Loading...
20050895.pdfy DATE RECEIVED 6 [PERMIT EXPIRES PERMIT CITY OF EDMONDS NUMBER CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION JOB SUIT Tit ADDRESS I ,� A 71AP 0 01 OWNER NAM&NAME OF BUSINESS PLAT NAME/SUBDIVISION LOT NO. LID NO. 1-144 / --0*, A _,iiii I TA MAILING ADDRESS LID FEE W z TESCP Approved 13 PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP VVP A- 4.11 RW Permit Required (3 0 Sireet Use Permit Requited 0 CITY ZIP TELEPHONE EXISTING PROPOSED- Inspection Required 0 Stdowa;k Required 13 Underground 0 REQUIRED DEDICATION _ FT ... E3 S)77;4-74�:,-)�b NAME METER SIZE LINE SIZE NO. OF FIXTURES PRV REQUIRED q I 1 0 1,_ YES113 NOO z U R UJI tu 1= ADDRESS REMARKS W f OWNER/CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROLIDRAINAG 0: i)1-0A1 -C7- FT LEPHONE CA, Prr QfX CITY ZIP g�'Jje,&M t4K 4�5-_V4:5A,16 r7- NAME zqwwe- ezw) CBLN ERING REVIEWED By DATE ADDRESS RE REVIEWED BY DATE w CITY ZIP TELEPHONE cc z U. 0 STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE CHECKED BY VARIANCE OR CU SHORELINE OR ADBI INSPECTION SEPA REO'D COMPLETED I EXEMPT E3YES ANO )< -j PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL NO. CAH C13-1— C2 ZONE SIGN AREA HEIGH < WAIVER 13/ PP-D ALLOWED I PROPOSED ALLOWED PROPOSED LD W _j 0 0 714?/ STUDY 101-19SL+1 7_15" 124.9 4. LOT COVERAGE REQUIRED SETBACKS (FT.) PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT.) NEW 5? RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING if MECH ALLOWED PROPOSED FRONT SIDE REAR FRONT URSIDE REA ADDITION 11 COMMERCIAL COMPLIANCE OR Act 5 1 �Vj 74-+ 3�6 05 Z-z CHANGE OF USE �L z 1:1 MIXED USE. PARKING LOT AREA PLANNING REVIEWED BY DATE REMODEL 1:1 MULTIFAMILY E3 SIGN REQ'D I PROVIDED 19 [3 FENCE 2. z REPAIR CYDS X FT.) REMARKS DEMOLISH TANK 1:1 OTHER SitARAGE RETAINING WALL FIRE SPRINKLER cARPORT ROCKERY 1:1 FIRE ALARM S OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAft (TYPE OF USE, BUSINES TYPE MRUCTION 15� OCCUPAN GROUP uj NUMBER NUMBER OF OF DWELLING SPECIAL INSPECTION CONSUUAN! OCCUPANT �z I LOAD 0 STORIES HKI'T� DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE REQUIRE YES REMARKS z GEOTE E BY: STRUOUP 4VIZ RlpbN4 pe.W t9q BY: 'if VALUATION Description FEE Description FEE Plan Check State Surcharge / HEAT SOURCE LOT SLOPEO/i VESTEP DATE 00 4,A Building Permit 2:5P 1 / qqq City Surcharge PLAN CHECK NO: Plumbing Z,5el 7 Base Fee 4— Mechanical ZJ 0 THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBIC Grading 0 DONMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS. MARQUEES. ETC.) WILL REQUIRE SEPARATE PERMISSION. 0: PERMIT APPLICATION: SEE ECDC 19.00.005(A)(5) uj PERMIT LIMIT: SEE ECDC 19.00.005(A)(6) Engr. Inspection SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION to 'APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE, HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESSORS Fire Review PlanChk.Deposit kvdw in . ­ ui IN INTEREST. AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF _j 2 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ITS OFFICIALS. EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND Fire Inspection Receipt Al 0: ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE DIFY, WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENT OF ANY CITY ORDINANCE Landscapelnsp. Total Amt. Due _j DEEMED TO MO ROVISION.* 0 NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAY THE CITY'S ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE P Recording Fee Receipt # 1 HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION; THAT THE INFORMATION APPLICATION APPROVAL' GIVEN IS CORRECT; AND THAT I AM THE OWNER, OR THE DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT OF This application is not a permit lintil signed by the THE OWNER. I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC- CALL Building Official or his/her Deputy: and Fees are paid, and TION; AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED receipt is acknowledged in space provided. IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO FOR INSPECTION WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18:27. SIGN RE DATE SIGNATUR!15((OW�NER IDR AGENT): DAI E SIGNED (425) 4XV-1. A-SED B 771-0220 E, DAf E mom ATTENTION EXT. 1333 IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTI- ORIGINAL -FILE YELLOW -IN(PECTOR FICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC109 / IBC110 I IRC110. PINK -OWNER GOLD - ASSESSOR 110104 PRESS HARD - YOU ARE MAKING 4 COPIES z 0 4 0 M --i -n M C M 0 ­10 0 C: -4 r, 7: M M Z K) -11 C �X w o -n n _11 x M M 0_0 0 r- 0 M C co r. Cn M 0 Z X z Cn z 0 i 0 M APPROVED AS NOTED 24 MR NaTICE EQ. LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR INSPECTION CB BY ENGINEERING RIM 95.14 LOT 8, EAGLES NEST DIVISION NO. 1. IE(l 9" E) 91.94 FORMERLY KNOWN AS EDMONDS MEW DIVISION IE(6'N) 92.14-. NO. 1, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF IE(6"W) z .1 ate: RECORDED IN VOLUME 46 OF PLATS, PAGES T 139 THROUGH 14-0, INCLUSIVE, RECORDS OF AM:0,9 IS RE PONSIBLE I:po CL SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. INN- - , - Q AT DRAIN >- (FROM 'EXHIBIT A' (SOURCE UNKNOWN) AS SS MH C3 PROVIDED BY CLIENT) RIM 95.49 PWR LLJ CONTAINS 3,820.8 SO FT (0-087713498 AC.) IE(8"SE/6"N/S/W) 86.41 \A-T. 20 C::>:). ccl cl. NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY LINE ;9,4 C8 (TYPE 11) "j, RIM 97.31 OWNER: HAUT A. R. SOYER ROOF DRAINAGE: IE(12"W) 91.7i ROOF DRAINS TO BE TlGHTUNED AND ROUTED ELEV. 97.40 n IE(30"E) 90.11 TO EXISTING STORM DRAJN IN THE ROAD. TREE DESIGNATIONS: 6'. M 0�1 (NUMBERS INDICATE DIAMETER 10' WIDE COMMON AREA I.E. FI 10: 10" FIR TREE) SMALLEST RECTANGLE ELEV. 96.10 '0* FI FIR AROUND BUILDING HE HEMLOCK AREA = 3338.97 SO. FT. ROOF O.H. (TYPICAL) rn MA MADRONA ELEV. NEIGHBOR'S. PRO 86.40 PERTY LINE 7N -�'l Nzk-k" \25.42 \J o? !P, /00 STO�RILE �15.42\ 1�%'qFkp `�11�- 94- (COVElt) N'o'VAL9 11 5 cl COMMON AREA FI < H 4 Q SS MH I cc GFI 24 --- ' e RIM (CTR LID) 100.09 71�- PRO NC V. 4.60 IE(8"NW/E) 85.65 COMMOf�A >1 4. 