20050275.pdfDATE RECEIVED
CITY OF EDMONDS I
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
ER NAMf/NAMjE.OF BUSINESS
M afmove-,
LU MAILINU ADDRESS
Letm
0 � M'0 yz"� FAVkWin
CITY ZIP TELEPHONE
IAA -)j'2"'j
I V
I NAME 4)s -Jq5:, r;-io
ADDRESS
Wya_w
ZIP TELEPHONE
NAME
PERMIT EXPIRES
USE PERMIT
ZONE
NUMBER
_)Ce-Z15
JOB
ADDRESS
S UITE/APT#
P T _�14AE/S1.1.4131VtSION NO.
LOT7
LID NO.
LID FEE $
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP
TESCII Approved
RW Permit Required
EXISTING PROPOSED
Street use Permit Hoq'd
Inspection Required
REQUIRED DEDICATION FT
Sidewalk Required
Underground
Wiring required
METER[IZE,
LINE �IZE
NO. OF FIXTURES
PRV REQUIRED
all
YES13 NO 0
REMARKS
OWNER/CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONIROWDRAINAGE
ERING
r
DATE
FIRE REVIEWED BY DATE UJI
cc
W
STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE D BY VARIANCE OR CU SHORELINE ORADBI1 I INSPECTION BOND
0� I REO'D POSTED
-70 D-5 .1 13YES 40 is
SEPA REVIEW SIGN AREA HEIGHT
< PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL NO. COMPLETE EXEMPT ALLOWED PROPOSED ALLOWED , PROPOSE
113 D
UJI
. EXP be 6—
NEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING MECH LOT COVERAGE REQUIRED SETBACKS (FT) PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT.)
ALLOWED PROPOSED FRONT SIDE. REAR FRONT LJR SIDE REAR
50
ge, S_7 I
COMPLIANCE OR '6'
ADDITION COMMERCIAL Ar's
13 CHANGE OF USE 010c)
Al —a z
1:1 REMODEL PARKING LOT AREA PLANNING REVIEWED BY DATE 5
MULTIFAMILY SIGN REO'D PROVIDED 9L
oz.
1:3 REPAIR Ei FENCE I f -.7
CYDS X FT) REMARKS
0 DEMOLISH TANK OTHER
GARAGE FIRE SPRINKLER
CARPORT ROCKERY FIRE ALARM
PE OF USE, BIUSINiM (A ACTIVITY) EXPL%N:
jkp CIJECKED BY TYPE CVC7;RUCT ON C;j
Lt
Ex OCCUPAN
S�d� 7 a- ^ 1� GROUP)��,
CRITICAL
_NUMBEFI*� NUMBER Od
M OF DWELLING AREAS SPECIAL INSPECTION JAREA OCCUPANT
ci STORIES UNITS NUMBEF REQUIRED uclt� LOAD
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE YES
REMARKS
V PROGRESS INSPEC71ONS PER UBC 108/IBC1091IRC109 FINAL INSPECTION REQ'D
A e(
3- L41 1 -1
CBL #
_K__ ff, 1j1`Zy1f/_j -1/vt C_ - I C1 t) C
ADDRESS
4WD 1kal ftUz-;,t&1Vd *Dg
CITY I
ZIP
0t)
ou
I �Vf VI%JT(.-f t W 17 VL*" I VALUATION
t )7
$
PP-D Not 6A.) At- ftz� I rpl. L'. i- 7
IfAYCO Description FEE Description FEE
V
Plan Check State Surcharge
E SOURCE qLAZING % nT R114PE %
Building Permit City Surcharge
PLAN CHEC ;" VESTED DATE Plumbing Base Fee
Mechanical
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE/WORK N HIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO U0,
I= BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC
DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS. MARQUEES, ETC-) WILL REQUIRE Grading
2_10
SEPARATE PERMISSION.
Engr. Review
PERMIT APPLICATION: 180DAYS
ul
PERMIT LiMrP 1 YEAR - PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN 180 DAYS
SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION Engr. Inspection
EST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND
MAPPLICANT ' ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE, HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESORS Fire Review Plan Chk. Deposit
IN INTER AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND Fire Inspection Receipt #
ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
I FROM THE ISSUANCE OF *THIS PERMIT ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE
9 DEEMED TO MODIFY, WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENT OF ANY CITY ORDINANCE Landscapelnsp. Total Amt. Due zpo
0 NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAY THE C17YS ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION.4
Recording Fee Receipt #
I HEREBY 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 APPLICATION APPROVAL
THE OWNER. I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC- This application is not a permit until signed by the
TION; AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED CALL Building Olficial or his/her Deputy: and Fees are paid, and
IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO FOR INSPECTION receipt Is acknowledged in space provided.
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18.27.
SIGNA 'URE DATE
SIGNA39RE (OWNER OR . ENT)/ DATE SIGNED (425)
os� IJ .
1 771-0220 DATE
ATTENTIW �Elf
ITIS UNLAWFULTO USE OR OCCUPYABUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTILAFINAL EXT 1333
INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVALOR A CERTIFICATE OF CCCU-
PANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED, UBC109/IBC110/IRC110. �j ORIGINALLF=111�� - YELLOW - INSPECTOR
09/03 PINK - 0 R GOLD -ASSESSOR
PRESS HARD -YOU ARE MAKING 4 COPIES
V,
k
I
z
0
1
0
M
—1 -n
M
C
M
0
0
0 C
M
M z
01
C
CD
to -n
n
M M
0 5
0 r-
0 M
C ch
9 CD
M 0
Z 17-
>
z
--I
X
Cn
z
0
i
.0
M
Hen
by.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Z"
Meadowdale Estates
Edmonds, Washington.
M.
For
Hoover Prem ier Home s
.
C) rn,
C
M
-A Ol
M Z:..
r Z.
>
M''
rTl
0.
c
M 0;�
z
z
0.
FERL
PIFINIMUT
C-41TY CO*DV,
Cornerstone 17625-13011 Ave. NE, C1 02, Woodinville, WA 98072
Phone: 425-844-1977
Geotechnical, Inc. Fax: 425-844-1987
January 6, 2005
Ms. Cathy Patterson
z
Hoover Premier Homes
16300 Mill Creek Boulevard, #108
0
Mill Creek, WA 98012
M
Geotechnical Engineering Re ort
p
Meadowdale Estates
M
M
Edmonds, Washington
-40
0
CG File No. 1 791
0 C.
M
JD -4
Dear Ms. Patterson:
INTRODUCTION
CY)
This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering investig ation for your Meadowdale
0 -n
Estates residential development in the Meadowdale area of Edmonds, Washington. The site is located at
X
rn M
nd in Figure 1.
