The URL can be used to link to this page

20060250.pdf[PERMIT EXPIRES _Tf CITY OF EDMONDS ERMIT NUMBER CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPI ICATION joB 11R11T1 ADDRESS V'j 6�, s Ess �7' lljicovc��f _Fvv(_ PLAT NAMEiSUBDIVISION NO, mo o ')? P-9 FEE L PUBLIC NIGHT .1 WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP —T-F-.1-9 R Sl= R 1� R 13 CITY �M JE111"IN EXISTING _ PROPOSED R., 1. 0 M R FE.UIDE. E.ICATI.. IT U21_111:zl. METER SIZE I PRI REQUIRED YES 13 NO 13 _IINE51z� REMARKS T OVVNER=NTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROUDIIANAGC 3 IS g, CBLX MM ENGINEERING RE:�� ADDRESS L, e,1,6 rXZM- fqkd fk 09 4 DATE ,Y�ITY � c 0 et K TEIEPRONE, L) VVV Ll 0 FIRE REVIEWED By T 1: z STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE C"%�AE cu sHo DION VARIANCE OR RELINE ORADB# INSPE.GT E.%ZTF`."j 11E1 k/V7 I 0 YES III NO 0 PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL NO 0 10 113 — 00`1 oo -0 ZONE SIGN AREA HEIGH; -4?1 -_ / I P P-P PROPOSED ALLOYED I �RIPOSE. VIA VERO AL -OWED v 2-51 0. rG. I I =1 9n -A)-W 11SKI11TIA1 'N PLUMBiNGIMECH ST uoy E )IRED SETBACKS E`T� PROP—G—B-111.) LOT COVERAGE REQUIRE.'s ALLOWED PRO ED 14T Pirlix- REAR— F�51NT �SIDE REg PoS 9 T M COMMERCIAL COMPLIANCE OR ADDITION '/ . 'b 1511-1 126 2-E5, 1 7.c>' 35 1, ie) Us Ej wcousE CHANGE OF E LOTAREA PLANNING REVIEWED BY 0, REMODEL MULTIFAMILY SIGN PROVIDED 1,LOTAREA RECTEARK"' 4 7— Do M REPAIR 19 !��yos Ei FENCE 9 _t' M, _X_FT.) OTHER ;�mF'100 — 7,007. C, +0 P W`07-, DEN40LISH f-1 TANK Ei RETAINING WALL R SPRINKLER N ROOKERY 0 FiREALARM =E, E: TYPE (V��Usla- -RAIUV-111 R L &Yl-ft F TYPE OF 6DE OCCUPANT I R.ME 0 -n 'n W NUMB R OF JSTRUCT'ON i . ............. ....... NUMBER OF DWELL NO STO IES UNITS IT T DESCRIBE WORK To BE GUND REMARKS IS 0 0 r 'YOU A PGI POWID-1 efl.30630 IT! sTFqM�= C) Z Y �1- 00,:-1— rl 0 t4— V A 0 N VA A L U T LUATI.N,,, M 7 30 4�1 $ j 404-tt Description FEE Description FEE > z Plan Check State Surcharge so n c k VESTED DATE ��RCE VESTED DATE d I. F em' City Surcharge z PLAN CHECK NO: Plumbing Base Fee P u m n g 0 ITI - WORK TO o-N T T Mechanical c h..'c MIT C-V R THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED, THIS PERMIT COVERS W IN T. PU - C BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE Pu c C'"'. o at W' DONMAIN (CURBS� SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS. MARQUEE% ETC.) WILL REQUIRE I Grading G d 7() SEPARATE PERMISSIOW =n REVIEW t PERMIT APPLICATION7 SEE ECDC 19.01LODS(A)(5)) PERMIT LIMIT.� SEE ECDC i9.ODSD5A)(6) SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION Eng, Inspection ;APPLICANT. ON BERAL 01 HIS OR HER SPOUSE, "Bills, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESSORS T Y IN INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF EDMONDS' WASKINGTONLITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND . A HTS FREI AN AND Kr _;4 Plan Chk. Deposit N ; 2- I I a CID `Z' Q 7 Fire Inspection Receipt # 36_ CLAIMS F R DAMAGE OF WHATEVER NATUR , ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ALL E MIT . L T as THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE FROM DEEMED TO MODIFY, WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENT OF ANY CITY ORDINANCE Landscapensp. Total Amt. Due 44 q26 NOR Ll MIT IN ANY WAY THE CITY'S ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION. Recording Fee Receipt # I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION; T ATTHEIHF.R.ATION APPLICATION APPROVAL GIVEN Is CORRECT: AND THAT IA THE OWNER. OR THE DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT OF Th—I d Ay Ih. THE OWNEtL IAGREE To COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC- CALL B.i1b, Offi-I ., h,I0,.1 D.P.IY: .. FS.S .,A pd, TION; AND IN DOING THe WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING To WORKMEN'S COMPENSATIO INSURANCE AND RCW 18:27. FOR INSPECTION EPI S .'I.dpd P, �p. p-O, MCI (425) SRI 771-0220 RE SED BY ftATE ATTENTION EXT. 1333 In STRUCTURE UNTIL IT IS UNLAWFULTO'USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTI- ORIGINAL FICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC109 I IBC110 / IRC1110. PINK -OWNER - GOLD - ASSESSOR IWD4 PRESS HARD - YOU ARE MAKING 4 COPIES m I U:1-5 _05"E 0 1`402 426 P, -Ali, bd PSE RFA6E To _.R ElE GQVE r NA S r 0 '41 b TE S D IJKLI I MA; - EA61 I KALL 'CIT'r' OF EDMONDS DETAIL" OCKERIE5 DETAIL" 3q4 39 'z ,T 131 392 f)NTROL — TO ALLQqm NED, 5 LT PENCE PER 36'7�2 5ANITARY O�TY 5TO . E)ETAI STUB cyll) ll� " I , - I FIRE AND AID ADDRESS SIGN REQUIRI SITE PLZ!��N - LoT al U) CD co 'w cc=c,i< mo:V w W . rrPE I GB Top= 38,75, CONSTRUCTION ENTFZANrl oefffvt-b JAN I Y 2006, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR. CITY OF EDMONDS B07TOM LOV4r=R POOTINC5 Ba7.B' SE:r= ewr. sm z 9 0 c m ,a -4 0 0 0 c 3: M M z 10 c > z E: nX mT 0 0 C'o 0 M a co 9 co To z .