20020537.pdfDATE IECEq
PERMIT EXPIRES —1 "6'
CITY OF EDMONDS
USE P R IT
ZG�F rz-) c, IN �um-m. �E
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
SUITEtAPT,
'A`OG
H E 5 A , g
T2.5 Lvig
OWNER NAMEINAME OF BUSINESS
PLAT NAMPSUBDIVISION NO.
[uoT N&
L NO
L:D
D FEE S
MAILING ADORES$
PUBLIC RIGHT Or WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP
PIWIll—PIP.11.1.
0—
EXISTING — PROPOSED�
I-P,I
CITY ZIP
TELEPHONE
��5-774� �
REQUIRED DEDICATION— FT
----
NAME
METER SIZE I
LINE SIZE
I .roFFIXTURES
T-
PRV REQUIRED
YE-M NO 0
ADDRESS
REMARKS
OWNERFCONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROLICHAINAGe
CITY zip
TELEPHONE
I
"hd icica
NAME
A
11DRE'
�151 5- A- r5 7- Aoe- iLa
t2l�
IRE F.VIEW...Y DATE
IF -
CITY ZIP
')a;;� 9e6V
TELEPHONE
fts-44-Roll
-
STATE LICENSE NUMBER
t\1 KIn
r CqfCKED BY
VARIANCE OR DO
SHORELINE OR ADB�
INSPECTION
C3YRE 'D
ES &Ko-
PBOND
OSTED
,
SEP—AREVEW
COMPLETE I IXEMP
FXp
SIGN AREA
ALL OWED , PIIZSED
HEIGHT
A�;D
PROPERTY TAX AC�C40UNT P RCEL NO.
olo o'5100
Pf--*--W-NTIAL P51,PLU.131NG I MEG.
LOTCOVERAGE
ALLOWED PROPOSED
REQUIRED SETBACKS (FT)
FRONT SIDE REAR
PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT.)
FRONT UASOE REAR
ADDITION COMMERCIAL COMPLIANCE OR
CHANGE OF USE
C3 REMODEL C] APARTMENT 0 SIGN
C3 FENCE
0 REPAIR X FTI,
7� CYD8
36-"— 7-1.3q
I Zo 5 15
1 1'a' GIA- 15-
PARKING
REQ'i
7-
I
LOT ARIA DATE
'I 11NMN. REVIEWED BY
REMARKS
0 OTHER
DEMOLISH 0 TANK
-A--E
0
1. fA AFFORT 0 RITAKIOIRNG WALL RENEWAL
(fYPE OF USE, BUSIN TIVITY), EXP�IN:
CHECKED BY
ITYPE 0 N
COD 0 C PANT
GROU
I NUMBER
OF
STORIES
0
G
AR
N U
SPECIAL INS TOR JAHEAJ�JftM!
REQUIRED �YES
1-113 CA CACINPANT
Lo
610
DES791��7
\,,j
REMARKS
PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 1081FINAL INSPECTION REO'l
VALUATION
PLAN CHECK FEE
/2:L3
Kz ""0
I ;�E
JTO�O
BUILDING
,., -*� -
PLAN CHECe4 �ESTED DATE
0A
PLUMBING
Ir
sc 1�'
/A—
MECHANICAL
THISPERMITAUTHO IZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO
BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. AN CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC
DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE
GRADINGIFILL
SEPARATE PERMISSIOM
N; 180DAYS
STAT ESUHCHARGE
YEPERIMITAPPLICATI
If PERMITILIMIM.1 AN -PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN 180 DAYS
ENG. REVIEW FEES
SAC K 01 PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION
_SEE
ENG INSPECTION FEE
'AP PLICANT. ON BEHALF 0 HIS OR HER SPOUSE. HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESORE
N NTEREST. AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF
I I
2 EDMONDS. WASHINGTON, ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES. AND AGENTS FROM ANYAND
==EJ
ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES 01 WHATEVER NATURE. ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
FROM THE ISSUANCE OF �HE PER.11 ISSUANCE 01 THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE
