The URL can be used to link to this page

17116 69TH PL W.PDFIIIIIIIIIIII 5311 17116 69TH PL W ADDRESS: (vq g TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: 10 000 00!5 0 (2 BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE): 2-005 - ows- COVENANTS (RECORDED) CRITICAL AREAS: 40/—�/3 DETERMINATION: 0 Conditional Waiver E] Study Required;"ZWaiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT 9'S: DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED: EASEMENT(S) RECORDED PERMITS ( PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED: SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED: /3111 c SEWER LID FEE $: LID #: SHORT PLAT FILE:p-Q�,q?� LOT: 5 BLOCK: SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) GEOTECH REPORT DATED: STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #: WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: OTHER: LATEMP\DST's\Fornis\Street File Checklist.doc �771,7P ;77 of Edmonds SIDE SEWER PERMIT PERMIT NO: 9986 PERART EXPIRE Address of Construction: 11, 1 V 19!d k I W - k * VUT 7D, I LED # Property Tax Account Parcel No. Attach copies.of all access and utility easements Verified and Approved,b Owner and/or Contractor: Twtt, Contractor Lice . nse#: Building Permit #: n5 V�Single Family Invasion.into City *Right-of.Way.: Yes . [:]No Multi -Family (No. of Units *RW Construction Permit 60 5 - QQ '6 3 Fj Commercial (No..of Units Cross other . *.*Private Property: Ej Yes No F� Public "Attach legal description and copy of recorded easement. 'autOwner/Contractor _0S Owner or contr ctor signatur and acknowledgement statement: Date y signing fort ermit I certify that I have read the City's public handout entitled ide Sewer Specifications, and shallbomply with all City requirements out in,ed therein. NOTE: IF JOB SITE IS NOT READYTOR INSPECTION WHEN INSPECTOR ARRIVES A $45 RE -INSPECTION FEE WILL BE CHARGED. Job Site Ready YES NO -Date.: Initial: Partial Inspection: kjoL, wvatT. Date: 46 (�dlnitial: PartiifinsR�ction: Da jt: Initial: 101 (P o3— initial: FINAL INSPECTION APPR,OVED: Dat. : -Z 1 It to Street File: E] MUST BE: POSTED ON JOB SITE t- Mile Copy: File Green Copy: Inspector Buff Copy: Applicant L-,temp;bldg,fo.r!ns;ssperinitjlg4/00 0 I 27,Qn1i el, �,O, 16221 V / � - I — 6805 16310 16238 16228 I Wo 16311 7212 To 6222 16232 68W 16315 !D 16330 7316 16318 (L 16315 16WO 16319 3 I Sumo — 116404 16319 H 1 7109 16323 16322 16321 6901 6904: w > < 1 14 - N 16411 16414 7404 7317 P 7114 66M, 02 73=20 7110 7040 M30 7014 1r. 16420 16429 1 H PL SW 16419 16508 16431 7406 7314 1 P 16423 7010 7028 7020 16 6811 16 6510 !2 6801 Meadowdale Communty 16 16520 16510 16500 If I � I LT—, CILb 16 lu IWM pL SW 7003 > < LU 16525 7130 :13, 7010 4 0 18621 16605 16618 16614 16612 16606 16616166DS 166DS 16610 16607 16611 16615 161, 16611 16m 16623 16624 16622 16620 16616 16618 16624 �: 16619 16620 16617 -j a. 16US MeadoVvdale 16711 16706 16632 ti 16628 16621 1670� 16710 662716703 Playfields 16717 16703 16742 16706 1672 16722 16707 1 691,1 �D A v 16711 16714 1671 16804 16715 16711 16721 7421 7417 16727 16748 16810 1672 !:i ST 730 0 Z lagal 7414 OSM56 Ii ov , 16832 16 16833 16905 7211 16809 69G7 16B31 16900 6917 16919 7418 7400 Eagle's 7203 Nest 16931 16925 16921 7420 7424 I ;; 17009 7103 17018 1 1 o 17015 17010 17006 m Qp 7121 7039 7037 Imam 17012 17001 17020 < 1 ri 17016 7 F7014 0% 7071 7041 17015 A b mi 1 7111 17020 7617 1w 11 17020 0 171) )7/17 17017 17024 ig M03 17 L, 17109 1 177114 17105 7529 17110 3: w 11 7120 7029 7001 I'M 17118 71.3 -- in' > < 7104 1 71 7009 '7111 17122 7126 7527 75V 7321 7305 171'22 17129 7005 17117 06 7112 1 126 17127 17207 7220 7202 17201 7082 17217 ,Ab 7210 — 17206 17215 7010 6920 7062 6917 17206 3: j 1723 1 7507 7510 7305 17216 17223 7020 6915 17 6718 7515 7404 74G3 17229 7012 6907 7529 7508 73RD ST M 17303 17210 !U 7220 721n ---------- 4-- 17324 Geotechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates .Edmonds, Washington I For Hoover Premier Homes RECENED JAN 7 2005 PERMIT COUNTER - EET FILE 0 17625-1301h Ave. NE, C102, Woodinville, WA 98072 Phone: 425-844-1977 Fax: 425-844-1987 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 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 6880-172 nd 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 ��p shows lot, road, and utility layout. We have also been provided ---------- with a Slope Stability Evaluation, prepared by GeoEngineers and dated June 18, 20DZ,—t�pt addresses the detention facility. Ad&!