6890 -172 Street SW, as shown on the Vicinity Map
0 r
om�
C ca�
Site development, including grading, road construction, and, utility placement, has been substantially
�Mo
co leted. We understand that you have purchased all of the building lots, with the exception of Lot 2,
inp
Z
for the purposes of constructing single-family residences. The City of Edmonds has required a
;U
-4
z.
geotechnical report for the lots with slopes great er than 15 percent, and you have requested that we
in
evaluate the subsurface conditions of your lots and provide foundation recoin endations for the proposed
Z'
residences. For our use in preparing this report, we have been provided with a copy of a site plan by CHS
0
Engineering, dated Septqmbpr 2003, that shows lot, road, and utility layout. We have also been provided
z
_2'_ ddresses the
with Stability Evaluation, prepared by GeoEngineers and dated June ig', 002--thata
0
M
detention facility. Additionally, we have been provided with field reports prepared by Sky V alley Testing
that document compaction testing performed during the main earthwork phase of the project.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The L-shaped project site has maximum dimensions of approximately 640 fee t north to south and 440 feet
east to west. The development consists of a total of 12 lots. We understand that you intend t o cons truct
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Meadowdale Estates
Edmonds, Washington
January 6, 2005
CG File No. 1791
Page 2
single-family residences on all of the lots with the exception of Lot 2, which you do.not own. The
provided grading plan indicates cuts totaling 6,000 cubic yards (CY) and fills totaling 12,000 CY. The
grading plan also indicates that fills may be at least 12 feet deep in some areas. At this point in time, site
grading has been completed and utilities have been installed. A completed storm water detention vault is
Z
0
located close to the western site boundary.
M
SCOPE
The purpose of this study is to explore and characterize the subsurface conditions and present
M
C
M
recommendations for site development. Specifically, our scope of services as outlined in our Services
0
80,
Agreement, dated December 23, 2.004, includes the following.
C
X M.
M Z
jo
1 . Review available geologic maps of the area and available project documentation.
C
> Z
2. Explore the subsurface conditions at the site with backhoe-excavated test pits.
r
3:
3. Provide recommendations f6r building foundations, including lateral pressures. for
0
n Is,
retaining walls.
4. Provide recommendations f.or site preparation and grading.
M M
5. Provide general. recommendations for site dr ainage.
0
0 M Cl:
6. Prepare a written report to document our conclus ions and recommendations.
C CD
Mo�
Z
SITE CONDITIONS
-A
Surface Conditions
Z
At the time of our exploration, the Access road (69"' Place W) was paved. Site grading was also complete
and grass was growing on all of the, lots. The storm water detention vault and utilities had all been
Z
0
completed, but no residences had been constructed yet. A layout of the site is shown onthe Site Plan in
MI.
Figure 2.
Generally, the ground surface slopes downward towards the west at approximately 3 Horizontal to I
nd
Vertical (314: IV). An existing residence borders the southwestern comer of the site and 172 Street SW
borders the site to the south. The rest of the site is surrounded by a wooded area with brush and evergreen
trees up to approximately 2 feet in diameter.
Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Meadowdale Estates
Edmonds, Washington
January 6, 2005
CG File No. 1791
Page 3
Geology
Most of the Puget Sound Region was affected by past intrusion of continental glaciation. The last period
of glaciation, the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation, ended approximately I 1 000 years ago. Many of
the geomorphic features seen today.ar e a result of scouring and overriding by glacial ice. During the
Z:
0
Vashon Stade, much of the Puget Sound region was overridden by over 3,000 feet of ice. Soil layers
0
overridden by the ice sheet were compacted to a much greater extent than those that were not. Part of a.
typical glacial sequence includes recessional outwash sand underlain by glacial till.
3:
M,
C
The site is mapped as bein gunderlain by glacial till (preliminary Surficial Geologic Map of the Edmonds
M
0
--10
Q
East and Edmonds West Quadrangles, Snohomish and King Co nties, Mackey Smith, 1975). The map
C
M
also indicates the presence of advance and recessional outwash in the general area surrounding the site.
M z
C z
Our site explorations encountered glacial till, recessional outwash, and fill. Glacial till,'commonly
referred to as "hardpan," is an unsorted mixture of sand, silt, and gravel that is deposited at the bottom of
0 in
a continental glacier. As a result of having been co nsolidated under the weight of the glacier, glacial till
-n D
M
exhibits both high strength and low permeability. Alluvial sand and gravel deposited by glacial melt
M
water during glacial recession is known as recessional outwash. In contrast to glacial till, recessional
0
0 r
M
outwasb has not been glacially consolidated.
0)
M 0
Z
Explorations
W
Subsurface conditions were explored at the site on December 28, 2004, by excavating a total of five test
>
pits. The test pits were excavated to depths ranging between 0.5 and 11.0 feet below the ground surface..
z
The explorations were located in the field by a representative from this firm who also examined the soils
W
and geologic conditions encountered, and maintained logs of the test pits. The approximate locations of
z
the test pits are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. The soils were visually classified in general
0
M
accordance with the Unified.Soil Classification System, a copy of which is presented as Fi gui -e 3. The
logs of the test pits are presented in Figur es 4 and 5. .
Subsurface Conditions
A brief description of the conditions encountered in our explorations is included below. For a more
detailed description of the soils encountered, review the test pit logs in Figures 4 and 5.
Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Meadowdale Estates
Edmonds, Washington
January 6, 2005
CG File No. 1791
Page 4
Our explorations encountered glacial till, recessional outwash, and fill. Test Pits, 3, 4 and 5 were
excavated in cut areas and all encountered very dense till within one foot of the surface. Test Pits I and 2
encountered approximately 4.0 and 5.0 feet of fill, respectively. Beneath the fill, Test Pit I encountered
Z
recessional outwash. Test Pit 2 encountered a layer of topsoil -underlying the fill. The topsoil layer was
0
underlain by weathered glacial till becoming glacial till. It should be noted that loose soils in the areas of
0�
M
Test Pits 1 and 2 extend at least 4.0 and 6.0 feet below the ground surface, respectively.
co
Hydrologic Conditions
M
C: a
M
Shallow ground water seepage was encountered in Test Pit 2 at a depth of approximately 1.0 foot. We
O�
0 0
C
consider this water to be perched, and associated with surface runoff. The on -site till, in particular, is
M
rn Z
considered poorly draining. During the wetter times of the year, we expect perched water conditions will
occur as pockets of water on top of the till layer. Perched water does not represent a regional ground
r
water "table" within the upper soil horizons. Volumes of perched. ground water vary depending upon the
0 -n
time of year and the upslope recharge conditions.
.3:
MM
Erosion Hazard
0 Vi
0."
The erosion hazard criteria used for determination of affected areas in.cludes.soil type,.slope gradient,
0 M,
C: (D
C CA
vegetation cover, and ground water conditions. The erosion sensitivity is related to vegetative cover and
M 0,
Z r.-
the specific surface soil types (group classification), which are related to the underlying geologic soil
units. The Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area Washington by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS)
was reviewed to determine the erosion hazard of the on -site soils. The site surface soils were classified
Z'
using the SCS classification system as Unit 5 (Alderwood Urban Land Complex). The corresponding
U.,
geologic unit for these soils is till, which is generally in agreement with the soils encountered in our site
Z
0
explorations. The erosion hazard for the soil is listed as being slight for slopes less than 8 percent. The
0
M
moderately -sloping portions of the site may encounter higher levels of erosion, but not to such a degree
that the site would be classified an erosion hazard. Best management practices (BMPs) and applicable
codes should be followed during site grading to limit potential for erosion. We do not expect this site will
require unusual or extreme erosion management methods., There are no water bodies -adjacent to the site.
Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Meadowdale Estates
Edmonds, Washington
January 6, 2005
CG File No. 1791
Page 5
Seismic Hazard
The site is classified based on its overall soil profile using Table 1615.1.1 of the 2003 International
Building Code (IBC). Site conditions best fit the IBC definition for Site Class C ("Very dense soil and
soft rock"). The IBC provides parameters and coefficients to be used in seismic design based upon this
Z�
0
site class.
M
Additional seismic considerations include liquefaction potential and amplificat ion of ground motions by
soft soil deposits. The liquefaction potential is highest for loose sand with a high ground water table. The
CD
M
C=
ication of
underlying dense till is considered to have a very low potential for liquefaction and a mplif
0
ground motion.
0
C
X M
M Z
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
It is our opinion that the site is compatible with the planned development. The underlying medium dense
0 -n
n
to very dense glacial. till deposits are c apable of supporting the planned �structures and pavements. We
-.4
M,
that the found e d through any topsoil, fill, loose or disturbed
recommend ations for the structures ext.n
M
soilsj and bear on the underlying medium dense to very dense, native glacial till, or on structural fill
0-
0. r
M
C cn,
extending to these soils. Based on our explorations, we anticipate thes e soils will generally be
M0
encountered at typical footing depths in the cut areas of the site. Fill encountered in Test Pits 1. and 2 wa s
loose. As a result, areas of fill may need to be over -excavated and properly compacted. Alternatively,
X
foundations could be constructed to extend through the loose soils.
>
Z
-4
The soils likely to be exposed during construction are- highly moisture sensitive and will disturb easily
.
when wet or during. wet conditions. We recommend that construction take place during the drier summer
Z
0
months, if possible. If construction takes place during the wet seaso n, additional expenses and delays
0.
M
should be expected due to the wet conditions.
Site Preparations and Grading
The first ste of site preparation should be to strip the vegetation, topsoil, or loose soils to expose medium
p
dense to very dense native soils in pavement and building areas. This material should be removed from
the site, or stockpiled for later use as landscaping fill. The resu Iting subgrade should be compacted to a
Pornerstone Geotechnical, Inc..
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Meadowdale Estates
r
Edmonds, Washington
January 6, 2005
CG File No. 1791
Page 6
firm, non -yielding condition.. Areas observed to pump or weave should be repaired prior to placing hard
surfaces.
The on -site glacial till likely to be exposed during construction is considered highly moisture sensitive,
ily when wet. We expect these soils would be difficult, if not impossible,
and the surface will disturb easi
Z'
.0
to compact to structural fill specifications in wet weather. We recommend that earthwork be conducted
�O
M
c
during the drier months. Additional expenses of wet weather or winter construction would in lude extra
excavation and use of imported fill or rock spalls.
Om
Structural Fill
M 0
General: All fill placed beneath buildings, pavements or other settlement sensitive features should be
0 0
C
placed as structural fill. Structural fill, by definition, is placed in accor dance with prescribed methods and
M
M Z
standards, and is monitored by an experienced geotechnical professional or. soils technician. Field-
Z
monitoring procedures w ould include the performance of a representative number ofin-place density tests
to document the attainment of the desired degree of relative compaction.
0 -n
n
Materials: Imported structural fill should consist of a good quality, free-dra ining granular soil, free of
M M
organics and other deleterious material, and be well graded to a maximum size of about 3 inches.
0 0)
0
0 M
Imported, all-weather structural fill should contain no more than 5. percent fines (soil finer than a Standard
CD
d on that fractio passing the U.S. 3/4-inch sieve.
U.S. No. 200 sieve), base n
M 0
Z
X
The use of on -site soil. as structural fill will be dependent on moisture content control. Some drying of the
native soils may be necessary in order to achieve compaction. During warm, sunny days this could be
Z
accomplished by spreading the material in thin.lifts and compacting. Some aeration and/or addition of
CD
moisture may also be necessary. , We expect that compaction of the native soils to structural fill
Z
0
specifications would be difficult, if not impossible, during wet weather.
0i,
M
Fill Placement: Tollowing subgrade preparation, placement of the stru ctural fill may proceed. Fill
should be placed in 8- to 10-inch-thick uniform lifts, and each lift should be spread evenly and be
thoroughly compacted prior to placement of subsequent lifts. All structural fill underlying building areas,
and within a depth of 2 feet below pavement and sidewalk subgrade, should be compacted to at least 95
percent of its maximum dry density. Maximum dry density, in this report,.refers to t hat density as
Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Meadowdale Estates
Edmonds, Washington
January 6, 2005
CG File No. 1191
Page 7
determined by the ASTM D 1557 compaction test procedure. Fill more than 2 feet beneath sidewalks and
pavement subgrades should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density. The
moisture content of the soil to be compacted should be within about 2 percent of optimum so that a
readily compactable condition exists. It may be necessary to over excavate and remove wet surficial soils
z
0.
in cases where drying to a compactable condition is not feasible. All compaction should be accomplished
0
by equipment of a type and size sufficient to attain the desired degree of compaction.
M
Temporary and Permanent Slopes
a rn
C
Temporary cut slope stability is a function of many factors, such as the type and consistency of soils,
M
0
c n and the
depth of the cut, surcharge loads adjacent to the excavation, length of time a ut remains ope
0
C
presence of surface or ground water. It is exceedingly difficult under these variable conditions to estimate
M
M z
a stable temporary cut slope geometry. Therefore, it should be the responsibility of the contractor to
—Z
>
maintain safe slope configurations, since the contractor is continuously at the job site, able to observe the
r
nature and condition of the cut slopes, and able to monitor the subsurface materials and ground water
O.M
-n
conditions encountered.
M
M
We anticipate cuts for the daylight basements of your proposed residences. For planning purposes, we
0 r
Om
recommend. that temporary cuts in the near -surface weathered soil s be no greater than 1 H: I V. Cuts in the
C CO
M Cn
fill should be no greater than I.5H:IV. Cuts in the dense to very dense till may stand at a 0.75H:IV
Q 0
Z r-
inclination or possibly steeper. If ground water seepage is encountered, we would expect that flatter
X
inclinations would be necessary.
z
We recommend, that cut slopes be protected from erosion. Measures taken.may include covering cut,
CD
slopes with plastic sheeting and diverting surface runoff away from the top of cut slopes. We do riot
z
0
recommend vertical slopes for cuts deeper than 4 feet, if worker access is necessary. We recommend that
0
cut slope h eights and inclinations conform to local and WISHA/OSHA standards.
M
Final slope inclinations for structural fill and the cuts in the native soils should be no steeper than 21-1: IV.
Lightly compacted fills or common fills should be no steeper than 31-1: IV. Common fills are defined. as
fill material with some organics that are "trackrolled" into place. They would not meet t he compaction
specification of structural fill. Final slopes should be vegetated and covered with straw or jute netting.
