is imposed on the walls. ' 5.8 Pavement Design Recommendations It must be recognized that pavement design is a compromise between high initial cost and little maintenance on one side and low initial cost coupled with the need for periodic repairs. As a result, the owner will need to take part in the development of an appropriate pavement section. Critical features which govern the durability of the surface include the stability of the subgrade soils, the traffic volume, and the frequency of use by heavy vehicles. Sub rg_ ade Pavement subgrades should be adequately stripped per the preceding recommendations of this report to expose a subgrade capable of being compacted to the recommended level of 95 percent in the upper 1 foot and 90 percent below 1-foot depth (ASTM:D-1557). Subgrades should be evaluated in the presence of a qualified geotechnical representative to detect any soft and yielding areas which may need to be overexcavated prior to paving. Subgrade evaluation could consist of proofrolling with a fully loaded dump truck in the presence of a qualified geotechnical representative. In the case of wet weather construction, the prepared subgrade could be protected with Asphalt -Treated Base (ATB) during construction with final Class B paving scheduled for the end of construction. Existing pavements could temporarily be left in place to protect subgrades outside of the new building area during construction. In general, compaction of subgrades and fills below pavement areas should conform to WSDOT Standard Specification 2-03.3(1)C Method B except that the reference maximum dry density should be based upon the modified Proctor test (ASTM:D-1557 or AASHTO T-180). Asphaltic Concrete Pavement Specifications for pavements and crushed base/top course should conform to those presented in the 1996 Washington State Department of Transportation, Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction. In lieu of crushed gravel base/top course, asphalt treated base ' (ATB) can be substituted. The ATB would provide a more durable wearing surface if the pavement GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 18 subgrade areas will be exposed to construction traffic prior to final paving with Class B asphalt. Some degradation of the ATB should be expected if it is subjected to concentrated construction traffic. Repair of degraded areas would be required prior to final Class B paving. ......... _................. ... . Recommended Pavement Sections Use Asphalt Thickness Base course ATB* Substitute (Inches) Thickness (Inches) (Inches) Heavy Trucks/Buses 3 6 4 Light Traffic/Parking 3 4 3 ' *Asphalt Treated Base; may be substituted for Crushed Base/Top Course beneath Class B Asphalt Base course should meet the requirements for crushed surfacing in Section 9-03.9(3) of the Standard Specifications. Asphalt concrete pavement should be Class B as addressed in Sections 5- 04 and 9-03.8 of the Standard Specifications. Asphalt -Treated Base (ATB) may be substituted for the granular base. Sections 4-06.3, 5-04, and 9-03.6 of the WSDOT Standard Specifications apply to the use of ATB. Subbase material should meet the recommendations for select granular fill contained elsewhere in this report. IRecommended pavement sections are based on assumed traffic loadings. Pavement design recommendations assume proper drainage and construction monitoring and are based on AASHTO ' Design parameters are for a 20-year design period. However, continual flexible pavement maintenance along with a major rehabilitation after about ±8 to 10 years should be expected to obtain a 20-year service life. ' 5.9 Conclusion ' The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based, in part, on the explorations accomplished for this study. The number, location, and depth of the explorations were completed within the constraints of budget and site access so as to yield the information to formulate ' the recommendations. Project plans were in the preliminary stage at the time of this report preparation. We therefore recommend that we be provided the opportunity for general review of the project plans and specifications when they become vailable in order to confirm that the ' recommendations and design considerations presented in this report have been properly interpreted and implemented into the project design package. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 11 1 1 1 Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 19 The integrity of earthwork, structural fill placement, and foundation and pavement performance depend greatly on proper site preparation and construction procedures. We recommend that we be retained to provide geotechnical engineering services during the earthwork and foundation construction phases of the project. If variations in the subsurface conditions are observed at that time, we would be able to provide additional geotechnical engineering recommendations to the contractor and design team in a timely manner as the project construction progresses. Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. appreciates the opportunity to have been of service on this project and would be pleased to discuss the contents of this report or other aspects of this project with you at your convenience. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 J 1 11 GENERAL CON VENTS The soil samples obtained during the subsurface exploration will be retained for a period of thirty days. If no instructions are received, they will be disposed of at that time. This report has been prepared exclusively for the client in order to aid in the evaluation of this property and to assist the architects and engineers in the design and preparation of the project plans and specifications. Copies of this report may be provided to contractor(s), with contract documents, to disclose information relative to this project. The report, however, has not been prepared to serve as the plans and specifications for actual construction without the appropriate interpretation by the project architect, structural engineer, and/or civil engineer. Reproduction and distribution of this report must be authorized by the client and Giles. This report has been based on assumed conditions/characteristics of the proposed development where specific information was not available. It is recommended that the architect, civil engineer and structural engineer along with any other design professionals involved in this project carefully review these assumptions to ensure they are consistent with the actual planned development. When discrepancies exist, they should be brought to our attention to ensure they do not affect the conclusions and recommendations provided herein. The project plans and specifications may also be submitted to Giles for review to ensure that the geotechnical related conclusions and recommendations provided herein have been correctly interpreted. The analysis of this site was based on a subsoil profile interpolated from a limited subsurface exploration. If the actual conditions encountered during construction vary from those indicated by the borings, Giles must be contacted immediately to determine if the conditions alter the recommendations contained herein. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report have been promulgated in ' accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practice in the field of geotechnical engineering. No other warranty is either expressed or implied. 1 0 1 APPENDIX B FIGURES The Site and Exploration Plan contained herein was prepared based upon information supplied by Giles' client, or others, along with Giles' field measurements and observations. The diagram is presented for conceptual purposes only and is intended to assist the reader in report interpretation. Other figures are presented to aid in interpretation of the report. Sources of the figures are as indicated. E EXISTING BUILDING x I a rA TP-1 TP-2 w ASPHALT PARKING (FOR US BANK) r M I DAYTONSTREET } TEST PIT LOCATION RELATIVE TO EXISTING BUILDING N A g . s PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING Job No. 6G-9805013 3RD AVENUE SOUTH AND DAYTON Design: RNH STREET Drawn: I RNH EDMONDS, WASHINGTON GILES SITE EXPLORATION PLAN Date: JUKE 2,1998 FIGURE 1 p C.NGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Scale: V = 20' I 1 I 1 APPENDIX C FIELD PROCEDURES AND EXPLORATIONLOGS The field operations were conducted in general accordance with the procedures recommended by the American Societyfor Testing and Materials (ASTM) designation D 420 entitled "Standard Guide for Sampling Soil and Rock" and/or other relevant specifications. Soil samples were preserved and transported to Giles' laboratory in general accordance with the procedures recommended by ASTM designation D-4220 entitled "standard practice for preserving and transporting soil samples. " Brief descriptions of the sampling, testing and field procedures commonly performed by Giles are provided herein. The Exploration Logs and related information enclosed herein depict the subsurface (soil and water) conditions encountered at the specific exploration locations on the date that the exploration was performed. Subsurface conditions may differ between exploration locations and within areas of the site that were not explored. The subsurface conditions may also change at the exploration locations over the passage of time. 1 d it 1 71 L LI I GENERAL FIELD PROCEDURES Test Pit Locations The test pits were located on -site bypacing from existing site features and/or apparent property lines using information on the site map provided to Giles. Test pit locations shown on the Site and Exploration Plan are approximate and based on locations as estimated in the field. Test Pit Exploration Procedures The field exploration phase of this project consisted of excavating test pits using a rubber - tired backhoe operated by a local excavating contractor working under subcontract to Giles. The testpitspermitted a detailed evaluation of the character of the shallow subsurface soils underlying the proposed development. Each test pit was continually logged and observed by an experienced staff -level geotechnical engineer. In situ strength and quality attributes of materials encountered were estimated by our field observer based on experience with similar soils and the difficulty incurred during excavation. Relative density estimates are presented on the test pit logs; however, the densities are not based on actual SPT blow counts. Density of the soils was estimated using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer methods, as described in ASTM Special Publication No. 399. The Dynamic Cone Penetrometer blowcount is labeled Nc on the enclosed test pit logs. Representative samples of the soils in the test pits were retrieved, classified in the field and transported to our laboratory for a detailed evaluation and classification as deemed necessary. The test pit logs are presented subsequently and the soil descriptions are based on the inspection of the samples secured, field logs and laboratory testing. Test Pit Backfill Procedures Following completion of the test pit exploration, the excavations were loosely backfilled with the excavated soils. A limited degree of compaction was performed with the backhoe bucket. However, if test pits will be located under new foundations, they should be reexcavated and compacted to comply with project specifications. GILES GINEQVNG ASSOCIAW; INC. 11807 North Creek P South, Suite othell, Washington (425) 482-20 5) 482-6300 RECORD OF TEST PIT EXPLORATIONS Test Pit TP-1 Location: See Site and Exploration Plan Approximate ground surface elevation (ft): Not established Project: 3rd Avenue So. & Dayton Street Project No: 6G-9805013 Date Excavated: May 21, 1998 Depth (ft) Material Description Nc Sample Testing 1 Very dense, moist, grey, gravelly SAND with little silt (Unweathered Glacial Till) Very dense, moist, grey, gravelly SAND with little silt, trace cobbles 1 2 2 48 S-1 w=10 3 3 4 4 5011" S-2 w=10 5 Test pit terminated at 4'-0" w=moisture content 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 M10 No seepage observed No caving observed GILES QGINEWNG ASSOCIAT , INC. 11807 North Creek P South, Suite othell, Washington (425) 482-202�) 482-6300 . -- t 1 1 L 1 RECORD OF TEST PIT EXPLORATIONS Test Pit TP-2 Project: 3rd Avenue So. & Dayton Street Location: See Site and Exploration Plan Project No: 6G-9805013 Approximate ground surface elevation (ft): Not established Date Excavated: May 21, 1998 Depth Material Description Nc Sample Testing (ft) 1 Loose, moist, dark brown, fine to medium SAND with trace to little 1 7 S-1 w=12 silt, little gravel — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Very dense, moist, grey, gravelly SAND with little silt (Unweathered 2 2 5011" S-2 w=11 Glacial Till) 3 3 4 4 5011" S-3 w=9 Very dense, moist, grey, gravelly SAND with little silt, trace cobbles Grades to little cobbles 5 5 6 Firm, moist, grey, fine to medium SAND with trace silt, trace gravel, 6 7 7 8 8 26 S-4 w=8 trace cobbles Very dense, moist, grey, fine to medium SAND with little silt, little 9 9 10 10 50/1" S-5 w=11 gravel Very dense, moist, grey, gravelly, silty SAND 11 11 12 12 5011" S-6 w=14 w=moisture content No seepage observed No caving observed F-1 1 I 11 1 I * 0 .-0 -o--- 1 IILABORATORY TESTING AND CLASSIFICATION Moisture Content (MCA fASTM.•D-2216) Moisture content is defined as the ratio of the weight of water contained within a soil sample ' to the weight of the dry solids within the sample. Moisture content is expressed as a percentage. Particle Size Distribution (ASTM.•D-421. D-422. D-1140) This test is performed to determine the distribution of specific particle sizes (diameters) within a soil sample. The distribution of coarse -grained soil particles (sand and gravel) is i determined from a "sieve analysis'; which is conducted bypassing the sample through a series of nested sieves. The distribution of fine-grained soil particles (silt and clay) is determined from an 1 'hydrometer analysis'; which is based on the sedimentation of particles suspended in water. Classification of Samples Each soil sample was visually -manually classified, based on texture and lastici ty�in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM.•D-2488-75). The classifications are reported on the exploration logs. 1 1 Mum 3, William Popp Associates Tednsportatiori Engineers/Planners (425)454-6692 FAX (425) 454-0187 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS for MARINE BUSINESS INTERNATIONAL EDM0NDS OFFICE BUILDING 3rci . / T)al+oH.. Prepared for: Marine BusJyiess Interriatl6hid do: Scott lhinidey Architects 2019 3rd Ave S Seattle, WA 98121 Prepared by: #11h4in Popp Assoclates . Bellevue Financial Cehiei, Suite 314 225 108th Ave NE Bellevue, WA 08004 May 18; 1998 SWED110 NOV 2 0 1998 CITY COPY 90& G 4j t* 3, 13 2 �. Sial--e 356 Bellevue Financial Center • Stiite 314 : 225 108th Ave NE Bellevue; *A; 0004 Traffic Impact Analysis i INTRODUCTION • Marine Business Infernationai - dmonds Building The following report was prepared to identify the traffic related impacts of the proposed Marine Business International - Edmonds Office Building. The city requested the analysis address the project impacts at the following intersections: Dayton Street/3rd Avenue S 6 Main Street/3rd Avenue 4 Main Street/5th Avenue Main Stree0th Avenue Edmonds Way (SR 104)/1)ayt6n Street y PROJECT IDENTIFICATION A. Project Name(§): Marine Business lnte"rnational - Edmonds Office Building B. Project Location: The project is located iri tte City of Edmonds on the northwest comer of the Dayton Avenue/aid Ave South intersection. A vicinity map is presented in"Figure 1. C: Developer Naitie(s): Mr. Alex Silagin c% Mr. Shane Hager Seott Huntley Architects 2019 3rd Avenue South ' - Seattle, WA 09 i {.. Phone Number: (206) 441=1 Io6 D. Development Description(§): ivlisrne Business International =Edmond§ Office Building 1) Site Area 4,560 sf 2) 3013 gsf 6&_e, 826 gsf apartment, 3,839 gsf restaurant 3) Zoning = BC --� The site is expected to tie occupied by}thespring of 1999. A site lan i2. ps sfiowi in Figure SITE INVENTORY A. Existing Roadway Network The major roadways serving the site include bayton Street; 3ird Avenue South j�� M Street; attld Edmonds Wtiy (Sly l 0 These roadways a e discussed below: Dayton Street is a two lane arterial "'fining east and west from marina to the west end of Yost Memorial Park. In the vtcfnity of the site the roadway is epproxitnaWy 40 feet wide William Popp Associates Page I P _jp WILLIAM POPP VICINITY MAO Marine Business ASSOCIATES Inteinational Figiiie 1 ,.................. ............---...._.. ........._.... ..... c a 1 1 ; : I . 1 1 YZ 1 6 •� . i V ; r r Q• tiit : ►' • � N i 1 I vs SOl Kt•VCr v � :.1 • J Zy (� f 4 dggg 0v .. a �, o top j t_ r to a or at1 !r r .ei Rv •�• II �LO 7 ; lk g I i :3 0 i V• .r vim•+ , • .3Q ...._ 1 ... .. ..•..•..:.•.�� �O.OU �'.:' Lit i� I 'i �` i C It s. K \\ at tt • 3P •AV* WILLIAM POPP ASSOCIATES SITE PLAN Matine Business International Figiue 2 t. in Traffic Impact Analysis Marine usifie.0 International l0ofids, OjTtce Building with 2 travel lanes and p5fAjjdj parking (j hour limit) On both 'sides. There Are -sidewalks on both sides and crosswalks at intersections. The speed jiffiit is 25 hri0h. 3rd Aveiiue Sdiith is a two and arterial running north and south from Main Street to SR 104. 3rd Avenue fibith of Main Street becomes 3rd MehUd North which is Also State Route 524. 3rd Avenue South d6nds under SR 104 with no direct connection to SR 104: In the vicinity of the site, the roadway is approximately 40 feet wide with 2 travel lanes and parallel parking (I , _dour limit) on both sides. However; the section of'roadway along the east side of 3rd-Averitie South As it fronts the site is designated As a no parking loading zone. There are §116*aiks on both sides and cr-O9§w''a'dks on both sides. The speed limit ism mph. Main Street is A two land hheiii'l !I=`­Iig east and west ftoifi the Kingston" Ferry Terminal to 212th Street SW,. it, the vicinity of the site; the ioadwAy is approximately 40 feet wide with 2 travel lanes And parallel parking Lj_h�pbf limit) on both sides. There are sidewalks on both sides and crosswalks At intersections. The speed limit is mph. Edmonds Way (SIR 10114) is a 5 lane arterial running north and South (in the Vicinity of the site) from the Kingston Ferry Tefffiffial to SR 99afid i= 5 to the southwest. Two of the three northbound lanes Are designated as ferry d storage loading lanes. The speed limit is _Sm . I . Trahift Service Transit services in the vicinity otthe site is provided by Community Transit. There are a multitude of routes including 110, 147, 190, 317, 04, 4 1 6'j 630, 870, and 915. There are bus stops located on 3rd Avenue South just north of the site And wi b#tO,fi Street just west of the site. Bicj,c1e,1Pedesjrjd,j Set-� vices Within the vicinity of the site as Well As throughout. the Ity, are cl there sidewalks on the majority Of, if not all, of the city streets including crosswalks !swalk§ at all intersections. There are no designated bicycle ' paths in th� Vicinity of the site. Existing Traffic cobiits Manual turningI Main movement counts at the Dayton 8treei/jid Avenue South, Main Street/3rd Avenije3Main Street/6 - d theMainSWMth Men-u6 intersections th AVdnIu6i an rsdc were collected in May i M. in addition; d PM peak hour 6c6fij was obtained fromWSDOT for the Edmohd§ Way (Sit104)/Dayton Street- hAiiidtW," The PM Peak hour turning movements At this intersection are presented in Figure 3. JIL-> (� 44 61__J �Ir � . ...,. �ASPM ST. L_ 49 L KAGSTON FERRY I 1— 24 -------------66 � 3>? _' I r MAIN 51 bmtON ST �1O Q F� 1=18.•� ill f- 21'°'`� 60 inE 105"� a , xx - 1999 PM Peak Now Volume's ! ; - •; -. ;' WILLIAM POPP j EXISTINGIPM EAK HOAR IvMarine Business ASSOCIATES VOL MES International Figure 3 Traffic Impact Analysis Marine Business International Building The transportation impact analysis will generally be based on the traffic conditions during the PM peak hour. This is based on An analysis of seven day counts summarized on a per 15 minute basis at the Main 8treet/9th Avenue and Main Streei/3rd Avenue intersections. These counts were conducted by the city during August and March of 1996 respectively, The data indicated that during the average weekday, the PM peak hour volume occurring between 4 pm and 6 pm is the critical time of day for traffic volumes. The PM peak volumes is approximately 67% higher than the AM peak. Therefore, the weekday street PM peak hour occurring between 4 pm and 6 pm is the most critical time of day for analysis. Level -of -Service Level -of -service (LOS) is a term defined by transportation and traffic engineers as a qualitative and quantitative measure of operational conditions within a traffic stream and the perception of these conditions by motorists and/or passengers: There are several quantitative indices utilized depending on' the type of intersection control present. There are six levels -of -service that are given letter designations from "A" to "F", with "A" being the best, or minimum delay conditions, and "F" being the worst, with maximum delay or jammed conditions. LOS "C" or "D" is generally considered acceptable for planning and design purposes, while LOS "E" represents operating conditions at or near capacity with freedom to maneuver being extremely difficult. Level -of -service for the existing condition was calculated using the techniques presented in the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual. Level -of -service for signalized and non - signalized intersections is quantified in terms of vehicular delay. Delay; measured in terms of time (seconds), also represents driver discomfort, frustration, excess fuel consumption and lost travel time. Level -of -service criteria and definitions for signalized and non -signalized intersections are presented in Table 1. Table 1 Intersection Level -of -Service Criteria Level of Service Definition Stopped Delay Per Vehicle signalized non -'signalized A Little or no delay Less than 5.0 sec Less than 5.0 'sec B Short traffic delays 5.1 to 15 sec 5.1 to 10 sec C Average traffic delays B.1 to 25 sec 10.1 to 20 sec D Long traffic delays 25.1 to 40 sec 20.1 to 30 sec E Very long traffic delays 40.1 to 60 sec 30.1 to 0 sec F Extreme delay Greater thaii 60 sec 'Greater than 45 sec t Dewy; seconds pei vehicle i William Popp Associates Page 3 .0 40 Traffic Impact Analysis � P Y Marine Business International-�!/nonds Office Building The city of Edmonds has varying level of service thresholds depending on the classification of the intersection. The thresholds are as follows: LOS D for all arterial intersections, LOS C for all collector intersections, and LOS B for all local street intersections. The existing level of service at the analysis intersections is presented in Table 2. Also presented are the city's intersection classification designations for each of the analysis intersections. Table 2 Existing p.m. Peak Hour Level -of serviee Intersection Traffic Control Classification 1998 Existing LOSa PM PAC Comments Dayton Sd3rd Ave S all -way stop Collector B ($.4) Overall intersection delay Main St/3rd Ave signal Arterial C (20.7) Overall intersection delay Main St/5th Ave all -way stop Arterial B (7.5) Overall intersection delay Main St/9th Ave all -way stop Arterial D (30) Overall intersection delay Edmonds Way/Daytoa Ave Signal Arterial B (1.1) Overall intersection delay a (xx) - Delay, seconds per vehicle As shown in Table 2, all of the analysis intersections are estimated to operate at acceptable levels of service per the city of Edmonds guidelines. TRIP GENERATION A. Project Trips Trip generation for the proposed Marine Business International = Edmonds Office Building was calculated using data presented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Sth Edition, 1991. For the restaurant portion of the site, trip generation was based on rates presented in the ITE February 1995 Update to the Sth Edition. This update focuses mainly retail uses. F ffice portion of the site, trip generation equations associated with Land Use Code 71 , General Office Building, were used. For the residential portion of the site, trip generation rates associated with Land Use Code 220, Apattment, were used. Note that there is only 1 apartment unit which is anticipated by the owner to function more like a William Popp Associates Page 4 Traffic Impact Analysis Marine Business I►iteri}atioirci/ 1 �?ds Ufce builditiz motel unit. However, the rate difference between a motel and apartment rates during the PM peak hour is negligible (0.61 vs 0.60 respectively), therefore, the apartment rates were used. the restaurant portion of the site, trip generation rates associated with Land Use Code 832 High -Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant, were used./As defined in Table VII-1 of the o r 1995 Update, ITE interview data indicates only 28 percent on average of Land Use Code 832 traffic are new trips during the PM peak hour. The remaining component of the ITE site traffic consists of interception of trips passing by the site, 40 percent, and diversion of trips from nearby routes, 32 percent. The ITE data allows a reduction in on -street site generated traffic for pass trips. However, for the diverted trips, since it is unknown as to what extent diversion will occur, in terms of distance from the site, it is assumed that these diverted trips are new trips within the analysis area. Therefore, the total on -street generated traffic from the restaurant is estimated to be 6LO percent of the total trips generated. Note that Table VII-1 of the 1995 Update defines pass -by rates for the PM peak hour only. Therefore; for purposes of trip generation discussion, it is presumed that this PM peak hour pass -by rate is indicative of the AWDT and AM peak hour as well. To determine the overall traffic impact of the proposed project, trip generation from the previous use of the site was deducted from the project trip generation. The previous use of the site was a similar type of restaurant 3,600 gsf in size which was vacated in February of this year. Therefore, the same rates and pass -by methodology was used in calculating the trip generation for the existing use. However, based on discussions with city staff, since actual trip generation cannot be readily obtained for the existing site, the city will only allow a maximum of 50 percent credit against ITE calculated rates. A summary of the trip generation is presented in Table 3. William Popp Associates�� Traffic Impact Analysis �r Marine Business Inlerrrationmondr Office Building Table 3 Trip Generation Land Use A WDT AM Peak Hour Total In Out PM Peak Hour Total In Out Project Offfice ° 3,613 sf 99 13 12 1 14 2 12 Restaurant 3,839 sf pass -by element b 683 (273) 57 (23) 29 (12) 28 (11) 50 28 20 11 22 9 non -pass -by element (410) (34) (17) (17) 30 17 13 Apt/Motel I Unit 10 1 1 0 1 1 0 Subtotal 192 71 36 35 65 31 34 pass-by'elenient (273) (23) (12) (11) 20 11 9 non -pass -by element (519) (48) (24) (24) 45 20 25 Existing Building (tear down) Restaurant 3600 sf (ITE rates) 640 53 27 26 47 26 21 pass -by element (256) (21) (11) (10) 19 11 8 non -pass -by element (384) (32) (16) (16) 28 15 13 50% of ITE estimate' 320 27 14 13 24 13 11 pass -by element (128) (I 1) (6) (5) 10 6 4 non -pass -by element (192) (16) (g) (9) 14 7 7 SUMMARY Total net new trips from project ° 152 18 9 9 18 5 13 pass -by element (17) (2) (1) (1) 1 0 1 non -pass -by element (135) (16) (8) (8) 17 5 12 Total net new trips from project ° 472 44 22 22 41 18 23 pass -by element (145) (12) (6) (6) 10 5 5 non -pass -by element (327) (32) (16) (16) 31 13 18 Office Equations: ADT Ln(T) = 0.756 Ln(X) + 3.765 AM PK Ln(T) = 0.777 Ln(X) + 1.674 b PM PK Ln('I) = 0.737 Ln(X) + 1.831 Pass by element estimated to be 40% of total during PM peak hour; PM peak pass -by rate used pass -by rates for AWDT and AM peak not available. thus d City allows a maximum credit of 50% for existing ` Net new based on 100% credit for existing use site use. Net new based on 50% credit for existing use As shown in Table 3, the proposed Marine Business Intetnational - Edmonds Office Dtiild'% is eatlmatoO to generate some 792 vehicles per day with 71 AM and 63 PM peak William Popp Associates Page 6 Impact Analysis Udhne Businens Iriierriationa r onds O 1ce guil ,Jj' drug hour trips. Of the 65 PM peak hotii trips, it is estimated that 20 dips are pass -by trips and the remaining 45 trips are new. Since there are no known pass -by rates for the daily and AM peak hour, PM peak hour pass -by rates were used to estimate the pass -by trips associated with the daily and:AM peak hour. Thus, of the 792 daily trips, it is estimated that 519 trips will be new and 213 are pass -by. Likewise, of the 71 AM peak hour trips, it is estimated that 43 trips aid itew, aiid 23 are pass -by. However, when considering the reduction of trips from the existing site use, the overall net impact from the proposed project is 472 daily, 44 AM peak hour and 41 PM peak hour trips. Of these, the non -pass by element is estimated to consist of 327 daily, 32 AM peak hour, and 31 PM peak hour trips': The pass=by'element is estimated to consist of 145 daily; 12 AM peak houf; and 10 PM peak hour trips.' For purposes of the traffic report; only the net new non=pass-by trips generated from the proposed project are considered in the intersection analyses since; by definition, the pass - by trips are already presumed to be on the street system. However, the analysis at the site access driveway considers the total 'net new trips from the project. In "summary, there are 31 net new non -pass -by PM peak hour project trips generated by the site; 15 trips (3 in, 12 out) from the office/apartment use; and 16 trips (10 in, 6 out) from the new restaurant use. If full reduction of trips from the existing site use (vs 50%) is considered, the overall net impact from the proposed project is only 152 daily; 18 AM peak hour and 17 PM peak hour trips. Of these, the non -pass by element is estimated to consist of 135 daily; 16 AM peak hour, and 17 PM peak pouf trip`': The pass=by element is estimated to consist of 17 daily, 2 AM peak hour; and I PM peak hour trip. As a general conclusion, the new restaurant is approximately a "wash" with the old restauraint and the net new trips arise mainly from the office and apartment use. Historical Growth According to city staff; background traffic growth within the City of Edmonds is estimated to be 2.5 percent per year. Thus, traffic volume's foi the 1999 background 0 condition were determined by factoring the existing 1998 PM peak hour traffic volumes at a rate of 2.5 percent per year (one year). TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT Trip distribution percentages applied to project generated trips associated with the apartment and office building were based on existing traffic patterns determined from existing PM peak hour movement counts at the five analysis intersections. The distribution assumed the following: 306/6 to the southeast via SR-104, 30% to the east via M$11" tot a �PfK l 000t OW, 300A t+a Via tart §24, 9% to the south via 3rd Avenue South to Woodway, and 5% within the local aiea. The total trips assigned to the William Popp Associates Page 7 Traffic Impact Afidlysis surrounding street network associated with the apaftffie,'ijV jfj6e use is 15 PM peak hour trips (3 in, 12 out). Trip distribution P . eiceht996§ 600hedi to the net new fibi In- p`ia'&-by restaurant PiOIJ 6 C` generated trips were based on the MsWffi`ti6h that attraction of the rests "want be p w limited to the imm6didt6 Edifto"n'd§ 66ad with ihe exception 6f, d 9thAll percentage �6 . 66hii z, ge of trips beyond. The distribiffidii iisstiffidd the following: 1 N� §bd&Mi yid §R 104, i 56/o, east via Main Street, 10% fibk6ast Via §R'-' 5241; i West VIA Dayton Street t 0% south of 3rd Avenue South, i 0 %` south of 5th Avenue Southj i 6%­ horth of Main Str6a W60 of Rd Avenue North, 106/o north bf. Mf'lifi §46& east of Sjl AV_e'ftue Noftlij And i 06/o froth 9th Avenue South south of Main Street.': The totai jApg assigned to the 'surrounding street network associated with the new ie"giadi"i use is 16 PM Peak hour 6109 (10 in; 6 but). Based on these calculations; net new hoh-pass-by project geindriAted traffic Was assigned to the surrounding arterial street network.. The 1999 background PM peak hour' traffic V61tim6s are 'presented in Figure 4. 1909 PM peak hour project traffic assigiihiefii§ for net new fiofi-jpiA§§-bY trips are presented in Figure 5. 1998 background phis project PM peak Mid traffic volumes are presented in Figure 6. LEVEL-O&SEIMCE Level -of -service was calculated using the McTran I s ddinputdilitd version of the 1904 Hi thn w' taC Ca Manual 'techniques for the 1999 (ekkiifig)) 1999 without project and r oil Idi 9 9 with I i 1 99 with project tion§ for the, PM peak hour time PdiibTs at tFdthe analysis intersections, as Well 69 at the §it6 i&e§s', intersection. Note that the PM peak hour was identified as the critical peak 'hour based on the fact that the ekisting PM peak mk hour traffic Volufh�§ within the city 6ftdm:Jibfid§ are approximately higher than the AM peak hour. in addition; the site trip generation indicates that the AM and PM peak hour trip gehetdfiofi ioidis are for the Mi-ott Part identical; 44 vs 41 trips, respectively. The results of the level-of-servide khaly§is, are presented in Table 4'. William Popp Associates Page R Vl 7f. q J(L-'§ 89 rJ Wms s ST — 200 205 ---------- KINGSTON FERRY _ 386 126 —1 24 J L —187 r•. ( - r63 1Ir 20� ,96 '1 m ST CAYTON ST srm 4 l_ 12 ` in Q J(L-'� 87--J III xu - 1999 P'M' Peak Hour Volumes WILLIAIVI POPP BACKGR0(jkb PM PEAK iJ t Marii►e Business ASSOCIATES VOLUMt§ {: - International Figure 4 30% 00%) 'm m 1 3 k r) GASPERS ST ) IONGSTON EEFSY m ------------------ ON , 0) m q. (0) 3 n r) A, 7 1 ') . (� 1 r) 1 n) t1AIN 5T 30% a3 ) m i. r) , r) 3 r) r) 3 r) ry 10) 1 0) DAYToN 5T 0) 5%) 4 1 SITE mrn 04, (0)0) 5% Ln mm mm tn Ln 00%) 00%) 7� nod K fl 5% 05%) 30% xx - Office/ Apartment trips .f xx% - Office/ Apartment distribution percentage (xx) - Net new non -pass -by Restaurant trips (xa%) : Net new non -pass -by Restaurant distribution percentage 4 S 4 :t :C 1 WILLIAM POPP PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT ASSOCIATES VOL:UMEB IVlarine Business Intemational Fi�tire 5 r18� Win_ _ JIB�—= 45 =j I I r �C45pm ril ST — 202 25 KJNGSTON FERRY m 32A I r � 24 } JIL r=� —j I i r 196 —1 MAIN ST DAYMN ST srm th JIB �� ,�— _7— �Ir g � uo fla zx - 1999 PM Peak Hour Volumes j= WILLIAM POPP BACKGROUND PLUS PROJECT INarine Business ASSOCIATES PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES International Figure 6 Traffic Impact Analysis Mdrifie Busifi6is !hterh6fibnal -*on V Orce Building Table 4 U'vei of Service PM Peak Hour Intersection Intersection Time Frame Los Delay Ciissifidifloh Comment Dayton St/3rd Ave S Mifti S0rd Ave Main St/5th Ave Milfi St/9th Ave 1908 Existing 1999 wid Project 1999 w/Projelci .- 1998 Existing 1999 W/o Project 1990 i n&ibject h (8.4) B (9.0) C (20.7) C L/ (2!.8) C (22.4) 1.098 Eilsiirig B (7.5) .5) 1999 wo, Project B ✓ (8.1) 1999 W/Project B.; . (8.2) - 1098 Existing b (30) 1999 w/o Project E (33) iggg w/1'roject E (33) Edmonds Way/Dayton Ave 1999 Existing 1999 */6 Project 1999 w/oroject B (7.1) 3kd Ave S/SRO Access Adeilai All -way stop control ail -way stop control ali4iy siol), control §igriiliied Signalized Sig6bli iid. all-wiy stop control h114, ay Stdo conirol 81146k sioo control A_W:*Y stop control, ail4ak stop control fflkw6y stop 6ntrol Signidiiid §igriillzed Signalized 1999 */Project B J (6.6) Local Westbound icft-turd from site As shown in Table 4, four of the five analysis intersection's` 66 estimated to operate at An acceptable cceptabie level of service dining the PM peak hour in t 009 and 1000 With or without the project The Main Stf.6et/otfi Avenue lfii6tsd6tion, h6w6vdr, is estimated to operate at 04.with or Without the project in the fiAdid Which is Below - the L08 b threshold for an arterial intersettioft. In addition, the project Acd6§§ *N6way,is estimated to operate at L09 13. CONCLUSIONS Based on the foregoing analysis for . the" proposed Marine Business International , :� I . Edmonds Office Building; the follo'Winig traffic impact " conclusions have been made in regards to the adjacent arterial I The project is estimated not to have 6 significant I ant impact t on ih6 surrounding urroiindifig street system. William Popp Associates Page 9 Traffic Impact AhalysU Voniist07ce hiNding 2. All ofthe analysis intersections are estimated tdoperate atsatisfactory levels of service with or Wftfiojuitt the pf'djd6t With the exception of the Main Street/ . 9th Avenue intersection. j. There are ample Pdd6sftfiAh and transit services sitfit—dunding' the site. MITIGATION The city is currently in the piA66-s§ developing e o 'At ii impact fee program for assessing new developments traffic the .6 IN_ ", . - ed f &6'id ilffiiip_roii� iht&§fttiOhs1' Within e city. e pe6fiffikiiiii), forthifli develop iiii the" city is !390 06i OM peak hour trip it selec'ie'd`areds Ahd/6i intersections. This fe6 was established ' - i I P - I 6*ttafloii I ba§�dohthdct'Y"'sdiA-6'�ydhft'ra-n o i ImpfoVdindrit Pt6gridiffi. In fiefti bf development it full intersection improvements at problem in­tdf96dtj6fi§j the deVelo-ipme"hi may contribute to the he Pf(jPcised improvement Per the impact fed f(qmuia­ established by the city. A 0M mifiAy estimate Of project traffic mitigation is shown in Table 5 below: Preliinina'"ry Impact Fees OfFicdApt 116staurfnt Total Intersection Trips New Trips Total rips i4e IN V6e Dayton S I t/3rd Ave S 7 18 $ 6,840 Main S't/Rd Ave 8 -1.54 13 4,046 4 Main St8th Ave 4 3 7 $2,660 06 Main St/9th Ave 4 2 6 $2,280 549 Edmonds Way/Dayton Ave 5 5 10 s 3*6 5 TOTAL e n I net new non -pass -by trips associated with the -restaurant (assumes" Wk- existing use credit) b6ed on i Prefirhin* fei of $396 per OM p`eik houi trio As shown in Table 5; the es6ffiaW project tiirld mitigation is $202o: 'N6te-,- that the city has identified the formula used to. calculate these fees is Orili TWifiaiy and is subject to change. If 100% credit per ITE were assumed for the existing g t68jqujhhtj the estimated project traffic mitigation fed Would be $A I jjgo. if the city § impact fee were city wide - where this fee were applied to the net new project geneiate"d PM peak hour trips, this project would be responsible for traffic. mitigation in theamount of $ PM peak trips (45-i4=31) times $096. However; if full credit is giv6n for the ex site use, the traffic mitigation fee applied to thisp-rOJddt would be in the fim6u'hi of $6,460; 17 PM peak trips (45-28—^11) times $380: Note that the maximum preliminary city, mitigation fee is $20;520. However,, the owner recognizes that this number is' Ot6iim1hikey and will be 6nalized at a later date. William Popp Associates 10 Traffic Impact Analysis Marine Business Iniernaionds Office Building WSDOT SUPPLEMENTAL The following supplemental was prepared to identify traffic related impacts of the proposed project on the surrounding state highway facilities. WSDOT requires an analysis of all state controlled intersection§ impacted by 10 or more peak hour project generated trips. In addition; WSDOT requires an analysis of#gh &tidentl;cations or Corridors (HAL or HAC) where such locations are impacted by 1 or more peak hour project trips. Based on the trip generation, distribution and assigm-0nient, it is estimated that the SR 104 (Edmonds Way)/Daytoti Street intersection and the SR 524 (3rd Avenue)/Main Street intersection will be impacted by 10 or more peak hoar trips. rde Volumes Traffic volumes at the SR 104 (Edmonds Way)/Da'"yton Street in; and the 3rd Avenue (SR 524/Nlain Street intersection are discussed above iri Existing Traffic Volumes section. Levei of Service Level of service for the existing; 1000 With and without project conditions were noted above in the existing and future level of service discussions. Andlysis A three year accident history for the SR 104 (Edmond§ Way)/Dayton Street intersection And the 3rd Ave (SR 524)/Main Street intersection Were provided by WSDOT from the period from January 1, 1904 through December 31; 1906. A summary of the accident history is provided in Table 6. o� . Table 6 Accident History Intersection 1994 1995E 1996 3 Year Total lr�l �r Edmonds Way (SR l04)/Dayt6n Si 3 3 2 it Z. 6-1 3rd Ave (SR 524)/Main St 2 13 14. ') 3 As shown in Table 6, the intersection of SR 104/Dayt6n Street is experiencing on average 2.61 accidents per year during the latest three year period on record. The major accident type is left turn colliding With opposing thru (5). The intersection accident rate at this 14,11111 m Popp Assoetates Page I! Traffic Impact Analysis ib&Me Bus r'' ` mess International - Edrn uls Otce Building intersection is estimated to be 0.93 accidents per million vehicles entering which is less than the typical threshold rate of 1.0 acc/triev. \3 , The intersection of 3rd Avenue (SR 524)/Mairi Street is experiencing on average 4.33� accidents per year during the latest three year period on record. Of the 13 accidents at this intersection, 7 were entering at an angle, 4 were left -turning accidents, and 2 were right ing accidents. The intersection accident rate at this intersection is estimated to b .2 ccidents per million vehicles entering which is more than the threshold rate of 1.0 However, the number of accident's decreased from 6 to 2,over the three year period indicating satisfactory conditions iri 1006. Likewise; the accident rate decreased from 3.07 to 1.02. In addition to the 10 peak hour,trip criteria, ,WSDOT require§ an a ccideiit.analysis under the following conditions: at all proposed direct access points to State Highways at all iiitersectioiis where developer mitigation is proposed ' at High Accident Locations or Corridor'§ (HAL or HAC) Direct Access to State Highways , The project will not have direct access to any state highway; therefore no analysis is required. Intersections Where Developer Hiligdtion is proposed Per the preceding capacity analysis; the protect is not proposing any developer mitigation at the SR 104/Daytori Street intersection since the hitersecttofi is estimated to operate at a satisfactory level of service. , Nigh Accideni Locations or Corridors (HAL's or HAC's) A review of the WSDOT Northwest Region Traff c Safety Management Systems 1998 High Accident Corridor array identified one highway section impacted by 1 or more project peak hour trips. 