20050551.pdfDATE RECEIVED 70 PERMIT EXPIRES
CITY OF EDMONDS
kRMIT
-NUMBER
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
JOB
ADDRESS M([S (,VISUITE IT
A-
OWNER NAMEINAME OF BUSINESS
i3i�Q A�xcr- I PIZZA
P�T NAMEISUBDIVISION NO.
LOT NO.
LID No
LID FEE S
MAILINGADDRESS
�4
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP
TESCPAp -
RWP.1A.1.
CITY ZIP
EX ST114G _PROPOSED
R
set,'My,—
ITELEPHONE
0
AEOLIRED DEMCATION IT
NAME
METER SIZE
LINEBIZE
NO. OF FIXTURES
PRV REQUIRED
11
I
_� i
YESX NO13
12
A..R�.
REMARK F
O.NERICSONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROUDRAINAGE 10
A E
0 VeX -7 11 Z41.42,�
JCILI
Wfr,�V4�`
1�5
ENGINEERING RtMtW-FDBY
—j 6 '�'
1
2
AO.RES9-
16 1 zfl Ow 1,�
ty Le h005
1
DATE
c
CITY
ZIP
%2�)
LEPHONE
JTE411�
FIR(R
z
STATE LICENSE NUMBER
EXPI
No
VIIANCEORCUI jaLINEORADB#
—
I OA -14
-1 ON
I 'NSPE 2
MZQ13
SEPA
I CcPPLS
NO
0
CA ' -5-
zo 'M I SIGN AREA HE GHT
PROFIT TAX ACCOUNT
PARCEL NO.
N� All
'A'19
I
tj
I ALLOWS I P-OSE1
D
0
ALL-0. , 1-1-D
I ZIS 7 5"
STUDY 13
NEW
13 RESIDENTIAL
PLUMBING I ..cH
LOT COVERAGE
ALL WED PROPO ED
REQUIRED SETIACREAFTI PROPOSED
FRONT SIDE R FRONT
1
SETBACKS (FT.)
URSIDE REAR o
-q
A
ADDITION
COMMERCIAL
2 C.-MER 'AL
Ei COMPLIANCE OR
c HANGE OF USE
'o
-
Z7
2-o'
M
M MIXED USE
E3
PARKING LOTAREA
PLANNING REVIEWED By DATE
REMODEL
G`E
[:] MULTIFAMI LY
13 SIGN
RED D PROVIDED
+9
0,
E3 REPAIR
o FENCE
IYIIS X FT.)
REMARKS
-M cm
0 DEMOLISH
�
OTHER
F1 TANK 0
C,
-- --
C -
Z,
EiGARAGE
CARPORT
0 RETAINING WALL 0 FIRE SPRINKLER
ROOKERY FREALAR.
P
0
(TYPE OF USE, BUSINESSW�TIVITWEI.ILEN
T�� CONSTRUCTION
c
OCCUPANT
GROUP
—?
.4
0,3
Ill NUMBER
OF
STO Es,
NUMIEROI
DWE
UNITS
LING
SPECIAL "Sjp�TION
REQUIRED
CONSULTANT
I-- 1;� - I--
111UPA
LOAD
'IT-7c?
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DON' 6x
1171 IT1
0
9
REMARKS
0
NEW Onl'-RAK WT
0 M
C
GEOT REPORT
BY. m, -5Lam tA, #2-s3e"g I
to
C 0
STRUXURAL DESIGN
1,44b 4h1q<Se1AI4A, 106 #21455
ITIO
Z r
SY1
VALUATION
$
3:
Description
FEE
Description
FEE
z
,an C .K
v
State Surcharge
VESTED DATE
Bu - ilding Permit
City Surcharge
z
PLAN CHECK NObil
P umbing
Base Fee
0
Mechanical
Awff�
R537
rn
THIS PERMITAUTHORIZES ON THEWORKNOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO
t B DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBIC
Grading
DONMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE
SEPARATEPERMISSIOW
Eng, Review
PERMIT APPLICATION: SEE ECDC 19.00.0051A)
PERMIT SEE ECDC 19,00XOS(A)(6)
LIMIT,
SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION
...
E1g, Inspection
'APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE, HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESSORS
Fire Review
Plan Chk. Deposit
:�3�
IN INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY .1
OIFICIALI, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND
Fire Inspection
Receipt
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ITS
ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
NO] b
---
FROM THE ISSUANC OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL
REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENT OF ANY CITY ORDINANC
Landscapeinsp.
Total Amt. Due
DEEMED TO MODIFY, WAIVE OR
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 INFORMATIO
APPLI APPROVAL
GIVEN IS CORRECrANDTHATIA THE OWNEFL OR THE DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT OF
Thi, ,PP,'a,n1ON
THE OWNER. I AGREE COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC
To
CALL
BL'id,�g O"'C'N ep,ty: ,,,d F p.dd
' AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMP YED
' WASHINGTON RELATING TO
FOR INSPECTION
OL F THE STATE OF
I ATION OF THE LA C
IN V A`NON
WORKMENs OMPE S NIN RXNCEANDRC.18211
FFICIA SIG T DATE
LTION;
.,..AT.. _N
0ATESKIN10
(425)
7=-
V
771-0220
I
ATTef4TION
EXT. 1333
�,Y �j 1015,
I JD�
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL
A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTI-
ORIG14L-)ILE YELLOW . 1.�PEC;OR
FICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBcjog I IBC110 / IRC110.
PINK -OWNER GOLD - ASSESSOR
IWIM PRESS HARD -YOU ARE MAKING 4 COPIES
FtLe-
I
-
RENOVATION & ESTATE SERVICES
70112"' Ave. N.
Edmonds, Wa. 98020
Ph.: 425 775-3727, Fax.:425 640-873 1, Cell: 206 372-1196
April 27, 2005
City of Edmonds
Building Division copy
%.,JL JL
121- 5" Av. N.
Edmonds, WA. 98020
Re.: Pagliacci Pizza Project located at 10204 Edmonds Way
am
C
m 0
In accordance with the 2003 edition of the International Building Codes Section
0
C
C
m
1705.3 this Contractor understands his responsibilities to insure all special inspections
m
are carried out in accordance with the Quality Assurance Plan and with Building
Z
Official approvals.. The General Contractor as required by work progress will
coordinate timing of such inspections.
CA
Ed Chapman 4kl
0
"n
m M
General Contractor N
0
0
C 0)
Cc: Matt Galvin, Owner
m 0
ra
KLEINFELDER
December 13, 2004
Kleinfelder Project No.: 52109
Mr. Mike Derry
Mesher Shing & Associates
506 Second Ave, Suite 3300
Seattle, Washington 98104
z
—01
Subject: Geotechnical Report
- f ,
0
Proposed Pagliacci Restaurant Site
"d
Edmonds Way & 102 Place
COPY
R1
Edmonds, Washington CITY
Vi --I
0
m
Dear Mr. Derry:
a V
0
This letter transmits three copies of our geotechnical engineering report for the proposed
0
C
rid
Pagliacci restaurant to be located on the southwest comer of Edmonds Way and 102 Place in
rn
In Z
Edmonds, Washington. This geotechnical engineering investigation was performed in
accordance with our proposal, dated December 1, 2004.
Based on our geotechnical investigation and evaluation of the project design requirements, we
0 -n
-n 21
believe that the proposed restaurant development can be constructed at the site, provided the
In In
building is founded on shallow spread footing s as recommended in our report. The
0 r-
recommendations presented in the attached report must be followed for the satisfactory and
. In
C CA
successful construction of this project, Our report includes recomniendations related to
m 0
z -
r
earthwork, foundation, concrete -slabs -on -grade, retaining walls, and drainage. Our report also
contains the findings of our Critical Areas Review, which was performed in accordance with
City of Edmonds Critical Areas Ordinance, Chapter 20.15B.
z
Because Kleinfelder was not able to advance borings at this site as part of this project, it is
z
imperative that Kleinfelder be retained to perform materials testing during construction. This
will allow Kleinfelder with the opportunity to veri the a ticipated site conditions and confirm
fy n
FIT
our geotechnical recommendations.
RECEIVED
DEC 2 0 2004
PERMIT COUNTER
521091SWRI44.doe Page] of2
Copyright 2004 Kleinfelder, Inc. Retail D—lopment 43850-00
KLEINFELDER 2405 140th AvellLle NF, Suito A101, Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 562-4200 1425) 562-4201 fax
r77
.... . ..
...
We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical services to you on this project. Please
contact the undersigned at (425) 562-4200 if you have any questions regarding this report or if
we can prov ide assistance with other aspects of the project.
Sincerely,
HLEINFELDER, INC.
0
—4
M
James M. Schmidt P.E.
Semor Geotechmcal Engineer
Vi
M
Attachment: December 13,2004 Geotechnical Engineering Report
M 0
0
0
4 C
=m
Mz
CE
C)
0 -n
m M
Vi
0
0
C
M 0
z
z
z
V
m
Page20172
5210MEA411144.doc Retail Dexlelopment #3850-00
Copyfight 2004 Kkinfelder, Ine,
KLEINFELDER 2405 140th Avenue NE, Suite Al 01, Bellevue, M 98005 (425) 562-4200 (425) 562-4201 fax
Geotechnical Engineering Report
z
Proposed Pagliacci Restaurant Site
Edmonds Way & 102 d Place
Edmonds, Washington
m
VJeiufelder Project Number: 52109
vi
m
m a
0
-40
0C
-4 C
X M
mz
'0
C
> z
--4
r
Cl)
O'n
CITY COPY
mm
a C—
.0
or -
CM
U)
9 CA
20
;a
z
-4
3:
z
0
m
All
19 KLEINFELDER
kT1 KLEINFELDER
Prepared for:
Mesher Shing & Associates
506 Second Ave, Suite 3300
Seattle, Washington 98104
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Proposed Pagliacei Restaurant Site
Edmonds Way & 102"d Place
Edmonds, Washington
Kleinfelder Project Number: 52109
Prepared by:
Frank D. Reinart, E.T.T.
ProjectGeotechnical Engineer
M-S
WA
James M. Schmidt; P.E.� P. Eng.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
0 At
Kleinfelder, Inc.
8/31;5 7
2405 - 140th Avenue NE
SuiteA101
Bellevue, WA 98005
Phone: (425) 5624200
Fax: (425) 5624201
December 13, 2004
Copyright 2004 Kleinfelder, Inc.
All Rights Reserved
UNAUTHORIZED USE OR COPYING OF THIS DOCUMENT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THE
CLIENT FOR THE SPECIFIC PROJECT.
z
0
0
C:
0 p
0
x m
In z
10-4
C: z
`77"7,4'-
- - 77,_
kn KLEINFELDER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0
2.0
3.0
INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE ..................................................................................... I
LIGENERAL ........................ ...................................................................................... I
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................ I ......................................................... I
1.3 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES .............................. .......................... 2
1.4 REFERENCES .................................................................................... ...... ............ 2
1.4.1 Standard Specifications .................................................................... 3
1.4.2 Agency/Association Initials .............................................................. 3
1.4.3 Common Abbreviations ....... .................................................................. 3
1.5 LIMITATIONS ................. ........................................................... .......................... 4
SITE CONDITIONS .......................................................................................................... 5
2.1 SURFACE ..................................................................................... w .......... .............. �5
2.2 SUBSURFACE .................................................. ...................................................... 5
2.3 GROUNDWATER .............................................................................................. 6
CRITICAL AREAS REVIEW ......................................................................................... 6
3.1 SITE RECONAISSANCE ....................... ...... __ .................................................. —.6
3.2 GEOLOGIC HAZARD CLASSIFICATION .......................................................... 7
3.2.1 Erosion ......... ... ......... 7
..3.2.2 Landslide ................................................................................................. 7
5.2.3 Steep Slope Hazard ............................... ................................................. 8
3.2.4 Seismic Hazard ............ I ................................................................. ......... 8
3.2.5 Streams ................................................. : ......................... ........................ 9
3.3 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ........................................................................... 9
3.3.1 Erosion Hazard ...................... ............................................................ 9
3.3.2 * Steep Slope Hazard ................................................................................. 9
4.0
DESIGN
4.1
4.2
RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................. 9
GENERAL ...................................................................................................... ....... 9
SITE PREPARATION AND EARTHWORK ............. 1 ........................................ 10
4.2.1 Demolition ............................................. I ................ -: ........................... 10
4.2.2 Excavation .... ................... ................ .................................................... 10
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6,
4.7
4.2.3 Slopes .................... ................................................................ ........ ...... I I
SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA ...... ................................................. ........... I .... 12
4.3.1 UBC Seismic Design Criteria ...................... ******** ...... ...... 12
4.3.2 IBC Seismic Design Criteria ............................... I ....................... I ......... 13
SPREAD FOOTING FOUNDATIONS ................................................................ 13
FLOORS ............................................. .................................................................. 15
DRAINAGE .............. .......... ............... ................................................................. 15
4.6.1 Short Term .......... ................................................................................. 15
4.6.2 Permanent. ......................................................................................... .... 16
UTILITIES ........ ........................................................................................... 16
5.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS ...............................................................
52109/SFA4R144.doc
17
P-.*e I o fii
Copyright 2004K]cinfeldff, Inc. Ra.11 D—Jp.crit #3850-00
Z
0,
0 m
C
In
-4
0
rn z
C
>
0)
O"n
'n
Min
055
0
0
C
K Cn
in 0
X
Z
Z
0
in
kTJ KLEINFELDER
5.1 GENERAL ................... ................................................. ............................... ....... 17
5.1.1 Description ............................................................................................ 17
5.1.2 Standard Specifications ......................................................................... 17
5.1.3 Reference Standards ............................................................................ -17
5.1.4 Geotechnical Engineer .......................................................................... 17
5.1.5 Geotechnical Report .............................................................................. 18
5.1.6 Construction Site Safety ........................................................................ 18
5.2 EARTHWORK ...................................................................................................... 18
I,,,
I
5.2.1 Materials ................................................................... 8
5.12 Terms ..................................................................................... ................. 19
5.2.3 Quality Control .......................................... ............. ....................... 19
5.2.4 Seepage Control ....................................................... ..................... 19
5.2.5 Demo ............................................................ ........ 20
lition .......................
