209 ELM ST.PDFIIIIIIIIIIIIII
11190
209 ELM ST
PLANNING DATA
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
11 S EET FILE
Na me:
� 6�
Site Address:
Date:
Plan Check
Project Description: FR
Reduced Site Plan Provided: ES NO)
Zoning: S - 6
Map Page: -
I Corner Lot: & NO)
Flag Lot: (YES
Criti4Areas Determination ff.- �2
Ag-S tudy Required
11 Waiver
SEPA Determination:
9--Exempt
El Needed (for over 500 cubic yards of grading)
0 Fee El Checklist El APO List with notarized form
Required cks
Street:
Side:
2-
Side:
1 /1J
r:
Actual Setback5
Street:
Side:
Side.
El Detached Structures:
Rockeries: -3 ( /VNCI Ic �.*Ie- 5464 /1 o CM /c,
Fences/Trellises:
El Bay Windows/Projecting Modulation:
Stairs/Deck:
Heght
Datum Point: B,� C �;J�)aturn
Elevation: 10 T5
Maximum Height Allowed:
Actual Height: 2 1,7 OY9
Other
Parking Required:
Parking Provided: +
Lot Area: -7
Maximum Lot Coverage: 35% Proposed: 5
Lot Coverage Calculations: 90 V SQ- r4�Q-s 'Lis-
ADU Created: (YES /Q)
Subdivision: (,L-Z000 -6-�
Legal Nonconforming Land Use Determination Issued: (YES
Cofnrnents
A 7
5 � � 3
C a3- 0 +
D -(76--5
Plan Review By: //(z /(' -r-
Plarmirq Data Form G4 -11 -06.doc
0 City of Edmonds I*
Critical Area Notice of Decision
Applicant:
� er—
fV 1 (0 �
Property Owner:
e-c- L -d 6
Critical Area File
V
'�D 00 ( (
Permit Number:
-L V
e0--Zo I — 0
Site Location:
—
log U—I/VL
Parcel Number:
0 C? 5- f I QQQ3 0 1 CO
Project Descriptio . n:
Af tIV S- 7--/2- (s �&+ C I ��f - T-c- -5c e 6r)
Conditional Waiver. No critical area report is required for the project described above.
I There will be no alteration of a -Critical Area or its required buffer.
2. The proposal is an �Ilowed activity pursuant to ECDC 23.40.220, 23.50.220, and/or
23.80.040.
3. 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.
Critical 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:
I The proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas in accordance with ECDC 23.40.120,
Mitigation sequencing;
2. 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. Any alterations permitted to the critical area are mitigated in accordancewith 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.
F-I 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.
Pavorable 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. Criti cal Area specific condition(s) have been applied to the permit number referenced
above. See referenced permit number for specific condition(s).
Reviewer
Ae'14 a:::fl�
Signature k4
'? /I Z-
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 12/16/2010
MAR 16 2012
City of Edmonds DEVELOPMENT SERVICE
COUNTER
Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet
Name of Proposed Project: �2_0r-i lEayv) 51-o5t:r I
Owner/Applicant
scy)t)Nonccw� m�je
,5�+eA
Name q
goo) )9V-_ S-F
Street/Mailing Address
Uq,0r1(,,wq1. wvq 110-30
city I State Zip
Telephone:
L4 2S-- Col 3 - I ) 0 0
Applicant Contact Person:
�Wvavmi — I
11irm
Street/Mailing Address
city
Telephone: <-, APA 7,'
Traffic Engineer who prepared the Traffic Impact Analysis (if applicable):
Finn Name
Telephone:
THRESHOLD LEVELS OF ANALYSIS
Contact Name
E-mail:
State Zip
Project Traffic Levels Sections to Complete
1. Less than 25 peak -hour trips generated I and 7 only (Worksheet/Checklist)
11. More than 25 peak -hour trips generated All sections
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
a. Location - Street address: 2-09 E7LA4 ST(L456��T-_
- j!�]D vw o 0 Q$ Lj A 990-0 —(Attach a vicinity map and site plan.)
b. Specify existing land use: A-ct y-Hr LcA�n A
c. Specify proposed type and size of development:. % 5 �:7 e. - V1 -11 5.E.7
(# of residential units andlor squarefootage of building)
�nMama=
M
Revised on 6124110
E82 - Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet
Page I of 5
0
0
F
d. Date construction will begin and be completed: 201 -2- ID -115- 2JD)7—
e. Define proposed access locations: D(%.Jt Le2�-� 1(5 Lr.& e�,T-(LeE T
f Define proposed sight distance at site egress locations: UJJ5�;PT_ >* 10C)
&95--T >
2. TRIEP GENERATION
Source shall be the Eighth Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation
manual. For independent fee calculations, the current edition of the ITE manual may be used.
ADT = Average Daily Traffic
PM Peak -hour trips (AM, noon or school peak may also apply as directed by the City Engineer)
a. Existing Site Trip Generation Table:
Land Use
Daily (ADT)
PM Peak -Hour
Trips
IN
OUT
b. Proposed Project Trip Generation Table:
Land Use
Daily (ADT)
PM Peak -Hour
Trips
IN
. OUT
c. Net New Project Trip Generation Table:
Land Use
Daily (ADT)
PM Peak -Hour
Trips
IN
OUT
d. State assumptions and methodology for internal, link -diverted or passby trips:
Revised on 6124110 E82 - Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet Page 2 of 5
3. TRIP DISTREBUTION
Prepare and attach a graphic showing project trip distribution percentages and assignments. For
developments that generate over 75 peak -hour trips, the City Engineer reserves the right to require
trip distribution to be determined through use of the City traffic model.'
4. SITE ACCESS ROADWAY/DRIVEWAYS AND SAFETY
a. Have sight distance requirements at egress location been met per AASHTO requirements?
b. Intersection Level of Service (LOS) Analysis:
Intersections to be evaluated shall be determined by the City ofEdmonds Traffic Engineer
Existing Conditions
LOS
Delays
Year of Opening
LOS
Delays
Five Years Beyond Change of
Land Use
LOS
I
I
Delays
I
I
c. Describe channelization warrants:
(Attach striping plan.)
d. Vehicle Storage/Queuing Analysis (calculate 50% and 95 % queuing lengths):
50%
95%
Existing Conditions
Year of Opening
Five Years Beyond Change of
Land Use
e. If appropriate, state traffic control warrants (e.g. stop sign warrants, signal warrants):
f. Summarize local accident history 2 (only required for access to principal and minor arterials):
1 Available upon request at City of Edmonds Development Services Department
2 Available upon request at City of Edmonds Police Department
Revised on 6124110 E82 - Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheel Page 3 of 5
0 0
5. TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Provide the following and other planned development tratfic within the city.'
a. Describe existing ADT and peak -hour counts (less than two years old), including turning
movements, on street adjacent to and directly impacted by the project.
b. Describe the estimated ADT and peak -hour counts, including turning movements, the year the
project is fully open (with and without project traffic).
c. Describe the estimated ADT and peak -hour counts, including turning movements, five years
after the project has been fully open (with and without project traffic).
d. State annual background traffic growth factor and source:
6. LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) ANALYSIS
a. Summarize Level of Service Analysis below and attach supporting LOS analysis documentation.
Provide the following documentation for each arterial street or arterial intersection impacted by
ten or more peak -hour trips. Other City -planned developments' must also be factored into the
LOS calculations.
LOS
LOS
Existing Conditions
Existing
Delays
Year of Opening
With Project
Without Project
Five Years Beyond Change o
Land Use
With Project
I
Without Project
b. Note any assumptions/variations to standard analysis default values and justifications:
' A list of planned developments are available at the City upon request for public records
Revised on 6124110 E82 - Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet Page 4 of 5
7. MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS
State recommended measures and fees required to mitigate project specific traffic impacts. Traffic
impact fee shall be calculated from the Edmonds Road Impact Fee Rate Study Table 4 (attached)
and as identified in ECDC 18.82.120, except as otherwise provided for independent fee calculations
in ECDC. 18.82.130.
11 CHANGE IN USE
Fee for prior use shall be based on fee established at the time the prior use was permitted. If the
previous use was permitted prior to the adoption of Ordinance 3516 (effective date: 09/12/04),
the 2004 ECDC 18.82.120 impact fee shall be used.
ITE Land Use Category
Per Unit
Fee Rate
New Use
$
Prior Use
$
X
X
New Use Fee: $ Prior Use Fee: $
9/"NEW DEVELOPMENT
Units in
square feet,
of dwelling,
vfm etc.
Units in
Per Unit square feet,
ITE Land Use Category Fee Rate # of dwelling,
vfp, etc.
New Use $ 1196,33 X
D OTHER
INDEPENDENT FEE CALCULATION: $200.00 (+consultant fee) $
TOTAL TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE $
h-e4-4
Edmonds, Engineering Division Approval
Fee
Fee
'e/z to h -2—
Date
No impact fees will be due, nor will a credit be given, for an impact fee calculation resulting in a net negative.
Revised on 6124110 E82 - Traffic Impact Analysis Worksheet Page 5 of 5
LIU & ASSOCIATES� INC.
Geotechnical Enginmring Engineering Geviogy
Dcccmbcr 3 0, 2011
Mr. Todd Echclbargcr
Echelbarger Development LLC
4001-198 th Stree * t Swi� S�ite 2
Lynnwood, WA 98036
Dear Mr. Echelbargcr:
Earth Scbence
Subject: Geotechnical Investigation and Recommendations
Onsite Stormwater Disposal
SinglerFamily Residence
2xx Elm Street
Edmonds, Washington
L&A Job No. 11-077 STREET FILE
INTRODUCTION
A( your request, we have completed a geotechnical investigation. of onsite stormwater
disposal for the proposed single-family residence, located at the above address in
Edmonds, Washington. The general location of this residence is shown on. Plate I —
Vicinity Map. The purpose of this investigation is to characterize the subsurface
conditions of the site and. evaluate feasibility of using infiltration trenches th dispose
stormwatcr onsite for the subject residence. Pmentcd in this report are our fmclings,
conclusion. and recommendations.
SCOPE
To achieve the above purpose, we propose a scope of services corriprising specifically the
following:
MAR 16 2012
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
COUNTER
19213 Kenlake Place NE Kenmore, Washington 98028
Phone (425) 483-9134 - Fax (425) 486-2746
December 3 0, 2011
Mr. Todd Echetbarger/Echelbarger.Development, LLC
L&A Job No. 11 -077
Page 2
1. Review geologic and soil. conditions at and in the vicinity of tile subject prop"
based on a published geologic, map,
2. Explore subsurface (ioil and groundwater) conditions in the area of proposed
infiltration trenches of the site with backhoe test piN to depths where a -soil stratum
suitable for stormwater infiltration is encountered or to the maximum depth (about
8 feet) capable by the backhoe used in test pit excavation, whichever occurs first.
3. Conduct laboratory gradation tests, in accordance with ASTN! D422, on two soil
samples obtained from a targeted soil stratum. in. the test pits. The test results are
to be used in determining the design infiltration rate for the design of tile
infiltration trenches in accordance with USDA'rexture Triugiq, per Washington
State Department of Ecology 2005 Stormwatet Desigg Manual of Western
Washington.
4. Prepare a written report to present our findings, conclusions and.geotechnical
recommendations for the design of infiltration trenches.
I
SITE CONDITIONS
Surface Condition
For our use in this investigation, you provided us with a topographic survey plan of the
residence site. As shown on this plan., presented on Plate 2, the residence site is bounded
by 2 nd Avenue South. on its west side and Elm Street on its south side. It is situated on the
top of a wcsterly-declining, gentle to steep hillside. The ground within the site generally
slopes down westward at grades from 6% to 35%. with the.steeper portion of the site lies
in its western 20 to 30 feet. The proposed residence is to be.located in the gently sloped
eastern two thirds of the site, to be accessed from Elm Street via a driveway entering the
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
December 30, 2011
Mr. Todd Echelbarger/Echelbarger Development, LLC
L&A Job No. .11-07 7
Page 3
site at its southeast corner. The proposed infiltration trenches are to be located near the
north end of the site and/or under thedrive-way.
The site is currently vacant with a storage shed located at its north end. It is dotted with
scattered tall', mature deciduous and evergreen trees along its north and west sides. The
gently sloped eastern portion is covered with sparse grass while,the western steep sloped
area is covered with shrubs and brush.
Geologic Setting
'llie Geolggic. Map of the . Edmonds East and Part of the. Edmonds West Quadran
WashingLon by James P. Minard, published by U. S. Geological Survey in 1983, was
referenced for the geologic and soil conditions at. the residence site. According to this
publication, the surficial soil unit at and in the vicinity of the subJect residence site is
mapped as an Advance Outwash (Qva) soil unit,
The advance outwash soil,unit is composed of stratified sand and gravel. with very minor
amount of silt and clay, deposited by the meltwater of advancing glacial ice of the last
glacicr. Due to their generally granular composition, the advance outwash deposits are of
moderately high permeability and drains fairly well. The advance outwash deposits had
been. glacially overridden and are generally dense to very dense in. their natural,
undisturbed state, except the soil in the top 2 to 4 fee t which is normally weathered to a
loose to medium -dense state, The advance outwash deposits can stand. in steep cuts or
natural slopes for extended period when undisturbed. Where exposed on slopes with poor
vegetation cover and subjected to storm runoff or groundwater seepage, the advance
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
December 301. 2011
Mr. Todd F.chclbarger/Echclbarger Development, LLC
L&A Job No. 11 -077
Page 4
outwash deposits can be gradually eroded and may slough and redeposit to a flatter
inclination. The underlying fresh. advance outwash deposits in their native, undisturbed
state can provide good foundation support With little sc-tticmcnt expected for light to
moderately heavy structures.
Soil Condition
Subsurface conditions of the site were explored with two test pits. These test pits were
excavated on August.30, 2011, with a rubber -tired backhoc to depths of 5.0 and. 5.5 feet.
The approximate locations of the test pits are shown on Plate 2 - Site and Exploration
Location Plan.. The test pits were located with either a tape measure or by visual
reference to existing topographic features in the field and on the topographic survey map,
and their locations should be considered only Accurate to the measuring method used.
A gcotechnical engineer from out office was present during subsurface exploration, who
examined the soil and geologic. conditions encountered and completed logs of' test pits.
Soil samples obtained from. each soil layerin the test pits were visually classified -in
general accordance with United Soil. Classification System, a copy of which is presented
on Plate 3. Detailed descriptions of soils encountered during site exploration are
presented in test pit logs on Plate 4.
Both tcst pits encountered a layer of loose organic topsoil from 12 to 14 inches th ick.
Underlying the topsoil is a layer of weathered soil of medium -dense., slightly silty, fine
sand, with a trace to some gravel, about 1.6 to 2.0 feet thick. The weathered soil is
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
December 3 0, 2011
Mr. Todd Echelbargcr/Echclbargcr Development, LLC
L&A Job No, H-077
Page 5
underlain to the depths explored by a brown -gray to gray, dense, gravelly medium to
coarse sand deposit. This deposit is interpreted to be of an advance outwash soil unit.
Groundwater Condition
Groundwater was not encountered by.cithcr test pits excavated on the site. The topsoil,
weathered soil and the underlying fresh advance outwash soil are all of moderately high
permeability and would allow stormwatcr to seep through easily. Water. infiltrating into
the ground would perch on the surface of a low -permeability fine-grained deposit at such
depth that it should have minimal or no impact on the functioning of the proposed
infiltration trenches.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
ONSITE STORMWATER DISPOSAL
General
Based on the soil condition encountered by the test pits excavated on the site, it is our
opinion that the clean gravelly medium to. coarse sand deposit at shallow depth should be
able to support proposed infiltration trenches to dispose stormwater onsite. Construction
of the infiltration trenches should be monitored by a geotechnical engineer.
Particle Size Distribution Tests
Two soil samples, one from each test pit, were selected for Particle Size Distribution. tests
in laboratory to determine the infiltration rate of targeted soil deposits. Soil Sample No. I
taken from Test Pit No. I at 3.5 feet deep is gravelly, fine to coarsesand; Soil Sample No.
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC4,
December 30. 20 It
Mr. Todd Echelbarger/Echelbarger Development, LLC
L&A Job No. 11-077
Page 6
2 taken from Test Pit 2 was taken at 4,5 feet deep. The reports of these tests are presented
on Plates A- I and A-2 in the attached APPENDIX
As shown on the Particle Size Distribution test reports, Soil Sample No. I had a clay
content of 1.7% and a gravel/sand content of 97.8% while Soil Sample No. 2 had a clay
content of .1.8% and a gravet/sand content.of 98.2%. Accordi,ng to the USDA Texture
Triangle (from U.S. Department of Agriculture) chart, shown on Plate A-3 in the attached
Appendix, both soil samples can be classified as "sand".
Design Infiltration Rate for Infiltration Trenches
The. Stormwater Management Manual for Westem Washinon, 2005 Edition published
by Washington State Department of Ecology, is used to estimate the design infiltration
rate of the target soil stratum for infiltration trenches to be constructed near the north end
or under the driveway along the east. side of the site. According to the table of
Recommended Infiltration Rates Based on USDA Soit Textural Classification shown on
Plate A-3, the estimated short-term inrittration rate would be 8 iph (inches per hour) and
the estimated long-term infiltration rate would be 2 iph for both soil samples classified as
"sand".
As shown on the Particle Size Distribution tcst.rcports., the DIU size (the size of 10%
passing) is 0.114 mch for Soil Sample No. I and 0,146 inch for Soil Sample 2.
According to the table of Alternative. Recommended Infiltration Rates Based On ASTM
Gradation Testing. presented on Plate A-4, by -interpolation, the estimated long-term
infiltration rate is 2.21 iph for Soil Sample No. I and 2.69,iph for Soi I Sample No. 2.
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
December 30, 2011
Mr. Todd FxhclbargcrAF3cbclbarger Development, LL.0
L&A Job No. 11 -077
Page 7 *
Based on the above, we recommend a design infiltration rate of 2.0 iph be used for the
design of the proposed infiltration for onsitc storinwater disposal.
Infiltration Trench Construcdon
The trenches should be cut at least 6 inches into.the underlying clean, brown -gray to gray,
gravelly,, fine to coarse sand. To: reach this target soil stratum the infiltration trenches
would have to be cxcavated al.least 3.5 to 4.0 reet deep. The soilunit at bottom of
infiltration trenches should be verified by a geotechnical. engineer.
The infiltration trenches should be set back at least 5. feet froin property lines and at least
8 feet -ftom nearby building foundations. The soil unit and trench cut bank stability
should be verified by a gcotechnical engineer. during qxcavation.
Our recommendations for' infiltration trenches are shown on Plate 5. The infiltration
trenches should be at least 24 inches wide.
The side walls of the trenches should be lined with a laver of' non -woven filter fabric,
such as MERAFI WONS. The trenches are then filled with clean washed 3/4 to 1-1/2 inch
gravel or crushed rock to within about 10 inches of the finish grade. The dispersion pipes
should be constructed of 4-inch rigid PVC pipes and laid level in the gravcl or crushed
rock filled trenches at about 16 inches below the top of trenches. The top of the gravel or
crushed rock fill should also be covered with the filter fabric liner. The remaining
trenches should then be backfilled with compacted onsite clean soils. Ile gravel or
crushed rock fill should bc placed in lifts, no more than 10. inches thick in loose state, with
LIU & ASSOCIATES.INC.
December 30. 2011
MT. Todd Echelbarget/1Fchelbarger Development., LLC
L&A Job No. 11 -077
Page 8 .
each lift compacted to a non -yielding state with a vibratory . mechanical compactor.
Stormwater captured over paved drive -way should be routed into a catch basin equipped
with an oil-watcr separator before being released into the infiltration trenches.
TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL
A silt fence should be constructed along the downhill sides of the construction area to
keep sediment from being transported onto neighboring properties and the streets. The
bottom of the filter fabric should be anchored in a trench backfilled with onsitc soils.
Unpaved disturbed areas devoid of vegetation should be seeded and re-vcgetated as soon
as possible. Re -seeded areas should be covered with clear plastic sheets, as required, for
erosion protection.
LIMITATIONS
This report has been prepared for the specific application to this project for the exclusive
use by Echelbarger Development, LIZ, its* associates, representative, consultants and
contractors. We recommend that this report, in its entirety, be included in the project
contract documents for the information of the prospective contractors for their estimating
and bidding purposes and for compliance with the recommcndations in this report durin. g
construction. The conclusions and interpretations in this- report, however, should not be
construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. The scope- of this study does not
include services related to construction safety precautions and oijr'recommcndations are
not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures,
except as specifically described in this report fbr design considerations.
