6915 MEADOWDALE BEACH RD.PDF11111111111111
12295
6915 MEADOWDALE
BEACH RD
ConverseWard Dfavis Dixon
Geotechnical Consultants
January 30, 1980
Whiteley Jacobsen and Associates
2118 Third Avenue
Seattle,*Washington 98121
Attention: Mr. Robert McClendon
Subject: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Edmonds View Property, Phase I
Meadowdale Beach Road
Edmonds, Washington
Gentlemen:
80-5251-02
This report presents the results of our subsurface investigation con-
ducted at the Edmonds View Property, a planned residential development.
The site is located near 172nd Street and Meadowdale Beach Road in
Edmonds, Washington. The site encompasses approximately 12.5 acres. It
is our understanding that project plans are to subdivide the property
into residential lots, and construct roadways and associated utilities.
Present plans call for the site to be developedin two phases. Phase I
would consist of development of the southern approximate 5 acres and
Phase II the northern 7.5 acres. At the present time, preliminary lay-
outs for both Phase I and Il areas have been provided. This layout
dated January 25, 1981 consists of 12 building areas in the Phase I area
and 16 building areas in the Ph ase Il area. In general, the building
areas are clustered on the higher elevations. It is understood that the
remainder of the area will be left in a natural state. Access into the
Phase I area is presently planned via 172nd Street, while the access to
the Phase 11 area would be via Meadowdale Beach Road.
Converse Ward Davis Dixon. Inc
a
300 Elliott Avenue West
Suite 150
Seattle, Washington 98119
Tele�hr 220G 235-5200
It is our understanding that the proposed structures will be wood -frame
and be both one and two stories in height. In general, the foundations
reportedly will consist of poles based in drilled holes on the downhill
side and some conventional wall footings for the uphill areas.
The purpose of this study was to obtain subsurface information and
develop geotechnical design and construction recommendations. The scope
of services for this investigation was outlined in our letter of confir-
mation dated January 20, 1981. Verbal authorization was given by Mr.
Robert.McClendon on January 13, 1981. The primary effort during this
investigation has been directed toward the Phase I area; however, a
limited overview of the entire development has been completed. Our
scope of services in the Phase I area consisted.&F the following:
1. excavation of approximately 18 hand -excavated test pits,
2. continuous logging of subsurface conditions,
3. obtaining. samples of representative soils encountered in
the test pits,
4. visual classification of the soils encountered,
5.. engineering evaluation of field exploration results,
6. preparation of a geotechnical report.
A preliminary geotechnical evaluation of the site has been completed by
our f i rm. The results of this evaluation were summarized in a letter
report dated December 29, 1980. For completeness, this report includes
the basic information,and findings developed in this previous report.
Site Conditions
The Phase I area is irregular in plan, approximately 700 feet in width
in an east -west direction and approximately 700 to 900 feet in a north -
south direction. The property is characterized by moderate to moderate-
ly steep slopes. The steeper slopes are approximately.2H:IV (horizontal
to vertical). The maximum amount of relief across the site is approxi-
mately 180 feet. A maximum elievation of 380 feet occurs in the southern
oortion of the Phase I area and the minimum elevation of approximately
200 feet occurs in the extreme northwest corner of the Phase 11 area.
I
Converse Ward Davis Dixon, Inc.
-3-
With the exception of an old logging road near the central portion of
the site, there are no roads into the site. The higher portions of the
site are covered by a moderately thick growth of second -growth evergreen
trees while the lower portions of the site are dominated by deciduous
trees and low brush.
Geol oqv
The subject area is located on an upland surface in the Puget Lowland.
The Puget Lowland was invaded by continental glaciers during at least
four separate periods during the Pleistocene Epoch. During these
glacial and accompanying non -glacial periods, a thick sequence of soils
was deposited. It is estimated that these s9vots reach thicknesses on
the order of a thousand feet.
The present surface characteristics and near -surface soils are the re-
sult of the last period of continental glaciation which occurred between
15,000 and 13,500 years ago. It is assumed that these sediments are
underlain by older glacially -related soils.
Field Exploration
The subsurface conditions in the area of proposed development in the
Phase I area were explored by means of excavating 18 test pits on Janu-
ary 16 and 18, 1981. The test pits were excavated by hand, as the
moderately dense growth of trees and irregular terrain prohibited the
use of power -operated equipment. The depth of the test pits rarged !in
depth from a few feet to 6.5 feet. The locations of the test pits were
concentrated in, the building and roadway areas at approximate locations
shown on Drawing 1. The test pits were excavated by a engineering geo-
logist from our office who maintained a continuous log of the subsurface
conditions encountered. Representative bag samples were secured for
visual examination and classification. Summar field logs are presented
y
at the end of this report. All soils have been classified according to
the Unified Soil Classification System.
I
Converse Ward Davis Dixon, Inc.
-4-
Subsurface Conditions
The near -surface soils which underlie the site were deposited during the
last period of glaciation, the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation.
These soils (from oldest to youngest) are referred to as the Whidbey
Formation, the Esperance Sand, and the Vashon Drift. The Vashon Drift
is Composed of three separate units: advance stratified drift, glacial
till, and recessional stratified drift. It appears that the only drift
unit present at the site is the glacial till. Glacial till consists of
a homogeneous mixture of silt, sand and gravel and was deposited direct-
ly beneath the glacial ice.