_o:ii_1l_y_, w-e have been provided with field reports prepared by Sky Valley Testing that document compaction testing performed during the main earthwork phase of the project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 7lFhe L-shaped project site has maximum dimensions of approximately 640 feet north to south and 440 feet east to west. ne development consists of a total of 12 lots. We understand that you intend to construct 0 Geotechnical Engineering Report 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: 1. 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 (69�h Place W) was paved. Site grading was also complete and grass was growing on all of the lots. The storm water 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 (311: IV). An existing residence borders the soutbwestem comer of the site and 172 "d 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 Geolechnical, Inc. 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 Vasbon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation, ended approximately 11,000 years ago. Many of the geomorpbic 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. Soil 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 (Preliminary Surficial Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Edmonds West Quadrangles, Snohomish and King Counties, Mackey Smith, 1975). The m*ap also indicates the presence of advance and recessional outwash 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 recess Ion 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 11.0 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 Sol] 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 eport Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 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 within 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 by weathered 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. Erosion Hazard The erosion hazard criteria used for determination 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 Snohomish 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 f6llowed 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 Report 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. ne I 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 2 was 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 due 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. . 0- 0 Geotechnical 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. 'ne on -site glacial till likely to be exposed during construction is considered highly moisture sensitive, and the su rface 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 I 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 on -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-tbick 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. 1 0 0 Geotechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 7 determined by the ASTM D 1557 compacti on. test procedure. Fill more than 2 feet beneath sidewalks and pavement subgrades should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density. The 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 suTficial soils in cases where drying to a compactable condition is not feasible. All compaction should be accomplished by equipment 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 presence o*f 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 contractor 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 soils be no greater than I H: IV. Cuts in the fill should be no. greater than 1.5H: IV. Cuts in the dense to very dense till may stand at a 0.75H:IV 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, it 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 2H: IV. Lightly compa cted fills or common fills should be no steeper than 3H:IV. Common fills Are defined as fill material with some organics that are "trackrolled" into place. They would not meet the compaction specification 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. 