Loading...
613 ELM PL.PDFIIIIIIIIIIIIII 11147 613 ELM PL 0 0 ADDRESS: 613 ELM PL TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL #: 00736400003200 BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE) #: #BLD19880513 COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR: CRITICAL AREAS #: DETERMINATION: El Conditional Waiver [I Study Required F] Waiver CRITICALAREAS #: DETERMINATION: [-I Conditional Waiver El Study Required E] Waiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S: PRD 1983-1, ADB 1983-88 DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED: EASEMENT(S) RECORD FOR: PERMITS (OTHER — list permit #'s): #BLD1 9860572 (not built under this permit), ROW 88-295 PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED: May 27, 1988 SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED: SEWER LID FEE $: LID #: ESR 279 SHORT PLAT FILE: P 1983-9 LOT: LOT 32 1 BLOCK: ELM PLACE BLK 000 D-.00 SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: December 2,1988 SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #: 07938 GEOTECH REPORT DATED: September 1986 STREET LISE/ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #: FOR: WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: NONE IN FILE AS OF JUNE 10, 2008 OTHER: USE PER." ZONE CITY OF ED CONSTRUCTION ''PERMIT APPLICATION G a ADDRESS sz? �Tzx-/ PZ NAME I OFT1 1E AL -DT§C-AIF'I ION',piqlCIII SUSDIVIt,314 N MAIL A DRESS TESrP PUSLIC.R,GHT OF WAY PERD"ICIAL STREET MAP. ARPROVED BY CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER EXISTING- %I)tRED,DEDiCATION REL PPOPOSE�MAA Z RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AEOUIRED Z ADDRESS STREET USE PE�MIT REOUIRED: REVIEW By SEE ENIGINEEFUliG �IEMO.DATED TELEPHONE NUMBER 1 14/054. -z 4 NAld;Z- ES$ TER SIZE SUPPLY 111t FIXTURE UNITS ONE N MBE9 1BUILDING Z MR111 STATE SF 4;IGN AREA ENV. PEVtEW ADS NO, ALLOWED PROP OSED C M. Lt 1�` EXEMPT Description of Properly - Include all easements I SHORELINE! La, lourcoples) (4m."loworatlach Z OZ. VARIANbE oR.cu PLANNING REVIEW By DATE % ell :YARDS�4,- HEIG T LO� F Z FRoNrle SIDE R R . . REMARKS D—n-IDENTIAL ING ADOULTIER MECHANICAL .--T,-JNING WALL SIGN REPAIR TIYPE CODE NEIGH CHECKED By EF CONSTRUCTION M EXCAVATE FENCE FT) 0 OR FILL t Z DIE moLtSH r -move 14spi SWLM 0 PRE SPECIAL IN�SPECTOR JA.L OCCUPANCY GROUP OCCUPANT LOAD REMODEL COMPLIANC INSP L-J POOL q..:, WOOD STEM I�SFRT APT. BLPG RENEWAL REM, KS Z PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PW UBC 305 ode NLp48Eq OF STORIES NUMBER OF MVELLING a I . 21 UNITS r-^ NATURE OF WORK t BE DONE (ATTACH PLO�T N) lVey VALUATtQ�4 FEE ,PLAN CHECK FEE A A�A MlIV BUILDING few. PLUMBING MECHANICA� This Permit Covers work to be done on private property UNLT. GFtADINGIFtLL Any construction on the public dom-ain.l[curts—.sidewalks. driveways, marquees, e1c.) Will require separate permission. S�A#E.SUACHARGE 0 r-erthill Application: 180 Days ENERGY CODE - Permit Limit: 1 Year - Provided Work is Startnd Within -Applicant. on behalf ofhis oj her spouse, heirs� assigns and successors in interest. agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harrnIeS5 the Cfty of Edmonds, Washington. Its officials, em ploye"- and agents from any and all claims for damages of from th eissuance A.30 lure, at ising directly Or indirectly hatever n shall not b deemed to of this pertrill. Issuance Of.tfiiq permit PLAN r.HECK�Dlt POSIT -nbdify waive or reduce anyreAtjirem6nt*Of any city ordinance CY -lot li,�it it, any way the City't ability 10 enforce any ordinancr, TOTAL AM'CUNT DUE rFoy;sion.*' I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application; that the ATtENTION APPLICATION APPROVAL Information given is cor,�eCt; and that I am the Owner, or the duly authorized agent of the owner'. I agree to comply with city and THIS PERMIT' Th,;s application Is not a permit until state laws regulating construCt!on: and In doing the work authOriZ- AUTHORIZES �ned by the Building Official of his ed thereby, no pIirsOl Will.be employed In violation of the Labor ONLY THE WORK NOTED ..-puly; and fees are paid, and rereipt.is Code of the State of Washington-relliting to.Work man's Compensa. ,Krowledged in space provided. - EP-AYME1,T !�-ohA' E I ER if �.Ti DATE -N.. U CITY OF OF ICIAL:S SirNATU51i� DATE. r We. - EDMOND;S�� RE By -7- 771732 2 ATTENTION IT IS UNLX-iVFU - L TO USE OR Q�(SCVPY A. BUILDING Ot3 STRUCTUTIIE, 'ORIGINAL Fll-e- YELLOW - Inspec.tor A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAI OR LINTIL A -CEPTIr.ICATE ..OF OCCUPAN(�Y HAS BEEN - GRANTED,' I U.Et.' PINK - Owner. QOLI� Assessor CHAPTER 3. 