The subsurface conditions encountered at the te,* pit locations consist
of a thin dark brown organic layer of forest duff which ranges up to a
few inches in thickness. This surface layer is underlain by a layer of
silty sand or sand which represents either a residual soil layer and/or
slopewash. This layer ranges in thickness between approximately one to
four feet and ranges between loose to medium dense. Underlying these
soils is either a medium to very dense silty sand or medium dense to
dense. sand. The denser silty sand unit represents glacial till and,
based on our explorations, is restricted to the upper elevations of the
site. The glacial till forms a thin cap over the underlying sand and is
estimated to be on the order of ten feet in thickness. The underlying
sand represents the Esperance Sand unit. The sand unit generally under-
lies the steeper sloping portio-ns of the site.
The sand is underlain by the oldest unit, the Whidbey Formation, which
is exposed in the lower slopes, along the extreme north property line of
the Phase I area below approximate elevation 280 feet. The Whidbey For-
mation consists of silt and clay with some interbeds of fine sand.
With the exception of the, near -surface soils, all oll" the soils which
underlie the site have been overconsolidated by glacial ice. Weathering
of the near -surface soils has resulted in loosening of these soils.
Converse Ward Davis Dixon, Inc.
-5-
The soils encountered in the test pits ranged frorn slightly moist to dry
and no oroundwater was encountered. The static proundwater table at the
site is anticipated to be in older granular soils which underlie the
qroundwater table which
Whidbey Formation. HowEver, there is a perched
exists within the Esperance Sand. Because of the clean nature of the
sand, surface water 'Infiltrates rapidly, percolatina downward to the
boundary of the Whidbey Formation. The Whidbey Formation is sufficient-
ly fined -grained so as to greatly reduce the downward percolation of the
water. The result i s a general downslope movement of the water above
the sand -clay contact. Springs or areas of seepage generally occur
where this contact intersects a slope. *The approximate locations of the
geologic boundaries are shown on Drawinq 1.
J
No areas of instability were noted during our investigations of the
site. On the steeper slopes there was evidence of a general down -
slope creep of the near -surface soils as evidenced by the bowing of tree
trunks. Creep of these looser surface soils is a nomal occurrence on
steeper slopes.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following conclusions an-d recommendations apply specifically to the
Phase I area. Somewhat different subsurface conditions are anticipated
in the Phase II area and should be examined in detail.
On the basis of the information obtained durinq this investigation and
our preliminary geotechnical evaluation, it is our opinion that the
proposed development is feasible from a aeotechAcal standpoint. The
steepness of some of the terrain will restrict development without
extensive grading.
The major portion of the proposed structure's will be founded on slopina.
around and excavations into the hillside are anticipated. Footings and
1 ovier floor slabs should be supported on competent, undisturbed moder-
ately dense to �ense native soils where exposed in the excavations. In
areas where the lower floor will be above the existing ground surface,
I
Converse Ward Davis Dixon, Inc.
-6-
it will be necessary to install footings well below the around surface
on a relatively steep slope. A pole -type footing would be suitable at
these locations. At locations where the ground is not steeply sloping,
it should be possible to place compacted structural fill which would be
suitable for support of spread footings and slabs -on -grade.
Our following recommendations are general. We have reviewed the planned
lower floor elevations for the proposed structures relative to the
existing ground surface as shown on the topographic drawing. In our
opinion, our recommentions are adequately complete to cover foundation
design and construction of the proposed structures; however, if design
changes are made such as changing structure locations or floor eleva-
tions, it would be prudent to review our recoMp%edations and their ap-
plications.
For each structure, it will be necessary to determine the required exca-
vation and filling, and the foundation system.
Site Preparation
All areas within the limits of excavations or where fill is to be placed
should be stripped to remove vegetation and debris. The vegetation and
debris should be removed from the site or placed in non -building areas.
No material should be placed on the hillside downslope from the proposed
houses. It is important that the slopes not be disturbed by the con-
struction. Surface water must be controlled so that it is not allowed
to become channelized and spill down the slope.
The preliminary plans indicate that the maximum depth of excavation will
be approximatel y 17 feet. Based on our explorations, the soils in the
excavations will generally be silty sands with some gravel. The upper
two to four feet of soil is loose to medium dense and grades to dense to
very dense below. We recommend that the contractor be made responsible
for the stability of temporary excavations. He is continually at the
site and can evaluate the stability of the soils as they are exposed.
I
Converse Ward Davis Dixon, Inc.
-7-
Structural fill to support floor slabs or footings should not be placed
4,
on the moderately to steeply sloping ground. Fills may be constructed
on flatter slopes provided the areas to receive the fill area benched to
provide a level surface to support the fill. A bench should be at least
six feet wide and the difference in elevation between adjacent benchs
shoul d be two feet or less. All structural fill should be placed in
layers approximately eight inches in thickness, conditioned to a mois-
ture content suitable for compaction, and compacted to at least 95
percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density as determined by the
ASTM D1557 compaction test. Fill slopes should be inclined at 2.5H:lV
(horizontal to vertical) or less.
Soil for structural fill should be free from Q*nic matter and debris
and should have a granular texture free from clay lumps. There are
on -site soils that are suitable and we rec ommend that soils containing a
minimum of silt or clay be utilized as they will be easier to compact
and less sensitive to moisture content.
