656 DALEY ST.PDF111111 lill lill
10797
656 DALEY ST
F- -I
L-A
TAX ACCOUNTfPARCEL NUMBER: MO�--EA�2-k
BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE):
.01
COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR:
CRITICAL AREAS I VV
em
DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S:
DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: - DI (Q-
PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED:
EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR:
PERMITS,(OTHER
PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED: —
SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED:
SEWER LID FEE S:
SHORT PLAT FILE:
SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED:
SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #:
GEOTECH REPORT DATED:
STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #:
FOR:
WATER METER TAP CARD DATED:
-- flin, -
TION: E] Conditional Waiver 0 Study Required iver
ywa
LID
LOT: BLOCK:
0
LATEMP\DSrsTomis\Stree1 File Cbecklist.doc
VAOVOU9 //76
�jtJql; ��AlLlco
to 10%
UftN40, — fizWW'?
L Llz��ZzzzzA,,
7-7.
RAISED, .................
PATIO
JUNIT 1011 UNIT
4
4-
APPROVED LANN�ING
7- Iz
96
116Y WIDE AL
EY
LA'NDSCAPE PL N
i
SCALE:
III = (-Ll
IkD� �tcm V�b%k eqsiq
m 6U-L DOJ 19)0
Lvp ko KYQS 61;(0
qW e(�2112
STREET FILE
mw
HW -MEWS/kKW
(0, WK MAeAcTAYd-u
z
R(S SCKLP—r O'OAM
2 PIM(5 JhfbtjleA
w
0:
o0 kzki�k
GU�Afo (UH'I(e
z
wo
G�l RkEA JAfl;400
Jkqkwe�*
fA-UAA6AA
,�mvucus-
tHUJA - 0(blVWTAQ
mmw - 6 m0i I
roftumv dowak e q6t
Kimmmoma,'t,bw
ulk
Nw
VKWMVR, JAW
REVISION
DEC 17 2010
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Crn OF EDMONDS
OiF ED -4fo
N6
STATUS: ISSUED 5/8/2008
Expiration Date: 5/8/2009
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDSWA 98020
PHONE: (425) 771-0220 - FAX: (425) 771-0221
Parcel No: 004' )4210101900
P ROPERTYOWNER APPLICANT CONTRACTOR
CHURCH OF THE OPEN BIBLE RONALD JOHNSON OWNER EXEMPTION TAKEN
657 DALEY ST 19601 23RD AVE NW
EDMONDS, WA 98020
DUPLEX
VALUATION: $369,318
SHORELINE, WA 98177
206-546-2288
LICENSE #: EXP:
PERMIT TYPE: Residential
PERMIT GROUP: 20 - Duplex
GRADING: N CYDS: 0
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: VB
RETAININGWALLROCKERY: Y
OCCUPANT GROUP: R3
OCCUPANT LOAD:
FENCE: N ( 0 X 0 FT.)
CODE: 2006
IOTHEK N ----- - OTHER DESC:
IZONE� RM-1
INUMBER OF STORIES: 3
VESTED DATE:
INUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS: 2
1
FNISTING ARE,%
IBASEMENT: 0 1 ST FLOOR- 0 2ND FLOOR- 0
PROPOSED ARFt
BASEMENT - 0 1 ST FLOOR- 430 2ND FLOOR- 1600
13RD FLOOR- 0 GA RAGE 0 DECK 0 OTHER 0
13RD FLOOR 1531 GARAGE, 870 DECK. 125 OTHER. 0
FRONT S ETBACK SIDESEFBACK REARSEFBACK
REQUIRED: N 15 PROPOSED: 15+ 1 REQUIRED: W 10 PROPOSED: I� �REQUIRED: E 15 PROPOSED: 15
HEIGHT ALLOWED:30 PROPOSED:29.875 REQUIRED: S 10 PROPOSED: 10
SETBACK NOTES:
PERMITAPPROVAL
I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STAT E LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUCTION AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED
THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STAT E OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18:27.
THIS APPLICATION IS NOT A PERMIT UNTIL SIGNED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL OR HISIHER DEPUTY AND ALL FEES ARE PAID.
Signature Print Narne Date Released By Date
ATTENTION
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL ORA CERTIFICATE OF
OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBCI09/ IBCI 10/ IRCI 10.
ARCHIVE APPLICANT ASSESSOR OTHER
0
STATUS: ISSUED BLD20071195
CONDITIONS
REQUIRED SPECIAL INSPECTIONS FOR THIS PROJECT:
1) Excavation, grading, & site preparation
2) Soil bearing verification
3) Placement of fill & compaction
4) Footing drain
5) Site retaining wall construction.
• E)dsting enclosed patio to remain until foundation is inspected, at which point it shall be removed in its entirety.
• Lot line stakes must be in place at the time of foundation/setback inspection.
• All new, evended, re -built or relocated electrical utility and/or service shall be placed underground.
• Approval of this foundation design is conditional subject to inspection of e�dsting site soil conditions.
Retaining Walls must be designed and constructed to resist the lateral pressure of the retained material.
Provisions must be made for the control and drainage of surface water around buildings.
• Installer shall provide the manufacturer's installation, operating instructions, and a whole house ventilation system operation
description. A label shall be affixed to the whole house timer control that reads "Whole House Ventilation" (see operating
instructions).
• Ma.4mum Height 25 feet. Measured from average elevation of undisturbed soil at comers of e)dended building rectangle.
Subject to field check by building department.
• Hose Bibbs (exterior faucets) are required to have a pen-nanently affixed anti-s iphon device installed.
• In addition to the required pressure/relief valve, an approved listed expansion tank shall be installed on all hot water tanks. Per
UPC 608.
• Type B or L vent connectors required on fuel-buming appliances pass ing through unheated spaces. Per IMC 803.2
• Obtain Electrical Permit from State Department of Labor & Industries. 425-290-1309
• Pursuant to UPC 605.2 a water service shutoff shall be installed on the water line as it enters the building.
• City approved plastic piping may be used in water service piping provided that where metal water service piping is used for
electrical grounding purposes, replacement piping shall be of like materials (UPC 604.8). A state electrical permit and
inspection is required if electrical grounding is altered, removed, improved, or added. Contact State Dept. of Labor &
Industries Electrical Division at 425-290-1309.
• Submit all special inspection reports to the City Building Inspector on a weekly basis.
• Any request for alternate design, modification, variance or other administrative deviation (hereinafter "variance") fi-om
adopted codes, ordinances or policies must be specifically requested in writing and be called out and identified. Processing
fees for such request shall be established by Council and shall be paid upon submittal and are non-refundable.
Approval of any plat or plan containing provisions which do not comply with city code and for which a variance has not been
specifically identified, requested and considered by the appropriate city official in accordance with the appropriate provision
of city code or state law does not approve any items not to code specification.
• Pursuant to UPC 608 a pressure regulator valve (PRV) shall be installed near the water shutoff.
• Sound/Noise originating from temporary construction sites as a result of construction activity are exempt from the noise lirnits
of ECC Chapter 5.30 only during the hours of 7:00am to 6:00pm on weekdays and 10:00am and 6:00pm on Saturdays, excluding
Sundays and Federal Holidays. At all other times the noise originating from construction sites/activites must comply with the
noise limits of Chapter 5.30, unless a variance has been granted pursuant to ECC 5.30.120.
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE
PUBLIC DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE SEPARATE PERMISSION.
PERMIT TIME LIMIT. SEE ECDC 19.00.005(A)(6)
BUILDING (425) 771-0220 EXT. 1333 1 ENGINEERING (425) 771-0220 E)CF. 1326 1 FIRE (425) 771-0215
I PUBLIC WORKS (425) 771-0235 1 PRE-TREATMENT (425) 672-5755 1 RECYCLING (425) 27 -4801 1
When calling for an inspection please leave the following information: Permit Number, Job Site Address, Type of Inspection being
0
I requested, Contact Name and Phone Number, Date Prefereed, and %fiether you prefer morning or afternoon. I
• E-Erosion Control/Mobilization
• FTraffic Control
• E-StormTightline
• E-Storm Detention System
• E-Footing Drain Connection
• E-Water Service Line
• E-Engineering Final
• B-Setbacks
• B-Footings
• B-Foundation Wall
• B-Isolated Footings/Piers
• B-Retaining Wall
• B-Slab Insulation
• B-Plumb Ground Work
• B-First Floor Framing
• B-Plumb Rough In
• B-Gas Test/Pipe
• B-Equipment-Mech
• B-FAerior Sheathing
• B-Shear Nailing
• B-Height Verification
• B-Framing
• B-Wall Insulation/Caulk
• B-Floor Insulation/Caulk
• B-Ceiling Insulation/Caulk
• B-SheetrockNail
• B-Building Final
*PLANNING DATA
New Commercial I Multi -Family Projects
Name: �e
Date: W06
Site Address bockv S�- _(bTO)
Plan Check#: BLD-.200-7 (q 5-
Project Description: 4-'Y
Use(s) Proposed.-
Allowed Use: (Y& NO)
CUP File Number:
To Allow What Uses:
Legal Nonconforming Land Use Determination Issued: (YES I
Reduced Site Plan Provided: (0 / NO)
Zoning: 12(W
Map Page: 70
Comp Plan Designation.
Corner Lot: QV I NO)
Flag Lot- (YES I to
AOB File Number (date waived):
4P& VO
Lot Area.-6 5- S-0
Plans Match ADI3 Approved: NO)
Shoreline Required: (YES I NO
Critical Areas Determination #: eoeli- zeo -7 7
11 Study Required
O-Waiver
SEPA D termination:
IV
K,�empt
Needed (for sites with 500 cubic yards of grading or within 200 feet of Puget Sound or Lake
Ballinger- Requires: (1) Fee, (2) Environmental Checklist, and (3) APO List with notarized form)-
72vA � S+�,
Str et:
e:
Side: _JRear:
57
A: ..Setbacks
Street:
Side:
Side: /0
Rear: /S-
Lot CoverageXAR1T-eq_u7r_ed:
Fro (K
Lot CoverageilEAR 12—ddad-/7-5
ox" ^tW r
A 2, 8' 75
Lot Coverage/ R Galetilationsi
Building Hei�rht'
Datum Point:
Datum Elevation:
Maximum Height: S_ _gj.,S-
Actual Height:
(2q. -2 S
Subdivision:
Lot Aggregation Required:
Landscaping,
Landscaping Matches ADB Approved:
L I andscaping Bid Provided: ((E-S)NO)
Bon d Amount (100% Bid): co 13
Plan Review By-
0
0
PLANNING DATA
New Commercial I Multi -Family Projects
iiSTREET =FILE I
P.
C6mmerci.41, irkindA^44�sis
I
Business Name
Type/Use
Parking
Ratio
Tenant
Area
Required
Parking
Total Parking Required.
Total Parking Provided
M -�A N
uly ahWy Air 04.4
# Bedrooms per Dwelling Unit
Parking Ratio
Units
Required
Parking
Studio
1-21D.U_
I Bedroom
1.51D.U.
2 Bedrooms
1.8/D.U.
3 + Bedrooms
2.0/D.U_
Total Parking Required.
Total Parking Provided.-
(Ak
d, A 5"
(OY- COM CO q 'a Ctk,�^e- k, OJ /0
�d- C04 5
AlkeLK
11./� Z'PtIv�4b,70w-(
jAd
vd� ,- - f_1 fc�
t 1.0 CLl �
\� V\_Q \, � ,
Plan Review By:
CNEOTECH
CONSULTANTS, INC.
Celebrating 20 Years 1986-2006
Ronald D. Johnson, Architect
19601 — 23rd Avenue Northwest
Shoreline, Washington 98177
Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Study
Proposed New Duplex Building
658 Daley Street
Edmonds, Washington
Dear Mr. Johnson:
13256 Northeast 20th Street, Suite 16
Bellevue, Washington 98005
(425) 747-5618 FAX (425) 747-8561
July 2, 2007
JN 07220
RECEWED
NOV 2 7 2067
BUILDING DEPT.
