The URL can be used to link to this page

BLD2019-0116Type: RESIDENTIAL BLDG Subtype: NEW SINGLE FAMILY Status: ISSUED Parcel No: 00434600007901 Site Address: 9527 190TH PIL SW EDMONDS,WA 98020 Applied: 1/30/2019 Subdivision: 005319, 004346, BLA AFN 201211210469 Lot: Issued: 1/22/2020 NED Fire Sprinklers: No Lot Area: 35 Zoning: RS-12 Final: Valuation: $384,592.24 Occupancy Type: SFR IRC Construction Type: VB Expiration Date: 1�/p r2021 NED Code Edition: 2015 No. Stories: 1 # of Dwelling Units: 1 WORK DESCRIPTION: NEW SFR, PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL INCLUDED 14UM FIRE SPRINKLER UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT CONTACTS NAME TYPE NAME ADDRESS PHONE EMAIL APPLICANT STROBL DESIGN PO BOX 20764, SEATTLE WA (206)661-3622 JACOB@STROBLDESIGN.COM 98102 CONTRACTOR PETERSON CUSTOM 2114 120TH PIL SW, EVERETT (206)351-7255 PCHBUILDER@MSN.COM HOMES WA 98204 OWNER CHAK AND EVA AW I 114 N 200TH ST, SHORELINE (425)785-203qCHAKAW63@GMAIL.COM WA 98133 Contractor License Information: WA State Contractor L & I #:PETERCH968JH City of Edmonds Business License #: 602454996-001- 0001 FEE INFORMATION DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT AMOUNT PAID DATE '";"RECEIPT4 B-BUILDING PERMIT FEE 001.000.322.10.000.00 $2,810.00 B-BUILDING PLAN REVIEW FEE 001.000.345.83.000.00 $2,304.00 $2,304.00 1/31/19 REC07539S B-GRADING PERMIT FEE 001.000.322.10.000.00 $370.00 B-MECHANICAL PERMIT FEE 001.000.322.10.000.00 $170.00 B-PLUMBING PERMIT FEE 001.000.322.10.000.00 $340.00 B-STATE BUILDING CODE 001.000.237.150 $6.50 SURCHARGE ENGINEERING INSPECTION FEE 001.000.341.82.000.00 $100.00 ENGINEERING INSPECTION FEE 001.000.341.82.000.00 $800.00 ENGINEERING REVIEW FEE 001.000.341.82.000.00 $240.00 PARK IMPACT ADMIN FEE 001.000.322.10.000.00 $50.00 PARK IMPACT FEE 332.100.345.85.000.00 $2,734.05 STORMWATER GENERAL 422.000.379.00.000.00 $1,328.20 FACILITY CHARGE COM/MF TRAFFIC IMPACT ADMIN FEE 001.000.341.82.000.00 $50.00 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE 112.502.345.86.000.00 $4,561.37 X-RECORDING FEE 001.000.345.89.030.00 $204.50 $204.50 7/5/19 REC076849 X-TECHNOLOGY FEE 001.000.321.99.100.00 $35.00 4000P 0z Printed: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 9:32:41 AM 1 of 5 ,e� 1,e,o TOTALS: $16,103.62 $2,508.50 CONDITIONS CONDITIONTY STATUS - NOTES 48 Hrs Notice-ENGR Final 48 hours notice is required when requesting your FINAL Engineering Inspection. 425-771-0220, ext.1326. Applicant shall repair/replace all damage to utilities or frontage improvements in Damage to Frontage City right-of-way per City standards that is caused by or occurs during the Improvments permitted project. Electrical Permit Obtain Electrical Permit from State Department of Labor & Industries. 425-290- 1309 ESC Required Maintain erosion & sedimentation control per city standards. In addition to the required pressure/relief valve, an approved listed expansion Expansion Tank tank shall be installed on all hot water tanks. Per UPC 608. Approval of this foundation design is conditional subject to inspection of existing site soil conditions. Retaining Walls must be designed and constructed to resist the lateral pressure Foundation Bearing of the retained material. Provisions must be made for the control and drainage of surface water around buildings. Applicant, an behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns, and successors in interests, agrees to indemnify defend and hold harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials, employees, and agents from any and all claims for Hold Harmless damages of whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the issuance for this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to modify, waive or reduce any requirements of any City ordinance nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance provision. Hose Bibbs (exterior faucets) are required to have a permanently affixed anti - Hose Bibbs siphon device installed. Lot Lines Staked Lot line stakes must be in place at the time of foundation/setback inspection. Maximum Height 2S feet. The agent/contractor shall set up the equipment; establish the datum point and the point of average grade. Call for inspection to Maximum Height verify. These items must be consistent with the approved plan. If the proposed height of a building (as shown on the plans) is within 12 inches of the maximum height permitted for the zone an elevation survey is required. Final approval on a project or final occupancy approval must be granted by the Building Official prior to use or occupancy of the building or structure. Check the Occupancy job card for all required City inspections including final project approval and final occupancy inspections. Printed: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 9:32:41 AM 2 of 5 RESIDENTIAL BLDG Permit PERMIT NUMBER :41111P111". City of Edmonds 121 Sth Ave N, Edmonds WA 98020 BLD2019-0116 www.edmondswa.gov 425.771.0220 Any request for alternate design, modification, variance or other administrative deviation (hereinafter "variance") from adopted codes, ordinances or policies must be specifically requested in writing and be called out and identified. Processing fees for such request shall be established by Council and shall be paid upon submittal and are non-refundable. Permit Disclaimer Approval of any plat or plan containing provisions which do not comply with city code and for which a variance has not been specifically identified, requested and considered by the appropriate city off icial in accordance with the appropriate provision of city code or state law does not approve any items not to code specification. New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly Post Address visible from the street or road fronting the property. Address numbers shall be Arabic numerals or alphabet letters. Numbers shall be legible from the public way, at least 4 inches high with a A inch min. stroke width on a contrasting background. PRV Required Pursuant to UPC 608 a pressure regulator valve (PRV) shall be installed near the water shutoff. Separate Permit Required For: FIRE. A residential fire sprinkler system is required. A recommended flow -through design will meet specifications and reduce equipment and continuing Separate Permit Required maintenance requirements. ECDC19.05.020132. Provide a minimum combination water service of one inch (1") meter and one and one half (11/2") service line, or show that domestic and fire protection needs can be met with a smaller service. DFM17 Sound/Noise originating from temporary construction sites as a result of construction activity are exempt from the noise limits of ECC Chapter 5.30 only Sound/Noise during the hours of 7:00arn to 6:00pm on weekdays and 10:00am and 6:00prn on Saturdays, excluding Sundays and Federal Holidays. At all other times the noise originating from construction sites/activities must comply with the noise limits of Chapter 5.30, unless a variance has been granted pursuant to ECC 5.30.120. Underground Utility Locates Call for locates of underground utilities prior to any excavation. Underground Wiring All new, extended, re -built or relocated electrical utility and/or service shall be placed underground. Vent Connectors Type B or L vent connectors required on fuel -burning appliances passing through unheated spaces. Per IMC 803.2 Water Line Asbuilt Owner/Contractor to provide Water Service Line asbuilt at final inspection. See City Standards for requirements. City approved plastic piping may be used in water service piping provided that where metal water service piping is used for electrical grounding purposes, Water Service Piping replacement piping shall be of like materials (UPC 604.8). A state electrical permit and inspection is required if electrical grounding is altered, removed, improved, or added. Contact State Dept. of Labor & Industries Electrical Division at 425-290-1400. Printed: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 9:32:41 AM 3 of S RESIDENTIAL BLDG Permit City of Edmonds PERMIT NUMBER 121 5th Ave N, Edmonds WA 98020 BLD2019-0116 www.edmondswa.gov / 425.771.0220 Water Service Shutoff Pursuant to UPC 605.2 a water service shutoff shall be installed on the water line as it enters the building. Whole House Fan Installer shall provide the manufacturer's installation, operating instructions, and a whole house ventilation system operation description. A label shall be affixed to the whole house timer control that reads "Whole House Ventilation" (see operating instructions). SEQID �iIASP C7110N. TYPE INSPE I N S PEC t6mp ETED DATE' TIONS kesbLT,�.-'-, NO E& B-6 BUILDING FINAL" OTHER - BUILDING E-2 TESC AND MOBILIZE B-1 BUILDING PRECON B-2 FOOTINGS B-2 FOUNDATION DRAIN B-2 FOUNDATION WALL B-2 PIER FOOTINGS B-2 RETAINING WALL B-2 SETBACKS B-3 UNDERFLR FRAMING B-4 DRYWALL FASTENING B-4 HEIGHT VERIFICATION B-2 SLAB INSULATION B-3 GAS PIPING TEST B-3 LATH B-3 MECH ROUGH IN B-3 PLUMB GROUND WK B-3 PLUMB ROUGH IN B-5 INSULATION ENERGY E-3 STRM TIGHTLINE E-4 DRIVE WIDTH SLOPE B-4 FRAMING B-3 ROOF SHEATHING Printed: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 9:32:41 AM 4 of 5 OIL' RESIDENTIAL BLDG Permit PERMIT NUMB? City of Edmonds 121 Sth Ave N, Edmonds WA 98020 BLD2019-0116 Ll www.edmondswa.gov 425.771.0220 B-4 INTERIOR SHEATH E-4 DWTRENCH E-4 RET WALL DRAA L-4 WA ILK SERVICE LINE—j�� E-6 ENGINEERING FINAL — Printed: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 9:32:41 AM 5 of S '�)V. Isq, BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION Development Services Building Division 121 Sth Ave N / Edmonds, WA 98020 425.771.0220 For handouts, submittal requirements, permit status and inspection scheduling information go to: httl)!//www.edmotidswa.gov/ JOB SITE INFORMATION/LOCATION. (Where the work is taking place) Job Site Address: 9527 190th PI SW, Edmonds, Wa 98020 Parcel: 00434600007901 Lot /Unit/Suite #: Subdivision: —, PROPERTY OWNER: Name: Chak & Eva Aw Mailing Address: 114 N 200th St City/State/Zip: Shoreline, WA 98133 Phone #: 425-785-2038 Email: chakaw63@gmail.com OWNER INSTALLATION: *If yes, read and sign* Wilt work be performed by the property owner? ED Yes El No I own, reside in, or will reside in the completed structure. This installation is being made on property that I own which is not intended for sale, lease, rent, or exchange according to RCW 18.27.090. Owner Signature: APPLICANT / CONTACT INFORMATION: Name of Applicant: Jacob Strobl MailingAddress: POBOX20764 City/State/Zip: SEATTLE/WA/98102 Phone tt: 206-661-3622 E-mail: jacob@strobldesign.com GENERAL CONTRACTOR, (if different from applicant) General Contractor: PETERSON CUSTOM HOMES INC Mailing Address: 2114 - 120TH PL SW #13 City/State/Zip: EVERETT/ WA/ 98204 Phone#: 425-789-1711 pchbuilder@msn.com WA STATE CONTRACTOR L & I # (CCB) & EXPIRATION DATE: PETERCH968JH - Exp. 04/08/2020 CITY OF EDMONDS BUSINESS LICENSE #: per(nd # TYPE OF PERMIT (Provide Details on Page 2) 111 Accessory Structure/ 0 Addition Detached Garage El Demolition 0 Mechanical 0 Plumbing [N New Single Family/ Duplex 0 Fire Sprinkler 0 Remodel 11 New Commercial/ Mixed Use 0 Re -Roof 0 Signs 0 Tank 0 Tenant improvement 0 Other Remociei rermiy Tees are vasea on: The value of the work performed. Indicate the value (rounded to and the profit for the work indicated on this application, Valuation: PROPOSED NEW SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THIS APPLICATION Basement sqft: 1,244 Finished IN Unfinished 11 1st Floor, sq ft: 2,452 2nd Floor, sqft: Garage/Ca r port:, sq ft: 679 Deck/Covered Porch/Patio: 522 Other sq ft: basement storai: 756 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Construction of new single family house per pi ns. I certify that the information I have provided on this formlapplication is true, correct and complete, and that I am the property owner or duly authorized agent of the property owner to submit a permit application to the City of Edmonds. Print Name, doM Signature* ::::2r._ ate_ A- GENERAL COMMERCIAL DATA Occupancy Group(s): Occupant Load(s): Type(s) of Construction: Fire Sprinklers: Yes El No El WA STATE ENERGY CODE: If your project affects the building envelope, mechanical systems, and/or lighting, you must complete the appropriate WSEC forms. DEFERRED SUBMITTALS: All commercial building permits that will require associated plumbing, mechanical, fire sprinkler, and/or fire alarm permits are applied for separately. TI / CHANGE OF USE / NEW BLDG: Include TRAFFIC IMPACT worksheet MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT COUNTS (New and Relocated) BTUs Gas / Elec Other Qty A/C Unit /Compressor Air Handler /VAV Boiler Dryer Duct Elec Exhaust Fans 7 Fireplace Gas 2 Furnace Gas Heat Pump Unit Hydronic Heating Roof Top Unit (Provide eleva- tions if a Commercial Bldg) Other: PLUMBING FIXTURE COUNTS (New, Relocated or re -piped) Qty Qty Clothes Washer 1 Tub/ Showers 3 Dishwasher 1 Backflow Device (RPBA, DCDA, AVB) Drinking Fountain Pressure Reduction/ Regulator Valve Floor Drain/Sink Refrigerator Water Supply Hose Bibs 2 Water Heater - Tankless? Y or N N Hydronic Heat Water Service Line Sinks 8 Other: Toilets 4 Other: GAS/FUEL CONNECTION COUNTS (New, Relocated or re -piped) BTUs Qty BTUs Qty A/C Unit Outdoor BBQ / Fire pit Boiler Stove/Range/Oven Dryer Water Heater Fireplace/ Insert 2 Other: Furnace Other: MEDICAL GAS, AIR VACUUM COUNTS (New, Relocated or re -piped) Qty Qty Carbon Dioxide Nitrous Oxide Helium Oxygen Medical Air Other: Medical - Surgical Vacuum Other: DEMOLITION Type of structure to be demolished: Square footage of structure to be demolished: AHERA Survey done? Y/N PSCAA Case #: Critical Areas Determination: Study Required El Conditional Waiver El Waiver El Fill in Place El Fill Material: Removal E] Size of Tank (Gallons) Critical Areas Determination: Study Required El Conditional Waiver El Waiver El GRAD E/Fl LL/EXCAVATE Grading:Cut 1,120 cubic yards Fill 850 cubic yards Cut / Fill in Critical Area: Yes IX No El GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICATIONS: Applications are valid for a maximum of 1 year. ESLHA Applications, 2 years. LICENSING: All contractors and subcontractors are required to be licensed with Washington State Department of Labor & Industries and have a current City of Edmonds Business License. RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT PERMIT NUMB City of Edmonds k P 121 5th Ave N, Edmonds WA 98020 ENG2019-0439�:�' www.cityofedmonds.gov / 425.771.0220 Description: AW SFR - INSTALL UTILITIES, SW, CURB RAMP, CROSS WALK ISSUED: 01/22/2020 Address: 9527 190TH PL SW EDMONDS WA 98020 EXPIRES: 07/20/2020 ,Permit Type: RIGHT OF WAY Permit Subtype: RESIDENTIAL Parcel Number: 00434600007901 CONTACTS NAME TYPE NAME ADDRESS PHONE APPLICANT CHAK AND EVA AW 114 N 200TH ST, SHORELINE WA 98133 (425)785-2038 CONTRACTOR PETERSON CUSTOM HOMES 2114 120TH PL SW, EVERETT WA 98204 (206)351-7255 OWNER CHAK AND EVA AW 114 N 200TH ST, SHORELINE WA 98133 (425)785-2038 FEE INFORMATION DESCRIPTION AMOUNT PAID, ENGINEERING INSPECTION FEE $1,000.00 ENGINEERING INSPECTION FEE $100.00 RIGHT OF WAY STANDARD PERMIT FEE $300.00 X-TECHNOLOGY FEE $35.00 REQUIREMENTS REQUIREMENTTYPE NOTES TRAFFIC CONTROL Traffic control and public safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City Engineer. Every flagger must be trained as required by WAC 296-155-305 and must have certification verifying completion of the required training in their posession. RESTORATION Restoration is to be in accordance with City codes. All street -cut trench work shall be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to the end of the workday - No Exceptions WARRANTY The contractor is responsible for workmanship and materials for a period of one year following Ithe final inspection and acceptance of the work. INSPECTION SCHEDULING: WWW.MYBUILDING PERMIT.COM 24 HR NOTICE REQUIRED INDEMNITY The Applicant has signed an application which states helshe holds the City of Edmonds harmless from injuries, damages or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, foreseen or unforeseen, that may be made against the City of Edmonds or any of its departments or employees, including but not limited to the defense of any legal proceedings including defense costs and attorneyfees by reason of granting this permit. RELEASED BY THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT VALID UNTIL FEES ARE PAID AND THE CITY ENGINEER OR HIS/HER DEPUTY HAS SIGNED BELOW DA Printed: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 9:43:15 AM 1 of 2 \4 CONDITION TYPE�"' RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT City of Edmonds PERMIT NUMBER 121 Sth Ave N, Edmonds WA 98020 ENG2019-0439 www.cityofedmonds.gov / 425.771.0220 CONDITIONS NOTES Damage to Frontage Improvements Applicant shall repair/replace all damage to utilities or frontage improvements in City right-of-way per City standards that is caused by or occurs during the permitted project. ESC Required Maintain erosion & sedimentation control. Keep street clean. ROW Restoration Restore ROW to City standards Sounds/Noise Sound/Noise originating from temporary construction sites as a result of construction activity are exempt from the noise limits of ECC Chapter 5.30 only during the hours of 7:00am to 6:00pm on weekdays and 10:00am and 6:00pm on Saturdays, excluding Sundays and Federal Holidays. At all other times the noise originating from construction sites/activities must comply with the noise limits of Chapter 5.30, unless a variance has been granted pursuant to ECC S.30.120. Traffic Control Handout Traffic Control per approved plan and MUTCD. Refer to City of Edmonds traffic control requirements. Underground Utility Locates Call for locates of underground utilities prior to any excavation. Utility Patch Restoration Utility patch restoration to be in accordance with Edmonds Standard detail E2.3 Work on Adjacent Property Easement and/or permission from adjacent property owner is required prior to entry/work within adjacent property. INSPECTION TYPE, DATE COMPLETE 01AUX0111114" LIM RESULT NOTES ROW COMPACT TEST ROW CURB POST ROW CURB PRE ROW DW APPROACH ROW MAILBOX PRE ROW PVMT SUBGRADE ROW RESTOR LIMITS ROW SIDEWALK POST ROW SIDEWALK PRE ROW STRIPING ROW TRAFFIC CTRL SWR LTRAL CONNECT SWR LTRAL PRESSUR SWR MAIN TAP SWR PIPE ROW STRM CONNECT ENGINEERING FINAL" Printed: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 9:43:15 AM 2 of 2 SEWER PERMIT VJ PERMIT NUMB�� 7-7 " City of Edmonds 121 Sth Ave N, Edmonds WA 98020 ENG2019-0438 www.cityofedmonds.gov / 425.771.0220 Description: INSTALL SIDE SEWER ISSUED: 01/22/2020 Address: 9527 190TH PL SW EDMONDS WA 98020 EXPIRES- 01/22/2021 PermitType: SEWER Permit Subtype: OTHER Parcel Number: 00434600007901 CONTACTS NAME TYPE NAME ADDRESS PHONE APPLICANT CHAK AND EVA AW 114 N 200TH ST, SHORELINE WA 98133 (425)785-2038 CONTRACTOR PETERSON CUSTOM HOMES 2114 120TH PL SW, EVERETT WA 98204 (206)351-7255 OWNER CHAK AND EVA AW 114 N 200TH ST, SHORELINE WA 98133 (425)785-2038 FEE INFORMATION DESCRIPTION AMOUNT PAV ENGINEERING INSPECTION FEE $200.00 SEWER GENERAL FACILITY CHARGE RESIDENTIAL $4,417.00 SIDE SEWER NEW $100.00 X-TECHNOLOGY FEE $35.00 REQUIREMENTS REQUIREMENT TYPE NOTES TRAFFIC CONTROL Traffic control and public safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City Engineer. Every flagger must be trained as required by WAC 296-155-305 and must have certification verifying completion of the required training in their posession. RESTORATION Restoration is to be in accordance with City codes. All street -cut trench work shall be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to the end of the workday - No Exceptions WARRANTY The contractor is responsible for workmanship and materials for a period of one year following the final inspection and acceptance of the work. INSPECTION SCHEDULING: WWW.MYBUILDING PERMIT.COM 77 24 HR NOTICE REQUIRED INDEMNITY The Applicant has signed an application which states helshe holds the City of Edmonds harmless from injuries, damages or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, foreseen or unforeseen, that may be made against the City of Edmonds or any of its departments or employees, including but not limited to the defense of any legal proceedings including defense costs and attorney fees by reason of granting this permit. RELEASED BY THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT VALID UNTIL FEES ARE PAID AND THE CITY ENGINEER OR HIS/HER DEPUTY HAS SIGNED BELOW DATE Printed: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 9:44:48 AM I of 2 SEWER PERMIT PERMIT NUMBER City of Edmonds 121 Sth Ave N, Edmonds WA 98020 ENG2019-0438 www.cityofedmonds.gov / 42S.771.0220 CONDITIONS CONDITION TYPE NOTES 10'Separation- Water & Maintain 10' separation between the sanitary side sewer and the water service line. Sewer Damage to Frontage Applicant shall repair/replace all damage to utilities or frontage improvements in City right-of-way per Improvements City standards that is caused by or occurs during the permitted project. Owner/Contractor to provide Side Sewer asbuilt at final inspection. See City Standards for Side Sewer Asbuilt requirements. Refer to City of Edmonds Side Sewer Information handout for approved pipe materials, inspections Side Sewer Handout and other requirements. Underground Utility LocatesTCall for locates of underground utilities prior to any excavation. INSPECTIONS INSPECTION TYPE DATE RESULT NOTES COMPLETE SWR ASBUILT SWR FINAL" SWR PIPE Printed: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 9:44:48 AM 2 of 2 WATER METER RECORD PERMIT NIUMBEk, -7 77 City of Edmonds 'a' 121 Sth Ave N, Edmonds WA 98020 �ENG2019-0431% www.edmondswa.gov / 425.771.0220 1014 1111 1.161 :4 IT, r-11V 9 Lai I, i WATER METER SIZE: I ISSUED: 01/22/2020 SITE ADDRESS: 9527 190TH PL SW EDMONDS WA 98020 IRRIGATION ONLY: FIRE SPRINKLING: APARTMENT/CCINDO UNITS: CONTACTS NAME TYPE NAME ADDRESS PHONE APPLICANT CHAK AND EVA AW 114 N 200TH ST, SHORELINE WA98133 (425)785-2038 CONTRACTOR PETERSON CUSTOM 2114 120TH PL SW, EVERETT WA 98204 (206)3S1-7255 HOMES OWNER CHAK AND EVA AW 114 N 200TH ST, SHORELINE WA 98133 (42S)78S-2038 FEE INFORMATION DESCRIPTION AMOUNT PAID PAID DATE 1" WATER METER FEE $2,970.00 3/4" WATER GENERAL FACILITY CONNECTION $5,050.00 PUBLIC WORKS -UTILITY BILLING INFORMATION METER NUMBER: REGISTER NUMBER: METER LOCATION: BRAND: INSTALLATION DATE: INSTALLED BY: SERVICE MATERIAL/SIZE: READ AFTER ADDRESS: BILLING ACCOUNT NO: ROUTE: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Fire Sprinkling TO SCHEDJLE INSTALLATION, CALL 425.771.0235 THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT VALID UNTIL FEES ARE PAID AND THE CITY ENGINEER OR HIS/HER DEPUTY HAS SIGNED BELOW KtLtA.')tU t5Y UA I t Printed: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 9:46:16 AM 1 of 1 A SPECIAL INSPECTION AND TESTING AGREEMENT 1P Permit BLD2019-0705 Project: Schwarz,18606 Soundview Place Prior to issuance of a permit, thiYfivin must be completed in its entirely and returned to the Cityfor approval. The completedform muw have signatures of acknowledgment by. all parties. DITTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES SI1ECi2I Inspection Firin and Special Inspectors - The Special Inspection firm of rlr'o�'Cj T_-' Will perform special inspection for the following types of work (separate forms must be submitted if more than one firm is (o be employed): --Reinforced Concrete —Bolting in Concrete —Prestressed Concrete —Shoterete —Structural Masonry --Structural Steel/Welding —fligh Strength Bolting --Spray applied Fireproofing —Smoke Control Systems —Lateral Wood —.-Structural Observation by design professional _X_ (irrading/soilsi Pipe Piles —Stec! Floor arid Rool'Decks —Other— , _.- All individual inspectors to be employed on this project will be WADO certified for tile ty . pe of work they are to inspect. If inspection is for -,kork that is not covered by the WA130 categories, or the inspector is not WABO certified. a detailed resunic of the inspector and Finn must be submitted. The resume must show that the inspector arid tile firin are qualified by education and experience to perform the wor� and testing required by the project desigm and specificai ions. Thework shall be inspected for conformance with the plans and specifications approved by the City. Revisions and addenda sheets will not be used for inspection, unless tile), have been approved by the City. Inspcclion records shall include: A daily record to be maintained on site, itemizing tile inspections performed. Any nonconforming work shall be brought to the immediate attention ofthe contractor for resolution. A wcckly report shall be submitted to the City, detailing the inspections and testing performed, listing any nonconforming work and resolution ot'nonconforming items. A final report shall be submitted to tile building department prior to the Cuilificatv of OQcupancy being, issued. This report will indicate that inspection and testing was completed in conformance with the approved plans, sp"Ifications and approved revisions or addenda. Any unresolved discrepancies must be detai led in the final rcport. haps 'n-dms,%t-crakappr1 RAh.; St:hwitrz 2019-07 05 docl,'1412020 Contmetor, The contractor shall providC tile special inspector or agency adequate notification of work requiring inspection. The City approved plan and specificatioris must be made available, at thejobsite for tile uSe of the special inspector and the City inspector. The contractor -,hall maintain all daily inspection reports, oil site, for review by all parties. The special inspection functions are considered to be in addition to the norinal inspections performed by the City and tile contractor is responsible for contacting the City to schedule regular inspections, No concrete shall be poured or other work covered until approval is given by the City inspector. Buildina Depailment: The buildine department shall review any revisions and addenda, The Cit% inspector will monitor the special inspection iunctions for compliance with tile agreement and the approved plans, The City inspector shall be responsible For approving various stages of construction to be covered and for work to proceed. Desityn Profmionnis: The architect andfor engineer will clearly indicate on the plans and specifications the specific types of special inspection required and shall include a s�hedule for inspection and testing. Tile architect and/or engineer will coordinate their revision and addenda process in such i way as to ensure that all required City approvals are obtained. prior to work shown oil the revisions being performed in tile field Owntr: The project owner, or the architect or engineer acting as tile owners ap ,ent, shall employ the special inspector or agency. ENIFORCEMENT A failure of the special inspector or firm to perform in keeping with the requirements of the 113C, the approved plans and this document, may void this agreement and the Building Official's approval of the special inspector. In such a case a new special inspector and/or firm would need to be proposed for approval. A failure of the design andior construction parties to perform in accordance with this agreement may result in a STOP WORK notice being posted on the project until nonconforming items have b"n resolved. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I have read and agree to comply with the terins and conditions of this agreement. Owner: Signature --Date 7,7, Je, ZP-" A f)y N-r- ;J Conti -actor: Date: �0 Arch. /Fng: Karl Schmidt Signature Date; 1.14.20 R_ M LC Special Insp. r Signature Date: X0 Special Insp. Agency e, n 4 & a kl - C.J,- ACCEPTED FO � JE CITY OF EDMONDS BUILDING DIVISION By: Date: 41-2-/501Z 0 Schwarz 20119-0705.doc 1114,2026 AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT Addendum To: Jacob Strobl 01;lava BY A P Company: Strobl Design From: Benjamin Mark — American Forest Management 1, J� A CC: 2,02-0 Date: 3/6/2020 Re: Proposed work near tree #106 at 9527 190th Place SW- Edmonds, WA Greetings, Per your request, On March 4, 2020, 1 evaluated the recent excavation near the root system of a tree identified in an arborist report I prepared on April 17th, 2019 as #106. The subject tree is a Douglas fir with a dripline to the south of 18 feet, 12 feet to the east, and 14 feet to the west. The dripline extends over the property line to the north. Prior to construction, this tree was surrounded by several mature Douglas fir trees to the west, south and east which have since been removed. The original arborist report recommended a limit of disturbance to the roots of Tree #106 no closer than 15 feet to the south. I visited the site to assess the subject tree's condition following excavation to the south for a concrete foundation. I found the grade 6 feet south of Tree #106 lowered by approximately 4 feet. Several large structural roots were found cleanly cut at the face of the newly excavated slope. Seven cut roots over 2 inches were documented. These range in diameter from 3 to 7 inches. A very large surface root at least 12 inches in diameter extends to the north and appears unaffected by the recent work. The cut roots represent a significant defect directly impacting the stability of this tree. Using the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Basic Tree Risk Assessment method, I determined the risk currently presented by this tree under normal weather conditions over a two year time frame to be HIGH. This assessment is made subject to Level 2 TRAQ assessment guidelines and best management practices and represents my observations on the day of the inspection. I used the ISA Basic Tree Risk Assessment method and assessed this tree for risk of branch or 666rhl trunk failure. I determined the primary target in the event of failure to be the ne,ig, , , , g A I IL 12020 11415 NE 128th St, Suite 110, Kirkland, WA 98034 1 Phone: 425.820.3420 1 Fax: 425.820.3437 1 arnericanfor�e'strqqricrj�6-rrt t,!i9rh, �Cjs Memo —9527 190th Place SW, Edmonds WA house to the north due to the prevalence of winds from the south west in this area, and all of the roots on the south side of this tree being severed. I determined the likelihood of whole tree failure to be probable under normal weather conditions in a two year time frame. I also determined the likelihood of the tree striking the target in the event of failure. Following these conclusions, I assigned the following rating: TREE #106 WHOLE TREE failure within the following two years is PROBABLE, with a HIGH likelihood of striking the neighboring house. It is LIKELY the probability of failure and impact would result in SEVERE consequences such as damage to high value property, serious injury or fatality, or major disruptions. Following the ISA TRAQ Risk Categorization Matrix, this tree presents a HIGH risk. Recommendations • Adhere to City of Edmonds City Code 18.45.050 — Performance Standards for Land Development Permits. • Consult with your City Planner to determine options to expedite removal of this High Risk tree. • Obtain all necessary permits from the City of Edmonds before carrying out removal of this tree. There is no warranty suggested for any of the trees subject to this report. Weather, latent tree conditions, and future man -caused activities could cause physiologic changes and deteriorating tree condition. Over time, deteriorating tree conditions may appear and there may be conditions, which are not now visible which, could cause tree failure. This report or the verbal comments made at the site in no way warrant the structural stability or long term condition of any tree, but represent my opinion based on the observations made. Nearly all trees in any condition standing within reach of improvements or human use areas represent hazards that could lead to damage or injury. Please call if you have any questions or need further assistance on this project. Sincerely, Benjamin Mark ISA Certified Arborist #PN-6976A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified American Forest Management, Inc. March 5, 2020 13W Ail IZZ AI-7 An 7 nk J,4 'his neighboring house is a Potential target in the event ff a whole tree failure. RAN-, Memo —9527 190th Place SW, Edmonds WA Looking down at the face of the excavated slope and recently assembled concrete form for the foundation. Note the largest root cut is at the surface and is approximately 6 feet from the trunk of #106. American Forest Management, Inc. March 5, 2020 AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT Date: 3.4.2020 Inspector: Benjamin Mark TREE RISK ASSESSMENT SUMMARY Site: 9527 119Gth Place SW Edmonds, WA 98020 DEIIH Height Tree # Spec!" (Inch-) (feet) Location Defects Failure Impact Conseq. EM Recommendation Recent excavation and all roots cut 6 On slope near north feet south of this tree. Newly 106 Douglas fir 39 115 property line. exposed interior tree. Probable High Severe High Remove Lik 9-Iffibod of Failure Imminent - started or likely in near future Probable - expected in normal weather conditions Possible - could occur, but unlikely in normal weather conditions Improbable - not likely in most weather conditions Likelihood of Impact Very Low - remote, protected target, rarely used Low - not likely, protected target, occasionally used area Medium - 50/50 chance of impacting target High - most likely, fully exposed target, constant occupancy Likelihood offallure Likelihood Impactilria Tar, iet Vert lWvT— Low I Medium H I a h lomminiont Unlikely Sam what likely Likely Very likely Probable_ Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Likely Likely :Possible Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Likely � Improibable Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely 'C of re Illue o"Seque"tos Negligible - no injury, repaired or replaced, low -value Minor - moderate property damage, minor injury, small disruptions Significant - high property damage, considerable disruption or personal injury Severe - damage to high value property, serious injury or fatality, major disruption Likelihood of failure & Impact Conswequ nwsoffailure Negligible Minor Significant Severe Vqry likely Low Moderate High Extreme it 4 Low Moderate High High Sbrin,ewhat likely Low Low Moderate Moderate Unlikely Low Low Low Low Low - mitigation may be appropriate, lower work priority Moderate - mitigation and/or retention and monitoring High - mitigation measures must be taken Extreme - mitigation measures as soon as possible A -'Mar AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT Aw Property 9527 190th Place SW Edmonds, WA 98020 Arborist Report April 17, 2019 11415 NE 1281h St., Suite 1 TO, Kirkland, WA 98034 1 Phone, 425.820.3420 1 Fax: 425.820.3437 a merica nf orestmanagement.com April 171h, 2079 Page I Table of Contents 1 . Introduction ....................................................................................................................... .............................. 2 2. Description ........................................................................................................................ .............................. 2 3. Methodology .................................................................................................................... . ............................. 2 4. Observations ..................................................................................................................... . ............................. 3 5. Discussion ........................................................................................................................... . ............................. 4 6. Tree Protection Measures ................................................................................... 4 Appendix Site/Tree Photos — pages 6-7 Tree Summary Table - attached Tree Conditions/Tree Plan Map AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. April 17th, 2019 Page 2 1. Introduction American Forest Management was contacted by Jacob Strobl, architect at Strobl Design and asked to compile an arborist report for a parceflocated within the City of Edmonds. The proposed development encompasses Snohomish County Parcel #00434600007901. Our assignment is to prepare a written report on present tree conditions, which is to be filed with the preliminary permit application. This report encompasses all of the criteria set forth under the City of Edmonds tree regulations (Chapter 18.45 of the Edmonds Community Development Code - ECDC). Dateof Field Examination . .................................................................................................... April 12, 2019 2. Description Fifteen significant trees with a caliper 6 inches or greater 4 feet above grade (or diameter at breast height - DBH) were located and assessed on the property. None of these trees are considered non- viable due to poor health condition, however there are two standing dead snags in this grove. Additionally, two neighboring trees with driplines that extend over the property line were also assessed for potential impacts from the proposed development. Every tree included in this report was identified in the field with a numbered aluminum tag. These tag numbers correspond with the attached Tree Summary Table and Tree Map. Several trees were found which did not appear on the original survey. These were added on the attached Tree Summary Table and their approximate location added to the Tree Map. Their actual location should be verified in an updated survey. The tree summary table provides descriptive data for all assessed trees, including drip -line measurements. 