20050360.pdfDATE RECEIVED
PERMIT EXPIRES
CITY OF EDMONDS NUMBER 2oC - ' (a CD
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION JOB SUITE/APT#
OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS ADDRESS �1 b
1/
C �/� PLAT NAMEISUbBD(`r IIVISI�ON NO. 11J' G LOT NO. LID NO.
Jnctt � J
z MAILING ADDRESS LID FEE $
W
z 1 TESCP Approved O
O I r �n (� n I, / ` PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP RW Permit Required O
U �J f �' 1. 7i cV `� street Use Pdrmd Required 0
CITY ZIP TELEPHONE EXISTING PROPOSED Inspection Required
Sidewalk it airedRequired
J% REQUIRED DEDICATION _/ FT Wnrt�rgrououad O
NAME �n ^ /! f METER SIZE LINE SIZE NO. OF FIXTURES PRV REQUIRED
U 1' `til. �/) V t ./ ./ YES O NO O 9
t ADDRESS REMARKS i
0/ r ` , OWNERICONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROUDRAINAGE
(vim "7 �-1f_-" z
nn W
CITY ZIP TELEPHONE L�
I�e�C Ucal.� �� �� �, 4ac", �S� — l0 to � ��L � s � c►
NAMECBL# .� �
/ eu
(v ,
ENGINEERING REVIEWED BY ATE
z ADDRES 0 Lacr ✓fn
UFIRE REVIEWED BY DATE W
Z CITY ZIP TELEPHONE LL
O
U
STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE CHECKED BY VARIANCE OR CU SHORELINE OR ADB# INSPECTION SEPA
REQ•D COMPLETED I EX�E,VT
OYES 40
CA# ZONE SIGN AREA HEIGHT
PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL NO. I
C7 •--
STUDY
O d�` ALLOWED PROPOSED ALLOWED `POSED
1�5 r� t�
❑ NEW RESIDENTIAL ❑ PLUMBING I MECH LOT COVERAGE REQUIRED SETBACKS (FT.) PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT.)
ALLOWED PROPOSED FRONT . SIDE REAR FRONT UR SIDE REAR O
COMMERCIAL COMPLIANCE OR 1 L t�, �� .-�► �� �, z
ADDITION ❑ CHANGE OF USE Ot/ z
MIXED USE PARKING LOTAREA PL NNING REVIEWED BY TE g
❑ REMODEL ❑ MULTIFAMILY ❑ SIGN REQ'D PROVIDED M
Cite
Is,
❑ REPAIR GG p� CYDS ❑ FENCE
( X FT.) REMARKS
❑ DEMOLISH ❑ TANK ❑ OTHER
z ❑GARAGE RETAINING WALL FIRE SPRINKLER
CARPORT ❑ ROCKERY ❑ FIREALARM
a (TYP OF USE, BUSINESS OR ACT`VIT ) EXPLAIN:
TYPE OFC E%
GROUP
STRUCTION CODE OCCUPANT
�jN L2 ii :• P
w NUMBER NUMBER OF V
O 16
OF DWELLING SPECIAL INSPECTION CONSULTANT OCCUPANT
STORIES UNITS LOAD
M REQUIRED YES
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE
REMARKS .. z
'.14
BY.OTECH EPO 'h 1 PLj` ' G �' O
'�STRUCT R L D S d'
0,"00 UJA 1A QA+0zo,4L I J4/ VALUATION
$LO
,?� -
Description FEE Description FEE
Plan Check e7e7State Surcharge
HEAT SOURCEOOOOO7 LOT SLOPE% VESTED DATE +
Building Permit/ �/J- City Surcharge
PLAN CHECK NO: .�• Plumbing Base Fee
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO Mechanical
iBE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY, ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBIC Grading
DONMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE
JSEPARATE PERMISSION,
s Engr. Review
W PERMIT APPLICATION: SEE ECDC 19.00.005(A)(5)
a PERMIT LIMIT: SEE ECDC 19.00.005(A)(6)
SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION Engr. Inspection
'APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE, HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESSORS Fire Review Plan Chk. Deposit
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 # n.�, h
111:_ ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE
DEEMED TO MODIFYt WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENT OF ANY CITY ORDINANCE Landscape Insp. Total Amt. Due
NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAY THE CITY'S ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION.• ^
Recording Fee Receipt # r`,J
1 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
IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO FOR INSPECTION receipt is acknowledged m space provided.
