Loading...
17113 69TH PL W.PDF111111111111 5309 17113 69TH PL W TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: 0101-73 -L,906:00 -60 BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE):- `� -0 a7 t5- COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR: CRITICAL AREAS: DETERMINATION: []Conditional Waiver XStudy Required E] Waiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S: DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: PARKING AGREEMENTS DA EASEMENT(S) RECORDED F PERMITS (OTHER): PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED: SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED:1 I I 100 SEWER LID FEE $: SHORT PLAT FILE:P- -V ft -02 - SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #: GEOTECH REPORT DATED: STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: LID #: LOT: �a BLOCK: LATEMP\DSTs\Fonns\Street File Checklist.doc 0 cl) I* CR !�2 w c� 0 I '1--1 zo LO M I-T ED lIq V* co a z LLI M cl) �) -j c-li a_ N C14 w w cl) w I -- NOTICE! [,,,10 IIIA.RIA,4,,TY OF ACCURACY Ze lfr rmation.shown on the ,ty L cm-loyues ,ch -e by the C U 0 ad �!Ie j f w us 1, Ily of E d-;n on d s d a a ii ar rzr. L ar.r! c _r's. 1'. Cl 0 C'�ny ap. AnV po.,sca or km�ly S'- C�- cn 1; c, P I I i', i" : 6 t o, t h �, I o c -_'J^ncf any Stub cl o., r,-zy noi c,,� and zj Pc! c.st al niL' st an av or rr Ne".1hei tit, City of Edmond & its employaes or b,,:, llzble foF tha information given on 0 map, not foi any oraj repraseniabon provided based upon said map. z 0 0 0 r- 00 U) 0) z z C5 z LU > WO Wo � 0 2: W M 0 LLI IM cy) LO Q� 0 C) C) QN LU a. M 0 01) Q(0 z 0 LLJ F— U-) C) r-4 M R otanysevietstub the Zp, including, but noIL limite to, the location shmAm. Such sevier stubs may or may not e)dst and may or may not e)dr.t at the location shown, Neither the City of Edmonds nor its ernplo-�,,.-as or officai s shall, be liable for the information givei.- an this main , nc� f cr En*j ar'� repr,;seo'.'ac;I- provide,, SM'd F-K.) 0 F— z LLJ U WO 0- z 'CN C3 U F- z 0 U 4- < lv� Li z LLJ LAJ LLI < 0 M: < IM "10,5 -, 4r 49 0 0 -1 ED,&_ F_ 9. 19. 15' I 1`110TICIE. NO WARPANTY OF ACCURACY The Information shown on th, ett.ffi.�d map yla,' ; cOmPilud for use b,v the city Of Edmonds, its employees arc! C-);,suftants. The Oily of Edmonds does not warrant the accuracy of anything set forth 01) the map. Any Person Or entity requesting a copy should conduct an Independent Inquiry regarding the Informaicn sjjoV,.-j C.n the map, Including, but not limited to, the location Of Z-71Y c'ub shown, Such sewer stubs Mayor may not e)dst and may or r_ the location shown. hlefthertheCltYofEdrsion�3r�7 Officers shag be liable for the Information , 1" C;'Xj - C: I t`3 mi­ orzj representation provided based UPOi I said m zp --.=Now CITY OF EDMONDS WATERLINE AS -BUILT ADDRESS HOMEOWNER -69 PL W - 17113 I_RH HOOVER, INC CONTRACTOR SCALE NTS DATE DRAM PERMJT 05/11/2005 1BY SIBREL No- 2005-0275 In NOTICE- No 11VARRAM 0;7 AcCURACY The infoTmaltion sllf-,Wn cn a,ttach-.d map viaA compN!,�� t0l ust. by thc, Do,, of H=---'- ;� -77 — I � vjzf C- - - . . 01 ano consu!tams. I -pc Olt-, of dc�,-. no -. r .1 C. - -- - -- , 0;- L�, ci catl-q rc�,-,,: ...: "- UPY inforn-Jon sh-Tc;;I M scvjcr stub th--, vo:. locz�jion of any t at S;'L-i: L,. j-jjt.,�f 0: nc;i cdsl and may or may not exis Wlbiei thb Ci� of Edmonds nor its employees Or s.jLii bi liable foi the information given on this map, not for any or-' r0p(,.,senxa�on provided basu-d upw said mp Q� Li z LAJ C3 M LLJ < -1 Zo \A) Ln 4c:) CD c CN. ?Wil 7,4v" IN t:. 1Y �j ij, IN, like. IF Cu 1 4 k.. I 4 k citi, qj 11)_C7 --_� i) City of Edm I Onds SIDE SEWER PERMIT Address of Constructi PERMIT NO:. 9987. PEFJMT EXPIRE Property Tax Account Parcel No. ()M __ 6> 0 to — (;?o Attach copies of all access and utility easements* Verified and Approved b Owne r and/or Con V tractor: P- - H a Contractor License Building Permit Single Family n Multi -Family (No. of Units T-1 Commercial (No. of Units F� Public Invasion into City *Right -of Way es E] No *RW i--onstructi on Permit Cross otfier "Private Property: 0Yes No "Attach1egal-description and copy of recorded. easement. Owner/Contractor Owner or contract r si nature and acknowledgement statement: Date "r si By s1gniing* for this`p` )rmit I certify that I have read the City's public handout entitled ide Sewer Specifications, and shall comply with all City requirements outlined therein. 9 CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1 -800-4Zq.;-5555) BEFOREANY EXCAVATION W. d& FOR INSPECTION CALL 425-771-0220 extensiorl,-L79270W 24'HOUR NOTICE REOUIRED FOR ALL INSPECTION REOUESTS Partial Inspection: —Date: Initial: Partial Inspection: Date: Initial: FINAL IN.SPECTION APPROVED: Date: nitial: As -built to, StreetFile: E] f,� PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE t, White Copy- File Green C'opy: Inspector Buff Copy: Applicant L;temp;bldg,fqrms;sspennitjlg4/00 F PERMITEXPIRES CITY OF EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION OWNER NAMEMAME OF BUSINESS _T41C 99 ul I-IL074X MAILING ADDRESS W.1 cfet'v, YAYA it log CITY ZIP TELEPHONE 43 q5- t? NAME �1(4 IL-yas ArdeK1,^1," ADDRESS tfl L-1 0 9 CITY Zip kla-lat')(t %11_)�13 TELEPHONE 41'1)�__ gag-, L41 1-1 NAME BL# 1_�Tivex I �T411 0 S 61v(t 4� 0 CITY ZIP (14 Pulu CAJU 900- TELEPHONE STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATIONDATE E_0�91) BY , I � -7. ;I PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL NO. WNEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBI . NG/MECH ADDITION E] COMMER61AL COMPLIANCE OR CHANGE OF USE REMODEL MULTIFAMILY SIGN RE FENCE PAIR CYDS X FT) -DEMOLISH TANK OTHER IWGARAGE q—V4"WUW&#A4.66 FIRE SPRINKLER ARPORT RA!ROCKERY E] FIRE ALARM rc (TYPE OF USE, BUSINESS OA XCTIVIM EXP7 , t r] in, Le 1 (.1 Us f- ;, 1 16& NUMBERJ -OF NUMBER OFJ D WELLING CRITICAL AREAS STORIE UNITS NUMBER DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE / _8 6 id g 17T!Y W 1034014/' r) a I f F-&ixt t C, .