20000367.pdfDATE RECEIVED
o/
FPERMIT
EXPIRES
U E P R M IT
USE PERMIT -2-00
2-
CITY OF EDMONDS
Z 0 N E
ZONE NUMBER
N U M ER
0'
,ATION
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
JOB SUITEIAPTP
0
A D RES
ADDFEssA2 `5 No` <4 <&3
Ej
��WN INAMENA
\A(_j
PLAT NAMEISUBDIVISION NO.
LOT NO*
L'DN�
LIII NO,
LID Ft
LID FEES
At IN
L)
P BLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP
U
d
F-' —ft FInd/ t�l a
0
EXISTING 14"IP PROPOSED—
R�..11RE.IDEINCATI.— FT
u, n
RES
P
NAME
YESXEQUIRED
YES NO 0 3
I
1,
5
ADDRESS
REMARKS
E.
OWNEWCONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EIROSiON CONTROUDRAINAGE
CITY ZIP TELEPHONE
� "I""i
ZIP
E�CNEVY
PLUMBING I MECH
C] ADDITION!
COMMERCIAL
COMPLIANCE OR
1:1 CHANGE OF USE
C] REMODEL
;o[] APARTMENT
C] SIGN
REPAIR
CYGE
2u§�L Cyos
FENCE
I X FT�
E] DEMOLISH
0 -rANK
OTHER
X'GA AGE
CARPORT
E] RETAINING WALL
.CKPP�Ry
RENEWAL
(TYP
,!fjt!�rNESS
OR CTIVITY) EXPLAIN:
NUMBER
NIIMBER F
RITICAL
OF
STORIES
DWELLV
UNITS
AREAS
IN MEER
U
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE
_:s IP_(z_
FIRE REVIEWED BY
7m
o Y�g_J5�_o
SERA REVIEW SIGN AREA HEIGHT
COMPLETE I EXEMPT SSG ALLOWED , j�OJIJED
EXP
LOT COVERAGE REQUIRED SETBACKS 1"T ) PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT.)
ALLOWED PROPOSED FRONT SIDE REAR FRONT UPSIDE REAR
,2
,6,;� il ,
PARKING I LOT AREA I PUNNING REVIEWED By ?ATE
REaD I PROVIDED 1 1
0 CUPANT
GROUP
PER UBC 108/FiNAL
VALUATION I FEE
PLAN CHECK FEE
Z
U PH
SOURCE GnG %
I
T SLOPE %
65 ACT
BUILDING
zo ;5, �,5
(o zq�
4AT
t -
0
fiv ,
yv,
No— I
PLAN CHECK NO:
PLUMBING
ECHANICAL
c(o
C'C)i�
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO
BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC
GRADINGIFILL
E
E DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS. DRIVEWAYS. MARQUEES. ETC.) WILL REQUIRE
S S E A K
M 'D W L
3 SEPARATE PERMISSION.
STATE SURCHARGE
49
a
PERMiTAPPLICATIO MIGIDAIS
I M
R IT A P' WITHIN 100 DAYS
50—
R V
PERMIT LIMIT, I YEAR - PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED
PR ,
F INK F
SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION
ENG. REVIEW FEES
ENG. INSPECTION FEE
—
1150
roo::—
'APPLICANT. ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE. HEIRS. ASSIGNS AND SUCCESORS
S INDEMNIFY. DEPEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE
IN INT A ST. AGREES TO CITY 01
ER�S
" `
%Km
0 1 S ANYAND
2 EDMOND WASHINGTON. ITS OFFICIALS. EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FRO.
S WAS
,M�E
L
ILLCLAIMSFORDA 4GES.1WHATEVEF NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLICIR INDIRECTLY
A LL 'M .4. S OF W.
E OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SMALL NOT BE
Th P i
PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT
Pill,
m FROM THE ISSUAN
OM Th I SU
S
DEEMEDTO MODIFY, WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENTOF ANY CITY ORDINAN E
To
0
I
,0
NOR LIMIT IN ANYWAY THE CITY'S ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION.
, TH CITY
RECEIPT
1
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
'53
_
I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION: THAT THE INFORMATION
APPLICATION
PROVAL
GIVEN I CDR ECT, AND THAT I AM THE OWNER. OR THE DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT OF
S 8
Th, eppl, .,, ne, , p1 until Mg.1d by the
THCOWNEA I AGREE TO COMPLY WIT. CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONST RUC
EMPLOYED
CALL
B.ild,lg 011,1 , himnto, Dept :end Fell 110 p,ld.,,d
Y
TION, AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE
STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO
FOR INSPECTION
rocaPOsacknowled dinilp—P1111dod.
Ile
IN V CODE OF THE
WorLATION OF THE LABO
KMEN S COMPENSATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18.21.
OFF SIG RE DATE
(425)
SA160
:2
771-0220
f
R Y DATE
EXT 333
-5//O/OD
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL
771-022 1
A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTIFI-
ORIGINAL -FILE - YgLLOW:INSPECTOR
CATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC SECTION 109
FAX
PINK - OWNER - GOLD - ASSESSOR
5`98
z
om
co
m 0
-10
0 C
MITI
am
o -PIT
IT
rn m
0
0 rn
c co
M 0
z
71
z
z
m
Western
N
Engineers "0'0 Highway 99 South Evereft, Washington 98204
(425) 356-2700 FAX (425) 356-2708
Inc.
SURVEYORS
PLANNERS ENGINEERS
A4p 4�b
DRAINAGE REPORT q
'?'?,909
��Nfl '9
FOR: olrp
� 1:
Z..
&
1
1 re,
IT!
DUANE LANDSVERK
o'.
DATE: FEBRUARY 28,2000
oo�
ml
m Z�
SITE: 196T" PLACE WEST
EDMONDS, WA 98020
(EXCELSIOR PLACE)
vi
0
M A,
PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY:
NEAL C. MOORE, E.I.T. DONNA L. BRESKE, PE.
0 ai,
�C)
0 In..
IT!
kZ;
7
2 010
D-D
2
m
CLIENT: DUANE LANDSVERK
230 174TH ST. S.W. WESTERN SURVEYORS, INC,
BOTHELL, WA 98012 JOB NO. 00-01 1�,
PHONE: (425) 754-2069
LAND USE CONSULTANTS CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND SURVEYORS E NGINELRING CORPORATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT DESIGN AND DISCUSSION
VICINITY MAP
2
3
INFILTRATION CALCULATIONS
4
BASIN MAP
5
fn!
m
100 YR.�24 HR. ISOPLUVIAL
SOIL INFORMATION
6-7
M.
m
INFILTRATI ON SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION DRAWING
8
''j
INFILTRATION SYSTEM DESIGN CRITERIA
9-10
0 -n
INSTALLATION & OWNER MAINTENANCE MANUAL
11
I
017
n;.'
