20050360.pdfDATE RECEIVED
ERMIT EXPIRES
FP
PERMIT
CITY OF EDMONDS NUMBER 2oC EYaCD
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION JOB SUITE/APTN
ADDRESS V;
OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS (0 A lojrj 1) r �
PLAT NAMEISUBDIVI SION NO. LOT NO. LID NO.
-S(_&7L
MAILINGADDRESS LID FEE $
W :72
z TESCPApproved
3: PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP RW Permit Required E3
0 street use Permit Required 13
CITY ZIP. TELEPHONE EXISTING PROPOSED Inspection Required
Sidewalk Required 113�
REQUIRED DEDICATION FT Undergfound 0
Wiring require
(17 13
it
0. OF FIXTURES PRV REQUIRED
YES 13 NOO 9
NAME METER SIZE LINE SIZE
I= ADDRESS REMARKS Lu
x OWNERICONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROUDRAINAGE
U
ZIP P'3 AT
CITY TELEPHONE
el<
NAME
ENGINEERING REVIEWED BY ATE
ADDRES9'
0 55
I'_ lap t�__
FIRE REVIEWED BY DATE ul
CITY ZIP TELEPHONE
0
STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION CHECKED BY VARIANCE OR CU SHORELINEORADB# INSPECTION SEPA
REQ'D COMPLETED I E;Z
OYES i601
-JI PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL NO. CA# ZONE SIGN AREA HEIGHT
VER ALLOWZEC�) PROPOSED ED
1714.111- ALLOWED , PROPOS
W 7� b- �0003 wAl
STUDY
NEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING I MECH LOT COVERAGE REQUIRED SET13ACKS (F . T.) PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT.)
ALLOWED PROPOSED FRONT SIDE REAR FRONT URSIDE REAR
COMMERCIAL COMPLIANCE OR z
ADDITION 9 1:1 CHANGE OF USE b6� /0 49- E
[] MIXED USE PARKIN LOTAREA NING REVIEWED BY QATE :5
REMODEL MULTIFAMILY 1:1 0.
SIGN REQ'D PROVIDED 15700 T4 If ROLO�
FENCE 1.0- 1 9. Le= 4 Fi- I
REPAIR CYDS ( x FT.) REMARKS
OTHER
DEMOLISH TANK
GARAGE RETAINING WALL FIRE SPRINKLER
z CARPORT ROCKERY FIREALARM
(TY OF USE, BUSINESS ORAC�IVITJ) EX IN:
IL TYPE OR.CqNSTRUCTION CID JOCCUPANT
GROUP
U n'V 6�L2' f V -.5-1 vk" _Lj'DE
W,
W NUMBER NUMBER OF
OF DWELLING PE�TION CONSULTANT
SPECIAL INS CCUPANT
0 STORIES UNITS LOAD
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE REQUIRED )�Y� ES —to
REMARKS
GEOTECH, EPORT
BY: I
STRUCTfWDl,)
A Ap
cl T:
VALUATION
$
1z::7 oz-;
Descriotion FEE Description FEE
Plan Check State Surcharge
/ 30
HEATSOURCE VESTED DATE
LOT SLOPE016 Building Permit city Surcharge
PIL AN CHECK NO: Plumbing Base Fee
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO Mechanical
BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBIC Grading
DONMAIN (CURBS. SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.).WILL REQUIRE
SEPARATE PERMISSION.
Engr. Review
PERMIT APPLICATION: SEE ECDC 19.00.005(A)(5)
PERMIT LIMIT: SEE ECDC 19.00.005(A)(6) Engr. Inspection
SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION
OAPPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE, HEIRS. ASSIGNS AND SUCCESSORS Fire Review Plan Chk. Deposit
U)
LU
IN INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF
I EDMONDS. WASHINGTON. ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND Fire Inspection Receipt #
0: ALL CLAIMS FOROAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE
DEEMED TO MODIFY, WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENT OF ANY CITY ORDINANCE Landscapelnsp. Total Amt. Due
NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAY THE CITY'S ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION. -
Recording Fee Receipt #
I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION; THAT THE INFORMATION APPLICATION APPROVAL
GIVEN IS CORRECT; AND THAT I AM THE OWNER, OR THE DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT OF This application is not a permit until signed by the
THE OWNER. I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC- CALL Building Official or his/her Deputy: and Foes are paid, and
TION: AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED receipt is acknowledged in space provided.
IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO FOR INSPECTION
WORKMEN'S Co�"SATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18:27, SIGN E ATE
SIGNATURE E OR AGENT DATE SIGNED (425)
3)0 771-0220 E tDa Y V V [JATEF
ATTENTION EXT. 1333
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL t
A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND f..PPROVAL OR A CERTI- ORIGIN. ALDV�E). YELLOW -INSPECTOR
FICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC1091 ISC110 / IRC1110. PINK GOLD -ASSESSOR
10104 PRESS HARD - YOU ARE MAKING 4 COPIES
z
0
IT!
-n
M
C
M
0
0
.0 C
M
M z
�z
0 -n
n
M M
0
0 M
C (j)
K Cl)
M 0
Z
X
>
z
3:
0)
z
0
0
M
oKs Sw4a r-C Cxd" (sol A sa,�cos J
17 34'a.TCaKsir- "00)
(,-o,,ttr -
(,OK+ S-r (COAStr - 2.000)
1�--q3, q�5
C.- for. qo
-D= 0 0. t 60
3q7.qS;4-q=qqqFA .6RAD,5
4 ;-;F. 0 0
_q.�q MAXi MUM
14
...........
a
34.39
.68
!A4u a A r,4- r 14 M 0% a
-;;� ...... ... .... ... ;.
.... .... ........
.. .........
rA ...
..... 126.24
At, 191. 5010
... . . ..... ........
... ............ . .....
...... ..... .....
........... ................ .....
... .......
7
.... ....... . ... ..........
119.81
... . ........... ... ..............
... ............. .
.......... .......
:.:., .. ............... ..... .......... .. ...
