19990348.pdf"'"T
CITY OF EDMONDS 'Z�
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION A
OWNER NAMEINAME OF BUSINESS
: . : (-v-
MAILING ADDRESS
-4,00 612�NwooC) AVO
CITY ZIP
T1110111INI
� -6A7-rL-e
nsq
NAME
ADDRESS
6517 FRAW35. A/
If 031TILI'll
CITY 4i
�e,Ak
62-%, 1L33-14D3�-
ME
DWAI F- A a- 6t�IIYlll (UlQTv40uR-
ADDRESS
CITY zip
TELEPHONE
STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRTION DATE
CHECKED By
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY INCLUDE ALL EASEMENTS
<
PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT FAR 5
c7,1511-0002
2.52�7
NE. (;� RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING I MECH -
[:3 ADDITION E3 COMMERMAL o MPLIANCEOR -
CHANGE OF USE
REMODEL 0 APARTMENT SIGN
REPAIR 9 m Y.. I X, FT)
DEMOLISH F1 TANK OTHER
GARAGE r-I RETAINING WALL RENEWAL
CARPORT - RoCKERY
;TYPE OF USE BUSINESS OR A TIVITY1 EXPLAIN
s,
I MEIEROI
NUMBER U
CRITICAL
o
OF DWELLING 6WC-
STORIES UNITS
R AS
A E
NUMBER
DESKIg ;RK (TO DONE
-F
67,00 Y16 ' !I I
IN 1 GLAZING I
LOAL2
6,,
PLAN CHECK NO: c
DATE
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO
a E ONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC
DOMAIN (CUFHBS�SIDEWALKS. DRIVEWAYS. MARQUEES.ETC.) WILL REQUIRE
SEPARATE PERMISSION,
PERMIT APPLICATI N: 180 DAYS
PERMIT LIMIT: I YEAR - PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN 180 DAYS
-AIRLICANT. 0. BE.ALP 01 HIS OR HER SPOUSE HEIRS. ASSIGNS AND SUCCESORS
IN INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY. DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF
EDMONDS. WASHINGTON. ITS OFFICIALS. EMPLOYEES: AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND
ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGESOF W AT5VER NATURE. ARISING DIFECTLYOR INDIRECTLY
FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE
0
DEEMEDTDMODIPY. WAIVEOR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENTOF ANYCITYORDINANC E
NOR LIMIT INANY WAYTHE CITY S ABILITY TGENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION,
I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION. THAT THE INFORMATION
GIVEN IS CORRECT AND THAT I AM THE OWNER. OR THE DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT OF
T I AGREE TO COMPLI WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONST.UC
T:IEOWNER
ON. AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY. NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED
IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO
WORKMEN S COMPENSATION INSURANCE AND RCVV t8.21
o
�.;,7 ------ IV
gR
ATTENTION gv
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL
A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTIFI-
CATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC SECTION 109
PERMIT EXPIR 4"/�,j,)
ES
SE
0/t-
PERMIT
1 2— NUMBER
%CA
v2-
SUJlE/APT.
DURESS IJ I
—7-DIVISION
VWAL DESCRIPTION-, NO,
LID NO
Is - z 4- - b 4--
e i zso&/
PUBLIC RIGHT
OF WAY PER OFFICIAL
STREET MAP
YEr-A11111.1 C3
EXISTING
REQUIRED DEDICATION
00
PROPOSED
NgSIZE
NO OF FIXTURES
� -7 1
P V REQUIRED
YES CK No 0
750d IHPE-X-VACAIS DE516W44
4GINEERING MEMO DATED REVIEWED BY
&/,,/,s ;,
'? e W
RE MEMO DATED
REVIEWED By
VARIANCE OR CU
ADBI
SHORELINE
-7ETA REVIEW
SIGN AREA
HEIGHT
OMPLETE EXEMPT
ALLOWED PROPOSED
ALLOWED ROPI
P I
W9 Ad
LOT COVERAGE
REQUIRED SETBACKS (FT.�
�ROPOSED SETBACKS
LLOWED FR02;0
FRONT SIDE REAR
FRONT UPSIDE RE
?2!�
0-1;- /-,o ;4!�-
I �7 &g- !�
LOT AREA
U��lsvfby
HECREDBY IT" F CONSTRf'-'
P ECIAL NSFE
iEOUIRED
IEMAPKS f
3RnGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 108
ILAN CHECK FEE
WILDING
0ECHANIGAL
3RADINGIFILL
3TATE SURCHARGE
5TORM DRAINAGE FEES
ENG. INSPECTION FEE
ILAN CHECK DEPOSIT
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
CALL
-OR INSPECTR
(425)
771-0220
VALUATION I FEE
APPLICATION APPROVAL
Th,s -1111110m 11 �IX A P- I-N 1.pod PV tho
nwl-! ON.r.l.. D.!y ��l 11-1
E:EASED �F E
b 1 :
ORIGINAL FILE YELLOW - INSPECTOR
PINK. OWNER ROLD ASSESSOR
= 11110111
z
0
j
0
C: m
m a
-40
00
c
M
M z
0-4
a
>
o -n
3:
m Mg
065
0
o
C D)
K (D
rn 0
Z
;a
z
-4
a;
ri)
z
0
-j
0
m
ve
WPM. rffl 2.
