The URL can be used to link to this page

16705 74TH PL W.PDF16705 74TH PL W \ ADDRESS: J UJ �L%.may TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE): COVENANTS(RECORDED)FOR: CRITICAL AREAS: _ DETERMINATION: []Conditional Waiver XS tudy Required ❑ Waiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S: DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED: EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR:_ PERMITS abr1/ PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED:57,g f , �o 5 SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED: /' R4,6 SEWER LID FEE $: LID #: SHORT PLAT FILE: LOT: BLOCK: SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: SIDE SEWER PERMITS) #: GEOTECH REPORT DATED: -/1 STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #: FOR LATEMP\DSTs\Forms\Street File Checklist.doc CITY OF EDMONDS TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS WORK SHEET Name of Proposed Project: ( Uskl')') &ai�M922ed- Owner/Applicant: Name e/07 20" Street/Mailing Address City State Zip Telephone: 41r-4Z?— 27 4 2 Applicant Contact Person: Phil aamhumer Name Street/Mailing Address City State Zip Telephone: 42.� " 42 z 7 -z,7 ' 2- Traffic Engineer who prepared the Traffic Impact Analysis: Firm Name 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Contact Name a. Street address (if known): 140 705 747� pl t b. Location: c. Specify existing land use: ya1 an - d. Specify proposed type and size of development: Telephone (Attach a vicinity map and site plan.) e. When will the project begin construction and when will it be completed? )r al f. Define proposed access locations: 74 T- P/ W g.. Define proposed sight distance at site egress locations: Page 1 • Dive Years After Opening LOS: With Project: Without Project: Note any assumptions/variations to standard analysis default values and justifications: 7. MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS State recommended measures and fees required to mitigate project specific traffic impacts. Traffic impact fee shall be calculated from the Edmonds Road Impact Fee Rate Study Table 4 (attached) and as identified in ECDC 18.82.120, except as otherwise provided for independent fee calculations in ECDC 18.82.130. Z SAENGR\Darrell\Cay Projeeu\nA Guidelines\TmflnVAnalyWork 9-04.doc Page 5 STANDARD DRAIIVAC1E DETENTION SYSTEM WORKSHEET � M ADDzt.Ess IMPERVIOUS AREA FINISHED i CALC BY: . PIIorrE: �t-2-S'—Z�� - 06 ro c DATE: *****DESIGN DATA*`* PIPE DIA PIPE LG DCTENTION PIPE LENGTH LOCKING LID `(TYPICAL) -4 MINIMUM 1 I UPPER CATCH BASIN ORIFICE C ASIUome D E O S ax OR =TOP OF ER ,.SY. TO IX SLOPE OUTL T OUTLET CONTROL MIN. ORIFICE CONTROL CATCH BASIN SYSTEM CROSS SECTION P 2'X2'X6'.DEEP, 4-6' SPALLS OR EQUAL FROM CONTROL CB 2'X 2'X 3' DEEP, 3/4' CRUSHED ROCK xtST1NG GRADE FROM CONTROL OUTLE vASHCD ROCK OUP IFLOv 7MIN 10' LONG. I—LS' PERF PIPE TO BE LEVEL PERFF PIPE V/ END CLAPS PRI�HTSMALL P ACEE HINEER WASHED URAl" ROCK Amup ourur RUNOFF SPREADER- TRENCH FOOTING DRAINS S ML,L NOT -BE CONNECTED TO DETENTION SYSTEM NOTES: 1. Call Engineering Division (771-0220) for a tightline and detention system inspection before backfilling and for final inspections- 2. Responsibility for operation and maintenance of drainage systems on private property is the responsibility of the property owner. Material accumulated in the.storage pipe Trust be flushed out and removed from the catch basins to allow proper operation. The outlet control orifice M111d he kent oven at all times. APPROVED BY DATE PLANNING DATA NAME: Cusra.- Q"•Ir 1-*whzS ,L+c. DATE: 5-/3,loi SITE ADDRESS: I (°-7o5- PLAN CHK#: O S -t& ) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 15 35 ° Ga/xsc 5 79 ° 25e° REDUCED SITE PLAN PROVIDED?: / No) MAP PAGE: 45-7 CORNER LOT: Yes / FLAG LOT: Yes /(N ZONING: 12S -70 CRITICAL AREAS DETERMINATION M. ;-<z3 - 5-3- Study Required: C,4kCZ4,'s rIeNT to 6enHr1^ L5' 5e*bc . to ii-ew S b.c wv4417 m4 -•n. ❑ Waiver PL' hr-a/A (�eetc.u.cq �. 1CP.�r �t;..r5d ,J,M. 13 Z•pS 6� (Sn'rM !tx✓ cI .�� uk h nev.-cr b„%f� ❑ Conditional Waiver SEPA DETERMINATION: ❑ Fee ❑ Checklist ❑ APO list w/ notarized form ❑ (Needed for 500 cubic yards of grading, Shoreline Area- site within 200 ft. of Puget Sound or Lake Ballinger) Exempt SETBACKS: Required Setbacks: , 1f C Street: 1 o' -)t Left Side: i 6 / Right Side: 1 C ' /39- Rear: Z 5-' Actual Setbacks: fo Street: 1& V" Left Side: Right Side: '73' Rear: TJ�" Street map checked for additional setback required? (Yes / No / DNA) >;,,k,, t,;� 10. 23y.7, ❑ DETACHED STRUCTURES: Aonc Sh"--+ -�— �-y •� i%.MH � I.�1 ROCKERIES: anty !at kerre� Sh«.., ir( 4'j Ar.+trT,, send sty r�u ht /i .Mil S��f ❑ FENCES/TRELLISES: llonc SHaw� J J S'3° G� BAY WINDOWS / PROJECTING MODULATION:LT _ • nm.�e - e� SyyvS n 1�.vsw.,, �s�•�"� 5+��•cs� � ,+• �,.. +:- as.�..., fsK:cv(. STAIRS / DECKS: ✓ 1 LM J��r _,,,..rr "dcrb•c. w/.7�,.wsr� :, r,.+ ,-b t.. 4r..A( -��a. iM'�il. a•i •, .� S,�pf /b,•,3{ L 3p A� °/� �% sH'v�.,C. PARKING: Required: ?i Actual: Z LOT AREA: i 9 9 39 n - 3 m.,.+ /sY,p,,,,• wc,+ LOT COVE . Calculations: I$3%,q �39 - `) . L -7. BUILDING HEIGHT: Datum Point: -SAn . S-wiz P-AA 1btr Datum Elevation: V- yw,�..r««+. Maximum Allowed: (3It. k4A Actual Height: 25 !.3!1.17) D.U. CREATED?: No Yes) SUBDIVISION: 5 - 30 - (v9 �-a-tys LEGAL NONCONFORMING LAND USE DETERMINATION ISSUED: Yes / o OTHER: V- 04 -(at, ac 2S —9 It,,. 5,> Rwt�du� c•.A,n..( -f*^+- ,4=t...- P�,,,,, a•a s,k o+M �+7 ,�,,...,�,,.,,,,,, a,: A.��-•k.„ 1. Plan Review Bv: NewB PPlanningDataForm. DOC 0 14th P AGE WEST (EXIST'G) WA1-�R METER Erb, N'AT 11A1 � AIM ?T. Zone z, Corner Flag`_ Setbacks Required Actual Front 110• pv r. ok- (-� 10 Sides io Z,3� . lo• /73' Rear Z5, Other z S' 5' HPioht 2-9' 2� �,PPROVED By PLANNING STREET FILE I RESUB DEC - 6 2005 BUILDING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDMONDS DQp UCUC_� � C z oy 9) m m o v z o� 1' P� .+ 'w Pr.p.ied Nnr H.Jm fun ow �+ CIGNfTBN110Yp OU CONSTUCTION SITE PLAN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN 167-7416 PLAY WEST A 1 1 O C l A T 1 1 N C. } N 1"�+ tttON113,WA1111NOTON 7D1RwnaAwool Bret' M."Sy 'p011 1{ifp71py1 S PLANNING DATA SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - Name:- ��-Z Date: Site Address: 6 C ` 70'� ' 7 4 w' Tax Parcel: Project Description: - Plan Check #: , i C , -013-7 Reduced Site Plan Provided: (YES / 0) Zoning: S -ZO Map Page: Corner Lot: (YES ,<f nO� Flag Lot: (YES / Critical Areas Determination #:G9A2 �c3 CsbSs ® Study Required.- ❑ Waiver SEPA Determination: Ed Exem pt ❑ Needed (for over 500 cubic .yards of grading) ❑ Fee ❑ Checklist ❑ APO List with notarized form Re u/red Setbacks Street: tb ' d-64 Side:- o. Side: 2 S 5 Rear: 2� Actual Setbacks Street: ,J/ 14 Side: !o Side: Rear: ❑ Detached Structures: ❑ Rockeries: ❑ Fences/Trellises: . ❑ Bay Windows/Projecting Modulation: ❑ Stairs/Deck: Bu"Id" Height Datum Point: P� 1A Datum Elevation: Maximum Height Allowed: Actual Height: Other Parking Required: ,� Parking Provided: Lot Area: N Maximum Lot Coverage: 35% Proposed: Lot Coverage Calculations: ADU Created: (YES / Subdivision: Legal Nonconforming Land Use Determination Issued: (YES Comments ' 1 O `r- -�� Plan Review By: Planning Dat3 Form 07-14-09 DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS PER INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE -SECTION R110 AT: 16705 74`h PL W Buildina Permit#: `b. 2008-0863 �p Occupancy established by this certificate: R3 Dwelling Units: 1 No. Stories: 2 Basement: Yes. Type:of;Construcbon VB Owner of building: City Bank The Single Family Residence at 16705 74T" PL W Edmonds, WA has been inspected and approved complying with the requirements of the 2003 edition of the International Residential Code as adopted, by the City�for the group and division of occupancy and the use for which the proposed occupancy is classified. Issued this 4T" day of December 1 2008 Chief Building Official By: Any change of occupancy or use requires a ffuilding permit and a new Certificate of Occupancy issued by the City of Edmonds Building Official. CITY OF EDMONDS GARY HAAKENSO i. ,. MAYOR -7 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771-0221 Website: www.d.edmonds.wa.us DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Inc. 1890 Planning e Building a Engineering September 7, 2005 Mr. James Thomas Architectural Design Associates 2221 Everett Ave, #210 Everett, WA 98201 RE: Plan Check #05-169, Custom ]Built Homes 16705 741h Pl W Driveway Slope ]Exceeding 14% Dear Mr. Thomas, This letter is being sent in response to your request to exceed the maximum allowed driveway slope of 14%, dated August 18, 2005. Review of the submitted letter and site plan indicate that site constraints prevent you from obtaining a 14% driveway slope without "burying" the basement & garage portion of the house. It is understood that adjustments to the house and driveway have already been made in order to reduce the driveway slope to 20% for a portion of the driveway and less than 14% for the remainder. For these reasons, it is found reasonable to allow a maximum driveway slope of 20% for the location noted on the site plan. All other areas of the driveway shall be less than 14%. Please call the Engineering Inspection line at 425-771-0220, ext. 1326, to schedule your driveway form inspection, prior to pour. If you have any questions regarding these requirements please feel free to contact Jeanie McConnell at 425-771-0220, ext. 1338. Sincerely, AVID K. GEIBERT, P.E. CITY ENGINEER Jm cc: Street file Plan check #05-169 Incorporated August 11, 1890 ° Sistar City - Hckinan Janan WATER & SEV STR 6" C.O. W/ CI LAMPNOLE COVER I INSPECTIONS R 2 \ 74th PL CE WEST S�M,' �`� a2�"'-°22° E H TITRANGE SP- \ s 124 / 14'-2" \ (EX15T'G) IUATER METER, vLT 6, ILT FENCE VERIFY LOC ION \ O� E ROCK T PORAR ONST UCTION OF NEW METED NTRANC EQU:ED /GA 1 co Ss N / N89.48 10 E 35.00 EXISTING \ _/ / _12" CONCfi i .�� STOCKPILE i 1 _ __ _` ��-_�--�--u - IN Cr L R ry \ L.283.1 A u �/ ,A DEP SEE NOTE 03 I I , I I EL. 2g2 25 B N89048' "E 6 .64 4RE CN D IN T.O.W. EL. 2895i TOP EL. 2115 c1` B.O.F. EL. 2165± ti > T.O.W. EL. 286.5± T.O.W. EL. 290.5 ul NV. 210.0 ^'� � 4) ( B.OF. EL. 211.0± ( 5-OF. EL. 286.� 7 T.O.W. I �o o EL. 214 I 218 R� aLR PROPOSED NEW RESIDENCE III re GARAGE SLAB 218.0 � \? 0 T.O.W tY� LOWER 5LA13 2185 282 283.5 MAIN FLOOR 2815 T.O.W. / �o I 'o UPPER FLOOR 2975 ^ i vJ EL. 2 6 ^,-lOgo_� � r- 5qo � _ - - -f � - - RIDGE _ 311.11 r �u „ T. O RIM 214.0 NEW + 4 DIA. 50LID 10% DRIVEWAY (1 °o� T.O.W. EL. 289.5- PVC PIPE (1°ro MIN. PERT. 26 0 TO --- ,emu T.O.W. EL. 286.5- P + B.O.F. EL. 286.0± SLOPE) FOR ALL `� 2140 I 1 zq 5-O.F. EL. 216.5± X I -q T.O.W. EL. 288.5 -+ G A E RAIN LINES �\ J I I T.O. T18W T .W + \ 28�2 5 B.OF. EL. 2765- -�• LANDSCAPE ROCK 2'-3' W. — — — — — — — � — WALL 2'-3' MAX. NIGH ? WALL,TY D 4u ` SOLI D# r j FROM RgOF 1 ` \ \ AREA OF 3 n DRAINS J 6'-011 28'-0" DISTURBANCE DETENTION PIPE 24 LONG I I� i r • • ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN A S S O C l A T E S I N C 1221 Eve rett Arm#l01 Lverett.Waalle at on 98701 lliZS"661 8-13-05 transmittal 8-15-05 To: City of Edmonds Permit Coordinator / Jeannie McConnell. P.E. 4ZS --171- OZZI RE: Plan Ceck # 05-169 16705 74`h PL W, Edmonds, WA. Dear Ms. McConnell - Please find this letter included which I failed to deliver yesterday to Teresa. Thanks for your assistance. Sincerely, James Thomas Architect / Partner Architectural Design Associates, Inc. T:425-259-0661 Fax 425-252-6911 Email: jthomas@arch-design.net 1-d 1169-292-92b UGH eBZ:6o SD EZ 2nH AR(CIH[I'I['IEcCTUIEBAIL DIERGN ASSOCIATES 2221 EVERETT AVE. #210, EVERETT, WA. 98201 425-259-0661 F:425-252-6911 ithomas(@arch-design.net 8-18-05 To: Jeannie McConnell, P.E. City of Edmonds Engineering Re: Plan check # 05-169 Phil Oppenheimer Custom Built Homes For construction at 16705 74'h Pl. W, Edmonds Dear Ms McConnell, This letter is written to explain the rationale for a driveway that slopes greater than the standard limit of 14 % . We have tried to graduate the approach to the driveway without excess cut and retaining wall by staying close to natural grade ( within 2') which at the central run of the driveway is about 20%. Less than this slope would create a deeper cut for the garage and require and even taller retaining wall which now already 10' tall. The home is designed to set into the hill such that the garage is bunkered into the hill in an effort to use the existing topography and site the home properly. As evidenced by the Variance required to get even this small building area, we did not have a lot of options to