Ifoundation Support
The proposed structures may be supported on conventional shallow spread
footings or a combination of spread footings and pole -type foundations.
We recommend that the foundation system be designed so that all hori-
zontal forces, such a's those due to earthquakes, are resisted by the
shallow spread footing portion of the foundation system.
Shallow footings founded on undisturbed medium dense to dense soils may
be designed for an allowable net bearing pressure of 3,000 psf (pounds
per square foot). Suitable bearing soils were observed at shallow
depths across the site in our explorations, generally two to four feet
below the existing ground surface. Wall footings should have a minimum
width of 16 inches and individual column footings should be a minimum of
18 inches wide. All footings should be founded at least 18 inches below
the lowest adjacent grade.
I
Converse Ward Davis Dixon, Inc.
d = A --- --r)
Z .( + /1 + 4 —.
where A = 2.34P
Sibi
P = applied horizontal force in pounds
S, = allowable lateral soil hearing pressure
h, = diameter of pole
h = distance in feet from ground surface to point
of application of P
d = depth of embedment of pole in feet
A value of 300 pounds per square foot may be used for the allowable
lateral soil bearing pressure (S1). The diameter of the pole (bl)
may be increased to the effective diameter of the hole provided the
annulus is backfilled with low -shrink concrete.
Shallow footings can resist horizontal forces through the horizontal
passive pressure -of backfill adjacent to the footing and by friction
across the base of the found ation. Horizontal passive pressure may be
calculated using an equivalent fluid weight (triangular distribution) of
250 pcf (pounds per cubic foot). This assumes thebackfill is drained
and compacted to at least 95 percent of the AST14 D1557 maximum dry
density. Resistance to sliding may be calculated using a base friction
factor of 0.45. Thp— above values do not include a safety factor. A
A9 *
minimum safety factor of 1.5 should be used to design for resistance to
sliding and overturning.
Basement Walls
All subsurface walls should be backfilled with a free -draining granular
soil and foundation subdrains installed behind the walls to minimize the
potential for hydrostatic pressure to develop. The walls must be sup-
ported on dense undisturbed soil.
Converse Ward Davis Dixon, Inc.
a
Our recommended criteria for footings founded in areas of sloping ground
are that the outside edge of the footing on the downhill side should be
at least eight feet back from the face of the slope measured in a hori-
zontal direction.
Footings founded on structural fill may be designed for an allowable net
bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Minimum size and depth of -embedment are
the same as recommended above. The outside edge of the footings founded
on fill should be at least five feet back from the face of the fill
measured in a horizontal direction.
Pole -type footings may be utilized on sloping ground where it is not
feasible to construct shallow footings. A pol ooting would be con-
structed by Arilling a hole with a power auger, inserting the pole and
then backfilling the annulus area. We recommend the annulus area be
backfilled with low -shrink Portland cement concrete. Our recommended
minimum depth of pole embedment below the ground surface is six feet.
The base of the poles should have a minimum diameter of eight inches.
Our recommended allowable bearing capacity for a pole embedded six feet
is 18,000 psf. For a pole embedded eight feet, the allowable bearing
capacity may be increased to 24,000 psf.. The effective area of the
foundation is equal to that of the base of the pole. The effective area
of the foundation could be increased to the area at the bottom of the
hole if a concrete footing was poured in the bottom of the hole to sup-
port the pole. Such a concrete footing should be at least 12 inches
thick.
The foundation systems for the proposed structures will generally con-
sist of a combination of shallow footings and pole -type footings. We
recommend that the horizontal loads be resisted by the shallow footings.
However, if pole -type footings are required to resist horizontal loads,
it may be necessary to deepen the footings to greater than the minimum
six-foot embedment depth. The following formula may be used to deter-
r-iline embedment depth to resist horizontal loads:
Converse Ward Davis Dixon, Inc.
The on -site sandy soils described as the Esperance Sand unit would gen-
erally be suitable for backfill behind walls. The silty glacial till
soils present in the southern portions of the site should not be used
for backfill behind walls.
Backfill behind walls should be placed in layers not exceeding eight
inches loose thickness and compacted with relatively light vibratory
equipment to at least 90 percent of its maximum ASMT D1557 dry density.
An 18-inch thick layer of impermeable soil should be placed on the
ground surface and compacted to prevent surface water from seeping down-
ward into the granular backfill. The ground surface should be sloped to
drain away from the wall.
Four -inch di*ameter perforated footing drains musT be placed behind base-
ment walls. The invert of footing drains should be at least 12 inches
below finished interior floor grades and sloped to drain at a grade of
at least 6.5 percent. Convenient cleanouts should also be provided.
All 'Perforated footing drains should be protected by a filter of drain-
age sand and gravel. There should be at least four inches of this mate-
rial below the drains, six inches along the sides, and 12 inches above
the drains. In addition, the filter material should extend upward,
adjacent to the wall so that it is a minimum of 12 inches thick measured
perpendicular to the wall. Our recommended gradation for filter mate-
ri-al i s:
U.S. Standard
Percent
Passing,
Size
by Dry
Weight
-Sieve
1 1/2
inch
100
3/4
inch
70
- 90
No.
4
30
- 60
No.
8
20
- 50
No.
30
8
- 30
No.
50,
3
- 12
No.
200
0
- 1.5
Converse Ward Davis Dixon, Inc.