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 minim um 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 (IBC) 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 1- inch total and '/2-inch differential b.etween 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 friction 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 friction 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 Report 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" condition. 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'design 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 appropriate. The above lateral pressures may be resisted by friction at the base of the wall and passive resistance against the foundation. A coefficient of friction of 0.45 may be used to determine 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 ba'ckfill in 8-mcb loose lifts and compacting with small, band -operated compactors. 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. 0 0 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 storm 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 ornitted around slab -on -grade floors where moisture control is important, the slab should be a minimum 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 tightlines 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. Mwe Cornetstone Geotechnical, Inc. 0 0 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 0 S 0511) AL rE7:PI IMS 08/16/,94 Rick B. Powell, PE Principal PAO:JPL:RBP:nt Three Copies Submitted Five Figures Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. CA uj HIM I.SLd cc CL 0 co 70 0 0 Ell E LL z co 75 T LU 144:� PO r— 00 co 00 CY) Ul) LO CN CN Co o Li- '10 A C14 LU 75 Z, C.2 HIOL C') L6 C04 led A 0 c (D I M, I TIM R IM ,� , '. wmmtw-�w N Ln Site Plan :77111 !:7� ...... 77 d 77 7,77 W: 7 1 ' 44 r rp < 5 7 ............ ;;Zz ... ....... Q E 7" --- --- --- — ----------- TP-5 . ........ T 7 I it' 1_1"_�:��s - - - - - - - - - A 4�4 . ..... T A 6 LEGEND TP-1 4, Number and Approximate Location of Test Pit 0 100 200 Scale 1 100' Reference: Site Plan based on scanned site plan by CHS Engineering, dated 09/2003. M a �_l Unified Soil Classification System MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP GROUPNAME SYMBOL GRAVEL CLEAN GRAV EL GW WELL -GRADED GRAVEL, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL COARSE- I 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 MORE THAN 50% 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 INORGANIC ML SILT FINE - CL CLAY GRAINED LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50% SOILS ORGANIC OL ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY MORETHAN50% PASSES NO. 200 SIEVE SILTAND CLAY INORGANIC 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 Fax: (425) 844-1987 Geotechnical, Inc. 17625-130th Ave NE, C-102 -Woodinville, WA* 98072 Figure 3 0 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 OUTWASH/FILL?) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.5, 8.0 AND 10.0 FEET GROUND 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) (TOPSOIL/DUFF) 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 12128/04 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 12/2a/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 12t28/04 CORNERSTONE GEOTECHNICAL, INC. FILE NO 1791 FIGURE 4 LOG OF EXPLORATION DEPTH USG SOIL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT FIVE 0.0-1.0 SM BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, MOIST) (FILL) 1.0-1.5 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 14' WE TAx a HRIED Development, LL( 200502170454 9 PGS FEB 17 Z5 .....1473.1,— 12th Avenue N.E 02-17-2005 03:19pm $27.00 161 Okra, siwwm cmly hum S ftw;-WA 98105 SNOHOMISH COUNTy. WASHINGTON BY, AJ21-DAIJTINI stliwitri-fitisC64 has placed this document of mer courtesy. and accepts no (ecord 85,4 iou�b or validity of the document DE'CLARATION OF EASEMENT FOR DRIVEWAYS Grantor q&4� Development LLC, a Washington corporation Grantee ..M MR.