site a viable home. Height limit and amount of cut also figured into the design of this driveway. We have graduated the approaches to the 20% area and created a 5% turnaround at the garage. We feel this area of 20% slope is not unusual in this area and hope you can allow this driveway to be constructed as designed in this latest revision. Respectfully submitted, James Thomas, Architect Architectural Design Associates, Inc- 2-Cl 1169-292-92b UGH eel:so so EZ 2nu GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Parcel at 167XX, - 74th Place West Edmonds, Washington HWA Project No. 2004-086-21-200 Prepared for Tehnoff Company. Custom Homes L! 1'L�ii January.13, 2005 RECEIVED APR 2 9 2005 PERMIT COUNTER HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. . Geotechnical Engineering • H)plrogeology Geoenvirontnentccl Services • bisection t✓ J.esting cFREET FLE . IWA GEOSCIENCES INC. "Geotechnical Engincering - Hydrogcology - (;C'ocFlrironmen/a/ serrict's - lnshcction & 7i•sting "`4` • �january 13, 2005 HWA:Project No. 2004-086-21-200 Tenhoff Company Custom Homes P.O. Box 64 Mukilteo, WA 98275 Subject: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Parcel at 167XX - 74th Place West Edmonds, Washington Dear Mr. Tenhoff, This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation, undertaken for a proposed single-family residence you plan to construct on the lot at 167XX - 74th Place West in Edmonds, Washington (Figure 1). The southern portion of the lot is considered a Steep Slope Hazard Area, as defined in Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). The°purpose of this investigation is to determine the subsurface conditions in the vicinity of the proposed development and to develop recommendations for foundation support and site development consistent with ECDC requirements. Our work included a site reconnaissance, subsurface explorations and engineering analyses to develop our results and conclusions. PROJECT DESCRIPTION We understand that the planned residence will have footprint dimensions of approximately 50 feet east -west by 35 feet north -south (Figure 2). The western half of the house will have a basement/garage floor slab at approximate finished floor elevation of 275 feet. The eastern half of the structure steps up to main floor elevation 284 feet. As currently proposed, the house will be set back at least 25 feet from the top of the steep slope to the south and east. SITE DESCRIPTION AND OBSERVATIONS The site is located on the south side of 74th Place West, to the north of Meadowdale Beach Road. Signage along 74th Place West indicates it to be a private road adjacent to the subject property. The undeveloped property is currently vegetated with grasses, shrubs, and some trees. An existing sports court is situated in the western edgeof the property, straddling the property line and encroaching on the subject property. We understand that.the subject property was formerly part of the adjoining property to the west, but these two properties were sub- divided. Access to these two sites is along an easement from 74th Place West along the . 19730 - 64th Avenue W common property line. ; suite,20( The'southern portion of the property slopes down to the south at inclinations Lynnwood, WA Fait: 4 .www.hwege6 7. 4.1 January 13, 2005 HWA"Project No. 2004-086-21-200 ,varying'from about 2'% to 1 H:1 V (horizontal: vertical), or 44 percent to 100 percent. An old/existing pioneer trail appears to have been cut into the south -facing slope, leading southeast from the subject property toward the rear of the adjoining property to the south with municipal address 16719 - 74th Place West. The steepest portions of the existing slope extend both above and below this trail. The northwest region of the property is relatively flat, and the northeast region is characterized as a promontory, with a gently sloping rise to the east, a summit, and a moderately steep slope down to the east/southeast. The attached site plan (Figure 2), which was provided to us by you, includes partial topography for the site. A north -south profile drawn through the proposed residence and the slope to the south is shown in Figure 3. SUBSURFACE (EXPLORATIONS The site was explored by means of three boreholes (designated BH-1 through BH-3), extending to depths ranging from 26.5 feet to 50.75 feet below ground surface (BGS), at the approximate locations shown in Figure 2. A standpipe piezometer was installed in borehole 1311-1, in order to monitor the ground water level. The boreholes were drilled using a rubber - track -mounted drill rig, owned and operated by Davies Drilling, of Seattle, Washington, under subcontract to HWA,. The boreholes were logged by an HWA geotechnical engineer. Pertinent information, including soil description and engineering characteristics, stratigraphy, and ground water occurrence, are recorded on the attached soil logs, Figures 5 through 7. A legend of the terms and symbols used on the exploration logs is presented in Figure 4. The stratigraphic contacts shown on the logs and cross-section represent the approximate boundaries between soil types; actual transitions may be more gradual. It should be noted that the soil and ground water conditions depicted are only for the specific dates and locations reported and, therefore, are not necessarily representative of other locations and times:. it is anticipated that water conditions will vary depending on seasonal precipitation, local {subsurface conditions and other factors. =.v (LABORATORY TESTING Representative soil samples obtained from the subsurface explorations were returned to HWA's laboratory for further examination and testing. Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples to characterize certain properties of the on -site soils. Laboratory tests, as described below, included moisture content determination and grain size distribution. Moisture Content of Soil: The moisture content of selected soil samples (percent by dry mass) was determined in accordance with ASTM D 2216. The results are shown at the sampled intervals on the appropriate summary logs, Figures 5 through 7. . Particle Size Analysis of Soils: Selected samples were tested to determine the particle distribution of material in accordance with ASTM D422. The results are summarized on the attached Grain Size Distribution reports (Figures 8 through 10), which also provide 2004086-200 Geotech Letter.doc 2 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. January 13, 2005 HWA Project No. 2004-086-21-200 information regarding the classification of the samples and the moisture content at the time of testing. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The geologic map for the project area (Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Part of the Edmonds West Quandrangles, Department of the Interior, United Stated Geological Survey, by J:;>P.:Minard, 1983, USGS Map MF-1541) indicates that the subject property is underlain by Vashgri Advance Outwash. Locally, advance outwash typically consists of relatively permeableand cohesionless sand and gravels, which were deposited by meltwater flowing from an advancing glacier, and subsequently over -ridden by glacial ice. Our subsurface explorations encountered Advance Outwash, consisting of medium dense to very dense sand, below approximately 5 to 7 feet. The upper 5 to 7 feet consisted of loose sand, which we interpret as disturbed or weathered Advance Outwash. Boring BH-.1, which extended approximately 5 1 . feet BGS, encountered a very stiff, cohesionless silt lens at 36 feet BGS (sample S-1 OB). The subsequent sample at 40 feet BGS (sample S-11) encountered clean sand (Advance Outwash), indicating the silt lens is relatively thin (less than 4 feet thick). The sand above the silt lens at 35 feet (sample S-10A) was wet, suggesting some appreciable lateral extent to the silt lens and perched ground water over the silt. The ground water level was measured at 41 feet below existing ground surface in the piezometer in BH-1 on November 12, 2004, four days after the boring was completed. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL Our explorations encountered approximately 5 to 7 feet of loose sand overlying medium dense to very dense sand. Based on our investigation and subsequent slope stability analyses, we believe that the structure can be supported on spread footings, provided the footings are founded in the unweathered, medium dense to dense, advance outwash encountered approximately 5 to 7 feet below existing ground surface, as discussed below. The ECDC requirements for steep slope hazard areas and development in these areas are also discussed below as pertain to this project. Based on our calculations, we anticipate no reduch"'i' n stability if the required buffer of 50 feet is reduced to 10 feet. Accordingly, ,i when combined with the required building setback of 15 feet, the new residence will be required to be at least 25 feet from the top of the steep slope hazard area. EDMONDS REQUIREMENTS FOR STEEP SLOPES In this section, extracts from the ECDC relating to steep slopes are summarized in italics, with our responses pertaining to the subject property following, as appropriate.. 2004086-200 Geotech Letter.doc 3 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. January 13, 2005 HWAProject No. 2004-086-21-200 Steep Slope Hazard Area Ilie following section of the ECDC (20.15B.060.A.3.c) defines Steep Slope Hazard Areas: 'Steep slope hazard areas " means any ground that rises at an inclination of 40 percent or more within a vertical elevation change of at least 20 feet (a vertical rise of 10 feet or more for every 25 feet of horizontal distance). A slope is delineated by establishing its toe and top and measured by averaging the inclination over at least 20 feet of vertical relief. The southern portion of the property is classified as a steep slope, as the slope is approximately 35 feet in height over approximately 56 feet in length, resulting in an approximately 63 percent (average) slope. Setback and Buffer The following sections of the ECDC describe the required building setback and buffers for critical areas: Section 20.15B.080. C — Building Setback Lines. A building setback line of I5 feet is required from the edge of any buffer to prevent construction intrusions into the buffer. The setback shall be identified on the site plan, which is filed as an attachment to the notice on title required by ECDC 20.15B.160(B). Section 20.15B.110.A —Buffers. Buffers for geologically hazardous areas shall be 50 feet in width, they shall be maintained with their native vegetation, and where appropriate, be placed within a critical areas tract. This 50 foot buffer requirement may be reduced to 10 feet by.,the director or his/her designee upon review of critical areas study prepared pursuant to ECDC 20.15B.140 (A) by a licensed geotechnical engineer or geologist which clearly demonstrates that the proposed buffer alteration will have no adverse impact upon the site, the publ c or any private party. "Adverse impact" shall include but not be limited to a decrease;in site stability as defined in Chapter 19.05 ECDC. Such report shall be certified in ` a form suitable for filing with the Snohomish County recorder and generally comply with the -' provisions of this chapter as well as the geotechnical report requirements of Chapter 19.05 ECDC. Staff approval or disapproval of proposed buffer reductions shall be subject to appeal pursuant to the provisions of ECDC 20.105.010(A)(4). A steep slope exemption would allow the building to encroach into both the 10-foot steep slope buffer and the 15-foot building setback. Steep Slope Exemption. ECDC Section 20.15B.110 identifies five site criteria a site must have in order to qualify for the Steep Slope exemption. These site criteria are described as follows: 2004086-200 Geotech L.etter.doc 4 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. January 13, 2005 HWA Project No. 2004-086-21-200 l')_,,'The site. following the permitted activity will be stable. " 2) "The development will occur on steep slope areas that are mapped as one of the following deposits on the "Geological Map of the Edmonds East and Edmonds West Quadrangles ", by J.P. Minard: Till, Advance Outwash, and/or Olympia Gravel or on steep slope areas comprised of fill placed under engineered conditions on stable geological deposits of these same soils. " 3) `Any fills must be placed with a grading permit, that the fill grading be designed by a licensed professional engineer, native soils beneath the fill were