We are pleased to present this geotechnical engineering report for the property at 658 Daley Street
in Edmonds. The scope of our services consisted of exploring site surface and subsurface
conditions, and then developing this report to provide recommendations for general earthwork and.
design criteria for foundations and retaining walls. This work was authorized by your acceptance of
our proposal, P-7359, dated May 29, 2007.
I You provided us with a preliminary site plan of the proposed development and elevation views of
the proposed building, which were undated. Based on this information, and conversations with you,
we understand that a new three-story duplex building will be constructed on the southern half of the
subject property. This building will have a proposed main floor elevation of 95.5 feet. Temporary
cuts of less than 4 feet are anticipated to reach the planned excavation bottom. Although minimal
excavation is anticipated, we understand that permission has been obtained from the adjacent
western property owner to extend the excavation for the western portion of the building onto the
adjacent property, if necessary.
.,,,,-Ph 2 of the proposed development will consist of removing the existing residence and replacing
lase
it with a new duplex building. However, we understand that Phase 2 will only take place o�ce
I-- �Pa"s*e 1 is completed.
If the scope of the project changes from what we have described above, we shou d be provided
with revised plans in order to determine if modifications to the recommendations and conclusions of
this report are warranted.
SITE CONDITIO
SURFACE
The Vicinity Map, Plate 1, illustrates the general location of the site near downtown Edmonds. The
rectangular -shaped property is located at the southwest corner of 7th Avenue North and Daley
Street. It measures approximately 60 feet (east -west) by 110 feet (north -south). A three-story,
single-family residence currently occupies the northern half of the subject property. This residence
has an approximate lower floor elevation of 98 feet. We did not observe any noticeable signs of
settlement in the existing house foundation. The southern half of the subject property, which will
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. STREET FILE
Ronald D. Johnson, Architect JN 07220
July 2, 2007 Page 2
contain the new duplex building, Contains grass landscaping with some sporadic trees. The
property slopes from north to south at a very gentle rate towards a moderate, 3-foot high slope. An
alley right-of-way is situated at the toe of this slope. A parking lot belonging to Edmonds Open
Bible Church is situated to the west of the subject property.
SUBSURFACE
The subsurface conditions were* explored by excavating three test pits at the approximate. locations
shown on the Site Exploration Plan, Plate 2. Our exploration program was based on the proposed
construction, anticipated subsurface conditions and those encountered during exploration, and the
scope of work outlined in our proposal.
The test pits were excavated on June 12, 2007, with a mini-trackhoe. A geotechnical engineer
from our staff observed the excavation process, logged the test pits, and obtained representative
samples of the soil encountered. "Grab" samples of selected subsurface soil were collected from
the backhoe bucket. The Test Pit Logs are attached to this report as Plates 3 and 4.
Soil Conditions
All three test pits encountered similar subsurface conditions. The test pits revealed loose,
slightly silty sand directly underlying a thin layer of topsoil. Beneath the near -surface soils
was medium -dense, gravelly sand at a depth of 3 to 4 feet below existing grade. This soil
became denser with depth and was exposed to the maximum explored depth of the test pits
(approximately 6.5 to 7 feet below existing grade). No caving was observed in the test pits.
From conversations with you, we understand that the excavation for an addition to Edmonds
Open Bible Church also exposed native sand. The native soils encountered in our test pits
are consistent with explorations that we have conducted in the vicinity.
Although our explorations did not encounter cobbles or boulders, they are often found in
soils that have been deposited by glaciers or fast-moving water.
Groundwater Conditions
No groundwater seepage was observed in the test pits. The test pits were left open for only
a short time period. It should be noted that groundwater levels vary seasonally with rainfall
and other factors. We do not anticipate that groundwater* will be a factor in the proposed
development.
The stratification lines on the logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types at the
exploration locations. The actual transition between soil types may be gradual, and subsurface
conditions can vary between exploration locations. The logs provide specific subsurface information
only at the locations tested. The relative densities and moisture descriptions indicated on the test
pit logs are interpretive descriptions based on the conditions observed during excavation.
The compaction of backfill was not in the scope of our services. Loose soil will therefore be found
in the area of the test pits. If this presents a problem, the backfill will need to be removed and
replaced with structural fill during construction.
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ronald D. Johnson, Architect
July 2, 2007 0
JN 07220
Page 3
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
GENERAL
THIS SECTION CONTAINS A SUMMARY OF OUR STUDY AND FINDINGS FOR THE PURPOSES OF A
GENERAL OVERVIEW ONLY. MORE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS ARE
CONTAINED IN THE REMAINDER OF THIS REPORT. ANY PARTY RELYING ON THIS REPORT SHOULD
READ THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT
The test pits conducted for this study encountered topsoil and loose sand overlying medium -dense,
native sands that became dense with depth. It is our opinion that the proposed buildings can be
supported on conventional foundations bearing on the medium -dense, native soils. Some
overexcavation will be required to remove the loose, near -surface soils and expose the competent
bearing soils. It will be important that the sand soils in the foundation excavations be protected
against disturbance. if the backhoe bucket has teeth on it, it will be necessary to remove any
loosened soils before pouring concrete.
It appears that the excavation for the proposed building can be made safely within the property
boundaries. Temporary cuts in the native soils should not be made steeper than a 1:1 inclination
(Horizontal: Vertical). As stated earlier in this report, we understand that permission has been
obtained from the adjacent western property owner to extend the excavation for the western portion
of the building onto the adjacent property if necessary.
The on -site sands can be used as structural fill beneath bearing elements, or as wall backfill, if they
are placed at, or near, their optimum moisture content.
The erosion control measures needed during the site development will depend heavily on the
weather conditions that are encountered. A rock -covered construction entrance should be provided
wherever trucks and equipment may have to drive off of existing paved surfaces. Cut slopes and
soil stockpiles should be covered with plastic during wet weather. As with any project, additional
erosion control measures may need to be implemented depending on conditions encountered
during construction.
The drainage and/or waterproofing recommendations presented in this report are intended only to
prevent active seepage from flowing through concrete walls or slabs. Even in the absence of active
seepage into and beneath structures, water vapor can migrate through walls, slabs, and floors from
the surrounding soil, and can even be transmitted from slabs. and foundation walls due to the
concrete curing process. Water vapor also results from occupant uses, such as cooking and
bathing. Excessive water vapor trapped within structures can result in a variety of undesirable
conditions, including, but not limited to, moisture problems with flooring systems, excessively moist
air within occupied areas, and the growth of molds, fungi, and other biological organisms that may
be harmful to the health of the occupants. The designer or architect must consider the potential
vapor sources and likely occupant uses, and provide sufficient ventilation, either passive or
mechanical, to prevent a build up of excessive water vapor within the planned structure.
Geotech Consultants, Inc. should be allowed to review the final development plans to verify that the
recommendations presented in this report are adequately addressed in the design. Such a plan
review would be additional work beyond the current scope of work for this study, and it may include
revisions to our recommendations to accommodate site, development, and geotechnical
constraints that become more evident during the review process.
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ronald D. Johnson, Architect JN 07220
July 2, 2007 is 10 Page 4
We recommend including this report, in its entirety, in the project contract documents. This report
should also be provided to any future property owners so they will be aware of our findings and
recommendations.
SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS
In accordance with Table 1615.1.1 of the 2003 International Building Code (IBC), the site soil
profile within 100 feet of the ground surface is best represented by Soil Profile Type D (Stiff Soil
Profile). The site soils are not susceptible to seismic liquefaction because of their dense nature.
CONVENTIONAL FOUNDATIONS
The proposed structures can be supported on conventional continuous and spread footings bearing
on undisturbed, medium -dense to dense, native soil. We recommend that continuous and
individual spread footings have minimum widths of 16 and 24 inches, respectively. Exterior footings
should also be bottomed at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finish ground surface for
protection against frost and erosion. The local building codes should be reviewed to determine if
different footing widths or embedment depths are required. Footing subgrades must be cleaned of
loose or disturbed soil prior to pouring concrete. Depending upon site and equipment constraints,
this may require removing the disturbed soil by hand.
Depending on the final site grades, overexcavation may be required below the footings to expose
competent native soil. Unless lean concrete is used to fill an overexcavated hole, the
overexcavation must be at least as wide at the bottom as the sum of the depth of the
overexcavation and the footing width. For example, an overexcavation extending 2 feet below the
bottom of a 2-foot-wide footing must be at least 4 feet wide at the base of the excavation. If lean
concrete is used, the overexcavation need only extend 6 inches beyond the edges of the footing.
An allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) is appropriate for footings
supported on competent native soil. A one-third increase in this design bearing pressure may be
used when considering short-term wind or seismic loads. For the above design criteria, it is
anticipated that the total post -construction settlement of footings founded on competent native soil
will be less than one inch.
Lateral loads due to wind or seismic forces may be resisted by friction between the foundation and
the bearing soil, or by passive earth pressure acting on the'vertical, embedded portions of the
foundation. For the latter condition, the foundation must be either poured directly against relatively
level, undisturbed soil or be surrounded by level structural fill. We recommend using the following
ultimate values for the foundation's resistance to lateral loading:
PARAMETER UIL,rimA,rE
J VALUE
Qo cient of Friction 0.45
Passive Earth Pressure 350 pcf
Where: (i) pcf is pounds per cubic foot, and (ii) passive earth
pressure is computed using the equivalent fluid density.
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ronald D. Johnson, Architect JN 07220
July 2, 2007 Page 5
If the ground in front of a foundation is loose or sloping, the passive earth pressure given above will
not be appropriate. We recommend maintaining a safety factor of at least 1.5 for the foundation's
resistance to lateral loading, when using the above ultimate values.
PERMANENT FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS
Retaining walls backfilled on only one side should be designed to resist the lateral earth pressures
imposed by the soil they retain. The following recommended parameters are for walls that restrain
level backfill:
PARANIETER
Active Earth Pressure
VALUE
35 pcf
Passive Earth Pressure
350 pcf
Coefficient of Friction
0.45
Soil Unit W ight
130 pcf
Where: (i) pcf is pounds per cubic foot, and (ii) active and
passive earth pressures are computed using the equivalent fluid
pressures.
* For a restrained wall that cannot deflect at least 0.002 times its
height a uniform lateral pressure equal to 10 psf times the height
of the wall should be added to the above active equivalent fluid
pressure.
The values given above are to be used to design permanent foundation and retaining walls only. It
is not appropriate to back -calculate soil strength parameters from the earth pressures and soil unit
weights presented in the table. The passive pressure given is appropriate for the depth of level
structural fill placed in front of a retaining or foundation wall only. The values for friction and
passive resistance are ultimate values and do not include a safety factor. We recommend a safety
factor of at least 1.5 ' for overturning and sliding, when using the above values to design the walls.
Restrained wall soil parameters should be utilized for a distance of 1.5 times the wall height from
comers or bends in the walls. This is intended to reduce the amount of cracking that can occur
where a wall is restrained by a corner.
The design values given above do not include the effects of any hydrostatic pressures behind the
walls and assume that no surcharges, such as those caused by slopes, vehicles, or adjacent
foundations will be exerted on the walls. If these conditions exist, those pressures should be added
to the above lateral soil pressures. Where sloping backfill is desired behind the walls, we will need
to be given the wall dimensions and the slope of the backfill in order to provide the appropriate
design earth pressures. The surcharge due to traffic loads behind a wall can 'typically be
accounted for by adding a uniform pressure equal to 2 feet multiplied by the above active fluid
density.
Heavy construction equipment should not be operated behind retaining and foundation walls within
a distance equal to the height of a wall, unless the walls are designed for the' additional lateral
pressures resulting from the equipment. The wall design criteria assume that the backfill will be
well -compacted in lifts no thicker than 12 inches. The compaction of backfill near the walls should
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ronald D. Johnson, Architect JN 07220
July 2, 2007 0 Is Page 6
be accomplished with hand -operated equipment to prevent the walls from being overloaded by the
higher soil forces that occur during compaction.
