Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
960199.pdf
0 I �' CITY OF EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION t WNl'n N•1ME NA\IE j E BUSINESS (I LI (I L. ..I W\ +IC VIIL L, tjICIL ZIP TELEPHONENUMBER C ij -1n c J S `I rIC• �L. 1 1 Ll Ct 2 1 AME. lL A IIF\[' G L.41 hJ 2I.A'. D`; Pol.V—, F, - IN D , r1TLL• CItY ZIP 1111P1ONE NUMBER r��'•�IL 13L•177•Zaf`C: NAME (3 _*.")(- t'h X.cN �} �D N( CITY ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER R6. AD VA n 8C.P-1.3 W STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE (3C re CT ,, K„ c)17 K </ Legal Descrippty Rif ProPPTrty - inctud all easement uT IR I�U<-%<(i ITIDIYr..,nc Sc'•AVID.. —,,'A LT` t i �• �THc'L ihn VAE. ^T1LD IDC 1 G•L. .. TTr.-C c�rTH: P',kI, 0- CE j k.1111L.i'�i`I A C c:L:.p,-1- rG pLr>T Ut, 1., cl cI• PLA1S PA L•a `Iu oT1, FfY+-I. nTinirmw 0 ProPerly Tex Account Parch NIL $6 .ilt• " 10 . —C-V , q(O iq ® NEW p RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING ADDITION O COMMERCIAL MECHANICAL ElREMODEL �. APT. BLDG. LJ SIGN ❑ REPAIR O GRADING ❑ FENCE CYDS (_k_Fr ©DEMOLISH El INSEAOT TOVE SWIMMOTPOOL SPA © CACARPRAGE BRT R CKIERY WALL/ © RENEWAL (TYPE OF USE BUSINESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN. NUMBER Z QL..7 NUMBER OF CRITICAL OF ))' DWELLING AREAS SionIFUNITS OJU NUMBER —1 C DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN) C LT1f T•!Z% L PERMIT —/ NUMBER .D f�I�iL LEGAL DESCRIPTION CHECK 5110DIW,51ON NO 00 NO PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP TESCP RW EXISTING ._____._._ REOUIRED DEDICATION ---- __--- $Iree1 IRFPPPRCR PROPOSED .r_S.dewelY APP—ed ❑ Permit RPQUIIed ❑ Ufa P—I Revd ❑ RPQIIvad ❑ RBQuved ❑ METF,R SIZE LINE: SIZE I NO OF FIXTURES PRV REQUIRED YES ❑ NO ❑ REMARKS ENGINEERING MEMO DATED REVIEWED BY FIRE MOO TED REVIEWED BY SIGN AREA ALLOWED PROPOSED SEPA REVIEW COMPLETE 1EXEMPT ExP ADS NO --SHORELINEf VARIANCE OR CU PLANNING REVIEW 81 DATE SETBACKS —FEET FRONT SIDE REAR HEIGHT I LOT COVERAGE REMARKS CHECKED BY TYPE OF CO TRUCTION — ICODE f4t OCCUPANT GRO 3 SPECIAL INSPECTOR REQUIRED ❑ YES 'ITMARKS AREA OCCUPANT LOAD PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 305 FINAL INSPECTION REQUIRED I,Q`�I '�]: L>,oe,-E C:. sL :j1 Ili /.\1: PLAN CHECK FEE BUILDING HEaI SOURCE GLAZING ,Z. L-. % PLUMBING �•. Plan Check No. `1 __ I ( MECHANICAL This Permit covers work to be done on private properly ONLY. GAADINGIFILL Any cons) ruction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks, driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission. STATE SURCHARGE Permit Application: 180 Days Permit Limit: 1 Year - Provided Work is Started Within 180 Days STORM DRAINAGE FEE "Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns and ENG. INSPECTION FEE u, successors in inter est, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold W harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials, employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of a whatever nature, arising directly or Indirectly from the Issuance of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT omodify, waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance �7�1 nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance " TOTAL AMOUNT DUE provision I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application; that the Information given is correct; and that I am the owner, or the duly ATTENTION APPLICATION APPROVAL authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with city and THIS PERMIT slate laws regulating construction; and In doing the work authoriz• AUTHORIZES This application is not a permit until ed thereby, no person will be employed in violation of the Labor ONLY THE signed by the Building Official or his/her Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's COmpensa. WORK NOTED Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is non Insurance and RCW 18.27, INSPECTION acknowledged in space provided. SiGNA TUPt .01-ER OR AGENn DATE $1 NED DEPARTMENT CITY OF OF C 'S IGNATURE PATE N( , L. 1' EDMONDS 6 ATTENTION FOR LEA D Y -- DATE INSPECTION IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR 771 -02Go ORIGINAL — Fill YELLOW — Inspector p A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC 7 CHAPTER 3. 