5.2.6 General Excavation ................................. !—*—**-1*—'1 ... *****"***'***'** — 20
5.2.7 Structural Excavation ............................................................................ 20
5.2.8 Weather Considerations ........... .................. , .................. .......... 21
5.2.9 Structural Fill Construction ............................. !- ........... ...................... -21
5.2.10 Utility Trench Backfilling and Compaction .......................................... 22
5.3 DRAINAGE... ...................................................... ................. .............. ................. 22-
5.3.1 General .................................................................................................. 22
5.3.2 Concrete Slab -on -Grade Drainage ....... ................................................ 23
6.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES .......................................................... .................... ............... 23
z
0
:1
'0
71
A
5i
am
C a
in 0
80
C
3� in
in
C Z-
0 n
FIGURES
Figure 1 — Vicinity Map
Figure 2 — Site Plan
APPENIJICIES
Appendix A — Existing Boring Logs
Appendix B — Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report
m m
0 Fa
0
C:
K 60
in 0
z
z
0
in
52109/SEA4RM.doc NgtHoffi
Copyright 2004KI.i.k1drr, I.-. Mail Devrlopmrnt #3850-00
k" KLEINFELDER
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE
1.1 GENERAL
This report presents the results of Kleinfelder, Inc.'s (Meinfelder's) geotechnical engineering
study for design and construction of the proposed restaurant, to be located on the southwest
comer of Edmonds Way and 102 d Place in Edmonds, Washington. Our services for this study
were performed in accordance with our proposal (Kleinfelder Proposal Number 51955), dated
December 1, 2004.
The location ofthe project site can be found on Figure I — Vicinity Map.
Because Kleinfelder was not able to advance borings at this site as part of this project, it is
imperative that Kleinfelder be retained to perform materials testing during construction. This
will allow Kleinfelder with the opportunity to verify the anticipated site conditions and validate
our geotechnical recommendations.
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Our understanding of the proposed development is based on an undated site plan designated
Al. I prepared by Mesher Shing & Associates.
Ile proposed development will initially consist of the demolition of the existing office building,
a small wood -frame building behind the office building, the existing parking lot, site features,
and a wood railroad -tie wall located at the toe of the slope southwest of the existing building.
We recommend that all excavations made during demolition activities, including excavations for
footings, underground storage tanks, and utilities, be backfilled with structural fill as
recommended in this report.,
Following demolition activities, a new single -story, wood -framed restaurant building, including
a new asphaltic -concrete paved parking lot, will be constructed. Based on an April 5, 2004
telephone conversation with Engineers Northwest, Inc., we anticipate structural loads will be
light- on the order of 10 to 15 kips and I kip per lineal foot for isolated and continuous footing
loads, respectively.
The proposed building will have a finished floor elevation of approximately 300.4 feet above
mean sea level (M§L). Based on the existing site grade of 300 feet above mean sea level in the
footprint of the proposed building, we anticipate cuts and fills of less then 3 feet will be required
to level the building pad at the proposed final floor elevation.
52109/SEA4RI44.d. Nge I of23
Copyright 2004 YJ.i.&Ider, I.e.
z
0
==5
C m
M
0
C
m m
z
C
E:�
0 n
n
m M
0
0 M
M 0
z
z
0
m
T
S
k" KLEINFELDER
3 puRPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES
e purpose of our study was to explore subsurface conditions at the site as a basis 'jor providing
-commendations for site preparation, design, and construction of the proposed retail facility.
pecifically, our scope of services included:
Literature Review and Site Visit: We reviewed the boring logs from the geotech:nical
study performed by Kleinfelder for Pagliacci at the property immediately south of t1iis
site. We further reviewed. the City of Edmonds files for geotechnical subsurface data in
the immediate site vicinity. The intent was to utilize this data and I extrapolate subsurface
data onto this site. We visited the site on December 6, 2004 to confirm that surface
conditions have not changed from the time of our study on the adjacent site.
Geotechnical Analysis: Engineering analyse s were performed as a basis for
recommendations regarding support of the proposed building and parking area. Our
design recommendations, presented in this geotechnical report, included the following:
Site preparation and grading including evaluation of the suitability of on -site soils for
use as fill, gradation criteria for imported fill soils, and placement and compaction
Z
0
0
0
C m
M
0
0
M
m
0 -n
criteria of on -site and imported soils; 1 1 E f". I I
Fieldwork performance for dry and wet weather conditions;
Allowable soil bearing pressures, minimum width and depth requirements, coefficient
of friction. and passive pressure to resist sliding, and estimates of foun . dation
settlement for shallow foundations;
The modulus of subgrade reaction for design of slabs;
Support of slab -on -grade floors and pavements;
Temporary and permanent site drainage and* erosion control measures; C site
Uniform Building Code (IJBC) and International Building Code (IBC) seismi
coefficients for use in structural analysis; and,
Critical Areas Review: This task includes performing a critical areas review in general
accordance with City of Edmonds, Critical Areas Ordinance, Chapter 20.15B.
1.4 REFERENCES
This section identifies, in brief, the standards, agency or association initials, and abbreviations
referred to in this report.
52109/SEA4RI44.d..
Copyfight 2904 Kicinfelder, Inc.
Page 2 01723
M
E
k'g KLEINFELDER
1.4.1 Standard Specifications
Where possible, we refer in this report to sections of the 2004 Edition of the State of Washington
at ns
Standard Specificationsfor Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction (Standard Specific io
I * 4 1 2 AgencylAssociation Initials
Agency or association standards are referred to by agency or association initials and refer to the
latest -edition standards published by those agencies or associations. References in this report
include the following:
Z
AASHTO - American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials
ACI - American Concrete Institute
ASTM - American Society for Testing and Materials: Annual Book of ASTM Standards
a In
IBC - International Building Code
C 0
In 0
OSHA - Occupational Safety and Health Administration
80
C
PCA - Portland Cement Association
In
UBC - Uniform Building Code
0-4
WABO - Washington Association of Building Officials
V
WISHA - Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act; Washington State's occupational
565
-n
safety and health program
0
n;o
WSDOT - Washington State Department of Transportation
m In
�0 r
In
1.4.3 Common Abbreviations
C
Z V)
The following are common abbreviations used in th e text ofthis report:
M 0
F
AC - Asphaltic Concrete
M
bgs - below ground surface
Z
CBR - California Bearing Ratio
_q
CRB - Crushed Rock Base
X
ESAL - Equivalent Single -axle Load
Z
HN - horizontal: vertical (ratio)
In
pef - pounds per cubic foot
pcfEFW - pounds per cubic foot equivalent fluid weight
psf- pounds per square foot
psi - pounds per square inch
sf— square feet
521091SEMR144.doc Np 3 of23
Copyrigitt 2004 Kicinfelder, Inc.
k'q KLEINFELDER
1.5 LIM17ATIONS
Recommendations contained in this report are based on the field explorations of the adjacent
properties and our understanding of the proposed project. The investigation was performed
using a mutually agreed upon scope of services. It is our opinion that this study was a cost-
effective method to explore the subject site and evaluate the potential geotechnical concerns.
The soils data used in the preparation of this report were obtained from exploratory boT ' ings
completed for adjacent properties, It is possible that variations in soil and groundwater
conditions exist between the points explored. The nature and extent of these variations may not
be evident until construction occurs. If soil or groundwater conditions are encountered at this
site that are different from those described in this report, our firm should be inunediately notified
so that we may make any necessary revisions to our recommendations. In addition, if the scope
of the proposed project, locations of facilities, or design building loads change from the
descriptions given in this report, our firm should be notified.
The scope of our services does not include services related to construction safety precautions and
our recornmendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences
or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design.
This report has been prepared for use in evaluating the feasibility of development of the subject
property by Mesher Shing and their client, in accordance with the generally accepted standards
of practice at the time the report was written. No warranty, express or implied, is made.
This report may be used only by Mesber Shing, their client, and their design consultants and only
for the purposes stated within a reasonable time ftom. its issuance, but in no event later than one
year from the date of the report. Land or facility use, on and off -site conditions, regulations, or
other factors may change over time, and additional work may be required with the passage of
time. Any party other than Mesher Shing, their client, and their design consultants who wishes to
use Us report shall notify Kleinfelder of such intended use. . Based on the intended use of the
report, Kleinfelder may require that additional work be performed and that an updated report be
issued. Non- compliance with any of these requirements by Mesher Shing, their client, and their
design consultants or anyone else will release Kleinfelder from any liability resulting from the
use of this report by any unauthorized party and client agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold
hannIess Kleinfelder from any claim or liability associated with such unauthorized use or non-
compliance.
521091SEMRI44.da. Pqp,1003
C.py,ight 2004 Kkinr.lda, In..
Z
m
0
80
C
M
0-4
Z
On
-4
M M
a 5)
0
0
C
M
Z
7-1
Z
--I
3:
FA
Z
9
0
M
k'4 KLEINFELDER
it is the responsibility of Mesher Shing to see that all parties to the project including the designer,
contractor, subcontractors, etc., are made aware of this report in its entirety. The use of
information contained in this report for bidding purposes should be done at the contractor's
option and risk. Further guidelines and information on this geotechnical report can be found in
the ASIZE publication entitled Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering
Report, which is included for your reference in Appendix B of this report.
2.0 SITE CONDITIONS
2.1 SURFACE
Th bject site is located at the southwest -comer ofthe intersection between 102nd Place W and
e su I
Edmonds Way, in Edmonds, Washington. The site location is shown in Figure I - Vicinity Map.
The finish floor elevation of the existing building is approximately 300 feet above MSL. The
slope located on the property southwest of the existing building rises from approximately 302
feet to approximately 3 10 feet above MSL.
The site is currently occupied by a vacant office building, which fronts to the east onto Edmonds
Way. The building appears to be a wood -framed structure with a brick veneer. Based on
observations of the building exterior, the existing building has either a basement or crawlspace
beneath it. The building is surrounded by asphaltic concrete paved parking and drive areas on its
north side.
2.2 SUBSURFACE
Our literature review identified 7 borings drilled on the site immediately to the south and 2
borings drilled for the assisted care living facility immediately across 102'd Place West. The
boring logs for these two sites are presented in Appendix A along with site plans illustrating their
locations. Kleinfelder performed the subsurface exploration at both sites. It should be
recognized that the subsurface description presented below is extrapolated from these borings
and unpublished subsurface data contained in our files. No site -specific borings were advanced
for this site as part of this study.
Fill: Fill was encountered beneath the asphaltic concrete pavement in the borings
advanced to the south of this site. The fill consists of medium dense crushed aggregate
gravel and is approximately 1 -foot thick.
Nge 5 o1`23
5210MEMR144-doc
Copyright 2004 Kicinfelder, Inc.
Z
0
q
0
In
K L E IN F E L DER
coijuvima: Colluvium should be expected beneath the fill. The layer consists of loose
sand with varying amounts of silt, gravel, and organics. The colluvium should be
expected at approximately I to 5 fe et bgs.
Recessional Outwash: Recessional outwash was generally encountered beneath the
colluvium. The recessional outwash consists of medium dense to very dense sand with
varying amounts of silt and gravel.
More detailed descriptions of subsurface conditions encountered at individual exploration
locations are pre sented on the exploratory boring logs, included in Appendix A: Field
Exploration.
2.3 GROUNDWATER
Groundwater was not encountered at the depths explored at the site immediately to the south.
The water table at this site will fluctuate seasonally, being highest during the wetter winter
that Kleinfelder did not
months and lower during the dry summer months. It should be noted
e we performed a hydrogeologic evaluation
install groundwater -monitoring piezometers, nor hav
for this site. The seasonal variability in groundwater depth at this site has not been measured.
3.0 CRITICAL AREAS REVIEW
3.1 SITE RECONAISSANCE
The slope southwest of the existing building is approximately 8 feet high, where it levels off to a
plateau that is developed with a single-family residence. The slope continues to rise
approximately 12 feet south of this residence. The slope has inclinations on the order of 20 to 50
percent. As shown in Figure 2, only the lower portion of the slope is located' on the subject
property -
Ground cover vegetation on the slope'consists of dense ferns adjacent to berry brambles, and
young trees. The area east and south of the existing building is landscaped with grass, bushes,
and trees.
During our site visit, we made the followihg observations:
No evidence of recent slope instability, but older trees displayed some evidence of
possible historical instability when the trees at the site were younger;
521091SEA411144.doc Pagc 6 o1`23
Copyright 2OG4 Kicinfelder, Inc.
z
0
M
0
M
0
80
C
C
F-�
0
3:
M In
0
0
0
219;
M 0
z
z
M
N
k'q KLEINFELDER
Groundwater seepage was not visible nor was there evidence of historic groundwater
seepage;
No streams are present on the property;
No evidence of alluvial surficial deposits was observed.
3.2 GEOLOGIC HAZARD CLASSMCATION
Potential geologic hazards (erosion, landslide, steep slope, and seismic) at the site were classified
in accordance with Section 20.15B.060 - Classification, of the City of Edmonds Critical Areas
Ordinance, Chapter 20.15B. The specific geologic hazards are classified below.
3.Z1 Erosion
An erosion hazard is specified in Section 20.15B.060 as areas containing soils that may
experience severe to very severe erosion hazard. The group of soils includes, but is not limited
to, the following when they occur on slopes of 15 percent or greater:
Alderwood Soils (15 to 25 percent slopes);
Alderwood/Evereff Series (25 to 70 'percent slopes);
Everett Series (15 to 25 percent slopes).
The Soil Survey of Snohomish County Washington maps that were prepared by the United States
Department of Agriculture indicates that the near -surface soil on the existing slope is designated
as an Alderwood/Eveiett Gravelly sandy loam (25 to 70 percent slopes). The near -surface soil in
the leveled portion of the site classify as an Everett gravelly sandy loam (0 to 8 percent slopes).
Therefore, the soil on the existing slope at the site does classify as an erosion hazard. However,
we did not observe obvious signs of erosion on the hillside during our site visit.
3.2.2 Landslide
One of the following five criteria provided in Section 20.1513.060 must be met in order for a
landslide hazard to be identified at a project site. The criteria are:
. Slopes with inclinations of 15 percent or greater and impermeable soil such as silt and
clay interbedded with granular soils and springs or groundwater seepage;
. Areas with significant visible evidence of groundwater seepage and includes existing
landslide deposits regardless of slope;
'210MEMR144.doo Page 7 of 23
CopyTight 2004 rJoinfelder, Inc.