prepared in accordance with the design, and that the specified compaction of the fill be verified throughout the entire fill. " 4) "None of the following conditions exist on the steep slope area: impermeable soils interbedded with granular soils, springs or groundwater seepage, significant visible evidence of groundwater seepage, previous landsliding or instability, or existing landslide deposits. " 5) "The thickness of organics, debris, weathered soils, colluvial soils, or soils exhibiting loose conditions on or adjacent to the steep slope may not exceed three feet. " Our deep boring (BH-1) encountered an interbed of very stiff silt between 36 and 40 feet, and evidence of perched ground water over the silt. The permeability of the silt is much lower than that.o.f the overlying sand. Additionally, 5 to 7 feet of loose weathered Advance Outwash was revealed in each of our borings. Because site criteria No's. 4 and 5 are not satisfied, we conclude that a steep slope exemption will not be allowed. Therefore, the house musttbe,sited with a 10-foot slope buffer and 15-foot building setback, unless a Critical Areas Variance is.obtained. The variance process is lengthy and requires a public hearing. We understand that the house footprint is currently proposed with a minimum 25-foot setback from the top of the steep slope. With this setback, our calculations indicate that the stability of the existing steep slope will not be affected by the house, provided the structure is founded on medium dense to dense, unweathered, advance outwash. Figure 11 presents the results of a static slope stability analysis for the current (existing) slope configuration, indicating an existing minimum factor of safety against sliding of 1.55. Figure 12 presents the results of a slope stability analysis for the proposed development, indicating a minimum factor of safety of 1.57. The very slight increase in the factor of safety is due to site grading (excavation) down to Elevation 284 feet between the house and the steep slope. The critical slip surface is a shallow slide, and the setback of the house is sufficient so as not to reduce the stability of this critical surface. The core of the slope is comprised of medium dense to dense granular materials and deep-seated slides are unlikely in such materials. 2004086-200 Geotech Lettendoc HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. January 13, 2005 HWA Project No. 2004-086-21-200 FOUNDATIONS Our, subsurface investigations revealed medium dense to dense, clean, sand with gravel (advance outwash) below approximately 5 to 7 feet below existing ground surface. The upper 5 to 7 feet consists of loose sand, which we interpret as weathered Advance Outwash. We'recommend the new structure bear in the medium dense to dense, unweathered, Advance Outwash. This will require footing excavations of up to 7 feet, which we understand will primarily be accommodated utilizing a daylighted basement/garage beneath the western half 7 of the structure. For foundations bearing in the unweathered advance outwash, we recommend using an allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 pounds per square foot (pso for spread footing foundation design. Wall footings should have a minimum width of 18 inches, and column footings should have a minimum width of 24 inches. Minimum footing widths may govern footing design. Footings should be founded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finished grade. Foundation subgrades for the new structure should be evaluated by an experienced geotechnical engineer to verify the presence of competent bearing soil and see that all loose and disturbed materials have been removed. In order to minimize impacts to the steep slope area, we recommend that no construction materials or stockpiled soils be placed within 15 feet of the top of the steep slope during construction. Additionally, construction equipment and machinery should be kept at lest 15 feet from the top of the steep slope. EXCAVATIONS Maintenance of safe working conditions, including temporary excavation stability, is the responsibility of the contractor. All excavations in excess of 4 feet in depth should be sloped in accordance with Part N of WAC (Washington Administrative Code) 296-155, or be shored. The weathered outwash classifies as Type C soil. Unsupported excavations in Type C soils must be inclined no steeper than 1'Y2H: IV (horizontal to vertical). Flatter slopes may be required where ground water seepage occurs; however, this is not anticipated based on the subsurface investigations. Temporary slopes should be protected from erosion, as necessary, by covering the cut face with well -anchored plastic sheets. Based on the soil conditions observed in our explorations, we anticipate that the on -site soils can be excavated with conventional equipment such as backhoes and loaders. F „ BASEMENT RETAINING WALLS For `this' -project, the proposed residential structure will include one or more basement walls that will need to act as a soil retaining wall system. We recommend a static -plus seismic equivalent^fluid density of 60 pounds_per cubic foot=(p:cf)_be=used-to-.determine_desi.gn lateral earth-pr_ rss ue es_against concrete basement/retaining walls• This assumes a level backfill against the wall. For sloping ground, not exceeding a maximum of gradient of 2H. I V (26 degrees), the equivalent fluid density should be increased by 1 pcf for each 1-degree increase in uphill inclination of backslope from horizontal. If surcharge loads such as parked 2004086-200 Geotech Letter.doc 6 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. January 13, 2005 HWA Project No. 2004-086-21-200 vehicles will exist above retaining walls., a--uniform-rectangular-surcharge-pressure of `80 pounds.per square=foot-should-be assumed; in-addition=fo=the-quivalent_fluid pressure noted above. Wind, earthquakes, and unbalanced earth loads will subject the walls to lateral forces, which may be resisted by a combination of sliding resistance of the footing base on the underlying soil, and by passive earth pressure against the buried portions of the wall and footing. For design purposes, an allowable coefficient of friction of 0.40 may be assumed between the base of the footing and compacted structural fill or native soils. The allowable passive earth pressure may be determined on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of 280 pcf. The recommended allowable passive earth pressure values include factors of safety of about 2.0 for static conditions and 1.5 for short-term transient conditions. It is to be recognized that any future grading plans should take into account the resistance being provided by the soil in front' 'of and restraining the wall. Therefore, removal of any soil from the area in front or below the wall should not be undertaken unless the wall is suitably braced to compensate for any_,losswof restraint. Similarly, any future grading which adds soil to the area above the wall needst:to`take into account the additional loading to the wall. ROCKERIES We understand that cuts may be used to terrace the backslope uphill and along the sides of the basement/garage excavation. We further understand a number of rockery walls are being considered for support of these cuts. It should be noted that rockeries are not considered structural retaining walls and, as such, provide protection primarily against surficial erosion of otherwise stable materials behind the wall. All rockeries should be developed in accordance with the City of Edmonds Design Criteria for Rockeries. According to the City of Edmonds, a retaining wall permit is not required for retaining walls-4 feet or less in height, provided the wall is not located in a Critical Area. We recommend limiting the maximum height of rockeries for this project to no higher than 4 feet. The gradient of the slope behind any rockery should not be steeper than 50%, or 2H:1 V. If, due to spatial constraints or other requirements, deeper cuts along the slope are necessary, rockeries will need to be designed by a professional engineer and permitted by the City.' HWA is available to provide assistance with rockery design, should this be required. Rock quality is an important factor in long-term rockery wall performance. Numerous rockery failures occur as a result of degradation of poor quality rocks from freeze -thaw and other weathering conditions. Visual assessment of rock quality is difficult, and the contractor should be responsible for verifying that the rocks used are sufficiently hard, sound, durable and relatively free from cracks, seams or other defects tending to reduce the resistance to weathering. Rocks should be placed so that each rock overlaps at least two rocks in the 2004086-200 Geotech Letter.doc HWA GEOSCIENCEs INC. ., Y January 13, 2005 HWA'Troject No. 2004-086-21-200 ,course`_ elow. The long axis of each rock should be placed perpendicular to the slope. The rock surfaces between individual courses should be relatively flat, and should never slope downward away from the wall. STRUCTURAL FILL MATERIALS AND COMPACTION For purposes of this report, material used to raise grades or material placed behind, under, or to support structures, is classified as structural fill. The existing site soils, which generally consist of clean to slightly silty sand, should be suitable for use as structural fill'in dry weather conditions, provided the soil is free of organics or other deleterious materials. If on -site soil is to be used as structural fill, the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content should be determined by performing a minimum of two Modified Proctor (ASTM D 1557) tests on representative on -site soil samples. If earthwork is to be performed during wet weather conditions, the. on -site soils will not be suitable and the recommendations of the Wet Weather Earthwork section of this report should be followed. If imported structural fill is to be used, it should consist of clean granular soils that are free from organic matter or other deleterious materials. Such materials should comprise particles of less than 4-inch maximum dimension, with less than 7 percent fines (material passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve), as specified for "Gravel Borrow" in Section 9 03.14(1) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications (WSDOT, 2004). The fine-grained portion of structural fill soils should be non -plastic. Imported backfill for walls should consist of clean, free -draining, granular soils that are free from organic matter or other deleterious materials. Such materials should comprise particles of less than 4-inch maximum dimension, with less than 5 percent fines, as specified for "GravelBackfill for Walls" in Section 9-03.12(2) of the Standard Specifications. The fine- grainedportion of structural fill soils should be non -plastic. 4 Compaction Structural fill soils should be moisture conditioned, placed in loose horizontal lifts less than 8-inches thick, and compacted to at least 95% of the maximum dry density determined using test method ASTM D1557 (Modified Proctor). Backfill within 3 feet of walls should be compacted with a hand operated vibratory plate compactor to at least 92% of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density, to avoid potential over -stressing of the wall. Wall backfill more than 3 feet away from the wall should be compacted to at least 95% of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density. Achievement of proper density of a compacted fill depends on the size and type of compaction equipment, the number of passes, thickness of the layer being compacted, and soil moisture -density properties. In areas where limited space restricts the use of heavy 2004086-200 Geotech Letter.doc HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. January 13, 2005 HWA Project No. 2004-086-21-200 equipment, smaller equipment can be used, but the soil must be placed in thin enough layers to achieve the required relative compaction. Generally, loosely compacted soils result from poor construction technique or improper moisture content. Soils with high fines contents are particularly susceptible to becoming too wet{'and coarse -grained materials easily become too dry for proper compaction. We recommend that HWA be retained to provide construction assistance and material testing. r:• S�dsMtlC CONSIDERATIONS EWe anticipate that the new structure will be designed in accordance with the 2003 International Building Code (IBC) standards. For seismic design, the site is considered Site Class D, as described in Section 1615.1 of the 2003 IBC. For the site location, the design maximum considered spectral response acceleration at short periods, SS, is 1.23g. The design maximum considered spectral response acceleration at 1 second period, SI, is 0.43g. Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon wherein loose, saturated, granular deposits temporarily lose strength and behave as a liquid in response to earthquake shaking. Based on the medium dense/dense nature of the outwash and the depressed ground water table, we consider the potential for seismic liquefaction on the site to be negligible. Hence, soil liquefaction is not considered to be an issue for this site. Seismic Slope Stability We analyzed the stability of the existing and proposed slope geometry along Cross Section A -A', as presented in Figures 11 and 12.. To assess the slope during an earthquake event, a pseudo -static slope stability analysis was performed. In the pseudo -static approach, the effects of an earthquake are modeled by applying, a constant horizontal acceleration to the potential slide mass. Because the ground motions during an actual earthquake are transient, the constant acceleration value assumed in the pseudo -static analysis is a fraction of the maximum acceleration that the site would experience during the design event. For,q _analyses, a design seismic event associated with a 10% probability of exceedance in 50 year's was selected. This corresponds to a recurrence interval of approximately 475 years. A horizontal peak ground acceleration (PGA) value of 0.30g was used for the on -site soils, based;on United States Geological Society (USGS) Earthquake Hazards Program recommendations for the site area. We used a constant horizontal acceleration equal to one- half of the. PGA, or 0.15g, for the pseudo -static analysis. Our analysis indicates that the minimum factor of safety associated with the design event is 1.15 for the existing geometry and 1.17 for the proposed geometry. Typically, a minimum factor of safety of the order of 1.1 during a seismic event is considered acceptable when evaluating seismic slope stability with the pseudo -static method. Additionally, our analyses 2004086-200 Geotech Letter.doc 9 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. January 13, 2005 HWA Project No. 2004-086-21-200 indicate that the critical sliding surface during an earthquake is a shallow surficial slide, located sufficiently far from the house as not to impact the structure, if sliding were to occur. SITE DRAINAGE Roof drains from the new residential structure should carry all runoff through a tightline to a storm drain or other appropriate outlet, and must not discharge on any part of the existing slope. Perimeter footing drains should be provided behind exterior foundation walls with their invert at or below the footing base level. Drainage pipe for footing drains should consist of a minimum 4-inch diameter, perforated, plastic pipe, appropriately sloped to drain. Bedding and backfill for the pipe should extend a minimum of one -pipe diameter around the pipe, and should consist of 3/8-inch minus, washed pea gravel. This gravel should be enveloped in filter fabric meeting the specifications of Section 9-33.2, Table 2, Class C, of the 2004 WSDOT Standard Specifications. Roof downspouts and footing drains should not be connected, in order to reduce the potential for clogging and flooding of the perimeter drains. ER&iON CONSIDERATIONS Erosion,'during construction can be minimized by careful grading practices, the appropriate use of silt fences and/or straw bales and other erosion control measures in accordance with the requirements of the City of Edmonds, and by implementing the recommendations in the Wet Weather Earthwork section of this report. Disturbed areas of the site should be mulched and seeded, and growth of vegetation should be encouraged as soon as possible after grading. Surface runoff and erosion control during construction should be the responsibility of the contractor. All collected water should be disposed of off -site in accordance with state and local stormwater discharge requirements. Permanent control of surface water should be incorporated in the final grading design. Water should not be allowed to pond immediately adjacent to foundations or paved areas. Grading measures, slope protection, ditching, sumps, dewatering, and other measures should be employed, as necessary, to permit proper completion of the work. Native soil or stockpiles of excavated native material should not remain exposed for more than 7 days during the drier months (May to end of October) and 2 days during the remaining part of the year. Stockpiles should be covered during periods of precipitation at any time of the year. WET WEATHER EARTHWORK On-site•,soils are not considered especially moisture sensitive, however, care should be taken !' when performing earthwork in wet weather or wet conditions in order to minimize potential I 2004086=200 Geotech L etter.doc10 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. 4 January 13, 2005 HWAProject No. 2004-086-21-200 ';for erosion, runoff, etc. General recommendations relative to earthwork performed in wet weather -':or in wet conditions are presented below. These recommendations should be incorporated into the contract specifications and should be required when earthwork must be performed in wet conditions. 1) Earthwork should be performed in small areas to minimize exposure to wet weather. Excavation or the removal of unsuitable soil should be followed promptly by the placement and compaction of clean structural fill. The size and type of construction equipment used may have to be limited to prevent soil disturbance. 2) Material used as structural fill should consist of clean granular soil with less than 5% passing the No. 200 sieve, based on wet sieving of the material fraction passing the'/ -inch sieve. The fine-grained portion of the structural fill soils should be non -plastic. These are additional restrictions on the structural fill materials described above. 3) The ground surface within the construction area should be graded to promote run- off of surface water and to prevent the ponding of water. 4) Excavation and placement of structural fill material should be monitored by someone experienced in wet weather earthwork to determine that the work is being accomplished in accordance with the project specifications and the recommendations contained herein. CONDITIONS AND 1LIMITATIONS We'fiave prepared this letter report for use by Tenhoff Company Custom Homes and their designated agents for use in the design of a single-family residence on. the site property. This report should be provided to prospective contractors for their bidding or estimating purposes, but conclusions and interpretations included in this letter report should not be construed as our warranty of the subsurface conditions. Experience has shown that soil and ground water conditions can vary significantly over small distances. Inconsistent conditions can occur between explorations and may not be detected by a geotechnical study. If, during future site operations, subsurface conditions are encountered which vary appreciably from those described herein, HWA should be notified for review of the recommendations of this letter report, and revision of such if necessary. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the appropriate design team personnel and incorporated into the project plans and specifications. It is also the owner's responsibility to see that the necessary steps are taken to verify that the contractor and subcontractors carry out these recommendations in the field. In 2004086-200 Geotech Letter.doc 11 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. January 13, 2005 HWA Project No. 2004-086-21-200 this regard, we recommend that HWA be retained to review the plans and specifications. We also recommend that HWA be retained to monitor the geotechnical aspects of construction. The scope of work did not include environmental assessments or evaluations regarding the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous substances in the soil, surface water, or ground water'at this site. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations and we cannot be responsible for the safety of personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if any of the recommended actions presented herein are considered unsafe. 0.0 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. EXPIRES 03/ 18 /U(o Bryan K. Hawkins, P.E. Geotedhnical Engineer Erik O.'t' dersen, P.E. Geotechiiical Engineer BKH:EOA:bkh " 'go 'Of LIN L.A. "Lorne" Balanko, P.E. Vice President 2004086-200 Geotech Letter.doc 12 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. January 13, 2005 HWA Project No. 2004-086-21-200 ENCLOSURES: Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 3. Figure 4. Figures 5 — 7. Figures 8 — 10. Figure 11. Figure 12. Vicinity Map Site and Exploration Plan Cross Section A -A' Legend of Terms and Symbols used on the Exploration Logs Logs of Explorations BH-1 through BH-3 Particle -Size Analysis of Soils Slope Stability Analysis — Existing Condition Slope Stability Analysis — Proposed Condition 20040867200 Geotech L.etter.doe 13 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. r�t ` Meadowdale County Park i 1 TdQ•.'rt!`. ! • . J a it :. ). FI 7.. �'''� f �� 1„J L^�,J "Pugef So untl t ' J i (DID�`�; 4i ia•L• 'C=..Y. q � M iA ` � � ,, = ! I 1 r I�I r t' �I I v , � �Y }tdk=ri F��1�`pr•�rr�, £,e tf f' �. '/�^ i \", .r.'� i I. � +' t • `r a'K�}i� , 'f��q�' � ��''� ,1i t g � /�� J.J r•.� \ � I;�•—�"""`—^'7 C ( � I ` �e 5y •.: #!:` J..;ityS'},.a°",tf)y ^tc tC;�. f\I�l p, �r.�t. ,' ••� Ii�'f .I-I�i1--'t a • MF'�ts it( F777dale e VIPROJECT SITE ; , .. eadowdale} `tr-- s,_ �� 1 +k ors` �� • •�.�1►J �I�4;1a IJ ;� � A , ,, 1s-ot- w� r_ , 'rsat sF-V Perrin.ville� �: �--� 7 =�' HWAGEaSMrrcEs INC t NOT TO SCALE VICINITY MAP DRAWN BY KS FIGURE NO. ACHEC Il 167XX 74TH PLACE GATE PROJECT NO. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON KED BY 1.5.04 1 2004-086 REV 00 KLS O •275.68 274.01 2.55 ', /280 nssiH _ ASPHALT' ` VLT I / . /x• 280.85 / x 285.,07 pi 1 ; \ 279.�4 F = 28954 71.64 S7."- 1 '. r ; ;'x 2f 9.16 N8 48'A 10" x 293.11':.; O i -28 7.36 135.00 ✓ , / i, x 270.26 278.5 x 274.47 p, - ! " ------------~------------ 64N8408E6. x 293 38 - 4 FCh�yE x 4' PAIL Ft'�rE x 69.6G BH-2 ; 90 / l -!;t p x jz PROPOSED RESIDENCE _x 2924. T / h^ x FOO PRINT Q / I 275.22 28C.84 FE=27! FF=2 x 286. 8 x 90.3 1 -lz/ � U �� i t GA . x cP i9 .43 m / - i � 1 268.69 I h \` \ �' t 90.06 ,x68.57 i -% X 262.65x275.31 280:59 x 285.131x 2y85 o i r' Q74.13 �� / 2 89 `A I� 9 9j0 zz °J a 2 68. 87' h �\-X-2-:�-1.87 --- / /i / /X 25 3.12 LIGHT a DOLE- c �' I cow Xr0.-24-270- N6'-s ! ' TOP OF /5C 253.50 NN 260 LIGHT - \ Q -`ice �1 S-7'9 POLE �' `Z3 x 267.67 � 6, 2 � � -�' '� - � -- / %% / x 254.64 260 _--X 252.16 x 224 - _ 250 x 248.25 -.. _ - �.9�1..`�2 250 / - . ,� 0- �� f X 248 22 _ _ _ x 245.18 0' 10' 20' 40' . BH-1 XZ3974-8 - x 242.66 SCALE: 1 "=20' -4� BOREHOLE DESIGNATION AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION A At CROSS SECTION DESIGNATION AND LOCATION BASE MAP PROVIDED BY: 167XX 74TH PLACE EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Sl 1 E AND EXPLORATION PLAN DRAWN BY 2- NECKED B7 DATE 1.4.05 PROJECT NO. 2004-086 290 ., - - --. -.-.- 3111? .................. ; SAND Z ............... ........................................LOOSE (WEATHERED ADVANCE OUTWASH) 4?__�_ 284 - 21 7� 280 25 . . . . . . . . . . MEDIUM DENSE TO . . . . . . . . . . . 14 DENSE SAND 18 ti?.............................. . . . . . . . 280 (ADVANCE OUTWASH) : \ \ 58 . w 270 w......................... ..... 31 .....:......................... \.. .... _ \.................:.......... w v 51 \LL 270 w Z O 39 _. ----- z O j 34 \ H \ . _.. Q w w 260 . . .. . . .......... . ... .. ... ..... ... .. .................................. . \ 2S.................. \. .... -..... 260 w 16 . \ 250 .....T:................... .... \ = 74......... .950+ 240.................................... ............................... 