3. Methodology Each tree in this report was visited. Tree diameters were measured by tape. This required removing some ivy from each tree to get an accurate measurement. The tree heights were measured using a digital clinometer. Each tree was visually examined for defects and vigor. The tree assessment procedure involves the examination of many factors: • The crown of the tree is examined for current vigor. This is comprised of inspecting the crown (foliage, buds and branches) for color, density, form, and annual shoot growth, limb dieback and disease. The percentage of live crown is estimated for coniferous species only and scored appropriately. • The bole or main stem of the tree is inspected for decay, which includes cavities, wounds, fruiting bodies of decay (conks or mushrooms), seams, insects, bleeding, callus development, broken or dead tops, structural defects and unnatural leans. Structural defects include crooks, forks with V-shaped crotches, multiple attachments, and excessive sweep. • The root collar and roots are inspected for the presence of decay, insects and/or damage, as well as if they have been injured, undermined or exposed, or original grade has been altered. Based on these factors a determination of viability is made. Trees considered 'non -viable' are trees that are in poor condition due to disease, extensive decay and/or cumulative structural defects, which exacerbate failure potential. A 'viable' tree is a tree found to be in good health, in a sound condition AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. April 171h, 2019 Page 3 with minimal defects and is suitable for its location. Also, it will be wind firm if isolated or left as part of a grouping or grove of trees. The four condition categories are described below: Excellent — free of structural defects, no disease or pest problems, no root issues, excellent structure/form with uniform crown or canopy, foliage of normal color and density, above average vigor, it will be wind firm if isolated, suitable for its location Good —free of significant structural defects, no disease concerns, minor pest issues, no significant root issues, good structure/form with uniform crown or canopy, foliage of normal color and density, average or normal vigor, will be wind firm if isolated or left as part of a grouping or grove of trees, suitable for its location Fair — minor to moderate structural defects not expected to contribute to a failure in the near future, no disease concerns, moderate pest issues, no significant root issues, asymmetric or unbalanced crown or canopy, average or normal vigor, foliage of normal color, moderate foliage density, will be wind firm if left as part of a grouping or grove of trees, cannot be isolated, suitable for its location Poor — major structural defects expected to cause fail in the near future, disease or significant pest concerns, decline due to old age, significant root issues, asymmetric or unbalanced crown or canopy, sparse or abnormally small foliage, poor vigor, and/or not suitable for its location The attached Tree Summary Table provides specific information on tree sizes and drip -line measurements. 4. Observations Most of the subject parcel was covered in dense mats of English ivy which is climbing into the canopy of the majority of the trees included in this report. Twelve of the 15 significant trees found here are Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) all but two of which are in good condition, the others are in fair condition. These range in caliper from 15"-44". Most are on the larger end of this range with an average caliper of 35.75" Trees #101 -107 are Douglas fir situated near the northern edge of the subject property. Most of these form a grove of contiguous canopy cover which includes trees north of the property line. There are two standing dead snags in this grove. Trees #101 and #106 are the only trees able to be retained in the proposed site plan due to the necessary excavation cut on the hillside. There are likely large structural roots on this slope which would be destroyed at the planned grade. Trees #108-112 are Douglas fir in the center of the parcel. All of these will need to be removed for the proposed structure to fit within the front yard setback. Limits of disturbance are shown for some trees which are proposed for removal in case revised plans include their retention. Other species present are red older (Alnus rubra), big leaf maple (Acer macrophyflum), and bitter cherry (Prunus emorginata). These are all located along the raised grade within the proposed building footprint. These are considered 'pioneer species' trees which are often the first to naturally germinate in open areas. These are fast growing when young, and quickly reach maturity. Their branch strength is rated as weak. A typical characteristic of these trees upon reaching maturity is to shed limbs as they become host to decaying fungi and eventually fall from primary stem failure. AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. April 771h, 2019 Page 4 Neighboring Trees with Overhanging Canopies Tree #201 is an apple (Malus sp.) with two primary stems for a calculated 8" DBH which has been regularly pruned to maintain a height of 12'. This tree is part of a small orchard in the southwest corner of the neighboring property. Its canopy extends approximately 12' over the east property line. This tree is below the existing driveway grade 6' to the west. #202 is a Douglas fir with a DBH of 14" growing just north of the property line in a grove which includes trees #101 -107. It is in fair condition with a thin canopy as a result of being dominated by the larger trees nearby. 5. Discussion/Recommendations Due to lack of existing targets, no high -risk tree conditions were observed at the site. All subject trees would be rated as low to moderate risk under an ISA Level 11 Basic Assessment, however this assessment is a limited by the extent of ivy coverage on their lower trunks. A reassessment upon final building and grading plans would be prudent. Given the proposed site plan, few of the trees found on the property are able to be retained. These trees are primarily Douglas fir and will help maintain a buffer to the property to the north. The neighboring trees to the north are not likely to sustain damage related to construction if all work performed remains outside of their Limits of Disturbance (LOD). The ground to the south of them on the subject property is sloped and there are several large trees which are not able to be retained (#102, #103, #104, and #105) due to the excavation cut to meet planned grade. Neighboring tree #202 is located at the top of the slope and is dominated by the larger trees to the south. This has led it to developing a thin canopy and likely a relatively small structural root system due to the larger trees sheltering it from prevailing winds. Removing these trees, particularly #105 will open up tree #202 to more severe exposure than it has previously received. The extent of drip -lines (farthest reaching branches) for the subject trees to be retained can be found on the tree summary table at the back of this report. The recommended LOD measurements can also be found on the tree summary table. The LOD measurements are based on species, age, condition, drip -line, and prior improvements. These shall be referenced when determining the feasibility of retention. 6. Tree Protection Measures The following general guidelines are recommended to ensure that the designated areas set aside for the preserved trees are protected and construction impacts are kept to a minimum. Tree protection should adhere to best management practices for tree and soil protection during development activity. 1. Tree protection fencing shall be erected around retained trees and positioned just beyond the drip - line edge prior to moving any heavy equipment on site. Doing this will set clearing limits and avoid compaction of soils within root zones of retained trees. 2. Any existing improvements to be removed within the drip -lines or tree protection zones shall be removed by hand or utilizing a tracked mini -excavator. 3. Excavation limits should be laid out in paint on the ground to avoid over excavating. AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. April 171h, 2019 Page 5 4. Excavations within the drip -lines shall be monitored by a qualified tree professional so necessary precautions can be taken to decrease impacts to tree parts. A qualified tree professional shall monitor excavations when work is required and allowed within the "limits of disturbance". 5. To establish sub grade for foundations, curbs and pavement sections near the trees, soil should be removed parallel to the roots and not at 90 degree angles to avoid breaking and tearing roots that lead back to the trunk within the drip -line. Any roots damaged during these excavations should be exposed to sound tissue and cut cleanly with a saw. Cutting tools should be sterilized with alcohol. 6. Areas excavated within the drip -line of retained trees should be thoroughly irrigated daily during dry periods. 7. Preparations for final landscaping shall be accomplished by hand within the drip -lines of retained trees. Large equipment shall be kept outside of the tree protection zones at all times. Simply finish landscape within 10' of retained trees with a 2" to 4" layer of organic mulch. There is no warranty suggested for any of the trees subject to this report. Weather, latent free conditions, and future man -caused activities could cause physiologic changes and deteriorating tree condition. Oyer time, deteriorating tree conditions may appear and there may be conditions, which are not now visible which, could cause tree failure. This report or the verbal comments made at the site in no way warrant the structural stability or long term condition of any tree, but represent my opinion based on the observations made. Nearly all trees in any condition standing within reach of improvements or human use areas represent hazards that could lead to damage or injury. Please call if you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, q1401" IV Benjamin Mark ISA Certified Arborist #PN-6976A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. April 7 71�, 20 7 9 Page 6 Photos #108#109 #106 #110 #111 #112 :)te ivy on �ms AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. I k�is .. �l I I . Ti N 4 FA ot 4;' 'lei 3�3.?rs z "a I li-f , N-4 -a� 7, '404 Ik Htm o ZN On- I AW4L 10 C, L l"L I b2 10 102, f Jul 104- . . ........ .. . 113 IV 5r.7 MI. 14 Is X/1" 1Z Fri,= 4 ?"o t I 4-p -77; PKW —.0 0u: Hle, N'LL t, I IVIL *t�\, rviek I'Z' .1AoK LIM ;;;jr rw 1� 01 -q — 6 -INC MPL�. a i N 4 LIMIT OF t> % S Tv e S 0,,N(.X X �UV�SMVt(2- ftm�ovp(k; Tree Summa Table I I I American orest Management, Inc. For: 9527 190th PI SW Edmonds WA Date: 4/11/2019 Inspector: Ben Mark Tag 1113 Genus species I DBH (inches) Height (feet) D -Lin2 LIM it of Disturbance (feet) L I Condition Viable I yes/no Proposal Comments N S W I 101 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 37 107 21 14 Good Yes Retain Trunk touches utilitiy lines. Ivy. Limbed up @ 30' and thin above 102 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menzlesii 15 85 12 14 6 Good Yes Remove Added to map 103 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesti 27 95 16 14 10 Good -Yes Remove Next to snag 104 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 34 110 24 19 22 Good Yes Remove 105 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesri 36 105 14 19 22/15 Good Yes Remove No canopy north 106 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menz�esfi 39 115 18/15 12 14 Fair Yes Retain Possible decay present in main stem. Added to map 107 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 41 97 15 16 22/16 Good Yes Remove Good taper 108 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesn 39 64 28 18 25 Fair Yes Remove Broken at 38' 109 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesit 44 118 20 12 20 Good Yes Remove Stout taper. Added to map 110 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesti 38 120 26/15 6 19 Good Yes Remove Dense ivy on south side. Just south of dead Douglas Fir I'll Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 35 117 25/15 15 Good Yes Remove 112 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesfi 44 105 16 16 16 Fair Yes Remove Broken at 39'. New leader and lesser codominant. Added to map 113 Alder Alnus, rubra 14 51 16 16 20 12 Fair Yes Remove Leans east. Added to map. 114 [Bitter Cherry Prunus emarginata 11 6 10 7 11 a:[ Yes Remove Broken top. Added to map 115 Big Leaf Maple 71 r macrophyllum 20 61 12 1 16 14 1 F; r Yes Remo�dded to map Neighbor Trees 201 jApple malus so 5,6 12 12/6 Good Yes 202 1 Douglas Fir Pseudotsugs menziesii 114 Fair Yes Leans west, thin crown Drip -Line and Limits of Disturbance measurements from face of trunk Trees on neighboring properties - Drip -line and Limits of Disturbance measurements from property lines Calculated DBH for multistern trees: The DBH in BOLD is the square root of the sum of the DBH of each individual stem, squared. Example 3 stem DBH = Square Root 1(steml)2 + (stem2)2 + (stem3)2 )] Addendum To: Jacob Strobl Company: Strobl Design From: Benjamin Mark — American Forest Management cG Date: Re: Greetings, 3/6/2020 Proposed work near tree #106 at 9527 190th Place SW- Edmonds, WA AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT P JU Per your request, On March 4, 2020, 1 evaluated the recent excavation near the root system of a tree identified in an arborist report I prepared on April 17th, 2019 as #106. The subject tree is a Douglas fir with a dripline to the south of 18 feet, 12 feet to the east, and 14 feet to the west. The dripline extends over the property line to the north. Prior to construction, this tree was surrounded by several mature Douglas fir trees to the west, south and east which have since been removed. The original arborist report recommended a limit of disturbance to the roots of Tree #106 no closer than 15 feet to the south. I visited the site to assess the subject tree's condition following excavation to the south for a concrete foundation. I found the grade 6 feet south of Tree #106 lowered by approximately 4 feet. Several large structural roots were found cleanly cut at the face of the newly excavated slope. Seven cut roots over 2 inches were documented. These range in diameter from 3 to 7 inches. A very large surface root at least 12 inches in diameter extends to the north and appears unaffected by the recent work. The cut roots represent a significant defect directly impacting the stability of this tree. Using the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Basic Tree Risk Assessment method, I determined the risk currently presented by this tree under normal weather conditions over a two year time frame to be HIGH. This assessment is made subject to Level 2 TRAQ assessment guidelines and best management practices and represents my observations on the day of the inspection. I used the ISA Basic Tree Risk Assessment method and assessed this tree for risk of branch or trunk failure. I determined the primary target in the event of failure to be the neighboring ea(-) k q D Cp f I . -) I " 2:." J I ,-.% U - 11415 NE I 281h St., Suite I 10, Kirkland, WA 9803A I Phone: 425.820.3420 1 Fax: 425.820.3437 1 arnericanfo;iestmanagement.corn Y C. ZZZ..�( I c�,.,� j , i Memo —9527 190th Place SW, Edmonds WA house to the north due to the prevalence of winds from the south west in this area, and all of the roots on the south side of this tree being severed. I determined the likelihood of whole tree failure to be probable under normal weather conditions in a two year time frame. I also determined the likelihood of the tree striking the target in the event of failure. Following these conclusions, I assigned the following rating: TREE #106 WHOLE TREE failure within the following two years is PROBABLE, with a HIGH likelihood of striking the neighboring house. It is LIKELY the probability of failure and impact would result in SEVERE consequences such as damage to high value property, serious injury or fatality, or major disruptions. Following the ISA TRAQ Risk Categorization Matrix, this tree presents a HIGH risk. Recommendations Adhere to City of Edmonds City Code 18.45.050— Performance Standards for Land Development Permits. • Consult with your City Planner to determine options to expedite removal of this High Risk tree. • Obtain all necessary permits from the City of Edmonds before carrying out removal of this tree. There is no warranty suggested for any of the trees subject to this report. Weather, latent tree conditions, and future man -caused activities could cause physiologic changes and deteriorating tree condition. Over time, deteriorating free conditions may appear and there may be conditions, which are not now visible which, could cause tree failure. This report or the verbal comments made at the site in no way warrant the structural stability or long term condition of any free, but represent my opinion based on the observations made. Nearly all trees in any condition standing within reach of improvements or human use areas represent hazards that could lead to damage or injury. Please call if you have any questions or need further assistance on this project. Sincerely, 9 - '/1", Jkk�� Benjamin Mark ISA Certified Arborist #PN-6976A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified American Forest Management, Inc. March 5, 2020 - I-q'S 41 ., 4 140. ,let ''Y At, tiv. J AU V4 C-A ''. � fl. Memo —9527 190th Place SW, Edmonds WA Looking down at the face of the excavated slope and recently assembled concrete form for the foundation. Note the largest root cut is at the surface and is approximately 6 feet from the trunk of #106. American Forest Management, Inc. March 5, 2020 AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT Date: 3.4.2020 Inspector: Benjamin Mark TREE RISK ASSESSMENT SUMMARY Site: 9527 19Dth Place SW Edmonds, WA 98020 DUH Height Tree # Species (inches) (feet) Location Defects Failure Impact Conseq. En Recommendation Re ent excavation and all roots cut 6 On slope near north fee south of this tree. Newly 106 Douglas fir 39 115 property line. exposed interior tree. Probable High Severe High Remove Likelihood ofFallure Imminent - started or likely in near future Probable - expected in normal weather conditions Possible - could occur, but unlikely in normal weather conditions Improbable - not likely in most weather conditions Likelihood of Impact Very Low - remote, protected target, rarely used Low - not likely, protected target, occasionally used area Medium - 50/50 chance of impacting target High - most likely, fully exposed target, constant occupancy Likelihood of fallure lukellihood Impactlourer3et io: �'E LIM N, 11 1"Medhim, r 'Igh tramilnent. Unlikely Some hat likely Likely Very likely Probable_ Unlikely U likely Somewhat Likely Likely �� Unlikel Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Likely Ulblo Unrpmobablo Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely ................ - ---- �'ll""I'll, . 11- 1 .1-1.1-1 1-, . . --- 11 f Copsequences o Failure j.1, R" Negligible - no injury, repaired or replaced, low -value Minor - moderate property damage, minor injury, small disruptions Significant - high property damage, considerable disruption or personal injury Severe - damage to high value property, serious injury or fatality, major disruption Likelihood of faillure, I impWirct c2nEt"o ncesofFe Hure, Neallolble —MAU -qU Minor I Sianificant I Severe Very likely Low Moderate High Extreme Likely Low Moderate High High Somewhat likely Low Low Moderate Moderate Unlikely Low Low Low Low Low - mitigation may be appropriate, lower work priority Moderate - mitigation and/or retention and monitoring High - mitigation measures must be taken Extreme - mitigation measures as soon as possible 4N April 171h, 20 7 9 Page I Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 2. Description ....................................................................................................................................................... 2 3. Methodology ................................................................................................................................................... 2 A. Observations ................................................................................................................................................... 3 5. Discussion .......................................................................................................................................................... 4 6. Tree Protection Measures ................................................................................... A Appendix Site/Tree Photos — pages 6-7 Tree Summary Table - attached Tree Conditions/Tree Plan Map AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. April 771h, 2079 Page 2 1. Introduction American Forest Management was contacted by Jacob Strobl, architect at Strobl Design and asked to compile an arborist report for a parcel located within the City of Edmonds. The proposed development encompasses Snohomish County Parcel #00434600007901. Our assignment is to prepare a written report on present tree conditions, which is to be filed with the preliminary permit application. This report encompasses all of the criteria set forth under the City of Edmonds tree regulations (Chapter 18.45 of the Edmonds Community Development Code - ECDC). Dateof Field Examination: .................................................................................................... April 12, 2019 2. Description Fifteen significant trees with a caliper 6 inches or greater 4 feet above grade (or diameter at breast height - DBH) were located and assessed on the property. None of these trees are considered non- viable due to poor health condition, however there are two standing dead snags in this grove. Additionally, two neighboring trees with driplines that extend over the property line were also assessed for potential impacts from the proposed development. Every tree included in this report was identified in the field with a numbered aluminum tag. These tag numbers correspond with the attached Tree Summary Table and Tree Map. Several trees were found which did not appear on the original survey. These were added on the attached Tree Summary Table and their approximate location added to the Tree Map. Their actual location should be verified in an updated survey. The tree summary table provides descriptive data for all assessed trees, including drip -line measurements. 3. Methodology Each tree in this report was visited. Tree diameters were measured by tape. This required removing some ivy from each tree to get an accurate measurement. The tree heights were measured using a digital clinometer. Each tree was visually examined for defects and vigor. The tree assessment procedure involves the examination of many factors: • The crown of the tree is examined for current vigor. This is comprised of inspecting the crown (foliage, buds and branches) for color, density, form, and annual shoot growth, limb dieback and disease. The percentage of live crown is estimated for coniferous species only and scored appropriately. • The bole or main stem of the tree is inspected for decay, which includes cavities, wounds, fruiting bodies of decay (conks or mushrooms), seams, insects, bleeding, callus development, broken or dead tops, structural defects and unnatural leans. Structural defects include crooks, forks with V-shaped crotches, multiple attachments, and excessive sweep. • The root collar and roots are inspected for the presence of decay, insects and/or damage, as well as if they have been injured, undermined or exposed, or original grade has been altered. Based on these factors a determination of viability is made. Trees considered 'non -viable' are trees that are in poor condition due to disease, extensive decay and/or cumulative structural defects, which exacerbate failure potential. A 'viable' tree is a tree found to be in good health, in a sound condition AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. April 171h, 2019 Page 3 with minimal defects and is suitable for its location. Also, it will be wind firm if isolated or left as part of a grouping or grove of trees. The four condition categories are described below: Excellent — free of structural defects, no disease or pest problems, no root issues, excellent structure/form with uniform crown or canopy, foliage of normal color and density, above average vigor, it will be wind firm if isolated, suitable for its location Good — free of significant structural defects, no disease concerns, minor pest issues, no significant root issues, good structure/form with uniform crown or canopy, foliage of normal color and density, average or normal vigor, will be wind firm if isolated or left as part of a grouping or grove of trees, suitable for its location Fair — minor to moderate structural defects not expected to contribute to a failure in the near future, no disease concerns, moderate pest issues, no significant root issues, asymmetric or unbalanced crown or canopy, average or normal vigor, foliage of normal color, moderate foliage density, will be wind firm if left as part of a grouping or grove of trees, cannot be isolated, suitable for its location Poor — major structural defects expected to cause fail in the near future, disease or significant pest concerns, decline due to old age, significant root issues, asymmetric or unbalanced crown or canopy, sparse or abnormally small foliage, poor vigor, and/or not suitable for its location The attached Tree Summary Table provides specific information on tree sizes and drip -line measurements. 4. Observations Most of the subject parcel was covered in dense mats of English ivy which is climbing into the canopy of the majority of the trees included in this report. Twelve of the 15 significant trees found here are Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) all but two of which are in good condition, the others are in fair condition. These range in caliper from 15"-44". Most are on the larger end of this range with an average caliper of 35.75" Trees # 10 1 - 107 are Douglas f ir situated near the northern edge of the subject property. Most of these form a grove of contiguous canopy cover which includes trees north of the property line. There are two standing dead snags in this grove. Trees #101 and #106 are the only trees able to be retained in the proposed site plan due to the necessary excavation cut on the hillside. There are likely large structural roots on this slope which would be destroyed at the planned grade. Trees #108-112 are Douglas fir in the center of the parcel. All of these will need to be removed for the proposed structure to fit within the front yard setback. Limits of disturbance are shown for some trees which are proposed for removal in case revised plans include their retention. Other species present are red alder (Alnus rubra), big leaf maple (Acer macrophylium), and bitter cherry (Prunus emarginata). These are all located along the raised grade within the proposed building footprint. These are considered 'pioneer species' trees which are often the first to naturally germinate in open areas. These are fast growing when young, and quickly reach maturity. Their branch strength is rated as weak. A typical characteristic of these trees upon reaching maturity is to shed limbs as they become host to decaying fungi and eventually fall from primary stem failure. AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. April 171h, 2019 Page 4 Neighboring Trees with Overhanging Canopies Tree #201 is an apple (Malus sp.) with two primary stems for a calculated 8" DBH which has been regularly pruned to maintain a height of 12'. This tree is part of a small orchard in the southwest corner of the neighboring property. Its canopy extends approximately 12' over the east property line. This tree is below the existing driveway grade 6'to the west. #202 is a Douglas fir with a DBH of 14" growing just north of the property line in a grove which includes trees #101 -107. It is in fair condition with a thin canopy as a result of being dominated by the larger trees nearby. 5. Discussion/Recommendations Due to lack of existing targets, no high -risk tree conditions were observed at the site. All subject trees would be rated as low to moderate risk under an ISA Level 11 Basic Assessment, however this assessment is a limited by the extent of ivy coverage on their lower trunks. A reassessment upon final building and grading plans would be prudent. Given the proposed site plan, few of the trees found on the property are able to be retained. These trees are primarily Douglas fir and will help maintain a buffer to the property to the north. The neighboring trees to the north are not likely to sustain damage related to construction if all work performed remains outside of their Limits of Disturbance (LOD). The ground to the south of them on the subject property is sloped and there are several large trees which are not able to be retained (#102, #103, #104, and #105) due to the excavation cut to meet planned grade. Neighboring tree #202 is located at the top of the slope and is dominated by the larger trees to the south. This has led it to developing a thin canopy and likely a relatively small structural root system due to the larger trees sheltering it from prevailing winds. Removing these trees, particularly # 105 will open up tree #202 to more severe exposure than it has previously received. The extent of drip -lines (farthest reaching branches) for the subject trees to be retained can be found on the tree summary table at the back of this report. The recommended LOD measurements can also be found on the tree summary table. The LOD measurements are based on species, age, condition, drip -line, and prior improvements. These shall be referenced when determining the feasibility of retention. 6. Tree Protection Measures The following general guidelines are recommended to ensure that the designated areas set aside for the preserved trees are protected and construction impacts are kept to a minimum. Tree protection should adhere to best management practices for tree and soil protection during development activity. 1. Tree protection fencing shall be erected around retained trees and positioned just beyond the drip - line edge prior to moving any heavy equipment on site. Doing this will set clearing limits and avoid compaction of soils within root zones of retained trees. 2. Any existing improvements to be removed within the drip -lines or tree protection zones shall be removed by hand or utilizing a tracked mini -excavator. 3. Excavation limits should be laid out in paint on the ground to avoid over excavating. AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. April 771h, 2019 Page 5 A. Excavations within the drip -lines shall be monitored by a qualified tree professional so necessary precautions can be taken to decrease impacts to tree parts. A qualified tree professional shall monitor excavations when work is required and allowed within the "limits of disturbance". 5. To establish sub grade for foundations, curbs and pavement sections near the trees, soil should be removed parallel to the roots and not at 90 degree angles to avoid breaking and tearing roots that lead back to the trunk within the drip -line. Any roots damaged during these excavations should be exposed to sound tissue and cut cleanly with a saw. Cutting tools should be sterilized with alcohol. 6. Areas excavated within the drip -line of retained trees should be thoroughly irrigated daily during dry periods. 7. Preparations for final landscaping shall be accomplished by hand within the drip -lines of retained trees. Large equipment shall be kept outside of the tree protection zones at all times. Simply finish landscape within 10' of retained trees with a 2" to 4" layer of organic mulch. There is no warranty suggested for any of the trees subject to this report. Weather, latent tree conditions, and future man -caused activities could cause physiologic changes and deteriorating tree condition. Oyer time, deteriorating tree conditions may appear and there may be conditions, which are not now visible which, could cause tree failure. This report or the verbal comments made at the site in no way warrant the structural stability or long term condition of any tree, but represent my opinion based on the observations made. Nearly all trees in any condition standing within reach of improvements or human use areas represent hazards that could lead to damage or injury. Please call if you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Benjamin Mark ISA Certified Arborist #PN-6976A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. Ar%ry R, U�o ITT It: OR, �3i 1 wou oil CAI P Al Ah I$ 4t TV N�o — NAA ,ow .1whavla-8 -bQA Q%Q"I �"Il a% -Zia %jj'A,j ITree Summa Table I American Forest Management, Inc. For: 9527 190th PI SW Edmonds WA Date: 4/11/2019 Inspector: Ben Mark Tag # IlD Genus species !DBH (inches) Height (feet) Drip -Line Limit o Disturbance (feet) Condition Viable I yes/no Pro osal Comments N I S E w 101 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesfi 37 107 21 14 Good Yes Retain Trunk touches utilitiy lines. Ivy. Limbed up @ 30' and thin above 102 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menz�esfi 15 85 12 14 6 Good Yes Remove Added to map 103 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 27 95 16 14 10 Good Yes Remove Next to snag 104 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 34 110 24 19 22 Good Yes Remove 105 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesfi 36 105 14 19 22/15 Good Yes Remove No canopy north 106 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menzieso 39 115 18/15 12 14 Fair Yes Retain Possible decay present in main stem. Added to map 107 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesit 41 97 1 15 16 22/16 Good Yes Remove Good taper 108 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesd 39 64 28 18 25 Fair Yes Remove Broken at 38' 109 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga mem�esfi 44 118 20 12 20 Good Yes Remove Stout taper. Added to map 110 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menz�esfi 38 120 26/15 6 19 Good Yes Remove Dense ivy on south side. Just south of dead Douglas Fir ill Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga men2jesti 35 117 25/15 15 Good Yes Remove 112 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga mem�esfi 44 105 16 16 16 Fair Yes Remove Broken at 39'. New leader and lesser codominant. Added to map 113 Alder Alnus rubra 14 51 16 16 20 12 Fair Yes Remove Leans east. Added to map. 114 Bitter Cherry jPrunus emarginata 11 48 6 10 7 Yes Remove Broken top. Added to map 115 Big Leaf Maple Acer macrophyflum 20 61 12 16 14 1 1 %j[ F r Yes Remove I Added to map Neighbor Trees 201 jAppl� Malus sp 5,6 12 12/6 Good Yes 202 IDouglas Fir Pseudotsuga menz�esfi 14 Fair Yes Leans west , thin crown Pqp-Line and Limits of Nisturbance measurements from face of trunk Trees on neighboring properties - Drip -line and Limits of Disturbance measurements from property lines Calculated DBH for multistern trees: The DBH in BOLD is the square root of the sum of the DBH of each individual stem, squared. Example 3 stem DBH = Square Root [(steml)2 + (stem2)2 + (stem3)2 )] ? . 1p� AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT Aw Property 9527 190th Place SW Edmonds, WA 98020 Arborist Report April 17, 2019 JUN 0 5 20ig BUILD:NG DEPARTMENT Cj-j Y OF EDMONDS Y%Z)�Rov� -C) I 10 11415 NE 1 281h St., Suite 110, Kirkland, WA 98034 1 Phone: 425.820.3420 1 Fax: 425.820.3437 americanforestmanagement.com 09 April 171h, 2019 Page I Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 2. Description ....................................................................................................................................................... 2 3. Methodology ................................................................................................................................................... 2 4. Observations ................................................................................................................................................... 3 5. Discussion .......................................................................................................................................................... 4 6. Tree Protection Measures ................................................................................... 4 Appendix Site/Tree Photos — pages 6-7 Tree Summary Table - attached Tree Conditions/Tree Plan Map AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. April 17'h, 20 7 9 Page 2 1. Introduction American Forest Management was contacted by Jacob Strobl, architect at Strobl Design and asked to compile an arborist report for a parcel located within the City of Edmonds. The proposed development encompasses Snohomish County Parcel #OOA34600007901. Our assignment is to prepare a written report on present tree conditions, which is to be filed with the preliminary permit application. This report encompasses all of the criteria set forth under the City of Edmonds tree regulations (Chapter 18.45 of the Edmonds Community Development Code - ECDC). Dateof Field Examination: .................................................................................................... April 12, 2019 2. Description Fifteen significant trees with a caliper 6 inches or greater 4 feet above grade (or diameter at breast height - DBH) were located and assessed on the property. None of these trees are considered non- viable due to poor health condition, however there are two standing dead snags in this grove. Additionally, two neighboring trees with driplines that extend over the property line were also assessed for potential impacts from the proposed development. Every tree included in this report was identified in the field with a numbered aluminum tag. These tag numbers correspond with the attached Tree Summary Table and Tree Map. Several trees were found which did not appear on the original survey. These were added on the attached Tree Summary Table and their approximate location added to the Tree Map. Their actual location should be verified in an updated survey. The tree summary table provides descriptive data for all assessed trees, including drip -line measurements. 