0i
K
;p I
INFILTRATION TRENCH DESIGN
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
FOR DUANE LANDSVERK
PROJECT AND DESIGN DISCUSSION:
A house and driveway are proposed to be constructed on a 0.95 Ac. parcel of land
located at 196h Place and Excelsior Place. The parcel is located within Section 13, Township
27, and Range 3.
ri
A geotechnical investigation of the site revealed the soils to be comp, sedofsandy
soils. The results ofthe investigation are included in the Geotechnical Report dated
December 17,1999 by Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. Several test holes were dug on the site. The
geotechnical engineer recommends using a maximum infiltration rate ofthirteen inches (13")
per hour for the storm water infiltration system.
The infiltration trench is sized per King County Standards for the 100-year storm
event, using a storm rate of 3 inches in 24 hours.
e proposed residence
One sixty foot long trench is proposed to infiltrate runoff from th
and new driveway.
PHOTO TAKEN FROM THE 1998 THOMAS GUIDE CD-ROM
WESTERN SURVEYORS SITE: Date: December 20, 1999
13000 HWY 99 SOUTH
EVERETT, WA 98204 DUANE LANDSVERK
(425) 356-2700 196T" PLACE WEST Drawn By: BRK
(425) 356-2708 FAX EDMONDS, WA File Name: mapbase.doc
0
0 M,
M 0
o
MM
0
0
0.
z
z
M
L . '
.2
E
0
z w
FRI
6
2,5
lee)
5 f
e? Z/,- ;
L a 0,5el
sr—
z
0 ir
3. 55 -Ailb—rlld 11 h
14, c T-f.
rcd�-411
r Ls (7�v
3
u 1
4"A
CO3:
m
or
AR
0
MU
mm;
i
0
1
.....
......
20,
CB-1 E-
W-32 FA
Ir-320. w
E.M.. OUr
)R PLAC
P4
324.
E-31 S
MADE
6'-PVC
a f."
12.4.3,
PROPOSED
rN, Z500 SF
FF-3215
Vt
3/0-
MV
p
At4
3
7
3,0
Jjj
-zz-�-3, 310
Job
260
255.-.,
xok. 1',.
P-
10
a
M
a
0 C:
M
mz
>
ca
3
0 In:
I M
Wt
0
o
C (1),
co�
M C)
Z
Z,
0
I NMI
N
gV il
IT
I n
C: m
rn C)
M
M Z
TIN
z
oh�i
Cl)
0 0',
ib'MOND'S"'
j.
F ows,
M.
M
Kill (n
z
m
SUIL
L:UNbhMVAIIUN SILINVICE
SNOHOMISH COUI
SOIL LEGEND
SYM86L
NAME
2
Alcl gn..Ily Sandy I.e., 2 to 8 p ...... I.P..
A d:,,i_d gravelly sandy loam, B to 16 percent Slopes
3
4
A:d _00d gravallY Sandy loom, 15 1. 25 P.1len, .1,01,
At gravelly sandy [dome, 25 70 Porto Pa. .11;c
Z
6
Urs-1
Aid =.'41' b. ::no I..mp p=,�:,,..p.,
6
7
no A mp::., ;:
Ald.rwood-Urdah ..a IS I Pa.
1V`.111TA`r!111M1U1:k1V
B
Zt:11:1
silty clay loom
9
Cathcart loam, 3 to ISP
C.dh.... Points '.26P ...... (.Pa.
Capnoin to _,2".
0
12
Cry himil""—dy A -I
113
Cv. far fine Andy loam
0
14
Elmll Wit Went. 3 to 30 percent slopes
[119
91- t- a 1. 30 P.11 slope.
Imt nt - ;.IS
EIZI-0 Rockto .0 .Mplax. 30 to 60 Par ... t slope,
17
EVA-101 of
18
'V to IS "'Can, Slope,
N
1.
20
Everett wint.1hy Sandy loam, 15 to 26 percent slopes
tidal
21
G So I AM, 3 to 30 pa tons Slopes
rn
22
23
:::.Silt
G:wh Otocomplex,15to3'Op ant slope$
Ga. .11.0 Ftc.k Cut, OP 30 1. 66 n, top..
0,
1
24
p
kumsy d'
0 C=
2 I
H-nit-Porch,b-Rock ouccrop complex 1. 90 P ....
- GO
a
27
Ind] Mis Worry, land, IS 40 25 porcom.c.e.
Kits: P silt Pont 0 to 8 percent Slopes
A M
c,
24
1.26p...—t.p.
29
30.
31
K .:8
P 'S A.GOP .... m dopes
I.VnndIo.MV1.rd,OI.3P...nI.I as
Ly.—CI.N.,ge, copipl... 65 to 90 p ... m stop..
ID
C
32
33
M.Kenna gravelly flft loam, 0 to 8 percent slope,
M.—I .11, 1.... 0 '. 3 Pa..., Slope.
2 4
35
MSkll,.o imick
N I!n: 0 to 15 percent Notes
0
' I
::,dy:o :1
Zed in oil : IS to 30 percent stop.s
.7
Na(g:rL"myMd1 iompl.K, 30 to 66 percent slopes
..............
38
39
Sri Varian .... dy It.., 3 to 30 p ... 1.p..
N r
NMM. I-
40
No,-. Variant Sam
0 F0
4 1
j.,tv-T.WI-Ad,k C.-op cothplA., 55,C 90 p.-MO.w.
0
12
43
I.Mouht all, P.M. 3 1. 15 P.1-1 Slopes
94:11-Aack outcrop Complex. 65 to 90 percent Slope%
1.
0 M
44
0 .. Pa.,
46
O:o gravelly loam, 3 to 15 percent slopes
0
'S
47
0 �OCchall-Rocls outcrop complex, 66 to 90 percent Slope$
-a P '.."Acp
P.Sfik 0 1, - as
Z
I
Pastlk silt coup, St. 25 Percent Slope,
4:
P.Ilk 11. Want. 25 to 50 p.nS.m.I.p,.