7, T 5, V- -,. " , V -�- %I ;79 �/(g "W* fiz- W7e -16 . W- QI, 'YJ 17 ii- /"-I/y 4-7 iycqce 4F, _q.7tY 7d pV7 um t -7cK 7l MEMO TO: Building Division FROM: Engineering Division SUBJECT: After review of the subject building permit application, we have the following comments: 1) Connection to City water system required. 2) Connection to City sanitary sewer system required.. 3) Right-of-way permit required for any work on City property. 4) Driveway slope not to exceed 14'.. 5) Back water valve required if downstairs plumbing is below elevation of upstream manhole. 6) Water and sewer lines to be separated by 10 foot minimum. 7) EX 112 Builder/owner responsibl'e for containing all temporary runoff and erosion on site and may 'not impact neig�boring properties in a'ny way. Construction hours from ':7:00 a.m. I to 10:00 p.m. on we�ekdays and 10:00 a.an. to 6:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays. No burning of construction refuse Vitha-ut --app-rdsTal by Vire Dept. //x '�e AO Cb A� cYe0,573 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ELM PLACE2 LOTS 30331,32536 Edmonds, Washington PREPARED FOR The Homeland 'Company PROJECT NO. 8608-24 SEPTEMBER 1986 ZW" ASSOCIATEI:3 AMAm EART" E1011100 SCIENCESs INC 903 - 5th Avenue, Kirkland, Washington 98033 (206) 827-7701 0 E SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT EL14 PLACE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT EDMONDS, WAS11ING-rON 1. PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic, and geotechnical engineering study for lot nos. 30, 31, 32, and 36 in the Elm Place Residential Development in Edmonds, Washington. The proposed lot - locations and approximate- locations of the explorations accomplished for this study' are presented on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 1. In the event that any changes in the nature, design or location of the structures are planned, the conclu ' sions and recoinmendat ions contained in this report should be reviewed and modified or ver ified as necessary. -1.1 Purpose and Scope The purpose of this study was to provide subsurface data to be uti I ized in the design and development of the above mentioned project. Our field study included excavat ' ion of 5 exploration pits and performing geologic studies to assess the type, thickness, distribution and physical properties of the subsurface soils. Engineering studies were also conducted to determine the type(s) of suitable foundation(s), allowable bearing pressures, and drainage considerations. This report summarizes our current field work and offers development recommendations based on our present understanding of the project. 1.2 Authorization Written authorization to proceed with this study was granted by Mr. Marty Spadafora of The Homeland Company on 27 August 1986. Our study was accomplished in general accordance with our scope of work letter dated the same. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of The Homeland Company, and their agents, for specific application to this project in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engineering geology practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Our I observations, findings, and conclusions are a means to identify and reduce risks. Such risks are inherent to development on or near slopes; it should be understood that slope.stability cannot be guaranteed. 2.0 PROJECT AUD SITE DESCRIPTION This report was completed with an understanding that one to two-story single family residences with conventional wood -frame construction will be built on the previously referenced lots. Daylight basements are planned for the houses on lot nos. 30, 31, and 32. No basement is planned on lot no. 36. The properties were situated near the west central portion of the Elm Place Residential Development,. which is located to the southeast of the intersection of Elm Street and 6th Avenue South in Edmonds, Washington. Lots 30, 31, and 32, which are adjacent to each other, are approximately 40 feet by 60 feet and are situated to the southwest of a northwest -southeast trending paved roadway. They are located on a hillside dipping downward to the southwest with an approximate slope of 5H:lV (horizontal :vertical). This slope continues until a small pond, with a diameter on the order of 20 feet, is encountered just beyond the lot property lines. A rockery had been p I aced around the perimeter of the pond. A I arge amount of f i I I has been placed on these lots creating a steeper slope nearthe pond (111:2V) and a generally level area near the center of the lots. Total elevation change across lots 30 and 31 was on the order of 10 to 15 feet. Lot 32 had an elevation change of about 10 feet. Lot -36, which is approximately 50 feet by 60 feet, is situated immediately south of lots 30 through 