17500 72ND AVE W (2).PDF111111111111
5635
17500 72ND AVE W
PLANNING DATA
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
FRE
.Name:-
Date: �Z,
Site Address:
Tax Parcel:
Project Description: Kjej
Plan Check #:
6 ss-
Reduced Site Plan Provided; (YES 0
Zoning: k?—
Map Page:
Corner Lot: NO)
t: (YES
Critical Areas Determination A -2- c> I I D
:Study Required' -
Waiver
SEPA Determination:
Exem pt'
Needed (for.over 500 Cubic yards of grading)
0 Fee 0 Checklist 11 APO List with notarized form
ReqLfir6d Setbacks
Street: ZtS MIr .
Side:- i.c.
I
Side:
- I
Rear:
I
Acruai.,)e 5
DacK
Street: Side: Side: Rear:
-45
F� Detached Structures:
El Rockeries:
13 F'ences/Trellises:
Bay Windows/Projectin 'Modulation:
Stairs/Deck: )4+. U J
atum Point Datum Elevation:
D 2-
Maximum Height Allowed: 3b 1, �-7 Actual. Height, _3b 0.
Other
Parking Required: Parking Provided:
Lot Area: 7_2 7 4 Maximum Lot Coverage: 35% Proposed: VLA
Lot Coverage Calculations: '3�
ADU Created: (YES
Subdivision:
Legal Nonconformin'g Land Use Determination Issued:. (YES
�-e_ J, 10y < LJ L-L"—
. . , 4,,_ � . _ 16/2 ( _,I .
L
reAj
A�
IPIannihg Dat3 Form 07-14-09
Plan Review By:
City of Edmonds
Critical Area Notice of Decision
Applicant:
'�- ]-�O— �-'-
Property Owner:
:5-cJ,J�-
Critical Area File #:
LgA 2-(�3 OOG -.-
Permit Number:
Z '--, I S - 1 -0 �-I's
,Site Location:
-is 0 0 --1 Z
Parcel Number:
60qC.('60C)0C )C)g 0 0
Project Description:
K3e-,-, S
R Conditional Waiver. No critical area report is required for the project described above.
There will be no alteration of a Critical Area or its required buffer.
The proposal is an allowed activity pursuant to ECDC 23.40.220, 23.50.220, and/or
23.80.040.
The proposal is exempt pursuant to ECDC 23.40.230.
Erosion Hazard. Project is within erosion hazard area. Applicant must prepare an erosion and
sediment control plan in compliance with ECDC 18.30.
OCritical Area Report Required. The proposed project is within a critical area and/or a critical area
buffer and a critical area report is required. A critical area report has been submitted and evaluated
for compliance with the following criteria pursuant to ECDC 23.40.160:
1 The proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas in accordance with ECDC 23.40.120,
Mitigation sequencing;
2. V"" The proposal does not pose an. unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare
on or off the development proposal site;
3. The proposal is consistent with the general purposes of this title and the public interest;
4. v-"' Any alterations permitted to the critical area are mitigated in accordance with ECDC
23.40.110, Mitigation requirements.
5. The proposal protects the critical area functions and values consistent with the best
available science and results in no net loss of critical functions and values; and
6. The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards.
Unfavorable Critical Area Decision. The proposed project is not exempt or does not adequately
mitigate its impacts on critical areas and/or does not comply with the criteria in ECDC 23.40.160 and
the provisions of the City of Edmonds critical area regulations. See attached findings of
noncompliance.
Favorable Critical Area Decision. The proposed project as described above and as shown on the
attached site plan meets or is exempt from the criteria in ECDC 23.40.160, Review Criteria, and
complies with the applicable provisions of the City of Edmonds critical area regulations. Any
subsequent changes to the proposal shall void this decision pending re -review of the proposal.
Conditions. Critical Area specific condition(s) have been applied to the permit number referenced
above. See referenced permit number for specific condition(s).
Reviewer
rignatur�e
Date
I k / 3/ :�;-
Appeals: Any decision to approve, condition, or deny a development proposal or other activity based on the
requirements of critical area regulations may be appealed according to, and as part of, the appeal procedure, if any,
for the permit or approval involved.
Revised 1211612010
NW114,SW114,SECBTWP27NRGE4EWM.
17500 72ND AVENUE W
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS
71'
175THSTREETSW
RAMIENGINEERING, INC
Z
a
.x— W
.71
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
'w
A EIENCI;;111�1
uj
jrl� Al
1. A— W
_2
LU
O"MAPPLXANT
Lu
mg"!,
E
Lu
c., F.. Lu
i c"
Lu
uj
m UTILITY PURVEYORS K ru
Q
tu 0 Ix
0 Lu
APPRMI) BY RANNING tn CL
C
IN"
�D
L
L
SIDE SEWER NOTES TO --Q, 'I P. 6-7 SHEETINDEX
91 MW
I SP-01 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
-I fFl, ELL ft�ll
A.)
GN-0 GENERAL NOTES & DETAILS
—T. 3 TP-01 CLEARING, GRADING& TESC PLAN
BUILDING HEIGHT IMPERVIOUS AREAS 4 TD-01, STANDARD DETAILS RESUB
�A �l GCT 2 6 2015
�M;T!�ONSWE UTILITYNOTE
=. )PA17D sToRmDRAtNAGENorEs —
�A— �4
--7 T o �A— APPROVED FOR CONS rRUCTION
—.S TO —T Tii C� OF EDMOMDS
FL —oT c o v E RA G E 15-026
A_ L_L [CONSTRU —MA
LOT CTION NOTE y —1 TO .1
—AT ALL O-A SP-01
u ALL �11 '.71"810,0"424-5555
w.1- . y � .1 m,
u� 4
8-�
0
1750072nd Ave W
Edmonds, WA 98026
Storm Drainage Report
Prepared for:
Select Homes rT R. F
Fill
Date: August 14, 2015
CONAJE8 WITH APPLIIGABJ.�
F WATER C 0 D E
uZ/7f 77,�
2A4/20:L'5
Prepared by: Rob Long, PE
"M v- �I
13
16531 13th Ave W, Suite Al 08, Lynnwood WA 98037
(425) 678-6960 RAMengineeringinc.com
Job No. 15-026
RESUB
"M Engineering OCT 2 6 2015
Somme DFE T
r Memorandum
.rM OF
To: City of Edmonds
Development Services Department
c/o Jennifer Lambert, Engineering Technician
121 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
From: , Rob Long, PE
RAM Engineering
16531 13th Ave W, Suite A108
Lynnwood WA 98037
Subject: 1750072ndAveW
Plan Check #K020151055
Drainage Report Revision Addendum
RAM Job No. 15-026
Date: October 23, 2015
1012--�Vln
This memo and the attached calculations address review comments of the City of Edmonds engineering construction
plan review. The below evaluation is an addendum to the original 17500 72nd Ave W Drainage Report dated August 14,
2015.
Comments by the City Stormwater Engineer Program Manager, Jerry Shuster, PE — emailed 9/22/15.
Storm Drainage Report, RAM Engineering 8/14/201.5
Section E.
WkVHM2012 has had several updates since the 2015/03/18 version (used in the report). Please
download the most current version (Clear Creek Solutions website) and use it for this project.
Latest DOE approved WWHM2012 version (9/9/2015 downloaded 9/18/2015) has been used for drainage
calculations (see attached calculations).
Section 5.7.4.2 of the Edmonds Storinw-ater Code Supplement states that the minimum orifice size for a
detention system is 0.5 inches. an orifice smaller than this is proposed in the report. As stated in Section
3.2.4 of the 2005 Ecology Stomnvater Management Alanualfor Wesieni Washington, if the allowable
discharp
te cannot be met even when the live storage depth is reduced to 3 feet using a 0.5 inch orifice,
that',; all that is expected. The allowable discharge rates can be rounded to 0.009,0.018, and 0.042 cts,
if that helps.
The orifice sized has been revised to 0.5 inches. Below is a summary of the drainage detention calculations,
WWHM2012 input/output report is attached. %
2-Year Allowable Release Rate = 0.07 cfs/acre-impervious x 0.126 acres = 0.009 cfs
10-Year Allowable Release Rate = 0.14 cfs/acre-im pervious x 0.126 acres = 0.018 cfs
100-Year Allowable Release Rate = 0.33 cfs/acre-impervious x 0.126 acres = 0.042 cfs
The required cletention system and release rates for the developed conditions are as follows:
Proposed Detention Tank: 28ft — 6ft Diameter Pipe
Release Rates:
Storm Event
Mitigated
Allowable
2-year =
0.009 cfs
0.009 cfs
10-year =
0.016 cfs
0.018 cfs
100-year =
0.028 cfs
0.042 cfs
RAM Engineering 1653113" Ave W, Suite A108 Lynnwood WA 98037 (425) 678-6960 RAMengineeringinc.corn
RAM Engineering
WWHM2012
PROJECT REPORT
Project Name: 15026 72ndx
Site Name: Select 72nd Ave W
Site Address: 17500 72nd Ave W
City : Edmonds
Report Date: 10/23/2015
MGS Regoin Puget East
Data Start 1901/10/1
Data End : 2058/09/30
DOT Data Number: 03
Version : 2015/09/18
Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year
High Flow Threshold for POC 1: 50 year
PREDEVELOPED LAND USE
Name Basin 1
Bypass: No
GroundWater: No
Pervious Land Use
acre
C, Forest, Mod
.126
Pervious Total
0.126
Impervious Land Use
acre
Impervious Total
0
Basin Total
0.126
Element Flows To:
Surface
MITIGATED LAND USE
Name : Basin 1
Bypass: No
GroundWater: No
Pervious Land Use
Pervious Total
Impervious Land Use
ROOF TOPS FLAT
DRIVEWAYS MOD
SIDEWALKS FLAT
Impervious Total
Basin Total
RAM Engineering
Interflow
Groundwater
acre
0
acre
0..085
0.039
0.002
0.126
0.126
16531 13'h Ave W, Suite A108 Lynnwood WA 98037
(425) 678-6960 RAMengineeringinc.com
RAM Engineering
Element Flows To:
Surface
Tank 1
Name : Tank 1
Tank Name: Tank 1
Interflow
Tank 1
Groundwater
Dimensions
Depth: 6 ft
Tank Type Circular
Diameter 6 ft.
Length : 28 ft.
Discharge Structure
Riser Height: 5.9 ft.
Riser Diameter: 6 in.
Orifice 1 Diameter: 0.5 in. Elevation: 1.5 ft.
Element Flows To:
Outlet 1 Outlet 2
Tank
Hydraulic Table
Stage(feet)
Area(ac.) Volume(ac-ft.)
Discharge(cfs) Infilt(cfs)
100.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
100.07
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
100.13
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.000
100.20
0,001
0.000
0.000
0.000
100.27
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.000
100.33
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.000
100.40
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.000
100.47
0.002
0.000
0.000
0.000
100.53
0.002
0.000
0.000
0.000
100.60
0.002
0.000
0.000
0.000
100.67
0.002
0.001
0.000
0.000
100.73
0.002
0.001
0.000
0.000
100.80
0.002
0.001
0.000
0.000
100.87
0.002
0.001
0.000
0.000
100.93
0.002
0.001
0.000
0.000
101.00
0.002
0.002
0.000
0.000
101.07
0.002
0.002
0.000
0.000
101.13
0.003
0.002
0.000
0.000
101.20
0.003
0.002
0.000
0.000
101.27
0.003
0.002
0.000
0.000
101.33
0.003
0.003
0.000
0.000
101.40
0.003
0.003
0.000
0.000
101.47
0.003
0.003
0.000
0.000
101.53
0.003
0.003
0.001
0.000
101.60
0.003
0.003
0.002
0.000
101.67
0.003
0.004
0.002
0.000
101.73
0.003
0.004
0.003
0.000
101.80
0.003
0.004
0.003
0.000
101.87
0.003
0.004
0.004
0.000
101.93
0.003
0.005
0.004
0.000
102.00
0.003
0.005
0.004
0.000
102.07
0.003
0.005
0.005
0.000
102.13
0.003
0.005
0.005
0.000
102.20
0.003
0.006
0.005
0.000
102.27
0.003
0.006
0.005
0.000
102.33
0.003
0.006
0.006
0.000
RAM Engineering
1653113" Ave W, Suite A108 Lynnwood WA 98037 (425) 678-6960 RAMengineeringinc.com
RAM Engineering
102.40
0.003
0.006
0.006
0.000
102.47
0.003
0.007
0.006
0.000
102.53
0.003
0.007
0.006
0.000
102.60
0.003
0.007
0.007
0.000
102.67
0.003
0.007
0.007
0.000
102.73
0.003
o.6o8
0.007
0.000
102.80
0.003
0.008
01.007
0.000
102.87
0.003
0.008
0'.0 07
0.000
102.93
0.003
0.008
0.008
0.000
103.00
0.003
0.009
0.008
0.000
,,103.07
0.003
0.009
0.008
0.000.
103.13
0.003
0.009
0.008
0.000
103.20
0.003
0.009
0.008
0.000
103.27
0.003
0.010
0.009
0.000
103.33
0.003
0.010
0.009
0.000
103.40
0.003
0.010
0.009
0.000
103.47
0.003
0.010
0.009
0.000
103.53
0.003
0.011
0.009
0-000
103.60
0.003
0.011
0.009
0.000
103.67
0.003
0.011
0.010
0.000
103.73
0.003
OAll
0.010
0.000
103.80
0.003
0.012
0.010
0.000
103.87
0.003
0.012
0.010
0.000
103.93
0.003
0.012
0.010
0.000
104.00
0.003
0.012
0.010
0.000
104.07
0.003
0.013
0.010
0.000
104.13
0.003
0.013
0.011
0.000
104.20
0.003
0.013
0.011
0.000
104,27
0.003
0.013
0.011
0.000
104.33
0.003
0.014
0.011
0.000
104.40
0.003
0.014
0.011
0.000
104.47
0.003
0.014
0.011
0.000
104.53
0.003
0.014
0.011
0.000
104.60
0.003
0.015
0.011
0.000
104.67
0.003
0.015
0.012
0.000
104.73
0.003
0.015
0.012
0.000
104.80
0.003
0.015
0.012
0.000
104.87
0.003
0.015
0.012
0.000
104.93
0.002
0.016
0.012
0.000
105.,00
0.002
0.016
0.012
0.000
105.07
0.002
0.016
0.012
0.000
105.13
0.002
0.016
0.012
0.000
105.20
0.002
0.016
0.013
0.000
105.27
0.002
0.016
0.013
0.000
105.33
0.002'
0.017
0.013
0.000
105.40
0.002
0.017
0.013
0.000
105.47
0.002
0.017
0.013
0.000
105.53
0.002
0.017
0.013
o.boo
105.60
0.001
0.017
0.013
0.000
105.67
0.001
0.017
0.013
0.000
105.73
0.001
0.017
0.014
0.000,
105.80
0.001
0.018
0.014
0.000
105.87
0.001
0.018
0.014
0.000
105.93
0.000
0.018
0.046
0.000
106.00
0.000
0.018
0.174
0.000
106.07
0.000
0.000'
0.312
0.000
ANALYSIS RESULTS
Stream Protection Duration
MM Engineering 1653113" Ave W, Suite A108 Lynnwood WA 98037 ' (425) 678-6960 RAMengineeringinc.com
-JIM
k —
a
Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1
Total Pervious Area: 0.126
Total Impervious Area: 0
Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1
Total Pervious Area: 0. '
Total Impervious Area: 0.126
Flow Frequency'Return
Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1
Return Period
Flow(cfs)
2 year
0.005053
5 year
0.008557
10 year
0.012011
25 year,
0.018146
50 year
0.024385
100 year
0.032448
Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1
Return Period
Flow(cfs)
2 year
0.009427
5 year
0.012828
10 year
0.015642
25 year
0.019912
50 year
0.023669
100 year
0.027975
RAM Engineering 1653113" Ave W, Suite A108 Lyn I nwood WA §8037
1
k
(425) 678-6960 RAMengineeringinc.com
17500 72nd Ave W
Edmonds, WA 98026
Introduction: This summary report provides site design information for a single family residence
by Select Homes. This report includes storm drainage analysis to support permit review and
approval. The property is located at the southwest corner of 72nd Ave W and 175 th St SW' in the
southwest 1/4 of Section 8, T 27 N, R 4 E, W.M.
Site Address: 17500 72nd Ave W Applicant: Select Homes
Edmonds, WA 98026 16513 13th Ave W, Suite A108,
Lynnwood WA 98037
Tax Parcel Number: 004560 000 009 00 Contact: Kayla Clark
(425) 742-6044
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
PAGES
A. ProjectSummary ............................................................................................................................... 5
B. Parcel (Vicinity) Map .......................................................................................................................... I
C. Site Development Plans ...................................................................................................................... 4
D. Aerial Photo ....................................................................................................................................... 1
E. Stormwater Control System Summary and Calculations .................................................................. 5
F. Drainage Basin Description and Maps ............................................................................................... 3
G. Grading & Erosion Control Summary and Soils Map ......................................................................... 4
H. Operation and Maintenance Guidelines ............................................................................................ 5
RAMEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report 17500 72nd Ave W
RAM No. 15-026 August 14, 2015
Page i
I
I
A. PROJECTSUMMARY.
This report provides engineering information for the proposed construction of a single family residence; the
project is located on the southwest corner of 72nd Ave W and 175th St SW (17500 72 nd Ave SW) in the City
of Edmonds. This report provides the evaluation for the construction of a single family residence onsite.
Existing Conditions. The total site consists of about 22,741 sf (0.463 acres) and is currently occupied by an
existing foundation of a previous structure, remnants of a looped driveway off of 72 nd Ave W also currently
exists onsite. The site is moderately teed with overgrown vegetation throughout the site. The site is
bordered by 72 nd Ave W along the east, 175 th St SW along the north, and single family residences to the
south and west (see attached aerial photo- section D).
The site generally slopes site on top of a local knoll and slopes off in the west and northerly directions,
ranging from 2% to +40% (steeper slopes found along the westerly undeveloped portion of the site). A
majority of the site's drainage runoff would sheet flow westerly/northwesterly direction and collect in an
existing pipe and catchbasin system located along the southerly pavement edge of 175 th St SW. Runoff
generally flows westerly into Terrace Creek, additional discussion of the local drainage basin and
downstream path is discussed in section F of this report.
Developed Conditions. The proposed project includes the construction of a single residence and associated
driveway and utilities. The proposed house will be located in approximately the same location as the
existing house foundation, thus leaving the westerly half of the site undeveloped. All existing
improvements/im pervious surface onsite will be removed/replaced with the site development; landscaping
and grass lawn around the new residence will stabilize the site upon building construction. New
infrastructure improvements include a stormwater conveyance and detention system; water; sewer; power;
and communications. Due to the existing till soils and the westerly slopes of the site no infiltration or low
impact development technique are proposed to be used to provide storm drainage flow control. All
disturbed pervious (lawn and landscape) areas will preserve or restore the health and water -holding
capacity of the soils by com post -a mending (Per DOE BMP T5.13: Post -Construction Soil Quality and Depth).
To control the stormwater runoff a detention tank will be installed northwest of the proposed residence; all
roof drains shall be routed to the proposed detention tank. Due to the fact a majority of the impervious
surface is the roof top area with limited pollution generating driveway area (less than 2,000 sf) no water
quality treatment system will be provided. The detention tank has be sized using the City of Edmonds flow
control standards for a Creek orLake Basin; a full overview of the proposed storm drainage control facilities,
offsite/downstream analysis and grading and erosion control measures are discussed in the following
sections of this report.
R4MEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
1750072 nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
� I Page A- I
Summary of Minimum Requirements for Small Site Projects:
S. I Small Site Minimum Requirement #1 — Preparation of Stormwater Site Plan
The proposed site development consists of disturbing about 0.522 acres of land and creating/replacing
about 5,500 sf of impervious surface. Thus, the project is classified as a Small Site- Category 2 project per
the City's classification system (see attached Site Classification Worksheet). The civil site development plans
have been prepared and reduced copies of the plans are included in section C of this report.
5.2 Small Site Minimum Requirement #2 — Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention
A construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) has be incorporated into the site
development plans. A summary of the site's erosion control measures that evaluates the typical 12
elements of a SWPPP are included in section G. The total site disturbance area of the project is less than
one acre, thus a formal Notice of Intent application for NPDES coverage will not be made to the Department
of Ecology. The grading quantities are estimated to be 2,000 CY of cut and 500 CY of fill.
5.3 Small Site Minimum Requirement #3 — Source Control of Pollution
Specific source controls are not required for single family residential sites. General requirements for these
sites include preventing the discharge of pollutants to the City's storm drainage system per Edmonds City
Code Chapter 7.200 (illicit Discharges). This includes common household items such as pesticides,
herbicides, fertilizers, detergents and fluids from vehicle maintenance.
5.4 Small Site Minimum Requirement #4 — Preservation of Natural Drainage Systems and Outfalls
A majority of the runoff leaves the site as sheet flow in a westerly/northwesterly direction. Site runoff
enters an existing pipe and catchbasin along the south pavement edge of 175 th St SW and enters the City's
storm conveyance system. The proposed detention system for the single family residence will discharge
flows to the City storm pipe system in 175 th St SW , thus maintaining the existing drainage flow path.* The
site is located in the Terrace Creek watershed basin and eventually discharge to the Puget Sound per the
City of Edmonds maps (see section F). The proposed development will maintain the stormwater flow
discharges to the Terrace Creek watershed basin.
5.5 Small Site Minimum Requirement #5 — Onsite Stormwater Management.
The developed site conditions include impervious surface roof top, driveway and walkway/patio areas for
the proposed residence. All rooftop and exterior area collection drains shall convey stormwater run-off to
the on -site detention tank. Due to the underlying dense till soils and slopes found onsite, no LID or
infiltration type stormwater management systems will be used onsite. An underground detention tank per
RAMEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report 17500 72nd Ave W
RAM No. 15-026 August 14, 2015
Page A-2
the City's drainage manual will be provided to control stormwater quantity control. See civil site
development plans and section E for additional sizing calculations and construction details.
5.6 Small Site Minimum Requirement #6 — Runoff Treatment. The project does not propose to
create/replace more than 5,000 sf of pollution -generation impervious surface onsite. The proposed new
exterior driveway about 1,700 sf; a majority of the site's impervious surface (3,800 sf of the 5,500 sf) is
rooftop and walkway/patio areas. Thus, no basic or enhanced water quality treatment will be provided.
The site's stormwater control system will include a sump and a control tee that will provide some water
quality and oil/water separation of the collected runoff.
5.7 Small Site Minimum Requirement #7 —Flow Control. An onsite storm detention tank will provide flow
control of the site's stormwater runoff. The detention tank system has been design to meet the flow control
standards of a Small Site- Category 2 project in a creek or lake basin (less than an acre of disturbance and
greater than 5,000 sf of impervious surface). The detention tank has be sized using Department of Ecology's
WWHM modeling software; a full overview of the proposed storm drainage control facilities calculations
are provided in section E.
5.8 Small Site Minimum Requirement #8 — Wetland Protection. No wetlands are known to exist on or
adjacent to the site. .
5.9 Small Site Minimum Requirement #9 — Operation and Maintenance. An operation and maintenance
summary is provided in section H.
5.10 Small Site Minimum Requirement #10 — Offsite Analysis and Mitigation. See section F. Drainage Basin
Description and Maps for a qualitative analysis.
5.11 Small Site Minimum Requirement #11 — Financial Liability. Cost estimates and bonds will be provided
by the applicant during final construction permit approval.
R44Engineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
17500 72nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
Page A-3
I
of F 0.11
City of Edmonds
Site Classification. Wotksheet
Page I of 2
The project's Site Classification will dictate the spcFific stormwater management
requirements applicable to your site. Completing this work-shect will help determine the amoun ' t of
regulated impervious surface and whether your project falls into the classification of a small Site
'(Categ6ry I or Cat600ry 2), or aMinoe Site. Please reference the Glossa!X (pg. 10-11). Figures D and
E. (op. 8-9). and Examples (pg, I I - 12). to assist with completion of this work -sheet.
1) Is Permeable Pavement' Proposed For Use on this Site? 0 Yes 1XI No
Refer to Storints-ater Supplement Chapter 5.1
,If YES, the subject area is to be considered impervio us for initial site classification purposes. Include total
permeable pavement area in the calculation of Non -Regulated Replaced and/or New impervious surface
areas in the table below.
Z) Determine the Amount and 7�ype (if Existing& Proposed Impervious Surface for the Site
J�r to Stornitsater Supplement Chapter 2 and Fig. C
Lifl!Lj: Identi6, the Non -Regulated Impervious Surface Arem
Line 2: Identify the Replaced Impervious Surrace Area, dividing the total between. Exempt and Regulated either or both
may be zero. Note: For project classification purposes. Replaced Iiiipervious may only be considered exempt
under certain conditions. Refer to the Glossary and Figure D.
LiMI: Identify the New Impetwious Surrace Area for your project. All impervious areas created post -July 7. 1977 or
after the date of annexation into the City are regulated & should be included in this total unless they can be
categorized separately as a Replaced -Regulated area.
Line 4: Enter the sum of the total Replaced -Regulated plus the total New impervious areas.
Line 5: Identify the total area currently mitigated by an existing city-app roved stormwater nurmgcnxnt system.
Li=6: Enter the sum of the value in Une 4 less the value in Une 5 to identify the total Regulated area in which
stormwater controls have not yet been applied.
Line 7: Identify the total area proposed to be mitigated through the use.of Low Impact IX-vclopnwnt Techniques.
jdM_X: Identify the total area proposed to be mitigaied through conventional Stormwater Management Techniques.
11rovid e a copy ofthe ftiljoidfig table on the.drainage,plan sheet for the proposed project
Line
Type
Arva (square feet)
1.
Non-Regidated
NONE
Exempt
Regulated
2.
Replaced
3.
4.
New (Post 1977� 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4-1
Total Regulated Impen-ious Area
Af itkation required if in excess of If
5.
6.
Total Area %N1111gated by Ex6fing St6rinivater Management System(s)
Regulated Area Not Vet Mitigated
0 SF
5,500 SF
7.
Area lWposed to be Mitigaled by Low Impact Developrwrit Techniques
0 SF
&
NI T
Area Proposed to be Mitigated through Conventional MV, ecbnlques
5,500 SF
I legpmousasptialt. ponxaconctete, paver b1ocLsconcwtc*nce11cd paving grids, or plastic latticesfificti with turf or stone)
Revised on _W5P201 2
RAMEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
E72-Slt'ALErosion—Coyarol-03.05. 11doc
Page 5 of 12
17500 72nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
IPage A-4
City of Edmonds
Site Classification Worksheet
Page 2 of 2
.3) Determine the Total Area of Land Disturbing Activity 22,741 sf
Referito Siorpinvater
14) Determine the Quantity of Grading. Fill and/or Excavation CUT=2,000 CY FILL=500 CY1
5) Will the project convert -Y4 Acre or Nlom of Native %legetation to Lawn or Ves X No
Landscaped Area? I
6) Identify the Watershed the 11-Nisting, Site Runoff Discharges to
Refer to Stonnwaier Supplement Chapter 2.3 1
Based on Site Location and Watershed Map — Figure-C. Check all that apply.
A. [I Direct Discharge B. N Creek or Lake Basin
c3 Edmonds Way Basin Terrace Creek
[3 Pug
get Sound Basin
o Puget Sound Piped Basin
DETERMINE PROJECT CLASSIFICATION USING THE INFORMATION ABOVE
AND THE PROJECT CLASSIFICATION CHART (Figure B, pg 4)
01 Small Site - Category I E]Small Site - Category 2 0 Minor Site
Storinivaier Supplentent Siortnivater Supplemelit Stornavater Supplement
Chapter 5 Chapter 5 Chapter 6
Revised on 3X5P2 012 F72-SIVALErofionSonfrot-03.05. 1Z doe Page 6 of 12
RAMEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report 17500 72nd Ave W
RAM No. 15-026 August 14, 2015
Page A-5
B. PARCEL (VICINITY) MAP
OUAFITER SECTION mw RANGEEMU. -- - - - - - -- - - -
4
j
Sw 8 '27" 4
commill'a Lot — ma — sod c"U" C2
C� LCI Sk*KW � TIM � MINIM - Tbl AM
hk --Zwj�
Us�w VAto Dow Lot ....... %be ROW ---- Ift - - -
lk,,�. W,,:). bell
Mlromr Vftw — Color Std. Vol: to
.003 11-00 08 02 3 Ito it
10 3
A,
In 123 02
10 20
3
2 3 09 t02;
.1 /0/3
v In I S 1 2 0 0
06 02 02 1
04 3
0 to I
0
MEAb
QW"D
S (513
............. g1p,
'"I'V I., Izzy, 14 ONDS HEI HTS
10 1 10 (75t
A 3
4-ODO PLAT OF JEADO, E H 10 to
go 04 Is 11.5 2
IN is
3RD S
TTT
76
To
Is
I T SW 0=31 3 2
6
I I )I I 1 20 08 07 3: a 1 01
'1�11 15 13 0, 07 07
02 a I '--,
§SITE - I Is
01
4.M.4 01 _j �Sp Ir
ro U. 03 at DO
S- W- 0 4 05 09
a 05 11 21 .52 05 03 02
W, 4
19 09 02 3
13
r
WESTWIN ESTATES 5 00 04 03
;:p to 1 11 141 12 22'1�
9 i 1 04
SPAFN IEW SPO I 175TH , 6 , zoi09 )25
77091604D2 (A.-f 14 .
2 3 7 to I I I - -: 2 02 1 20
-7 Io.,
27 tj
114 �z sp 03
(7009) "3560 v " 1 9
C 09
1 1 161 01 1 17 to
- - - - - - - ----
oo at Is
23 03 1 9 ; -
01
2 Y— I
1 11 73
, 2 01) . : 2." —
1 -176
to -0o - 3l'
7 to 10 1 R1 6 wl -
ot 13 6
x 3 01 4
20 02 3J 0
T, 02 �a 0-- 2
it 2 " I
0 2L
x ILA 4
21 01 j"- 02 3
Z 01
12 01 6 0 4 ! ': , 1 5
04 .57"m of , I-
1 03 22 it I A4,111
MEZOWDA.E to 4
S21ND V1 ACTS (5136) 0w)2 5; 8 a Ix
M DO kEST 748P 3 0 7 1 1,0.-0-
1 I A
C 00 12 11
5 U
03 M n A 31 2 1 :
!4 R I
05 1 1.-
I.- Is
Is 14 '57 so I r-I 70TH PL SW
%113 11 ; a 04 03
41 a
01 7 to
40
01
4 20 1
25 47
17 If If 33 42 ;6 no
:1 i, 4 02 a
i 4-030 U
34' 38 T
43 ADD IqN 14
7 32 73 ZT a 3 — 06 too
1 20
US 31 07 "10
44 0043 13 1114115 1 CIO 2 8 162 1
0 o
i Isis 03
02 171 --- -ST--Svv-- -- 2
0 2 4 5 6 2 20 Is
BR OL
SPIS-11 ac --- is 52 2-OD4 3
53
MAD ONA JL� 4
03
IS .004
To 54
\L
-7. 2.,7
7. F -
RAMEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
17500 72nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
Page B- I
C. SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS
-
mm""q,�
13"!�
Nor'
rF,
k
'A LU
:Ul�
80"04
614"Amadoo"
63NOMA03739
m 3nmmy CNU 009ZS-
NMAMMOMNIRIN
fli 11 1
lit
lilt
:Z", 7
I lit
TY..