'The highway section impacted is SR 524 from Caspers Street to Edmonds ECL/Lynnwood WCL (approximately 2.0 mile§,, MP, 0.50 to IVIP.2:50). For the SR 524 highway sections; a f ve year §iimmAry data sheet was obtained for the period from July 1, 1991 through Jurie k 100& A sumrna y of the accident history is Provided in' Table 7. William Popp Associates Page l2 lTra Traffic Impact Analysis 'urine Business .,�' p Y s ess International - Edmvn"fficeilding Table 1 Accident History Intersection/ 5 Year Acc. Roadway Section 1994 1995 1996 Total ° Rate SR 524: Caspers St to Edmonds ECL/ Lynnwood (2.00 mi) - - - 114 2.49 b Five year summary accident data from July I, 1991 through June 30, 199.6 roadway section rate: accidents per million vehicle mile§ traveled (based on rive year data) For the stretch of SR 524 from Caspers Street to Edmonds ECL/Lynnwood WCL, there were 114 accidents recorded for the five year period between 1091 and 1996. Based on the five year accident record, the number of accidents per year per mile occurring along this section of highway is 11.4 acc%yr/mi. The accident rate for this section is 2.49 accidents per million vehicle miles traveled. Mitigation Recommendations Necessary to Help Relieve impacts In discussions with WSDOT staff, they have indicated that there are no projects identified in the WSDOT Sunshine Report which would attempt to mitigate the existing accident problems along this section of highway. In addition, there are no known developer funded roadway projects which this project could pay a pro=rate share towards. In lieu of this project providing sole responsibility towards mitigating the identified HAC through major roadway construction, which would be excessive and inequitable towards a single development, it is suggested that the project contribute toward the WSDOT's mitigation fee of $VADT. This fee was established through an interlocal "agreement between WSDOT andSnohomish County for state roadway facilities improvements within the entire county. There is no interlocal between the city and state. As discussed in the Trip Generation section, the new (primary) trips generated by the restaurant is 28% of the total for the restaurant: The net new trips generated from the new restaurant, considering full credit for the existing "restaurant's primary trips, is 12 daily trips [(683*28%)-(640*28%)=12], see Table 3. Adding this to the office daily estimate of 99 ADT and the apartment daily estimate of 10 ADT yields a.iotal net new ADT of 121. ` If the developer were to contribute toward the existing SR 524 HAC based on the W't v S' o"f WSDOT fee of $36/ADT and based on the estimated net new project ADT of 121; the C. appropriate fee would be $4,356. s 3 3 cmz-s oa irccrosprr�s �a 4William Popp Associates Page 13 William Popp Associates So Transport on Engineers/Planners (425)454-6692 FAX (425) 454-0187 TECHNICAL APPENDIX FOR MARINE BUSINESS INTERNATIONAL EDMONDS OFFICE BUILDING May 18, 1998 CONTENTS: ✓ PM Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes 1998 PM Peak Hour (existing) 1999 PM Peak Hour Without project 1999 PM Peak Hour with project ✓ 1994 HCS Level of Service Calculations 1998 PM Peak Hour (existing) 1999 PM Peak Hour Without project M. 1999 PM Peak Hour with project 6 3 13 17 75 ai Bellevue Financial Center • Suite 314.225 108th Ave N1E • Mievue, WA • 98004 MARINE BUSINES ATIONAL : EDMONDS OFFICE PM PEAK HOUR TURN MOVEMENTS 1 Dayton Stl3rd Ave S EBLT EDT EBRT WBLT WBT WBRT NBLT NBT NBRT SBLT SBT SBRT PM PK 1998 Count 1900 Background Growth 1999 Background ...Maiine Bus Intl - ands O11ice 1999 with . Project Off—ice,J "partme t. estaurent (net impact) .,Total ,. Primary. ....Pats -by 85 2 3 1 I 3 2 1 3 1 2 4 2 87 }' 0 0. 0 01 0 0 0" 0 ; 1 1 4 4 0, 0 0 0 4 0: 2 0 3 1 1 3 3: 0 0 0 0; 3 0 r 1., 0. 2' 0 1 24 1 0 6; 0 0; 1 0, 1 1 6'. r 1 V 1 ,'. 91 119 122 122 33 34 34 21 22 22 113 116 116 70 72 75, . 60 62 62 IN 121 128 . 24 25 .25 66 68 . 71 153 B7 158 72,; 74 80 1998 Count 201 219 245 264 237 207 209 208 1999 Background 298 296 251 200 243 214 212 213,., . with Project 308 294 .257 212 247 217 21 940 23 964 7 17 I1 6 982 0.8% g e 2 Main 8tl3rd Ave 199il count EBLT EDT EDRT WBLT wBT WBRT NRLT NBT NBRT SBLT SBT SDRT ptij pK 1998 Count 1999 Background GiowtN 1999 Background Marine Bus Intl -Edmonds Office 1999 with Project Oflice/ Apartment Restetiiant (net impact) Total . Primary., Pass -by 87 2 2 0 1 4 2 . 1 5 0 1 6 1 89 0 0 0' 1 0, 0 : 0. 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 6 6 2 2 0 1 9 0 '; 0. 1 `f 1 0 0 ;� 6: 1 1 0 1 0; 0 0 0 / 0 6 ` 0 1 1 0 1 0 89 97. 99 99 19 18 18 42 43 45 155 159 159 69 71 71 53 54 54. 182 187 191 25 , 57 255 _ 47 20 21 56 57 247 253 46 . 47 . 1072 27 1099 8 9 5 4 1112 G C L Zz4 349 339 254 266 202 173 307 255 1909 Dackeround 358 346 260 273 207 177 315 261 with Protect 360 350 260 275 208 181 320 269 EDMONDS.XLS, pia turns 5113198. Pepe t William Popp Associates MARINE WAR& tkNAtIbNAU'---; PJ*6011OP$*bft -PMPEAkH6UiRtUANM6VkMkI S 3 Main Stl5th Ave i 098 Count PM PIC 1998 Count 6 EBLT 121 E13f 105 IEBRT 60 WBLT 162 WBT 18 WBRT 100 NUT 69 NBT 74 NBRT 20 SBLT 51 SBT 14 SBRT PM P.K 1999 Count 1990 Backgftnd Groikth 1999.. - fieckgrouni'd 1909 with ,PrqJed,, - '.0fricel Apkftritiht katsiiii6t.(Act impact) Total 1iI�"JdfiwI 'h ,,,.-.ajs bT 7 0 3 3 2 4 0 3 2 2 1 1 0 7, 01 3 01 6 1 0. 6 0 0 0 0. 6 0. 1 6 j . 2;' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 1 0 0 0 0 011" 0 0, 1 ; : 0, 0 j 0 0 0' 01, 0' 0, 0 T 133 136 146 116 lit lit 66 69 69 178 183 185 20 20 20 110 113 113 76 78 78 81 83 83 22 23 23 56 58 58 15 16 94 102 304 264 255 237 L 238,267 1999 Bulcgiound 96 105 311 271 262 242 244 274 with Project 961105 313, �'. 214 266 246 800 880 22 902 4 5 3 2 909 note: high incidents of u-tams (assume I fi%) 07 1 S A Main St.19th,AVO 1098 Count EBLt EBT EBRT WBLT WBT W13itt NBLT NBT NBRT SBLT SBT SBRT PM PIC i 091i COUM 1990 Background GTOVVih 1999 Bidiha-iihi M6ifie HWjfitl.:,,Edmonds ofrice, 1999 ;wtfi Piqjid Office/ Aogtim6i Reitiuiint (nit impact) Tow "Piimmiq Pass -by 86 2 8 3 1 5 1 2 7 1 2 5 2 88' 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ; 0 0 0 0 1 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 v. 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 312, 320 324, 123.. 126 126 24 25 25 195 200 202. 49 50 50. 74 76 76. 265 272 272 35 36, 36, 71 13 73. 219 224 224 68 7" ,, 70 1521 38 1559 4 Eomokoi.ni, pm 6m 358 400 337 269 521 419 3661374 1999 Backwound 367 410 345 215 534 428 .3751383 with Proiect 367 1 410 347 277 538 432 375 383 am <ort a 1 MARINE BUST ERNATIONAL EbM6hbS i -'00 G 1K i♦OUh TUNN �VIOVEMENTS § 8R 1041biyt6h St A;' loos adjusted PM PK 1996 raw count 1EHLT EBT EBRT WBLT WBT WART NBLT NOT NBRT SBLT SBT 19 217 182 77 174 22 134 375 26 32 227 ISBRT 17 1502 PM PK 1998 adjusti:d 1999 Background Growth 1909 Backgrourid m••a2 .x.Lnit •.f -H ••F_... Marine Bus Intl =Edmonds OlTice, h Ike logo+ with Project l)1Tice/ Apartment Restauiani (riot iinpactj , : ,' Total., ; Primary_, ,Pons-6. 20 0 6 5 5 1 4 10 1 1 6 0 20 0 0 6 0. 0 0 0 ;. I 0 0 0 0 / 0 / ,. 0 0 0 3 0' 0 0 0, �. 1 1 0 1 , 0 0 0 2' 0 0. 0 0 , 0 .0 , 0. 0. 0 .,0 % 0 0. 0 20 228 234 ; ' 235, 191 196 i96 183 187, 188 . 23 24 24 141. 144 144 394 404 404 27 28 31 34 34 34 ' 238 244 244 . 18 18 ,, ,.. 18 1�/ti .1Y 1617 5 p 6 3ed Ave SAite Access EBLT EBT EBRT WBLT WBT WBRT NBLT NOT NBRT SBLT SBT SORT 7 5 2 1627 PM PK 1999 Count logo Background Growth logo Background Marine Bus Intl - Edmonds Office logo ! with . Project Office/ Apartment Resisuiaht (nct impact) Total Pumary;Posy-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 1 2 0 0, 0 0 0 7 0 4 0 0 10 3 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 0 6 7 3 0 0 0'. n 0 3_ 0 2 0 0 3 2 0 b., 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 10 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 279 286 286 0 0 8 _ 5 298 0 0 0 291 298 0 0 ifv 26 16 10, 615 EDMONb§.XLS, pm hmis s�t�se• Pie 3 „ N' A' •. •William Popp Associate§ 290 437 341 287 439 289 511 562 1999 Background 297 448 356 294 450 296 523 576 with Proiect 297 448 351 300 451 300 528 519 1998 Count 291 279 0 0 0 0 291 279 1999 Background 298 286 0 0 0 0 298 286 with Proiect 303 294 0 IB 0 13 308 294 o F Uvei of Service Alinesi Ihiekhadoial HCS: Unsignalized Ifit6rgection6 Release Lle MBIiF.9db Page 1 Center For Midr6c6inputei.§:,-Ih Trah§06ktatibh University of 512 Wei-1 Hall Gainesville, FL 1-2083 Ph: (904) 392"0378 rd - '4,a-kibri�St': Stk6ets: (R-S) ;3i- ;"AVi�' b 8 Analyst. Date of An6iys�..*,...;,.-�.i M3, i:,/§8r, Other Ihiormationi.;.-;,....�1998,i§xigtihg pih peak count;Ali=way'-' St6p-ddhtk'oile8 in"te`i6ectio-n? 1.j Eastbound I Westbbbfi& I, Northbound 1' Southbbund ;R L T" R IL i T R j L T R ---- --- No:' Lanes j 0 > 1 < 16 0 15; 1. 0 > 1 < 0 1 0 > 1 < 0, 5 331 70.1 6 Volumes 8 2­1 . i i 3 60. i2 4 153 72 A241 91 9 -A .91 19 A 4" .4 , .. , 41 -- ------------ -------- Volume SdiknAirlighd' da'-pa-cit'yj Analf, ish e-ett Ysib Wo k ----------------------- E B NB SB LT F16W Rate 94 -f .23 67 73 RT Flow Rate... 37 78 27 80 Appro6ch ft6w RAt6 263 .227 232 323 Proportion LT 0:36 0.10 6:25 0.23 Propoktion RT 0.14 0.�34 0.12,_ 0.25 s 232 Obpo,04 Approach Fi6i4 fta'te' 227 263 Pti Conflictiniq Appi8dA'6he`6-,fto-`W hate- 555 490 490 Proportion,, 8ubj:66t Approach ti6W Rat6 80.25, 2 2. 6:22 0.31 Proportion; 0 1 pp66ing 'Appkbidh 22` 0. 2 5 0A1 0;22 Lanes oii Sib 66t, A&foabW Lands on Oppo6ihg Approach'' LT, Opp66ihg Ap�r6&ch 23 94 73 67 RT; Oppg6ing Approach ;j. 78 3 37 k 80 27 LT; Conflicting, Approaches14.0 140 'i17 117 RT, Coniliciing: Approacfie-s'i 107 107 115 115 p 0.10 A6 Proportion LT,,' bppoisin'g� A" 0 0.23 0;29 Proportion; RT 0 . proach poo6in'4 Approach 1 0. 34 0;14 0.25 0.12 Proportioh LT: * boAili-C,tih§-Apptoabhes J' 0i25 0J5 0;24 0.24 Propoition RT, Con,flictih4 Apoio6bfi6s, s f 0-19 6.19 0A3 0.23 Approach Capacit''Y; 529 396 519 500 ,J, 7- -- ---- ------ ------- 7 -------------- f ec-tidnP6kiorrfiancb Summary. Appir66ch Approach z. V/C Avf§tag6 Capac y Movement FloW Nit6 Capacity Raiio 'rotal b6lay LOS �24, 0;�50 EB 263 6.7 B , W6 221 i 39(7 8A.- NB 232 .519 6.45 5;5 SB 323 500 0;65 11.6 C Intersection beiSy' 8.4 SO! Level of kvIce (hii6kS66fi6h) BI// Level of Service Calcuistibd Sheets ,II1IIW.W, HCS: Unsignalized Intersect idn§ ­ ,Abl'ba:§6 2; 16 031 lb HCO Page 1. Center For Microcomputers in tkAn6p6r4tati6n University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2093 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) 3rd Ave S baYto'-fi. St Analyst ................... BPJ Date of Analysis......... 5/13%09 . . . Other Information:..,....,.;,bAckgr*'o'-uhdj,l-§5§ pm' peak All -way Stop -controlled Int!I s6dtibfi'�ft r I Eastbound Westbddnd..' Northbound - 1 , §outhbound I L T A R I " L E T R. I L T ---- - --- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 0 > 1 < 0 1 0 5, --- ---- 0 1 < o Volumes 1 87 122 141- 22'-I* 116- 721 62'r, 127, 251 68 157 - 74 PHF I A A .91 .9 A',Al A A.91 .9 A '9 1 - - -_ , '"I a." � --- ------------ --------------------------- 7-- Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis W0_`ikSh6et­ ------------------------- ----------------- tBW6 N13 SB ---------------------------- ------ LT Flow Rate ­ -------------- 97 24 7 ----------- 69, -76 RT Flow Rate j§.' go 28' 82 Approach Flow Rate 271 233- %:238 332 Proportion LT 0.36'0.10 0!29-: 0,23 Proportion RT 0.14 0;34 O.,i2 0;-25 Opposing Approach Flow Rate ­ 2ij`-, .271, 332 238 Conflicting Approaches FlbW Rate 5j, 0 5 70 .'5 o 4 ;�04 Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0 2 5;; 22,, - 0, 22 0.31 Proportion, Opposing Apprb6cb F164j,kAt6' 6 22 i,' �;�1'0',25. 0.31 - 0.22 Lanes on Subject Approach Lanes on Opposihg Approach 1 A LT; Opposing Approach 24 57, 16 69 RT, Opposing Approach 86 38 28 � LT, Conflicting A"pproach6s 145 ;i2l'� - 121 RT; Conflicting Approacheis lid 110 - i 18,-, in Proportion LT; opposing Approach;.'.;:, ­i 6 4 1, 0 1 -3 6 AMII,', 0:29 Proportion RT, Opposing Ap'p-r-o"ach, Ot25­1` 0.12 Proportion LT, Cohflictifiq #bpk6gch6g:. 0 t'25 0" 25, Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches'?:"0 0'i23 Y" .; 0.23'. Approach Capacity ------------------ --- - --- -------- !.�, _.� ------------------- Interjectio2n P6kf6iinAhces S-u'mffia"riy­f't! Approach Approach - V/C -Average Movement Flow Rate c6p6dity Ratio total Diblay "_M ---------- LOS ---------- EB ---------- 271 524 ...; --- 0.52 7--- B W9 233 396 0-,59 9A 8 NB 238 517 0'.46 -548 B: SB 332 c499 6167 12-5 C Intek6ebtio_n D6idy:eii- 9. Lexiel of Williani Popp Associates' PAP 2 Level of Service Justness latern tonal HCS: UhsignAliz6d Intersections Reie'-dsL- ,2; le' MB11P. kco Page i Center For Microcomputers In Transportation' University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2063 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) 3kd Avb'S (t-W) Dhytb'n-' St Analyst .... BPi Date of Analysis..;.;.I.;.,5/l3./98 Other Information..i;;:,.iib6dkqr6thd plUsi- project 1999 pm*peak All -way Stop -controlled Intersection tastbbufid, - t' We'stbbbhd`,I Northbound I touthbound L T R I L T R I L T R 1 ---- L T R No. Lanes 1 0 > 0 > 1 < 0 I -0 > 1 < 0 10 ---- 5 1 ---- < 6 Volumes 1 91 122 341', 22 116, r 75I 62 128 251 71 158 80 PHF 1 .9 .5, 91 .9 :q a91 ;q :9 Al --------------------- .9 .9 .9 ---------------------- ----------- Volume Summary &nd,Ca06city': Atia-lysig WorkSh6Lt ------------------------ ------------------------ --------------------- -------------------- NB SB -- - - - ---- --------------------------------- LT Flow Rate 101 24 69 79 RT Flow !late 38 83 28 89 Approach F16W R&t6 275 236 239 344 Proportion LT ar 0.37 6.,16 6.29 0.,23 Proportion RT 0.14 0A5 OM 0.26 Opposing Approach Flow Rate, 236 275' 344 239 Conflictihg ApptO66hdi Flow'Rate 563� 583 511 511 Proportion, Subjedt Apok6h-6h,'Flow Ast''e" 6: 26'-:- �O; 22 .:0622 0:31 Proportion;, Opposifig AppribAch FioWR&tid"`fl 0;22 ;14-'�0:25, .0.31 OM Lanes on Subject Approach, 11 Lanes on Opposing Approach 1 LT; Opp6§ifig Approach 24 101 79 69 RT; Opposing Appr6a"dh 83 38 -85 28 LT, Conflicting Ap0kogthb§P.k '148' 126 125 RT; Conflic'ting.Abpi6Achd.§' €1, 1, 7, 121 121 Proportion LT- Opp?s1ng;Ajjpibdch 0, 1, 0 0 . :37' 0,23 0,29 Propbrtioh'RT, bp 0. 3 6 0,26 0.,12 Proportion LT; Conflicting, jkpproad-h6§'�'.-'? 0, 25 0,.25, .0124 0.24 Proportion Ati Cofifiictifitj.;ApproAch6 ;0-,20 0-.20 0;24 0:24 Approach capacity -1: 51". . 526 391 --------------- ------- I ----------------- 510 502 Intersection :P6rf6rman 66!Saft6airy, Approzibh Approaidh'. -,V/C i Average MoVement Flow Rate tbp6dity Ratio total De"iay LOS ---------- EB -------- 275 526 ------- 6'452- 7.3 B WB 236, 393 0i60 9-.8 B NB 239 519 '6;; 4 6 5A B SB 344 502 0169.• 13.5 C Int6k6dctibn D616y, I, 19� ' 5 Level of` Service•(Intersection)+= a Willihm Popp As§ociaio Pfikt3. Level of Service Calculation " Marrne siness Interhntiona! HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4e 05-13-1998 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets: (N-S) 3rd Ave (E-W) Main St Analyst: BPJ File Name: MBI2E AC9 Area Type: Other 5-13-98 1998 PM Comment: existing count I Northbound I Southbound I Eastbound I Westbound I L T R j L T R 1 L T R j L T R No. Lanes 1 0 > '1 < 0 j 0'> 1 < 0 1 0> 1 < 0 1 0 > 1 < 0 Volumes 1 53 182 .201 56 241 461 87 "97 181 42 155 69 Lane W (ft)I 12.0 1 - 12.0 j 12:0 1 12.0 RTOR Vols 1 01 01 01 0 Lost Time 13.00 3.00 3.0013.00 3.00 3.0013.00'3.00 3.0013.00 3.60 3.00 --------------------------------- -------------------------- Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 ..3...',. 4 1 5 6 7 8 NB Left * IEB Left 41 Thru * I Th ii Right 1 Right Peds * 1 Peds SB Left * IWB Left Thru * I Thru Right * I Right Peds * I Peds EB Right INB Right WB Right 188 Right Green 26.OA jGreen 21.OA 21.OA Yellow/AR 4.0 IYelloia/AR 4.0 4.0 Cycle Length: 80 secs Phase combination order: 01 #5 #6 ------------------------- ------------------------- Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat•v/d g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio D616y LOS- Delay LOS NB LTR 403 1193 0 703 0 338 18 6 C 18 6 C SB LTR 456 1352 0:848 0:338 25.6 D ' 25:6D EB LTR 445 1619 •0:565 0.275 16s6 C 16.6 C WS LTR 440 1598 6:673 0.275 19:5 C 19.5 C Intersection Delay = 20.7 sec%veti lntersection LOS C Lost Time/Cycle; L 9.0 sec Ciitical•v/c('x)'- 0.688 ----------------------------------------------------------'=----------- William Popp Associates page 4 Level of Service Calcu s a Business Interiiationa! HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4e 05-13-1998 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation - ---------------------- Streets: (N-S) 3rd Ave (E-W) Main St Analyst: BPJ File Name: MB12B.HC9 Area Type: Other 5-13-98 1999 PM Comment: background pm pk I Northbound I Sorthbound I Eastbound I Westbound I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R I---- ---- ----I---- ---- - =1---- =-- ='--I-=-- ---- --- No. Lanes 1 0 > 1 < 0 1 0 > 1 < 0 1 0 > 1 < 0 10 > 1 < 0 Volumes 1 54 187 211 57 253 471 89 99' 181 43 159 71 Lane W (ft)I 12.0 1 12:0 1 12:0 I 12.0 RTOR Vols 1 01 01, 01 0 Lost Time 13.00 3.00 3.0013.00 3.00 3:0013:00 3:00 3.0013:00 3:00 3.00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 NB Left * IEB Left Thru * I Thru Right * I Right Peds * I Peds SB Left * IWB Left Thru * I Thru Right * I. Right Peds * I Pods EB Right INB Right WB Right ISB Right Green 26.OA (Green 21.OA 21.OA Yellow/AR 4.0 (Yellow/AR 4.0 4.0 Cycle Length: 80 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c O/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS ----- ----------- ----- ----- ----- --- ----- --- NB LTR 400 1185 0.728 0:338 19s5 C 19.5 C SB LTR 453 1343 0:874 0.338 28.0 D 28.0 D EB LTR 445 1620 0.514 0.275 16.7 C 16.7 C WB LTR 440 1599 0.692 0.215 19.9 C 19.9 C Intersection Delay = 21.8 sec/veh Intersection LOS = C Lost Time/Cycle, L = 9:0 sec Critical v/c(x) = M06 William Popp Associates - Page 5 Level of Service Cajculation She JWHfie"OeJsiernalr n o a! HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4e 05-13-1998 --Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets: (N-S) 3rd Ave (E-W) Main St Analyst: BPJ File Name: MBI2P.HC9 Area Type: Other 5-13-98 1900 PM Comment: background plus project I Northbound I Southbound j Eastbound I Westbound I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R I---- ------------ --------1---- _ __ No. Lanes 1 0 > 1 < 0 1 0 > 1 < 0 1 0 > 1 < 0 1 0 > 1 < 0 Volumes 1 54 191 251 57 255 471 89 ' 99 191 45 159 71 Lane W (ft)I 12.,0 1 12.0 1 12.0 1 12.0 RTOR Vols I 01 01 01 0 Lost Time 13.00 3.00 3.0013.00 3.00 3.0013.00 3.00 3:0013.00 3.00 3.00 ------------------------------ ---------------------------------------- Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 NB Left * IEB Left Thru Right I Thru i g * I Right Peds * I Peds SB Left * IWB Left Thru * I Thru Right * I Right Peds * 1 Peds EB Right JNB Right WB Right (SB Right Green 26.OA (Green 21.OA 21.OA Yellow/AR 4.0 IYellow/AR 4.0 4.0 Cycle Length: 80 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 ----------------------------- ----- ----------------------== Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts -Cap --Flow_ Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS NB LTR 401 1189 0.747 0.338 20.3 C 20.3 C SB LTR 450 1334 0.884 0.338 29:1 D 29.1 D EB LTR 445 1619 0.517 0.275 16.7 C 16.7 C WB LTR 440 1598 0.696 0.275 20.1 C 20.1 C Intersection Delay = 22.4 sec/veh Intersection LOS = C Lost Time/Cycle, L = 9.0 sec Critical v/c(x) = 0.712 William Popp Associates Page 6 Level of Service Cale Business Interridtiohdi HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1e MBI3E.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 a aaacaaaaa=saaaaa=ssaaaaaa=saaaaa=saaaaa=as=aaa=aaaav=aaaa Streets: (N-S) 5th Ave (E-W) Main St aa=asaa=saaaa Analyst ................... Bpi Date of Analysis.......... 5/13/98 Other Information.:.. ..... 1998 ekisting pm peak All -way Stop -controlled Intersection ________________________________________'____=__ I Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound I L T R I L T R L T R j .L T R No. Lanes 1 0 > 1 < 0 1 0 > 1 < 0 1 0 > ---=--- 1 < 0 .1 0 > 1 < 0 Volumes I 7 133 1161 66 178 201 110 76 811 22 56 15 PHF 1 .9 .9 .91 .9 .9 .91 .9 .9 .91 .9 .9 .9 Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis --------------------------I-------------------------------------------- WorkSheet ----------------------------------------------------------------=------ EB WB NB SB. LT Flow Rate 8 73 122 24 RT Flow Rate 129 22 90 17 Approach Flow Rate 285 293 296 103 Proportion LT 0.03 0.25 0.41 0.23 Proportion RT 0.45 0:08 0.30 0.17 Opposing Approach Flow Rate 293 285 103 296 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 399 399 578 578 Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.11 Proportion; Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0.30 0.29 0.11 0.30 Lanes on Subject Approach 1 1 1 1 Lanes on Opposing Approach 1 .1 1 1 LT, Opposing Approach 73 8 24 122 RT, Opposing Approach 22 129 17 90 LT, Conflicting Approaches 146 146 81 81 RT, Conflicting Approaches 107 107 151 151 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0.25 0.03 0:23 0.41 Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0.08 0.45 0.17 0.30 Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0.37 0.37 0.14 0.14 Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0.27 0.27 0.26 0.26 Approach Capacity ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 513 657 476 391 Intersection Performance Summary Approach Approach V/C Average Movement ---------- Flow Rate ---------- Capacity --------- Ratio Total Delay LOS EB 285 513 ------- 0.56 ----------- 8.3 ---- B WB 293 657, 0.45 5.4 B NB 296 476 0.62 10.6 C SB 103 391 0.26 2.7 A Intersection Delay = 7.5 Level of Service (Intersedtion) = B William Popp Associates Page 7. Level of Service Calculation HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.le MBI3B.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 ------------------------------ Streets: (N-S) 5th Ave (E-W) Main St Analyst ................... BPJ Date of Analysis.......... 5/13/98 Other Information ... ......1999 background pin peak All -way Stop -controlled Intersection I Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R --- I ---= ---- - No. Lanes I' 0 > 1 < 0 1 0 > 1 < 0 1 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 Volumes 1 7 136 1181 68 183 201 113 78 831 23 58 16 PHF 1 .9 .9 .91 .9 .9 .91 •9 :9 •91 A •9 •9 . Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis WbrkSheet -------------------------------------------------=---=----------------- EB WB NB SB ----------------------------------------------------------------------- LT Flow Rate 8 76 126 26 RT Flow Rate 131 22 92 18 Approach Flow Rate 290 301 305 108 Proportion LT 0.03 0.25 0.41 0.24 Proportion RT 0.45 0.07 0.30 0.17 Opposing Approach Flow Rate 301 290 108 305 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 413 413 591 591 Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0.29 6.30 0.30 0.11 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0.30 0.29 0.11 0.30 Lanes on Subject Approach 1 1 1 1 Lanes on Opposing Approach 1 1 1 1 LT, Opposing Approach 76 8 26 126 RT, Opposing Approach 22 131 A 92 LT, Conflicting Approaches 152 152 84 84 RT, Conflicting Approaches .110 110 153 153 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0.25 0.03 0.24 0.41 Proportion RT; Opposing Approach 0.07 0.45 0.17 0.30 Proportion LT; Conflicting Approaches 0.37 0.37 0.14 0.14 Proportion 11, Conflicting Approaches 0.27 0.27 0.26 0.26 Approach Capacity ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 507 654 475 392 Intersection Performance Summary Approach Approach V/C Average Movement Flow Rate Capacity Ratio Total Delay LOS ---------- EB ---------- 290 --------- 507 ------- 0.57 ----------- 8.8 ---- B WB 301 654 0.46 5.7 B NB 305 475 0.64 11.5 C SB 108 392 0.28 2.8 A Intersection Delay - 8.1 Level of Service (Intersection) = B William Popp Associates P"ge j; Level of Service International 0 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1e MBI3P.HCO Page i Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: (N-S) 5th Ave (E-W) Main St Analyst ................... BPJ Date of Analysis.......... 5/13/98 Other Information ......... 1999 background plus project pm peak All -way Stop -controlled Intersection Eastbound I Westbound ( Northbound I Southbound I L T R I L T R( L T R j L T R 1---- --------1---- --------1---= No. Lanes 1 0 > 1 < 0 1 0 > 1 < 0 1 ---- 0 > ----I---- 1 < 0 1 ---- 0 > 1 ---- < 0 Volumes 1 7 140 1181 69 185 201 113 78 831 23 58 16 PHF 1 .9 .9 .91 .9 .9 .91 .9 .9 :91 .9 .9 .9 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis WorkSheet ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- EB WB NB SB LT Flow Rate 8 77 126 26 RT Flow Rate 131 22 92 18 Approach Flow Rate 295 305 305 108 Proportion LT 0.03 0.25 0.41 0.24 Proportion RT 0.44 0.07 0.30 0.17 Opposing Approach Flow Rate 305 295 108 305 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 413 413 600 600 Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.11 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0.30 0.29 0.11 0.30 Lanes on Subject Approach 1 1 1 1 Lanes on Opposing Approach 1 1 1 1 LT, Opposing Approach 77 8 26 126 RT, Opposing Approach 22 131 18 92 LT, Conflicting Approaches 152 152 85 85 RT, Conflicting Approaches 110 110 153 153 Proportion LT; Opposing Approach 0.25 0.03 0.24 0.41 Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0.07 0.44 0.17 0.30 Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0.37 0.37 0.14 0.14 Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0.27 0.27 0.25 0.25 Approach Capacity ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 510 655 471 388 •Intersection Performance Summary Approach Approach V/C Average Movement ---------- Flow Rate ---------- Capacity --------- Ratio ------- Total Delay LOS EB 295 510 0.58 ----------- 9.0 ---- B WB 305 655 0.47 5.9 B NB 305 471 0.65 11.7 C SB 108 388 0.28 2.9 A Intersection Delay = 8.2 Level of Service (Intersection) = B William Popp Associates Page 9 00 -.- ALLWAY STOP ANALYSIS TRC/NRC CIRCULAR 0373, July 1991 INPUT WORKSHEET INTERSECTION: 9th Ave/Main St PEAK HOUR: PM PK ANALYSIS YEAR: 1998 PM PK COMMENTS: existing count Traffic Volumes: Left Thru Right PHF Lanes Eastbound 86 312 123 0.9 1 Westbound 24 195 49 0.9 1 Northbound 74 265 35 0.9 1 Southbound 71 219 66 0.9 1 VOLUME SUMMARY WORKSHEET EB WB NB SB 86 24 74 71 (1) LT Volume (2) Thru Volume 312 195 265 219 (3) RT Volume 123 49 35 68 (4) Peak Hour Factor 0.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 (5) LT Flow Rate; (1) / (4) 96 27 62 79 (6) TH Flow Rate 347 217 294 243 (7) RT Flow Rate 137 54 39 76 (8) Approach Flow Rate 579 298 416 396 (9) Proportion LT 0.17 0.09 0.20 6.20 (10) Proportion RT 0.24 0.18 0.09 0.19 (11) Opposing Approach (Direction) WB EB SB NB (12) Conflicting Approaches (Directions) NS SB NB SB EB WB EB WB (13) Subject Approach Flow Rate 579 298 416 398 (14) Opposing Approach Flow Rate 298 579 398 416 (15) Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 813 813 877 677 (16) Total Intersection Flow Rate, (13) + (14) + (15) 1690 1690 1690 1696 (17) Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate, (13)1(16) 0.34 0.18 0.25 0.24 (18) Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate, (14) / (16) 0.18 0.34 0.24 0.25 (19) Proportion, Conflicting Approach Flow Rate, (15) / (16) 0.48 0.48 0.52 0.52 (20) LT, Opposing Approach 24 86 71 74 (21) RT, Opposing Approach 49 123 68 35 (22) LT, Conflicting Approach 145 145 110 110 (23) RT, Conflicting Approach 103 103 172 172 (24) Proportion LT, Opposing Approach, (20) / (14) 0.08 0.15 0.18 0.18 (25) Proportion RT, Opposing Approach, (21) / (14) 6.16 0.21 0A7 0.08 (26) Proportion LT, Conflicting Approach, (22) / (16) 0.18 0.16 0.13 0A 3 (27) Proportion RT; Conflicting Approach, (23) / (15) 0.13 0.13 0.20 0.20 HCM4WAY.XLB Paae 1 .909ML AWL INTERSECTION: Oth A46/Maln St PEAK HOUR: OM PK ANALYSIS YEAR: ig§j OM Ok I * I COMMENTS: existing count Traffic Volumes: Left Thru Right PHF Lanes Eastbound 86 312 123 0.9 1 Westbound 24 195 49 0.9 1 Northbound 74 285 35 0.9 1 ,Southbound 71 210 68 0.9 CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEET. EB, WB NB SB (11) (2) Proportion, Subject Approach Flow kale Proportion, Opposing Aopioaich how Ridte 0.34 0.18 0.25 0.18 0.34 0.24 0.24* 0J5 (3) Lanes on Subject Approach 1 1 i4i Lan6s on Opposing Approach (5) + 1000 x (1) 343 176 246 235 (6) + 700 x (1) 123 240 165 172 (7) 4 200 x (3) 200 200 200 200 (8) - 100 x (4) -100 -100 -too A00 (9) (5) + (6) + (7) + (8) 566 616 511 507 (10) Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0.08 0.15 0.18 0.18 (11) (12) Proportion hTi Opposing Approach Proportl6n LT, Con#fdiihg Approach 0.16 0.16 uj 0.18 0.17 0.13 6.06 6.0 (13) Proportion OT, Cdnhldln6 A00i6nfi 0.113 0.13 6.20 0.20 (14) - 300 x (10) -24 45 -54 -0 (15) 4. 200 x (11) 33 42 34 17 (16) - 300 k (12) -63 -53 -38 -36 (17) + 300 x (13) 36 38 50 59 (18) (14)4(1. 5) + (16) + (17) .7- -18 2 -15 (19) Approach Capacity; (9) 4 (18) 550 496 .492 LEVEL OF,SERVICE WORKSHEET.., EB J .,NB SB (1) Approach Flow Rate 679 ..--298 416 398 (2) Approach Cdpi . cify 559 498 513 492 (3) Volume/Capacity Ratio, (1) (2) 1.04 0.66 0.61 0.61 (4) Delay = exp(3.6 x (3)) 51 10 22 22 (5) Level of Service (from table] le) F B D D -J (1) Average Delay (Intersection) 30 (2) ILevel-oi-Service D Source: TAMOC Number 373; July 1001 (Int6ifin CIrcuW: not Incorporated into 65HCM) HCM4WAY.XLS:Pjg9' 2 INTERSECTION: Oih Air Bin St :f PEAT( HOUR` PM PK ANALYSIS YEAR: 1999 PM PK COMMENTS: without project Traffic Vnlurrips L"eft , , :. Thru Right PHF Lanes Eastbound 88 320 126 6.9 1 Westbound 25 206 50 0.9 1 Northbound 78 +: 272 36 0.9 1 Southbound 73 r.; 224 70 0.9 1 CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEET d EB .•. _ ,.. WB NB SB 0.34 0.16 0.25 0.24 (1) Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate (2j Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0.18 0.34 - 6.24 0.25 (3j Lanes on Subjed Approach (4) • Lanes on Opposing Approach (5) + 1000 x (1) 342 176 246 235 (6) + 700 x (2) I 123 + 240 lies 172 (7) + 200 x (3) 200 200 260 200 (8) - 100 x (4) -100 -100 -100 -100 , (9) (5) + (6) + (7) + (8) 566 516 511 508 (10) Proportion LT, Opposing Approach • 0.08 OAS 0.18 0.16 (11) Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0.16 0.21 0.17 0.08 (12) Proportion LT; Conflicting Approach 0.18 0,18 0.13 0.13 (13) Proportion RT, Conflicting Approach 0.13 6.13 0.20 0.20 (.14) = 300 x (10) -25 -44 (15) + 200 x (11) 33 42 34 17 (16) - 300 x (12) '54 .54 -36 -38 (17) + 300 x (13) 38 38 59 59 (18) (14) + (15) + (16) + (17) , -7 -i7 2 : -16 (19) Approach Capacity, (9) 4.(18) ., ,•, 558 498. :;. •. • 512,•,•,., •.; ,, , 492 .. LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEET. } , . "' , -<, : V" .. 1. , . EB . WB , NB .. SB . .503 : - • .. 306 427 408 (1) Approach Flow Rate (2) Approach Capacity 558. 498 512 492 (3) Volume/Capacity Ratio, (1j 1(2) 1.06 0.61 0.83 0.83 (4) Delay = exp[3.6 x (3)) 57 10 24 23 (5) Level of Service (from table) .. , r; ,,,, F . C D ;,.,;._ :.,:::, . D : (1) Average Delay (Intersection) 33 (2) Level -of -Service hz E Source' TRBlNRC Number 3b Juiy 1991 (interim Circular: not Incorporated Into 85HCM) HCWWAY.XL0ipe 2 ALLWAY STOP ANALY819 TRC%NRC CIRCULAR 0323, My 1991 INPUT WORKSHEET INTERSECTION: 9t6 Ave/Main St PEAK HOUR: ; PM PIC ANALYSIS YEAR: 1099 PM Pk COMMENTS: with p-ioJto Traffic Vnhimcc 1-0 ; ,. , Thrii..,,, : Right PHF Eastbound se 324 126 0.9 1 Westbound 25 202 50 0.9 1 Northbound 76 272 36 6.9 1 Southbound 73 .. 224 „ . 70 6.6 1 VOLUME SUMMARY WORKSHEET EB WB NB SB 88 25 76 73 (1) LT Volume (2) Thru Volume 324 202 272 (3) RT Volume 126 50 36 70 (4) Peak Hour Factor 0.9 6.9 6.0 ' 0.9 (5) LT Flow Rate; (1) / (4) 98 28 84 61 (6) TH Flow Rate 360 224 302 ' 249 (7) RT Flow Rate 140 se 46 78 (8) Approach Flow Rate 598 308 427 468 ' (9) Proportion LT 0.16 6.60 0.26 0.20 (10) Proportion RT 0.23 0.18 0.09 0.19 (11) Opposing Approach (Direction] WB EB SB NB (12) Conflicting Approaches (Directions) NB SB NB SB EB WB EB WB (13) Subject Approach Flow Rate 598 308 427 466 (14) Opposing Approach Flow Rate 308 .598 408 427 (15) Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 834 834 906 . 908 (16) Total intersection Flow Rate, (13) + (14)'4 (15) . 1740 *7 6 ' 1746 1740 (17) Proportion, Subject Approach Floik Rafe; (13) / (16) . , 0.34 0.18 0.25 0.23 (18) ProWl on, Opposing Applok i M4 AAK (14) ) (16) 0.18 0.34 0.23 0.25 ' (19) Proportion, Conflicting Approach Floiiv Rate, (15)1(16) ! 0.48 0.48 0.52 0.52 (20) LT, Opposing Approach 25 88 �' � t 73 k " 78 (21) RT, Opposing Approach ' 50 126 70 36 (22) LT; Conflicting Approach 149 149 ' "113 ` 113 (23) RT, Conflicting Approach 106 108 176 176 (24) Proportion LT, Opposing Approach, (26) / (14) 0.68 0.15 0.18 0.18 (25) Proportion RT, Opposing Approach, (21) % (14) 0.16 0.21 0.17 0.66 (26) Proportion LT, Conflicting Approach, (22) % (15) 0.18 0.18 6.12 0.12 (27j Proportion AT, Conflicting Approach, (23) / (16) 6.13 6.13 0.19 O,i9 HCM4WAV.XL3;PG" 1 XV66AM"i'l A' St HbUk! t�M ANALYSIS YEAR: i000-om 0 K- COMMENTS: wit` -hi project Right Eastbodhd 681'%JmaylLL:O 324 126 0.0 .1 Wdsibburid --T 262 50 6.9 1 Nbrthbouhd 6.9 Southbb4hd _224; :_,_,._.,,70 ._,,,O.g j_ CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEET,,,, (1) Proportion, Subject Aooibi6 016W kit6 0.34 0.18 0.25 0.23 (2) Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate0.18 0.34 7 6.23 0.25 Lmhes on Sbbjed Approa6h (4) Lanes on Opposing Apotbich (5) 1000 x (1) t 344 177 245 234 (6) 4 706 x (2) 12 240 164 172 (7) + 260 x (3) 200 266 200 200 (8) - 100 x (4) -100 (9) (5) 4 (6) 4 (1) 4 (6) 50 60 509 506 (16) Proportion LT; 000661hj Ap'-- Oibkh 0.08 0.16 08 0.18 (ii) PiIbPonlofi Af j Opposing Approach 66h bA 0.21 0.17 0.08 (12) Proportion LT, cohhictifij Apoi6bdh OA b.i b 0A2 0.12 (0) Ptopbrtbn 11T, 6onAidinig'Approach 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.19 (14) = 300 x (10) 124 (16) 260 x (11) 32 42 (16) - 300 x (12) -64 -.,37 -37 (I JI) +1 300 it (13) 38 38 58 68 (14) i (15) * ('10) (17) 7 =17 (19) Approach Capacity, (9) 4 (18). LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEU,,,,, WB (1) Approach hoW AM6 598 308 Approach Capacity Soo 511 s 490 (3) Wurh6/Capddty Ratio, 0 i (ij ik 6.62 6.63 (4) Delay* exptI6 xi' (3)1 — 24 (5) Level of Service (from (1) Avbrage Daisy (Wirik-66) 13 2) Level -of -Service TRB/NRC Nuffibit 7 33, July 1001 (Interim ,46 Circular: not Incorporated into 85HCM) flCM4WAY.XLS;OiQi 2 Level of Service Calculation.._; .. W ss Iri�ernd�fona! i HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION'SUMMARY"''•Ver`s`iori 2:4e''t "" 05-13-1998 Center For Microcoi►puters Ii5'Tr`ansport9ti8n ------a.ao=acaoaaacaa=aaaa=a=oeaa==aavavaaaecaaaaaaaacaaaaaaaaa=aa_ =ava Streets: (N=S) SR 104 = Edmbfids'Way t-14) bayton St';.. Analyst: BPJ Fiie Name. M6I513:HC9 Area Type: Other 5-13=98 1999, PM Comment: background pm pk =aaaaa=aa=a=a==aoaaaaa=a.ea=�v�aev�=vaaaaaaaaaaaaameaoaaaaaaaaaa=aa=aaa I Northbound I Southbound I `Eastbound I Westbound I L T R I L T it I L T R I L" T R No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1: ' 2 < 0 ''i 1" 1 1 11 1 < 0 Volumes 1 144 404 291 34 244 181..:20. 234 1961 83 187 24 Lane W (ft)112.0 12:0 12:0112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0112.0 12.0 RTOR Vols 1 61 01 01 0 Lost Time 13.00 3.00 3.0013:00 3:00 3:0013:00 3.00 3.0013.00 3.00 3.00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 I;._ 5' 6 7 8 NS Left * IEB Left Thru * I Thru * j Right Right , Peds * I Peds SB Left IWB Left Thru * I , Thru Right * 1 Right * ` Peds EB Right INB Right WB Right "' ISB Right Green 26.OA IGreen 26:OA' Yellow/AR 4.0 (Yellow/AR 4.0`,' Cycle Length: 60 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 - --------------------- ---------------=--------------•------------------ Intersection '0erforM6hdd Summary' Lane Group: Adj,Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap F16W Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS NB L 436 969 0.367 0:'450 7.3 B 7:9 B T 838 1863 +0:536 0450 8.3 B R 712 1583 0:044 0:450' 6.0 B t SB L 190 422 0:200 0'¢450 '6:5 B ' 6.4 B TR 1659 3687 `0:184 011.450• "6:4 4,.B ' EB L 419 930 O':053 Oo`450. 60 B..:,, 6.8 ' B T 838 1863 0:310 GA50 4 6:9 R 712 i1583 0:306 6.450 6:9 B WB L 385 856 0.239 6.450 '6.6 B, 6.7 B TR 824 ' 1831 0.285, 01.450? Intersection Delay = 71 sec/veh Intersection LOS = $ Lost Time/Cycle, L 6.0 sec Critical v%C M 0.423 William Popp Associates Page 17 � 1 Level of Service Ulculation 900... .. :'fi .. ' ll?a s InieMational HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4e 05=13=1998 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation a --a= .e===aae=aaaaa==aaaaaaaea=aaaaaaaae��a-v��>=a=ooa�=yea �=aaa==a =aa= Streets: (N-S) SR 104 - Edmonds Way (E-W) Dayton Stl Analyst: BPJ File Name: MBISP.Hc9 Area Type: Other 5=13-98 1999 PM Comment: background plus project ------------====aaaaaaaveaa=aa===aaa=c=aaaaaa=aaaaeaa=a=a=aa= =.a. a=ca== I Northbound I Southbound I Eastbound j Westbound I L T R I L T R I L T R''I L T R No. Lanes 11 1 i l l "2 < 0 11. 1 1, 11 1< 0 Volumes 1 144 404 311 34 244 181 26 235 1961 88 188 24 Lane W (ft)112.0 12.0 12.0112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0112.0 12.0 RTOR Vols 1 01 01 01 0 Lost Time 13.00 3.00 3.0013.00 3.00 3.0013.00 3.00 3.0013.00 3.00 3.00 ----------------------------- Signal Operations Phase Combination 1, 2 3 4 j 5 6 7 8 NB Left * DEB Left Thru * j T.hru Right * I Right Peds * I Peds SB Left * 1WB Left Thru * I Thru Right * j Right * ` Peds * I Peds EB Right JNB Right WB Right ISB Right Green 26.OA IGreen 26.OA Yellow/AR 4.0 jYellow/AR 4.0 Cycle Length: 60 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 ---------------------------=--- ,a. --------------------=------------------- Intersection Perfoimance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat V/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow ' Ratio 11atib Delay LOS Delay LOS NB L 436 969 0.367 0.450 7.3 B 7.9 B T 838 1863 0.536 0:450 8.3 B R 712 1583 0.048 0.450 6.0 B SB L 190 422 0.200 0.450 6.5 B 6.4 B TR 1659 3687 0.184 0.450 6.4 B EB L 417 921 0.053 6.450 6.0 B 6.8 B T 838 1863 0:311 0.450 6.9 B R 112 1583 0:306 0:450 6:9 B WB L 384 853 0.255 0:450 6.7 TR 824 1831 0.286 0.450 6:8 B Intersection Delay = 7.1 sec/Veh Intersection LOS B Lost Time/Cycle; L = 6.0 sec Critical V/c(xj a 0.424 William Popp Associates Page 18 111"Level of Service CslculAse usiness Inter"national HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1e MBI6P.HC0 Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets: �(N-S)m3rd0Ave �8(E--OO_meW)-Site-Acce-ssevamem Major Street Direction.:.: NS Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Analyst ................... BPJ Date of Analysis......... 5/13/98 Other information ... :... ::1999 PM PK with project Two-way Stop -controlled Intersection emasaaamaemaeaanaa-e-Qasasas-aammanmeema®a--------=------ ----mavasm�a I Northbound I Southbound j Eastbound I Westbound I L T R I L T R► L T A I L T R I---- ---- ----I---- =--- -I---- =-------1=---.---- ---- No. Lanes 1 0 1 < 0 1 0 > 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 > 0 < 0 Stop/Yield I NI I NI I Volumes 1 286 111 7 298 1 1 13 10 PHF 1 .9 .91 .9 .9 1 1 •9 .9 Grade 1 0 I 0 1 1 6 MC's (8) I I I I SU/Rv's (B)I I I I CV's (9) I I I I PCE's 1 11.10 1 I1.10 1.10 Adjustment Factois Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver -- - - ------------------------------------------------- Gap (to) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step l: RT from Minor Street we EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 324 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 949 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 949 Prob. of Queue -Free State:-0_99 -- --------------------- - ------------ Step 2: LT from Major Street SB NB -------------------------- ----------------------. Conflicting Flows: (vph) 330 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1194 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1194 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.99 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcohpl) 1900 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue -Free State: r0.99 ----------------------------------- Step 4: LT from Minor Street ' iiB EB -------------------------- =-------------- -------=------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 663 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 437 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.99 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.99 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.90 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 433 ------------------------------------- -------------- ------ Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue_ Approach Rate Cap Cap_ Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh)(veh)- (`sec/veh) - - ---- WB L 15 433 > 571 6.6 0.0 B 6.6 WB R 12 949 > SB L 9 1194 3.0 0.0 A 0.1 Intersection Delay - 6.3 sec/veh William Popp Associates Page 19 4P • CIVIL ENGINEERS PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS INCORPORATED 6141 N.E. BOTHELL WAY KENMORE, WASHINGTON 98155-4649 (425) 485-9711 • FAX (425) 485-6795 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE ANALYSIS for MARINE BUSINESS INTERNATIONAL Site address: 303 Dayton Street City of Edmonds, WA I. PROPOSAL: Proposal is -for one commercial building with under -building parking on a previously fully - developed site; one existing structure to be removed (see attached). The site is fairly flat, sloping downward from NE -to -SW with approx. 7' relief. Negligible off -site surface drainage enters the site, C �I as it is surrounded by improved properties draining o around the site. cs Existing site improvement: Impervious = 3032 sf �`�•l( Pervious _ 1468 sf V(J�j Proposed site improvement: Impervious = 4500 sf N II. DETENTION: Detention is not proposed, as new ( impervious surfaces will be less than 2000 sf. Roof rOVA) downspouts will be connected directly to an existing I t XX,�,-- closed public drainage system. III. BIO-FILTRATION: Bio-filtration is not proposed, as exposed driving surfaces consist only of a 5'-10' long driveway entrance. A driveway trench drain will be installed at the entrance to under -building parking; 14 connected directly to an existing closed public drainage system. z IV. Boundery/Topo Surveys ..EROSION CONTROLS: Proposed erosion controls will consist of CB filters (2) on existing grates; filter fences will be required if surface drainage infringes on sidewalks. Detention Facilities l/ l.. SEja \dA- C-409 1977 �. Land Design Construction Staking rl •i ' `.T•INFt IMPO12�to1-1�� ALL UrIL PIES SHOOLD PC LOCATED EIY to :'IT)OW SERVICES )'RICIR TO CI:INSTRUCIRpv. hlR.1' %MSUILE UTILUIUS S110'04 [IN TI'iiS NAPPING. r T. Orr SET I)UK DIN i o FDONUATIUN 1J11,1 CLEFN 1JALK - t)CC — NALY - Jaw• a SOIL. J c.w. DEcK = 33(o SF CXJSIING AM. PING TO BC R114U,'Uij `\1 01 ^ ), I r� A 0 u C rya o 0, CLINE> �• P�'' '„� I I J'• 4 3.9 / � )ivI • o zi4 10' CDN)7, 3.3 / 13LILDII..IG = SF DKIVEWAY = 100 SF 4 FT. OF`SE: I CL=r WiCAI }30Y✓ C•k/. E 5TAIRS = 16v0 SF ON% WAL-KI SOIL 75.00 N SCALE: I"= Z.O' PATE: 9-7UQE-98 - ---DfFSCri WII< c co CONCR_TL :k—JFT.— I\rr" -"-'� r_nf,TErt -ISIGil — ! S f()P �'CB W �/ --.Q�� CURP Sitar! nb' NOTE, POSS)ll. is t. i)11N _ _ fly 4 L; O co,s LINE NJSIn[ � 12' SCw-R AL014t Tll: CCISTCR LINE ot, �.