Retaininq WaY Backfill and Waterproorin
Backfill placed behind retaining or foundation walls should be coarse, free -draining
structural fill containing no organics. This backfill should contain no more than 5 percent silt
or clay particles and have no gravel greater than 4 inches in diameter. The percentage of
particles passing the No. 4 sieve should be between 25 and 70 percent. If the native sand
is used as backfill, a drainage composite similar to Miradrain 6000 should be placed against
the backfilled retaining walls. The drainage composites should be hydraulically connected
to the foundation drain system. Free -draining backfill or gravel should be used for the entire
width of the backfill where seepage is encountered. For increased protection, drainage
composites should be placed along cut slope faces, and the walls should be backfilled
entirely with free -draining soil. The later section entitled Drainage Considerations should
also be reviewed for recommendations related to subsurface drainage behind foundation
and retaining walls.
The purpose of these backfill requirements is to ensure that the design criteria for a
retaining wall are not exceeded because of a build-up of hydrostatic pressure behind the
wall. The top 12 to 18 inches of the backfill should consist of a compacted, relatively
impermeable soil or.topsoil, or the surface should be paved. The ground surface must also
slope away from backfilled walls to reduce the potential for surface water to percolate into
the backfill. The section entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill contains
recommendations regarding the placement and compaction of structural fill behind retaining
and foundation walls.
The above recommendations are not intended to waterproof below -grade walls, or to
prevent the formation of mold, mildew or fungi in interior spaces. Over time, the
performance of subsurface drainage systems can degrade, subsurface groundwater flow
pafterns can change, and utilities can break or develop, leaks. Therefore, waterproofing
should be provided where future seepage through the walls is not acceptable. This typically
includes limiting cold -joints and wall penetrations, and using bentonite panels or
membranes on the outside of the walls. There are a variety of different waterproofing
materials and systems, which should be installed by an experienced contractor familiar with
the anticipated construction and subsurface conditions. Applying a thin coat of asphalt
emulsion to the outside face of a wall is not considered waterproofing, and will only help to
reduce moisture generated from water vapor or capillary action from seeping through the
concrete. As with any project, adequate ventilation of basement and crawl space areas is
important to prevent a build up of water vapor that is commonly transmitted through
concrete walls from the surrounding soil, even when seepage is not present. This is
appropriate even when waterproofing is applied to the outside of foundation and retaining
walls. We recommend that you contact a specialty consultant if detailed recommendations
or specifications related to waterproofing design, or minimizing the potential for infestations
of mold and mildew are desired.
SLABS -ON -GRADE
The building floors can be constructed as slabs -on -grade atop existing non -organic soils, or on
structural fill. The subgrade soil must be in a firm, non -yielding condition at the time of slab
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ronald D. Johnson, Architect JN 07220
July 2, 2007 Page 7
construction or underslab fill placement. Any soft areas encountered should be excavated and
replaced with select, imported structural fill.
Even where the exposed soils appear dry, water vapor will tend to naturally migrate upward through
the soil to the new constructed space above it. All interior slabs -on -grade must be underlain by a
capillary break or drainage layer consisting of a minimum 4-inch thickness of gravel or crushed
rock that has a fines content (percent passing the No. 200 sieve) of less than 3 percent and a sand
content (percent passing the No. 4 sieve) of no more than 10 percent. As noted by the American
Concrete Institute (ACI) in the Guides for Concrete Floor and Slab Structures, proper moisture
protection is desirable immediately below any on -grade slab that will be covered by tile, wood,
carpet, impermeable floor coverings, or any moisture -sensitive equipment or products. ACI also
notes that vapor retarders, such as 6-mil plastic sheeting, are typically used. A vapor retarder is
defined as a material with a permeance of less than 0.3 US perms per square foot (psf) per hour,
as determined by ASTM E 96. It is possible that concrete admixtures may meet this specification,
although the manufacturers of the admixtures should be consulted. Where plastic sheeting is used
under slabs, joints should overlap by at least 6 inches and be sealed with adhesive tape. The
sheeting should extend to the foundation walls for maximum vapor protection. If no potential for
vapor passage through the slab is desired, a vapor baffier should be used. A vapor barrier, as
defined by ACI, is a product with a water transmission rate of 0.00 perms per square foot per hour
when tested in accordance with ASTM E 96. Reinforced membranes having sealed overlaps can
meet this requirement.
We recommend that the contractor, the project materials engineer, and the owner discuss these
issues and review recent ACI literature and ASTM E-1643 for installation guidelines and guidance
on the use of the protection/blotter material. Our opinion is that with impervious surfaces that all
means should be undertaken to reduce water vapor transmission.
DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS
We recommend that foundation drains be installed at the base of all foundation and earth -retaining
walls. These drains should be surrounded by at least 6 inches of 1-inch-minus, washed rock and
then wrapped in non -woven, geotextile filter fabric (Mirafi 140N, Supac 4NP, or similar material). At
its highest point, a perforated pipe invert should be at least 6 inches below the bottom of a slab
floor or the level of a crawl space, and it should be sloped for drainage. All roof and surface water
drains must be kept separate from the foundation drain system. A typical drain detail is attached to
this report as Plate 5. For the best long-term performance, perforated PVC pipe is recommended
for all subsurface drains.
No groundwater was observed during our field work. If seepage is encountered in an excavation, it
should be drained from the site by directing it through drainage ditches, perforated pipe, or French
drains, or by pumping it from sumps interconnected by shallow connector trenches at the bottom of
the excavation.
The excavation and site should be graded so that surface water is directed off the site and away
from the tops of slopes. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where foundations,
slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Final site grading in areas adjacent to a building should
slope away at least 2 percent, except where the area is paved. Surface drains should be provided
where necessary to prevent ponding of water behind foundation or retaining walls.
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ronald D. Johnson, Architect JN 07220
July 2, 2007 0 is Page 8
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND STRUCTURAL FILL
All building and pavement areas should be stripped of surface vegetation, topsoil, organic soil, and
other deleterious material. The stripped or removed materials should not be mixed with any
materials to be used as structural fill, but they could be used in non-structural areas, such as
landscape beds.
Structural fill is defined as any fill, including utility backfill, placed under, or close to, a building,
behind permanent retaining or foundation walls, or in other areas where the underlying soil needs
to support loads. All structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts with a moisture content at, or
near, the optimum moisture content. The optimum moisture content is that moisture content that
results in the greatest compacted dry density. The moisture content of fill is very important and
must be closely controlled during the filling and compaction process.
The allowable thickness of the fill lift will depend on the material type selected, the compaction
equipment used, and the number of passes made to compact the lift. The loose lift thickness
should not exceed 12 inches. We recommend testing the fill as it is placed. If the fill is not
sufficiently compacted, it can be recompacted before another lift is placed. This eliminates the
need to remove the fill to achieve the required compaction. The following table presents
recommended relative compactions for structural fill:
LOCATION OF FILL MININIUM RELATIVE
PLACENIENT COMPACTION
Beneath slabs or 95%
walkways
Filled slopes and behind 90%
retaining walls
Where: Minimum Relative Compaction is the ratio, expressed in
percentages, of the compacted dry density to the maximum dry
density, as determined in accordance with ASTM Test
Designation D 1557-91 (Modified Proctor).
The General section should be reviewed for considerations related to the reuse of on -site soils.
Structural fill that will be placed in wet weather should consist of a coarse, granular soil with a silt or
clay content of no more than 5 percent. The percentage of particles passing the No. 200 sieve
should be measured from that portion of soil passing the three -quarter -inch sieve.
LIMITA TIONS
The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions as
they existed at the time of our exploration and assume that the soil and groundwater conditions
encountered in the test pits are representative of subsurface conditions on the site. If the
subsurface conditions encountered during construction are significantly different from those
observed in our explorations, we should be advised at once so that we can review these conditions
and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. Unanticipated soil conditions are
commonly encountered on construction sites and cannot be fully anticipated by merely taking soil
samples in test pits. Subsurface conditions can also vary between exploration locations. Such
unexpected conditions frequently require making additional expenditures to attain a properly
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ronald D. Johnson, Architect JN 07220
July 2, 2007 Page 9
constructed project. It is recommended that the owner consider providing a contingency fund to
accommodate such potential extra costs and risks. This is a standard recommendation for all
projects.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Ronald D. Johnson, Architect, and his
representatives, for specific application to this project and site. Our conclusions and
recommendations are professional opinions derived in accordance with current standards of
practice within the scope of our services and within budget and time constraints. No warranty is
expressed or implied. The scope of our services does not include services related to construction
safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods,
techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for
consideration in design. Our services also do not include assessing or minimizing the potential for
biological hazards, such as mold, bacteria, mildew and fungi in either the existing or proposed site
development.
ADDITIONAL SERVICES
Geotech Consultants, Inc. should be retained to provide geotechnical consultation, testing, and
observation services during construction. This is to confirm that subsurface conditions are
consistent with those indicated by our exploration, to evaluate whether earthwork and foundation
construction activities comply with the general intent of the recommendations presented in this
report, and to provide suggestions for design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ
from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. However, our work would not include the
supervision or direction of the actual work of the contractor and its employees or agents. Also, job
and site safety, and dimensional measurements, will be the responsibility of the contractor.
During the construction phase, we will provide geotechnical observation and testing services when
requested by you or your representatives. Please be aware that we can only document site work
we actually observe. It is still the responsibility of your contractor or on -site construction team to
verify that our recommendations are being followed, whether we are present at the site or not.
The following plates are attached to complete this report:
Plate 1 Vicinity Map
Plate 2 Site Exploration Plan
Plates 3 - 4 Test Pit Logs
Plate 5 Typical Footing Drain Detail
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. i
Ronald D. Johnson, Architect JN 07220
July 2, 2007 Page 10
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. If you have any questions, or if we
may be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us.
GDB/MRM: jyb
Respectfully submitted,
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Gerry D. Bautista, Jr.
Geotechnical Engineer
42
EXPIRES
Marc R. McGinnis, P.E.
Principal
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
7
ERlCr, PL
EMU L
9TH PL
SW
T
PK
IT
hvTT
18STH fl.
PL Sw
i87TH
5W
S"'S"w,
Pt Sw
188TH S, SW
189TH S SW
01
TER
WE PL
190TH ST W
CHERR''ST
192ND ST SW
196T
j
PUGET
HE LODY L N Wr'
a NINkn IF
OR SMONKRE
El
EWUM WY
ST
iv WT.
"MI
SP
MAD
ST
�
ST
�0 I
PAIK'
8PACKE
VISTA WO —M." VISTA W' 200TH
PL 3a
SW6 B3w �[
UAIDIA
Ma
Zulu,
SITE s, 19;
IT
LEY ST
Ss
ST
p1mi,
is 51 ST
N1
DAYMN &�fwj ST I
KAPLE ST is 209TH PL
23
ALBE4 -10 -11 jT
SW
01,
sr
ST CI As
HOWELL WY Aa
FS 21ZTH
4z ,
MRSM
SP f sf. ST 111)
F Sw
2
n
p=71
ST
"u"IL is ZISTM 14V
SQ1
� ZISTH ST 21
SW i2�
L.A Q;
'M I
ZISTK n
j." ED#=
KUM
af 217TH ST
26
a sm
9 FI F R ST - r
m
—BEL COOLA
J4
3 0
D
E 2( ST
2
'1 Sw
L
a PL
T
ZZM S1 z
2" �
)M
S sum
(Source: The Thomas Guide, Snohomish County Washington, 1998)
GEOTECH
VICINITY MAP
658 Daley Street
CONSULTANTS,
INC.
Edmonds, Washington
A
011 No. Date:
F
Plate.
.0722 June 2007
1
0 0
Daley Street
Phase 2
Building
TP-3
Phase 1
Building
I
TP-1 TP-2
............................................
Alley
GEOTECH
CONSULTANTS, INC.
SITE EXPLORATION PLAN
658 Daley Street
Edmonds, Washington
Job No: Date: No Scale Plate: 2
07220 1 June 2007 1 1 1
m=6.5%
10-
15F
10
15
'V,
TEST PIT 1 0
Description
ropsoil
Brown SAND, fine- to medium -grained, with trace gravel, moist, medium -dense
becomes brown/gray, medium- to coarse -grained, dense
• Test Pit terminated at 6.5 feet on June 12, 2007.
• No groundwater seepage observed during excavation.
• No caving observed during excavation.
