17130 TALBOT RD.PDF1111111111 lill
13534
17130 TALBOT RD
Drainage and Grading Plan
for the
13card Now Reoldence
& Drive/Parking
City of Edmomdo
County of 5mohomieh
Mark & Lettic l3eard
16920 Talbot Rd.
Edmondo, WA 9b026
(425) 771-6014
Revised March 20, 2000
A\�j OY f
�rOT_ �VIASJ
930'.
7_16-1
I Expipas I'LA k-->l 0 -0 :1
Pcoiom 5uild 5ervioem , Itic.
Enoinecrine & Comotruction Mamaocmemt Phone. /Fax: (360) 793-9659
28119 -120th 5t. 5.E., Monroe, WA 98272 Pager: (425) 290-076&
E-Mail: rheidc@premicrl.net
beard Reoidence
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Purpose and Scope
2. Existing Site Conditions
3. Developed Site Conditions
4. Design Philosophy
5. Erosion Sedimentation Control
6. Upstream and Downstream Analysis
7. Erosion Risk Assessment
8. Grading Quantities
Appendix:
Legal Description
Site/Basin Map, and SCS Map
Site Existing and Developed Hydrographs
Conveyance Capacity Calculations
Grading Quantities Report
Soil Logs
1. Purpose and Scope
The purpose of this report is to address the changes to the existing drainage that
will be caused by the construction of a new home and associated driveway.
This development will change the runoff characteristics of the site. The addition of
impervious surfaces could increase the rate and volume of stormwater runoff.
Without the provision for mitigating measures downstream drainage's could be
adversely impacted. In addition, during construction, on -site erosion could result
in sediment being transported downstream with associated negative impacts.
Temporary and permanent water quality measures are proposed to mitigate
potential impacts.
2. Existing Site Conditions
The SCS soil types from Snohomish County Map Sheet #50 is Everett and
Alderwood (map symbols 4/6). Everett is a Group A soil and Alderwood is a
group C soil. Soil logs confirm the front part of the lot at the bluff is a deep sandy
soil and further back from the bluff is a very hard layer at 3.5 feet down. At the
bluff caving of the test hole was noted due to the sandy nature of the soil.
Appropriate trench sideslopes should be proposed to minimize hazards
associated with sandy soils. The test hole adjacent to the existing house showed
some seepage at the top of the hard dense sand layer. This could be expected at
the interface with the overlying loose sand. Refer to the AES report previously
submitted for a full discussion of these conditions.
The site is 0.5 acres on the gently sloping portion back from the steep slope and
has an existing house, garage with associated a/c drive. The house has been
there at least 10 yrs. The area of development is all developed with house paving
or landscaping. Flows from the site would sheefflow to the west, down the steep
bank to the railroad r/w and then to the beach. Most flows now infiltrate in the fine
sand and no erosion channels are evident.
3. Design Philosophy
The design is in accordance with requirements of the City Drainage Handout and
articulated at the City of Edmonds Counter for projects with over 5000 s.f. of
impervious. 2, 10, and 100 yr precipitation amounts have been used as specified
in the City Code. Given the existing developed state of the lot it was agreed
modeling the existing condition as meadow/pasture instead of forested was
I
reasonable. I was to attempt to meet the "existing" condition with the 10 and 100
yr flows. The minimum size orifice allowed is 5/8".
Existing and developed areas were modeled using a SCS based hydrograph
program called Hydragraphs for Windows, version 6.0, by Hydraflow. The Cn
values for Group A and Group C soils were averaged to get a site specific value
to reflect the site soils shown on the SCS map and confirmed by the soil logs.
The peak flows, were mitigated by designing a detention tank that would store the
difference between the design "existing" pasture condition, and the developed
condition within the limitations of the primary 5/8" orifice. The 100 yr release is
met due to the use of a secondary as well as primary orifice.
The tank designed is a 5' diameter, 45' long tank with 36" access and sump risers
welded to it. This will allow the entire structure to be welded and asphalt treated
with only one coupling band. It is important to minimize seepage adjacent to the
steep bluff so a liner is specified under the tank. Footing drains will be combined
with the tank discharge in a 6" HDPE pipeline going down the face of the steep
bluff. The pipe will be installed in accordance with an agreement with Burlington
Northern RR for discharge to their easement. Blocking normally used for pressure
piping is now specified.
The cables required by the BNRR agreement provide 100% redundancy since
the pipe is designed to handle all the stress of the weight of water and pipe in a
completely plugged, or fully flowing pipe with the associated impact at the bottom
T.
Water quality for the paving will be accomplished by use of a floatable separator
at the paving, then combination with roof water and further separation in the tank
due to the orifice discharge.
Following is a summary of the hydrograph results.
Lot
Drainage
"Existing"
Pasture
Developed
Mitigated by
Tank
10 yr.
0.02 cfs
0.12 cfs
0.02 cfs
100 yr.
0.08 cfs
0.23 cfs
0.08 cfs
4. Developed Site Conditions
The developed site conditions will consist of a new residence, and modified
access drive. All impervious surfaces will be captured and piped to the detention
tank.
I
5. Erosion Sedimentation Control
Straw bales will be provided at the discharge of the spreader T to the existing
ditch. Silt fence will be provided at the west edge of the areas of disturbance
before the steep slope to the beach. Seeding, straw and jute netting have been
specified at the slope disturbance where the pipe daylights.
Permanent erosion control will be provided by pavement of the access drive, a
floatable separator at the drive, and flow through the detention tank direct to the
toe of the slope. Quarry spalls have been specified at the discharge.
6. Upstream and Downstream Analysis
The site has about 165' of area upslope between the lot boundary and Talbot
Drive. No evidence of concentrated flows were evident crossing the lot line. Any
sheefflow will be picked up as part of the drive flow to the catch basin and be
piped through the detention tank direct to the toe of the slope.
The downstream system starts at the west edge of the property with sheefflow to
the west to the Railroad easement. There is a culvert under the railroad tracks
near the dispersed site discharge that takes the flow under the tracks and then
out into the Puget Sound Tidelands.
Given the size of the culvert and no proposed increase, there should not be any
adverse downstream impacts from this project.
7. Erosion Risk Assessment
Slope, Soil lype and Relative Risk of Erosion during Construction
Slopes in the area of development are 0-8%. The soil type in the areas of
development are Group A and C. Erosion hazard for these soils given these
slopes are considered slight. The erosion hazard of the Everett bluff is considered
moderate. Given the collection and mitigation of all impervious flows, piping to the
foot of the slope, and dispersal there, the risk of erosion from this site is slight.
During construction the risk of erosion due to concentrated flows is moderate due
to the steep slopes along the bluff. However, the specified containment of all
flows to the tank and tank construction at the beginning of the project along with
the silt fence at the area of disturbance will act to disperse flows, and the
detention system will trap silt, but these measures must be installed and
maintained.
Location of Critical Areas and Related NGPA Areas
Puget Sound is to the west. The site borders a steep slope in excess of 33% at
the bluff. The discharge pipe will run on the surface of the bluff after daylighting
from the tank.
I I , Risk to Fishbearing Streams or Bodies of Water from Proposed Construction
The runoff from the site going to the Sound to the west is limited to treated flow
which will be similar to the existing. With the adequate erosion control measures
proposed for this project there should be no adverse impact to this waterbody.
Potential for Slides or Ground Movements
There are no features evident on this site indicating a great potential for slides or
natural ground movements. Leaks in the drainage system that could saturate the
bluff could change this evaluation.
Sources of Erosive water other than Rainfall
No other concentrated sources of water from upstream exist. No evidence of any
channels or ditches providing water to the development were evident.
Conclusion
The risk for erosion for this site will be greatest during construction and build -out.
BMP's will be specified to keep erosion potential at a minimum. Given the Type A
and C soils with the proposed landscaping and asphalt, and the flow direct to the
toe of the slope, this should be achieved at a high level for minimal risk. With
proper installation and maintenance of BMP's it should be possible to keep
material transported off site at their pre-existing levels.
Upon completion of the project, areas of greatest risk will be disturbed areas and
concentrated discharge points for collected rainwater. As such these should be
kept at a minimum. To mitigate these occurrences all areas should be
mulched/planted such that this risk is minimized prior to the rainy season with
constant re-evaluation of risk. All dispersion trenches or other areas of potential
point discharge are to be armored/mulched such that erosion at these points are
minimized.
8. Grading
The grading quantity was calculated as 2449 c.y. cut using an ACAD14/Eagle
Point 99, tin -to -tin computer model for grades shown on the architectural plans,
and will be the amount necessary to meet height limitations.
Appendix: Site/Basin Map, SCS Map and USGS Quad Map
zaam -
Zzaz
Ay
Ale.
"7zlvzzlc -IYIIOII;f-f
lopf, r r z 111 91 1 W7
-,Vz,;rz AIZ-rr
6 r- INVIA 0
Awff ojfLZT-f IV
1
11,42 M.
LLI
w
41,M, 7, 4
Z�
,ry
All-f
cn
cn
LD
a17-
iiia 1,5'
4
. 11A.0
k�
Xz
pw
z aV. 44U. Ze-f,
JYe. 7-Z7-Z
ivy 's/
-7
ez mr, gyp- f
OWN BY _Z�'.1VAW
CHKO BY
DATE 7-A�'-,91 I J09ND.
SCALE-Z"'-�5V
SHEET - / -
OF
Appendix: Site/Basin Map, SCS Map::
r-.Q —I--
45 Oor.
-ntlr. TI —,--I I
rL 1+ C-.<)
TPIP
ell 10,
AMU
YY
q I - All
40
V
54 V,
)Q �7
-19 C-)
A Ain -
06
pop" 1 11 q,lv 0 rTr—T IF T
PIP WT ,
Ln
T.
If
41
1�1 tl
vi C 7
LI)
WJ
'Ve
00
;-F--,4y,! N
Ai
Zj
pt,
Mj
Emu
W
-iLn
14
T 7 4 Y".
w �Fw
-) - I " ; ij
ai
All 'O'i -A
jesul SUIOF)
Appendix: Site Existing and Developed Hydrographs
I ( 'Z'O� co
K o (1, -A p (- Z---
tv
vv;\
JQ
JQ
G�Yoq 61".)
ez
477 (1-1
4-7 4�3
-1; C)
SA),
'o.
C seL A�
0
OA):
C
TO
.0
c-, 1�-
Co
Irbf O'C',CA
V/
C—
0 C) eL C_P,�
D"C�-T C-
4k
Legend
Runoff
Combined
ChannelReach
Diversion
Pond Route
IProject: c2000beard.GPW I IDF: SAMPLE.IDF 1 3 hyd's 1 03-14-2000
TR55 Tc Worksheet
Page I
HYd. No. 1
Pasture Model - Pre -Existing
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Sheet Flow
Manning's n-value
= 0.150
Flow length
= 225.0 ft
Two-year 24-hr precip.
= 1.50 in
Land slope
= 7.6 %
Travel Time ........................................ 16.1 min
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Flow length
= 0 ft
Watercourse slope
= 0.0 %
Surface description
= Paved
Average velocity
= 0.00 fus
TravelTime ........................................
0.0 min
Channel Flow
Cross section flow area
= 0.0 sqft
Wetted perimeter
= 0.0 ft
Channel slope
= 0.0 %
Manning's n-value
= 0.015
Velocity
= 0.00 ft/s
Flow length
= 0.0 ft
Travel Time ........................................
min
Total Travel Time, Tc ........................ 16.1 min
TR55 Tc Worksheet
Hyd. No. 2
Developed Condition
Storm frequency= 10 yrs
Sheet Flow
Manning's n-value
= 0.150
Flow length
= 92.0 ft
Two-year 24-hr precip.
= 1.50 in
Land slope
= 5.4 %
Travel Time ........................................ 9.0 min
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Flow length
= 112ft
Watercourse slope
= 0.5 %
Surface description
= Paved
Average velocity
= 1.44 ft/s
Travel Time ........................................ 1.3 min
Channel Flow
Cross section flow area
= 0.0 sqft
Wetted perimeter
= 0.0 ft
Channel slope
= 0.0 %
Manning's n-value
= 0.015
Velocity
= 0.00 ft/s
Flow length
= 0.0 ft
Travel Time ... ..................................... = min
Total Travel Time, Tc ........................ = 10.3 min
Page I
11 Hydrograph Summary Report
Page 1 ,
Hyd.
No.
Hydrograph
type
(origin)
Peak
flow
(cfs)
Time
interval
(min)
Time to
peak
(min)
Volume
(cuft)
Return
period
(Yrs)
Inflow
hyd(s)
Maximum
elevation
(ft)
Maximum
storage
(cuft)
Hydrograph
description
I
SCS Runoff
0.02
6
492
648
10
Pasture Model - Pr
2
SCS Runoff
0.12
6
480
1,862
10
Developed Conditio
3
Reservoir
0.02
6
1194
1,862
10
2
L
79.34
728
Detention Pipe
Proj. file: c2000beard.GPW
OF file: SAMPLEADF
FRun date: 03-14-2000
Mydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. I
Pasture Model - Pre -Existing
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Drainage. area
= 0.50 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0%
Tc method
= TR55
Total precip.
= 2.00 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
English
Peak discharge = 0.02 cfs
Time interval =
6 min
Curve number =
75
Hydraulic length =
0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) =
16.1 min
Distribution =
Type A
Shape factor =
484
Total Volume = 648 cuft
1 - SCS Runoff - 10 Yr - QP 0.02 ds
0.020-
0.015-
Hyd. 1
0.010-
CY
0.005-
0.000 L__+ 1
03 lb 115 �O _'5
Time (hrs)
Hydrograph'Plot
Hyd. No. 2
Developed Condition
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Drainage area
= 0.50 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0%
Tc method
= TR55
Total precip.
= 2.00 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
English
Peak discharge = 0.12 cfs
Time interval =
6 min
Curve number =
90
Hydraulic length =
0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) =
10.3 min
Distribution =
Type A
Shape factor =
484
Total Volume = 1,862 cuft
2 - SCS Runoff - 10 Yr - QP 0.12 ds
0.15-
0.10-
Hyd. 2
CY
0.05-
0.001
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (hrs)
.Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 3
Detention Pipe
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 10yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 2
Max. Elevation = 79.34 ft
Storage Indication method used.
English
Peak discharge
= 0.02 cfs
Time interval
= 6 min
Reservoir name
= Detention Tank
Max. Storage
= 728 cuft
Total Volume = 1,862 cuft
3 - Reservoir - 10 Yr - QP 0.02 cfs
0.15-
/ Hyd. 2
0.10--
0.05-
/ Hyd. 3
0.00 j
0 10 20 �O 40 50
Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Summary Report
Page I
Hyd.
No.
Hydrograph
type
(origin)
Peak
flow
(Cfs)
Time
interval
(min)
Time to
peak
(min)
Volume
(cuft)
Return
period
(Yrs)
Inflow
hyd(s)
Maximum
elevation
(ft)
Maximum
storage
(cuft)
Hydrograph
des6ription
1
SCS Runoff
0.08
6
486
1,635
100
----
Pasture Model - Pr
2
SCS Runoff
0.23
6
480
3,376
100
—
—
--
Developed Conditio
3
Reservoir
0.08
6
540
3,376
100
2
80.16
853
Detention Pipe
Proj. file: c2000beard.GPW
OF file: SAMPLEADF
Run date: 03-14-2000
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 1
Pasture Model - Pre -Existing
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Drainage area
= 0.50 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0%
Tc method
= TR55
Total precip.
= 3.00 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
English
Peak discharge = 0.08 cfs
Time interval =
6 min
Curve number =
75
Hydraulic length =
0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) =
16.1 min
Distribution =
Type IA
Shape factor =
484
Total Volume = 1,635 cuft
I - SCS Runoff - 100 Yr - QP = 0.08 ds
0.08-
0.06-
Hyd. 1
0.04-
CY 0.02-
0.00
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (hrs)
, Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 2
Developed Condition
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Drainage area
= 0.50 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0%
Tc method
= TR55
Total precip.
= 3.00 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
English
Peak discharge = 0.23 cfs
Time interval =
6 min
Curve number =
90
Hydraulic length =
0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) =
10.3 min
Distribution =
Type A
Shape factor =
484
Total Volume = 3,376 cuft
2 - SCS Runoff - 100 Yr - QP 0.23 ds
0.25-
0.20-
0.15-
Hyd. 2
CY 0.10-
0.05-
0.00
0 5 10 15 2 5
Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 3
Detention Pipe
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 100 yrs,
Inflow hyd. No. = 2
Max. Elevation = 80.16 ft
Storage Indication method used.
English
Peak discharge
= 0.08 cfs
Time interval
= 6 min
Reservoir name
= Detention Tank
Max. Storage
= 853 cuft
Total Volume = 3,376 cuft
3 - Reservoir - 100 Yr - QP = 0.08 ds
0.25-
0.20- Hyd. 2
0.15-
CY
0.10-
0.05- Hyd. 3
0.00,
0 10 �O 3�0 40 50
Time (hrs)
, Reservoir Report
Reservoir No. 1 - Detention Tank
Pond Data
Pipe diameter = 5.00 ft
Stage / Storage Table
Stage
Elevation
ft
ft
0.00
75.50
0.50
76.00
1.00
76.50
1.50
77.00
2.00
77.50
2.50
78.00
3.00
78.50
3.50
79.00
4.00
79.50
4.50
80.00
5.00
80.50
Pipe length = 45.0 ft Invert elevation = 75.50 ft
Contour area Incr. Storage Total storage
sqft cuft cuft
00
0
0
00
46
46
00
80
127
00
97
223
00
107
330
00
114
444
00
ill
555
00
107
662
00
96
758
00
80
838
00
46
884
Culvert I Orifice Structures
[A]
[131
[C]
[D]
Rise in
= 6.0
0.6
1.8
0.0
Span in
= 6.0
0.6
1.8
0.0
No. Barrels
= 1
1
1
0
Invert El. ft
= 75.50
75.50
79.50
0.00
Length ft
= 50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Slope %
= 1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
N-Value
= .013
.013
.013
.000
Orif. Coeff.
= 0.60
0.60
0.60
0.00
Multi -Stage
= -
Yes
Yes
No
Stage / Storage / Discharge Table
Weir Structures
[A]
Crest Len ft
= 1.6
Crest El. ft
= 80.25
Weir Coeff.
= 3.00
Eqn. Exp.
= 1.50
Multi -Stage
= Yes
Page I
English
[13] [C] [D]
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
No
No
No
Tailwater Elevation = 0.00 ft
Note: All outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage Storage Elevation Civ A Civ B Civ C CIv D Wr A Wr B Wr C Wr D Discharge
ft
cuft
ft
cfs
cfs
cfS cfs
cfs cfs cfs cfs
cfs
0.00
0
75.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.50
46
76.00
0.47
0.01
0.00
0.00 -
0.01
1.00
127
76.50
0.68
0.01
0.00
0.00 -
0.01
1.50
223
77.00
0.83
0.01
0.00
0.00 ---
0.01
2.00
330
77.50
0.96
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.01
2.50
444
78.00
1.07
0.02
0.00 ---
0.00 -
0.02
3.00
555
78.50
1.18
0.02
0.00 ---
0.00 - - ---
0.02
3.50
662
79.00
1.27
0.02
0.00
0.00 - - -
0.02
4.00
758
79.50
1.36
0.02
0.00
0.00 - - -
0.02
4.50
838
80.00
1.44
0.02
0.05 ---
0.00 - -
0.07
5.00
884
80.50
1.52
0.02
0.08
0.59 - ---
0.69
Appendix: Conveyance Capacity Calculations
6" PVC Pipe Discharge
Worksheet for Circular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\typculvt.fm2
Worksheet 6" Pipe
Flow Element Circular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Full Flow Capacity
Input Data
Mannings Coefficient
0.010
Channel Slope
1.0 %
Diameter
6.00 in
Results
Depth
6.0
in
Discharge
0.73
cfs
Flow Area
0.20
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
1.57
ft
Top Width
0.00
ft
Critical Depth
0.43
ft
Percent Full
100.00
Critical Slope
0.009287 ft/ft
Velocity
3.71
ft/S
Velocity Head
0.21
ft
Specific Energy
FULL
ft
Froude Number
FULL
Maximum Discharge
0.78
cfs
Full Flow Capacity
0.73
cfs
Full Flow Slope
0. 0 10000 ft/ft
03/14/00 Design Build services, Inc. FlowMaster v5.10
03:53:53 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
6" PVC Capacity
Rating Table for Circular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:Xhaestad\fmw\typculvt.fm2
Worksheet 6" Pipe
Flow Element Circular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Channel Depth
Constant Data
Mannings Coefficient 0.010
Channel Slope 79.0 %
Diameter 6.00 in
Input Data
Minimum Maximum Increment
Discharge 0.23 0.78 0.25 cfs
Rating Table
Discharge
Depth
Velocity
(cfs)
(in)
(ft/S)
0.23
0.8
15.53
0.48
1.1
19.33
0.73
-1.4
21.86
03/14/00 Design Build Services, Inc. FlowMaster v5.10
04:16:25 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of I
s I �-s I z:,o
"K �) CL ctlz--,_ IX2,
C kx"VA.
42 e7
Ap
02—
TA�"ros uo-,�_-
ry.N
ss
cc, s
4,c 4c,
2;-z
OA(_
C. 0.0,5A 41400 1,6 So x,
X�L
Go 6oA-t-z,,,. -c- L,:k t S5,).t- . JL
LAA
el
':;7b-o
0, a,�� L
0
0 - 11w)
Te-I -, 'IV 41.4i
--7
4,L,7
Ln
'3'2- 0, >
Driscopipe - A Division of Phillips Petroleum Page I of 3
D il)RISCOPIPE, I
�.� 1 .1 .��
SIZE and DIMENSIONS
Standard 1PS* Dimensions
& Workina Pressure Ratinas (W
3/4" - 8" SDR 7-15.5
I DR7
WPR 267 osl
OD--
Size
- ---
Weight
(lbsift)
(lbs/ft)
Mwulm�-
Mum
N��K
"I,
��EUUUI
NELL.U.
N
OR 13.5 (WPR = 128 psi) is available for 2" through 36" sizes
iron Pipe Sizes; commonly known as "steel pipe sizes"
Pressure ratings are for water at 73.4 T
DR (Dimension Ratio) = OD/ min. wall thickness
Contact your local Driscopipe distributor for availability of pipe diameters and DRs not listed 1,n the previous tables.
A
cXc,e-'LA�;�
2" - 8" SDR 17-32.5
Size
DR 17
WPR = 100 psi
OR 21
WPR = 80 psi
111--�
WPR = 64 psi
Q=151--/
WPR = 50 psi
IPS* Pipe
size
OD
Size
(in)
Min.
Wall
(in)
Weight
(lbsift)
n.
Wall
(in)
Weight
(lbsift)
In.
Wall
(in)
Weight
(lbsift)
n.
wall
In
Weight
(lbsift)
2"
2.375
0.140
--U.706—
0.43
-
3"
T3--
--G.T67--
--T.77
0. 13 _5
--U-3(F
4"
4.-)
0.26-5
5"
5.563
0.327
---2-.3T—
0.265
1.93
--O-.2T'4---,---T-.5T—
--G-.r7T—
--F.2T--
6"
—
—T175—
02.),.)
2.23
7"
—T4Tg--
—7XF---
---ff.T40---'
3.16
U.274
2-M
8"
3. 79
ron Pipe Sizes; commonly known as "steel pipe sizes"
Pressure ratings are for water at 73.4 T
DR (Dimension Ratio) = OD/ min. wall thickness
Contact your local Driscopipe distributor for availability of pipe diameters and DRs not listed in the previous tables.
IV'-26" SDR 77-1.5-5
DR11
WPR = 160 psi
DR 15.5t
WPR=110psl
Weight
Weight
(lbsift)
�=WUIMEUWIIM�M�M�=�Wtl
"INUU,
MELUM
=UAQ,
N�=Uffilm��
MIAMI
MEM lm�-
MA1.
M,
Sul Um
���=Ufful
OVAL,
lm�-
��=MHA
Ihq://www.driscopipe.com/1000/1000size.httn 03/13/00
� I Driscopipe - A Division of Phillips Petroleum
Page 1 of 2
1000
Data Sheet
series
Customer Benefits
High quality DriscopipeO 1000 is manufactured from extra high molecular
weight, high density PE
3408 polyethylene pipe grade resin.
This black, weather -resistant pipe exhibits...
Outstanding Chemical & Corrosion Resistance
High Environmental Stress Cracking Resistance
Excellent Flow Characteristics
Toughness & Ductility
Flexibility & Ease of Installation
Abrasion Resistance
Fatigue Endurance
Reliability
Suggested Applications:
Acid/Caustic Lines Hazardous Wastes
Organic Chemicals
Agriculture High Purity Processes
Petrochemicals
Aquaculture Ice Rinks
Pulp/ Paper/ Wood
Brine Industrial Piping
River Crossings
Coal Slurry Inorganic Chemicals
Salt Mines
De -watering Irrigation
Sugar Mills
Dredging/ Sand/ Gravel Leachate Collection
SX Acid Mining
Fertilizer Marinas
Tailings
Fly Ash Metal (Cu, Fe, Al, etc.)
Temporary pipelines
Hard Rock Disposal Mining
Utility piping
And Many Others...
Typical Physical Properties* of Driscopipee 1000 (PE 3408) Polyethylene Pipe Resi
PropertV Tes-t Method
Unit
Value
Density ASTM D 1505
gms/CM3
0.955
Mel, Index ASTM D 1238 (190/2.16)
gms/10 min.
0.11*
Environmental Stress Cracking Resistance
--Condition A,B, & C, Fo ASTM D 1693
hrs.
>5000
(molded specimen)
--Compressed Ring, Fo ASTM F 1248
hrs.