� .y 1)141-1 i �. hi l :r j i CD - ' ' I All y ar- ASPIIA'. i PARKINr (FOR US DAM) rC$ A -- •0 0 0 c S,J CA FILE NO. Critical Areas Checklist -------------------------------------------------------- Site Information (soils/topography/hy rol gy/vegetation) 1. Site Address/Location : d' 2. Property Tax Account Number: 3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): "t 3 S 4. Is this site currently developed? yes; n . If yes; how is site developed? 144 ,L�.�cr 5. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply. Flat: less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site. Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of 66-feet). Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% ( a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet). Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of less than 33-feet). Other (please describe): 6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: /V0 ; Approx. Depth: 7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: /00 ; Approx. Depth: What season(s) of the year? qq 8. Site is in the floodway /vim floodplain of a water course. 9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year- round? Mb Flows are seasonal? (What time of year? ), 10. Site is primarily: forested ; meadow _;shrubs ; mixed urban landscaped (lawn,shrubs etc) NC 11. Obvious wetland is present on site: (V© 6:. - .. Site: designated on -the_ Environmentally Sensitive Areas 1VIap? DETERMINATION ^m_chk.doc; Rev 10/03/97 City of. Edmonds ' }V4����, --� Critical. Areas Checklist r J7C. i s90 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 a development permit to the City. The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to determine whether'any potential Critical Areas are or may be present on the subject property. The information needed to complete the Checklist should. be easily available from observations of the site or data available at City Hall (Critical Areas inventories, maps, or soil surveys). r An applicant, or his/her 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. With a signed copy of this form, the applicant should also submit a vicinity map or plot plan for individual lots of the parcel with enough detail that City staff can find and identify the subject parcel(s). In addition, the applicant shall include other pertinent information (e.g. site plan, topography map, etc.) or studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assist staff in completing their preliminary assessment of the site. I have completed the attached Critical Area Checklist and attest that the answers provided are factual, to the best of my knowledge (fill out the appropriate column below). Owner / Applicant: xANl�c2 Name' Street Address ,P Gt 4 9 YS�r�77,3 City, State, ZIP Phone Applicant Representative: Name Street Address City, State, ZIP Phone Signature Date MEMORANDUM CITY OF EDMONDS ENGINEERING DIVISION 250 - 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020 TO: INTERPRETATION FILE 95-E01 FROM: Don Fiene, Hydraulics Engineer SUBJECT: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT - ECDC CHAPTER 18.30 NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACING DATE ISSUED: June 12, 1995 EXPIRATION OF APPEAL, PERIOD: June 29, 1995 EFFECTIVE DATE BARRING APPEALS: June 30, 1995 As defined in the Stormwater Management Ordinance, impervious surfacing includes roof tops, concrete, asphalt, brick and gravel/packed earth. Regarding determination of when impervious surface is new, the following clarification is provided: 1) Generally, an existing impervious surface at the proposed development site will = be considered new impervious surface unless bDb of the following conditions exist: (a) the site was developed after July 6, 1977, the date of the City's first drainage ordinance, and_(b) no stormwater detention was provided and no waiver was granted. For example, a gravel surface that is being paved will only be considered as a new impervious surface if the gravel surface developed after July 6, 1977, no detention was provided, and no waiver was granted. 2) Regarding the demolition of a structure, if the entire structure, including the foundation is demolished and a new development is constructed, all impervious surface for the development will be considered new impervious. However, when the existing foundation is used in development, that portion of the site will not be considered new impervious surface unless it was constructed after July 6, 1977 without detention, or a waiver. Don Fiene, Hydraulics Engineer ddines C. Walker, City Engineer STRMWTR.DOC Paul Mar, Community Services Director 00 CIVIL ENGINEERS PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS 15 114CORPORATED 814i N.E. BOTFIELL WAY KENM6RE, WASHINGTON Oi55-4849 (425) 485-971i FAX (425) 485-6795 PRELIMINARY bOAMAGE ANALYSIS `U for MARINE BUSINESS INTERNATIONAL Site address: 303 Dayton Street " City of Edmonds, WA I. PROPOSAL: Proposal is -for one commercial building with under -building parking on a previously fUlly- developed site; one existing structure to be removed (see attached). The site is fairly flat;,sloping downward frbm NE -to -SW with approx 7' relief: Negligible off -site "surface drainage enters the site, as it is surrounded by improved properties draining around the site: Existing site improvement: Impervious = 3032 sf Pervious = i466 sf Proposed site improvement: Impervious = 4500 sf II. bETENTION: Detention is not proposed; as new impervious surfaces Will be less than 2000 sf�, Roof downspouts will be connected directly to an existing closed public drainage system: III. BIO-FILTRATION: Bio=filtration is hot proposed, as exposed driving surfaces consist only of a 5'-10' long driveway entrance: A driveway t''b ch dr`aih will be installed at the entrance to Linder=building< parking; connected directly to an existing closed public drainage system. Iv. EROSION CONTROLS: Proposed erosion corn"roll will consist of CB filters (2):on existing grates; filter fences will be required if surface drainage infringes on sidewalks: Bounderyrropo Surveys beteniion Facilities Design b coris'travon Staking • . • i <I�,TIiJ Gi . GON•tDl �1�! DI�1. . Ex,l • T' � ��3 - .� C.) I -XI sit N �, n • �/I�ka 5 = 14 G ALL UrILJIICS SHOULD DC LUC"TC.D By I t.0C.ATIC1N SE12'JICE:S PRICII? TO CLINSTRLICUON. ` isint.E: UTILITIj•S SHOWN ON TF-EI$ H4'0 46, N i:bl , -1 TT. CFrSET D/�*E `�-7U0E'1S F'LIUNUATIUPI x n /� N 139`5915`' L 51 ---- --_-- —I pb� • ~ - = �_ �'S.DO �NCRL• lE ^ : r C>� 4 �' i. -- --- I;.�V CL'1NC: ti✓r1LK _ I)CC CFf SCT l 1�ALY. _ �' Zaw• `cr � j SOi! C.W. 9ecv<= 33u, s 11 19 o at3U1Lbi�1 = 2�3Co s>= o 0-), o P1� NEEWAY - 100 SF i" "ARkINC W CLINC Pam' N e c�L' I (l oR U5 bAi)K) I 1 43.9 fd �- CAk/. �` STAIRS = ItoD SF z C> > r— 4 rT. DFi-$__ I o ; Z1 )0 CC)N..I i / �oYCTRi:.At • CbNC `, ALKI SO].L �`y • ?�, ' Al 52 } 1 i _ t , 5.00 _ CONCR WALK- rir'h `�.. _ _ P� ANT --- `� SIGN CB /�-- \ CURd �.,• i S f (?P� U 11H $r W h1Cl7E:+�• Will -- 1 J A� �. S WGhJ p�. /f✓i O Q ilk 4 -v 6A'S LINE 1WSIT1 fILANTER ---- s %1 1' L Fi Uii�'7i'1J Ifh. 1�.' SE=WFR �',I:LIJi: TII:. CE�137Cr2 lldf r- _ __ a—._�— -�• — it bkk I Y. Vt.- k Qv Iy U1•III C gft')F IONOS CONSTRUCIT APPLICATION PEROT �JL�310 z T »a C � GC �0 cc D, Q� Fo. �La �o � tA� zF C u= o~ z . FN awftjf(' R1Qw,t �'MA. AjatDtinQM'L t.TA�{'1,T u1P 1CV.7ADD'O.r•0 (7 aH Pp�'M DMOYH: .� A.wS"InYIF.-.........RtG.�•W 210l:Lodat.�fw �...-.. .. S.tn.r ve W.a�a fm0a :i r•.tarva�n.a...o U .AS,flb:M y,tiN LIfNI' l,-1 rYQ CY YYY tYe1M(„� YY•V ME'rJuklf) II � VL•t to •Ya a I.t Alyi•/d.:J .. ••yil r . •Y'N `''. % �/ /:/ s� /� N Iq Ylt'1Y1� O I.PYl11 1WiM:1 vf:trn:e."t✓ 1 t"�._ 5'ijr JS Ft7�r� • %0 9 c r i.. ? �r ft�rt C.aVsr1urn41%1 t71 v"ONANIOL Di- OLT am. Lt'v O C-1clortecri O7 p"*Cr7y •' ant-` a atj eB$effw. U. lit" wtwdH 8u7+1 uLLa IUKwt covftrtt E upt Auor,113 �rN+Dp=3 +itOwLn tf+x)Kw D COP J LOT GO'n Q^Q''t A.ILcw(O f+DiiOMID rtl.O{J'!'.tO SLIBAC1lG tFt) wprpy�D yi'76K:F5 (/!? movt tittic It[4k9 fwOl:7 LmSDL "EA1t sAePatY -- h.'.cimcl,.?_ 3, !% • _ Lot APLA PLAWWO Aco4w eY OA1L 0. 0 PSStbW'71•L 0 COOK-Unm OR ®tLwvt new LJ auuwt OF use +xrta-Y U �clva iL 0 AP: ELL!C. ❑ slcal :nLCAfO 8�:7t'f: ODNS� i i ;C.t ^..f.?A.�l't$Sf'• 0 C.SLVL. $A:at r!.pi 0 "371%z SPA sp({NL etSPLCi v7 FlOolAw OCCiWANT •'�A LOAD O� > tc �:.,w�L 0 iTQ(KEAI 0 Rfh2VrAL ALWAAkS PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 108 tt.�,to* ���,�� •.:crlrttrt Ecr;Laaw. q(yvstaOf, 'YWIr4LA CrN7n:,.:: OA. evAlL� /iJ/Q VoNcls l Ljwtn ♦ f ! MS.. !e+unnMlF �ff ' • J "`1'r owc+Im�L»VWXrOotnL~dcytreiarngj•LAND FINAL INSPECTION REQUIRED Oct;/� /�,/vALUAf1O.Oc/ B�j� Nat o mc+t rct 1 �` /� ' t r oy PLtiwn.O Plan Check No. ANtr NArl CAL i1713 PL-1-4: cc -Ns ww-. to be ecne On Oryr'At4 ofOoefty OnLy. GAA304WILL Any corwfvt:ion on I" Outilk corm to Ir+uaLY. 3660;s'Iv a". Caw^fn'AyD..^•KTCUQCB. QSC.?'•�9t .Q04tiQ IICCf+'t�/7Q C4smtibbii. �'7•!t 9u�G•+a'.ti P@m0 AppYcaftM 160 Csy7 �. s: awaLA ct<+.Alt:.G� t x c4f0lr3 tjw ft, 1 rw - Prtmndsd wort Is S'latted 17CSNh! 120 Rags - i 'd,.tt;M 5,. cn ,^,4hd:! a' ru3 Of Piet SOduse. hells. Q53 V$ and 023 tr.9riCtiID'1 ft£ ,;,I,c ;..yyQ•t •f, N.^.:;t•ts•. ste4 is IrnDb."•rtlhy. attendamC hold1 N.roow, I:s omcLass. �! f!3'•t.Cwy.3 m4 COT, O' Eer, -rcrr. vrav !Y'+''tape-, .-.:o py* 'm Item 81-.1 wv, aSi C7au:Ni Ica dar ases ct l.cen 'wr.+:�1•w F'aiuft. i•11rsy eux:ty O. mcire vy me issuance .N CNtCa'3fi95+: Of Ittrs Issua'!e fE this OY1CRi:t WWI r,�Dt be dtttm d 10 - m,Yio,iv, wa;44 e• re -ace any feau,ta- eel: et"city Ordinance ire +!• h a+!' w3f the G:y s 0040ty 10 T!q!*rte a::y ordinar4f TOTAL AM04JUT OJE Gd,@.b91.6r e rro•e� :tt®weed9a tAs' 1 kayo reaz this aOWt.arotl; Ira[ the ATTENTIOU APPLICATION APPROVAL ,ned,r-a ,dn ywc is COffs=t: a tnaa t Qua In► Owr e-. LOT the au:y av:`rLtcC aae t o! ttse awsr.. t afire! to COr +chr eiieh city and ;. s otev t Thrs aaOlitat:Dri Is rot a Occmit untie Swet,1A.sregutrwr4;construction:and rncc.n;taleAOfkaotre00 o-.�p-i sgynedttyW* BWC-9 ed er,+_ re owsOn 'mm be QlrNclLged rn anQLa- Cri Ot t:re Lazes C.Cei3oret`ssS:re.atC,:/ta;g:O/+ceu: td:r:'a .-e.+'sCa?rOem..�• DIN v60-1, w0'SD D"-'D+tiY: q}+C �eeS ErC Pad. 81+d RCi'�O: 6 e,fsn I.TAHvtRtyC/':L'1.8 AC.o t®17 ac}*DPer^4grD•nsae:,eprovided. r E:/WO;+DS CALL r''DR "asjsi. - N•rt TENTION INSPECTION C: Is UnIAATUIL TO USE to* CCrU"IF ALL'0 BU7Ltiti!AG On S:pY =*DE I(i!F7�q,rt� 0W&Gf AND '%"D yv.At OD I�® �� ♦i _®�i` 2 OO:G:':at. — s.r ViLLO':=--_ J — e'vor y� q, %G ff-*1C i1E- Cx 0=Uv-%nCf -,as t;.EFrt G'Ska 7flu AYE&i 5F.: CECNu %* PJ!.� — Gh'v^ GOL7 — A.,w, Dr .Ya-- v11� 'y .r .. -�V��^.r „%rn '.•�✓-N.� �rP..r,�fi'�k �"1J�1X�~�tN�.w �'✓, d;-'I... ?. `_".h ��. ],)}''�'..�'],.. �:��E`� •M°��:t�I :.�'i T'4�.`;: My::rain •,,f,. ._t-,..i .. v.. �>y:;�.. ' ✓i. ''�Y PSydfa"'..'L�`i 4,,�r.�:FEt+` '.,��i1tr� -..ate..` _City of Edmon fnc. - 189v RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION.,_ PERMIT Permit Number' I Issue Date: V / 101 A. Address or Vicinity of Construction: B. Type of Work (be specific): .S C. Contractor: Mailing Address: 57' 'State License #: D. Building Permit # (if applicable):n Contact:--A��Z&19rX-d Phone: A&K —a:?,K;//�7 Liability Insurance: _ Bond: $Z�. 00 Side Sewer Permit # (if applicable): NA E. Commercial ❑ Subdivision ❑ City Project E] Utility (PUD, GTE, WNG, CABLE, WATER) ❑ Multi -Family ❑ Single Family ❑ Other INSPECTOR: , u ,-r r 04T INSPECTOR: - F. Pavement or Concrete Cut : ❑ Yes No G. Size of Cut: x H. Charge $ APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application to hold the City of Edmonds harmless from injuries, damages, or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, foreseen or unforeseen, that may be made against the City of Edmonds, or any of its departments or employees; including or not limited to the defense of any legal proceedings including defense costs and attorney fees by reason of granting this permit. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPEC- TION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK. ESTIMATED RESTORATION FEES WILL BE HELD UNTIL THE FINAL STREET PATCH IS COMPLETED BY CITY FORCES, AT WHICH TIME A DEBIT OR CREDIT WILL BE PROCESSED FOR ISSUANCE TO THE APPLICANT. Two sets of construction drawings of proposed work required with permit application. A 24 hour notice is required for inspection. Please call the Engineering Division, 771-0220. Work and ti kerj#1 is to be inspected during progress and at completion. Restoration is to be in accordance with City Codes. Street shall be kept clean at all times. Traffic Control..,Public Safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City Engineer.. , All street cut trench work shall be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to the end of the working day; NO EXCEPTIONS. I have read the above statements and understand the permit requirements and the pink copy of the permit will be -available on site at all times for inspection purposes. Signature: Date: ntractor or Agent) CALL DIAL -A -DIG PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK FOR CITY USE ONLY APPROVED BY: RIGHT OF WAY FEE:/Q •�� ! j� TIME AUTHORIZED: VOID AFTER DAYS DISRUPTION FEEIFUND 11 l: SPECIAL CONDITIONS: RESTORATION FEE: RECEIPT, NO WORK SHALL BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE Eng. Div 1997 FIELD INSPECTION NOTES Comments Diagram (Fund 111 - Route copy to Street Dept.) 0 CONTRACTOR CALLED FOR INSPECTION ❑ YES ❑ NO Partial Work Inspection by P.W.: Work Disapproved By: ' '. Date: FINAL APPROVAL BY: Date: AB * 00 vity of Edmondfo RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT Permit Number: e,3 / Issue Date: / A. Address or Vicinity of Construction: 3. 03 V_�o.yto I O B. Type of Work (be specific): Z1.1 t, Ql SQe,� (Z' air o N 3�? 8 9 � - l g of �r s►-e� �+atJ d W '1�r S'� 1� r..e+� k. ^`'A Sa� R QQ . . C. Contractor:. V^ 3) Contact: p'. H o wyk rJ _ ,--Iyx-r MART t IJ Mailing Address: O .S6 Hwy. '10 : Phone: State License #: Liability Insurance: Bond: $ D. Building Permit # (if applicable): Side Sewer'Permit #..(if appl cable): E. X Commercial ❑ Subdivision ❑ City Project 'gJ Utili PUD, GTE, WNG, CABLE, WATER) ❑ Multi -Family ❑ Single Family' ❑ Other INSPECTOR: all INSPECTOR: F. Pavement or Concrete Cut : ❑ Yes 'f No G. Size of Cut: H. Char ems$ APPLICANT TO READ. A7hold r INDEMNITY. Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees te City of Edmonds'hatmless from injuries, damages, or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, foreseen or unforeen, that may be made against the City of Edmonds, or any of its departments oremploy- ees, including or not limited to the defense of any legal proceedings including defense cosh and attorney fees by reason of granting this permit. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND.MATERIALS FOR A` PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING .THE FINAL INSPEC77ON AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK ES77MATED RESTORA77ON FEES WILL BE HELD UN77L THE FINAL STREET PATCH IS COMPLETED BY CITY FORCES, AT WHICH 77ME A DEBIT OR CREDIT WILL BE PROCESSED FOR ISSUANCE TO 7HE_ APPLICANT. Construction drawing of proposed work required with permit application. l A 24 hour notice is required for inspection; Please call the Engineering Department-,,7,71-3202. Work is to be inspected during progress and at completion. Restoration is to be in accordance with City Codes. . Street shall be kept clean of all times. Traffic Control and Public Safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City Engineer. All street cut ditches shall be patched with asphalt or. City approved material prior to the end of the -working day; NO EXCEPTIONS. I have read the above statements and understand the permit requirements and the pink copy of the permit will be available on site at all times for inspection pu ses. Signature: (Contractor or Agent) CALL DIAL -A -DIG PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK FOR CITY USE ONLY TIME. AUTHORIZED:: VOIDAFTER=- - - DAYS;.. DISRUPTION. FEE/FUND.I AL FEE:' DATE: , . ........ ISSUED .BY:.. NO WORK SHALL BEGIN' ts.� Engrg. Div. 1991 4. FIELD INSP ION N S (Fun 1I I - Route copy to Street Dept.) Comments: Diagram: CONTRACTOR CALLED FOR INSPECTION ❑ YES El NO Partial Work Inspection by P. W.: Work Disapproved By: Date: FINAL APPROVAL BY: Date: Eng. Div. J FfD PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT NO.1 OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY 1476 Rev. 57 LOCATION O 3 D ai N • - AREE A 1 /4 S :2. 3 T 2') R 03 DATE 3) W.O. NO. 00 7 $ POLE NO. REASON FOR WORK idYV'kG.ls i?rt`q A L^ ENGINEER DWG. NO. 0 130 G.+:ti '� «•a$ s��a cy �'� via (Z ► iv rnV t` csEr DRAFTER U.G. NO. SCALE i- O O DATE WORK COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 0 EXEMPT ❑ NOT EXEMPT PARA. 18 ITEM C FOREMAN FEES REQ D UYES ❑NO PRIMARY OVERHEAD O.H. U.G. COND. KV ❑ RESIDENTIAL ADD CKT. FT. PH ❑ COMMERCIAL REM CKT. FT. PH LEO# NET CKT. FT. O.H. U.G. COND. KV ADD CKT. FT. PH REM CKT. FT. PH NET CKT. FT. SECONDARY OVERHEAD BASIC FEE $ METER/CONV. POLE $ PERMITS (DATE GRANTED) PRIMARY UNDERGROUND ❑TREE TRIM ❑ RESIDENTIAL ❑ STATE ❑ COMMERCIAL BASIC FEE $ LEU# ❑ COUNTY X CITY *cfav,\S. /®$ /=$ ❑ EASEMENTS ❑ REQUIRED ❑ NOT REQUIRED SECONDARY UNDERGROUND BASIC FEE $ — /®$ /=$ UNDERGROUND PLAT DATE RELEASED BASIC FEE $ AFT. ®$ /_ $ FOREIGN CONTACTS ❑ GTNW JPN# STREET LIGHTING t FT. ® $ / _ $ ❑ CATV JPN# ❑ JOINT TRENCH GTNW & CATV ❑ JOINT BORE GTNW & CATV WORK IN RIGHT OF WAY ❑ PRIMARY ❑ ❑ SECONADARY t FT. ®$� _ $ POLE STENCILING FROM TO TAKE OFF POLE MISCELLANEOUS FEES PRE-CONSTR. REQUIREMENTS VAULT $ PERMIT $ 3 O b' ❑ TREE TRIM ❑ PUD LOCATOR rob.oc t Zoo?q� $ / O ` o ❑ BACKHOE ❑ $ 11 ONE CALL DATE $ # INDEX POLES PLAT TOTAL DUE $ O 7_O eo LOGS U-MAP DATE PAID-�i% XFMR C-MAP RECEIPT# _ ���� % LOCATION MAP PAGE`tF!` t--5_17-6 NEW SVCE APPLICATION# I c� 843S_ DATE PRINTED APPROVED SUBSTATION CIRCUIT NO. PHASE ra T }� 3�1 Sack \SQc p N Thy Eas`� S►da o� Q ,J ch l.. N c� �.� VL h 5 ► a. 2 W '.AV, RkN4J 3 S ®r� S,-,K f% INS, 's O�sZW�pYA `i�.� c� � a. 2 S ,�� • �•�sttC' 4,,�:,� `�'�r a �\o -o M E M O R A N D U M January 6, 1992 T0: Ed Somers Planning Division FROM: Gordie Hyde aall- Engineering Division SUBJECT: REVIEW OF AGENDA ITEMS FOR ADB MEETING 1/15/92 The Engineering Division has comments on the following items: ADB-98-91:. This application is incomplete. Engineering will not prepare requirements until ancomplete application package is submitted. ADB-99-91: A grading and drainage plan will be required. ADB-106-91: A grading and drainage plan will be required. ADB-107-91: This application is incomplete. Engineering will not prepare requirements until a complete application is submitted. ADB-94-91: Parking inside buildings needs to be dimensioned. Landscaping in two foot overhang of parking stalls -to be low growing and durable. Curbs to be provided between landscaping and parking. Grading and drainage plan will be required. High traffic load driveway will be required. College Place traffic mitigation fee required. A ten foot setback from drainage pipes must be maintained to the buildings. Engineering has no comments on the other items. GCH/sdt ADBMTG/TXTST530 . ) Alberts ., ax CI CLERK REQUIRED CENTER Mo s ' WA 98020 ju'`Vl 1 1984 LEASE Acltr:r:rn'.wT KI IEVERS, Sicliomish Suwty ire�s�ct This Lease, made this T day of 1g�I between R41jj162 18,*Ul� )GbM01U and and4 01k U# OD, Lessee, Lesser STREscr 1. The Lessor hereby leases to Lessee, and Lessee hereby leases from Lessor those certain premises situated in the City of l:dn:onds, Snohomish County, I'lashington, described as follows; TWO PRk)L)% 6W-Z-S- f}IJU'�(_K_V T -7-0 Iq Mn er. #?T 766F 50077 f WCST C-60JEA- A)C4 2 TNT .o�LLXY. Ul�i � �O0 FILE - 7�6D�03 . 30 3 ()AYTDiV S/ 2. • The premises are to be used as Barking for Lessee's L-usines§ and for no other business,' without the written consent of Lessor. 3. The term of this le-ase shall he for one (1) year and N __-shall commence on.. the day of 19 ARIL 198'� and end oil the day — _ c+- �p of _L(L _ 19a inclusive. C. 4. Rental for said premises small. be IU©i►�i� �.C. .. C per month in U.S. currency paid in advance to Lessor at f _ ,. == The premises have been inspected and are ,accepted by =1.(tPsee -kap the in their Present condition, and Lessee will at all tires premises neat, clean and in a sanitary condition and will at they are all times preserve said premises in as good repair as now or are required may hereafter be put to. If any improvements under Local, State or Federal ordinances, rules or statutes, regulations, compliance will be at the sole cost and expense of Lessee. G, All personal property on said leased premises shall be at the risk of: Lessee. Lessor or I,es:j()rs' agent shall not be liable for any damage, either to person or property, sustained by Lessee or others caused by any defects now in said premises or hereafter occuring thereon due to the premises becoming out of repair or due to the happening of any accident or occurrence from whatsoever cause on or about said premises. Lessee agrees to defend and hold Lessor harmless from any and all clainis for damages suffered or alleged to be suffered on or about the leased premises by any person, firm or corporation. in order that this covenant and agreement may be effective, Lessee here- by convenants and agrees to maintain at all times during the 8405310302 von 1846 PacE pg?g term oflOs 1 (public liability*;uraon the promises herein described equivalent to that business insuranccarried upon Lessee's restaurant business for whic)l this lease provides parking. In the event Lessee fails to insure said premises as agreed Lessor retains the right to obtain equivalent insurance thereon at Lessee's expense. 7. This lease is cancelable ilt the sole option of either Lessor or Lessee upon thirty (30) days written notice given by • one to the other. Q. It is agreed between Lessor and Lessee that parking as provided shall be for customer use only and all driveways as established shall be free of permanently parked cars. 9. Lessor and Lessee understand that it is their intenti � to renew this lease at the expiration thereof and agree to nego- tiate in good faith in regard to said-4.�ase renewal. Vice and STATE OF WASHINGTON ) --- ss. County of Snohomish ) This is to certify that o> > ��_-E� Y r t,�e _ day of 19B#, before me the undersigned, �i t��c�tary Public in at�d fo , the State of shington duly conimi.ssioned and ualifi d, personally appeareU-IAX L:�_ /' ; � and �.+-L. to me known to be the individuals described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they signed the same as their free and voluntary act and deed, for Lhe uses and purposes therein mentioned. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,����I have herc►.,nto set my hand and affixed my official seal, th�2labove written. 8405310-90 4 cVO'1'Alt1'"PUBLIC � fc>i' the •`� St lt0 /. Nts h i n i res - dine at . VOL 1846 PAGE 08?9 Quintana Roo 303 Dayton St. Edmonds, Wa. 98020 City of Edmonds Planning Dept. 4-20-84 Dear Mrs. Block This letter is to accept full responsability in regards to fullf illing our parking obligations. We acknowledge responsability for acquiring an additional two parking spaces in the event of cancellation of our current agreement with Rainier Bank of Edmonds. Sincerely; /Z��-__ . Matt owner 8405310302 VOL 1846 PAGE 0830 .-; 1N -O CE COMMUNI TIO 6 DATE hay 22 1984 TO Jackie Parrett FROM Cindy Ri ngstad City Clerk Permit Coordinator SUBJECT: _ RECORDING. Please record the attached agreement for' Qunitana Rood We are collecting $5.00 for recording fees Please return.a copy of the recorded document. Pw�l ti CITY OF E®MONDS 250 5th AVE. N. • EDMONDS. WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771-3202 BUILDING DIVISION May 22, 1984 Chris Matt Qunitana Roo 303 Dayton Street Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: PARKING LEASE AGREEMENT LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR Your lease agreement with Rainier Bank for two parking spaces, dated April 24, 1984, is in the process of being recorded by the City. Recording fees are $3.00 for the first page and $1.00 for each additional page. Total cost for this agreement is $5.00. Please remit this amount at your convenience to the Edmonds Planning Department, 250 5th Avenue N. Edmonds, WA. Cindy Ri gs ad Permit ordinator • Ob CITY OF E®fV ONDS 200 DAYTON ST. • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771.3202 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CERTIFIED MAIL June 15, 1982 Mr. Christopher L. Matt 303 Dayton Street Edmonds, WA 98020 HARVE H. HARRISON - ' MAYOR PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Parcel 4-056 (Acreage) Sec. 23, T.27.N., R.3E WM Re: 3q? __Da ony Stir, 100 B1k. Edmonds, WA 98020 Dear Resident: On February 17, 1981, the Edmonds City Council passed Resolution 488 for construction, reconstruction, and repair of deteriorated sidewalks. A letter dated March 169 1981 was sent to residents that were required to repair the sidewalk abutting their property. The improvement of sidewalks in need of repair at the expense of the abutting property owner is provided by City Ordinance, Chapter 7.20 and Revised Code of Washington, Chapter 35.68. The areas needing repair have been marked in paint on the sidewalk adjoining your property. Reconstruction permits must be obtained from the Building Department at 501 Bell Street within 30 days upon receipt of this certified letter. The fee for the sidewalk repair has been waived by the City of Edmonds. In the event these improvements are not completed within ninety (90) days upon receipt of this certified letter, the City will emVloy a private contractor to perform the designated repairs and the City will bill the abutting property owner. This action is in response to many citizen requests and pedestrian falling accidents which have been increasing in recent years as a result of sidewalk deterioration and increased pedestrian traffic. If you have any questions, please call Bobby Mills at!771-3202, ext. 289. Sincerely, STREET FILE . OHN B. MITCHELL` Superintendent of Public Works BM/ml 4 i �� C 200 DAYTON ST. • EDMONDS, WASHINGION 98020 • � Ou) 1/� !i^_S DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS STREE7 FILE Dear Resident: I HARVE H. HARRISON MAYOR March .16, 1981 On February 17, 1981, the Edmonds City Council passed Resolution 488 for construction, reconstruction and repair of deteriorated sidewalks. A public hearing will be held in the Council Chambers at the Civic Center. on April 21,198.1 at 7:30 P.M. You are invited .to,_at.t.end_,t..his_he,a-ring for. discussing'repair of portions of de ter iorated�'sidewalk. abutting your property:' The AimprovemeriE�of sidewalks in need of repair at the expense of the abutting property owner is provided by City Ordinance, Chapter 7.20 and Revised Code of Washington, Chapter 35.68. The areas needing repair have been marked in paint on the sidewalk adjoining your property. Reconstruction and repair of these sidewalks must be corllpl.eted on .or before September 1, 1981. In the event improvements are not completed within the above specified time, the City will perform and complete the improvements at the expense :of the abutting property owner. This action is in response to many citizen requests and pedestrian falling accidents which have been increasing in recent years as a result of sidewalk deterioration and increased pedestrian traffic. Sincerely, ) F RED F. HERZBERG Director of Public Works I RECEIVED• City of Edmonds Attn: City Engineer Dear Sirs: NOV 2 1976 Lb0i_tb Engr. Dept. November 01, 1976 Within the past few days I received a building permit to remodel the house at 303 Dayton St., Edmonds. Along with the permit I was informed that since this location was going to be used in a commercial capacity we would have to underground the electrical service if the amount of remodeling was fifty percent or more of the value of the property. In the month of April of this year my business partner and I purchased the property at 303 Dayton for $$35,000, plus closing costs. The construction and oost of remodeling will be S2,650.for plumbing $1,550, for new electrical service and wiring and $8,437. to Paul Roy as general contractor. This total of $12, 637. represents far less than half of the value of the property, and we therefore wish to postpone thisadditional expenditure since we must maintain a budget until our business has become better established in the community. We would greatly appreciate your understanding and patience in this matter.. STREET FILE Yours Truly,- Christophe L. Matt Q Craig Baile O o.� I X O 1 ,No Lb 0 oo� O05 ��I uNw� DATE414JY�CO PERMIT ADDRESS LEGAL. DESCRIF � . -M. BUILDING PERMIT RFVTFU _ FMRTNFMMA ncOADTMC rr rurry .Ter Instruction: . Check Accuracy of Legal Description • Check Against Assessor's Map for Legal Subdivision • Does it conform to City. Approved Subdivision? Reviewer's Initials 1. This lot included in Subdivision/Plat No.: 2. Site Inspection made on: 3. What are around water and soil conditions? "iz 4. Site Drainage Checked? Ell q: S. Storm Sewer Availability: Sht. of g. No. Project Roadside Ditch 6. Grading & Final Contours: 7. Septic Tank System Design Approved: 8. Sanitary Sewer Availability Sht. of Dwa. No. Project Side sewer availability: 9. Sanitary Sewer Connection Fees? Raw- 10. hater Mains & Fire Hydrants (Indicate Site Plain) Check Fire Dept.'s Comments , 11. S alks: (Site inspection shows conditions of sidewalks as follows) 12. Curb Cuts/Drivew (Check driveways for safety, location, Curbs: grade and w dth : 13. underground Vfiring:__ Street Lights: 14. Street Right-of-way b Bldg. setbacks.: ht. of Iffficial Street Map.. 15. Existing utility Easements? 16. Access Easements: 17. Site Plan checked for accuracy? 18. Special Requirements listed in Memo to Bldg. Dept. 19. Commercial 6 Apt. Requirements form completed? "te m 20. Drawings stamped & notations made? 1` 21. All Items filled in on Bldg. Permit Application? 22. Bonds posted for site work?_ 23. Right-of-way Invasion Permit required? Rev. 7/1/76 q -4P,i . *1 = No - A.A*lp4r-trltj4 zjTRE.ET FILE T Al 7 PF PAIM li-4 Now ApvtfioA 6-,xr�eo ?4,�rr TYKE v r4 6-f lor T 'MIA -4a .14 ao� ::-:... ....... . . SAP ItO LFAC /7-76 `. ;Q • • RECEIVED CITY OfEDMONDS ENGINEERING DEPARTr.IENT OCT 2.7 1976 505 BELT. STREET EDr101IDS, NASHINGTON 98020 Edmonds. Engr. Dept. APPLICATION FOR STREET USE PERMIT Name of Applicant: lJ L fo Mailing Address: D �11:_1`$ Telephone Number: /0�ol° 17d! Description of Public Place or.Portion thereof desired to be used: (exhibit may be attached) Type of Use desi red to be made of Public Pl ace :_i�? jM ^4�/Sl7 oe/wEJ,/j��-� Ea If applicable, attach plans and specifications for, any utility or structure to be erected and/or maintained on the Public Place: TEMPORARY PERMIT: Unless otherwise designated herein, this permit is understood by applicant to be wholly of a temporary nature, that it vests no permanent right whatsoever. If the permitted use becomes dangerous or such structure shall become insecure or unsafe, or shall not be constructed, maintained or used in accordance with.the provisions of this title, the same may be revoked.and the structure and obstructions ordered removed by order of the City Engineer. If this application is for a specified period of time, the terms, of said application is:-__ �4,C3ovZ ce 'EF"47 INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees to hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any injuries, danlages or claims of any kind or descrip- tion whatsoever,, foreseen or unforeseen, that may be made against the applicant or the City of Edmonds, or any of its departments or employees, including but not limited to the defense of any legal -proceedings including defense costs, court costs, and attorney.fees by reason of granting this permit. In addition, applicant understands that the City shall be provided a certificate of insurance.t:o indemnify and hold the -City of Edmonds harmless from all claims and/or, property damage, naming the City of Edmonds as an also insured. APPLICATION OF CHAPTER 6.40 OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE: -,Applicant or had the opportunity to read, Chapter 6.40. of the 'Edmonds -City and understands that all terms of that Ordinance are incorporated in full and this application and permit therefore. are subject to of the Edmonds City Code.. Applicar�i's. Sidna_ture _ l5ate STREET FILE warrants that he' has read, Code, attached herewith, herein as if set. forth the terms of that Chapter 1. 11/7/74 rev. City of Edmonds Engineering Departnient APPLICATION FOR STREET USE PERMIT -- Page.2 Approval (and Agreement, if applicable) of Abutting Property Owners: Signature Printed Nance_ Address Date DO NOT WRITE BELOW.THIS LINE (To be completed by Tssuing Agency) City.Counci'l Approval, (Attach Minute Entry): Permit Fee: _ Annual Fee: due January 1, 19__ Amenities.Design Board Approval (.if applicable) Attach'Minute Entry: Building Official.Approval'(if applicable): ^^�' Signature � Date Provision for Indemnity: Terms and Provision of Performance Bond, if applicablec (Reference 6.40.050 of applicable Ordinance) PERMIT AUTHORIZATION BY CITY ENGINEER: Remarks: a gniture Date PERMIT NO.l �^ _7� � DATE ��/a y ,6 11/7/74 rev. A OINEER44IG REQUIREMENTS FOR COft�AL AND APARTMENT BUILDING PROJECTS Name OUINTANA.R00 - Restaurant remodel Date October 19,:1976 STREETS AND ACCES .1. Right-of-way Requirements: 60-foot exlsti'ng 2. Road Bed Width: 40=foot existing 3. Turn Around: Required on site. 4. Sidewalks: 4-inchconcrete existing 5. Parking Strip: N/A 6. Access Easements: None UTILITIES 1. Water Mains: 12-inch'C.I. main existing 2. Fire Hydrants: Existing 3. Sewers or Septic Tanks: Existing sanitary sewer connection 4. Drainage:' Install all necessary storm sewers and drainage facilities per drainage plan and City Standards. Where drainage is across adjacent private property, all parties. having any ownership interest in the lands being developed shall provide, as a restriction on the title running with the land, that the City of,Edmonds shall be held harmless from any and all claims for damages which maykbe occasioned to adjacent land by reason of.the construction and operation of the drainage.system,'unless,.releases of damages and/or drainage easements are obtained from the other property owners' affected by said drainage.. Any drainage problems created by change of contour during development must be corrected'prior to occupancy permits or release of performance bond. Final approval (or.release of bond) will be withheld until actual drainage as installed has been, -inspected by the City Engineer. 2123a Engineering RequireMor0-1 & Apartment Building Prod s -e 2 . 5. Utility Easements: 6. Underground Utilities:; To be provided in accordance with Ordinance No. 1387.. Street Lighting shall also be provided with the necessary street light standards and underground wiring. Street lighting not required. TOPOGRAPHY 1. Excavation and Grading: Excavation and grading shall conform to the requirements outlined in Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code, latest adopted'edition, Vol. 1. Where extensive grading and fill are involved in the development, a grading plan and specifications shall be prepared. QUOTATION FROM THE CITY CODE REGARDING IMPROVEMENTS 11.02.025(f) Utilities and Street Improvements. No building permit shall be issued for the construction of any building or.structure of any kind or description unless the plans and specifications include the construction for curbs; gutters, sidewalks, paved streets, necessary water lines, sewer lines, and storm drainage necessitated by the new construction or improvement, to be built to applicable City standards, provided, however, if found by the City Engineer to be impractical to construct at the time of application for said building permit, construction may be waived by the City Engineer and in lieu thereof a performance bond filed with said engineer to cover the estimated cost of construction to City standards for said improvements, provided further, in areas zoned single family residential at the time of said application for building permit in which the applicant has received final approval for a plat or sub -division and has compiled with requirements therein compliance with this subsection shall be deemed by compliance with the sub -division or plat requirements. COMMENTS Off street parking spaces should be provided. i Engineer Rev. April 2, 1971 2123 b &2124 a CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771-0221 Website: www.ci.edmondsma.us DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT I n C . 18 Planning • Building • Engineering September 7, 2007 Charles Greenburg Triad Law Group 128 — 3rd Avenue south Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Greenburg Building, Parking and Sidewalk Disruptions Dear Mr. Greenburg: GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR On February 1, 2006, a total of $8,155 was paid to the City of Edmonds to cover sidewalk and parking disruptions associated with the Greenburg Building's construction. Those disruptions were not expected to last longer than one year. The sidewalk and parking disruption fees paid for your project covered disruptions through February 1, 2007. To date, parking and pedestrian movement ability remains unavailable. As of September 1, 2007 additional parking and sidewalk disruption fees in the amount of $4,953 are due to the City to cover parking and sidewalk disruptions through September 1, 2007. Please remit this amount by September 14, 2007. Additional disruption fees will be assessed until sidewalks and parking are restored to full public use. It was never the City's intention to grant such sidewalk and parking disruptions on an open-ended basis, whether paid for or not. Such a situation as this is becoming a public access and safety issue which is both unacceptable and a code violation. Several complaints have been received by the City concerning this. Therefore you are directed to begin construction of sidewalks and curb no later than September 17, 2007, and complete restoration of the sidewalks and parking along the frontage of your property to full use by the public no later than September 28, 2007. We realize that portions of the sidewalk may need to be subsequently removed for future construction activities, therefore we will permit the sidewalks to be constructed of asphalt in the interim until permanent replacements can be installed. Please note that ADA slope and truncated dome requirements will still need to be met at the intersection. If you have any questions, feel free to contact either Ed Sibrel or Jeanie McConnell at 425-771-0220 for assistance. Again, please begin the above -noted corrections by September 17, 2007, and complete them no later than September 28, 2007. Please refer to the enclosed Order to Correct Violation. We will assist and monitor your pro&ress to that end. Call our Engineering Inspection line (425-771-0220, Ext. 1326) to schedule the required nspections. Sin re , 19o,af►e V. Bowman Director, Development Services c: Permit File Mike Thies, Code Enforcement Officer C:\Docu nts and Settings\gebert\Ivcal Settings\TenWrary Intemet Fi1es\0LK95\Greenb"g - 155-3 Ave S_ParkingS W Dismption.doc • Incorporated August 11, 1890 Sister Citv - Hekinan. Jaoan CITY OF EDMONDS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020 ORDER TO CORRECT VIOLATION Location of Violation (Address and/or description of location: 155 — 3rd Avenue South, Edmonds, WA 99020 Issued To: Greenburg Building Address Of Person This Order Is Issued To: 128 — 3rd Avenue, South, Edmonds, WA 98020 Code Section Violated: Edmonds Municipal Code 9.20.050 — Responsibility and duty to repair, maintain and reconstruct sidewalk; Edmonds Municipal Code 9.20.100 — Hazardous conditions on public street right-of-way Description of Violation: 1) Missing, broken, unreconstructed sidewalk abutting 155 — 3`d Ave, South Corrective Action Required: 1) Pay the additional sidewalk and parking disruption fees in the amount of $4,953 by September 14, 2007; 2) Restore sidewalks and parking to full use by the public per City letter dated September 7, 2007. Correction is Required no later than: 1) Pay the additional sidewalk and parking disruption fees in the amount of $4,953 by 4:00 pm September 14, 2007; 2) Begin restoration of sidewalks and parking by September 17, 2007; 3) Complete restoration of sidewalks and parking to full use by the public by September 28, 2007. If correction is not made by the date and time specified in the Order, a Notice of Civil Violation shall be issued. The Notice of Civil Violation shall assess fines of $100.00 per day, or portion of a day, during which the violation continues. Issuing Party Signature Title City Engineer zk Cornerstone Kenmore, Washington 98028 206.682.5.500000 -- ARCHITECTURALGROUP cornerstonearch.com September 19, 2011 Leif Bjorback Building Official City Of Edmonds 121 5th Ave. North Edmonds, WA. 98020 RE: 155 3rd and Dayton Building (2006 IBC) Leif, - - - — - It appears that the original drawing's Door Schedule for this project was in error by indicating one hour rated doors in a corridor with one hour rated walls separating the corridor from the office/tenant spaces. These doors should be 20 minute rated doors as per the 2006 IBC. A one hour rated corridor requires a 20 minute rated door per the 2006 IBC Table 715.4 Type of Assemble 1 hour rated corridor walls has a minimum fire door assembly = 1/3 hour. The glass in the door shall be rated the same as the door per IBC section 715.4.3.2. If you need addition information to make this revision to the door schedule please let me know. Sincerely, 4410- Rick Utt Architect IL 4" TVUTT cc: Elliot Shaw, Shaw Elevators �� 7::�' Sys J 00 s h•- 3 n ' � t r-•S . Ho "4 ING 7 CiVIL M. INEERtN'G Y 's Drainage Report for the 3rd & Dayton Mixed -Use Building RECEIVED APR - 2 2004 WT COUNTER Prepared for: Charles Greenberg Triad Law Group 128 3`d Avenue South Edmonds, WA 98020 Prepared by: Mark Davis Reviewed by: Jim Kresge, P.E. January 20, 2004 CITY COPY Drainage Report for the 3rd & Dayton Mixed -Use Building Prepared for: Charles Greenberg Triad Law Group 128 3rd Avenue South Edmonds, WA 98020 Prepared by: Mark Davis Reviewed by: Jim Kresge, P.E. January 20, 2004 CONTENTS Introduction Existing Conditions Developed Conditions Downstream Drainage Analysis Upstream Drainage Analysis Erosion Risk Assessment M Appendix 4 Summary of Results Basin Summary Runoff Curve Number & Time of Concentration Drainage calculations Pump Specifications INTRODUCTION The proposed project will include the development of a three-story, 4500 square foot mixed -use building and construction of a driveway access through existing frontage. The proposed development is located on the corner of 3rd Avenue South and Dayton Street in the City of Edmonds, Washington. Runoff from building will be handled by an underground pipe and pumped to the existing storm -drainage system within 3rd Avenue. EXISTING CONDITIONS The 4500 sq. ft. site has no existing structures, except for several railroad tie bulkheads located around the perimeter of the site. The site slopes to the southwest at a 9% grade and is covered with patches of grass. The site is bounded to the north and east by developed commercial lots and to the south by Dayton Street and to the west by 3rd Avenue South. The existing frontage along 3rd Avenue and Dayton Street consist of curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscape strip. The SCS Snohomish County Soil Survey identifies the predominant soil type throughout the site as Alderwood Urban Land Complex. DEVELOPED CONDITIONS The proposed project will include the construction of a three-story, mixed -use building that will occupy 94% of the site. The frontage along 3rd Avenue will be reconstructed to facilitate a proposed high -traffic driveway access for the building. An underground stormwater detention pipe will be constructed to handle roof runoff from the building. Discharge from the detention pipe will be directed west to a type 2 catch basin, which is equipped with a Myers S25 or equivalent storm drain pump, to force water into the existing pipe conveyance system along 3rd Avenue South. The City of Edmonds Municipal Code Section 18.30.060(1)(c) requires that stormwater be released from new developments at peak rates not exceeding pre - development rates as calculated for 24-hour storms with 10-year and 100-year recurrence frequencies. A streambank erosion criterion, based on the 2-year, 24 hour storm peak discharge rate, does not apply to this project because it discharges directly to a pipe system rather than an open channel. The detention pipes will be sized per City of Edmonds guidelines to provide storage for runoff from the 10- and 100-year, 24-hour design storm over the entire building area. Outlet structures will release stormwater at rates not to exceed the current runoff rates for the 10-year and 100-year 24-hour design storms. Per City of Edmonds staff, no volume correction factor has been used in the design of the detention pipes. The 30" detention pipe will be approximately 36-ft long. The downstream catch basin will include a 12" restrictor with orifice for flow control. The maximum live storage water depth will be approximately 2.06 feet. Water quality is not required because roof runoff is only being detained and requires no water quality treatment. The "Waterworks" program with the Santa Barbara Unit Hydrograph (SBUH) method and Type I rainfall distribution was used in the design of the proposed detention facilities. DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS Runoff from the site will be conveyed to the existing storm drainage system along 3`d Avenue South. The drainage system continues south and west until it eventually discharges into Puget Sound approximately 2000 feet west of the site. Because peak stormwater discharges from the developed site will not be increased from existing rates, no significant impact on downstream conveyances is anticipated. UPSTREAM ANALYSIS The site is surrounded by existing buildings and frontage structures that do not contribute any runoff to the site, thus there will be no adverse impacts to any upstream drainage areas. EROSION RISK ASSESSMENT & PROPOSED CONTROL METHODS Due to the following site characteristics, the erosion risk category for this site will be LOW: • Less than 5 acres will be disturbed. • The Alderwood soil has a slight erosion hazard when worked and exposed to rain. • There are no critical areas or buffers located down slope and within 't/4 mile down stream of the stormwater discharge point. Temporary erosion control measures preliminarily recommended at this time include silt fences, a gravel construction entrance to prevent tracking debris onto the public road and temporary inlet protection for all proposed catch basins. APPENDIX Summary of Results Basin Summary Runoff Curve Number and Time of Concentration Soils Map Drainage Calculations SUMMARY OF RESULTS PROPOSED DETENTION POND TotalArea of Site: .................................................................................................. ** .......... 