WORKMEN'S CO SATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18:27,
OFF LS SIGN AT E ATC
SIGNATURE ( E OR AGENT DATE SIGNED (425)
bl' 0 771-0220 R YN5ED BY V V, �dATEr
ATTENTION EXT. 1333
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL '
A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND C.PPROVAL OR A CERTI- ORIGINALaE YELLOW -INSPECTOR
FICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED, UBC109 1 ISC110I IRC110. PINK .0 GOLD - ASSESSOR
10104 PRESS HARD YOU ARE MAKING 4 COPIES
Z ZA
1 -
OVA
", Zipper Zeman Associates. Inc.
Geotechnical and Environmental Consulting
RECEIVED
APR 18 2005
J-488-11
PERMIT COUNTER April 13, 2005
Or
Karen Hibbert
18420 Homeview Drive
Edmonds, Washington 98026
z
yyrs O
Subject: Geotechnical Reviewl l®py
Proposed Sunroom Addition m
.18420 Homeview Drive Or
Edmonds, Washington
Dear Ms. Hibbert, C grn
1,
TO
As per your request, Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. (ZZA) has prepared this letter based
O
on review of the proposed revised plans and our original geotechnical report tiprepared for them Z
subject site and a site reconnaissance performed on April 5, 2005. This letter addresses item 11),C.
as listed in the Plan Review Comments letter from the City of Edmonds, Building Division, Or.,,
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 =n10w
(ECDC), 23.80.020, 060 and 070. "n ;UOPP4 ,;.
rn m
Our original geotechnical evaluation, J-488, Proposed Residential. Development at v —
Olympic View Drive and Home View Drive was dated July 21; 1999. The proposed revised ` n rn
plans reviewed were titled, Addition to Existing Residence, 18420 Homeview Drive, Edmonds; a
Washington and prepared by McJ of Redmond, Washington. In addition, we reviewed z 0;
geotechnical components of the submitted structural engineering items by Mitchell Engineering,
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; z
and a deck, approximately 45 square feet in area,. are proposed at the northwest corner of theOr
iI Ch
existing residence. An existing deck will be removed for the new construction. The addition.
will attach to the existing residence at the northwest corner. 0
Geotechnical Comments n
m ;
The revised plans show a foundation plan with continuous footings for the proposed
addition.. The north and west walls are to be supported by new continuous footings. The west f
F
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 feet in depth. Three spread footings, 2 feet square, are shown for the interior
portion of the addition. �.
18905 33rd Avenue West#117; Lynnwood, WA 98036 (425) 771-3304 Fax: (425) 771-3549 i
ZZAProposed Hibbert Sunroom Addition
iv J-488-1 'I
r April 13, 2005
Page 2
Our original geotechnical evaluation, J488, 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 '
HA -4, for our original study. Z
O
We understand grading for the original site development included cuts at the northern ! mOr
portion of the residence on the order of 8 to 10 feet for the lower level garage. After the cuts, the
northern portion of the residence was founded on the medium dense sand. As discussed in our �1 Mn
original soils report, the structure should be founded atop the medium dense sand or compacted _
structural fill placed atop the medium dense sand. i c m
M
o
Review of specific items requested by the City of Edmonds, in Chapter 23.80 of O c
Geologically Hazardous Areas, included ECDC 23.80.020, Designation of Specific Hazard Nz
Areas; ECDC 23.80.060, Development Standards -General Requirements and ECDC 23.80.070, r" z
Development Standards -Specific Hazards, y z
I ION
Based on ECDC 23.80.020, the site has soils which may be erosion hazard, and slopes 6;
in excess of 2H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical) maybe' a landslide hazard. Our previous study, J-488,
O�
dated July 21, 1999, interpreted the soils to consist of the Indianola loamy sand of the i
Alderwood/ Everett Series. The Indianola sands are defined as a slight water erosion hazard. M m
NO
The portion. of the north slope..which is greater than 2H:1 V is limited and a 25400t buffer was o
incorporated in the .original design. No evidence of deep-seated slope movement or springs, c
Ch
seeps or wet areas were observed on the hillside during our original study in 1999 or during ourMo
y
site reconnaissance on April 5, 2005. NO
) r
�n
Based on ECDC 23.80.060, our previous study and current design,.the existing 25 foot
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
O
Based on ECDC 23.80.070, the current 25400t buffer will have no. adverse impact to the nON ,
site or the area of the proposed addition. The .proposed addition shall not result in greater risk orNO
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.