'Y -A'VEOR REDUCE ANY REOUIREMENTOF ANY CITY ORDINANCE
T=Y
PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT
IRECE
Nyo
0 N-E"�`L�,.-N THE CITY'S ABILITY TO F.R. A POINANCE FROVISION,�
11
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
JREC�Z, 17
I _:�' '�) 4/ q
I HERESY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT t HAVE REA THIS APPLICATION, THAT THE INFORMATION
APPLICATION APPROVAL
GIVEN IS CORRECT. AND THAT I A. THE WNER. OR THE DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT OF
THE OWNER, I A COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS R GULATINGCONSTRUC-
NON,oANO IN NO EWOAKAUTH RIZED THEREBY. NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED
CALL
VIFI�ggnld Py,,IhO
ol I. hll 1plly. I.d . , I— P Id, �,,4
IN VI LAT H 5 LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO
FOR INSPECTION 11—pt 1kldqld 11 1PIP, ,,dod,
171-0220
WORKME ' MPENSATIO�ItSURANCE AND PC. 18.27
OFFI�IA�S SIGNATURE DATE
SIGN
(425)
llpItgor &tgm 71wo
I b-z�
7
'�DAIC I
-ATTENTION-
EXT 1333
IT IS UNLAWFULTO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL
771-0221
A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTIFI-
ORIGINAL FILE - YELLOW INSPECTOR A
CATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED, USC SECTION 109
FAX
PINK -OWNER - GOLD -ASSESSOR
5198
z
0
:d
0
m
0 m
c
m
0
0
c
M
m
a
ch
0 -n
n
Im m
0
0
0
c m
En
ri)
m 0
Z
7-4
z
z
m
3
Mavallon 21*.w Ft.
Elevaft 9: 2,4 tjo Ift Lot Coverap:
Elevation 0. 20M Ft Aftmakse: 95% 4620 54. F1
Elevation 0: 244-15 ft, I Actual: House 2285-32 94. Ft
TOTAL: 1,112.15 Ft. I CvveW Porch I alms4m
Deck above 18- 446.0054- F
AYEWE: 20.18 FL
+ 25 fL) $15.16 Ft. TOTAL- 2012.72 Sq. Ft
0 % COVERA69: 21.3%
ACTU 1 2 3 4 31S.16 Ft. 6 1 a 9 10 11
r4
—2
En*om corbel ferice w8lon contral lance
LO 34_
LfT AREA 13,200 4. ft. I
zr=
LOT 52
-24
A Ft
22"52 64,
COVIERZOPOn" AREA 612054,FL
VEMARZA 446.00 04, PL
0-
TOTAL LOT COVER469 2612M 54. Ft.
==M9VATION: M,751
Ft 19.4VATION
OT51
POP F CLEVATIOK:
MAJ N FLOOR ELEVATION: 2 242"WA0
—TO 0
ISISM
llo T"
-4
L
P,LO IT FL 'AN I I I I I
'APPROVED BY PINING ZONE
SEWCKS�
Z,�y �,m— FRONT
,e
SIDE
REAR
FILE
OTHER
HEIGHI
m
0
m m
M z
jo-1
C4
o -n
-n
m M
0
0
M C)
Z r"
;U
z
z
m
STANDARD DRAINAGE DETENTION SYSTEM
WORKSHEET
CALCBY:
Owl,=
ADDMS ALmg PHONE. fZb CJ2'Z 1(,&h
DATE:—itzolor,
Z,
"""DESIGN DATA*****
0
IMPERVIOUS AREA PIPE DIA PIPE LG ORIFICE
am
........................
CM a
-40
0
OC
DCTENTION PIPE LENOTH LOCKING LID M Z
V111PICIL
FINISHED
r4L MINIM" C z
I >
TIGHTL or
CONC BOX OR RI$CR
By. TO 1% SLOPE -n
0
OU
OUTL T CONTROL
MIN, m m
UPPER CATCH BASIN ORIFICE 0
0 Fn
CONTROL CATCH BASIN C (A
FIT 0
SYSTEM CROSS SECTION q
RECEIVED
E'XZ'X6* DEEP, 4-6- SPALLS OR EQUAL
z
FROM CONTROL CO 2'X Z'X 3' DEEP, 3/4' CRUSHED ROCK MAY 1 3 2002
Ca
BUILDIINIG DEPT. z
0
FROM CONTI _j
ROL 0 ROCK 0
TFL IT!