0 LE .19 0 Fl R R V: .13 D/i T6 Ullt u > rn RID ELE 113. SMALLEST RECTANGLE MA 1 SI LD AROUND BUILDING C AREA = 33,38.97 SQ. FT. FI q NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY LINE MPA .33 M 9 .40 N Nffi,9�110'1 5-- (D ELEV. 74. Fl 24 LE 8 D 88.55 �,94.6+82.5�/2 CL ILT E 7a.2 i /2 LEV. 81.60 Bull /2 mworbAj .0 . *�l *-� 355.45 TOTAL ME -0 0 (u m .8 P4 o CO AREA C3 355.45/4 = 88.86 BASE ELEVATION C4 HAY BALE FILTER ;R 88.86 + 25.00 = 113.86 MAX. ELEVATION AT LOW CORNER- LOT CO kAV P H 2041.3 ft" FNI05 LINE INCL, GARAGE 368.0 S.F. DECK & OVERHANGING FLOOR AREA 5)TE- C=,9A;>lKJCp c�kOUL-b IEIF- &A 64.2 S.F. COVERED PORCH -Np- 5Lftcr- - Pows Ljmt>E-P- 2473.5 S.F. TOTAL LOT COVERAGE OF 3820.8 S.F. LOT AREA 64.74% LOT COVERAGE CITY COP FiRE *0 Al-n ADDRESS SIGN REMM OFPARTMEN). 24 MR. I =11NIOTICE EQ- NSPECTION q NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. -ee-N A NG GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS GEOLOGISTS. 17311 — 135'h Avenue NE, A-500 Snohomish County (425) 337-1669 Woodinville, WA 98072 (425) 486-1669 (425) Fax 481-2510 Wenatchee/Chelan (509) 784-2756 June 3, 2005 Z Rl T", Mr. Halit Soyer -4 -n Montclair Construction Co. Inc� Cn 901h 22910 Avenue West, Suite B-25 M C Edmonds, Washington 98026 M 80 Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Z Soyer Residential Property nd 72 Place West M M OW4,qw — Edmonds, Washington NGA File No. 405704 Dear Mr. Soyer: 0 _n We are pleased to submit this report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Soyer Residential M M nd — Edmonds, Washington." This report summarizes the existing Property — 17016-72 Place West surface and subsurface conditions within the project site and provides opinions and recommendations 0 0 FTI regarding site development. 'Out services were completed in general accordance with the contract signed C Co. 1C ca, 6,4 by you on December 17, 2004. mo� Z r The project site is located on sloping ground in the Eagle's Crest residential neighborhoo d in Edmonds. Z The site consists of a vacant lot between two existing single family residences. A small portion of the lot. nd is relatively flat along 72 Place West, and the remainder of the lot slopes steeply down to the southwest into a small ravine. The flat area is grass covered, while the sloping area is generally covered with trees Z and underbrushi Project plans include a multi -level single-family residence to be placed on the steep slope. It is our Z 0 understanding that the residence will include a daylight basement and attached garage. . Based on preliminary plans, it appears that the residence will cover most of the slope within the property. Specific M. plans for stormwater management were not available at the time this report was written,. The City of Edmonds has required a geotechnical evaluation for this site to address const ruction on steep slopes. The evaluation is to include an assessment of steep slope stability and recommendations for foundation design. J. We visited the site on February 15, 2005 to evaluate site conditions with a deep soil boring and slope inclination measurements. In general, we encountered compact silty sand with gravel overlying relatively clean sand with gravel. We interpreted these materials to be na tive glacial soils. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION *Goose*&*@ get as *assesses ****asset 901 I fd SCOPE$ ***asset SITE CONDITIONS 2 SURFACE CONDITIONS z 2 SUBSURFACECONDITIONS 31 a a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 HYDROLOGIC CONDITIONS f., it don 4 rf. SENSITIVE AREA EVALUATION ca, 4 1 a m jd 0 a a a a a 4 a a 0 0 0 6 6 6 0 0 a 0 a 0 0 0 0 C EROSION m d 0 4 SEISMIC HAZARD 0*0064.00.0.00 **&sea moose 00600 6 a *.so 0**0 0, 0 C: 084000*0608 5 LANDSLIDE HAZARD/SLOPESTABiLrry a 6 0 00446*0 *$so a a*****@ 0 a 000090000 &@*a me* 6 0081*0*0406 6900**0000 0 x z It 10 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS C Z, > 5 moose 60 000 8400*008 00 **as 0* of*** a @food @ease 000000 eased *a GENERAL Ij J� C41 0 a a 0 4 0 a 0 6 9 a 0 a a a 0 a 0 0 0 0 a a a 0 6 EROSION CONTROL AND SLOPE PROTECTION MEASURES 0 f4 I on 0 0 a 6 6 0 6 *1 0 a a 0 8 a a a a 0 a 0 a 0 a a 0 SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING o`7 0 I L 01m SLABS**ON—GRADE C 0Y. M 0 8 STRUCTURAL FILL z rood"; SITEDRAINAGE a a 4 0 a a a 0 0 0 0 a a 0 a 0 0 9 a 9 0 9 a a 0 0 6 0 0 0 4 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 # 0 a a 9 0 0 a 0 6 0 0 0 a 0 a a 6 a 0 0 a 0 6 a 0 a a 6 0 0 a 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 4 a a 0 0 0 0 6 a a 0 6 .0 a a 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 006084 12 old 'ed 13 > USE OF THIS 11%) EdPORT Z� z LIST OF FIGURES m Figure I Vicinity Map Figure 2 Site Plan Ficruire 3 Cross Section A"A' t Fimire 4 — Soil Classification Chart Figure 5 — Boring Log NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, JNCs 4 r I 1 -4 1 1 ik Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Soyer Residential Property nd 17016-72 Place West Edmonds, Washington INTRODUCTION 0. This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering evaluation of the residential roperty p nd designated as Lot 8 of the Eagle's Crest residential neighborhood located at 17016 — 72 Place West in M Edmonds, Washington, as shown on the Vicinity Map in Figure 1. The purpose of this study is to explore. and characterize the site subsurface soil and groundwater conditions, and to provide'recommendations. for. M% �c site development. M 0 0 0 C M The site consists of a.single-family residential lot. Most of the property consists of 'steeply, sloping P M Z ground. Current project plans consist of constructing a single-family residence on the.slope within the central portion of the site. Cuts on the order of about 10 feet are proposed for this site. We have been requested to provide geo technical opinions and recommendations for site development. 