32 and the pond. This lot was relatively level except near the north toward the pond. At the time of our study, a large fill pile was located on this lot. 3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Our field study included excavating a series of 5 exploration pits to gain information about the site. The various types of soi Is as we I I as the depths where the soils or characteristics of the soils changed are indicated on the exploration logs presented in the Appendix. The depths indicated on the logs where soil conditions changed may represent gradational changes between soil types in the field. Our exploration pits were approximately located in the field by taping and pacing from known site features shown on the site plan given to us by The Homeland Company (undated). �J I The conclusions and recominendat ions presented in this report are based on the exploration pits completed for this study. The number, location, and depth of the explorations were completed within site and proposal constraints. Because of the nature of exploratory work below ground, extrapolation of subsurface conditions between field explorations is necessary. It should be noted that differing subsurface conditions may sometimes be present due to the random nature of deposition and the alteration of topography by past grading and/or filling. The nature and extent of any variations between the field explorations may not become fully evident until construction. If variations are observed at that time, it [nay be necessary to reevaluate specific recommendations in this report and make appropriate changes. 3.1 Exploration Pits Our field study included excavating a series of 5 exploration pits with a tractor -mounted backhoe. Each of the pits penetrated between 10-1/2 and 14- 1/2 feet below present ground surface and permitted direct, visual observation of subsurface conditions. The materials encountered in the exploration pits were studied and classified in the field by a geotechnical engineer or engineering- geologist. Al 1 exploration pits were-backfil led immediately after examination and logging. Selected samples were then transported to our laboratory for testing as necessary. 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions on the lots were inferred from field explorations accomplished for this study, visual reconnaissance of the site, and review of applicable geologic literature. As shown on the field logs, tile exploration holes generally encountered fill materials overlying natural deposits. 4.1 Stratigraphy Fill soils (those not naturally placed) were encountered in all exploration pits. The fill ranged in thickness from 7 feet in EP-4 to 13-1/2 feet in EP-3. As noted on the exploration logs, the fill generally consisted of loose to medium dense, moist, brown, silty, gravelly, fine to medium sand with organics and large amounts of rubble and debris. These materials probably originated from cut and f i I I operations on th is and nearby s ites. P I acemen t and compact ion of the f i I I mater i a I s was apparen t I y not documented. The specific nature, extent, and uniformity of such materials 3 i 0 .. 0 are therefore uncertain and unpredictable. During the digging of thE exploration pits, I to 2 feet of caving off of the sides of the pits was quite common. Natural soils beneath the fill materials consisted for the most part of medium dense to dense, saturated, gray, gravel ly, medium to coarse sands locally overlain by I foot of an old topsoil horizon. These sediments are interpreted to be glacial drift derived from the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation which was in this area approximately 15,000 years ago. 4.2 Hydrology Ground water seepage was encountered in some of our exploration pits at the time of our field study. The depth of seepage ranged from 10 feet to 14 feet. A] I of the coarse sands and gravels at the base of the exploration - pits were in a wet or saturated condition and probably represent the current site water table. In exploration pi.ts 2 through 5, these sands produced free standing water. The existence of a pond adjacent to the lots is a good indication that the local water table is not deep. Other shallower seepages were located near an old topsoil layer and in the fil 1. These seeps represent water that has temporarily migrated to or been stored at these. locations. 4 11. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 5.0 INTRODUCTIO14 Our exploration indicates that the lots in question (nos. 30, 31, 32, and 36) appear to be suitable for the proposed residential development. Due to the extensive quantities of uncontrolled fill placed on the lots, the bearing stratum is 8 to 14 feet below existing ground surface. Therefore, a deep seated foundation system will be required for building support. 