>3500
(extruded specimen)
Tensile Strength, Ultimate ASTM D 638
psi
5000
—Type IV Specimen (2"/min)
Tensile Strength, Yield ASTM D 638
psi
3200
—Type IV Specimen (2"/min)
Elongation at Break ASTM D 638
%
750
--Type IV Specimen (2"/min)
Impact Strength (IZOD)
--Specimen thickness 0. 125"
Vicat Softening Temperature
Brittleness Temperature
ASTM D 256
In -lb./ 42
in. notch
Method A
ASTM D 1525
oF 257
ASTM D 746
oF < -180
Ihttp://www.driscopipe.com/1000/1000data.htm
03/13/00
Driscopipe - A Division of Phillips Petroleum
Page 2 of 2
Flexural Modulus
ASTM D 3350
psi
135,000
Modulus of Elasticity (Young's Modulus)
ASTM D 638
psi
130,000
Hardness
ASTM D 2240
Shore D
65
Coeff. of Linear Thermal Expansion
ASTM D 696
in/in/*F
1.2 x 10-4
Thermal Conductivity
ASTM D 177
Btu -in /
2.7
ftA2/hrs/*F
Hydrostatic Design Basis (RDB) ASTM D 2837
—73*F psi 1600
--- I 40OF psi 800
Material Cell Classification ASTM D 3350 345464C
Material Designation PPI Recommendation PE3408
Average Melt Index with a standard deviation of 0.01
'This list of typical physical properties is intended for basic characterization of the material and does not represent specific
determinations or specifications. The Physical properties values reported herein were determined on compression molded
specimens prepared in accordance with Procedure C of ASTM D 1928 and may differ from specimens taken from the pipe.
This Document reports accurate and reliable information to the best of our knowledge but our suggestions and
recommendations cannot be guaranteed because the conditions of use are beyond our control. The user of such information
assumes all risk connected with the use thereof. Phillips Petroleum Company and its subsidiaries assume no responsibility for
the use of information presented herein and hereby expressly disclaim all liability in regards to such use.
I
More Information
Data Sheet Brochure
Size and Dimension Sheet FM Approved Pipe and Fiftings
Fittings Pricing, Availability, Selection, etc.
Home Paq
Ihttp://www.driscopipe.com/1000/1000data.htm 03/13/00
Appendix: Grading Quantity Report
jUser Name: rick
Proj.ect: Concept 2000 Beard Residence
Prismoidal Volume Results
Prismoidal Volume Results
Original Surface Model: topolines
lFinal Surface Model: final
Cut Compaction Factor: 0.00
Fill Compaction Factor: 0.00
Raw Cut Volume: 2449.47 cu yd
Compacted Cut Volume: 0.00 cu yd
Total Cut Volume: 2449.47 cu yd
Raw Fill Volume: 9.10 cu yd
Compacted Fill Volume: 0.00 cu yd
Total Fill Volume: 9.10 cu yd
Date: 01-24-00
Time: 14:09:07
Page: 1
am
PROPOSED
NEW HOUSE
Mae
q7L;.
EP-2 . . I " I
--�\`M M 'q I DRIVEWAY
WON
EP- 1 -7
HOUCE
TO 13E EP-31
REMOVED
Ir
j
Ij
I -in =LAW
CP 10
LEGEND
P.1 N Approximate location of exploration pit
101-
0 40 80
SCALE IN FEET
ASSOCIATED
EARTH
4#44MMMSCIENCESs INC
SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN
BEARD RESIDENCE
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
G95003A 1 1/9 GURE I
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
Number EP-1
Topsoil; loose, moist, black with sod.
Loose, moist, brown -gray, gravelly, fine SAND with some sift, roots, some wire debris. Old topsoil
at base. (Fill)
Loose, moist, red -brown, silty, fine SAND.
Loose to medium dense, moist, brown -gray to yellow -brown, gravelly, fine to medium SAND. Loose
pockets.
Dense, moist, brown -gray to yellow -brown, gravelly, fine to medium SAND with some silt.
BOHF @ 10'
Note: No seepage; caving 0-8'.
� 1 0 Number EP-2
4" Sod.
Loose, moist, dark brown and red -brown, organic -rich, gravelly, fine SAND with some sift, abundant roots.
(Fill)
Loose, moist, red -brown, gravelly, fine SAND with wood. (Old Regolith)
Medium dense with loose pockets, moist, yellow -brown,, gravelly, fine to medium SAND.
Stiff to hard, moist to wet, light brown, sandy SILT, brecciated.
BOH C 101
Note: Light seepage at T; caving Tto 5'; light spalling at seepages.
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observation at the time and location of this exploratory hole. modified by geologic
Interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and location. We vvIH not
accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of Information presented on this log.
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
KirkNmd, Washington 98033
Phone: 206-827-7701
Fax: 206-827-5424
Reviewed By
Beard Residence
Edmonds, Washington
Project No. G95003A
January 1995
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
J
0
5
io
15
a Number
5
10
Number EP-3
15
Subsurface conditions depleted represent our observation at the time and location of this exploratory hate, modified by geologic
Interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and location. We will not
accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of Information presented an this log.
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
Phone: 206-827-7701
Fax: 206-827-5424
Reviewed By
Beard Residence
Edmonds, Washington
Project No. G95003A
January 1995
rl% W- -
ver)
?000
�ICES C-rR.
'Nos
VY/7.
..'AMMURl-ATION.
rn
�'. � mi, At
0.
Thq-,�fty., & �11-'
S
kA P-MENT M"
SIDE SEWER PERMIT
NEW CONSTRUCTION REPAIRS E] LID NO. AS
OiNEk"' - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------- ---------------- CONTRACTOR ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ PERMIT NO—W
f:,-* . ..............
-T LE A-L-DESCR-IPTION: L
ADDRESS - -------------------------------- 7.4`k--�a(P ...... F?---CDLz)
JO-9, - ------- -- - ------ G OT No.'[-N�T'TtS-CHED ------- BLOCK NO.
............................................ ......................................................................................
NAME OF ADDITION ...............................
...........................................................................
77
3:
mv
CITY 0 F EDMONDS SIDE SEWER PERMIT
WATER -SEWER DEPARTMENT
�0,
PERMIT
7 - V!
. . .........
side sewer inspections BEFORE covering any' portion of the construction,
-2525
Call 775 for
(Inspection will be provided within 24 hours after requst. inspecti
NO Sat., Sun., or holiday ns.
j
o-- Ficnd
16920 TaIL
:4, , ADDRESS LOCATION OF CONSTRUCTION ........
----------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- ------ ------ ------ -----------------------------
ATTACHED %
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION
------------------------------- — ------------- -------------- ---------- -------------------- ------- ------------------------------ -- ----------------- .......... ----- . ..................................................
OHN EATCHELDER
.. ........................... : .................................... OIVNERAND/OR BUILDER ....... ... . .......................... . .................................. . ........................................
...............
!:;7
Owner
(2WTUACTOR'S NAME & ADDRESS ....................................................................................... . .............................. . .. . ... ....................................
...............
July 1, 74
............................................ . ... t ..... .......
-ion Is granted. _19.. for repair and/or connection of a side sewer to the city sanitary sewer
system in accordance with City of Edmonds ordinances.
7:,
A( . _)rION IS CALLED TO THE FOLLOWING:
NOTE No. I —The owners of the property may obtain a permit to construct sewer inside Property line. A licensed Side Sewer contractor must be employed to construct
side sewer in street area. Do not cover any portion of sewer before it has been inspected.
NOTE No. 2—All work performed in city right-of-way requires an Invasion of Right -of -Way Permit obtain ble fr m. the City Engineer's offi
a 0 ce
tNOTE No. 3—Obtsin full information regarding Ordinance 11.16.030 and Regulations governing side sewers when you get permit.
NOTE No. 4—Top of side sewer must have at least 30 inches coverage at property line and 12 inches inside property line; minimum grade of 2 No bends
sharper than 'A will be permitted. in grade
NOTE No. 5—Trenches in street must be water settled and surface of street restored to original condition. Contractors shall be responsible for failure due to improper
work which may develop within one year of completion.
NOTE No. 6—It is unlawful to alter or do any other work than is provided for in the permit, or to do; any work on the main sewer or its appurtenances except to in-
sert the pipe into the wye.
DISAPPROVEDDate..._ ... By ...... ........ Date .................. ... . ..... ................ Date ............... . ................... By ................
APPR
OVED Date --- - ----
-------------------- ............. BY ------------ ........ .. . . ....................... ................................................................
4 ------------------
Remarks: ....... . .................................. . ... ...... ............................. ................. . ..............................
........................ ............................ o .......................
.............................................................. ------ . ............................. .......................................................... . .................................. . ........................................
BOTH Permit Copies MUST Be Signed By Owner of Firm Performing C
onstruction PRIOR To Request For Inspection
....................................................................................... ... hereby certify that the side sewer installation constructed under this permit
(Owner of Contracting Mrrn PerfGrming Construction)
W( stalled in accordance with all governing ordinances of the City of Edmonds.
Datedthis ............................ day of ................................................................ 1_9 .........
Check BEFORE you dig for: Water E], Gas E], Telephone Power Sewer Other
"Sy ------ ------------------ .. ....
------ ----- ----------
4.,
IN
Ir
-4-
IZ,
I
The City of Edmonds
OWNER
/7
JOB ADDI�Z�S ---- - ----- 120 -------------- ;�/
APPLICATION
for
SIDE SEWER PERMIT
NEW CONSTRUCTION REPAIRS E]
EASEMENTNO . .......... ---------------------------------
LID NO. ....... . ASMT. NO.
----------------- CONTRACTOR --- --------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- PERMIT NO.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO. .4- ----------------------------------- BLOCK NO - ---------------------- ---------
RE- CEIVIEO
�10 -
� E -1 1 9 74
Approved:
DATE............................................ By ............................................................
/ ` .
N n�� � �W� `
0��� w
," �Tr
UAL
~^
xrATs c� v:AxowG7nw
/�vcuv^n' owmwm'm
AND
' -- n� ^u STATE. «'v`, o^� TAXES'
TOTALSPECIAL
GENERAL
�-,
BUILDIN
2�
V--' --___ ..--'
..~---'Ll- .~"
"` -- - m"� °« -'7"-
_ , - nm \ |
:R | ( L-_1__---
, \ —/ -----
3~4~74 `
) SEC 07 TWP 27/RGEO�p4TH N �37,�� FT TH N
� RT-lI� R�R El/4 CH N��^�� I0477
� IOI� OD FT T0 TpR T N 7FT TH S
AL6 uov` r.`" ~
q8IT.�5
7 F\ |n
' �5* � IO� �// ou ` ''' EL� I�?
\ * ' N
` %SU T T0 \r»LM \ W�Y 5� FT ~S S
FT OF ���'
i
iAxp^,sn OF NW
!BELOW
'y
�!
- »
o
Alba
BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD
STREET FILE
146 A'Oa
2000 First Interstate Center
999 Third Avenue
PERMIT SERVICES Seattle, Washington 98104-1105
Telephone: 1-800-67&0145
APPLICATION FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY OCCUPANCY PERMIT
Name: —MAR-14 4"r:;, OIXTA ;�6eA.Izr> Date: (2 17- 19 95'
(Or Permit Holder)
Address: j(o0t,?_�o TA�_�,:) —% -t70_A.T>
or'31>s ' I klA_S�A I �9)nZ4;E
-1-11 - Qpo w4,
Contact Name: L EF-- V 1, 6 (z C- i A r&.�.9 Tel: ^&Imv - 9 .5 t; -
Station: 'GeA-r-T-Ls
(Nearest City)
County: I "e-, State: WA
i.960 ' 150074A
Line Segment: MP: eF -it z I Survey Station:
(If you have the above iaformation, please complete.)
Is the work to be performed within 50 feet from the track? X Yes No
How many feet from the track will the work be performed? /0 F67U r
Total cost of project: `-'�>EZ' AT-T':A.C�AAi5T")
Percentage of project done within 50 feet of tracks:
Area To Occupy: 717-E -Feet by -Feet
Purpose:
'5Ct9?E OF Wo—zzj4 I.
(,,ble
A77- e-:.4 (M t 6_5
W4,T'S�V_'
C,0"pTZkS;"r_, L,04-iDS
hi -510 1�,&" te- - T,,.1 ki Q I �J G-t 71:> A f4 S�AA:1�7- i �4C-%
Anticipated date to begin work:
The cost of the Right -Of -Way Occupancy Permit is $300.00 for the first ten (10) year
period hereof, due when the Permit has been signed by the Permittee and is returned
for execution to the Burlington Northern Railroad, and $150.00 for each subsequent
ten (10) year period. Also, Railroad Protective Insurance is required when work is
within 50-feet of the track. This insurance will be offered when the Permit draft is
sent. There will also be an ADDENDUM attached which is necessary when hiring a
contractor and or subcontractor, which will require as our Application letter indicates,
proof of General Liability, Auto, and Workers Comp.
SIGNATURE: fi:2z -AT&zi4 t7e��- D A T E: i z - I -z
'��e & Title)
BNRR File:
-1-A 4,53,07— )Z:;;4):)
IA1710 7'#/S Plr-S
WlElC-A14FvOrZ 1 9 OUT-r-,ALI,'
—Ft*pp— 13T*H6;zc—, NOW.
op
Ir
"4Y
�4<
v
-4- 1 . .
_a,�Araj> 4400SE;
2.0.-TA L a 07 rZ.V -
q;%.Zocv
AME'. F.A1477- �0. _ ME rZ.-FEUX
A LONd-i "MS 7riZACK-
-.Fo)z. buz
SAA1614T
-WALL
-'I PF
-&''AT'wALL
IL
00-
J6
c vi rz
T. fa..'pi
WILL
tF,�NTUALLX0--*
o P, I -P S_ - el i
J4
PS AezS. A. PAW*G;
1,EE* KIEM I C�
SW OFAMS
ri
CITY OF EDMONDS-__
AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR REVIEW
OF AN EXISTING CRITICAL AREA STUDY
Mark Beard, hereinafter referred to as "Proponent," HongWest & Associates Inc., hereinafter referred to
as "Consultant," and the City of Edmonds, Washington, hereinafter referred to as "the City," for and in
consideration of mutual promises contained herein, agree and contract as follows:
The City's Planning Official has determined that a Critical Area may exist on or near the
subject property, pursuant to Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section
20.15.B.
Ii. The City is in receipt of a critical area study which describes items in accordance with ECDC
Section 20.15.B. 150 and directs independent peer review of the study.
1113. Paragraph 1113 shall be applicable only the life of this contract. The work of the Consultant
and the critical area study review are for the purpose of providing the City with information
and analysis, independent from the Proponent and the owner of the subject property. To that
end, the Consultant shall, during the. life of this agreement, perform no other services for
Proponent with respect to the subject property. In addition, the Consultant shall not perform
services for the Proponent with respect to other property or proposed developments without
full disclosure thereof to the City. Proponent specifically agrees not to communicate with, the
Consultant, except for such communication as may be necessary for the Consultant to carry
out the performance of this agreement. Any such communication between the Proponent and
Consultant shall be carried on only in the presence of or with the prior approval of the City.
Ill. Proponent agrees to pay to Consultant in the manner set forth in Section VII below the
reasonable costs of having the critical area study reviewed. The Consultant has been
recommended and selected by the City. Proponent understands and agrees to pay Consultant
for actual time and materials expended in accordance with the scope of services set forth in
Attachment "A" hereto, provided, however, that the total to be received by the Consultant for
review of the critical area study shall not exceed the sum of $ 900. Progress payments are to
be issued to Consultant in accordance with the provisions of Sections VII and IX in this
agreement.
IV. The Proponent agrees to cooperate reasonably with both Consultant and the City so as to
cause the efficient and prompt review of the existing critical area study. The City agrees to
make available to the Consultant all relevant information in the City's files. The proponent
and their professional(s) will cooperate in the review of the Critical Area Study.
V. The scope of services contemplated by this agreement shall consist of peer review of a critical
area study which shall be delivered to the City on or before May 16, 1995. '
VI. Consultant shall prepare and deliver to the City up to 5 copies of the review of the critical area
study.
Vil. Proponent shall, within ten (10) days of the signing of this agreement:
(a) Deposit with the City of Edmonds funds sufficient to pay for the cost of review of the
critical area study, but not less than $ 900. subject to the provisions of subparagraph
(b) below;
Page I of 4
CA((YR))((#))Ct((I)ATr-)).CRITICAI.\CONTRACT
E
(b) Agree to disbursement from time to time of funds on deposit in said account to pay for
Consultant services. covered by the Agreement.
VIII. If the Proponent fails.to deposit funds with the City as specified in Section VII of this
agreement within the required ten days, this agreement shall terminate.
Ix. Consultant agrees to submit invoices for services and costs to date on a monthly basis along
with a description of services rendered and a project progress report. The Consultant shall
submit the original invoice to the City and a copy to the Proponent. The City shall pay the
invoiced amount from the assigned account described in paragraph VII of this agreement
within thirty (30) days of receipt if the *work covered by the invoice has been satisfactorily
completed.
X. In the event the City, in its sole opinion determines there is a need for changes in the scope of
work in Attachment "A," the City shall obtain from the Consultant an estimate of , the total
added charges and shall seek the Proponent's written approval, which shall not be unreasonably
withheld. This Agreement shall then be amended to cover these changes, and the funds
deposited accordingly to cover the changed scope of work. Failure to obtain such approval
from the Proponent and to obtain an increase in the funds deposited to cover the proposed
changes at the time of amendment, shall be grounds for suspension of work until agreement is
reached.
M. The parties hereto agree that the peer review of the critical area study and all supporting
material therein submitted by the Consultant in the course of performing services under this
agreement shall be, in the hands of the City of Edmonds, as public records and not subject to
copyright. Consultant further agrees to make research notes and any other work products
produced in performing this agreement available to the City for reproduction, upon completion
of the critical area study, or sooner upon request by the City.
mi. Unless otherwise specified within this, Agreement, this proposal shall be governed by the laws
of the City of Edmonds and the State of Washington.
MIL (a) The parties intend that an independent Consultant/City relationship will be created by
this Agreement. No agent, employee, or representative of the Consultant shall be
deemed to be. an employee, agent, or representative of the City or Proponent for any
purpose. Employees of the Consultant are not entitled to any of the benefits.the City
provides for City employees. The Consultant will be responsible for the acts of its
employees, agents, and subcontractors during the performance of this Agreement. The
Consultant further agrees to testify at any hearing concerning the project or the critical
area study only if requested to do so by the City, unless pursuant to court order.
(b) In the performance of the services herein contemplated, the Consultant is an
independent contractor with the authority to control and direct the performance of the
details of the work, subject to applicable regulations. However, the results of thework
contemplated herein must meet the approval of the City, and shall be subject to the
City's general rights of inspection and review to secure the satisfactory completion
thereof, as required by ECDC Chapter 20.15.B.
XIV. The Consultant shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment
. because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Xv. The,City reserves the right to suspend or terminate this agreement on ten (10) days written
notice to the Consultant and Proponent. If terminated or suspended, -Consultant shall be
Page 2 of 4
CA((YR)X(#))Ct((DATE)).CRrrICALXCONTRACr
40
entitled to receive reasonable compensation for services rendered to the date of termination or
suspension. The Consultant shall then invoice the City for all work performed in a satisfactory
manner through the effective date of termination, and shall be paid by the City, subject to the
limitations on liability contained in Paragraph IX; provided that if the termination is due to the
fault of the Consultant, no payment shall be due.
XV1. The Proponent reserves the fight to suspend or terminate this Agreement on ten (10) days
written notice to the Consultant and City, and withdrawal of all related building, zoning,
subdivision, and/or shoreline permit applications. If terminated or suspended, Consultant shall
be entitled to receive reasonable compensation for services rendered to the date of termination
or suspension.
XVIL In the event that any legal action is necessary to enforce the terms of the Agreement, the
prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party a sum for reasonable attorney's
fees, including reasonable attorneys fees incurred prior to the filing of the action.
XVIR. Consultant agrees to report to the City any situation that might involve a possible conflict of
interest in connection with the performance of the Agreement. The Consultant shall not have a
financial interest in the proposal other than fees due under this Agreement. The Consultant
will not perform any work or provide any services to any person in connection with or related
to the Proposal, except as provided' in this Agreement. The Consultant has listed in
Attachment "B" all present contracts or work for the Proponent.
M. The Proponent agrees to provide the Consultant with a legal description of the project site,
reproducible site plan or plans, copies of any relevant site studies produced by other
consultants,'and such other information as required by the Consultant. The Proponent agrees
to cooperate reasonably with both the City and Consultant so as to facilitate the efficient and
prompt preparation of the critical area study.
XX This Agreement, including the Attachments hereto, represent the entire agreement and
understanding between the parties, and any negotiations, proposals, or agreements are intended
to be integrated herein and to be superseded by this written Agreement.
ATTACMVIENTS
CA((YR))((#))Ct((DATE)).CRMCAL%CONTRACr
Page 3 of 4
EXECUTED by -the parties hereto this /Z day of 19
CITY OF EDMONDS:
B
Laura Hall
Mayor
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
6AI-K-11 ' I
Rhonda March
City Clerk
CONSULTANT,
By
name: RA, 1t,4_ Go I'ZL4 &I'%_
fitle:- Va -; _e P#.*
PROPONENT,
name:
fide.:_
APPROVED AS PLANNING MANAGER:
By' By
Scott Snyder Rob -C.have, Manager
(City Attorney Planning Division
Attachments: "A" - Scope of Services
"B" Consultant/Proponent Contracts/R0ationships
P �� OFA
Page 4 of 4
CA((YR)X(#))CJ((DATE)).CRMCAL%CDNTRACr
ATTACHMENT "A"
Scope of work for Hong West & Associates in reviewing the Mark Beard project:
Located at:
16920 Talbot Rd.
Edmonds
1. Review the geotechnical report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences (AES) for
conformance with the City of Edmonds Critical Areas Ordinance.
2. At a minimum the report prepared by AES should evaluate the subsurface soil and
groundwater conditions in order ' to determine the general site slope stability, drainage
characteristics, erosion potential, and to provide general recommendations for site
development.
3. Review the methodology used, including, excavating test pits, laboratory tests or
representative soil samples and ge'otechnical engineering analysis.
4. Provide analysis of the recommendations pertai ning to setbacks from top of slope.
SPIRODOC
CA FILE NO.
Critical Areas Checklist* -
Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegftation)-
1. Site AddressfUcation: lro9zo -rAL�-ear
2. Property Tax Account Number: Q-1 a-1 041 (34-7-00
3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): �M,200:5r- -0 SM. ;ZOW -
4. Is this site currently developed? X yes; —no.
If yes; how is site developed? �Sp4te txwtiN - -one Skfot�e - 1- zaml.T- - I e4rqO4"e
5. Describe the'general site topography. Check all �at apply.
VIU*r-
L>_
Flat:
Rolling:
Hilly:
Steep:
less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site.
slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a
horizontal distance of 66-feet). 14P F7-. VtSS W ezo r-T.
slopes present on.site of more than 15% and less than 30% ( a vertical rise
of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet).
grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a
horizontal distance of less than 33-feet).
Other (please describe):. 1&BACA $L.UFV: T-0 13tU$EV-
6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: fjo Approx. Depth:
7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: No Approx. Depth:
What season(s) of the year?
8. Site is in the floodway- WO floodplain of a water course.
9.14Cke contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year-
round? Flows are seasonal? (What time of year?,,
10. Site is primarily: forested meadow shrubs mixed
urban landscaped (lawn,shrubs etc) )(
11. Obvious wedand is present on site: M 0
For City Staff Use Only
1. Site is Zoned? ks- a
2-, SCS mapped soil type(s)? fe ff�,A..
_V
3. .-Wedandinvento orC.A. map indicates wetland present on site? 11149.
ry
4. Critical Areas inventory or C.A. rnap indicates Critical Area on site? !�7-teeg
:5.. Site within designated earth subsidence landslide hazard area? Ifle
:6.. Site aesignat6d,dn the'Environinent.ally Sensitive Areas Map?
DETERMINATION
Rcv0Q/"/93
0
City of Edmon&
'e Alist
Criti'da"I"'Ate-aS, Ch" C
The Critical Areas Checklist contained on
this form is to be filled out by any person
preparing a Development Permit
Application for the City of Edmonds -prior
to his/her submittal of a development
permit to the City.
The purpose of the Checklist is to enable
City staff to determine wh6ther'any'
potential Critical Areas are or may be
present on 'the subject property. The..,,
information needed to complete the % .
Checklist should be easily available from
observations of the site or data available at
City Hall (Critical Areas inventories, maps,
or soil surveys).
An applicant, or his/her representative,
must fill out the checklist, sign and date it,
and submit it to the City. The City. will
review the checklist, make a p��cursory site
visit, and make a determination of"the
subsequent steps necessary to complete a
development permit application.
' I - '-1
With a signed copy of this form, the
applicant should also submit a vicinity map
o . i plot plan for individual lots of the'parcel
with enough detail that City staff can find
and identify the subject parcel(s). In
addition, the applicant shaU include
other pert inent infonnation (e.g. site
plan, topography Map,. etc.) or studies in
conjunction With this Checklist to mist
staff in completing their prelirnina
ry.
assessment of the site.
I have completed the attached Critical Area Checklist and attest that the answers provided are
factual, to the best of my knowledge (fill out the appropriate column below).
'F—O-w—n-e-r"V Applicant:
tAAF*-- vA-=Algv
Name
Street Address
E:C>tA0t4r.1G -1-11 -CP04
City, State, ZIP Phone
Signature
Date
Applicant Representative:
UWE 4SE(C-b , A9CA%TEK-,-r
Name
Street Address
-eEA7M-Z-,' q��MC4�> tq3J3--q43S"
City, State, ZIP Phone
/?) � f?) ^J; t- q-1q.qc1
Signature Date
City of Edmonds
Critical Areas'Determination
Applicant: Mark Beard Determination CA-94-191
Project Name: Permit Number:
4104200
Site Location: 16920 Talbot Rd. Property Tax Acct
I FT�
Project Description
non -project specific
A site inspection of the property has revealed a steep slope which may be as steep or steeper than
30% and there is more than 20 feet of vertical elevation gain.