0 Y, M M To aid in the preparation of this report, we have been -provided with an untitled, undated, plat map and Cn '0 r untitled, undated site p ]an showing the proposed houselocation. We also have been provided with a .0 M C Ch cn, 1h. nd topographic drawing,by C & C Surveying titled, "Topography Survey for Halit Soyer — 17016-72 i Q 0 Z - r Place West Project," dated March 1, 2005. Design Lines provided to I us a drawing titled, "Halit A.R. Soyet — Custom Residence — Daylight Basement," dated April 26, 2005. Z SCOPE The purpose of this study is to explore and characterize the site surface and subsurface soil and Z 0 hnical recommendations for the propose groundwater conditions, and to provide geotec d single-family 0 M residence. Specifically, our scope of services includes: 1. Review available geologic and soils maps of the area. 2. Explore the site subsurface soil and groundwater conditions. The site was explored with a geotechnical boring. The drill rig was subcontracted by NGA. 3. Measure slope inclinations and construct cross sections, as necessary. 4. Evaluate potential geologic hazards, including landslide and erosion hazards. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Ge.otechnical Engineering Evaluation Soyer Residential Property "d 17016 - 72 Place West Edmonds, WA June 3, 2005 NGA File No. 405704 Page 2 5. Provide recommendations for site -grading and earthwork including structural fill. 6.. Provide recommendations for foundation support. 16 7. Provide recommendations for drainage and erosion control. PIN 8. Document our findings, observations, and recommendations in a written geotechnical z engineering report. 0 Ellis 0 Ri SITE CONDITIONS -n Surface Conditions The site is irregular in shape covering approximately 0.1 acre. The site is bordered to the, northeast by M C M 72 nd Plate West. Single4amily residences border the site to the northwest and southeast. Residential 0� 0 C: property borde rs the site to the southwest. The site layout is shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. :3: M, M Z: Z1 In general, the site occupies part of a northwest -southeast trending ravine and ridge area, with the site access at the top of the ridge. The ridge slopes steeply down to the southwest and exhibits about 30 feet CD 0 -n of vertical relief. Tall trees and underbrush cover most. of the site. We did not observe any groundwater "n seepage on the slope at the time of our visit. mm, -0- 0 r M A cross, section was constructed to illustrate, site topography, subsurface soil conditions, and the proposed Cn C Cn Mai location of the residence. Cross Section A -A' is presented as Figure 3. z Subsurface Conditions Z Geology: The geologic units for this area are shown on the geologic map titled PreliminM Surficial Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Edmonds West Quadrangles, Snohomish and King Counties z Washington by Mackey Smith (U.S.G.S., 1975). The site is mapped as Quaternary Vashon till (Qvt). 0 Quaternary Esperance Sand (Qe) and Quaternary Whidbey Formation (Qw) underlie the site at depth, as rn Ills indicated by the map. Vashon till generally consists of a compact mixture of clay, silt, sand, and gravel. Moderately to well� sorted, compact sand makes up most of the Esperance Sand., The Esperance Sand is interpreted to be part. of a geologic deposit known as outwash, or sand and gravel deposited by flowing water. The Whidbey formation generally consists. of compact clay, silt, and sand. Our explorations generally encountered NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. L Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Soyer Residential Property 17016.— 72"' Place West Edmonds, WA June 3, 2005 NGA File No. 405704 Page 3 well -compacted silty sand with gravel materials overlying well -compacted san d with silt and gravel. The silty sand with gravel is generally cons istent with the description of the Vashon till, and the sand. with silt and gravel is generally consistent with outwash materials. Explorations: The subsurface conditions within the site were explored on February 15, 2005 with one Z, soil boring and a shallow hand auger excavation on the slope. The approximate location of our soil boring is shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. A geologist from Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. =n (NGA) was present during the exploration, examined the soils and geologic conditions encountered, 0 M obtained samples of the soils, and maintained a.soil log. C M 0 00 C The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System, M M Z s sent a brief summary of the presented in Figure 4. The soil boring log is pre ented as Figure 5. We pre > Z, ubsurface conditions in the following paragraph. For a detailed description of the subsurface conditions, r the soil logs should be reviewed. .0 -n M A -A About 0.5 feet of topsoil was encountered at the s urface in the exploration. In general, we encountered mm� compact silty sand with gravel in the upper 18 feet of our soil.boring. We encountered com pact sand with 0 0 M C W. silt and gravel from 18 feet to 31.5 feet in our exploration. C co M 01 Z r Hydrologic.Conditions Moist soil conditions were. encountered at depth. We did not encounter groundwater seepage in our, Z, e