Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
7603 OLYMPIC VIEW DR.pdf
7603 OLYMPIC VIEW DR 0 STREET FILE CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT I p Public Works .• Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering 890.1g June 17, 1993 Tom Snyder Postmaster Edmonds Post Office 201 Main St. Edmonds, WA 98020 Tom,' LAURA M. HALL MAYOR On numerous occasions, USPO container trucks have been observed on Main Street and also Bell Street in downtown Edmonds. Enclosed is a copy of a map showing the approved truck routes as ordained by the Edmonds City Council. It should be noted that USPO trucks have also been observed on'roads posted "no trucks", such as 212th St. S.W. The City is amenable to finding routes that will work for you that conform to the City Code. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Tom, on another subject, I have enclosed a copy of a letter written to Cree Construction in January, 1993 indicating that the driveway approaches at the Perrinville Carrier Facility do not conform to City standards and have never been approved by the City. Your attention to this matter is also appreciated. If you have questions, please contact Gordie Hyde, Engineering Coordinator, 771- 0220, extension 325. Sincerely, ROBERT J. ALBERTS, P.E. City Engineer RJA/sdt Enclosures POSTOFF.DOC • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • .tt. Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan CITY OF EDMONDS LAURAM.HALL t -� 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS. WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 18 g O Public Works o Planning o Parks and Recreation o Engineering crii(Q � o m,,�W I W13 January 4, 1993 Michael Boyle, Project Manager Cree Construction Co.; Inc. 5529 - 186th P1. S.W. P. 0. Box 36003 Lynnwood, WA 98046 SUBJECT: U. S. POST OFFICE - PERRINVILLE FACILITY Dear Michael, Enclosed is a copy.of the City of Edmonds standard detail for a high traffic load driveway. The U.S.P.O. representatives and architects received this detail nume,-ous times throughout the course of the project. The driveway entrances, as constructed, do not conform to this detail. The City of Edmonds finds the driveway entrances, as constructed, unacceptable. Repair -of this deficiency should be coordinated with Lyle Chrisman. Thank you for your cooperation in bringing this part of the improvements into conformance with City standards. Sincerely, GORDON C. HYD Engineering Coordinator GCH/sdt Enclosure CREECONS/TXTST530 0 Ircor-poruted August 11, 1890 o i • 'STREET FILE r CITY OF EDMONDS r. 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS. WA_98020 • (206) 771-0220 FAX (206) 771-0221 NQ COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT f p Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation . Engineering 8g0.1g Mailed 5/6/93 May 5, 1993 Mike Doyle Cree Construction 5529 - 186th P1. S.W. P. 0. Box 36003 Lynnwood, WA 98046-9603 Re: Post office at 7603 Olympic View Drive (ED49) Dear Mike, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR Pursuant to our conversation last month regarding the driveway cut across Mr. Park's driveway at 7404 Olympic View Drive, we have not seen any work to restore the asphalt approach. By May 19, 1993, please take the necessary action to pave that area of the driveway where you crossed with the eight inch water.line. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to call. Sincerely, e�� e-4� ��- ADDISON L. CHRISMAN IV Engineering Inspector ALC/sdt POSTOFF/TXTST530 fizo Al its • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan • RCV BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 4-28-92 ;11:46AM ; CCITT 03-► 2067710221;# 1 CNA►NDAT, 1 KING COUNTY D2PAR4xWT OF pUj;LIC WOAXB Surface Water Management Division BACKWATER ANALYSIS PROGRAM varsiOn 4.20 1 - INFO ON THIS PROGRAM 2 - BWCHAN 3 - SWpIPE d - RwcuLV 5 - nwsox. 6 - DATA -FILE ROUTINES 7 - RETURN TO DOS ENTER OPTION BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR OPEN CUANNELa ENTSK td,.][pet11]filename[.ext] OF CHARNEL -DATA FILE DISPLAY CHANNEL DATA (Y or N)7 RECEIVED APR 2 8 1992 'LNG/NEERING ------------------------------------------------------------------------------0 OUTFLOW CONDITIONS AT STATION .00 TAILWATER DATA: 1) SPECIFY TYPE CF TAILWATER DATA INPUT: S - SINGLE TW-ELEV. F - TW/HW DATA FILE 2) ENTER: [d:][path]fil*namm[ .ext] OF HW/TW DATA ENTER: OXIN, QMAX, QINCiEE, PRINT -OPTION (STANDARDml, CONDF.NSEDual EXpANDED=3) STATION .00: INVERT= 259.17 FT EC.1.15 Q-RATIO= .00 CROSS-SECTION DATA: DI:ST/STAGE IS MEASURED FROM INVERT,. N-FAC IS MEASURED BETWEEN STAGES Z41FT(FT) STAGE(FT) N-FACTOR w RIGHT(FT) STAGE(rT) N-FACTOR 3.00 .90 .0d0 * 3.00 ..50 27.00 6.50 .027 * 21.00 9.50 .040 .027 Q(CFS) Yl(FT) WS ELEV. * YC-IN YN-IN Q-TW TW-AT N-Y1 A-Y1 WP-Y1 V-Y1 wrr.a.��.�.ww**,�w�a+rar.,►***x*xewwwrrxrrrrrrr*wwfrwwRMrwwYA**�AwwiriMwkkiii*YF;yy***twM 5.00 .64 259.61 .* .55 .64 5.00 .51 .038 2.40 5.97 2.08 10.00 .82 259.99 * .73 .82 10.00 .71 .037 3.73 8.12 2.68 15.00 20.00 .96 260.13 * .86 .99 1.07 260.24 * 15.00 .91 .036 4.99 9.01 3.06 25.00 .98 1.07 1.i9 260.36 • 1,08 1.17 20.00 1.06 .035 25.00 1.19 .035 5.89 9.72 7.06 10.46 3.29 3.54 RCV BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 4-28-92 ;11:47AM ; CCITT G3-+ 20577102214 2 30.00 1.31 260.48 * 1.17 1.36 30.00 1.31 .034 8.37 11.26 3.59 35.00 1.44 260.61 * 2.26 1.34 35.00 1.44 .034 9.77 12.05 3.58 d0.00 1.56 260.73 * 1.34 1.41 40.00 1.25 .034 11.12 12.77 3.60 45.00 1.65 260.82 * 1.41 1.49 46.00 1.45 .033 12.41 13.42 3.63 50.00 1.76 260.93 * 1.49 1.54 50.00 '1.76 .033 13.76 14.05 2.63 55.00 1.86 261.03 * 1.54 1.60 55.00 1.86 .033 15.17 14.71 3.63 60.00 1.96 261.13 * 1.61 1.66 60.00 1.96 .032 16.64 15.36 3.61 65.00 2.06 261.23 * 1.67 2.71 65.00 2.06 .032 18.19 16.01 3.57 70.00 2.16 261.=3 + 1.72 1.76 70.00 2.16 .032 19.80 16.67 3.54 75.00 2.27 261.44 * 1.79 1.01 75.00 2.27 .032 21.48 17.32 3.49 80.00 2.37 261.54 * 1.83 1.86 90.00 2.37. .032 23.22 17.90 3.45 85.00 2.47 261.64 * 1.88 1.91 85.00 2.47 _032 25.02 12.63 3.40 90.00 2.59 261.76 * 1.93 1,9S 90.00 2.59 .031 27.20 19.39 3.31' 95.00 2.72 261.89 * 1.98 1.99 95.00 2.72 .031 29.58 20.19 3.21 ****REACH NO. 1! LM4=H- 100.00 FT AVG.GRADVn 1.30% »wwa STATION 100.00: INVERT= 260.47 FT wo1.15 Q-PATlO= .00 CROSS-sECTICN DATA: DISTMAGE IS MEASURED FROM INVERT; N-FAC IS MEASURED BETWEEN STAGES LEFT(FT) STAGE(FT) N-FACTOR * RIGHT(FT) STACE(FT) N-FACTOR 3.00 .50 .040 * 3.00 .50 .040 21.00 6.50 .027 * 18.00 .8.00 .027 Q(cps) Y1(FT) WS ZLEV. * YC-IN YKI-IN YC-OT YN-QT N-Yl A-Yl WP-71 V-Yl *****wet:*****�yyr*##*,r**++++r+w�waa,s.�awi»*ww*ww**w*rro**rww**wwwwwr*xxxxxxww**w*w 5.00 .64 261.11 * .55 .64 .55 ,64 .039 2.39 6.84 2.09 10.00 .82 261.29 * .72 .82 .72 .82 .037 3.66 7.01 2.72 15,00 .96 2E1.43 * .86 .96 .86 .96 .036 4.79 8.57 3.13 20.00 1.08 261.55 * .98 1.08 .98 1,08 .036 5.82 9.21 3.44 25.00 1.18 261.65 * '1,09. 1.18 1.09 1.18 .035 6.74 9.75 3.71 30.00 1.27 261.74 * 1.18 1.27 1.18 1.27 .035 7.60 10.24 3.95 35.00 1.26 261.83 * 1.27 1.36 1.27 1.36 .035 8.51 10.73 4.11 40.00 1.43 261.90 * 1.35 1.43 1.35 1.43 .034 9.24 11.10 4.33 45.00 1.50 261.97 * 1.43 1.90 1.43 1.50 .034 10.00 11.40 4.50 50.00 1.57 262.04 * 1.50 1.57 1.50 1.57 034 10.78 11.89 4.64 55.00 1.63 262.10 * 1.57 1.63 1.57 2.63 .034 11,47 12.18 4.79 60.00 1.69 262.16 * 1,63 1,69 1.63 2.69 .034 12.18 12.51 4.93 65.00 1.75 262.22 * 1.59 1.75 1,69 1.75 .033 12.91 12.83 5.04 70.00 1.00 262.27 * 1.75 1.80 1.75 1.80 .033 13.52 13.10 5.18 75.00 1.86 262,23 * 1,81 1.86 1.81 2.06 .033 14,28 13.42 5.25 80.00 1.91 262.28 * 1.87 1.91 1.97 1.01 .033 14.93 13.69 5.36 85.00 1.95 262.42 * 1.92 1.95 1.92 1.95 .033 15.46 13.91 5.50 90.00 2,00 262.47 * 1.97 2.00 1.97 2.00 .033 15.12 14.18 5.59 95.00 2.05 262.52 * 2.02 2.05 2.02 2.05 .033 16.81 14.45 5,65 *ee*RRACH NO. 2: LENGTH- 90.00 FT AVG,ORAD$a 1.30% +++* STATION 190.00: INVERT= 261.64 FT EC=1.15 O-RATIO= .00 CROSS-SECTION DATA: DIST/rSTAGE I0 MEASURED FROM INVERT; N-FAC IS MEASURED BETWEEN STAGES LEFT(FT) STAGE(FT) N-FACTOR * RIGHT(FT) STAGE(FT) N-FACTOR 3.00 .50 .040 3.00 .50 .040 18.00 8.00 .027 * 18.00 9.00 .027 Q(CPS) Y1(FT) W5 ELEV. * YC-IN YN-IN YC-OT YN-OT N-Y1 A-Y1 WP-Y1 V-Y1 RCV BY;Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 4-25-92 ;11:40AM ; CCITT 03-9 2007710221;# 3 ******A***t*At**tiltlift*wwtwwwAtA*tRttttl.tNwwwwwwAw�wwA*Rtt**Wie Ask*s►***#.lAt4Ai♦ 5.00 .64 262.28 * .55 .00 .55 .64 .039 2.38 9.72 2.10 10.00 .82 262.46 * .72 .60 .72 .02 .029 2.62 7.S1 2.76 15.00 .97 292.61 * .86 .00 .86 .97 .037 4.76 9.19 3.15 20.00 1.09 262.73 * .98 .00 .98 .1.09 .036 5.74 8.72 3.49 25.00 1.20 262.84 * 1.09 .00 1.09 1.20 .036 6.68 9.21 3.74 30.00 1.29 262.93 * 1.19 .00 1.19 1.29 .036 7.49 9.62 4.01 35.00 2.38 263.02 * 1.28 .00 1.28 1.38 .035 5.33 10.02 4.20 40.00 1.46 263.10 * 1.37 .00 1.37 1.46 .035 9.10 10.30 4.39 45.00 1.53 261.17 * 1.45 .00 1.45 1.53 .035 9.00 10.69 '4.59 50.00 1.60 263.24 * 1.52 .00 1.52 1.60 .034 10.52 11.00 4.7S 55.00 1.67 263.31 * 1.59 .00 1.59 1.67 .034 11.26 11,32 4.89 60.00 1.73 263.37 * 1.66 .00 1.66 1.73 .C34 11.91 '11.58 5.04 65.00 1.79 263.43 w 1.73 .00 1.73 1.79 .034 12.57 11.85 5.17 70.00 1.65 263.49 * 1.79 .00 1.79 1.85. .034 13.34 13.12 5.29 75.00 1.91 263.55 * 1.85 .00 1.85 1.91 .034 13.94 12.39 9.36 90.00 1.96 263.90 * 1.91 .00 1.91 1.96 .034 14.52 12.61 5.51 85.00 2.01 263.65 * 1.96 .00 1.96 2.01 .033 15.12 12.84 5.62 90.00 2.06 263.70 * 2.02 .00 2.02 2.06 .033 15.73 13.06 5.72 95.00 2.11 263.75 * 2.07 .00 2.07 2.11 .033 16.34 13.28 5.82 NOTE: WATER DEPTH INFORMATION FOR THIS LAST CROSS-SECTION WAS COMPUTED ASSUMING APPROACH VELOCITIES GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO CROSS-sEcTIoNAL VELOCITIES. IF NOT THE CASE, WATER DEPTHS CAN HE ADJUSTED BY SPECIFYING, A - KbMAT. SPECIFY: F - FILE, A - ADJUST, P - PRIVY' R/D, N - NEWJ09, S - STOP SPECIFY: S - KWITW DATA FILE, R - ROUTING DATA FILE, E - ESCAPE, S - STOP ENTER Ed I (path IfiIona=ol.ext] FOR STORAGE OF HW-DATA COMPUTED AT STA. 190.00: FILE ALREADY EXIST: OVERWRITE (Y or NI 7 E'ER Idil(path]fileaeme[.ext] FOR STORAGE OF KW -DATA COMPUTED AT STA. 190.00: ,RCV BY:Xerox Tetecopier 7020 ; 4-26-92 ;11:46AM ; END OF MESSAGE CCITT G3� 2067710221;# 4 04/28/1992 11:13 i It AND� B;4JRNSTAD WE JACOBS, INC FROM ABKJ Consulting Engr RECEIVED TO P..08 Job #: o161-'L 42 i JobName:A'576-&- f901q51tiV1t,1--& APR 2 8 1992 �Date/Iime:%;_?�'�1 _ ENGINEERING FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET To: Fax #: ro. - -n- Ptrm;�1�Y From- + Total pagm transmitted, including ibis transmittal sheet:, 1 -- Please call (206) 285-118;5, if transmission is incomplete or illegible. Message/Comments: 425t&6 [15 rjtq TOTAL P.08 CIaANDaT. 1 KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS surface Water Management DiviCion BACKWATER ANALYSIS PROGRAM Version 4.20 1 - INFO ON THIS PROGRAM 2 - BWCHAN 3 - EWPIPE 4 - SWCULV 5 - BWEOX 6 - DATA -FILE ROUTIN2S 7 - RETURN TO DOS ENTER OPTION BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR OPEN CHANNELS SNTr.R (d:][path]filename(.ext3 OF CHANNEL -DATA PILE DISPLAY CHANNEL DATA (Y or N)' OUTFLOW CONDITIONS AT STATION .00 TAILWATER DATA: 1) SPECIFY TYPE OF TAILWATER DATA INPUT: V. F _ 'SINGLE DTW-EATAPILE 2) SNT&R: [d:](path]filename(.0xt) OF HW/TW DATA ENTER: QMIN, QDW, QINCRE, PRINT -OPTION (STANDARDal, CONDENSED=2, EXPANDED=3) STATION .00: INVERT= 259.17 FT EC=1.15 Q-RATIO= .00 CROSS-SECTION DATA: / , DISTISTAGE IS MEASURED FROM INVERT; N-FAC iS MEASURED BETWEEN STAGES (� LEF-T+FT) STAGE (FT) � N-FACTOR � RICAT.(•FT,) STAGE (FT� N-FACTOR '3 .00') .50 . oaa * �3.0.0� 5a� .040 nn a RA / n27 * 21.00 9.50 .027 Q(CFS) Y1(FT) WS ELEV. * YC-IN YN-IN Q-TW TW-HT N-Y1 A-Y1 WP-Y1 V-Y1, 2.40 6.97 2.08 5.00 .64 259.81 259.99. " * .55 .64 .92 S.00 .61 10.00 .71 .028 .037 3.73 8.12 2.68 10.00 15.00 .82 96 260:13 * .73 .86 .96 15.00 .91 .036 4.89 9.01 3.06 20.00 1.07 260.24 * .98 1.07 20.00 1.06 .035 5,89 9.71 3.39 25.00 1.19 260.36 " 1.08 1.17 25.00 1.19 .035 7.06 10.46 2.54 i Told of J6ua 6UT,+Tncuad rHed woad e8111 zeeT�ez�ae 30.-00 1.31 260.46 * 1.17 1.26 30.00 1.31 1.44 .034 034 a.37 9.77 11.26 12.05 3.59 3.58 35.00 1.44 1.55 260.61 260.72 * * 1.26 1.34 1.34 1.41 35.00 40.00 1.55 .034 11.12 12.77 3.60 40.00 45.00 1,65 260.82 * 1.41 1.48 45.00 1.65 .033 12.41 13.76 13.42 14.06 3.63 3.63 50.00 1.76 260.93 * w 1.48 1.54 1,54 1.60 50.00 55.00 1.76 1.86 .033 .033 15.17 14.71 3.63 55.00 60.00 .1.86 1.96 261.03 261.13 + 1.61 1.66 60.00 1.96 .032 16.64 15.36 16.01 3.61 3.57 65.00 2.06 261.23 * * 1.67 1.72 1.71 1.76 65.00 70.00 2.06 2.16 .032 .032 18.19 19.80 16.67 3.54 70.00 75.00 2.16 2.27 261.33 261.44 * 1.78 1.81 75.00 2.27 .032 21.48 17.32 17.98 3.49 3.45 80.00 2.37 261.54 * * 1.83 1.86 80.00 85.00 2.37 2.47 .032 .032 23.22 25.02 18.63 3.40 85.00 2.47 261.64 1.88 1.91 95,00 2.72 261.99 * 1.98 1.99 95.00 2.72 031 29.58 20.19 3.21 ****REACH NO. 1: LENGTH- 100.00 FT AVG.GRADE= 1.30$ **** STATION 100.00: INVERT= 260.41 FT EC=1.15 0-RATIo= .00 CROSS-SECTION DATA! DIST/STAGE IS MEASURED FROM INVERT, N-FAC IS MEASURED BETWEEN STAGES LEFT(FT) STAGE(FT) N-FACTOR w RIGHT(FT) STAGE(FT) N-FACTOR 3.00 .50 •040 r 8.00 21.00 6.50 .027 1$.40 .027 Q(Cps) V1(FT) WS ELEV. * YC-IN YN-IN YC-OT YN-OT N-'Y1 A-YI WP-Y1 V-Yi *****wxxx***wwx****wwxxx**�**xx****wxx***+wxx+**wwxx***ww*trwwxsxrrrrlr++�.v.w++�.r 6.84 2.09 5.00 .64 261.11 * .55 .64 .55 .64 .039 2.39 3.68 7.91 2.72 10.00 .82 261.29 261.43 w .72 + .82 .96 .72 .86 .62 .96 .037 .026 4.79 8.57 3.13 15.00 20.00 .96 1.08 261.5S .86 * ..98 1.09 .98 1.08 .036 5.82 6.74 9.21 9.75 3.44 3.71 25.00 1.19 261.65 * 1.09 * 1.18 1.18 1.27 1.09 1.18 1.18 1.27 .035 .015 7.60 10.24 3.95 30,00 35.00 1.27 1.36 261.74 261.93 * 1.27 1.36 1.27 1.36 .03$ 8,51 lo.73 4.11 4.33 40.00 1.43 261.90 * 1.35 1.43 1.35 1.43 1.43 1.50 .034 9.24 '10.00 11.14 11.48 4.50 4S.00 1.50 1.57 261.97 262.04 1.43 W 1.50 1.50 1-.57 1.50 1.57 .034 .034 10.78 11.86 4.64 50.00 55.00 1.63 262.10 * 1.57 1.63 1.57 1.63 .034 11.47 12.18 12.18 12.51 4.79 4.93 60.00 1.69 262.16 * 1.63 * 1.69 1.69 1.75 1.63 1.69 1.69 1.75 .034 .033 12.91 .12.83 5.44 65.00 70.00 1.75 1.80 262.22 262.27 * 1,75 1.80 1.75 1.80 .033 13.52 13.10 13.42 5,19 5.25 75.00 1.86 262.33 * 1.81 ' 1.86 1.81 1.$7 1.86 1.91 .011 032 14.20 14.93 13.69 5.36 80.00 1.91 1.95 262.38 262.42 1.87 * 1.92 1.91 1.95 1.92 1.9S .033 15.46 13.91 5.50 85.00 90.00 2.00 262.47 * 1.97 2.00 1.97 2.00 .032 16.12 16.81 14.18 14.45 5.58 5.65 95.00 2.05 262.52 * 2.02 2.05 2.02 2.05 .033 ****REACH NO. 2: LENGTH= 90.00 FT AVG.GRADE= 1,20% **** STATION 190.00: INVERT'_ 261.64 FT EC-1.15 Q-RATIOS .00 CROSS-SECTION DATA: DIST/STAGE IS MEASURED FROM INVERT: N-FAC IS MEASURED BETWEEN STAGES LEFT(FT) STAGE(FT) N-FACTOR * RIGHT(FT) STACR(FT) N-FACTOR 3.00 .50 .040 * 1.00 .50 .040 18.00 8.00 .027 * 18.00 8.00 .027 Q(CFS) Y1(FT) WS ELEV. * YC-IN YN-IN YC-OT YN-OT N-YS A-Y1 WF-Y1. V-Y1 LB'd O1 ASUB SuTlinouop rmeu WOtld 66ITT L667razelo 1 *r*+rwxR�**rrww++wrw.aim****xx**55"�xx*Ofi�***55*x**64wxa039,vxa2*38xf*6w7i**N"10 5.00 .64 262.29 262.46 * .72 .00 .72 .82 .038 3.62 7.51 2.76 10.00 15.00 _82 .97 262.61 * .86 .00 .86 .97 .037 4.76 5.74 8.10 S.72 3.15 3_d9 20.00 1.09 262.73 * .98 .00 .98 1.09 .036 25.00 30.00 1.20 1.29 z5.84 262.93 1.19 .00 1.19 1-29 .036 7.49 8.33 9.62 10.02 4.01 4.20 35.00 1.3s 263.02 263.10 * * 1.29 1.37 .00 1.28 1.37 i.38 1.46 .035 .035 9.10 10.38 4.39 i 40.00 45.00 1.d6 1.53 263.17 * 1.45 .00 .00 1.45 1.53 .035 9.60 10.52' 10.69 11.00 4.59 4.75 50.00 1,60 263.24 * * 1.52 .00 1.52 2.59 1.60 1.67 .034 .034 11.26 11.32 4_89 55.00 55.00 1.b7 263.3 1 * 1.59 1.66 .00 1.66 1.73 .034 11.91 11.58 5.04 1.67 263.3 263.43. * 1.71 .00 .00 1.73 1.79 .034 12.57 11.85 .5.17 65.v0. 70.00 1.79 1.95 263.49 * 1_79 .00 1.79 1.85 .034 13.24 13.94 12.12 12.39 5.2� 5.35 75.00 1.91 263.55 263.60 * * 1.85 1.91 .00 1.85 1.91 1.91 1.91 .034 .013 14.52 1F.61 5.62 80.00 85.00 1.96 2.01 263�65 * 1.96 .00 .00 1,96 2.02 2.01. 2.06 .033 15.12 15.73 13.06 13.06 5.62 5.72 G 90.00 2.06 f 263.70 263.75 " ` 2.oz 2,07 .00 .00 2.o7 2.11 .033 033 16.34 13.2$ S.81 95.00 2.11 LAST CROSS-SECTION WAS COMPUTED ASSUMING NOTEi WATER DEPTH INFORMATION PROACH VELOCITIES FOR THIS QUAL TO CAJUSTEDBy i VEIADJJUST. IF NOT THE CASE, WATER DDEEPTHSHCANpBE�A $ PECIFYI�G, SPECIFY: F - FILE, A - ADJUST, P - ?RTNT R/D, N - NEG1JOB, S - STOP SPECIFY: H - HWIlrvi DATA FILE, R - ROUTING DATA FILE, E - ESCAFE, S - STOP ENTER Id. I[Dath]filename[.ext] FOR STORAGE OF HW-DATA COMPUTED AT STA. 190.00e FILE ALREADY EXIST; OVERWRITE (Y or N) ? ENTER Ed=I[path]filename [.extl FOR 9T0iL.XGE OF'gW-DATA ccMPUTED AT STA. 190.00: c0'd 0L isu3 suTiinsuoo rmau NOad BT:TT ZGsT'9Zib2 I GULVEt_T1, 0P►�' lj KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Surface Water Management Division BACKWATER ANALYSIS PROGRAM Version 4.20 1 - INFO ON THIS PROGRAM 2 - BWCHAN 3 - BWPIPE 4 - BWCULV 5 - BWSOX 6 - DATA -FILE ROUTINES 7 - RETURN TO DOS ENTER OPTION BACKWATER PROGRAM FOR ROUND/ARCH CULVERTS ENTER: NUMBER OF CULVERTS OUTFLOW cONDITIONS PIPE NO. 1 - TAILWATER DATA: k' 4 ^ F> TW-ELEV. 4 1) SPECIFY'TYPE OF TAILWATER DATA INPUT: S F - SINGLE - TW/t1,4W DhTA PILE a 2) ENTER: [d-][patn] filen4me[.extl OF MW/TW FILE C 2a) DISPLAY TWIKW DATA -FILE (Y or N) 7 ` ROUND/ARCH PIPE INPUT CODING INFORMATION: PIPE TYPE CODING: 1 - CONC/SMOOTH BORE (n-0.012) 5 - CMP ARCH (NEW GEOMETRY) 2 - CORRUGATED MRTIaL (n_0.024) 6 - CONCISMOOTH ARCH (OLD) '2 - HELICAL CMP (n-fac varies) 7 - CONC/SMOOTH ARCH (NEW) 4 - CMP ARCH (OLD GEOMETRY) 8 - ROUND (user sets n-fac) ARCH PIPE CODING - EQUIV.klENT ROUND SIZE MUST BE INPUTTED PER pOLLOWY23G TABLE: EQUIV-DIP*s• OLD -ARCH NEW -ARCH * BQUIV-DIAM. OLD -ARCH NEW -ARCH 50"X 31" 49•X 33" 15" 18"x 11" 171X 130 * 19• 22"X 12' 21"X 13" * 42" X 48" 58•X 36" " try" 25"X 16" 24•X 18" * 64' 54• 65"X 4X 43• 24' 292X 18' 28uX 20" * 60" 72"X 94' 711h 47" 49" 77NX 52" 301, 36•X 22" 35'X 241 " 66• 79"X 72" 85"X S4• 33•X 57• 36" 431X 27" 421X 29' INLET TYPE CODING: 1 - CMP/PROJ_ 4 - CP SOCKET/PROD. 7 - CMAP/PROD• 10 - OTHER {SEE A REPOItT HDSNO.5) 3 - CMP/MITER RL 6 - CP SOCKET/HAWALLLLL 9 - CMAP/MDITERL ENTER PIPE # 1: LkNGTH (It } , OUTLET-IE, IM 8T-IE, INLET -TYPE nip?7.T.Y.RE, b8'd D1 j6u3 6uiiinsuo3 rNab NDMd 81111 Z66112Z1b13 C14AJ,.lVAT2 I'DP SAO KING COVIM DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Surface Water Management Division BACKWATER ANALYSIS PROGRAM Version 4.20 4 1 - INFO ON THIS PROGRAM 2 BWCHAN GG S 3 - BWPIPE 4 - BWCULV 5 - RWBOX 6 DATA -FILE ROUTINES '7 - RETURN TO DOS ENTER OPTION BACKWATER COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR OPEN CHANNELS I ENTER [d:][path)filaname[_ext] OF CHANNEL -DATA FILE DISPLAY CHANNEL DATA (Y or N)? OUTFLOW CONDITIONS AT STATION 228.00 TAILWATER DATA: 1) SPECIFY TYPE OF TAILWATER DATA INPUT: S - SINGLE TW-ELEV. jr - TW/!iW DATA FILE 2) ENTER: [d:3[path1filaname[_ext] OF HW1TW DATA -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ENTER: QMIN, QMA.X, QINCRE, PRINT -OPTION (STANDARD=1, CONDENSED -a, EXPANDED=3) STATION 228.00; INVERT- 262.13 FT EC_1.15 O-RATIO= .00 CP.GSS-SECTION DATA: I)IST/STAGE IS MEASURED FROM INVERT; N-FAC IS MEASURED BETWEEN STAGES LEFT(FT) STAGE(FT) N-FACTOR RIGHT(FT) STAGE(FT) N-FACTOR 3.00 .50 .040 * 3.00 .90 .040 18,00 8.00 .027 * 18.00 8.00 .027 Q(CFS) Y1(FT) WS LLEV, * YC-IN YN-IN Q-Tw TW-HT N-YI A-Yl WP-Y1 V-Y1 5.00 .92 263.05 .55 .64 5.00 .92 .037 4.37 7.96 1.14 10.00 1.13 263.26 .72 .62 10.00 1.13 .016 6.07 8.90 1.65 15.00 1.40 263.53 * .96 .97 15.00 1_d0 .035 S.52 10.11 1.76 20.00 1.64 263.77 * _98 1.09 20.00 1.64 .034 10.94 11.18 1.83 25.00 1.85 263.98 " 1.09 1.20 25.00 1.85 .034 13.24 12.12 1.89 56'd 01 J6u3 6utljnsuo3 CN6tl WOMB :I:TT Z661i8Z/00' 30.00 2.04 294.17 * 1.19 1.25 30.00 2.04 .033 15.48 12.97 1.94 35.00 2.22 264.35 * 1.28 1.38 35.00 2.22 .033 17.74 13.77 1.97 40.00 2.40 264.53 * 1.37 1.46 40.00 2.40 .033 20.12 14.56 1.99 45.00 2.56 264.69 * 1.45 1.53 45.00 2,56 .032 22.35 15.30 2.01 50.00 2.72 264.65 * 1..52 1.60 50.00 2.72 .032 24.68 16.01 2.03 55.00 2.87 265.00 w 1.S9 1.67 SS.00 2.97 .032 26.95 16.68 2.04 60.00 3.02 295.15 * 1.66 1.71 60.00 3.02 .032 29.32 17.35 2.05 65.00 2-17 265.30 * 1.73 1.79 65.00 3.17 .032 31.78 18.02 2.05 70.00 3.32 265.4S * 1.79 1.85 70.00 3.32 .012 34.32 18.69 2.04 75.00 3.46 265.59 * 1.85 1.91 75.00' 3.46 .031 36.78 19.32 2.04 80.00 3.60 265.73 * 1.91 1.96 80.00 3.60 .031 39.32 19.95 2.03 $5,00 3.74 265,57 * 1.96 2.01 85.00 3.74 .031 42.04 20.57 2.03 90.00 3.88 * 2.02 2.06 90.00 3.aS _033 44.63 21.20 2.02 9S.00 4.41 266.5d. * 2.07 2.11 95.00 4.41 .031 55.54 23.57 1.71 ****REACH NO. 1: LENGTH= 85.50 FT AVG.GRADE= 1.30% ***" STATION 313.50; INVERT= 263.24 FT EC=1.1S Q-RATIO= .00 CROSS-SECTION DATA: DIST/STAGE IS MEASURED FROM INVERT; N-FAC IS MEASURED BETWEEN STAGES LEFT(FT) STAGE(FT) N-FACTOR w RIGHT(FT) STAGS(FT) N-FACTOR 3.00 .50 .040 * 3.00 .SO .040 21.00 6.50 .027 * 33.00 6.50 .027 Q(CPS) Y1(FT) .WS ELEV. * YC-IN YN-IN YC-OT YN-OT N-Y1 A-Y1 WP-Yl V-Y2 kxxx#****Irk kWkxx##***kkkkrtxxx****.tkkkxxxx*****kkxxxxwwtiex wxxxx*:w*ww"w.�+.+Wwww**� 5.00 ..64 263.88 w .55 .64 .55 .64 .038 2.42 7.24 2.07 10.00 .82 264.06 * .73 .82 .73 .92 .036 2.83 8.73 2.61 15.00 .95 264.19 * .86 .95 .96 .95 .035 .5.01 9:80 2.99 20.00 1.05 26d.29 * .97 1.05 .97 1.05 .035 6.01 10.63 3.33 25.00 1.17 264.41 * 1.07 1.1S 1.07 1.15 .034 7.32 11.62 3.42 30.00 1.28 264.S2 * 1.16 1.23 1.16 1.23 .034 8.61 12.53 3.48 35.00 1,40 264.64 * 1.24 1.30 1.24 1.30 .033 10.14 13.52 3.4S 40.00 1.53 254.77 * 1.31 1.37 1.31 1.37 .033 11.92 14.59 1.35 45.00 1.65 264.89 1.38 1.0 1.38 1.d3 .032 13.69 15.58 3.29 50.00 1.77 265.01 * 1.44 1.49 1.44 1.49 .032 15.57 16.57 3.21 55.00 1.90 265.14 * 1.50 1.55 1.50 1.55 .032 17.74 17.65 3.10 60.00 2.03 265.27 * 1.56 1.60 1.56 1.60 .032 20.04 18.72 2.99 65.00 2.16 265.40 * 1.62 1.65 1.62 1.65 .031 22.48 19.80 2.89. •2.77 70.00 2.30 265.54 1.67 1.69 1.67 1.70 .031 25.26 20.95 75.00 2.43 265.67 1.72 1.74 1.72 1.74 .031 27.98 22.03 2,69 80.00 2.56 26S.A0 * 1.11 1.78 1.77 1.78 .021 30.83 23.10 2.59 8S.00 2.70 26.5_.94 * 1.a1 1.83 1.81 1.83 .031 34.06. 24.26 2.50 90.00. 2.83 266.07 * 1.86 1.87 1.86 1.87 .030 37.20 25.33 2.42 95.00 3.34 266.58 * 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.91 .030 50.80 29.54 1.87 ww"REACH NO. 2: LENGTH= 34.50 FT AV0.43RADE- 1.30% **** STATION 348.00: INVERT= 263.69 FT EC=1.15 Q-RATIO= .06 CROSS-SECTION DATA:' DIST/STAGE IS MERSURED FROM INVERT; N-FAC IS MEASURED BETWEEN STAGES LEFT(FV STAGS(FT) N-FACTOR * RIGHT(PT) STAGE(FT) N-FACTOR 2.00 .50 .040 * 3.00 .50 .040 18.00 5.50 .027 * 18.00 5.50 .027 Q(CFS) Y1(FT) WS ELEV. * YC-IN YN-IN YC-OT YN-QT N-Y1 A-Y1 WP-Y1 V-Y1 98'd O1 j6ug Ducitneuoo rmea NOMd TT:TT L66T/8L/h8 ., yr In **wwwxx****wwxx**+**,rxtr**wwwxxx*+*w*exx*::**wwx***+*wx*x**ww*w***+*wwwxxx•.**r** 5.00 264.33 * .55 .00 .55 .64 .039 2.40 6.97 2.08 10.00 .64 264.51 * .73 .00 .73 .82 .037 3.71 8.11 2.68 15.00 .82 .96 264.65 * .86 .00 .06 .96 1.07 .026 d.89 5.89 S_99 9.69- 3.06 3.39 20.00 25.00 1.07 1.17 264.76 264.96 * .98 1.08 .00 .00 .92 1.08 1.17 .035 .035 6.87 10.32 3.64 30.00 1.25 264.94 * 1.17 .00 1.17 1.25 .035 7.69 10.83 3.90 35.00 1.33 265.02 * 1.26 .00 1.26 1.33 .034 8.55 11.33 4.10 40.00 1.41 265.10 * 1.34 .00 1.34 1.41 .034 9.44 11.84 4.24 45.00 1.47 265.16 * 1.41 .00 1.41 1.47 .034 10.14 12.22 d.dd $0.00 1.54 265.23 * 1.49 .00 1.48 l.Sd 034 10.98 ll.73 12.66 13.04 4.55 4.69 55.00 60.00 1.60 1.66 265.29 * 265.3S w 1.5d 1.61 _00 .00 1.54 1.61 1.60 1.66 .033 .031 12.50 13.42 4.80 65.00 1.71 265.40 * 1.67 .00 1.67 1..71 .033 13.1S 13.74 4.94 70.00 1:81 265.50 * 1..72 .00 1.72 1.76 .033 14.51 14.37 4.82 75.00 1.93 265.62 * 1.78 .00 1.78 1.81 .033 16.21 15.13 4.63 80.00 2.05 265.74 * 1.83 .00 1.83 1.86 2.90 .012 10.01 20.21 15.99 16.77 d_44 4.21 $5.00 90.00 2.19 2.32 265.88 269.01 i.ag 1.93 .00 .00 1.88 1.93 1.95 _032 .032 22.36 17.59 4.03 95.00 2.85 266.54 * 1.98 .00 1.98 1.99 .031 32.17 20.95 2.95 NOTE: WATER DEPTH INFORMATION FOR THIS LAST CROSS-SECTION WAS COMPUTED ASSUMING APPROACH VELOCITIES GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO CROSS -SECTIONAL VELOCITIES - IF NOT THE CASE, WATER DEPTHS CAN BE AD UaSTUD BY SPECIFYING, A - ADJUST. SPECIFY% F - FILE, A - ADJUST. P - PRINT R/D, N - NEWJOB, S - STOP SPECIFY: H - HW/TW DATA FILE, R - ROUTING DATA FILE, E - ESCAPE, S - STOP ENTER [d:j[path]filename(.ext) FOR STORAGE OF mw-DATA COMPUTED. AT STA. 3d8.00: FILE ALREL= EXIST; OVERWRITE (Y or N) 7 ENTER [d:]Lpathlfilename[.eRt3 FOR STORAGE OF HW-DATA COMPUTED AT STA. 348.00: a LB'd 01 .+6u3 6uT`3Tnsuo3 CH9tl NOMd ZT:TT Z66TiBZ1be ANDER6EN • OJTAD . J, nrC, + �•on= MCHOPAW, AK ee - a.5.t'� jr It�� ►r� ,,� oe BPS K � P✓G k t �' �� 5 - Mrft Pam.0. - Z'y/as 0-60vwv s�•+a•.� de.Ny-�„ Aq •- rraawe4wirmw, gar —�44 v 3. r4,72,- PLA VAULT I l C IZZOILLOOZ +-ED llioo WdII.Z ZB—OZ—V OZOL Jotaoaolol MoX;,IA A08" ANDER8EN • &M. NSTAD • KANE • JAB per, terra e s ArU WA iutcNowu sac VW ,40 - ea►-�. r�� - / ..cam - ro 47 Orly 4� a,Fsp ��,��� 0•� V" � bra p, I S�. 3a d� ?�• ,,�f ��: dr`L7 7 f��a 9? ' o,zz3 Ioc ea.�i�r� jots �•: w-76 r d Yacrrql co. �i A3 14G G ; = %o Y 4v Co(r,)-IR doss xs '0312 q S m•tr� �aoip a.5`P �V CAI (ccWw 4 eutdeW- ) F �� �+•��5 $ v'� sfzv 4 4e.r e.,&j �O 2.141 (Doti)' Z,t4 �•alfd�' O.�i? ZA( (*.ouj : O,o4 a C IZZO «Lsoa «'£o 11Ioo : wdt [ : z ; z6-8Z-V : OZOL Jetdonj el XOJOX:Ag A08 It ANDOWN-BJQM43TAD,KAM-JAPM.IN. !�IlWwr GATE o�neo p , LDS ANCELRa, CA ANCHOMRACM AK SUBJ[CPT RKE No. U �2rp �� 7i�L.I�1E�si+rrk, c�t�� � Ti3G, �•3.G,A /gyp 7A17�r� Aiipdt9,2,e.7c evr.K4M#,.: 4e 60wl k) r -- 1►1 "7 tP /zc4w cow rats a ��71,d� P► l wr r7R. - t W- /6t 3 rZm, - , Gomr-O !*3' C.e►�G. tct r I ' E #:IZZOlLd90Z �E� 11I9� WdZk Z Z6-9Z-4 OZOL Jozd000lol xoM A AOd AND9WFN•&K"W3TAD•KAN9•JACp08, INC. e&MN-++w wm� vat w Z. n� 0 0 (21 A-iG -!N ,,rt5'C % tell ce A-m- 2 vit, $ reAs. dn,r-, ;i ? w Glftc*mr ,.v , a9"47, 041V\ - _ • f��ra. �. �� = , sK Via �- ��� s 416 5 (vim V WdEI:Z ; Z6-9Z-t V-T ev t C LUO1669OZ «£D 11Io9 OZOd jatdoaa;al xoaM A A08 .,,,jY •. y, ,.. •' ..,�`.,.�� �. . ` �� 't�• '. � .•'9�i � .:.'$'tF.L •rb i ;:c: (... :,y„r.?:rx, ....... � ._ -- F , AMDMEN•OMRNSTAD•KAMm.jAoow INC. PROJP= oo�nnao�mn OGRE tttt>Q'1L,tt' a LA8 ANGIOOM AK oy r • / t ,f oars -Ir -a --. M' *ArA) P u OW — z X =� t! 7-W s Stop a 5 C LUOLLL90L 4-ED llioo WdE L ; S U-8S-1 ; 030L isTd000 l ei XOJOX;Jk9 AOa 1 i ANDM EN-BWaN>3 O.KANE•jjKXBS, INC. FRUOT eovaucrno.��,. WAMj• w% Lab M041U, CA AMCHORME, AK BU�,IEGY By 49 ell -p s-.- YT , z -727 sr-_ t 7�s�-fce vz'—y� zel /?W , o tjr' Aory 14l"s vim. K vp �, q V. ���_ �•�8s �s "tom g- 002/ a anx Inje i n K 3rs� �a 7M rQ►%Z� 4a�h0� 9 fl;�ZZOL6d90Z "to 11IJ'J Wd4t;3 Z8-8Z-4 030d JoTd000loi XOJOX:AG A08 CURT SMITCH Director 1 i i S STA77+�£ 0 7 •s �i yy1 1869 DY STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE 16018 Mill Creek Blvd., Mill Creek, OVA 98012 April 27, 1992 Mr. Dick Nelson U.S. Postal Service, Facilities P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, Washington 98064-5000 Tel. (206) 7 5-1311 vtscv g �992 ppR 2. RE: LANDSCAPING AND STREAM DESIGN COMMENTS FOR THE PERRINVILLE STATION ON PERRINVILLE CREEK TRIBUTARY TO PUGET SOUND Dear Mr. Nelson: My major concern with this plan is the lack of shrubs or trees on the north side of this stream. Shrubs that could be planted in clumps include: hazelnut, red elderberry; ninebark, salmonberry. I would discourage the use of ivy -for ground cover and use salal and Oregon grape. These plants will provide organic input into the stream and, at the same time, food and cover for birds. In addition, river gravel should be used for the stream so as to provide for a more natural -looking and a more beneficial substrate for aquatic insects. A gravel mix could include a size range from one- half inch to three inches with less than 20 percent the total volume being smaller than one-half inch. Larger eight -inch rock could be interspersed in the channel to help stabilize the gravel. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to review the plans. If you have any further questions, please feel. free tp call me at (206) 774-8812. Sincerely, Philip Schneider l �' Habitat Biologist PS:ks cc: Jim Walker Michael Anderson Ted Muller TO ny O Plierena n f BUILDING DeSION TELEPHONE/VISIT RECORD DATE 7.G,/.k �13 - Sl 7 TIME_ /6/.r PERSON CALLED j j COMPANY G Gh sf TELEPHONE # PROJECT iPO. ll%e,: i.vyMIS RE: AVX e .S a c rUt LurtMMS: ,fi�c-mot �.�-� pia%w� /► ✓jil�ac . G G��t�/ ��� �t'�/� %'�t� 'c,�-,�� ,Zv7-1 CALL TAKEN BY: Srs��ryt�r7t�lra'rik,tfesYir•frit�b�k�r,Mr�t•k�r�kr*�rs��r•k�ic�krs'r�k•Ar,t�lr*s'r�csk�•�Irs+rir4r�*$tdrirfii�rtt�cyk�ftdk�trs���r�fr�irdr�*�t:�lr�lnks�s! VISIT DATE TIME LOCATION PROJECT SUBJECT, WHOM/COMPANY FILE Ml EN- -- — "-` - — CITY REPRESENTATIVE: 0 • IL v Z J N, BUILDING D' -SIGN TELERHONE/VISIT RECORD ................ ._�. y W.. .�'~... DATE 22OTT���E PERSON CALL Ep a'-x�XCOMPANY ::: b o�.�i4nNsr, TELEPHONE #_Ate?,- PROJECT�'v fi'1 t2�J�iu `i F 7 RE: _^I !W '17t t l' 11 'vu 0 tr► ��,�.� -ram.,-ram Ht- -votes'-.c__ FILE COMMENTS: .CALL TAKEN BY: VISIT DATE TIME LOCATION PROJECT SUBJECT WHOM/COMPANY. FILE C M E S:-- CITY REPRESENTATIVE: aw A , 6 -e, Xe� P'I,,, 4.v. fi_2- � CALL. 'TAKEN . BY;':�,. CR.�cGT CII C D PROJECT . l:e............................. PROJ. # F.-4..4q ............................. CONTRACTOR .................... DATE.'t�C:`:..G�.3............... WORKERS ON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M. !?! A4f'..��.°1,i,°,.,,, Gur%, filCGswa�?` �/ . x �c s1l • � . �704. �. U D . �ovf�i �. ............... .... .......... .. ..... .. ... . .. ..... .ice .� ./ pi�.. tv .fib.• .V%!�-iNGr-. `. 25, dZ.�. jr ..� .. .Cd....... . �a .. 7Tfi /ix. . r; lAa......... . ........................................................... Hof ..;...;........,�,000 .o .... gge COMMEJNTTS� (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS)..A. t"�� ........................................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE ..C!....................... DATE/TIME ..��.% � ....... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT f"�!��rr.�•��-�;�f�•� . PROJ. # `..�..�4��'•i .................... CONTRACTOR................................... ....... DATE .....1�:. z z :.. ��......... . ................. WORKERS ON SITE....< .Grp :........................ ............... ........................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE... .....f.......:.................................. ..���..s............ TEMPERATURE •••• ...................... WEATHER .��-��':............... o� �• •� DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ...���°`� •..................... . ............. ...fin a r... , .... L"/ai, .�.... ���� �... lei. rrzca.,� . • - . . �� ��. C�� . �-fi• ram! .. �-c�r-� ...S�' - • • �^��'�� ..... 4 .. 4K... .. .......................' .......................... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS).... 77 FOLLOW-UP TESTING .................................................... ..............� ........................... !-? . -"-? ._R`7, PROJECT F .���................... PROD. # � 4 4f............................. CONTRACTOR. .................... DATE. J�.�G`� 1.................... WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENTON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) I�:`!L�........................................................ K ca.?. ............. ....:..1�t.�^�..Vi a. . . ....... ....... ......... ..... .... ... Wi'b4H . OA-5.. V f..i '.:"...G:'.1.. -F 6 ...L .t',ioo `TZ <9 IZtr, r-I��It-!& . Gd. git .... ��..'�.. t+ : .:+ !�:�.. t-a ter.. +�T? 1 . ,.z- .......... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ f �.��...., ..{C-�, , �'.. Ike, .. (►J��?g""�'►"� .l'47"v' . !�!�P� ..1:�1... . ..... . ... .... ..... ..... Mon ...goqt,&- , , F !T . tbiyV . N:. T. f).W.. ....T-T� - o ...... . �"':':'..�►.+:1 . . gip*0� FS°f25v� .f.. �,.r.7,........ ........... .... !......... . ....t wS. �:KY .....��.. .i� , ms. , �►.n/S,..t : �.... , L..sO.N..S.Gct�7�v�• ;l t �. �� . i�..Y �;, ri : s . IN qi?� , w� , ,ice; ! why �0 .1 plo.. A. X. p-LQ... . yam.. I-E?�...�1 ... . .x� 1 . z-..W.*a. ?.. kv' ...................................... . CITY REPRESENTATIVE ...V...! .............. DATE TIME........... .......... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT ....0/... Ci'.............. PROJ. #.00.4?........................... CONTRACTOR .......................................... DATE.. No.v..I................ WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENTON SITE....................................................................... ........................................................................................ WEATHER ...... ........ TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M. , '.�,�.�`�.. 7.::r..-. .................. ...... . . COMMENTS �(``CONVERRSSATIONS,FIELD PROBLEMS) .................................................. .... .......:.lc �Gc���� ..:...� /"J'—.�lflG.................. ........................................................................................ /W- . � ......�.............................................................. . FOLLOW-UP TESTING ..................................................... ............... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE .................................. DATE/TIME....................... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT .... °sue. : ................ PROJ. # .44 ? ............................ CONTRACTOR .......................................... DATE. .( 1� ................. WORKERS ON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE....................................................................... .`:`z�l�T,�f Ai . A. f:f�:`'7. •TEMPERATURE• WEATHER ... ........................................ DAILY?; ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) e'?qD/04.S.................................................. ....................... ... 72�..�'�' . l�'�c.- .................. ..................................... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ..................... ...... ITY REPRESENTATIVE .:':".... .. .....:''.............. .•DATE/TIME.....::e�� PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT Qom .................. PROJ. #.Vd9............................. CONTRACTOR ... . ......................... DATE V CrT ':.................. WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENTON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ...................//........ TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.)/�`Rd........................................................ ... �`;d �vG7�LC�?? ... .. ITl]. �Tf'`. jA...��.�'C�L.'.if7�Ll:........... . .... l5.ra6..��.:1:�°'�. uond COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... .............................. ....................................................... CITY REPRESENTATIVE .. ..4 ...... G .......... DATE/TIME ..................... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT ,`.:fQ�:'�..�..... PROJ. # ...�¢...................... CONTRACTOR 6.! . .. qO?�re. . !7!fJP !'. 914��,r DATE ... AD r ......... WORKERS ON SITE A)jvG.r. ..?`................................................ ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITE N. Yem............................................................. WEATHER .. A.. TEMPERATURE ... Q.�!l.. c.4 /.. ........ . DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M. ) . .....�.. /0X.Ae5t� .......... ............................................................................. COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REP.RESENTATIVEE�%�/.�.�..�, .. ��� DATE/TIME.�I0-l...; '? ...��. . PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT 8?-S�.O ................ PROJ. # ...4�`.�:1 ...................... CONTRACTOR 6•� ..6MT... .................. DATE..© P.R.11........... WORKERS ON SIT �)Z.."'�"%%..T1/, el- Ar..�.......................... .............. ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITE���ll�. rY.�/.L' ................ ..................... WEATHERL�:Q�l..pk�"/.':/.. TEMPERATURE':�P./... DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) J . i��.lei< . d.'.eoriot............................................ ...................................................................................... .C!S.K. e.!? A rJ.... pr..,�.��!??�fe.�olC�J�.7`�/.:.r.✓!�.t��f4.. COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ....................G....../........ �.......p..................................o............... . CITY REPRESENTATIVE'- .VZi/7/eel,-..j6..r.. (/. ��1, ..... DATE/TIME.��..Ol '.1. .. . PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT Cl ... PROJ. # .... ACFR4 l ...................... CONTRACTOR .C����ARWII ...................... DATE..../ ^ �.. �............ WORKERS ON SITE��)%��.�r�./Q1U��,/ �4!�c�i��j��',��Lcj�J,O/; ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITEP..r.............................................. WEATHER 091n.9..4M .lf4 ���/C! TEMPERATURES. :�.-Val.,:5ab DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) -4f.h.//I. ....................................... ........................................................................................ .. yam..1l,el.lhiq ............................... ........................................................................................ &.4 wry!. .Qo� .:tocl'lx ... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE .�_ .4,eAAfa-..ao. ..... ... DATE/TIME./�}: 0..l:'. f ..... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT .F067 . 0) C6C ......... PROJ. # .. �p�..... ................. CONTRACTOR �. �:s`r':...................... DATE../n jx .. z ........... WORKERS ON SITE. A! �.;O. C� .. <Y.Q/ .... 3— �qe (n.. ��................ . ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITE&I'✓(247/ ... N.0. V.�...... 6..®O...... .... .................... TEMPERATURE q/q� . ...r ............�..�... �.WEATHER A :� .;3�!°a?.��! . DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.).,..�i../%%)..Q...�p�.......................... ........................................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PRO LEMS)Xw..0...... ..P1 �. . fn�r l f�l . walcr. .. r..drldMa 4 el.. �,b��/................................................... . FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... CITY REPRESENTATIVE DATE/TIMvo.::�4�`. �..... . PROJLOG/TXTFORMS 0 • PROJECT ............. PROJ. # ....E �2 45.; ..................... CONTRACTOR ..Ci 2�4 .. C044� r. �....... DATE. 40 . �.�y�:............ . WORKERS ON SITE ... l�.%c��........ ... Q71.=�J.. N ............. ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITE. xa :3D. alln... A_!.4 V4......a`>..�.�J,D ....... y 0716 7.........p).Y.�igj.�0 ...... �Q, ..... . 3` �............ WEATHEP.. .., ... .441!v .R . TEMPERATURE ........ .. ................. DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ................................................ ........................................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS)..AVO.. eaf,0 a4l ln4. /. . .......... /olo ............... . FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE .CI� ..:. C-!7Kr.DATE/TIME../O::..�?Z .... . PROJLOG/TXTFORMS • PROJECT ............ PROJ. # ... 4�0.�.V ....................... CPNNTRACrOR /L.,D,C �! �. .... ..... DATE .. �Q:16 — �. ............... WORKERS ON SITE�F�/..4 z/r?or..G .. l/� -r�� 1�,1 ► �/t. �A �..1 i<��.,n.? .Q�rVl.�l ........................... . EQUIPMENT ON SITE'r7�)���%f7.��`l[/f?fS!�'p►!!��.�'1'I�,CLi� A0G.44e...... .................... . WEATHERP✓ G i .%%�� . ! �./%J.. TEMPERATURE V `:�?4 .. DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) 4A.Yll,*I&. AT.,tl� 5...o Sr...1!S6F��77 Z �o/o ./.V. 4&%/O.A1 W(4,2E Ro.h.7XV10-27. o r .................... . ................. ......................................................................................... COMMENTS (CONVERS'ATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS).".,,... �.1 C.l ov?. .. 15:3Q6.7.7r. .�O &)a elf?.(e . le.� mwl hl?. . ©.�:. 4.1?. vazl. nre..pr_�.fgl........................................... . FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... CITY REPRESENTATIV DATE/TIME. 6 .:16 %fe",..... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT ... PROJ. # ....................... CONTRACTOR G� ��.�'- IASIP7 E`a�VST ....... DAT ..�Q.':4,� �r............ . WORKERS ON SITE 0... P� a.���--�n9MA� ll-7rz J ... . IQ C F� rf)4a�Wr .................................. EQUIPMENT ON 4 4q' . v.................................. .................. . WEATHER gIOT AM . ................ TEMPERATURE `e'4P X A5.. ..................... l. DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M. ) Z�%7 �y.I.%J :'- 7., ........ ..... 4 ............ .APMe-IN. 6 .0A1_Z7��?�9e�!L//l,%�7./. G ��.4&..l�.-�`. �.......................... ........................................................................................ ........... ........................................................................................ ..4.1.4 4EE7 �! ........... . ........................................................................................ ........................................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS)./�L�..P�,/J..T.�OJ�I..TI.'� oir-Alz,wa r, ........ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATI4-�l.�!!� fir: !. AZI ..... DATE/ TIMEI.Q:'`/S�::9z....... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS 0 • PROJECTbf��.I.'1.� .. .. .. PROJ. # ...--�.•P ...................... C0NTRACT0Re�4�ia .BOA. 4 7.-2rgjj�4/af'45....... DATE....14.: Jam.. .... .... WORKERS ON SITEN'c 4. ,1.�, � LqAeeP............................................. ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITE.�l.P!�;..7.!.......................................... ....................................................................................... ¢- p o WEATHER(A!7?). DVE�CA-.C�.�.%�) TEMPERATURE .7J.� �I .. .:C�. �I��% ............ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.)A�.C-r:q!��.�P. .o.p%A1Qp�S.<? !�-..Q.!�./.. �:!� ............................ ......................................................................................... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS). lY!'i... Zfp121M. /7iGA7. loal) . �..41kl� .. bo.uf. 47��r.!gin .Qr..dr. ...................... y FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE/��...:.<�:!��..... DATE/TIMEf�.:E`7 ^< PROJLOG/TXTFORMS , V.1, 0 • PROJECT e0T..QFF.I .. ... PROJ. # .....��.................... CONTRACTORt%F451di . ........... DATE..... ! d..l ^ :.9 ....... . WORKERS ON SITE/.P EQUIPMENT ON SITE&)4 , .4l�%(i ��.�..................... �........ .....o .................. WEATHER (,�l[,l�/�c�/n).�l�lt�i. TEMPERATURE ��// .... ............. . A . DAILY ACTIVITY (A. ./ . `� .r,Ol�/��tp..�,f�i..�L%l'Q�� 7 e a yr, ell ,; /I .. /'n /.. 4 0 ay ........................................................................................ .0. axo o .. o. rlf/ Q! :,la 4�./.o. �qw ......................... ........................................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ..�4-!Q... ,/��--�.5f.���:���. T/^� .......... �..�.,,........................................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................... ............................ . CITY REPRESENTATIV G ..�- :'�'e�..... DATE/TIME. /al* .l.7V ....... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS 0 0 PROJECT.`7.C.�'i ... PROJ. # ........................ CONTRACTOR r�.�/. `1-G .. . ..DAT WORKERS ON Ga be, >eN6 EQUIPMENT ON SITE(l),-'e eg lim .� 0�6, (/1 �G Il ij;'�� ��.11✓!� � J WEATHER ./� !�'I. �n%. ..... TEMPERATURE S.V. ,4M . ...... . p: ............. . DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ..0.;.,�/� ..... ')OS. r WA&/WA ffln-l� .. 710.!A4a4�n tdo.. o—..we' p�w�.Iv.jay r............................................ ........................... '4. x4e. .aaye/I ....................... .......................... ............. I .. COMMENTS. (CONVERSATIONS, • FIELDPROBLEMS). . )jo... C(„1���.f:. �.%1 �rl�/a � . . .................................................... ........................................................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE /�.. �l��........... DATE/TIME �r�...� ��... /.Y..... . PROJLOG/TXTFORMS 0 • PROJECT �.G. .......... PROJ. # ........................ CONTRACTOR ...................... DAT/.�:":/. /. Z ................. WORKERS ON (?)o.�04w............................................................ ........... EQUIPMENT ON SITE(Z)&MOe(et,.� �l 4:Ohpli C4, ................ ................. o o . o o .... .............. o . . . . . . o . . WEATHER .................... TEMPERATURE 7 7AIn) . .......................... DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) !Q �i��. �.�,��,�. , ;f"P.aY/Cidl..104ed o . ......................... ........................................................................................ awr.z1.f o�??.s�Gie.. ��.o. aSmc.rrariw�..�he...��<�re�l� .o.?�.:.�fi.�.u.���.: /ter. �........... ........................................................................................ f......:. ........................................................................................ ................................................................... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ...................................................................0............0....... CITY REPRESENTATIVE DATE/ TIME. 107(?::y.Z ..... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS 0 • PROJECT . Q 'f. Q �.J ......... PROJ. # ... �......................... CONTRACTORta-xW.4/10 .�j�: DATE...`4�...7._4�4........... WORKERS ON SITE..�l.. %1J.:-�I........................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE. ............................................ ........................................................................................ WE AT HER4ZMl2r_$ttk) .............. TEMPERATURE ,J. ............ ............ DAILY ACTIVITY(A.M./P.M.) � oy� ....................... ........................................................................................ ........................................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PR0BLEMS),�1l/ �/.��.��.�l�.c. <.�rf�' .�-�.✓�. ��14C1.`/ A"--%?a1. �' �1--..� r� ................................... FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... CITY REPRESENTATIVE 4-1.A.)eoe ...... DATE/TIME...rC ::/.:-.�. .... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT .�,04�! . �! /..G.�.t../.......... PROJ . # ........................ CONTRACTOR ., .................... DATE.. fD::�7..q`5.............. WORKERS ON SITE. .......................................... ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITE.�I.�%%G,r..QJ�...�P. �rl.:.................... .................... ............................................................... ........................ a WEATHER 9ts �%` �.�U�.f.P�% TEMPERATURE 5e514. vp.. .................. .. .. DAILY ACTIVIW' (A.M./P.M.)7� aid a j zi�� P 1h.......... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ....................................................................................... CITY REPRESENTATIVE !��...�4-44�'�%%��... DATE/TIME.A05 :4.7-11=.... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT �i..Q �'. ..... PROJ. # ............... el- ... .................... CONTRACTOR :':� 711161.e. � � f P��i.��:�1.� �L'r/ . i% . DATE. ®.. `�..c. % .�............ . P WORKERS ON SITE(f)7.�O./. Ci./7 ,.14�j��.l.� (�� fr(1L`.'/.'C�/ .1. ) /Qr5.......... ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITE��55'f�.lC-C3.(r��.11l`,ri�%�"�:r1�7�.���%//�/. . POVv........................................................................... . WEATHER &6.fho)............... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) �j.,�a4✓.% ... .171t1tv .a)..aad. .:�.qat..... 11ri, .hAml. �4y_ox j?. �� .:` . ................................................. COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVErGl�rC% �. C '' �:- ..... DATE/TIME.AQ 5.. / .`�....... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT C . /.047":t :! .G.'�.:............ PROJ . # ... ,. ��. � ....................... CONTRACTORS. ��L�cl'. G�B,/,7,! ,/„�`��it1!�! `'P4�!.... DATE .. J i-� ..G7: ............ . WORKERS ON ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON S IT EJ��.�.'���.�ss�1��?p�,Y��f�.. <�,1/�G' flT .. D�G.'Par. . ............................... ..................... . WEATHER r�lMIMI TEMPERATURE ................... DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.);r,(�Q��%y elm Ali-A�clW .................................. ........ * . * .. ✓.r�rya,���r..5.��f��rr. 9/rrrrr7y..7G.f�..�..`�0� ........................................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS .zio..��%Q�J�,�a/.��,,��:a . . ..... !✓.�� JLI �41: Ile.,d./.a J ./ ! Y.Y.��S-l.Q.! �1�YJ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... CITY REPRESENTATIVE_ZZ(R s .L9. '. .... DATE/TIME `-?r 9L.......... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS .. PROJECT ®J. ... <1.� ........ PROJ. # .... 4 .. ....................... CONTRACTOR ..�i'. .. .Pl-a.1��.'.�..... DATE...��. �_.`:[ .�............... . WORKERS/ON SITE��rrIPMI%.(,f�� iCq,I�.QS. / � �f ............................... . EQUIPMENT ON ............. ./�.............. ..................................................... WEATHER EMPEKATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ..... ✓. G1f1�7 .. l ..�J..l�...49 ": .. .. . . .. .. .................... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... - o* CITY•REPRESENTATIVE,!....:...............•.DATE/TIME `�..-.!:.�t PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT ............ PROJ. # .. .4-..�.7 ...................... CONTRACTOR//.',��l..�s!�.�1`....................... DATE.... :.� �':......... WORKERS ON SITE!��0.��.1f3'lCMG.Br........................... ......................................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE(V 4/4il`w.zce7Rv/f%��................................... ............................................................ .......................... WEATHER �!1,C-1'f��jj�A./.�� ........ TEMPERATURE6/*N.). ............................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.).(i���G://��/9..I!�Q�%�Q��r..%I%.��/y/l% .� 04�'.�?�.�.�?�%1.���%l.Ql/l% . y 7 'w ................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVEtD4/,4A�� ..• ..G.'L� . .... DATE/TIME..-. �r. ... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT "/........... PROJ. # ...��..¢�...................... CONTRACTOR DATE .... 9::'.......... WORKERS ON SITEC�,I./:(`:'l/.%��1.11/��'if��lYQ.:�?��1�.................. .... ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON ........................ ......................................................................................... WEATHER .................. TEMPERATURE ............ ......... . DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M. ) � 4!; .. Gcl� . Qu'�d��:..���.. t.�D�? ..r�'�........................... . COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW—UP TESTING ..................................................................... ...........................................o................................/.............. CITY REPRESENTATIVE�l%'�%�,F.. �:.G-�lrlA�-.... DATE/TIME..9:J�T���...... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT i�C r� C.j.` .T.rG�... .. PROJ. # ....L�. .yY ..................... CONTRACTORfS�Cl%L' �'UCJ.��9P�S.�'-�. /-� .... DATE. ..�::7..�.l.1�............ . WORKERS ON SITE AForm-at7. 13..��.�%��........................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITFCi/`�,' ::��'/` � �!�r� �IGG1 L,l �L�.%1�I.7 L•� 4el-11IL-7 e, A1cve..................................................... ........................ WEATHER ,�L,�l�..................... TEMPERATURE .. .��Il%%.. ......../53"............... DAILY ACTIVITY(A.M./P.M.)L%'��/,,,/,%I�/,i/,1 rI.�?1�. w ................... .......... ......................... . ... dory�.� ... � ��<1`.c�12. X.�tdz*. / 4b.. xt;r ...4!5w,1........ . ........................................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE,C�/S�.�F.G-�..-.�... DATE/TIME.. �r�?`U.�.�j. .. PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT ............ PROJ. #.A�49......................... CONTRACTOR ..41PA-2:5 T...................... DATE... g..�. ::.1 ............ WORKERS ON SITE(�)f:,(?Vad.(2)QPIeV4-Ve!:!;(2).T1T��.,priV4/.'��?.(t�.z - g - 0�.t.... ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITF�/)A_>_4 °ld.f �.!t� le-l- �lCll &........................... ........................................................................................ p� u WEATHER .!�/i ........... TEMPERATUR E.-1 M ............................. DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M. ) .��. .�./.l. y...�l�. l�:�af ..4? 0( .................... 7.0 re. 44 ..45 e4. AMed .. .................. . COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE.i.�I�-c.:..� .. • DATE/TIME.c- �• ...... . PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT ...4� . 0.?. G(Z ......... PROJ. # ... �.o.`.Iq ...................... CONTRACTOR/�l./.WO�Q�,�:�� ....... DATE...JJ. .......... WORKERS ON SITE.-:r).--/4Y r-/;% ./.jr(/'G.%%1�/.� f l�l !��......................... ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITE���:�af�i�.%��G.YIiZ��/�f .......... .............................................................. ........................ WEATHER ON) TEMPERATURE P. ............. . DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./ .M.)l� r ........................................................................................ armo."... ........... 0 0 ZA ..... o .. oov ........................................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS). .. ................................... FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ....................... ............. ............................................... CITY REPRESENTATIVE .. .. ...... DATE/TIME.. %.7Q_. ........ PROJLOG/TXTFORMS 0 • PROJECT 17�.74.......... PROJ. # ........................ CONTRACTOR 17i, .. . C�O/I f ..... DATE .... /..- ��........ WORKERS ON L�®.VG��................................................ ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITE(/.)F�!o' q............................. .............................................................. ........................ �o ��►►--� WEATHER�� �l� � �I).. TEMPERATURE o� . o�.YI'll00000loll DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M. ) JlW_14w...4C. .. .2 g .�..l�.........J ......... loll ..._................................................ . ........ /vo ...o....r„..... ....... t�� v ......... ol.%� ... ..... ......... ......... ......................................... ..... ....:......................... ....... ..... lot' ....................................................................................... ...................................................................................loll. , COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW—UP TESTING....................................................................... ............................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE �l/.;W,� ��'�=:�- .4... DATE/TIME. 67. . P..— &l PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT �.�..�r..!!�.......... PROJ. # .... ..-_/...................... CONTRACTOR y %'/. lCr . C. 7W4:. t..................... DATE. . /� ............ WORKERS ON SITE.! ............................................ ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON!C... . ............................. ................••..••.....•••..•••..................................................... WEATHER ... 142�l .......... TEMPERATURE &5gm . . ,% . h ............... . DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) . %17.1M. 1, zZp / :.. 04�.)4rt .lil.yGewy`..� o .`• .................... . ?b. �eclhp.�drs ................. ........... ..�? .4170. om��.. . R 7v�- �ia� ...... . . .... ...... ......... . ... . . . .. ... .. . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . I . .. ....... � .... .. .. ........ %� .. . • • • • • . • • • • • • • . • • • . • • .n• • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • . • • • • • • • • • • . • .. • • . *I* . . .. .. i • .. .... • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • . • • • . • • . • • • • .. • • . . • • . • • • • • • .. . ...... • • • • .. • .. . . ... . . • . • . • . • . . . . • . . • . ... .. ..... . . . • . . .. • .. • • .. • • • . • . • ....... . • . • • • . • ... • • • • . • • • • • • I I I • • .. • • ..: • • 6 o • . COMMENTS (CONVERSATION FIELD PROBLEMS)........... . .� .5 ... . • . • . • .. • • • U._� . • . .. . • • • • . . . . • • • • . �... . • . • .. • . • .... . • . ........� ........... FOLLOW-UP •TESTING..lhe4h.�VIC�C✓ ..fo wo /c ...... • • . cn. .. • •�.. y � CITY REPRESENTATIVLZ,. .4-.4^o .... DATE/TIME.. ......�. .. PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT ............ PROJ. # . r�.-V4 .......................... C0NTRACT0RA/.lid4. 61114 DATE ............ . WORKERS ON ...................................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE >rJ ez�o/'Zl�. ........................................................ WEATHER ....,k/f .................. TEMPERATURE 410'4177............................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) %��.F% ���.L.����A.0.................. ..�. . .,f.?t..?.:....�/.'}1........................ . .. .............. ........................................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) 'av,6le4ou. y FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVEa/% ..4-!..a.4IYe..... DATE/TIME...'?." ATE/TIME...!.�..9 ...... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS 0 • PROJECT�..Q�`:��'_ .......... PROJ. # .....��. :-t-"/....................... CONTRACTOR M�' Zl ... DATE.... 17.fI5� ............... WORKERS ON SITE�1�F��C,I.C.�Of��I2�11�1.�........................... ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITEO G.'4 f�? 1 XL 1/100171......................... ........................................................................................ D WEATHER .................. TEMPERATURE .............................. DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.)lT.+'..�.��i%C� ..J`.✓/.� .. �,�rr�.. ,�...�/.ZKi.!'J . JP.� r-�..��.f.� .. �. ..'L.��'1a.� .......... .................. /wo 20;!". . 104o�44 o wo &4/4v Apo ---o 140 4v.ol� .44,000 � ........................................................................ . COMMENTS. (CONVERSATIONS, • FIELD • PROBLEMS) .A/fl.. ..!vt'. ..,��6�.�.s.................................................................. . FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE A! .�-..._ ! .. DATE/TIME.!..-!/` .... :...... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT .......... PROJ. # ... ....................... CONTRACTOR .... �'75�. . ............. DATE. ............... WORKERS ON SITE...!%���'.%.1,V�...�J..:,`:.......................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE. s�ggtn4%..4Z. .... ."/.J�._. y....................................... ........................................................................................ WEATHER .................... TEMPERATURE ................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M. ) ��.E....7/./...�I.%D!�1.+�.�.�i............... ..................................................................... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... .......................................................................................... CITY REPRESENTATIVEti�4,�f�.�..�- ..... DATE/T1IME...�.71475 �-. . PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT ; ...<6K/ cG fir.......... PROJ. # ... :�D � ......................... CONTRACTOR .. l�.Q/'.%%Q�'.. �0�1�`.�:...:-�.J.�-rl...... DATE... !J�..%.............. WORKERS ON S I T E .I,l`,. �D.%�i��l�,�pT�.S�.�1�.� ......................... ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITE.NFiA-M 'X�.'�-�'. (.*'7'^r Weer.&). riz/GA ........................ ........................................................................................ WEATHER .. (I .................... TEMPERATURE.A�.7.9................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ........................................ .......................................................................................... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS). ... ... ✓. Y� .���.�%........ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ....................................................................../.................. CITY REPRESENTATIVE`DATE/ TIME.�f ��.../....... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS 9 PROJECT .ems 1.4 066 C e........... PROJ. # ......................... CONTRACTOR ..4VAC . DATE... :'`�%:`,��,.............. WORKERS ON SITEVY'.-�1Q ..dal') iXjoi./��C�2)4la'p1�....................... ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITjeA ................................. WEATHER!?,i�! • • • • ............ TEMPERATURES¢ .ar. • • • ..! ............... DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M. ) 7%T.7.!�'.Q�/.�i.!/�i� .4�! :-- ................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE�,041✓4�. fir. 47.--.1.. X�<....... DATE/TIME.:7.`:1���.......... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS 0 9 PROJECT PO:! 17. .1.c,��..�........ PROJ. # ....... CONTRACTOR ����..�G . CV11.1`. r. .. DATE ... /..7..1.�:. . . WORKERS ON SITE.., IW6...a.1r...................................... ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITE... (1� -�.. - 1................................... ............................................................... ........................ WEATHER I&f��x/�/��9!�%?%P./'�. TEMPERATURE 6_7' O RAY% ............. DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ././tlT.7.'/.�:..�.0&.�................. :............................ ........ ........................................... 7-XAlm s�"Ylr............ ........................................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS).1���LJ..:�./✓I..Gili�.�..... Ll q 2 /. . I � lrl)4fa ... (!,49W ..................................................... FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIV�J.�....'..�� DATE/TIME. ...�........ PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT Fc?,57...Ox5RC_�............ PROJ. # ...: .4 ....................... CONTRACTOR ..... �/.'.�% .� .... ....... DATE ... �:4Q` .Z.............. WORKERS ON SITE..��.�'.1�G�..:� ".r�.:-p.�:g.2....................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE..... ' ;�J . JZ ................................................... ........................................................................................ a WEATHER ................. TEMPERATURE ............................... DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ,%`�,11.�..�/.�Q!.r% . . /4.1, ........................................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ..� :�17T.��:�CI.�.G`-� .Ane�ll�� :. . le c KIZ.�........... .................................... FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... CITY REPRESENTATIVE C.�,f ..�Ll.YA . .-...... DATE/TIME..: FQ.��.�-'........ PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECTr ......... ......................... .. CONTRACTOR AK�I TI- . I . 2�47er........ DATE .... ........... WORKERS ON SITE..4�1./. %::?.!A ..6.: 31� C7......................................... ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON ....................................... ................................................................................. ...... ��vv WEATHER ..�,f�% .�%��.��! .. TEMPERATURE ..� . -��. ..1.� .. .... . DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ��.f�'.rr:!'�f.C�Q�,If%.la.�.�.`��.............. z,ftrekl. � /1� i �.&Tm?4................................................... e.�t..��ll len.�.fh..t!���r. V., 9.1f. C ................................................................. .......... ........................ ................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS).4-�F7- �.�i%r ..�L� / �/V........ ........................................................................................ FOLLOW-UP TEST ING.�*;V/4,17.l `.f0/7.. �fCG .J�/i1G��'.. ©;`; ,J.CIf%%.. ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE �/S457..DATE/TIME.. :9.. lz......... . PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT ................ PROJ. # . � a.4-. I ......................... . CONTRACTOR ,i`�.�.%2 C-'...4 � .V-� A .... DATE... ?:`f. ..- � ............. WORKERS ON SITE.. / .&-.:V-Y&............................................. ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITE..t�7Ql�l�/.�.1/ :�1,......................................... ....................................................................................... WEATHER l> .� �. TEMPERATURE 6929' 0) . . 4.f i A .............. DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) 71.'T"/...'.lJ/.�4.���G�.�-�...Q.�%�:r!l�%rf. J 10,7 Aw....... Go .r. . r .14 .:00 ................... . ......................................................................................... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD l ........................................................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING. l?/� Q/% 4��` .II��G%/c.w. . b. ................. ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIV:�,IC��,�/ ..��........ DATE/TIME..!. 5* �1 E/,�(I�.......... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT Ur",7:'./..�.......... PROJ. # ....'�¢ 1'...................... CONTRACTOR �,eQ�:'�fE�r.......... DATE ... �':.� .�r�............... . WORKERS ON SITE.4!kZV ,.4445'.. 7.3 ........................................... ........................................................................................ 43o. EQUIPMENT ON SITE.J�.?..�..c'1.7..:......................................... ................................................................ ....................... WEATHER .lP4!/7.................. TEMPERATURE ......................... DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) �ac.of . ..... ...................... ...................... .......... ..... . ........................................................................................ ....2,.. 4a�frQ�fo.�. ........................................................................................ COMMENTS • (CONVERSATI O. • , • FIELD. PROBL EMS[.. !. -W�. eAfd,�. Z.�lZ%`.. htfxi .... Zda'-040e, 40atll _t44w&a,1 v 41-2�- -A��X!plolzl .41,65!ei4e p9/,m5;6 &, l;-& ej-, oe-emw-� s-11-lal�m ...................... ....................................................................................... ...... ...`..i : ��./�. r"r" .. Qom.... S/�.�.�.�% . i. so�J................ . ell, FOLLOW-UP TESTIN ��'�T.O{.�..l�,ll,� . .P./.1../.�-.�sr�a.!�. CITY REPRESENTATI19 ,�Xdiil�.:Fl ��r�.......... DATE/TIME...`...��.. ...... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS 0 9 PROJECT ���5/... Q. ACi4fe ............ PROJ. # ... `�..T,r!....................... CONTRACTOR?�a.Mde..��f�./. .................. DATE...:�..7.g .............. WORKERS ON ......................................... . ...................................... .......................... .................. ...... EQUIPMENT ON SITE......1........................................ ........................................................................................ TEMPERATURE Lo.o�,��l�....<<....�. .. . DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M. )��f.7 /.. ��o.�..%�.�.��. . QP�Ilh.... ............................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... .....................'....�................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIU2��...&94�......... DATE/ TIME. .I.... .. %. ........ PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT 1% 6A. l l i.... ...... PROJ. # ....�`� .��................... CONTRACTOR �Y.% :Cl��.�J�.l.!.................. DATE... �. P.7. �? ............ WORKERS ON .......................................... . ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITE. .................................6. 66 ........................................................................................ WEATHER' �il�.�U./1 �Pj� ..... TEMPERATURE..../.�.............................. ` T-- DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) 7,,�,�FJ.�,(�.. �f%��Q/ ./. /7���1.� ".....��; . . ��Q! .��. / 'r ✓c�?�e. -'sp�W,e719M.4.� ........................ ....... . /.��� ...�.--�1.1�. 4� ................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, • FIELD • PROBLEMS).... 0... ..�.`:.��................. .................. .�. . � . . � . FOLLOW-UP ..1. Ql�S.r............... ................ .QQ���J CITY REPRESENTATIVE ... ..� .. DATE/TIME `94?j r......... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT S f c,�>, 'C ................ PROJ. # ... 1 ..................... CONTRACTOR /E .�lSiA..G..C:��.�f alq� ......... DATE .... 9 /.. 1.................. WORKERS ON SITE..�A.4—.?.3.:� 9............................................... ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITE.*/Ig-.�:.......................................... WEATHEf��%�%L?�!..'.. I. ........ TEMPERATURE �P.2 � . ........ ............ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) A < e?!r?: ............................... . ."0001. 4irg�z1� e : i. �n V ./oar �! . .f .... ..... fir. ..I... . r•9 ../. t . �.. 2p o �?.... . .................. . .. .. �?rs........................................................... . COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ ........................................................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING.. ..� .'ov . cal ...................... CITY REPRESENTATIVeE!�� .�.�........... DATE/TIME. F.. 179:� ......... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT ./. t QT—T-!G{�r:............ PROD. #..................................... CONTRACTOR . ............. DATE..6. :,M::4Z? . ............. WORKERS ON • EQUIPMENTON.SITE�f,/• ��,P/�Xl�'a�%C!��?:G;.l%.4 �C w1ca ei .................. ......................... WEATHER 0YgI.'4a.4 �4�. „S�/t1'fO TEMPERATURE �.� .. .:� � P ............... DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ................. o per. ........................................................................................ ..r174. i//,!fi®W a/v/Ipsl�layf'y.,i .Ae j -. %o/1X4. A � K� � - COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS)..Q�.J11��Ts�.�f�?.GlI�.Q'1�.. .. ............ FOLLOW—UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE .40i�................ DATE/TIME. .. .<.. ......... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS • 0 PROJECT �................. PROJ. # �............................ CONTRACTOR ... DATE A .....!..Z................. WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) 4-10................................................... ....... �/: ...oww!!.�T!/��.�cr,-�l.t%� %�,CQ�►�.G/J/J61� �dJ� .. <!::�'` .. ma`s' �f `,w...: .....!' '-?7�!� % iJ. ��2 17� /� .. ...... .. .. ..... ... ...... ;.??T;. Gue;S !.i eye:.-,?'�' .. �f �-- �' , 4�Jf ;�I. , t :cJZYI ..... . ... f .. Gdi... !�E`:b."I�............................................. . COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... CITY REPRESENTATIVE .... .............................. DATE/TIME..`..:. ..`.......... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS • PROJECT .� f r.................. PROJ. # ............................. i CONTRACTOR ...... ...... DATEI�...� ?.................. WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.)Po-A....................................................... tw�r-• 07, /vle : iwng, ,�,l?ov�;/�j9��,r� f eu .C� , ,;[!• .!.?`�' .. . o l F �• 5�/�� � Z�" - �ir7,e ........................................................................................ 12�3 .......... ... ........ ...... .... .... ............... . 1......�..... ....... /....., ....... , ... o T1J cL" ,�rl� ... �o ...... GJ�l7v�s . �y9� .7Z f� . �..�!�?.:.1?? ...... . . ... ... .. .. ....... ... ........... ,�•.. r/a� 1,17 �44 , ,1rrih�� �r1ZT?11, a......................... . .... ................... ....... .... ... .. .. . .......... .. r A ��S�')��OC.................. FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... CITY REPRESENTATIVE ......... ......... .............. DATE/TIME... Imo..'........ PROJLOG/TXTFORMS • PROJECT ST .................. PROJ. # ......... .................... CONTRACTOR .......................................... DATE. !�.Z %./.�.Z................. WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.)............................................................. .l.??!N�� , por�•�s: o�..-%�..�...,�. ,�a�;e�y , .X:<�,�.r, . =. ....... . .... ... . . .. . . 7�... ...... j..?3 , ... ! ../..zc...T..... i.. L?...................... . COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ... .. CITY. .W.a., • . REPRESENTATIVE...:?t u ::-........... DATE/TIME.. Z !/ ......... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS • PROJECT A!;), .�'�'��r.................. PROJ. # .� 4q ........................... CONTRACTOR .. ras .......................... DATE. z¢ !�..�'.?............... WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENTON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) 1�0....................................................... ................................................... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... CITY .REPRESENTATIVE•4 X� ..................••DATE•TIME..e. .................. PROJLOG/TXTFORMS 9 0 PROJECT J. .................. PROD. # ............ .. ................... CONTRACTOR .......................................... DATE. ? / ....................... WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.)%vF??....................................................... ....%?r.-....� . .. s/�.:'..P&O..c�. �.�:�?:.�?c'�:���.5..1�► 6Lr 5�.............. COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................... CITYE REPRESENTATIVE ! : u:�- .................DATE•TIME..� ...�.5 .. ........... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS 0 0 PROJECT.................................. PROJ. # -9............................. CONTRACTOR .......................................... DATE..? f �u� .................... WORKERS ON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ./ G? /dz-e e- ...................................................... 6 /g1 e/��� o,j 76t'f� ........................................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... CITY• . REPRESENTATIVE..... �•. � ..............DATE/TIME../ .................. PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT .�©5i.. ................... PROJ. # ............................. CONTRACTOR .......................................... DATE. z v:`-'�. �2 ................ WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENTON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.)............................................................. COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... CITY REPRESENTATIVE .................................. DATE/TIME....................... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT .... Psj.U��?�1................. PROJ. # ............................. CONTRACTOR .......................................... DATE.. 7 Vic.. !.................. WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ./Z`....................................................... .G..... Svc- .....i.?, '.:...o............ . COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE .il". ........o................... DATE/TIME........ .............. PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT .!oSi-.DEC ................. PROJ. # . C�-3...��............................ CONTRACTOR .......................................... DATE. ....Luc...................... WORKERS ON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENTON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.)....................................................... .. .. .. ... ........ .. .. .. jt-3src^ :.1'jb. �-�i c e�� s eV-- S14 h fie- , An>v I .< j9*A-, . �.z? .c�:�=t ........ . .. ... ... ........... ........... 1,� wreD o-�V6-S ........................................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE .................................. DATE/TIME. � ...' ...... .......... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT Sl*� .................. PROD. # .G n... ............................ CONTRACTOR .......................................... DATE.R.`.�r.. 9Z.................. WORKERS ON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) .`........................................................... ... ..si r7............... .L'. .1... , .... .. K/W.. 51D�..C��aXc Yv ..P-? .. ...... ... .. ..... ....... ... .....1.... � . L`c .6:F.P °t:`:'�..rto!�' �. I!I?r; 51"0. 06ollAo ►� .l i .......... D1�.��..'.�....i t-t� .. Si�it�.. ;PA�7, � , ;t?..w,2s/15. . ... ........ .. . .... .... ........ .... ..... ...... .. . 1 3�? 7+ air— 'M)5 , sires ..'k TI-te ..? �- ' ':u ! .. Pz:c'!�?�.. �L :-►FJN.` Jc�r'?,1.................. ._..` ...... ..T4`�?�:..:?� �'i?e 3 .�UtD �..13Sr�?E;,� ; �Z.. 'oj .Sty .... . ....... ... .... T ,t, y u Cr?f.rl , }t? .? S:h?:c cat ►i,i?..1!, t.1??. . ":Z : ..:i: '�. ... i�?. �.:��?:.................................................... . COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE ..�,!- ........... DATE/TIME..nc:n. �?:........ PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT .. A�r_.� .-�.................. PROJ. # .of�A 4.1 ............................ CONTRACTOR .......................................... DATE../fv4v�?.I �................ WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENTON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ r DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) . J4 4S................................. ................. ..... .... � , . G % . /�) � o /�Sr�uT ,ST., ��A . A�wc . 76 . , rT .. ................. .. .. ..... .. ..... .. ... ... .......... b93 e7Qi�. 7 .7�-Do,�.,. D4M .S;6 v.. kor*A( c�. c' �. TLz_.� . .�.` ... ..... . ..... . ... ..... ... ..... ..... .. .. !f!, . GLG9S .,i2�,v vi.vS , jp ,S , . G'Z o4a✓, �j� .S'sh o . !� ..... . ,Gu65. ..;'.................................................................... .... ...o... G?.....l( .W .. .,..... . /G. ..:?,...:3.....�. . . . , ........ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE .. ..:.. ??-.-.c- .............. DATE/TIME..�I ;z; ........ . PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT ................. PROJ. # ............................. CONTRACTOR .......................................... DATE..A �-�i;'!?. � ............... WORKERS ON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ...................................................... ........... f7'or� . .... . .�''�.......1�.:. . iz ...... ...... ... .. .. ...... .... .......... . t......... fF.... y .l.. . ... :'�.��r':'? . �: -'.�. .. �l �...... . ........ ....... . ....... . .... . .......... ........................................................................................ . Ruw5 % �? . i "a .1 Y �' .... ,�- z., r c��vT� y, t�L �.E�:� %.c.'�.. !117— ..".4 7a...5i . a.J CJ1JD . .. ..... .. . .... ........... . . .. ... .... .. .....`'........................................................................... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... • . CITYREPRESENTATIVE.................................. •.DATE/TIME A .�: ..7 .......... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS • 0 PROJECT .? « ................ PROD. #..`F`............................ CONTRACTOR .......................................... DATE..�J..:'n lz'.................. WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... ........................................................................................ EQUIPMENT ON SITE....................................................................... ........................................................................................ WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) �'i�-5 ............. bvie_ i�'5iaa_L'1,�4o+�t ►,. ce -dvD�.#b:c�SXT ..... . ..... ......... i. .. ,l,... ................ ...... Ae.. 5:. :.�C'.`�T�'!:........................................ ..................... LXGr•;YVA "1 c . r-�;L, l-�We_4� Cyep `'S-F.�ro�- vim ' -"ci.. �- r..nl�Y.lxzJf.,. ... .......... ... .. .. ..... ........of ........ .. ...... ;FL4 we en !`�.. WkTf;�.' ... C.iJ Z .. . Gam.. . oiv ..... ► . ti.... �..... . . ...... ....... .... ......... .. ...... ..... ...... ........................................................................................ Iti N r To i',a�-c��v o� c .. ti TO cc- c v__ ........................................................................................ H LA 47r2j . !4A rql : i4,'i , o :�urv,.�w�C , c�a:-s^l, PAr 4 , fo c.1OetG: c.��.�.� PACK- ... . .... .. ... ..... .... ... ... .. ... ....... ...... ..... ........................................................................................ ........................................................................................ ........................................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS)................................................ ........................................................................................ ........................................................................................ ........................................................................................ ........................................................................................ ........................................................................................ ........................................................................................ FOLLOW—UP TESTING....................................................................... D ...................................................... .ITY•REPRESENTATIVE•..•...F . ... DATE/TIME..,....45 C 6� ........ PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT ..r.T..�.................. PROJ. # . �—�-f�'i............................. CONTRACTOR .4". .% ............................. DATE. .�.� uc;,..`.'Z.................. WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENTON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.).f..©........................................................ . Dbl aO 1 .. .C,..... ... . .......... �.... A.... :. i^11 ...`.... . DP-r ... U... . . .i . ......... Ll->cv : o.,d �... %; rl�. is..pt��u�'rr►c;� . "A.-b:�P� .............. . `7� ,nc�G..... . ... .... ..... ........ ..... ...... .. .... lu , !T 6 L ; zo . ;�qt! .. i i2 . Dt o*J T . �r . FAQ Ly . # t�AT v-,2.. 4t0fri NGj . . . ... .... ....... .. .. . Yam. , ice, G'�. :..Ma5i .vF.. I�l�i-. SMA -rieJ4 0.J . S ou�.c��,e ; . .40c*! . . ... ........ .. ...... ... ....... ........ .. ... .ro................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE .. �....... ........ DATE/TIME............ PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT .'Ie�W. 00f?l !................... PROJ. # .F.--DAq. ............................. CONTRACTOR . Gam. l�r�s-�.......................... DATE. ................. WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) 10q .................. .......................... ..t4'e-e .5;rx- lolis . ,Qf����P. ,�,',►;' , In r ..l° ...I.z,. M.4 ..N: sioG :L SIN; r--X'CAvAriNGj pi-r'cr� L• i 5—i kg4 to ........................................................................................ COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE .Al/ ............................ DATE/TIME..?:Vl . g `........... PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT..!.'.�........................... PROJ. #.f�4.1......... .................... CONTRACTOR .................................. DATE.1:JU.0.................... WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENT ON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.)Ylto ....................................................... )::�7-g_ L-{vr, tNs i L-4 or G p a m-w o . op �A4 ........................................................................................ fire, . �+�'�e c p c?�v : I Z , s. " . m 4, 1 NsYHu C r9 s ; , ..... ..... ...... ...... .. .. .... COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ......................................................................................... CITY REPRESENTATIVE ..��.'f�.� 11'�1�� " ................ DATE/TIME. � .`:`'. ............. PROJLOG/TXTFORMS PROJECT.l.'.4.0 ............................ PROJ. #...���...�......................... CONTRACTOR .......................................... DATE..��'`.'" .`I z................ WORKERSON SITE......................................................................... EQUIPMENTON SITE....................................................................... WEATHER ........................... TEMPERATURE ........................................ DAILY ACTIVITY (A.M./P.M.) ew:y...................................................... .... �.Vty� S/�....lGo Gvri. h,4yiG44..C! !t-,fir ........ lr„vr'1� ,?►%Y�,6n1 , g u.s. �:�!R . 1??�d �.:`..¢1. .......... _`�e7�` :` 9 .:':a :!�:..�: •... . .:J:..f�►^I-ry..................._._.._................................................... irw ................. COMMENTS (CONVERSATIONS, FIELD PROBLEMS) ................................................ FOLLOW-UP TESTING....................................................................... ........................................................................................ CITY REPRESENTATIVE .. .............. DATE/TIME:j/.......� ........ PROJLOG/TXTFORMS '* Job No: 2613 STREET��� Code: CXCOE003 RECEIVED PtL4-=- ` T>49 CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. FEB9 1gg3 General Contractors ENGINEERING TO: City of Edmonds Community Services Department Engineering Division 250 - 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 ATTN: Jim Walker We are sending: Herewith X OUANTITY IDENTIFICATION 1 Each DATE: February 18, 1993 JOB: Perrinville Carrier Facility, Edmonds, WA Contract #549986-91-B-0147 Separate cover by DESCRIPTION Copy of letter from Shannon & Wilson Dated 2/5/93 Re: Inspection Reports For Approval Approved as Noted Correct and Resubmit For Your Files/Records REMARKS: 5529 186th Place S.W. Box 36003 Lynnwood, WA 98046-9603 (206) 775-0454 FAX (206) 771-8219 223-01-CR-EE-C `-`334NM XXFor Review Per Your Request Per Contract Documents General Information CREE ONSTR ION CO. INC. By ichael J. Boffle Project Mana r . - SEATTLE SHANNON 6WILSON, INC EVER ENNEWICK ® GEOTECHNICAL ANO ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT AIRBANKS `HORAGE STREET FIL ZNT LOUIS Feb D ruary 5, 1993 FEBR"Et"XIVE 1 1993 Cree Construction CREE COST. CO. 5529 186th Place SW Lynnwood, Washington 98046 Attn: Mr. Mike Boyle RE: FINAL INSPECTION REPORT, PERRIlWILLE CARRIER FACILITY: STORM SEWER INSTALLATION AND PARKING AREA CONSTRUCTION, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON This letter presents a summary of monitoring work performed at the Perrinville Carrier Facility in Edmonds, Washington. This work included monitoring the installation of storm sewer lines, a water line, and fill placement and compaction (in a parking area). This work is now substantially complete. Between August 31, 1992 and September 11, 1992, we were present at the site to observe backfilling of the 42-inch-diameter storm sewer line which runs from the south edge of the Post Office property and ties into Manhole No. 3. This line extends parallel to and to the west of 176th Avenue West and crosses Olympic View Drive West. During this time, we also observed the backfilling of a 12-inch-diameter storm sewer line which runs from Manhole No. 1 east, across 76th Avenue West. This work was performed on a full-time basis from August 31 to September 2, 1992 and on a part-time, on -call basis thereafter at the request of Cree Construction. Between September 8 and 21, 1992, we were present at the site to monitor the placement and compaction of fill for a parking and driveway area along the west edge of the site. This work was performed on a part-time, on -call basis at the request of Cree Construction. Between December 4 and 8, 1992, we were present at the site to monitor the backfilling of an 8- inch-diameter water line. This line extends roughly from north of the Post Office property parallel to and along the west side of 76th Avenue West, to near the south edge of the Post Office property. Along most of its length, this line is located beneath the curb lane of the street. In general, compaction tests performed for most of the utility trench backfill and for the fill in the area of the parking and driveway areas met the project specifications (at least either 90 or 95 400 NORTH 34TH STREET • SUITE 100 W-4892-05 P.O. BOX 300303 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98103 206.632.8020 FAX 206.633.6777 11 Cree Construction Attn: Mr. Mike Boyle February 11, 1993 Page 2 SHANNON 6WILSON, INC. percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density, ASTM Modified D-1557-58, depending on location). Two exceptions were noted during our field monitoring: along the portion of the 42-inch-diameter pipe where it passes beneath Olympic View Drive West, and the portion of the 8-inch-diameter water line where it extends beneath the northeastern driveway into the Post Office. In both of these instances, density tests failed to meet the specified compaction of 95 percent. During our monitoring efforts of the 42-inch-diameter storm sewer line, the results of density tests were conveyed to the contractor, Karnak Construction, at the time of testing. To the best of our knowledge, no additional compaction was performed in this area. We understand that this area has since been asphalted over. During the installation of the 8-inch-diameter water line, the results of the density tests in the driveway area were reported to the contractor, Karnak Construction, and to Mr. Wade Hardy of Cree Construction on the following working day (after the results of the Proctor Compaction tests were available). It is our understanding that the backfill placed in this area will be removed and replaced with suitably compacted material. Daily memorandums have been prepared for each site visit. Please refer to those memorandums for specific information. Sincerely, SHANNON & WILSON, INC. 4"ja, V )n Michael J. Wolc Senior Engineer Herman H. (Tex) Druebert, P.E. Vice President SEW:MJW:HHD/eet Enclosures: Six Field Memorandums (August 31 through December 8, 1992) W4892-05. LTR/W4892-1kd/eet W-4892-05 • 46 W-4892-05' SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Geotechnical Consultants 400 North 34th Street, Suite 100 - P.O Box C-30313 • Seattle. Washington 98103 . (206) 32-8020 MEMORANDUM To: Cree Construction Date: August 31, 1992 Day: Monday 5529 186th Place S.W. Lynnwood, Washington 98046 Page 1 of 1 Attn.: Mr. Mike Boyle Project: U.S. Post Office Facility - Perrinville Arrived at the site at 1:00 PM, observed the installation of the storm line concrete pipe at the intersection of 76th Avenue West and Olympic View Drive. Compaction tests were performed on the compacted backfill at selected points at different elevations in the trench. A nuclear density was used for this gauge purpose. Compacted areas were periodically probed to ensure a consistent compaction effort. Some of the backfill materials were import brown slightly silty gravelly sands, and some were native soils that were similar to the imported soils. Both appeared to be acceptable as backfill materials. Included with this report are the field data sheets of the compaction tests taken and a sketch that shows the corresponding approximate locations of these tests with respect to existing structures in the area. The results indicate whether the compacted fill material did or didn't meet 95% of the laboratory standard (established by ASTM Modified D-1557-78). KCI representative at the site was notified of the results after the compaction tests were performed. Compaction at the site was achieved by using a hoe -pack. Left the site at 4:45 PM. By: ]a#-Y4 George assis Engineer Encl: Site Plan Field Data Sheets 0 • 0 W-4892-05 Encl: Site Plan Field Data Sheets By: George Kassis Engineer . Reviewed by: Herman H. (Tex) Druebert Vice President SHANNON & WILSON, INC. SOILS TESTING NUCLEAR DENSITYWOISTURE GAUGE FIELD DATA SHEET DATEI7TME "' JOB NO. PROJECTILOCAMON SOURCEIMATERIAL z: INSPECTOR PROJECT ENGINEER OTHER cieoge Kassis CURVE NO. S==CIF1_D COUIP MAX DEN MIN DEN OPTXFt20 EQUIPMENT IN USE REPORT NO I PAGE I OF Z GAUGE NO. S,IJ C Z90 DENSITY STD DENSITY k 2 SC.o I MOISTURE S T D -]MOISTURE XI SPECIFIED % H2O LAB TEST METHOD FIELD TEST METHOD n1NGlCAr Ar GAUGE READINGS St� ► I RE V '-=ST TEST VAT H2O DRY % % NO - DEFTH DENSITY DENSITY DENSITY MOST COMP. LOCATION ELEV. ST i 12S I 11►z.� I ►r.3 19b I A I I J/.D �o I I 2 I J ZN-y l I//2• I /O, I q6.� I G( I I I//. 3 l a I I I lo. I I ga 110.q I y l I I 1NS-- - r�C, OR: REY1E1'tED: • SOILS TESTING NUCLEAR DENSITY\MOISTURE GAUGE FIELD DATA SHEET DATnTI1vlE JOB NO. PROJEC MOCAMON SOURCEWATERIAL U.t. 'Pob+ osf glae- e-rr iI 2 INSPECTOR �/ PROJECT ENGINEER OTHER •-I 2 9\A SSiS • REPORT NO I PAGE 2- OF Z GAUGE NO. SA4 G zgo DENSITY STD DENSITY XI MOISTURE STD I MOISTURE XI CURVE NO. MAX DEN MIN DEN OMH2O EQUIPMENT IN USE I S?ECIFlE7 COUIP SPECIFIED : H2O LAB TES METHOD FIELD TEST METHOD GAUGE READINGS 1 '=ST NO = i RE % ST TEST DEr71H Wr.T DENSITY H2O DENSITY DRY DENSITY % MOST % COMP. LOCATION ELEV. �o I I 2 I Io�.N I I q$.0 I ��l l ��•� I � I I c l I ,o 3. I :;L. I I I I I I ( I I ( I � i3 ( I o I � 32 I I Iz2.K•I �•8 � •q0.1 I�� � I Iu•t I -�. 18a.s l F I I I I I I I I I I I I I i �.E :cARrs: INS?=CTOR: REVIEWED: SHANNON & WILSO . INC. ass' Geotechnical Consultants . • JOB NO. SUBJECT BY DATE -SHEET- of l O X> - Fri, _ — wa+er t�•K� T� 9 W-4892-05 SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Geotechnical Consultants 400 North 34th Street Suite 100 • P.O. Box -4031Seattle. Washington 98103 • (206)632-8020 MEMORANDUM To: Cree Construction Date: September 1, 1992 Day: Tuesday 5529 186th Place S.W. Lynnwood, Washington 98046 Page 1 of 1 Attn.: Mr. Mike Boyle Project: U.S. Post Office Facility - Perrinville Arrived at the site at 8:00 AM, to observe the installation of the storm line concrete pipe right at the intersection of 76th Avenue West and Olympic View Drive. Compaction tests were performed on the compacted backfill at selected points at different elevations in the trench. A nuclear density was used for this e' ° \m- c gauge purpose. Compacted areas were periodically probed to ensur�a consistent compaction effort. Some of the backfill materials were import brown slightly silty gravelly sands, and some were native soils that were similar to the imported soils. Both appeared to be acceptable as backfill materials. Included with this report are the field data sheets of the compaction tests taken and a sketch that shows the corresponding approximate locations of these tests with respect to existing structures in the area. The results indicate whether the compacted fill material did or didn't meet 95% of the laboratory standard (established by ASTM Modified D-1557-78). KCI representative at the site was notified of the results after the compaction tests were performed. Compaction at the site was achieved by using a hoe -pack. Left the site at 5:00 PM. By: e George K&sis Engineer Encl: Site Plan Field Data Sheets K Y\ SOILS TESTING NUCLEAR DENSITYWOISTURE GAUGE FIELD DATA SHEET D:.TEITIME JOB N0. PROJECT%LOCAMOK SOURCEWATERIAL ce 7I e-�r��Jil e INSPECTOR PROJECT ENGINEER OTHER �e rqe Kassi5 REPORT NO Z PAGE I OF 'L GAUGE NO. gK4 j�pzqd DENSITY STD DENSITY Xi Z6,03 MOISTURE STD I MOISTURE XI CURVE NO. MAX DEN MIN DEN OPT%H20 EQUIPMENT IN USE :GIF1�D COMP SPECIFIED : H2O I LAB TEST METHOD FIELD TEST METHOD 1�-INC.IP.11r �e✓lS�'�y.. C,n„ram, A IkAG GAUGE READINGS r t� �LZArli^ I i=ST NO ! i RE T= ST TEST DEr1H WE D=_NSrY H2O DENSITY DRY DENSITY r MOIST % COMP. V . LOCAMON ELL-V. ci I I I 2 I I 2.� I 1 3 3 I ( I ZN• S I I I 92 I I I 3 I 14 s I 12C.5 I I I15�(o I �.� I oil I H L I 67 I I 11(o �,� I 01�,3 i Iv • z l I Irb,Q I 193.6 I H I � I I ►�� � �z •� � I III-,�1 � �,� I 9z.d I �+ I G I I Z�� iy�•(r I I II(�-I I � I l� I r I 30 0 I I 123• ) Co.1 I 10 I C I F. .1ARrIS: LNS?EC T OR: REVIEWED: SOILS 7 ESTIN G NUCLEAR DENSITI'\MOISTURE GAUGE FIELD DATA SHEET R_POAT NO PAGE ?-OF Z GAUGE N0. -s DATI EMME JOB NO. PROJECTtoc-t"I"ON SOURCEWIATERIAL DENSITY STD DENSITY Xi Il 2 GJ-<I�9L-o$ U. S. ?os+ mot' it,2 INSPECTOR PROJECT ENGINEER I OTHER I MOISTURE STD MOISTURE MOISTURE XI Gcaw- Ka•SS)s CURVE NO. MAX DEN MIN DEN OPT%H20 EQUIPMENT IN USE S?=CIFI=O COy1P I SPECIFIED : H2O I LAB TES METHOD I FIELD TEST METHOD GAUGE READINGS I NO RE T_ ST T=S D i DENSITY H2O DENSITY DRY DENSITY % MOIST % COMP. LOCATION ELEEV. It .. I I I 1 33 . S I I I INS2EC;OR: REVI_` c : • JOB NO. �1 I SHANNON & WILSON,INC. SUBJECT sssss Geotechnical Consultants BY DATE SHEET_ of 0 T) 2, 0 • W-4892-05 MEMORANDUM To: Cree Construction Date: September 2, 1992 Day: Wednesday 5529 186th Place S.W. Lynnwood, Washington 98046 Page 1 of 1 Attn.: Mr. Mike Boyle Project: U.S. Post Office Facility - Perrinville Arrived at the site at 8:00 AM, to observe the installation of the storm line concrete pipe just to the south of the intersection of 76th Avenue West and Olympic View Drive. Compaction tests were performed on the compacted backfill at selected points at different elevations in the trench. A nuclear density gauge was used for this purpose. Compacted areas were periodically probed to C n 111_� 4 -n ewe a consistent compaction effort. Some of the backfill materials were import brown slightly Y\ silty gravelly sands, and some were native soils that were similar to the imported soils. Both appeared to be acceptable as backfill materials. Included with this report are the field data sheets of the compaction tests taken and a sketch that shows the corresponding approximate locations of these tests with respect to existing structures in the area. The results indicate whether the compacted fill material did or didn't meet 95% of the laboratory standard (established by ASTM Modified D-1557-78). KCI representative at the site was notified of the results after the compaction tests were performed. Compaction at the site was achieved by using a hoe -pack. Left the site at 4:00 PM. By:_V_XL) eorge ifassis Engineer Encl: Site Plan Field Data Sheets • AEPORT NO PAGE I OF L SOILS TESTING NUCLEAR DENSITYWOISTURE GAUGE FIELD DATA SHEET 1 IDATEWIME JOB NO. PROJECTI.00A;ION SOUR CEW�ATcRIAL q/Z q Z uJ--h3'9z -05 U, %- •ao sda & ', ce �e«;Nv�tic. INSPECTOR PROJECT ENGINEER OTHER 6r-o�qe Ko ss Ps CURVE NO. MAX DEN MIN DEN OFMH20 EQUIPMENT IN USE GAUGE NO. S (�1 C> DENSITY STD DENSITY x 2 595 MOISTURE STD I MOISTURE XI S•"=C1•`1=7 CQm? SPECIFIED : H2O LAB TEST METHOD FIELD TEST METHOD ' GAUGE READINGS c�lC�k tom^ 1_ST I NO i 1 RE ST T=S D_rF-lH 1 D=NSliY H2O DENSITY DRY DENSITY MOIST % COMP. LOCAMON ELEEV. I I -A, I 1y I l5. � I q• Z I 92•l, I �; I I 7-I I, I ► Z- I I I► �. 3 I q. 2 I 9 3 I K I 3 I 11_3. (o I 11 Z.2 I ro./ I 89• ;z K 1 i Ai I 3.5 I"'S3e1 I IA.S 0114 I-- 5 1 -2- 115.3 /o. 92, z L I % I I 1.5 1L5-I I I IIZ•1 I //•<o I 90 I �- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ( ( I I I I I I I I I ( I R_ :MARrE: 1\S2EC'OR: REVIEWED: • JOB NO. SHANNON & WILSOI�, INC. SUBJECT Geotechnical Consultants BY DATE SHEET of V, yl ' (b� S \r i 0 Job SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Geotechnical & Environmental Consultants 400 N. 34th St., Suite 100 0 P.O. Box 300303 e Seattle, WA 98103 * Tel: (206) 632-8020 Fax: (206) 633-6777 MEMORANDUM To:..Cger (.2-z) ................... 15crzTZ9 ----------------------------- \f;"-6 ... ................................... ------ Lt- ................... Attn: ...... ................................. Day.__ -------------- Date.1-1 A:].qz— Field Report Page____,________ of --- 3 ----- — ------ Project:?e. ...... ---= .... 51:1 — ------------------ c ....� c ..... Cf ------ ......... TPV�-- -- ---- ..... C�7 ------- -U Q-Q � 3 -t .... �A ... .. zao .... C> ....... ...... ................................................................................................ ...................................................................... .................................... .......... - - ------- --- rzul,�L -------- . ..... . ... V ........ 7j(!*t C)� ... 7 Y U; ............. .... ft�� ..... ........... ............................ .......................................... .... ......... ........................ ......................................... ---- ------ ............................ .............................................. .... ...... ........................... .............................................. . .... .... N -------------------------------------------- ..... tt ......... --- pc3p-- ..................... 12;'�- '4� ------- .................... ....................... .... -- .. w- ---- At) .... g Vkou- ..................... I ................ ..... ...................................................... ..................................................................... . .... ......... ........... .......................................................... .. .... . ............... r1D .......................................... ............ Sca'-r ........................................ ........... ........ .............................................. ........... -------- ....... ............................................................... lw� =, .............. F-1 -79 NC RICK .................................... .................. ........... I .... ------------- J--------------- ............ .... . ............... ............... ... ....... I ........................ ........ .......... ... --------------- ........... I ....................... ........ ....... .............. "Q� -------- ............. ............ ............ ............... I ------------------------ -------------.. ..... � By----------- .. Gtk�... .. ............................. Job No. U%.r ......... SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Geotechnical & Environmental Consultants 400 N. 34th St., Suite 100 • P.O. Box 300303 e Seattle, WA 98103 9 Tel: (206) 632-8020 Fax: (206) 633-6777 MEMORANDUM ................ Date._ 1� -C� ------ To:. ( --r C� - ------------------ KField Report Page ---- :z--- of --- 5 ------ �522 ------- . ........ ... ..... ............ ---cam--...._ c ;L ------- ... ... Project:..R��Z . ........ ---I - ----------- k .... Attn:...