4500 sq.ft 10 YEAR STORM Peak Discharge for Pre Developed Conditions (Retained Area),Q,..:...................................0.02 cfs Allowable Release Rate From Detention System, Q, = Q,,,: ................................................ 0.02 cfs Peak Inflow to Detention Pond: ............................................................................................ 0.04 cfs ProposedRelease Rate: ......................................................................................................... 0.02 cfs Design Water Surface Elevation: .............................................................................................. 42.95 Approximate Volume of Storage Required (Design Volume): ........................................... 69.68 cf 100 YEAR STORM Peak Discharge for Pre Developed Conditions (Retained Area),Qe7C:...................................0.04 cfs Allowable Release Rate From Detention System, Q, = Q,,: ................................................ 0.04 cfs Peak Inflow to Detention Pond: ............................................................................................ 0.07 cfs ProposedRelease Rate: ......................................................................................................... 0.03 cfs Design Water Surface Elevation: .............................................................................................. 43.88 Approximate Volume of Storage Required (Design Volume): ......................................... 148.80 cf BASIN SUMMARIES 3" & DAYTON BASIN SUMMARIES EXISTING CONDITIONS BASIN ID: EX-10 NAME: EXISTING IOYR STORM SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: 0.10 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE....: TYPEIA PERV IMP PRECIPITATION....: 2.20 inches AREA..: 0.10 Acres 0.00 Acres TIME INTERVAL....: 10.00 min CN.... : 86.00 0.00 TC.... : 6.56 min 0.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 0.02 cfs VOL: 0.01 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: EX-100 NAME: EXISTING 100YR STORM SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: 0.10 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE....: TYPEIA PERV IMP PRECIPITATION....: 3.40 inches AREA..: 0.10 Acres 0.00 Acres TIME INTERVAL....: 10.00 min CN.... : 86.00 0.00 TC.... : 6.56 min 0.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 0.04 cfs VOL: 0.02 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min 3RD & DAYTON BASIN SUMMARIES DE V ELOPEDCONDITIONS BASIN ID: DV-10 NAME: DEVELOPED 10YR STORM SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: 0.10 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE....: TYPEIA PERV IMP PRECIPITATION....: 2.20 inches AREA..: 0.00 Acres 0.10 Acres TIME INTERVAL....: 10.00 min CN.... : 0.00 98.00 TC.... : 0.00 min 6.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 0.04 cfs VOL: 0.02 Ac-ft TIME: 480 nun BASIN ID: DV-100 NAME: DEVELOPED 100YR STORM SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: 0.10 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE....: TYPEIA PERV IMP PRECIPITATION....: 3.40 inches AREA..: 0.00 Acres 0.10 Acres TIME INTERVAL....: 10.00 min CN.... : 0.00 98.00 TC.... : 0.00 min 6.00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 PEAK RATE: 0.07 cfs VOL: 0.03 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER TIME OF CONCENTRATION GREENBERG - 3RD & DAYTON BUILDING RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER CALCULATIONS PRE DEVELOPED CONDITIONS ON -SITE BASIN - PERVIOUS AREA Total Retained Area (Acres): ........................................................................... 0.100 Soil Name and Hydrologic Soil Group Cover Description Runoff Curve Number RCN Area (Acres) A RCN x A Name HSG Alderwood C Grasses 86 0.100 8.600 0.000 0.000 Totalsl 0.100 8.600 Runoff Curve Number = (RCN x A) / A: ...................................................................................................... 86.00 Runoff Curve Number Used in Basin Calculations........................................................................................ 86.00 GBERGDetCalc.xis 1 /20/2004 .GREENBERG - 3RD & DAYTON BUILDING RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER CALCULATIONS POST DEVELOPED CONDITIONS ON -SITE BASIN IMPERVIOUS AREAS Total Retained Area (Acres): ........................................................................... 0.100 Impervious Area Per Lot (Square Feet): ............................................................................... 0 Number of Lots Tributary to Detention Basin: ....................................................................... 0 Soil Name and Hydrologic Soil Group Cover Description Runoff Curve Number RCN Area (Acres) A RCN x A Name HSG Alderwood C Roof Area 98 0.100 9.800 0.000 f779.800 Totalsi 0.100 Runoff Curve Number = (RCN x A) / A: ...................................................................................................... 98.00 Runoff Curve Number Used in Basin Calculations........................................................................................ 98.00 GBERGDetCalcAs 1 /20/2004 GREENBERG - 3RD & DAYTON BUILDING TIME OF CONCENTRATION PRE DEVELOPED CONDITIONS ON -SITE BASIN Sheet Flow (ADDlicable to Tc only) Surface Description Grass Manning's Roughness Coefficient, nsheet 0.150 Flow Length (L<=300'), Lsheet 80 feet 2-Year, 24-Hour Rainfall, P2 1.50 inches Land Slope, Ssheet 0.090 ft/ft Tt Sheet 0.109 hours Tt Sheet 6.559 minutes Shallow Concentrated Flow (See DOE SWM Manual, Paqe 111-1-14) Surface Description Grass Flow Length, Lshallow 0 ft Watercourse Slope, So 0.190 ft/ft Time of Concentration Velocity Factor, k 11.00 Average Velocity, Vshallow = k x So^0.5 4.79 fps Tt Shallow 0.000 hours Tt Shallow 10.000 minutes Channel Flow (See DOE SWM Manual. Pages Ill-1-15. 111-1-16) Type of Channel Ditch Flow Length, Lchannel 0 ft Watercourse Slope, So 0.020 ft/ft Time of Concentration Velocity Factor, kc 17.00 Average Velocity, Vchannel = k x So10.5 12.40 fps Tt Channel 0.000 hours Tt Channel 10.000 minutes Results: Watershed or Subarea Tc or Tt Total Tc or Tt 0.109 hours Total Tc or Tt 6.559 minutes Note: 1. Worksheet based on time equations from Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin, Chapter III GBERGDetCalc.xls 1/20/2004 COMBINATION DISCHARGE Description: COMBINATION Structure: OR-1 Structure: Structure: RIS-i Structure: Structure: STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE ID No. CMB-1 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE -DISCHARGE ---> (ft) ---cfs --------- (ft) ---cfs--------- (ft) ---cfs --------- (ft) --- cfs--------- 41.82 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0.0000 42.50 0.0171 43.20 0.0244 43.90 0.0300 41.90 0.0059 42.60 0.0183 43.30 0.0253 44.00 0.3387 42.00 0.0088 42.70 0.0195 43.40 0.0261 44.10 0.9025 42.10 0.0110 42.80 0.0206 43.50 0.0269 44.20 1.6323 42.20 0.0128 42.90 0.0216 43.60 0.0277 44.30 2.4965 42.30 0.0144 43.00 0.0226 43.70 0.0285 44.40 2.7077 42.40 0.0158 43.10 0.0235 43.80 0.0292 44.50 2.9635 MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. OR-1 Description: ORIFICE Outlet Elev: 41.82 Elev: 39.82 ft Orifice Diameter: 0.8750 in. STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE -DISCHARGE ---> (Et) ---cfs --------- (ft) ---cfs --------- (ft) ---cfs --------- (ft) ---cfs--------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 41.82 0.0000 42.50 0.0171 43.20 0.0244 43.90 0.0300 41.90 0.0059 42.60 0.0183 43.30 0.0253 44.00 0.0307 42.00 0.0088 42.70 0.0195 43.40 0.0261 44.10 0.0314 42.10 0.0110 42.80 0.0206 43.50 0.0269 44.20 0.0321 42.20 0.0128 42.90 0.0216 43.60 0.0277 44.30 0.0327 42.30 0.0144 43.00 0.0226 43.70 0.0285 44.40 0.0334 42.40 0.0158 43.10 0.0235 43.80 0.0292 44.50 0.0340 RISER DISCHARGE ID No. RIS4 Description: RISER Riser Diameter (in): 12.00 elev: 43.90 ft Weir Coefficient...: 9.739 height: 44.50 ft Orif Coefficient...: 3.782 increm: 0.10 ft STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <- -DISCHARGE ---> STAGE ­-DISCHARGE-­ (ft) ---cfs --------- (ft) ---cfs --------- (ft) ---cfs --------- (ft) ---cfs --------- 43.90 0.0000 44.10 0.8711 44.40 2.6743 44.50 2.9295 43.90 0.0000 44.20 1.6003 44.50 2.9295 44.00 0.3080 44.30 2.4638 44.50 2.9295 3 LEVEL POOL ROUTING LPOOL 2 n10YR STORM" EX-10 DV-10 PIPE OR-1 2 Description MatchQ PeakQ Sto Dis PkStg OutQ hyd Volume 10YR STORM 0.02 0.04 PIPE OR-1 42.95 0.02 2 69.68 cf LPOOL 3 "100YR STORM" EX-100 DV-100 PIPE OR-1 3 Description MatchQ PeakQ Sto Dis PkStg OutQ hyd Volume 100YR STORM 0.04 0.07 PIPE OR-1 43.88 0.03 3 148.80 cf 4 GREENBERG - 3RD & DAYTON BUILDING DETENTION PIPE - LIVE STORAGE Water Surface Elevation Catch Basin Live Volume (CF) 12" CMP Live Volume (CF) 30" CMP Total Volume (CF) Total Live Volume (CF) cDesign! :. Volume.'. 41.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.30 0.00 0.00 17.87 18.00 42.80 0.00 0.00 56.50 57.00 43.30 0.00 0.00 100.90 101.00 101.00; 43.80 0.00 0.00 143.16 143.00 `: °°: --143.00•N 44.30 0.00 0.00 173.29 173.00 .173a10 44.50 0.00 0.00 176.72 177.00 177.00 DETENTION PIPE Length of Detention Pipe, Lp (Feet): ......................................................................... 36.00 Number of Detention Pipes, Np:............................................................................... 1.00 Diameter of Detention Pipe, Dp (Feet): .................................................................... 2.50 Invert of Detention Pipe at Downstream Catch Basin: ............................................. 41.75 Slope of Detention Pipe. Sp(ft/ft):............................................................................ 0.0050 Diameter of Catch Basin, Db (Feet): ......................................................................... 4.00 Number of Catch Basins, Nb:................................................................................... 0.00 S ' STORM DRAIN PUMP REQUIREMENTS 100 YEAR STORM STORAGE 188.58 CF MATCH Q 0.04 CFS CFS TO GAUMIN GAL/MIN = CUIFT/SEC X IMIN/60SEC X 7.47GAL/CF REQD G/M = 0.04 X 60 X 7.48 = 17.952 GAUMIN PUMP Myers S25 or equivalent Pump must pump 18gal/min at 9ft head. sump depth = 4.Oft AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe Centrifugally Cast in Metal Molds or Sand -Lined Molds For Water or Other Liquids. What is AMERICAN Ductile Iron? The ideal of cast iron with ductility, long sought by metallurgists, was realized with the introduction of ductile iron in 1948. Acclaimed to be one of the most significant metallurgical developments in this century, ductile iron has had an increasing impact in many industries. Ductile iron has ductility —as the name implies —and in addition, it has strength and impact resistance far greater than that of gray iron; yet it retains the proven cor- rosion resistance of gray iron, thus making it an ideal piping material. American Cast Iron Pipe Company pioneered in the development of Ductile Iron Pipe and produced experimental casts of ductile pipe and fittings as early as 1948. In 1949 Mr. C.K. Donoho, AMERI- CAN's chief metallurgist, authored a paper on the amazing properties of this Photomicrograph showing graphite form in gray iron. new metal. Following this experimental work, the first shipment of AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe was made in 1955. Production of Ductile Iron Pipe has grown steadily and it is now a predominant pip- ing material for conveying water and other liquids. Ductile iron is produced by treating molten low -sulfur base iron with magne- sium under closely controlled conditions. The startling change in the metal is char- acterized by the free graphite in ductile iron being deposited in spheroidal or nodular form instead of flake form as in gray iron. With the free graphite in nodu- lar form, the continuity of the metal matrix is at a maximum, accounting for the formation of a far stronger, tougher ductile material exceeding gray iron in strength, in ductility and in impact charac- teristics by wide margins. RECO "1 ► JA N - 5 top BUILDING DE .:_ PT. Photomicrograph showing graphite form in ductile iron. AMERICAN Ductile Iron -Grade 60-42-10 Minimum Physical Properties AWWA C151 These properties are verified by ten- Tensile Strength ...................60,000 psi sile samples taken from the wall of the Yield Strength ......................42,000 psi pipe. Elongation ..........................10 per cent =i-a. 3-1 9 w AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe provides ... High Impact Resistance AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe has the high impact strength and toughness to withstand shocks usually encountered in transportation, handling and installation. These characteristics also provide added security against stresses induced by water hammer, highway traffic and unexpected adverse forces. Excellent impact resistance is confirmed by tests made at regular intervals in accordance with ANSI/AWWA C151 /A21.51 Standard. Superior Strength AMERICAN utilizes the ideal combi- nation of chemical analysis and heat treat- ment to produce a pipe with the most desirable combination of high strength and excellent ductility ... a pipe that will withstand high internal pressure and deep cover ... a pipe providing added reliability and additional factors of safety for normal and for unusual conditions such as expan- sive soils and earth movement due to freezing and thawing. Assured, Proven Long Life Historical records document the proven service for centuries of gray cast iron pipe. Extensive laboratory and field tests conducted by many authorities under various installation conditions prove the superiority of ductile iron for soil cor- rosion resistance over gray cast iron. The outstanding resistance of Ductile Iron Pipe to soil corrosion has been verified by more than four decades of service. After receiving the full force of a 4,500 pound weight dropped from a height of 30 feet, this 30" AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe was severely deformed, but did not fail. Design of AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe The principal standards covering ductile iron pipe are ANSI/AWWA C150/A21.50 and ANSI/AWWA C151/A21.51. These and other standards are referenced throughout this Section either by the full ANSI/AWWA designation or by only the AWWA numbering, such as AWWA C150. AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe is designed for combinations of internal pressure, water hammer, earth load and truck load. Thicknesses are determined in accordance with ANSI/AWWA C150/ A21.50, employing design methods applicable to flexible pipe. Utilizing the principal mechanical properties of high :t_7 tensile strength, ductility and impact resis- tance, the design of ductile iron pipe is conservative in all respects and embodies high factors of safety. For qualification of pipe these properties are confirmed during production by frequent tensile and impact tests of specimens from the wall of pipe. Physical Properties The ductile iron in AMERICAN pipe is grade 60-42-10, an annealed grade with the following specified minimum proper- ties: tensile strength, 60,000 psi; yield strength, 42,000 psi; elongation, 10 per cent. A typical stress -strain curve obtained on a tensile specimen from the wall of ductile iron pipe shows that the pipe metal is an elastic material; that is, its stress -strain relation is linear over a sub- stantial portion of the ultimate strength range. The average modulus of elasticity is 24,000,000 psi, the value used in the design equations. Beyond the yield point the metal continues to exhibit substantial ductility before ultimate failure. The high tensile strength of ductile iron allows the use of diameter -to -thick- ness ratios in which the deflection of the pipe, under trench loads, is of sufficient magnitude that the principles of flexible pipe design are applicable. Design Steps 1. Pipe is designed for external loads including both earth load and truck load as follows: Earth load is based on the prism load concept and conservative weight of backfill soil of 120 Ib/cu.ft. Truck load is based on an AASH- TO H-20 truck with 16,000-lb wheel load and 1.5 impact factor considered at all depths for all sizes of pipe. The ring bending stress used in design is 48,000 psi. The maximum pipe deflection used in the designof cement -lined pipe is 3 %. The larger net thickness, resulting from bending stress design or deflection design, is the trench load design thickness. The design values for the five types of standard laying conditions in AWWA C150 and C151 (see Fig. 3- 2, page 3-12) are as follows: Type 1: E'= 150 Bedding Angle = 300 Type 2: E'= 300 Bedding Angle = 450 Type 3: E'= 400 Bedding Angle = 600 Type 4: E'= 500 Bedding Angle = 900 Type 5: E'= 700 Bedding Angle = 1500 2. Pipe is designed for internal pres- sure including working pressure and surge pressure as follows: Working pressure is the specified design working pressure. Surge pressure is 100 psi unless a different surge pressure is specified by the buyer or his engineer. The design internal pressure in psi is the safety factor 2.0 multiplied by the sum of the working pressure and the surge pressure (100 psi). The metal design strength is the minimum yield strength in tension of 42,000 psi. 3. The larger net thickness is selected from the trench load design thickness and the internal pressure design thickness. To this thickness is added a service allowance of 0.08". A casting tolerance is then added giving the total design thickness of the pipe. Casting tolerances are listed in Table No. 3-1. 4. The pressure class thickness is determined by the selection of a standard pressure class thickness from Table No. 3- 8. If the calculated thickness is between two standard pressure class thicknesses, select the larger of the two. Later in this Section, tables show thicknesses of ductile pipe for a number of different pressures and depths of cover. For conditions not covered in tables, all formulas and data for designing ductile iron pipe are given in AWWA C150. Manufacture of AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe is cast centrifugally in nominal 20-foot laying lengths by the deLavaud process. After the careful proportioning of select high -quality raw materials, the melting of iron for the manufacture of AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe takes place in one of the world's largest foundry cupo- las under continually controlled conditions. AMERICAN also owns and operates one of the most impressive and modern scrap recycling facilities in the world. This facility ensures a dependable supply of high quality shredded ferrous scrap for the production of high quality piping prod- ucts, conserving valuable natural resources in the process. The melting process utilizes a control computer in the operation of the highly sophisticated electronic and mechanical components of the system. Rigid clean air requirements are satisfied through modern emission control equipment. Molten iron flows continually from the cupola and is collected in a 75-ton capacity ladle where it is desulfurized. From here the iron is transferred into a 1300-ton holder which provides a reser- voir of iron of uniform chemistry. The molten iron is then transferred from the holder to coreless electric induction fur- naces where chemistry and temperature are adjusted to the precise requirements of each production unit. The iron is then ready for treatment with magnesium, the most important step in the production of ductile iron, requiring close control of both the mechanics of the operation and the final chemistry of the iron. After treat- ment, each ladle is checked for exact con- tent of magnesium and other elements, and the metal is sent to the production area for pouring. The molten iron is introduced into a horizontal rotating mold with the quantity of the metal poured controlling the pipe thickness. The centrifugal force generated by rotation holds the metal against the mold wall and forces lighter, non-metallic impurities to the inside of the pipe to be removed in the cleaning process. After the iron has solidified, the casting machine is stopped and the pipe is stripped from the mold. All AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe is annealed in modern heat treating ovens with precisely controlled time and temper- ature cycles to produce optimum physical properties. The pipe is then moved to pro- cessing stations where it is cleaned, machined, hydrostatically tested, lined and coated, and given final inspection. View of modern plant where the large diameter sizes of pipe are centrifugally cast in nominal 20-foot lengths by the deLavaud process. n A AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe in sizes 4" through 64" is manufactured in accor- dance with and meets or exceeds all applicable requirements of AWWA C151 Standard for "Ductile Iron Pipe, Centrifugally Cast, for Water or Other Liquids." The quality of AMERICAN's products and conformance to appropriate specifications is assured by the British Standards Institute's certification that AMERICAN's quality system complies with the ISO 9002 Quality Management System Standard. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe, with Fastite or mechanical joints, complies with AWWA C151 and the joints meet require- ments of AWWA C111. The outside diameters of 4"-48" are the same as for gray iron pipe that was formerly manufac- tured per AWWA C106 or C108, making ductile iron pipe completely interchange- able with gray iron pipe made to these standards with respect to joining diame- ters, accessories and fittings. The installation of ductile iron pipe is covered in AWWA C600, including gener- al instructions for the assembly of push -on and mechanical joint pipe. See Section 2 of this Pipe Manual for detailed assembly instructions for Fastite and Mechanical Joint pipe. The nominal laying length of the pipe is as shown in tables in this Section. A maximum of 20 per cent of the total number of pipe of each size specified in an order may be furnished as much as 24" shorter than the nominal laying length, and an additional 10 per cent may be furnished as much as 6" shorter than nominal laying length. Dimensions The plain end, the socket of the pipe, and the accessories are gaged at suffi- ciently frequent intervals to assure that the dimensions comply with the require- ments of AWWA C151. Thickness Minus thickness tolerances of pipe are shown below: Table No. 3=1 Size in. Minus Tolerance in. 4"-8" 0.05 10"-12" 0.06 14"-42" 0.01 48" 0.08 54"-64" 0.09 During production each ladle of ductile iron is checked for exact content of magne- sium and other elements with this computer controlled vacuum emission spectrometer. An additional minus tolerance of 0.02" is permitted along the barrel of the pipe for a distance not to exceed 12". Weight The weight tolerance of pipe is minus 6 per cent for pipe 12" and smaller in diameter, and minus 5 per cent for pipe larger than 12" in diameter. COATINGS AND LININGS Outside Coating The outside coating for use under normal conditions is an asphaltic coating approximately 1 mil thick as specified in AWWA C151. The coating is applied to the outside of all pipe, unless otherwise specified. See Section 11. Inside Lining AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe for water service is normally furnished with standard cement lining on the inside as specified in AWWA C104. For other types of service, pipe can be furnished uncoated inside or with cement lining, asphaltic lining, Polybond lining, PolybondPlusTM lining, coal tar epoxy or with other special lining as may be required to meet special service conditions and as agreed upon at time of purchase. For more detailed information on coatings and linings see Section 11. TESTING To insure that the properties of the fin- ished pipe meet or exceed the requirements of AWWA C151 and those of AMERICAN's quality control program, continuous inspection and testing are performed. Spectrum Analysis Following magnesium treatment of the molten metal, a sample is poured from each ladle for spectrum analysis. Within minutes, the amount of magnesium and other elements in the iron is determined. This early verification of the metal compo- sition is a vital factor in the control of pipe quality. Tensile Test The physical characteristics of the pipe are continually checked by tensile tests made at a frequency of at least one such test during each casting period of approximately 3 hours. The tensile test specimens are cut from the pipe wall, and are machined from the midsection for testing. The acceptance values for test specimens are as follows: Each 30" and larger diameter AMERICAN ductile iron pipe is hydrostatically tested to 75% of yield strength which results in higher test pressures than those required by AWWA C151, varying to over 900 psi depending on size and thickness of the pipe. Grade of Iron: 60-42-10 Minimum tensile strength .........60,000 psi Minimum yield strength ............ 42,000 psi Minimum elongation ...............10 per cent Impact Test Impact tests are made on at least one sample machined from the pipe wall dur- ing each operating hour to assure the desired toughness in the.finished pipe. Notched Charpy impact tests are per- formed in accordance with ASTM E23, except that specimen size is 0.500" by full thickness of the pipe wall. The corrected acceptance value for this test is a mini- mum of 7 ft-lb for test conducted at 70°F t 100. Low -temperature impact tests are made from at least 10% of the test pipe to assure compliance with a minimum cor- rected value of 3 ft-lb for tests conducted at -40°F. Hydrostatic Test As specified by AWWA C151, each pipe is subjected to a hydrostatic test of not less than 500 psi with the pipe under the full test pressure for at least 10 sec- onds. Suitable controls and recording devices are provided so that the test pres- sure and duration are positively con- trolled. Any pipe that leaks or does not withstand the test pressure is rejected. For even greater assurance of pipe quality, each 30" and larger AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe is hydrostatically tested to 75% of specified yield strength of the metal, based on the nominal thickness of the pipe. As an example of the higher test pressures this dictates, each length of 30" diameter Ductile Iron Pipe, Class 150 (the lightest class produced), 0.34" nominal wall, is tested to 669 psi. See Table No. 3- 2 for a listing of AMERICAN's hydrostatic tests on 30" and larger Pressure Class pipe. Contact AMERICAN if higher test pressures are desired. Hardness Test Hardness tests of pipe samples are routinely made to further assure the quali- ty of the final product. MARKING PIPE The weight, class or nominal thick- ness, and casting period are shown on each pipe. AMERICAN's identifying mark, the year in which the pipe is produced, and the letters "DI" or "DUCTILE" are cast or stamped on the pipe. When speci- fied on the purchase order, initials not exceeding four in number are stamped on the pipe. All marks are on or near the bell. WEIGHING PIPE Each pipe is weighed before the application of any lining or coating other than the asphaltic coating. The weight is painted on the outside of the bell end. AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe Hydrostatic Proof Test Pressures Table No. 3-2 30"-64" Pressure Classes Size in. Outside Diamete Pressure Class 150 200 250 300 350 in. Wall Test Thickness Pressure Wall Thickness Test Pressure Wall Thickness Test Pressure Wall Thickness Test Pressure Well Thickness Test Pressure In.psi In. psi In. psi In. psi in. psi 30 32.00 - 0.34 669 0.38 748 0.42 827 0.45 886 0.49 965 36 38.30 0 338 625 0.42 691 0.47 773 0.51 839 0.56 921 42 44.50 0.41 580 0.47 665 0.52 736 0.57 807 0.63 892 48 50.80 0.46 570 0.52 645 0.58 719 0.64 794 0.70 868 54 57.56 0.51 558 0.58 635 0.65 711 0.72 788 0.79 865 60 61.61 0.54 552 0.61 624 0.68 695 0.76 777 0.83 849 64 1 65.67 1 0.56 537 1 0.64 1 614 1 0.72 1 691 1 0.80 1 767 1 0.87 1 835 These pressures produce a 31,500 psi stress in the pipe wall (which is equal to 75% of the 42,000 psi minimum yield strength for Ductile Iron pipes) based on outside diameter and total standard thickness. Test pressure = 2 x T x 31,500 / O.D. AMERICAN Ductile Iron Fastite Joint Pipe ANSI/AWWA C151/A21.51 Standard Dimensions Table No. 3-3 F Dimensions in Inches Size Nominal Laying A D F* in. Length ft. Outside Diameter Depth of Socket Bell O.D. 4 20 4.80 3.31 6.71 6 20 6.90 3.38 8.90 8 20 9.05 3.75 11.16 10 20 11.10 3.75 13.25 12 20 13.20 3.75 15.37 14 20 15.30 5.23 17.73 16 20 17.40 5.23 19.86 18 20 19.50 5.50 22.16 20 20 21.60 5.50 24.28 24 20 25.80 5.50 28.50 30 20 32.00 6.50 34.95 36 20 38.30 6.50 41.37 42 20 44.50 7.50 48.27 48 20 50.80 8.00 54.71 54 20 57.56 8.50 61.65 60 20 61.61 8.75 65.80 64 20 65.67 9.00 70.04 'Dimensions subject to change at our option. Check AMERICAN if exact dimensions required. For Fastite assembly instructions see Section 2. The liberal allowable deflection in the Fastite Joint facilitates pipeline installation with sweeping horizontal or vertical curves without the use of fittings. Q_st AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe ANSI/AWWA C150/A21.50 and ANSI/AWWA C151/A21.51 Nominal Wall Thicknesses for Special Thickness Classes Table No. 3-12 Size Outside SPECIAL THICKNESS CLASSES -Wall Thickness in Inches* in. Diameter in. S0 51 52 53 54 55 56 4 4.80 - .26 .29 .32 .35 .38 .41 6 6.90 .25 .28 .31 .34 .37 .40 .43 8 9.05 .27 .30 .33 .36 .39 .42 .45 10 11.10 .29 .32 .35 .38 .41 .44 .47 12 13.20 .31 .34 .37 .40 .43 .46 .49 14 15.30 .33 .36 .39 .42 .45 .48 .51 16 17.40 .34 .37 .40 .43 .46 .49 .52 18 19.50 .35 .38 .41 .44 .47 .50 .53 20 21.60 .36 .39 .42 .45 .48 .51 .54 24 25.80 .38 .41 .44 .47 .50 .53 .56 30 32.00 .39 .43 .47 .51 .55 .59 .63 36 38.30 .43 .48 .53 .58 .63 .68 .73 42 44.50 .47 .53 .59 .65 .71 .77 .83 48 50.80 .51 .58 .65 .72 .79 .86 .93 54 1 57.56 1 .57 .65 .73 .81 .89 .97 1.05 "These are Special Thickness Classes as shown in AWWA C150 and C151. They were previously designated standard thickness classes. AMERICAN can furnish any thickness in between these Special thicknesses if deemed economical for major projects. Special classes are most appropriately used for some threaded, grooved, or ball and socket pipes or for extraordinary design conditions, and they are generally less available than standard pressure class pipe. For pressure rating and maximum depth of cover capabilities of Special Thickness Classes, check AMERICAN. These capabilities can be estimated by comparing metal thickness and capabilities of those of Pressure Classes in Table No. 3-11, or may be calculated by using the design formulas shown in AWWA Cl 50. :t_2n Tyler/Union DUCTILE IRON C 110 FLANGED FITTINGS Nominal Dia. of Flange Pipe Size Flange Bolt Thickness Bolt Hole Number Bolt Dia. Inch O.D. Circle T Diameter of Bolts and Lengths 2 6 4.75 .62 .75 4 5/ex 21/4 3 7.5 6 .75 .75 4 s/ex 21/2 4 9 7.5 .94 .75 8 5/6 x 3 6 11 9.5 1.00 .875 8 3/4x 3'/2 8 13.5 11.75 1.12 .875 8 2/4x 3'/2 10 16 14.25 1.19 1.00 12 7/ex 4 12 19 17 1.25 1.00 12 7/e x 4 14 21 18.75 1.38 1.125 .12 1 x 4'/2 16 23.5 21.25 1.44 1.125 16 1 x 4'/2 18 25 22.75 1.56 1.25 16 1'/ex 5 20 27.5 25 1.69 1.25 20 1'/ex 5 24 32 29.5 1.88 1.375 20 11/4 x 51/2 30 38.75 36 2.12 1.375 28 11/4x 6'/2 NOTE: Drilling templates are in multiples of four, so that fittings may be made to face in any quarter. Bolt holes shall straddle the center line. SAMPLE SPECIFICATION Flanged Fittings, 2" through 30" shall be manufactured in the USA of Ductile Iron in accordance with all applicable terms and provisions of standards ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10 (current revisions). Flange surface shall be faced and drilled in accordance with ANSI Class 125 B16.1. All Ductile Iron Flanged Fittings shall be rated for water pressure of 250 PSI. NOTE: Fittings are CEMENT -LINED and seal coated in accordance with ANSI/AWWA C104/A21.4, also available prime coated, bare or epoxy coated.All coated fittings shall be in accordance with NSF-61. Interiors shall be lined and seal coated in accordance with ANSI/ AWWA CI 04/A21.04 'Cement-mortor Lining for Ductile Iron Pipe and Fittings for Water" unless otherwise specified. -4.1 FLANGE DETAILS B.C. NOTE: No flange joint 211,311 4", 6", 8" 10", 12", 14" 16", 18" 20", 24" BENDS Note: Base Bends are on page 33 and 34, reducing and long radius 900 bends are on page 33. A- per.. ;�q �A--i 1--A-, � , A R 90° Bends (1/4) 45° Bends (1/8) 22'/2° Bends (1 16) 30" Al A� R 11'/4* Bends (1 /32) Dimensions Dimensions Dimensions Dimensions Size R A Weight R A Weight R A Weight R A Weight 2 3.0 4.5 14 ... ... ... 3 4 5.5 26 3.62 3 20 7.56 3 22 15.25 3 20 4 4.5 6.5 44 4.81 4 36 10.06 4 35 20.31 4 40 6 6 8 67 7.25 5 57 15.06 5 64 30.5 5 56 8 7 9 115 8.44 5.5 105 17.62 5.5 90 35.5 5.5 90 10 9 11 164 10.88 6.5 13.1 22.62 6.5 130 45.69 6.5 130 12 10 12 236 13.25 7.5 196 27.67 7.5 194 55.81 7.5 193 14 11.5 14 330 12.06 7.5 245 25.12 7.5 250 50.75 7.5 245 16 12.5 15 478 13.25 8 315 27.62 8 315 55.81 8 315 18 14 16.5 527 14.5 8.5 422 30.19 8.5 402 60.94 8.5 385 20 15.5 18 878 16.88 9.5 595 35.19 9.5 505 71.06 9.5 505 24 18.5 22 1085 18.12 11 730 37.69 11 528 76.12 11 760 30 21.5 25 1755 27.75 15 1335 57.81 15 1385 116.75 15 1395 Tyler Pipe/Ufilities Division • P.O. Box 2027 • Tyler, Texas 75710 • (903) 882-5511 4-4-2003 Union Foundry Company • P.O. Box 309 • Anniston, Alabama 36202 • (256) 236-7601 29 Tyler/Union DUCTILE IRON C 110 FLANGED FITTINGS TEES, REDUCING TEES, CROSSES �M H H H H H� M� �H HLj JJ y JLT r NA J I J .. .. .. 4 ..l ....... ...♦_. _....... .J p_.... �._...�4 ....._� , I rr - ------------ J f Straight Tees, Reducing 'Reducing 'Reducing on 'Bullhead Straight and on Branch Tees on Run Run and Branch Tees Reducing Crosses Run Size Run Branch Dimensions H J Weights Tee Cross 2 2 2 4.5 4.5 20 3 3 2 5.5 5.5 35 ... 3 3 3 5.5 5.5 42 51 4 3 3 6.5 5.5 53 ... '4 4 2 6.5 6.5 55 ... 4 4 3 6.5 6.5 54 76 4 4 4 6.5 6.5 60 87 '4 4 6 8.0 8.0 88 ... '6 4 4 8.0 8.0 96 ... '6 4 6 8.0 8.0 100 '6 6 2 8.0 8.0 85 ... 6 6 3 8.0 8.0 85 96 6 6 4 8.0 8.0 90 112 6 6 6 8.0 8.0 98 141 6 6 8 9.0 9.0 138 ... '8 6 4 9.0 9.0 130 ... 08 6 6 9.0 9.0 148 ... '8 6 8 9.0 9.0 154 ... 8 8 3 9.0 9.0 128 140 8 8 4 9.0 9.0 155 155 8 8 6 9.0 9.0 148 172 8 8 8 9.0 9.0 179 195 08 8 10 11.0 11.0 225 ... '8 8 12 12.0 12.0 277 ... 't 10 6 6 13.0 13.0 278 .. 't 10 6 10 13.0 13.0 308 ... 't 10 8 6 13.0 13.0 298 ... 't 10 8 8 13.0 13.0 278 't10 8 10 13.0 13.0 325 .. 10 10 4 11.0 11.0 239 220 10 10 6 11.0 11.0 215 242 10 10 8 11.0 11.0 254 294 10 10 10 11.0 11.0 265 330 10 10 12 12.0 12.0 337 ... 't 12 6 6 14.0 14.0 346 ... 't 12 6 8 14.0 14.0 362 ... 't 12 8 6 14.0 14.0 355 ... Size Dimensions Weights Run Run Branch H J Tee Cross '12 8 8 12.0 12.0 375 ... '12 8 12 12.0 12.0 420 ... 't12 10 6 14.0 14.0 390 ... 12 10 8 12.0 12.0 400 ... 12 10 10 12.0 12.0 420 12 10 12 12.0 12.0 440 ... 12 12 4 12.0 12.0 322 310 12 12 6 12.0 12.0 297 326 12 12 8. 12.0 12.0 346 351 12 12 10 12.0 12.0 394 415 12 12 12 12.0 12.0 369 438 '14 14 4 14.0 14.0 410 ... 14 14 6 14.0 14.0 420 450 14 14 8 14.0 14.0 435 475 14 14 10 14.0 14.0 450 ... 14 14 12 14.0 14.0 470 555 14 14 14 14.0 14.0 500 595 '16 16 4 15.0 15.0 525 ... 16 16 6 15.0 15.0 573 565 16 16 8 15.0 15.0 555 590 16 16 10 15.0 15.0 565 620 16 16 12 15.0 15.0 590 665 16 16 14 15.0 15.0 610 ... 16 16 16 15.0 15.0 635 755 18 18 6 13.0 15.5 780 18 18 8 13.0 15.5 609 ... 18 18 10 13.0 15.5 585 ... 18 18 12 13.0 15.5 638 706 18 18 14 16.5 16.5 808 ... 18 18 16 16.5 16.5 760 ... 18 18 18 16.5 16.5 865 915 ' Not included in AWWA C110 t H and J dimensions are two -inches longer than straight tees. Tyler Pipe/Utilities Division • P.O. Box 2027 • Tyler, Texas 75710 • (903) 882.5511 30 Union Foundry Company • P.O. Box 309 • Anniston, Alabama 36202 • (256) 236-7601 4-4-2003 Tyler/Union DUCTILE IRON C 110 FLANGED FITTINGS TEES, REDUCING TEES, CROSSES (Con'O Run Size Run Branch Dimensions H 1 Tee Weights Cross 20 20 6 14.0 17.0 773 20 20 8 14.0 17.0 720 ... 20 20 10 14.0 17.0 735 ... 20 20 12 14.0 17.0 816 820 20 20 14 14.0 17.0 770 ... 20 20 16 18.0 18.0 950 1065 20 20 18 18.0 18.0 965 ... 20 20 20 18.0 18.0 1005 1175 24 24 6 15.0 19.0 1089 ... 24 24 8 15.0 19.0 1060 ... 24 24 10 15.0 19.0 1020 24 24 12 15.0 19.0 1125 1100 24 24 14 15.0 19.0 1050 1125 24 24 16 15.0 19.0 1070 1160 24 24 18 22.0 22.0 1534 ... 24 24 20 22.0 22.0 1510 1695 24 24 24 22.0 22.0 1685 1850 *30 30 6 18.0 23.0 1725 ... 30 30 12 18.0 23.0 1801 30 30 18 18.0 23.0 1852 ... 30 30 24 25.0 25.0 2475 2695 30 30 30 25.0 25.0 2615 2985 ' Not included in AWWA C110 FLANGE AND FLARE X - ...1Y D ..... REDUCERS L� D Concentric Reducer D Eccentric Reducer Size Dimensions Wts Size Dimensions Wts D D' L D D' L 3 2 6 17 4 3 7 30 4 2 7 23 6 3 9 45 4 3 7 29 6 4 9 52 6 2 9 30 8 4 11 70 6 3 9 44 8 6 11 80 6 4 9 46 10 6 12 98 6 5 9 56 10 8 12 123 8 3 11 61 12 6 14 135 8 4 11 63 12 8 14 149 8 5 11 70 12 10 14 177 8 6 11 75 16 6 18 210 10 4 12 98 16 8 18 230 10 6 12 107 16 10 18 255 10 8 12 116 16 12 18 285 12 4 14 119 16 14 18 315 12 6 14 130 18 8 19 265 12 8 14 152 18 10 19 290 12 10 14 178 18 12 19 306 14 6 16 165 18 14 19 350 14 8 16 185 18 16 19 385 14 10 16 205 20 10 20 340 14 12 16 235 20 12 20 370 16 6 18 210 20 14 20 402 16 8 18 230 20 16 20 449 16 10 18 255 20 18 20 455 16 12 18 285 24 12 24 535 16 14 18 315 24 14 24 570 18 8 19 265 24 16 24 614 18 10 19 290 24 18 24 645 18 12 19 320 24 20 24 695 _ D -._..: 18 14 19 350 *Flange and Flare 90° Ell 'Flange and Flare Piece 18 16 19 405NOTE: 20 10 20 418 not Dimensions Dimensions 20 12 20 465 Clio Size D X Y Weight Size D L Weight 20 14 20 430 3 7.5 5.5 8.5 26 3 7.25 8 21 20 16 20 445 NOTE: Eccentric Reducers 4 9.0 6.5 9.5 39 . 4 9.00 8 30 20 18 20 470 Offset 6 11.0 8.0 12.0 73 6 11.00 8 44 24 12 24 608 1 /2 D minus 1 /2 D 1- _Offset 8 13.5 9.0 13.0 110 8 13.50 10 75 24 14 24 565 Example: 10 16.0 11.0 15.0 171 10 16.00 10 113 24 16 24 610 6x3 Ecc.Reducer 12 19.0 12.0 16.0 253 12 19.00 12 155 24 18 24 645 3-11/2= 11/2" Offset 14 21.0 14.0 22.0 450 14 21.00 16 225 24 20 24 695 16 23.5 15.0 23.0 545 16 23.50 16 330 30 16 30 945 18 25.0 16.5 24.5 675 18 25.00 16 355 30 18 30 970 20 27.5 18.0 26.0 860 20 27.50 18 465 30 20 30 1144 24 32.0 22.0 30.0 1195 24 32.00 18 598 30 24 30 1155 ' Not included in AWWA C110 Tyler Pipe/Utilities Division • P.O. Box 2027 •Tyler, Texas 75710 • (903) 882-5511 4-4-2003 Union Foundry Company • P.O. Box 309 • Anniston, Alabama 36202 • (256) 236-7601 31 Tyler/Union DUCTILE IRON C 110 FLANGED FITTINGS ' WYES BENDS ...... _ H._..._..1. J a •90° Reducing •45° Wye True Wye Bend (1/4) •90° Long Radius Bend (114) Size Dimensions Size Dimensions Dimensions Dimensions Run Branch H J Weight StemBranches X Y Weight Size A Weight Size R A Weight 3 3 10 3 49 4 4 6.5 3.0 49 4x3 6.5 35 3 6.25 7.75 32 4 3 12 3 68 6 4 8.0 3.5 75 6x4 8 65 4 7 9 46 4 4 12 3 76 6 6 8.0 3.5 84 8x4 9 88 6 9.5 11.5 83 6 4 14.5 3.5 106 8 6 9.0 4.5 134 8x6 9 96 8 14 14 140 6 6 14.5 3.5 131 8 8 9.0 4.5 125 1Ox6 11 126 10 16.5 16.5 252 8 4 17.5 4.5 153 • Not included in AWWA C110 1 Ox8 11 151 12 17 19 310 8 6 17.5 4.5 188 12x6 12 172 14 19 21.5 475 8 8 17.5 4.5 201 12xB 12 191 16 21.5 24 630 10 4 20.5 5 232 12x10 12 218 • Not included in AWWA C110 10 6 20.5 5 288 • Not included in 10 8 20.5 5 333 AWWA C110 10 10 20.5 5 300 12 4 24.5 5.5 355 12 6 24.5 5.5 370 BASE BENDS, BASE TEES 12 8 24.5 5.5 395 12 10 24.5 5.5 420 12 12 24.5 5.5 460 14 6 27 6 500 _ �_ 14 8 27 6 525 1 14 10 27 6 555 X U X U L_ U 14 12 27 6 600 1 - I 14 14 27 6 640 16 6 30 6.5 655 90° Base Bend (1 /4) '90° Long Radius Base Bend (1 /4) Base Tees 16 8 30 6.5 680 16 10 30 6.5 715 Support Dimensions Pipe Weight 16 12 30 6.5 755 Size X S U Size 90' 90OLR Tee 16 14 30 6.5 800 3 4.88 5 .50 1.5 38 41 47 16 16 30 6.5 850 4 5.5 6 .50 2 50 60 76 18 8 32 7 820 Base Bends 6 7 7 .62 2.5 83 100 115 18 10 32 7 855 8 8.38 9 .88 4 142 180 195 18 12 32 7 1003 order only, 10 9.75 9 .88 4 210 315 315 18 14 32 7 940 not 12 11.25 11 1.00 6 300 427 450 18 16 32 7 990 returnable. 