Z
0
0
3:
in
0
0
C
Z
0
;1
m
0 -n
n
in M
0 5
0
0
C co
M 0
Z
Z
9 1
0
in
9 L ElNFEtDER
Areas which have shown movement during the Holocene epoch (from 10,000 years ago
to present) or which is underlain by mass wastage debris of that epoch;
Potentially unstable areas resulting from rapid stream incision or stream bank erosion;
ris flow
Areas located on an alluvial fan, presently subject to, or potentia y subject to deb
or deposition of stream -transported sediments.
it is our opinion that the existing slope at the site does not fit the criteria given above. The basis
for our opinion includes the following elements:
Though the slope inclinations along portions of the site exceed 15 percent, the subsurface
investigation performed for the adjacent sites did not identify the presence of
impermeable soil, such as silt and clay, on the site.
No evidence of springs or groundwater seepage was observed or noted at the site.
We did not observe evidence of a deep-seated slope failure or instability during our
December 6, 2004 site visit. There is a potential for some sloughing to occur within the
loose, surficial colluviurn. However, this layer is only I to 2 feet in thickness on the face
of the hill slope, and we believe that that colluvial sloughing should be localized.
There are no streams on the site to create unstable areas.
The site is not located on an alluvial fan and is not presently or potentially subject to
debris flow or deposition of stn�am-transported sediments.
3.2.3 Steep Slope Hazard
Section 20.1513.060 specifies a steep slope hazard as any ground that rises at an inclination of 40
percent or more. The existing slope inclinations at of approximately 20 to 50 percent.
Therefore, the steeper areas of the existing slope are classified as a steep slope hazard.
3.2.4 Seismic Hazard
A seismic hazard area is classified as those areas subject to severe risk of earthquake damage as
a result of seismically -induced landslides, earth adjustments, settlement, or liquefaction.
The Pacific Northwest region is subject to ground shaking resulting from seismic events. It
should be noted that any sloped site in this region has a certain level of seismic risk associated
with it, particularly during a large -magnitude seismic event. However, given the relative density
521091SEMR144.doc Np 8 of23
Copyii&2004 Kleinfelder, Inc.
Z
'45i
Zij :� i
C) in
C
in
0
80
C
A: in
C
>
0
M in
0 _Cft
0
0
C Ci
M 0
Z
r
M
Z
Z
0
in
t
k4KLEINFELDER
of the glacial soil encountered at the site, the lack of groundwater within 20 feet of the ground
urflace at the time of our site visit, and the lack of evidence of disturbance due to recent seismic
is
events (for example: the 2001 Nisqually earthquake), it is our opinion that the site is not at a
:severe risk of sustaining earthquake damage.
Streann
::There are no streams that pass through the property.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
:As specified in City of Edmonds Critical Areas Ordinance, Chapter 20.15B, the steeper west
:portion of the site does classify as a steep slope hazard area, and the entire slope classifies as an
erosion hazard. The site does not classify as a landslide or seismic hazard. We understand that a
portion of the proposed development will involve disturbance of extreme east edge of the
existing slope. Therefore, a variance may be required for erosion and steep slope hazard areas.
3.3.1 Erosion Hazard
Within the erosion hazard area, an approved erosion control plan
will have to be prepared in
accordance to Chapter 18.30 ECDC. The plan will have to be approved by the City of Edmonds
d be maintained as much as possible on the
prior to site development. Natural vegetation shoul
surface of the slope during construction, to avoid creating potentially hazardous geological
conditions
3.3.2 Steep Slope Hazard
Because portions ofthe slope adjacent to the site site classifies as a steep slope hazard area, the
C
in
rifical Areas Ordinance Aill require a buffer zone and build g setback. Typically, buffer zone
in es are 50 feet and 15 feet, respectively. According to the Critical
and build g setback distanc
Areas ordinance, the buffer zone and building setback distance requirements can be reduced o ' f
eliminated if the city grants an exemption or exception pursuant to ECDC 20.15B.040. A
variance can be granted pursuant to ECDE 20.15B. I 70(A).
4.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 GENERAL
The following paragraphs present our design recommendations for use by you and your
hese
nsultants on this project. For satisfactory and successful construction of this project, t
CO
reconuriendations must be applied in their entirety and in conjunction with the construction
endations provided in Section 5.0.
recomm
52109/SEA4RI44.doc Page 9 of23
Copyight 2004 KkinW&r, Im.
--i -n
0 m
in
0
80
in in
Z
jo —4 i
C —Z
C
:� —(/) I
0 -n
n
in M
a
0
0 Fn
C o)
C (1)
in 0
Z
74
X
Z
Z
0
in
kn KLE1 NF EL DER
4.2 SITE PREPARATION AND EARTffWORK
4.Z1 Demolition
Demolition at the site will include removal of the existing building, paved parking and drive
areas, Portland cement concrete slab, and other site developments and debris found in the area of
the proposed building and new parking lot. We recommend that all excavations made during
demolition activities, including excavations for footings, underground storage tanks, and utilities,
be backfilled with structural fili as recommended in this report. The demolition debris should be
removed from the site, and disposed of properly. Alternatively, Portland cement concrete
demolition debris can be crushed and used as fill.
4.2.2 Excavation
Excavation: Before placing structural fill to establish foundation, floor slab, and/or pavement
section grades, the exposed soil should be prooftolled or hand probed. Unsuitable soils should
be overexcavated as recommended below. Excavation work can be performed with conventional
earthmoving equipment.
Prooftolling and Overexcavation: After general site excavation has been completed to the:
planned subgrades, the exposed soil surface should be either proofrolled and/or hand probed to
identify soft areas that require over excavation. Prooftolling should be performed with either a
fully -loaded tandem axle dump truck, a fully -loaded scraper, and/or a fully -loaded front-end
loader. A minimum of two passes should be performed when proofrolling. Prooftolling and
handprobing should be performed under the guidance and observation of the geotechnical
engineer. Soft soils encountered during prooftolling or probing should be overexcavated to a
firm and unyielding subgrade, and replaced with structural fill. Overexcavation should extend
beyond the footing a distance equal to the depth of the excavation below planned subgrade
elevation.
Structural Fill: Structural fill consists of the soil materials used to establish grade beneath
structural elements, such as spread footings, floor slabs and pavement sections. Structural fill
should consist of on -site fill, native recessional outwash, native colluviurn with organics and
other deleterious materials screened out, and/or imported select fill as defined in Section 5.0; and
should be compacted to the following minimum relative compaction based on ASTM D1557
(Modified Proctor) compaction test methods:
Foundations and Floor Slabs: 95 Percent
Pavement Subgrades: 95 Percent (upper 2 feet)
52109/SEA4RI44.doc Past 10 of23
Copyright 20W KIcirtrelder. Inc.
k'9 KLEINFELDER
Pavement Subgrades: 90 Percent (below 2 feet)
Topsoil is not suitable for use as structural fill, but can be used for non-structural backfilling and
landscaping purposes. excavating
Fill Placement and Compaction Upon completion of stripping, general
proofrolling/hand probing, and overexcavating, structural fill should be placed and compacted M
described in Section 5.0 to achieve design elevations.
4.Z3 Slopes
Temporary Slopes (Maximum height of 10 feet)
Cut: Maximum 1-1/2:1 H:V
(horizontal:vertical)
Compacted Structural Fill: Maximum 1-1/2:1 H:V
Permanent jo�s
(Maximum height of 10 feet)
Cut: Maximum 2:1 HN
Compacted Structural Fill: Maximum 2:1 HN
Permanent gravity buttress or soldier -pile retaining walls can be designed for the heights and
grades desired at the site.
Temporary. Excavations
General
All excavations must comply with applicable local, state, and federal safety regulations including
the current OSHA Excavation and Trench Safety Standard s and WISHA Safety Standards for.
Construction Work. Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the Contractor, who
shall also be solely responsible for the means, methods, and sequencing of construction
operations. We are providing the information below solely as a service to our client. Under no
circ unistances should the information be interpreted to mean that Kleinfelder is assuming
responsibility for construction site safety or the Contractor's activities; such responsibility is not
being implied and should not be inferred.
Excavations and Siopes
The Contractor should be aware that slope height, slope inclination, or excavation depths
(including utility trench excavations) should in no case exceed those specified in local, state,
52109/SEA4R144.d. Pagc I I of23
Copyright 2004 Kicinalder, Inc.
z
0
a m
m
40
0
m
z
z
0
In M
D—O)
0
0
C
z
-4
z
0
m
k'4 K L E I N F E L D E R
and/or federal safety regulations (e.g., OSHA Health and Safety Standards for Excavations, 29
CFR Part 1926, or successor regulations). Such regulations are strictly enforced and, if they are
not followed, the Owner, Contractor, and/or earthwork and utility subcontractors could be liable
for substantial penalties.
Construction Considerations
Heavy construction equipment, building materials, excavated soil, and vehicular traffic should
not be allowed within one-third the slope, height from the top of any excavation. Where the
stability of adjoining buildings, walls, or other structures is endangered by excavation operations,
support systems such as shoring, bracing, or underpinning may be required to provide structural
stability and to protect personnel working within the excavation. Earth retention, bracing, or
underpinning required for the project (if any) should be designed by a professional engineer
registered in the State, of Washington.
During wet weather, earthen berms or other methods should be used to prevent runoff water from
entering all excavations. All runoff water should be collected and disposed of outside the
construction limits.
Slope Protection
Temporary slopes should be protected from the elements by ' covering with a protective
membrane consisting of plastic sheeting or some other similar impermeable material. Sheeting
sections should overlap by at least 12 inches and be rightly secured with sandbags, tires, staking,
or other means to prevent wind from exposing the soils under the sheeting.
Permanent slopes should be planted with a deep-rooted, rapid -growth vegetative cover as soon as
possible after completion of slope construction. Alternatively, -the slope should be covered with
plastic, straw, etc. until it can be landscaped.
4.3 SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA
The following seismic design criteria should be used for the design of the proposed building.
Recommendations for both Uniform Building Code (UBC) and International Building Code
(IBC) are provided.
4.3.1 UBC Seismic Design Criteria
In accordance with Section 1636 of the 1997 UBC, the following seismic design criteria should
be used:
Site Profile:
52109/SEMR144.d�
Copyright 20M Kicinfelder. Inc.
So (Stiff Soil profile)
Page 12 of23
z
0
C
in
-40
0 C
in
10 -4
0
X
in m
0 V;
K
0
0
C
r
20
z
__4
3:
z
9
0
m
k 'g KLEINFELDER
Seismic Zone: 3; Z 0.30
Seismic Source Type: A
Seismic Coefficient, C.: 0.36
Seismic Coefficient, C,: 0.54
4.3.2 IBC Seismic Design Criteria
In accordance with the 2003 IBC and based on the results of the standard penetration tests
performed at the site, we believe a Site Class ofl) is appropriate. Spectral parameters for short -
duration period and I -second period accelerations for Site Class D in the vicinity of the site are
calculated at 1.26g and 0.65g, respectively.
4.4 SPREAD FOOTING FOUNDATIONS
We judge that a conventional shallow foundation system, such as spread footings, will provide
satisfactory support for the proposed development. Specific design recommendations are
presented in the following section. Specific construction recommendations are presented in
Section 5.0.
Foundation -Bearing Soil: Firm and unyielding native recessional
outwash or compacted structural fill placed
directly on a firm and unyielding native
recessional outwash. All colluviurn must be
stripped and removed from the building
footprint.
Note: On -site fill and native recessional outwash are suitable for use as structural
fill. Colluviurn can be used as structural fill, provided organics and other
deleterious materials can be screened out.
Minimum Footing Depth of Embedment
Perimeter and Isolated Footings: 24 inches below the lowest adjacent
final exterior grade
Interior Footings: 24 inches below top of floor slab
Minimum Footing Lateral Dimension
Spread Footings: 24 inches
Continuous Footings: 24inches
52109/SFA4R144.doc Page 13 or23
Copyright 2004 Kicinfelder, Inc.
z
0
m
a
I '
-40
0
C
mm
CZ
0M
.n
M M
0
0 m
C at
(A
0
56
z
z
9
0
In
M
KLEINFELDER
Footing Excavation Protection
If footing excavations are opened during the winter season or periods of wet
weather, itRill be helpful, because of the moisture sensitivity ofthe exposed
soils, to provide a lean concrete mud mat, gravel layer, or tent to protect the
subgrade until footings are poured.
Allowable Soil Bearing Pressure
Foundations Bearing on Recessional Outwash: 2,000 psf
Foundations Bearing on Structural Fill: 2,000 psf
Note: Allowable soil bearing pressures are for 01 dead and live loads and may be
0 In
C
increased bypne-third for temporary short-term wind and seismic loads.
In
0
C
Lateral Load Resistance
r , �"!;
In Mz
Passive Resistance:
Colluvium: 150 pounds per cubic
c:
>
foot (pcf) equivalent
-n
fluid weight (EFW)
o
Recessional Outwash or Structural Fill: 220 pounds per cubic
M In
foot (pef) e,
quivalent
Vi
a
0
fluid weight (EFW)
0 m
C CO
Coefficient ofFriction:
m 0
z
Recessional Outwash & Structural Fill: 0.35
Note: The passive resistance includes a safety factor of about 2 and is based on the
z
assumption that all backfill around the foundation has been placed and compacted as
recommended in Section 5.0. The upper foot of soil should be neglected in design
Vi
computations unless protected by pavement or a slab -on -grade. The coefficient of
z
friction includes a safety factor of 1.5.
0
M
Static
Settlement
Total Settlement: less than I inch
Differential Settlement: less than 3/4 an inch over 50 feet
Time Rate: a—roximatel
percern ng
construction
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction
52109/SEA4RI44.d.
Copyright 2004 Kleinfelder, Inc. Page 14 of23
k" KI-EINFELDER
K,: 200 kcf
4.5 FLOORS
A concrete slab -on -grade floor system is appropriate provided the floors are underlain by firm
and unyielding native recessional outwash or compacted structural fill placed directly on a firm
and unyielding native recessional outwash. All colluviurn must be removed from the building
footprint. The subgrade should be proofrolled or hand probed as described above prior to
placing the capillary break or structural fill.
In order to provide a firm base for slab construction and to provide a capillary break, we also
recommend the following underslab drainage measure be included:
Capillary Break: Minimum of 4 inches of free -draining gravel containing less than 5
percent fines (silt and clay -sized particles) based on the fraction passing the 3/4-inch
mesh sieve.
Vapor Barrier: In areas where moisture would be detrimental to equipment, floor
coverings or furnishings inside the building, a vapor barrier should be placed beneath the
concrete floor slab. Reinforced plastic sheeting is satisfactory for this purpose.