J.. A
RAMEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report 17500 72nd Ave W
RAM No. 15-026 August 14, 2015
Page C-1
� � m m m m m m m � m m m m m m m m m
CD
nn
Yl Cb CD
0 CD.
N) :3 �5.
0)(0 (a
co
:3
cL
to
(1)
--L
N
(14
C)
C)
=T=
=7=1
0
COAL Tvpff
SECnM DEMAMON DETAM
C84,48-ME
DEMM 'A'COMWC"M S COMnM DEME
RAMIENSOCEEMNS. WC
tu
A&A
M�
=71
MAO*
NOU*nMLtMW JIMP
Sjubm moumosd am
MR M'
Wt-
J-9 V TVA
V"Vwmw
ol Aol
-pp wxz -A
; ol
(Do
g. C\l
,C:t ,,:
cu
z
C�v
Q
C,4
Q) (Z)
(1) L6
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
� m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
CD
rn
C?l CD
CD Cb
CD
N)
(3)
cL
CD
�u
SD
0
-.k
c')
N)
(ZI
I Rmayl-
21�.l.=l—l--..=Z
am
KAM]
%M�LEI�W "INC
It
lu
:3
I amAp I
A""= "I" I
4 4
7�7-777V
SITE
iOu
E. STORMWATER CONTROL SYSTEM SUMMARY AND CALCULATIONS:
To mitigate the development of the site, an underground detention tank systems will be installed to
control the drainage runoff releases (flow control). The site is less than one acre (0.522 ac) and proposes
to create/replace 5,500 sf of impervious surface, thus the project is considers a Small Site- Category 2
project per the City's classification system. Below is a summary of the project impervious surface areas:
Project Area Summary:
Total Site Area = 22,741 sf (0.522 Ac.),
Proposed Impervious 5,500 sf (0.126 Ac.), 24.2%
Impervious Area Summary Breakdown:
SF Ac.
Roof 3,720 0.085
Driveways 1,700 0.039
Walk way 80 0.002
5,500 0.126
The site is located within the Terrace Creek watershed, thus the post -development 2-, 10-, and 100-year
recurrence interval peak flows shall not exceed 0.07, 0.14, and 0.33 cfs per acre of impervious surface
area, respectively (per City of Edmonds flow control standards). Using the impervious area above, this
results in the following allowable release rates:
2-Year Allowable Release Rate = 0.07 cfs/acre-impervious x 0.126 acres = 0.0088 cfs
10-Year Allowable Release Rate = 0.14 cfs/acre-impervious x 0.126 acres = 0.0177 cfs
100-Year Allowable Release Rate = 0.33 cfs/acre-impervious x 0.126 acres = 0.0417 cfs
The developed runoff rates and storage calculations were performed using the DOE 2012 Western (-,a
t
Washington Hydrology Model (WWHM2012) continuous runoff model. The required detention system �b
and release rates for the developed conditions are as follows:
Proposed Detention Tank: iOft — 6ft Diameter Pipe
Release Rates:
Storm Event
Mitigated
Allowable
2-year =
0.0082 cfs
0.0088 cfs;
10-year =
0.0174 cfs
0.0177 cfs
100-year =
0.0416 cfs
0.0417 cfs
See WWHM2012 printout on the following pages.
R4MEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
17500 72nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
IPage E- 1
WWHM2012
PROJECT REPORT
Project Name: 15026 72ndx
Site Name: Select 72nd Ave W
Site Address: 17500 72nd Ave W
City : Edmonds
Report Date: 8/14/2015
MGS Regoin Puget East
Data Start 1901/10/1
Data End : 2058/09/30
DOT Data Number: 03
Version : 2015/03/18
Low Flow Threshold for POC 1 : 50 Percent of the 2 Year
High Flow Threshold for POC 1: 50 year
PREDEVELOPED LAND USE
Name : Basin 1
Bypass: No
GroundWater: No
Pervious Land Use
Acres
C, Forest, Mod
.126
Pervious Total
0.126
Impervious Land Use
Acres
Impervious Total
0
Basin Total
0.126
Element Flows To:
Surface Interflow
MITIGATED LAND USE
Name : Basin 1
Bypass: No
GroundWater: No
RAMEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
Groundwater
17500 72nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
Page E-2
I
I
Pervious Land Use
Acres
Pervious Total
0
Impervious Land Use
Acres
ROOF TOPS FLAT
0.085
DRIVEWAYS MOD
0.039
SIDEWALKS FLAT
0.002
Impervious Total
0.126
Basin Total
0.126
Element Flows To:
Surface Interflow Groundwater
Tank 1 Tank 1
Name : Tank 1
Tank Name: Tank 1
Dimensions
Depth: 6 ft.
Tank Type Circular
Diameter 6 ft.
Length : 20 ft.
Discharge Structure
Riser Height: 5.96 ft.
Riser Diameter: 6 in.
Notch Type: Rectangular
Notch Width: 0.042 ft.
Notch Height: 0.250 ft.
orifice 1 Diameter: 0.390625 in. Elevation: 0 ft.
Element Flows To:
Outlet 1 Outlet 2
Tank
Hydraulic Table
Stage(ft)
Area(ac) Volume(ac-ft)
Discharge(cfs)
Infilt(cfs)
100.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
100.07
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
100.13
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
100.20
0.001
0.000
0.001
0.000
100.27
0.001
0.000
0.002
0.000
1U0.33
0.001
0.000
0.002
0,000
100.40
0.001
0.000
0.002
0.000
100.47
0.001
0.000
0.002
0.000
100.53
0.001
0.000
0.002
0.000
100.60
0.001
0.000
0.003
0.000
100.67
0.001
0.000
0.003
0.000
100.73
0.001
0.000
0.003
0.000
100.80
0.001
0.001
0.003
0.000
100.87
0.001
0.001
0.003
0.000
100.93
0.002
0.001
0.003
0.000
101.00
0.002
0.001
0.004
0.000
101.07
0.002
0.001
0.004
0.000
R4MEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
17500 72n6 Ave W
August 14, 2015
IPage E-3
I
I I
I
I
101.13
0.002
0.001
0.004
0.000
101.20
0.002
0.001
0.004
0.000
101.27
0.002
0.002
0.004
0.000
101.33
0.002
0.002
0.004
0.000
101.40
0.002
0.002
0.004
0.000
101.47
0.002
0.002
0.004
0.000
101.53
0.002
0.002
0.005
0.000
101.60
0.002
0.002
0.005
0.000
101.67
0.002
0.002
0.005
0.000
101.73
0.002
0.003
0.005
0.000
101.80
0.002
0.003
0.005
0.000
101.87
0.002
0.003
0.005
0.000
101.93
0.002
0.003
0.005
0.000
102.00
0.002
0.003
0.005
0.000
102.07
0.002
0.004
0.005
0.000
102.13
0.002
0.004
0.005
0.000
102.20
0.002
0.004
0.005
0.000
102.27
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.000
102.33
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.000
102.40
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.000
102.47
0.002
0.005
0.006
0.000
102.53
0.002
0.005
0.006
0.000
102.60
0.002
0.005
0.006
0.000
102.67
0.002
0.005
0.006
0.000
102.73
0.002
0.005
0.006
0.000
102.80
0.002
0.005
0.006
0.000
102.87
0.002
0.006
0.006
0.000
102.93
0.002
0.006
0.006
0.000
103.00
0.002
0.006
0.006
0.000
103.07
0.002
0.006
0.007
0.000
103.13
0.002
0.006
0.007
0.000
103.20
0.002
0.007
0.007
0.000
103.27
0.002
0.007
0.007
0.000
103.33
0.002
0.007
0.007
0.000
103.40
0.002
0.007
0.007
0.000
103.47
0.002
0.007
0.007
0.000
103.53
0.002
0.008
0.007
0.000
103.60
0.002
0.008
0.007
0.000
103.67
0.002
0.008
0.007
0.000
103.73
0.002
0.008
0.007
0.000
103.80
0.002
0.008
0.007
0.000
103.87
0.002
0.008
0.007
0.000
103.93
0.002
0.009
0.007
0.000
104.00
0.002
0.009
0.008
0.000
104.07
0.002
0.009
0.008
0.000
104.13
0.002
0.009
0.008
0.000
104.20
0.002
0.009
0.008
0.000
104.27
0.002
0.009
0.008
0.000
104.33
0.002
0.010
0.008
0.000
104.40
0.002
0.010
0.008
0.000
104.47
0.002
0.010
0.008
0.000
104.53
0.002
0.010
0.008
0.000
104.60
0.002
0.010
0.008
0.000
R4MEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
17500 72nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
Page E-4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
k
I
I
104.67
0.002
0.010
0.008
0.000
104.73
0.002
0.011
0.008
0.000
104.80
0.002
0.011
0.008
0.000
104.87
0.002
0.011
0.008
0.000
104.93
0.002
0.011
0.008
0.000
105.00
0.002
0.011
0.009
0.000
105.07
0.002
0.011
0.009
0.000
105.13
0.001
0.011
0.009
0.000
105.20
0.001
0.012
0.009
0.000
105.27
0.001
0.012
0.009
0.000
105.33
0.001
0.012
0.009
0.000
105.40
0.001
0.012
0.009
0.000
105.47
0.001
0.012
0.009
0.000
105.53
0.001
0.012
0.009
0.000
105.60
0.001
0.012
0.009
0.000
105.67
0.001
0.012
0.009
0.000
105.73
0.001
0.012
0.010
0.000
105.80
0.001
0.012
0.013
0.000
105.87
0.000
0.012
0.018
0.000
105.93
0.000
0.013
0.023
0.000
106.00
0.000
0.013
0.065
0.000
106.07
0.000
0.000
0.196
0.000
ANALYSIS RESULTS
Stream Protection Duration
Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC *1
Total Pervious Area:0.126
Total Impervious Area:O
Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1
Total Pervious'Area:O
Total Impervious Area:0.126
Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1
Return Period
Flow(cfs)
2 year
0.005053
5 year
0.008557
10 year
0.012011
25 year
0.018146
50 year
0.024385
100 year
0.032448
Flow Frequency
Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1
Return Period
Flow(cfs)
2 year
0.008152
5 year
0.012935
10 year
0.017412
25 year
0.025
50 year
0.032391
100 year
0.041609
RAM Engineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
17500 72nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
I
Page E-5
I
I
F. DRAINAGE BASIN DESCRIPTION:
The site is located in the Terrace Creek watershed basin. The Terrace Creek basin is a relatively small
urban basin that collects stormwater runoff from primarily residential areas in the City Edmonds and
ultimately discharges flows to westerly to Puget Sound (see attached watershed map).
The collected stormwater runoff from the site will discharge to a pipe and catchbasin system located in
175th St SW along the site's northerly boundary. The storm pipe system (consisting of 12" and 15" pipe)
within 175th St SW directs flows west 330 ft to the street end of 175 1h St SW and continues westerly past
the street end. The pipe systems continues westerly and crosses under 76 1h Ave W about 1,200 ft
downstream of the site at which point the pipe system daylights to an open channel (Terrace Creek), see
F-3 Downstream Drainage Facility Map. Terrace Creek continues in a westerly direction and eventually
discharges into the Puget Sound about 0.7 miles from the site.
A majority of the downstream conveyance system within a 1,200 feet of the site consists of a man-made
pipe and catchbasin system. No apparent flooding or system inadequacies within a Xmile downstream of
the site were discovered during site visits or research of the downstream system.
See attached watershed and downstream drainage facility map for the local downstream path.
P.4M Engineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
4
17500 72nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
Page F- 1
F-2. Watershed Basin Mao
FIGURE B-1
CITY OF EDMONDS
WATERSHEDS
womowk
mftmme
M]wmf,bmwsh mp'w"kww
MU.I.h"
Mft9nS.M1Wd
mmmmal,
mshemoeek
PW G*od K*M P.W M $WbbaW
FIN mabclft*
m Safthwg ON)OWS A
MW,dWj&mk
W Swtt�a [&nandl 8
LAM emmv"
rm--] smwm C'*A
t.-Wi GWth
Tarbat Pwt A
M.W0.44. A Tar"t Pwk 8
Uftdmd�0
UmmOvA
—
MR —6- -
oudal C'"k
0 � Lm Xwo
rm--j wal" crea
k= ."m $AM
11n-X00Dft
R4M Engineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
N
A
'4=-
17500 72nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
Page F-2
110"
X r,�,A i "OP17,
A-71,
PM
, y
cl,
G. GRADING & EROSION CONTROL SUMMARY:
This project will require grading to construct the proposed building and utilities (including the stormwater
detention system). Standard erosion control measures are proposed to be used during construction. The
primary erosion and sediment control BMP during construction will be proper soil stabilization methods.
Exposed soils shall be stabilized by application of effective BMPs that protect the soil from the erosive forces
of raindrops, flowing water, and wind. Applicable practices include, but not limited to, temporary and
permanent seeding, sodding, mulching, plastic covering, erosion control fabrics, matting, soil application of
polyacrylamide (pam), the early application of gravel base on areas to be paved, and dust control. The
contractor shall select a soil stabilization method best suited for the particular situation. Stock piles must
be stabilized and protected with sediment trapping measures. In addition, site containment of exposed
soils shall be sustained by using silt fence barriers along the down -slope boundaries of the site's disturbance
areas. See the site development plan for details.
Soils: In accordance with the City of Edmonds Soil Map Units the on -site soils consist of Alderwood-Urban
land complex- 2% to 8% and Alderwood Gravelly sandy loam- 15% to 25%. Alderwood soils are moderately
well drained soil on till plains formed in glacial till and are categorized as a hydrologic group C soil (see full
description attached). The Alderwood till soils are typically not suitable for infiltration of stormwater.
Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Pion (SWPPP): The following is a summary of the site's
erosion control measures that evaluates the typical DOE 12 elements of a SWPPP:
Element 1: Mark Clearing Limits: Clearing limits have been delineated on the engineering site development
plans.
Element 2: Establish Construction Access: A construction access has been delineated on the engineering
site development plans.
Element 3: Control Flow Rates: Due to the relatively small size of the project and minor change in current
and proposed runoff characteristics of the site during construction no flow control system (ie:
pond) is proposed. During construction silt fencing will provide attenuation of site runoff and
upon project completion the storm detention tank will provide flow control.
Element 4: Install Sediment Controls: Filter fabric fence has been delineated and detailed on the
engine6ring site development plans. At a minimum, silt fence will b� installed along the down
gradient perimeter of the disturbed area that will receive sediment -laden runoff.
Element 5: Stabilize Soils: Soils will be stabilized per the TESC notes listed on the engineering site
development plans.
Element 6: Protect Slopes: Exposed slopes shall be stabilized per the TESC notes listed on the engineering
site development plans.
Element 7: Protect Drain Inlets: Drain inlet protection will be installed on all catch basins that will receive
RAMEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
17500 72nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
IPage G- I
sediment -laden runoff. See the engineering site development plans for locations and detail.
Element 8: Stabilize Channels and Outlets: This element is not applicable since there are no temporary
channels or outlets proposed.
Element 9: Control Pollutants: Pollutants shall be managed as described in the TESC notes listed on the
engineering site development plans.
Element 10: Control De -Watering: Highly turbid or contaminated cle-watering water shall be handled
separately from stormwater. The water from all cle-watering systems for trenches and
foundations shall be treated or disposed prior to discharging from the site.
Element 11: Maintain BMPs: BMPs shall be maintained and removed at the end of the project as follows:
i. All temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be inspected,
maintained and repaired in accordance with the Drainage Manual or as approved or
required by the City to assure continued performance of their intended function in
accordance with BMP specifications.
ii. The applicant may remove temporary BMPs when they are no longer needed.
iii. All temporary erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be removed within 30 days after
construction is completed and the City has determined that the site is stabilized.
Element 12: Manage the Project: The owner of the site is responsible for managing the installation and
maintenance of the site BMPs.
Element 13. Protect Low Impact Development (LID) BMPs: No LID facilities are proposed with the project.
Grading Quantity Approximation: The below listed grading quantities have been estimated using the
AutoCAD 31) modeling of the site; estimated quantities are for permitting purposes only.
Estimated grading site development quantities:
Cut: 2,000 CY
Fill: 500 CY
Conclusion: The site development construction plans include specific grading and drainage improvement
notes and details. With proper installation, maintenance and inspections of the proposed construction the
project should have minimal impact to the surrounding environment.
RAMEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
17500 72nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
Page G-2
G-3 Soils Map
F [gu re 13- 2
City of Edmonds
Soil Map Units (SCS 1983)
LEGEND
M= City of Ednwnds Bwndary
son wp Units
SOR.NAME
=AkkrA*W CvaveDy sandy barn. 2-8 % sbpes
I=Ak*rwood Gravelly sandy loam. S. 15 % slopes
Sa S"
F =IZVO,, 4Jand=2-58'?% stopes_
MAIderwood Urban land ciomple)C845 %slopes
'AkWr,p6d.a� Qwilly sandy loarm.-25-70
CUSWF Fne SW* 6M
"a 9—efly i&w 1O.W. owes
*A, Everett F-elly sandl 1— $71:5 %,a" -
ME, 1 .11 9.ely saAd Wn 1.5-25 lo�es
Fluviipa��s. Mat
lamv shl loarn, 0.8 % siope�
lftv sift loain, 8.25 % slol�as
MMeKenna wavelly sift barn. U% q*s
MWMw muck
Pft
t -Urban land
0 1.000 ZODO 4,000 6100D 8,000
Fog
I In= i,060 ft
No Warranty ct any $On. Inctuav amraky. w*54'Or "Wamu ami O"ampm M mduct
RAMEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
I
m2k
L�l
17500 72nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
Page G-3
SOIL SURVEY OF
SNOHOMISH COUNTY AREA., WASHINGTON
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE
Alderwood -Urban land complex, (2 to 8 percent slopes)
Alderwood Gravelly sandy loam, (15 to 25 percent slopes)
This moderately well drained soil is on till plains. It is moderately deep over a hardpan. The soil formed in glacial till. Areas are long and
narrow. They are about 125 acres in size. The native vegetation is mainly conifers and hardwoods. Elevation is 50 to 550 feet. The average
annual precipitation is about 40 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 50 degrees F, and the average frost -free season is 170
to 190 days.
Typically, the surface layer is very dark grayish brown gravelly sandy loam about 7 inches thick. The upper part of the subsoil is dark
yellowish brown and dark brown very gravelly sandy loam about 23 inches thick. The lower part is olive brown very gravelly sandy loam
about 5 inches thick. A weakly cemented hardpan is at a depth of about 35 inches. Depth to the hardpan ranges from 20 to 40 inches.
Included in this unit are small areas of soils that have a stony or bouldery surface layer and areas of McKenna soils, Norma soils, and Terric
Medisaprists in drainageways on plains. Also included are small areas of Everett, Indianola, and Ragnar soils on terraces and outwash plains.
Included areas make up about 15 percent of the total acreage.
Permeability of this Alderwood soil is moderately rapid above the hardpan and very slow through it. Available water capacity is low.
Effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. A seasonal perched water table is at a
depth of 18 to 36 inches from January to March.
This unit is used mainly for urban development and as woodland. It is also used for hay and pasture.
Douglas -fir is the main woodland species on this unit. On the basis of a 100-year site curve, the mean site index is 142. On the basis of a
50-year site curve, the mean site index is 108. The mean annual increment at culmination (CMAI) for Douglas -fir at age 65 is 148 cubic feet
per acre. Among the trees of limited extent are western red cedar, western hemlock, and red alder. Among the common forest under
story plants are salal, evergreen huckleberry, Oregon -grape, bracken fern, and western sword fern.
This unit is well suited to year-round logging. Logging roads require suitable surfacing for year-round use. Rock for road construction is not
readily available on this unit, but gravel is available in areas of adjacent Everett soils. Brush competition is the main limitation for the
production of timber.
Reforestation can be accomplished by planting Douglas -fir seedlings. If seed trees are present, natural reforestation of cut over areas by
red alder occurs periodically. When openings are made in the canopy, invading brushy plants, if not controlled, can prevent the
establishment of seedlings. Because tl�e rooting depth is restricted by a cemented pan, trees are subject to windthro*w.
This unit is suited to hay and pasture. The main limitations are the low available water capacity and the weakly cemented hardpan, which
limits the use of the soil in this unit for deep-rooted plants. Grazing when the soil is wet results in compaction of the surface layer, poor
tilth, and excessive runoff.
The main limitations for homesites and septic tank absorption fields are the depth to the weakly cemented hardpan and wetness because
of seasonal high water table. Effluent from absorption fields flows laterally above the hardpan and may seep at the bottom of slopes.
Drainage is needed if buildings with basements and crawl spaces are constructed. During construction, disturbed areas need to be seeded
and runoff controlled to protect the soil from erosion. Temporary sediment basins can be used in construction areas to reduce the amount
of sediment in runoff water.
This map unit is in capability subclass lVe
RAMEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
17500 72nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
Page G-4
H. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES:
These guidelines are intended to provide operation and maintenance instructions for the project's storm
drainage control facilities. The owner is responsible for maintenance of storm drainage facilities within
the property (private property owner system); the owner is not responsible for maintenance within the
public right-of-way (City system).
Private Property Owners: Private property owners are responsible for properly maintaining the stormwater
infrastructure on their property to ensure it operates as designed. The City has developed an inspection
program to ensure private property owners are properly maintaining their stormwater systems.
City System: City crews perform maintenance activities on the entire storm drainage system, including
inspection and cleaning of catch basins, street sweeping, emergency flooding response, creek
maintenance, inspection and monitoring of private siormwater detention systems.
Operation and Maintenance Requirements for private property owner system:
This manual is not comprehensive; although it explains the intended operation of the various
components of the drainage system, and suggests a routine of inspection and maintenance, it cannot
anticipate every problem. Once a historical record of maintenance is established, it may be prudent to
alter the routine. It is recommended that maintenance records be kept, and that the records be
reviewed periodically.
Concept of Operation: The drainage design is shown and described in the site development engineering
plans and report. The approved site development plans and report should be retained by the owner and
used as a reference to identify drainage facilities outlined in this manual.
Conveyance Systems. The design objective in pipe sizing was to convey the large storm events without
the water surface exceeding the ground elevation. Frequent overtopping of the pipe system in a particular
area might indicate a downstream blockage. Overtopping of the drain systems at the catch -basins is an
indication that maintenance is required.
Stormwater Storage Derention Tank System. The onsite detention system consists of an underground
detention tank along the north side of the proposed residence. Onsite storm water runoff is routed to
the detention tank and discharged (northwesterly) to the storm pipe system in 175th St SW. The detention
tank is a typical component of a storm water control system for new development. Standard maintenance
I procedures should be followed.
The following pages outline standard general maintenance criteria for the project's drainage facilities.
For additional and updated maintenance information visit the Washington State Department of
Ecology's web -site at: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/wqhome.htmI
R4MEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
1750072 nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
IPage H- I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
No. 3 — Closed Detention Systems (Tan ksNau Its)
Maintenance
Component
Defect
Conditions When Maintenance Is Needed
Results Expected
When Maintenance Is
Performed
Storage Area
Plugged Air Vents
One-half of the cross section of a vent is
blocked at any point or the vent is damaged.
Vents open and
functioning.
Debris and Sediment
Accumulated sediment depth exceeds 10%
All sediment and
of the diameter of the storage area for 1/2
debris removed from
length of storage vault or any point depth
storage area.
exceeds 15% of diameter.
(Example: 72-inch storage tank would
require cleaning when sediment reaches
depth of 7 inches for more than 1/2 length of
tank.)
Joints Between
Any openings or voids allowing material to
All joint between
Tank/Pipe Section
be transported into facility.
(Will require engineering analysis to
tank/pipe sections
are sealed.
determine structural stability).
Tank Pipe Bent Out
of Shape
Any part of tank/pipe is bent out of shape
more than 10% of its design shape. (Review
required by engineer to determine structural
Tank/pipe repaired or
replaced to design.
stability).
Vault Structure
Includes Cracks in
Cracks wider than 1/2-inch and any
evidence of soil particles entering the
Vault replaced or
repaired to design
Wall, Bottom,
structure through the cracks, or
specifications and is
Damage to Frame
maintenancelinspection personnel
structurally sound.
and/or Top Slab
determines that the vault is not structurally
sound.
Cracks wider than 1t2-inch at the joint of any
No cracks rnore than
inlet/outlet pipe or any evidence of soil
particles entering the vault through the walls.
1/4-inch wide at the
joint of the inlettoutlet
pipe.
Manhole
Cover Not in Place
Cover is missing or only partially in place.
Manhole is closed.
Any open manhole requires maintenance.
Locking Mechanism
Not Working
Mechanism cannot be opened by one
maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts
Mechanism opens
with proper tools.
into frame have less than 1/2 inch of thread
(may not apply to self- locking lids).
Cover Diff icuft to
One maintenance person cannot remove lid
Cover can be
Remove
after applying normal lifting pressure. Intent
is to keep cover from sealing off access to
removed and
reinstalled by one
maintenance.
maintenance person.
Ladder Rungs Unsafe
Ladder is unsafe due to missing lungs,
Ladder meets design
misalignment, not securely attached to
standards. Allows
structure wall, rust or cracks.
maintenance person
safe access.
�chsins
See"Catch Basins"
See "Catch Basins" (No. 5).
See "Catch Basins"
1
(No. 5)
(No. 5).
Volume V— Runoff Treatment BMPs — December 2014
4-36
RAN Engineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
17500 72n1f Ave W
August 14, 2015
Page H-2
I
I
l�
I
I
I
I
I
I
No. 4 — Control Structure/Flow Restrictor
Maintenance
Defect
Condition When Maintenance Is Needed
Results Expected
Component
When Maintenance
is Performed
General
Trash and Debris
Material exceeds 25% of sump depth or I
Control structure
(includes Sediment)
foot below orif ice plate.
orifice is not blocked.
All trash and debris
removed.
Structural Damage
Structure is not securely attached to
Structure securely
manhole vall.
attached to wall and
outlet pipe.
Structure is not in upright position (allow up
Structure in correct
to 10% from plumb).
position.
Connections to outlet pipe are not watertight
Connections to outlet
and show signs of rust.
pipe are water tight;
structure repaired or
replaced and works
as designed.
Any h I oles--other than designed holes --in the
Structure has no
structure.
holes other than
designed holes.
Cleanout Gate
Damaged or Missing
Cleanout gate is not watertight or is missing.
Gate is vatertight
and works as
designed.
Gate cannot be moved up and down by one
Gate moves up and
maintenance person.
down easily and is
watertight.
Chain/rod leading to gate is missing or
damaged.
Chain is in place and
works as designed.
Gate is rusted over 50% of its surface area.
Gate is repaired or
replaced to meet
design standards.
Orifice Plate
Damaged or Missing
Control device is not working properly due to
Plate is in place and
missing, out of place, or bent orifice plate.
works as designed.
Obstructions
Any trash, debris, sediment, or vegetation
Plate is free of all
blocking the plate.
obstructions and
works as designed.
Overflow Pipe
Obstructions
Any trash or debris blocking (or having the
Pipe is free of all
potential of blocking) the overflow pipe.
obstructions and
works as designed.
Manhole
See "Closed
See "Closel Detention Systems" (No. 3).
See "Closed
Detention Systems"
Detention Systems"
(No. 3).
(No. 3).
Catch Basin
I
See "Catch Basins"
See "Catch Basins" (No. 5).
See "Catch Basins"
1
(No. 5).
1
(No. 5).
Volume V— Runoff Treatment BMPs — December 2014
4-37
RAMEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
17500 72nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
Page H-3
No. 5 — Catch Basins
Maintenance
Defect
Conditions When Maintenance is Needed
Results Expected When
Component
Maintenance is
performed
General
Trash &
Debris
Trash or debris which is located immediately
in front of the catch basin opening or is
No Trash or debris located
immediately in front of
blocking inletting capacity of the basin by
catch basin or on grate
morethanlO
opening.
Trash or debris (in the basin) that exceeds 60
No trash or debris in the
percent of the sump depth as measured from
catch basin.
the bottom of basin to invert of the lowest
pipe into or out of the basin, but in no case
less than a minimum of six inches clearance
from the debris surface to the invert of the
lov%est pipe.
Trash or debris in any inlet or outlet pipe
Inlet and outlet pipes free
blocking more than 1/3 of its height.
of trash or debris.
Dead animals or vegetation that could
generate odors that could cause complaints
or dangerous gases (e.g., methane).
No dead animals or
vegetation present within
the catch basin.
Sediment
Sediment (in the basin) that exceeds 60
No sediment in the catch
percent of the sump depth as measured from
basin
the bottom of basin to invert of the lovoest
pipe into or out of the basin, but in no case
less than a minimum of 6 inches clearance
from the sediment surface to the invert of the
lov,est pipe.
Structu re
Top slab has holes larger than 2 square
Top slab is free of holes
Damage to
inches or cracks wider than 1/4 inch
and cracks.
Frame and/or
Top Slab
(Intent is to make sure no material is running
into basin).
Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e.,
Frame is sitting flush on
separation of more than 3/4 inch of the frame
the riser rings or top slab
from the top slab. Frame not securely
and firmly attached.
attached
Fractures or
Cracksin
Maintenance person judges that structure is
unsound.
Basin replaced or repaired
to design standards.
Basin Wallst
Bottom
Grout fillet has separated or cracked wider
Pipe is regrouted and
than 1/2 inch and longer than 1 foot at the
secure at basin wall.
joint of any inlettoutlet pipe or any evidence of
soil particles entering catch basin through
cracks.
Settlementl
Misalignment
If failure of basin has created a safety,
function, or design problem.
Basin replaced or repaired
to design standards.
Vegetation
Vegetation growing across and blocking more
than 10% of the basin opening.
No vegetation blocking
opening to basin.
Vegetation growing in inlettoutlet pipe joints
No vegetation or root
that is more than six inches tall and less than
growth present.
six inches apart.
Contamination
See "Detention Ponds�' (No. 1).
No pollution present.
and Pollution
Volume V— Runoff Treatment BMPs —December 2014
4-38
RAMEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
17500 72nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
Page H-4
No. 5 —Catch Basins
Maintenance
Defect
Conditions When Maintenance is Needed
Results Expected When
Component
Maintenance is
performed
Catch Basin
Cover Not in
Cover is missing or only partially in place.
Catch basin cover is
Cover
Place
Any open catch basin requires maintenance.
closed
Locking
Mechanism cannot be opened by one
Mechanism opens with
Mechanism
maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts
proper tools.
Not Working
into frame have less than 1/2 inch of thread.
Cover Difficult
One maintenance person cannot remove lid
Cover can be removed by
to Remove
after applying normal lifting pressure.
one maintenance person.
(Intent is keep cover from sealing off access
to maintenance.)
Ladder
Ladder Rungs
Unsafe
Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs, not
securely attached to basin wall,
Ladder meets design
standards and allows
misalignment, rust, cracks, or sharp edges.
maintenance person safe
access.