;0:
so
PIC ucklo&,y Send
5 1
P:111
62
Powhvb 04 its'. 3 to 30 Percent Stop-
53
fto,h.�H.,W .11.5p
PlMi
54
55
P.I1h..H,rm1:-'
R.Ck worpl.., 30M 65
Puget 'Ify Cl.y:...
66
Puyallup fit. and' Id..
57
58
Reg... fin. sandy I
R.gnar fine Sandy r*0 %"P-."mCP.,PS.
S9
River h
6 0
Rob:; :! t 104M. 0 to 16 percent slopes
6 1
6 2
R.b .11 Its., I - ':'
0 , n: ::'P a
Rob.111111...,3 1.6 =1 does
0
M:
63
64
Sn M mi,h 0t do.
65
Suft—, gr..Ily I.e., 0 � 0 P ...... Alto..
66
S, n silt loam
SU::n7 V.r4m,111 I...
68
u... .11, I.e.
69
Urtic M,dimp,isce, neatly level
70
7 1
Tokut silt loam, 2 *'P'
T.ku 15 Z.—I"IcIps,
12
U:
Tots gray.fly It., *8 "6PP.1,.".m'.IP.*P`S.
73
Tokul gravelly loom: :*.
74
T.t.glly W.m. 15 M 25 p mftp..
75
Tok. 0g.rty-Rock I P�:.: I to 25.0-am dopes
76
.P C:1
:U�:Mp
Toku:-Ogs' :v-Rwk thic 6 M 6 P.M.m II.P.,
7 '
78
Tok, Win, on Gravelly items, 25 to 65 psrc.nt Slopes
Urban land
79
V.,I.t u.ky .11, I.e., 3 1. 26 p m too..
A
80
Wlw 9 Ily loam, Ow 3 P.Scont.lop.,
Winson gravittly loam, 3 to 30 percent Alto..
X.—ItchStI, nearly level
SIGN WE 11111,
1
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
FJGURr4.S.IX ROOF D )WNSPOUT INFILTRATION SYSTEMS
Oivp,:44�� We
�wjVIM.
" -7—
PVi�. pye.
(12p+a0v vo4e-
eo vj�
T-5�
4.5.1.3
1/90
a�
o
(n =1
m o'
> z
0
mm
0
0
z 0
3-
3!
z
K I N 0 COUNTY, W 141NGTON, SURPACr WA ER Dr -SIGN ?viANUAL
0 Filter fabric Shall be wrapped entirely around trench drain rock prior to backfilling,
Method of Analysls/Longth of Roof Downspout I nfiltration Trenches
n
The Is gth of trench required is based on the assumption of providing a bottom trench area sized% to
Infiltrate at. a rate equal to the rainfall intensity for the peak 10-minute time step for the 10-year, 24.
hour duration design storm event JTime step 460 to 470 minutes, 5,4% 0 f total Storm v olume P,
see Table 3.5,1AI, and by the maximum Infiltration rate (1�) which Is based on the Soil Texture CFSSS
by the United States Department of Agriculture (U.S.D,A.) designation system (see Figure 4.5.18 and
Table 4.5. 1 A). The length of trench required Is determined by dividing the required infiltration area.
(Ali by 4 feet (the two -foot trench width plus one foot on either side for side wall infiltration). A, Is
Z
computed using the following equation;
All, (0.054 P,�AR)/t 1.
0
wherel
u-,
P,� = 10-Year, i4-hour design storm total precipitation, Inches (from Figure 3,51E)
1
- time step: 10 minutes,
t M
C
. the mexlriium Infiltration rate from Table 4.5.1 A, inch/min,
-10
0
0a,
A� - area of the roof tributary to the system, it', (Note: a typical single-family residence has v
ro of area of approximately 2,000 ft2.)
M
10
Therefore, the trench length required is:
L (A,/4 (feet); in feet
&
0
TABLE 4.5.1A - MAXIMUM INFILTRATION RATES FOR RESIDENTIAL ROOF DOWNSPOUT
INFILTRATION RATES
Soil Texture Class (U.S.D.A.)
Maximum Infiltration Rates'
(Inches per Hour)
I
(Inches Pe'r Minute)
1. Coarse sandsi or Cobbles
20.00
0.333
2. Medivm send
8.27
0.138
3. Fine sand, loamy sand
2.41
0.040
4. Sandy loom,
1.02
0.017
5. Loam
0.52
L 01009
*From a study of over 5,000 soil samples under.carefully controlled procedures by the U.S.D,A.
(Rawls, Brakensick and Saxton, 1982).
-MM
0
0 M
M
r Ge4-ec
Z
Dec, )qql
z
-0,
M
_VA Example: Proposed residence located at Kent -East Hill
fx
5N
Roof area (A.) - 2,000 square feet; Soil Texture Class loamy sand;
I� = 0.040 inches per minute; P,� 2.9 Inches; t = 10'minutes
A, = (0.054 P,�Aa)/t Im - ((0.054)(2.91(2,OC)6)1/((10)(0.040)I - 783 ftz
K A,14-(783)/(4j 196 feeti (Note: could be accomplished by two trenchs),
4.5.1-2 11193
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
4.5 INFILTRATION SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
The analysis and design of infiltration systems are defined, and requirements regarding their design
1 g
and use contained in Section 1.2.3, The specific requirements for the analys a and desi n of
infiltration systems are dependent upon the type of facility. There are three types of I ' nfiltfation
and Infiltration
systems allowed for use in King County: Roof Downspout Systems, infiltration Tanks,
Ponds,
4.5.1 ROOF DOWNSPOUT INFILTRATION SYSTEMS
Roof downspout infiltration sy,stems are infiltration trench systems intended only for use in infiltrating
runoff from roof downspout drains. They are not designed to directly infiltrate any surface water that
could transport sediment or pollutants such as from paved areas.
Limitations
o A single roof downspout system can serve up to 5,000 square feet of roof area (A, described
below),
o Not allowed on slopes greater then 25% (4:1).
o Not allowed in fill materials, must be native soil.
o Limited for use only In the SCS soils described In Section 1 .2.3.