21' W.Y� 4! A
52!.d.
Pfl.
A07 yi-f �'hs 1p
;o.
"For- I'M
W—PIA-f
IWI" PIT Fff-
Ngw
=M-- N
-eA VillyrA, FLA(:a
PLAAIC
AeMoAM PLAO By*;/
OR
m
IZ
MM
=1
ID
MM
0
OF..,
ic (j)
NOTICE: IF T14E DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE
IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT.
CITY COPY
�fAL-cLj Levowe 4 VIAQ C-OPE-� lt4ffO
'Zo
HIN (IAAy p
loo
M5 RA�,PMSI-47+ 1-5,34 �-`!Al t� FLz Z42-,! 'S'F
1-0 6q 4o HM FL9 A
s e-oIApoNaI,.r - F-OAe-1-4
. MP-1104HAN68- APP
-rAg,5qe7r
49
4d 1#! 1 & . I pe-opo�F-L; 6AA = 6io. 6 rFqa46,�r-( (0e DeTT
-ro M "15p. E! . r-)
WHOLg H0�4,96 ic 0"r'
Cr_ro aN,4gZ,,r -r , -Ip
Ir-ILB7r Pm C7 eprA V pl.-ONLAI�
10'ero A �e 4e,- -ro
jig, 5* 507. A -le- HAt-lr-Lf-5v— lr4LZT pc4er 'r.,2 Hl-,.�IS I;,AJ
-�,v 40. , 1. 12. 6-7-lzo CFH(--3, pF-PP-001-te-J).
ALi- Woley - 1-0 Cot -API,-( W1 1199-1 mIAc 9 WA V - IAO 60P�
16 WINI;Ipp-5 -jo e;r;� HIL�64A?-12
I-rAl-
A i
-7,0,
Is, 0,
AV W KW pW A4? 01A �4 V
rorTow op �AW> i -- -.. cl
-,p I
(4- PLAr----5 mri if;
OALL)
ef7-5 &1-5e A*O,�
r-r4-Ft.P. 0
Vr%
rd!
WALL
0
�oj
J,
S L-F-M L
P�.eIG4T CA LLqLPT
7-0 Cot-w---�j -\�LJF W%I.XT
Cl-r-Y
or-
G7t*jla"-N->s
14—cle.HT
ToP
Or- 11)9AI A6L6 C�VF-R. 0 H
C%T?
OF 6 DMQI')'Dc- t))%7 k)t\ OJ 0
pbt) -ro ?qLL
P-T
c)
L4
C
7 '
10"
10 8� ;L"
t4v,x"Rjt�6E
io"
t Z 6' 2-'
'SUIArvo�q .
�j C A L C-S
OR' 7"
e>' 2-
10'
Av r� GP-4 t) s
AcT i s L. r- \-, (�, - I b'
m "Jj,�Qm = I ,
cmmm
DI 5007 2070 REV. 1/98
DI 5007 2070 REV. 1/98
Z�
w
b
X M,
In 2;
>Z
0 1
'O"o,
M m
.0
amv. or room*=,
rn o.
z
T16,41A
id D"O&
IRMA. Fl,r I'M
lory FIN4.