Metal Grates
Grate opening
Grate with opening wider than 7/8 inch.
Grate opening meets
(if Applicable)
Unsafe
design standards.
Trash and
Trash and debris that is blocking more than
Grate free of trash and
Debris
20% of grate surface inletting capacity.
debris.
Damaged or
Grate missing or broken member(s) of the
Grate is in place and
Missing.
grate.
meets design standards.
No. 6 — Debris Barriers (e.g., Trash Racks)
Maintenance
Defect
Condition When Maintenance is
Results Expected When
Components
Needed
Maintenance is Performed
General
Trash and
Trash or debris that is plugging more
Barrier cleared to design flow
Debris
than 20% of the openings in the barrier.
capacity.
Metal
Damaged/
Bars are bent out of shape more than 3
Bars in place with no bends more
Missing
inches.
than 3/4 inch.
Bars.
Bars are missing or entire barrier
Bars in place according to design.
missing.
Bars are loose and rust is causing 50%
Barrier replaced or repaired to
deterioration to any part of barrier.
design standards.
InlettOutlet
Debris barrier missing or not attached to
Barrier firmly attached to pipe
I
Pipe
pipe
Volume V— Runoff Trealment BMPs — December 2014
4-39
RAMEngineering, Inc.
Final Engineering and Drainage Report
RAM No. 15-026
1750072 nd Ave W
August 14, 2015
Page H-5
-;'it �P6
17
Earth -.4
Solutions
NW LLC
11 L
YEARS
EV url-
If
3�-
Lz
j7 '-:5—
J— '4-- -
-p -
2
Id
72nd AVENUE WEST
17 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
M
17500 - 72nd AVENUE WEST
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
1, --�
ES-4150
0�7—
,71
-:1 t I
jL
PREPARED FOR
SELECT HOMES
October 23, 2015
Trevor J. McDonald
Staff Engineer
-A
0
AV.
t
Kyle R. Campbell, P.E.
Principal
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
72nd AVENUE WEST
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
17500 — 72nd AVENUE WEST
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
ES-41 60
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
1805-136 th Place Northeast, Suite 201
Bellevue, Washington 98005
Phone: 426-449-4704 Fax: 425-449-4711
Toll Free: 866-336-8710
G , lechnocel En - n
eo, i ulnee.pin.g Repopt
Geotechnical Services Ape Pepfopmed fop
Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects
Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of
their clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engi-
neer may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another
civil engineer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each
geotechnical engineering report is unique, prepared solelyfor the client. No
one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineering report without
first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one
— not evenyou —should apply the report for any purpose or project
except the one originally contemplated.
Reatthe Full Repopt
Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical
engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary.
Do not read selected elements only,
A Geotechnical Engineeping Report Is Based an
A Unique Set of PpoJect-SpOcificFactops
Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project -specific fac-
tors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the
client's goals, objectives, and risk management preferences; the general
nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of
the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements,
such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the
geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates oth-
erwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was:
not prepared for you,
not prepared for your project,
not prepared for the specific site explored, or
completed before important project changes were made.
Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical
engineering report include those that affect:
the function of the proposed structure, as when it's changed from a
parking garage to an office building, or from a light industrial plant
to a refrigerated warehouse,
o elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the
proposed structure,
• composition of the design team, or
• project ownership.
As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project
changes --even minor ones --and request an assessment of their impact.
Geolechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems
that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which
they were not informed.
Subsurface Conditions Can Change
A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at
the time the study was performed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineer-
ing reportwhose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of
time; by man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site;
or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctua-
tions. Always contact the geotechnical engineer before applying the report
to determine if it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or
analysis could prevent major problems.
Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional
.Opinions
Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where
subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engi-
neers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional
judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the
site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ —sometimes significantly —
from those indicated in your report. Retaining the geotechnical engineer
who developed your report to provide construction observation is the
most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated
conditions,
A Report's Recommendations Ape Not Final
Do not overrely on the construction recommendations included in your
report. Those recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engi-
neers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical
engineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual
subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geolechnical
engineer who developedyour report cannot assume responsibility or
liability for the report's recommendations if that engineer does not perform
construction observation.
A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Subject to
Misinterpretation
Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotechnical engineering
reports has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by having your geo-
technical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team after
submitting the report. Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review perti-
nent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. Contractors can
also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by
having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction
conferences, and by providing construction observation.
Do Not Redraw the FbgIneep's Logs
Geotechnical engineers prepare f inal boring and testing logs based upon
their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or
omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering report should
never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings.
Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize
that separating logs from the report can elevate risk
Give Contractors a Complete Report and
Guidance
Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make
contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what
they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give con-
tractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, but preface it with a
clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letter, advise contractors that the
report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the
report's accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with the geotechnical
engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to
conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they
need or prefer. A prebid conference can also be valuable. Be sure contrac-
tors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only then might you
be in a position to give contractors the best information available to you,
while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities
stemming from unanticipated conditions.
Read Responsibility Provisions Closely
Some clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that
geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disci-
plines. This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that
have led to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk
of such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of
explanatory provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled "limitations"
many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers' responsi-
bilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities
and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical
engineer should respond fully and frankly.
Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered
The equipment, techni ques, and personnel used to perform a g6oenviron-
mental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geolechnical
study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering report does not usually
relate any geoenvironmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations;
e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or
regulated contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led
to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own geoen-
vironmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk man-
agement guidance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for
someone else.
Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with Mold
Diverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction,
operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from
growing on indoor surfaces, To be effective, all such strategies should be
devised for the express purpose of mold prevention, integrated into a com-
prehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a professional
mold prevention consultant. Because just a small amount of water or
moisture can lead to the development of severe mold infestations, a num-
ber of mold prevention strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry.
While groundwater, water infiltration, and similar issues may have been
addressed as part of the geotechnical engineering study whose findings
are conveyed in -this report, the geotechnical engineer in charge of this
project is not a mold prevention consultant; none of the services per-
formed in connection with the geotechnical engineer's study
were designed or conducted for the purpose of mold preven-
tion. Proper implementation of the recommendations conveyed
in this report will not of itself he sufficient to prevent mold from
growing in or on the structure involved.
Rely, on Your ASFE-Membep Geotechnclal
Engineer fop Additional Assistance
Membership in ASFE/The Best People on Earth exposes geotechnical
engineers to a wide array of risk management techniques that can be of
genuine benefit for everyone involved with a construction project. Confer
with you ASFE-member geotechnical engineer for more information.
ASFE
Me sell People 9.0 forlb
8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106, Silver Spring, MID 20910
Telephone: 301/565-2733 Facsimile: 301/589-2017
e-mail: info@aste,org www.asfe.org
Copyright 2004 by ASFE, Inc. Duplication, reproduction, or copying of this document, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever is strictly prohibited, except with ASFE's
specific written permission. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission ofASFE, and only for
purposes of scholarly research or book review Only members of ASFE may use this document as a complement to or as an element of a geotechnical engineering report. Any other
firm, individual, or other entity that so uses this document without being an ASFE member could be committing negligent or intentional (fraudulent) misrepresentation.
11GER06045.0M
October 23, 2015
ES-4150
Select Homes
1653113 th Avenue West, Suite Al 08
Lynnwood, Washington 98037
Attention: Mr. Gary Klick
Dear Mr. Klick
Earth
L'. ��,a.. rf!
Solutions
NWLIC
Earth Solutions NW LLC
• Geotechnical Engineering
• Construction Monitoring
• Environmental Sciences
Earth Solutions NW, LLC (ESNW) is pleased to present this report titled "Geotechnical
Engineering Study, 72nd Avenue West SFR, 17500 — 72nd Avenue West, Edmonds,
Washington". This study reflects current development plans proposed on the southwest corner
of the intersection between 175 th Street Southwest and 72nd Avenue West. Based on the
results of our investigation, construction of the proposed single-family residence is feasible from
a geotechnical standpoint. The soil underlying the site consists predominantly of Vashon
Advance Outwash deposits (Qva), and Vashon Glacial Till (Qvt). The proposed residential
structure can be supported on conventional foundations bearing on competent native soils or
on structural fill placed as part of site grading activities. Recommendations for foundation
design, earthwork, and other pertinent geotechnical recommendations are provided in this
report.
If you have any questions regarding the content of this geotechnical engineering study, please
contact us.
Sincerely,
EARTH SOLUTIONS NW, LLC
Trevor J. McDonald
Staff Engineer
1805 - 136th Place N.E., Suite 201 0 Bellevue, WA 98005 * (425) 449-4704 9 FAX (425) 449-4711
Table of Contents
ES-4150
PAGE
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... 1
General.................... ........... ........
Promect 2
SITE CONDITIONS ................. ; ............. ;..' - -
.................... 2
Surface......................... ....... ............................. 2
Subsurface........................................................ s ............ 2
Geologic Setting .............................. � �; .................. 3
Groundwater...................................................................... 3
CRITICAL AREAS ASSESSMENT .................... .................................. 4
Erosion Hazard ................................... ...... 4
Landslide ....... 4
Seismic Hazard ........ !,. ....... 5
Analysis of Proposal..;..., ............. 5
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................
6
General........................................................................
6
Site Preparation and Earthwork .......................................
6
Temporary Erosion Control ..........................................
7
Stripping.........................................................................
7
In -situ Solis ....................................................................
7
ImportedSoils ................................................................
7
Subgrade Preparation ..........................................
8
Structural Fill .................................................................
8
Foundations................................................................
8
Seismic Considerations ................................................
9
Slab -on -Grade Floors ....................................................
9
Retaining -Walls ..............................................................
10
Drainage...............................................................................
10
Infiltration Feasibility ..............................................
11
ivati6fis and Slo0es ......................................................
Eiccc�
11
'Utility Support and Trench Backfill .................................
11
LIMITATIONS.;.. ......... ....... ................ 12
Additional Services .......... ............. 12
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Table of Contents
Cont'd
ES-4150
GRAPHICS
Plate I Vicinity Map
Plate 2 Test Pit Location Plan
Plate 3 Retaining Wall Drainage Detail
Plate 4 Footing Drain Detail
APPENDICES
Appendix A Subsurface Exploration
Test Pit Logs
Appendix B Laboratory Test Results
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
72nd AVENUE WEST
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
17500 — 72nd AVENUE WEST
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
ES-4150
INTRODUCTION
General
This eotechnical 'engineering stUoy, was prepared for the proposed singlerfamily residential
.9
struct . ure to be compl . e I ted at 17500 — 72nd Avenue West in Edmonds' Washington. The
purpose of this study was to provide geotechnical recommendations for currently proposed
development plans. Our scope of services for completing this geotechnical engineering study
included the following:
Completing subsurface explorations for purposes of characterizing site soils and
groundwater conditions;
9 Completing laboratory testing of soil samples collected at test pit locations;
Assessing critical areas on the subject site in accordance with the Edmonds Community
Development Code Chapters 23.40 and 23.80;
9 Conducting engineering analyses, and;
* Preparation of this report.
The following documents and maps were reviewed as part of our report preparation:
* Conceptual Site Plan, provided by RAM Engineering;
Web Soil Survey (WSS) online resource maintained by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service under the United States Department of Agriculture;
Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Part of the Edmonds West Quadrangles, by
James P. Minard, 1983;
'o Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapters 23.40 and 23.80.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Select Homes
October 23, 2015
Proliect Descriptio'n
ES-4150
Page 2
We understand proposed development plans include construction of a single-family residence
and associated improvements. The sites relatively flat within the footprint of the proposed
building. Grading activities will likely involve cuts of about eight feet or less to establish final
design grades -for the daylight basement. The proposed footprint of the structure will be moved
closer to 72nd Avenue West, with respect to the existing foundation.
Based on the provided preliminary plans and our experience with similar projects, the proposed
residential structure will likely be on the order of two to three stories in height and constructed
utilizing relatively lightly -loaded wood framing supported on conventional foundations. We
anticipate that the residential structure will incorporate slab -on -grade floors at the garage area.
Perimeter foundation loads will likely be on the order of 1 to 2 kips per lineal foot (k1f). Slab -on -
grade loading is anticipated to be on the order of 150 pounds per square foot (psf).
Site development plans show a detention pipe located on the northwest corner of the site,
which will treat stormwater before discharging to the existing city storm system. The plans also
show a drywell trench located on the west side of the site, which will infiltrate stormwater from
the footing drains.
If the above design assumptions are incorrect or change, ESNW should be contacted to review
the recommendations in this report. ESNW should review final designs to confirm that our
geotechnical recommendations have been incorporated into the plans.
SITE CONDITIONS
Surface
The site is comprised of one tax parcel ( I—
00456000000900) located southwest of the intersection
between 175th Stte'et Southwest and 7.2nd Avenue West in Edmonds, Washington. The
approximate location of the property is illustrated on Plate 1 (Vicinity Map). The site is
approximately 0.52 acres in size, and is currently developed with a single-family residence
foundation following demolition activities and general landscaping. In general, the site is
relatively level with slopes descending off the building pad and yard areas to the north and
west. The lot borders single-family residences to the south and west, while city roadways
border the north and east.
Subsurface
An ESNW representative observed, logged, and sampled three test pits excavated on the site
using an excavator, on September 30, 2015 for the purpose of assessing soil and groundwater
conditions at the site. The approximate locations of the test pits are depicted on Plate 2 (Test
Pit Location Plan). Please refer to the test pit logs provided in Appendix A for a more detailed
description of subsurface conditions.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Select Homes ES-4150
October 23, 2015 Page 3
Topsoil was encountered generally within the upper four inches of existing grades at the test pit
locations and was characterized by dark brown color, the presence of fine organic material, and
small root intrusions.
Fill was encountered along the west side of the site at test pit location TP-1. The fill consisted
of medium dense poorly -graded sand with silt (Unified Soil Classification System: SP-SM), and
continued until a relic topsoil layer was uncovered at approximately four feet below the ground
surface.
Underlying topsoil and fill, native soils were encountered consisting primarily of medium dense
to very dense silty sand with gravel (Unified Soil Classification System: SM), and medium
dense to dense poorly graded sand with silt and gravel (USCS: SP-SM). Clean, poorly -graded
sand with gravel (USCS: SP) was encountered at approximately two and one half feet below
the ground surface at test pit location TP-3. Based on our observations of iron oxide staining
within native soils, we characterized the soil primarily as "weathered". Soil density generally
increased with depth. The native soils were observed primarily in a damp to moist condition
and extended to the maximum exploration depth of nine feet below existing grades.
Geologic Sefting
The referenced geologic map resource identifies Vashon Advance Outwash deposits (Qva),
with glacial till (Qvt) across the site and surrounding areas. As described on the geologic map,
glacial till deposits consist of a nonsorted mixture of clay, silt, sand, pebbles, cobbles, and
boulders. Advance outwash underlies the till, and is typically comprised of mostly clean pebbly
sand and gravel. Based on the results of the subsurface investigation, the soils observed at the
test sites are generally consistent with glacial till and advance outwash. Additionally, the
referenced WSS resource identifies Alderwood series soil (Map unit 3) as being present across
much of the southwest portion of the site, which formed in glacial till. Alderwood-Urban land
complex (Map unit 5) is mapped to occupy much of the northeast portion of the site, which is
comprised of a combination of Alderwood series soil and urban land. In our opinion, the soils
encountered during the subsurface explorations are consistent with the referenced geologic
resources.
Groundwater
We did not observe groundwater seepage during our fieldwork completed on September 30,
2015. In our opinion, perched groundwater could be encountered within site excavations.
Seepage rates and elevations fluctuate depending on many factors, including precipitation
duration and intensity, the time of year, and soil conditions. In general, groundwater flow rates
are higher during the wetter, winter months.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Select Homes
October 23, 2015
CRITICAL Akt-AS ASSESSMENT
ES-4150
Page 4
As part of our report preparation, we evaluated the presence of geologic hazards, as defined by
the City of Edmonds, on the subject property and immediately surrounding parcels, as well as
methods of mitigating geologic hazards where applicable.
Erosion Hazard
Erosion hazard areas are defined by ECDC 23.80.020 (A) as areas with the following
characteristics:
�p Soils that may experience severe to very severe erosion hazard, including the following
when they occur on slopes of 15 percent or greater:
• Alderwood soils (15 to 25 percent slopes);
• Alderwood/Evereft series (25 to 70 percent slopes);
• Everett series (15to 25 percent slopes);
Slopes of 15 percent or greater and impermeable soils 'interbedded with granular soils
and springs or ground water seepage, and;
Significant visible evidence of ground water seepage, and which also include existing
landslide deposits regardless of slope.
As previously discussed in the Geologic Setting section of this report, Alderwood gravelly sandy
loam and urban land complex are mapped across the subject site. However, based on the
results of the subsurface exploration, the site is predominately comprised of Alderwood gravelly
sandy loam. These soils that are located within the development envelope present a moderate
erosion hazard potential, especially during wetter, winter months. It is our opinion that provided
appropriate measures for controlling erosion are incorporated into final designs and maintained
during construction, the site will not present an erosion hazard. Based on our experience with
similar projects in similar settings, permanent landscaping and drainage control measures will
successfully mitigate effects related to long-term erosion potential.
Landslide Hazard
ECDC 23.80.020 (B) defines landslide hazard areas as "areas potentially subject to landslides
based on a combination of geologic, topographic, and hydrologic factors", which includes:
* Areas of historic failures;
Areas with both of the following characteristics:
• Slopes steeper than 40 percent;
• Vertical relief of 10 feet or more except areas composed of consolidated rock;
Areas potentially unstable because of rapid stream incision and stream bank erosion,
and;
Any area located on an alluvial fan, presently subject to, or potentially subject to,
inundation by debris flow or deposition of stream -transported sediments.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Select Homes
October 23, 2015
ES-4150
Page 5
Our analysis of the potential for landslide hazard included review of site conditions, City
geologic hazard maps, and topography from the provided site plan. With respect to each
defining criterion for landslide hazard areas, we respond as follows:
• The subject property is not in an area of historic failures, according to the referenced
map of Snohomish County Landslide, Erosion, and Volcanic Hazards.
• The subject property contains slope gradients ranging from approximately 50 to 80
percent, and are between 8 and 20 feet in height. These slopes are located
predominately on the north and west sides of the property, outside of the main
development area.
The subject property is not located in an area where rapid stream incision or stream
bank erosion will occur.
The subject property is not located on an alluvial fan, and is not subject to inundation by
debris flow or deposition of stream -transported sediments.
Because the property contains a landslide hazard based on ECDC 23.80.020 (B) 2, the
applicable mitigation is a minimum buffer equal to the height of the slope existing within the
project area or 50 feet, whichever is greater. A buffer reduction to 10 feet can be applied. In
our opinion, this buffer can be reduced to 10 feet based on the favorable and stable soil
conditions found during our subsurface exploration.
Seismic Hazard
Seismic hazard areas are defined by ECDC 23.80.020 (C) as "those areas subject to severe
risk of damage as a result of earthquake -induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement, soil
liquefaction, lateral spreading, or surface faulting". According to the referenced City map, the
site is located in an area with low potential for seismically induced ground failures.
Liquefaction is a phenomenon where saturated or loose soils suddenly lose internal strength
and behave as a fluid. This behavior is in response to increased pore water pressures resulting
from an earthquake or other intense ground shaking. In our opinion, site susceptibility to
liquefaction should be considered negligible. The high relative density and the absence of a
uniformly established shallow groundwater table are the primary bases for this characterization.
Analysis of Proposal
The provided plans show a proposed 28 foot long detention pipe that is 72 inches in diameter
located at the northwest corner of the site. The detention pipe connects to a 48-inch Type 11
catch basin, before discharging to the existing city storm system. This stormwater facility is
proposed to exist within the landslide hazard area and buffer, which will require temporary
alterations of the geologically hazardous area. The provided plans also show a proposed
drywell located above the west slope that will provide infiltration for footing drains. This drywell
also lies within the landslide hazard buffer. Section 23.80.060 of the ECDC allows alterations of
geologically hazardous areas or associated buffers, provided that the alterations:
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Select Homes
October 23, 2015
ES-4150
Page 6
• Will not increase the threat of -the geological hazard to adjacent properties beyond
predevelopment conditions;
• Will not adversely impact other critical areas;
• Are designed so that the hazard to the project is eliminated or mitigated to a level equal
to or less than predevelopment conditions, and;
• Are certified as safe as designed and under anticipated conditions by a qualified
engineer or geologist, licensed in the state of Washington.
Based on the favorable soil conditions encountered during our subsurface exploration, it is our
opinion that, provided the recommendations in this report are followed, the altered critical area
can be mitigated to a level equal to or less than predevelopment conditions. Excavations
should be performed in a manner that minimizes disturbance along the slope. Backfill should
consist of structural fill (see Structural Fill section for recommendations) that is compacted and
graded so that the slope is restored to predevelopment grades. Temporary construction and
permanent erosion control measures should be applied to the area of disturbance.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
Based on the results of our investigation, construction of the proposed residential structure is
feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. The residential structure constructed on this site can
be supported on competent native soil or structural fill placed as part of site grading activities.
In general, cuts of less than two feet should be anticipated in order to reach competent native
soils suitable for support of foundation elements. The primary geotechnical considerations
associated with the proposed development include providing uniform foundation support, slab -
on -grade subgrade support, and preliminary infiltration feasibility.
This study has been prepared for the exclusive use of Select Homes and their representatives.
No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This study has been prepared in a manner
consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the
profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area.
Site Preparati6n-and Earthwork
Site preparation activities will include installing temporary erosion control measures, removing
the remaining structural improvements, establishing grading limits, and performing clearing and
site stripping, as necessary.
Earth Solutions NW. LLC
Select Homes
October 23, 2015
Temporary Erosion Control
ES-4150
Page 7
Temporary erosion control measures should include, at a minimum, silt fencing placed along
the downslope perimeter of the construction envelope, and a construction entrance consisting
of quarry spalls to minimize off -site soil tracking and to provide a firm surface for vehicles.
Surface water must not be allowed to flow over or collect above temporary or permanent
slopes. Interceptor drains or swalles should be considered for controlling surface water flow
patterns and shallow interflow. Temporary approaches for controlling surface water runoff
should be established prior to beginning earthwork activities.
Stripping
Topsoil was primarily encountered in'the upper approximately four inches of existing grades.
ESNW should be retained to observe site stripping activities at the time of construction to better
assess the degree of required stripping. Topsoil and organic -rich soil is neither suitable for
foundation support nor is it suitable for use as structural fill. Topsoil and organic -rich soil may
be used in non-structural areas if desired.
In -situ Solis
From a geotechnical standpoint, native soils encountered at the test pit locations are generally
suitable for use as structural fill, provided the moisture content of the soil at the time of
placement and compaction is slightly above the optimum level. The native soils have a
moisture sensitivity that can be characterized as moderate. Successful use of native soils as
structural fill will largely be dictated by the moisture content at the time of placement and
compaction. If the on -site soils cannot be successfully compacted, the use of an imported soil
may be necessary.
In our opinion, if grading activities take place during periods of extended rainfall activity, a
contingency should be provided in the project budget for export of soil that cannot be
successfully compacted as structural fill. Silty sand and soils with fines contents greater than 5
percent typically degrade rapidly when exposed to periods of extended rainfall.
Imported Soils
Imported soil intended for use as structural fill should consist of a well -graded granular soil with
a moisture content that is at or slightly above the optimum level. During wet weather
conditions, imported soil intended for use as structural fill should consist of a well -graded
granular soil with a fines content of 5 percent or less defined as the percent passing the
Number 200 sieve, based on the minus three-quarter inch fraction.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Select Homes
October 23, 2015
Subgrade Preparation
ES-4150
Page 8
Following site stripping and removal of existing structures, cuts and fills will likely be completed
to establish proposed subgrade elevations throughout the site. ESNW should observe the
subgrade during initial site preparation activities to confirm soil conditions as anticipated and to
provide supplementary recommendations for subgrade preparation. The process of removing
existing structures may produce voids where old foundations are removed and where crawl
space areas may have been present. Complete restoration of voids from old foundation areas
must be executed as part of overall subgrade and building pad preparation activities. The
following guidelines for preparing building subgrade areas should be incorporated into the final
design:
Where voids and related demolition disturbances extend below planned subgrade
elevations, restoration of these areas should be completed. Structural fill should be used
to restore voids or unstable areas resulting from the removal of existing structural
elements.
Recompact, or overexcavate and replace, areas of existing fill, if present, exposed at
building subgrade elevations. Overexcavations should extend into competent native
soils and structural fill should be utilized to restore subgrade elevations as necessary.
ESNW should confirm subgrade conditions, as well as the required level of recompaction
and/or overexcavation and replacement, during site preparation activities. ESNW should
also evaluate the overall suitability of prepared subgrade areas following site preparation
activates.
Structural Fill
Structural fill is defined as compacted soil placed in foundation, slab -on -grade, and roadway
areas. Fill placed to construct permanent slopes and throughout retaining wall and utility trench
backfill areas is also considered structural fill. Soils placed in structural areas should be placed
in loose lifts of 12 inches or less and compacted to a relative compaction of 90 percent, based
on the laboratory maximum dry density as determined by the Modified Proctor Method (ASTM
D1 557). Soil placed in the upper 12 inches of slab -on -grade, utility trench, and pavement areas
should be compacted to a relative compaction of at least 95 percent. Additionally, more
stringent compaction specifications may be required for utility trench backfill zones depending
on the responsible utility district or jurisdiction.
Foundations
In our opinion, the proposed residential structure may be supported on conventional continuous
and spread footing foundations bearing upon competent native soil, recompacted native soil, or
new structural fill. In general, native soil deposits suitable for support of foundations will be
encountered approximately two to three feet below existing grades. Where loose or unsuitable
soil conditions are exposed at foundation subgrade elevations, compaction of soils to the
specifications of structural fill, or overexcavation and replacement with a suitable structural fill
material, will be necessary.
Earth Solutions INK LLC
Select Homes ES-4150
October 23, 2015 Page 9
Provided foundations will be supported as described above, the following parameters may be
used for design:
* Allowable soil bearing capacity 2,500 psf
o Passive earth pressure
a Coefficient of friction
300 pcf
0.40
A one-third increase in the allowable soil bearing capacity may be assumed for short-term wind
and seismic loading conditions. The above passive pressure and friction values include a
factor -of -safety of at least 1.5. With structural loading as expected, total settlement in the range
of one inch and differential settlement of about one-half inch is anticipated. The majority of the
settlements should occur during construction, as dead loads are applied.
Seismic Considerations
The 2012 IBC recognizes the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) for seismic site class
definitions. In accordance with Table 20.3-1 of the ASCE Minimum Design Loads for Buildings
and Other Structures manual, Site Class D should be used for design.
The referenced liquefaction susceptibility map indicates the site and surrounding areas maintain
low liquefaction susceptibility. Liquefaction is a phenomenon where saturated or loose soils
suddenly lose internal strength and behave as a fluid. This behavior is in response to
increased pore water pressures resulting from contraction of soil particles during an earthquake
or other intense ground shaking. In our opinion, site susceptibility to liquefaction can be
negligible. The high relative density of the native soils and the absence of a uniformly
established groundwater table are the primary bases for this characterization.
Slab -on -Grade Floors
Slab -on -grade floors for residential structures should be provided a uniform subgrade consisting
of competent native soil or structural fill. Unstable or yielding areas of the subgrade should be
recompacted or overexcavated and replaced with suitable structural fill prior to construction of
the slab. A capillary break consisting of a minimum of four inches of free draining crushed rock
or gravel should be placed below the slab. The free draining material should have a fines
content of 5 percent or less (percent passing the #200 sieve, based on the minus three-quarter
inch fraction). In areas where slab moisture is undesirable, installation of a vapor barrier below
the slab should be considered. If a vapor barrier is used it should consist of a material
specifically designed for that use and be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's
specifications.
Earth Solutions INK LLC
Select Homes
October 23, 2015
Retainina Walls,
ES-4150
Page 10
Retaining walls must be designed to resist earth pressures and applicable surcharge loads.
The following parameters may be used for design:
Active earth pressure (yielding condition)
* At -rest earth pressure (restrained condition)
e Traffic surcharge* (passenger vehicles)
9 Passive earth pressure
* Coefficient of friction
-m Seismic surcharge
Where applicable
Where H equals the retained height of at least six feet
35 pcf
50 pcf
70 psf (rectangular distribution)
300 pcf
0.40
6H**
The above design parameters are based on a level backfill condition and level grade at the wall
toe. Revised design values will be necessary if sloping grades are to be used above or below
retaining walls. Additional surcharge loading from adjacent foundations, sloped backfill, or
other loads should be included in the retaining wall design.
Retaining walls should be backfilled with free -draining material that extends along the height of
the wall and a distance of at least 18 inches behind the wall. The upper 12 inches of the wall
backfill may consist of a less permeable soil, if desired. A perforated drain pipe should be
placed along the base of the wall and connected to an approved discharge location. A typical
retaining wall drainage detail is provided on Plate 3. If drainage is not provided, hydrostatic
pressures should be included in the wall design.
Mailha-46
Perched groundwater should be anticipated in site excavations depending on the time of year
grading operations take place, particularly in utility excavations at depth; however, we expect
flow volumes to be very low. Temporary measures to control surface water runoff and
groundwater during construction would likely involve interceptor trenches and sumps. ESNW
should be consulted during preliminary grading to identify areas of seepage and to provide
recommendations to reduce the potential for instability related to seepage effects.
Finish grades must be designed to direct surface drain water away from structures and slopes.
Water must not be allowed to pond adjacent to structures, walls, or slopes. In our opinion,
foundation drains can be omitted if clean sand is exposed at the subgrade. ESNW should
observe subgrade conditions to evaluate the need for footing drains. A typical foundation drain
detail is provided on Plate 4.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Select Homes
October 23, 2015
Infiltration Feasibility
ES-4150
Page 11
In general, native soils primarily consist of dense to very dense glacial till and advance
outwash. Infiltration characteristics typically exhibited by glacial till can be characterized as low,
especially when encountered in a dense to very dense condition. Infiltration characteristics
typically exhibited by advance outwash can be characterized as moderate to high. Based on
this, infiltration is feasible as a stormwater management system provided the soils encountered
at depth consist of clean sandy soils.
Exca'vatiofis and Slopes
The Federal Occupation Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the Washington
Industrial Safety and Health Act (WISHA) provide soil classification in terms of temporary slope
inclinations. Soils that exhibit a high compressive strength are allowed steeper temporary slope
inclinations than are soils that exhibit a lower compressive strength.
The Federal and state Occupation Safety and Health Administration (OSHANVISHA) classifies
soils in terms of minimum safe slope inclinations. Based on the soil conditions encountered
during our fieldwork, the native soils would generally be classified by OSHAANISHA as Type C.
Temporary slopes over four feet in height in Type C soils should be sloped no steeper than
1.5H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical). Dense native soils and where groundwater is not exposed would
generally be classified by OSHANVISHA as Type A. Temporary slopes over four feet in height
in Type A soils should be sloped no steeper than 0.75H:1V. The geotechnical engineer should
observe temporary and permanent slopes to verify that the inclination is appropriate, and to
provide additional grading recommendations, as necessary. If temporary slopes cannot be
constructed in accordance with OSHANVISHA guidelines, temporary shoring may be
necessary.