Protection Measures: A layer of sand, approximately 2 inches thick, may be placed over
the plastic sheeting to protect it from damage, to act as an aid in curing of the concrete
slab, and also to help prevent cement paste from bleeding down into the underlying
capillary break.
Specific construction recommendations are presented in Section 5.0.
4.6 DRAINAGE
Both short- and long-term drainage control measures should be included in project design and
construction.
4.6.1 Short Term
over the short term, we believe site and construction drainage can be reasonably well controlled
by careful excavation practices. Typically, these include, but are not limited to, shallow upgrade
perimeter ditches or low earthen berms, and temporary sumps in excavations to collect seepage
and prevent water from damaging exposed subgrades.
Drains should be included at the bottom of all temporary slopes to collect surface water flow
from the slope and prevent it from flowing onto exposed building subgrades. All collected water
52109/SEA4RI44,dw hg. 15 d23
Copyriglit 2004 Kicinfelda, Inc.
Z
am
C
In
-1 0
0 C
M
M Z
Z
0
n
-4
In m
0
0
0
C
In 0
X
Z
Z
In
k" K L E IN F I LD E R
should be conveyed under control to a positive and permanent discharge system, such as a storm
sewer.
4.6.2 Permanent
Over the long term, more permanent measures, such as installation of footing and retaining wall
drains, should be included. All permanent drains should be conveyed to a positive and
permanent discharge point well away from the structure. Roof downspouts should not be
connected to footing drains, but should be tight lined separately to a positive discharge system.
z
This will avoid the potential for roof debris to be washed into footing drains, possibly blocking
M
them. Clean -outs should be provided for footing drains, retaining wall drains, and downspout
tight lines.
:qzfi
--I
M
Specific site drainage details are provided below.
m
C
M
0
Footing Excavation Drain: In event that groundwater seeps into footing excavations, it
0
C
C �'z
m
should be possible to remove it by gently sloping the base of excavation to one or more
z
shallow sump pits and pumping the water from ther� to a positive, permanent discharge
C: —
>
system. The exposed footing subgrade should be protected from softening by placement
Vi
oferushed rock or a lean mix material.
om
n
• Footing Drains: These drains should be installed after construction of the building
m M
C-0
footings and immediately before backfilling against building stem walls.
0
0 F;
C: to
• Surface Runoff. Interceptor ditches or trenches or low earthen berms should be installed
M 0
Z r-
along the upgrade perimeters of the site to prevent surface water runoff from precipitation
or other sources from floAring over the face ofexcavated slopes or onto graded areas. We
recommend that a surface interceptor ditch be placed every 25 feet (slope distance) on
z
slopes exceeding 25 feet in height.
in
z
0
• Downspout or Roof Drains: These should be installed once the building�s roof is in
4
place. They should discharge in tight line to a positive, permanent drain system. Under
0
m
no circumstances connect these tight lines to the perimeter footing drains.
4.7 UTILITIES
The contractor should be responsible for the safety ofpersonnel working in utility trenches. We
recommend all utility trenches, but particularly those greater than 4 feet in depth, be supported in
accordance with state and federal safety regulations.
52IMEA411144.doo P.go 16 of23
Copyright 2004 YJ.M.1der, I...
KLEINFELDER
Utility trench backfill should consist of structural fill. The onsite fill and native recessional
outwash are suitable for use as structural fill in utility trenches. Colluvium can be used as
structural fill in utility trenches, provided organics and other deleterious materials can be
screenedout. Topsoil is not suitable for use as structural fill. Altematively,an imported select
fill material that meets the requirements described in Section 5.2 can be used as a structural fill.
The percent compaction required for utility trench backfill is 95 percent of the maximum dry
density of the backfill, as determined in the laboratory by AS'fM Standard D 1557 (Modified
Proctor).
Particular care should be taken to make sure bedding or fill material is properly compacted in
place to provide adequate support to the pipe. Jetting or flooding is not a substitute for
mechanical compaction and should not be allowed.
5.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 GENERAL
5.1.1 Description
This section presents our recommendations for the geotechnical aspects of construction.
Specifically, we cover earthwork, drainage, and pavement. Our design criteria are based on
these construction recornmendations; therefore, these recommendations should be incorporated
into the project specifications in their entirety.
S.L2 Standard Specifications
Where possible, we refer to the 2004 Edition of the State of Washington Standard Specifications
for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction (Standard Specifications).
5.1.3 Reference Standards
Reference Standards are referred to by agency or association initials and are from the latest
editions of the following:
ASTM -American Society for Testing and Materials: Annual Book ofASTM Standards
5.L4 Geotechnical Engineer
a We recommend you retain Kleinfelder during construction to observe and test the geotechnical
aspects ofthe contractor's work. This will allow us to compare the actual conditions encountered
oil with those expected by this investigation and to modify our recommendations, if necessary.
52109/SEA4R144.doc Page 17 of23
Copyright 2004 YJ6nf0dtr. Int.
z
a m
C
in
0
80
C
M M
z
'o-4
C
0 _111
X
in M
a-
0 0
1 r-
CTz (1)
Q 0
Z
;0
z
z
0
Z5
in
k9 KLEINFELDER
-time basis to check that the contractor's work
VJeirifelder should be present at the site on a full
conforms to the geotechnical aspects of the plans and specifications.
The daily field reports and final reportiorm. an important record of construction. Observation
and testing by the geotechnical engineer, however, should not in any way release the contractor
from the responsibility of performing the work in such a manner as to provide a satisfactory job
that meets the requirements of the project plans and specifications, or from meeting contractual
obligations to the owner.
5.1.5 Geotechnical Report
This report has been prepared for Mesher Shing & Associates and its design consultants for the
design of this project only. The entire report should be provided to contractors for their bidding
or estimating, but not as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. We cannot be responsible for
the interpretation by others of the information contained in this report.
5.1.6 Construction Site Safety
Our scope of services did not include construction safety practices and this report is not intended
to direct construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as
specifically described, and then only for consideration in design, not for construction guidance.
The contractor should be made responsible for construction site safety and compliance with
local, state, and federal requirements.
5.2 EARTHWORK
Earthwork consists of placing and compacting fill; utility backfilling; and all subsidiary work
necessary to complete the grading of the developed areas to conform to the lines, grades, and
slopes shown on the plans.
5.Zl Materials
Ile on -site fill and native recessional outwash obtained at the project site during excavation are
suitable for use as a structural fill beneath footings, slabs -on -grade floors, or pavements. These
materials can also be used for general backfill and landscaping purposes. Colluvium can be used
as structural fill, provided organics and other deleterious materials can be screened out. Topsoil
is not suitable for use as structural fill, but can be used for non-structural backfilling and
landscaping purposes.
Imported select fill material should consist of clean, free -draining sand and/or gravel containing
less than 5 percent fines (silt- and clay -sized particles), based on the fraction passing the %-inch
52109/SEMR]44.d� Pap I& d 23
C�ppiiiht 2004 KwnWda, Im
z
0
M
in
m
0
0
C
M m
Z
C Ft
>
E:
:�
0 -n
n ;D
m M
a
0
0
C co
K 0)
M 0
M
z
9
0
m
k" K L E IN IF E L D E R
sieve. A greater fines content is acceptable, provided it is approved in advance by the
geotechnical engineer.
The contractor should submit sampleg� of each of the required earthwork materials to the
geotechnical engineer for evaluation and approval prior to use. The samples should be submitted
at least 4 days prior to their use and sufficiently in advance of the work to allow the contractor to
identify alternative sources ifthe material proves unsatisfactory.
5.Z2 Terins
Terms used in this section are defined as follows:
Percent Corm)act is the required in -place dry density of the material, expressed as a
percentage of the maximum dry density of the same material as determined in the laboratory by
ASTM Standard Dl 557 (Modified Proctor).
Optimum Moisture Con is the moisture content (percent by dry. weight) corresponding to the
maximum dry density of the same material as determined by ASTM Standard DI 557.
Moir Sensitive Soil is soil containing more than 10 percent fines (silt- or clay -sized particles)
based on the fraction passing the 3/4-inch sieve.
Structural Fill is fill material placed and compacted in areas that underlie structures or
pavements. It should be compacted to the Percent Compaction specified in Section 4.2. It has a
maximum particle size of 6 inches.
5.2.3 Quality Control
Proper geotechnical observation and. testing during construction is imperative� to allow the
geotechnical engineer the opportunity to verify assumptions made during the design process.
The recommendations provided in this report are based on the assumption that an adequate
program of tests and observations will be conducted during . the construction phase in order to
evaluate the compliance with our recommendations.
5.2.4 Seepage Control
Runoff or groundwater seepage that would interfere with the contractor's work should be
controlled during construction. Control may consist of temporary drainage ditches or subsurface
drains. Installation of such measures should be the contractor's responsibility.
52 1 1091SEA4RI44.d- Page 19 of23
Copyright 2004 Kleinfelder, Inc.
r
Z
m
0
0
C
-i K
V�
C 2
0 -n
m M
0
0 m
C_
K (7 0)
M 0
M
>
Z
Z
m
k4K L E I N F E L D E R
5.2.5 Demolition
Demolition at the site will include removal of the existing buildings, paved parking and drive
areas, wood railroad tile retaining wall, Portland cement concrete slab, and other site
developments. The demolition debris should be removed from the site, and disposed of properly.
Alternatively, Portland cement concrete demolition debris can be crushed and used as fill.
5.2.6 General Excavation
General excavation consists of removing soil to sufficient depth to achieve design grades. The
contractor should be responsible for excavating and disposing ofor reusing excavated material.
Z
-04
Based on the undated drawing provided by Mesher Shing & Associates, the proposed building
mill have a finished floor elevation of 300.4 feet above MSL. Based on the existing site grade of
=i
__q
300 feet above MSL in the footprint of die proposed building, we anticipate cuts and fills of less
m
C:
then I feet will be required to level the building pad at the proposed final floor elevation.
M
Excavation work can be performed with conventional earthmoving equipment.
0
3: M
After design grade is reached, exposed soils should be prooftolled and/or hand probed to identify
M Z
soft or unstable areas requiring additional excavation and replacement with structural fill. These
C 2
>
procedures help delineate soft or weak soils. Proofrolling should be performed with either a
55
fully -loaded tandem axle dump truck, a fully -loaded scraper, and/or a fully -loaded front-end
0 -M"
-TI � j
loader. A minimum of two passes should be performed when prooftolling. Hand probing should
—4
X C i,
M M
be performed by the geotechnical engineering technician with a Vinch-diameter steel bar.
0 r-
Proofrolling and haridprobing should be performed under the guidance and observation of the
0 M
C Co
geotechnical engineer. Soft soils encountered during prooftolling or hand probing should be
C CI)
M 0
Z
overexcavated to a firm and unyielding subgrade, and replaced with structural fill.
Overexcavation should extend beyond the footing a distance equal to the depth of the excavation
M
below planned subgrade elevation. All final surfaces exposed by the complete excavation should
Z
be finished true to line and grade and present a smooth, firm surface.
After a rainfall, construction equipment travel on the exposed site subgrade should be minimized
Z
until the soils have been allowed to dry sufficiently. Otherwise, traffic activity on the wetted
m
subgrade will degrade the exposed materials and result in additional excavation of the disturbed
materials.
S.Z7 Structural Excavation
The work addressed in this section covers excavation and backfill for structural elements such as
the proposed foundations, floor slab, and pavements.
52109/SEA4RI44.dw Np 20 OM
C.Pyright 2004 Kitinf0der, Im.
k'g KLEIN FELDER
Excavation for footings, floor slab, and pavements should be performed after site preparation is
completed. Excavations for footings should be -performed so as to avoid disturbing or loosening
adjacent soils. Footing excavations should extend into foundation-beanng material to the depth
shown on the plans. Excavations should be kept free of water at all times and all loose material
should be removed from excavations prior to placement of forrinvork, reinforcing steel, concrete,
or backfill.
The contractor shouldinform the geotechnical engineer after the footing excavations have been
z
completed and before placement of reinforcing steel, formwork, or concrete. The geotechnical
engineer should then observe foundation excavations and provide written confirmation that the
0
footings bear on the expected foundation -bearing material. After placing foundation concrete,
=i �n
backfilling with structural fill should be performed.
a In
C
5.2.8 Weather Considerations
M 0
0
During winter weather and in areas where the exposed subgrade may consist of moisture-
X In
sensitive soils (soils containing more than 10 percent fines based on the fraction passing the 3/4-
MZ
inch sieve), the contractor should take measures to protect foundation excavations once the
geotechnical engineer has approved them. These measures could include, but are not limited to,
U5
placing a layer of pea gravel, crushed rock or lean concrete on the exposed subgrade, or
0 -n
_n
covering the exposed 'subgrade with a plastic te nt. If additional overexcavation is required
because the subgrade was not protected, the cost of such additional wo rk should be bom e by the
In m
a Vi
contractor.
0
C
001
During dry weather, the contractor should take measures to protect the foundation excavations'
rn 0
exposed subgrade soils from drying out. These measures may include watering the subgrade as
necessary. If the subgrade soils dry out and become loose, they should be moisture conditioned
and recompacted to the percent compaction specified.
z
5.Z9 Structural Fill Construction
V5
z
This section covers placement and compaction of earth materials to create structural fill.
9
0
in
Soil used for structural fill should be moisture conditioned to within 3 percent of optimum
moisture content, placed in level lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness, and compacted
to �the specified Percent Compaction (as defined in Section 5.2.2) to produce a firm and
unyielding surface. If field density tests indicate the required Percent Compaction has not been
obtained or the surface is pumping and weaving under construction traffic, the fill material
52109/SFA4RI44.d.c Pap 21 of23
copyfight 2OD4 Kicinfelder. I-
k'q KLEINFELDER
should be reconditioned as necessary and recompacted to the required percent compaction before
placing any additional material.
Fill slopes should be compacted by slope rolling and trimming, or should be overfilled and
trimmed back to plan grade to expose a firm, smooth surface free of loose material.
5.Z10 Utility Trench Backfilling and Compaction
This section covers backfilling of all utility trenches at the site.
Z
0
The contractor should be responsible for the safety of personnel working in utility trenches and
but those than 4 feet in
UST excavations. We recommend all utility trenches, particularly greater
depth, be supported in accordance with state and federal safety regulations.
