710 ALDER ST.PDF710 ALDER ST
qf
CITY OF EDMOND SIDE SEWER PERMIT
WATER-SEU R7_DEjPARTMENT
PERMIT
li
= 6212
Call 7.76-1107 for side sewer inspections BEFORE covering any portion of the construction.)
Inspection will be provided within 24 hours after request. NO Sat., Sun., or holiday inspections.)
ADDRESSLOCATION OF CONSTRUCTION .............. C! ............. .......................................................................................................................................
r ", n
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION ......... :-.ati6
: .............. J ... ...... I. ........ I
.................................... z ..........................................................................
........................................ ! ................................................................................................................................................................ ..................................................
---- OWNER AND/OR BUILDER --- A. 1tC0_1K,Cl'iL ----------------- **"* -- ----------- ............ ------------ I
-------------- * .. .... c -1 -loc. .5'c'�',rvi w, No.),15 - 012iid kvL,. Edrjuilos
QN, A AM & ADDRESS ... 0,
CTOR S NAME . . . ...................................................................................................................... ............ ......................................
on Is granted ........ .
.... .. ........................................... 19.7., for repair and/or connection of a side sewer to the city sanitary sewer
tem In accordance with City of Edmonds ordinances.
ELATION IS CALLED TO THE FOLLOWING:
NOTE No. 1—The owners of the property may obtain a permit to construct sewer Inside property line. A licensed Side Sewer Contractor must be employed to construct
side sewer in street area. Do not cover any portion of sewer before it has been inspected.
NOTE No, 2—All work performed in city right-of-way requires an Invasion of Right -of -Way Permit obtainable from the City Engineer's office.
NOTE No. 3—Obtain full information regarding Ordinance 11.16.030 and Regulations governing side sewers when you get permit.
NOTE No. 4—Top of side sewer must have at least 30 inches coverage at property line and 12 inches Inside property line; minimum grade of 2%. No bends in grade
sharper than 'A will be permitted.
NOTE No. I 5—Trenches in street must be water settled and surface of street restored to original condition. Contractors shall be responsible for failure due to improper
work which may develop within one year of completion.
NOTE No. 6--It is unlawful to alter or do any other work than is provided for in the permit, or to do any work on the main sewer or its appurtenances except to in-
sert the pipe into the wye.
DISAPPROVEDEj Date ... . ................................... By------.......... Date .................................... By_------......... Date............ ----
APPROVED ----- - ).'?-.e . ....................... ................
Remarks: ...............................................................................................................................................................................
.. 'BY ----------------
111VBOTH Permit Copies MUST Be Signed By Owner of Firm Performing Construction PRIOR To Request For Inspection
......... 0 ------ ..... .......................................................... ... I hereby certify that the side sewer installation constructed under this permit
(Owner of Contracting Firm Performing Construction)
Qs installed in accordance with all governing ordinances of the City of Edmonds.
*2,-
....... I .............. ,-day'of .... ------------- ....................... 1 .......
-
Dated this .....!:.A4 - 19 ..7 -
Check BEFORE you dig for: Water [], Gas E], Telephone E], 'S'Power E], Sewer E], - Other
K
CITE OF EDMONDS - SIDEEWER PERMIT
WATER -SEWER DEPART3flWT
PERMIT N? 4 212
/Call 776-1107 for side sewer inspections BEFORE covering any portion of the construction.
\Inspection will be provided within 24 hours after request. NO Sat., Sun., or holiday inspections.)
ADDRESSLOCATION OF CONSTRUCTION..............Z.1 Q.-.Al.dar.....................................................................----........--.............................................
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION ... LgtS--S.do4... -0... bocg... ...of..the... U.ty..Af..Edmoods...........................................
................................................... _......................_................-----------.....---........----..................--.....-----........................................------...............--------...................----.......
C. A. McConnachie
.......................................................OWNER AND/OR BUILDER...........:........----.-........-..---•---------------------
..----
......._......................-........-....-..................
TRACTOR'S NAME . ADDREssBob Akl i n Backhoe Servi ce_I...24006.. __92nd..Ave..__-_W.it..--Edmonds-..9. Q2Q..............
Ion is granted ....... Ngwit--U........................... 193.2., for repair and/or connection of a side sewer to the city sanitary sewer
*tem in accordance with City of Edmonds ordinances.
ATTENTION IS CALLED TO THE FOLLOWING:
NOTE No. 1—The owners of the property may obtain a permit to construct sewer inside property line. A licensed Side Sewer Contractor must be employed to construct
side sewer in street area. Do not cover any portion of sewer before it has been inspected.
NOTE No. 2—All work performed in city right-of-way requires an Invasion of Right -of -Way Permit obtainable from the City Engineer's office.
NOTE No. 3—Obtain full information regarding Ordinance 11.16.030 and Regulations governing side sewers when you get permit.
NOTE No. 4—Tap of side sewer must have at least 30 inches coverage at property line and 12 inches inside property line; minimum grade of 2%. No bends in grade
sharper than % will be permitted.
NOTE No. 5--Trenches in street must be water settled and surface of street restored to original condition. Contractors shall be responsible for failure due to improper
work which may develop within one year of completion.
NOTE No. 6—It is unlawful to alter or do any other work than is provided for in the permit, or to do any work on the main sewer or its appurtenances except to in-
sert the pipe into the wye.
DISAPPROVEDDate ... _................................... By ................ Date .................................... By....------= Date ............... _................... By ................
APPROVED ❑ Date...
Remarks: .................
.......................... BY ------------------------------------------- _..
............................................................-........------.....--•-----•---------------------------..........................--------..................-•------------............---.............................................
BOTH Permit Copies MUST Be Signed By Owner of Firm Performing Construction PRIOR To Request For Inspection —
I....................................................................................... hereby certify that the side sewer installation constructed under this permit
(Owner of Contracting Firm Performing Construction)
was installed in accordance with all governing ordinances of the City of Edmonds.
Datedthis ............................ day of ................................................................. 19.........
Check BEFORE you dig for: Water [], Gas [:], Telephone [], Power 0, Sewer E], Other ❑ V
ADDRESS: ' /L(J dbe// 551
TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER:
BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE):
COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR:
CRITICAL AREAS : ✓ I l 2 1-01'7-4 DETERMINATION: ❑ Conditional Waiver *tudyRequired ❑ Waiver
DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S:
DRAINAGE PLAN DATED:
PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED:
EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR:
PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED: I i if I
SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED:
SEWER LID FEE $:
LID #:
SHORT PLAT FILE: LOT: 95 fe (D BLOCK: C1 I
SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED:��I';�
SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #: T�L111
GEOTECH REPORT DATED:
STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
FOR:
WATER METER TAP CARD DATED:
0 Not fouNd 44 ficur
LATEMP\DSTs\Forms\Street File Checklist.doc
0 City of Edmonds
THE T.
Critical Area Notice of Decision FILE
Applicant:
Property Owner:
4 0
Critical Area File #:
Permit Number:
20
Site Location:
Parcel Number:
00 20
Project Description:
1Tq .F'-!, a.dc/ �o� on -SOL4, g;da 4 \ *tag,L'-a-em -.,..,ew P;VC.L,
v
❑ Conditional Waiver. No critical area report is required for the project described above.
1. There will be no alteration of a Critical Area or its required buffer.
2. The proposal is an allowed activity pursuant to ECDC 23.40.220, 23.50.220, and/or
23.80.040.
3. The proposal is exempt pursuant to ECDC 23.40.230.
Erosion Hazard. Project is within erosion hazard area. Applicant must prepare an erosion and
sediment control plan in compliance with ECDC 18.30.
Critical Area Report Required: The proposed project is within a critical area and/or a critical area
buffer and a critical area report is required. A critical area report has been submitted and evaluated
for compliance with the following criteria pursuant to ECDC 23.40.160: See. rapo,sr d-Aed VRAM s..,ei
e►,e�.o�and�� of-*t4 11/1Q/10 b
1. The proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas in accordance with ECDC 23.40.120, Nalso., L}
Mitigation sequencing; Assoc,
/ lz�dsltd
2. ./ The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare area, No ceps
on or off the development proposal site;
3. The proposal is consistent with the general purposes of this title and the public interest; sAve-u-c"
EGbc �3. y0.:t-Q0
4. ✓Any alterations permitted to the critical area are mitigated in accordance with ECDC
23.40.110, Mitigation requirements. ex;s�;n dc.�lepao(
M work
5. ✓ The proposal protects the critical a functions and values consistent with the best a •per-k4, s;de e4,
available science and results in rio net loss of critical functions and values; and 11pysa ;s :., i"C'
6. v The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards. �l
❑ Unfavorable Critical Area Decision. The proposed project is not exempt or does not adequately
mitigate its impacts on critical areas and/or does not comply with the criteria in ECDC 23.40.1.60 and
the provisions of the City of Edmonds critical area regulations. See attached findings of
noncompliance.
Favorable Critical Area Decision. The proposed project as described above and as shown on the
attached site plan meets or is exempt from the criteria in' ECDC 23.40.160, Review Criteria, and
complies with the applicable provisions of the City of Edmonds critical area regulations. Any
subsequent changes to the proposal shall void this decision pending re -review of the proposal.
Conditions. Critical Area specific condition(s) have been applied to the permit number referenced
above. See referenced permit number for specific condition(s).
s� Moc�►�s a�l � 1
Reviewer ignatum Date
Appeals: Any decision to approve, condition, or deny a development proposal or other activity based on the
requirements of critical area regulations may be appealed according to, and as part of, the appeal procedure, if any,
for the permit or approval involved.
Revised 12/16/2010
LA N N I N G DATAFSTJiWET!IL]'
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
Name: e,
Date: % bs,61
Site Address:
Tax Parcel 00 00
Project Description: ia9 s?.�'�. .odd;�;o� on so�.�, a:de_CP
tio�►se. �e�. •kc�,e.al roo� bsck s�e.ps�
Plan Check #: %L® a0009 194
..
