21917 78TH PL W.PDF111111111111
6724
21917 78TH PL W
E
0
ADDRESS: �-7/67/7 797" Z91
TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL #:
BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE) #:
COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR:
CRITICAL AREAS #: DETERMINATION: Conditional Waiver- F1 Study Required Waiver
CRITICAL AREAS #: DETERMINATION: Conditional Waiver Study Required Waiver
DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S:
DRAINAGE PLAN DATED:
PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED:
EASEMENT(S) RECORD FOR:
PERMITS (OTHER — list permit #'s):
PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED:
SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED:
SEWER LID FEE $:
LID #:
SHORT PLAT FILE:
LOT:
BLOCK:
SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED:
SIDE SEWER PEkMIT(S) #:
GEOTECH REPORT DATED:
STREET USE/ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #:
FOR:
WATER METER TAP CARD DATED:
OTHER:
L:\TEMP\DST's\Forms\Jana's Street File Checklist 5-14-08.doc
A 0 Tv. E D
C-4
CITY OF EDMONDS — ENGINEERING DIVISION
SPECIAL INSPECTION AND TESTING AGREEMENT
PERMIT # bld20130020 DATE:
PROJECT SITE ADDRESS: 21917 78th Place W.
PROJECT NAME:. Belton Homes
SPECIAL INSPECTION AGENCY
*One form must be completed by each Special Inspection Agency or Inspector.
SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED: Special inspections are required for this project, as
applicable, in accordance with Title 18 Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). When
required, the project must be installed/constructed per approved plans and specifications. The owner or
the registered design professional in charge shall employ an independent testing/inspection agency/special
inspector to perform required special inspections. - The special inspector shall be -a qualified person with
competence for inspecting the specific,type of construction or operation requiring special inspection. The
owner, registered professional, contractor and special inspector/agency shall provid * e a special inspection
report detailing compliance with approved plans and specifications directly to the Engineering Division.
WORK REQURING SPECIAL INSPECTION: Special inspections' will be required for the following
categories' of work: FOR SPECIFIC INFORMATION REGARDING REQUIRED SPECIAL
INSPECTIONS SEE THE STATEMENT OF SPECIAL INSPECTION NOTED. AS A CONDITION ON
THE BUILDING PERMIT AND/OR ON THE APPROVED PLANS.
E] Permeable Pavement (asphalt, concrete, paving blocks, "grass-crete" and others)
E] Raingarden (Bioretention Cells)
X Erosion and Sediment Control
n Vegetated Roofs
X Drywell Construction
Retaining Wall Drainage:
RECEIVED
FE�- 2 d� 2013
DEVEL OPMENT SERVICES
COUNTER
BEFORE A PERMIT CAN BE ISSUED: The owner and contractor and special inspector shall
complete this agreement and return to a Permit Coordinator prior to permit issuance'.
APPROVAL OF SPECIAL INSPECTORS: Each special inspector shall be approved by the
Engineering Division prior to performing any duties or inspections. The credentials. of the specific person
performing the inspection shall be submitted. When applicable, the company performing inspections
must be accredited by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Of�icials
(AASHTO) R18.
A. Duties and Responsibilities of the Special Inspector
1. OBSERVE WORK
C:\Users\terri\AppData\Loca]\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Intemet Files\Content.Outlook\OW4VJGC6\Speciallnsp
b1d20130020.doc Revised 06.06.2012
The special inspector shall observe the site work for conformance with the approved (stamped)
plans and specific�tions. Special inspections are to be performed as needed, to confirm that the
work being completed.meets specifications and approved plans.
2. REPORT NONCONFORMING ITEMS
The special inspector shall bring non -conforming items to the immediate attention. of the
contractor and engineer of record. The special inspector shall provide a report to the Engineering
Division notifying of any items not resolved and/or not installed: per the approved plans -and
specifications.
Items not constructed per the approved plans and specifications will result in a review of the plans
to determine what requirements will be needed for the project to meet the, necessary stormwater
requirements; such as removal and reconstruction, re -design of the storniwater management
system(s), etc.
Final approval for the project will not occur until installation of all required improvements i's
complete and accepted by the Special Inspector and the City.
3. FINAL CONSTRUCTION REPORT
The special inspector or inspection agency shall submit a final signed report or Certificate of
Compliance to the City stating that all items requiring special inspection and testing were fulfilled ,
and reported. The report shall also include a statement from the inspector statmig'to the best. of
his/her knowledge the project is in conBarmance with the Approved plans, specifications, and
approved plan revisions, if any. Items not in conformance, unresolved items or any discrepancies
in inspection'coverage (i.e., missed inspections, periodic inspection when continuous inspections
were required, etc.) shall be specifically addressed in this report.
B. Contractor Responsibilities
1. NOTIFY THE SPECIAL INSPECTOR OF ALL REQUIRED SPECIAL INSPECTIONS
It is the duty of the contractor to notify the special inspector when work is ready for special
inspection. Note, the items listed under the statement of special inspection on the building permit
and as noted on the approved plans and specifications are required to have special inspections.*
Adequate notice shall be provided.by the contractor so that the special inspector has time to
become familiar with the project.- All work requiring special inspection must be approved prior to
concealing or covering said work.
2.- PROVIDE ACCESS TO APPROVED PLANS
The contractor is responsible for providing the special inspector access to approved plans at the.
jobsite.
3. RETAIN SPECIAL INSPECTION RECORDS
The contractbr is responsible to retain at the jobsite all special inspection records submitted by the
special inspector. These records are to be provided to the City Engineering inspector upon request
and upon completion of work.
C:\Users\terri\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Intemet Files\Content.Outlook\OW4VJGC6\Speciallngp
W20130020.doc Revised 06.06.2012
C. City of Edmonds Eneineering Division Responsibilities
1. APPROVE SPECIAL INSPECTION
T'he Engineering Division shall approve all Special Inspectors and special inspection requirements.
2. MONITOR SPECIAL INSPECTIONS AND APPROVE REPORTS
Work requiring special inspection and performance of special inspectors shall be monitored by the
Engineering Division Inspector. Engineering. Inspector approval must be obtained prior to
placement of concrete or other similar activities in addition to that of the special inspector.
3. - FINAL APPROVAL
The'Engineering Division may provide final inspection approval after the special inspection
report(s) have been submitted and accepted by the City.
D. Owner Responsibilities
1. The project owner or the engineer or architect of record acting as the owner's agent shall fund
special inspection semces.
E. Eneineer or Architect of Record Responsibilities
1. Prepare Statement of Special Inspections.
2. Review the special inspection reports and provide corrective action for work dial may not conform
to the approved plans.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I kave read and agree to comply with tke term and conddions of this, amemenit
Owner name
Signat
General Contractor Compf
Signature-z-:4-
Special
Engineer of Record name
(please print or type)
Signature 'Date
CADocuments and Settings\ray.cog1as\Loca1 SettingskTemporary Intemet FileskOLK5\Special Insp blc[20130019 Lot 09 2-14-
13.doc Revised 06.06.2012
L)
Return the original signed agreement to:
City of Edmonds Development Services Department
121 5'h Avenue North, City Hall Second Floor
Edmonds, WA 98020
ACCEPTED BY CITY OF "MO�iDS NGINE G DIVISION:
cR42(c)
City Official Signature- Date
N
Title: LnAineay--
I
C:\Users\tem\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Intemet Files\Content.Outlook\OW4VJGC6\SpecialInsp
b1d20130020.doc Revised 06.06.2012
PLANNINGDATA
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
IFSTREETFILE
Name: ri yy.D-
Date: 7-
Site Address:
Tax Parcel 600 0100 0
Project Description:
Plan Check #:
�1
'zL-Z>2o30 0;)-L)
Reduced Site Plan Provided: (YES 00
Zoninq: v, 67 -2:@
Map Page:
Corner Lot: (YES /(�N;o -rF1'ag
Lot: (YES
Critical Areas Determination #! - D
El Study Required
WWaiver
SEPA Determination: AA-1-2 �,a,-J V-1.