.................. ....... .
+ 118.78
7. . ........... . .....
1 4.57 . . ............... ........
... ....... .......... ......
........ . ...... .
... ... ........ .
.. . ..... ... .
. ... ....... ... ... . .. ..
.. . ... .... ... .. ...........
/Z 0 ee,
.... ...... . .... .
2
......... ......
z
owl,
.... .. ....
...... .. .... ..
. .. ... ... 0
. ...... 10(
.. . .... ...... .. .....
m
. ......... ..
loll
............. - - =:::".
.............. . .. .... .
?. .... .......... . . . .
. .... ... . ...
4c
.... ......
M.... .... .. ........ ..
c
m
119 0
..........
0
103.52
c
m
mz
103A
9.44(
-7, 2.0
+ 10 4
4 + 101.18
0 -n
-n
.9.32
m M
0
Qv, 0 M
IV A-
C co)
LLJ 95. /
4:5 CO)
0.00 M 0
$4113 Z
C14 + 94.10
+-93 r/ .49
3 ..99.48
3.64
P%'ov?q-) BY f,' kuml 't Z
+ 93.22 -4 . .
M
+ 5. 0+ 97156. ca
z
10 L 17
m
+ 92.36 + 4
4� 9 3.3 .6 GHTLINe,
MAT IAL
0 5;597 DR 35
R 6 0 2 6
L 62.76' SCH 40
.4 RF-Cr-IVED
N - V
Pim).HA COR
m 4 2005
MT.117\ M
M
10
'Popy PE&AIT C,'0UNTEA
96.09
I gqzo
ID A NOTED
r
-P,
XA P[k B`i 1NEERING
I �-
AamF PAQC6L*: q
------,QUTTEHS/DoWNSP0UTS
T
..EDMONDS B .
EVERLYA o co T ",Q-��--SY-STl'
ova,
FF-11"ONSIPTEi.
AR/<
'A
E R 0 ROAn
ZZA
&VIC
VA Zlimer Zeman Associates, Inc.
,
Geotechnica I a nd EnvIronmenta I Cons ulting
RECEIVED
APR 18 2005
J -488
PERMIT C,'OUNTER April 13, 2005
Karen Hibbert
18420 Homeview Drive
Edmonds, Washington 98026
Subject: Geotechnical CITY COPY
z
Review
Proposed Sunroom Addition
0�'
.18420 Homeview Drive
Edmonds, Washington
%
Dear Ms. Hibbert,
0 ff
C
rn
As per your request, Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. (ZZA) has prepared this letter based
0 C
on review of the proposed revised plans and our original geotechnical report.prepared for the
M
M Z!
subject site and a site reconnaissance perfon-ned on April 5, 2005. This letter addresses item 11),
as listed in the. Plan Review Comments letter from the City of Edmonds, Building Division,
C
dated March 17, 2005. In addition, the Plan Review Corrections letter dated March 24, 2005�
requests our geotechnical response to items in the Edmonds Community Development Code
Vi
Q -n
(ECDC), 23.80.020, 060 and 070.
"n ��.
I -' .
Our original geotechnical evaluation, J-488, Proposed Residential, Development at
rn M
(3
Olympic View Drive and Home View Drive was dated July 21, 1999. The proposed revised
0 r
rn
plans reviewed were titled, Addition to Existing Residence, 18420 Homeview Drive, Edmonds
C co:
ic ca
Washington and prepared by McJ of Redmond, Washington. In addition, we reviewed.
mot
geotechnical components of the submitted structural engineering items by Mitchell Engineering,
Z
Inc., requested by the City of Edmonds which were included in the revised plans.
We understand a single story. sunroom addition, approximately 225 square feet in area
and a deck, approximately 45 square feet in area,. are proposed at the northwest comer of the
existing residence. An existing deck will be removed for the new construction. The addition
will attach to the existing residence at the northwest comer.
0,
Geotechnical Comments
M
The revised plans show a foundation plan with continuous footings for the proposed
addition.. The north and est walls are to be supported by n ew continuous footings. The st
w we
half of the south wall and northernmost portion of the* east wall are also to. be supported by new
continuous footings. The remaining portions of the east wall and the south wall will be founded
atop the existing wall foundation. The plans.reviewed show a foundation plan on Sheet A-1
which also includes three continuous spread footings approximately 1.0 foot'wide and a
minimum of 1.5 f6et in depth. Three spread footings, 2 feet square, are shown for the interior
portion of the addition.
18905 33rd Avenue West#1 17; Lynnwood, WA 98036 (425) 771-3304 Fax: (425) 771-3549
ZZA Proposed Hibbert Sunroom Addition
J -488-11
April 13, 2005
Page 2
MOM
Our original geotechnical evaluation, J-488, included four shallow test pits which were
deepened. by hand auger methods to depths of approximately 5 to 6 feet. The geotechnical study
encountered loose topsoil up to 1.5 feet in thickness atop loose sand, interpreted as colluvium, to
depths of 3.5 to 5 feet. Medium dense sand was noted below the loose sand to the bottom of the
test holes. Test hole, HA-4 was advanced in close proximity to the location of the proposed
addition. The medium dense sand horizon was encountered at a depth of approximately 5 feet in
H -4, f
A or our original study.
We understand grading for the original site development included cuts at the northern
portion of the residence on the order of 8 to 10 feet for the lower level garage. After the cuts, the
M
northern portion of the residence was founded on the medium dense sand. As discussed in our
original soils report, the structure should be founded atop the medium dense sand or com acted
p
Co
structural fill placed atop the medium dense,sand.
M
C
M 0
Review of specific items requested by the Cit y of Edmonds, in Chapter 23.80 of
0
Geologically Hazardous Areas, included ECDC 23.80.020, Designation of Specific Hazard
M
Areas; ECDC 23.80.060, Development Standards -General Requirements and ECDC 23.80.070,
M Z�
Development Standards -Specific Hazards.