-i 3: Do z 0 0 m 7 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. fE !R;E V1 <F 1� RAM fig HUM FEW 0.6-051 ni C, b L� li'J EECE Geotechnical Engineering Report z Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington 3 M For Hoover Premier Homes c M M 0 0 c I r-n M Z lio "n RECEIVED M TR a- 0) JAN 17 2006 0 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR, CITY OF EDMONDS B: Q 0 z z 4 co z C M Cornerstone 17625-130th Ave. NE, C102, Woodinville, WA 9802 Phone: 425-8444977 Geotechnical, Inc. Fax: 425-844-1987 January 6, 2005 Ms. Cathy Patterson Hoover Premier Homes z 16300 Mill Creek Boulevard, #108 Mill Creek, WA 98012 0 Geotechnical Engineering Report =i 5i Meadowdale Estates Vi --i Edmonds, Washington 11.1 m C M %'U rite rio. Dear Ms. Patterson: INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering investigation for your Meadowdale Estates residential development in the Meadowdale area of Edmonds, Washington. The site is located at 6880 -172n, Street SW, as shown on the Vicinity Map in Figure 1. ty la t, has been substantially Site development, including grading, road construction, and utili p cemen completed. We understand that you have purchased all of the building lots, with the exception of Lot 2, for the purposes of constructing single-family residences. The City of Edmonds has required a geotechnical report for the lots with slopes greater than 15 percent, and you have requested that we sed evaluate the subsurface conditions of your lots and provide foundation recommendations for the propo residences. For our use in preparing this report, we have been provided with a copy of a site plan by CHS Engineering, dated September 2003, that shows lot, road, and utility layout. We have also been provided with a Slope Stability Evaluation, prepared by GeoEngineers and dated June 18, 2002, that addresses the detention facility. Additionally, we have been provided with field reports prepared by Sky Valley Testing that document compaction testing performed during the main earthwork phase of the project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The L-shaped project site has maximum dimensions of approximately 640 feet north to south and 440 feet east to west. The development consists of a total of 12 lots. We understand that you intend to construct 0 80 C 3: 0-4 C 0 m In 0 0 0 M 0 z z __4 z 0 0 in 5 1 Geotccbmcal Engineering Report' Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 2 single-family residences on all of the lots with the exception of Lot 2, which you do not own. The provided grading plan indicates cuts totaling 6,000 cubic yards (CY) and fills totaling 12,000 CY. The grading plan also indicates that fi may be at least 12 feet deep in some areas. At this point in time, site grading has been completed and utilities have been installed. A completed storm water detention vault is located close to the western site boundary. 0 SCOPE q:9 The purpose of this study is to explore and characterize the subsurface conditions and present 0 m C dation site devel ment Specificall, our scope of services as outlined in our Services m recommen s Agreement, dated December 23, 2004, includes the following: I . Review available geologic maps ofthe area and available project documentation. 2. Explore the subsurface conditions at the site with backhoe-excavatcd test pits. 3. Provide recommendations for building foundations, including lateral pressures for retaining walls. 4. Provide recommendations for site preparation and grading. 5. Provide general recommendations for site drainage. 6. Prepare a written report to document our conclusions and recommendations. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions At the time of our exploration, the access road (69' Place W) was paved. Site grading was also complete and grass was growing on all of the lots. The storm water detention vault and utilities bad all been completed, but no residences had been constructed yet. A layout ofthe site is shown on the SitePlan in Figure 2. Generally, the ground surface slopes downward towards the west at approximately 3 Horizontal to 1 Vertical (311: IV). An existing residence borders the southwestern comer of the site and 172n1 Street SW borders the site to the south. The rest of the site is surrounded by a wooded area with brush and evergreen trees up to approximately 2 fi�et in diameter. Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. 0 80 C m m Z —Z 0 n m M 0 0 0 C K CA M 0 M Z , 1 3: CA Z 0 M lim- ,Geotechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 3 Geology Most of the Puget Sound Region was affected by past intrusion of continental glaciation. The last period of glaciation, the Vasbon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation, ended approximately 11,000 years ago. Many of the geomorphic features seen today are a result of scouring and overriding by glacial ice. During the Vashon Stade, much of the Puget Sound region was overridden by over 3,000 feet of ice. Soil layers z overridden by the ice sheet were compacted to a much greater extent than those that were not. Part of a typical glacial sequence includes recessional ourwash sand underlain by glacial till. The site is mapped as being underlain by glacial till (Preliminary Surficial Geologic May) of the Edmonds a In C: East and Edmonds West Ouadr gles, Snohomish and King Counfie , Mackey Smith, 1975). The map in 0 80 indicates the of advance and recessional ourwash in the general area surrounding the site. C -4 C also presence X in Our site explorations encountered glacial till, recessional