Loading...
20050097.pdfDATE RECEIVED A PERMIT EXPIRES zONE tel" � NUMBER � PERMIT CITY OF EDMONDS , CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION JOB ` SUITE/APTN OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS J 1o�7 - �'�J L?i 1 + �`j"Tl ►—��� PLAT NAMEISUBDIVISION NO. LOT NO. LID NO. MAILING ADDRESS �.LID FEE f �� [) PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP IESCP Approved RW Permit Required O Street Use Permit A" d o CITY EXISTING PROPOSED Inspection Required p ZIP TELEPHONE Sidewalk Required Q L REQUIRED DEDICATION FT _ _ Underground _ ` l �•- L Wiring required 0 NAME £jMETER SIZE LINE SIZE NO. OF FIXTURES PRV REQUIRED Gill� YES ❑ NO 13_ w ADDRESS REMARKS x OWNER/CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROL/DRAINAGE CITY ZIP TELEPHONE rt In Q'VS 00\k1419w- F. .- - 11*4 NAME^ CBL # '1 I i.7 CA t1 WO �� a lv C% i ENGINEERING REVIE B DATE t ADDRESS\ �� / ) FIRE REVIEWED JY k DATE w CITY ZIP TELEPHONE .Lyt q'ALM11*;3-j CIO i l STATE VARIANCE OR CU SHORELINE OR ADB# INSPECTION BOND TATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE CHECKED B R Q'D� POSTED OYES ANO g C_ ja A SEPA REVIEW SIGN AREA HEIGHT PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL NO. + COMPLETE EXEMPT ALLOWED PROPOSED ALLOWED PROPO�ED .t l.i� ` ce-� EXP �LEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING / MECH LOT COVE AGE REQUIRED SETBACKS (FT.) PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT.) 'TT �, ALLOWED PROPOSED PROPOSED FRONT SIDE REAR FRONT UR SIDE REARCOMPLIANCE OR � 1:1 49 ADDITION ❑ COMMERCIAL ❑ CHANGE OF USE c� vW/ I 20 !�' t s �L� , �j� l� 1 I S� z PARKING LOT AREA PLANNING REVIEWED BY DATE og ❑ REMODEL ❑ MULTIFAMILY ❑ SIGN RErZOD ' PROVIDED I 1187 FENCE 4 4 4 QP ❑ REPAIR G 1 CYDS ❑ (. X FT) REMARKS ❑ DEMOLISH ❑ TANK ❑ OTHER GARAGE RETAINING WALL FIRE SPRINKLER CARPORT ❑ ROCKERY ❑ FIRE ALARM (TYPE OF USE, BUSINESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN: PE OFC CMION Forgo OCCUPA T ANUMBER NUMBER O CRITICAL w OF r% DWELLING ` AREAS SPECIAL INSPECTION AREA OCCUPANT STORIES Gam' UNITS ` NUMBER " REQUIRED r�� LOAD YES DESCRIB WORK TO BE DONE f") • �' REMARKS z PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 108/FINAL INSPECTION REQ'D i S l � C.a_�IF.,. ►til l!✓y. � ��TP ; .t ,1,_r-� / /'� ,1-! (? � % i,1.r� � / - - it i ; >�-�-� �l tit ( m 7ne - - 24 -,-� , killtion FEE Description FEE ck State Surcharge t�v HE SOURCE GLAZING % LOT SLOPE % ��, 7CJ: Permit jI City Surcharge _� PLAN C ECK NO: VESTED DATE Q, cal 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. viewPERMIT APPLICATION: 180 DAYSd PERMIT LIMIT. 1 YEAR• PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN 180 DAYS spection SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION 'APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE, HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND IBE SORS Fire Review Plan Chk, Deposit ZdAW IN INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS TTY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROY AND Fire Inspection Receipt # ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY ORECTLY I FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHOT BE 9 DEEMED TO MODIFY, WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENT OF ANY CITYANCE Landscape Insp. :::Total Amt. Due t = NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAY THE CITY'S ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCEISION.' Recording Fee Receipt # -71 I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION; THAT THE IATION APPLICATION APPROVAL GIVEN IS CORRECT; AND THAT I AM THE OWNER, OR THE DULY AUTHORIZENT OF THE OWNER. I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATINSTRUC• CALL This application is not a permit until signed by the TION; AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BLOYED This Official or his/her Deputy: and Fees are paid, and IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON ING TO FOR INSPECTION receipt is acknowledged In space provided. WORKMEN'S C NSATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18.27. DATE FIC S SIGNAT E SIGNATU NER DATE SIGNPD (425) ' 1 Iri(��if[ 77`1 0220 R" ED BY / DAT /\ A NT EION 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- ORIGINAL • FILE YELLOW • INSPECT R CATE. OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED, UBC SECTION 109 PINK • OWNER GOLD -ASSESSOR 04/02 PRESS HARD -YOU ARE MAKING 5 COPIES GREEN - ACCOUNTING 0 m 0) _ crn m� �0 00 C IT MZ 117 _ DZ r = 0971 'TI Z1 MMI mm 0 0 rn r M 0 Zr D z 0 0 m e `I• � 11`111.11 ,t „ I, �$ _ .Tf`-). �� Fn I ZoneCo Corner Flag____ 1 IM Setbacks Reduired Actual :c--FQ t: III °°•Oo'ay`�- oe - e i3wides -77`-VedFW SETBACK ..