Permanent slopes should maintain a gradient of 2H:1V, or flatter, and should be planted with
vegetation to enhance stability and to minimize erosion.
Utillity Support and Trench Backfill
In our opinion, the native outwash and till deposits will be suitable for support of utilities.
Organic -rich soil is not considered suitable for direct support of utilities and may require removal
at utility grades if encountered. Remedial measures may be necessary in some areas in order
to provide support for utilities, such as overexcavation and replacement with structural fill.
Groundwater seepage may be encountered in utility excavations and caving of trench walls
may occur where groundwater is encountered. Temporary construction dewatering, as well as
temporary trench shoring, may be necessary during utility excavation and installation.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Select Homes ES-4150
October 23, 2015 Page 12
In general, the native outwash and till deposits should be suitable for use as structural backfill in
the utility trench excavations provided the soil is at or near the optimum moisture content at the
time of placement and compaction. Moisture conditioning of the soils may be necessary at
some locations prior to use as structural fill, especially where groundwater seepage is
encountered; however, the moisture content of utility trench backfill should not be below the
I abo ratory-d e rived optimum moisture contents. Each section of utility line must be adequately
supported in the bedding material. Utility trench backfill should be placed and compacted to the
specifications of structural fill as previously detailed in this report, or to the applicable
specifications of Snohomish County and City of Edmonds or other responsible jurisdiction or
agency.
LIMITATIONS
The recommendations and conclusions provided in this geotechnical engineering study are
professional opinions consistent with the level of care and skill that is typical of other members
in the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. A warranty is not
expressed or implied. Variations in the soil and groundwater conditions observed at the test pit
locations may exist and may not become evident until construction. ESNW should reevaluate
the conclusions in this updated geotechnical engineering study if variations are encountered.
Additional Services
ESNW should have an opportunity to review final project plans with respect to the geotechnical
recommendations provided in this report. ESNW should also be retained to provide testing and
consultation services during construction.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
sw
I n, ff
V
f 1 rM 00 it'
3 530 F.V! -
MN .1 FrF a
7-
?31 In
I V
FLU
44M
'A �vrM IS �Ia� "I X'4i
S
FA -I
7-
17. 1 AT14 E
1M
L 17
Ida KIM
Rnsff-
OIL
J�-
e
u iz
7Rih
it
Ki, " "W'; .
IM f,
-. '. -Ib�'-M!Zwl - Ip
Ang Tff—
�! 1 11 : -
EN L
PL'
T
wra aw..
Lr
�V" S-11Y ;� - ,
�V
S R
Am,
t
'A
3-0:
AL
91 - �-o
MAt
o7' go
Reference: NORTH Ar "l,
Edmonds, Washington
Map 455
By The Thomas Guide
Rand McNally
32nd Edition Vicinity Map
72nd Avenue W. SFR
Edmonds, Washington
NOTE: This plate may contain areas of color, ESNW cannot be
responsible for any subsequent misinterpretation of the information Drwn. MRS Date 10/12/2015IProj. No. 4150
resulting from black & white reproductions of this plate. Checked TJM Date Oct. 2015 Plate 1
LEGEND
TP-1
Approximate Location of
ESNW Test Pit, Proj. No.
ES-4150, Sept. 2015
r
i
Subject Site
Proposed Building
Existing House
Foundation
z
0
0 20 40 80
1"=401 W W
I Scale in Feet
330,_
330
-.;r 330
N
330
340
TP -3
340
U1
7
tbntioy\
ac)I�ty
350
I ki
TP-21
CD
-350)
Y
NOTE: The graphics shown on this plate are not intended for design
purposes or precise scale measurements, but only to illustrate the
approximate test locations relative to the approximate locations of
existing and / or proposed site features. The information illustrated
is largely based on data provided by the client at the time of our
study. ESNW cannot be responsible for subsequent design changes
or interpretation of the data by others.
72ND AVENUE W-
Test Pit Location Plan
72nd Avenue W. SFR
Edmonds, Washington
NOTE: This plate may contain areas of color. ESNW cannot be Drwn. MRS Date 10/23/2015 Proj. No. 4150
responsible for any subsequent misinterpretation of the information Checked TJM Date Oct. 2015 Plate 2
resulting from black & white reproductions of this plate. I
11-111—
III r
NOTES:
18" Min.
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U. 0
00 0 0 40 0 '0 0 .0
0 0 0 0
0 00 000000
0 '0 0*00 0.
0, 0 0 a 0
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
- 0 o - .. - o . -o
. 0 0 --�' -0 .0 - (5 .
00 0 a 0 0
a 0 0 0
0 0 0 00 0 c c� 0
0 00 0 0 0 jr -
0 0 . 0 0 . 0
0 0 ..0
.000
.00 , (1 6
0. .0 *
0 0 00
0
(f 00 0 0
-: 0
0 0 00
0 00 0 0
0 0 0 . C
0
OC6.0.. 0 0
0 0 .0 00 00, 0
0 , 0 .
0 , 0 0 0 0
0 0 - '90
0000 00 0 o 0 00
0 0
0 00 0 0 0 0 08
0
0. 0 0 0
o 0 0'% - doo o
0 00 0 0
Free Draining Backfill should consist
of soil having less than 5 percent fines.
Percent passing #4 should be 25 to
75 percent.
e Sheet Drain may be feasible in lieu
of Free Draining Backfill, per ESNW
recommendations.
Drain Pipe should consist of perforated,
rigid PVC Pipe surrounded with 1"
Drain Rock.
LEGEND:
0'-o 0
0 0 Free Draining Structural Backfill
1 inch Drain Rock
Structural
Fill
\ Perforated Drain Pipe
(Surround In Drain Rock)
SCHEMATIC ONLY - NOT TO SCALE
NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING
RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL
72nd Avenue W. SFR
Edmonds, Washington
Drwn. MRS Date 10/12/20151 Proj. No. 4150
Checked TJM I Date Oct.2015 Plate 3
Perforated Rigid Drain Pipe
(Surround with 1" Rock)
NOTES:
Do NOT tie roof downspouts
to Footing Drain.
Surface Seal to consist of
12" of less permeable, suitable
soil. Slope away from building.
LEGEND:
Surface Seal; native soil or
other low permeability material.
Ictc;ctc;�
C;C;C;C;C 1" Drain Rock
SSST-
SCHEMATIC ONLY - NOT TO SCALE
NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING
FOOTING DRAIN DETAIL
72nd Avenue W. SFR
Edmonds, Washington
Drwn. MRS
Date 10/12/2015
Proj. No.
4150
Checked TJM
I Date Oct. 2015
Plate
4
Appendix A
Subsurface Exploration
Test Pit Logs
ES-41 50
The subsurface conditions at the site were explored on September 30, 2015 by excavating a
total of three test pits. The approximate locations of the subsurface explorations are illustrated
on Plate 2 of this study. The test pit logs are provided in this Appendix. The excavations were
advanced to a maximum depth varying up to nine feet below the surface.
The final logs represent the interpretations of the field logs and the results of laboratory
analyses. The stratification lines on the logs represent the approximate boundaries between
soil types. In actuality, the transitions may be more gradual.
Earth Solutions INK LLC
Earth Solutions NWLLC
SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
SYMBOLS
TYPICAL
MAJOR DIVISIONS
DESCRIPTIONS
GRAPH
LETTER
CLEAN
'61
WELL -GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -
GRAVEL
GRAVELS
GW
SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO
FINES
AND
POORLY -GRADED GRAVELS,
GRAVELLY
SOILS
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)
GP
GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE
OR NO FINES
COARSE
GRAINED
GRAVELS WITH
GM
SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -
SOILS
MORE THAN 50%
FINES
SILT MIXTURES
OF COARSE
FRACTION
RETAINED ON NO,
4 SIEVE
(APPRECIABLE
GC
CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -
AMOUNT OF FINES)
CLAY MIXTURES
CLEAN SANDS
sw
WELL -GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY
MORE THAN 50%
SAND
....
SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES
OF MATERIAL IS
AND
SID
POORLY -GRADED SANDS,
GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NO
LARGER THAN
NO. 0 SIEVE
20,
SANDY
S OILS
SIZE
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)
FINES
SANDS WITH
s m
SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILT
MORE THAN 50%
FINES
MIXTURES
OF COARSE
FRACTION
PASSING ON NO.
4 SIEVE
(APPRECIABLE
sc
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY
AMOUNT OF FINES)
MIXTURES
INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE
ML
SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR
CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY
SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY
SILTS
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO
FINE
AND LIQUID LIMIT
CL
MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY
GRAINED
LESS THAN 50
CLAYS
CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY
CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS
SOILS
OL
ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC
SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY
MORE THAN 50%
INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR
OF MATERIAL IS
MH
DLATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR
SMALLER THAN
SILTY SOILS
NO. 200 SIEVE
SIZE
SILTS
LIQUID LIMIT
AND
CH
INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH
GREATER THAN 50
PLASTICITY
CLAYS
OH
ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO
HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
PT
PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH
HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS
DUAL SYMBOLS are used to indicate borderline soil classifications.
The discussion in the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature
of the material presented in the attached logs.
Earth Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-1
1805 - 136th Place N.E., Suite 201 PAGE 1 OF 1
Bellevue, Washington 98005
Telephone: 425-449-4704
Fax: 425-449-4711
CLIENT Select Homes - PROJECT NAME 72nd Avenue W. SFR
PROJECT NUMBER - 4150 PROJECT LOCATION Edmonds, Washington
DATE STARTED 9/30/15 COMPLETED 9/30/15 GROUND ELEVATION 350 ft TEST PIT SIZE
EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating GROUND WATER LEVELS:
EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION
LOGGED BY TJM — . CHECKED BY TJM AT END OF EXCAVATION
NOTES Depth of Topsoil & Sod 4": vegetation AFTER EXCAVATION
W
CL
a.
�: W
W
W ca
TESTS
(3
(D
CL 0
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
M z
C6
0
.0.5
TOPSOIL 349.5
Brown poorly graded SAND with silt, medium dense, damp (Fill)
MC = 5.90%
Fines = 9.20%
SP-
14.0.
SM
346.0
TPSL
.7-7.,:
4.5 TOPSOIL lense 345.5
Light brown mottled silty SAND with gravel, dense, moist (Native)
MC 9.40%
SM
MC 3.50%
343.0
Light brown poody graded SAND with silt and gravel, dense, damp
SRt
SM
MC 3.90%
9.0 341.0
Test pit terminated at 9.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during
excavation.
Bottom of test pit at 9.0 feet.
Earth Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-2
1805 - 136th Place N.E., Suite 201 PAGE I OF I
Bellevue, Washington 98005
Telephone: 425-449-4704
Fax: 425-449-4711
CLIENT Select Homes PROJECT NAME 72nd Avenue W. SFR
PROJECT NUMBER 4150 PROJECT LOCATION "E6monds Waihington
DATE STARTED 9/30/15 COMPLETED 9/30/15 GROUND ELEVATION 358 ft TEST PIT SIZE
EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating GROUND WATER LEVELS:
EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION
LOGGED BY TJM CHECKED BY TJM AT END OF EXCAVATION
NOTES Depth of Topsoil & Sod 2": grass AFTER EXCAVATION —
W
a-
;
C-)
(09
Lu
�W
W
00
2
TESTS
1:0
a. 0
g
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
a. D
-i
� z
co
TPSL
Brown poorly graded SAND with silt and gravel, medium dense, moist
MC 5.90%
SP-
Sm
MC 7.00%
2.0 356.0
Gray silty SAND with gravel, very dense, moist
MC = 7.20%
Fines = 17.40%
15
SM
MC 7.80%
%
8.5 349.5
Test pit terminated at 8.5 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during
excavation.
Bottom of test pit at 8.5 feet.
Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-3
bl.��Earth
1805 - 136th Place N.E., Suite 201 PAGE 1 OF 1
Bellevue, Washington 98005
Tax
Telephone: 425-449-4704
Fax: 425-449-4711
CLIENT Select Homes PROJECT NAME 72nd Avenue W. SFR
PROJECT NUMBER 4150 - PROJECT LOCATION Edmonds, Washington
DATE STARTED 9/30/15 COMPLETED 9/30/15 GROUND ELEVATION 353 It TEST PIT SIZE
EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating GROUND WATER LEVELS -
EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION
LOGGED BY TJM CHECKED BY TJM AT END OF EXCAVATION
NOTES Depth of Topsoil & Sod 4". grass AFTER EXCAVATION
W
Q-, -
LU
Uj
TESTS
a-
0
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
LU
C6
g
z
0.
TPSL:"
1.5 352.5
Light hrown silty SAND with gravel, dense, damp
MC 3.80%
SM
2.5 350.5
Gray poorly graded SAND With gravel, dense, damp
.5
SP
MC 2.80%
7.5 345.5
Test pit terminated at 7.5 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during
Fines 1.00%
excavation.
Bottom of test pit at 7.5 feet.
Appendix B
Laboratory Test Results
ES-41 50
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Earth Solutions NW GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
18 - 136th Place N.E., Suite 201
MOREBellevue, WA 98005
Telephone: 425-284-3300
CLIENT Select Homes PROJECTNAME 72ndAvePlo`tSFR
PROJECT NUMBER ES-4150---- PROJECT LOCATION Edmonds
U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U,S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER
3 2,'.5 1 314 1/23/8 3 4 6 810 1416: �O 30 40 50 60 100140200
100
90 -
85--
,113 , -Ila E ��I-Tjt
LLI
M
z
U-
F-
z
Lu
C-)
It
LU
(L
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
ICOBBLES
-GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
I coarse I fine
coarse
I medium I
Specimen Identification
Classification
LL
PL
P1
Cc
Cu
0
TP-1 1.5ft.
Brown Poorly Graded SAND with Silt, SP-SM
0.97
6.81
X
TP-2 3.Oft.
Gray Silty SAND with Gravel, SM
A
TP-3 7.5ft.
Gray Poorly Graded SAND with- Gra-vel, SP
0.66
15.12,
Cd
Cn
Specimen Identification
D1 00
D60
D30
D10
%Gravel
%Sand
%Silt
%Clay
0
TP-1 1.5ft.
37.5
0.�
0.204
0.079
14.6.
76.2
9.2
2
TO-2 3.0h.
37.5
1.04
0.183
26.9
55.6
17.4
En
LU
A.
TP-3 7.5ft.
37.5
3.668
0.765
0.243
35.4
63.6
1.0
Side Sewer Drawing
The City of Edmond� , �T
S EASEMENT NO - -------------------------------- .........
NEW CONSTRUCTION REPAIRS F� LID NO. — --------------- - ASMT. NO - ----------------
OWNER ------- 01,97M,41V -------------------------------- ------ ---------------------- CONTRACTOR --- 10"PlIrr -------------------- PERMIT NO. .47V ----
JOB ADDRESS --- 17500 z7IN-0 Ar 14/
------------------------ -- ---------------- --------------------- LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO . ...... ------------------- ------- BLOCK NO - ---------- -------------------------
I
3Z
PWW-0001-1 1/75 (REVA 1178)
39
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAME OF ADDITION --- 674,6W ... 44-4-W ---- Vf 0 --- --------
11
L I
"'77CE: P40 WARRAN-ly OF ACCURACY Tho lnfq�,mat
Zftach3d map t�ja�-, cmmuijeu,
Z1,10 consuftams. ft'uce by tho Ciq, of Edhc:—!� hoj'n, oil tha
, "- r
Tha Dili of Edma-b 8 noi V"!urzT.1 t,-
s dw
Or, tht) Map, Arty P101f SOP 01 erslay all,
Co'!-
L'�c !�'
ir rsgudmg th�-
ul. bt C'l
" ",-;! lim X
skll.�.l S.- '. , - - I il' d tc, the I
r,�J�lj - oc"I" oil Of En*,
ch, ma
th 1/ 110. CX.131 @1
c: d or i,
th, C'-'jY Of Ed�.iuqds
JjL�'ji& fr
IhG ncj ii
05V,44 Lil thii 'rap, nci to( ajiy 0[ci
b�-6j uPuii said n'hp
Approved:
DATE By
V, ---------------------
City'of Edmonds STR"'EET FILE
-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION
RIGHT
PERMIT e,) Permit Number:
I
jAA Issue Date:
A. Address or Vicinity of Construction:
17500 72 Ay, W. (9310941)
B. Type of Work (be specific): Tnqtnll NeLq Ser3rice
9 0 C)
C. Contractor: jigghington Nat'l - Gas Co.
MailingAddress: 815 Mercer St.Seattle.Wn
State License #: 98111
D. Building Permit # (if applicable):
Contact: Orank gRan
Phone: 224-2278
Liability Insurance: Bond: $
Side Sewer Permit # (if applicable):
E. D Commercial El Subdivision El -City Project- E0 Utility (PUD, GTE, WNG, CABLE, WATER)
E] Multi -Family 0 Single Family n Other
INSPECTOR: INSPECTOR: w44r_v�
F. Pavement or Concrete. Cut: zAiWes E]No G. Size of Cut:(l),Z, x 4@ Wateti. Charge$
APPLICANT TO READ A14ND6 I'GN
INDEMNITY. Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees to 'ol the City of Edmonds har.0yrf"1194 0-damages, or
claims of any jUnd or description whatsoever, foreseen or unforeen, that may be made agains the City of Edmonds, or any of its departments or employ-
ees, including or not limited to the defense of any legal proceedings including defenie cons, a2 attorneyfees by reason of grantijkg this pertnit.
THE CONTRA CTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMA NSHIP A AD MA TERIA LS FO R A_��RIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLO WING 7HI�F�NAL INSPEC77ON
WILL _�ftL THE FINAL S7REET 4 ))WPLETED BY
AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK ES77MA TED RESTORA77ON FEES IfELIrbA
CITY FORCES, A T WHICH 77ME A DEBIT OR CREDIT WILL BE PROCESSED FOR ISSUANCE TO THE APPLICANT
Construction drawing of proposed work required with permit application.
A 24 hour notice is required for inspection; Please call the Engineering Depairtme
Work is to be inspected during progress and at completion.
Restoration is to be in accordance with City Codes. 771. .0220
Street shall be kept clean at all times.
Traffic Control and Public Safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City Engineer.
All street cut ditches shall be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to the end of the working day;
NO EXCEPTIONS.
I have read the above statements and understand the permit requirements and the pink copy of the permit will be available
on site at all timesfor inspection purposqs.,,o--'0_.1_
I,/;
Signature: 7x;1'q9f 7� 61;� Date: March 9,1993
(Contractor or Agent)
CALL DIAIA-DIG PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK
............ .....RECEIPT. NO:
DATE::::� :: ISSUED BY
ISSUANCE
Engrg. Div. 1991
lo.
Eng. Div. July 1985
Addendum to City of Edmonds
Right of Way
Permit Application
Submitted by:
-qu\-I
Engineering Aide
Washington Natural Gas
P52-1 — c52-4B
LL\J.
.V7
WNG to window-�
Water main depth
unknown2-7'cl
Z/-, 11 gas main----_
I (?—X4) CUT AT WNEE
Key:
-w- water
-g- gas -
-ss- sewer
-E)-- water hydrant
-<D,- water valve
815 M=cr St. (P.O. Box 1869), Scattk, WA 98111 (206) 622-6767
I —
C I T.74 in
OF-EDMONDS Per it No.
COMMUNITY SERVICES, DEPARTMENT /,� & &
RIGHT-OF-WAY CO . NSTRUCTION PERMIT *^710" E17TFLE ls§u'e Date
0 1 il L. I
A. 9 Owner: B. 0 Contractor: %Q C_ % (—'I C 14
_-Name __7
N\,A V-0- CD
Mailing Address Mailing Address
City State Zip' City Staie Zip
C �l 2-0
State License Number Telephone Number
C. e Address or Vicinity of C6ffstruction: D S(')C::)
C, 4—
Type of Work to be Done; C- V3� Q�l
1 -64Y y- I.A I _%
(Z
D. *Work in Connection With: �r?Iat 0 Single Family El City Projects.
0 Commercial 0 Multifamily Utility
E. 0 Pavement Cut: D Y El N F. 0 Size of Cut: — X
APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN
INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees to hold the City of Edmonds
harmless from any injuries, damages, or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, forseen or unforseen, that may
be made against the City of Edmonds, or any of its departments or employees, including or not limited to the defense
of any legal proceedings including defense costs, court costs, and attorney fees by rbison of granting this permit.
V
THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE
YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK.
Nq
Estimated restoration fees will be held until the final street patch is completed by City forces, at which time a debit or credit will be
processed for. issuance to the applicant.
9 A 24 hour notice is required for inspection; Please call Engineering: 771-3202
9 Work is to be inspected during'progress,-and at completion.
9 Restoration to be in accordance with City Code.
e Street to be kept clean at all times.
* Traffic Control to be in accordance with City regulations.
NN 9 All street -cut ditches must be patched with asphalt or.City approved material prior to end of working day;
NO EXCEPTIONS.
I understand the above and that this permit must be availa at the job site for inspection purposes at all times.
CSignature: Date:
Own
er orkontractor
Z
0
U
94
0
�J-
Thk Permit Must be Posted at the Job Site For Inspection Purposes
Call DIAL -A -DIG Prior to Beginning Work
APPROVED BY: PERMIT P'EE73 o - o o _x_�
Time Authorized: void after 3(-) —days. Restoration Fee:
Special Conditions:
RELEASED BY:
Date
Receipt No.:
Fund I I I Fee:
Street Cut Dimensions: x
INSPECTED BY
NO WORK TO BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE
Date
Eng. Div. March 1989
FIELD INSPECTION NOTES (Fund I I I Route copy to Street Ekpt
Comments:
m
Diagram:
CONTRACTOR CALLED FOR INSPECTION 0 YES 0 NO
Partial Work Inspection by P. W.:
Work Disapproved By: Date:
FINAL APPROVAL BY: Date:
Eng. Div. July
ola
-t
WV
September 9,
MEMO TO: Mary Lou Block
Planning Director
FROM: James E. Adams
City Engineer
SUBJECT: IMPLEMENTATION OF EROSION CONTROL AND SLOPE
SUPPORT ROCKERY AT 17500 - 72ND AVE. W.
REFERENCE: LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 2, 1982 TO PLANNING, ENTITLED
"INSPECTION OF SLOPE AT 17500 - 72ND AVE. W.
RLE
On September 2, 1982 Pat Wilson communicated by telephone with Dave
Ostergaard of Group Four,,Inc., engineer for Mr. and Mrs. Weisman,
owners of the subject property. In this telephone call, Dave Ostergaard.
indicated that the Weismans had asked him to prepare a letter in regard
to work to be accomplished.on the site. He was not asked to prepare any
plans.,.,
Please be aware that neither the City Engineer,*Jerry Hauth, nor Pat
Wilson ever agreed that a letter was sufficient for the purpose of de-
picting -the details necessary for the completion of erosion control or
rockery,.or retaining wall protection of the slopes on this site.
Our letter of September 2, 1982, with the attached inspection report.
dated August 30, 1982, outlines what is required in the way of working
documents. This was communicated to Dave Ostergaa*rd by Pat Wilson on
September 8, 1982. Nothing less than complete drawings containing plans,
cross sections, and complete construction details are required to either
approve or disapprove the plan as submitted. Thereafter, inspection of
the work shall be in accordance with such complete, correct, and approved
plans. We had, as stated before, agreed to meet with the Weisman's cho-
sen professional engineer after he had completed sketch details for rock-
ery and erosion control to assure that his plans are sufficient. On
August 30, 1982 Mr. Weisman agreed to have his engineer prepare the.re-
quired plans.
If the Weismans have changed their minds and are not now agreeable to
these requirements, and if we do not receive positive indication of com-
pliance by (1) the receipt of complete and correct drawin's by September
9
17, 1982, and (2) positive steps to execute said approved drawing works
on the site immediately after our approval, we feel that any subsequent
steps to force compliance should be referred to the City Attorney.
POW/JH/st
Attachment
Marigare-�- Hi 1-
errV H a �t_l_t
Ut
CITY OF EDMONDS
CIVIC CENTER - EbIVIONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 - (206) 775-2525
CITY ATTORNEY
September 2, 1982
Mrs. Weisman
P.O. Box 611
Lynnwood, Washington 98036
Dear Mrs. Weisman:
L9 '7
C�
HARVE H. HARRISON
MAYOR
RECEIVED
SEP' '71982
Or- Of Public Works
f: � r-7
LET
Re: City of Edmonds Building Code
Pursuant to your request, please find enclosed a copy of
several provisions of the City of Edmonds Building Code and the
Uniform Building Code pertaining to your property. .
Section 19.00.000 adopts the Uniform Building Code a portion
of.which is enclosed for your review.
Section 19.00.030 contains additional provisions regarding
drainage and grading.
Various sections of Chapter 70 of the Uniform. -Building
Code detail the need for a permit, the need for an engineered
drawing and the various req . uirements for excavation and grading.
Also enclosed is a copy of the section defining what is a'
firetaining wall" and the section, Section 2308(b) which sets
forth the specific design of retaining walls. a
Please keep in mind that compliance with these various
sections of the Edmonds City ordinance is determined in accordance
with standard engineering practice as determined by the City
of Edmonds Engineering Department, Any questions re(�arding
complaince with these sections should be directed to that
department.
Very truly yours,
OFFICE OF THE_�.'ITY ATTORNEY
z
Mark A. Eames
MAE/kav
Enclo uke
cc: ktrry Hauth
Hal Reeves
WE
CITY OF EDMONDS
CIVIC CENTER - EDMONDS. WASHINGTON 98020 (206) 775-2525
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
August 19, 1982
Mr. and Mrs. N. N. Weisman
17500 72nd Avenue W.
Edmonds, WA 98020
RESIDENCE @ 17500 72ND AVENUE W, PERMIT # 810378
41 mb- '
HARVE H. HARRISON
MAYOR
Prior to final approval of the above permit, it will be
necessary for you to submit an engineered grading plan
for the west portion of your property.
It has come to the attention of the Building Division
that You are Occupying Your residence without final
approval of the bui'lding permit. This is a violation of
Section 304 of the Uniform Buildin Code. Please contact
the Building Division within five ?5) days regarding your
intentions and schedule for completion of the required
work.
HR/cn
36'1
s�o""�e b�z-
Ola Reeves
Building Official
STREET FILE,,!''
August 27, 1982.
MEMO TO: Mary Lou Block
Planning Director
FROM: James E. Adams
City Engineer
SUBJECT: CITIZEN 'COMPLAINT - MRS. WISEMAN,�17500 72ND AVE. WEST
On Tuesday, August 24, 1982, Mrs. Wiseman complained to the Mayor's
office regarding an alledged disrespectful and uncooperative attitude
of the Engineering Department. I spoke with Mrs. Wiseman (telephone
number 743-6814) and she stated that she,had no complaint against
Engineering, but -she did not appreciate our building�inspectzij��, in
my opinion, who she complains about is dependent upon to whom -she is
speaking. She stated that her house had been completed for over three
months, and the building inspector -will not make a final inspection.
She also stated that her builder was there finishing the work.
We have had considerable problems at this address with bank erosion,
which caused damage downstream. Mrs. Wiseman stated that she has an
approved grading and erosion control plan. To my knowledge, no one from
Engineering has approved such a plan.
Pat Wilson is scheduled to meet.with Mrs. Wiseman between 10 a.m. and
12 a.m. on Monday, August 30, 1982. Since there appears to be a question
of who said what to whom, I recommend that a representative from Planning
and Building accompany Pat to this meeting. He will call you prior to
leaving to meet Mrs. Wiseman. Possibly, you should all meet prior to
that time to compare files.
JEA/st
CC.
. Pat Wilson
7 /f 2,-
Sharon Tompkins Dt
(Acting Off. Admin.)
L
nn A
_.Z'50 . _'Is
i
DATE
S-IGNED
o-4S469
Pay PAK (50 SETS) 4P 469 -,SEND PARTS I AND 3 WITH CARBON INTACT.
PART 3 WILL BE"RETURNED-WITH REPLY.——
DETACH AND FILE FOR FOLLOW-UP
7
S7 REET HLE
July 28, 1982
MEMO TO: Dan Smith
Planning/Engineering Inspector
FROM: Jerry Hauth
Hydraulics Engineer
VIA: Jim Adams
City Engineer
'72ND
SUBJECT:, NELSON WEISMAN"S' 'GRADING' PLAN',,,__ 175�
I am returning the copies of Nelson Weisman's grading plan.
Since the plan that the Weismans have proposed is dependent
upon Dennis Hania making certliin improvements to his property,
it will be necessary to wait until Dennis Hania submits his
proposed grading plan to see if he intends to make the improve-
ments -that the Weismans have proposed.
After receiving a grading plan from Dennis Hania, I will be
able to review the.plan proposed by the Weismans.
JH/st
Attachments
nd IMarch Dt
-110000,
iry
cl,
F EDMONDS
MOI
CIVIC CENTER MONDS. WASHINGTON 98020 * (206) 775-2525
CITY ATTORNEY
September 2, 1982
HARVE H. HARRISON
MAYOR
RECEIVE
SEP' ap
719
Mrs. Weisman
Dr' Of PUblic W(
P.O. Box 611 )rks
Lynnwood, Washington 98036 ^V7 , "! M r
�t, A
Re: City of Edmonds-Bdilding Cdlcff-�`"'
4�0
Dear Mrs. Weisman:
Pursuant to your request, please find enclosed a copy of
several provisions of the City of Edmonds Building Code and the
Uniform Building Code pertaining to your property.
Section 19.00.000 adopts'the Uniform Building Code a portion.'
of which is enclosed for your review.
Section 19.00.030 contains additional provisions regarding,-�.
drainage and grading.
Various'sections of Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building
Code detail the need for a permit, the need for an engineered
---drawing and the various requirements for excavation and grading,,,;,.,,,
Also enclosed is a copy of the section defining what is a"
"retaining wall" and the section, Section 2308(b) which sets
for.th the specific design.of retaining, walls.
J VT'411�-1t1j 1,
4 -t
'N V_-1 ,;,v
11 that C.ompliance with these various
sections -of the Edmonds City.'Ordinance is-determined,;iht.accori
with -standard engineering practice -as determined by":t'he'' City
�of Edmonds EngineeringDepar�Ment. Any ques"tions-regarding",'
complaince with these.se.ctions,�6hould be directed to.that
department.
Very truly yours,4
OFFICE OF TH�E��TY-ATTORNEY
Mark A. Eames
MAE/kav
Encl ure
CC: �-.Terry, Hauth
Hal Reeves
N
"WIT
IL
qT �747
mw
OVED AS VC T� P,
16
tA
4,
®r.�,
'Colt
�, 40.
�V
1Z,
. vi
�L� D2 . . . . . .
"7"
W."'e"V 411 1.,
Wr
4.
7i V,
.Ore
V-A- 4 lW
-JUL*
_jl
DEVELOPMENT
7p
F
C4 or- wvMe, 4qtt-L, CITY 0 EDIAO;qn
COAfOjTlW,&UlTh 144 7*
-k , 0.)