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
December 30, 2011
Mr. Todd Ecbelbarger/Echelbarger Development, LLC
L&A Job No. 11 -077
Page 9
Our recommendations and conclusions are based- on the geologic and soil Conditions
encountered in the test pits, and our experience and engineering judgment. The
conclusions and recommendations arc professional opinions derived 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. No warranty,
expressed or implied, is made.
The actual subsurface conditions of the site may vary from those encountered by the test
pit.-,. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until construction
starts. If variations appear then, we should be retained to re-evaluale the
recommendations of this report, and to verify or modify them in writing prior to
proceeding ftirthcr with the constructimof the proposed development,
Yours very truly,
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
J. S. (Julian) Liu, Ph.D., P.E.
Consulting Geotechnical Engineer
Five Plates and Appendix. attached
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
]FATHOM';-. CTW4 CL
14
AITT
187TH
PL
IBM
sw
PL
19M
COQUE '�sr-
ST;.*.: SW'
Foal;;
PL -
196T i -ST
MELODY IN
V,
�j
HINDXL
V'
lk
00
7
Oftb,;-
PiL
EMD'S . . . . . .
VNDERMA TER 4SPE s S
S vy
PARK;., ST.
'20P
BACKEM wi L
1A SI
LAAVIAG 51
ST
9L4GJFI GLEN 51 < ST SlErRA
24 1 1pt
ST
FM Mwu
SPMWE'
ILL.
ST
ELL
'Elm st
A SM
IN 1g.." 'R
Ila, ST
DAYTON !U
ST
MAPLE r
77sw
23.
ZIP'.
VION
XQ, I Ly OR T. low
oil
M" 7.
sprixt,ev
P1
'4310—Co lap
—NIV
ST:
ZI
s SM
Lu I
L
firm ITS
PROJECT Elm vt sw
isT11
ST
sw
Ot
SITE
.3
tELLX coo"
RD 221 ST.
ST
OW CA Vani rL
221ST Pt
flu'.
_jsj
B RDI
PL
14ro it Fri
ST, L _5k.,J
N
VICINITY MAP
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE
2)(of ELM STREET
Geotachnical Engineering - Engineering Cieology - Earth. Science EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
------------ Nam
'Rill
- --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TP I
Ir
slam
Lu
rl
Jr
T— Or I
IL I
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering -,Engineedng (�oofM - Earth Science
..........
WE AREA
7,3M SM FT
Pell Tplz
OWN 777\07 RM
L=
SITE AND EXPLORATION LOCATION PLAN
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE
2 XXELM STREET
WASHINGTON
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GROUP
GROUP NAME
SYMBOL
GRAVEL
CLEAN
GW
WELL -GRADED GRAVEL; FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL
COARSE-
MORE THAN 50% OF
GRAVEL
Gp
POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL
GRAINED
COARSE FRACTION
GRAVEL WITH
GM
SILTY GRAVEL
SOILS
RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE
FINES
GC
CLAYEY GRAVEL
SAND
CLEAN
SW
WELL-G I RADEO SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND
MORE THAN 50%,
MORE THAN 50% OF
SAND
SP
POORLY -GRADED SAND
SAND WITH
SM
SILTY SAND
RETAINED ON THE
COARSE FRACTION
NO� 200 SIEVE
PASSING NO, 4 SIEVE
FINES
SC
CLAYEY SAIND
FINE-
SILT AND CLAY
INORGANIC
ML
SILT
CL
CLAY
GRAINED
LIQUID LIMIT.
SOILS
LESS THAN 50%
ORGANIC
OL
ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY
MORETHAN M
SILTY AND CLAY
INORGANIC
MH
SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY. ELASTIC SILT
CH
CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY
PASSING ON THE
LIQUID LIMIT
140� 200 SIEVE
50% OR MORE
ORGANIC
OH
ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC SILT
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
PT
PEAT AND OTHER.HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
NOTE
SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS:
1. FIELD CLASSIFICATION IS BASED ON VISUAL EXAMINATION
DRY - ABSENCE OF MOISTURE, DUSTY, DRY TO
OF SOIL IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D2468-81
THETOUCH
I SOIL CLASSIFICATION USING LABORATORY TESTS It BASED
SLIGHTLY MOIST - TRACE MOISTURE, NOT DUSTY
Ott ASTIA D2487-83,
MOIST - DAMP, BUT NO VISIBLE WATER
3. DESCRIPTIONS OF SOIL DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY ARE
VERY MOIST - VERY DAMP, MOISTURE FE LTTO THE TOUCH
BASED ON INTERPRETATION OF BLOW�COUNT DATA, VISUAL
WET m VISIBLE FREE WATER OR SATURATED,
APPEARANCE OF SOILS, ANDiOR TEST DATA.
USUALLY SOIL IS OBTAINED FROM BELOW
WATER TABLE
LIU & ASSOCIATIESINC.
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Gootechnical Engineeting Engineetin Ge"y - Eanh Stlence
PLATE 3
TEST PIT NO. 1
Logged By: JSL Date: 8/3012011
Ground El. i
Depth
ft�
LISCS
CLAS&
Soil _ Description
Sample
No,
W
%
Other
T�st
-
OL
Dark -brown, louse, organic, silty fine SAND, with fine roots, dry
—
- -
- - - -
- - - (TOPSOIL) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2
SWSP
Brown, medium -dense, slightly silty, fine SAND, trace to some
gravel,,dry
3
------------------------------------------
4
Sw
Brown -gray to gray, dense, gravelly, medium to coarse SAND.
occasional cobble, dry
Test pit terminated at 6.0 ft; groundwater not encountered.
8
9
10
TEST PIT NO. 2
Logged By: JSL Date: 8/30/2011
Ground El.
Depth
ft.
I
I
USCS
CLASS,
Soil Description
Sample
No.
W
%
Other
Test
OL
Dark -brown, loose, organic, silty fine SAND, with fine roots.. dry
------------------------------------------
(TOPSOIL)
2
SM/SP
Brown, medium -dense, slightly silty. fine SAND, trace to some
gravel, dry
3
-------------------------------------------
SW
Brown-grayto gray, dense, gravelly, medium to coarse SAND,
4
occasional cobble, dry
6
7
Test pit terminated at 5.5 ft; groundwater not encountered.
a
10
I
t
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotethnical Engineering - Engineering Geo"y - Earth Soience
TEST PIT LOGS
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE
2*4 ELM STREET
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
JOB NO. 11-077 1 DATE: 12/23111 1 PLATE 4
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Gootechnical Engineering - Engineering Geology - Earth Science
V-
-Z
z -x
'-4
72
VL
-Z
z
TYPICAL SECTION - INFILTRATION TRENCH
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE
2XX ELM STREET
MERCER ISLAND, WASHINGTON
APPENDIX
Particle Size Gradation Test Report
Single -Family Rcsidence
2xx Elm Street
Edmonds, Washington
LIU &ASSOCIATES, INC.
10C
Tc
U
U
41
31
211
ASTM C1171136 Particle Size Distribution Report
Kim
F� -Z,l t�l �� WA
%
% OPAVEL
% SMO % FINM
Rk.
CRS.
MEDIUM'
CLAY
1.7.1
.4 &
-7
SIMM
Sim
PERCENT
FINER
SPEC.'
PERCENT
PASS?
-jXeMO)
I in.
I WO
314 irk.
97.1
518 in.
94A
1/2 in.
8"
313 in.
85,5
.#4
80.0
#10
75.5
440
53.5
9200
2.2
0.0351 mm.
244
0,0221 ram.
2-5
0.0128 Mm.
1,7
0.0091 MM.
1.7
0,004 nwL
1-7
0.0031 Mrn-
1.7
0.0013 mtn.
1.7
I ,
I
I
TP-2
Sand
RMT14=77-7"M-M
AtWbeiml-imits
PL=
LL= Pl=
D,6 1:61
coefficients
D60= 0.549 D%= 0,378
,13
30: 0 7
D DIO 0. 114
CIj= 4.79
= j137
CICV00
2
Massitimuori
Uscs-
AASHTO=
Remarks
F.Nl.=0.37
. (no spc6ficafiun pmvi�)) �?Of L SAMMG- f4o I
Sample No.: 1033 SiDurce of Sample: Elin Stred Lot 12-21-2011
Location: ElevJDepth: 3-5'
Client: Lui & Assmiatcs
BCD ProjerA: 201.1 LaboraturyTesfing
cAE304MjOE TESTINK3 L.AOORA'MVky. "C-' 7
M-*q Ro�*� OrMaMWev Robert Ailtmary
FLATe A - I
PERCENT FINER
8 a 911 S-v 8
LA
11
-7� w 0 bs;= m I W
14M
at
4)
----------
m
1 .5z
44 00
10
blow
44L wmmwm�
F4
CN
IM
M
MIX .
it
USDA Soil Textural Tdangle
Table Recommended Infiltration Rates
based -on USDA Soil Textural Classification.
*Short -Term
Correctioll
Pstimated Long -Term
Sol] Textural Clissification
Infiltration
(Dtsign) InfiltrAtion Rate
1(A (in . Jkr)
Factor, CF
(InJb!)
Clean sandy gravels and
20
2
to
gravc1ly sands (i.e,, g(r/o of
the total Soil sample is
retaincd in the A 10 sicye)
Sand
4
2
2
4
0.5
5amoy-Loam
4
0.7-S
Loant
0.5
4
0.13
FLATE� - A-3
Correction factors higher than those provided in table 3.7 should be
considered.for situations Where lon&4erm maintenance will be difficult to
implcment� where little or no pretreatment is anticipated, or where site
conditions are highly variable or uncertain. These situations require the
use of best professional judgment by tile site engineer and tile approval of
tile local jurisdiction. An Operation and Maintenance plan and a financial
bonding plan may be required by the local jurisd iction.
2. ASTM (Iradatinn-Te-ging at FUJI Scale Infiltration Facilities
As an alternative toTable 3.7, recent studies by Massmann and Butchwit
(2000) W= used to develop the correlation provided in Table 3.8. These
studies compare infiltration measurements from full-scale infiltration
facilities to soil gradation data developed using theASTM procedure
(AStM D422). The primary source of the data used by Massmann and
Butchart was froin Wiltsic (1998), who included limited infiltration
studies only on Tliurston County sites. However, Massmann and Butchart
also included limited data from King and Clark County sites in their
analysis. This table provides recommended long-term infiltration rates
that have been correlated to soil gradation parametcrs using the ASTM
soil gradation procedure.
Table 3.8 can be used to estimate long-term design infiltration rates�
directly from soil gradation data, subject to the approval of the local
jurisdiction. As i's true of Table 3.7, the long4erm rates provided in Table
.8 represent average conditions regarding site variabi lity, tile degree of
long-term.maintenance and pretreatment for ISS control. The long-term
infiltration rates in Table 3.8 may inced to be decreased if the site is highly
variable, or if mainteriance 'and influent characteristics are not well
controlled. The data that forms the basis for Table 3.8 was from soils that
would be classi ' fied as sands or sandy gravels'. No data was available for
finer soi Is at the time the table was dtvelopW. Therefore, Table 3.8 shou td
not be used. for soils with a dio size (10% passing the size listed) less than
0.05 nini (U.Si Standard Sievc).
Alternative Recommended Infiltration
Rates nased on ASTM Gradation Testing.
D to Sizt from ASTNI D422 Soil
Gradittion, Tcst (mm)
Estimated Long -Term (Design)
Infiltration Rate (Whr)
> 0.4
9
0.3
6.5*
0,2
3.5*
Oil
2.0*t
0.05
0,8
— FWQUUD=ca tat UMMxffl
keer to SSC4 inxi SS" for Umbret-A *=VbWjiW critcria
Februar
y2005 'Volume'lli��Hydrut6gicAn�lksts'andFiow,co�i;;-lBmps
A-4
0 V ED A,
#P71
St. I
Purpose of Checklist.
CITY OF EDMONDS
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.2 1 C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental
impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with
probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help
you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to
help the agency decide whether an EIS is required.
Instructions for Applicants:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this
checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer
the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer
the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or
if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may
avoid unnecessary delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if
you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of
land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you
submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there
may be significant adverse impact.
Use of checklistfor nonprojectproposals:
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION,
complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D).
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as
"proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively.
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: 0?09 F I Y y 7 !Sr(zE76� -i - S�FP-
2. Name of applicant: . *Vx-) )�:rn ( rel,,e M-n-oend nn2mls, 1-,L-c—
J -
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
L
n] Z—
n D d L1319 990-SU
A E-C-"e- I bc,� - gft
4. Date checklist prepared: -3 - I �; - 7-0 1 -L_ R=%-#Ml V 9--D
5. Agency requesting checklist: City ofEdmonds MAR 16 2012
DEVELOPMENT SERViCES
COUNTER
Revised on 4120110 Page I of24 P71 - SEPA Cliecklist
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 5 +rvct�on
L-) I Z' 13y j 2 D j 2-
IF
(STAFF COMMENTS)
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this
proposal? If yes, explain.
M D
(STAFF COMMENTS)
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related
to this proposal.
4jkgW 5n.Q-5 J2 6.00 P- 7- - -50-rL--S A05 4 A.M D ND 5T-AJQDX��C2
1;U A Tr::: a.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting
the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
NO
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 4120110 Page 2 of24 P71 - SEPA Checklist
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
S E02=
(STAFF COMMENTS)
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and size of the project and site.
There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You
do not need to repeat those answers on this page.
Cp4s4roc+ 'Z;Z-71 -SQ Pr 4 E -Z, ce- r 1,6Jewr::,!1
anj V-'f �U; n f,15-, I evuee'( +M I . S 33H -e, & F: T
(STAFF COMMENTS)
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your
proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal
would occur over a range of area, provide range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide legal description, site plan,
vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the
agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related
to this checklist.
2,0-1 51-0 6rarau-1- WA go 7- D
0 C -a tlx e-D-f ek-e-,' j, m c(vzd sr -a E:c-r
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 4120110 Page 3 of 24 P71 - SEPA Cliecklist
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
APTIN
a. General description of the site (circle one): ekshilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other:
9A
i!5'4-) tj 4- ,Ln'6-L lo,04-- Pz- tbsL L-no,-s4- v4C DmPe.44
(STAFF COMMENTS
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
1-3 .3 7%,
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, and muck)? If you
know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland.
.!57qyjj� 4- arc,&�)v-N %vose y[jQn,-e-
Zyx- say%r) -v-
(STAFF COMMENTS)
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe.
A)O
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 4120110 Page 4 of 24 P71 - SEPA Cliecklist
e. Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source
of fill.
b e-- -ai-e-el-pJ i-% fevs�-,M 8011Wwo
(STAFF COMMENTS)
L Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
. f � n (,D er-r -T- 115-5. C-
%J
%) s
(STAFF COMMENTS)
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for
example, asphalt or buildings)?
20,D/z,
(STAFF COMMENTS)
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any:
.5-C I+ 4t-ne'e-
(STAFF COMMENTS)
2. AIR
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, and
industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe
and give approximate quantities if known.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 4120110 Page 5 of 24 P71 - SEPA Checklist
b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may effect your proposal? If so, generally describe.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to the, if any:
LjzJer- _sJ-c dc>,.,)n 61,3sf- 19ecc>e-,e.S A- 12.,pble-&--
(STAFF COMMENTS)
3. WATER
a. Surface:
(1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and
seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, and wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names.
If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
Eli
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If
yes, please describe and attach available plans.
K) a
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface
water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of rill
material.
Q . V1 k-
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 412 0/10 Page 6 of 24 P71 - SEPA Checklist
(4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description,
purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
&) C)
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan.
0V
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the
type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
f3 0
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Ground:
(1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 4120110 Page 7 of 24 P71 - SEPA Checklist
C.
(2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if
any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural;
etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to
be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
1- hD vv,,R- %--, *, )) b,'- S e- 0&e A tQAh )ei ntCO�C I �6k
LVQ' J in�-�r-Jivn rj'pe.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Water Runoff (including storm water):
(1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any
(include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters?
If so, describe.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
*5' Tt.:c 4- ac--e, Lecle el o�l pr oAL
(STAFF
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any:
dialm SM12 iyj" c&A%1e-9Qr7ce ivucvly-r-�6)"
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 4120110 Page 8 of24 P71 - SEPA Checklist
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
V/' deciduous tree: alder<E34spen, other:
,.7 evergreen tree(Dedar, pine, other:
,.7 shrubs
grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other:
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other:
other types of vegetation:
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
A)I tCe--e-.5 avid -!�hrOk75 101-11 10t (tMV'Iej CAnd !J(C6�S.
wp- L-n� fyi O-A 1) cc vi -cc, em< 4-ree-<,&!!t -s-hyoJos ct"O(
4c -C�e- r eoj -� +-.'Ll L-�O&j
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
&)D Aj
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 4120110 Page 9 of 24 P71 - SEPA Checklist
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other materials to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site,
if any:
C
:71(c.55 15hj(%)J2-s 52or- 1-6ees s oc k eLs
Lyle( :R- r
(STAFF COMMENTS)
5. Animals
a. Check or circle any birds and animals that have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or
near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: luoof-:� C'315eaybo' -5-04kv
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: -NnOJ15
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: &��p�krC
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Q> Q G-:7— k-jJDL.--W
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
Do<�i
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 4120110 Page 10 of 24 P71 - SEPA Cliecklist
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
Doo-k sh(OP-5 4. 4-rees
(STAFF COMMENTS)
6. Energy and Natural Resources
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed
project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc.
J0 -c- i4ov 44tices
.4;)y 9ecAA- &i - uoc-�—e-r
am
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally
describe.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed
measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
c-prr�eejr Cn&4ec4,A enA e-
,J
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 4120110 Page I I of24 P71 - SEPA Checklist
7. Environmental Health
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and
explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so describe.
A) 0
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
Xb1J C-
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Noise
(1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment,
operation, other)?
r) in 0—
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 4120110 Page 12 of 24 P71 - SEPA Cliecklist
(2)
What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or
a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hour's noise
would come from the site.
lot 1c, V-% - Ce 12 M - F
0 Av, - ce S LT -
(STAFF COMMENTS)
(3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
AJ�D 0 6
(STAFF COMMENTS)
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
\J&CC-14_ JCtVXJ CM fir- DIQ-" �!A 90W DQ-f� d
V
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 4120110 Page 13 of 24 P71 - SEPA Checklist
C. Describe any structures on the site.
. -5rA CL ) 1 5 11 e d
(STAFF COMMENTS)
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
I UA - �5 YV%CJI V-Ded
U
(STAFF COMMENTS)
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
CP
(STAFF COMMENTS)
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master plan designation of the site?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
ReWsed mi 4120110 Page 14 of24 P71 - SEPA Cliecklist
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify.
t-3 C, +- tyl,,4 S "C>.-,3 -zr�
k.
1.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
?3v n -f—
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if
any:
V,rDe!!!Si n cw-,� e- z1n;CA\ i Lo t. .0CA0V en tz-� AV-,
�7 b f %* n!r,
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 4120110 Page 15 of 24 P71 - SEPA Cliecklist
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income
housing.
6^e— — t�AAA%k_ iv) L0V%%'e__
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income
housing.
0
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
t6y V)-t_
(STAFF COMMENTS)
10. Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principle
exterior building material(s) proposed?
4V Z�V el 4—C4
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 4120110 Page 16 of 24 P71 - SEPA Checklisl
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
A, V n -e-
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
A)V,l
(STAFF COMMENTS)
11. Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur?
ua(e- wsr-, ien, b e- vrve4 vc -e ok 4ov-k woc( D%..),c in
.J -
MED-ni I'Vi S, cind i"i e-ri; (79
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 412 0/10 Page 17 of 24 P71 - SEPA Checklist
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
A-IDA e—
(STAFF COMMENTS)
12. Recreation
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
C-% 4nA nc— j?-Q r
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreation uses? If so, describe.
NO
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be
provided by the project or applicant, if any:
(STAFF COMMENTS
Revised on 4120110 Page 18 of24 P71 - SEPA Cliecklist
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers
known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance
known to be on or next to the site.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
Q0 -1 -Z-
(STAFF COMMENTS)
14. Transportation
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street
system. Show on site plans, if any.
i-;. Y14 SJ-re-,e4-.