We recommend that subsurface or retaining walls up to approximately 12
feet high be designed for horizontal pressures equivalent to that of a
fluid weighing 40 pcf (triangular distribution).
Surface Water
The exterior ground surface should be sloped to drain away from the
building and surface should either be paved or covered with at least 18
inches of imperviouls soil to inhibit surface water from infiltrating
into the subdrains.
It is our understanding that it is desirable to dispose of roof drainage
in dry wells. We anticipate that this scheme.0111 work satisfactorily
based on certain requirements. These requirements are as follows: 1)
the dry wells be located in the Esperance Sand unit, 2) the wells should
not be located on the very steep slopes, and 3) they should not be
located in the proximity of the basement wall perforated drains. The
use of dry wells will be somewhat restricted in the Phase II area, these
are anticipated to generally be those areas underlain by the Whidbey
Formation.
We understand that the storm drain tystem, relative to -the roadways,
will be designed to flow into a retention system. We recommend that the
retention system have a controlled orifice and be tight lined away from
the slopes.
Summary
This report has been prepared to aid in the evaluation and development
of this site for its intended use. The discussion of site development
is conceptual in nature and must be refined to take into account final
roadway grades, slope locations, and construction sequencing. It is
recommended that vie continue our involvement with the design engineers
to assure that final site development plans and specifications are con-
sistent with the findings of our investigation.
I
Converse Ward DavisDixon, Inc.
-12-
We recommend that site preparation, foundation excavations, fill place-
ment and drainage installations be observed by personnel qualified by
training and experience to see that the work is perfomed in accordance
with these recommendations, the plans and specifications, and good engi-
neering practice.
The findings and conclusions of this report we -re prepared in accordance
with generally accepted professional engineering principles and prac-
tice. We make no other warranty, either express or implied. Please do
not hesitate to call us if there are any questions regarding the conclu-
sions and recommendations contained herein.
Respectfully submitted,
CONVERSE WARD DAVIS DIXON, INC.
William S. Bliton' M. HOO
Senior Geologist i;A
4C
P..; -
Jack M. Hogan
Senior Engineer
Converse Ward Davis Dixon, Inc.
0
11��'
Qvt
00,
-Z
N
N
cl! �'
PHAS
ex
//00'
QW)
y1f, / I--,' , I/ I � ' EXPLA""ATION
P
T!�) 'M
QVT Glacial Till
ance Sand
�1' P 0 E
\T)D 110 !""--'!Dey For
QW mation
v - 3--)
<1 TP-
Approximate Geologic
T 16
T PI; 2 C c r; 4. a c&
QA IQ d6tteo .vhere Inferred
/X
I/ T.P
'bLOR'\
GFOLOGY AND EX,j
EDMONDS VIEW PROPLERTY1
Edmonds, ViashlnSton
for North,.vest Enginc�ers
" Test Pil
LAI
T 10 ID
G-.,.ch Cal conu�i:&n-ts
--- 80-5152-02
1 --; 3 1
SUMMARY LOGS OF TEST PITS
Test Pit I
0.0'-0.2' SM FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND, dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse sand and fine to medium gravel, organics,
numerous roots; slightly Moi st, loose.
0.2--l.5- SM/SP RESIDUAL TILL SOIL, SILTY SAND, gray -brown, with orange
oxidized layers, fine to medium, with some coarse sand
and fine to medium gravel, occasional cobble, trace organ-
ics, few roots; slightly moist, loose to medium dense.
1.5'-1.9' SM GLACIAL TILL, ' SILTY SAND, gray -brown, fine to medium, with
some coarse sand and fine to medium gravel, occasional
cobble to 6" diameter; dry, very de
--------------------------------------------- M ---------------------
Test Pit 2
0.0 -0.11 SM FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND, dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse sand and fine to medium gravel, organics,
numerous roots; slightly moist, loose.
O.V-2.5' SM/SP RESIDUAL TILL SOIL/SLOPEWASH, 'SILTY SAND, gray -brown, with
orange oxidized layers, fine to medium, with some coarse
sand and fine to medium gravel, occasional cobbles, trace
organics, few roots; slightly moist, loose to medium dense.
2.5'-2.7' SM GLACIAL TILL, SILTY SAND, gray -brown, fine to medium, with
some coarse sand and fine to medium gravel, occasional
cobble; dry, very dense.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Pit 3
0.01-0.21 SM FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND , dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse sand and fine to medium gravel, organics,
numerous roots; slightly moist, loose.
0.2-1.2' SM/SP SLOPE WASH, SILTY SAND, brown, fine to medium, with some
coarse sand and fine to medium gravel, occasional cobble,
trace organics,some roots; slightly moist, loose to medium
dense.
SP SAND. brown to reddish brown, with mottled gray streaks,
fine to medium, with some coarse sand and fine to medium
gravel, little silt; slightly moist, medium dense to dense.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 2
Test Pit 4
0.0'-0.3' SM FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND, dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse sand and fine to medium gravel, organics,
numerous roots; slightly moist, loose.
0.3'-3.2' SM/SP RESIDUAL TILL SOIL/SLOPE WASH, SILTY SAND, gray -brown, fine
to medium, with some coarse sand and fine to medium gravel.,
occasional cobble, trace organics, some roots; slightly
moist, loose to medium dense.