Design Criteria
o See Figure 4.5.1 A f6r details.
o A soils report must be prepared which demonstrates compliance with the requirements in Section
1.2 . 3, and 1.3.12.
o A minimum of one soils log, minimum 4 feet in depth, that describes the SCS series of the soil,
the textural class of the soil horizon through the depth of the log, and notes any evidence of high
groundwater level, such as mottling, shall be obtained for each proposed roof downspout system
seaso nai high ground water
location, Note, trench bottoms must be a minimum of 1 foot above
level.
o Trenches may be located under paveme . nt provided that a small ya I rd drain/catch basin with a
grate cover is placed at the end of the trench pipe,such that if the trench infiltration, capa',olty Is
exceeded, the overflow w ou Id occur out of the catch basin at an elevation of at least on foot
below that of any over Ving pavement, and in a location which can accommodate the overflow
I'
and meet the requirements of Section 1.2.1.
o Minimum spacing between trench center lines shall be 6 feet.
o All tre - nches shall be a minimum of 10 feet from any structure, property line, Native Growth
Protection Easement, Sensitive Area Tract, Sensitive Area Setback, Area, and 30 feet down slope
from any septic tank/drain field (not Aowed upslope within 100 feet). A trench can be located
a 1 all of these
within 10 feet downstope of a structure foundation. Plot plan must show loc ton of
features,
o All trenches shall be a minimum of 50 feet from any steep slope ( a a defined by the Sensitive
Areas Ordinance and Rules). This setback may be reduced to 15 feet based on a geotechnical
engineering report but in no instances less than the buffer width.
o Trench length shall not exceed 100 feet from the inlet sump.
o Each trench shall have one observation well, that extends to the bottom of the trench, located at
a point approximately halfway along the trench length.
N
11192
z
0
0
M
-4 -n
0 M
C
M
0
z
Z
o -n
rn:
Cl)
0
C5
M C-):
Z r.,
z
z'
.0
0
M
I
. lb�
lj
INSTALLATION AND OWNER MAINTENANCE MANUAL
FOR INFILTRATION TRENCH
cl�
1. The Catch Basin Sump shall be cleaned of all debris at the time of construction prior
Fn
M,
to tying in any roof drains.
-4 6
0
'M
A
2. The Catch Basin Sump shall be cleaned of all debris by a qualified contractor on a
Z�
year ly basis.
vii.
0
Z'
Ei
JoIallo.
Western
13000 Highway 99 South Everett, Washington 98204
*Engltneers 356-2708
(425) 356-2700 FAX (425)
Inc.
RVEYORS PLANNERS ENGINEERS
SUPPLEMENTAL DRAINAGE REPORT
z
FOR:
DUANE LANDSVERK
in
RECEIVED
c:
m
0
APR 2 4 KOO
-4 0
0
-4
DATE: APRIL 20,2000
m n
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR
m z
10 -I
CITY OF EDMONDS
z
SITE: jq�m PLACE WEST
EDMONDS, WA 98020
0 -n
(EXCELSIOR PLACE LOT 2)
n
m m
PREPAREDBY:
0 M
DONNA L. BRESKE, P.E.
C C/)
7— cn
rn 0
X
OV
z
-4
co
z
7 00
CITY COPY
m
I Elpfam 1115 2001
CLIENT: DUANE LANDSVERK
230 174T' ST. SW. WESTERN SURVEYORS, INC.
BOTHELL, WA 98012 jOB No. 00-01 I -A
PHONE: (425) 754-2069
LAND USE CONSU IL ENGINEERS LAND SURVEYORS ENGINEERING CORPORATION
DUANE LANDSVERK, LOT 2
DRAINAGE REPORT
SUPPLEMENTAL
APRIL 20,2000
01
Overview:
This Supplemental Drainage Report is provided in response to City of Edmonds first
m a:
OK,
review engineering comments. Two items as reque sted in the "red -line" mark-up of the
r- �'
Drainage Report Prepared by Western Engineers an d dated February 28, 2000, are addressed
in Z
in this report.
1.) Provide and updated Basin Map which matches the site layout of the Road, Drainage,
Grading, and TESC Drawing. This is included in this report.
2.) Attac h the Geotechnical Report Which addresses percolation rates which were used in the
0
0 q
infiltration design. Please find attached the Geotechnical Report dated 12-17-99 prepared
0
by Dennis M. Bruce. Specifically, refer to page 8 ofthe report, Drainage Controls.
Additionally, a "red -line" comment includes a request to check the impervious area of the
Ag:
driveway. Please refer to the revised Basin Map dated 4-20-00 which shows the areas of
driveway to be detained.
m
N8946'49"E
ui
Z LOT 2
TBM 41,642 SF
TOP OF RESAR P
ELEMON-324,53
I ME-1
�ss ssro
to Ir-319.5
lob
vc
rypgl C&
MJ,2
FA
IN P,
'x
6421.0 30 vnem IN
our
GARAGE
Ae c 325..
P2'R S,
(P GTH
%
0., 7:�
J05
J00
.290
85.
R=389 26
2,90
L-10 48
'70
265
260 ZY5
Z�
.0,
�n
CM
m a
0;
o oc
m
10
C
>
60
-n
m rn
0 —Cl)
0
o
c �; co
U)
o �'k
Z
m 'i.
RECEIVED
DEC 4 1 1999
WRTFAN FNMNFFAs, Iri
Dennis M. Bruce, P.E.
Geotechnical I Civil Engineer
M.S.C.E., M.B.A.
December 17, 1999
Landsverk Quality Homes, Inc.
19511 - 94th Place West
Edmonds. Washington 98020
Attn: Mr. Duane, Landsverk, President
Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation and Foundation Recommendation
Proposed Two New Single Family Residences
Lots No. I and 2, 19518 - 94th Place West
Edmonds, Washington
This engineering report presents the results of a geotechnical evaluation Of two
building lots (Lots No. I and 2) at 19518 - 94th Place West, Edmonds, Washington.
This evaluation was required due to owner/ developer. concerns, as well as City of
Edmonds requirements.
REFERENCES:
Location map
Site plan and topographic map by Western Surveyors, Inc.
Site photographs
SACKGROUNID:
Lots No. I and 2 have never been developed, and are covered by mature trees
and dense underbrush. Lot No. I consists of approximately three acres, and Lot No. 2
consists of approximately one acre (see site plan), Both lots exist adjacent and north
of S.R. 524 (196th Street). The southern portions of both lots contain relatively steep
slopes adjacent S.R. 524. The slopes reside at approximately 3H:2V.
Visual examination of the properties revealed no evidence of any geotechnical
distress: No settlements, no shifting, no soil creep, nor any significant erosional
degradation were observed.