Reduced Site Plan Provided oNO)
Zoning:
Map Page: �/'� .
Corner Lot: (YES /0
Flag Lot: (YES /4O
Critical Areas Determination #: cRA201!JOOQ4 - Srirr�, m;on >� La^�g\;a(e, �}ms�
Study Required - Upo,)r c4a 7/g/09 4 AAed I�UWIo fro,-, Nclso, G'"\e'A"mul A
❑ Waiver Assoc,-Jkcs 4,4 the work 3e4l- A l -
SEPA Determination: E - Vkj �s s.Ve, cy ct} C Cy ll. No �cPc'Ne/p`d
c, 0VAx on N VAK_ eP �s aLe- ig
Exempt .o/c,% e�Xrsk. da.. Fookpr.�}
❑ Needed (for over 500 cubic yards of grading) C-a\lewed Per Ec-Dc, aa.40. 22Z,
,
❑ Fee ❑ Checklist ❑ APO List with notarized form Mks\ 4e11,60 13M .S.
Required Setbacks
Street: ,
Side:
Side: S i
Rear: 4�,
Actual Setbacks
Street:
Side: (� i
Side: i
•
Rear:
❑ Detached Structures: None Sknaw,.. or, v11as,s ,
Rockeries: Ex;s���q ��oc\c tzb\\ %1nvLac% o" V\ang,
Fences/Trellises: EX1Sk;a% �'e�ce_ S�now� ova p� ag �o re eo( r�ov
El Bay Windows/Projecting Mo ation: Nc,,e_
JR Stairs Deck: Ex. ec%c e.
uildin Hei ht \-b d% o ,
Datum Point: C
Datum Elevation:
Maximum Height Allowed:.
Actual Height:
Other
Parking Required: a
Parking Provided:
Lot Area:N
Maximum Lot Coverage: 35% Proposed:
Lot Coverage Calculations: �x'S}' H"'`s` ° �� ys� Ex,-s . fleas }Wood 5�a.�,s = ��g t* T i` _
Ad E co s = y
ADU Created: (Y NO) gWSe,^P^V � :�15 ae� ek;g��+� w a►e-, ��+.� �v} XpProved
Subdivision: C• esp L.o sGa
Legal Nonconforming Land Use Determination Issued: (YES
Comments
Plan Review By: Planning Data Form 07-14-09
J
/a
re
e
0
.i OV E 06,1
City of Edmonds
Site Classification Worksheet
♦n�. 1890
The project's Classification serves to identify the specific Stormwater Management requirements applicable
to your site. Complete the worksheet below to determine whether your project falls into the classification of
a Large Site, Small Site (Category 1 or Category 2), or a Minor Site.
Step 1: Determine the Exempt Impervious Surface Area for your project and enter it on line 1 of the
table (yellow box).
Step 2: Determine the Replaced Impervious Surface Area for your project and enter it on line 2 of the table
below dividing the total between Exempt and Non -Exempt (orange and blue boxes); either or both may be zero.
Sten 3: Determine the New Impervious Surface Area for your project. If a portion of the new impervious surface
area is also Non -Exempt Replaced Impervious Surface Area subtract this from the total of the new impervious
surface area. Enter the final value on line 3 of the table below (blue box).
Stern 4: Add the values in the Non-exempt column for lines 2 and 3 and enter it into line 4 (green box).
Where. does the existing site
runoff discharge?
(Check all that apply)
See Watershed Map
Fi a-B, Handout pg 4
Supplement
Chapter 2.3
❑ Direct Discharge
❑ Edmonds Way Basin
❑ Creek or Lake Basin
Line
Type
Area (square Feet)
Impervious surface:
How much and what type?
(fill in colored boxes)
See Definitions, Handout pg 9
Figure-C, Handout pg 7
Supplement
Chapter 2.2
&
Figure-C
b
1.
Exempt
2 6p-7
Exempt Non -Exempt
2•
Replaced
_
Examples, Handout pg 10
3.
New 15 rl
L4_
Total Replaced (Non -Exempt) _ �5
(add members in bhie boxes)
Land -disturbing activity area
See Definitions, Handout pg 9
Supplement
Chapter 8
sf
Grading, Fill or Excavation
Area
I?�2
sf
Will project convert % acre or
more of native vegetation to
❑ YES
NO
lawn or landscaped area?
Proceed to the Proiect Classification Chart (Figure D, pg 8) and use the data collected above to follow
the flow chart and determine the classification of your project.
❑ Large Site (Handout E72a) ❑ Small Site (Handout E72b) Minor Site (Handout E72c)
� RECEIVE®
Revised on 719110 E72 - Sto> afar Mana ement Erosion l�ontrol-FINAL2 o 11
. g DEC 2 2 f
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR:
CITY OF EDMONDS
#P20
of ED41 City of Edmonds
Development Services Department
r^ Planning Division
Phone: 425.771.0220
Jn C. I g90 Fax: 425.771.0221
The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is to
be filled out by any person preparing a Development
Permit Application for the City of Edmonds prior to
his/her submittal of the application to the City.
The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to
determine whether any potential Critical Areas are, or
may be, present on the subject property. The information
needed to complete the Checklist should be easily
available from observations of the site or data available at
City Hall (Critical areas inventories, maps, or soil
surveys).
Date Received: U - " t - V ZS
City Receipt #:
Critical Areas FileFile—#: (-�-A O
Critical Areas Checklist Fee: $1.35.0
Date Mailed to Applicant: 5 D �,
A property owner, or his/her authorized representative,
must fill out the checklist, sign and date it, and submit it
to the City. The City will review the checklist, make a
precursory site visit, and make a determination of the
subsequent steps necessary to complete a development
permit application.
Please submit a vicinity map, along with the signed copy
of this form to assist City staff in finding and locating the
specific piece of property described on this form. In
addition; the: applicant shall include other pertinent
information (e.g. site plan, topography map, etc.) or
studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assistant staff
in completing their preliminary assessment of the site.
The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees
to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable
attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or
incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees.
By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and that I am authorized to file this application on the behalf of the owner as listed below.
7 _ /
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT l' ` DATE
Property Owner's Authorization
By my signature, I certify that I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application,
and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the
purposes of inspection and posting attendant to this 15plication.
SIGNATURE OF OWNER ,� — DATE /
PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY
Own e /Applican✓
Name
l 0 14 IJc,�, 5diec t�
Street Address
I� W�
City State /� L I'Zip
Telephone: L4 Z- S_ - 7/ 2-`�0 6 f 6
Applicant Representative:
Name /
Street Address
City State Zip
Telephone:
Email address (optional): Email Address (optional):
Critical Areas Checklist CA File No: C!(�ADDZ-9
Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation)
1. Site Address/Location: ' .'4 1 Jv.r- �(cc T �_ lei" '�'�
Imo5
2. Property Tax Account Number: E`�rc.l A)a . D 3 u L v 1 ? 5 v
3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): _L`} C %L S i ?e O 5
4. Is this site currently developed? ✓es; no.
If yes; how is site developed? "i NVr'»e
5. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply.
Flat: less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site.
Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal
/ distance of 66-feet).
Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% (a vertical rise of 10-feet
over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet).
Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal
distance of less than 33-feet).
Other (please describe):
6. Site contains areas of year-round stan t water: A'I
; Approx. Depth:
7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: /4 ; Approx. Depth:
What season(s) of the year? /% 4
8. Site is in the floodway floodplain 1V of a water course.
9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year-round?
�G?ST. —
�jc K c Ru J Flows are seasonal? (What time of year? ).
10. Site is primarily: forested ; meadow ; shrubs ; mixed
urban landscaped (lawn, shrubs etc) •;11
11. Obvious wetland is present on site: A 6vJc C/ee It
For City Staff Use Only
1. Plan Check Number,, /if ap'cable?
9 2. Site is Zoned? K s'
3. SCS mapped soil type(s)? A I C
4. Critical Areas inventory or C.A. map indicates Critical Area on site? JOSS/ e- P/bS`!on w2P ^ w - (f-
5. Site within designated earth subsidence landslide hazard area? /V o
cro S t vj kot Z > DETERMINATION
541—ean —STUDY REQUIRED WAIVER
Reviewed by: �� G/" "%� Date: 3 S' / Y
Critical Areas Check] ist.doc/2.17.2004
•
U
CITY OF EDMONDS
CRITICAL AREAS RECONNAISSANCE REPORT
Site Location:
710 Alder Street
Tax Acct. Number:
00434209100500
Determination:
Study Required
Determination #:
CRA-2008-0024
Applicant:
Allan Townsend
Owner:
Allan Townsend
CRITICAL AREAS RECONNAISSANCE REPORT: STUDY REQUIRED
During review and inspection of the subject parcel, it was found that the site contains and/or is
adjacent to critical areas including Geologically Hazardous Areas and Fish and Wildlife Habitat
Conservation Areas, pursuant to Chapters 23.40, 23.80 and 23.90 of the Edmonds Community
Development Code (ECDC).
A small daylighted segment of an unnamed stream runs east -west through the northern third of
the parcel. The stream is underground on parcels to the east and west. The segment of stream
appears to have been channelized and the streambanks are armored.
According to the City's LIDAR data, the parcel slopes moderately steeply south -north and more
gently east -west. A steeper section of east -west slope in excess of 40% exists near the northeast
corner of the subject parcel. The southern third of the parcel rises to the south and ends in a
short, fairly steep slope in excess of 40%.
GENERAL CRITICAL AREAS REPORT REQUIREMENTS
Critical Areas Reports identify, classify, and delineate any areas on or adjacent to the subject
property that may qualify as critical areas. They also assess these areas and identify any potential
impacts resulting from your specific development proposal. If a specific development proposal
results in an alteration to a critical area, the critical areas report will also contain a mitigation plan.