3. Methodology Each tree in this report was visited. Tree diameters were measured by tape. This required removing some ivy from each tree to get an accurate measurement. The tree heights were measured using a digital clinometer. Each tree was visually examined for defects and vigor. The tree assessment procedure involves the examination of many factors: The crown of the tree is examined for current vigor. This is comprised of inspecting the crown (foliage, buds and branches) for color, density, form, and annual shoot growth, limb dieback and disease. The percentage of live crown is estimated for coniferous species only and scored appropriately. • The bole or main stem of the tree is inspected for decay, which includes cavities, wounds, fruiting bodies of decay (conks or mushrooms), seams, insects, bleeding, callus development, broken or dead tops, structural defects and unnatural leans. Structural defects include crooks, forks with V-shaped crotches, multiple attachments, and excessive sweep. • The root collar and roots are inspected for the presence of decay, insects and/or damage, as well as if they have been injured, undermined or exposed, or original grade has been altered. Based on these factors a determination of viability is made. Trees considered 'non -viable' are trees that are in poor condition due to disease, extensive decay and/or cumulative structural defects, which exacerbate failure potential. A 'viable' tree is a tree found to be in good health, in a sound condition AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. April 171h, 2079 Page 3 with minimal defects and is suitable for its location. Also, it will be wind firm if isolated or left as part of a grouping or grove of trees. The four condition categories are described below: Excellent — free of structural defects, no disease or pest problems, no root issues, excellent structure/form with uniform crown or canopy, foliage of normal color and density, above average vigor, it will be wind firm if isolated, suitable for its location Good — free of significant structural defects, no disease concerns, minor pest issues, no significant root issues, good structure/form with uniform crown or canopy, foliage of normal color and density, average or normal vigor, will be wind firm if isolated or left as part of a grouping or grove of trees, suitable for its location Fair — minor to moderate structural defects not expected to contribute to a failure in the near future, no disease concerns, moderate pest issues, no significant root issues, asymmetric or unbalanced crown or canopy, average or normal vigor, foliage of normal color, moderate foliage density, will be wind firm if left as part of a grouping or grove of trees, cannot be isolated, suitable for its location Poor — major structural defects expected to cause fail in the near future, disease or significant pest concerns, decline due to old age, significant root issues, asymmetric or unbalanced crown or canopy, sparse or abnormally small foliage, poor vigor, and/or not suitable for its location The attached Tree Summary Table provides specific information on tree sizes and drip -line measurements. 4. Observations Most of the subject parcel was covered in dense mats of English ivy which is climbing into the canopy of the majority of the trees included in this report. Twelve of the 15 significant trees found here are Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) all but two of which are in good condition, the others are in fair condition. These range in caliper from 15"44". Most are on the larger end of this range with an average caliper of 35.75" Trees #101 -107 are Douglas fir situated near the northern edge of the subject property. Most of these form a grove of contiguous canopy cover which includes trees north of the property line. There are two standing dead snags in this grove. Trees #101 and #106 are the only trees able to be retained in the proposed site plan due to the necessary excavation cut on the hillside. There are likely large structural roots on this slope which would be destroyed at the planned grade. Trees #108-112 are Douglas fir in the center of the parcel. All of these will need to be removed for the proposed structure to fit within the front yard setback. Limits of disturbance are shown for some trees which are proposed for removal in case revised plans include their retention. Other species present are red alder (Alnus rubra), big leaf maple (Acer macrophylium), and bitter cherry (Prunus emarginata). These are all located along the raised grade within the proposed building footprint. These are considered 'pioneer species' trees which are often the first to naturally germinate in open areas. These are fast growing when young, and quickly reach maturity. Their branch strength is rated as weak. A typical characteristic of these trees upon reaching maturity is to shed limbs as they become host to decaying fungi and eventually fall from primary stem failure. AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. April 17th, 2019 Page 4 Neighboring Trees with Overhanging Canopies Tree #201 is an apple (Malus sp.) with two primary stems for a calculated 8" DBH which has been regularly pruned to maintain a height of 12'. This tree is part of a small orchard in the southwest corner of the neighboring property. Its canopy extends approximately 12' over the east property line. This tree is below the existing driveway grade 6' to the west. #202 is a Douglas fir with a DBH of 14" growing just north of the property line in a grove which includes trees #101 -107. It is in fair condition with a thin canopy as a result of being dominated by the larger trees nearby. 5. Discussion/Recommendations Due to lack of existing targets, no high -risk tree conditions were observed at the site. All subject trees would be rated as low to moderate risk under an ISA Level 11 Basic Assessment, however this assessment is a limited by the extent of ivy coverage on their lower trunks. A reassessment upon final building and grading plans would be prudent. Given the proposed site plan, few of the trees found on the property are able to be retained. These trees are primarily Douglas fir and will help maintain a buffer to the property to the north. The neighboring trees to the north are not likely to sustain damage related to construction if all work performed remains outside of their Limits of Disturbance (LOD). The ground to the south of them on the subject property is sloped and there are several large trees which are not able to be retained (# 102, # 103, # 104, and # 105) due to the excavation cut to meet planned grade. Neighboring tree #202 is located at the top of the slope and is dominated by the larger trees to the south. This has led it to developing a thin canopy and likely a relatively small structural root system due to the larger trees sheltering it from prevailing winds. Removing these trees, particularly # 105 will open up tree #202 to more severe exposure than it has previously received. The extent of drip -lines (farthest reaching branches) for the subject trees to be retained can be found on the tree summary table at the back of this report. The recommended LOD measurements can also be found on the tree summary table. The LOD measurements are based on species, age, condition, drip -line, and prior improvements. These shall be referenced when determining the feasibility of retention. 6. Tree Protection Measures The following general guidelines are recommended to ensure that the designated areas set aside for the preserved trees are protected and construction impacts are kept to a minimum. Tree protection should adhere to best management practices for tree and soil protection during development activity. 1. Tree protection fencing shall be erected around retained trees and positioned just beyond the drip - line edge prior to moving any heavy equipment on site. Doing this will set clearing limits and avoid compaction of soils within root zones of retained trees. 2. Any existing improvements to be removed within the drip -lines or tree protection zones shall be removed by hand or utilizing a tracked mini -excavator. 3. Excavation limits should be laid out in paint on the ground to avoid over excavating. AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. April 171h, 2019 Page 5 4. Excavations within the drip -lines shall be monitored by a qualified tree professional so necessary precautions can be taken to decrease impacts to tree parts. A qualified tree professional shall monitor excavations when work is required and allowed within the "limits of disturbance". 5. To establish sub grade for foundations, curbs and pavement sections near the trees, soil should be removed parallel to the roots and not at 90 degree angles to avoid breaking and tearing roots that lead back to the trunk within the drip -line. Any roots damaged during these excavations should be exposed to sound tissue and cut cleanly with a saw. Cutting tools should be sterilized with alcohol. 6. Areas excavated within the drip -line of retained trees should be thoroughly irrigated daily during dry periods. 7. Preparations for final landscaping shall be accomplished by hand within the drip -lines of retained trees. Large equipment shall be kept outside of the tree protection zones at all times. Simply finish landscape within 10' of retained trees with a 2" to 4" layer of organic mulch. There is no warranty suggested for any of the trees subject to this report. Weather, latent tree conditions, and future man -caused activities could cause physiologic changes and deteriorating free condition. Over time, deteriorating tree conditions may appear and there may be conditions, which are not now visible which, could cause tree failure. This report or the verbal comments made at the site in no way warrant the structural stability or long term condition of any tree, but represent my opinion based on the observations made. Nearly all trees in any condition standing within reach of improvements or human use areas represent hazards that could lead to damage or injury. Please call if you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Benjamin Mark ISA Certified Arborist #PN-6976A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. le� spoirk 41, Mi 17- -7 7' oo IMUW ;e7T - e�.*-"%- ALI. IRV MaA 'js�'.0 t 4 If A, of*- 'i j4. 74 v lob V 11 KO Ile 02 0 1, 34-2, 162)( 1 'T 101 1 1 4' 1 CA. -108 f'"D145 fir /V 'f.f t92 113 ]10 �2& ' �4 - " 9rII+ 0114 1,r It3A, I rT, A' 14 Or-rAl 7' CC� A AAa pf I HF -"ACX f--w- i fAL <KAY PQIVt^AY e7 - rr' flee f-E, 3' Ijlc� KA.. I Jvt.. 1,1 cAxr- TL PEI^?M I 44-- �4 p 171PI,143A� eM VF'. (-loot) rosowvlluf�j I 94�F- %0-�Atlz Da-\ 9 Ll 1046 L vr a F: t' % Sru a-SAmie X wmm 'Vt� Tree Summary Table American Forest Management, Inc. For: 9527 190th PI SW Edmonds WA Date: 4/11/2019 Inspector: Ben Mark 4 4 Viable Tag # ID Genus species DBH (inches) Height (feet) Drip -Line / Limit of Disturbance (feet) Condition yes/no Proposal Comments Ki R F; W 101 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 37 107 21 14 Good Yes Retain Trunk touches utilitiy lines. Ivy. Limbed up @ 30' and thin above 102 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesd 15 85 12 14 6 Good Yes Remove Added to map 103 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesd 27 95 16 14 10 Good Yes Remove Next to snag 104 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 34 110 24 19 22 Good Yes Remove 105 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 36 105 14 19 22/15 Good Yes Remove No canopy north 106 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 39 115 18/15 12 14 Fair Yes Retain Possible decay present in main stem. Added to map 107 Pouglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 41 97 15 16 22/16 Good Yes Remove Good taper 108 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 39 64 28 18 25 Fair Yes Remove Broken at 38' 109 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesit 44 118 20 12 20 Good Yes Remove Stout taper, Added to map 110 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 38 120 26/15 6 19 Good Yes Remove Dense ivy on south side. Just south of dead Douglas Fir ill Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesit 35 117 25/15 15 Good Yes Remove 112 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 44 105 16 16 16 Fair Yes Remove Broken at 39'. New leader and lesser codominant. Added to map. 113 Alder Alnus rubra 14 51 16 16 20 12 Fair Yes Remove Leans east. Added to map. 114 Bitter Cherry Prunus emarginata 11 48 6 10 7 11 Fair Yes Remove ��ken top. Added to map 115 Big Leaf MWple cer macrophyllum 20 61 12 16 14 14 1 Yes I Remove lAdded to map Nei hbor Trees 201 lApple malus sp 5,6 6 Good Yes 202 Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesh 14 Fair Yes Leans west , thin crown Unp-Line and Limits of Usturbance measurements Trom tace ot trunk Trees on neighboring properties - Drip -line and Limits of Disturbance measurements trom property lines Calculated DBH for multistern trees: The DBH in BOLD is the square root of the sum of the DBH of each individual stem, squared. Example 3 stem DBH = Square Root [(steml)2 + (stem2)2 + (stem3)2 )] 1 Aw Residence 9527 1901h Place SW (Parcel # 00434600007901) Edmonds, Washington June 4, 2019 Project #18102 Critical Areas Report for Geologically Hazardous Areas Aw Residence Parcel # 00434600007901 9527 190th Place SW Edmonds, Washington The purpose of this report to fulfill the requirements of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) as set forth in previous planning department reviews. To ensure completeness, this report will include excerpts of the ECDC, specifically ECDC 23.80.50, and our responses will follow each code item or series of items, as appropriate. From ECDC 23.80.50 Critical area report requirements for geologically hazardous areas are generally met through submission to the Director of one of more geotechnical engineering reports. In addition to the general critical area report requirements of section 23.40.90, critical area reports for geologically hazardous areas must meet the requirements of this Section and ECDC Chapters 19.05 and 18.30 as applicable. Critical area reports for two or more typos of critical areas must meet the report requirements for each relevant type of critical area. Geotechnical report(s) submitted for the purpose of critical areas reviews are required as necessary in addition to reports, data and other information mandated per ECDC Titles 18 and 19. A. Preparation by a Qualified Professional. (details omitted for the sake of brevity) Response: Andrew L. Glanclon, LEG is a licensed engineering geologist in the State of Washington (License #2689) with 20 years of professional experience as an engineering geologist in the Puget Sound region. Mr. Glanclon's credentials fulfill the requirements for a Qualified Professional. B. Area Addressed in Critical Area Report. The following areas shall be addressed in a critical area report for geologically hazardous areas: 1. The project area of the proposed activity; and 2. All geologically hazardous areas within 200 feet of the project area or that have potential to be affected by the proposal Response: There was no observed evidence of current or past landslide activity on or within 200 feet of the subject property. The attached figure titled "Mapped Erosion and Landslide Hazard Areas" shows the mapped erosion and landslide hazard areas on and adjacent to the subject property. This map information was from the City of Edmonds GIS viewer. Based on our site reconnaissance, it is our opinion that the landslide hazard areas present only fulfill the criteria in set forth in ECDC 23.80.20 B (2), which define are any areas with a slope of 40 percent or greater that is in excess of 10 feet in vertical height as a landslide hazard area. None of the other codified landslide hazard area criteria (ECDC 23.80.20) were observed on or adjacent to the subject property. Based on our knowledge of the area and our review of the geologic and other mapping resources referenced in our geotechnical report (SFG, January 2014), it is our a C) —C) I I (,�p SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PLLC Roge 1 PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-B90-4658 I INFOCaSFGEO.COM JUN 0 5 20T BUILDING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDMiONDS Aw Res�dence June 4, 2019 9527 1901h Place SW (Parcel # 00434600007901) Project #18102 Edmonds, Washington opinion that there are not any off -site critical areas that are likely to impact the proposed development. C. Geological Hazards Assessment. A critical area report for a geologically hazardous area shall contain an assessment of geological hazards including the following site- and proposal- related information at a minimum. 1. Site and Construction Plans. The report shall include a copy of the site plans for the proposal showing: a. The type and extent of geologic hazard areas, any other critical areas, and buffers on, adjacent to, within 200 feet of, or that are likely to impact the proposal; b. Proposed development, including the location of existing and proposed structures, fill, storage of materials, and drainage facilities, with dimensions indicating distances to the floodplain, if available; c. The topography, in two -foot contours, of the project area and all hazard areas addressed in the report; and d. Clearing limits; Response: As previously stated, the mapped erosion and landslide hazard areas from the City of Edmonds GIS viewer are shown in an attachment to this report. The referenced grading and drainage plan (CG Engineering, January 21, 2019) for the project shows the information set forth in C. 1. b, c & d. 2. Assessment of Geological Characteristics. The report shall include an assessment of the geologic characteristics of the soils, sediments, and/or rock of the project area and potentially affected adjacent properties, and a review of the site history regarding landslides, erosion, and prior grading. Soils analysis shall be accomplished in accordance with accepted classification systems in use in the region. The assessment shall include, but not be limited to: a. A description of the surface and subsurface geology, hydrology, soils, and vegetation found in the project area and in all hazard areas addressed in the report; b. A detailed overview of the field investigations, published data, and references; data and conclusions from past assessments of the site, and site specific measurements, test, investigations, or studies that support the identification of geologically hazardous areas; and c. A description of the vulnerability of the site to seismic and other geologic events; Response: These items were addressed in the referenced geotechnical report for the project (SFG, January 2014). However, this section will further address the soil conditions with respect to the mapped geologic hazards. Erosion Hazard Areas Though there are mapped erosion and severe erosion hazard areas on and adjacent to the subject property, it is our opinion that there are not any specific soil properties that exacerbate the erosivity of the soils. As such, it is our opinion that no special mitigation is required. SOUTH FORK GEosclENCES, PLLC Page 2 PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFO@)SFGEO.COM Aw Residence 9527 190th Place SW (Parcel # 00434600007901) Edmonds, Washington June 4, 2019 Project #18102 Implementation of a temporary erosion and sediment control plan that is consistent with the recommendations in our referenced geotechnical report will adequately mitigate soil erosion during construction. Buffers and setbacks are not required or warranted for the mapped erosion hazard areas. Landslide Hazard Areas We interpreted the native soils to be Vashon advance outwash sediments. Vashon advance outwash sediments are alluvial and fluvial sediments that were deposited by meltwater streams and channels from the advancing Vashon glacial ice sheet. The advance outwash sediments are typically dense, relatively permeable, and moisture insensitive due to the past glacial consolidation and the small amount of silt and clay present. Groundwater was not observed in any of the exploration pits performed for the study and there were no signs of springs observed. Medium dense native Vashon advance outwash soils without adverse groundwater conditions that have slope geometry like the subject property are not prone to deep seated, rotational slope failures. Due to the relatively low overall slope heights and the proposed regrading and use of foundation retaining walls, it is our opinion that all the mapped landslide hazard areas may be altered and that buffers and setbacks for the mapped landslide hazard areas are not necessary. The referenced grading and drainage plan shows that through the use of retaining walls and grading of the subject property, the slope geometry will be changed to eliminate slopes over 40 percent and in excess of 10 feet in vertical height. It is our opinion that the construction can be performed with temporary cut slopes consistent with OSHA/WISHA rules without creating an unstable condition during construction. Upon completion, permanent soil cut slopes and soil slopes in structural fill should be limited to a maximum of 2H:1V. Slopes in constructed with non-structural fill should be limited to 3H:IV. 3. Analysis of Proposal. The report shall contain a hazards analysis including a detailed description of the project, its relationship to the geologic hazard(s), and its potential impact upon the hazard area, the subject property, and affected adjacent properties; and 4. Minimum Buffer and Building Setback The report shall make a recommendation for the minimum no -disturbance buffer and minimum building setback from any geologic hazard based upon the geotechnical analysis. Response: As stated in the preceding response, it is our opinion that the mapped erosion and landslide hazard areas may be altered as shown in the grading and drainage plan, and the alterations will not have adverse impacts during construction or upon completion. These alterations will improve the slope geometry on the subject property and will effectively eliminate the site conditions that fulfill the landslide hazard area criteria. It is our opinion that these alterations may be completed, and no buffers or setbacks are required. D. Incorporation of Previous Study. Where a valid critical areas report has been prepared within the last five years for a specific site, and where the proposed land SOUTH FORK GEOSCIFENCES, PLLC Page 3 PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFOCaSFGEO.COM Aw Residence 9527 1901h Place SW (Parcel # 00434600007901) Edmonds, Washington June 4, 2019 Project #18102 use activity and surrounding site conditions are unchanged, said report may be incorporated into the required critical area report. The applicant shall submit a hazards assessment detailing any changed environmental conditions associated with the site. Response: To our knowledge, aside from our referenced geotechnical report, there are not any other previous studies to incorporate into this study. E. Mitigation of Long -Term Impacts. When hazard mitigation is required, the mitigation plan shall specifically address how the activity maintains or reduces the pre-existing level of risk to the site and adjacent properties on a long-term basis (equal to or exceeding the projected lifespan of the activity or occupation). Proposed mitigation techniques shall be considered to provide long-term hazard reduction only if they do not require regular maintenance or other actions to maintain their function. Mitigation may also be required to avoid any increase in risk above the pre-existing conditions following abandonment of the activity. Response: Since the proposed construction will effectively eliminate the slope conditions that fulfill the landslide hazard area criteria, the proposed construction is the mitigation. As such, it is our opinion that additional mitigation for long-term impacts is not warranted. Final soil stabilization and landscaping will provide long term erosion protection for finished slopes. F. Additional Technical Information Requirements for Erosion and Landslide Hazard Areas. In addition to the basic critical area report requirements for geologically hazardous areas provided in subsections A through E above, technical information for erosion and landslide hazard areas shall meet the requirements of ECDC 19.05 and include the following information at a minimum. 1. Site Plan. The critical area report shall include a copy of the site plan for the proposal showing: a. The height of slope, slope gradient, and cross section of the project area; b. The location of springs, seeps, or other surface expressions of ground water on or within two hundred feet of the project area or that have potential to be affected by the proposal; c. The location and description of surface water runoff features; Response: F. la. — The referenced civil engineering plans for the project show the slopes and 2-foot contours of the project site. Since the total relief on the subject property is relatively low and the native soils have been overconsoliclated by the Vashon glacial ice, it is our opinion that a cross section of the slope is not warranted. F. 1b. & c. — No springs, seeps, other surface expressions of groundwater, or surface water runoff features were noted in our prior site reconnaissance. As such, these features are not shown on the civil engineering plans for the project. 2. Hazards Analysis. The hazards analysis component of the critical areas report shall specifically include; a. A description of the extent and type of vegetative cover; SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PLLC Page 4 PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFO @bSFGEO.COM Aw Residence 9527 190th Place SW (Parcel # 00434600007901) Edmonds, Washington June 4, 2019 Project #18102 b. A description of the subsurface conditions based on data from site specific explorations; c. Descriptions of surface and ground water conditions, public and private sewage disposal systems, fills and excavations, and all structural improvements; Response: It is our opinion that for the proposed construction of a single-family residence, these items were adequately assessed and described in the referenced geotechnica I report for the project (SFG, April 2014). d. An estimate of slope stability and the effect that construction and placement of structures will have on the slope over the estimated life of the structure; Response: The entire site is underlain by medium dense Vashon advance outwash sediments. These sediments were over -consolidated by the Vashon glacial ice sheet and there are not adverse geologic conditions or ground water conditions on or near the site. As such, it is our opinion that the likelihood of a deep-seated, rotational failure on or adjacent to the subject property is low. The mapped landslide hazard areas are areas that exceed the slope geometry criteria, and some of these areas were created by previous grading. As previously stated, the proposed construction will effectively eliminate the slope conditions that fulfill the landslide hazard area criteria. it is our opinion that the construction and placement of structures will improve the overall slope stability on the subject property. e. An estimate of the bluff retreat rate that recognizes and reflects potential catastrophic events such as seismic activity or a one -hundred year storm event; Response: A bluff retreat rate estimation is not applicable to the subject property or a slope of this nature, since the slope geometry is not extreme and there is not an ongoing process that creates accelerated erosion and/or instability, such as stream erosion, channel migration, or toe erosion from wave action. f. Consideration of the run -out hazard of landslide debris and/or the impacts of landslide run -out on down slope properties. Response: As previously stated, the native soils are not prone to deep-seated rotational failure and the proposed construction and critical area alteration will improve the slope geometry on the site. It is our opinion that the proposed construction and landscaping will eliminate the potential for landside debris or landslide runout on or adjacent to the subject property. g. A study of slope stability including an analysis of proposed cuts, fills, and other site grading; SouTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PLLC Page 5 PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFO@SFGEO.COM Aw Residence June 4, 2019 9527 19011 Place SW (Parcel # 00434600007901) Project #18102 Edmonds, Washington Response: As previously stated, it is our opinion that the construction can be performed with temporary cut slopes consistent with OSHA/WISHA rules without creating an unstable condition during construction. Permanent soil cut slopes and soil slopes in structural fill should be limited to a maximum of 2H:lV. Slopes in constructed with non-structural fill should be limited to 3H:lV. These finished slope recommendations are consistent with the standard of practice in the region and are relatively conservative. h. Recommendations for building siting limitations; and Response: It is our opinion that the erosion and landslide hazard areas can be fully altered, and the proposed construction will provide improved slope geometry. As such, no other building siting limitations are necessary. 1. An analysis or proposed surface and subsurface drainage, and the vulnerability of the site to erosion; Response: Surface Drainage The Vashon advance outwash sediments are conducive to stormwater infiltration and stormwater from impervious surfaces will be infiltrated on site. In -situ infiltration testing was recently performed on the subject property by Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. It is our understanding that the proposed infiltration trenches were sized based on the recommendations set forth in referenced infiltration testing report (NGA, May 24, 2019). It is our opinion that these measures will perform adequately for the proposed development and there will not be adverse erosion effects. Subsurface Drainage Recommendations for foundation and retaining wall were set forth in out referenced geotechnical report and the recommendations are still valid. 3. Geotechnical Engineering Report. The technical information for a project within a landslide hazard area shall include a geotechnical engineering report prepared by a licensed engineer that presents engineering recommendations for the following: a. Parameters for design of site improvements including appropriate foundations and retaining structures. These should include allowable load and resistance capacities for the bearing and lateral loads, installation considerations, and estimates of settlement performance; b. Recommendations for drainage and subdrainage improvements; c. Earthwork recommendations including clearing and site preparation criteria, fill placement and compaction criteria, temporary and permanent slope inclinations and protection, and temporary excavation support, if necessary; and d. Mitigation of adverse site conditions including slope stabilization measures and selismically unstable soils, if appropriate; SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PLLC Page 6 PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND. WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFO@SFGEO.COM Aw Residence June 4, 2019 9527 190th Place SW (Parcel # 00434600007901) Project #18102 Edmonds, Washington Response: These design parameters and recommendations were made in the referenced geotechnical report for the project (SFG, January 2014) and/or have been addressed in previous sections of this report. 4. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. For any development proposal on a site containing an erosion hazard area, an erosion and sediments control plan shall be required. The erosion and sediment control plan shall be prepared in compliance with requirements set forth in ECDC Chapter 18.30; Response: As previously stated, implementation of a temporary erosion and sediment control plan that is consistent with the recommendations in our referenced geotechnical report will adequately mitigate soil erosion during construction. G. Limited Report Requirements for Stable Erosion Hazard (details omitted for brevity) Response: Not applicable due to the presence of mapped landslide hazard areas. H. Seismic Hazard Areas (details and subsections omitted for brevity) Response: As stated in the referenced geotechnical report, there are no site -specific seismic hazards (such as liquefaction potential) that significantly impact the subject property or proposed development. Recommendations for standard seismic considerations were made in the referenced report and the recommendations are still valid. Closure We have enjoyed working with you and we are confident that the information provided in this report will aid in the design of your project. If there are any questions about this report, please feel free A Engineering Geologist / Owner South Fork Geosciences, PLLC Attachment: Mapped Erosion and Landslide Hazard Areas References: Edmonds Community Development Code, https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Edmonds/ City of Edmonds GIs, https:Hmaps.edmondswa.gov/Html5Viewer/`?viewer=Edm onds SSL.HTML "Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Geotechnical Engineering Report, Johnson Residence, Parcel # 00434600007901, 9527 190th Place SW, Edmonds, Washington", South Fork Geosciences, Project #12058, January 14, 2014 "Stormwater Infiltration Letter, Aw Residence Infiltration, 9527 190th Place SW, Edmonds, Washington", Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc., NGA File No. 1105019, May 24,2019 SOUTH FORK GEoscIENCES, PLLC Page 7 PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFO@SFGEO.COM Aw Residence June 4, 2019 9527 190th Place SW (Parcel # 00434600007901) Project #18102 Edmonds, Washington n. T 0 r-zrS;r._' X 9;;;;1 YJ 0 30 60ft 0 I PL. S North is up Linear Scale Valid J Landslide and Erosion Hazard N Landslide Hazard Area 40% severe Erosion Hazard 15%-4096 Erosion Hazard Areas 15%-40% 4 Source: City of Edmonds GIs Mapped Erosion and Landslide Hazard Areas SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PLLC Page 8 PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFO@)SFGEO.COM r Aw Residence 9527 1901h Place SW Edmonds, Washington Strobl Design LLC V acob@strobldesign.com Attention: Jacob Strobl Subject: Grading Season Extension — Aw Residence City of Edmonds Permit #. BLD20190116 Mr. Strobl: Revised September 6, 2019 Project #18102 BY 1D1'Zt19 The purpose of this letter is to provide our opinion with respect to a grading season extension. Based on our recent correspondence, it is our understanding that the normal grading season restriction for geologically hazardous areas is from October 11t through May 1st. To facilitate efficient construction, a reduction of the grading restriction is desired. For the sake of brevity, we presume that people reading this letter are highly familiar with the subject property and the proposed development. The remainder of this letter will set forth our opinions on extending the grading season for the proposed development of the subject property. Summary of Soil Conditions and Statement of Minimal Risk The native Vashon advance outwash soils are dense in -place, relatively permeable, and moderately resistant to erosion, except when subjected to concentrated flows. Based on our review of the site topography, the native soils present, and the proposed grading and temporary erosion and sediment control plan prepared by CG Engineering, it is our opinion that the site work may be performed through the wet season and this construction, the areas disturbed by construction will remain stable, there will not be an increase in the potential for soil movement, and the risk of damage to the subject property and adjacent properties will be minimal. Review of Wet Season Work Schedule Though some weather work is required to facilitate timely construction, it is our understanding that there is an intent to limit earthwork during the wet season. The intent is to start construction in mid -September and to have the foundation excavation, foundation concrete placed, and foundation backfill, and temporary soil stabilization completed by mid -November. Then final grading and landscaping will be completed next year. The following contractor schedule was provided via e-mail for our review by Strobl Design: Start: Mid -September Grub site, install filter and high visibility fencing, construction entrance ,remove certain trees, remove stumps, haul logs. a 2-weeks Excavate for foundation including removal of unsuitable soil, import and compaction of compactable soil if necessary. 0 1-week Install foundation. Waterproofing, footing and roof drainage. 0 3-weeks. SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PLLC PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFOCaSFGEO.COM Page 1 Aw Residence Revised September 6, 2019 9527 1901h Place SW Project #18102 Edmonds, Washington Backfill 1-week TIES as required. 0 1-week Total - 8 weeks This construction scheduling and phasing is consistent for the standard of practice for the Puget Sound region. As previously stated, it is our opinion that the site work may be performed through the wet season and this construction, the areas disturbed by construction will remain stable throughout construction. Closure We have enjoyed working with you and we are confident that this letter will aid in the permitting_QJjjjM6kroject. If there are any questions, please feel free to contact us. Since 19 I Andrew L. Glandon AnU1C:VV L. %�JICIIIUL)111 LL%.J Engineering Geologist / Owner South Fork Geosciences, PLLC Cc: City of Edmonds Attention: Building Department SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PLLC Page 2 PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFO(-aSFGEO.COM . IL Szafran, Michele From: Jacob Strobl <jacob@strobldesign.com> Sent: Friday, September 6, 2019 10:23 AM To: Szafran, Michele Subject: RE: BLD2019-0116 AW - Ground Disturbance Timeline Extension Hi Michele, *1 Per our phone call, final grading would not occur until the summer of 2020. Thanks, Jacob STROBL DESIGN LLC 206.661.3622 strobidesign.com From: Jacob Strobl [mailto-.jacob@strobldesign.com] Sent: Friday, September 06, 2019 9:40 AM To:'Szafran, Michele' <Michele.Szafra n@ed mondswa.gov> Cc:'Chak Aw'<chakaw63@gmaii.com>; 'EVA PETERSON' <pchbuilder@msn.com>; 'Andrew Glandon' <Andrew@sfgeo.com> Subject: RE: BLD2019-0116 AW - Ground Disturbance Timeline Extension Hi Michele, Please see the updated letter addressing your comments in your email below regarding timeline. Let me know if you need any additional information. Thanks, Jacob STROBL DESIGN LLC 206.661.3622 strobldesign.com From: Szafran, Michele [mailto: M ichele.Szaf ran @edmondswa.gov] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2019 9:46 AM To:'Jacob Strobl' <iacob@strobldesign.com> Cc:'Chak Aw'<chaiaw63@gmail.com>; 'EVA PETERSON'<Pchbuilder@msn.com> Subject: RE: BLD2019-0116 AW - Ground Disturbance Timeline Extension Jacob, The seasonal restrictions are from October thru April so any ground disturbing activity during this time should be clearly addressed by the Geotech. The remaining question regarding the Grading Season Extension letter is what ground disturbing activity will take place after mid -November? The letter states that final grading and landscaping can be completed next year, if that's January next year that would need to be in the letter, or if that's April then state that. A . % Please see the attached example letter for reference. Additionally the example letter includes mitigating measures along with ongoing monitoring. April is a ways out so if you want to address the first scenario for now you may do that and you may always revisit this for April as it gets closer. Regards, Michele Q. Sufran / Plainer City of Edmonds 1215 th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 42S-771-0220 michele.szafran@edmondswa.gov General permit assistance, online permits, and Web GIS: http://www.edmondswa.gov/handouts.html Permit Center Hours: M, T, Th, F 8:00 AM — 4:30 P M Wednesday 8:30 AM — 12:00 PM From: Jacob Strobl <*acob@strobldesign.com> Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2019 7:37 AM To: Szafran, Michele <Michele.Szafran@edmondswa.gov> Cc:'Chak Aw'<chakaw63@gmail.com>; 'EVA PETERSON' <pchbuilder@ msn.com> Subject: RE: BLD2019-0116 AW - Ground Disturbance Timeline Extension Hi Michele, The intent is to start construction when the permit is issued in September or alternatively in April if the client decides to wait till April due to weather. Do you need a construction schedule for both scenarios to review this request? Thanks, Jacob STROBL DESIGN LLC 206.661.3622 strobldesign.com From: Szafran, Michele [mailto�.Michele.Szafran@edmondswa.gov] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2019 3:55 PM To: 'Jacob Strobl'<.iacob@strobldesign.com> Subject: RE: BLD2019-0116 AW - Ground Disturbance Timeline Extension Jacob, I ran the request by with the Development Services Director and there was a question regarding the timelines. My understanding is that the foundation excavation, foundation concrete and foundation backfill will be completed by mid - November and then there will be temporary soil stabilization completed until final grading and landscaping next year. What is next year January, please be more specific. 