:q
-4
M
C
Utility trench backfill should consist of structural fill constructed as discussed above. If
m 0
backfilling is performed during periods of winter weather, it may not be possible to achieve
0
C
adequate compaction with structural fill material unless it is sufficiently well drained. Within
M
m
building areas, and the upper 2 feet below grade in the surrounding parking areas, utility trench
backftil should be compacted to at least 95 Percent Compaction; below 2 feet in the surrounding
Z
parking areas, it should be compacted to at least 90 Percent Compaction. Particular care should
o"n
be taken to make sure bedding or fill material is properly compacted in place to provide adequate
__4
support to the pipe. Jetting or flooding is not a substitute for mechanical compaction and should
mm
not be allowed.
0,
5.3 DRAINAGE
drainage and drain lines in the areas
0
-4 r
T :",
This section covers the placement of aggregate materials
X
and to the lines and grades shown on the plans.
Z
5.3.1 General
The materials that we recommend be used for site drainage are as follows:
Z
Capillary Break- Minimum of 4 inches of free -draining gravel containing less than 5
percent fines (silt and clay -sized particles) based on the fraction passing the 3/4-inch
m
mesh sieve.
Free -draining Granular Material: Should consist of clean, free -draining gravel or
crushed rock meeting the requirements of Section 9-03.12 (2), "Gravel Backfill for
Walls," on page 9-27 of the Standard Specifications.
52100EMR144.doc Page 22 of23
Copyright 20N KIcinfelder, Inc.
k4K L E I N r E L D E R
Drain Pipe: Should be smooth -walled, rigid PVC or other rigid pipe conforming to the
minimum sizes and dimensions shown on the plans. Corrugated plastic pipe should not
be used because it has a tendency to crush and become blocked, and is often laid without
a gradient.
5.3.2 Concrete Slab -on -Grade Drainage
are satisfacto y compacted and subgrade preparation
After structural and utility trench backfi ril
is completed, the capillary break should be placed in a manner to prevent segregation and should
be compacted with appropriate vibratory equipment to provide a tight particle interlock. Any
free water that has collected in the capillary break should be drained or removed by pumping
before concrete is placed.
6.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES
The recommendations made in this report are based on the assumption that an adequate program
of tests and observations will be made during construction to verify compliance with these
recommendations. These tests and observations should include, but not necessarily be limited to,
the following:
observations and testing during site preparation, earthwork, and structural fill placement.
Testing and inspection of concrete, masonry, structural steel, fireproofing, and roofing
materials.
Consultation as may be required during construction.
We recommend that project plans and specifications be reviewed by us to verify compatibility
with our conclusions and recommendations. In particularly, we recommend the final grading
and earth retention system plans for the existing slope be reviewed by us for slope stability
issues. Also, Meinfelder maintains fittly-accredited WABO-certified laboratory and inspection
personnel, and are available for this project's testing and inspection needs. Information
concerning the scope and cost for these services can be obtained from our office.
521091SEMR144.doc Pagc 23 of23
Copyright 2004 Kicinfelder, Inc.
Z
0
om
C 0
0
-4
0
-4
3: m
in Z
>
0 -n
in M
a V-
0
0 in
(i)
cc/)
I'�
in
M
>
Z
Z
0
m
Copyright- 2004 Kleinfelder, Inc., All rights reserved. Not td Scale
Vicinily Map FIGURE
SHKLEINFELDER Proposed Pagliacci Restaurant
Edmonds Way
PROJECT NO. 52109 December 2004 Edmonds, Washington
>
o
\ X
NEW
EXISTING T3
14
<
DEMOLITION SITE- PLAN
-N�E,
'p
JPAMNG
ADA PARKI G SIGNAGE
4 S�.I.: 1/2-
29
Me
29W
W-D,
-;opyright- 2004 KJoinfeWer, Inc., Urights reserved. G:52109ISitePlan
z
0
0
a m
-40
0 c
in z
0-4
c
0 n
m M
0
0
c m
M 0
z
z
m
NOTICE:
IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE
IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT.
NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE
IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT.
to
co
EXISTING ADJ.
BUILDING
'j2-9Z A
REMOVE EXISTING
ASPHALT PAVEMEN,
REMOVE ONE S RY
S RY BRICK BUILDING
I ING
B-1
REMOVE
CONC. WALL
REMOVE WOOD
STRUCTURE
\ 1�n
Le end
HA- Hand-Augered boring
0 and approximate location
B-1 Drilled Boring and
Scale: 1"= 29 approximate location
Reference: -s#e Plan-mvided by Mesher Shing Ass9clates and dated Decamber 10, 2003.
Proposed Paglia-1 R ' U=L . FIGURE
Edmwds WaY Site Plan
r :dm-d�, W.WVf-
'IE Pmjecl. 42054 Apfil 2004
z
0
0 M
C
M
0
0
C
Mz
C
0,
M M
v V;
I,,
0
0
C
M
X
-4
z
z
0
r"
SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
MAJOR DIVISIONS
SYMBOLS
TYPICAL
DESCRIPTIONS
GRAPH
LETTER
GRAVEL
AND
GRAVELLY
SOILS
CLEAN
GRAVELS
(LITTLE OR NO FINE�)
1;0 *;, 0
'00 '6
0 so*
. * *!.*!
GW
WELL-GR&DED GRAVELS. GRAVEL
SAND MIXTURES. 09 TO 15%
FINES
0.
jo Cy. a
000000
j0051
30 O�'�
GP
POORLY -GRADED GRAVELS.
GRAMEL-SAND MIXTURES. 07 TO
15% FINES
COARSE
GRAINED
SOIL
MORE THAN 509
OF COARSE
FRACTION
RETAINED ON NO.
4 SIEVE
-
GRAVELS WITH
FINES
(APPRECIABLE
AMOUNT OF nNES)
io
$00-0-1.
;a
0
04
05
GM
SILTY GRAVELS, SILTY GRAVEL-
SAND MIXTURES
CLAYEY GRAVELS, CLAYEY GRAVEL
SAN. MIXTURES
SAND
CLEAN SANDS
SW
WELL-GRADEO SANDS, GRAVELLY
SANDS, OX TO 15% FINES
MORE THAN 50%
OF MATERIAL IS
LARGER THAN NO
200 SIEVE SIZE
AND
SANDY
SOILS
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)
7:
SP
POORLY -GRADED SANDS,
GRAVELLY SAND. 0% TO 15%
FINES
SANDS WITH
FINES
...
SM
SL1Y SANDS, SILTY SA.D-GRAVEL
MIXTURES.
MORE THAN 50%
OF COARSE
FRACTION
SC
CLAYEY SANDS. CLAYEY SAND
GRAVEL MIXTURES
PASSING ON NO.
4 SIEVE
RErIABLE
F
A. OF INES)
ML
INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE
nyDS' ROCK FLOUR.,SILTY OR
EY FINE SANDS R CLAYEY
SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY
FINE
GRAINED
SOIL
SILTS LIQUID UMrr
AND LESS THAN So
CLAYS
CL
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO
MEDIUM PLASTICITY GRAVELLY
CLAYS, SANDY CLAK SILTY
CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS
OL
ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC
SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY
MORE THAN 50%
OF MATERIAL IS
SMALLER THAN NO.
200� SIEVE SIZE
MH
INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR
DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR
SILTY SOILS
CH
INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH
PLASTICITY
SILTS
AND GRUE00kUTEIRR UMAITN 50
CLAYS
OH
ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO
HIGH PLASTICITY
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
..........
..........
.......
Pt
PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOLS WITH
HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTSI
NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS
m
C
In
0
80
C
m
o -n
M M
0
0
0
C
C CA
IT, 0
>
z
z
9
0
m
Proposed Pagliacci Restaurant
Edmonds Way & 102nd Place Wes
Edmonds, Washington SOIL CLASSIFICATION LEGEND
Projeof; 42054 April 2004� Iq
Proposed Pagliacci Restaurant
Edmonds Way & 102nd Place Wes
Edmonds, Washington SOIL CLASSIFICATION LEGEND
Projeof; 42054 April 2004� Iq
TE& 3PROGRAM
U.&CS
LAK iTORY LzZ�HELD
::F
WELIJPIEZO
SOIL DESCRIPTION
CONSTRUCTION
4A
IZ
Surface: Asphaltic concrete p2VeMCnt
0
Paz
0—
GP
I
Lsqllgl��can r�te mchc§tjIjiqk)
P-SN
GRAVEL WITH SAR5 COP): gray/brown,
moist, medium dense, fine-grained.
L)
SAND WITH SILT AND GRAVEL
(SP-SMY- yellow/brown, dry, medium
dense, fine to medium grained, once roots.
6.4
(RECESSIONAL OUTWA SH)
9
SP
- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -
SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP): gray -brown,
5-
0/5.5
dry to moist, very dcnsc� medium -grained,
some cobbles.
(RECESSIONAL OUTWASH)
It
SP
-
- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -
SAND (SP); gray to gray -brown, dry,
dense, fine to medium -grained, som silt,
truce gravel.
9
S1.2
16
X
10-
2 0
14
si -3
grades to very dense.
21
X
15-
30
10
S14
grades to dense.
14
X
20L Boring completed to a depth of 20 feet
below the surface. Groundwater �vas not
encountered during drilling. Boring was
backfilled with cuttings and bentonite
chips, and capped with Portland cement
concrete.
is
DATE DRILLED: 3-12-04 SURFACE ELEVATION (feet): 301.0 DRILLING METHOD: USA
LOGGED BY: F. Reinart TOTAL DEPTH (feet): 20.0 DRILLER: Boll
REVIEWED By. J. Schmidt DIAMETER OF BORING (in): 8" CASING SIZE: N[A
Proposed Pagliacci Restaurant
Appendix
102nd Place West and Edmonds Way
ELEINFELDER
Edmonds, Washington
I
A-2
GEOTECHNICAL A" ENMONMENTAL ENGINEERS
BORING LOG
SODS =IATERIALS TESTING
P..CTNUMBE-'
B-1 _
PAGE I of I
z
0
M
:4 TI
0
-40
0 C
-4 r !f,
M
z
,0-4
C
,n
m In
a aj
or-
0 m
c: 0)
C to
m
M
z
z
m
U.S.(
TE:
Z PROGRAR__
WELLIPIEZO
E�
so DESCRIPTION
CONSTRUCTION
Z
E
0
S g,
-Z
Surface:
Asphaltic concrete p2VCnlCnt
0
GP tlLqoncLc e C' .5 Ln IvLs LhLck
'm
sp
GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP): gray -brown,
Imois4 medium dense, fine-grained.
I LD
SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP): gray, dry to
moist, loose, fine to medium -grained, some
sflt� trace roots.
12.8:
4
S2_1
P-Sh
(_CQ U�U V_R_W_ L - - - - -
§A 45 WTM SILT (SP-SM): brown,
4
moist, loose, fine- to medium -grained, trace
5-
4
gravel, trace roots.
(COLLUVRM
SM
":m4es-to FAX-Iz'_CL—_ 2�tmqnont_s_
SILTY SAND (SM): gray -brown, moist,
medium dense, fine- to meditun-grained,
a
some gravel.
(RECESSIONAL OUTWASH)
8
S2-2
grades to trace gravel.
13
10-
16
a
_X
12
S2.3
20
grades to very dense.
31
a
20
some lenses offine�grained sand, 2.0 tsf
unconfined compressive strength (pocket
enetrometer).
(RECESSIONAL OUTWASH)
Bonng completed to a depth of2O feet
below the surface. Groundwater was not
encountered during drilling. Boring was
backfilled with cuttings and bentonite
chips, and capped with Portland cement
concrete.
DATE DRILLED: 342-04
SURFACE ELEVATION (feet): 300.0 MULLING METHOD: USA
9!
LOGGED BY. F. Ittluart
TOTAL DEPTH (feel): 20.0
DRILLER: Holt
REVIEWED BY: .13cbraldt
DIAMETER OF BORING (in): 8"
CASING SIZE: N/A
Proposed Pagliacei Restaurant
Appendix
k"KLEINFELDER
102nd
Place West and Edmonds Way
Edmonds, Washington
A-3
GEOTECHN11CAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS
SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING
BORING LOG
it PROJECT NUMBER: 42054
B-2
PAGE I of I
TES
; PROGRAM
U.S.CIL
LAB,
ATORY LzZTLD
OL
WELLTEEZO
_02, SOIL DESCRIPTION
CONSTRUCTION
-9
E
0z
XO
S-f—: uati—eg.tmi..
— — — — — — — — —
sm
— — — — — —
SILTY SAND (SM): brown, moist, loose,
fine- to coarse -grained, with roots, trace
gravel.
sm
SILTY SAND (SM): brown, mois4 loose,
fine- to medium -gained, some gravel, trace
roots.
SHAI-1
SM
WCESSIONAL OUTWASH)
grades to gray -brown, medium dense, no
Toots.
5-
7
Boring terminated at a depth of 7 feet
below the surface due to refusal in dense
recessional outwash. Groundwater was not
encountered during drilling. Boring was
backfilled with cuttings.
DATE DRILLED: 3-12-04
SURFACE ELEVATION (feet): 309.0
DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger
LOGGED KY.: F. Reinart
TOTAL DEPTH (feet):
7.0
DRILLER: Weiaftld,r
REVIEWED BY: J. Stlunkft
DIANIETER OF BORING &): 3"
CASING SIZE: N/A
Proposed Pagliacci Restaurant
102nd Place West and Edmonds W ay
k4KLEINFELDER
Edmonds, Washington
EAPpendix
A - 4
GEOTkCHNICAL AND FNVIERONMENTAL ENGINEERS
130R-U'4G LOG
SOILS ANDM[ATERIALS
PROJECT NUNGF11,42054
TESTING
RA -I
PAGE Iorl
I
z
0
In
0 In
C
MO
--10
00
C
-j M ?�
x In
In Z
0-4
C 2 6
r- -4
0 -n
n jxd
In
a
0
0 Fn
C o)
C (j)
In 0
Z T"
.1
z
z
0
In
TEST PROGRAM
U.S.C.S.
LABG_ JURY I FIELD
WELUPEEZO >
L-1
0 SOIL DESCRIPTION
C ONSTRUCTION
9
o
z
Surface: native vegetation
no a ,4
z
SM
SILTY SANDT9&i�.
fine- to coarse -grained, with roots, trace
e
SIIA2-1
gravel.