The vegetation should be maintained until it is established.
Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Meadowdalc Estates
Edmonds, Washington
January 6, 2005
CG File No. 1791
Page 8
Foundations
Conventional shallow spread foundations should. be founded on undisturbed, medium dense to very
dense, glacial till, or be supported on structural fill extending to those soils. If the soil at the planned
bottom of footing elevation is.not medium dense to very dense, it sh ould be overexcavated to expose
Z
suitable bearing soil, and the excavation should be filled with structural fil 1, or.the footing may be
0'
overpoured with extra concrete. For re sidences planned to be built on sloping ground, we recommend a
0
M
minimum horizontal distance of 10 feet between the bottom of the footing and the slope face.
Cn
Footings should extend at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finished ground surfa ce for: frost
M,
rn
protection and bearing capacity considerations. Minimum.foundation widths of 16 and 20 in ches: should .
0
0
0
be used for continuous and isolated spread footings, respectively. Standing water should no t be allowed
C
M
to accumulate in footing. trenches. A 11 loose or disturbed soil should be removed from the foundation
rn Z
—i
excavation prior to placing concrete.
Z
Cn
For foundations constructed as outlined above, we recommend an allowable design bearing pressure of
0 -n
2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be us ed for the footing design. International Building Code (IBC)
M M
guidelines should be followed when considering short-term transitory wind or seismic loads. Potential
0
foundation settlement using the recommended allowab le bearing pressure is estimated to be less than 1-
0 M
C Cn
inch total and 1/2-inch di fferential between footings or across a distance of about 30 feet. Higher soil
C CO
M 0
Z
bearing values may be ap propriate for footings founded on the unweathered till,- and with wider footings.
X
These higher values can be determined after a review of a specific desi gn
Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the foundation and subgrad c soil, and by -passive soil
Z
resistance acting on the below -grade portion of the foundation. For the latter, the foundation must be
Z
eted structural
poured "neat" against undisturbed soil or backfilled with clean free -draining, compa fill.
0
Passive resistance may be calculated. a's a trian gular equivalent fluid pressure distribution. We
0
M
recommend that an equivalent fluid dens ity of 225 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) be used to calculate the
allowable lateral passive resistance for the case of A level ground surface adjacent to the footing. An
allowable coefficient of friction between footings and soil of 0.45 may be used, and should be applied to
the vertical dead load only. A factor of safety of 2.0 has been applied to the passive pressure to account
for required movements to generate these pressures. The friction coefficient does not include a factor of
safety.
Corn erstone Geotechnical Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Meadowdale Estates
3
Edmonds, Washington
January 6, 200
CG File No. 1791
Page 9
Lateral Loads
The lateral earth pressure acting on retaining. walls is dependent on the nature and density of the soil
behind the wall, the amount of lateral wall movement that can occur as backfill.is placed, and the
inclination of the backfill. Walls that are free to yield at least one-thousandtb of the height of the wall. are
z
in An "active" condition. Walls restrained from movement by stiffness or bracing are in an "at -rest".
0
condition. Active earth pressure and at -rest earth pressure can be calculated based on equivalent fluid
M,
density. Equivalent fluid densities for active and at -rest earth pressure of 35 pounds per cubic foot (pco
y be used fo pe. Equivalent fluid densities for
and 55 pcf, respectively, ma r design for a level backslo
M
active and at -rest earth pressure. of 45 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) and 75 pcf, respectively, may be used
C
M 01
for design for a 20 degree backslope. These values assume that the on -site soils are used for backfill,
0
C
and. that the wall backfill is drained. The preceding values do not include the effects of surcharges due to
M
M.z
foundation loads, traffic or other surface loads. Surcharge effects should be considered where
z
appropriate
The above lateral pressures may be resisted by friction at the base.of the wall and passive resistance
0 -n
n
against the foundation. A coefficient of friction of 0.45 may be used to deten -nine the base friction when
M M
supported on the above recommended foundation subgrade preparat ion alternatives. An equivalent fluid
0 r
0 M
ety
density of 225 pcf should be used for passive resistance. The friction value does not incorporate a saf
C CO)
C co
factor. A safety factor of 2 is applied totbe passive pressure to limit movement.
M 0.
Z r-
All wall backfill should be well compacted. Care should be taken to prevent the buildup of excess lateral
soil pressures due to overcompaction of the wall backfill. This can be accomplished by placing wall
Z
backfill in 8-inch loose lifts and'compactingwith small, hand -operated compactors.
co
z
0
Slabs -On -Grade
Slab -on -grade areas should be prepared as recommended in the Site Preparation and Grading
0-
rn
s section. Slabs should be supported on medium dense to very dense native soils, or on structural fill
ub
extending to these soils. Where moisture control is a concern, we recommend that slabs be underlain by 6
inches of free -draining coarse sand or pea gravel for use as a capillary break. A suitable vapor barrier,
such as heavy plastic sheeting, should be placed over the capillary break.
Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Meadowdale Estates
Edmonds, Washington
January 6, 2005
CG File No. 1791
Page 10
Drainage
We recommend that runoff from impervious surfaces, such as roofs, driveway and access roadways, be
collected and routed to an appropriate storm water discharge system. Final site grades should allow f6r
drainage away from any buildings. We suggest that the finished ground surface be sloped. at a gradient of
Z
0:
3 percent minimum for a distance of at least 10 feet away from the buildings. Surface water should be
collected by permanent catch basins and drain lines, and be discharged into a storm drain system.
M
We recommend that footing drains be used around all of the structures where moisture control is
M
C
important. The underlying till will pond water that accumulates in the crawl space. It is good practice to
M 0
01
use footing drains installed at least I foot below the planned finished floor slab or crawl space elevation to
0 C
provide drainage for the crawl space. At a minimum, the crawl space should be sloped to drain to an
M z
outlet tied to the drainage system. If drains are omitted around slab -on-grade floors where moisture
C
>
c ntrol is important, the slab should be a minimum of I foot above surrounding grades.
o
3:
Where used, footing drains should consist of 4-inch-diameter, perforated PVC pipe that is surrounded by
0 -n
free -draining material, such as pea gravel. Footing drains should discharge into tightlines leading to an
M M
appropriate. collection. and discharge point. Crawl spaces should be sloped to drain, and a positive
CO)
0 r-.
connection- should be made into the foundation drainage system. For slabs -on -grade, a drainage path
0 M
C
C. CO)
should be provided from the capillary break material to the footing drain system. Roof drains should not
M
�zo
r-
be connected to wall or footing drains.
>
MONITORING
Z'
We should be retained to provide monitoring and consultation services during construction to confirm that
the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, and to provide
z
0
recommendations for design changes, should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those
0
M
anticipated.
USE OF THIS REPORT
We have prepared.this report for Hoover Premier Homes and their agents, for use in planning and design
of this project. The data and report should be provided to prospective contractors f6r theirbidding and
Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Meadowdale Estates
Edmonds, Washington
January 6, 2005
CG File No. 1791
Page 11
estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty
of subsurface conditions.