3.2'-3.6' . SM GLACIAL TILL (moderately weathered), SILTY SAND, gray -brown,
fine to medium, with some coarse sand and fine to medium
gravel, occasional cobbles; dry, medium dense to dense.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Tact Pit
0.01-0.11 SM FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND -, dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse sand and fine to medium gravel, organics,
numerous roots; slightly moist, loose.
M
0.11-2.81 SP/SM . SLOPE WASH, SAND, brown, fine to md-ium, with some silt,
coarse sand, and fine to medium gravel, occasional cobble,
trace organics, some roots; slightly moist, loose to medium
dense.
2.8'-4.0' SP SAND, brown, fine to medium, with little coase sand and
gravel, trace silt; dry, medium dense to dense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Pit 6-
0.01-0.11 SM FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND, dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse sand and fine to medium gravel, organics,
numerous roots; slightly moist, loose.
A 0-11-2.7' SP/SM SLOPE WASH, SAND, brown,.fine to medium, with some silt,
coarse sand, and fine to medium gravel, occasional cobble,
trace organics, some roots; slightly moist, loose to medium
dense.
2.71-3.11 SP SAND, brown, fine to medium, with little coarse sand and
gravel, occasional cobble, trace silt; dry, medium dense to
dense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Pit 7
0.0'-0.2' SM FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND, dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse' sand and fine to medium gravel, organics,
numerous roots; slightly moist, loose.
0.2'-3.4' SP/SM SLOPE WASH/WEATHERED SAND, SAND, reddish brown, fine to
medium, with some silt, little fine to coarse gravel, some
roots, trace organics; slightly moist, loose.
3.4'-6.5' SP SAND, brown to gray -brown, fine, with little silt and medium
to coarse sand, trace fine to medium gravel; slightly.moist,
medium dense to dense.
Page 3
Test Pit 8
0.0'-0.2' SM FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND, dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse' sand and fine to medium gravel, organics,
numerous roots; slightly moist, loose.
0.2'-2.5' SP/SM SLOPE WASH/WEATHERED SAND, SAND, reddish brown, fine to
medium, with some silt, coarse sand, and fine to coarse
gravel, some roots, trace organics; slightly moist, loose
to medium dense.
2.5'-4.0' SP SAND, gray -brown, fine to medium, with some coarse sand and
fine to coarse gravel, trace silt, occasional cobble
slightly moist, medium dense to dense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Pit 9
O.Ol-0.31 SM FOREST DUFF, ' SILTY SAND ' , dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse sand and fine to med�pm gravel, organics,
numerous roots; slightly moist, 166se.
0.3'-4.58 SP/SM SLOPE WASH/WEATHERED SAND, SAND, reddish brown to brown,
fine to medium, with some silt, coarse sand, and fine to
coarse gravel, some roots, trace organics; slightly moist,
loose to medium dense. (Includes zone of moderately cemented
sand at 1.5'-2.5', possible Till layer.)
4.5'-5.0' SP SAND, gray -brown, fine to medium, with some coarse sand
Tn—dfine to coarse gravel, trace silt, occasional cobble;
slightly moist, medium dense to dense.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Pit 10
0. 0'-0. 2' SM FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND, dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse sand and fine to medium gravel., organics,
numerous roots; slightly moist, loose.
0.31-4.21 SP/SM SLOPE WASH/WEATHERED SAND, SAND, reddish brown to brown,
fine to medium, with some silt, coarse sand, and fine to
coarse gravel, some roots, trace organics; slightly moist,
loose to medium dense.
4.21-5.11 SP SAND, gray -brown, fine to medium, with some coarse sand and
fine to coarse gravel, ICrace silt, occasional cobble;
slightly moist, medium dense to dense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 4
Test Pit- 11
0.01-0.11 SM
FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND, dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse sand and fine. to medium gravel, organics,
numerous roots; slightly moist, loose.
O.V-3.0' SP/SM
SLOPE WASH/WEATHERED SAND, SAND, reddish brown to brown,
fine to medium, with some silt, coarse sand, and fine to
coarse gravel, some roots, trace organics; slightly moist,
loose to medium dense.
3.0'-4.0' SP
SAND, gray -brown, fine to medium, with some coarse sand and.
fine to coarse gravel, trace silt, occasional cobble-,
--------------------------------------------------------------------
slightly moist, medium dense to dense.
Test Pit 12
0.01-0.31 SM
FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND, dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse sand, fine to medium gravel, organics, numerous
roots; slightly moist, loose.
0.31-3.31 SP/SM
SLOPE WASH/WEATHERED SAND, SAND, T�6ddish brown to brown, fine
to medium, with some silt, coarse sand, and fine to coarse
gravel, some roots, trace organics; slightly moist, loose to -
medium dense.
3.3'-4.1' SP
SAND, gray -brown, fine to medium, with some coarse sand,
�_nd.fine to coarse gravel, trace silt, occasional cobble;
----------------------------------------------------------
slightly moist,'medium dense to dense.
Test Pit 13
0.01-0.11
FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND, dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse sand and fine to medium gravel, organics,
numerous roots; slightly moist, loose.
0.11-1.01 SM/ML
SANDY SILT., light gray, very fine to fine, with trace medium
to coarse sand and fine gravel, organics and roots; slightly
moist, soft.