xploration. However, perched water could occur on top of the compact silty soils during extended W periods of wet weather. Z 0 Perched water occurs when surface water infiltrates through more permeable soils and accumulates on top M of underlying, less permeable soils.. The more permeable soil 9 consist of the thin layer of topsoil. The less permeable material consists of the compact silty soils. Perched water does not represent a regional 6s groundwater table within the upper soil horizons. Perched water tends to vary spatially and is dependent upon the arnount of rainfall. We would expect the amount of groundwater t o decrease during drier times of the year and to increase during wetter periods, NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Soyer Residential Property ra "d 17016 — 72 Place West Edmonds, WA June 3, 2005 Fa NGA File No. 405704 Page 4 SENSITIVE AREA EVALUATION Erosion Hazard The criteria used for determining erosion hazards includes soil type, slope gradient, vegetation cover, and rA groundwater conditions. The erosion sensitivity is related to vegetative cover and the specific surface soil types, which are related to the underlying- geologic soil units. The Soil Survey, Snohomish County Area, Z Washington, by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) was reviewed to determine the erosion hazard of the on -site soils. The surface soils mapped on this site were classified by the SCS classification system as Alderwood-Urban land complex,(2 to 8 percent slopes) and Alderwood -Everett gravelly sandy loams (25 ca to 70 percent slopes). We interpreted site conditions to more closely relate to the Alderwood-Everett C soils. The Alderwood-Everett soils are described as having a high erosion hazard when stripped of M 0 .-I 0 vegetation. All undisturbed, vegetated areas should have a low to moderate hazard for erosion, depending 0 C M� on how surface water is controlled on the site. M Z r -4 Seismic Hazard Co We reviewed the 2003 International Building Code (IBC) seisntic site conditions. Since -medium dense to 0 -n. n dense soil s were encountered underlying the site at depth, the site conditions best fit the IBC description M M; F'11 C0 for Soil Class D. r 0, M C K V) 6A, Hazards associated with seismic activity include liquefaction potential, amplification of ground motion, M 0, Z e and increased sliding potential in areas of sloping ground. Liquefaction is caused by a ris in pore f pressures in a loose, fine sand deposit within the groundwater table-. Amplification of ground motion is usually cziused.by the presence of soft, wet soil deposits. It is our opinion that the compact soils Z' interpreted to underlie the site have a low potential for liquefaction or amplification of ground motion. Z Also, deep-seated sliding potential of the site slopes should not be increased by a design seismic event due to the high strength of the site soils. The potential for shallow slough -type movement on the slopes 0 M could be increased if a significant seismic.ev ent is experienced when the surface soils are wet. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Soyer Residential Property 17016-72 nd Place West Edmonds, WA June 3, 2005 NGA File No. 405704, Page 5 Landslide Hazard/Slope Stability The criteria used for the evaluation of potential landslide hazards include soi.1 type, slope gradient, and groundwater conditions. The sloping ground at the site had an inclination up to 27 degrees, or 50 percent. Z P airea was not ev Recent sliding within this ident. 0� 0 M The soils within the steep slope are inferred to consist of compact sandy soils that typically have go od. -W strength. We did not observe signs of deep-seated slope failures., Acco rdingly, it is our opinion that there CA M C VA is not a significant potential for deep-seated slope instability within these slopes. M a -40 0 C Relatively s hallow failures as well as surficial erosion are natural processes and are to be expected on M M Z these slopes. It is our opinion that while there is potential for erosion, soil creep and shallow failures on. ID -4, Z the steep slope, there is not a significant potential for deeP7seated slop e failure under current site 3: conditions. Proper site grading and drainage should help maintain. current slope stability conditions. 0 -n _n Protection of steep slope areas should be performe d as required by the City of Edmonds. Vegetation on the slope should be managed such tha t the soils are not exposed and allowed to erode. M T 0 0 M CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS co ca; Q 0 tT4 Z r General ru mp It is our op inion, from a geotechnical standpoint, that the proposed residence const ction is co atible with site conditions, provided that all of our recommendations for site development are incorporated into Z; the design,and followed during construction. It is also our opinion that the soils that unde rlie the site and X�_ form the core of the site slopes should be stable with respect to deep-seated earth movements. Z' 0 0: The residence could be supported on conventional spread footings, pr ovided that the foundation M excavations are advanced through any surficial topsoil or soft material and exten ded into medium dense pro or better native soils. Furthermore, we recommend that th e downhill footing lines be extended a minimum of five feet below finished grade to key the residence into th e slope ;�nd­reduce sliding potential. All footings, including pier pads, should be structurally tied togeth er to form a rigid system. NELSON GEO TECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC- Ge6technical Engineering Evaluation Soyer Residential Property 17016 — 72"'J Place West Edmonds, WA June 3, 2005 NGA File No. 405704 Page 