Adjacent properties in the immediate vicinity have been developed with single
family residences. it is understood that Landsverk Quality Homes, Inc., intends to
construct a single family residence on Lot No. 1, as well as an additional single family
residence on Lot No. 2. it is further understood that City of Edmonds building code
DEVELOPMENT - INSPECTION - DRAINAGE - DESIGN & PEIIMIT - LEGAL
SOILS - FOUNDATIONS - SITE
P.O. Box 55502 - Shoreline, WaShington 98155 - (206) 546-9217 - FAX 546-6442
0 -71- C
-0
z
0;
0
M
%
i 0 M
C a
M 0
0, 7�
g,
0
Cr
M i p,
'0
FZ
R
0 -n
n X
MM I
0 V5 1
0" 1
I J�
;D 1
J
z
-4
z
-J
p
Landsverk Quality Homes, Inc.
Pagetwo
requires improvement to the existing Excelsior Place roadway in order to service these
two new single family residences. These lots may also be accessed by the existing
street network to the east.
EVALUATION:
In order to augment the existing site geotechnical information, nine (�)) soil test
pits were dug under this engineer's observation on December 3, 1999 using a rubber -
tired backhoe (see photographs and site plan for test pit locations). All nine test pits
revealed similar subgrade conditions, and were consistent with this erigineer's
g CI
experience in the area. The following test pit log is reflective of the sub ra e
conditions of all nine test pits:
0" to 6" Organics, roots, and slight top soil (forest duff)
6" to approx. 7.5' Medium to coarse sands with occasional
(bottom of pit) cobbles. Dense to very dense at
five foot depths. Subgrade sands
contain less than six percent material
No water was encountered in any of the nine test pits. All test pit walls
remained vertical and stable. No sloughing or caving occurred.
CoNcLUSIONS / REC0lVlMENDATl0KS�
Based on the findings of this investigation, and experience with similar sites in
the area, both lots (No. 'I and No. 2 at 19518 - 94th Place West) are geotechnically
approved for the proposed Landsverk Quality Homes two new single family
residences, subject to the following:
Standard reinforced continuous and spread footings. Allowable bearing
pressure: 2,000 p.s.f.
Set back distance from top -of -slope: This engineer walked the top -of -slope
alignment and placed staking. This top -of -slope line is indicated on Western
Surveyors topographic map. The proposed two new residences may t be
constructed in accordance with the recommendations herein, up to f if een feet
set back from the top -of -slope alignment. Note: If desired, residence may be
constructed within this fifteen foot setback, however, specific and more costly
foundation methods would be required.
Z
M�
VM
C
rn
0i
O�
rn
M z ; "
>
0 n
0
6 R
C
MO
z
Z,
z
,0
0�
M
Landsverk Quality Homes, Inc.
Page three
Equivalent fluid pressure of 35 p.c.f . is recomm ended -for any retaining wall
design provided drainage zone is inspected and verified by this engineer.
For retaining wall design, use friction factor of 0.55and passive pressure of
350 p.c.f.
Geotechnical inspection by this engineer prior t any foundation concrete
placement.
The proposed structure can be supported on conventional continuous and
spread footings bearing on undisturbed native soils or on structural fill placed above
native soils. See the later sub -section entitled General Earthwark and StEuptural-Fil
for structural fill placement and compaction recommendations. Continuous and
individual spread footings should have minimum widths of eighteen (18) and twenty-
four (24) inches, respectively, and should be bottomed at least eighteen (18) inches
below the lower adjacent finish ground surface.
Depending on the final site grades, some overexcavation may be required
below footings to expose competent native soils. Unless lean concrete is used to fill
the over excavated hole, the width of the overexcavation at the bottom must be at least
as wide as the sum of two times the depth of the overexcavation and the footing width.
For example, an overexcavation extending two feet below the bottom of a three-foot
wide footing must be at least seven feet wide at the base of the excavation.
Footings constructed according to the above recommendations may be
designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of three OOLIsand (3,000) pounds per
square foot (p.s.f.). A one-third increase in this design bearing pressure may be used
when considering short-term wind or seismic loads. For the above design criteria, it is
anticipated that total post -construction settlement of footings founded on competent,
native soils (or on structural fill up to five (5) feet in thickness) will be about one-fialf
inch, with differential settlements on the order of one -quarter inch.
Lateral loads due to wind or seismic forces may be resisted by friction between
the foundations and the bearing soils, or by passive earth pressure acting on the
vertical, embedded portions of the foundations. For the latter condition, the
foundations must either be poured directly against undisturbed soil or the backfill
placed around the outside of the foundation must be level structural fill. We
recommend the following design values be used for the foundation's resistance to
lateral loading:
Z
MO
OC
M M
03
M rn
0 rA
0
0
C M
M 0
Z
-4
Z,
M
Landsverk Quality Homes, Inc.
Page four
Parameter Desian Valu
Coefficient of Friction 0.55
Passive Earth Pressure 350 p.c.f.
Z'
0�
Where:
4,
0
(1) p.c.f. is pounds per cubic foot.
(2) Passive earth pressure is computed using the equivalent fluid density.
1 6 -41
We recommend that a safety factor of at least 1.5 be used for design o[ the
M,
M 0.
foundation's resistance to lateral loading.
0 0;
SLABS-ON-GRAIDE:
Mz
4
VA
Z
Slab -on -grade floors may be supported on undisturbed, competent native soils
or on structural fill. The slabs may be supported on the existing soils provided these
0 -Mm
soils can be recompacted prior to placement of the free -draining sand or gravel
four
n
underneat h the slab. This sand and gravel layer should be a minimum of (4)
32 M�
M Me
inches thick. We also recorn mend using a vapor barrier such as 6-mil. plastic
membrane beneath the slab with minimum overlaps of 12 inches for sealing purposes.
0
0 Fn:
pEgMANENT-FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS
M 01
Retaining walls backfilled on one side only should be designed to resist lateral
5
earth pressures imposed by the soils retained by these structures. The following
recommended design parameters are for walls less than twelve (12) feet in height
z
which restrain level backfill:
Z.
Paramet Deslan Value
0
Active Earth Pressure* 35 p.c.f.
0
A
Passive Earth Pressure 350 p.c.f.
Coefficient of Friction 0,55
Soil Unit Weight 125 p.c.f.
Where:
(1) p.c.f. is pounds per cubic foot
(2) Active and passive earth pressures are computed using equivalent fluid
densities.
Landsverk Quality Homes, Inc.
Page five
d
For restrained walls which cannot deflect at least 0.002 times the wall
height, a uniform lateral pressure of one hundred (100 p.s.f. should be
added to the active equivalent fluid pressure).
0
M
The values given above are to be used for design of permanent fouticlation and
I -n
retaining walls only- An appropriate safety factor should be applied when designing
CA
the walls. We recommend using a safety factor of at least 1.5 for overturning and
X
0 M,
sliding.