Based on the above findings, it is determined that there is potential for critical areas on or adjacent
to the site. A Critical Areas Study is required to delineate the boundaries of the potential critical
area, its buffers and setbacks. For the steep slopes, a licensed surveyor must create a
topographic map of the site which indicates all areas which slope 30% or more and have a vertical
gain of 20 feet or more within the 30% slopes. The map must also show the location of the steep
slope buffers and setbacks. All critical area studies shall'be performed as three party agreements
with the city selecting the -consultant and the'property owner or applicant paying the fees.
If the property owner wishes to apply for a specific development permit which they feel would not
impact the Critical Areas located on the site, they may submit their proposal to the Planning
Department for review. If the Planning Department finds that the proposed development permit
will not adversely impact aCritical Areas or its buffers, a conditional waiver may be issued on a
project by project basis.
Kirk Vinish
Name
SignatuiQ�/
Septeniber 26, 1994
Date
CA FILE NO.
Critical Areas Checklist
Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation)
1. Site Address/Location: 141AZO MAL--Eor 7_o4-C;,
2. Property Tax Account Number. QL_1 04-1 lbdr-Lo 0
3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): C6jZC0:5F- -0 ;2.10W - t
4. Is this site currently developed? eS; —no.
If yes; how is site developed? i!�jte 4aWUN - Vtre. t+_0CX - 15�r- - I d4Xq4�
5. Describe the general site topography. Check all dw apply.
— Flat:* Ir less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site.
yo Rolling�. slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a
"'FIAT- sp horizontal distance of 66-feet). Ko Pr.ZtSS W
Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% ( a vertical rise
of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet).
'5U,T-T7- Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a
horizontal distance of less than 33-feet).
Other (please describe): BEACkk 16LQ'FN= 170 13&11ZtZ-
6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: Approx. Depth:
7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: NO Approx. Depth -
What season(s) of the year.?
8. Site is in the floodway WO floodpWn of a water course.
9. �*e contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface?. Flows are year-
round? Flows are seasonal?. (What time of year?
10. Site is primarily: forested meadow shrubs mixed
urban landscaped (lawn,shrubs etc)
11. Obvious wedand is present on site: M 0
V" 0*11nm
City of Edmonds .
Critical Areas Determination
Applicant: Mark Beard Determination #: CA-94-191
Perrait Number:
Project Name:
Site Location: 16920 Talbot Rd. Property Tax Acct #: 1 0727 04104200
Project Description:
non -project specific
A� site inaction of the Rrope!ly has revealed a stM sl2ga..w
�ich may be as steep or steeper than
.. W.W.W.P.-
30% and there is- -more than 20 feet of vertical elevation gain.
Based on the above findinas, it is determined that th�ential for critical areas on or ad;ace-t
to the site. A Critical Areas Study is required to delineate the bound ries of the potential criticaf
area, its buffers and setbacks. For the steep slopes, a licensed surveyor must create a
t�q�ographic map of the site which indicates all'areas N�&ch slope ' 50% or more and �*ave a vertical
gainof26-1�ei r 4;re"Zithin the'-3 )0% slopes. The map must also show the location of the steep
slope buffers and setbacks. All critical area studies shall be performed as three party agreements
with the city selecting the cg'n;ZYiW�a� the' 1p�6�p�eiit-yz6`NGe_�r or applicant pa in e e6e."'
If the property owner wishes to apply for a specific development permit which they feel would not
unpact the'Crifical'Areas, lbbated-bri tfie site,' tHe�`ffi`a'y'sUAmTt'th"e'ir propo'sial-Idtifie' Planning
Department for review. If the Planning Department finds that the proposed development permit
"'d
will not adversely impacilaT�nticir ea7ii—o-ri'liks u. ers, a conditional 'waiver may be issue on a
rr6j"��6t by'p r6ici UisT9`'
/V, -
Kirk Vinish 06: / September 26, 1994
Name Signatura�/ Date
IM
PLANNING DATA
SITE ADDRESS: 16 ? 2- 0 -r4b. � el DATE: r-q5--
ZONING: P 5 - I z PLAN CHK#: f5-- Z06
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
SETBACKS:
Required Setbacks:
Front: Z- r Left Side: 10 Right Side: (0 Rear: 2-
Actual Setbacks:
Front: Sl Left Side: 13 Right Side: I Rear:
CORNERLOT 41b Yes/No)
LEGAL NONCONFORMING LAND USE DETERMINATION ISSUED A10 (Y/N)
LOT COVERAGE:
Maximum Allowed: 35-z Actual:
BUILDING HEIGHT:
. Maximum Allowed: Actual Height:
Datum Point: Datum Elevation:
SUBDIVISION:
CRITICAL AREAS #:
SEPA DETERMINATION: � . C/Z(— tq
LOT AREA:
OTHER:
Plan Review By:—
March 12, 1981
'6;A
MEMO TO: RHONDA MARCH
JACK MITCHELL
FROM: MARGARET
SUBJECT: ACCOUNT #302-03400 - Mr. Batchelder
Property, Addres�s�; 16920 Talbo*t Rd
Edmonds., Wa.
I talked with Mr. Batchelder in Jan., 1981 concerning
Mr. Deuterene, the renter in his house. He said the
renterr,�was moving and wanted us to turn off the water.
I informed Mr. Batchelder that the account was del iquent
and we would turn the account off for non-payment but
if he paid the bil I there was nothing we could do about
turning off the account. We turned off the account, with
a bill of 156.51 owing, on the 14th of Jan and he came in -
and paid the bill in full on the 16th, (ali except the
previous renters closing bill of 53.13.). He said they would
be moving Jan-. 31, 1981 and would then call us for a closing.
This information I passed on to Mr. Batchelder which seemed
to satisfy him at this time. He wanted us to al so bi 11 the
previous renter for the past due amount on her closing. The
renter had never si gned up for this account , it was in Mr.
Batchelder name. She sent in two separate checks to cover
this closing and both were returned for insufficient funds.
Since the checks did come from her and to please Mr. Batchelder,
I did send her a new bill, informing her of her checks and
received no answer. This is as far as I went on this account
for I was moved to the Work Order Desk at this time.
Mr. Bathelder asked to
speak to the supervisor
on 3/11/81. 1
took the call. Prior
to taking the call I had
talked with
Wayne Tanaka who gave
me further information on
the lien law.
The utility charge of
$21 could be filed for.
However, Jack and
I agreed that the number
of staff who have been
involved over.
a period of time in resolving this exceeded the amount of the A
bill and to drop the $53.13 from his bill. I advised Mr. Batchelde-ril,
of this determination. ....._-��I&nda Plarch 3/11/'81
REGARDING:
16920 Talbot Road
STRE-)) E
Ea T
F � L E
(address)
R E C 0 R
D 0 F C 0 N T A
C T S
DATE
NAME,, PHONE NO.J. &
ADDRESS of CALLER
COMMENTS
ACTION TAKEN INITIALS
5/l/74
John Batchelder
Certified
Letter No. 406416 sent
Letter returned. Not claimed at
TE
19419 27th Ave. NE
requiring
hook-up within 60 days.
P.O.
Referred to Jack for delivery.
6/24/74
Seattle.,
Certified
Letter No. 406455 sent
Letter received. Called office.
TE
wk - 587-5616
requiring
hook-up within 60 days.
No one in.
6/2S/74
Jack returned call. Has finan(�ial
Ken
to call when letter is typed
TE
problem.
May have to install sewer
and
is to take out permit.
himself.
Requested ext. to 8/l/74.
7/1/74
Came into
office and signed Letter
TE
of Ext. to 8/1/74 and obtained permit
#4928.
7/12/74
Requested
ext. to 8/12/74. Contractor
Ext.
granted and letter signed.
TE
cannot install until mid -August.
8/7/74
Connection completed.
TE
0
CITY of EDMONDS
200 Dayton Street - Edmonds, Washington 98020 - Telephone (206) 775-2525
Department of Public Works
July 12, 1974
Mr. John Batchelder
19419 - 27thAvenue N.W.
Seattle, Washington
Re: Property at 16920 Talbot Road, Edmonds
Dear Mr. Batchelder:
In reference to your receipt of a Certified Letter of May 1,
1974, reqUesting' you to connect your property to the Edmonds sanitary
sevier within sixty days; due to the hardship stated by you and indicated
below, You are herewi th al I owed an extension to August 12, 1974?
- sewer connection -
in order to make the SUbject
Time Extension Requested Because:
Contractor will not be able to install side -sewer
until mid -August.
Sincerely,
q F E N D S
j
J.H RB GILBO
Director
JBM:te
ACKNOWLEDGED BY PROPERTY OWNE
PROPERTY ADDRES
MAILING ADDRES
ALKNOWLEDGEMENT DATE:
CITY of EDMONDS
200 Dayton Street - Edmonds, Washington 98020 - Telephone (206) 775-2525
Department of Public Works
June 25, 1974
Mr. John Batchelder
19419 - 27th Avenue N.W.
Seattle, Washington
Re: Property at 16920 Talbot Road, Edmonds
Dear Mr. Batchelder:
In reference to your receipt of a Certified Letter of May 19
1974, requesting you to connect your propert-y to the Edmonds sanitary
sewer within sixty days; due to the hardship stated by you and indicated
below, you are herewith allowed an extension to Auqust..l, 1974,
in order to make the subject sewer connection:
Tfine Extension Requested Because: At the Dresent
time, the owner is financially unable to make the
sewer commiction. In addition, the May 1,_1974,
Certified Letter was received by the owner on June 24.
Sincerely,
—.-CITY MONDS
J ERB GILBO
Director
JBM: te
ACKNOWLEDGED BY PROPERTY OWNER:
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
MAILING ADDRESS:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DATE:
I
�1 I
DATE HOUR
TO
J
WHI OU WERE OUT
M t,
7
PHONE
AREA CODE PHONE NUMBER
TELEPHONED
RETURNED CALL
LEFT PACKAGE
PLEASE CALL
WAS IN
PLEASE SEE ME
E
WILL CALL AGAIN
WILL RETURN
IMPORTANT
47
SIGNED
LITTLE'S OFFICE SUPPLIES
1 11
PHONE 782- 10501
ROUTING FORM
Lin Low
2.
,4.
A
5.
[Message:
/0
'elvp,4 -c
I
or,
'15W
Date:
EL-7-72 Z-�-7
Ks�
4
%
Q)
s- 0
Q) C
=5 0
r— 4-)
QV 4SC-0 OZO L :040 lIVW 1VNOIIVN831NI HOJ ION I L61
008C
UJ
�ps jaqjo OaS) VHnSNI ON
—03QIAOHd 35VH3AO3 33N -1 Sd
W
4-)
..... ...... ... .... ... ...... (pal!nbui "I 014x") A83A[130 JV133dS
Pos
. ......... . ...... - ....
AlNO 33SS3HGOV 01 83AI13G
'A'
617
S9 .
C.-
...... — Aluo aassaippe O� fAaAllap 41-M S33IA83S'
pajaAtlap ajag/A pue, alup 'W041A 01 S..qS Z ld1333H
. ....... AJUO a8SS�Jppe 01 AJaAklap I im
. . 41 s 0 S.- I munl3a
pajaAllap alep pue woq* ot A% q
d
S333 WN011100 82A S33IA93S UNOM a
31va Ho
)48VWISOd
3dO3* d!Z G V ViS "O'd
(V
(INV 133HIS
01 lN3S
c1li
J:tt m
.6.0 , , 0
C) W 6 7M 4-3
4-)
0
cy�
CL
%
t 0
CL
crl
ag
CD
m
a2elsod snid) odc—nm 631311H33 HOA Ldl333H
'44
s-
:0
74 cu
'si e
'MYSENDEM'lai6
I ns� e r,
LLI
-,PLEASE,-:�FURNISH��SEkVi6i�- -mbj&' b'-, §W- `6 14 E 0
-4) E E� 6�
C7,
4.3
_j
ShdW.'�icldm�s� �7-
N
I
uj
%cn:� f
x Q�a resse'&-.��';.`.,
U ji B
R, -f di
�kre' or icie% ese
10 0 CIQ z 2
ii - s
,[..REGIST
LL. 2
c:,
SIGN RE 0 T, 0 z < 14
4e
4-)
(L 4J 0 ;7)
CERTIFIED NO;,— 1 -
c�
. - L. - m 17�. S.: :-- 'az
-A M e: C> < E
GNATURE- OF:ADDRESSEE'SL* ly
Rs
'S
iL
L S -E.
IINSURED
"114 .':POST4
's,
'SliQYI: WHER9:,PF�l.
DATE DELIVERED - VEREP..
10TIC
jOTItE"
T v, 9 0 v *ON �Ly AYZ�
,;i T'
Lsl�
%
Date: October 22, 2001
To:
Teresa Stone
From:
Debbie Karber
Subject:
Customer Ref und
Please prepare a treasurer's check in the amount of $760 payable to the following:
Mark & Oleta Beard
16920 Talbot Rd
Edmonds WA 98020
$560
Tran Code 7040
BARS# 001.000.000.273.70.00
Receipt #18492
$200
Tran Code 7050
BARS# 001.000.000.273.74.00
Receipt #18492
City of Edmonds
UMMASMNT City of Edmonds PAGE 1
10/19/01 07:40- Print Master File Account Details
Account: 3-08775
Screen 1
Tenant Information Owner Information
01 Name BEARD MARK S-T j AJ 10 Name
02 Care of 11 Care of
03 Addr 1 16920 TALBOT RD 12 Addr 1
04 Addr tA e-ve--r.-L 13 Addr 2
05 City EDMONDS 14 City
06 State WA 07 Zip 98026-5051 15 State 16 Zip 00000
08 Phone 425) 17 Phone (000) 000-0000
09 Status A 19 Water 0.00
===Meter Reading Information== 20 Surcharge 0.00
18 Locatio,n 16920 TALBOT RD 21 Sewer 0.00
Current Previous 22 StrmDrain 0.00
27 Curr 0 28 Date 08/23/01 29 06/26/01 23 Swr Tax 0.00
30 YTD 2 31 Rdng 404 32 404 24 Previous Due 0.00
35 LTD 843 33 Rdng 0 34 0 25 Current Due 0.00
-- -- Dates 26 Balance 0.00
38 Extension Dt 00/00/00 39 Acct Setup 00/00/00
40 Last Pay 09/27/01 41 Last Bill 09/20/01
42 Due Date 10/20/01
36 Meter #: 6701 37 Location N OF DR N MTR
Screen 2
Misc Codes Rate Codes Units ***Meter Info***.
01 Status A 14 Water 001 5/8 R 15 1.00 28 Meter BrndSR
02 Type 13 16 SurchargeOO1 TAX 17 1.00 29 Meter #: 6701
03 Cycle 02 18 Sewer 000 NOCHG 19 1.00 30 ID'Meter
04 In/Out 1 20 StrmDrain001 STMDR 21 1.00 31 Type M A
05 Sort Cd 0000. 22 Swr Tax 001 TAX 23 1.00 32 # Readings 1
06 Est Flag N 24 Misc 000 NOCHG 25 0.00 33 Meas Code HCF''
07 #Tenant 1 26 Penalty 27 0.00 34 Install Dt 10/15/82
b8 #Owner ' 35 Shutoff Dt 00/00/00
09 Respon? T 36 Route 303
37 Sequ 2200
10 Penalty Y 38 Codes AE1AL
11 Past No'te T 39 ADDR CODE 1 00
12 Shut Note T 4"0 ADDR CODE 2 00
13 Account Info ?
41 Hist Memol
42 Hist Memo2
(It,ACE Tk-AkS CACC�OL)N)'T- f.,\ 1z
V,j I L- L-
'2 &- I �j C) S t-N-r-
-T-(-� r-
S P� t-x 6:�
A,DD(Zess
CKIeuj tAOUSE APr&P-
OCmo)
TKerz.<---
N 6L-lj
oil
�SIAOUL-D Bc-
1,N 0 (-- M(ZGC— F-0 R
co - C- C r"J C- 4 A P, G
Al
:UMMASMNT
City of Edmonds PAGE 2
10/19/01
'07:40
Print Master Pile Account Details
Account: 3-08775
Cons
Water Consumption
2001
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995
06 0
January
2
14 0 16
February
0
March
0
14 16 19
April
0
May
0
15 15 15
June
July
0
15 35 26
August
September
0
46 30 35
October
November
16 23 31
December
UTILITY SERVICE ORDER
Today's Date Account Number Pulled Meter -Meter Written By
17�1 /t,, R6quested By
Service Address
T_
Water Service Date Turn -On- Turn -Off - C/B Read
Location of Meter
Reread Reread
Leave D/H Edit/Cust.
Current Read Date Current Read Previous Read Date Previous Read Consumption
m7[ i i
Read by uate
Notes
Closing Bills Sent To:
Name ea kd
Street
Address
city ovo
State Zip
Date New Meters Installed
I I
Size 3124 . Lock C] Unlocked
Residential x
Apartment Units
Office Units
Commercial Units
Sprinkler
Other
Sewer Avail. Unavail.
Meter Charge $
FS Connection $
H20 Connect $ __�Loo.
$
Street Cut
Total
Receipt
Permit
Screen 1 ***Tenant Information"* ***Owner Information"'
01 Name
09Name
02 Care of
10 Care of
03 Addr 1
11 Addr 1
04 Addr 2
12 Addr 2
05 City
13 City
06 State 07 Zip
14 State 15 Zip
08 Phone
16 Phone
33 Meter #:
36 Acct Setup Date
34 Location
Screen 2
**Misc Codes"
***Rate Codes***
"Units"
01 Status
14 Water
15 0.00
23 Meter #:
02 Type
16 Surcharge TAX
17 0.00
25 Type M A
03 Cycle
18 Sewer RSEWR
19 0.00
26 # Readings
04 In/Out
27 Meas. Code HCF
07 # Tenant
28 Install Dt.
08 # Owner
30 Route
09 Respon?
31 Sequ.
32 Codes
D:udsvordtword
FILE
eTREET
CITY.- OF. EDMONDS.. BARBARA FAHEY
MAYOR
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 FAX (425) 771-0221
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Public Works Planning/Building Parks and Recreation Engineering Wastewater Treatment Plant
C.
January 28, 1998
Lee Kierig
957 N. Shoshone
Hamilton, MT 59840
Re: Permit Application #97-51 @16920 Talbot Road/Beard Residence
This letter is in response to your written request * received by my office on January 20,
1998 requesting the i ' ssuance of the.above reference. permit'application prior to the
expiration date to avoid paying new plan review fees. Your request was forwarded t , o
the City Engineer for a decision, since the last remaining. item'for permit approval is a
drainage issue. Unfortunately, he has declined to allow this permit to be issued without
an approved drainage plan.and Burlington Northern approval.
Under Edmonds Community Development Code Section 19..00.010 permit applications.
are valid for 180 days from the' date of 'submittal and only one extension for an additional
1.80 days is permitted by the Building Official. This application was received on'
February 19, 1997 and extended on August 19,1997. The fina.1 expiration date for this
application is February 19, 1998. In order to renew action on an application after
expiration, the applicant shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan review fee� The plan
review fee in this case is $1580.00. Furthermore,. it is probable that the State Building
Code Council will be adopting the 1997 Uniform- Building Code and State Energy Code
in June of 1998. In order to be vested under the 1994 Code that your project is '
currently governed by, full plan review and building, permit fees must be paid prior to the
adoption of the new code. All development applications in the Stateof Washington are
governed by specific application time frames for vesting purposes and these . timelines
cannot be changed.
If you have any questions'you may. contact me at 771-0220.
Thank you.
�eann�ineGra
Building Official
cc: Mark and Letie Beard
EXPAPPL.DOC
0 Incorporated August 11, 1890 0
Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan
14 January 1998
City of Edmonds
Building Dept.
Ms. Jeannine Graf
121 5th Ave. N. 14,V
Edmonds, Wash.
Re: Beard House D4Fpr
16920 Talbot Road
Dear Ms. Graf:
Per a telecon wi th your office this p.m., I am writing in regard
to the above named project. We are currently in a 'holding
pattern' on this project that has a current file in your
department. We are trying to exact an agreement with the BNRR
concerning our drainage design that goes through their property
and under the track. This will be for our storm out -flow.
I spoke with Mr. Christman who referred me to the building dept.
for an answer to our question regarding the status of our permit.
We expect to come into an agreement' with the BNRR directly,
but it might not happen before our current permit comes due
on Feb. 19, 1998 for renewal fees. Mr. Beard has currently
paid in excess of $2,000.00 to keep this project current. We
are wondering if there is some way for us to get on with portions
of the project while we wait for the BNRR to complete their
paper dance. We are committed to an agreement with them as
it is our only way to satisfactorily discharge our out -flow.
Notwithstanding, we will not actually connect to that system
until late Summer or early Fall. We would like to be able. to
get started in.this early Spring. We would like to avoid another
$1,000.00 charge if at all possible. Your help and, kind
consideration in this matter would be greatly- appreciated.
Please call me at 4.o6-363-o983 if you have any questions. We
are not looking, in any way, to circumvent any requirements ...
only to find a way for us to begin or roll some of the previous
fees into this context where we expect to follow through with
this project. Thank you for your time.
sri'nc, ely,_
LEE KIERIG
ARCHITECT
E --A A.. T W.
STREET FILE.
d S TAr r L, U 0 &16 112 Co P. eo ila4s
22 January 1996
Comm. Services
Mr. Lyle Christman
250-5th Ave. N.
Edmonds
1LZe:7?2 0
EN(31NLL_JiA1t4'3
Re: Telecon 19 Jan. 1*996 8
Detention system waiver request JAN 2 4 .1996
BEARD House 95-206
Dear Mr. Christman:
Per our telecon, referenced above, I am submitting this letter,,
on behalf of our project, to request a waiver on the requirement
for a storm water detention system as prescribed by Edmonds
city code.
As is the case for detention systems, their purpose is to
regulate 'the discharge rate of excess run-off when that discharge
is into a public storm sewer system. The regulated discharge
is intended to alleviate a surge that, when combined with others
tied to the system, might tend to overload the capacity of t'he
system. This is normal to prudent engineering and exists as
a precaution to causing flood problems. In our case, we will
not connect to the public system. We have asked f or and have
been granted permission by the BNRR to directly discharge our
run-off into an existing drainage way that currently provides
direct access to the Sound. Moreover, our system is privately
funded and does not fall into the category of public welfare
protection which is the case for the public system. BECAUSE
our run-off has immediate access to an unobstructed discharge,
the BNRR has granted their approval for use of their 24" culvert
and does not require a regulated discharge.
I trust that this request will be approved as we are not
affecting the life, health, safety and welfare of the public
whose domain is outside these private works.
Thank you for your kind attention. Please call me if you have
any further.interests.
Si erely,
j
L rig
AR 4ITECT
0111
STREET FILE
PLANNING DATA
SITE ADDRESS: 19 ?Z-0 Pj DATE: (—(-5--16
ZONING: PC, /Z PLAN CHK#: I? �_-,70 a
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: �� tz� P,
SETBACKS:
Required Setbacks: ' t 0
Front: . z_ 6-. Left Side: Right Side: -!A- Rear:Z
Actual Setbacks:
Front: 57 Left Side: I Right Side: Rear:_ 5
CORNERLOT A/0 —(Yes/No)
LEGAL NONCONFORMING LAND USE DETERMINATION ISSUED /
__ 1/0 (Y/N)
LOT COVERAGE: -ell
Maximum Allowed: Actual:
BUILDING HEIGHT:
Maximum Allowed: ActualHeight: 110 1011-4
Datum Point: PO U.1e Datum Elevation:- q 7, 5—
SUBDIVISION:
CRITICAL AREAS #: 1?4( — , ? /
SEPA DETERMINATION:
LOT AREA: 7, 7—ro 0 0 0
OTHER:
Plan Review
RECEIVED
-0F11Y
7v- G NOV 3 0 1995
PERMIT COUNTER
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION, GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
RECEIVED
FEB 15 2000
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR.
CITY OF EDMONDS
BEARD RESIDENCE
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
Mark Beard
PROJECT NO. G95003A
JAWARY 1995
ASBOCIATEO
AMMANEARTH
SCIENCES, INC
911 - 5th Avenue, Suite 100, Kirkland, WA 98033
(206) 827-7701 FAX (206) 827-5424
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION9 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
BEARD RESIDENCE
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
January 30, 1995
Project No. G95003A
1. PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS
V
This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic hazards and geotechnical
engineering study for the proposed new Beard residence. The approximate locations of the
explorations accomplished for this study are shown on the site and exploration plan, Figure 1.
In the event that any changes in the nature, design or layout of the project are planned, the
conclusions and recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed and modified, or
verified, as necessary. '
ME a I ' I -- - 4Q$J
The purpose of this study was to provide subsurface data to be utilized in the design and
development of the proposed new home construction. Geotechnical engineering studies were
conducted to determine the depth to the foundation bearing strata, the type of suitable
foundation, the allowable foundation soil bearing pressure, anticipated foundation settlement,
floor support recommendations and drainage considerations. Geologic hazard evaluations were
also completed to determine if mitigations would be required for potential seismic, landslide, and
erosion hazards and a minimum top of slope setback distance. This report summarizes our
current field work and offers development recommendations based on our present understanding
of the project.
1.2 Authorization
Written authorization to proceed with this study was granted by Mark Beard by executing our
proposal dated January 5, 1995. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Mr.
Beard and his agents, for specific application to this project. Within the limitations of scope,
schedule and budget, our services have been performed in accordance with accepted geotechnical
engineering and engineering geology practices in effect in this area at the time that this report
was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied is made. It must be understood that
no engineering design or geologic analysis can yield a guarantee of stable slopes. Our
observations, findings, and opinions are a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the
owner.