14 12.5 11 1.00 6 400 580 570 18 18 32 7 1035 Bases are 16 furnished 13.75 11 1.00 6 505 740 710 20 10 35 8 1095 18 15 13.5 1.12 8 645 ... 900 20 12 35 8 1130 20 16 13.5 1.12 8 805 ... 1125 20 14 35 8 1170 24 18.5 13.5 1.12 8 1453 ... 1927 20 16 35 8 1220 30 23 16 1.15 10 1945 ... ... 20 20 35 8 1345 24 24 40.5 9 2020 •Not included in AWWA C110 ' Not included in AWWA C110 Tyler Pipe/Utilities Division • P.O. Box 2027 • Tyler, Texas 75710 • (9031 882-5511 32 Union Foundry Company • P.O. Box 309 • Anniston, Alabama 36202 • (256) 236-7601 4-4-2003 Tyler/Union DUCTILE IRON C 110 FLANGED FITTINGS REDUCING BASE BENDS •FLANGE SLUDGE SHOE f X U )-s x ,-- 1- �; L--�S--� -i Base Drilling Details Base Under Base Under D Nom. Dimensions - Inches Large End Small End Flange Sludge Shoe Diameter Bolt Hole Number Dimensions Dimensions Inches BC Diameter of Bolts Size X S U Weight Size D X Y Weight 3 3.88 5/8 4 4x3 5.5 6 .50 45 3 5.75 12 6 28 4 4.75 3/4 4 6x4 7 7 .62 75 4 7.00 12 6 35 6 5.50 3/4 4 8x4 8.38 9 .88 118 6 7.87 12 6 45 8 7.50 3/4 4 8x6 8.38 9 .88 135 8 10.12 12 6 69 10 7.50 3/4 4 1Ox6 9.75 9 .88 175 10 12.25 12 6 88 12 9.50 7/8 4 10XB 9.75 9 .88 184 12 15.25 12 6 120 14 9.50 7/8 4 12x6 11.25 11 1.06 230 ' Not included in AWWA C110 16 9.50 7/8 4 12x8 11.25 11 1.00 255 18 11.75 7/8 4 12x10 11.25 11 1.00 285 20 11.75 7/8 4 ' Not included in AWWA C110 24 11.75 7/8 4 NOTE: "X" dimensions are identical on Base- 30 14.25 1 4 under -large -end and Base -under -small -end. 36 17.00 1 4 "S" dimensions are determined by the largest 42 21.25 1-1/8 4 fitting opening. 48 22.75 1-114 4 FLANGES Dimensions Weight Size 0 0 Y Z Steel DI Blind Blind Tap '- 10 Y 2 6 .62 1 4.75 4 ... 21/2 7 .69 1.13 5.50 8 ... ... ... 0""""""'"' 3 7.5 .75 1.19 6.00 7 6 8 8 Flange for Steel Pipe 4 9 .94 1.31 7.50 12 11 15 15 Reducing Flange for Steel Pipe 6 11 1.00 1.56 9.50 21 14 28 28 8 13.5 1.12 1.75 11.75 28 34 45 45 10 16 1.19 1.94 14.25 49 33 62 62 b 12 19 1.25 2.19 ... 61 52 72 87 14 21 1.38 2.25 ... ... 72 110 110 Flange for DI Pipe 16 23.5 1.44 2.5 ... ... 90 165 165 Reducing Flange for DI Pipe 18 25 1.56 2.69 ... ... 105 192 190 20 27.5 1.69 2.88 ... ... 115 249 250 0 24 32 1.88 3.25 ... ... 160 375 370 r Z -1 30 38.75 2.12 ... ... .. 255 580 580 NOTE: All flanges conform to ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10 Standards. a / MIMMMIIIL T- I Tap I Is lte"'"°di DI Reducing Flange DI Reducing Flange Under 12" Blind Flange Threaded For Steel Pipe Threaded For Cast Iron Pipe With Optional 2" Taps Size Tap x O.D. Weight Size Tap x O.D. Weight 4x3 3x9 16 4x3 3x9 16 6x4 4x11 25 6x4 4x11 25 1- O Q 8x4 4xl 3 '/z 44 8x4 4xl 3 '/, 40 8x6 6x131/2 31 8x6 6x13'/2 35 12" and Larger Blind Flange 1 Ox6 6x16 50 1Ox8 8x16 50 With Optional 2" Taps 12x6 6x19 60 12x8 8x19 85 1Ox8 8x16 55 12x10 1Ox19 72 Tyler Pipe/Ufilities Division • P.O. Box 2027 • Tyler, Texas 75710 • (903) 882-5511 4-4-2003 Union Foundry Company • P.O. Box 309 • Anniston, Alabama 36202 • (256) 236-7601 33 Tyler/Union DUCTILE IRON C 110 FLANGED FITTINGS ADAPTERTLANGES OQ ' O DUCTILE IRON ADAPTER FLANGE Ductile Iran D F C O O Pipe OD +.06 +.07 Size +.06 or -.06 -.04 -.03 Weight 3 3.96 4.94 4.06 - .94 7 D F 4 4.80 6.02 4.90 1.00 10 O t O 6 6.90 8.12 7.00 1.06 14 8 9.05 10.27 9.15 1.12 22 10 11.10 12.34 11.20 1.19 30 12 13.20 14.44 13.30 1.25 40 All set screws are s/s" 80 lb. torque head. See Index for Installation Instructions Wall Thickness Note: Recommended for Ductile Iron Pipe Rated No. of No. of Bolt Class 53 thru Class 56. Working Set Bolt Bolt & Size Hole Size Pressure Screws Circle Nuts of Bolt Dia. 3 250 4 6.00 4 5/8x21/2 VA 4 250 4 7.50 8 5/Bx3 3/4 LOCATION OF TAPPED HOLES FOR DRAINS 6 250 8 9.50 8 '/.x31/2 7/8 AWWA C 110 Flanged Fittings 8 250 8 11.75 8 3/4x3'/2 '/e Fittings can be supplied with taps sized and located to ANSI 10 250 12 14.25 12 7/Bx4 1 1116.1 and MSS-SP-45. Specify fitting size, tap location by letter 12 150 12 17.00 12 '/ex4 1 (refer to drawings) and tap size by NPT dimension, on order. R R E Y Y K G F gT2 90' Elbow, snuight size R R E Y Y,� K G M F T T N 90° Elbow, Reducing Size 90° Base Elbow R R 3" ...................... 1 /2" 4" - 6" ................ 3/4" 8" ...................... 1-1 /4" 10" - 16" ............ 1-1 /2" 18" - 30" ............ 2" MS K x Y ZZ Y X T N M17IG M G M KiA NKF H N K 45' Elbow T S R R S T Concentric Reducer Eccentric Reducer SPECIAL TAP PRICING POLICY Special taps in fittings apply to C- 110 Flanged Fittings only. Flanged Fittings that require a tapping boss will have a one time $200.00 (net) set up charge per boss per position. The price of each special tap, regardless of the tap size, is $50.00 (net). For more details consult your Customer Service Representative. Tyler Pipe/Utilities Division a P.O. Box 2027 • Tyler, Texas 75710 a 1903) 882-5511 34 Union Foundry Company 9 P.O. Box 309 • Anniston, Alabama 36202 • (256) 236-7601 4-4-2003 Mechanical Joint Compact Fittings SUBMITTAL SIZES: STANDARDS: PRESSURE RATING: NSF-61: COATING: CEMENT LINING: EPDXY COATING: BARE: BOLTS: INSTALLATION: 3" through 36" ANSI/AWWA C153/A21.53 3"-24" @ 350 PSI; 30"-36" & fitting3 with flanged branches @ 250 PSI Meets all requirements, UL Certified ANSI/AWWA C104/A21.4 and Tnemec 1AO- 1211 ANSI/AWWA C10.4/A21.4, Double available ANSI/AWWA C116/A21.16 Available ANSI/AWWA C111 /A21.11 AWWA C600 KI J D C F A K' JOINT DIMENSIONS IN INCHES BOLTS Size A Dia. B C Dia. D Dia. F Dia. 0 J Dia. K' Dia. K' Dia. L M S T X Dia. Size No. 3 3.96 2.50 4.84 4.94 4.06 280 6.19 7.62 7.69 .58 .62 .39 .33 3/4 5/8x3 4 4 4.80 2.50 5.92 6.02 4.90 280 7.50 9.06 9.12 .60 .75 .39 .34 7/8 3/4x3'/, 4 6 6.90 2.50 8.02 8.12 7.00 280 9.50 11.06 11.12 .63 .88 .43 .36 7/8 3/Ax3'/2 6 8 9.05 2.50 10.17 10.27 9.15 280 11.75 13.31 13.37 .66 1.00 .45 .38 7/8 3/4x3'/2 6 10 11.10 2.50 12.22 12.34 11.20 280 14.00 15.62 15.62 .70 1.00 .47 .40 7/8 3/Ax3'/2 8 12 13.20 2.50 14.32 14.44 13.30 280 16.25 17.88 17.88 .73 1.00 .49 .42 7/a 3/4x3'/2 8 14 15.30 3.50 16.40 16.54 15.44 280 18.75 20.31 20.25 .79 1.25 .56 .47 7/8 3/Ax4 10 16 17.40 3.50 18.50 18.64 17.54 280 21.00 22.56 22.50 .85 1.31 .57 .50 7/8 3/Ax4 12 18 19.50 3.50 20.60 20.74 19.64 280 23.25 24.83 24.75 1.00 1.38 .68 .54 7A 3/Ax4 12 20 21.60 3.50 22.70 22.84 21.74 280 25.50 27.08 27.08 1.02 1.44 .69 .57 7/8 3/04 14 24 25.80 3.50 26.90 27.04 25.94 280 30.00 31.58 31.50 1.02 1.56 .75 .61 7A 3/Ax41/2 16 30 32.00 4.00 33.29 33.46 32.17 200 36.88 39.12 39.12 1.31 2.00 .82 .66 11/8 1x5'/2 20 36 38.30 4.00 39.59 39.76 38.47 200 43.75 46.00 46.00 1.45 2.00 1.00 .74 1'/8 1x51/2 24 MADE IN THE USA Tyler Pipe/Utilities Division • P.O. Box 2027 • Tyler, Texas 75710 • (903) 882-5511 Union Foundry Company 9 P.O. Box 309 • Anniston, Alabama 36202 9 (256) 236-7901 iyrerT union MECHANICAL JOINT SSB-DUCTILE IRON CLASS 350 FITTINGS SAMPLE SPECIFICATIONS 3" THRU 24" MECHANICAL JOINT DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS shall be produced in accordance with all applicable terms and provisions of ANSI/AWWA C153/A21.53 and ANSI/AWWA C111 /A21.11. NOTE: Fittings are cement -lined and seal - coated in accordance with ANSI/AWWA C104/A21.4; also available double cement - lined or bare. See list price sheet for details. Size A Diu. B 3 3.96 2.50 4 4.80 2.50 6 6.90 2.50 8 9.05 2.50 10 11.10 2.50 12 13.20 2.50 14 15.30 3.50 16 17.40 3.50 18 19.50 3.50 20 21.60 3.50 24 25.80 3.50 BENDS C Dia. D Dia. 4.84 4.94 5.92 6.02 8.02 8.12 10.17 10.27 12.22 12.34 14.32 14.44 16.40 16.54 18.50 18.64 20.60 20.74 22.70 22.84 26.90 27.04 90° Bends (1/4) K' 1 0 C JOINT DIMENSIONS IN INCHES F Dia.. J Dia. K' Diu. W Dia. 4.06 6.19 7.62 7.69 4.90 7.50 9.06 9.12 7.00 9.50 11.06 11.12 9.15 11.75 12.31 13.37 11.20 14.00 15.62 15.62 13.30 16.25 17.88 17.88 15.44 18.75 20.31 20.25 17.54 21.00 22.56 22.50 19.64 23.25 24.83 24.75 21.74 25.50 27.08 27.08 25.94 30.00 31.58 31.50 45' Bends (1/8) F A K' BOLTS L M S T X Dia. Sim No. .58 .62 .39 .33 3/e s/ex3 4 .60 .75 .39 .34 7/9 3/4x3'/2 4 .63 .88 .A3 .36 7/6 3/,x3'/2 6 .66 1.00 .45 .38 7/6 3/4x3'/2 6 .70 1.00 .47 .40 7/s 3/Ax3'/2 8 .73 1.00 .49 .42 7/s %x3'/: 8 .79 .1.25 .56 .A7 7/8 3/Ax4 10 .85 1.31 .57 .50 7/s 3/4x4 12 1.00 1.38 .68 .54 7/8 3/Ax4 12 1.02 1.44 .69 .57 7/e 3/4x4 14 1.02 1.56 .75 .61 7/8 3/Ax4'/2 16 221/2 Bends (1/16) Size T Dimensions A R Weight Dimensions A R Weight Dimensions A R Weight Dimensions A R Weight 3 .34 4.5 4.0 20 2.00 3.62 16 1.50 4.98 15 1.25 7.62 15 4 .35 5.0 4.5 ' 26 2.49 4.81 22 1.82 6.66 21 1.55 10.70 20 6 .37 6.5 6.0 48 3.50 7.25 38 2.59 10.50 37 1.81 13.26 33 8 .39 7.5 7.0 68 4.00 8.44 59 2.85 11.80 51 2.06 15.80 48 10 .41 9.5 9.0 107 5.01 10.88 81 3.35 14.35 67 2.32 18.36 61 12 .43 10.5 10.0 141 5.98 13.25 111 3.86 16.90 80 2.56 20.90 79 14 .51 12.0 11.5 220 5.50 12.06 164 3.93 17.25 148 2.59 21.25 131 16 .52 13.0 12.5 264 5.98 13.25 202 3.98 17.50 179 2.62 21.50 159 18 .59 15.5 14.0 410 7.50 14.50 289 7.50 30.19 292 7.50 60.94 287 20 .60 17.0 15.5 505 8.00 16.88 348 8.50 35.19 364 8.50 71.07 346 24 .62 20.0 18.5 695 9.00 18.12 475 9.00 37.69 460 9.00 76.12 457 Tyler Pipe/Utilities Division • P.O. Box 2027 • Tyler, Texas 75710 • (903) 882.5511 5-1-97 Union Foundry Company • P.O. Box 309 • Anniston, Alabama 36202 • (205) 236-7601 3 t t e ni Z O o as t w t t t U U O CONSTRUCTION AMERICAN FLOW CONTROL SERIES 2500 RESILIENT WEDGE VALVE Ductile iron operating nut provides Upper O-rin replaced w open and L mize operating Lower O-rin chamber. High strength bronze stem and nut resist corrosion and abuse. Fusion -bonded epoxy coating insid and out ensures maximum corrosion resistance for long service life. Ductile iron construction - greater strength, durability, and lighter weight than cast iron construction. 250 p.s.i.g. AWWA pressure rating. Smooth, waterway construction - 100% full port diameter waterway. No recesses to trap debris or obstruct flow. Reduces pumping costs. EPDMRubber, �.,....,,,..,..,�.....,.,..� iron wedge design ensures drop tight seal every time with low stem torque. gg C} SECTIONAL DRAWIlNGS/DRAENSIONS AMERICAN FLOW CONTROL SERIES 2500 RESILIENT WEDGE VALVE SERIES 2500-STANDARD NRS DIMENSIONS, 2"-12" SIZES SHOWN WITH OPERATWG NUTS LU42 SHOWN WITH OPTIONAL HANDWHEEL DIMENSION VALVE SIZE 2" 2-1/2" 1 3" 4" 6" 8" 101, 12" A 9.25 11.03 11.84 13.72 16.75 20.19 24.12 27.69 B 10.22 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA End to End - MJ MJ 8.25 N A 8.62 11.00 12.00 12.50 14.75 16.62 La Length - MJ/MJ 3.25 N/A 3.62 6.00 7.00 7.50 9.75 11.62 End to End - FL FL Class 125 7.00 7 550 8.00 9.00 10.50 11.50 13.00 14.00 End to End - FL FL Class 250 N/A N A 11.12 12.00 15.88 16.50 18.00 19.75 End to End - TY N/A N A N/A 13.50 16.88 18.50 20.50 22.38 End to End - PO PO Push -On N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 'N/A N/A End to End - FL MJ Class 125 N/A N/A N/A 10.00 11.25 12.62 13.88 15.31 End to End - FL Class 125 N/A N/A N/A 11.25 13.69 15.00 16.75 18.19 End to End - PVC PVC 10.75 11.12 11.38 13.50 16.88 18.50 N/A N/A End to End - Threaded 6.25 7.38 7.38 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Handwheel Diameter 8.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 16.00 No. of Turns to Open 1 1 9 11 13 13 19 26 32 J 38 1. Valves 2%12" meet or exceed requirements of ANSI/AWWA C515. 2. 250 p.s.i.g. AWWA rated working pressure. 500 p.s.i.g. test pressure. 3. 2" through 16" valves may be ordered in configurations which are UL Listed and/or FM Approved. 4. Fusion -bonded epoxy coating meets or exceeds requirements of ANSI/AWWA C550. 5. Flanged ends are in accordance with ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10 (ANSI B16.1, Class 125). 6. Threaded ends are in accordance with ANSI B16.4, Class 125. 7. Mechanical joint ends are in accordance with ANSI/AWWA C111/A21.11. 8. TytonO ends and push -on ends are in accordance with ANSI/AWWA C111/A21.11 for use with ductile iron pipe. 9. PVC ends are suitable for use on steel (IPS) sizes of PVC or steel pipe. 10. 2" through 12" valves are certified to ANSI/NSF Standard 61. 11. it is recommended that stems be vertical in raw sewage applications. 12 2"-8" AWWA and UL/FM Pressure Rating 250 p.s.i.g., 10"-16" UL/FM Pressure Rating 200 p.s.i.g. PARTS LIST AMERICAN FLOW CONTROL SERIES 2500 RESILIENT WEDGE VALVE NRS Parts List 7 8 i a- Sam N-40'SIZES) 11 40 L-3 SHOWN WITH 2. OPERATING NUT SHOWN WITH OPTIONAL HANDWHEEL OS & Y Parts List 40 17 6 5 15 10 12 13 14 69 Reference Number Description Material 1 Hex Head Boll, 5/8-11 x 1' Zinc Plated Steel 2 Operating Nut, 2' Square Ductile Iron 3 O-ring - Nitrie Rubber 4 Lower Thrust Washer Nylon 5 Stuffing Box Gasket Nble Rubber 0-ring 6 Hex Head Bolt, 518-11 x 1-3/4' Zinc Plated Steel 7 Stuffing Box Ductile Iron 8 Valve Bonnet Ductile Iron 10 Throat Flange Gasket EPDM Rubber 11 Valve Body Ductile Iron 12 Stem Manganese Bronze 13 Wedge Nut Manganese Bronze 14 Restkerd Wedge DucWe Iran, Coated with EPDM Rubber 15 Hex Nut, 5/8-11 Zinc Plated Steel 17 Handwheel Ductile Iron 19 Hex Head Bolt, W-11 x 2.1/4' Zinc Plated Steel 21 Hex Head Bolt, 5/8-11 x 2-12' Zinc Plated Steel 29 Flat Washer, 5/8 Zirc Plated Steel 40 UUFM Label Pressure Sensitive Acrylic Rim 49 O-ring Nitrite Rubber 65 Upper Thrust Washer Stainless Steel 69 Wedge Guide Cover Acetal Ref No. Description Material 2 Stem Nut Bronze 3 O-ring Nitrile Rubber 4 Handwheel Washer Brass 5 Stuffing Box Gasket Nitdle Rubber 8 Bonnet Ductile Iron 9 Hex Head Bolt, 5/8- 11 x 2' Zinc Plated Steel 10 Throat Flange Gasket EPDM Rubber 11 Valve Body Ductile Iron 12 Stem Free Cutting Brass 13 Wedge Nut Ductile Iron 14 Resilient Wedge Ductile Iron, Coated with EPDM Rubber 15 Hex Nut, 5/8 -11 Zinc Plated Steel 16 Hex Nut, 5/8 -11 Brass 17 Handwheel Ductile Iron 18 Groove Pin Stainless Steel 19 Hex Head Bolt, 518 -11 x 2-1/4' Zinc Plated Steel 20 Gland Follower Ductile Iron 21 Hex Head Bolt, 5/8% 11 x 2.12' Zinc Plated Steel 22 Hex Head Boll, 5/8'-11 x 2.3/4' Zinc Plated Steel 23 Gland Sintered Bronze, Oil Impregnated 24 Packing Ring Tallow Impregnated Flax 25 Yoke Ductile Iron 40 UUFM Label Pressure Sensitive Acrylic Film 69 Wedge Guide Cover Aced Z O FEATURESBENEFITS AMERICAN FLOW CONTROL SPECIFICATIONS SERIES 2500 RESILIENT WEDGE VALVE FEATURES The Series 2500 Ductile Iron 250 p.s.i.g. AWWA Resilient Wedge Gate Valve is designed for use in drinking water, sewage and fire protection systems as well as irrigation and backflow control systems. Ductile Iron Construction The ductile iron body, bonnet and wedge provide strength and a pressure rating that meets or exceeds the requirements of AWWA C515. Strength more than doubles that provided by cast iron designs, and the pressure rating is 250 p.s.i.g. All this strength and higher pressure rating is provided in a compact, lightweight, and easy -to -handle ductile valve. Fusion -Bonded Epoxy The Series 2500 valve is fully epoxy coated both on the interior as well as the exterior. The fusion -bonded coating is applied prior to assembly so that even the bolt holes and body -to -bonnet flange surfaces are fully epoxy coated. Triple O-ring Stem Seals This valve features triple O-ring stem seals, Two O-rings are located above, and one O-ring is located below the thrust collar. The lower two Owigs provide a permanently sealed lubrication chamber that will mace the valve eager to operate over a longer period of time. The upper O-ring assures that sand, dirt or grit cannot enter the valve to cause damage to the lower O-rings. This is especially important for buried and sewage service applications. The Series 2500 Ductile Iron Resilient Wedge Gate Valve has these standard features: UL Listed -FM Approved • Shell Tested 500 p.s.i.g. Seat Tested 250 p.s.i.g. • 250 p.s.i.g. AWWA Pressure Rating Fusion -Bonded Epoxy Coating • Rubber Encapsulated Wedge Complies With ANSI/AWWA C550 Triple O-ring Stem Seals 250# Raised Face Flanges . Smooth (No Pocket) Waterway Available - Ductile Iron Body, Bonnet and 100% Leak -Tight Closure Wedge, Operating Nut NSF Standard 61 Certified AWWA C515 SPECIFICATIONS Valves 2'-36' shall be resilient wedge type rated for 250 p.s.i.g. cold water working pressure. All ferrous components shall be ductile iron, Valves 3'-36' shall be in full compliance with AWWA C515. The words "D.l." or 'Ductile Iron" shall be cast on the valve or stamped on a permanently attached corrosion resistant metal tag. The wedge shall be ductile iron encapsulated with rubber. The wedge shall be symmetrical and seal equally well with flow in either direction. Valves shall be NSF Standard 61 certified. Bolting materials shall develop the physical strength requirements of ASTM A307 and may have either regular square or hexagonal heads with dimensions conforming to ANSI B18.2.1. Metric size socket head cap screws, therefore, are not allowed. Operating nut shall be constructed of ductile iron and shall have four flats at stem connection to assure even input torque to the stem. All gaskets shall be pressure ener- gized O-rings. Stem shall be sealed by three O-rings. The top two O-rings shall be replaceable with valve fully open and Thrust Washers Two thrust washers are used. One is located above and one is located below the thrust collar. These thrust washers assure easy operation at all times. No Flat Gaskets The body -to -bonnet and bon- net -to -bonnet cover seals are pres- sure energized O-rings. This elimi- nates the need for excessive bolt loading which is required by designs that use flat gaskets. The O-rings are reusable which eliminates down time during any needed repair. The Series 2500 Resilient Wedge Gate Valve is furnished.in configura- tions that are listed by Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. and approved by Factory Mutual Research Corp. while subject to full rated working pres- sure. 0-rings set in a cartridge shall not be allowed. Valve shall have thrust washers located with (1) above and (1) below the thrust collar to assure trouble -free operation of the valve. All internal and external surfaces of the valve body and bonnet shall have a fusion -bonded epoxy coating, com- plying with ANSI/AWWA C550, applied electrostatically prior to assembly. Valves shall be American Flow Control's Series 2500 Ductile Iron Resilient Wedge Gate Valve. 1, American Flow Control° American -Darling Valve and Waterous A Division of American Cast Iron Pipe Company http://wwwacipco.com/0fc American -Darling Valve P.O. Box 2727 Birmingham., AL 35202-2727 Phone: 1-800-326-7082 Fax: 1-800-610-3569 e-mail: bpatton@ocipco.com Waterous Company 125 Hardman Avenue South South St. Paul, MN 55075-1 191 Phone: 1-888-266-3686 Fax: 1-800-601-2809 e-mail: medybedohl@waterousco.com SIGN SCHEDULE IO 0l PpHaVEU* r�S NOWD BY, EIIGIN ERI ECEIVED FEB 1.4 2004 BUILDING DEPT. STREET FILE H IGA- B U RKHOLDER NWASSOCIATES, LLC LAND USE PLANNING / CIVIL ENGINEERING 1721 Hewitt Avenue m Suite 401 Everett, WA 98201 phone (425)252-2826 fox (425)252-9551 ( f I PROPOSED i SI TE i SPACING BETWEEN SIGNS SHALL BE 200 FT (TYP.)ji O O O O I M M M M W 20-7o PRWARM m SUP oc ws Ao.o .�c.o M M t W pe NOTES PROPOSED TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN SHALL FOLLOW WSDOT STANDARD PLAN K-3. ONLY SINGLE TRUCKS SHALL BE ALLOWED. LANE CLOSURES CAN ONLY BE BETWEEN 9AM AND 4PM, MONDAY THRU F R I D A YJ fV►1t7 4.W.ST PF' F:E"Op�l� �! Tbt6 eN� of C►+C V.a�y . OW20-7o "FLAGGER. AHEAD" OW20-76 "BE PREPARED TO STOP" OW20-4 "ONE LANE ROAD AHEAD" OW20-1 "ROAD WORK AHEAD" OG20-2A "END ROAD WORK" SIGN POST SYMBOLS FEB 1 4 2005 PERMIT COUNTS GRAPHIC SCALE 0 50 100 200 GREENBURG MIXED USE BUILDING I TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN 7 17 JOB NO. 1766, H:\PRGJECT FILESACTIVE\GBERG\dwg\GBERB-LC.dwg, 1/21/2005 9:07:51 AM. Copyright 2005 Higa Burkholder .Associates i H IGA- B U RKHOLDER WASSOCIATES, LLC LAND USE PLANNING / CIVIL ENGINEERING 1721 Hewitt Avenue ■ Suite 401 Everett. WA 98201 phone (425)252-2826 1 fox (425)252-9551 si NOTES PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN SHALL FOLLOW WSDOT STANDARD PLAN K-14 FOR PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC CONTROL AT INTERSECTIONS. GREENBURG MIXED USE BUILDING PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN N pq GRAPHIC. SCALE 0 20 a0 80 • 1766 KTRO.IECT FILESACTNE\GBERG\dwg\GBERB•LC.dwg. 121/2005 9:08:30 AM. Copyright 2005 Higa Burkholder AssoCiates �q. f d z z LU LLI z 0 z r i K c GILES ENGINEERING lSSOCIATTES, INC. GEOTECNNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS • Atlanta, GA • Dallas, TX • Los Angeles, CA • Madison, WI • Milwaukee, WI • Seattle, WA June 9, 1998 • Washington, D-.C. Marine Business International Blanchard Plaza 2201 - 6' Avenue, Suite 1301 Seattle, Washington 98121 Attention: Mr. Dennis LaPorte, Vice President Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Office Building 31 Avenue South and Dayton Street Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Dear Mr. LaPorte: In accordance with your request and authorization, we have conducted a Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis for the above -referenced project. The conclusions and recommendations developed from the analysis are discussed in detail in the accompanying report. We appreciate the opportunity to have been of service on this project. If there are any questions or if we may be of further service, please do not hesitate to call at any time. Respectfully submitted, GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Cz�. lip Richard Hyland. Staff Engineer g sIIAA� 4 John E. Zipper, P Regional Manage LOG FEIM # 11807 North Creek Parkway South • Suite 102 • Bothell, WA 98011 425482-2020 • Fax 425/482-6300 • E-Mail seatde@gilesengr.com '.t TABLE OF CONTENTS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EXPLORATION AND ANALYSIS PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING 3`D AVENUE SOUTH AND DAYTON STREET EDMONDS, WASHINGTON PROJECT NO.6G-9805013 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ... ............................. .. l 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES ..................................................... 2 3.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................ 3 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ............................................. 3 4.1 Soil Conditions...................................................4 4.2 Groundwater Conditions ............................................ 4 4.3 Seismic Conditions................................................5 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................. 5 5.1 Site Preparation Recommendations .................................... 5 5.2 Structural Fill ...................................... , ............. 8 5.3 Temporary Excavations, Construction Dewatering, and Permanent Slopes .... 11 5.4 Utility Installation ................................................. 12 5.5 Foundation Design Parameters ...................................... 13 5.6 Slab -on -Grade Design Parameters .................................... 15 5.7 Retaining Wall Design Parameters ................................... 15 5.8 Pavement Design Recommendations .................................. 17 5.9 Conclusion ....................................................18 APPENDICES -Appendix A -General Comments -Appendix B-Figures -Appendix C-Field Procedures and Exploration Logs -Appendix D-Laboratory Procedures ® Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. 1998 LOG ITEM ' GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EXPLORATION AND ANALYSIS PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING 3RD AVENUE SOUTH AND DAYTON STREET EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ' PROJECT NO.6G-9805013 ' 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following is a brief summary outline of the geotechnical engineering conclusions and ' recommendations. This summary should be read in complete context with the accompanying report for proper interpretation. ' Subsurface Conditions • The subsurface exploration program performed for this study consisted of excavating ' two trackhoe test pits on May 21, 1998. Test pit TP-1 extended to a depth of 4 feet and TP-2 extended to a depth of 12. feet below the existing ground surface. • The test pits revealed the site to be underlain by firm to very dense, unweathered ' native.glacial till deposits. A loose, weathered silty sand mantles the upper I1/z to 2 feet of the site. • No groundwater seepage was encountered in the explorations. A perched ` groundwater condition could develop above the dense glacial till horizon during the winter and spring months. 1. Site Preparation and Development Recommendations • The site should be stripped of vegetation, organic material, and deleterious materials including existing fills below planned developments. Subgrades should be stripped to reveal firm native deposits or soils capable of being compacted to a firm, non - yielding condition and a minimum compaction level of 90 percent of ASTM:D-1557. 0 Moisture sensitivity of site soils during -wet weather or wet site conditions should be expected due to the high fines (silt/clay) content. During wet weather,.removal of additional material may become necessary to achieve a firm subgrade. 0 Native soils are suitable for reuse as structural fill material during dry weather conditions. However, during wet weather their use may be limited due to moisture sensitivity. • Backfilled walls should be designed using equivalent fluid pressures of 35 and 55 pcf for active and at -rest loading conditions respectively. • Caving of the site soils should be anticipated in excavations which extend through loose surficial native soils or through seepage zones. In dense, unweathered glacial till, caving is not anticipated and temporary sloped cuts up to 1 H:1 V are tentatively thought to be feasible. Cuts should meet the requirements of federal, state, and local ordinances, such as OSHA and WISHA. Use of temporary bracing, "trench boxes" and/or sloped cuts may be necessary.. I W:a114-7 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 .. m ,,proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 2 •. Excavation along the east property line for construction of the below -grade parking structure may be on the order of 8 to 13 feet in height. To make these cuts feasible, shoring and/or temporary excavation easements into adjacent property to allow sloped cuts will be required. If shoring is required for the project, additional engineering and/or field exploration will be.required. • We understand footings along the north property line will be constructed adjacent to ;: .. and/or underneath existing foundation elements. If the new foundation elements are constructed underneath existing foundation elements, it will likely be necessary to temporarily support the existing foundations. Building Foundations and Floors • Foundations should bear on at least firm native deposits at depths of at least 2 feet below existing grades. • Conventional spread and strip footings should be designed with a maximum net allowable soil'bearing capacity of 2,000 psf for firm native soils or compacted fill and 4,000 psf for very dense unweathered glacial till at depths generally greater than 2 feet. • Slab -on -grade should be founded on structural fill or native soils compacted to at least 92 percent of the modified Proctor. A capillary break layer is recommended for moisture protection. 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES, The scope of services performed for this phase of the project included. a visual site reconnaissance, a subsurface exploration program consisting of test pit explorations, geotechnical engineering analyses; and preparation of this report. -These services were generally performed as described in our Proposal for Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis (6GP-980506). The purpose of this study was to establish general subsurface conditions from which conclusions and recommendations regarding foundation design and earthwork construction could be formulated. ' This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical design practice for the exclusive use of Marine. Business International, and their agents for specific application to this project. This report has not been prepared to serve as the plans and specifications ' for actual construction without the appropriate. interpretation by the project architect, structural engineer, and/or civil engineer. This report and our field services. were based on assumed conditions/characteristics of the proposed development where specific information was not available. Available project information at the time of this report preparation included a preliminary building layout and site and parking details of adjacent building. Finished floor elevations and grading plans IGMES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 , c:. G rrE-m # a7 - ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 4. ' exploration logs and a description of field procedures are enclosed in Appendix C and should be consulted for a more detailed description of the conditions encountered. Laboratory testing information is enclosed in Appendix D. 4.1 Soil Conditions Our test pit explorations generally revealed weathered, loose silty fine sand to a depth of 1 to 2 feet. Firm to very dense glacially -consolidated soil, consisting of grey sand with variable amounts of silts and gravel, was typically encountered at depths of 2 feet below the ground surface. ' These materials are interpreted to be unweathered glacial till. Glacial till consists of a compact mixture of silt, sand, and gravel deposited below glacial ice. In the Puget Sound region, the glacial ' till and stratigraphically deeper soils were overridden and consolidated by the weight of thick glacial ice sheets (up to several thousand feet thick) and therefore these soils exhibit characteristics including low compressibility and high relative density. The glacial till underlying the site consists primarily of silt and sand with low to moderate gravel content. Grain -size distribution curves ' generated by our laboratory for selected soil samples are included in Appendix D for soil classification purposes. The USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Soil Survey for Snohomish County, Washington maps native soils in the project vicinity as belonging to the group known as Alderwood Urban Land Complex. The origins of this soil are as glacial till deposits according to the SCS. Alderwood Urban Land Complex soils are described by the SCS as having the following characteristics in an undisturbed condition. • Low shrink -swell potential; • pH range of 5.1 to 6.0; • Negligible permeability below the cemented layer beginning below about 2 feet; • Designated in Hydrologic Soil Group C indicating slow infiltration rates; • Unified Soil Classification System designation of GM; • Potential for perched water at 2.5 to 3 feet; • Cemented layer beginning at 20 to 40 inches below the surface; • Moderate risk of corrosion to uncoated steel and concrete. 4.2 Groundwater Conditions Groundwater was not encountered in the explorations performed for this study. Moisture contents were typically judged to be moist or slightly above optimum within the upper weathered soils and moist within the dense, unweathered soils. The highest moisture contents would typically GMES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. _LOGREM# d7 Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 5 be associated with surface soils, due to precipitation, and soils directly above the contact with the dense, unweathered till due to groundwater perching. However, a perched groundwater condition was not observed in the explorations. Perched groundwater may be present where a relatively impermeable soil layer, such as unweathered glacial till, impedes infiltration of water causing it to buildup and saturate overlying more permeable soil horizons. Groundwater perching would be most likely encountered following significant precipitation and during the winter and spring months. Soil moisture and groundwater conditions should be expected to fluctuate with season, precipitation amounts, and other on- and off -site factors including site utilization. The moisture content.of soils. as determined by our laboratory is shown for selected samples on the exploration logs. 4.3 Seismic Conditions According to the Seismic Zone Map of the United States contained in the 1994 Uniform Building Code, the project site lies within seismic risk zone 3. Based on native soil conditions encountered at the site, the subsurface site conditions are interpreted to correspond to a seismic soil profile type SZ as defined by Table 16-J of the 1994 Uniform Building Code. Soil profile type SZ applies to a profile consisting predominantly of dense or medium dense/medium stiff soil where soil depth exceeds 200 feet. We interpret native site soils as falling under the Sc seismic soil profile of the 1997 UBC. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The conditions imposed by the proposed development have been evaluated on the basis of the assumed development plan, the engineering characteristics of the subsurface materials encountered in the explorations, and the anticipated soil behavior both during and after construction. Based on the information obtained from our subsurface exploration program, the project appears feasible with respect to soil and groundwater conditions encountered at the site. The conclusions and recommendations for foundation, slab -on -grade, along with site development recommendations and considerations, are discussed in the following sections of this report. 5.1 Site Preparation Recommendations Based upon the subsurface conditions encountered during exploration, the following site preparation procedures have been developed and include recommendations regarding site drainage, stripping, subgrade protection, proofrolling and subgrade compaction. Site preparation effort is expected to be dependent upon prevalent weather conditions during the earthwork phase of the project. Therefore, bids for site preparation, earthwork, and paving operations should be based upon GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 8 used as fill may be necessary during dry weather conditions to achieve a moisture content adequately close to optimum to allow required compaction. When moisture is to be added to soil, it must be thoroughly blended throughout the lift to achieve uniform moisture distribution. Dust control measures may also be necessary during dry weather grading. Wet Weather Construction _ Subgrade stability problems should be expected if site development and grading activities are conducted during wet weather due to the sensitivity of these soils to moisture and disturbance. In the event.the subgrade is exposed to significant increases in moisture and subgrade stability problems develop, additional undercutting or stabilization techniques should be expected to achieve a stable subgrade due to the moisture -sensitive nature of the fine-grained site soils. If undercutting or stabilization is necessary, the actual depth of undercutting or the appropriate stabilization methods should be determined by a qualified geotechnical representative during construction. Overexcavation/Stabilization Construction during extended wet weather periods could create the need to overexcavate exposed soils if they become disturbed and cannot be recompacted due to elevated moisture content and or weather conditions. The need for overexcavation should be confirmed Through continuous monitoring and testing by a Giles representative. Selective drying and recompaction of unsuitable subgrades may be accomplished by scarifying or windrowing surficial material during extended periods of dry and warm weather, generally only occurring during summer months in the Puget Sound region. During winter months, special techniques may be required to achieve stable subgrades and could include 1) overexcavation and replacement with select, granular fill or crushed rock, 2) use of geotextile fabrics, and 3) chemical stabilization with additives such as flyash or cement. We recommend that contingencies for stabilization alternatives be included within the project documents if construction will occur during winter months. We can assist in developing contingency plans once grading plans and construction scheduled have been developed. Frozen Subgrades If earthwork takes place during freezing conditions, all exposed subgrades should be allowed to thaw and then be recompacted prior to placing subsequent lifts of structural fill or foundation components. Alternatively, the frozen material could be stripped from the subgrade to reveal unfrozen soil prior to placing subsequent lifts of fill or foundation components. The frozen soil should not be reused as structural fill until allowed to thaw and adjusted to the proper moisture content, which may not be possible during winter months. G/I/LLES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. ' Proposed Office Building EZmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 ' Page 9 ' 5.2 Structural Fill . All structural fill should be placed in accordance with the recommendations presented herein I for structural fill. Prior to the placement of structural fill, all surfaces to receive fill should be prepared as previously recommended. ' Structural fill includes any fill material placed under footings, pavements, or other permanent structures or facilities. The use of on -site soils for structural fill should be limited as described in this report. Materials typically used for import structural. fill include clean, well -graded ' sand and gravel ("pit -run'; clean sand; various mixtures of gravel; crushed rock; controlled -density fill (CDF); and lean -mix concrete. Recycled concrete derived from crushed parent material is also useful for structural fill provided the material is thoroughly crushed to a size deemed appropriate by the geotechnical engineer (usually less than 2 inches). Structural fill materials should be free of deleterious, organic, or frozen matter and should contain no chemicals that may result in the material being classified as "contaminated". Structural fill for raising site grades can consist of a combination of "common" and "select granular" material. Select granular fill should contain less than 5 percent by weight passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve, based on the fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve. Select granular fill is recommended for use in wet weather conditions and wet site and subgrade conditions, as discussed in the pertinent sections of this report. Common structural fill should consist of predominantly granular soil, free of organics and deleterious materials, which is compactable to a firm and unyielding condition at the specified compaction levels. Common structural fill should meet the requirements of specification 9-03.14(3), "Common Borrow" in the 1996 WSDOT/APWA Standard Speciftcationsfor R=4 Bridge, and Municipal Construction. Select structural fill should meet the minimum requirements of specification 9-03.14(2) "Select Bon ow" except that the percent passing the No. 200 sieve should be reduced to 5 percent maximum. The suitability of soils used for structural fill depends primarily on the gradation and moisture content of the soil when it is placed. As the fines content (that portion passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) of a soil_ increases, it becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more difficult or impossible to achieve. Soils containing more than about 5 percent fines by weight cannot be consistently compacted to the recommended degree when the moisture content is more than about 2 percent above or below optimum. Drying of the soils may only be accomplished during favorable dry weather by methods such as scarifying and windrowing. It should be noted that the placement of structural fill is in many cases weather -dependent and delays due to inclement weather are common even when using select granular fill. GALES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. `OG ITEM # 02 7 Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 10 ' When moisture conditioning of the soils is required to increase moisture content of dry -of - optimum soils, we recommend that the soils be uniformly blended with the added moisture to provide a uniform moisture content throughout the affected soils. Use of tillers or thorough blending ' using excavators or repeated windrowing with bladed equipment is recommended. Simply spraying the top of individual lifts with water does not adequately moisture condition the soil. ' Structural fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. Individual lifts should be compacted such that a minimum density of at least 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density is achieved (ASTM:D-1557). Higher compaction levels should be achieved rwhere called for -in the project specifications or the local development standards or elsewhere in this report. We recommended that a geotechnical engineering representative be present during the placement of structural fill to observe the work and perform a representative number of in -place ' density tests. In this way, the adequacy of earthwork may be evaluated, as grading progresses. euse of On -Site So Reuse of the native glacial till soils for structural fill is considered feasible provided soils are ' free of organic matter and moisture content can be adjusted to achieve proper compaction levels. The native soils should be considered highly moisture -sensitive due to their high, fines (silt and clay) content and generally fine granular fraction. During wet weather, elevated moisture content would preclude use of on -site. soils for fill unless they are adequately protected from excessive moisture and/or can be dried back during favorable weather. Therefore, for planning purposes, we recommend that wet season construction include contingencies for use of imported select -granular ' fill for all structural fill applications in the event that elevated moisture and weather conditions preclude reuse of on -site soils. Recommended Compaction Levels The following table summarizes the recommended compaction levels based on ASTM:D- 1557 (modified Proctor) for various locations of the proposed project and may be incorporated into the project specifications. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. f oG ITEM O � 7 0 Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 11 Recommended Minimum Compaction Levels Location Depth Compaction• (%) Below Building All 92 Pavement (Asphalt or Concrete) Below I foot 90 Top foot of subgrade 95 Utilities Location controls 90 - 95 Retaining Wall Backfill All 90 (with hand -operated equipment) Landscape I All 1 85 - 90 (final use controls) 5.3 Temporary Excavations, Construction Dewatering. and Permanent Slopes Some excavation bank stability problems for foundation and utility construction may occur where excavations extend into loose cohesionless soil, undocumented fill, or saturated zones. Generally, only the upper 2 feet of the site soils were considered to be in a loose condition. Caving of the test pit walls was not observed. . Temporary slope stability is a function of many factors including the presence and abundance of groundwater, the type and density of the various soil strata, the depth of excavation, surcharge loadings adjacent to the excavation, and the length of time and weather conditions while the excavation remains open. It is exceedingly difficult under these variable circumstances to preestablish a safe and "maintenance free" temporary excavation. slope angle. Therefore, it should be the responsibility of the contractor to maintain safe slope configurations since the contractor is continuously at the job site, able to control some of the factors, and able to observe and alter the nature and condition of the cut slopes. We recommend that excavations be adequately sloped or braced to prevent injury of workmen from local sloughing and spalling. All excavations including utilities should conform to applicable sloping or shoring standards for worker access such as WISHA and OSHA. Temporary slope angles of 1H:1V are tentatively recommended for excavations in dense, unweathered glacial till where groundwater is not present. We anticipate that these soils would fall into a Type A classification according to WAC Chapter 296-155, Part N, "Excavation, Trenching, and Shoring". The upper weathered soils would fall under a Type C classification and temporary slope angles of 1.511:1 V are tentatively recommended. Excavations adjacent to the east, sfouth, and west property line can be sloped, provided that ttemporary easements can be obtained. The top of the cuts should be protected_ with asphalt berms, sandbags, or other means to prevent sheet flow runoff from entering the site. If easements cannot GILEESSS ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 7 Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 12 ' be obtained, temporary shoring may be required. Design of temporary shoring is beyond our authorized scope of services. If temporary shoring is required, it is possible that cantilever soldier piles can be used. Additional field exploration and engineering analysis is recommended, if shoring ' is required. ' We recommend that any excavations ,which extend below a 2H:1 V plan subtended down from existing footings from the adjacent building be reviewed by our firm. Slot cut underpinning may be required for excavations below the level of the existing footings. ' Construction Dewaterins ' Groundwater was not encountered in the explorations. Slight seepage due to groundwater perching above the dense glacial till contact may be possible during wet weather. It is likely that any accumulated water in excavations could be removed with sump pumps placed directly in the ' excavation. Permanent Slopes We generally recommend all permanent slopes be designed at a 2H:1 V (:horizontal: Vertical) ' inclination or flatter. With. slopes steeper than about 2H:1V, topsoil erodes readily and it is more difficult and time consuming to establish vegetation for slope protection. Some sluffing of surficial soils should be expected during wet weather until vegetation has become established. The 1996 Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction provides guidelines under ' "Placing Jute Matting, Erosion Control Blanket, or Clear Plastic Covering" which may be incorporated for protection of slopes. 5.4 Utility Installatio ' All utility subgrades should be firm and unyielding, and free of all soils which are loose, disturbed, or pumping. Such soils should be removed and replaced, if necessary. All structural fill used to replace overexcavated soils should be compacted as specified and as recommended in this Ireport. Trenching and shoring should conform to applicable regulations such as WISHA and OSHA. Pipe bedding and cover should be placed according to utility manufacturer's recommendations and local ordinances. Generally, we recommend that a minimum of 6 inches of bedding material be placed in the trench bottom. Bedding material for rigid and flexible pipe should conform with Sections 9-03.15 and 9-03.16, respectively, of the 1996 WSDOT/APWA Standard a- GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. LOG ff EMl #S7--- Proposed_ Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 13 Specifications for Roat4 Bridge, and Municipal Construction. Native, on -site soils are not suited for use as bedding material. All excavations should be wide enough to allow for compaction around the haunches of pipes. Otherwise, materials such as controlled density fill or pea gravel could be used to reduce the compactive effort required. ' Backfilling for the remainder of the trenches could be completed utilizing common fill or select granular.fill, depending on soil moisture and weather conditions. Compaction of backfill material should be accomplished with soils within t2 percent of their optimum moisture content in ' order to achieve the minimum specified compaction levels set forth in this report and project specifications. However, initial lift thickness could be increased to levels recommended by the manufacture to protect utilities from damage by compacting equipment. It may be necessary to ' separate soils as they are excavated according to their suitability for reuse. Soils which are to be reused should be protected while stockpiled. 5.5 Foundation Desian Paramete The proposed new building may be supported by conventional spread footings founded on ' at least firm native soils (moderately weathered or unweathered glacial till), or on properly compacted new structural fill placed above suitably prepared subgrades per the recommendations in this report. The depth to suitable bearing deposits for conventional foundations disclosed in the test pits is at least 2 feet below existing grades. Structural fill used to raise site grades below buildings should be compacted to a minimum of 92 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. A minimum embedment depth of not less than 18 inches for exterior footings, and not less than 12 inches for interior footings should be maintained for frost protection. We recommend a minimum footing width of 18 inches for continuous footings and 24 inches for isolated footings. Foundations should not be set in or above loose or disturbed soils or any existing uncontrolled fill. As some of the site soils are silty, site work in the presence of water or-�during wet weather could disturb the bearing strata.. The contractor should avoid disturbance of these soils and limit traffic across the building pad or foundation area during wet weather. To minimize disturbance associated with foundation form work and reinforcement bar placement, the use of a lean concrete "mud mat" may be required during very wet site conditions. Considering the provided structural loads, the foundations could be designed with allowable soil bearing pressures of 2,000 pounds per square foot for foundations placed on at least firm native soils or on structural fill constructed as described above. A bearing pressure of up to 4,000 psf may be used for foundation bearing on undisturbed native unweathered glacial till generally encountered GELES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. F_O I ITEM # ,::;N7 Proposed Office Building Edmonds; Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 14 at least 2 feet below existing grades. These allowable bearing pressures may be increased by up to one-third to accommodate transient seismic and wind loads. Ultimate passive resistance values for the fill and native glacial till "soils may be assumed to be 250 pounds per cubic feet expressed as equivalent fluid weights beginning at a depth 1 foot below finished grade. An ultimate base friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used for concrete foundations cast neatly against undisturbed native soils or properly compacted structural fill. Estimated Settlement Assuming the foundation elements are founded on the prescribed bearing strata, we anticipate the total settlement would be essentially elastic in nature and should. be less than % inch, with differential settlement on the order of one-half of the total. If disturbed or soft materials are left within the footing area prior to concrete placement, future settlements may be greatly increased. For this reason, the condition of the footing subgrade should be closely monitored by a qualified geotechnical representative prior to concrete placement to confirm that the condition of the bearing soils are consistent with those assumed during design. Foundation Construction Considerations fr' Currently, the depth and condition of the existing foundation elements for the adjacent t building, is unknown. We recommend excavations for new footings do not extend below adjacent — existing footings. If construction of new footings extends below existing foundation elements, ;! additional engineering will be required. Slot -cut underpinning may be required for footings constructed below existing adjacent foundations. Perimeter Drainage We recommend that the building be provided with a perimeter footing drain system -to collect free water. Footing drains with cleanouts should consist of at least 4-inch diameter, perforated, PVC pipe fully enveloped in pea gravel or washed lock and be placed at the footing su-bgrade: elevation `\ around the outside perimeter of the foundation: The pea -gravel envelope_should be wrapped on tlie- top and sides with a non -woven geotektile fabric to prevent the migration of fine-grained soils into the drain rock. All drainage systems should bd -sloped to drain by gravity to a storm sewer or other suitable discharge location. Water from downspouts and surface water_ should be independently collected and routed to a storm sewer.' This water must not :be allowed to enter the footing drain system. Additionally, it is recommended that the finished grades around the building be designed to route surface water away from the building. GMES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. LOG FEE #_� X Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 15 Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage from the building areas at all times. Water must not be allowed to pond or to collect adjacent to foundations or within the immediate building area. It is recommended that a gradient of at least 3 percent for a minimum distance of 10 feet from the building perimeter be provided, except in paved locations. In paved locations, a minimum gradient of 1 percent should be provided unless provisions are included for collection and disposal of surface water adjacent to the structure. 5.6 Slab -on -Grade Design Parameters Slab -on -grade floor support would be feasible provided subgrades are prepared as previously discussed for foundations. Floor slab subgrade should consist of at least firm native soil or fill compacted to a minimum of 92 percent of modified Proctor maximum dry density. . Moisture Protection: To minimize moisture infiltration, we recommend that slab -on -grade floors be underlain by the following. layers (top to bottom): ► Curing Course - A 2-inch thick layer of clean sand to allow proper curing of -the concrete. slab and to protect the vapor barrier; ► Vapor Barrier - A layer of plastic sheeting (such as Crosstuff®) to prevent the upward migration of ground moisture vapors; ► Capillary_ Break - A nominal 4-inch thickness of washed crushed rock or pea gravel containing less than 3 percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve, based on that soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve with at least 30 percent retained on the U.S. No. 4 sieve. Any holes or punctures in the vapor barrier membrane should be repaired prior to the placement of.the floor slab concrete. 5.7 Retaining Wall Design Parameters The following general wall design parameters are offered. Walls may be designed as a "restrained" retaining wall based on "at rest" earth pressure, plus any surcharge on top of the wall as described below, if the wall is attached to the building and/or movement is not acceptable. The wall could also be designed based on "active" earth pressure, if the wall is not part of the building and some movement of the retaining wall is acceptable.. We anticipate that this lateral movement could equal at least'/4 inch or 0.2 percent of the wall height, whichever is greater. Subgrades should be compacted to at least 92 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM:D-1557) and may require select pit run or crushed rock base below footings if subgrade conditions cannot be compacted to this minimum level. GILESS ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. E nrl ITMA -4 z i 7 ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 16 The_ following table, Wall Design Criteria, presents the recommended soil related design parameters for cantilever retaining walls with level backfill. behind the wall. Giles should be contacted for alternate recommendations if sloped backfill surfaces are planned. Design of the wall should incorporate an adequate factor -of -safety against both overturning (FS=2.0) and sliding (FS=1.5). The overturning resultant should also fall within the center third (kern) of the retaining walls footing for stability, or the design must be rechecked with a limited bearing surface area. WaU Design Criteria "At -Rest" Conditions 55 psf/ foot of depth,.2 "Active" Conditions 35 psf/ foot of depth,,Z Passive Earth Pressure on Low Side of Wall (Allowable) Neglect upper 1 foot; then 200 psf/lineal foot of depth Soil Parameters (Compacted Select Backfill) y=130 pcf . i�=35 degrees Soil -Footing Coefficient of Sliding Friction (ultimate) 0.40 Traffic Surcharge 250 psf (for car loads) 500 psf (for truck loads) Recommended Backfill Compaction 90 percent (ASTM D-1557 1. For granular backfill y=130 pcf 2. At compaction levels of approximately 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum To minimize the lateral earth pressure and prevent buildup of water pressure against the walls, it is recommended that continuous footing drains (with cleanouts) be provided at the base of the walls. The footing drains should consist of perforated pipe, sloped to drain, with perforations placed down and enveloped by 6 inches of pea gravel in all directions. The backfill adjacent to and extending a lateral distance behind the walls a minimum of 2 feet should consist of free -draining granular material. All free draining backfill should contain less than 3 percent fines (passing U.S. No. 200 sieve) based upon the fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve with at least 30 percent retained on the U.S. No. 4 sieve. Native soils are not suitable for this use. It should be realized that the primary purpose of the free -draining material is reduction of hydrostatic pressure. Some potential for moisture to contact the back face of the wall may exist, even with this treatment, which may require that more extensive waterproofing be specified for walls which require interior moisture - sensitive finishes. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1-7 LOG ITEM ?t C / ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 17 ' Compaction of the backfill is recommended to achieve a density of 90 percent of the modified Proctor density. Soil compactors place transient surcharges on the backfill. Consequently, only light hand -operated equipment is recommended within 3 feet of walls so that excessive stress ' is imposed on the walls. ' 5.8 Pavement Design Recommendations _ It must be recognized that pavement design is a compromise between high initial cost and ' little maintenance on one side and low initial cost. coupled with the need for periodic repairs. As a result, the owner will need to take part in the development of an appropriate pavement section. Critical features which govern the durability of the surface include the stability of the subgrade soils, Ithe traffic volume, and the frequency of use by heavy vehicles. Subgrade Pavement subgrades should be adequately stripped per the preceding recommendations of this report to expose a subgrade capable of being compacted to the recommended level of 95 percent in the upper 1 foot and 90 percent below 1-foot depth (ASTM:D-1557). Subgrades should be evaluated in the presence of a qualified geotechnical representative to detect any soft and yielding areas which may need to be overexcavated prior to paving. Subgrade evaluation could consist of proofrolling with a fully loaded dump truck in the presence of a qualified geotechnical representative. In the case of wet weather construction, the prepared subgrade could be protected with Asphalt -Treated Base (ATB) during construction with final Class B paving scheduled for the end of construction. Existing pavements could temporarily be left in place to protect subgrades outside of the new building area during construction. In general, compaction of subgrades and fills below pavement areas should conform to WSDOT Standard Specification 2-03.3(1)C Method B except that the reference maximum dry density should be based upon the modified Proctor test (ASTM:D-1557 or AASHTO T-180). Asphaltic Concrete Pavement Specifications for pavements and crushed base/top course should conform to those presented in the 1996 Washington State Department of Transportation, Standard Specifications for Roact . Bridge, and Municipal Construction. In lieu of crushed gravel base/top course, asphalt treated base (ATB) can be substituted. The ATB would provide a more durable wearing surface if the pavement GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. LOG I R EM- 22!�_7_ Proposed. Office Building Edmonds, Washington. Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 18 subgrade areas will be exposed to construction traffic prior to final paving with Class B asphalt. . Some degradation of the ATB should be expected if it is subjected to concentrated construction traffic. Repair of degraded areas would be required prior to final Class B paving. Recommended Pavement Sections Use Asphalt Thickness:. Base course ATB* Substitute .(inches) '. Thickness (Inches) (Inches) Heavy Trucks/Busts 3 1 6 1 4 Light Traffic/Parking 1. 3 1 4 3 ' *Asphalt Treated Base; may. be substituted for Crushed Base/Top Course beneath Class B Asphalt Base course should meet the requirements for crushed surfacing in Section 9-03.9(3) of the ' Standard Specifications. Asphalt concrete pavement should be Class B as addressed in Sections 5- 04 and.9-03.8 of the Standard Specifications. Asphalt -Treated Base (ATB) maybe substituted for the granular base. Sections 4-06.3, 5=04, and 9-03.6 of the WSDOT Standard Specifications apply ' to the use of ATB... Subbase material should meet the recommendations for select granular fill contained elsewhere in this report. ' Recommended pavement sections are based on assumed traffic loadings. Pavement design recommendations assume proper drainage and construction monitoring and are based on AASHTO Design parameters are for a 20-year design period. However, continual flexible pavement ' maintenance.along with a major rehabilitation after about ±8 to 10 years should be expected to obtain a 20-year service life. ' 5.9 Conclusion ' The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based, in part, on the explorations accomplished for this study. The number, Iocation, and depth of the explorations were completed within the constraints of budget and site access so as to yield the information to formulate ' the recommendations. Project plans were in the preliminary stage at the time of this report preparation. We therefore recommend that we be provided the opportunity for general review of the project plans and specifications when they become vailable in order to confirm that the ' recommendations and design considerations presented. in this report have been properly interpreted and implemented into the project design package. I 166?� W - LOG ITEM # GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. ' Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 19 The integrity of earthwork, structural fill placement, and foundation and pavement performance depend greatly on proper site preparation and construction procedures. We recommend that we be retained to provide geotechnical engineering services during the earthwork and foundation construction phases of the project: If variations in the subsurface conditions are observed at that time, we would be able. to provide additional geotechnical engineering recommendations to the contractor and design team in a timely manner as the project construction progresses. Giles EngineeringAssociates, Inc., appreciates the opportunity to have been of service on this project and would be pleased to discuss the contents of this report or other aspects of this project with you at your convenience. If you have any.questions; please do not hesitate to call. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. I. LOG ITEM #_— LOG ITEM # & GENERAL COMMENTS The soil samples obtained during the subsurface exploration will be retained for a period of thirty days. If no instructions are received, they will be disposed; of at that time. This report has been prepared exclusively for the client in order to aid in the evaluation of this - property and to assist the architects and engineers in the design and preparation of the project plans and specifications. Copies of this report may be provided to contractor(s), with contract documents, to�isclose information relative to this project. The report, however, has not been prepared to serve as the plans and specifications for actual construction without the appropriate interpretation by the project architect, structural engineer, and/or civil engineer. Reproduction and distribution of this report must be authorized by the client and Giles This report has been based on assumed conditions/characteristics of the proposed development where specific information was not available. It is recommended that the architect, civil engineer and structural engineer along with any other design professionals involved in this project carefully review these assumptions to ensure they are consistent with the actual planned development. When discrepancies exist, they should be brought to our attention to ensure they do -not affect the conclusions and recommendations provided herein. The project plans and specifications may also be submitted to Giles for review ' to ensure that the geotechnical related conclusions and. recommendations provided herein have been correctly interpreted. The analysis of this site was based on a subsoil profile interpolated from a limited subsurface exploration. If the actual conditions encountered during construction vary from those indicated by the borings, Giles must be contacted immediately to determine if the conditions alter the recommendations contained herein. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report have been promulgated in ' accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practice in the field of geotechnical engineering. No other warranty is either expressed or implied. EO(a ITEM APPENDIX A GENERAL COMMENTS 1 OG ITEi' _. GENERAL CONMIENTS The soil samples obtained during the subsurface exploration will be retained for a period of thirty days. If no instructions are.received, they will be disposed. of at that time. This report has been prepared exclusively for the client in order to aid in the evaluation of this - property and to assist the architects and engineers in the design and preparation of the project plans and specifications. Copies of this report may be provided to contractor(s), with contract documents, toiscose information relative to this project. The report, however, has not been prepared to serve as the plans and specifications for actual construction without the appropriate interpretation by the projectarchitect, structural engineer, and/or civil engineer. Reproduction and distribution of this report must be authorized by the client and Giles. This report has been based on assumed conditions/characteristics of the proposed development where specific information was not available. It is recommended that the architect, civil engineer and structural engineer along with any other design professionals involved in this project carefully review these assumptions to ensure they are consistent with the actual planned development. When discrepancies exist, they should be brought to our attention to ensure they do not affect the conclusions and recommendations provided herein. The project plans and specifications may also be submitted to Giles for review to ensure that the geotechnical related conclusions and. recommendations provided herein have been correctly interpreted. The analysis of this site was based on a subsoil profile interpolated from a limited subsurface exploration. If the actual conditions encountered during construction vary from those indicated by the borings, Giles must be contacted immediately to determine if the conditions alter the recommendations contained herein. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report have been promulgated in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practice in the field of geotechnical engineering. No other warranty is either expressed or implied. LOG IT #_4o�_7— APPENDIX B FIGURES ' The Site and Exploration Plan contained herein was prepared based upon information supplied by Giles' client, or others, along with Giles' field measurements and observations. The . diagram is presented for conceptual purposes only and is intended to assist the reader in report interpretation. Other figures are presented to aid in interpretation of the report. Sources of the figures are as indicated. LOG ITEM PARKING 3ANK) DAYTON STREET TEST PIT LOCATION RELATIVE TO EXISTING BUILDING LOG ITEM 4 -7._ s PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING Job No. 6G-9805013 31DAVENUE SOUTH AND DAYTON STREET Design: RNH Drawn: RNH EDMONDS, WASHINGTON SITE URE 1 EXPLORATION PLAN FIG GILES (T T �^ ,p GNGINEERING ►SSOCIATES. INC. Date: DUNE 2,1998 Scale: 1" = 20' .1. APPENDIX C FIELD PROCED URES AND EXPLORATION LOGS The field operations were conducted in general accordance with the procedures recommended by the American Societyfor Testing and Materials (AST* designation D 420 entitled "Standard Guide for Sampling Soil and Rock" and/or other relevant specifications. Soil samples were preserved and transported to Giles' laboratory in general accordance with the procedures recommended by ASYM designation D-4220 entitled "standard practice for preserving and transporting soil samples. " Brief descriptions of the sampling, testing and field procedures commonly performed by Giles are provided herein. The Exploration Logs and related information enclosed herein depict the subsurface (soil and water) conditions encountered at the specific exploration locations on the date that the exploration was performed. Subsurface conditions may differ between exploration locations and within areas of the site that were not explored. The subsurface conditions may also change at the exploration locations over the passage of time. OG i7EMft �7 1 1 11 GENERAL FIELD PROCEDURES Test Pit Locations The test pits were located on -site by pacing from existing site features and/or apparent property lines using information on the site map provided to Giles. Test pit locations shown on the Site and Exploration Plan are approximate and based on locations as estimated in the field. Test Pit Exploration Procedures The field.exploration phase of this project consisted of excavating test pits using a rubber - tired backhoe operated by a local excavating contractor working under subcontract to Giles. The test pits permitted a detailed evaluation of the character of the shallow subsurface soils underlying the proposed development. . Each test pit was continually logged and observed by an experienced staff -level geotechnical engineer. In situ strength and quality attributes of materials encountered were estimated by our field observer based on experience with similar soils and the difficulty incurred during excavation. Relative density estimates are presented on the test pit logs; however, the densities are not based on actual SPT blow counts. Density of the soils was estimated using Dynamic Cone Penetrometer methods, as described in ASTM Special Publication No. 399. The Dynamic Cone Penetrometer blowcount is labeled Nc on the enclosed test pit logs. Representative samples of the soils in the test pits were retrieved, classified in the field and transported to our laboratory for a detailed evaluation and classification as deemed necessary. The test pit logs are presented subsequently and the soil descriptions are based on the inspection of the samples secured, field logs and laboratory testing. Test Pit Back�ill Procedures Following completion of the test pit exploration, the excavations were loosely backfilled with the excavated soils. A limited degree of compaction was performed with the backhoe bucket. However, if test pits will be located under new foundations, they should be reexcavated and compacted to comply with project specifications. LOG ITEM # e INC. GILES ' IGINEEMG ASSOCIAT S, 11807 North Creek Parkway South, Suite 102, Bothell, Washington (425) 482-2020, (425) 482-6300 (FAX) RECORD OF TEST PIT EXPLORATIONS Test Pit TP-1 Location: See Site and Exploration Plan Approximate ground surface elevation (ft): Not established Project.: 3rd Avenue So..& Dayton Street Project No: 6G-9805013 Date Excavated: May 21, 1998 Depth. (ft) Material Description Nc Sample Testing 1 Very dense, moist, grey, gravelly SAND with little silt (Unweathered Glacial Till) Very dense, moist, grey, gravelly SAND with little silt, trace cobbles 1 Z 2 48 S-1 w=10 3 3. 4 .4 5011" S-2. w=10 5 1 Test pit terminated at 4'-0" w=moisture content 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 No seepage observed No caving observed GILES T TGINEERING ASSOCIAT- ' S, INC. 11807 North Creek Parkway South, Suite 102, Bothell, Washington (425) 482-2020, (425) 482.6300 (FAX) RECORD OF TEST PIT EXPLORATIONS. Test Pit TP-2 Project: 3rd Avenue So. &Dayton Street Location: See Site and Exploration Plan Project No: 6G-9805013 Approximate ground surface elevation (ft): Not established . Date Excavated: May 21 1998 Depth Material Description Nc Sample Testing (ft) 1 Loose, moist, dark brown, fine to medium SAND with trace to little 1 7 S-1 w=12 silt, little gravel Very dense, moist, grey, gravelly SAND with little silt (Unweathered 2 2 5011 "... S-2 w=11 Glacial Till) Very dense, moist, grey, gravelly SAND with little silt, trace cobbles Grades to little cobbles 3 3 4 4 5011" S-3 w=9 5 5 6 m --------------------- Firm, moist, grey, fine to medium SAND with trace silt, trace gravel, 6 7 7 8 8 26 S4 w=8 trace cobbles Very dense, moist, grey, fine to medium SAND with little silt, little 9 9 10 gravel Very dense, moist, grey, gravelly, silty SAND 10 50/1" S-5 w=11 11 11 12 12 5011" S-6 w=14 w=noisiure content No seepage observed No caving observed LOG7 IT M APPENDIX D LABORATORY TESTING AND SOIL CLASSIFICATION Laboratory testing was conducted under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer in general accordance with the procedures recommended by the American Societyfor Testing and Materials (ASTM and/or other relevant specifications. Brief desc7lptions of laboratoryprocedures, testing results, and soil classifications are included herein. ITEM #.v_._!�� LABORATORY TESTING AND CLASSIFICATION Moisture Content (ASTM.-D-2216,E Moisture content is defined as the ratio of the weight of water contained within a soil sample to the weight of the dry solids within the sample. Moisture content is expressed as a percentage. Particle Size Distribution (AS7M.-D-421. D-422. D-1140,t This test is performed to determine the,distribution of specific particle sizes (diameters) within a soil sample. The distribution of coarse grained soil particles (sand and. gravel) is determined from a "sieve analysis ", which is conducted bypassing the sample through a series of nested sieves. The distribution of fine grained soil particles (silt and clay) is determined from an "hydrometer analysis' which is based on the sedimentation of particles suspended in water. Classification of Sams Each soil sample was visually -manually classified, based on texture and plasticity, in general accordance with the Unified Soil. Class fication System (ASTM.`D-2488-75). The classifications are reported on the exploration logs. J aIEENI 17 GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Atlanta, GA (770)458-3399 (770) 458-3998 (Fax No.) Dallas, TX (214) 358-5885 (214) 358-5884 (Fax No.) Los Angeles, CA (714) 779-0052 (714) 779-0068 (Fax No.) Madison, WI (608) 838-9708 (608) 838-3194 (Fax No.) Milwaukee, WI (414) 544-0118 (414) 549-5868 (Fax No.) Seattle; WA (425) 482-2020 (425) 482-6300 (Fax No.) Washington, D.C. (410) 312-9950 (410) 312-9955 (Fax No.) GITEN4-AGILES ENGINEERING t JSSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS J Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 6 the time of year that construction will proceed. We recommend that a �. Y p representative of our firm observe the soil conditions prior to and during site preparation activities to evaluate. the suitability of stripped subgrades prior to placement of fill, foundation elements, and paving. Site Drainage and Surface Water Control Adequate temporary and permanent control of surface water runoff and subsurface seepage will be required in order to allow site access, grading, and construction of underground utilities to proceed. Excavation, filling, subgrade and grade preparation should be performed in a manner and sequence that will provide drainage. at all times and proper control of erosion. Surface water should be pumped or drained to provide a suitable working platform. Successful drainage of local saturated zones due to accumulations of surface water runoff could be accomplished by localized ditching and/or the installation of cut-off trenches, berms, or french drains.. Groundwater from upgradient sources could be intercepted with cutoff trenches or french drains and routed around the work area. Sump pumps could be required for foundation (and other) excavations during wet season construction. Standing water and loose, saturated soils ("mud") should be removed from subgrades prior to placement of fill or structural concrete. The soil should be provided with temporary drainage and siltation control as required by local standards. Site Stripping/Clearing Preparation of the site should include the removal of any vegetation, topsoil, fill, debris or any other deleterious materials which may exist at the time of development. Based on the condition of the site at the time of exploration, site clearing activities are anticipated to be accomplished during the demolition phase of work. Subgrade Preparation Once the site has been stripped to reveal a non -organic subgrade, we recommend. that the stripped subgrade be evaluated by a representative of our firm prior to placement of structural fill or concrete. Methods for subgrade evaluation could include probing and/or proofrolling with appropriate heavy, wheeled construction equipment. to detect any soft or yielding areas which may need to be removed and replaced. However, the need for subgrade evaluation methods such as proofrolling are best determined during construction by the geotechnical engineer and would be dependent on factors such as weather and subgrade conditions. Following site stripping and subgrade evaluation, the subgrades should be scarified as deemed necessary by the geotechnical engineer, moisture conditioned and recompacted to at least 90 percent of the modified Proctor (ASTM:D-1557-91) maximum density. During wet weather or BOG ITEM GALES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 Proposed Office Building Edmonds, Washington ' Project No. 6G-9805013 Page 7 ' wet site conditions, a stable subgrade may be difficult to achieve due to the moisture sensitivity of the site soils and could require additional stripping or other subgrade stabilization methods if exposed subgrade soils become saturated and are disturbed. Appropriate subgrade protection ' measures, as outlined subsequently, should be employed. Following subgrade preparation, structural fill may be placed in lifts with suitable compacted structural fill material. The selection, placement and compaction of structural fill should be performed in accordance with the project specifications ' and the recommendations contained in this report Subgrade Protection Soils exposed by subgrade preparation operations are anticipated to consist of silty sand (unweathered glacial till - see "Soil Gradation Curves" in Appendix D). Given the relatively high fines content (silt/clay), the site soils are considered highly moisture -sensitive. Moisture -sensitive soils are prone to softening when disturbed in the presence of excess moisture. Therefore, site preparation and initial construction activities, particularly site stripping, should be planned to minimize disturbance to .the existing ground surface particularly during extended wet weather periods and the wet season (typically October through May) in order to reduce possible export soil volumes. Ideally, initial earthwork would be planned for the drier summer season. Subgrade protection measures could include but are not limited to the following: _ • A working drainage system (as outlined above) which must be implemented into the construction sequence to protect the subgrade from excessive amounts of water. • Use of dedicated traffic areas to limit to lateral extent of subgrade disturbance. During wet site conditions, concentrated equipment traffic should not be allowed on exposed subgrade areas. • Placement of fill off an advancing pad so as not to traffic exposed, moisture -sensitive site soils. • "Sealing" of subgrades with a smooth drum roller and sloping subgrades.to drain, if possible, before wet weather leads to their. deterioration. Preparation of a stable subgrade will be dependent in part on the contractor's ability to implement a well -planned grading sequence which incorporates adequate subgrade protection measures. Dry Weather Grading During dry weather and site conditions, extensive undercutting or overexcavation- is not anticipated to be required. However, if loose fill or previously disturbed soils are encountered, some localized overexcavation may be necessary. Moisture conditioning of the site soils which are to be Lt3ia ITEM 9 e,-< 7 GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. City of Edmonds'.. Permit No:�!,. ff,D RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT Issue Date: A. Address or Vicinity of Consinictiori' / J� gp( &'e J B. Type'of Work(be specific):_ rl �.~ v ✓ C. Contractor: 1A168g &QW . S UC S • 1A/ Contact: OAUCL OEM Mailing Address: / % % 0 4 I AyE SE Phone: ZU & - to/ , S7 State License #: k/t-MOS1 036016 Liability Insurance: 5''e7 Bond: DCX! City Business License #: 996L5- D. Building Permit # (if applicable): rQ4/� ?,—Va Side Sewe rmi # (if a le): E. Commercial ❑ Subdivision ❑ City Pro' ct' ❑ EUC U , VERIZ SE, COMCAS , OVWSD) ❑ Multi -Family ❑ Single Family ❑ Other (� �K9 INSPECTOR: V /I F. PAVEMENT CUT: ❑YES ❑ NO G. SIZ F UT CONCRETE CUT: ❑ YES ❑ NO G. ❑ Mail Approved Permit ❑ Call for Pickup APPLICANT TO ' 1 1 SICN INDEMNITY. • Applicant understanl by h her signature t th a lica ' n he/ a holds the City of Edmonds harmless from, injuries, damages or claims of any kind or des i tion wha oever, oreseen oreseen, that may be made against the City of Edmonds or anv of its departments or` employees, i udin ut no i ited to the defense of anv legal proceedings including defense costs and attorney fees by reason o 'granting this perms . ' 9, THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMAN IP A ATERI S FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL -INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE"OF THE WORK. EST ATE RES . TIO FEES WILL BE HELD UNTIL THE FINAL STREET PATCH IS COMPLETED BY CITY FORCES, AT WHICH TIME APE TOR DIT WIL P OCESSED FOR ISSUANCE.TO THE APPLICANT. ♦ Traffic control and public safety shall b in a ordance with City regulations as requi d by the City Engineer. Every flagger must be trained as required y (W C) 296-155-305 and must have certification verifying completion of the required training in their possession. " ♦ Restoration is to be in accordanc with ity codes. All street -cut trench work shall be patched with asphalt or City - approved material prior to the a of t e workday - NO EXCEPTIONS. ♦ Three sets of construction draw' gs I roposed work are required witli'the permit application. CALL DI - IG (1-800-424-5555) PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK I HAVE'READ THE ABOVE ATj MENTS AND UNDERSTAND THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND ACKNOWLEDGE'l THAT I MUST AKE THE NK/COPY O TH P IT AVAILABLE ON SITE AT ALL TIMES FOR INSPECTIONS Signature: Date: -0s (Contractor or Agent) REQUIRED INSPECTIONS: Call 425-771-0220; Ext. 1326 for a 24-hour voice -recorded inspection request line. FINAL APPROVAL OF PERMITTED WORK: DATE: Inspector's Signature CADocuments and SettingsTu tis\My Documents\Forms\Engnrng\ROWpermit_ doc Revised 10/01/03 = LA 050APE NOTES: i�------ I. A COMPLETE AND OPERABLE BELOW GRADE • - AUTOh ATIC IRRIGATION 5YSTEM WILL BE •. _'---. i'ROVIDED fOR ALL FLATIN6 AREAS AS AND5GAPE DRAWIN 5. . IDENTIFIED ON THE 2. ALL PLANTING AREAS WILL RECEIVE A 2-INCH LAYER OF MErwiLL BE BASEDE MOOD ONA SOIL 5. SOIL AMENDMENTS / ANALY5f5 BY AN APPROVED TESTING LABORATORY. 4. PLANT MATERIAL COUNTS ARE FOR CITY USE ONLY. CONTRACTOR i5 RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN COUNTS PER PLANTING PLAN SYMBOLS. 5. 5EE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN FOR GRADING AND 5POT ELEVATION5. 