. . . . . . . . . .
Al
Ila
;M rNN.-I
I P. "Tm 6.
'WAX
Of.
%
P,0
11 TAI..,
WN"
FA
w
�4f
V t)%
ei.
`� rl
04
Vik,
IN
I �'7L-
A 114,
4
I'llmlil
171
c
Yl
7-)
e7
�i 7/j:
__I 7-�--6
Let-)
at
6� 1 Ito)
jl� Ct kj
zz
1-1c) OSE�
$lWa
13,Al
..'� t 0 1�
Lk)
5-ol) OF=- :Llo
elp
76
7 -Z
c J-) L-V
1. -L-Y- Pu-5 -I
-6 If
8-1-a)AJ
-4-7
7!5Z)
v
-SX A-T
-.7
L) asu
--------- - .. ....
I V. LO.U) I
-Aj))) 1,77-10 NJ
AM u U� /I)))) L�'y
&C A, 1-01' li &W I —
lop ow
75"CIN 7 2-
67REET
CITY OF EDMONDS HARVE H. HARRISON
MAYOR
CIVIC CENTER * EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 * (206) 775-2525
CITY ATTORNEY RECEiVED
March 25, 1982 JUR 2 9 1982
Dir. Of Publ'ic Works
Mr. and Mrs. Weisman
P.O. Box 611
Lynnwood, Washington 98036..
Re: Building Code Violations:
Failure to Control Storm
Runoff
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Weisman:
This letter is to confirm our telephone conversation
of March 25, 1982 regarding the problem of uncontrolled
storm water runoff from your property at 17500 72nd Avenue
West on to surrounding properties. It is my understanding
that you have agreed to take the following steps to correct
this problem:
1. To temporarily control the eroding runoff water by
a cross -slope ditch or swail and some sort of filtering
device, either bales of straw or cloth fabric, to remove the
.sediment from the water before it.leaves your property.
2. To obtain professional advice regarding a permanent
solution to the problem.
3. By April 15th, weather permitting and after having
obtained necessary city permits, effect a permanentsolution
to theerosion problems of your slope.
. If you have any difficulty in complying with this agree-
ment you should contact Mr. Jerry Hauth or -myself immediately
and inform us of such difficulties.
By copy of this letter I am informing Mr. Hauth of your
agreement and requesting that he inspect the slope on Monday,
March 29th, 1982, to see that the temporary corrective action
has been properly taken.
I trust that this arrangement will be all that is nec es-
STREET RLE 0
September 2, 1982
MEMO TO: Mary Lou Block
Planning Director
FROM: James E. Adams
City Engineer
SUBJECT: INSPECTION OF SCOPE AT 17500 72ND AVE. W.
On August 30, 1982 Pat Wilson, Jerry Ha,uth, and Dan Smith met,
with Mrs. Wiseman to discuss options to remedy thezlope.;arid,
erosion problems from the property. A copy.of Pat,Wilson's.memo
is attached'.
I recommend that we pursue this matter and require the installa-
tion of rockery or other approved erosion control measures prior
to the start -of the rainy season.
Erosion from this site caused considerable downstream damage last
year. Something should be done within the next month.
JEA/st
Attachments
91,1F
R offa Ma.�ch/ Dt
A4 f (.7 7 7, —'f A Yer. ell.
Poll w /?-A 2-
V7� Ily 111,q q f-A 14�a e
oK
ow AI
Poo,
4tj -IAOLe WS reo
-*7 -e q sr q oet�
1,11 �e c? e4
e q 74� 4e
44 4r-> q e-
a it 11-4p t=k A-e/ /0 e c? A7, 7-to 400,
r-o
-T 7 AZ'
4-1
7%at 5 Z elo-e- �4 Z�
,b,e- r e ale
70','61-r 410!5( Z -C Z O�e .57 Al c<
;P,ee
Id q
74-0-
4-
-zd 'Ce 7 ly
44 e t5e, 7D,
-e Or e- e Ijay -5 Ole- A:9 74e
ef, 0 4-7 -71��-C-) v e c e a
ej-0
'711W 44oLev-�p ne?4-
7-, eV,�P- c 7Le6,,,I -5 dOf
4ei u 6 orr
'Ole
d c
.
e—
/9, A
-s V 7L- 74e eve o v-e
e
00,
'Ze
'y 4 7 c V6 ui 14 14
eJOjoj Opo- / 'Ve 5 14-0
Lej,e t C�;I
r4P
'-eoo- /'d e
74
%
e
IoojIq 4 ��
4
6--e
c.) 7 0 OJ. 74-
,7'
C' '/j 7Z
Aof
611' J--cV— 7—e 4—:'1'7'Xo e— Al
r2�-�
1144 b-e- ct7r4�-,
.7-6
7! �q
w1a 6d 7"0
eq
o e-f &J-P-
4e e-i o A-
4. 4e C-Z
1Y 7'1/11
qlwR e-
ro d
a13
la- e4�—
CITY00 EDMONDS
Civic Center Edmonds, Washington 98020 Telephone (206) 775-2525
3
41ar'ch 2 1�8�
HAND'DELIVERE'D:'
Mr. & Mrs. Weisman
17500 - 72nd Ave. W.
Edmonds, WA 98020
.4
RE: Building':'Code�:Vi-61at'ions':-,,�c-.
Failure.�'6,,.Contro -'a -,f Storia
..Runoff
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Weisman:
Despite numerous notifications and warnings'regarding an"*i
erosion and storm runoff 'condition on your,,, property which
f
'66s� a; v'i6lation'*`-_o'U'Section, 013 ''of 'the''Uni orm`)3di1d-m-!,,'
coristitu
Coa�e',,',.;',.you hav'; f ai'l�&-,.t
e.. 6 take,, adequate..:*ac. -ion to,;Cdrrect�.:,!-,�,.*,.,,";,'��-.,.',
this situation.' This'do'n�ditiofi is a contintii*'n�'cj'�-,'riuisance"
hazard,' to" ''surrounding' 'properties 'and,, as .'long "as,. it remains
uncorrected, is a clear violation of the ordinances'of the.
City of Edmonds. After all other reasonable attempts to seek
your compliance with the laws of Edmonds have been disre-
garded by you# this matter has been referred to my office for
appropriate..legal. action.
Please-be'advised: that the.,�b�rdinance�s.-.'Of*-the'�ti.i�.,'."O'f
Edmonds,provide that any person violating any provision"of
the Edmonds'City Code,.,including th4� Uniform Building Code'
which has been adopted by reference, is guilty of a misde-
.meanor and, upon conviction thereof, may be punished by a
fine up to $250.00 and/or imprisonment up to 90 days in jail.
In addition, each continuing day of violation may be consid-.
cred a separate offense subject to the penalties just de-
scribed. I am sure you -will agree that the City of Edmonds
cannot insist on other people complying with City ordinances
and not insist upon your compliance as well. This is
especially true where the situation poses a hazard and
nuisance to other lives and property.
You'._will' hav6'24'-hbu' s�'fro the"receipt*-'of: this
r m
to take''t*hei'.'i:nexpensive':'steps necessary to correict:��i
problem.',:,1.1r.,Jqrry. Kauth of. the. Rublic,.'Works.. Departm en�t.. has
described this c6rrecti I o . n- �11t, o I you 'a .. s� a , s . imple I one' of .
diver ing
the water running vertically down your slope by'.mean's of.
swales or ditches across the face of the slope and then
funneling such water through bales of straw or a cloth fabric
which will remove the sand and'debris from the'water before
mr� Mrs;_Weii4W-
"Page.
it * leaves your property. Anything short of this will be
inadequate,., --..,If, ot.
you-have;n `-co"irreicted-this situ'ation.,.in.'a
.ho
sa'tisfactory-Manner�v�ithiri.'stich 24 ur period*the City wili.
have. -no 'choice but, to e a
cadii criminal ditatiori.'to'66'.ftled
in South. Snohomish_-,�C'6nty--T)istrict Court- seeking appropriate
0
penalties. Please'understand that the City has no particular
desire to bring such a criminal action against your however,
if this situation is not adequately corrected the City will
have. no choice. The choice is entirely yours.
By. copy of this letter I am instructing 14r. Jerry..Hauth
of the Public Works 6epartmirent to notify.me im'miedia'te`ly'�upon..
.thb.-expiratidn''of this'24 hour Period or no later of..Friday—'
.morning..,oif..this w6ek.whether this situation has'bee'n,,.,
corrected. If not, a 'criminal citation will be issued. I
trust the latter is not necessary.
MAr./lc
cc: Jerry Hatith
Doar Jerry:*.
Pursuant to our telephone conversation please see that
this letter is hand served on the Weismans. Be sure that the
person who does hand serve it makes notes regarding the de-
tails of this service. The letter should be left in the hands
of either Mr. or Mrs. Weisman.
5a
p0 11--0 0 5 -/- C�>- f
oaf
"t- pze> /0 m 5
skl-, --1 �ft
i
ro�
63
67 7 l-"
.P"T V; � "
17 �7—
W 77�
7 7- fe
-CIO, --r,�f
P- aj
-M q)cil
�5- MJ o e-�Zpe �>,el k
/ All ew oe�� -e.,
r"r
D1,5 e
tj
U/ S Q�Jea—p ek 5 Z 7-6
it -s
e
-T7
C�A�a
U,741
1 Z
-9 f:-P ,40,ow-o,�O-a)000, ae r Ae
r-Q
-4e e
1,ofc7—
�5
h4cr =Fq4� r- e-f 7^
f xep
44
ejoo,�7_A�:,
14,
oo
77
/1'? �-A -Z.�5
�ep- 4-- 7 7
per
04
0 qf
V --aj le-
5Z
40"d
114 e6.5
Weja
ce--,
4-q
.'.. �k- 9
0
xev C-?,
(r-?- 1-7
"11761e-c/ 1-4-0
1!!4 ff
qt 4L- QL�O���ej �.Vp�t
ZZAC /'
A),
N
5A5
54X,r1Z L
,etql/.
0
GENERAL NOTES: RDCKERY
1) The rock material shall be as nearly rectangular as possible." .'No
Stone shall be used which does not extend through the wall. The
rock'material shall be hard, sound, durable and free from weathered
portions, seams, cracks, other defects. The rock density shall be
a minimum of 160 pounds per cubic foot. Size categorie's shall
include:
Two -man rocks (300 to 600 pounds), 13" in-least'dimensi(in;.
-Three InC211 rock- 4PAQ nq,
16" in least ahne
1 A.%-^ A
O&C- m4ok roegs Odra to 760 PO4st 5 21, in I-eqjrr
2) The retaini 01 shall be started by excavating a trench I not
a P
less tha inches or more than W4- (11) foot in depth below
subgrade in excavation sections or below the existing ground level
in embankment sections.
3) Pock selection and placement shall be such that there will. be
minimum voids and, 'in the exposed face of -the wall, no open voids
over six (6) inches across in any direction. The final course
shall have a continuous appearance and be placed to minimize
erosion of the backfill material. The larqer rocks shall be placed
at the base of the rockery so that the wall will be stable and have
a stable appearance. The rocks shall be placed in a manner such
that longitudinal axis of the rock shall be at right angles or
perpendicular to the rockery face. - The rocks shall'..have all
inclining faces sloping to the back of the ' ro . ckery. Each c6urse of
rocks shall be seated as tightly and evenly as possible on the
course beneath. After setting -each course of rock . , all' voids
between- the. rocks shall be 6hinked� on the back with quarry rock to
eliminate any void sufficient to pass a 2-inch squar"
e probe.
4) The wall backfill shall consist of quarry spalls with a maximum
size of four (4) inches and a miry , 5f two (2) inches. Ibis
material -shall be placed to 4 Ueq� inch minimum thickness
between- the entire wall and the cut or f ill material. The ba6kf ill
material shall be placed in lifts to an elevation approximately six
(6) inches below the top of each course of. rocks as they are
placed, until the uppermost course is placed. Any backfill
material on the bearing surface of one rock course shall be removed
before setting the next course.
5) The above specifications apply, to the construction of the rockery,
only and are based upon standard design practice for rockeries
under 8 * feet in height. Any investigation of the condition of
'existing soils with regards to the placement and stability of said
-'-'rockery shall be the responsibility of an engineer experienced in
-soils mechanics i.e. by others.
I
4.
fiPe I)( 4e W 4e &4 sy
",:'G'ENE
IA�
eOCe
F-41 f-
00
000
lZI
00
, exl<,
1'0,4,Y
1770,^1 0/%/,/
67)CA VA y
/YM
q q a e A t. -re ro t it/ q- Det-ql/.
rox"
0.6
A L
'Otc Vxj$t-l�,p
Ay
m ?d -r-a,7- .
-ale
ato ne r*,Alr$. 4/4P_ 15 Mqy
4c Al dct0ber- 411?Sz.
A r4ff)q A/,+ r 116
A4 C
?-kit
ll�-* r
A
A
Elr#c-&
,4 c e- e,,o 71-.q
A��-e5
1411V 171ICZAe,55
A??Iy h4
MIAI
A#A.Y
tm
I
/�4 r
R06MCK 406T414
I'll M".
,OR,
0
IC�CAIC-,,eY' .-,56,1-- 06MIL
(Nat4,1 r=rr*eea,4
7ILQ. tjtqc4ed
1� q < r- �Cptq ble
-140
13,�
-cat oe.
PR Y W4e
'tt Tke-
OY4.*7
qs
(
CAV'Arl
b4t 71pr�
byrALOZ /4/,4
qjf ef
C4 ?-�j
45 4 -An
ro 'be
TO
-S4
Pry
4P_
4re
01A
C-1
V"
A
ic 4= x
,ep Pt'rc,4.
4
From roar,�,
PM4.
�M
p
40
CITY OF EDMONDS -7ft ASSEON FORMATION SHEET
F7=3
7
E�fN EW ASSET NO.
ADDITION ADDITION TO ASSET NO.
I P-Loperty. ni�
y of.
TTY QF ED 0
RETIREMENT sl
wo- G3-
- 3:o
DESCRIPTION
6AJ
SERIAL NO.
LOCATION
,w
DEPT. NQp
ei�s—n
"PURCHASE ORDER NO.
PURCHASE ORDER DATE
COST
*PROJECTNUMBER
PROJECT COMPLETION DATE
COST
B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO. --o 00 - 0 o 6
ESTIMATED LIFE
INITIATED BY
DATE
APPROVED BY
"SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST
*SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT
ACCOUNTING ONLY
12 /DEPRECIATE
MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
0 G.L. ENTRY
REFERENCE
DATE
VERIFIED BY
PROCESSED
BATCH NO
INITIAL
LOW
DEPARTMENT FILE
- IR-iffirz
September 2, 1982
MEMO TO: Mary Lou Block
Planning Director
FROM: James E. Adams
City Engineer
SUBJECT: INSPECTION OF SCOPE AT�'1150_0 - 72ND AVE. W.
On August 30, 1982 Pat Wilson, Jerry Hauth, and Dan Smith met
with Mrs. Wiseman to discuss options to remedy the�slope and
erosion problems from the property. A copy of Pat Wilson's memo
is attached. .3 1
I recommend that we pursue this matter and require the installa-
tion of rockery or other approved erosion control measures prior
to the start of the rainy season.
Erosion from this site caused considerable downstream damage last
year. Something should be done within the next month.
JEA/st
Attachments
tMT FILE
April 28, 1982
MEMO TO: Hal Reeves
Building.Official
FROM: Jim Adams
. City Engineer
SUBJECT: WEISMAN'S GRADING PLAN 17500 72ND AVENUE WEST
After reading the letter from Mr. Weisman and looking at his
proposed drainage plan, I would suggest that he be required
to submit a drainage plan prepared by a Professional Engineer.
I feeU that his proposal to infiltrate water into the soil at
the top of the bank may lead to a major mud slide.
In addition to this, I question whether or not he will be able
to construct a 2:1 slope in his back yard without a retaining
wall or rockery.
JH: j kw
1jr-IM. 1,9.7
er Haut�frii-. ?dt
a
T,
NOTKE,
TO � OWNER
PARTIAL APPROVAL
VIOLATION
CORRECTIONS REQUIRED
. _'F:�' v
.f� � I 7f
PERMIT
NUMBER
JOB ADDRESS
No PERMIT — STOP WORK — REMOVE CONSTRUCTION OR OBTAIN
PERMIT AND MAKE WORK COMPLY WITH BUILDING LAWS.
CONSTRUCTION IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPROVED PLANS
0 AND PERMIT — STOP WORK. MAKE EXISTING WORK COMPLY WITH
APPROVED PLANS AND PERMIT OR REMOVE IT.
STOP WORK —UNTIL AUTHORIZED TO CONTINUE BY INSPECTO&
CORRECTIONS LISTED BELOW MUST BE MADE BEFORE WORK CAN
BE APPROVED.
WORK DESCRIBED BELOW HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND IS APPROVED.
CONTACT INSPECTOR AND RECALL FOR INSPECTION.
ARRANGE FOR APPOINTMENT. 1:1
m � 1�9 lam
THE ACTIONS OR CORRECTIONS INDICATED ABOVE ARE REQUIRED
WITHIN .... . ::S ....... DAYS OR PENALTIES IMPOSED BY LAW MAY BE
APPLIED EOR INS ONS CALL: 775-2525.
,,"CTI
. \_zk, BUILDING DIV.
INSPECTOR �&PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF FIRE.DEPT.
EDMONDS eATF1 19
HARVE H. HARRISON
CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR
200 DAYTON ST. - EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 * (206) 771-3202
OFFICE OF THE CITY ENGINEER
i �,-4 r
March 10, 1982
Mr. Wayne Tanaka
Ogden, Ogden & Murphy
2300 Westin.*,Bl'd�., 2001 - 6th Ave.
Seattle, Wa. 98121
Dear Wayne:
SUBJECT: WISEMAN HOUSE CONSTRUCTION -,17500 72ND AVE. WEST
The Wisemans have been contacted several times in the past in
an attempt to control the erosion from the storm runoff on their
property. I spoke to Mrs. Wiseman and Norm Ramquist (their contrac-
tor) on March 8, 1982 and at that time I was assured that the prob-
lem would be corrected. I spoke with Mr. Wiseman at great length
on March 9, 1982 and he assured me that the problem would be cor-
rected. An inspection of the site on the afternoon of March 9, 1982
showed no signs of any attempt to resolve the erosion.
In the past six months they have been cited twice for the same
problem, and they have made no attempt to resolve the problem.
Because of the number of calls complaining about siltation prob-
lems that have resulted directly from the Wiseman's failure to imple-
ment simple, inexpensive erosion control, I urge you to take appro-
priate action. They are in violation of the Uniform Building Code,
Section 7013.
If you have any questions, please contact Jerry Hauth, extension
282.
Sincerely,
City Engineer
JH/st
'4d! erx)p,"Hauth 7 IDtr
nd�aa�M ch r _TTF Ik — —
"!77�'e�' 7
tot,
�NO
CHECK -LEGAL ACCESS INdREPSID UTILITIESID
YESM YES,E)
ZT F 1618= '!F
March 24, 1982----
MEMO FOR RECORD
SUBJECT: BUILDING CODE VIOLATIONS FAILURE TO CONTROL A STORM
RUNOFF - -17500 72ND AVENUE WEST
On March'241 1982, at 1:30 p.m., I delivered a copy of this
letter to a woman, whom identified herself as Mrs. Wiseman.
JH: j ky
ond'aa 6h
Jim �kdams dt.
4
Ask
CITY of EDMONDS
Civic Center - Edmonds, Washington 98020 - Telephone (206) 775-2525
March 23, 1982
HAND DELIVERED
Mr. & Mrs. Weisman
17500 - 72nd Ave. W.
Edmondst WA 98020
RE: Building Code Violations
Failure to Control a Storm
Runoff
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Weisman:
Despite numerous notifications and warnings regarding an
erosion and storm runoff condition on your property which
constitutes a violation of Section 7013 of the Uniform Build-
ing Code, you have failed to take adequate action to correct
this situation. This condition is a continuing nuisance and
hazard to surrounding properties and# as long as it remains
uncorrected, is a clear violation of the ordinances of the
City of Edmonds. After all other reasonable attempts to seek
your compliance wi - th the laws of Edmonds have been disre-
garded by youp this matter has been referred to my office for
appropriate legal action.
Please be advised that the ordinances of the City of
Edmonds provide that any person violating any provision of
the Edmonds City Code, including the Uniform Building Code
which has been adopted by reference# is guilty of a misde-
meanor and, upon conviction thereof# may be punished by a
fine up to $250.00 and/or imprisonment up to 90 days in jail.
In additiong each continuing day of violation may be consid-
ered a separate offense subject to the penalties just de-
scribed. I am sure you -will agree that the City of Edmonds
cannot insist on other people complying with City ordinances
and not insist upon your compliance as well. This is
especially true where the situation poses a hazard and
nuisance to other lives and property.
You will have 24 hours from the receipt of this letter
to take the inexpensive steps necessary to correct this
problem6 Mr. Jerry Hauth of the Public Works Department has
described this correction to you as a simple one of diverting
the water running vertically down your slope by means of
swales or ditches across the face of the slope and then
funneling such water through bales of straw or a cloth fabric
which will remove the sand and debris from the water before
In
n
Mr, & Mrs* Weisman
March 23, 1982
Page 2
it leaves your property. Anything short of this will be
inadequate. If you have not corrected this situation in a
satisfactory manner within such 24 hour period the City will
have no choice but to cause a criminal citation to be filed
in South Snohomish County District Court seeking appropriate
penalties. Please understand that the City has no particular
desire to bring such a criminal action against youo however,
if this situation is not adequately corrected the City will
have no choice. The choice is entirely yours.
By copy of this letter I an, instructing Mr. Jerry Hauth
of the Public Works Department to notify me immediately upon
the expiration of this 24 hour period or no later of Friday
morning of this week whether this situation has been
corrected. If not, a criminal citation will be issued. I
trust the latter is not necessaryo
Very truly yours,
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
Mark A. Eames
MAE/Ic
cc: Jerry Hauth
Dear Jerry:
Pursuant to our telephone conversation please see that
this letter is hand served on the Weismans. Be sure that the
person who does hand serve it makes notes regarding the de-
tails of this service. The letter should be left in the hands
of either Mr. or Mrs. Weisman.
Thanks.
&Zrk A. Eames
MEMO TO:
FROM:
Mary Lou Block
Planning Director
James E. Adams
City Engineer
August 2j', 1982
SUBJECT: CITIZEN COMPLAINT - MRS*. WISEMAN, 17500 - 72ND AVE. WEST
On Tuesday, August 24,- 1982, Mrs. Wiseman complained to the mayor's
office regarding an alledged disrespectful and uncooperative attitude
of the Engineering Department. I spoke with Mrs. Wiseman (telephone
number 7 43-6814) and she stated that she had no complaint against
Engineering, but she did not appreciate our building inspecto'k-s—�.',- In
my opinion, who she complains about is dependent upon to whom ---she is
speaking. She stated that her house had been completed for over three
months, and the building inspector willmot make a final inspection.
She also stated that her builder was there finishing the work.
We have had considerable problems at this address with bank erosion,
which caused damage downstream. Mrs. Wiseman stated that she has an
approved grading and erosion control plan. To my knowledge, no one from
Engineering has approved such a plan.
Pat Wilson is scheduled to meet.with Mrs. Wiseman between 10 a.m. and
12 a.m. on Monday, August 30, 1982. Since there appears to be a question
of who said what to whom, I recommend that a representative from Planning
and Building accompany Pat to this meeting. He will call you prior to
leaving to meet Mrs. Wiseman. Possibly, you should all meet prior to
that time to compare files.
JEA/st
cc:, Pat Wilson
0
STREET FLE
CITY OF E13MON13S
200 DAYTON ST. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 - (206) 771-3202
OFFICE OF THE CITY ENGINEER
March 10, 1982
Mr. Wayne Tanaka
Ogden, Ogden & Murphy
2300 Westin Bldg., 2001 - 6th Ave.
Seattle, Wa. 98121
Dear Wayne:
HARVE H. HARRISON
MAYOR
SUBJECT: WISEMAN HOUSE CONSTRUCTION - 17500 72ND AVE. WEST
The Wisemans have been contacted several times in the past in
an attempt to control the erosion from the storm runoff on their
property. I spoke to Mrs. Wiseman and Norm Ramquist (their contrac-
tor) on March 8, 1982 and at that time I was assured that the prob-
lem would be corrected. I spoke with Mr. Wiseman at great length
on March 9, 1982 and he assured me that the problem would be cor-
rected. An inspection of the site on the afternoon of March 9, 1982
showed no signs of any attempt to resolve the erosion.
In the past six months they have been cited twice for the same
problem, and they have made no attempt to resolve the problem.
Because of the number of calls complaining about siltation prob-
lems that have resulted directly from the Wiseman's failure to imple-
ment simple, inexpensive erosion control, I urge you to take appro-
priate action. They are in violation of the Uniform Building Code,
Section 7013.
282. If you have any questions, please contact Jerry Hauth, extension
Sincerely,
JAMES E. ADAMS, P.E.
City Engineer
JH/st
Z
1i
U
0
U
W
co
0
Z
0
LLJ
Q)
re
0
CITY OF EDMONDS
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
RIGHT - OF - WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT
I Eolcr F
LL.:; Ln
A. *Address or vicinity of Const t
17�;.,
'0 40 ;7�.,i,7c1'2" 11�e,
0 Owner:
Name 6'
Mailing Address 6/
4&7.9 t Z., 0 6 e, . 0
City, . state, Zip Code
* Contractor:
Name V
— 12 / ?. 5- —
MaIIN,,*ddress
XX.Og 0
City, S t a/te , Zip Code
Permit No. 2.1 S,
Issue Date /Y— 13 Ig/
/.5-
o Permit Issued To: Ak , )n(-(V7
Type of Work to be Ppne,
�Ibm �Jla-velloll*
Work in 1krinection'With-
0 Sub or Plat ��Single Family
El Comml. / Ind. El Apt. Condo.
9 Pavement Cut: El Yes 2��o
State License N mb r
_-u S
5 P P6
T�Iephone Number
* * NO WORK TO BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE * *
B. APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN
INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees to hold the City of Edmondsharmless
from any injuries, damages, or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, foreseen or unforeseen, that may be made
against the City of Edmonds, or any of its departments or employees, including or not limited to the defense of any legal
proceedings including defense costs, court costs, and attorney fees by reason of granting this permit.
Upon issuance of this permit, the contractor is responsible for workmanship and materials for a period of one year
following the final inspection and acceptance of the restoration by the Engineering Division.
Funds held from the Security Deposit (estimated restoration fee) will be held until the final street patch is completed, at
which time a debit or credit will be processed for issuance to the applicant.
Work is to be inspected. Restoration to be in accordance with City Code. Traffic Control.to be in accordance with Traffic
Section of City Code. Street to be kept clean at all times. A 24 - hour notice is required- for inspection by Engineering.
Call 775-2525, extension 220.
I understand that this permif must b�available at the job site for inspection purposes at all times.
Signature:IA-& Date—/
Owner or Agent
THIS PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT THE JOB SITE FOR INSPECTION PURPOSES
CALL DIAL - DIG PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK
C. Issued By:/," --l"loack
r 1.
Time Authorized: Void after 1,50 days
Special Conditions:
Ammendments:
Permit Fee:—"
Security Deposit:
Receipt No.:
Fund III Fee:
Street Cut Dimensions
X
�NQ WORK TO BEGIN PRIOR TO PERM -IT I$5UANCE
1� r -.\ '_
Eng. Div. Deccmber 1978
FIELD INSPECTION NOTES (Fund. 111 - Route conv to Street Dent.
rnMMr-%n+-Q-
Diagram:
Contractor called for inspection Yes NO
I
,,7ork Disapproved BY: %= Date: Bv Date:
Work Approved Bv: D a t e -
Inspector:
Ena. Div. December 1978
C5
11 f*IJ
SITE P I- \AN. SCALE:
NAGE.. PLAN'�.,',--
STANDARD'DRAI;
NOTE:, DQ NOT USE INFILTRATION,,§.)�S4SV ION
.-:-- : '', - INFILTRAT
ON SLOPES OVER 15. P E�C- E-K-Ti (15
PAGE .2�:OF Z,
'RISE, PER 100 FEE T HORIZONTAL
6,v
71)z
O\
its.
C=
0
m
C2 C>
0
R
& 'a"
- . -, I . . ., ... - :
1�7
Is
ol 1. 1, 1
-Zz
14- W c
-Jf
Id
%�ITY OF EDMONDS FOR INSPECTION CATL % Permit HGO
PUBLIC WORKS DEPAR%T
SIDE SEWER PERMIT 775-2525 Ext. 220 Issue Date
PEP -MIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE
AWANWAIWAW"
JA 3.
�z
ca 4.
5.
6.
Address of Construction
Property Legal Description (include all, easements)
�, 4 /1 T /Z., ,? ///10 kei —7i_,,,.,
Single Family Residence 1,,' Multi -Family No. of Units
Commercial
Owner and/or Builder
Contractor & License No. -W - Ile- /yA
Invasion into City Right -of -Way: No- Yes (If Yes Right-of-
way Construction Permit Required - Call Dial Dig (342-5344) before
excavation).
E-1 7. Cross other private property: Yes No Easement required -
attach legal description and county easement number.
READ THE FOLLOWING AND SIGN:
P4
a. Property owners must obtain a permit to install side sewers on
>4 their property. A licensed side sewer contractor must be employed to
construct side sewers in the public' right-of-way.
b. The side sewer contractor assumes full reponsibility for each
installation for one year.
c. Commercial establishment requires a minimum of a six inch (6")
P4
z side sewer line.
0 d. Side sewers may not be installed closer than thirty inches (30")
U to any structure. t
e. Side sewer lines must be laid at 2% (1.150)
and maximum grade of 100% (450). a minimum grade. of
0 0
f. No turn in side sSwer greater than 45 (1/8,bend) is 0 allowed
between cleanout. All 90 turns must be constructed of a 45 (1/,q
bend) and wye with'removable cap. I
g. No down spouts, footing dr-ains.or floor drains can be connected
to side sewer -system.
h. Pea gravel is require d for bedding when installing sewer lines
through other than granular soil.
i. Cleanouts are required at 30"-60" from each plumbing exit line
and at minimum intervals of 100' along sewer 'line run.
j. Trenches within City right-of-way must be restored to original
conditions. Contractors shall be responsible for right-of-way failure
due to poor compaction of fill.
k.. Side sewer must be left uncovered until inspected and approved
by the City.
1. Inspection during normal working hours only. Two (2) working
days notice required.
DATE:
I tertify that I have read
and shall comply With the above
PERMIT FEE: DISAPPROVED BY: Date:
H
r-) W /kUIA, B Date:
00
CONNECZ1ON_FEE,6. Date:
APPROVED By
PEP141T MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE
'j� 87 -,R,-,AraT RLE
CATC44 BASIX:
mks I* IS-30(01L
USUAL)
(.' -nwi-uwir
TRE NC W L Ir 04 G—T H
ft
Tftu%CW COVIM 2A
K' . M�� .—OW ... . .........