Exempt
vl�
El
Needed (for over 500 cubic yards of grading)
0 Fee 0 Checklist 0 APO List with notarized form
Required Setbacks
—1
Street-
D- �-
Side:
0
Side:
1 S
Rear:
t;-
Actual Setbacks
Street:
Side: -T�oe:
Rear:
El Detached Structures:
Rockeries:
El Fences/Trellises:
1�k Bay Windows/Projecting Modulation:
El Stairs/Deck:
Buildin Heigh t
Datum Point:
Datum Elevation:
car-\"
Maximum Height Allowed:
Actual Height: L-1
Offier
Parking Required:
Parking Provided:
Lot Area:
Maximum Lot Coverage: 350/c, Proposed:
Lot Coverage Calculations:
ADU Created: (YES / NO)
Subdivision: o-7
Legal Nonconforming Land Use Determination Issued: (YES UO
Comments
f-& c,e-,,5.
�k, VQ- Va. J e-J kz,,, S-e-
ro -^e— Vn e
?�
Inc V� e, -J
Plan Review By: Yx\ , 46L-�
Planning Data Form 07-1+09.doc
PREPARED FOR
PHOENIX DEVELOPMENT, LLC
RECEIVED
January 27, 2012
Revised January 31, 2012 JAN 8 20V
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR-
CITY OF EDMONDS
Raymond A. Coglas, P.E.
Principal
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
STONEBRIDGE COURT
7723 AND 7807 - 220TH
STREET SOUTHWEST
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON W�A
ES-2295 111111;5 d'q0-tkj-S
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
1805-136 th Pl. Northeast, Bellevue, Washington 980052
Ph: 425-449-4704 Fax: 425-449-4711
Toll Free: 866-336-8710
STREET FILE
January 27, 2012
Revised January 31, 2012
ES-2295
Phoenix Development, LLC
16108 Ash Way, Suite 201
Lynnwood, Washington 98087
Attention: Ms. Loree Quade
Dear Ms. Quade:
Earth
Solutions
NW,tc
Earth Soilutions NW LLC
• Geotechnical Engineering
• ConstrUC6011 Monitoring
• Environmental Sciences
Earth Solutions NW, LLC (ESNW) is pleased to present this report titled "Geotechnical
Engineering Study, Stonebridge Court, 7723 and 7807 — 220th Street Southwest, Edmonds,
Washington". Based on the results of the geotechnical investigation, the proposed residential
development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. Soils are comprised. largely of silty
sand with gravel (weathered and unweathered) till deposits. The proposed residential
structures can be supported on conventional foundations bearing on competent, native soils or
structural fill placed as part of the site grading activities. Recommendations for foundation
design, earthwork, and other pertinent geotechnical recommendations are provided in this
report. If you have any questions regarding the content of this geotechnical engineering study,
please call.
Sincerely,
1/A7" SO TIONS NW, LILC
e`
Raymond A. C glas, P.E.
Principal
1805 - 136th Place N.E., Suite 2ol I BelleVL]e, WA96005 1 (425) 449-4704 * FAX (425) 449-4711
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ES-2296
1:7-ITC14
INTRODUCTION........... ..........................................................
General......................................... .......................... ... —
Proiect Description ........................................................... I
Surface............ ....................................................... ........ 2
Subsurface...... ...................................... ......................... 2
Geologic Setting .................................. .............. 2
Groundwater ........................................ ................ ............ 3
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......... ............................. 3
General...................................................... ...................... 3
Site Preparation and Earthwork .................................. .......... 3
In -situ Soils .............................................................. 3
Structural Fill Placement.. .......... .............................. 4
Subgrade Preparation ............... — ..................... ....... 5
Rockeries and Modular Block Walls ............................ 5
ErosionControl .............................................. ....... - 5
Excavations and Slopes ................................. .................. 5
Utility Trench Backfill ......................................................... 6
Detention Vault ..... .......... ............... .................. 6
Pavement Sections ............................................................ 6
Foundations.... � ......... ...................................................... 7
Slab -on -Grade Floors ....... .......................................... ...... 8
RetainingWalls ........................... ................ ......... ........ 8
Drainage................................................ ...................... — - 9
Seismic Considerations- .............. ........ ................................ 9
LIMITATIONS ....... ........ .............................. ...... ........ 9
Additional Services .............................. ............................. 9
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cont'd
ES-2295
GRAPHICS
PLATE I VICINITY MAP
PLATE 2 TEST PIT LOCATION PLAN
PLATE 3 FOOTING DRAIN DETAIL
APPENDICES
Appendix A Subsurface Exploration
Test Pit Logs
Appendix B Laboratory Test Results
Grain Size Distribution
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
STONEBRIDGE COURT
7723 AND 7807 — 220TH STREET SOUTHWEST
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
ES-2296
INTRODUCTION
General
This geotechnical engineering study was prepared for the proposed Stonebridge Court
residential development. The approximate location of the subject property is illustrated on the
Vicinity Map (Plate 1). This study provides geotechnical recommendations for the proposed
site development. Test pit excavations and laboratory testing of soil samples were completed
to characterize subsurface conditions. The scope of services for completing this geotechnical
engineering study included the following:
0 Subsurface exploration and characterization of the soil and groundwater conditions.
An assessment of overall site conditions with respect to the proposed grading and
earthwork activities.
Preparation of this geotechnical engineering study with recommendations for
foundation design, earthwork, and other pertinent geotechnical recommendations, as
necessary.
The following documents were reviewed as part of preparing this geotechnical engineering
study:
a Preliminary Site Plan and Topographic Survey prepared by LSA Engineers.
0 Geologic Map of the Edmonds Quadrangle, by Booth and Minard, 1992.
9 The NRCS soil survey online resource.
Project Description
Current development plans include construction a ten lot residential plat with associated
infrastructure improvements. The layout of the subject property with approximate existing
topography is illustrated on the Test Pit Location Plan (Plate 2). Grading activities will include
cuts and fills to establish the planned building lots and access roadway alignments. Site
improvements will also include underground utility installations and construction of a stormwater
detention vault and related water quality facilities. Final grading plans were being developed at
the time of this study. However, we estimate cuts and fills to establish finish grades will be on
the order of two to six feet on average. Engineered rockeries or modular block walls may also
be utilized as part of the overall grading plan.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Z
Phoenix Development, LLC
January 27, 2012
Revised January 31, 2012
ES-2295
Page 2
The proposed residential structures will consist of relatively lightly loaded wood framing
supported on conventional foundations. We anticipate the majority of the residential structures
will incorporate crawl space and slab -on -grade garage floors. Based on our experience with
similar developments, we estimate wall loads on the order of 2 kips per lineal foot and slab -on -
grade loading of 150 pounds per square foot (psf).
If the above design assumptions are incorrect or change, ESNW should be contacted to review
the recommendations in this report, and provide supplement recommendations, as appropriate.
Surface
The subject property is currently identified as 7723 and 7807 — 220th Street Southwest,
Edmonds, Washington. The total site area is on the order of 1.8 acres. The approximate limits
of the property are illustrated on the Test Pit Location Plan (Plate 2). The property was
previously developed as two residential properties. At the time this study was prepared, the
residential structures and related access drives associated with the previous development
were present (these structures will be removed as part of the planned development).
Vegetation throughout the site is variable, with localized areas that are densely vegetated.
Topography is relatively flat to gently sloping. From our review and site observations, there
are no geologically hazardous areas present on the property. An existing drainage ditch does
cross a portion of the property. We understand permanent conveyance through the property
will be installed as part of the final design.