-v
The scope of our work does not include se ic related to construction safefy pre autions, and our
I es C
Z.
recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor s' methods techniques, sequences or
procedures, except as specifically described in our report, for consideration in design. There are possible
variations in subsurface conditions. We recommend that project planning include contingencies in budget
fi ort.
and schedule, should areas be found with conditions that vary frointhose desc bed in this rep
O'M
rn 0
0'0
Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget for our work, we have, strived to take care that our
C
work has been completed in accordance with generally accepted practices followed in this area at the time.
M
p M Z
this report was prepared. No other conditions, expressed or implied, shou d be understood.
C
>
0 -n
-n
M
M
0
.000
0, M
CJ)
M 0
z
M
Z
0)
Z
C
M
Cornerstone Geotechnical, In C'.
A B C D E F G H
TH
!PT
�2ND -�, — ' I
L 150TH.
1 J 7= 15. U
54TH
TH 4-
6 'D
)'11W --E ce)
OR, —IT Ln
+
4.4
JwT(r-
100TH. 59TH
T-
11;4
ND
—J LO
7
16
411 -169714t"'
t 477
Project
17
T
Site
67
0
7c_ 7-\'
0
J
87T tt,
3
2
N: V-0.1
J..
7
U—I
4 -;`.' tA." 711",
T,
uE
CO IST--
R'D
5
-i i F—'40', TH.1
@1995 Thomas Bros. Maps
Cornerstone Phone: (425) 844-1977 RH Hoover - Meadowdale Estates
Fax: (425) 844-1987
Ir Figure
File Number
Geotechnical, Inc.
17625-130th Ave NE, C-102 - Woodinville, WA - 98072 1791
z
0
1
0
M
:; =fi
P
L
Of
It Plan
i e
......6so., OsOkr�
i
. ......... ------
.4 %...1* ON
0,1 11
6 0 j
O""�Oss�
M
A,
Or
o4-Mo 6-.- 0. 0 so As,
0 s 4 Is 0
Ok
missile.
. . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1 f
-so
is. 0 0 0
k 0 is.
. . . . . I . . . . . � :-. . I', : - 1
0 P7=1%171�7
so oks
- --, 1. 0-00. :� ,-
10 6 1 . . - . - , %..6 . . � .. ... - - . -, .:.- I . - I
4' -.00. -, 0'. " -o-, , -0
of ff�?f
....... 77"P .40
I
I Okkso 0 1- 11 1 1 ko sk %so
o'sess
so,
o' I I /I so 1. "0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. k��- "00 O,-k .. . . .. L-"4
as
:4.0 Joe. O�X,o' " " .. . . I
1% T Is ..k.
-'s-, o; o:A, we., V�4� J� 'I P -
....... ........
% Asset
P 4'. %t".w Z
%. i�". A 10 P
::Osk" "M.
%A
% ... ..
ok
so so
%L 04
is . . . . . . . . to
1 4.0. �kkk > '4N I r. .
"r", P, OONX. see
r
1044 006 --1 %ft
10 .. . .. , 0-.,
I . .. . . . P I Ike
00. an k
t * A
Vo %'Ok Is I Oo
Is 4
NO I I
A O:..;k osoo.!
% N
'0. sloo . . . . . . ok okIIII
TP d - - �;6:1.
o: ago
oss, N, I
'k 4e I
so o
I s.- o 16-1
No 'to o "N. k., No k . . .. . . .7 A
so.,
---V: Oki 77 w
'ok 44-01
so" 7
I A %
%
% OL% so. &W
61 % Ose
..'Oo
so
61,
P
1-0
Ask
1, A
7 1%0
1[0000 IIII.sook.. kooks. NO,
I P
I ...kkkkk...'�:Al L% I
Joe fr..
AOI kokk mookkkkkOokok :4kooksm, �Yo
Ij0 . . . . I I . ON 0' 'Oosess 15., 0, .0
...........
V- - - kookkke,
so 1p;
to 0 1
� r 1.
s:: . I I . . . I , , "'k- . - :11"',
. - ; . , 'k� I. "P�� I.
Or.. I iss,
Ok O.,o W7-�- ... 7-
L'-sks"
.... .. Or. ... ...
.1o;O-o
0 1 WOO
P
es Los Is
so .. . . . . 0 Is
Or K
of , `o% . . . 1 10' If '4. go
01 -
f III` $ Ni"
%
so,
-`TF1w5 "s
skof :F,2."
'ke ... is
------- "�-VT Pastio,
Z, 0 ft 0... ON I so ;w
so .1 1 1 .1- P
.% Is NO 'e, o 0, ON :... N %
A, 0.
- .. Il . :.ok
% No �V
10 J�JAJ so oo� �-ffi T Of
IN N I j i-oh
-.foN .-op -0 .00' 1
;.4 A O...rsok-
t o so esk
koke I >1 A
1 sk"e- We
A 014r So
S oi- koz;ko.i;�.;X:1 Ask
qO. NO Joe,
o os:. 6
4 &T rl -- ----- Zoe
I ss-.�
OkOO
%
A
of kkkk4
I , I,;: *7�
6 Wl-: 7A 1 N
% 14. - Is
I
of
100 get,
d I I I I . I , : 0 1 . � 0 0 1- 1 A ; 0 - . ::: A.
0 -see
.19
ot
14
F. s , P 0 .1 , . I I nj
6 so 0
P
of 41-f L sk
P I t to .1 1 0 1 ;.
10 . z * j . I V\ I ra 4.4. 1
4, o 'so/t' 0, 0 iss, 1, 41 Ail t f%�� A- As'. I I I I
4 2 kook, foods 04
ks, I\.1 ; : A loo %
A.; to is 0` �U
A. ......... 1 0 0 0 6 0 LEGEND 0
I r J 6A .% 1. of Or P o I
As A I t to 0. *0 1 1 Isis
% % .. 0 00 ssossW"�
%d 0 1 0 1 1 A Ost" J: / & so >t of .
ea, it" I `� k, % * 0 so 0.01,
to
0 Is A 1 0 A a 17- x -AN 0 f' so A.
t 'k I I
MNooI000k 0
41111 o " \104 -Vo 'Oss: -
I f ; ; ; 0 , X it
; o / f 0 1 Is, .1
t e 'i I f 0
60e. Jo r o
0; 0
I Ell as
q o IN'. I,'-, 1 1. 6 a I Number and Approximate
0 V t OF f so if 0
I is TO 1 8 0 set, -.0 Location of Test Pit
0.0`1 1
0 joO 1 .1 d
1. 1 1, 1 is, F ko 0 1
11
so wz..
1 0, so I% F-4.*
I -Is 0
Wet "t 0 100 200
P I
Scale 1" 100'
09/2003,
Reference: Site Plan based on scanned site plan by CHS Engineering, dated
Phones (425) 844al977 RH Hoover fee, Meadowdale Estates
Cornerstone
FaX1 (425) 8441987
Geotechnical, Inc. File Number Figure
low 17625w130th Ave NE, Cw102 Woodinville, WA *'98072 1791 2
I L j�s"OL' V�T-,
d w
I r L r
4A;l
P
F I
r
P
d
ko..