-- _' - 77 `vI Other - \ \ !3 \ \ m '� I' H&ht _ eco \ � N rill Cf) mto 0 ,,• I` \` _ �� � �� ..4ka _^��e _ �•_ I ' eCO M milli --1 r ; ° g /OYCO �-- � FRIA { ~� ' \\_. Y'\moi' _ _ 4/�jI R(�f, "4.1...........1/�♦ lit 'his FJO \ 1 Mill Ol �. ,• all SS � \ ,lQ m Vit. ' ♦ r,� iii 1J� 1+34 1..1 . Q a J�N� p ,IT �~ � / �` •l 1, e'f� \\W'�'r�' \ I fWPM. irill Wit per. I'� z mMITpICS • � � IB.. g� °= r— ;� I _ J ,,^^ LS------------L--�=C. -1' SETBACK -- - - I m a C7 J} -- �� = i i SII L i•...- (tia_F Y.J�f[LZ'L7:1;: L till I I III w ...I Mill _ n Ip y. Pill � R� `' � I '-, ria A �' � �rt•� 0 a C3 'wo ilia CD A R� � pi I CO Rill C1'2Qq pn � m � f l p•�a x 7rs 01 w > m ic v ii8 8 R� Q 8 +;tic z CIAx 191§1 _y �g Egg nQi"q ni rT. L2� s N m A g ' aaa a a. _ �-- Z Iij� N �s!!S :8 88�9p \\ „'ass <. y.- yVim I VW L. Ail r •r r r a v A o vo mM v�s v N C n O z <. y.- yVim I VW L. Ail r •r r r Dennis M. Bruce, P.E. M.S.C.E., M.B.A. Geotechnical/Civil Engineer RECE I ED JAN 10 2005 January 4,2005 PERMIT COUNTER Z o. City of Edmonds 0 r� - c/o Design Works Construction CITY COPY 1 m 1.7515 A 52"d Ave. W Lynnwood, WA 98037"Co _ 0 Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation — Foundation Recommendations M o Proposed New Residence p 731 Bell St., Edmonds, Washington = m M This engineering report presents the results of a geotechnical evaluation of the C.— property at 731 Bell St„ Edmonds, Washington. This property is owned by Phill and Cybil Butler: Design Works Construction (Bruce O'Neil) will be the general contractor. This evaluation was required due to City of Edmonds concerns regarding the site slope o i and soil integrity. mm REFERENCES: o r Site YTopographic-Surve and Map by LSA dated October 19, 2004 vi • Project Plans for new Butler residence by Design Works Construction : r • Site photographs by D. Bruce, P.E. dated May 26 and December 28,'2004 BACKGROUND: a Z The overall property at 731 Bell is rectangular in shape with approximately 120 feet of frontage along Bell St. and approximately 110 -foot depth. co 0 Currently, the site contains an existing wood -frame residence that is proposed for 0 demolition. rn Existing residence reveals no evidence of any geotechnical distress: no foundation cracking or settlement or any evidence of erosional degradation. The lot contains significant slopes (see Topographic Map). Project Plans propose to construct a new residence in a similar footprint location as the existing house. The new residence will be further setback from the east property line (and further setback from the easterly up-slope zone). SO/LS FOUNDATIONS SITE DEVELOPMENT INSPECTION DRAINAGE DESIGN & PERMIT LEGAL P.O. Box 55502 Shoreline, WA 98155 (206) 546-9217 FAX (206) 546-8442 City of Edmonds c/o Design Works Construction January 4, 2005 Page 2 The existing residence contains a building footprint that has utilized a westerly rockery zone for landscaping stability. The proposed new'residence will not encroach the existing rockery. Some modifications or extensions of the existing rockery may be required due to localized grading conditions. Z It is further understood that an additional lot (Lot No. 34) exists within the overall property. No development is proposed at this time for the down-slope portion of the m overall property. EVALUATION: � in vm , In order to augment the existing site geotechnical information, 4 soil test holes were dug by this engineer. Two holes were dug in the vicinity of the. proposed new o c residence : Two holes were dug approximately mid-lot in the zone of maximum slope, m z All 4 test holes revealed similar sub-grade conditions, namely: A DZ 0" to 6" Lawn, organics, roots, and organic siltANNE _ 6" to 38" (bottom of test holes) Dense sandsCn wn No water was encountered in any of the 4 test holes. All test hole walls remained _ vertical and stable. No sloughing or caving occurredm m_ o �n CONCLUSIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS: c MO Based on the findings of this investigation, and experience with. similar sites in r the.area, the property at 731 Bell St. is geotechnically approved for the proposed new X Butler residence, subject to the following: i a • Standard reinforced continuous and spread footings. Allowable bearing pressure: 3,000 p.s.f. z • 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. m • For retaining wall design, use friction factor of 0.55 and passive pressure of 350 p.c.f. • Geotechnical inspections by this engineerrid or 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 i. City of Edmonds c/o Design Works Construction January 4, 2005 Page 3 native soils. Seethe 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) inches, respectively, and should be bottomed at least eighteen (18) inches below the lower adjacent finish ground surface. zz 0 Depending on the final site grades, some over -excavation may be.required below m footings to expose competent native soils. Unless lean concrete is used to fill the over L. excavated, hole, the width of the.over-excavation at the bottom must be at least as wide -=i �, 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 m v footing must be at least seven feet wide at the base of the excavation. o 0 C f. Footings constructed according to the above recommendations may be+designed m z for an allowable soil bearing pressure of three thousand (3,000) pounds per square foot Q (p:s.f;). A one-third increase in this design bearing pressure may be used when y z 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. _ mm Lateral loads due to wind or. seismic forces may be resisted by friction between 0 m the foundations and the bearing soils, or by passive earth pressure acting on the} m CAvertical, embedded portions of the foundations. For the latter condition, the foundations n 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: _ n Parameter Design Value WWI Coefficient of Friction 0.55 z Passive Earth Pressure 350 p.c.f. - -� 0 Where: (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 foundation's resistance to lateral loading. I City of Edmonds c/o Design Works. Construction January 4, 2005 Page 4 SLABS -ON -GRADE: Slab -on -grade floors may be supported on undisturbed, competent native soils or on structural fill. The slabs may be supported on the existing soils provided these soils can be re -compacted prior to placement of the free -draining sand or gravel underneath P. o the slab. This sand and gravel layer should be a minimum of four (4) inches thick. We also. recommend using a vapor barrier such as 6 -mil, plastic membrane beneath the m slab with minimum overlaps of 12 inches for sealing purposes.. Ch -� PERMANENT FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS: c rn Mo Retaining walls backfilled on one side only should be designed. to resist lateral o 0 earth pressures imposed ,by the soils retained by these structures. The following recommended design. parameters are for walls less than twelve (12) feet in height, m z which restrain level backfill: Z Parameter Design Value Om j Active Earth Pressure* .35 p.c.f. Passive Earth Pressure 350 p.c.f. rn m ' Coefficient of Friction 10055 v Cn Soil Unit Weight 125 p.c.f. 0m Where: r z 0 (1) p.c.f. is pounds per cubic foot (2) Active and passive earth pressures are computed using.equivalent fluid n densities. , z M For restrained walls which cannot defect at least 0:002 times the wall height, a uniform lateral pressure of one hundred (100 p.s.f. should be Z added to the active equivalent fluid pressure). M 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. 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 I, City of Edmonds' c/o Design Works Construction January 4, 2005 Page 5 to be given the wall dimensions and slope of the backfill in order to provide the appropriate design earth pressures. Heavy 1construction equipment should not be operated behind retaining and foundation walls within a distance equal to the height of the wall, unless the walls are Z designed for the additional lateral. pressures resulting from the equipment. Placement o and compaction of retaining wall backfill should be accomplished with hand -operated 0 equipment. m Retaining Wall Backfill Cn _ vm Backfill placed within eighteen (18) inches of any, retaining or foundation walls: m o should be free -draining structural fill containing no organics. This backfill should contain o c no more than five (5) percent silt or clay particles and have no particles greater than = m four (4) inches in diameter. The percentage of particles passing the No. 4 sieve should m Z be between twenty-five (25) and seventy (70) percent. Due to their high silt content, if D Z the native soils are used as backfill; a drainage composite, such as Mirafi and r� _ Enkadrain, should be placed against the retaining walls. The drainage composites N i should be hydraulically connected to the foundation drain system. The purpose of these o „ i backfill.requirements is to assure that the design criteria for.the retaining wall is not _ exceeded because of a build-up of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. The rn M. subsection entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill contains recommendations o Vi regarding placement and compaction of structural fill behind retaining and foundation M walls. CO) Z r EXCAVATION AND SLOPES: r Project Plans for the new Butler residence do not' require extensive excavationv a This engineer understands that maximum soil cuts will be less than 3 feet in depth, and , Z ' thus no shoring or slope stability issues exist. In no case should excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, Z 0 state and national government safety regulations. Temporary cuts up to a height of 0 four (4) feet deep in unsaturated soils may be vertical. For temporary, cuts having a m height greater than four (4) feet, the cut should have an inclination no steeper than 1:1 (Horizontal: Vertical) from the top of the slope to the bottom of the excavation. Under specific recommendations by the geotechnical engineer, excavation cuts may be modified for site conditions. All permanent cuts into native soils should be inclined no steeper than 2:1 (H:V). Fill slopes should not exceed 2H:1 V. It is important to note that sands do cave suddenly, and without warning. The contractors should be made aware of this potential hazard. City of Edmonds c/o Design Works Construction : January 4, 2005 Page 6 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. Z . o DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS: 0 M Footing drains are recommended at the base of all footings and retaining walls. mn These drains should be surrounded by at least six (6) inches of one -inch -minus washed rock wrapped in non -woven geotextile filter fabric (Mirafi 140N, Supac 4NP, or similar Co rn material). At the highest point, the perforated pipe invert should be at least as low as m v the bottom of the footing and it should be sloped for drainage. All roof and surface o 0 water drains must be kept separate from the.foundation drain system. _M M MZ. No groundwater was observed in any of the 4 test holes during the fieldwork. Extremely porous sandy soils will result in little moisture problems during construction. Seepage into the planned excavation is possible, and likely if excavation occurs during N winter months, and if encountered should be drained away from the site by use of o � drainage ditches, perforated pipe, French drains, or by pumping from sumps interconnected by shallow connector trenches at the bottom of the excavation. m m oCO The excavation of the site should be graded so that surface water is directed off n m the site and away from the tops of slopes. Water should not be allowed to stand in any m N area where foundations, slabs, or pavements are to.be constructed. Any exposed z 0 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. D ` Z GENERAL EARTHWORK AND STRUCTURAL FILL: Cn The proposed building and pavement areas should be stripped and cleared of all o surface vegetation, all organic matter, and other deleterious material. The stripped or 0 removed materials should not be mixed with any materials to be used as structural fill. m Structural fill is defined as any fill placed under the building, behind permanent retaining or foundation walls, or in other areas where the underlying soils needs to support loads. This engineer should observe site conditions during and after excavation prior to placement of any structural fill. All 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 