(COLLUVIUM)
z
SM
SILTY SAND (SM): brown, moist, loose,
fine- to triedium-grained, some gravel, trace
roots.
z
(RECESSIONAL OUTWASH)
C
SM
grades to gray -brown, medium dense, no
z
roots.
7
During terminated at a depth of 7 feet W
below the surface due to refusal in dense
recessional outwash. Groundwater was not E_
encountered during drilling.'Boring was <
backfilled with cuttings. a
z
C
z
z
2
DATE DRILLED: 3-12-04
SURFACE ELEVATION (feet): 305.0
DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger
e, LOGGED BY: F. Reimtrt
TOTAL DEPTH (feet): 7.0
DRILLER: JOeinfelder
REVIEWED BY: J. Sch-idt
DIAMETER OF BORING (in): 3"
CASING SIZE: NIA
Proposed Pagliacci Restaurant
Appendix
102nd Place West and Edmonds Way
---IKLEINFELDER
Edmonds, Washington
A-5
GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS
BORING LOG
SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING
HA-2
PAGE I of I
PROJECT NUMER:..42054
z
-24
0
In
-4 -n
Ar
C
In
0
C)
0 C
-4 K f�
X m
M z
to -q
C 2
>
0
n
In M
a C-0
0
0
M 0
Z r-
.4w
X
z
z
In
-4 -n
Ar
C
In
0
C)
0 C
-4 K f�
X m
M z
to -q
C 2
>
0
n
In M
a C-0
0
0
M 0
Z r-
.4w
X
z
z
In
TES
;PROGRAM
U.S.0
LAI
F_
ATORY FIELD
:z ff
2,
WELIRIEZO
q
W SOIL DESCRIPTION
CONSTRU CTION
X
5 7
4 -Z
Z
Oz
�0
P
Surface: ..fl-"pt.1i..
0
-- -
SM
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
SILTY SAND (SM): brown, moist, loose,
fine- to coarse -grained, with roots, trace
gravel.
�COLLLWIUM)
SM
------- — — — — — — — — — — — — — -
SILTY SAND (SM): brown, moist, loose,
r�
fine- to medium -grained, some gravel, trace
SUA3-1
roots.
(RECESSIONAL OUTWASH)
SM
grades to gray -brown, medium dense, no
roots.
5 .
6
Boring terminated at a d epth of 6 feet
below the surface due to refusal in dense
recessional outwash. Groundwater was not
encountered during drilling. Boring was
backfilled with cuttings.
is
DATE DRILLED: 3-12-04
SURFACE ELEVATION 1,11�ct): 306.0 DRILLING METHOD: Hand Auger
LOGGED BY: F. R.i.ort
TOTAL DEPTH (feet):
6.0
DRILLER: Kleinf.1der
REVIEWED BY: J. Schmidt
DIAMETER OF BORING (in): 3"
CASING SIZE: N/A
Proposed Pagliacci Restaurant
Appendix
102nd
Place West and Edmonds Way
1114-KLEMELDER
Edmonds, Washington
A-6
GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS
BORING LOG
SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING
PROJECT NUMBER:
HA-3
PAGE I of I
z
0
0
In
3:
In
In 0
00
C
-4 C
Nil
m
z
0
M In
0
0 In
C (n
co
In 0
X
3:
z
m
j
TEST
- PROGRAM
U.S.C.S
LABC
TORY FIELD
I-
WELTjPff
0
SOIL DES CRIPTION
CONSTRUCTION
2
2
2!
z;
Surface: native vegetation
z
sm
oP_S_0JL__
J.
SILTY
�J_
fine- to coarse -grained, with roots, trace
sm
gravel.
SHA4-1
SILTY SAND (SM): gay -brown, moist
t medium dense, fine- to medium -grained,
3
some gravel, trace roots.
2
'Boriug��'d' OUTWASH'
epth ot 3 feet
below the surface due to refusal in dense
recessional outwash. Groundwater was not 2
encountered during drilling. Boring was
backfilled with cuttings.
F
C
DATE DRILLED: 3-12-04
SURFACE ELEVATION (feel): 317.0 DRILLING.METHOD: Hand Auger
LOGGED BY: F. Rinat
TOTAL DEPTH (Ject): 3.0
DRILLER: Kicinfelder
REVIEWED BY: J. Schmidt
DIAMETER OF BORING (in): 3"
CASING SIZE: NIA
Proposed Pagliacci Restaurant
Appendix
'ELDER
102nd Place West and Edmonds Way
k4]KLEINF
Edmonds, Washington
A-7
GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS
BORING LOG
SOILS AND MATERIALS
&ROJECTNUMER: 42054
TESTING
HA-4
PAGE I of I
z
In
m
C
In a
0
-40
0 C
M In
z
,0-4
C
0
in In
0
0
m
z
z
0
In
T
LAB
PROGRAM
VTORY FIELD
U.S.C.!
'P WELOMZ0 >
Z; t.
2W
0 SOIL DES CRIPTION
;�
C ONSTRUCTI[ON
E g,
z
HE
z
Surface; native vegetation
73Z
0 -c;
z
sm
fine- to coarse -grained, with roots, trace
SM
gravel. I
STI Y SAND (SM): brown, moist, loose,
fine- to medium -grained, some gravel, trace
roots.
(RECESSIONAL OUTWASH)
SM
grades to gray -brown, medium dense, no
SHA5-1
roots.
6L—
Boring terminated at a depth of 6 feet
below the surface due to refusal in dense
recessional outwash. Groundwater was not
encountered during drilling. Boring was
backfilled with cuttings.
DATE DMLED: 3-12-04
SURFACE ELEVATION (feet): 308.0 DRILLING METHOD: Road Auger
LOGGED BY: F. Rehutrt
TOTAL DEPTH (feet):
6.0
DRILLER: Kleinfelder
REVIEWED BY: J. Sthcnidt
DIAMETER OF BORING (in): 3"
CASING SIZE: NIA
Proposed Pagliacci Restaurant
A endix
pp
102nd Place West and Edmonds Way
JEW = KLEINFELDER
Edmonds, Washington
A-8
GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS
BORING LOG
SOILS AND MATERIALS
PROJECT NUMBER: 42054 - -
TESTING
HA-5
PAGE I of I
z
9
0
in
-4 'n
Fn -4
a 'in
Co
0
0
C
m
z
z
— (1) ;��
0 _11
n;0
M m
H0
M 0
;D
-4
x
z
--I
I
ca
z
0
m
-4 'n
Fn -4
a 'in
Co
0
0
C
m
z
z
— (1) ;��
0 _11
n;0
M m
H0
M 0
;D
-4
x
z
--I
I
ca
z
0
m
k" KLEINFELDER
Sunrise Development Site
102,d
Place West
North A'�ross
z
55
C m
M 0
0
Mz
m M
055
0
0
C cl)
Q)
M 0
z
0
z
0
m
5!
w
4 M,
6V
E7�
V "4; s
ik�WGB-2
411
A
EX C.B.
Or
LEGEN
GB-1 Boring number and
approximate location
9 40 0
APPROXIMATE DRAWING
SCALE: I *= 40'
Reference: Prelilrninary Site Plan. Prepared by Lovell Sauerland
and Associates. Inc.. Dated August 15, 2000
KLEINFELDER
Site Plan
FIGURE
Edmonds Way and 102nd PL West
Edmonds, Washington
2
Project: 60-2100-01 August. 2000
98020
z
C m
m 0
0
80
C
m M
6)
0,
-n
m T
a
0
0
C TO
0
r
Z
m
SOIL CLASSIFICATION
CHART
SYMBOLS
TYPICAL
MAJOR DIVIS ONS
DESCRIPTIONS
GRAPH
LETTER
WELL -GRADED GRAVELS. GFLAVEL
CLEAN
GW
S D MIXTURES. Ln rLE OR NO
AINNE
GRAVEL GRAVELS
F S
0
GP
POORLY -GRADED GRAVELS.
GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE
AND WTTUE OR NO FINES)
GRAVELLY
SOILS
OR NO FINES
z
GM
SILTY GRAVELS. GRAVEL - SAND -
COARSE GRAVELS WITH
SILT MIXTURES
GRAINED MORETHAN50% FINES
m
SOILS OFCOARSE
FRACTION
APPRECIABLE AMOUN
G C
V - SAND -
CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -
RETAINED ON NO.
OF FINES)
CLAY MIXTURES
-n
4 SIEVE
WELL -GRADED SANDS. GRAVELLY
m
C
ANDS
Sw
_.RA..L,y
SAN DS, LITTLE OR NO FINES
m 0
0
CLEAN
-40
0
SAND
MORE THAN 50% AND (LITTLE OR NO FINES)
OF MATERIAL Is
S P
'LNE.j
POORLY -GRADED SANDS,
GRAVELLY SAND. LITTLE OR NO
C
-4 C
M
LARGER THAN NO. SANDY
FINES
4
200 SIEVE StZE SOILS
c —
z
S M
SILTY SANDS. SAND - SILT
)�
SANDS WITH
MORE THAN 50%
OF COARSE FINES
MIXTURES
0
FRACTION
PASSING ON NO- 4 LAPPREciAmr: AMOUN
SIEVE
SC
CLAYEY SANDS. SAND - CLAY
MIXTURES
-n
-4
OF FINES)
'C SILTS AND VERY FINE
x
m
IN R13AN
0
PLO UR. SILTY OR
ac-0
M L
S AN R -
FIN. SAN OR CLAYEY
�:'Y. -C S
0
LASTICITY
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW To
o
C (n
(A
SILTS LIQUID LIMIT
C L
MEDIUM PLASTICITY. GRAVELLY
CLAYS . SANDY CLAYS, SILTY
0
I. -
AND LESS THAN 50
FINE
CLAYS LEAN CLAYS.._
T
;a
GRAINED CLAYS
ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC
SOILS
0 L
SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY
z
INORGANIC SILTS, mICACEOUS OR
MH
DiATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR
rj) I
MORE THAN 50%
SILTY SOILS
z
OF MATERIAL IS
9
-Rs,=S,ZE SILTS LIQUID LIMIT
NO. 200
CH
INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH
PLAST ICITY
0
m
AND GREATER THAN 50
CLAYS
ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO
OH
HIGH PLASTICITY. ORGANIC SILTS
4L
PT
PEAT HUMUS SWAMP SOILS WITH
CONTENTS
OILS
HIGH-6RGANI�
NOTE. DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL
CLASSIFICATIONS
SOIL
CLASSIFICATION
LEGEND
KLEINFELDER
copvt 19"
-
j
FIGURE A-1
Proiecl
mov
__jffFj_N OGRAM U.S.C.S.
MOM I FIELD
Wee SOIL DESCRIPTION
WELLTIEZO jw W
CONSTRUCTION Z� A.02 x 1
z z
at ';z' a
S JRFACE- _P.-V-1-1
on;
Z
N�, —medi—
SAND (SP-SM, b d%,c
in me 2�
;P/S1*Af dense, fine- d'i gra d, trace silt.
Z�
ZZ
0
U�i
5-
13 X GB
=z
r
z1j
to-
6 GB-1-2 becomes dense
Z:4
31
z
e
115- 2
12 X GB-1-3 becomes very dense Z C
25 OZ
31 W-<
JZ
0
20- to Ga-14
21 k-
27
1.5 Borin terminated a
surface on 7/27/00. Groundwater was not
encountered during drilling. Boring was
backfilled with bentortite on 7/27/00. >
DATE 7-27-00 SURFACE ELEVATION Met): NIA DRILLING METHOD: HSA Auger
LOGGED BY: R. Yates TOTAL DEPTH (feet): 21.5 DRILLER: Gregory Drilling
REVIEWED BY: Jim Schmidt DIAMETER OF BORING Qn): N/A CASING SIZE: NIA
Sunrise Development FIGURE
102nd P1. West and Edmonds Way,
&M—ELEINFELDER Edmonds, WA A
GEOTECHNICAL AL ENGINEERS
BORING LOG PAGE I of I
?ROJECTNWIBEIL- 60-2100-01 GB-1
0
TESTV
U.S.C.S.
LABOK
SOIL DESCRIPTION
es
CONSTRUCTION
cd
2
z
W
�z
'SURFACE.
No
SAND (SP-SM), brown, dm mcdiu
;P/Sfv
dense, finc- to medium -grained, trace silt.
10-
3
GB-2-2
becomes moist
15-
5
GB-2-3
becomes dense
13
20-
13
GB-24
becomes very dense
34
is
DATE DRILLED: 7-27-00
LOGGED BY' R. Yates
fl—q,h-ldt
z
0
d
0
0
M
M
0
-40
C
M
M z
C
0
3:
M M
a
0
0 M
C o)
C 0)
M 0
Z
Z
z
0
In
surfh,�; an 7/27/00. Groundwater -was not
encountered during drilling. Boring was
backfilled with bentonite on 7/27/00,
SURFACE ELEVATION (fee* N/A DRILLING MTHOD; BSA Auger
TOTAL DEPTH (feet). 21.5 DRILLER: Gregory DrflUg
DIAMTER OF BORING (in): N/A CASINGSIZE: N/A
Sunrise Development FIGURE
102nd Pl. West and Edmonds Way,
KLEINFELDER Edmonds, WA A-3
GE.TEC,%CA1,=,E.rO..
IA ERIALSTEST.j�MNEERS BORING LOG
FRO'JECTNUNIBER' 60-210"1 GB-2 PAGE I -f I
za
2C
E�-
z 2
0.4
z
W
Z
Z
C
z
E-=
ZC
0z
C.
nu
iac
NOV 18 '05 03:50PM MESHER SHING&ASSOC. P.3/3
CITY Copy
MICROFILM
MESHERISHING
RESUB
November 18, 2005
NOV 18 2005
Z
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
To: Ann Buflis, Assistant Building Official CITY OF EDMONDS
0
M
425-771-0221
In
From: Bob Mesher
Me&her Shing Fcr— A4�� Z-r�coj cr—
In
C
IT 0
V",
206-6224981
Pax
-40
OC
N,
206-682-4289
� r.
Re: Revision to Permit #2005-0551
IT
M
Project: Pagliaccl Pizza
Project Address: 10200 Edmonds Way
PC: Z
Dear Ann:
0 In
-n
in response to your review comments, November 17,2005:
1. The new location ofthe ADA parking stall is now closer than the original approved design
M M
0
and conforms to IBC 1106.6 for the shortest acOcssible rOUTO Oftravel, as shown in attached
OM
plaul. The distance oftravel is 65 feet versus the approved plan distance oftravell of75 lbet-
C ot
Also there is no ramp required as the property is at the same grade in the back where The new
M 0
stall is located as the elevation ofthe front door.
r
2. We have adjusted the exterior stairs to so the handrail does not infringe into the right-of-way,
X
per Plan 2.
