20020982.pdfPERMIT EXPIRES a 0-2
CITY OF EDMONDS ZOINE PERMIT -q
NUMBER 2boZ.-c,
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION JOB
ADDRESS S.)TE.FT,
OWNER NAMEINAME 'a2 '�� /Z
OF BUSINE S
PLAT NAMEISUBDIVISION NO. [ LOT NO. LID NO
a
-1-1 ADDRESS
LID FEE S
,�7 PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP
S
U.. __ B rT
'ITY ZIP TELEPHONE EXISTING — PROPOSED
c?a"v' qj RE UIREDDCOICATION_ FT — u-4-m
ia��_;twa zp� �'3 Y-; 11071
NAME MEWE I LINE I
R MARKS
OWNERICONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROL/DRAINAGE
CITY
E �Lxgw'Raa 6
WwuaL
NAME �fn
pLf� Cd �IjS�rXU& e 8/
77 R
m ADDRESS
FIRE "IIEWED.Y
CH Y ZIP
s IT
M37 "' L�Z e86 7
STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATI-6—NOATE VAR ANCE 01 CU SHORELINE 08 ADS#
C&M V-2,)01-11 -
004<�' 0 orl*'OV4
SERA REVIEW SIGN AREA
ROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL NO.
3 If - coo - 1415 COMPLETE EXEMPT
65-oz
EXP x
ESIDS TIAL FLUIVEN.I.ECH LOT COVERAGE REQUIRED SETBACK.
g NEW ALLOWED FRONT
So BED SIDE REAG
U ADDITION 0 COMMERCIAL COMPLIANCIGOSE -1
CHANGE OF Ofe I W 161,2r,'
0 REMODEL C] APARTMENT RADIANS LOT AREA
SIGN D PR.W.F.7'"
0
I
REPAIR GRADING FENCE 7
4Nn CYDE ( X FT) FTEMAR�S
_
PEP-
DEMOLISH 0 TANK C3 OTHER
GARAGE
DA CRT RETAINI�YG WALL 0 RENEWAL
0 CKE'
IT 'I
�_n_
r TYR 0, LEE, EUE'H'EE C I ITY) EXPLAIN:
CHECKED By]!!!!�
NUMBER NUMBEROl
OF DWELLING SPECIAL NIPICTOR JAIIA &�WT i
0 STORIES UNITS R.OLIBEG
[:] YES
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE I'2T
-REMARKS
PR GRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 108/Fl I
hj 1w Of ;�16111mj
sloe
No
OR
RED �CN PBOTED
0 YES NO
HEIGHT
ALLOWED
I
&sy_�K_,r
VALUATION
FEE
PLANCHECKFEE
Pi -7
URCE GLAZING % T:�PE�
,;R6 I
BUILDING
--am
'�W_f
PLAN C��,K NO:� VESTED DATE
�,�Z
PLUMBING
�'
I
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO
MECHANICAL
I: BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY, ANY CONSTRUCTION ON,THE PUBLIC
2 D
:I OMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAY . MARQUEES, ETC.) W LL REQUIRE
GRADINGIFILL
t: SEPARATE PERMISSION.