2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION
This report was completed with an understanding of the project based on a topographic survey
dated April 22, 1993 prepared by Darrell Ford and Associates, and undated development plans
prepared by Lee Kierig, Architect. The project site was located in a residential neighborhood
west of Talbot Road atop a west -facing marine bluff in north Edmonds, Washington. The
property was roughly rectangular and measured approximately 100 feet north -south by about 260
feet east -west. An existing residence and detached garage occupied the central portion of the
property, and it is our understanding that these structures will be razed prior to construction of
the new residence. According to the present plans, the new structure will be a two-story home
with a partial basement, and will be constructed at essentially the same location as the existing
structure.
Most of the property was relatively flat to gently sloping down to the west. The western -most
40 feet of the property was along the marine bluff that was about 80 feet in height, and sloped
steeply down to the west at a gradient of about 100 percent. The bluff was heavily vegetated
with small saplings, blackberries, vines and other brush. A Burlington Northern railroad right-
of-way with two sets of tracks ran along the base of the bluff.
No surface water was- o*bserved on the site or on the upper portions of the bluff at the time of
our field work. Also, no evidence of recent slope movement was noted at the time of our study.
According to the client, a drainage ditch was located along the railroad grade. This ditch is
periodically brushed out and cleaned by the railroad. Apparently, following the removal of
vegetation along the toe of the slope, some shallow sloughing of soils usually occurs in this area.
1 3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIO
Our field study included excavating three exploration pits, using a track -mounted excavator. The
pits permitted direct, visual observation of subsurface conditions. The materials encountered
were studied and classified in the field by an engineering geologist from our firm. Selected
samples were then transported to our laboratory for further visual classification and testing, as
necessary. All exploration pits were backfilled immediately after examination and logging.
The various types of sediments as well as the depths where characteristics of the sediments
changed are indicated on the exploration logs presented in the Appendix. Our explorations were
approximately located in the field by measuring from known site features shown on the site and
exploration plan, Figure 1.
Because of the nature of exploratory work below ground, extrapolation of subsurface conditions
between field explorations is necessary. It should be noted that differing subsurface conditions
sometimes may be present due to the random nature of deposition and the alteration of
topography by past grading and filling. The nature and extent of any variations between the
field explorations may not become fully evident until construction. If variations are observed
1 2
I
at that time, it may be necessary to re-evaluate specific recommendations in this report and make
appropriate changes.
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface conditions at the project site were inferred from the exploration pits, the visual
reconnaissance of the site, review of the Edmonds Quadrangle Geologic Map, and a review of
the supplied topography. Within the property boundaries, the stratigraphy encountered included
fill soils overlying natural deposits of gravelly sand, and sandy silt. These units are described
in the following sections in the order they were encountered from the surface, followed by our
observations of the hydrology of the site.
4.1 Fill Soils
Fill soils (those soils not naturally placed) were encountered in two of the three exploration pits.
The fill consisted of loose, moist, dark brown to brownish gray, gravelly fine sand with some
silt and abundant roots. The fill was encountered at the surface (beneath a topsoil horizon) and
extended to depths ranging to 2-1/2 feet in EP-2, to 4-1/2 feet in EP-1.
,T�e q11ality ill materials m be variable and is undc
thickness and compaction of the f gy
,Therefore, if fill is encounfe-r-ca �duringconstructioh at the site it should be considered
4.2 Gravelly Sand
Underlying the fill soils, and near the surface where the fill was absent, all three of the
exploration pits encountered a loose to medium dense to dense, moist, brownish gray to yellow
brown, gravelly fine to medium sand with some silt. This unit was encountered from 4-1/2 feet
to below the 10 foot termination depth of EP-1, and from 2-1/2 to 6 feet in EP-2. In EP-3 this
unit was encountered at the surface (beneath a topsoil), and it extended to below the 5 foot
termination depth of this pit.
The gravelly sand was interpreted as advance outwash that was deposited by'meltwater streams
emanating from an advancing glacial ice sheet. These sediments were overridden by the glacial
ice and consolidated to a dense state by the weight of the ice. The loose to medium dense
character of the near surface portions of this unit is attributed to weathering, and the
development of roots within this unit.
4.3 Sandy-5i
Underlying the gravelly sand, a stiff to hard, moist to wet, light brown, mottled, brecciated,
sandy silt with trace gravel was encountered in EP-2. The silt extended from 6 feet to below
the 10 foot termination of EP-2, and was interpreted to underlie the entire site at depth.
[ - I
I
11
I
I
I
I
I
17,
_1
-1
I
r
I
1-1
The sandy silt was interpreted as glacial sediment deposited in a pr'oglacial lacustrine Oake)
environment created in front of, or within an advancing ice sheet. The stiff to hard state of this
material is also attributed to glacial consolidation.
4.4 Hydrology
No surface water was observed at the site, and in general the near surface sandy soils at the site
appeared to be well drained. Light ground water seepage was encountered at a depth of 7 feet
in EP-2, within the sandy silt unit. The amount of seepage was minor, considering that our
explorations were conducted following a two month period (November -December 1994) with
above average rainfall. Fluctuations in ground water levels at the site will occur due to the time
of the year and variations in rainfall. Random seepages could also occur during the wetter times
of the year in isolated areas within the fill soils.
4
7
I
January 30, 1995
Project No. G95003A
H. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND rvHTIGATIONS
Our interpretation of geologic hazards on the property is based on the stratigraphy encountered,
as well as the slope and hydrologic conditions observed during our field reconnaissance.
Potential hazards include those related to seismic (earthquake) activity, landslide or mass -wasting
hazards, and erosion hazards. The potential risk of these hazards and their mitigations are
discussed in the following paragraphs.
5.0 SEISMIC HAZARDS AND RECOMMENDED MMGATIO
Earthquakes occur in the Puget Sound region with great regularity. The vast ma ority of these
events, are small and are usually not detected without instruments. However, large earthquakes
do occur as evidenced by the 1949, 7.2 magnitude event in Olympia, and the 1965, 6.5
magnitude event in Seattle. The 1949 earthquake appears to have been the largest in this area
during recorded history. Evaluation of earthquake return rates indicate that an earthquake of the
magnitude between 5.5 and 6.0 could occur within the next 8 to 12 years in the Edmonds area.
Generally, there are 4 types of potential geologic hazards associated with large seismic events:
1) surficial ground rupture; 2) seismically induced landslides; 3) liquefaction; and 4) ground
motion. The potential for each of these hazards to adversely impact the proposed project is
discussed below.
5.1 Surficial Ground Rupture
The majority of large earthquakes that have occurred in recent times in the Puget Sound area
are sub -crustal events with epicenters ranging from 50 to 70 kilometers in depth. No surficial
faulting, or earth rupture, have been documented to date within two miles of the Beard property,
according to previous geological mapping by the U.S. Geological Survey (Yount 'and Gower et
al, 1991, U.S.G.S. Open file report 91-147). Therefore, it is our opinion, based on existing
geologic data, that the risk of surface rupture impacting the proposed project is low.
5.2 Seismically Induced Landslides
The greatest risk of seismically induced landslides within the Puget Sound region occurs within
unconsolidated sediments along steep slopes (greater than 40% gradient). The marine bluff on
the west side of the property does slope steeply, however the slope is interpreted to be underlain
by consolidated glacial sediment5j Tli—eref&—eff-i ...opinion. that, the risk, of seismicall '
YJ
Filff6ced landslid�� affecting .. !�e pLop
qsed home is lQw,, -roVided that the _�Iopq setbaqk
6i
I
I
7 f lmen6ti6h- ' p
repoorit are followed.
5.3 Liquefaction
Liquefaction is a process in which soil loses strength during vibratory shaking, which can result
in large ground deformations. The weight of a soil is supported both by grain -to -grain contact
of soil particles and by the pressure of water in the pore spaces between the particles. Vibratory
shaking can disrupt the grain -to -grain contact, increase the pore water pressure and result in a
decrease in the soil shear strength. The soil is said to be liquefied when nearly all of the weight
of the soil is supported by its pore pressure alone. Soils most susceptible to liquefaction are
loose sediments, composed of mostly fine sand to coarse silt, that are in areas with high ground
water.
[TTe —pore-ntiAl-ffirliqueficffoif -affatiff g--the-developmeFn on tlfe- —property-W—consid&W �Iow, due
ro-tite7-consolidated-state-and/or-coarse-granular-nature-of-stratigraphy-encountetdd-afi-d-the lack
of adverse ground water conditions.
5.4 Ground Motio
Based on the stratigraphy and visual reconnaissance of the site, it is our opinion that earthquake
damage to the proposed new home would be caused by the intensity and acceleration associated
with the seismic event and not any of the above discussed geologic hazards. This opinion
assumes that all structures are founded on a suitable foundation bearing strata, and constructed
according to the top of slope building setback limits outlined in the following section. Structural
design of the buildings shoulil-J61low ifie lit_est--Un_if5FmBWrdi Code (UBC) standards. for
�Seismi7cZone 3 and take into consideration stress caused, by seismicatly -ind u-ced earth shaking..
1 6.0 MASS WASTING HAZARDS AND MMGATION
The marine bluff along the west side of the site sloped at gradients as high as 100 percent over
a vertical height of about 80 feet, and present a moderate landslide risk. The greatest risk from
landslide damage-Qccurs down -slope of the failure, to structures directly Ln th-e-path-of-the-slid-e.
he Ian , �sli�e risk tl�erefore 'shoula not affR_ttfi&—prqposed new home, if it is set back a'suitable-
distance back from the top of the slope. Based upon the site stratigraphy, hydrology, and Oppe-
rgr�dients, we recommend a 'Minimum 40 foot top. of slope building setback for the new ho- m-e-.
In add itio-n—to the —above b u fl-d in igsetti-ack reco m mendifidn-,-aIrr—unof f -ffo—m M p—ermeablie —su ifici—es
should be collected- and tightlined into.a suitable storm. water drainage system during Pd, after
con stiMi '—onof lfi�eproj ect., , Under no circumstances and at not time I should water'be disch
arged.
I on or above steeply sloping areas. Likewise, fill'br debris must not be pIa&&ITadJaceni to or on
Lthe steep j1ope.jV_nc6ntroIled filfing over 'the top of-tl�e-sFope—wilV�romote-la�dslidig-6r-d6b-ris-
Iflow activity.
1 6
I
I
Continued cleaning of the ditches at the toe of the slope by railroad maintenance crews within
their right-of-way could trigger shallow debris flows, as has been reported in the past. Although
we did not observe any evidence of soil movement during our site reconnaissance, the owner
should periodically monitor the condition of the slope. If there ever is a question regarding the
condition of the slope, please contact our firm and/or the railroad about their maintenance
practice along the right-of-way.
7.0 EROSIGN HAZARDS AND MMGATION
The near surface soils encountered at the Beard property possesses a moderate to high potential
for erosion from concentrated flow, such as uncontrolled storm water drainage. To mitigate the
erosion hazard potential and offsite sediment transport, we would recommend the following:
1) Storm water from impermeable surfaces, such as driveways and roofs, should be
tightlined into a suitable storm drainage facility or discharge via tightline to the toe
of the bluff, and not be directed onto or above the west marine bluff.
2) Silt fences should be placed along the lower elevations of disturbed areas.
3) Soils which are to be reused around the site should be stored in a manner that would
reduce erosion, such as covering with plastic sheeting, using low stock -piles in flat
areas, or the use of hay bales/silt fences.
4) Areas stripped of natural vegetation during construction should be replanted as soon
as possible or otherwise protected.
5) The existing vegetation along the bluff should be left in its present state and at no
time should vegetation be removed from the bluff.
7
January 30, 1995
Project No. G95003A
M. PRELEMINARY DESIGN RECONMIENDATIONS
8.0 INTRODUCTIO
Our exploration indicates that, from a geotechnical standpoint, the parcel is suitable for the
proposed new home construction, provided the recommendations contained herein are properly
followed. In general, the glacially consolidated sediments (gravelly sand or sandy silt) that
underlie the site from approximately 3-1/2 feet to 5 feet below surface grade will be capable of
,�- — - __ ____� _�X
providingysuitable support for conventional- spread footing foundations'.
-66uldalso"b'e su'vvoked on -the natural bearin . ir sedimen . ts or structural fill that overlies natur,-d
co—nsid-
The contractor should be:aware that filled areas exist and.are.not Fred—suffibli for
foundation 'suovort., FBased on our xploration, t — Rke-st-fill-ed-ifeas —occurwthe�-westof -the
existing residence, with little or no fill to the east of the existing structures. The -filled areas will
FfN__uife-ddEppned- ootings or removal and replacement of the existing fill material with structural
-f Iiia—
fill'pflor'? to constructing a new -foundation. JTffie ill y 5e capa6lF of Upp—ortffig a slib--dn-
-k—rad[E-flo—or, 15-ut-this-sh-offild-Ke —revi—ewed-it-tfie time of construction.
9.0 SITE PREPARATI
�jite-preparation-w.ill-inclo,d�z the demolition of the existing structure. t-The'debris from thisl
qpSration-sliQuIld-be
__taken to an offsite disposal area and-ifie —resulfi—ng depression -should be
excavated to medium den'se,' natural sediments and then backfilled with structural filIF Within
fhe Tnew b-uil-di—ngarea the upper organic topsoil lay .r should be stripped and the remaining roots
grubbed. Any existing trees, brush, debris or other deleterious material should also be removed.
Areas where loose surficial soils and fill soils exist beneath the building footprint should be
considered as unsuitable and this material should either be removed and replaced with structural
fill or recompacted to its full depth. Since the density of soils is variable, random soft/loose
pockets may exist and the depth and extent of stripping can best be determined in the field by
the field engineer.
10.0 STRUCTURAL FILL
All fill should be placed in accordance with the recommendations outlined in this section. Prior
to filling, topsoil, organics, and loose soils should be excavated from the subgrade as advised
by the field engineer. After overexcavation/stripping has been performed to the satisfaction of
8
the geotechnical engineer, the upper 12 inches of exposed ground should be recompacted to 90
percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard.
After recompaction of the exposed ground is tested ' and approved, structural fill may be placed
to attain desired grades. Structural fill is defined as non -organic soil, acceptable to the
geotechnical engineer, placed in maximum 8 inch loose lifts'with each lift being compacted to
95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard.
The contractor should note that any proposed fill soils must be evaluated by Associated Earth
Sciences, Inc. prior to their use in fills. This would require that we have a sample of the
material 48 hours in advance to perform a Proctor test and determine its field compaction
standard. Soils in which the amount of fine-grained material (smaller than No. 200 sieve) is
greater than approximately 5 percent (measured on the minus No. 4 sieve size) should be
considered moisture -sensitive. Use of moisture -sensitive soil in structural fills should be limited
to favorable dry weather conditions. If fill is placed during wet weather or if proper compaction
cannot be obtained, clean, free -draining gravel and/or sand should be used. Free draining fill
consists of non -organic soil with the amount of fine-grained material limited to 5 percent by
weight when measured on the minus No. 4 sieve fraction.
A representative from our firm should inspect the stripped subgrade and be present during
placement of structural fill to observe the work and perform a representative number of in -place
density tests. In this way, the adequacy of the earthwork may be evaluated as filling progresses
and any problem areas may be corrected at that time. It is important to understand that taking
random compaction tests on a part-time basis will not assure uniformity or acceptable
performance of a fill. As such, we are available to aid the owner in developing a suitable
monitoring and testing program.
11. 0 FOUNDATIONS
Spread footings may be used for building support when founded on stiff/dense natural soils
(approximately 3-1/2 feet to 5 feet below present surface grade), or approved structural fill
bearing on the natural sediments. For building support, structural fill and recompacted natural
soils should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density as defined
by ASTM D-1557. Structural fill placement must be inspected by AESI to verify suitable
subgrade preparation and compaction.
We recommend that an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be
utilized for design purposes, including both dead and live loads. An increase of one-third may
be used for short-term wind or seismic loading. Perimeter footings should be buried at least 18
inches into the surrounding soil for frost protection; interior footings require only 12 inches
burial. However, all footings must penetrate to the prescribed bearing stratum and no footing
should be founded in or above loose, organic, or existing fill soils.
I I
I
I
I
12.0 FLOOR SUPPORT
Slab -on -grade floors may be used over the stiff/dense natural sediments or approved structural
fill. In each case, the upper 12 inches of subgrade must be compacted to a minimum of 90
percent of the modified Proctor maximum density as determined by ASTM:D 1557. A
polyethylene plastic vapor barrier and pea gravel capillary break layer should be used under
floors likely to receive an impermeable floor finish or where passage of water vapor through the
floor is undesirable. Based on American Concrete Institute recommendations, we suggest
placing a two to three inch layer of clean sand over the vapor barrier to protect the vapor barrier
and to allow some moisture loss through the bottom of the slab to reduce warping in the curing
process. Sand should be used to aid in the fine grading process of the subgrade to provide
uniform support under the slab.
13.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS
tAll basement retaining walls and perim t r 0-0 iigw_a1l_ssfio__uld_Fe, —provi7de—dwi7th —adri-alin at —the
Ffooting elevation. Drains should consist'of ri id, perforated,.PVC pipe' surrounded, by� washM
9
b,pea gravel. �elvvel �of thieeifo-rations in the- Vesfiould be —set appr6x_imatet� 2 inches below
__perl pi
W
.,,the bottom ' o he footing an the drains should be constructed with sufficient iradient to allow
gravity-dfizharge '�way iffoim' the building.
All basement/retaining walls should be- rtned;,with a� �tnimuM f27iiFcli__thiZlZ —washe-d7fr—avef
"an et provided over the full -height of thd� wall, which'ti6s:into the,footing drain. 1 pl'
n- anning-;'
exteifo �gradiesadj�acent to �wall�s�l�o�uldbe ikiliEd-6wnward aw—ay ffo—mNe —structure to achieve
positive surface drainage. Roof and surface runoff should notdischarge into the footing drain
system but should be handled by a separate, rigid tightline drain. Both footing and
downspout/pavement drainage should then be tightlined to a suitable storm water drainage
system, or to the toe of the marine bluff to the west of the site.
14.0 PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING
We are available to provide additional geotechnical consultation, as the project design develops
and p��ssibly han recommen- 11fiat7Associa—ted'
Earth-Sciences,-,,Iq;z.,-,Orform.a.ge�Qtcqhiit I offile
qq,, revie;� o iw!�desigpcomp etiog-
_pW� pA__FJqJf__ _ __ _L_
In this way, our earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and
implemented in the design.
We are also available to provide geotechnical engineering.and monitoring services during
construction. The integrity of the foundation depends on proper site preparation and construction
procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field in the event that
variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring services are not
10
I
i
part of this current scope of work. If these services are desired, please let us know and we will
prepare a proposal.
We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that these recommendations
will aid in the successful completion of your project. -If you should, have any questions, or
require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
George H. Bennett, C.P.G.
Engineering Geologist
A
VRonald A. Paikir, P.-G.
Principal
GHB/ld
G95003A.1
WP.1/10/95 Id
11
/+
268 0
P, 01
SION
Bruce L. Blyton, P.E.
Senior.Project,Engineer
=dh
CP
va
co 0 0
co
PROPOSED
�EW HOUSE
EP
2 ow>
<'nO I DRIVEWAY
MO 1;
C
EP-1
*not I HOU4
TO BE 4EP-3,
REMOVED j
irLs
Ij
em OLAW
, 10
P-1 0 Approximate location of exploration pit
'01-
0 40 80
I I i
SCALE IN FEET
ASSOCIATED
EARTH
/4=MM SCIENCES, INC
%9
4v
SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN
BEARD RESIDENCE
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
G95003A 1/95 FIGURE I-
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
0 Number EP-1
5
10
15
Topsoil; loose, moist, black with sod.
Loose, moist, brown -gray, gravelly, fine SAND with some silt, roots, some wire debris. Old topsoil
at base. (Fill)
Loose, moist, red -brow n, silty, fine SAND.
Loose to medium dense, moist, brown -gray to yellow -brown, gravelly, fine to medium SAND. Loose
pockets.
Dense, moist, brown -gray to yellow -brown, gravelly, fine to medium SAND with some silt.
BOHF @ 10'
Note: No seepage; caving 078'.
0 Number EP-2
5
10
15
4" Sod.
Loose, moist, dark brown and red -brown, organic-dch, gravelly, fine SAND with some sift, abundant roots.
(Fill)
Medium dense with loose pockets, moist, yellow -brown,, gravelly, fine to medium SAND.
Stiff to hard, moist to wet, light brown, sandy SILT, brecclated.
BOH 0 10'
Note:'Tight seepage at T; caving Tto 5'; light spalling at seepages.
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observation at the time and location of this exploratory hole. modified by geologic
Interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and location. We wig not
accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of Information presented on this log.
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
Phone: 206-827-7701
Fax: 206-827-5424
Reviewed By
Beard Residence
Edmonds, Washington
Project No. G95003A
January 1995
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
0
5
10
15
Number EP-3
4" Topsoll/sod.
Loose to medium dense, moist, red -yellow-brown, gravelly, fine SAND with some sift, abundant roots,
loose pockets to 3', becomes dense below 3-1/2'.
BOH Q.5'
Note: No seepage; no caving.
n Number
5
10
15
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observation at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
Interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times *and location. Wevvillnot
accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of Information presented on this log.
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
Phone: 206-827-7701
Fax: 206-827-5424
Reviewed By
Beard Residence
Edmonds, Washington
Project No. G95003A
January 1995
i 33HS
3M
'ON 80f
As
A a,7 R/
IX
IV
-�71W,7
,�4
IN
.7
.�Wyp-,.e
relVP77dY� AZ
ey,
Z7
71
,7 Z7
W. 7-, V.,
r 7 0 F Z
,e
.!F,�71a,O�jV
-
7,71*r" ZRIV11WI-FWA7
-J r '
f47,ff1;W1-'Pl
�7
7 J71yl yAW�r
.,Jj'Vr X7
.7,717 av
. / J,2 6 WX 7j--, ' 7z v
Ire fle7 -711407
.77/
pj 12
LD
CD
L I
L
w
rq
0
7
70
c
0
7
La
pM-3 MI)
r-.0 T,
I t - r % ,7,1
G�-
k e VVI�
IV'
tr
f ad
JILL aw.
Af di t
iw Of A A
A , f.0
. It
11,zffo /v W 4%,111
7, ig
rl�y -mig-tctm
of
N
Lf)
M01,
k.ji
r-4
Lo
17
AT
r)
y";
ff
�X
w LO Air
U-1
N I-
r-, LO b,
R:� A7,
iLO
ob
.4 LO
M.
1.
41
Z, .. 60
M
t
tj
tA
Ole
.jQ
4A
fM�
14
jesul sulo
Appendix: Site Existing and Developed Hydrographs
I � -2,0� co
(Z—
go. (L-�L p 7
I
CL
E
00
Lo
Lo (D
Lo r-
tm
a
zw
I V� 2,o T" t
VV\
lie,
Toko
C-Kyoo� Mo �Lk 0%.,, 0, (v V,(,- tx,:, V, s5l�G
477C.1
L
L
e,
t C L,
`7 1
O)r
co
Cbf
0.. 0
C-
0.?
J5
t\
Legend
Runoff
Combined
ChannelReach
Diversion
Pond Route
IProject: c2000beard.GPW I IDF: SAMPLE.IDF 1 3 hyd's 1 03-14-2000 1
TR55 Tc Worksheet
Hyd. No. 1
Pasture Model - Pre -Existing
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Sheet Flow
Manning's n-value
= 0.150
Flow length
= 225.0 ft
Two-year 24-hr precip.
= 1.50 in
Land slope
= 7.6 %
Travel Time ........................................ 16.1 min
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Flow length
= 0 ft
Watercourse slope
= 0.0 %
Surface description
= Paved
Average velocity
= 0.00 fus
Travel Time ........................................ 0.0 min
Channel Flow
Cross section flow area
= 0.0 sqft
Wetted perimeter
= 0.0 ft
Channel slope
= 0.0 %
Manning's n-value
= 0.015
Velocity
= 0.00 fus
Flow length
= 0.0 ft
Travel Time ........................................ = min
Total Travel Time, Tc ........................ = 16.1 min
Page I
TR55 Tc Worksheet
Hyd. No. 2
Developed Condition
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Sheet Flow
Manning's n-value
= 0.150
Flow length
= 92.0 ft
Two-year 24-hr precip.
= 1.50 in
Land slope
= 5.4 %
Travel Time ........................................ 9.0 min
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Flow length
= 112ft
Watercourse slope
= 0.5 %
Surface description
= Paved
Average velocity
= 1.44 ft/s
Travel Time ........................................
= 1.3 min
Channel Flow
Cross section flow area
= 0.0 sqft
Wetted perimeter
= 0.0 ft
Channel slope
= 0.0 %
Manning's n-value
= 0.015
Velocity
= 0.00 ft/s
Flow length
= 0.0 ft
Travel Time ........................................
= min
Total Travel Time, Tc ........................ = 10.3 min
Page I
Hydrograph Summary Report
Page 1 .
Hyd.
No.
Hydrograph
type
(origin)
Peak
flow
(cfs)
Time
interval
(min)
Time to
peak
(min)
Volume
(cuft)
Return
period
(Yrs)
Inflow
hyd(s)
Maximum
elevation
(ft)
Maximum
storage
(cuft)
Hydrograph
description
1
SCS Runoff
0.02
6
492
648
10
—
Pasture Model - Pr
2
SCS Runoff
0.12
6
480
1,862
10
—
—
—
Developed Conditio
3
Reservoir
0.02
6
1194
1,862
10
2
79.34
728
Detention Pipe
Proj. file: c2000beard.GPW
OF file: SAMPLEOF
Run date: 03-14-2000
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 1
Pasture Model - Pre -Existing
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Drainage. area
= 0.50 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0%
Tc method
= TR55
Total precip.
= 2.00 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
M
lei
0.
a
M
13
English
Peak discharge = 0.02 cfs
Time interval =
6 min
Curve number =
75
Hydraulic length =
0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) =
16.1 min
Distribution =
Type IA
Shape factor =
484
Total Volume = 648 cuft
I - SCS Runoff - 10 Yr - QP = 0.02 ds
Time (hrs)
5
/ Hyd. 1
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 2
Developed Condition
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Drainage area
= 0.50 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0%
Tc method
= TR55
Total precip.