0 I -STRUCTURAL CAICVOTJO�U STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 00 Ald RESLDENCE COMONDS, wA 101301-zoly Lu Lu tn z 0 0 z uj W B L-D-zo M - D I � 0 L W L-_.. LY) .----JAN 3 0 20: BUILDING 4 Criteria Sheet Codes: Project Location: Structural: IBC 2015 Street & Number: 9527 190th PI Sw Loading� ASCE7-10 City: Edmonds State: WA Wood: NDS 2015 ZIP: 98020 Concrete: ACI 318-14 Latitude: 47.8262 W Longitude: -122,3610 N Occupancy Category Risk Cateciorv: 11 ASCr 7 T.H. I i;.1 Seismic Load Summary: Analysis Procedure: Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure Lateral System: Wood'Structural Panels Rated for Shear Resistance R: 6.50 Cd= 4 Base Shear V = 10.7 kips ().= 2.5 Ss= 1.282 S,= 0.503 SDS� 0.85 SDI� 0.34 C�= 0.131 'E= 1.0 Wind Load Summary. V= 110 KzT= l.00 Exposure = C Dead Loads: Roofing 2.5 psf I/Z'Sheathing 1 �8 psf Trusses @ 24!'oc 2.5 psf Misc./Mech. 1.5 psf Ceiling Finish 2.8 psf 11.1 psf Use 15 psf Floor Finish Floor 1 psf 3/4" Sheathing 2.7 psf Joists @ I&' oc 2.2 psf Misc./Mech. 2 psf Ceiling Finish 2.8 10.7 psf Use 12 psf Live Loads: Snow 25 psf Floor 40 psf Soils: Allowable Bearing 1500 psf L 00/-111'11-1'1U.�1-14G Aw Residence Criteria Edmonda r Community Edmondi MapdataCMB 800gle DATE 1013012018 PRO-1. # DESIGN JpJ SHEET I �v 2 00 a) 0 .V iR ii z 0 5, Seismic Design ASCE 7-10 Seismic Analysis Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure Seismic Force Resisting System: Per , Table 12.2-1 System: Bearing Wall Systems Type: Light -frame (wood) Walls Sheathed with Wood Structural Panels Rated for Shear Resistance Risk Catego4 11 1, 11, or III, or IV per Table 1.5-1 Site Class 1 8 per sails report (D assumed, without soils report) Diaphragm Flexibilityl Flexible o� 2.5 Ss 1.282 g 2% in 50 yr, Latitude & Longitude lookup S, 0.503 g 2% in 50 yr, Latitude & Longitude lookup h, 33 It R 6.50 1.0 Table 1.5-2 T. = ctq Eq. 12.8.7 Cd 4 Ct 0.02 Table 12.8-2 Sms = FaSs Eq. 11.4-1 x T 0.075 0.03 sec Table 12.8-2 Eq. 12.8-7 Sm, = FVS, Eq. 11.4-2 TO 0.08 sec SDS = '/3 SMS Eq. 11.4-3 Ts 0.39 sec 2/3 SD1 = SM, Eq. 11.4-4 k I.00G Fa 1.00 Table 11.4-1 CS = SDS Eq. 12.8-2 Fv 1.00 Table 11.4-2 (RI[e) sms SMI 1.28 g Eq. 11.4-1 CS = SQ 1 r(R/10) Eq. 12.8-3 0.50 g Eq. 11.4-2 CS = SDITL Eq. 12.8-4 SDS 0.855 g Eq. 11.4-3 T;I(Rlle) Sol 0.335 g Eq� 11.4-4 C, 0.044SDSI, Eq. 12.8-5 CS 0.01 Eq. 12.8-5 CS 0.131 Eq. 12.8-2 1�984 Eq. 12.8-3 need not exceed, T < TL 0,010 Eq. 12.8-5 or 12.8-6 minimum CVX W.,,h k/En 1 WO Eq. 12.8-12 Cs. design 0.131 F Fpx Wpx Eq. 12.10-1 Bldg. Weight 81.7 k I.X i Fpx �t 0.2SDSIwVX Eq. 12.10-2 V=CsW 10.7 k Eq. 12.8-1, Strength Level Base Shear Fx < 0.4SDII.Wx Eq. 12.10-3 V = CS.,dW 7.5 k Eq. 12.8-1 ASD Base Shear P= 1.0 Story Shear Diaphragm ASD Force (p not Included) hx (ft) Wx hXk (ft) W01C CVX M Fx (k) SV (k) Fpx,.,, Fpx,, FPxmax Fpxdesign V=Fpx/Fx Roof 20.0 56.7 20.0 1134.0 0.8119 6.2 6.2 6.16 6.78 13.57 &78 1.10 Main 10.0 25 10.0 250.0 0.181 1.4 7.5 2.30 2.99 S.98 2.99 2.20 S 81.7 1384.0 7.5 Aw Residence Seismic Criteria L DATE 10/30/2018 PROJ. # DESIGN jpj SHEET 2 00 < g ei m A w A � 2 68 (404 E LL 4 Ln z 0 V1 z �11_ LO Wind Design - MWFRS ASCE 7-10 Chapter 27 - Directional Procedure Design Method Location and Building Dimensions Wind Coefficients Exposure C V= 110 mph -fatt-le-26-.6--l- K,= 0.97 Table 27.3-1 G=. 6.8� 26.9.4 Transverse Wind Pressures US = 0.6 h/L = 0.6 Pressure Coefficients from Finurp 97 4-1- Bldg Face L., Windward Wall 0.8 Leeward Wall -0.50 Windward Roof -0.3/0.17 Leeward Roof -0.60 Wall Pressures (Unfactoredl Calculate Kzt?. YES Kzt Ro of Angle -Transverse Dir. R-0-of Angle - Long Dir 27 ';degrees Ground to top of roof ft Sot of roof to top of roof 12 ft Mean Roof Hei 9-6i, h- 26 4ft Slhort anDimen-i-n' sto 44 ift Long Plan Dimension 74 !ft Parapet ? No Ground to top ofipa-rape-t* 1 Velocity Pressure at Mean' 25.5 Roof Height, qh = ACr) Ht K, q. I Pw� waits I'l-ft P..11, (Psf) 0-15 0.85 22.38. 15.22, 10.85 15.6Z Z3.76 - 16.11' _T625 --iO-25 094 24)5 16-83' 10.85 116.61 25-40 6-98 25.86 17.55 10.85 17.04 3040 1.04 27.38 18.62 10.85 17.68 4V�O I.Tg� 28.70' 19.K' 0. CS 18.22 51-60 L`13 29.75 20.23 10.85 18.6S 61-76 1.17 30.6 M975' UO.85 -ii. 6 8 71-80 1.21 316C 21.66 10.6t 10.M 8i 90 t24 32.65 .20' 2y- - 16 ITS 4.113 91-100 UIS jj7 i2.56 10.851 20.05. LongitucHnall-MridPressums US = 1.7 h/L = 0.4 Pressure Coefficipntq from FI-p- 77 4-1- Bldg Face CP Windward Wall 0.8 Leeward Wall -0.36 Windward Roof -0.23/0.25 Leeward Roof -0.6 W.11 Pr--- (I Roof Pressures (Unfactored) ASD Windward Horiz Proj Vax - Min Leeward 3.6 -6.6 -13.0 Parapet (Unf, ASD Windward: Leeward Total (p=q -NIA- ! -N/A- -N/A- Transverse Direction rB.- -Sh.., (k-.Ps) ASD Roof P-q-r- (I JnI`tnrI1 Aqn Ht K, qz I"wwwds IFw.11, P..I(. (psf) 0-15 0.85 0.9 22.38' 23.701 15.22 1611 7.89 7.89 13.87 14.40 15-20 20-25 094. : 75 16.83 7.89 14.83 25-30 0.98 .24 j5�.86- 718 9 SIG _ A— 36 0 1.04- 2TJ8' -18-.6 2 _,K9� 41-�O �9-52- 16.45 1.13 29.75 20.i:� 7.89 16.88 1.17' 30.81 20.95 7.89 17.31 711-�_O 1_211 - ------ _3t8_6 17.73 W-40 '124 _3165' 22.20---- - - 789 : 18.06 91-100, 1.26, 33.18 22.S6 7. 18.2 Windward H riz Proj - - - ---- -- - Leeward Max Min (psf) b.4 . -t.-V -13.0 208 Parapet (Unf) ASD Windward Leeward Total (p=q -NtA- -N/A- -N/A- Longitudinal Direction S) -,.vD CotvTlRots L3117�i 0 t g I c Tl o tJ!It Aw Residence DATE 1013012018 Wind Criteria PROJ. # RUCTURAL GINEE PING DESIGN jPj SHEET 3 < IPt , L W 0 W Z 0 Site Address Address 9527 190th PI Sw Wind Radius 2.00 Miles City: Edmonds State: WA Angle 0, Lat Long 47.82615 -122.3610 Exposure C Profile 1: 0 'to 180' Profile 2 : 270 * to 90 SITE MAP Profile 3: 315 * to 135' 0 I`�"`Mea' vdale dov A4-.Bee(c*h Park _>0 Q1, j, eo uthwest ou&�-Park PERRI)NVILLE 1-0 C52.) Edmonds communityo College Edmonds All 704 (Dw 0 §Y1 2201h SW d oe 4 Val 06-E Oak o per n Iviap, data 02018 Googi ESCARPMENT Aw Residence Kzt Calculations TRUCTURAL GINEERING 2-D RIDGE OR 3-D AXISYMMETRICAL HILL Kzr (11 + K, K2 K3) Z K, Per Figure K2 (1 — jxj1jiLh) K 1 3 K., .t 1, If H/Lh!g 0.2 PER RQUW213.8-1 DATE 91512018 PROJ. # DESIGN jPj SHEET 4 00 ,7, C2 Ui < 0 in 15 z 0 U) z 11 Direction 1 I Top 0 Bottom 0 Mid Profile 1 : 0 ' to 180 -10560 ft -S280 ft Direction 3 10. ,kTop ABottom *Mid Direction 2 400 ft 200 ft 0 ft S280 ft 10560 ft 4 Direction 4 400 ft 300 ft 200 ft 100 ft W U TE -10560 ft -5280 ft 0 ft 5280 ft 10560 ft Direction I - 0 'to Site Direction 2 - Site to 180' Direction 3 - 270'to Site Direction 4 - Site to 90 Site Conditions (26.8.1) Site Conditions (26.8.1) Site Conditions (26.8.1) Site Conditions 12G.8.11 1. Unubstructed I Yes 1. Unubstructed Yes 1. Unubstructed Yes 2. Isolated Yes 2. Isolated Yes 2. Isolated Yes 3. Upper Half Hill i No Kzt--i 3. Upper Half Hill No Kzt--1 3. Upper Half Hill No Kzt--1 4. H/Lh �t 0.2 No KzM 4. H/Lh ? 0.2 No Kzt-i 4. H/Lh � 0.2 No Kzt--1 5 . H� 15' 1 Yes 5. H�t 15' Yes 5. H> 15' Yes Terrain Data Terrain Data Terrain Data Terrain I Escrprnnt fop of Hill Dist 10029 '75; Bott. of Hill Dist.---t--- L @ H/2 -212 Top of Hill Elev. upwind 384, Bott. of Hill Ele v 0 Site Elev. .1 Site Dist. 1164 0 11-1/2 192 Kzt Calculations H=i 384 Lh= 10241 X= 10029 Z=. 28 g--: 1.5 v::;r2-5- K1 value =: 0.85 KW 0.03 K2=! 0.35 lk3=10.99 H/Lh 0.04 Kzt Do! Atorzk4t. luTRUCTURAL NGINEERING g Srz ; Site 0 ft Profile 2 : 270 * to 90 ' Site Terrain Ridgel i.p of Hill Dist. 10029 Bott. of Hill Dist, 1008 L Ccb H12 5996 Site clownwncl Top of Hill Elev. 1 384 Bott. of Hill Elev. 61 Site Elev. 1641 Site Dist. 11-1/2 0 , I Kzt Calculations H= 223 4033 X= 10029 Z-; 28 p=11.5 T .-- y--! 3 K1 value =!1.45 - cijo-ca- ----K2=�A00 k3= 0:98 ---H/Lh =IO.06 Terrain- Ridgell Top of Hill ist 8597 Bott of Hill Dist. -2016 L @ H/2 0 Site upwind Top of Hill Elev. 464 Bott of Hill Elev. 0 Site Elev. 164.1 Site Dist. 0 11-1/2 2321 Kzt Calculations H=i, 464 Lh= 8597 X-1 8597 ti=11.5 28 y '3 K1 value= 1-45 KWO.08 K2=: 0.33 k3= �: 0.99 H/Lh =!I 0.05 Kzt = rl 1.00, 1. Unubstructed Yes Isolated Yes 3. Upper Half Hill I No .2 L No 5. H�o 15' Yes Terrain Data Terrai-n Top of Hill gist. Ridge 8597 BotL of Hi I I Dist. 1 0 L @ H/2. Site t.d-ownwnd Top of Hill Elev. 464 --4- Bott. of Hill Elev. 1154 Site Elev. 164.1 Site Dis t. 0 14/2 314 Kzt Calculations H=, 300 Lh= 7217 X=; 8597 Z=: 28 y=-3 K1 value =! 1.45 K1=10,06 K2=.0.21 k3=:0.99 H/Lh =: 0 Kzt=l 1.00 L#1 Aw Residence DATE 91512018 Kzt Calculations PROJ. # DESIGN jpj SHEET C; 5 OD 04 rn T C 0 VI) Ln 'n C) > a) CA W 0 U E L11 V) z 0 V) z Direction 5 Profile 3 : 315 ' to 135 Direction 6 iTop KBottorn *Mid 400 ft 'air 200 ft Site 19 0 ft -10560 ft -5280 ft 0 ft S280 ft 10560 ft Direction 7 Profile 4 45 ' to 225 Direction 8 A.Top 1113ottom *Mid 400 ft 300 ft 200 ft Sib 100 ft X- 0 ft -10560 ft -5280 ft 0 ft 5280 ft 10560 ft Direction 5 - 315 *to Site Directlon 6 - Site to 135 Direction 7 - 45'to Site Direction 8 - Site to 22S Site Conditions (26.8.1) Site Conditions (26.8.1) Site Conditions t26.8.11 Site Conditions (26.8.11 1. Unubstructed Yes 2. Isolated Yes 3. Upper Half Hill No 4. H/Lh ;t Oz2 No .5. Hz 151 Yes Terrain Data Terrain I Ridgel Top of Hill Dist 769 Bott. of Hill Dist. A592 L 0 H/2 0 Site upwind Top of Hill Elev. 441 Bott. of Hill Elev- Site Elev. 0 1641 Site Dist 0 H/2 2il Kzt Calculations H=j 441 Lh= 7694 X-- 7694 Z=1 28 V--T1-!F- Y= 3 K1 value = 11.45 -K`1�10.08 hliliK2 --I . k3=! 0.99 H/Lh 0.06 1 Kzt 1.001 1. Unubstructed Yes 2. Isolat, �z m- 3. Upper Half Hill No Kzt--1 :zt--i 4. H/Lh > --tio- ot-mi 5. H� 15' Yes Terrain Data Terrain Ridge Yo-pof F Fill -Dist. Bott. of Hill Dist. 7694 0 L 0 H/2 1167 Site Top of Hill Elev. clownwnd 441 Bott of Hill Elev. 164 Site Elev. Site Dist 164.1 0 11-1/2 Kzt Calculations H-' 276.952 Lh=! 6527 X= i694 28 ym-3 KI value =11.45 k1=10.06 K2=iO.21 k3='0.99 H/Lh =!0.04 Kzt =1 1.00 1. Unubstructed Yes 2. Isolated Yes 3. Upper Half Hill 4.H/Lh?0.2- No No- 5. Hz! 15' j Ye s Terrain Data Terrain Ridge Top of Hill Dist. -10560 Bott. of Hill Dist. 0 L @ H/2 -531 Site downwnd Top of Hill Elev. 349 Bott. of Hill Elev. 164 Site Elev. 164 . 1 Site Dist. 0 H/2 257 Kzt Calculations H=j 1851 Lh=l 10029 10560 Z--i 28 IA=11.5 K1 va.�I.e= 1.45 Kl--'0.03 K2=. 0.30 k3=10.99 H/Lh = 0.02 Kzt = 1.00 t Unubstructed Yes 2. Isolated Yes czt--i 3. Upper Half Hill Kzt-1 (z m- 4. H/Lh 2: 0.2 No__ i<�t-i S. H� 1S' Yes Terrain Data Terrain Top of Hill Dist. Ridge -10560 Bott. of Hill Dist- 9286 L. @ H/2 Site upwind Top of Hill Elev. 349 Bott. of Hill Elev. 7 Site Site Dist. 164.1 0 H/2 7-8- Kzt Calculations H=j 342,677 ____LtL._10560 10560 Z=: 28 Y=! 3 K1 value 1.45 K1=10.05 K2=-0.33 k3=, 0.99 H/Lh=10.03 Kzt =! 1.06 Aw Residence DATE 91512018 10 Kzt Calculations PROJ. # DESIGN jpj STRUCTUPAL GI NEERING C*/' SHEET C 6 CT cj CJ V < 0 Y 0 Ln 7 ASCE 7-10 Wind Loads - Components and Cladding Flat, Gable and Hip Roofs Wind Coefficients Exposure� C V=1 110 mph K O�85 !Table 26.6-1 C�C' (Calcufated from Ch. Td-faI3-leis�- GCP1 0.18 !Table 26.11-1 Velocity Pressure, qh = 0.00256KAJ�V' Design Wind Pressure, p = qh[(GCp)-(GCpJ] D��inn Wind Pmqqifrp fnqfl Part 1: Low -Rise Buildings (h:5 60 feet) Section 30.4 Location and Building Dimensions K,t 1.00 Mean Roof Height, h 28 ift K, 0.97 Jable 303-1 15.3 psf (30.3-1) Design (30.4-1) JRoofTylpe Ga�ble Component Zone Effective Wind Area (sq ft) 1510 20 so 100 200 �:soo Gable and Hip Roofs 7 to 27 deg 1 + 10.4' -16.5 9.7* -16.1 8.3* 7.4* 7.4* 7.4* -15.3' -15.0* -15.0* -15.0* 2 + 10.4* -28.8 9.7* -26.5 8.3* -23.3 7.4* -21.1 7A* -21.1 -- - -36.5 7,4* -21.1 -36.5 OH -36.5 -36.5 -36.5 -36.5 3 + 10.4' 9.7* 8.3* 7.4* 7.4' 7.4* -42.6 -39.5 -36.2 -33.4 -33.4 -33A OH -59.5 -53.3 -45.7 -41.1 -41.1 -41.1 Wall 4 + 18.1 17.3 16.2 15.3* 14.6' 13.5* -119�6 -183 -17.8 -16.7 -16.1 -15.0* 5 + 18.1 17.3 16.2 15.3* 14.6* - 13.5* -15.0' -24.2 -22.7 -20.5 -18.8 Typ - LC A + 46.9 43.8 39.5 36.5 35.7 34.6 Parapet (Fig. Typ - LC B -37.7 -36.0 -34.0 -32.0 -30.6 -28.5 30.7-1) -Corner - LC A Corner-LCB + 60.7 56.9 52.4 48.7 -34.2 48.0 -31.6 46.9 -28.5 -42.3 -40.0 -36.8 Note: * Indicates 10psf minimum lateral load per 30.2.2 controls this load case for most buildings. Gable/Hip Roofs 7 -27 degree - Figure 30.4-28 Wall Zones - Figure 30.4-1 a: 10 percent of least horizontal dimension or O.4h, whichever is smaller, but not IM than either 41/9 of Icast horizontal t1imension or 3 ft (0.9 m). h: Mean roof height, in feet (meters), except (hat eave height shall be used for 0 5 10P. 0 STRUCTURAL NGINEERING 0/sr= 17, Aw Residence Date: 91512018 Project #: Design: JPJ Sheet: C7 0� 00 LO 0 C: M F, 'T LU 'M 0 F- M z 0 U) —fluf.C��k 1-11A10 fitiff5w0f O-J H 9,+,Oc A eC Ll A/ x L = i5 16 A 12 1 A 7-5 xF 5 16 Aj 0 ?11 fS'S- tief 7. JA/ Ir AME414) cH ex PCs r ca -01 2- 2,17 0 -3 1:51 ?- Op cf/ 1 0 51 iq / STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 0 0 Lu 0 u Lu ;� Ln I-- u- z z LLI - - ' �� F� �� 5ouTtf f1[VATioAi 150014T. GALC. HE16W LIMIT 0 nv loll T�W- TEMP, TEimp. - TEMP. TEMP GLA55 TE"P. Tf3[4P. OUARDRAIL -T ---------------- 71— LEVEL MAIN ELEV, lbo.Q, AVG,C,RAve T W. TEMP� TW. MENT LEVEL ;VES-r EIEVATIOAI -------------- - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -- ±Jl 51C 1 EL E A r El. f VA T/OA/ R LATERAL OESIGl/ STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 7q' LOAD L f.V6rl4 S-61 S. I' �vpvs SH M P, 7147 136 wALL sw Li S E,,j I 0 T- Sq76 13" H D Cm Sri Hbu7- 16 0 LOAD ro L fAlGT H- t I 5 H f A k 117 WA L I sw 3 -T 16741 V D H Ou H 4w/ C x OF P-157- A,z-j AIESIDeNCE 10 / 3 o I f J- P,7' 0 0 uj 0 < u ui W ul 0 z 0 (n z w FERAL OCSIGN elISF-WEST' DIRIECT-ioA/ v LOAD 1782*0� 176 2, LFN6rH 38' 21Y ' s,H i pt P- 14 7:*N' -7 Li Vt. WALL SLj I SW( 0 0. No or. LOAD LENGTH S'h EA IZ WA LL OT H.D. STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING l7t7 1782 0 6,6 7 cb I ioq *F41 7-2 5WI Sw 16 7-zo ,vo a T: A16 Or LF Sl D 1' /7 ('F- 7PT 0 0 Lu �7' 0 u ul V) LLJ U) z 0 (1) z Lu (n - ATERAL PEs(6/v (f n F Ck C*Oxo -Zvf,;-]- v --3,611 = 3c?/l 7" -Y,5 3,5 /':*/ 5 - 6 7 4 7 2 -V-t)et -: 4;7?al"-Vc"7 IV /I z se s V/ 59S .1 275' 3 7 3' 60 COLLiCTOR AC)ZCf 2397- clifeic SPLIC-E -z3c/z */,? /I 14 tl q � 41&? P w Ri 5 oElv E STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING J-P j 0 0 0 uj tn z 0 (n z uj V) j —V—FR 11 � A ROOF FeAMIAJ6 tz-) -Z..,- 40 Q3 SYSxt?- LZ -Z-S jl'� 100pi I L /I : 2 Iq #t-1 f- lz Pf/ M 1(-1 2 00 lz 356-# tZ 3. 6 00 G) (-Z) z x r 0 W., T40 1*11 L 5 sz -1 4.) X's ei j L7ZI g: 2' 3so 0. os"- M: 11,025,or- 1 Z,l 00 Clio 7-S' 0 11 ps-/ 6,6 &q -3 FO iZ-- 457-5 A 0. 12 ": L-1701 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING AW 0 - 71 1076t" I olzqlwol v 00 uj Lu Ln Lu 0 V) z 0 V) z uj VERTICAL DES16,V 54 y x MAW FLOO(Z FRAr"WC, (D (2) 2x g W -Z 375 ith L - is f f� -: 53 5 M -- 11 TZ fv :- li 9 t'll R: 4-�'; r- A -. o-rW'-Y/qoq 6 L G 5 t�' -. If z o Ll: Zl' L4 Li C FS) 23,15;W" 76 f5f q�lo az 0-71 V-3st, 03 7 P5L L) - 5.50 L Ps, fb m I q'Or. q 4t-) 75 ps' Y675 0 - qS' 2 Sl STRUCTURAL yEtNGINEERING l4t- -�' @ 613 S'l8xl3.5 -J 7 9 7r, L IS ' 3 P5" 7 2 134 ?rl (z 7, Z 7 5 o. 5&q L13 69 4r Px 94,l17q L 2 67/* )r,, 6(f R =27 37 * 6 0.06 Aw RO/Ok"CE 0 0 ui 0 <1 u w � Ln -LU Q) z 0 Ln z Lu 3: V) I 2011 Of 72 ^4 "' ' 2 4.) 4 PISS Tj I.V^�;f:TY. ASHINP After Recording Return to: City Clerk City of Edmonds 1215 th Avenue N Edmonds, WA 98020 NOTICE OF PRESENCE OF CRITICAL AREAS AND/OR CRITICAL AREAS BUFFERS ON PROPERTY GRANTOR: Chak-Yoon Aw and I -Wei Aw GRANTEE: City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation Legal Description: Abbreviated Fon-n: LOT 2, CITY OF EDMONDS BLA, REC. 201211010497 AND 201211210469, BEING A PORTION OF TRACT 79, EDMONDS SEAVIEW TRACTS, VOL. 3, P. 75-76, SNOHOMISH COUNTY. Additional Legal is on Exhibit A attached to document Assessor's Tax Parcel ID No.: 00434600007901 Reference Number(s) of Related Docurnents(s): n/a NOTICE OF PRESENCE OF CRITICAL AREA(S) AND/OR CRITICAL AREA BUFFER(S) ON PROPERTY NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN this S day of J14, V 2019, by Chak-Yoon and I -Wei Aw ("Grantor"), as required by Grantee, City of Edmonds, pursuant to Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 23.40.270.13, that at least one type of critical area and/or critical areas buffer has been found through field verification to be present on the Property described in Exhibit A hereto. This notice is being recorded as a condition of issuance for a development permit related to the property. As part of the permit application review process it was determined that the following type(s) of critical area and/or critical area buffer(s) were found to be present on the property: Slopes on and adjacent to the subject property exceed 40%. The steepness of these slopes classifies the site as a potential landslide hazard area pursuant to Chapter 23.80 ECDC. The City of Edmonds has adopted ordinances that regulate this type of critical area and/or buffer. Prospective purchasers are advised hereby that these regulations may limit the type and/or location of development or other use that may occur on the property. Please contact the City of Edmonds for specific infon-nation about the applicable critical area regulations. This notice shall remain on the title records of Snohomish County until released by the City of Edmonds, which shall only occur if the owner is able to submit a critical areas report to demonstrate to the City of Edmonds that the critical area designation no longer applies to the Property. Any release of this notice shall be subject to applicable procedural provisions of the ECDC. GRANTOR(S): By: ztl� Name: 64 ale- - lom Title (if applicable): By: Name: Title (if applicable): STATE OF )ss. COUNTY OF I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that CvNa� -vam P, Lj is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he/she sigTted this instrument, on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as his/her free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: � -f -,)06 ROTARY R;'IUC SWIM 01F kl.'AY 22, 2021 rUse this snace for notarial stamn/seal) STATE OF COUNTY OF Notary Public V, 66W A o Vp t r kw',, a, Print Name (-f�um LIL"'�e Oau�s My commission expires 'IS - ^I-Ql p Zak )ss. I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that j—(A-)e;-, �) Lj is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he/she signed this instrument, on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as his/her free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: -1 -5 -DOI � BTAM W IAd4AZ:-X.'II'Z'FC:� 7 Aq p Wn 3r, Z,� Z,- -MAY 2 2, : ZV. I space A Notary Publiew-jo�LL1\0 ��ag C2 to PrintName ?U.L*-c4 L�pl-e- My commission expires 5 - A,;). -2- Exhibit A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY LOT 2, CITY OF EDMONDS BLA, RECORDED UNDER 201210195001 AND CORRECTED UNDER NOS. 201211010497 AND 201211210469, BEING A PORTION OF TRACT 79, EDMONDS SEAVIEW TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOL. 3 OF PLATS, P. 75-76, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY. PROPERTY ADDRESS: 9527 190" PL. SW, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ov EID/11 City of Edmonds Park Impact Fee Worksheet "'2 7 17 9 - Aw Residence Name of Proposed Project. Current Site Address- 9527 190th P1 SW, Edmonds, WA 98020 Buildinq Permit#: BLDWICI—CM0 Previous Site Address (if different): Owner/Applicant: Chak & Eva Aw Applicant Mailing Address- 114 N 200th St, Shoreline, WA 98133 Phone: 425-785-2038 E-mail address: chakaw63@gmail.com TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT (select one) New Commercial: Square footage of all floor area: Fj Commercial Addition: Square footage of all floor area - Description of use: Description of use- FE-1 New Single Family: Does this new residence replace an existing residence demolished with previous 12 months? F-1 Yes RE No Demo Building Permit No.: Date issued: SFR building permit must be issued within 12 months of issue of demo permi . F-1 New Multi -Family: Number of dwelling units proposed: Multi -Family Addition: Number of existing dwelling units: Number of dwelling units propose Exempt from P1 fee (Low-income or other per ECC 3.36.040. Provide additional documentation.) Credit (For off -site improvement, etc. per ECC 3.36.050.) $ FEE RATES TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT: RATE: Single Family $2,734.05 per dwelling unit Multi -Family $2,340.16 per dwelling unit Non -Residential $ 1.34 per square foot of new or additional floor area For City Use Only Calculate Fee Here: Total Fee Int 111_� " V I L� �_ JAKI 3 U *C S 79.0 7' < 242.83, �2 8 �, 6 �E IN—I14Q.7 tMH RIM=40.33 C=m x ss C==== 190TH PL SW SDIAH RIM. 141.11 CEN-ERL14E OF EXIST"YG ROADWAY REPAINT FOG LINE, R 20' CS _RIM--140 5 \0 0 ENGINEERI N-G DlVk%#M Vi: NOTED Tel- AW RESIDENCE VEHICLE TRACKING EXHIBIT SCALE: 1" = 20' 20 u 10 20 40 NOTES: WA 1. VEHICLE USED: SU-30 SINGLE UNIT TRUCK (AASHTO 2011 US CUSTOMARY) 2. DESIGN SPEED: 5.0 MPH 3. STEERING LIMITED TO 80% 2�0 tel - Ott �p IST U [-�-�3 0 L 26- 19 -0- eNGINercRING 250 4TH AVE. S., SUITE 200 EDMONDS. WASHINGTON 98020 PHONE (425) 778-8500 FAX (425) 778-5536 AW RESIDENCE mvv I- v I-Wl%o 9527 190TH PL SW BUILDING DEPARTMENT EDMONDS, WA 98020 CITY OF EDMONDS DATE 08/26/19 SHEET VT-1 PROJECT NO, 18300.22 SCALE I" = 20' TITLE AW RESIDENCE VEHICLE TRACKING EXHIBIT TURNING EAST ONTO 190TH PIL SW FROM OLYMPIC VIEW DR DRAWN BY TAF CHECKED BY Jpu APPROVED BY Jpu w 4M ENGINEERING 250 4th Ave S Ste 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 Phone: (425) 778-8500 Fax: (425) 778-5536 civil & structural engineering & planning DRAINAGE REPORT CWPLIES WR APPLICABLE MY STORYWATERMDE Mae.' � -=V=11. , -1 1 1 Aw Residence 9527 190" PI SW Edmonds, WA 98020 0812712019 CG Project No.: 18300.20 '�LD20 (9 0116 R E a U 0 AUG 2 8 2019 13UILDING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDMONDS 0 Table of Contents Section I — Project Overview Section 11 — Off -Site Analysis Section III — Permanent Stormwater Control Plan Section IV —Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Section V — Special Reports and/or Studies Section VI — Other Permits Section VII — Bond Quantities & Operation and Maintenance Manual 4= 4M IENGINiCERING 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 August 27, 2019 Drainage Report Section 1, Page 1 Section I — Project Overview Section i Surnmary Overview Existing Condition Developed Condition Minimum Requirements Overview This drainage report has been written for a new single-family residence project on a 0.32 ac lot. The existing lot is undeveloped and site topography descends east to west. Site Address: 9527 190th PI SW, Edmonds, WA 98020 Parcel Number: 00434600007901 Zoning: RS-12 Watershed: Fruitclale Watershed The new single-family residence will consist of a house and other impervious surfaces consisting of a driveway, walkways and a deck. The house will have roof coverage of approximately 4,000 sf (0.09 ac). The project will also include right-of-way (ROW) improvements including a small amount of road widening and a new 5.5' (curb included) sidewalk along 190th PI SW (see civil plans for more). The total new/replaced impervious area for the project (including ROW improvements) is approximately 6,050 sf (0. 14 a c). Since the project will add more than 5,000 sf of new impervious surfaces, the project is classified as Category 2 per the Edmonds Community Development Code (herein referred to as ECDC) Chapter 18.30.060.C.I.c.i and the June 2017 Addendum to Edmonds Community Development Code Chapter 18.30 (herein referred to as the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum), Chapter 3.1.3.1. Category 2 projects are required to comply with Minimum Requirements #1-9 from ECDC 18.30.060.D and Chapter 5 of the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum. Existing Condition The site is currently undeveloped. Vegetation on -site generally consists of grass, shrubs, and small to large trees. Site topography descends east to west with an average slope of about 17%. On average, there is about 25 ft of grade change between the east and west property lines. The site contains Severe Erosion Hazards and Landslide Hazard Areas (see Figure 1-1). The geotechnical reports can be found in Section V of this report. Please note that the original report by South Fork Geosciences was completed in 2014 for a previous owner of the subject property. According to the geotechnical engineer, the site contains advance outwash soils that have been consolidated by glacial advance. Another geotechnical report has been provided by Nelson Geotechnical Associates since they performed a small-scale Pilot Infiltration Test to determine the design infiltration rate for the site. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 CENGINiERING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 August 27, 2019 Drainage Report Section 1, Page 2 The property is bordered by another single-family residence and driveway on the north and east sides, 190" PI SW on the south side, and Olympic View Dr borders the site on the west side. Utilities are generally located in Olympic View Dr and 190" PI SW (see Figure 1-2). There is an 8" cast iron water main running north/south along the east side of Olympic View Dr. An 8" concrete sewer main runs east/west close to the centerline of 190th PI SW and has a manhole located near the center at the edge of the intersection of Olympic View Dr and 190th pl SW. There are two catch basins in the north edge of 19011 P1 SW that convey runoff to an 18" concrete main that runs east/west down 190th pI SW. The site appears to take on some upstream runoff from the steep, grassy slopes east of the site. Based on the elevation contours from the survey and the location of the proposed driveway, there is approximately 4,600 sf (0.105 ac) of tributary area that has been considered for WWHM modeling purposes. This extra area can be seen in Figure 1-3. Runoff from the neighboring driveway above appears to flow along the driveway's edge in a ditch toward 190th PI SW where it will flow into the existing catch basins along the roadway. For WWHM modeling purposes and to be conservative, the proposed ROW improvements were accounted for in the basin area and the existing basin was considered as follows: Forest (A/B, Steep): 10,650 sf (0.244 ad Tota 1: 10,650 sf (0.244 ac) Developed Condition The project is classified as New Development and will occur on an undeveloped lot. The proposed develompent is the construction of a new single-family residence that consists of a 2-story house with a driveway, walkways and a deck. The total of the new impervious area is 6,050 sf (0.14 ac). Land disturbance will be to the extents of the clearing limits and will be approximately 13,000 sf (see civil plans for more). The site will utilize an infiltration trench to comply with Minimum Requirement #5: On -Site Stormwater Management. The infiltration trench was designed to meet the LID Performance Standard using WWHM 2012 with an infiltration rate of 0.99 in/hr. A stormwater infiltration letter from Nelson Geotechnical Associates can be found in Section V. A 44'x Yx 3'trench will will be located in the SW quadrant of the property. All runoff from impervious areas sloping to the site will be tied into the house's roof drains, which will route the runoff into a catch basin before conveying to the infiltration trench through a 6" perforated pipe. A 6" overflow pipe in the catch basin will convey excess runoff to an existing catch basin in the intersection of 190th PI SW and Olympic View Dr. See the civil plans and Section III for more on the Permanent Stormwater Control Plan. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA98020 EINIGINkRING ph.425.778.8500 I f.425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section 1, Page 3 The proposed impervious areas were considered as follows: Impervious Areas Roof: 4,000 sf (0.092 ac) Deck/Walkways (uncovered): 2S6 sf (0.006 ac) Driveway (on -site, uncovered): 418 sf (0.010 ac) Driveway (in ROW, uncovered): 309 sf (0.007 ac) 190t' PI SW Road Widen ing/Sidewa I k: 1,067 sf (0.024 ad Total: 6,050 sf (0.139 ac) The new and replaced po I lution-gene rating impervious areas were considered as follows: Pollution -generating Impervious Areas Driveway: 730 sf (0.017 ac) 1901h PI SW Road Widening: 160 sf (0.004 ad Total: 890 sf (0.020 ac) Total Lot Area: 0.32 ac Total New Impervious Area: 0. 12 ac PGHS/PGIS: 0.02 ac PUGET SOUND FRUITDALE CREEK Total disturbed area: 0.30 ac Average slope: 17% NRCS Parent Material: Glacial Outwash NRCS Hydro. Soil Group: B 9527190ih 4 Place Southwest ch—Y tj t Figure 1-1. Vicinity map (from Google Maps). 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 EN(illNiERING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 1 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 August 27, 2019 Drainage Report Section 1, Page 4 EXISTING WATER 4-210 PROJECT SITE 9527 U 0 EXISTING SEWER 4-72 4-269 EXISTING STORM 4-211 -4 -- 19M PL3W 44- 267 40 Figure 1-2. Map showing existing utilities near site (from City of Edmonds GIS map). 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ENrBiNiERING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 August 27, 2019 Drainage Report Section 1, Page 5 Figure 1-3. Aerial image of site (from City of Edmonds GIS map). Minimum Requirements Stormwater requirements were determined per the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum, the ECDC, and Ecology's 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (herein referred to as the DOE Manual). The project is classified as a Category 2 project per Chapter 3.1 of the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum and will comply with Minimum Requirements #1-9 per Figure 1-4 (Figure 3.1 in the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum). Minimum Requirement #1: Preparation of Stormwater Site Plans: The stormwater site plan consists of this report and the civil drawings, and is prepared in accordance with Chapter 3 of Volume 1 of the DOE Manual and the requirements in the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum. Minimum Requirement #2: Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP): The SWPPP shall include a narrative and drawings. The SWPPP narrative shall include documentation that addresses the 13 elements of Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention. See Section IV and the civil drawings. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ENGINEERING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 August 27, 2019 Drainage Report Section 1, Page 6 Minimum Requirement #3: Source Control of Pollution: Source control BMPs are described in Section IV and Source Control BIVIP sheets can be found in the Operation and Maintenance Manual in Section Vill. Minimum Requirement #4: Preservation of Natural Drainage Systems and Outfalls: Natural drainage patterns shall be maintained, and discharges from the project site shall occur at the natural location, to the maximum extent practicable. The manner by which runoff is discharged from the project site must not cause a significant adverse impact to downstream receiving waters and down gradient properties. All projects shall submit an off -site qualitative analysis. A qualitative analysis of the upstream and downstream system entering the site is presented in Section 11. Minimum Requirement #S: On -Site Stormwater Management: Category 2 project sites that discharge directly or indirectly to the City's MS4 and are required to comply with Minimum Requirements #1-9 (per ECDC 18.30.060.C) shall either use On -site Stormwater Management BMPs from List #2 or demonstrate compliance with the LID Performance Standard. This project will comply with the LID Performance Standard (see Section 111). Minimum Requirement #6: Runoff Treatment: This requirement applies to the new plus replaced hard surfaces and the converted vegetated areas. Runoff treatment is not required because the project will not result in more than 5,000 sf of pollution -generating hard surfaces or % acres of pollution -generating pervious surfaces. Minimum Requirement #7: Flow Control: Projects must provide flow control to reduce the impacts of stormwater runoff from hard surfaces and land cover conversions. Flow control is not required for projects that discharge directly to, or indirectly through the City's IVIS4 to Puget Sound. Furthermore, the project will not result in 10,000 sf or more of effective impervious surfaces, convert % acres or more of vegetation to lawn, or cause a 0.10 cfs or more increase in the 100-year flow frequency (see WWHM report in Section 111). Minimum Requirement #8: Wetlands Protection: Not applicable. There are no wetlands located in the immediate vicinity of the site or along the stormwater's route to Puget Sound. Minimum Requirement #9: Operation and Maintenance: An Operation and Maintenance Manual that is consistent with the provisions in Volume V of the Drainage Manual is required for proposed Stormwater Treatment and Flow Control BIVIPs/facilities. The party (or parties) responsible for maintenance and operation shall be identified in the operation and maintenance manual. For private facilities approved by the City, a copy of the operation and maintenance manual shall be retained on - site or within reasonable access to the site, and shall be transferred with the property to the owner. For public facilities, a copy of the operation and maintenance manual shall be retained in the appropriate department. A log of maintenance activity that indicates what actions were taken shall be kept and be available for inspection. See Section VII. 4= CM 2SO 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 EINIGINkRING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section 1, Page 7 Does the project result in 2,000 square feet, or greater, of new plus replaced hard surface arca9 OR Does the land disturbing activity total 7,000 square feet or greater? No Minimum Requirements No. I through 5 apply Minimum Requirement No. 2 applies INext Question Does the project add 5,000 square feet or more of new plus replaced hard surfaces" OR Convert 0.75 acres or more of vegetation to lawn or landscaped areas? OR Convert 2.5 acres or more of native vegetation to pasture.) <S�) Is this a road related p � 'Y roject? --70S All Minimum Requirements yes apply to the new and replaced hard surfaces and converted vegetation areas. All Minimum Requirements apply to the new hard surfaces and converted vegetation areas. Does the project add 5,000 square feet or more of new hard surfaces? yes Do new hard surfaces add 50% or more to the existing hard surfaces within the project limits? No No No a dditional requirements. Figure 1-4. Flow Chart for Determining Minimum Requirements for Development (Figure 3.1 in the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum). 4= CM 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 r=NGIN�C=RING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section 11, Page 1 Section 11 — Off -Site A Section 11 Summary Task 1 — Define and map the study area Task 2 — Review all available information of the study area Task 3 — Field inspect the area Task 4 - Describe the drainage system, and its existing and predicted problems Task 1 — Define and majo the study aLea An initial qualitative analysis shall document potential off -site impacts of stormwater discharges for each upstream drainage system entering a site, and each downstream drainage system leaving a site according to Section 6.2.1 of the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum. The downstream analysis shall extend from the project site to the receiving water, or up to one -quarter mile, whichever is less. Runoff from the site will enter the City's MS4 within one -quarter mile since the project proposes to connect into an existing catch basin southwest of the site. The catch basin conveys runoff to the public storm main that crosses Olympic View Dr and continues west. The receiving water is Fruitdale Creek, which is about 0.35 mi downstream from the site. The downstream flowpath is outlined below in Figure 11-1 from the City GIS map. PDJA2 18914 SOUND VIEW PL BLA EF1 PO4. K -,:PROJECT SITE U CHERRY ST 0 13, e Figure 11-1. Map showing stormwater flow path and distance from site to outfall (from City of Edmonds GIS map). Task 2 — Review all available information on the study area Existing stormwater improvements were determined from the survey and the City GIS map. There is a catch basin in the north edge of 190th PI SW at the intersection of Olympic View Dr that conveys runoff 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 r=NGIN4ERING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 August 27, 2019 Drainage Report Section 11, Page 2 through a 12" concrete pipe to a manhole on the south side of 1901h PI SW. From there, runoff is conveyed through a series of 18" to 36" concrete pipes west down Cherry St and north down Sound View PI until its outfall into Fruitclale Creek. Per the City GIS map, the site appears to contain erosion and landslide hazard areas (see Figure 11-2 below). The east side of the lot has a steep, vegetated slope that will bring in extra runoff onto the site. The existing driveway above the site to the east appears to be sloped such that runoff will flow to 1901h PI SW and is not expected to contribute runoff to the site. The additional tributary area has been considered in the design of the infiltration trench for this project. Figure 11-2. Landslide and Erosion Hazard area map (from City of Edmonds GIS map). Task 3 — Field inspect the study area A site visit was done in the afternoon on October 1, 2018. The weather was cloudy and there was light rain. From evaluating surrounding conditions, the site appears to take on some upstream runoff from the steep slopes to the east of the property. This runoff is expected to flow onto the proposed driveway and into the trench drain. This area has been accounted for in the design of the infiltration trench. Runoff from all impervious areas has been designed to be connected to the proposed house's roof drains before being conveyed into a catch basin, which will convey runoff to the infiltration trench that was 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ENGIN�EFZING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 1 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section 11, Page 3 designed per the LID Performance Standard. In the case of an overflow event, stormwater will back-up into the catch basin and exit through an overflow pipe that will connect into the existing catch basin in the NE corner of the intersection of 190th PI SW and Olympic View Dr. The following figures show pictures that were taken on the site visit that show the existing site, the upstream area draining to the site, and the end of the flowpath at Fruitclale Creek. Figure 11-3. From 1901h PI SW, looking north at existing site. 2SO 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 rENGINiCERING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section 11, Page 4 Figure 11-4. Looking north from edge of upstream neighbor's driveway. Figure 11-5. Looking east up project site at steep slopes upstream from site. 4 = CM I ENGINiERING 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section 11, Page 5 Figure 11-6. Looking west toward Olympic View Drive. 