1.01-3.11 SP/SM
RESIDUAL TILL SOIL, SAND, brown, fine, with little medium to
coarse sand, gravel, and silt, trace organics, some roots,
occasional chunks of weathered hard till; slightly moist,
medium dense.
3.1'-3.41 SP/SM
GLACIAL TILL, SAND, gray -brown, fine, with some silt, little
medium to coarse sand, and fine to, . c . o . ar se . gr avel, occasional
---------------------------------------------------------------------
cobble, slightly moist to dry, very d�nse.
I
1,age b
Test Pit 14
0.01-0.3' SM FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND, dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse' sand and fine to medium gravel, organics,
numerous roots; slightly moist, loose.
0.3'-3.5' SM/SP SLOPE WASH/RESIDUAL TILL SOIL, SILTY SAND, brown, fine to
medium, with some coarse sand, and fine to medium gravel,
trace organics, some roots; slightly moist, loose to medium
dense.
3.5'-3.6' SM/SP (As above, but harder, with chunks of till. Possibly top of
till but not sure because could not dig further.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Pit 15
0.0'-0.2' SM FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND I.dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse sand and fine to medium gravel, organics,
numerous roots; slightly moist, loose.
0.2'-3.0- SM/SP SLOPE WASH/RESIDUAL TILL SOIL SILT�. SAND, brown, fine to
medium, with some coarse sand: an4-fine to medium gravel,
trace organics, some roots; slightly moist, loose to medium
dense.
3.01-3.31 SM GLACIAL TILL, SILTY SAND, dark brown, fine to medium, with
some coarse sand and fine to medium gravel, occasional cobble;
dry, very dense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Tpc,t Pit 16
0.0'-0.3' SM FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND ' , dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse sand and fine to medium gravel, organics,
numerous roots; slightly moist, loose.
0.3'-3.5' SP/SM SLOPE-WASH/RESIDUAL TILL SOIL, SAND, brown, fine to medium,
with little to some silt, little coarse sand, fine to coarse
gravel, occasional cobble, trace organics, some roots, (with
chunks of hard till); slightly moist, loose to medium dense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Pit 17
0.01-0.11 SM FOREST DUFF, SILTY SAND, dark brown, fine to medium, with
little coarse sand and fine to medium gravel, organics,
numerous roots; slightly moist, loose.
O.V-3.4' SM/SP SLOPE WASh/RESIDUAL TILL SOIL, SILTY SAND, gray-brown,.fine
to medium, with some coarse sanZ and fine to coarse gravel,
occasional cobble, trace organics, some roots; slightly
moist, loose to medium dense.
3X-3.5' SM (Harder, probably till.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Tp-,t Pit IR
Road Cut SM GLACIAL TILL, SILTY SAND, aray-brown, fine to medium, with
Surface Saimple some coarse sand, and 7ine to coarse gravel; dry, very dense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
CITY OF EDMONDS
D /NEW
ADDITION
RETIREMENT
ASSET INFORMATION SHEET
STREET FILE
ASSET NO.
ADDITION TO ASSET NO.
DESCRIPTION
SERIAL NO.
LOCATION
)o C._) D119-IC4 &-A
DeT NO,
* * PURCHASE ORDER NO
PURCHASE ORDER DATE
COST
0
PROJECT NUMBER
PROJECT COMPLETION DATE
COST
B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO. o
ESTIMATED LIFE
INITIATED BY
DATE
APPROVED BY
"SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST
*SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT
ACCOUNTING ONLY
2(DEPRECIATE
MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
G.L. ENTRY
REFERENCE
DATE
VERIFIED BY
PROCESSED
BATCH NO. -
ttnp
INITIAL
DEPARTMENT FILE
-zi-
00
C)
V)
CITY of EDMONDS STR EIET F16ED E'- S E W E R, P E R M I T
For Inspection Call 771-3202 PERMIT NO 07856
EC E E D
Address of Construction: Rn
Property�Lega.l;Description (Include JVBRCsements)
Owner and/or Builder:
Contractor & License No: W--,
n t-A
'Single Fami 1 y Residence
FNNWOO� LINE]
Multi -Family (No. of.Units
Commercial (No. of fixture Units
Invasion,into City Right -of -Way: No Yes (If Ye's., Right-of-Wa.1y.,
Constru.ction 1. Permit required. Call One -Call -Center (1-!800-424-5555) before any'-"'t".
excavation.
Cross other Private Property: No Ye's (If Yes, easement required,
attach le'gal description and co.unty easement number.)
READ THE ITEMS LISTED ON THE BACK
A A
I cer—ti y a have read and-sha.11 comply
with the i Ms listed on the- back..
Permit Fee: �0. 00 iIssued By:,.
Trunk Charge: 00 IDate Issued:' 6 Z13
Assessment Feei Receipt,No.