0 "G,
CP
TEST PIT 2
Description
ropsoil
, fine- to
Light brown SAND, fine- to
, witn trace gravel, moist, medium -dense
- becomes brown/gray, medium -dense to dense
• Test Pit terminated at 7.0 feet on June 12, 2007.
• No groundwater seepage observed during excavation.
• No caving observed during excavation.
GEOTECH
CONSULTANTS, INC.
TEST PIT LOG
658 Daley Street
Edmonds, Washington
Job Date: Logged by.
072206 1 June 2007 1 GDB I Plate: 37
0
4
m=5.6%
10
TEST PIT 3
I opsoil
Description
Orange/brown, slightly silty SAND, fine-grained, moist, loose
Ught brown SAND, fine- to medium -grained, with trace gravel, moist, medium -dense
becomes light brown to gray, fine- to medium -grained, dense
becomes gravelly
• Test Pit terminated at 7.0 feet on June 12, 2007.
• No groundwater seepage observed during excavation.
• No caving observed during excavation.
GEOTECH
CONSUILTAWS, INC.
TEST PIT LOG
658 Daley Street
Edmonds, Washington
Job Date: Logged by.
07220 June 2007 GDB I Plate: 4
-------------
0
I
Sieve Opening (mm.)
Sieve Opening (US standard)
--*--TP - 1. 3 feet 6.5% moisture . --*-- TP - 3. 7 feet, 5.6% moisture
GEOTECH
CONSULTANTS, INC.
[Go
10
0
0
0
M
3
CL
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
658 Daley Street
Edmonds, Washington
No:
[�!
ftte:
1
plate.
07220
June 2007
1 —
1 :51
1$ 0
Slope backfill away from
foundation. Provide surface
drains where necessary.
Washed Roc
(7/8" min. size)
4" min.
Backfill
(See text for
requirements)
Nonwoven Geotextile
Filter Fabric -
0074-
0-
0
.0.10P-t 110 6.0
L.L
Tightline Roof Drain
(Do not connect to footing drain)
I Possible Slab
000-0*0, 000-O'D' 06o-o�;'
00 0 0 00
0
4" Perforated Hard PVC Pipe
(invert at least 6 inches below
slab or crawl space. Slope to
drain to appropriate outfall.
Place holes downward.)
Vapor Retarder/Barrier and
Capillary Break/Drainage Layer
(Refer to Report text)
NOTES:
(1) In crawl spaces, provide an outlet drain to prevent buildup of water that
bypasses the perimeter footing drains.
(2) Refer to report text for additional drainage, waterproofing, and slab considerations.
GEOTECH
CONSULTANTS, INC.
FOOTING DRAIN DETAIL
658 Daley Street
Edmonds, Washington
Job No: Plate:
07220 JU
- t�ate: ne 2007 1 67
OEOTECH
CONSULTANTS, INC.
Celebrating 20 Years 1986-2006
Ronald D. Johnson, Architect
19601 — 23rd Avenue Northwest
Shoreline, Washington 98177
'8�
�'�07 - 8 �1(2 ��Y'
EDM'
132�6 Northeast 20th Street, Suite 16
Bellevue, Washington 98005
(425) 747-5618 FAX (425) 747-8561
July 2, 2007
WS% a-- IV" FILE JN 07220
�4"Et I
(,O�s rr '��t ,
REC ERWED
Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Study
NOV 2 7
Proposed New Duplex Building
658 Daley Street BUILDING DEPT.
Edmonds, Washington
Dear Mr. Johnson:
We are pleased to present this geotechnical engineering report for the property at 658 Daley Street
in Edmonds. The scope of our services consisted of exploring site surface and subsurface
conditions, and then developing this report to provide recommendations for general earthwork and.
design criteria for foundations and retaining walls. This work was authorized by your acceptance of
our proposal, P-7359, dated May 29, 2007.
You provided us with a preliminary site plan of the proposed development and elevation views of
the proposed building, which were undated * * Based on this information, and conversations with you,
we understand that a new three-story duplex building will be constructed on the southern half of the
subject property. This building will have a proposed main floor elevation of 95.5 feet. Temporary
cuts of less than 4 feet are anticipated to reach the planned excavation bottom. Although minimal
excavation is anticipated, we understand that permission has been obtained from the adjacent
western property owner to extend the excavation for the western portion of the building onto the
adjacent property,. if necessary.
Phase 2 of the proposed development will consist of removing the existing residence and replacing
it with a new duplex building. However, we understand that Phase 2 will only take place once
Phase 1 is completed.
If the scope of the project changes from what'we have described above, we should be provided
with revised plans in order to determine if modifications to the recommendations and conclus I ions of
SITE CONDITIONS
RE C DO
NE
3 0 2007
EECE
The Vicinity Ma . p, Plate 1, illustrates the general location of the site near downtown Edmonds. The
recta ng ul ar-sh aped property is located at the southwest corner of 7th Avenue North and Daley
Street. It measures approximately 60 feet (east -west) by 110 feet (north -south). A three-story,
single-family residence currently occupies the northern half of the subject property. This residence
has an approximate lower floor elevation of 98 feet. We did not observe any noticeable signs of
settlement in the existing house foundation. The southern half of the subject property, which will
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. op�
MTY 0 1
�?onald D. Johnson, Archite* JN 07220
July 2, 2007 Page 2
contain the new duplex building, contains grass landscaping with some sporadic trees. The
property slopes from north to south at a very gentle rate towards a moderate, 3-foot high slope. An
alley right-of-way is situated at the toe of this slope. A parking lot belonging to Edmonds Open
Bible Church is situated to the west of the subject property.
SUBSURFACE
The subsurface conditions were explored by excavating three test pits at the approximate locations
shown on the Site Exploration Plan, Plate 2. Our exploration program was based on the proposed
construction, anticipated subsurface conditions and those encountered during exploration, and the
scope of work outlined in our proposal.
The test pits were excavated on June 12, 2007, with a mini-trackhoe. A geotechnical engineer
from our staff observed the excavation process, logged the test pits, and obtained representative
samples of the soil encountered. "Grab" samples of selected subsurface soil were collected from
the backhoe bucket. The Test Pit Logs are attached to this report as Plates 3 and 4.
Soil Conditions
All three test pits encountered similar subsurface conditions. The test pits revealed loose,
slightly silty sand directly underlying a thin layer of topsoil. Beneath the near -surface soils
was medium -dense, gravelly sand at a depth of 3 to 4 feet below existing grade. This soil
became denser with depth and was exposed to the maximum explored depth of the test pits
(approximately 6.5 to 7 feet below existing grade). No caving was observed in the test pits.
From conversations with you, we understand that the excavation for an addition to Edmonds
Open Bible Church also exposed native sand. The native soils encountered in our test pits
are consistent with explorations that we have conducted in the vicinity.
Although our explorations did not encounter cobbles or boulders, they are often found in
soils that have been deposited by glaciers or fast-moving water.
Groundwater Conditions
No groundwater seepage was observed in the test pits. The test pits were left open for only
a short time period. It should be noted that groundwater levels vary seasonally with rainfall
and other factors. We do not anticipate that groundwater'will be a factor in the proposed
development.
The stratification lines on the logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types at the
exploration locations. The actual transition between soil types may be gradual, and subsurface
conditions can vary between exploration locations. The logs provide specific subsurface information
only at the locations tested. The relative densities and moisture descriptions indicated on the test
pit logs are interpretive descriptions based on the conditions observed during excavation.
The compaction of backfill was not in the scope of our services. Loose soil will therefore be found
in the area of the test pits. If this presents a problem, the backfill will need to be removed and
replaced with structural fill during construction.
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
�onald D. Johnson, Architei*
July 2, 2007
JN 07220
Page 3
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
GENERAL
THIS SECTION CONTAINS A SUMMARY OF OUR STUDY AND FINDINGS FOR THE PURPOSES OF A
GENERAL OVERVIEW ONLY MORE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS ARE
CONTAINED IN THE REMAINDER OF THIS REPORT. ANY PARTY RELYING ON THIS REPORT SHOULD
READ THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT
The test pits conducted for this study encountered topsoil and loose sand overlying medium -dense,
native sands that became dense with depth. It is our opinion that the proposed buildings can be
supported on conventional foundations bearing on the medium -dense, native soils. Some
overexcavation will be required to remove the loose, near -surface soils and expose the competent
bearing soils. It will be important that the sand soils in the foundation excavations be protected
against disturbance. If the backhoe bucket has teeth on it, it will be necessary to remove any
loosened soils before pouring concrete.
It appears that the excavation for the proposed building can be made safely within the property
boundaries. Temporary cuts in the native soils should not be made steeper than a 1:1 inclination
(Horizontal: Vertical). As stated earlier in this report, we understand that permission has been
obtained from the adjacent western property owner to extend the excavation -for the western portion
of the building onto the adjacent property if necessary.
The on -site sands can be used as structural fill beneath bearing elements, or as wall backfill, if they
are placed at, or near, their optimum moisture content.
The erosion control measures needed during the site development will depend heavily on the
weather conditions that are encountered. A rock -covered construction entrance should be provided
wherever trucks and equipment may have to drive off of existing paved surfaces. Cut slopes and
soil stockpiles should be covered with plastic during wet weather. As with any project, additional
erosion control measures may need to be implemented depending on conditions encountered
during constructiom
The drainage and/or waterproofing recommendations presented in this report are intended only to
prevent active seepage from flowing through concrete walls or slabs. Even in the absence of active
seepage into and beneath structures, water vapor can migrate through walls, slabs, and floors from
the surrounding soil, and can even be transmitted from slabs and foundation walls due to the
concrete curing process. Water vapor also results from occupant uses, such as cooking and
bathing. Excessive water vapor trapped within structures can result in a variety of undesirable
conditions, including, but not limited to, moisture problems with flooring systems, excessively moist
air within occupied areas, and the growth of molds, fungi, and other biological organisms that may
be harmful to the health of the occupants. The designer or architect must consider the potential
vapor sources and likely occupant uses, and provide sufficient ventilation, either passive or
mechanical, to prevent a build up of excessive water vapor within the planned structure.
Geotech Consultants, Inc. should be allowed to review the final development plans to verify that the
recommendations presented in this report are adequately addressed in the design. Such a plan
review would be additional work beyond the current scope of work for this study, and it may include
revisions to our recommendations to accommodate site, development, and geotechnical
constraints that become more evident during the review process.
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
I
Ronald D. Johnson, Archite*
July 2, 2007
JN 07220
Page 4
We recommend including this report,
should also be provided to any future
recommendations.
SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS
in its entirety, in the project contract documents. This report
property owners so they will be aware of our findings and
In accordance with Table 1615.1.1 of the 2003 International Building Code (IBC), the site soil
profile within ' 100 feet of the ground surface is best represented by Soil Profile Type D (Stiff Soil
Profile). The site soils are not susceptible to seismic liquefaction because of their dense nature.
CONVENTIONAL FOUNDATIONS
The proposed structures can be supported on conventional continuous and spread footings bearing
on undisturbed, medium -dense to dense, native soil. We recommend that continuous and
individual spread footings have minimum widths of 16 and 24 inches, respectively. Exterior footings
should also be bottomed at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finish ground surface for
protection against frost and erosion. The local building codes should be reviewed to determine if
different footing widths or embedment depths are required. Footing subgrades must be cleaned of
loose or disturbed soil prior to pouring concrete. Depending upon site and equipment constraints,
this may require removing the disturbed soil by hand.
Depending on the final site grades, overexcavation may be required below the footings to expose
competent native soil. Unless lean concrete is used to fill an overexcavated hole, the
overexcavation must be at least as wide at the bottom as the, sum of the depth of the
overexcavation and the footing width. For example, an overexcavation extending 2 feet below the
bottom of a 2-foot-wide footing must be at least 4 feet wide at the base of the excavation. If lean
concrete is used, the overexcavation need only extend 6 inches beyond the edges of the footing,
An allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) is appropriate for footings
supported on competent native soil. A one-third increase in this design bearing pressure may be
used when considering short-term wind or seismic loads. For the above design criteria, it is
anticipated that the total post -construction settlement of footings founded on competent native soil
will be less than one inch.