50+ ............... LEGEND _ 2 m 4 10 14 BASE MAP PROVIDED BY: H:11PROJECTS12004 PRO, BOREHOLE DESIGNATION BLOW COUNT WATER LEVEL READING - NOV. 12, 2004 INFERRED GEOLOGIC CONTACT PIEZOMETER SCREEN ZONE BOTTOM OF BORING HORIZONTAL SCALE:-- 1 "=10' 0' 5' .10' - 20' 0' 5' 10' 20' VERTICAL SCALE: 1 =10' CROSS SECTION A -A' 240 WN BY CKED BY RU 3 PROJECT NO. 1.4.05 2004-086 ■ , RELATIVE DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY VERSUS SPT N-VALUE COHESIONLESS SOILS COHESIVE SOILS Approximate Density N (blows/ft) Approximate Consistency N (blows/ft) Undrained Shear Relative Density(%) Strength (psf) Very Loose 0 to 4 0 - 15 Very Soft 0 to 2 <250 Loose 4 to 10 15 - 35 Soft , 2 to 4 250 - 500 Medium Dense 10 to 30 35 - 65 Medium Stiff 4 to 8 500 - 1000 Dense 30 to 50 65 - 85 Stiff 8 to 15 1000 - 2000 Very Dense over 50 85 - 100 Very Stiff 15 to 30 2000 4000 Hard over30 >4000 USCS SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP DESCRIPTIONS Gravel and GW Well -graded GRAVEL Coarse Clean Gravel .' Grained Gravelly Soils (little or no fines) u Q GP Poorly -graded GRAVEL Soils More than 50% of Coarse Gravel with oac GM Silty GRAVEL Fraction Retained Fines (appreciable on No. 4 Sieve amount of fines) GC Clayey GRAVEL Sand and Clean Sand SW Well -graded SAND More than Sandy Soils (litte or no fines) SP Poorly -graded SAND 50% Retained 50% or More on No. of Coarse Sand with SM Silly SAND 200 Sieve Fines (appreciable SC Clayey SAND Y r!:r,, r; y, . SIZ6 F ' . ractiPassing Fraction assng amount of fines) -- No. 4 Sieve ML SILT Fine Sill CL Lean CLAY Grained '• and Liquid limit Soils Less than 50% Gay _ - OL Organic SILT/Organic CLAY MH Elastic SILT 50% or More Silt Liquid Limit Passing and 50% or More CH Fat CLAY No. 200 Sieve Clay Size OH Organic SILT/Organic CLAY Highly Organic Solis PT PEAT COMPONENT DEFINITIONS COMPONENT SIZE RANGE Boulders Larger than 12 in Cobbles 3 Into 12 In Gravel 3 in to No 4 (4.5mm) Coarse gravel 31n to 3/4 in Fine gravel 3/4 In to No 4 (4.5mm) Sand No. 4 (4.5 mm) to No. 200 (0.074 mm) Coarse sand No. 4 (4.5 mm) to No. 10 (2.0 mm) Medium sand No. 10 (2.0 mm) to No. 40 (0.42 mm) Fine sand No.. 40 (0.42 mm) to No. 200 (0.074 mm) Silt and Clay Smaller than No. 200 (0.074mm) TEST SYMBOLS %F Percent Fines AL Atterberg Limits: PL = Plastic Limit LL = Liquid Limit CBR California Bearing Ratio CN Consolidation DO Dry Density (pcf) DS Direct Shear GS Grain Size Distribution K Permeability MD Moisture/Density Relationship (Proctor) MR Resilient Modulus PID Photolonization Device Reading PP Pocket Penetrometer Approx. Compressive Strength (tsf) SG Specific Gravity TC Tdaxial Compression TV Torvane Approx. Shear Strength (tsf) UC Unconfined Compression SAMPLE TYPE SYMBOLS ® 2.0" OD Split Spoon (SPT) (140lb. hammer with 30 in. drop) IShelby Tube 3-1/4" OD Split Spoon with Brass Rings OSmall Bag Sample Large Bag (Bulk) Sample Core Run Non-standard Penetration Test (3.0" OD split spoon) GROUNDWATER SYMBOLS Q Groundwater Level (measured at time of drilling) 1 Groundwater Level (measured in well or open hole after water level stabilized) COMPONENT PROPORTIONS PROPORTION RANGE DESCRIPTIVE TERMS < 5% Clean 5 - 12% Slightly (Clayey, Silty, Sandy) 12 - 30 % Clayey, Silty, Sandy, Gravelly 30-50% Very (Clayey, Silty, Sandy, Gravelly) Components are arranged In order of Increasing quantities. NOTES: Soil classifications presented on exploration logs are based on visual and laboratory observation. Soil descriptions are presented in the following general order. Density/consistency, color, modifier (if any) GROUP NAME, additions to group name (d any), moisture content. Proportion, gradation, and angularity of constituents, additional comments. (GEOLOGIC INTERPRETATION) Please refer to the discussion in the report text as well as the exploration logs for a more complete description of subsurface conditions. MOISTURE CONTENT DRY Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch. MOIST Damp but no visible water. WET Visible free water, usually soil is below water table. .LEGEND OF TERMS AND 167xx 74th Place SYMBOLS USED ON HWAGEOSCIENCES INC Edmonds, Washington EXPLORATION LOGS PROJECT NO.: 2004-086 FI RE: 4 LEGEND 2004086.GPJ 12/29/04 DRILLING COMPANY: Davies Drilling SURFACE ELEVATION: 288.50 t feet DATE STARTED: 11/8/2004 DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger DATE COMPLETED: 11/8/2004 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/rope and cathead LOGGED BY: B. Hawkins LOCATION: SE Comer of Proposed House - See Figure 2 rn g 0 J_ J O Z 0 �- m m O V) 7 0 1 5 1 10 1'15 1 20 1 30 W W v Z Standard Penetration Test to a) (140 lb. weight. 30" drop) } D y w U F- z rn w )_ ♦ Blows per foot n �� w i as o Ow N m DESCRIPTION U)) U)) a $ O a ai 0 °7 0 10 .20 30 40 50 :• 'SP,, Very loose,.dark brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist. Organiciand roots noted. OPSOIL Lodse,' brown, fine to medium SAND, moist. [WEATHERED OUTWASHI SP Medium dense, brown and gray, fine SAND with silt, moist. Oxidation stains noted. [ADVANCE OUTWASHI Some gravel noted. SP Medium dense/dense, gray, fine SAND, moist. Trace fine to coarse gravel noted. Driller noted likely driving on gravel at 15 feet resulting in artificially high blow count value. Some fractured gravel In S-7. Likely driving on gravel resulting in artificially high blow count value. I Medium dense, olive gray, fine SAND, moist. SP. _Sic i� 1 ■1--sm S 7 23 25 26 •.:....:....:....:....:....:....: 20 S-8 13-13-21.....:....:........:....:..�....;....;.... 25 NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated and therefore may not necessarily be Indicative of other times and/or locations. 130 0 20 40 60 80 100 Water Content (%) Plastic Limit ' 0 Liquid Limit Natural Water Content BORING: ` 167xx 74th Place BH- 1 HWAGEOSCIENCES INC Edmonds, Washington PAGE: , of z PROJECT NO.: 2004-086 FIGURE: 5 ■11 c, PZO 2004086.GPJ 1/5/05 DRILLING COMPANY: Davies Drilling SURFACE ELEVATION: DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger SAMPLING METHOD:- SPt w/rope and cathead LOCATION: SE Comer of Proposed House - See Figure 2 288.50 t feet DATE STARTED: 11/8/2004 DATE COMPLETED: 11/8/2004 LOGGED BY: B. Hawkins U) r, ,,.. ' d g ' ' ;} > m w c) z Standard Penetration Test V " a , t Enof (140 lb. weight, 30" drop) w w ¢ • Blows per foot w w ti o n. r o �' DESCRIPTION Cn ai a O a. rUn 0 10 uj O 30 S-9 8-12-13 20 30 40 50 c 30 35 —I IMV—Itl 1 55 1 60 Becoming wet at approximately 35 feet. ML Very stiff, gray, non -plastic SILT with fine sand, wet. SP Very dense, gray, fine to medium SAND, wet. Some heave noted at 50 feet • Total depth = 50.75 feet { Ground 'water encountered at approximately 35 feet during 7 'drilling. ;Ground water measured at 41 feet on November , ; =1212004. . I 10A 8-7-9 -10B GS XS-11 20-30-44 4 S-12 23-50/6" S-13 38-50/3" NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations. 45 1 0 20 40 60 80 100 60 Water Content (%) Plastic Limit 1 0 Liquid Limit Natural Water Content BORING: 1 167xx 74th Place BH- 1 HWAGEOSCIENCES INC Edmonds, Washington PAGE: 2 of 2 PZO 2004086.GPJ 1!5/05 PROJECT NO.: 2004-086 FIGURE7 5 DRILLING COMPANY: Davies Drilling SURFACE ELEVATION: 290.50 t feet DATE STARTED: 111812004 DRILLING METHOD: -Hollow Stem Auger DATE COMPLETED: 11/8/2004 SAMPLING METF913: SPT w/rope and cathead LOGGED BY: B. Hawkins LOCATION: NE,Corrier of Proposed House - See Figure 2 V m m w V Z w Standard Penetration Test U Y 2 � r ~¢ (140 lb. weight, 30" drop) w w Z •Blows per fool 0 m a w �� w D rn wm } ai Q s ¢ w—;° cc 1= w� 0,- rn � DESCRIPTION w rn o- B O O 0A 0 S-1 1-1-2 Very loose, dark brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist. SP A6rganIcs noted. OPSOIL Loose, yellow brown, slightly fine to coarse gravelly, fine to medium SAND with silt, moist. S-2 3-5-6 GS [WEATHERED OUTWASH] 5 S-3 2-4-4 GS S-4 6-9-12 GS SP Medium dense, olive gray, fine to medium SAND with silt, moist. [ADVANCE OUTWASH] 10 S-5 8-11-15 15 S-6 7-9-9 1 20 - 1 25 - 1 30 - SP Dense, brown gray, fine to medium SAND with silt, moist. S-7 8-14-17 S-8 10-18-21 Total depth = 26.5 feet. No ground water seepage observed during drilling. I NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date Indicated and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations. .... .................... ........... . • �....�.... �.... �....:.... �. it 0 20 40 60 80 Water Content (%) Plastic Limit a Liquid Limit Natural Water Content D 0 5 10 15 I— 25 1 --J `30 I 100 BORING: �•� 167xx 74th Place BH- 2 I HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. Edmonds, Washington PAGE:1 of 1 1 f PROJECT NO.: 2004-086 FIGURE: 6 BORING 2004086.GPJ 1/5/05 i R -1 DRILLING COMPANY: Davies Drilling SURFACE ELEVATION: 281.00 t feet DATE STARTED: 11/8/2004 DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger DATE COMPLETED: 11/8/2004 SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/rope and cathead LOGGED BY: B. Hawkins LOCATION: SW Comer of Proposed House - See Figure 2 rn m w Z w Penetration Test gStandard U 0- — N ) ¢ (140 lb. weight, 30" drop) w W e o ♦ Blows per foot x .+• �� D 0. Co y a s o w m o v}i D DESCRIPTION rn 'n Q. g O r, 0 10 20 30 40 0 Very loose, dark brown, silty, fine to medium SAND, moist. S-1 1-3-3 :• SM Organics noted. OPSOIL 4 Loose; brown, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND, moist. ,,,Trace Me gravel noted. S-2 4-4-3 (WEATHERED OUTWASHI 5 S-3 1-2 4 GS SP Medium dense, gray brown, fine to medium SAND with silt, moist. S-4 4-" (ADVANCE OUTWASHI 10 S-5 4-6-7 GS 15 9 S-6 7-12-15 20 i SP Medium dense to dense, gray, fine to medium SAND with S-7 10-16 22 silt, moist. 25 S-8 8-10-15 GS Total,depth = 26.5 feet. I No,gbund water seepage observed during drilling. 30 0 20 40 60 80 100 Water Content (%) Plastic Limit 10Liquid Limit Natural Water Content NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations. BORING: 1 167xx 74th Place BH- 3 HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. Edmonds, Washington PAGE: 1 of 1 PROJECT NO.: 2004-086 FIGURE: 7 -5 -10 1 -15 1 -20 1 -25 1 BORING 2004086.GPJ 1/5/05 9C 8C F— 7C W } 60 m W W 50 Z E F— 40 Z W C) CC 30 W a 20 10 0 GRAVEL SAND Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine SILT CLAY u.5. SIANDARD SIEVE SIZES `' <�-� 3/4" - - V•'j . VA u.uo 0.01 0.005 0.001 0.0005 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS SYMBOL SAMPLE DEPTH (ft) CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name % MC LL I PL pl Gravel Sand Fines % • BH- 1 S-3 5.0 - 6.5 (SP) Brown, poorly graded SAND with silt 7 0.5 9% 9.5 ■ BH- 1 S-5 10.0 - 11.5 (SP) Brown, poorly graded SAND with silt 4 0.1 94.5 5.4 ♦ BH- 1 S-10B 36.0 - 36.5 1 (ML) Brown, SILT 28 0.0 89.2 PARTICLE -SIZE ANALYSIS 167xx 74th Place OF SOILS HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. Edmonds, Washington METHOD ASTM D422 HWAGRSZ 2004086.GPJ /2/29/04 PROJECT NO.: 2004-086 FIGURE: 8 i_ W m W Z F_ Z W U W W a GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY Coarse Fine Coarse I Medium Fine U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES 3/4" 1-1/2" i 5/8- 3/8- #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 A��l��l�I�I�I�iiiH�IlNlll■■IIIII��I son P 0 i0 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001 0.0005 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS SYMBOL SAMPLE DEPTH (ft) CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name % MC LL PL PI Gravel Sand Fiones • BH- 2 S-2 2.5 - 4.0 (SP) Brown, poorly graded SAND with silt 6 7.3 87.2 5.5 ■ BH- 2 S-3 5.0 - 6.5 (SP) Brown, poorly graded SAND with silt 9 0.4 90.2 9.4 A BH- 2 S-4 7.5 - 9.0 (SP) Brown, poorly graded SAND with silt 8 0.0 91.2 8.8 PARTICLE -SIZE ANALYSIS 167xx 74th Place OF SOILS 1 HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. Edmonds, Washington METHOD ASTM D422 PROJECT NO.: 2004-086 FIGURE: 9 HWAGRSZ 2004086.GPJ 12/29/04 - PARTICLE -SIZE ANALYSIS 1 167xx 74th Place OF SOILS HMGEOSCIENCES INC Edmonds, Washington METHOD ASTM D422 HWAGRSZ 2004086.GPJ 12/29/04 PROJECT NO.: 2004-086 FIGURE: 10 Material Unit Wt C Phi Piezo Ru HWA GeoSciences Inc. - Lynnwood y nwood WA pcf psf deg _ .: -,., Surf. ~J Loose sand 100. 50 28 0 0 2004086 - Dense sand 120 50 36 `1 0 n : Grant Terholf - 167xx-74th LPL ;K 11/15/04 _ 290 290 280 — - - — GRANTi.GSL — 280 — 270 — F = 1.55 _ — — 270 260 — — 260 250 250 240 — — 240 ,. 230 _ — 230 220 — - - — 220 ' 210 — - - 210 0 i 50 100 150 IMGEOSCCUMS INC 167XX 74TH PLACE DRAWN BY SLOPE STABILrrYCHECKED BY ex FIGURE NO. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ANALYSIS ATE PROJECT NO. (EXISTING CONDITION) 1.5.05 2004-086 HAIPROJECTM004 J 4-086-21 167XX 74WESTXDWQGRANT-1.