3. We have reinstalled the public walkway that was approved in the original plan per Plan 2.
Z
-4
4. The clearance between the building and front column is 4'-6' and shown per Plan 2.
Z
I have also stamped Plan 2 and bugged the changes and revisions.
0
ITI
Sinc
Rob esher AIA
Attached: Plan I & stamped copy of Plan 2, Copy ofReview Comments
506 Second Avenue. Suite 3300, Seattle. WA 98104 206.621,1981 '1 206,682.4269 F
jIOV IB '05 03
S.
m
t. ,
.9,
X 04
,
7�4-
19,
'96.
m 0
m m
M m
M 0
:z
0
<
cl)
G
0
10
m
Ln
IT, —1
m
;0
3)
A m
(n
PLAN 0
q, �IS��N�. O�IMGIIIION �SIIE
kI
SITE SECTION A —A
2 A
l(RiLyli STO
NLY
(D (D
0 �P LAN
,,A_A PAfflK111�0ACE
TRAFFIC SICNS
001
pAllpllll.,Ell*ll.l. A K N.�
NTO
'n T,
_T�
II..I.
RE t).J. il-18.06
"TE
w
(I(P CTIT A. VE3", 01 NOV 18 2005
ql'ATI-'. OF 1.7A�!j j.'JG T(X,4
BUIL ING DEPARTMENT RW 4..
Height Calculation Worksheet
Date
Permit Number C>S-S I
Address_VQ,�-�j 4f� �YA
Inspector AAS
Z.
r
Average Grade "30e
Max Height (25'+Ave.)
Actual Reight (A+B+C) 32 13
rn
C:
C
0
-40
0
X M
M
C
+ 9, A
rwj)
O"n
-n
M
-4 3
<;
=(C
1Oj
0
C
45
z
M,
Z
Z
M
Elevation of transit above Datum (B) (P
Datum Q— Elevation (A) 99'C&2
l/temp/building/fon-ns/height workshed
'77T,
RENOVATION & ESTATE SERVICES
T
701 12 "Ave. N.
L,
Edmonds, Wa. 98020
Ph.: 425 775-3727, Fax.:425 640-873 1, Cell: 206 372-1196
IV!
April 27,2005
City of Edmonds
Z
Building Division
0
=j
121- 5" Av. N.
0
Edmonds, WA. 98020
F,
Re.: Pagliacci Pizza Project located at 10204 Edmonds Way
C m
In accordance with the 2003 edition of the International Building Codes Section
m a
0
1705.3 this Contractor understands his responsibilities to insure all special inspections
0
8 C
are carried out in accordance with the Quality Assurance Plan and with Building
m
Official approvals.. The General Contractor as required by work progress will
m
coordinate timing of such inspections.
A
Ed Chapman
0 -n
-n n
General Contractor
4
m M
vi
0
Cc: Matt Galvin, Owner
41�
0
C
C 01)
TO
-4
Z
CW4
Z
m
FIELD. No. 57187
REPORT
CASCADE TESTI—J LABCRATORY, INC .
TESTING & INSPECTION
1 N.E. I 26TH PLACE
IA251823-9800
DATE
3"1
XIRKLAN , —1-ItNOTON 9803A
EVERETTO (,1251 �-- 17
PROJECT
P
COMPRESSION REPORT
LOCATION
� 0 -1- .0 5:) CIJZ
TO:
BLDG. PERMIT NO.
JOWNER
WEATHER
T111 AT AM
- ----------- i- n- W G
(f,l 57 4,,<
AT I PM
ENGINEER
I
OCT
ARCHITECT
ATTN:
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
CONTRACTOR
DATA -X 7-3
FIELDTEST ,
f
TICKET NO, 011f MIX NO.—
TRUCK SAMPLED ET
--T--�.ADJUS�TE
4
WEIGHTS
M %
GIST
GIST,
D
WEIGH S
-7
TIME
-2�;)—jFTRUCK
I,
%AIR
T
W L�NIT
WEIGHT
�JT�
YIELD
YIELD
EIEN
c T
I
CIA.T.FT
T. A
ICEMENT
FLY ASH,
ASTLMUCM-P143
ST.'G
M '.
ASTMC-138
I CONG I
AIR
t
t2
TO
C.A.
AIRTESTMETHOD:
E]PRESSURE
ASTM
C-231 OR
0 VOLUME ASTM
0-173
EQUIPMENT USED I.D.
SLUMP CONE CSLCOO THERMOMETER CCOTH0—
AMMETER CCOAID— OTHER
TYPE OF BREAK: ��)�.one
__ �' E) Co�n�e, a n d IT E a r I --
CYLINDER
NUMBER
DATE
MADE
DATE
T STED
---�GE
DAYS
—
SIZE
AREA
(SQ. IN)
TOTAL
_LOAD
STRENGTH
PSI
--i�iPE
BREAK
41on
'e'v
r,
Z9,42
6S
ff/ 7z5
QW5 /
��-ZB
CONCRETE COMPRES51ON MAUHINE LO.ffUL,-UV- 0 ASTM C-1231 SAMPUNG IN ACCORDANCE WITH
SAMPLE P/U DATE TEST METHOD 0 ASTM C-617 APPLICABLE CODES & SPECS.
CU.YARDS PLACED
CEMENTTYPE L
SUPPLIER
ENGTH e2 '�D C
AFA ADMIX. CAC1, % DESIGN STR
PLACSMENTAREA& NOTrS-
TEST RESULTS A PLY ONLY TO THE ITEMS
H REIN TESTED. THIS REPORT SHALL NOT INSPECTOR(S), NAME(S) PRINTED
BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL, WITH-
OUT�EWRWTENAPP OVALOFCASCADE
TESTING LABORATORY. INC. INSPECTOR SIGNATURE
REVISED SIGNED BY
COPIESTO:
z
0
a m
c
M
0
80
c
m
m
0
n Lu
A rn
061)
0
0
c
M 0
z
0
0
m
FIELD
57�
CASCADE TESTINQ LABORATORY, INC.
REPORT No. .....-No.
TESTING & INSPECTIONN Ece:IVE:r)
OAT
— 9 N.E. 126TH PLACE
—HINGTON 9603A 1425)`�3,9.00
'9-3"l
KIRKLAND,
B-117T S& 2 fi�"-"
PROJECT
1 .6
p
COMPRESSION Wd?QWT SERVICES
LOCATION
OTR
CITY OF EDMONOS
-7 4) ef:)
L... PERMIT NOP
OWNER
TO:-
/'qa/
WEATHER
TEMR
ENGINEER
ARC4�'4
ATTN:
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
CONTRACTOR
FIELOTEST DATA (3 3 73
TRUCK TICKET NO. MIX NO,
F
DESIG
WEIG
TRUCK SAMPLED
UNIT
TEMP
CEMENT
% AIR
WEI HT
C_138
ASTMG
YIELD
CEMENT
C
T
FA R
C
CID C
106
At
FLY ASH
CA.
CA.
AIRTEST
METHOD: El PRESSURE
ASTM
C-231 08
0 VOLUME ASTM
C-173
OA
EQUIPMENT USECIM�
T:K
SLUMPOONE CSLCOC�— THERMOMETER CCOTHO
[TOTAL
AMMETER CCOAIB�_ OTHER
TYPE OF BREAK: bh—
VZ
7
AM
IJUSTED
EIGHT
ml�
111111111
CONCRETE COMPRESSION MACHINE i.D. #(;(;OL;UOO 0 ASTM C-1231 SAMPLING IN ACCORDANCE WITH
SAMPLE PlU DATE TEST METHOD 0 ASTM C-617 APPLICABLE CODES & SPECS.
J
IS CEMENTTYPE .......
SUPPLIER CU,YARDS PLACED
% DESIGN ST
RENGTH
AEA ADMIX. CAC12—
PLACEMENT AREA & NOTES,
TEST RESULTS APPLY ONLY TO THE ITEMS
HEREIN TESTED. TH16 REPORT SHALL NOT INSPECTOR(S), NAME(S) PRINTED
BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL, WITH.
OUTTHE WRITTEN APPROVAL OF CASCADE 'URE
TESTING LABORATORY. INC INSPECTOR SIGNAI
REVISED BIN SIGNED BY
COPIES TO:
19 t
C-) 2 e- 5
z
0
P
0
ITT
c
M
00
c
M
Z
to
01
n
mm
a
0
m
ch
M 0
;a
z
z
9
0
m
k" K L E I N F E L D E R
Construction Observation Report
Date---'
Project Name
Client Project No. DFR No.
....... Time Arrived
Project Location
Contractor Bldg. Permit No. Time Departed
Reviewed by Date Reviewed Travel Time . .......
D Masonry D Batch plant D Foundations 0 Concrete
Type of observations
D Welding D Reinforcement Steel [J Fireproofing
_j Sail
D Bolting pro -post Tensioned Tendon D Metal Decking Li Other
Documents Referenced
—I;ummary
�,A
Eti�eport items comply 0 Report items incomplete 0 Report items comply wi�h exceptions
�cknowledged by -IZI
—ki-einfelder Representative Signature
Representing
Page _ of Kleinfelder Representative Print Name
(9m)
KLEINFELDER
Project Name Pa C� k' C' C
Project Location
Contractor P-"4
Weather —
Earthwork
Q
DFR Given to (or left at)--,
Reviewed b
Y
Observations/Remarks:
Daily Field Report (DFR)
Project No.
CI -Z�C%&K-
Cat I
Ect,,�!nt, �, -'�N� % ,
Time Arrived
Technician C
Time Departed
Travel Time I
z
Qn\l
Total Time (Hours)
0
Q
Mileage
Date Reviewed
DIFR No.
M
C
0
1110
80
C
-4 K
X M
�4
C 'I't
M
0
E:
"n
X
C'
e—t,— d,
Q 9p� Q_
�e ck
m m
a ro
I— c_
6s
0
0 M
C
M 0
Z r-
M
-4
X
>
z
�'K V_/_
C Q�'NLtL W 1�
\-C"r C' \I CUH-1,
J, C P C. �)c C t�� r
z
0
IM
N�A
NOTE: observations, passifaii evaluations, and/or recommendations
(it applicable) provided herein have not been reviewed by an Kleinfelder Representative Signature
engineer and, therefore, should be considered preliminary and
subject to change. _r -,. L
Kleinfelder Representative Print Name
Page— of
k" K L E I N F E L D E it
Construction Observation Report
Project Name Data
Client - Project No. DFR No.
Project Location t TimeArrived-
Contractor Bldg, Permit No. Time Departed
Reviewed by Date Reviewed.---- TravelTime---
Documents Referenced _FC,
C A
C
C Ir l
LQ� I
---Summary
C.
EC-
C-1 \J
V
_-C
c
V,
PLIReport items comply El Report it6ms incomplete 0 Report items comply with exceptions
_4knowledged by Kleinfelder Representative Signature
Representing
�, o
Page f Kleinfelder Representative Print Name
z
9
0
m
m
M
0
80
C
__4 M T,
M
m M
z
0 _n
'n
m M
a
0
0
C m
M 0
z
'I
-4
z
CA
z
M
k" K L E I N F E L D E R
Construction Observation Report
Date :1,
ProjectName—
Client Project No. DFR No.
Project Location
TimeArrived
Contractor Bldg. Permit No. Time Departed
Reviewed by Date Reviewed Travel Time z
Type of Obsemations El Masonry 0 Batch plant [I Foundations 0 Concrete
E) Welding 0 Reinforcement Steel 0 Fireproofing b� soil
EJ Bolting 0 Pre -Post Tensioned Tendon 0 Metal Decking 0 Other
0 M
C
m
0
Documents Referenced
0
C
M
M Z
10-4
>
0 n
"n
In m
mmary A
Ce�,�, A ck A� A.
0
0 r-
01
MO
1p'r S c,,-,
>
z
't c. A�
55
z
0
m
4
— -------------
------ -----------Lo�
g
Report items Comply
Report items incomplete 0 Report items com ly with a t,
Ar,. jwledged by
Kleinfelder Reprisentative
Signature
Representing
L.,U__ci:Jk
Page — of
(96n)
Kleinfelder Representative
Print Name
wn,truoimi ac�Mw exempt �rom i 1, noke limit, ECC
.0
"'I"trult"M
iti, PERMII#:
1,1 1—suant w ECC5.3o. 120. EXPIRES'�jjlqjq
City of Edmond I s ISSUED:
THIS CARD MUST BE POSTED ON SITE AND AVAILABLE TO THE INSPECTOR
Owner:
Site Address-
Jk).-..)
Setbacks for �' i\j Zone
Front 24�) '. -]��
Side: 0 ' - I Height:
Variance#: --
Inspections Approve a e otes
#1 ENGINEERING
MOBILI 6ATION AND EROSION CONTROL INSTALLA711ON MUSTBE APPROVED PRIORTO CONINIENCEMENTOFADDITIONAL WORK.
