20040863.pdfDATE RECEIVED
CITY OF EDMONDS i .
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS
,P5PIP— A.A PFAI!tif L-7
cc MAILING ADDRESS
uj
z
z--z, 714 - R, ii? z, VI-7
0
CITY ZIP TELEPHONE
C7 r
r
NAME
tu
t: ADDRESS
U
cc Z' 0 kv
CITY
TELEPHONE
Itt E--- 492 Z
NAME Irmt 01)
ADDRESS
30ZL9 15�4.-+4)VAtff
CITY
ZIP
ELEPHONE
J5�A-RVAI+VvA
47L�107T
STATE LICENSE NUMBER
EXPIRATION DATE
C6-01 &Ai9t)N41033
PROPERTY TAX ACCOU "EL NO.
0 cq
713
NEW
RESIDENTIAL
1:1 PLUMBING MECH
ADDITION
COMMERCIAL
COMPLIANCE OR
1:1 CHANGE OF USE
REMODEL
MULTIFAMILY
1:1 SIGN
REPAIR
GRAD NG
CYDS
FENCE
1:1 ( X
D DEMOLISH
TANK
1:1 OTHER
GARAGE
CARPORT
RETAINING WALL
ROCKrRY
FIRE SPRINKLER
FIPP At ARM
(TYPE OF USE, BI,!.,9kNESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN:
w NUMBER NUMBER OF
OF DWELLING
o STORIES UNITS
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE
CRITICAL
AREAS
NUMBER
AMW MIMI r4-tS1PCMf:.
By
FT)
HEAT SOURCE GLAZING % LOT Rl 1"100
IV47— e
VESTED DA�
PLAN CHECK NO- A
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO
BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC
DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE
SEPARATE PERMISSION.
W PERMIT APPLICATION: 180DAYS
PERMIT LIMIT., I YEAR - PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN 100 DAYS
SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION
APPLICANT. ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE. HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESORS
W IN INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMI ESS FHE CITY OF
i
M EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND
tr
ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OFWIIATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY On INDIRECTLY
FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF 1111S PERMIT SHALL Nor BE
C3
_j DEEMED TO MODIFY. WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENT OF ANY Cl IN ORDINANCE
01 NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAY THE CITY's ABILITY TO ENFORCE 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 AUTIIORIZED AGENT OF
THE OWNER. I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC
TION AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY. NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED
IN V�61_ATION OF THE LA13OR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18.27,
sl�-: (07 11 OR GEN DAJEj6IG'NED/
M I/
USE
ZONEI'2
,JOB
ADDRESS
LERMIT EXPIRES
PERMIT
NUMBERA�',,/i"
SUITE/APT#
Ab
PLAT NAME/SUBDIVISiON NO.
LOT NO
LID NO.
LID FEE $
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP
TESCP Approved
RW Permit Required
street Use Permit Reri'd
EXISTING 1
PROPOSED
Inspection Roquitud
Sidowalk Required
REQUIRED DEDICATION FT
underground
Wiring required
ME;TER S
LINE SIZE
NO. OF FIXTURES
PfjV REQUIRED
'ZE
I It I
YES V NO 11
REMARKS I
OWN ER/CON TRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROWDRAINAGE
11605
ERING
FIRE REVIEWED BY
/ATE
:5.xz:
/I DAT7
Lu
z
z
G
z
Uj
VARIANCE OR CU HOREIINE OR ADBI I INSPECTION I BOND
RERD. POSTED
OYES KNO $
SEPA REVIEW SIGN AREA HEIGHT
COMPLETE EXEMPT ALLOWED PROPOSED ALLOWED
I ,, PROPOSP
EXP ;'�!5 1 'a Ll
LOT COVERAGE REQUIRED SETBACKS (Fr.) PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT)
ALLOWED PROPOSED FRONT SIDE BEAR FRON; UF�SIDE REAR
35"lo lo,q,,I,. jor IUI' 35 / 1-7 Z�
to 13, t 7q, z
PARKING LOT AREA I PC g DATE 5
BIT PFIXED 0.
Cf Mo I
REMARKs*L.v—,ct,vt/-kAP -jAC1Vje) qllq�e.
�e_tb'Acks wxet!—t- Y51to rvtk -Vr 4a6 Id-0
CHECKED BY
OCCUPANT
GROUP
SPECIAL INSPECTION JAREj)��/:Z_ 1:.56,1e7l
OCCUPANT
REQUIRED XYES LOAD
REMARKS 116
PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 108/FINAL INSPECTION REQ'D
��ey4l'!152 ,
VALUATION
$ 4 "n / -;�
Description
Plan Check
Building Permit
Plumbing
Mechanical
Grading
Engr. Review
Engr. Inspection
Fire Review
Fire Inspection
Landscapelnsp.
Recording Fee
ILI * �10
FEE Description FEE
State Surcharge
City Surcharge
Base Fee
'W .
CALL
FOR INSPECTION
(425)
771-0220
ATTENTION EXT 1333
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
Plan Chk. Deposit
Receipt #
Total Amt. Due 3i 4
Receipt # 2) /:�
APPLICATION APPROVAL
This application is not a permit until signed by the
Building Olficial or hisiher Depuly:and Fees are paid. and
receipt is acknowledged in space provided,
OFFICIALS SIGNATURE DAT E
'DATE
09/03 PRESS HARD -YOU ARE MAKING 4 COPIES
I
P'f- ).A , /�
OFIIGI14AL - FILE YELLOW - INSP&TC
PINK - OWNER GOLD - ASSESSOR
Vt
z
0
i
0
ITI
--I T1
0 M
C
M 0
0
0
0 C
M
M Z
01
C
0 -n
n ;d
>
M M
0
0
M
C/)
Cn
M C)
Z
z
z
0
1
0
IT!
mi
OlO A.�PROV�Q BY PLANNING
ZONE
V` ` 90o'a
.7 3�9
SETBACKST-�i-
�W - 39
_Ac-r,j.(-,*") IV E L�
714 4 7
L q
ACCP, 6 4�-*5 D/
OTHER
Iq Ll, IYD' zo(
HEIGHT-
+
70 e?o -t90 t (oo
75
z
0
rz
�'AZAI — 0
Ow
OM
c
0
m
0
00
c
M
4IVe, M. Z'
C:
M'tA kt c"
NW
ve, n
-n
two W14 K:� m m
0, CD
0 r-
0 m
c cn
r. C/)
M 0
Z
av
Z
\vj
en
69. "�S'
HEIGHT CALCS
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE CALCS
HOUSE:
HOUSE:
1,360 sf
A = +100.5
GARAGE:
574 sf
B = +112.5
DECK:
384 sf
C +98.5
COVERED DECK:
96 sf
D +112.5
COVERED PORCH:
64 sf
0
AVE GRADE = +106
DRIVEWAY:
960 sf
m
MAX HEIGHT = AVE GRADE 25'
CONCRETE STEPS:
320 sf
= 106 + 25
ASPHALT DRIVE:
960 sf
= 131
TOTAL:
4,718 sf
cn
PROPOSED HT = 130
0 M,
c
LOT COVERAGE
GARAGE:
HOUSE:
1,360 sf
0,
0
Oc
A= +106
GARAGE:
574 sf
B
C = +98.5
COVERED DECK:
96 sf
m
m z
D = +104.5
COVERED PORCH:
64 sf
io
c
AVE GRADE +105
TOTAL COVERAGE:
2,094 st
MAX HEIGHT = AVE GRADE + 15'
LOT AREA:
20,069 st
= 105 + 15
2'
0 -n
-n
= 120.0
PROPOSED HT = 119.9
COVERAG/AREA
10.4% or
--4
3:9
mm
LOTSLOPE
0
NORTH PROP LINE: 357o
om�
c CD
MIDWAY: 247o
c cl)
mo�
SOUTH PROP LINE: 2 0'7o
Z
c/)
z
0
F5
m
RnGE@
I N C 0 N P 0 0 A T 5 0
Geotechnical & Earthquake
Engineering Consultants
March 19, 2004
File No. 04-014
Jeff and Linda Beattie
Z
0
C/o Tim Hossner
0
M
Replinger-Hossner Architects
7203 — 360'Avenue SW
Seattle, WA 98128
Ui -i
M
Subject: Geotechnical Report
0
0
0
0
Beattie Residence
C:
rd
17304 — 73 Avenue West
XM
MZ
Edmonds Washington
10--1 1
C —
Z
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Beattie,
As requested, PanGEO Inc. completed a geotechnical engineering study to support the design
and construction of your new residence in Edmonds, Washington. This study was performed in
accordance with our proposal dated January 29, 2004, and was subsequently authorized by you
on February 6, 2004. Our service scope included reviewing readily available geologic data,
drilling four exploratory borings (including one hand hole) at the site, and developing the
conclusions and recommendations presented in this report. No environmental analyses
(including underground fuel oil tanks assessment) were part of our current scope of service.
SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The vacant site is located on the west -facing slope of me
Parrinville area north of Edmonds, overlooking Brown's
Bay and Admiralty Inlet (see Figure 1). The lot has a
rectangular shape, and is roughly 120 feet in the east -west
direction, and about 170 feet in the north south direction.
The lot is bordered on all sides by other residential
properties.
Plate 1. View of the project site looking I ne surface of me Me s vey Laninucky see
east, upslope from the SW comer of the Numerous animal borrows were observed on the site. The
proposed residence. east central portion of the site is gently sloping and forms a
FZF_C-EVV-E—E)-----,- 1 1F5:5T'_S_11*e_e1
se"1111C. %VA 9810i
Tel (206) 262-0370
r
APR 2 7 2004
Fax (206) 262-0314
PEPNAIT (-
,(-,I W-rcq
C/)
o -n
n
M M
0
0
0 M
C CO
C Cl)
M 0
Z
Z
--I
X
Cn
Z
0
i
0
M
Jeff and Linda Beattie
March 19, 2004
knoll, with the ground sloping off to the southwest, west and northwest. The steepest portion is
in the northwest comer of the site where the ground surface slopes at approximately 2H: 1 V.
Elsewhere the ground surface slopes at an approximate average inclination of 4H: IV. Maximum
relief on the site is approximately 45 feet. The lowest point on the site is in the northwest comer
of the lot. The north half, approximately, is open and covered with blackberries and other brushy
vegetation. The south half of the site supports a stand of large firs trees. All trees observed on
site were straight and vertical, with no pistol butts, leaning or other indications of soil instability. z
0
A shallow westward facing drainage swale runs along the north property boundary. i
We understand that you plan to build a new house at the site. The building layout is shown on
Figure 2. We also understand that, the house will include two levels, with a maximum
excavation of approximately 8 to 10 feet on the up -slope side of the building lower level
footprint. Fill will be placed to raise the grade within the footprint of the garage and the
driveway/terrace area. Maximum fill thickness is estimated to be about 7 feet. Retaining walls
will be constructed to retain the new fill.
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS
Three borings (BH-1, BH-2 and BH-3) were drilled at the site on February 19, 2004, to explore
the subsurface conditions. The approximate locations of the borings were measured in the field
from site features, mainly trees, using a Leitz lazer range finder. The approximate boring
locations are indicated on Figure 2.
The borings were drilled to depths of 121/2,73/4and 10 feet for BH-1, BH-2 and BH-3,
respectively, using a portable drill rig owned and operated by CN Drilling of Seattle. The drill
rig was equipped with a 4-inch outside diameter hollow stem auger. Soil samples were obtained
from the borings at 2Y2intervals. Standard penetration tests were performed in the borings using
a 2-inch outside diameter split -spoon sampler. The sampler was driven into the soil a distance of
18 inches using a 140-pound weight falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows
required for each 6-inch increment of sampler penetration was recorded. The blowcount
provides an empirical measure of the relative density of coliesionless soil, or the relative
consistency of fine-grained soils.
An engineering geologist from our firm was present throughout the field exploration program to
observe the drilling, assist in sampling, and to document the soil samples obtained from the
borings. The soil samples were classified using the system outlined on Figure 3. Summary
boring logs are included as Figures 4, 5, and 6.
In addition, a hand boring (HH-1) was excavated on the site on February 26, 2004, in the area of
the proposed garage retaining wall. This boring was terminated at a depth of about 3 feet due to
presence of very dense till. The summary log is included as Figure 7
1 04-014 Report.doc 2 PanGEO, Inc.
M
M
M 0
0
0 C:
M
M Z
C
C/)
0 -n
M M
0 U5
0 r-
0 M
C C/)
9 Cl)
M 0
Z
z
--I
X
z
0
q
0
M
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Based on their engineering characteristics, the site soils encountered in the borings are grouped
into three different units, as follows. Generalized subsurface soil profiles were prepared based
on the results of our explorations, and are shown in Figures 8 and 9.
Soil Unit 1 (Topsoil) — This unit is roughly I foot thick in borings BH- I through BH-3, and
was not present in HH-1. It consists of loose, dark brown, silty, moist, fine, mixed, organic -
bearing sand with some rounded gravel and cobbles. The soil unit contains high amounts of
humus, forest duff and other organic material mixed in. This unit is particularly soft due to
al burrowing.
Soil Unit 2 (Ablation Till)— This unit extends to a depth of 3 to 4 feet below surface in the
borings, and consists of loose, dark red or yellow brown, silty, moist, fine sand with some
rounded gravel and cobbles. This unit is interpreted as ablation till, and is anticipated to
exhibit moderate compressibility.
Soil Unit 3 (Vashon Till) — Below the Ablation Till the borings encountered very dense,
gray, silty, fine to medium sand with gravel. This unit is interpreted as Vashon till. The
upper portion of this unit is weathered. This unit is anticipated to exhibit low
compressibility and high strength characteristics.
No groundwater was observed in the borings. However, it should be noted that till soils often
contain relatively clean sand seams, and groundwater seepage could be present in these sand
seams. It should also be noted that groundwater conditions at the site may vary depending on
seasonal rainfall.
SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION
Our review of Meadowdale Landslide Area map at the City of Edmonds indicates that the site is
located south of the high -risk landslide area (southern boundary of the Meadowdale Landslide
Area is near West 1640' Street). Based on the results of our field explorations and our site
reconnaissance, it is our opinion that the site is globally stable in its present configuration. All
large trees presently on the site are very straight with no bending or tilting, suggesting little or no
creep of surficial soils. However, some surficial erosion has taken place along the north and
south property margins, where shallow swales occur. The hummocky surficial topography,
sometimes an indication of instability, is in this case due to animal burrowing. No other signs of
instability were observed at the site during our visits.
It is also our opinion that your house as currently planned will not increase the potential for slope
instability, provided that the recommendations outlined in this report are properly incorporated
into the design and construction of the residence.
04-014 Report.doc 3 PanGEO, Inc.
Z
0
M
C
M
0
0
rn
M Z
Cn
0 _n
-n
--I
M M
0
0
0 M
9 Cl)
M 0
Z
7-1
Z
Z
0
I
0
M
Jeff and Linda Beattie
March 19, 2004
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
SEISM]c DESIGN PARAMETERS
Based on the Uniform Building Code (UBC, 1997), the project site is located within Seismic
Zone 3. If the UBC design methodology is used, it is our opinion that the site can be classified
as UBC Soil Type Sc.
FoOTINGS
Conventional spread and strip footings are appropriate for the project. All footings should bear
on the dense to very dense Vashon till (Soil Unit 3), or compacted structural fill placed on
Vashon Till. Base on the results of our subsurface exploration, we estimate that Soil Unit 3 to be
present at a depth of about 3 to 4 feet below the existing ground surface. We recommend that a
maximum allowable bearing pressure of 4,000 psf be used for sizing the footings. The
recommended allowable bearing pressure may be increased by 1/3 for transient conditions such
as wind and seismic loading. All footings should be embedded a minimum of 18 inches below
adjacent grade
Lateral forces from wind/seismic loading or un-balanced earth pressures may be resisted by the
combination of passive earth pressures acting against the embedded portions of the foundations
and by friction acting on the base of the foundations. Passive resistance values may be
determined using an equivalent fluid weight of 350 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). This value
includes a safety factor of about 1.5 assuming that properly compacted granular fill will be
placed adjacent to and surrounding the footings. A frictional coefficient of 0.5 may be used to
determine the frictional resistance at the base of the footings. This coefficient also includes a
factor safety of approximate 1.5.