6 Temporary cuts on the order of 10'feet are proposed for this site. We recommend that temporary cuts be sloped back for worker safety as recommended in the Temporary and Permanent Slopes subsection. If the recommended inclinations could not be maintained, temporary shoring should be considered.. Also, grading on the site should be performed in a fashion that maintains slope stability, not reduce it. We Z 0 should be retained to review final grading plans and observe earthwork. Water from the surrounding area 0 M at the site should be routed around the planned foundation excavation to reduce the potential for erosion and cut slope failure. ca 3 M, The steep slopes should be protected from erosion. Vegetation should cover sloping ground to reduce the M 0 01 0 C potential for erosion. Stormwater runoff should be routed to an appropriate discharge Iodation. Specific M recommendations for erosion control and slope protection are presented in this report. mz� C > We recommend that stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces be routed to an appropriate stormwater (A e subject to system. Stormwater discharge from impervious surfaces should b City of Edmonds .0 n "n regulations. Stormwater should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over site slopes. M M Most of the soils underlying this site are considered moisture -sensitive and will disturb easily when we't. 0 r- 0 M, C ca, To lessen the potential impacts of construction on the slope and to reduce cost overruns and delays, we M Z 0 r recommend that construction take place during the drier summer mo nths. Erosion Control and Slope Protection Measures Z -4 The erosion hazard for the on -site soils is considered high for exposed soils, but actual erosion potential 3: ca will be dependent on how the site is graded and how water is allowed to concentrate., Be st M anagement Z. 0 Pr ol erosion. Areas disturbed during construction should be actices (BMPs) should be used to contr M. protected from erosion. Measures taken may include diverting surface water away from the stripped areas. Silt fences or straw bales should be erected to prevent muddy water from flowing over the site slopes. Disturbed areas should be r eplanted with vegetation at the end of construction. The vegetation f should be maintained until established. Final grading should incorporate appropriate erosion control measures to route stormwater runoff to an appropriate discharge location. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Soyer Residential Property 17016-72 nd Place West, Edmonds, WA June 3, 2005 NGA File No. 405704 Page 7 Protection of the steep slope area should be perform ed as required by the City of Edmonds. Specifically, we recommend that the slope not be disturbed or modified through placement of any fill or the removal of any soil outside the approved development areas. Replacement of vegetation on the slope should be z performed per City of Edmonds regulations. 0 M Site Preparation and Grading Site preparation should consist of stripping any topsoil, undocumented fill, or loose soils to expose 0:2 0 M C: medium dense or better native material in foundation, pavernent,. and slab -on -grade areas. The stripped M 0 material should be hauled off -site and not stockpiled on site. If the, ground surface, after stripping, should 0. C appear to be loose, it should be compa cted to a non -yielding condition. Areas observed to pump or weav e M M during compaction should be reworked to structural fill specifications or over -excavated and replaced Z icant surface wa ter flow is encountered with property compacted, structural fl or rock spalls. If signif during co . nstruction, this. flow should be diverted around areas to be developed and the exposed subgrade. 0 -n -n maintained in a semi -dry condition. m Fn ca Most of the soils underlying this site are considered moisture-wsensitive. and will disturb easily when wet. 0 0 M C 0) To lessen the potential impacts of c onstruction on the slope and to reduce cost overruns and delays, we CD M 0, recommend that construction take place during the drier summer months. if construction takes place, z during the wet season, additional expenses and delays should be expected. Additional expenses could include additional erosion control and temporary drainage measures to protect th I e slope, placement. of a z -or blanket of rock spalls to protect exposed subgrades, and the ne ed for importing all-weather materials f structural fill. z 0� 0 Temporary and Permanent Slopes M Temporary cut slopes are proposed for the con struction of the foundation and retaining walls of the daylight basement area. The temporary excavation for the back wall of the daylight basement will be up to approximately ten feet in height. Final grading plans wer e not available at the time this report was prepared. Stability of cut slopes is a function of many. factors, such as the type and consistency of soils, depth of the cut, surcharge loads adjacent to the excavation, length of time a cut remains open, and.the presence of surface or groundwater. It is exceedingly difficult under these variable conditions to p re- NELSON GEOTECHNICA L ASSOCIATES, INC. L Geotechnical En ineering Evaluation 9 Soyer Residential Property 17016 — 72"" Place West Edmonds, WA June 3, 2005 NGA File No. 405704 Page 8 establish a "safe and maintenance7free" temporary cut slope angle. The refore, it should be the responsibility of the contractor to maintain safe slope. configurations since the contractor is continuously at the job site, able to observe the nature and condition of the cut slopes, and able to monitor the Z subsurface materials and groundwater conditions encountered. .0 M The following information is provided