6.0 SITE PREPARATION The p I acement and grading of the f i I I on the 1 ots has genera 1 ly prepared the lots for residential construction with deep seated foundations. Excavation of the basement areas should be undertaken with care since' the fill soils are in a loose condition in many areas. Temporary cut slopes should not exceed 1H:1V (horizontal :vertical). Even at this angle, some sloughing should be anticipated. Excavated material stockpiled on site will be suject to erosion and should be protected. 7.0 FOUNDATIONS .Due to the presence of 8 to 14 feet of uncontro I I ed f i 11 and o I d topsoi I in the areas of our exploration pits, it wil 1 be necessary to support the buildings on deep seated foundations which bear on the underlying, natural, medium dense to dense, grey, gravelly sands. Several alternative foundation designs may be utilized as discussed below. 7.1 Drilled -in Piers Drilled -in concrete piers will provide suitable foundation support if extended through the fill and embedded a minimum of 6 feet into the underlying natural soils. Piers with a diameter of 14 inches and properly reinforced wi I I be capable of supporting loads on the order of 8 tons per pier. The actua I depth and load carrying capacity of each pier wi I I be adjusted in the f ield during instal lation by the Engineering Geologist/Geotechnical Engineer. 5 The utilization of this foundation system requires that the soils will stay open after auger withdrawal while concrete is being placed. If tile holes wi I I not stay open, it may be necessary to case the ho I es. In addition, if excess water seeps into the hole during and iminediately following augering, it may be necessary to use a flexible drop chute or concrete pump with hose Lo the bottom of the hole to assure that the water is adequately displaced. Based on observations during our field exploration, it is our opinion that the augered holes will generally stay open, although a few may need casing. Water seepage near the bottom of the holes may present minor problems espec ia I I y wi th the downs I ope piers. 7.2 Auger Cast -In -Place Piles Cast -in -place concrete piling (Augercast TM) may also be used for foundation support. We recommend that the placement of all piles be accomplished by a contractor experienced in their installation. The actual total length of each pile may be adjusted in the field based on required capacity and conditions encountered during drilling. Since completion of the pile takes place below ground, the judgement and experience of the Geotechnical Engineer must be used as a basis for determining the required depth and acceptability of each pile. Consequently, use of the presented pile capacities in the design requires that all piles be inspected by a.qualified Geotechnical Engineer or Engineering Geologist from our firm who can interpret and collect the installation data and examine the contractor's operations. Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. acting as the owner's field representative, would determine the required lengths of pi les and keep a record of the same. AugercastTM pi I es with a minimum diameter of 14 inches wi 11 be capab 1 e of supporting 15 tons per pile when embedded a minimum of 3 feet into the underlying natural, gravelly sand sediments. Although this' type of installation is usually significantly more expensive than dri I I ed-in piers, it el iminates the need for casing or concrete pumps due to caving or water conditions. 7.3 Rock Trenches The third presented foundation alternative for this site is rock trenches. This system also has the advantage of being relatively low cost and can be performed by the general contractor. Rock trenches have been utilized with M. 0 - 0 favorable success in many soil types around the Puget Sound area. The trenches should have a minimum width of 4 feet and be excavated down to tile medium dense to dense, natural soils. Because of the potential for caving, the actual trench width may be greater than specified. It would be appropriate to backfill tile trenches as the excavation proceeds to minimize caving. The use of a larger, track -mounted backhoe with the teeth covered will greatly speed trench excavation over the use of a conventional, rubber - tired backhoe. To determine when suitable bearing has been achieved and to verify proper rock placement, the Geotechnical Engineer/Engineering Geologist must be present on a full-time basis during footing trench excavation and backfill. A pump may be required to control seepage so that the bearing level can be visually determined. After tile bearing