Subsurface
Four test pits were excavated at the site for purposes of assessing soil and groundwater
conditions. The approximate locations of the test sites are illustrated on the Test Pit Location
Plan (Plate 2). Please refer to the test pit logs provided in Appendix A for a more detailed
description of the subsurface conditions.
Topsoil and duff were encountered to depths of approximately ten to 12 inches throughout the
majority of the site. Soils are comprised of silty sand with gravel associated with weathered and
unweathered glacial deposits. The upper (weathered) soil deposits were generally in a wet
condition (associated with winter season rains) at the time of the subsurface investigation. Soil
relative density, however, was observed to generally increase with depth. Due to the history of
past development, localized areas of fill may also be present throughout the site.
Geologic Sefting
The geologic map of the area identifies glacial till (Qvt) deposits throughout the site, and
surrounding areas. The Snohomish County soil survey (NRCS online resource) identifies
Alderwood series soils throughout the site. Based on the results of the subsurface
investigation, the soils observed at the test sites are generally consistent with the geologic map
and soil survey classifications.
Earth Solutions NK LLC
Z
Phoenix Development, LLC
January 27, 2012
Revised January 31, 2012
Groundwater
ES-2295
Page 3
Perched groundwater seepage was encountered at a depth of three feet at test pit location TP-
1 (January, 2012). The groundwater seepage zone generally coincided with a contact between
the weathered and unweathered till deposits. Perched groundwater seepage conditions were
not observed at the remaining test pit locations. Where deep excavations are planned, or
where a contact between the weathered and unweathered till is encountered, zones of
groundwater seepage may be encountered. Groundwater seepage rates and elevations
fluctuate depending on many factors, including precipitation duration and intensity, the time of
year, and soil conditions.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
Based on the results of our study, the proposed residential development is feasible from a
geotechnical standpoint. The proposed residential structures can be supported on competent
native soil or structural fill placed as part of the site grading activities. Throughout the cut areas
of the site, we anticipate competent native soil suitable for support of foundations will generally
be exposed at the design subgrade elevations. Where fill areas are proposed, compaction of
the soils to structural fill specifications described later in this study will be necessary.
This study has been prepared for the exclusive use of Phoenix Development, LLC and their
representatives. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This study has been prepared in
a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the
profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area.
Site Preparation and Earthwork
The primary geotechnical considerations during the proposed site preparation and earthwork
activities will involve the overall cut and fill activities, structural fill placement and compaction,
underground utility installations, and final building and pavement area subgrade preparation.
We anticipate the mass grading will utilize a balanced approach, with cut soils used as
structural fill elsewhere on -site.
In -situ Soils
From a geotechnical standpoint, the silty sand deposits encountered at the test sites are
generally suitable for use as structural fill. The moisture sensitivity of the silty sand deposits
can generally be characterized as moderate to high. Due to the moisture sensitive nature of the
silty sand soil, successful use of the soil will largely be dictated by the moisture content at the
time of placement and compaction.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Phbenix Development, LLC
January 27, 2012
Revised January 31, 2012
ES-2295
Page 4
If the on -site soils cannot be successfully compacted, the use of an imported soil may be
necessary. Imported soil intended for use as structural fill should consist of a well graded
granular soil with a maximum aggregate grain size of six inches, and a moisture content that is
at or near the optimum level. During wet weather conditions, imported soil intended for use as
structural fill should consist of a well graded granular soil with a fines content of 5 percent or
less defined as the percent passing the #200 sieve, based on the minus three-quarter inch
fraction.
Structural Fill Placement
In general, areas to receive structural fill should be sufficiently stripped of organic matter and
other deleterious material. The geotechnical engineer should observe cleared and stripped
areas of the site prior to structural fill placement.
Structural fill is defined as compacted soil placed in foundation, slab -on -grade, and roadway
areas. Fills placed to construct permanent slopes and throughout rockery, retaining wall, and
utility trench backfill areas are also considered structural fill. Soils placed in structural areas
should be compacted to a relative compaction of 90 percent, based on the maximum dry
density as determined by the Modified Proctor Method (ASTM D-1557-02) and placed in
maximum 12 inch lifts. In pavement areas, the upper 12 inches of the structural fill should be
compacted to a relative compaction of at least 95 percent.
Subgrade Preparation
Following site stripping and removal of the existing single family residences cuts and fills will be
completed to establish the proposed subgrade levels throughout the site. The geotechnical
engineer should observe the subgrade during the initial site preparation activities to confirm soil
conditions and to provide supplement recommendations, for subgrade preparation, if necessary.
The process of removing the existing building structures may produce voids where the old
foundations are removed, and where basement or crawl space areas may have been present.
Thorough restoration of any voids from old foundation and basement areas must be completed
as part of the overall subgrade and building pad preparation activities. The following guidelines
for preparing the building subgrade areas should be incorporated into the final design:
Where voids and related demolition disturbances extend below the planned subgrade
level, restoration of these areas should be completed. Structural fill should be used to
restore voids or unstable areas resulting from the existing building removal.
Re -compact or overexcavate and replace areas of existing fill (if present) exposed at the
building subgrade elevation. The geotechnical engineer should confirm subgrade
conditions and the required level of re -compaction or overexcavation and replacement
during the site preparation activities. Overexcavations should extend to competent
(medium dense) native soils and replaced with structural fill.
The geotechnical engineer should confirm overall suitability of the prepared subgrade
areas following the site work activities.
Earth Solutions NK LLC
Phoenix Development, LLC
January 27, 2012
Revised January 31, 2012
Rockeries and Modular Block Walls
ES-2295
Page 5
Rockery or modular block wall construction may be necessary as part of the earthwork and
grading activities. Based on the soil conditions and our understanding of the proposed
earthwork, the use of rockeries or modular block walls is feasible from a geotechnical
standpoint. In general, the soils observed throughout the site exhibit good soil strength
characteristics, and are suitable for cut rockery construction. Where fills will be utilized, geogrid
reinforced fill will be necessary as part of rockery or modular block wall construction. A formal
design should be completed once the final wall alignments and proposed heights have been
established. The design should include approximate wall alignments, with top and bottom
elevations depicted. Supporting engineering calculations and construction details should also
be included as part of a rockery or modular block wall design.
Erosion Control
Temporary erosion control measures should include, at a minimum, silt fencing placed along
the downslope perimeter of the construction envelope, and a construction entrance consisting
of quarry spalls, as necessary, to minimize off -site soil tracking and to provide a firm surface.
Surface water should not'be allowed to flow over any temporary or permanent slopes.
Interceptor drains or swales should be considered for controlling surface water flow patterns.
The geotechnical engineer should observe the erosion control measures, and provide
supplement recommendations for minimizing erosion during construction, as necessary.
Excavations and Slopes
The Federal and state Occupation Safety and Health Administration (OSHA/WISHA) classifies
soils in terms of minimum safe slope inclinations. Based on the soil conditions encountered
during our fieldwork, the site soils would be classified by OSHA/WISHA as Types B and C.
Temporary slopes over four feet in height in Types B and C soils should be sloped no steeper
than 1H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical) or 1.5H:1V, respectively. The geotechnical engineer should
observe temporary and permanent slopes to confirm that the inclination is appropriate, and to
provide additional grading recommendations, as necessary. If temporary slopes cannot be
constructed in accordance with OSHA/WISHA guidelines, temporary shoring may be
necessary.
Permanent slopes should maintain a gradient of 2HAV, or flatter, and should be planted with an
appropriate species of vegetation to enhance stability and to minimize erosion.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Phoenix Development, LLC
January 27, 2012
Revised January 31, 2012
Utility Trench Backfill
ES-2295
Page 6
In our opinion, the soils observed at the test sites are generally suitable for support of utilities.