You have the option of completing the portion of the study that classifies and delineates the critical
areas and waiting until you have a specific development proposal to complete the study. You may
also choose to submit the entire study with your specific development application.
• Please review the minimum report requirements for all types of Critical Areas that are listed
in ECDC 23.40.090.D. There are additional report requirements for different types of
critical areas (see below).
• Note that it is important for the report to be prepared by a qualified professional as defined
in the ordinance. There are options on how to complete a critical areas study, and there is
an approved list of consultants that you may choose from. You may contact the Planning
Division for more information.
• General Mitigation Requirements for all Critical Areas are discussed in ECDC 23.40.110
through 23.40.140.
STUDY REQUIREMENT — EROSION HAZARD AREA
It appears that this property contains or is adjacent to an Erosion Hazard Area. Erosion Hazard
Areas include:
• Those areas with Alderwood and Everett series soils on slopes of 15 percent or greater.
• Any area with slopes of 15 percent or greater and impermeable soils interbedded with
granular soils and springs or ground water seepage.
• Areas with significant visible evidence of ground water seepage, and which also include
existing landslide deposits regardless of slope.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ASSOCIATED WITH EROSION HAZARD AREAS
Development within an Erosion Hazard Area must meet additional criteria.
• For erosion hazard areas with suitable slope stability, the only critical area study needed is
an erosion and sediment control plan prepared in compliance with the requirements set
forth in Chapter 18.30 ECDC as part of the construction documents. This option is at the
director's discretion, per Edmonds Community Development Code section 20.80.050.G.
• In areas where the slope stability is not suitable, projects within Erosion Hazard Areas will
require a report by a licensed Geotechnical Engineer or other qualified professional. Note
that it is important for the report to be prepared by a qualified professional as defined in the
ordinance.
• Report requirements are given in ECDC 23.80.050, and more generally in ECDC
23.40.090. D.
• Development standards are given in ECDC 23.80.060 and 23.80.070.
STUDY REQUIREMENT — LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREA
It appears that this property contains or is adjacent to a Landslide Hazard Area.
• A Landslide Hazard Area is any area with a slope of forty percent (40%) or steeper and
with a vertical relief of ten (10) or more feet (except areas composed of consolidated
bedrock).
• Landslide Hazard Areas are further defined and illustrated in ECDC 23.80.020.B.
• In addition to the general requirements for Critical Areas reports referenced above, specific
Critical Area report requirements for Landslide Hazard Areas are provided in ECDC
23.80.050.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ASSOCIATED WITH LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREAS
Development is restricted within a Landslide Hazard Area and its buffer.
• Projects that will intrude into these areas will require a report by a licensed Geotechnical
Engineer.
• The criteria that are applied depend on the amount that the buffer is reduced.
• The buffer can be reduced to a minimum of ten (10) feet (with an additional 15' building
setback per ECDC 23.40.280) if a report is prepared that meets the standards listed in
ECDC 23.80.050. The alteration must also meet the requirements listed in ECDC
23.80.060.
• In addition, proposals to reduce the buffer to less than ten (10) feet must comply with the
design standards listed in ECDC 23.80.070.A.3.
STUDY REQUIREMENT — FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION AREAS
Since the site is located within a mapped fish and wildlife habitat conservation area, the City would
like to preserve as much of the native vegetation as possible.
2
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ON A SITE WITH FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT
CONSERVATION AREAS
The applicant must submit development plans that meet the requirements defined in ECDC
23.90.030 and 23.90.040.
ALLOWED ACTIVITIES
Certain activities are allowed in or near critical area buffers as specified in ECDC 23.40.20. If you
have any questions about whether your proposed development qualifies as an allowed activity,
please contact a Planner for more information.
EXEMPT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
Certain development proposals may be exempt from Critical Areas Requirements (ECDC
23.40.230). If you think that a specific development proposal may be exempt, contact a Planner
for more information.
Michael Clugston
Name
Signature Date
NOTE: Cited sections of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) can be found on
the City of Edmonds website at www.ci.edmonds.wa.us.
K
APPLICATION
The City of Edmonds for
SIDE SEWER PERMIT
NEW CONSTRUCTION REPAIRS EASEMENT No . ............................. ............
zeo
OWNER ............ / 2 ...........Al......... t ... ... fi ................. .................. CONTRACTOR 13A4 .... A-,klj ............. ------- �*lv . ........ ......... PERMIT No. _7ZK.W.1A.
ADDRESS ......... ........ . ............ 5-,qc ...................... LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT No . .............................................. BLOCK No.....-_.`
NAME OF ADDITION ............ jtF ....
. s ......... M .................................................
19Acle,- Si -
RECEIVED
'-4 1
AUG 2 i
19-2
Approved:
DATE................................................ By ------- _
r
APPLICATION
for
The City of Edmonds SIDE SEWER PERMIT EASEMENT No . ..........................................
NEW CONSTRUCTION REPAIRS O
63GSb L-ID 1=-=4
Nth CUNtyL .0 -11� h � t p{�� Ate- d n
OWNER.............................................................................................................. CONTRACTOR ._... ..._.......�,l...i l�1.•"`"��'�-�C».-- ERMIT No. -T � G_..:
71<7 NLDSR ST
ADDRESS....................................................................... ......... LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT No.-. .............................................
BLOCK No.............................................
NAME OF ADDITION-�TY--......iV_►Y`�NI
-
•w
wi
ST.
'm
A roved:
DATE_..�...............:.......... Z.—_•--.-.. BY
NG
J Main Office
17311 —135" Avenue NE, A-500
Woodinville, WA 98072
t (425) 486-1669 FAX (425) 481-2510
(425) 337-1669 Snohomish County
DATE:
TO:
CC:
FROM:
December 22, 2010
Mr. Allen Townsend
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
ASSOCIATES, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
Engineering -Geology Branch
437 East Penny Road
Wenatchee, WA 98801
(509) 665-7696 FAX (509) 665-7692
MEMORANDUM
STREET FILE
Mr. Tom Leren — The Leren Company, Inc.
Khaled M. Shawish, PE
Updated Foundation Support Recommendations
Townsend Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 813009
l"iF" VEIVE®
DEC 2 2 2010
DEVELCOPMENT SERVICES
CTR.
EDMONDS
I
12 f 0zllc?
This memorandum provides our updated foundation recommendations for your single family residence
addition project located at 710 Alder Street in Edmonds, Washington. We previously prepared a
geotechnical engineering evaluation report dated July 8, 2009 which provided recommendations for site
development. We understand that plans have changed from constructing a basement addition to
constructing a 4-foot by 30-foot addition along the south side of the upper floor.
For our use in preparing this memo, we have been provided with a site plan and Plan Sheets 1 through 6
titled "Townsend Residence," dated July 14, 2010, prepared by The Leren Company, Inc. The plans
indicate that the new addition foundation will consist of a monopour thickened edge foundation. The new
slab/foundation will also be connected to the existing concrete retaining wall through rebar dowels.
Our previous explorations encountered up to seven feet of loose fill underlying the proposed new addition
area, which is most likely wall backfill. We recommend that the new foundations bear on competent
native material or structural fill extending down to competent soil. Alternatively, the new addition
footings could be supported on pin piles driven through the loose fill and terminating into the native
material. We recommend that we be retained at the beginning of construction to observe tile foundation
subgrade prior to the placement of concrete forms. Upon our observation of the foundation subgrade, we
Townsend Addition
Edmonds, Washington
December 22, 2010
NGA File No. 813009
Page 2
can provide specific recommendations for the different foundation support options. We must observe and
approve the foundation subgrade in writing prior to placement of any concrete for this memorandum to be
valid.
We trust this memorandum should satisfy your needs at this time. Please contact us if you have any
questions or require additional services.
I/
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
i
yr
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
EVALUATION
TOWNSEND RESIDENCE ADDITION
71.0 ALDER STREET
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
FOR ..
MR. ALLAN TOWNSEND
•
N G�
4� Main Office
17311 — 135" Avenue NE, A-500
Woodinville, WA 98072
(425) 486-1669 FAX (425) 481-2510
(425) 337-1669 Snohomish County
July 8, 2009
Allan Townsend
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, Washington 98020
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL,
ASSOCIATES9 INC.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 813009
Dear Mr. Townsend:
Engineering -Geology Branch
437 East Penny Road
Wenatchee, WA 98801
(509) 665-7696 FAX (509) 665-7692
We are pleased to submit the attached report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation — Townsend
Residence Addition — 710 Alder Street — Edmonds, Washington." This report summarizes the existing
surface and subsurface conditions within the site and provides recommendations for the proposed site
development. Our services were completed in general accordance with the proposal signed by you on
June 13, 2009.
The site generally slopes gently to steeply down from the southern property line to the northern property
line along Alder Street. The site is currently occupied by a single-family residence with a basement and
associated concrete driveway. The planned improvements will include removal and reconstruction of the
upper level of the residence and extending the existing basement foundation along the south side of the
residence. Cuts on the order of eight feet will be needed for the basement addition. A shoring wall is
anticipated along the eastern property line for the excavation of the basement. Stormwater is proposed to
be directed to an existing stormwater system.
We performed four hand auger explorations within the proposed development area. We have concluded
that the site is generally compatible with the planned development. We have recommended that the new
addition be founded on medium dense or better granular native soil for bearing capacity and settlement
considerations. Our explorations indicated that the site is underlain by advance outwash and transitional
bed deposits. The site slope appears to be stable under current conditioins. However, there is a potential
for shallow sloughing and erosion events to occur on the steep slope. The new addition is planned to be
within approximately 17 feet from the toe of the steep slope. It is our opinion that these setbacks are
adequate provided that all of the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the plans
and followed during construction. In the attached report, we have included recommendations for site
grading, foundation support, retaining walls and site drainage.
0
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Summary - Page 2
We recommend that NGA be retained to review the geotechnical aspects of the project plans prior to
construction. We recommend that NGA be retained to provide monitoring and consultation services
during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the
explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the
work differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation
activities comply with contract plans and specifications.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide service to you on this project. Please contact us if you have any
questions regarding this report or require further information.