NO In summary, our review of the proposed revised plans for the addition and the
recommendations of the original geotechnical report, J488, ' 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.
J4884141ibbert
P. 04
HrK- Wuu Ml U3 ,1 � FM FAX N06
:. Tom Belt homes
- J-488
Residential Development July 21, 1999
Edmonds, Washington Page 2 r
�. Review information available in our files regarding geologicconditions in the site
vicinity.
2. Complete a reconnaissance of the site.
3. 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
rn
4. Supplement the test pit excavations by band augering and performing Dynamic Cone
Penetration (DCP) tests in three of the test pits. and hand augering an additional hole N =
near the northwest comer of the planned residence. rn
mo
Q
5. o n
Provide geotechnical recommendations and design criteria for the development, This
fincludes an assessment of slope stability. Recommendations are provided for site = m
preparation, earthwork, foundations, drainage, and pavement subgmde preparation, m z
(- Z
5. Prepare a written report. which contains our conclusions and recommendations, along
with the supporting field, data. v,
0 M
SITE CONDITIONS
I. mm
.. .. v
Co.
Geolo�JC 0 .�{ .
r The soils at the property are mapped as Alderwood gravelly sandy .loam in the 1983 r rn
0.
U;S.D.A. Soil Conservation Survey, "Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area Washington": 'rhero
ri
Alderwood is described as a deep soil developed in glacial till. Included in the Alderwood are
small areas of other soil units including the Indianola loamy sand, The Indianola is described as
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. .�
- SurfAce Conslltigtos Z
Z,
The property is located on a south -facing slope, Slopes on the property are steeper on the m
northern portion, of the lot and shallower on the southern portion. Based on our site
reconnaissance and the topographic survey of the property you provided us, slopes in the planned
building location vary from 2.25, 1 (H;V) near the northern *portion, to less than 4;1 in the
southern portion.
It 9231 361' Avenue West, Suite 8201 Lynnwood, Washington 98036 (425) 771— 3304
J481,Oc11,0799
i.
. i '
APR-14-00 FR I 03'12 PM FAX NO, P, 05 '
Tom Belt homes
J-488
Residential Development July 21, 1999
Edmonds, Washington Page 3
air
No evidence of deep•scated slope movement was observed during our site .
reconnaissance. However, the upper soils on the slope consisted of loose colluvium (slope wash)
-- which is indicative of soil creep and erosion. Springs, seeps or wet areas were not observed on
the hillside at. the time of our reconnaissance.
/ Substirtace -Conditions
Z
Subsurface conditions were explored by observing the soils exposed in four shallow test
-- pits excavated by you prior to our field visit on July 8, 1999. The test pits were concentrated in rn
the central and southern portions of the planned house location. On July 12, 1999, Zipper Zeman
Associates, Inc. utilized three of the test pit excavations to extend hand auger holes to depths =4 -n
-
between.5 and 6 feet below the. ground surface. Dynamic cone penetration tests were performed v in
the holes to assess soil density characteristics. One additional hand auger hole was advanced
c
near the northwest corner of the planned residence. The approximate locations of the test
pitAtind auger holes are shown on the attached site plan (Figure I). 0 e
A poorly developed topsoil, zone consisting of dark brown, loose, moist, silty fine sand m
with some gravel was, encountered below the surface. The topsoil extended to depths between 9 A z
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 CO)
to be colluvium. 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. oca
M
rCONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. rn
Z�Slopit St2hflity
No indications of deep-seatedslope instability were observed on the property. Slope
creep and erosion in the form of near surface colluvium (slope wash) soils were. evident, i 1
Provided proper construction techniques are utilized, it is our 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 anticipated to dissipate through the subsurface soils.