NEW
L A MAY. 4�
0
m
Foamy
FLA Aj
rdwl
I 'A 7' pxj,914
CD
PLAO TO
e_,-t Y S-rA-A-DAA6L
SV-,
al:�y —5ro/N
&A1,417-f HOOVPA ploMe. FOP- 1!�F-r-VTINA F, HAI�net-lglSr-
T
Dean B. Griswold, P.E.
Geotechnical Engineer
9745 College Way North
Seattle, Washington
206/627-3370
May9,1999
Mr. Rick Hagemeier
7600 Greenwood Avenue North, #202
Seattle, Washington 98102 hnv
-J
C
RE: 912 Sea Vista Place, Edmonds, Washington
Geotechnical Engineering Study
Dear Mr. Hagemeier:
I am pleased to present this geotechnical engineering study for your
proposed residence in Edmonds, Washington. This study was performed
to assess the soil conditions on the site for use in design and construction
of the project.
The attached report contains the results of the limited subsurface
exploration and recommendations for foundation and retaining wall
construction, subsurface drainage provision, temporary excavation
slopes, erosion control, and other pertinent site development issues.
Feel free to contact me if you have questions or need further geotechnical
information.
G R iS
Dean B. Griswold, P.E.
Geotechnical Engineer t'2: E
�Z.r,C,JV jVVE D
19 1999
pEVFLOPMENT SFRVICES CTR.
CITY OF EDMONDS
z
0
C: M
M 0 11
-q 0
00
C:
M M
C
0)
o -n
n � I '
M M
a Ui
0,-
0 M
a C/)
9 C/)
M C)
z
-A
z
z
0
M
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
HAGEMEIER RESIDENCE
912 SEA VISTA PI.ACE
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
EDMONDS PROJECT #99-90
This project presents the findings and recommendations of our geotechnical
engineering study for the proposed Hagemeier residence, to be constructed in the
nine hundred block of Sea Vista Place, Edmonds, Washington. The general
location of the subject property is shown on the vicinity map, Figure 1.
We were provided with the Sheets 1 through 7 of the plans prepared by Cindy
Hoover, Architect, dated April 14, 1999 (Sheet 7 is a framing plan from Trus
d discussions with the owner,
Joist MacMillan). Based on these plans, an
residence will consist one story with a daylight basement and a split level
for the basement
entrance. A reinforced cautilevered retaining wall is planned
entry on the north side. Short rockeries are planned to facilitate the driveway
grades and a small amount of level backyard adjacent to the east side of the
residence.
SITE CONDITIONS
SURFACE CONDITIONS
The irregularly shaped parcel is approximately 83 feet wide along Sea Vista
Place. The north and south property lines are approximately 147 feet and 117
feet, respectively. A rockery ranging from about 2 feet in height at the
southwest property comer to almost 5 feet near the northwest corner exists along
the right-of-way. A concrete slab from a former shed structure is located in the
northeast portion of the parcel.
The topography slopes moderately up to the east at inclinations roughly 30 to 35
percent with a topographic relief of about 35 to 40 feet until the site levels off.
The slope is generally uniform with the exception of short steep section is present
near the top of the slope. No evidence of earth movement or distress was
observed.
A short rockery exists approximately 30 feet east of the top of slope. The site was
vegetated with various grasses and low gound cover.
Pagel
z
C M
M 0
-40
0 0
C:
�g
M M
z
0 -n
'n
M M
0
0
C Cn
90)
Q 0
Z
3:
z
-1
z
0
1
0
M
No evidence of emergent groundwater seepage was present.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The subsurface soil conditions were assessed with a series of shallow hand
excavated test pits. The approximate locations of the test pits are shown on
Figure 2, which also shows the proposed site development and topography (basis
of Figure 2 is Sheet I of 7 of the plans developed by Cindy Hoover, Architect).
The exploration logs are provided at the end of this report.
The conditions encountered in the explorations consisted, in general, of three to
lo inches of topsoil over silty sand with gravel and occasional cobbles some zones
of sandy silt. The silty sand was loose to medium dense, with increasing density
with depth, and was moist to wet.
In Exploration H-5, glacially consolidated soil was encountered at a depth of one
foot beneath the ground surface. This soil was also silty sand with gravel, and
appeared to be weathered till, and was in a dense to very dense condition.