2
I PERMIT APPLICATIO : 'UID DAYS
STATE SURCHARGE
7'lf
A, PERMIT LIMIT, 1 YEAR - PROVIDED WORK UI STARTED WITHIN 180 DAYS
ENG REVIEW FEES
I SEE BACK F PINK PERMIT FOR MORE IN FORMATION
'A PLICANTON EHALF F HIS OR HER SPOUSE. HEIRS. ASSIGNS AND SUCCESORS
ENG. INSPECTION PEE
IN INTEREST, AGREES T INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF
—LANDSCAPING
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. ITSOFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANYAND
ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OFWHATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
INSPECTION FEE
FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT, ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL Nor E
REEVED TO MODIFY, WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENT OF ANY CITY ORDINANC6E
PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT
41
NOR UMIT IN ANY WAYTHE CITY S ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION. -
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
I HERSEY 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
THE OWNER, AGREE
APPLICATION APPROVAL
I TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC
TION. AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED
CALL
by_
-, ", �' D-I'lly:
I I N 1 1; 1 THE S E OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO
.,,d F — 1,L —
FOR INSPECTION
Wo E AND RCW 18.27
TP— PIl.dld
ON E I. 'R T)
OW12
(425)
Ot CIALSSIGNAFUR&
'\1
DATE
�/20-/ 1
41 ti�' &
'i
!�&z
C
771-0220
,
,
ATTENTION -
EXT 1333
RELEASE
AIE/
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL
771-0221
'A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTiFl-
�ATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC SECTION 109
FAX
ORIGINAL (FfT_`E
YELLOW iNS`PEC7OF/
PINK OWNER
GOLD ASSESSOR
z
0
0
M
0
80
m m
z
10
cl)
0 -n
"n
m M
0
O'_
0 M
C CD
9 w
M 0
Z
z
ch
z
m
cr
WII ,r tum....
RE ;019 v E D
Ju
Ju 2 6 2001
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR.
CITY OF EDMONDS
e'r
or
HOUSE
Ji
3
D� Y NNING
PLO7 PLAN
ZONE-
- -
-
SETEACK S.
FRONT 2,G
Fl,
r4x ll� 6,131- e7,90
ei'7 /11/451' 5W.
td4 ?94A(,
REA"l-17
OTHER
CITY COPY
HEIGHT— T
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
AssoaATEs, INC.
GEOTECHNICALENGINEERS&GEOLOGISTS
17311 — 13e Avenue NE, A-500 Snohomish County (425) 337-1069
Woodinville, WA 98072
(425) 486-1669,-Fax (425) 481-2510 Wenatchee/Chelan (509) 764-2766
June 27, 2002
RECEIVEg)
SEP,) � 2002
Mr. Brock Baker
615 — 10e Place SE PFRMIT COUNTEn
K
n
Everct� Washington 98208
9 m
Foundation Review Letter
m 0
0
0 C:
6907 — 170 Street
Edmonds, Washington
351002
In
m
NGA File No.
C: —
>
Dear W. Baker:
This letter summarizes our review of the foundation support plan for the planned residence at 6907 —
0
-n
174" Place SE in 6mords, Washington.
M m
0
INTRODUCTON
0
C
You plan to construct a residence with a daylight basement on the project site. A cut up to 14 feet in
height will be made at the south side of the planned residence. A concrete retaining wall will be
constructed along the south side ofthe residence to retain the planned cut. You have provided us with a
letter dated Oct ober 2, 2001 from the City of Edmonds which states, in part, "Geotechnical engineer must
Z,
review foundation plan and submit a letter to the City indicating that the foundation design is adequate for
the site."
Z
You have provided us with an undated plan sheet titled, "Foundation and Drainage." You have also
provided us with an undated Plot Plan for the site showing the location of the planned residence, and an
undated grading plan titled, "Contours After." In addition, you have provided us with a Gectechnical
Engineering Study prepared by Couvrette Geotechnical Engineering, Inc., dated July 10, 1992. You have
informed us that grading has not been performed on the site since 1993. You have requested that we
prepare this letter providing our opinions concerning the suitability ofthe planned foundations.
Foundation Review Letter
16907 — 174" Street SW
Edmonds, Washington
June 27, 2002
NGA File No. 351002
Page 2
The provided plan sheet indicates that the planned residence will be supported on conventional strip
footings 10 inches thick and 18 and 24 inches wide, for perimeter and interior footings, respectively.