stratum has been reached, the trench may be backf i 1 1 ed. We recommend the use of 1 to 2 inch s ize, crushed rock for backf ' ill. The crushed rock must be tamped,into place to achieve a tightly -packed mass; this may be done with either a "Hoepac" type compactor mounted on the backhoe or with the bucket of the backhoe itself. Staging areas should be* maintained so that the rock is not contaminated by mud prior to placement in the trench. Equipment access to trench locations should also be maintained. Spread footings may be used for building support when founded on rock trenches properly constructed and bearing on the lower sand's. Masonry fireplaces are settlement sensitive and should be supported by the lower sands as wel 1. . Footings which bear on approved rock trenches may be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf including both dead and live loads. Perimeter footings should be buried at least 18 inches into the surrounding soil for frost protection. Interior foot'ings need only extend 12 inches below adjacent grade. However, a] I footings or rock trenches must penetrate to the prescribed bearing. stratum and no footing should be founded in or above loose, organic, or existing fi I I soils. In addition, al I footings should have a minimum width of 14 inches. All of the above given design loads may be increased by one-third for short term wind or seismic loading. Anticipated settlement of footings founded on pile or pier foundations should be less than I inch. For footings founded on rock trenches, the settlement should be on the order of 112 inch. However, disturbed material not removed from footing trenches prior to concrete placement could result in increased settlements. 7 0 - 0 8.0 FLOOR SUPPORT S I ab- on -grade f I oors are not recommended for these I ots due to potent i a I settlement problems associated with the extensive thickness and variability of the fill soils. Crawlspace type construction with internal footings founded on piles, piers or rock trenches will minimize problems associated with the sites and should be the preferred construction method. The soil below the floor system should be covered with a vapor barrier to reduce potential dampness. Adequate ventilation must be provided to prevent the buildup of methane gas below the structures. 9.0 PASSIVE RESISTANCE AND FRICTION FACTORS FOR GRADE BEA14S To obtain passive resistance against lateral translation, the grade beams must be backfilled with structural fill compacted to 95 percent of the Modified Proctor Maximum Density using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard. If grade beams are placed on grade and then backfilled, the top of the backfill must be horizontal and extend outward from the beam for a minimum lateral distance equal to three times the height of the backfil 1, before tapering down to grade. With backfill placed as discussed, beams may be des . igned for passive resistance against lateral translation using an equivalent fluid equal to 250 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). This va lue includes a factor of safety equal to 3 in order to minimize the amount of movement necessary to generate passive resistance. The friction coefficient for grade beams will be minimal on the organic fill. 10.0 LATERAL WALL PRESSURES All backfill behind walls or around foundation units should be placed as per our recommendations for structural fil 1 and as described in this section of the report. Backfil led wal Is which are free to yield lateral ly at least 0.1 percent of their height, may be designed using an equivalent fluid equal to 35 pounds peir cubic foot (Pcf). Fully restrained rigid (basemen t -type) walls which cannot yield should be designed —for an equivalent fluid of 50 pcf. The lateral pressures presented above are based on the conditions of a uniform, horizontal backfill consisting of free -draining sand and gravel, compacted to 90 percent of maximum density using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard. A h i gher degree of compact i on i s not recommended as th i s wi I I increase the pressure acting on the wal 1. Surcharges from adjacent footings, heavy construction equipment, vehicles or sloping ground must be added to the above values. Perimeter footing drains should be provided for al I retaining wal I s as discussed under Section 11.0, Drainage Considerations. If the onsite soils are used for backfil 1, an equivalent fluid equal to 54 pcf should be used for the yielding condition. Since the wal I wi I I be restrained prior to backfil I ing, it should be designed for an equivalent f luid equal to 72 pcf where onsite soi I wi I I be used for backfil 1. These values do not include hydrostatic pressures. Because ons i te f i I I mater i a I s are not free -draining, it is imperative that proper drainage be provided so that hydrostatic pressures do not develop against the wal 1. This wi I I involve installation of a blanket drain using imported gravel ful I -height against the wal Is. If a structure is below the water table,, it mus' be designed for hydrostatic uplift and lateral pressures as well as soil pressures. In this case, restrained wal Is should be designed using an equivalent fluid equal to 90 pcf to account for soil and water pressures. 