outwash, and fill. Glacial till, commonly referred to as "hardpan," is an unsorted mixture of sand, silt, and gravel that is deposited at the bottom of a continental glacier. As a result ofhaving been consolidated under the weight of the glacier, glacial till exhibits both high strength and low permeability. Alluvial sand and gravel deposited by glacial melt water during glacial recession is known as recessional outwasb. In contrast to glacial till, recessional outwash has not been glacially consolidated. Explorations Subsurface conditions were explored at the site on December 28, 2004, by excavating a total of five test pits. ne test pits were excavated to depths ranging between 0.5 and 11,0 feet below the ground surface. The explorations were located in the field by a representative from this firm who also examined the soils and geologic conditions encountered, and maintained logs of the test pits. The approximate locations of the test pits are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System, a copy of which is presented as Figure 3. ne logs of the test pits are presented in Figures 4 and 5. Subsurface Conditions A brief description of the conditions encountered in our explorations is included below. For a more detailed description of the soils encountered, review the test pit logs in Figures 4 and 5. Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. MZ C— z ca -n m In a- 0 0) 0 ri) in 0 :0 --i z -4 z 0 i m Geotechnical Engineering Report, Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 4 Our explorations encountered glacial till, recessional outwash, and fill. Test Pits 3, 4 and 5 were excavated in cut areas and all encountered very dense till within one foot of the surface. Test Pits I and 2 encountered approximately 4.0 and 5.0 feet of fill, respectively. Beneath the fill, Test Pit I encountered recessional outwash. Test Pit 2 encountered a layer of topsoil underlying the fill. The topsoil layer was underlain by weathered glacial till becoming glacial till. It should be noted that loose soils in the areas of Test Pits i and 2 extend at least 4.0 and 6.0 feet below the ground surface, respectively. Hydrologic Conditions Shallow ground water seepage was encountered in Test Pit 2 at a depth of approximately 1.0 foot. We consider this water to be perched, and associated with surface runoff. The on -site till, in particular, is considered poorly draining. During the wetter times of the year, we expect perched water conditions will occur as pockets of water on top of the till layer. Perched water does not represent a regional ground water "table " within the upper soil horizons. Volumes of perched ground water vary depending upon the time ofyear and the upslope recharge conditions. Erosion Hazard The erosion hazard criteria used for determination of affected areas includes soil type, slope gradient, vegetation cover, and ground water conditions. The erosion sensitivity is related to vegetative cover and the specific surface soil types (group classification), which are related to the underlying geologic soil units. The Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area Washington by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) was reviewed to determine the erosion hazard of the on -site soils. The site surface soils were classified using the SCS classification system as Unit 5 (Alderwood — Urban Land Complex). The corresponding geologic unit for these soils is till, which is generally in agreement with the soils encountered in our site explorations. The erosion hazard for the soil is listed as being slight for slopes less than 8 percent. The moderately -sloping portions of the site may encounter higher levels of erosion, but not to such a degree that the site would be classified an erosion hazard. Best management practices 03MPs) and applicable codes should be 161lowed during site grading to limit potential for erosion, We do not expect this site will require unusual or extreme erosion management methods. There are no water bodies adjacent to the site. Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. I om C 0 C -49 !", Mm m 0 _n --n X m M 0 0 0 C 9 M M -4 M Z Z m Gcotechnicil Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 5 Seismic Hazard The site is classified based on its overall soil profile using Table 1615.1.1 of the 2003 International Building Code (113C). Site conditions best fit the IBC definition for Site Class C ("Very dense soil and soft rock"). The IBC provides parameters and coefficients to be used in seismic design based upon this site class z Additional seismic considerations include liquefaction potential and amplification of ground motions by soft soil deposits. The liquefaction potential is highest for loose sand with a high ground water table. The underlying dense till is considered to have a very low potential for liquefaction and amplification of ground motion. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General It is our opinion that the site is compatible with the planned development. The underlying medium dense to very dense glacial till deposits are capable of supporting the planned structures and pavements. We recommend that the foundations for the structures extend through any topsoil, fill, loose, or disturbed soils, and bear on the underlying medium dense to very dense, native glacial till, or on structural fill extending to these soils. Based on our explorations, we anticipate these soils will generally be encountered at typical footing depths in the cut areas of the site. Fill encountered in Test Pits I and 2 was loose. As a result, areas of fill may need to be over -excavated and properly compacted. Alternatively, foundations could be constructed to extend through the loose soils. The soils likely to be exposed during construction are highly moisture sensitive and will disturb easily when wet or during wet conditions. We recommend that construction take place during the drier summer months, if possible. If construction takes place during the wet season, additional expenses and delays should be expected due to the wet conditions. Site Preparations and Grading The first step of site preparation should be to strip the vegetation, topsoil, or loose soils to expose medium dense to very dense native soils in pavement and building areas. This material should be removed from the site, or stockpiled for later use as landscaping fill. The resulting subgrade should be compacted to a Cornerstone Geritechnical, Inc. Y4 0 C: m M 0 0 0 c: m m z 0-1 C r--4 X 0 -ri n m M 0 0 0 M cl) M 0 X z z m ini -Geotc�hnieal Engineering Report - Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 6 firm, non -yielding condition. Areas observed to pump or weave should be repaired prior to placing hard surfaces. The on -site glacial till likely to be exposed during construction is considered highly moisture sensitive, and the surface will disturb easily when wet. We expect these soils would be difficult, if not impossible, to compact to structural'fill specifications in wet weather. We recommend that earthwork be conducted during the drier months. Additional expenses of wet weather or winter construction would include extra excavation and use of imported fill or rock spalls. Structural Fill General: All fill placed beneath buildings, pavements or other settlement sensitive features should be placed as structural fill. Structural fill, by definition, is placed in accordance with prescribed methods and Field - standards, and is monitored by an experienced geotechnical professional or soils technician. monitoring 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. Materials: Imported structural fill should consist of a good quality, free -draining granular soil, free of organics and other deleterious material, and be well graded to a maximum size of about 3 inches. Imported, all-weatber structural fill should contain no more than 5 percent fines (soil finer than a Standard U.S, No. 200 sieve), based on that fraction passing the U.S. 3/4-inch sieve. The use of on -site soil as structural fill will be dependent on moisture content control. Some drying of the native soils may be necessary in order to achieve compaction. During warm, sunny days this could be accomplished by spreading the material in thin lifts and compacting. Some aeration and/or addition of moisture may also be necessary. We expect that compaction of the native soils to structural fill specifications would be difficult, if not impossible, during wet weather. ral fill may proceed. Fill Fill Placement: Following subgrade preparation, placement of the structu should be placed in 8- to 10-inch-thick uniform lifts, and each lift should be spread evenly and be thoroughly compacted prior to placement of subsequent lifts. All structural fill underlying building areas, and within a depth of 2 feet below pavement and sidewalk subgrade, should be compacted to at least 95 percent of its maximum dry density. Maximum dry density, in this report, refers to that density as Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. z �n C m M 0 0 80 C in m z 0-4 o -n n -4 in M 0 0 0 C K in 0 Z z CA z 0 0 in Geotechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 7 determined by the ASTM D 1557 compaction test procedure. Fill more than 2 feet beneath sidewalks and mpacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density. The pavement subgrades should be co moisture content of the soil to be compacted should be within about 2 percent of optimum so that a readily compactable condition exists. It may be necessary to overexcavate and remove wet surficial soils in cases where drying to a compactable condition is not feasible. All compaction should be accomplished z bv eauiDment of a type and size sufficient to attain the desired degree of compaction. Temporary and Permanent Slopes Temporary cut slope stability 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 ground water. It is exceedingly difficult under these variable conditions to estimate a stable temporary cut slope geometry. Therefore, 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 subsurface materials and ground water conditions encountered. We anticipate cuts for the daylight basements of your proposed residences. For plarming purposes, we recommend that temporary cuts in the near -surface weathered soils be no greater than IH: IV. Cuts in the fill should be no greater