-0WG V 00 KL 1! OS Material Unit Wt C Phi Piezo Ru Pcf Ps deg . Surf. Footing Loose sand 1667 100 1000 50 50 28 0 0 Dense sand 120 , 50 36 0 1 0 .0 Hong West & Assoc. - Lynnwood WA 2004086 Grant Terhoff 167bc 74th PL 11/15/04 280 _ . —_ z z — 280 270 — g - - _- 270 260 - O 0 - - _ _ - Z a — 260 250 — _- - — 250 240 — _- - — 240 230 — _- t 230 0 50 100 150 DRAWN BY FIGURE N0. ' �' IMQ0SC1WaS INC .167XX 74TH PLACE SLOPE STABILITY HECKED 8Y 12 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ANALYSIS ATE PROJECT NO. (PROPOSED CONDITION) 1.5.05 2004-086 00 KL T 1!5/ ; Ali'_-: t'"V t�A■ I� ~ - - , 111616 City of Edmonds Permit No ' IFS =RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT Issue Date: 5 A. Address or Vicinity of Construction: Lo105' 77411 P) {N B. Type of Work (be specific): w C. Contractor: Ca S�v M 8A /` �� H o rH e s 44c. Contact: Ply "I D& ,, H e_:., e r • Mailing Address: 8I 0 7 2-v ti rH k,�.. 3 E S^ �� m- rlPhone: I%L S — 2 Z. - Z-7 4 2- State License #: GtA iA,4 9 3 Z Liability Insurarim Y e s Bond: $ 0-000 City Business License #: .t •k ' ' D. Building Permit # (if applicable): b 4:�-- 16 Side Sewer Permit # (if applicable): E. ❑ Commercial ❑ Subdivision ❑ City Project ❑ EUC (PUD, VERIZON, PSE, COMCAST, OVWSD) ❑ Multi -Family Single Family ❑ Other INSPECTOR: ��fm �-A #7 u1`Llnj F. PAVEMENT CUT: ❑ YES ' ❑ NO G. SIZE OF CUT X CONCRETE CUT: ❑ YES ❑ NO G. ❑ Mail Approved Permit ❑ Call for Pickup APPLICANT 1 READ AND SIGN INDEMNITY. Applicant understands by his/her signature to this application he/she holds 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 emplovees, including but not limited to the defense o_f any legal proceedings including defense costs and attorney fees by reason ofgranting this permit. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK. ESTIMATED RESTORATION FEES WILL BE HELD UNTIL THE FINAL STREET PATCH IS COMPLETED BY CITY FORCES, AT WHICH TIME A DEBIT OR CREDIT WILL BE PROCESSED FOR ISSUANCE,TO THE APPLICANT. ♦ Traffic control and public safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City Engineer. Every flagger must be trained as required by (WAC) 296-155-305 and must have certification verifying completion of the required training in their possession. ♦ Restoration is to be in accordance with City codes. All street -cut trench work shall be patched with asphalt or City - approved material prior to the end of the workday — NO EXCEPTIONS. ♦ Three sets of construction drawings of proposed work are required with the permit application. CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-424-5555) PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK I HAVE READ T E ABOVE STATEMENTS AND UNDERSTAND THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I MUST T N PY OF THE PERMIT AVAILABLE ON SITE AT ALL TIMES FOR INSPECTIONS Signature: Date: i' /a 3 /o � _ •ac or Agent) REQUIRED INSPECTIONS: W �, Call 425-771-0220, Ext. 1326 for a 24-hour voice -recorded inspection request line. FINAL APPROVAL OF PERMITTED WORK:. ,i�TP� DATE: i1�ZSl0� Inspector's Signature 1 WORK SHALL BEGIN PRIOR1 PERMIT ISSUANCE CADocuments and Settgs\Curtis\My D,/�cuments\Forms\Engnrng\ROWpermit_ doc • Revised 10/01/03 1 f DATE RECEIVED PERMIT EXPIRES CITY OF EDMONDS NUMBER =- CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION ooREss OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS 3 a-11 �J,. PLAT NAME/SUBDIVISION NO. LOT NO. LID NO. MAILINGADDRESS i LID FEE $ . C �' Q °p G 3 9- H SE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP TESCPApprovedof RW Required PermiStreet CITY ZIP TELEPHONE EXISTING + PROPOSED Inspection sel RequiredequiredPermit 0 �YiA�OTV11 S i 1 d Z��' s7 7,Z' Z% Lf 2,,,- Sidewalk REQUIRED DEDICATION ^� FT Underground Required I3 O NAME -,t METER SIZE LINE SIZE:, NO. OF FIxTURES Wkin required 0 PRV REQUIRED u 1-t F•t I T 2 a (_ �~ S ( b�+ 0 NO E Z ADDRESS _ V REMARKS W OWNER/CONTRACTOR RESP0 SIB�� FOR EROSION CONTROL/DRAINAGE z a C '1.2a Ir rE;ve:•re'�' Aug �11ELEP-ANE CITY - ZIP 0 It. 4. 0, • (D 3 NAME CBL# no 1 L4 -r S Y,,' +rfl VDATE_ ENGINEERING REVIEWED BY K ADDRESS I r� J U 2-0 A0 G {( CITY ZIP TELEPHONE FIRE REVIEWED BY DATE U • y•z2 2.`1uZ z a STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE q.H15,CKED Y VARIANCE OR CU *- SHORELINE OR ADTOYES SPECTION SEPA 'T •' 1 01 c 10 / V d i- too 'MREQ•D ErNO COMPLETED EXEMPT PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL NO. 91 CA# ZOp ZONE SIGN AREA HEIGHT O WAIVER O ALLOWED PROPOSED ALLOWED PROPOSED J STUDY EP ,/1/� I 57 • NEW RESIDENTIAL ca PLUMBING / MECH LOT COVERAGE REQUIRED SETBACKS (FT.) PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT.) ❑ COMMERCIAL COMPLIANCE ALLOWED PROPOSED FRONT SIDE REAR FRONT L/R SIDE REAR ❑ ADDITION OR ❑ CHANGE OF 5 %a Z I (t p z5_ Q �� / Z_ ❑ MIXED USE USE ❑REMODEL ❑ MULTIFAMILY ❑ SIGN PARKING REryO'D PROVIDED LOTAREA PLANNING REVIEWED BY DATE g ❑ REPAIR GRRRR(([(��DIN ❑ FENCE CYDS Z_ 2- ( 9 31 ( X FT.) REMARKS ❑ DEMOLISH ❑ TANK ❑ OTHER , r9 %/%W /Y[en.rhetdd; SPRINKLER ARAGE RETAINING WALL FIRE CARPORT 6Gdk�Rr ❑I FRE o ALARM a (TYPE OF USE, B INESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN: y u TYPE OF VS CTION C�QD� /Uj � OCCUPANT GROUP C NUMBER NUMBER OF O OF STORIES DWELLING UNITS SPECIAL I SPE TION CONSULTANT OCCUPANT DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DO REQUIRED YES � LOAD REMARKS O t ! z GEOTECH P RT j I STRUCTUR S BY: C Milll �l�R �( 46 VALUATION 1 Description FEE Description +`. FEE Plan Check 'r State Surcharge HEAT SOURCE LOTd LOPE % VESTED DATE 7L )4— Building Permit City Surcharge PLAN CHECK NO: Plumbing Base Fee `0 THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED, THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO Mechanical \ L- BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBIC £ DONMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE Grading -' t SEPARATE PERMISSION. Lu PERMITAPPLICATION: SEE ECDC 19.00,005(A)(5) Engr, Review PERMIT LIMIT: SEE ECDC 19.00.005(A)(6) SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION Engr. Inspection Irn •APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE, HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESSORS Fire Review Plan Chk. Deposit W IN INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND .,HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF i EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS Fife Insection p C% FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY Receipt # FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE s/S QDEEMED 0 TO MODIFY, WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENT OF ANY CITY ORDINANCE Landscape Insp. Total Amt. Due �i h_ NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAY THE CITY'S ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION.- 7, Recording Fee Receipt # I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION; THAT THE INFORMATION GIVEN IS CORRECT; AND THAT I AM THE OWNER, OR THE DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT OF APPLICATION APPROVAL THE OWNER. I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC• TION; AND IN DOING THE WORK CALL This application is not a permit until signed by the AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED Building Official or his/her Deputy: and Fees are paid, and IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO WORKMEN'S CO ENSATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18:27. FOR INSPECTION receipt is acknowledged in P 9 space provided. SIGNATU (OWNE OR AGANT): DATE SIGNED (425) FI S SIGNAT �2E DATE 1 2-1 n�• 771'0220 ATTENTION EXT.1333 REL E. Y lb TE % IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL f�� A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTI- FICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. USC109 I IBC110 / IRC110. ORIGINAL -FILE • YELLOW . ItXPEITOR 2x4 OR EQUAL POST @ 4' O.C. USE 5TAPLE5 OR WIRE RINGS ' It II II II&.0 II it II II lu u u uI i BURY BOTTOM of FABRIC MATERIAL IN 8" x 12"TRENCH 2" x 4" OR EQUjL P05T e 41 0 C. u5E STAPLES '' OR WIRE RINGS FILTER FABRIC ON i i 2" x 2" 14 GA. WIRE FABRIC 3/4" WASHED ROCK NEWLY GRADED OR I� D15TURBED SITE BURY BOTTOM OF FABRIC 10' CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS BY DEED A.F. NO. 2131659 NOTE: I ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH H.W.A. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT DATED JANUARY 13, 2005 \ NOTE: REDUCTION IN FRONT YARD 4" SETBACK ALLOWED @ 10'-0" 0% 1 \ VIA VARIANCE V-04-100 \ JANUARY 18, 2005 I \ PROPOSED RESIDENCE ELEVATIONS: GARAGE SLAB 218.0 Q) L \ LOWER SLAB 2785 � MAIN FLOOR 281B \ UPPER FLOOR 29i5 NEW 24" 0 G \ 0 w/�3/4" ORIF RIDGE 311.11 12 CONCRE' P'c�: NOTED V i'c �IIrIFEF� N ?ate: Y I?; 22 x, ��f�ftDIN6+ � ��hN/�•Gii �lFt`N S DATUM REFERENCE 65MH +124 INVERT ELEVATION PER CITY OF EDMONDS SANITARY SEWER A85UILT PLAN TO (E) SEWER VIA (E) STU50UT CONNECT ALL DOQNSPOUTSlow /--------------/ �. —` _ \_;:.:v'""'!!-�..�"�-----=---------__//�,�/ TO NEW DETENTION PIPE ---------------' /-- ---- -- /;�____________________--- \ `_- ---------- ---_--------_-_ --_J- \\'2so��.— — _Zone ��-S Corner Flag Set__ backs Re uired Actual `--403• SLOPE OVER 20' ELEVATION CHANGE SHOWN HATCHED �_ .�-..�— _--------------' Front �P"y- 4tt _ lay APPROVED I,,Y PLANNING �� —___ ___--_--_—__�/ °,,�•"` Sides qLM`�� ( G) Rear 2 5 5 5r' 1 t� 29/or MATERIAL IN 8"xl2" TRENCH II L EXPOSED SURFACES TO \ y^ vwP'� ah sir' �� •� Other sl�rs6xZ5 45 BE COVERED WITHIN 2 DAYS NOTES: N • S,(;r., OP t•P (P' Height 25' L5 11-111 A rl"In'N CnNrff11R0L OFENCE DETPAIrlyu�. 1. ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE h � S TE LAN 1 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT BY HWA# 2004-086-21-200 DATED 1-13-05 • - - - - NOT TO SCALE _..,.�_. .... '._ ...2. REDUCED O FRONT SETBACK PER VARIANCE CITY OF EDMOND FILE 0 V-04-100 11-1-2004 I-1 1- — - - - 3. STOCK PILE NOTE: ALL EXCAVATED OR OWNEWcoNTRgcroR IS RESPONSIBLE DISTURBED SO1L TO BE STOCKPILED 4 COVERED �v FOR EROSION ACCONTROLRIq ES w/VISQUEEN WIN 24 HOURS OF PLACEMENT, TYP. DAMAGE 25'R , �cj .d d, d•' 'd e •' e 251R I e ° e C ° a: , . de• a ,d MIN. EMPORARY CONSTRUCTION 4%6" QUAK T 5PALL6 ENTRANCE REQUIRED 1. INSTALLATION: THE REA of THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE CLEARED OF ALIT VEGETATION, ROOTS AND OTHER OBJECTIONABLE �1 'TERIAL, THE GRAVEL SHALL BE PLACED TO THE SPECIFIE6. DIMENSIONS. ANY DRAINAGE FACILITIES REQUIRED BECAU69 OF WASHING SHOULD BE CONSTRUCTED TO THE SPECIFICAT ONS IN THE PLAN. IF WASH RACKS ARE USED THEY 6HOULC BE INSTALLED TO THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. I 'I 2. AGGREGATE: 411 Td 6 CRUSHED BALLAST ROCK. 3. ENTRANCE D IMEN51 NS: THE AGGREGATE LAYER MUST BE AT LEAST 6 INCHES THICK: IT MUST EXTEND THE FULL WIDTH OF THE VEWXAR INGRESS AND EGRESS AREA. THE LENGTH OF THE EkfRANCE MUST BE AT LEAST 50 FEET LONG, 4, WASHING: IF CONDITIONS ON THE 517E ARE SUCH THAT M06T OF THE MUb 15 NOT REMOVED FROM VEHICLE TIRES BY CONTACT WITH THE GRAVEL, THEN THE TIRES MUST BE WASHED BEFORE VEHICLES ENTER A PUBLIC ROAD, WASH WATER MUST BE CARRIEbl, AWAY FROM THE ENTRANCE TO A SETTLING AREA TO REMOVE EDIMENT. A WASH RACK MAY ALSO BE USED To MAKE W� ZHIND CONVENIENT AND EFFECTIVE. 5. MAINTENANCE: *, ENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICU ILL PREVENT TRACKING OR FLOW OF MUD ONTO PUBLIC RI H. S-OF-WAY. THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING W�T2-INCH STONE, AS CONDITIONS DEMAND, AND REPAIR AND/bR CLEAN OUT ANY STRUCTURES USED TO TRAP SEDIMENT. A L MATERIALS SPILLED ONTO ROADWAY OR INTO STORM ; AINS MUST BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY. EL TEMPORARY G -L NOT TO SCALE Ad IF REQU'D• T%v_% 4_1 TT 4""" r'i"IT A A R HEIGHT LIMIT: EL 283 -15 JAMES THOMAS, ARCHITECT ® EL. 292.0 ` ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. #201 C EL. 289.00 2221 EVERETT AVENUE EVERETT, WASHINGTON 90201 © E (425) 259-0661 1,146.5 = 286.625 AVERAGE GRADE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER 4 CHRI5 COVINGTON + ' = .625 MAX. BUILDING HEI STRUCTURAL DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. NORTH STAR BUILDING CUT / FILL CALC.: # 2210 HEWITT AVENUE, SUITE 401 EVERETT, WA. 98201 CUT: < (425) 339-0293 GEOTECHNICAL: SEE CITY OF EDMONDS CALKCULATIONS. HWA GE05CIENCE5, INC. 523 C.Y. PER CITY OF EDMONDS ESTIMATE ` 19130 64th AVENUE WEST, SUITE. 