All footing excavations should be trimmed neat and the footing subgrades should be carefully
prepared. Any loose or softened soil should be removed from the footing excavation. Footing
subgrade should be verified by PanGEO to confirm that the exposed footing subgrade is
consistent with the expected conditions and adequate to support the design bearing pressure.
Footings designed and constructed as recommended above are expected to perform satisfactory.
We estimate that the footing settlement under the design load to be about Y2inch and the
differential settlement to be about 1/4inch.
Footing Drain - Conventional footing drains should be installed along the outer footing
perimeter. The footing drain should consist of a 4-inch diameter perforated pipe embedded in at
least 6 inches of pea gravel or washed gravel. The footing drain should be equipped with clean -
outs that allow periodic inspection and maintenance. The drain should conduct intercepted
groundwater away from the foundation area and discharge it to an appropriate facility. The
footing drain should not be connected with the roof drain system.
04-014 Report.doc 4 PanGtO, Inc.
Z
0
0
M
rn-
M
C
M
0
0
0
X M
M Z
—Z
cl)
0 -T1
n
M M
055
0 r-
0 M
C Cn
M 0
Z
X
Z
Z
0
1
0
M
RETAINING/BASEMENT WALL
We anticipate that conventional concrete retaining walls will be used to retained both cut and fill
for this project. All retaining walls should be properly designed to resist the pressure exerted by
the soils behind the walls and surcharge loads. Presented below are our geotechnical
recommendations for the design and construction of walls.
Lateral Earth Pressures — Walls with level backfill that are unrestrained, or free to rotate at
the top, should be designed for a horizontal active equivalent fluid unit weight of 35 pcf. If
restrained walls are required such as typical basement walls, they should be designed for 45
pcf. Where sloping ground surface (no steeper than 2H:IV) is present behind the walls, the
recommended earth pressures should be increase by 20 percent to account for the effect of
backslope
Surcharge — Surcharge loads, where present, should also be included in the design of
retaining walls. We recommend that a lateral load coefficient of 0.3 be used to compute the
lateral pressure on the wall face resulting from surcharge loads located within a horizontal
distance of one-half wall height.
Wall Footing — See Footing section above
Wall Backfill — The existing on -site soils are not suitable for wall backfill as it provides
poor drainage characteristics and difficult to compact when wet. Free draining granular
soils (1 Y4 inch maximum size and less than 7% fines) are recommended for -use as wall
backfill.
Wall Drainage — As a minimum, a 4-inch diameter perforated drainpipe should be placed
along the outer perimeter of wall footings, surrounded by at least 6-inches of pea gravel or
washed gravel. The drainpipe should be graded to direct water away from the backfill and
subgrade soils and to a suitable outlet. Alternatively, where appropriate, 3-inch diameter
weep holes should be provided along the base of wall at 6-foot intervals.
Damp Proofing — All basement walls should be protected with a damp proofing compound.
In addition to a concrete wall, a MSE wall such as a Keystone wall is also considered appropriate
to retain the fill to be place on the north side of the garage. If you plan to use MSE wall on this
project, PanGEO should be consulted to provide additional design recommendations.
FLOOR SLAB/CONCRETE PAVEMENT
We understand that on -grade concrete slabs are planned for the garage area and for the up -slope
portion of the house. All concrete slabs and pavements should be supported on dense native
glacial till (Units 2 or 3) or properly compacted structural fill, and be provided with an adequate
04-014 Repoitdoc 5 PanGEO, Inc.
Z
0
q
0
Ri
--i -n
r
M
C 0
M 0
—1 0
0 C:
-49
X M
M Z
0
o -n
ri
M M
0 U5
0 r-
0 M
C C/)
F, 0)
M 0
Z r-
.iT
X
-1
X
Z
Z
0
i
0
M
A
moisture break or drainage provisions. The drainage layer should consist of a minimum of 4
inches of free -draining, crushed rock or well -graded sand and gravel which is compacted to a
firm and unyielding condition. We recommend that the drainage material have a maximum
particle size of % inch, with no more than 80 percent passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 5
percent passing the U.S. Standard No. 100 sieve. For interior floor slabs, we recommend that a
polyethylene vapor barrier (10 mil minimum) be placed directly below the slab.
Where concrete slabs are designed as beams on an elastic foundation, the compacted subgrade
should be assumed to have a modulus of subgrade reaction of 80 pounds per cubic inch (pci).
CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
TEMPORARY EXCAVATION
Excavation will be required for the eastern portion of the main house, and along the access
driveway. We anticipate the maximum depth of excavation to be about 8 feet. Temporary
excavations can be accomplished with conventional excavating equipment. Maintenance of safe
working conditions, including temporary excavation stability, is the responsibility of the
contractor since the contractor has control over factors during construction which are critical to
the stability of the slope, including the length of time the slope is left open, and to some extent
when the slope is left open in terms of weather conditions. For planning purposes, excavations
deeper than 4 feet should be sloped no steeper than '/2H: 1 V.
It should be noted that water -bearing sand lenses could be present in the excavation. The amount
of groundwater seepage, if encountered, is anticipated to be quite limited and likely can be
controlled by shallow ditches along the toe of excavation.
STRUCTURAL FILL AND COMPACTION
The on -site soils may be used as general fill, but not suitable as wall backfill or structural fill for
supporting pavements or load -bearing elements. Structural fill and wall backfill should consist
of freely draining, granular soils with a maximum dimension of I 1/4inch, and less than 7 percent
passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve. Fill materials should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8
inches of thickness when loosely placed. Thinner lifts may be necessary to achieve proper
compaction where small compaction equipment is used.
Structural fill should be properly moisture conditioned, placed in loose, horizontal lifts less than
8 inches in thickness, and compacted to at least 95 percent maximum density, determined using
ASTM D 1557 (Modified Proctor). The procedure to achieve proper density of a compacted fill
depends on the size and type of compacting equipment, the number of passes, thickness of the
layer being compacted, and certain soil properties. in areas where the size of the excavation
04-014 Report.doc
R
PanGE0, Inc.
Z
0
i
0
M
Cl)
M
C
M
0
0
0 C
4 K
X M
M Z
o -n
n.
M M
0
0
0 M
C C/)
9 (n
M 0
Z
3:
>
Z
--f
X
Cl)
Z
0
M
restricts the use of heavy equipment, smaller equipment can be used, but the soil must be placed
in thin enough layers to achieve the required relative compaction.
Small compaction equipment should be used within 2 feet concrete walls to avoid over -stressing
the wall. Backfill within 2 feet of walls should be compacted to 90 percent maximum density.
Z
0
WET WEATHER EARTHWORK RECOMMENDATIONS
4
0
The site soils contain a considerable percentage of fines, and are therefore moisture sensitive. As
a result, it may be more economical to conduct earthwork activities during the drier summer
months. If earthwork is to be performed in wet weather conditions, the following general
Ui
recommendations should be followed:
M
C 0
M
e Any softened soils should be removed and replaced with properly compacted granular
0
--1 0
0
fill.
C
M
M Z
e Site stripping, excavation and subgrade preparation should be followed promptly by
0 --1
—Z
the placement and compaction of clean structural fill, capillary break material or base
C
course material.
X
co
e Footing subgrades must be protected from softening from rainfall. A mud seal (2- to
0 _n
n
4-inch layer of I 1/2-sack lean mix concrete) may be constructed over recently
excavated footing subgrade to provide adequate protection against softening from
M M
0—
Cn
rainfbLI1.