Sincerely,
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Khaled M. Shawish, PE
Principal
Three Copies Submitted
cc: Tom Leren — The Leren Company, Inc. via email
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................1
SCOPE.........................................................................................................................................................I
SITECONDITIONS...................................................................................................................................2
SURFACECONDITIONS...............................................................................................................................2
SUBSURFACECONDITIONS.........................................................................................................................2
HYDROLOGICCONDITIONS........................................................................................................................3
SENSITIVE AREA EVALUATION.........................................................................................................4
SEISMICHAZARD.......................................................................................................................... .........4
EROSIONHAZARD..................................................................................................................................:...4
LANDSLIDE HAZARD/SLOPE STABILITY....................................................................................................5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................................5
GENERAL...................................................................................................................................................5
EROSION CONTROL AND SLOPE PROTECTION MEASURES........................................................................7
SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING............................................................................................................7
STRUCTURESETBACKS..............................................................................................................................8
TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SLOPES.....................................................................................................9
FOUNDATIONS..........................................................................................................................................10
STRUCTURALFILL...................................................................................................................................11
SHORINGWALL.......................................................................................................................................12
SLAB-ON-GRADE.........................................................................................................................:...........13
RETAININGWALLS..................................................................................................................................14
SITEDRAINAGE........................................................................................................................................15
USEOF THIS REPORT..........................................................................................................................16
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 — Vicinity Map
Figure 2 — Site Plan
Figure 3 — Cross-section A -A'
Figure 4 — Soil Classification Chart
Figure 5 — Hand Auger Logs
Figure 6 - Conceptual Soldier Pile Wall Detail
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, Washington
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering investigation and evaluation of the
proposed Townsend residence addition in Edmonds, Washington. The project site is located at 710 Alder
Street, as shown on the Vicinity Map in Figure 1. The purpose of this study is to explore and characterize
the site's surface and subsurface conditions and to provide geotechnical recommendations for site
development. For our use in preparing this report, we have been provided with an untitled, undated site
plan and south elevation prepared by The Leren Company showing the existing residence, proposed
development locations, and property boundaries.
The site is currently occupied by an existing residence with a daylight basement. The planned
improvements will include removal and construction of the upper level of the residence and extending the
basement to the south. A steep north -facing slope is located along the southern portion of the property
that extends off site to the south. The existing residence is setback approximately 31 feet from the toe of
the steep slope. The new addition will extend as close as approximately 17 feet from the toe of the slope.
An excavation approximately eight feet deep will be needed for the construction of the new basement.
The existing and proposed site layouts are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2.
SCOPE
The purpose of this study is to explore and characterize the site surface and subsurface conditions, and
provide recommendations for site development. Specifically, our scope of services includes the
following:
1. Review available soil and geologic maps of the area.
2. Explore the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions within the site with hand tools.
3. Map the conditions on the site slopes and evaluate slope stability.
4. Provide recommendations for residence setback from the steep slopes.
5. Provide recommendations for earthwork and slabs -on -grade.
6. Provide recommendations for foundation support.
7. Provide recommendations for temporary and permanent slopes.
8. Provide recommendations for temporary shoring, if needed.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 2
9. Provide recommendations for retaining walls.
10. Provide recommendations for site drainage and erosion control.
11. Document the results of our findings, conclusions, and recommendations in a written
geotechnical report.
SITE CONDITIONS
Surface Conditions
The property is a rectangular shaped parcel covering approximately 0.15 acres. The southern portion of
the site consists of a steep north -facing slope that descends down from a vacated alleyway and the
southern property line to the relatively level backyard area. The site then slopes gently to moderately
down from the backyard area to the northern property line along Alder Street. The site is currently
occupied by an existing single-family residence with a daylight basement in the central portion of the
property. The northern portion of the property is covered with grass, landscaping plants and a man-made
creek/drainage area. The property is bordered to the north by Alder Street, to the west and east by
existing residential properties and to the south by a vacated alleyway.
The steep north -facing slope and backyard area within the southern portion of the property is vegetated
with large, mature evergreen trees, grass, and miscellaneous underbrush. We measured an overall slope
inclination of approximately 25 degrees, (47 percent) as shown on Cross-section A -A' in Figure 3. The
steep slope is approximately 12 feet in height. We did not observe surface water on the site or seepage on
the slope during our site visit on June 24, 2009. We also did not observe any signs of recent slope
movement.
Subsurface Conditions
Geology: The geologic units for this area are shown on the Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Part
of the Edmonds West Quadrangle, Washington, by James P. Minard (U.S.G.S., 1983). The site is
mapped as Advance outwash (Qva) with Transitional Beds (Qtb) and undivided Till (Qtu) mapped
nearby. The advance outwash is described as clean, pebbly sand. The transitional beds are described as
clay, silt and fine to very fine sand. The undivided till is described as compact, nonsorted clay silt sand
and gravel similar to Vashon Till. Our explorations generally encountered fine to coarse sand and gravel
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 3
generally consistent with the description of advance outwash underlain by silty sand with gravel and silt
with sand consistent with the description of undivided till. and transitional bed deposits, respectively.
Explorations: We visited the site on June 24, 2009 to explore the subsurface conditions within the
proposed development area with hand auger explorations. The approximate locations of our explorations
are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. A geologist from Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. (NGA)
was present during the explorations, examined the soils and geologic conditions encountered, and
maintained logs of the explorations.
The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System,
which is presented in Figure 4. The logs of our explorations are presented as Figure 5. The following
paragraph contains a brief description of the subsurface conditions encountered in the explorations. For a
detailed description of the subsurface conditions, the hand auger logs should be reviewed.
In Hand Augers 1 through 3, we encountered approximately 4.5 to 6.0 feet of loose to dense, brown to
red -brown silty fine to medium sand with varying amounts of gravel and fine to medium sand with gravel
and trace silt that we interpreted as advance outwash deposits. Underlying the advance outwash in Hand
Augers 1 through 3, we encountered dense, gray silty fine to coarse sand with gravel that we interpreted
as undivided till deposits. Hand Augers 1, 2 and 3 met refusal and were terminated within the undivided
till at depths of 7.0, 6.0 and 5.0 feet below the existing ground surface, respectively.
In Hand Auger 4, we encountered approximately 7.0 feet of loose to medium dense, brown silty fine to
medium sand with gravel that we interpreted as undocumented fill placed behind the basement retaining
walls. Underlying the fill, we encountered stiff, blue -gray silt with fine sand that we interpreted as
transitional bed deposits. Hand Auger 4 was terminated within the transitional bed soils at a depth of
approximately 8.0 feet below the existing ground surface.
Hydrologic Conditions
Moderate groundwater seepage was encountered between approximately 4.5 and 5.5 feet below the
existing ground surface in Hand Augers 1 through 3. We interpreted this seepage to be perched water.
Perched water occurs when surface water infiltrates through less dense, more permeable soils, such as the
NELSON GEO TECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation •
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 4
advance outwash deposit, and accumulates on top of a relatively low permeability material, such as the
undivided till and transitional bed deposits. Perched water does not represent a regional groundwater
"table" within the upper soil horizons. Perched water tends to vary spatially and is dependent upon the
amount of rainfall. We would expect the amount of groundwater to decrease during drier times of the
year and increase during wetter periods.
SENSITIVE AREA EVALUATION
Seismic Hazard
We reviewed the 2006 International Building Code (IBC) for seismic site classification for this project.
Since medium dense to dense sand and silty sand deposits were encountered underlying the site, the site
conditions best fit the IBC description for Site Class D.
Hazards associated with seismic activity include liquefaction potential and amplification of ground
motion by soft deposits. Liquefaction is caused by a rise in pore pressures in a loose, fine sand deposit
beneath the groundwater table. The advance outwash and transitional bed soils interpreted to underlie the
site have a low potential for liquefaction or amplification of ground motion.
The medium dense to dense glacial soils interpreted to form the core of the site slope are considered
stable with respect to deep-seated slope failures. However, the overlying loose surficial materials on the
slope have the potential for shallow sloughing failures during seismic events. Such events should not
affect the planned structures provided the foundations are designed with the depths and setback distances
from the slope as described in the Foundations and Structure Setback subsections of this report.
Erosion Hazard
The criteria used for determination of erosion hazard areas include soil type, slope gradient, vegetation
cover, and groundwater conditions. The erosion sensitivity is related to vegetative cover and the specific
surface soil types, which are related to the underlying geologic soil units. The Soil Survey of Snohomish
County Area, Washington, by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) was reviewed to determine the erosion
hazard of the on -site soils. The site surface soils were classified using the SCS classification system as
Everett gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes. This unit is listed as having a moderate erosion
hazard. The on -site soils should have a low hazard for erosion where the vegetation is not disturbed.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
• •_
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 5
Landslide Hazard/Slope Stability
The criteria used for evaluation of landslide hazards include soil type, slope gradient, and groundwater
conditions. A steep west -facing slope with a gradient of approximately 25 degrees (47 percent) and a
height of approximately 12 feet is located above the planned development area. We did not observe
evidence of past erosion or sloughing on this slope during our site visit. We did not observe seepage on
the slopes during our visit.
Relatively shallow failures as well as surficial erosion are natural processes and could occur on the steep
slope. It is our opinion that while there is potential for erosion, soil creep, and shallow failures within the
loose surficial soils on the steep slope, the potential for deep-seated slope failure under current site
conditions is low. Proper site grading and drainage as recommended in this report should help maintain
current stability conditions.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
It is our opinion that the planned development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided that
our recommendations are incorporated into the design and construction of this project. The steep north -
facing slope is considered stable with respect to deep-seated failures. However, there is a potential for
shallow sloughing and erosion events to occur on the slope. We anticipate that during periods of
extended rainfall and/or as a result of seismic activity, shallow slough -type failures may originate on the
slope.