10247 PINK — Owner GOLD — Assessor \ 0 - .7 u , •��.1"- gull/J'1/ll /1l ullll r��ll1 �. � � iri.'-� � Awl M Al - I y p jTPROVED BY- 5 lo J E Il llllll��� - m m -Z Flo rv�_O-lr-f zvwg�N^ 41vvl- A A 32 E 0 11 1 WPM= LJALii3 01 ULM,1116 CCNICRUW Or OLWAPIC Vif.W pm4w Few PLATdF BeqmuRST (VOL. q, FU qd) 4 4,C eq%pp"&4TI LT10e9L$VTA1%CTRo ` y / W meTwO01 ReLa WRWY ACCURACY1 CONFORMS TO WAC 337-17-o" $A0NUMFNT5V13ff4E01A5N0TEP z _ O ` / go (j Z < 40"'q LU L) u L'j LU j F'p Nln'v-•V- u) LL N" 0 LU �Is.02'COESG) It A00116 D jr '?;'j t -,-. eA wG Lu 41 45- aU '0 Z wa -3b- Lu Lu 194 U 0 CAI / J — A, LU Uj F- 4z. LL c e 7 z Lu u Vol cir ip LEGEND (m) MeASUREV P) • PLAT 0 '6E71ROMPIN WITH CAP mow tz ss/zzqcq W $j PRELIMINARY BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT COW. mamumWr W/ vm�" PLAM -01 FOR WALTER YEAGER, - IN NE 1/4, SEC. 13,T 27N.,R W.M. 0 .3 E, C-7 CITY OF EDMONDS M PIvsGEo SNOHOMISH COUNT Y.WASHINGTON tft&i PIPE INCASE Lovell-Saued %300.Ll .-dwl 7-' 77; 4 4) 92 3 1 0 w 32XIC .,, .» r copY James C. Walker, P.E. Assistant City Engineer City of Edmonds Community Services Department Engineering Division 250 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, Wa. 9eO20 Dear Mr. Walker, M 171 UUIMIN7 FEB U 6 1995 January 3L. 1995 8 J mot iD �� A),pr0 exceed 20 0 fie. 0t, Re: Request for driveway slope waiver Yeager Residence Plan check no. 95-11 On Monday, January 30th, I submitted the contract documents for a new single family residence to the City of Edmonds for a building permit. During the process I was advised by Ms. Nolan that I would need a waiver for the slope of the driveway since the design exceeds the maximum of 14% recommended by the City, and that I should write a letter requesting a waiver and address it to your attention. This is that letter. An existing house now occupies the site and it will be demolished to make way for a new residence. The existing house does not have a garage, and access is gained by following .a steep unpaved path down a series of switchbacks with a few steps here and there. The pathway is difficult and dangerous enough for a physically capable person, but Mrs. Yeager is both a senior citizen and blind. It is not logical for the Yeagers to build a new residence on this site and expect Mrs. Yeager to make her way down the steep hillside in weather either fair or foul. It is much too dangerous for the elderly and blind. Also with crime being the factor it is in our society today, and with the expectation it can only get worse, the Yeagers want the security of entering a garage prior to disembarking from their automobile. During the process of developing this project I had the occasion to discuss the driveway slope with Mr. Chrisman. He told me the recommended slope should not exceed 14% but with a waiver the slope could be up to but not exceed 20%. I spent a considerable amount of time investigating schemes with the intent of having the least possible driveway slope, but when all factors are considered including maximum possible footprint area due to slope of the site, the height necessary to generate enough floor area to make the project financially feasible, and the average grades used in the 25 foot height restriction calculations, it became clear the only solution was a driveway slope of exactly 20%. To aid in the accurate design of the driveway Mr. Yeager hired a professional surveyor to accurately determine the existing grades on the site. A copy of that survey is included in the documents submitted to the city for the building permit. A copy of the Site Plan for the project is included with this letter for your information. Please notice the that both the existing grades and the finished grades along the driveway are accurately shown. Also notice the note that no portion 9f the driveway may exceed a 1.30 �- 0 ■ � M �T�n� 32x slope of 20%. A contract