0 r—
0 M
a The size and type of construction equipment used may have to be limited to prevent
C co
m Zn
soil disturbance.
M 0
Z
e During wet weather, the allowable fines content (material by weight passing the #200
sieve) of the structural fill should be reduced to no more than 5 percent, based on the
portion passing3/4-inch sieve. The fines should be non -plastic.
Z
0 The ground surface within the construction area should be graded to promote run-off
__q
3:
of surface water and to prevent the ponding of water.
(n
Z
0 Bales of straw and/or geotextile silt fences should be strategically located to control
0
i
0
erosion and the movement of soil. As a minimum, erosion control along the
M
downslope side of any stripped areas should be in place before construction proceeds.
EROSION CONSIDERATIONS
Surface runoff can be controlled during construction by careful grading practices. Typically, this
includes the construction of shallow, upgrade perimeter ditches or low earthen berms to collect
runoff and prevent water from entering the excavation. All collected water should be directed to
a positive and permanent discharge system such as a storm sewer.
04-014 Report.doc 7 PanGEO, Inc.
During construction, the downslope margins of all stripped areas should be equipped with
erosion control structures to prevent the egress of eroded soils. Erosion control measures should
consist of silt fencing supported by steel stakes placed at intervals. The lower portion of the
fencing should be buried in a shallow trench located at the foot of the fence on the upslope side.
The silt fence may be further reinforced with hay bales.
Permanent control of surface water and roof runoff should be incorporated in the final grading
z
0
design. Water should not be allowed to pond immediately adjacent to paved areas or buildings.
T
All collected runoff should be directed into conduits that carry into storm drain systems or other
appropriate outlets.
M
C
ADDITIONAL SERVICES
M
--i 0
To confirm that our recommendations are properly incorporated into the design and construction
00
C
of the proposed residential structure, PanGEO should be retained to conduct a review of the final
M M
M Z
project plans and specifications, and to perform a field -monitoring program during construction.
r,) --i
C -2
Specifically, we anticipate that the following additional services will be needed:
>
final
Cn
-n
o Review project plans and specifications
0
Observe and monitor stability of temporary excavation
M M
Observe footing subgrade
0
0
Verify proper installation of footing and retaining wall drains
0 M
C CD
Verify placement and compaction of structural fill
9 ch
M 0
Z
Other consultation as may be required during construction
X
Modific'ations to our recommendations presented in this report may be necessary, based'on the
actual conditions encountered during construction.
z
CLOSURE
Cn
z
We have prepared this report for use by the Beatties and the project team. Recommendations
0
--I
0
contained in this report are based on a site reconnaissance, a subsurface exploration program,
M
review of pertinent subsurface information, and our understanding of the project. The study was
performed using a mutually agreed -upon scope of work.
Variations in soil conditions may exist at locations away from the explorations and the actual
conditions underlying the site. The nature and extent of soil variations may not be evident until
construction occurs. If any soil conditions are encountered at the site that are different from
those described in this report, we should be notified immediately to review the applicability of
our recommendations. Additionally, we should also be notified to review the applicability of our
recommendations if there are any changes in the project scope.
04-014 RcporLdoc 8 PanGEO, Inc.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LJ
I
I
The scope of our work does not include services related to construction safety precautions. Our
recommendations are not intended to direct the contractors' methods, techniques, sequences or
procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design.
Additionally, the scope of our work specifically excludes the assessment of environmental
characteristics, particularly those involving hazardous substances.
This report has been prepared for planning and design purposes for specific application to the
proposed project in accordance with the generally accepted standards of local practice at the time
this report was written. No warranty, express or implied, is made.
This report may be used only by the client and for the purposes stated, within a reasonable time
from its issuance. Land use, site conditions (both off and on -site), or other factors including
advances in our understanding of applied science, may change over time and could materially
affect our findings. Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after 24 months from its
issuance. PanGEO should be notified if the project is delayed by more than 24 months from the
date of this report so that we may review the applicability of our conclusions considering the
time lapse.
It is the client's responsibility to see that all parties to this project, including the designer,
contractor, subcontractors, etc., are made aware of this report in its entirety. The use of
information contained in this report for bidding purposes should be done at the contractor's
option and risk. Any party other than the client who wishes to use this report shall notify
PanGEO of such intended use and for permission to copy this report. Based on the intended use
of the report, PanGEO may require that additional work be performed and that an updated report
be reissued. Noncompliance with any of these requirements will release PanGEO from any
liability resulting from the use this report.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service.
Sincerely,
*.ek 1712-Of
J�X�PJRES, �0/1 1�2.1.zvps
Siew L. Tan, P.E.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
04-014 Reportdoc
W. Paul Grant, P.E.
Principal
9 PanGEO, Inc.
Z
0
4
0
M
:; 9
Vi
M
0
0
W_i 0
0 C
M
M Z
10 --1
C —Z
CO
o -n
n
M M
0
0
0 M
C C/)
90)
M 0
Z F_
Z
--I
M
CD
Z
0
1
0
M
Jeff and Linda Beattie
March 19, 2004
Enclosures:
Figure I Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Site and Exploration Plan
Figure 3 Terms and Symbols for Boring Logs
Figure 4 Log of Test Boring BH- I
Figure 5 Log of Test Boring BH-2
Figure 6 Log of Test Boring BH-3
Figure 7 Log of Test Boring H-H-1
Figure 8 Generalized Section A -A'
vi -1
Figure 9 Generalized Section B-B'
rn
M
M
mz�
C
> Z.
CI)
-n
n
M
M
0
rr;.
0
C Ch
Cn
M 0!
Z r
Z
3:
Z
M
04-014 ReporLdoc 10
PanGEO, Inc.
z
0
i
0
m
--4 -n
0 m
C 0
m 0
--10
0 C:
M
mz
C
CD
0 -n
n
M m
0
0
0
Cn
co
M 0
Z
X
z
Cl)
z
0
i
0
m
Approx. Scale: 1 '/2 mile
CP Beattie Residence VICINITY MAP
.E
13
PmGE@) 17304 73rd Ave. West
5
N C 0 a P 0 R A T E D Edmonds, Washington We No
04-014
9
20 55
z
26 0
36
36
0
40
A 4t
w
H-1
�b - Existing j:�arage Cl) --I
OG T
�.$tdhe -I! m
,Top @ C
tExis:fing ar:age mo
0
GSO"G&kL 57-
0
C
0
0
uw
m
0. rn z
C
H-1 > z
10
r
CD
70
% 0 -n
n
Existing
.. %
BH-2 Main House m M
65 0
0 rn
C/)
B 60.� 9 C/)
U 'JE
xi'
Mai
M 0,
Z
0
5
3:
U
>
z
3:
tk' U5
z
0
0
m
Legend:
Approx. Borehole Location
Approx. Hand Boring Location
Note: Base map provided by
Approx. Scale B 13- Location of Subsurface Replinger-Hossner Architects
A ----A Profile (see Figures 8 and 9)
1/32"
pBeattie Residence SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN
MGEe 17304 73rd Ave. West
C a R P 0 Edmonds, Washington
R A T E D project Nc Floure No
04-014 2
I
I
Pj
I
I
Ll
I
I
Ll
I
RELATIVE DENSITY I CONSISTENCY
Density
SPT
N-values
Approx. Relative
Density
Consistency
SPT
N-values
Approx. Undrained Shear
Strength (psf)
Very Loose
<4
<15
Very Soft
<2
<250
Loose
4 to 10
`15-35
Soft
2 to 4
250-500
Med. Dense
`10 to 30
35-65
Med. Stiff
4to 8
500-1000
Dense
30 to 50
65-85
Stiff
8 to `15
1000-2000
Very Dense
>50
85-100
Very Stiff
15 to 30
2000-4000
Hard
>30
>4000
I INIFIFD Rf)II rill ASSIFICATION SYSTF-M
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GROUP DESCRIPTIONS
RX
GW: Well -graded GRAVEL
Gravel
GRAVEL (<5% fines)
............................................................