The new addition will be as close as approximately 17 feet from the toe of the slope. The planned
structure setback should allow for normal slope recession during a reasonable life span of the structures
providing that no material or water is allowed to reach the slope. This is further discussed in the
Structure Setback subsection of this report.
Our explorations indicated that the planned development area is generally underlain by competent native
glacial deposits. The underlying medium dense/stiff or better native soils should provide adequate
support for the planned structure. We recommend that the structures be designed utilizing conventional
spread foundations. Footings should extend through any undocumented fill, organic soil, or loose
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Eva uation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 6
materials, and be founded on the underlying medium dense/stiff or better native soils or structural fill
extending to these soils. Based on our explorations, medium dense soils should typically be encountered
approximately one to two feet below the existing surface in the planned building area.
The main geotechnical aspect of this project is the planned excavation along the eastern property line for
the basement walls. This excavation will be on the order of eight feet deep. Due to the expected depth of
the excavation and boundary constraints, we anticipate that a shoring wall will be needed to retain the cut.
The most likely shoring system that will be utilized on this site is a driven cantilever soldier pile wall with
timber lagging. We do not anticipate that the use of tiebacks for the shoring system would be feasible due
to the close proximity of the planned cut to site boundaries. Due to the close proximity to neighboring
structures, we recommend that all of the adjacent structures be monitored before, during, and after the
installation of the shoring walls to minimize the risk to the residence and any other structure.
The soils anticipated to be encountered during excavation are considered to be moisture -sensitive and
may disturb when wet. We recommend that construction take place during the drier summer months if
possible. However, if construction takes place during the wet season, additional expenses and delays
should be expected due to the wet conditions. Additional expenses could include the need for placing a
blanket of rock spalls on exposed subgrades, construction traffic areas, and paved areas prior to placing
structural fill.
Under no circumstances, should water be allowed to flow over, or concentrate on the slope, both during
construction and after construction has been completed. We recommend that stormwater runoff from the
roof drains, paved areas, and yard drains be collected and tightlined to a suitable discharge point. The
slope should be protected from erosion. We recommend that all disturbed areas be replanted to re-
establish vegetation as soon as possible. The steep slope should not be disturbed or graded for the
placement of the addition or any other structures. No fill of any sort should be placed on the slope, or
near the top of the slope, without a specific geotechnical evaluation. Stormwater runoff should not be
allowed to concentrate or flow over the slope. Specific recommendations for erosion control are
presented in the Erosion Control and Slope Protection Measures subsection of this report.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 7
Erosion Control and Slope Protection.Measures
The erosion hazard for the on -site soils is interpreted to be moderate, but the actual hazard will be
dependent on how the site is graded and how water is allowed to concentrate. Best Management Practices
(BMPs) should be used to control erosion. Areas disturbed during construction should be protected from
erosion. Erosion control measures may include diverting surface water away from the stripped or
disturbed areas. Silt fences and/or straw bales should be erected to prevent muddy water from leaving the
site or flowing over the steep slope on the western side of the property. Stockpiles should be covered
with plastic sheeting during wet weather and stockpiled material should not be placed on the slope.
Disturbed areas should be planted as soon as practical and the vegetation should be maintained until it is
established. The erosion potential for areas not stripped of vegetation should be low.
Protection of the setback and steep slope areas should be performed as required by the City of Edmonds.
Specifically, we recommend that the setback area and slope not be disturbed or modified through
placement of any fill or removal of the existing vegetation. No additional material of any kind should be
placed on the slope or be allowed to reach the slope, such as excavation spoils, lawn clippings, and other
yard waste, trash, or soil stockpiles. Trees should not be cut down or removed from the steep slope unless
a mitigation plan is developed, such as the replacement of vegetation for erosion protection. Replacement
of vegetation should be performed in accordance with the City of Edmonds code and should be approved
by the City. Any proposed development within the slope setback area, other than light decks or patios,
should be the subject of a specific geotechnical evaluation. Under no circumstances should water be
allowed to concentrate on the slopes.
Site Preparation and Grading
After erosion control measures are implemented, site preparation should consist of stripping any
fill/modified ground or loose soils to expose medium dense or better native soil in foundation, slab -on -
grade, and pavement areas. The stripped materials should be removed from the site or be stockpiled for
later use as landscaping fill. Stockpiles should be covered with plastic sheeting during wet weather, and
should be kept away from the steep slope.
If the ground surface should appear to be loose after stripping, it should be compacted to a non -yielding
condition. Areas observed to pump or weave during compaction should be over -excavated and replaced
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 8
with properly compacted structural fill or rock spalls. If loose soils are encountered in the pavement
areas, the loose soils should be removed and replaced with rock spalls or granular structural fill. If
significant surface water flow is encountered during construction, this flow should be diverted around
areas to be developed, and the exposed subgrades should be maintained in a semi -dry condition.
If wet conditions are encountered, alternative site stripping and grading techniques might be necessary.
These could include using large excavators equipped with wide tracks and a smooth bucket to complete
site grading and covering exposed subgrade with a layer of.crushed rock for protection. If wet conditions
are encountered or construction is attempted in wet weather, the subgrade should not be compacted as this
could cause further subgrade disturbance. In wet conditions it may be necessary to cover the exposed
subgrade with a layer of crushed rock as soon as it is exposed to protect the moisture sensitive soils from
disturbance by machine or foot traffic during construction. The prepared subgrade should be protected
from construction traffic and surface water should be diverted around prepared subgrade. Shallow
groundwater, if encountered, should be intercepted with cut off drains and routed around the planned
grading area, or the groundwater should be controlled with sump -pumps or dewatering systems.
Structure Setbacks
Uncertainties related to building near steep slopes are typically addressed by the use of building setbacks.
The purpose of the setback is to establish a "buffer zone" between the structure and the slope so that
ample room is allowed for normal slope recession during a reasonable life span of the structure. In a
general sense, the greater the setback distance, the lower the risk of slope failures impacting the structure.
From a geological standpoint, the setback dimension is based on the slope's physical characteristics, such
as slope height, surface angle, material composition, and hydrology. Other factors such as historical slope
activity, rate of regression, and the type and desired life span of the development are important
considerations as well.
The new addition will be as close as approximately 17 feet from the toe of the slope. It is our opinion that
this planned setback distance is adequate for the structure. We should be retained to evaluate the
residence foundation setback distances and subgrade soil prior to placing foundation forms. Any
proposed development within the setback area, other than light decks or patios, should be the subject of a
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Eva uation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 9
specific geotechnical evaluation. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to concentrate on the
slopes, during or after construction.
Temporary and Permanent Slopes
Grading plans were not available at the time this report was prepared. However, we understand that
shoring walls may be used to support the eastern cut for the basement addition. Temporary cut slope
stability is a function of many factors, including the type and consistency of soils, depth of the cut,
surcharge loads adjacent to the excavation, length of time a cut remains open, and the presence of surface
water or groundwater. It is exceedingly difficult under these variable conditions to estimate a. stable,
temporary, cut slope angle. Therefore, it should be the responsibility of the contractor to maintain safe
slope configurations since they are continuously at the job site, able to observe the soil and groundwater
conditions encountered and able to monitor the nature and condition of the cut slopes.
The following information is provided solely for the benefit of the owner and other design consultants and
should not be construed to imply that Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. assumes responsibility for job
site safety. Job site safety. is the sole responsibility of the project contractor.
For planning purposes, we recommend that temporary cuts in the near surface topsoil, weathered soil
and/or loose to medium dense/stiff soils be no steeper than 2 Horizontal to 1 Vertical (2H:1 V). If
significant groundwater seepage or surface water flow were encountered, we would expect that flatter
inclinations would be necessary. We recommend that cut slopes be protected from erosion. The slope
protection measures may include covering cut slopes with plastic sheeting and diverting surface runoff
away from the top of cut slopes. We do not recommend vertical slopes for cuts deeper than four feet, if
worker access is necessary. We recommend that cut slope heights and inclinations conform to
appropriate OSHA/WISHA regulations.
Permanent cut and fill slopes should be no steeper than 2H:1V. However, flatter inclinations may be
required in areas where loose soils are encountered. Permanent slopes should be planted and the
vegetative cover should be maintained until it is established. We should review the project plans and visit
the site to evaluate excavations for this project.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Eva uation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 10
Foundations
Conventional shallow spread foundations for the addition should be placed on undisturbed medium dense
or better native soils or be supported on structural fill extending to those soils. These soils were generally
encountered one to two feet below ground surface. Where undocumented fill or less dense soils are
encountered at the planned footing elevation, the subgrade should be over -excavated to expose suitable
bearing soil. The over -excavation may be filled with structural fill, or the footing may be extended down
to the bearing native soils. If footings are supported on structural fill, the fill zone should extend outside
the edges of the footing a distance equal to at least one-half of the thickness of the fill placed below the
bottom of the footing.
Footings, including interior footings, should extend at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finished
ground surface for frost protection and bearing capacity considerations. Foundations should be designed
in accordance with the 2006 International Building Code (IBC). Footing widths should be based on the
anticipated loads and allowable soil bearing pressure. Water should not be allowed to accumulate in
footing trenches. All loose or disturbed soil should be removed from the foundation excavation prior to
placing concrete.
For foundations constructed as outlined above, we recommend an allowable design bearing pressure of
not more than 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be used for the design of foundations supported on the
medium dense or better native soils or structural fill extending to the competent native soils. A
representative of NGA should evaluate the foundation bearing soil. We should be consulted if higher
bearing pressures are needed. Current IBC guidelines should be used when considering increased
allowable bearing pressure for short-term transitory wind or seismic loads. Potential foundation
settlement using the recommended allowable bearing pressure is estimated to be less than one -inch total
and '/z-inch differential between adjacent footings or across a distance of about 30 feet based on our
experience with similar projects.