with the contractor responsible for the driveway construction will be made prior to the beginning of the work requiring that no portion of the driveway can exceed 20%. It will be his responsibility to do whatever is necessary to be certain the 20% slope is not exceeded. If you have questions concerning thus project please contact me by telephone at 1-360-377-2066. Very truly yours, L� & Cain, Arch4tect m 32XIE January 31, 1995 Sharon Nolan Permit Coordinator City of Edmonds Community Services Department Building Division 250 - 5th Ave. N Edmonds, Wa. 98020 Re: Plan Check no. 95-11 Walter Yeager Residence Structural Calculations Dear Ms. Nolan, Mr Yeager and I submitted the construction documents for his new residence to you on Monday, January 30th. The submittal was complete with the exception of the structural calculations and a request for a driveway slope waiver. Two sets of the structural calculations are enclosed. I will mail the driveway slope waiver request to Mr. Walker today. Thanks for help, Wallace Cain, Architect CITY OF EDMONDS LAURA M.'HALL 250 - STH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (2061771.0220 • FAX (2061771.0221 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 890-199 O Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation • Engineering February 24, 1995 Mr. Wallace Cain 3 83 9 Erlands Point Road Northwest Bremerton, Washington 98312 RE: Yeager SFR @ 18504 Olympic View Drive, Plan Check #95-11 This is a follow-up to our conversation regarding the requirement for a soils report for the subject project. As we discussed on the phone, the City has established Chapter 19.05 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) to regulate sensitive and steep slope areas (lots in excess of 15% slope). In reviewing the site plan, the building pad area has a slope of 24.3% (the overall slope of the lot is 25.5%). Since the code requires that lots in excess of 15% slope adhere to ECDC 19.05 the following is required: a soils report, all plans stamped by a licensed engineer, outside consultant review, a hold - harmless agreement, a site restoration bond and a ten year liability insurance policy. The code does however grant authority to the Building Official to waive certain requirements of this chapter provided a favorable soils report is submitted to the City. Since the site itself is subject to Chapter 19.05 and I cannot waive the soils report requirement and it would be in the best interests of your client to provide a report at his earliest convenience so the review process in not delayed. Furthermore, based -on the findings of the soils report I will have to render decisions on what, if any, of the other code requirements can be waived. I have included a soils report informational handout for your convenience. Either a state licensed civil engineer or geotechnical engineer may be the author of the soils report. Any recommendations called out in the soils report for the development or design of the site shall be incorporated into the plans on file with the City. Thank you, Jeannine L. Graf Building Official • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan 4 32XIC March 8.1995 Community Services Department RECEIVED City of Edmonds MAR 1 .� 250 5th Avenue North WS Edmonds, Washington 98020 KWOMM REF: City of Edmonds Plan Review Number 95-11 The Yeager Residence Resubmittal Package To whom it may concern, Included in this resubmittal package you will find the following: 1. Two complete sets of the Architects Construction Drawings which have been updated to include corrections as required by the Structural Review. 2. One complete set of the Structural and Civil Engineers Calculations including his responses to the comments made by the Structural Review. 3. A separate envelope for Mr. Chrisman containing one additional set of the Civil Engineers Storm Drainage Calculations and two copies of a Driveway Profile as he requested in a phone call to my answering machine on March 3rd. If you have additional requirements please notify me by calling 360-377-2066. i llace E. C in, itect Da March 8. 