GP Poorly -graded GRAVEL
50% or more of the coarse
fraction retained on the #4
GM: Sit t y GRAVE L
sieve. Use dual symbols (eg.
GRAVEL (>12% fines)
... 6 ............. 6 ........................... 6 ..............
GP -GM) for 5% to 12% fines.
GC: Clayey GRAVEL
6 ...........
.....................................
6 .......... 6 ............
..... . .............................
SW Well -graded SAND
Sand
SAND (<5% fines)
...................................................
SP Poody-graded SAND
so% or more of the coarse
fraction passing the #4 sieve.
...................................
..
.%
.
.:;..
................................................ ............
' Silty SAND
SM-
Use dual symbols leg. SP-SM)
SAND (>12% fines)
............................................................
for 5% to 12% fines.
SC : Clayey SAND
......................................................................
..... . .....................................................
ML: SILT
......... ..................................................
Liquid Limit < 50
CL : Lean SILT
1-u
......................................................
OL: Organic SILT or CLAY
Slit and Clay
50%or more passing #200 sieve
MH Elastic SILT
.............................................................
Liquid Limit > 50
CH * Fat CLAY
............................................................
OH Organic SILT or CLAY
.................................................................. ....
Highly Organic Soils
..... I ....... ................................................
PT PEAT
Notes: 1. Soil exploration I s contain material descriptions based on visual observation and field tests using a system
modified from the Unflilorm Soil Classification System USCS). Where necessary laboratory tests have been
conducted (as noted in the 'Other TestsN column), uril�l descriptions may include a classification. Please refer to the
discussions in the report text for a more complete description of the subsurface conditions.
2. The graphic symbols given above are not inclusive of all symbols that may appear on the borehole logs.
Other symbols may be used where field observations indicated mixed soil constituents or dual constituenT materials.
DESCRIPTIONS OF SOIL STRUCTURES
Layered:
Units of material distinguished by color and/or
composition from matehal units above and below
Laminated:
Layers of soil typically 0.05 to 1 mm thick, max. I cm
Lens:
Layer of soil that pinches out laterally
Interlayered:
Alternating layers of differing soil material
Pocket:
Erratic, discontinuous deposit of limited extent
Homogeneous:
Soil with uniform color and composition throughout
Fissured:
Breaks along defined planes
SlIckensided:
Fracture planes that are polished or glossy
Blocky:
Angular soil lumps that resist breakdown
Disrupted:
Soil that is broken and mixed
Scattered:
Less than one per foot
Numerous:
More than one per foot
BCN:
Angle between bedding plane and a plane
normal to core axis
AK@bM;0V1_=WtE 114 0 1 C I I I LVJ e K
SIZE I SIEVE RANGE
COMPONENT
SIZE / SIEVE RANGE
-COMPONENT
Boulder: > 12 inches
Sand
Cobbles: 3 to 12 inches
Coarse Sand:
#4 to #10 sieve (4.5 to 2.0 mm)
Gravel
Medium Sand:
#10 to #40 sieve (2.0 to 0.42 mm)
Coarse Gravel: 3 to 314 inches
Fine Sand:
#40 to #200 sieve (0.42 to 0.074 m,4..
Fine Gravel: 314 inches to #4 sieve
Slit
0.074 to 0.002 mm
Clay
<0.002 mrn
PanGE( )
I N C 0 R P 0 R A T 9 D
Phone: 206.262.0370-
Terms and Symbols for
Boring and Test Pit Logs
TEST SYMBOLS
for In Situ and Laboratory Tests
listed in "Other Tests" column.
CBR California Bearing Ratio
comp Compaction Tests
Con Consolidation
DD Dry Density
DS Direct Shear
%F Fines Content
GS Grain Size
Perm Permeability
PP Pocket Penetrometer
R R-value
SG Specific Gravity
TV Torvane
TXC Tdaxial Compression
Ucc Unconfined Compression
SYMBOLS
SamplelIn Situ test types and Intervals
2-inch OD Split Spoon, SPT
(140-lb. hammer, 30' drop)
3.25-inch OD Split Spoon
(300-lb hammer, 30, drop)
Non-standard penetration
test (see boring log for details)
Thin wall (Shelby) tube
Grab
Rock core
Vane Shear
MONITORING WELL
Groundwater Level at
time of drilling (ATD)
static Groundwater Level
Cement / Concrete Seal
Bentorilte grout I seal
Silica sand backfill
Slotted Up
Slough
Bottom of Boring
MOISTURE CONTENT
Dry Dusty, dry to the touch
Moist Damp but no visible water
Wet Visible free water
Figure 3
z
0
4
0
M
--I -n
0 M
C
M
0
0
0 C::
4 r.
X rn
M Z
C/)
o -n
n
M M
0
0
0 rn
C C/)
9 Cn
M 0
Z
X
z
__4
:C
0)
z
0
i
0
IT!
I
0)
E
w
0
= F-
CD
<
Z
0 (L
M U)
0
0
M
>
cm
C
0
r-
2
o
C3)
c CL
E
cL.
0
�_f M
co
NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE
IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT.
's
I
INNE
a)
a)
E
0,0
8
-0
c�
0
V) a)
r
a)
z
E
0
F_
a)
E
0
(L
C13
cMj__
cm
0
0
en
_0 —M
U)
r—
= a)
E r_
..o
LLI
3::5
a ui
0-0
0
z
z
< 0
<
H
<
U)'o
c:
a) 0
a) M
c
ca
Lu
a)
8
ui 0)
6,0
a)
3:,o
a
0 a
<
�: >:::�-
0 M
�a
6
12 CL
oc
CD
a) -0
c
0
E
(n
0
ca 0
0
0
U) a M
0 :3:5
'D
w
00
0 0 <
loqwAS'
a)
>
<
n
w
-2
C43
a)
>%
w
Sisa-L lqqjO
cc
9
c)
0
-Ul 9 / SMOIE3
C-4
Cn
Ln
L:
a)
edA _L eldweS
.0
E
E
0
M
-ON eldweS
z
=
-ff.0
a.
0
-5
8
0
-1
0
0
0
[ (:4)'qldeCl
a)
E
0
V)
cn
E
0 i2
L)
c:
vi
a)
Z.9
cf)
V)
0
(n
ca 31 o
M
ch >4) w
:5
cu
0 M
>
E
>1
c.0 E
0
cn _21
r
>
0
13 0
a)
V) -0
r_ c
cc
-0
=3 -0
0 a)
a)
a)
0
> =r- E
F-
IV cv)
c�
cl)
............... A ................. .. I ..................
A........... .....................
............... ........
............... .................. .....................
............... .................. ............ ........
............... .................. .................. _
.............. I ................... .....................
............... ... I ............... .....................
. .............................. ................... .
.............. ....................................... .
.........................................................
.........................................................
.............. ................... ...................
.............. ................... ... I ............... ..
.............. ......................
......... ..........................................
............... I ..................................
.............. ................... . I ....................
............... I ...........................................
:3
0
M
0
0
z
0
0
E
0
0
m
S2 tn tn Lo
0 0 0
Lo In Lo Ln
N - N — — —
M IT to W
cl) U) (b ch
I I —T-1 I I I i a I I a I I a
N
CD
I
MOW
14Ct -r--
4-
0
E
E
4)
(A
>1
gn
'a
ca
a)
=7
k
c:
M
ca
0
a)
E
M
cm
E
0
a)
cc
cc
E
0-
U)
c
0
Lu
(n
E
cr
LL
0
M
0
E
cn
x
0
0 0
1 1 a
C) a)
CL
CL
M
v:
C-4 � �:C Z
C
Ig
a)
(n
w
Ca)L
:CD
a)
(n
0) 0.