- R . ..... &. .P-( ...... T.(ze. 1-:Rn-S-5; . . ........... ------------------------------------ ----- 1--tvV .................... ;� ........... .. . ......... ............................................................................................................................................................. 7 ... ----------------------------------------- ......................................... ................................................................................................................. . .... ..... .... ------ -A ............. ca- f............... n.... . ....................... ...... U.Lc" -A ---- V . ................ --- . . . ................. r— ....... ------------ r N-A TT . R ..1 --------U------------------- �-3 ......... . r-D ........ ?e'aL.-mk ..... --- ------ - ----- 7�.= ..... ... ...... it z 2 '4� ........... -AL ... ...... t--'ccol .. .... gr .............. .......... ....... um--- z -ce.71 L 2 ----- CZ . .. ...... �-. .... (0-t 2.3 .... I .......... It ---------------------- ...................... F-1-79-NCR/CK By ..... .. . z;7D .......................... Job No. SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Geotechnical & Environmental Consultants 400 N. 34th St., Suite 100 - P.O. Box 300303 * Seattle, WA 98103 0 Tel: (206) 632-8020 Fax: (206) 633-6777 MEMORANDUM To:... ...... ..... . ........ - - -------------------- --- Attn: ------- ----- ....... V. Day_ .. ...... K_Field Report Date..A.q__A4.q-.7 - ------ Page ... 5 ..... of --- 5 ------ .... . . . Project: .... Razzkiak.j uu._. F XAU.-mf ... . .... e� ... ujmla .... . ..... .............. .................................................... ................................. ---_------------- ....... * ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .......... ----------- ----- � eoe___ . .......... ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... -------bra ......... V .... .................. . ..... TL - ----------------------- LL............. LU ------ ...... ----- vb.(L c - - ----- ----- -------------------- ... ........................................................................................... - - --------- ------------------ * ---------------------------------- --------------- * ---------------- ------ ca_T:t�a .... I ...... ...... k1a; . ....... FAV-) 7 ..... e_r ... c:C (7 V 12 _c 0LA-7 Asev.�� ..... I I Y_' 0 ..... . ... k �_ ....... F ----- ......... 2� ... .... b . ........ ... T1 ------------------ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------_-- ------------------------------------------------------------------ ................................................................................................................. .--.k ...... ------ V—Xa-20.� ............................................ ............................................................................. ------- -------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- * ------------- ..................................................................... .. ......... .. ...................................... . ---- — ------------------ ..... - ---- -------------------- __.X% ....... .......... . ----------------------- ....................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................... ...................................... ................. .............. ................................. F-1.79-NCR/CK By___________ F:PORT NO PAGE I OF SOILS TESTING NUCLEAR DENSIMMOISTURE GAUGE FIELD DATA SHEET iDAMI TIMIE JOB NO. PROJEC%OCA;ION SOURCEW,ATERIAL I Z.t W-4WZ- 61 Fe4ze-k au t, F P.o, Qpmo�;—r INS?_CTOR PROJECT ENGINEER OTHER mDkx�o W t w txvS GAUGE NO. (., Z9 0 DENSITY STD I DENSITY Xi ?�s MOISTURE SM MOISTURE XI eta CURVE NO. MAX DEN MIN DEN OPTXH2O EQUIPMENT IN USE S?_CIFIED COvIP (��y) SPECIFIED : H2O LAB TEST METHOD FIELD TEST METHOD 915 b Ii-.�d'� t f tzy the GAUGE READINGS c I R: TES V= ; N.20 DRY % t 1;0 T D-r �'' D=Nsr, D-NS17Y DENSITY MOIST COMP. LOCATION i SEL'V. to.o �l I ma -T LVS?= CT OR: REVIEWED. �� I I I Job No. W 7 - 4 - ewz_- - C) (.1z' SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Geotechnical & Environmental Consultants 400 N. 34th St., Suite 100 o P.O. Box 300303 e Seattle, WA 98.103 * Tel: (206) 632-8020 Fax: (206) 633-6777 MEMORANDUM To: .... cq';E.* -- ----- ------------------------------ ........... ... .. ........ .. ... ...... Attn:...--Hv ..... Dayl���..�a-------------- Date --- \ Field Report Page ...... ! ...... --------------------------------- r ----------- ------ ....... kk(ZV4-0.E1;.> cry. -- - ----------------- a ..... ----------------- ... OPP ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ -1 ------------------------------------------------ - -- ----- sa-A ------- ...... Z 14� 9 ... ... ................. ...... D .... OF ......... .. �L ------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- .................................................................................................................................... -- Fcy.-L-0-OX11� .......... L ------ pe—.AA .. -----!.. .. ------ nva4 ..... uND-)c� ------ ----- .... .... (2 ... --'tom — S.c -------- ...... .. -- ---- 1-161 - - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ----- .............................................................................. ..................................... .............................................................. — - . ' - ...... ....... A .............................................................................. .......... . -.9. f� 0 ............................................................................................................................................................... I ............................................. ................................... ........................................................................................................................ ............................. ----------------------------------------- .. .. . ' ]w .. ......... M ------------------- .............. ...... ---- - -------- 1-1- .- .................. .... ------------- -- - ------ R���'P ---------------- * --------------------- ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ ........... .... .... . ..... ... -79 NCRICK ICK ILK) I F-1 By .... .............. ........ s --- ------------------------- Jab No.w .................. FJ SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Geotechnical & Environmental Consultants 400 N. 34th St., Suite 100 * P.O. Box 300303 9 Seattle, WA 98103 e Tel: (206) 632-8020 Fax: (206) 633-6777 MEMORANDUM To: GK:�Sl-q-u tznc��a ........ I.Exct ................................ .... 9 Attn: ----- �AL .... ...... Z.o ............................. Day ---------- Date.-� 81- Field Report Page ------- 1 ----- of----- _ iWz� ..... -------------------------------------- Project:. --- ------- ----------------------------------------------------- ------ wl� .. 4 ...... i ...... V - ------ ----- 1-b ----------------- KAC) ..... C-�7 ............... ------ co -a------ (C) ------ 11V ------------ --------------------------------------------------------------- *-*-* --------------------------------------- * ------ * --------------------------------------------------------------- --------- .... CF- ..... . ..... ..... 11.1 3: . . .... ---- --------- -- ---- 0C.7 ... Qth.� ...... HjtZo ------ nV, ... s L --- oc---tc) L-L)NT'k-(-L--) ............. .... c ........... ....... C-). C- ------------- ry . ...................... ... ...... C! ... 7PC�... . ................ n ....... - - -*'-' -1 — - —.. 0 ------- ...... - ----- ------------------------ 1>1 ---------------------- ---------- ) . ........ liz --------------- -------- -------- ........ ............................... ........ ---------- ................................ ------- WQzT ........................... VT - 9' ................... . . ................................................. ....... ------ ------------------------ ... ........... ................ ----- ) ....... f ....... ................ ........... ..................... ----------- . .......................... ............... . ......................... ............. ....................................................................................R--------------------------- --------------------- ) ................................................ ------------------------------------------------------------------ - nu-w-D -exp, - - ----------------------------------- -.4, ------ ............................................................... ...................... CC ------- .. .................................................... ..................................................................... ....................................................................................... .............................................. F7 . ............ P-1 ......... j��. ....... lu(;;� . ........ ..... 14 ..... e. ------------------------- n, . .... ........... ------ 4� > . . ............. F-1-79-NCR/CK By__..._.... . CQS-q� Job No.W—.. ....... �77: P44:1 SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Geotechnical & Environmental Consultants 400 N. 34th St., Suite 100 * P.O. Box 300303 e Seattle, WA 98103 * Tel: (206) 632-8020 Fax: (206) 633-6777 MEMORANDUM To:... ..... VLpma.-:S' ............... U)p":!tk-k ........ %CA� ........ Attn:.---"L.-f--5,?�.r . .............................. Day--FQES�`'� ............ Field Report Date ---- 4-519 - ----- Page ..... Z ... of--.Z-- ------------------------- - ------- Project: ..... PL-- I -- ------------------------------------------------ - -------- - --- 7 ......... tt�. --- ---- U�- Un- -c------------- L> e- - - ----------- - --------------- D.V1 . ......... �u ----- vc;>%Y=uc�� ......... 1.5 ....... W�(=? tu --- ......... ------------------------------------------- - ................................................................................................................... ........................................................................................ -7Ti �S ...... ------ o� ... t` '.� --.(- - . *> t ...... k .. ..... ------ ----- -� — -- ------- -------- - ---------- ------- 11::� .. ... no --------------- V-) ... . .................. --------------------------------------------------------------------- - .............................................. ................................................................................... ........................ ------- Lk---T� -------- ............... �? . . .......... ............................................... ................................... . ....................... .......... ( ................................................................................... ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------- ----------- ..... . ..... - . P� ------------------------------------------------------ ......................................................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................................... ........................................................................... . .............................................. ............................ . --- -- --------------- ------------------------------------ * --------------------------------------------------- .......................................................................................... / .......................... --------------------- e ----- — - -------- -------- ) ----------------------- I --------- kj.�'( ... ------ . .......... ... �. - .2 ----- ............... .)� .... --- --- ...... . �-E' ......... ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................... ...................................................... .................. ................... .. ............................. \ -------------------------- F-1.79-NCR/CK By------------ .. ............. ...... 0-1 y SOILS TESTING NUCLEAR DENSITYIMOISTURE GAUGE FIELD DATA SHEET D:.TE1T1tJO"c JOB N0. PROJECT�OC:.'lON SOURCEW.ATERIAL W -42yn - IINS?:CTOR I PROJECT ENGINEER I OTHER 0 F_PORT NO PAGE 1, OF GAUGE NO. 6Z9-O DENSITY STD DENSITY Xi MOISTURE SiD MOISTURE XI CURVE NO. MAX DEN MIN DEN OFMM2O EQUIPMENT IN LOSE i ==ZCJFI_D CCv1P 9S SPECIFIED : H2O LAB TES IAETHOD %-�kv-1OD 1tir,�lrc.. GAUCE READINGS FIELD 1zST METHOD 1 R= H2O DRY % r I NO i= DD=NSTTY D=NSJTY DEN'S1TY N.O:ST COMP. LOCATION ELEV. ! ST r 3 u 14o,Z IOU (igo,S I I I oV I ►�-s.c� I i JLT I2✓�. Z I %. I q%. �, I -� 1Cp� I bQlTG I I I I l i n I Q 1 I r,G . I 1 I I • c..w� . i � -- 1 / `mow � "r 1 I �'���- I 1191 0.E 196.7- I 9 I 1 o I 14-1. o f 11Z'1, o I 9. o INS=E C 7 0R: REVI WED; M-4 STREET FILE'tce-,V CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. F General Contractors �011k. "993 February 10, Wilder Construction Co. 3315 - 15th Street Everett, WA 98201 Attention: Jeff Schock Letter No: 2613-004 Reference: Perrinville Carrier Facility Construction Contract ##549986-91-B0147 --- Subject: Asphalt Patch Replacement Dear Jeff: As discussed with you the morning of February 10, 1993 and on two previous occasions, the City of Edmonds has rejected asphalt patching work at -the above referenced project, specifically at the 76th Avenue West street storm crossing. You are directed to repair the deficiencies.' Please contact.Lyle -Chrisman of the City of Edmonds at 771-0220 to review the scope of replacement work and to inform him of your schedule to complete the required replacement. Please note that Mr. Chrisman has indicated that an overlay, as attempted previously, is unacceptable. Please keep us informed as to the result of your discussion with Mr. Chrisman and the resulting schedule. Sincerely, CREEjbTTRUT ON COMPANY, INC. Michael J. Bo ie Y Project Manager MJB:kc1 CC: Lyle Chrisman-City of Edmonds Eng. Dept. 5529 186th Place S.W. Box 36003 Lynnwood, WA 98046-9603 (206) 775-0454 FAX (206) 771-8219 223-01-0R-EE-C' -' 334NM 89p-194 CITY OF EDMONDS STREET FILE 250 - 5TH AVE. N.. EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation . Engineering Mailed 1/4/93 January 4, 1993 Michael Boyle, Project Manager Cree Construction Co.; Inc. 55,2-9 - 1186th P1. S.W. P. 0. Box 316003 Lynnwood, WA 98046 SUBJECT: U. S. 'POST OFFICE - PERRINVILLE FACILITY Dear Michael, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR Enclosed is a copy of the City of Edmonds standard detail for a high traffic load driveway. The U.S.P.O. representatives and' architects received this detail numerous times throughout the course of'the pro jiect . The driveway entrances, as constructed, do not conform to this detail. The City of Edmonds finds the driveway entrances, as constructed, unacceptable. Repair of this deficiency should be coordinated with Lyle Chrisman. Thank you for your cooperation in bringing this part of the improvements into conformance with City standards. Sincerely, GOR,DON C. HYD Engineering 'Coordinator GCH/sdt Enclosure CREECONS/TXTST530 Alberts • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan ACP DRIVEWAY O . . . . . .sFs 51 MIN. VARIABLE PER, CODE IRAMP (TYP)l BACK OF SIDEWALK 51 TYPE "A" CURB & GUTTER CONCRETE GUTTER CARRIED THROUGH INTERSECTION ISOMETRIC VIEW SIDEWALK RAMP (7'WI, DE SIDEWALK) 18" TRANSITION (TYP) 7# 12" -JL- P24: GUTTER SECTION ERGINEERI CITY �.F EDMONDS Dl:vls NTAAFF1CLOINDOAIMEA'AYACCESS DATE SCALE: - NTS ---TONNaG. N' 9 • STREET4tDviob No: 2613 a* al !leg Code: CXCOE002 CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. RECEIVED General Contractors DEC 2 u TO: City of Edmonds DATE: December 21, 1992 Community Services Department Engineering Division 250 - 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 ATTN: Lyle Chrisman We are sending: Herewith X QUANTITY I IDENTIFICATION JOB: Perrinville Carrier Facility, Edmonds, WA Contract #549986-91-B-0147 Separate cover by DESCRIPTION 1 Each Specification on installed backflow preventer as installed at P.C.F. by Peak Landscape & Const. Inc. XX For Approval Approved as Noted Correct and Resubmit For Your Files/Records REr;ARRS : For Review XX Per Your Request Per Contract Documents General Information Please contact me if you have questions or require further information. 5529 186th Place S.W. Box 36003 Lynnwood, WA 98046-9603 (206) 775-0454 FAX (206) 771-8219 223d1-CREEL- 334NM CREE CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. By 1 4-rl"JI'l , Michael J.` oyle Project Manager PEPOLANDSCAPE CONST INC 20641&523 P.01 02, k%L.- LANDSCAPE &CONSTRUCTION, INC, �lx F A x 6� 206/485-6523 FAX COVER SWEET DATE �� 1� o. P N _�l o �, �,�, t AGES .J INCLUDING COVER TO C k2r.?,a 0.0A, s7 -FAX NO 771- 0d._0 All Y 11C FROMP.�� s u e J. �ti. rL w Pt � c= n M t i .. G-, mots/1-- * S 16515 Ist AVENUE SOUTH EAST BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 96012 487-3083 PE LANDSCAPE CONST INC 206 5'23 P. 03 t1�23i92 13: $ 322t3�1i t.F...l. WILKINS A Division of Zurn Industries, Inc. 1747 Commerce Way Paso Robles, CA 93422 ��� (805) 238-7100 MODEL MODEL 950 REDUCED PRESSURE PRINCIPLE DOUBLE CHECK VALVE ASSEMBC, BACKI=LOW PREVENTER Sizes 3/4e1- 2" INSTALLATION - TESTING - MAINTENANCE BASIC INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS CAUTION: Installation of Backflow Preventers must be performed by qualified, licensed person- nel. Fataliy Installation could result in an Improp- erly functioning device. The installer should be sure the properdevice hat been sele`ted for the particular insWlation. WrQaNIS Model 9?s Reduced Pressure Prin- I ie Backflow Preventers are for use on potable water lines where a health hazard could exist if a back -now or backsiphonage sltuation were to occur, WILMS Model 950 Double Check valve assemblies are for use on potable water lines where a health hazard would not exist In the event of a backAow altuation. Proper performance is dependent upon fol- lowing these installation instructions and prevall. Ing governmental and Industry standards end codes. Failure to do so, accord ing to WILKA's Limited Warranty "releases' I(INSofany liability that it might cthorwise have with respect to that devke." Such faliure could also result in an Improperly functioning deice. Damage to the device could result wherever water hammer and/or water thermal expansion could create excessive line pressure. Where ibis could occur, shock arrestors: and /or pressure relief valves should be installed downstream of the device. I. Before installing elther a Model 975 or Model 950 Backflow Preventer, flush the lines thor- oughly to remove all debris; chips and other foreign matter. If required, a strainer should be placed upstream of the Backflow Preventer, CAUTION; Do ootus_ a stralner in seldom used emergency water lines such as fire lints. 2. The Modei 975 must be installed In a horizon- tal position to provide proper operation of the relief valve. 3. Provide adequate space arot:nd the Installed unit so that the test tacks will bn, accessible for tzr.ting and servicing. 4, if Installation of a Model 975 unit is in a build- Ing, proovide a sultable drain arrangement to drain off aplllege from the relief valve. An air POP of at least two times the pipe diameter must be provided :rtween the relief valve and the drain ptping to prevcni a treat -connection. CAUTION: Do not pipe the relief valve talidiy in z floor drain, :,,over or sump. _. 5. Inatoll.'olve at !test 12 Inches above surround- Ine now tev�:i. OUTDOOR INSTALLATION Model 975 and 950 Backilow Preventers may be installed outdoors only if the device is pro- tected against any freezing conditions. Exposure to freezing conditions will result in improper function or damage to the device. The Installation location must be kept above 320P. All the basic Installation Instructions apply, If Installation is in a pit or vault, the baekRow vreventer must never be submerged In water because this could cause a cross -Connection. Make sure that the pit or vault always remains dry by providing ample drainage. INDOOR INSTALLATION Indoor installation is preferred in areas that are eubjeet to freezing conditions. All the basic instal- lation lnst-lctlotts apply to such Installallons. PARALLEL INSTALLATION Where uninterrupted service from a single meter connection must be maintained, two or more Backllow Preventers may be connected In parallel. All the basic installation Instructions apply to a parallel Installation, Be sure to allow adequate room between the units for testing and repair. PLACING THE DEVICE IN SERVICE; After the installation of a Model 975 or Model 950 unit has been Completed, plate the unit In service as follows: MODEL 975 REIDUCiii) PRESSUREPR1NCiPLE BACKFLOW PMFNrrER5 I. Start with both shut-off valves closed. Slowly open the inlet shut-off valve until the backnow prevenrer is completely pmssuritecl. 0 A ";.,(.4 ..U.--- f. .t.-..v.f... t... _.... 3. If the discharge doc< not stop, refer to "Mair,iC- nance Instructions` for Repair Procedures. 4. Repress rite d6i ice as 1n Step s; , i)rti ice should Nriciian ,properly. 5, After the device has been precsut 7,ed, vent x!.i trapped air from both check valves and the relief valve 4iy shilhiiy opQ(t!n7j {lath cif m;t cc:ks. G. Slowly op-n the downstream shut-' ff valve, The Mode; 975 Reduced Pressure principle Backflow Preventer is now in service. 7,. If "Pphting" or Intermittent dfschirges from the relief valve are noted, "Fpifbnr (dodnags;i from the rellef valve could be * re.uit of ptessurefluctuations and/or water hammer Condition In the system. It ouch condition exists, install water pressure reducing valves or water hammer shock arrestors In compli- ance whit Industry standards as needed. 3. After the backhow preverter has been prop- erly Installtd, test the device (see "testing the Modci 975 Device"): If the device fails the test, remove the first and second check valves and thoroughly flush the device. if the relief valve falls to operate properly, Inspect the scnsing Passage for doping (also see rnaimenanre Instructions). Clean rubber seats of all debrii and place unit back in service. MODEL 950 nOlUSLE CHECK VALVE ASSIVEMBLIES 1. Start wlth both shutoff valves closed. 510x ly open the Inlet shut-0 valve until the back,'low prevente•+Is completely pressurized, When the unit has been pressurized, vent on) trapped airy alighily opening tacit of tl+e four test cock;. 3. Slowly open the downstream shut-off valve, The Model 95u Double. Checz Valve Assmbiy Is now In service. 4. After the itackfiow Prcventer has tern prop- erty Installed, test the device (see'Icsting rite Model 950 Device'). If the dcvicc falls the tes', remove the first and second atrek valves and thoroughly flush the d^_vice. Clean rlibber seats of ali debris and plzee unit back in service. host sources of drinkinS water (unialn come amount of lead. Due to the fact that bronac plumbing products mrilain delectable amqurt,'r of lead and other malerials, the Ssrte"of C alifern,a requires the following r.otice:'1VAg.RT;G, this rrkxtuct contains chemicals kno-n to the Stntc �r . our _ t.,,.,, .i.._ PE=A.WANDSCAPE CONST INC 2064 523 P.04 13t51 3220419 EEL. TEST PROCEDURE AND MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTION MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTIONS t. GENERAL A. Clean all parts thoroughly with water after di.9assembly, B. Carefully Inspect rubber seal rings, dia- phragms and o-rings for damage. C. Test unit after reassembly for proper. operation, 2. SBRVICIP)G CHECYr, VAL'r BS A. Close inlet and outlet shut-off valves. B. Open No. Z, 3, and 4 test cocks to release pressure from vat -to, C. Unscrew check valve cover using approppriate s!7,e wrench. CAUTION: COVER IS SPRPc LOADED. To avoid Injury, hold cover down firmly. with one hand while unscrewing cover. D. Remove cover, spring and poppet assembly. E. Inspect the rubber seal ring for cute or embedded debt•fs. F. To remove seal ring, remove screw and seal retainer. G. If the reverse side of the seal ring is unused, if 1a possible to Invert the seal ring, H, Irspact valve cavity and seating Area. Remove any debris. I. if supplied wit} removable watt unscrew seat from body and replace with new Beat and lightly greased "O" ring,, J. Reverse the above procedures to reinstall check valve assembly, NOTE; Care should be Wen to make sure the heavy spring is Installed In the No,1 check valve (Model M only). 3. SERVICING RELIEF VALVE A. Remove relief valve cover bolts. CAU71ON: COVER IS SPRING LOADED. Hold cover firmly with one hand while removing bolts, B. Remove cover, plunger assembly and spring, C, Inspect rubber seal ring and diaphragm for cuts or embedded debris. D. Remove seal ring and diaphragm by removing retaining bolt. li Inspect relief valve seat. Remove any debris, F. To remove aeat, unscrew from body, G. Reverse the above procedures to reinstall the relief valve. 'Pot seat tmiovu..detana. conga Gtforr. wAM'S A100ft. 3.Sd r1ELt) IES coo►A", C Rr. r.t IM ts�M.teM,tw vA vst Coca.+t s J �. ,.'its• tot,.!, •- Ill. tat..' t t.�,.,w•.,1 i. , w:W Mlttw � w•ot . � TEST PROCEDURE MODEL 950 DOUBLE CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY EQUIPMENT REQUIRED: Differential pressure gauge test kit ?'EST Nl PURPOS6r Test Ni check valve for tightness against reverse flow, REQUIREMENT: The valve must dose tight against reverse flow under all pressure differentlafa. 1, Close #2 and 01 shut-off valves. 2. Open testcocks N, and 03. 3. Attach "vent" hose to testcock N1; "low" hose to testcock #2; and ''high" hose to testcock 03, 4. Open.by-pass valves (A) kid (C); then open testoodc Ni. S. Open testcock #4 to bleed air from valve and teat kit. 6. Close by-pass valve (C). Slowly open by-pasis valve (0) until differential gauge reads 5 psid. Close by -paws valve (B). 7, #1 check Is considered tight If differential pressure is maintained. TEST02 PURPOSE; T cat 02 check valve for tightness against reverse flow. REQUIREMENT, The valve must close Hght against reverse flow under all pressure differentials. I, Close Taatcock 11. 1. Attach "high" hale to tesicod 44 and "low" hose to Testcock #3. 3. Open By-pass (C). Open testcocks #1 and #4. 4. Repeat step 6. 5. 02 check valve is considered tight if differen- tial pressure Is maintained. WrtKdvS M40ft 97S FIELO Ufitmo PROCEDURE ,t,st"t MODEL 975 REDUCED PRESSURE PRINCIPLE ASSEMBLY EQUI PM ENT REQUIRED: Differential Pressure Test Gaup;, TEST Ni PURPOSE; Test 92 check valve for ti6Mri &s against reverse now. REQUIREMENT: The valve must close light against revemn fiuv: under all pressure differentials. 1. Attach the "high" side hose to leslxck #z; and the 'low" side hose to tesicock 43, 2. Close 92 shet•off valve. ?. Open Tesicocks 02 and 03. 4. Open By-pass valve (C) and (A?, and bleed tit atmosphere until all air is expelled. S. Close by-pass calve (A). Open by: -pass va.'i e (B) and bleed to atmosphere until ail atr is expelled. Close by-pass valve (B) and (C). 6. Attach the "ven!" hose to testco&,, tr4. 7. Slowly open by-pass valve (A) and (C), a;t.a keep by-pass valve (B) close:. c. Open testcock 04, 9. Indicated pressure differential will drop slightly, it pressure differential does not continue to decrease the #2 check valve 1,t considered tight. TbST N2 PURPOSE; Tebt 11 check valve for tightness, and record pressure drop across #1 check valve, REQUIREMENT: The static pressure drop across the NI check valve, should be at least 3.0 psi greater then the relief valve opening point (Test 03), 1 • Close by-pass valve (A). 2. Close teetcockl4,and disconnect "vent" htl;c from testcock #4. 3. Open by-pass valves (B) and (C) bleeding to atmosphere, then close by-paKs valve (o) restoring the system to normal static condition. 4. Observe the pressure differential gauge anti note this as the 01 check valve p;ld. TF 57 $3 PURPOSEt To test operation of & differential relief vaivc, REQUIREMENT, The pressure differential :&lief valve must operate to maintain the "zone" between the two check valves at least 2 psi less then the supply prcaslarc. 1. 00%, by-pass valve (C) and open by-pnsi valve (A)• . 2. Open by-pass valve (B) very &lowly until tt,o differential gauge needle starts to drop. Hold the valve at this position and observe (tic gauge readteg at the moment the first discharge is noted from the relief valve. Fecord this as the opening differential pressure of the relief valve. PE LANDSCAPE CONST INC 2064j523 P.05 4. SPECIFICATIONS MODEL 950 3/4" _ 1'r FLOW CHARACTERISTICS za 36 As 60 Flow Rate (V S. OPM) PURPOSE The WILKINS Model 950 Double Check Valve Backflow Preventer consists of amain body with two check valves. The check valves are spring loaded.and operate inde- pendently. PRESSURE-TEMPERAT URE MODEL M 1 1/4" — 2" r� ■ co NV 135 Flow A816 (U.S. GPM) MATERIALS • All corrosion resistant • Cast bronze maincase • Stainless steel springs • Rubber check valve discs • Stainless steel bolts 10 Suitable for supply pressure up to 175 PSI and water temperatures from 331"F to 140°F. TYPICAL INSTALLATION Install with minimum clearance of 12" from floor or grade. Install with adequate side clearance for test- ing and maintenance. Protect from freezing, If installed in pit or vault consult local codes; provide adequate drainage. OPTIONS SuffIx. .(options can be combined) B - with full port resilient seated ball valves S _ with bronze "Y" strainer t1 with union connections L - without shut-off valves i XL - high temperature service w/removable plastic check seats j A - removable brass check seats DIMENSIONS & WEIGHTS r—A wvu r•.�, 0.. IDawonw 1 �.. sr.• i__�-� _—j �l... c�.r �..o,� _ .,,' . r •S! r.wn � va». I nrw� ! vu. � C. Q. { I 7 Y.4.. .p... a step *hood of tomWrOw _ • ^RE$SURE REDUCING VALVES • 8A('KFLC)W PREVENrERS VI/ILICl101S + TEMPERATURE AN010A PRESSURE RELIEF VALVES DIVISION VALVES IRRIGATION VALVES • ort LEC7Rlf UNIONS "Y' fiTAAInrFw 1747 Commerce WBV. Paso RObiwf f A 4AAAA- 1ROR . . .- .1..-- I - --_. •- . • .•4 a: V V 1 VJO 11!23,192 1 3 : * $ a_29At9 E- I* qF_ 91 BA WV1616W11 FEATURES 3/4" to 2" • Bronze body construction - ASTM B584.89 • All internal parts made from corrosion re- sistant materlals • Low head loss • Spring loaded''Y" type center guided check valves • All Internal parts serviceable in -line • ..Threaded inlet and outlet ANSI B2.1 • Maximum working pressure - 175 PSI • Temperature range - 33°F to 140"F • Nigh temperature option available STANDARDS WILKINS Model 950 Double Check Backflow Preventer meets or exceeds the require- ments for flow rates and head loss of FCCCHR at U.S.C., ASSE Standard No. 1015, ANSI/AWWA C510.89, IAPMO (UPC)! and CSA 064.5. Consult your local WILKINS representative or factory for other state, county or city acceptances. C A APPLICATION The WILKINS Model 950 Double Check Valve Backflow Preventer has been designed for installation in potable water lines where a potential health hazard does not exist. WILKINS' low head loss makes the device most suitable where system pressures are low or where it is important to hold pressure loss to a minimum. NOTICE Proper performance is dependent upon the user adhering to recommended installation procedures and by having licensed, quali- fied personnel perform regular, periodic in- spection and maintenance. For proper in- stallation, consult WILKINS' Installation and maintenance manual and prevailing govern- mental and local codes. Two shut-off valves and four test cocks are provided for testing and maintenance. All Model 950 Double Check Valve Backfidw Preventers can be disassembled and re- paired without removing the device from the line. Damage to the device could result wherever water hammer andtor thermal expansion could cause excessive line pressure. Where this could occur, a spring check, shock ar. restor and/or pressure relief valve should bo installed downstream of the device. WARRANTY WILKINS' Backflow Preventers are warranter; against defects in material and workman- ship for a period of one year from dat3.ot shipment strictly in accordance with WILKINS' Certificate of Limited Warranty, STREET FILE CITY OF EDMONDS .250 - 5TH AVE. N.. EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT p Public Works o Planning a Parks and Recreation o Engineering 89p. 19 Mailed 11/17/92 November 17, 1992 Martin Hansen, Project Manager Design and Construction Branch Seattle Facilities Service Office P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 SUBJECT: POST OFFICE SITE - 7601 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE (ED49) Dear Mr. Hansen, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR As you are aware, during the construction of the subject facility, the concrete curbing and asphalt walkway along 76th Ave. were damaged, as well as 76th Ave. itself, by subcontractors working for Cree Construction. Cree has been confronted with this and asked to repair the damage. To date, neither the curbing along 76th Ave., as marked, nor portions of the asphalt walkway have been replaced or repaired. The City repaired the street surface prior to resurfacing at a cost of $1,679. Please take notice that the City of Edmonds claims damages of and from Cree Construction arising out of the construction of the Perrinville Post Office. We request that neither the retainage nor the bond be released until this issue is resolved. If you have any questions, please call Lyle Chrisman at (206) 771-0220, extension 324. Your assistance in this matter will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, ROBERT,J. ALBERTS, P.E. City Engineer ALC/RJA/sdt POSTOFFC/TXTST530 0 Incorporated August 11, 1890 0 890 19C�- � STREET FILE CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N.. EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works . Planning . Parks and Recreation • Engineering November 9, 1992 Mailed 11/13/92 Martin Hansen Project Manager Design and Construction Branch Seattle Facilities Service Office P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 Re: Post office site - 7601 Olympic View Drive (ED49) Dear Mr. Hansen, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR This letter is just to confirm our conversation November 6, 1992 regarding the installation of the eight inch water line on 76th Ave., the lock -on of the water meter, and the 76th Ave. overlay. Based on our conversation, it is my understanding that the post office does plan to install the eight inch water line on 76th Ave., but wishes to do the work with another contractor after the post office takes occupancy of the facility, and that doing it later would,ha�ve�to be agreed to by Bob Alberts, the City Engineer. In addition, I understood you to say the post office does not want to pay their portion of the cost to overlay 76th Ave. and in essence, is asking the City to waive reimbursement. Again, such a decision would have to come from the City Engineer. With regard to the locked water meter, you felt the lock should be removed to continue to provide construction water. I explained service to the facility would occur when the outstanding problems were resolved and that you needed to discuss the matter with Bob Alberts. We also talked briefly about the catch basin on the south side of Olympic View Drive, where the invert elevation is lower than the outlet at the stream, and who would be resolving the issue. According to our records, we informed Dick Nelson of the problem by letter dated October 2, 1992 and are Waiting for a solution. If any context of this letter does not represent what we discussed, please let me know. We are willing to work with you to resolve the remaining issues. O Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan r Martin Hansen November 9, 1992 Page 2 In a discussion with the City 'Engineer today, temporary eonstruetion water service to the building will be provided and the meter unlocked. Sincerely, ADDISON L. CHRISMAN IV Engineering Inspector- ALC/RJA/sdt POSTOFF.OVD/TXTST530 Public Works Division Report Noel Miller, Public Works Superintendin$, presented the 1992 Public Works Programs for Administra- tion, Streets, Water/Sewer, Facilitie And Equipment Rental. As a procedural matter, COUNCILMEMBER EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PALMER, TO EXTEND THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. Council President. Palmer inquired on the alley maintenance program and asked if that is required by law. Mr. Miller said he does not believe it is required by law, however Mr. Miller said there are numerous public requests for this type of project. Council President Palmer said he would C0� like to see some figures from staff on what the cost is to the city regarding alley maintenance. Council President Palmer inquired on the Safe Water Drinking Act, and said the City is testing for lead and copper levels, yet the City is buying water from Alderwood and Seattle who also perform the same test. Council President Palmer said this sounds like needless government duplica- tion, and asked if the City is required by law to perform testing. Mr. Miller said the City is required by the EPA to perform the test as the City is considered a distributor of water. Council President Palmer said this is a piece of legislature which perhaps the City Council should recom- mend a change to as he feels it is a needless duplication which costs the water customer more money. Mr. Miller said the City of Everett and the City of Seattle have implemented a program which reduces the number of samplings the City of Edmonds has to do. Mayor Hall thanked all departments for their presentation MAYOR Mayor Hall referenced the upcoming Edmonds Downtown Waterfront meeting. 0 r Mayor Hall referenced two liquor license applications, in which Chief Prinz recommends approval: i� 1) House of Teriyaki, and; 2) Pyramid Texaco. No objections were noted by Councilmembers. Coun- LI`��,� ;�Jcil President Palmer requested copies of liquor licence applications in the- future. Mayor Hall concurred. p✓Q P �1 Mayor Hall said the Cross Sound Transportation Program has now included Mayor Hall as a member C �p55 ' and said she is very interested in getting involved. COUNCIL Council President Palmer referenced the Staff Meeting Minutes in which Engineering had reported �r some problems with the Perrinville Post Office complying with some improvements which are re- T quired. It was noted Mr. Alberts, City Engineer, was out of town, however Mayor Hall said Mr. Qpti C� / Alberts will be handling the issue when he returns. 0 Council Petruzzi commended Mayor Hall on her "Think -Tank". Councilmember Dwyer said he would like a response from Staff on the Claim for Damage description Cp�included in tonight's packet. Mayor Hall concurred. p With no further business before the Council, Mayor Hall adjourned the meeting at 10:14 p.m. A PERMANENT RECORDING OF ALL COUNCIL MEETINGS, AS WELL AS THE OFFICIAL SIGNED COPY OF THESE MIN- UTES IS LOCATED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES Page 4 October 13, 1992 0 STREET FILE 0 CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT _ Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation . Engineering 89o_19y October 8, 1992 Mr. Kenneth W. Kirkpatrick Contracting Officer Manager, Design & Construction Branch Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 LAURA M. HALL MAYOR SUBJECT: EDMONDS, WA - PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY ED49 76TH AVE. W. OVERLAY COST AND WATER PIPELINE IMPROVEMENTS Dear Mr. Kirkpatrick, The carrier facility project appears to be nearing completion. I bring to your attention the eight -inch -water pipeline required to be installed in 76th Ave. W. has not been installed to date. I am raising this issue because the work being observed is proceeding as if the pipeline is not going to be installed. We would appreciate your attention to this matter. In August, 1992, a cost of overlaying 76th Ave. W. was submitted to you. To date, we have not received a payment for this work. We would also appreciate a review of this matter. Again, we are concerned that the requirement and approved,plans for the water pipeline in 76th Ave. W. is being ignored. We consider this very serious. I will be out of the office during the week of October 11, 1992. Please contact Gordie Hyde, Engineering Coordinator, if you need to speak with someone during my absence. Sincerely, ROBERT J. ALBERTS, P.E. City Engineer RJA/sdt Enclosure c: Mayor Laura M. Hall Gordie Hyde, Engineering Coordinator PRNVLFAC.2/TXTST530 Q�- MR� h �f"Se--k- /act 10 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan CITY OF EDMONDS LAURA M. HALL CIVIC CENTER • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 775-2525 MAYOR 890.199- n,4QyJ 9'/3//92-- August 27, 1992 Richard Nelson Project Manager, Design & Construction Branch Seattle Facilities Services Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 Re: Perrinville Carrier Facility ED49 8" water main installation and curb repair along 76th Ave. W. Dear Mr. Nelson, With the construction of the subject facility nearing completion, the four (4) inch water line along 76th Ave. has yet to be replaced with the eight (8) inch line per approved drawings. Please take the appropriate action to insure installation of the eight inch water line. A second area of concern is the damaged curbing along 76th Ave. caused by the contractor's trucks. To date, the curbing has not been replaced, nor that portion of damaged walkway repaired. We request you hold part of Cree Construction's retainage until the curb replacement is resolved. If you have any question's, please call me at 771-0220. Sincerely, ROBERT J. ALBERTS, P.E. City Engineer ALC/RJA/sdt PRNVL8".WTR/TXTSTS30 • Incorporated August 11. 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan 890 19C� CITY OF EDA e- LAURA M. HALL 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206), 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering October 2, 1992 Mr. Richard Nelson, Project Manager Contract Design & Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 SUBJECT: PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY ED49 Dear Mr. Nelson, A recent site inspection indicates that the recently installed landscape irrigation system is 1.5 feet back of the sidewalk along 76th Ave. W., which conflicts with the approved plan location of the 8 inch water.l.ine. The water line must be installed along 76th Ave. W. for fire protection (see the enclosed plan highlighted in yellow). There is another problem with the drainage system from Olympic View Dr. to the stream (see enclosed plan highlighted in yellow). The control invert of this system is approximately 1.5 feet below the stream bed. The drainage system must be resolved to prevent a backflow condition in the existing storm drainage system. The City would appreciate your cooperation in expediting the resolution to the above problems to assure final project acceptance by the City of Edmonds. If you have any questions or require our assistance, please call 771-0220. Sincerely, 00- DUANE E. CLARK Engineering Specialist c: Bob Alberts, City Engineer / Lyle Chrisman, Engineering Inspector PERRINVL/TXTST530 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan f890-199 0 STREET FILE 0 CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N.. EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206).771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation . Engineering October 2, 1992 Mailed 10/2/92 Mr. Richard Nelson, Project Manager Contract Design & Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 SUBJECT: PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY ED49 Dear Mr. Nelson, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR A recent site inspection indicates that the recently installed landscape irrigation system is 1.5 feet back of the sidewalk along 76th Ave. W., which conflicts with the approved plan location of the 8 inch water line. The water line must be installed along 76th Ave. W. for fire protection (see the enclosed plan highlighted in yellow)_. There is another problem with the drainage system from Olympic View Dr. to the stream (see enclosed plan highlighted in yellow). The control invert of this system is approximately 1.5 feet below the stream bed. The drainage system must be resolved to prevent a backflow condition in the existing storm drainage system. The City would appreciate your cooperation in expediting the resolution to the above problems to assure final project acceptance by the City of Edmonds. If you have any questions or require our assistance, please call. 771-0220. Sincerely, 046d� n r� DUANE E. CLARK Alberts —� Engineering Specialist c: Bob Alberts, City Engineer Lyle Chrisman, Engineering Inspector PERRINVL/TXTST530 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan CITY OF EDMONDS LAURA M. HALL CIVIC CENTER • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 775-2525 MAYOR STIDUCIL-T FILE 890-19'1 August 27, 1992 Richard Nelson Project Manager, Design & Construction Branch Seattle Facilities Services Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 Re: Perrinville Carrier Facility ED49 8" water main installation and curb repair along 76th Ave. W. Dear Mr. Nelson, With the construction of the subject facility nearing completion, the four (4) inch water line along 76th Ave. has yet to be replaced with the eight (8) inch line per approved drawings. Please take the appropriate action to insure installation of the eight inch water line. A second area of concern is the damaged curbing along 76th Ave. caused by the contractor's trucks. To date, the curbing has not been replaced, nor that portion of damaged walkway repaired. We request you hold part of Cree Construction's retainage until the curb replacement is resolved. If you have any questions, please call me at 771-0220. Sincerely, ROBERT J. ALBERTS, City Engineer ALC/RJA/sdt P.E. PRNVL8".WTR/TXTST530 • lncorporoted August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan TREE` F1L Off'" Mayor Hall said the Transportation Commission is still trying to operate in a vacuum, and said P ./ she has contacted Mayor Sullivan from the City of Mukilteo for the purpose of signing a joint i have a lace on a steering committee the 1f(N i55� letter requesting that the City of Edmonds of Mukilteo p g Commission is setting up. Councilmember Kasper suggested Mayor Hall contact Aubrey Davis on the r OtAM Commission prior to writing the letter. l/ Mayor Hall referenced citizen. letter of complaint concerning the train whistle during the late night/early morning hours. Council President Palmer said he is not surprised the Transportation Commission is proceeding in their normal way of doing business. Council President Palmer said it might be.appropriate for both cities to have a representative on the steering committee rather than one. He said if the Commission decides that neither city will have a place on the Committee, it may be an appropriate jj time for the two cities to form a separate task force. Z1"_V-1A /'Regarding the Post Office project notification in Council packets, Council President Palmer said t•f\� ` it appears the re-route is through the Post Office Property and said at this time, that is an unpaved portion. He is concerned with who would be liable for an accident on the property. Mayor .-Hall said she would get further information from Staff. ' COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO EXCUSE COUNCIL PRESIDENT PALMER'S ABSENCE OF AUGUST 18, 1992.-MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Hall reported on Health District Issues. Councilmember Hall said the tuberculosis epidemic is on the rise once again, and explained the process of what steps the Health District .must go through when a person is found to have tuberculosis. Mayor Hall recognized a boy scout in the audience, and asked him to come forward with his name and troop number. Mr. Chris Henderson, from Troop 838 said he was present to earn a merit badge. The Mayor and Council welcomed Mr. Henderson. At 9:35 p.m., the Mayor and Council recessed to an Executive Session to discuss labor negotia- tions. Following the Executive Session, which ended at 10:35 p.m; Mayor Hall adjourned the meet- ing. A PERMANENT RECORDING OF ALL COUNCIL MEETINGS, AS WELL AS THE OFFICIAL SIGNED COPY OF THESE MIN- UTES IS ON FILE IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES Page 5 August 25, 1992 STREET BILE TM UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE ENGINEERING UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Seattle Facilities Service Office P.O. Box 5000 June 25, 1992 Kent, WA 98064-5000 CITY OF EDMONDS ENGINEERING DIVISION ATTN ROBERT J ALBERTS 250 5 AVENUE EDMONDS WA 98020-3181 Subject: Edmonds, WA -- Perrinville Carrier Facility Waterline Requirements Gentlemen: We have recently been notified by Mr. Gordon Hyde of your staff and by Mr. Mike Boyle of Cree Construction that the City of Edmonds is requiring installation of an 811 water line along the entire length of 76th and Olympic View. This is contrary to the agreement reached at the April 15th meeting between you, Mayor Hall, Mr. David A. Katcher of the USPS, and myself. The agreement was that, due to the higher than anticipated costs of the stream relocation and contaminated soils removal and a participation of $4,500.00 in street improvements, the City of Edmonds would only require the installation of a water line for fire protection along Olympic View, as developed by our engineer per our letter of May 5, 1992. I would appreciate an immediate phone call if this is not correct. Sincerely, wrmetn w. Airxpai i x Contracting Office Manager, Design $ C truction Branch Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P.O. Box 5000, Kent, WA 98064-5000 Telephone 206/656-4312 cc: Mayor Laura Hall PRO.,�T NOTIFICATIOI' -0 --- - MAYOR ❑ OTHER: TO. M STREET FILE Detour Route ` L> i e i i ;j O.V.D. x x W Q I INFO ONLY ■ OTHER: PROJECT DESCRIPTION STREET CLOSURE AT PERRINVILLE STAFF CONTACT G. HYDE DATE 8/24/92 PROJECT VICINITY PERRINVILLE CORNER CITY OF EDMONDS I ® O 890 19� CITY OF FDMONDS • 250 - 5TH-AVE. N.. EDMONDS, WA 96020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works a Planning o Parks and Recreation o Engineering June 23, 1992 Alfred A. Perez, Manager Real Estate Branch Seattle Facilities Service Branch P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA.98064 SUBJECT: PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY Mr. Perez, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR STEE°� FILE Mailed 6/23/92 Per the March 17, 1992 meeting with Mr. Richard Nelson and representatives of the City Engineering Division, right-of-way dedication is not required. However, an easement will be provided to allow public access over those portions of the frontage of 76th Ave. W. affected by sidewalk construction and road widening. My letter of June 8, 1992 requesting property be deeded was in error. I hope this has not caused undue inconvenience. Thank you. Sincerely, �J GORDbN C. HYDE Engineering Coordinator GCH/sdt PRNVL/TXTST530 Alberts • Incorporated August 11, 1890 Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan "TM '�ia'".ty ��'�! 1z'4' •�J�iStams:.��„ ' e2_�s� .1�'de 'x` .