The shallow explorations were left open for two days prior to backfilling. No
sloughing of the sides of the explorations were observed. The density of the
exploration bottoms were assessed with the use of a one half inch steel probe. The
bottoms of the explorations were found to be medium dense except in Exploration
H-5, which was dense to very dense.
GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE
No free groundwater was observed in the hand -excavated test pits prior to
backfilling. Groundwater seepage can vary seasonally. During construction, it
is possible that zones of seepage may be encountered.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECONMENDATIONS
GENERAL
Medium dense to dense silty sand was encountered beneath the loose surficial
soil. The foundations and slabs for the residence can be supported on the medium
dense to dense soil or structural fill placed above these soils.
The location of the structure, including associated retaining walls and rockeries,
will allow adequate space for sloped temporary excavations without encroaching
upon neighboring properties.
The on -site soil appears to be suitable for general backfilling purposes. However,
Page 2
Z
0
am
C
rn 00
80
C
� C
M M
Z
0-4
0 -n
n
M M
1�1
0
0 Fn
a (J)
C 0)
Q 0.
M
Z
U)
Z
0
q
0
M
it will be difficult to compact as structural fill if it is over the optimum moisture
content. Imported sand and gravel may be used if project scheduling does not
permit moisture conditioning of the on -site soil.
SITE STABIIJTY
No evidence of earth movement was observed during site reconnaissance. No
tension cracks were observed. No emergent groundwater seepage was observed.
No vegetation was apparent which requires wet soil conditions for survival.
Provided the project as shown on the referenced plans is designed and
constructed in accordance with recommendations contained in this report, the
risk of damage to the proposed development due to earth movement appears to be
minimal.
FOUNDATIONS
The proposed residence can be supported with continuous or spread footings
founded on the medium to very dense native soils or on structural fill placed on
those soils. Continuous footings should be at least 16 inches wide. All footings
should be embedded a minimum of 12 inches beneath the adjacent finish ground
surface for frost protection.
The bearing surface for foundations should be cleaned of all loose or disturbed soil
prior to pouring concrete. A smooth backhoe bucket should be used to minimize
disturbance of the bearing surface. Recompaction of loosened soil should be
avoided.
Foundations constructed in accordance to the above recommendations may be
designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot. This
-term loads due to
value may be increased by one-third when considering short
wind or seismic forces. Total settlement of footings founded as recommended in
this report is expected to be no more than three quarters of an inch, with
differential settlement of about one half inch.
Lateral forces from wind or seismic loading can be resisted by friction between
the base of the foundation and the underlying soil and passive earth pressure
acting on the embedded portion of the foundation. For design purposes, we
recommend using a coefficient of friction of 0.4, and passive earth pressure
equivalent to a fluid weighing no more than 300 pounds per cubic foot, For the
recommended passive earth pressure, the footing should be poured directly
against the native undisturbed soil or compacted structural fill.
SLABS ON GRADE
Slabs on grade may be constructed on competent native soils in a firm, non -
Page 3
I
Z
9
0
M
C M
M 0
0
80
C:
-4 K
= M
M Z
10-1
om
n
-4
X rcn
M
U C/)
0
Fn
rJ)
C 0)
M 0
Z
Z
Z
9
0
M
yielding condition. A capillary break material consisting of 4 to 6 inches of
clean, well drained sand or gravel should be placed above the subgrade soil. A
vapor barrier, consisting of 6-mil plastic sheeting should be placed above the
capillary break material. A thin layer of finishing sand should be placed above
the vapor barrier to reduce the risk of damage to the plastic sheeting.
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS
Retaining walls must be designed to resist the lateral earth pressures from the
retained soil.
For retaining walls which can deflect approximately 0.1 percent of the total
height of the wall, the active lateral earth pressure is recommended to be
equivalent to a fluid with a density of 35 pounds per cubic foot. For sloping
backfill, an equivalent active fluid weight of 55 pounds per cubic foot is
recommended. This value is for the case of level backfill.
For restrained walls which are not free to deflect, the recommended at -rest
pressure for design is equivalent to a fluid with a density of 55 pounds per cubic
foot. The structural engineer should account for any slope surcharges in the
design of restrained walls.