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised oii 4120110 Page 19 of 24 P71 - SEPA Cliecklist
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If no, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit
stop?
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate?
41 Lglle4--N e�0^41ele4'e d -4d tw
(STAFF
d. Will the proposal require any new roads, streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not
including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private).
Igb txg- LD 2 00 r'
k-P- %,.-, � � N a d J C-V(,o ny-1 A S)CI-C V-.,C\y- \ZN-V-Tf' X .404--s
n-o- coryr ev;4 cAA --,o cl -4-e- -c-Ae zJIL aiwom —
-J
(STAFF COMMENTS)
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so,
generally describe.
K) D
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 4120110 Page 20 of 24 P71 - SEPA Checklist
L How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when
peak volumes would occur.
4F
(STAFF COMMENTS)
9. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
42_
(STAFF COMMENTS)
15. Public Services
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police
protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
MOO
410 -V-',me fe
qoirc- 19blie- KRIji'ce IC41
-6fe- 0h) ; t-�e-o f25; 601-C I 'e 4-c-
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any:
N-ovte
(STAFF COMMENTS)
Revised on 4120110 Page 21 of 24 P71 - SEPA Cliecklist
16. Utilities
a. Circle utilities currently avail I able at the site: (�elcctricity, �natu�ralgas �water, �refusel �serviceqejlepEho�ne)
anitary sewe septic system, other:
(STAFF COMMENTS)
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general
construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed.
u.�e'r CAA-e-c INIC — tr>lYmpic- Nice-ko
12 05, 94 -51�,0110( ef �!A
I J
S63n r- 0 POO
7rA" tit + - V667 ov'\
(STAFF COMMENTS)
C. SIGNATURE
I declare under penalty of perjury laws that the above answers are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand
that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision.
Signature of Proponent
3 - I U- ?o 1'Z-
Date Submitted
Revised on 4120110
Page 22 of24
P71 - SEPA Checklist
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geoteohnical Engineering
Mr.'rodd Echelbarger
Echelbarger Development, LLC
4001-198 th Street SW, Suite 2
Lynnwood, WA 98036
Dear Mr. Echelbargcr:
EngiDeering Gootogy
July 18, 2012
Subject: Precast Concrete Block Wall
Singlc-Family Residence
.1'D%,2�.Elrn Street
Edmonds, Washington
L&A Job No. 11-077
CT
0 1 REET FILE
INTRODUCTION
Earth Science
RESUB
JUL 20 2012
BM "MENT
CXG p=
OF NDS
We understand that grading along the south and west sides of the subJJect site will require
an existing rockery to be removed and a new rockery and a new precast concrete block
wall constructed along these sides. As shown on Plate I - Site Plan, the new rockery, not
to exceeds 4 feet tdll� is to be located just inside the south and west, boundaries and the
new precast concrete block wall, up to 6 feet tall, is to be located a few feet inside the
stTeet concrete curbs along these sides. At your request, we have completed our stability
analysis and design of this block wall, presented in this report.
SUBSURFACE CONDITION
The Geolop-ic M of the Edmonds East and Part of the Edmonds West Quadranales,
Was&gLon, by James P. Minard, published by U. S. Geological Survey in 1983, was
referenced for the geologic and soil conditions at the residence site. According to this
publication, the surficial soi.1 unit at and in the vicinity of the subject residence site is
mapped as an Advance Outwash (Qva) soil unit.
19213 Kenlake Place NE - Kenmore, Washington 90028
Phone (426) 483-9134 - Fax (426) 486-2746
F—r-
1-
July 18, 2012
Block Wall — Single�-Family Residence
L&A Job No. 11-077
Page 2
Subsurface conditions of the site were explored with two test pits excavated om the. site.
Both test pits encountered a layer of louse organic topsoil from 12 to 14 inches thick,
which is underlain by a layer of weathered soil of medium -dense, slightly silty, fine sand,
with a trace to some gravel, about 1.6 to 2.0 feet thick! The weathered soil is underlain to
the depths explored by a brown-gridy to gray, dense, gravelly, medium.to coarse sand
deposit. This deposit is interpreted to be of an advance outwash soil unit. Groundwater
was not encountered by the test pits.
PRECAST CONCRETE BLOCK WALL
General
The block wall to be constructed to the south and west sides of the site will be up to about
6 feet tall. We recommend the block wall be constructed with Keystone compact blocks
(I 2-inch deep x I 8-inch wide x 8-inch high) or approved equal. The ground between the
rockery wall and the new block wall will be sloped upward from the top of the block wall
to the base of the rockery wall. The most critical stretch of this block wall is the southern
half of its west leg where the wall is the tallest and the slope behind the block wall is the
steepest. Two cross sections cutting through this stretch of block wall are pres ented. on
Plate 2. The angle of slope behind the block wal I within this stretch varies from 11.60 to
16.30. An average angle of backslopc of 150 will be used for stability analysis of this
critical stretch of wall. The slope behind -the remaining block wall outside of this critical
stretch is very gently sloped and may be assumed to be level for stability analysis. We
understand that the block wall will not be subjected to structural or traffic surcharge.
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
July 18, 2012
Block Wall — Single -Family Residence
L&A Job No. 1. 1-077
Page 3
Design Soil Parameters
Based on the soil condition described above, we recommend that the precast concrete
block wall be designed for a fully drained condition in accordance with the following soil
perimeters:
Reinforced
Soils
Unit Weight, r, pcf 130
Angle of Internal Friction, 36
0, degrees
Cohesion, C, psf
Retained
Soils
120
32
0 0
Foundation
Leveling
Soils
Rock Base
125
130
34
40
0
0
The block wall should be designed for both the static and seismic loading conditions. For
the static loading condition, the block wall should be designed to have a minimum factor
of 1.5 against sliding and over -turning failures, and 2.0 against foundation bearing railure.
ne Puget Sound region is in an active seismic zone and the block walls should be
designed �for a 100-year seismic event under the seismic loading condition. The peak
ground acceleration is about 0.3g (g = gravity force) for such an event in the Puget Sound
region. The block wall, however, is to be built with interlocking concrete blocks with
relatively high flexibility, and the blocks will not move in unison during earthquakes.
Therefore, for design of the block wall under the seismic loading condition, the peak
ground acceleration may be reduced to 0.2g. The, block walls should be designed for a
factor of safety of at least 1. 1 against sliding, 1A 5 for overturning and 1.5 for foundation
bearing failure under (he seismic loading condition.
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
July 18, 2012
Block Wall — Single -Family Residence
L&A Job No. 11 -077
Page 4
Stability Analysis and Design
The computer program SRWall version 3.22 computer program, developed by National
Concrete Masonry Association, was used in our stability analysis of the precast concrete
block wall. The results of the block wall stability analysis are presented under the
attached APPENDIX. Out block wall design and general notes for the precast concrete
block wall are presented on Plates A- I and A-2.
Site Preparation and General Grading
Vegetation within the footprint of the block wall and backfill should be cleared and the
roots thoroughly grubbed. Topsoil, disturbed soils and weak surficial soils should be
stripped down to firm undisturbed native soils of an allowable bearing capacity of at least
2,500 psf The exposed soil within the block wall and backfill footprint should be
thoroughly compacted to a non -yielding state with a vibratory mechanical compactor.
Keyway Trench
The keyway trench of the block wall should be cut down into undisturbed, firm, native
soil. Soil exposed at bottom of the keyway trench should be thoroughly corn, pacted to a
non -yielding state with a vibratory mechanical compactor. Over -excavation, of unsuitable
soils should be backfillcd with compacted structural fill. A minimum 6-inch layer of 7/8-
inch crushed rock leveling base, c9nipactedto a non -yielding state, should be placed over
bottom of the keyway trench. The basc-course blocks are to be placed on this crushed
rock base with an embedment at least 8 inches below the finish grade in front of the block
wall. The hollow cores of the precast concrete blocks should also be filled with 7/8-inch
crushed rock, tamped to a non -yielding state. 1lie blocks should be stacked tightly
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
July 18,2012
Block Wall — Single -Family Residence
L&A Job No. 11 -077
Page 5
against one another. Each course of blocks should be interlocked with the blocks of the
course below "ith connecting Teflon pins or other mechanical means built into the
blocks.
Drainage Control
The bottom of keyway trench should be sloped down at 2% grade towards a minimum 6-
inch perforated, rigid, PVC drain line wrapped in a non -woven filter fabric sock. laid
behind the base blocks to collect and drain away groundwater flowing towards the wall.
The bottom of keyway trench and the drain fine should have sufficient slope (0.5 percent
minimum) to generate flow by gravity. The drain pipe should be tightlined to drain into a
storin sewer or a suitable stormwater disposal facility. A minimum 10-inch-thick
(horizontally) vertical drain mat, constructed of clean free -draining 7/8-inch crushed rock,
should be placed against the back of the block wall. This vertical crushed rock drain mat
should be hydraulically connected to the wall drain line. Structural fill is to be
constructed behind the vertical drain mat. The vertical crushed rock drain mat and
structural fill. should be constructed in lifts after each course of blocks is completed.
Structural Fill
Fill embankments should be constructed with structural fill. Structuralfill is the fill that
support structural or traffic load. Structural fill should consist of clean granular soil with
particles not larger than three inches and should be free of organic, debris and other
deletcrious substances. Structural fill should havc a moisture content within one percent
of its optimum moisture content at the time of placement. Optimum moisture content is
the water content in the soil that enables the soil to be compacted to the highest dry
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
July 18, 2012
Block Wall — Single -Family Residence
L&A Job No. 11 -077
Page 6
density
., for a given compaction effort. Onsitc soils meeting the above requirements may
be used as structural fill. Crushed roek fill and structural fill should be placed in lifts no
more than 10 inches thick in loose state, with each lift compacted to at least 95% of the
maximum dry, density determined by ASTM DI 557 (Modified Proctor. method) with a
vibratory mechanical compactor.
Geogrid Mesh Placement
Geogrid mesh shall be pinned or anchored between rows of blocks and laid over a level
ground of wall backfill. Geogrid mesh should then be stretched taut and securely staked
down before placing the next lift of backfill. Overlaps of geogrid mesh in the direction
parallel to the wall alignment shall be at least 12 inches, while overlaps of geogrid mesh
in the direction perpendicular to wall alignment should not be allowed. The portion of
block wall less than 4 feet tall does not need to be reinforced with geogrid mesh.
Erosion Control
Vegetation outside of construction limits should be preserved and maintained. Disturbed,
unpaved, exposed ground should be re -seeded and re -vegetated as soon as possible. The
seeded and vegetated areas should be covered with clear plastic sheets, as required, until
the vegetation is fully established. The plastic sheets should be securely weighted down
with sandbags.
CLOSURE
We are pleased to he of service to you on this project. Please feel free to call us if you
have any questions regarding this report and design of the precast concrete block wall.
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
July 1. 8, 2012 '
Block Wall — Single -Family Residence
L&A Job No. It -077
Page 7
'lly,
C - �S, INC.
',iu, Ph.D., P.E.
eotechnical Engineer
Attached: Plates 1. and 2
Appendix — Stability Analysis and Design of Precast Concrete Block Wall.
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
��L)mr r
Lpl�ORTW_V 'I?OCKFRY
IA� :�VTEW."
MAX)
(Stf 40AH ON C2)
J),
CONSTRUCT! 0�
.)4,, 130
ENTRANCE
ELM
moll
2"
t
CoAtc, coR
.. ..........
SITE PLAN
LIU & ASSOCIATESt TNC. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE
213 ELM STREET
Geatechnicol EngirteeNng - Engingering GeokW - Ea" Sdonce EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
. . ...................
APPENDIX
STABILITY ANALYSES AND DESIGN
PRECAST CONCRETE BLOCK WALL
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE
312 ELM STREET
EDMONDS, WASIUNGTON
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002)
Licensed to: Liu & Associates Inc.
19213 Kenlake Place NE
Kenmore WA 99028
License NuinbeE: 0511135
Page 1
PrOj(-n:t Idpntiffcation:
Proiect Name: SFR 213 ELM STREET, EDMONDS
Section: 4-FOOT TALL BLOCK WALL - STATC WADING
Data Sheet:
owner: ECHELBhRGER DEVELOPMENT
Client:
Prepared by: J S LIU
Date: May 29 2012
Time: 03:03:08 PH
Data file: c:\Program files
(x86)\arwall32\11-077-4foothlockwall-staticloading-afr2l3el=ted
monds
TyTe of Structure:
Design Methadology:
Geosynthetic-Roinforced Segmental Retaining Wall
NCMA Method A
Seismic Analysis Dntails:
Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) -ratio
wa'13' ceometr
0.00
Design Wall Height (ft) 4.67
Embedment Wall Height (tt) 0.67
Exposed Design Wall, Height (ft) 4.0
Minimum Levelling Vad Thickness (ft) 0.5
Number of Segmental Wall Units 7
Hinge Height (ft)' 4.67
wall Inclination (degrees) 7.1
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002)
Page 2
Vq 05211-35
Slopes.,
Front Slope (degree,,:)
horizontal
Back Slope (degreQs)
horizontal
Live Load Surcharge (psfj
200
Dead Txad SurchaLge
none
Cohesion
Angle
un i t we 1 gh t,
So i .1 T)a, ta Soil Dercription:
(Fisf)
(deqrees)
(Pcf�)
Reinforced Soil sand
N/A
36.0
130.0
Retained So.11 sand
N/A
32.0
120,0
Levelling Pad Soil gravel
N/A
40.0
130.0
FoUndaL ion Soil sand
0.0
34.0
125.0
seclaental Mnit Name:
segmrntal UnIt Data:
Cap Height (in)
none
Unit ;](,light (HU)(ifl)
8.0
Unit Width (Wu)(in)
12.0
Unit. Length (in)
18.0
Setback (in)
1.0
WeighL (infilled) Ubs)
135.0
Unit Weight (infilled) (pcf)
135.0
CeZ')teT of Gravity (in)
6.0
Segmental Unit Tnterface Shear Data:
Properties Ultimate Strengt.h CrILeria Secvice State Criteria
Mininum (lbs./ft) 500.0 500.0
Friction Ang!(! (deqLees) 45.0 45.0
max -mum (lbs/ft) 2000.0 2000.0
Geu-,,wnthetic ReinfoxceinenL Tvves and Number:
Type Number Name
1 3 KDPE geosynthatic
2 0 PET geosynthatic
3 0 PP goosynthetic
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002) Page 7
LN 051113,5 tq 0 1
Project Identification:
Project
Name., SFR 213 ELM STREET, EDMONDS
Section: 4-FOOT TALL BLOCK MALL - STATC LWWING
Data Sheet:
Owner: ECHELBARGER DEVELOPMENT
Prepared by:J S LIU
Date: May 29 2012
Time: 03:03:08 PM
l'-wa file: c:\proqraz f1les
(x86)\srwall32\11-077-4footblockwall-staticloading-afr2
5 : RWall (ver 3,22 April 2002) Page I
Licensed to: Liu & Associates Inc.
19213 Kenlake Place NE
Kermore WA 98028
License Number: 0511135
Project Identification:
Project Name: SYR 213 ELM STREET, EM40NDS
Section: 4-FOOT TALL BLOCK MALL - SEISMIC L4WING
DaLa Sheet:
Owner: ECH3LBAR=R DEVELOPME)IT
client:
Prepared by- J S LIU
Date: may 29 2012
Time: 03iO5:49 PM
Data file: c:\program files
(x86)\arwall32\11-077-4foothlo,ekwall-saismicloading-afr2l3elmsto
dmonds
Type of Structure: Geosynthetic-Reinforced Segmental Retaining Wall
Desiqn �ne-thodollaqy-- NCHA Method A
Seismic ��� Details:
Peak GrOUTid AcceJeration (PGA) ratio 0.25
waLl Geometry;
Design Wall Height (ft) 4,67
EmbedmenL Wa.11 Height (ft) 0.67
Exposed DesigTl Wall Height (ft) 4.0
Minimum Levelling, Pad Thickne!7-; (ft) 0.5
Number of Segmental wall Units 7
Hinge Height (ft) 4�67
wall Inclinatiuri (degreeq) 7.1
.. . ... . ...... .
S RWall (ver 3.22 April 2002)
Page 2
MI 05111 �5
Slopes.,
FrOTIt Slope (degrees)
horizontal
Back Slope (degrees)
.............. .. . .............
horizontal
unlfozmly Distributed� surqhqzqf�s:
T.ive i,oad. surcharge
none
Dead Load Surcharge
none
Friction
Cohesion
Angle
Unit Weight
Soil Data: Sol I Description:
fps F)
(degrees)
(pcf)
Reinforced Soil sand
N/A
36.0
130.0
Retained Soil sand
N/A
33.0
125.0
Levelling Pad Soil gravel
N /A
40.0
130.0
Foundation Soil sand
0.0
. .
30.0
. ..........
120,0
;�eqmantal Unit Name.
Segmental Unit: Data.
cap Height (ill)
none
Unit neight. (HuHin)
8.0
Unit Width Mu) (in)
12.0
Unit Length (in)
18.0
Setback (in)
1.0
Weight (infilled) (1bq)
135.0
Unit Weight (infil,led) (pcf)
135.0
center of Gravity (in)
6.0
Leqmt�qal UniL Intprface Shear Data
Properties Ultimate Strepgth Criteria Servicp StaLe Critorla
Minimum (lbs/ft) 500.0 500.0
Friction Angle fdegrees) 45.0 45.0
maximum (l.bsIft) 2000.0 2000.0
GeosynLheL,ic Rpinforcement TM�s and N�Uabcr:
TYPC Numbe r Naiti e
1 3 HDRE geosynthat'lo
2 0 PET gocaynthetic
3 0 PF geosynthet-ic
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002)
Page 3
i,N 051123.5
(;eos nLheLics PrqP i P, .5
strength an _Polnor Type:
Type I
Typ e 2
TYP e 3
Ultimate Strength (lbs/ft)
3700.0
2625.0
5300.0
Polymer Type
HDPE or PP
polyester
HDFE or FP
Reduction F347far`S.
Type 1
Type 2
71ype
Creep (=1.00 for seismic analysis)
1.00
1.,00
1.00
Durability
2.00
2.00
2.00
Installation Damage
3.00
3.00
3.00
overall FacLor of Safety
1.50
1.50
1.50
,�r!.cL Aiiwwab��-- S rength:
TYP e 1
Type 2
Type 3
Ta (lbs/ft)
411.11
291.67
588.89
Coefticient of InteracClon:
Type 2
Type 3
Ci
0.7
. . . . .... .........
0.7
0.7
... ..... .... .
c a e f f i c I Qn o�f Direct Sliding:
Type 1
Type 2
T�-pe 3
Cds
0.95
0.95
0.95
Connection Stre
Type I
Type 2
Type 3
ultiluate s�rength Criterinn:
Minimum (lbs/ft)
1233.3
975.0
1766.7
Friction Ang-Le (degrees)
22.0
22.0
22.0
Maximum (lbs/ft)
1950.0
1312.5
2650.0
service State Criterion:
MiLn'MUM (lbs/ft)
1233.3
875.0
1766.7
Friction Angle (degrees)
22.0
22.0
22.0
maximum (lbs/ft)
1850.0
1312.5
2650.0
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002)
Page 4
rw 0.5111.3.5
Geos thrtic-Segine.riLal ReLaining Wall Unit
Interface Shear Strength: TYP e .1 Type 2 Typ e 3
UILimate Strength Criterion.
Minimum
0,b5/ft)
500.0
500.0
500.0
FrictIon
Angle (degrees)
45.0
45.0
Maximum
(lbs/ft)
2000.0
2000.0
2000.0
Servi.cp
State Criterion:
Minimum
(lbs1ft)
500.0
500.0
500.0
Friction
Angle (dearees)
45.0
45.0
45 ' .0
Maximum
(lbs/ft)
2000.0
2000.0
2000.0
Coefficients of EarLli Pressure and Failure Plane Orientations.,
Seismic Coefficent (k(int))
0.3
Seismic Coefficent (k(ext))
0.125
Reinforoed Soil (static) (Ka)
0.188
Reinforced Soil (otatiu) (Ka hori7ontal
component)
0.18
. Reinforced Soil. (static + dynamic) (Xae)
0.405
Reinforced Soil (static + dynamic) IKaeb
horizontal component)
0.387
Orientation of ral],ure plarie from horizontal
(,Jejrk-.Ps)
56.81
Ret . ained Soil (static) (Ka,)
0.216
Retained Soil (static) (Kah horizontal com1wnent)
0.195
Retained Soil (static + dynamic) JKae)
o.3
Retained. Soil (Stati,C, 4- dynamic) (Kaeh horizontal
component)
0.27
Orientation of failure plane. from horizontal (degrees)
47.47
Results of External Stability (Sejsmic)
Analy�tq.