�Sv#�p inent, LLC, a Washington corporation Legal Descnpbon�---tits---g ra;-. 7), 8. 9. 10, 11 and 12 of Steinman's Meadowdale Eitatei" plat recorded under Recording Number 2004.VN.4349,'-fecords of Snohomish County, Washington (the "Lot Assessoes Tax Parcel IDft. 00 --`01 * 0113 000006 00 ...010173130000-..00 010173 (M6006 00 0 0173 00000 00.- 010113 00001f) 00 010173"bQ00-11 00 01CPt73'06bOj2-'00 This Declaration of Ease!pent fb�-bnVeiiwayrk (tbis 4Easemenr) is made this day ofce-kNAxi . 2QO�j_, by the abov6 Montibned Grantor/Grantee, as the owner of the property described above (the 1'�otsft). .. ........ RECITALS A Grantor/Grantee is the owner of Loti-.5, ff'*'-j9--f0 1 land 12 of Steinman's Meadowdale Estates per plat recorded &;6if,R6`c,o*r .dihg Number 200410085349, Records of Snohomish County, Washingt0q.0e PL B Gmntor/Grantee is constructing homes on'ft Lots-,:khi6fi--vAIl be served by a common driveway,,as shown on the drawings attachiWf�rdfii asrExhibits A, B, C and D (the "Driveways"). IVED RF-C (%Tr% MAR 9 2005 MEL I FILE PERMIT COUNTER ents over the Lots for the Grantor/Grantee desires to create easern ptivevibys for the benefit of itself and the future owners (the uOwnersj of the Lots :,-"-a.0d�a-provkde for the common maintenance of the Driveways. / -"I ' ' Jer I . - ri,.coosiii -ation of the premises and other good and valuable consideration. the Madipt and-96firbency of which are hereby acknowledged, Grantor and Grantee h&epy-skO' 'We a0arant as follows- %f ' =Ii�- Ma Grantor declares and grants to the Owners of the Lots an.-fiasaiiie—nt for purposes of ingress and egress for the Lots 2. U s*'e .. ar*:�asement The Owners of the Lots shall not park motor vehicles in th—e.. YS 617 use the Driveways in a manner that would restrict the access of any er..t6 the Qwnees Lot 3. 'bib.'"'bimers shall share equally in the cost of maintenance, repafr-antjxepl�qieement of the Driveways on the basis of one share for each Lot owned. 4 Decisions .- AlL.d etislorib with ---respect to work to be done under this Easement shai- be ma e%b orgy-yot6 q .4he Owners of the Lots on the basis of one vote for each Lot ownW 5. EMe In the ivept*h decision is,*Made under this Easement to have work done on the Driveway, eabK'Owner h s aff* a 'the Ownees share of costs upon p 3 not less than 15 days' notice from another.- Ait..payment is due Payment may be required in advance of the work bein done. g 6. Lien. Each Owner of a'1_ot )sh6ll W� a Ion upon each other Lot for that Lots shaFre—of the cost of any work;-Aqnp.twe�ie�ler, plus interest and attorney's fees in the event of default, which lien maj'4g*kradpied in the same manner as a . .1 . - : matenalman's lien is foreclosed. F. : ..... ... .. 7. Duration. The rights granted as of the date of execution hereof —and shall be perpetual. 8. Indernrift. Grantee agrees to indeinnify-anit-bold Grantor harmless from any loss or damage ansing out of Grantee's usoaf*,2five_Way- 9 Bindin-a 01`66t. The benefits and burdbns:-*of-thm .'Easement are appurtenant to and shall run with the Lots, shall be bindog'6pon- " Imnsferees or successors in interest or assigns of the Grantee and Grantor for" * terrii-bereof, and shall not be extinguished by merger of title or transfer of any'-fioeiest-in....the ',Lots. 10 Attorneys Fees. In the event it becomes necessAFY-io ugny 6ivner to defend or institute legal proceedings as a result of the failure 6f mriothbr QWner to comply with the terms of the Easement, the substantially prevaiiiing' pPr_tY'_,-in -such litigation shall be entitled to be reimbursed by the substantially noh..