1995 Community Services Department City of Edmonds 250 5th Avenue North Edmonds, Washington 98020 REF: City of Edmonds Plan Review Number 95-11 The Yeager Residence Dear Mr. Chrisman. RECEIVED MAR 1 31995 V MR COUWER On March 3rd you left a call on my answering machine requesting copies of the Civil Engineers Storm Drainage Calculations for the subject project. Also you requested a drawing of the Driveway Slope Profile. Those items are enclosed in this envelope. If you need additional information please call me at 360-377- 2066. v [d'allace E. Cain, Architect 1*7 0 • 10. 32XIC b March 21. 1995 RECEIVE® Sharon Nolan MAR 2 1995 Permit Coordinator Community Services Department PERMIT COUNTER City of Edmonds 250 5th Avenue North Edmonds, Washington 98020 Ref: City of Edmonds Plan Review Number 95-11 The Yeager Residence Corrected Storm Drainage Drawing and Calculations Dear Ms. Nolan, I received a telephone call from Mr. Chrisman during which he informed me my Civil Engineer may have made an error in his storm water detention calculations. Investigation has proven that was indeed the case. The calculations and the details on the drawing have now been revised. Enclosed are two copies of the corrected Sheet 1, and two sets of the corrected Storm Calculations. Would you please do whatever is necessary with this informatic review process may proceed. If you need additional information or have comment call me at 360-377-2066. �� L� Gace E. Cain, Architect O tti� RECEIVED APR 2 8 1995 PLANNING DEPT. GAVE WILSON CERTIFIED 1"IRBURISI 2j2- 350 DATE APRIL 17. I?7f-i TO WALTER YEAGER RE TREE PROTECTION/M.111111IG PLAN REVISIONS Mr. YeaLier. I will herein address the -uecific trer, is -.='Lies that. are of concern to the City of Edmonds' Flarillina Division. as stated iii their Plan Chock Carrectioiis. Item #2- Ouestions the remuval of the -.6" and 16" doat-jood on the north r)ruperty Iiiie. Firstly, the Z-6" ft)arjlr-- is to remain. althrntall "toppinq" of this tree is planned. !--Hrice "tovoit)q" i.-).f trees is, not an ArboriculLur-AlIv soi-ind nractice I would recommend that VC.ILI C0nSiC1F.--I- Crown redttction (or "drop -crotch") DrUflilltl f0r- this tree. Information on this Druninq technique is available on request. Secondly, as stated Con rj;.nj(t� 2 of the original Tree Cutting Plan. the 16" doqwoud is dead and should be removed. Item #3A: Issue resolved. Item #:3B: ISIMA6.1 resolved AlthOL10h this is not a willow tree, but rather* a dElUble-steinmF.�d birch. The following addresses issues brought forth by ECDC, 18. 45. 050H. In paragraph 2 of ECDC 10.175.o5ull it is stated that. "Where the drioline of a tree averlaDs Fk construction line....". I tat.-".e that to mean that the City is aware that in some cases the nartial. intrusion of a drioline may be unavoidable, as is the case on your heavily treed lot. ;CITY COPY a 32XIL rage Through years of research it has bean fouml that: a tree can remain healthy and relatively uivaffected when as much as 1/3 of its' rout zone (which e!:ter!ds far" beyond the dripline) is impacted or removed -- soeci•fir_ information available con rertuest. Upon inspection of the trees to remain on vor_lr property I have 'Found there has been Tattle disruption of the root zones. Any tree that may be partiallv impacted throuuh the dripline area will. therefore, retain JhIAVh more than 2/3 of the root: zone as long as the r•ool zone protection measures set: forth by 1?CAA.; I1 ,4*5,.oE:iOfl art_ followed. I would make one change concerning FCD[; 11.1,4`.i,irSl'!FI 07 Instead of a rope barrier fl.:u- rook zone orl:Aecl::ion I would suggest construction fencing, chair link: fencing. or a barrier made OF wood. You should also make sure that the Site Foreman inform every worker on the site that these barrier- are not to be arossl:ad. Lastly, I would.suyyest that. the 3 -• IQ" maples ("V" on the free Cutting F'lanl he or•unecl using the same "drop -crotch" method as simp4p.sted for the 36" maple in par-agraoh #2 of this r•egorl:. Dave Wilson. f.:ert. i •f i ed Ar