The coefficient of friction may be taken as 0.4 and passive earth pressure
equivalent to a fluid weighing 300 pounds per cubic foot.
Appro priate factors of safety should be incorporated into wall design in
accordance with local building codes and engineering practice.
Heavy construction equipment should not be operated behind retaining walls
unless the walls are specifically designed to accommodate the associated
surcharges.
Compaction of backfill for retaining walls should be attempted only with hand -
operated equipment to avoid inducing excessive lateral pressures. Compaction of
retaining wall backfill should be limited to that necessary to limit settlement of
the ground surface and rockery elements that will be founded in the backfill
area.
Retaining walls should be provided with subsurface drainage to prevent the
buildup of hydrostatic pressures. Recommendations for subsurface drainage are
contained in the subsequent section on drainage provisions.
DRAINAGE PROVISIONS
Subsurface drains should be placed at the exterior of all footings. The subsurface
Page 4
E
z
0
rn
C M
M
__10
00
C
M
M
E:
o"n
n
-4
M
0
0 Fn
M 0
z
71
X
--I
z
(j)
z
0
M
drains consist of 4-inch perforated pipe surrounded by at least 6 inches of washed
gravel, and wrapped in a non -woven geotextile fabric (such as Mirafi 140N or
equivalent). The perforations should be placed level with the bottom of the base
of footings and must be sloped to drain. Subsurface drains must be tight lined
separately from the storm drainage system and should be connected to the storm
water system downstream of the detention system.
The subsurface drain system for the restrained wall on the east side of the
residence should include placement of 12 inches of washed gravel for the full
height of the exterior wall minus about one foot. The final foot of backfill
adjacent to the wall should be relatively impervious native soil. The washed
gravel should be separated from general backfill with geotextile fabric.
The recommended subsurface drainage provisions will not ensure that the below
grade spaces in the residence are waterproof. Consideration should be given to
other moisture prevention methods and waterproofing systems.
STRUCTURAL FILL
Structural fill beneath foundation elements should consist of clean, well graded
pit run material or crushed rock compacted to a density of at least 95 percent of
the maximum dry density based on ASTM D-1557 (Modified Proctor). Lift
thicknesses of structural fill should be limited to 12 inches loose. If the on -site soil
is to be used as structural fill, it must be moisture conditioned so that it is placed
close to the optimum moisture content.
EXCAVATIONS
n
The contractor should adhere to all local, state, and natio al governmental
safety regulations. For this project, temporary excavations deeper than 4 feet
should be inclined no steeper than IH:1V (100 percent). In the event that
seepage or marginal soil conditions are encountered during construction, flatter
slopes may be warranted.
Temporary excavations within the unweathered glacial till unit can be
steepened to 3/411: IV (133 percent). If encountered, the contractor may have
difficulty excavating through this geologic unit.
During wet weather, excavation slopes should be protected with anchored
geotextile fabric. If plastic sheeting is used, concentrated runoff from the
sheeting must be carefully controlled.
Temporary excavations should be backfilled as soon as possible to reestablish
rough grade.
Page 5
Z
0
0 M
rn 0
0
80
C
M
M z
C
0 -n
n
M M
a
0
0 Fn
C (4
0
0
r
T
;D
z
z
0
d
0
M
Permanent cut or fill slopes should be no steeper than 2H: IV (50 percent) unless
local regulations require flatter permanent slopes.
ROCKERIES
Rockeries planned for the development of this parcel should be constructed in
accordance with the Association of Rockery Contractors guidelines, or local
requirements.
in general, rockeries should consist of 3 and 4 man rocks, with the lowest course
of rocks embedded 12 to 18 inches. The face of the rockery should be battered at
least 15 degrees. At least 12 inches of drainage material should be placed behind
the rockery, to within one foot of the surface. Relatively impermeable soil should
be placed in the upper foot to cover the drainage material. A 4-inch perforated
pipe should be placed behind the lower course of rocks, and routed to an approved
discharge point. The slope above the rockeries should be limited to iuclinations of
8H:3V or flatter.
Consideration should be given to the use of a modular block and geogrid system
in place of the rockery planned to the east of the residence. Two layers of geogrid
reinforcement should be used, with lengths equal to the height of the wall. The
geogrid should be separated by at least 12 inches of compacted fill and connected
to the modular blocks. The subgrade for the wall should be compacted to at least
90 percent of the maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM D-1557
(modified Proctor).