PIP TR MIN 10- WHO.
PE LEVEL
1.5 F W,
I END CAPS
"A"MCBEW9 'UHM&N ROCK
W)UP OUTZBF
RUNOFF SPREADER. TRENCH
FOOTING DRAINS SHALL NOT RE CONNECTED 770 DE7ENTION SYSTEM
NOTES.
1. Call Engineering Division (771-0220) for a tightline, and detention system inspection
before bacidilling and for find inspections. APPROVED BY
2, Responsibility for operation and maintenance of drainage systems on private Property is the Lt
responsibility of the property owner. Material accumulated in the -storage pipe must be flushed
==M.,,%=0h basins to allow proper operation. The oudet control orifice DATE
6
7ROM -D.Prum, P.E. Engineer PHONE NO. 206 546 e442 May. 13 2002 01:33PM PI
Dennis M. Bruce, P.E.
M.S.C.F., M.B.A. Geotochnical/ Civil Engineer
May 11, 2002
Design Woflka Construction
Z
1175115 52nd AV9,_W., SUlto A
Lynnwood, WA 98037
Subject: Geciteehnical Evaluation I Foundation Recommendations
49
Proposed New Single -Family Residence at 926 Alder St.
rn
Edmonds, Washington
M 0
This engineering report presents the results of a geotechnical evaluation of the
80,
C
property at 926 Alder St., Edmonds, Washington. This evaluation was required due to
� M,
m
developer concerns, as well as City of Edmonds requirements.
m
to
REFCRENCES:
'u,
I.
K
Vicinity Map
CA
0
Property Topographic Map and She Plan for now residence (furnished by Design
Works Construction).
Site photographs
0
0
V
BACKGROUND:
0
It is understood that the overall property at 925 Alder St. consists of Lots No. 31,
Tho
32, 33, and 34, Each lot is approximately 30 feet wide (along Alder St.) and
M
approximately - I 10 feet deep (see Site Plan).
Currently, an existing residence and detached garage exists at 926 Alder St.
Z
It is understood that Design Works Construction proposes to demolish the
z
existing residence, and construct a new residence of Lots No. 31 and 32.
Lots No. 33 and 34 (to the west) are to be developed with a single-family
m
residence at a future date.
The existing residence at 925 Alder St. reveals no evidence of any geotechnical
distress: no settlements, no foundation Cracking, no shifting, or any evidence of
erosional degradation were observed.
The overall property contains a relatively flat building site (to the east), and a
sloped bench to the west (aft photographs and Topographic Map).
SOILS FOUNDATIONS - SITE DEVELOPMENT - INSPECTION - DRAINAGE - DESIGN A PERMIT - LEGAL
P.O. Box 65509 Shoreline, Washington 98155 (206) 546-9217 FAX 646-8442 RECEIVED
MAY 1 3 2002
BUILDING DEFT�
�ROM :'D.Bruce, P.E. Snqlmer PHONE HM 206 546 8442 Mlay. 13 2 02 01!34PM P2
Design Works Construction
May I 1 2002
Page 2
The sloped portion of the property repoeft at approximately 1 H; IV. No evidence
of any slope geotechnical problems were observed: no slides, no sloughing, no Boll
tension cracks, or any evidence of erosional degradation.
Z'
The portion of the property not occupied by the existing residence contains lawn,
Or
mature trees and dense shrubberies (see photogrsphs).