0200 HAS BEEN REDUCED BY 60 C.Y. BY RAISING LYNNWOOD, WASHINGTON 98036 THE BUILDING HT.1'-0" WHICH RAISES THE (425) 714-0106 CUT HEIGHT BY 1'-0" X THE FOOTPRINT FAX (425)114-2114 1625 S.F. / 21 : 60.185 C.Y. SURVEYOR: NEW CUT AMOUNT : 523 - 60 : 463 C.Y. TRI-COUNTY LAND SURVEYING COMPANY 4610 200th STREET 5.UJ. 5UITE A FILL: LYNNWOOD, WASHINGTON 98036 FILL OVER DETENTION PIPE FROM CUT SOILS (425) 113-2926 CA CULATED ABOVE. FAX (425) 116-2850 SHEET INDEX: LOT AS 5HOUJN (APPROX.)19,9395.F. 5P-1 51TE PLAN SP-2 GRADING PLAN NoUSE FOOTPRINT 1,625 S.F. 5P-3 DRAINAGE PLAN DRIVEWAY 894 S.F. A -I ELEVATIONS COVERED PORCH / DECK 135 S.F. A-2 MAIN 4 UPPER FLOOR PLANS 51DEWALK4 STAIRS 128 S.F. A-3 BASEMENT 4 FOUNDATION PLANS TOTAL 21782 S.F. A-4 MAIN 4 UPPER FLOOR FRAMING PLAN A-5 ROOF FRAMING PLAN A-6 BUILDING SECTIONS A-1 GENERAL NOTES, SCHEDULES 4 DETAILS 6-1 STRUCTURAL NOTES, AND DETAILS 5-2 STRUCTURAL DETAIL5 "W"S !1 TT A"rl" 'T1 1 T A _ CONSTRUCTION V-B PROPERTY ADDRESS 167XX 14th PLACE WEST EDMONDS, WA. TAX PARCEL NUMBER: T T1 e-1 A T 7l1M, C1 /'•'I" TT1rTTl1AT LOT 1, SITIO, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 26 OF PLATS, PAGE 20, RECORDS OP SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON, EXCEPT THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 1, THENCE NORTH 8904558" EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT I, A DISTANCE OF 112.14 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 01°00'00" EAST A DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 62°53'20" EAST A DISTANCE OF 6224 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1, THENCE SOUTH 19°10123" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE A D15TANCE OF 155.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 1, THENCE NORTH 54046'01" WEST ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT I A DISTANCE OF 61DO FEET, THENCE NORTH 11°06'01" WEST, AND CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE A DISTANCE OF 10123 FEET TO THE POINT. OF BEGINNING, ALSO EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH 10 PEET CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS BY DEED RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 2131659. (ALSO KNOWN AS LOT WOF REVISED PLAT 'APPROVED BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS AND RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 2321593). SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. BUILDING COVERAGE LOT AS SHOWN (APPROX.)19,939 S.F. BUILDING COVERAGE 1,880 S.F. = 9•5 % BUILDING COVERAGE 191939 S.F. RESUB 24113 i DEC - 6 2005 13UILDING OF EDMO DNT S spwi. pyright 2005 /12 CITY cop,112 ,� /G7as- 721 6�, lVe mr, STREET FILE DATUM REFERENCE SSMW M24 INVERT ELEVATION PER CITY OF EDMONDS SANITARY SEWER A55UILT PLAN 2x4 OR EQUAL P05T @ 4' O.C. 211 x 4" OR EQUAL POST Q 4' O.C. U5E STAPLES OR WIRE RINGS FILTER FABRIC ON 2 x 2 14 GA. WIRE FABRIC 3/411 WASHED ROCK -\ NEWLY GRADED OR - D15TURBED 51TE FLOW BURP BOTTOM OF FABRIC MATERIAL IN 8 x12 TRENCH --NOT-TO-SCALE USE STAPLES OR WIRE RINGS BURP BOTTOM OF FABRIC MATERIAL IN 8" x 12" TRENCH 10' CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS BY DEED A.F. NO. 2131659 NOTE: ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH H.W.A. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT 1 DATED JANUARY 13, 2005 \ NOTE: REDUCTION IN FRONT YARD 4" C SETBACK ALLOWED @ 10'-0" \ VIA VARIANCE V-04-100 \ JANUARY 18, 2005 \ I PROPOSED RESIDENCE ELEVATIONS: \ GARAGE SLAB 216.0 L \ LOWER SLAB 218B MAIN FLOOR 281B UPPER FLOOR 2915 ' \ NEW 24" 0 D \ O w/3/4" ORIF RIDGE 311.11 12"CONCRE' 'O°' :�. is ti RIOTED ` �--- — 62° - 11y tr `�`11NEER19V- n S�) — — — — — — LIGHT Y 6 __- --- 9° \ ____ ---- — ---` — ___ `�---°�� POLE �-' -_ � _ _ _ •• ` --- CONNECT ALL DOWNSPOUTS --------------/ --- — — ,.�—�',-------------------- _� /� TO NEW DETENTION PIPE _ _ _ _ _ _ _ l'iTl"11�JiN�T► I��N^y 260 _----------- Pt��Ns ----__-_ _-- ---_ ' '------------ ----------------- - --- ------ - _ \--- ----------------- '\ fir• ---- _� ,/ // /-�� - -� / \\• ,Sl —2so---- ------------ ;�'.',��`�;`�� 2so��__ — _—done ICorner Flag Setbacks Re uired Actual TO (E) SEWER VIA (E) STUBOUT In o M! �(54. e e 25'R a a a • • aa• 6" MIN. 4"4o" QUARRY SPALLS IPORARY C"'ONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE REQUIRED 1. INSTALLATION: THE AREA OF THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE CLEARED OF ALL VEGETATION, ROOTS AND OTHER OBJECTIONABLE MATERIAL. THE GRAVEL SHALL BE PLACED TO THE SPECIFIED DIMENSIONS. ANY DRAINAGE FACILITIES REQUIRED BECAUSE OF WASHING SHOULD BE CONSTRUCTED TO THE SPECIFICATIONS IN THE PLAN. IF WASH RACKS ARE USED THEY SHOULD BE INSTALLED TO THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. 2. AGGREGATE: 4" TO 6" CRUSHED BALLAST ROCK. 3. ENTRANCE DIMENSIONS: THE AGGREGATE LAYER MUST BE AT LEAST 6 INCHES THICK. IT MUST EXTEND THE FULL WIDTH OF THE VEHICULAR INGRESS AND EGRE65 AREA. THE LENGTH OF THE ENTRANCE MUST BE AT LEAST 50 FEET LONG. 4. WASHING: IF CONDITIONS ON THE SITE ARE SUCH TI AT M05T OF THE MUD 15 NOT REMOVED FROM VEHICLE TIRES BY CONTACT WITH THE GRAVEL, THEN THE TIRES MUST BE WASHED BEFORE VEHICLES ENTER A PUBLIC ROAD, WASH WATER MUST BE CARRIED AWAY FROM THE ENTRANCE TO A SETTLING AREA TO REMOVE 5ED IMENT. A WASH RACK MAY ALSO BE USED TO MAKE WASHING CONVENIENT AND EFFECTIVE. 5. MAINTENANCE: THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT TRACKING OR FLOW OF MUD ONTO PUBLIC RIGHTS -OF -WAY. TH15 MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRE851NG WITH 2- INCH STONE, AS CONDITIONS DEMAND, AND REPAIR AND/OR CLEAN OUT ANY STRUCTURES USED TO TRAP SEDIMENT. ALL MATERIALS SPILLED ONTO ROADWAY OR INTO STORM DRAINS MUST BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY. NOT TO SCALE IF REQU'D. 40% SLOPE OVER 20' ELEVATION CHANGE SHOWN WATCHED O t runt w V - t�APFRK,' 10, i ? ! G :41 I.k �J n-+I..R�IYN1N�7 y./1�� jAA � Sides IQ Rear �Q -�7 91or ALL EXPOSED SURFACES TO y^`'`��`�. :�" r. stp� (t'G) BE COVERED \' P Other � s►�r s�«� WITHIN 2 DAYS NOTES: . rJ ° s S op t,P oh P'`°) T <_i.ht 2� 2 OWNER/CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROL AND DAMAGE 1. ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT BY HWA# 2004-086-21-200 DATED 1-13-05 • SITIE PLAN lit 2. REDUCED 10' FRONT YARD SETBACK PER VARIANCE CITY OF EDMOND FILE 0 V-04-100 II-1-2004 3. STOCK PILE NOTE: ALL EXCAVATED OR 20' U14 01___� DISTURBED SOIL TO BE STOCKPILED 4 COVERED w/VISQUEEN w/IN 24 HOURS OF PLACEMENT, TYP. ARCHITECT JAMES THOMAS, ARCHITECT ARCHITECTURAL DE51GN A550CIATE5, INC. 2221 EVERETT AVENUE #201 EVERETT, WASHINGTON 95201 (425) 259-0661 STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CHR15 COVINGTON STRUCTURAL DE51GN A55OCIATE5, INC. NORTH STAR BUILDING 2210 HEWITT AVENUE, SUITE #401 EVERETT, WA. 98201 (425)339-0293 GEOTECHNICAL: HWA GE05CIENCE5, INC. 19730 &4th AVENUE WEST, SUITE 1200 LYNNWOOD, WASHINGTON 9803( (425)114-0106 FAX (425)114-2114 SURVEYOR: TRI-COUNTY LAND SURVEYING COMPANY 4610 200th STREET S.W. SUITE A LYNNWOOD, WASHINGTON 98036 (425) 713-2926 FAX (425) 176-2850 S EET INDEX: 5P-1 51TE PLAN SP-2 GRADING PLAN 5P-3 DRAINAGE PLAN A-1 ELEVATIONS A-2 MAIN 4 UPPER FLOOR PLANS A-3 BASEMENT 4 FOUNDATION PLANS A-4 MAIN 4 UPPER FLOOR FRAMING PLAN A-5 ROOF FRAMING PLAN A-6 BUILDING SECTIONS A-1 GENERAL NOTES, SCHEDULES 4 DETAILS 5-1 STRUCTURAL NOTES, AND DETAILS 5-2 STRUCTURAL DETAIL5 HEIGHT LIMIT: EL. 283.15 EL 292.E �C EL. 289.0 n Elr3Sl�l�-� .5 "=2&o.621J AVERAGEGRADE MAX. BUILDING HE C1TT/F11,1,CA1,C-- uu1 5EE CITY OF EDMONDS CALKCULATIONS. 523 C.Y. PER CITY OF EDMONDS ESTIMATE HAS BEEN REDUCED BY 60 C.Y. BY RAISING THE BUILDING HT. 1'-0' WHICH RA15E5 THE CUT HEIGHT BY 1-0 X THE FOOTPRINT 1625 S.F. / 21 : 60.185 G.Y. NEW CUT AMOUNT : 523 - 60 : 463 G.Y. FILL: FILL OVER DETENTION PIPE FROM CUT SOILS C4CUL,4TED ABOVE. LOT A5 SHOWN (APPROX.)19,939 S.F. CONSTRU gC ,�TION,_, V-B PRnPF.RTV AD"nRF..qC Iro]XX 14th PLACE WEST EDMONDS, WA. TAX PARCEL NUMBER: LOT 1, SITIO, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 26 OF PLATS, PAGE eta, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON, EXCEPT THAT POR11ON DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 1, THENCE NORTH 8904558" EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT I A DISTANCE OF 112.74 FEET, THENCE SOUTW 07°00'00" EAST A D15TANCE OF 55.00 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 6 2°53'20" EAST A DISTANCE OF II FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1, THENCE SOUTH 7113' WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE A DISTANCE OF 155.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 1, THENCE NORTH 54046'07" WEST ALONG THE WWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 A DISTANCE OF 67.00 FEET, THENCE NORTH 17011 WEST, AND CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE A D15TANCE OF 16123 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, AL50 EXCEPT THAT -PORTION OF THE NORTH 10 FEET CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS BY DEED RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 2131659. (ALS'd KNOWN AS LOT 1A OF REVISED PLAT 'APPROVED BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS AND RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 2321593). SIT4ATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. BUILDING COVERAGE LOT A5 SHOWN (APPROX.) 19,939 S.F. R SUB TOTAL 1,888 S.F. DEC - 6 2005 BUILDING COVERAGE �OOITY OF EDMO DS T 1,888 S.F. - 9.5 % BUILDING COVERAGE •,19,9395.F. DIR �I RESUB DEC - 6 2005 BUILDING DEPAR'MIENT cITY OF EDMONDS VERT .BARS 166 12 O.C. HORIZ. BARS 166 12 O.C. (TYP) 04612" O.C. E.W. �T - u_ _ I M a SITE RETAINING WALL 1/2"=1'-0." MAXIMUM DRIVEWAY SLOPE ALLOWED 140/0 19KG0T all its'• MID f(s 'ZO?. am t3s - /�S NOTED t, ,.ry1�C�,N��.ERINCP� Date: n?z BIGHT -OF -WAY CONSTRUCTION PERM 1IT AND INSPECTION REQUIRED NOTE: LOCATE EX15T'G C5, CLEAN 2 4 CLEAR OF EXIST'G ANY DEBR15 EXTEND AS REQUIRED e NEW DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE PER CITY OF EDMONDS STIDE 10' CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS SY DEED AP. No. 2131659 �0 TEMPORARY CbMSTRUCTION DATUM REFERENCE SSMH 10124 INVERT ELEVATION PER CITY OF EDMOND5 SANITARY SEWER A55UILT PLAN .5 NOTE: NOTE: REDUCTION IN FRONT YARD ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY SETBACK ALLOWED @ 10'-0" WITH H.W.A. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT VIA VARIANCE V-04-100 DATED JANUARY 139 2005 JANUARY 189 2005 -- ELEVATION Z68 CONNECT TO (E) SEWER VIA (E) STUSOUT 6" C.O. W/ CI LAMPHOLE COVER NCE RE UIRED \ 7uh WE 4thS6M H II ARMORED ENTRANCE 2 5\ SECURE SILT FENCk \ \ INTO DRIVE ROCK \ Yr�Y� 11I-loll 03 N 00 1 � 1 \ / / N89048'10"E 35.00 • , • • -- .. •• , 1 X1Go: C 1 �m \ �roCKPILE 1 I L 263 A ~ �" " ~ 1 I EL. 292.25 B p P f 1 \ �%EE NOTE #3I N89048'0 "E 0.64 1 i IL/ ' \�. I = u �e° T.O.W.1=L. 289.5 } \� 1 1� d c� 5.O.F. EL. 216.5- 4 NCH D IN T.O.W. EL. 290 5 + FEN TOP EL. 271.5 I 1 ` _2 2B T.O.W. EL. 2865 0IV 2�0.0 ry -.� B.O.F. EL. 211.0 P.O . EL. 286.0-1 % / / (N) CB RIM EL. 268.0 • I ' NV' N INV EL 267 o A, -` "�Z 1 T 0 p� 4)R ONC. RETAIN C AL ON 1� 1b I 2 2-18 PROPOSED NEW RESIDENCE I / / / o _ EL. 2�4 6R1 nz / / / / / +\ cn s GARAGE 5LA5 218.0 IM EL 1.5 d n ti�„N g T.o.W T.o.W LOWER SLAP 215.5 �� / / � / / / / / / N (N) 5 R / 1 \� �`ti \ 282 283.5 MAIN FLOOR 2815 / INV. EL. 26B.5 0 / / I T.o.W. 15.01=. 5.o.F. �a UPPER FLOOR 291.5 / EL. 2 6 ti I0� � u� 2180 q 211 o r RIDGE 311.11 NOTE: SILT F NCE TOP OF 26 1 p T.O.W. EL. 289.5± /'� / SLOPE TO B DUG BY HAND PER / -� T. 0 RIM 27 0 Iv q y o 5,0 . EL. 286.0± _ / 1 GEOTECH PORT „ Z 10y DRIVEWA . �u T.O.W. EL. 286.5- X S�. 4 DIA. SOLI PVC PIPE (151. MIN. VERT. 26 .0 T.O. 1 zn B.o . EL. 276.5± GA B SLOPE) FOR ALL ;OF 12�4 2 T.o. r.o.�J T!Q.W T.O.W. EL. 288.5 + " IN LINES _ 21�. 2�8 28�.5 � - P.OF. EL. 2-(6.5- -�• LANDSCAPE ROCK WL,TY�. / .P I I � AL \ 3N4124 / 14'-211 cb N 53 -0 (EXIG 5T' ) DATER METER VLT / 0 cA N c9 VERIFY LOC�TION \ / t' I O OF NEW METED I N /GA / ss J -3 MAX. HIGH � _ WALL 2 f--- 01.1 _ -� • _ • . _ - � 2Bn 4" 50Liq CONC.. �3 p \ AREA OF �'1 I I FROM 1? OF RET�+ NG W II ti�� 11-I- I-oil IDISTUR5ANCE DRAINS I • � - � 6 -t� 28 -O 20 NEW 24" DETENTION PIPE 24' LONG -2 II 15'-ol' 4'-0 W/ 3/4" ORIFICE DAYLIGHT TO EX15TINCc 275. rI 25 � I NOTE: FO T ING DRAINS TO - zg - � -/ %� • / / / __ . / / . 12" CONCRETE CONVERT CP / I�_2 CONNECT T6\THE OUTFALL DETENTION l SYSTEM a 1% SLOPE/ DO NOT TIE I X X 5. DRAIN LINE" o RIM 2130 T.o.W IX •� INVERT. 268. CONNECT ALL DOWNSPOUTS TO NEW DETENT ON FIFE LIGHT POLE • . 5P- - ' ' / / O 0 1-----�} - 1 s I 6 All ALL EXAOSEQ SURFACES TO `•---.., I 9 T �, _ _ • • / gE COVERED WITHLIGH IN 2 DA POLE OWNER/CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE - - - - - - __- -- - FOR EROSION CONTROL AND DAMAGE / - - \ -- - - '- - - __- - - - - - - - -250 / / / \ \ 2s - 250- GRADING LAN NOTE5: " = 10'-0" 1. ALL WORK 5HALL CONFORM WITH TI41E R501.1IRIEMENT5 Or TN5 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT BY NWA# 2004-08(o-21-200 DATED 1-13-05 10, CuT/FI L.