Calculated
Design Criteria
FOS Sliding
2.5
1.15 0K
FoS overturning
4.38
1�2
OK
FOS Bearing Capacity
8.12
1.5
OK
Base Reij)forcement Length (L) (ftl
3.5
2.8
OX
Base Eccentricity (eHft)
0.2
JVA
Base Eccentricity Ratio (e/T,-2o,)
0.07
Nll�
Base Reinforcement Ratio (L/H)
0.75
0.6
OK
Note: calculaLed values MEET ALL design criteria
Detailed Results of Ext6rnal Stabi.7ftv Analyses. Calculated Values;
Total Hori,zontal Force (lbS/ft)
Total vertical Force (lbr,/tt)
Sliding Resistance (Ibs/ft)
Driving Moment (lbs-ft/ft)
Rosisting Moment (lbs-ft/ft)
Bearing Capacity (p5f)
Maximum Bearing Prossure (psf)
495.9
2146.7
1239.4
974.9
4271.2
5637.2
694.0
SRWall (ver 3.22
Apri 1
2002)
a
IiJ40 p ge
im 0-52,1135
Ee ults of liltezzial Stgbilitj', (Seismir)
Analyses;
SRW Gposyn A 1. e
length
Anchof FOS Fo-,.;,
FC-5 Layer
Uni t, 7ypp (ft)
(I't)
Length Over Pullout
511ding nq
(Ft) stress
(ft.)
> 1.0 > 1.0 > III
> 1.15 < 3.0
6 1 3.33 C06 113 1.39 0.')7* 10,43 OK
4 1 2.0 3.3 1.44 1.92 2.38 6.45 QK
2 1 0,67 3,5 2.15 1.01 3101 4.89 Ox
Note: I value does HCYT 147-UT des�qn cTirerion (I
ripte- Selsruc analysis may not give the lowe-s.t tactorz of safety for FOS against rpinforcement
over-nLrc�s�- in intprnal stabilLy Calckilati,ong. L5e sure to ck,.eck current rIF-pign using fstatiC
analysis option.
Detailed Resulte of Int rnal
S,R W
(;posyn
Elev
Allowable
Tonsil,�-
Pullout S1 lal ng sliding
(Ini t
Typ:�
(fr)
S-Irength
fi-gad
Cdpac i ty Force. C,3pacity
#
(IL)SIft)
(lbslft�
(lbslf'-J (IbSlft) (lbslft)
6
1
3.33
411.1
296.5
.228.5 93.9 979.1
4
1
2.0
411.1
213.9
509.3 226.0 1458.2
2
1
0-67
411.1
2206.8 1135.7 396.4 1937.3 7-
A-)
J-T
Re'sults_5Lf Fdcj-j A'ta�b R�L, ($Pi.-�c
0
SRW
Roe I
GV06yothetic
Fos
FOS
Shear FCS Cofjrrt:*Cr10-n
unir
glev
T�pe
(.)vex-
5hear
(deformation) Connectloo (deformaClon)
#
(ft)
turning
(p�eak)
fpeap�
> 1.1
> 1.1
c 0.02 x Ku > 1j < 0.75 in
7
4.0
none
1.42
6.18
OK -
6
3.33
1
0.76*
3.5
ox� 4,42 Ox
5
4
2.67
2.0
none
1
1,48
1.48
-
8.18
Ox 6.45 09
3
2
1.33
0,67
none
1
1.69
1.68
-
9.33
-
OK 6.4 OR
1
010
n*ne
1.77
-
Note;
, value
dvcs TicT MEZT
jp-qiqn criterion 11 L-ccurr�-nceB)
verailed Re,4112ts of racirg 3tabiTityknalYses 040MC11t an:1 Shear),
SRW
Hool
GOO
Dr! Ve
R e S i 5
shear
shear
Shea r
unit
F I ev.
Type
Motnent
m"rent
T;-�Od
C-apacity
capa c! t Y
(I bs - I t ft)
(Ibs-ft/ft)
ilbSlft)
(lb.,/fr)
Ubslft)
+out -in
�peak)
(doformarion)
7
4-0
none
31.7
45.0
95.5
590.0
590.0
6
3.33
1
128.1
97.S
194.3
690.0
680.0
5
2,67
none
291.5
431.6
-0.1
770.0
770.0
4
2.0
1
524.0
773.1
105.1
060.0
96010
3
1.33
none
827.7
1396.3
-0,2
950-0
950.0
2
0.67
1
1204.8
2U7.0
111.5
1040.0
1040.0
1
0�0
none
1651-S
2939-2
-0.3
1130.0
1130.0
SRA'all (ver 3.22 April 2002)
Page 16
LN 061113.5
Deta 12ed Regults of Facinq Stability Analy:w4g (Connoctions)
SRRT
Htv I
Geo
Cornectign
Connecrirn
Connection
uhi t
Elev
T�pp
L 0 a ('4
rapa=-, ty
cap4clly
i
(Ftj
Ubslftj
1peak)
�deformarion)
Obslfr)
(INcr/ft)
6
3.33
296.5
1306.1
1306.1
4
2.0
1
213.0
1378.0
1378.8
2
0.67
1
226.8
145l.-5
1451.5
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002)
FIN 0511135
4.67 ft
degrees
0. 67 ft
IR
--J
ft
Project Identification;
Project
3.5 ft
144b Page 7
Type I
4-'0
HDPE geoSylltheti-C-
05
HDPE geosynthet-ic
Name: SFR 213 ELM STREET, EDMONDS
Section: 4-FOOT TALL BLOCK MLL - SEISMIC LOADING
Data Sheet:
Owner; XCHELBARGER DEVELOFbWNT
Client:
Prepared by:J S LIU
Date: May 29 2012
Time: 03:05:49 PM
Data file; c:\program files
(x86)\s:rwall32\11-077-4foothlockmall-soismicloading-sfr
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002)
LN 0511133
Licensed to.- Liu & Associates Ino.
19213 Kenlake Place NX
Kenmore MA 9SD28
License Nomber. 0511135
1-5/4,
Page .1
Project Name: SFR 213 ELM STREZT, EDM M 9
section: 5-FOOT TALL BLOCS MJX - STATC LOADING
Data Sheet:
Owner* ECHELBARGER DEVELOPMEM
Client:
Prepared by: J S LIU
T
Date: May 29 2012
Tinie: 02:58:53 PM
Data file: c.\program files
(x86)\srwall32 . \11-077-Sfoothlockwall-staticloading-sfr2l3elast4ed
monds
. . ........... ....
131�t-of Structure. Goosynthetic-Reinforced Segmental Retaining Wall
Des ig�.. MoLhodol!p2Z: NcmA method A
Seismic Anglysic, Do -tails:
Peak Grolind Acceleration (PGA) ralio 0.00
wall Geovlet=-'
Design Wall. Height (ft) 5.33
Eml-w1ci-ent Wall Height ift) 0.67
F.xpoaed Design Wali Height (ft) 4.66
minimum Tevellinq Pad Thickne3s (ft) 0.5
Nwnber of Segmental Wall UniLs
Hinge Height (ft) 5.33
Wall Inclination (deqiees) 7.1
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002)
LN 05111-15
. .1 . I ... ...................
Slopes:
Front Slope (degrees)
Back slope (degrees)
Uniformly Distributed Surc�arges,,
Live Load Surcharge (psf)
Dead Load Surcharge
.Soil Data: Soil Description:
Reinforced Soil sand
Retained Soil sand
Levelling Pad Soil gravel
Foundation Soil. sand
��t ental Unit, Name:
Soym
ental Unit Data:
Cap Reight (in)
none
unit Height Oiu)(in)
8.0
Unit Width 09u) (in)
12.0
Unit Lerigth (-in)
18.0
setback (in)
1.0
Weight (irifilled) (lbs)
135.0
Unit. Weight (infilled) (pcf)
135.0
Center of Gravity (in)
6.0
Le�z�ai�Un�t Tntt�rface Shear Data:
- - I - t/-4 6
horizontal
horizontal
200
none
Page 2
Friction
Cohesion
A n g I e,
Ifn i t Wei gh t
(P,.,3 f
(deqrees)
(Prf)
N/A
36.0
130.0
N/A
33.0
125.0
N/A
40.0
130.0
0.0
30.0
120.0
Properties Ultimate StTength Criteria Service St3te Criteria
Minimum (,I:b-q/ft) 500.0 500.0
Friction Angle (deprees) 45.0 45.0
maximum (lbs/ft) 2000.0 2000.0
Geosynthetic Reinfoicement Types and Numbef:
Type Number Name
1 4 KDRE goosynthetic
2 0 PET geosynthatic
3 0 PP geosynthetic
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002)
Page 3
LN 0511115
Geosynthetics Properties:
Stren th and FNy7rie.r TZpT..*
T.�Te I
Typ t, 2
Typ e 3
Ultimate Strengtb (Ibs/tt)
3700.0
2625.0
5300.0
Polymer Type
HDPZ or PP
polyester
HDPZ or PP
ReduCtiorl FacLors.
y . 1
Typc
T�Te
1),pe 3
Creep
5.00
2.50
5.00
Durability
2.00
2.00
2.00
Tnr,tallation Damage
3.00
3,00
3.00
Overall Factor of Safety
1.50
1.50
1.50
Allowable Streagth:
Type, 1
Typo 2
2"W-Ie 3
Ta (l.b.9/ft)
82.22
116.67
117.78
Coefficient. of 11)teractfoll;
TITe I
!'ype 2
Trp & 3
0.7
0.7
M
Coeffi,t7ic-nt oll- Direct Sliding.-
IYpe 1
TYP e 2
lype 3
Cds
0.95
0.95
0.95
Connection StrengLh.
Type 1
Typ e 2
Type 3
UlLimaLe Strengtlj Criterion:
Mi nimlmi (lbs/tt)
1233.3
875.0
1766.7
FricLion AngJe (degrees)
22.0
22.0
22.0
Maximum (lbs'Ift)
1850.0
1312.5
2650.0
service Stote Criterion:
Minim= Ubs/ft)
1233.3
875.0
1766.7
Friction Angle (degrcos)
22.0
22�O
22.0
maximum Ubs/ft)
1850.0
1312.5
2650.0
...... . ............. ..
SRWall (ver 3.22 Aptil 2002) Page 4
&N 051L;35
Ceosynthetjc-Segmen�al Ret'lininq Wall Unit
�-.. - -9- 1 -.--
Interface Shoar strongth; Type I Type 2 Typ e 3
Ultimate Strength Criterion:
Minimum
Ubs/ft)
500.0.
.500.0
5WO
Friction
Angle (degreeq)
45.0
45.0
45.0
Maximum
(lbs/ft)
2000.0
2000.0
2000.0
Service
statf? critprion:
Minimum
(ibs/ft)
500.0
500.0
soo.0
Friction
Angle (degrees)
45.0
45.0
45.0
Maximum
(lbs/ft)
2000.0
2000.0
2000.0
Coef-ficients of Earth Pressure and Failurn Plane, OrientaLions.,
Reinforced Soil (Ka) 0.189
Reinforced Soil (Ka horizontal component) 0.18
Orientation of failure plane from horizontal (degrees) 56.81
Retained Soil (Ka) 0.216
Retained Soil (Ka horizontal component) 0.195
orientation of failure plane from horizontal (dagrees) 53..88
Results of Fxternal Stability _Analysos.'
.. ... ......
Calculated
pe, s
i gh Criteria
FOS Sliding
2.56
OR
FOS Overturning
.4.26
1.7
OR
FOS Bearing Capacity
5.93
2.5
OR
Base Reinforcement Length (I,) (ft)
3.�
OR
Base Eccentricity (e)(EL)
0.2
N/A
Base Eccentricity Ratio (e/L-2e)
0.06
N/A
Base Reinforcement Ratio M/14)
0.66
0.6
OR
Note: calculated values MEET ALL design criteTi.a
Detailed Results of External Stability )IIIalyses: Calculated Values:
Total Horizontal Force Ubs/ft)
Total Vertxcal Force (lbi/ft)
Sliding Resistance (lbs/ft)
Driving Moment Ubs-ft/ft)
Resisting Moment (lbs-ft/ft)
Bearing Capacity (Psf)
Maximum Bearinq Pressure (pst)
553.7
2453.3
1416.4
1169�O
4983.6
5659.3*
955.1
SRWall, (ver 3i22 April 2002)
LN 0511135
Result.9 of Interral Stability Analvges.,
SRW
Geuayrz
Elev
Lenqth
Anchor
P105
Fos
Uni t
Typ 0
(ft)
?fQ
Length
Ove r -
Pullout
> 1.0
>
> 1�5
9
1
4.67
C57
I'l
1
1.41*
6
1
3.33
4.06
1.3
14*
0.74*
3.1
4
1
2,0
3.7
1.64
nO.541*1
4.76
2
1
0.67
3.5
2.15
0.42*
6.94
Nore, ' Valk)P. CiOPI.� VM KFFT dp.qtgn criLet.100 (4 ijCCur_,ejv;siu)
- ___ - -, __ I -
Fos Laye-f
Sliding Spacing
(f 0
1. 5 < 3.0
23.58 OK
9.63 Ox
6.41 Ox
4,07 Ox
Page 5
Dctailt�d ResulLs ot rJ!tOXnJ_' Stdbillty AnalYSCS.'
SRW Geosyn Elev Allowable Tensile pullout Sliding Slidina
Unit Typ e (ft) strength Load Capaci ry F�)T-Ce Capacity
(lb.71ft) tjhslft� f1b.91ft) (lbs'Ift) (lbs1ft)
1 4,67 82.2 68.5 97,0 31.4 739.5
6 2 3.33 82�2 110�5 342,7 126 , 5 1218.6
4 1 2.0 82.2 152.1 723,5 26S,O 1697.7
2 1 0.67 82.2 19316 1325.0 446.7 2176.8
vz�
Re.,7U1,13 of Facing Stabilityp,�n,��,Ysp.!,T�,
SRW HeeJ aeosyntheLlc FV5 FOS Sheax FOS Connection
U11.1 t 8) e Ir Type over- '$hear (deforna Lion) Connection (derOfMd tiOn)
(ft,) turning (peak) (peak)
> 1.5 > 1.5 < 0.02 x Ru > 1.5 < 0;75 in
8 4.67 1 4.91 20�19 Ox 10.44 OR
7 4.0 none 3.69 - -
6 3.33 1 2.59 15.39 (M 12.15 CK
5 2.67 none 2�2 - -
4 2.0 1 1..82 13.41 Ox 9.3 CnK
3 1.33 nGne 1.63 - -
2 0.67 1 1-43* 12.32 Ox 7.68 Ox
1 0.0 none 1.31* - -
Note: I value does NOT M�,'J�r design rriterian 12 occuxrence5)
Detdilod Re2�.jIlq of Facin
Stability Andlvscs (Moment and. I;hpar)
$RW
Reel
Geo
DZ'iVe
Re2 2, at
Shear
$ h..,3 r
Shear
Uni t
Elev
Type
Moment
Moment
I.Oatl
Capacity
capacity
0
f ft)
(lb,-ftIft)
(?hj,.ft/Ff7)
(lbslft)
(Ibslfr)
0 b..?Ift)
40ut -in
fpeak)
(d8formatiol)
8
4.67
1
9.2
45.0
29.2
590.0
5WO
7
4.0
none
41.3
152.3
0.0
680.0
680.0
6
3.33
1
103.3
267.1
solo
770.0
770.0
3
2.67
ncpno
202.2
444.3
0.0
860.0
S6010
4
2.0
1
U4.8
626�9
70.9
950.0
950.0
3
1.33
none
538.1
875.8
0.0
1040.0
1040.0
2
0.67
1
789.1
1130�3
91.7
1130.0
1130.0
1
0.0
none
1104.7
1447.0
0.0
1220.0
1220-0
Project Jd6ntification:
Project
Name: SFR 213 ELM;STREET,,EDMONDS
Section: 5-FOOT TALL BLOCK WAILL - STATC LOADING
Data Sheet:
Owner: ECHELBARGER DEVEWPMNT
Client:
Prepared by:J S LIU
Date: May 29 2012
Time: 02:58:53,PM
Data file: c:\PrOgram f1160
(x86)\srwall32\11-077-Sfoothlockwall-staticloading-afr2
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002) Page 1
TN 055 11, J, 35
Licensed to; Liu & Associates Inc.
19213 Kenlake Place NE
Keranore WA 98028
License Number: 0511135
gLqjtq_�dent-Mcqt ion:
Project Ndme: SFR 213 KIM STRZET, KDHONDS
8ection: 5-FWT TALL BLOCK WALL - SEISMIC LOADING
Data Sheet:
Owner: ECMLBAI:tGMR DVMLOPMFNT
Cl,ient,,
Prepared by: kT 9 LIU
Date: May 29 2012
Time: 02:56:51 PM
Da ta f e?,: c:\program files
(x86)\srwall32\11-077-5f*othlockwall-sei,emicloading-afr2l3elmate
dmonds
Type of Structure; Geosynthetic-Reinforced Seg=ntal-Retaininq Wall
DPSigll KCM Method A
Seisinic An.alysis D&Lails:
Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) ratio 0.25
wall Geoftl!Lt:Ly"�
Design Wail Height (ft) 5.33
Embedment Wall Height (ft) 0.67
Exposed Design Wall Height (fL) 4.66
Minimum 1,evelling Pad Thickness (ft) 0.5
Number ot Segmental Wall Units 8
Hinge Height (ft) - 5�33
Wall Inclination (degrees) 7.1
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002) Page 2
051173,5
Slopes.