= 2.00 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
English
Peak discharge = 0.12 cfs
Time interval =
6 min
Curve number =
90
Hydraulic length =
0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) =
10.3 min
Distribution =
Type A
Shape factor =
484
Total Volume = 1,862 cult
2 - SCS Runoff - 10 Yr - QP = 0.12 ds
0.15-
0.10-
Hyd. 2
CY
0.05-
0.001 Ile
0 10 15 �O �5
Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 3
Detention Pipe
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 2
Max. Elevation = 79.34 ft
Storage Indication method used.
English
Peak discharge
= 0.02 cfs
Time interval
= 6 min
Reservoir name
= Detention Tank
Max. Storage
= 728 cuft
Total Volume = 1,862 cuft
3 - Reservoir - 10 Yr - QP 0.02 ds
0.15-
Hyd. 2
0.10--
Or
0.05-
0.00 Hyd. 3
0 10 20 �O 40 50
Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Summary Report
Page i
Hyd.
No.
Hydrograph
type
(origin)
Peak
flow
(cfs)
Time
interval
(min)
Time to
peak
(min)
Volume
(cuft)
Return
period
(Yrs)
Inflow
hyd(s)
Maximum
elevation
(ft)
Maximum
storage
(cuft)
Hydrograph
description
1
SCS Runoff
0.08
6
486
1,635
100
—
Pasture Model - Pr
2
SCS Runoff
0.23
6
480
3,376
100
—
---
—
Developed Conditio
3
Reservoir
0.08
6
540
3,376
100
2
80.16
853
Detention Pipe
Proj. file: c2000beard.GPW
OF file: SAMPLEADF
Run date: 03-14-2000
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 1
Pasture Model - Pre -Existing
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Drainage area
= 0.50 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0%
Tc method
= TR55
Total precip.
= 3.00 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
English
Peak discharge = 0.08 cfs
Time interval =
6 min
Curve number =
75
Hydraulic length =
0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) =
16.1 min
Distribution =
Type IA
Shape factor =
484
Total Volume = 1,635 cuft
1 - SCS Runoff - 100 Yr - QP = 0.08 ds
0.08, 1 - I I I I
M
1102
0 0.
CY
M
N
Time (hrs)
/ Hyd. 1
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 2
Developed Condition
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Drainage area
= 0.50 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0%
Tc method
= TR55
Total precip.
= 3.00 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
English
Peak discharge = 0.23 cfs
Time interval =
6 min
Curve number =
90
Hydraulic length =
0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) =
10.3 min
Distribution =
Type A
Shape factor =
484
Total Volume = 3,376 cuft
2 - SCS Runoff- - 100 Yr - QP = 0.23 ds
0.25-
0.20-
0.15-
Hyd. 2
CY
0.10-
0.05-
0.00
0 5 1'0 1'6��2 0 �5
Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 3
Detention Pipe
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storrnfrequency = 100yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 2
Max. Elevation = 80.16 ft
Storage Indication method used.
[a
[a
0.
0
A
M
English
Peak discharge
= 0.08 cfs
Time interval
= 6 min
Reservoir name
= Detention Tank
Max. Storage
= 853 cuft
Total Volume = 3,376 cuft
3 - Reservoir - 100 Yr - QP = 0.08 cfs
Time (hrs)
/ Hyd. 2
/ Hyd. 3
Reservoir Report
Reservoir No. I - Detention Tank
Pond Data
Pipe diameter = 5.00 ft
Stage I Storage Table
Stage
Elevation
ft
ft
0.00
75.50
0.50
76.00
1.00
76.50
1.50
77.00
2.00
77.50
2.50
78.00
3.00
78.50
3.50
79.00
4.00
79.50
4.50
80.00
5.00
80.50
Pipe length = 45.0 ft
Invert elevation = 75.50 ft
Contour area Incr. Storage Total storage
sqft cuft cuft
00
0
0
00
46
46
00
80
127
00
97
223
00
107
330
00
114
444
00
ill
555
00
107
662
00
96
758
00
80
838
00
46
884
Culvert / Orifice Structures
[A]
[B]
[C]
[D]
Rise in
= 6.0
0.6
1.8
0.0
Span in
= 6.0
0.6
1.8
0.0
No. Barrels
= 1
1
1
0
Invert El. ft
= 75.50
75.50
79.50
0.00
Length ft
= 50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Slope %
= 1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
N-Value
= .013
.013
.013
.000
Orif. Coeff.
= 0.60
0.60
0.60
0.00
Multi -Stage
= --
Yes
Yes
No
Weir Structures
[A]
Crest Len ft
= 1.6
Crest El. ft
= 80.25
Weir Coeff.
= 3.00
Eqn. Exp.
= 1.50
Multi -Stage
= Yes
Page 1
English
[B] [C] [D]
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
No
No
No
Tailwater Elevation = 0.00 ft
Note: All outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage / Storage / Discharge
Table
Stage
Storage
Elevation
Civ A
Clv B
Clv C
CIv D Wr A
Wr B Wr C Wr D Discharge
ft
cuft
ft
cfs
cfs
cfs
cfs cfs
cfs cfs cfs efs
0.00
0
75.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.50
46
76.00
0.47
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.01
1.00
127
76.50
0.68
0.01
0.00
--- 0.00
--- 0.01
1.50
223
77.00
0.83
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.01
2.00
330
77.50
0.96
0.01
0.00
0.00
--- 0.01
2.50
444
78.00
1.07
0.02
0.00
0.00
- 0.02
3.00
555
78.50
1.18
0.02
0.00
0.00
- --- 0.02
3.50
662
79.00
1.27
0.02
0.00
0.00
- 0.02
4.00
758
79.50
1.36
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.02
4.50
838
80.00
1.44
0.02
0.05
0.00
0.07
5.00
884
80.50
1.52
0.02
0.08
0.59
--- --- 0.69
Co. kq_s�
Appendix: Conveyance Capacity Calculations
6" PVC Pipe Discharge
Worksheet for Circular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\typculvt.fm2
Worksheet 6" Pipe
Flow Element Circular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Full Flow Capacity
Input Data
Mannings Coefficient 0.010
Channel Slope 1.0 %
Diameter 6.00 in
Results
Depth
6.0
in
Discharge
0.73
ds
Flow Area
0.20
ft2
Wetted Perimeter
1.57
ft
Top Width
0.00
ft
Critical Depth
0.43
ft
Percent Full
100.00
Critical Slope
0.009287 ft/ft
Velocity
3.71
ft/S
Velocity Head
0.21
ft
Specific Energy
FULL
ft
Froude Number
FULL
Maximum Discharge
0.78
cfs
Full Flow Capacity
0.73
cfs
Full Flow Slope
0.010000 ft/ft
03/14/00 Design Build services, Inc. FlowMaster v5.10
03:53:53 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1
6" PVC Capacity
Rating Table for Circular Channel
Project Description
Project File c:\haestad\fmw\typculvt.fm2
Worksheet 6" Pipe
Flow Element Circular Channel
Method Manning's Formula
Solve For Channel Depth
Constant Data
Mannings Coefficient 0.010
Channel Slope 79.0 %
Diameter 6.00 in
minimum maximum increment
Discharge 0.23 0.78 0.25 cfs
Rating Table
Discharge
Depth
Velocity
(cfs)
(in)
(ft/s)
0.23
0.8
15.53
0.48
1.1
19.33
0.73
1.4
21.86
03/14/00 Design Build Services, Inc. FlowMaster v5.10
04:16:25 PM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page I of 1
71,
rl
7D�
14.
I
_U C 06)3 C*n)--.,,"r)C)
d
vp
L: � C7- 0
-27
Oct
1'7- 1�7
,rvc-1 WnD
7/-7
Driscopipe - A Division of Phillips Petroleum
Pagel of3
ejup M01,9510811y4mas SIZE and DIMENSIONS
Standard 1PS* Dimensions
& Working Pressure Ratings (WPR)**
3/4" - 8" SCIR 7-15.5 10"-26" SUR 7-15.5 28"-36" SDR 7-15.5
2" - 8" SDR 17-32.5 10"-26" SDR 17-32.5 28"-54" SDR 17-32.5
3/4" - R" SDR 7-15.5
j P1
--DR7-
WPR = 267 psi
DR 9
WPR = 200 psi
WPR 160 psi
--
i
MEW
DR 13.5 (WPR = 128 psi) is available for 2" through 36" sizes
Iron Pipe Sizes; commonly known as "steel pipe sizes"
Pressure ratings are for water at 73.4 T
DR (Dimension Ratio) = OD/ min. wall thickness
Contact your local Driscopipe distributor for availability of pipe diameters and DRs not listed in the previous tables.
p
d-Z C., Cx---,-A
2" - 8" SDR 17-32.5
Size
wr% if
WPR = 100 psi
DK 21
WPR = 80 psi
QLR �
WPR - 64 psi
Qf� �-51
WPR = 60 psi
--Wn.
IPS* Pipe
Size
OD
Size
(in)
Min.
wall
(in)
Weight
(lbsift)-
Min
Wali
(in)
Weight
(lbsift)
Min.
Wall
(in)
Weight
(lbs/ft)
wall
(in)
Weight
(Ibs/ft)
2"
2.375
0.140
0.43
-
-
-
31,
3.5
0.206
--T9T---ff.T6T----U.-77---O-.T35-
0.62
U. 108
0.51.11
--TgT-
4"
4.5
--V.265-
--T.3T-
--0-1rT-
---r26--
-U.T73---
r3Y--
5"
--S.T6T-
U.327
U.214
13-7
--U.MT-
177
6"
6-.623-
-
U.39U
--T
.34
U.3 1.)
2.7
U.255
---
2-23-
7"
--T.T2-5--
-V.41V-
--T.TF-
--G.T4U-
I I
--T.39-
--0.22T
TOT
--TD3-
81,
T.623-----U3U7---Y6-5--
U.411
4.64
1 0. _3 _3 2
--T79F-F7U�
Iron Pipe Sizes; commonly known as "steel pipe sizes"
** Pressure ratings are for water at 73.4 *F
DR (Dimension Ratio) = OD/ min. wall thickness
Contact your local Driscopipe distributor for availability of pipe diameters and DRs not listed in the previous tables.
1.0"-26" SDR 7-1.5.5
7 7
WPR = 267 psi
DR9
WPR 200 psi
Now �ENLUMJ[=i
Wall
(in)_
Noun
=0111
on-BLIM
M-MEM
lm�-
MAZA
N�����MEAWMM
W-�MNLRAIM��
EWA"$
'A�-
�MLLM==
Effillu, 0
�=Mul
mum
�,Wju-
el
.w
Ih4://www.driscopipe.com/1000/1000size.htm 03/13/00
IDriscopipe - A Division of Phillips Petroleum
Page 1 of 2
1000 series Data Sheet
Customer Benefits
High quality DriscopipeO 1000 is manufactured from extra high molecular weight, high density PE
3408 polyethylene pipe grade resin.
This black, weather -resistant pipe exhibits...
Outstanding Chemical & Corrosion Resistance
High Environmental Stress Cracking Resistance
Excellent Flow Characteristics
Toughness & Ductility
Flexibility & Ease of Installation
Abrasion Resistance
Fatigue Endurance
Reliability
Suggested Applications:
Acid/Caustic Lines Hazardous Wastes
Organic Chemicals
Agriculture High Purity Processes
Petrochemicals
Aquaculture Ice Rinks
Pulp/ Paper/ Wood
Brine :ndustrial Piping
River Crossings
Coal Slurry norganic Chemicals
Salt Mines
De -watering Irrigation
Sugar Mills
Dredging/ Sand/ Gravel Leachate Collection
SX Acid Mining
Fertilizer Marinas
Tailings
Fly Ash Metal (Cu, Fe, Al, etc.)
Temporary pipelines
Hard Rock Disposal Mining
Utility piping
And Many Others...
Typical Physical Properties*
of DriscopipeO 1000 (PE 3408) Polyethylene Pipe Resi
Property
Tes-t Method
Unit
Value
Density
ASTM D 1505
gms/cm3
0.955
Mel, Inde.
ASTM D 1238 (190/2.16)
gms/10 min.
0.11+
Environmental Stress Cracking Resistance
—Condition A,B, 9, C, Fo
ASTM D 1693
hrs.
>5000
(molded specimen)
—Compressed Ring, Fo
ASTM F 1248
hrs.
>3500
(extruded specimen)
Tensile Strength, Ultimate
ASTM D 638
psi
5000
—Type IV Specimen
(2"/min)
Tensile Strength, Yield
ASTM D 638
psi
3200
—Type IV Specimen
(2"/min)
Elongation at Break
ASTM D 638
%
750
—Type IV Specimen
(2"/min)
Impact Strength (1ZOD)
ASTM D 256
!n-lb./
in. notch
42
—Specimen thickness 0. 125"
Method A
Vicat Softening Temperature
ASTM D 1525
oF
257
Brittleness Temperature
ASTM D 746
oF
< -180
Ihttp://www.driscopipe.com/1000/1000data.htm 03/13/00
Driscopipe - A Division of Phillips Petroleum
Page 2 of 2
Flexural Modulus
Modulus of Elasticity (Younes Modulus)
Hardness
Coeff. of Linear Thermal Expansion
Thermal Conductivity
ASTM D 3350
psi
135,000
ASTM D 638
psi
130,000
ASTM D 2240
Shore D
65
ASTM D 696
in/in/OF
1.2 x 10-4
ASTM D 177
Btu -in /
2.7
ft^2/hrs/*F
Hydrostatic Design Basis (HDB) ASTM D 2837
—73*F psi 1600
-- 140*17 psi 800
Material Cell Classification ASTM D 3350 345464C
Material Designation PPI Recommendation PE3408
Average Melt Index with a standard deviation of 0.01
'This list of typical physical properties is intended for basic characterization of the matedal and does not represent specific
determinations or specifications. The Physical properties values reported herein were determined on compression molded
specimens prepared in accordance with Procedure C of ASTM D 1928 and may differ from specimens taken from the pipe.
This Document reports accurate and reliable information to the best of our knowledge but our suggestions and
recommendations cannot be guaranteed because the conditions of use are beyond our control. The user of such information
assumes all risk connected with the use thereof. Phillips Petroleum Company and its subsidiaries assume no responsibility for
the use of information presented herein and hereby expressly disclaim all liability in regards to such use.
More Inforniation
Data Sheet Brochure
Size and Dimension Sheet FM Approved Pipe and Fittings
Fittings Pricing, Availability, Selection, etc.
Home Page
Ihttp://www.driscopipe.com/1000/1000data.htm 03/13/00
Appendix: Grading Quantity Report
lUser Name: rick
Project: Concept 2000 Beard Residence
Prismoidal Volume Results Prismoidal
Original Surface Model: topolines
Final Surface Model: final
Cut Compaction Factor: 0.00
Fill Compaction Factor: 0.00
lRaw Cut Volume: 2449.47 cu yd
Compacted Cut Volume: 0.00 cu yd
Total Cut Volume: 2449.47 cu yd
lRaw Fill Volume: 9.10 cu yd
Compacted Fill Volume: 0.00 cu yd
Total Fill Volume: 9.10 cu yd
Volume Results
Date: 01-24-00
Time: 14:09:07
Page: 1
co
PROPOSED
NEW HOUSE
'u 67 "1
V, EP-1
U, >8
EP-2 <W01 $13RIVEWAY
—7 40, 1-. us
IV
am J
as
ca
�%
HOUSE
TO BE
REMOVED j
Ir
r
Ij
J69 GRAMP
LEGEND
,P. I m Approximate location of exploration pit
0 40 so
I I I
SCALE IN FEET
ASSOCIATED
EARTH
/MMM SCIENCES, INC
SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN
BEARD RESIDENCE
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
G95003A 1 1/95 1 FIGURE I
0 Number EP-1
5
10
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
Topsail; loose, moist, black with sod.
Loose, moist, brown -gray, gravelly, fine SAND with some silt, mots, some wire debris. Old -topsoil
at base. (Fill)
Loose, moist, red -brown, silty, fine SAND.
Loose to medium dense, moist, brown -gray to yellow -brown, gravelly, fine to medium SAND. Loose
pockets.
Dense, moist, brown -gray to yellow -brown, gravelly, fine to medium SAND with some silt.
BOHF @ 10'
Note: No seepage; caving 0-8'.
0 Number EP-2
5
10
15
4" Sod.
Loose, moist, dark brown and red -brown, organic -rich, gravelly, fine SAND with some sift, abundant roots.
(Fill)
Loose, moist, red -brown, gravelly, fine SAND with wood. (Old Regolith)
Medium dense with loose pockets, moist, yellow -brown,, gravelly, fine to medium SAND.
Stiff to hard, moist to wet, light brown, sandy SILT, brecclated.
BOH C 10'
Note: -light seepage at T; caving 31 to 51; light spalling at seepages.
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observation at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
Interpretation, engineering analysis, and Judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and location. We YAR not
accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of information presented o6 this log.
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
Phone: 206-827-7701
Fax: 206-827-5424
Reviewed By
Beard Residence
Edmonds, Washington
Project No. G95003A
January 1995
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
Number EP-3
4" Topsoll/sod.
Loose to medium dense, moist, red -yellow -brown, gravelly, fine SAND with some sift, abundant mots,
loose pockets to 3', becomes dense below 3-1/2'.
BOH 9.5'
Note: No seepage; no caving.
Number
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observation at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
Interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and location. We will not
accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of Information presented on this log.
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
Phone: 206-827-7701
Fax: 206-827-5424
Reviewed By
Beard Residence
Edmonds, Washington
Project No. G95003A
January 1995
PLANNIMr-, DATA
SITE ADDRESS: DATE:
ZONING: PLAN CHK#:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
CORNERLOT —(Yes/No)
SETBACKS:
FLAG LOT____If_______(Yes/No)
Required Setbacks:
Front: IP Left Side:_,�.*_RIght Side: 1,9 Rear:
Actual Setbacks: -fa—
Front: —. Left Side: a . Right Side: /0 Rear:-52- mw
Street map checked for additional setback required? , ;F
(Yes/No)
LEGAL NONCONFORMING LAND USE DETERMINATION ISSUED (Y/N)
LOT COVERAGE: 1�01040 I
Maximum Allowed: Actual:
BUILDING HEIGHT:
Maximum Allowed: Actual Height: /i
Datum Point: Datum Elevation:
A.D.U. CREATED?:
SUBDIVISION:
CRITICAL AREAS #: Y4f -
SEPA DETERMINATION:
LOT AREA:
OTHER:
------- ----
Plan Review
Ckfi1W%PanW*V$nd&Ldoa
ulml
May 19,1995
HWA Project No. 95084
City of Edmonds
250 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, Washington 98020
Attention: ]�Ar. Ydrk Vinish
STREET FILE
1,6?20 1?14-1X01-;V
Subject: CRiTicAi AREA STUDY - PuER REviEw
Beard Residence -
16920 Talbot Road
Edmonds, Washington
EONGWEST
&ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering
Hydrogeology
Geoenvironmental Services
Testing & Inspection
Reference: Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Geotechnical
Engineering Report, Beard Residence, E&nonds, Washington, by
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc., January 30, 1995.
Dear Mr. Vinish:
In accordance with your request, Hong West & Associates, Inc. (HWA) has completed a
geotechnical peer review associated with the proposed new home construction at 16920
Talbot Road in Edmonds, Washington. As part of this study, we visited the sit e and
reviewed the consultant's methodology, conclusions, and recommendations as
surnmarized in the report referenced above. Particular emphasis was placed on
recommendations relating to the City of Edmonds Critical Areas Ordinance (Ord. No.
2874, rev. No. 3014). Authorization for this project was received from Mr. Kirk Vinish of
the City of Edmonds on May 10, 1995.
Methodology
The City has requested we review the consultant's methodology and evaluate whether the
subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, and analysis was sufficient to adequately -.
address slope stability concerns, drainage characteristics, erosion potential, and to provide
recommendations for site development.
Based on our review of the consultant's report� it is our opinion that the subsurface
investigation performed was adequate to characterize the soil and groundwater conditions
across the site. An appropriate number of excavations were advanced to sufficient depths,
and detailed soil descriptions and groundwater conditions were recorded. In addition, the
consultant reviewed and utilized appropriate geologic references. A review of the
referenced report suggests that an appropriate level of geotechnical engineering analysis
19730-64th Avenue West
Lynnwood, WA 98036-5904
Tel. 206-774-0106
Fax. 206-775-7506
May 19, 1995
HWA Project No. 95084
was performed in order to reach conclusions and present recommendations on site
earthwork, foundation design, site drainage, erosion control, and slope stability.
Critical Areas Ordinance
We have reviewed the City of Edmonds Critical Areas Ordinance and revisions.
According to the ordinance, a Steep Slope Hazard is any slope with an inclination of 40
percent (2.5H: IV) or greater, measured over at least 10 feet of elevation change. For
such slopes, a buffer of 50 feet is required. This buffer can be reduced to 10 feet if a
Critical Area Study is prepared which indicates no adverse impacts from the proposed
development. Building setbacks from the edge of the buffer must be a minimum of 15
feet. However, the Critical Area Study can waive these requirements (buffer and setback)
if the steep slope is 20 feet or less in height.
The City of Edmonds has requested HWA to determine whether the referenced report
meets the requirements of a Critical Area Study. The consultant has identified an area
along the northwest property margin which meet& the definition of a Steep Slope Hazard.
Since this slope is greater than 20 feet in height, a Critical Area Study can recommend a
setback of no less than 25 feet from the top of the slope (10 foot buffer with 15 foot
setback from buffer). The consultant has recommended a minimum setback of 40 feet
from the top of the slope. We agree that a setback larger than 25 feet is warranted in this
case.
We feel the consultant has adequately addressed potential impacts of the proposed
development on the steep slope. The consultant acknowledges a moderate risk of
landsliding. The consultant has clearly indicated that this risk win not be increased due to
the proposed development, provided the recommendations in the report are followed. In
our opinion, recommendations presented for surface and groundwater drainage and
erosion control are appropriate. It is our further opinion that the recommended setback
appears to be adequately justified in the referenced report.
Summary
It is our opinion that the referenced report meets the requirements for a Critical Area
Study as specified in the City of Edmonds Critical Areas Ordinance.
It should be noted that the scope of services performed by HWA was limited to a site
reconnaissance and review of the referenced document. Field studies and/or verification
of calculations were not performed; accordingly, we can offer no assurances regarding the
performance of the site. In addition, the services performed consist of professional
opinions made in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles
and practices.
95084RDOC 2 HONG WEST & AssociATEs, INc.
May 19,1995
HWA Project No. 95084
* C)
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions, or if we can be
of finther service, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
HoNG WEST& Assomms, INc.
C:
310
q
Andr6 D Mar6, P.E.
Geotechnical Engineer
al a Ur P-4 Mr. r, 11
95084R.DOC 3 HoNG WEST& AssociATEs, INc.
0
-f-'? C. 18 9,3
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: www.d.edmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
May 6, 2003
Mr. and Mrs. Beard
16920 Talbot Road
Edmonds, WA 98026
Re: Address Change request
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Beard;
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
S HEET FILE
This letter is to inform you that your request for an address change has been approved
by the City. Your address has been changed from#@94,200053"Ilt-o iAoNk"o 17130 Talbot
Road. I will inform all City Divisions including Gtilit'y Billing, Public
Works and Building.
It is your responsibility to inform the Post Office, the Phone Company for Enhanced 911
emergency purposes and all other 'interested parties of this correction. We apologize for
the inconvenience this may cause you and greatly appreciate your cooperation.
S i erely
Lara Palmatier
Permit Coordinator
Cc: Fire Department
Police Department
Utility Billing
Public Works
Building Official/Street File
L\Ternp\IDST's\Master Letters\Address Change
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister Citv - Hekinan. Jat)an
t
N
CITY OF EDMONDS SIDE SEWER AS -BUILT
ADDRESS PERMIT
16920 TALBOT RD, NUMBER 9557
HOMEOWNER CONTRACTOR MARK BEARD
DATE 10/17/01 DRAWN ISMAEL ABILA
I BY
C-'9Q)
.18
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH , EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: www.d.edmonds.wa.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
April 28, 2003
Mr. and Mrs. Beard
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
16920 Talbot Road
Edmonds, WA 98026
Re: Address Change requestlo
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Beard; "t�
'V
This letter is to inform you that your request for an address change has beD.-gp
..4moved
by the City, Your address has been changed from 16920 Talbot Road t6 17132 Talb�i�
Road. I will inform all City Divisions including Fire, Police, Utility B
Works and Building.
It is your responsibility to inform the Post Office, the Phone Company for Enhanced 911
emergency purposes and all other interested parties of this correction. We apologize for
the inconvenience this may cause you and greatly appreciate your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Lara Palmatier
Permit Coordinator
Cc: Fire Department
Police Department
Utility Billing
Public Works
Building Official/Street File
L\Temp\DST'sWastei�'Letters�Address Change
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
it, C. I SO)
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: wwaci.edmonds.wa.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
January 5, 2009
MEMO TO:
Snohomish County Assessor's Office
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
This letter is to inform you of an address correction. Please change the following Street
(Situs) Address and the Taxpayer Address:
From
16920 Talbot Rd
To
17130 Talbot Rd
We apologize for the inconvenience this may cause you and greatly appreciate your
cooperation.
Occupancy: Residential Tax ID Number: 27040700104200
Subdivision: SEC 07 TWP 27 RGE 04
if you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at 425-771-0220 or
Harri son@ci.edi-nonds. wa. Lis
Respectfully,
Senior Permit Coordinator
Edmonds Building Department
Cc: File
00e,
4% c-.1 S ()"I
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: www.d.edmonds.wa.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
May 6, 2003
TREF'
Mr. and Mrs. Beard
16920 Talbot Road
Edmonds, WA 98026
Re: Address Change request
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Beard;
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
This letter is to inform you that your request for an address change has been apprg
by the City. Your address has been changed from 16920 Talbot Road t6^47,430'
Road. I will inform all City Divisions including Fire, Police, Utility BilfiRg, Public
Works and Building.