-= E
t�
c
o
CL
cu M
on
04
U.co
.2
a) a) CL
0 -6 —0
04
CU
E
0 a) a) o
cc
CD
a) 0 0,0
co
C-4
M
a)
4) cm
E cn
w
0 M 0
0
no
Project: Beattie Residence
Surface Elevation: 52.0ft
Job Number: 04-014
Top of Casing Elev.: NA
Location: 17304 73rd Ave. W., Edmonds, WA Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Coordinates: not surveyed
Sampling Method: SPT
N-Value A
0 a) a Cn
z Cn
CD a)
—
0
PL
Moisture LL
CD
-a CD L_
.0
E
1
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
0 1
CL a)
a) E E �r
CU M 0
>1
U)
RQD
M
Recovery M
U) CO a3 0
0
50 100
0 2
L1. A..* -S'_'
Loose, dark brown, silty fine SAND with organics: moist, some fine
z
to coarse - rounded gravel and cobbles with humus/forest duff. (Unit
S_1
1 -Topsoil).
0
3
Loose, red brown, silty fine SAND and fine sandy SILT: moist, some
ITI
2
fine to coarse - rounded gravel and cobbles. (Unit 2 - Ablation Till).
— — — — — — — — — — — —
-n
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Medium denE ;e, yellow brown, fine to coarse SAND with silt moist, . . . . .
. . . . . . .
--I
W
some fine to coarse gravel and silt, mass. (Unit 2 - Ablation Till).
0 M
S-2
C
M 0
16
4
Very dense, brown gray, fine SAND with silt: moist, trace rounded
3 Vashon Till).
. . . . . . .
0
0 C
gravel, occasional mottles. (Unit -
M
M
. . . . . . . . . .
Z
JD --I
S-3 50/6
C z
6
-n
-n
S-4 50/3
Fine to c arse sand, moist to wet, indistinct layering.
. .........
M 171
8
Bottom of Boring. Possible seepage zone at about 8 feet..
. . . . . .
0
0 IT!
Cn
Cn
M 0
Z
10-
X
z
.........
.........
Cn
z
.......
0
IT!
14 -
...
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
W
W
161
Compl ' etion Depth:
7.8ft
Remarks: SPT hammer operated using a cat -head system
co
Date Borehole Started:
2/19/04
9
Date Borehole Completed:
2/19/04
9
Logged By:
SHE
W
0
Drilling Company:
CN Drilling
LLI
0:
LOG OF TEST BORING BH-2
0
co
FbnGEI@
LL
0
Figure 5
1 M C 0 R P 0 R A T
E 0
Phone: 206.262.0370
The stratification lines represent approximate boundaries. The transition may be gradual.
Sheet 1 of I
NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE
IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT-.
..............
............... . ...... . .............. ............... ................... .......................
................................ ................ ............... ............................ I ..............................
...................................... ......... . .............. ............... ........................................................... 0
.......................... .............. .............. ...........................................................
. ................. ...............
............................ ............. .............. ..................... I ................. ......................
............................. ......... ......... -i,-.
> .................................... ............. i7L
.............. .............. .................. .......................................
.... .......... ...................................... ..
r ..... ................ ............... .................... I
.4 ......................... ...............
........... ................ ............... ............................................................
�!e ul ........... ................ .............. .......................................
0 ..... .... .......... ............... .............. .......................................................... ..
z.... ........... ............... .............. ..............................................................
..... ........... ................ ............... ...................................... ................... ..
a) ......... ................ ................ ................................ I ...... .............. E
< ................... ....................................... cu
. ........... . ................ ...............
E .......... ............... ....................................... ...................
........... . ................
.......... ...... ................... ................... ...................
C a) ...........
3) .......... ...........................................................
:3 .......... ......... ................ ...............
.......... ........ ............. ..............
o 0
c� < 0 a- >1 cm
co Z 3: co r- 0
= n
0 .:. a CD
0) a) a) CL= 4)
,a
E 0 UT n
02 E :3
a)
.0 0 a) cm gn 0) ;-Z.. E; 0 3.1 >. 'D
= a. 2= m
m cm 0 E =>, �cn; =` 10
> 00 .50 Im a)
V) ca 'D cc d)
0) 0 E 0 a) 10 w a) cc
UJ (a CL 0. c a) CL =1
a) z FA - m 'a
.5 �tr- �o 0
'D 0 m
0 cb 0 a. 0 a)
o a E Qc) U) r- z C.2 c 't- cm
cL :E E cc (D E
o r- M (L ca in a)
I U) E 0 m
U) cm >1
ca W C3 CD r- cc
C) cm r- a r- B
cl) � = Z a 0 !2 E
w 0 si < Cc E > a) rz
a) co a) i-5 - >1 4) c/) .0
> 4) m �i U)
.0 'D > U)
3-.0 —.0— (1) ui cc cc a
00 CL U) cc ca
< L) ca 0 fn F-
z -0 4. 0 m .@ E
R < r- --- = E 0
0
Lij U) m U) 0 m cc 13 E (D LL
ca 0) 9 >
-6 CL -5 :5 >1 cc) 0 co
> 0 >< MS2 > m (1) 0
CL M u) CD ui
tu �- m — r" . (D
" , 0 r
cn t3) r- a Im IE =01 0) 4)
010 .2 cq tr- (a
-0 -0 c c:
(L) 0 r
0 d) =3 >' c
0*0 0 :3
m M*: E 0
.2 a tm 0
< *: =3 " 0 0 a) �o
0 2 o o r- 4) 0 CD
� 0 ".a
tz E 0) a) a)
c: .> =li E
a) (n a) Lr- 0
0 0 U) E
uo) "co E 0 cc cm
ca x
E 00 0 0 a) a) 0 cc 0
_0 -i L) -i L) U) U) m
00 rL
C Lij
D m
loqwAS
c
�ci U) L)
>
Sjsq-L JqqjO
cr) (j)
r' 2! a) —CL cc o a)
E
0 (D co 0 a —
ce) to 51
a) r- 0 C-4 (D I . c
0 U) L) c
Lo m
ul 9 SMOI13 cj Ln cl) U) a) cu (b N*410,f L C14 0
0 0 CL oi
= r- �,% E W
a) ca 0 C)
(n adA_L oldweS 2 L)
Lo 0 0 -0 tm
cv cv) M M a)
I I (n
0 'ON oldweS co U) w �;
0 cl) U) E 2 C W
z (u cm —
0 M 0 *c 20 _r_
0 D
0 0 0 co
-"-A'--l—jj-LV3eK�tr0 310H31108:10VOI
IS LOE)*039
NVd NO SaU3
NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE
IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT.
a
c� **"** -------- : ................... .................. ...........
.................... .................. ......................................
................... .................. ...................................... ................... .................. .................. ..... I ..............
... .................. ....................
.................... ...... , ... ' ******'*"* ... * ... * **"*'** ... '**'*"*"* ... **** '******* ....
............... : .... .................. ..................................... ........
> ...................................... ................... .................. .................. ....................
0 ................ .................. ........... .................. .................. ....................
.................... .................. ...................................... ........ ......... ....................
........................ ................... .................. .........
................... .................. ............ .................. .................. .................. .. I ................
a) ........................................................... ...................
C)
U) ............................................................. I ................... ......................................
0 .................... ..................
Im ...............................................................................................................................................................
z............................................................ I ..................................................................................................
.............................................................................. ................... I ...........................................................
.............. ................... I .................. ....................................... .................... ..................
a............ ; ....... ................... ................... ................... ................... ...................
w. . .. .............. .................... ............ ................... ...................
. ...................
. ............. ............ .
................. ................... .............. . ................ ............ ......... .........
..................
................... ............