Lateral loads due to wind or seismic forces may be resisted by friction between the foundation and
the bearing soil, or by passive earth pressure acting on the, vertical, embedded portions of the
foundation. For the latter condition, the foundation must be either poured directly against relatively
level, undisturbed soil or be surrounded by level structural fill. We recommend using the following
ultimate values for the foundation's resistance to lateral loading:
PARAMETER U L,r i M A,r i,
VALUE
,oe cien of Friction 0.45
Passive Earth Pressure 350 pcf
Where: (1) pef is pounds per cubic foot, and (ii) passive earth
pressure is computed using the equivalent fluid density.
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ronald D. Johnson, Architeo 9 JN 07220
July 2, 2007 Page 5
If the ground in front of a foundation is loose or sloping, the passive earth pressure given above will
not be appropriate. We recommend maintaining a safety factor of at least 1.5 for the foundation's,
resistance to lateral loading, when using the above ultimate values.
PERMANENT FOUNDATION AND RETAiNING WALLS
Retaining walls backfilled on only one side should be designed to resist the lateral earth pressures
imposed by the soil they retain. The following recommended parameters are for walls that restrain
level backfill:
PARAMETER
Active Earth Pressure
VALUE
35 pcf
Passive Earth Pressure
350 pcf
Coefficient of Friction
0.45
Soil Unit Weight
130 pcf
Where: (i) pcf is pounds per cubic foot, and (11) active and
passive earth pressures are computed using the equivalent fluid
pressures.
For a restrained wall that cannot deflect at least 0.002 times its
height, a uniform lateral pressure equal to 10 psf times the height
of the wall should be added to the above active equivalent fluid
pressure.
The values given above are to be used to design permanent foundation and retaining walls only. It
is not appropriate to back -calculate soil strength parameters from the earth pressures and soil unit
weights presented in the table. The passive pressure given is appropriate for the depth of level
structural fill placed in front of a retaining or foundation wall only. The values for friction and
passive resistance are ultimate values and do not include a safety factor. We recommend a safety
factor of at least 1.5 ' for overturning and sliding, when using the above values to design the walls.
Restrained wall soil parameters should be utilized for a distance of 1.5 times the wall height from
corners or bends in the walls. This is intended to reduce the amount of cracking that can occur
where a wall is restrained by a corner.
The design values given above do not include the effects of any hydrostatic pressures behind the
walls and assume that no surcharges, such as those caused by slopes, vehicles, or adjacent
foundations will be exerted on the walls. If these conditions exist, those pressures should be added
to the above lateral soil pressures. Where sloping backfill is desired behind the walls, we will need
to be given the wall dimensions and the slope of the backfill in order to provide the appropriate
design earth pressures. The surcharge due to traffic loads behind a wall can 'typically be
accounted for by adding a uniform pressure equal to 2 feet multiplied by the above active fluid
density.
Heavy construction equipment should not be operated behind retaining and foundation walls within
a distance equal to the height of a wall, unless the walls are designed for the'additional lateral
pressures resulting from the equipment. The wall design criteria assume that the backfill will be
well -compacted in lifts no thicker than 12 inches. The compaction of backfill near the walls should
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ronald D. Johnson, Architeco 10 JN 07220
July 2, 2007 Page 6
be accomplished with hand -operated equipment to prevent the walls from being overloaded by the
higher soil forces that occur during compaction.
Retainina Wall Backfill and Waterproofin
Backfill placed behind retaining or foundation walls should be coarse, free -draining
structural fill containing no organics. This backfill should contain no more than 5 percent silt
or clay particles and have no gravel greater than 4 inches in diameter. The percentage of
particles passing the No. 4 sieve should be between 25 and 70 percent. If the native sand
is used as backfill, a drainage composite similar to Miradrain 6000 should be placed against
the backfilled retaining walls. The drainage composites should be hydraulically connected
to the foundation drain system. Free -draining backfill or gravel should be used for the entire
width of the backfill where seepage is encountered. For increased protection, drainage
composites should be placed along cut slope faces, and the walls should be backfilled
entirely with free -draining soil. The later section entitled Drainage Considerations should
also be reviewed for recommendations related to subsurface drainage behind foundation
and retaining walls.
The purpose of these backfill requirements is to ensure that the design criteria for a
retaining wall are not exceeded because of a build-up of hydrostatic pressure behind the
wall. The top 12 to 18 inches of the backfill should consist of a compacted, relatively
impermeable soil or.topsoil, or the surface should be paved. The ground surface must also
slope away from backfilled walls to reduce the potential for surface water to percolate into
the backfill. The section entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill contains
recommendations regarding the placement and compaction of structural fill behind retaining
and foundation walls.
The above recommendations are not intended to waterproof below -grade walls, or to
prevent the formation of mold, mildew or fungi in interior spaces. Over time, the
performance of subsurface drainage systems can degrade, subsurface groundwater flow
patterns can change, and utilities can break or develop leaks. Therefore, waterproofing
should be provided where future seepage through the walls is not acceptable. This typically
includes limiting cold -joints and wall penetrations, and using bentonite panels or
membranes on the outside of the walls. There are a variety of different waterproofing
materials and systems, which should be installed by an experienced contractor familiar with
the anticipated construction and subsurface conditions.' Applying a thin coat of asphalt
emulsion to the outside face of a wall is not considered waterproofing, and will only help to
reduce moisture generated from water vapor or capillary action from seeping through the
concrete. As with any project, adequate ventilation of basement a ' nd crawl space areas is
important to prevent a build up of water vapor that is commonly transmitted through
concrete walls from the surrounding soil, even when seepage is not present. This is
appropriate even when waterproofing is applied to the outside of foundation and retaining
walls. We recommend that you contact a specialty consultant if detailed recommendations
or specifications related to waterproofing design, or minimizing the potential for infestations
of mold and mildew are desired.
SLABS -ON -GRADE
The building floors can be constructed as slabs -on -grade atop existing non -organic soils, or on
structural fill. The subgrade soil must be in a firm, non -yielding condition at the time of slab
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ronald D. Johnson, Architeo 10 JN 07220
July 2, 2007 Page 7
construction or underslab fill placement. Any soft areas encountered should be excavated and
replaced with select, imported structural fill.
Even where the exposed soils appear dry, water vapor will tend to naturally migrate upward through
the soil to the new constructed space above it. All interior slabs -on -grade must be underlain by a
capillary break or drainage layer consisting of a minimum 4-inch thickness of gravel or crushed
rock that has a fines content (percent passing the No. 200 sieve) of less than 3 percent and a sand
content (percent passing the No. 4 sieve) of no more than 10 percent. As noted by the American
Concrete Institute (ACI) in the Guides for Concrete Floor and Slab Structures, proper moisture
protection is desirable immediately below any on -grade slab that will be covered by tile, wood,
carpet, impermeable floor coverings, or any moisture -sensitive equipment or products. ACI also
notes that vapor retarders, such as 6-mil plastic sheeting, are typically used. A vapor retarder is
defined as a material with a permeance of less than 0.3 US perms per square foot (psf) per hour,
as determined by ASTIVI E 96. It is possible that concrete admixtures may meet this specification,
although the manufacturers of the admixtures should be -consulted. Where plastic sheeting is used
under slabs, joints should overlap by at least 6 inches and be sealed with adhesive tape. The
sheeting should extend to the foundation walls for maximum vapor protection. If no potential for
vapor passage through the slab is desired, a vapor barrier should be used. A vapor barrier, as
defined by ACI, is a product with a water transmission rate of 0.00 perms per square foot per hour
when tested in accordance with ASTM E 96. Reinforced membranes having sealed overlaps can
meet this requirement.
We recommend that the contractor, the project materials engineer, and the owner discuss these
issues and review recent ACI literature and ASTM E-1643 for installation guidelines and guidance
on the use of the protection/blotter material. Our opinion is that with impervious surfaces that all
means should be undertaken to reduce water vapor transmission.
DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS
We recommend that foundation drains be installed at the base of all foundation and earth'retaining
walls. These drains should be surrounded by at least 6 inches of 1-inch-minus, washed rock and
then wrapped in non -woven, geotextile filter fabric (Mirafi 140N, Supac 4NP, or similar material). At
its highest point, a perforated pipe invert should be at least 6 inches below the bottom of a slab
floor or the level of a crawl space, and it should be sloped for drainage. All roof and surface water
drains must be kept separate from the foundation drain system. A typical drain detail is attached to
this report as Plate 5. For the best long-term performance, perforated PVC pipe is recommended
for all subsurface drains.
No groundwater was observed during our field work. If seepage is encountered in an excavation, it
should be drained from the site by directing it through drainage ditches, perforated pipe, or French
drains, or by pumping it from sumps interconnected by shallow connector trenches at the bottom of
the excavation.
The excavation and site should be graded so that surface water is directed off the site and away
from the tops of slopes. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where foundations,
slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Final site grading in areas adjacent to a building should
slope away at least 2 percent, except where the area is paved. Surface drains should be provided
where necessary to prevent ponding of water behind foundation or retaining walls.
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
I Ronald D. Johnson, Architeie JN 07220
July 2, 2007 Page 8
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND STRUCTURAL FiLL
All building and pavement areas should be stripped of surface vegetation, topsoil, organic soil, and
other deleterious material. The stripped or removed materials should not be mixed with any
materials to be used as structural fill, but they could be used in non-structural areas, such as
landscape beds.
Structural fill is defined as any fill, including utility backfill, placed under, or close to, a building,
behind permanent retaining or foundation walls, or in other areas where the underlying soil needs
to support loads. All structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts with a moisture content at, or
near, the optimum moisture content. The optimum moisture content is that moisture content that
results in the greatest compacted dry density. The moisture content of fill is very important and
must be closely controlled during the filling and'compaction process.
The allowable thickness of the fill lift will depend on the material type selected, the compaction
equipment used, and the number of passes made to compact the lift. The loose lift thickness
should not exceed 12 inches. We recommend testing the fill as it is placed. If the fill is not
sufficiently compacted, it can be recompacted before another lift is placed. This eliminates the
need to remove the fill to achieve the required compaction. The following table presents
recommended relative compactions for structural fill:
LOCATION OF FILL MININIUNI RELATIVE-
PLACENIENT COMPACTION
Beneath slabs or
walkways
Filled slopes and behind
retaining walls
Where: Minimum Relative Compaction is the ratio, expressed In
percentages, of the compacted dry density to the maximum dry
density, as determined in accordance with ASTM Test
Designation D 1657-91 (Modified Proctor).
The General section should be reviewed for considerations related to the reuse of on -site soils.
Structural fill that will be placed in wet weather should consist of a coarse, granular soil with a silt or
clay content of no more than 5 percent. The percentage of particles passing the No. 200 sieve
should be measured from that portion of soil passing the three -quarter -inch sieve.
LIMITATIONS
The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions as
they existed at the time of our exploration and assume that the soil and groundwater conditions
encountered in the test pits are representative of subsurface conditions on the site. If the
subsurface conditions encountered during construction are significantly different from those
observed in our explorations, we should be advised at once so that we can review these conditions
and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. Unanticipated soil conditions are
commonly encountered on construction sites and cannot be fully anticipated by merely taking soil
samples in test pits. Subsurface conditions can also vary between exploration locations. Such
unexpected conditions frequently require making additional expenditures to attain a properly
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ronald D. Johnson, Architeco JN 07220
July 2, 2007 Page 9
constructed project. It is recommended that the owner consider providing a contingency fund to
accommodate such potential extra costs and risks. This is *a standard recommendation for all
projects.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Ronald D. Johnson, Architect, and his
representatives, for specific application to this project and site. Our conclusions and
recommendations are professional opinions derived in accordance wit ' h current standards of
practice within the scope of our services and within budget and time constraints. No warranty is
expressed or implied. The scope of our services does not include services related to construction
safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods,
techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for
consideration in design. Our services also do not include assessing or minimizing the potential for
biological hazards, such as mold, bacteria, mildew and fungi in either the existing or proposed site
development. .
ADDITIONAL SERVICES
Geotech Consultants, Inc. should be retained to provide geotechnical consultation, testing, and
observation services during construction. This is to confirm that subsurface conditions are
consistent with those indicated by our exploration, to evaluate whether earthwork and foundation
construction activities comply with the general intent of the recommendations presented in this
report, and to provide suggestions for design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ
from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. However, our work would not include the
supervision or direction of the actual work of the contractor and its employees or agents. Also, job
and site safety, and dimensional measurements, will be the responsibility of the contractor.