It is your responsibility to inform the Post Office, the Phone Company for Enhanced 911
emergency purposes and all other interested parties of this correction. We apologize for
the inconvenience this may cause you and greatly appreciate your cooperation.
S' ce�el
Lara Palmatier
Permit Coordinator
Cc: Fire Department
Police Department
Utility Billing
Public Works
Building Official/Street File
L\Temp\DST's\N4 aster Letters\Address Change
Incorporated August 11, 1890
f-:1. . T.- I - I.
of EbAf
0
Ot
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH EDMONDS WA 98020 (425) 771-0220
CITY OF EDMONDS
http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us
RCW 197-11-970 Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS)
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
Description of proposal: Construction of a New Single Family Residence C
Proponent: Mark Beard
16920 Talbot Road
Edmonds, WA 98026
ddress if any. t RP IDS
Location of -proposal, including street a' -*lr6 92'01T affb�.o
Lead agency: CITY OF EDMONDS
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse
impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement is not required under RCW
43.21.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other
information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request.
xx There is no comment period for this DNS.
This DNS is issued under 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14
days from the date below. Coniments must be submitted by 2000..
Responsible Official:
Position/Title:
Phone:"
Address:
Karissa Kawamoto
Planner
425-771-0220
City of Edmonds
121 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
Dafe: �,�Ioljltolhb Signatur;xv,41(�,/
xx You may appeal this determination to Robert Chave, PI ing Manager, at 121 5th Avenue
North, Edmonds, WA 98020, no later than 14y,�'
�2 2000, by filing a
written appeal citing the specific factual reasons for thd appeal. The appeal submittal must
also include the required fees and mailing list. Please contact the Planning Division for
specific submittal requirements..
xx Posted on 2000, at the Edmonds Public Library, Edmonds Community
Services BuildingJand the Edmonds Post Office.
xx Distribute to "Checked" Agencies on the reverse side of this form, along with a copy of the
Checklist.
I
Pagel of3
00-59 SEPADOC
CREATED ON 03/22/00 2:45 PM
M 'ailed to the following along with the Enviromnental Checklist:
;xx Environmental Review Section
Department of Ecology
P.O. Box.47703 xx.
Burlington Northem-Santa Pe Railroad
Olympia, WA 98504-7703
2900 Bond
Everett, WA 98201
xx Department of Fish & Wildlife
xx
Attn.: Richard E. Johnson
Mark Beard
Regional Habitat Manager
16920 Talbot Rd.
16018 Mill Creek Boulevard
Edmonds, WA 98026
Mill Creek, WA 98012
kX National Marine Fisheries Service
Attn.: Steve Landino
WA. State Habitat Branch Chief
5 10 Desmond Drive SE
Lacey, WA 98503
Attachments
pc: i File No. Plan Check 00-59
SEPA Notebook
Page 2 of 3
00-59 SEPA.DOC
CREATED ON 03/22/00 2:45 PM
_A
CITY OF EDMONDS
CHECKLIST
Purpose of Checklist. -
asc
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), clx��Vlff-RCW, req �s all governmental agencies to consider the
environmental impacts.of a proposal before making etkions. An OviroDmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all
proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the 4—uatiw-of-ffie—environment * The purpose of this checklist is to provide
information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it
can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required.
Instrudionsfor Appficants.
This environmental. checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this
checklist to detern-tine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer
the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer
the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or
if a question does not apply to your p . roposal, write "do not know" or does not apply". complete answers to the questions now may
avoid unnecessary delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions
if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do. them over a period of time or on different parcels of
land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you
submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or. provide additional information reasonably related to determining if
there may be significant adverse impact.
Use of checklistfor nonprojedproposals.
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions* may be ans ered does not apply."
w IN ADDITION,
complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (pan D).
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as
"proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively.
.A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: 1 &3!7 e*7 A-Mlljt4
2. Name of applicant: mitalen- /hC-A/Zr>
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact penon:
'TA LES0 rZr.> D WA -Q & I Q W A bQ 2 C
WK., 10& 01,7. *2 -%o I
Page I of 24
CHUTDOM-NOV-93
MASMSPEA
4. 'Date checklist prepared: I o - zoo o
5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Edmonds.
C6::) Proposed timing or schedule (including phasi if ap licable):
(STAFF COMME
I. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity. related to or connected with this
proposal? N yes, explain.
Al 42
(STAFF COMMENTS)
S.. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related
to this proposal.
0 MEN
A
9. Do you know whether applications arc pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting
the property covered by your proposal? N yes, explain.
(STAFF COMMEN
Page 2 of 24
cHrLT.Dmi-Nov-93
MASrFR%PEA
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
C>
4�!ro kee AJ r/",o
r
(STAFF COMMENTS)
11 Give brief, complete description of your proposal, includi ng the proposed uses and size of the project and site.
There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You
do not need to repeat those answers on this page.
/'0V -:z e z-*— f C'
Z'o 00
(STAFF COMMENTS)
12. Location of the propoisal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your
proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. N a proposal
would occur over a range of area, provide range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide legal description, site plan,
vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the
agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related
to this checkfisL
-7-ift
f V—C-:) z AJ )A UP
'(STAFT COMMENTS)
Page 3 of 24
CHUTDOCU-NOV-93
MAMMSM
TO BE COMPLETED
B.
APPLICANT
ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one)-Qolling, hilly,
b.
C.
U t 4'em F-:>
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(STAFF COMMENTS)
mountainous, other: __-j
What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muckY
know th I ification of agricultural soils, S �fy ;the:,Xd note any prime farmland.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Are there
indications or history of . unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, descriw
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Pap 4 of 24
CHKLT.DCGI-NOV-93
MAMMSPEA
Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source
of fill.
AJO u-4 I 00gr A0, GIU.0
- Pao A�e
IsAvOL-Vt V�;ADD -C-JL
F I I
(STAFF COMMENTS) co
Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? generally describe.
J.'w
P��
(STAFF COMMENTS) zwo
About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for
example, asphalt or buildings)?
--7
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any*
(-ZOO
(STAFF COMMENTS)
2. AHL
Mat types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial
wood smoke) during construction and when,the project is completed? 9 any, generally describe and give
approximate quantities if known.
EGEL Ex
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Page 5 of 24
CHUTDC01-NOV-93
MASMRWRA
b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may effect your proposal? If so, generally describe.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to the, if any:
(STAFF COMMENTS)
3. WATER
Surface:
Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and
seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If
appropn7e, state what st�=r Aver it flows into.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If
yes, please describe and attach available. plans.
(3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material thatmould be placed in or removed from surface
water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source Of rill
material.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
CKLT.DMI-NOV-0
MAMMSPEA
Pap 6 of 24
(4) Will � the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description,
purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Does the pro I lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan.
PU'S (0
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters?� 9 so, describe the
type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Ground:
(1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give
general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Par 7 of 24
CHKLTDOLNI-NOV-93
MASMSPRA
(2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or
other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the
following chemiC21L..; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the
number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the
number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Water Runoff (including storm water):
Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and
disposal, if any (include quantities, if k nown). Where will this water flow? Will this
water flow into other waters? N so, describe.
ka'"Ops?- 1594w-., I Oak pcvwks sutrxcrs
WIL'L M-TAIAP C-6 A, 06 rCsj T
ptofu -ro �-w-r or- BLUFr-
T4,ow a Pu&rx�r i;;v-kjm-0-
Lvv
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? N so, generally describe.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any:
vs-TEoTi o Av L apfz v
4k-izcx e. ip a itAxp rL
C/
nz�
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Pap 8 of 24
CHKLT.DOCU-NOV-93
MASUWEA
4. Plants
a� Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other.
evergreen tree: fir, her. AwoaZiz
shrubs
grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet.soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other:
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfbil, other.
other types of vegetation:
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b.-
C.
What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
"0 NO e- e-
;&ifA Aj
List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Par 9 of24
CHKLT.DMI-NOV-0
MA9=%SMA
d.
Proposed landscaping, use of or other materials to preserve or enhance vegetati on on the
site, if any:
(STAFF COMMENTS)
5. Animals
a. Check or circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on
or near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, eagle4s:o:n:g�Wirds�bther.
mammals: deer, bear, elk, heavier, other. /V10 V25;
fish:. bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: 16)4"
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. List any threatened or endangered S des known to be on or near the site.
;0,0 A-)
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Page 10 of 24
CHUTDOMI-NOV-93
MAMRNSPRA
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
(STAFF COMMENTS)
6. Energy and Natural Resources
a. What kinds of cncrkxAelectrl"atural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed
project's energy needs? Describe whethe . it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc.
c,
P7� -7.,4 _/
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Would your project affect the pot eintial use of solar energy by. adjacent properties? If so, generally
describe.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed
measures to duce or control energy impacts, if any:
IV4
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Page I I of 24
CHUTDC01-NOV-93
MAMERWRA
7. Environmental Health
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and
explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so describe.
X)o
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
A.)
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Noise
(1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic,
equipment, operation, other)?
zC)0 AJ
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Pap 12 of 24
CHKLT.D=t-NOV-93
MAMR%SMA
(2) What types and levels of noise would be created by.or associated with the project on a short-term or
a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise
would come from the site.
-R�)
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
Fox J e>,L)-
(STAFF COMMENTS)
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a. What is the current se of the site and adjacent properties?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Has the site been' used for agriculture? H so, describe.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
61 7- 99V /K
CHKLTDOCNI-NOV43 Page 13 of 24
MAMR%SPEA
C. Describe any structures on the site.
d.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Will iknv dnichire-% hP demnlishpd? Tf qn- what?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
E What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
g. U applicable, what is the current shoreline master plan designation of the site?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Par 14 of 24
CHKLT.D=I-NOV-93
MAFM\SPRA
Has any part of the site been classified as an qven*ironmentally-s�ps�iveqq area? If so, specify.
JL 09 �- A-AJ 10 Zo a:�
L 1 100,
(STAFF COMMENTS) 1,40a .41f JflAIVI-k AW AI
L Approximately bow many people would reside or work in the completed project?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
j. Approximately bow many people would the completed project displace?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
(STAFF COMMENTS)
L Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans� if
any:
4-1 42 L--p-r>
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Page 15 af24
CHKLMDOCNI-NOV-93
MASMR%PRA
9. Housing
'a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income
housing. .4
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-
income housing.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
(STAFF COMMENTS)
10. , Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not. including antennas; what is the principle
exterior building material(s) proposed?
F-40 AV AVA. 40
6& 0.4 ZZ --01,e IA.) 2L' 9= A:t 4rpc 15>' 45 AJ &W--
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Page 16 of 24
CHUT.D001-NOV-93
MASFERWRA
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstriucted?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
12 o� 5057 6WA--?^�, Le.� 15- c-,,, C.- . r ac)
(STAFF COMMENTS)
11. Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
A) eD
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Pap 17 of 24
CW.LTD=I-N0V-"
MAMUNSMA
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
(STAFF COMMENTS)
12. Recreation
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Would the proposed project displace* any existing recreation uses? H so, describe.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be
provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Ak��
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Page ISOM
CHKLTDCOI-NOV-93
MASMSPEA
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation
2. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, 'state, or local preservation registers
known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural
importance known to be on or next to the site.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Proposed measures toreduce or control impacts, if any:
1§7
(STAFF COMMENTS) i
14. Transportation .
2. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access, to the existing street
system. Show on site plans, if any.
ZA 7-- />
.-/2 '02-1 -A=P-Xf -.5 6V Al '6TAX
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Pap 19 of 24
CHXLT.DCC%1-N0V-"
MASMSPEA
b. h site currently served by public transit? If no, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit
stop?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
c. How many parking spaces would the ompictcd project have? How many would the project eliminate?
-644 C- 7 4-, /0 /-1 i�-
(STAFF COMMENTS)
d.
e.
Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not
including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private).
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, ran, or air transportation? N so,
generally describe.
Xt a
(STAFF COMMENTS)
CWLT.D=I-N0V-93
MAMMSPEA
Page 20 of 24
How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? N known, indicate when
peak volumes would occur.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
00 AJr 9 , . I
(STAFF COMMENTS)
15. Public Services
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police
protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
AleD
(STAFT COMMENTS)
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Pap 21 of 24
CHKLT.DOCI-NOV-93-
MAWERWRA
16. Iffilities
refuse sc
Circle utilities currently available at the site: C atural gas
�ryw septic system, other.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Describe the utilities that are proposed for Ahe project, the utility providing the service, and the general
construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Page 22 of 24
CHKLTDOCNI-NOV-93
MASMSPILA
RECEIVED
NOV 3 0 1995
PERMIT COUNTER
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION9 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
I
RECEIVED
FEB 152000
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR.
CITY OF EDMONDS
BEARD RESIDEMCE
I EDMONDS9 WASHINGTON
PREPARED FOR
Mark Beard
PROJECT NO. G95003A
JAMARY 1995
ABSOCIATEO
EARTH
ArAffmikill BCIENCES. INC
911 - 5th Avenue, Suite 100, Kirkland, WA 98033
(206) 827-7701 FAX (206) 827-5424
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONO GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
BEARD RESIDENCE
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
January 30, 1995-
Project No. G95003A
1. � PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS
This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic hazards and geotechnical
engineering study for the proposed new Beard residence. The approximate locations of the
explorations accomplished for, this study are shown on the site and exploration plan, Figure 1.
Inthe event that any changes in the nature, design or layout of the project are planned, the
conclusions and recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed and modified, or
verified, as necessary.
The purpose of this study was to provide subsurface data to be utilized in the design and.
development of the proposed new home construction. Geotechnical engineering studies were
conducted to determine the depth to the foundation bearing strata, the type of suitable
foundation, the allowable foundation soil bearing pressure, anticipated foundation settlement,
floor support recommendations and drainage considerations. Geologic hazard evaluations were
also completed to determine if mitigations would be required for potential seismic, landslide, and
er�sion hazards and a minimum top of slope setback distance. This report summarizes our
current field work and offers development recommendations based on our present understanding
of the project.
1.2 Authorizatiom
Written authorization to proceed with this study was granted by Mark Beard by executing our
proposal dated January 5, 1995. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Mr.
Beard and his agents, for specific application to this project. Within the limitations of scope,
.Schedule and budget, our services have been performed in accordance with accepted geotechnical
engineering and engineering geology practices in effect in this area at the time that this report
was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied is made. It must be understood that
no engineering design or geologic analysis can yield a guarantee of stable slopes. Our
observations, findings, and opinions are a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the
owner.
. I
2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION
This report was completed with an understanding of the project based on a topogmphic survey
dated April 22, 1993 prepared by Darrell Ford and Associates, and undated development plans
prepared by Lee Kierig, Architect. The project site was located in a residential neighborhood
west of Talbot Road atop a west -facing marine bluff in north Edmonds, Washington. The
property was roughly rectangular and measured approximately 100 feet north -south by about 260
feet east -west. An existing residence and detached garage occupied the central portion of the
property, and it is our understanding that these structures will be razed prior to cons . truction of
the new residence. According to the present plans, the new structure will be a two-story home
with a partial basement, and will be constructed at essentially the same location as the existing
structure.
Most of the property was relatively flat to gently sloping down to the west. The western -most
40 feet of the property was along the marine bluff that was about 80 feet in height, and sloped
steeply down to the west at a gradient of about 100 percent. The bluff was heavily vegetated
with small saplings, blackberries, vines and other brush. A Burlington Northern railroad right-
of-way with two sets of tracks ran along the base of the bluff.
No surface water was observed on the site or on the upper portions of the bluff at the time of
our field work. Also, no -evidence of recent slope movement was noted at the time of our study . .
According to the client, a drainage ditch was located along the railroad grade. This ditch is
periodically brushed out and cleaned by the railroad. Apparently, following the removal of
vegetation along the toe of the slope, some shallow sloughing of soils usually occurs in this area..
3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Our field study included'excavating three exploration pits, using a tra&-mounted excavator. The
pits permitted direct, visual observation of subsurface conditions. The materials encountered
were studied and classified in the field by an engineering geologist from our firm. Selected
samples were then transported to our laboratory for further visual classification and. testing, as
necessary. All exploration pits were backfilled immediately after examination and logging.
The various types of sediments as well as the depths where characteristics of the sediments
changed are indicated on the exploration logs presented in the Appendix. Our explorations were
approximately located in the field by measuring from known site features'shown on the site and
exploration plan, Figure 1.
Because of the nature of exploratory work below ground, extrapolation of subsurface conditions
between field explorations is necessary. It should be noted that differing subsurface conditions
sometimes may be present due to the random nature of deposition and the alteration of
topogra phy by past grading and filling. The nature and extent of any variations between the
field explorations may not become fully evident until construction. If variations are observed
K
at that time, it may be necessary to re-evaluate specific recommendations in . this report and make
appropriate changes.
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface conditions at the project site were inferred from the exploration pits- ' the visual
reconnaissance of the site, review of the Edmonds Quadrangle Geologic Map, and a review of
the supplied topography. Within the property boundaries, the stratigraphy encountered included
fill soils overlying natural deposits of gravelly sand, and sandy, silt. These units are described
in'the following sections in the order they were encountered from the surface, followed by our
observations of the hydrology of the site.
4.1 Fill Soil .
Fill soils (those soils not naturally placed) were encountered in two of the three exploration Pits.
The fill consisted of loose, moist, dark brown to brownish gray, gravelly fine sand with some
silt and abundant roots. The fill was encountered at the surface (beneath a topsoil horizon) and
extended to depths ranging to 2-1/2 feet in EP-2, to 4-1/2 feet in EP-1.
The quality, thickness and comvaction of the fill
4.2 Gravelly Sand
Underlying the fill soils, and near the surface where the fill was absent, all three of the
exploration pits encountered a loose to medium dense to dense, moist, brownish gray to yellow
brown, gravelly fine to medium sand with some silt. This unit was encountered from 4-1/2 feet
to below the 10 foot termination depth of EP-1, and from 2-1/1 to 6 feet in EP-2. In EP-3 this
unit was encountered at the surface (beneath a topsoil), and it extended to below the 5 foot
termination depth of this pit.
The gravelly sand was interpreted as advance outwash that was deposited by'meltwater streams
em ' anating from an advancing glacial ice sheet. These sediments were overridden by the glacial
ice and consolidated to a dense state by the weight of the ice. The loose to medium dense
character of the near surface portions of this unit is attributed to weathering, and the
development of roots within this uniL
4.3 Sandy Sil
Underlying the gravelly sand, a stiff to h . ard, moist to wet, light brown, mottled, brecciated
sandy silt with trace gravel was encountered in EP-2. The silt extended from 6 feet to belo;
the, 10 foot termination of EP-2, and was interpreted to underlie the entire site at depth.
3
The sandy silt was' interpreted as glacial sediment deposited in a proglacial lacustrine Oake)
environment created in front of, or within an advancing ice sheet. Ile stiff to hard state of this
material is also attributed to glacial consolidation.
HE
No surface water was observed at the site, and in general the near surface sandy soils at the site
appeared to be well drained. Light ground water seepage was encountered at a depth of 7 feet
in EP-2, within the sandy silt unit. Ile amount of seepage was minor, considering that our
explorations were conducted following a two month period (November -December, 1994) with
above average rainfall. Fluctuations in ground water levels at the site will occur due to the time
of the year and variations in rainfall. Random seepages could al . so occur during the wetter times
of the year in isolated areas within the fill soils.
4
January 30, 1995
P "ect No. G95003A
r0i
H. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND MMGATIONS
Ou r interpretation of geologic hazards on the property is based on the stratigraphy encountered,
as.Vell as the slope and hydrologic conditions observed ' during our field reconnaissance.
Potential hazards include those related to seismic (earthquake) activity, landslide or mass -wasting
hazards, and erosion hazards. The potential risk of these hazards and their mitigations are
discussed in the following paragraphs.
5.0 SEISMIC HAZARDS AND RECOMMENDED MMG
Earthquakes occur in the Puget Sound region with great regularity. The vast majority of these
events are small and are usually not,detected without instruments. However, large earthquakes
do occur as evidenced by the 1949, 7.2 magnitude. event in Olympia, and the 1965, 6.5
magnitude event in Seattle. The 1949 earthquake appears to have been the largest in this area
d-uning recorded history. Evaluation of earthquake return rates indicate that an earthquake of the
magnitude between 5.5 and 6.0 could occur within the next 8 to 12 years in the Edmonds area.
Generally, there are 4 types of potential geologic hazards associated with large seismic events:
1) surficial ground rupture; 2) seismically induced landslides; 3) liquefaction; and 4) ground
motion. The potential for each of these hazards to adversely impact the proposed project is
discussed below.
5. 1; Surficial Ground Ruptu
The majority of large earthquakes that have occurred in, recent times in the Puget Sound area
arel sub -crustal events with epicenters ranging. from 50 to 70 kilometers in depth. No surficial
faulting, or earth rupture, have been documented to date within two miles of the Beard property,
according to previous geological mapping by the U.S. Geological Survey (Yount and Gower et
al, 11991, U.S.G.S. Open file report 91-147). Therefore, it is our opinion, based on existing
geologic data, that the risk of surface rupture. impacting the proposed project is low.
5.21 Seismically Induced Landslides
The' greatest risk of seismically induced landslides within the Puget Sound region occurs within
unconsolidated sediments along.steep slopes (greater than 40% gradient). The marine bluff on
thewest side of the property does slope steeply, however the slope is interpreted to be I underlain
5
5.3 Liquefaction
Liquefaction is a process in which soil loses strength during vibratory shaking, which ca. . n result
in large ground deformations. The weight of a soil is supported both by grain -to -grain contact
of soil particles aind by the pressure of water in the pore spaces between the particles. Vibratory
shaking can disrupt the grain -to -grain contact, increase the pore water pressure and result in a
decrease in the soil shear strength. The soil is said to be liquefied when nearly all of the weight
of the soil is supported by its pore pressure'alone. Soils most susceptible to liquefaction are
loose sediments, composed of mostly fine sand to coarse silt, that are in areas with high ground
water.
of adverse ground water conditions.
5.4 Ground Motion
Based on the stratigraphy and visual reconnaissance of the site, it is our.opini . on that earthquake
damage to the proposed new home would be caused by the intensity and acceleration associated
with the seismic event and not any of the above discussed geologic hazards. This opinion
assumes that all structures are founded on a suitable foundation bearing strata, and constructed
6.0 MASS WASTING -HAZARDS AND MMGATIoN
The marine bluff along the west side of the site sloped at gradients as high as 100 percent over
a vertical height of about 80 feet, and present a moderate landslide risk. The greatest risk from
flow activity.
6
Continued cleaning of the ditches at the toe of the slope by railroad maintenance crews within
their right-of-way could trigger shallow debris flows, as has been reported in the past. Although
we did not observe any evidence of soil movement during our site reconnaissance,' the owner
should periodically monitor the condition of the slope. If there ever is a question regarding the
condition of the slope, please contact our. firm and/or the railroad about their maintenance
practice along the right-of-way.
The near surface soils encountered at the Beard property possesses a moderate to high potential
for erosion from concentrated flow, such as uncontrolled storm water drainage. To mitigate the
erosion hazard potential and offiite sediment transport, we would recommend the f6llowing:
1) Storm water from impermeable surfaces, such as driveways and roofs, should be
tightlined into a suitable storm drainage facility or discharge via tightline to the toe
of the bluff, and not be directed onto or above the west marine bluff.
2) Silt fences should be placed along the lower elevations of disturbed areas.
3) Soils which are to be reused around the site should be stored in a manner that would
reduce erosion, such as covering with plastic sheeting, using low' stock -piles in flat
areas, or the use of hay bales/silt fences.
A) Areas stripped of natural vegetation during construction should be replanted as soon
as possible or otherwise protected.
t
�5) The existing vegetation along the bluff should be left in its present state and at no
time should vegetation be removed from the bluff.
7
January 30, 1995 ,
Project No. G95003A
M. PRELBUNARY DESIGN RECONMIENDATIONS
AMR I
Our exploration indicates that, from a geotechnical standpoint, the parcel is suitable for the
proposed new home construction, provided the recommendations contained herein are properly
followed. In general, the glacially consolidated sediments (gravelly sand or sandy silt) Ihat
underlie the site from V
proximate -1/2 feet to 5 feet below surface grade will be capable of
j! 3
-f ' - ' "q ---i - ---;- 1--il e -4
�qygq
Based on our exploration, th c eMsWriffina-re--as- o1cc`UW-0q911�15V11A'
existing residence, with little or no fill to the east of the existing structur . es.
s su 6or a a
uppoifing, a'
of.1he existing structure.
in
w u
t e ne il ing area the upper organic topsoil layer`*s"ho'u'ld"be stripped and the remaining roots
grubbed. Any existing trees, brush, debris or other deleterious material should also be removed.
Areas where loose surficial soils and fill soils exist beneath the building footprint should be
considered as unsuitable and this material should either be removed and replaced with structural
fill or recompacted to its full depth. Since the density of soils is variable, random so . ft/loose
pockets may exist and the depth and extent of stripping can best be determined in the field by
the field engineer.
I toxf 14 0 "A 1141101AM
All fill should be placed in accordance with the recommendations outlined in this section. Prior
to filling, topsoil, organics, and loose soils should be excavated from the subgrade as advised
bythe field engineer. After overexcavation/stripping has been performed to the satisfaction of
8
the geotechnical engineer, the upper 12 inches of "posed ground should be recompacted to 90
percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard.
After recompaction of the "posed ground is tested and approved, structural fill may be placed
to,attain desired grades. Structural fill is defined as non -organic soil, acceptable to the
geotechnical engineer, placed in maximum 8 inch loose lifts with each lift being compacted to
95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard.