Lateral loads may be resisted by friction on the base of the footing and passive resistance against the
subsurface portions of the foundation. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used to calculate the base
friction and should be applied to the vertical dead load only. Passive resistance may be calculated as a
triangular equivalent fluid pressure distribution. An equivalent fluid density of 200 pounds per cubic foot
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 11
(pcf) should be used for passive resistance design for a level ground surface adjacent to the footing. This
level surface should extend a distance equal to at least three times the footing depth. These recommended
values incorporate safety factors of 1.5 and 2.0 applied to the estimated ultimate values for frictional and
passive resistance, respectively. To achieve this value of passive resistance, the foundations should be
poured "neat" against the native medium dense soils or compacted fill should be placed against the
footing. We recommend that the upper one -foot of soil be neglected when calculating the passive
resistance.
Structural Fill
General: Fill placed beneath foundations, pavement, or other settlement -sensitive structures should be
placed as structural fill. Structural fill, by definition, is placed in accordance with prescribed methods and
standards, and is monitored by an experienced geotechnical professional or soils technician. Field
monitoring procedures would include the performance of a representative number of in -place density tests
to document the attainment of the desired degree of relative compaction. The area to receive the fill
should be suitably prepared as described in the Site Preparation and Grading subsection prior to
beginning fill placement.
Materials: Structural fill should consist of a good quality, granular soil, free of organics and other
deleterious material, and be well graded to a maximum size of about three inches. All-weather structural
fill should contain no more than five -percent fines (soil finer than U.S. No. 200 sieve, based on that
fraction passing the U.S. 3/4-inch sieve). The use of some of the on -site soils as structural fill may be
feasible but will be dependent on moisture content of the material at the time construction takes place.
The organic topsoil should not be used as structural fill. We should be retained to evaluate proposed
structural fill material prior to placement.
Fill Placement: Following subgrade preparation, placement of structural fill may proceed. All filling
should be accomplished in uniform lifts up to eight inches thick. Each lift should be spread evenly and be
thoroughly compacted prior to placement of subsequent lifts: All structural fill should be compacted to a
minimum of 95 percent of its maximum dry density. Maximum dry density, in this report, refers to that
density as determined by the ASTM D-1557 Compaction Test procedure. The moisture content of the
soils to be compacted should be within about two percent of optimum so that a readily compactable
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 12
condition exists. It may be necessary to over -excavate and remove wet soils in cases where drying to a
compactable condition is not feasible. All compaction should be accomplished by equipment of a type
and size sufficient to attain the desired degree of comlaction.
Shoring Wall
General: Cuts on the order of eight feet or more in height are anticipated along the eastern property line
of the site for the purpose of constructing the proposed basement addition. Due to the depth of the
excavation, the close proximity to neighboring residences, and soil and groundwater conditions, a shoring
wall is recommended to retain this cut during construction. The shoring wall can be made permanent and
be incorporated into the basement walls.
The most practical wall system for use on this site may be a driven soldier pile wall with timber lagging.
This wall system is most compatible with the site conditions. A driven soldier pile wall typically consists
of a series of steel H-beams driven vertically with a constant spacing between the beams (typically four to
six feet). The beams are driven with a hydraulic hammer and embedded below the bottom of the planned
excavation a distance equal to one to two times the height of the cut to be shored. The steel beams are
extended above finished ground surface to provide shoring capabilities for the cut. The beams are
typically spanned by pressure treated timber lagging or concrete panels. The H-beam size, embedment,
and pile spacing are dependent on the nature of the soils anticipated in the cut and at depth below the cut,
cut height, surcharge loads on the wall, drainage conditions, and final geometry.
Soldier Wall Design: An experienced structural engineer licensed in the State of Washington should
design the shoring wall. The wall designer should be provided a copy of this report, and we should be
retained to review the shoring wall design prior to construction.
The lateral earth pressure acting on the shoring wall will be dependent on the nature and density of the
soil behind the wall, structure and traffic loads on the wall, and the amount of lateral wall movement that
may occur as material is excavated from the front of the wall. If the shoring wall is free to yield at least
one -thousandth of the retained height, an "active" loading condition develops. If the wall is restrained
from movement by stiffness or bracing, the wall is considered in an "at -rest" loading condition. Active
and at -rest earth pressure can be calculated based on equivalent fluid densities.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
•
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 13
The shoring wall should be designed to resist a lateral load resulting from a fluid with a unit weight of 35
and 50 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) for the active and at -rest loading conditions, respectively. These loads
should be applied across the pile spacing above the excavation line. A lateral load of equivalent fluid
density of 40 pcf should be applied on the pile diameter below the excavation line. These loads can be
resisted by a passive pressure of 200 pcf and the medium dense/stiff or better soils. The passive pressure
should be applied on two -pile diameters below the excavation line. These values of the passive pressure
incorporate a factor of safety of 2.0.
A drainage system should be installed for the shoring wall. Minimum '/a -inch gaps should be maintained
between the lagging elements to allow water seepage through the wall. All voids left behind the timber
lagging should be filled with free draining material such as pea gravel or washed rock. A composite drain
should be installed between the timber lagging and the concrete wall to promote drainage. The composite
drain should be connected to the footing drain. Roof drains should not be connected to wall or footing
drains. The shoring wall and recommended drainage concepts are illustrated in the Conceptual Soldier
Pile Wall Detail, in Figure 6. This figure is not intended for use in construction or final design; the
structural engineer should provide the final wall drainage detail.
Shoring Wall Installation: A shoring contractor experienced with soldier pile wall construction should
install the shoring wall. We recommend that the H-piles be driven into place using a hydraulic hammer,
with a minimum energy rating of 1,200 ft-lb. The pile spacing and embedment should be determined by
the structural engineer. In addition to the minimum recommended embedment, the piles should be driven
to a refusal criteria of less than one inch of movement during 10 seconds of continuous driving. We
should be retained to observe shoring wall installation on a full time basis.
Slab -on -Grade
Slabs -on -grade should be supported on subgrade soils prepared as described in the Site Preparation and
Grading subsection of this report. We recommend that all floor slabs be underlain by at least six inches
of free -draining gravel with less than three percent by weight of the material passing Sieve #200 for use
as a capillary break. We recommend that the capillary break be hydraulically connected to the footing
drain system to allow free drainage from under the slab. A suitable vapor barrier, such as heavy plastic
sheeting (6-mil minimum), should be placed over the capillary break material. An additional 2-inch thick
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 14
moist sand layer may be used to cover the vapor barrier. This sand layer is optional and is intended to
protect the vapor barrier membrane during construction.
Retaining Walls
Retaining walls will be used for the basement additions. The lateral pressure acting on subsurface
retaining walls is dependent on the nature and density of the soil behind the wall, the amount of lateral
wall movement which can occur as backfill is placed, wall drainage conditions, and the inclination of the
backfill. For walls that are free to yield at the top at least one thousandth of the height of the wall (active
condition), soil pressures will be less than if movement is limited by such factors as wall stiffness or
bracing (at -rest condition). We recommend that walls supporting horizontal backfill and not subjected to
hydrostatic forces, be designed using a triangular earth pressure distribution equivalent to that exerted by
a fluid with a density of 35 pcf for yielding (active condition) walls, and 50 pcf for non -yielding (at -rest
condition) walls.
These recommended lateral earth pressures are for a drained granular backfill and are based on the
assumption of a horizontal ground surface behind the wall for a distance of at least the subsurface height
of the wall, and do not account for surcharge loads. Additional lateral earth pressures should be
considered for surcharge loads acting adjacent to subsurface walls and within a distance equal to the
subsurface height of the wall. This would include the effects of surcharges such as traffic loads, floor slab
loads, slopes, or other surface loads. We could consult with you and your structural engineer regarding
additional loads on retaining walls during final design, if needed.
The lateral pressures on walls may be resisted by friction between the foundation and subgrade soil, and
by passive resistance acting on the below -grade portion of the foundation. Recommendations for
frictional and passive resistance to lateral loads are presented in the Foundations subsection of this
report.
All wall backfill should be well compacted as outlined in the Structural Fill subsection of this report.
Care should be taken to prevent the buildup of excess lateral soil pressures, due to over -compaction of the
wall backfill. This can be accomplished by placing wall backfill in eight -inch loose lifts and compacting
the backfill with small, hand -operated compactors within a distance behind the wall equal to at least one -
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
• •
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 15
half the height of the wall. The thickness of the loose lifts should be reduced to accommodate the lower
compactive energy of the hand -operated equipment. The recommended level of compaction should still
be maintained.
Permanent drainage systems should be installed for retaining walls. Recommendations for these systems
are found in the Subsurface Drainage subsection of this report. We recommend that we be retained to
evaluate the proposed wall drain backfill material and observe installation of the drainage systems.
Site Drainage
Surface Drainage: Final site grades should allow for drainage away from the planned structures. We
suggest that the finished ground be sloped at a minimum gradient of three percent for a distance of at least
10 feet away from the buildings. Surface water should be collected by permanent catch basins and drain
lines, and be discharged into an appropriate discharge system. Water should not be allowed to collect in
any area where footings, slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Surface water generated from paved
areas and roof drains should be routed into permanent catch basins and then tightlined into an appropriate
stormwater facility.
Subsurface Drainage: If groundwater is encountered during construction, we recommend that the
contractor slope the bottom of the excavations and collect the water into ditches and small sump pits
where the water can be pumped out and routed to a suitable discharge point.
We recommend the use of footing drains around the planned structures and behind retaining walls.
Footing drains should be installed at least one foot below planned finished floor elevation. The drains
should consist of a minimum four -inch -diameter, rigid, slotted or perforated, PVC pipe surrounded by
free -draining material, such as washed rock, wrapped in a filter fabric. Werecommend that an 18-inch-
wide zone of clean (less than three -percent fines), granular material be placed along the back of the walls
above the drain. Washed rock is an acceptable drain material, or a drainage composite may be used
instead. The free -draining material should extend up the wall to one foot below the finished surface. The
top foot of backfill should consist of low permeability soil placed over plastic sheeting or building paper
to minimize surface water or fines migration into the footing drain. Footing drains should discharge into
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evation •
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 16
tightlines leading to an appropriate collection and discharge point with convenient cleanouts to prolong
the useful life of the drains. Roof drains should not be connected to footing drains.