EROSION AND SEDIMENATION CONTROL
Erosion and sedimention control measures are required to contain sediment
within the construction activity area. Recommended measures include
provision of a controlled access area, construction and maintenance of a silt
fence, and proper staging of grading activities.
The controlled access area should be constructed in accordance with local
regulations, and should include a geotextile fabric beneath the spalls or gravel to
maintain separation with the underlying soil.
The silt fence may be a filter fabric fence or staw bale fence. Both systems must
be properly embedded or trenched into the surface soil to ensure that runoff will
be filtered. Proper staking and support are necessary to minimize maintenance
requirements.
Temporary drainge control will be facilitated if the storm system is connected
during the early stages of construction. Concentrated runoff prior to installation
of gutters and downspouts should be avoided.
Page 6
Z
9
0
M
M,
rn 00
80
-4
X
M
0 -n
M rn
0
0
0
a
M 0
M
-4
Z
Z
9
0
M
7
Measures should be used, to protect exposed soil surfaces, especially during rainy
periods.
LIMITATIONS AND ADDITIONAL SERVICES
The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are
based on the conditions observed during site visits, soils encountered in the
explorations, and our understanding of the proposed construction. This study
included limited subsurface exploration. If subsurface conditions encountered
during construction are significantly different from that exposed in the
explorations for this study, we should be notified immediately so that we can
reconsider our recommendations as necessary.
This report has been prepared for the use of Kristina and Rick Hagemeier and
their representatives for this project. The conclusions and recommendations
contained in this report are professional opinions derived in a manner consistent
with the current state of engineering practice. No warranty is expressed or
implied.
We should be retained to provide geotechnical consultation and observation
services during the construction phase of this project to confirm that the
subsurface conditions are consistent with those encountered during our site
investigation.
Page 7
..77
z
V M
C — k
M Z5
40
0 C
A M
0 -n
n
M M
DO—)
0
0
M 0
z
0)
z
9
0
M
C-)
LD
CL
2
=1
2M
a
LL
D
CD
IL
C)
cli
<
CF)
z
0
Uwe
-T
SA-0.
(Fk5"
-5HF-v).
lid
le"
a
26
New g��P--f
. .......................... 4 -66,95
Z
- - - - - - - - - - - - - ca
'Z
rAno
t4
1&1;9 6F FoLvT F p I"i I
1-7 -ib,
OF
J3
12! matT
m
p
id
PIT,
MA)( ZO'/-
MA',C. 14
14
aee
-YrAr li
eIN vie
--z
Z,
ol
0
rl:
0
80,
IM m
2;
ID
z
E: �
� ra i
0 -n
n
m M
a-
00)
0 Fn'
C 0)
c W
M 0
z
z
0)
z
m
7j
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS
'2.
Location: Hagemeier Residence; 9xx Sea Vista Place, Edmonds, WA
Date: May 6,1999
Exploration H-1
77
122=
Descriplion
z
0 to 10 inches
TOPSOIL, silty sand with organics, with gravel, roots,
0
loose, moist, dark brown
10 inches to 2.5 feet
SILTY SAND (SM) with gravel and occasional cobbles and
-1 -n
—
roots, loose to medium dense, moist, reddish brown
-4
C
N"
M
0
0
Exploration H-2
M
Descriplion
>
-j
0 to 3 inches
TOPSOIL/DUFF, silty sand with organics, loose, moist, dark
brown
0"
n LU
3 inches to 3 feet
SILTY SAND (SM), loose to medium dense, to sandy sift,
M M
S to firm, with gravel, moist to wet, reddish brown
oft
0
0
6 Fn
C co
C co
Q 0
Exploration H-3
QescNpdon
0 to 8 inches
TOPSOIL, silty sand with organics, roots, loose, moist to wet,
z
dark brown
U)
8 inches to 1 1/4 feet
SILTY SAND (SM) with gravel and occasional cobbles,
z
occasional roots, loose to medium dense, moist, reddish brown
0
1 1 /4 feet to 3 feet
SILTY SAND (SM) with gravel, medium dense, moist, light
grayish brown
)1
"K.