��'1fe:� y` s � 0 STREET FILE 0 CITY OF EDMONDS CIVIC CENTER • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 775-2525 8 g � _ 19 August 11, 1992 Mr. Kenneth W. Kirkpatrick Contracting Officer Manager, Design & Construction Branch Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 SUBJECT: EDMONDS, WA. - PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY 76TH AVE. W. OVERLAY COST Dear Mr. Kirkpatrick, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR n ell/ l9 Z- Enclosed is a pay estimate summary sheet for the overlay costs on 76th Ave. W. The final actual contracted cost was $7,045.26. In addition, there was a cost of $2,139.18 for repairs due to road damage by your contractor. We request the repair cost be deducted from your contractor's retainage or pay requests and be reimbursed to the City. If we can be of any assistance, please call. Sincerely, ROBERT J. ALBERTS, P.E. City Engineer RJA/sdt Enclosure PRNVLFAC/TXTST530 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • T_______ sJ're u 1 r a(d J chedule "F" - 76th Ave. W. - Olympic VieA Drive to 625 feet north CONTRACT BID PRICE ;;PAY REQUEST NUMBER ONE .;PAY REQUEST NUMBER TWO -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7---------------------- TEN ; ESTIMATE ; DESCRIPTION OF ITEM ;;UNIT PRICE ; TOTAL PRICE ;;QUANTITY ; TOTAL PYMNT. ;QUANTITY TOTAL PYMNT 0. ; QUANTITY ; ;;D1rs.Cents ; D1rs.Cents ;;This reaue ; D1rs.Cents ;This reaue ; D1rs.Cents 2f ; 650 Grind pavement ;; $1.12 ; $11118.00 ;; 647 $1,112.84 ; 0 ; $0.00 L.F. ; ;; ; ;;L.F. ; ;L.F. ----'----------'----------------------- "-----------'---------= --- " -----------'-------------- I ----------- ' II ------------- 4f ; 220 ; Asphalt Concrete for ;; $33.59 ; $7;389.80 ;; 169.17 ; $5,682�42 ; 0 ; $0.00 tons ; overlay -Modified "B" ; ;;tons ; ;tons ----'----------'----------------------- "-----------'------------- " -----------'--------------`-----------'------------- :, Sf ; 2 ; Adjust Catch Basin ;; $100.00 ; $200.00 0 -$0.00 ; 0 ; $0.00 each ; to final grade ;; ' ;;each ; ;each ' ----'----------;-----------------------;;----------- ;------------- ;;----------- ;-------------- ;----------- ;------------- 6f ; 2 Adjust Manhole $100.00 $200.00 ;; 0 $0.00 ; 1 $100.00 c each ; to final grade ;; ; ;;each ;each ---------------------------------------- I Adjust Water Valve $75.00 $75.00 2 ; $150.00 0 ; $0.06 each ; to final grade ;; ;;each ;each ' ----'----------'----------------------- "------------------------- " ----------- °-------------- '----------- '------------- Total - Schedule 'F' l ANGE ORDER NUMBER 1 $8,982.80 $6,945.26 ;AND TOTAL - ALL SCHEDULES "A' TEROUGB "F $203.220.58 $190,072.11 2C i •2 i��� ii� r $1C0.00 $2,139.18 _ $16,438.62 FINAL PAYMENT cve,.)Cy 76 + 1 A v e- i/i . i ?�Yv�T;r- �OS June 25, 1992 CITY OF EDMONDS ENGINEERING DIVISION ATTN ROBERT J ALBERTS 250 S AVENUE EDMONDS WA 98020-3181 *TM UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Seattle Facilities Service Office P.O. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 Subject: Edmonds, WA - Perrinville Carrier Facility Waterline Requirements Gentlemen: We have recently been notified by Mr. Gordon Hyde of your staff and by Mr. Mike Boyle of Cree Construction that the City of Edmonds is requiring installation of an 811 water line along the entire length of 76th and Olympic View. This is contrary to the agreement reached at the April 15th meeting between you, Mayor Hall, Mr. David A. Katcher of the USPS, and myself. The agreement was that, due to the higher than anticipated costs of the stream relocation and contaminated soils removal and a participation of $4,S00.00 in street improvements, the City of Edmonds would only require the installation of a water line for fire protection along Olympic View, as developed by our engineer per our letter of May S, 1992. I would appreciate an immediate phone call if this is not correct. Sincerely, Contracting Office Manager, Design & Ustruction Branch Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P.O. Box 50001 Kent, WA 98064-S000 Telephone 206/656--4312 cc: Mayor Laura Hall STREET F1 4=17;D LE construction co., inc. an equal opportunity employer July 27, 1992 United States Postal Service Seattle Facilities Service Office P.-O. Box 5000 Kent, Washington 98064-5000 Attention: Dick Nelson general contractors (206) 775-0454 RECEIVED J U E 2 9 1992 ENGINEERING' Letter No: 2613-054 Reference: Perrinville Carrier Facility Construction Contract #549986-91-B0147 Subject: Sidewalk at 76th Dear Mr. Nelson: Per our telephone conversation of this morning, we are proceeding with placement of the sidewalk at the 76th Street Right -of -Way, per your direction. Lyle Christian of the City of Edmonds has previously informed us that the water line along 76th was to be installed and we were concerned that portions on the sidewalk would have to be removed if this was the case. Per our conversation, you informed us that the Contracting Officer, Ken Kirkpatrick, has indicated that the water line will not be installed and that City of Edmonds Officials should contact him to get a clarification. Sincerely, CREE Ye7J. 7Bo4e ON CO., INC. Mich Project Manager MJB:kc cc: Ken Kirkpatrick-USPS Lyle Christian -City of Edmonds Water Department Mike Anderson -Hewitt Isley 5529 - 186th place s.w. • box c 36003 • lynnwood, washington 98046 223-01-CR-EEV-*3340 �II 77 o ID S .V cr -; �- J,'-� STREET FILE Nf 1 it GALL GOWN f / /v EXIST 05" � GONNEGTtTO NEW MH No 1 ` F PLU& F-XIST PIPE PLUG Ex t5T h H z � 1u1 No 3 (?2 � ) L 0 .. Y t} r. r DN -Z r Sl1EWi► - - -_ i� p ! ti. .per Q . $i. STA 3t 02 See 06T 2/0•2 .2 FOIL SECT ftwo4 MA 4/ Z TOP OF �?t1N^ Y r -. c� - - - - - , - - _ _+"'•_ - _! _- = _ _ _ _ — --_ / _ _ = _ _ _ _ _ _ �( A=t=t�"- arcs _ c °y+.......•7(0 AV MON UM tip/ 12�BL=M.17 _-______=_ =___ � 4�D ______�--_ - - r•r=a�ti FOUND rtar. ---- WATER 7Ei^r n�i \� ,SYV .o. $t (E)8� 42' �- WVSTORM SEWER CE)S' IN GhSP - f%INTLD GAS A !-0L'ND FES1,R.,�[�•„ LG •� %+ % r.,-..Y leg: `dGAPD1sm5 r I:X 16T Gt?, GONNEGj TO NEW MH No 1 W� W 0 GP e W'VaSANITARY Hu. - SAWMARY -SEWER MI.N �OI % )ZIM• Z74.79 \ I ! RIM '-282-45 I E 264.74 �, e, I.E. = 26b.79 - 24•CF S. s �/ t:lr a273:70 ^ 24' GP 5. TS > LE. 266.65-24•L.E N. 1_E. a273.54•-'24" GP N. MH No 1 (TV 0) RAM_ �:0.g3 ~ .e NE. MH No 0 0 STSTA.I t 00� 'EX15T CA5 _ i 6eE VeT 2 G-:2 s 0 - REMOVE i� jZSPLACe EXIST WATSIZ MAIN AS NECESSARY "FOR INSTALL AT ION OF NEW J c / I STORM SEWEu.. VERIFY IE 41 PLAN ij ) may, 12EMOJE 'f RePL:ACE EXIJr SiDEWAI-K , GURP i E = 268.04 KPH PVMi. P6 NEC.E55ARY ' POFZ N1 I IWOMALLATIOW of N$W eTolzM SEVVSjZ. 'j— S7rRM M_4. -- "'�` RIM. = 272.513 f , 46• N.w. 269.04— B" C.�. 'N, i ��p ��IVl� o& j A dR� Pau M rua To ECm ET XIST GD PLUX1540PIPE l t PRv (LE $1 PILL EXJ57 MH W/GONG 1•-�� ` UP TO EL. 2CoB.04 Q � Cl Q ck TM UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE June 15, 1992 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Seattle Facilities Service Office P.O. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 CITY OF EDMONDS ATTN GORDON C HYDE 250 5 AVE N EDMONDS WA 98020-3181 Subject: Edmonds WA - Perrinville Carrier Facility Street Right -Of -Way Gentlemen: STREET FILE RECEIVED J UN 1 6 1992 ENGINEERING We have reviewed your request of June 8, 1992 regarding the street right-of-way and are willing to deed a portion of the above site to the City for its proposed use. Upon receipt of the deed we will forward it to our legal counsel for review. Please be advised that the Postal Service will sell the described property with the following conditions: 1. City of Edmonds assumes costs for deed preparation; 2. City of Edmonds contracts for escrow services; 3. City of Edmonds assembles documents to verify fair market value; 4. Property is sold at fair market value. Please forward the completed deed to my attention. A. Perez Ma ger, Real sttBranchSeattle Facil''ieOffice Enclosure 890_199 TYE � FILE CITY OF EDMONDS S 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering June 9, 1992 Mailed 6/9/92 Mike Boyle Cree Construction Co., Inc. P. 0. Box C36003 Lynnwood, WA 98046 SUBJECT: PERRINVILLE USPS STATION - STREAM DEGRADATION Dear Mr. Boyle, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR A water quality discharge problem involving your company was brought to my attention on this date. Water from an excavated area of the construction site was -pumped to 76th Street, where it ran off and continued to flow back through an exposed (nonvegetated) area of your site and then into Perrinville Creek. The discharge of untreated wastes to waters of the State constitutes a violation of RCW 90.48.080 (see attached copy) of the Washington State Pollution Control Law and is subject to enforcement actions, which includes penalties of up to $10,000 per day. A copy of this letter is being mailed to the Washington State Department of Ecology. If you wish more information, please feel free to contact me at 771-0220 or Bob Wright (649-7060) at the Department of Ecology - Sincerely, DON FIENE, P.E. Hydraulics Engineer TIbe1_ts DF/sdt Enclosure c: Bob Wright, Department of Ecology CREECNST/TXTST530 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan l CITY OF EDMONDS ' 0 STREET FILE 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT ! p Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering 890_19 June 8, 1992 Mailed 6/8/92 Richard J. Nelson, Project Manager Contract Design & Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 SUBJECT: PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY ED49 Dick, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR The City has not commented on reduced scope of water line installation on Olympic View Drive because we have never received a plan showing the proposed reduced scope of improvements. It has been the City's expectation that new eight (8) inch D.I. water mains, together with necessary appurtenances, would be constructed across the postal office frontages of both 76th Ave. W. and Olympic View Drive. Regardless of postal design standards, the City design standard for driveway/road access at the mail drop is a minimum of fourteen (14) feet between curbs. Hewitt-Isley notes that this is a City request, but is, in fact, a code requirement. Regarding the concern noted by Hewitt-Isley about required frontage improvements on 76th Ave. W., it was my understanding that you have communicated to the architect the results of the numerous meetings and discussions you have had with the City of Edmonds' Engineering Division, giving them the necessary direction they need to do their design. Indeed, it appears that the plans'submitted show the level of improvement decided upon with the exception that the pavement widening section should show three (3) inches of Class B ACP. It should be noted that a deed needs to be prepared dedicating right-of-way on 76th Ave. W. to the City. Sincerely, GORDON C. HYDE Engineering Coordinator GCH/sdt PRNVLCAR.FAC/TXTST530 Rc-- Alberts • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan • • ,=sue CITY OF EDMONDS TEET�fI.LH v 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 FAX (206) 771-0221 YOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT j p Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation • Engineering 890 19 June 8, 1992 Mailed 6/8/92 Richard Nelson, Project Manager Contract Design & Construction Consultants Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 SUBJECT: PERRINVILLE USPS STATION - STREAM DEGRADATION Dear Mr. Nelson, A water quality discharge problem involving your company was brought to my attention on this date. Water from an excavated area of the construction site was pumped to 76th Street, where it ran off and continued to flow back through an exposed (nonvegetated) area of your site and then into Perrinville Creek. The discharge of untreated wastes to waters of the State constitutes a violation of RCW 90.48.080 (see attached copy) of the Washington State Pollution Control Law and'is subject to enforcement actions, which includes penalties of up to $10,000 per day. A copy of this letter is being mailed to the Washington State Department of Ecology. If you wish more information, please feel free to contact me at 771-0220 or Bob Wright (649-7060) at the Department of Ecology. Sincerely, DON FIENE, P.E. Hydraulics Engineer DF/sdt Enclosure c: Bob Wright, Department of Ecology A/SEASNS/TXTST530 Uc,= Alberts • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan 0 CITY OF EDMONDS STREET F 1LE LAURA M. HALL 250 - 5TH AVE. N. - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771-0220 - FAX (206) 771-0221 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Y 1 Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering 890 911 June 5, 1992 Mr. Richard Nelson, Project Manager Contract Design & Construction Consultant Mailed 6/5/92 Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 SUBJECT: PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY ED49 Dear Mr. Nelson, After having received the revisions and comments in response to the May 1, 1992 storm water management review of the proposed Perrinville USPS facility, we still have the following concerns: 1) A sequence of construction is required by the designer for the contractor to follow to ensure that the design is carried out in the proper manner. It should not be developed by the contractor during the course of construction. This should be standard design practice. 2) A profile should be used in any design of a storm drain system. It is also helpful for the contractor to help foresee clearance and crossing problems. It is also necessary for our review in determining the adequacy of the system. In particular, there is an eight (8) foot drop at a storm drain manhole where the creek is conveyed from the proposed forty-eight (48) inch RCP (invert elevation = 247.35) to the existing forty-eight (48) inch RCP (invert elevation = 239.40). How is that structure (in particular, the sidewalls and bottom) going to handle that drop? 3) A proper study or review cannot be facilitated without an organized drainage report. 4) The construction of the detention pond was done without review by me or approval by the City .Engineer. Please address these comments and resubmit the drawings and calculations and forward to my attention. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please feel free to contact me at 771-0220, extension 323. Thank you. Sincerely, DON FIENE, P.E. Hydraulics Engineer Alberts DF/sdt PRNVLPO.6/5/TXTST530 ' Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan `- City of EdmondsO :�,.. RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION C Ib PERMIT Permit Number: rl f ��Cinity STREST F��Ee Date:A. Ad ess of Construction: YMM \M M. & 76TH AVE. WESr 8 _ B. Type of Work (be specific): STREET MMENDS @ 76TH, STORM SSAER 9 0 C 76TH, KATER LIK C OLYMPIC VIEW DR. Contractor: CREE CONSTRUCTION CO., ®NC, 1'onlact:, MIKE .BOYLE Mailing Address: BOX C66003 LYNNWOOD, WA Phone: 775-0454 State License #: 223-01-CR-EE-C*334NM. `+'c Liability Insurance: YES Bond: $ Building Permit # (if applicable): N/A Side Sewer Permit # (if apbl�); LY0lN��Ob6311,nn �--�, e t Commercial ❑ S tston ❑ City Project Utility (PUD� GTI:, WflVG, CABLE, WATER) i ❑ <- Multi=F- y ingle Family ❑ Other INSPECT R: INSPECTOR: F. Pavement r et Cut : es ❑No G. Size of Cut: 10 x 200 H. Charge $ APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees to hold the City of Edmonds harmless from injuries, damages, or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, foreseen or unforeen, that maybe made against the City of Edmonds,. or.'any of its departments or employ- ees, including or not limited to the defense of any legal proceedings incltding defense costs, and attorney fees by -reason of granting this permit. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPEC77ON AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK. ES77MATED RESTORA77ON FEES WILL BE HELD UN77L THE FINAL STREET PATCH IS COMPLETED BY CITY FORCES, AT WHICH 77ME A DEBIT OR CREDIT WILL BE PROCESSED FOR ISSUANCE TO THE APPLICANT. Construction drawing of proposed work required with permit application. A 24 hour notice is required for inspection; Please call the Engineering Departm�'=32�1' Work is to be inspected during progress and at completion.�o���® Restoration is to be in accordance with City Codes. T' Street shall be kept clean at all times. Traffic Control and Public Safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City Engineer. All street cut ditches shall be -patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to the end of the working day; NO EXCEPTIONS.. I have read the above. statements and -understand the permit requirements and the pink copy of the permit will be available on site at all times for inspection urpo Signature: MDate: 5/ 11/ 92 (Cont act or Agent) CALL_DIAL-A-DIG PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK NO WORK SHALL BEGIN, PRIOR TO PERMIT. ISSUANCE Engrg. Div. 1991 CERTIFICA'k ..: OF PRODUCERv - BUSH, COTTON, THOMPSON & SCOTT, INC. 5612 LAKE WASHINGTON BOULEVARD N. E. KIRKLAND, WASHINGTON 98033 i i INSURED CREE CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. P. 0. BOX C36003 LYNNWOOD, WASHINGTON 98046 ( I ISSUE DATE (MM/DD/YY) ! INSURANCE 8-5-91 _ I THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CQUfERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE COMPANY LETTER A TRANSCONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY COMPANY B LETTER COMPANY `+ LETTER COMPANY D LETTER COMPANY E LETTER ;COVERAGES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, ccr,ocnircn ov onin ri nu�c CO iLTR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFFECTIVE POLICY EXPIRATION DATE (MM/DD/YY) DATE (MM/DD/YY) LIMITS GENERAL LIABILITY GENERAL AGGREGATE S 2,000,000 , A X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY (A) 600299371 5 / 1 / 91 5 / 1 / 9 2 PRODUCTS-COMP/OP AGG. S 2,000,000 CLAIMS MADE X OCCUR. PERSONAL & ADV. INJURY S 1,000,000 ' � X OWNER'S 8 CONTRACTOR'S PROT. EACH OCCURRENCE S 1,000,000 X STOP GAP LIABILITY FIRE DAMAGE (Any one fire) S 50,000 MED. EXPENSE (Any one person) S 000 AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE $ A X ANY AUTO (A)400299369 5/l/91 5/1/92 LIMIT 1,000,000 ALL OWNED AUTOS X BODILY INJURY S i X SCHEDULED AUTOS (Per person) i X HIRED AUTOS BODILY INJURY S X NON -OWNED AUTOS (Per accident) GARAGE LIABILITY PROPERTY DAMAGE S ' EXCESS LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ UMBRELLA FORM AGGREGATE S I OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM STATUTORY LIMITS WORKER'S COMPENSATION ' EACH ACCIDENT $ AND DISEASE —POLICY LIMIT $ EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY DISEASE —EACH EMPLOYEE S OTHER DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONS/VEHICLES/SPECIAL ITEMS RE • PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY - EDMONDS , WASHINGTON. CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE SEATTLE FACILITIES SERVICE OFFICE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL )QW)t4 P . 0. BOX 5000 MAIL 30 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE KENT, WASHINGTON 98064-5000 LEFT, XX_{XA4Xip{X� KIX Ik�C A ZED REPRESENTATI i ACORD 25-S (7/90) OACORD CORPORATION 1990 IF 0 TM UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 1992 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE June 3 Seattle Facilities Service Office P.O. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 CITY OF EDMONDS ATTN ROBERT J ALBERT 2505AVE N EDMONDS WA 98020-3181 Subject: Edmonds WA - Perrinville Carrier Facility City Review Comments Gentlemen: STREET FILE RECEIVED J UN 4 1992 ENGINEERING We are enclosing a 100% set of design drawings for the revised site at the Edmonds WA - Perrinville facility. Also attached are three copies of review comments forwarded by Hewitt-Isley referencing City of Edmonds letters dated April 1, 1992, April 27, 1992 and May 1, 1992. A further clarification of the comments is as follows: 1. Since the City has not specifically commented on the reduced scope of water line installation along Olympic View, Drawing C-1 has not yet been revised. The Contractor has been instructed to install the 811 water line from 175' north of our property to the service line connection shown on Drawing C-1 and relocate the existing hydrants along 76th as required. 2. The landscape plan is being revised to accomodate Department of Wildlife planting requirements along the stream sides. 3. As stated by the A/E it is a postal design standard for a 10101I wide snorkel lane at the mail drop area. The vehicle at this point is moving at 0-5 mph and a 101011 width has always been adequate. I would appreciate a quick response if there are.any additional questions. Sincerely, Richard J. Nelson Project Manager, Contract Design & Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P.O. Box 5000, Kent, WA 98064-5000 Telephone: (206) 656-4341 cc: Don Fiene, City of Edmonds Gordon C. Hyde, City of Edmonds Enclosures From KARNAK-CONSTRUCT INC. KARNAK CONSTRUCTION INCORPORATED 1729 208th STREET S.E., BOTHELL, WA. 98011 VAX COVER PACE Jun. 992 01:38 PM P01 once: (206) -AS-2904 'STREET .BILE D ATTENTION: a ffzaptq1�I FROH vie FAX h RBs ��L-121NVilf II- ;J7vSl�c NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDUG COVBR%, �• _ __ ,_„� IV TNERR ARE AND PROBLEMS WITS THl$ TRANSMISSION PLEASE CONTACT AT 493-2904 0 OUR PAX I xS 064793 NOTRSo m WITH ��i W I��t �'�'l. L) N G 1� S�Z.C�/1.'.(.i O��l ' 4 '�!.!j g' ,�•L'� THANK YOUI 5,' �Io lei 7i9 c r-LA-c G, f,/t,, �. H I L c . t,W ran--,-. i/v C /vf 01-W F/c . V ram' 0�1 VC W Fort'`� ,From : KARNAK-CONSTRUCTINC. Jun. 992 01:39 PM P02 FLAGGER t i rr . i r� r 0 O O O FLAGGER STATION SHALL BE 0 IN LINE OP SIGHT OF 0 APPROACHING VEHICLES c� by T 11 ❑ FLAGGER �1 I� IAIIE "d AHEAD � �~ CDHSTRUCfroN AHEAD.; ONE LANE , Two -WAY OPERATION HORIZONTAL CURVE (ILLUSTRATED) VERTICAL. CURVI? (SIMILAR) David M. Hewitt, AIA 400 Doyle Building A Professional William A. Isley, AIA, AICP 4met Service Timothy L. Spelman, ALA S98101-1540 Corporation P ;- Fax:206.626.054I L , r-;:i. Architecture Interiors Urban Design May 21, 1992 STKL.t.—T Mr. Richard Nelson United States Postal Service Seattle Facilities Service Office Design and Construction Branch P.O. Box 5000 Kent, Washington 98064-5000 Re: City of Edmonds Review Comments Dear Mr. Nelson: yry yy �j iSr �'c IN :ia�ir if We have received review comments from the City of Edmonds pertaining to the water main replacement, the storm sewer located in 76th Avenue, and the on -site civil work including the stream and detention system. We have revised the drawings to reflect these comments as follows: Water Main Replacement Comments contained in a letter dated April 1, 1992. The comments have been incorporated without exception. The fire flow capacity has been discussed with the City and documented with several letters. As discussed, we feel the flow rates will be met but cannot categorically state they will be reached. Additional work may be needed to meet the required flow once the system is installed and tested. These revisions were incorporated in the drawing used for developing the proposal received from Cree Construction dated April 30, 1992. We understand USPS and the City are discussing potential reductions in the scope of the water main replacement but that no resolution has been agreed upon. These drawings do not reflect these discussions. Storm Water Management Review Comments contained in a letter dated May 1, 1992. The comments have been incorporated in the documents with the exception of items 2 and 3. The design criteria outlined in itern 2 is not consistent with the input and direction we received from the City at the time the design took place. Conversations with the City indicate the criteria outlined in the letter is not adopted policy and that the City encourages that these guidelines be met. Item 3 asks that the 48-inch concrete pipe be shown in profile section. We can see no benefit in including this drawing in that the length of pipe involved is straight, there are no other utilities in the vicinity, and it is located on private property. Please refer to the attached response letter written by ABKJ (dated May 18) discussing the action taken on other items. Refer to the landscape plan L-1 (dated May 22) for planting and hydroseeding of the stream and retention pond areas as requested in item 9. Item 10 should refer to the Department of Wildlife,pomments below. The comments pertaining to the off -site storm sewer attached to the letter dated May 1 have been incorporated into sheet C-6. 9022-284 r, 0 May 21, 1992 Mr. Richard Nelson Page 2 Department of Wildlife Comments contained in a letter dated April 27, 1992. The extent of the landscaping associated with the stream was reduced at a meeting held on December 3, 1992, in an effort to reduce costs. The agreed upon concept was to develop a grassy slope on the west bank and a retaining wall/rockery at the east bank along the road. This concept was reversed when the road width was increased. The grassy slope was replaced by ground cover as a budget reducing measure. Per your direction at our meeting, the Department of Game Guidelines for Stream Vegetation were not to be used as a design guide. Consequently, we have not revised the landscape drawing to reflect the comments pertaining to selection of plant material. We have included the additional river gravel as the top layer of the stream bed per the review comments. This item was not shown on the documents used for developing the proposal but was included per our verbal direction. Storm Sewer in 76th Avenue Comments contained in a letter dated April 27, 1992. The design calculations were sent to the City for review with their comments included in the Storm Water Management comments discussed above. The drive-thru at the Snorkel Lane was designed to USPS standards. The City request that the lane be widened to 14 feet was not incorporated in the documents. The vent traps requested at the sewer clean outs have been incorporated. No review comments have been received concerning the off site improvements associated with the widening of 76th Avenue. Included in these improvements are sidewalks, gutters, curbs, and catch basins. We have not received comments concerning the dedication of the additional right-of-way at the south portion of 76th Avenue. We recommend you forward documents to the City for final review and acceptance and to the general contractor for final pricing. These drawings should be the basis for the formal change order with the revision dates used to describe the scope of work. Sincerely, David M. Hewitt Senior Principal In Enclosure cc: Michael Anderson - Hewitt Isley 9022-284 r ANDERSEN BJORNSTAD KANEOACOBS•INC May 18, 1992 Mr. Michael Anderson Hewitt Isley 400 Doyle Building 119 Pine Street Seattle, Washington 98101-1511 Re: USPS Perrinville Carrier Station Edmonds, Washington Dear Mr. Anderson: We have reviewed the Storm Water Management Review letter from the City of Edmonds, dated May 1, 1992 and following are our responses to the individual comments: 1. We will add to Sheet C-6 a sequence of construction which is being developed by the Contractor. 2. The detention pond has been designed to detain a 25 year storm released at a 25 year existing rate and to detain a two year storm released at 50% of a two year existing condition for all new impervious surfaces. The Snohomish County Drainage Manual was used as the basis of design. Our conversations with the City of Edmonds provided this criteria to follow for the design of the storm water drainage and detention system. 3. a. The Snohomish County Drainage Manual does not require that the drainage plan include profiles of the 220 W. HARRISON proposed on -site storm drains. SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98119-4108 b. The "top of pipe" note on Sheet C-1 refers to the top of TEL: 206.285. 185 204 the existing48" diameter pipe. FAX: 206.285.8204 P P 4. a. The profile of the emergency spillway will be shown on W. 6ENSON BLVD. Detail 6/Sheet C-3. SUITE 500 ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503-3690 b. The slope of the 12" diameter outlet pipe from the catch TEL: 907.274.3660 basin in the Swale will be indicated to be 20%. grassy FAX: 907.276.7073 5. a. The design calculations submitted to the City of Edmonds were. -pot organized or edited into a report form for a technical review. Please advise if a formal drainage report needs to be developed. b. The maximum design water surface of the pond is El. 264.00. The top of the surrounding berm is El. 265.00 which provides one foot of freeboard: Michael Anderson Page 2 May 18, 1992 6. It is our understanding that the detention pond is already constructed. 7. The headwall structures and 72 inch CMP are shown on Detail 9, Sheet C-3. 8. The grade at the northeast driveway entrance is shown to be 0.30 feet higher than the maximum water surface of the detention pond. The only situation where storm water flow may flow towards the street is if Catch Basin No. 8 becomes totally plugged. 9./10. Refer to the landscaping plans for vegetation indicated for the detention pond and stream bed. Should you have any questions or comments concerning the response to any of the above items, please contact our office. Sincerely, ANDERSEN BJORNSTAD KANE JACOBS, INC. David L. B DLB:bml 90261-01.401 890-19y 0 01 CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering STRE"Y" �iLE May 7, 1992 Mr. Richard J. Nelson, Project Manager Contract Design and Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 LAURA M. HALL MAYOR SUBJECT: LETTER FROM MR. NELSON TO MR. ALBERTS DATED MAY 5, 1992 Dear Richard, PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR In discussions with your engineer, a determination was made that the improvements proposed may provide the 2000 gpm fire flow requirements. Your engineer felt the combined flows from two (2) different pressure zones will provide the flows. We thought that only one pressure zone was used in the calculations. The City cannot guaranty this will work.. The engineer's calculations indicate it will. If the flows are not achieved, a new pipeline would have to be brought into the area from one of the City's pressure reducing valves. Your engineer is aware of this option. I beli-eve your engineer feels the pipelines proposed would be needed in any event, thus saving you money if the proposal works. If there are any questions, please call. Sincerely, ROBERT J. ALBERTS, P.E. City Engineer RJA/sdt PRNVL5/5.LTR/TXTST530 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan STREET FILE RECEIVE® *T. MAY 7 1992 UNITED SLATES ENGINEERING POSTAL SERVICE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Seattle Facilities Service Office May 5, 1992 P.O. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 CITY OF EDMONDS ENGINEERING DIVISION ATTN ROBERT J ALBERTS 250 5 AVENUE EDMONDS WA 98020-3181 Subject: Edmonds, WA - Perrinville Carrier Facility Fire Hydrant Requirements Gentlemen: The following drawing copies 'show proposed revisions to sheet C-1 previously sent to your office. Please respond if this is in agreement with the meeting held on April 15, 1992. After your comments, we will revise sheet C-1 and reissue new prints. Your letter of April 13, 1992 indicated some hesitation in achieving the required 2,000 GPM. Our engineer has stated that since the City does not have complete modeling information for their water system, it is impossible to state with certainty that 2,000 GPM will be achieved. If the values described in our April 6, 1992 letter remain constant and the line is upgraded from 6" to 811, the 2,000 GPM should be easily surpassed. If this is not correct, we would appreciate your response and more specific information of what can be done to assure the required 2,000 GPM. Please call me at 656-4341 with any questions or comments. Sincere" , Richard Nelson Project Manager, Contract Design & Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P.O. Box 5000, Kent, WA 98064-5000 Telephone: (206) 656-4341 Enclosures: April 6 and April 13 letters Drawing Revisions cc: Hewitt.Isley Architects, PS • 0 bcc: FS0502:RJN : jas FS0502 : KWK/Dldd/JPH FS0502:GLC/RJN FS0502:C 44S6M/o5 SUSPENSE: lb/92 April 6, 1992 CITY OF MI -MS ENGINM,'ING DIVISION Am ROM IT J ALBERTS 2SU S AVWQE NOR7111 8'iMONDS 4A 98U20-3181 Subjeci..: Edmonds, M - Perrinville Carrier.Facility Fire Hydrant keyuirements Gentlemel:: The subject building is presently being upgraded to a Type V one -hour rated building, and now re%Vires a mit:imur; of 2,000 GPIM fire flow with two hydrants. In conversations with Roil Holland and Gary McComas, the fire hydrant at the northwest corner of the intersection of Glywpic View and 76th was recently tested and produemi 1,JCOU C!'M at a static pressure of 130 PSI. Additional iire flow tests were requested and completed in September for hydrant M05-47 wrich, is approximately 110' south of our north property line on the west side of Ulympic View. This tested at 647 GPM with a static pressure of 90 PSI, with 737 GlIk availabie at 20 P5I. We are pruposing that the Postal Service extent an 8" water line 75' north of our north property line and connect with the existing 8" ductile iron main on tide west side of Olympic Vier. This mu 8" lire would then be brought to the southwest corner of our building where a new lire Hydrant would be located. This should substantially increase the water flow at that point and therefore deliver the fire flow required. The cost savings for not upgrading thf= City water lane system beyond benefit to ttte Postal Service would be applied toward the stream's construction. Sincerely, Richard J. Nelson Project Manager, Contract Design $ Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, LISPS P.U. Box 5000, Kent, 4A 98064-SUOU Telephone (206) 656-4341 0 ZvpS( ��i�uaP Zp CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering LAURA M. HALL MAYOR I` t='vEI E:D April 13, 1992 Mr. Richard J. Nelson, Project Manager Contract Design & Constr(.iction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 SUBJECT PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY ED49 LETTER FROM MR. NELSON TO MR. ALBERTS DATED APRIL 6, 1992 Dear Mr. Nelson, Your April 6, 1992 letter was reviewed with the City's Fire Marshall, Gary McComas. Mr. McComas confirmed the field information stated in your letter. The upgrade in building materials for the new facility has lowered the fire flow requirements to 2000 gpm. The proposed improvements, after installation, will be tested for compliance to the fire flow requirements. If the required flows are not met, additional improvements will be needed. If there are any questions, please call. Sincerely, ROBERT J. ALBERTS, P.E. City Engineer RJA/sdt c: Gary McComas, Fire Department Lyle Chrisman, Engineering Inspector PRNVLPO/TXTST530 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan r r . tJ 8 ATE AN VAt EKTEMO EX1's'i1Uc ' •A! , f2Et-OGAT1 �iXI�T ,/ PH VALVE -, pETENTIDN P6NL W/ VFC--�ETAT ION, .• - WA-raz sLoAGE I<L ?1-A:00; z x� AGGI: MAINTENANGt 12D, lo" ' OUAgPRY SPAL U 4 & IZAV El:, 2 WINPOW TOP GI' P�F-lip-M 5EE O�'f �� G -3 - • F L,O W GO NT FZOL - , .. ou'r� , 6TRU GT UP -a ) i EME2&EN6'Y OVE2FLOW roPILL.WAY, SEE.D�T to/G��' X a i2A'f ION. X 1 ��tZp.:�SY) WALE ._._. ;; ' • - r ' _ o 8x6��xCo 7EE o WATER. METE �. 211cP GATE VALVE \—FN ASS1✓W�� -y W/ OX.::..... GATE VALVS _........................... CAP Exi-b C� T 4" LI N e id' Wa.?Ee LWE ' GATE VALve VAL\l� NOTES: I. NEW all WA T ER MAIN n I��I SipNDA.Rp SPE: GON15,TRUG71ON" PR` DEPARTMENT OF T P- AS5061,6.1'I ON , WA5 r THE—: CITY OF EDMO` FD R NEW WATER M:` 890 19y 0 10 CITY OF EDMONDS STREET 250 - 5TH AVE. N.. EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation . Engineering May 1, 1992 Mr: Richard Nelson, Project Manager Contract Design and Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, LISPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 SUBJECT: STORM WATER MANAGEMENT REVIEW OF PROPOSED PERRINVILLE FACILITY ED49 Dear Mr. Nelson, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR Failed 5/4/92, A storm water management review of the proposed Perrinville Facility has yielded the following concerns: 1) A sequence of construction, including flow routing and diversion, is needed as the storm drainage is converted to the new system. (Sheet C-6) 2) The City requires that the twenty-five year storm event for the developed flow.condition be stored and released at the ten-year existing rate (not twenty-five year as your design calls for). We also will require the two-year storm for the developed flow condition be released at fifty percent of the existing rate. 3) The storm drain system needs to be profiled from the downstream connection point up to the proposed channel (seventy-two foot and one hundred foot segment of forty-eight inch RCP and three manholes). Clarify top of pipe=.243.82 remark on Sheet C-1. 4) Profile the emergency spillway system from beginning of overflow to connection at storm drain system. It appears that the twelve inch PVC has a slope of approximately thirty-five percent (257 upstream to 247 downstream at storm drain system connection). This would need to be corrected. Also, it appears that the catch basin located in the swale area could constrict flow, clarify, or correct this situation. 5) The methodology for the pond design is confusing and somewhat disorganized. A stage storage relationship needs to be calculated for the pond volume. A stage -discharge relationship needs to be figured also. Then, a SCS computer methodology (such as TR-20 or Santa Barbara method) should be utilized. We also will require one foot of freeboard to the top of dam for the design storm event. • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan 4 # i Mr. Richard Nelson, Project Manager May 1, 1992 Page 2 6) Detail the sequence of pond construction. 7) Call out the detail for the head wall structures and seventy-two inch CMP (including the gauge of the pipe) at the southeast entrance. Show culvert inverts (seventy-two inch CMP) on plan view. There appears to be less than 1.5.feet of cover over the seventy-two inch CMP. Check cover requirements for live load and specify cover on detail. 8) Ensure that grade at northeast entrance will restrict flow from going toward street (i.e. go toward the pond/creek) in the larger storm events. 9) Be more specific on the vegetation for the pond area. Specify stream area vegetation (upstream of pond area; upstream and downstream of seventy-two inch CMP). 10) Address Department of Wildlife comments regarding landscaping (see attached letter of April 27,1992). Please address these comments and resubmit drawings and calculations and forward to my attention. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please feel free to contact me. .Thank you. Sincerely, DON FIENE, P.E. Hydraulics Engineer b its DF/sdt PRNVLSTR.WTR/TXTST530 TrtF- 4q C April 27, 1992 CREE CONSTRUCTION CO INC ATTN MIKE BOYLE BOX C-36002 LYNNWOOD WA 98046-9603 TM � , E T UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Seattle Facilities Service Office P.O. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 Subject: Edmonds, WA - Perrinville Carrier Facility Construction Contract No. 549986-91-B-0147 Gentlemen: n APR 2 8 1992 EfVGI1V'EERIIyG We have been informed by the City of Edmonds that damage was caused to City owned curb, walkway and roadway as a result of construction of the above project. We request that you contact Mr. Alberts and immediately resolve the concern expressed in the enclosed letter. Sincerely, Richard J. Nelson Project Manager, Contract Design & Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P.O. Box 5000, Kent, WA 98064-5000 Telephone: (206) 656-4341 Enclosure L//Cc: City of Edmonds CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT l p Public Works • Planning . Parks and Qecreation, • Engineering 890 t--q»JCE OFECE ECEL rC April 15, 1992 �R 2 S Mr. Richard J. Nelson, Project Manager Design & Construction Branch Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 SUBJECT: ROADWAY AND SIDEWALK DAMAGE ALONG 76TH AVE. PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY SITE ED49 7601 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE Dear Mr. Nelson, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR In January of this year, our Engineering Inspector, Lyle Chrisman, noticed approximately 141 lineal feet of curbing along 76th Ave. adjacent to the subject site was damaged, along with 66 feet of the walkway and approximately 60 square feet of roadway. This was brought to the attention of the Project Superintendent on site. On a recent visit to the postal site, we noted more areas of roadway have sunk as a result of the numerous loaded trucks entering and leaving the site. Prior to construction of the post office, there was no road' settlement, little to no curb damage, and the sidewalk was intact adjacent to the project site. We contend the failures occurred because of the volume of trucks driving on the sidewalk while entering and leaving the site and should be repaired by the contractor. If you have arty questions, please call. Sincerely, ROBERT J. AL ERTS, P.E. City Enginee ALC/RJA/sdt PRNVLST.DMG/TXTST530 Action Info MGR D&C BR RMGR D&C PROG MGR PROJ MGR RE BR — P�'1 1.O Tn PAC I,,--C tV -R S_.-....._--.1.-..-....... I .I • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan J --AMMN— Co 890 19°t is CITY OF EDMONDS • STREET FILE 250 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation . Engineering LAURA M. HALL MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR April 27, 1992 Mailed 4/27/92 Mr. Richard Nelson, Project Manager Contract Design and Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 SUBJECT: PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY - PROJECT REVIEW ED49 Dear Mr. Nelson, The Engineering Division has reviewed the plans submitted on April 14 and April 22, 1992. Some issues regarding storm drainage need to be clarified. Upon receipt of the drainage calculations from your engineer, review will take place on these concerns. Additionally, the City of Edmonds requires that the drive -through for the postal drop box�be a minimum width of fourteen (14) feet curb -to -curb. The sewer cleanouts should be provided with vent traps. Otherwise, the designs of Sheets C-1, C-2, C-3, C-5, and C-6 appear to conform to earlier discussions and agreements. Sincerely, ORDON C. HYDE Engineering Coordinator GCH/sdt POSTOFFC.PRJ/UTST530 (24Alberts L - • Incorporated August 11, 1890 e Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan CITY OF EDMONDS STREET FILE 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering April 15, 1992 Mr. Richard J. Nelson, Project�Manager Design & Construction Branch Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 SUBJECT: ROADWAY AND SIDEWALK DAMAGE ALONG 76TH AVE. PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY SITE ED49 7601 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE Dear Mr. Nelson, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR PETER E. HAHN . DIRECTOR In January of this year, our Engineering Inspector, Lyle Chrisman,. noticed approximately 141 lineal feet of curbing along 76th Ave. adjacent to the subject site was damaged, along with 66 feet of the walkway and approximately 60 square feet of roadway. This was brought to the attention of the Project Superintendent.on site. On a recent visit to the -postal site,.we noted more areas of roadway have sunk as a result of the numerous loaded trucks entering and leaving the site. . Prior to construction of the post office, there was no road settlement, little to no curb damage, and the sidewalk was intact adjacent to the project site. We contend the failures occurred because of the volume of trucks driving on the sidewalk while entering and leaving the site and should be repaired by the contractor. If you have any questions,'please call. Sincerely, ROBERT J. ALBERTS, P.E. City Engineer ALC/RJA/sdt PRNVLST.DMG/TXTST530 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan Architecture 4fd Doyle A Professional Interiors i ! 9 Pine So Service Urban Design Seattle, WA 98101-1511 Corporation Phone: 206.624.8154 Fax: 206.626.0541 S T Letter of Transmittal F11 To: City of Edmonds Date: April 14, 1992 Community Services Department Project: USPS Perrinville Carrier Facility Engineering Division Job No.: 9022.003 250 5th Avenue N Edmonds, Wa 98020 Attn: Jim Walker We Transmit: X herewith Via Messenger in accordance with your request tinder separate cover via For Your: approval X review & comment use The Following: X drawings specifications change order Copies Date Description distribution to parties record information shop drawing prints samples shop drawing reproducibles product literature financial information 3 Sht C-1 and C-2 --Revised Water main Replacement 3 Sht C-6 -- Revised 76th Avenue Storm Sewer Relocation Remarks: Transmitted directly to you as requested by Dick Nelson of USPS Copies To: (with encs.) Dick Nelson Transmittal only By: Michael R. Anderson CITY OF EDMONDS �a Y ,L LAURA M. HALL 250 - 5TH AVE. N. EDMONDS, WA 98020 (206) 771-0220 FAX (206) 771-0221 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT PETER E. HAHN j O Public Works • Planning Parks and Recreation Engineering DIRECTOR 890 lq°t April 13, 1992 Mr. Richard J. Nelson, Project Manager Contract Design & Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 .A SUBJECT PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY ED49 LETTER FROM MR. NELSON TO MR. ALBERTS DATED APRIL 6, 1992 Dear Mr. Nelson, Your April 6, 1992 letter was reviewed with the City's Fire Marshall, Gary McComas. Mr. McComas confirmed the field information stated in your letter. The upgrade in building materials for the new facility has lowered the fire flow requirements to 2000 gpm. The proposed improvements, after installation, will be tested for compliance to the fire flow requirements. If the required flows are not met, additional improvements will be needed. If there are any questions, please call. Sincerely, ROBERT J. ALBERTS, P.E. City Engineer RJA/sdt c: Gary McComas, Fire Department Lyle Chrisman, Engineering Inspector PRNVLPO/TXTST530 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE April 6, 1992 Seattle Facilities Service Office P.O. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 CITY OF EDMONDS _ ENGINEERING DIVISION ATTN ROBERT J ALBERTS 250 5 AVENUE NORTH EDMONDS WA 98020-3181 Subject: Edmonds, WA - Perrinville Carrier Facility Fire Hydrant Requirements Gentlemen: RECEIVE® APR 7 1992 ENGINEERING The subject building is presently being upgraded to a Type V one -hour rated building, and now requires a minimum of 2,000 GPM fire -flow with two hydrants. In conversations with Ron Holland and Gary McComas, the fire hydrant at the northwest corner of the intersection of Olympic View and 76th was recently tested and produced 1,300 GPM at a static pressure of 130 PSI. Additional fire flow tests were requested and completed in September for hydrant #H05-47 which is approximately 120' south of our north property line on the west side of Olympic View. This tested at 647 GPM with a static pressure of 90 PSI, with 737 GPM available at 20 PSI. We are proposing that the Postal Service extend an 8" water line 75' north of our north property line and connect with the existing 8" ductile iron main on the west side of Olympic View. This new 8" line would then be brought to the southwest corner of our building where a new fire hydrant would be located. This should substantially increase the water flow at that point and therefore deliver the fire flow required. The cost savings for not upgrading the City water line system beyond benefit to the Postal Service would be applied toward the stream's construction. Sincerely, Richard . Nelson Project Manager, Contract Design $ Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P.O. Box 5000, Kent, WA 98064-5000 L Telephone (206) 656-4341 (JI-e 0 TM UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE April 6, 1992 Seattle Facilities Service Office P.O. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 CITY OF EDMONDS ENGINEERING DIVISION ATTN ROBERT J ALBERTS 2S0 S AVENUE NORTH EDMONDS WA 98020-3181 Subject: Edmonds, WA - Perrinville Carrier Facility . Fire Hydrant Requirements Gentlemen: STREET FILE RECEIVED APR 7 1992 ENGINEERING The subject building is presently being upgraded to a Type V one -hour rated building, and now requires a minimum of 2,000 GPM fire flow with two hydrants. Z211( In conversations with Ro Holland and Gary McComas, the fire hydrant at the northwest corner of the intersection of Olympic View and 76th was recently tested and produced 1,3 0 GPM at a static pressure of 130.PSI. Additional fire flow tests were requested and completed in September for hydrant #H05-47 which is approximately 120' south of our north property line on the west side of Olympic View. This tested at 647 GPM with a static pressure of 90 PSI, with 7:34. GPM available at 20 PSI. We are proposing that the Postal Service extend an 8" water line 75' north of our north property line and connect with the existing 8!1.ductile iron main on the west side of Olympic View. This new 8" line would then be brought to the southwest corner of our building where a new fire hydrant would be located. This should substantially increase the water flow at that point and therefore deliver the fire flow required. The cost savings for not upgrading the City water line system beyond benefit to the Postal Service would be applied toward the stream's construction. Sincerely, Richard . Nelson Project Manager, Contract Design & Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P.O. Box S000, Kent, WA 98064-5000 Telephone (206) 656-4341. RECEIVED APR 08 1992 EDMONDS FIRE DEPL VIEW HYDRANT GROUP TEST INFORMATION oaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa"""aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa&C0 ° HYDRANT NUMBER �-47 TEST DATE: 09/18/91 ° ° ° ° LOCATION: OLYMPIC VIEW DR STEAMER PORT? (Y/N):Y ° ° ° ° MAKE OF HYDRANT: MUELLER WATER MAIN SIZE: 8in ° ° ° ° TEST HYD #: H05-47 ° aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaai HYDRANT FLOW TEST INFORMATION Oaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa� ° TESTERS: WOODS,FLETT,SCHMITT ° ° ° ° STATIC PRESSURE: 90 psi RESIDUAL PRESSURE: 36 psi ° ° ° ° HYD #:HO5-46 OUTLET DIA: 2.5in VEL. PRESS: 15 psi ° ° ° ° HYD #: OUTLET DIA: O.Oin VEL. PRESS: 0 psi ° ° ° ° TOTAL GPM FLOWED: 647 GPM AVAILABLE AT 20 psi: 737 ° aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaai DO YOU WISH TO VIEW ANOTHER (Y/N): L.J 40 Page No. 04/09/92 1 HYDRANT TEST LOCATION GPM MAKE OF NUMBER DATE @ 20 HYDRANT H05-0043 05/09/91 CORNER OF 76TH& OVD 1224 IOWA Page No. 04/09/92 HYDRANT NUMBER H05-0043 1 ALL HYDRANTS ON RECORD HYDRANT FLOW TEST INFORMA STEAM MAIN HYDRANT PORT SIZE TESTED N 6 H05-0043 DATE LOCATION GPM AVAILIBLE HYDRANT TESTED AT 20 PSI TESTED 05/09/91 CORNER OF 76TH& OVD 1224 H05-0043 VIEW HYDRANT GROUP TEST INFORMATION oaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaadaaaadadaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaG 0 HYDRANT NUMBER: H05-0043 TEST DATE: 05/09/91 0 0 0 0 LOCATION: CORNER OF 76TH& OVD STEAMER PORT? (Y/N):N ° 0 0 0 MAKE OF HYDRANT: IOWA WATER MAIN SIZE: bin 0 0 0 0 TEST HYD #: H05-0043 0 aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaai HYDRANT FLOW TEST INFORMATION oaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaddaaa� 0 TESTERS: FISCHER,STORM,WOODS,FLETT,SCHMITT 0 0 0 0 STATIC PRESSURE: 130 psi RESIDUAL PRESSURE: 48 psi 0 0 0 0 HYD #:H05-0051 OUTLET DIA: 2.5in VEL. PRESS: 40 psi 0 0 0 0 HYD #: OUTLET DIA: O.Oin VEL. PRESS: 0 psi 0 0 0 0 TOTAL GPM FLOWED: 1057 GPM AVAILABLE AT 20 psi: '1224 ad6aadd aaadd aaadadaa6ad&aadd aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa3a3aaaaaaaai DO YOU WISH TO VIEW ANOTHER (Y/N): l -%W0NNWF— O 890 199 . 