Front Slope (degrees) horizontal
Back Slope (degrees) horizontal
uniformly Distributed Surcharqes:
Live Load Surcharge none
Dead Load Surcharge none
Soll Data: Soil Description:
ReiTIforced Soil sand
Retained Soil sand
Levelling Pad Soil gravel
Foundation Soil sand
Segmental Unit Name:
Segmental Unit Data:
Cap Height (in)
none
Unit Height (Hu)(in)
8.0
Unit Width (Wu)(iri)
12.0
unit Length firl)
18.0
Setback (in)
1.0
Weight (infilled) (1 ' bs)
135.0
Unit Weight (infilled) (pef)
135.0
Center of Gravity (in)
6.0
��-me�!Itql unit interface Shear Data:
Friction
Cohesion
Angle
Unit Weight
(Ps.f)
(degrees)
(Pcf)
N/A
36.0
130.0
N/A
33.0
125.0
N/A
40.0
130.0
0.0
30.0
120.0
Properties Ultimate Strength Criteria Service State Criteria
Minimum Ubs/:ft) 500.0 500.0
�*rictjon Angle (degrees) 45.0 45.0
Maximum (Ibs/ft) 2000.0 2000.0
Geosynth tic Rcinforcement Types and Number:
Typ P, Number Name
1 4 HDP8 geosynthetic
2 0 PET goosynthetic
1 0 PP geosynthetic
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002)
LN 0511135
Geosy
Page
044
SLrenqLh
and Polymer Type:
Type, I
Type 2
T-ype 3
Ultimate
Strength (lbs/ft)
3700.0
M5.0
5300.0
Polymer Type
HDPE or VP
polyest�er
HDFE or FP
Reduction Factors: Type 1
Creep (=1.00 for seismic analysis) 1.00
Durability 2.00
Installation Damage 3.00
Overall Factor of Safety 1.50
_Lqynamic) Allowable Strength:
Ta (ibs/ft)
coefficie.nt of Interaction.
cl
Type 2
1.00
2.00
3.00
1.50
Type 1 Type 2
411.11 291.67
Type 1
A P7
Typ e 2
0.7
Type 3
1.00
2.00
3.00
1.50
Typ e 3
Type 3
0.7
Coefficient of Direct Sliding:
Type I
Typ e 2
Type 3
Cds
0.95
0.95
0.95
Connection Strtng Lh
TYP e 1
Typ e., 2
pe 3
Typ
Ultintate Strenyth Criterion:
Minimum (lbs/ft)
1233.3
$75.0
1766.7
Friction Angle (deqrees)
22.0
22.0
maximum Rbs/ft)
1850.0
1312.5
2650.0
Service State Crit arion:
minimum (lbs/ft) '
1,233.3
875.0
1766.7
Friction Angle (degrees)
22.0
22.0
22.0
Maximum (lbs/Et)
1850.0
1312.5
2650. 0
Geosynthetic-S2,gmenta.1 Retaining
Wall Unit
Y;Tt-erface shear strength:
Typ e I
Type 2
Type 3
Ultimate .5trengLh Criterion:
Minimum (lbs/ft)
500.0
500.0
500.0
Friction Angle (degrees)
45.0
45.0
45.0
Maximum (lbstft)
2000.0
2000.0
2000.0
Service State Criterion:
Minimu.m (lbs/ft)
500.0
500.0
500.0
Friction Angle (degrees)
45.0
45.0
45.0
Maximum, (lbs/ft)
2000.0
2000.0
2000.0
SRWall (ver-3.22 April 2002)
LN 05111,45
CaefficienLs of Earth Pressure and Failure Plane.Orientations:
Page
Seismic Coefficent (k(int))
0.3
Se.ismic Coefficent (k(exL))
0.125
Reinforced Soil 09tatic) (.Ka)
0.188
Reinforced Soil (static) (Ka hori7ontal component)
0.18
Reinforced Soil (static + dy-namic) (Kae)
0. 40�'
Reinforced Soil (static + dynamic) (Kaph horizontal
comporient)
0,397
orientation of failure plane, from horizontal
(degrees)
56.81
Retained Soil (staLic) (?,a)
0.216
Retained Soil (static) (Kah horizontal. component)
0.195
Retained Soil (static + dynamic) (Kap)
0.3
Retained Soil (static + dy-nami,c) (Kaeh horizontal component)
0.27
orientation of faillire plane from horizontal
(degrees)
47.47
Results of Ext-ernal Stabjl�_�y _(Soj,smIc) Analyses:
Calculated
Design
Critetia
FOS Sliding
2.19
1 ' 15
OK
FOS Overturning
3.43
1.2
OK
FOS Rearing Capacity
6�38
1.5
OK
Base Reinforcement Length (1j) (.ft)
3�5
3.2
ox
Base Fccentricity (e)(ft)
0.3
N/A
Base Eccentricity Ratio (e/L-2e)
0.1
N/A
Base Rein f or6ement Ratio (L/11)
0666
0.6
0K
Note, calculated values MEE,T ALL design criteria
Detailed Results of External SLjbili�y__AaLjK,�,es, Calcula Led Vej lues:
Total Hor . izontal Force (lbs/ft) 647.2
ToLal Vertical Force (Ibs/ft) 2453.3
Sliding Resistance (lbs/ft) 1416.4
DrivAng Monnent (lb,-,-ft/ft) 1454. 0
Resistinq Mompnt (lbs�ft/ft) 4983.6
Rearing Capacity (Psf). 5386.0
Maximum Bearing Pressure (psf) 844.1
�-sujL,r, of Int-ernal Stabi-liry (-ReismiO Aftdl�fff:
SRPI Ge'osyn El ery Length Anchor FOS F05 FOS La�er
LIni t Type (ft) (1t) Ienqth Over- Pullout Slidjpg Spacing
(it) "ftress (ft)
> 1.0 > 110 > 1.1 > 1.15 < 3.0
4.67 4.57 111 1.93 0.45* 15.59 OR
6 1 3,33 4.06 1�3 1.82 I.n 7.13
4 1 2.0 3.7 1.64 1.12 3.02 5.1 CK
2 1 0.67 3A 2.15 1.63 5.25 4.09 01K
Note; , value dces NOT MEET design cTiteriob (I oecurrencW
Note: Seismic analynis May not give thp lowest factors 6f safety for, FOS againit reinforce=llt
over -stress in 4.nteriial stabilty calculations. Be sure to check current design usinq static
analy.5is option.
SRWall (ver 3.22
April 2002)
Z�'. Page
mv 0511134
betailed
Reszi)ts of 7nternal Stabil Ity !�gqly!�Ps:
�$RW
r--(7'3 Yn
�Qev
A 13 awa b ie
Tensile
P'Jljcw� Sliding S li, d i ng
Unit
Type
Ift)
StrPngth
boad
Capa C: i t Forre rapa c 7; ty
Y
#
(11.'Rlft�
IlWfo
(IL�Ift I flbslft) (.Lbs1ft)
a
1
4.67
411.1
213,
97.0 47.4 739.5
6
1
3.33
411.1
226.3
342�7 171.0 1218.6
4
.1
2.0
dil�i
Q239.3
3
723.5 332.6 1697.7
2
1
0.67
411.1
252.2
1325,0 532.9 2176 8
. ..........
4^ j7
Restilts of Facing Srabi.11r
SRN
Beel
FOS
FOS
Shear Connection
Unit
Elev
Type
Ovez-
Sheaz
(defomnation) Connection (deforzation)
(ft)
taxiling
(Peak)
(pedk)
> 1A
> 1.1'
< 0.02 x Hu > 1.1 < 0.75 in
4,67
1
1.29
5.61
OK 5.95 Ox
7
4.0
none
2.64
>99
OK -
6
3.33
1
2.2
6.69
Ox 5�93 OR
5
2,67
none
2.3
>90
GK -
4
2.0
1
2.14
8.03
OK 5.91 OK
3
1.33
n1one
2A6
>99
Ox -
2
0.67
1.
2.07
9.05
Ox 5.9 Ox
1.
0.0
norka
2�07
>99
Ox -
Note: calculated valuect M�'.k;T ALL design criteria
petailed Penults of Facina Srabi,litv Ar.ajvRes (Pioment and Shejr);
SAN
Scol
(-,-n
LJri,.,e
Roe 10 C,
5.4 pa T
Shea 1,
Shed r
Z7111 t
Eler
T]'Pe
Momej I t
Mrmpn t
Lo-id
capacity
C-i aciry
I
(ft)
01 hs - ft Iff.)
(Iba-ftlf�Lj
rlibslft)
Ob.q/ft)
ilb_��11'0
4our -in
(pe ak
(deformation)
8
4.67
1
34.9
45.0
105.1
590,0
590.0
7
4.0
none
140.9
371.6
011
680.0
680.0
6
3.33
1
�320.2
706.�
111.7
770.0
770.0
5
2.67
none
574.9
1321.3
0.2
060.0
860.0
4
2.0
1
907.4
1944A
118.3
950.0
950.0
3
1.33
none
131S�.5
2849.1
0.3
1040,0
1040.0
2
0.67
1
1813.7
3761.4
124.8
1130.0
1130.0
1
0.0
norm
2391.9
4955.2
0.4
1220.0
1220.0
Detailed Renults of Facing Stability Analyses (CbrinectiWnu);
SRW
Ilep I
C-ev
ConflectJon
conriection
COWIOCtjon
U17i r
�" I L. v
Oad
capaci ty
capacity
tf t)
i bs/ f t)
(Pea*)
(deformation)
(1b., If 0
(7 h.'Tlf t)
a
4,67
1
213.3
1269.7
1269.7
6
3.33
1
2M.3
1342.4
1342.4
4
2.0
1
239.3
1415.1
1415.1
2
0.61
1
252.2,
1487.9
1407.9
- - - -Z-7 / 40
Type
Type I
((46
i
HDPF gcosyiithetic '
aeosvnthetic
-0.5 ft '3.5 ft
Projec I L identification:
Project
Name: SPR 213 ELbd,STREET, EDMMS
Section: S-FOOT TALL BLOCK WALL - sFiSMIC LOADING
Data Sheet:
Owner: EC DMMLORMENT
Client:
Prepared by:J S LIU
Date: Xay 29 2012
Time: 02:56:51 PM
Data IA Ie: c:\program files
(x86)\srwall32\11-077-Sfoothlockwall-seismicloading-sfr
SRWall (ver 3.22 April .9-002)
rw 0511135
Licc.msed to; Liu & Associates Inc.
19213 Kenlake Place NE
Kenmore WA 98028
LJCr-nSC hlumbcr; 0511135
,7 F,/4o
Page 1
ProjP(7t Tidpntification:
Project Name: SFR 213 ELM STREET - ED14ONDS
Section: G-FOOT TALL BLOCK WALL - STATIC LOADING
Data Sheet -
Owner: ECHELRARGER DEVELOPMENT, LLC
client:
Prepared by: J 8 LITJ
Date., July 17 2012
Time: 08:42:03 PM
Data file: c:\program files
(xg,6)\srw&1132\11-077-6foothlockwall-staticloading-almstreetsfr
Type of StrUctUrc2: Geosynthatic-Rainforced Segmental Retaining Wall
Design P!etpodoloc;v: XCH& Method A
Seismic Arialysis Details.'
Peak Ground ACceierat-ion RGA) ratio 0.00
Wall �4emrjet4y:
Design Wall Height (ft.)
Einbedmem�- Wall Height (f t)
Exposed Design. Wall Height (ft)
Minimu-�n Levelling Pad Thickness (ft)
Number of Seyineatal Wall linitr,
Hinge Height (ft)
Wall Tnclination (degrees)
6.67
0,67
6.0
0.5
10
6.67
7.1
SRWall (ve-r 3.22 April 2002) Page 2
Slopes:
FronL Slope (degrees)
Back Slope (degrees)
Infinite Back Slope
UnitLrTly Di.stributed.-Surcharges:
Live Load Surcharge
Dead r.oad Surcharge
Soil Data: soll DOSCrIption.
Reinforced Soil sand
Retained Soil sand
Levelling Pad Soil. gravel
Foundatton Soil sand
Segmental Unit Name:
.5rgmental Unit Data:
horizontal
15.0
none
none
friction
Cohes.fon
An gJ e
Unit weight
fpsf)
Wgrces)
(Pcf.)
N/A
36.0
130.0
N/A
32.0
120.0
N/A
40.0
130.0
0.0
34.0
125.0
C,ap Height (in) none
Unit Height (HuHin) 8.0
Unit width 061u) (in) 12.0
Unit Length (in) 18.0
Setback (in) 1.0
Weight (infilled) (lbs) 135.0
Unit Weight (infilled) (pcf) 135.0
Center of Gravity (in) 6.0
nta] Unit Intorface Shoar Data:
properties ultiftiaLe Strength Criteria
Srrvice State Cri.teria
Minimum (Ibs/ft) 500.0
500.0
Friction Angle (degrees) 45.0
45.0
Maximum (lbs/ft) 2000.0
2000.0
C,bosynthetic Reinforcement Types and Nzjmhpr:.
Type Number rm M 6.,
1 5 HDPE geosynthetic
2 0 PET geoeiynthatic
3 0 PP geosynthetic
SRPIall (ver 3.22 April 2002)
LN 0511135'
Geos�Lnthetics f��qp.ertieq.:�
Strength and Polymer Type:
Ultimate St-cength (lbs/ft)
Polymer Type
Reduction Factors
Creep
Durability
Installation Damage
Overall Factor of Safety
Allowable Strength:
Ta (Ibz.;/ft)
Page 3
-3 C, 0
Typ P 1
Typ e 2
Typ e 3
3700.0
2625.0
5300.0
RDFE or VP
polyester
HDPE-or PP
1
Type 2
Type 3
5.00
2.50
5.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
1.50
1.50
1.50
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
92.22:
116.67
117.78
coefficient of inte.-action:
Type 1
'T,-YT, e P
Type 3
Ci
0.7
0.7
0.7
coc-ifficient of Direct. Sliding.
Typt� I
T.�ve 2
7ypr, 3
Cds
0�95
0.95
0.95
Connection Strenath:
Typ e 1
Type 2
Typ a 3
Ultimate SLrength Criterion. -
Minimum (lbs/ft)
1233.3
875.0
1766.7
Friction Angle (degrees)
22.0
22.0
22.0
Maximum (lbs/ft)
1850.0
1312.5
2650.0
Service State Criterion:
Miiiimwrt (lbs/tt)
1233.3
875.0
1766.7
E'riction Angle (degrees)
22.0
22.0
Maximum (J:b.-,/ f t)
1850.0
1312.5
2650.0
Geos thetic-Seymelital Retaininq
Wall Unit
.Interface Sljear-,SL-r th.,
. I f�
Type I
Typ e 2
Type 3
Ultimate StrencjLh Criterion.
Minimum (lbs/ft)
500.0
500.0
Friction Angle (degrees)
45.0
45.0
45.0
Maximum (lbs/ftl
2000.0
2000.0
2000.0
Service State Criterion:
Minimum llbs/ft)
500.0
500.0
500.0
Friction Angle (degrees)
45.0
45.0
45.0
Maximum (lbs/fL)
2000.0
2000.0
2000.0
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002) Page 4
LN 0.511135
Coefflcin.nts of Earth Pzessu.,e and Failure Plane or.ientations!
Reinforced Soil (Ka)
Reinforced Suil (Ka horizontal component)
Orientation of failure plane from horizontal (deqrees)
Retained Soil (Ka)
Retained Soil, (ka horizontal componenU
orientation of failure plane from horizontal (degreps)
Resujtr of External StdbiJity.AnajXLPr*
O�223
0.213
54.24
0.277
0.251
49.89
Calculated Desiqn Criteria
F'os S1.1ding
3.17
1.5
OK
FOS Overturning
4.96
1.5
ox
FOS Bearing Capa,UiLy
13.99
2.5
OK
Base Rei.nforceinent Length (T.) (ft)
4.5
4.0
OK
Base EccenLricity (e)(ft)
0.1
N/A
Base Eccentricity Ratio (e/L-2e)
0.02
N/A
Base Reinforcement Ratio (L/H)
0.67
0.6
OK
Note: cal,culated values MEET ALL design criteria
Detailed Results of External sLability �na.
lys e S
Total Horizontal ForM, (lbs/ft)
Total Vertical Force (lbs/ft)
Sliding Resistance (lbs/ft)
Driving moment (Ibs-ft/fL)
Re5istinq Moment (lbs-ft/ft)
Bearing Capacity (Psf)
maximum Rearing Pressure (psf)
Results of Intesnal Stabi2ity Analyueo:
SRW �;eosyn Elav Lenqrh Anchor
Uni t Type (fr) (ftl Zongth
(fr)
> 1.0
10 1 6.0 6.07 1.5
a 1 4.67 5.09 1.3
6 1 3.33 S'd 2 * 02
4 1 2.0 415 2.31
2 1 0.67 4.5 3.1
Note: * valuv does 140T mrFT design criteri
FOS
FaI7
over-,
Pullout
B t re:�S
> 1.0
> 1.5
3.33
14.67
1.11
6.69
-�! : :1
::733-,
0.37Y
-11,73
13.
3 joccurrencos)
L?etaiied Pc6;uitr, of internal 5va.b.i4iry �pq4xses
reosyn
Elov
Allowable
e
rensile
"e"'i
Uni t
Type
(fc)
Strengch
Load
#
(Ibs1ft)
f
(Ibslft)
t'
10
1
6.0
02,2
24.7
8
1
4.67
82.2
74.
6
1
3.33
62.2
123.3
4
1
2.0
82.2
112.6
2
1
0.67
a2.2
221-9
caicuiated values:
885.2
4159.3
2805.5
2260.2
11215.1
13516.7
965.9
FW L'ayer
SlIdInq Spa c i n g
> < 3.0
22.98 on
11.5 OR
7.62 OR
S.69 09
4.64 0K
P012out
Sliding
Sliding
Capacity
Fo rc e
Capacity
(lbs1ft)
Ub,-/10
Ubslfr)
Use F-OKTRAC, Z-06-7,).
4& 1-
:� -IF
361.1p'
.-Z.
41.Yel
955.4
495.1
135.2
1554.1
1078.6
202.4
2152.8
1576.3
483.3
2751.5
2604.3
737.0
3350.3
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002) Page 5
LN
Rosults, ot Facing Stabi.0tV An4ly.-3,PS.
SRW
jie�.I
c4er.-Ynthpric
FO.13
F0.13
sh Pa r
FOS
Co.,mection
Uni t
F."Iev
2'�J�pe
Over-
Shear
(defoinatlaW
cullnectioll
(deformacion)
(f t)
turning
(peak)
(pea k)
> INFO,
> 1,5
< 0.02 x Ru
> 1.5
< 0. 75 in
[.-I
10
6.0
1
32.85
95.1
OR
51.49
OR
5.33
non4
13.9
-
-
4.67
1
7.22
24.98
or,
18.15
OK
7
4-0
none
5.07
-
-
6
3.33
1
3.67
17.12
Ox
11.49
Ox
5
2-61
none
2.96
-
-
4
2-0
1
2.41
14.1
QK
B.62
OK
3
1.33
none
2.06
-
-
2
G.A7
1
1.17*
12-5
OK
7;03
Ox
1
0.0
none
1�58*
-
-
Note; value doca N0,7.MEFT dp,.Riqn rri.-terion f2 occurrencezO
D�otlafle,.f RpqzjJIR cf Facinq Stabilitv Araly-?,m.q tMament and Shear),
SAW
Opa
Drive
Re.SiSt
Shea r
Shear
5,hear
Unit
Elct,
TYPL
rfo'n r
Load
CdPdCjfY
rapa Ci ty
(jbR-,ff1f0
(Ibv-f_1/fW
-4 / f 0
flbs1ft)
f1w1frp
#out --in
fIx a k
�deformation)
10
6.0
1
1.4
45.0
6.�
590.0
590.0
9
SA3
n*"
11.0
152.3
0.0
600�0
680.0
a
4.67
1
37.0
267.1
30.8
770.6
710.0
7
4.0
none
8'7.7
444.3
0.0
e60.0
860-0
6
3.33
1
171,2
626.9
55.5
950.0
95010
5
2.67
no"
293.9
87519
0.0
1040-0
1040.0
4
2.0
1
469.9
:LI30.3
80 * 1
1130.0
1130,0
3
1.33
none
'101.4
1441.0
0.0
1220.0
1220.0
2
0�67
1
998.7
1771.3
104.8
1310.0
1310.0
1
010
none
1370.0
2157.9
0.0
1400.0
1400.0
b,Ot6jjP,I ppsult� ct Pac4nq rtRbi1Ity_Ana1,,.-sys (��nn,!-,rtiqns):
S,RW
Reel
C7�0
connectivil
ConnPrt ion
conpection
Unit
Elev
2-pe
Load
Capacity
capa c i ty
(ft)
ObSIFC)
(Pudk)
(deformation)
IlbsIft)
(jl.b-qlft)
10
6.6
1
24.7
1269.7
1269.7
8
4.67
1
74.0
1342.4
2342A
6
3.33
1
W.3
1415.1
1415,1
4
2.0
1
172.6
1467.9
1487.9
2
0.67
1
221.9
1560.6
15.60.6
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002)
LN 0511135
7.1 degrees
6,67 ft
'F
M� ft
-0.5 ft
Proiect Identification:
Project
Page 6
10
Type I
HDPE geo-syntheti-c
HDPE geosynthetic
-- HDPE geosyntheti.c
Z+'-5 1
Pe� 9,1- 9A C 101q -211> mnpF nPnqvnt-hPt-ic
4,5 ft
Name:, SFR 213 ELM STREET - EDH01qDS
Section: 6-FOOT TALL BLOCK WAIX - STATIC WADING
Data Sheet:
Owner: ECHELBARGER DEVELOPMENT, LLC
Client:
Prepared by:J S LIU
Date: July 17 2012
Time: 08:42:03 PH
Data file: c:\pr09raM filOG
(x86)\srwall32\11-077-6foothlockwall-statioload.ing-olms
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002) Page I
LN 0511135
Licensed to: Liu & Associates Inc.