The contractor should note that any proposed fill soils must be evaluated by Associated Earth
Sciences, Inc. prior to their use in fills. This would require that we have a sample of the
material 48 hours in advanc'e to perform a Proctor test and determine its field compaction
standard. Soils in.which theamount of fine-grained material (smaller than No. 200 sieve) is
greater than approximately 5 percent (measured on the minus No. 4 sieve size)' should be
considered moisture -sensitive. Use of moisture -sensitive soil in structural fills should be limited
to favorable dry weather conditions. If fill is placed during wet weather or if proper compaction
cannot be obtained, cleanj free -draining gravel and/or sand should be used. Free draining fill
consists of non -organic soil with the amount of fine-grained 'material limited to 5 percent by
weight when measured on the minus No. 4 sieve fraction.
A representative from our firm should inspect the stripped subgrade and be present during
placement of structural fill to observe the work and perform a representative number of in -place
density tests. In this way, the adequacy of the earthwork may be evaluated as filling progresses
and any problem areas may be corrected at that time. It is important to understand that taldng
random compaction tests on. a part-time basis will not assure uniformity or acceptable
performance of a fill. As such, we are available to aid the owner in developing, a suitable
monitoring and testing program.
Spread footings may be used for building support when founded on stiff/dense natural soils
(approximately 3-1/2 feet to 5 ' feet below present surface grade), or approved structural fill
bearing on the natural sediments. For building support, structural fill and recompacted natural
soils should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density as defined
by ASTM D-1557. Structural fill placement must be inspected by AESI to verify suitable
subgrade preparation and compaction.
We, recommend that an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be
utilized for design purposes, including both dead and live loads. An increase of one-third may
be used for short-term wind or seismic loading. Perimeter footings should be bunted at least 18
inches into the surrounding soil for frost protection; interior footings iequire only 12 inches
burial. However, all footings must penetrate to the prescribed bearing stratum and no footing
should.be founded in or above loose, organic, or existing fill soils.
9
Slab -on -grade floors may be used over the stiff/dense natural sediments or approved structural
fill. In each case, the upper 12 inches of subgrade must be compacted to a minimum of 90
percent of the modified Proctor maximum density as determined by ASTM:D 1557. A
polyethylene plastic vapor barrier and pea gravel capillary break layer should be used under
floors likely to receive an impermeable floor finish or where passage of water vapor through the
floor is undesirable. Based on American Concrete Institute recommendations, we suggest
placing a two to three inch layer of clean sand over the vapor barrier to protect the vapor barrier
and to allow some. moisture loss through the bottom Of the slab to reduce'warping in. the curing
process. Sand should be used to aid in the fine grading process of the subgrade to provide
uniform support under the slab.
1-910B OM Q NUMON RIMAINSWOR
-vel of tn.e perforations in the pipe should be set approximatf
the drains should be constructed with sufficient
Paw!yrii2m the building.
exterior grades adjacent to walls should be slop6d"downward 'a--*w-'a-'y'7jr�o�"'-m-��'tWiie�.-s"�t'�r-'�ulcture to achieve
positive surface drainage. Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the foot . ing drain
system but should be handled by a separate, rigid tightline drain. Both footing and
downspout/pavement drainage should then be tightlined to a suitable storm water drainage
system, or to the toe of the marine bluff to the west of the site.
14.0 PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING
We are available to provide additional geotechnical consultation as the project design develops
and oss I changes from that upon which this rqport is based.
4: �e:
In this way our earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and
implemented in the design.
We are also available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during
construction. The integrity of the foundation depends on proper site preparation and construction
procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field in the event that
variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring services are not
10
I
part o , th s current scope of work. If these services are desired, 'please let us know and we will
prepare a proposal.
We have enjoyed worldng with you on this study and are confident that these recomm
I endations
will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you. should have any questions, or
require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
AS SOCIATED EARTH SCIEENCES9 INC.
Gorge H. Bennett, C.P.G.
Engineering Geologist
Ronald A. Park-dr, P.G.
Principal
GHBAd
G95003A.1
WP.1/10/95 Id
001
� - W- -
1EXPIRES
Bruce L. Blyton, P.E.
Senior Project Engineer
I/ f 11W
m
10
PROPOSED
NEW HOUSE
U,
EP-2 as
I I DRIVEWAY
"o
-7
'V\, EP-1 1.0 wx
I'm I N I . . I r 40M
ft —1-�
HOUSE a
'ro oE.
ir
LEGEND
P-1 0 AppmMuft Imaltion of exowa*m pit
ev
le
0 40 so
SCALEI FEET
ASSOCIATED
EARTH
SCIENCESS INC
1100 -
SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN
BEARD RESIDENCE
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
G95003A 1/95 TFIGURE I.
0
.EXPLORATION PIT LOG'
0 Number EP-1
5
10
15
Topsoil; loose, moist, black with sod.
Loose, moist, brown -gray, gravelly, fine SAND with some sift, mots, some wire debris. old topsoil.
at base. (Fill)
Loose, moist, ired-brown, slity, fine SAND.
Loose to medium dense, moist, brown -gray to yellow -brown, gravelly, fine to medium SAND. Loose
pockets.
Dense, moist, brown -gray to yellow -brown, gravelly, fine to medium SAND with -some slit.
BOHF Q 10'
Note: Wo seepage; caving 0-8'.
n . Number EP-2
10
4" Sod.
Loose, moist, dark.brown and red -brown, organic -rich, gravelly, fine SAND. with some sift, abundant mots.
(Fill)
Loose, moist, red -brown, gravelly, fine SAND with wood. (Old Regolith)
Medium dense with loose pockets, moist, yellow -brown,, gravelly, fine to medium SAND.
Stiff to hard, moist to wet, light brown, sandy SILT, brecclated.
BOH 10'
Note: Light seepage at 7'; caving Tto 51; light spalling at seepages.
Su bsurface conditions depicted represent our observation at the time and location of,IhIs exploratory hole. modified by geologic -
Interpretation, engineering analysis. and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and location. We vAl not
accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of Information presented on this log.
Associated Earth Sciences Inc.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 106
Kirklarid, Washington 98033
Phone: 206-827-7701
Fax: 206-827-5424
Reviewed By
Beard Residence
Edmonds, Washington
Project No. G95003A
January 1995
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
Number EP-3
0
5
10
is
Number
5
10
Subsurface conditions depleted represent our observatlan'at the time and location of this exploratory hole. modified by geologic
Interpretation, engineering analysis. and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and location. We VAII not
accept responsibility for the use or Interpretation by others of Information presented. on this log.
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
Phone: 206-827-7701
Fax: 206-827-5424
Reviewed By
Beard Residence
Edmonds, Washington
Project No. G95003A
January 1995
a, 9 0 - 119 4 "
City. of Edmon&
Critic''al "Are*as* Checklist
The Critical Areas Checklist contained on
this form is to be filled out by any per son
preparing a Development Permit
Application for the City of Edmonds prior
to his/her submittal of a development
permit to the City. -
The purpose of the Checklist is to enable
City staff to determine whether any
potential Critical Areas are or may be
present on the subject property. The
information needed to complete the
Checklist should be easily available from
observations of the site or data available at
City Hall (Critical Areas inventories, maps, -
or soil surveys).
An applicant, or his/her representative,
must fill out the checklist, sign and date it,
and submit it to the City. The City will
review the checklist, make a p�ecursory site
visit, and make a determination of 'the
subsequent steps necessary to complete a
development permit application.
With a signed copy of this form, the
applica. ' nt should also submit a vicinity map
or plot plan'for individual lots of the parcel
with enough detail that City staff can find,
and identify the subject parcel(s). In
addition, the applicant shall include
other pertinent information (e.g. site
-plan, topography Map, etc.) or studies in
conjunction with this Checklist to assist
staff in completing their prelirninary'
assessment, of the site.
I have completed the attached Critical Area Checklist and attest that the answers provided are
factual, to. -the best of my knowledge (fill out the appropriaie column below).
FO--w—ner"V Applicant:
Street Address
. ar_>tAOW1DG , . -1-11 -CP04
City, State, ZIP Phone
Signature
Applicant Representative:
UVE Y-twke I AFzCA�TF16--r
Name
G S ri - .,B �A
Street Address
City, State, ZIP Phone
Date Signature Date
CA FILE NO. 14 iLci L,
Critical Areas Checklist
Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetafion)
1. Site Address /Location: 16D9ZO -rAL--BUr
2. Property Tax Account Number: cna-i 04�i
3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): *Z'QZC0:5F- ROW - 't
4. Is this site currently developed? X yes; no.
If yes; how is site developed? 'Si!414 vne. efoty. 1- eAr qai=.Pte
5. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply.
Flat: less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site.
I Yo Rollinj slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a
L&.r horizontal distance of 66-feet). 14P FT. WSE, W ezo ;::T.
Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% a vertical rise
of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet).
1!>LUV:-r— Steep: grades of greater than 30 % present on site (a vertical rise of I 0-feet -over a
horizontal distance of less than 33-feet).
Other (please describe): 1_5BAVA ELOFV: T-0 IWIZUr
6. Site contains areas of year-rou nd standing water: Approx. Depth:
7. Site contains area-, of seasonal standing water: No Approx. Depth:
What season(s) of the year?
8. Site is in the floodway WO floodplain of a water course.
9.14eke contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface?' Flows are year-
round? Flows are seasonal? .. (What time of year?
10. Site is primarily: forested meadow _; shrubs mixed
urban landscaped (lawn,shrubs etc)
11. Obvious wetland is present on site: "o
DETERMINATION
F-v 09/29/9.3
it—L7, LP# -A-j-
4J"
do 1J.To
%0V
cil i rr,
FIL
Rece v
I 'et)
FES 16,2009
DEV&LONENT
CITY Oe SERVIC',
E64jk,D;ks CrR,
s
VIY/7 2,WC/./Yvsvw
bull
waviviiiiiii�
moo i
AA%:2-
ON
JIMCAM
mmids
F-WqIKENIT NO.
SIDE S4k PERAUT ........... . .....
TF 0 REPAIRS 0
1% W CONSTRUCT[ N
Ac
Uc>A�-A
..................... ....................... ..................................... .......
........ . ....... NO,
JOB!iDDRES5z ........... ............................................ ........ --------- ------ NO. ........
5q,
.............
NAME OF ADDITION ....... --
.......... ........
Ab,
73 Lps
ills's
As
Li
Is
M
SM
5: 1
ca ca
14
7.
A VllqF!pi�; _4
" 00K
-�t tis.
DATE RECEIVED Sj PERMIT EXPIRES
USE PERMIT
ZONE
CITY OF EDMONDS
NUMBER
JOB SUITE/APT#
ADDRESS / � (I
jklAj- xfl�
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
Y..7,0
OWNER AME/NAN E20F BUSINES
)VI-Aa z- 0 / & �A i§& A&
PLAT NAM E/SUBDIVI SION NO.
LOT NO.
LID NO.
LID FEE $
W
MAILING ADDRESS
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP
TESCP Approved 0
RW Permit Required 0
0
46
Street Use Permit Req'd 0
EXISTING — PROPOSED
Inspection Req lied 0
Sidewalk Required 0
-0,
CITY ZIP
TELEPHONE
RAO f_ b S VA,
'125-771 b6`1
REQUIRED DEDICATION FT
Underground
Wiring required 0
NAME
METER SIZE
LINE SIZE
NO. OF FIXTURES
PRV REQUIRED
A EC2 /-f A i -, J
YES C3 NO 0
9
ADDRESS
REMARKS
z
z
x
U
OWNEFUCONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROUDRAINAGE
a
Z,
I
b L 1-311 V LL____
eydl-le
CITY Zip
E ONE
LEPH
17 z
NAMPENGINEERING
REVIEWED/DATE
ADDRESS
Ix
FIRE REVIEWED BY DATE
Lu
CITY ZIP
r,2//.�
TELEPHONE
�7, -�WVM-V
z
0
061410-h;
U.
VA RIANCE OR CU
SHORELINE OR ADB#
INSPECTION
STA LICENSE NUMBER tAVIHAI ION DATE
CHECKED BY
REQ*D
IPBOND
OSTED
YES []NO
SEPA REVIEW'
SIGN AREA
HEIGHT
j
PROPERTY TAX A CCO NT PARqL NO.
0
COMPLETE EXEMPT.
ALLOWED PROPOSED
ALLOWED PROPOSED
EXP,
NEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING I MECH
LOT. COVERAGE.
ALLOWED i5R6PbSED
REQUIRED SETBACKS (Fr.)
FRONT REAR
PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT.)
FRONT 'UR SIDE REAR
:SIDE
ADDITION 0 COMMERCIAL o COMPLIANCE OR
CHANGE OF USE
z
z
PARKING,
LOTAREA
PLANNING, REVIEWED BY DATE
C] REMODEL APARTMENT E]. SIGN
REO'D PROVIDED'
f-I REPAIR GRADING FENCE X
CYDS FT)
REMARKS
OTHER
DEMOLISH TANK
XO
GARAGE REOTAININ13 WALL RENEWAL,
CARPORT :RY
R CKr
z
(TYPE OF USE. BUICANESS. OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN:
CHECKEbi3Y
TYPE 0$.LQONSTRUCTION
C OCCUPrA
G
NUMBER
OF
IUMBER OF
DWELLING
CRITICA
AREAS
ILI H
w
a
SPECIAL INSPECTOR AREA OCCUPANT
o
STORIES
UNITS
MBE
NU R
LOAD
REQUIREDE3' ES
DESCRIBE^RKTOBEDPNE
I& r fit
PlEmARKS
z
-PROGRtSS:INSPECT16N9 P'ER'UB1C',106/FINAL INSPECTION REQ D
o
VALUATION
FEE
PLAN CHECK FEE
HEAT SOURCE GLAZING % LOT SLOPE % BUILDING
PLAN CHECK NO: VESTED DATE PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO
1`_ 0 E DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC GRADING/FILL
DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE
SEPARATE PERMISSION.
t
CHARGE OKI
2
M PERMIT APPLICATION: 180 DAYS
W
PERMIT LIMIT* I YEAR - PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN 180 DAYS ENG. REVIEW FEES
SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION
'APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE. HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESORS ENG. INSPECTION FEE
OF
IN INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY LANDSCAPING
2 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND INSPECTION FEE
ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
RECEIPT
x FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT
DEEMED To MODIFY. WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENTOF ANYCITY ORDINANCE
0 NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAYTHE CITY'S ABILITYTO ENFORCE ANYORDfNANCE PROVISION.
X, RECE/Py
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
gg
I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION; THAT THE INFORMATION
APPLICATION APPROVAL
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- CALL This application is not a permit until signed by the
T'LOIN ISNDOIFNG THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED Building Official or his/her Deputy: and Fees are paid. and
�e
IN V LAT 0 TH LABOR CO;S�OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO FOR INSPECTION receipt is acknowledged in space provided.
0
OLI
W KME S COMPEN ATION INSyAAqCE AND RCW 18.27.
G ATURE DATE
S, TtjjE pWZNER E DATE SIGNED (425) RALS "SI
-
/N A-)
W_ 11-_A� a
Z-1 '�� /
IPF14 j 771-0220
-.,j
RELEASED BY DATt
A"ENY10h EXT)333
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL 771-0221
A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTIFI- ORIGINAL - FILE - YELLOW - INSPECTOR
CATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC SECTION 109 FAX PINK - OWNER GOLD - ASSEScOR
5198 r
--,NNW
DATE RECEIVED
PERMIT EXPIRES
CITY OF EDMONDS
USE
ZONE �12 PERMIT
NUMBER
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
JOB fPUITE/APT#
ADDRESS
OWNER NAME/NAME-OF
BUSINESS
0 1 C-�+4, 964EI-)
PLAT NAM E/SUBDI VISION NO.
LOT NO.
LID NO. / 6(-
12, 84
U
LCC
MAILING ADDRESS
LID FEE $
z
0
-T
I-� , I �jt v 0
PU BLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP
TESCP Approved 0
Rvy Permit Required 0
.
Street Use Permit Req'd 0
CITY ZIP
TELEPHONE
EXISTING - PROPOSED
Inspection Required
Sidewalk Required
Underground
,CDMOA,0�-),
WA
71 01
REQUIRED DEDICATION- FT
ng required EI
t-
.
NAME
/--(ZA
ME, Sl
LINE SIZE
NO. OF FIXTURE
2
EQUIRED
YEPW NO 0 cc
W
Uj
ADDRESS
REWRKS z
F:
OWNER/CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROUDRAINAGE a
cc
A t/t,:7
z
/,V C77 -7,D W
'rAll;
CITY ZIP
TELEPHONE
IVA
�Z5-3673-91723
N�
ig r,_
ENGINEERING REVIEWED/PATE
tl A /,j
x
-4
t J "t /, L 4
ADDRESS
2
/ :5
9 1
FIRE REVIEWED BY DATE Lu
CITY ZIP
I
r-i 1 /5 1 )vs-1
TELEPHONE
S
UL
VARIANCE OR CU
SHORELINE OR ADB#
INSPECTION
REO'D
OSTED
STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE
CHECKED 13Y
lo-z-Z000
ri,
_JPBOND
-t:rYES-'-C:rNO
SEPA REVIEW
SIGN AREA
HEIGHT
-j
PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL NO.
COYP ETE EXEMPT
ALLOWED PROPO§ED
ALLOWED PROPOSED
W
072- 7 - Ll 1 0 7, Q(V-2
1171
E
NEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING MECH
q R X
LOT COVERAGE
ALLOWED PROPOSED
REQUIRED SETBACKS (FT.)
FRONT SIDE REAR
PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT.)
FRONT UR SIDE REAR
4
ADDITION COMMERCIAL COMPLIANCE OR
Y
A",
/ ///, � 171
2
k'Z
CHANGE OF
APARTMENT
PARKING
REO'D PROV IDED
LOT AREA.,
..P N NG,REVIEWED BY "dATE
REMODEL SIGN
�
FENCE
n REPAIR CYDS X FT)
I
REMARKS
Q��EMOLISH TANK OTHER
Z
It V,
GARAGE o ROETAINRING WALL RENEWAL
CARPORT R CKE Y 0
mv,rr:� 1/-, Ac:� I')
(TYPE OF USE. BUSINESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN:
S P
C D y
*CHE E
TYPE.0 =ROCTION
ICOQE, OCCUPANT
GROUP
NUMBER
OF
NUMBER OF
DWELLING
CRITICAL
AREAS
w
0
SPECIAL INSPE9TOR
C U PANT
TOAD
M
0
STORIES
UNITS
N UMBER
R QUI
m REQUIRED XYES
'I JIM/ .9)
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE
I a
M
REMARKS z
'PR 1RESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 108/FINAL INSPECTION REQ'D_
OC
:�,' I I 1� r-;2- - "/,-,j i&,Y7 uq �::
EAT SOURCE' GLAZING % LOT SLOPE %
PLAN CHECK NO: VESTED DATE
Q-0 _.S
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO
BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC
DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE
SEPARATE PERMISSION.
PERMIT APPLICATION: 180 DAYS
uu
PERMIT LIMIT. 1 YEAR - PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN 180 DAYS
SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION
W ;APPLICANT. ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE, HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESORS
N INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF
2 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 CITY'S ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION.-
, I
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.
SIGNATURE (OWNER OR 1��NT�(� DA
TE SIGNED
VALUATION
FEE
PLAN CHECK FEE
'/1 V_� 17
BUILDING
PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
GRADING/FILL
STATE SURCHARGE
ENG. REVIEW FEES
ENG. INSPECTION FEE
I:ANIMCAPtNG-�_'.
INSPECTION. FEE
ATTENTION
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL
A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTIFI-
CATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC SECTION 109
PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT RECEIPT
IRECEIPT r')
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
CALL
FOR INSPECTION
(425),
771-0220
EXT 333
771-0221
FAX -
/6 �/7 I I z_ / r " � �,
APPLICATION APPROVAL
This application is not a permit until signed by the
Building Official or his/her Deputy: and Fees are paid. and
receipt is acknowledged in space provided.
zFICIA� DATE
OR
ELEASED BY DATE'
ORIGINAL -FILE YELLOW - INSPECTOR
PINK - OWNER GOLD - ASSESSOR
CD
Cd
'mmMll
0J
L'J
Ln
C)
C:)
C:).
C:)
Z
�UV
Q'I H
I a I r� P0 PrION6
t I ST
oc�e,
e,
.�'p C� <Z>
0.
e'�� '�? <11�� 0
0
<e C*1 �51_
PrIsmolcial, VoLume Resu(ts
Original, Surface Moole(l
topol,lnes
Final, Surface Moclet,
f naL
Cut COM Factorl
0.00 %
Fitt COMPPOICCI:Cttiolonn F a ctor,
0100 %
Raw Cut Votume,
2449,47
cu yol
Compacteel Cut VoLume,
0.00 cu
yd
Totat Cut Votume,
2449,47
cu yol
Raw FILL Votumei
9.10 cu
yd
Compacteol FILI VoLume,
0.00 cu
yd
Total. FILL Votume,
9,10 cu
yd
STAKED AND ENTRENCHED
STRAW BALE (WOOD STAKE)
BINDING TWINE T' COMPACTED SOIL TO
PREVENT PIPING .
FILTERED RUNOFF 4 SEDIMENT LADEN
RUNOFF
STRAW BALE DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
Cj \0, @
tX
1+ 66
"�\'<e <)
C
e)
v----N 45-*43'lV
00
_4_5*_4_3'10`_W
292,43\FT
Q�
q-
@
4)
SHEETFLOW
6 � \\-\W
OR
0;5�
'Sp
rd
z6v�
DRIVE CROSS SECTION
NOT TO SCALE
R-10'
5EI/4/ 66c, I/ TLUP 21 N/ R 4 E/ UJ'M.
-00 - -
<Z9 ONI1`0
/ C'
SHEETFLOW
EX.
GARAGE
SHEETFLOW
Li SHEETFLOW
C5
AV S
.2
SHEE
TFLOW
I
_Q�
C)
n
Zo
0
o
FIRE AND I ADDRESS SIGN UIRED
U-)
0
y
165.00 FT
TO PUGET SOU�)
(EXISTING)
S 45*43'10" E
185.00 FT
EASEMENT
I
L--------
-------- ---
Genera I Notes:
1. All work and materials shall conform to City of rEolmonds
Standards andlor W5r_)0T/APWA Standard epeci ficati Otis
as applicable.
2. No part of the drainage system shall be covered,
concealed, or put to use until It has been tested, Inspected,
and accepted by the Cit�.
3.4pproximate locations of existing utilities have been
obtained from available recorcI5 and are shown for convenience.
The contractor shall be responsible for verification of
locations and to avoid damage to any additional utilities not
shown. if conflicts arise during construction, tine contractor
shall notify the public works inspector and any chatiees
required shall be approved by the City enginser prior to
commencement of related construction on the project.
4. All storm c1ra in work must be staked by survey for line
and grads prior to starting construction.
71( -rp C &A/c, IN &"P-4 o F 0 E-S / 6 A/ a V e-R--S
04 Lz- 0 /—' 4 1,146 C5, -S 4---? P E - 7_E_S(ZIP63c�:_
-/-z) j 16 /1/
C' le-V 7�7
X,
0 4-6" QUARRY
LO SPALLS
12" DEPTH
J
TEMP. CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
I
FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL IN CONTINUOUS ROLLS.
USE STAPLES OR WIRE RINGS TO ATTACH FABRIC WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE
TO WIRE. r—FOR SILT FILM FABRICS.
.41p. iL
L
Emmooffinumas son
moss an IIIIIIIIIIIIII110
IRM
!! ENERNMUMENNUMSE
H,
M mom EvffiWR".
\-77777'c - -----
BURY BOITOM OF FILTER MATERIAL
IN 8 BY 12" TRENCH
WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE
FOR SILT FILM FABRICS -_
FILTER FABRIC
MATERIAL —
PROVIDE WASHED GRAVEL
BACKFILL OR COMPACTED
NATIVE SOIL AS DIRECTED
BY ENGINEER
BURY BOTTOM OF FILTER —
MATERIAL IN 8" BY 12" TRENCH
2" BY 2" WOOD POSTS,
STANDARD OR BETTER
OR EQUIVALENT
04
LO
—8" MIN.
SEC11ON
SILT FENCE DETAIL
ENGINEERING APP,;',_:)\4AL AS NOTED NOT TO SCALE
/Vio
C"I
I"
SITE
4TH
E LA
C14
0
Z
04
UJ
C)
cli
vlclnit� �Iap
SCALE 1 1000'
Ene inser:
RD. Heide, F.E.
Desien 5uil6 Services, Inc..
Soil T�pe: SCS sheet 50 - Type 41(o Alderwood -9 House Site
Applicant:
Mark 5eard
1(oe20 Talbot Rol.
Edmonds, WA 'Ba02(o
(425) 223-1014
(425) Ill-&014
Soil Cover: Landscaped w/ Existing House and Garage.
Grading: 244S c.�. out/ S c.�. fill Calculated w/ Eagle Point 'BIB
Legal Description:
A PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOTS:.-, '- 3, IN SECTION -1. TOLLNSHII= 21 NORTH, RANGE 4 E, W.M, CITY
OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY,, %-_5HINGTON. SEE DRAINAGE REPORZT FOR FULL DESCRIPTION.
Project Notes.
Proposed house elevation FF- 64, Grade a Foundation 02.5 UNO.
Excavated material to be spread oA around the building during backfilling and seeded/covered
with straw within 24 hre. Excess material is to be taken to a permitted dump site,
Propert� ' lines from 5ounclary Surve� Property Description on
1-20-IBI surve� by Darrell Ford 4 As.�oc. Topo lines and datum taken from TOPOGRAPHY MAP for
Mark G. 4 Oleta J. 5eard, by Darrell Ford 4 Assoc. Drawing 0 133-013.
Vertical Datum City of Edmonds Sewer District Manhole 200+- of S'19 Prop. Line 4 on Talbot
Road IE 66.64'. Site 5M SE propertS corner e N side of Easement. Elev. 134,11'.