0 S CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation . Engineering April 1, 1992 Mr. Richard Nelson, Project Manager Design and Construction Branch Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 SUBJECT: PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY (ED49) Dear Mr. Nelson, LAURA M. HALL MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR We have reviewed the design drawings C-1 and C-6 submitted to the City. Design sheet C-1 deals with new water pipelines in 76th Ave. W. and Olympic View Drive. The inadequacy of the system to provide.fire flows with this design has already been brought to your attention. A red -lined copy is enclosed, which reflects the following comments for C-1: 1) Provide 8' valves MJXMJ at northerly connections on 76th Ave. W. and Olympic View Drive. 2) Relocate existing hydrant on Olympic View Drive. 3) Provide separate services for fire flow and domestic service. 4) Double check valve assembly to be located at property line if assembly is needed. 5) Provide detail of connection at intersection of 76th Ave. W. and Olympic View Drive. 6) Replace existing hydrant on 76th Ave. W. 7) Provide easement as needed. 8) Insure 36" cover over all water lines. 9) Add cleanout and vent trap for side sewer. • Incorporated August 11, 1890 S Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan Mr. Richard Nelson April 1, 1992 Page 2 Sheet C-6 pertains to drainage and diversion of the creek. Another drawing was referenced but was not submitted: Our comments, again, can only reflect what is being reviewed. A red -lined drawing is enclosed. If we can be of any further assistance, please call. Sincerely, ��;2 ROBERT J. ALBERTS, P.E.. City Engineer RJA/sdt Enclosures POPERRVL/TXTST530 NF E Meeting Te i�t ey and Post. Office 1) 6-2-88 Culverting of stream not allowed. Accommodate storm retention upstream. Post office interested in participating in trail system. Post office to install plaza area at Perrinville intersection. Concrete sidewalks would be provided around perimeter. Left turn lanes would be provided on Olympic View Dr. and on 76th Ave. City expects complete resurfacing curb -to -curb. 2) 6-21-88 Letter from Hewitt Isley to post office requesting resolution to issues: a) Intersection improvements b) Number of curb cuts required c) Road improvements d) Stream bed e) Storm water retention f) Soils contamination Meeting with City, Hewitt Isley and Post Office 3) 9-6-90 Culverting of stream not allowed. Required updated traffic study. Required connecting trail from 76th Ave: to Olympic View Dr. Required frontage improvements. Grass -lined swale required. Detention required. Meeting with City, Hewitt Isley and Post Office 4) 10-31-90 Upgrading of water -lines required on both 76th Ave. and Olympic View Dr. Provide seven (7) to ten (10) foot sidewalks with curbs and gutters along both streets. Provide hydrants every 300 feet. Double detector check valve required in right-of-way. Requested designs from Hewitt Isley showing alternative site designs. 5) 6-21-91 Request from City to post office for design review. 6) 7-1-91 Letter from USPO announcing project being advertised for bid without intent to apply for permits. 7) 7-3-91 Letter from Peter Hahn questioning lack of coordination. 8) 7-12-91 Memo of understanding from USPO agreeing to relocate creek; widening of 72nd Ave. (sic) to provide six (6) to eight (8) feet wider street and allowing City to maintain a corner park at 76th/Olympic View Dr. 9) 7-15-91 Response from USPO. 10) 7-17-91 Clarification from Peter Hahn. 11) 7-17-91 Letter of clarification from Hewitt Isley indicated that in 1988 (?). Hewitt Isley was aware of outstanding items, including intersection upgrade, road improvements, storm water retention, and condition of existing stream bed. 12) 7-24-91 Meeting in Congressman Miller's office: solution to stream relocation proposed. Engineering requirements discussed: a) On -site detention b) Widening of 76th Ave. c) Paving of driveways d) Overlaying of Olympic View Dr. e) Obtaining easement for corner park f) Stream relocation 13) 7-31-91 Issues: a) On -site detention b) Water system c) 76th Ave. widening d) Olympic View Dr. overlay e) Corner park dedication f) sty t Zstvc"rr(o-) 14) 8-5-91 Walker relocation plan submitted to Hewitt Isley. 15) 9-10-91 City and post office meeting centered on relocation/rehabilitation of stream. 16) 9-17-91 City explains rerouting of stream to design team. 17) 10-21-91 City meeting with Nelson and Snyder. 18) 10-22-91 Letter to post office from Wildlife regarding damage to fish habitat. 19) 10-31-91 Meeting with neighbors at Miller's office. 20) 11-6-91 City memo for ADB review. Water line improvements required. Creek restoration required. Plans are not reflective of actual site conditions. Frontage improvements required. Face of curb to be twenty (20) feet west of surveyed centerline of 76th Ave. Asphalt driveways only; no concrete. High traffic load driveways required. 21) 3-17-92 City reiterated'requirements: Complete overlay of 76th Ave. and Olympic View Dr. Replacement of curb on 76th required. Frontage improvements on 76th required. Water line improvements required. 22) 3-24-92 Letter from post office proposing to delete 76th Ave. frontage improvements, deleting future storm drainage, deleting water line in 76th Ave. 23) 3-25-92 City letter objecting to deletion of any required improvements. TRFSTUDY/TXTST530 • STREET FILE 0 t OUTSTANDING ISSUES Street improvements on 76th Ave. CA g.n;-�-- Street improvements on Olympic View Drive Water line improvements H Traffic study requi reck'A geC • $ Stream relocation and storm improvement P�j,� OUTSTND.ISS/TXTST530 I STREET FILE OUTSTANDING ISSUES Street improvements on 76th Ave. Street improvements on Olympic View Drive Water line improvements Traffic study required Stream relocation and storm improvement I ►Jcvu �low�f OUTSTND.ISS/TXTST530 d El • 1 C s t� 1 �LA `n a Or o A o7"' r 17 O � 1 f� v cn --I c O a �\ 4 N � t � t � N (y C i Cr � Q t Z V) ZN t" m O T. v m o 0*' 41 %C m0 0 M :9 3 O Z v 0. m z n m C/) MY ,�9 l= rn 1 —%alrp O 890.19� • CITY OF EDMONDS • STREET -FILE LAURA M. HALL MAYOR 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation . Engineering March 26, 1992 Mr. Richard Nelson, Project Manager Design and Construction Branch Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 SUBJECT: PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY NO. ED49 PRELIMINARY WATER LINE DESIGN Dear Mr. Nelson, PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR The preliminary water line design was received on March 25, 1992 and placed into the City's review process. A detailed evaluation with comments will be mailed to you in the near future. The preliminary design, however, does not reflect the fire flow concerns discussed with Mr. Michael Anderson of Hewitt-Isley in October, 1991. The calculated needed fire flows by the Fire Department for your structure are 2,750 gpm. The existing fire flows from the existing eight -inch water pipeline at 76th Ave. W. are 900 gpm. We request a copy of the calculations on how the fire flow requirements will be met. A conclusion from the meeting with Mr. Anderson was that additional improvements would be needed. If there are any questions, please call me at 771-0220, extension 327. Sincerely, ROBERT J. ALBERTS, P.E. City Engineer RJA/sdt c: Peter Hahn, Community Services Director Gary McComas, Fire Marshall, Edmonds Fire Department PERRIN.WTR/TXTST530 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan CITY OF EDMONDS t ( _ 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT ! p Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation . Engineering 8g0.1g March 25, 1992 Mr. Richard J. Nelson Project Manager, Design & Construction Branch Seattle Facilities Service Office P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 STREET FILE LAURA M. HALL MAYOR SUBJECT: PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY LETTER FROM MR. NELSON TO MR. HAHN DATED MARCH 24, 1992 Dear Mr. Nelson, PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR Your March 24, 1992 letter expressed an attitude and reflected a tone on your part that is disturbing. The postal service project has an impact on the community and should be evaluated as any other development in the City. The discussion on improvements that need to be incorporated in the project has been going on since June, 1988. Although we sympathize with your concerns about the budget, we don't sympathize with the budget being established without considering all of the improvements required or overruns in other areas. The City would strongly object to the deletion of any improvements without the City's approval. Mayor Laura Hall is very displeased with your letter and would encourage you to discuss your potential actions with her before you make any final decision. If there are any questions, please call. Sincerely, ROBERT J. ALBERTS, P.E. City Engineer RJA/sdt c: Mayor Laura Hall Peter Hahn, Community Services Director Scott Snyder, City Attorney Tom Snyder, Edmonds Post Office PERRINVL/TXTST530 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan UNITED STATES PWL SERVICE ,vtcs ►osr.�, KENT FACILITIES SERVICE OFFICE DESIGN $ CONST ucriON BRANCH PO BOX S000 • ICFNT WA 98064-S000 STREET TO: C 1,yy OF zso Ste AgE : iU. Z� ATTENTION: k�C3ECT AL Mccm WE ARE SENDING YOU THE ATTACHED: Prints Original Drawings Specifications . i SAflITT,4L LETTER BILE DATE: 3.7.q -9Z FACILITY: Ekmc ►Ci. PROJECT: NV,-C=A3*U0.e (] Copy of Letter [[ ]] Change Order RECEIVED M 2 5 1992 ENGINEERING RECEIVED MAR 2 5 1992 COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION t 3-14 _ T`W%-L Jib C-1 i Eu MI QAe7 QATlErC THESE ARE TRANSMITTED: s requested . Approved as noted ! For rgsponse by For your use and information - 4prvd. as submitted 1 I For your signatufe and For your review and cv�ment For approval. return to this office Returned for'correctiond ' . Return after loan ( ) to us REMARKS: COPIES TO: r--D ILA SIGNED: , - -14 Richard J. elson Project Manager (206) 656-4341 If enclosures we not 3s :io:e7. „'ease r?t.'y us at once. rT1 L _J TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM March 24, 1992 Bob Alberts Peter Hahn Postal Office Project at Perrinville STREET Ff146 RECEIVED MAR 1 q 1992 &NG1N fERING Late today I got a FAX of the attached letter from Dick Nelson. I gave a copy to Jim Walker. I also immediately talked to the Mayor. She was not pleased at the attitude displayed. She asked me to call Tom Snyder (774-6667). He did not know anything about this letter, and he feels caught in the middle. Note the last paragraph: it's possible that no stream daylighting will be done. Since I'll be out the rest of the week, and Jim is a APWA, I am depending on you to coordinate this. Tom Snyder will call Nelson on Wednesday and find out what is going on. He will also talk to the Mayor. The Mayor is feeling cornered into making this a political thing if we don't get cooperation. Please review the letter. If you have any ideas let Nelson know. Till you hear from the Mayor or Snyder, there isn't much you can do. But if you have ideas, go ahead. cc.Mayor f.po392a f. City of Edmonds Community Services Department MRR 24 '92 14:06 SE FSO 206 656 4335 527 P02 i w FAXLD 03/24/92 March 24, 1002 CITY OF EDMONDS ATTN PETER E HAHN 2SO S AVENUE NORTH EDbUNDS WA 98020--3181 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Seattle FaeUlties Service Office P.O. Box 5000 Kent, WA 96084•3000 Subject: Edmonds, WA - Perrinville Carrier Facility Stream Redesign Gentlemen: A preliminary proposal has been developed (copy enclosed) which indicates costs for daylighting the stream to be substantially over the allocated budget. In order to reduce costs, be within our budget and in compliance with the scope of our Memorandum of Understanding dated August 12, 1991, the following items are considered for reduction: A. Delete sidewalk, curb/gutter and increased street width along the west side of 76th (preliminary estimate is for a 2'-0" wide increase and not 8'-0" increase as referenced in previous letter). DELETE $ 9,907.00 B. Delete requirement of designing for future storm drainage. This reduces flow from 170 C1~M to 95 CFm in the daylighted portion of the stream. B.J. Reduce size of box culvert by 1/2. DELETE $ 13,050.00 B.1 Reduce M.H. sizes (reduce total cost by 5%). DE]',EfiB $ 11,204.00 C. Reduce the added landscaping and irrigation by 1/2. DELETE $ 44,783.00 D. Reduce height of bloat wall by 7'-011. DELETE $ 14,256.00 B. Delete water lint extention along 76th. DELETE $ 40,000.04 F. Delete cost for street use permit and waiver costs for any other permits. DELETE $ 20796.00 TOTAL REDUCTION $135*996.0 By deleting the above listed items the estimated cost for daylighting the stream can be brought within the $200,000.00 budgeted by the Postal. Service. r MAR 24 192 14:07 SE# FSO 206 656 4335 52 P03 Edmonds, WA Perrinville Carrier Facility Stream Redesign Page Z The only item still to be verified is the location of the existing water line under 76th just south of the Olympic View intersection. If the location of the water line requires removal prior to excavation for the storm line, these additional costs may mean the daylighting project can not be accomplished as proposed. Sincerely, 11'�A- kk,— Richard J. Nelson Project Manager, Design & Construction Branch Seattle Facilities Service Office PO Box 5000, Kent, WA 98064-5000 MAR 24 192 14:07 SE E FSO 206 656 4335 527 PO4 JOB 2613 P)ERINVILLE CREE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC. �TL TZ FACILM'imS FACILITY: U. S. P. S. PERRINVILLE CONTRACTOR: CREE CONST. CO., ��►±�•� �;;:. t CARRIER FACILITY CONTRACT NO.: 549986-91-8-0147' ' �f�L•(�.':: EDMONDS, WA PROJECTS NEW CONSTRUCTION USPS OWNED :-'... J BULLETIN NO. A� PM *** ITEMIZED PRET.IMINARY PROPOSAL **• ?'����►sll��tt�2t$��;5� 1. Time Detail (additional time requested)# Calondar Days 2. Cost Detail: a. Direct Labor (attach supporting detail estimate) $16,700 b. Insurance $5,212 c. Materials and equipment (attach supporting $20,003 detailed estimate) d. Deduct offsetting debit or credit for materials, labor and equipment (attach supporting detailed estimate) Subtotal $41,915 e. Overhead (10%) $4,191 f. Profit (10%) $4,191 g. Employment taxes under FICA and FUTA $1,059 h. Subcontracts (attach subcontractor's proposals) COMPANY CATEGORY Of WORK COST + FICA/ (OH + P) FUTA $252,845 $0 $252,845 $0 50 $0 S0 S0 $0 $0 $0 S0 Se S0 S0 TOTAL $252,845 i. Contractor's commission on Total Cost + (OR + P) (Max 10%) $25,285 TOTAL INCREASE OR DECREASE $329,486 PREPARED BY (signature): M nVA (firm): Cree Conit tlon C pany, Inc. (date): 19-Mar-92 PAGE 1 MAR 24 192 14:08 SE FSO 206 656 4335 52? P05 ro • da N s.w«w wm iadd .•am« Y A( r tl r i+ ^ R tl w tl w ••• ua Y •q Y ` � a• a � � O .a 1�. �. n` a+ • �•• M d Y S N 1 1- M •O » OI w� M c, V i w" w �1 M •~i N y tl •d• M YJ M Y H '� {.� s�'J p~ p 6^ A 6 : err N A0YY•i7g « ry � ^ � Yl• •b 0 0 .�.• O C~C O 4�1 P• W 1_•1 N O � ~ Y W • G• R P O tl � i m tl tl b v Y Y N O � 9 V} d M dL d 0 0 tl ••�I T W A P4 � m i` •�.aars 0 .aoa.Y..w.00"�ra`o"14 na • s. � ...Q...u.rs.mv>> o..� NAi•.'Yoaaa m M e G a! U �+ �1 M a. •. a d aL u u o r •J ad V� s ••r o •Id O 7� C b9 m 1••• '•1 m i — a •••• •-• �+ Yb fr PI PII P• Q• oc • : w Y y` m m o m r•• b /! 9 1Ys N p Q Oo m m m o 9 Z YP 1p• ♦P 11 p N •-Y tl ♦ �i] b Y • �. M Y • Y Y tl N p m m Q m v o w w� A w .a ev � r w Y • b , Y 1 w b ^ ~ y m � Ip• + � m tY m � m r• ..� �Y 6 n7 P•• � .a. .r @ F • u � W P@ m m aD m m o t1 tlr �9 @ aP m Y•1 m m m v o m G? w tl VN � M1 4D m m O m m G �Y O Yn Y-Y I m o r v� •'^ O 6 •fp a o p m m m Y l i• m m l'• � M • — — — — — r r- 1! •6 o m o m o m 2 m — d d ?Y @ YP 4 • _ Y Y � a• rr ^ "� ' Y yO� • 0 r p m m m m m m m G• •� •P m m m m v an d K� m 4 o mmm e.• •. m m 9 m •G• m A •P m o o m o o v —___.--. ....--__— --__—_ m o oC z O m 4 •9 p •P ao p m m m o 6f $ 6 9 9 p p N N rf ^l N N W H � v Y @_ ab a •® @ Z O p m o ed d► @@ o m m m m Y i ..• m y p y .p d m e m m m v 9 0 9@ m A o@ m r � � � � rr a- ti ti � � m � � � r .Y. o �. o •o � s Y �' •v -• ►•. P • •.a ! va •J V V •-i J �a •--� •••• •� •-b b � •J V V J w •".• i un m o m v ti• b 6 4 w p p m m y • i•• a.• ✓ r O � b a • q � n ar db• O m r oe m •~•Y A d to or Pd i $ � rs a ea :e c •. m Y • M N N Y• _ _ 4. 1�id 0. Pi o b• ••1 l!• i+ ai r N Y1.a m H F m 0 •-Y W1 m r � • O b m YO M it •+ pi iY• CC «« m N m V ar m x O Y N � « � -� .a aJ m cS �Oy lY• q m eq �_ •4 PK a c O� m Y� b .-f. K e w " ocre Yd `pqy: N� •� b •,1. d b la• a V i m m -- M Y • w i^ m .bc re h o u! E R A A E K m c�c dm c y tl R tl � R'H[ GY 7 14 • 'UO FAXLD /24/92 March 24, 1002 CITY OF EDMONDS ATTN PETER E KkW 2S0 S AVENDB NORTH fiDM0IdD8 *A 98020-3181 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Boatilo Fsogltius serwos Office P.O. Box 9000 Kont, WA 96004•3000 Subject: Edmonds, WA w Perrinville Carrier Facility Stream Redesign Gentlemen. V V kl "*' v! / V V "Y 'VH! re-�' A preliminary proposal has been developed (copy enclosed) which indicates costs for daylighting the stream to be substantially over the allocated budget. In order to reduce costs, be within our budget and in compliance with the scope of our Memorandum of Understanding dated August 12, 1991, the following items are considered for reduction. A. Delete sidewalk, curb/gutter and increased street width along the west side of 16th (preliminary estimate is for a 21'01, wide increase and not 8'^0" increase as referenced in previ us letter). A" � �, a h� r� o r s �' eoj l m h T DELETE $ 9,907.00 B. Delete requirement of designing for future storm drainage. This reduces flow from 170 CFM to 95 CFM in the da 1'gghted portion of the stream. "f:; k ;F=.x:;.,i ; ncr �►uut°:.fir B.J. Reduce size of box culvert by 1/2. 4 o 'Jr o r � , � �� �;� �,, e # � DELETE $ 13,050.00 1 B.2 Reduce M.H. sizes (reduce total cost by 5%). DELETE $ 11,204.00 C. Reduce the added landscaping and irrigation by 1/2, i DELETE $ 44,783.00 D. Reduce height of block wall by 71-011. �,� �;r sut�r;..`t +t�DEL�h'T'E 14,256.00 E. Delete water lint xtenticx�,,. along 7,6th. rh+ts "ot' 5 tA�l~'# r c t 'r; i Ls DELUM $ 40,000.00 F. Delete cost for street use permit and waiver costs for any other permits. DELETE TOTAL REDUCTION $ 2,796.00 $135,996.0 By deleting the above listed items the instiftiated cost for da li htin the sty r m can be brought within the $200,600.00 budgeted by the Postal service. Ll March 20, 1992 CITY OF EDMONDS _ ATTN ROBERT J ALBERTS ENGINEERING DIVISION 250 5 AVENUE NORTH EDMONDS WA 98020-3181 TM UNfTED STATES POSTAL SERVICE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Seattle Facilities Service Office P.O. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 Subject: Edmonds, WA - Perrinville Carrier Facility Off -Site Improvements Gentlemen: 0 RECEIVE® MAR 2 3 1992 ENGINEERING S, er��ET FILE The following are abbreviated notes from our meeting on Tuesday, March 17, 1992 concerning the above project. The City of Edmonds Engineering Department indicated that the following would be requirements of the USPS as part of the project: A. Road width on 76th Avenue for the west curb will be set at 18' from the centerline of the existing street to the outside face of the curb. This 181 width will extend from the NE postal exit to the intersection of Olympic View Drive. From the NE postal exit north to the USPS property line the width from the centerline will taper from 18' to 161. B. A 51-0" wide sidewalk the entire length of 76th with handicap ramps at curb cuts and at the Olympic View intersection. City standards for the curb and sidewalk will be used. C. An easement for the City sidewalk which lies within the USPS property line at the Olympic View intersection will be processed when construction is completed. D. The sidewalk along Olympic View Drive will remain as is for its entire length. E. Overlay of 76th and Olympic View Drive is required. F. The straightening of the daylighted stream will not violate the preliminary approval of the Architectural Design Review Board. G. A preliminary water' line design will be immediately sent to your attention. The proposed design was reviewed by Mr. Ron Holland of the City of Edmonds Water Department on February 18, 1992. CITY OF EDMONDS Page 2 H. An increased street right-of-way for the USPS parcel adjacent to the 76th Avenue and Olympic View Drive intersection will not be required. We regret the Perrinville project has proceeded with a misunderstanding with your department, and hope this will improve. The stream relocation was an issue from the very first meeting on September 6, 1990, and should have not changed the relationship on any other issues. Our first meeting was to present a preliminary site/floor plan and to begin a dialogue with the City through the Planning Department. Road improvements or setbacks were not generated at this meeting, and no further correspondence was received concerning these issues. On October 31, 1990, we presented to the City through the Planning Department a schematic set of plans including colored site plans, floor plans, building elevations and sections. The meeting minutes indicate a requirement for curb, gutter and sidewalk only. No additional correspondence other than regarding the stream relocation was received. In mid -June 1991, the Postal Service sent five sets of 99% construction documents for the City's review. This initiated the letter dated June 21, 1991 from the City of Edmonds referring only to the issue of the stream. As reported at our recent meeting, the Postal Service has already budgeted funds for the pproject and will not be able to meet all of the obligations as now requested by your department. I will report again when costs have been finalized for the water line, daylighted stream, and off -site improvements for the storm sewer. Sincerely, Richard .Nelson Project Manager Design & Construction Branch Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P.O. Box 5000, Kent, WA 98064-5000 Telephone 206/656-4341 Enclosures cc: Jim Walker, Assistant City Engineer Gordon Hyde, Engineering Coordinator Hewitt.Isley.Architects, P.S. David Nt. Hewitt, AIA Ak Building A Pn)fe»Kxwl William A. Wey, AIA, AICP II t ServiLe Tinxwthy L. Spelman, AIA Sea 101-1511 Corporation Phn .o24.8154 Fax: 206.626.0541 Perrinville Carrier Annex Meeting Notes September 6, 1990 (Revised September 16,1990) • (Revised September 21, 1990) Archiltvtury Imcrwtn frbun lk�ign Present: Richard Nelson (RN) USPS Jim Walker (JW) City of Edmonds Gordon Hyde (GH) City of Edmonds Mary Lou Block (MLB) City of Edmonds Carter Hart (CH) Hewitt Isley Lukas Delen (LD) Hewitt Isley 1. CH gave background on the history of the project: USPS was looking at building a postal facility on the site several years ago. There was a similar meeting, as this one, set up with the City of Edmonds approximately two years ago in which traffic, drainage, and community issues were raised. These issues were never resolved when the project went away due to USPS budget cuts. Now that the project has returned at a reduced scope, these issues need to be raised again. 2. The City of Edmonds is near completion of a drainage study of the area. The waterway running through the site, known as Perrinville Creek, is considered a stream with a 100-year storm rate of 200 cfs. According to JW, there are fish further down stream. The Department of Fisheries and the Department of Wildlife would definitely be involved in the permitting process. 3. MLB indicated that typically the City of Edmonds has not, in the last several years, allowed this kind of stream to be covered over. JW indicated that they have allowed normal bridging of the streams. Currently, there is a 15' building setback on both sides from the width of the stream. MLB indicated that this setback is likely to be increased to 25' by the beginning of next year. 4. RN asked what process the USPS would need to go through to petition the City of Edmonds to be able to cover the stream. He said that the USPS would write a letter to the Mayor of the City of Edmonds outlining the proposal; who could, in turn, reply. MLB said that would be acceptable. 5. MLB indicated that another option may be to divert the stream so that the lot could be better utilized for the building. USPS would have to back this proposal up with a complete analysis showing they had exhausted all other options. She cited a local example of a recently completed stream bed diversion, North Creek in the Bothell area by the Koll and Quadrant development companies. 6. RN then asked whether the City of Edmonds would consider USPS restoring and uncovering the stream on the northernmost parcel in return for being allowed to cover up the stream on the middle parcel. MLB indicated that this had never been tried before in the City of Edmonds, but that such a creative idea could possibly work in this situation. 9022-30 Page 1 of 2 A- 7. CH asked if storm water retention would have to be provided. JW indicated that he did not know, but that he would get more information from the consulting engineers that are completing a drainage study of the area. 8. The traffic study two years ago of the Post Office project concluded the following: a) left turn lanes should be provided at the intersection of 76th Avenue W. and Olympic View Drive and b) the left turn into the site should be a minimum of 210' from the intersection. GH indicated that as a minimum, the City of Edmonds would require an update of the traffic study based on the reduced scope of the project. 9. GH indicated that there would be some frontage improvements required, such as a connection of the trail system from 76th Ave W. to Olympic View Drive, across the northernmost parcel 10. MLB indicated that the 29 required setback has not changed. A 15' screened and landscaped setback is required at the North property line. Parking can occur within the required setbacks as long as they don't interfere with the landscaping requirements. The City of Edmonds has adopted new landscaping requirements effective September 10, 1990. 11. RN inquired about the review process of the project from here. MLB indicated that after the stream issue has been resolved, the Design Board would have to review the project for compliance with their guidelines. The Design Board meets once a month on the first Wednesday of the month. Applications need to be received at least three weeks, plus the -en vironmental review period, prior. 12. JW indicated that there are plans for a detention facility to be built downstream from the current site. This could potentially be incorporated into the USPS scheme, but would not relieve the project of the responsibility for detention of run off from its own non -pervious surfaces (this is a revision of the meeting minutes). A grass -lined swale is required as a minimum for all major developments discharging into a stream. 13. The City of Edmonds utilizes the Bonneville Power Authority Energy Code, regardless of energy source utilized. Note: Please review the above meeting notes and notify H-I of any changes or clarifications within one week. LD:dc cc: All present Tom Kane - ABKJ Paul Petska - Esmond Petska & Assoc. David Hewitt - H-I 9022-30 Page 2 of 2 ArOilecture Interiors Urban Iksign PostAuy Perrinville Station Meeting Notes October 31, 1990 Present: Richard Nelson (RN) Jim Walker (JW) Gordon Hyde (GH) Mary Lou Block (MLB) Bobby Mills (BM) Ed Somers (ES) Bill Stroud (BS) Ron Holland (RH) Dick Mumma (DM) Gary McComas (GM) Tom Snyder (TS) David Hewitt (DH) Carter Hart (CH) Lukas Delen (LD) David M. I le ill. AIA William A. Iskh. AIA. AICP Thwthy L. Slxhnan. AIA JINI Stan- -EIS II 1PlxxxtIX 54 Fax: 206.626A541 Seattle FSO - USPS City of Edmonds - Engineering City of Edmonds - Traffic City of Edmonds - Planning City Of Edmonds - Public Works- City of Edmonds - Planning City of Edmonds City of Edmonds City of Edmonds - Building City of Edmonds - Fire Department Edmonds Postmaster - USPS Hewitt Isley Hewitt Isley Hewitt Isley A Prn1i\skmi Service CorlxuatKm lei ._. .. ......: ., .- ....- 1. CH introduced the project scope: An approximately 12,500 sq.ft. facility located on large irregularly shaped lot on the northwest corner of Olympic View Drive and 76th Avenue W. H-I was not able to come up with a site plan which satisfies USPS requirements and at the same time left the existing stream uncovered. The service area will be fenced and buffered by ee:b~fi&47 landscaping according to City of Edmonds requirements. 2. The following upgrading of utilities would be required in order for the project to receive the go-ahead from the.Utilities Department:. a) Upgrade 4" waterline on 76th Avenue W to 8" along the extent of the site. ��.}.�• Upgrade 6" waterline to 8" along Olympic View Drive. c) Locate hydrants as assigned by Fire Department. d) Existing culverts on the. site will need to be inspected by means of a camera. e) Any underground utility lines need to be a minimum 10' away from the outside edge of the building. f) Fire sprinkler water lines (if any) need a double -detector valve system that cannot be located within the security fence. g) Provide 7' to 10' wide sidewalks with curbs and gutters along both streets bordering the property (or a fee agreement will be negotiated with the City). 3. DH gave an analysis of the design: The building consists of several different zones required by the functions of the building. Berming has been provided to cut down the apparent height of the building's taller spaces. The parapet has been notched to cut down the apparent'length of blank walls. A single large well -detailed window has been provided as a gesture to the "Perrinville" architecture. 4. MLB asked whether the post office standard of an 8' high cyclone fence with 3 strands of barbed wire was required around the service area. RN indicated that this was a USPS standard and would eventually be screened by the landscaping. 9022-80 Page 1 of 3 5. GQ 7. Cvey 8. 2M lubr'A=6 .* A 2SQOZ&'r TO C4LVECT 6TGMAJI LOA& VW14q ftz?'- Zb -M sc%_*M1-r Tb Coup Of E�1cjlw vw ,s . MLB asked at what stage the environmental review of the project was. -e.". indiented DM raised the following building code concerns: a) Averaging of the height (according to Edmonds zoning regulations) of the four corners of the smallest rectangle that will enclose the building from existing grade may cause the building to exceed the height limit. b) The Northwest Energy Code is applicable when using electricity to heat the building. State code is applicable when using fossil fuels. c) Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment must be screened. d) The interior lighting must conform to the Northwest Energy Code standards no matter how the building is heated. e) Roof is overt 6,000 S.F., therefore must be Class A or B. r. . RN indicated that building permit would not be required for a federal agency building: DM expressed that this premise should be checked because he has previously been involved with a governmental agency that was required to obtain a uildinngpee permit ,Plan check performed by ICBO or Whitely/Jacobsen. IS uA'JAV-Y The following fire -safety concerns were raised by GM: a) Emergency lighting must meet UBC requirements. b) Portable fire extinguishers must be provided. RN indicated that the USPS standard was to provide extinguishers every 50'. c) The City of Edmonds requires fire hydrants every 300'. d) There will be an alarm and detection system installed in the building. 9. RN indicated that the USPS has chosen not to follow up on the previous traffic study . for the llowing reasons: EVto�b a Th traffic study was conducted for a me@ larger 21,000 sq. ft. facility that4teed 14C,6vbCZ a rne�el'► larger public function, CuesGEwT pzq ccx TEc A MigimoM pF TrA p1q, b) The data of the existing traffic study varies greatly with what little data is 1M?AaT available and consequently seems to be unreliable. c) The post office has no similar facilities in similar situations that traffic numbers can be generated from. 10. RN feels that the USPS should be allowed to culvert the open part of the creek on the site for the following reasons: a) In an analysis of the stream on the site by Ebasco Engineering, the stream flow, quality of the stream, and size of the wetlands were deemed insignifica CooZb-V4Qb _ b) A review the by the USPS's 44aQwi5indicates of stream regional environmental that the wetlands are insignificant. He is confident that the Corps of Engineers will approve culverting of the site. c) The stream is further blocked in three separate places downstream. d) . DAMA4E 'Tb OM 16ME 6Tj EAM FIAS e) USPS program requirements cannot practically be met without culverting the ALZrAbY stream. OCcc)eE,D f) The cost of moving the stream is prohibitive. �STVCr1 wAT1<t 11. RN indicated that a national environmental impact checklist would be done. �ecstav, . 12. MLB requested that H•I send them copies of preliminary design proposals that HAZAZAr.�b Ftu.� Ex,sry5 showed alternative site designs were the stream either remained intact or was moved. 9022-80 Page 2 of 3 f , . 13. MLB indicated that . at there were four appeals due to the affect on the stream on the. Proposed development directly north of the USPS site even though this proposal left the stream intact. She said this indicates a public level of concern about the stream. JW also said that currently efforts are underway to clear the remaining blockages 'downstream. In addition, proposed state environmental laws would not allow the stream to be culverted. E was• wRO" 14. RN indicated that i! "-s USPS itefiieto present the project to the Design Review IF LEQJE4T� Board The next Design Review Board meeting is scheduled for December 5th at p.m. MLB indicated that the Board cannot approve design until environmental and creek issues are resolved. Note: Please review the above meeting notes and notify H•I of any changes or clarifications within one week. LD:dc cc: All present Tom Kane - ABKJ Paul Petska - Esmond Petska & Assoc. Architecture Interiors Urban Design HEWITT ISLEY To: City of Edmonds Community Services Department Engineering Division 250 5th Avenue N Edmonds, Wa 98020 Attn: Jim Walker 400 Doyle 10 A Professional 119 Pine Street Service Seattle, WA 98101-1511 Corporation Phone: 206.624.8154 Fax: 206.626.0541 S T cAPTFILE- We Transmit: X herewith Via Messenger in accordance with your request under separate cover via Letter of Transmittal nv) Date: March 20, 1992 Project: USPS Perrinville Carrier Facility Job No.: 9022.003 For Your: approval distribution to parties information X review & comment record use The Following: X drawings shop drawing prints samples specifications shop drawing reproducibles product literature change order financial information Copies Date Description 2 Sht C-6 --Storm Sewer in 76th Avenue Plan and Profile Remarks: As requested by Dick Nelson of USPS Copies To: (with encs.) By: Michael R. Anderson 8g0-19°ty � STREET Ficc CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 96020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering March 17, 1992 Mr. Richard J. Nelson United States Postal Service Seattle Facilities Service Office P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 LAURA M. HALL MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR 3 / 7 /9 Z- SUBJECT: LETTER FROM MR. NELSON TO MR. ALBERTS DATED MARCH 16, 1992 Dear Mr. Nelson, I write in response to your March 16, 1992 letter. In your letter you make several references to designs, conflicts between existing right-of-way and future stream relocation, and previous agreements. To this date, the Engineering Division has received no accurate drawing showing proposed improvements for our review. If you have accurate and detailed drawings that support your statements, please share them with US. The meaning of the statement "previous agreements" is unclear. The City Code dictates a number of requirements, including the dedication of right-of-way for road widening, drainage, and water system requirements to name a few. The need to widen the road was discussed as far back as June 1988 with Greg Cutler of the United Postal Service and David Hewitt and Peter Watson of Hewitt Daly Isley. The discussions also included the need to overlay the roads after construction. We are pleased to meet with you on March 17, 1992 as mentioned in your letter. Since past discussions with the postal service seem to have been ignored and we in Engineering have not seen accurate drawings, I cannot promise to respond to the urgency of the situation reflected in your letter. Sincerely, ROBERT J. ALBERTS, P.E. City Engineer RJA/sdt NELSON2/TXTST530 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan a a A* CITY OF EI=DMONDS 260 - STH AV@. N. • EMMONoa. WA D0020 + (206) 771-0220 • FAX (200) 771-0221 COMMUNITY 23ERVIOMS DEPARTMENT B 9 q Public Walks . Planning . Park& and ReOraallon . Engin—Ing TELEC®PIER COVER PAQE Reclplants Talecopler Number_ PROM: "a Sander's Telecoplar Number: (206) 771-0221 am 0:\O9Wordd to\F—Porn1 LAURA M. MALL MAYOR PETER S. HAHN M m ECTCA GATE TRANSMIZTE0: NUMBER OF PAGES C— (Including Cover Page) FACSIMILE EC]UIPMENT: Automatic Group 11 (2,3 mins.); CSrcup 111 it there esre an problems during transmiaston or documents are raoalved incomplete, please call (206) 771 -0220 and ask for c /ncorpo ro fad August 12, 2890 - Sister Cities International — Hakinan. Japan TRANSMISSION REPORT THIS DOCUMENT (REDUCED SAMPLE ABOVE) WAS SENT COUNT 2 *** SEND *** NO REMOTE STATION I.D. START TIME DURATION #PAGES COMMENT 1 SEATTLE FSO 206 656 3-17-92 11:54AM 1'28" 2 TOTAL 0:01'28" 2 XEROX TELECOPIER 7020 tlFILE DECEIVED MAR 18 1992 FAXED 3/16/92 - 206/778-5322 �� ENGINEERING UNRED STATES March 16, 1992 °OSIA`SEWrA UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Seattle Facilities Service Office CITY OF EDMONDS P.O. Box 5000 ENGINEERING DIVISION Kent, WA 98064-5000 ATTN ROBERT J ALBERTS 250 5 AVENUE NORTH EDMONDS WA 98020-3181 Subject: Edmonds, WA - Perrinville Carrier Facility Stream Re -Design Gentlemen: It has come to our attention that the City of Edmonds is requiring the U.S. Postal Service to install an increased street width of 20' from the existing street centerline, and a 7' wide sidewalk on 76th Avenue just north of the Olympic View intersection. We are currently designing the stream realignment with a 13' wide road improvement from the centerline, with a 5' sidewalk in the vicinity of the stream. Your increased road and sidewalk width requirements result in the following three design concerns which are not in compliance with previous agreements. A. The additional costs of road and sidewalk may preclude the completion of the daylighted stream as previously presented. B. The increased road and sidewalk width will increase the side slope of the daylighted stream. This prevents the use of natural materials on stream bottom and sides in order to stabilize the stream during an increased stormwater flow. C. The centerline of the existing road does not parallel our eastern property line and, therefore, the existing right-of-way near the South 76th Avenue intersection and Olympic View is approximately 9'-011. This does not allow the proposed 40' wide street and 7'-0" sidewalk. These issues need to be resolved immediately to allow stream construction to continue. I will be meeting with you and your staff at 3:00 p.m. on March 17, 1992. Sincerely, Al Richar Nelson Project Manager, Contract Design & Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS. P.O. Box 5000, Kent, WA 98064-5000 Telephone (206) 656-4341 MAR 16 192 16:31 SEATTLE FSO 206 656 4335 489 P01 -�. - - - RECEIVED it a MAR 1 6 1992 CNGINEERING FACILITIES SERVICE OFFICE P.O. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 }~'AX Phone No.: 206/656-4350 Voice phone No.: 206/656-4334 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET DATE: iG ��i--• PROJECT:r.�.�'.�-*�v NAME: TITLE: FIRM: FAX NO.: SUBJECT: SENDER: TITLE: PLEASE DELIVER THE FOLLOWING PAGES TO: v?— Z J-4 NUMBER OF PAGES (including cover sheet): MAR 16 192 16:32 SE E FSO 206 656 4335 489 P02 YAM 3/16/92 - 206/778-5322 March 16, 1992 CITY OF MCNDS ENGINEERING DIVISION AYTN ROBERT J ALBERTS 250 5 AVENUE NORTH EDMONDS WA 98020-3181 UNITSD STATES POSTAL SERVICE Seattle Facilities Service Office P.O. Box 6000 Kent, WA 98064.5000 Subject: Edmonds, A - Perrinville Carrier Facility Stream Re -Design Gentlemen: It has come to our attention that the City of Edmonds is requiring the U.S. Postal Service to install an increased street width of 201 from the existing street centerline, and a 7' wide sidewalk on 76th Avenue just north of the Olympic View intersection. We are currently designing the stream realignment with a 13' wide road improvement from the centerline, with a 5' sidewalk in the vicinity of the stream. Your increased road and sidewalk width requirements result in the following three design concerns which are not in compliancc with previous agrtomonts. A. The additional costs of road and sidewalk may preclude the completion of the daylighted stream as previously presented. B. The increased road and sidewalk width will incrcasc the side slope of the daylighted stream. This prevents the use of natural materials on stream bottom and sides in order to stabilize the stream during an increased stormwater flow. C. The centerline of the existing road does not parallel our eastern property line and, therefore, the existing right-of-way near the South 76th Avenue intersection and Olympic View is approximately 9`-01'. This does not allow the proposed 40' wide street and 7'-0" sidewalk. These 'issues need to be resolved immediately to allow stream construction to continue. I will be meeting with you and your staff at 3:00 p.m, on March 17, 1992. SincereI , Richar Nelson Project Manager, Contract Design & Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P.O. Box 5000, Tent, WA 98064-5000 Telephone (206.1 656-4341 13ercc, 6 K- STp,,cczT F ILL �✓v�1 �c� e i ���o r/e.,�,z� ✓'c� 'o� �'l �G � -- Gr��1�- � �'�',S�e i 4 CC D T 661 J' yD AT GL' e s 74- o 76 Q�P� (Cl.G/ ��y !�� � C !//GLI� .../✓' � �/`� TV ��ac l /S , 's Z,�,�ool-4YI7 4S eW 79,,,-,:P A�57,�� 7'�� 7�� ` ToDAM Date 3 Time % r� ❑ PM WHILE Y U WERE OUT M of Phone Area Code Number Extension L 0NTSjTOjSEEYOUj� GAIN I— j LURGENT — Message •ilkeFICIENCY@ REORDER N23-000 ADB Agenda December 4, 1991 Page 2 STEETILE* ADB-80-91 STEVENS PROFESSIONAL CENTER ADDITION Lewis Nelson Architects rot t em 21616 76th Ave. W Final Approval ADB-83-91 NEW POST OFFICE AT PERRINVILLE P qCjeb Tom Snyder 18400 76th Ave. W. Preliminary Approval ADB-93-91 NEW ONE-STORY RETAIL/OFFICE BUILDING s &S pQ R1 MS eog Ron Harned 622 Edmonds Way Preliminary Approval ADB-94-91 NEW 38 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX 6 4 Tim Jorve 7230 & 7316 208th St. S.W. Preliminary Approval ADB-78-91 PROPOSED INDOOR AND OUTDOOR TENNIS COURTS AND NEW PARKING LOT AT HARBOR SQUARE ATHLETIC CLUB Warren Lafon 12L I 19- �Mti 160 W. Dayton St. Preliminary Approval ADB-79-91 NEW OFFICE BUILDING FOR BERT STOLEGa K Warren Lafon 551 Dayton St. Preliminary Approval ADB-97-91 EXPANDED PARKING AREA FOR DOUG'S LYNNWOOD MAZDA Max Meyring & Assoc. 22130 Highway 99 SCC ^SV4Nft% Final Approval �^ ADBAGDEC/TXTADB CURT SMITCH Director 41 STR�T F, STAr- OF, 0 0 �yt lase � y FILE • STATE OF WASHINGTON Aa683--7t DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE 16018 1%,1111 Creek Blvd.. \ ill Crcck. WA 99012 Tel. (206) 775-1311 November 22, 1991 Mr. Dick Nelson U.S. Postal Service, Facilities P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, Washington 98064-5000 RE: PERRINVILLE STATION - STREAM SEDIMENTATION Dear Mr. Nelson: i w., On November 14, 1991, I visited this site and found that the French drain system had been installed and the contractor was filling in the old streambed. I went down to the stream below the project and found that the pool below the outfall pipe had filled with sediment from the construction site. I walked downstream for a distance of approximately 200 feet and observed that sand had settled out in the pools and along the edges. I walked this stream prior to the start of this project and observed that this stream had excellent fish habitat which included clean gravel which is necessary for fish to spawn. We also found cutthroat trout immediately below the culvert. The amount of sediment that has come from this project has severely impacted this stream and may prevent fish from spawning. The sediments have already affected the aquatic insect production by covering up gravels on which these insects live. These insects are the main source of food for fish. Since this is an isolated population of fish due to a migration blockage at Talbot Road, the loss of spawning habitat could seriously deplete this population. We realize that some turbidity and sedimentation will occur when a project involves a stream, however, the amount of sedimentation that has occurred and the impacts it has had on this stream are unacceptable. Even though a Hydraulic Project Approval was issued to the contractor and the contractor seemed to cooperate with various agencies, substantial inadvertent damage has been done to the state's resources. We request that the Postal Service, as the project proponent, correct this problem. The streambed should be cleaned of sediment prior to February 1, 1992. The fish will be spawning after this.date and work in this stream will not be possible. Failure to take timely action will result in a needless loss of public resources. If 3 Yt' Mr. Dick Nelson November 22, 1991 Page 2 I will be available to review and discuss ways to remove silt from the gravel. Please call me at (206) 774-8812 if you have any questions. Sincerely, a. I � ) V '.� Philip Schneider Habitat Biologist PS:ks cc: Senator Slade Gorton Congressman John Miller Mike Boyle, Cree Construction Ron Devitt, DOE Jim Walker, City of Edmonds Diane Azure Gordy Zillges, WDW Ted Muller, WDW FI 0 STREET FILE MEMORANDUM Wednesday, November 20, 1991 TO: Noel Miller Public Works Superintendent FROM: Jeff Palmer Councilmember SUBJECT: CURB DAMAGE AT PERRINVILLE POSTAL SITE RECEIVE® NOV 2 rz>� PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. A curb has been damaged opposite the entrance to the new postal office site in Perrinville, which is under construction. Would you please review this to decipher who is responsible for repairing the curb? Thank you. CIS Qi r +- P 2J,4zv �!I /��5���0-� 5��,�/ � /f�i9�'-�B� Diprli�,f�S �F.�,sfS Cs�iss✓� /.�y a: 0 STREET FILE 41 ��yy M E M O R A N D U M November 6, 1991 TO: Ed Somers Associate Planner FROM: Gordy Hyde Engineering Coordinator Bob errs SUBJECT: US POST OFFICE SITE AT PERRINVILLE DI AN DFVTFW Engineering has the following comments regarding the plans submitted: Eight-inch water mains will be required across the property c « frontages in both Olympic View Drive and 76th Avenue West to provide required fire flow. 2) Creek restoration is required to meet Department of Wildlife standards. 3) Detention pond needs to be redesigned to prevent surface water from leaving the site (existing design elevation for pond is 264.0, northeast entrance is 263.5). 4) Design control for both two-year and ten-year storms. 5) Plans as submitted do not accurately reflect actual site conditions. 6) Wheelchair ramps are required at each driveway. 7) Frontage improvements (curb, gutter, and 7' sidewalk) required on 76th Avenue West. Face of curb to be located 20 feet west of surveyed centerline at 76th Avenue West right-of-way. 8) Ten feet of right-of-way to be dedicated on 76th Avenue West. 9) Driveway for drop box access to be minimum of 14' wide. 10) Show driveway width dimensions. 11) Concrete driveways are not allowed within right-of-way, asphalt only. 12) High traffic load driveways required at all locations. Memo to Ed Somers 06 Re: Post Office Plan Review November 6, 1991 Page 2 13) Traffic study mentioned in meeting of September 6, 1990, as having been completed two years ago has never been provided to the City. The requested update also has not been received. GH/dm POPlan/TXTForms STREET HLE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 29, 1991 PSE MINUTES SUBJECT TO NOVEMBER 4,1991 APPROVAL The special meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Council Presi- dent Jack Wilson in Room 115 of the Francis Anderson Center, 700 Main St, Edmonds. All present joined in the flag salute. PRESENT STAFF Larry Naughten, Mayor Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor Jack Wilson, Council President Rob Chave, Planning Manager Steve Dwyer, Councilmember Peter Hahn, Community Services Dir Roger Hertrich, Councilmember Bob Alberts, City Engineer Jo -Anne Jaech, Councilmember Rhonda March, City Clerk William Kasper, Councilmember Jacqui Austin, Office Admin. John Nordquist, Councilmember Scott Snyder, City Attorney Jeff Palmer, Councilmember Buzz Buzalsky, Fire Chief Amanda Foote, Student Representative Barb Mehlert, Recorder CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Hertrich requested Item (B) be removed from the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Kasper requested Item (C) be moved to the end of the meeting for discussion. COUNCILMEMBER NORD- QUIST, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. The ap- proved items are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL ✓(0) APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE 2854 AMENDING OFFICIAL STREET MAP AND VACATING 275 FEET OF ALLEY EAST OF 7TH AVE. S. BETWEEN SPRUCE AND HEMLOCK STS. (APPLICANT: MCBRIDE, ET AL/FILE ST-3-91) y APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 22, 1991 (ITEM (B) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA) Councilmember Hertrich said there was an omission to the minutes, and he would like the Council Assistant to listen to the Council tape of October 22, 1991 and include his comments regarding the Perrinville Postal Office Construction. Per Councilmember Hertrich's request, the following information is added to public record: Councilmember Hertrich referenced the zoning at the current Postal Construction site. Councilmem- ber Hertrich said it was indicated in a letter sent to the Council on October 17, 1991 from a Mr. Jeff Jones, that the Postal site was a multi -family residential site and it was changed to neigh- borhood business. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if that included the whole section, and Peter Hahn, Community Services Director, replied the only part that was changed in the rezone was the Phorse corral. Councilmember Hertrich inquired on the hours of operation in a neighborhood busi- YYY ness according to City code. Councilmember Hertrich thought it was 11:00 p.m. until 6:00 a.m., unless they applied for a conditional use permit, and Mr. Hahn replied that sounded correct. Councilmember Hertrich indicated the hours of operation for the Post Office in Perrinville will intrude into the the night time close down time in a BN zone, which: is 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Councilmember Hertrich said if this facility opens up before 6:00 a.m., will they be required to apply for a conditional use permit, and Mr. Hahn replied the hours of the Post Office operation will be 4:30 a.m. until 6:00 p.m. Mr. Hahn said the position of the Postal Service is they do not have to get local permits, which includes a conditional use permit. Councilmember Hertrich expressed his concern that the business is located in a residential area which has more restric- tions applied to that business. AUDIENCE PORTION Council President Wilson inquired if anyone from the audience wished to address the Council on any issue. No member of the audience came forward. Council President Wilson closed the audience portion of the Council Meeting. Mayor Naughten arrived at the Council Meeting at 7:10 p.m. HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING SETBACK ADJUSTMENT TO REDUCE 25- ., SE B CK TO 16 FEET LL W D KADDIT ION AT 23800 74TH AVE. W.