1 • IPt ANT SC'HEbl1LE SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME/ COMMON SIZE REMARKS QUANTITY 1. KINNIKINNIK GROUND COVER 4" POTS 18" ON CENTER AS REQUIRED 2. ROCKERY - EXISTING 3. ACER/BOWHALL 2/-1/2" CAL.- B&B 4 4• PYRUS/CAPITOL 2/-1/2.' CAL. -B&B 3 5. CITY PERINNIEL BEDS - - CITY 6. SIDWALKS - - MAINTAINED 7. 3RD AVE S - - - 8. • DAYTON/3RD ENTRANCE - 9. DAYTON STREET ENTRANCE - _ 10. AGAPANTHUS AFRICANUS/LYLY- OF-THE-NILE 171GAL 18" ON CENTER AS REQUIRED 11. BERGENIA CRASSIFOUEA/WINTER-BLOOMING BERGENIA -I-GAL 18" ON CENTER AS REQUIRED 12. CAMILLIA SANQUA'HANA JIMAN' 48"X48" 5 • ESPALIER 13. PODOCARPOS M. MATCHING MAKI/SHRUBBY YEW 4' 3 14. VINCA MINOR/PERIWINKLE 4" 18"-ON CENTER AS REQUIRED 15. TRACHASPERMUM JASMOIDES/STAR JASMINE 36"X36" ESPALIER 2 16. NANDINA DOMESTICA'WOODS DWARF' 18"-21" FULL FOLIAGE 11 17. TAXUS BACCATA'STRICTA' 3' B&B 5 18. ESCALONIA "COMPACT' 21"-24" FULL FOLIAGE 6 19. ACANTHUS MOLLIS'BEARS 6 BREACH' 1-GAL FULL FOLIAGE 20• TREE GRATES 3' - 3 _' w G ==-== Iktf�1G�1s'I"IaN 'L-IN� 1 ------------- M,,,r/��+/1�I.ry1.,.�Y,rY-.w, �11P•+•i, SIr:A✓ry,M�I111.1,I ���IMw,M11aM� fw•�wjI1r1A11�•-•••.mow ' ' • . •�•��._w.rw��V-�,•�•�r M..../11.1�i �Fir�ii�- .•w1 Ir�.w•w..�.r•++wr••r�rw Perennial Lawn & Garden Lto. 'Em An P.O. Box 12421 ' • Mill Creek, WA.,98082, • ' Dole Estimate # . 8/1312004 814 I i Ij I r Project . • • .Item Tolel Descriplion Qty fete ' • Irrigation Hookup _ 950.00T includes backflow valve, ball valve ulck 'coupler and ' 91 950.00 ' 1 itrlgaUon Bed prep conlrollar. 4zone sprinklergslem 30yards topsoll & compostlnsleiled to bad area's 4 *875.00 3,50U.0DT plants Perplan ••• 30 55.00 ' l,650.06T Street Grates , 4' x 4''Tree gretesfor Street trews . 5 13,800:00 195,00 13,800.00T 975.00T -Meg �$ T�.1�E�•tciC PLArVft � G-S . ---- i i j 50%a to dart & rcmalnder upon cumptetian. o ?� ®�-�� � t.�-`•� 'Subtotal $20,875.60 • Sales Tax (8.9%) $1,857.88 Total -�- $22,732.98 - 7? Pt (WOM 6- L;0'5* w.•..r�•r� Iw�../�rrr./ 1 d. f . 4 ; • A 4 -4 i Z_ 4 -�®W S RE—f— -'� ��...i—� a - CITY COPY r: F RESUB., 7 - FOURSEASONS LANDSCAPING� JUL 21 Zu'i;5 PLANT SCHEDULE SITE PLAN AND NQTES tab MD OWL Vary . �'�.a 5- o`Z `� 16 8C' E 1" =10' BUILDING CITY G EDM NDEN 1 CO t-UM N F MAW 891wng - ., ---- Jr • --_—.'_'___ -- I i� fir •,s I /.(�►%%f APPROVED BY PLANNING � - . , ' • . .. :. . i2i 31*AY�.8.sj�7i�+�1u++4►�Yi jTTw > Ave.& 984110„ x'�E'Sy�7d i $r /5' ��CceS MIN GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE "THE CURRENT -EDITION OF WSDOT'S STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD. BRIDGE & MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION" AND STANDARD PLANS AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS, AND ANY REQUIREMENTS ESTABLISHED AT CITY _. . HEARINGS.. ' 2. ALL CONSTRUCTION IS SUBJECT .TO THE INSPECTION BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS AND THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY - THE CITY OF THEIR SCHEDULE IN SUFFICIENT TIME TO PERMIT I INSPECTION PRIOR TO AND DURING THE WORK. I 3. EXISTING UNDERGROUND FACILITIES HAVE BEEN SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING FOR THE PURPOSE d OF ASSISTING THE .CONTRACTOR IN LOCATING SAID FACILITIES IN THE FIELD. THE in ' CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CHECKING ACTUAL LOCATIONS IN THE FIELD AND CHECKING WITH APPROPRIATE AGENCIES THAT MAY HAVE UNDERGROUND FACILITIES WITHIN v d THE PROJECT LIMITS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES r ° • TO UNDERGROUND FACILITIES RESULTING FROM HIS OPERATIONS. d Ip I 4. A COPY OF THESE APPROVED PLANS MUST BE ON THE JOB SITE WHENEVER CONSTRUCTION r . IS IN PROGRESS. ' 5. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE. CONTRACTOR TO CLEAN, FLUSH, DISINFECT WHERE it APPLICABLE AND OBTAIN SATISFACTORY APPROVAL FROM THE CITY OF EDMONDS REGARDING `l' THE QUALITY AND INTEGRITY OF THE EXISTING STORM SEWER LINE, WRITTEN ACCEPTANCE BY in d THE CITY OF THESE PROCEDURES MUST BE TRANSMITTED TO THE DESIGN ENGINEER. 0 1 M ' • --6. APPROVED STORM SEWER MATERIALS ARE AS FOLLOWS: A. CONCRETE RUBBER GASKETED JOINTS. d • ' B. GALV. HELICAL ASPH. COATED TREATMENT 1 STEEL 16 GA. OR BETTER GASKETED. C. HELICAL ALUMINUM 16 GA. GASKETED. ° (i z EX II w ROCKIER 'CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE AND SCHEDULE m LL 1 PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL THE of i 41 _ BELL ST MAIN ST YTON ST a YOST APLE ST MEMORIA PARK 104 X CITY �7 PARKLi I' VICINITY MAP' SCALE: 1" = 2,006' , i ENGINEERING INSPECTION LINE (425-771-0220 EXT 1326) TO SCHEDULE AND ATTEND A E W d ' N89'59'15"E 75.00' S5;20 — -C PRE -CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE WITH THE CITY OF EDMONDS INSPECTOR. ISSUES TO BE In m / j DISCUSSED WILL INCLUDE WATER QUALITY MONITORING AND THE DESIGNATION OF AN ON -CALL _ CONTACT PERSON FOR EROSION -CONTROL EMERGENCIES. 2. ALL LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN HEREON HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED BY FIELD l\ a 16,5' (m') SURVEY OR OBTAINED FROM AVAILABLE RECORDS AND SHOULD THEREFORE BE CONSIDERED (rn') -1 i_%"r_ . - C�r''G7r� �,. i1 APPROXIMATE ONLY AND NOT NECESSARILY COMPLETE. IT 1S THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE cV I LL•L'L ' i CONTRACTOR TO INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF ALL UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN AND .0 �" LLLL I I / I �••� �••� 11' ( II' ' TO FURTHER DISCOVER AND AVOID ANY OTHER UTILITIES NOT SHOWN HEREON WHICH MAY p LLLL I I X / II1�..._....- AFFECTED BY THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS PLAN. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE Z '�p UNDERGROUND UTILITIES LOCATION SERVICE (1-800-424-5555) AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ® - CONSTRUCTION. THE OWNER OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE AND THE ENGINEER BE CONTACTED •' " / -- �d - - �' o SHALL / i IMMEDIATELY IF CONFLICTS EXIST. LD I 3. INSTALL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES, SILT FENCES AND OTHER EROSION CONTROL FACILITIES AS DETAILED ON SHEET 3.Lu fi o i'# �'.•!,P({..}-�•. tj .. Z�j� Ott - '�.�( t'' r I 4. CLEAR AND GRUB SITE. STABIUZE DISTURBED AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE •TE.S.C. GENERAL ; : _ __ ..... ___� __...___...._�._ - / GARAGE FL008 PLAN - _ / ,': ••:,1.�::,::): ; 0 =:.f'=:::::..... . NOTES ON SHEET 4. MAINTAIN CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES TO PREVENT THE TRANSPORT OF I '' 1'' ' '''"'''' `' r _ -- i _ SEE ACHITECTUAL PLAN SEDIMENT ONTO ADJACENT STREETS. IF SEDIMENT IS TRANSPORTED ONTO A PAVED SURFACE. / y•• •f • •.Y.' I THE SURFACE SHALL BE SWEPT AT THE END OF EACH DAY. _Q I SHEET :1 OF 7 FOR DETAILS 5. REVIEW T.E.S.C. NOTES AND DETAILS . r" :G V I'(.. hl� I-I�) _ I / EX. PARKING `^�'�`--• 6. INSTALL U11LI71ES'AND STORM DRAINS. �G�VI�•'LcN� , _. = LOT _ — • I o • •, I o0 5' (T•YP) AREA 4,500 SQ. FT.f � .-'� .. , 7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP OFF -SITE STREETS CLEAN AT ALL TIMES BY SWEEPING. WASHING OF THESE STREETS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED WITHOUT PRIOR CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVAL ® -� P BIKE RACK 20' TAX ACCOUNT NUA�®IE �' - o / PROP STAGING Y x / 17032..00405600 / • AREA PER TEMP. 8. AFTER ALL UPSTREAM AREAS HAVE RECEIVED FINAL, PERMANENT STABILIZATION, CLEAN THE -I-n z I BENCHMARK �_ / EASEMENT W/OWNER I STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. - '. � I a - _ � - TOP WESTERLY 11E -- ���� 9. REMOVE ALL REMAINING EROSION CONTROL FACILITIES UPON COMPLETE FINAL PERMANENT BOLT ON FIRE HYDRANT I I l\ „ 4' 9' 9' 9' 8.75' x / STABILIZATION. DATUM--4MLLW I ( LEGAL • DESCRIPT ION: I I np�Af"I j I COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER 0 � F THIRD AND DAYTON STREETS, / IN THE CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND BEING IN FH THENORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 23. TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, .RANGE 3 EAST. �{-�,9Q M.:89459=15". E : __7-5,00°_ W.M., -- a r �• 10 i s0 NCFEENORTH ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY, UNE F SAID THIRD STREET, THENCE EASTERLY ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH BOUNDARY SITE INFORMATION — — -- — — , d ZONE: BC MAX.' HEIGHT 30' ° ° d _q L� 4 EX. EDGES ° a d LINE OF LANDS FORMERLY BELONGING TO EDA F. RUSSELL, 75 FEET, ° U OF SIDEWALK ° THENCE SOUTH TO A POINT ON THE NORTH UNE OF DAYTON STREE, WHICH LOT COVERAGE: 1009b I ° • ' d IS 75 FEET EAST OF THE POINT OF BEGINNING; d - .• ,. THENCE WEST ALONG THE NOR _ �• �\ �\ /�` '•.• '•' _ ,,. :' �'•�:.' •.fir. �: �.. •'•i; �Y•. ,•., � A .:►,-:••: .. x' • NORTH LINE OF DAYTON STREET TOTAL SITE AREA: 4 500 SF 0.10331 AC f.. _ ::.:t:►.'. .;:,,r.. ►•; 75 FEET TO'1HE• ° \ ,• '., '' ' POINT OF BEGINNING IN SNO OMIS l l I l\ =..+''..: ;..L H H COUNTY,;WASHINGTON. UNITS W/2 PARKING STALLS (ENCLOSED) d BUILDING FOOTPRINT SF �?-�7 EX. 30 PARKING LANE It PROVIDED LOT COVERAGE: 949 I R/W j 1ST FLOOR AREA GROSS: -SF 2ND FLOOR AREA GROSS: SF � SF 3RD FLOOR AREA GROSS: + SF �f b _ •fir PROVIDED LANDSCAPE: 86 SF"L �3 ` r SET TACK 5.00' NO. DAYTON , ✓5 (g�c Sc1 OF STREET INTERSECTION TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA: .4,414 SF AT POSTION OF PREVIOUSLY ,RECORDED BRASS DISC \- SURFACE MON. BASED ON _ ._ ...-.- 2 R.P. NAILS. N 89 59 , _ - • , . - - - - Zone SITE PLAN -- _ .___,_ Comer, -Flag ; SCALE: 1 =10 Set-- backs Re uired Actual - - - - Front .. ----......------- - -- Sides _...,�_,._.____._ � � '• : ' Other I - i 10 20 BUILD C,: HEITG T. SITE I.� M.—ATION:.. \ \ �I SITE PLAN NOTE SCALE: 1" = 10' j nISTAN ZONES Bc.Maw WEIGWt �m I SITE, PLAN SHOWN IS A CONCEPTUAL REP_•FESENTATION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL GARAGE 1 Comm MEVA'nON ADovn FT LOT COYERACiE Immr, NORTH ST CaF�IIER 55-0 (.I I e.TO i FIvPPR PLAN. ;:; ' , ` : • ;. , NORTW WEST COWER 48.10 (2) 1.60 TOTAL BITE AREAS 4�Om CF: 0,10331 nc I , „ REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR DETAILS ON THE COPY SOUP" WEST CO"R 41.90 (3 I . 1.40 2, eMllr, W/ 1 PAWING 5TALLs ( ENCLOSED) BUILDING LAYOUTCITY jj t / + _ 60UTW EAST COf�IER 61J0 I d 4b0 ZIT DATUM MLLW TOT 10230 BUILDING FOOTPRINT4�27 PF, PARKING SPACES RE • ' AVEP.AGE ELEVATION 0058 PROVIDED LOi COVERAGE 94f.• l I MAX Btlil.PA•IC, ITEIGFIi - 3mAm fit FLOOR AREA GROSS I MAX BLE•ELEY TION 0058 FT 7ndFLOOR,AREAGROBB tio(/� \ _�• ' ENTRY ELEVATION jD,ep :�• '� Pd0 I�R, ANDBCAPE B6 M. i 0 3 t BENCHMARK . �m7e't e� 3�-� APPROVED RY PI-ANNI U ELEVATION = 48.58 qq AREA TOP WESTERLY 11E BOLT ON FIRE HYDRANT. TOP of 1WE •MGNEBT WAGE 3190 TbTAL P6Rvlou AREA 4,i14 CF.' PARKING SPACES q }! DATUM - MLLW w R1 qu9, GARAGE ELEVATION ,Q4d0'•�b•.�,-• -— - RE PARKING SPACES REG'O:. i �l MAX BUILD ''ML+It Y. �: &G 809m T t \ .__.. __ _ *" PARKING 5PACESPROPCSEO: --- - - __. — . BARRIER FREE PARKING SPAN, _...___.. _ JUL 21u.a _.. _ ...._..., .. _ PARKING CALCULATION T BARRIER fHEF. pARI(INGSPACES E! T Area or Stall-/ Require 8lalle' R lded Stolle• C OF EDMONDS UIL NG DEPARTMEN • 4 ` � CITY I .• Bu11d We Unlla 5F,11nit 1:ar e• . Gom cC i Total old. compAce total .i, WoveM _ _1 I PER UNIT office I /:50Oaf 0 G •— o I_ i Total 4,988 - e, 0 I B •8• 0 f 9. fow- I 1 126 3'� Mrs, &D '�Wi►i ; 0/ (�1 z o •r 0 o » r r 0 w • o w , w 1 O L D ram- r�- M -o Z M z- M -- -- — — -- — -- — - — • CF1 . 3 U ---- NOTE, AL_I_ UTILITIES SHOULD BE LOCATED BY LOCATION SERVICES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. ONLY VISIBLE UTILITIES SHOWN ON THIS MAPPING, £ 4 FT. OFFSET BUILDING > o FOUNDATION F- x �/ N 89'59'15" E 51; 1 I pro ' �- 75.00 CONCRETE tit CONC. WALK DEC WALK P rr — SOIL -1 m o EXISTING BUILDING M SOTO BE REMOVED I\ _ o 4s I� C G 8' CUNC` INV.43.9 G o D 4 FT. OFFSE 0 10, CONC. -q INVA3.3 M ELECTRICAL 210 WV BOX tk I F P F / — G I O)v 31 ' < II PP DMH �b STOP �3 DMH a Fv SIGN / �//� f• I _, ••� I V Q GAS `7 o�%/= �_- VALVE 26 00-- 3' SURFACE BRASS -- A�b fj SMH 0b DISK AT 5 F001 �1�3 �'1'� OFFSET. 4�J �P DMH ❑NC WALK I SOIL 11'—`-52— 75.00 4 FT, OFFSETT I z 0 0 o iW N o o ASPHALT �Z I�L ` PARKING (FOR US BANK) IZ U U I�' r n c WALK kC11� OFFSET PLANTER_ -,I SIGN _ CB - /✓ CURB W NOTE, POSSIBLE ate'' e:p CD GAS LINE INSIDE � �� PLANTER 12' SEWER ALONG THE CENTER LINE N 89.59'15' E 181.95 79.00 Pti� -- -- 76.95 Q WV WV i WL- WI_ — WI. _M W, J / / �i i DMF�n WL RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE .............................. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE filed for record this.......... day of ......... 19...... at ...... M This map correctly represents a survey made by me In book ......... ofat page ........ at the request of or under my direction In conformance with the ................................... requirements of the Survey Recording Act at the ....................................... ALEX SILAGIN .... ..,19-2.8.....regUest Of ............. ..... ............. ,� ........0... ......... ....................................................................... 9567 Mgr. Supt. of Records Certificate No. ................................... KUKER-RANKEN INC./ 171036 1 8 ( 8 MERIDIAN: SAME AS SURVEY OF RECORD BY R.M.A. VOL.. 13, PG. 95 E'ER T ICr�L DATUM; M.L.L.W. LEGEND b DENOTES 24'xl/2' IRON BAR SET WITH CAP #9567 SET. X DENOT ES TACK IN COLLAR WI1 H #9567 SET IN LEAD. CB DENOTES A CATCH BASIN. DMH DENOTES A DRAIN MANHOLE. FH DENOTES A FIRE HYDRANT. FL DENOTES A FLOW LINE. PP DENOTES A POWER POLE. Salll DENOTES A SEWER MANHOLE. WM DENOTES A WATER METER. WV DENOTES A WA1 ER VALVE.' LEGAL DESCRIF)TION1. THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF WASHINGT❑N, COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF-T-HIRD AND_DAYTON_STREE-TS, IN THE CTTY_L EDMQNDS, SNOHOMISH__-___ COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND BEING IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M.j THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID THIRD STREET, 60 FEETJ THENCE EASTERLY ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH BOUNDARY LINE OF LANDS FORMERLY BELONGING TO EDA F. RUSSELL, 75 FEET) THENCE SOUTH TO A Pn1N1 ON THE NORTH LINE OF DAYTON STREET, WHICH IS 75 FEET EAST OF THE POINT OF BEGINNING) THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF DAYTON STREET 75 FEEI TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SITUATF. IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. ' t WAS �� ' <<- ,� tic, .• � � , + 41 Y T 0 N Mar=Vn�- •t .,..,.� ,..- EA 495.28 HEAS. TO CONC, MONUMENT AT 51H. AVE. S. _— WL WL SURVEYS: Boundary, ALTAs, Condos, Topographic, Constructicn,Court Maps LAND PLANNING: Short Subdivisions, Boundary Line Adj., Long Plats CHENONNYETH ` & ASSOCIATES, INC., P.S. Professional Land Surveyors 18130 Midvole Ave.N.,Suite A e Shoreline, WA 98133 (206)542-2188 a (206)672-8333 FAX- (206) 672 - 8333 WL WL WL FIRE -6 BENCH MARK, 'R' ON FIRE HYDRANT HYDRANT S.W. CORNER OF 4TH. AND DAYTON ST. ELEV. 61.35 FT. - DATUM, M.L.L.W. IN THE S.EJ/4 S.E.1/4, SEC.23, T-27-N, .R-3-E, W,M, IN THE CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGT❑N 'MARINE BU51NE55 INTERNATIONAL DWN. BY DATE J013 N0. LS 98020 PAUL J. PISINGER 21 APR, 1998 FIELD BQ❑K158 , PAGFI2 CHKD. BY SCALE SHEET A.W. CHENOWETH 1' = 20' 1 OF I -:. Nov 2 0 I998 Nw /�55 �5 qs l5c�-o lovu D COPY NOV 2 0 jcQ8 jlj • • • MI•,••/A,IA/I�IIHI-�.=��.�.•-q,•w1•r••^ni•~•i1ilI1 GA1•^„M��IIIaw1��RM�wl1 1•�.I���I` •�• I • \ • . w••••-•,,11•••••. •••r��w..�•�•�.�M�,b���y�jp� • � _ 1--Y•ww..•�rr•i�,.+•r♦•��•'_- i Perennial Lawn & Garden Inc• P:G, Box 12421 ..Q.11mat ' Mill Creek, WA.,98082• • ' Date Estimate # e113i2094 814 ' . -7 Name I Addreeo Charles Greenberg ' •126.3rdAveSoulh Edmonds, WA 98020. Contact: Jack Hicks • 425 290.6545 ' 1 • Project I . Ilem _ `- t]esoripllort q r • ty Rate Total / - --- ----- - - - --• " --'- -,, irrlgalion Hookup Includes es bnokflow valve, bell valve, quick Coupler and 950.00 950600T I #Z 2 I 'i" !=a fi�l s G p U L irrl atlon 4 zone sController. rinkler stem 4 ' 87S 00 g 3,500.00T � `• • L,4ND5GAPE NOTES _ t Bed Prep 30yerds lop5oil � compostlnstelled to bad areas ' A COMPLETE AND OPERABLE 6ELOW GRADE A W�`C� ,;�i_ , - IGATION SYSTEM WILL BED , •plug Perptan ••• , 30 S5.OD • 1,650,06T AUTOMATIC IR•R -- PROVIDED fOR ALL PLANTINr; AREAS AS j ; }�V-11VA% I Streetaretes 4'ti4�'7'reegratesfurstreetiree's I3,800100 13,800,OQT IDENTIFIED ON THE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS. G. - _-- 112tZ I' lail•'i I ON • L_ 1 N l s I9sloo 975106T 2. ALL PLANTING AREAS WILL RECEIVE A 2-INCH j� -W WJ�'1« tz S'�V I G LAYER OF MEDIUM -FINE WOOD MULCH. 3. SOIL AMENDMENTS WILL BE BASED ON A SOIL - 3 ANAwYS1S BY AN APPROVED TESTING LABORATORY. V7 MATERIAL COUNTS ARE FOR CITY USE ONLY. � 4. PLANT , v 9 a I , CONTRACTOR 15 RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN r COUNT S PER PLANTING PLAN SYMBOLS. S I 5. SEE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN FOR GRADING AND T 6 ( l SPOT ELEVATIONS. a - f_wttAfi_M RIND - i a W stedA • �-� --�-°• --- -----•---- l I SO°/a to remainder upon completion. ' , `► ! 6 n ° ®4�•N ('""`� 'Subtotal PLANT SCHEDULE SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME/ COMMON SIZE REMARKS QUANTITY 1. KINNIKINNIK GROUND COVER 4" POTS 18" ON CENTER AS REQUIRED 2. ROCKERY - EXISTING 3. ACER/BOWHALL 2/-1/2" CAL.- B&B 4 4. PYRUS/CAPITOL 2/-1/2.' CAL. -B&B 3 S. CITY PERINNIEL BEDS - - CITY 6. SIDWALKS - - MAINTAINED 7. 3RD AVE S - - - 8. • DAYTON/3RD ENTRANCE - 9. DAYTON STREET ENTRANCE - 10. AGAPANTHUS AFRICANUS/LYLY- OF-THE-MILE 1-GAL 18" ON CENTER AS REQUIRED 11. BERGENIA CRASSIFOLIEA/WINTER-BLOOMING BERGENIA -I-GAL 18" ON CENTER AS REQUIRED 12. CAMILLIA SANQUA 'HANA JIMAN' 48"X48" 5 • ESPALIER 13. PODOCARPOS M. MATCHING MAKI/SHRUBBY YEW 4' 3 14. VINCA MINOR%PERIWINKLE 4" 18"-ON CENTER AS REQUIRED 15. TRACHASPERMUM JASMOIDES/STAR JASMINE 36"X36" ESPALIER 2 16. NANDINA DOMESTICA `WOODS DWARF' 18"-21" FULL FOLIAGE 11 17. TAXUS BACCATA `STRICTA' 3' B&B 5 18. ESCALONIA "COMPACT' 21"-24" FULL FOLIAGE 6 19. ACANTHUS MOLLIS `BEARS 6 BREACH' 1-GAL FULL FOLIAGE 20. TREE GRATES 3' - 3 Sates Tax (8.9% , $1,857188 4 :� - J I � Q l ��r P[. i w G-S • . Total $22,732.98 - Col v�� tJ .• I' �'� � l•. • •�• • , • .w.+•w-V w.�M++......�l•r•r..A.M•.r r . 1 I .13 e ~� a Cr- I - M.M.•••••w.MwLMwl.lt..•7 13 car/ imn d a G d. a •V1 6 'f ' , . , u # .' • I . , Q 6. Ia t",ptk�?.X4,tiUCb-• �fl� / 7 4 � lfo :r` ; •% OITY COPY 5 Y. (" ,) 7 FOURSEASONS LANDSCAPINGPLANT SCHEDULE li SITE PLAN JUL 21 AND TES E� MIS Mt sa) LJ hr. • AQ 5- A i � -1 � 1 % : ' SCALE 1" =10' WILDING DEPARTMEN. ' CITY O, ' E� Co nn _ �O�d� Lu APPROVED BY PLANNING r7 . • f y „ _.......... 126 3" A% Ill wit Wei A V06Sr �'yy i.1 15S �wzgw- 5 le V*�ez�l 2 5, BWLUNG DEP.49TMa-", 61W OF y EDMOml CITY Cbp, I GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE "THE CURRENT —EDITION OF WSDOT'S STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD, BRIDGE & MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION" AND STANDARD PLANS AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS, AND ANY REQUIREMENTS ESTABLISHED AT CITY HEARINGS. 2. ALL CONSTRUCTION IS SUBJECT TO THE INSPECTION BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS AND THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE CITY OF THEIR SCHEDULE IN SUFFICIENT TIME TO PERMIT INSPECTION PRIOR TO AND DURING THE WORK. 3. EXISTING UNDERGROUND FACILITIES HAVE BEEN SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASSISTING THE CONTRACTOR IN LOCATING SAID FACILITIES IN THE FIELD. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CHECKING ACTUAL LOCATIONS IN THE FIELD AND CHECKING WITH APPROPRIATE AGENCIES THAT MAY HAVE UNDERGROUND FACILITIES WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO UNDERGROUND FACILITIES RESULTING FROM HIS OPERATIONS. 4. A COPY OF THESE APPROVED PLANS MUST BE ON THE JOB SITE WHENEVER CONSTRUCTION IS IN PROGRESS. 5. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO CLEAN, FLUSH, DISINFECT WHERE APPLICABLE AND OBTAIN SATISFACTORY APPROVAL FROM THE CITY OF EDMONDS REGARDING THE QUALITY AND INTEGRITY OF THE EXISTING STORM SEWER LINE, WRITTEN ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY OF THESE PROCEDURES MUST BE TRANSMITTED TO THE DESIGN ENGINEER. 6. APPROVED STORM SEWER MATERIALS ARE AS FOLLOWS: A. CONCRETE RUBBER GASKETED JOINTS. B. GALV. HELICAL ASPH. COATED TREATMENT 1 STEEL 16 GA. OR BETTER GASKETED. C. HELICAL ALUMINUM 16 GA. GASKETED. CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE AND SCHEDULE 1. PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY, -THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL THE ENGINEERING INSPECTION LINE (425-771-0220 EXT 1326) TO SCHEDULE AND ATTEND A PRE —CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE WITH THE CITY OF EDMONDS INSPECTOR. ISSUES TO BE DISCUSSED WILL INCLUDE WATER QUALITY MONITORING AND THE DESIGNATION OF AN ON —CALL CONTACT PERSON FOR EROSION —CONTROL EMERGENCIES. 2. ALL LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN HEREON HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED BY FIELD SURVEY OR OBTAINED FROM AVAILABLE RECORDS AND SHOULD THEREFORE BE CONSIDERED APPROXIMATE ONLY AND NOT NECESSARILY COMPLETE. IT IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF ALL UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN AND TO FURTHER DISCOVER AND AVOID ANY OTHER UTILITIES NOT SHOWN HEREON WHICH MAY AFFECTED BY THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS PLAN. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES LOCATION SERVICE (1-800-424-5555) AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE OWNER OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE AND THE ENGINEER SHALL BE CONTACTED IMMEDIATELY IF CONFLICTS EXIST. 3. INSTALL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES, SILT FENCES AND OTHER EROSION CONTROL FACILITIES AS DETAILED ON SHEET 3. 4. CLEAR AND GRUB SITE. STABILIZE DISTURBED AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE T.E.S.C. GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET 4. MAINTAIN CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES TO PREVENT THE TRANSPORT OF SEDIMENT ONTO ADJACENT STREETS. IF SEDIMENT IS TRANSPORTED ONTO A PAVED SURFACE, THE SURFACE SHALL BE SWEPT AT THE END OF EACH DAY. 5. REVIEW T.E.S.C. NOTES AND DETAILS ON SHEET 4. 6. INSTALL UTILITIES AND STORM DRAINS. INSTALL INLET PROTECTION ON ALL CATCH BASINS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INTERIM CATCH BASIN GRATE PROTECTION DETAIL ON SHEET 3. 7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP OFF -SITE STREETS CLEAN AT ALL TIMES BY SWEEPING. WASHING OF THESE STREETS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED WITHOUT PRIOR CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVAL 8. AFTER ALL UPSTREAM AREAS HAVE RECEIVED FINAL, PERMANENT STABILIZATION, CLEAN THE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. _.. 9. REMOVE ALL REMAINING EROSION CONTROL FACILITIES UPON COMPLETE FINAL PERMANENT STABILIZATION. SITE INFORMATION ZONE:. BC MAX. HEIGHT 30' LOT COVERAGE: 100% TOTAL SITE AREA: 4,500 SF 0.10331 AC 6 UNITS W/2 PARKING STALLS (ENCLOSED) BUILDING FOOTPRINT: 4,227 SF PROVIDED LOT COVERAGE: 949 1ST FLOOR AREA GROSS: 4,227 SF 2ND FLOOR AREA GROSS: 4,028 SF 3RD FLOOR AREA GROSS: 4,258 SF PROVIDED LANDSCAPE: 86 SF TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA: 4,414 SF SECTION 23p TOWNSHIP 27N.p RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. CONSTRUCTION FOlt-li I m c� z it w m ' w 01 m EX. 30' R/W m I 3 oI 0 X N 0 Iggggg o 0 Garbage/recycle collection area/enclosure z 0 size and location approved by: Recycling Coordinator Date w I 67EMARgo<-- TOP WESTERLY TIE BOLT ON FIRE HYDRANT ELEV. = 48.58 DATUM - MLLW m ° N89'59'15"E 75.00' iT 9' 16.5' (TYP) Lt_ I I I//// _LL ' x / o i 0 _ 'I"�SH' �N•GLf���l��.. o CraI1'I to It-�Ci oft / I V SET TACK 5.00' NO.---�� OF STREET INTERSECTION AT POS11ON OF PREVIOUSLY RECORDED BRASS DISC SURFACE MON. BASED ON 2' R.P. NAILS. #z�-ro� t►"s U ► IJ2 SITE PLAN SCALE: 1 =10 SITE PLAN NOTE 9' 0 j GARAGE FLOOR PLA 7 % I SEE ACHITECTUAL PLAN, x j _ SHEET 1 OF 7 FOR DETAILS / I / EX. / PARKING I (TYp) AREA = 4,500 SQ. FT.t 3 j LOT o BIKE BIKE RACK .0 j, o z x -- 20' / PROP STAGING / AREA PER TEMP. / EASEMENT W/OWNER I 9' 8.75' x % I I / / EX. EDGES a, OF a d°SIDEWALK ° a /� ''� •.i .'n� .. ,-: �. '••� ;�.. 1. •; •. :.... i•� •.).�~ •� :' h .. .. �: •, •, h•. •i• .: �. ° EX. 30' I PARKING LANE R/W SITE PLAN SHOWN IS A CONCEPTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL GARAGE FLOOR PLAN. CIVIL PLANS SHOW CONSTRUCTION FROM PROPERTY LINE TO EDGE CURB FACE AND UNDERNEATH BUILDING ONLY. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR DETAILS ON THE BUILDING LAYOUT. CITY OF EDMONDS ENGINEERING DIVISION APPRO ED FOR CONSTRUCTION ITY ENGINEER DATE CALL R •' R BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 DAYTON TO STREET N 89'59'15" E P 0� _ BELL ST MAIN ST YTON ST YOST APLE ST MEMORIA ¢ ST PARK 104 HOWE 0) CITY a PARK VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1" = 2,000' `Q ER: ENGINEER• CHARLES GREENBERG TRIAD LAW GROUP HIGA—BURKHOLDER ASSOCIATES, LLC 126 3RD AVE S. 1721 HEWITT AVE SUITE 401 EDMONDS, WA 98020 EVERETT. WA 98201 (425) 774-0138 (425) 252-2826 SURVEYOR: STRUCTU6RAL EN INE1=Ri TIM HANSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. STRUCTURAL DESIGN ASSOCIATES 6025 108TH AVE S.E. 2210 HEWITT AVE. SUITE 401 KIRKLAND, WA 98033 EVERETT, WA 98201 (425) 822-7271 (425) 339-0293 ARCHITECT/CONCEPT: CONTRACTOR: A.D. SHAPIRO ARCHITECTS PS WROUGHT CORP. 600 MAIN STREET SUITE C 10924 MUKILTEO SPEEDWAY EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 778-5400 MUKILTEO, WA 98275 (425) 347-0404 / (425) 210-9884 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER 27032300405600 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THIRD AND DAYTON STREETS, IN THE CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND BEING IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M., THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY LINE F SAID THIRD STREET, 60 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH BOUNDARY LINE OF LANDS FORMERLY BELONGING TO EDA F. RUSSELL, 75 FEET; THENCE SOUTH TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF DAYTON STREET, WHICH IS 75 FEET EAST OF THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF DAYTON STREET 75 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. DATUM MLLW IiE14CHMARK TOP WESTERLY TIE BOLT ON FIRE HYDRANT. ELEVATION - 48.58 DATUM — MLLW Es �u JUN t' U BUILDING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDMONDS 1 0 LEGEND WATER METER m WM TRAFFIC SIGN TS EX. CATCH BASIN ❑ EX. MANHOLE O - EX. GAS LINE G . EX. POWER POLE o-� PROP. CATCH BASIN CE GRATE PROTECTION T NOTE: . EX. CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALK AND LANDSCAPING WITHIN PROPOSED 24' ACCESS TO BE REMOVED a �' 4 . IxM I c a. r) 3 .Ts- .4 I 4 m EX. CURB & . A. • • z GUTTER (TYP) 3 Qre 4% m o I EX. EDGE OF PAVEMENT (TYP) a F �o m m E4 ' I I 3 SD % d. al 0 N I LLLLL LLL OLt O R=10' . LL' z (TYP) sa. LL EX. WATER 3 is i I METER TO BE WM RELOCATED TEMP. CONSTRUCTION . `, ENTRANCE SEE DETAI 1. ION SHEET 4 Il- ;, - .. 2.N8" H 24' - __ .__ _ EI STA 0+60 *(3RD IEX. NOTE: AVE) = STA 0+00 ( STA 0+00 (SECTION A -A) STARTS OF SECTION A -A 9'N8" HDPE CB RIM = INV = 46.0 43.R,. AT R/W CENTERLINE OF 3RD AVE CONTINUES EAST AS SOUTH AND SHOWN ON SECTION A -A PROFILE. ® EX COI W GRADING NOTE: REMOVE &REPLACE ALL EXIS71NG EX. FLOWER BED TO REMAIN SIDEWALK. REPLACE EXISTING CURBING Ill AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY INSPECTOR. I Lu ID EX. 8" in STORM PIPE (TYP) I � cc 0 EX. STORM MH I NV = 43.1 .6.7 4 EX. STORM MH RIM = 46.5 INV = 42.2 PLAN VIEW STA 0+00 ? CL INTERSECTION I OF 3RD AVE AND DAYTON ST. .ri i%y' :( .I ..I . , \-EX. VEGETATION so TO BE REMOVED PROP. SECTION 23i TOWNSHIP 27N., RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. -IrvsL,vt _1r. cp BURIED 4" PVC 1 A AT SURFACE CONSTRUCTION TO BE REMOVED FENCE (TYP) %////////////////// PROP. DRAINAGE I XIIFLOW ARROWS( ) x Y, ly / I 4" STORM Y 8 DRAIN PIPE / () C8 2 STA 0+31 I CE T 2 10'-� DPE j . ''{-' (` :"i.i.:1•{:= ?i5'•":_ CONTROL TRUCTURE . u- i•. STA 0+36 I 36' - 30" DIA. CMP DETENTION PIPE / EX. I L S 0+41 ST 0+77.J % PARKING �> r, ��; yz LOT I � C® TYPE ■ ME / 5'-15" HD STA 0+87 W-B! DIP PROVIDE SAND/O C TYPE Y I SEPERATOR s 0+63.5. 5 RT FOOTING DRAINS WILL / I BE CONNECTED TO CB d 3. REFER TO BUILDING PLANS FOR FOOTING 2 -�SDR 35 / LOCATIONS. S R PIPE ® CONNECT FLOOR DRAIN � PROPERTY LINE M N. 0.5% TO BUILDING SEWER AT Apig I�.ET AN ' SIDE SEWER CLEANOUT � X. I TORMDR IN / EX. RR BULKHEf/////////////////////I // / TO BE RE MOVED o �� a ,52 a / p`im I' ►L� _ - -� r . �VL�?vUvdlo EX. FLOWER I TO REMAIN - 89'5915 E 5.00 a a, / I C / ­II� PROP. 'SIDE SE R " , . v . R00 RAIN' ' d EX. 'IN T RIM = 4 .4 C d STD d CAA ESU2 SIDEWALK K=� QU•T5(T'iP.) a d INV•= 45.7' 4 dPER d • r_ • e ' •-!-. ►• •t' _ i •w•: - . r i.. ••�... : f � ' .� �< P. iti. e' :ii- �.+' ;�� :�s.: �' :le .,.i. ••.. _'�- •�'' . ':tf- _.... ►'' _• •f' 'h_ 'TC''''`ze •'••'�t''Cs. _. ._ . C9 ._ ._ _. . - _ _. . w- INV = 45.6 PARALLEL. PARKING RAW m GUY ANCHOR TO BE RELOCATED PLUG EX. 4" AD & CAP OTHERS. AT PROPERTY LIE k w DAYTON T E T STORM DRAINAGE NOTES 1 DALL ETAILSRM SEWER PIPE AND DIVISION 7 OF LL CONFORM NTH CITY OF THE EDMONDS STANDARD THE WSDOT/APWA SPECIFICATIONS. 2. ALL PIPE SHALL BE PLACED ON STABLE EARTH, OR IF IN THE OPINION OF THE CITY INSPECTOR THE EXISTING FOUNDATION IS UNSATISFACTORY, THEN IT SHALL BE EXCAVATED BELOW GRADE AND BACKFILLED WITH A GRAVEL MATERIAL TO SUPPORT THE PIPE. 3. THE BACKFILL SHALL BE PLACED EQUALLY ON BOTH SIDES OF THE PIPE IN LAYERS WITH A LOOSE AVERAGE DEPTH OF 6", MAXIMUM DEPTH 8"-9", THOROUGHLY TAMPING EACH LAYER. THESE COMPACTED . LAYERS MUST EXTEND FOR ONE DIAMETER ON EACH SIDE OF THE PIPE OR TO THE SIDE OF THE TRENCH. MATERIALS TO COMPLETE THIS FILL OVER PIPE SHALL BE THE SAME AS DESCRIBED. (REFER TO WSDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS 7-04.3(3) AND 2-03.2(14)C. METHOD B & C). 4. ALL CATCH BASINS SHALL BE TYPE 1 PER CITY OF EDMONDS STD DETAIL EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE NOTED. 5. ALL CATCH BASINS WITH A DEPTH OVER' 5.0 FEET TO THE FLOW LINE SHALL BE A TYPE II CB OR LARGER (MANHOLE). 6. CATCH BASIN FRAME AND GRATES SHALL BE EAST JORDAN IRONWORKS MODEL 00370084, LOCKING TYPE OR EQUAL. 7. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE CORRUGATED POLYETHYLENE PIPE: THE MATERIAL SUPPLIED UNDER THIS SPECIFICATION SHALL BE HIGH -DENSITY CORRUGATED POLYETHYLENE SMOOTH INTERIOR PIPE AND SHALL BE MANUFACTURED IN CONFORMITY WITH THE LATEST AASHTO SPECIFICATIONS OR M 294 TYPE S AND THE MATERIAL COMPOUND SHALL CONFORM TO AASHTO M 294. COUPLERS SHALL COVER NOT LESS THAN ONE FULL CORRUGATION ON EACH ANNULAR SECTION OF PIPE AND PASS THE WSDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATION SECTION 7-04.3(4)D LOW PRESSURE AIR TEST FOR STORM SEWERS. 8. GALVANIZED STEEL PIPE SHALL HAVE TYPE 1 ASPHALT COATING. ALUMINIZED PIPE DOES NOT REQUIRE COATING. CORRUGATED METAL PIPE AND TREATED CORRUGATED STEEL PIPE, EXCEPT ALUMINIZED, SHALL NOT BE USED IN STREAMS, IN OR DOWNSTREAM OF WETLANDS, IN ACID SOILS, OR AS ANY PART: OF A DETENTION, RETENTION, INFILTRATION OR TREATMENT SYSTEM. ALUMINIZED METAL PIPE MAY BE USED IN STREAMS, IN OR DOWNSTREAM OF WETLANDS, IN ACID SOILS, OR IN ANY PART OF A DETENTION. RETENTION, INFILTRATION OR TREATMENT SYSTEM. 9. STORM WATER RETENTION/DETENTION FACILITIES, STORM DRAINAGE PIPE AND CATCH BASINS SHALL BE FLUSHED AND CLEANED PRIOR TO CITY OF EDMONDS ,ACCEPTANCE. ** RIM AND INVERT ELEVATIONS FOR ALL UTILITIES ARE SHOWN ON SHEET 5 OF 5. N 89059'15" E SITE SOILS GROUND COVER AND WATER QUALITY CONTROL la THE SOILS ON THIS SITE ARE ALDERWOOD URBAN -LAND COMPLEX. THE MAJORITY OF THE SITE IS BARREN WITH SOME PATCHES OF GRASS. THE SITE SLOPES TO THE SOUTHWEST AT A 8% GRADE. THERE ARE NO EXISTING STRUCTURES ON THE SITE. AT FULL BUILDOUT, A MULTI -USE BUILDING WILL OCCUPY APPROXIMATELY 947o OF THE SITE. WATER QUALITY TREATMENT WILL NOT BE REQUIRED ON THIS PROJECT PER CITY OF EDMONDS ENGINEERING STAFF. GRADING QUANTITIES, CUT. 750 CU.YDS FILL: 0 CU.YDS QUANTITIES CALCULATED FROM TINS BY AUTODESK LAND DESKTOP TERRAIN MODEL EXPLORER. NO PROPOSED GRADING LINES ARE SHOWN. SINCE THE ENTIRE SITE IS COMPOSED OF THE BUILDING. SPOT ELEVATIONS OF THE BUILDING ARE SHOWN. FOOTING ELEVATIONS: APPROXIMATELY 1.5 BELOW FINAL FLOOR ELEVATION = 45.0' TRENCH NOTE A 3/4-SACK MIX OF CDF SHALL BE REQUIRED ABOVE ALL BEDDING FOR ALL TRENCH WORK ON DAYTON ST AND 3RD AVE. CITY OF EDMONDS ENGINEERING DIVISION APPROV D FOR CONSTRUCTION / % O S.+- __ - I / CITY ENGINEER DATE 0 CALL 48 HOURS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-E566 ii DATE Fil 3/15 5 17 7 /15 ........ ....... ........ { ..........1.........I • • • • . . . . . • . . • • • • • i . . . . . . • . . i . . . . . . . • ` • • • • . . . . : . It•.•..........•..•. I 1.........:W:..•....I . . . . . . . . . ; . . . . . . . . I 1 1 �. ...................................... I ...........................:.........f.......a Ia:........ _�._ _ .. �._,._�.: _ ._:._�..:....:_ _:. _.w _.:_:.._.�_. _:_ _ _�.. �:_ :.___...._.__:._. .:... :.......-.-. € I 1 I. . . . . . . . i ......� ... �..._.. . . . . �_i _. ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . j . . . . . . . I . . • . • . . � ?taJ. ....... ......... 1......... i o :0. ; .:i`� £� I i V ? I ...................€mW.` .................I.........I.........;........ I ........I :.........? �....... .........1.........I ....... ........:.......•. ......... ........ ......... 4..... %:......... i.... . ........1.........i....�.�:.:......... ......... ... ................. i I.........1.................. :::::::::: ....../. �::::::::`::::::::: ::::::::: ::::::.*, __.__......_..._......__......__:......._.........._..._....�.__..._.._•_•_---_.._...._ _.._._........._.._...__ .._._._._.._..-"---.._......... .•........ ....... ....... _.-_I ........:....j....1.........:......... .........€.......•.1 ......../......'.........1.........1................. i 1..................1.........I.........j........._......... I.........i�..................................... .......___:_I . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : ; ........ ...... I I i I......... :::: ::::::::. Y:................................ .........I.........' i = ; :......... ::::::::: ::::::::: : : :: ::::::::: :::::::::I:::::::::!:: :::::{:::::::::' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i ? I € : _ I.........I.........i......... .......:......... .... .... ......... ....... i _. �__..._ .. _.-_ I __...__ ._ _�.- _--..._-.. _----._--- _ __ �___.._...- _. _. _. _ I _ '_ _.....--. ___.--- _ -_ _ I........._ -; € -� i.........1......... •/. I _ . i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . I I I i E I.........i......... ......... .......:......... ......... ../...............1.........I.........i.. ;........ `...............:.. i ....... /........ .......• ........._.........1.. ?.........'•t .........: .......I ........ ......:/.........'...... .I.........I.•....... . . . .... 1 1 : : = I ;.........•.........: i......... ,: _ __:� _ _ _ _ _ _ ._ _ __.- .. -.. _ .. _ _€�. _..�_ ` Y __: .. _._ _.. _ -__ ......__..._.. `- _._...._..__----•__... .._....-._...__..__.....l__...__•--•_•__._._.........-...-._.. . -=- 50 i. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . I ......... ......... - EXISTING' GROUND f .. l ......... 1 ......... _ .. i . . . R. . . . i - . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :/: I . . ` . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . :.........:.........:......... ....... ....... .../.... ..................:.........1............ .....i.........; . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . € i 1 i.........:.........:.......... ;..... �. _ i 49 I. . . . . . . . . ` . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . j. . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ? . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . I ....... .........I........ ........._I........ i 1 i. . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . ; ; i . :`......... ......... .... J. ......... ......... ......... .........i . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . I F . . . . . . . I ...... ..... ... ......... .........I.........;.........:......... .....I.........: i ... ? i I ..........._ ........................... ..-••.............._...__................................................_................................... _ _........... .............I......._. 48..._............_......................_...;........._.__._.._-.•_.__.................--.----•-•--•- ---..__... __ _ _......__.. _.._...._.-. _...__...._..__._...._.. - ` I 48 _ : ....:........ ....... �. ......... ...... ........ ....:.........I........- ..... ....... ........ ........ ........ •........ ....... !9 . ; _ ...... =1 . .l I. i { i t I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ©� . . . . . . W . . : . . . . . . . . . . F,,Z ......a /.. ......... i........1.........€ ......... I ::: o� :::::: :::: ::::::::: ::::::::: :::P!ROP.: BUTT .1NG GRAD)=:. ' :::::::: € : ::: :::::::: : pa m.. I 47 - - __ € -I- . .........WIL........,�. ....... .......•: ........ :........'.........i.:::.:::: :::::_._- ...I...:':::�I Q . . . . . . . . . i I = € i i I M` `. �. : :'::.... ....:� .........I...0 . .....E ,� :::::::.::::: :: ....... :: ::: ......... ........`.....:f"` I.........1::" ::: I.....::::1:::m ::::I:::::::::1 ,}6 .4 ._.__.____ ` _ _____ -- ._ _ _ _l _.._+___..___._.._.__-_= __ _ _ ; _ _ .l ._..._ _ ..........4s o........1..... ....... .. ... 1......... :�......... I.... ... 1......... 1... ....!.........j[i i 0 i 1 ......... 1 ..... :� :..:I :. 'PIPE' ... I ........ I ::: o :::::......... I ' :: ::_ ::::::: :: ::: .:....... ........ ..... :AII2VEt�Ir .. . :......... o .... ::::::::'_ ?... :: . : 45 ' _ _ __..___._.____ ._..__ - _ _-_._-_..-.__ _ _._-_-_...._..._..._... _._.__..._,_..__- 45 I _. W t i : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -1 . . . :I : . E) : i . . . --•1: . . . . . . . . . -^? -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i »?, i......... :..... .. .. .... ... .........1.........-IN........ I i i_ :............... ... ........i.....:�:::`�:.. I.... ... I.........i......... _ ..... ....... ... ..: i.........1......:-: •........ 1 '•: " t I { I::::::::::..... :1:2!�S.'PIPE : ::: :I:::::.... :: :::: ::: ::::::::: ::::::::::.'.,.,::, I.........:..... ®1.096.. :....1......�...1...... ;.... i.........1.........1 I I : 1 I I.......•.[ .. _ _ :�: .�: ::::::•..;.....•.. _ _ 44: -.. = . i = . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : i ...... ... . ....... .....:�:..�:..... ... `.........I.........I........ I i i ........ ..... .... .. £...... i. _.................... ........ ... ........ .........*1:..... ;......... i......:::1.:::::::: i = 3 i _ e s s : ... ....... .. ... .: ........1... .»�...:. i :........3.............1 ....TYPE 1N6LOSE0 LID : : 43 r -- ___., _. I __.-.._. _ _ _ _-.._..._.____ _ _.._ _.. _-.- ? .. w .._ _____ ._._._ _- _.-...._..__.-.__'•___. r. - . _..-__ 43 RE;- 46.-V __.._ _ __ .. € ........ _ .. ... .... ....... 10� ;r PIP . .. s - ... ... -'- ........ . i ......... : It ::.:IE:. 44.001 ....... 5'NS" PIPE ; C8 :5: 1.0% .. _ .... ... ? ......... ......... 1 :....CONNECTIT� EX. CB . € .. ... . ` :.... i ........ . ......... ? .. ®.0.88... 1 RE:' ,If.25 _ ...... I ......... j ......... i ......... i :...9'-i8" :P11?E ...... ........ .......... IE..43.9b . - - :: • : .: ... .. I :::: 1 ::....... i ......... ........ . = I ....® 1.1% . I ........ . Di6HCARGE 40-EX: •SEWER: I ...... ...... ......... i .........:........ . ........ : PIPE :(QaYTot :AvE) ::: ::::.. .. I .::::: • ........ _ • . • ... • .. _ ......... I I.........€.........I........ .... 42 =- _.._.___ _ :_------•---_ _ _..._ _. _ _ _._.. ' _ i _.__...-._--y';�CLOSEI? -IJD_ _.___..____-______... _...•_. __ .___-.....I 42 :....TYPE 1- STD. GRATE...:........ i ...... i " "RE 46.00 " " : " = ... ::::v..... I :. ::: i-* , * , , * : ::::: : ELEV:: 42.00 :Rj=: 38 ... .:::::::::: ; ::::::::: I :IE:. 43.901 ::::::::: i .. ' ...... :IE::3.05 ..... . € I i _ '5'^t$":DIP : . I ......... i ' ... ..:26'-%4." :PJP:E:. I ......... ` .... ... [ ? . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . . ; ; i ®1.OX... i.........1.... _.........:®MIN.•0:5%.i.........1.........1......... .......I ........ .... 1.........1 .1..................:........ ::::::::. -. w__� .. i _ _ .r_.._._ _ r._ ___ __ 41 ____ _ -_ _._...___.-.__.._..._;___.. i-______ -_..._ _ _._..-_ -._ _......._........... __........_......__..__ . 41 - ROP--0E-TENTION ;-PIPE - - ::::::::: ' ::::.' . B '31 S PUM : :::: :::: 3©" DIA: CMP 'x; 36' -LQNG :::: ::: : 'xx CB• 5 - , ::::::: _ .:::::::::- TYPJ=: 2NCLOSED. LID 1 ..... =C TU . • .. 6. 0.59E DER •STD. ;DETAIL ..... INSTALL. SEWER TRAP :. : £ I ......... ..... • RE: • 46.50 ...... I ......TYPE 2-,CLOSED LID . 1 ....... E5.12 ...... .. W/Dj20P 'VALVE' TO I ...... _ ......... i :::::::::: ...... (E; '41.70 :(I,)' - .. .. .. 'RE: 46.45 ::::::: I ::.... . ......... 1 ......... i ... .. PREVENT. GAS: BACItbRAFT :..... ........ . I IE: 4 .15 .(yy) ....:.. • .. 'IE: 41'7:5' . ......... ......... 1 .........:... . 1 ......... _ ......... I ` ::......: ...... S£E pETA1LS. SHT 4 = ......SEE D�TAILSi SHT 4 _ ......... 1 ... € ......... ......... : ......... : :......... .........I......... ;......... .........1.......... 40 00 `0 0^. rn ,�`d Ili o co L0 � LOi 40 0+00 1+00 S "I4 F !i l,f E t {.,:1 JUL 21 2005 SECTION A -A PROFILE <�tR�� N'N"���.� Cat=Pf,RTINIEM1!•i SCALE: 1 =10 t13 : °r crs- ��ti�;vu HORIZONTAL .. /) � 1"=1' VERTICAL DATUM BENCHMARK TOP WESTERLY TIE BOLT ON FIRE HYDRANT. ELEVATION = 48.58 __4 DATUM - MLLW _ REVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTS PER CITY COMMENTS PER CITY COMMENTS PER CITY COMMENTS PER CITY COMMENTS PER CITY COMMENTS PER CITY COMMENTS BY PLAN DATE: 08/20/04 MAD DESIGNED BY: MAD MAD DRAWN BY: JMH MAD PLAN CHECK BY: JAK MAD 1ST SUBMITTAL: 1 /21 /04 MAD 2ND SUBMITTAL: 5/12/04 MAD 3RD SUBMITTAL-8/19/04 MAD I4TH SUBMITTAL: 11 /23/04 3RD & DAYTON PROJECT I ,I'' :1 � 51� A GR is T :r' ►°� I - III 1 _ 11 40 0+00 1+00 S "I4 F !i l,f E t {.,:1 JUL 21 2005 SECTION A -A PROFILE <�tR�� N'N"���.� Cat=Pf,RTINIEM1!•i SCALE: 1 =10 t13 : °r crs- ��ti�;vu HORIZONTAL .. /) � 1"=1' VERTICAL DATUM BENCHMARK TOP WESTERLY TIE BOLT ON FIRE HYDRANT. ELEVATION = 48.58 __4 DATUM - MLLW _ REVISIONS PER CITY COMMENTS PER CITY COMMENTS PER CITY COMMENTS PER CITY COMMENTS PER CITY COMMENTS PER CITY COMMENTS PER CITY COMMENTS BY PLAN DATE: 08/20/04 MAD DESIGNED BY: MAD MAD DRAWN BY: JMH MAD PLAN CHECK BY: JAK MAD 1ST SUBMITTAL: 1 /21 /04 MAD 2ND SUBMITTAL: 5/12/04 MAD 3RD SUBMITTAL-8/19/04 MAD I4TH SUBMITTAL: 11 /23/04 3RD & DAYTON PROJECT I ,I'' :1 � 51� A GR is T :r' ►°� I - III 1 _ 11 3RD & DAYTON PROJECT I ,I'' :1 � 51� A GR is T :r' ►°� I - III 1 _ 11 TE 1AVEL CON; ON ENTR SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. 