4= CM ENGINEERING 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 August 27, 2019 Drainage Report Section 11, Page 6 Figure 11-7. From Sound View PI, looking south at Fruitdale Creek before crossing under road. Figure 11-8. Looking NE from Sound View Pl. Task 4 — Describe the drainage system, and its existing and predicted problems Existing stormwater improvements were determined from the survey and the City GIS map. The proposed point of connection for the site's stormwater will be through an overflow pipe to a catch basin in the north edge of 190th PI SW at the intersection of Olympic View Dr. The catch basin conveys runoff through a 12" concrete pipe to a manhole on the south side of 190th PI SW. From there, runoff is conveyed through a series of 18" to 36" concrete pipes west down Cherry St and north down Sound View PI until its outfall into Fruitclale Creek. The project proposes to route all runoff from impervious surfaces of the site to an infiltration trench designed per the LID Performance Standard to meet the on -site stormwater management requirements (see Section 111). On -site runoff is only expected to enter the public storm system in the event of an overflow and through the house's footing drains. There are no anticipated problems associated with the development from this project. = GM ENGINEERING 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 August 27, 2019 Drainage Report Section III Page 1 Section III — Permanent Stormwater Control Plan Section III Summary Narrative LID Performance Standard WWHM Report Narrative The project is classified as a Category 2 project and will comply with Minimum Requirements #1-9 because the project proposes more than 5,000 sf of new impervious surfaces. Category 2 projects shall either use On -Site Stormwater Management BMPs from List No. 2 for all new plus replaced hard surfaces and land disturbed, or demonstrate compliance with the LID Performance Standard. This project will demonstrate compliance with the LID Performance Standard. LID Performance Standard Projects selecting this option cannot use rain gardens. Stormwater discharges shall match developed discharge durations to pre -developed durations for the range of pre -developed discharge rates from 8% of the 2-year peak flow to 50% of the 2-year peak flow. Bioretention BMPs, as described in Chapter V-7 — Infiltration and Bioretention Treatment Facilities, may be chosen to achieve the LID Performance Standard. The Bioretention BMPs that may be used are as follows: Infiltration Basins (BMP T7.10); Infiltration Trenches (BMP T7.20); Bioretention Cells, Swales, and Planter Boxes (BMP T7.30); and Compost -amended Vegetated Filter Strips (CAVFS) (BMP T7.40). An infiltration trench has been chosen to demonstrate compliance with the LID Performance Standard for this site. The infiltration trench was sized using WWHM 2012 and the "Puget East 36" time series. Per the geotechnical engineer, an infiltration rate of 0.99 in/hr was used for the design of the trench. The trench was sized to be 44'x5'x3' (see WWHM report on the following pages). According to the "Stormwater Infiltration Letter" provided by Nelson Geotechnical Associates, there is about 2.0' of undocumented fill near the proposed location of the infiltration trench. Based on the survey, the infiltration trench will be placed such that one end is at an existing elevation of about 143.0 (proposed elevation 143.0) and the other end at existing elevation of about 141.0 (proposed elevation 144.0). Therefore, in order to account for the undocumented fill and provide necessary cover over the trench, the top of the infiltration trench will be 142.0 and bottom of infiltration trench will be 139.0. This should place the bottom of the trench either into or right on top of the well -draining outwash soils. The infiltration trench was designed per the LID Performance Standard to collect runoff from roof drains from the proposed hard surfaces of the site. All site runoff from new hard surfaces that slope towards the proposed house will be directly connected to the roof drains by downspouts or by the trench drain in the driveway. Upstream runoff from steep slopes to the east of the site were accounted for in the 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 rEINGINiCERING ph. 425.778,8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section III Page 2 basin area of the trench design in WWHIVI. There will be new and replaced impervious area in the ROW from a portion of the driveway (approximately 165 sf) that slopes towards 190th PI SW and from the road widening of 190th PI SW and new sidewalk (approximately 1,067 sf). These areas were included in the design of the on -site infiltration trench to mitigate ROW flows. The trench was designed to back-up into a catch basin and overflow into a pipe that is to connect into the existing catch basin in the NE corner of the intersection of 190th PI SW and Olympic View Dr in an overflow scenario. The house's footing drains are shown to connect into the overflow pipe that outlets from the proposed catch basin (see civil plans for more). WWHM Repor WWHM2012 PROJECT REPORT Project Name: Aw Residence Infiltration Trench - LID Standard Site Name: Aw Residence Site Address: 9527 190th pl SW City : Edmonds Report Date: 8/26/2019 MGS Regoin Puget East Data Start 1901/10/1 Data End : 2058/09/30 DOT Data Number: 03 Version Date: 2018/10/10 Version : 4.2.16 Low Flow Threshold for POC I : 8 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC 1: 50 Percent of the 2 Year PREDEVELOPED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use acre A B, Forest, Steep 0.244 Pervious Total 0.244 Impervious Land Use acre Impervious Total 0 Basin Total 0.244 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ENGINiERING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425,778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section III Page 3 MITIGATED LAND USE Name : Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use acre A B, Lawn, Steep .105 Pervious Total 0.105 Impervious Land Use acre ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.092 DRIVEWAYS FLAT 0.017 SIDEWALKS FLAT 0.006 SIDEWALKS STEEP 0.024 Impervious Total 0.139 Basin Total 0.244 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Gravel Trench Bed 1 Gravel Trench Bed 1 Name : Gravel Trench Bed 1 Bottom Length: 44.00 ft. Bottom Width: 5.00 ft. Trench bottom slope 1: 0 To 1 Trench Left side slope 0: 0 To 1 Trench right side slope 2: 0 To 1 Material thickness of first layer: 3 Pour Space of material for first layer: 0.33 Material thickness of second layer: 0 Pour Space of material for second layer: 0 Material thickness of third layer: 0 Pour Space of material for third layer: 0 Infiltration On Infiltration rate: 0.99 Infiltration safety factor: 1 Total Volume Infiltrated (ac-ft.): 51.006 Total Volume Through Riser (ac-ft.): 2.198 Total Volume Through Facility (ac-ft.): 53.204 Percent Infiltrated: 95.87 Total Precip Applied to Facility: 0 Total Evap From Facility: 0 Discharge Structure Riser Height: 2.9 ft. Riser Diameter: 8 in. Element Flows To: 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 eNCMN6ER1NCi ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section III Page 4 Outlet 1 Outlet 2 Gravel Trench Bed Hydraulic Table Stage(feet) Area(ac.) Volume(ac-ft.) Discharge(cfs) Infilt(cfs) 0.0000 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0333 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.0667 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.1000 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.1333 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.1667 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.2000 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.2333 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.2667 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.3000 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.3333 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.3667 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.4000 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.4333 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.4667 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.5000 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.5333 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.5667 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.6000 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 0.6333 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 0.6667 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 0.7000 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 0.7333 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 0.7667 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 0.8000 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 0.8333 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 0.8667 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 0.9000 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 0.9333 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 0.9667 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 1.0000 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 1.0333 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 1.0667 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 1.1000 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 1.1333 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 1.1667 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.005 1.2000 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.2333 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.2667 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.3000 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.3333 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.3667 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.4000 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.4333 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.4667 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.5000 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.5333 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.5667 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.6000 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.6333 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.6667 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ENGIIN�CERING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778,5536 1 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section III Page 5 1.7000 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.7333 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.7667 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.005 1.8000 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 1.8333 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 1.8667 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 1.9000 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 1.9333 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 1.9667 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 2.0000 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 2.0333 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 2.0667 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 2.1000 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 2.1333 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 2.1667 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 2.2000 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 2.2333 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 2.2667 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 2.3000 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 2.3333 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 2.3667 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.005 2.4000 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.005 2.4333 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.005 2.4667 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.005 2.5000 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.005 2.5333 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.00S 2.5667 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.005 2.6000 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.005 2.6333 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.005 2.6667 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.005 2.7000 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.005 2.7333 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.005 2.7667 0.005 0.0,04 0.000 0.005 2.8000 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.005 2.8333 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.005 2.8667 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.005 2.9000 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.005 2.9333 0.005 0.004 0.043 0.005 2.9667 0.005 0.004 0.121 0.005 3.0000 0.005 0.005 0.219 0.005 ANALYSIS RESULTS Stream Protection Duration Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:0.244 Total Impervious Area:O Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:0.105 Total Impervious Area:0.139 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ENGIIN�r=RING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section III Page 6 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.000044 5 year 0.000053 10 year 0.000059 25 year 0.000067 50 year 0.000073 100 year 0.00008 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.024923 5 year 0.039681 10 year 0.047826 25 year 0.056188 50 year 0.061188 POC #1 POC #1 100 year 0.065315 (0.085587 w/out mitigation) LID Duration LID Duration Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. Year Predeveloped Mitigated 1902 0.000 0.021 1903 0.000 0.011 1904 0.000 0.024 1905 0.000 0.011 1906 0.000 0.006 1907 0.000 0.030 1908 0.000 0.019 1909 0.000 0.014 1910 0.000 0.031 1911 0.000 0.016 1912 0.000 0.067 1913 0.000 0.016 1914 0.000 0.033 1915 0.000 0.002 1916 0.000 0.029 1917 0.000 0.019 1918 0.000 0.015 1919 0.000 0.011 1920 0.000 0.014 1921 0.000 0.009 1922 0.000 0.026 1923 0.000 0.013 1924 0.000 0.010 1925 0.000 0.000 1926 0.000 0.019 1927 0.000 0.015 1928 0.000 0.017 1929 0.000 0.029 1930 0.000 0.014 1931 0.000 0.019 1932 0.000 0.023 1933 0.000 0.021 POC #1 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 EINIGIN&RING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 1 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section III Page 7 1934 0.000 0.043 1935 0.000 0.012 1936 0.000 0.018 1937 0.000 0.032 1938 0.000 0.011 1939 0.000 0.005 1940 0.000 0.040 1941 0.000 0.012 1942 0.000 0.031 1943 0.000 0.016 1944 0.000 0.057 1945 0.000 0.033 1946 0.000 0.010 1947 0.000 0.021 1948 0.000 0.030 1949 0.000 0.033 1950 0.000 0.015 1951 0.000 0.008 1952 0.000 0.056 1953 0.000 0.053 1954 0.000 0.019 1955 0.000 0.009 1956 0.000 0.000 1957 0.000 0.014 1958 0.000 0.036 1959 0.000 0.017 1960 0.000 0.001 1961 0.000 0.051 1962 0.000 0.025 1963 0.000 0.005 1964 0.000 0.034 1965 0.000 0.031 1966 0.000 0.010 1967 0.000 0.011 1968 0.000 0.014 1969 0.000 0.011 1970 0.000 0.025 1971 0.000 0.033 1972 0.000 0.052 1973 0.000 0.029 1974 0.000 0.021 1975 0.000 0.046 1976 0.000 0.037 1977 0.000 0.006 1978 0.000 0.035 1979 0.000 0.012 1980 0.000 0.005 1981 0.000 0.013 1982 0.000 0.003 1983 0.000 0.025 1984 0.000 0.022 1985 0.000 0.018 1986 0.000 0.013 1987 0.000 0.026 1988 0.000 0.017 1989 0.000 0.015 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ENGIIN�ERIING ph. 42S.778.8500 I f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 August 27, 2019 Drainage Report Section III Page 8 1990 0.000 0.021 1991 0.000 0.034 1992 0.000 0.038 1993 0.000 0.014 1994 0.000 0.025 1995 0.000 0.000 1996 0.000 0.024 1997 0.000 0.015 1998 0.000 0.030 1999 0.000 0.011 2000 0.000 0.016 2001 0.000 0.007 2002 0.000 0.029 2003 0.000 0.021 2004 0.000 0.025 2005 0.000 0.032 2006 0.000 0.004 2007 0.000 0.036 2008 0.000 0.012 2009 0.000 0.010 2010 0.000 0.033 2011 0.000 0.000 2012 0.000 0.033 2013 0.000 0.008 2014 0.000 0.004 2015 0.000 0.023 2016 0.000 0.000 2017 0.000 0.051 2018 0.000 0.037 2019 0.000 0.044 2020 0.000 0.014 2021 0.000 0.034 2022 0.000 0.010 2023 0.000 0.012 2024 0.000 0.071 2025 0.000 0.011 2026 0.000 0.025 2027 0.000 0.021 2028 0.000 0.000 2029 0.000 0.016 2030 0.000 0.031 2031 0.000 0.004 2032 0.000 0.000 2033 0.000 0.000 2034 0.000 0.013 2035 0.000 0.031 2036 0.000 0.022 2037 0.000 0.012 2038 0.000 0.031 2039 0.000 0.011 2040 0.000 0.024 2041 0.000 0.016 2042 0.000 0.036 2043 0.000 0.033 2044 0.000 0.024 2045 0.000 0.014 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 0 4M Edmonds, WA 98020 ENGINEERING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 1 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section III Page 9 2046 0.000 0.019 2047 0.000 0.012 2048 0.000 0.027 2049 0.000 0.029 2050 0.000 0.020 2051 0.000 0.043 2052 0.000 0.016 2053 0.000 0.016 2054 0.000 0.036 2055 0.000 0.006 2056 0.000 0.014 2057 0.000 0.009 2058 0.000 0.013 LID Duration Ranked Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated Rank Predeveloped Mitigated 1 0.0002 0.0709 2 0.0001 0.0673 3 0.0001 0.0573 4 0.0001 0.0556 5 0.0001 0.0533 6 0.0000 0.0523 7 0.0000 0.0513 8 0.0000 0.0513 9 0.0000 0.0463 10 0.0000 0.0441 11 0.0000 0.0434 12 0.0000 0.0432 13 0.0000 0.0405 14 0.0000 0.0383 15 0.0000 0.0369 16 0.0000 0.0368 17 0.0000 0.0365 18 0.0000 0.0359 19 0.0000 0.0358 20 0.0000 0.0356 21 0.0000 0.0350 22 0.0000 0.0343 23 0.0000 0.0340 24 0.0000 0.0336 25 0.0000 0.0335 26 0.0000 0.0334 27 0.0000 0.0334 28 0.0000 0.0333 29 0.0000 0.0330 30 0.0000 0.0328 31 0.0000 0.0326 32 0.0000 0.0324 33 0.0000 0.0321 34 0.0000 0.0313 35 0.0000 0.0311 36 0.0000 0.0311 37 0.0000 0.0308 38 0.0000 0.0306 4 = CM I ENGI[Ni�ERIINCS POC #1 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 1 f, 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section III Page 10 39 0.0000 0.0306 40 0.0000 0.0301 41 0.0000 0.0300 42 0.0000 0.0295 43 0.0000 0.0292 44 0.0000 0.0291 45 0.0000 0.0291 46 0.0000 0.0289 47 0.0000 0.0287 48 0.0000 0.0271 49 0.0000 0.0263 50 0.0000 0.0255 51 0.0000 0.0254 52 0.0000 0.0253 53 0.0000 0.0253 54 0.0000 0.0252 55 0.0000 0.0248 56 0.0000 0.0247 57 0.0000 0.0242 58 0.0000 0.0242 59 0.0000 0.0238 60 0.0000 0.0236 61 0.0000 0.0234 62 0.0000 0.0230 63 0.0000 0.0219 64 0.0000 0.0218 65 0.0000 0.0215 66 0.0000 0.0215 67 0.0000 0.0214 68 0.0000 0.0211 69 0.0000 0.0208 70 0.0000 0.0208 71 0.0000 0.0207 72 0.0000 0.0199 73 0.0000 0.0194 74 0.0000 0.0192 75 0.0000 0.0192 76 0.0000 0.0189 77 0.0000 0.0185 78 0.0000 0.0185 79 0.0000 0.0179 80 0.0000 0.0177 81 0.0000 0.0175 82 0.0000 0.0168 83 0.0000 0.0166 84 0.0000 0.0165 85 0.0000 0.0164 86 0.0000 0.0162 87 0.0000 0.0162 88 0.0000 0,0161 89 0.0000 0.0159 90 0.0000 0.0157 91 0.0000 0.0155 92 0.0000 0.0155 93 0.0000 0.0154 94 0.0000 0.0149 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 CENGIIN�ERIINCS ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 1 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section III Page 11 95 0.0000 0.0147 96 0.0000 0.0145 97 0.0000 0.0144 98 0.0000 0.0141 99 0.0000 0.0140 100 0.0000 0.0139 101 0.0000 0.0139 102 0.0000 0.0139 103 0.0000 0.0138 104 0.0000 0.0136 105 0.0000 0.0136 106 0.0000 0.0132 107 0.0000 0.0132 108 0.0000 0.0129 109 0.0000 0.0126 110 0.0000 0.0126 ill 0.0000 0.0124 112 0.0000 0.0121 113 0.0000 0.0120 114 0.0000 0.0118 115 0.0000 0.0117 116 0.0000 0.0117 117 0.0000 0.0116 118 0.0000 0.0112 119 0.0000 0.0112 120 0.0000 0.0111 121 0.0000 0.0111 122 0.0000 0.0109 123 0.0000 0.0108 124 0.0000 0.0107 125 0.0000 0.0107 126 0.0000 0.0106 127 0.0000 0.0103 128 0.0000 0.0101 129 0.0000 0.0100 130 0.0000 0.0098 131 0.0000 0.0096 132 0.0000 0.0092 133 0.0000 0.0089 134 0.0000 0.0086 135 0.0000 0.0081 136 0.0000 0.0076 137 0.0000 0.0074 138 0.0000 0.0063 139 0.0000 0.0059 140 0.0000 0.0056 141 0.0000 0.0054 142 0.0000 0.0053 143 0.0000 0.0053 144 0.0000 0.0044 145 0.0000 0.0043 146 0.0000 0.0038 147 0.0000 0.0029 148 0.0000 0.0021 149 0.0000 0.0015 150 0.0000 0.0000 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ENGINkRING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section III Page 12 151 0.0000 0.0000 152 0.0000 0.0000 153 0.0000 0.0000 154 0.0000 0.0000 155 0.0000 0.0000 156 0.0000 0.0000 157 0.0000 0.0000 LID Duration POC #1 The Facility PASSED The Facility PASSED. Flow(cfs) Predev Mit Percentage Pass/Fail 0.0000 26176 3281 12 Pass 0.0000 25158 3281 13 Pass 0.0000 24745 3281 13 Pass 0.0000 23851 3281 13 Pass 0.0000 23149 3281 14 Pass 0.0000 22378 3281 14 Pass 0.0000 21552 3281 15 Pass 0.0000 20809 3281 15 Pass 0.0000 20107 3281 16 Pass 0.0000 19446 3281 16 Pass 0.0000 19144 3281 17 Pass 0.0000 18552 3281 17 Pass 0.0000 18015 3281 18 Pass 0.0000 17478 3281 18 Pass 0.0000 17011 3281 19 Pass 0.0000 16570 3281 19 Pass 0.0000 16116 3281 20 Pass 0.0000 15896 3281 20 Pass 0.0000 15469 3281 21 Pass 0.0000 15070 3281 21 Pass 0.0000 14671 3281 22 Pass 0.0000 14299 3281 22 Pass 0.0000 13914 3281 23 Pass 0.0000 13575 3281 24 Pass 0.0000 13257 3281 24 Pass 0.0000 13083 3281 25 Pass 0.0000 12763 3281 25 Pass 0.0000 12401 3281 26 Pass 0.0000 12081 3281 27 Pass 0.0000 11795 3281 27 Pass 0.0000 11512 3281 28 Pass 0.0000 11256 3281 29 Pass 0.0000 11123 3281 29 Pass 0.0000 10892 3281 30 Pass 0.0000 10630 3281 30 Pass 0.0000 10402 3281 31 Pass 0.0000 10165 3281 32 Pass 0.0000 9927 3281 33 Pass 0.0000 9693 3281 33 Pass 0.0000 9496 3281 34 Pass 0.0000 9404 3281 34 Pass 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ENCONiERING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 1 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section III Page 13 0.0000 9232 3281 35 Pass 0.0000 9042 3281 36 Pass 0.0000 8840 3281 37 Pass 0.0000 8637 3281 37 Pass 0.0000 8449 3281 38 Pass 0.0000 8280 3281 39 Pass 0.0000 8202 3281 40 Pass 0.0000 8018 3281 40 Pass 0.0000 7872 3281 41 Pass 0.0000 7726 3281 42 Pass 0.0000 7552 3281 43 Pass 0.0000 7408 3281 44 Pass 0.0000 7269 3281 45 Pass 0.0000 7132 3281 46 Pass 0.0000 7064 3281 46 Pass 0.0000 6936 3281 47 Pass 0.0000 6812 3281 48 Pass 0.0000 6701 3281 48 Pass 0.0000 6587 3281 49 Pass 0.0000 6463 3281 50 Pass 0.0000 6351 3281 51 Pass 0.0000 6277 3281 52 Pass 0.0000 6163 3281 53 Pass 0.0000 6053 3281 54 Pass 0.0000 5954 3281 55 Pass 0.0000 5849 3281 56 Pass 0.0000 5740 3281 57 Pass 0.0000 5621 3281 58 Pass 0.0000 5511 3281 59 Pass 0.0000 5469 3281 59 Pass 0.0000 5363 3281 61 Pass 0.0000 5281 3281 62 Pass 0.0000 5195 3281 63 Pass 0.0000 5105 3281 64 Pass 0.0000 5012 3281 65 Pass 0.0000 4926 3281 66 Pass 0.0000 4887 3281 67 Pass 0.0000 4798 3281 68 Pass 0.0000 4725 3281 69 Pass 0.0000 4652 3281 70 Pass 0.0000 4573 3281 71 Pass 0.0000 4485 3281 73 Pass 0.0000 4419 3281 74 Pass 0.0000 4348 3281 75 Pass 0.0000 4310 3281 76 Pass 0.0000 4217 3281 77 Pass 0.0000 4149 3281 79 Pass 0.0000 4070 3281 80 Pass 0.0000 3999 3281 82 Pass 0.0000 3931 3281 83 Pass 0.0000 3863 3281 84 Pass 0.0000 3831 3281 85 Pass 0.0000 3765 3281 87 Pass 0.0000 3716 3281 88 Pass 0.0000 3665 3281 89 Pass 0.0000 3606 3281 90 Pass 2SO 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ENGIIN�ERIING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 August 27, 2019 Drainage Report Section III Page 14 0.0000 3552 3281 92 Pass 0.0000 3493 3281 93 Pass 0.0000 3438 3281 95 Pass LID Report LID Technique Used for Total Volume Volume Infiltration Cumulative Percent Water Quality Percent Comment Treatment? Needs Through Volume Volume Volume Water Quality Treatment Facility (ac-ft.) Infiltration Infiltrated Treated (ac-ft) (ac-ft) Credit Gravel Trench Bed 1 POC N 48.42 N 95.87 Total Volume Infiltrated 48.42 0.00 0.00 95.87 0.00 0% No Treat. Credit Compliance with LID Standard 8 Duration Analysis Result = Passed Per1nd and Impind Changes No changes have been made. This program and accompanying documentation are provided 'as -is' without warranty of any kind. The entire risk regarding the performance and results of this program is assumed by End User. Clear Creek Solutions Inc. and the governmental licensee or sublicensees disclaim all warranties, either expressed or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of program and accompanying documentation. In no event shall Clear Creek Solutions Inc. be liable for any damages whatsoever (including without limitation to damages for loss of business profits, loss of business information, business interruption, and the like) arising out of the use of, or inability to use this program even if Clear Creek Solutions Inc. or their authorized representatives have been advised of the possibility of such damages. Software Copyright C by Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 2005-2019; All Rights Reserved. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ENGIN�ERING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 1 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section IV, Page 1 Section IV — Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Section IV Summary: Narrative Construction SWPPP Elements Source Controls Erosion control details are provided on the civil plans that are consistent with the City of Edmonds guidelines. Erosion control plan sheets are provided in full size as a part of the civil drawing set. A full Construction SWPPP is not required by the Department of Ecology because land -disturbing activity will be under one acre. The remainder of this section is a discussion of the Construction SWPPP Elements per Section 2.5.2 of Volume I of the DOE Manual and the requirements in the Edmonds Stormwater Addendum. See the civil plans for reference. Construction SWPPP Elements The elements for construction pollution prevention are discussed as follows: Element 1: Mark Clearing Limits To protect adjacent properties and to reduce the area of soil exposed to construction, the limits of construction will be clearly marked before land -disturbing activities begin. Clearing limits will be to the extents of necessary land disturbance for the new house and associated driveway and walkways. The BMPs relevant to marking the clearing limits that will be applied for this project include: High Visibility Plastic or Metal Fence (BMP C103) Element 2: Establish Construction Access Construction access or activities occurring on unpaved areas shall be minimized, yet where necessary, access points shall be stabilized to minimize the tracking of sediment onto public roads. The proposed driveway area should be used for a stabilized construction entrance to the site. The BIVIPs relevant to establishing construction access are: Stabilized Construction Entrance (BMP C105) Element 3: Control Flow Rates The site is small enough that a silt fence used for Element 4 may be used to control flow rates. Element 4: Install Sediment Controls 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 r=NG1NrEr=R1NG ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section IV, Page 2 All stormwater runoff from disturbed areas shall pass through an appropriate sediment removal BMP before leaving the construction site or prior to being discharged. Silt fence will be installed mainly on the western half of the site and can be seen on the Temporary Erosion Control Plan, C2.1. Pollution prevention facilities on the erosion control plan must be constructed prior to or in conjunction with all clearing and grading to ensure that the transport of sediment to surface waters and adjacent properties is minimized. The specific BIVIPs to be used for controlling sediment on this project include: Silt Fence (BIVIP C233) Element 5: Stabilize Soils Exposed and unworked soils shall be stabilized with the application of effective BIVIPs to prevent erosion throughout the life of the project. The specific BIVIPs for soil stabilization that shall be used on this project include: Temporary and Permanent Seeding (BIVIP C120) Mulching (BIVIP C121) Nets and Blankets (BIVIP C122) Plastic Covering (BMP C123) Sodding (BIVIP C124) Topsoiling/Composting (BIVIP C125) Surface Roughening (BMP C130) Dust Control (BIVIP C140) Element 6: Protect Slopes Exposed slopes shall be stabilized with BIVIPs found in Element 5. Element 7: Protect Drain Inlets Drain inlets within 100' of the site along 1901h PI SW and Olympic View Dr and those made operable on - site will be protected from sedimentation. Stormwater shall not enter the conveyance system without first being filtered or treated to remove sediment. Inlet protection devices shall be cleaned or removed and replaced when sediment has filled one-third of the available storage (or as specified by the manufacturer). The specific BMPs to be used for protecting drain inlets are: Storm Drain Inlet Protection (BMP C220) Element 8: Stabilize Channels and Outlets Conveyance channels are not located on or in the immediate vicinity of the site. Element 9: Control Pollutants Design, install, implement and maintain effective pollution prevention measures to minimize the discharge of pollutants. The suggested BMPs are: 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 CENGIIINIkRIING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section IV, Page 3 Concrete Handling (BMP C151) Sawcutting and Surfacing Pollution Prevention (BMP C152) Material Delivery, Storage and Containment (BMP C153) Element 10: Control De -Watering De -watering is not anticipated. Element 11: Maintain BMPs All temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be maintained and repaired as needed to assure continued perfon-nance of their intended function. Element 12: Manage the Project 0 Phase development projects to the maximum degree practicable and take into account seasonal work limits. • inspection and monitoring — Inspect, maintain, and repair all BMPs as needed to assure continued performance of their intended function. Conduct site inspections and monitoring in accordance with the Construction Stormwater General Permit or local plan approval authority. • Maintain an Updated Construction SWPPP - This SWPPP shall be retained on -site or within reasonable access to the site. - The SWPPP shall be modified whenever there is a change in the design, construction, operation, or maintenance at the construction site that has, or could have, a significant effect on the discharge of pollutants to waters of the state. - The SWPPP shall be modified if, during inspections or investigations conducted by the owner/operator, or the applicable local or state regulatory authority, it is determined that the SWPPP is ineffective in eliminating or significantly minimizing pollutants in stormwater discharges from the site. The SWPPP shall be modified as necessary to include additional or modified BMPs designed to correct problems identified. Revisions to the SWPPP shall be completed within seven (7) days following the inspection. Element 13: Protect Low Impact Development BMPs High visibility fence shall be placed around the proposed infiltration trench to protect it from compaction during construction activities. Source Controls This project should incorporate required BMPs from Volume IV of the DOE Manual: S407 — BIVIPS for Dust Control at Disturbed Land Areas and Unpaved Roadways and Parking Lots; S411 — BMPs for Landscaping and Lawn/Vegetation Management; and S417 — BMPs for Maintenance of Stormwater Drainage and Treatment Systems. The Operation & Maintenance Manual found in Section V11 contains guide sheets for the aforementioned BMPs. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 CENGIINiiCERIING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section V, Page I Section V — Special Reports and/or Studies Section V Summary: Narrotive The following reports are included in this section: 1. Stormwater Infiltration Letter by Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. dated May 24, 2019. 2. Design Infiltration Rate by South Fork Geosciences dated January 18, 2019. 3. Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Geotechnical Engineering Report by South Fork Geosciences dated January 14, 2014. 4. Soil Resource Report from the USDA and NRCS Web Soil Survey dated September 26, 2018. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 EINIONErERING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com N11 f� A GA Main Office 17311 — 135'h Ave NE, A-500 Woodinville, WA 98072 (425) 486-1669 - FAX (425) 481-25 10 May 24, 2019 Mr. Chak Aw c/o Jacob Strobl Strobl Design VIA Email: iacob@,sti-obIdesign.com Stormwater Infiltration Letter Aw Residence Infiltration 9527 — 190" Place SW Edmonds, Washington NGA File No. 1105019 Dear Mr. Aw: NELSON GEOTECHNICAL AssociATEs, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS Engineering -Geology Branch 5526 Industry Lane, #2 East Wenatchee, WA 98802 (509) 665-7696, FAX (509) 665-7692 This letter documents our explorations and provides our opinions and recommendations for the feasibility of stormwater infiltration at the property located at 9527 — 190th Place SW in Edmonds, Washington, as shown on the Vicinity Map in Figure 1. INTRODUCTION The property consists of a roughly rectangular -shaped parcel covering approximately 0.32 acres. The property is currently undeveloped, and is bordered by residential properties to the north and east, and to the west and south by Olympic View Drive and 1901 Place SW, respectively. The ground surface generally slopes gently from east to west with localized steep slopes within the central portion of the site. Vegetation within the site consists of grass yard areas and low shrub plants around the perimeter and scattered young to mature trees within the central portions of the site. We understand that the proposed development within the site will consist of constructing a new single-family residence, with an associated paved driveway, within the east -central and southeastern portions of the site respectively, We understand that stormwater generated within the property may be directed to onsite infiltration systems, if feasible. We have been requested to evaluate the infiltration capacity of the site soils within the property. The City of Edmonds utilizes the Department of Ecology 2014 Department of Ecolm (DOE) Stormwater Management in Western Washington to determine the design of infiltration or detention facilities. According to this manual, long-term design infiltration rates for this site are to be determined by performing on -site infiltration testing consisting of the Small Pilot Infiltration Test (PIT). Stormwater Infiltration Letter NGA File No. 1105019 Aw Residence Infiltration May 24, 2019 Edmonds, Washington Page 2 SCOPE The purpose of this study is to explore and characterize the subsurface conditions within the site and to provide opinions and recommendations for stormwater infiltration. Specifically, our scope of services included the following: 1. Review available soil and geologic maps of the area. 2. Explore the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions within the site with trackhoe excavated test pits. Trackhoe was provided by NGA. 3. Perform grain -size sieve analysis on selected soil samples, as needed. 4. Provide long-term design infiltration rates based on one on -site small-scale Pilot Infiltration Tests (PIT) per the 2014 DOE Stormwater Manual. Location and depth of test to be determined by civil engineer. Water for the test to be secured by client. 5. Provide recommendations for infiltration system installation. 6. Observe the conditions on steep slopes within the site, and evaluate current slope stability. 7. Provide our opinion regarding the stability conditions of the steep slopes and potential impacts from proposed on -site infiltration, as needed. 8. Provide recommendations for slope protection measures and infiltration system location, as needed. 9. Document the results of our findings, conclusions, and recommendations in a written geotechnical letter. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions The property consists of a roughly rectangular -shaped parcel covering approximately 0.32 acres. The property is currently undeveloped, and is bordered by residential properties to the north and east, and to the west and south by Olympic View Drive and 190'h Place SW, respectively. The subject site is generally situated on a gentle to steep west -facing slope. The ground surface generally decends westward from the eastern portion of the property at gradients of 5 to 10 degrees (9 to 18 percent) with a localized north - south trending steep west -facing slope area within the central portion of the site that reaches gradients of up to 26 degrees (49 percent). The overall vertical relief of the localized steep slope area is generally 10 to 15 feet, The lower western portion of the site is generally level to very gently sloping to the west. Vegetation within the site consists of grass yard areas and low shrub plants around the perimeter and scattered young to mature trees within the central portions of the site. We did not observe any surface water within the site on our visit on May 9, 2019. We did not observe indications of significant slope stability issues such as deep-seated landsliding within the site and in the vicinity of the property during our site visit. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Stormwater Infiltration Letter NGA File No. 1105019 Aw Residence Infiltration May 24, 2019 Edmonds, Washington Page 3 Subsurface Conditions: The geologic units for this area are shown on the Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and part of the Edmonds West Quadrangles, WashinZo , by J. P. Minard (U.S.G.S., 1983). The site is mapped as Qva (Advance Outwash deposits), with Qvr (Glacial Recessional Outwash) nearby. Texture and structure vary from place to place but Advance Outwash generally is composed of moderate- to well -sorted, stratified, light gray to tan medium to coarse sand and pebbly sand containing minor amounts of fine sandy silt. Recessional outwash deposits are generally described as stratified sand and gravel with minor silt and clay layers. In our explorations, we encountered soils primarily consisting of fine to medium sand with varying amounts of gravel and minor amounts of silt, which we interpreted to be consistent with the description of the outwash deposits mapped in this area. Explorations: The approximate locations of our explorations are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. A geologist from NGA was present during the explorations, examined the soils and geologic conditions encountered, obtained samples of the different soil types, and maintained logs of the explorations. The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System, presented in Figure 4. The logs of our explorations are attached to this letter and are presented in Figures 5 and 6. We present a brief summary of the subsurface conditions in the following paragraph. For a detailed description of the subsurface conditions, the exploration logs should be reviewed. At the surface of Infiltration Pit I we generally encountered approximately 2 feet of dark brown to reddish brown, silty fine to medium sand with charcoal and various organics, which we interpreted as undocumented fill. Underlying the layer of undocumented fill, we encounted about 1.8 feet of orange brown to gray silty fine to coarse sand with gravel and iron oxide staining in a medium dense to dense condition, which we interpreted as native glacial outwash deposits, Infiltration Pit I terminated at 5.0 feet below the existing ground surface. In Test Pits I and 2 we encountered 3.8 to 4.0 feet of dark brown, silty fine to medium sand with gravel and organics in a loose to medium dense condition, which we interpreted as undocumented fill. Underlying this deposit, we encountered gray -brown fine to coarse sand with silt and gravel in a medium dense or better condition, which we interpreted as native glacial outwash soils. Test Pits I and 2 terminated at respective depths of 5.0 and 8.0 feet below the existing ground surface. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Stormwater Infiltration Letter NGA File No. 1105019 Aw Residence Infiltration May 24, 2019 Edmonds, Washington Page 4 In Hand Augers I and 2, we encountered 3.0 feet of surficial dark brown, silty fine to medium sand with gravel and various organics, which we interpreted as undocumented fill. In Hand Auger 2, we encountered an additional 2.5 feet of light brown, silty fine to medium sand with gravel and roots in a loose to medium dense condition, which we interpreted as undocumented fill. Hand Augers I and 2 met refusal within undocumented fill soils at respective depths of 3.0 and 5.5 feet below the existing ground surface. Hydrogeologic Conditions We did not encounter groundwater seepage in any of our explorations completed within the site. If groundwater seepage is encountered during construction, we would interpret this water to be perched groundwater. Perched water occurs when surface water infiltrates through less dense, more permeable soils and accumulates on top of underlying, less permeable soils. Perched water does not represent a regional groundwater "table" within the upper soil horizons. Perched water tends to vary spatially and is dependent upon the amount of precipitation. We would expect the amount of perched water to decrease during drier times of the year and increase during wetter periods. Landslide Hazard/Slope Stability The criteria used for evaluation of landslide hazards include soil type, slope gradient, and groundwater conditions. The property is generally situated on relatively level to gently westward sloping ground within the eastern and western portions of the property. A localized steep slope area bisects the central portion of the site from north to south and extends into the adjacent properties. The short steep slope area generally decends west at gradients up to 26 degrees (49 percent) to gently sloping ground, as shown on Cross Section A -A' in Figure 3. The overall height of the steep slope is approximately 10 to 15 feet. We did not observe evidence of significant slope instability within the immediate vicinity of the property during our investigation, such as deep-seated landsliding. We also did not observe groundwater seepage emitting from the site slopes. The core of the slope is inferred to consist primarily of dense or better native glacial soils, Relatively shallow sloughing failures as well as surficial erosion are natural processes and should be expected on these slopes during extreme weather conditions. It is our opinion that while there is potential for erosion, soil creep, and shallow failures within the loose surficial soils on the site slopes, there is not a significant potential for deep-seated slope failures under current site conditions. We understand that any proposed infiltration systems on this site will be located within the southwestern portion of the property, with the proposed residence being located within the northeastern alighnment of the property. We estimate that the overall setback of the infiltration system to the steep slope area to be approximately 60 to 70 feet. It is our opinion that the proposed infiltration system to be located within NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Stormwater Infiltration Letter NGA File No. 1105019 Aw Residence Infiltration May 24, 2019 Edmonds, Washington Page 5 the southwestern portion of the property below the steep slope area is feasible and should not adversely impact the existing slope stability conditions of the steep slope areas within the subject site. Regular maintenance of this system will be required to ensure functionality. Storinwater Infiltration The subsurface soils generally consisted of topsoil and/or fill underlain by fine- to coarse- grained sand with varying amounts of silt and gravel to the depths explored within the proposed infiltration areas. We conducted on -site infiltration testing in accordance with the Department of Ecology 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, to determine the long term design infiltration rate of the site soils. On -site testing consisted of a Small Pilot Infiltration Test (Small PIT) to determine the long- term design infiltration rates. We conducted a Small PIT within Infiltration Pit 1, located as shown on the attached Schematic Site Plan in Figure 2. The test was conducted within a pit that measured 3.0-feet long by 4.0-feet wide by 5.0-feet deep. We filled the pit with 12-inches of water at the beginning of the day fa begin the soaking period of the PIT for approximately 6 hours. At this time, the water flow rate into the hole was monitored with a Great Plains Industries (GPI) TM 075 water flow meter for the pre-soak period. After the 6-hour soaking period was completed, the water level was maintained at approximately 12.0- inches for one hour for the steady-state period.. The flow rate for Infiltration Pit I stabilized at 0.372 gallons per minute (22.32 gallons per hour), which equates to an approximate infiltration rate of 2.98 inches per hour. The water was shut off after the steady-state period and monitored at least every 15 minutes. After 60 minutes, the water level within the pit dropped approximately 2.75 inches, resulting in an infiltration rate of 2.75 inches per hour. In accordance with the Table 3.5 of the Department of Ecology 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, correction factors of 0.8, 0.5, and 0,9 for site variability and number of locations tested (CF,), testing method (CFt), and degree of influent control to prevent siltation and bio-buildup (CFn,), respectively were applied to the field measured infiltration rate of 2.75 inches per hour, selected from the falling -head portion of the testing. A total correction factor of 0.36 was applied to the measured field infiltration rate obtained frorn the falling head portion of the test to determine the long-term design infiltration rate. Using the above correction factor, we calculated a long-term design infiltration rate of approximately 0.99 inches per hour. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Stormwater Infiltration Letter NGA File No. 1105019 Aw Residence Infiltration May 24, 2019 Edmonds, Washington Page 6 CONCLUSIONS It is our opinion that the subsurface soils within the site are suitable for traditional stormwater infiltration. Using the above correction factors, we calculated a long-term design infiltration rate of 0.99 inches per hour to be utilized to design any on -site infiltration systems within the site, provided that the base of the system tenninates within the native glacial outwash soils encountered at depth. The storm water management systems should be designed and maintained in accordance with 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. We recommend that any proposed infiltration systems be placed as to not negatively impact any proposed or existing nearby structures and also meet all required setbacks from existing property lines, structures, and sensitive areas as discussed in the drainage manual. In general, infiltration systems should not be located within fill areas within the site (associated with site grading or retaining wall backfill) as such condition could lead to failures of the placed fills and/or retaining structures. We should be retained to review infiltration design and oversee installation. Based on our infiltration testing and additional soil explorations, the observed relatively stable nature of the steep slopes within the the subject site and the overall distance separating the proposed infiltration system from the steep slopes within the vicinity of the site, it is our opinion that the proposed infiltration system to be located within the southwestern portion of the property is feasible and should not adversely impact the existing slope stability conditions of the steep slope areas within the vicinity of the subject site. USE OF THIS LETTER This letter was prepared for Mr. Chak Aw and his agents, for use in planning and budgeting the above - referenced project only. Our services included an evaluation of the infiltration capability of the site soils at specific locations and should not be considered as an in-depth geotechnical study of the site or an evaluation of the overall site stability. This letter may be used for bidding and estimating purposes, but our letter, conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. The subsurface conditions between explorations may vary. A contingency for varying conditions should be incorporated into the project plans. We recommend that NGA be retained to review the design and provide monitoring and consultation services during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether or not earthwork activities comply with contract plans and specifications. We should be contacted a minimum of one week prior to construction activities and could attend pre -construction meetings if requested. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Stormwater Infiltration Letter Aw Residence Infiltration Edmonds, Washington NGA File No. 1105019 May 24, 2019 Page 7 Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been performed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in effect in this area at the time this report was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Our observations, findings, and opinions are a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner. �9 V NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Stormwater Infiltration Letter Aw Residence Infiltration Edmonds, Washington NGA File No. 1105019 May 24, 2019 Page 8 We appreciate the opportunity to provide set -vice to you on this project. If you have any questions or require further information, please call. Sincerely, NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Katelyn S. Brower, GIT Staff Geologist I 44 4-/W/1 Alex B. Rinaldi, GIT Project Geologist Khaled M. Shawish, PE Principal KSB:ABR:KMS:dy Six Figures Attached NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. VICINITY MAP t N Not to Scale Seavit I Wh N SW 3: Hutt Park Mffi St I rUh M syt 1671h St SW I Bith S,, S'N Project Elementary School Site To A I B911, P1 Sw M! rI Watt' ,,I 10(ht, St S'N III P: Ch"ry st 3 R /9 < =r Portofino U ReMaurwit & Bar 6AII Maplewood Rock Ilvgtl D1 Gem Club 196th St SW Edmonds Maplewoo 9-11 d Elementary School Park Itnd;cy Ln vle.lzi.1 lVay C 0 E caspers st 700"It st Tit C 0 Edmonds United Methodist Church -K V. ',I, d) THE BOWL Cucdobf C2 Edmonds, WA LL 7u 2 IL z Project Number NELSON GEOTECHNICAL No. Date Revision By CK 1105019 Aw Residence Infiltration Vicinity Map ASSOCIATES, INC. -eN A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS ABR 1 5/16/19 Original DPN Figure 1 W-dlMlt. Offl.. East Mn.whes offlt4 17311 '135thA-14E.A-500 SS26 Inchisby L... #2 M astWenstchmWA 06802 =j 501I)IISS-78961IF-665-7692 CD Site Plan (C) CDI!�- C Cri z (D 1"i N 07 Y AA- (D J CO CL, AT -F� (D 7�!�T �_16—NW,_ �T 0 CD Ut LINE DO T -2 P 0 71 6 0 rroposed LC Resi den VM Fdb .0 Z We INF�11 A "ZL > 114 > z r LIM M mz > r U) U) -------- (0 0 rq 0 z rn = oR M 0 M LO rrI 0 0 > r LEGEND z INF-1 F4 P Property line Number and approximate 0 location of infiltration test pit 0 30 60 TP-1 0 - Number and approximate ,> A A' Approximate location —I < Scale: 1 inch 30 feet of cross-section location of test pit HA-1 2 Number and approximate *D M z �< > Cl) location of hand auger Go X Pafaranpg% cZifa nlon hneizirl f%n n ninn rivkf M zei Annimm 91 91711 q fitipri "Aw RPAidPnr-A_" nranarad bv Strnhl Desion LLC_ MILUcompany\2019 NGA Project FoIders\1 1050-19 Aw Residence Infiltration Edmonds1Draflting%SP.dwg k I M 0, z 0 (0 3 Cr Southwest Northeast 220-- Q M Q) G M :3 0 0 190-- __190 M 5' (D > 0 0 Fill D cu > 26* 26* 160-- W a) Fill Z, ;,: 0, z 10* HA-2� -0 E INF-1 X 41.? K > 0 ? 0 z < 130-- 130 M M z > r In 0 z 0 z M -10 M -4 LQ M 100 100 o r .'M; 0 0 z 0 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 > r- Distance (feet) Exploration z P E; Infiltration Test Pit Hand Auger Designation IN F-1 HA-1 ;U Groundwater Level----> V NOTES: During Exploration 1) Stratigraphic conditions are interpolated between Geologic Contact --> 2) the explorations. Actual conditions may vary. Elevations are approximate. IOU z I �< (approximate) Reference: Cross Section is based on field measurements usinq a hand-held clinometer and 100-ft tape measure. > Co ;U 1 0 ;K M I WcompanyX2019 NGA Pmject Folders\11050-19Aw Residence Infiltration Edmonds\Drafting=.dwg UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM GROUP MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUPNAME SYMBOL CLEAN GW WELL -GRADED, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL COARSE- GRAVEL GRAVEL GP POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL GRAINED MORE THAN 50 % GRAVEL GM SILTY GRAVEL OF COARSE FRACTION RETAINED ON SOILS NO. 4 SIEVE WITH FINES GC CLAYEY GRAVEL SAND CLEAN SW WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND SAND SID POORLY GRADED SAND MORE THAN 50 % RETAINED ON MORE THAN 50 % NO. 200 SIEVE OF COARSE FRACTION SAND Sm SILTY SAND PASSES NO. 4 SIEVE SC WITH FINES CLAYEY SAND FINE - SILT AND CLAY ML SILT INORGANIC GRAINED LIQUID LIMIT CL CLAY LESS THAN 50 % SOILS ORGANIC OL ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY SILT AND CLAY MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT INORGANIC MORE THAN 50 % PASSES LIQUID LIMIT CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY NO. 200 SIEVE 50 % OR MORE ORGANIC OH ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT NOTES: 1) Field classification is based on visual SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS: examination of soil in general accordance with ASTM D 2488-93. Dry -Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch 2) Soil classification using laboratory tests Moist - Damp, but no visible water. is based an ASTM D 2488-93. 3) Descriptions of soil density or Wet - Visible free water or saturated, consistency are based on usually soil is obtained from interpretation of blowcount data, below water table visual appearance of soils, and/or test data. Project Number NELSON GEOTECHNICAL No. Date Revision By CK 1105019 Aw Residence Infiltration N �GA ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 5116/19 Original DPN ASR Soil Classification Chart GEOTECKNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS Figure 4 Wwd1nv111e Ofte EastWtch� Ofte 17311-135th Ave. NE. A-500 SM Indistry L, #2 Vh 11171 East Wen&Whee, WA 98602 481-2510 (5D9)655-7696/Fw 665-7692 LOG OF EXPLORATION DEPTH(FEET) Usc SOIL DESCRIPTION INFILTRATION PIT ONE 0.0-2.0 DARK BROWN TO REDDISH BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH ROOTS, CHARCOAL, AND ORGANICS (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (UNDOCUMENTED FILL) 2.0-3.2 SM LIGHT BROWN TO ORANGE -BROWN, SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH [RON-OXIDE WEATHERING, AND TRACE ROOTS (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST) 3.2-5.0 SP-SM LIGHT BROWN TO GRAY, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH SILT, GRAVEL, AND IRON OXIDE STAINING (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST) SAMPLES WERE NOT COLLECTED GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 5.0 FEET ON 5/9/2019 TEST PIT ONE 0.0-3.8 GRASS UNDERLAIN BY DARK BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL, ORGANICS, AND ROOTS (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (UNDOCUMENTED FILL) 3.8-5.0 SP-SM GRAY -BROWN TO LIGHT BROWN, FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH SILT, GRAVEL, AND IRON - OXIDE STAINING (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST) SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AT 4.5 FEET GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED SLIGHT TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 5.0 FEET ON 5/9/2019 TEST PIT TWO 0.0-4.0 GRASS UNDERLAIN BY DARK BROWN TO LIGHT BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL, ROOTS, AND ORGANICS (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (UNDOCUMENTED FILL) 4.0-8.0 SP-SM LIGHT BROWN TO GRAY -BROWN, FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH SILT, GRAVEL, TRACE COBBLES, AND IRON OXIDE STAINING (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST) SAMPLE COLLECTED AT 8.0 FEET GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 8.0 FEET ON 5/9/2019 HAND AUGER ONE 0.0-3.0 DARK BROWN TO LIGHT BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL, ROOTS, ORGANICS (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (UNDOCUMENTED FILL) SAMPLES WERE NOT COLLECTED GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER MET REFUSAL AT 3.0 FEET ON 5/912019 DJO:ABR NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. FILE NO 1105019 FIGURE 5 LOG OF EXPLORATION DEPTH(FEET) Usc SOIL DESCRIPTION HAND AUGER TWO 0.0-3.0 DARK BROWN TO REDDISH BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL, ROOTS, ORGANICS (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (UNDOCUMENTED FILL) 3.0-5.5 LIGHT BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND ROOTS (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (UNDOCUMENTED FILL) SAMPLES WERE NOT COLLECTED GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER TWO MET REFUSAL AT 5.5 FEET ON 5/9/2019 DJO:ABR NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. FILE NO 1105019 FIGURE 6 Aw Residence January 18, 2019 9527 190th Place SW Project #18102 Edmonds, Washington Strobl Design LLC r acob@strobldesign.com Attention: Jacob Strobl Subject: Design Infiltration Rate — Aw Residence Mr. Strobl: The purpose of this letter is to provide a design infiltration rate for stormwater infiltration for the proposed development of a single-family home on the subject property. Summary We recommend using a design infiltration rate of 2 inches per hour for the proposed infiltration trench. The following sections will provide support for our recommendation. Geologic/Hydrogeologic Setting Our referenced geotechnical report describes the geologic and hydrogeologic setting and soils encountered in more detail. For the purposes of the design infiltration rate, EP-2 was close to the proposed infiltration trench. In EP-2 Vashon advance outwash sediments were encountered from the ground surface to the total depth explored (5 feet). The soil log and location of this exploration pit is attached to this report. There was no groundwater seepage observed in any of the explorations performed for our previous geotechnical report. Soil conditions observed were generally dry for the time of year (winter), which is indicative of permeable soils. Also, there were no signs of ponding water or flowing water observed on the subject property. Groundwater conditions are subject to change depending on seasonal weather conditions but based on the permeable native advance outwash soils encountered at depth, we do not anticipate seasonal high groundwater of adverse groundwater conditions affecting infiltration facilities. Receptor Soil Horizon The soils present at the bottom elevation of the proposed infiltration trench consist of medium dense, light brown GRAVEL with fine to coarse sand (GP). These coarse -grained soils are well suited for stormwater infiltration. Based on our previous experience with in -situ infiltration testing of similar soils, measured rates range from approximately 20 to 100 inches per hour. Design Infiltration Rate Due to the coarse -grained soils present at the receptor horizon and the nature of the project (single-family residence) , we recommend using a design infiltration rate of 2 inches per hour. This rate is extremely conservative for the soils present and based on our previous experience, this design infiltration rate incoroporates an approximate factor of safety of 10 to 50 (Correction Factor = 0.1 to 0.02). It should also be noted that 2 inches per hour was the design infiltration rate used for infiltration facility design on the adjacent property to the north (Mione Short Plat), which South Fork Geosciences worked on as well. SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PLLC Page 1 PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFO(-aSFGEO.COM A - WAI Aw Residence January 18, 2019 9527 1901h Place SW Project #18102 Edmonds, Washington Civil Engineering Plan Review We have reviewed referenced civil engineering plans (CG Engineering, January 17, 2019) and EP-2 was located near the proposed infiltration trench. The respective locations are shown on the attached Annotated Grading and Drainage Plan. Based on our recent correspondence with the civil engineer, it is our understanding that the infiltration trench was sized based on a design infiltration rate of 2 inches per hour. Also, upon review of the plans, we noted that the infiltration trench has an overflow to the storm system. Based on the coarse -grained receptor soils present and the geologic and topographic setting, we do not think the infiltration trench will ever overflow, but if it did, it would not adversely impact the subject or adjacent properties. As such, it is our opinion that the overflow feature of the design makes constant head infiltration testing and/or groundwater mounding analysis onerous and wasteful. Closure We have enjoyed working with you and we are confident that this letter will aid in the design and permitU��our project. If there are any questions, please feel free to contact us. Since 'A I Andrew L. Glandon Anul�_Vv L.. %ilalluuIll tL_%J Engineering Geologist / Owner South Fork Geosciences, PLLC Attachments: Annotated Grading and Drainage Plan Exploration Pit Log (EP-2) References: "Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Geotechnical Engineering Report, Johnson Residence, Parcel # 00434600007901, 9527 190th Place SW, Edmonds, Washington", South Fork Geosciences, Project #12058, January 14, 2014 "Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Part of the Edmonds West Quadrangles, Washington", Minard, James P., 1983, United States Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Field Studies, Map MF-1541, Scale 1:24,000 "Aw Residence, 9527 190th PI SW, Edmonds, WA 98020, Sheets C1.1, C2.1, C2.2, C3.1, C3.2, C4.1 & C4.2", CG Engineering, Job #18300.20, January 17, 2019 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PLLC Page 2 PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFO@SFGEO.COM Aw Residence 9527 1901h Place SW Edmonds, Washington January 18, 2019 Project #18102 EP-2 T-A6- 53,V2 Q. N 1.226- E- C3 R�v Infiltration Tren h k Locat on North is up Linear scale is valid -T 1901H PL SW Source: Grading and Drainage Plan CG Engineering Annotated Grading and Drainage Plan SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PLLC Page 3 PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFO@SFGEO.COM Aw Residence 9527 1901h Place SW Edmonds, Washington Johnson Residence 9527 1 q0th Place SW, Edmonds, WA Date: 1-1-2014 Depth Number: EP-2 M 0 Vashon Advance Outwash loose to medium dense, damp, brown to reddish brown, fine SAND with gravel and silt (SP-SM) 2 medium dense, damp, light brown GRAVEL with fine to coarse sand (GP) 4 6 1 Total Depth = 5 feet No seepage observed No caving observed 0-2ft weathered 8 10 12 14 January 18, 2019 Project #18102 Exploration Pit Log The subsurrace coomons shown an th.,s #old log represent our obsewattons a[ Itte Ww and tocation of axcavatoa ffooMod by go"c riterprelation andlud9nent. and where noted, by mffwenr?g an3"s and laboratory testiq FW condbons shown rmy not W representatwe of condtons at other tffnes. South Fork Goosuences mY nor be respon&bfe forusp ormforpretabon by others of intonnaton presLnted on these Aogs. SouTH FORK GEOSCIFENCE:S POBOx 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 Project# 12058 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, IPLLC Page 4 PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFO(-a)SFGEO.COM SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 (425) 831-2023 AGLANDON@COMCAST.NET January 14, 2014 Project #: 12058 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Johnson Residence Parcel # 00434600007901 9527 190th Place SW Edmonds, Washington Introduction The purpose of this study was to gain subsurface information to be utilized in the design and construction of a single-family residence on the subject property. The proposed construction will consist of grading, foundation subgrade preparation, home construction, utility installation, driveway construction, and retaining wall construction. Authorization to proceed with this study was provided by Mr. Chris Johnson via e-mail on December 10, 2013. This report was prepared for Mr. Johnson and his agents for specific use in support of this project. The location of the subject property is shown in the attached Vicinity Map. An excerpt of the proposed site plan prepared by Architects Northwest and the approximate locations of the subsurface explorations logged for this study are shown on the attached Site and Exploration Plan. Site Conditions The subject property was located. at 9527 190th Place SW in Edmonds, Washington. The property was irregularly shaped and was approximately 150 feet in the east -west direction and ranged from approximately 90 to 100 feet in the north -south direction. Based on information from the Snohomish County Assessor website, the property was 0.32 acres in size. The property sloped gently to moderately from the east down to the west. Based on a review of the site survey, the slope on the west portion of the property was on the order of 5 to 10 percent, and some of the areas to the east had slopes up to approximately 50 percent. Based on our field observations, some of the steeper areas were associated with past grading. Based on the surveyed elevations, there is approximately 32 feet of total relief on the property. The property was bordered on the west by Olympic View Drive, to the south by 190th Place SW, and to the north and east by existing residential properties. The property was marked with survey stakes at key points to delineate the property. The western portion of the property had been cleared and was covered with grass. Near the southern and central (E-W) portion of the lot, there was an area that appeared to have been filled to provide vehicle SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045,(425) 831-2023 access to the property. An area near the north property line had not been cleared and was covered with typical second -growth forest vegetation. Vegetation in the forested portion of the property consisted of Douglas Fir and maple trees with underbrush consisting of blackberry vines and sallal. We did not observe any signs of accelerated soil erosion or soil movement during our site reconnaissance. Subsurface Conditions Subsurface conditions on the property were inferred from a visual reconnaissance of the property, a review of the referenced geologic map (Minard, 1983) and seven exploration pits excavated with a subcontracted track -mounted excavator provided by Northwest Excavating and Trucking Co., Inc. The explorations were logged by the undersigned licensed engineering geologist and were immediately backfilled. The approximate locations of the subsurface explorations are shown in the Site and Exploration Plan and the exploration logs are attached to this report. Our interpretation of the native soils found at depth as Vashon advance outwash is in agreement with the referenced geologic map. The detection of fill soils on the property is due to the site specific nature of our study. Stratigraphy Fill Soils Fill soils were encountered in all of the exploration pits performed for this study except for EP-2, which was located in an area that had not been cleared. The fill soils in the other exploration pits ranged in depth from the ground surface to 3.5 to 9 feet below the ground surface. As shown in the attached logs, the fill soils varied in grain size distribution and in relative density. The fill soils included construction rubble which primarily consisted of asphalt and concrete pieces, with small amounts of other manmade material (garbage). We presume that the fill soils were placed to provide better vehicle access to the property and possibly in association with filling a past topographic low. Due to their inconsistency, generally low relative density, and lack of knowledge of the means and methods used to place and compact the fill soils, proposed structures should not be founded on existing fill soils without mitigation measures, which are set forth in later sections of this report. Vashon Advance Outwash Vashon advance outwash sediments were encountered in all of the exploration pits logged for this study. In EP-2 these sediments were encountered from the ground surface to the total depth explored (5 feet). In the other exploration pits, the advance outwash sediments were encountered underlying the fill soils at a depth ranging from 3.5 to 9 feet below the ground surface to the maximum depth of each exploration pit. The advance outwash sediments generally consisted of medium dense, sand with gravel or gravel with sand. Vashon advance outwash sediments are alluvial and fluvial sediments that were deposited by meltwater streams and channels from the advancing Vashon glacial ice sheet. As the glacial ice advanced, the advance outwash sediments were overridden and consolidated by the glacial ice. As such, the advance outwash sediments are typically dense, relatively permeable, and moisture insensitive due to the past glacial 2 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045, (425) 831-2023 consolidation and the small amount of silt and clay present. Due to their relatively coarse grain size distribution, the advance outwash sediments are moderately resistant to erosion, except when subjected to concentrated water flows. Hydrology There was no groundwater seepage observed in any of the explorations performed for this study. Soil conditions observed were generally dry for the time of year, which is indicative of permeable soils. Also, there were no signs of ponding water or flowing water observed. Groundwater conditions are subject to change depending on seasonal weather conditions, but based on the permeable advance outwash soils encountered at depth, we do not anticipate encountering adverse groundwater conditions during construction. Geolo2ic Hazards The following discussion of potential geologic hazards is based on the visual reconnaissance of the site, the subsurface explorations, reviews of aerial photographs and regional topographic and geologic maps of the area, and review of the applicable City of Edmonds Municipal Code and maps that are available online. Based on our comparison of the City of Edmonds Municipal Code to the topographic and geologic features of the subject property, the property does not fulfill the criteria for an erosion hazard area, landslide hazard area, or a seismic hazard area. The following two sections of this report will set forth some basic erosion control best management practices for use in construction and will address general seismic risks and design parameters associated with a seismic event. Erosion Concerns Though special mitigations are not necessary, a temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) plan should be created and implemented during site construction. It is our opinion that implementation of a relatively basic erosion control plan will prevent off site sediment transport. The proper use of "best management practices" (BMPs) should be utilized during earthwork activities to reduce the potential for erosion and sediment transport off of the property. The following is a partial list of BMPs that should be implemented: 0 Phasing and scheduling earth work activities during dry conditions 0 Rock construction entrances 0 Straw mulch 0 Plastic sheeting 0 Silt fence 0 Keeping exposed soils and stockpiles covered when not actively worked 0 Establish temporary/permanent vegetation as soon as possible after foundation and utility installation SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045,(425) 831-2023 Implementation of a TESC plan will likely be a requirement of the clearing and grading or building permit. South Fork Geosciences is available to design the TESC plan and to provide any required inspections during construction. Seismic Concerns Generally, there are four types of potential geologic hazards associated with large seismic events: 1) ground rupture; 2) seismically induced landslides; 3) liquefaction; and 4) ground motion. The potential for each of these to impact the site is discussed below. Ground Rupture Most large earthquakes in the Puget Sound area are sub -crustal events with epicenters ranging from 50 to 70 kilometers in depth. The subject property is approximately 5 to 6 miles south of the Southern Whidbey Island Fault Zone (SWIFZ). Though the subject property is near the SWIFZ, to our knowledge, there are no signs of past ground rupture in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. Based on the location of the subject property to the south of the known fault zone and the lack of sufficient information to infer a recurrence interval for earthquakes on the SWIFZ (Johnson, et al., 2004), it is our opinion that the probability of ground surface rupture impacting the subject property is low, and no mitigations are necessary. Seismically Induced Landslides Due the topography and absence of steep slopes on the subject property, it is our opinion that the potential for seismically induced slope failures on the site is low and no mitigations are necessary. Liquefaction Liquefaction is a condition where loose, saturated, fine sandy soils lose their shear strength due to rapid pore pressure build-up when subjected to high intensity cyclic loads, such as occur during earthquakes. Due to the medium dense, well -graded, native soils encountered in the subsurface explorations and the absence of adverse ground water conditions, the liquefaction potential of this site is very low, and no mitigations are necessary. Ground Motion Seismic hazards that will affect the structure would likely be due to the intensity and duration of the ground shaking. The structural design of the project should be consistent with 2009 International Building Code (2009 IBC) guidelines (Section 1613). Based on the results of our subsurface explorations and our estimation of soil properties at depth utilizing available geologic data, Site Class "C" as defined by Table 1613.5.2 of the IBC may be used for the design of the project. Geotechnical Engineering Recommendations Our exploration indicates that, from a geotechnical standpoint, the subject property is suitable for the proposed development, provided the risks discussed are accepted and the recommendations 4 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045,(425) 831-2023 contained herein are properly followed. Though the surficial fill soils encountered will need to be mitigated during site grading, the underlying medium dense, Vashon advance outwash sediments will be capable of providing support for the proposed structure or structural fill soil. To aid in the design of the project, the following general recommendations for site development are provided. South Fork Geosciences is available for further consultation with respect to specific design items, if needed. Site Preparation and Site Grading It is likely that structural fill soils will be required to establish grades for the project. Any fill soil placed beneath a foundation, retaining wall, or driveway/parking area must be constructed as a structural fill. In areas that will provide structural support, any existing fill soils or loose soils should be removed and replaced with structural fill as described below, or the fill soils should be mitigated as described in later sections for specific applications. Structural fill is defined as non -organic soil, placed in maximum 8-inch loose lifts, with each lift being compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density, using the modified Proctor test (ASTM: D1557) as the standard. Prior to placing any structural fill the exposed soils must either be undisturbed or be compacted to a dense, non -yielding condition and be approved for structural fill placement. In the case of utility trench filling, the backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with the applicable City of Edmonds or utility franchise standards. If fill soil will be imported to the site, it should be free of organics and other deleterious material. Mineral soils with more than 5 percent fines are considered to be moisture sensitive. The use of moisture sensitive soils should be confined to dry weather conditions. The moisture condition of the imported soil should be within a few percent of the optimum moisture content of the soil. Soils that are too dry or too wet of the optimum moisture content to achieve suitable compaction will need to be moisture conditioned prior to final compaction. The existing fill soils should be considered moisture sensitive. The native, Vashon advance outwash sediments are not moisture sensitive, but due to the dry soil conditions observed, may require the addition of water to be placed as structural fill. In the case that moisture sensitive soils are used in structural fills, this type of work should be limited to the summer months and good weather conditions. Placement and compaction of the structural fill should be monitored by a competent field technician. In situ density testing should be performed during fill placement to verify proper compaction of the fill soil. A sample of the planned structural fill soil will need to be available at least 48 hours prior to fill placement for laboratory analysis. Temporary cut slopes may be necessary to allow the installation of the foundations and for utility installation. Temporary cut slopes should be limited to 1H: IV (Horizontal: Vertical) in the existing fill soils and 1/2H:IV in the Vashon advance outwash sediments. Stability of the cut slopes is the responsibility of the on -site contractor and a safe work environment should be maintained at all times. A trench shield or trench box should be used to install all utilities over 4 feet in depth or the sides of trenches and excavations should be sloped back per OSHA/WISHA standards. 