11.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS Al I retaining and footing wal Is should be provided with a drain at the footing elevation (unless supported on rock trenches). Rock trenches may be used as footing drains if they daylight or can drain by gravity away from the building. Drains should consist of perforated pipe enclosed in a pea gravel, sand -free trench. They should be constructed with sufficient gradient to all ow gravity discharge away from the building. Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the footing drain system but should be handled by a separate tightline drain. In planning, exterior grades adjacent to wal Is should be sloped downward away from the structure to achieve surface drainage. We are available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during construction. The integrity of the foundation depends on proper site preparation and construction procedures, and engineering decisions may have to be made in the field in the event that 1 oca I ized variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. We trust our findings, conclusions and recommendations wil I be helpful in the successful completion 60 of your project. Should you have any questions or require further assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EART11 SCIENCES, INC. Aft A k / (x "'\� G.ary AAFlowers, P.G. Principal -> T'*X� Gary T.(kobdell, P.E., P.G. Principal GAF/jaw 8608-24A isf- -v. % tit f%-, low 4Qr ISTILVI 'c ICJNAL f-11,110 10 ,Z-1- 141 3 T A?/0 EP-5 Lid —FXP10'-'911017 D1.15 120 Porld Scale: 50 ER I Id EP-2 .3Z Ep- 4 56 -56 `�216 Figure 1: Site and'Exploration Plan Elm Place Lots 30, 31, 32, and 36 Edmonds, Washington ASSOCIATED EARTH IMSCILZNCESSINC 8608-24 lAugust 1986 0 NUMBER EP- I 0 EXPLORATION PIT LOGS SEDIUFNT nj=ftruaoTv%u W Q. L oose to medium dense, moist, dark brown, gravellY7 I t y sand , with logs and bui Iding debris . (Fi I I Loose, moist, light brown, gravelly, medium sand, with organic debris. (Fill) Note: Medium caving from 0 to 7 feet. XX No seepage. Me d ium dense to dense, wet to saturated, gray, gravelly, medium to.coarselsand. B011 L NUMBER EP-2 0% 11 1 acnt"C"V @%C0&-n1ffVr"%&fi Loose to medium dense, moist, dark brown, silty, gravelly sand, with logs and building debris. (Fill) Fill becomes light brown 5 Loose, moist, light brown, gravelly, medium sand, with logs -and other wood debris. -(Fill) Peat layer from 11 2 to 11-1 feet. Medium caving from 2 to 10 feet. dense to dense, wet to saturated, gray, medium to coarse sand. 5- B011 . Note: medium seepage a t 14 feet. Water contains high amounts of silt. Elm Place, Lots 30, 31 , 32 ai;,'* 36 for the Homeland Company, 4P Edmonds, Washington. 8608-24 jAugUSL 1986 EXPLORATION PIT LOGS INUMBER EP-3 r% gFnIUF:PJT ns:Qj-mwru%.. il it Flu 1 r ts oose to.medium dense, moist, dark and liglit brown, silty, gravelly sand, with logs and brick material. (1, Peat layer from 121' to 13 feet. X Note: Minor caving from 2 to 11 feet. Minor seepage at 11 feet and 13 feet. B011 Dense, saturated, gray, gravelly, medium to "rse sand. NUMBER EP-4 0— SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION NOTES Medium dense,.moist, dark brown, silty, gravell X-*e Y .W sand, with logs. (Fill) 1-.X I 5 1 Medium dense..to d' ense, saturated, gray, gravelly, coarse sand. Note: Very minor seepage at base of hole. Minor caving from 1 to 8 feet. Elm Place, Lots 30, 31, 3-2 and 36, for the Homeland Company, Edmonds, Washington. B011 8608-24 lAugust 1986 NUMBER EP-5 10 15 EXPLORATION PIT LOGS sFniurtir nca.