.... .....................
&,� PLrkr PIPC --,
rb"TEE W/ 16" LONG LEGS
lLcvdrL 7,RMNC.N
CAP
SYSTEM CROSS-SECTION
TkENCH COVER -
3/4 WASW ED
GqA,VEL
6" DIAM FESW P1
L - I
1- 4 0-001-1
TRENCH CROSS—SECTION
STANDARD DRAINAGE PLAN
INFILTRATION SYSTEM
PAGE I OF 2
for :Ziln—
location
plan by
phone
date
DESIGN DATA
Trench Perc LF per Imperm Trench
Number Rate 1000 sq.ft. Area Req.
NOTES
1. Call Engineering Division (771-3202)
for prebackfill and final inspections.
2. Responsibility for operation and
maintenance of drainage systems on
private property is the responsibility
of the property owner(s). Preventive
maintenance consists of preventing
soil and other materials from entering
trench during construction as well as
after construction. Catch basins should
be cleaned of floating material -and
sediment at re?ular intervals (at least
twice per year .
0 y-
CITY OF EDMONDS
ce)
Op
2 OAL E
1 1'7 Zr -2�
/0 0? 1 /0 e9 /1'
L 4 X
2
9
-7 l/ 7
7'N
4
17
/7
DR. _j j. 3
/0 z
2
t 'IN L -A
7
�]-77
06 (,j \0) plip �A,
7 3 �`;S P08 LE
1 139 0 7 -7 0!
12
16 72
7901/ -7 Ll 0 _T_ r- r=- 173 rd ST. S. W.
E511WES 1-2-Zo �72_/O 03
/7 03
18 13 00 07 1, 6
?55 35) /"/Ol -1-5d q 7ZL t-
l7z, 617--7
-4. 02
15 13 /3,9 7
7qo2
F
19 17 3 zcl
/ 7 �,_,7'1 1
I/ 7�;zj Z
ol 03 1 02 1 01 1 ;5t- 0/ 09
4 /732,- 07
1 4 1 3 7 71 )023
0
3
3
3
_0
L
I "17
75 .37
.7 Ll 6-f-!
-7L/
- 1,., /, -
C/ 41 h,
LAT op
04 7 11 7 5 EN 02 1- 1 1_0 Lit 701to
-7391 7 -7 Z
S.W P' 77
I o,\r to
Cl) 7 LAZ
/7q2Z
141 175th.
143
142 8 TRA 6 T-S
-3 j
.73/o Vic W., /0 , , , "' — — __ — — — — - *
w
------ / 75 �X_J_
6 02 1/.,' 0A I
6)
/7
(456 �j
7 512 0 S- 7-*/
-1 Ll
T,
C\j
18. 17 16 45 14
05
0/
S-
/ 1117/ f�',, 5 7 ""O'l 7
j` n�S- 7 15 2 1
��,;407 -71 1_5 1-7//71/ 7!5.'�Z -7 C.
176 th. ST S. W
-7 17.
30V
T 16 .04 1 02 (5136) 1 SEA L AWN
L/
9
P 4"') 7
tj
Q
JEWI I---- --IV
00 S 176 tK' PL. S. W
c 0 2
14 SO�No N
92 /0/ 7(_ zo
8
-7 -/7/8-
16 15 14'�'-
)ALE 13�_
S N ol 7413 1 17
02
'7 3- 7
t/7700
03
.0
0/ /771/ 0.2
r7 tj 7 Z, Ir) - 7ZI 155
4 77/c
01
7. N 6
'7
7 7Z.7
c�02 15
7'7' 3 0
0 PA
'L3 wv�,
IA8 r7 01 N'O .(4 1 , 5 6
�'i D _. . _ / 1 2
5 4LO 313' (5 JI)
6 1 N -
1 �3 N 02
8 L
04
179th--ST-- -S.
7, \15
14 /JQ -0 '17
41 48
N
1 1 160
cdo of I _. - f
1 20 /8
164i
59 42 47 47
33 1 (71 or( i � 5 0?
4
17 /8 19 F
V, 43 1 46 IMORAN,� -5 rA
38 D9D. 1
24
119 -1 Cl i-t.-
Akjq6t -7 "t 1 7'
13 14
20 17
35�Nj 3 6: 37 44 1 45
K)
I T?
q w
C)
o 3 I
11409- E:
'it11 is a parcet MaP
his is not a survey.. it I
ho
r.er relu-eslyl- o
oa))Iler A4r$. We Is jolqq
Oki 4,1?67-
4cr-
A uj,"
Elrh,cro.
cie -rhe,�
Al-jz
1,flv. m1c4lve555
it
Af?ly
C)
.4
Id,
)eAVAI
I< 44A I(.
00 7.
4 6
/MvAr
11�4,y Z 1AVA.'T
4 VA170H Y
DeT.414
3.
0
?
CITY OF EDMONDS EN
Examined by
Date
A
Remarks
loeol- MR,
GENERAL NOTES: ROCKERY
5% MA >(.
I I IEEJ The rock material shall be as nearly rectangular as
15 =1
140— possible. No
140 stone shall be used which does not extend through the wall. The
rock material shall be hardp soundr durable and free from weathered
portions, seams, cracks, other defects. The rock density shall be
a minimum of 160 pounds per cubic foot. Size categories shall
one include
Two -man rocks (300 t-)6500 pounds) 13" in least dimension;
IV14111 ,-OCe 4
S,% M,4 K one - n?qn go ck-$
t6c I'd 360
2) The retai -1,1 shall be started
1090/1, 00A. F=4 I f- r&excavating a trench, not
r
0 0 less than��inches or more than
APP90X. 4S5611V1,5D 1000 00 0()-
0. foot in depth below
0 00 subgrade in excavation sections or below the existing ground level
0 0 in embankment sections.
0,
000 00
XIV1,11 7711CeIVEa5 3) Rock selection and placement shall be such that there will be
SI-15CII-169 aw-1-FIZ-6 minimum voids and, in the exposed face of the wall, no open voids
over six (6) inches across in any direction. The final course
shall have a continuous appearance and be placed to minimize
erosion of the backfill material. The larq
er rocksshall be placed
125 A/ at the base of the rockery so that the wall will be stable and have
a stable appearance. The rocks shall be placed in a manner such
>C I-11AI that longitudinal axis of the rock shall be at 'right angles or
X'.
1 1. Perpendicular to the rockery face. rIhe rocks shall have all
11 -1 - inclining faces sloping to the back of the rockery. Each course of
1219 rocks shall be seated as tightly and evenly as possible on the
120 4,-6, Za=5* ^14 /Y. 4&r/,�- course beneath. After setting each course of rock, all voids
7 W-0 between, the rocks shall be chinked on the back with quarry rock to
11�4)v 01VIT15- 6�- eliminate any void sufficient to pass a 2-inch square probe.
6Y(�24 VA/70,1Y 01V,1-
4) The wall backf ill shall consist of quarry spalls with a maximum
J�fC17'10N 4 -4 ROMMY D6Z5411. size of four (4) inches and a mini . �, Yf two (2) inches. This
1115 A71-5 material * shall be placed to a* inch minimum thickness
between the entire wall and the cut or fil-1 material. The backfill
aterial shall be pl'aced in lifts to
0 'qff'M<4Rc( pe?tqil, m an elevation approximately six
i tker (6) inches below the top of each course of rocks as they are
placed, until the uppermos
t course is placed. Any backfill
material on the bearing surface of one rock course shall be removed
before setting the next course.
5) The above specifications apply to the construction of the rockery
only and are based upon standard design practice for rockeries
under 8 feet in height. Any investigation of the condition of
20 40 so existing soils with regards to the placement and stability of said
rockery shall be the responsibility of an engineer experienced in
soils.mechanics i.e. byothers.
1410
1-3:5
CIO —
126
120-
115—
all
WA5174-0 le6CA'
R416AQ5AI�o 7X!Z5 7 7,4eL—
/0, — 1106156
:5Z IsMX —1
140
AO,f-MIL
(�Jdt-C '. e-jtAee a.4 7110-
A"c4eet
13,5
/.30
12a
� A 5
JS
116-
Per re 7 o c s-1- .6 041 &f \Y
P%A P 10 1/0 W I Itj I -S R
PA Y
,Ftlt-et je; e-
Q Pt Jr j ef I Cj $ 02 4q J6 4t
byrk-r- se4ik/ 0 r- jr.
Fillzcl UJ17A
14FO,4D 7-lec-5
7-165 7,1 7-1;
:::) C AC
r
7e); j e
jV,
C) 1� sit,
Lacctl tepoer, "e
pp"�R 14 e
r
,�, f, '
Rev" d6nvenle-
e. sh-ow" -7-
ar- 10 - ENGINEERING DEPT.
ow 11'ay,
ir- Tk9 CITY OF EDMONDS
Examined b�--
Date
7R,
L0 C9t
j -11V
$
V Ll -rj�c-,H r 4. In-e
om fzcarl
Fr . 10/11'
n $A q h, 6 e
ro -a Sf d-
.q* axisrml
/ X<Xffsfy A5 f,-,2,0
V 6ey A�
L L
3
K
: 14ZY- 6�5;14712�21-IS "01/V/Y &-11-151-11-�7 - �12,71,130
"t17
�y
Remarks
2
0
- 33
JC4Lf /0
G&�tR41- NOTES: Zwo,5101Y colyTlen
I`RVXI,0�5 41-10 lV41M-41,"I rfMl-OKAR�'
,54ell-171e,5 rO 111MqZf 71147
OlqlZ-r 1V411Y14-11Y,50 &11,rlZ Ca`>1S1-,-CZ11f17011,4110
C01V'1`Z'Z-7Z-,D 41>0 lWff 1OL21-Z5,,171-4Z XIAS
2) 1��fCll-117ZU J1'14ZZ-
;).4Z,I- 41-,--A5 3%14ZI- A5,- J�fWW /-V//7/ 4
�F/e4-15 -Y:f 25,211'>16 AYIZZ &5 6CP//x* 41-1
CITY OF EDMONDS ENGINEERING DEPT.
Examined bY 00
Date L
Re m a rks
RECL-iVED
4 =1 e-- eVO OCT 51982
"V
7.:5-0 0 7 -Z'O& 4 (/67 Dir. Of Public Works
lel,? 7le-5 /:�5^F C17-Y 9 - 2`7-62 I<Zle
4,0,0,E,9 S6Cj10,,1,1 A -4 6' 6 -3 19�R C17-X- -9 -/5 -eg AZIQ
Ila —
—//0
AV 0- d4 -C/A
SeC 8, r. e 71Y. I R. 4 E.� PV. A4.
1,40
125-
120
115
//0
140-
1-35-
110U,56
�j J=
A ffiZO X
J�fCRON 4 -4
=5'il,
U go 40 .50
APPROX
//-Z�5 e7R Z-41-,K-,-LZ74,,cLc
7
,146�� ,`1-ZZ
4Ce 5'0 4S
:5 7,144X
-140
IOC-1-4111-
/-30
12-1
12V
//5
140
/35
-150
125
120
51V
R416A014,0 7-165 0 I-R-51qr649 41b
45 ReV�9.
-7 7 7"
\V,30� &-1
,y -
4ZZ 6��V,4TAV,-7�5
2 11141,1 ZOCe
�5 �. 114,4 11
0 00
00
0 0.
0o 0
0 0, D
4 Lno 0
4' .�o 00
C>6
C
YC
& `1V11,1 7711C,(�VE�5
6 " 1111A1
12"IVAX'.
,L--
4'- 6 171R,-,- 1-141Y ZXA�
/fOCAM/Cr 064M.
/Y7�5
(X>
�W,
GENERAL WrES: ROCKERY
1) The rock material shall be as nearly rectangular as possible. No
stone shall be used which does not extend through the wall. The
rock material shall be hard, sound, durable and free from weathered
portions, seamst cracks, other defects. The rock density shall be
a minimum of 160 pounds per cubic foot. Size categories shall
include:
Two -man rocks (300 t,-.X,600 pounds) 13" in least dimension;
Three-man rocks (800 to 1200 pounds), 16" in least dimension.'
2) The retaining wall shall be started by excavating a trench, not
less than six (6) inches or more than one (1) foot in depth below
subgrade in excavation sections or below the existing ground level
in embankment sections.
3) Rock selection and placement shall be such that there will be
minimum voids and, 'in the exposed face of the wall, no open. voids
over six (6) inches across in any direction. The final course
shall have a continuous appearance and be placed to minimize
erosion of the backfill material. The larqer rocks shall be placed
at the base of the rockery so that the wall will be stable and have
a stable appearance. The rocks shall be placed in a manner such
that longitudinal axis of the rock shall be at right angles or
perpendicular to the rockery . face. The rocks shall have all
inclining faces sloping to the back of the rockery. Each course of
rocks shall be seated as tightly and evenly as possible on the
course beneath. After setting each course of rock, all voids
between the rocks shall be chinked on the back with quarry rock to
eliminate any void sufficient to pass a 2-inch square probe.
4) The wall backfill shall consist of quarry spalls with a maximum
size of four (4) inches and a minimum size of two (2) inches. This
material shall be placed to an eight (8) 'inch minimum thickness
between the entire wall and the cut or fill material. The backfill
material shall be placed in lifts to an elevation approximately six
(6) inches below the top of each course of rocks as they are
placed, until the uppermost course is placed. Any backfill
material on the bearing surface of one rock course shall be removed
before setting the next course.
5) The above specifications apply to the construction of the rockery
only and are based upon standard design practice for rockeries
under 8 feet in height. Any investigation of the condition of
existing soils with regards to the placement and stability of said
rockery shall be the responsibility of an engineer experienced in
soils mechanics i.e. by others.
2
0
33
Gf"Ml- IYOTfs: fR0,510N colyrlea-
I-R67J1Z0,- 4/yZ 1V,411yZ411Y relV190KA&Y COIY71WZ
,,W11- 171e,5 7-0 7114 7- ZA.041.1 w4rcR 10 455 111a7 lf;11�11Z;-Az
Ne 1Y,4,r41R41- JK�75111- /:54CIZ-171,f �5 IVZ157,5e J471,511WCr
011ZIZ CaA�l
/41' 1W11Y7--411Yzf0 &1'11r1Z s7lezllf�olv 4110 1-4yZZjrXR11>i� 41(z:
COIV�01-e7-`O 141Y�9 Zle 10a7-�/Y714Z- 4�� OW-,Y17,-e� z5;Ze2J1,!W A/A-5 11-4-�549
2) et�I'Yl-/Fa- IW11-117Z�5 Y11,4Z1- 9,f 551,7,��14� Y11X,-4A1
41WA5 5%1,4ZI- 5,- J�f&069 1,V1771 4 11'5,�Ze1Y1Y1,4Z- qRz�vlV
!FR-Im 0,5,6vl-y�f 6ull,>�
V,5eQ11'16 ZZ2 r0l-ISIST 1��-
--�--W 4X,-,,VI7-eC7-
� I
RECEIVED
OCT 4 198Z
T
F.7 i :7- Dir. Of Public Works
2 RI? r125-25 110eAl' C11-Y 9-2,1-30 I<Zle
A -4 4' 6 -6 19eR C17�- 9-/-1 60 AZR
�7 40
//0
460- 4-115/4
�71e,
111072U
1--4- ell- 1711f 5 ro r//,4,r 52011-14-Nr 14,9,fll pl.4rrg �94574� lyalr 04//r/1Z
.9
2) 64w,-T1,o-1 - rf f 1rheR PIVAV
45-4,zes oe 41c11'4,11;Fa11Z1O /-CW/7�R
41WAY P11411- 5e 5'eeo�w hy//7/ 4 111,f,4ZZW1-11,4,1
411
.45 071e~1,5�5
RECEIVED
All^ n nAfld-fl
NW 114., SW 114, SEC 8., TWP 27N. RGE 4E, W.M.
IN
Q)
cl
to
LO C)
CN
SCALE. 1 10'
0 5 10 20
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LOT 9, GLEN ELLEN WEW TRACTS. ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF
RECORDED IN VOLUME 23, PAGE 6 AND 7, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH
COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON.
PROJECT TEAM
OWNERIAPPLICANT
SELECT HOMES
16531 137H AVENUE W #A 107
LYNNWOOD, WASHINGTON 98037
(425) 742-6044
EMAIL: KA YLA.CLARKOOUTLOOK. COY
CONTACT- KAYLA CLARK
CIVIL ENGINEER
RAM ENGINEERING, INC.
16531 137H AVE W SUI 7E A 108
LYNNWOOD, WA 98037
(425) 678-6960
EMAIL:ROBLORAMENGINEERINGINC.COM
CONTACT- ROB L. LONG, PE
EXISITNG IMPERIOUS SURFACE REMOVED
BUILDING FOUNDA 71ON 3,200 SF
ASPHALT DRIVEWAY 2000
TOTAL IMPERWOUS AREA REMOVED 5,200 SF
TESC NOTES
1. 7EMPORARY EROSION CON7ROL MA Y BE REQUIRED
By CITY OF EDMONDS PRIOR TO, DURING AND POST
DEMOL1710N.
2 7HE S7REET IS TO BE CLEAN OF DEBRIS, VEGETA 710N,
AND GARBAGE AT ALL 77MES.
Applicant shall repairtreplace all damage to
-utifties or Irontage improvements in City I
right-of-way perCity Standards that is cau.-,ed
or occurs during the permitted project.
OVINERICONTRACTOR ISS RESPONSIBLE FOR
EROSION CONTROL AND DRAINAGE
C""r7:7,
ET FILE
Call 2 Working Days Before You Dig
811 or 1-800-424-5555
Utilities Underground Location Cen!!EJ
OCT 2 6 2015
13WILDING DEPAR4::MENT
CITY OF EDMONDS
APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION
CITY OF EDMONDS
DA TE. - 12-110115-
BY.
aTY-EWGINURING DIMON
16531 13TH AVE W, SUITE A108
LYNNWOOD, WA 98037
PHONE: (425) 678-6960
WWW.RAMENGINEERINGINC.COM
UJ
at
Q.
Z
Z
C >- I �
a :z
U.,
Q- 1i
U
R
U)
LU
X
LU
U)
N
LU
Q
till
W
Z
Q
w
ENGINEER.
ROB L. LONG, PE
DRAWN B Y-
MIKE MORRIS
ISSUE DA TE. SCALE.
8114115 AS N07ED
JOB NO.
SHEET-
15-026
DM-01
SHT I OF I
J�J'Dob)5- /b5v
NW 114., SW 114., SEC 8., TWP 27N. RGE 4E. W.M.
SCALE: I" = 10'
5 10 20
momm�m�
UPTION
I TRACTS. ACCORDING TO THE PLAT
OLUME 23, PAGE 6 AND 7, RECORDS
WASHINGTON.
OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON.
D, CONC. MON. & 3- BRASS DISK W1 -X- &
'ND STREET SW & 76TH AVENUE WEST WGS#45
(7BM "A -)
MANHOLE LOCA7ED AT THE IN7ERSECTION
72ND A VENUE W
T
4107
98037
7LOOK.COM
A 108
RINGINC. Com
PE
.-YORS
9F EDMONDS
771-0235
�F EDMONDS
771-0235
7 EDMONDS
771-0235
?7ER
263-4024
4CT- JEREMYFALLT
4ST
244-5088
A C T- JEFF BURNS
225-5773
�MISH COUNTY PUD
783-1000
ICT- ROB LARSON
)MISH COUNTY RRE
551-1200
VDS SCHOOL DISTRICT
�70-7000
cn
m
m
—i
x
m
TE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FNERAL NOTES & DETAILS
.EARING, GRADING & TESC PLAN
"ANDARD DETAILS
X> QO c to S5- f-WILUING DEFARTMErvi-b,
(,-rry OF F-nvco%
., tn�,,
APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION
CITY OF EDMONDS
DA 7E. 3�hk
ar 4--
aTY DVGINMING DIWSION
16531 13TH AVE W, SUITE Al 08
LYNNWOOD, WA 98037
PHONE: (425) 678-6960
WWW.RAMENGINEERINGINC.COM
m )-J�J�
:x Z
(8
Uj u'-
oc �:
ul
0
'u z
t"'o
cln
Z
V)
5
�i
W
tn
ftj
Lu
0
t ri ca
Q
Q
w
U.
1�on�'�eg;'
4;�" Z"GisTo;
�
� �N I..
IIY-7110
ENGINEER. -
ROB L. LONG, PE
DRAWN BY.
MIKE MORRIS
ISSUE DA TE.
SCALE.
811411.5
AS NOTED
JOB NO.-
15-026
SHEET-
SP-01
SHT
OF 4
NW 114, SW 114, SEC 8., TWP 27N., RGE 4E. WM.
I SIDE SEWER NOTES
IF RE-USNG EXIS77NG SIDE SEWER (FROM PROPERTY LINE TO HOUSE). -
PROPERTY OWNER MUST HA VE CONDI 77ON VERIFIED AND PRO VIDE A
REPORT TO THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPAR77WENT
F RE- USING EXIS 77NG SEWER LA 7ERA L (FROM PROPERTY LINE TO CITY
MAIN). COND177ON MUST BE VERIFIED BY PUBLIC WORKS DEPAR7714ENT
colv rA c r mmow �5 sEorR DI 14SION A r 425- 771- 0236.
LINE TYPE AREA (SQUARE FEET)
1. NON-REGULA TED 0
............ ...... .. ... ........ ... ...
EXEMPT
REGULA TED
2.
REPLA CED
0
0
J.
NEW (POST 1977)
+
5,500
4.
TOTAL REGULATED IMPERVIOUS AREA
5,500
5.
TOTAL AREA M177GATED BY EX157ING STORMW47ER MANAGEMENT SY57EM(S)
0
6.
REGULATED AREA NOT YET M/ 77GA TED
51500
Z
AREA PROPOSED TO BE MITIGATED BY LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT 7ECHNIQUES
0
8. 1
AREA PROPOSED TO BE M(77GA7ED THROUGH CONVEN77ONAL SVAf 7ECHNIQUES
5,500
BUILDING HEIGHT
CALCULATIONS (AEG)
SPOT ELEZA 77ONS FOR HEIGHT CALCULA
ELEVA 77ON A:
356.06
ELEVA 71ON B.
355.49
ELEVA 77ON C.
ELEZA 77ON D.
356.76
35Z 18
TO TA L:
AVERAGE ORIGINAL GRADE (AO!2)
1, 425.49
= 356.37
TOP OF GARAGE SLAB
360.00
ROOF A T RIDGE
360.JJ
ALLOWABLE BUILDING HEIGHT
381.37
(356.37 + 25 FT)
"'I'm I I "k", So A
I IMPERVIOUS AREAS
HOUSE+ COVERED DA, PA 770, PORCH & WALK 3, 720 SF
(ROOF LINE)
UNCOVERED PA770 AND WALK 80 SF
UNCOVERED DRIVEWAY 1. 700 -5r-
TOTAL 5,500 SF
LOT COVERAGE
LOT AREA: 22,741 SF
ALLOWABLE COVERAGE (35X) 7,959 SF
HOUSE, COVERED DECK AND GARAGE 3,320 SF
PERCENT CO VERA GE 14.6X
EX WA TER METER TO BE REMOVED
CITY TO CUT & CAP 0 THE MAIN . . . . . .
UPON CONSMUC77ON FINALIZA77ON E
(EX WA TER ME TER SER WCE TO BE . . . . . . .
E
MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT
CONSTRUCRON W?7H AVB)
ALL FINAL RESTORA 77ON RESUL TING
. . . . . . . . . .
FROM WA 7FR METER INSTALLA 77ON TO
. . .. . . . . . . . . .
BE COMPLE7ED BY CON7RACTOR
(SEE TYP HMA AND U 77LI TY PA TCH
DETAIL E2.3 ON SHT 7D-01)
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
UTIL17YNOTE
ALL NEW U77LI77ES ARE REQUIRED TO BE INSTALLED
UNDERGROUND.
� CONSTRUCTION NOTE
APPLICANT SHALL REPAIRIRELACE ALL DAMAGE TO
U77LI77ES OR FRONTAGE IMPROVEMEN7S IN CITY
RIGH T- OF- WAY PER CITY STANDARDS 7HA T IS
CAUSED OR OCCURS DURING 7HE PERMIT7ED PROJECT
FSTORM DRAINAGE NOTES
IF 7HE RIM TO IN VER T OF A N Y CA TCH BA SIN EXCEEDS
5 FEET A TYPE 9 CATCH BASIN WLL BE REQUIRED.
F007ING DRAINS TO CONNECT TO STORM DRAINAGE
SYS7EM DOKWS7REAM OF DE7EN770N TANK OR
CON7RACTOR MAY INSTALL AND CONNECT TO DRY WELL.
ALL STORM PIPES TO BE CPEP OR APPROVED EQUAL.
SCALE.- 1 10'
0 5 10 20
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LOT 9, GLEN ELLEN VIEW TRACTS. ACCORDING TO THE PLAT
7HEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 23, PAGE 6 AND 7, RECORDS
OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON.
BENCHMARK
ORIGINA 77NG BENCHMARK:
WEST 114 CORNER, CASED, CONC. MON. & 3" BRASS DISK W/ "X" &
PUNCH, LOCATED ON 172ND STREET SIN & 76774 AVENUE WEST WGS#45
EL. = 173.86
7EMPORARY BENCHMARK (7BM -A-)
RIM OF SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE LOCATED AT THE INTFRSECTION
OF 1757H STREET SW & 72ND AVENUE W,
EL. = 355.12
DATUM. NA VD 88
PROJECT TEAM
OWNERIAPPLICANT
SELECT HOMES
16531 137H AVENUE W, #A 107
LYNNWOOD, WASHINGTON 98037
(425) 742-6044
EMAIL: KAYLA.CLARK@OU7LO0K.COM
CONTACT- KAYLA CLARK
CIVIL ENGINEER
RAM ENGINEERING, INC.
16531 13TH AVE W, SUI 7E A 108
LYNNWOOD, W4 98037
(425) 678-6960
EMAIL: ROBLORAMENGINEERINGINC. COM
CONTACT- ROB L. LONG, PE
UTILITY PURVEYORS
*-.5feCjprL. It.-�6(tr'717100 IS
leemmom Forl- n4s
jr4Sn*LLA'r)0A':50 OF WY 101re
WA TER SUPPL Y-
CITY OF EDMONDS
425-771-0235
SA N/ TA R Y SE WER.
CITY OF EDA40NDS -
APPROVED BY PLANNING
425-771-0235
STORM SEWER.
CITY OF EDMONDS
425-771-0235
7f
PHONE.
FRON 77ER
425-263-4024
CABLE.-
CONTACT- IEREMYFALLT
COMCAST
oThEPET
FILE
425-244-5088
CON TACT JEFF BURNS
GAS.-
PSE
888-225-5773
POWER.
SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUD
Zone 12- C,oracrX
425-783-1000
CONTACT- ROB LARSON
Setbacks
FIRE DIS7RICT-
DIS7RICT NO. 1
SNOHOMISH COUNTY RRE
425-551-1200
Front
Sides -� /-L-L
Rear
SCHOOL DISMICT-
EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT
Other
425-670-7000
Hei ' t �zs 7-1
SHEET INDEX
1 SP-01
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
2 GN-01
GENERAL NOTES & DETAILS
3 TP-01
CLEARING., GRADING & TESC PLAN
4 TD-01
STANDARD DETAILS
RE -SUB
gv151bF'-" Tb
147-
OCT 2 6 2015
(Fcw- STW*4 "m*m-r10f-3.S -&
DtPAR
mTmm"3 -.Vslzm LWA4,Y160
.,PUILDIN(3
017y OF: EaW;;MOSENT
6NL%b
Call 2 Working Days Before You Dig
811 or 1-800-424-5555
Utilities Underground Location Center
APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION
CITY OF EDMONDS
DA 7E.- 12-IC>l
BY. , ','5-
07Y ENGINMING DIMON
16531 13TH AVE W, SUITE Al 08
LYNNWOOD, WA 98037
PHONE: (425) 678-6960
WWW.RAMENGINEERINGINC.COM
C �- I �
a ZE
Z k
0
ch, U)
'ut
U)
U,
Z
L
'm
Yb
LU
Q
Im
9:
LU
LU LU
x
LU
Uj
to QL
Scanned Uj
LL.
Z
%ftvi
Z
U)
lalai�-1115;
ENGINEER:
ROB L. LONG, PE
DRAWN BY.
MIKE MORRIS
ISSUE DA TE.- SCALE.
8114115 AS NOIED
JOB NO:
15-026
SHEET-
SP-01
SHT I OF 4
NW 114., SW 114, SEC 8, TWP 27N. RGE 4E, W.M.
GENERAL NOTES
1. ALL MA 7ERIALS AND WORK SHOWN ON THESE PLANS SHALL CONFORM To THE CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD PLANS AND DETAILS, THE FOLLOWNG
SPECIFICA 77ONS AND CODES, AND ALL 0774ER APPLICABLE LOCAL MUNICIPAL, STA 7E, AND FEDERAL CODES, RULES AND REGULA TONS.
- CURRENT IN7ERNA 77ONAL BUILDING CODE (18C)
- 2015 KSDOT1APW4 STANDARD SPECIFICA 77ONS FOR ROAD, BRIDGE AND MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION
- WASHINGTON STA IF DEPARTWENT OF ECOLOGY STORMWA TER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN (CURRENT ED17TON)
7E 7H DRA KINGS REFER To Cl TY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAILS, UNLESS NO TED 0 7HER WISE.
2. STANDARD PLAN AND TYPE NUMBERS INDICA D ON ESE
3. A COPY OF 7HESE APPROVED PLANS MUST BE ON THE JOBSITE WHENEVER CONS7RUC71ON IS IN PROGRESS.
4. DEWA 77ONS FROM 7HESE PLANS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD AND 7HE LOCAL GOVERNING AUTHORITY
5. CON7RACTOR SHALL RECORD ALL APPROVED DEWA 77ONS FROM THESE PLANS ON A SET OF `AS-BUIL T"DRA WINGS AND SHALL SUMMARIZE ALL AS-BUIL T
COND177ONS ON ONE SET OF REPRODUCIBLE DRA KINGS FOR SUBMITTAL TO THE OWNER PRIOR PROJECT COMPLE77ON AND ACCEPTANCE. A SET OF AS-BUIL T
DRA KINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL OF THE BUILDING OCCUPANCYIFINAL PROJECT APPROVAL.
6. ELEVA 77ONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET SEE SURVEY FOR BENCHMARK INFORMA 770N.
Z THE LOCA 77ONS OF EXIS77NG U77LI77ES AND SITE FEA TuRES SHOKoN HEREON HA VE BEEN FURNISHED BY OTHERS BY FIELD SURVEY OR OBTAINED FROM
A VAILABLE RECORDS AND SHOULD THEREFORE BE CONSIDERED APPROXIMA TE ONL Y AND NOT NECESSARIL Y COMPLETE. IT IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF
THE CONTRACTOR TO INDEPENDENTL Y VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF ALL UTILITY LOCA 77ONS SHOKN AND TO FURTHER DISCOVER AND PR07ECT ANY 07HER
UTILITIES NOT SHOWN HEREON WHICH MA Y BE AFFECTED BY THE IMPLEMENTA 77ON OF THIS PLAN. CON7RACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCA TION, DEPTH, SIZE, TYPE
AND COND17ION OFEXIS77NG U77LITYLINES AT CONNEC77ON OR CROSSING POINTS BEFORE 7RENCHING FOR NEW UTIL177ES. ENGINEER ASSUMES NO
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY OF THE EXIS77NG U77LI77ES AND S17E FEATURES PRESENTED ON THESE DRAWNGS. ENGINEERSHALL
BE NO 77FIED IMMEDIA TEL Y OF CONFLICTS TRA T ARISE.