0
m
11VALUATION:
In order to augment the existing site geotechnical information, 4 soil test holes
M
were hand dug by this engineer on April 25, 2002. All 4 soil test holes were dug In the
m
vicinity of the proposed now residence. All 4 test holes revealed similar sub -grade
O�
conditions, namely:
0' to 4" Lawn, organics, and organic slit
m
m
4'to 16" Moderately dense light brown sandy loam
16' to 40" (bottom of test holes) Increasingly dense silty sand grading to
weathered glacial till
0 -n
No water was encountered in either of the four test holes. All test hole walls
remained vertical and stable. No sloughing or caving occurred,
m m
!20NCLUSIONS I RECOMMENP_AUONS:
0
0 Fn
C ca
K ca,
Based on the findings of this investigation, and experience with similar sites In
m 0
Z
the area, the property at 925 Alder St., Edmonds, Washington is Slootechnically
aporoved for the proposed now single-family residences on Lots No. 31 and 32, subject
M
to the following:
a Setbacks; The new residence may be located aMythere on Lots No. 31 and 32,
Z:
subject to municipal yard setback dimensions. There are no geotechnical
requirements for any additional or special setback distances.
z
Standard reinforced continuous and spread footings. Allowable bearing
0
pressure: 2,000 p.s.t
m
Equivalent fluid pressure of 35 p.c.f. is recommended for any retaining wall
design provided drainage zone is Inspected and verified by this engineer.
For retaining wall design, use friction factor of 0.55 and passive pressure of 350
�ROM D.Brum, P.G. Gnsimer PHONG NO. 206 546 8442 Mag, 13 2002 01:34PM P3
Design Works Construction
May 11, 2002
Page 3
Gootechnical Inspection by this engineer prior to 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 Earthwork and Structural Fill for
structural fill placement and compaction recommendations. Continuous and individual
spread footings should have miniMum widths of eighteen (18) and twenty-four (24)
inchss� respectively, and should be bottomed at least eighteen (18) inches below the
lower adjacent finish ground surface,
Depending on the final site grades, some over -excavation may be required below
footings to expose competent native soils. Unless loan concrete is used to fill the over
excavated hole, the width of the over -excavation at the bottom must be at least as wide
as the sum of two times the depth of the over -excavation and the footing width. For
example, an over -excavation 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 two thousand (2,000) 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-half
inch, with differential settlements on the order of one -quarter inch.
NOTE: The bearing capacity of 3,000 p.s.f. applies to over -excavated and
backfill conditions. Footings placed on native soils may be designed for 2,000 p,s,f.
Lateral loads due to wind or seismic forces maybe 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:
Param Desian Value
Coefficient of Friction 0.55
Passive Earth Pressure 350 p.o.f.
Where:
Z,
0
0M
co
m 0
-40
0 C
MM
0
m M
0
0
C
K co
M 0
Z
7-1
X
z
z
0
m
i'ROM Brum, P. G. Eng I neer PHONE NO, 206 546 8442 Maj. 13 2002 01135PM P4
Design Works Construction
May 11, 2002
, V
Page 4
(1). p.c.f. is pounds per cubic foot,
-(2) Passive earth pressure Is computed using the equivalent fluid density.
We reCOmmend that a safety factor of at least 1.5 be used for design of the
Z'
foundation's resistance to lateral loading.
0
SLAMS-O&GRADE:
M,
g"
Slab -on -grade floors may be supported on undisturbed, competent native soils or
on structural fill. The stabs may be supported on the existing soils provided these soils
CA
can be re -compacted prior to placement of the free -draining sand or gravel underneath
0 M,
the slab. This sand and gravel layer should be a minimum of four (4) inches thick. We
0
also recommend using a vapor barrier such as 6-mil. plastic membrane beneath the
0 C
slab with minimum overlaps of 12 inches for sealing purposes.
I C
m
m
PERMANONT FOUNDATI AND RETAINING WALLS:
Retaining walls backfilled on one side only should be designed to resist lateral
i"'r
earth pressures Imposed by the soils retained by these structures. The following
0 -w
recommended design parameters are for walls less than twelve (12) feet in height,
which restrain level backfill:
M m
Peramete DeEian Value
0
0 Fn
Active Earth Pressure* 35 p.c.f.