0�° oe 11110�g� R = 25' MIN Q04 O O OOOO O O 12" MIN -j \^� 4"-8" QUARRY SPALLS J UNDERLAIN WITH GEOTEX11LE FABRIC (200 ROAD FABRIC OR EQUAL PER ASTM D 3786) FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL IN CONTINUOUS ROLLS. - USE STAPLES OR WIRE RINGS TO ATTACH FABRIC TO WIRE. WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE FOR SLIT FILM FABRICS FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL m 1. INSTALLATION: THE AREA OF THE ENTRANCE SHOULD BE CLEARED OF ALL VEGETATION, ROOTS AND OTHER OBJECTIONABLE MATERIAL. THE GRAVEL TEMPORARY CULVERT AS SHALL BE PLACED TO THE SPECIFIED DIMENSIONS. ANY DRAINAGE FACILITIES •- NEEDED TO ENSURE REQUIRED BECAUSE OF WASHING SHOULD BE CONSTRUCTED ACCORDING TO UNIMPEDED DITCH FLOW SPECIFICATIONS IN THE PLAN. 700. 2. AGGREGATE: 4" TO 8" QUARRY SPALLS. M/NV44/M 3 IONS: THE AGGREGATEMUST BE AT T 12 SMU INCHES THICK. ITCE T EXTEND FULL WIDTH OF THE VEHICULAR INGRESS AND EGRESS AREA. THE LENGTH OF THE ENTRANCE MUST BE AT LEAST 50 FEET. 0 4. MAINTENANCE: THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION ° WHICH WILL PREVENT TRACKING OR FLOW OF MUD ONTO PUBLIC RIGHT- 0 �O OF -WAYS. THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING WITH 2 INCH STONE, AS CONDITIONS DEMAND, AND REPAIR AND/OR CLEAN OUT ANY STRUCTURES USED TO TRAP SEDIMENT. ALL MATERIALS SPILLED, DROPPED, WASHED OR . MAN NCO ,5 TRACKED FROM VEHICLES ONTO ROADWAY OR INTO STORM DRAINS MUST BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY. �GFtEs P R ,pi� �5 E F WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE FOR SLIT FILM FABRICS. COMPACTED 1 /2" TO 1-1/2" iv WASHED ROCK BACKFILL 1777- to BURY BOTTOM OF FILTER MATERIAL IN 8" BY 12" TRENCH 8" MIN. 2" X 2" WOOD POSTS, STANDARD OR BETTER OR EQUIVALENT SECTION TEMPORARY FILTER FABRIC FENCE 1. THE FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE PURCHASED IN A CONTINUOUS ROLL AND CUT TO THE LENGTH OF THE BARRIER TO AVOID USE OF JOINTS. WHEN JOINTS ARE NECESSARY, FILTER CLOTH SHALL BE SPLICED TOGETHER ONLY AT A SUPPORT POST, WITH A MINIMUM 6 INCH OVERLAP, AND BOTH ENDS SECURELY FASTENED TO THE POST. 2. POSTS SHALL BE SPACED A MAXIMUM OF 6 FEET APART AND DRIVEN SECURELY INTO THE GROUND A MINIMUM OF 30 INCHES (WHERE PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE). 3. A TRENCH SHALL BE EXCAVATED APPROXIMATELY 8 INCHES WIDE AND 12 INCHES DEEP ALONG THE LINE OF POSTS AND UPSLOPE FROM THE BARRIER. THE TRENCH SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED TO FOLLOW THE CONTOUR. 4. WHEN SLIT FILM FILTER FABRIC IS USED, A WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE SHALL BE FASTENED SECURELY TO THE UPSLOPE SIDE OF THE POSTS USING HEAVY-DUTY WIRE STAPLES AT LEAST 1 INCH LONG, TIE WIRES OR HOG RINGS. THE WIRE SHALL EXTEND INTO THE TRENCH A MINIMUM OF 4 INCHES AND SHALL NOT EXTEND MORE THAN 36 INCHES ABOVE THE ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE. 5. SLIT FILM FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE WIRED TO THE FENCE, AND 20 INCHES OF THE FABRIC SHALL EXTEND INTO THE TRENCH. THE FABRIC SHALL NOT EXTEND MORE THAN 36 INCHES ABOVE THE ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE. FILTER FABRIC SHALL NOT BE STAPLED TO EXISTING TREES. OTHER TYPES OF FABRIC MAY BE STAPLED TO THE FENCE. 6. WHEN EXTRA -STRENGTH OR MONOFILAMENT FABRIC AND CLOSER POST SPACING ARE USED, THE WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE MAY BE ELIMINATED. IN SUCH A CASE, THE FILTER FABRIC IS STAPLED OR WIRED DIRECTLY TO THE POSTS WITH ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF NOTE "5" APPLYING. EXTRA CARE SHOULD BE USED WHEN JOINING OR OVERLAPPING THESE STIFFER FABRICS. 7. FILTER FABRIC FENCES SHALL BE REMOVED WHEN THEY HAVE SERVED THEIR USEFUL PURPOSE, BUT NOT BEFORE THE UPSLOPE AREA HAS BEEN PERMANENTLY STABILIZED. RETAINED SEDIMENT MUST BE REMOVED AND PROPERLY DISPOSED OF OR MULCHED AND SEEDED. 8. INSPECT IMMEDIATELY AFTER EACH RAINFALL, AND AT LEAST DAILY DURING PROLONGED RAINFALL. REPAIR AS NECESSARY. 9. SEDIMENT MUST BE REMOVED WHEN IT REACHES APPROXIMATELY ONE THIRD THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE, ESPECIALLY IF HEAVY RAINS ARE EXPECTED. 10. ANY SEDIMENT DEPOSITS REMAINING IN PLACE AFTER THE FILTER FENCE IS NO LONGER REQUIRED SHALL BE DRESSED TO CONFORM WITH THE EXISTING GRADE, PREPARED, AND SEEDED. SURROUND CATCH BASN GRATE WITH A 3-4 INCH BERM OF 7/8" WASHED GRAVEL SUMP-\ v- -1 11 11 11 1 *jd Q 110" FILTER SOCK WITH ' OVERFLOW HOLES 01 ThA CATCH BASIN JJ� IRAFI 140-NFILTER FABRIC CATCH BASIN GRATES SHALL REMAIN BERMED UNTIL COMMENCEMENT OF PAVING. INTERIM CATCH BASIN ©RATE PROTECTION PER STD. DETAIL E1.3 NOT TO SCALE CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY FOR EROSION/SILTATION CONTROL: IT IS THE INTENT OF THIS TEMPORARY EROSION AND SILTATION CONTROL PLAN THAT STORM WATER RUNOFF BE CONTROLLED AT ALL TIMES TO SILTATION, THE CONTRACTCR SHALL IMMEDIATELY REPORT TO AND PREVENT SOIL EROSION AND TO MAINTAIN WATER QUALITY. ANY AND ALL CONSULT WITH THE PROJECT ENGINEER TO FIND AN APPROPRIATE REMEDY. ALL MEASURES NECESSARY TO DO SO SHALL BE EMPLOYED BY THE CONTRACTOR. CONSTRUCT104 ACTIVITIES, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF EROSION AND SILTATION CONTROL MEASURES, SHALL 1 • REGARDLESS OF S/7& WEATHER, SOIL OR 0714ER CONDI7I01VSy 774E CEASE UN71L SUCH A TIME AS THE WATER QUALITY IS BROUGHT UNDER CONTROL. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING THAT 4, EROSION DOES NOT OCCUR ON THE SITE AND THAT POLLUTED OR THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING WEATHER SILT -LADEN RUNOFF DOES NOT LEAVE 7HE SITE OR ENTER IN70 V I FORECASTS AND ANTICIPATING STORM ACTIVITY TY AND SHALL SCHEDULE ANY CREEK, STREAM, WETLAND OR I%A7ER BODY ON 7HE S17E ALL PROJECT ACTIVITIES IN ANTICIPATION THE WEATHER. 2. BEYOND THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN, 5• ALL SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS NECESSARY FOR IMPLEMENTING BMPs THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SELECTING AND SHALL BE STORED ON SITE AND SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY AVAILABLE FOR IMPLEMENTING APPROPRIATE METHODS, "BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES" (BMPs), FOR STORM WATER TREATMENT AND CONTROL USE. SUCH SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS SHALL INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO, STRAW BALES OR OTHER MULCHING MATERIAL, SILT THAT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF BOTH THE WASHINGTON STATE FENCING AND STAKES, FILTER FABRIC, ETC. DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY AND CITY OF EDMONDS ENGINEERING DIVISION. 6. 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPORT ALL WATER QUALITY CONCERNS AND DURING AND AFTER RUNOFF PRODUCING STORM EVENTS, CONTRACTOR SHALL MONITOR ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AND SHALL ACTIVITIES TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER AND TO CITY OF EDMONDS ENGINEERING DIVISION. IN THE EVENT THAT THE INSTALLED WATER PRIORITIZE IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE OF EROSION AND SILTATION CONTROL MEASURES ABOVE CONTROL MEASURES ARE INEFFECTIVE AT CONTROLLING EROSION AND ALL OTHERS. SANITERY SEWER NOTES 1. ALL WORK AND MATERIALS SHALL CONFORM TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARDS AND APWA STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AS NOTED. 2. NO PART OF THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM SHALL BE COVERED, CONCEALED OR PUT INTO USE UNTIL IT HAS BEEN INSPECTED, TESTED, AND APPROVED BY THE CITY OF INSPECTOR. 3. APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES HAVE BEEN OBTAINED FROM AVAILABLE RECORDS AND ARE SHOWN FOR CONVENIENCE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFICATION OF LOCATIONS AND TO AVOID DAMAGE TO ANY ADDITIONAL UTILITIES NOT SHOWN. IF CONFLICTS WITH EXISTING UTILITIES ARISE DURING CONSTRUCTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEERING INSPECTOR AND ANY CHANGES REQUIRED SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF RELATED CONSTRUCTION ON THE PROJECT. 4. ALL SEWER MAIN EXTENSIONS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OR IN EASEMENTS MUST BE "STAKED" BY SURVEY FOR "LINE AND GRADE" PRIOR TO STARTING CONSTRUCTION. ESC CHECKLIST - CH. 18.30.080 ECDC WATER NOTES 1. ALL WORK AND MATERIALS SHALL CONFORM TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARDS AND APWA STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AS NOTED. 2. APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES HAVE BEEN OBTAINED FROM AVAILABLE RECORDS AND ARE SHOWN FOR CONVENIENCE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBL I7 FOR VERIFICATION OF LOCATIONS AND TO AVOID DAMAGE TO ANY ADsDVOONAL UTILITIES NOT SHOWN. IF CONFLICTS WITH EXISTING UTILITIES ARISE DURING CONSTRUCTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE CITY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND ANY CHANGES REQUIRED SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF RELATED CONSTRUC'10N ON THE PROJECT. 3. NO PART OF THE WATER SYSTEM SHALL BE COVERED, CONCEALED OR PUT INTO USE UNTIL IT HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY INSPECTOR. 1. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT - CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ROUTE. CONSTRUCTION VEHICLE ACCESS SHALL BE, WHENEVER PRACTICAL: LIMITED TO ONE ROUTE. ACCESS POINTS SHALL BE STABILIZED WITH QUARRY SPALLS OR CRUSHED ROCK TO MINIMIZE THE TRACKING OF SEDIMENT ONTO PUBLIC ROADS. IF SEDIMENT IS TRANSPORTED ONTO A ROAD SURFACE, THE ROADS SHALL BE CLEANED THOROUGHLY AT THE END OF EACH DAY. SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM ROADS BY SHOVELING OR SWEEPING AND BE TRANSPORTED TO A CONTROLLED SEDIMENT DISPOSAL AREA WITHIN 24 HOURS. STREET WASHING SHALL BE ALLOWED ONLY AFTER SEDIMENT IS REMOVED IN THIS MANNER. 2. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT - STABILIZATION OF EXPOSED AREAS. ALL SOILS EXPOSED BY LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES SHALL BE STABILIZED BY SUITABLE APPLICATION OF BMP'S, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, SOD, HYDROSEEDING, OR OTHER VEGETATION, PLASTIC COVERING, OR MULCHING. ALL BMP'S SHALL BE SELECTED, DESIGNED, AND MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUAL. THE EXPOSED SOILS SHALL BE STABILIZED ACCORDING TO AN APPROVED TIMETABLE. (TYPICALLY, NO SOILS SHALL REMAIN EXPOSED FOR MORE THAN TWO DAYS FROM OCTOBER 1 THROUGH APRIL 30 AND NO MORE THAN SEVEN DAYS FROM MAY 1 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30). ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT - PROTECTION OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES. 3. ADJACENT PROPERTIES SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM SEDIMENT DEPOSITION BY APPROPRIATE USE OF VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS, SEDIMENT BARRIERS OR FILTERS, DIKES OR MULCHING, OR BY A COMBINATION OF THESE MEASURES AND OTHER APPROPRIATE BMP'S. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT - MAINTENANCE. 4- ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S SHALL BE REGULARLY INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED BY THE OWNER TO ENSURE CONTINUED PERFORMANCE OF THEIR INTENDED FUNCTION. ALL MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUAL. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT - OTHER BMP'S. 5• AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY, OTHER APPROPRIATE BMP'S TO MITIGATE THE EFFECTS OF INCREASED RUNOFF SHALL BE APPLIED. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENT - UNDERGROUND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION. 6. THE CONSTRUCTION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY LINES SHALL SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING: a. EROSION CONTROL FOR EXCAVATED AND STOCKPILE MATERIALS; b. THE PLACEMENT OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL WHERE CONSISTENT WITH SAFETY AND SPACE CONSIDERATIONS SHALL BE PLACED ON THE UPHILL SIDE OF TRENCHES; c. TRENCH DEWATERING SYSTEMS (MUST DISCHARGE IN SEDIMENT TRAPS, SEDIMENT PONDS, OR OTHER ACCEPTABLE MEANS); d. TRACKING AND SPILLING OF MATERIALS ON STREETS DUE TO HAULING; e. DAILY CLEANUP AND STREET MAINTENANCE. ADDITIONAL ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR LARGER DEVELOPMENTS. 7. ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT THAT INCLUDES DISTURBING ACTIVITIES OF GREATER THAT, OR EQUAL TO, ONE ACRE IN ADDITION TO MEETING THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH ABOVE SHALL COMPLY WITH ESC REQUIREMENTS LISTED BELOW. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT - DELINEATE CLEARING AND EASEMENT LIMITS. 8. IN THE FIELD, MARK CLEARING LIMITS AND/OR ANY EASEMENTS, SETBACKS, SENSITIVE/CRITICAL AREAS AND THE BUFFERS, TREES AND DRAINAGE COURSES. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT - SEDIMENT TRAPPING. 9• PRIOR TO LEAVING THE SITE, STORM WATER RUNOFF SHALL PASS THROUGH A SEDIMENT POND OR SEDIMENT TRAP, OR OTHER APPROPRIATE BMP'S. SEDIMENT PONDS AND TRAPS, PERIMETER DIKES, SEDIMENT BARRIERS, AND OTHER BMPs INTENDED TO TRAP SEDIMENT ON -SITE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS A FIRST STEP IN GRADING. THESE BMPs SHALL BE FUNCTIONAL BEFORE LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES TAKE PLACE. EARTHEN STRUCTURES, SUCH AS DAMS. DIKES, AND DIVERSIONS SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED ACCORDING TO AN APPROVED TIMETABLE. PLANNINGHIGAc3BURKHOLDER LAND USE ENGINEERING Suite1721 Hewitt Avenue M 401 Everett,98201 ph on c . fox,551 / - EXPIRES 00. CITY OF EDMONDS ENGINEERING DIVISION APPRO D FOR CONSTRUCTION / �70�5 - CITY ENGINEER DATE 12'-8" HDPE ® 1.0% TO CB 4 44.15 INSTALL FASTNERS (300 SERIES STAINLESS STEEL) TO SECURE CORDS & LINES y' NOTE: INSTALL VOLTAGE CONNECTION FOR PUMP. `r. ti= •�J T.E.S.C. GENERAL NOTES THE NOTES AND DETAILS PROVIDED ON THIS SHEET ILLUSTRATE SOME MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs). ALTHOUGH SOME MEASURES OF THE MOST COMMON TEMPORARY EROSION/SILTATION CONTROL BEST SHOWN HERE MAY NOT BE SPECIFIED IN THE T.E.S.C. PLAN FOR THIS PROJECT, THE DETAILS ARE PROVIDED FOR FUTURE REFERENCE SHOULD SITE CONDITIONS REQUIRE ADDITIONAL MEASURES APPROPRIATE BEYOND THOSE SPECIFIED. RESPONSES TO UNANTICIPATED SITE CONDITIONS MAY INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED To, THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL BMPs: • STRAW MULCH • JUTE OR SYNTHETIC MATTING, EITHER GENERIC OR PROPRIETARY • TEMPORARY DITCHES, SWALES, DIKES OR BASINS -BRUSH OR GRAVEL FILTER BERMS • ANCHORED PLASTIC SHEETING • SLOPE SCARIFICATION OR TERRACING • TIRE WASH STATIONS • SODDING • ROCK CHECK DAMS • DUST CONTROL SUCH MEASURES SHALL BE SELECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR IN CONSULTATION WITH THE COUNTY INSPECTOR AND THE PROJECT ENGINEER, AND SHALL BE INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS, PRACTICE AS THE SITUATION DICTATES. ENGINEER'S DESIGN OR STANDARD CONTRUCTION INDUSTRY 1. THE TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL FACILITIES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO ANY GRADING OR 7. WHERE STRAW MULCH FOR TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL IS LAND CLEARING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENT- REQUIRED, IT SHALL BE APPLIED AT A MINIMUM THICKNESS OF TWO INCHES. ATION CONTROL PLAN. THESE FACILITIES MUST BE SATISFACTORILY MAINTAINED UNTIL CONSTRUCTION AND LANDSCAPING IS COMPLETED AND THE POTENTIAL FOR ON -SITE EROSION HAS PASSED. 8• ANY AREA NEEDING T.E.S.C. MEASURES, NOT REQUIRING IMMEDIATE ATTENTION, SHALL BE ADDRESSED WITHIN FIFTEEN (15) DAYS. 2. NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS, WATER 9• THE T.E.S.C. FACILITIES ON INACTIVE SITES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND QUALITY REQUIREMENTS, AND/OR CLEARING LIMITS MAY RESULT IN MAINTAINED A MINIMUM OF ONCE A MONTH OR WITHIN THE 48 HOURS REVOCATION OF PROJECT PERMITS OR PLAN APPROVAL, FINES AND FOLLOWING A STORM EVENT. BOND FORECLOSURES. 10. ALL TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHALL 3. THE T.E.S.C. FACILITIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE THE MINIMUM BE REMOVED WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER FINAL SITE STABILIZATION IS REQUIREMENTS FOR ANTICIPATED SITE CONDITIONS. THE CONTRACTOR ACHIEVED AFTER THE TEMPORARY BMPs ARE LONGER NEEDED. TRAPPED SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING IMPROVED OR MODIFIED SEE SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED OR STABILIZED ON SITE. L FACILITIES AS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN RUNOFF WATER QUALITY DISTURBED SOIL AREAS RESULTING FROM REMOVAL SHALL BE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED. DURING AND AFTER SIGNIFICANT STORM EVENTS AND TO ADDRESS THE ACTUAL SITE AND SOILS CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. 11. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE INDUSTRY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN ON SITE AT ALL TIMES SUFFICIENT TO PREVENT PETROLEUM PRODUCTS, FERTILIZERS, CONCRETE QUANTITIES; OF EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS TO COVER ALL BY-PRODUCTS AND OTHER POLLUTANTS FROM ENTERING OFF -SITE EXPOSED SOIL IN THE EVENT OF UNANTICIPATED WEATHER DRAINAGE COURSES. SLASH PILES AND OTHER SOLID WASTE SHALL CONDITIONS. CONTRACTOR MAY CONSIDER PHASING GRADING ON BE DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE LOCAL LARGE SITES TO MINIMIZE BARE SOIL EXPOSURE. REGULATIONS. 5. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE TESC PLANS AND THE CONSTRUCTION, 12 HALL BE ROUTED OR OJECT AN UPLANDVI IOF MAINTENANCE, REPLACEMENT, AND UPGRADING OF THESE T.E.S.C. FACILITIES IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AREAFOR REMOVAL FINE SEDIMENTS AND OTHER CONTAMINANTS. ONLY CLEAN, APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR UNTIL ALL CONSTRUCTION IS APPROVED. UNPOLLUTED WATER SHALL LEAVE THE SITE. 6. ANY AREA STRIPPED OF VEGETATION WITHEXPOSED SOILS, INCLUDING . THETS CLEAN 13 ALL TIMES BYTOR SWEEP SWEEPING. WASHING FSHALL KEEPI TE THESE STREETS WILL T ROADWAY EMBANKMENTS, THAT WILL NOT BE DISTURBED FOR TWO DAYS (OCTOBER 1 TO MARCH NOT BE ALLOWED WITHOUT PRIOR SNOHOMISH COUNTY 31) OR SEVEN DAYS (APRIL 1 TO APPROVAL. SEPTEMBER 30) SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY STABILIZED WITH APPROVED T.E.S.C. METHODS (E.G. SEEDING, MULCHING, NETTING, EROSION BLANKETS, PLASTIC COVERING, ETC.). SOIL STOCKPILES SHALL BE STABILIZED WITHIN 24 HOURS. SOLID ROUND LOCKING LID ELEV = 46.50 ® POLYPROPYLENE STEPS - 1.5" `. PIPE 5'-8" HDPE 0 1.07. FROM CB 2 41.70 +� 4' 37.70 -MYERS S25 PUMP OR EQUIVALENT SEE PUMP DETAILS IN DRAINAGE REPORT. MOUNT PUMP WITH 5/8" x 4" LAG BOLTS WITH LEAD PLUG. NOTE: REFER TO CITY OF EDMONDS STD. DWG E5.3 FOR CONSTRUCTION DETAILS CB 3 - TYPE 2 - 48" DIAMETER NOT TO SCALE DATE REVISIONS BY 8 19 04 PER CITY COMMENTS MAD 11/23/04 PER CITY COMMENTS MAD 1 21 05 PER CITY COMMENTS_ MAD PLAN DATE: 08/20/04 DESIGNED BY: MAD DRAWN BY: JMH PLAN CHECK, BY: JAK 1ST SUBMITTAL: 2ND SUBMITTAL: C TYPE 2 CB 48" DIAMETER ; Y 8" SD ' 24" DIA. SOLID ROUND - LOCKING LID 5'-8" HDPE ® 1.07. TO CB 3 41.75 PLAN o i; cV s' 39.75 +*' _4 o N }Y 37.75 f jj- ELEVATION 8" SD (� 12" CMP RESTRICTOR SOLID ROUND LOCKING LID ELEV = 46.45 12" CMP RESTRICTOR s: ' TOP OF RESTRICTOR = 43.90 !.,1 1 6" MIN. 5'-8" HDPE 0 0.88%. FROM DETENTION -- PIPE 41.75 PIPE SUPPORT(S): 3" x 0.090 GAUGE BOLTED OR IMBEDDED 2" INTO WALL MAX. 3'-0" VERTICAL SPACING 3" MIN. CLEARANCE RESTRICTOR PLATE WITH 0.875" ORIFICE. PLATE TO BE 12 GAUGE AND WELDED TO CMP RISER. ORIFICE HOLE TO BE SHOP -DRILLED WITH SHARP EDGES NOTE: THIS DETAIL IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE ORIFICE DIMENSIONS & ELEVATIONS ONLY. REFER TO CITY OF EDMONDS STD. DWG. - E5.3 S CONSTRUCTION DETAILS. CB 2 - TYPE 2 - 48' DIAMETER MAY 2 p 2005 BUILDING DEPARTMENT OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE CITY OF EDMONDS NOT TO SCALE CO STRUCT10 IN PLAIMS FOR JOB NO. H VRCJECT FILEMCTNE\GBERG\dwg\GBERG-004.dwg, 1/21/2005 2:54:56 PM, Copyright 2005 Higa Burkholder Associates SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 27N., RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. EX. CURB & GUTTER (TYP) EX. EDGE OF - PAVEMENT (TYP) I I PROP. HIGH —� CAPACITY GUTTER (TYP-) 2" DOMESTIC I SERVICE SEE DETAIL E7.18, E7-19 SEE CONNECTION•% NOTE THIS SHEET a I 4" FIRE -! LINE EX. WATER METER TO BE REMOVED DRIVEWAY ACCESS - I PER SM. DETAIL � E2.27.1 REMOVE EXISTING CURB, LANDSCAPING & SIDEWALK I R=10' (m') SAWCUT (TYP O TELEPHONE GUY m I ANCHOR, SEE NOTE THIS SHEET Ex Uj F EX. FLOWER - BED (TYP) Uj I EX. HAND----� HOLE - EX. EDGE OF SIDEWALK I PAINTED CURB-� (TYP) GV C; �, � .� , A.,. s*„-, �, ,--ir� . � 'ter•,.. t�� �; �a N89'59'15"E -� - -- -- '~ EPRO POWER 4SD i 4! I PAD/P %IL N SAWCUT (TYP) WM �-LL PDA PER I LLL DETAIL E7.11 x j �'- DETAIL E7.8 I j \ SENSUS ECR / /WP REMOTE DER. / WM C 48 SHALL BE PLACED ON EX IOR WALL / -FT ABOVE SIDEWALK GRA SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN t NOTE; FOR TREE AND SHRUB o TURN OFF EXIS NG WATER LOCATIONS - SERVICE AT WA MAIN / "' g`.. . `O WHEN METER IS EMOVED. 24' 3 * NEW CURB RAMP SHALL HAVE A / EX. 1" UP (FLOW LINE) PARKING o *TRUNCATED DOME SHALL BE TRUNCATED DOME WARNING DEVICE LOT a INSTALLED ACROSS TIRE (PER WSDOT SUPPLEMENTAL DESIGN / c CURB RAMP MANUAL-ADA STANDARDS FOR c IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS) LOCATED AT z * PROP. SIDEWALK RAM AND THE BOTTOM 2 FEET OF THE RAMP TRACTION GRID PER DETA E2.15 AND E2.23 (TYP) PROPERTY LINE 4. SAWCUT (TYP) EX. FIRE HYDRANT PROP. 7' h8 SAWCUT (TYP) SIDEWALK (TYP) p a a v N 89'59'15" E 75.00' S2 a a s - EX. c a d a. a a PROP. 10' FP (TYP) c Q DEWAAK a Q•. .. � :y. .•' �' �L !f: '.i:... •`•i.TN;- .�..,!••!. - r. .'••'�s'.. si�•!a.:• - i�• i. i►•:,p• •"�'�•, LAPPUCANT/OWN TO COORDINATE WITH PARKS D T FOR LOCATION AND DEPTH OF CITY'S IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN 7FLOWE' BEDS. ,vp Rum"AYTON ST E,T PROP. 3'x3' TREES 30, GRATES (TYP.) R/W CONNECT 29'-6" PVC SIDE SEWER 0 2.0% MIN. TO BUILDING SEWER 4R m RE: 48.59 (FIELD SET) ss IE: 39.23 (EX. 87) IE: 39.25 (PROP. 6") SD so so PLAN VIEW - SCALE: 1"=10 SAWCUT 2' MIN. & REMOVE (TYP.) (SEE NOTE)-� EXISTING PA' 2" COMP. DEPTH CLASS "B" ACP 3" COMP. DEPTH ATB 6" COMP. DEPTH GRAVEL BORROW NOTE: THE SAWCUT SHALL BE A NEAT -LINE CUT MADE BY EITHER SAWCUTTING OR JACKHAMMERING A CONTINUOUS LINE. CLEAN. HEAT AND TACK EDGES WITH SEALER SS-1 AND SEAL WITH HOT ASPHALT CEMENT. PAVEMENT SHALL BE SAWCUT PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF FINAL ACP. SAWCUT DETAIL. NOT TO SCALE CURB NOTE ALL NEW CURBING SHALL BE PAINTED YELLOW AND EXTEND TO THE NORTH FOR 3RD AVE S. AND EXTEND EAST ALONG ENTIRE PROPERTY BOUNDARY ON DAYTON ST. IRRIGATION SYSTEM NOTE COORDINATE WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT FOR LOCATION AND DEPTH OF CITY IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN THE EXISTING FLOWER BEDS. TRENCH NOTE 3/4-SACK CDF SHALL BE REQUIRED ABOVE BEDDING FOR ALL TRENCH WORK ON DAYTON ST. AND 3RD AVE. CONNECTION NOTE SIZE, TYPES OF VALVES AND TEES AT THE FIRE LINE AND 2" DOMESTIC SERVICE CONNECTIONS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER STD. DETAIL E7.18 AND E7.19 FOR CITY OF EDMONDS. ANY CHANGES FROM THE STD. DETAIL MUST BE APPROVED BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS TELEPHONE GUY ANCHOR NOTE THE EXISTING TELEPHONE GUY ANCHOR SHOWN SHALL BE RELOCATED. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH THE TELEPHONE PURVEYOR AND THE CITY OF EDMONDS TO DETERMINE THE NEW LOCATION OF THE GUY ANCHOR. ,�gr, C,1M fMc#.42- ,DESIGN DP,-re:O Ohl /0V CALL 48 HOURS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-42-5555 DATE REVISIONS 5 12 04 PER CITY COMMENTS 8 19 04 PER CITY COMMENTS 11 /23/04 PER CITY COMMENTS 1 /21 /05 PER CITY COMMENTS 3 15 05 PER CITY COMMENTS 5 17 05 PER CITY COMMENTS 7/15/05 PER CITY COMMENTS LOCATE MANHOLE FRAME AND - COVER ON UPSTREAM SIDE OF MANHOLE AND TO THE SIDE OF CHANNEL. ALIGN ONE BOLT HOLE OVER LADDER POLYPROPYLENE NO. P-13938 MANHOLE STEPS. /1 PRECAST CONCRETE MANHOLE A _.�-- CHANNEL AS REQUIRED SHORT PIPE SECTION AT :MANHOLE (D.I. PIPE ONLY). -► A SLOPE SHOULDERS 3/8' PER FOOT • SECTI❑N A —A MANHOLE FRAME & COVER WITH "SEWERS" CAST ON COVER WITH 3" HIGH RAISED LETTERS (NON-SKID PATTERN) AS MANUFACTURED BY "EAST JORDAN IRON WORKS CO.." NO. 00370084. 3 HOLE LOCKING FRAME AND COVER. ONE (1) BOLT HOLE TO BE CENTERED OVER LADDER. �-a iz .:. GROUT BETWEEN POLYPROPYLENE MANHOLE---,,,,. STEPS NO. P-13938 LOCATED 0 12" O.C. STANDARD PLAN 5-120-004 GROUT LIFT HOLES INSIDE AND OUTSIDE POLYPROPYLENE LADD' (3' MAXIMUM LENGTH) !CUT OUT EXISTING PIPE, - 'MAKE SMOOTH INVERT & CHANNEL AFTER NEW LINE IS ACCEPTED. CAST IN PLACE CHANNE,'- & SHELF, 3000# PSI CONCRETE. FINISHED GRADE •4" x 24" PRECAST CONCRETE ADJUSTMENT" RINGS. 2 RINGS REQUIRED, 4 RINGS MAXIMUM PLASTER INSIDE AND OUTSIDE FACE WITH 1 /0 THICK GROUT. 48" TO 24" OFF —SET CONE PRECAST MANHOLE RUBBER GASKET SEALING ELEMENT 8' MINIMUM (I F ; ...Y;; :, ... ? ,.: ; _:.,,. :..• : I I SHORT PIPE SECTION AT MANHOLE (D.I. PIPE ONLY) - coma FLOW COMPACTED FOUNDATION-''-' GRAVEL 8' MINIMUM NOTESI UNDI; 1. PIPE CONNECTIONS TO MANHOLES SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: PVC PIPE" CAST OR GROUT A MANHOLE COUPLING INTO WALL. D.I. PIPE:. BELL AND SPIGOT JOINT OR FLEXIBLE COUPLING EITHER SHALL BE 12" MAXIMUM DISTANCE FROM MANHOLE WALL PVC AND D.I. PIPE, OPTIONAL: CORE THE MANHOLE -AND CONNECT SEWER PIPE WITH A WATER TIGHT FLEXIBLE RUBBER BOOT IN MANHOLE WALL, KOR-N-SEAL BOOT OR EQUAL 2. DROP OF GRADE THRU MANHOLE SHALL BE 0.10'. UNLESS OTHERWISE APPLICABLE. 3• PVC CONNECTIONS TO CONCRETE STRUCTURES SHALL HAVE A SAND COLLAR. IF KOR-N-SEAL IS USED, IT MUST BE CAST INTO THE MANHOLE STRUCTURE. TYPE 1 - SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE (SSMH #1) PER CITY OF EDMONDS STD. DETAIL E6.1 BY PLAN DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: PLAN CHECK BY: 01 /21 /04 MAD JMH JAK MAD MAD MAD MAD 1ST SUBMITTAL: 2ND SUBMITTAL: 3RD SUBMITTAL: 4th SUBMITTAL: 1 /21 /04 5/12/04 8/19/04 11 /23/04 MAD MAD MAD NOT TO SCALE URBED EARTH pq vJ SCALE: 1" = 10' .JUT..212005 Grp ULULDI4'IG DUARTMLNT UNOF EDMONDS 1 DATUM MLLW tr3 BENCHMARK TOP WESTERLY TIE BOLT ON FIRE HYDRANT. ELEVA11ON = 48.58 DATUM — MLLW .inR kin V ' X H:\PRQIECT RLEMC1NE\GBERG\dwg\GBERG-005.dwg, 7/15/200510:10:06 AM, Copyright 2005 Higa Burkholder Associates L 4, C.U�LD,6N'C- DEPARTMENT CiTY OF EDN,1010 5YREEY AIL_ (SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 2TN., RANGE 8 EAST, W.M. 2" DOMESTIC I SERVICE AGAV CFFtO N)zM,: !Z K)A*fZ� SEE DETAIL 01rCA4C �i,JplGl �i 'j�C UAtUG7 AXi M" � SEE THIS CTION— SHEET ,},.. "_{ AMI�t � NOTE THIS SHEET ke" t5l I sa IN-t`'t 4a pAq pWgz I 4" RE 7 gct-t�O�ucD 6z�1°Ae� • �?�4s� In���1 .114 gA-cl- e /DF FMb f Ach4U AfXN& /VOTED 4 I/ / EX. PARKING LOT �j —717 y q� a RE: 48.59 (FIELD SET) SS IE:.39.23 (EX. 8") IE: 39.25 (PROP 6") so PLAN VIEW SCALE: 1 =1U i a i � I i i •. li i �1 8 IS® 'I'JD1�11 Q1r11 i f.l�'d'3 .. COt�lNE0117ION NOTE ®PJ,I B C ME � 0 BA •(3 0CVA � SIZE, Ti1'cS 01` VALVES AND TEES AT THE FIRE IJNE AND 2" Location, -ram. II _—_ show n In sheet dv S I I DOMESTIC SERVICE CONNECTIONS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER I SID. DETAIL E7.16 AND E7.19 FOR CITY OF EDMONDS. ANY i CHANGES FROM THE STD. DETAIL MUST BE APPROVED BY THE XDCDA O ®CJA ri FDA lI Catioll CITY �Fy I:DMONDS .�w . �.. � ghown in 3E1eet :1 >fR'171G4T10IN LINE: DMA O.RP-DA CJ ?�MjA i dusatlon , �._ _...._ . _....._ shovin on sleet 3 I i CCSAtsprmved By:,�7--27, i li REVISIONS /�AMIE�i1C�►1[� S6�)R G®RPOIRIL#"�•1®�11 ' 2311 153rd Ave SE Snohomish, Wa 98290 Phone: 425-335-4645 Fax: 425-335-4766 APPROVING AGENCIES CUSTOMER: Chuck Greenberg City Of Edmonds ADDRESS: 3rd & Dayton, Edmonds Wash. PROJECT: Greenberg Mixed Use Building JOB NO. DRAWN BY: DATE SCALE DRAWING NO. N.A. Doug 12/22/2006 Varies 1 OF 1 I ' I DATE REVISIONS CITY OF EDMOND f 1 ! ENGINEERING DIVISION CALL 48 -1 OUR$ APP'ROV FOR CONSTRUCTION , I BEFOf�E Y`OU 0A�ai II a S 1-800-424-JJGJ CITY ENGINEER ( DATIt i CONC. BRICK SUPPORT FL X FL X 4' TEE MJ X MJ D.I. LUNG BODY COUPLING 13' MIN. I ( 3' MIN. UPLING MAIN MAIN d.PINGN WATER M L -- J MJ� $�FL X MJ RSGV (TYPICAL) 4' FL X MJ RSGV v � 940 STYLE CAST IRON i VALVE BOX AND EXTENSION ACP SURFACE / MATCH THICKNESS (3' MINIMUM) 6'- 1-1/4' CSBC BLIND FLANGE WITH 2' FIPT THREAD - 2' BRASS STREET ELLS 1- 3' BRASS NIPPLE MIPT 2' RSGV (F.I.P.T. X F.i.P.T.) ru 2' BRASS- MIPT x CTS PAC JOINT (IF COPPER) -MIPT x IPS PAC JOINT (IF POLY) WITH 2' HI-MOL POLY (160 PSI) A i 2' STAINLESS STEEL STIFFENER AND w 2' MIPT X IPS PAC JOINTS REQUIRED y (SEE WATER SERVICE STD DETAIL E-7.6.1) A at INSTALL 12' RIBBED PVC PIPE (ASTP1 D-3034) o I- Z WHEN USING CDF BACKFILL ONLY °W.. w M N a (TYP FOR ALL VALVES) U J to 0 nJ <E3 0- u Q x fy 0 _ N * E7 -� W J N Q Q M • • 0 J XQ u * � 0 c. . LU I--III-f-I-l—�f=i�fi—III—III—III—I. _ ONC. BRICK SUPPORT III -I I (_III I III —I (I —III -I I I I NUMBER OF BRICKS REQUIRED DEPENDS ON AMOUNT OF OVER EXCAVATION - C7. APPROVREV BY ISIONSll�TE STAN DAR D DETAIL FIRE LINE AND 2" DOMESTIC SERVICE CONNECTIONS (DETAILS) DA=07/12/05 SCALE NTS DWG NO. E7.18 1890-19910 Underground Dotes 1. Work to start at 8" pipe on 3`a Street: 2. Provide and install 2 8" N.R.S. gate valves. 3. Provide and install a 4" N.R.S. gate valve for fire main. 4. Provide and install a 2" N.R.S. gate valve for domestic. 5. Provide and install 4" ductile class 52 pipe and,fittings for fire main. 6. Provide and install a 4" 90 degree elbow under slab in sprinkler room. 7. All piping to be rodded fronLyalves into building. 8. All mechanical joint connections to be made witlTlega-lugs for one form of restraint. 9. All work from new valves into building to be installed and tested per NFPA & City of Edmonds. APPROVED FM, »EPA a Cergdc�re 9 raa of ' I Buehler 4-42 i � � I A Sp�et " ,j1• it li iiii � - RrECEIVED'i, DEC 2 7 2006 BUILDING DEPARTMENT t r' CITY OF EDL'IMS A A " 0 6 i0 20 SCALE: 1" = 10' ' LEJ""hTREETIFI DATUM MLLW . 0 BBNCHMAnK TOP WESTERLY TIE BOLT ON FIRE HYDRANT. ELEVATION = 48.58 -!Ji'lCONSTRUCT10111 PLA&I1413 FOR 3 RD .0 D A Y N PROJE%A"' T UTILITIES SIDEWALK IT Q RCVS DEC 2 7 2006 +"U"� �T4Mga ,M GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE "THE CURRENT -EDITION OF WSDOT'S STANDARD ` SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD, BRIDGE & MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION" AND STANDARD PLANS AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS, AND ANY REQUIREMENTS ESTABLISHED AT CITY - HEARINGS. . 2. ALL CONSTRUCTION IS SUBJECT .TO THE INSPECTION BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS AND THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY- THE CITY OF THEIR SCHEDULE IN SUFFICIENT TIME TO PERMIT INSPECTION PRIOR TO AND DURING THE WORK. 3. EXISTING UNDERGROUND FACILITIES HAVE BEEN SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASSISTING THE .CONTRACTOR IN LOCATING SAID FACILITIES IN THE FIELD. THE i CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CHECKING ACTUAL LOCATIONS IN THE FIELD AND CHECKING WITH APPROPRIATE AGENCIES THAT MAY HAVE UNDERGROUND FACILITIES WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO UNDERGROUND FACILITIES RESULTING FROM HIS OPERATIONS. 4. A COPY OF THESE APPROVED PLANS MUST BE ON THE JOB SITE WHENEVER CONSTRUCTION IS IN PROGRESS. i 5. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE. CONTRACTOR TO CLEAN, FLUSH, DISINFECT WHERE APPLICABLE AND OBTAIN SATISFACTORY APPROVAL FROM THE CITY OF EDMONDS REGARDING THE QUALITY AND INTEGRITY OF THE EXISTING STORM SEWER LINE, WRITTEN ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY OF THESE PROCEDURES MUST BE TRANSMITTED TO THE DESIGN ENGINEER. --6. APPROVED STORM SEWER MATERIALS ARE AS FOLLOWS: A. CONCRETE RUBBER GASKETED JOINTS. B. GALV. HELICAL ASPH. COATED TREATMENT 1 STEEL 16 GA. OR BETTER GASKETED. I C. HELICAL ALUMINUM 16 GA. GASKETEO. r I ' II CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE AND SCHEDULE 1. PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL THE ENGINEERING INSPECTION UNE (425-771-0220 EXT 1326) TO SCHEDULE AND ATTEND A PRE -CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE WITH THE CITY OF EDMONDS INSPECTOR. ISSUES TO BE j DISCUSSED WILL INCLUDE WATER QUALITY MONITORING AND THE DESIGNATION OF AN ON -CALL ICONTACT PERSON FOR EROSION -CONTROL EMERGENCIES. 2. ALL LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN HEREON HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED BY FIELD SURVEY OR OBTAINED FROM AVAILABLE RECORDS AND SHOULD THEREFORE BE CONSIDERED APPROXIMATE ONLY AND NOT NECESSARILY COMPLETE. IT IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE • CONTRACTOR TO INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF ALL UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN AND TO FURTHER DISCOVER AND AVOID ANY OTHER UTILITIES NOT SHOWN HEREON WHICH MAY AFFECTED BY THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS PLAN. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES LOCATION SERVICE (1-800-424-5555) AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE OWNER- OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE AND THE ENGINEER SHALL BE CONTACTED i . IMMEDIATELY IF CONFLICTS EXIST. I 3. INSTALL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES, SILT FENCES AND OTHER EROSION CONTROL FACILITIES AS DETAILED ON SHEET 3. 14. CLEAR AND GRUB SITE. STABILIZE DISTURBED AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE T E.S.C. GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET 4. MAINTAIN CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES TO PREVENT THE TRANSPORT OF SEDIMENT ONTO ADJACENT STREETS. IF SEDIMENT IS TRANSPORTED ONTO A PAVED SURFACE, THE SURFACE SHALL BE SWEPT AT THE END OF EACH DAY. 5. REVIEW T.E.S.C. NOTES AND DETAILS 6. INSTALL UTILITIES' AND STORM DRAINS. 7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP OFF -SITE STREETS CLEAN AT ALL TIMES BY SWEEPING. WASHING OF THESE STREETS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED WITHOUT PRIOR CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVAL 8, AFTER ALL UPSTREAM AREAS HAVE RECEIVED FINAL, PERMANENT STABILIZATION, CLEAN THE i STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. 9. REMOVE ALL REMAINING EROSION CONTROL FACILITIES UPON COMPLETE FINAL PERMANENT STABILIZATION. i . ...BENCHMARK TOP WESTERLY TIE BOLT ON FIRE HYDRI ELEV. = 48.5B DATUM - MLLW EX. 30' R/W 55:20 r , x I I i / EX. PARKING / LOT I x / 20' PROP STAGING AREA PER TEMP. j EASEMENT W/OWNER I K % I I i Q' 0 ) _ BELL ST MAIN ST YTON ST APLE ST CO) ER ST 104 ° Q i S r CITY a PARK VICINITY MAP' SCALE: 1" = 2,000' �, �',.s'�'!!��'S► 1�-1� tom::!' i �r..�"��� ° -- - -- ll a _._....a: -e _ TAX ACCOUNT NU ®ER 27032300405600 -- - - LEGAL .DESCRIPTION: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THIRD AND DAYTON STREETS, IN THE CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND BEING -IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, WLA a r NOR LONG THE EAST j4 / THENCE NORTH. A T BOUNDARY' LINE F SAID THIRD STREET, 60 SITE I I:®R ATIO a ° d ,Q d / THENCET,EASTERLY ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH BOUNDARY ZONE: BC MAX.* HEIGHT 30' a - a EX. EDGES a 4 UNE OF LANDS FORMERLY BELONGING TO EDA F. RUSSEU, 75 FEET, LOT COVERAGE: 100� I a• . ' -- OF DA STREET, WHICH I ::. a• °S ALK � N 'd � / � ...: -.. ...:r •, ... ' �•�'• • •., '� ' •,,:•: :.�' - v.•• ,; :'•,, ..; , ;., . . ,.• . IS WEST G, E T ALONG THE NORTH 0 DAYTON ° ' ° YTON T WH • `. .... •` •.. � ►'• ..•:• -....:�., . .�::.••• • '•...'.•• '•a•�.x' ••�••• STREET 75 FEET TO THE TOTAL SITE AREA: 4,500 SF 0.10331 AC ,• _ s •' POINT OF BEGINNING IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY,'. WASHINGTON. 2—X UNITS W/2 PARKING STALLS (ENCLOSED) • ° I �' . BUILDING FOOTPRINT: SF�� I EX. 30' PROVIDED LOT COVERAGE: 94% R/W PARKING LANE 1ST FLOOR AREA GROSS: NSF 2ND FLOOR AREA GROSS: �SF� ! 2l c 3RD FLOOR AREA GROSS: ,W58413F ��p 2� : .. PROVIDED LANDSCAPE: 86 SF SET SI % S ' SET TACK 5.00' NO.---..,�. ® T `STREET OF STREET INTERSECTION TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA: .4,414 SF AT POSTION OF PREVIOUSLY _ `RECORDED BRASS DISC , SURFACE MON. BASED ON — — — — 2' — — R.P. NAILS. N 89'59'15" _ Zone P_k� CornerFlag�..•._ SITE PLAN Setbacks Required Actual SCALE: 1 =10 ,- Front �-.- Sides Rear r I- r Other Baum BUIL - �. . Hei to s i0 20 zit ': rGz�T: SITE INVORzvzA'ION:.. : - I SITE PLAN NOTE SCALE: 1" = 10' �- ntsxnN zoNE Bc.Max HEIGHt 30' i SITE PLAN SHOWN IS A CONCEPTUAL REPFESEN.TATION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL GARAGE CORNER M!aVATION ABOVE PP . 4oT COYERAGE Ivor. - - . _ ..- -.a_ - . _ .. Y . . _ NORTH E ST CORNER 65�0 (.1) 8.7m j FLQpR PLAN. :.* - : • :';. NORTH WESTGOFa`IER gB.lm (s) 1.5m TOTAI:SITE AREA, A,5mm BF: m,1m331 AC - ..I �, ." REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR DETAILS ON THE � � STREET'. FILE SOUTH WEST CORNER 47.9m (3) IAm Z/UNITS W/ z PARKING STALLS ( ENCLOSED BUILDING LAYOUT. SOUTH EA$i CORNER 511m (� j 4bm PARKING SPACES RQ�: DATUM TOT t. 20230 BUILDING FOOTPRINT, 4P27 6N MLLW AVERAGE ELEVATION BOSS PROVIDED LOT COVERAGE 9dr.- '/ t MAX WILDING HEIGHT 30.00 let FLOOR AREA GROSS q2_9 MAX OWABLE ELEVATION 8058 FT 2nd FLOOR, AREA GROSS �' —�to �fb � `' PPROVE[� �Y P�. ANNINC, BENCHMARK NV TOP WESTERLY TIE BOLT ON FIRE HYDRANT. 3rd FLOOR AREA GROSS BF.-qp3 PARKING SPACES PROPQ ELEVATION = 48.58 ENTRY ELEVATION �vmra-.'T�•� P O IDED[�j�AgJRB�C�At�p1AE8�6 6F. / • DATUM —MLLW TOP OF 'THE -HIGHEST RIDGE 31130 �TOT�L i F'ERYlOt18. AR9A 3,914 . ' - GARAGE ELEVATION " s$r! PARKING SPACES REG'0; . .q ` •� MAXBARRIER PAR�Nt7 SPA ' !'�U1LDI '•!` �„� • ''8m5m 1'T - PARKING SPACES PROPOSED:— __... L t! PARKING CALCULATION A ... _ __ _ : _- -- --•- - .... __ _ ._._. ---- - --' _ .. - - - - _ c . I BARRIER fHF.F. PARKING SPACES - -_... — --- - -- - _.. S CITY EDMONDS BUILDING DEPARTMENT Arse ar - 'Stall'/ Redtllre Stalls' Provided 9talle'' - OF - ADS 6Uildln9 Via, Unlla 5F, Unll kar e. .Com IAcC i Total 8ld' Com .Acc Total Noveln (PER UNIT a m m: h _ m, m OTiloe S I/:50Usf — fD m Total 1,98E g m i 8 8• m I' 9. i ail . LANDSCAPE NOTES: -- (. A COMPLETE AND OPERABLE BELOW GRADE - AUTOMATIC IRRI&ATION SYSTEM WILL BE - PROVIDED fbR ALL PLANTING AREAS AS IDENTIFIED ON THE LANDSCAPE DRANING5. 2. ALL PLANTING AREA•` WILL RECEIVE A 2-INCH LAYER OF MEDIUM -FINE WOOD MULCH. 3 SOIL AMENDMENTS WILL BE BASED ON A SOIL ANALYSIS BY AN APPROVED TESTING LABORATORY. 4. PLANT MATERIAL COUNTS ARE FOR CITY USE ONLY. CONTRACTOR i5 RE5PON5IVLE FOR THEIR OWN COUNTS PER PLANTING PLAN SYMBOLS. 5. SEE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN FOR GRADING AND SPOT ELEVATIONS. I PI ANT S('HFDULF SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME/ COMMON SIZE REMARKS QUANTITY 1. KINNIKINNIK GROUND COVER 4" POTS 18" ON CENTER AS REQUIRED 2. ROCKERY - EXISTING 3. ACER/BOWHALL 2/-1/2" CAL.- B&B 4 4. PYRUS/CAPITOL 2/-1/2" CAL. -B&B 3 S. CITY PERINNIEL BEDS - - CITY 6. SIDWALKS - - MAINTAINED R 7. 3 AVE S - - 8. DAYTON/3RD ENTRANCE - 9. DAYTON STREET ENTRANCE 10. AGAPANTHUS AFRICANUS/LYLY- OF-THE-NILE 1-iGAL 18" ON CENTER AS REQUIRED 11. BERGENIA CRASSIFOLIEA/WINTER-BLOOMING BERGENIA -1-GAL 18" ON CENTER AS REQUIRED 12. CAMILLIA SANQUA'HANA JIMAN' 48"X48" 5 • ESPALIER 13. PODOCARPOS M. MATCHING MAKI/SHRUBBY YEW 4' 3 14. VINCA MINOR%PERIWINKLE 4" 18"-ON CENTER AS REQUIRED 15. TRACHASPERMUM JASMOIDES/STAR JASMINE 36"X36" ESPALIER 2 16. NANDINA DOMESTICA'WOODS DWARF' 18"-21" FULL FOLIAGE 11 17. TAXUS BACCATA'STRICTA' 3' B&B S 18. ESCALONIA "COMPACT' 21"-24" FULL FOLIAGE 6 19• ACANTHUS MOLLIS'BEARS 6 BREACH' 1-GAL FULL FOLIAGE 20. TREE GRATES 3' - 3 (Oki sGNvpU L5 0,&T I ON P-w, wSZ-1-15s,10- s vlr, INS C'o).Uniti1 WWA .� .. ..o_...... m _..,.. - -- nA - eoi.uM N W . . 13 7,.r ' � C•�I v l�l N g- I. s MIXC-1. V P. I .. I I A.nLt1Mr.1 ''l� ' P - ••FI*nwrrwV.rl�ww��..r-wl,fur:.:nin:wr�,w-,nnsn.���w�....iiw.w•1�.. �./i�:-1.�• ' ��_ `� . ••• �•� ..�.�_.•���, w��iur�.inr • Ir•..r•ww.i.r.rrr+....�.r-... Perennial Lawn & Garden Inc. P:O, Box 12421 ' ' sty .e Mill Creek, WA.,98082 13818 Estimate # 8/13/2904 814 Name I Address ' • Cheries Greenberg ' ' •126 - 3rdAve Saulb Edmonds, WA 98020. Contact:Jackllicks I 425 290.6545 / I l Project • .Item Description - • Qly Rate Tolai ` irrigation Hookup Includes backnow valve, bell valve quick coupler and , conlrollar. ' 9 p 1 950.00 950.00T Irrigation 4201110sprinktersystem t Bed Prep 30yards topsoil & compostinstalted In bad area's 4 '675.00 3,506.00T Plants Parplan , 30 $5.00 • 1,650,00T Streetaretes 4'x4''Treagtatesforstreetlrea's ' • 13,800:00 13,800.00T 5 I95.00 975.00T R S i ----- I I 50%a to start A remainder upon completion. 1 o Xe • Subtotal ' i$20,875.00 ' Sates Tax (8 9%) • � $1,857,88 ' --��- Total $22,732.88 t Ile ?F-ft- ' pLFir &Jti N G-S Sx •'-'�'���1-. '\'Mr•+ruraro�r - J W. j ' . 4. a . 4 , A ' I. \ I_ L4 / 7 I `� �1©i2T1•� ho �STREET FILE �..�� "Zk ALTO N S`CREE''G'. / 7 - FOURSEASONS LAN DSCANING PLANT SCHEDULE SITE JUL 21 AND NOTES UJ I� A. a s- a I t ~ I ' 16 SCALE 1" =10' �,� `Yl� `�i� �w � F3UILD1,''3G DEF'AfiifA►:PJ7 CITY OF EDNlONDS �o> Urn N // --- - • APPROVEq RY PLA ����lG� dLaworo I1WAV9str�t3:'4rtz Z/5LT �o A�e,5 GUfLMNG DES RTNIEN't C;T'Y OF EDMONILDS LANV% PE NOTES: a_ A CONP4E 'E AND OPEWLE BELOA OWDE AMMJA1,10 IRAW�ATON YSZEM� HILL B� v1v7 f ALL PLANfwd; AREAS AS IDENTIFIED ON THE LANDSCAPE OR MINDS. 2. ALL PLANTING AREA MILL ROME A 2 -INCT, LAYER OF mDIUMi-FINE POOP M CH. B. WIL AMI*NI MENTS MILL BE BASED CAN A SOIL A LY91 BY AN APP'R Q TESTINr LABORATORY.) 4. pLANr mAmRIAL COUNTS ARE FOR CITY USE ONLY. CONTRACTOR iS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OAN COUNTS PER PLANTINS PLAN SYMMS. S. SEE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN FOR 6RADINC ANC SLa& ELEVATIONS. PLANT SCHEDULE SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME/ -COMMON SIZE REMARKS QUANTITY L. KINNIKINNIK GROUND COVE. 4" POTS 18" ON CEN#-.R AS REQUIRED. 2. ROCKERY EXSNG- 3. ACERIBOWHALL , . 2/-r!1 2!-CA►L.-- I3&13 4.-_ 4. PYP-US/CAPlT0L 2 j-1/2rr CAL: -B&B .3 . a. CITY PERINNIEL SEDS. - CITY 6. SIDWALS MATnjW_E_ D 7. 3RD AVE S 8. • DAYTON,/3R3 ENTRAN�E w y. DAYTON STREET ENTkANCE .. r r - - 18. AGAPANTHUS AFRICANUS/LYLY r CIF-'TH E-N LE �. ,CAL 18" ON CENTER. AS REQUIRED 11* BERGENIA CRASSIFOLIBIWINTER-tLOOMING BERCENIA A -GAL 18" ON CENTER AS REQUIRED 12. +CAMILLIA SANQUA 'HANA .. ESPALIER _13. Fmt'-ONCENTER MATCHING A 1REQUIRED .S) RED 15, • RACHASPERMUM JASMOIDESISTAR JASMINE 36"X36rr ESPAtJER Z DWARF' 1811- 21" ULL FOLIAGE Ii 17. 'v4l L-.K &B 5 141, FSCA 01 IA " O P r Iu„ 4it ULL, FOLIAGE . 6 9. A A S MO LIB 'BEAMS . BREACH' .•-GAL FULL: FOLIAGE 61. 20, TREE CRATES 3' r 0 00LUM J a �E 0C' v 05 a ®E =8 U ui _ v-co „ sup D V. UIT JAil 0 3 2012 r Z .13 r Q Lo K.5 tA'eo 0 L0 U) r 4 ` zQ .Z.. • �'