Based on ECDC 23.80.020, the site has soils which may be an erosion hazard' and slopes
in excess of 2H: IV (Horizontal:Vertical) may be' a landslide hazard. Our previous study, J-488
_n
dated July 21, 1999, interpreted the soils to consist of the Indianola loamy sand of the
Alderwood/ Everett Series. The Indianola sands are defined as a slight water erosion hazard.
M M
The portion. of the north slopewhich is greater than 211: IV is limited and a 25 botbufferwas
0
incorporated in the.original design. No evidence of deep-seated slope movement or springs,
0
C: cjj�
seeps or wet areas were observed on the hillside during our original study in 1999 or during our
ic CD
site reconnaissance on April 5, 2005.
M
Z
Based on ECDC 23.80.060, our previous study and current design,.the existing 25 -f ot
;a
buffer will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent properties. No indications
of deep-seated slope instability were observed on the property and provided proper construction
Z
techniques are utilized for the addition, it is our opinion that the construction will not adversely
affect the overall stability of the slope.
Z,
Based on ECDC 23.80.070, the current 25-foot buffer will have no. adverse impact to the
0
s ite or the area of the proposed addition. The.proposed addition shall not result in greater risk or
i
rn
a need for increased buffers on neighboring properties, in our opinion. Geotechnical
recommendations in our original report should be implemented for the proposed addition.
In summary, our review of the proposed revised plans for the addition and the,
recommendations of the original geoteclinical report, J-488,,dated July 21, 1999 are still
adequate for the proposed addition, in our opinion.
Our involvement in the project will continue with special inspection services for
foundation soil bearing for the proposed sunroom addition, as construction proceeds.
J488-11-11ibbert
APR-14-00 FRI 03:11 PH FAX,NO. F. U3
Ziner Zeman Inc.
-Assodges.
Geotmhaiad and Envirow=u1.CQ=WtjnS.
10d
-488
July 21, 1999
Tom Belt Homes
Z1.
P 0. Box 314
i&onds, Washington 98020
CITY COPY
M
Attention: Mr. Tom Belt
co
11 M;
Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
M 0
Proposed Residential Development R 5 CEIVED
0
Olympic View Drive & Home View D nve
MAR 4 2005,
C
M
Edmonds, Washington
M
PERMIT COUNTER
Dear Mr. Belt,
.This report presents the results of our geotechnical evaluation for the at
property located
0.11
Olympic View Drive and Home View Drive in Edmonds, Washington. These services are bein 9
performed in accordance with out proposal dated July 8, 1999.
M M
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
0
0 M
C 0
The project site is located, northwest of the intersection of Olympic Vic Dirive and
w
:M0
Z r
Home View Drive in Edmondt, Washington. The sloped is currently
property undeveloped and
covered with fir and deciduous trees with an understory of brush and weeds.
M
We understand that the proposed development will involve the construction of 'a
z
residential home and associated driveway. The house will be of conventional wood framed
construction with a daylight basement, Access to the residence will be ftorn Rome View Drive.:
CA
z
We understand that the finished grade of the lower floor will be:at an clevation.of approximately
94 feet, � or at the elevation of the lower portion of the existing lot.
M.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
Ile purpose of this evaluation.was to explore shallow subsurface soil and un
gro dwater
conditions. at the site and to provide geotechnical recoinm endations for design and construction
of the residential development. The evaluation focused on the portion of the lot where the house
is planned. We understand that, per the Edmonds Community Development Code, a geotechnical
assessment of the site is required prior to issuing building permits. The site has slopes in excess
of 2� 1 (H-.V). Our s ecific scope of services has included:
P
1923.104 Avenue West, suite B20 1. Lynnwood, Washington 98036 (42S)771--3304
HrK_14_UU Ml U3:1� FM FAX NO.' P. 04
Tom Belt homes J-488
Residential Development My 2 J, 1999
Edmonds, Washington Page 2
Review information available in our riles regarding geold'gic conditions in the site
vicinity.
2. Complete a reconnaissance of the site.
Explore subsurface soil and ground water conditions by observing four shallow backhoe
Z.
excavated test pits within the planned residential building area. The test pits were
excavated prior to our field visit.
0
4. Supplement the test pit excavations by band augering and paforming Dynamic Cone
Penetration (DCP) tests in three of the test pits. and hand augering an additional hole
CO)
near the northwest comer of the planned residence.
C M
M 0
5. Provide geotechnical recommendations and desip'criteria for the development, This
0
includes an assessment of slope stability. Recommendations are provided for site
M
preparation, earthwork, foundations, drainage, and pavement subgmde preparation.
M z
io -4
S. Prepare a written report -which contains our conclusions and recorfiniendations, along
with the supporting field, data.
0 -n
SITE CONDITIONS
M
M
GeoJ2
ca
0 r
0 M
C
The soils at the property -are mapped as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam in the IM
U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Survey, "Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area Washington".' The
M 0.
Z M.
Alderwood is described as a deep soil developed in glacial till. Included in the Alderwood are
small areas of 6ther soil units including the Indianola lo�arny sand. Th6 Indianola is described as
M -
a very deep soil that formed in glacial outwash. Based on our observations of the on -site soils,
we interpret the. 'near surface soils to be.a part of the Indianola loamy sand.
Z.
Z.
The property is located on a south -facing slope. Slopes on the property are steeper* on the
0
n6rthem portion of the lot and -shallower on the southern portion. Based on our site
6
riconhaissance and the topographic survey of the property you provided us, slopes in the planned
building location v from 2.25, 1 (H:V) near the northern to less than 4:1 i n the
M
southe portion,
9231 361h Avenue Wesk Suite a201 Lynnwood, Washington 98036 (425) 771 - 3304
1481,bclt,0799
APR- 14-00 FRI 03:12 PH FAX NO. 05
Tom Belt homes J-488
Residential Development July 21, 1999
Edmonds, Washington Page 3
No evidence of deep-seated slope movement was observed during our site
reconnaissance. However, the upper soils on the slope 6onsisted of loose colluvi (slope wash)
ium
which is indi Icative of soil creep and erosion. Springs, steps or wet areas were not observed on,
the hillside at. the time of our reconnaissance.