(425) 771-0220 x1326 Mobilization / Erosion Control I
Tightline
Detention
Forms (sidewalk, driveL4±4)
Water Service
-
- - - - - - - - - I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - I - - - - - -
- - -- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -
-
Side Sewer
�ermit # Ri�1,1�'ol-',Yay) t,
(s, '. P-mg
#2 SITE/DEMOLITION Pre -Demolition
Asbestos PSCAA Permit
Sewer Cap
Cleaned Site,
MI)s ssFeAd"Or— - J
ITS 1
#3 FOUNDATION Setbacks
Footings
Foundation Wall
Piers
Retaining Wall
Slab Insulation
Zlk�
fL%A __ _ _ -----------
----------------- ---
---------------------
------------- --------
----------------------
—
#4 PLU BIN G Ground Work
P, I Rough in
Grease Fixture
M5
erce Adh4 i+wu'
L)
- - - - 0�'R --------
M5
M—
Il
#5 PUBLIC WORKS Cross Connection Control
(425) 771-0235 ,Trash Enclosure
L
—46 —MECH/HVAC Gas Test/Pil)
Permit # Equipment
TE 7
CR;
#7 FRAMING Exterior Sheathirli
Shear Nailing
First Floor Framing
Framin
Height Cl,—�*
I
I
L�4*
:-� Q ---------------
- ----- -----------
#8 INSULATE/ CAULK
Floor
Ceiling
-------
--- - -------- --------
J-1
#9 SHEETROCK NAIL
M�
0- 154
Olp
#10 FIRE Hydrant
(425) 771-0215
Fire Protection S stem
Extin uishers
Addressing Visibility
—
--- ---- ----------------
-----------------------
-------- --------------
.......... ---------
it
91�IR-?R 1111. INA I, rn"Jjrl!�!Ivtli 1,
I —11�p
APPLICABLE,QITY D PARTMENTS HAVE GRA A FINAL APPROVA
Call (425) 771-0220 x1333 for BUILDING INSPECTIONS
z
M
0 M
C
M 0
80
C
M
M z
C
> z
0
M M
0
0
0 M
C 07
K co
Q 0
z
z
9
0
M
Graf, Jeannine
From: Larry Holmes [Larry@ovwater.com]
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 12:03 PM
To: Graf, Jeannine
Subject: RE: Pagliaccl Pizza MICROFILM
Jeannine,
I looked over backfiow installations at *2(5'4 Edmonds way and have copies of test reports. They installed backflow
assemblies for the irrigation system and premises isolation inside the building to avoid the use of Hot Boxes. If you have
any questions please let me know, Thanks,
Larry R. Holmes
Olympic View Water & Sewer District
0
k"
23725 Edmonds Way
Edmonds WA 98026-8981
Larry@ovwater.com
-q "n
Ph: 425 774-7769
Fax: 425 670-1856
m
M
0
N
80
m
01
0 "T1
n
X
m m
0
0-
0
n
CO
0
6
777777
M
FINA,u PROJECT APPROVAL I %JRM
TO:
DATE:
MEMO TO: PERMIT COORDINATOR, BUILDING DIVISION
FROM: -FIRE DEPARTMENT DATE-
F-ESIGN
ENGINEERING DIVISION DATE_J/_7ek�1_
PLANNING DIVISION DATE-_
PROJECT
SITE ADDRE SS� (dWQ
PERMIT �5.ADB#___________�DATE INSPECTED 7/0 (P
DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE INSPECTED____&SJAJfaa�..
A field inspection was conducted to determine compliance with � approved plans. Final approval
denotes that there are no objections from the above signed Department to the release of
PERFORMANCE BONDS ad the granting of:
GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
GRANT PROJECT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS NOTED
0 Copy of CONDITIONS given to owner/contractor by inspector
FAILED FINAL INSPECTION - OUTSTANDING ISSUES
0 Copy of CORRECTION NOTICE given to owner/contractor by inpector
2.
3.
RE -INSPECTED OUTSTANDING ISSUES - GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
Date Signature
1:temp:b1dg:fbnw:ocaprv1 3/25/04
0
71
M
M 0
-40
OC
M
M z
0 --1
0 _n
4
= 9
M M
U co
0 r-
0 M
C co
9 0)
M 0
z
70
-4
z
co
z
0
A
0
M
FINA� PROJECT APPROVAL F %jRM
TO:
DATE: —
MEMO TO: PERMIT COORDINATOR, BUILDING DIVISION
FROM: —FIRE DEPARTMENT DATE—
I— SIGN
_______________�ENGINEERING DIVISION DATE�_
2_x�� —PLANNING DIVISION DATE_____1LZ!La,_,_
PROJEC
SITE ADDRESS lc)2�- fA-ti &Igi
PERMIT #___________—_--__--ADB#—DATE INSPECTED 3/17/G,&
DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE INSPECTED Pks* 1,
A field inspection was conducted to determine compliance with�approved plans. Final approval
denotes that there are no objections from the above signed Department to the release of
PERFORMANCE BONDS -and the granting of:
GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
GRANT PROJECT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS NOTED
Z' Copy of CONDITIONS given to owner/contractor by inspector
1. L_A�'L� t�?3 � �I�U.
0 d4A 14. ;*
FAILED FINAL INSPECTION - OUTSTANDING ISSUES q.3% 0*7
0 Copy of CORRECTION NOTICE given to owner/contractor by inpector
1.
2.
3.
RE -INSPECTED OUTSTANDING ISSUES - GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
Date Signature
1:temp:b1dg:forms:ocaprv1 3/25/04
z
0
C M
M a
__4 0
0 0
C
M
M z
'0
o -n
3:9
M M
U C/)
0 1,
M
co
ri)
M 0
Z
z
z
0
i
0
M
FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL FORM
TO:
DATE:,Lko _('
MEMO TO: PERMIT COORDINATOR, BUILDING DIVISION
FROM: PRETREATMENT PLANT DATE 31Lk_L_C(0
..........
PROJECT SLCC.*�
SITEADDRESS f—'Q'%OJi Wf-1
PERMIT '.10016"-0551 ADB#
# INSPECTED
DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE INSPECTED G-re--14
A field inspection was conducted to determine compliance with Approved plans. Final approval
denotes that there are no objections from the above signed Department to the release of
PERFORMANCE BONDS and the granting of:
GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
GRANT PROJECT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS NOTED
0 Copy of CONDITIONS given to owner/contractor by inspector
FAILED FINAL INSPECTION - OUTSTANDING ISSUES
0 Copy of CORRECTION NOTICE given to owner/contractor by inpector
2.
3.
RE -INSPECTED OUTSTANDING ISSUES - GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
Date Signature
BTEM P\13U ILDNOF-OkM STRETREA-m ENTAPPROVAL. DOC 1/4/2005
z
0
:j
0
Vi -4
X
M
M a
__4 0
0 0
a: M
ra
0 _n
M M
0 6
0 r-
0 M
C: (/) J
C (n
M
Z
z
--I
Cn
z
9
0
in
FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL FORM
TO: —
DATE:
MEMO TO: PERMIT COORDINATOR, BUILDING DIVISION
��FIRE DEPARTMENT
FROM:
DIVISION DATE—
—ENGINEERING
z
PLANNING DIVISION DATE—
0
0
P—E smN
PROJEC
in- --i
SITE ADDRESS 6 -2-0 0 6i2l—k4e�t/P3
0 rn
PERMIT ADB#__________PATE INSPECTED 3—/6 —22 C.—
__10
0
0 C
-4 K
M
DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE INSPECTE 5 (--JP 60 C,
M z
A field inspection was conducted to determine compliance wiih�approved plans. Final approval
denotes that there are no objections from the above signed Dep artment to the release of
0
PEPXORMANCE BONDS nd the granting of:
:z
mT
0
GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
0 M
C CD
M 0
GRANT PROJECT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS NOTED
z
0 Copy of CONDITIONS given to owner/contractor by inspector
1.
Cn
z
FAILED FINAL INSPECTION - OUTSTANDING ISSUES
0
rn
0 Copy ofCORRECTION NOTICE given to owner/contractor by inpector
3.
RE -INSPECTED OUTSTANDING ISSUES - GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
Date Signature
1:temp:b1dg:fonns:ocaprv1 3/25/04
Cit? Of 0moubo
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS
Of Ott"alit?
PER International Suilding Code Section 110
—ru. --rids We ---�Building Permit #: 2005-0551
occupancy established by this certificate: Dwelling Units: NIA
A2 Type, Construction: VB Basement: N/A
Maximum occupant Load tbr (Per IBC 1004)
Room capacity signs, when,required, must remain Posted at all times.
Owner of Building: Pagliace! Pizz_aAddress: 10200 Edmonds
THE: P I I a Restaurant_"Jillb BEEN INSPECTED AND ROVED AS COMPLYING WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
---RR29229ELZ�� LOING CODE AS ADOPTED By THE CITY FOR THE GROUP AND DIVISION OF OCCUPANCY AND THE
2 3 E—N OF THE INTERNATIONAL BUI
0' OVID
U —
SE 'OR WHICH THE PROPOSED OCCUPANCY IS CLASSIFIED.
issued this 20 th day of _March .06
CHIEF B1kILeWG FFICIAL
BY:
t7l�� a, lims. Any dbang.., —apdry cruse mquired a building p,naft and d new
Thl�,dnftmandl b. pa,a.d in, d.,Vl..aa publilluddlund dual a., da, ra...d. nnnilaNul d, ab—adlynd ah.11 ad -uu.luad In lagibul dd-dad- -1
C.Alfi.t.af od.p.rdy laduad by Md city af Ed-rd, Building Ofifid.l.
4
. . . . . . . . . .
GARY HAAKENSON
CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR
1215TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA98020 - �425) 771-0220 FAX (4251771-0221
webSile: ~.dedmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
8913 Planning Building Engineering
3-24-08 Z
Indeminity Company of California
Karen L. Staffanson, Attorney
9759 3rd Ave NE #305
Seattte, WA 98115 uj
m
m
Re: Maintenance Civil Site Bond Account # 576723S 0
0
Pagliacci Pizza Restaurant 10200 Edmonds Way, Edmonds, WA a
m
Dear Karen L.Staffanson, Attorney: In
Z
The City ofEdmonds hereby authorizes the release of the Maintenance Civil Site Bond in
the amount of $4,264.20 from the above referenced account. All interested City
0 _n
departments have approved release of this bond amount. -n
Sme9rely, m M
0
0
C 0
Theresa m a.g (wa
na 0
Senior Permit Coordina or Z r-
cc: Applicant
File
Z
Z
'0
0
M
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister Citv - Hekinan. Jar)an
MAi "ENANCE BOND RELEASE i RMC
TO: PERMIT COORDINATOR, BUILDING DIVISION
FROM: ENGINEERING INSPECTOR DATE:
PLANNING DIVISION
DATESENTTO: . ....... . . . DUE BACK �'RECEIVED:_
PERMIT# - �025�1��AI)Bff
z
PROJEC
9
0
SITE ADDRESS-
OWNER
OT
CM
rn 0
OWNER ADDRESS
0
80
C
-4 K
TYPE OF BOND TO BE RELEASED
X M
M Z
01
136NDEXPIRES
C 2
BONDDATEPOSTED ......... .
05
0 -n
Please field inspect at your earliest convenience for the release of the subject bond. If there
X 9
M M
are outstanding requirements, please note in the space provided. Failure to respond by the
0 co
noted bond expiration date constitutes Department approval and automatic release of the
0
0
bond. It is each Departmenfs responsibility to contact the developerlowner when outstanding
C: cn
90) 1
issues prevent the release of the bond. Please copy the Permit Coordinator on all City
Q 0
Z
correspondence sent regarding this bond.
OND IS APPROVED FOR RELEASE
z
BOND IS NOT APPROVED - OUTSTANDING REQUIREMENTS NOTED
0
z
1
2
2.
3.
0
M
-WORK TO BE COMPLETED WITF11N __________�DAYS SUSPENSE TO
COPY TO FILE
TO DEVELOPER/CONTRACTOR
Lten1p:bIdg;forms;bondrcI 3/25/04
%
_R
GARY HAAKENSON
CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR
i2l 5THAVENUC NORTH -EDMONDS, WA 98020 - 1425l 771-0220 -FAX (425) 771-0221
WeWte: �dedmond
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
(I? C) 1) Planning Building Engineering
3-24-08
Z
0
ludeminity Company of California
Karen L. Staffanson, Attorney
71
9759 3rd Ave NE 4305
Seattle, WA 98115
Re: Landscaping Maintenance Bond A ccount # 576716S
M
C
M C;
Pagliacci Pizza Restaurant / 10200 Edmonds Way, Edmonds, WA
0
X
Dear Karen L.Staffanson, Attorney:
m
jo
The City ofEdmonds hereby authorizes the release ofthe Landscaping Maintenance
C: —
>
E :1
"",
Bond in the amount of$4,394.87 from the above referenced account. All interested City
4 80 ,
i
departments have approved release of this bond amount.
0 _n
_n
Sin ly
Rba�h
M m
0
0
The ugO�
C ca
Senior Permit Coordinator
M C.'
cc: Applicant
X
File
Z
Z
0
0
m
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister 0tv - Hekinan. Janan
MAL. fENANCE BOND RELEASE I, ORN
TO: PERMIT COORDINATOR, BUILDING DIVISION
FROM: ENGINEERING INSPECTOR DATE:--i� �'o
G&TVAlk, -PLANNING DIVISION
DATE SENT TO: JQF2 .-----�DUE BACI�- 011";W RECEIVED: -
PERMIT# OZO
ADB# z
0
--1
0
SITE ADDRESS-10MD 6)(MV-7
0 M
OWNER Pk� U R ab P42;A: C:
MO
0
OWNER ADDRESS 0 C
-4 M
2: M
TYPE OF BOND TO BE RELEASED M
T
BOND DATE POSTED 72�QLP BOND EXPIRES
vi
0 n
Please field inspect at your earliest convenience for the release of the subject bond. If there n
:0 9
are outstanding requirements, please note in the space provided. Failure to respond by the m T
0 U)
noted bond expiration date constitutes Department approval and automatic release of the 0 r-
bond. It is each Department's responsibility to contact the developerlowner when outstanding 0 M
C co
the release of the bond. Please copy the Permit Coordinator on all City M (0 1
,issues prevent M0
correspondence sent regarding this bond. z
V/ BOND IS APPROVED FOR RELEASE >
z
BOND IS NOT APPROVED - OUTSTANDING REQUIREMENTS NOTED 3:
I z
2. 2
0
3. M
-WORK TO BE COMPLETED WITHIN _DAYS SUSPENSE TO
TO FILE
COPY TO DEVELOPER/CONTRACTOR
Ltemp:b1dg;Fbrms;bondreI 3/25/04
RECORD OF INSPECTIONS
INSPECTOR DATE APPROVED
SETBACKS .....................
FOUNDATION:
Footing ......................
Wall..........................
Pier/Porch .................
Retaining Wall ...........
Slab Insulation ..........
PLUMBING:
CS
Underground ..........
Rough -in
Commercial Final
HEATING:
Gas Test ................
a
Gas Piping .................
Equipment
.................
Commercial Final
EXTERIOR SHEATHING
NAILING ..........................
FRAMING . .....................
FIRST FLOOR FRAMING
INSULATION ............
Floor Insulation
Wall Insulation ...........
Ceiling Insulation
SHEETROCK NAILING
SPECIAL INSPECTION
MISCELLANEOUS ..........
FINAL APPROVAL FOR
(go _10L,
OCCUPANCY ..................
swseww#
Ree*t#-
wwrmewslzi
A011111111111111tPidd
P
towl
26
DOUtMed -7