USE OF THIS REPORT
NGA has prepared this report for Allan Townsend and his agents for use in the planning and design of the
development planned on this site only. The scope of our work does not include services related to
construction safety precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractors'
methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for
consideration in design. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions between the explorations
and also with time. Our report, conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of
subsurface conditions. A contingency for unanticipated conditions should be included in the budget and
schedule.
All people who own or occupy homes on hillsides should realize that landslide movements are always a
possibility. The landowner should periodically inspect the slope, especially after a winter storm. If
distress is evident, a geotechnical engineer should be contacted for advice on remedial/preventative
measures. The probability that landsliding will occur is substantially reduced by the proper maintenance
of drainage control measures at the site (the runoff from the roofs should be led to an approved discharge
point). Therefore, the homeowner should take responsibility for performing such maintenance.
Consequently, we recommend that a copy of our report be provided to any future homeowners of the
property if the home is sold.
We recommend that NGA be retained to provide monitoring and consultation services during
construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the
explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the
work differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation
activities comply with contract plans and specifications. We should be contacted a minimum of one week
prior to construction activities and could attend pre -construction meetings if requested.
Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been performed in accordance
with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in effect in this area at the time this report was
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
9
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 17
prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Our observations, findings, and opinions are
a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
9 •
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Townsend Residence Addition
710 Alder Street
Edmonds, WA
July 8, 2009
NGA File No. 813009
Page 18
It has been a pleasure to provide service to you on this project. If you have any questions or require
further information, please call.
Sincerely;
NELSON GE TECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Lee . Bellah
Staff Geologist
Michael D. Rundquist, PE
Senior Engineer
LSB:KMS:pkw
Six Figures Attached
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
VICINITY MAP
Not to Scale
2110
/ig,
- - •% •�` ///141 -
-------------
j011t{S.SY ' �z
—/
C '
P, L iD
ject =...
S it
Jz
Ma
`: f Mein St ,tMaP11>t St 1 .': i I�
J
�� # I � ;� jp�p¢..�1[;"�r : i I �— .,. �.. � I i �I.. •._i fQ`.
G !flit -i'F+i �ly i$Pa1Il0lIt Ln __. i-. Lame
��ne•St+s�ne5[._....._-� — I--- -'�� .__._._ I 1'{_ -._
8M ki
S.2d09Idkv t4 1�; '`' e ;f /! :•. ✓ r__._. —.._ l ; MVDate ffieO'j714A Q dr;TefEFi�liia
Edmonds, WA
Project Number NELSON GEOTECHNICAL. NO. Date I Revision By CK
813009 Townsend Addition j�(y,r� ASSOCIATES INC.y original DPN LSB
Vicinity Ma GEOTECHNIGAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS i
Figure 1 P 17311.1&%A-.NEAd00 ��C«v1,25,�-1�
VWodm�W. WAM72 WhneWnv�Chehn (SOB) 66Y7698 G
(425)t88.16W I Foy r81-2510 rwwMlmrpeobd,.can
Planned
addition
LEGEND
Property line
Site Plan
Alder Street
Existing
jDriveway
� fill
HA-1
Number and approximate
location of hand auger
A AI Approximate location
of cross-section
Existing R
Reference: Site Plan based on field measurements and observations.
Project Number
813009 Townsend Addition
Site Plan
9
0 20 40
Scale: 1 inch = 20 feet
_ /'� NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
-'`, 18► +` ASSOCIATES INC. /N
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
No. Date Revision By CK
1 W26/M Original I)PN LSB
Figure 2
17311-13ft Ave. HE. AM Svh—d h C..* (4M) x -Ie
Wood—ft. WA 9W72 VVnbchwrh&Wn(SM) 005-7888
(4 5) 488-1880IF- 481-7910 rwwmkpgevbcfi.00m
-o
0
_n pp CD
0
N CCD:) C
w 3
U
m
o °
U
(A rn
m °
0
o a
Q
North
40
30
a�
ry
c
0
:N
> 20
a�
VA
vor-o+arl Anal,
AV
W 1
"1
Existing 25'
4 y s )
°' residence
Lyi •fit l+n j3
b t rif,F' ,Ht etTfarx
X �Yek X, arrxrc'k ahlfi Jfc �c�
° HA-1 r °F JY}��i4 T Sr#Yrp o�trm Nt �°i Ft rt r 1�
Z �, :. •' �i is rc' "i� �"� x; c t' i �x k vey � r. Z�.. `� f _ t i . QM.
a 10 a l Wr RC r{ `j? Ili•. •j�Cyrg�y"��tA mo 1
m •a.v-...",AJ+ri ;t...,'L.,�[
�: • t tf ti t d?�{) o e7: •Zt t 11) t .. Yi�'4
r k._1r�� 1tf\1 S11L hJ LkA Ypl Vet l4 iYA }v1Sf S k Wti 11f �t d> c r 7t f 33
A f'rii+� b4 1 ' «1f $. '�y_ ;tt Sty .Y2;t' t�7�r F� 4 v 9'�,�} s 'Stfiltl�riSF ,r ; s ytkin hi,, (Yr•wYit•a''Iy`�r`" § t
ui t\z t 1 �,F,r2 Av° R f �yf tt I b O f .r y{ 1 r Yi:.' .lerw if hS b
1 S(�i t� 3 ?v. 9 �A 'V tF rft �2{tt }.�St�"F+'g5f'�t t 1 t t""1.. H ve riY�^il $'¢. S ♦ 91 h, 't''; •,
O +r;•`�f4�il('9 \j. IC+ CC 1.) 4f•�S O�J l�N.yf`.Y, f 3{�' t� 1 t:,tr
N 5 NSi tt H tYd ti} PLr ;ra (t a it1 Y )� ff Z7 a� .0
0 'z Yh ills .y5 );ct. C.y �`�? 1 K �(` )r ){{ 'v U. KS, Ct �- t>q:� Sy.. _U,t r r4i\: Q'A§3'i t'..✓ IC r' t. rlli ti.
i'" n tia i+tx l�` i i r t 1 � , b.1t }y ti � • � �'�n , f � l r. C J TY i t\ fl �� + r§
n p. SY:Q�,�:y stif,o3S�t±$,tf.i �� tk�tr.�.,y ��:y.3k lti�s�__��T��,.tt(r�`'��•,v:�L. F'tt�,at�S���li`zg�<�.u���,rf)'•��t�yyl'3�1 y.f+ f y�`°+':st�ltr,7'htki; } �(
2; t rti '���r ,, 4 r u i�`y r�V�s.r 4 Ta y ,rs�i c mpw aly�t�}2tty�t ti s x t us�k t/ mr.+
>
m� a��tt4tetT�r'°�..ri�'f}'�en`dE,it,. tp-a'Ye alj�yuV�3•iT'�'��-oar>r'a3bhf�R,p�t�*�9(<�tind'itih�&r\X s' i`3��EY'"
N m p
zZ
A a 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 -- 70
r
Distance (feet)
South
40
nil
20
10
0
Exploration
o
Test Pit Designation TP-1
Groundwater Level
o
<
During Exploration NOTES:
1) Stratigraphic conditions are interpolated between
Geologic Contact --? the explorations. Actual conditions may vary.
(approximate) 2) Elevations are approximate.
Reference: Cross Section is based on field measurements using a hand-held clinometer and 100-ft tape measure.
Z
W
w
� 20091813009
Townsend AdditionlCS.dwa
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
GROUP
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GROUP NAME
SYMBOL
CLEAN
GW
WELL -GRADED, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL
COARSE-
GRAVEL
GP
POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL
GRAVEL
GRAINED
MORE THAN 50 %
GRAVEL
GM
OF COARSE FRACTION
SILTY GRAVEL
RETAINED ON
SOILS
NO.4 SIEVE
WITH FINES
GC
CLAYEY GRAVEL
SAND
CLEAN
SW
WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND
SAND
SP
POORLY GRADED SAND
MORE THAN 50
RETAINED ON
MORE THAN 50 %
NO. 200 SIEVE
OF COARSE FRACTION
SAND
SM
SILTY SAND
PASSES NO. 4 SIEVE
WITH FINES
SC
CLAYEY SAND
FINE -
SILT AND CLAY
ML
SILT
INORGANIC
GRAINED
LIQUID LIMIT
CL
CLAY
LESS THAN 50 %
SOILS
ORGANIC
OL
ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY
SILT AND CLAY
MH
SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT
INORGANIC
MORE THAN 50
PASSES
LIQUID LIMIT
Cl" I
CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FLAT CLAY
NO.200 SIEVE
50 % OR MORE
ORGANIC
OH
ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
PT
PEAT
NOTES:
1) Field classification is based on visual SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS:
examination of soil in general
accordance with ASTM D 2488-93. Dry - Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to
the touch
6
2) Soil classification using laboratory tests
is based on ASTM D 2488-93. Moist - Damp, but no visible water. d
Wet -Visible free water or saturated,
3) Descriptions of soil density or �
consistency are based on usually soil is obtained from c
interpretation of blowcount data, below water table c
visual appearance of soils, and/or
test data.
Project Number
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
No.
Date
Revision
By
M
CK
813009
Townsend Addition
Soil Classification Chart
-NG ASSOCIATES INC.