solely for the benefit of the owner and other design consultants and assumes responsibility forj should not be construed to imply that Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. ob p" site safety. Job site safety is the sole responsibility of the project contractor. M C M —40 00 C We recomm end that temporary cuts in the on -site, medium dense weathered s oils near the surface be no �MM M steeper than 1.5 Horizontal to I Vertical (1.5H:IV We recommend that temporary cuts in the on -site, Z dense to very dense unweathered soils be no. steeper than IH:IV. If groundwater c onditions- are 3: encountered, we would expect that flatter inclinations would be necessary. We recommend that cut 0 -n slopes be protected from erosion. Such protection measures may include covering cut slopes with plastic -n h top of cut slopes. We do not recommend vertical sheeting and diverting surface runoff away from. t e M.M slopes. for cuts deeper than four feet, if worker access is necessar y. We recom mend that cut slope heights 0 0 Fn and inclinations conform to appropriate 0 SHA/WISHA regulations. If these temporary inclinations are C CA K CA M 0 kv not feasible due to boundary constraints and/o r soft and wet conditions, temporary sh oring or a Z combination of safe slope inclination and shoring should be considered. Permanent cut and fill slopes should be no steeper than 2HAV. However flatter inclinations may be Z required in areas where soft soils are encountered. Permanent slopes should be veg etated and the Z A vegetative cover maintained until estab lished. 0. Structural Fill tJ General: Fill placed beneath foundation footings, slabs, pavement, o r other settlement -sensitive structures should be placed as structural fill. Structural fill, by definition, is placed in accordance w ith methods and standards, and is monitored by an experienced geotechnical profess ional or soils prescribed technician. Field monitorin g procedures would include the performance of a representative number of in - place density tests to document the attainment, of the desired degree of relative compaction. Theareato receive the fill should be stripped of topsoil and organic material and be thoroughly comp acted to a non - NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Soyer Residential Property 17016--72 "d Place West Edmonds, WA June 3, 2005 NGA File No. 405704 Page 9 yielding condition. Sloping areas to receive fill should be benched for.added stability. The -benches ta should be level and have a minimum w idth of four feet. Materials: Structural fill should consist of a g ood quality, granular soil, free of organic material and Z other deleterious material, and be well -graded to a maximum size of about three inches. All-weather fill 0 should contain no more than five -percent fines by weight (soil finer than U.S. No. 200 sieve, based on M that fraction passing the U.S. 3/4-inch sieve). The use of the majority. of on -site soils as structural fill should generally be feasible provided that this material can be moisture -conditioned to near -optimum M C '11 will be very difficult, if not moisture content for com action. The use of the on site soils as structural fi p M 0 —40 impossible, in wet conditions. We are available to evaluate the suitability of the soils intended for use as 0 C:� I conditionin structural fill and to provide recommendations for soi g or alternative inaterials as necessary. M M Z 10 C > Z Fill Placement: Following subgrade preparation, placement of structural fill may, proceed. All r backfilling should be accomplished in uniform lifts up to eight inches thick. Each lift should be spread 0 "n -n evenly and be thoroughly compacted prior to placement of subsequent lifts. All structural fill should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its maximum dry.density. Maximum dry density, in this report, M M 0) refers to th etermined by the ASTM D-1557 Compaction Test procedure. The moisture at density as d 0 0Fn C 0) content of the soils to be compacted should be within about two percent of optimum so that a. readily K CD M 0 compactable condition exists. It may be necessary to over -excavate and remove. wet soils in cases where Z drying to a compactable condition is not feasible. All compaction should be.accomplished by equipment of a type and size sufficient to attain the recommended degree of compaction. Z Cn Foundations Z 0 Residence foundations could consist of conventional spread footings restina on the native compact soils interpreted to underlie the site. We recommend that the downhill foundation line. extend a minimum of. M five feet below finished grade for soil bearing considerations as well as erosion and surface sliding hazard considerations. Shallow spread footings could be utilized for the remainder of the residence. All footings should be structurally tied together to form a rigid system. Where loosesoils are encountered at footing subgrade elevation, the loose materials should be over excavated to expose suitable bearing soil. The over -excavation may be filled with structural fill, or the A, NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Soyer Residential Property nd 17016 - 72 Place West Edmonds, WA June 3, 2005 NGA File No. 405704 Page 10 footings may be extended down to the native bearing soils. If footings are supported on structural fill, the fill zone sho uld extend outside the edges of the footings a distance equal to one-half of the depth of the over -excavation below.the bottom of the footings. Our exploration indicated competent native soil should typically be encountered within one to two feet below the existing ground surface. Z' 01 We recommend a depth of five feet below finished grade for the downhill foundation