- 0 5 10 2. REDUCED 0FRONT YARD SETBACK PER VARIANCE CUT/FILL -- 463 C.Y. CITY OF EDMOND FILE # V-04-100 11-1-2004 FILL 0/ DETENTION PIPE W/ EXCAVATION CUT 49)" TOP 3. 5TOCK PILE NOTE: ALL EXCAVATED OR SOIL COVER tG SHEET SP-1 DISTURBED SOIL TO BE STOCKPILED D � COVERE SEE SITE PLAN W/Y15QUEEN WIN 24 NOUR5 OF PLACEMENT, TYP. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 40% SLOPE OVER 20' ELEVATION CHANGE SHOWN HATCHED RESUB DEC 13 2005 SUCiTy OFDEDMO14r DS STREET FILE ©Copyright 2005 VERT .BARS V6 a 12 O.C. NORM. BARS -w 12 O.C. �r (TYP) 04612° O.C. E.W. e • d •, '4. 0 .11 m 1/2" =1'-0" NOTE: LOCATE EX15T'G C5, CLEAN DATUM REFERENCE 2 4 CLEAR OF EXIST'G ANY IDE13R15 SSMH #124 INVERT ELEVATION EXTEND AS REQUIRED s NEW DRIVEWAY PER CITY OF EDMONDS ENTRANCE PER CITY OF EpMONDS STDS SANITARY SEWER ASBUILT PLAN ELEVATION 268.5 10' CONVEYED TO THE NOTE: NOTE: REDUCTION IN FRONT YARD ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY SETBACK ALLOWED @ 10'-0" WITH H.W.A. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT VIA VARIANCE V-04-100 DATED JANUARY 13, 2005 JANUARY 18, 2005 CONNECT TO (E) SEWER VIA (E) STU50UT CITY OF EDMONDS BY UUAI"ER SEWER 5� DEED A.F. NO.2131659 u '� \ �1, INSPEO-flONS REQ'D, ��`b CALL 42,5`7'7e-022© EXT. 1326 6 C.O. W/ CI LAMPHOLE COVER 2 74t ��MI� ARMORED ENTRANCE SP- S . `--; 12 / 14'-2" N 53'-0" -10" \ \ (EXIST'G) IOATER METER, VLT / 6, 00 . i SECURE 51LT FENCE, VERIFY LOCi4TIoN \ O I a' INTO DRIVE ROCK \ OF NEW METEF� / o �� N co ro \ /GA / I I 1 o coss _ - N89048f101tE 135.00 E�XISTING _// 12 CO: I ,`� \ STOCKPILE i I ` I 'I v u ui u / 'b \ p'fi 1 ^' \ BEE NOTE #3 L. 283.1 A I �' �/ I I EL. 292.25 B \ N89°48i0 "E 61.64 � �/ ` � \ ' / / / --1-- C \ is \ / / / / (c) ,--- --� 1� I Ole L I = u ��% T.O.W. EL. 289.5± � / 4 RA!L F x --- NCH p IN �� 25 cfi S.O.F. EL. 216.51 1 •� / FNc TOP EL. 211.5 �ti y5-2 T.O.W. EL, 286.5± T.O.W. EL. 2.0.5 } ( N (N) CB RIM L. 268.0 I NV. 210.0 �, •� cn. B.O.F. EL. 211.(d± B.D.F. EL. 286.0_ INV. EL261�0-t--�•---�. � � N '7 T.O W. lI 2 DN �R ONC. RETAIN I AL / '1 s EL. 214. 218 6R� PROPOSED NEW RESIDENCE (N) cB RIM EL. 211.5 �1 GARAGE SLAB 215.0 / \� `� ..� r.o.W T.o.W LOUDER BLAB 215.5 INV. EL. 269.5 Az �, I �`� \ 282 283 5 MAIN FLOOR 2815 N o / / , I B.O.F. 5.o.F. UPPER FLOOR 2915 I , / / / / / EL. 2 6 ti ley, I 1.18.0 q 211.0 �a RIDGE 311.11 / / / / J / 26 � NEW + I NOTE: SILT FENCE TOP OF T. 0 RIM 21 .0 �"' N `O T.O.W. EL. 289.5_ /61 � . / / I.•,, 4" D IA. SOLI 10�0 0� i Q VERT. 26 .0 2 DRIVEWAY �u T.O.W. EL. 256.51 S.OF. EL. 286.0f _ � / � / SLOPE TO E DUG BY HAND PER / PVC PI E (lia MIN. T.O. ,u •�_ X s�. G50TECN REPORT / / LOPE FOR ALL z 214.0 1 t (zQ B.O.F. EL. 216.5 " RAIN LINES �\ �.OF, i 2 T.O. -T.O.W T..W T.O.W. EL. 288.5 + - 22 211. 218 1 2 .5 B.O.F. EL. 216B -3• LANDSCAPE ROCK I 2'-3' O C. 1 - - - - - -�_ WALL,TY 4 �`. /-- CEL. 289.5 WALL 2 -3 MAX. NIGH � ,� 1 ---�•- � � � �, / • o \ � I 4" 50LIO R OF CONC. VAREA OF DRAIN" RET,!'al NGW 0 NEW 24� DETENTION PIPE 24 LONG 1 61_011 28l -0" _ \ DIBTUR�BANCE / w/ 3/4" ORIFICE DAYLIGHT TO EXISTING �'\. /rJ OF. 20'-' ; -2 12" CONCRETE CONVERT CB 215 NOTE: F 25 i E O TING DRAINS TO I -2 CONNECT T0\THE OUTFALL DETENTION SYSTEM a 1%, SLOPE/ DO NOT TIE I \ ` X 5. DRAIN DINE' IT.0RIM 213.0 INVERT. 268 0 2 ," \ SOP 0� • - r / / / / / / / / / \ CONNECT ALL DOWNSPOUTS TO NEW DETENT ON PIPE LIGHT 51LT-FENCE 1 ' POLE \ -- 0 ` •. A0CEP ABLE TIGHTLINE I / / - , • / / / MATERIAL 810HANCOR LIGHT �'� k� ,/�- ��, 90 4r / / POLE 40% SLOPE OVER FOOTING DRAINS -NOS - - - - - -� _ - -- --- \ - - - -- - - / TO BE TIED INTO 20' ELEVATION CHANGE ---/ -,•_-` ��\ \--- �""�'------- -- / / SHOWN HATCHED DETENTION-SY`' ---- /-------- --- / 260 -250 250 Q BY ENGINEERINGLLj - e -7� --- s--- / PLAN NOTES: ill= 10'-0" I. ALL WORK 5NALL CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENT5 OF THE 10' o' TM7S' l0' GEOTECHNICAL REPORT BY NWA# 2004-006-21-200 DATED 1-13-05 CUT/FILL, = 463 C.Y. 2. REDUCED 10' FRONT YARD 5ETBACK PER VARIANCE FILL O/ DETENTION PIPE W/ CITY OF EDMOND FILE # V-04-100 11-1-2004 EXCAVATION cut 6" toP 3. STOCK PILE NOTE: ALL EXCAVATED OR SEE SITE PLAN, SHEET SP-1 D15TURBED 501L TO BE 5TOCKPILED 4 COVERED FOR ADDITIONAL .INFORMATION w/VISQUEEN Lu/IN 24 HOURS OF PLACEMENT, TYP, RESUB DEC 13 2005 BUILDING DEPARTMENT CI"(Y OF EDMONDS ©CopyWght 2005 r FOUNDATIONS 1. THE FOUNDATION DESIGN IS BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATION FROM GEOTECHNICAL REPORT SUBMITED BY HWA GEOSCIENCES INC., JANURY 13, 2005 2. FOUNDATION EXCAVATIONS SHALL BE EXAMINED AND CERTIFIED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT OF ANY REINFORCING STEEL OR CONCRETE. 3. THE FOUNDATION DESIGN IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING VALUES: ALLOW. SOIL BEARING 2500 PSF SOIL FRICTION .40 EQUIV. FLUID PRESSURES ACTIVE PRESSURE* 60 PCF PASSIVE PRESSURE 280 PCF (*WALLS RESTRAINED AGAINST ROTATION SHALL BE DESIGNED FOR AN EQUIV. FLUID PRESSURE OF 55 PCF). 4. ALL FOOTINGS SHALL BE FOUNDED AT LEAST 18" BELOW THE UNDISTURBED GROUND SURFACE. ALL FOOTINGS SHALL BE FOUNDED ON COMPACTED FILL OR UNDISTURBED NATURAL GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 5. COMPACTION: MATERIAL USED FOR BACKFILLING SHALL CONSIST OF CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND, DERIVED FROM ON SITE EXCAVATIONS, OR IMPORTED GRAVEL BACKFILL FOR WALLS, AS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9-03.12(2) OF THE 2004 WSDOT Standard Specifications. ALL BACKFILL MATERIAL SHALL BE FREE OF ORGANICS, TRASH, OR OTHER DELETERIOUS MATERIALS. ALL BACKFILL SHALL BE MOISTURE CONDITIONED TO WITHIN 2% OF OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT, PLACED IN LOOSE HORIZONTAL LIFTS NO GREATER THAN 8 INCHES IN THICKNESS, AND COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 95% OF THE MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY DETERMINED USING TEST METHOD ASTM D 1557(Modifed Proctor). WALL BACKFILL WITHIN 3 FEET OF ANY RETAINING WALL SHOULD BE COMPACTED TO 92% OF THE MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY, TO AVOID OVERSTRESSING THE WALL. CONCRETE 1. ALL CONCRETE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED SHALL BE REGULAR WEIGHT HARD ROCK TYPE (150 PCF) AGGREGATES SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM C33 WITH PROVEN SHRINKAGE CHARACTERISTICS OF LESS THAN 0.05%. 2. CONCRETE COMPRESSIVE STRENGTHS AT 28 DAYS (f'c) SHALL BE: SLAB ON GRADE: 2500 PSI CONTINUOUS FOOTINGS: 2500 PSI PAD FOOTINGS: 2500 PSI 3. ALL CONCRETE WITH A DESIGNATED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH EXCEEDING 2500 PSI SHALL REQUIRE SPECIAL INSPECTION BY AN INSPECTOR APPROVED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND THE ENGINEER. 4. CEMENT SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM C150, TYPE I, CSA NORMAL. 5. MAXIMUM SLUMP SHALL NOT EXCEED 4 INCHES IN FLATWORK. I 6. PLACEMENT OF CONCRETE SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH ACI 301. 7. CONCRETE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A MOIST CONDITION FOR A MIN1:4UM OF FIVE (5) DAYS AFTER PLACEMENT. ALTERNATE METHODS WILL BE APPROVED IF SATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE CAN BE ASSURED. 8. MINIMUM CONCRETE COVERAGE OF REINFORCING STEEL FOR FORMED WORK SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: INTERIOR WALL: 3/4" EXTERIOR WALLS, EXPOSED TO WEATHER: 1 Y2 EXPOSED TO EARTH OR WEATHER (#5 OR SMALLER): 1 %" EXPOSED TO -EARTH OR WEATHER (#6 OR LARGER): 2" *NOTE: CONCRETE CAST AGAINST GROUND SHALL HAVE 3" MINIMUM COVERAGE 9. PIPES OTHER THAN ELECTRICAL CONDUITS SHALL NOT BE EMBEDDED IN STRUCTURAL CONCRETE EXCEPT WHERE SPECIFICALLY APPROVED. 10. CONCRETE MIXES SHALL BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE TABLES 19—A (WHEN STRENGTH DATA FROM TRIAL BATCHES OR FIELD EXPERIENCE ARE NOT AVAILABLE). CEMENT CONTENT SACKS PER F'c (PSI) LBS(MINIMUM) � N MI UM) YARD CUBIC MINIMUM) 2500(no special inspection) 470 5 SEE NOTE A SHEARWALL PER PLAN P.T. 2x6 HF#2 w/ 5/8' DIA. x 12' A.B. w/ 3"x3"x 1 /4" GALV. PLATE WASHER © 48" o.c. (MAX.) z 00. => GRAD O ® HOUSE 0 4 0 r 4" DIA. PERFORATED PLASTIC PIPE --/ CENTERED IN 1 FT OF 3 WASHED PEA GRAVEL AND DRAIN TO TO DAYLIGHT OR APPROVED OUTFALL #5 @ 14" o.c. VERITACAL ��\ ---#4 ® 12" o.c. a'• _ HORIZONTAL a' SLAB —ON —GRADE ,s 4", 8" 1---6" (3) #4 BARS CONTIN )US z (2) #4 00 :2 GRADE ' #4 © 16" o.c. VERITACAL B @ SITE o ® 12" o.c. wall HORIZONTAL a• ,s •.e °• 3" CLEAR •' r; 4" DIA. PERFORATED PLASTIC PIPE •• I (3) #4 BARSCONTINOUS CENTERED IN 1 FT OF 3 WASHED PEA GRAVEL AND DRAIN TO TO DAYLIGHT OR APPROVED OUTFALL 4" rl-�.ANTILEVERED RET N ,._TG WALL - \ J`- / it, = V-0" - - - - P.T. 2x6 HF#2 w/ 5/8' DIA. x 12' A.B. w/ 3"x3"x 1 /4" GALV. PLATE WASHER ® 16" o.c. 00 z GRADE —v/\� a `t —FLOOR JOIST PER PLAN 4,, c° #10 © 13" O.C. N VERITACAL r *NOTE: DO NOT BACKFILL UNTIL ALL FLOOR FRAMING IS COMPLETE JOIST PER PLAN (2) #4 BARS (3) 1Od PER BLOCK SLAB —ON —GRADE /r(NO SURCHARGE) (3) BAYS OF JOIST BLOCKING @ 48" o.c. #5 © 12" o.c. ; \ VERITACAL A 0 #4 © 12" o.c. •'� HORIZONTAL iv aC d- 4 ° • ' DOWEL TO MATCH : VERTICAL REBAR ALTERNATE HOOK SLAB —ON —GRADE d DIRECTION, TYP. ®rC CLEAR (3) #4 BARS 6"CONTINOUS 4" DIA. PERAD PLASTIC PIPE CENTERED IN 1 FT OF 3 WASHED PEA GRAVEL AND DRAIN TO TO DAYLIGHT OR APPROVED OUTFALL *NOTE: DO NOT BACKFILL UNTIL ALL FLOOR FRAMING IS COMPLETE RETAINING WALL NOTES: INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE 60 PCF EQUIV. FLUID PRESSURE 40 PSF SURCHARGE Vc = 2500 PSI Fy = 40 KSI (#4 AND SMALLER) Fy = 60 KSI (#5 AND LARGER) SOIL BEARING = 2500 PSF BACKFILL W/ PORUOS MATERIAL MIXESSHALL BE PROPORTIONED TO PRODUCE A SLUMP OF 5" OR LESS. NO MORE THAN A 1 " PLUS •• . TOLERANCE SHALL BE ALLOWED. � •'•`e #4 © 12„ o.c. HORIZONTAL C° 00 < • y ° A) WHERE SPECIAL INSPECTION IS NOT REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 1704.4 OF THE I.B.C., CONCRETE SHALL CO 00 HAVE A MINIMUM CEMENT CONTENT OF 5 SACKS PER CUBIC YARD OF CONCRETE. ' 12' REINFORCING STEEL DOWEL TO MATCH VERTICAL REBAR •: ALTERNATE HOOK :. 1. ALL REINFORCING STEEL SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A615 GRADE 60 (fy = 60 KSI) FOR BAR SIZES DIRECTION, TYP. NO. 5 & LARGER, GRADE 40 (fy = 40 KSI) FOR NO. 3 AND NO. 4 BARS. SLAB —ON —GRADE 2. ALL REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE LAPPED AS NOTED ON THE PLANS. WHERE LAP OR SPLICE LOCATIONS ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY INDICATED ON THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, LAPS AND/OR SPLICES :L °'--- ' 4 a • , SHALL BE WELL STAGGERED. DO• <° . 3. WELDED WIRE FABRIC SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A82 AND A185 AND SHALL BE 6X6 W2.1 /W2.1 T • • ••. a:' ♦ : ;-3 CLEAR UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. LAP REINFORCEMENT 6" MINIMUM. L1'-9" — '0' S'-0" 4" DIA. PERFORATED PLASTIC PIPE DOWELS AND OTHER EMBEDDED ITEMS SHALL BE SECURELY TIED IN PLACE BEFORE 4. ANCHOR BOLTS, _/ " CONCRETE IS POURED. SLAB ON GRADE REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE PLACED AT MID —DEPTH OF SLAB AND CENTERED IN 1 FT OF 3 WASHED PEA 6 BARS @ 10"o/c E.W. GRAVEL AND DRAIN TO TO DAYLIGHT CONTINOUS SHALL BE HELD SECURELY IN PLACE WITH MECHANICAL DEVICES DURING PLACING OF THE CONCRETE. OR APPROVED OUTFACE 3 CA T�lLE VERE�DR�ET. WALL JOIST�PE�RP. 1 —1-0 P.T. 2.x6 HF#2— w/ 5/ 8" DIA. x 12' A. B. w/ 3"x3"0/4" GALV. PLATE WASHER @ 16"' o.c. -- ool� BRA ) #4 U) N •U N O 0 N 0 r N Q a) c X `t O N LL Q� N•�Q = to s' N O O 04 cV o .i d LL7 -N ICI z © 12" VERITACAL a_ / U u \ • d' / 4 o.c. V B @ SITE HORIZONTAL 6' wall • (� .° OA • 4' _— o 3" CLEAR ' = 3) #4 BARS CONTINOUS • • a I No. Date By •� 4 c- 10" 8,1 ,—g„ 4" DIA. PERFORATED PLASTIC PIPE rR - CENTERED IN -1---FT—OF -3 WASHED --PEA- — - Z GRAVEL AND DRAIN T TO —[DAYLIGHT -_ OR APPROVED OUTFALL U _� F' :I:Z W (f z IL aOo d FLOOR JOIST PER PLAN LJ L •'• , e V ° 2 912 O. \\ :. #5 © 12" O.C. ° '• VERITACAL d A a� 4 , • #4 © 12" o.c. • HORIZONTAL •fee 6 ' DOWEL TO MATCH , VERTICAL REBAR ALTERNATE HOOK DIRECTION, TYP. SLAB —ON —GRADE 0j a 3" CLEAR 4" DIA. PERFORATED PLASTIC PIPE U64"' rO I'—g" 3) #4 BARS CENTERED IN 1 FT OF 3 WASHED PEA CONTINOUS GRAVEL AND DRAIN TO TO DAYLIGHT OR APPROVED OUTFALL 4 RE'T'AINING WALL (JOIST :PERPENDICI. 34Sj%r.� rXPIRES / J___.� Drawn By: P.Q. C 0 7 Checked By. C.C. Date: Job No. 2912 DEC 13 2005 STRUCTURAL JILDING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDMONDS NOTES SHEAR SCHEDULE S=2mO ®� gono-m1 I N A vvatA . ?gm ow 84 V_e4b MA00Lj;j�,T0 J )(- POP -ROM AL40M&% O(V\/ Ds-/�9 � p�„� /67as 7-// SQL RESUB DEC 13 2005 BUILDING DEPAR'NENT �ITY OF EDMONDS STREET FILE