C (a
M
Passive Earth Pressure 350 p.c.f.
z
Coefficient of Friction 0.55
Soil Unit Weight 125 p.c.f.
Where:
z
(1) p.o.f. is pounds per cubic foot
(2) Active and passive earth pressures are computed using equivalent fluid
z
densities.
0
For restrained wells which cannot defeat at least 0.002 times the wall
m
height, a uniform lateral pressure of one hundred (100 p.s.f. should be
added to the active equivalent fluid pressure).
The values given above are to be used for design of permanent foundation and
retaining walls only. An appropriate safety factor should be applied when designing the
walls. We recommend using a safety factor of at least 1.5 for overturning and sliding.
''FROM P.E. Gn9imar
Design Works Construction
May 11, 2002
Page 5
PHONE NO.,: 206 546 8442 Maj, iS 2002 01:36PM P�S
The above design values do not include the effects of any hydrostatic pressures
behind the walls and assume that no surcharge slopes or loads will be placed above the
walls. If these conditions exist, then those pressures should be added to the above
lateral pressures. Also, if sloping backfill is desired behind the walls, then we will need
to be given the wall dimensions and slope of the backfill In order to provide the
Z
appropriate design earth pressures.
Heavy construction equipment should not be operated behind retaining and
m,
foundation walls within a distance eq ual to the height of the wall 1, unless the walls are
designed for the additional lateral pressures resulting from the equipment. Placement
=i 9
Vi -4
and compaction of retaining wall backfill should be accomplished with hand -operated
0 X
equipment.
m
C
m
Retaining Wall Backfill
-10,
0 a
Backfill placed within eighteen (18) inches of any retaining or foundation walls.
-4 K
X M
mz�
should b a free -draining structural fill containing no organics. This backfill should contain
_Z
no more than five (5) percent silt or clay particles and have no particles greater than
>C
four (4) inches in diameter. The percentage of particles passing the No. 4 sieve should
C0
be between twenty-five (25) and seventy (70) percent. Due to their high silt content, if
0 -n
i
the native sails are used as backfill, a drainage composite, such as Miraii and
n
Enkadrain, should be placed against the retaining walls. The drainage composites
m M
should be hydraulically connected to the foundation drain system. The purpose of these
backfill requirements is to assure that the design criteria for the retaining wall is not
0
0
exceeded because of a build-up of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. The
C:
M CAI
subsection entitled General Earthwork and Strm ural Fill contains recommendations
m 0
regarding placement and compaction of structural fill behind retaining and foundation
walls.
X
EXCAVATION AND $LOPES:
In no case should excavation slopes be greater then the limits specified in local,
Z
state and national government safety regulations. Temporary outs up to a height of
ca
four (4) feet deep in unsaturated soils may be vertical. For temporary cuts having a
1:1
Z
0
_j
height greater than four (4) feet, the out should have an inclination no steeper than
0
(Horizontal;Vertical) from the top of the slope to the bottom of the excavation, Under
m
specific recommendations by the geotechnicall engineer, excavation cuts may be
modified for site conditions, All permanent outs into native soils should be Inclined no
steeper then 2:1 (H:V). Fill slopes should not exceed 2H: 1. It is important to note that
sands do cave suddenly, and without warning. The contractors should be made aware
of this potential hazard
N
�ROM D. Brum P. G. ringimer
Design Works Construction
May 11, 2002
Page 6
rHONr= NO, 206 S4G 8442 Maj. 13 2002 01:37PM P6
Water should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of any temporary
or permanent slope. All permanently exposed slopes should be seeded with an
appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and Improve stability of the surficial
layer of soil.
DRAIWE CONSIDERATIONS,
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 washed
rook wrapped in non -woven geotextile filler fabric (Mirafi 140N, Supac 4NP, Or similar
material). At the highest point, the perforated pipe invert should be at least as 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 groundwater was observed in any of the 4 test holes during the fieldwork,
Seepage into the planned excavation Is possible, and likely If excavation occurs during
winter months, and if encountered should be drained away from the site by use of
drainage ditches, perforated pipe, French drains, or by pumping from sumps
interconnected by shallow connector trenches at the bottom of the excavation.