line.. These footings should bear directly on the native material. Other footings should extend at least 18 inches below the co lowest adjacent finished ground surface for frost protection and bearing capacity considerations. M C 0 d Minimum foundation footing widths of 15 inches should be used for continuous sprea footi gs for two M 0 -40 0 C story structures per International Building Code (IBC). Isolated footing pads should, be a minimum __4 M dimension of 24 inches. Footings should also be sized based on anticipated loads and allowable soil M Z bearing pressure. Standing water should not be allowed to accumulate in footing trenches. All loose or C Z > disturbed soil should be removed from the foundation excavation prior to p acing concrete. X 0 -n -n aring pressure For foundations constructed as outlined above, we recommend an allowable design be of M M not more than 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be used for the footing design for footings founded on 0— CO) 0 r- the medium dense or�better soils or structural fill extending to the native c ompetent mate rial. A design 0 M, C C& C bearing pressure of 3,000 psf could be used for retaining wall footings with a minimum width of three co M 0 Z feet placed on undisturbed, compact, native soils. A representative of our firm should evaluate ;a foundation bearing soil. We should be consulted if higher bearing pressures. are needed. Current International Building Code (IBC) guidelines should be used when considering increased allowable Z bearing pressure for short-term transitory wind or seismic loads. Potential foundation settlement using ca the recommended allowable bearing pressure is estimated to be less than one inch total and 1/2- inch Z 0 differential between adjacent footings or'across a distance of about 20 feet,'based on our experience with M similar projects. Lateral loads may be resisted by friction on the base of the footing and passive resista nce against the subsurface poi -tions of the foundation. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used to calculate the base friction and should be applied to the vertical dead load only. Passive resistance may be calculated as a triangular equivalent fluid pressure distribution. An equivalent fluid density of 250 pcf should be used for passive resistance design for a level ground surface adjacent to the footing. This level surface should NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Soyer Residential Property d 17016 — 72n Place West Edmonds, WA June 3, 2005 NGA File No. 405704 Pill Page I I extend a distance equal to at least three times the footing depth. For sloping ground not steeper than 2H:IV we recommend a passive resistance of 150 pcf. These recommended values incorporate safety factors of 1.5 and 2.0 applied to the estimated ultimate values for friction al and passive resistance, respectively. To achieve this 'Value of passive resistanc e, the. foundations should be poured neat" against the native medium dense soils or compacted fill should be used as backfill against the front of the footing- Z 0 We recommend that the upper one foot of soil be neglected when calculating the passive resistance. n Slabs -on -Grade 0 Slabs -on -grade, if utilized, should be supported on subgrade soils prepared as described in the Site rn C: rn ra n of this report. We recommend that all floor slabs be underlain. by Preparation and G ding subsectio -.61 0 0 01 C at least 6 inches of free -draining san d or gravel for use as a capillary break. We recommend that the M� lically c How free drainage from under capillary break be hydrau onnected to the footing drain system to a M Z' C the slab. A suitable va por barrier, such as heavy plastic sheeting (6-mil minimum), should be placed over > Z the capillary break material. An additional. 2-inch-thick sand blanket may be used to cover the vapor co 0 -n barrier. This sand blanket is to protect the vapor barrier membrane and to aid in curing the concrete. n M M r-n Retainin Walls g/Basernent Ch 0 rl, 0 M We have been informed that basement walls are planned for the new residence. The lateral pressure co C co: acting on subsurface retaining walls is dependent on the nature and density of the soil behind the wall, the M 0, Z r amount of lateral wall movement which can occur as backfill is placed, wall drainage cond itions, and the inclination of the backfill. For walls that are free to yield at the top at least one thousandth of the height > of the wall (active condition), soil pressures will be less than if movement is limited by such factors as Z wall stiffness or bracing (at -rest condition). We recommend that walls supporting horizontal backfill and CD Z not subjected to hydrostatic forces, be designed using a triangular earth pressure distribution equivalent to 0 that exerted by a fluid with a density of 35 pcf for yielding (active condition) walls, and 50 pcf for no . n- 0 rn. yielding (at -rest condition) walls. These recommended I ateral earth pressures for a drained backfill are based on the assumption of a horizontal ground surface behind the wall for a distance of at least the subsurface height of the wall, and do not account for surcharge loads. Additional lateral earth pressures should.be considered for surcharge NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geiotechnical Engineering Evaluation Soyer Residential Property d 17016 — 72 Place West Edmonds, WA June 3, 2005 NGA File No. 405704 Page 12 loads acting adjacent to subsurface and retaining walls within a distance equal to the subsurface height of Fill s the wall. This would include the effects of traffic loads, floor slab loads, foundation loads, slope or other surface loads. Z: 0 The lateral pressures on walls may be resisted by friction between the foundation and subgrade soil, and tit resistance acting on the 0 foundation. Recommendations. for by passive below -grade porti n of the frictional and passive resistance to lateral loads are presented in the Foundations subsection of this am report. M 0 —40 0 C Site Drainage m m Surface Drainage: The finished ground surface should be graded such that stormwater is directed away. Z a from structures. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where footings, slabs, or pavements are ;,J to be constructed. Final site grades should allow for drainage away from the structure. If possible, we 0 M. suggest that the finished ground be sloped at a minimum gradient of 3 percent for a distance of at least 10 In feet away from the structure. Surface water should be routed to an appropriate discharge location. m m Stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces should be collected in catch basins and yard drains and 0 r 0 M, routed away from sloping ground and into solid drainpipe to minimize the potential for soil.erosion. C (a, C M. Stormwater runoff plans should conform to City of Edmonds regulations. M Z If a crawl space is utilized under the residence, the ground surface in the crawl space should be sloped to a low.point and covered with crushed rock. Water generated in the crawl space should be collected in a Z solid pipe and routed into the stormwater system or to an approved location. co Z 0 Subsurface Drainage: If perched or groundwater is encountered during construction, we recommend that 0 M, the contractor slope the bottom of the excavation and collect the water into ditches and small sump pits where the. water can be pumped out and routed to an appropriate discharge location.. We recommend the use of footing drains.around the residence and behind all retaining, walls. Footing drains should be installed at least 1-foot below planned finished floor elevation. The drains should consist of a minimum 4-inch-diameter, rigid, slotted or perforated, PVC pipe surrounded by free -draining material wrapped in a filter fabric. We recommend that an 18-inch-wide zone of clean (less than 3 NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Soyer Residential Property d 17016-72 Place West Edmonds, WA June 3, 2005 NGA File No. 405704 Page. 13 percent fines), free -draining, granular material b.e placed along the'back of walls. Pea, gravel is an acceptable drain material or drainage composite. may also be used instead. The free -draining material should extend up the wall to 1-foot below the finished surface. The top foot of soil should consist of impermeable soil placed over plastic -sheeting or building paper to. minimize surface water or fines Z nate migration into the footing drain. Footing drains should discharge into tightlines leading to an appropr collection and discharge point with convenient cleanouts to prolong the useful life of the drains. Roof =n drains should not be connected to footing drains. Co M C 0 USE OF THIS REPORT 80 NGA has p repared this report for Mr. Halit Soyer and his agents, for use in the planning and design of the C. 3: M proposed single family residence on this site only. The scope of out work does not include services Z jo --I related to construction safety precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the C -4 contractors' methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, exc ept as specifically described in our report (n for consideration in design. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions between the 0 -n explorations and also with time. Our report, conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as a X M M warranty of subsurface conditions. A contingency for unanticip ated conditions should be� included in the 0 r budget.and schedule. 0 M C CO) K co, Q 0 Z r- We recommend that NGA be retained to provide monitoring and consultation services during construction to confirrn that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revea led during the Z work differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation activities.comply with c ontract plans and specifications. Z 0 0 M All people who own or occupy land on hillsides should realize that landslide movements are always a possibility, although the likelihood is low that such an event will actually occur. The slope should be periodically inspected by the landowner, especially after a winter storm. If distress is evident, a geotechnical engineer should be contacted for advice on remedial/preventative measures. The probability that landsliding will occur is substantially reduced by the proper maintenance of drainage measures at the It's site. Therefore, the landowner should recognize the responsibility for performing such maintenance. Consequently, we recommend that a copy of our report be provided to any future landowners if the A TES, INC. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCI Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Soyer Residential Property "d 17016-72 Place West Edmonds, WA June 3, 2005 NGA File No. 405704 P ge 14 a property is sold. Alsoj lawn clippings and any other household debris or trash should not be cast over the slope. Within the limitations of scope, schedule,. and budget, our services have been perfoi -med in accordance Z. 0 with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in effect in this area at the time this report was 0 M pr epared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Out observations, findings, and opinions are % a means to rent risks to the owner. identify and reduce the inhe (na VAI 0-0-0 C. M1 M ri.� z C Z, !.0 _n MM 0 CA' 0;_ ;z Z, 64 z 0 0 M NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.