19213 Kenlake Place NE
Kenmore VA 99028
License Number: 0511135
Pro I-
Ject Tdent.11fication:
Project Name: SYR 213 EIM STRMT - FX140NDS
Section: 6-FOOT TALL BLOCK WALL - SEISMIC LOADING
Data Sheet:
Own e 7: -. ECHELBARGER DVrELOPi4ZNT, LLC
Clipnt:
Prepared by; J S LIU
Date: July 11 2012
Time: 08:48:06 PM
Data file: c:\program files
--- (x$6)\arwall32\11-077-6foothlockmall-saismicloading-almstreetsfr
n�,f Geosynthetic-Rainforced Segmental Retaining wall
Desigq__!I��-�Odoloa�V- NCM Method A
Seismic Ana.lysls DetailS:
Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) ratio
wall � GeometTy,
0.20
Design Wall Height (ft) 6.67
EmbecUnent Wall Height (ftl 0.67
Exposed Design Wall Height (ft) 6.0
Minimum Levelling Pad Thickncqs (ft) 0.5
Number of Segmental wall units 10
Hinge Hoirght (ft) 6.67
Wall Inclination (degrees) 7.1
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 200.2)
Slopes:
FronU Slope (degrooH)
Back Slope (degrceg)
Infinite Back Slope
Uniformly DIstributed
Live Load surcharge
Dead T�oad surcharge
Soil Data: Sol! DesCL!Ption:
Reinforced Soil sand
Retained Soil sand
Levelling Pad Soil gravel,
Foundation Soil sand
ffymeLital 11n.1L NaMe:
SegmclnLal UnI t Da L a:
Cap Height (in)
none
Unit Height (11u) (in)
awo
unit width (Wu) (in)
12.0
Unit Length (in)
18.0
Sethack (in)
1.0
Weight (in -filled) (lbs)
135.0
unit weight !,infillod) (pcf)
135.0
Center of Gravity (in)
6.0
��taj UnIL Interface Shear. Data:
3514t,o
horizontal
15.0
none
none
Page 2
Friction
Cohesion
Angle
Unit 4-Yeiqht
(Psf)
(d'- g r C' C.- S)
(pc.f)
N/A
36.0
130.0
N/A
32.0
120.0
N/A
40.0
130.0
34.0
125.0
Prqj)er1L-ieS UltimaLe Strpngth cziterij Service StOtc Criteria
minimum (lbs/ft) 500.0 500.0
Friction Angle (degrons) 45.0 45�O
Maximum (lbs/ft) 2000.0 2000.0
Geosynthetic Reinforcement TYpes..�dnd Number.
Type Number Nalne
1 5 EMPE geosynthetic
2 0 PET goosynthetic
3 0 PP geosynthetic
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002)
Page 3
LN 0311135
�>14c>
Strength and. P lym=, Typr:
TYP 0 1
T�T P 2
Type 3
Ultimate Strength (Ibs/ft)
3700.0
2625.0
5300.0
Polymer Type
HDPE or PP
polyester HDPZ or PP
Reduction Fac�nrs:
Type 1
Type 2
Typo 3
Creep (=I..00 fc,,r seismic analysis)
1.00
1.00
1.00
DurabIlity
2.00
2.00
2.00
Ins tall a tion Dam -age
3.00
3.00
3.00
Overall Factor of Safety
1.50
1.50
1.50
(�)'Ylamir) Allowable Strength:
T' ype 1
Type 2
Ty p e 3
Ta (lbs/ft)
411.11
291.67
588.89
coefficient of Interaction:
Type I
Type 2
Type 3
Ci
0.7
0.7
0.7
Coef-ricienk'. of DirecL Slidinq.
Type 1
T�-pe 2
Tjrpr 3
Cds
0.95
0.95
0.95
Connection StrengEh:
Type I
2-ype 2
Typ e 3
UlLimdLe Strength crlLezion:
Mirilmam (Ibs/ft)
1233.3
075.0
1766.7
E'riction Angle (deqiees�
22.0
22.0
22.0
Maximum (Ibs/ft)
1850.0
1312.5
2650.0
Service state Criterion:
Minimuin (lbs/tt)
1233.3
875.0
1766.7
Friction Angle (degrees)
22.0
22.0
22.0
maximum, (Ibs/ft)
1850.0
1312.5
2650.0
SRWall (ver 3.22 April 2002) Page 4
L24 0311135
Geosyn the ti c-Seqm�tz�4...�e+ta iningr �,� unit
interface Shear Strewth. -IYpf- I Type 2 Type 3
Ultimate Strength Criterion:
MiTliMUM
(Ibs/ft)
500.0
500.0
500.0
Friction
Angle (degrees)
45.0
45.0
45.0
Maxintuitt
(Ibs/Et)
2000.0
2000.0
2000.0
Sorvice
State CriLefion:
Minimum
flbu/ft)
500.0
500.0
500.0
Friction
Angle (degrees)
45.0
45.0
45.0
Maximum
(lbs/fL)
;000.0
2000.0
2000.0
Coefficients of Earth Pressure and FcH 1,TJ,r(-)' Plane Orientations:
Seismic Coefficent Wint))
0.25
Seismic Coefficent Wext))
0.1
Roinforced Soil (5tatic) (Ka)
0.223
Reinforced Soil (static) (Ka horizontal,
compononL)
0.213
Reinforced Soil (static + dynamic) Wae)
0.502
Reinforced Soil (static + dynamic) (Kaeh
horizontal component)
0.48
Orientation of failure plane from horizontal
(degrees)
54.24
Retained Soil (static) (Ka)
0.277
Retained Soil. (static) (Kah horizontal component)
0.251
Retained Soil (static + dyninnic) (Kae)
O.M
Retained Soil (static + dynamic) Wach horizonta) component)
0.347
orientation of failure plane. from horizontal. (degrees)
43.04
Results of External Stabl.ljty (Seismic)
Calculated
Design Cr.iteria
FOS Sliding
2.07
1.15
OR
FOS OVelt,UTning
2.75
1.2
OR
FOS Rearing Capacity
9.61
1.5
OR
Base Reinforcement Length (L) (ft)
4.5
4.0
OR
Base Eccentricity (e)fft)
0.5
N/A
Base Eccentricity Ratio (e/L-2e)
0.14
N/A
Base Reinforcement Ratio (L/H)
0.67
0.6
OR
Note: calcul.ated values MEET ALL design cri.teria
Detailed Results ot Extt-�,rnal Stalbility AI)alySeS:' Calculated Valuos:
Total, Horizontal kl;'orce (Ibs/ft)
1355.7
Total Vertical ForGn (lbs/ft)
4159.3
Sliding ResisLance (lbs/tt)
2805.5
Driving Moment (Ibs-ft/Ift)
4077.2
Resisting Moment (Ibg-ft/ft)
11215.1
Bearing Capacity (psf)
114j3.3
Maximum Bearing Pressure (psf)
1190.3
S,RWall (ver 3.22.April 2002)
Page 5
LN 0511135
Results of Internal Stability (Seismic) Analyses.
39 kc� - ---- -
SRW
GeoL�yn Elev
T'engrh Anchor
ror
1;10S
Fos
Layox
Unit
Type (fr)
(F0 I-ength
Over-
Pullout
sliding
spacing
#
(Ft)
strpss
(ft)
> 1.0
> 1.0
> 1.1
ills
< 3.0
10
1 6.0
6.07 1.5
1.38
1.22
7.1
OR
a
I d.67Y
S.G8 1.3
1.33
1.6
4.82
OR
6
1 3.33
5.0 2.02
1.28
3.35
.3.85
OR
4
1 2.0
4.5 2.31
1.23
4.71
3�27
OR
2
1 0.67
4.5 3.1
1.10
7.5
2.86
ox
Note-
c.alculated values MEET ALL design criterja
Note:
Sei_smir- analysis
imay not give the 1,owesi*. factors,
of safety fol: F0,1 ac,)atnat. reinforcement
o,,,er-,qtress in internal *tabllty calcolations- Be sure
to chock
cuvj�ent design using static
analysiu option.
Detailed Regults of'Intorildl 5rahj)fry Anallses.
5RW
G�eosyn
Elev
Allowable
Zensilc
P0101it
Sliding
Sliding
Unit
Type
(ft)
Strehgtlj
Load
Capacity
Force
capacity
UbSLlft)
(I b'.j / ft)
(lbsltt)
(I t.%qlf 0 (Ibs1ft)
056
10
1
6.0
411.1
297.4
1.34.5
955.4
a
1
4.67
411.1
309.8
495.1
322.7
1554.1
6
1
3.33
411.1
322.2
1078.6
558.5
2152.8
4
1
2.0
41i.]L
33416
1576.3
841.7
2751.5
2
1
0,67
411.1
347.0
2604,3
1172.5
3350.3.
Results
ability f5e.1sm1c) Analyses:
SRW
Heel
GLUSY11thPOtic
FOS
Fwo
Sbear
FC-";
Connectzr,)n
63'ev
TYPE)
Over-
Vhpar
fdoformat4on)
Connect4on
(defornation)
(ft')
rurning
(Podk)
(peak)
> 1.1
> 1�1
< 0.02 x Ru
> 1.1
< 0.75 in
10
6.0
1
0.92*
4.01
OK
4.27
OK
S
5.33
none
1.09
-
-
-
-
a
4-67
1
I.so
5.03
0K
4.33
7
4.0
none
1.66
6
3.33
1
1.55
5.97
OR
4.39
OK
s
2�67
=16
1.56
-
4
2.0
1
I.Sl
6.83
OK
4.45
OR
3
1.33
n*nqt
1.51
-
-
2
0.67
1
1.47
7.64
OK
4.5
OK
1
0.0
none
1.47
-
-
Uote: * Value does NOT MEET design criteriLQn �j Gct:Urrej'Ce��)
SRWall-
(ver
3.22
April 200 c 2)
Page
Detailed
Results
of f3rinq 5 ab,flity Analygp-4
tMo-ment aria Shear).
"IRK
L
HCL�d
Goo
vr.4 ve
Re.,-3 i s t
Shear
Shear 5heaz
EIev
Typp
sament
Moment
k'O I ad
caparicy capacity
(Jbq-L't1flI)
(ibs-ftlft)
Obslft)
�IbsIfO (Ibslft)
+out -112
(Peap) (deforna r I on)
10
9
6.0
1
48.9
45.0
147.1
590.0 590.0
8
5.33
4.0
none
196.8
371.6
-0.1
680.0 680.0
7
1.
446.0
705.1
153.2
�70.0 770,0
6
4.0
none
798.3
1321,3
�O,�
.060.0 860.0
5
3.33
1
1256.0
1944.4
JL50.3
950.0 95010
2.67
1821.1
2849,2
-0.4
.1040.0 1040.0
4
2.0
2495.5
3761.4
165.3
113010, 113010
3
1.33
none
3201.5
4955.2
-0.5
1220.0 1220.0
2
0.67
1
4181,1
6156.5
171.4
1j1O.0 1310.0
1
0.0
none
5196.3
7639.4
�0.6
14WO 1400.0
Dclailed Relults of Facing Stability Ana y.�rpe Mjzinprrione,).
SRW
Heel.
G�-o
Connection
cc-'rivecticin
Unit
E16V
TYL--
zodd -
capa ci t,'Y
C-Pacity
(pajk)
(ckformarion;
(Ibs1ft)
Ubslft)
10
6.0
1
297.4
1269.7
1269.7
8
4.67
1
369.8
1342.4
1342A
6
3.33
1
322-2
1415.1
1415.1
4
2.0
1
334.6
1487.9
1487.9
2
0.67
1
347.0
1560.6
1560.6
a
SRWall
LN 0511135
(ver 3.22 April 2002)
6.67 ft
Type I
HDPE qeosynLhetic
11DPE geusyndieLic
HDPE geosyllLheLlc
0.67 ft
HDPE geosynthetic
-0.5 ft
4.5 ft
Project Identification.,
Proj ect
Name: SFR 213 ELM STREET - EIDMONDS
Section; 6-FOOT TALL BWCK W= - SEISMIC LOADING
Data Sheet:
Owner., ECHELBARGER DEVEWPHENT, LLC
Client:
Prepared by:J S LIU
Date: July 17 2012
Time: 08:48:06 FM
Data file: c:\program files
(x86)\srwall32\11-017-6foothlockwall-seismicloading-elm
GENERAL .NOTES
1. Contractor shall provide material, -equipment, " labor. and tools to complete the precast concrete block wall in
accordance with lines and grades shown on the design drawing by Utu & Associates, Inc. (L&A)
2. Contractor shall visit site and familiarize him/her with site conditions, and shall verify existing grades,
dimensions and elevations -in the field. Contractor shall report any discrepancy from the design drawings to
L&A before proceeding with wall construction. Contractor shall exercise extreme care not to damage any
underground utilities, existing structures, driveway, house, landscape. et(,- Damage. to the above shall be
repaired and restored to their original conditions or better at Contractors experim
3. Precast Concrete B shall be of Keystone compact blocks (8-inch high x 18,4nch widex 124nch deep)
or approved equal.
4. anushed Rock Leveling Base and Verti� I &Drain �Mat shall consist of dean, durable, free -draining, 7/8-inch
-crushed rock.
5, Non -Woven Filter Fabric Sock shall be of 140NS by Mirafi Inc. or approved equal,
6. Stru
� . ctuml Fill shall be clean granular soil free of organics, debris. and other deleterious substances and With
particles no larger than 3 inches, �Structural fill shall have a moisture content within one percent of the
opfimurn moisture at the time of. placement- Onsite soils. meeting these requirements may be used as
structural fill.
7. Wall Drain Lines shall be of 4-inch diameter, rigid, perforated, PVC pipes, with glued watertight joints and
wrapped In a non -woven filter fabric sock.
8. Geogdd Mesh shall be Fortrac 20/9-20.
9. Bottom of keyway trenches and wall. drain line shall have sufficient slope (0.5% minimum) to direct water
into the drain line and to generate flow by gravity- The wall drain line shall be tightlined to discharge into a
storm sewer.
10. Concrete blocks shag be tightly stacked With the rows of blocks inter -connected with Teflon pins or
interlocked. The cores of blocks shall be filled with 7/64n crushed rock and tamped to an unyielding state.
11, Structural fill, crushed rock base and vertical, drain mat shall be placed in Ift no more. than 10 inches in
loose state, with each lift compacted to at least'92% of the maximum dry density determined b y ASTM
131557 (Modified Proctor method).
12 Each layer of geogrid mesh shall be laid on level ground, anchored between rows of blocks or with Teflon
pins, sbetched tight and. staked down, prior to placing the next Oft of structural fill. Overlaps for geogrid
mesh shall be at least 12 inches in the diredRm of wall alignment, and shall not be allowed in the direction
perpend[icular to wall alignment
13 Exposed unpaved ground shall be seeded and vegetated as soon as possible.
14 Construction of concrete block walls shall be inspected by Mk Placement and in -situ density tests of
structural fill shall be monitoredand tested by a geotechniml engineering technician.
15 Contractor shall remove debris and clean up site after completion of work.
16 Contractor shall be solely responsible for construction safety and his/her methods, techniques, sequences
or procedures used for the construction, and shall take necessary measure to maintain stability of cut banks
during construction to prevent bodily injury or property damages.
17 Contractor shall indemnify and save harmless the Owner and Engineer from and against any damage, cost
and fiability for injury or death to pewnsand Wn damage to prdperty,caused by negligence of Contractor,
his agents, employees or-subooft-actors.,
BLOCKWALLOENERAL NOTES
'SINGL&FAMILY,RESIDENCE
LIU & ASSObATESINC.
.213 ELM. STREET
Geotachnical Enakmfing -. Engilmmo Goqft
Y'. Earth stience
TON,
mz Ea"
(J 8�'tA)x 6�0")
T'
10 miti.
14 <
ro
L
4a
t
42
U.AeO K6&, FeAf-- K(GIE> P& Cipc-. W"r-_D
l' PIC -WOVEA r-wveg FA5cic 50CK
At
V40T :140 4�i�ALP,
. . ........
GEOGRID MESH SCHEDULE
WaILL
Height
H. ft
Geogrid Mesh (Length LN, ft I Type)
Layer 1
(DN = 0.67 ft)
Layer 2
(DN= 2.0 ft)
Layer 3
I (DN= 3.34 ft)
Laye
(DN = 41 r64ift)
Layer5
(DN= 6.0 ft)
H<4
Geogrid Mesh Not Requi
4 i�_ H < 5
3.50
3,50
4.00
-
-
Fortrac 20/9-20
Fortrac; 2019-20
Fortrac 20/9-20
-
5.:s H < 6
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.50
Fortrac 2w9-20
Fortrac:20/0-20
Fortrac 20/9-20
Fortrac 2019-2G
-
H=6
4.50
4.50 1
5.00
1 5.00
6.00
Fortrac 20/9-201
Fortrac 20/9-201
Fortrac'20/9-201
Fortrac 20/9-20
Fortrac 20/9-20
NOTES. Dm Location of Layer of Geogrid, Height in feet tiorn bottom of base -course blocks.
WAL
CONCRETEBLOCK' L TYPICAL SECTION
UU,&ASSOCIATES, INC. SINOLE'FAMILY RESIDENCE
21.3 ELM STREET
Geotecbffical Engirspeft -,EVneeft.Geology - Earth Science EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
J -NO. 11-0-17 �QATE Z/1 8/2012 1 -PLATE j
013
BY ENGINEERING
rL
5' ASPHALT L
CL -m C,4 V1
V) RAMP Zone Corner Y-11m 0
5 POW-
LU W� Setbacks Re d
-Recluire Actual
PROPOSED C� (n 70
-POWER - i,- 5 Z — — - . FrontStW — Z�o
Nqo�L- --I-- Izo
0.5' Sidesgftt
CONCRETE
LU
Rear
CURB
5`ASPHAL Other
BM
SIDEWALK' 12'. A, 0 -7
Height
OU
f
FOUND CONC. MON
IN CASE WITH 2" BRASS DOME
20' 40
U I E
3140 WATER -IR EL. 109.50'
3" 5
j METER f SCALE: V 20'
JO D1 Pt DATUM
NAVD 88
0 10 SITE AREA:
—PROPOSED 1& POLY WATER - - 7,334 SQUARE FEET
'A
PROPOSED �ALL -4-�— 7-/ WMCE UNE "M WIRE
r__ X1, F LOT SLOPE
6' MAX. HEIGHT NLL BE ADM TO THE ENGINEER SURVEYOR
WATER SERYWE WEST -EAST 126' - 1 18'= 8'
(REFER TO THE WALL UNE) Impw ENGffimmG COMAW PACFIC Ca4ST SURVM W_
PO BOX 1478 PO BOX 13619
DESIGN BY THE 2' FF= 124.50 '4 EVERETT, WA 9a206 MILL CRM, WA 98092
I C9 8.00 VERTICAL FEET 13.37. SLOPE CONTACT.- BR64N R. KALAB, P.E. CONTACT.- DARREN J. RIDDLE
GEOTECHNICAL ASPHALT, 1 q:
IR Typ.)>�, EL= 119.50 V- PH. ((425 303-9363 PH. ((4425)) 508-4951
807TOM OF FOOTING 4 ) 25
ENGINEER) :CUT 60. 00 LINEAR FEET FAX. 25) 303-9362 FAX. J57-3577
U, SITE A
icN 7,334 SQ. FT.
HEIGHT CALCULATIO
APPLICAATIOWNER
A= 122.5
B= 121.5 M02ARM WMVENM UC
Q IT
E G " -\\ C= 123.0 4001 198TH ST. SIN. SUITE 2
SIDE SE LYNNWOOD, WA 98036
VVE P > Z
I , < D= 126.J (425)
PH. C .3 1100
S,
93.314= 123.3'
5.9' AVERAGE GRADE= 12J.3' LEGAL DESCRIPTIOW
ACTUAL BUILDING HEIGHT= 148.00'
PARCEL A
CITY OF EDMONDS LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LL-2000-67
-j! —
A'I . I I I MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT= 148.3'
LOT COVER4GE.- AS RECORDED UNDER AF. NO. 200008085002
Cn RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
RESIDENCE .2,515 SQUARE FEET
mm4
SITE ADDRESS. 209 ELM STREET
T INC. COVERED
4,� EDMONDS, W4
PORCHES, GAR4GE
EX, TOTAL Z515 SQUARE FEET TAX ACCOUNT NO.'S. 00937900000700
- - -- -- rn
'25'00" W\7O.00` LOT COVERAGE
N Z51517,334= 34.3% 35% MAXIMUM
__4 SE 114, NE 114, SEC.26, T.27N., RJE., WM.
�9
y-20 CO % SNOHOMSH COUNTY
t 4tRETE-,
IMPERVIOUS COVER4GE:
VV :�_ ��3t
ACCESS �n
RESIDENCE 2,848 SQUARE FEET
DRIVVY, ELM STREET
(including overhangs)
r�9 CA. DESIGNED BY. DATE. SCALE: JOB NO.:
ROPOSEO ROCKERY X. CAS kIN
C EX. — DRIVEWAY 860 SQUARE FEET m 12-28-201 1
C, JRC
(4' MAX) 2'
(SEE DETAIL ON C2) ASPHALT WALKWAY 25 SQUARE FEET
17 CUT TOTAL 3,473 SQUARE FEET snEPLAN
N 39' -54" W 0 2d'
�j
p ASPHALT R4A* I (I
A
2 'ORI
ED ROCKE E�
TAIL ON C2)
)0, W 7 0
BM ELM TR EE_T1
FOUND CONC. MON I ___(��_p-(RAMP SHALL BE U B
IN CASE WITH 2' CONSISTENT WITH RES
1 3 mk�,4 STANDARD DETA14
BRASS DOME
-75
L AUG 162012
I (Irlp E.2.26) 2,,D Q_- 0 t
EL. 109.50'
"011vc. /,7u,
NT
BUILDING DEPARZTNE
NOTE: CITy OF EDIIJONDS
1. SEE GR4DINGITESC AND DR41NAGEIUTILITY PLANS UNS06107 Omeo[mmmalme Co.
FOR MORE INFORMATION. P.O. BOX - 1478
EVERETT, WA 98206
(425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX
INF0@1NSIGHnNGDaMRING.N1ET
PLACE POWER
UNDER GROUND
'r;' AQPWAI T
t
)_
0.5
CONCRETE
JJ
CURB,
J_J SPHAL Z,
SIDEWALK' IZ�
PROPOSED-
1A
,// -T)y WATER
METER
30
PROPOSED WALL
6' MAX. HEIGHT
(REFER TO THE WALL.