8. CON7RACTOR SHALL LOCA IF AND PR07ECT ALL U77LI77ES DURING CONSTRUCRON AND SHALL CONTACT 7HE UNDERGROUND U77LI77ES LOCA 77ON SERWCE
(1-800-424-5555) A T LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONS7RUC770N.
9. CON7RACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL CONDITIONS AND DIMENSIONS A T THE PROJECT SITE BEFORE STAR77NG WORK AND SHALL N077FY OWNEW5 REPRESENTA 77VE
OF ANY DISCREPANCIES.
10. PIPE LENGTHS WHERE SHOWN ARE APPROXIMA IF AND MA Y CHANGE DUE TO FIELD CONDITIONS.
11. CON7RACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE GE07ECHNICAL REPORT (WHERE APPLICABLE) AND SHALL 7740ROUGHLY FAMILIARIZE HIMSELF KITH THE
CON7ENTS TREREOF ALL S17E WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN STRICT COMPLIANCE KITH 7HE RECOMMENDA77ONS OF IRIS REPORT
12 STRUCTURAL FILL MA 7ERIAL AND PLACEMENT SHALL CONFORM TO THE RECOMMENDA 77ONS OF THE PROJECT GE07ECHNICAL REPORT
13. MANHOLES, CA TCH BASINS, U77LI77ES AND PA VEMENT SHALL BEAR ON MEDIUM DENSE TO VERY DENSE NA 77VE SOIL OR COMPACTED STRUCTURAL FILL. IF SOIL
IS DISTURBED, SOFT, LOOSE, WET OR F ORGANIC MA TERIAL IS PRESENT A T SUBGRADE ELEVA TION, REMOVE AND REPLACE K17H COMPACTED STRUCTURAL FILL
PER GE07ECHNICAL REPORT
14. SEE SURVEY AND ARCHITECTURAL ORA WINGS FOR DIMENSIONS AND LOCA 77ONS OF BUILDINGS, LANDSCAPED AREAS AND 07HER PROPOSED OR EXIS77NG S17E
FEA TURES.
15. SEE ARCHI 7ECTURAL DRA WINGS FOR PERIMETER FOUNDA 77ON DRAINS. FOUNDA77ON DRAINS SHALL BEINDEPENDENT Or 07HER S17FDRAIN LINES AND SHALL
BE 77GH7LINED To THE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM WHERE INDICA TED ON THE PLANS.
16. ALL REQUIRED STORMW47ER FACIL177ES MUST BE CONSTRUCTED AND IN OPERA77ON PRIOR TO INSTALLA77ON OF ANY PAVEMENT UNLESS 07HERMSE
APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER.
1Z ALL ROOF DRAINS, PERIMETER FOUNDA 77ON DRAINS, CATCH BASINS AND OTHER EXTERNAL DRAINS SHALL BE CONNECTED TO THE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM,
UNLESS N07ED OTHERKISE.
18. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AND PA Y FOR ALL PERMITS REQUIRED FOR INSTALLA 77ON OF ALL S17F IMPROVEMENTS INDICA TED ON THESE DRA KINGS.
19. AS A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT, ALL DISTURBED AREAS ON AND OFF S17E SHALL BE RETURNED TO 7HE EQUIVALENT OF THEIR PRECONS7RUC77ON COND177ON IN
ACCORDANCE NTH APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS.
20. ALL DISTURBED SOIL AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED OR STABILIZED BY OTHER ACCEPTABLE ME774ODS FOR 774E PREVEN77ON OF ON-517E EROSION AF7ER THE
COMPLE77ON OF CONS`7RUC77ON- SEE EROSION CON7RR PLANS FOR SPECIFIC GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS.
21. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP OFF -SITE STREETS CLEAN A T ALL 77MES BY SWEEPING. WASHING OF THESE STREETS KILL NOT BE ALLOWED W7HOUT PRIOR
APPROVAL.
22. THIS PROJECT IS NOT A BALANCED EAR7HWORK PROJECT B07H EXPORT AND IMPORT OF SOIL AND ROCK MATERIALS ARE REQUIRED.
23 SLOPE OF FINISHED GRADE SHALL BE CONSTANT BETWEEN FINISHED CONTOURS OR SPOT ELEVA 77ONS SHOWN.
24. FINISHED GRADE SHALL SLOPE A WA Y FROM BUILDING WALLS A T MINIMUM 5% SLOPE FOR A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF 10 FEET
25. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AND SHALL INSTALL AND MAINTAIN SHORING AND BRACING AS NECESSARY TO PR07ECT WORKERS, EXIS77NG
BUILDINGS, STREETS, WALKKA YS, U77LI77ES AND 0774ER EXIS77NG AND PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND EXCA VA 77ONS AGAINST LOSS OF GROUND OR CA WNG
EMBANKMENTS. CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVAL OF SHORING AND BRACING, AS REQUIRED.
26. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN APPROVAL FROM THE CITY AND FOLLOW CITY PROCEDURES FOR ALL WATER SERWCE INTERRUP77ONS, HYDRANT SHUTOFFS,
STREET CLOSURES OR 07HER ACCESS RESTRICTIONS. CON7RACTOR SHALL NOT RELOCATE OR ELIMINATE ANY -HYDRANTS WTHOUT FIRST OBTAINING WRITTEN
APPROVAL FROM 774E FIRE MARSHAL.
2Z COORDINA, TE AND ARRANGE FOR ALL U77LITY CONNECTIONS, U77LITY RELOCA T70NS ANDIOR SERWCE INTERRUPTIONS WTH THE AFFECTED OWNERS AND
APPROPRIATE U77LITY COMPANIES. CONNEC77ONS TO EXIS77NG U77LI77ES SHALL BE MADE ONLY WTH ADVANCE WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE AUTHOR177ES
GOVERNING SAID U77LI77ES.
28. EXIS77NG U77LITY LINES IN SERWCE WHICH ARE DAMAGED DUE TO CONS7RUCTION WORK SHALL BE REPAIRED AT CON7RACTOR�5 EXPENSE AND INSPECTED AND
ACCEPTED BY CITY OF EDMONDS AND OWNER�5 REPRESENTA 77VE PRIOR TO BACKFILLING.
29. NEW U77LITY LOCA 77ONS ARE GENERALL Y SHOWN BY DIMENSION, WHERE NO DIMENSIONS ARE INDICA 7ED, LOCA 77ONS MA Y BE SCALED FROM DRA KINGS. FIELD
ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE APPROVED BY OWNER�3 REPRESENTA 77VE AND CITY
30. TRENCH BACKFILL OF U77LI77ES LOCA TED WITHIN THE CITY RIGHT -OF- WA Y SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 95% COMPAC77ON TEST REPORTS SHALL BE PROWDED
TO THE CITY PRIOR TO PA VoING.
31. WHERE NEW PIPE CLEARS AN EXIS77NG OR NEW U77LITY BY 6" OR LESS, PLACE POLYETHYLENE PLAS77C FOAM AS A CUSHION BETWEEN THE U77L177ES.
32. SEE MECHANICAL DRA KINGS (WHERE APPLICABLE) FOR CON 77NUA 77ON OF 51 7E U 77LI 77ES KI 7HIN 774E BUILDING.
33. SEE ELECTRICAL DRAWNGS (WHERE APPLICABLE) FOR EXTERIOR ELECTRICAL WORK.
34. SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWNGS (WHERE APPLICABLE) FOR S17E IRRIGATION SYSTEM.
LEGEND
EXISTING FEATURES
PROPOSED FEATURES
- - - - - - - FLOW
0
CATCH BASIN, TYPE I
STORM DRAIN PIPE
ID
ROCK CHECK DAM
- __ ----CURB
@
CATCH BASIN, TYPE
------------- ROOF & F0077NG DRAIN
00
TEMPORARY STAND PIPE
- - - - - - - ASPHALT
- - - - - - - CONCRETE
<
SO PIPE FLOW
DITCH
SURFACE FLOW
CATCH BASIN
- - - - - - - GRA VEL
@
YARD DRAIN
RIPRAP PAD
PROTECRON
------------- ROOF
0
STORM CLEANOUT
M
TYPE I CB
CONS7RUC7ION ENTRANCE
------------- DRIP LINE
STORM CUL VERT END
. ...... .. ........ ....... ..... SURFACE FEATURES
0
SEWER MANHOLE
0
TYPE H CB
0---
FILTER FENCE
CONSTRUCTION FENCE
Z1_Z,1Z_z1Z_Z1_Z1_Z11_ BUILDING FOOTPRINT
4
PIPE FLOW
0
SEWER CLEANOUT
LIMITS OF CLEARING
EDGE OF WEILAND
<
SS PIPE FLOW
CULVERT END
INTERCEPTOR SWALE
.................... WEILAND BUFFER
SEWER STUB
0
STORM CLEANOUT ------------- SA WOU T
00
... ........ ........ .... .....
(D
SEPTIC LID
YARD DRAIN
EASEMENT
STORM DRAIN PIPE
JQ
FIRE HYDRANT
RIPRAP PAD
BUILDING F007PRINT
SEWER MAIN
Eg---
WA TER METER
- - -
SEWER MAIN
- - - -
BUILDING SETBACK
FM- SEWER FORCE MAIN
SEWER SERWCE
X
FENCE
W- WA TER MAIN
m
CATE VALVE
- - - - - - -
WA 7ER MAIN ...
RETAINING WALL
____OHP- AERIAL POWER LINE
WATER MANHOLE
SEWER MANHOLE C)0C[DC[D0=
ROCKERY
____P- BURIED POWER LINE
AIRIVAC RELEASE VALVE
PIPE FLOW
G- GAS MAIN
MAILBOX
C- BURIED CABLE
0-
BLOW OFF
SEKER CLEANOUT
jm_
SIGN
-TV- BURIED TV
0
IRRIGATION METER
WATER METER
)2"
S7REET LIGHT
-OTV- AERIAL TV
IRRIGATION VALVE
IRRIGA71ON METER
----T- BURIED TELEPHONE LINE
- - - - OHT AERIAL TELEPHONE LINE
WA TER WELL
FIRE HYDRANT
SLOPE DAGGER
- - - - PIT - BURIED POWERITELEPHONE
E!b
HOSE BIB
FIRE DEPT CONNEC71ON (FDC)
- - - - OHPT- AERIAL POWERITELEPHONE
-0-
POWER POLE
AIRIVAC RELEASE VALVE
GRA VEL
----OHU- AERIAL UTILITIES
E-
GUY ANCHOR
BLOW OFF
FO- BURIED FIBER OPTIC CABLE
El
A SPHA L T PA VEMEN T
WIRE FENCE
STREET LIGHT
GATE VALVE
CHAINLINK FENCE
POLE LIGHT
7EE W/ CONC BLOCKING
r, 7 " 1
Lj
SIDEWALK
BOARD FENCE
POWER VAULT
BEND W1 CONC BLOCKING
DITCH OR SWALE
RESTRAINED JOINT
RETAINING WALL
FA-1
TRANSFORMER
1104
REDUCER
C!0:)Cl��� ROCKERY
AV
POWER METER
1=�
SLEEVE
EASPHALT
l
Z
JUNCTION BOX
#
COUPLING
0
GAS METER
r ---- 1
GAS VALVE
19
DETECTOR CHECK VALVE
L�j CONCRETE
P OS T INDI CA TOR VA L VE (PI V)
13
TV RISER
El GRA VEL
FT I
TELECOMM VAULT
=1 MAIL BOX
n SIGN
CONMOL DEWCE
SECTION VIEW
CB 1 -48 FF T YPE H
NOT TO SCALE
COE STO PLAN E8. 16 PLAN VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
DETENTION PIPE DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
STTUCTURE
I'MIN
DOUBLE GASKET
AND ADHESIVE
BONDED SAND FINISH
ON EX7ERIOR. MIN 7"LONG
Z
a
16531 13TH AVE W, SUITE Al 08
LYNNWOOD, WA 98037
PHONE: (425) 678-6960
WWW.RAMENGINEERINGINC.COM
Q
ct
U)
C14
co
-4
oftli
Uj
�4,jj
4.5" PVC PIPE
BE
A 5SEMBL Y TO BE
OM
REMOVABLE FROM
A40V
INSIDE THE FCS z
IN VER T
PVC PIPE CR
DIAMETER
4.
4,
ORIFICE PLA
24
PVC ADAPTER AND PIPE STUB
DETAIL "FA ffy CONNECTION & CONTROL DEVICE
NOT TO SCALE
ICall 2 Working Days Before You Dig
811 or 1-800-424-5555
Utilities Underground Location Center I
RESUB
OCT 2 6 2015
BUtLDINQ DEPARF-MENT
oITy OF EDMONDS
APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION
CITYOFEDMONDS
DA TE. - 4
BY. / 2-ho/4,51-
aTY EWGINMING DIW301V
ENGINEER:
IVA7
4j
laly- � 1116;
ca
Q
Q
w
LL
0
ROB L. LONG, PE
DRAWN BY.
MIKE MORRIS
ISSUE DATE. SCALE.
8114115 1 AS NOTED
JOB NO. 15-026
SHEET.
GN-01
SHT 2 OF 4
GENERAL NOTES
1. ALL MA TERIALS AND WORK SHOWN ON THESE PLANS SHALL CONFORM TO 7HE CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD PLANS AND DETAILS, 7HE FOLLOWNG
SPECIFICA 77ONS AND CODES, AND ALL 07HER APPLICABLE LOCAL MUNICIPAL, STA 7E, AND FEDERAL CODES, RULES AND REGULA 77ONS.-
- CURRENT INTERNA 77ONAL BUILDING CODE (18C)
- 2015 WSDOTIAPWA STANDARD SPECIFICA 77ONS FOR ROAD, BRIDGE AND MUNICIPAL CONS7RUC77ON
-WASHINGTON ST47EDEPARTWENT OF ECOLOGY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR 7HE PUGET SOUND BASIN (CURRENT EDITION)
2. STANDARD PLAN AND TYPE NUMBERS INDICATED ON 7HESEDRAWNGS REFER TO CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAILS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERIMSE.
1 3. A COPY OF THESE APPROVED PLANS MUST BE ON 7HE JOBS17E WHENEVER CONSTRUC77ON IS IN PROGRESS.
4. DEVA 77ONS FROM THESE PLANS MUST BE APPROVED BY 7HE ENGINEER OF RECORD AND THE LOCAL GOVERNING AU7HORITY.
5. CONTTACTOR SHALL RECORD ALL APPROVED DEWA 77ONS FROM THESE PLANS ON A SET OF `AS-BUIL T"DRA WNGS AND SHALL SUMMARIZE ALL AS-BUIL T
COND177ONS ON ONE SET OF REPRODUCIBLE DRAWNGS FOR SUBMITTAL TO THE OWNER PRIOR PROJECT COMPLE77ON AND ACCEPTANCE. A SET OF AS -BUILT
DRA WNGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL OF THE BUILDING OCCUPANCYIFINAL PROJECT APPROVAL.
6. ELEVA 77ONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET SEE SURVEY FOR BENCHMARK INFORMA 770N.
Z THE LOCA 77ONS OF EXIS77NG U77LI77ES AND S17E FEATURES SHOWN HEREON HAVE BEEN FURNISHED BY OTHERS BY FIELD SURVEY OR OBTAINED FROM
AVAILABLE RECORDS AND SHOULD THEREFORE BE CONSIDERED APPROXIMA IF ONLY AND NOT NECESSARILY COMPLETE. IT IS 7HE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF
7HE CONTTACTOR TO INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY 7HE ACCURACY OF ALL UTILITY LOCA 77ONS SHOWN AND TO FUR7HER DISCOVER AND PR07ECT ANY 07HER
U77LI77ES NOT SHOWN HEREON WHICH MA Y BE AFFECTED BY 7HE IMPLEMENTA 77ON OF THIS PLAN. CON7RACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCA 77ON, DEPTH, SIZE, TYPE
AND COND177ON OF EXIS77NG U77LITYLINES AT CONNEC77ON OR CROSSING POINTS BEFORE TTENCHING FOR NEW U77L177ES. ENGINEER ASSUMES NO
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY OF THE EXIS77NG U77LI77ES AND S17E FEATURES PRESENTED ON THESE DRA;4qNGS. ENGINEER SHALL
BE NO 77FIED IMMEDIA TEL Y OF CONFLICTS THA T ARISE.
8. CON7RACTOR SHALL LOCA 7E AND PR07ECT ALL U77LI77ES DURING CONS7RUC77ON AND SHALL CONTACT THE UNDERGROUND U77LI77ES LOCA 77ON SERVFCE
(1-800-424-5555) AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONS7RUC77ON.
9. COlTOR SHALL VERIFYALL COND17IONS AND DIMENSIONS AT 7HE PROJECT S17E BEFORE STARTING WORK AND SHALL N077FY OWNM5 REPRESENTA77VE
OF ANY DISCREPANCIES.
10. PIPE LENG7HS WHERE SHOWN ARE APPROXIMA 7E AND MA Y CHANGE DUE TO FIELD COND1770NS.
11. CON 7RA C TOR SHALL OB TAIN A COP Y OF THE GEO TECHNICAL REPOR T (WHERE APPLICABLE) AND SHALL THOROUGHL Y FAMILIARIZE HIMSELF 141 7H THE
CON7ENTS THEREOF ALL S17E WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN STTICT COMPLIANCE K17H IRE RECOMMENDA77ONS OF TVIS REPORT
12. S7RUCTURAL FILL MA TERIAL AND PLACEMENT SHALL CONFORM TO THE RECOMMENDA 77ONS OF THE PROJECT GE07ECHNICAL REPORT
13. MANHOLES, CA TCH BASINS, U77LI77ES AND PA VEMENT SHALL BEAR ON MEDIUM DENSE TO VERY DENSE NA 77VE SOIL OR COMPACTED STRUCTURAL FILL. IF SOIL
IS DISTURBED, SOFT, LOOSE, WET OR IF ORGANIC MA TERIAL IS PRESENT A T SUBGRADE ELEVA 77ON, REMOVE AND REPLACE KITH COMPACTE]D S7RUCTURAL FILL
PER GE07ECHNICAL REPORT
14. SEE SURVEY AND ARCH17ECTURAL DRA WNGS FOR DIMENSIONS AND LOCA 77ONS OF BUILDINGS, LANDSCAPED AREAS AND 07HER PROPOSED OR EXIS77NG S17E
FEA TURES.
15. SEE ARCH17ECTURAL DRAWNGS FOR PERIMETER FOUNDA77ON DRAINS. FOUNDA 77ON DRAINS SHALL BE INDEPENDENT OF OTHER S17E DRAIN LINES AND SHALL
BE 77GH7LINED To 7HE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM WHERE INDICA TED ON THE PLANS.
16. ALL REQUIRED STORMWATER FACIL177ES MUST BE CONS7RUCTED AND IN OPERA 77ON PRIOR TO INSTALLA77ON OF ANY PAVEMENT UNLESS 07HERMSE
APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER.
1Z ALL ROOF DRAINS, PERIMETER FOUNDA 77ON DRAINS, CA TCH BASINS AND 07HER EXTERNAL DRAINS SHALL BE CONNECTED TO THE STORM DRAINAGE SYS7EM,
UNLESS N07ED 07HERMSE.
18. CON7RACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AND PA Y FOR ALL PERMITS REQUIRED FOR INSTALLA 77ON OF ALL SITE IMPROVEMENTS INDICA 7ED ON THESE DRA WINGS.
19. AS A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT, ALL DISTURBED AREAS ON AND OFF S17E SHALL BE RETURNED TO 7HE EQUIVALENT OF THEIR PRECONSTRUC77ON COND177ON IN
ACCORDANCE W7H APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS.
20. ALL DISTURBED SOIL AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED OR STABILIZED BY 07HER ACCEPTABLE METHODS FOR 7HE PREVEN77ON OF ON-SITF EROSION AF7ER 7HE
COMPLE77ON OF CONSTYUCT70N. SEE EROSION CON7Ra PLANS FOR SPECIFIC GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS.
21. THE CONTTACTOR SHALL KEEP OFF-97E S7REETS CLEAN A T ALL 77MES BY SWEEPING. WASHING OF THESE S7REETS WLL NOT BE ALLOWED WTHOUT PRIOR
APPROVAL.
22. 7HIS PROJECT IS NOT A BALANCED EAR7HWORK PROJECT 807H EXPORT AND IMPORT OF SOIL AND ROCK MATERIALS ARE REQUIRED.
23. SLOPE OF FINISHED GRADE SHALL BE CONSTANT BETWEEN FINISHED CONTOURS OR SPOT ELEVA 77ONS SHOWN.
24. FINISHED GRADE SHALL SLOPE A WA Y FROM BUILDING WALLS A T MINIMUM 5% SLOPE FOR A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF 10 FEET
25. CON7RACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AND SHALL INSTALL AND MAINTAIN SHORING AND BRACING AS NECESSARY TO PR07ECT WORKERS, EXIS77NG
BUILDINGS, S7REE7S, WALKWA YS, U77LI77ES AND 07HER EXIS77NG AND PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND EXCA VA 77ONS AGAINST LOSS OF GROUND OR CA 14NG
EMBANKMENTS. CON7RACTOR SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVAL OF SHORING AND BRACING, AS REQUIRED.
26. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN APPROVAL FROM THE CITY AND FOLLOW CITY PROCEDURES FOR ALL W47ER SERWCE INTERRUPTIONS, HYDRANT SHUTOFFS,
STREET CLOSURES OR OTHER ACCESS RESTRICRONS. CON7RACTOR SHALL NOT RELOCA7E OR ELIMINATE ANY HYDRANTS W77-IOUT FIRST OBTAINING WRITTEN
APPROVAL FROM 7HE FIRE MARSHAL.
2Z COORDINATE AND ARRANGE FOR ALL U77LITY CONNEC77ONS, U77LITY RELOCA 77ONS ANDIOR SERVFCE INTERRUPRONS WTH THE AFFECTED OWNERS AND
APPROPRIA 7E U77LITY COMPANIES. CONNEC77ONS TO EXIS77NG U77LI77ES SHALL BE MADE ONLY K17H ADVANCE WITTEN APPROVAL OF 7HE AUTHOR177ES
GOVERNING SAID U77LI77ES.
28. EXIS77NG U77LITY LINES IN SERWCE WHICH ARE DAMAGED DUE TO CONS7RUC77ON WORK SHALL BE REPAIRED AT CONTTACTOR�5 EXPENSE AND INSPECTED AND
ACCEPTED BY CITY OF EDMONDS AND OWNER�5 REPRESENTA77VE PRIOR TO BACKFILLING.
29. NEW U77LITY LOCA77ONS ARE GENERALLY SHOWN BY DIMENSION, WHERE NO DIMENSIONS ARE INDICATED, LOCA77ONS MAY BE SCALED FROM DRAWNGS. FIELD
ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE APPROVED BY OWNER�5 REPRESENTA 77VE AND CITY
30. 7RENCH BACKFILL OF U77LI77ES LOCATED I4q7H1N THE CITYRIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 95% COMPACT70N 7EST REPORTS SHALL BE PROWDED
I TO THE CITY PRIOR TO PA V7NG.
31. WHERE NEW PIPE CLEARS AN EXIS77NG OR NEW U77LITY BY 6" OR LESS, PLACE POLYE7HYLENE PLAS77C FOAM AS A CUSHION BETWEEN THE U77LI77ES.
32. SEE MECHANICAL DRA WINGS (WERE APPLICABLE) FOR CON 77NUA 77ON OF St 7E U 77LI 77ES Kq THIN 7HE BUILDING.
33. SEE ELEC7RICAL DRAWNGS (WHERE APPLICABLE) FOR EXTERIOR ELEC7RICAL WORK.
34. SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWNGS (WHERE APPLICABLE) FOR S17E IRRIGA77ON SYSTEM,
LEGEND
EXISTING FEATURES
PROPOSED FEATURES
-------FLOW
0
CATCH BASIN, TYPE I
STORM DRAIN PIPE
ROCK CHECK DAM
CURB
@
CATCH BASIN, TYPE//
------------- ROOF & F0077NG DRAIN
TEMPORARY STAND PIPE
- - - - - -
- ASPHALT
<
SD PIPE FLOW
D/ TCH
- - - - - -
- CONCRETE
SURFACE FLOW
CATCH BASIN
GRAVEL
@
YARD DRAIN
RIPRAP PAD
PROTEC71ON
-------------
ROOF
0
STORM CLEANOUT
0
TYPE I CB
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
-------------
DRIP LINE
S TORM CULVERT END
..... ....... ... ..., ....... ....... .... 11 .
..... SURFACE FEATURES
0
SEWER MANHOLE
TYPE // CB
FILTER FENCE
Z1_1_1Z,/ZZ1_Z1_Z1z BUILDING FOOTPRINT
PIPE FLOW
CONSTRUC71ON FENCE
0
SEWER CLEANOUT
LIMITS OF CLEARING
EDGE OF WETLAND
SS PIPE FLOW
CULVERT END
INTERCEPTOR SWALE
....................
WEILAND BUFFER
0
STORM CLEANOUT
SEWER STUB
-------------
SA WCU T
.. .... ......... .... .. . . ........ ......... ....
....
SEPTIC LID
YARD DRAIN
EASEMENT
STORM DRAIN PIPE
�Q
FIRE HYDRANT
2*
RIPRAP PAD
BUILDING F007PRINT
SEWER MAIN
EEF--
WATER METER
SEWER MAIN - - -
- - - -
BUILDING SE713ACK
-FM- SEWER FORCE MAIN
SEWER SERWCE
X
FENCE
W-
WATER MAIN
m
CA TE VALVE
- - - - - - - WATER MAIN
RETAINING WALL
- - - - OHP-
AERIAL POWER LINE
WATER MANHOLE
SEWER MANHOLE C)CDCD0C[DC[=
ROCKERY
----P-
BURIED POWER LINE
AIRIVAC RELEASE VALVE
- G-
GAS MAIN
IV
PIPE FLOW
MAILBOX
- C-
BURIED CABLE
0-
BLOW OFF
SEWER CLEANOUT
AL
SIGN
-TV-
BURIED TV
z
IRRIGATION METER
Bi-
WATER METER
S7REET LIGHT
- OTV-
AERIAL TV
IRRIGATION VALVE
M-
IRRIGA 77ON METER
----T- BURIED TELEPHONE LINE
- - - - OHT AERIAL TELEPHONE LINE
WA TER WELL
A
FIRE HYDRANT
SLOPE DAGGER
- - - - PIT
- BURIED POWERITELEPHONE
c!!�
HOSE BIB
A
FIRE DEPT CONNEC77ON (FDC)
- - - - OHPT
AERIAL POWERITELEPHONE
-0-
POWER POLE
AIRIAIAC RELEASE VALVE
GRA VEL
----OHU-
AERIAL UTILITIES
E--
GUY ANCHOR
BLOW OFF
FO-
BURIED FIBER OPTIC CABLE
r
A SPHAL T PA VEMEN T
WIRE FENCE
STREET LIGHT
3m[
GATE VALVE
CHAINLINK FENCE
POLE LIGHT
IV
TEE W/ CONC BLOCKING
F-79
Ld
SIDEWALK
BOARD FENCE
POWER VAULT
BEND W/ CONC BLOCKING
DITCH OR SWALE
RESTRAINED JOINT
RETAINING WALL
ZI
TRANSFORMER
110-[
REDUCER
ROCKERY
AY
POWER METER
3==[
SLEEVE
ElASPHALT
Z
JUNCTION BOX
#
COUPLING
M
CA S METER
19
DETECTOR CHECK VALVE
ElCONCRETE
0
GAS VALVE
a
POST INDICATOR VALVE (PIV)
=1
El
TV RISER
GRA VEL
FT I
TELECOMM VAULT
MAIL BOX
SIGN
NW 114, SW 114., SEC 8, TWP 27N., RGE 4E., W.M.
6"PV(
TO SD(
..W&-
CON7ROL DEWCE
SECTION VIEW
c MEM
ti ly A48" TYPE H
NOT TO SCALE
COE SID PLAN E8. 16 PLAN VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
NOT TO SCALE
VK GROUT 4.5"
MIN
SKET (TYP)
PVC ADAP W
DOUBLE GASKET
AND ADHESIVE
BONDED SAND FINISH
ON EX7ERIOR. MIN 7"LONG
PVC ADAPTER AND PIPE STUB
A SSEMBL Y TO BE
REMOVABLE FROM
INSIDE THE FICS
ORIFICE PLA 7E
DETAIL ""A"" CONNECTION & CONTROL DEVICE
NOT TO SCALE
0
Call 2 Working Days Before You Dig
811 or 1-800-424-5555
i!]
Utilities Underground Location Center
F E rl 8
,'31JILDINO DEPARDAENT
CITY OF Enk�ONr)S
APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION
CITYOFEDMONDS
2-
DA TE. 12Y11 (0 4!!�i Lk-)LV
/ 4-
,,-'�'�CITY ENGINEERING DIW30N
co
S;
16531 13TH AVE W, SUITE Al 08
LYNNWOOD, WA 98037
PHONE: (425) 678-6960
WWW.RAMENGINEERINGINC.COM
Q_
C)
Z3
Z3 LU
c2n
0
Z
ENGINEER.
0
cl,
Z
Z
Nftft-
Z
(10
115
(10
LU
X
U
ftj
LU
(0
Q
Q
w
U.
& W, 0
A.
11:27110
ROB L. LONG, PE
DRAWN BY.
MIKE MORRIS
ISSUE DATE. SCALE.,
[ 8114115 1 AS N07ED
JOB NO. 15-026
SHEET.
G 'IRV' -0 1
1tr-v1&1&->
SHT 2 OF 4
NW 114, S W 114, SEC 8, TWP 27N, RGE 4E, W. M.
SCALE. I" = 10'
0 5 10 20
GRADING QUANTITIES
CUT RLL
11300 CY 700 CY
CB INLET PROTECTION NOTE'
1. CA TCH BASIN INLET PR07EC71ON SHALL BE INSER7ED
ON ALL EXIS71NG CATCH BASINS AS SHOWN ON PLAN.
ADD17IONAL CB PR07EC77ON SHALL BE ADDED AS
D)REC7ED BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS.
2 CATCH BASIN INLET PR07EC77ON SHALL BE INSER7ED
A ND MA IN TA INED ON A LL NEK Y CONS 7RUC 7ED CA TCH
BA SINS 7HROUGHOU T 7HE Sf 7E IMMEDIA 7EL Y AF7ER
INSTALLA 770N.