-1, iv I �k, pf2-D (,fil, �U tr .. _UEAT SOURCE AZING % /� -1 . .. j rni -,,LQT.IWPE % V> ' Z PLAN CHECK 7 I= THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THWWORK NOTED- THIS P ERMIT COVERS WORK TO BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC 02 DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYSj MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE I= SEPARATE PERMISSION. IL PERMIT APPLICATION: 180 DAYS PERMIT LIMIT I YEAR - PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN 180 DAYS SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE, HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESOR4 IN INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON; ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY FROM.THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO MODIFY� WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENT OF ANY CITY ORDINANCE 0 NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAY THE C17YS ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION.* 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 THE OWNER. I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE -LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC- TION; AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED 'IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18.27. SIGN=R0ENT)j_ DATE SIGNI ED USE ZONE JOB PERMIT NUMBER PLAA4T,N0AE/SI;*Dj�PION NO., LOT LID NO. IV, LID FEE I PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP TESCP Approved RW Permit Required EXISTING PROPOSED Street Use Permit Req'd Inspection Required Sidewalk Required REQUIRED DEDICATION FT Underground Wiring required LINE SIZE NO. OF FIXTURES PRV REQUIRED 7T[�E YES13 NO 13 REMARkS_ OWNERiCONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROL/DRAINAGE ?0 T�i NA L MINEERING REVIEWEITBY DATE J— Wr�onrlp] 1 3 h� FIRE REVIEWED BY DATE uj IZE VARIANCE OR CU SHORELINE OR ADB# REO'D, 1,,INSPECTION I PBOND YES 9NO _OSTED $ — SEPA REVIEW SIGN AREA HEIGHT COMPLETE EXEEMPT ALLOWED PROPOSED, ALLOWED PROPOSED , I _.XP LOT COVERAGE REQUIRED SETBACKS (Fr.) PROPOSED SETBACKS (FrE) ALLOWED PROPOSED FRONT SIDE REAR FRONT L1R SIDE REAR 7 1 _ _:1 I" , z PARKING LC IT AREA PLANNING REVIEWED BY D ATE REQ'D PROVIDED IL iw, I REMARKS 'HECKED BY TYPE OV�qRUCTION C�� OCCUPA I GROUP r�� 3 SPECIAL INSPECTION JAREA OCCUPANT I REQU . IRED YES PrA&24. LOAD IEMARKS IROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 108/IBC109/iRC109FINALINSPECTION REO'D 6tru aureUi Iz Aftg�� 0 A, VALUATION $ 1 CK a Description Plan Check FEE Description State Surcharge FEE Z Building Permit City Surcharge Plumbing Base Fee Mechanical luru zlpf- Grading 2_0 Engr. Review Engr. InspectioV 460 Fir� Review IfWn Chk. Deposit Fire Inspection ., " f I \I; �, .,Rep ipt # 1 e 4377,3 J.") , , V y- nqscapelnsp. J�j I Total Arrill. Due Recording Fee Receipt # CAU -OR INSPE 2 "(425) 771-0220 ..PPLICATION APPROV AL This application is not a permit until signed by the \�ujldjlitg Official or his/her Deputy: and Fees are paid, and receipt Is acknowledged in space provided. rbwims SIGNAA�RE DATE if $ED­ �RFL AS- BY/\, ;DATE' ATTENTIOW J L, eff,1,333 '11._. (/ IT IS UNLAWFULTO USE OR OCCUPYA BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTILAFINAL,,; , vw INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL ORA CERTIFICATE OF OCCU- PANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC109/IBC110 /IRC110. ORiGINALLFI YELLOW - INSPECTOR 09/03 ) PINK-0 VR GOLD -ASSESSOR PRESS HARD -YOU ARE MAKING 4 COPIES --<,LOT 5 OT'pp� INSPECTIONS REQ'D. cALL 425-771--0220 W. 1326 13M ME 6qth PI. Ill EDMONDS. YA PARCM NktN3t OlOrPJ-000-006-00 LOT AREA, q.2w SIZAARE FEET L50AL DIESCAP110" LOM L26, HEADDIVALE BEACK AGWRIPM TO -1111! MAT \RSTf UCTIO RISWFIDED IN VOLUll! 5 OF PLAIS, PAISEW W, REWFWS ��7EMPORARY CO %V"OKSH coot"MI KAS"IsTak EZEPT me EAST'WO FEET newop, AM EAU3�r 1�11! SOU" 205 FEET Ile POST wo FEET AM EXCEPT THE SOM 5 FEET OF &4WD LOT 126 CZMMYED TO ENTRANCE RE\qUIPIF-D IM GITY OF 137�"IDS FOR ROAD PLIa-05M BY OEM W4XR FtI5=FMqN& 1`0419M 2515256. SITUATE IN TM COXIM OP 514%101� STAIE OF M5HNSTON. \,v3znC.AL PATL#4. WAD a5ffll PM RECORDED APII�eh SURVEY 0200905145077 BEIIIIISWARK MKh RIM OF SAWTARY SEYIrR 1`� "C", ELEVA'nom sm.Ev PER EMON33UNS DRAPONSS, Of-? cq c uT 511-T PENCE PER SRADI?15 PLAN 0 rY 5TV. DETAIL 6- , -R = — BALAWIED 014 Sm 6- PVG T16HTLI!Lj� 1:1\ ��TD STOR� S A I �%'Ell X, 5HORT PLAT X I%:, I 27.r ER05ION r-ONTROL SE6'OO 2 13 \4%ZrICAL 361 \t/ 151,00 LIMAR 20.2% SLOPE MEA5URE5 TO BE MAINTAINED. felaff TALLEI SW AINTAIN PLAT I TALLED EROSION CONTROL c. W-1 v. W6 l5ES/4- M431 A\?ER,AW &1 5, WIAKNBULDIN95M --OWNER/CONTRA OR IS RESPONSIBLE '06"T ACIVAL BUILDINS H9SHr- 411.1- LOT C10119ZASM FOR EROSION CONT17-10L AND DAMAGE (PROPOSED) 5qev, 3qf, ReSn2I5WZ w4 5OU-JM FEET 6AP.46E '724 SGIVIRE FEET Ow. AftEAS 241 SGLAJtE FEET PROPOSED ROGKERY a RgOEPHIT&H rMAX. EA "' KALL TOTAL 20M SaJAIM FEET M]OW 0 �ITY .. rE,,... l�� (PROPOSED) RESIVEWE 7712 5GLXARE FEET ov OVERA"469) PRJVM MALK 4 PATIO 11-12 SWAM FEET TOTAL 5064 SGIUV4M FEET MIAV flEFEM910E5 R ECOW or _ SURVEY OF THIS Err C+5 EN&INISt$, M. LHDEIZ REcORDM mr). 200505K50a7. SHOHOKSH C<X*TW WI*MNSTON RIGHT-OF-WAY C014STRUCTION PERMIT TO BL� TIED INTO )ETENTI SYSTEM R EQVI V E D ACCEPT B!l IG INE MAR 2005 TER \�Dll5 SCH L-OT 5 PERMIT COUNTER C APPROVED AS NOTED BY GAEERINA 7 /7- 71 FIN, FLR 0 557.00* 0 �A'\o R Zlli. FL 0 5955.00 5e5e, OC' 1534 5F- APPROVED BY PLANK T D 5q aTnEET FILE ��EULA' I"� DETAIL 1,04. g3wayrery vzceA" puvas Comer Flag /4�ha�ks Requirel TEINMAN'S MEADOWDALE ES�WIES A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SECTION 8, TWP. 27N., R.4E.,W.M. Sides 10 It 0 CITY OF EDMONDS SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON Rear oio z IL 93 F- IL Hei%ft 0 0 Geotechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington For Hoover Premier Homes RECEIVED FEB 0 1 Zun05 PERMIT COUNTER STREET FILE C ..Orners, ente A a Geotechnic 'I, I*nc. January 6, 2005 Ms. Cathy Patterson Hoover Premier Homes 16300 Mill Creek Boulevard, #108. Mill Creek, WA 98012 Geotechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington CG File No. 1791 Dear Ms. Patterson: INTRODUCTION 0 17625-13011 Ave. NE, C102, Woodinville, WA 98072 Phone: 425-844-1977 Fax: 425-844-1987 This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering investigation for your Meadowdale Estates residential development in the Meadowdale area of Edmonds, Washington. The site is located at 6880 -172nd Street SW, as shown on the Vicinity Map 'in Figure 1. Site development, including grading, road construction, and utility placement, has been substantially completed. We understand