Excessively loose, organic, or otherwise unsuitable soils encountered in the trench excavations
should not be used for supporting utilities. In general, the on -site soils observed at the test sites
should be suitable for use as structural backfill in the utility trench excavations, provided the soil
is at or near the optimum moisture content at the time of placement and compaction. Moisture
conditioning of the soils may be necessary at some locations prior to use as structural fill. Utility
trench backfill should be placed and compacted to the specifications of structural fill provided in
this report, or to the applicable specifications of the city or other applicable jurisdiction or
agency.
Detention Vault
Competent native soils, suitable for support of vault foundations are anticipated to be exposed
at the vault subgrade elevations. For design, the following geotechnical parameters should be
used:
e Allowable Soil Bearing Capacity
9 Active Earth Pressure (Yielding Wall)
* At -Rest Earth Pressure (Restrained Wall)
* Soil Unit Weight
a Active Earth Pressure Coefficient (Ka)
0 At -Rest Earth Pressure Coefficient (Ko)
5,000 psf (dense native)
35 pcf
50 pcf
125 pcf
0.28
0.40
The geotechnical engineer should observe the vault excavation to confirm soil and groundwater
conditions. As necessary, supplement geotechnical recommendations for foundation support
will be provided.
Pavement Sections
The performance of site pavements is largely related to the condition of the underlying
subgrade. To ensure adequate pavement performance, the subgrade should be in a firm and
unyielding condition when subjected to proofrolling with a loaded dump truck. Structural fill in
pavement areas should be compacted to the specifications detailed in the "Site Preparation and
Earthwork" section of this report. It is possible that soft, wet, or otherwise unsuitable subgrade
areas may still exist after base grading activities. Areas containing unsuitable or yielding
subgrade conditions will require remedial measures such as overexcavation and thicker
crushed rock or structural fill sections prior to pavement.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Ph;enix Development, LLC
January 27, 2012
Revised January 31, 2012
ES-2295
Page 7
For relatively lightly loaded pavements subjected to automobiles and occasional truck traffic,
the following pavement sections can be considered for preliminary design purposes:
Two inches of asphalt concrete (AC) placed over four inches of crushed rock base
(CRB), or;
* Two inches of AC placed over three inches of asphalt treated base (ATB).
Main access drives and heavier truck -traffic areas generally require thicker pavement sections
depending on site usage, pavement life expectancy, and site traffic. ESNW can provide
appropriate pavement section design recommendations for truck traffic areas and City of
Edmonds right-of-way improvements, as necessary. Additionally, the City of Edmonds Road
Standards may supersede the recommendations provided in this report.
Foundations
Based on the results of our study, the proposed residential structures can be supported on
conventional spread and continuous footings bearing on competent native soil or structural fill.
We anticipate competent native soil suitable for support of foundations will generally be
exposed throughout the proposed cut areas of the site. Building pad fill areas should be
compacted to the specifications of structural fill previously described in this report. Where loose
or unsuitable soil conditions are encountered at foundation subgrade elevations, compaction of
the soils to the specifications of structuralfill, or overexcavation and replacement with structural
fill may be necessary.
For design the following parameters can be used for the foundation design:
v Allowable soil bearing capacity 2,500 psf
* Passive Resistance 350 pcf
* Coefficient of Friction 0.40
The passive resistance value provided above assumes the foundations are backfilled with
structural fill. A facto r-of-safety of 1.5 has been applied to these passive resistance and friction
values.
For short term wind and seismic loading, a one-third increase in the allowable soil bearing
capacity can be assumed.
With structural loading as expected, total settlement in the range of one inch is anticipated, with
differential settlement of approximately one-half of an inch. The majority of the settlements
should occur during construction, as dead loads are applied.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Ph�enix Development, LLC
January 27, 2012
Revised January 31, 2012
Slab -On -Grade Floors
ES-2295
Page 8
Slab -on -grade floors for the residential structures should be supported on competent native soil
or structural fill. Unstable or yielding areas of the subgrade should be recompacted or
overexcavated and replaced with suitable structural fill prior to construction of the slab. A
capillary break consisting of a minimum of four inches of free draining crushed rock or gravel
should be placed below the slab. The free draining material should have a fines content of 5
percent or less (percent passing the #200 sieve, based on the minus three-quarter inch
fraction). In areas where slab moisture is undesirable, installation of a vapor barrier below the
slab should be considered.
Retaining Walls
Site retaining walls should be designed to resist earth pressures and any applicable surcharge
loads. For design, the following parameters can be assumed for retaining wall design:
e Active Earth Pressure (Yielding Wall)
9 At -Rest Earth Pressure (Restrained Wall)
* Traffic Surcharge (Passenger Vehicles)
0 Passive Resistance
* Coefficient of Friction
e Allow. Soil Bearing Capacity
35 pcf (equivalent fluid)
50 pcf
70 psf (rectangular distribution)
350 pef (equivalent fluid)
0.40
2,500 psf
Additional surcharge loading from foundations, sloped backfill, or other loading should be
included in the retaining wall design, as appropriate. Drainage should be provided behind
retaining walls such that hydrostatic pressures do not develop. If drainage is not provided,
hydrostatic pressures should be included in the wall design, as appropriate. The geotechnical
engineer should review retaining wall designs to verify that appropriate earth pressure values
have been incorporated into design, and to provide additional recommendations, as necessary.
Retaining walls should be backfilled with free draining material that extends along the height of
the wall, and a distance of at least eighteen (18) inches behind the wall. The upper one foot of
the wall backfill can consist of a less permeable (surface seal) soil, if desired. A rigid,
perforated drain pipe should be placed along the base of the wall, and connected to an
appropriate discharge location. Where desired, the use of a sheet drain in lieu of free draining
backfill can be considered. However, the geotechnical engineer should review the proposed
use of sheet drain on a case by case basis, and provide supplement drainage
recommendations, as appropriate.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Ph'Oenix Development, LLC
January 27, 2012
Revised January 31, 2012
Drainage
ES-2295
Page 9
Perched groundwater seepage was encountered at one test pit location (TP-1). In our opinion,
the presence of groundwater seepage should be expected within the deeper site excavations.
Where localized zones of groundwater seepage are encountered, temporary measures to
control groundwater seepage may be needed.
In our opinion, perimeter drains should be installed at or below the invert of the building footing
foundations. A typical footing drain detail is provided on Plate 3 of this report.
Seismic Considerations
The 2009 International Building Code specifies several soil profiles that are used as a basis for
seismic design of structures. Based on the soil conditions observed at the test sites, Site Class
C, from table 1613.5.2, should be used for design. In our opinion, liquefaction susceptibility at
this site is low. The medium dense to dense relative density of the site soils and the absence of
an established shallow groundwater table is the primary basis for this conclusion.
LIMITATIONS
The recommendations and conclusions provided in this geotechnical engineering study are
professional opinions consistent with the level of care and skill that is typical of other members
in the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. A warranty is not
expressed or implied. Variations in the soil and groundwater conditions observed at the test
sites may exist, and may not become evident until construction. ESNW should reevaluate the
conclusions in this geotechnical engineering study if variations are encountered.
Additional Services
ESNW should have an opportunity to review the final design with respect to the geotechnical
recommendations provided in this report, ESNW should also be retained to provide testing and
consultation services during construction.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
m
NORTH
Snohomish County, Washington sk
Map 455
By The Thomas Guide, Vicinity Map
Rand McNally Stonebridge Court
32nd Edition Edmonds, Washington
NOTE: This plate may contain areas of color. ESNW cannot be Drwn. GILS Date01/27/2012 Proj. No. 2295
responsible for any subsequent misinterpretation of the information
resulting from black & white reproductions of this plate. Checked RAC Date Jan. 2012 Plate 1
394 392 388
7
394 7
4
394
5
TIP
/�4
F-
3.941,
392
kA
-A
F .77
3,90'
3 eterifionVault
U
�84
po
-'Op
en ecreationi Space�;,.,
388 38)6
220TH STRIET S.W
NORTH
111=60'
Scale in Feet
NOTE: The graphics shown on this plate are not intended for design
purposes or precise scale measurements, but only to illustrate the
approximate test locations relative to the approximate locations of
existing and / or proposed site features. The information illustrated
is largely based on data provided by the client at the time of our
study. ESNW cannot be responsible for subsequent design changes
or interpretation of the data by others.