0
0
The above design values do not include the effects of any hydrostatic pressures
0
C
behind the walls and assume that no surcharge slopes or loads will be placed above
M Z
the walls. If these conditions exist, then those pressures should be added to the above
z J
lateral pressures. Also, if sloping backf ill is desired behind the walls, then we will
>
need to be given the wall dimensions and slope of the backf ill in order to provide the
Vj
appropriate design earth pressures.
0'
n LO
Heavy construction equipment should not be operated behind retaining and
M M
foundation walls within a distance equal to the height of the wall, unless the walls are
t3 Vi:
0
designed for the additional lateral pressures resulting from the equipment. Placem ent
r—
0 M.
and compaction of retaining wall backfill should be accomplished with hand -operated
C CO
CO,
equipment.
M Oi
z
Retaining Wall Backfill
Backf ill placed within eighteen (18) inches of any retaining or foundation walls
Z I
should be free -draining structural fill containing no organics. This backfill should
contain no more than five (5) percent silt or clay particles and have no particles greater
than four (4) inches in diameter. The percentage of particles passing the No. 4 sieve
should be between twenty-five (25) and seventy (70) percent. Due to their high silt
content, it the native soils are used as backfill, a drainage composite, such as Mirafi
M
and Enkadrain, should be placed against the retaining walls. The drainage
I
composites should be hydraulically connected to the foundation drain system. the
purpose of these backf ill requirements is to assure that the design criteria for the
retaining wall as not exceeded because of a build-up of hydrostatic pressure behind
the wall. The subsection entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fil contains
recommendations regarding placement and compaction of structural fill behind
retaining and foundation walls.
V
Landsverk Quality Homes, Inc.
Page six
EXCAVA ON AND SLOPES;
In no case should excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local,
state and national government safety regulations. Temporary cuts up to a height of
four (4) feet deep in unsaturated soils maybe vertical. For temporary cuts having a
M
height greater than four (4) feet, the cut should have an inclination no steeper than 1:1
(Horizontal:Vertical) from the top of the slope to the bottom of the excavatiol 1. Under
specific recommendations by the geotechnical engineer, excavation cuts
C3 M
maybe modified for site conditions. All permanent cuts into native SoilS ShoUld be
M 0.
inclined no steeper than 2:1 (H:V). Fill slopes should not exceed 1:1 (H:\/). Itis
0
important to note that sands do cave suddenly, and without warning. The c, mLracLors
M
should be made aware of this potential hazard.
M
ID
Water should not be a Bowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of any temporary
>
or permanent slope. All permanently exposed slopes should be seeded with an
CO
appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve stability of the
icial layer of soil.
o -n
-n
surf
M M
pgAINAgE CONSIDERATIONS:
0
0
Footing drains are recommended at the base of all footings and retaining walls.
These drains should be surrounded by at least six (6) inches of one -inch -minus
Supac 4NP, or
washed rock wrapped in non -woven geotextile filter fabric (Miraf I 140N,
similar material). At the highest point, the perforated pipe invert should be at least as
M.
low as the bottom of the footing and it should be sloped for drainage. All roof and
surface water drains must be kept separate from the foundation drain system.
No ground water was observed in any of the nine test pits during the field work.
Z
Seepage into the planned excavation is possible, and likely if excavation occurs.
0
during winter months, and if encountered should be drained away from the site by use
0
of drainage ditches, perforated pipe, French drains, or by pu mping from sumps
M
interconnected by shallow connector trenches at the bottom of the excavation.
The excavation and site should be graded so that surface water is directed off
the site and away from the tops of slopes. Water should not be allowed to stand in any
area where foundations, slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Any exposed
slopes to be covered with plastic to minimize erosion. Final site grading in areas
adjacent to buildings should be sloped at least two (2) percent away from the building,
e pt where the area adjacent to the building is paved.
xce
Landsverk Quality Homes, Inc.
Page seven
GENERAL EARTHWOR AND STRUCT RAL FILL:
The proposed building and pavement areas should be stripped and cleared of
all surface vegetation, all organic matter, and other deleterious material. The stripped
or removed materials should not be mixed with any materials to be used as structural
fill.
Structural fill is defined as any fill placed under the building, behind permanent
retaining or foundation walls, or in other areas where the underlying soils needs to
support loads. This engineer should observe site conditions during and after
excavation prior to placement of any structural fill.
All structur a] fill should be placed in horizontal lifts with a M0iStLJ1'e content at or
near the optimum moisture content. The optimum moisture content is that moisture
content which results in the greatest compacted dry density. The moisture content of
fill soils is very important and must be closely controlled during the filling and
compaction process.
The allowable thickness of the fill lift will depend on the material typo.,
compaction equipment, and the number of passes made to compact the lift. In no case
should the lifts exceed twelve (12) inches in loose thickness. The following table
presents recommended relative compaction for structural fill:
nt Minimum Relative
osmo=
Beneath footings, slabs or walkways 95%
Behind retaining walls 90%
Beneath pavements 95% for upper 12 inches of
subgrade, 90% below that level
Where: Minimum relative compaction is the ratio, expressed in percentages. of
the compacted dry density to the maximum dry density, as determined in
accordance with ASTM Test Designation D-1 557-78 (Modified Proctor).
Use of On -Site Soils
As stated, the subgrade soils consist of relatively clean sands with occasional
gravels. These on -site soils provide for excellent fill material, if required.
Z'
0
-1 _n
0 M
rn
80
M
10
Z'
E:
0
'n
M M
r—J)
0
0
C
X
Z
Z
M
Landsverk Quality Homes, Inc.
Page eight
Ideally, structural fill which is to be placed in wet weather should consist of a
granular soil having no more than five (5) percent silt or clay particles. Th percentage
of particles passing the No. 200 sieve should be measured from t hat portion of the soil
passing the three -quarter -inch sieve.
0,
The use of "most" on -site soils for fill material may be acceptable if the upper
0
M!
organic materials is segregated and moisture contents are monitored by engineering
inspection.
V rn
C:
DRAINAGE CONTR )ILS;
a
M 0
—10
0
I '.,
No drainage problems were evident on either Lot No. 1 or Lot No. 2. Given the
C
rn
M
extremely porous nature of the subgrade soils, surface water runoff is a rar
Z,
occurrence. Most storm water percolates into the sandy soils. Whatever storm water
exist would flow down slope (southerly) Into the existing City of Edmonds
C: 2
—51
runoff would
S.R. 524 roadside drainage system.