Substirf&e
-Conditions
Subsurface conditions were explored by observing the soils exposed in four shallow test
Z'
0:
pits excavated by you prior to our field, visit on July 8, 1999. The test pits were concentrated in
0
the central and southern portions of the planned house location. On July 12, 1999, Zipper Zeman
M
Associates, Inc. utilized three of the test pit excavations to extend hand auger holes to depths
7, 9
between.5 and 6 feet below the ground surface. Dynamic cone penetration tests were performed
in the holes to assess soil density characteristics. One additional hand auger h6le was adv ed
anc
C
near the northwest comer of the planned rtsidence. The approximate locations of the test
M
0
pits/band auger holes ate shown on the attached site plan (Figure 1).
0'
0 C
_4
M
A poorly developed topsoil, zone consisting of, dark brown, loose, moist, silty fine sand
M Z'
with some gravel was, encountered below the surface. The topsoil extended to depths between 9
-i
and 18 inches in the'test pitsthand auger holes. Orange -brown to gray, loose, moist, fine. to
coarse sand with some gravel was encountered below the topsoil. The loose sand is interpreted
to be collavium. The loose sand extended to depths of 3.5 to 5 feet in the test holes. Medium
dense, moist, fine to coarse sand was observed below the loose sand. The medium dense sand.
extended to'the bottom of the test holes.*- Copies of the test pit/hand auger boring logs are
M Fn
attached to this report.
0.-
r
0 M
C M
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
M 0:
Z
Slope St2b
..No indications of. deep.!seated -slo e instability were observed on the property. Slope
P
creep and erosion in the f6rm of near surface colluvium (slope wash) soils were evident,
Z
Provided proper construction techniques are utilized, it is out opinion that the construction of the
planned residence will not adversely affect the overall stability of the slope. Due to the granular
Z
soils observed, groundwater is aaticipated to dissipate through the subsurface soils.
0
Site Prep2radon, and E2rthwork
0
M
We recommend that the vegetation and topsoil be stripped from th building and
e
pavement areas. All tree stumps and roots more than 2 inches in diameter.should be grubbed and
removed from these areas.
19231304 Avenue West, Suitt B201 Lynnwood, Washington 98036 (42S) 771 - 3304
J483.belt.0799
APR-14-00 FRI 03:13 PH FAX NO, P. 06
Torn Belt homes. J-488
Residen * tial Development July 21, 1999
Edmonds, Washington. Page 4
too
Based on our conversations with you, the northern portion of the residence will require
cuts on the order of 8 to 10 feet, and the - existing sufface is near Ahe planned subgrade in the
southern portion of the planned house, The soil conditions observed in the test holes indicate
that the footings and floor slabs in the northern portion of the house will be founded on the
medium dense sand. Loose, sand in the southern portion of the planned residence was observed
to.extend to approxninately 3,5 feet below the existing ground surface. To reduce the potential
for differential settlement of footings and floor slabs caused by spanni g across soils of variable
n
Z
densityo werecommend that the loose colluvial subgrade sand in the building site that underlies
footing and floor slabs be compacted to a minimum of 92 percent of the maximum dry density in
0
rp
accordance with the ASTM D-1557 test. method. Alternatively, the loose soils should be
removed below all footings. SoA. loose or otherwise unsuitable areas identified during site
preparafio r A6 hid be repaired to a firm non -yielding condition.. A representative of Zi ,
r h Mr
Co M
am - 1,
Zeman Associates, Ing. should,�tpjesent to assess tbe.suitability.of subgrade soils...
C
M 0
Where necessary, new fill in building and pavement areas should be placed as compacted
0
C
structural fill following subgrade preparation as described above. The fill should be placed in
M
horizontal lifts not exceeding 10 inches in loose thickness. Each. lift should be conditioned to the
M Z
proper moisture content and uniformly compacted to a firm, non -yielding condition using
Z
mechanical equipment.. All structural fill placed in building areas, and within the upper 2 feet in
pavement areas, should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density (MD D)
-n
as determined by the ASTM D-1557 test method. Below a depth of two feet in pavement areas,
0
the structural fill should be compacted to a minimarn of 92 percent of the (MDD). This applies
M
to all utility, trench backfill as well. Non-structural fill placed in landscape areas need only be
m
compacted to the extent required for construction equip Mient tralffic support.
0
0. M.
C
All structural rill should be free of organic matter, debris, and other deleterious material,
M 0
with no individual particles larger than 6 inches In maximum dirriension. The suitability of soil
Its
Z r
for use as structura I fill will,depend on I radation and moisture content. As the t of
amoun
M
fines (material passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly
more sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more
difficult to achieve, The subsurface fine to coarse San d encountered in the test holes should �be
Z
suitable for use as all-weather fill.
Imported structural fill placed during wet weather should consist of free draining sand
Z
0
and gmvel containing less than 10 peTcent fines by weight relative to the fraction of the material
m
passing the 1/4-inch sieve, Importcd structural fill may contain a higher fines content for
placement during dry weather provided that the moistum contents are near optimum- during
compaction.
We recommend that permanent cut slopes in the native soils are inclined at a maximum
inclination of 2:1 (H:V), Temporai)r construction cut slopes should conform to Uniform
Building Code (UBC) and/or local construction codes. Shoring of temporary cut slopes. is not
anticip6tied to be necessary based on the. soil conditions observed'in the test holes. However,
provisions for shoring should be incorporated into construction plans should subsurface
7,1S11per 7.em2im Alandatea- Ing-
19231136" Avenue West, Suite B201 Lynnwopd, . Washingtori 99036 (425) 771 — 3304
J488,b@11.0799
APR- 14-00 FRI 03:13 PH FAX NU. F. Ut
Tom Belt homes J-488
Residential Development July 21, 1.999.