1. New parking to slope to new drain. Downspouts and footing drains to be piped to detention tank-
2. Detention Pipe 5' Dia x 44' lone to be installed as shown and detailed on sheet 2.
3. Catch basin grate to be coverec; with filter fabric during construction.
4. Pipeline over bank to be per 5NRR Agreement. Details are on sheet 2.
5. ALL SLOPE DISTURIBANCE Is to be seeded, strawed with 3" min. cover, and all steep slopes are
to have jute netting placed over straw and staked as required to prevent movement.
Construction SeQuenc
1. Install all slit Pence and other erosion control measures as shown on the plan. Meet with DESIGN
5UILD SERVICES, INC: Engineer and City of Edmonds Inspector and confirm all Erosion control
measures are adequate.
2. Demolish existing structures, excavate for detention tank, new house and parkTne. Cover all
stockpiles Win 24 hra and insure ang water coming from the plies does not cause erosion to adjacent
areas. Install detention tank and discharge pipe to toe of bluff at time of excavation. All excavation
discharge is to be routed to tank. F'rior to system completion provision is to be made to pump to
exIstine C15's In access easement. Following backfill of foundation all disturbed areas are to drain
to temporar� catch basins tied Into downspout stubs. NO DRAINAGE TO SLOPE.
3. Four Foundations, place footing and downspout drains, and drive catch basin, t9ing into detention
tank and discharge pipe. 5ackfill around all footings and rough grade site. Straw or gravel all
exposed areas. Grade drive to cat--h basin. Place slit fabric on grate on catch basin.
4. Complete all construction and landscaping. 30 days after stabilization of all ground surfaces
remove slit fence and clean catch Lasin and detention tank. Inspect discharge pipeline, clamps,
cables, and dischares T/quarrq roc�' dissipation pad. Repair a.s necessarg.
5. Homeowner to check and clean s4item yearly or after significant rainfall events to Insure continued
operation of the system.. Any repairs are to be made immediately.
6ummar� of New Impervicus Areas:
5U!Io1!n!2/5!dewaIkS 4,7671 5S, V .
Fa rkine 4,143 s,f,
------------------------
Tota 1 121 E 10 .5, f. 01E��r NNW
-IV OF
ILE
V)
I-_
Z
0
V)
Z
0
5;
LJ
Ld
V)
Ld
W
:g
CA
CIO
NL
(P
a)
Q)
C'_D
S_
Z:
\�)
(P
vl�
X
Q)
Q)
0-)
W
IL
C\1
\S�
C-4
1:�)
�_D
IL
Q)
LIU
Add -
DRAWN:
RDH
DESIGNED: RDH
APPROVED: RDH
DATE:
1
�26�00
PROJECT NO. 20002
SCALE:
1 "= 20'
SHEET I
OF
3
5EI/4/ 5ec, I/ T.UJP 21 N/ R 4 E/ ui,m.
1/2" VENT HOLE
611 PVr
FACTORY TEE
C14
EXHIBIT 11cli
K - JalkT!5 W IL4, 6e,
SW-r-r ;=L15 eD I f= I-JE CAM 7
..M415 rl r-ET WILL� I -AY 61�4
!A=d..%4J9- 44AVM -A
OP
OF: a-AH le.. So A<,* 17_>
."1_VSMr
XDLCAWL.
-VOR 0
ALI-
S
iPwr= ==;z;-1 I 9A-rr=s A-r o0r' 0 6 ro �-J.
WA'rG'7. 15 =%r4aP.`rl5-=P TIM f-er row
7p` !lrg A =-=A. 0 lAJ t L4= W 'rZ:V
. L4
-K*9
F5 ID 545 1 G, �4
e)y
rAL_P� ;zi:�,.
ew?& go' 15
L)
2411
3211
b" PVC PLUG
FROM DRIVE
21
r
M,4X
L
-TO DETENTXQN-
N11,—ADAPTER OR PIPE
JOINT
(01, OR all PVC PIPE
FAC COLLAR
roll PVC PIPE
AS REQUIRED
TYPE I C5
FLOATA5LE MATERIAL 5EFARATOR
NOT TO SCALE
REFERENCE AGREEMENT WITH 5NRfR
GE 82.5
36" CMP
ACCESS RISER
OVERFLOW 80.5
4" D.S. DRAINS & 6" DRIVEWAY CB
IE 79.5 � -_7
PROVIDE 6" WELDED STUB
WELD ALL CONNECTIONS
6"
60'
FOOTING DRAINS
RESTRICTOR PLATE w/ 5/8"
ORIFICE CUT IN PLATE, MACHINE
DRILLED, SHARP EDGE ORIFICE.
Installation of the pipeline will -'De difficult due to steep slope in which the pipe will be laid. Any
damage to the slope due to construction must be repaired to its original condition. A large load
on the concrete anchor which supports the pipe on the top of the slope will result due to this
installation. This anchor should be moved as far away from the face of the slope as possible to
maximize its support capability. The pipeline should be designed to withstaad the weight of the
water within the pipe. See detail below commonly used to support and hold the pipe in place
which should be used for this installation. If the pipeline fails, it will be the owners
responsibility to reinstall the pipeline. If damage occurs to the railway property due to the failure
of the pipeline. the property owner will be respon�ible for damages. The property owner must
not deposit grass clippings, yard waste, trees or other debris on the slope at any time.
Double cable with clamps spaced at 20'-3 0' intervalls.
I WX -7/f A' M. 6-&�V. TIZA FtS
W
x L0
L& X
C"LE CLAmrm5
5 EC X, - X
L
CLAMP DETAIL
71nad�dition to the clamps,- Xc-L%.v�
pk-,
Clarence Johnson - Field Engineer
Z
2
Z0
6. 1 ",IN
6"
Z
Z
FIFELINE DET,41Le
NOT TO 5CALE
ROUND SOLID LOCKING LID
Xca
�l
X 4" D.S. DRAINS
YxO.064" METAL PIPE SUPPORT IE 80.0 F_ 7
ANCHORED 10 CMP WALL PROVIDE 4" WELDED STUB
NO-E:
ALL STEEL PARTS AND SURFACES
MUST BE GALVANIZED & ASPHALT
COATED (TREATMENT #1 OR BETTER).
COMPLETE CORROSION PROTECTION
MUST BE ASSURED.
45'LF 60" CMP 0 0.507.
W/ ASPHALT TREATMENT i
E 75.50
1 4 —12"
Smooth Coupling Band
for Smooth Pipe
material to be
ASTM A 36 1/4"
plate galvanized
after fabricatio C;5"
per ASTIVI A 12
#s 6[s'to be
all holes 119/32 X 1/4"
3/4 diam.
pipe stakes
\D
41/2" 7 coupling band
12" 112" or 24"coupling band
Plate Detail
coupli ng ban collar (2" pipe)
1/41' C 1/41'
plate (see detail)
material to be ASTM
A 36 galvanized after
11/2" x 6' st kes —IQ fabrication per ASTM
flatten to point each side of culvert A 153
Anchor Assembly
DETENTION TANK ACCESS DETAr�
standard type 2-60" diam. ---frame locking lid
CE3 concrete top slab
eccentric opening
(marked "DRAIN")
++ mounted over 24" diam.
36" CMP riser
+ A
- -" ctlu 1OCKinc
M.H. frame & cove'i
see K.C.R.S. dwg. no. 2-022
compacted pipe bedding
M.H. steps 12" O.C.
weld or bolt
standard M.H. steps
PLAN
NTS
maintain 1 " gap between
bottom of -slab & top of
riser — Provide pliable
gasket to exclude dirt
riser, 36" diam. min.,
same material & gage as
tank welded or fused to tank
Max detention tanK
SECTION
NTS_
NOTES:
Use adjusting blocks as required to bring frame to grade.
4" - DRAIN 2. All materials to be aluminu . m or galvanized and asphalt- coated (Treatment 1 or better).
BED BOTTOM HALF OF TANK
36" CMP STUB IN PEA GRAVEL. PROVIDE POSITIVE
DRAIN TO DISCHARGE LINE.
PROVIDE 20 MIL LINER UNDER TANK TO TOP OF PEA GRAVEL.
NOTE: LEAKAGE TO SLOPE COULD FAIL BANK
000 DETENTION PIPE w/ RESTRICTOR
NOT TO SCALE
V)
Z
0
V)
W
L
,
W1.
Cq
Q)
Q)
Q)
(P
6
(P
Q)
0I)
-4P
'o-)
X
Q)
Q)
0-)
Lu
(L
\R�
IL
LL1
Q)
Ad&
DRAWN. RDH
DESIGNED: RDH
APPROVED: RDH
DATE:
1/26/00
PROJECT NO. 20002
SCALE:
N/A
SHEET 2
r
01
a
cl)
U) -0
0 >
0
0
m
0 m
> m
m
u)
m
>
m
r- c-
X
6
:::E
m M
0
Z:
=
M
<
m
—q
M
z
p
0
11101
1
co
*"
—
u �u
�u
�u
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-n
N)
0
Drainage Profile 4 DetaiI6
Mark 4 Lettie 5earal
16920 Talbot Rd, Edmond5, WA 9a02(o
(425) 1114014
4*01:mi�n
'�,l BLOCKING
"W'50 B E N D S
MUM& mxxxm
VERT.BM
CUST,
A
D
L
11 —1/'r
I a 1
2.0'
VIC
7—.5—'
22-1/7
11
2.2'
311C ""
2.Cr
317
17
2.6'
2-W
4V
30
3.11
VIC
2.(r
1
2.2*
314'
2Jr
1 /2'
25
2.9'-
31,C
2.0*
MY
41
3.5*
31,C
T 2.(r
4S
4-11'
r
qqp
4R-S.. V YVI
Canetruction Manaeement
27934
GIST
2011S 120th 5t, 5-E., Monroe/ WA 130212
Phone/Fax.- (3roo) le3-9(059 I
REVISIONS
(P
m
4�-
Z-
A
-tll
m
�u 't
CD C)
Z
C'
C�b
0
PrIsmolclat Volume Results
X0 /\u 1W I'D
c'
0
Original Surface Mocleti
tcpotlnes
Final Surf ace Moole(i
f naI,
Cut Compaction Factori
0.00 X
Fill Compaction Factori
0.00 %
Raw Cut Vo(umei
2449,47
cu yol
Compacteol Cut Volume,
0.00 cu
yd
Total Cut VoLumet
2449,47
cu yol
Raw FILL Votumei
9,10 cu
yd
Compactecl FILL Votumei
0.00 cu
yd
Total FILL VoLumei
9.10 cu
yd
STAKED AND ENTRENCHED
STRAW BALE (WOOD STAKE)
BINDING NE COMPACTED SOIL TO
7 PREVENT PIPING .
FILTERED RUNOFF SEDIMENT LADEN
RUNOFF
Xy
STRAW BALE DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
SHEETFLOW
-.90
TO PUGETSOU
SHEETFLOW
'q"' KHEETFLOW
0/ -90
I
L— — — — — — — —
Genera I Notes-
1. All work and materials shall conform to City of Edmonds
Standards andlor 11151DOT/AF111A Standard Specifications
as applicable.
2. No part of the drainage system shall be covered,
concealed, or put to use until it has been tested, inspected,
and accepted by the City.
3. Approximate locations of existing utilities have been
obtained from available records and are shown for conventence.
The contractor shall be responsible for verification of
locations and to avoid damage to any additional utilities not
shown. If conflicts arise during construction, the contractor
shall notify the public works inspector and any changes
required shall los approved by the City engineer prior Lo
0
0 commencement of related construction on the project.
R n
4. All storm drain work must be -staked loy survey for line
and grade prior to startIng construction.
INNNe'o -X T-f te 6 /"J D es 167 1�j 0 a "z--s C- Z�s
4 tt- 0 �414 INI A 67 I-V
01
4e:V V1 7
r),C�
17-J ye-P7-5-&
1.5" MIN. COMP. DEPTH CL "B" ASPHALT
1.5" MIN. COMP. DEPTH CSTO
6" MIN. COMP. DEPTH GRAVEL BORROW9
DRIVE CROSS SECTION
NOT TO SCALE
X,
R-10'
'N
M
0 4-6" QUARRY
U) SPALLS
—12" DEPTH
C7 6��
TEMP. CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL IN CONTINUOUS ROLLS.
USE STAPLES OR WIRE RINGS TO ATTACH FABRIC WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE
TO WIRE. I r—FOR SILT FILM FABRICS.
WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE
FOR SILT FILM FABRICS -.
FILTER FABRIC
MATERIAL —
PROVIDE WASHED GRAVEL
BACKFILL OR COMPACTED
NATIVE SOIL AS DIRECTED
BY ENGINEER
BURY BOTTOM OF FILTER --
MATERIAL IN 8" BY 12" TRENCH�
2" BY 2" WOOD POSTS,
STANDARD OR BETTER
OR EQUIVALENT
C)
04
to
—8" MIN.
SECTION
vlalnit� I*Wlap
SCALE 1 " = 1000'
Applicant:
R.D. Peide, P.E.
Mark 5eard
Desien 5u!ld &erviaes, h"Ic..
16>1B20 Talbot Rd.
Ecimon6s, WA (BO02(o
(42 E�) 2 2 3 - -1014
Soil Type: SCS sheet 50 - T�pe 4/6,41derwood a House Site
Soil Cover: Landscaped w/ Existing House and Garage.
Gradine.- 24413 c.�. cut/ S c.q. fill Cal��ulated w/ Eagle point aa
Legal Description:
< A PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOTS_ 1' 3, IN SECTION -1. TOWNSHIP 2-1 NORTH, RANGE 4 E, W.M., CITY
OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY., �,�,WlNr-:;TON. SEE DRAINAGE REPORT FOR FULL DEScRIpTION.
Project Notes -
Proposed house elevation FF a4, Gi �;ounclatlon 52.5 UNO.
Excavated material to be spread ot around the building during backfilling and seeded/covered
with straw within 24 hre. Excess materl I Is to be taken to a permitted dump site.
Property ' lines from 5oundarg SurveQ Property Description on
T-20-SI survey by Darrell Ford 4 Asi or- Topo lines and datum taken from TOPOGRAPHY MAP for
Mark G. 4 Oleta J. 5eard, by Darrell ord 4 Assoc. Drawing 0 W-013.
Vertical Datum City of Edmonds Sew,ir District Manhole 200+- S.Wly of S'ly Prop. Line 4 on Talbot
Road IE Sa.S4'. Site IBM S.E propertt" corner e N side of Easement. Elev. S4.11'.
1. New parking to slope to new drain. Downspouts and footing drains to be piped to detention tank.
2. Detention Pipe 5' DIa x 44' lone i o los installed as shown and detailed on sheet 2.
3. Catch basin grate to be covered with filter fabric during construction,
4. Pipeline over bank to be per 5N'1!1,R Agreement. Details are on sheet 2.
5, ALL SLOPE DISTUR5ANCE Is to ke seeded, strawed with 311 min. cover, and -all steep slope$ are
to have juts netting placed over st,aw and staked as required to prevent movement.
Construction Sequence
1. Install all silt Fence and other eros on control measures as shown on the plan. Meet with DESIGN
IBUILD SERVICES, INC: Engineer and ",Ity of Edmonds Inspector and confirm all Erosion control
measures are adequate.
2. Demolish existing structures, exca,(,,ate for detention tank, new house and parking. Cover all
stockpiles Win 24 hrs and insure any iater coming from the plies does not cause erosion to adjacent
areas. Install detention tank and ollac, iaree pipe to toe of bluff at time of excavation. All excavation
discharge to to be routed to tank, firlor to system completion provision is to be made to pump to
existing C,5's In access easement. F�'Alowlne backfill of foundation all disturbed areas are to drain
to temporary catch basins tied Into 1�n'ownspout stubs. NO DRAINAGE TO SLOPE.
3, Four Foundations, place footing ind downspout drains, and drive catch basin, qne into detention
tank and discharge pipe. 5ackfill ar.-�und all footings and rough grade site. straw or gravel all
exposed areas. Grade drive to cat,r-.h basin. Place silt fabric on grate on catch basin.
4. Complete all construction and lan,"iscaping. 30 days after stabilization of all ground surfaces
remove silt fence and clean catch 1:,1sin and detention tank. Inspect discharge pipeline, clamps,
cables, and dischares T/quarry rocrVeAlselpation pad. Repair as necessary,
5.14omeowner to check and clean sy �tem gearig.or after significant rainfall events to Insure continued
operation of the system. An� repaire gre to be made Immediately.
5ummar� of New Impervicue, Areas:
RSC151VF' D
l5uildine/eiclewalks 4 'i, MAR 2 4
.i�
CT SE,,11ICES CTR-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - y 0 EE)MO D
Tota 1 :'0 s.f.
Z
0
Z
0
o
W
W
W
00
CID
Q)
(P
r
(S)
X
Q)
Q)
Q)
C-4
\S�
LU
M
Q)
DRAWN: RDH
DESIGNED: RDH
APPROVED: RDH
DATE: 1426�C
PROJECT NO, 20002
SCALE: 1"= 23
ENGINEERING APPROVAL AS NOTED SILT FEP4CE DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
SHEET OF
M
1/2" VENT HOLE
611 PVr
FACTORY TEE
C14
11C11 JF30
EXHIBIT
T-OLY �7�yuewF_ rim
C-OrqT-. 4=r_0i,1 Dt-r—Q low
-r.&NK - Jai t4T!5 W I", 61F,
-r--,WT"r r-LIS eD IF WE CA�47
CH15 7-1 r-q WILL, LAY O�J 4K.
44AVC� -A 75�1
rr
T B�X 1. slp�' op,
S7A- JOW-r
, :o, pe- J,,
1117 WII.;L- exoss—
W Y__ *;Far I CIN 51AL;,=
r"Atgll-le IS
sto
AL%-
jPjf-S -rS;tM I I4A-rr=S A-r A.'-r' W 1
WAIrs,z. Is VIMIW."Irecp TV Per �-o w
ip`�Iro AMPOZ64
aX4La S;QS-r1114Qv
"
fWiM041 is, ouwr
V- V_= M TZV V" 9-AJU4 W- W S r-^ WLS
L) k-r..
1.5 AL_kC7Sr
$Y *V_AXr) 4410use
�R� .
L. U_ r-. Y-t SV_1 I C-1 J 4A MdA tr,55 ellr TAL-�
o
2411
10
R31111111111M
0
3211
6" PVC PLUG
FROM DRIVE
2'_
M,4X
TO DETENT�QN
"���ADAPTER OR PIPE
JOINT
6" OR 8" PVC PIPE
AC COLLAR
6 11 PVC pipe
AS REQUIRED
TYPE I C5
FLOAT,45LE MATERIAL 6EFARATOR
NOT TO SCALE
5EI/4/ 5ec. I/ TUJF 21 N/ R 4 E/ W,M.
. .. ......... ...
Installation of the pipeline will -be difficult due to steep slope in which the pipe will be laid. Any
damage to the slope due to construction must be repaired to its original condition. A large load
on the concrete anchor which supports the pipe on the top of the slope will result due to this
installation. This anchor should be moved as far away from the face of the slope as possible to
maximize its support capability. The pipeline should be designed to withstamd the weight of the
water within the pipe. See detail below commonly used to support and hold the pipe in place
which should be used for this installation. If the pipeline fails, it will be the owners
responsibility to reinstall the pipeline. If damage occurs to the railway property due to the failure
of the pipeline. the property owner will be respon�ible for damages. The property owner must
not deposit grass clippings, yard waste, trees or other debris on the slope at any time.
Double cable with clamps spaced at 20'-30'intervalls.
I Wx -7/t 6' f It- . 6^t-v. --s rsz^ Pts
X
x L
711
ClkiLg CLAM r5 3'
5EC_ X_X
.19
4C'3r'
CLAMP* DETAIL
I rn��a d d i �ti o�n t o th e c I am p s, X, c L%
_�d
L b
+
Clarence Johnson - Field Engineer
fREFEfRENCE AGfREEMENT WITH 5NfRfR
GE 82.5
36" CMP
ACCESS RISER 10
OVERFLOW 80.5
4" D.S. DRAINS & 6" DRIVEWAY CB
IE 79.5
PROVIDE 6" WELDED STUB
a
WELD ALL CONNECTIONS 6"
6"
'6"
6"
FOOTING DRAINS
Z
RESTRICTOR PLATE w/ 5/8"
ORIFICE CUT IN PLATE, MACHINE
DRILLED, SHARP EDGE ORIFICE.
FIFELINE DETAILe
NOT TO SCALE
ROUND SOLID '-OCKING LID
\,�; X,
X
V'xO.064" IVETAL PIPE SUPPORT IE 80.0-1
ANCHORED -0 CMP WALL
NOTE:
ALL STEEL PARTS AND SURFACES
MUST BE GALVANIZED & ASPHALT
COkTED (TREATMENT #1 OR BETTER).
CDAPLETE CORROSION PROTECTION
MUST BE ASSURED.
stcof,ior-'4'i 09-k rt-,cE
rks"es,�Ap,fw EV)CkF-C19.15o h
4�4�'LF 60" CMP @ 0.50%
w/ ASPHALT TREATMENT #1
4" DRAIN
4" D.S. DRAINS
PROVIDE 4" WELDED STUB
75.50
4
Smooth Coupling Band
for Sm nth Pina
material to be
ASTM A 36 1/4"
plate galvanized
after fabrication\
per ASTM A 123
1
all holese
3 1 1 , 01 m
/ X11
4'ldiam.
755�ts to be
1119/32 X 1/4"
7/8". 17/8"
1211—
Plate Detail
(0
112:
pipe stakes
coupling b Ind
of or 24"coupling band
coupling band collar (2" pipe)
1/4! 1/411
plate (see detail)
material to be ASTM
A 36 galvanized after
11/2" x 6' stakes fabrication per ASTM'
f I atte ni �tp 0Int-_J_D\__ A 153
--each side -of culvert
Anchor A7�r`;!embly -
DETENTION TANK ACCE
SS DETAk
standard type 2-60" diam.
CB concrete top slab frame locking lid
(marked "DRAIN")
++ mounted over 24" diam.
36" CIVIP riser eccentric opening
+ A
s a" aid locking
M.H. frame & covei
see K.C.R.S. dwg. no. 2-022
compacted pipe bedding
M.H. steps 12" O.C.
weld or bolt
standard M.H. steps
PLAN
NTS
maintain I" gap between
bottom of -slab & top of
riser — Provide pliable
gasket to exclude dirt
riser, 36" diam. min.,
same material & gage as
tank welded or fused to tank
max detention tank
SECTION
NTS
NOTES:
1 .-Use adjusting blocks as required to bring frame to grade.
2. All materials to be aluminu . m or galvanized and asphalt co-ated (Treatment 1 or better).
BED BOTTOM HALF OF TANK
IN PEA GRAVEL. PROVIDE POSITIVE
36" CMP STUB DRAIN TO DISCHARGE LINE.
PROVIDE 20 MILLINER UNDER TANK TO TOP OF PEA GRAVEL.
NOTE: LEAKAGE TO SLOPE COULD FAIL BANK
60'0 DETENTION PIPE w/ RESTRICTOR
NOT TO SCALE
_7
Z
0
W
C3
C-4
cj)
12)
X
Q)
LU
<1
CID
[L
M
C
LL1
Q)
Adti.
DRAWN: RDH
DESIGNED: RDH
APPROVED: RDH
DATE:
1 �26�00
PROJECT NO. 20002
SCALE:
N/A
SHEET 2
0
CO
w
-u
a >
0
0
0
x
> -u
M
x
>
0
-.1 -u
0)
>
M
r-
c-
M ;u
"
G)
:E
rr,
0
z
z
M
0
<
M
I
M
z
p
1101
0
1
1
co
*"
U x
X
x
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-61"
"
0
0
Drainage Profile 4 DetaiI6
Mark 4 Lettie 5earcl
16920 Talbot Rol., Edmoncl5, WA 9502(o
(425) 111=6014
2 0 - r- at -
9
Conetruction Management
2011e - 120th 5t, 6-E.., Monroe, WA c-)0212
Fhone/Fax.- (3&0) -1c33-e&5c3
��W 3
VERMAL BLOCKING
VERT-BEND
CUST.,
A
D
L
a
FA
2.0'
3/,V
1.5,
22-1/7
11
2.2-
314-
2.(r I
w
17
2.6'
31,C
2.0
4V
130
3.1"
31-C
2.(r
11-' 1 /'r
11
2.2"
314'
2.v
22-1/2'
25
2.9'
314'
2.01
W,
41
3.50
2-0'
4V
68 1
4.16
.cj
_279M
I ST'EV��
REVISIONS
(P�
M
E—H
a
Z-
A
4�11
M
�K
A/ A) 1:4/
v�\
N1 I P/1105ff
N
'I yf-.5'
0- 49 A rp3b"
-- let t I
pd,
I ILL N
lilt J- I
Koo
n1p
oo
Ile
lfly'�f. . 0/1 *70PAO 11
JAR, L44
13
k
zz;�'Xz
-..!" �Aiooe "IAl a,,* f
-!!QE',r1AV 7
0
JJJ
N
A&`
iVO4A;C-
,&Agq6c-u
AOSM50--g' '200 S�=
,1:/.. 14'4
1. . f
:1 AV�
I
STREET FILE
RECmvED
110/.'If 3 0 1995
PERMIT COUIVTCp
AAWW.
SCALE: lelzl� APPROVED BY:
DRAWN
DATE: t�f— REVISED
DRAWING NUMBER
1140 X 04 FRLNM ON Ito. 1000H CLI"pnw
,6 t-71-q 4 -D
RECEivEo
NOV 3 0 1995
PERMITCOUNTER
STREET FILE �-
t�
t
-2 I -A
A-7
%q -
77
F/r A
ol
L
�ML
jz� 7-0
A LG
jvv C,
5f)
7� &EA
IS
550 3
Vt CO A=,
PP,T-(D
-771 5r- D,Zl
T-A
(0
M
3,7 1 i %so
C
A
ico
st
INK
�fu cl C7 e.-
00 40
U0,
q