�r6v6ilin.g-q6it.Y 2 it all:costs incurred or expended in connection therewith including, but not lim ed to, rdasphable attorneys fees (including appellate fees) and court costs. Enforcement In the event of a breach of any provision of this faserffdnt,' ;the parties shall be entitled to any and all remedies available at law or in !eq0dy--ific1,4dIn. I imabda" - . g;*btit not limited to, the equitable remedies of specific performance or ybr prohibitory injunction issued by a court of appropriate jurisdiction 12 dmi . hft. Any addition, variation, or modification to this Easement C. en shall not6e.e'ffbchvd"u61"s in writing and signed by each of the Owners of the Lots. We"Law. 'This Easement and the performance thereof shall be govemed� 1 t�t_qonstrued, and regulated by the laws of the State of Washington 14 Ndtio�s AnV no* -..required or permitted to be served upon a party hereto shall be in writing bi�diikh![-be deemed to have been served when delivered in person to the ph�e-6r,.-ffiaijod by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt party. at the address of the party's property described requested, addressed, o th6 herein or to such othisr adilres.sasi&.party shall by notice give to the other party DATED as of the *jifid mir fif9t above written. GRANTOR: DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a Washington ration 90!PO its 14!t2 dle", GRANTEE: MMR --tyevii6kkNT, LLC, a Washington corporaton'* Its 141100,46.-1 3 > STATIE OF WASHINGTON) )ss. 14TY-OF KING .-I-'certftJhat-.I know or have satisfactory evidence that Ron Steinman is the pergon wtid"'appoarbld before me, and said person acknowledged that said person signed-*9'inshidMW--,. on oath stated that said rson was authorized to execute the Instryment.-aftd-'ablinm4leciged it as the dfteM / ApAo,.e- of MMR-Dievel6pmenk-L-I.C. a Washington corpdration, to be the free and voluntary act of §u0-6orP6m0Wfqe-1he uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. k---1 .-.**- .'- - 1346�jhl-' day of February, 2005 Notary) (sign Of 040 S. (Legib Print or Stamp Name of Notary) 0 A :f., 'Notary P.4blic in and for the State of Washington, �e%% - Rebidjn§ dt -TZ&S- U4 IVA a expires STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss. COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have bpt1sfacWiy eVidence that Ron Steinman is the person who appeared before me, and..said p"on-acknowledged that said person signed this instrument on oath stated #i�tsiQ-fZ-rsori-Nvas authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the M. AWL. Me the free and voluntary of MMR Development, LLC, a Washington Por0o to) be act of such corporation for the uses and purposes a!lbene�in the instrument Dated this 14"110 day of February, 2005 A E L I A\ ,to + V owe .A +?1JBL1t :6--e VP 0 e VAS Notary Public in and for the,�;tyitd.i0Waihjngton, Residing MY appointment exptreS--&d1L4`- 4 30 20 0 40 80 SCALE IN FEET LOT 5 f 610173 000005 001 69TH PL-,-W-'""**-- f 71.00. Lot 010173. O000Q&-*OO S RED DRIVEWAY SEMENT DATE 02/07/05 mmrMilea.mom" sure om STEINMAN'S MEADOWdALli-iEST-AT . tS oftL~ ow araw-2m SHARED DRIVEWAY EM��fs..*' cmaklawfim uc Ya f4" M? SM fUf4M dU,-,MW I EXHIBIT A dL— owl"- 46,3o to 0 4 1 0 so SCALE IN FEET ...693-H PL W f NAY SHARED D VEV T "%f-ASEMENT mn LOT 8 ..---i.OT 7 P10173 000008 001 1 Ot-0173 OID0007 00 _J L - - - - - - - DATE 02/07/05 STEINMAN'S, MEADOWDALE"ESTATES I seux" rm SHARED DRIVEWAY EASqMgMTS EXHIBIT B 20 0 .-,(6.-.30 40 so qrAl F IN F*FFT 69TH PL W r C,6 SHARED DRI 'AY lcn .......... LOT 10 9 q10173 000010 00 1 01.017,3 C100009 DATE 02/07/05 OWEVW WA 9SOVS.