0
Site Preparation,and Earthwork m
We recommend that the vegetation and topsoil be stripped from the building and
pavement areas. All tree stumps and roots more than 2 inches in diameter.should be grubbed and
removed from these areas.
[pper 7_eeLe as latera. Yec:
19231 301 Avenue West, Suitt B201 Lynnwood, Washington 98036 (423) 771 — 3304
J483.belt.0799 I
APR-14-00 FRI 03;13 PM FAX N0, P. 06
r~ Torn Belt homes 1-488
Residential Development July 2l, 1999
too Edmonds, Washington. Page 4
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 surface is near the 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 approximately 3,5 feet below the existingground surface. To reduce the potential
for differential settlement of footings and floor slabs caused by spanning across soils of variable Z
o
density, we recommend 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 v
m
accordance with the ASTM D4557 test. method. Alternatively, the loose soils should be _
removed below all footings. Soft . loose or otherwise unsuitable areas identified during site -"
re station sliouid be repaired to a firm non"yielding ' ' -
— P p p yielding eondthon. A representative of Zipper v m
Zeman Associates, Inc. should be present to assess the suitability,of. subgrade soils. v v
- _ mO
n
Where necessary, new fill in building and pavement areas should be placed as compacted v
structural fill following subgrade preparation as described above. The fill should be placedin m M
horizontal lifts not exceeding 10 inches in loose thickness. Each. lift should be conditioned to the A
proper moisture content and uniformly compacted to a firm, non-yielding condition using z
mechanical equipment, All structural fill placed in buildingareas, and within the. upper 2 feet In _
pavement areas, should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density (MDD) o'
_ as determined by the ASTM D4557 test method. Below a depth of two feet in pavement areas,
0�
the structural fell should be compacted to a minimum of 92 percent of the (MDD). This applies _
to all utility° trench backfill as well. Non-structural fill placed in landscape areas need only be o —,
compacted to the extent required for construction equipment traffic support. 0.rn
All structural fill should be free of organic matter, debris, and other deleterious material, t m 0
with no individual particles larger than 6 inches In maximum dimension, The suitability of soil -�� r
for use as structural fill will,depend on its gradation and moisture content: As the amount of M
fines (material passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly n
more sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more t. Z
difficult to achieve, The subsurface fine to coarse sand encountered in the test holes shoul&be _
_ suitable for use as all-weather fill. CA
Z i.
Imported structural fill placed during wet weather should consist of free draining sand
.. and gravel containing less than 10 percent fines by weight relative to the fraction of the material 0
passing the 3/,-inch sieve, Imported structural fill may contain a higher fines content for
placement during dry weather provided that the moisture 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). Temporary construction cut slopes should conform to Uniform
Building Code (UBC) and/or local construction codes. Shoring of temporary cut slopes. is not
anticip®ted 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
7s1S11jor 7.em2im Aman latwe. Inc,
19231136" Avenue West, Suite B201 Lynnwood, Washington 98036 (425) 771 -3304
J488,Dolt,0799
APR-14-00 FRI 03:13 PH.SAX NU, r, U�
• Tom Belt homes M88
Residential Development July 21, 1.9994
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 driveway 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 S feet from pavement surfaces, We
recommend that the outer slope be constructed at a maximum inclination of 2*1 (H;V). Existing
soils below the constructed slope that are loose or disturbed should be excavated down to the z
— medium dense sand. The exposed subgrade should be prepared as described above. We
0
recommend that the base of the excavated area be graded with a reverse (into the hillside) slope m
of 1 to 2 percent to provide a key for the fill. Structural fill can than be placed and compacted as
recommended above.