O_, 0
1 0 Nos
oo
%
Is
to
of
ON
so
okOo"'o"A
Mokood",
_V�o
osso
Ako
po is
so
4_4
I
Is
so 40
I I
I
J4
P
d
Unified Soil Classification System
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GROUP
SYMBOL
GROUPNAME
GRAVEL
CLEAN GRAVEL
GW
WELL -GRADED GRAVEL, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL
COARSE -
GRAINED
MORE THAN 50% OF
GP
POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL
COARSE FRACTION
SOILS
RETAINED ON NO. 4
SIEVE
GRAVEL
WITH FINES
GM
SILTY GRAVEL
GC.
CLAYEY. GRAVEL
MORETHAN50%
RETAINED ON
number 200 SIEVE
SAND
CLEAN SAND
SW
WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND
SP
POORLY -GRADED SAND
MORE THAN 50% OF
SAND
WITH FINES
SM
SILTY SAND
COARSE FRACTION
PASSES NO. 4 SIEVE
sc
CLAYEY SAND
FINE -
SILT AND CLAY
INORGANIC
ML
SILT
GRAINED
LIQUID LIMIT
LESS THAN 50%
CIL
CLAY
ORGANIC
OL
ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY
SOILS
MORETHAN50%
PASSES NO. 200 SIEVE
SILT AND CLAY
INORGANIC
MH
S I ILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT
CH
CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY
LIQUID LIMIT
50% OR MORE
ORGANIC
OH
ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
PT
PEAT
NOTES:
SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS
1) Field classification is based on Dry- Absence of moisture, dusty, dry
visualexamination of soil in general to the touch
accordance with ASTM, D 2488-83.
Soil classification using laboratory Moist- Damp, but no visible water
tests is based on ASTM D 2487-83. Wet- Visible free water or saturated,
3) Descriptions of soil density or usually soil is obtained from
consistency are based on below water table
interpretation of blowcount data,
visual appearance of soils, and/or
test data.
Cornerstone Phone: (425) 844-1977
Unified Soil Classification System
Fax: (425) 844-1987
Nam Geotechnical, Inc.
17625-130th Ave NE, C-102 - Woodinville, WA* 98072
Figure 3
z
9
0
M
M
C
M
0
-40
.0 C
M
M Z
101
17-
� C4
.o -n
M.�
M M
0
0
0 M
C (j)
C 4:1)
'Mo
z
X
—i
M
z
z
0
M
LOG OF EXPLORATION
DEPTH
use
SOIL DESCRIPTION
TEST PIT ONE
0.0-3.0
sm
GRAY -BROWN SILTY FINE TO COARSE SA ND WITH, GRAVEL (LOOSE, MOIST) (FILL).
3.0-4.0
sm
DARK GRAY SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH TRACE GRAVEL AND ORGANICS
(LOOSE, WET) (FILL)
4.0-10.0
sm
GRAY SILTY MEDIUM TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE,
WET) (RECESSIONAL OUTIfVASHIFILL?)
Z1.
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT. 3.5,8.0 AND 10.0 FEET
GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED BETWEEN 0.0 AND 4.0 FEET
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 10.0 FEET ON 12/28/04
m
TEST PIT TWO
ca
0.0-1.0
sm
DARK BROWN TO BLACK SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, WET) (TOPSOILJDUFF)
M
c
1.0-5.0
sm
GRAY -BROWN SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, WET) (FILL)
m EV
5.0-6.0
sm
DARK BROWN TO BLACK SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL AND ORGANICS (LOOSE, WET)
-40
ci
(TOPSOIL)
-4
m
6.0-10.0
sm
RED -BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND ROOTS (LOOSE TO
m z
MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED TILL)
c
z
>
10.0-11.0
sm
BROWN -GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST) (TILL)
SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.0, 5.0, 9.0 AND 11.0 FEET
0 in,
GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS ENCOUNTERED AT APPROXIMATELY 1.0 FEET
SLIGHT TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED BETWEEN 0.0 AND 6.0 FEET
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 11.0 FEET ON 12/28/04
TEST PIT THREE
0
0.0-1.0
sm
BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, MOIST) (FILL)
0
c
1.0 -4.0
sm
GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (VERY DENSE, MOIST) (TILL)
M o'
Z
SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AT 4.0 FEET
GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
__q
TESTPIT WAS COMPLETED AT 4.0 FEET ON 12/28/04
z
TEST PIT FOUR
0.0-0.5
sm
GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (VERY DENSE, MOIST) (TILL)
z
NO SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED
.0
GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
d
TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
0
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 0.5. FEET ON 12/28/04
CORNERSTONE GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
FILE NO V91
FIGURE 4
LOG OF EXPLORATION
DEPTH
USC, SOIL DESCRIPTION
TEST PIT FIVE
0.0-1.0
SM BROWN SILTY FINET.O MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, MOIST) (FILL)
1.0-1.5
sm GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (VERY DENSE, MOIST) (TILL)
NO SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED
z'
GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
0
TEST PIT CAVING WA S NOT ENCOUNTERED
TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 1.5 FE ET ON 12/28/04
ca
a
c rn,
IT!
ol
0�
0 C!
m
Z� .
c zl�
>
0 -n:
m M
W;.
0
C'oy
�mo%
Z.
>i
Z
Z.:
m
CORNERSTONE GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
FILE NO 1791
FIGURE 5
Mar 18 .05 09:55a Scott Hoover 425-745-1466 p.2
PAGE 02
03/17/2005 14:54 42584419B7 CORNERSTONEGEOTECHNI
ANk
Cornerstone 17625-1301h Ave. NE, C1 02, Woodinville, WA 9B072
tO.Geotechnical,
Phone: 425-9"-1977
Inc.
Fax: 42s-844-1987
March 17,2005 Y41?
up
Z
0'
Ms. Catby Patterson
_4
Hoover Prcaiier Homes
16300 Mill Crcek Boulevwd� # 108
Mill Crcck, WA 98012
X
Rocl=y Dc-ign Review Letter
M
�c
MO
Meadowda)e Estates - Lot 6
Edmonds, Washinpon
0
0 C
CG File No. 1791
M.
M Z
10 74
Dear Ms. Pattersion:
71tis letter presents our re view of the proposed two-ticred rockcry design located on Lot 6 at the
ashi n. We have
Mcadowdale Estates development at 6880 — 172'"' Street SW, in Edmonds, W n9to
0 -n
For
previously prepared a Geotcchnical Enginccring.Repon for the site, dated Jamurry 6,2005.1-1
our use in preparing this lettcr, we have been provided with a copy of the Lot 6 site plan that
Plan Revic Comments fium the
shows the locations and elevations of the pmposcd rockcries W
0 r.,
0 M
City, of Edmonds dated Marcb .2, 2005, and the City�s handout NB63 regarding rockcries. This
C CO
M CD
harkdout includes the City of Edm6nd's dctail shect for tiered rock-crics.