00
LEGEND
Approximate
Location of ESNW
TP 1 Test Pit, Proj. No.
ES-2295, Jan. 201
Subject Site
Existing Building
Proposed Building
Footprint
- -
F
E 0 1h,
S lutions
olutions
N W LLc
W LLC
Test Pit Location Plan
Stonebridge Court
Edmonds, Washington
NOTE: This plate may contain areas of color. ESNW cannot be Drvvn- GLS Date 01/27/2012 Proj. No. 2295
responsible for any subsequent misinterpretation of the information I
resulting from black & white reproductions of this plate. Checked RAC I Date Jan. 2012 1 Plate 2
Perforated Rigid Drain Pipe
(Surround with 1" Rock)
NOTES:
Do NOT tie roof downspouts
to Footing Drain.
Surface Seal to consist of
12" of less permeable, suitable
soil. Slope away from building.
LEGEND:
EESurface Seal; native soil or
other low permeability material.
I" Drain Rock
SCHEMATIC ONLY - NOT TO SCALE
NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING
FOOTING DRAIN DETAIL
Stonebridge Court
Edmonds, Washington
Drwn. GLS Date 0 1 /27/20121 Proj. No. 2295
Checked RAC I Date Jan - 2012 1 Plate 3 d
APPENDIX A
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
ES-2295
The subsurface- conditions at the site were explored by excavating four test pits at the
approximate locations illustrated on Plate 2 of this report. The test pit logs are provided in this
Appendix. The subsurface exploration was completed in January 2012. The final logs
represent the interpretations of the field logs and the results of laboratory analyses. The
stratification lines on the logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types. in
actuality, the transitions may be more gradual.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Earth Solutions NWLLC
SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
MAJOR DIVISIONS
SYMBOLS
TYPICAL
DESCRIPTIONS
GRAPH
LErrER
GRAVEL
AND
CLEAN
GRAVELS
GW
WELL -GRADED GRAVELS. GRAVEL -
SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO
FINES
GRAVELLY
SOILS
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)
<
b
C) '0 C
GP
POORLY -GRADED GRAVELS.
GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE
OR NO FINES
COARSE
GRAINED
SOILS
MORE THAN 50%
OF COARSE
FRACTION
GRAVELS WITH
FINES
11 <
GM
SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -
SILTMIXTURES
GC
CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -
CLAY MIXTURES
RETAINED ON NO.
4 SIEVE
(APPRECIABLE
AMOUNT OF FINES)
MORE THAN 50%
OF MATERIAL IS
SAND
AND
CLEAN SANDS
SW
WELL -GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY
SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES
x
SID
POORLY -GRADED SANDS,
GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NO
FINES
LARGER THAN
NO. 200 SIEVE
SIZE
SANDY
SOILS
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)
SANDS WITH
FINES
sm
SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILT
MIXTURES
MORE THAN 50%
OF COARSE
FRACTION
SC
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY
MIXTURES
PASSING ON NO.
4 SIEVE
(APPRECIABLE
AMOUNT OF FINES)
INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE
ML
SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR
CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY
SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY
FINE
GRAINED
SOILS
SILTS
LIQUID LIMIT
AND LESS THAN 50
CLAYS
C-
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO
MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY
CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY
CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS
OL
ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC
SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY
MORE THAN 50%
OF MATERIAL IS
SMALLER THAN
NO. 200 SIEVE
MH
INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR
DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR
SILTY SOILS
SIZE
SILTS LIQUID LIMIT
AND GREATER THAN 50
CLAYS
CH
INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH
PLASTICITY
OH
ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO
HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
PT
PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH
HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS
DUAL SYMBOLS are used to indicate borderline soil classifications.
The discussion in the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature
of the material presented in the attached logs.
Earth Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-1
1805 136th lace N.E., Suite 201 PAGE 1 OF 1
Bellevue, Washington 98005
Telephone: 425-284-3300
CLIENT Phoenix Development_ --- PROJECTNAME Stonebridge Court
PROJECT NUMBER 2295 PROJECT LOCATION Edmonds, Washiag!on
DATESTARTED 1/13/12----- COMPLETED 1/13112 GROUNDELEVATION 100ft TESTPITSIZE
EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NWExcavatinA_______----- GROUNDWATER LEVELS:
EXCAVATION METHOD___ AT TIME OF EXCAVATION
LOGGEDBY BTS---. CHECKED BY -BTS AT END OF EXCAVATION
NOTES Depth of Topsoil& Sod 10"- 12": thick bramble bushes/ grass AFTER EXCAVATION
a-
Lu
W
2
TESTS
0
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
-j
2 z
Uj
0
Brown Forest Duff TOPSOIL
SL
.0
1.0 99.0
MC = 15.10%
Brown silty fine to medium SAND grav 1, 1 se to medium dense, moist to wet
Fines = 15.90%
(Native)
-becomes wet to saturated
MC 15.90%
-oxide layering, perched seepage
-increased silt
-becomes gray medium dense, moist (Till)
-increased sand content
-becomes dense to very dense
SM
-becomes very dense, cemented Till
10
MC = 12.50%
MC = 10.10%
12.0 88-0
Test pit terminated at 12.0 feet below existing grade. Groundwater seepage encountered
at 3.0 feet during excavation.
Bottom of test pit at 12.0 feet.
91
Uj
z
Earth Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-2
1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 201 PAGE I OF I
Washington 98005
qwmBellevue,
Telephone: 425-284-3300
CLIENT Phoenix Development PROJECTNAME StonebridqeCourt
PROJECT NUMBER 2295 PROJECT LOCATION Edmonds, Washington
DATE STARTED 1/13/12 COMPLETED 1/13/12 GROUNDELEVATION 100ft ------ TEST PIT SIZE
EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating GROUND WATER LEVELS:
EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION
LOGGED BY BTS CHECKED BY BTS AT END OF EXCAVATION
NOTES Depth of Topsoil& Sod 10" - 12"; thick bramble bushes/ grass AFTER EXCAVATION
of
W
6
IL .
on
M
TEST S
6
(L 0
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
z
(9
U)
0
Brown Forest Duff TOPSOIL
I PSL,,
MC = 34.00%
1.0 99.0
Brown silty fine to i�_edium SAND with gravel, loose to medium dense, wet (Native)
MC = 22.50%
-increased silt content
Fines = 35.10%
-oxide layers
-becomes gray silty sand with gravel, dense to medium dense, wet
SM
-becomes very dense
-cemented Till
-increased sand and small gravel 92.0
MC 8.10%
Test pit terminated at 8.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during
excavation.
Bottom of test pit at 8.0 feet.
L9
I
D.
P
z
Uj
&D Earth Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-3
610 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 201 PAGE I OF I
amm=
Bellevue, Washington 98005
Telephone: 425-284-3300
own
CLIENT Phoenix DevelopMMt PROJECT NAME Stonebridge Court
PROJECT NUMBER 2295 PROJECTLOCATION Edmonds, Washing!on_____,,
DATE STARTED 1/13/12 COMPLETED 1/13112 GROUND ELEVATION 104 ft TEST PIT SIZE . .. ...
EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating GROUND WATER LEVELS:
EXCAVATION METHOD ------- AT TIME OF EXCAVATION
LOGGED BY BTS CHECKED BY BTS AT END OF EXCAVATION . ....... ..........
NOTES Depth of Topsoil& Sod 10" AFTER EXCAVATION
W
jE�
uj
LU
TESTS
M
(L 0
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
C6
_j
M z
CD
0
Light brown TOPSOIL/ Forest Duff
TPSL,,
1.0 103.0
MC 15.40%
Brown silty fine to medium SAND with gravel. loose to medium dense, wet (Native)
SM
-oxide stained layers
MC 6.60%
-becomes gray, dense, moist
MC 13.80%
-increased sands and gravels
Fines 30.30%
-becomes very dense, cemented Till
97.�
MC 7.20%
Test pit terminated at 6.5 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during
excavation.
Bottom of test pit at 6.5 feet.
C�
D
:z
0
Uj
(91
1
.4
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
ES-2295
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Earth Solutions NW GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
1805 - 136th Place N.E., Suite 201
Bellevue, WA 98005
Telephone: 425-284-3300
CLIENT Phoenix Development PROJECT NAME Stonebridge Court
PROJECTNUMBER ES-2295 PROJECT LOCATION Edmonds
F-
co
z
LL
F-
z
lu
L)
ON
NMI
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
COBBLES
I GRAVEL
SANDE��
SILT OR CLAY
se I medium 'e
Specimen Identification
O� TPA -5ft-
0 TP-2 3.5ft.
L9 TP-3 5.5ft,
M
15
5 Specimen Identification D1 00
q 0 TP-1 1.5ft. 37.5
0 TP-2 3.5ft. 19
W TP-3 5.5ft. 37.5
t!
Classification
Brown. silty SAND with gravel, SM
Brown silty SAND, SM .
Gray silty SAND with gravel, SM
01
LL � PL I PI I Cc I Cu I
D60
D30
D10-
%Gravel
%Sand 1_%Silt
1
0.681
0.182
17.3
66.8
15.9
0.327
6.4
58.4
35.1
0.54
16.6
63.0
30.3
f . io
REPORT DISTRIBUTION.
ES-2295
EMAIL ONLY Phoenix Development, LLC
16108 Ash Way, Suite 201
Lynnwood, Washington 98087
Attention: Ms. Loree Quade
Earth Solutions NW, LLO
February 11, 2013
ES-2295.01
Belton Homes, LLC
16108 Ash Way, Ste 201
Lynnwood, Washington 98087
Attention:. Mr. Bill Keith
Subject: Geotedhnical Plan Review
Storm and Utility
Lots 9 and 10
Stonebridge Court
Edmonds, Washington
Reference: City of Edmonds
Plan Review Corrections
BLD20130019 — BLD2013020
Dated January 25, 2013
Dear Mr. Keith:
E Earth
Solutions
NWLLC
Earth Solutions NW LLC
• Geotechnical Engineering
• Construction Monitoring
• Environmental Sciences
I
f7o--)
FEB 112013
WILDING DEIPARTMENT
OM OF rzo=NDS
In accordance with your request, Earth Solutions NW, LLC (ESNW) has reviewed the
referenced correction notice and drainage plan for Lots 9 and 10. The plan review comments
pertinent to the geotechnical aspects of the design are provided below, followed by* our
response:
City of Edmonds (Comment 1) - Please provide a report from the geotechnical engineer of
record stating that this current plan has been reviewed and;
a. Footing drain drywell will be functional in existing cionditions.
. . b. Yard drain will function collecting area surface water.
ESNW Response — ESNW has reviewed the plan for accommodating footing drain systems
with drywell facilities. Based on 'our review, the proposed drywell systems will be functional
given the existing site conditions. The proposed use of yard drains as planned will also be
functional, based on our review. The geotechnical engineer, 'however, should observe the
installation of these facilities to confirm conditions.
We trust this plan review letter meets your current needs
information, or have questions, please
Sincerely,
EARTH SOLUTIONS NW, LLC
Raymond A. Coglas, P.E.
Principal
1805 - 136th Place N.E., Suite 201 0 Bellevue, WA
Should you require additional
41'f((-3
* FAX (425) 449-4711
ll
, : ....... ---------- 1-r ---
LOVELL— SAU ERLAN D & ASSOCIATES, INC., 19217 36TH AVE. W., SUITE 106, LYNNWOOD, WA 98036 ENGINEER
TELEPHONE: 425.775.1591 LSA FILE NO. 4912 DATE: 1-4-13 DRAWN: JTT
DIVISION
NOTEID I
Date:aj I 1� I (�
C-9
BELTON HOMES, LLC
16108 ASH WAY, SUITE 201
LYNNWOOD, WASHINGTON 98087
OFFICE : 425-775-8661 FAX : 425-742-8469
STATE REGISTRATION #BELTOHL883L2
SITE PLAN INFORMATION
PROPERTY OWNER & CONTRACTOR:
BELTON HOMES, LLC
16108 ASH WAY, SUITE 201
LYNNWOOD, WA 98087
425-775-8661
SITE ADDRESS:
21917 78th PLACE W.
EDMONDS, WA 98026
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT 10, STONEBRIDGE COURT
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS:
01129500001000
FOOTPRINT — 29023 SQ FT
COVERAGE 2,023--.6,187=32.6%
ko-ImulillivIvo zikv,011014
TOTAL LOT AREA —
6,187 SQUARE FEET
RMIXX
MAIN FLOOR
1,572
SQ.
FT.
UPPER FLOOR
844
SQ.
FT.
GARAGE
390
SQ.
FT.
PORCH
40
SQ.
FT.
WALKWAY
90
SQ.
FT.
DRIVEWAY
497
SQ.
FT.
PATIO
120
SQ.
FT.
HOUSE/EAVES/PORCH
29238
SQ
FT
DRIVEWAY
CONCRETE
497
SQ
FT
210
SO,
FT
TOTAL
29945
SQ
FT
BUILDING HEIGHT CALCULATION
(ORIGINAL GRADE)
A=384.11
B=382.53
C=384.08
1,535.44 + 4 = 383.86 AVE. ELEV.
MAXIMUM HEIGHT = 383.86 + 25=408.86 Corneli—oFlag-L
Setbacks ReQuired Actual
PROPOSED MAX. ELEVATION= 408.50 Vi nt 12- <— - A �
NAIL AND WASHER ON NORTH
OF CURB
ELEVAT10N : 386.26
SideslJk -7 .2 -7 -7/1 -7/:2-
Rear
Other
Ifeift
LOT LINE EXTENSION AT TOP
DATUM : CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE — NGVD 1929
IOU
JAN - 8 202
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTFI.
CITY OF EDMONDS
APPROvED
lill''T'i'll !I i�'i Ili - ' a
N i I �
AN
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
_Iubviu�
:'W LK
1.
ATTEND PRE -CONSTRUCTION MEETING. CALL ENGINEERING
MCN T
INSPECTOR (771-0220 EXT.1326) TO SET UP MEETING.
2.
CALL FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS (1-800-424-5555).
3.
CONTRACTOR TO REVIEW AND READ ESC NOTES AND PLAN.
4.
FLAG CLEARING LIMITS.
5.
INSTALL AND MAINTAIN ALL TESC MEASURES ACCORDING TO
APPROVED PLANS, CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAILS,
E1.1, E1.2, E1.3, AND ALL OTHER MEASURES THAT MAY BE
G
REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION. INTERCEPTOR SWALE SHALL
BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO SITE GRADING/CLEARING.
6.
CLEAR SITE PER THIS PLAN (DEMO, ROUGH GRADING).
7.
CONTRACTOR TO ADHERE TO STABILIZATION OF EXPOSED AREA
00
REQUIREMENTS AND MAINTAIN DUST CONTROL.
r4_
8.