--Rol
<
US z
a a)
0
13
ca CD 0
0
(o co
CD
z
0
o a
E
:3 0 'r- M
iz
a-
C/) I— U)
Lo
LLI
0
E
'a
Lu
loqwAS
ai
-2
a) >1
cr) 0)
Sjsq_L JqqjO
m 9 M
0 -tr 1.- 0
M 0
-ul 9 / SMOIE]
adA L eldweS
E
0
C5
Z
E
Li c
z 0
<
<
c:
Fn c
2
>
0 C)
>1
-6.r-
215
*: a)
0
E
0
00
_j
E -ON eldweS
m .2 '2
z — I
.0 8 0
aF -0 0 c' (U) lqlde(l o
2
0
E
0
0
C;
0)
= 0
Zc
0
E
0
> =
a] m o
o bi m
04
0
C14
To]
HE
0
C14
0
3:
co
co
C)
>1
C13
E
cl)
0
ul
LL
0
ui
0
.r
m
*0
:3
0
E
x
0
CD 0
I I
CD cc) W
m
CL
m
cm! QN =u)
'a),
:CD
(D CL
E
r�
r_
o
—CL c
c)
UL(o
a) M
0 0
cli
0
E
0 P.) (1) M o
w
to
0 8.0
E 4) a) cm.—
00) =r-
w
o co
(D 0 a 0
no
04-014 cross sectlon NorthAA.grf w/ 04-014 Set-up Sheet.Ass and 03-076 StIcklogs.x15 311 SM4 (9:01). SHE
Property Line
Property Line
Al
Limits of House A
80
80
75
75
Proposed Garage and Driveway Grade (Elev. 57' BH-1
70
70
65
1
Unit 1: Topsoil BH-3 ::?
-WIR
65
Unit 2: Loose Ablation Till
60
60
5015.-
55
? 5014
Fill 50/6
55
50/6
50
C:
50 =-
Existing Ground Surface
— Unit 3: Very Dense Vashon Till
HH-1
45
o
45
40
CU
>
40
35
35
di-
30
30
25
25
ap rox. 20 degrees
20
20
15
115
0 5 10 15 20
10
10
Scale in Feet
LEGEND
Borehole Symbols
Boring
Designation
Notes:
1. Ground profile based on the topographic survey, provided by others (see Figure 2)
BH-1
2.
See Figure 2 for location of Section A -A'
3.
Subsurface profile based on interpolation of widely -spaced test borings, actual
S IT N-value
F 7-- / Groundwater table
2 - -Y
4.
conditions should be anticipated to vary.
All footings should be founded on Unit 3 - very dense Vashon Till
25
26-- Silt
-7 >50 -
Soil description
Beattie Residence GENERALIZED SECTION A -A'
PmGE8
17304 73rd Ave. West
Geologic Contact
Edmonds, Washington
(approximate)
1 0 C 0 R P 0 M A T 5 V
Project No. 1171gure No.
k
04-014 cross section South9B.grf w/ 04-014 Set-up SheeLxlss and 04-014 aticklogs.xis 3118104 (11:39SHE
B
80
75
70
65
60
55
42
50
0 45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
Property Line
Limits of House I
>
Unit 1: TOP]
Unit 2: Loo Ablation Till
Proposed Finish Floor
(Elev. 56') \ 7
Crawl
Existing Ground Surface
approx. 15 degrees
Unit 3: Very Dense Vashon Till
V/3
0 . 5 10 15 20
Scale in Feet
Property Line
I
BH-1
5015t
LEGEND
Borehole Symbols Notes:
Boring 1. Ground profile based on the topographic survey, provided by others (see Figure 2).
Designation 2. See Figure 2 for location of Section B-B'
BH-1 3. Subsurface profile based on interpolation of widely -spaced test borings, actual
conditions should be anticipated to vary.
SPT N-value 4. All footings should be founded on Unit 3 -very dense Vashon Till
131
— 80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
roun wo et a e
25--
26-- Silt
? >so.. Soil description
>-5-0 i— Beattie Residence GENERALIZED SECTION B-B'
Geologic Contact PmGE(D 17304 73rd Ave. West
(approximate) I N C 0 R P 0 M A T 0 D Edmonds, Washington
I-bnGE&
I N t 0 " P e x A I i a
Geotechnical & Eartliquakn
Fnglneenng Consultants
z
May 18,2004 0
File No. 03-014.200 0
M
RECEIVED
:n
Tim Hossner
Reptinger-Hossner Architects JUN 7 20S X
0M
7203 — 36th Avenue SW
PERMIT COUNTER 0
Seattle, WA 98128 --1 0
0
C
M
Subject: Gimechnical Plan Review Mz
Beattie Residcnce
C
17304 — 73`1 Avenue West > z
Edmonds, Washington
0 -n
n
Dear Tim,
41
As requested, we completed a review of permit dra--Aings datedA.Lpri.1 1-3, 2004 prepared
MM
by your office. In addition, we also reviewed the response to the City's comments 0 50
I . 0
prepared by the structural engineer, and discussed the project details %Arith You. Based on r-
orn
Cn
our review. it is our opinion that the recommendations outlined in our report dated Marcb
19, 2004 were properly incorporated into the project design. MO
Z
We trust that the information outlined in this letter meets your need at this time. Please
call if you have any questions.
z
Sincerely,
z
0
0
A) J I M
Siew L. Tan, E.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
3414 NE 55" Sireet
Seattle. WA 98105
1'el:(206) 262-0370
Fax:(2rYi) 2624)374
3E)Vd 'ONI 103!DNVd ptcoz9z9oz 16:9T VOOVeT/90
100:1�
MEMORANDUM
Date: June 30, 2004 z
0
To: Rob Chave, Planning Manager
0
M
From: Don Fiene, P.E., Assistant City Engineer
73rd Ave. W. CI)
Subject: Proposed Single Family Residence @ 17304
0 M
C
M
I visited the subject site today. The site topography appeared extremely steep, and was -40
difficult to access. I viewed it from both the west (down slope) and east (upslope) and
felt that the slope most likely exceeded the 40% slope — 20 foot vertical rise rule that
would classify it as a Steep slope in the Critical Areas ordinance. I am very concerned
about how drainage could be addressed properly for this site and I am also very concerned
about erosion potential on the slopes if the trees on the steep slope are to be removed.
When I got back to the office, Jeanie McConnell provided me with more background
information on the site. Specifically, she had topography from a surveyor that showed
slopes exceeding 45% with a vertical rise of 45 feet. I feel strongly that a geotechnical
report addressing the steep slope critical areas issues should be required for this site. I do
not believe that a waiver from the Critical Areas buffer requirements should be allowed
unless such a study is undertaken and reviewed by our designated expert. There is a
geotechnical study that was issued to address the building issues on the site, but I don't
believe it adequately addressed the issues of drainage or slope erosion.
When such a report is received by the City I would be glad to review the proposed
development plan as it relates to drainage and erosion control issues. As far as a drainage
concept I can state that I will most likely require detention and tight line of the outlet to
our City storm system on Braemar Drive.
City of Edmonds
0 C
M
Mz
() --I
C -Z
-4
Ic')
-n
n
M M
0
0
0 M
C0
C/)
Q 0,
Z
X
z
ri)
z
0
M
M�
A r c h i t e c t s
February 14, 2006
To: Dave Gerbert, City Engineer
z
0
City of Edmonds
0
Development Services Department
m
121 5'b Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
Cn
am
Re: Driveway Slope Waiver Request (permits 2004-0863 and 2004-0864)
C
ma
0
0
0C
Mr. Gerbert,
mm
This letter is a formal request for a driveway slope waiver for a driveway slope exceeding
mz
—Z
14%, but less than 20%.
The reasons a driveway exceeding 14% is necessary for this project is a d irect result of
0 -n
existing topography on the site and access casement. Accessing the less steep portions of
n
I
the site. where it was feasible to build the house and garage structure, necessitate a
mm
driveway of this pitch.
a—
C1)
0 r- �
The proposed driveway, clearly in excess of 14% slope, is part of the original permit
om
C: Cn
9 CD
submittal, while the reqw'rement for a waiver has only now bee n brought to our attention.
RIO
z
A letter, dated February 13, 2006, with drawings illustrating the exact proposed final
grades for the driveway was submitted to you by G. Rodney Johnson Construction. We
will make formal plan revisions to the permit drawings reflecting this information.