5 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH REND, WA 96045,(425) 831-2023 Foundations Spread footings may be used for building support when founded on medium dense native soils, approved structural fill soils, or rock trenches. To limit differential settlements between footings that bear on both structural fill and medium dense to dense native soils, we recommend that an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be utilized for design purposes, including both dead and live loads. An increase of one-third may be used for short-term wind or seismic loading. Perimeter footings should be buried at least 18 inches into the surrounding soil for frost protection; interior footings require only 12 inches burial. However, all footings must penetrate to the prescribed bearing stratum, and no footing should be founded in or above loose, organic, or existing fill soils. It should be noted that the area bounded by lines extending downward at 1 H: IV from any footing must not intersect another footing or intersect a filled area that has not been compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D 1557. In addition, a 1.5H: IV line extending down from any footing must not daylight because sloughing or raveling may eventually undermine the footing. Thus, footings should not be placed near the edge of steps or near vertical cuts in the bearing soils. Anticipated settlements of footings founded on the medium dense native soils or approved rock trenches should be less than I inch. Loose or disturbed surface soils, excessive moisture present or poor foundation subgrade preparation could result in larger settlements. South Fork Geosciences should perform a foundation bearing evaluation prior to concrete placement to verify that the design bearing capacity of the soil has been attained. A foundation bearing evaluation will likely be required by the City of Edmonds Building Department as a condition of the building permit. Perimeter footing drains should be provided as discussed under the section titled Drainage Considerations. Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the foundation and the supporting soils, and/or by passive earth pressure acting on the buried portions of the foundations. The spread footings must be backfilled with structural fill compacted to a dense, non -yielding condition to achieve the passive resistance provided below. The structural fill must extend horizontally outward from the embedded portion of the foundation a distance equal to at least three times the embedment depth over which the passive resistance is applied. We recommend the following design parameters, • Passive equivalent fluid = 300 pcf • Coefficient of friction = 0.30 The above values are allowable and include a factor of safety of at least 1.5. Mitigation of Existing Fill Soils The existing fill soils are not suitable for structural support without mitigation measures. There are several options for mitigating the fill soils, but based on our observations and discussion with Mr. Johnson while onsite during the subsurface exploration, it appears that the basement floor elevation will be on native soils that are adequate for support of conventional spread footings. 6 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045,(425) 831-2023 The current plans provided by Architects Northwest indicated a step up to a structural/crawlspace type floor on the eastern portion of the proposed house. Since fill soils were encountered in the eastern portion of the building pad, we recommend constructing a full basement under the entire house, rather than having to extend crawlspace footings down to bearing soils, or reworking the existing fill soils. We explained this to Mr. Johnson while we were onsite and he said that the crawlspace area was originally designed as a full basement and a change was made to the home design to reduce cost. Due to the fill soils being present here, Mr. Johnson said that they will likely revert to the full basement design to reduce the amount of fill soil mitigation. Since the home will likely be built with a full basement, we presume that all spread footings will be constructed on medium dense, Vashon advance outwash soils. In the event that native soils are not encountered at the design foundation elevation, the footings will need to be extended down to native soils, or the fill soil will need to be removed and replaced with structural fill as explained in the preceding section titled Site Preparation and Site Grading. Lateral Earth Pressure Cast -in -place, concrete foundation walls or retaining walls should be designed to resist "at -rest" lateral soil pressure conditions if the concrete walls will not be free to yield laterally at the top. Restrained walls should be designed to resist an "at -rest" equivalent fluid pressure of 55 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). Concrete walls that are free to yield laterally at the top of the wall may be designed using an active soil pressure of 35 pcf. Surcharges from sloping backfill conditions or adjacent structural loads should be added to the above lateral soil pressures. Full height drainage of foundation walls will need to be installed to prevent hydrostatic pressures from acting on the walls. Rockeries The site plan provided by Architects Northwest indicates that rockeries will be utilized to face the cut slopes around the north and east sides of the building envelope. Rockeries should be limited to a maximum height of 8 feet when facing a native cut, and to 4 feet in height when facing a cut into fill soils. All rockeries should be built by experienced contractors and should be built in accordance with the Associated Rockery Contractors standards of practice. The City of Edmonds may require a detail and geotechnical engineering recommendation for rockeries. South Fork Geosciences can provide more extensive design recommendation, if required. Other Retaining Walls Rockeries, segmental block walls, or cast -in -place concrete walls may be used for grade separation between the upper and lower driveways. Segmental block walls should be limited to 30 inches in height without specific design of mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) fill and wall drainage. South Fork Geosciences is available to design the segmental block wall/MSE fill. Cast -in -place concrete SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045,(425) 831-2023 walls should be designed by a structural engineer using the soil bearing capacity, lateral resistance, and lateral earth pressure values in the preceding sections. Floor Support We anticipate that the single-family home built on the subject property will utilize slab -on -grade floors. Slab -on -grade concrete floors should be cast atop a prepared subgrade of structural fill soil compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. A capillary break with a minimum thickness of 4 inches should be placed atop the prepared subgrade. The capillary break material should be a gap graded material consisting of pea gravel, 3/4-inch washed drain rock, or clean crushed rock with less than 5 percent fines (material passing the No.200 sieve). The capillary break will reduce the potential for moisture wicking through the floor slab. A I 0-mil thick plastic vapor barrier should also be placed atop the capillary break material. All concrete placement should follow the guidelines set forth by the American Concrete Institute (ACI). Driveway Support Our subsurface explorations indicate that there are fill soils of significant depth located under the proposed driveways. Full removal and replacement of the existing fill soils with structural fill would likely be very expensive and earthwork intensive. For driveway support, the whole fill column does not need to be removed and replaced, provided that there is some tolerance for future settlement. We recommend that a 2 foot thick pad of structural fill should be placed over the existing fill in the area that the driveway is to be constructed. The existing fill subgrade should be compacted to a firm and unyielding condition prior to placing the structural fill pad. The structural fill pad should extend horizontally beyond the area to be paved by 2 feet. Though the structural fill pad will not entirely eliminate the potential for settlement, it will reduce the potential for differential settlement, and as a result will reduce the potential for pavement cracking. We also recommend that the driveway should be paved with asphalt, since asphalt is somewhat flexible and can tolerate minor amounts of settlement. Asphalt can also be repaired or overlain more easily than concrete in the event that it becomes damaged due to cracking. Drainage Considerations A perimeter foundation drain should be established to protect the floor slab and internal crawlspace areas from ground water intrusion. The level of the foundation drain should be set at, or slightly below, the base of the footing elevation. The drain should consist of 4-inch diameter, rigid, perforated, PVC drain pipe and should be set to allow for gravity discharge. The drainpipe should be surrounded by a minimum of 6 inches of pea gravel or washed drain rock. Roof drains should not tie into the footing drain but should be collected in a separate, tightline drain. The drain lines should be set to discharge via gravity to a dispersion or infiltration area or to an approved stormwater drainage. In addition, all footing stem walls that enclose conditioned space should be lined with a minimum, 12-inch-thick, washed gravel blanket provided over the height of the wall that ties into the footing 8 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045,(425) 831-2023 drain. The washed gravel blanket should be ended one foot below the desired ground surface and the top of the gravel should be covered with filter fabric. The remaining one foot should be filled with compacted soil to reduce the amount of surface water entering the wall and footing drain system. Site Drainage We have not reviewed any plans for stormwater disposal at this time. The native, Vashon advance outwash sediments are well suited for infiltration methods due to their relatively coarse grain size distribution and lack of fine sediments. With the relatively large lot size and the relatively flat area on the western portion of the property, we presume that infiltration methods such as a series of drywells or infiltration trenches in the native sediments will be used to dispose of stormwater generated from the site. Based on our visual assessment of the native Vashon advance outwash soils, we believe that the soil would be classified as "sand" in the USDA Soil Textural Triangle. We obtained a grab sample from EP-2 for grain size analysis testing to verify this classification, if required for infiltration design. South Fork Geosciences is available for additional consultation with respect to site drainage, if necessary. 9 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045,(425) 831-2023 Conclusion Our findings and recommendations provided in this report were prepared in accordance with generally accepted principles of engineering geology and geotechnical engineering as practiced in the Puget Sound area at the time this report was submitted. We make no other warranty, either expressed or implied. Our observations, findings, and opinions are a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner. We are available to provide additional design recommendations and consultation throughout the development of this project. We should be contacted to review architectural and grading plans and to provide additional design team support, if needed. We are also available to provide construction monitoring services during the development of the project for earthwork quality control and to help ensure that the recommendations in this report are properly implemented. We have enjoyed working with you and we are confident that this report will aid in the design of your project. If there are any questions, please contact us at (425) 831-2023. Sincerely, 'b Andrew L. Glandon, LEG, CPESC Geologist / Owner South Fork Geosciences Attachments: Vicinity Map Site and Exploration Plan Approximate Location of Fill Soils Exploration Pit Logs References: J� A T?-�, Jainey S. Battermann, PE Geotechnical Engineer Minard, James P., "Geologic map of the Edmonds East and Part of the Edmonds West Quadrangles, Washington" U.S. Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF- 154 1, scale 1:24,000,1983 ---�O-- - SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO BOX 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045, (425) 831-2023 Edmonds Municipal Code http://www.edmondswa.jzov/aovemment/rules-and-reizulations.html City of Edmonds Maps http://www.edmondswa.gov/services/mas-a-gis-data/services-maps-mal)s.html United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service, h!Ltp:Hwebsoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.c,�ov Snohomish County Assessor Property Summary hLtps://www.snoco.org/proptax/(ujcvtcbfeqgvolbpgOg5xm45)/result.asl2x USGS Quaternary Faults Web Mapping Application hn://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/Afaults/m4p/ Johnson, S.Y., Blakely, R.J., Brocher, T.M., Sherrod, B.L., Kelsey, H.M., and Lldke, D.J., compilers, 2004, Fault number 572, Southern Whidbey Island fault zone, in Quaternary fault and fold database of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey website, http://earthguakes.usgs.gov/hazards/Afaults, accessed 01/10/2014 03:28 PM I I SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO BOX 127 b, NORTH BEND, WA 98045, (425) 831-2023 �,o=, "Z .__ I—, .. J 0 4, I if Ng (L fill PI I "�b vw 1 4 TT A. "IF i Of— 1j, dl,p; .41 'L * i 4pe lit C13 ly I CL LO w U w Z Z w 0 o u > (Y) Lo _- N 0 -0 r-, 0 N X N Z � 0— W — Z LL x ca (r) 0 0 00 oz CE) 00 o (qq JD U) a- z Co LO CD C\j 'r— it 0 (1), r_ (n _0 C: 0 CL E _0 w U) (D cz C\j C: (D c 0 Cl) 0 _D i 5�1 [Not to Scale Source: Architects Northwest, Johnson Residence Site Plan, 4-10-13 SOU TH FORK GE OSCIE NCES PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 (425) 831-2023 AGLANDONgCOMCAST.NET Site and Exploration Plan Johnson Residence, 9527 190t' PI SE, Edmonds, WA Locations are approximate Project #12058 a4U't2 73.11, J W EP-5 FNot to Scale ------ no ---- , I" \A V 01 10 '-7 lu LU CL ------- ID)74 14 -Z IcIOTH F[- 5Vq,, -10-13 Source: Architects Northwest, Johnson Residence Site Plan, 4 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES Locations are approximate PO Box 1275 i NORTHBEND,WA 98045 (425) 831-2023 AGLAN DONCO)COMCAST. NET Approximate Location of Fill Soils Johnson Residence, 9527 1 901h PI SE, Edmonds, WA Project #12058 Johnson Residence 9527 1 q0th Place SW, Edmonds, WA Date: 1-1-2014 Depth Number: EP-1 (ft) 0 Fill loose, damp, brown to light brown, fine..to'* medium SAND, trace gravel, roots'Af esent (SP) 2 loose to medium dense,..Od�p, light brown, fine SAND (SP) 4 d Iloose .W'medium dense, damp, brown to light �r-6�n, fine SAND with silt (SP-SM) 1.9 8 Vashon Advance Outwash medium dense, damp, light brown, fine to 10 coarse SAND with gravel (SW) Total Depth = 10 feet No seepage observed No caving observed 12 Measured from back of pit, surface slopes down to west (dashed line = ground surface) 14 Exploration Pit Log The subsurface conditions shown on this field log represent our observations at the time and location of excavation, modified by geologic interpretation andjudgment, and where noted, by engineering ana�ysis and laboratory testing. The conditions shown may not be representative of conditions at other times. South Fork Geosciences will not be responsible for use or interpretation by others of information presented on these logs. SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 Project # 12058 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 Johnson Residence 9527 1 q0th Place SW, Edmonds, WA Date: 1-1-2014 Depth Number: EP-2 (ft) 0 Vashon Advance Outwash loose to medium dense, damp, brown to reddish brown, fine SAND with gravel and silt 'SP-SM, 2 medium dense, damp, light brown GRAVEL with fine to coarse sand (GP) 4 Total Depth = 5 feet No seepage observed 6 No caving observed 0-2ft weathered 8 M 12 14 Exploration Pit Log IThe subsurface conditions shown on this field log represent our observations at the time and location of excavation, modified by geologic interpretation I andjudgment, and where noted, by engineering analysis and laboratory testing. The conditions shown may not be representative of conditions at other times. South Fork Geosciences will not be responsible for use or interpretation by others of information presented on these logs. I Project # 12058 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES PO BOX 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 Johnson Residence 9527 1 90th Place SW, Edmonds, WA Date: 1-1-2014 Depth Number: EP-3 (ft) 0 Forest Duff (0-6") Fill medium dense, damp, light bro �"ray, fine to medium SAND with gravel gpd'silt, roots 2 present (SP-SM) 4 6 Vashon Advance Outwash medium dense, damp, light brown, fine to medium SAND with gravel, trace silt (SP) 8 Total Depth = 9 feet No seepage observed 10 Minor caving in low cohesion soils Measured from back of pit, surface slopes down to NW (dashed line = ground surface) 12 14 Exploration Pit Log The subsurface conditions shown on this field log represent our observations at the time and location of excavation, modified by geologic interpretation andjudgment, and where noted, by engineering analysis and laboratory testing. The conditions shown may not be representative of conditions at other times. South Fork Geosciences will not be responsible for use or interpretation by others of information presented on these logs. SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 Project # 12058 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 Johnson Residence 9527 1 q0th Place SW, Edmonds, WA Date: 1-1-2014 Depth lft� Number: EP-4 0 Fill loose to medium dense, damp, gray to brown silty SAND with gravel and construction debris (asphalt and concrete rubble) (SM) 2 4 11 8 1 Vashon Advance Outwash loose to medium dense, damp, light brown, fine to medium SAND with gravel, trace silt (SP) Total Depth = 9 feet 10 No seepage observed Minor caving in fill soils Difficult digging due to rubble in fill soils Fill soils 0-8 feet 12-1 14 Exploration Pit Log The subsurface conditions shown on this field log represent our observations at the time and location of excavation, modified by geologic interpretation andjudgment, and where noted, by engineering analysis and laboratory testing. The conditions shown may not be representative of conditions at other times. South Fork Geosciences will not be responsible for use or interpretation by others of information presented on these logs. I Project # 12058 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 Johnson Residence 9527 1 q0th Place SW, Edmonds, WA Date: 1-1-2014 Depth (ffi Number: EP-5 0 Fill loose to medium dense, damp, gray to brown silty SAND with gravel and construction debris (asphalt and concrete rubble) (SM) 2 4 1 Vashon Advance Outwash loose to medium dense, dry, light brown, fine to medium SAND with gravel, trace silt (SP) 6 Total Depth = 6 feet No seepage observed No caving observed Contact between fill and outwash ranges from 8 3 to 4 feet below ground surface -deeper to south ON 12 14 Exploration Pit Log IThe subsurface conditions shown on this field log represent our observations at the time and location of excavation, modified by geologic interpretation andjudgment, and where noted, by engineering analysis and laboratory testing. The conditions shown may not be representative of conditions at other times. South Fork Geosciences will not be responsible for use or interpretation by others of information presented on these logs. I Project # 12058 SOUTH FORK GF_osciF_NcF_s PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 Johnson Residence 9527 1 q0th Place SW, Edmonds, WA Date: 1-1-2014 Depth Number: EP-6 (ft) 0 Fill loose to medium dense, dry to damp, brown, silty fine to medium SAND with gravel, occasional debris (SM) 2 2 8 _ Vashon Advance Outwash loose to medium dense, dry to damp, brown, fine to medium SAND with gravel and silt 10 (SP-SM) -medium dense@ 10feet Total Depth = 11 feet No seepage observed 12 Very minor caving observed Measured from back of pit, surface slopes down to west (dashed line = ground surface) 14 Exploration Pit Log The subsurface conditions shown on this field tog represent our observations at the time and location of excavation, modified by geologic interpretation andjudgment, and where noted, by engineering analysis and laboratory testing. The conditions shown may not be representative of conditions at other times. South Fork Geosciences will not be responsible for use or interpretation by others of information presented on these logs. SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 Project # 12058 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 Johnson Residence 9527 1 q0th Place SW, Edmonds, WA Date: 1-1-2014 Depth tft\ Number: EP-7 0 Fill loose to medium dense, damp, light brown, silty SAND with gravel, roots present to = 6ft (SM) 2 4 6 1 Vashon Advance Outwash medium dense, damp, light brown -gray, fine to medium SAND with gravel and silt. (SP-SM) 8 12 14 Total Depth = 9.5 feet No seepage observed No caving observed Exploration Pit Log The subsurface conditions shown on this field log represent our observations at the time and location of excavation, modified by geologic interpretation andjudgment, and where noted, by engineering analysis and laboratory testing. The conditions shown may not be representative of conditions at other times. South Fork Geosciences will not be responsible for use or interpretation by others of information presented on these logs. Project # 12058 SOUTH FORK GF_oscimcEs PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 USDA United States Department of Agriculture NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Snohomish County Area, Washington Aw Residence September 26, 2018 47o 49 35'N 47o 49 33"N Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 547771 547778 547785 5477M 547799 547806 547W 547E27 547834 3: Map Sm1e: 1:307ffprWited on A 1andqmpe(11"x8.5')4ieet -Meters N 0 4 9 18 V 0 10 20 40 60 Map pugecbon: Web WrGatw Comer coordnates: WGS84 Edge tK:s: LJTM Zone ION WGS84 �V. 47' 49135"N 14Y33"N MAPLEGEND Area of Interest (A01) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines 13 Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features VO Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot 0 Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill A. Lava Flow .& Marsh or swamp op Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop + Saline Spot Sandy Spot 4g. Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Custom Soil Resource Report MAP INFORMATION Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your A01 were mapped at 1:24,000. Stony Spot 40 Very Stony Spot Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Wet Spot Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause Other misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil Special Line Features line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed Water Features scale. . . Streams and Canals Transportation Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map Rails measurements. Interstate Highways Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service US Routes Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Major Roads LocalRoads Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts Background distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Aerial Photography Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Snohomish County Area, Washington Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 10, 2018 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 7, 2014—Jul 8, 2014 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in A01 Percent of A01 3 Aldprwnnd nrqvpllv q:;nriv InAm nA' 1 nn no/. 15 to 30 percent sfopes Totals for Area of Interest 0.4 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Custom Soil Resource Report An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha -Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha -Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop i's an example. Custom Soil Resource Report Snohomish County Area, Washington 3—Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2t627 Elevation: 0 to 1,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 25 to 60 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 52 degrees F Frost -free period: 160 to 240 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Alderwood and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Alderwood Setting Landform: Ridges, hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, nose slope, talf Down -slope shape: Linear, convex Across -slope shape: Convex Parent material: Glacial drift and/or glacial outwash over dense glaciomarine deposits Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: gravelly sandy loam Bwl - 7 to 21 inches: very gravelly sandy loam Bw2 - 21 to 30 inches: very gravelly sandy loam Bg - 30 to 35 inches: very gravelly sandy loam 2Cdl - 35 to 43 inches: very gravelly sandy loam 2Cd2 - 43 to 59 inches: very gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 39 inches to densic material Natural drainage class: Moderately well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 18 to 37 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 2.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Forage suitability group: Limited Depth Soils (GO02XS301 WA), Limited Depth Soils (GO02XF303WA), Limited Depth Soils (GO02XN302WA) Hydric soil rating: No 10 Custom Soil Resource Report Minor Components Indianola Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Eskers, kames, terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Hydric soil rating: No Everett Percent of map unit. 5 percent Landform: Karnes, eskers, moraines Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down -slope shape: Convex Across -slope shape: Convex Hydric soil rating: No Shalcar Percent of map unit.- 3 percent Landform: Depressions Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip Down -slope shape: Concave Across -slope shape: Concave Hydric soil rating: Yes Norma Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Depressions, drainageways Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip Down -slope shape: Concave, linear Across -slope shape: Concave Hydric soil rating: Yes 11 Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 August 27, 2019 Drainage Report Section VI, Page 1 Section VI — Other Permits Section VI Summary: Narrative Other permits are not anticipated beyond those required by the City of Edmonds. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 rENGINkRING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 August 27, 2019 Drainage Report Section VII, Page 1 Section V11 — Bond Quantities, Declaration of Covenant, & Operation and Maintenance Manual Section V111 Summary: Narrative The Bond Quantity Worksheet is a standalone document that can also be submitted to the City of Edmonds separately from this document. A Declaration of Covenant is provided for the proposed on -site BMP. The Operation and Maintenance Manual is a standalone document that will be given to the owner(s) following the construction of the project. The maintenance manual contained herein is for the Aw Residence building project. The contractor will be responsible for the maintenance and operation of all stormwater structures and BMPs requiring maintenance during construction and, after construction, responsibility will pass to the home owner(s). The project contractor will be responsible for passing along the information in this maintenance manual to the owner(s). Upon request by the City, it shall be made available for their inspection. It is generally expected that few to none of these defects will be present upon the yearly inspection of each facility. 4= 4M ENGINEERING 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com After recording return to: City Clerk City of Edmonds 121 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Document Title(s) Declaration of Covenant - Private Stormwater Facility Reference Number(s) of Related Documents N/A Grantor(s) (Last, First and Middle Initial) Aw, Chak-Yoon Aw, I -Wei Grantee(s) (Last, First and Middle Initial) City of Edmonds Legal Description (abbreviated fonn; i.e., lot, plat or section,. township, range, quarter/quarter) NE 1/4, SE 1/4, SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number at the Time of Recording: 004346-000-079-01 The Auditor/Recorder will rely on the information provided on this form. The staff will not read the document to verify the accuracy or completeness of the indexing information provided herein. DECLARATION OF COVENANT Private Stormwater Facility WHEREAS, the undersigned Declarant(s) have installed a stormwater facility under Edmonds Community Development Code Chapter 18.30 known as a "low impact development best management practices (LID BMP)" in lieu of other required more conventional stormwater systems, as selected below: 0 Permeable Pavement 0 Drywell 13 Rain Garden / Bioretention Cell El Gravelless Chamber 0 Other M Infiltration Trench WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds has allowed installation of the LID BMP, subject to the execution and recording of this Declaration of Covenant; NOW, THEREFORE, THE UNDERSIGNED DECLARANT(S), being the owners of the real property ("the Property") located at the following address: 9527 190th PI SW in the City of Edmonds, Washington, and legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full, hereby covenants and agrees, on behalf of himself/herself/themselves/itself and his/her/their/its successors and assigns, as follows: I Declarant(s) warrant that he/she/they are the owners of the property described on Exhibit A and have the authority to impose this covenant on the property and bind all future owners, successors, and assigns of the Declarant(s). The Declarant(s), future owners, successors, and assigns of the Declarant(s) shall be referred to collectively as "Owners." 2. The Owners of the property described on Exhibit A agree that the property contains a stormwater management facility called a "LID BMP," which was installed to mitigate the stormwater quantity and quality impacts of some or all of the impervious or non-native pervious surfaces on the property. "Low impact development" means development conducted in a way that seeks to minimize or completely prevent alterations to the natural hydrology of the site. Low impact development includes site planning and design to reduce alterations of natural soil and vegetation cover, minimize impervious surfaces, and specific practices that help to replicate natural hydrology such as permeable pavements, green roofs, soil amendments, bioretention systems, and dispersion of runoff. 3. The Owners of the property described on Exhibit A shall maintain the size, placement, and design of the LID BMP as depicted on the approved site plan, Exhibit B, and design details shall be maintained and may not be changed without written approval either from the Engineering Division of the City of Edmonds or through a future development permit from the City of Edmonds. Chemical fertilizers and pesticides shall not be used where LID BMP is located. . All costs of maintenance and repair shall be the sole responsibility of the Owners. 4. The Owners of the property described on Exhibit A shall inspect LID BMPs annually for physical defects. After major storm events, the system shall also be checked to ensure that the overflow system is working properly. The Owners also shall maintain all LID BMP so it functions as designed on a year-round basis. 5. The City of Edmonds is hereby granted by the Owners the right, but not the obligation, to enter upon the property described on Exhibit A at all reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting the private stormwater LID BMP facility. If, as the result of any such inspection the City of Edmonds determines that the LID BMP is in disrepair, requires maintenance or repair, or is otherwise not functioning as provided in the BMP site plan, the City Engineer or his designee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to order the Owners of the property described on Exhibit A to maintain or repair the same. 6. If the City of Edmonds determines that the LID BMP requires maintenance or repair pursuant to Section 5, the City of Edmonds shall provide notice to the Owners of the deadline within which such maintenance or repair must be completed. Said notice may further advise that, should the violator fail to perform required maintenance or make repairs within the established deadline, the work may be done by the city or a contractor designated by the City Engineer and the expense thereof shall be charged to the Owners. The City's officers, agents, employees, and contractors shall have the right, which is hereby granted by the Owners, to enter upon the property described on Exhibit A in order to perform such work. The Owners shall bear the cost of all work performed. 7. The Owners shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of Edmonds, its officers, officials, employees and agents from any and all claims, demands, suits, penalties, losses, damages, judgments, attorneys' fees and/or costs of any kind whatsoever, arising out of or in any way resulting from the approval of the LID BMP, the installation and presence of the LID BMP, and the acts or omissions of the Owners, their officers, employees, contractors, and agents relating to the construction, operation and maintenance of the LID BMPs on the property, except for the City's intentional and willful tortious acts, and waive and release the City of Edmonds from any and all claims for damages and injunctive relief which the Owners may themselves have now or in the future, by reason of the construction, maintenance and operation of said LID BMPs. 8. This covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon the Declarant(s), as the owner of the property described on Exhibit A, and on Declarant's successors and assigns as to such property. Dated: DECLARANT(S): (Signature) (Print Name) (Signature) (Print Name) State of Washington ss. County of Snohomish APPROVED: ClTY OF EDMONDS (Signature) (Print Name) (Title) On this day personally appeared before me I Declarant(s) I to me known to be the individual, or individuals described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they signed the same as his/her/their free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN before me this day of � 201— (Signature) (Name legibly printed or stamped) Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing at: My commission expires Exhibit A EDMONDS SEA VIEW TRS BLK 000 D-01 - LOT 2 CITY OF ED LLA REC UND AFN 201211210469 & SURV REC UND AFN 201210195001 CORR BY NO 201211010497 BEING SWLY PTNLOT 79 SD PLAT Exhibit B Tag, NED 44 x5 x3 'U.." FILTRA I ON TRENCH f lit w ROM 1 90TH, I L SWtj Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section V11, Page 2 Aw Residence 9527 19011 PI SW Edmonds, WA 98020 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL Date: August 2019 2SO 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ENGINiERING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section VII, Page 3 Operation and Maintenance Manual This Operation and Maintenance Manual has been created for the Aw Residence: a 6,050 sf single-family residence project on a 0.32-acre lot. The proposed storm system consists of an infiltration trench that collects runoff from all new impervious areas on -site via roof drains. Included in this Operation and Maintenance Manual is an 11" x 17" grading and drainage plan sheet showing the location of the infiltration system. Please note that this map is generated during the design phase and may not reflect all changes made in permitting and construction. CG Engineering may be contacted for an updated copy of this map once the as -built drawings are completed for the site. The contractor will be responsible for the maintenance and operation of all stormwater structures and BMPs requiring maintenance during construction and, after construction, responsibility will pass to the home owner(s). An aerial image of the project area can be seen on the following page in Figure VII-1. Attached at the end of this section are maintenance sheets taken from the 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (DOE Manual). Guide sheets for source controls are also included that were taken from the DOE Manual. Maintenance sheets are included for the following facilities: Infiltration: The downward movement of water from the surface to the subsoil. See "No. 2" for maintenance. "No. 1 — Detention Ponds" sheets are included as they are referenced by "No. 2". Catch Basins: Concrete structures with steel grates that collect stormwater runoff from the site and act as junctions for storm conveyance pipes. See "No. 5" for maintenance. Trench Drains: Drainage pipes with metal grates crossing driveways to collect stormwater runoff. See "No. 5" for maintenance. Vegetation Management: Landscaping can include grading, soil transfer, vegetation removal, pesticide and fertilizer applications, and watering. Stormwater contaminants include toxic organic compounds, heavy metals, oils, total suspended solids, coliform bacteria, fertilizers, and pesticides. Facilities shall be inspected for defects listed in the following facility sheets. Most maintenance tasks are generally reactionary to a defect being found, rather than a matter of constant upkeep. It is generally expected that few to none of these defects will be present upon the yearly inspection of each facility. The facility sheets list the potential conditions warranting maintenance and the expected result following any maintenance. Several engineer's notes for specific tasks are provided within the facility sheets. Unless otherwise noted on the facility sheets the maintenance tasks should be performed on an "as needed" basis: (a) when the described defect is visible to whomever performs the yearly inspection, or (b) should any defect become apparent between inspections. 