that you have purchased all of the building lots, with the exception of Lot 2, for the purposes of constructing single-family residences. The City of Edmonds has required a geotechnical report for the lots with slopes greater than 15 percent, and you have requested that we evaluate the subsurface conditions of your lots and provide foundation recommendations for the proposed residences. For our use in preparing this report, we have been provided with a copy of a site plan by CHS Engineering, dated SeDtember 2003, that shows lot, road, and utility layout. We have also been provided with a , giope Stability Evaluation, prepared by GeoEngineers and dated June 18, 200 -71-1 t addresses the detention facility. Additional] ave en provided with field reports prepared by Sky Valley Testing that document compaction testing performed during the main earthwork phase of the project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The L-shaped project site has maximum dimensions of approximately 640 feet north to south and 440 feet cast to west. , The development consists of a total of 12 lots. We understand that you intend to' construct Geotechnical Engineering Rfrt Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 2 single-family residences on all of the lots with the exception of Lot 2, which you do not own. The provided grading plan indicates cuts totaling 6,000 cubic yards (CY) and fills totaling 12,000 CY. The grading plan also indicates that fills may be at least 12 feet deep in some areas. At this point in time, site grading has been completed and utilities have been installed. A completed storm water detention vault is located close to the western site boundary. SCOPE The purpose of this study is to explore and characterize the subsurface conditions and present recommendations for site development. Specifically, our scope of services as outlined in our Services Agreement, dated, December 23, 2004, includes the following: I Review available geologic maps of the area and available project documentation. 2. Explore the subsurface conditions at the site with backboe-excavated test pits. 3. Provide recommendations for building foundations, including lateral pressures for retaining walls. 4. Provide recommendations for site preparation and grading. 5. Provide general recommendations for site drainage. 6. Prepare a written report to document our conclusions and recommendations. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions At the time of our exploration, the access road (69h Place W) was paved. Site grading was also complete and grass was growing on all of the lots. The storm wa ter detention vault and utilities had all been completed, but no residences had been constructed yet. A layout of the site is shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. Generally, the ground surface slopes downward towards the west at approximately 3 Horizontal to I Vertical (31-1: IV). An existing residence borders the southwestern comer of the site and 172 nd Street SW borders the site to the south. The rest of the site is surrounded by a wooded area with brush and evergreen trees up to approximately 2 feet in diameter. Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. 0 0 Geotechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 3 Geology Most of the Puget Sound Region was affected by past intrusion of continental glaciation. The last period of glaciation, the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation, ended approximately 11,000 years ago. Many of the geomorphic features seen today are a result of scouring and overriding by glacial ice. During the Vashon Stade, much of the Puget Sound region was overridden by over 3,000 feet of ice. Sol] layers overridden by the -ice sheet were compacted to a much greater extent than those that were not. Part of a typical glacial sequence includes recessional outwasb sand underlain by glacial till. The site is mapped as being underlain by glacial till (P TeliminM Surficial Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Edmonds West Quadrangles, Snohomish and King Counties, Mackey Smith, 1975). The map also indicates the presence of advance and recessional outwasb in the general area surrounding the site. Our site explorations encountered glacial till, recessional outwash, and fill. Glacial till, commonly referred to as "hardpan," is an unsorted mixture of sand, silt, and gravel that is deposited at the bottom of a continental glacier. As a result of having been consolidated under the weight of the glacier, glacial till exhibits both high strength and low permeability. Alluvial sand and gravel deposited by glacial melt water during glacial recession is known as recessional outwash. In contrast to glacial till, recessional outwash has not been glacially consolidated. Explorations Subsurface conditions were explored at the site on December 28, 2004, by excavating a total of five test pits. The test pits were excavated to depths ranging between 0.5 and I LQ feet below the ground surface. The explorations were located in the field by a representative from this firm who also examined the soils and geologic conditions encountered, and maintained logs of the test pits. The approximate locations of the test pits are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System, a copy of which is presented as Figure 3. The logs of the test pits are presented in Figures 4 and 5. Subsurface Conditions A brief description of the conditions encountered in our explorations is included below. For a more detailed description of the soils encountered, review the test pit logs in Figures 4 and 5. Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Jprt Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1,791 Page 4 Our explorations encountered glacial till, recessional outwash, and fill. Test Pits 3, 4 and 5 were excavated in cut areas and all encountered very dense till with in one foot of the surface. Test Pits I and 2 encountered approximately 4.0 and 5.0 feet of fill, respectively. Beneath the fill, Test Pit I encountered recessional outwash. Test Pit 2 encountered a layer- of topsoil underlying the fill. The topsoil layer was underlain byweathered glacial till becoming glacial till. It should be noted that loose soils in the areas of Test Pits I and 2 extend at least 4.0 and 6.0 feet below the ground surface, respectively. Hydrologic Conditions Shallow ground water seepage was encountered in Test Pit 2 at a depth of approximately 1.0 foot. We consider this water to be perched, and associated with surface runoff. The on -site till, in particular, is considered poorly draining. During the wetter times of the year, we expect perched water conditions will occur as pockets of water on top of the till layer. Perched water does not represent a regional ground water "table" within the upper soil horizons. Volumes of perched ground water vary depending upon the time of year and the upslope recharge conditions. I Erosion Hazard The erosion hazard criteria used for detennination of affected areas includes soil type, slope gradient, vegetation cover, and ground water conditions. The erosion sensitivity is related to vegetative cover and the specific surface soil types (group classification), which are related to the underlying geologic soil units. The Soil Survey of SnohoMisb County Area Washington by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) was reviewed to determine the erosion hazard of the on -site soils. The site surface soils were classified using the SCS classification system as Unit 5 (Alderwood — Urban Land Complex). The corresponding geologic unit for these soils Is till, which is generally in agreement with the soils encountered in our site explorations. The erosion hazard for the soil is listed as being slight for slopes less than 8 percent. The moderately -sloping portions of the site may encounter higher levels of erosion, but not to such a degree that the site would be classified an erosion hazard. Best management practices (BMPs) and applicable codes should be f6flowed during site grading to limit potential for erosion. We do not expect this site will require unusual or extreme erosion management methods. There are no water bodies adjacent to the site. Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering R!Rrt Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 5 Seismic Hazard The site is classified based on its overall soil profile using Table 1615.1.1 of the 2003 International Building Code (IBC). Site conditions best fit the IBC definition for Site Class C ("Very dense soil and soft rock"). The IBC provides parameters and coefficients to be used in seismic design based upon this site class. Additional seismic considerations include liquefaction potential and amplification of ground motions by soft soil deposits. The liquefaction potential is highest for loose sand with a high ground water table. The underlying dense till is considered to have a very low potential for liquefaction and amplification of ground motion. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General It is our opinion that the site is compatible with the planned development. The underlying medium dense to very dense glacial till deposits are capable of supporting the planned structures and pavements. We recommend that the foundations for the structures extend through any topsoil, fill, loose, or disturbed soils, and bear on the underlying medium dense to very dense, native glacial till, or on structural fill extending to these soils. Based on our explorations, we anticipate these soils will generally be encountered at typical footing depths in the cut areas of the site. Fill encountered in Test Pits I and 2was loose. As a result, areas of fill may need to be over -excavated and properly compacted. Alternatively, foundations could be constructed to extend through the loose soils. The soils likely to be exposed during construction are highly moisture sensitive and will disturb easily when wet or during wet conditions. We recommend that construction take place during the drier summer months, if possible. If construction takes place during the wet season, additional expenses and delays should be expected d ue to the wet conditions. Site Preparations and Grading The first step of site preparation should be to strip the vegetation, topsoil, or loose soils to expose medium dense to very dense native soils in pavement and building areas. This material should be removed from the site, or stockpiled for later use as landscaping fill. The resulting subgrade should be compacted to a Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geofechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 6 firm, non -yielding condition. Areas observed to pump or weave should be repaired prior to placing hard . surfaces. The on -site glacial till likely to be exposed during construction is considered highly moisture sensitive, and the surface will disturb easily when wet. We expect these soils would be difficult, if not impossible, to compact to structural fill specifications in wet weather. We recommend that earthwork be conducted during the drier months.. Additional expenses of wet weather or winter construction would include extra excavation and use of imported fill or rock spalls. Structural Fill General: All fill placed beneath buildings, pavements or other settlement sensitive features should be placed as structural fill. Structural fill, by definition, is placed in accordance with prescribed methods and standards, and is monitored by an experienced geotechnical professional or soils technician. Field - monitoring procedures would include the performance of a representative number of in -place density tests to document the attainment of the desired degree of relative compaction. Materials: - Imported structural fill should consist of a good quality, free -draining granular soil, free of organics and other deleterious material, and be well graded to a maximum size of about 3 inches. Imported, all-weather structural fill should contain no more than 5 percent fines (soil finer than a Standard U.S.