-n-y- Loose, damp, light brown, silty, gravelly sand, with wood debris and a tire*. (Fill) - Loose to medium dense, light brown, silty, gravelly sand, with wood debris. (Fill) Medium dense to dense, wet to saturated, dark gray, gravelly, medium to coarse sand. t'-. '. . - j I I ne RY, I A0, L: 4 V V ill Note: Heavy seepage at 10 feet. Minor caving from 10 to 12 feet. Elm Place, Lots 30,31,32 and 36- for the Homeland Company, Edmonds, Washington. BOH ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIEfYCESg INC 8608-24 August 1 1 1-9861 �Ir 00 CD -0 a) CITY of EDIONDS SDE SEWER P,�J%JT For Inspection Call 771-3202 STREET FIL PERMIT NO. 07938 Address of Construction: Property Legal Description (Include all easements): Owner and/or Builder: 71 457 Contractor & License No: Singl:e Family Residence EDIMONDS Multi -Family (No. of Units ETREATMENT PLANT, Commercial (No. of fixture Unit,s Invasion into City Right -of -Way: No Yes (If Yes, Right -of -Way Construction Permit required. Call One -Call -Center (1-800-424-5555) before any excavation.) Cross other Private Property: No w"' Yes — (If Yes, easement required, attach legal description and county easement number.) PLEAS READ THE ITEMS LISTED ON THE BACK RECEIVED NOY �3 01988 I certify that I have read and shall comply bAe- with the items listed on the back. PUBLIC WORKS -7 Permit Fee: Issued By: Trunk Charge: bate Issued: Assessment Fee: Receipt No.: 262mlo Partial Inspection: Comments Date Initial Final Inspection Approved: Date Initial Rejected: Reason Date Initial ** PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE ** Wh.ite Copy - File Green Copy -'Inspector Buff Copy - Applicant Ab WA h J, M A40 de OjP )VW �14 i-0,04A 2 1 -,,r, ,,r., 2 41. dELA-EZ 516414 Ez . Faoelc lvlq.5 E'le JOA—rilr RF-CEIVED MAY '2J7 1988 KIRMIT COUNTER At /-/,Oa e-PS?-- 6444X /" The City of Edmonds Side Sewer Drawing EASEMENT NO - ----------------------------------- -------- NEW CONSTRUCTION REPAIRS r-1 LID NO - ------------------ - ASMT. NO - ------------------ OWNER ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CONTRACTOR - -- --------------------- -- ---- ---------------------------------- PERMIT NO. JOB ADDRESS ------- F--Lenln ....... ---------------------------------- LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO. --------------------------- BLOCK NO . ........ --------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ NAMEOF/ADDITION ----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- EDMONDS ITRENFIMEN-r PLANT] LL( PWW-0001-11/75 (REV.11/78) Approved: xv� DATE12 ............... By WN" 17- Z U 0_� 114 >4 0 U W OQ 0 Z 0 W U 04 0 "q CITY OF EDMONDS , I COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT STREET FILE A. * Owner: Washington Natural Gas Co B. 0 Contractor: �ff'156 AV NE pefte g Addre'19A 9 8 0 0 7 vue, City State Zip 9 Address or Vicinity of Con Type of Work to be Done: Work in Connection With: Pavement Cut: 0 Y 0 N El Sub or Plat 0 Commercial Wit No. 'QT� 9 S Issue Date ��- - ��B Same Name 11 Mailing Address City ­ State Zip State License Number Pi El Single Family 0 Multifamily 447-0700 Telephone Number 0 City Projects R1 utility APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees to hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any injuries, damages, or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, forseen or unforseen, that may be made against the City of Edmonds, or any of its departments or employees, including or not limited to the defense of any legal proceedings including defense costs, court costs,. and attorney fees by reason of granting this permit. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THEFINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OFJHE WORK. Funds held from the Security Deposit (e9tima Oiestoration fee) will be held until the final street patch is completed by City forces, at which time a debit or credit will be processed for issuance to the applicant. • A 24 hour notice is required for inspection; Please call Public Works: 771-3202 • Work is to be inspected during progress and at completion. • Restoration to be in accordance with City Code. • Street to be kept clean at all times. • Traffic Control to be in accordance with City regulations. .0 All street -cut ditches must be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to end of working day; no exceptions. I understand the above and that this permit must be available at the job site for inspection purposes at all times. Signature. Date: 8/11/88 Owner or Contractor This Permit Must Be Posted at theJob Site For Inspection Purposes Call DIAL -DIG Prior To Beginn ing Work ISSUED BY: k4l _Q 9 V Time Authorized: Void after —days. Special Conditions: PERMIT FEE: Security Deposit: Receipt No.: Fund 11.1 Fee: — Amendments: Street Cut Dimensions: X NO WORK TO BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE bc bille Eng. Div. July 1985 Eng. Div. July 1985 IcocioN h(go, -,"PI t 0 i Gd6l N ,61Y M*I 56, Ilk, 750 -40 Lq CD t. io 4so 640 9-Ibi 0 r 0 a; V. - - % fop: -7d W 7-7 u F— . ;; Z6 "'-I jr*" ft # sv*. CO ;1 s His #6 Ms 119 Ezel SO NV 'F60 7w M-720 724--Flb 700 r, I bT. or 2 L"t 4 1AC 'Itz? /44po Ap, I d co te! I 0 v lot rb W, or/ I d mz V V Raw qn fjl' NO 91 It be co P.. ridt 4, W 13 S, 0 ov Wl- do Aug V Z*61 991091