------ ----
Partial Inspection.:�
Comments
Fin'al Inspection,��Approved:
�D_'�a
te Initial
Rejected:
Keason
PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE,
White Copy File Green Copy 21Inspector
c= I
Date
Date Initial
Date' Initial
Buff Copy Applicant
% Side Sewer Drawing
The City of Edmonds EASEMENT NO. — --------- -------------------------------
NEW CONSTRUCTION REPAIRS F-1 LID NO - ------------------ - AsmT. NO - -------------
T
OWNER GLA- ----- -- ------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- PERMIT NO. A72
--------- S—;7� k 4.,- i \ ---------- CONtRACTOR--A!� ---- 41 .... Qk W-.,x
JOB ADDRESS ------
- - - ----- ------------ -------- LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO - -------------------------------------- BLOCK NO - ------------------------------------
I
Lv?.,).C- A0 w4x, I I ke ±Q
kAwrtL
,,�, �)-v - c- I/S Q"t,-)
PWW-0001 -11/75 (REV. 11178)
4 Celt J t
NWOOD UNE
A c,
Approved:
c
DATE ........... By IZ� .. �Ze,--�. -------- ----------------
C11 P
1 1I6wl6- \,_,/PERMIT
CITY OF EDMONDS
ZONE g5-/ NUMBER
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
JOB
ADDRESS
$5� 1n6A00Wd,4A-' ZrACA-
NAME (OR NAME OF BUSINESS)
U)
z
3:
0
g, fz,' 4 " , , � -�- r a-, a ", —1
LEGAL DESCRIPTION CHECKI
SUBDIVISION No,
1
ILID NO.
144-
MAILING ADDRESS/
"I"N f
A C-31 cl nj
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP.
EXISTING —0 REQUIRED DEDICATION
PR POSED-&-O—
CITY
A V-f\ r, (A ) A]
TELEPH NENUMB R
N (I
NAME 77/-L/572-4
A'on 2SRA�:I�d 4�'
RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT REQUIRED
Uj
STREET USE PERMIT REQUIRED I.':
z
a
ADDRESS
SEE ENGINEERING MEMO DATED
.111,51
z
Uj
CITY
PHONE NUMBER
REMARKS
jw!v ev
NAME
-4SAX"rve- QLn'
ADDRESS
METER SIZE
BUILDING SUPPLY SIZE
FIXTURE UNITS
0
a:
Cc
W
CITY
TELEPHONE NUMBER
z
0
0
REMARKS
STATE LICENSE NUMBER
SIGN AREA
ENV. REVIEW
ADB NO.
ALLOWED PROPOSED
COMPLETE EXEMPT
W I-T�y -
AA�-v
SHORELINE N
z
P:
Legal Description of Property - include all easements
(show below or attach four copies)
0
VARIANCE OR CU
PLANNING REVIEW BY
LA
DATE�,
('n
W
W
L5
YARDS
REAR
F R 0 N T '5,11 D E rF
HEIGHTrj
a4
�-
LOT COVERAG
z
z
EMARKS
&I Pq om, &4AO
R—T
NEW L8J RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING
ADDIALTER El COMMERCIAL MECHANICAL
E] REPAIR El RETAINING WALL El SIGN
EXCAVATE FENCE
DEMOLISH El OR FILL 1:1 — x —FT)
CHECKED BY
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION
I =—/I,/
CODE
I
HEIGHT
PRE -MOVE INSP./
REMODEL El COMPLIANCE INSP. E]
SPECIAL INSPECTOR
REQUIRED
AREA
OCCUPANCY
GROUP
OCCUPANT
LOAD
z
0
WOOD STOVE/ F�
INSERT APT.BLDG EI RENEWAL
n YES 0 NO
%3
)?_
REMARKS
PROGRES S INSPECTIONS PER UBC 305
0
cc
0
(D
NUMBER OF STORIES NUMBER OF
W,4 &ve4eYe0Anlf
D
W
0
ca
0
DWELLING
UNITS
NATURE OF WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN)
/;�V-44
,-t- —jL at c-- \ Sn ca
VALUATION
FEE
PLAN CHECK FEE
BUILDING
PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
GRADING/FILL
This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY.
Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewelks,
driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission.
STATE SURCHARGE
Permit Application: 180 Days
ENERGY CODE
Permit Limit: 1 Year - Provided Work is Started Within 180 Days
11 Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns and
successors in interest, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials,
employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of
whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the issuance
F" 9'0'V- 1
'j'jwi, Pr4ojB=,j.REVIEWj CHEMIST'!
RD;n= NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS:',;!
fiECEIP`r, DAn
kPP=CATION 10"
�,Reviewed by:;,:,(ini ial/da teh'i
WI
l4iit PLANNIM', WM/SWR. STPIM,'. -MG'
1v til BUILDING: 'I //////// / / // Itl
'-',j'(6:f[icle
E mwdi� ku
�InNG=L; 0 11111111MIM17-1 ZY17.177111
ne),
;ETBACKS CHECKED - Planning
N,V
ARIANCE/SETFIAC1(iADJ
7777777774,,
if
�OMITIONAL USE PETNIT
.7-
777T7777777777777777777
�'2
OMEQUIREMEMS
H
'j,
Mv
77777777
11111111411"
7rHER1 z6hfiiGli REQUIRDMM Nilr;14441!�CPI I
, i . ,�- 14; 16 �, --
0
CCESSTSIbPF':&' VEHI=:'i18:1s
7.7
111117777
777777777TR�
oMAN*i� vs, .61" A 1111,jil, ",14
4
6
777777
777777777
77TI7777T
)RAINAGE PLAN'(0n, Site&h A 4,k!A
//////
/////////
F iE
7TRII
777777777
777777777-
'N
A
A=L"DESCRii;�i'C.'Nfi,VF'R�'IFICATIC)N
//W/
4111111117777717
U/M/8
Iliffim
il
9
6*1mm"WOM, I
. "IT. MAIM/D llsfflwlpl� 01100131.