in =
It is our opinion that the earthwork can be accomplished with conventional construction m v
equipment. We recommend that construction occur during the drier months of the year. if 0
construction must occur during wet weather, it may be necessary to overexcavate wet, disturbed o C
material and replace with crushed rock or a clean layer of sand and gravel (less than 5 percent = z
fines) to provide a reasonable working surface and help protect.exposed subgrades. p z
cZ
The site has moderate slopes and the potential for erosion and sloughing of exposed soils ro z
is significantly increased during wet weather. Erosion control measures are recommended during CA
construction to reduce the potential impacts to adjacent areas. Erosion control measures should
be designed. to prevent downslope sediment movement. Silt fences and diversion structures
should be incorporated to control runoff and sediment transport. Temporary erosion protection m m
(e.g, straw, plastic) should be placed on exposed soils during construction. Permanent o in
groundcover should be established as soon as possible on exposed soils. 0 M
�CO
MO
Foundations r
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 3.5and 5.0 feet below y
the surface or on a zone of compacted soil or fill as described in the Site Preparation section. All f z
footing excavations should be observed by a representative of Zipper Zeman Associates; Inc, to
confirm that suitable bearing soils have been exposed. Keyways should be incorporated into the
footings to provide resistance to lateral movement. ' ' p
The depth of embedment below lowest adjacent finished grade for all exterior and
m`
interior footings should be at least 18 inches and 12 inches, respectively. We recommend a
minimum footing width of I8 inches- for continuous will footings and 24 inches for isolated
column footings. For footings designed and coristtucted according tb •the 'above criieria`, "v6e
._.. i recommended an allowable bearing capacity of 2500 pounds per square foot. This value applies
to the total of all dead plus long=tcciiei live loads;' exclusive of ttie'weight of the 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. `
1923130 Avenue West. Suite B201 Lynnwood, Washington 98036 (425) 771 — 3304
14881belt 0799
w Tom Belt homes J-488
Residential Development July 21, 1999
Edmonds, Washington Page 6
The settlement of footings supported as recommended is.expected to be on the order of 1
inch or less. Differential settlements are expected to be less than '/s inch over 6a distance of 30
feet. Most of the anticipated settlements are expected to occur 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. 0
Goo
m
The northern portion of the residence will have below grade walls. We recommend that
an equivalent fluid density of 50 pounds per cubic foot (pco for at-rest conditions, and 40 pcf for
active conditions be utilized in the design of the walls. The at•rest conditions should be used v m
where no movement (deflection) of the top of the wall- is allowed. Active conditions can be used m o
where deflections of 1/100 of the height of the wall are acceptable. For footings founded in o
—I I accordance with our recommendations, the allowable frictional resistance may be computed 00
using a coefficient of friction of 0.40 applied to the dead load forces. The allowable passive m
too !. resistance., on the sides of footings may be. computed using an equivalent fluid density of 225 M
pounds per cubic foot for a level -ground surface.
P p gr The above coefficient of friction and y z
equivalent fluid density values both include a factor of safety of about 1.5.
�CA
Slab-gn-grade F1oorR �>
The-slab-on-grade floors should be founded on pre-rolled native ground or structural fill mm,
per our recommendations outlined previously. We recommend that the floor slab be underlain by o
a minimum of 6-inches of clean sandy gravel, crushed rock or pea gravel to serve as a drainage M
layer, capillary break and working surface. The fines content of the capillary break should be rn.
limited to 5 percent or less, by weight, when measured on the minus '/4 inch sieve fraction. An Z
impervious moisture barrier should be installed beneath the slab.
Pavementl
z
The design and construction of driveways should conform to current City of Edmonds CO
standards. We recommend that the subgrade for pavement areas be prepared as recommended in z
the Site Preparation section of this report, The upper one-foot of subgrade soils should be
compacted to at least 92 percent of the maximum dry density determined in accordance with the rn
'ASTM D-1557 test method. Finish subgrade surfaces should 'be constructed to facilitate
:drainage and prevent pending of water below the pavement soction..We recommend a layer of
-- crushed base course be placed between the prepared subgrade or 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.
j
7IppoCZeman Axsec10s1LTog,
1923130 Avenue West, Suite B201 Lynnwood, Washington 96036 (425) 771— 3304
1488.bcl ,0799
APR -14-00 FR 103 ,14 PM FAK NO, P.: 09 '
Torn Belt homes J488
Residential Development July 21, 1999
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 recommend that site grading allow for positive
too
drainage away from foundations and roadways. The concentrated runoff from impervious
surfaces should be directed to appropriate storm water discharge receptors and not allowed to 1 Z
flow down slopes. Concentrated storm water flow on slopes can lead to excessive erosion and .+
—
compromise "the stability of the slope, 0
M
Runoff from the roof should not be concentrated and allowed to flow over slopest We 7 �+
- recommend that roof runoff be. collected in .tightline pipes and directed to a suitable discharge vrn
receptor.