-No. 200 sieve), based on that fraction passing the U.S., 3/4-inch sieve. The use of 6n-site soil as structural fill. will be dependent on moisture content control. Some drying of the native soils may be necessary in order to achieve compaction. During warm, sunny days this could be accomplished by spreading the material in thin lifts and compacting. Some aeration a nd/or addition of moisture may also be necessary. We expect that compaction of the native soils to structural fill specifications would be difficult, if not impossible, during wet weather. Fill Placement: Following subgrade preparation, placement of the structural fill may proceed. Fill should be placed in -8- to 10-inch-thick uniform lifts, and each lift should be spread evenly and be thoroughly compacted prior to placement of subsequent lifts. All structural fill underlying building areas, and within a depth of 2 feet below pavement and sidewalk subgrade, should be compacted to at least 95 percent of its maximum dry density. Maximum dry density, in this report, refers to that density as Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 7 determined by the ASTM D 1557 compaction test procedure. Fill more than 2 feet beneath sidewalk� and pavement subgrades should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density. ne moisture content of the soil to be compacted should be within about 2 percent of optimum so that a readily compactable condition exists. It may be necessary to overexcavate and remove wet surficial soils in cases where drying to a compactable condition is not feasible. All compaction should be accomplished by equipme nt of a type and size sufficient to attain the desired degree of compaction. Temporary and Permanent Slopes Temporary cut slope stability is a function of many factors, such as the type and consistency of soils, depth of the cut, surcharge loads adjacent to the excavation, length of time a. cut remains open, and the pres ence of surface or ground water. It is exceedingly difficult under these variable conditions to estimate a stable temporary cut slope geometry. Therefore, it should be the responsibility of the contradtor to maintain safe slope configurations, since the contractor is continuously at the job site, able to observe the nature and condition of the cut slopes, and able to monitor the subsurface materials and ground water conditions encountered. We anticipate cuts for the daylight basements of your proposed residences. For planning purposes, we recommend that temporary cuts in the near -surface weathered soil s be no greater than I H: IV. Cuts in the fill should be no greater than 1.5HAV. Cuts -in the dense to very dense till may stand at a 0.75HAV inclination or possibly steeper. If ground water seepage is encountered, we would expect that flatter inclinations would be necessary. We recommend that cut slopes be protected from erosion. Measures taken may include covering cut slopes with plastic sheeting and diverting surface runoff away from the top of cut slopes. We do not recommend vertical slopes for cuts deeper than 4 feet, if worker access is necessary. We recommend that cut slope heights and inclinations conform to local and WISHA/OSHA standards. Final slope inclinations for structural fill and the cuts in the native soils should be no steeper than 21-1: IV. Lightly compacted fills or common fills should be no steeper than 31-1: IV. Common fills are defined as fill material with some organics that are "trackrolled" into place. They would not meet the compaction specificat ion of structural fill. Final slopes should be vegetated and covered with straw or jute netting. The vegetation should be maintained until it is established. Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. 0 . 0 Geotechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 8 Foundations Conventional shallow spread foundations should be founded on undisturbed, medium dense to very :dense, glacial till, or be supported on structural fill extending to those soils. If the soil at the planned bottom of footing elevation is not medium dense to very dense, it should be overexcavated to expose suitable bearing soil, and :the excavation should be filled with structural fill, or the footing may be overpoured with extra concrete. For residences planned to be built on sloping ground, we recommend a minimum horizontal distance of 10 feet between the bottom of the footing and the slope face. Footings should extend at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finished ground surface for.. frost protection and bearing capacity considerations. Minimum, foundation widths of 16 and 20 inches should be used for continuous and isolated spread footings, respectively. Standing water should not be allowed to accumulate in footing trenches. All loose or disturbed soil should be removed from the foundation excavation prior to placing concrete. For foundations constructed as outlined above, we recommend an allowable design bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be used for the footing design. International Building Code (113C) guidelines should be followed when considering short-term transitory wind or seismic loads. Potential foundation settlement using the recommended allowable bearing pressure is estimated to be less than I - inch total and V2-inch differential between footings or across a distance of about 30 feet. Higher soil bearing values may be appropriate for footings founded on the unweathered till, and with wider footings. These higher values can be determined after a review of a specific design. Lateral loads can be resisted by ffiction between the foundation and subgrade soil, and by passive soil resistance acting on the below -grade portion of the foundation. For the latter, the foundation must be. poured "neat" against undisturbed soil or backfilled with clean, free -draining, compacted structural fill. Passive resistance may be calculated as a triangular equivalent fluid pressure distribution. We recommend that an equivalent fluid density of 225 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) be used to calculate the allowable lateral passive resistance for the case of a level ground surface adjacent to the footing. An allowable coefficient of ffiction between footings and soil of 0.45 may be used, and should be applied to the vertical dead load only. A factor of safety of 2.0 has been applied to the passive pressure to account for required movements to generate these pressures. The friction coefficient does not include a factor of safety. Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Rf Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 9 Lateral Loads The lateral earth pressure acting on retaining walls is dependent on the nature and density of the soil behind the wall, the amount of lateral wall movement that can occur as backfill is placed, and the inclination of the backfill. Walls that are free to yield at least one -thousandth of the height of the wall are in an "active" 1condition. Walls restrained from movement by stiffness or bracing are in An "at -rest" condition. Active earth pressure and at -rest earth pressure can -be calculated based on equivalent -fluid density. Equivalent fluid densities for active and at�rest earth pressure of 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) and 55 pcf, respectively, may be used for design for a level backslope. Equivalent fluid densities for . active and at -rest earth pressure of 45 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) and 75 pcf, respectively, may be used for de sign for a 20 degree backslope. These values assume that the on -site soils are used for backfill, and that the wall backfill is drained. The preceding values do not include the effects of surcharges due to foundation loads, traffic or other surface loads. Surcharge effects should be considered where appropnate. The above lateral pressures may be resisted by ffiction at the base of the wall and passive resistance against the foundation. A coefficient of ftiction of 0.45 may be used to deten-nine the base friction when supported on the above recommended foundation subgrade preparation alternatives. An equivalent fluid density of 225 pcf should be used for passive resistance. The friction value does not incorporate a safety factor. A safety factor of 2 is applied to the passive pressure to limit movement. All wall backfill should be well compacted. Care should be, taken to prevent the buildup of excess lateral soil pressures due to overcompaction of the wall backfill. This can be accomplished by placing wall backfill in 8-Inch loose lifts and compacting with small, band -operated compactors. I Slabs -On -Grade Slab -on -grade. areas should be prepared as recommended in the Site Preparation and Grading subsection. Slabs should be supported on medium dense to very dense native soils, or on structural fill extending to these soils. Where moisture control is a concern, we recommend that slabs be underlain by 6, inches of free -draining coarse sand or pea gravel for use as a capillary break. A suitable vapor barrier, such as heavy plastic sheeting, should be placed over the capillary break. Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 10 Drainage We recommend that runoff from impervious surfaces, such as roofs, driveway and access roadways, be collected and routed to an appropriate stonn water discharge system. Final site grades should allow for drainage away from any buildings. We suggest that the finished ground surface be sloped at a gradient of 3 percent minimum. for a distance of at least 10 feet away from the buildings. Surface water should be collected by permanent catch basins and drain lines, and be discharged into a storm drain system. We recommend that footing drains be used around all of the structures where moisture control is .important. The underlying till will pond water that accumulates in the crawl space. It is good practice to use footing drains installed at least I foot below the planned finished, floor slab or crawl space elevation to provide drainage for the crawl space. At a minimum, the crawl space should be sloped to drain to an outlet tied to the drainage system. If drains are omitted around slab -on -grade floors where moisture control is important, the slab should be a mini mum of I foot above surrounding grades. Where used, footing drains should consist of 4-inch-diameter, perforated PVC pipe that is surrounded by free -draining material, such as pea gravel. Footing drains should discharge into tigbtlines leading to an appropriate collection and discharge point. Crawl spaces should be sloped to drain, and a positive connection should be made into the foundation. drainage system. For slabs -on -grade, a drainage path should be provided from the capillary break material to the footing drain system. Roof drains should not be connected to wall or footing drains. MONITORING We should be retained to provide monitoring and consultation services during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, and to provide recommendations for design changes, should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those anticipated. USE OF THIS REPORT We have prepared this report for Hoover Premier Homes and their agents, for use in planning and design of this project. The data and report should be provided to prospective contractors for their bidding and Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page I I estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of subsurface conditions. The scope of our work does not include services related to construction safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractors' methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our report, for consideration in design. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions. We recommend that project planning include contingencies in budget and schedule, should areas be found with conditions that vary from those described in this report. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget for our work, we have strived to take care that our work has been completed in accordance with generally accepted practices followed in this area at the time this report was prepared. No other conditions, expressed or implied, should be understood. "M Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 12 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you. If there are any questions concerning this report or: if we can provide additional services, please call. Sincerely, Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Jeff Laub, LG Project Geologist 1EXP11KES OW161,4- Rick B. Powell, PE Principal PAO:JPL:RBP:nt Three Copies Submitted Five Figures Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Vicinity Map N I A B c D E IF G J T F 6 TH 4 L 7 F- L Project bT 2 3 -"1 4 5 OR 01995 Thomas Bros. Maps Cornerstone Phone: (425) 844-1977 RH Hoover - Meadowdale. Estates Fax: (425) 844-1987 Geotechnical, Inc. File Number Figure 17625-130th Ave NE, C-1 02 - Woodinville, WA - 98072 1791 1 TP-3 .. ..... .. ... .... 7.7) �' A ." t 'j, J N r 0 n: Reference. Site Plan based on scanned site plan by CHS Engineering, dated 0912003. 