Exploration H-4
Descripbon
0 to 8 inches
TOPSOIL, silty sand with gravel, organics, roots, loose, moist,
dark brown
6 inches to 2 feet
SILTY SAND (SM) with gravel, loose to medium dense,
z
moist, reddish brown
2 feet to 3 feet
SILTY SAND (SM) wit h gravel, medium dense, moist, light
brown
K,
Exploration H-5
0
-40
C:
M
Z
0 to 3 inches
TOPSOIL, silly sand with gravel and organics, roots, loose,
C: 2
>
dark brown
<
3 inches to 1 foot
SILTY SAND (SM) with gravel and occasional cobbles, loose
03
to medium dense, moist, brown
1 foot to 1 114 foot
SILTY SAND, dense to very dense, moist, reddish brown
M
0
[7
n
0)
M01
r
X
z
0
FINAL C1 AMOVAL IEORM
TO:
DATE:
MEMO TO: PERIVHT COORDINATOR, BUILDING DIVISION
FROM: FIR DEPARTINIENT DATE
____ENGiNEERiNGDmsioNDATE_!�: �i-2_
PLANNING DIVISION DATE
PROJPCT--!!L plmlm'�'c
SITE ADDRESS 0C-+rJL
PERXUT# q4J-�2240 _ADB#_DATE INSPECTED
DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE INSPECTED_I�E��--
A field inspection was conducted to determine compliance with approved plans. Final approval denotes that
there are no objections from the above signed Department to the granting of:
inal approval of the described work
P rmance Bonds associated with the project may be released
GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
V"I GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS NOTED
1. zgl�_'JA
WM_ N v0s
___FAILED FINAL INSPECTION - OUTSTANDING ISSUES
1
2.
3.
—RE-INSPECTED OUTSTANDING ISSUES - GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
ocaprvi.doc.l:temp:bldg:forms6/98
9
z
0
1
0
R1
4 'fi
C M
C,
0
0 C:
4 M
3: M
M z
jo -q
C 2
o -n
n
M M
055
0 r-
0 M
M 0
Z
z
--I
M
U)
z
0
M
FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL FORM
TO:
DATE:
MEMO TO: PERMIT COORDINATOR, BUILDING DIVISION
FROM: FIRE DEPARTMENT DATE
ENGINEERING DIVISION DATE 7-11-rl
PLANNING DIVISION DATI�--
PROJECT
SITE ADDRESS- 2,4 V1-(11V zlp�
PERMIT #-� �qO3�.ADB#--?!!�/14f—DATE INSPECTED
DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE INSPECTED-��
A field inspection was conducted to determine compliance with approved plans. Final approval denotes that
there are no objections from the above signed Department to the granting of:
Final approval of the described work
___GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
____GRANT PROJECT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS NOTED
AILED FINAL INSPECTION - OUTSTANDING ISSUES
2.
3.
—RE-INSPECTED OUTSTANDING ISSUES - GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
ocaprvl.doe.l:temp:bldg:fomis6/98
z
0
1
0
rp
=i
U5
M
m 0
4 0
0 0
:C m
m z
1C) --I
C 2
0 -n
m M
0 U")
0 r-
0 M
C c)
K V)
M 0
Z r-
.IT
X
z
C1)
z
9
0
m
RECORD OF INSPECTIONS
INSPECTOR
DATE APPROVED
SETBACKS .....................
Z
FOUNDATION:
Footing
......................
C
Wall.......................... --------
PierlPorch .................
Retaining Wall ...........
Slab Insulation ..........
PLUMBING:
Underground .............
Rough -in ..............
Commercial Final
HEATING:
GasTest .................... . . .
Gas Piping .................
Equipment .................
Commercial Final
EXTERIOR SHEATHING
NAILING ..........................
FRAMING ........................
INSULATION ...................
Floor Insulation
Wall Insulation
Ceiling Insulation
SHEETROCK NAILING
w
SPECIAL INSPECTION
MISCELLANEOUS ..........
FINAL APPROVAL FOR
0 0
OCCUPANCY ..................
z
0
171 0
80
a
-4 K
x ITI
ITI
0 -n
n
M M
0
6 Fn
cm
K 0)
M 0
z
-4
z
171