than 1.5H:IV. Cuts in the dense to very dense till may stand at a 0.75H:IV inclination or possibly steeper. If ground water seepage is encountered, we would expect that flatter inclinations would be necessary. We recommend that cut slopes be protected from erosion. Measures taken may include covering cut slopes with plastic sheeting and diverting surface runoff away from the top of cut slopes. We do not recornmend vertical slopes for cuts deeper than 4 feet, ifworker access is necessary. We recommend that cut slope heights and inclinations conform to local and WISHA/OSHA standards. Final slope inclinations for structural fill and the cuts in the native soils should be no steeper than 2HAV. Lightly compacted fills or common fills should be no steeper than 3H:IV, Common fills are defined as fill material with some organics that are "trackrolled" into place. They would not meet the compaction specification of structural fill. Final slopes should be vegetated and covered with straw or jute netting. The vegetation should be maintained until it is established. Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. M M C M 0 80 C: --I C M M M Z () -q C 0 -n "n in m m a 50 0 0 C in (1) C V) in 0 Z z m Geotechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 9 Foundations Conventional shallow spread foundations should be founded on undisturbed, medium dense to very dense, glacial till, or be supported on structural fill extending to those soils. if the soil at the planned bottom of footing elevation is not medium dense to very dense, it should be overexcavated to expose suitable bearin g soil, and the excavation should be filled with structural fill, or the footing may be Z 9 overpoured with extra concrete. F or residences planned to be built on sloping ground, we recommend a 0 M minimum horizontal distance of 10 feet between the bottom of the footing and the slope face. Footings should extend at least 18 inches below the In West adjacent finished ground surface for frost 0 m C and bearing capacity considerations. Minimu in foundation widths of 16 and 20 inches should M 0 0 protection n flow be used for continuous and isolated spread footings, respectively. Standing water should ot be a ed 80 to accumulate in footing trenches. All loose or disturb ed soil should be removed from the foundation m m Z excavation prior to placing concrete. C > Z For foundations constructed as outlined above, we rec ornmend an allowable design bearing pressure of Vi 0 -n -�pmmds,�per square foot (psf) be used for the footing design. Internati onal Building Code (IBC) guidelines should be followed when considering short-term transitory wind or seismic loads. Potential m m 0-0) foundation settlement using the rec onimended allowable bearing pressure is estimated to be less than 1- 0 0 I inch total and Yinch differential between footings or across a distance of about 30 feet. Higher soil C 90) M 0 w der foo ngs. th th i ti bearing values may be appropriate for footings founded on the unwea ered till, and wi Z These higher values can be determined after a review of a specific design. Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the foundation and subgrade soil, and by passive soil Z resistance acting on the below -grade portion of the foundation. For the latter, the foundation must be in - poured "neaf' against undisturbed soil or backfilled with clean, free -draining, compacted structural fill. Z 9 Passive resistance may be calculated as a triangular equivalent fluid pressure distribution. We 0 that an equivalent fluid density of 225 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) be used to calculate the m recommend allowable lateral passive resistance for the case of a level ground surface adjacent to the footing. An allowable coefficient of friction between footings and soil of 0.45.may be used, and should be applied to the vertical dead load only. A factor of safety of 2.0 has be n applied to the passive pressure to account for required movements to gene rate these pressures. The friction coefficient does not include a factor of safety. Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report' Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 9 Lateral Loads The lateral earth pressure acting on retaining walls is dependent on the nature and density of the soil behind the wall, the amount of lateral wall movement that can occur as backfill is placed, and the inclination of the backfill. Walls that are free to yield at least one -thousandth of the height of the wall are in an "active" condition. Walls restrained from movement by stiffness or bracing are in an "at -rest" z condition. Active earth pressure and at -rest earth pressure can be calculated based on equivalent fluid R1 density. Equivalent fluid densities for active and at -rest earth pressure of 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) and 5;ipcf, respectively, may be used for design for a level backslope. i6i'ment fluid densities for V.S. active and at -rest earth pressure of 45 ds per cubic foot (pcf) and 75 pef, respectively, may be used 0 M C M ,7 for design for a 20 degree backslope. These values assume that the on -site soils are used for backfill, 0 80 C and