M 0
Zr
Lot is located toward the northwest comer of the Meadowd ale Estiles plat. The lot is gcocrallY
.6
flat lying to the east with a slope rising up to a property comer to the west. Based an our
3:1
>
Z
we expect that the material conng this slope is dci Lse glacial till.
previous explorations,
COO
e irito th
The provided site plan shows a two -tiered rockery system fiacing.a cut mad c western
Z
0
slope for the ptanned residence, with a lower tier ranging up to 8 feet in height and an upper tier
0
=ging up to 6 feet in height. The horizontal distance bc tween the tOCS of these rockeries raWs
bctwccn 8 and I I feet. Givcn the base rock size stipulated in.handout #136 3 of 48 inches (5 -man)
for an 8-foot-higb rockery, The horizontal distance fxorn the upper rockery to the back of the
lower rockery will range betwem 4 and 7 feet. Based on this geometry, wc expect that, with a
Mar 18 05 09:55a Scott Hoover 425-745-1466 P-3
03/17/2005 14:54 4258441997 CORNERSTrkEGEOTECHNI PAGE 03
Rockcry Review Letter
Meadowdale Estates — Lot 6
Marob 17,2005
CG Re No. 1791
Page 2
typical 12-inch. ernbednicnt� the u pper rockery will be seated above the I Horizontal to I Vertical
(IR: IV) slope drawn frorn the back of the bottom of the lower rockerY.
We have reviewed the provided Tiered Rockeries Detail, d2ted October 6, 2003, and prepared by
the City of Edmonds. Based on th is review of the Edmonds details, the provided plans, and uur
Z
0
previous explorations, we expect that the detail in the city of Edmonds shoul d be a quitab)c des, i gn
0
for the planned tiered rockery system at Lot 6 it is our opinion thal the proposed two -tiered
M
rockcry system should be adcqua tc.for the project, provjdcd the upper rockcry is embedded bc)o*
-n,
the 11L. I v line extending upward from the back of the lower rocktry base. An alternative would
co
be to increase the horizon tal distance between the rockerics, or use R combination of distance and
M
C
M
embedment, to place the upper rockcry below this IH:IV line reducing surcharge cffccts FTOW
0
0.
0
�theupperrockeTylothelowe-rTockery-
C
MM
:M Z.
We should be retained to provide monitoring and c onsultation so -vices during construction to
10
C Z
sc surficial
confirm that the conditim-, encountered am consistent with tho indicated by our
>
E:
observations. and to provide recommendations for design changes, should the conditions reve aled
CO)
0 -n
q r
dunng the work differ from those, anticipated. As part of ou seMces, we woi�d also evalu tc
J
whether or not earthwork activities comply with conh -act plans and specifications.
ITIM
to t e a
Within the limitations of scoM schcdulcand budget for our work, we ba ve stTived ak 6 re
0 r*
0 M
C co
in accordance with generally azcepted practices followed in
that our work.has been completed i
ITI 0�
this am& at the time this report was prepared. No other conditions� expressed or implied, s ou d
Z
be understood
Z
coo
0)
Z.
0
.01
M
Cornerston e Geotechnicalinc,
Mar 18 05 09:55a ..Scott Hoover 425-745-1466 p.4
03/17/2005 14:54 4258441997 CORNERSTONEGEOTECHNI PAGE 04
Rockery.ft-wdew Letter
r
M -idowdale F—statoes — Lot 6
-March 17, 2005
CG File.No. 1791
Page 3
We apprcciatc the opportunity to be of:scrvice to you. If there am any questions concerning this
report or if we cum provide additional services, please call.
Z'
0.
Sincerely�
-4
Comerstone Geotechnical, Inc.
Jcff Laub, LG
M
C
M
Project. Geologist
0�'
0�
0 C'
M z
C
>
r
0 _n;
n
MM
JEXr1RF,5.08/161X
0
0 Fri
K M
M 0
Rick B. Powell, PE,
z I
Presidcrit
J."
IPL:RRP:nt
c Copy Submitted
z
Z�
0'
0
M
Comerstorie Geotechnical, Inc.
EXYISE TAX
REQ J1RFD
LLC 200502170454 9 PGS FB 17 20
......MMK.Development,
12'hAvenue KE 02 -17-2005 03:19pm $27.00 DANTINI, slaulnisn County baswit
SNOHOMISH COUNTY. WASHINGTON
'Se-attle;,WA 98105
tie Cofi) has placed this document Of
-4 mer coultesy. and accepts no
0�
C046 d s C000
o lidity of the document
r va
0:
---t)tCLMMTION OF EASEMENT FOR DRIVEWAYS
3:
Grantor MMR Development, LLC. a Washington corporation
M 0
Grantee MR 0�vj��pjnent, LLC,,a Washington corporation
.M
0 .0
C
n
Legal Description �,L ""7, 8. 9,'10. 11 and 12 of Steinmai 's Meadowdale
-6ts
Egtqtes, : pet-. plat recorded under Recording. Number
M M:
z
C 2
2004-1008 .4349,--fecords of Snohomish County, Washington (the
>
r - -4 ,
CD
Asses sor's Tax Parce I lDk. ..`04*017340000500
0 -n.
....-ol.oV300000600
00QW*%0O
M M
..010173
010173 0001001100
73 __0
0 09 00;
101�
r
0M
0 1 1 3 000010 oQ*
.
01Q173:'b000'i1 !30
M 0.
01CP173*0db0j2-'00
Zr
This Decla ration of E aseMent for Dn4eways (this "Easemenf) s made this
P/ day of _,20 o,5- , by the. abov6 m nt I nod Grantor/Grantee, as the
X
owner of the property descnb id above (the Uis ........
..........
RECITALS
0)
A Grantor/Grantee is the owner of Loti-5, 1,0 11 and 12 of.
2
R'-' di�g Number
Steinman's Meadowdale Estates per plat recordedUndet dr-of
5349 Records of Snohomish. County, Washlngion#he�J'LQts-)-
20041008z
ff:
B Grantor/Grantee is constructing homes on the Lot r,jkht6fi,-will be. served
atta tjec!-h*6f6 as�Exhibits A, B,
by a common driveway, as shown an the drawings c
C and D (the '..Driveways").
RECEIVEC�`
MAR 2005
"ITY COPY
PERMI'F COUNTER
...... ...... Isements over the Lots for the
esires to create ea
Grantor/Grantee d if and the future owners (the "Owners") of the Lots
D ys for the benefit of itse
riveWa maintenance of the Driveways.
tde for the common
and-li)-prov
other good and valuable consideration,
-consider_ation of the premises and
In acknowledged, Grantor and Grantee
-t6fribiency of which care hereby
t6e reodipt ind follows*
re and..gjant as
z
sement Grantor declares and grants to the owners of the 0
of ingress and egress for the 4
nVeWayS Tor purposes 5
Lots ail..