INSTALL U11LITIES (SEWER, STORM, WATER, POWER, GAS, ETC.).
9.
FINAL GRADE/PAVE, MAINTAIN CB PROTECTION.
10.
LANDSCAPE, HYDROSEED AND MULCH ALL EXPOSED AREAS.
DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE COMPOST- AMENDED.
>
11.
REMOVE ESC DEVICES ONCE PERMANENT SITE STABILIZA11ON
0
MEASURES ARE INSTALLED. APPROVAL BY CITY REQUIRED,
M
PRIOR TO REMOVAL OF ESC DEVICES.
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL (ESC) NOTES
::E
1. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT - CONSTRUCT10N ACCESS ROUTE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLE:
ACCESS SHALL BE, WHENEVER PRACTICAL, LIMITED TO ONE ROUTE. ACCESS POINTS SHALL BE
STABILIZED WITH QUARRY SPALLS OR CRUSHED ROCK TO MINIMIZE THE TRACKING OF SEDIMENT
ONTO PUBLIC ROADS. IF SEDIMENT IS TRANSPORTED ONTO A ROAD SURFACE, THE ROADS SHALL
BE CLEANED THOROUGHLY AT THE END OF EACH DAY. SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM
ROADS BY SHOVELING OR SWEEPING AND BE TRANSPORTED TO A CONTROLLED SEDIMENT
DISPOSAL AREA WITHIN 24 HOURS. STREET WASHING SHALL BE ALLOWED ONLY AFTER SEDIMENT
-0 C)
IS REMOVED IN THIS MANNER.
M CD
2. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT - STABILIZATION OF EXPOSED AREAS:
0 -
--- i Z
ALL SOILS EXPOSED BY LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES SHALL BE STABILIZED BY SUITABLE
M r-
APPLICATION OF BMPS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, SOD, HYDROSEEDING, OR OTHER
0 M
VEGETATION. PLASTIC COVERING, OR MULCHING. ALL BMPS SHALL BE SELECTED, DESIGNED. AND
___I
MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE NTH THE MANUAL. THE EXPOSED SOILS SHALL BE STABILIZED
0
ACCORDING TO AN APPROVED TIMETABLE. (TYPICALLY, NO SOILS SHALL REMAIN EXPOSED FOR
z
MORE THAN TWO DAYS FROM OCTOBER 1 THROUGH APRIL 30 AND NO MORE THAN SEVEN DAYS
FROM MAY 1 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30).
SID
3. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT - PROTECTION OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES:
- - -
ADJACENT PROPERTIES SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM SEDIMENT DEPOSITION BY APPROPRIATE USE
- - -
OF VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS, SEDIMENT BARRIERS OR FILTERS, DIKES OR MULCHING, OR BY A
COMBINATION OF THESE MEASURES AND OTHER APPROPRIATE BMPS.
4. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT - MAINTENANCE:
ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS SHALL BE REGULARLY INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED
BY THE OWNER TO ENSURE CONTINUED PERFORMANCE OF THEIR INTENDED FUNCTION. ALL
MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUAL.
5. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT - OTHER BMPS-
AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY. OTHER APPROPRIATE BMP'S TO MITIGATE THE EFFECTS INCREASED
RUNOFF SHALL BE APPLIED.
6. ESC MINIMUM REQUIREMENT - UNDERGROUND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION:
THE CONSTRUCTION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY LINES SHALL SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THE
FOLLOWING:
A. EROSION CONTROL FOR EXCAVATED STOCKPILED MATERIALS;
B. THE PLACEMENT OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL WHERE CONSISTENT NTH SAFETY AND SPACE
CONSIDERATIONS SHALL BE PLACED ON THE UPHILL SIDE OF TRENCHES;
C. TRENCH DEWATERING SYSTEMS (MUST DISCHARGE INTO SEDIMENT TRAPS, SEDIMENT
VA
0
A01
:_2
Cn
CP
I]-
LOW- 3.9 ..............................................
. ................. ABT- -POLYDRAIN- - PD-SHAL
OR EQUAL CONNECT TO ROOF DRAIN
u
TOP=385.86
INV=384.87 112.4-9'
N 88'41'51 " E 1-9 - - r-- -
_Jt4 110 A0 -------
-7, - __
N BB-47�) I
E L
Gj- G
P V
q5 <
.22'W-99% I
-t- --t -
INV=384.72
GARAGE
20' @ 17-
U_
73-&2
51'-4"RD @ 0.7% RD
7=
INV=384.36 ;,I
1 11' 10
`-386.21
"��386.01
.497 SF.... HI SLAB
;P C . LOW SLAB
�.f A' B i*.L.(Z. E
QON.ST* PL�N 422B
t NQE:k
ENRA
. _�_�INV=384.50 LLr I
4� :C.0NC.WALK-:,
:.190-SF. - .1
8'14"RD@1 %
E.G.=382.80
T C7KInkl=-�RF; 91
CA
6,187sf
CA
Z
DIRECT ALL
SURFACE
I
I
WATER To
I
@
YARD DRAIN
�T
0
SOUTHEAST
I
�A
CORNER OF
LQT
01q
I
R RD _J F V INV=384.13
f) INV=384.42 FF=386.71
14)
PVC B.O.F.=383.21
4 10.9%
SS INV=381-50 100YR ELEV.=38
C.O. ��l 5'- 4" R D @1 % � PAT] 0, @
co C� 1 120. SF. `��Q '%- �
C-9 . INV=383.90
INV=384.27
4__
9
4
7
S
C
D
PVC
0.
INV
1
L3 RD
I N'
RD
C", I
SD --`E���
RD -5-3�-4!!RD-@ 0-776-- 382.8- RD_ __�31'_-_4"FFVC @
L3,84+
14-2.49
-38,6- CB IN4ET
___ - - - -, =:: 1 --=: � � �E � �_ r-ffT 10 N
00
I-_
CD Lo n
CO 0
00 co 0 Do
22.1'@1.99% In _j n
386 386
384 F 384
382 382
PONDS, OR OTHER ACCEPTABLE MEANS);
D. TRACKING AND SPILLING OF MATERIALS ON STREETS DUE TO HAULING; DRIVEWAY PROFILE
E. DAILY CLEANUP AND STREET MAINTENANCE. Li D� i 10=1 r)9
.DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION NOTES
1. FOOTING DRAINS SHALL NOT BE CONNECTED TO DETEN11ON
SYSTEM. INDIVIDUAL LOT FOOTING DRAINS SHALL BE TO DRYWELLS
INSTALLED AT TIME OF BUILDING CONSTRUCTION.
2. PIPE MATERIAL:
UNLESS CALLED OUT OTHERWISE ON THIS PLAN, ALL STORM DRAIN
PIPE MATERIAL SHALL BE PER C.O.E. APPROVED MATERIALS LISTS
MM-1, MM-2 & MM-3.
3. INDIVIDUAL LOT FOOTING/WALL DRAINS WILL GO TO INDIVIDUAL
I DRYWELLS LOCATED ON EACH LOT.