(APPELLANT: CLAREME77 A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, COUN- CILMEMBER PALMER, AND COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST VOTING IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, COUNCILMEM- BER DWYER, AND COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH OPPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER PALMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO EXTEND THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS TO PURCHASE NEW AID CAR (ITEM (C) ON CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Kasper inquired why the aid cars seem to wear out so fast, and asked about City ,,,aU maintenance of the vehicles. Fire Chief, ',Buzz" Buzalsky replied they haven't been maintained fY they way they should, however, the unit needs to be replaced, due to excessive repairs, and costs. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO APPROVE ITEM (C). MOTION CARRIED. COUNCIL Council President Wilson noted Port Ludlow is offering a retreat packet that is substantially lower than their regular rates. The one catch is there could only be one menu selection for all retreat participants. Council President Wilson asked the Council if they would like consider this as a possible Council/Staff retreat site for 1992. The consensus of the Council was not to consider Port Ludlow as a possible retreat site under those conditions. Council President Wilson noted the current date for the retreat is still set up for February 14 and 15, however, Council - member Kasper will be out of town that weekend. The retreat details will be decided at a later date. Councilmember Palmer said there is a problem in the Perrinville area with regards to the roads -n being left muddy by the trucks hauling earth out of the Post Office site, and asked Staff to take whatever action is possible in order to have them clean up the roads after those trucks leave the site. Councilmember Hertrich noted he recently had occasion to be in the vicinity of the Lynnwood Sew- age Treatment Plant, and experienced very strong odors permeating from the plant, and he feels this poses a serious health problem. Councilmember Hertrich reiterated his desire to get togeth- �f er with the, Lynnwood City Council to discuss the issues. Councilmember Hertrich said he was recently in the area of 80th, and said a school bus went speed- ing down 80th at approximately 40 miles an hour. Councilmember Hertrich feels the police don't have the citizens afraid of the law, and they are speeding. Councilmember Hertrich also said this same instance happens on Meadowdale Road, and it is not just the school buses, but everyone. Councilmember Dwyer thanked City Attorney Scott Snyder for providing a memo to the Council regard- ing Regulating Contractors on Federal Government project. Amanda Foote, Student Representative, apologized for being absent the last two meetings, however, she has been home ill. The meeting adjourned at 10:09 p.m. THESE MINUTES ARE SUBJECT TO NOVEMBER 4, 1991 APPROVAL. THE OFFICIAL SIGNED COPY OF THESE MINUTES IS ONE FILE IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 11 October 29, 1991 STREET FILE* led 10/30/91 Ii-ow CITY OF E D M O N D S LARRY S. NAUGHTEN 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-3202 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES: PETER E. HAHN Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering DIRECTOR 8g0_lg y October 28, 1991 Mr. Richard J. Nelson Project Manager Contract Design & Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P.O. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 RE: YOUR LETTER TO MR. JIM WALKER DATED OCTOBER 23, 1991 REGARDING THE PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY Dear Mr. Nelson: Your October 23, 1991, letter was received and reviewed. Your statement that the Postal Service will not be held responsible for damages due to work being done by the Postal Service is not correct. Your statement that the existing pipe was not correctly installed or improperly grouted shows a great deal of presumption on your part. It was not an uncommon practice to design pipe systems with ungasketed joints to collect groundwater. The dam mentioned in your letter is for the sole purpose of the Postal Service. Damage resulting directly or indirectly due to the dam will be the Postal Service responsibilities. All work done for this project which causes any damages will be the responsibility of the Postal Service and their agents. If additional survey type work needs to be done to properly construct your facilities, I suggest you do so. If there are any questions, please call. Sincerely, Robert J. Alberts, P.E. City Engineer RJA/dm USPostOf/TXTForms • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan M_.:EVORANDA l << 14LU7v1�f -72 s7'� .. 0CFT7, - -Pi4�- - ..CYO _ ?�`Tus4,� Pao v yr 2 . _.. =c-c I ...... MA7r -A40-.. q Z Ni�n cut .. CS -lb a 111 _5!Te=-- _ .. --- --. %�Z,�c � .. _ G�J ._�L•2. _ � . Ca.; � 7/i` r�L/c; G-�,i,�r� .� C'Cc�-�,tLi,�1c; �G/ - — - -- _ !�� � � CaJI!_ S' > ✓�✓'- C/' G�.JCC%'cacZ� r . ZC'!L� i /'��'+Gc. �L- - - - - --- -- x-e1z%G lcctd • G%foozl /=l Gv�Li' / . F :SIG ` !/ - /cyya— ,i� October 23, 1991 CITY OF EDMONDS ATTN JIM WALKER 250 STH AVENUE N EDMONDS WA 98020-3181 STR FILE TM UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Seattle Facilities Service Office P.O. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 Subject: Edmonds, WA - Perrinville Carrier Facility Dear Mr. Walker: RECEIVED 0 C T 2 4 1991 ENGINEERING A site visit on October 21, 1991 to the Perrinville postal project has revealed unanticipated concern with the stream diversion design. Final diversion of the stream was completed on Friday October 18, 1991. When the contractor returned on Monday he noticed a two foot sink hole at the excavation where the 36" diversion pipe connected to the existing manhole. It was also noticed that a substantial amount of water was still draining from the 4811 culvert. A visual examination indicated that the water was entering the culvert from ungrouted joints in the existing 481' culvert. The construction superintendent believes the leak was from the connection at the downsizing of the existing manhole and proceeded to pump the manhole in order the regrout the connection. Lowering the water level in the manhole did not diminish the flow of water in the culvert and excavation was begun to tear out a section of the 4811 culvert to remove the travel path for the water. Excavation discovered that the water was entering the excavation about 510" below grade and did not seem to be coming from the direction of the manhole. A section of the 48" culvert was removed and existing soils were replaced and compacted to form a dam for the ground water. It must be clarified that the Postal Service has not surveyed the condition of the existing culverts or manholes in Olympic View Drive and 76th and is operating under direction from the City for the design of the stream mitigation. The Postal Service is not responsible for damage caused due to existing storm lines that are not correctly installed or improperly grouted. Sincerely, ARichard. Nelson Project Manager, Contract Design & Construction Consultant Seattle Facilities Service Office, USPS P.O. Box 5000, Kent, WA 98064-5000 Telephone: (206) 6S6-4341 0 0 STREET FILE Councilmember Hertrich said Ms. Ohlde listed bike safety programs as a revenue producing program, and reminded Ms. Ohlde this is being covered by the Police Department. COUNCILMEMBER PALMER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE IMMEDIATE HIRE OF FULL-TIME OUTDOOR RECREATION COORDI- NATOR IN THE PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS YEAR AND AMEND THE 1991 BUDGET TO REFLECT 7 FULL TIME EMPLOYEES IN DIVISION 640. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST SECONDED FOR DISCUSSION. Councilmember Nordquist expressed his concern the Council is up against the budgetary process, and he would like this discussion held over until December 4th, when the Council can review the budget. Councilmember Nordquist feels there are some budgetary problems as Council President Wilson has expressed in the past, and would like to hold off for a time. Council President Wilson concurred with Councilmember Nordquist. Councilmember Wilson said Ms. Ohlde has a very strong case, however, he is committed to no new hires because of problems the City is facing, and feels this discussion should be part of the budgetary process. Given the comments that Councilmembers made, COUNCILMEMBER PALMER WITHDREW HIS MOTION, and agreed to review the position in the budgetary process. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST WITHDREW THE SECOND TO THE MOTION. It was the consensus of the Council to continue the program on a part time basis with the under- standing that the Council will address the full time position during the budgetary process. REPORT FROM STAFF TO COUNCIL ON POST OFFICE DEVELOPMENT © Mayor Naughten said there has been numerous calls to the Mayor's Office as well as to Councilmem- bers from citizens regarding the Post Office development in Perrinville. Mayor Naughten said at the last Council Meeting, it was decided that Staff would contact Post Office Officials to dis- cuss these concerns once again, and report back to the Council with the current development. Mayor Naughten said Staff, Councilmember Palmer, and himself did meet with the Post Master, Tom Snyder, on October 21, and reviewed the plans at present. Mayor Naughten said the meeting went well, and asked Peter Hahn, Community Services Director, to review the meeting. Mr. Hahn noted there were at least three representatives from the Postal Service present tonight, including the Post Master, Tom Snyder, and Ken Kirkpatrick, Manager of Design and Construction for the Postal Service. Mr. Hahn also noted there were a number of citizens present who live in the immediate vicinity of the postal office project. Mr. Hahn proceeded to give the Council a chronology of the details surrounding the Postal Service project in Perrinville. Mr. Hahn said the Postal Service representatives have consistently held the position that as a Federal agency, the Postal Service is not subject to local regulation. City Staff contacted Congressman Miller, and after intervention by Congressman Miller, the Postal Service agreed to modify its site plan. With regards to the on site stream, Mr. Hahn credited Jim Walker, newly appointed Assistant City Engineer, with the preservation of that stream, as Mr. Walker did significant research and put forth much effort in order to have the Postal Service daylight the stream versus culverting, as the Postal Service originally planned. Mr. Hahn pointed out that in late July, City Staff pointed out to the Postal Service there were other engineering concerns, as well as design requirements. Mr. Hahn also said the ADB held a meeting on October 2, 1991, addressing issues of great importance to the immediate neighborhood such as landscaping, elevations, fencing, egress and ingress. Mr. Hahn said no representative from the Postal Service appeared at that meeting, and the neighbors assumed the Postal Service did not care about the concerns of the citizens. In summary, Mr. Hahn said the position the Postal Service held is they are unwilling to do many of the things that the neighborhood wanted; they reserved the right to exclude themselves from the process because the position has been that they do not need permits and approvals from the City, however, at the same time, they say they are willing to abide by the City's code and com- ments, but to the extent that they can do that. Mr. Hahn said Councilmember Palmer met with Post Master Tom Snyder on Friday, October 18, 1991 to discuss these issues, and on October 19, Mr. Hahn met with three neighbors to discuss the same issues. Concerning the meeting on October 21, 1991, Mr. Hahn said that meeting addressed the neighborhood concerns. Mr. Hahn said at that meeting, the Postal Service expressed their willingness to take the points of the ADB Meeting on October 2, 1991, one by one, and address each one in detail. Mr. Hahn noted the Postal Service seemed to be sensitive to those needs which included better EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 October 22, 1991 screening, landscaping, and revision of traffic patterns. Mr. Hahn said the most important re- sult stemming from the meeting is the Postal Service said they were willing to be scheduled for an ADB Meeting as soon as this can be arranged. Mr. Hahn said this can be accomplished by ad- dressing this issue at the ADB Meeting on November 6, 1991. Mr. Hahn said it was his hopes the Council would allow the citizens in the audience to speak so they could express their views, as they have done a significant amount of research, which he feels is important. Mr. Hahn said it is the neighborhood's view that while the Postal Service may have a point of view where they are not subject to local or state regulation, they do have their own internal Post Office procedures, and it is the citizens' position that their own proce- dures were not followed to the letter. Mr. Hahn said the bottom line is the Citizens are interest- ed in asking the Council to approve an injunction against the Postal Service. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO OPEN THE POSTAL SERVICE ISSUE TO THE PUBLIC, ALLOWING 20 MINUTES FOR TESTIMONY. Under discussion, Council President Wilson inquired how Councilmember Kasper wished to allot the 20 minute time period. After Council discussion, COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL - MEMBER WILSON TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ALLOT 10 MINUTES TO THE POSTAL SERVICE AND 10 MINUTES TO PEOPLE NOT FROM THE POSTAL SERVICE. MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED. THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, THEN CARRIED. Councilmember Dwyer asked Mr. Hahn if there are other issues to be resolved other than ADB is- sues, and Mr. Hahn replied affirmatively. Mr. Hahn explained part of it has to do with providing redundant water service to get adequate water flows, and believes those concerns are being ad- dressed. Mr. Hahn said other than that, the ADB should address the majority of the concerns. Mr. Hahn reiterated, however, the citizens will probably say the Postal Service does not have a right to go ahead with their plans because of a flaw in the process, both with NEPA requirements, and their own internal procedures. Councilmember Palmer said a basic problem the City may be running into time and time again, is the Postal Service is claiming exemption from all local codes, therefore not having to comply with anything, and asked City Attorney Scott Snyder if this statement was correct. City Attorney Scott Snyder said Councilmember Palmer is correct in his statement. Mr. Snyder explained this issue has been before the City since approximately March. Mr. Snyder said he was contacted by Mr. Hahn in March of 1991 and asked for an opinion regarding the position of the Postal Service that the City did not have regulatory zoning over the authority. Mr. Snyder said that was re- searched, and in general, the results agreed with the Post Office. In May of 1991, Mr. Snyder notified the Council of the lack of NEPA notification to the City. At that time, Mr. Hahn wrote the Post Office a letter and got them to confirm their position that this was excluded or exempt from the NEPA process; in other words, they had made their own determination. In summary, the Council in effect, has adopted an approach of negotiation through Staff to achieve mitigation and to try and bring the Post Office into procedures. Mr. Snyder proceeded to give a chronology of events leading up to the present situation for the benefit of the audience. Mayor Naughten opened up the hearing portion of the meeting. Jeff Jones, 18119 76th Ave. West, said he got involved with this issue when he found he and other neighbors might have some input as to the aesthetic look of the Post Office. Mr. Jones said he and other neighbors appeared at the ADB Meeting on October 2, only to find out Postal Service Representatives were not present. Mr. Jones said this fostered anger in the neighbors, as appar- ently, the Post Office did not feel it was important to find out how the people surrounding the facility felt about the facility, particularly since the neighbors will have to look at this facility every day. Mr. Jones said if the Postal Service would have shown some interest in work- ing with the neighbors, all of this wouldn't be necessary. Mr. Jones said he and neighbors have done significant research on the project, and noted the Postal Office has claimed they are cate- gorically exempt based on the fact they are under 30,000 square feet, however, Mr. Jones said there is a section of the Federal Register indicating they are exempt, unless unusual circumstanc- es exist, which Mr. Jones feels is the case in this particular instanced to the creek and the human environment. Mr. Jones said it is his contention that the Postal Service does fall under NEPA, and something has to be done now, as they have already started digging. Councilmember Palmer inquired on the unusual circumstance clause in the Federal Register and asked if the Register defined what an unusual circumstance was, and Mr. Jones replied he didn't find anything that explained what an unusual circumstance might be. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6 October 22, 1991 0 • Councilmember Palmer brought up the wetlands issue, and referenced a letter dated June 21st from Mr. Kirkpatrick saying the Postal Service conducted a biological study and engaged in wetlands analysis. Councilmember Palmer asked what definition the Federal Government used with regards to wetlands. Mr. Jones replied the Postal Service told him the file has been lost which had all the information regarding environmental issues. Dianne Eckert, 18223 76th Ave. W, said she contacted law students at the University of Washing- ton, as well as the State and County concerning possible legal action against the Postal Ser- vice. Mr. Eckert said it was the consensus that the City of Edmonds be the one to pursue legal action, if necessary. Ms. Eckert said one of the points that came up, is that it was post time, however, she feels that new issues have come up. Ms. Eckert went on to discuss her research with the Council. Ken Kirkpatrick, Manager of Design and Construction for the Postal Service, said he thought the Postal Service had answered all the questions when the Postal Service met with the Planning De- partment to negotiate and mitigate all existing problems that were on board at that time. Mr. Kirkpatrick noted he was on vacation when the ADB Meeting was held on October 2, 1991. Mr. Kirkpatrick noted he has been in contact with the Postal Service's attorney and environmental staff, and the advice that was given him is that the Postal Service is categorically exempt from local regulations. Mr. Kirkpatrick said a wetland study was performed on the site, and since it involved less than 1/10th of an acre, it was not deemed to be significant. However, the Postal Service wanted to be a good neighbor and left the stream, which in his opinion, is a storm drain, open down as far as possible across the property without disturbing the existing structure. Mr. Kirkpatrick feels this was a big concession on the part of the Postal Service, and cost a large sum of money. Mr. Kirkpatrick said the Postal Service has agreed to other concessions in the interest of being a good neighbor, such as revising entrances and exits to the satisfaction of the neighbors. Mr. Kirkpatrick said the Postal Service is also working with the local neighbors on the aesthetic look of the building, and Mr. Kirkpatrick feels the Postal Service has done more than their share in the interest of being a good neighbor. Councilmember Dwyer said he has heard the position of the Postal Service in that they are exempt from local zoning requirements, however, Councilmember Dwyer asked if there is any reason why the Federal Attorney could not provide the Council with a rationale with why the Government believes that to be true. Councilmember Hertrich referenced the good neighbor aspect, and said the Post Office will be located in a residential neighborhood and retaining a good neighbor image is of utmost importance on the part of the Postal Service. Councilmember Hertrich mentioned the Postal Service is rely- ing on its legal right, however, they are dealing with people and should be sensitive to their needs since it is located in a residential area versus commercial zone. Councilmember Hertrich would like to see this worked out on a non legal basis, where the Postal Service really makes an attempt to address the concerns of the citizens. Tom Snyder, Post Master, 8204 182nd Pl. S.W., Edmonds. reiterated that noise and traffic concerns are being mitigated at present time. Post Master Mr. Snyder reviewed the truck schedules and what the Postal Service is doing with regards to keeping the noise level down, as to not disturb the neighbors. This includes re-routing the 40 foot trucks from 4:30 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. so that they do not go down 76th Avenue at all, using instead, Olympic View Drive. Post Master Tom Sny- der then reviewed other traffic concerns, and assured the Council the Postal Service is doing everything under their power to blend in with the community. Councilmember Hertrich expressed his concern over the width of 76th, with regards to the ability of the Postal trucks and the turning radius that exists. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the Postal Service planned to widen 76th, and Post Master Tom Snyder replied negatively. Post Master Tom Snyder felt there would be no problem with regards to the turning radius. Councilmember Palmer thanked Post Master Tom Snyder for his cooperation in trying to mitigate neighborhood concerns. Councilmember Palmer addressed some traffic revisions that possibly would save the Postal Service money, thus, the Postal Service would have funds available within their budget to mitigate items the neighborhood has deemed important. Councilmember Palmer stated the Postal Service is willing to come back to the ADB to go through their process, and asked Mr. Snyder if that meant the Postal Service will abide by the recommendations and Post Master Tom Snyder replied they will comply as much as it wouldn't add additional costs to the project, and it also depended on what the request is. As far as aesthetic changes, Mr. Snyder does not see any problems complying. COUNCILMEMBER PALMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILSON, TO DEFER THE YOST POOL PROJECT FROM THE NOVEMBER 6TH ADB AGENDA TO A DECEMBER ADB AGENDA, SO THE POSTAL SERVICE PROJECT CAN BE HANDLED ON THE NOVEMBER 6, 1991 ADB AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7 October 22, 1991 r� 71 STFtLE7 FILE M E M O R A N D U M October 21, 1991 TO: Peter Hahn, Community Services Director FROM: Bob Al berts,\�i jy((Engi neer SUBJECT: POST OFFICE DEVELOPMENT - FIRE PROTECTION The post office development needs fire flows, which the existing water system cannot provide at the development. We have been meeting with Mr. Michael Anderson of Hewitt-Isley regarding needed water system improvements. Improvements in the City's system will have to be made. Mr. Anderson has not indicated that the postal service will not construct the improvements at their cost. He informed us last week that he will be discussing the needed improvements with their client, the postal service. RJA/sdt FIREPRO.PO/TXTST530 0RE, CEIVE-D i 1 `(-� J� HYDRADLIC PROJECT �- �e DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE APPROVAL AMcAPtTOL WAr w. ���! OLYMPIA WASHINGTON 98501-1091 EEC NG (R.C.W. 7 5. 2 0. 10 0 ) (206) 753-5897 (R.C.W. 7 5. 2 0. 10 3 ) 0 October 14, 1991 (applicant should refer to this date in all correspondence) PAGE 1 OF 2 PAGES 10)APPLICANT NAME 18 CONTACT PHONES) CONTROL NUMBER F. Cree Construction Co. Inc. 206 775-0454 01-82459-01 19 STREET OR RURAL ROUTE q WRIA P.O. Box C36003 Attn: Mike Boyle 08 CITY STATE ZIP Lynnwood WA 98046 14 76 15 34 12 WATER TRIBUTARY TO 11 TYPE OF PROJECT Miscella_ne_ou_s_-_ _ 03 QUARTER SECTION TOWNSHIP RANGE(E-W) COUNTY SECTION NE 18 27N 04E Snohomish ----------------------------- Temporary Diversion TIME LIMITATIONS: THIS PROJECT MAY BEGIN R © AND MUST BE COMPLETED BY October 14 1991 October 9 1992 THIS APPROVAL IS TO BE AVAILABLE ON THE JOB SITE AT ALL TIMES AND ITS PROVISIONS FOLLOWED BY THE PERMITTEE AND OPERATOR PERFORMING THE WORK. SEE IMPORTANT GENERAL PROVISIONS ON REVERSE SIDE THAT ARE ALSO PART OF THIS APPROVAL. 1. All work shall be done in the dry, utilizing a temporary bypass around the work area. 2. The temporary culvert shall be of sufficient size to pass flows and debris occurring during the project. 3. Erosion control methods shall be utilized to prevent siltation. These may include, but not limited to, straw bales, filter fab- ric, temporary sediment ponds, quarry spalls, check dams, and im- mediate mulching of exposed areas. 4. The stream shall be diverted around the manhole during the installation of the temporary bypass. If water is diverted to the than storm system the outfall shall be armored to prevent scour. 5. The diversion plan submitted with the Hydraulic Project Applica= tion shall be followed. 6. At least 48 hoursrior to starting this project, contact Philip Schneider at (206) 774-8812. NOTE: The applicant has a reed to submit for review to the Department of Wildlife the configuration and the revegetation plan of the open portion of the channel whose location is indicated on the plans submitted with the Hydraulic Project Approval. LOCATION: Olympic View Drive and 76th Avenue West in Edmonds SEPA: Exempt HABITAT BIOLOGIST: Phil Schneider (206) 774-8812 AGENT: Bill Sarvey Pl APPLICANT - FISHERIES - AGENT - INVESTIGATOR - REGION - OLYMPIA: DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE4"4e-tIRECTOR HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL October 14, 1991 (applicant should refer to this date in all correspondence) PAGE 2 OF 2 PAGES APPLICANT NAME a CONTROL NUMBER Cree Construction Co., Inc. 01-82459-01 cc: Dick Nelson Facilities Service Center P.O. Box 5000 Kent, Washington 98064-5000 0 0 STREET FILE MAYOR Mayor Naughten announced that Chief Buzalsky has been appointed as Team Manager for the 1992 U.S. Olympic Amateur Boxing Team, which is quite an honor. Mayor Naughten noted that there are two proclamations this week; National Recycling Week October 14 - 20th; and National Businesswoman's Week, which is October 21 - October 25. rnIINrTI Council President Wilson expressed his concern over the situation surrounding the construction of the Post Office in Perrinville. Council President Wilson said the neighbors are becoming rest- less and it appears that the Post Office is not cooperating. Council President Wilson asked the Council if some time should be set aside on a near future Agenda concerning this issue to let the citizens know the City is aware of their concerns. It was the consensus to put this on the Octo- ber 22nd Agenda for a review. Councilmember Palmer said that the project is moving ahead rapidly, and City Staff is finding it difficult to obtain up-to-date plans, and at least one of the residents made him aware of a let- ter from Slade Gordon indicating the Postal Service will be complying with all Federal, State, and local ordinances in the building of that structure, so he feels an update is in order. City Attorney Scott Snyder suggested Staff prepare an update which lists all the steps and con- tacts the City has made with regards to the construction of the Perrinville Post Office, so the public is aware of everything. Planning Manager, Rob Chave, mentioned that the Department of Wildlife was also involved, and Staff will include an update on that as well. Council President Wilson referred to the Council/Staff Retreat slated for February 14 and 15th. Council President Wilson mentioned Councilmember Kasper will be out of town during that time, so he is considering another date, and will be forthcoming with suggestions for the Council to con- sider. Council President Wilson mentioned that Don Stay, Chairman of the Planning Board, invited the City Council to attend the Planning Board Meeting on December 11th. Councilmember Jaech noted that she will be out of town during that period, however, it was the consensus that the remainder �1 L ram• of the Councilmembers attend. Council President Wilson noted a recent article concerning the City of Lynnwood and the fact that -1 they sliced their sin law into two ordinances. Councilmember Dwyer asked what the next step for the City of Edmonds is with regards to Adult Entertainment. City Attorney Scott Snyder mentioned that City Staff is going through the Council Minutes to make a list of public comments concerning this subject. Mr. Snyder said after this list is completed, he will review the list and provide various legal alternatives to address the issue. Councilmember Dwyer suggested discussing this matter during November, either on the 12th or 26th. Council President Wilson said he would pencil this in on the extended agenda. Council President Wilson asked the Council on their thoughts with regards to a four- hour Satur- day session on November 2, to discuss budget issues per a request from Art Housler. After discus- sion amongst the Council, it was decided that the session be held on Monday, November 4th at 7:00 p.m., in place of the regular Council Meeting. It was noted that the existing items scheduled for November 4th be switched to October 29th, which is a fifth Tuesday. COUNCIL PRESIDENT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER KASPER'S AB- SENCE ON OCTOBER 1, 1991. MOTION CARRIED. L Art Housler, Administrative Services Director, reminded the Council of a previous time table he l� submitted to the Council which contained budget meetings at certain times. Mr. Housler asked Council President Wilson if those dates can be placed on the agenda, and Council President Wilson replied affirmatively. Councilmember Palmer asked Mr. Housler to provide the Council with a duplicate copy of that schedule. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8 October 15, 1991 STREET FILE RECEIVED AUG 1 3 1991 coMmulsirry DIRECTOR VICES TM UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE August 12, 1991 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Seattle Facilities Service Office P.O. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 CITY OF EDMONDS ATTN PETER HAHN DIRECTOR COMMUNITY SERVICES 250 5 AVENUE N EDMONDS WA 98020-3181 Re: Edmonds, WA - Perrinville Station Memorandum of Understanding; Rerouting of Perrinville Creek Dear Mr. Hahn: MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Pursuant to our meeting on July 31, 1991, the following is a synopsis of the agreement between the U.S. Postal Service and the City of Edmonds: 1. The U.S. Postal Service will instruct their A-E to proceed with the stream alignment as presented by the City of Edmonds. This will consist of approximately 200' of re-establishing the current 48" diameter pipe off -site to effect a discharge about 5' below the existing grade to daylight the stream along Olympic.View Drive to the west side of the property where it would cascade down to its existing stream head. This, in effect, will eliminate at least one contributing discharge and combine the others in a single daylighted stream. The above agreement is based on: a. The operations of the Post Office as it is now designed will not be affected. b. The revised site design can be completed within our construction budget. c. The relocation of the stream will not affect the construction schedule for completion. d. It is confirmed there is no liability for the open and unguarded stream. The USPS will reserve the right to provide fencing for this stream should there be a necessity for same. e. The City of Edmonds will be responsible when flows exceed the design capacity of the stream bed. 2. The U.S. Postal Service will revise the sidewalk along 72nd Street to provide a 6-8' wider street width. City of Edmonds Page 2 Memorandum of Understanding 3. The U.S. Postal Service will allow the City of Edmonds to utilize approximately a 10' x 15' area at the corner of 76th Avenue West and Olympic View Drive to plant and maintain a flower garden and signage. 4. The City of Edmonds will set aside the setback requirements both for the stream and_the USPS facility to accommodate these changes as documented herein. Sincerely, i enneth W. Kirkpatr}c Manager, Design & n truction Branch Seattle Facilities ice Office Telephone 206/656-4312 Concurrence City of Edmonds Director, Community Services cc: Congressman John Miller - Attention: Alta Kendall A B CITY OF EDMONDS COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT A. • Owner: U.S., R2s eq��-- Name Mailing Address City State Zip. RECEIVED Permit No. ✓` -2. �kP3 �99� Issue Date 7 — -3G 1—T B �i TCURctor: Or,e. P_ (711, �o . Name 55a9— 136tf SW lax C34603 Mailing Address Ci State Zip State License Number Telephone Number C. • Address or Vicinity of Construction: 1 11 SSW 0+ V0 Type of Work to be Done:Yo4'/ STl�C'M I'l�ctG1�. �i�UtJ6'�tP�� -TcU D. • Work in Connection With: ❑ Sub or Plat ❑ Single Family ❑ City Projects Commercial ❑ Multifamily ❑ Utility E. • Pavement Cut: ❑ Y [9 N F. • Size of Cut: X APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by . his signature to this application, agrees to hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any injuries, damages, or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, forseen or unforseen, that may be made against the City of Edmonds, or any of its departments or employees, including or not limited, to the defense of any legal proceedings including defense costs, court costs, and attorney fees by reason. of granting this permit. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK. Estimated restoration fees will be held until the final street patch is completed by City forces, at which time a debit or credit will be processed for issuance to the applicant. • A 24 hour notice is required for inspection; Please call Engineering: 771-3202 • Work is to be inspected during progress and at completion. • Restoration to be in accordance with City Code. • Street to be kept clean at all times. • Traffic Control to be in accordance with City regulations. • All street -cut ditches must be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to end of working day; NO EXCEPTIONS. I understand the above and that this permit must be available at the job. site for inspection purposes at all times. Signature: Date: Owner or Contractor This Permit Must be Posted at the Job Site For Inspection..Purposes Call DIAL -A -DIG Prior to Beginning Work y, APPROVED BY: Z Time Authorized: Void after 180 days. OW Special Conditio? . t5�-.Mie U.41Kw� �® FWA-e6 Cn IK.IAUr--M5*3 .Dg.51Ct to 'C1 1 45rCRM F'AS M 04J(L S V2wt H 10 . M. !�RYEASEDBY: Date !7-3r-, PERMIT FEE: `t/Ait/ EiA Restoration Fee: Receipt No.: Fund I I . Fee: Street Cut Dimensions: x = $ INSPECTED BY Date ENO WORK TO BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE Eng. Div. March 1989 7,0 04 �. STREET FILE MEMORANDUM September 25, 1991 TO: Ed Somers, Associate Planner FROM: Gordy Hyde, Engineering Coordinator SUBJECT: CDRC REVIEW OF 9-12-91 FOR ADB APPL C IONS Engineering has comments regarding the following proposals: ADB-73-91: ✓ Earlier review of this proposal showed that drainage consideration and high traffic load driveway would be required. ADB-74-91: Earlier review of this proposal showed that driveway width is required to be fourteen feet curb to curb and storm water is to be discharged at an approved location. ADB-79-91: `'/ Incomplete submittal. See attached sheet for deficiencies. Drainage detention will be required. Seven to ten foot sidewalk required in BC zone. Existing curbs to be inspected; replace if determined. Alley to be inspected; overlaid with 1-1/2" ACP if determined. Curb to be constructed to separate alley from private property. ✓ ADB-80-91: Traffic report will be required. High traffic load driveways required; 216th St. approach to be exit only. All two-way driveway widths twenty-four feet minimum. All parking stalls overhanging sidewalks require wheel stops; storm drainage detention required. J ADB-83-91: f Comments have been submitted under separate cover. GCH/sdt Attachments Alberts CDRCREVW/TXTST530 p 890 19°t DATE: TO: FROM: RE: STREET FILE CITY OF EDMONDS OFFICE OF THE CTY 4447 000 FAX: 447I 20 5TTORNEY RECEIVED FES 12 1991 ENGINEERING February 12, 1991 Mary Lou Block, Peter -Hahn W. Scott Snyder, Office of the City AttorneAvq- Post Office Property NEPA Review LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR We have reviewed the letter forwarded to you from the Post Office regarding the City's lack of regulatory authority --that is, its inability to require building and other permits for the Post Office. The law which they cite is good law but begs an important question. Among the cases they cite are cases involving situations in which a federal agency (the Post Office) has found that their action is not environmentally significant and therefore has not followed the National ' Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). NEPA procedures would be applicable to any action which has environmental significance. In other words, they do not have to follow our process or adhere to state SEPA mitigation bindings but are subject to NEPA. As the responsible entity, they conduct their own environmental review. In discussions with Mary Lou, it appears that the City has received no formal notification of action regarding the NEPA review process. This implies that there has been a finding that this action is not environmentally significant. If the City and the State wish to require environmental mitigation with regard to the stream, my suggestion is that you immediately initiate a letter to the Post Office inquiring regarding the status of NEPA review. If the Post Office found that the action is not significant or refuse to follow through with NEPA review, the City and state's option is to pursue injunctive relief in federal court. Given that the majority of the headwaters of this stream would be underneath a large parking lot with all the environmental impacts that it would cause, this seems on the surface to be a good case to pursue. I suggest that the City work in conjunction with the State if it intends to pursue litigation. Unless the City is prepared to resort to litigation, given the Post Office's posture, there is no other remedy available to 2100 Westlake Center Tower, 1601 Fifth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101-1686 - Incorporated August 11, 1890 - Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan you. I suggest this matter be reviewed with Council to see if litigation will be authorized. WSS/klt cc: Jeff Palmer Members of the City Council WSS53090M/0006.150.094 • • UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Seattle Facilities Service Office P.O. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064-5000 Janaury 2S, 1991 Ms. Mary Lou Block Manager, Planning Division 2S0 S Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020-3181 Subject: Edmonds, WA - Perrinville Station Dear Ms. Block: BAN . ;: 9 PLANNING UtpT Mr. Hart of Hewitt-Isley has requested that we reply to your letter of November 19, 1990 concerning the USPS Perrinville Station project.. We have reviewed your correspondence with our legal staff and consistent with their comments, offer the following response. The Postal Service policy is to comply, as far as possible, with state and local laws concerning building codes, permits, environmental requirements, etc., but, as previously stated, it is.not legally required to submit its plans to design review by local authorities or to obtain building permits. It is the practice of the Postal Service to obtain suitable zoning of property that is acquired for postal construction, but this compliance is voluntary and is not the result of any legal obligation. The Postal Service is an independent establishment of the executive branch of the Government of the United States (39 U.S.C. Sec.201). It is mandated to provide prompt, reliable and efficient postal services and, in so doing, has been specifically authorized by Congress to acquire real property and to construct, operate and maintain buildings and improvements on that property (39 U.S.C. Sections 101, 401 (5), (6). The activities of the Postal Service are not subject to local regulation. United States Postal Service v. City of Pittsburg,Cal., 467 F. Supp. 1080 (N.D. Cal. 1979), affirmed 661 F 2d 783 9th Cir. 1981 ; Grover City v. United States Postal Service, 391 F. Supp. 982 (C.D. Cal. 1975 ; see Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission v. United States Postal Service, 487 F. 2d 1029 D.C. Cir 1973). This freedom from local regulation derives from the Supremacy Clause of Ariticle VI of the Constitution as described in cases such as McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 31S (1819), Johnson v. Maryland, 254 U.S. S1, S5 1920), United States v. City of Chester, 144 F. 2d 415 3rd Cir. 1944), and Leslie Miller, Inc. V. Arkansas, 3S2 U.S. 187 (1956). 0 • Ms. Mary Lou Block Page 2 The Postal Service has generally been able to comply with zoning and building code requirements to the satisfaction of local governments. In the few instances where the Postal Service could not reach an agreement with local officials and litigation was necessary, the Postal Service has been successful in obtaining determinations that its projects are not subject to local governmental control and that it is not required to obtain building permits from local authorities. See, for example, United States Postal Service v: City of Bedford, TX, Civ. No. 4-86-732-B (N.D. Tex Septem er 22, 198 ; Township of Middletown v. Northeast Regional Office United States Postal Service, 601 F. Supp. 125 D. N.J. 1985 ; and Stewart v. United States Postal Service, 508 F. Supp. (N.D. Ca. 1980). In the area of environmental concerns, the Postal Service complies with the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water act, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendment of 1972, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act of 1968 and Executive Order 12372, and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, including Executive Orders 11988, 11990, and 11S14. See 39 C.F.R., Parts 775, 776, and 778. During the design process the Postal Service has examined all alternatives for siting and has concluded that, based on our site requirements, the existing conditions and the efficient use of the property the subject steam must be redirected as indicated on the drawings dated September 19, 1990. The Postal Service has received the 60% submittal from the architect and will be most willing to conduct a second design review or a discussion of alternatives with the City. Please contact the Project Manager, Richard Nelson at 656-4341 if additional information is desired. Sincerely, retn:f-nxeth W. Kir patr. Contracting Officer Seattle Facilities PO Box 5000, Kent, WA Telephone 6S6-4312 cc: Hewitt-Isley sign & Construction Branch ice Office, USPS 98064-5000 STAre oA o r. CURT SMITCH = s Director yl ises �° STATE OF WA%iNGTON DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE 16018 Mill Crcck Blvd., Mill Crcck, WA 98012 CSA Dick Nelson P. 0. Box 5000 Kent, Washington 98064-5000 • C.�i,�z'I� Kc 2 6 1990 ENGINEERING Tcl. (206) 775-1311 December 20, 1990 RE: PERRINVILLE POST OFFICE STATION ON UNNAMED TRIBUTARY TO PUGET SOUND (PERRINVILLE CREEK) IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY Dear Dick: You have asked me to comment on this project as a result of our field review of the project site. The part of the project that directly relates to the Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) is the proposal to culvert a 150 foot portion of Perrinville Creek and 100 feet of a tributary to Perrinville.Creek. The Department of Wildlife discourages the tightlining of streams even though this section of the creek does not support fish. A 48 inch by 150 foot concrete culvert has been installed downstream from.your project site which is a barrier to fish migration. During.a recent electrofishing survey of this stream, we found cutthroat trout up to eight inches just below the 48 inch culvert and we also found coho salmon below the culvert on Talbot Road. We walked the stream below the site to the Sound. We observed excellent fish habitat in the upper reaches. As we proceeded downstream and the'gradient changes, the impacts of the effects of stormwater become evident. The channel becomes deeply incised alongwith slumps and slides in the predominately sandstone banks. There are numerous adverse impacts to fish and wildlife resources that would result if this stream were placed in a culvert. This stream section would cease to function as a biological connection to downstream areas. There would be direct loss of leaf litter input from the deciduous trees. Leaf litter and other organic materials provide a base for the food chain that includes bacteria, aquatic insects and fish. Aquatic insects and terrestrial insects that fall off trees and shrubs from upstream areas provide an important source of food for fish. In addition, an open stream channel will store more water than a culvert and dissipate energy which may help to lessen erosion problems downstream. The densely vegetated riparian area along this stream will be removed and will result in a loss of habitat for songbirds and small mammals. ..ice,,.. Schneider to Nelson December 20, 1990 Page 2 As you can see, even though this area does not support fish and it has been impacted by previous activities (filling, dumping of refuse, etc.), it still plays an important ecological role. We would recommend -that this stream not be tightlined, which is the same conclusion as the report written by Ebasco Environmental regarding this project. If you proceed with this project, we would require some form of mitigation for loss of this stream. Some of the mitigation . ideas that we discussed during the field -review include: removing the culvert downstream from the site and recreating the stream channel, building a detention pond where the downstream culvert is located that could detain a five year storm to a two year release rate. We would be glad to review any other ideas for mitigating the impacts of this project to fish and wildlife resources. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to provide early input into this project. A Hydraulic Project Approval will be required from the Department of Wildlife for this project. -If a Corps Notice is issued by the Corps, we can use the notice as a Hydraulic Project Application for'this project. In addition, NEPA and/or SEPA documentation will be required before we can issues an HPA. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 206-774- 8812. Sincerely, Philip Schneider Habitat Biologist PS:ks c: Jim Walker Ted Muller Tony Oppermann y l� David M. Hewitt, AIA William A. Isley. AIA. AICP Timolhy L. SPclman, AIA 400 nlding 119 Pin et Seattle, WA 98101-1511 PNine: 206.624.8154 Fax: 206.626.0541 A Professional Service Corlwation Perrinville Station Meeting Notes October 31, 1990 Architecture Present: ntcrion Urban D sign STEET FILE Richard Nelson (RN) Seattle FSO - USPS Jim Walker_(JW) City__of_Edmonds---Engineering Gordon Hyde (GH) City of Edmonds - Traffic } Mary"Lou Block -(MLB)-- ---City of Edmonds - Planning Bobby Mills (BM) City Of Edmonds - Public Works Ed Somers (ES) City of Edmonds - Planning Bill Stroud (BS) City of Edmonds Ron Holland (RH) City of Edmonds Dick Mumma (DM) City of Edmonds - Building Gary McComas (GM) City of Edmonds -_Fire Department Tom Snyder (TS) Edmonds Postmaster - USPS David Hewitt (DH) Hewitt Isley Carter Hart (CH) Hewitt Isley Lukas Delen (LD) Hewitt Isley RECEIVE 0 NOV 13 1990 FN(;I1VF;:9/NP, l . CH introduced the project scope: An approximately 12,500 sq.ft. facility located on large irregularly shaped lot on the northwest corner of Olympic View Drive and 76th Avenue W. H•I was not able to come up with a site plan which satisfies USPS requirements and at the same time left the existing stream uncovered. The service area will be fenced and buffered by substantially landscaping according to City of Edmonds requirements. 2. The following upgrading of utilities would be required in order for the project to receive the go-ahead from the Utilities Department: a) Upgrade 4" waterline on 76th Avenue W to 8" along the extent of the site. b) Upgrade 6" waterline to 8" along Olympic View Drive. c) Locate hydrants as assigned by Fire Department. d) Existing culverts on the site will need to be inspected by means of a camera. e) Any underground utility lines need to be a minimum 10' away from the outside edge of the building. f) Fire sprinkler water lines (if any) need a double -detector valve system that cannot be located within the security fence. g) Provide 7' to 1.0' wide sidewalks with curbs and gutters along both streets bordering the property (or a fee agreement will be negotiated with the City). 3. DH gave an analysis of the design: The building consists of several different zones required by the functions of the building. Berming has been provided to cut down the apparent height of the building's taller spaces. The parapet has been notched to cut down the apparent length of blank walls. A single large well -detailed window has been provided as a gesture to the "Perrinville" architecture. 4. MLB asked whether the post office standard of an 8' high cyclone fence with 3 strands of barbed wire was required around the service area. RN indicated that this was a USPS standard and would eventually be screened by the landscaping. 9022-80 Page 1 of 3 iiP{x � 'HE IT 5. MLB asked at what stage the environmental review of the project was. CH indicated that at this time, it was not clear whether the project falls under state or national environmental review policies. 6. DM raised the following building code concerns: a) Averaging of the height (according to Edmonds zoning regulations) of the four corners of the smallest rectangle that will enclose the building from existing grade may cause the building to exceed the height limit. b) The Northwest Energy Code is applicable when using electricity to heat the building. State code is applicable when using fossil fuels. c) Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment must be screened. d) The interior lighting must conform to the Northwest Energy Code standards no matter how the building is heated. e) Roof is oven 6,000 S.F., therefore must be Class A or B. 7. RN indicated that building permit would not be required for a federal agency building. DM expressed that this premise should be checked because he has previously been involved with a governmental agency that was required to obtain a building permit. Plan check would be performed by ICBO or Whitely/Jacobsen. 