DESIGN BY THE 2
GEOTECHNICAL A� HALT
ENGINEER) UT
C/)
EX. 6
SIDE SEWaERi
SS SS SS S�
PROPOSED
co
0,::�
6 C. 0.
vo
tp w #Ad Z (J
(WI TH 12 - CAST wAA, fmox
IRON LAMPHOLE Me"OL- 1§ (_3
yy CA-_ :�__
COVER & 112
�L_
HEXBOLTS) (TYP.)
RIM= 114
IE= 1 0�1
REPLAC
E
��j
W1 STO Z
FITTING
r ZSSCO
)c
PROPOSED
F. H. (3' CLEARANCE
FROM FACE OF PORT
-AND BACK OF FIRE
HYDRANT.)
-OHP-
G
G G
A\
BW
FOUND CONC. MON
IN CASE WITH 2
BRASS DOME
EL. 109.50'
0 '" 14 NE 114, SEC.26, T27N., ME, W.M.
L
Ora 11 --tJ
SNOMAHSHCOLMY, WASHNGTON
CB W1 SOLID LID
TYPE- 1 L
RIM= 123. 0
IE= 119.50, 6"0
_x_
- - - - - - - - - - - -
6" ROOF
DRAIN
IE= 123. 0
IWERVIOUS SURFACE
SURFACE
DRIVEWAY
WALKWAY
ROOF
OUTLINE
TOTAL
IMP. AREA
HOUSE
2,455 SF
2,455 SF
DRIVEWAY
500 SF
1 40 SF
540 SF
TOTAL
2,995 SIF
DESIGN INFILTR47ION RATE 2 NCHES PER HOUR
OBSERVATION WELL
Mw wmwn NESM 1~1 01=19aw
ACCEPTAW.1- TIGHTLINE
MAT :RIP
3DR 35
SCH 40
-12
-810 HANCOR
co
LL1
CN
EX
51
-
DRAIN
TO CB
147o MAX.�\�\\
SLOPE
k. nis rjWT
8,10411M
RD
AR-;rRt -
STANDARD TYPE "A" CUEBZCUTTER DETA
NTS
24.H.R. NOTICE RM
HOUSE
INFILTRA77ON TRENCH-1 LENGTH (FT.)=
= 2,455 SF X 1.87. = 44.19 FT.
USE 44LF INFILTRATION TRENCH PER
FIGURE 3.2 OF EDMONDS STD. DEIAIL.
DRIVEWAY
INFILTRATION TRENCH-2 LENGTH (FF.)=
=540 SF X 1.87. = 9.72 FT.
USE 1OLF OF 3' DEEP INFILTRATION TRENCH
PER FIGURE 3.2 OF EDMONDS STD. DET41L.
OBSERVATION WELL
""I. NATIVE BACKFILL
1E = 122. 0 MIN
6' PERFORATED PIPE @ OY.
EACKFILL TO BE 1 112" TO
3" WASHED ROCK OR EQUAL)
1ILTER FABRIC (win 10OX, TYPAR
3201, POLYFELT TS420 OR
EQUIVALENT)
LVBL TRA TION TRENCH- 1 SECTION
NTS
STANDARD TYPE "A"
CURBIGUTTER DEMIL
12'
.05'
'-f. TO I' NAT'VE
1L
1E = 122.0(+1-)
6" PERFORATED PIPE 0 Ox
'BACKFILL TO BE 1 112" TO
WASHED ROCK OR EQUAL)
FABRIC (MIRIFI 10OX, TYPAR
3201, POLYFELT TS420 OR
INFH, M TION TRENC H-2 SECTION
NIS
NOTES.
1. TRENCH SHALL BE LOCATED AT ELAST 5-FF FROM THE ROCKERY.
2. PER GEOTECH, THE BOTTOM OF THE TRECH SHALL BE AT LE4ST
ONE FOOT BELOW THE BOTTOM OF THE ROCKERY WALL.
EQ.
27o
5*
2 CLASS "B" ACP
-518- MINUS CSTC
4
TACK CONC. SURFACE
2' MIN SAW
518" MINUS CSTC
2'�
NOTE:
PAVEMENT COMPAC77ON- 91Z RICE DENSITY
SUBGR4DE AND TOP COURSE COMPACTION - 95Y. (ASTM1.557)
CITY INSPECTION REQUIRED ON ALL EROSION CONTROL
MEASURES BEFORE WORK CAN BEGIN.
CURBIGUTTER FORMS AND SUBGRADE INSPEC77ON REQUIRED
PRIOR TO POURING AND BEFORE APPLYING ACP
CB
TYPE- 1 L
2 INCH TO 4 INCH QUARRY SPALLS FREE OF ORGANIC WITH LESS THAN
5 PERCENT FINES (SILT AND CLAY PARTICLES
PASSING THE NO. 200
RIM=
122. 0
MESH SIEVE)
IE=
120.0, 6 "0
UNDISTURBED FIRM NATIVE SOIL
- -
- - - - - - - - -
DESIGNATED SIZE OF ROCK REQUIRED ie 4 MAN
LA.
EX. CB OWNER/CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE
(WIL L BE REMOVED AND REPLACED
RIM- 109.35 FOR EROSION CONTROL AND DRAINAGE
1E_ 107.0±1 (120) TO MEET ADA REQUIREMENTS PER
WSDOT STANDARDS) MAXIMUPA DRIVEWAY SLtpE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- &LOw_'r_-D_ 14% - - - - - - - - -
Ap I plicant shall repair/replace all I damage to
utilities or frontage Improvements in City
right -Of -Way psi- City standards that Is caused
or occurs during the permitted project.
.
MINIMUM 4 IdCH DIAMETER UNDERDRAIN PIPE CONFORMING TO SECTION
7-01 OF THE WSDOTIAPWA SPECIFICATIONS. SUCH PIPE SHALL BE BEDDEC
ON AND SURROUNDED BY 2 INCH TO 4 INCH QUARRY SPALLS AS DESCRIB,
ABOVE
NOTES:
1. MAXIMUM INCLINA77ON OF THE SLOPES ABOVE AND BEHIND ROCKERIES SHOULD
BE 2:1(HORIZONTAL; VERTICAL).
2. MINIMUM THICKNESS OFDRAIN ROCK LAYER B=6 INCHES.
'ED FILL
3. MINIMUM EMBEDMENT D=12 INCHES UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL OR COMPACT
PLACED IN ACCORDANCE MTH GEOTECHNICAL REPORT RECOMMENDAVONS.
4. ROCKERIES GREATER 7744N 8 FEET IN HEIGHT TO BE INSTALLED UNDER PERIODIC
OR FULL TIME OBSERVARON OF THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER.
5. ROCK SHALL BE PLACEO TO GRADUALLY DECREASE IN SIZE MTH INCREASING WALL
HEIGHT IN ACCORDANCE VWTH THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
6. THE LONG DIMENSION OF THE RCCKS SHALL EXTEND PERPENDICULAR TO THE ROCK
FACE TO PROVIDE MAXIOUM STABILITY.
7. ROCKS SHALL BE PLACED TO A%OID CONTINUOUS JOINT PLANES IN VERTICAL OR
LATERAL DIRECTIONS
EACH ROCK SHALL BEAR ON TWO
SECTION (A -A)
NTS
SIZE
APRROX. WT LBS.
APPROX. DIA.
1 MAN
50-200
12"-18"
2 MAN
200-700
3 MAN
700-2000
28'�-36"
4 MAN
2000-4000
36"-48"'
5 MAN
4000-6000
48"-54"
6 MAN
6000-8000
54t'-600'
.
MORE ROCKS BELOW IT,
WITH GOOD FLAT -TO -FLAT CONTACT. ROCKERYDETAH,
NO SCALE
NOTES:
1. REPLACEMENT IS REQURED OF ANY PLAT IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION.
2. IF THE SLOPE OF THE SIDE SEWER IS GREATER THAN 20% THE SEWER WILL NEED TO BE ANCHORED.
J. THE ROCKERY MUST BE EQUAL DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AS IT IS HIGH.
4. THE EXISTING CORNER RAMP AT 2NO AND ELM ST, WILL BE REMOVED AND REPLACED TO MEET
ADA REQUIREMENTS PEI? WSDOT STANDARNDS.
5. ALL NEW UTILITIES MUST GO UNDERGROUD,
T
NIS
�MAINTAIN 2' MIN. SEPARATION FROM 807TOM
OF WALL To TOP OF PIPE.
5.5' 3'
lizol
EL=11
110. 0(±)
2$
2.25±
109.25
�OZ06
6" PVC SIDE SEWER CROSShVG
NTS
MAINTAIN 2' MIN. SEPARATION FROM BOTTOM
OF WALL TO TOP OF PIPE.
EL=11ZO
10'
=109.35
L=109,35
I id L
L J__
1OZO(±)
110.25
6rr PVC DRAINAGE L17VE CROSS17VG
-WC9MS 08TA'" Arx -ro sHtw uMuTy stw"A-rjow
PLeftse- "pm Tx� -rft ae"-r r-oa_ -rH15
a6CVk,-1a/
UTILI7 Y COML 10 r 1VO.M.
CA U-TIOW
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING THE LOCATION,
DIMENSION, AND DEPTH OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHETHER SHOWN ON
THESE PLANS OR NOT, BY POTHOLING THE UTILITIES AND SURVEYING THE
HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL LOCA77ON PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THIS AND
THEN SHALL INCLUDE CALLING UTILITY LOCATE 0 1-800-424-5555
POTHOLING ALL OF THE EXIS77NG U77LITIES AT LOCATIONS OF NEW UTILITY
CROSSINGS TO PHYSICALLY VERIFY WHETHER OR NOT CONFLICTS EXIST.
LOCATIONS OF SAID UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS ARE BASED
UPON THE UNVERIFIED PUBLIC INFORMATION AND ARE SUBJECT TO
VARIATION- IF CONFLICTS SHOULD OCCUR, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL
CONSULT WITH INSIGHT ENGINEERING COMPANY TO RESOLVE ALL
PROBLEMS PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION.
wit 0
'10
16
0 "to
a -
PROPOSED WALL
6' MAX. HEIGHT
(REFER TO THE
WALL,
DESIGN BY THE
GEOTECHNICAL
ENGINEER)
co
EX. 6 "
I cjo
5ds Co
w 0 W
ss�_OHP� `-
-0 H P - cl
C)v G Z- G G
\Bjf
FOUND CONC. MON
IN CASE WITH 2
BRASS DOME C)
EL. 109.50' 1
NOTES:
1. REPLACEMENT IS REQUIRED -OF ANY PLAT IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE DAMAGED
DURING CONSTRUCTION.
2. SEE SITE PLAN AND DMNAGEIUTILITY PLANS FOR MORE INFORMATION.
J. ALL DISTURBED SOILS WILL BE COMPOST AMENDED.
FILTER FABRIC
SECURED TO 2" X 2"
14 GA. WIRE FABRIC
EQUAL
2" X 2" WOOD OR
EQUIVALENT
FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL IN
CONTINUOS ROLLS, USE STAPLES
OR WIRE RINGS TO ATTACH
FABRIC. TO WIRE,
VWEIRSE MESH SUPPORT FE�J..E
T] UPPORT FILTER FA IC,
cu
Nil
z 1 0
I
cu 7FCB;RY BOTTOM [IF FILTER
MATERIAL 8- TO 12-
6' MAX,
I,-,' 1 1 2' X 2' WOOD POSTS OR
PLACE 3/4"-1.5" WASHED GRAVEL IN EQUIVALENT
THE TRENCH AND ON BOTH SIDES OF
FILTER FABRIC FENCE ON THE SURFACE. CITY INSPECTION RE
CONTRACTOR/DEVELOPER SHALL MAINTAIN AND REPLACE EEROSION CONTROL M
OT
OTHER WORK CAN BI
STRAW BALES TO INSURE PROPER EROSION CONTROL, HER
F& TER FABRIC FENCE F& M TION S YSTEMS
NOT TO SCALE SID DTL. El. I
Lj
ESCNOTES (ECD 18.30.Q50) GEATRAL NOTES:
SE 114, IVE 114, SEC.26, T27N., R.3E., W.M. A. ESC MW1MIM REQUIREMENa ALL ACTIVITIES NECESSITATING A CLEARING OR GRADING PERMIT AND ALL U77LITY PROJECTS CONSISTING OF MORE THAN 1. ALL MATERIALS AND WORK SHOWN ON THESE PLANS SHALL CONFORM TO THE
L-Li 500 LINEAL FEET OF TRENCH EXCAVA77ON SHALL BE REQUIRED TO CONTROL EROSION AND SEDIMENT DURING CONSTRUCTION AND TO PERMANENTLY CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD PLANS AND DETAILS, THE FOLLOWING
Z�t STABILIZE EXPOSED SOIL RESULTING FROM CONSTRUCTION. PROJECTS INVOLVING A CRI71CAL AREA MAY ALSO BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH ANY SPECIFICATIONS AND CODES, AND ALL OTHER APPLICABLE LOCAL MUNICIPAL,
SNOHOMISH COUNTY WASHINGTON COMBINATION OF THE ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. COMPLIANCE WILL BE DEMONSTRATED 7HROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN APPROVED ESC PLAN.
LLJ
cn
LLJ LLJ
cr)
_7a
-69IJ-1`471" W_ . 00
x
GUIDELINES FOR PREPARING ESC PLANS ARE PROVIDED IN THE MANUAL. THE PLAN MUST ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS. atAir, BIVU rCUCRAL Wut.D, nULLO AIVU REGULATIONS.
- CURRENT INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE (IBC)
1. ESC MINIMLM REQUIREMENT - CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ROUTE. CONSTRUC77ON VEHICLE ACCESS SHALL BE, WHENEVER PRACTICAL, LIMITED TO ONE - 2010 WSDOTIAPWA STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD, BRIDGE AND
ROUTE. ACCESS POINTS SHALL BE STABILIZED WITH QUARRY SPALLS OR CRUSHED ROCK TO MINIMIZE 7HE TRACKING OF SEDIMENT ONTO PUBLIC MUNICIPAL CONSTRUC77ON m hf N
- WASHINGTON STATE DEP TME OF ECOLOGY STORMWATER MA AGE E T
ROADS. IF SEDIMENT IS TRANSPORTED ONTO A ROAD SURFACE, THE ROADS SHALL BE CLEANED THOROUGHLY AT THE END OF EACH DAY. SEDIMENT AR NT
SHALL BE REMOVED FROM ROADS BY SHOVELING OR SWEEPING AND BE 7RANSPORTED TO A CONTROLLED SEDIMENT DISPOSAL AREA WITHIN 24 HOURS. MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN (CURRENT EDITION)
STREET WASHING SHALL BE ALLOWED ONLY AFTER SEDIMENT IS REMOVED IN 7HIS MANNER. 2� STANDARD PLAN AND TYPE NUMBERS WDICA7ED ON THESE DRAWINGS REFER To
_x Z ESC MWIMLM REQUIREMENT - STABIL12ATION OF EXPOSED AREAS. ALL SOILS EXPOSED BY LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES SHALL BE STABILIZED BY C17Y OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAILS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE
- - - - - - - - - - - - SUffABLE APPLICATION OF BMPS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, SOD, HYDROSEEDING, OR OTHER VEGETATION, PLASTIC COVERING, OR MULCHING. ALL J. A COPY OF THESE APPROVED PLANS MUST BE ON THE JOBSITE WHENEVER
BMPS SHALL BE SELECTED, DESIGNED, AND MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUAL. THE EXPOSED SOILS SHALL BE STABILIZED ACCORDING TO CONS7RUCTION IS IN PROGRESS.
AN APPROVED TIMEFABLE. (TYPICALLY, NO SOILS SHALL REMAIN EKPOSED FOR MORE THAN TWO DAYS FROM OCTOBER 1 THROUGH APRIL 30 AND NO
MORE THAN SEVEN DAYS FROM MAY 1 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30). 4. DEVIATIONS FROM THESE PLANS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER OF
3. ESC MWIMLM REQUIREMENT - PROTEC77ON OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES. ADJACENT PROPERTIES SHALL BE PR07ECTED FROM SEDIMENT DEPOSITION BY RECORD AND THE LOCAL GOVERNING AUTHORITY.
APPROPRIATE USE OF VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS, SEDIMENT BARRIERS OR FILTERS, DIKES OR MULCHING, OR BY A COMBINA77ON OF THESE MEASURES
AND OTHER APPROPRIATE BMPS. 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL RECORD ALL APPROVED DEVIATIONS FROM THESE PLANS -ON
A SET OF "AS -BUILT" DRAWINGS AND SHALL SUMMARIZE ALL AS -BUILT
4. ESC MINIMLM REQUIREMENT - MAINTENANCE ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS SHALL BE REGULARLY INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED BY THE CONDITIONS ON ONE SET OF REPRODUCIBLE DRAWINGS* FOR SUBMITFAL TO THE
OWNER TO ENSURE CONTINUED PERFORMANCE OF THEIR INTENDED FUNCTION. ALL MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE OWNER PRIOR PROJECT COMPLETION AND ACCEPTANCE. A SET OF AS -BUILT
WITH THE MANUAL. DRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS PRIOR TO FINAL
APPROVAL OF THE BUILDING OCCUFANCYIFINAL PROJECT APPROVAL.
5. ESC MINIMLM REQUIREMENT - OTHER BMPS. AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY; OTHER APPROPRIATE BMPS TO M177GATE THE EFFECTS OF INCREASED RUNOFF
SHAII BE APPLIED. 6. ELEVA77ONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET. SEE SURVEY FOR BENCHMARK INFORMATION.
6. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENT - UNDERGROUND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION. THE CONSTRUCTION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY LINES SHALL Z THE LOCA77ONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND SITE FEATURES SHOWN HEREON
SCALE: I"= 10' SPECIFIGALL( ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING. HAVE BEEN FURNISHED BY OTHERS BY FIELD SURVEY OR OBTAINED FROM
AVAILABLE RECORDS AND SHOULD THEREFORE BE CONSIDERED APPROXIMATE
Linn mum A. EROSION CONTROL FOR EXCAVATED AND STOCKPILED MATERIALS; ONLY AND NOT NECESSARILY COMPLETE. IT IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF
I Em Imm"m9momm 1 THE CONTRACTOR TO INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF ALL U77UTY
10 5 0 10 20 B. THE PLA�,EMENT OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL WHERE CONSISTENT WITH SAFE7Y AND SPACE CONSIDERA71ONS SHALL BE PLACE0 ON THE UPHILL SIDE OF LOCA77ONS SHOWN AND TO FURTHER DISCOVER AND PROTECT ANY OTHER
TRENCHE3; UTILITIES NOT SHOWN HEREON WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS PLAN. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION, DEPTH,
C. TRENCH DEWATERING SYSTEMS (MUST DISCHARGE INTO SEDIMENT TRAPS, SEDIMENT PONDS, OR OTHER ACCEPTABLE MEANS); SIZE, TYPE AND CONDITION OF EXISTING U77LITY LINES AT CONNEC77ON OR
CROSSING POINTS BEFORE TRENCHING FOR NEW UTILITIES. ENGINEER ASSUMES
0. TRACKING AND SPILLING OF MATERMLS ON S7REETS DUE TO HAULING; NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY OF THE EXISTING
UTILITIES AND SITE FEATURES PRESENTED ON THESE DRAWINGS. ENGINEER
E DAILY CLEANUP AND STREET MAINTENANCE. SHALL BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY OF CONFLICTS THAT ARISE.