-M GWowUV,W8M LLC STEINMAN'S MEADOWD, SHARED DRIVEWAY E EXHIBIT C T, m 0 DATE RECEIVED PERMITEXPIRES USE PERMIT CITY OF EDMONDS ZONE r/ 20 NUMBER Ik-5-J I -A 20?),6- CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION JOB 0I SUITE/APT# ADDRESS 1 (P OWNER NAMEINAYE OF BUSINESS 1-71 cH Inv Tnt, PLAT NAME/SUBDIVISION NO. LOT NO. LID NO, r_7 I z MAILING ADDRESS 1. �0, vi 09 LID FEE $ PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP TESCP Appnwad RW Permit Required EXISTING PROPOSED 000w� Street Use Permit Roq'd Inspecilon Required -13 CITY ZIP TELEPHONE REQUIRED DEDICATION -000" FT Sidewalk Required Underground Wiring required NAME METER IZE LINE SIZE NO. OF FIXTURES PRV REQUIRED 111 1 / I YES C3 NO 13 ADDRESS REMARKS z x OWNER/CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROL/DRAINAGE Un"Ido CITY ZIP LrWv_nk TELEPHONE mw (00. NAME I C14LI# 64 Tyu, �� :2 (I NGINEERING REVIEWEM DATE !" Or. C1 ADDRESS � FIRE., REVIEWED BY DATE l" 0 qITY Zfil L TELEPHONE Ir N CE,OR C1U,. HORELINE OR ADB#` INSPECTION REO'D 'S BOND POSTED STATE LICENSE NUMBER �P..' EXPIRATION DATE��,, t4R0G*,Vf, -313�� T 93 YE xe Is SEPA REVIEW;,,�� :�SIGWAREAP HEIGHT PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL�NO. COMPLETE EXEMPT 'ALLOIED ;ALLOWED PROPOSED 0 11;5 bM -OD5-DD __�IROPOSED EXP NEW RESIDENTIAL, X LU1MBINGfyECH,, LOT COVERAGE ALLOWED ' PROPOSED �AEQUIRED�SETBACKP (FT)" FRONT-'SIDE�, REAR 'rROPOSED SETBACKS (FT.) FRONT, L/R SIDE REAR f ADDITION COMMERCIAL COMPL ANCE OR 'OF /of 14.? z CHANGE USE 13 REMODEL MULTiFAM ILY SIGN PARKING REO'D PROVIDED LOT AREA PLANNING REVIEWE 0, BY DATE %- I s I �4 4 4 FENCE 13 REPAIR CYDS X FT) 4 t`1t:MAHKb OTHER [3 DEMOLISH TANK GARAGE RETAINING WALL F RE SPRINKLER' E] .13 ME ARPORT ROCKERY- ALARM ftYPE OF U ISINESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN: rc 1 M+V H KED BY TYPE OF CTION OCCUPANT A_q 'PU GROUP NUMBER NUMBER OF CRITICAL OF DWELLING A l(V64-0, SPECIAL INSPECTION OCCUPANT o STORIES UNITS N REOUIREDtZ .yEr LOAD DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE -1, V11,46.71is— REMARKe IV PROGRESS INSPE&IONS PER USIC108/1SC1091*109 FINAL INSPEcnON REO'D 49 0,5 F kbo -73 PdA-/46 VALUATION 7, Description ,�F,,,E _0QW-k2 Description FEE Plan Che, q� AIAP3 State Surcharge HWE LLJ GLAZING% LOPE % b & Rk's , Nbl", " uildin Rerm 4 — - City Surcharge PLAN dHECK NO: 06- 0 �� v VESTED DATE oo li?lumbi`�ng-'� Base Fee Mechanical THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO It BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PU13UC Grading DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE SEPARATE PERMISSION. Engr. Review PERMIT APPLICATION: ISODAYS CL PERMIT LIMM I YEAR " PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN 180 DAYS Engr. Inspection C__ SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION 'APPLICAWT, ON BE LF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE. HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESORS Fire Review Plan Chk. Deposit IN INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF X EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANYAND Fire Inspection Receipt # 42 IALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY !3 FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO MODIFX WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENT OF ANY CITY ORDINANCE Landscapelnsp. Total Amt. Due 0 NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAY THE CITYS ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION., Recording Fee Receipt # 1 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- CALL This application Is not a permit until signed by the TION; AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED Building Official or histher Deputy: and Fees are paid, and IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO FOR INSPECTION receipt Is acknovAedged In space provided. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATI9W"73tIQANCE AND RCW 18.27. S SIGN RE DATE SIGWTURE (OWNER OR DATE SIGNED (425) 9A_141//9' I - 2�_ D 771-0 220(� .1 R dA E[j;A DAT" ATTENTIdN) M 1333 ITIS UNLAWFULTO USE 08 OCCUPYABUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTILAFINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVALOR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCLI- PANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC109/IBC110/IRC110. OR GINAq- FILJI YELLOW - IfISPECTOR P:NK - C11601ER GOLD -ASSESSOR nquiq 0 N As 9 A MIPS 01111 A 00111,84% a 0%0w&§%8fm0% In tr6,5* 1-ZECEIVED MAR 0 9 2005 PERMIT COUNTEJ-' CG-O�_u "U-O\f 1p-�c ,� re-- R I&E-UI2:) IV ED MAR 0 9 2005 PERMIT COUNTER