Lots
rs of the Lots shall not park motor
U-` Df-'�,asement The Owne uld restrict the
se !
manner.that Wo -1
2. use the Driveways in a
vehicles in the..09.VC M
nees Lot
access of any 6 e�..W !he Ow C
M
the cost Of 0
owners shall share equally in hare for 0
C
3. ys on the basis of one s
ir-an-0-7j�j.qcdiment of the Drivewa
maintenance,.repa M
M
each Lot owned. M Z1.
ith-%.respect to work to be done under this J0
Decisions --AII-A�ihqion� W, C
4 2ijoqWy0t6 qfthe Owners of the Lots on the basis of >
-,b : M
ent sh;l=l made*% y,
Easem
for each Lot own6o-,
one voL%
o -n
d js,-Made under. this Easement to. have'
5. Eft—Me-M In the idvent*a ecision. -n
"owner sNif pay the Owner's share Of'cOsts upon
-ath
Work done on the Driveway, e r)avment is due Payment may
rn anothRr--(Jwner*that--., M
s, than 16 days- notice frol M
not les rice of the work belngi do.nd*.* 065
be required in adva 0 -
a lien upon each other Lot for 0 M
'*'Lot -sh6ll Ka4e
M 0)
6.- Lien. Each Owner of a rest and attorney's C co
st of any Work,,-(Jonp.he.j:eundqr, plus. trite
that LOVs she�r—eof the cO I sed in the same manner as a M 0.
it of default, which lien may Z
fees in the ever
matenalman's lien.is foreclosed. .......
--tiffective as of the date of
d h6rQjnJ�*--lSi§
rights grante i
7 Duration. The
>
e perpetual.
n her;01 '�nd shall b
z
executIO
in�ranit--hqld. Grantor harmless
eM
8. Indemnit. Grantee agrees to ind
from any loss or damage ansing out of Grantee's Uge.01 CD
f.--Ahis .'Easement are
n its and bur*ns,.'
_9 0
9 Bin The be ef binding UpOn-the-*transferees or 1
Eyect; v, `h reof, and 0
Abg-� qth the Lots, shall bf
fo and shall rut A Grantor for,thd term: e M
appurtenant vris of the Grantee an( "jhteies!0r!.Ahe`�-ots-
successors in interest or ass le or transfer of any,
merger of tit
shall not be extinguished by
nerto
nt it becomes necesiiiFy1or.-aft OW
10 Attcja��. In the eve Of the failure CA ;jrf6th6r oWner to
as a result diltnt' p
prt
legal proceedings y---in-such
defend or institute the Easement, the substantially prev
ply With the terms Of d b the substantially norv-rpr6VgI1n-.g--P6rty
Corr e entitled to be reimburse y
litigation shall b
2
. . . . . . . . . .
;5-A-AT.1E OF WASHINGTON)
)ss.
'ptlWY-OF KING
n Steinman is the
evidence that Ro
now or
I k have satisfactory
cei
iried before me cknowledged that said person
Oergon wti0*'a'ppeE and said person a s authorized to execute the
n oath stated that said person wa z
si�fwd "�nt.-sftd:-*jckw41edged it as the 0.
instwi e untary
of MM1R.-,DeveIbpmentj-,L-LC, a Washington corpora ion, to be th
0
f -the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. M.
-eorP%aq000
act of "such
Dak6d th
CO
tt cN
4 . ).A L �ay of. February, 2005 X
M
M
"ONPIDN't. (Sign NotaryT
+
0
01
.... ... .. ................... C:
---- N-i
I.; tai r,ip Name of ;4e-o-t�arY)
X M
egi
bIFPnnt: or S'
V 40 00 ' .. .. ��%
A .,,PUB Lit M
z
0 1, ie-V A� Y.. Notary P4blic in and for the State of Washington,
`V' '"ointment exp co
ire
Y ppp
0 -T!
STATE.OF WASHINGTON)
ss.
M M
COUNTY OF KING
0
is the r
ifaddi evi ence that Ron Steinman OM
or have 'sat ry . id
I certify that I know J aerson C (n
acknowledged that saic
.!ar�on .. M
person who appeared before me, and. said p . Nvas authorized to execute the
th stated tfiats,61a4erson Q0
ent, on oa Z
signed this instru.m MWe
instrument and acknowledged it as the jorl: to free and voluntary
LLG, a Washington p4o tion', to "etl i e
of MMR Development, r2 ;
-beined in the instrument
ration for the uses and purpose er
act of such corpo
day
of February, 2005. z
Dated this
X
tjAEL C4
o Z
0
sION P,
+ %
Z:i taffrp j�pirrif.Z.4-TNOtpry) 0
(Legibly, Print or M,
Wa!0ington,
!!4 Notary Public in and for the'-Statd 9f*
4,
Residing a
see
fit OP WAO ointment expires -a:?,
--AL %
My app
4
... .........
nn r�--�Abeo�thee`eandMql
ornora�bon. to
(Sign 0
rpo
M
0-
0 30 20 0 40 80
SCALE IN FEET
Z,
LOT 5
610173 b00005 001
0 m
m C)
c,
69TH 71 oos
3:
10
.>Z.
a.
.00
Ld
mm
`0
Oi011-�,3 00000.6 ..... .. RED DRIVEWAY
0
;ASEMENT
cl)
m 0,
z
/*
M
...........
cn
z
m
DAT E 02/07/05
;'--9STATaS
STEINMAN'S MEADOWdAL TES
fj5#JlfiEt-AEQPaW 5LNrr 00
MEL~ WA M00,25M
SHARED DRIVEWAY EASEME NTS.*
C99
EXHIBIT A
- ---------
..... ......
80
0 40
-30 20
-.4o.
SCALE IN FEET
z
0,
m
69TH PL.W
4
m
m
-+0
0 c�
m
r m
*.%qt --U.
z
>
SHARED DRI VAY 0 -n
-n pu�
JEASEMENT
m W
V5
r
In 0
0 m
c VY
:Mo.
z
9 74
LOT 10
01 al 73 Q00009 0
10 00 ........
10173 0000
All,
L- - - - - - - -
Z:
z
0,
0.
.. ...... rn
DATE 02/07/05
T ES
AN'S MEADOWDALE"'
MOROAD WTV 10P STEINM t
O&LEM IYA 90POS SHARED DRIVEWAY EASEM
ra j":Q jjr.JU.T rA914,M) W-X" EXHIBIT c
4
of
80
40
e. .410* 30 20
-.SCALE IN FEET
..........
z
m
169TH PL W
SHARED DRIVEWAY
......... . EASEMENT
Q m
C
9L.
0
m Al...
M ff
r mz
. .. ..... . 10
cl�
z
b
co
CL o -n
-n
:mm
m 0
m
41
% I .
0
z
LOT 16
LOT 12 13.., i 000011 0
Poll
q10173 000012 00 1 ..... ...
. .. ....... .. ..
tl
Z
z
m
DATE 02/07/05 ........... .
T4TE
MEADOWDAL S.
STEINMAN'S,
1M.,ma-Afo POAO SOW
IVA MM 2" SHARED DRIVEWAY EASEM"T'S
EXHIBIT D
64VA
CRS LLC