GEOTECNNICAL ENGINEERS St GEOLOGISTS
I
Mag
Origin)
DPN
LSB
a
Figure 4
17811.135fhA NE.X6M 8mhoniah CDur,(,25)33,-16M
Woom48mi8s, WA 88072 Wuukhwic .(509)88S7BW
o
Q
(42 148889 / F=481.2510
Z
•
LOG. OF EXPLORATION
4
DEPTH (FEET)
USC SOIL DESCRIPTION
HAND AUGER ONE
0.0 - 0.5
SM BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, MOIST)
0.5 - 6.0
SP RED -BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND TRACE SILT
(MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST TO WET)
6.0 - 7.0
SM GRAY, SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, WET)
SAMPLES WERE. COLLECTED AT 2.5 AND 6.5 FEET
MODERATE GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS ENCOUNTERED AT 5.5 FEET
HAND AUGER CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
HAND AUGER WAS COMPLETED AT 7.0 FEET ON 6124109
HAND AUGER TWO
0.0 - 0.5
SM BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, MOIST)
0.5 - 5.5
SP RED -BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND TRACE SILT
(MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, DRY TO WET)
6.0-6.5
SM GRAY, SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, WET)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.0 AND 6.0 FEET
MODERATE GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS ENCOUNTERED AT 5.0 FEET
HAND AUGER CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED FROM 0.5 TO 4.0 FEET
HAND AUGER WAS COMPLETED AT 6.5 FEET ON 6/24109
HAND AUGER THREE
0.0 - 4.5
SP RED -BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND SILT
(MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST TO WET)
4.5 - 5.0
SM GRAY, SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, WET)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 6.0 AND 7.5 FEET
MODERATE GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS ENCOUNTERED AT 4.5 FEET
HAND AUGER CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
HAND AUGER WAS COMPLETED AT 5.0 FEET ON 6/24/09
HAND AUGER FOUR
0.0 - 7.0
SM BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND TRACE ORGANICS
(LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST)
7.0 - 8.0
ML BLUE -GRAY SILT WITH FINE SAND (STIFF, MOIST)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 6.0 AND 7.5 FEET
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
HAND AUGER CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
HAND AUGER WAS COMPLETED AT 8.0 FEET ON 6/24/09
DPN:LSB NELSON GEO TECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
FILE NO 813009
FIGURE 5
0.. Conceptual Soldier Pile Wall Detail
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION USE
Washed rock drainage
behind lagging
X
m
rU
12
CD
r
rn
M
3
aD
0
0
n
x
w
Concrete wall
Miradrain drainage matting full
height & width centered between
piles, installed with fabric to lagging
Waterproofing membrane
along length of wall
Pressure treated timber
lagging with 1/4-inch gap
between boards
Multiflow drainage collector
4-inch diameter weep holes
Basement slab
4-inch diameter
PVC pipe tightlined
to storm drainage
system
Wall Embedment
(typically 1.5 to 2.0 times
exposed wall height)
NOT TO SCALE �
IS
Project Number NELSON GEOTECHNICAL No. Date Revision By CK
Townsend Addition ASSOCIATES, INC. N
813009 Conceptual Soldier Pile N�A , �17/M ori9� use Knns
GEOTECMNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
Wall Detail
Figure 6 17311_13%A. „E, �
,..�9 w��.dcn.m�(sos,sss�me
(42� 4Q64660 /Fu het-E10
Site Plan
SCALE: I "=20.00'
0' 10' 20, 50' 40' 50' 60'
Site Address
710 ALDER
EDMONDS, WA 115020
Owner
ALLEN 4 HEATHER TONN5END
• 110 ALDER
EDMOND5, WA SD020
425-712-5056
Assessor's Parcel No.
0045420Q 100500
Lot Size
6554 50. FT. (PER CO. RECORDS)
Stockpile
A5 NOTED ON DRAWING. WILL BE COVERED
WITHIN 24 HOURS.
Excess Material From Excavatio
EXCE55 MATERIAL TO BE U5ED AROUND
PERIMETER OF FOUNDATION AND FOR
LAND50API NG.
Drainage
ALL NEW DRAINS TO TIE INTO EXI5TING.
NEN ROOF OUTTER5 TO TIE INTO EXI5TING
DRAINAGE 5Y5TEM.
E C t I
roslon on ro 1
SILT FENCE AT EDGE OF D15TURBED
501L5. EXI5TING VEGITATION TO
REM HE
Buildinq Footurint \-�FL&
/ 1457 50. FT. (EXI5TING HOU5E)
1241 (NEN ADDITION)
266 50. FT. (EXI5TING DECK5)
54 (EXI5TING CURVED GONG. 5TAI )
1906 TOTAL
LOT COVERAGE: 2a.1-1%
N
Note 4
ALL DISTURBED SOILS SHALL BE ZI
COMPOST AMENDED PER BMP T5.13
OF THE STORMH^IATER MANUAL.
Cut and Fill
GUT: 6 TO 6 Y05.
FILL: 6 YD5. (APPROX)
PLC Uir&-"�\
-
5TA61NC, AREA...
no construction staging except on the existing
Zoning driveway or In the rear of the property
Height
Calculations
A
106.45
B
115.00
G
11425
D
106.60
AVERAGE /� 110.125
MAX RIDGE /4\ 155.125
RIDGE OF NEW ADDITION m 154,56
D.P. AT GATGH BA51N IN ROAD
ELEVATION SET AT 100.00'
mpeivious S�rlace Cams
EXI5TING BLDG ROOF OUTLINE 16% so.
(GON5T. PRE-1976)
EXISTING DECK (PRE-Icrb) 215
EXISTING WALK5/PATIO (PRE-Ilrb) 69
EXI5TING DRIVEWAY (PRE-14-I6) 621
PR-OP05ED BLDG. ADDITION 145
PROP05ED NEW LANDING 8 5TEP5 12
TOTAL NEW AREA
151
CATCH BASIN ; OWNER/CONTRAC.TOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR
Datum
Qt um Ft . � / EROSIOtj CONTROL AND DRAINAGE
02' I t `E,)STIN
1 � : DRIVEWAY
1Q.4 - L
k -' '•., E
104/�
16-
1
1 I !EX15T. DECI4 t
X15T.
VAULT
-- 1
ILT
FENCE
T.
STEP5
110 - I i 106.45 _ /, 4 106.
N II NEW
.j EXIST. ROOF
oII i ROOF I
Ii I
EX 15TI NG RE51 DENGE
��—j I MAIN FLR • 115,65'
112
i
Zone CornerA/oFlag,[g
Setbacks Rec aired Actual
Front (N) 2Q'
Sides (111 -
Rear (g) ►�� 15'�-
—B00 _ _` 114.251(n
1 -
NEN ADDITION SILT FENCE—'
114 I i LANDIN �� / 1
I I -' t/
�� pie rn
XIST. FENG
T� REMC
QOX'CEDAR
/ o n
`E'ilb `:�'1 A 6 ®TE[20, 1zR E AR
' BY ENGINEERING �/��� M
FEB 41 2011
: BUILDING DEPART, NT
®fit$ j�--�w CITY OF EDMONDS
f--; EX15T.
1 : BLOCK
I I WALL
(I O
io
APPROVED
®y PLANNING
Site Plan
SCALE: 1 "=20.00'
0' 10' 20' 50, 40' 50' 60,
Site Address
710 ALDER
EDMONDS, NA a8O2O
Owner
ALIEN 4 HEATHER TONN5END
110 ALDER
EDMONDS, NA 98020
425-112-8086
Assessor's Parcel No.
0045420r-1100500
Lot Size
6554 50. FT. (PER CO. RECORDS)
Stockpile
AS NOTED ON DRAWING. WILL BE COVERED
WITHIN 24 HOURS.
Excess Material From Excavatio
EXCE55 MATERIAL TO BE USED AROUND
PERIMETER OF FOUNDATION AND FOR
LANDSCAPING.
Drainaue
ALL NEW DRAINS TO TIE INTO EXI5TIN5.
NEN ROOF GUTTERS TO TIE INTO EXISTING
DRAINAGE SYSTEM.
E C
5TA61 N6 AREA... _
no construction staging except on the existin,
Zoning driveway or in the rear of the properly
Height
Calculations
A
106.45
B
115.00
G
11425
D
106bo
nvr=r W= IIv.IL7
MAX RIDGE 4 155.125
l
RIDGE OF NEN ADDITION ® 154.66
D.P. AT CATG# BASIN IN ROAD
ELEVATION SET AT 100.00'
roslon ontrol &- i
SILT FENCE AT EDGE OF 015TURBFD
SOILS. EXI5TIN5 VEGITATION TO
REM
BuildingFootprint
145i 50. FT. (EXI5TIN5 HOUSE)
12cl (NEN ADDITION)
266 50. FT. (EXISTING DECKS)
54 (EXI5TIN5 CURVED GONG. STAIR
I a06 TOTAL
\ LOT COVERAGE: 2a.1'7%
mperv�ous ace Calcs
EXI5TIN5 BLDS ROOF OUTLINE 1696 SQ
(CONST. PRE-Icrb)
EXISTING DECK (PRE-1a16) 215
EXI5TIN5 NALK5/PATIO (PRE-M6) 841
EXI5TIN5 DRIVEWAY (PRE-14116) 621
PROP05W BLDG. ADDITION
PROP05ED NEW LANDING 8 STEPS
TOTAL NEW AREA
ALDER STREET
OWNERICONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR
^-� EROSION CONTROL AND DrRiAdNIAGE
.
FL&i
SILT
FENCE
f—; EX 15T.
1 : BLOCK
1I HALL
II�
f�
FEB 0 12011
BUILDING DEPAWN- ENT
CITY OF EDMONDS
Cn
rn
"Lone aS -6 Corner_,LloFlag &;L
Setbacks ReCauired Actual
Front
Sides &/E):_
Rear 'a -
Other
Height 2s' 2 y. 5�'
cc=ffa
m
APPROVED By PLANNI Is
NG
4OKS e� S no4 'a�r ved 4a
DweI�N„� U•.:� (� �
B o e BUILDING DEPARTi ISN, ,`�)- ((� ' (� �`�"
I i We'r CITY OF EDMIOINDS I