>
z
As this is affecting the firutl occupancy, and owner"s mortgage financing, we appreciate
CD
z
0
your timely response to this request.
m
RESUB
Sincerely,
Tim Hossner
FEB 15 2006
Architect
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF EDMONDS
7203 36"' Ave SW Seattle, WA 98 126
P- 206.933.82*1.8 f. 206.913-0110 1TV Pr)PN/
%j
GARY HAAKENSON
CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR
R 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220 FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: wwwdedmondswa.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
C. C) Qs Planning - Building - Engineering
January 5, 2006:
Jeff and Linda Beattie
Z
0
nd
22714 B 82 Ave W
—1
0'
Edmonds, WA 98026
M
Fn
Re: Building Permit: 2004-0863
d
M
Site Address: 17304 73 Ave W
C
M 0,
Expiration Date: 10/15/06
0
-10
0
Dear Jeff and Linda Beattie,
M
M Z
-orm you that the last remaining inspection on your
The purposeof this letter is to inf
Z
project is a final inspection(s). The final inspection(s) deten-nines that there arc no
outstanding life -safety issues and approval allows the City to close your permit file.
-n
0
n
inal inspection to be one of the most important inspections
The City considers the f
conducted on a project. In order to grant final approval the following must be complete:
M M
0—
co
smoke detectors, house numbers, guardrails, handrails, self -close doors between garage
0
0 M
and residence, egress from sleeping rooms, safety glazing, weather-stripping, ally
9 W
Engineering department requirements etc. Of course not all of these things may
M 0�
specifically apply to your project but it does give you an idea about the kinds of things
Z
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 expire one year from
the date of issuance. if you will need n -iore time to complete the work, permits can be
>
Z
renewed prior to expiration for one half fees. If the permit expires without a final
approval granted by the Building Inspector, full fees are required in order to renew the
CD
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
0
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.
Sincerely,
Y,
JOAbi c Zu au
a
Perrill 5pe ialist
Incorporated August 11, 1890
C ifit Holeinnt .1:%nnn
-040tachnical and Earthyake Engineadng Combnt$
3414 NE 5511 street Project No. P2ge No.
StAttle, WA 98105 04-014.300 1 of I
Tel: (206) 262-0370 Fax: (206) 262-0374 Report No. Date / Day of Week
2 January 28, 2005/ Friday
Project Name Location or Address
Beattie Residence 17304 — 73d Averrue West
Owner's Representative Weather
Tim Hossuer, Replinger-Hossner Arehitects Perndt No. Partly cloudy, cool
Owner ContrjiOAr PanGEO Field Rep.
Jeff and Uu& Beattie G.R. Jobnoon (Stu. Jobnson, Curtis K. Mathis
425.802,1650)
As requested by the contractor (Stu Joh=on), PanGEO was on site on Friday from about A 1:45 to 12:15 to
verify the bearing surfaces for footing excavations. The following was noted-
PanGEOverified the bearing surfaces for footings beneath the house and the garage. The exposed
soils consisted of glacial till and are adequate for the recommended bearing pressure of 4,000 psf, as
indicated in the PanGEO Geotoohnical Report (March 19, 2004). Due to the fines conten� the bearing
soils are moisture sensitive and may becotnc softened if exposed to rain or moisture. Due to the wet
season, PanGEO recommends that the subgrade soils be protected from rainfall prior to the, concrete
pour. The exposed surfaces may be covered with plastic sheets and the ground surface above the
excavation can be graded to prevent runoff of water into the excavation, In the event that bearing
soils become wet, PanGEO recommends that the contractor minimize disturbance of the wet soils and
remove the soft muck from the bewing surfaces prior to the concrete pour.
The contractor is exporting excavated soils from the project site, The soils are stockpiled in the area
of the driveway to the northwest of the garage. Because of the stockpiled soils. no check was made of
the bearing surface fbr the driveway,
a The silt fence is in good condition and no off -site erosion or traciting was observed.
RECEIVED
FEB 0 9 2004
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR.
CITY OF EDMONDS
ZO/ZO 39Vd *0NI '03"d VL60Z9Z9GZ LZ:LT GOOZ/GZ/,TO
Z
0
0
Cn
M
0
--10
0 C:
M M
M Z
C
0 -n
n
-i
M
M M
0
0
0 M
C cl)
9 C/)
M 0
Z
Z
Cl)
Z
0
0
M
ki
Height Calculation Worksheet 40�.X
j--73 —7
Address:
C�
Date:
hispector(s): Cn'�
1. Datum Point:
Z'
2. Datum Point Elevation: 1 OC), CD
0
M
3. Average Grade: 0 �p
=n-
6i
.4. Maximum Elevation Allowed: (0 (aver�t& giade):+"' 25
M
C
M C)
5. Reference Point Elevation Shot to House: 0
0
0
t3a,_j� (datum elevation) �,S (grade to transit level tine'shot to house) X M
M z
6. Measurements from line shot onto house to roof ridge: C —z
W
0 -n
M M
0 CI)
0
0 M
C CI)
?. CO
M 0
Z
z
0)
z
Total:
M
4q (reference point elev n') (measurements
7. Actual Elevation: atio
from #6)
conclusion:
ess th n o (allowed); therefore the house is/
(actual) is gjreater/l�s-`"h'n
er the height requirementper/ECDC 16.20-30 requirements
FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL FORM
TO:
DATE:
MEMO TO: PERMIT COORDINATOR, BUILDING DIVISION
FROM: FIRE DEPARTMENT DATE
PLE,
ENGINEERING DIVISION DATE 2—IZ—
z
1 0
PLANNING DIVISION DATE
M
4
PLEASESIGN
PROJECT
(n
C: M
0
SITE ADDRESS ZSO,:�� 2-31:14 Av ec
M
__40
00
C:
PERMIT It 2-(2r(611 ADB# DATE rNsPECTED 7/0j��
M
M Z
DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE INSPECTED
—Z
Cn
A field inspection.was conducted to determine compliance Nvith -approved plans. Final approval
0 -n
-n
denotes that there are no objections from the above signed Department to the release of
m
>
PERFORMANCE BONDS and the granting of
M M
U5
0
Q M
C: Cn
GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
M
C)
Z r-
71 M
z
GRANT PROJECT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS NOTED
0 Copy of CONDITIONS given to owner/contractot by inspector
z
0
M
FAILED FINAL INSPECTION - OUTSTANDING ISSUES
Copy of CORRE CTION NOTICE given to owner/contractor by inpector
2.
3.
RE -INSPECTED OUTSTANDING ISSUES - GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
Date Signature
1:temp:b1dg:f6rnis:ocaprv1 3/25/04
SETBACKS .....................
FOUNDATION:
Footing ......................
Wall..........................
�201 Pier/Porch .................
Retaining Wall . "'*"*"*
P1 Slab Insulation ..........
U K
PLUMBING:
Underground .............
Rough -In ...................
Commercial Final ......
HEATING:
Gas Test ....................
Gas Piping .................
Equipment .................
Commercial Final .......
EXTERIOR SHEATHING
NAILING ..........................
FRAMING ........................
FIRST FLOOR FRAMING ...
INSULATION ...................
Floor Insulation .........
Wall Insulation ...........
Ceiling insulation .......
SHEETROCK NAILING ...
SPECIAL INSPECTION ...
MISCELLANEOUS ..........
FINAL APPROVAL FOR
OCCUPANCY ..................
Al e
-f lie 111iti"lls MT lict
te
'1111�0r,
,f1,01111)S011, "I ary contr,
!,,Svectov for the city.
INSPECTOR DATE APPROVED
116 _r 2- - /n - C>"C;
-A L
Lv')
T
V\A�
V\/\�s _..) 6 -
SlideSewerff k
AmoutPWd$_1_7t_)_ Recelpt#,�ZE��,
Date bsued._/6�/�/�"'5__Expires
WaterMeterSize
AmountPald Receipt# qiaq V.
Date Purchmsed
ROW
Ar��-nn0o!d $—.Receipt#
Da Issued',_-,
ate __.Expires
z
0
i
0
M
—4 -n
0 M
C
M 0
0
0
0 C
M
M z
JO --I
C: —Z
cf)
o -n
n
4
:lf
M M
0 —C/)
0 r-
0 1711
C cf)
9 0)
Q 0
Z
z
_11
cf)
z
0
1
0
ITI