8. The following fire -safety concerns were raised by GM: a) Emergency lighting must meet UBC requirements. b) Portable fire extinguishers must be provided. RN indicated that the USPS standard was to provide extinguishers every 50'. c) . The City of Edmonds requires fire hydrants every 300'. d) There will be an alarm and detection system installed in the building. 9. RN indicated that the USPS has chosen not to follow up on the previous traffic study for the following reasons: a) The traffic study was conducted for a much larger 21,000 sq. ft. facility that had a much larger public function. b) The data of the existing traffic study varies greatly with what little data is available and consequently seems to be unreliable. c) The post office has no similar facilities in similar situations that traffic numbers can be generated from. 10. RN feels that the USPS should be allowed to culvert the open part of the creek on the site for the following reasons: a) In an analysis of the stream on the site by Ebasco Engineering, the stream flow, quality of the stream, and size of the wetlands were deemed insignificant. b) A review of the stream by the USPS's regional environmental director indicates that the wetlands are insignificant. He is confident that the Corps of Engineers will approve culverting of the site. c) The stream is further blocked in three separate places downstream. d) USPS is exempt from state environmental laws. e) USPS program requirements cannot practically be met without culverting the stream. f) The cost of moving the stream is prohibitive. 11. RN indicated that a national environmental impact checklist would be done. 12. MLB requested that H•I send them copies of preliminary design proposals that showed alternative site designs were the stream either remained intact or was moved. 9022-80 Page 2 of 3 13. MLB indicated that there were four appeals due to the affect on the stream on the proposed development directly north of the USPS site even though this proposal left the stream intact. She said this indicates a public level of concern about the stream. JW also said that currently efforts are underway to clear the remaining blockages downstream. In addition, proposed state environmental laws would not allow the stream to be culverted. 14. RN indicated that it was USPS intention to present the project to the Design Review Board. The next Design Review Board meeting is scheduled for December 5th at 7:00 p.m. MLB indicated that the Board cannot approve design until environmental and creek issues are resolved. Note: Please review the above meeting notes and notify H•I of any changes or clarifications within one week. LD:dc cc: All present Tom Kane - ABKJ Paul Petska - Esmond Petska & Assoc. 9022-80 Page 3 of 3 EDMONDS, WA 1. RINVILLE STATIC Mmtoj.!� f':'ljkF' AMR ARRIER RC DMONDS_ V 4LVIzKl MANOF 3TAT I O OOU WFI UNTLP :RRAC AIN Of :.- .�_ TABLE 1 Trip Generation (21,000 sq. ft. gross floor area) P.M. Peak Hour Daily Enter Exit Total Parking Customers 1,829 176 176 352 Drive -Through Customers 788 76 76 152 Employees and Delivery Vehicles 118 -- -- -- Totals 2,735 252 252 504 that some of the trips to the post office are already'on the street passing by the site for other, more primary, trip purposes (e.g., home -to -work). Trip distribution to and from the site was based on the existing volumes entering and exiting the 76th Avenue West/Olympic View Drive intersection and the geography of the adjacent communities. Figure 4 shows the trip distribution percentages used in this study. Trip assignment of the project -generated p.m. peak hour volumes based on this distribution is shown in Figure 5. These are "gross" volumes, which include passby trips. To estimate the non -site (background) traffic volumes expected at project completion (1990), a compounded growth factor of 3 percent per year was used for the existing volumes in the project vicinity. This growth factor was determined from historical traffic volume data and confirmed with Chris Beckman of the City of Edmonds Public Works Department (November 30, 1987). Figure 6 shows the total 1990 traffic volumes during the p.m. peak hour both with and without the proposed postal annex. As shown in Table 1, 118 vehicle trips per day for employees and delivery vehicles are predicted. These trips are not represented during the p.m. peak hour because employees are not expected to arrive and depart Environmental Assessment for Wilsonville, Oregon Post Office Sites 1 & 2 ' Page 59 September 1990 The Parkway Center Planned Development is being developed gradually in phases. Most of the development is still undeveloped (see Figure 2). {g Impacts Project implementation will comply with the Wilsonville City Planning code requirements. Mitigation Measures None are required. 9. ,`� TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION .'JSection 8 has been prepared by Thomas R. Lancaster, Consulting Transportation Engineer) Settin _..'.. Introduction Proposed site number 2 for . the new Wilsonville Post Office is on Parkway Center Loop south of Elligsen Road. The Post Office would be 34,800 square feet in size.. Initially there would be about 34 employees, with about 54 employees expected after ten years./1/ The purpose of this study is to estimate the traffic impact of the proposed Post Office. This will be accomplished by projecting the number of trips to be generated, estimating the directional distribution of the trips, and calculating the level of service at nearby intersections. The level of service will be determined for both the planned opening day (1993) and ten years later (2003). l • L _ L i i TABLE 11: SITE 2 TRIP GENERATION 1993 CALCULATIONS Land Use Code: 732 Land Use: Post Office Variable: Employees VARIABLE: 34 _ .. .. AM PEAK HOUR RATE 1.5 4-� - ER EXIT TOTAL DIRECT. DISTRB. 0.53 0.47 TRIPS 27 24 51. WEEKDAYS RATE (:24.5 EXIT TOTAL a DIRECT. DISTRB. 0.5 TRIPS 417 0.5 417 Environmental Assessment for Wilsonville, Oregon Post Office Sites 1 $ 2 Page 63 September 1990 PM PEAK HOUR 1.9 EXIT TOTAL 0.51 0.49 33 32 65 SATURDAY 13.7 ENTER EXIT TOTAL 0.5 0.5 - 233 233 466 Source: TRIP GENERATION, 4th Edition and Tom R. Lancaster, P.E., Consulting Transportation Engineer 0 Environmental Assessment for Wilsonville, Oregon Post Office Sites 1 & 2 Page 64 September 1990 TABLE 12: SITE 2 TRIP GENERATION 2003 CALCULATIONS AM it;" HOUR PM PEAK HOUR RATE �.1.5 aER .ENTER E%IT TOTAL EXIT TOTAL DIRECT. DISTRB. 0.53 0.47 - 0.51 0.49 - TRIPS 43 38 8 52 :... .• 50 103 .. .'WEEKDAYS -SATURDAY RATE 24.5 3 1 .7 E%IT ..TOTAL ENTER. E%IT TOTAL DIRECT. DISTRB. TRIPS 0.5 0.5 662 662 1323 095" 0.5 370 370 740 Source: TRIP GENERATION, 4th Edition and Tom R. Lancaster, P.E., Consulting Transportation Engineer t/.7/ G'-!/ yt7 1 I: l b t• AA GUb 1iL l (:i6e LN 1 XANCU EK. pp2 { 1 Trip Generation of Post Offices by Phlltrnone G. Azar and Prahlad D, Pant The ITE Informational Report Trip Gen- eration is the most widely used source of data for quick response estimates of trips generated for various land uses. The wide acceptance of the report rests on the fact that the data are obtained from actual studies submitted to ITE by government agencies, consultants, uni- versitles, planning organizations, and other transportation professionals. The following ardcles describe a re- cent effort to further Improve the ITE data base. To further encourage submissions of existing data and the undertaking of new -studies to strengthen data bases for certain land uses, the iTE Permanent Trip Generation Committee has developed the simplified data submission form shown at the end of these articles. Trans. portation professionals are encouraged to submit any trip generation data to Committee Chairman Cart Buttke using this form. The ITElnformational Report Trip Gen. eration can be ordered from the Publi- cations Clerk at i7E Headquarters or on the Publication Order Form he trip generation phase of urban transportation planning is one of the most important stages of the travel demand forecasting process. Trip generation helps us estimate vehicular trips generated by a parcel of land or zone from a knowledge of the land use properties of the land or zone. We gen. erally assume that relationships be. tween trip rates and land use or aortal characteristics remain stable over time, and hence the equations developed by a trip generation analysis can be used to forecast trips for a horizon year. A large number,of studies have beer(' completed to develop relationships be- tween vehicular trips and various land use Characteristics of areal units. Many of the studies on vehicle trip generation of urban land uses and building types are summarized in the ITE publication, "Trio Generation, An Informational Report." The publication provides information on trip generation of various land uses and building types including port and termi- nal, industrial/agricultural, ,residential, lodging, recreational, institutional, medi. cal; office, retail, and services. This pub. lication has been widely used by engi- neers and planners for various transportation and traffic studies. The trip rates are updated when new infor- mation on trip generation analysis is available. Very few studies have been done on trip generation'of post Offices. 'The ITE publication described above includes a study that was done in the San Francisco Bay area using only one post office. Be- cause of the limited sample size, the re- port does not include any regression equation for trip generation. Obviously, trip rates obtained from a larger data base would be more desirable, The purpose of this article is to ex- amine the trip generation of 15 post of- fices in Cincinnati, Ohio. We exam`'ine e re atlons ips a ween vehicular trips and several independent variables as. sociated with the post offices. Data Collection In April and May 1984. 15 post offices in the Cincinnati area were surveyed, Most of the post offices were located in the suburbs of Cincinnati and the re- maining were located outside the central business district of the City of Cincinnati. Post offices with separate buildings and private parking lots were selected. The data were collected manually on week- days from 8:30 A.M. to 5:00 PM. —the regular 0usiness hours of post offices in Cincinnati. Three types of trips were ,counted for every 15-minute interva►: 1. Vehicle trips: Trips in which individu- als park their vehicles in file parking lot of a post office. The vehicles that were parked on the street in front of the post office were also counted. 2. Passing -by vehicle trips: Trips in which Individuals drive through a parking lot'and drop their mail in a mail receptacle without parking their vehicles. These facilities. as ex. plained below, were not available at all post offices. 3. Walking trips: Trips by individuals who do not use vehicles to visit the - post offices. It is interesting to note that passing -by vehicle trips were found in only 8 of the 15 post offices. We found that every post office that generated gassing-tw vphicia a parking lot with se�ardte en - id exit enabling traffic to circu- !eop� ie could drop off the;r mail without parking t err ve ides. One rea- son or a unavailability of passing -by facilities in the remaining 7 post offices is the small parking lots that these post of- fices have. Traffic congestion could re- sult if passing -by facilities were installed. The average daily vehicle trip for the 15 Post OtQeS was M while the average daitypassing-byv-eT;Tl for the,_ t a a the passing -by kxilities was 223. thus, the passing -by vehice trips, where applicaole. constitute; oon the average. 42 percent of the vehicle trips. All 15 post Offices had walking trips. but ITE JOURNAL4UNE 1985 41 1 09/24/90 11:17 FAX 20 7338 ENTRANCO ENG. [in003 I r. 0 the number of these trips was small com- pared wfth the vehicle trips. The average .! daily walking trip was 28, that is, 4.4 per- cent of the average vehicle trip. An interesting observation was that many women visiting the post offices were accompanied by children. This mostly occurred during the noon and afternoon hours. The average number of such children was 25, The following independent variables are considered in this study: �1. Number of parking spaces for cus• P.M. on a typical weekday. No data were collected on Saturdays, because the Post offices close at noon on those days, The means and standard deviations of all independent variables are presented in Table 1. The means and standard de- viations of daily vehiclo trips, passing -by vehicle trips, peak -hour vehicle trips, and walking trips are also presehted in this table. We calculated the peak -hour ve- hicle trips by summing vehicle trips for all four consecutive 15-minute intervals. The daily and peak -hour vehicle t tourers, rip gen- k2. Number of residential units in the eration for all independent variables are presented in Table 2- The passirq-by ve- hire, trips were not included in the cat- Culatton o eEr,prar_ tom• -mouse onto ff of Hie post offices_ had pass-l-bv fa - cilities. 1 Regressalon Analysis We perforrried regression analyses to - examine both the daily and peak -hour vehicle trip generation of post offices. As before, the analysis does not include - passing -by vehicle trips. postal zone. ""�3. Table 1. Means and Standard Deviations of Variables Number of business units in the postal zone. Floor area of the post office building, Number of Standard independent Variable Post Offices Mean Deviation �' S. Number of post office boxes inside l7 Number of parking spaces for customers 15 the post office. ` Number of residential units in the postal zone 6. Number of post office employees. Number 14.5 6.0 15 14,193.5 6.559.1 7. Population of the postal zone, of business units in the postal zone yao Floor area of post office building '15 948.5 476.0 8. Area of the postal zone. �2' 9. Population density of the postal zone. (square feet) 0 Number of post office boxes inside the 15 7,643.9 4.401.1 The information on the number of rest- post office I15 denial and business units, floor area of Number of post office employees 473.1 202.8 is post office buildings, number of post of- fice boxes, and number of employees Population of postal zone Area of postal zone 53.3 21.4 is 34.9 x 103 21.7 < 10' were obtained from the branch manager (square miles) 15 13.3 of each post office. The U.S. Census Population density of postal zone 7.1 15 2.9 x 10.7 1.4 x 1W was used to find the population of each___ -Daily vehicle trips ' 15 665.5 156.2 postal zone because the branch man- assing-by vehicle trips 8 283.4 agers did not know the exact number of� Peak -hour vehicle trips 119.4 people they served. The area of each C Walking trips 15 97.1 23.5 Postal zone was measured from avail- -`-� 15 28.3 t5.1 able Cincinnati and Hamilton County maps. The density of a postal zone was Table 2. Vehicle Trip Generation for Post Off ices determined by dividing the population of the zone by Its area, . The data collection and analysis de- Daily Vehicle Trips Peek -Hour Vehicle Trips independent Variable Minimum Average Maximum Minimum Average Maximum scribed in this article refer to a single or Parking space for `- - one -direction movement that has its des- tination at a post office. The trips leaving customers 29.9 45.8 73A 100 residential 4 6 7 11 1 the post offices were not counted and units 2.6 4.7 11,9 100 business units '7 70.2 233.5 0.4 0.7 1. 6.2 10.2 hence are not included in the analysis. 100-square feet of 34.2 We did not count persons leaving the floor area of Post office because they usually stay only for a brief period. A sampling p rig of 108 post Office building 34,2 87.1 2996 Post office box 4.8 12.7 42.7 visitors dunng morning, noon, and after- 0.8 1.4 2,8 Post office employee 0.1 0.2 0.4 noon hours showed that people spend, Population (1000 1.1 1 8 4.0 On the average, 3.8 minutes in a post of- persons living in a fice including walking time to and from vehicles. Thus, if vehicle trip ends. that postal zone) 9.5 1') 1 64.6 Area (square miles 1.5 2.8 9.2 is, a trip entering plus post of- fice is needed, it can be_ ob ined by dou- of postal zone) 23.5 49.8 180.0 Population density 3.6 7.3 24.2 bling the counted trips. --- (per person per All daily ve icular trips in this article square mile of refer to the trips that were made to the Post offices between 8:30 A.M. and 5:00 postal zone) 0.1 0.2 0.9 0.01 0.03 0.14 42 ITE JoVRNAL�jUNE igas 09/24/90 11: 18 FAX 20617 7338 ENTRANCO ENG. 10 004 Regression Analysis for Daily Vehicle Trips , In this analysis the dependent variable is the daily vehicle trip and the indepen dent variables are those described in the previous section. The analysis was per formed by using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). Because of the large number of inde- pendent variables involved in the study the stepwise multiple regression tech nique was used to enter into the mode the independent variables in order of their significance and the degree of oorrela- tion with the dependent variable. In this study, the stepwise regression analysis showed that only one independent vari- able could be used in a regression equa- tion. As soon as a second independent variable was entered, the F-values be- came unacceptable at the 0.10 level of significance. Thus, we decided that the only way of developing an equation was by using a simple linear regression, that I is, by performing the analysis individually between the dependent variable and each of the independent variables. The analysis showed that three of the inde- pendent variables were significant at the 0.10 level or less. These variables are: 1. Number of business units. '11*2. Number of parking spaces for cus- 4 tamers. - . Number of employees. ' The equations that were developed from the regression analysis follow: "VT = 464.40 + 0.21 x BU Where QVT = daily vehicular trips: tau number of business units in a postal zone; correlation. coefficient, Ft = 0.65: and standard error = 123.66. DVT = 454.29 + 14.54 x PSC Where PSC = parking spaces for cus- tomers: correlation coefficient, R = 0.56; and standard error = 134,82. DVT = 479.75 + 3,49 x EMP Where EMP = number of employees in j a post office: correlation coefficient. A = 0.48: and standard error = 142.32. Any of the above equations can be used to estimate daily vehicular trips for a post office, depending on which of the data aro avoilablo. Tho moot desirable equation is the one in terms of business units, because it has the highest corre- lation coefficient. Regression Analysis for Peak -Hour Vehicle Trips It was found that 10 of the 15 post of- \ fiees had their peak hours in the morning vehicle trips were related to the two in. between 8:30 A.M. and 10:45 A.M. dependent variables: number of busi- These 10 post offices have been used to mess units in a postal zone and number perform the regression analysis de- of post office employees. In addition, scribed below. The remaining post of- daily vehicle trips were related to the fices did not show any patterns and number of parking spaces for customers. hence were excluded from the analysis. All the coefficients were acceptable at The dependent variable for the regres- the 0.10 level of significance. We, there- sion analysis is the peak-houF%hicle trip fore, suggest that future use of vehicle and the independent variables are those trip generation of post offices be limited described above. The stepwise regres- to these three independent variables. l sion procedure was used. As before. we We found it interesting to find that found that a multiple regression equation passing -by vehicles, where applicable, containing more than one independent constituted about 42 percent of the ve- variable was not acceptable because the hicles parked in the post office lots. AI- F-values were not significant at the 0.10 though these vehicles provide no extra level. Hence, simple regression analysis _Somand on s irimplacts was done individually between the de- on traffic flow on ad' 'ni streets pendent variable and each of the inde- be ianor4d. We su est that future pendent variables. The following two in- ies focus on the examination gassing - dependent variables were acceptable at by vehicle top generation of post offices. the 0.10 revel of significance: 1. Number of business units in a postal zone. 2. Number of employees in a post office. Reference The equations developed for these van- wasp; rnp GenerIIu°n. An tnfon„ati inW Report"' ables are as follows: neer6 �. on o.c.. Institine of TransportatiFngi PHVT = 84.03 + 0.024 x BU Where PHVT = peak -hour vehicular trips; BU = number of business units in a postal zone; correlation coefficient, R = 0.74; and standard error = 10.44. ---z_--fP.PHVT = 87.56 + 0.39 x EMP Where EMP = number of employees in a post office; correlation coefficient, R = ti 0.59; and standard error = 12.59. Note that business units give a higher � Azar correlation coefficient. Indicatinga stronger relationship between peak -hour vehicle trips and number of business Azar (Student member) has recently com- pleted the Master's Program in Transportation units in a postal zone. Eng,r>een et the University of Cincinnati. He holds a BSCE from Td-State University, Indi- ana. Conclusion This article has examined trip gener- ation of 15 post offices in Cincinnati. Ohio. The data on trips that have desti- nations at the Post offices were collected manually during the business hours of a typical weekday. The average. minimum, and maximum daily and peak -hour ve- hiele trip ratan warn Cdid6filtad 6 9 dependent variables selected by this study. Regression analysis was performed to examine the strength of association be- tween the vehicle trip generation and the independent variables. The analysts showed that both daiiy and peak -hour Pant Or. Pant (M) is an Assistant Professorof Civil Engineering at the University of Cincinnati. where he teaches Transportation and Traffic Engineering. He holds MSCE. MPW. and Ph() hearees from the University of Pitts- burgh ii@ is the faculty advisor to the student chapter of ITE of the University of C,nemnati. M JOUR11 AL11UNE 1985 43 EBASCO ENVIRONMENTAL A Division of EBASCO SERVICES INCORPORATED 10900 NE 8th Street, Bellevue, WA 98004-4405, (206) 451-4600, Fax (206) 451-4691 15 October 1990 RECEIVED Richard Nelson OCT 16 199() United States Postal Service .:.;,. Kent Facilities Service Office &(WFAOUM P.O. Box 5000 *Z __Kent, Washington .98064-5000 Dear Mr. Nelson, At your request, I visited the proposed site of the Perrinville Station in Edmonds, Washington, to investigate a portion of*Perrinville Creek that runs ;:..through this property. On 4 October 1990, I met with you, Steve Stielstra and other staff of USPO, and James Walker, hydraulics engineer, from the City of ." Edmonds. One objective of the site visit involved identifying stream treatment alternatives in the development of this site. This letter describes my findings. in three sections: 1) Existing.Conditions; 2) Existing Functions; and 3) .'Recommendations. Some of the discussion below is based on a 10 October 1990 telephone conversation with David Hoopes, a biologist with R.W. Beck. Mr. Hoopes participated in a habitat survey of Perrinville Creek (and two additional creeks) as part of a basin study of urbanizing watersheds. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site originally was part of a steep -sided ravine that contained Perrinville Creek and (probably) an additional smaller tributary. Currently, fill surrounds all sides of the lower portion of this ravine. Fill from road construction of Olympic View Drive and 76th Avenue West has impacted the west and east and south sides. Fill on the north side is currently being used informally as a parking lot. As a result, the creek is situated in a "hole" of sorts. .Much litter/dumping has occurred in the ravine and the streams within it. Perrinville Creek is identified as a Class II stream in the Snohomish County Stream and Wetlands Survey Map Atlas (Class 1 is the most sensitive). Currently it is culverted and underground for most of its length upstream of the site. The creek enters the "hole" in the fill via a culvert on the south end of the property, flows along a naturally confined and slightly undulating channel, and exits approximately 150 feet later via another culvert. One small tributary enters the "hole" from a PVC culvert under 76tfi Avenue West on the southeast part of the site, flows through what appears to be a natural gravel -bottom channel, and joins Perrinville Creek about midlength in the main channel. The channel bottoms of both creeks are primarily gravel/cobbleand support abundant organic debris such as stumps, logs, etc. In addition, a large culvert empties into the ravine several feet above the exit culvert for Perrinville Creek. At the time of my survey during a heavy rain event, waters in Perrinville Creek and waters from the culvert above the exit culvert were running heavy with silt. The large culvert above the main outlet culvert was discharging very large volumes of water into Perrinville Creek. Perrinville Creek appeared to be carrying volumes of water in excess of its channel morphology, as evidenced by Perrinville Station, Site Assessment Clayton J. Anti eau . 15 October 1990 Page 2 of 4 - slumping banks, bank erosion, etc. The water in the small tributary, however, was flowing slowly and clearly, an indication that it is perhaps spring -fed and :.:that -it -.is not used in stormwater management. Vegetation in the ravine is primarily second -growth deciduous forest dominated by red alder (A1nus rubra) and willow (Salix Iasiandra). Western hemlock (Tsuga heterbpfiylla)=is'an abundant conifer species in the understory. 'Shrub species include salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) stink currant (Rubus bracteosum), dewberry (Rubus ursinus), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), and red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa). Dominant herbaceous species include piggy -back plant .(Tolmeia menziesii) and lady fern (Athyrium felix-femina). A few large - diameter stumps of western red cedar (Thuja plicata) stumps suggest that the site was dominated by coniferous forest prior to its being logged. la Some very small wetlands do exist on the site. These palustrine forested wetlands are associated with seeps from the surrounding fill, and are dominated by red alder, salmonberry, stink currant, and lady fern. Other wetlands are associated with the creek channels, especially the smaller channel. These are riverine streambed (vegetated) wetlands and palustrine scrub -shrub wetlands dominated by salmonberry and stink currant. Although no data were recorded, I lb estimate that total wetland acreage on the site is (conservatively, towards wetlands) less than 900 square feet. EXISTING FUNCTIONS. The existing functions of the creeks, associated wetlands, and riparian (stream - side) forest vegetation on this property are difficult to assess. The site's small size, physical isolation from nearby forested habitats, and proximity of encroaching urban development, as well as Perrinville Creek's present role as a major stormwater collector, obscure the roles these natural features have and will have for wildlife habitat, fish habitat, water quality, and aesthetics. The discussion below focuses on existing characteristics that are relatively valuable for achieving these benefits. Wildlife Habitat Significant wildlife habitat characteristics on this site include the proximity of a well -developed forest vegetation to a major stream. Riparian forests like this often support relatively diverse faunal assemblages, particularly in urbanizing areas. Presence of nearby forest vegetation probably reduces the site's current relative contribution to provid.i.ng wildlife habitat. The site's 2 small size and proximity to roads and encroaching development will limit the site's potential for providing future habitat. However, the site would become more important for wildlife habitat as urban development removes neighboring forest vegetation. t Perrinville Station, Site Assessment Clayton J. Antieau •.:15 October 1990 Page 3 of 4 Fish Habitat At one time Perrinville Creek supported notable runs of anadromous fish (such as salmon and steelhead) (Hoopes, personal communication). Currently, barriers to 3 a fish migration exist at three points downstream of the property. V.The gravel/cobble-bottomed creeks that flow through the site have potentially high value for fish spawning habitat. The natural organic debris and gravel channel bottoms could provide suitable rearing habitat for some species of anadromous fish. The small, clear -flowing creek possesses excellent habitat potential due to its apparently consistent/constant flow, lack of sediment, association with riverine wetlands, and relatively distant position upstream from the mouth. Unfortunately, the use or role of Perrinville Creek as a 3 b Idrainage feature, and its subsequent stormwater volumes and sediment loads diminish the potential for fish habitat. David Hoopes revealed that R.W. i Beck's habitat survey report will recommend taking some or all of the existing �3 C I barriers down. Mr. Hoopes also indicated that the study found this site to be of insufficient quality to warrant the expense of` getting fish up to it. Water Quality The undulating course of Perrinville Creek through the property, as well as the gravel/cobble bottom and abundance of natural organic debris in the creek bed, suggests that this reach has a role in removing sediments and pollutants from flows. The degree to which the creek contributes to improving water quality is 4 unknown, however, and is diminished by the size of this reach,,',' bank erosion, and water volumes that pass through the channel during storm events. Aesthetics The forest vegetation in the ravine currently contributes to an aesthetic component along 76th Avenue West and Olympic View Drive. The degree of this, contribution is unknown because forested habitat is abundant in the vicinity of J `'the site The site would become more important as urban development removes 'surrounding forest vegetation, however. RECOMMENDATIONS There appear to be three feasible alternatives for the treatment of this stream: 1) culverting the stream and filling the remaining portion of this ravine; 2) rehabilitating this section of stream to increase its habitat value, its efficiency in handling stormwater, and its ability to remove sediment (rehabilitation would likely include removing much of the existing fill); and 3) taking no action. A fourth alternative, relocating the stream to one side of the site or off -site, was discarded as being impractical due to the -depth with which fill has been placed on all sides, and by the confinement of the site by adjoining roads. ` Perrinville Station, Site Assessment • ' Clayton J. Antieau ..15 October 1990 r .Page 4 of 4 ,:.The first alternative would involve culverting the remaining open stretch of this creek and placing fill to match the grade of existing fill. This alternative would allow development and be relatively inexpensive, but would preempt functions and values that this reach of creek does and will possess. The creek and surrounding riparian vegetation does have some good -to -excellent natural features, as explained above. The third alternative involves taking no action to fill this area or culvert :. ..;.:.these creeks, thus preserving existing functions and values. This alternative limits development potential and ignores the possibilities this site has for rehabilitation. ..'The second alternative appears to be the most practical alternative from national policy and local environmental impact perspectives. Executive Order s 11990 requires that no federal project be .located within a wetland if practical alternatives exist that avoid the wetlands. Not knowing the history of the Perrinville Station project or why this site was selected, I suggest that there must be practical alternatives to developing a site containing wetlands and other sensitive features in -a developing (contrasted with developed) area such as Perrinville. Undergrounding streams is not an acceptable alternative in these times of increased environmental awareness, improved technologies, and increasing pressures on natural resources. In addition, my conversation with Mr. Hoopes revealed that Perrinville Creek 7 could be a relatively high quality stream for wildlife and fish habitat if the silt load could be reduced. Such a goal requires basin -wide planning and growth management, but culverting and filling this site would contribute incrementally to eroding the quality of this Creek and its basin. The filling and development of this site would prohibit the site's rehabilitation for habitat and/or sedimentation and water quality functions, which may be a goal or an eventual goal of the City of Edmonds. Mr. Hoopes indicated that development in the watershed has progressed to the point where it is now essential that any place in that basin where sedimentation can be lessened or stopped must be used for that purpose. The thought is that numerous small sediment catchments located throughout a basin have proven more effective than a single or a few large sediment catchments. This site has excellent potential for contributing to this "numerous small catchments" approach to stormwater management. This alternative may prove to be the best and most valuable land use for this site. If you have any questions or comments regarding the statements contained in this report, please contact me. I hope my observations are helpful. Sincere � a d�. ayto J. Antau, Wetland Scien ist and Botanist 206-451-4174 ;Ik` Architecture 400 Doyle Buildin A Professional HEWITT ISLEYInteriors 119 Pine Street Service Urban Design Seattle, WA 98101- Phone: orporati �� t"� ip 206.624.8154 Fax: 206.626.054 1 STREET FILE SEP 24 1y9U ENGINFFRIN 1b: United States Postal Service Seattle, Fac. Service Office Design & Constr. Branch P.O. Box 5000 Kent, WA 98064 Atm: Mr. Richard Nelson We Transmit: ® herewith, via U.S. Mail ❑ in accordance with your request ❑ under separate cover via Letter of 1ransmittal Date: 09-21-90 Project: Perrinville Carrier Annex Job No.: 9022 For Your: ❑ approval ❑ distribution to parties ❑ information ❑ review & comment ❑ record ® use ❑ The Following: ❑ drawings ❑ shop drawing prints ❑ samples ❑ specifications ❑ shop drawing reproducibles ❑ product literature ❑ change order ❑ Copies Date Description 1 09-06-90 Meeting Notes (2nd Revision — 09-21-90) Remarks Copies To: (with enclosures) City of Edmonds: Jim Walker, 0 Gordon Hyde, Mary Lou Block ❑ ABKJ: Tom Kane icy EP&A: Paul Petska §7 ❑ By: Carter Hart CH:dc David NI. Hewitt, AIA 400 Doyl ding A Professional William A. Isla. AIA, AICP 119 Pine . Service Timothy L. Sfxlman, AIA Seattle, k 01-1511 Corfxxation Phone: 206.624.8154 Fax: 206.626.0541 Perrinville Carrier Annex Meeting Notes September 6, 1990 (Revised September 16,1990) (Revised September 21,1990) Architect tire Inferiors Urban Ikwign Present: Richard Nelson (RN) USPS Jim Walker (JW) City of Edmonds Gordon Hyde (GH) City of Edmonds Mary Lou Block (MLB) City of Edmonds Carter Hart (CH) Hewitt Isley Lukas Delen (LD) Hewitt Isley 1. CH gave background on the history of the project: USPS was looking at building a postal facility on the site several years ago. There was a similar meeting, as this one, set up with the City of Edmonds approximately two years ago in which traffic, drainage, and community issues were raised. These issues were never resolved when the project went away due to USPS budget cuts. Now that the project has returned at a reduced scope, these issues need to be raised again. 2. The City of Edmonds is near completion of a drainage study of the area. The waterway running through the site, known as Perrinville Creek, is considered a stream with a 100-year storm rate of 200 cfs. According to JW, there are fish further down stream. The Department of Fisheries and the Department of Wildlife would definitely be involved in the permitting process. 3. MLB indicated that typically the City of Edmonds has not, in the last several years, allowed this kind of stream to be covered over. 7W indicated that they have allowed normal bridging of the streams. Currently, there is a 15' building setback on both sides from the width of the stream. MLB indicated that this setback is likely to be increased to 25' by the beginning of next year. 4. RN asked what process the USPS would need to go through to petition the City of Edmonds to be able to cover the stream. He said that the USPS would write a letter to the Mayor of the City of Edmonds outlining the proposal; who could, in turn, reply. MLB said that would be acceptable. 5. MLB indicated that another option may be to divert the stream so that the lot could be better utilized for the building. USPS would have to back this proposal up with a complete analysis showing they had exhausted all other options. She cited a local example of a recently completed stream bed diversion, North Creek in the Bothell area by the Koll and Quadrant development companies. 6. RN then asked whether the City of Edmonds would consider USPS restoring and uncovering the stream on the northernmost parcel in return for being allowed to cover up the stream on the middle parcel. MLB indicated that this had never been tried before in the City of Edmonds, but that such.a creative idea could possibly work in this situation. 9022-30 Page I of 2 .+•� ; �° . a= r t �f ``�.;:=•rte �jP°l1� � �', 1 `' �7.'4� ,�,}� � t'Yi fit.-�`r: '.,�' .'. i;���.•-�9'_�����r�z`.t:' .;'�kr est ms:.. 7. CH asked if storm water retention would have to be provided. JW indicated that he did not know, but that he would get more information from the consulting engineers that are completing a drainage study of the area. 8. The traffic study two years ago of the Post Office project concluded the following: a) left turn lanes should be provided at the intersection of 76th Avenue W. and Olympic View Drive and b) the left turn into the site should be a minimum of 210' from the intersection. GH indicated that as a minimum, the City of Edmonds would require an update of the traffic study based on the reduced scope of the project. 9. GH indicated that there would be some frontage improvements required, such as a connection of the trail system from 76th Ave W. to Olympic View Drive, across the northernmost parcel 10. MLB indicated that the 20' required setback has not changed. A 15' screened and landscaped setback is required at the North property line. Parking can occur within the required setbacks as long as they don't interfere with the -landscaping requirements. The City of Edmonds has adopted new landscaping requirements effective September 10, 1990. 11. RN inquired about the review process of the project from here. MLB indicated that after the stream issue has been resolved, the Design Board would have to review the project for compliance with their guidelines. The Design Board meets once a month on the first Wednesday of the month. Applications need to be received at least three weeks, plus the environmental review period, prior. 12.. JW indicated that there are plans for a detention facility to be built downstream from the current site. This could potentially be incorporated into the USPS scheme, but would not relieve the project of the responsibility for detention of run off from its own non -pervious surfaces (this is a revision of the meeting minutes). A grass -lined swale is required as a minimum for all major developments discharging into a stream. 13. The City of Edmonds utilizes the Bonneville Power Authority Energy Code, regardless of energy source utilized. Note: Please review the above meeting notes and notify H-I of any changes or clarifications within one week. LD:dc cc: All present Tom Kane - ABKJ Paul Petska - Esmond Petska & Assoc. David Hewitt - H-I 9022-30 Page 2 of 2 Architecture 400 Doyle Buildin A Professional SLEY'r HEWIRY IInteriors 119 Pine Street Service s Urban Design Seattle, WA 98101- PFione:206.624.8154 corporation C� 1 Fax: 206.626.0541 V �v .STREET FILE sEp 13 1990 11110IY8169, G Letter of Transmittal To: United States Postal Service Date: 09-12-90 Seattle, Facilities Service OfficeProject: Perrinville Carrier Annex Design & Construction Branch P.O. Box 5000 Job No.: 9022 18000 - 72nd Avenue S., Suite 100 Attn: Kent, WA 98064 Mr. Richard Nelson We Transmit: ® herewith via U.S. Mail ❑ in accordance with your request ❑ under separate cover via For Your: ❑ approval ❑ distribution to parties ❑ information ❑ review & comment ❑ record ® use ❑ The Following: ❑ drawings ❑ shop drawing prints El samples ❑ specifications ❑ shop drawing reproducibles ❑ product literature ❑ change order ❑ Copies Date Description 1 09-06-90 Meeting Notes Remarks Copies To: (with enclosures) City of Edmonds: Jim Walker, gl Gordon Hyde, Mary Lou Block ❑ ABKJ: Tom Kane KI EP&A: Paul.Petska �l ❑ By: Lukas Delen LD:dc David M. Hewitt, AIA 400 fk�ylc tog A Professional William A. Islcy, AIA, AICP 119 Pine S Service Timothy L. Spelman,, AIA Seattle, W'WI-1511 Corporation Phone: 206.624.8154 Fax: 206.626.0541 Perrinville Carrier Annex Meeting Notes September 6, 1990 Architecture Present: Interiors Urban Design Richard Nelson (RN) - Jim Walker. (JW) Gordon Hyde (GH) Mary Lou Block (MLB) Carter Hart (CH) Lukas Delen (LD) USPS City of Edmonds City of Edmonds City of Edmonds Hewitt Isley Hewitt Isley 1. CH gave background on the history of the project: USPS was looking at building a postal facility on the site several years ago. There was a similar meeting, as this one, set up with the City of Edmonds approximately two years ago in which traffic, drainage, and community issues were raised. These issues were never resolved when the project went away due to USPS budget cuts. Now that the project has returned at, a reduced scope, these issues need to be raised again. 2. The City .of Edmonds is near completion of a drainage study of the area. The waterway running through the site, known as Penrinville Creek, is considered a stream with a 100-year storm rate of 200 cfs. According to.JW, there are fish further down stream. The Department of Fisheries and the Department of Wildlife would definitely be involved in the permitting process. 3. MLB indicated that typically the City of Edmonds has not, in the last several years, allowed this kind of stream to be covered over. JW indicated that they have allowed normal bridging of the streams. Currently, there is a 15' building setback on both sides from the width of the stream. MLB indicated that this setback is due to be increased to 25' by the beginning of next year. 4. RN asked what process the USPS would need to go through to petition the City of Edmonds to be able to cover the stream. MLB replied that the USPS would have to write a letter to the Mayor of the City of Edmonds outlining the proposal; who would, in turn, reply. 5. MLB indicated that another option may be to divert the stream so that the lot could be better utilized for the building. USPS would have to back this proposal up with a complete analysis showing they had exhausted all other options. She cited a local example of a recently completed stream bed diversion, North Creek in the Bothell area by the Koll and Quadrant development companies. 6. RN then asked whether the City of Edmonds would consider USPS restoring and uncovering the stream on the northernmost parcel in return for being allowed to cover up the stream on the middle parcel. MLB indicated that this had never been tried before in the City of Edmonds, but that such a creative idea could possibly work in this situation. 7. CH asked if storm water retention would have to be provided. JW indicated that he did not know, but that he would get more information from the consulting engineers that are completing a drainage study of the area. 9022-30 Page 1 of 2 8. The traffic study two years ago of the Post Office project concluded the following: a) left turn lanes should be provided at the intersection of 76th Avenue W. and Olympic View Drive and b) the left turn into the site should be a minimum of 210' from the. intersection. GH indicated that as a minimum, the City of Edmonds would require an update of the traffic study based on the reduced scope of the project. 9. GH indicated that there would be some frontage improvements required, such as a connection of the trail system from 76th Ave W. to Olympic View Drive, across the northernmost parcel 10. MLB indicated that the 20' required setback has not changed. A 15' screened and landscaped setback is required at the North property line. Parking can occur within the required setbacks as long as they don't interfere with the landscaping requirements. The City of Edmonds has.adopted new landscaping requirements effective September 10, 1990. 11. RN inquired about the review process of the project from here. MLB indicated that after the stream issue has been resolved, the Design Board would have to review the project for compliance with their guidelines. The Design Board meets once a month on the first Wednesday of the month. Applications need to be received at least three weeks prior. 12. JW indicated that there are plans for a detention facility to be built downstream from the current site. This could potentially be incorporated into the USPS scheme. A grass -lined swale is required as a minimum for all major developments discharging into a stream. 13. The City of Edmonds utilizes the Bonneville Power Authority Energy Code, regardless of energy source utilized. Note: Please review the above meeting notes and notify H•I of any changes or clarifications within one week. LD:dc cc: All present Tom Kane - ABKJ Paul Petska - Esmond Petska & Assoc. David Hewitt - H•I 9022-30 Page 2 of 2 June 21, 1988 Mr. Greg Cutler Design & Construction Branch Kent Facilities Service Office, USPS 216 W. Gowe Street P.O. Box 2000 Kent, WA 98035-2000 :lrchilcclurc 41N !{uilJin_ :11'ngr..uln:d Inlcrinrs IN llrrrl Scr%ice t rhan Design scall1c. WA 8101 `1 Cllrpir:lllt1ll 206.621.8154 STREETPILE Re: Olympic View Station , 98020 / Edmonds, WA Final Close-out Dear Greg, With three postal facilities in our office at different stages of design, we feel it is necessary to formally close out each project and leave you and the Design and Construction Branch with a final accounting. Hewitt Daly Isley has satisfactorily completed all the contractual obligations authorized by the USPS to date for the Olympic View Station. The Preconcept Phase Submittal was presented 12/17/87. A revised Site Plan, Floor Plan, and South Elevation was submitted on 1/29/88. These drawings were refined further for the presentation of the project to the City of Edmonds on 6/2/88. Thus, the most developed drawings to date are the Site Plan, Floor Plan, and Elevations dated 6/2/88. These presentation drawings are colored and retained in our files (prints were copied for your files). The meeting with the City of Edmonds concluded HDI's last contractual obligations with the USPS of work authorized at this time. In accordance with your letter of 2/3/88, design activity for the Olympic View Station will now be deferred until further notice. To help facilitate the reactivation of this project, HDI has developed a list of issues which will need to be examined and resolved by the USPS and the design team before proceeding into the Concept Phase of Title I Services. Of particular concern are issues raised in the 6/2/88 meeting with the City of Edmonds. These include: 1. Traffic improvements at the intersection of 76th and Olympic View Drive. The initial traffic study by Entranco Engineers dated 12/28/87, and amended by a letter dated 4/21/88, has now been augmented by a second traffic analysis prepared by Gibson Traffic Consultants, dated 5/23188. At this time no clear resolution is apparent and when this project is reactivated, the post office and A/E will need to work towards a resolution with the City of Edmonds. 2. The number of curb cuts presented on the site plan of 6/2/88. It would be wise, when this project is reactivated, to spend time developing a continuation of the trail systems around the site in a way that would alleviate some of the City's concern for the number of curb cuts presently shown. It would appear that a well conceived and 8732-5 MironLr`isi Mr. Greg Cutler June 21, 1988 Page 2 developed trail system would give the USPS greater latitude to develop the site in a manner more conducive to their operations. 3. Off -site road improvements. The City required considerably more improvements in the Right of Ways than what the USPS has traditionally provided (see item 8.8, 6/2/88 meeting notes). A resolution concerning both the extent and upgrade of the road bed needs to be worked out. 4. The existing stream bed. Perhaps the most troublesome issue that was raised pertained to the permitting process for continuing the stream bed in a network of culverts and filling the major depression on the site that exists at this time. A process needs to be established to work these issues out before the A/E can effectively proceed with the site design work in the Concept Phase. 5. Stormwater Retention. As. indicated in the meeting notes, the City believes this stream bed plays a role in the storm water retention for the Perrinville shopping plaza upstream from the site. Either the USPS or the A/E will have to resolve this issue with the City. 6. Soils Contamination. On page 15 of the geotechnical report prepared by Shannon & Wilson, Inc., dated 1/88, they indicated a strong petrochemical odor was detected during the excavation of test pit #7. Evaluation of this contamination will be required when this project is reactivated, and funds should be secured to fully explore the implications of this situation. On a more general level there are additional issues that should be addressed when the project is reactivated. They include: 1. At this time, the A/E team is disbanded. Whether the key individuals familiar with the project will be available to work on the project when it is reactivated is uncertain. As a result, time should be allowed for the consultants personnel to refamiliarize themselves with the project once it is reactivated. 2. HDI has been told that the A/E handbook will soon to be reorganized. There will undoubtably be changes to the USPS design criteria. Accordingly, the A/E must be allowed time to refamiliarize themselves with the handbook and to alter the existing drawings accordingly. Of course, this would only happen if this handbook was reissued prior to reactivation of the project. 3. Time should be given to carefully review the Construction Cost Limit. Of particular concern are the off -site and site development costs. Since these costs depend in large measure on resolutions with the City of Edmonds, perhaps the wisest time to re- evaluate the CCL is after these issues have been settled. If the scope of work changes in connection with developing resolutions with the City of Edmonds, the A/E's fee should also be modified accordingly. 