trrn i St . =Q,kp�lOHq! .roJ 0o w, �9BORICU�IJQ W r of 0 CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING UIIATNG DIVISION CONDITIONS OF A PPROVAL FOR BUILDING PERMIT Property Address: 19504 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, Washington Property Owner: Walter Yeager Pursuant to ECDC 18.45.5011 and Certified Arborist recommendations for protection of existing trees on site during construction, the following are conditions of approval must be followed during all phases of construction: 1. Erect and maintain a temporary chain link construction fence or harrier made of wood to protect the root zone of the existing.trees to remain, as recommended by the Certified Arborist, Dave Wilson (see lei ter dated April 17, 1995). In addition, provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. 2. There shall he no filling, excavation, stacking or storage of equipment, or compaction of the earth in any way that impacts the inner 2/3 of the viable root zone area of any existing tree to be retained. 3. If the grade level adjoining a retaining tree is to be raised or lowered, a dry rock wall or rock well shall he constricted around the tree. The wall or well may not intrude into a tree's root zone more than 2 of that root zone. 4. No ground level impervious surface material shall be installed within the inner 2/3 of the viable root zone aren. 5. The grade level around any tree to be retai ied may be lowered within the inner 2/3 of the viable root zone siren. APPROVED BY •s ;CITYrCOPY (�Vpe ILY, 0 0 • R; 0 32X C *v N1 C 7-1 NO EXCISE fAX REQUIRED rcn2C 1994 GRANT OF EASEMENT & J,'j 3 1) KIRKS SIEVIIS, Swhorcisl (odg�Jpfi�terpROPERTY AGREEMENT THIPY iIV— executed and entered into at Edmonds, Snohomish County, State of Washington this Z3 day of July, 1994, by and between James A. Smith and Myrtle Anne Smith, husband and wife, and Walter M. Yeager and Barbara A. Yeager, husband and wife, :.x hereinafter respectively referred to as "Smith" and "Yeager", W I T N E S E T H: WHEREAS, Smith is the owner of residential real estate, Parcel 2 on the engineering drawing attached and incorporated as Exhibit A and parties Yeager are owners of the adjoining tract immediately to the south, sharing a common boundary, identified as Parcel 1 on Exhibit A attached, and WHEREAS, Yeager is desirous of obtaining a building permit from the City of Edmonds to construct a new residence and incidental thereto requires access and use of a storm drainage system currently located -on, within and under Parcel 2 owned by Smith, and WHEREAS, Smith is willing to grant a perpetual easement to Yeager for use and access to such drainage system to facilitate the grant of a building permit and the construction of a new residence on Parcel 1, and WHEREAS, in consideration of such grant of easement, Yeager is willing to jointly maintain the easement area to be defined below, and to remove, maintain and/or trim native deciduous trees located on the Yeager property, Parcel 1 as more particularly identified in topographic survey dated January 6, 1994, attached -1- 29, C0P F26 sq 32 X I .; .0mm e [7 IM n as Exhibit B and incorporated by this reference, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the parties' mutual promises and undertakings, they agree as follows: 1. For a good and valuable consideration receipt of which is hereby acknowledged in the form of this executed agreement, Smiths do grant to Yeager an easement for use and access to an existing six-inch diameter stormwater system presently in place and use on Parcel 2 legally described as follows: an area seven feet in width north of the south boundary line of parcel 2 measured from the adjusted lot line between Parcels 1 and 2 established by quit claim deed recorded under Number 8202010131 as confirmed by agreement recorded under Number 8202010133 and by lot line adjustment recorded under Number 9404180612, and running in an east west direction 40 feet from the western boundary of said Parcel 2. (a) The purpose of the easement shall be to provide lot 1 with access