Edmonds, Washington Page 5
conditions vary from those observed in the test holes. Permanent cut slopes should be
revegetated as soon as possible to reduce erosion and the susceptibility to sloughing,
Constructed slopes for dziveway or foundation support should be keyed or benched into
the existing slope. The top, outer edge of the constructed slope should be designed to provide a
minimum separation of 10 feet from foundations and 5 feei from pavement surfaces, We
recommend that the outer slope be constructed at a maximum inclination of 2:1 (H:V). Existin 9
soils below the constructed. slope that we loose or.disturbed should be excavated down to the
z
medium dense sand. The exposed subgrade should be prepared as described above. We
recommend that the base of the excavated area be graded with a reverse (into the hillside) slope
0
M
of I to 2 percent to -provide a key for the fill. Structural fill can than be' laced and compacted as
p
recommended above.
CO
It is our -opinion that the earthwork can be accomplished with conventional construction
C M
equipment. We recommend that construction occur during the drier months of the year. If
M 0
constructi during wet weather, it may be necessary to overexcavate wet'
on must occur disturbed
80.
C
material and replace W1
ith crushed rock or a clean layer of sand and gravel (less than 5 percent
M
fines) to provide a reasonable working surface and help protect.exposed subgrades.
M - z
The site has moderate slopes and the potential for erosion and sloughing of exposed soils
z
is significantly increased during wet weather. Brosion control measures are recornmended during
construction to reduce the potential impacts to adjacent areas. Erosion control measures should
0
n
be desipe4. to prevent downslope sediment movement. Silt fences and diversion structures
should be incorporated to control runoff and sedi ment transport Temporary erosion protection,
M M
straw, plastic) should be placed on exposed soils during construction. Permanent
..0 CO
0 r
groundcover should be established as soon as possible on exposed soils.
0 M
C V)
rb V)
Foundations
M 0
Z
We recommend that all spread footings for the structures be founded on the medium
dense,, fine to coarse sand encountered at the test hole locations between 3.5 and 5.0 feet below
the surface or on a zone of compacted soil or fill as described in the Site Preparation section. All
z
footing excavations should be observed by a representative of Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. to
M
confirm that suitable bearing soils have been exposed. Keyways should be incorporated into the
Vi
footings to provide resistance. to lateral movement.
z
The depth of embedment below lowest adjacent finished grade for all exterior and
0
M,
interior footings should be at least, 18 inches and .12 inches, respectively. We r6commend a
T=Unum footing width of - 18 inches - for continuous will footings and 24 inches for isolated
column footings. for footitigs desiped and cohWuc7tidiic&ding th -the ';Wove:,�riffinis, 'we
recommended an allowable bearing capacity of 2500 pounds per square foot. 71his value applies
to the total 6f af1'_d'e4`p'ius lorilj� 'live lo-ai,ei6-lu-sive of thiW6rghtl6f tKe footing and any
overlying backfill. The allowable bearing value may be increased. by one-third for non -sustained
live loads such as wind or seismic.
ZISMAK ZAMG
1923130 Avenue West. Suite B201 Lynnwood, Wahington 98036 (425) 771 - 3304
148B,bel�07"
HFK-14-UU MI UJ:14 Fn AX NUI F. 08
Tom Belt homes J-488
Residential Development July 2 1, 1999
Edmonds, Washington Page 6
The settlement of footings supported as recommended is.expected to be on the order of I
inch or less. Differential settlements are expected to be.less than 1/2 inch over*a distance of 30
feet. Most of the anticipated settlements are expected to occut rapidly as loads are applied.
Loose.or disturbed soils not removed from the footing excavations prior to pouring concrete may
result in increased settlement. The soils observed are not considered to be compressive or
z
expansive.
The northern portion of the residence will have below grade walls. We recommend, that
0
M
an equivalent fluid density of 50 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) for at-reit conditions and 40 pcf for
-"H
active conditions be utilized in the design of the walls. The at -rest conditions should be used
Co. E2!
where no movement (deflection) of the top of the wall- is allowed. Active conditions can be used
0 M.
C:
where deflections of 1/100 of the height of the wall are acceptable, For footings founded in
M 0
accordance with our recommendations, the allowable frictional resistance may be computed
0
C
using a coefficient of ftiction of OAO applied to the dead load.forces. The allowable passive
M
resistance.,on the sides of footings may be.computed using an equivalent fluid density of 225
M z
pounds per cubic foot for a level -ground surface. The above coefficient of friction and
equivalent fluid density values both include a factor of safety of about 1.5.
Slab_-9n=ade Fla.=
o -n
n
The -slab -on -grade floors should be f
ounded on pre -rolled native ground or structural fill
M M
per our recommendations outlined previously. We recommend that the floor slab be underlain by
0 -
r
a minimum of 6-inches of clean sandy gravel, crushed rock or pea gravel to serve as a drainage
0 M
C CA
layer, capillary break and working surface. The fines content of the capillary break shouldbe
C (D
limited to 5 percent or less, by weight, when measured on the minus 1/4. inch sieve fraction. An
M '0
Z
impervious moisture barrier should be installed beneath the slab.
74
X
Pavements
z
The design and construction of driveways should conform to current City of Edmonds
standards. We recommc'nd that the subgradr. for pavement areas be prepared as recommended in
CO
z
the Site. Preparation section of this report.. The upper one -foot of subgradc, soils should be
compacted to at least 92 percent of the maximum dry density determined in accordance with the
'ASTM D-1557 test method. Finish subgrade surfaces should'be constructed to facilitate
rn
'drainage and prevent ponding of water below the pavement soction-We recommend a layer of
crushed base course be placed between the prepared subgrade 6r structural fill, and the pavement
working surface material (asphalt or concrete). The base course should be compacted to at least
95 percent.of the maximum dry density per ASTM D-1557. The thickness of base course and
working surface material should be based on local codes.
71ppor Zeman Axsecista- Tog,
1923130 Avenue West. Suite B201 Lynnwood, WasWngton 98036 -3304
(425)771
1488.bcl�0799
APR-14-00 FRI 03:14 PH FAKNO, P. .09
Tom Belt homes.
J-488.