The excavation at the site should be graded so that surface water Is directed off
the she 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 exposw
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,
except where the area adjacent to the building is paved.
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND STRUCTURAL 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 deflned 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 structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts with a moisture 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.
Z
0 M
C
m 0
80
C
0
C
V
�ROM 'D.Brumo P.G. Engirear PHON9 NO, 206 546 2442 May. 13 2002 01:37pm P7
Design Works Construction
Mayll,2002
Page 7
The all owable thickness of the fill lift will depend on the material type, 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
recommen ded relative compaction for structural fill:
0
Location of Fill Placeme Minimum Relative
0
I
Comi)action
Beneath footings, slabs or walkways 95%
Ca
Eiiiihind retaining walls 90%
C
m
0
-40
0
Beneath pavements 95% for upper 12 inches of
C:
M
m
Sub -grade, 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).
On
Use of On -Site Soils
mm
If grading activities take place during wet weather, or when the silty, on -site soils
Vi
0 -
or,
m
ate wet, site preparation costs may be higher because of delays due to rairis and the
Co
potential need to import granular fill. The on -site soils are generally silty and thus are
M 0
moisture sensitive. Grading operations will be difficult when the moisture content of
Z
these soils exceeds the optimum moisture content.
Moisture sensitive soils will also be susceptible to excessive softening and
pumping" from construction equipment traffic when the moisture content is greater than
z
the optimum moisture content.
Ideally, structural fill, which is to be placed in wet weather, should consist of a
z
granular soil having no more than five (5) percent silt or clay particles. The percentage
ft
of particles passing the No. 200 sieve should be measured from that portion of the soil
m
passing the three -quarter -inch sieve,
The use of'.'some" on -site soils for fill material mg be acgeptable if the upper
organic materials are segregated and moisture contents are monitored by engineering
inspection.
�'FROM D.Brumi P.E. ringimer PHONr= NO. 206 546 8442 MaV. 13,2022 01:38PM Pe
Design Works Construction
May 11, 2002
Page 8
DRAINAGE CONTROL
No drainage problems were evident with the existing residenre and overall
property at 926 Alder St.
The -current residence appears to have functioning gutter downspouts end tight
0,
-4
0
lines that tie into the existing City of Edmonds drainage system.
m
Surface storm water runoff flows westerly into the vegetated area to the west.
A
The now residence shall comply with the City of Edmonds standard drainage
0 M,
requirements.
m
0
-4 011
0C
CONCRETE:
mm'
All foundation
concrete (footings, stem walls, slabs, any retaining walls, etc.)
z
shall have a minimum cement content of 5-1 /2 sacks per cubic yard of concrete mix.
SL!2PE SETBACKS I BUFFERS:
L
0 'n'
"n
As previously stated, the new residence is to be constructed on the eastern
m m
portion of the overall property (Lots No. 31 and 32). There are no geotechnical
requirements for any special or distinct setback distances. The new residence may be
0
0
constructed aMnMhere on Lots No. 31 and 32, subject to nominal City of Edmonds yard
C
setback dimensions.
m
WESTERN PORTION OF OVERALL PROPE
M
As discussed, this engineer understands that the western portion of the overall
property (Lots No. 33 and 34) may be developed at some future date with a single-
family residence.
ca
The distinct minor slope within Lots No. 33 and 34 will require additional
agotechnical investigation and recommendations for developmAnt of this Propft.
01
m
INSPECTION:
The recommendations of this report are only valid when key geotachnical
aspects are Inspected by this engineer during construction:
Soll cuts
Foundation sub -grade verification
Retaining wall, or rockery placement
May,
FROM D.Bruce, P.G. Engimar FHONr= NO. 206 S46 8442 13 2002 01:39PM P,9
Design Works Construction
May 11, 2002
Page 9
* Any fill placement
* Subsurface drainage installation
SUMMARY:
The proposed Design Works Construction new residence at 926 Alder St.,
0
an with
Edmonds, Washington is geotechnically viable when constructed in accord ce
5
M
the recommendations herein, compliance with City of Edmonds approved plans and
requirements, and key geotechnical inspection 4 "In construction.