W1,11
1411,11111,
;ivvll,�Ifi
If Mfil�
01
"1111
�10,
VT
7771777
T177TT777
77777777
P LIC/P
UB RIVATE.
'C"qNECrli�h'.iF'�,'N"O'�",ILIID
777777
77777777777777777
W5U�'tSEW;'ER
12,
Milk, wiit�
77T777
"IMP 1'
aWsUbIbIVI9164 ,fq'
13
77777
14�
cjrr2oF-4qAytcoNsTnucri IV
iolv�� lit T,
DVRJEW fp(J,B,,L,I"C,;,IM,P"RDVEMEMS:�
7 77T17
wm
77777777
77T/7/ 7T
n!
COND
S`C, ITIMIS & GROUND-pt,j,
IZ � 7
117T .77
-T/7777T
fo
�q
TMER IFiE%TD'CHE
L
LI
v f �, .: ,, 5
177TI7111
;4�
t,PAVTNr,
P"V REQUIRED
D
.17'
I Iw lk)�-Iu"�! �. .
� t�5
LM1fiW*.,
AND GUMER REQUI 4 fl4l I.,. "q!Al!
T177TT17T
/O/w//
777777777
A
;IDEWUX`REO* IREb';,
_U
117711111
111117TI7
7
PC
7 7 7 T1777
77T/T/77 7
1111111117
.UM5CW`MR �DRIMAY,�REQD
20
7 TITM77-
77T17T17T
7777777 711:
—
-4
'I'll1w IGN,, RE)QD1
NAME
21
7TIT17
777777T/7
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 17
22'
SEWER NAM:
777777777
117777711
,ID9 lit
-.23
MISTMG WhTE11i MAIN SIZE j
777TI7
7777TTR
17711777
T77777T777,
24;
ATER,MF'M SliE
1111111IT77T7777777
31MWICE:1LTNE,SIz9*!I
111777-771111111
A
26
iyDRAmr.,kqduifiE:6
777777777777777777
777777777777777777
27
NDRK�.'SIZE EXISTING:,
TITTI=
28
MM'CONNErrION rNSPECrICN RT
777777
77TI7777T
!V
29
WER' k�IM CHA]IM ROM J. ...
: 777T/7
777TI-1777
3;
iTIRE LINE CHARGE REQD - SPRI�R,
3'
)-rREsT cur
3 214,
5P�i .
D MICH EXISTING
77777777
q
oil'
00
CATCH DAZIN:
TKr.NCw L-KNC-TH
WSUAL
1 14
covom
........................... . ..........
TF-F. w/ 4'Low. Lacs
SYSTEM CROSS—SECTION
MIRAff I SOOX
r--,e r=L --r
TO Bf_:� LAYED e
W4..�_�4tf[) P,0�_K
*17F.E1,C4 COVER
41W/54 VZ" VVA59 E: D
GRAVEI
4 oiAm M$W P
L__ v-0.
TRENCH CROSS—SECTION
7
CAP
in
STANDARD DRAINAGE PLAN
INFILTRATION SYSTEM
PAGE I OF 2
for
location M#%:�,
plan by
phone
da te
DESIGN DATA
Trench Perc LF per Imperm Trench
Number Rate ..1000 sq.(t. Area Rea.
NOTES
1. Call Engineering Division (771-3202)
Jor prebackfill and final inspections.
2. Responsibility for operation and
maintenance of drainage systems on
private property,is the responsibility
of the property owner(O. Preventive
maintenance consists of preventing
soil and other materials from entering
trench during construction as well as
after construction. Catch basins should
be cleaned of floating material and
sediment at I tervals (at least
f 4F AF
CITY OF EOMONos
1�
mEM0 TO: Building Di . v s i on
FROM: Engineering Division
SUBJECT:
After review of the subject, building permit application, we have the
following comments:
1) Connection to City water system required.
2) Connection to City sanitary sewer system required.
3) Right-of-way permit required for any work.on City property.
4) Driveway slope not to exceed 1.4'a.
5) Back water valve required if downstairs plumbing is below
elevation oil upstream manhole.
6) Water and sewer lines to be separated by 10 'Foot minimum.
7) Builder/owner respons ible for containinto all temporary runoff and
eros on on site and may pot impact neighboring properties in any
way.
8) Construction hours from 7:00 a.m. 0 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and
L
10:00 a.-.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays.
9) No burning of construction refuse 'withnat -approval by '�'i " re Dept.
7
STT I
.ST E
dr
F
+0 ISLA" OW
C*,-k
350
PILrtt-.\-
ET Fit E.
I
Isla
wr
R L-:- ci-, 11* 'IV E 0
JAN 27 1988
PERMIT COUNTER
-- - �; 3 5,5
H Iris
�d
r; I 41t, % E
�� 'Q� ('� � � '�i I-r_, D
JAN '17 1988
COUNTER
Xs- -/ 2,
CITY COPY
0 - I.
LU
LU
LU
g-Cc
co
A
C,
- - i I iq ", 4 4
bj n
I I
N- 3S.S
G,
CEIV D-q.� -C -W. -ot 1�
C FE 'v
RECKNED FE# 14988 !a Hiz -
R
F0 3 1988 PERM T COU R r- el*�,L-jy=,_!!�
PERMIT COUNTR� O'd