Residential Development July 21, 1990
Edmonds, Washington Page 7
Site grading and the construction of impervious structures (e.g. roofs, pavement areas)
will alter drainage in the development area. We reconunend that site gnding allow for positive
drainage away fyom * foundations and roadways. The concentrated runoff fiom, impervious,
surfaces thould be directed to appropriate storm water discharge receptors and not allowed to
Z
flow down slopes. Concentrated storm water flow on slopes can lead to excessive erosion and
compromise the stability of the slope.
M
Runoff from the -roof should not be concentrated and allowed -to fl ow over slopes. We
:q 5i
recommen d that roof runoff be.. collected in tightline pipes and directed to a suitable discharge
receptor.
C M
All backfilled walls surrounding the structure should be provided with subsurface
M 0
0
C
ainage.
dr i To protect'wills and floors from moisture and to avoid, the buildup of hydrostatic
(_.pqqsurcs, y�pygKpmmend that the backfill material within 36 inches outside backfilled walls and
M
M Z
1. A?�fi4?Tjdie full7htight of the wall consist of clean, free -draining sand and gravel. Washed or
10-1
screened -gravel could be substituted for sand and gravel drainage, material, ri
provided 111ter fab c
is placed to separate the waahed gravel from adjacent site.soils of fill. The backfill should be
sealed at the ground surface with a minimum of I foot of impervious soil in any unpaved areas to
0
n
prevent surface water from entering directly into the wall backfill. Final site grades should be
designed to �arry water away from the struc -rom a
ture in order to prevent it f ccumulating and
m M
ponding next to the -structure.
.0 CO)
At the base of backfilled walls, we recommend 'roviding footing drains. The footing
p
0M
C Cn
ic (n
drains (,With cleanouts) should consist of perforated pipe, sloped to drain, with ped6rations
M 0
Z F_
placed down. Mic free -draining backfill adjacent the backfilled walls should be c inuous and
ont
envelop the footing drains for at least 6, inches in all directions. Roof drains should not be
conriected to the subdrains.
M
Z
USE OF. THIS REPORT
M
Cn
We. have prepared this report for the exclusive use of Tom Belt Homes and their agents
Z
with respect to the proposed residential development northwest of the intersection of Olympic
Vicw Drive and Home View Drive in Edmonds, Washington. The recommendations presented
. M
iA, this report are intended to be used to assist inthe design of th e proposed residence.
If there are any chan es in the loads, grades, location or confi guration of the proposed
residence, our firm should be notified so that we may confirm the geotechnical recommendations
presented in this report, or modify these recommendations if appropriate. When the design has
becri finalized, we recommend that the final design drawings and specifications be reviewed by
our firm to see that our recommendations have been interpreted and Implemented as intended.
Zlpatr Zeman Asseeigtgu- Inc-
1923136* Avenue West. suite B201 Lynnwood..Washington 99036 (425) 771 — 3304
J488,bell,0799
mrK-iq-.uu rKi
0j; it) rn FAX NO.
12
ZIPPER ZEMAN ASSOCIATES, INC.
1 P231 367".Avt. W Suite B20 1. Lynnwood, washington* "036
TeAt P101nd Ativer Rariny HAA
Project: Tom Belt Homes
Uandon: Edmonds, WA.
Pk*Jftt No., J-488
Appro3daute ground surfaft ewadan (fftt)-.
D*te
ExcAvAted
July 12, 1999
Depth
Haterlid Deseripdon
z
Z�
Loose, moist, dark. brown, silty fineSAND wi some gravel., (Topsoil)
rn
-W -
Loose, mois; orange to brown, One to coarad SAND with Some gravel
M
2
(C011uvIum),
C
M 0
80
C
3
M
M z
io
F.
4
9di
M urn dense, moi.st, orange to brown, fine to coarse SAND with some
gravel.
0 -n
19
S-1
5
M M,
Bon*ng Completed at 4 feet 10 inches on &26/99. No gmundwater
0
encountered at time of excavation.
0�
C M
V)
M 0
Z.
7
z
8
z
0*'
9
M.
10
7 .
HrK-14—uu HU
W1.16 rn FAX No.
P. 13
ZIPPER ZEMAN ASSOCIATES, INC.
19231 3eAvc W. Seits 0201, Lymwwd, Washlngwn98036
191 1131mand,&uggr Bari
Prolect: Tom Bait Homes
Location: Edmonds� WA.
Project No: 1-488
Approximate ground surface elevation (feet):
Date
fteavated July 12,1999
Depth
Material Description
Z
Loose, moist, dark brown, silty fine SAND with gome gravel. (Topsoil)
M,
Loom moist, brown, fine to coarse SAND with some Smvel (Coliuviulm).
2
M.
M
0
0 2
3
M
M z
4
Medium demo, mok; brown, fine to coarse SAND with some gravel.
0-11
33
S-1
MM
0
.0
M 0
z
7
Boring completed at 6 fee on 7/12/99. No groundwater encounterW at
time of excavation.
X
z
M,
Z�
9
0
rn
to
APR- 14-00 FRI.
03:16 PH FAX NO.
P. 14
ZIPPER ZEMAN ASSOCIATESS INC..
19231361V Ave. W. Suite B201, Lynwood.. Washinpau9U311
Test Pftffl2nd AUggiltormnip Rk-13
Project: Tom Belt Roma
Lontlon: Eftwds, WA-
Project No. J-488,
Approxtmate groved tar face elevadon (feet):
Date Excavated
July 12, 1"9
Deptk
MaterW Description
A
z
M
dark brown, A fine SAND with some graQ.
Loose, moist, ity
C
Loose, moist, brown to gray, fine to coaTst SAND with some gravel
M 0
2
(Colluvium).
0
86
C
rn.�
M
3
r
'dense,
0
medium moist, brown to gmy, fine to coarse SAND with some
gravel.
0
27
S
moimre
M
C
M 0:
z
Boring completed at 6 feet on 7/12/99. No groundwater encountered at
time of excavation.
Z�
z
0
M
10
L
Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc.