1 t6 C 11 41 Site Plan LEGEND. Number and Approximate Location of Test Pit 100 200 Scale I" = 100' a a Unified Soil Classification System MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP GROUPNAME SYMBOL GRAVEL CLEAN GRAVEL GW WELL -GRADED GRAVEL, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL COARSE- GP POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL GRAINED MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION GRAVEL SOILS RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE WITH FINES GM SILTY GRAVEL GC CLAYEY GRAVEL- MORETHAN50% RETAINED ON number 200 SIEVE SAND CLEAN SAND SW WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND SID POORLY -GRADED SAND MORE THAN 50% OF SAND COARSE FRACTION PASSES NO. 4 SIEVE WITH FINES SM SILTY SAND sc CLAYEY SAND SILT AND CLAY INO RGANIC ML SILT FINE - CL CLAY GRAINED LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50% SOILS ORGANIC OL ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY MORETHAN50% SILT AND CLAY INORGANIC PASSES NO. 200 SIEVE MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY LIQUID LIMIT 50% OR MORE ORGANIC OH ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT .HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT NOTES: SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS 1) Field classification is based on Dry- Absence of moisture, dusty, dry visual examination of soil in general to the touch accordance with ASTM D 2488-83. 2) Soil classification using laboratory Moist- Damp, but no visible water tests is based on ASTM D 2487-83. Wet-, Visible free water or saturated, 3) Descriptions of soil density or usually soil is obtained from consistency are based on below water table interpretation of blowcount data, visual appearance of soils, and/or test data. Cornerstone Phone: (425) 844-1977 Unified Soil Classification System Geotechnical, Inc. Fax: (425) 844-1987 1 17625-130th Ave NE, C-102 - Woodinville, WA* 98072 Figure 3 1 LOG OF EXPLORATION 0 DEPTH TEST PIT ONE 0.0-3.0 3.0-4.0 4.0-10.0 TEST PIT TWO 0.0-1.0 1.0-5.0 5.0-6.0 6.0-10.0 10.0-11.0 TEST PIT THREE 0.0-1.0 1.0-4.0 TEST PIT FOUR 0.0-0.5 USG SOIL DESCRIPTION SM GRAY -BROWN SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, MOIST) (FILL) SM DARK GRAY SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH TRACE GRAVEL AND ORGANICS (LOOSE, WET) (FILL) SM GRAY SILTY MEDIUM TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, WET) (RECESSIONAL OUTWASHIFILL?) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.5,8.0 AND 10.0 FEET GRO UND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED BETWEEN 0.0 AND 4.0 FEET TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 10.0 FEET ON 12/28/04 SM DARK BROWN TO BLACK SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, WET) (TOPSOILIDUFF) SM GRAY -BROWN SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, WET) (FILL) SM DARK BROWN TO BLACK SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL AND ORGANICS (LOOSE, WET) (TOPSOIL) SM RED -BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND ROOTS (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED TILL) sm BROWN -GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST) (TILL) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.0,5.0,9.0 AND 11.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS ENCOUNTERED AT APPROXIMATELY 1.0 FEET SLIGHT TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED BETWEEN 0.0 AND 6.0 FEET TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 11.0 FEET ON 12/28/04 SM BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, MOIST) (FILL) sm GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (VERY DENSE, MOIST) (TILL) SAMPLE WAS- COLLECTED AT 4.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 4.0 FEET ON 12/28/04 Sm GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (VERY DENSE, MOIST) (TILL) NO SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 0.5 FEET ON 12/28/04 CORNERSTONE GEOTECHNICAL, INC. FILE NO 1791 FIGURE 4 LOG OF EXPLORATION DEPTH Usc SOIL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT FIVE 0.0-1.0 1.0-1.5 SM BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, MOIST) (FILL) SM GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (VERY DENSE, MOIST) (TILL) NO SAMPLE WA' S COLLECTED GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT. 1.5 FEET ON 12/28/04 CORNERSTONE GEOTECHNICAL, INC. FILE NO 1791 FIGURE 5 gay)#181,E JAX L ...... ..... .....-MM A -Development, LL( 200502170454 9 PGS FEB 17 205 ....473v— i2th Avenue N.E 02-17-2005 03:19pm $27.00 000 DANTim, sioutaisn counly buju& . ttle--WA 98105 SNOHOMISH COUNTY. WASHINGTON If, a0B DABI(NI 61, has placed this document of ... ........... ­'tecbrd as .416mromer courtesy. and accepts no or validity of the document 507 IDF,*CLARATION OF EASEMENT FOR DRIVEWAYS Grantor 'Development, LLC, a Washington corporation Grantee -..MyRjbqv0b e pin nt, LLC, a Washington corporation Legal Description . 6'. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of Steinman's Meadowdale JEjtatet'*,' plat recorded under Recording Number 210WO'085-349,'-fecords of Snohomish County, Washington (the Assessoes Tax Parcel IDOO. ..-­-0.T0173--6boo05OO -`0 1.0173 000006 00 ..jDI0173 000W,00 010173 IOJD6000 bO 010173-'600.009 00: 010113 006010 0q- 010173bQ001 00 OUK73*00012`0 ............ This Declaration of Easeqjent for Dn4ewayrk (this "Easement") is made this Iq day oficePreAttj , 20 05- , by the abov6 mentthined Grantor/Grantee, as the owner of the property describid— —above (the "I-ob"). ` ....... .... . RECITALS A Grantor/Grantee is the owner of Loti-.5 11 and 12 of 1��ai 6'cofi Steinman's Meadowdale Estates per plat recorded tR " '.4thq Number 200410085349, Records of Snohomish County, Washingion.(thq�J"Laitsi. B Grantor/Grantee is constructing homes on Lots-Whf6fi*-_wilI be served by a common driveway, as shown on the drawings attachiW-64rofio as7"'Exhibits A, B, C and D (the "Driveways"). J RECEIVED MAR PERMIT COUNTE17' MEET FILE .77 ents over the Lots for the Grantor/Grantee desires to create easern -Owners") of the Lots ew riv ;bys for the benefit of itself and the future owners (the apdjo-provi.de for the common maintenance of the Driveways. -boOsideraltion of the premises and other good and valuable consideration. the i I ecdipt,,jnd,*66fVbiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Grantor and Grantee h6rr,Py.jde§hire and.. grant as follows, to E t Grantor declares and grants to the Owners of the ni tEROR �Menl Lots a'n'--6awMen.t: df-the Driveways for purposes of ingress and egress for the Lots 2. Use of "hasement The Owners of the Lots shall not park motor vehicles in tre--) anner that would restrict the .EWy—dways 6c i e the Driveways in a m access of any 64erA6 ihe Qwner's Lot 3. Mai . hj�6�. -Owners shall share equally in the cost Of maintenance, repailr-antl.repk;jeement of the Driveways on the basis of one share for each Lot owned. 