:q%
GEOTECHNICAL RMEW OF FINAL PLANS:
M
C
At the time of this investigation and report, final house plans were not available
m
0
-40,
0
for review.
M
As stated in this report, the new residence may be located anywhere on Lots No.
A Z
0 A
C
��':
31 and 32, subj" to City of Edmonds approval and inspection by this engineer.
>
Prior to final permit issuance, this engineer should review the final house plans to
0 -n
yg& compliance with the recommendations of this report.
n pa
Upon satisfactory review, a 'Statement Of Minimal Risk" will be issued.
-4
m M
gL9fiU_RE,.
00
0
Thefindings and recommendations of this report were prepared in accordance
i mol
z
with generally accepted professional engineering principles and practice. No other
warranty, either express or implied, is made. The conclusions are based on the results
of the field exploration and interpolation of subsurface conditions between explored
locations. If conditions are encountered during construction that appear to be different
z
than those described In this report, this engineer should be notified to observe the
situation and review and Verify or modify the recommendations.
C&
If there are any questions, do not hesitate to call.
z
-01
0
m
Dennis M. Bruce, P.E.
4 Geolechnical /Civil Engineer
V406
MIX*
DMB:a
[ExPIRES 12W ME 33
FROM D.Bruce, P.E. Engineer PHONE NO. 206 546 8442 May, 13 M02 0V39PM P10
DESIGN WORKS CONST. 425 742 6154 P.01
RFA-21�,-2002 01;58 PM
4
XXI 7//1
at.
T7
ZZ;
17-`g�' I Z+- -T
LOT
J�,
�1"M M= &ZiAIWK� 21
2mo.
LIVAIM4 JIM&-
JI
LI
ilk
Height Calculation Worksheet
Address: 9d-S Al&,L
Date:
lnspector(#___In�i-
1. Datum Point:
Z
2. Datum Point Elevation: yl
0:
rO
3. Average Grade:
(average grade) 25' >
4. Maximum Elevation Allowed: 0
C 00.
5. Reference Point Elevation Shot to House: .
In
-q
0
�YOI y?�(datum elevation) + S'3?�grade to transit.level line shot to house) (0 (OAS
m In
0
C 2
>
6. Measurements from line shot onto house to roof ridge:
SO'
0 -n
A A
0
i 0
0 Fn'
2 r')
i m
�Z
z
Z�
Total
?5
m
7. Actual Elevation: TC6,(I'd' (reference Point elevation) + (measurements
from#6)=
Conclusion:
(actual) is greater4j� (allowed); therefore the house is/
is not over the height requirement per ECDC 16.20.30 requirements
UTENeWILDINGMSOHeight Cakulation Worksheet.doc
GARY HAAKENSON
CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR
121 STHAVENUE NOR H - EDMONDS, WA98020 - (425) 771-0220 FAX (425) 771�0221
Websile: �&edmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
S Planning Building Engineering
December 10, 2002
Desmond Neff
0:1
=j,
I'�
11
924 Alder St
0,
Edmonds, WA 98020
Building Permit: 2002-0537
R
Site Address: 925 Alder St
a M'
Expiration Date: 7/19/03
M
Dear Desmond Neff-
M
Z'
10
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the last remaining inspection on your
project is a final inspection(s). The final inspection(s) determines that there are no
outstanding life -safety issues and approval allows the City to close your permit file.