and use to an existing storm drainage system located within the easement area sufficient for construction of a new residence on Parcel 1. (b) The easement shall extend to the surface and beneath the surface within the easement area and shall permit grantee to go onto and into the easement for the purpose of constructing and maintaining a connection to the existing drainage system to service a residence to be constructed on Parcel 1 and to do all things necessary and incidental to accomplish the purpose for grant of this easement. (c) Upon completion of the installation and hook-up, the surface of the ground within the easement area shall be restored to its prior condition. Grantee shall also have access to the easement area for purpose of repair and maintenance. (d) Thereafter the parties shall be jointly and equally responsible for maintenance of the easement area, and the drainage system located therein. -2- VOL. 29, G0PAu29V0(F 32 IE ....r..rrrur 0 3. Upon issuance of building' permit for the construction of a new residence on Parcel 1 at the instance and application of Yeager, Yeager will, at their sole expense, trim or remove natural deciduous trees located on Parcel '1 specifically identified by reference to the topographic survey, Exhibit B attached as follows: Remove Maple Tree Number 6; Remove Maple Tree Number 32; Remove Alder Number 24- Remove Dogwood Number 16;1 20 feet Maple Tree Number 36 will be topped at 20. 4. Upon advance of that portion of the property inclusive of Maple 10 per Exhibit B, Yeager will, at their expense top the Maple clump in such as manner as to not impede the water view from the existing residence located on Parcel 2. "SMITH" By: ames A. Smit By:,/�%Lc.i1�z ,Myrtle Anne Smith "YEAGER" By: Wa m, -YY1,-JETb�fay. 1 Walter M. Yeager -7 By. rbara A. Ye r -3- t11 1�921301 �S14 �. VOL. 2��i0PGGE269� o .r r� M ■s�� a���nt�^r� y , 32XC 0 0 U L 4, TO: Permit Coordinator, Building Division FROM: FIRE DEPARTMENT =ENGINEERING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION OWNER \/�/����L ADDRESS PERMITd(J I ! ! ADB# INSPECTED ON Q)ec-2. 199(, A field inspection was conducted to determine compliance with approved plans. Final approval denotes there are no objections to the granting of: Occupancy for the building Performance'Bonds may be released Maintenance Bonds may be released Landscaping is approved Other inspected PASSED FIRST INSPECTION - CONDITIONS NOTED 1. 2. FAILED INSPECTION - OUTSTANDING REQUIREMENTS - RECALL FOR INSPECTION 1. 2. 3. 4. N OCCUPANCY APPROVAL FAILED FIRST INSPECTION RE -INSPECTED - APPROVED RE -INSPECTED - FAILED RE -INSPECTED APPROVED OCCAPRVL/TXTRECEP/October 13, 1993 DATE m ps. 2 06 BY DATE BY DATE BY_ DATE BY DATE FEES RECEIPT#. 1. e 0 r 0 0 0 Z = Z �w a� w U J 0 w= RECORD 01_.00NTACTS J � 0 W Y < J 1 21 _ �D To 2 22 z h 3 23 z 4 24 w w 0 5 25 v rn o F, 6 26 = L) 7 27 - F-F, -` 0 z 8 28 RW PERMIT A DATE ISSUED RECEIPT #29 Cr z 10 30 11 31 12 32 13 PAID RECEIPT # DATE 33 SS PERMIT # PZO D T I 1 -54ECEIPT3 3 ~ 14 PAID $ RECEIPT 0 DATE 34 r 15 35 0 16 36 17 37 METER SIZE //PAID $. DATE / RECEIPT 18 38 7"/ c ��Z 7- �(/ �(SL7� 19 39 C✓Z 0 20 40 0 0 E* 0 PROJECT REVIEW CHECKLIST VZ-- PROJkCT NAME:A 6;— !_�; - — PLAN CHECK PROJECT ADDRESS: RECEIPT DATE: _Z.:�,-�— Reviewed By: FIRE PLANNING ENGINEERING PUBLIC WORKS rj 0 00 0 ■ 141 RECORD OF INSPECTIONS INSPECTOR DATE APPROVED SETBACKS ................... FOUNDATION: Footing .................... Wall ....................... Pier/Porch................ - Retaining Wall............ Slab Insulation............ PLUMBING: Underground ............. Rough -In ................. Commercial Final........ HEATING: - Gas Test....:............ G as Plping ................ Equipment ................ Commercial Final......... EXTERIOR SHEATHING NAILING .................... FRAMING .................... INSULATION: Floor Insulation........... Wall Insulation ........... Ceiling Insulation......... SHEETROCK NAILING ...... SPECIAL INSPECTION ...... RADON MONITOR AT SITE.FINAL APPROVAL FOR OCCUPANCY .......... % F^fs V 0 32XIE