Z ADDITIONAL ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR LARGER DEVELOPMENTS. ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT THAT INCLUDES LAND DISTURBING 8. CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE AND PROTECT ALL UTILITIES DURING CONSTRUCTION
AC71VITIES CF GREATER THAN, OR EQUAL TO, ONE ACRE IN ADDITION TO MEETING THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS SET FOR774 ABOVE SHALL COMPLY WITH AND SHALL CONTACT THE UNDERGROUND UTIL171ES LOCATION SERVICE
ESC REQUIFEMENTS LISTED' BELOW. (1-800-424-5555) AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR To CONSTRUCTION.
9. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL COND17YONS AND DIMENSIONS AT THE PROJECT
OWNER/CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE& ESC MINIMUd REQUIREMENT - DELINEATE CLEARING AND EASEMENT LIMITS. IN THE FIELD, MARK CLEARING LIMITS ANDIOR ANY EASEMENTS, SETBACKS,
FOR EROSION CONTROL MI) DRAINAC-E SENSITIVE10?177CAL AREAS AND 7HE BUFFERS, TREES AND DRAINAGE COURSES. SITE BEFORE STARTING WORK AND SHALL NOTIFY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE OF
ANY DISCREPANCIES.
9. ESC MINIMLM REQUIREMENT - SEDIMENT TRAPPING. PRIOR TO LEAVING THE SITE, STORM WATER RUNOFF SHALL PASS THROUGH A SEDIMENT POND OR 10. PIPE LENG7HS WHERE SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE AND MAY CHANGE DUE TO
SEDIMENT 7RAP, OR OTHER APPROPRIATE BMPS. SEDIMENT PONDS AND TRAPS, PERIMETER DIKES, SEDIMENT BARRIERS, AND 0774ER BMPS INTENDED TO
Z TRAP SEDIMENT ON -SITE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS A FIRST STEP IN GR40ING. THESE BMPS SHALL BE FUNC77ONAL BEFORE LAND DISTURBING FIELD CONDITIONS.
ACTIVITIES TAKE PLACE. EARTHEN STRUCTURES, SUCH AS DAMS, DIKES, AND DIVERSIONS SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED ACCORDING TO AN
APPROVED TIMETABLE 11. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT (WHERE
APPLICABLE) AND SHALL THOROUGHLY FAMILIARIZE HIMSELF WITH THE CONTENTS
c) 10. ESC MINIMLM REQUIREMENT - CUT AND FILL SLOPES. CUT AND FILL SLOPES SHALL BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED IN A MANNER THAT WILL THEREOF. ALL SITE WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH
THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THIS REPORT.
MINIMIZE EFOSION. IN ADDITION, SLOPES SHALL BE STABILIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ESC REQUIREMENT NO. Z 1Z SIRUCTLIRAL FILL MATERIAL AND PLACEMENT SHALL CONFORM TO THE
11. ESC MINIMUd REQUIREMENT - CONTROLLING OFF -SITE EROSION. PROPERTIES AND WATER WAYS DOWNSTREAM FROM DEVELOPMENT SITES SHALL BE RECOMMENDA71ONS OF THE PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL REPORT.
PROTECTED FROM EROSION DUE TO INCREASES IN THE VOLUME, VELOCITY, AND PEAK FLOW RATE OF STORM WATER RUNOFF FROM THE PROJECT SITE.
12. ESC MWIMLM REQUIREMENT - STABIL12ATION OF TEMPORARY CONVEYANCE CHANNELS AND OUTLETS. ALL TEMPORARY ON -SITE CONVEYANCE CHANNELS 13. MANHOLES, CATCH BASINS, UTILITIES AND PAVEMENT SHALL BEAR ON MEDIUM
SHALL BE LESIGNED, CONSTRUCTED AND STABILIZED TO PREVENT EROSION FROM THE EXPECTED VELOCITY OF FLOW FROM A TWO-YEAR, 24-HOUR DENSE TO VERY DENSE NATIVE SOIL OR COMPACTED STRUCTURAL FILL. IF SOIL
FREQUENCY STORM FOR THE DEVELOPED CONDITION. STABILVTION ADEQUATE TO PREVENT EROSION OF OUTLETS, ADJACENT STREAM BANKS, SLOPES /S DISTURBED, SOFT, LOOSE, WET OR IF ORGANIC MATER14L IS PRESENT AT
AND DOWNSTREAM REACHES SHALL BE PROVIDED AT THE OUTLETS OF ALL CONVEYANCE SYS7EMS. SUBGRAIDE ELEVATION, REMOVE AND REPLACE WITH COMPACTED STRUCTURAL
FILL PER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
EX. H 0 U,' 13. ESC MINIMLM REQUIREMENT - STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION. ALL STORM DR41N INLETS MADE OPERABLE DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE 14. SEE SURVEY AND ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR DIMENSIONS AND LOCATIONS
PROTECTED SO THAT STORM WATER RUNOFF SHALL NOT ENTER THE CONVEYANCE SYSTEM W17HOUT FIRST BEING FILTERED OR OTHERWISE TREATED TO
REMOVE SEDIMENT. OF BUILDINGS, LANDSCAPED AREAS AND OTHER PROPOSED OR EXISTING S17E
FEATURES.
14. ESC REQUIREMENT - REMOVAL OF TEMPORARY BMPS. ALL TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL 8MPS SHALL BE REMOVED Wf7HW 30 DAYS 15. SEE ARCHITECTURAL *DRAWINGS FOR PERIMETER FOUNDA77ON DRAINS.
5 AFTER FINAL S17E STABILIZATION IS ACHIEVED OR AFTER THE TEMPORARY BMPS ARE NO LONGER NEEDED. TRAPPED SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED OR FOUNDA77ON DRAINS SHALL BE INDEPENDENT OF OTHER SITE DRAIN LINES AND
STAVILIZED ON SITE. DISTURBED SOIL AREAS RESULTING FROM REMOVAL SHALL BE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED. SHALL BE 77GHTLINED TO THE STORM DRAW SYSTEM WHERE INDICA7ED ON THE
15. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENT - DEWATERING CONSTRUCTION SITES. DEWATERING SYSTEMS SHALL DISCHARGE INTO A SEDIMENT TRAP PLANS.
OR SEDIMENT POND.
16. ALL REQUIRED STORMWATER FACILITIES MUST BE CONSTRUCTED AND IN
16. ER05ION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENT - CONTROL OF POLLUTANTS OTHER THAN SEDIMENT ON CONSTRUCTION SITES. ALL POLLUTANTS OTHER OPERA71ON PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY PAVEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE
THAN SEDIMENT THAT OCCUR ON SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE HANDLED AND DISPOSED OF IN A MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER.
CONIAMINATON OF STORM WATER. 1Z ALL ROOF DRAINS, PERIMETER FOUNDATION DRAINS, CATCH BASINS AND OTHER
1Z ER03ION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENT - FINANCIAL LIABILITY, PERFORMANCE BONDING, OR OTHER APPROPRIATE FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS, O(TERNAL DRAINS SHALL BE CONNECTED TO THE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM,
SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR ALL PROJECTS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPROVED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN. [ORD. 3013 § 1, UNLESS N07ED OTHERWISE.
199,91. 18. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AND PAY FOR ALL PERMITS REQUIRED FOR
COWSTRUCTIONSEJOUEMCE ThE 12 ELEMENTS OF TESC BAV INSTALLATION OF ALL SITE IMPROVEMENTS INDICATED ON THESE DRAWINGS.
1. SCHEDULE A PRE -CONSTRUCTION MEETING WITH CITY ENGINEERING DIVISION AT ELEMENT il - MARK CLEARING LIMITS: 19. AS A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT, ALL DISTURBED AREAS ON AND OFF SITE SHALL
425-771-0220, E)(T. 1326. LIMIT OF CONSTRUCTION ARE CLEARLY MARKED. RE RETURNED TO THE EQUIVALENT OF THEIR RECONSTRUC77ON CONDITION IN
ACCORDANCE WITH APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS
- - - - - - --- - - - - - - - 2. REVIEW ESC MOTES. ELEMENT #2 - ESTABLISH CONSTRUCTION ACCESS: 20. ALL DISTURBED SOIL AREAS SHAH BE SEEDED OR STABILIZED By OTHER
3. CALL FOR U71LITY LOCATES. A STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE IS SHOWN. ACCEPTABLE METHODS FOR THE PREVENTION OF ON -SITE EROSION AFTER THE
ELEMENT #3 - CONTROL FLOW RATES: COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION SEE EROSION CONTROL PLANS FOR SPECIFIC
4. INSTALL ESC MEASURES AND MAINTAIN DUST CONTROL. INFILTRATION TRENCH IS PROPOSED. GR40ING AND EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS.
5. HAVE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES INSPECTED BY CITY OF EDMONDS CITY ELEMENT J4 - INSTALL SEDIMENT CONTROLS: 21. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP OFF -SITE STREETS CLEAN AT ALL 77MES BY
ENGINEERING INSPECTOR. (ALL TEMPORARY SEDIMENTA77ON AND EROSION CONTROL SILT FENCE, INLET PROTECTION AND MULCH ARE PROPOSED. SWEEPING. WASHING OF THESE STREETS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED WITHOUT PRIOR
APPROVAL.
MEASURES MUST BE IN PLACE AND INSPECTED PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION OR SITE
CLEARING. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRAC77CES ANDIOR DEVICES SHALL BE ELEMENT #5 - STABILIZE SOILS.
MAINTAINED UmL PERMANENT VEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED). SOIL STABILIZATION IS ACHIEVED BY MULCHING, PLASTIC COVERING AND 22. THIS PROJECT IS NOT A BALANCED EARTHWORK PROJECT. BOTH EXPORT AND
SEEDS. IMPORT OF SOIL AND ROCK MATERIALS ARE REQUIRED.
_ss i 5:2�_ ss 6. ROUGH GRADE SITE AS REQUIRED TO INSTALL DR41NAGE FEATURES.
I n . I ELEMENT J6 - PROTECT SLOPE- 23. SLOPE OF FINISHED GRADE SHALL BE CONSTANT BETWEEN FINISHED
'LPROPOSED ROCKERYI�EX- GAS LINE 7. DEMOLISH EKSTING STRUCTURES. SLOPES ARE PROTECTED BY PLASTIC COVERING, MULCHING AND CONTOURS OR SPOT ELEVATIONS SHOWN
G - G G EXIS77NG VEGETATION. 24. FINISH GRADE SHALL SLOPE AWAY FROM BUILDING WALLS AT MINIMUM 57.
(4' MAX) 8. CLEAR, GRUB & ROUGH GRADE REMAINDER OF SITE. REVEGEFATE DISTURBED AREAS ELEMENT J7- PR07ECT DRAIN INLETS. SLOPE FOR A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF 10 FEET.
\ I NOT SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL SURFACE DISTURBANCE IMMEDIATELY A17ER ROUGH INLET PROTECTIONS ARE PROPOSED FOR THE STORM DRAINS.
(S EE DETAIL ON C2) TEMP. GRADING. (07YER EXPOSED AREAS SHALL RE STABILIZED PER EROSION CONTROL NOTES 25, CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AND SHALL INSTALL AND MAINTAIN
CONSTRUCTION BELOW). ELEMENTJ8 - STABILIZE CHANNELS AND OUTLETS: SHORING AND ORACING AS NECESSARY TO PROTECT WORKERS, EXISTwG
Hp- OUTLET PROTECTIONS ARE NOT PROPOSED. BUILDINGS, STREETS, WALKWAYS, UTILITIES AND OTHER EXISTING AND PROPOSED
N 89'25'06 w 330.21' __o 9. INSTAI I UTIL171ES AND OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS. IMPROVEMENTS AND EXCAVATIONS AGAINST LOSS OF GROUND OR CAVING
ENTRANCE' EMBANKMENTS. CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVAL OF
- 10. STABILIZE AND REVEGETATE ENTIRE SITE. ELEMENT J9 CONTROL POLLUTANTS: SHORING AND BR4CWG, AS REQUIRED.
ALL VEHICLES, EQUIPMENT AND PETROLEUM PRODUCT
ELM S, TPXE TURES STORAGEIDISPERSING AREAS WILL BE INSPECTED REGULARLY TO 26. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN APPROVAL MOM THE CITY AND FOLLOW CITY
0 H p 11. ESTABLISH LAVDSCAPING AND PERMANENT VEGETATION. EROSION CONTROL FEA DETECT ANY LEAKS OF SPILLS, AND TO IDENTIFY MAINTENANCE NEEDS
CAN BE REMCMED UPON FINAL SITE STABILIZ4TION AND APPROVAL BY CITY INSPECTOR. AND PREVENT LEAKS OF SPILLS. PROCEDURES FOR ALL WATER SERVICE INTERRUPTIONS, HYDRANT SHUTOFFS,
3' lv�a A 6 ive d rv, �4j STREET CLOSURES OR OTHER ACCESS RESTRICTIONS. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT
/GRATE ELEMENT JIO - CONTROL DEWATEITING. RELOCATE OR ELIMINATE ANY HYDRANTS WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING WR17TEN
THESE WILL BE NO DEW47FRING AS PART OF THIS CONSTRUCTION APPROVAL FROM THE FIRE MARSHAL
PROJECT.
"ppi-JOVED PLANNING
Hp- TILITY CONNECTIONS, UTILITY RELOCATIONS
ANDIOR SER CE TERRUPTIONS WITH THE AFFECTED OWNERS AND
ELEMENT ill- MAINTAIN BMP's: APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANIES. CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING U77LMES SHALL
CONC. CURB ALL TESC BMPS SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND REPAIRED AS NEEDED.
/-I\C�B BE MADE ONLY WITH ADVANCE WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE AUTHORITIES
ELEMENT J12 - MANAGE THE PROJECT. GOVERNING SAID UTILITIES.
THIS COULD BE ACHIEVED BY MINIMIZING THE EXTENT AND DURATION
OF THE AREA EXPOSED AND BY EMPHASIZING EROSION CONTROL THEN 28. EXIS71NG UTILITY LINES IN SERVICE WHICH ARE DAMAGED TO CONCSTRUCTION
SEDIMENT CONTROL. WORK SHALL BE REPLACED AT CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE AND INSPECTED AND
MIN. RADIUS
QUARRY SPALLS
2-4" MIN DIA
8"-12" MIN. DEPTH
CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN TEMPORARY ",�
1Z PROVIDE FULL WIDTH OF INGRESS/
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE DURING THE EGRESS AREA
CONSTRUCTION PERIOD,
CITY INSPECTION REQUIRED ON ALL EROSION CONTRO
MEASURES BEFORE WORK CAN BEGIN,
STABLLMED CONSTRUCTIONENTRANCE
NOT TO SCALE SID DTL. EI.2
STRAW BALES MAY BE USED IN
CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES (SEE
DETAIL E111), THIS APPLICATION
SHALL BE MAINTAINED AT ALL
TIMES DURING CONSTRICTION
PERIOD,
TEAVOK4R Y SEDIAENT TRAP FOR CATCH BASINS
NOT TO SCALE STO DTL. EI.3
ACCEPTED BY CIIY OF EDMONDS AND OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR To
BACKFILLING.
29. NEW U77UIY LOCATIONS ARE GENERALLY SHOWN BY DIMENSION, WHERE NO
DIMENSIONS ARE INDICATED, LOCA77ONS MAY BE SCALED FROM DRAWINGS.
FIELD ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE APPROVED BY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE AND
AND CITY.
30. WHERE NEW PIPE CLEARS AN EXISTING OR NEW UTIL17Y BY 6" OR LESS, PLACE
POLYETHYLENE PLAS77C FOAM AS A CUSHION BETWEEN THE UTILITIES.
31. SEE MECHANICAL DRAWINGS (WHERE APPLICABLE) FOR CONTINUA77ON OF SITE
OTIL177ES WITHIN THE BUILDING.
32. SEE ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS (WHERE APPLICABLE) FOR EXTERIOR ELECTRICAL
WORK.
ff,(LflT CONFLICTIVOEE.- 33. SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS (WHERE APPLICABLE) FOR SITE IRRIGATION
SYSTEM.
CA UTIO) V -
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING THE LOCATION,
DIMENSION, AND DEPTH OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHETHER SHOWN ON
THESE PLANS OR NOT, BY POTHOLING THE UTILITIES AND SURVEYING THE
HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL LOCATION PRIOR TO CONSTRUCRON. THIS AND
THEN SHALL INCLUDE CALLING UTILITY LOCATE 0 1-800-424-5555
POTHOLING ALL OF THE EXISTING UTILITIES AT LOCATIONS OF NEW V77LITY WA rn
CROSSINGS TO PHYSICALLY VERIFY WHETHER OR NOT CONFUCT5 EXIST
LOCA77ONS OF SAID U17LI77ES AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS ARE BASED rn
UPON THE UNVERIFIED PUBLIC INFORMATION AND ARE SUBJECT TO
VARIATION. IF CONFLICTS SHOULD OCCUR, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL
-n
CONSULT WITH INSIGHT ENGINEERING COMPANY TO RESOLVE ALL
PROBLEMS PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION. 36499
/-I A -1 -t S T "0'
LltiLL TWO (2) BUSENESSIDA YS
BEFORE YOUMIG 1-80041..,241-5555
BN
FOUND CONC. MON
IN CASE WITH 2" BRASS DOME
EL. 109.50'
DA
NAVD 88
GA WING 9 U W. T, fFIES.
CUT. 405 Cu.Yds.
FILL: 80 Cu. Yds.
(GRADING QUANTITIES WERE CALCULATED USING THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT DESKTOP COMPOSITE METHOD. CALCULATIONS DO NOT
ACCOUNT FOR SOIL SWELLING AND SHRINKAGE.)
iVOTE.-
1. EXCESS CUT MAY BE SPREAD ON SITE.
2. ANY SOIL REMOVED FROM THE SITE MUST BE HAULED TO A CITY
APPROVED SITE.
TE. S C. LEGE%D
- SF_ SF
SILT FENCE
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION
ENTRANCE
CATCH BASIN INSERT
PROTEC77ON (TYR)
CLEARING LIMITS
MULCH &IOR STRAW MA77ING
PLASTIC COVER
FLOW ARROW (EX.)
ENGINEER
SURVEYOR
INSIGHT ENGINEERING COMPANY
PACIFIC COAST SURVEYS, INC.
PO BOX1478
PO BOX IJ619
EVERETT, W4 98206
MILL CREEK, WA 98082
CONTACT. BRIAN R. KALAB, P.E.
CONTACT. DARREN J. RIDDLE
PH. (425) J03-9363
PH. (425) 508-4951
FAX. (425) 303-9362
FAX. (425) 357--J577
,4 PPE [M) r / 0 W) VER
ECHELR4RGER INVESTMENTS, LLC
4001 198TH ST. SIM. SUITE 2
LYNNWOOD, WA 980J6
PH. (425) 67J-1100
LEGAL DESCRIP)rIO)V
PARCEL A
CITY OF EDMONDS LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LL-2000-67
AS RECORDED UNDER AF NO. 200008085002
RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUW, WASHINGTON.
SITE ADDRESS. 209 ELM STREET
EDMONDS, WA
TAX ACCOUNT NO.'S.- 00937900000700
CITY OF EDMONDS
APPR 0 VED FOR CONS 7R UCTION
FOR:
, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE
I REV. NO. I DESCRIPTION I INITIALS I 'DATE I
INSIGHT ENGINEERING CO.
P.O. BOX - 1478
EVERETT, WA 98206
(425) 303-9363 (425) 303-9362 FAX
1NF0@1NSIGffrENGINEER1NG.NET
SITE ADDRESS. 209 ELM STREET
EDMONDS, WA RESUB
TAX ACCOUNT NO.'S. 00937900000700 AUG 16 2012
. L3UILDING DE,6FA�Rl�j EN'
CITY OF E NDS
SE 114, NE 114, SEC.26, T.27N., RJE., W.M.
ELM STREET
DWG FILENAME DESIGNED BY: DATE: I SCALE, JOB NO.:
110545-FINAL.DWG IJRC I; 1p�_ 10, 11-0545
SHEET
ci
GRADVVG AND TESC PLAN Of
2