8732-5 Mr. Greg Cutler June 21, 1988 Page 3 4. Finally, in regard to the remaining Title I Design Services and Title II Construction Support Services, the cost for these services should be re-evaluated and negotiated based on current labor and overhead costs of the A/E when the project is reactivated. We hope these comments will serve to help familiarize the future team involved with this project. We sincerely hope that this project is placed in the fiscal year'89 Design Budget so that we can bring the learning curve experienced in the development of the Bremerton P.O. to your best advantage. If you have any questions with regard to this project, do not hesitate to call us. We look forward to working with you further on this and other projects. Sincerely, I I 100400k-- David M. Hewitt Principal in Charge M 8732-5 • USPS Edmonds Washington Olympic View Station City of Edmonds Presentation June 2, 1988 Present: Larry Naughten Bob Alberts Peter Hahn MaryLou Block Sheri Claussen Tom Snyder Greg Cutler David Hewitt Peter Watson STREET FILE Mayor, City of Edmonds City of Edmonds `;A City of Edmonds Fo�t J City of Edmonds Planning Board Post Master United States Postal Service Hewitt Daly Isley Hewitt Daly Isley 1. GC presented an explanation of the current schedule in the most optimistic circumstances. The design, which is currently at 10%, could resume October 1, 1988; the construction of the facility could be completed 14 months later. However, he was emphatic stating that the decision to put the Edmonds facility in the '89 design budget has not been made. 2. GC introduced the architects and briefly outlined the issues they would discuss: • The USPS traffic study by Entranco Engineers. • Site circulation. • Landscaping and screening. • Building elevations. 8732-4 0 • I PW briefly described the traffic impact study for the Edmonds facility prepared by Entranco Engineers, dated September 28, 1987. A copy of this study will be forwarded to the City of Edmonds. 4. PW further explained the chronological events that produced a letter from Entranco, dated April 21, 1988, as a follow-up to the revised site circulation developed by the architects. He stated that this letter will also be copied and sent to the City of Edmonds for their files. 5. PW explained the vehicular site circulation on the customer side of the facility as well as the vehicular circulation on the post office side of the facility. 6. PW briefly explained the siting of the facility and the existing soils conditions. He stated a soils report was prepared for this project by Shannon & Wilson, dated January 5, 1988, and is available to the City of Edmonds. 7. PW briefly explained the opportunities inherent in the siting of the building for landscaping and screening around the perimeter of the site, as well as the opportunity to place a public seating area at the intersection of Olympic View Drive and 76th. 8. The following issues were raised by the City of Edmonds: 1. BA and MLB indicated that there could be potential permitting problems connected with the stream bed and the engineer's proposal to connect the existing culverts on the site. MLB indicated that it was her belief that the Corps of Engineers would require a permit to do this work. She further indicated that the City hasn't allowed the use of culverts in this situation for a. considerable number of years. 2. BA pointed out that presently the open stream provides an opportunity for storm water retention of the existing system. He would expect the post office to review this situation and accomodate retention for the storm drainage system upstream from this site. 8732-4 0 • 3. PW indicated that on -site storm water retention would be incorporated in the site development work. 4. SC was concerned about the number of curb cuts indicated on the site plan. She indicated that this site is sensitive on account of the number of pedestrians along Olympic View Drive and 76th. She indicated that this site was connected to a system of trails that ran throughout the City of Edmonds. There was considerable discussion about providing a small trail along the north property line that would connect the trail on 76th with the trail on Olympic View Drive. GC stated that the post office would be interested in participating in the development of this trail system but they were concerned about liability issues. 1VILB presented GC with a copy of the statute in the RCW relating to the liabilities of owners in possession of land and water areas for injuries to recreational users (4.24.210). 5. Both SC and ULB stated that the primary concern of the neighborhood was that the "sea of asphalt" was properly screened from view. DH indicated that there were many ways in which the screening could be handled sensitively. Perhaps the most important way, to provide good screening was through the judicious placement of landscape material. GC stated that the USPS uses vinyl coated security fencing around its facilities and this tends to blend well with the landscaping. 6. SC and MLB were concerned that the exterior lighting of the parking area for the post office would create a problem in the night time hours. GC indicated that the light levels were in the range of 2 ft. candles and that the post office is extremely sensitive about preventing light from its standards spilling over into adjoining property. 7. Considerable discussion was generated about the post office property immediately adjacent to the intersection. There was unanimous consensus that a small garden or plaza area with a few small benches or perch walls could be provided by the USPS and planted by the community with annuals to form a wonderful gesture welcoming people to this part of Edmonds. A sign stating 8732-4 "Welcome to the City of Edmonds at Perrinville" was discussed. This sign would not be incorporated with the facility remote sign. 8. BA questioned the architects as to the extent of the site improvements around the facility. PW indicated that a curb and cutter was provided around the perimeter of the site. Furthermore, concrete sidewalks would be installed around the site in accordance with the City of Edmonds standards, and that left turn lanes would be provided on 76th and Olympic View Drive where necessary. Typically, post office improvements are cut into the existing road bed and tied together with dowels. BA indicated that the City of Edmonds would expect complete resurfacing of the right-of-way from curb line to curb line. BA and PH indicated their concerns about the heavier loads on the road bed as a result of the postal service facility. TS indicated that the facility expected only 4-5 trips a day that involved the large 40' semis. 9. DH presented the architect's elevations. 10. DH explained the process that lead to the development of three major volumes within the facility. He explained the architect's desire to reduce the scale of the facility and to use a architectural vocabulary that was sensitive to the existing Perrinville development. 11. DH described the extent of the layering of materials on the west elevation which relates most directly with the Perrinville environment. DH suggested that the fenestration of this elevation found its derivation in the Victorian dormer window as expressed in Perrinville. 12. The concensus on the part of the participants at the meeting was that the facility would work well. Some further effort should be directed toward screening the facility to help break up the scale and mass. DH agreed wholeheartedly that this would help and would be incorporated in further designs. End of Meeting Report. 8732-4 0. oi . PTW:ab cc: All present???? 8732-4 y rid 1 1 ? � � � DSI , �.�. ._ � .� ! �4 �`` to �» '� t •�, � _ � �•y,.`�F�. i\� � ��' ,_ �YY1+✓.i y'9` �.%�''• .. �`4''�^ !. 8-01 •' �� ,, � ,� .d tit; �1 » �`; " , -' +—�•+`�.,� -• �: 1� �. ill ��., k ' � � i. ' rT� a e?' r '� � � ' y11� t';,'!., . is �� • ,! At �%?."� �" � ,,I • A�p`' '� � t yt WWI Loll n • r 0 \ >, a y, .h a ny�'i f } , k1 r �ha�°y3 �:+ •F l� h _ .,. �+, wA m +J'��Sr'"��'9 1/�.'sti7�' �.\� !!9it:*� at„`'(� � ��,,'}f .rv`�"°k '.r-1 ' ,'R♦'Y` .. , � n y ,y'y�ry�tu '`�►1�1'! ^�'. 64 t• '�.� yam, r. ,• �g �. i1 � ,�-c. a" Vo.. mo r � �;. I �,t � \�Ya jl 'u w�, ♦ } V ►r � t / __.—�` ... � ,1 C Y � �!3" `W a P s �7 9' *�" � �. .1��.�,�•, y i '`k � ,� �' � -- •III '� � $41�Y .�JS rjr« ,A( , ."httF ��i.. ,.,:. 1��R� ��. •� �. i .�'; �i�/M*'�ysF-� 1' YY4 RSyy,�� 'T. 4�A"lT� '"�' � \ '' • U, j1 r ,.f/`r..\�+4'Y ::� 1 y�, p � ♦ a s 4 !r l sr 1 �! �.1`� • ` jai` I Y R !!14 � '' :, 3 1l4�f �`�'�' �� � ,y � r '� vt�+✓�''�� 1, x .� > ;�- � - ��y a ids• dd, I�«� .uY. ��� '���•�"17� * ,�Ir.:•� r �Rj♦r'� �M< �tl'�`; vi' .r�� ^!1` 1 ., �� 1 �� I1y�� S a"°� �i1 9pr }_ S `•.'�/�.• r •an,; f ♦ �y, itC ' S .,.r�,f/J. • t t'' '�._ S't,1 . Y 1 '?r:i� .l. _ } "�,. .�Y' , ._ i� ,.', ,:.,..i. �' , .Y / I , .� ) '11�Lr itt�• F��'� s � •1'���t , •, P , ' Y' r t�.9,•i o-J ma's F / }`; ok •' Ar �F j f go 1 0.. r'1,w�,• � T¢ ��1 i � r 11 r , � i '1 I 1 1� r'i •'�';���y1, r .? - ��'` ��t r���, j, t _1 vY' +' �� Qtl r' i'�1 •r r r �,aa > �1► 4��. ' (,K�q'r � � � P;�A 'br �`_• qfi r;1 _ �k I .7 I rAp� 1''rt T�rr�{j4.\�;.. :'es j''��• y �.v t, Tr ' y�9�'i i « • ' .. •dl !.,►I:.f'7�'�'li>: � }� �. �.ft 3• i+F � { $?i� 1 Ih •4�•{ � �. ,iq ' r�agyg I � •� ,. 41�1, AV • :,At.'•' - �.".�:R,�l�� �"a. � >� 7,s��;r i Wry= i � t � � ,�'� � •�Y-,,.., " ' " ti .r r�+.r,.ia'A• . . `��i� ,�� "l�t� Y 51sy'1i' 7+ � �r � , � � i ��. . .� � w<, i1, �'i i�'yyU��g4"C ��J:^�'F'��h, ali :}` }i� :ry F" •� all yv y . � xI� � S t�.;L n•�sY � � ✓1 �S ! ) C 1 JE� s c7 '14 J4 wIXof , it4 -1,1 1 41 1 1, �hw f6 Ply OVII M M = I \Uhl IRA Ot r f 'N" !�,% 1, 1, a e3€�1Gy41S1t1 v rl,i� • :>,�. i!Yl ffi$k--a j i� 4 a ' X•d. R�L � m 1 'q,u ,'.3 ' t t '� s ��'��i to � �f� � , t _ , t ♦9}? , i �� / e - F11 �cA y is 6 yVZ , . ` w 7f �� a �f . �►, •`� �5Y Syii _. }f+.s7Rf+1� r J ,3• ! r.r tU 1.. 3r�•� _r .mot' j � � '� � •'� raw *:i"` � 1 �, rt ' t�'+l a�'ib y' Q^� ��: �.rt ,•t r� .•ri �}�q 9,A l\ �• �y � y{�.{ua�f:i tC'•a'q��r•� t�'t`.�iti{j,-/xp 4 a 5li.a a 9 A\' r;l� r fit •Or :r • �r1.. f 14iik�HtA�'�\ �,(1 Y: `4 !�, � 7 �•t J ' e'f bye },�,'( ��,1�',� to � ''. r:x. i+% J• � � �. 9..t • � t ti. v r , r� e b� r a r: " pu 7 tyi WI � zx z k � � l jJ, t t —TAN* w � 6 w sv A r � z p Y w +(����e. �4. ,+�••�, trot; 0 �'k' ,thy w �1�, kx �'. 1.( 9 �1' ) a '1� pAll I IA it �". t Af ut . .3 jjj r°£i. % tpr,,- 'wr }' •b r q u ,,t+ lq,+ it 1 e qu . ' `,T,• e r td t � �14&tf} ;fit �, ,�°.' ♦ �r ,\�� � y t r '�"�- - c € �,.1, �, � tSt � �� et�h� r ak��r:f 11`�6�r�k, rP�•.a is �i __. J ti AlW (�rt:� � J 1��� t yy k • Y. �fi A • � 1 A! 1 Y � ,i off V—p 'T Nr t qw. ------------- L �c IC I............. T0 9 0 (Ae r; T Architecture 400 Doyle Building A Professional Interiors 119 Pine Street Service Urban Design Seattle, WA 98101-1511 Corporation. Phone: 206.6243154 Fax: 206.624.0541 ANOERSEN BJORNSTAO (5 6 z CD z KANW JAC0889 114C. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 00 0 00 z 220 WEST HARRISON SEATTLE. WA. 96119 ao� C2063 285-1 85 Z_ a cri ............... . ........... .... ... .......... . . ..... Lij 0 .. ........... ..................... .... ......... . .... ....... . ..... .... �w co 01 LLJ F_ _72 LLI ............ .. z ......... .. .... . .. . ....... - V) ... . ... ........ ... .. .. ....... .... ........ ..... .... .. . ........ ...... I (P qACTE.VALVE D < __F_ff__*mkL V a- > Lq cr, ....... ....... ...... ... . .... . . ...... .. . . . ....... ... ....... 00 .. . ..... . ........ .. ---- - _ . ..... ...... . .... . . i.... ......... ....... . . . ....... . ...... ........ V) ... . .. . .... .. ........ . .... . LLJ .... . ... ......... .. az M-E V) z Im ... . ....... . . ... . ............... . W C-4 U ..... .... ....... .. ...... . . ... ....... Li (* M EA.. .. . .. ........... . . ... ........ . ......... ...... . ................ U . ...... . ........ .... C DE SEE T__ __AZIC W3 __eee 741 0r S7 lip V) yj 69L II2j;;, w OF eegmL_ 0 -4 4 0 _�O _a 41\ T_' e;TK _CT A f > �4e -1 W- IV i�_, - - r 26,000 A� EUV�. I D tMEX 0VeF-.FL0,VV -7 ol T__ a,: 0 U vt Ir) I 0 5a, 0I oe, I-7 C1 ........ WWI ILA ------- Ic- ............ ry 0 I17' SL 0 0 . .... .... ..... . . .. ..... ... .... ..... .... ....... I. . . ...... . 0 . .. ..... . ... ... Q: .. ............ ..... _U -------- . .......... �y I�p IU" METEew �7_ IAte, KIM ELL 270.'60 A15oSF_MVLl W I0-I x .......... - --------- .... ... ... y X L'�r NOTES: 69 Ioil. H E-: _'APP-IJ_F_,Tr= HALL CON 1=0Fm ro r .. ......... . N M4J I I F L PAR ROAP,' e�RIDCJEE ii� wo A ... ........ -LIWI� 4i ON'� �"FF_FAAEP E�Y THE A NI 64TON 5TA -v ro� -ext -T-.6ATe AL\/a W. r-q-TON e7AT`_CHAF-- A 4i AIF7 MOPIFIED 5Y .71"tVI F�N T 0 F. AM F-.F;ICAN PLJ E3,L1C,W0._9_K5 ...... ...... W CIA .. ....... .. .... .. .... . ....... �T14 15� .. ........ - i, - - - K_ W, . . . .. ..... . ... ..... F-E T m1f4l.mum 4:5��r_R VIATEF,_: ............. .. . ...... .... .. -NT W ITA W019K Ll M-1 T6._ -.'CLEAR ..... ... .... ..... ... . ... ... .......... . REMO-VE::E.' )(1-57- -Efics., FANE E UC1 ow11 ........ . ...... CON EW 51 0 W 91k Ak E TO --F^C 0 F C U 9 5 0 f9 WA . ............. E ... . .. . ......... l0. 5E-IN57 -E Ew, ... .... ...... I M. -_TF_ 0 F 7H E -rI0Q SEE PET.- VC- GA7E DETAILS. AL PLANS. ForFk__j=EtI 5- -E-*. A-RCH I.TffC7[ UP ......................... I........... spor EL.;. E FINISH- i:�RADE_ Zi-NEW C 0 WN ..... ....... .. .. ... ..... To_'� _CU R a =r-OF�5POT- F-LE'VA71ON5'--S'HOWKF"ADJACE�JT S--ADD- OF 4L1TTEJ;k_ ....... ....... ..... ... 011. . ................. RELOCATE-_E A 7 E VA LY El N C-1 BOX' -FH OVAL Io- FH) i 0 CXZATION 4 0 60 N�4 5 0T 'TO 1��)(Ier 'F0_WE.R_.F>0LE 4F P) WFIT15�lz Vr_19Ir_y SIZF1 —San 6—� GANITA" SEWF_R MAI -76l, wcizv i -.-f r_om -rH WX 7 E 9 Nf.CT TO SYI'Z�r 61' 4) --G_RADI_NG_.& UTILITY PLA_N RD--. PNOOF D9AJ N, N 1 =201 _F0 _FLODF�DKAIN -V�. (�AT-E-VALI/E _Wj_M.J_x_m_J_4 ICLEANOUT (CO) PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 10 CL CL d z I Lo LA4 LIJ < LLJ V) D LAA cc zw LAI < CL� t I Z z F Li La 9z w Ix UNITED STATES POSTAL SER,VICE PERRIN\ALLE CARRIER FACI'LITY .98026-9998 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DRAWN BY: BJB CHECKED BY: DLB APPROVED BY:' TAK bf &� A-4- DRAWINGS SCAI F CIVIL SITE PLAN 1 2(f --GRADING & UTILITY PLAN PROJECT NO DRAWING - NO. 9022=0---- SHET DATE OF 13 f . r .. r _ c .......... , , _.. v r r , y;. .tilt �Y. „ .. ... _ .. .. ..... ' .. ....... s, ...... ... fq Wit' , .. .....— - ■ i pvc IF ..... r..'� ....r ... .... � i .. .. u , .. .r 5 .. y ... �. _r .. b Y , "'.... may. •:' '� ... .. ... �. ...................: �: ,:. .. 1 ..... _... • .... .... '. .............. a Yr I ZZAM WJW i [a A_ . IVr v� fl ♦ �.♦.wr ♦I �v1• vi—:.�r..Y L.. IV L./%. IV) II I•V V1-1.•VYY' ' j ` I ' i O r�i CO 5 , �o , F Nct�ET � PAYIN:�. 5...000RDINJA7E LOCATION OF IRRIGA I ION SLEEVES 4 CCN R A CYO( LL ,., ET H T ICI E LK„ ..L Y�IA A � E 4 G c 5 K OV R 211. THICK LAYER OF KUS:HED RdGK 5EDDIN(- . 50ORE WALK•1/2." -DEEP (S 4,0' OC . PROVIDE EXPANSION JOINT5 .C.172" FILLER) AT ALL ASU7TINC3 CONSTRUCTION. 5.. -:ON CJNCRETE PAVEMENT, PI:ZOVIDE"21' DEEP L III WIDE SAWN CONTROL JOINTS C 15.0' OC MAXIMUM. SEAL- SJOI NT) A -TER CURING, WITH APPROVED --GAU_LK1-- ROV► DE %2l' EXPAN51ON JOINT MATED IA L _. _. -AT---ALL__A5UTTi NCB CON571"R UGTION . CAM PAC" 5U5Cj9ADE —TO ----- _'/_a MAXIMUM DEN 5I T Y . ' I Architecture 400 Doyle Building A Professional Interiors 119 Pine Street Service Urban Design Seattle, RYA 98101-1511 Corporation Phone: 206.624.8154 Fax: 206.624.0541 ANOERSEIV SJORNSTQD z KANE a � JACOSS, INC. t CONSULTING ENGINEERS m z Z 220 WEST HARRISON1. SEATTLE• WA. 98119 0 CL C 2063 285- 1185 Z Cai t p Lf} L11 w d I� Q C � I W Q U U- o I I Q C/� L c� I � z Q z < U v Q F-- > w m III CVVVV/ I Cr— . (5) Lj �. © 1 z - V) /(0 I _ a_ 0) W I ! e W 1 LL Q z ((�� _.�...t..... aCL cc . �J LLJ I— � I Lei I I I C LL {n� I I wry{ f V {( I fr 0�. L Q Q F U') 0 Li LU � I UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE PERRINVILLE CARRIER FACILITY 98026-9998 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON DRAWN BY: BJB CHECKED BY: DLB APPROVED. BY: TAK DRAWINGS I PAVING _PLAN_ SCALE 1' = 20' 0 MINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELI PROJECT NO. 9022.000 DATE `f/20/n DRAWING ,NO. SHEET OF C�5 ----- .. _ to w OPTIONAL. SIDE SLOPE BY CONTRACTOR TYPICA NO SCALE ID 401 15"IDr SMALLER LA 18" I D L.ARG ER FIN Gr'R I�IIIi J '.Q V J D J v� LU Y �m -0 Z _ o w m NCH SECTION' L TRE 1-112" SOUARE TUBING 00'-0 9/16" J C 3" C.C. ,E.W. 3 16- 1/4" x 5" x 10" Till s x 1-1/2plate CHANNEL TYPICAL FOUR PLACES \ Square Tube I o._5,. 1 3" X 1-1/2" CHANNEL 72"DIA.. DROP STRUCTUF _._EXIT GRADE aG3:0 1 SECTION THRUL CREEK CHANNEL NO sOALE-9- r - _GRASsY SWALE INLE ►- --- __ ,r(r ' r. CzUAR SPAL LS— Co., 1 N LET ' TYP 5" WIDE 86A STI, W/1/2"CLAM PINI ROD SHOP .WELDED TO 15AN D (TYP) NOTES: ' USE 3 VE>'1 F'I'c . • GRIND SMOOTH ALL EXPOSED SHARD EDGES. •ALL MTL PAR. j SHALL BE HOT DIP GALVANIZED. II SLOPE AS PER PLAN G 1 MIN c PIPE M ITER -PIPE END LO'G TO M ATC H SLOP` E (00,��TYPICALPIrE INLET. .; OUTLET SCREE114. FRAME, GRATE 4 ROUND SOLID COVER MARKED" DRAIN" W/ LOCKING BOLTS 54" ID TYPE S PIPE SUPPORTS I:3 PROVIDE AT � LEAST ONE VEIRTICA� i3AR GRA,- 3"XG.090 GAGE ..; FOR POND OVERFt_c v _ SUPPORT BRACKET 17 MAX DES IGi\, WS ?_G4.00 1 ANCHORED CONIC - . __ WALL (MAX 0 8 i FRAM E/ GRATE FOR VERT SPACING) STD GALV HANDHOLDS CONTROLLED POND STEPS OR LADDER SECTION B- B OVERFLOW. PROVIDE l.SDIA VERT BARS IN FRAME IN 2' 6 MIN 6ALV STEEL I2oD Ir: I HANDLE '�-- NOTES: INLET PI FE 1. SHEAR GATE SHALL BE INVERT `L , PE:: PLAN., z _ OL T ROD FORACLE�NCOU -- ODY AND �-GATE; DLYMPIC�`_`- _ a.---SH1 AIt GATE; CAST -IRO-' � O �� f� FDY. STD. OR EQUAI. OR iv DRAIN (ROD BENT AS B. SHEAR GATE ALUMINUM OR CAST IRON, DRAINAGE REOD FOR VERTICAL SPECIALTIES (SAVANNAit, ;GA) STD. OR EQUAL. ALIGNMENT VVIvIER) F SHUp DRILLED z -= SEE NOTES AT RIGHT SS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 2. GATE SHALL BE 8 DIAM. UNLESS Ole I FEND It Z 3. GATE SHALLBE JOINED TO, TEE SECTION BY BOLTING ( THROUGH FLANGE) , WELDING, OR OTHER SECURE MEANS. o� 4. LIFT ROD: AS SPECIFIED,BY MFR. WITH HANDLE EXTENDING TO WITHIN ONE; FOOT OF COVER AND ADJUSTABLE HOOK. LOCK FASTENED TO FRAME OR UPPER HANDHOLD. LOtV CONTROL STRUCTURE t FI _. :_ice. - ._QC.lARRY USED ON ALL EXPOSED PIPE ENDS NO s A`E __SPA LLB _ NO S CASE C�`-_O"..-GYP Et_ OII --- - 4..---- 1 , , I ' II WASI-t ED ROCK. CORE G^`.� 0 -' E�U^�I . .�TR�lCT P.A, a __ , 2 NGE A� f _. G 0 - X------ Orj.._ . Q `J t� I ` I ColviPACT__ T O 2 = t Pf jj EL ..aG4.00- .... _. 1 •-• .iF41 LS. I /J 41 i v _. - - _� PONDSECTION A -A `�� L__ TOP Or=. �R,M D!YIDING _ _ :�. � C?�1.,lTLET i �_ cGO. C� t-- 0 E)ELO _ POND_ IN .t t VV 0. C"E__ _ .. n _ ..l L...Lr' IGi Pa/t 37 LF 12 PVG/ ( _ t -- — T OF POND - -- DESK N VV,�:, EL -C'1 3.50 - - .. _ -EL P-G4.00 :: w 5. - ..... _ Q I ". BL1 "FACF: KE"_.'-E?CCA\/ATON I!�I T O ' fNATf\/F` GROUND ALL _ ____ TOP.-_O.F_ DEAD STORAGE ` Or R�NTJ ,.-- F LOW CONTROL_ • . \ > > S T RUCTURE;SEI= :.G0.00 r- ^ _ 1 CTIn.N_T_HRU_GRASSY_SWALE-A-BERM.. 0___F'L0W___C_0_NTR0LSTRUCTURE No TO W -- - -50TOF FTG ON G SI DaWALk_ SECTION THRU NEADWA GRASSY S11�LAL� _ __.. FMC7-p I' OVERT LOW SPILLWAY TOP Oi= SERiYI EL EGE .00 SECTION C-C FILTER WINDOW OVI=RFLOWV WS EL 2G 4.J0 WuE1 R P0ND.. - �(=� ON G SI DaWALk_ SECTION THRU NEADWA GRASSY S11�LAL� _ __.. FMC7-p I' OVERT LOW SPILLWAY TOP Oi= SERiYI EL EGE .00 SECTION C-C FILTER WINDOW OVI=RFLOWV WS EL 2G 4.J0 WuE1 R P0ND.. - �(=� I' C, _... .._ I I i OW ' ----1C3t_ Qf: (DVERF LOB WS EL_ ZCa4.00 ... I 2.7.0._ ✓0-- - --- I TOP ERM , _1TL_S• ' EL aG5.00 WDR EL 2G3.8O ALL _RIP .RAP_ .� QUARRY SPALLS i I Si-iAI_L. BE7 -1N ACCCo'RDAN4f-F_ _ VV/ SE.0 9-I3. 1 .: ? 3_. F— _ Oi- I H t_ VVSDOT A. W STD SPEC .5 � -- ': SHALL BE; _ RENSONABLY_.__WF—LL_ GRADED. G A I O , R Dry, , lON AS I-O�L — M AX .: _ STOI�I E SIZE 611 ry MED STONE St I _ M! N STONE_ SIDE 2, - FTN-,S:tH GR�.Dc_O ,�iL.....I� • i DP QUARRY ' . 501 OF..�TG� I�: - z �1J`� i I� -OE3DTEXTILE FABRIC I - :V11RAF.) _SO0 X 0_R EQUAL I� ky TICTiE 1-.y ._ __EMER-CENCY-OVERFLOV_LL -T10- SGA-� PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIOt Arclutedure 400 Doyle Building A Professional Interiors 119 Pin: Saeet Service Urban Design Seattle, WA 98101.1511 Corporation Phone: W6.624SI54 Fax: 206.624.0541 A ERS E V �i:..J z M z O BJOE� STAO o CD m K:E Jr -COBS, IIrlO o b z z CONOULTING Q,NGINGERB z z z to co 2 c to m w , Q Ln z W o I m i� } 0 LJ I U v � zo + O Lij W i CD .I C) I Q w I L J -J co - ' m I Q V) >�tn Z I r n LEI cf � O � O I �--� C!� ~wCoM CIL m w J L,J L_ � o a - < r Ln `� Q I u I-- I � Ld I Io Li o n LU w w I 1 o z z L�! i z I Lt c v LLJ Q r� i 1 z o z t, 7-) Q Ld n IOf 'I r 1 i , 7j I 1; 'S ER VICE PERR I NV I LLE7CARRII=R FACILITY 9802�=9998 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON I DRAWN BY: - - Sv% - - CHECKED BY: APPROVED BY: TAK. DRAWINGS r CIVIL DETAILS SCALE ASr NOT:I PROJECT NO. DRAWING NO. 9022.000 SHEET DATE, OF - No SGAL1= RECEIVED MAR 2 5 092 ENGINEEMNO :mo Wt;w WArC--F- !,AAIi-1 -151 ff-OM -FH1t3 �4ppjzc;x 11 01 QAIN W1 6a A NN Qi 41 it ALV9r X (0— Architecture 400 Doyle Building A- Professional Interiors 119 Pine Street Service Urban Design Seattle, WA 98101-1511 Corporation Phone: 206.624.8154 Fax: 206.624-0541 C5 re) C5 z c::> o in co 0 CS z co 0 0 Ul Z. 60 CD U-) LU SE'RVICI PERRINVILLE . CARRIER FACILITY 98026-9998 PnmnNn,-:;- WASHINGTON DRAWN BY: VCA CHECKED BY: DLB APPROVED BY: TAK rDRAWINGS PROJECT NO. DATE SCALE 1 0 = 2(r DRAWING NO. SHEET C— of1 GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY SHALL CONFORM To THE 1991 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD, BRIDGE AND MUNICIPLE CONSTRUCTION PREPARED BY THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION, WASHINGTON STATE CHAPTER. PAVEMENT, CURB AND GUTTER, AND SIDEWALK SHALL CONFORM TO CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAILS. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE TRAFFIC CONTROL WITH THE CITY OF EDMONDS. TRAFFIC CONTROL REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE AS OUTLINED BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS TRAFFIC CODES, THE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, (MUTCD), PUBLISHED BY THE FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. 3. THE EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED BY THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE. THE LOCATION OR EXISTENCE OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES HAS NOT BEEN VERIFIED. THE CONTRACTOR, SHALL COORDINATE WITH THE UTILITY COMPANIES AND THE CITY OF EDMONDS TO VERIFY THE LOCATION OR EXISTENCE OF ANY UTILITIES WITHIN THE AREA OF CONSTRUCTION PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. 4. 42" DIAMETER CCP SHALL CONFORM TO AASHTO M 170 CLASS 11. 1211 DIAMETER CCP SHALL CONFORM TO AASHTO M 86, CLASS II. e Jr z C� I...... . . .. . . .. ......... ..... . ...... W 3' . ..... .................................................... . ..... - - ---- .. . .... . 0 P 9, .......... ...... .. ........................ il", 104 2 7 F. 4 6 4. IA� �27_3,53-48` C-P ix'� FLUe e 1�5T .7 0, H z �3.3 +ALL C01"N IX161T 6115 CONNE!67 TO QeW MH No I �LU& 5X 1'2 X 1,5T PIPF- FLUCv I!- W ... . ..... .......... ...... ........... . ......... ..................... . H 5 �'712114>) P, CIRE-111E -0 8 I 'N� 7 A., - - - - - ------- -------- - - 0 Izw -7(a TL� AV E�! . ................ .......... ........................... . .............. ................................. . ... . .... .................... ............. ....... ... ......... ...... . . . . . ..... ............ . .. . ............. . ... .... ... .. ....... .. - - - — - ----- - - - ---- ----------------- -- - . . . .......... F �2-715�, 17 'Q1 7- L 15TOKNA eaWEIQ-- Z, 42 W011 6, V w w VV A.A 10. 'P .................... . .. . . ........................... . .............. ca !P. ....... ..... ..................................... ........ .. J_ J r"7 x 1T_ q `5, 6,0N N a 0T TO WFEW MH No 1 N V , I W/ t12 11 (4) C c I F e 2. 0 6/0 S Ai 0 ......... . ....... ............... ....... ...... . ..................... ................ ......... . ................... . . ........... J 11, 1 7i v 51, 2 7% 9 MH No 1 (772 4)) `H., IZ /6 2 MH No 2 5TA 2 t so T WATr, - � MAIN A I A '0SeSA12Y r-Ofz INSTAL-L-P710W OF: NSW PLANP L U Fr-_:-: \S GTO 6UITE:1z - Ar, LL:- G N]w ALL -A ....................... ...................... ___--,-_____, . ......... .... . PK A I N 1611 0 rl* E"> "k, FLUBe_ x►455T 4�1_ e> EX15T PIPE IN v G L, = 2( P5,72 285 A_ CID UZ r__Xl�T C-1-9AS 1!5: -14 < e Y, I'a T cop 42 AO.04 % I DOLr- 4121140 C101::' 0. 7 > 0, -7& % 2 &0 o MA A-1 X" 10 4 250 5z %U oo 3 oo PROFILE �TORm SEWER 'RELOCATION' - 76TH AVE WF Architecture 400 Doyle. Building A Professional Interiors 119 Pine Street Service Urban Design Seattle, WA 98101-1511 Corporation Phone: 206.624.8154 Fax: 206.624.0541 ANDERSEN E3JORNS*AO Pei z C) CS z 0 KANE- I.- cn, 0 1 JACOBSI, INC. < f5 CONSULTING ENGINEERS z 0000 0 0 z Ci z 220 WEST HARRISON SEATTLE. WA. , 98119 0 1 to z co ffi w CID z C2063 285-1165 M m Z 5 < .94- aLo Z Uj 0: Lij > LLJ ly_ LJ z �0 L, f r% F- LLJ < I-- C) < V) Q 00 > LL, C/) _j j LLj 5; (y) V) (,() 0 zoo n OZr') ENO V) Q:� 0oo :2 Cn LJ Lu o IL 0) LLJ < U < V z w f LL 0 V) a< a. w LLJ _j (-) P LIJ F— < Ld 0 Ld w w M Q Ld m 0 z 5 z a_ 0- V) Z 0 z 0 F= V) CL 5; LLJ w LLI X UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE PERRINVILLE STATION 9W20-999-8 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON DRAWN BY: . VGA CHECKED BY: DLB APPROVED BY: TA K DRAWINGS SCALE , STORM :SEWE.R' 1`20' PLAN AND PROFILE PROJECT NO. 'DRAWING NO. 9022.004 SHEET DATE OF C - 6 GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY SHALL CONFORM TO THE 1991 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD, BRIDGE AND MUNICIpLE CONSTRUCTION PREPARED BY THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION, WASHINGTON STATE CHAPTER. PAVEMENT, CURB AND GUTTER, AND SIDEWALK SHALL CONFORM TO CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAILS. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE TRAFFIC CONTROL WITH THE CITY OF EDMONDS. 1TRAFFIC CONTROL REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE AS OUTLINED BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS TRAFFIC CODES, THE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, (MUTCD), PUBLISHED BY THE FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. 3. THE EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED BY THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE. THE LOCATION OR EXISTENCE OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES HAS NOT BEEN VERIFIED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH THE UTILITY COMPANIES AND THE CITY OF EDMONDS TO VERIFY THE LOCATION OR EXISTENCE OF ANY UTILITIES WITHIN THE AREA OF CONSTRUCTION PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. 4. 42" DIAMETER CCP SHALL CONFORM TO AASHTO M 170 CLASS 11- 12" DIAMETER CCP SHALL CONFORM TO AASHTO M 86, CLASS 11- 2. e .............. V . . . . . . . . . . . g 1pi -5; -? n/ W, (;AMi4 NA,51�14 A . . .... ............. . .............................. . .. RIM= Z-74kUS S TO R t_17 --z m z 76, �Ml zlt'c F 11, 4, 6 74101 V5 C,P q, 5, W. 5.5. PLUG V--XleT (.45, '463-68 1z"Cl-IF 5.14". IL E 278.38 eTOFZ, M +ALL COtN rf EXIST 61b __r CoNmV-6-r To QEW MH No I f-, X If PIPE: FL U & 15 X 1,eT PKi xaw,:.4 N A X V H �Jo 5 > coul_i�ZZ_ Ti� eTA V d) V, Ql ........................... ......... . . . . .. ..... .... . . . ............. .. ..... ... ... ......... . . .. .. ....... 0 �,Oy ......... . .. M ON U MEAT 7 & A V .. . ........ . .... 4, 17 7::--- Z_ -:7 OL eTOKM eewe 42 w 77 V w A W w 7— v 0 Z_ . . ......... . . ... .............. R TiF 5 C� EIAIA L i< 14e. ........ D :% X X ✓ EXIST GE5 N r-- �w wl 6ON mc_,l 10 4_iFNER M-H, . ... . ......................................... . . ........ . . ... 5'2 .`� 5 M. W/ wia V j e 2.0 1/ mm-, 274, 7�j 770 2 4 C F 5, "U" 'd %, RIM-1. MH No 2 _7' Z 70.1 2t e A I 'XV5T WATeP_ VAIN A5 r 11"�S_rAL�-16j_tION OF �4SW _y 16T09m leswel?_ Pf 1�: F11-u 6 f, p PLAN PLUSF- WSOSEp Y 6ulTev- f, A,�aFH PvM7 AS q H New':-:JrOF--M a?,wf�g L 44L NN _5 7- ; — G T a IRZ11" M . ................... . ..... . . . . .. . ..................... .. 5. F_ z 5 7. PLUS EXISTaxleT 61e) <) 4= < -14 Q0 r < Z 270 ---------- L_ r 42 0. 7& "lo .................. =,14 Lr 00 Lr -7& L-7 I 7z AA 03 V13 %i MA \& w 400 Architecture 400 Doyle. Building ilding A Professional Interiors 119 Pine Street Service Urban Design Seattle, WA 98101-1511 Corporation Phone: 206.624.8154 Fax: 206.624.0541 ANDERSEN BJORNSTAD d z re)C) 0 z 0 KANE JACOBS,, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS z 00 0 00 0 z 0 z taJ 220 WEST HARRISON SEATTLE. WA. SeIIS 0 1 to z co W z CD z C2063 285-1165 0 m C7) a 1 -!FC < o-44 Z w Ix 0 Io Li 0 - > Li 0, 0 0 0 Z: _j Q=F Q F— V) > 00 L'i (:Y) Cn _j i Cy) V) (j)0 Ld 1 0 5; z 1 1 0 OZ E V) CE 0:2CNO Ld LLJ 00 0 Cn CL 0) Ld F Ld < C) < z L4 LL 0 W_ (L 5-: � <0 10 V) w a. (L Ld _j C) LLJ Q LLJ ::D I to 0 w w w z w o w m z C.2 w (L (L V) Z 0 z 0 V) CL > Ld w Cr UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE )EERRINVILLE STATION )8020-9998 DIVIONDS, WASHINGTON DRAWN BY: :VCA CHECKED BY: DLB APPROVED BY: TA K DRAWINGS SCALE., 1 11=20' -STORIVISEWEB PLAN AND- . PROFILE - PROJECT NO. 'DRAWING NO. 9022.004 - SHEET DAM OF C-6, t _ t t ' - -' - ,I - _ I __ _ _.�... - .- b-ogend .: : - . _ 1.:, :. .--I/tI14AI .,vI:wv(iI )-.!II1 II N " .. ; I . ---1-,- .11�:,-1,45;E-a-�1�I .I --. ,,- .... I -1. -.. -'1 ? ',. I, -,...II. -,.-11 . .11, ,��I,k �A-I% -. .l-or -fe, - ,I - (c -11 '-1-1 �-I.?-\---I I,-_ I1-<.-I-I 7_,,-A1- -",,; —, �, �-"" I�I� II LIII !I ;�--1:!I1I-�ol-!7,r1���ivr,`--3�__/t-�It,I �F _ (rC fh - 'fire- .hydrant ' . - - - : r. , ff r 2..1 -. 1-7c44Ni1-,. e;:!.� ,.t ,v! Ie . .: 0I . ./I- .. 1I . -\- I Ai //%/ l` . , . tit c G.IU �`Gt' '`- - -'`` - p�Qwel~/telephone �Ie, _ � C - �--__ . $ 257, � , �''� . Nor ti . - , .. . dap G., r b - - ,j �. ' SGaie !"=20' _ WV • - . �Ftc %f �la1�f . - . . - - . 1 0 a9 F''c ----1_ � /gd�r� b\N back- of Wa I k- • ,. '�`'a,AF�' ,� 1� - T. p a ?� ' --�� 1P . s9 � ��� ep et� e- G' a yement - . - • • y j, '�� c� t,� 2 `s �,�v -�.� *FP � eta �'' I `f \ _ �� `�� san.� corn car b �� , '�`, 2� r,� \ --1 - \ `�� 4- 5 a� ' '� 4. j qA f9�kt _, r1tcn) �' cv_n� {; i`5 ,!�, \ ` \ �-- �'`__--�� 1('° cry i° 2� .OQ �`~ ---� �J 3) �'' C -____ ' fe, . of do rr�n7. -'�--� P� r % --�_ ___zrtc y A� Z51. -1 motet . f 1.:,d r -1 _- 13Y `- ---`_ �-~-- -- PP . .Car . \ \ - ' _ _ i3 \ frOf 1) � . �`- -�-,. 2 � �c t� �-----_- •---_ _... _._-_•--.- fe,2`-30`7k1I , .' 1�-:*:3-� 1<--- --------- Pt -,Z4Ir07.- \\ \\ - -� ►q°cane. \\\�. -52 ` ~- - �b 24 /e?xr -'--' ---, W 96 ~- y j�zias�o. - r \ \ \ s\ y1?t`` \ ? �? ry 9y a�,t?--- -__ his. ' I �; . >*y Ef 0 „-� , \ \ \ �` �kp%\1 ` / .__ -�•., 5 %� e47e ,!� \ �Z5e fV y �iSC 2r+.roQ '_` _ bJ4 ♦ • .-_ Efi"Gof�G \\\ �\ \°�`��L�� 1`��\ i �/ J� W 1?8 33' � �''`__- A �� -" - ? - I�D h A{( t�� 33 ? �'' '6) ---- Z1 - ,t- e - \\ 1 `.L_�- 4 I --- - ��' y \ 4r. � �e �i 1��-- s t� . f°rc -"-. -- N 51/ I -. 1 .��� / fr :r a. . //./. /I - /. I/ /.1 / / /-LI / ,/ / /I//I// / /, . / /,-- / ./ /-/ --'/ ". //1 Z/ .%.-.," .) 11//-" "-/ x/ / -, -./1-1./-/1/ 1/ -1-1/ -/,.- ,/-//-"1 .z --. I, , ,/ /nII- /-pI "" *-' 'I/I *- /% ..%,---- ,/ -/-I*. . .),,/1I,' I-: - /- ,�-�- /- t 1I- --II--t - -----III-/I /I-t -- /I I. -- \-/-- -\ !II -/ II/t--/ .-\-/\ -/ \- (-\ \-- \./ -1-/ -\-/ ---.-/ -,--.- ,- /\ -, /-- , /-/ -.\ / _-/ "� �I - \�- 1 -/ '', \\-//" I - II, - .> ."-/ I- -- \"/. / I- - /\ -- / - ---,-.I.I. -- 7--,,-.\ ":-\---Qi-- \ . l- \---%= . \ .-=-.T.,---=-. .--- =-,-�-"1" �- I. - ,1":/1 ;-, ;I",-"�-',L,/"--1-,,-/,`--I -/1--\1,-�-.-.,11-\I1/-;. 1-, :/ 1 /-X1 .j/--111 -/-1 .- I,- . ,I--I . , - \ . "" I - ,I . I I '.'I-. - . I I1; --I-I. 1 .I -. .,,// . -I 1. 1 .z,, . I. 1I -. _-. I- I -I... . .R'. -. I61 \ \ 1 I meets/" --- _ _\ 2 Z 6`�' / s r -----_ e f — r A--� : / %., - .1. . ... / ... '. . . \ \ \ I '\ --- --� \P3�'�' . _6�3g , j8. rc / 2crc . ?�g`4E� z6 ----"" �x % , \ \ \ \ / \ \ -� � - . -, . / 3q 7c 1�' 26���56 Gone. curb ..(good COtldttt0tl ?r '�4x`�x .`c . 1 " . \ \ \ zi" liz 245.4 f j g S 7C i - t \ 1 / . . ` matt _ - `rene. R. 94 ? A -- . \ \ r I I . ¢ Jaav� Meadorntdale ►'x u r d . \ / ( 1 ''� _� -- _ _ � t . . . iz�i t ,z KOdd� -t%•It 34 i •. ,rcnc \ '` \\ J I , 8 } tQ, i ; I ` - 9' � a .- e�6� tip �o� ' - 26�� h'i� 'I ': d.G.�3VefnErit (gocz{ G°ttdtttori), fk..r . .-�!I" IaI.a.. I../ I.I . /'. I- II, �L . r . \ - \ 1 V '��n� W r 1 __ ._.- _ - i i `` W er __ S6 �f� -- -- '_ ---, '� ' ' 'I,b�'.'. �x1n �GCfIG. `i V. tea`' S - i, ..-, -1 ._ _ J , . \\ \ ; t G,fiy of �am0rtd5 Pt• �. {$�ZOI� --�` `'_--4 -8"24, +�� - qr .3�� -� - - - - - --- i7c --- -- - - - ----�_ - ---_ ---= - - -- --- - -- -- - t I. 1. . A 4(02 ' - 4_ z �- �'' eG of .kb _ } \ I - . - 5-1 � \ ` - •- --- �1 _ - _ - -- - . �.Jo 2l7 � 4tt� �,Na. �4 crxr� }I / 21q / ���- s.an _ /� I\ y - ter \ N\ i r,i 1 I --------------- _- -'(: -- 21' 1 - - -- - t oil / o N I I � /" _ e I 9 S Z`i `t 2 9.4 \ / q 2 1 - _ s e � \ `' / 5 f 5 ,y - I .. W - = 1t,Nl\i-aiII l4I I �[ I I *-' I- . -,----1 '- I " .. \I\ \ -\ . ,IIII I ,4 I x _ - - .I x , r \ 1 / - - •- - / - -- _- - - _ / / ... , 4 . ter, � 'z �. s`- ^y "`^ & - -_y., ram`-.zzc"; ;.` era --a- ram' ' 4 - . -- \ - i 1 I I I J x-- - N(OM {ZC1Ce 1fOi {tLX�� 'r! ! / / / - // / - �� / , / / � -- = _ - _ - - ..._.. i 9 * Z . ' . _ , : - /" . Y ( i ,/ / / -��-�-�� / /// 11 fi I �\ 1 I , ( I \ ,/ / /� / / // / ,/ ''` --�_ -Z1C'�E� _. C-_(,J,��/ - -- i1MO3IsMATIE.` f 1. \\ 1 ' \ \ i /i / / // / f // /f /, / / `-- - ---- ---- I —- V.. --- -- t7%82 r r -_ I \ !, , l r ,,� i / ,// , / ., 1 , I_ I \\ i I II \ 1 tx ' f ,f / /;/ ,/ ; ,/; / ,' , / f/ ff .. 1 - -� t,' ��+ ,,, . . I \ II ?44r //// _ / / f f / / - I C / \ \ j , \ I diI / / / / / / I 1 o 10 \ \ \ 1 I i \\ \ 1 , 3ottTJll-arm j /a�/2a l /f/�i // .' ; 1 i . i \ \ ' A \ \\ \ \1 i I ,� I � \ i� / /�// / / ` 1\ \\ \ ` /' \� \ ;'dote : 7n15 I X(4 cav�red . by 21rf 2pod v;,-d f1igh I ,1` � t'rZ `� � ' \ \ \ 1, I P f F - -- °- /// /// / / I \ \\ ~ \ I \\ - t _ - . / ;7 / ?� .•wv: _ . \ \\\: \\ I J1 1 i �/ : / / / ( \ \ \\\ \ \\ \ __ l / gar / , . -t-�"-^``.r . N \"I -c, \�--. I (� I 1 ` ( r Lot 8 /-/ / //% / /f // / r/ °%y , 1 I` \\_`\\ `.\\ cv \\ \\\ �`-y 72 f M ` / ? \\ \, a`' I ; I I f E . 52,954 5-f- / I. Zl l03 .I Y r I , - // /' /' / // /f // •/6a , a 11 1It \��_ \\ \\ \\ \\ \ 1 ' ,1 `- 4\ 1 I I I f , r ' . 4- -- /,- / / / , ! r \ \ `. \ \\ \ \ \ - _ � \ �"{ f001 e-f 0.q 09 I aG• I - . \ ` M I " '._ / / // I / i / J \ \\ \, \ \ `\ 1 1 . j V GSIey "E. [?dhl �`\ � _ \I 1 1 I ! - Z I - -' ./ i / i r \�\ '-- `` -�`\ \`� .\\ \\ ,!r -4 \\ 1 _ - 1 { I I - "�-- - - - --- /`-- / \ '-- -\ \ \ \ Z \ I r .. �\ ``\ I I ( i I f / ,f/' / /,6 Z �' - -''_-/ / /f / /4/6�dd ``\ \ \\\\ \\ \\\ \ \\ I i- l fj` ,Ctt.E ,�, '/ - . - II . ► I I i ---- ' - ' - / , \ \ 1 `\ \ \ �\ I - I1 / --'" N -/ Z71-B Z'Ct•2 °h� I I I I I I J - / - _ - /' / Lot \ a \ \ \ ' .. .�I .I .q .*. I I. .- I 1 I -.., .. . I. . -I . , III -. . .v I6n . . .,** - .-.. . I .1I . .,I. / I .,.1 1, . W . I. -. . .',. 7�"-II II I0 .-. \ i r fit • 24a. i3 - - 1 \ \ f , /� \ \ \ I ' f t 'j'12'i3 re 5 , .. ? I I f I rt / 1-l \i \ \ r �--- \ \ '50,151 5S \ / \ \ \ , -,_ -, __, I 1 _.-.` 1 �"'mac ) 1- I I I ( + -- �, f --c \ \ - -- - - `. - -- _ _ _ \ � , .-� - I i �b f ! I - _ . 1: I . \ \` Ir 1 I l l 1 I r. f /f f- "i�f -- \\ \ti \\\ \\NI`�-__-- -`- "- _ ��-`_1` 1� \�� -`_ -`� �- `,` ``\, `"-\\ - l mil'(•'• --41 f 1fi ! {t'- 1 - - .t \ - \\` 1 I I i ( r / - / �_'�� /- \\ \� \�--`-'-- ---_---- �sf4a- _`� -----------`, -- -�__ --- --- -'-`� �, ` \` \\ \ l '�l - , t / '�I,- : - - I. I .. \ " I . 1 - J ems- �ia �''' __ - �d d �-'- `-� ` 1 L° ' Z \ ` \ / \1 -/ _ - _ '_ - . . II. 1. \ \ \ - \ ,1, I -'-. �- I� . \ :"-\1� &�'7--, - ,. . - .;.... ...... ..I-. __-.------.\-. I----.1-1-- - - - ---------- 7. \\ l ! j I I t I J '� ,-- f/ \ \ 1_- \ \\ �/" - -----` _ / f 1 Yr q \"l 1 I i I I I I I / - - r I --, \ \ `\-------------- - - ---- --------� f �/ / I / I I. / . / / Zt i - - \\ / ! I I 1 Ji"�_ - ! `� \ \`' .____-_____ __- _-__._ -' _,.,, �•_-__-_-_-'- .--- -- .-._-�--ice /�' / ' / / i / / ��y* - \ I t / / l "f fl- /�l� >} Wy -� /`, ' 1 \\ ----._-..-_---_-_- _---__-__-_-_._----'---.___- _ _ ------------� /// / / / I /� ? I. , `\ I t !-�` / I / T ) , . � / I i � ��n _ _----------_-_ _ _ _-/ 1 � /� "' � /� ! /' ,+/ �/.a 2z`t� ,' t •23fo.�r i ! 1 tI i y/ { / t 11 ----- �_--------------- _- - -- ---------- -'' '_yam /' �' l / I / / z 292.5R' r -�- \ I ' / / / / / /j � / ' r I \------------------------------------ -------------..----_ ---- - -- -� -/� 11� // 1 p . �f ,. ' / / ! / I , I l -________ -__---------------- _ - _ - _ . /� / / - , `\ . I I / I . l ( / I , I 1__--------_-- -- _ _ - - -- - - It \�' x r.. \'`.\ \` 1J { III I I I , j / -- ' / I----- ----- - ----------- -' - --------------- - `•--- _ �_`' __-------- ��---' i/ �/� - �:' ///! //- _ - - , \ `' l l 1 I / �� / / / `- - - -- - - - . - - --- -_---- --- -- - -' ~ - - , -' ' I / ' - -. II N II - /, 1\ tII / i I �I i I I I k. I -I -41 II- I / 4- , I . I� II I i,I II I �:�I'- I - /I --r---` ,11- - tiII.- , �'- -'-,-. .-, -. , ..,1, . . , '�� _ -... \ I I / / / tl / / / _ -- ----------- --- - _ ---_-- / — \ /Z-1 // • . '\ I I I I I I l -r� r I / --- - - -._- '' _-�� _� \ / rw r 5 \ v I f I I I l f I i I I I l I -� __-__-.1 _ `'-- ---- - v / 2i ►. �r tc - . - \ \\ I I I i I I i I / / . / I . x ----- - . •---- _ - _ _ - `\ / / 21{.to�i } . . . \\ I I i I ► / J J 1 / wdQ; fer1C2 for horse crral ,.-. � � �.--"- r I /, - _ - - - - \ /- �'• S`I `----- ! \ \\ I I I I I ` I I I / I i ~- / 2-(Z t _ 1 i I ��\ •. \.J I t I I I I I I I I i -I / -- - 4 i `JEte I ���. - 2.ay '�K,, 4�Par I I I I I I I //- � - �� - - I \\ 1 I ;/ \\ 90,�Sb e,.f / I.07�030 ��,:`°� /.—_?o� �,2 E, 'z7?� - \ i I 1 I I ► 1. I 1 -- �� ,, /� !jra.G.sidewa,{L \ 1 I t I 1 1 t I \- - - - _ o�� . _ �Q°�'' / `P th,Gkerled u a�. gutter - \' I I 1 I I I 1 / , I _ '� . \, \ I i I i 1 \ \ I 1 I -------------- _--- � _ ___- _ "-l�- - 7Z -'`sG L (Ai ' . \ \ ) ( I ( 1 1 1 t t It \ - _ - --Zr? / �' . - \, \ I t I ► i t 1 ti _ . )5eF'f2"rebdr w/cap (©EA-C 52 0) _�--------------- ac :"Zeri3ly-. f_- �51 1' - - \ \ I I ; t i 1 1 /,"' I Typ. at al l lot -or,n er5 .. - / _ -• . Y \ N. . \ \ I 1 I l I ` ► I't I �? '�131i _ f r� z �2'rr / / ` \ I l 1 t 11 I r �\ i 1 I I 11► 1 1 I l� z i - - ��- 11\ - , /: \I/� \6 i Z>>.>� _� \>zox*t 71,8\'Z*c /?8� r+I /'" l I. .- . -.-.. --.. .—.... 1.-. .I 1I --..- - t-- t" -I.- . . ".1I. ..1 �- --. ,--1-1. - I.. - .--..I.I II --. I - I C -.-— -. .:- :I I�-41.I . I. I - . . -I -.. iI - \ i I r I l , } I , ,�/ _ \.Yr'tt�al 5ectlCt tlmp{� VIt t'iYe. I --I. -- .- - .II. I. I I I. -. II -.. - . I .- .i\,..1- .. . I . . . . I I. ... .. I..I . II I .I II I .. I . .. . I- iII (:�� ,II IIi I� �iIII rI. I .. ,, . I-. I . .I .I I I I .II .. .I .I 1.Ij I.. . . S \\ \ I( 1 I I I I I L // - r \blv ���- -_ j'C?lr8gt 21228 _ , -- ` I 1 ) ! 1 I �11 - - - -- _ - - _ ' J ,2.f'1 5."K bt,ClPui `_ - '-'— /66r ¢ 7 272 a 2, -F -4Vg _ _ / \ l I I ( I I" I / i /' tt tl i-" ttl t �-f 2Z'/g �d�,f�3 � *z 4s rr y' . \ \ }I 1 I j I I I 111 r/ 1 N �b 71 ` 21 `H p1n i/ �'J -' z, '/ /z�tc � . - per\ Q _ - �-� 1 16 - ) 9rat /r1 t //' \ 1 I ► I I t 1 1 Z;y \`�a , o t o.\' H r¢ z z7o rr�! 1 ,7 c, per I 5t?-- _ _ - / t \ - ( I I I i i it II i1 - < 9g - c�c� Off\ I1°'_ �a 2! �_ ~ 9 r=�0r j c3Ac . ,f" `` (�1 �� \J `ene , i' ', - ! I f I 1 ' 1 1 1 , \ - -- -- /� - - :" - -y� f' Zf0 /1' / - �2y - ",,,,r� 1�'' - - _ .. /" ... 11'I .. III- II I- :eI1,III I- .v�,II . ?.- .. I `- - - -- - \ \ \ / I I- t I pL 1.')`b.I&I e ' E f©.QO is • Zags 40 - 2r �36?c o /� K'11VV11 . E- --- -- \ \ \ a ' t` f 1= ;�J Q1- 1 - (;tbl ©Z.�IN _ - - l _, If /- _ . — \ I Qa9-. _ --- ���� k.�;1 may* 27z.11ep�gLt . . . __ \ = �? E I ( I \ ` r / - _ s �CX}4_ -'- �� 1 t°G 48 _'►__ „ 9c �0 4f ul!iti; GUrb II. . II -I.. .1 .I III . 4 ..I - , iI4�II I! 'i !-:1 I I'II 1i i�I !i,. ".I i !, : t i ;iI !r1, 1iI I I. I I.,I��� �,, I -. I1 .,I. .I!- ,I . I. .i ."-, 1 II�..I. If , .1I -,,. 4.I ,1, I,. �1'I I—-. I' .,I L.I . III.I.II . .1I II.1.'I- I II , I I I ' . II .-I I I -.. .' . I . . I I r ;I .I11II.I I ,.: .- , I. I .II -. I - I,I" i.I .IIII .- . 1 I � . II 1I "11,,-.,1 .I -LI . : .I. I- ,,I I..I-I..I..I 4. 1. I .- II. 1III . I, .I ,1.I. I1. _-11 ,, . . - ,1 .,I -.L.,.IbII I1 ...I,. I1 -').. I -II-.I0,, X..". I 5I.1.-(e1I .w.-I,IIt,I1 It,-t1� ,I CI1- .'La .I, ,; I -. .I---,II-,I I -I ,. LM, ..- % I. -,I I e I: .-. ,1I-1tI- . .I . 1 % I , I vI L I �1I..�.1,.\;-�I. 1..,- —,Z...,,v)I .-.I ",.,.-�I.. - ;.-, I�' I I -- I I 1. .0. 7, -I - .I,1. III II II I..I —, . II JIII. 1I-,I1 II1I II I. 5.I I-.;. -, II . I4... ,tI-- 1.'-*..X --I1�.1I--.- � , .eII I A .- II lI1j-I, 4. I ,-z " I I - I .-I..,-Ll .I :71,r ' 1- ,. 1/-t11' I ..It----\IM�. I I..I- III1=I %,. 1I.-� .=. I I .. 1-:.,--- - - -I, I..II . .,. .-� I ..1,-..,- t. . . 1J�.- 1-I,o .A :..I "1I I 1.:1 --= -- 1I1'I-I. 1 . *'X, ., I 1.. ,I , , - -I 1Cl.1, - r) --.. I. . 1I4 I -r'�F-.-- I. - ,-I -, ,I . . -,-. I 1I..- --I -?. - III I r -II -�.- I- - .---. .- .I42II.I, .--/�.-.-00.�� 1� �',I. >I.,I'-I�' -- N�-1-.,N/. '.-.-1I. ' \ l..- \\6-I I. J -"\ -II .-" I\,--�1..\I I .. \z\ 14I1 -j-. -,.=kI:�— I.II-.I . - -j Il(I. Et ---I III -I -%- s,II-r ,- —I 1oI -.--) I - . - -w-. , - -aII - .II, I u� o-1I ; I I . 1r I . .--, -II-I I . - -I. ,- �.!I 1--r . '.I. 4 I.I�`?.II -.. ,�t I.f.-%.- 1 1-, W." 1 I. "1 .. �I -." R--?-. -.1Z,I * �,I I, �a ---I� -4I-. -r-. .--1A �'4 ---j �v.� I - II -.. --7..�A.I? I.6.1 1C t-IIIII ��i( 1I� ( '-,,*-,;-'-� :�%lI-�7:I: .. -s. -I,-t.l -�.I '-.. '-;6-,'�j.----. --(:,-.. 1. .- I -. -. 'I.- .7 -lt. . ---I I -.-- . - � 1 - --- ":*---:---.�,-Z-I - :-:-: ,:---;- --. -1.11I\.51-1I ---.- - - ..-I .'. �_ ,�I i- i-I --- --. - -I , --.-- . .-/ ...� . -. �� �o / 1 �_. — - `? a _ �--- ux�` 11 `I�rl.y ca '1�'iF1fi fYlc3r '- - - - - - - --- "- \ \ \ \e hl• 1 1 1 eauld not -find ` -� ��-�,rteG1 ' fJ-" 4�69 --` - - vw�En' I� z� ti�� ` - -�-- grlchrn- \ \ 1 I 1 1 to a rox ttr�fir¢n- t c _ l .0 Pa �° ��� - ,e rc 2 tyI - . / - / , I Pf' ax -r \z a 3 _ /� 57i. I p a a n 0 I ic. VIE; ?toU '`\ \ _ _ • l ; \ 1\ _-- - _ - 1- � t2 _ lam - �j4�9 c z �o �a , -- 1� -' a, ` �80 T p Phi` tlrtt f'l i1(rlPrlt I tC'-r Sf'Gtl fi o 4 fri ? W - ' '' .'- i --- I ------___ ----- �-i'_ _- --__- , - aG ;;d��at Jr-,�_ /� 2,coas �;a �r - f �_- � ,_r. ���� �,Z., 1 {�i"fVG' attd �ir�t�' �V�l-1e �i, . - -}� j �y /� /�i�.�}��1 �( i `�- _ _ -- • --- '��..- /'- ---�\�61 ''�- "? `� �irI ti Y7�9(,r f- f�'` vi - �+ l �} y -7 . t y�1Ga I 1©l 1. ��J R'TY f1Iti>"► • 1�� tel - - -` _- _- - Ciftk- � - // --"� �- 76 2�'°,,G\ '� 9/8 \Jle. o -�- ti ^`" L'IFi t. L #�•I ( 1 I 7~____ °wY? / - �bs� �^ I �2 rc �•Pso -� o °` x-� ' i �- -��— 2 H? Zq r �_ h 4N('' / -' - - --`_- fo5 �2 z lit �p ti IV - 9 \ . . - • - / c `\ t�' r _ /}1 0 i 1e- ' Z6 � r �s. 1 __ � gg _P �--=-� -```- j 4 EJurvp✓ or-11; I �'tC.�3t'E, .\, _''mil 4�r jf w/ _ l y 1 iiQ ,v, of t %'1' ' il �/> �` ` - ' Z g '76 ` u 7q 2a t pttG - - '' -- , ;' .� `�.._ _.+ : -h,�"' rtar1 I-tea'Lr'�- 1. Ut f i f t _ lacat long show n are ap�"oxfrna� TtI u maQor're�fl �-er-eent5 a 5urve done Ir>� ar under - - 1 1,3 I /,Z- - - =" — � only. A5 t�1 If plans do not accurately my direGi ►on lr► ��r� orm,ance w++h -one survey Fewrding Aot- ! ,- / � g� __- � - ih at the re uest d +he United states Postal t'Y{�. I '- f7"can- ` .. I ,,,. r,r 6Wtrt t5how -{ he ioGC�tIon � • rr�.�� . ' , t,�/ v----=--- ----- I ? ,, 2 Title repor+ Provided by 5af eco Tf tle. -�- _,f4NP , �, . , _- J( �� > Irl ranee CO�i n �ammltrnent No.l3-II95`�3- ' �� " 87 =` A ,N�s c3. tbtr ti� h`', �' y� Y3�a / `r6 f 1 ate �n c,A, . .\o C� .�CL�,� n.) 3. Arl eaevement for the right to male all nerc ;r r .. � , I 4i � ,.W, try y Vc-.9h. Reg. No_ 2f5P�_ , & ti,; �„ �.O'E fOr GU �5 c3t1ClI l �S U(1 (O l S 8 d (1Cj ` �'2,58� �'cy ,ePoT o f P�dm{ralt Awes a5 recorded I n VoI . I2 { ' ' S, � � :: - ., .. '_ i .�1,�R ` .,a . - - . . - ;lay) t, . - _ _ 4 Plats, p3ge. 48, , Records of Snohornl5h (ounty, �11 - � - - - - .. .. j , �(Ild ✓7 { I n tori - i - i r Il - LW D yC.�"Ipt�ic)n (p�;c-.t tle repor+) Legal Pe5crlptlon (mefesp 4 bounds) . - - . Legp-1 Qescrij?Tiorn (site1A , A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 27 Ted"Gt5 6 'am 9.1 P�cx�� `2; dmlralty e5,3ccording t© the Plat NORTH RANGE £AST W.M. IN SNOHOMISH, COUNTY WASHINGTON, MORE ock cirrl,raifi Acres Ac-ordtn -ro -rhe- Plat' Thereo-F . MV I /"1 1t V � " V Tract 9 ) 131 Z, A y 9 - . I {a 48 f�eGordS o +he ' thrEd recorded i(1 V©lurne 2 0 P t5, page i PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS : ,, , __. _ :._ ._ f2,ccc�rcied In Vofurrte; l2 of Ptc�-t's , Page �8, t2ecc�rdS a�f 1he Aud, f or o� _.. - - - } o t e tinnhornl�li Mate of 1ta5hfn of�► . Audit r of h ty of 9� 4 BEGINNING AT HE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 8 , BLOCK 2 , PLAT OF 'the Cour{ty crF Snohomish, 0.Ie of Wash►rlgton And All That Parfi,on �'"�1 1 ("` .1 - and aII that por fan'_ Tract log, Edmonds 6eavfew Tracf6, ADMIRALTY ACRES., ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME (}p TraGi' IO�aS �drri©r[�S SEa \�12w-rraC'IS,. AccoMin9 "fo I F Iafi -(�►ereof, E� � DSO —PERK• ILL �+ IE F C`LIT 4` 12 OF PLATS, PAGE 48, RECORDS .OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON; afiS Pa 2 "i� t2eCords of Thy Aud,fior of - - _ _ ._ - accordtng to the Plat fherea recorded ►n Valumef Pial�> ° , ,� recorded In volume 3 o PI . -' THENCE SOUTH 12 07 10 WEST 178.33'FEET ALONG THE WEST MARGIN OF 9 '• r_..�-;.. s, of r\vhottt,sha�te of v�la5ha tan t; ,n Northerl And _ :.. 't(o, ReGorJ5 off.the Gounlf of .ron©horni5h, %te Of 76TH AVENUE s W. TO A TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS The County S , y 9 y : r:- • P�. , �% - OF 1462. 7o FEET; THENCE 214 .59 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT e-asi"erl of Edrnond5 Bever► Park Road, Also Kneen As Olympic Vlew Delve. . _ r - wa5nlrlgton, lying IJor+herly and Easterly aFdrnond5 y y -- - - THROUGH A CENr$'RAL ANGLE OF 8024 '21".; THENCE NORTH 89'05'15" WEST ) } ete�-1 Park Rcd.Jal l;nccn a tymPlc Vie �rlve 1.16 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 0°29'19" WEST 249.42 FEET TO THE NORTH ' , I 1 r y. I- "; r _ .MARGIN OF OLYi4PIC VIEW DRIVE: THENCE NORTH 70°30'21" WEST 59.36 _ . . .- -I II - I I `\, FEET ALONG SAID NORTH MARGIN TO A TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT C Site 1 - I- I Trrtal 5lte.Ared {t3 �7�2 �J-•�1�13G. HAVING A RADIUS OF 218.70 FEET; ' THENCE`235.45 FEET ALONG SAID . ' - ` CURVE TO THE RIGHT THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6i ° 41' Ora" ; THENCE LoC 8, Mack Z , Adm,ralty Acres, p.ccord, n� To "the {�{a� Thereof` rveeorded + /: - NORTH 8°57'2I" WEST 392.79 FEET; THENCE NORTH 81°02'39" EAST irn volurne- •IZ -of Pla'I's, page 48 , l2�ord5 ra� me A« (tar o{"'the County of Snohom,sh, I .1 . . 10 00 FEET TO AN NON -TANGENT CURVE TO THE. RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS . ttCl _ t t _ " OF 533 .70 FEET WHICH BEARS SOUTH 81 ° 02' 39" WEST FROM THE RADIUS - 5tccre'- OP Washing . - .7: .I I. 1.. .'. I. -.... , - E I.I .. I , I.. . I. -..I. I .V.-I . .I. , ,I- T.. I ....-. I .-I1 .-,.... . -. .1.: �. ...... .. ,. I/I I:I.. OII - .. I. . .I .. . 4 -, I . - -. -,1. I I."1 .-. I -I... . .. . I 1--. P,I-I. ,,.1 1. ...1 1�., I.I. S.,.I.- . I . . . 7. - I. . . , .I. . :.O.- 1W.1 .I - I.II ., I . E----I .1EI I .-. .1-,I. .. . I ..- '.. ., -I. .A.DI... .. . .I .-,.'UI "'C ..I: -. . - I-"-' ,. .I I. . .- I .I.1* I . ,-1I .I- - I . I . j .-I � -R.I.-I .. .0I.I. ,O I , 0.-.-..I"-I i. s.'1.. . .. . 01N..AI.-.-. . .: . . . . I Iz . �,I8. -I., -I I1: . -., I,- - I.1I . I�1.I .. I. ...� , . .A I -I -. IP". ,-:- .I.1�. I ..-.' .-�-. --.*r.. .-. -I.I-., ,.0.1,,..w , '...4.1. ,I.. . ,. . -I.-. - -.. ,'I.-. .4 ,-,.TN-i..', -. ,.-- H1., '.-- 4-..I 41. - -I..,. 4 .,I ."Iw,II- I.-- . ..,*�1 ... . ft'V-. I.1-I.- I .I-- ` . .II. ..:., I.. .1. , z ,'.1A .:e .. - . 1I. ," I-` - -., I .... : - * IIL,-, 0.,--.2I l .- --..... I -iI: -: .. ,% --. . - .I .o.,I �, II . I7I . I,S�S, I . . ,.- ,-. ,.. i.E. .-I-,I, V..'I.. 1H..4. ."..�-. .-. - . ..... -- I..N. : - .. .-. I - .-.-. ." .-" .I.. I .'1..- .I ,1 . .., .- - I.- . . .. ,. . . , I- . -.. - I -. I".. . !... ,I. ..,. .�. I,II . 0"- .I-.1 I..1-. A.-. - —.. ..-...I , . . .-," I. . - , - S..: . -: I ..,.1-.I ...�. .I..I t :. -"'I.—I I . I III I... - -. I .. I ,I ,�-IR-.;- .I ; .I . .I .. -..1,I....1..,.1� . ." ."I... I 9,. . ,. .. . ., . ."U.,. -I-I- 1-..',I.I, .. . .RI.- ".1 . 7.,..'I .�. . ,.:... ,I .-1..I I . . :. .I ..1 1.: .. ...-. .. ,, ,I .. '-. .II.`` .. I... j. -.,:..' I I.I - :-. I. ..-.-.!.t.. V....1"I�"- ': .,4.-.... . � '.,.. .-.I, -.I..:.." ' '1':-:.I -- . I: . .: I. .L.. I,I�, I �I 1I1,. 1.�--?.E .--I ,..e- I. .- .. ,1.. -1I I ,;.,..v'. --,�1.- ,, It.,*. . . .--, , Io.I- . I. j ,- . , .. , . 1,- -"'.,.t-1.,,-- -I ,.1-I .-.IE.... .Z:.. . .... . .-1., 1 , -I., �11: 1II..I ,v1.I-I . I , ..- I.- -....7I 1,I-,.,..,.... . I-1.,,1.1., : .- -., II ;. 1,.I.`f.:. I-I,I A'-:.e- ". ..- -- . I .I,-. - -. I... . 1 *. ..1 y.... . . I. .. ,`1. .. .-. :-. .v. . 1%... . . .-.Z,,I.,-. '. ..-. ..I1, 1 ...'I-1 -.. .:.I -. ', I..... .- I -. ..1.,�, .W "--, -. -II, , .. i � '1 a;)III..--'. .,I.�- ,. .. I. .,, .,I . / '1, . I.- . , -..,I .-. tI ,I 1 1 ,. ."- ....,,- � ,' -.1, , :- ..,I...-". . ,-. - -..--- ... , "I I * 1... -, . . - tI. ,.r--..-, ..1-, 1"-:: '.--1 .., ",1 '.:,.,.".M."--I. .1.. I I.,.-I...I"I.*:. 1- .. ;I- —",z.:,.. '-.-.-I,.-— 1-, ...,.:. 1 1-I.-.I1.I. 1- 1I . . I ,-I.I . .- %-":.�,, . I., --. �' : -:tII. .I. ' t -..-!-I-.:-...I ...I�_.--.I ...,'.- 1--, 1.,1,. -.1 , �- .. 1,...I.'., ...,.,1, : I - : I. .II .-.-, . . I I. I . 6 ...: ." I,,. : .- I-,,'1` I.,1-` -- I "-I,. I..I,-:.�, ,..1.I - - . ... , .I..,,I..1,,/ , ,, 111 I - I�.1..'-.* ; : , - , I. ,.,.., ,.! , II- -. - ;.,.. ;. I' -. '..: .'-,.1-, ., 1.I ..-. -' 1.:..I .'.; . ..,; .'.�r -,. ..- � -I,I ..,, -I1.I:�.I- I ..1 .. : ::v. I. 7.I � .1., I .:. # - I , . I.. .., . 7 �, ".1-,- L".: I. .... . ,.,..'.: - , *1.;-,,-.- -., .I ., .-.- . . ,.:, I, .:, ' - :.-I ... ,,,1;`.".1�I..1'.,.1., ,- .' ` -1- ..o .F,!.1.� .,.11,-�-, ,..-..: "1? ,.i:,,I- .',, I, ,. .,., .,. 1.,*, ...."*.,, .- I-_. I 4 ' .,-.,,-. .�..I,�I,,..��, ,I,I ,-1 ..-:�-....;. . .-.I-.%.-.. : '".., : I ; , -, ".. .._ .- '.,V ._., .,--- 1. ,. ., -I. - POINT; THENCE,55.16 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT THROUGH A,..,. I ,I ,II.AI.,.. I :. . .-I . . ,.�1 ... I. CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5 55' 17" ; THENCE SOUTH 89 57' 28 EAST 326.82 DFII�'i Ate "Tt I. ,tI. : ,.-.. I..1. . .t .-J,..."Y :. C .. •-. FEET ALONG TH£ NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 8 TO THE POINT OF BEGINN- - •- _ .- _ - :; . .I-, i. I ....-.: .,.-- -,...�-R.1.I. '. ..I. . I- . .-. t- ,I I I. . .I .. I -I, . ...,I .. -I - .. I.�.- -1.:.I ,. -.. -s "' :l4 , ,.:..-',.-, .I. -I %4, - .I .1 , - ".. II" -. , '. I -,..RI.1I1II..,,... : . .- I ,II. . .1. I , , . ,., 1" '*-I-. -. I' .I %". . -....., --..I.- 11..-, " "% ".. '- ,I"-1 _.Iv*f. 1".. ..,-, '- -.-,..--�.:, ,."I-:11.'-I ,-I, '.-Iy , 1'-- ..,. . . . . - " . . . ' - 301 11I � &E.edAII t 6TfXl 2cGa .., 5S7i - -. ) ING. - - - .. . - - - - _ _ . - ti. - ;i,; �' k - f' ` S - µ . I -- . .-. . ---''., �b-- .I��k- --r..�1 3. I�l-- . -Z. I . II -�."-I':I;**,.--. - I -3f�.,.... . I 0-- 1"� , 1 ..-.- I I'I.t -_II .... 1* `� ,AP. .I I o. .-.lI, z-:-.-- ,- ,. -. .. , -I. , . '- - I 7 ..- ' I- I I . ... . -- .-t-.� .-. j, z,-�. "-i- I--. 7- -. ,II'I -l-- "1—I . y-. -I - . Y - . I I... . 4.I-- -1-. -. t --II - - I --11:I. . I! . -. . ., I.. -- -- '-*I ..I I -I I I- ';- .-I :.. � - -..----I . ;- - -' ,I -,- <I I- e- . , I.`I�,'L. / � . -I . -I.. . . --. .-�-, --- l. . -. .- .�1 ,+.. _ .. - - r . - - - _ -- - - — - _ ------ 7 • _ • - -