City of Edmonds. c/o Design Works Construction January 4, 2005 Page 7 soils is very important and must be closely controlled during the filling and compaction process. The allowable thickness of the fill lift will.depend on the material type, compaction equipment, and the number of passes made to compact the lift. In no case should the s z lifts exceed twelve (12) inches in loose thickness. The following table presents recommended relative compaction for structural fill: v } m Location of Fill _Placement Minimum Relative � Compaction" vm C Beneath footings, slabs or walkways 95%° oC 'Behind retaining walls 90% m z Q� Beneath pavements 95%° for upper 12 inches of D z Sub -grade, 90% below that level 4 Cn I Wmn latiompaction is the ratio, expressed in percentages, of -� here: Minimum relative c ,. the compacted dry density to the maximum dry density, as determined in _ accordance with ASTM Test Designation D-1557-78 (Modified Proctor). m m CN Use of On -Site Soils r If grading activities take place during wet weather, or when the sandy, on-site Zr soils are very wet, site preparation costs may be higher because of delays due to rains and the potential need to -site soils generally'sandy and import granular fill. The on -� thus are not highly moisture sensitive. Grading operations will be difficult when the z moisture content of these soils greatly exceeds the optimum moisture content: CO Moisture sensitive soils will also be susceptible to excessive softening and - z 0 "pumping" from construction equipment traffic when the moisture content is greater than : the optimum moisture content. rn Ideally, structural fill, which is to be placed in wet weather, should consist of a granular soil having no more than five (5) percent silt or clay particles. The percentage of particles passing the No. 200 sieve should be measured from that portion of the soil passing the three -quarter -inch sieve. The use of some on-site soils for fill material may be acceptable if the upper organic materials are segregated and moisture contents are monitored by engineering inspection. City of Edmonds Commercial Services Division Re: Design Works Construction November 12, 2005 Page 2' • Foundation Sub-Grade: This engineer verified the dense, native sub-grade sands that provided 3,000 p.s.f. bearing capacity. Contractor subsequently installed reinforced concrete footings and slabs in accordance with City of Edmonds approved Plans and normal good practices. o n • Fill Placement: The on-site native sands provided excellent sub-grade material M for all slab work. Contractor imported a small amount (less than 20 cubic yards) of gravel for construction logistic purposes, co vm All fill placement is geotechnically approvedm o 0 n • Subsurface Drainage: This engineer verified proper installation of sub=surface XM drainage in accordance with City of Edmonds approved Plans and normal good m Z practices. D'Z r -1 • Slope Stability: All slopes within this property, as well as the adjacent properties, _ remained stable through the construction and final grading phases. No adverse own geotechnical impacts occurred to project slopes or adjacent property slopes. M • Rockeries: This engineer worked closely with project contractor (Design Works o in Construction) and rockery, subcontractor (B & D Rockeries): c Extensive rockery work occurred during March and April 2005. This engineer. r Z verified that the base rock for each rock tier was properly embedded in dense native soils. The geometry of the west side slope required the use of some fill material (native sands) in conjunction with a geo-grid reinforcement (see photographs). Z ► This engineer provided daily on4te inspections during the installation of the West side rockeries, geo-grid material placement and, compacted fill installation. p All rockery work (rock size, rock embeddment, batter, linkage, geo-grid and final 0 grading) complies with this engineer's on-site inspections and normal good m practices. ip All project rockeries are approved as constructed. • Erosion Control Measures: Contractor properly installed the initial construction entrance and siltation fencing. All temporary erosion control measures were effectively maintained throughout the project. No adverse erosional impacts occurred during the construction phase.