0 -n
'n
This engineer conducted four (4) percolation tests (Test Pits No. 2, 4, 8 and 9).
La
This engineer followed the recommended procedure in King County drainage manual,
M rn
055,
t g
with saturated test conditions. Percolation rates varied from eighteen inches (IS") per
0
0
hour (minimum in one test pit) to "almost instantaneous". Thus, the high permeability
r Ca
of the subgrade sands was verified.
rn 0
This engineer recommends using a maximum infiltration rate of thirteen inches
(13") per hour for the storm water infiltration system.
NOTE: This engineer strongly recommends the use of the on -site infiltration
Z
system for storm water management. It is understood that a storm water tightline
65,
system exists down slope, adjacent S.R. No. 524. In order to "tie-in" with this storm
Z
water system, a steep trench would be required along the slope face above S.R.'524.
This steep face trenching would create geote chnical instabilities. Thus, it is LlgL
rn
recommended to utilize a tightline drainage system down slope.
All foundation concrete (footings, stem walls, slabs, any retaining walls,
etc.) shall have a minimtjm cement content of 5-1 /2 sacks per cubic yard of
concrete mix.
I L
Landsverk Quality Homes, Inc.
Page nine
TRAFEIC SAFETY:
This engineer observed the existing road configuration at 94th Place West,
intersecting S. R. 524 (1 96th Street). (Note: The street signs immediately south of this
intersection indicate 12th Avenue North and Puget Drive --see photographs.)
Currently, traffic signage requires a right turn only (west turn), leaving Lots 'I and 2,
and merging into S.R. 524. This "right turn only" exits along an V&LrQj_p_e_b
=. This engineer observed and subsequently verified that standard passenger cars
,(and any vehicle larger) cannot negotiate this right turn only without drifting across
highway center line. This condition is dange ous, and should be remedied.
Additionally, the sight distance up slope (to the east) along S.R. 524, is
ininima This minimal site distance is caused by a slide debris material pile within
the highway right-of-way. This dangerous condition should be rectified. TI iis engineer
recommends City of Edmonds officials and State of Washington Department of
Highway officials acknowledge this dangerous condition, and plan a mitigation. The
current excess material should be removed with a proper retaining wall installed
several feet back from the current line of site.
INSPECIION:
The recommendations of this report are only valid when key geotechnical
aspects are inspected by this engineer clurinamnat==.
Soil cuts
Foundation subgrade verification
Any retaining wall or rookery placement
Any fill placement
Subsurface drainage installation
SUMMABY:
The proposed two new Landsverk single family residences (Lot No. 1 and Lot
No. 2), are geotechnically viable when constructed in accordance with the
recommendations herein, compliance with City of Edmonds approved plans and
requirements, and key geotechnical inspection during construction.
REVIF.W-OF-FINAL P ANS:
This engineer approves the current site plan locations for the proposed
residences. It is recommended that final review occur once specific house plans and
siting are completed.
a M
M
0
--f 0
i
�Q
M rn
M
0
n
M M
0
C Cal
rj)
rn 0,
z
Z
0
Landsverk Quality Homes, Inc.
Page ten
CLOSUREm
The findings and recommendations of this report were prepared in accordance
Z11
with generally accepted professional engineering principles and practice. No other
warranty, either express or implied, is made. The conclusions are based on tile results 0, !'J.p
of the field exploration and interpolation of subsurface conditions between explored
locations. If conditions are encountered during construction that appear to be different
than those described in this report, this engineer should be notified to observe tile
situation and review and verify or modify the recommendations. Uj
am
a
M
If there are any questions, do not hesitate to call.
0
EHE��
DMB:vlb
10
z
va
0 -n:
W,
�mm
Or- 1
Oi
Dennis M. Bruce, P.E.
Geotechnical /Civil Engineer
0,
m
0
Project Review Checklist
Project Name: Plan Check #:
Project Address: .,-z,,Jj Receipt Date:
RECEIVED
Underground Wiring Required
M:�
1,11A
MAR 0 3 2000
Hydraulics Permit
Plat/Subdivision Requirements
PUBLIC WO RKS DEPI
street Dedications
Easements - Public/Private
Engineering Storm Drain Review Feel
Engineering 2.2 Inspection Fee
Drainage Plan (on -site)
setback - Storm Drain Line
open Ditch - Existing
Culvert Required
Culvert Size
Shoulder Drainage/Shale Open Runoff
Catch Basin Required
Driveway Slope & Vehicle Access
A,�
Sidewalk Required .
Curb & Gutter Required
Curb Cut for Driveway Required
"a
Street Paving Reoluired
Right -of -Way Construction Permit Required
Bond Required for Public Improvements
FEMA Map Check/Water Table
Side Sewer Availability
calculate Sewer Fee if No LID#
Water Meter Size
Water Meter Charge Required
Hydrant Required
Street Cut
Miscellaneous
RW Permit 4
SS Permit #
Date Issued —
Date Issued —
Fire Connection $ Date issued
Meter Size Paid$ Date
Receipt# —
Receipt #
Receipt #
Receipt# —
Z
0
—n
C M
M a
0
80
C:
M
M Z
—Z
-4
29
on
o,n
-n
M M
0
0
0 Fn
C on
90) -
M 0
Z r- . .
X
Z
Z
M
FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL FO
TO:-
DATE: -
MEMO TO: PERMIT COORDINATOR, BUILDING DIVISION
FIRE DEPARTMENT DATE -
FROM:
�E
c4m ENGINEERING DIVISION DATE_<�� 1Z �O
P�Eslw
PLANNING DIVISION DATE-
'PROJEC
SITE ADDRESS- syV
PERMIT ADB#________pATEINSPECTEI)
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
I
MAY 2001
____pAILED FINAL INSPECTION - OUTSTANDING ISSUES
DEVELOPIADIT S1_1R1/!CF7'
C"p OF
2.
3.
RE -INSPECTED OUTSTANDING ISSUES - GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
ocaprvl.doc.l:temp:bldg:forMS6/98
z
9
0
C M
rn C3
0
0
C
X M
M Z
--i
z
-4
0
n
-4
M M
0_0
0
0
C
C CD
M 0
Z
7-1
X
-4
x
z
-4
0)
z
0
j
0
M
RECORD OF INSPECTIONS
INSPECTOR
DATE APPROVED
SETBACKS .....................
FOUNDATION:
Footing ......................
Wall ..........................
Pier/Porch .................
Z
Retaining Wall
0
Slab Insulation ..........