co
mo
All backfilled walls surrounding the structure should be provided with subsurface o c
`drainage. To protect walls and floors from moisture and to avoid the buildup of hydrostatic z
(...pressures, we recommend that the backfill material within 36 inches outs'
id backfilled walls and A
` extonding the fuli-height of the wall consist of clean, free -draining sand and gravel. Washed or D z
screened -gravel could be substituted for sand and gravel drainage material, provided f lter fabric '_ _
is placed to separate the washed gravel from adjacent site.soils of fill. The backfill should be 65
sealed at the ground surface with a ntinirnuin of 1 foot of impervious soil in any unpaved areas to ° 711
prevent surface water from entering directly into the wall backfill. Final site grades should be _
designed to carry water away from the structure in order to prevent it from accumulating and m m
ponding next to the -structure. .o CO)
n r
C � i
At the base of backfilled walls, we recommend providing footing drains. The footing t m
drains (with cleanouts) should consist of perforated pipe, sloped to drain, with perforations Zi �
placed down. The free -draining backfill adjacent the backfilled walls should be continuous and
envelop the footing drains for at least 6 inches in all directions. Roof drains should not be
connected to the subdrains.
Z
USE OF THIS REPORT _
Cn
We. have prepared this report for the exclusive use of Tom Belt Homes and their agents
_ with respect to the proposed. residential development northwest of the intersection of Olympic m
Vim Drive and Home View Drive in Edmonds, Washington. The recommendations presented
id this. report are intended to be used to assist in the design of the proposed residence.
If there are any changes in the loads, grades, location or configuration 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
been 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 Assneht sInc.
1923136* Avenue West, Suite B201 Lynnwood Washington 99036 (425) 771— 3304
J488,bc11,0799
APR -I4 -OO FRI 0315 PM FAX N0. P. 1I
r
I
Is. _ _ G 14 b 1 w�N.' Its0010"V I
oV0VwVIF .00 flow so �
"-0 001100 00
Got,60 i
y.. ✓ �.�• ;
1•. �-r o - '000000's/ 0000
`
,44
am 0000"
Volt It 0 to 00
a 011100" too"
VIVO, a town,
ow"' Vows. loole Go
fit too Vo Vw 0 m*w to
• 1
. • �'7 J, r. ung
two! - / • •'.• / • / , , _
Jtoosto to
ftpV6 to 14 64 moll
19L 00 m
too Wtwill
• •. \ � � ` 1 i
r .• / r •� 1. _ _
IF
too, mom wom
towns,
•rrl- . r
VIVO
i
two froo
IV 1 / �
0 m
ra,,� , Q
- y 1:.,- `� i
Who Von o
Z 0
a
,� 4 m
. ` •�1 pto
Z.;
`
, C
_ . I ,1.�
- i1CTh I WA ig Mi Slues t+A►.0
X\� /
�oic 0 ton
,
\ t-�
SSm m
,�, • 1, ; o
rom
COMMAND atoo, ISM m
i z r
VV
tooto
Oc.yMf+l� vl�
... ./
! Z
r - O
1
SCALE 1" = 30 m
EXPLANATION ( "'
HM] 30 15 0 30 60 +:
® HAND AUOER NUMBER AND APPROVe MATE LOCATION
SCALE IN FEET i
Depth
MMM" I
Tet[ Ptf/Rand Anger Boring Ifs► -Z
Proleat: Tom Bolt Homes i
Location: Edmonds WA. Project No:1w488 '
Approximate ground mrface elevation (feet): Date Excavated July 12, 1994
Material Description b r
QLip
H Z ;
Loose, moist, dark brown, silty fine SAND with Tome gravel. (Topsoil)
.+•w...war.++o.nw.rreww....�w.•.wr'.w.r.nww.w�nw�.w.............wn.rww.w.w......rw..wnr.nwrwr.+.uw«.�..•nw�wwww.w..+...-r.....w
Loose, moist, brown, fine to coarse SAND with some gravel (Colluvium).