Geotechnical Engineers and Environmental Consultants
18905 33rd Ave. W, Suite 117, Lynnwood, WA 98036 (425) 771-3304 / FAX (425) 771-3549
DAILY FIELD REPORT # DATE r -� PAGE —L OF —�
PROTECT: ! ,I,�>c,t'f rl dU,1lf n ZZA JOB NO: U r 4S" ! 1
CLIENT: fitll[cJe CONTRACTO
ZZA FIELD REP: �r�-�� Holll.'L LOCATION: - Cdtkio d"t.yyw
ARR./DEP. TIME* S:•1,,..
PERMIT NUMBER:
WEATHER: EQUIPMENT USED
154 L<C 1�CL/h�151(1� ID 4kis ell V �Cl/tJ11 �Id`it/fl/IGrG ldrG v'� �rtlll �Ir � 1rttJ•�!',Al!/^ri
t'U�� h1C R✓/11Vcd ejf, c. 14 IV Ae !Z
lc"6/•JL Coyttylt 1 �!'1-
-77Lf rr)1'lry X c:(VILi/irr.. (> /ytYe- ! 1 J ?D rt c� e- /l. /;die In qtr r e1G�
fes- /t /1 ,/ , /' /
4o 1/s/✓=IiM'M l(lS ��X!/Cscfk( /!1t^!�!•/i rt C/Gdtje. `diteAr IC 7�fZl�,
r J / iIV se, AO £k /iieX! s tw5e /rrr � rlel /
(I
! ( lCr6tvrt// /!' ul,+1•//r /; �/ ,v J r .J
,
,ftai;F<. .% it.
r / %t! T1 C • /ir fir/t.�•,
/"i. c`f. T N GGirLlr,C_ /+lac /riID14r., /f 0 `�GI/f:• Iii[ oGlSf' /ISI f d/I:
r ( /
l,lf i t ('e 1 Gtt/k k �Ch i7 r k� l�lr ' t. 4 e / '�J!�r �G'JL!•r . ���
! /I / /!ja
I(I< i!!6( (jt 2�0 hlc fJlr 11 (✓'., ///l1IdL'Illcv !�[ii( /'1 /( Sr l r ItJt !r/ e,
el
ee.�li f 4•//yrs%I/r f mil( 1LC' /liel/slhr.'�e/
�l1/t •1 �tL! ITillllft rl e-i,°l / / F: f J k"*i% C!/
t / . lJ/ f .S { % OH. t/.l� �r9 �G/r ..•'i C__/Jr
.t. t Y!•f t �!
/pit
1(fir- ! >1yLrl•.�lt/JA,� i �f'i(`r! lr.l�. -
v J 1 j
AUG 0 2 2005
DEVELOPMENT SERVICE ,
REVIEWED BY: CITY OF EDMONDS
This report presents opinions formed as a result of our observations of the contractors activities relating to geotechnical engineering. We rely on the contractor to comply with
the plans and specifications throughout the duration of the project irrespective of the presence of the ZZA field representative. The presence of our field representative will
he for the purpose of providing observation and field testing services, Our work does not include supervision or direction of the actual work of the contractor, its employees,
or agents. Neither the presence of the ZZA field representative nor the observation and testing by ZZA shall excuse the contractor in any way for defects discovered in its
work. ZZA will not be responsible for job site safety on this project.
Form # 1
O
n
M
eM
M
0
OC .
XM
p
Z•I
DZ
r=
f
'1
Z �
MITI,
` 0O m
(;
z r
J
Z
y WMI
i
Z
0
n.
M
11
i
Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc.
Geotechnical Engineers and Environmental Consultants
18905 33rd Ave. W, Suite 117, Lynnwood, WA: 98036 (425) 771-3304 / FAX (425) 771-3549
DAILY FIELD REPORT # Z PATE =� PAGE OF
PROJECT: t `r 1� ZZA JOB NO: y r
CLIENT: i CVs fte �. ` �- CONTRACTOR: t C- 4,_ ctW+ '�. ; k
C2 we ,c (J I py%e
ZA FIELD REP: o t"� --� o '^ s LOCATION: �rQ Pn .7 V7 ey �
ARR./DEP. TIME: 1 PERMIT NUNIBER: -
.
WEATHER: EQUIPMENT USED:
A -G re O cVP
FJ�Si'rVe �oo����, CA rem �.0-��c S�
—� c / t T
� c ,+ ¢ �t 'i -( � C tr�lS-f-C`�� h it
rc .4'', C ti V t r ba 5 C 419 he e7 4.J !!
(�
} `ttd; �o4 Ow 5�b� ucQ
c �
Svt' �oc Vxf -f ��C CK�r�Srd� So t Go�rtciRG��tX el Gr c� 7l•i2
L 0c Y�4�c-� wr4 4e t27
V� C 4 �.�- r u < -� r t ci cl7 �� d t,C 4 Z' � E"
r
r(� `f
y �Q�e % �cLi ccdC cCl T 41 ,G �'V 0
Y1CiS bc�cv� S�t�-tti�il�/ cov+iajqG�r &0'c�
// /
5 t V -n ti°. L n 7 Gi 64r oh `� <<2 I l•r� � � sr r',r G1 J--7CI� LGv, t f h Lot
`� ..t �j t= GL (M• ('%` !✓� Y C 7 C VC11 �j f� Y' Gl" V� Gr V -e c� t't d1f i') ew 4 � lr C 5 tc c r G�
Y V ( Qq 0A'% c^ 4 u(� � rG G` `F' Y t/ ee —t 1 a �1 „ Y f1 [. C O �I, �i er 7 r e(
( � d
C 0
REVIEWED BY: _ RECEIVED
This report presents opinions fprtrted as a result of ourobservatinns of the contractors activiti es tc eot�c�cltitical engineering., we rely on the contractor w comply with
the plans and specifications throughout the duration of the project irrespective of the ljyt�lkppFl�NI �ttcF�VI�+C�fAlative.'rhe presence of our field representative will
lie for the purpose of providing observation and field testing services. Our work docs not inclQdf YtQFrfiDMDNMection of the actual work of the contractor; its employees,
or agents. Neither the presence of the ZZA field representative nor the observation and testing by ZZA shall excuse the contractor in any way for defects discovered in its
work. ZZA will not be responsible for joh site safety on this project.
i
c
i
j
i
i.
Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc.
Geotechnical Engineers and Environmental Consultants
18905 33rd Ave. W, Suite 117, Lynnwood, WA: 98036 (425) 771-3304 / FAX (425) 771-3549
DAILY FIELD REPORT # Z PATE =� PAGE OF
PROJECT: t `r 1� ZZA JOB NO: y r
CLIENT: i CVs fte �. ` �- CONTRACTOR: t C- 4,_ ctW+ '�. ; k
C2 we ,c (J I py%e
ZA FIELD REP: o t"� --� o '^ s LOCATION: �rQ Pn .7 V7 ey �
ARR./DEP. TIME: 1 PERMIT NUNIBER: -
.
WEATHER: EQUIPMENT USED:
A -G re O cVP
FJ�Si'rVe �oo����, CA rem �.0-��c S�
—� c / t T
� c ,+ ¢ �t 'i -( � C tr�lS-f-C`�� h it
rc .4'', C ti V t r ba 5 C 419 he e7 4.J !!
(�
} `ttd; �o4 Ow 5�b� ucQ
c �
Svt' �oc Vxf -f ��C CK�r�Srd� So t Go�rtciRG��tX el Gr c� 7l•i2
L 0c Y�4�c-� wr4 4e t27
V� C 4 �.�- r u < -� r t ci cl7 �� d t,C 4 Z' � E"
r
r(� `f
y �Q�e % �cLi ccdC cCl T 41 ,G �'V 0
Y1CiS bc�cv� S�t�-tti�il�/ cov+iajqG�r &0'c�
// /
5 t V -n ti°. L n 7 Gi 64r oh `� <<2 I l•r� � � sr r',r G1 J--7CI� LGv, t f h Lot
`� ..t �j t= GL (M• ('%` !✓� Y C 7 C VC11 �j f� Y' Gl" V� Gr V -e c� t't d1f i') ew 4 � lr C 5 tc c r G�
Y V ( Qq 0A'% c^ 4 u(� � rG G` `F' Y t/ ee —t 1 a �1 „ Y f1 [. C O �I, �i er 7 r e(
( � d
C 0
REVIEWED BY: _ RECEIVED
This report presents opinions fprtrted as a result of ourobservatinns of the contractors activiti es tc eot�c�cltitical engineering., we rely on the contractor w comply with
the plans and specifications throughout the duration of the project irrespective of the ljyt�lkppFl�NI �ttcF�VI�+C�fAlative.'rhe presence of our field representative will
lie for the purpose of providing observation and field testing services. Our work docs not inclQdf YtQFrfiDMDNMection of the actual work of the contractor; its employees,
or agents. Neither the presence of the ZZA field representative nor the observation and testing by ZZA shall excuse the contractor in any way for defects discovered in its
work. ZZA will not be responsible for joh site safety on this project.
i
Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc.
Geotechnical Engineers and Environmental Consultants
18905 33rd Ave. W, Suite 117, Lynnwood, WA: 98036 (425) 771-3304 / FAX (425) 771-3549
DAILY FIELD REPORT # Z PATE =� PAGE OF
PROJECT: t `r 1� ZZA JOB NO: y r
CLIENT: i CVs fte �. ` �- CONTRACTOR: t C- 4,_ ctW+ '�. ; k
C2 we ,c (J I py%e
ZA FIELD REP: o t"� --� o '^ s LOCATION: �rQ Pn .7 V7 ey �
ARR./DEP. TIME: 1 PERMIT NUNIBER: -
.
WEATHER: EQUIPMENT USED:
A -G re O cVP
FJ�Si'rVe �oo����, CA rem �.0-��c S�
—� c / t T
� c ,+ ¢ �t 'i -( � C tr�lS-f-C`�� h it
rc .4'', C ti V t r ba 5 C 419 he e7 4.J !!
(�
} `ttd; �o4 Ow 5�b� ucQ
c �
Svt' �oc Vxf -f ��C CK�r�Srd� So t Go�rtciRG��tX el Gr c� 7l•i2
L 0c Y�4�c-� wr4 4e t27
V� C 4 �.�- r u < -� r t ci cl7 �� d t,C 4 Z' � E"
r
r(� `f
y �Q�e % �cLi ccdC cCl T 41 ,G �'V 0
Y1CiS bc�cv� S�t�-tti�il�/ cov+iajqG�r &0'c�
// /
5 t V -n ti°. L n 7 Gi 64r oh `� <<2 I l•r� � � sr r',r G1 J--7CI� LGv, t f h Lot
`� ..t �j t= GL (M• ('%` !✓� Y C 7 C VC11 �j f� Y' Gl" V� Gr V -e c� t't d1f i') ew 4 � lr C 5 tc c r G�
Y V ( Qq 0A'% c^ 4 u(� � rG G` `F' Y t/ ee —t 1 a �1 „ Y f1 [. C O �I, �i er 7 r e(
( � d
C 0
REVIEWED BY: _ RECEIVED
This report presents opinions fprtrted as a result of ourobservatinns of the contractors activiti es tc eot�c�cltitical engineering., we rely on the contractor w comply with
the plans and specifications throughout the duration of the project irrespective of the ljyt�lkppFl�NI �ttcF�VI�+C�fAlative.'rhe presence of our field representative will
lie for the purpose of providing observation and field testing services. Our work docs not inclQdf YtQFrfiDMDNMection of the actual work of the contractor; its employees,
or agents. Neither the presence of the ZZA field representative nor the observation and testing by ZZA shall excuse the contractor in any way for defects discovered in its
work. ZZA will not be responsible for joh site safety on this project.
iId
Mai�
i
mm
. n' Cl)
cCl)
rZ-�
M
I Z
-i
2
O
0
m
AUG 0.2 2005
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR.
CITY OF EDMONDS
I.
Form # 3