During the construction phase, we will provide geotechnical observation and testing services when
requested by you or your representatives. Please be aware that we can only document site work
we actually observe. It is still the responsibility of your contractor or on -site construction team to
verify that our recommendations are being followed, whether we are present at the site or not.
The following plates are attached to complete this report:
Plate 1 Vicinity Map
Plate 2 Site Exploration Plan
Plates 3-4 Test Pit Logs
Plate 5 Typical Footing Drain Detail
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ronald D. Johnson, Architeo JN 07220
July 2, 2007 Page 10
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. If you have any questions, or if we
may be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us.
GDB/MRM: jyb
Respectfully submitted,
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Gerry D. Bautista, Jr.
Geotechnical Engineer
EXPIRES
Marc R. McGinnis, P.E.
Principal
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
BROINS
-Fir-
R 0 7D
ID 7
L
R1 cK PL
FREDERICK P
PL
��SITH
SW
MST
OVERLOOK PK
HUTT
"TH
185TH 185TH Ff.
PL SWW
TH PL S,
187TH
-�L ST SW
-�
189TH I
Sw
S _1187
188TH ST Sw-
2 ST
wr R
BI AM PL
ST
LST Sw
190TH IT IN —
CHERR
13
191ST 9
;
192NO ST %v
4t, -
FORM
OR
196T
I S-r FR
MELODY LN
.. no
HIND
BROOKAJERI LN
LEY =
OR BRV)XRE
BRAND
ST
E NY
�E 19m
PE
ud:)
IT
ST
8P4CX
VISTA
LAND �NG
51'YE
S'T
S1
MIST
L
BEACH
LEN
SIERRA ST
LEY ST
aw
ly:!
IC
E., SpM
7
HILL PK!.'�
ST
w
-Q
CT
MRIPM
>-
400 L 09TH PL
MMAPLE ST
21
.11"' IN
1 ALDERI LT
UNION
OIL
61 W&NUT1' g'
r
HDL FS ZIZTH
HDL Y OR CEDA cl p
HOWELL WY
\14:0 94RSH
A
A SPRUCE RD
1,13 1w
-"t
I 101M 4TH Pt Sw
Mau" �
\�
214 1 IT 21
pl-Alp
"
L.Mf ZISTH .215TH
9 IN iMu-�
i L4iAQ;,' MRIX4 51
21STM PL
BEACH r E(L MS MAKAH
ZIG
r 217TH ST SW
26
FL R 218
BELLA LA
a
31 F
IT
E 22 ST I e 'S.W.
R
114
r
I RD" IRCH
T 0
223 7
t2
ST
(Source: The Thomas Guide, Snohomish County, Washington, 1998)
GEOTECH
VICINITY MAP
658 Daley Street
CONSULTANTS,
INC.
Edmonds, Washington
-FDa
Job No: te: Plate.
07220 June 2007
Daley Street
Phase 2
Building
TP-3
Phase 1
Building
L
TP-1 TP-2
. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . ....
Alley
,GEOTECH
CONSULTANTS, INC.
404i'tllk
I �ji
rA
SITE EXPLORATION PLAN
658 Daley Street
Edmonds, Washington
Job No: Date: Plate:
07220 1 June 2007 1 No Scale I
5
10
is
10
15
0 0�0
TEST PIT 1
CP Description
m=6.5%
010
0
0
Fopsoil
Drangelbrown,
6ANU, tine- to
with trace gravel, moist, mediu
- becomes brown/gray, medium- to coarse -grained, dense
• Test Pit terminated at 6.5 feet on June 12, 2007.
• No groundwater seepage observed during excavation.
• No caving observed during excavation.
TEST PIT 2
. opsoil
Light brown SAND,
Description
, with trace gravel,
t!pj;
becomes brown/gray, medium -dense to dense
• Test Pit terminated at 7.0 feet on June 12, 2007.,
• No groundwater seepage observed during excavation.
• No caving observed during excavation.
GEOTECH
CONSULTANTS, INC.
TEST PIT LOG
658 Daley Street
Edmonds, Washington
Job I Date:. Logged by.
072206 June 20C17 GDB I Plate: �3
#
o
e/ 0
0
5
m=5.6%
10—
,5L
TEST PIT 3
opsoll
Description
Orange/brown, slightly silty SAND, fine-grained, moist, loose
Light brown SAND, fine- to medium -grained, with trace gravel, moist, medium -dense
- becomes light brown to gray, fine- to medium -grained, dense
- becomes
Test Pit terminated at 7.0 feet on June 12, 2007.
No groundwater seepage observed during excavation.
No caving observed during excavation.
GEOTECH
CONSULTANTS, INC.
TEST PIT LOG
658 Daley Street
Edmonds, Washington
Job Date: Logged by:
07220 1 June 2007 1 GDB I Plate: 47
Sieve Opening (mm.)
Sieve Opening (US standard)
I --O—TP - 1, 3 feet, 6.5% moisture . M TP - 3. 7 feet, 5.6% moisture I
GEOTECH
CONSULTANTS, INC.
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
658 Daley Street
Edmonds, Washington
Job No:
Date:
Plate: 75
07220
1 June 2007
1
1
Slope backfill away from
foundation. Provide surface
drains where necessary.
Washed Rocl
(7/8" min. size)
4" min.
Backfill
(See text for
requirements)
0
CM.
Nonwoven Geotextile
Filter Fabric 0:
000
o .0%
0
0�0
0, .0
LL
Tightline Roof Drain
(Do not connect to footing drain)
Possible Slab
4" Perforated Hard PVC Pipe
(invert at least 6 inches below
slab or crawl space. Slope to
drain to appropriate ouffall.
Place holes downward.)
o, o.. 0
-T 0
00 00 00
0
Vapor Retarder/Barrier and.
Capillary Break/Drainage Layer
(Refer to Report text)
NOTES:
(1) In crawl spaces, provide an outlet drain to prevent buildup of water that
bypasses the perimeter footing drains.
(2) Refer to report text for additional drainage, waterproofing, and slab considerations.
GEOTECH
CONSULTANTS, INC.
FOOTING DRAIN DETAEL
658 Daley Street
Edmonds, Washington
Job No:
Date:
Plate:
07220 1
June 20071
1 67
1325.6 NE 20'h Street, Suite 16
GEOTECH. BeUevue, WA 98005
CONSULTANTS, INC* (425) 74.7-5618 FAX 747-8561
07220
Memo JINI: , ,
To: Ronald Johnson, Architect Frorn: Marc R. McGinnis, P.E.
Co.: Date:' December 29,2010
Address: Email- DlqaLoironmaile@domcast.net
RE: Summary of Geotechnical Observations During Construction,
656 Daley Street
Edmonds, Washington
Permit No. 2007 1195
Representatives of Geotech Consultants, Inc. provided geotechnical observation and testing
services during the foundation preparation and earthwork associated with the new building, We
provided geotechnical design considerations for the structure in our July 2, 2007 geotechnical report.
Our initial visit during construction was made to observe the completed excavation and verify
suitable bearing soils for t ' he foundations. The soil conditions exposed in the excavation were
consistent with those anticipated from our geotechnical study, consisting of topsoil and loose sand
overlying mediumi-dense sand. No groundwater or wet conditions were observed.
The foundation subgrades consisted of medium -dense, native sand that was suitable for an
allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf).
We returned to the site following construction of the foundation walls to verify compaction of backfill
placed outside of the building. The I�ackfill consisted primarily of the on -site sand. After probing the
fill that had been placed, we recommended removing the fill to half its depth and recompacting the
soil as it was replaced behind the walls.
Please contact us if you have any questions regarding this summary.
I M C_
RECEIVED
0* 27 5 40
Ah� -Q,
JAN 0 3 2010
DEV . ELOPMENT SER VICES CTR.
1Y CITY OF EDMONDS
0
e Page I
C ty
Aid
Cie7 Tz
Di WENT OFB
WT 1'. � .' ,�O '"" -1
PERINTE�7A ON RegIDE E,
AL' SECT ON R110
AT: 656 Dalev Street n
uiloirlj rmit M BLD2007-1195
Occupancy established by this certificate: ka DWelli' 2
No. Stories: 2 + Basement. s e rn erh t: 'Y
a i� ype of d6ftstruction
P
Owner of building: e" u
The Duplex at 656 We . tre a spected and approved complying with the requirements
of the 2006 edition of the International Residential Cod 9, adopt group and division of occupancy and the use for which
the proposed occupancy is classified.
nd
Issued this 2 day of March, 2011
Chief Building Official
By:
Any change of occupancy or use requires a building permit and a now Certificate of Occupancy Issued by the City of Edmonds Building official.
R EC E 1. V? B U
BEE
ST 2007
M A IQ, I
CITY OF EDMONDS
PERMIT COUNTP
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
WORK SHEET
4me of Proposed Project:
ner/Apolicant:
W uwoo� —
-7
Stiect/Mailing Address
I
(st-
q?)O-Zo
State Zip
4-1s- --n I - i($�)
Applicant Contact Person:
fo P Ko -i) - 40-�iso� Auatz-t
Name
mo( Ni? At MW
Stree ailing Address
9REW15 WA.
city State Zip
Telephone: ID6 45VO V11W
Engineer who prepared the Traffic Impact Analysis:
U6 �;� T-L88
Finn Name Contact Name Aw*49- Telephone
11, PROJECT DESCRIPTION
t$"WDf WA-- 790to
a. Street address (if known):
b. Location: 6fty,
(Attach a vicinity !nap and site plan.)
c. Specify existing land use: GuOuE, �kmkvl RESIA*NM
d- Specify proposed type and size of development: &V�o UN14C fD Wrbt- 014,
Upw to a l'bCoc-t
e. When will the project begin construction and when will It be completed? MWj 1 0-7
f. Define proposed access locations: kut-H 00 (;60V
L�L(St. -OPQtwd a %0't6 Wqj -1, KOV-) �PVOWAJ Off, 3"- -tV
g. Define proposed sight distance at site egress locations: -Ua4 �5m, to tow.). "T otaci� to O-Z
NO' 0 UiVst W9 I fWal lb ast 1-00 1 to Pow; v50- 10 �401w. 0%1�
Paee I
7.
Five Years After Openin?, LOS:
With Project:
Without Project:
Note any assumptions/variations to standard analysis default values and justifications:
I 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 othemise provided for independent fee cailulations in ECDC 18.82.130.
Nmbowoom *Pk�- k--e Y- et - 19q10-%
SAEN+R%D�eIRCity P.j.UITIA Guidefi�%TrafIrnpAnalyWork 9-04.doc Pai2e 5
rK.
CIVIC
CENTER
PLAYFIELD
NCINITY MA
'A"P'PVRQYED BY PLA NING j.6
LEGEND
SOFFIT LIGHTING
60 WATT DOWNLIGHTING
CATCH BASIN
Front ti
5
Height
�IIVM
TO IIIMIAIIN
!cum
MUT
*00101M MIL rum=
my crry
Of FuTum LANDWAIlm
AROUND
FUTIIIIIIIIIIIIIII BLDG. 2
-AT TMG TIM ALL
EXIISTING LANDWAPING
TO RMAIIIN ANOCIND
manna su no
PARKING
LOT
mo cmumn To wommm)
LEGAL DESCMPTION
MY OF MMONM
BIK 101 D-00 - LM
c�
1&20 (PARM
PARENG-MMONM
OMM�WrPERSTOF
�//l
WA REGM5254M)
N
PARCEL #
00434210101600
PARCEL #
00434210101900
10
I N0Tft NEIN APPRO�
Come
Requirod
ACtual
10
2
rn
rl)
03\- " 7", w
7
7% ;1V 7
I
"_�_G�j -
UATWR
rorotrr
(D
1 50.00
Ex"mus
CARPORT
no
manme
-;;;;;m WALLS
up at .16cw
MOM TRPAN
CON'TAIIIIIIIIIIINS TO m
L0"TIIN) IN NAM
GARAGE & PLACM
cuillIONDIIII MOUND
IF\
NANDUND
Ex"mmu mu�
iiiiiiamum mmu
NOUTO
Toum
ENCLOM) IPATIO
I-U
wn
marm ax
x -or STrAmUAs\\
wn"m a
uiiAom ca
STALLS Fl
M UNIT)
c,
RETAINIING WALL
r
7y...