that the wall backfill is drained. The preceding values do not include the effects of surcharges due to M m foundation loads, traffic or other surface loads. Surcharge effects should be considered where C appropriate. The above lateral pressures may be resisted by friction at the base of the wall and passive resistance against the foundation. A coefficient of friction of 0.45 may be used to determine the base friction when supported on the above recommended foundation subgrade preparation alternatives. An equivalent fluid density of 225 pcf should be used for passive resistance. The friction value does not incorporate a safety factor. A safety factor of 2 is applied to the passive pressure to limit movement. All wall backfill should be well compacted. Care should be taken to prevent the buildup ofexcess lateral f This can be accomplished by placing wall soil pressures due to ovcrcompaction of the wall back ill. backfill in 8-inch loose lifts and compacting with small, band -operated compactors. Slabs -On -Grade Slab-on-gradc areas should be prepared as recommended in the Site Preparation and Grading subsection. Slabs should be supported on medium dense to very dense native soils, or on structural fill extending to these soils. Where moisture control is a concern, we recommend that slabs be underlain by 6 inches of free -draining coarse sand or pea gravel for use as a capillary break. A suitable vapor barrier, such as heavy plastic sheeting, should be placed over the capillary break. Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. 0 ,n M M a 0 0 M C: (n C 0) 0 ;U z V z m Geotechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 10 Drainage We recommend that runoff from impervious surfaces, such as roofs, driveway and access roadways, be collected and routed to an appropriute storm water discharge system. Final site grades should allow for drainage away from any buildings. We suggest that the finished ground surface be sloped at a gradient of 3 percent minimum for a distance of at least 10 feet away from the buildings. Surface water should be collected by permanent catch basins and drain lines, and be discharged into a storm drain system. We recommend that footing drains be used around all of the structures where moisture control is important. The underlying till will pond water that accumulates in the crawl space. It is good practice to use footing drains installed at least I foot below the planned finished floor slab or crawl space elevation to provide drainage for the crawl space. At a minimum, the crawl space should be sloped to drain to an -on-grade cars where moisture outlet tied to the drainage system. if drains are omitted around slab fl control is important, the slab should be a minimum of I foot above surrounding grades. Where used, footing drains should consist of 4-inch-diameter, perforated PVC pipe that is surrounded by free -draining material, such as pea gravel. Footing drains should discharge into tightlines leading to an appropriate collection and discharge point. Crawl spaces should be sloped to drain, and a positive connection should be made into the foundation drainage system. For slabs -on -grade, a drainage path should be provided from the capillary break material to the footing drain system. Roof drains should not be connected to wall or footing drains. 'MONITORING We should be retained to provide monitoring and consultation services during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, and to provide recommendations for design changes, should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those -N anticipated. USE OF THIS REPORT We have prepared this report for Hoover Premier Homes and their agents, for use in planning and design of this project. 'Me data and report should be provided to prospective contractors for their bidding and Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. z 2 0 m -1 'n 0 M m 0 -40 0 M M z 0-4 C C4 in M a 0 0 C cl) C 0) M 0 Z r, ;0 3: z -i z 0 m Geotechnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 11 estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of subsurface conditions. The scope of our work does not include services related to construction safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractors' methods, techniques, sequences or z procedures, except as specifically described in our report, for consideration in design. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions. We recommend that project planning include contingencies in budget R1 and schedule, should areas be found with conditions that vary from those described in this report. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget for our work, we have strived to take care that our a m work has been completed in accordance with generally accepted practices follow ed in this area at the time M 0 -40 0 this report was prepared. No other conditions, expressed or implied, should be understood. -4 X M M z '04 Z 0 -n -n 000 m M 0 0 M 0 X z z ?5 m Comerstone Geotechnical, Inc. 777777� Geotcchnical Engineering Report Meadowdale Estates Edmonds, Washington January 6, 2005 CG File No. 1791 Page 12 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you. If there are any questions concerning this report or if we can provide additional services, please call. Sincerely, z Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. 