PLUMBING:
-4
Underground .............
03:
M
r6
M
Rough -in ...............
0
Commercial Final
HEATING:
m z
jo -q
Gas Test ...............
Gas Piping .................
0
d: Equipment .................
0 'n
Pornmercial Final
M M
EXTERIOR SHEATHING
0 vj�
0
NAILING .................
0
C
FRAMING........................
FIRST FLOOR FRAMING
MIS
X7
I'll!
z
7-1
INSULATION ................
Floorlinsulation
Wall Insulation ...........
Ceiling Insulation
z
SHEETROCK NAILING
SPECIAL INSPECTION
0
M
MISCELLANEOUS ..........
FINAL APPROVAL FOR
OCCUPANCY ...... ........
PROPOSED
Y�
PERMIT
1.7
CITY OF EDMONDS
NUMBER
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
JOB
A..RES.Qq
m s�
NE NAMEINA E F BUSINESS
FLAT NAMEISUBDIVISION NO -
ILI AD RESS
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREIT MAP
AWL —
LID EE S
TE5 III—
1 '0
'N, P. , '""
—R.�d
EXISTING
Y REOUIRED DEDICATION— FT
QUIRED
METER SIZE I ,O,S,,, 00, OF 111T FES PI
es NO 0
NAME 10
REMAZ;;� 0 DRAI�NLAIE
OWN
ADDRESS E. T�ACTOR IESPON LO LRLSC��
E H I moo
CITY
AME
A EDYI),TE
ICY_ FNGNEEFIN.
DRESS DATE
FIRE REVIEWED By
ZIP TELEPHONE
Y
0 INSPECTION DO D
VARIANCE OR CU SHORELINE.OR ADB� Ea
DBY OYREO�60 �OSTEt
STA E LICENSE Ft Ex DATE CHECK ss
SEPA RE JE SIGN AREA RE""PT6OPOS'
com� I �EM T 1 ALLOWED PROPO ID ALLOWED
RROIBi 1 � 4' 1 C�
EXP
T OVE A E REQUIRED SETBACKS PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT)
C FRONT URSIDE FEAR
RESIDENTIAL
'K ILL.. N:.l MECH ALLOWED PR POSED FRONT' SIDE REAMR
NEW
ADDITION cl COMMERCIAL C..PL�A EOR
CHANGE OF USE LOT ARE PLANNING REVIEWED By
ON FIE.-D PROVIDED
0 REMODEL JC] APARTME!:ifl 0 F, -7-
FENCE EMARKS
X
C3 REPAIR 0 X PT)
OTHER
DEMOLISH 0 TANK cl 65,66 Ko
X.AG GARAGE o RET IRNGWALL Cl RENEWAL
.,OR ROM
FOR E CTION CODE CCUPANT
0 Tp L CH ED T PE OF CONST ROUP
(TYP
CUPANT.
NUMBEROF CRRRCAL,—Z� SPECIAL INSPEC AD
NUMBER DWELLING AREAS F UIRED
U REQUIRED Y
OF ON S N MBER Q 'n (0-A U.
o STORIES IT
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE
REMARKS 'D I
'0
GRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 108/FINAL INSPECTION REQ
C�, lAd-Rq+
VALUATION FEE
PLAN CHECK FEE
UiLDING
HEAT SOURCE GLA, G, OT SLOPE I B
VESTED DATE PLUMBING
PLAN CHECK NO: MECHANICAL
ZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED W-RKTO
THIS PERMIT AUTHOR ATE PROPERTY .L,. AN, C iSTRUCTiON ON THE PUBLIC GRADINGIFILL
�.,HIS .MIT COVERS
BE DONVION PRIV R
DOMAIN CURBS, SIDEWALKS. DRIVE AYS, MA QUEES, ETC.) WILL REOUIRE
W 45
SEPARATE PERMISSION. STATE SURCHARGE
PERMIT APPLICATIONIIS160 DAYS ENG. REVIEW FEES
PERMIT LIMIT'. I YEAR - PROVIDED WORK M STARTED WITHIN 180 DAYS
SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR ORE INFORMATION
IONS AND SUCCESORS 5NG. INSPECTION FEE
;APPLICANT. ON BEHALF OF HIS 01 HER S1.1SE. HEIRS, ASS
4AR
F IFY, DEFEND AND HOLD H MLESS THE CITY F ct
N N.TERESWT AGR.ETS.T�o, �,NDOEMN,C -S. AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND ,,,,,,T"N-FEE 1211016
ED. NOS AS.�. FF IALS, EMPLOYEE ECTLY OR INDIRECTLY RECEIPT
ALLCI-AIMS FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE
N6ARISINGOIR ALL NOT BE PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT
HE I=NCE OF THIS PERMIT ISSUA L OF THIS PERM T SH
WAIVEORREDU EANY REO IREMENTOF ANY CITY ORDINANCE
=ETD TO Y U
Fy. RECEIPT
TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION.
NOR LIMIT I� ANY WAY THE CITY'S ABILIT TOTAL AMOUNT DUE j-3
M
APPLICAT ON PPROVAL
I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION THAT THE INFORMATION IIY III.
A AUTHORIZED AGENT OF
TH 11 '01 V P-1 u""' d
1HER5BY A"N.-LE-GET CALL
GIVEN Is CORRECT. AN AT I A. THE OW111, OF THE DULY W�I- D.�pu :P.dF-- --X`
THE OWNER. LY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC-
I AGREE TO COMP 0 PERS N WILL BE EMPLOYED �.—.I.dg p,ll.ded�
G AU Y. N WASHIO FOR INSPECTION
TION, AND IN DING THE WOPKCOTHOF'ZED THEREB
N OF THE CE — 'HE STATE OF OGTON RELATING TO DATE
IN 0 LABO OFFJ SIG RE
VVoV KMEN .5 COMPENSATIONRINSURANCE AND ACW 18.21� 1 S
D (425) 160
I TURE (014 ER OR'AGIENT)'
771-0220 RE EA!3EF BY D E
EXT 333
7F-7lNTION
IT IS UNLAWFULTO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNT,L. 771-0221 -INSPECTOR
I F CRIS NA. - FILE YELLOW
A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERT - PI�4K I OWNER COLD - ASSESS I OR
CATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. USC SECTION 109 FAX
z
0
d
0
M
c m
m a
0
80
c
M
m
a
a
0 -n
m M
0 Fn
0,
0
, M,
mca
M 0
Z
7-1
z
-4
29
z
0
1
0
m