4 Decisions I vrith,sespect to work to be done under this djor;.VVot6 qf -the Owners of the Lots on the basis of Easement shall be made',b --M one vote for each Lot owne 5. Pgyment In the ldvept-iii .. decision js,"Made under this Easement to have work done on the Driveway, eabK'Owner shaff'pa 'the Owners share of costs upon tt - not less than 115 days' notice from another.-Owner--jt at...payment is due Payment may be required in advance of the work bi�in§ do.nd 6. Lien. Each Owner of Aofthai'll We a lien upon each other Lot for that Lots share of the cost of any work,'-i plus interest and attorney's Ion ­ fees in the event of default, which lien may b0oreclpied in the same manner as a matenalman's lien is foreclosed. 7. Duration. The rights granted hdFQ�n-.s*4Y6­L1ff8ctive as of the date of execution heFeof —and shall be perpetual. 8. Indemnily. Grantee agrees to indeipriffi'f-anit-hold Grantor harmless from any loss or damage ansing out of Grantee's US;b,�Jlhe�Dflv 9 Bindtm —Effect. The benefits and burdjbns:'*9f*,jhjs -'.Easement are appurtenant to and--s—hall run with the Lots, shall be binding'6powthelmnsferees or successors in interest or assigns of the Grantee and Grantig fb(fhd'-terf6berecf`, and shall not be extinguished by merger of title or transfer of any%-ihtereqt-t.n,Ahe'�.ots. flbr..affly OWner to 10 Aftornncahk�m FPP - In the event it becomes neces6an . -r pWner to defend or institute'ligal proceedings as a result of the failure 6f o6oft comply with the terms of the Easement, the substantially prevdilm "' .1-11- 9 pp?. in --such litigation shall be entitled to be reimbursed by the substantially nort-pr�:v rt.g--�ar.tY 2 .-for all.costs incurred or expended in connection therewith including, but not limited to, ....r6asoinable attorneys fees (including appellate fees) and court costs t of a breach of any provision of this Enfdrcem!@�nt In the even )5asefffi�nt,;the parties shall be entitled to any and all remedies available at law or in ieqQibr--jficIUdjng;,bbt not limited to, the equitable remedies of specific performance or : TPand00fi_-br pr�qllip_'Itory injunction issued by a court of appropriate jurisdiction ..."I . 2 )0i4n . drn . ents. Any addition, variation, or modification to this Easement shall not"6e e-ff-jc—tjvif*unTe*s in writing and signed by each of the Owners of the Lots. ',-Law. This Easement and the performance thereof shall be ..-Anobbable" __ laws of the State Of governed,-,- intetpretM .... ponstrued, and regulated by the Washingtorl.. 14 Ndtic6i AnV nottd.6% required or permitted to be served upon a party hereto shall b_eih wrrbnlg 6iid-gtibUbie deemed to have been served when delivered in person to the ph�­&.-itailed by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed46 th4party. at the address of the partys property described herein or to such othiar addresi,a*i &.party shall by notice give to the other party DATED as of the da y!�&.&�t jDove written. GRANTOR: DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a Washington catporation GRANTEE: MMR -DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a Washington corporatio6* /n 3 ..... ....... .)St�TE OF WASHINGTON) )ss. KING j ; ..F!�pAity.1hat-.1 know or have satisfactory evidence that Ron Steinman is the oer�6n wtio*. ippoared before me, and said person acknowledged that said person s1gned--tbis�*instndMfirA,,on oath stated that said person was authorized to execute the instrument-ofid4clinaMedged it as the of MMR-0�v0Ibpment,­L-LC, a Washington corpdration. to be the tree and voluntary act of �uch-dorpmt6*,�of-lhe uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. day of Da jh' . February, 2005 (Sign of Notary) s' *-....(Legibly Print or Stamp Name of Notary) JIM "PUBLIt �'v 0 N e A� 6t P4blic; in and for the State of Washington, 'oil 'ointment expires .14-0so, W A �8 a pp _AAd STATE OF WASHINGTON) )ss. COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have 'iatiiia�� evidence that Ron Steinman is the person who appeared before me, and. said p Onowledged that said person signed this instrument, on oath stated t6atsifia.- " rsoh-was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the . _ .0 -- - - '/ I A1066tee- of MMR Development, LLC, a Washington porp a- - and vofuntar� act of such corporation for the uses and purpQses in the instrument Dated this day of February, 2005 —ammuk. - - ___7 . - 1, t%AEJ. `111 (Signatuff'�yNotoy)..— lot ar;T4 e" 6 .40. (Legibly Print or ff 4f Wary) .A Notary Public in and for thEr*ate6of-Waahington, IV% 0 lip Residing at My appointment exp1res__jd6iLz_ AM 4 woo=- jm 30i 20 0 40 80 SCALE IN FEET LOT 5 1 00, 610173 000005 001 69TH PL`-W--"--'.- 76 ol ol RED DRIVEWAY EMENT .............. .... 4b/ "RED Di AS .......... . DATE 02/07/05 MMfj-v.la".ffvmmv sore m STEINMAN'S MEADOWDAM-ESTATEp So#"" SHARED DRIVEWAY EMEMEfff's..", CHSENMEMS LLC Yaf4jMdJ7XM JrAArf4ffM,-40W EXHIBIT A .-30 lo 0 40 nor — SCALE IN FEET .69T.H PL W LOT 8 P10173 000008 001 -j L — — — — — — — — j DATE 02/07/05 10C, SHARED D VEVWAY, T �ZASEM ENT 7 01. 1 V .0..75 000007 00 lmj,aa,qwRmo$lmrvfv, STEINMAN'S MEADOWDALE"'IESTAT-ES I MLLEKZ OIA M=rJM SHARED DRIVEWAY EASIWIMT6 EXHIBIT B 40 80 ko 0 SCALE IN FEET 69TH PL W 00, r-------- r r b SHARED DRI�EVAY %EASEMENT IV) I LOT 10 9 ol.017S C160009 T0173 000010 00 1 . .... .. O� .... ...... DATE 02/07/05 NUE&W IYA WOU"AV GMSWINEWS,UC - I-$) a;*-%M M14M STEINMAN'S MEADOWDi SHARED DRIVEWAY E EXHIBIT C F4 ........ ...... 20 0 40 so SCALE IN FEET -69TH PL W SHARED DRIvEWAY .. ........ EASEMENT b ry r 4-- m lin CD LQT LOT 12 :010113.:� .'000011 0 1 0173 000012 00 1 1 L ............ DATE 02/07/05 ROAD Mm rat STEINMAWS MEADOWDALF,-'#t5l A.4.t:a L IMPAtEL-NO ! I mmnw SHARED DRIVEWAY EASEM "-.TS wa&xmcws LLC UL M.-mamr-sm" r"fow mr-"w EXHIBIT D a