0 Jeff Laub, LG C m Project Geologist 0 C 0 M 10 C Vi 0 -n 30530 z: m m 0 0 m C C/) rETP7i iii M 0 RickB. Powell, PE S>n Principal X PAO:JPL:RBP:nt Three Copies Submitted T 0) Five Figures z 0 m Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. M � Site Plan N 4 LEGEND Number and Approximate Location of Test Pit 100 200 Scale I" = 100' Referenw: Site Plan Weed - S-An-d all. plan by CHS Enginwing. dated 0912001 Cornerstone Phone: (426) 844-1977 RH Hoover - Meadowdale Estates Geotechnical, Inc. FaX: (425) 844-1987 File Number 0 17625-130th Ave NE, C-1 02 - WoodInVille, WA - 98072 1791 2 a , Unified Soil CiaSsification System MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOLI GROUPNAME GRAVEL CLEAN GRAVEL GW WELL -GRADED GRAVEL, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL COARSE- GP POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL GRAINED MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION GRAVEL WITH FINES GM SILTY GRAVEL SOILS RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE GC CLAYEY GRAVEL 1 MORE THAN 50% RETAINED ON number 20D SIEVE SAND CLEAN SAND SW WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND SP POORLY -GRADED SAND MORE THAN 50% OF SAND WITH FINES SM SILTY SAND COARSE FRACTION PASSES NO. 4 SIEVE SC CLAYEY SAND FINE - SILT AND CLAY INORGANIC ML SILT CIL 1 CLAY GRAINED LIQUID MIT LESS THLAiN 50% (5RGANIC OL I ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY SOILS MORE THAN 50*/ PASSES NO. 200 SIEVE SILT AND CLAY INORGANIC MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY. ELASTIC SILT CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY LIQUID LIMIT 50%ORMORE i ORGANIC I OH ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT ___ HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS - PT I PEAT NOTES: SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS 1) Field classification is based on Dry- Absence of moisture, dusty, dry Visual examination of soil in general tothetouch accordance with ASTM D 2488-83. 2) Soil classification using laboratory Molst- Damp, but no visible water tests is based on ASTM D 2487-83. Wet- Visible free water or saturated, usually soil is obtained from 3) Descriptions of soil density or below water table consistency are based on interpretation of blowcount data, visual appearance of soils, and/or test data. Cornerstone Phone: (425) 844-1977 Unified Soil Classification System Geotechnical, Inc. Fax: (425) 544-1987 W625-130th Ave NE, C-1 02 - Woodinville, WA* 98072 Figure 3 z 0 1 1 1 0 m m 0 0 80 C Mm 10 O"n n mm 0 0 a 9 co M 0 Z 71 ;0 Z -4 M z 0 m 'LOG OF EXPLORATION DEPTH Usc SOIL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT ONE 0.0-3.0 SIM GRAY -BROWN SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, MOIST) (FILL) 3.0 - 4�O SM DARK GRAY SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH TRACE GRAVEL AND ORGANICS L (LOOSE, WET) (FILL) 4.0-10,0 SM GRAY SILTY MEDIUM TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, WEr) (RECESSIONAL OUTWASHIFILL?) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.5. 8.0 AND 10.0 FEET z GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED -4 TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED BETWEEN 0.0 AND 4.0 FEET 0 TEST PITWAS COMPLETEDAT 10.0 FEET ON 12t2a/04 TEST PITTWO SM DARK BROWN TO BLACK SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, WET) (TOPSOIIUDUFF) m c 1.0-5.0 SM GRAY -BROWN SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, WET) (FILL) M 0 0 5.0-6.0 SM DARK BROWN TO BLACK SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL AND ORGANICS (LOOSE, WET) 0 0 C ITOPSOIL) -49 m 6.0-10.0 SM RED -BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND ROOTS (LOOSE TO M z MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED TILL) z 10.0-11,0 Sm BROWN -GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL PENSE, MOIST) CTILL) > SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.0,5.0,9.0 AND 11.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS ENCOUNTERED AT APPROXIMATELY 1.0 FEET 0 n SLIGHT TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED BETWEEN 0.0 AND 6.0 FEET TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT I i.0 FEET ON 12J2a/04 9 C IT! m TEST PIT THREE 0 _c 0 0.0-1.0 SM BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVE L (LOOSE, MOIST) (FILL) o 1,0-4.0 SM GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (VERY DENSE, MOIST) (TILL) c: (a 9 J) M SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AT 4.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED ;U TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 4.0 FEET ON 12/28104 TEST PIT FOUR z -4 f.*" GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (VERY DENSE, MOIST) (TILL) x 0.0-0.5 SM NO SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED z GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED 2 TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED 0 TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 0.5 FEET ON 12128104 IT! CORNERSTONE GEOTECHNICAL, IN6. FILE NO 1791 FIGURE 4 LOG OF EXPLORATION DEPTH use SOIL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT FIVE V 0.0-1.0 SM BROWN SILTY FINE TO M EDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE, MOIST) (FILL) Sm GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (VERY DENSE, MOIST) (nLL) 1.0-1.5 NO SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED z GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED -oj TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TE TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 1.5 FEET ON 1211. m m 0 0 c m c 0 -n m M 0 0 c M 0 > z -4 z 0 m CORNERSTONE GEOTECHNICAL, INC. FILE NO 1791 FIGURE 5 Height Calculation Worksheet Date 9 Pern-tit NumberpoO6 -0,PS() Address 11/1-f Inspector rv\� z 0 Average Grade 0 Max Height (25'+Ave.),J-R� 18 Actual Height (A+B+C)A 913, C500 M CO MO 0 0 C M M z 0 -n A PH M M -7 a Co 0 C =(C) M CO M 0 Z 1> z Z 0 M Elevation of transit above Datum (B) Datum a Elevation (A) S S (p 11temp/building/fonns/height workshcet 7777777, 'Of I f9occ umpa) Z CY DEPART OF 0 BUIL=GESSECTION R110 PER INTERNAT36 L RESIDENTIAL AT: 17119 — 69" PI W F4jrrnit M 2006-0250 Occupancy established by this certificate: R3 Dwelling Units�, I No. Stories: 3 Basement: N/A Type of Constryction: VB_ 0 Owner of building: The Single Family Residence at 17119:T9I"—PRWT7"";� 7,�7,mv,�nheWbg 2003 edition of the International Residential Code as; Wotediby t .0mftispecidd and approved complying with the requirements of the fhii4 and division of occupancy and the use for which the proposed occupancy Is classified, Issued this 3e day of January, 2007 Chief Building Official By:_ 2h L Any change of occupancy or use requires a building permit and a now Certificate of Occupancy Issued by the City of Edmonds Building official. Permit Inspection Details Permit: BLD20060250 1001 - E-Eroslon Control/Mobilizatlon y 01/2312007 Sibrel 0 TESCOKperJH6116/06 Y Total Time: 0 1OU-E-StonrinTightline Complete? A, 0 1 7111/2006 Ed 20 OK 1. BF front & sides still need to see rear corner connections. N =02/2006 Ed 30 fightfine good Y Total Time: 50 z 1 US'- E-Sevier Later I at Main In spectlo do mplate?. �'Y, 12/1912006 Sibi-el 10 Legacy SS permit#10127 complete. Y Im Total Time: 10 1034 - E-Water Service Line 'do 016/206 Sibrel 6 'not wrin at meter. OK to backfif per JH 6130/06 N 0 3: C: Im 0112312007 Sibrel 0 y M 0 0 Total Time: 0 80 1077- E 7"gineering: Final 3: m 01/2312007 Mr.] �0 correction notice dwy needs to be paved before final. N m z 0V24/2007 Hawkins 15 ok to grant Engineering final Y to -q Total Time: 45 > r- -4 1106 - B-Setbacks', C 4 orn 00�/2006 MS 20 SETBACKS APPROVED PER STRUNG PROPERTY LINES y 0 Total Time: 20 -n 1106 7.B7Footings Comp ete�?�I, M 06/15/2006 NIS 20 FOOTINGS APPROVED Total Tim.: Y 20 m 0 0 17- 1110z-B�F uri prW '11' a, p6brip iete?,�, ,,: 0 m C C/) 06/22/2006 MS 20 FOUNDATION APPROVED I , I I - - y r. C/) MO Total The.: 20 11,16-B-RetainingWall co ?— triplets, 07/18 t2 0 0 6 MS 20 RETAINING WALL FO OT I NGSAPP R OVED N 07lig/2006 MS 20 RETAINING WALL APPROVED y Total Time: 40 z 1120 - B-Plumb,GrounclWork, pl t ?, Cc m 0 a 06/30M06 M S 20 UNDERGROUND PLUMBING APPROVED Y Total Time: 20 11126, B-Plumb Rough In compi to 0 0611412006 MS 20 APPROVED Y Im Total Time: 20 1128 - B-Gas Test/Pipe Complate: -�V 0912212006 MS 20 APPROVED Y Total Time: 20 1132 - S-Exterlor Sheathing Complete? 09/06/2006 MS 25 APPROVE[) y Total Time: 25 1136 - B-Shear Nailing m co plate?, 'y 10/0412006 Snook 25 APPROVED Y Total Time: 25 6/22/2009 11:32:12 AM Page I of 2 1146 -rg�Heluht-Verfflciittiq 1 -MS, Y, 06;n'12006 30 APPROVED y Total Time: 30 11142: B Framing.,.' 7; co 10104/2006 Snook 25 APPROVED y Total Time: 25 Ii44�. B.Wall dmolete 10/0412006 Sn o.k 20 APPROVED y Total Time: 20 Y� —.7 1016412006 Snook 20 APPROVED y Total Time: 20 u 1146:� B-�d�ijing Ins6litionidii Ik" Y, z 01124/2007 Snook 20 APPROVED y Total Time: 20 10/18/2006 Snook 20 APPROVED y --I -n Total Time: 20 -4 IdIn ete i, bM 'L M 01/2412007 Snook 25 APPR6VED y M -4 0 Total Time: 25 0 OC 3bIJ6 �t'k k" D �i�006 X M Ed 30 mckery drain for lot 9 portion of plat good y Total Time: 30 M z Inspections: 26 Total Time: 505 > Total 0 -n n �a M M 0 0 M C C/) Cl) 0 M -4 z 3: C', z 0 M 6/22/200911:32:12AM Page 2 of 2 RECORD OF INSPECTIONS INSPECTOR DATE APPROVED 6_tc; _011� SETBACKS .......... .......... FOUNDATION: Footing ............... Wall .............. ^ 31 Pier/Porch ................. Retaining Wall Slab Insulation 0 PLUMBING: Am Underground ............. VV-\ 0 M Rough -in ................... C: a M 0 Commercial Final 0 C: HEATING: ( 2 ITI M .1 X� - 0 z Gas Test .............. 10 V`,% C _r4 Gas Piping ........... Equipment ................. 0 -n n Commercial Final x EXTERIOR SHEATHING 11111 ITI NAILING ............... .......... a 0 a FRAMING ........... ............ 0 M C C') vvA FIRST FLOOR FRAMING Q 0 Z INSULATION ................... Floor Insulation —4 x Wall Insulation z Ceiling Insulation Cl) SHEETROCK NAILING z SPECIAL 14SPECTION 0 M MISCELLANEOUS FINAL APPROVAL FOR OCCUPANCY .................. SideSewer# AM0UtP8Id$2j�j_newJptQ. Dde WaterMeter row I— 9f bu, -wl 5 Amountftld$ �),K Reulpto 12,1W. Datelss=44U_�Expir. VA4�,