STORMWATER CLASSIFICATION WORKSHEET INFORMATION:
1. PERMEABLE PAVEMENT PROPOSED=0.0 SF
2. IMPERVIOUS AREA TABLE (SEE TABLE ON THIS SHEET)
3. TOTAL AREA OF LAND DISTURBING ACnVITY=5,732+SF
4. EARTHWORK QUANTITY:
EXCAVATION=154:ECY.- FILL=17±CY-, TOTAL=154±CY
5. PROJECT WILL NOT CONVERT 3/4 AC OR MORE OF NATIVE
VEGETATION TO LAYM OR LANDSCAPED AREA
6. WATERSHED=CREEK OR LAKE BASIN=HALLS CREEK
7. PROJECT CLASSIFICATION: SINGLE LOT IN A LARGE SITE PROJECT
mpromni IQ APrA TARI r fnATA mnu ri N
ENGINEERING' DIVISION
0 4�i N TE
GRATE
-OR
IE
C'R IS �r 0i 12in
ER11011S,,1W1 G 'I"flHo,
� L Af,,!D D�-_',AINAGE
'51R0_Ck,aa15PCC+(0y-6 Pkc�Jkv_e- , �y N
r�v bq W-e_� CB
CLMC� mb-�f_ I
TYPE
AREA (SQUARE FEET)
NON -REGULATED
0
1711111111111111111111
EXEMPT
REGULATED
REPLACED
0
0
NEW (POST 1977)
+
2,945
TOTAL REGULATED IMPERVIOUS AREA
2,945
TOTAL AREA MITIGATED BY EXISTING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM(S)
2,945
REGULATED AREA NOT YET MITIGATED
0
AREA PROPOSED TO BE MITIGATED BY LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT TECHNIQUES
0
1 AREA PROPOSED TO BE MITIGATED THROUGH CONVENTIONAL SWM TECHNIQUES
0
F71ER SOCK WITH
LT
0 OV
VER FLOW HOLES
STRAW BALES MAY BE USED IN
CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES (SEE DETAIL
E1.11). THIS APPLICAITON SHALL BE
MAINTAINED AT ALL TIMES DURING
CONSTRUCITON PERIOD,
CB INLET PROTECTION DETAIL
CITY OF EDMONDS DETAIL E1.3
CERTIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT
CONTROL LEAD (CESCL)
CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A DOE CERTIFIED CESCL WHO
SHALL BE AVAILABLE AT ALL TIMES.
TRACT 998
DETENTION/OPEN SPACE
GENERAL NOTES
1. ALL MATERIALS AND WORK SHOWN ON THESE PLANS SHALL CONFORM TO THE CITY
OF EDMONDS STANDARD PLANS AND DETAILS, THE FOLLOWING SPECIFICATIONS AND
CODES, AND ALL OTHER APPLICABLE LOCAL MUNICIPAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL
CODES, RULES AND REGULATIONS:
- CURRENT INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE (IBC)
- 2010 WSDOT/APWA STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD, BRIDGE AND
MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION
- WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN (CURRENT EDITION)
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL RECORD ALL APPROVED DEVIATIONS FROM THESE PLANS ON A
SET OF "AS -BUILT" DRAWINGS AND SHALL SUMMARIZE ALL AS -BUILT CONDITIONS
ON ONE SET OF REPRODUCIBLE DRAWINGS FOR SUBMITTAL TO THE OWNER PRIOR
PROJECT COMPLETION AND ACCEPTANCE. A SET OF AS -BUILT DRAWINGS SHALL
BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
BUILDING OCCUPANCY/FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE AND PROTECT ALL UTILITIES DURING CONSTRUCTION
AND SHALL CONTACT THE UNDERGROUND U11LITIES LOCATION SERVICE
(1-800-424-5555) AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL CONDITIONS AND DIMENSIONS AT THE PROJECT
SITE BEFORE STARTING WORK AND SHALL NOTIFY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE OF
ANY DISCREPANCIES.
5. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT (WHERE
APPLICABLE) AND SHALL THOROUGHLY FAMILIARIZE HIMSELF WITH THE CONTENTS
THEREOF. ALL SITE WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THIS REPORT.
6. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AND PAY FOR ALL PERMITS REQUIRED FOR
INSTALLA11ON OF ALL SITE IMPROVEMENTS INDICATED ON THESE DRAWINGS.
7. ALL DISTURBED SOIL AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED OR STABILIZED BY OTHER
ACCEPTABLE METHODS FOR THE PREVENTION OF ON -SITE EROSION AFTER THE
COMPLET10N OF CONSTRUCTION. SEE EROSION CONTROL PLANS FOR SPECIFIC
GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS.
8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP OFF -SITE STREETS CLEAN AT ALL TIMES BY
SWEEPING. WASHING OF THESE STREETS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED WITHOUT PRIOR
APPROVAL.
9. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AND SHALL INSTALL AND MAINTAIN
SHORING AND BRACING AS NECESSARY TO PROTECT WORKERS, EXISTING
BUILDINGS, STREETS, WALKWAYS, UTILITIES AND OTHER EXISTING AND PROPOSED
IMPROVEMENTS AND EXCAVATIONS AGAINST LOSS OF GROUND OR CAVING
EMBANKMENTS. CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVAL OF
SHORING AND BRACING, AS REQUIRED.
10. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN APPROVAL FROM THE CITY AND FOLLOW CITY
PROCEDURES FOR ALL WATER SERVICE INTERRUPTIONS, HYDRANT SHUTOFFS,
STREET CLOSURES OR OTHER ACCESS RESTRICTIONS. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT
RELOCATE OR ELIMINATE ANY HYDRANTS WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING WRITTEN
APPROVAL FROM THE FIRE MARSHAL.
CONSTRUCTION NOTE
ALL DISTURBED
AREAS ON AND OFF
Lovell- Sauerland
SITE SHALL BE
& Associates, Inc.
COMPOST AMENDED
7-
TO MEET
Engineers/Surveyors/Planners
2
REQUIREMENTS OF
Development Consultants
BMP T5.13 IN THE
19217 36th Avenue W.
STORMWATER
Suite 106
MANUAL, VOL. V,
Lynnwood, WA 98036
CHAPTER 5
phone: (425)775-1591
PRIVATE
e-mail: info@lsaengineering.com
DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
web: Isaengineering.com
FOR LOTS 6
THROUGH 10
BMP#C1 21
MULCHING EXPOSED
SOILS(TYP-)
BMP#C123 PLASTIC
CD COVERING AT
o STOCKPILES(TYP-)
EX. 810YD
TOP=384.37
INV=381.29
FTG DRAIN DRYWELL
24"PERF PVC
---BOTTOMLESS
-ROCK -FILLED
FABRIC -LINED
'GRATED LID
(DEPTH PER SOILS ENG.','
ACCEPTABLE TIGHTLVE
MATPPIAI
SDR 36
'00TING DRAINS lei!01� SCH 40
TO BE TrED INTO N -12
DETENITION 8'fSTEIM F�110 HANCOR
W E
S
SCALE : 1"=10'
t2
I
00
C14
z
R
0
M
0
0
z
tL
2
M
W
Z
I M EMM
z
ISM Im 11MEMEMMIM666ii
<
0 5' 10, 15' 20'
i
LEGEND
XXX
0
EXISTING CONTOURS PER PLANS
z
n
<
ry Q)
0
LL_
Z)
N,�,
Lij Q)
UTILITY CONFLICT NOTE
THE LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN HEREON IS
APPROXIMATE ONLY. THE OWNER SHOULD CONTACT THE PURVEYORS 0
OF ALL UTILITIES IN THE AREA TO DETERMINE THE LOCATION AND
DEPTH OF ALL UTILITIES ON AND ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY. V)
CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY UTILITY LOCATIONS PRIOR TO
* I ANY CONFLICTS ARE IDENTIFIED CONTACTRE UB
ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY. JAN ro 2,13
APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION
CITY OF EDMONDS
DATE:
1. ALL MATERIALS AND WORK SHOWN ON THESE PLANS SHALL CONFORM TO THE CITY BY -
OF EDMONDS STANDARD CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE LATEST CITY
STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS. I
CITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT
SCALE
0
T_
I—
0
_j
0
C)
III
0
r')
ry
M
Li
z
0
I—
U)
AS SHOWN
DRAWN CHECKED SHEET
JTT JY I
DATE F-L, PG.44 C2
1-4-13 49H
PERMIT #
LSA FILE NO.
4912-