FILTER FABRIC FENCE NOTE
ADD17IONAL nL7ER FABRIC FENCING SHALL BE ADDED AS
NEEDED. FENCING TO BE INSTALLED PER CITY OF EDMONDS
SM DETAIL El. 1 (SEE DETAIL ON SHEET 7D- 01).
PROPOSED HOUSE CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
JJAJAI CC' 73 r)
L 0 WER FF 352. 0
147
EX HOUSE
RIDGE 380.33
FOUNDA 77ON
2.
(TO BE (362.0 + 18.33 FT) CONCRETE
1 WALKWAY
REMO VED) 6., Li
3.
k. 381.37 ALLOWED
(356.37 AEG + 25FT)
4.
C WRED: . ... ..
0
3628A
DECK
. ...... ....... ... . . . . . . . .
CLEARING LIM1,7S, - - ------- ..... ...... ....... ... 9. 2 . . . . . .
J55.'8
F
GROUND FG
.EXISTING (Typ)�
Ed.'.
ZONTOUR
S�, Z
ORANGE F1L7ERFA`9C FENCE
x,
PER 61TY OF MMONDS SID . ..... 6.
DWG NO. El. 1i
EX HOUSE z
ON SHEET 7D 01
A 8.
p.A CONSTRUCT CONCRETE
DRIVEWAY-TODRAIN'
20'
.'TO YA RD. DRA IN - a'. 1. OZ -
7
CONCRETE MIN. SL 6PE
GE
GARA 4
FF 360.00
9.
DRIVE W4 Y
OW
2
�Tk /// - - 10.
P-4
M4 ----------------
% CONSTRUCTION EN7RANCE
NOTE. DIRECT
%
PEO Cl:
TY OF EDMONDS
DRIVE WA Y SURFA CE
�STU DWG NO. EI.2 ON SHEE
T . . . . . . . .
FLOW TO CB
FT,`
J;111 X"
3 . . . . . . Cf)
30'MIN LENGTH P
X"
r_� Ai
15'MIN WD TH
W
V FG
4Z.
I Ae�k
. . ...........
. ..... - - ----- - ----------- ---- - - - . .......... ... 7 356' ..0
2._
.TESC NOTES
1. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREWENT-CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ROUT, CONSMUC77ON VEHICLE ACCESS SHALL BE, WHENEVER PRACTICAL, LIM17ED TO ONE ROUTE. ACCESS POINTS
SHALL BE STABILIZED WTH QUARRY SPALLS OR CRUSHED ROCK TO MINIMIZE THE TRACKIIVG OF SEDIMENT ONTO PUBLIC ROADS. IF SEDIMENT IS TRANSPORTED ONTO A
ROAD SURFACE, THE ROADS SHALL BE CLEANED THOROUGHLY A T THE END OF EACH DA Y SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM ROADS BY SHOVELING OR SWEEPING AND
BE 7RANSPORTED TO A CONTROLLED SEDIMENT DISPOSAL AREA WTHIN 24 HOURS. STREET WASHING SHALL BE ALLOWED ONLY AFTER SEDIMENT IS REMOVED IN THIS
MANNER.
2. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT-STABILIZA 77ON OF EXPOSED AREAS. ALL SOILS EXPOSED BY LAND DISTURBING AC77W77ES SHALL BE STABILIZED BY SUITABLE APPLICA 77ON
OF BMPS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED, SOD, HYDROSEEDING, OR OTHER VEGETA TION, PLAS77C COVERING, OR MULCHING. ALL BMPS SHALL BE SELECTED, DESIGNED, AND
MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WTH THE MANUAL. THE EXPOSED SOILS SHALL BE STABILIZED ACCORDING TO AN APPROVED TIMETABLE. (TYPICALLY, NO SOILS SHALL
REMAIN EXPOSED FOR MORE THAN TWO DAYS FROM OCTOBER 1 THROUGH APRIL 30 AND NO MORE THAN SEVEN DAYS FROM MAY 1 774ROUGH SEP TEMBER 30).
3. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT-PR07EC77ON OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES. ADJACENT PROPER77ES SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM SEDIMENT DEPOS177ON BY APPROPRIATE USE OF
VEGETA77VE BUFFER STRIPS, SEDIMENT BARRIERS OR FILTERS, DIKES OR MULCHING, OR BY A COMBINA77ON OF THESE MEA5URES AND 07HER APPROPRIA TE BMPS.
4. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT- MAINTENANCE. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS SHALL BE REGULARLY INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED BY THE OWNER TO ENSURE
CON77NUED PERFORMANCE OF THEIR INTENDED FUNC77ON ALL MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WTH THE MANUAL.
5. ESC MINIMUM REOUIREMENT-07HER BMPS. AS REOUIRED BY THE CITY, OTHER APPROPRIA IF BMPS TO M177GA TE THE EFFECTS OF INCREASED RUNOFF SHALL BE APPLIED.
6. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENT- UNDERGROUND U77LITY CONSTRUCTION. THE CONS7RUCTFON OF UNDERGROUND U77LITY LINES SHALL SPECIFICALL Y
ADDRESS THE FOLLOWNG.
0. EROSION CONTROL FOR EXCAVATED AND STOCKPILED MATERIALS;
b. THE PLACEMENT OF EXCA VA TED MA TERIAL WHERE CONSISTENT WTH SAFETY AND SPACE CONSIDERA 77ONS SHALL BE PLACED ON THE UPHILL SIDE OF TRENCHES,
C. TRENCH DEW4 TERING SYSTEMS (MUST DISCHARGE INTO SEDIMENT TRAPS, SEDIMENT PONDS, OR OTHER ACCEPTABLE MEANS),
d IRA CKING AND SPILLING OF MA TERIALS ON STREETS DUE TO HAULING,
e. DAILY CLEANUP AND STREET MAIN TENANCE.
Z ADD177ONAL ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR LARGER DEVELOPMENTS. ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT THA T INCLUDED LAND DIS77JRBING AC77077ES OF
GREA TER THEN, OR EQUAL TO, ONE ACRE IN ADD177ON TO MEE77NG THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH ABOVE SHALL COMPLY W774 ESC REQUIREMENTS LISTED
BEL 0 W.
8. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT- DELINEA TE CLEARING AND EASEMENT LIMITS, IN THE FIELD, MARK CLEARING LIMITS ANDIOR ANY EASEMENTS, SETBACKS,
SENSI 77 VEICRI 77CAL AREAS AND THE BUFFERS, TREES AND DRAINAGE COURSES.
SCHED ULE A PRE- CONS TRUC 77ON MEE 77NG W TH Cl TY ENGINEERING DI WSION A T
425- 771- 0220, EX T 1326. TWO DA Y (48HR) NO 77CE REQUIRED.
REWEW TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CON7ROL NOTES.
CALL FOR U77LITY LOCA TES,
INSTALL TESC MEASURES AND MAINTAIN DUST CONTROL WHILE PREVEN77NG DISTURBANCE
OF ANY AREAS OF VEGETA 77ON OUTSIDE THE CONSTRUCTION ZONE.
HA VE EROSION CON TROL YEA SURES INSPEC TED B Y Cl TY OF EDMONDS Cl TY ENGINEERING
INSPECTOR. ALL TEMPORARY SEDIMENTA 77ON AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MUST BE
IN PLACE AND INSPECTED PRIOR TO ANY CONSMUC77ON OR S17E CLEARING. EROSION AND
SEDIMENTA 77ON CONTROL PRAC77CES ANDIOR DEWCES SHALL BE MAINTAINED UN77L
PERMANENT VEGETA 77ON IS ESTABLISHED.
DEMOLISH EXIS77NG STRUCTURES.
ROUGH GRADE S17E AS REQUIRED TO INSTALL DRAINAGE FEATURES.
aEAR, GRUB & ROUGH GRADE REMAINDER OF SITE. REVEGETATE DISTURBED AREAS NOT
SUBJECT TO ADD177ONAL SURFACE DISTURBANCE IMMEDIA TEL Y AFTER ROUGH GRADING.
(07HER EXPOSED AREAS SHALL BE STABILIZED PER EROSION CONTROL NOTES BELOW)
INSTALL U77LI77ES AND OTHER S17E IMPROVEMENTS.
INSTALL CB PRO TEC 77ON ON AN Y NEW CA TCH BA SIN IMMEDIA TEL Y UPON INSTALLA 770N.
MAINTAIN CB PR07EC77ON 7HROUGHOUT HOME CONS7RUCTION,
STABILIZE AND COMPOST AMEND ALL EXPOSED SOILS PRIOR To REVEGETA 77oN OF EN77RE
SITE.
ESTABLISH LANDSCAPING AND PERMANENT VEGETA 770N. ALL TEMPORARY EROSION
CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE REMOVED UPON FINAL 97E STABILIZA77ON AND APPROVAL
BY CITY INSPECTOR.
p .. . . . .......... ..
. . ........... ......
. ...........
-T ........ .......... ..... ....... - i
77 -_151. TREE PROTECTION NOTES
6D. 0-+
-;1�10T 10
GLEN ELLEN WEW 77MC7�S
6-7
. . . ....... . - - - - - ---
EX HOUSE
OWNER/CONTRACTOR IS 770PONSIBLE FOR
EROSION CONTRU_ i'%iND DRAINAGE
--w
Lj
9. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT -SEDIMENT TRAPPING PRIOR TO LEA WNG THE SITE, STORM WA TER RUNOFF SHALL PASS 774ROUGH A SEDIMENT POND OR SEDIMENT TRAP, OR
07HER APPROPRIA TE BMPS. SEDIMENT PONDS AND TRAPS, PERIMETER DIKES, SEDIMENT BARRIERS, AND OTHER BMPS INTENDED TO TRAP SEDIMENT ON -SITE SHALL BE
CONSTRUCTED AS A FIRST STEP IN GRADING. THESE BMPS SHALL BE FUNC77CNAL BEFORE LAND DISTURBING AC77WT7ES TAKE PLACE. EARTHEN S7RUCTURES, SUCH AS DAMS,
DIKES, AND DIVERSIONS SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED ACCORDING TO AN APPROVED TIMETABLE
10. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT -CUT AND FILL SLOPES. CUT AND FILL SLOPES ShALL BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED IN A MANNER THA T MLL MINIMIZE EROSION. IN ADDITION,
SLOPES SHALL BE STABILIZED IN ACCORDANCE WTH ESC REQUIREMENT NO. 2QU. SEE ADD177ONAL GE07ECHNICAL RECOMMENDA 77ONS IN REPORT DA TED OCTOBER 23, 2015.
11. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT -CONTROLLING OFF -SITE EROSION. PROPER77ES AND WA TER WA YS DOWNSTREAM FROM DEVELOPMENT S17ES SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM EROSION
DUE TO INCREASES IN THE VOLUME, VELOCITY, AND PEAK FLOW RA TE OF STORM WA TER RUNOFF FROM THE PROJECT SITE.
12. ESC A41NIMUM REQUIREMENT -STABILIZATION OF TEMPORARY CONVEYANCE CHANNELS AND OUTLETS. ALL TEMPORARY ON -SITE CONVEYANCE CHANNELS SHALL BE DESIGNED,
CONSTRUCTED AND STABILIZED TO PREVENT EROSION FROM THE EXPECTED VELOCITY OF FLOW FROM A TW`O- YEAR, 24-HOUR FREQUENCY STORM FOR THE DEVELOPED
CONDITION. STABILIZA 77ON ADEQUA TE TO PREVENT EROSION OF OU7LETS, ADJACENT STREAM BANKS, SLOPES AND DOWNSTREAM REACHES SHALL BE PROWDED A T THE
OUTLETS OF ALL CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS.
13. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT -STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION. ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS MADE OPERABLE DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PROTECTED SO 77-IA T STORM
WA TER RUNOFF SHALL NOT ENTER THE CONVEYANCE SYSTEM WTHOUT FIRST BEING FIL TERED OR 0 THERMSE TREA TED TO REMOVE SEDIMEN T
14. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT -REMOVAL OF TEMPORARY BMPS. ALL TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CON7ROL BMPS SHALL BE REMOVED WTHIN 30 DA YS AFTER FINAL
S17E STABILIZA 77ON IS ACHIEVED OR AFTER THE TEMPORARY BMPS ARE NO LONGER NEEDED. TRAPPED SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED OR STABILIZED ON SITE. DISTURBED
SOIL AREAS RESUL 77NG FROM REMOVAL SHALL BE PERMANENTL Y STABILIZED.
15. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CON7ROL REQUIREMENT-DEWA TERING CONSTRUCTION SITES. DEW4 TERING SYSTEMS SHALL DISCHARGE INTO A SEDIMENT TRAP OR SEDIMENT POND.
16. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENT -CONTROL OF POLLUTANTS OTHER THAN SEDIMENT ON CONS7RUC`770N SITES. ALL POLLUTANTS 07HER THAN SEDIMENT THAT
OCCUR ON S17E DURING CONSMUC77ON SHALL BE HANDLED AND DISPOSED OF IN A MANNER THA T DOES NOT CAUSE CONTAMINA 77ON OF STORM WA TER.
1Z EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENT -FINANCIAL LIABILITY PERFORMANCE BONDING, OR 0774ER APPROPRIA TE FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS, SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR
ALL PROJECTS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WTH THE APPROVED ER05ION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN. [ORD. 3013 1, 1995]
R07EC77VE BARRIER. BEFORE DEVELOPMENT, LAND CLEARING, FILLING OR ANY LAND
FRATION, THE APPLICANT SHALL:
� ERECT AND MAINTAIN READILY WSIBLE 7EMPORARYPR07EC77VE7REEFENCINGALONG 774E
IMITS OF DISTURBANCE TO COMPLETELY SURROUND THE PROTECTED AREA OF ALL RETAINED
REES OR GROUPS OF TREES FENCES SHOULD BE CONSTRUCTED OF CHAIN -LINK AND BE AT
EAST SIX (6) FEET HIGH, UNLESS OTHER TYPE OF FENCING IS AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY
WHEN REQUESTED BY THE CITY, INSTALL HIGHLY VISIBLE SIGNS SPACED NO FURTHER THAN
5 FEET ALONG THE EN77RETY OF THE PROTECTIVE TREE FENCE. SAID SIGN MUST STA TE A T A
UNIMUM "TREE PR07EC77ON AREA, ENTRANCE PROHIB17ED " AND PROVIDE THE CITY PHONE
(UMBER FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT TO REPORT V70LA TIONS.
. PROHIBIT EXCA VA 77ON OR COMPAC77ON OF EARTH OR 07HER POTEN77ALL Y DAMAGING
IC77W77ES WTHIN THE BARRIERS, PROWDED, 7HA T THE ADMINISTRA TOR MA Y ALLOW SUCH
iC771477ES APPROVED BY THE CITY TREE PR07EC77ON PROFESSIONAL AND UNDER THE
'UPERV7SION OF A QUALIFIED TREE PROFESSIONAL RETAINED BY THE APPLICANT
'MAINTAIN THE PR07EC77VE BARRIERS IN PLACE FOR THE DURA 77ON OF THE PROJECT UN77L
11E CITY A U THORIZES THEIR REMO VA L.
. ENSURE 7HA T A N Y A PPRO VED LA NDSCA PING D ONE IN THE PRO TEC TED ZONE SUBSEQUEN T
0 7HE REMOVAL OF THE BARRIERS SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED KITH WALK -BEHIND MACHINERY
R HAND LABOR.
IN ADD177ON TO THE ABOVE, THE CITY MAY REQUIRE THE FOLLOKING.
1) IF EQUIPMENT IS AUTHORIZED TO OPERA TE WTHIN THE CRI77CAL ROOT ZONE, COVER THE
AREAS ADJOINING THE CRI77CAL ROOT ZONE OF A TREE W774 MULCH TO A DEPTH OF AT
LEAST SIX (6) INCHES OR WTH PLYWOOD OR SIMILAR MA TERIAL IN ORDER TO PR07ECT
ROO TS FROM DAMA GE CA USED B Y HEA VY EQUIPMEN T
fl)MINIMIZE ROO T DA MA GE B Y EXCA VA 77NG A 2-FOO T-DEEP TRENCH, A T EDGE OF CRI 77CA L
ROOT ZONE, TO CLEANLY SEVER THE ROOTS OF TREES TO BE RETAINED.
111) CORREC 77 VE PRUNING PERFORMED ON PRO TEC TED TREES IN ORDER TO A VOID DA MA GE
FROM MACHINERY OR BUILDING AC77WTY
iv) MAINTENANCE OF TREES SHALL BE ACHIEVED BY THE APPLICANT THROUGHOUT THE
CONS TRUC 77ON PERIOD B Y WA TERING A NO FER TILIZING.
Call 2 Working Days Before You Dig
811 or 1-800-424-5555
Utilities Underground Location Center
APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION
CITY OF ED ONDS
DA
BY.
a7Y LWGINMRING DIWSON
16531 13TH AVE W, SUITE A108
LYNNWOOD, WA 98037
PHONE: (425) 678-6960
WWW.RAMENGINEERINGINC.COM
rX
Z
co
.w
Z
Waft
Z
's
U5
En
LQU
U
L9U
9.
X
5 7-7 �7
I
Rg
OCT 2 6 2015
BU
Z
co
5
�i
4
ZZ
Q
W
17
X�'-QIST00_
'� ftAl. V,9
W2�0_1115;
ENGINEER.
ROB L. LONG, PE
DRAWN B Y-
MIKE MORRIS
ISSUE DA TE: SCALE.
8114115 AS N07ED
JOB NO.
15-026
SHEET.
TP-01
SHT 3 OF 4
(FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT)
SEWER STUB SHALL BE LOCATED 10' INSIDE PROPERTY LINE & STAKED.
PLACE 2x4 AT END OF SIDE SEWER STUB AND CUT TO LENGTH TO
ENSURE 3 FEET EXTENDS ABOVE GRADE. PAINT TOP 18 INCHES WHITE. IN
3 INCH HIGH LETTERS, STENCIL THE NUMBER OF EVEN FEET FROM
GROUND ELEVATION TO THE SEWER STUB INVERT. 8 GAUGE WIRE TO BE
DOUBLE WRAPPED AROUND PIPE AND 2x4 STAKE AT OR ABOVE FINISHED
GRADE.
LIJ
z CASTIRON LOCKING LID
.010, -j LAMPHOLE COVER
(MODEL #: 00366108)
(EAST JORDAN IRON WORKS CO.)
n
0
ry
a.
Ld
z
2�
0 w 6" WYE AND 45' BEND
a-
0
x 6" LATERAL RUN TO HAVE
a_
SLOPE OF 2% MIN. TO
50% MAX.
RUBBER JOINT BISCUIT PLUG OR
OTHER APPROVED WATERTIGHT PLUG
N 0 T E: 22.5* OR
1. WHEN TAPPING INTO EXISTING MAIN 45* BEND
AN INSERTA-TEE SHALL BE USED.
PLACEMENT OF TEE SHALL DEPEND
ON DEPTH OF SEWER MAIN. AS A
MINIMUM, THE TEE SHALL BE PLACED
AT A 45 DEGREE ANGLE.
2. IF CONNECTING SIDE SEWER TO EXIST
CONCRETE LATERAL, A CONCRETE/PVC ADAPTER
SHALL BE USED AND SECURED PER MFGR'S INSTRUCTIONS.
EXISTING HM
EXISTING
MATERIAL
6" TEE
POSSIBLE
SEWER MAIN
LOCATION
CONNECTION AT
N
AT 45' ANGLE
OR GREATER
POSSIBLE
SEWER MAIN
LOCATION
'�F ---E-_D--M:--
-7 .0
PTVISIONS DATE
APPROVED BY STANDARD DETAIL
D. GEBERT 01/28/04
TYPICAL SEWER LATERAL
D. GEBERT 05/06/05
DATE SCALE DWG NO.
7/24/01 NTS
D, GEBERT 4/2/07 EM
FINAL JOINT SHALL BE A NEAT HMA CLASS 1/2'
iSTRAIGHT LINE AND ALL EXPOSED PG 58-22
EDGES SHALL BE TACKED NEATLY (SEE NOTE 5)
WITH WSDOT STANDARD
SPECIFICATIONS 5-04,3(5)A
APPROVED TACK OR APPROVED
EQUAL, SLOPE EXCAVATION TO
AVOID UNDERMINING EXISTING
1-1/4' MINUS
CSBC PER WSDOT
9-03.9(3)
(SEE NOTES 3&4)
TRENCH WIDTH
IMPORT OR NATIVE MATERIAL
BACKFILL SHALL BE COMPACTED TO
95% MAXIMUM DENSITY (SEE NOTE 2)
NOTES:
1. SEE CITY OF EDMONDS MODIFICATIONS TO DIVISION 9 OF THE CURRENT WSDOT STANDARD
SPECIFICATIONS FOR BACKFILLING REQUIREMENTS,
2, SUBMIT PROCTOR AND DENSITY TESTS FROM CERTIFIED TESTING COMPANIES DOCUMENTING THAT
THE BACKFILL MEETS A MINIMUM OF 95% DENSITY PER ASTM D 1557,
3, CSBC DEPTH SHALL BE A MINIMUM 6' OR MATCH EXISTING WHICHEVER IS GREATER, WHEN
MATCHING EXISTING CSBC DEPTH GREATER THEN 6', THEN CSBC SHALL BE INSTALLED IN
MULTIPLE EQUAL THICKNESS LIFTS NOT EXCEEDING 6'.
4. IF TRENCH WIDTH EXCEEDS 6 FEET IN WIDTH, THE TOP 2' OF CSBC SHALL BE REPLACED
WITH A SEPARATE 2' LIFT OF 5/8' MINUS CSTC PER WSDOT 9-03,90),
5. HMA DEPTH SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4' THICK, UNLESS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER, ANY
DEPTH GREATER THAN 4' SHALL MATCH EXISTING. UNLESS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER, THE
HMA SHALL BE INSTALLED IN MULTIPLE EQUAL THICKNESS LIFTS NOT EXCEEDING 2',
6. FINAL PAVEMENT JOINTS SHALL BE NEATLY AND UNIFORMILY SEALED WITH WSDOT STANDARD
SPECIFICATIONS APPROVED JOINT SEALANT OR APPROVED EQUAL,
--C-1-TY
REVISIONS
APPROVED BY DATE STANDARD DETAIL
D. GEBERT 7/29/05
D. GEBERT 04/2/07 TYPICAL HMA AND UTILITY PATCH
DATE SCALE DWG NO.
R. ENGLISH 10/04/11 7/24/01 NTS EU
FILTER FABRIC —
SECURED TO 2' X 2'
14 GA. WIRE FABRIC
EQUAL
2' X 2' WOOD OR C I D
EQUIVALENT I
0i
8#- 12'
80
PLACE 3/4'-1,5' WASHED GRAVEL IN
THE TRENCH AND ON BOTH SIDES OF
FILTER FABRIC FENCE ON THE SURFACE.
NW 114., SW 114, SEC 8., TWP 27N, RGE 4E
W. M.
FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL IN
CONTINOUS ROLLS. USE STAPLES
OR WIRE RINGS TO ATTACH
FABRIC TO WIRE.
F1
C I D --VWOIRE MESH SUPPORT FEN�E
T S
UPPORT FILTER FAJ91C.
`T�
CU TOM OF FILTER
MATERIAL 8' TO 12'
- - - — — — — — — — - r r-
--��BURY BOT
. ............ 6' MAk
H
I,\
2' X 2' WOOD POSTS OR
EQUIVALENT
CONTRACTOR/DEVELOPER SHALL MAINTAIN AND REPLACE
STRAW BALES TO INSURE PROPER EROSION CONTROL.
C590-1 94V
CITY INSPECTION REQUIRED ON ALL
EROSION CONTROL METHODS BEFORE
OTHER WORK CAN BEGIN,
M0 N D - S.'--
TY
C. OF
REVISIONS STANDARD DETAIL
APPROVED BY DATE
FILTM I= FSCE FLM70 SYSM
DATE
7/24/01 1 SCALE NTS IDWG No' E1.1
RESIDENCE
CLEANOLIT
--)BEND AND CAP
WITH 45*
Ld
z
_j
d-
0
a_
NOT TO EXCEED 100' BETWEEN
CLEAN OUTS
CLEANDUT <WYE WITH
AND LOCKING LAMPHO VER)
& CONCRETE LEVELING COLLAR
WATER TIGHT CAP
7
RISER
iFA
<
Ld
3:
0
z
a_ _j
14xl 4"x6"
CONCRETE
COLLAR
LEVELING COLLAR
LOCKING LAMPHOLE COVER
12" MIN.
CONCRETE PAD
12" PVCZ
SLEEVE
6" RISER,/
4' OR 6' SIDE SEW
SEWER
SID�E
GENERAL CLEANOUT DETAIL
6' WYE AND 45*
AND 1/8 B4ENDI�j 6" CITY STUB
121
4' OR 6' SIDE SEWER
ASPHALT SURFACE CLEAN OUT DETAIL AT PROPERTY LINE
12 LOCKING LAMPHOLE COVER
(EAST JORDAN IRON WORKS CO.)
6' RISER 12" PVC SLEEVE (MODEL #: 00366108)
C
PVC CAP
YPIC L7
C I NOTE:
TYPICAL CL ANOUT UNDER ASPHALT SIDE SEWER JOINTS SHALL BE
OR CONCRETE GASKETED
------------
C"I Y1*:`1--.0'-F'--- .Q.-M
7 ' � ' . I" 1" .1
REVISIONS STANDARD DETAIL
APPROVED BY DATE
D. GE13FRT 6/16/03
SEWER CLEANOUT DETAILS
D. GEBERT 01/06/05 DATE SCALE DWG NO.
18 0
D. GEBERT 4/2/07 7/24/01 NTS EU
MIN, RADIUS
QUARRY SPALLS
2-4' MIN DIA
8'-12' MIN. DEPTH
PROVIDE FULL WIDTH OF INGRESS/
EGRESS AREA
CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD,
CITY INSPECTION REQUIRED ON ALL EROSION CONTRO
MEASURES BEFORE WORK CAN BEGIN,
1090-1 991j
-ND - S.'-.
TY
D.
Q
REVISIONS
STANDARD DETAIL
APPROVED BY DATE
D. GEBERT 10/6/03
VAINED COOMM 9MM
DATE SCALE DWG N
7/24/01 NTS 0' E1.2
LINE
CO
QMETER INSTALLED BY CITY
0
FINISHED
NOTE: G
SHALL BE SET AT THE ;A
PROPERTY LINE. METER
BACK SIDE OF METER BOX 10 GRADE
z I
BOXES SHALL NOT BE
PLACED IN DRIVEWAY AREAS,
BALL VALVE fZ-
Go
E
A
Li
1111ECTIM
WATER ',,,"�OF FLOW��
MAIN A
d(F
MATERIAL LIST
ALL V SERVICES TO BE TYPE 'K' SOFT COPPER TUBING.
G) 1' BALL CORP. STOP WITH CC THREAD INLET AND COPPER <CTS) GRIP OUTLET.
(FORD OR MUELLER).
DUAL PURPOSE UNION.
MIPT X CTS GRIP BALL VALVE CURB STOP EQUAL
TO FORD B84-444Q FORV
NEW1'9MRV1C9- ANGLE BALL METER VALVE BY SINGLE CHECK. 15' HIGH WITH DUAL
PURPOSE UNIONS ON INLET AND OUTLET. HORIZONTAL IN HORIZONTAL OUTLET,
EQUAL TO FORD VBH94-15W-11-44.
9XX=NG1"SERVZCE: USE SAME AS ABOVE WITH NO SINGLE CHECK.
EQUAL TO FORD VB94-15W-11-44,
0 V CC TAP SERVICE SADDLE EQUAL TO ROMAC 101S
MID -STATES PLASTIC METER BOX 1324-12 FOR 1' SERVICE
MS 13x24 DUCTILE LID WITH 73�'x4Ya' READER FOR I' SERVICE
FOR VACANT LOT (FUTURE USE) LOCATION MARKED WITH PAINTED 2' X 4' STAKE
WITH 'WATER' STENCILED ON IT,
14GA. VINYL COATED WIRE TRACER (TAPED TO PLASTIC PIPE EVERY 10') TO BE
GROUNDED AT METER AND HOUSE,
SCHEDULE 40 3/4' OR V PLUG. REMOVE WHEN CONNECTION IS MADE TO CUSTOMER LINE.
WATER SERVICE TO HOUSE, INSTALLED BY OWNER/CONTRACTOR.
PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSIBLE FOR PURCHASING 3/4' OR I- METER THROUGH THE CITY,
CITY WILL INSTALL METER AFTER PURCHASE,
IF USING 3/4' METER, CITY WILL PROVIDE REDUCERS,
.1-TY
C.
. 11
REVISIONS
APPROVED BY DATE STANDARD DETAIL
METER
D, GEBERT 6/19/03 1-WATERSERVICE. FOR 3/4' OR I
D. GEBERT 4/2/07 DATE SCALE INSTALLATION
DWG NO.
Est. lacio R. ENGLISH in/ulll 7/24/01 NTS E7.6
A
'A
TE
CD
FILTER SOCK WITH
OVERFLOW HOLES I
I CATCH BASIN I
STRAW BALES MAY BE USED IN
CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES (SEE
DETAIL E1.1.1). THIS APPLICAITON
SHALL BE MAINTAINED AT ALL
TIMES DURING CONSTRUCITON
PERIOD.
CITY INSPECTION REQUIRED ON ALL EROSION CONTROL
MEASURES BEFORE WORK CAN BEGIN,
ITY...
C
0 F
REVISIONS
APPROVED BY DATE STANDARD D ETAI L
D. GEBERT 10/06/03 Tmpm
05/19/05 SMW MP FM CA7011 BM
189 D. GEBERT 05/05/06 DATE SCALE DWG NO.
0_19913 7/24/01 1 NTS E1.3
TD:IUNDISTURBED
RANK TYPICAL
SLOPE-
SPACIN& (LF)
lal8ja 35Y
1 Nur OvER..zia LF
35 TO 50
NOT UVER'.7+ LF
PLAN 50V
NOT aVER`16 [F :SE'CT1'0N C-C
CONCRETE ANCHOR 910CR DIETAm FOR PIPES ON STIEE0 SLOPES
NTS..
Call 2 Working Days Before You Dig
811 or 1-800-424-5555
Utilities Underground Location Center I
EEDDIN(�
I
RESUB
OCT 2 6 2015
BUILDINa DEPAR-tMENT
--- rITv OF POMONDS-
APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION
C17Y EDMONDS
DA 7TE.
BY- -2,
CITY ENGINffRING D111430N
16531 13TH AVE W, SUITE Al 08
LYNNWOOD, WA 98037
PHONE: (425) 678-6960
WWW.RAMENGINEERINGINC.COM
Co
0
Q.
Uj 8)
Cz Z
ILL
Z3
U)
�_j
LU
Z
Uj
Z
L
A;�
OV WA& 0
38508
laly- 1/7! 5
Z
ENGINEER:
ROB L. LONG, PE
DRA WN B Y-
MIKE MORRIS
ISSUE DA 7E. SCAALE:
8114115 AS N07ED
JOB NO.
15-026
SHEET. TD-01
SHT 4 oF 4