465,
The City considers the final inspection to be one ofthe most important inspections
0.111
Im" 301
q_.
conducted on a project. In order to grant final approval the following must be complete:
In In
smoke detectors, house numbers, guardrails, handrails, self -close doors between garage
0
0
and residence, egress from sleeping rooms, safety glazing, weather-stripping, any
C
Engineering department requirements etc. Of course not all of these things may
X
rn 0:
specifically apply to your project buf it does give you an idea about the kinds of things
that must be complete as well as some items that do not need to be installed such as:
paint, carpet, moldings, wallpaper, etc. Please be advised permits exp ire one year from
be
the date ofissuance. Ifyou will need more time to complete the work , permits can
renewed prior to expiration for one half fees. Ifthe permit expires without a final
Z
u th
approval granted by the Building Inspector, f 11 fees are required in order to renew e
permit. This can be very costly to you and we strongly encourage you to check your
Z
permit expiration date and call for the required final inspection(s), Note: If more than
9
one department is required to final your project, this is noted on your Job Card.
0
M
Please feel free to contact me at 425 -771-0220 if you have any questions.
Sin�c�erel..
Permit Coordinator
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
0
By order of the Building Official for the
Cifir of Edmonds
.7
V� (J� All wPersons Are Ordered to
SrrrNp
jL %j WORK
AT 0 N C"' hr"
Pursuant to Section 202(d) of the Uniform Building Code the Building Official for the
City of Edmonds hereby orders all work to STOP at the site listed below.
exAddress:
J�, Vor the following reason(s):
&�rAVMWKS AW70 417Y Jftft
69
ft4040 7.) ht"
W#MW 7FA#A~Y 69&rA*%# RANAL
WARNING
Posted this. 91 day ofJ;W&*AYs The failure to stop work, or the
V resuming of work without permis-
at am/pm 29V3 sion from the Building Official,
or the removal, mutilation, or
K:J7 concealment of this notice is
I punishable by fine and imprison-,
Building OfF06� ment.
z
0
--i
0
R1
�n
m
M 0
0
80
C
M
M Z
0
0 _n
"n;u
__j >
M 9
m M
0 U5
0 �
0 M
C Cf)
K Cf)
M 0
z �
z
-4
M
fn
z
0
i
0
m
FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL FORM
TO:
DATE:
MEMO TO: PERmrr COORDINATOR, BUILDING DIVISION
FROM: FIRE DEPARTMENT DATE —
ENGINEERING DIVISION DATE —a
PLANNING DIVISION DATE—
PROJECT--!)�G—
SITE ADDRESS -
PERMIT # #—_------PATF INSPECTED—.
DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE INSPECTED
A field inspection was conducted to determine final compliance with approved plans. Final approval
denotes that there are no objections from the above signed Department to the release of
CE BONDS and the granting of:
PERFORMAN
V/ GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
GRANT PROJECT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS NOTED
u Copy of CONDITIONS given to owner/contractor by inspector
1.
FAILED FINAL INSPECTION - OUTSTANDING ISSUES
u Copy of CORRECTION NOTICE given to owner/contractor by inspector
1.
2.
3.
RE -INSPECTED OUTSTANDING ISSUES - GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
Date_ Sign_
ocaprvl.doc.l:temp:bldg:fomisIO/O1
z
0
0
C M
M0
-1 0
0 0
C
-4 M
3: M
M
0
C
0
n
--i
x
M M
065
0 r-
M
C co
9 U)
Q 0
z
7-1
>
z
--4
x
0)
z
0
0
M
rA
RECORD OF INSPECTIONS
INSPECTOR
DATE APPROVED
SETBACKS .....................
OTT
FOUNDATION:
Footing......................
0
wall..........................
Pier/Porch — ..............
Retaining Wall ...........
Slab Insulation
PLUMBING:
Underground
Rough -in ...........
Commercial Final
HEATING:
GasTest .............
Gas Piping ............. o
Equipment .............
Commercial Final
EXTERIOR SHEATHING
NAILING -- ......................
MA
FRAMING ........................
FIRST FLOOR FRAMING...
INSULATION — ................
Floor Insulation
Wall Insulation ...........
Ceiling Insulation
SHEETROCK NAILING
SPECIAL INSPECTION
vv)
MISCELLANEOUS ..........
FINAL APPROVAL FOR \(y)
OCCUPANCY ..................
Side Sewer
AmoutPx!d
Datehcz-,
3114
Dale Pcrc,'==7� Ftq��/�47--