,,4�8 MaT
M5' 20' 9.5' 1 23'
92' 904 160 IA
RESUB
JAN 15 2008 SITE PLA
.34 MV
8fiMR&YOMN SCALE: V
CAM,
�.4
,for x w
TO NMAIIN
__m)cISTIINQ
�Duous
TO NMAIIN
CN 0
ex"mus
DECUNIOUS
To MmAllm
V4 Qe
_NOTEl
SOLOIN GIIIIAIINII
011111TENT110" IIWIIIII
LOCATON
00
cli
m
Lf)
L6 m
0
0
A� 9&V
15' C-911116w
D- 98ff
y TOTAL- 30"
AVG =8711NO GRADI& SILIF
FL.Al w 1112LI211IF
DO&III211612W
CITY c0pV
Lu
Lu
01
8
�j I IL
z
0
(j) rz
z i
wdh
6TZP
Z
z
0
z
ILI
:z
\-Z
F2—A-7A
�/'l 61
L 0
Z-A
'7
g
P'N
%
T.
'AAW DEMNTM
v nAfE,
KOTlb Ak
mtltM INSPECTM AMUIRED aEFOM'
MRS AND SIDEWALK,
At AS
O'UNING Twe
r OF� W.
At $.T
00 .0
is Mau TO Be
T "an
NX
CURRENT JSC)�
FOOTING i�Alt�kEObl�6 ADER O"M '
a
ROOF OUTTER
"S
ipali, WwKLy'
.4;? . P'�C STORM �PIPE Y,
( INE -=lbfi*l .- - . - , I I 1 6 '�
CE I
J
4" MIN. OUTFLOW PIPE TO APPROVED
STOPM COLLECTION -POI.NT
(REFER TO DWG 5A FOR
*A*ER
APPROVFD COLLECTION POINTS). '4
CONTROL CATCH BASIN a It 00.W DAITMU M
DETENTION PIPE (3
ID
z
NOTE: Mamma conc. STI"
No
FOOTING axwn .x
THE DETEPMON SYSTEM: PIPE CAN
�P"NS SHALL NOT CONNECT TO
lClOWNtCt-,V �OUT FLOW SIDE OF
CONTROL�
mu
OTHER APr
-A
DRYWEILIL OR
0;doiNTo
ROVED CONVEYANCE SYSTEIvL
DRAINACE TICHT-1-tNE FROM HOUSE CAN
T 7q, EITHER OR BOTH �',ATCH BASINS.
CONNEC
4T
INISHED RADE
4
TO �PPR&Vlib
COLLEC'nON POINT'.
TO
EMnNg
dARO*kt
�60NJ�o'
�BA R ICE 4 A,
A-,
V
S-V -'RESI61NT4AL--OE'TE�TION��-' Ot
8';t--TCiA S�ZESS- FOR PROPER SIZE)
V
-'o' T. E:
k'
6F
OPMEN-f-EXCEEDiNC, 5.bQO SIDJAk -FEE�T.OF'I�PERVIOU5 SUR ��C �S�t"I�qAVt�'THI?4�1-
U
.4
DRAINAGE PLAN PREPARED AND STAMPED BY L
A LICENSED -CIV I E� ,ANY PLAN by 190
A"A
TEO -w A tRAICAL DRAINAGE AREA, ENV R9 E
FOR A*PPOJECT LOCA ENTAi rl'M�HWIINIE 7
-SEINSM 'DR
Cr'XE 'i " r 1. 10
A�ft PRIZS�MNG SOCCIAL PROBLEMS, MUSTJ3 PREPARED 'By- A LIQEN5-j _!A EER, 1�c Dqwmwo
t
��Awlg - GHTL*E
;OTHER 'bEVEoFrm :n'
LA�i' ... " r� t�
SLIRFACE� ON'THAT StTE.
laPCRWOUS EN't-
tTOl EXCf -iMPtR
SQUARE TE ET Qf VIOLS SURFAC 44Y USE $T.NDARD PLANS. 4 A -
YAl*
-tTY
oTi s
s AN AR D 'ETAIL
A'2= ere ml
% TM,2 CW'.19
PARKING A-02
V., GC BERT lot6/03
tRT: . A/?/07� t
-'D. GFB
DATE
t!r V,24/0
'NTS
STAMAN LIDT fib
Rk, lmqoTe N
DRAM
Lro'TW -nom
T Co
u
p,
DETE li-01
n,;'
-4c 610 S./., -
;*A 'A
ac,
4 . . . . . .
FOlt V DRJAUl ASI
PJMT DAWWAY% N�
93"
2.
mv,
un
OF li
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- -- - - - -- :4 . . ',. : r . 'I tz
_0
PO"NECT. -
lrQ 9 A-L UW OF,,'
FillidIIIIIIII-ft:�,TO- 111240
FROM DETENT EOKr OvIr. FAIIII m'
OVMEM,PRO ENAUK
-TREET FILE INV..Ip 920�
OtrrlFKAAtLIL, UNE Tq
=TrS STOMA -I
— — — — --- — — —
APNO D AS NNED.
NEERING
RESUM
WW
'A
D,
JAN
To
7
7, LIMLI� %4�.
WIN ww�
0
r-]
L
FIESUB
8UCjLt),t4Cj DEWINIES14T
;IV or rr
. -OMONO
STREET FILE
Mk(
w
MINI WN
O:Aff
'jigs
WPM=
swag
- WN
q
J
syi, A�,i
two%
ik
. .........
MIT
Ana
W rod An A".
ko""07A._ Q_yME 0
WT& *
if
TO% MAE 010-11"
V-1
vkF
0131 �A�Oml _=M=
xi'l '141�X;jr�.,
J
A'S
J
if
F, t�,-
STA
WWI Q,
1 WAY
Koo
AW ''As MR, 10�
MOSCOW
nil
acC', DIU "Ge
-"nay-
ix�co AjQ 4
_-A
114101T All limit 0 11
X.
'S
RANOM t
A
_4
rot
'q-
;4 i._ � - ". , , A
MAMA
e,
80K IW NON
Qx -i"
11111 pill
�*W�A wm� xq� I f�, 7A �yn N, Aim
lot
Q I
K &I# A§ 0 up,
d
Odor
AWS
A-A-W
him
t zq;q
A; ry
oil W
posit ANI
RX "WQ
tin
&,nos!
J�
611-11, M-14
GLEN.,
iST
plant:
7-, j
.1.1 A,
7w
A
U94 V
Tt
00
E,
DAL TAU
tip
j
Y
SIR _-k
Any A
AJ� P!
Alf
VA"
.. ... Alto
,Z
VISIT?
i., i - �
J�
ILDWRP W4,
KAMA-
son,
a
10-
1 7;
AWL,
04
A now AAV 1MV.,
-,win
7:7
AS
him,
12 fill
D 1: 5
lot
j'o
U
LU
9 P.
OV
0 Mo
"IN `71M 41, a
monist
se
V� On,
AIN
BON
AW
8 it,
�"Ou ORE 11 TIMM Q
o
_u
Rottman WOVA
L U
AS JI&
MUM-
iY
its.
OVA WgIA spin" toot
a
1 YAM
MUST
Non— ..'e,
VOW A 0
C gnu!
WIS A
1 tip
till
4�_
AU
DO
07
ys
M,
INN �;z
MyR
ilk
0T G%,
4 t
X1
W",
Toy
J�
V
T
Tin-,
51.
se —Woo 5--
V11
loop
'I, A )Uq z
two I
fit
SAW
Pin
,W� MON a �:i
7!
WAY, Q A jb,
. Ryoxxv!
lid
:t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
T",
t. FAR
_cff 1 11 -0
y OF
0.
t "07
may
low.
!L
. . -. , .: '' L olf�l `1 � 4
-7s, _M
J':j`%
Mot a q
101 D-0 T
BLK a
6-2
.V 4.11 .
WWI j;_ XiXt""'
- N. -ED
�YA K .0 S,
ND
C�"- a 1. Z
T 0 ff`�:' lot Q
MI I W T P R
, � �_E
high. Alhl�
(Oil
`5
A 0 v v
E0#00'O
7 1 W., A IMP
�r, w
0
MI
3
w&
"&WWI W_ k a a C EL
-Tt� Pon AFA
M 1;
T !t-ti" 'X�,
0,
1 0 1', 4, -4 10,101-6 0 1A
_2
wool
-P 0 JIM.,
.211 la, e. 7� L
lot wEvol- - py its
n:y'
M.
L
J:
cW
VS
RCEL
�,T' SAO
[MAX
0*1 342301,01900
004
I I `j7 I
topsoil
NOW 11
- MR,
CO
if
U,
pill
1:7
tow
d
. . . . . . . . . .
ip
z
its, AL
MW
tit"
AN, I
M WWI 0
'k
10 it W
7 �', NINON
&Sub
-U.
7
14 Atli
took TINSTON
"n MM
N
.5TFW_Gr, 0
J:.
Wish
SWUM
'Pot ra
won 1 No Im
M
W
'bNIRA-
...... .. .
L
00 1"'T
IMGE?:�
P
10
co
W 11
WJIJ Au
P
2
q p
'�F
'6_44`
Y",
F 70 MIN
1. � Ai:`o�
q_ 1, .-;4
Ili: EXPOSED �;W ACE
9 _W
41210
P
X,
Not sy TAM
...... ....
j.. 1 0: it;:2
Hill-
t� o;;
JL
limit
i
A..
_444"-� �4� t
c
fq.
to r;
ir
46;,�
till a
......... ..
zoo
'EF
5 �j 0 ZD "j" ji
A;
b
Qo FTC PVT
00 NG
Ni I � U.
1 Ala
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 111k,;__1
D- 0" `Vv,�,`
j." I p
moo? WA
J. Imp A
A Iva wynQ5
'AZT
JAN'
00I,
MW 40
tf"
. . . .......
:
63
Inv A
ONVAPM-11 -
71; q
... ... ....
Mot A " T� 'T" ,
-0 - q WE
M,4
pool,
64
E, LIM
. . . . . . . . . .
-ttN
It A a 0
Woo M -AM AQ,
MOO,
f, 12W
DOW
'T 4 ya.
A
tot;
-if �'TEF UT
� Mi B VV
�S
IN,
�o-7.
MOMS
NOW
nil, un
F
`j'
ISO OWN r-E
fj:1
ot
Ezi
11
. . . . ...........
.................
................
..........
M, 7-0 ata BROKEN
NOTS". ANY.Exulov.0 a DMA M
n-nngirm Amnv annagnpamu an mon n An -wam-m
HOTY MAP
LEGEN D
=-77-7-
. ...... . ........
11 1 wil
R,
M.
11 E I U ym,
AL
I'll", Em "IMIR
ag "o"m 11
uj
H,� OTE. VMS
RNOSTONG CURM TO REEIMAIN,
CON "WAUH1,2913 TO ESE:
LOCATED IN MACN
Lu
CA RACE PLACED
114 4
0 V111,1051, q 'A M MOM
4 14 4,,,, '' OU go
A
T19 M FOR WEEHI-Mv
41M
ma 0 a ab ou 0 1 0 03
'Icu M", uj
4 4 me AMM"W"" ALGITI. 4 1
'ICU M.
CUMISIDE PICKUP
4a A -a [/N
10
--wId
JF
a WE
"lowl VINE0,12, U71LL PRO Wom 51
I I E0
I R NX
I AllfORTHI
TUlrO:lAfz.Y COX;S D, 1,07130.
Uri RMCE REQUIRED Low CME391
-PLM2@07@C)
OW NER/CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE
FOR EROSION CONTROL AND DRAINAGE
69
"Af
9"S
. .........