.�Ywwryn...wrw..wMw.wMw.rw.�n.u.rw..�.m.wMw..�....w.....w.mr.w..r.ww..wn..«.w...r.wrww�w.www«�....r.....+w..r.w.l...w.yl
Medium demo, moist, brown, fine to coarse SAND with some gravel.
,
1
2
r
r ;
3
•
4
.
s
S
33
Sol
MolsNre
U.
Boring completed at 6 feet on 7/12/99. No groundwater encountered at
time of excavation.
7
8
�
9
10
i
I
1l
i
FR i 03 l 0 2M FAX NOI
ZIPPER ZEMAN ASSOCIATES, INC.
19231361 Am -We suite 8201 • Lynnwood, Wuhinpon 98036
ow
of
00
of
of
rof
oject; Tomo.I off
f,
I.oc�Uo�, F.dtho &, WA. ProJeet No: J-488
Date Excavated Ju 12,1999
•.. Approximate pvmd surface ekvadew (feet): My `.
J•, Matarial>aeecetdar '
•I: ;:�{, } .r. •A ., ); 1 1. ft'•' Ly •j•+t4, f �1-,.vl1 -r 'n i -1 le .. l'..•} J, ••1<<i ♦ off
..i .-I t,t .Ci. 1• z. i
;r• 1 ,• 1 1. f• 'I
'C1't: Jr1 1 1 t: •, t .1 Y- ii Ly .1• .1 1 S'. ,,..'`7,11 f.•� ,� 1 ;,`r• 1�g111'�i ' tY i,�4
tT�. I. 14'•� 'r ', '.��. �, ..f +di, f- 1 '1 7! �. 11. j ' r :+ �: 1.x.,14 •: t
.,, .J •'.1 1 t, - .t. I ., ] ,t t• f7. I' j ! I r'.M t
1Y,-of .f 1 •,, ,•l tl i.1.j , �. .} .1 • r 1�': x,l ''1•1'l '• \♦
., ,._. rn
T,Bbsa',o*M0 3t,'6raege'tobrow0. siltyrMeAV D'W tlrsotrte
_ gravel. (TopsJ.
oil)mn
;
! C rn �
i,,,,,•/W,,,,1�„.r..w..._..i..M.�I...NM1.H..n..,. t ]j1 yg ,
.rw�wM.ww+•�• :It j. .1 .j I r•) ){�I���i•7 • .� 0 i
s Loose, moist, broom to gray, fine to coarse SAND with some gravel c+•n ►. r ,
(Colluvium). 7 c:.t rn
mz
C z
3 e D
1 �'1i • _of
,. .;to 1'1 ' 'i -fl. •ill.•i; f�I�Q(� i31
C �Mouaue _ �
I 4 :S•a s: c r��.a mm
O
N
S n
M {
••• Ywr•MMMMMrtirINM.MIMMIIM.M,ww•MMr,M.IMr„wMMIM•.•NIIIM••NY•MrYYNNWMMMMMM�ww-.w.HHHw.•.,.�w.—•...�.• ..,.�...rw�... ., + P
. h17 .. ... .. . ..•1• .. i.... .• J,rt. t •'•.. Too: 1! d� f t_ (n
6 Medlutn dense, moist, brown to gay, fine to couse SAND with some S-3. c'�
.� gravel.,
MMI 4
7 Boring completed at 6 feet on 7/12/99. No groundwater encountered at i Z
time of excavation. ►
z
m
... 9 4
10
F.:
_ 11 .
l~
I to
-_
APR -14- 7 PM FAX N0, P. 16
00 FRI 03;1
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ASTM D422 .
SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE HYDROMETER
1 I& Lic 31P 4 10 20 40 00 100 200' `
. 1
I 100
ZIPPER ZEMAN
GEOTECHNICAL
ASSOCIATES. INC
AND ENVIRONMENTAL
PROJECT NO, J486 jEdm
DATE OF TESTING: July 14,1990
-
VIP
OND
Y
ZIPPER ZEMAN
GEOTECHNICAL
ASSOCIATES. INC
AND ENVIRONMENTAL
PROJECT NO, J486 jEdm
DATE OF TESTING: July 14,1990
-
CONSULTING
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