Surface Conditions
We visited the project site on June 17, 2002. The site is a rectangular -shaped parcel, approximately 0. 18-
acres in size. The lot is undeveloped and is fronted by 174d, Street SW to the south, and is bordered by a
0
residence to the north, and undeveloped lots to the east and west. The southern portion ofthe site slopes
steeply down to the north. Below the steep slope, the site slopes down moderately to the north. There is
Ui
approximately 20 feet of relief across the site. A garden occupies the northern portion of the site, and the
a M
C 0
west side is covered with tall grass and brush. Surface water was not observed at the time of our field
m 0
—10
reconnaissance.
m
in Z
The surficial conditions at the time of our field reconnaissance appear to be as described in the provided
�'4
Couvrette Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. report.
Fn
Subsurface Conditions
0 -n
'n X
;I
Our understanding of the subsurface conditions is based solely on the provided report prepared by
in in
Couvrette Geotechnical Engineering, Inc., dated July 10, 1992. As described in the provided report,
0
0
C
subsurface explorations encountered 2 to 10 feet of loose fill material near the south side of the site.
in 0
Native medium dense to dense weathered and unweathered till was encountered underlying the ill
material at the south side of the site, and underlying approximately 1.5 feet oftopsoil at the north side of
X
the site.
z
;1
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
It is our opinion that supporting the residence on shallow conventional spread footings should be suitable
provided native medium dense or better soil is exposed in the foundation subgrade areas. The provided
in
plan sheet does not indicate the soil bearing capacity that was used in the design. We recommend that
your structural engineer review the foundation design for a bearing capacity of no more than 2,000 psf
and make any appropriate modifications. The foundation bearing soil should be medium dense or better
native material, and should be evaluated by a representative of our firm at the time of construction. We
should be consulted if higher bearing pressures are needed. Current Uniform Building Code (UBC)
Foundation Review Letter
6907 — 174" Street SW
Edmonds, Washington
June 27,2002
NGA File No. 351002
Page 3
guidelines should be used when considering increased allowable bearing pressure for short-term transitory
wind or seismic loads. Potential foundation settlement using the recommended allowable bearing
pressure is estimated to be less than I inch total and 1/2 inch differential between adjacent footings or
across a distance of about 40 feet based on our experience with similar residential projects.
Z
We recommend a minimum effective horizontal setback distance of 15 feet be maintained between the
0
M
face of the slope and the bottom of the downhill footing lines. In addition to this recommended setback
distance, the downhill footing line should be embedded a minimum of 2 feet into medium dense or better
V5
native soils. We should be retained to evaluate the effective setback after the foundation excavation has
in
C 0
m
been made.
C,
M
The cut expected on the southern side of the residence for the purpose of constructing the basement wall
Z
Z
could reach 14 feet in height. This cut will likely expose loose fill material. We recommend that this cut
be shored or sloped back to a safe inclination. We should be retained to observe the cut along the
Ca
0
southern side oftheiresidence. We are available to provide specific recommendations for shoring this cut.
We do not reconmiend a vertical cut at this location. The excavation should meet all WISHA/OSHA
m in
safety requirements.
0
0 Fn
C CI)
ind all retaining walls. Foot
We recommend the use of footing drains around the structure and beh ing
M 0
drains should be installed at least I foot below planned finished floor elevations. The drains should
consist of minimum 4-inch-diameter, rigid, slotted or perfumed, PVC pipe surrounded by free -draining
>
material wrapped in a filter fabric. We recommend that the five -draining material consist of an 18-inch-
Z
wide zone of clean (less than 3 percent fines), granular material placed along the back of the wall. Pea
Ca
gravel is an acceptable drain material or drainage composite may also be used instead. The fiee-draining
Z
material should extend up the wall to I foot below the finished surface. The top foot of soil shoul d
m
consist of impermeable soil placed over plastic sheeting or building paper to minimize surface water or
fines migration into the footing drain. Footing drains should discharge into tightlines leading to an
appropriate collection and discharge point with convenient cleanouts to prolong the useful life of the
drains. Roof drains should not be connected or routed to wall or footing drains.