Id
v 'ZOOTINa'. CON,& ST13pall To 101, As
M
4.
ohou, an
4d;s
r
DECIDUOUS
TO Rem, Au �411111
M11610,113TIN 03,
LANDSCAPONSTO
10 cux, 03TOW; a Houma
00
ox Q
EXOSTIN'a NOUGM
StIli. - *' 101
CARPORT
DECIDUOUll"'.
TO mal'Al
Rllqffl%lw M.-P ft"I n: p- �M A R 11, eplarl"ll." vn,
cr.
LLJ
2V
c
us
OS-TanTION POPM
LOCATION
f)
f)APPROVED BY PLA NG,
k =21
Zone Comer FlagL-
5 zka —ck s red
Front /v 15 1.5
Sides js IS
ear 5, /,o
ther /0 /0 t
57t
.pkht V-77
L
50 LIN
. . . . . . . . ---
wow let
ANING'
saw
t.;j
0:
\11z
I ME Tr.�
,22
or,
7
MT
FILE
FEB' 2 J 11108
MILDING DEPARMENT
CITY OF EDMONDS
JAN
A J 15 2000
7 7
'7.77 -
colm
M-Mcm MOND To
civic
WIM
CENTER I"llp My CITY
MOVE
PLAYFIELD
46
.7
Vp U, WWW'"'IL cAft STING
6 upso
. mo
I U L.-
Tz
BELL ST.
AL
mw
memo -
aim G
.. . . . .... ..
olml
MAIN ST.
Al
AT
EEC
Mn
0 iall
, WWI
V I
TY�
141 =Tl (10;
'z
NOTE. -
FOOTING DRAINS, TIGHTLINEo AlVD DETENTION
SYSTEM INSPECTION REQUIRED BEFORE.
BACKFILLING.
ry Lli
FOOTING DRAIN(REQUIRED UNDER CURRENT 18C)
co ROOF GUTTER
>1
n 4" MIN, P STORM PIPE
10', MIN.
H,—_'(TIGHTLINEf
Z_ nw I CLEARANCE I
MIN. OUTFLOW PIPE TO APPROV[tD
STORM COLLECTION POINT
OCC-17D Tn MAIn r, I UnD
4 - - - - ' -1 . ' . . n 11 .
A !Lj 0<,
APPROVED COLLECTION POINTS)
x
17—) CL
L
CONTROL CATCH'BASIN <
DETENTION PIPE
r z
0
NOTE:
cnr%"rlrxlf-% MMAINIC! C�MAH 0 t"^"l f%nrAjNlCf%rrt%
THE DETENTION SYSTEM. PIPE CAN
CONNECT TO OUT FLOW SIDE, OF CONTROL
STRUCTURE, GO INTO A DRYWELL OR
OTHER APPROVED CONVEYANCE SYSTEM.
DRAINAGE TIGHTLINE FROM HOUSE CAN
CONNECT TO EITHER OR BOTH CATCH BASINS.
FINISHED GRADE
TO APPROVED
0.5% TO 1.0% SLOPE. COLLECTION POIN_
-----------
1' MINIMUM 4
DETENTION PIPE LENGTH CONTROL
CATCH BASIN
(REFER TO: TABLE OF
STD RESIDENTIAL DETENTION
SYSTEM SIZES FOR PROPER SIZE)
N 0 T E:
will
�,
U
C(o MITAUNER's TO ISE
LOCATIMID 02 1272 A, a rA.
[a:&, PLACEED
''ouvagom pan m Esm,
Lu'.
CU M-SDOS PICKUP
4 V
A '4�-j 4 7.
-64'.j4 4
A .4
4<.4 4
4 4
, , , '.4, -44 .9 4 A
A
4
4 4 , . <., 4 4
um, Aws m,
41
1100 aftyu ji
Lu
Lu
�oj
ha CONC, 3, TWO
1")!(
EXCEEDING 5,000 SQUARE FEET —OF �IMPERVIQU
—Suk�_ACE -1 UST HAVE THE
DRAINAGE PLAN PREPARED AND STAMPED BY A LICENSED CIV�L
ENG ER. ANY PLAN
FOR A PROJECT LOCATED IN A CRITICAL DRAINAGE AREA, ENVIR
ENTAL SENSITIVE,6REA, OR
�A �SITE PRESENTING SPECIAL PROBLEMS, MUST BE PREPARED
Y A LICENSED CIVJL,-tNG NEER,
REGARDLESS OF THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE ON THAT SITE. ALL
OTHER DEVE�OrMENTS
NOT EXCEEDING 5,000 SQUARE FEET OF IMPERVIOUS SURFAC�
MAY USE NDARD PLANS.
I . T
�11`_1&0 'W I.- "lls-77-1-=
��l L
STAN
DAR P,,,�ETAIL
REVISIONS
APPROVED BY
DATE
D. GEBERT
10/6/03
STMIDM0 M
iD STOIRM Wwcl�� SYNE013111
D. GEBERT
4/2/07
'0 19
DATE S
7/24/01
'ALE NO.
NTS E5.1
2112�1111M It IN 2,1111,1121 �111_1
coo
t
N
"s,
og
4
<
4
UsTom'", 8, HOU
i CARPORT
...............
44
5,2
4
un- u L1.7multi fj Uwul V-I u fill L91 tu
7
Y,7
Lo
ELu
TO mus, D 9 ml-13 a
EFRO ALL
m mu D31 0 mll\l
H, PIPEJ
FOOTING
.41 TO BE
T1
DETEEN
----------
gDng M"' 3 VO4
OUTFALL LgNP,,.
DEB 7 E73 HN, � T 8 0 D, 1, P 0 P
W
91,
a
COTOP @,Da.@o
.j
ae
U77
2'CE3. ga f)
0
S,
I
To j5p p
TO
out, J, ON "s. OUTS B1111
700
V 0
TROW op S
E4
DOT 71�� P
L3
4
E)FIAEX
-nED DITO
14AJb
,4 MTEM
APPRO
N
S OTED ota
IN
I EERIN(I
0 -6A EDO.
D
D S
< L*
CE3 TOP
07, 0
>
. . ...................
(7�
g
con NOW? 70 Ouv 9. NOME OF
la@ OF 97"1 U D
LV.
97mom 0 EVOINITSOM POPS @m U:ROM Co TO CITM CE)
0 pla
(9111, NOR powp0myVINISM RUM
%
\s\,
OUTPAIL LUM13 TO 010.13V V@
9113 ago- A37m 91 313zo
Q=5L
611",
...... .... .....
..... .......
JAN,15 20
........ .........
1* N ......
L
'ILL] HLE
A 6
3=H E
'H TECT,
H ON i
D S
LE
M,
STATE OF INGT0N
16
,,-Z7
STREET FILE
2 IOU Il.
�3 Lr. L 0 1, Ms
0 1 T Y 61-37M 51 INME
=I
.. ....... . ....... . ........ . . . ......
7
Rill
.......... ........ . .
VNE12 011300@�Y 1, AVED STMEW, TREE FOR,�DALGI-V OTREEiTL US C
JONG
%'jo 09LOSA
D
p UAOD["' HNAOR TRMC�,_ AD5",�, TNE 0230@MM
on
VP RI Cc -TON sm t TIR I imon
US P9NH3VLVM9CA
R UN 93 FRM00
VMS FOR 7= AVENUE, NOR
URBAR, Na, ITS" I U Rim" DA�,,IOTE AONO,
11 RE
'STREET TREEP MUST On PLANTED ACCORDING TO VNEE fC9TV!3
VMBEPLM Mi,110 SHOULD DER ONOMLLEED M WHIM 40 OF BROWNER SIDE OF:
TO, MEM
g
EDROP[3011,TV� LONvE20 amusTums Cumim g,
sac" 111V 9013 PLMTER"311111TUTIP
OWN
PuRsum 7 TO [2coc 20012002@000 sm, a VE8
44,
4.
'4 G100&, AL ...T( em, q
4V jV 0 E '.81 t
A
4 Icum, I fl. . . 9, 5;�� 4 A I
mn m"'u"10870D mu,
(90�_ REBUVERS 1710 OWNER OF OWNS SITE go PRI'ape 13OX0, 10 s"", v a 4 4 . que'n A
Icusm 1 0,
R7 11 m MR,
ICUV
I - Z t", -
(CUT
7 w i c a w oAT u 0,011
m, 0 3 R11 01717
PRMODS SeMON ON@ BETWSEM THE M' A(C[ENT p&RKO§j@ 7 AMD THEE
L
�0
IT
PROP@ ED BUILDOMOU
musTs mmm m, 03TIM81 camc., STEEPS
USS aa: bffl&LL FEMCE2 OR WaLLER SNIRF U98 FOR SCREEMIM, 0 P"RPOSE80 100.01
DROV7
BRAIDS EBA0013 (99:, T
4. 4
=1 STU H, call
99.01
.4 9900
RAND r1aciapflum TO
W V
3
@ BAG, Is OF 7 1112
"g,
MUSTONG Nouss
'd A
04.
EX a B EXOGTIN, a No
i I TOM
' N7770
(CA ull 03TO
E L El
E";
99 OIL
DAWN P
ZDWOOD'META5EQUOIA GLUPTO5TRO5OIDE5
AJ)p
Gl-81 HIGH @ INITIAL PLANTING
14E
ERING
MF".DIOVE M117611118TON, 6 2-
Dat
"�"CLCGMP Too
PA
gg
PAPERBARK MAPLE-'ACER GR]5r:UM 41 1 i
IZ
G�)
- - - - - - - - 4fjAjbj -a-- -OF
4�
3 5TEM MIN. 51- 101 HIGH @ INITIAL PLANTING
PRM kv 0 0
orb
-rAE-m
5PACING A5 SHOWN- tj
F D
To umums!"'30 PATO .'4.4 A
sy spo
TU5CAN BLUE PO5EMARY-`RO5MARJNU5 OFI`ICINAL15' El
LO
Q
61\
MEDIUM 5HRUD I GALLON @ 481, O.C.
A ............
(ma emmass TO Examom(m)
RJ1ODODENDRON-'ANAH KRU5CHKE'
a)
O.C. 31 TIRE Ev,
5HRUB 2 GALLON @ 48
IT RES
LEI,,
0 41,01, 111
-A 114
u MIAGAY, By 2- 'A 0711 N
5UMMER ICE-DAPHNE X TRAN5ATLANTICAl
O.C.
CFO=
SMALL,5HRUB I GALLON @ 3G UL avrlol
Eu woi I (I D
Ww� ff,7- I P'' R% 0m D
T.
-ADDED
002
FRAGRANT 5WEET BOX-5ARCOCOCCA RU5CIFOLIN LOT @0 MDOMATOOM
-PLMS0070001
5MALL 5H IRUB I GALLON @ 30 O.C.
LEY 5 ET TREE)
GINKO 51 LBOA- 'PRINCETON 5ENTRY --MAIDNEHAIR TREE --(DA
G, HIGH @ INITIAL PLANTING ILA, ......
CALIPER MIN.
2-2.5
r
0 wA*
UUMAM 97122 A No
FRAXINU5 PENN5YLVANICAURBANITE URBANITE A5H (7TH AVE 5TIRE REE) E3
G'-b'tllGtl @ INITIAL PLANTING
-- - - - - - --- - -
0 2-2.5" CALIPER. MIN. El 1. 4 4
4?, R MDBY PL N!N'NG
APP
R
LAWN AREA
RIM,
"� 0
D39M LOC ATION
13LANK AREA COTONEA5TER0- (ADPRE55U5)
1A
O,C.
4 POT5 @ 24
"I'll SQUODA
-GROUND COVER IN 25% Of ALL GROUND COVER PLANTING5 EINIC"'m
D A
UR
..... . JAN
G' HIGI-1 CEDAR fFNCE I .... 11
*25% Of ALL PLANTING5 REQUIRED LAND5CAPE AREA5 TO 13171 LOW
WATE R U5AGET DROUG11T TOLERANT PLANT5'.
.... ..... .
..........
........ ... ......
....... ... ..... ..
....... .... ........
...... ..... ......
...... .......
.... ......... ........
... ......... .......
ST
R
'EET FIL"
63
IMM,�
RONALD
AL
STATEOF W,
k 6��
ev
111�61�
STR- EET FLE
RESU-83
JAN 15 2000