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 IEINIGIIN�ERIIINIG ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www,cgengineering.com Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 August 27, 2019 Drainage Report Section V11, Page 4 Figure VII-1. Aerial image of project area (from City of Edmonds GIS Map). 4= CM ENGINEERING 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com NE 1/4, SE 1/4, SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. 0 4m 1ENGINIEERING - a .513'12" E 16" 250 4TH AVE. S., SUrrE 200 x EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 PHONE (425) 778-8500 42 7 . TOP 600 TOE 41.0 Top: D :1 FAX (425) 778-5536 EG: 141.0 14" TOE: isio TOP: is EG: 159.0 \TOP: 142.0 TOE: 154.0 T E: 141.0 ZG: 156.q WINDOWAhELL t�: 142.0 - T'p� T.E o "04 p I x �DO TO W L TOP\ 147.0 TOP: 147..o \TOE: 150.0 TOE: T E: 145.:'o, WE TOP: 141.75 1 4.50 T P: 11551. 0 TOE: 140.0 ist.0 WIN ow V�E_ X f TOE: TOP: 164.0 LL --rOE-159.75 170 67 09, R90F D FOOTING DRAI (SEPARAT 07 1 SEE DETAIL) Z-1- 3. P: So 30" TGH TOP: 141.75 TOP: 14 ENTR�,ISBD TOE'l,47.0 H07 TOE: 139.50 (M IN Fl, A DIER TO SDOO 145 COVERE CK ABOVE) V/ xx/V reT ROOF ERHANG ENTRY. �.o NEWS( MILYR'NDENCE iN TO A N Aw. LO GE: 1,7.3 COV ERF %KABOVE) BS�T FFE: 147.k I MA - IS IARA B SM EDD TENTR77.0 TOP: 141.7S CONNECTRO?F CONN�Cr FOOTING`\ TOE: 139.50 D (MAIN N DRAINS�ONLY 470 AX 1, 44'. 0 J45,0 MAr ENTRY: 158.� < S'X3' INFIIIATIONTRENCH T E: ISED I"3y�) BO TOP:OITIENC , :142. TTOMOFTRENCH: 1 9.00 z 2 =) > Top: 147�.-' 1 7.4� SEE ARCH PLANS TOP: 141*10 TOE: 144.50 2'IMAX HT CONCRETE 1011 BASEMENT RETAINING WA L WAL LOCATIONS z TOE: 140.0 1 t= t EG 138 75 1 r- -, GAR�GE ENTRY: 157. AND HEIGHTS 2 2 45 / I w 01 c TOE: 14 TOP: 1164 a W TOE: 62 F7 TYPE I CATCH BASIN (SIO _j M�.ID ID) R 1 3.0 IEOUT(6"NW):141.0 RENeH D N (W -INTO R09F DRAINS) L[15" SW, OVERFLOW): 41.40 0 0 0 /'_lE FN-(6" NEI: 141.50 4"TRA TOP: 145.0 '14 TOE: 11411 TToE.:pl..`SCol ,�S - - EG: 4 So 157.96 RAIN TOE: 148. TIE FOOTING D EG: 14��O TOP: 150. -,S '2 �'4 6 \5 FLO I DESIGN: ci INTO OVER W PIPE 71 j EG: lSI. T P: 1 5.50 157.96 7AF TOE: 15 0 DRAWN: ATD 0 0 54' 1 EG: 155.0 .0 0 CHECK: JPU RAMPGRADES(a "R / T E: 152.50 ipil�q-� jr / / JOB NO: 18300.20 152.0 o CB RIM�178.34 / DATE: 01/21/19 EG: 154.50 6'co) 7 7 ------ �op: I FND 11 1 55.75 CUT IN TOE: 155.2 EG: 116,0 LT. WIDEN E OUNDTRAV TO I V M :lNj "B'70 T_H PROPOSED ASPHALT DRIVEWAY isjo BS 45-1-2 BSW 147.81 .6 /0 B RI 2.06'-=' �E 1 U.06 sw 151.59 - BS155.53 158. W 157.92 -\ E 1 40 4 08 159/4 .33 rTO 45. TOC 44 7 V,;� 155-45 T C 157.84 L lbl.53 -v :� - - - - - - - - - - - ---- 41 I IE OUT (8"/W): 162.73 MH RIM=l �0.33 157.34 144.54 t 147.23 isi.01 .66 S _iL 15�; /TYPE I CATCH BASIN RIM 9 DR*4IJITIE5 BY OTHERS 49 �l �11 41�\ i .30 _j R�PLACE EXIST CB _F RIM: 158 ' 0±1 (BRING OF-TJFEXkZWG (8" S): 156.o±i UD W/ SOLID NON UTILI�Y POLE) IM LID. ADJUST R 190TH' I'l SW N EC9Z%r ASPH. m GRADING QUANTITIES TOTAL EXCAVATION (CUT) 1120 CU YDS TOTAL PAVING LEGEND EMBANKMENT (FILL) - 850 CUYDS NEW ASPHALT TOTAL 1970 CU YDS OVERLAY EXISTING ASPHALT rTHE -QUANTITIES SHOWN ABOVE ARE FOR THE PERMIT PROCESS 10 N LY. THESE VALUES ARE APPROXIMATE. DO NOT USE FOR NEW CONCRErE BIDD;NG, PAYMENT, OR ESTIMATING PURPOSES. iiv i c�p 1. VESEPARATION IS REQUIRED BETWEEN THE DRY UTILITIES (POWER, GAS, PHONE, CABLE, ETC.) AND S WER, WATER, AND STORM AND S' FROM ANY CITY MAINLINES. EG: EXISTING GRADE 2. SITEWALLSPER RUCTURAL To P: F�N�SH GRADEE ATTOP OF WALL W 3. DMVE AY SLOPST SHALL NOT EXCEED 14% SLOPE. TOE: F N SH GRAD AT BOTTOM OF WAI I 4. CONTRACTORTO VERIFY EXISTING ELEVATIONS PRIOR TO CONNECTING PROPOSED DRAINAGE SYSTEM. S. FOR TRENCH I NG, SEE DETAILVC4.2. 6. TIGHTLINE PIPES UNDER DRIVABLE SURFACES SHALL HAVE 2'MINIMUM COVER. SOILS REPORTS: 7._ N EW/REPLACED IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: 6,050 SF ROOF: 4,000 SF 1. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT - DECK/WALKWAYS (UNCOVERED): 256 SF REPORT NUMBER: 12058 D RIVEWAY (ON -SITE, UNCOVERED): 418 SF PREPARED BY: SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES DRIVEWAY (ROW, UNCOVERED): 309 SF DATED: JANUARY 14,2014 190TH ROAD WIDENING: 264 SF 2. STORMWATER INFILTRATION LETTER SIDEWALK� 803 SF REPORT NUMBER: 110SO19 8. ALL DISTURBED AREAS ON AND OFF -SITE SHALL BE COMPOSTAMENDED PER REQUIREMENTS OF PREPARED BY: NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES BMP TS.13 IN THE STORMWATER MANUAL, VOLUMEV, CHAPTER 5. DATED: MAY 24, 2019 9. ALL FINAL RESTORATION SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE CONTRACTOR, NOT THE CITY OF EDMONDS. s. RIM=l 72.73 M APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION CITY OF EDMONDS DAM - BY, CITY ENGINIXNNG DIVISM z _j CL Ld z 0 04 V) 0 00 _j 0) z (L z cn cn cn - a z - LLI z F�' C) 04 M ul a ol LLI SHEET C3.1 Aw Residence - CG #18300.20 Drainage Report August 27, 2019 Section VII, Page 5 SAMPLE ACTIVITY LOG I F-D-ATE FACILITY MAINTENANCE PERFORMED RESULTS / NOTES 4= CM 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ENCSINkRING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com 4.6 Maintenance Standards for Drainage Facilities The facility -specific maintenance standards contained in this section are intended to be conditions for determining if maintenance actions are required as identified through inspection. They are not intended to be measures of the facility's required condition at all times between inspections. In other words, exceedence of these conditions at any time between inspections and/or maintenance does not automatically constitute a violation of these standards. However, based upon inspection observations, the inspection and maintenance schedules shall be adjusted to minimize the length of time that a facility is in a condition that requires a maintenance action. Table 4.5.2 Maintenance Standards No. 1 — Detention Ponds Maintenance Defect Conditions When Maintenance Is Results Expected When Component Needed Maintenance Is Performed General Trash & Debris Any trash and debris which exceed 1 Trash and debris cleared from site. cubic feet per 1,000 square feet. In general, there should be no visual evidence of dumping. If less than threshold all trash and debris will be removed as part of next scheduled maintenance. Poisonous Any poisonous or nuisance No danger of poisonous vegetation Vegetation and vegetation which may constitute a where maintenance personnel or the noxious weeds hazard to maintenance personnel or public might normally be. (Coordinate the public. with local health department) Any evidence of noxious weeds as Complete eradication of noxious weeds defined by State or local regulations. may not be possible. Compliance with (Apply requirements of adopted IPM State or local eradication policies required policies for the use of herbicides). Contaminants Any evidence of oil, gasoline, NO and Pollution contaminants or other pollutants eeRtaminants (Coordinate removal/cleanup with Or pell[Htants local water quality response agency). Rodent Holes Any evidence of rodent holes if Rodents destroyed and dam or berm facility is acting as a dam or berm, or repaired. (Coordinate with local health any evidence of water piping through department; coordinate with Ecology dam or berm via rodent holes. Dam Safety Office if pond exceeds 10 acre-feet.) Volume V— Runoff Treatment BMPs — December 2014 4-32 No. 1 — Detention Ponds Maintenance Defect Conditions When Maintenance Is Results Expected When Component Needed Maintenance Is Performed Beaver Dams Dam results in change or function of Facility is returned to design function. the facility. (Coordinate trapping of beavers and removal of dams with appropriate permitting agencies) Insects When insects such as wasps and Insects destroyed or removed from site. hornets interfere with maintenance activities. Apply insecticides in compliance with adopted IPM policies Tree Growth Tree growth does not allow Trees do not hinder maintenance and Hazard maintenance access or interferes activities. Harvested trees should be Trees with maintenance activity (i.e., slope recycled into mulch or other beneficial mowing, silt removal, vactoring, or uses (e.g., alders for firewood). equipment movements). If trees are not interfering with access or Remove hazard Trees maintenance, do not remove If dead, diseased, or dying trees are identified (Use a certified Arborist to determine health of tree or removal requirements) Side Slopes Erosion Eroded damage over 2 inches deep Slopes should be stabilized using of Pond where cause of damage is still appropriate erosion control measure(s); present or where there is potential for e.g., rock reinforcement, planting of continued erosion. grass, compaction. Any erosion observed on a If erosion is occurring on compacted compacted berm embankment. berms a licensed civil engineer should be consulted to resolve source of erosion. Storage Area Sediment Accumulated sediment that exceeds Sediment cleaned out to designed pond 10% of the designed pond depth shape and depth; pond reseeded if unless otherwise specified or affects necessary to control erosion. inletting or outletting condition of the facility. Liner (if Liner is visible and has more than Liner repaired or replaced. Liner is fully Applicable) three 1/4-inch holes in it. covered. Pond Berms Settlements Any part of berm which has settled 4 Dike is built back to the design (Dikes) inches lower than the design elevation. elevation. If settlement is apparent, measure berm to determine amount of settlement. Settling can be an indication of more severe problems with the berm or outlet works. A licensed civil engineer should be consulted to determine the source of the settlement. Piping Discernable water flow through pond Piping eliminated. Erosion potential berm. Ongoing erosion with potential resolved. for erosion to continue. (Recommend a Goethechnical engineer be called in to inspect and evaluate condition and recommend repair of condition. Volume V— Runoff Treatment BMPs — December 2014 4-33 No. 1 — Detention Ponds Maintenance Defect Conditions When Maintenance Is Results Expected When Component Needed Maintenance Is Performed Emergency Tree Growth Tree growth on emergency spillways Trees should be removed. If root Overflow/ creates blockage problems and may system is small (base less than 4 Spillway and cause failure of the berm due to inches) the root system may be left in Berms over 4 uncontrolled overtopping. place. Otherwise the roots should be feet in height. Tree growth on berms over 4 feet in removed and the berm restored. A height may lead to piping through the licensed civil engineer should be consulted for proper berm/spillway berm which could lead to failure of restoration. the berm. Piping Discernable water flow through pond Piping eliminated. Erosion potential berm. Ongoing erosion with potential resolved. for erosion to continue. (Recommend a Goethechnical engineer be called in to inspect and evaluate condition and recommend repair of condition. Emergency Overflow/ Emergency Only one layer of rock exists above Rocks and pad depth are restored to Overflow/ native soil in area five square feet or design standards. Spillway Spillway larger, or any exposure of native soil at the top of out flow path of spillway. (Rip -rap on inside slopes need not be replaced.) Erosion See "Side Slopes of Pond" Volume V— Runoff Treatment BMPs — December 2014 4-34 No. 2 — Infiltration Maintenance Defect Conditions When Maintenance Is Results Expected When Component Needed Maintenance Is Performed General Trash & Debris See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). Poisonous/Noxious See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds" Vegetation (No. 1). Contaminants and See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds" Pollution (No. 1). Rodent Holes See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1) Storage Area Sediment Water ponding in infiltration pond after Sediment is removed rainfall ceases and appropriate time and/or facility is cleaned allowed for infiltration. Treatment basins so that infiltration system should infiltrate Water Quality Design Storm works according to Volume within 48 hours, and empty within design. 24 hours after cessation of most rain events. (A percolation test pit or test of facility indicates facility is only working at 90% of its designed capabilities. Test every 2 to 5 years. If two inches or more sediment is present, remove). Filter Bags (if Filled with Sediment and debris fill bag more than 1/2 Filter bag is replaced or applicable) Sediment and full. system is redesigned. Debris Rock Filters Sediment and By visual inspection, little or no water flows Gravel in rock filter is Debris through filter during heavy rain storms. replaced. Side Slopes of Erosion See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds" Pond (No. 1). Emergency Tree Growth See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds" Overflow Spillway (No. 1). and Berms over 4 feet in height. Piping See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). Emergency Rock Missing See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds" Overflow Spillway (No. 1). Erosion See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). Pre -settling Facility or sump 6" or designed sediment trap depth of Sediment is removed. Ponds and Vaults filled with Sediment sediment. I and/or debris I I I Volume V — Runoff Treatment BMPs — December 2014 4-35 No. 5 — Catch Basins Maintenance Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is performed General Trash & Trash or debris which is located immediately No Trash or debris located Debris in front of the catch basin opening or is immediately in front of blocking inletting capacity of the basin by catch basin or on grate more than 100 6. opening. Trash or debris (in the basin) that exceeds 60 No trash or debris in the percent of the sump depth as measured from catch basin. the bottom of basin to invert of the lowest pipe into or out of the basin, but in no case less than a minimum of six inches clearance from the debris surface to the invert of the lowest pipe. Trash or debris in any inlet or outlet pipe Inlet and outlet pipes free blocking more than 1/3 of its height. of trash or debris. Dead animals or vegetation that could No dead animals or generate odors that could cause complaints vegetation present within or dangerous gases (e.g., methane). the catch basin. Sediment Sediment (in the basin) that exceeds 60 No sediment in the catch percent of the sump depth as measured from basin the bottom of basin to invert of the lowest pipe into or out of the basin, but in no case less than a minimum of 6 inches clearance from the sediment surface to the invert of the lowest pipe. Structure Top slab has holes larger than 2 square Top slab is free of holes Damage to inches or cracks wider than 1/4 inch and cracks. Frame and/or Top Slab (intent is to make sure no material is running into basin). Frame not sifting flush on top slab, i.e., Frame is sifting flush on separation of more than 3/4 inch of the frame the riser rings or top slab from the top slab. Frame not securely and firmly attached. attached Fractures or Maintenance person judges that structure is Basin replaced or repaired Cracksin unsound. to design standards. Basin Walls/ Bottom Grout fillet has separated or cracked wider Pipe is regrouted and than 1/2 inch and longer than 1 foot at the secure at basin wall. joint of any inlet/outlet pipe or any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks. Settlement/ If failure of basin has created a safety, Basin replaced or repaired Misalignment function, or design problem. to design standards. Vegetation Vegetation growing across and blocking more No vegetation blocking than 10% of the basin opening. opening to basin. Vegetation growing in irlet/outlet pipe joints No vegetation or root that is more than six inches tall and less than growth present. six inches apart. Contamination See "Detention Ponds" (No. 1). No pollution present. and Pollution I I Volume V— Runoff Treatment BMPs — December 2014 4-38 No. 5 — Catch Basins Maintenance Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is performed Catch Basin Cover Not in Cover is missing or only partially in place. Catch basin cover is Cover Place Any open catch basin requires maintenance. closed Locking Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism opens with Mechanism maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts proper tools. Not Working into frame have less than 1/2 inch of thread. Cover Difficult One maintenance person cannot remove lid Cover can be removed by to Remove after applying normal lifting pressure. one maintenance person. (Intent is keep cover from sealing off access to maintenance.) Ladder Ladder Rungs Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs, not Ladder meets design Unsafe securely attached to basin wall, standards and allows misalignment, rust, cracks, or sharp edges. maintenance person safe access. Metal Grates Grate opening Grate with opening wider than 7/8 inch. Grate opening meets (If Applicable) Unsafe design standards. Trash and Trash and debris that is blocking more than Grate free of trash and Debris 20% of grate surface inletting capacity. debris. Damaged or Grate missing or broken member(s) of the Grate is in place and Missing. grate. meets design standards. No. 6 — is Barriers (e.g., Trash Racks) Maintenance fect Condition When Maintenance is Results Expec hen Components Needed Maintena s Performed a General Trash and Trash or debris that is plugging more B r cleared to design flow Debris n 20% of the openings in the barrier,� apacity. Metal Damaged/ Bars > of s�hape 3 Bars in place with no bends more Missing �entout �morn inches. than 3/4 inch. Bars. Bars are!.miss' r en ' barrier �d Bars in place according to design. missing. .� - '4, arEe loose and rust is causin % Barrier replaced or repaired to —.00'1d�eterio �01. rior, ration to any part of barriiier. design standards. >InI utlet u Deb is barrier missing or not attached to '111t firmly attached to pipe peo"� pipe �er .00'. Volume V — Runoff Treatment BMPs — December 2014 4-39 S406 BNR,%, for Streets/ Highways Applicable BN[Ps: Select de and anti-icers that cause the least erse environmental Nkact. Apply only as needed using mjpAum quantities. WheNacticable use roadway �Kers, such as calcium magnesium acetate, p , sium acetate, op�ilar materials, that cause less adverse Ns'un environ enta*NmDac� am'6ea, and sodium chloride. • Store and transfer;Knd anti -icing materials on an impervious containment pjKn accN�,ance with BMP Sto=e or Transfe (Oiltsi ) ol-Ko'lid Raw WS&ls, BY -Products, or Finished Prodncts in this me. ��u • S d i-icing materials and grit from ,wfep/clean up accumulated de a�n . roads as soon as possible after the road 0%Qace clears. Recommended Additional BMPs Intensify roadway cleaning in early spring to help r articulates from road surfaces. N� 0 Include limits on toxic metals in the specifications for de/and S407 BMPs for Dust Control at Disturbed Land Areas and Unpaved Roadways and Parking Lots Description of Pollutant Sources: Dust can cause air and water pollution problems particularly at demolition sites and in and areas where reduced rainfall exposes soil particles to transport by air. Pollutant Control Approach: Minimize dust generation and apply environmentally friendly and government approved dust suppressant chemicals, if necessary. Applicable Operational BMPs: Sprinkle or wet down soil or dust with water as long as it does not result in a wastewater discharge. Use only local and/or state government approved dust suppressant chemicals such as those listed in Ecology Publication #96-433, Techniques for Dnst Prevention and Suppression. Avoid excessive and repeated applications of dust suppressant chemicals. Time the application of dust suppressants to avoid or minimize their wash -off by rainfall or human activity such as irrigation. Apply storrnwater containment to prevent the conveyance of sediment into storm drains or receiving waters. Volume IV - Source Control BMPs — December 2014 2-15 S408 Ecology prohibits the use of motor oil for dust control, Take care when using lignin derivatives and other high BOD chemicals in areas susceptible to contaminating surface water or ground water. Consult with Ecology and the local permitting authority on discharge permit requirements if the dust suppression process results in a wastewater discharge to the ground, ground water, storm drain, or surface water. Recommended Additional Operational BMPs for Roadways and Other Trafficked Areas: • Consider limiting use of off -road recreational vehicles on dust generating land. • Consider graveling or paving unpaved permanent roads and other trafficked areas at municipal, commercial, and industrial areas. • Consider paving or stabilizing shoulders of paved roads with gravel, vegetation, or local government approved chemicals. • Encourage use of alternate paved routes, if available. • Vacuum sweep fine dirt and skid control materials from paved roads soon after winter weather ends or when needed. • Consider using pre -washed traction sand to reduce dust emissions. Additional Recommended Operational BMPs for Dust Generating Areas: Prepare a dust control plan. Helpful references include: Control of Open Fugitive Dust Sources (EPA-450/3-88-088), and Fugitive Dust Background Document and Technical Information Document for Best Available Control Measures (EPA-450/2-92-004). 0 Limit exposure of soil (dust source) as much as feasible. • Stabilize dust -generating soil by growing and maintaining vegetation, mulching, topsoiling, and/or applying stone, sand, or gravel. • Apply windbreaks in the soil such as trees, board fences, tarp curtains, bales of hay, etc. Dust Control at Manufacturing Areas DNwiption of Pollutant Sources: can 2enera�nsiderable amounts exhaust systems. 1�? powdered materials idustr��alrial handling activities �A�at is typically removed using concrete products and handling dust. Particulate materials that can cause air p2aulioll—include grain dumt�,wdust, coal, gravel, crushed rock, d boiler fly ash. Air emissions cAT14oQ41taminate stormwater. The d5j—ective of this BMP is to reduce the stormwater p_'CN%t4.nts caused by dust generation and control. Volitme IV - Source Control BMPs — December 2014 2-16 a Applicable Operational BMPs: • Eliminate unpermitted wastewater discharges to s rm sewer, ground water, or surface water. • Convey unpermitted discharges to a sanitary ewer if allowed by the local sewer authority, or to other approve reatment. Obtain appropriate state and local pe i s for these discharges. Rec mended Additional Operation BMPs: At commercial and indust ' I facilities, conduct a survey wastewater discharge connections to storm ins and to surface wate s follows: • Conduct ield survey of bu' ings, particularly older buildings, and other indust ' I areas to lo te storm drains from buildings and paved surfaces.Note hereth e join the public storm drain(s). • During non -storm r conditions inspect each storm drain for non- stormwater discha e Record the locations of all non-stormwater discharges. Incl e all itted discharges. • If useful, pre re a map of h area. Show on the map the known , or location of orm sewers, sani sewers, and permitted and unpermi discharges. Aerial p tos may be useful. Check records ' such a iping schematics to identi own side sewer connections uc' and ow these on the map. Consider ing smoke, dye, or chemical an ysis tests to detect connections betw two conveyance systems .g., process water and stormwater). If desi ble, conduct TV inspections of the storm drains and record the otage on videotape. Compare the observed locations of connections *th the information on the map and revise the map accordingly. Note s ect connections that are inconsistent with the field survey. • Identify all connections to storm sewers or to surface wa and take the actions specified above as applicable BMPs. S411 BMPs for Landscaping and Lawn/ Vegetation Management Description of Pollutant Sources: Landscaping can include grading, soil transfer, vegetation removal, pesticide and fertilizer applications, and watering. Stormwater contaminants include toxic organic compounds, heavy metals, oils, total suspended solids, coliform bacteria, fertilizers, and pesticides. Lawn and vegetation management can include control of objectionable weeds, insects, mold, bacteria, and other pests with pesticides. Examples include weed control on golf course lawns, access roads, and utility corridors and during landscaping; sap stain and insect control on lumber and logs; rooftop moss removal; killing nuisance rodents; fungicide application to patio decks, and residential lawn/plant care. It is possible to Volnme IV - Sonrce Control BMPs — December 2014 2-21 release toxic pesticides such as pentachlorophenol, carbarnates, and organometallics to the environment by leaching and dripping from treated parts, container leaks, product misuse, and outside storage of pesticide contaminated materials and equipment. Poor management of the vegetation and poor application of pesticides or fertilizers can cause appreciable stormwater contamination. Pollutant Control Approach: Control of fertilizer and pesticide applications, soil erosion, and site debris to prevent contamination of stormwater. Develop and implement an Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) and use pesticides only as a last resort. Carefully apply pesticides/ herbicides, in accordance with label instructions. Maintain appropriate vegetation, with proper fertilizer application where practicable, to control erosion and the discharge of stormwater pollutants. Where practicable grow plant species appropriate for the site, or adjust the soil properties of the subject site to grow desired plant species. Applicable Operational BMPs for Landscaping: Install engineered soil/landscape systems to improve the infiltration and regulation of stormwater in landscaped areas. Do not dispose of collected vegetation into waterways or storm sewer systems. Recommended Additional Operational BN[Ps for Landscaping: • Conduct mulch -mowing whenever practicable • Dispose of grass clippings, leaves, sticks, or other collected vegetation, by composting, if feasible. • Use mulch or other erosion control measures on soils exposed for more than one week during the dry season or two days during the rainy season. • Store and maintain appropriate oil and chemical spill cleanup materials in readily accessible locations when using oil or other chemicals. Ensure that employees are familiar with proper spill cleanup procedures. • Till fertilizers into the soil rather than dumping or broadcasting onto the surface. Determine the proper fertilizer application rate for the types of soil and vegetation encountered. • Till a topsoil mix or composted organic material into the soil to create a well -mixed transition layer that encourages deeper root systems and drought -resistant plants. • Use manual and/or mechanical methods of vegetation removal rather than applying herbicides, where practical. Volume IV - Source Control BMPs — December 2014 2-22 Applicable Operational BMPs for the Use of Pesticides: Develop and implement an fPM (See section on IPM in Applicable 0 Werational BMPs for Vegetation Manygement and use pesticides only as a last resort. Implement a pesticide -use plan and include at a minimum: a list of selected pesticides and their specific uses; brands, formulations, application methods and quantities to be used; equipment use and maintenance procedures; safety, storage, and disposal methods; and monitoring, record keeping, and public notice procedures. All procedures shall conform to the requirements of Chapter 17.21 RCW and Cha2ter 16-228 WAC (A22endix IV-D R.7 . Choose the least toxic pesticide available that is capable of reducing the infestation to acceptable levels. The pesticide should readily degrade in the environment and/or have properties that strongly bind it to the soil. Conduct any pest control activity at the life stage when the pest is most vulnerable. For example, if it is necessary to use a Bacillus thuringiens application to control tent caterpillars, apply it to the material before the caterpillars cocoon or it will be ineffective. Any method used should be site -specific and not used wholesale over a wide area. • Apply the pesticide according to label directions. Do not apply pesticides in quantities that exceed manufacturer's instructions. • Mix the pesticides and clean the application equipment in an area where accidental spills will not enter surface or ground waters, and will not contaminate the soil. • Store pesticides in enclosed areas or in covered impervious containment. Do not discharge pesticide contaminated stormwater or spills/leaks of pesticides to storm sewers. Do not hose down the paved areas to a storm sewer or conveyance ditch. Store and maintain appropriate spill cleanup materials in a location known to all near the storage area. • Clean up any spilled pesticides. Keep pesticide contaminated waste materials in designated covered and contained areas. • The pesticide application equipment must be capable of immediate shutoff in the event of an emergency. • Spraying pesticides within 100 feet of open waters including wetlands, ponds, and rivers, streams, creeks, sloughs and any drainage ditch or channel that leads to open water may have additional regulatory requirements beyond just following the pesticide product label. Additional requirements may include: • Obtaining a discharge permit from Ecology. • Obtaining a pen -nit from the local jurisdiction. • Using an aquatic labeled pesticide. Volume IV - Source Control BMPs — December 2014 2-23 obtain a publication entitled "Suspended, Canceled, and Restricted Pesticides " which lists all restrictedpesticides and the specific uses that are allowed. Applicable Operational BMPs for Vegetation Management: Use at least an eight -inch "topsoil" layer with at least 8 percent organic matter to provide a sufficient vegetation -growing medium. Amending existing landscapes and turf systems by increasing the percent organic matter and depth of topsoil can substantially improve the permeability of the soil, the disease and drought resistance of the vegetation, and reduce fertilizer demand. This reduces the demand for fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides. Organic matter is the least water-soluble form of nutrients that can be added to the soil. Composted organic matter generally releases only between 2 and 10 percent of its total nitrogen annually, and this release corresponds closely to the plant growth cycle. Return natural plant debris and mulch to the soil, to continue recycling nutrients indefinitely. Select the appropriate turfgrass mixture for the climate and soil type. Certain tall fescues and rye grasses resist insect attack because the symbiotic endophytic fungi found naturally in their tissues repel or kill common leaf and stem -eating lawn insects. However, they do not, repel root -feeding lawn pests such as Crane Fly larvae, and are toxic to ruminants such as cattle and sheep. The fungus causes no known adverse effects to the host plant or to humans. Endophytic grasses are commercially available; use them in areas such as parks or golf courses where grazing does not occur. Local agricultural or gardening resources such as Washington State University Extension office can offer advice on which types of grass are best suited to the area and soil type. Use the following seeding and planting BMPs, or equivalent BMPs to obtain information on grass mixtures, temporary and permanent seeding procedures, maintenance of a recently planted area, and fertilizer application rates: Temporary and Permanent Seeding, MitIching, Plastic Covering, and Sodding as described in Volume 11. • Adjusting the soil properties of the subject site can assist in selection of desired plant species. For example, design a constructed wetland to resist the invasion of reed canary grass by layering specific strata of organic matters (e.g., composted forest product residuals) and creating a mildly acidic pH and carbon -rich soil medium. Consult a soil restoration specialist for site -specific conditions. • Aerate lawns regularly in areas of heavy use where the soil tends to become compacted. Conduct aeration while the grasses in the lawn are growing most vigorously. Remove layers of thatch greater than 1/4-inch deep. Volume IV - Source Control BMPs — December 2014 2-25 Mowing is a stress -creating activity for turfgass. Grass decreases its productivity when mown too short and there is less growth of roots and rhizomes. The turf becomes less tolerant of environmental stresses, more disease prone and more reliant on outside means such as pesticides, fertilizers, and irrigation to remain healthy. Set the mowing height at the highest acceptable level and mow at times and intervals designed to minimize stress on the turf. Generally mowing only 1/3 of the grass blade height will prevent stressing the turf. Irrigation: The depth from which a plant normally extracts water depends on the rooting depth of the plant. Appropriately irrigated lawn grasses normally root in the top 6 to 12 inches of soil; lawns irrigated on a daily basis often root only in the top I inch of soil. Improper irrigation can encourage pest problems, leach nutrients, and make a lawn completely dependent on artificial watering. The amount of water applied depends on the normal rooting depth of the turfgrass species used, the available water holding capacity of the soil, and the efficiency of the irrigation system. Consult with the local water utility, Conservation District, or Cooperative Extension office to help determine optimum irrigation practices. Fertilizer Management: Turfgrass is most responsive to nitrogen fertilization, followed by potassium and phosphorus. Fertilization needs vary by site depending on plant, soil, and climatic conditions. Evaluation of soil nutrient levels through regular testing ensures the best possible efficiency and economy of fertilization. For details on soils testing, contact the local Conservation District, a soils testing professional, or a Washington State University Extension office. Apply fertilizers in amounts appropriate for the target vegetation and at the time of year that minimizes losses to surface and ground waters. Do not fertilize when the soil is dry. Alternatively, do not apply fertilizers within three days prior to predicted rainfall. The longer the period between fertilizer application and either rainfall or irrigation, the less fertilizer runoff occurs. Use slow release fertilizers such as methylene urea, IDBU, or resin coated fertilizers when appropriate, generally in the spring. Use of slow release fertilizers is especially important in areas with sandy or gravelly soils. Time the fertilizer application to periods of maximum plant uptake. Ecology generally recommends application in the fall and spring, although Washington State University turf specialists recommend four fertilizer applications per year. Vohime IV - Source Control BMPs — December 2014 2-26 Treatment BMPs: Install biofiltr-altmt,*�les.Laa4-ftlte-r-.strips - (See Chapter 9, Volume V) to treat roadsidLe ble and .;.�ere cticable and use engineered topsoil's tion . These systems C r m of ro 7"r w necessary to maintain adequa tation. These systems can ..4� 'I improve infiltration and stormwater pollutant con ream of roadside ditches. S417 BMPs for Maintenance of Stormwater Drainage and Treatment Systems Description of Pollutant Sources: Facilities include roadside catch basins on arterials and within residential areas, conveyance systems, detention facilities such as ponds and vaults, oil/water separators, biofilters, settling basins, infiltration systems, and all other types of stormwater treatment systems presented in Volume V. Oil and grease, hydrocarbons, debris, heavy metals, sediments and contaminated water are found in catch basins, oil and water separators, settling basins, etc. Pollutant Control Approach: Provide maintenance and cleaning of debris, sediments, and oil from stormwater collection, conveyance, and treatment systems to obtain proper operation. Applicable Operational BMPs: Maintain storrnwater treatment facilities per the operations and maintenance (O&M) procedures presented in Section 4.6 of Volume V in addition to the following BMPs: • Inspect and clean treatment BMPs, conveyance systems, and catch basins as needed, and determine necessary O&M improvements. • Promptly repair any deterioration threatening the structural integrity of stormwater facilities. These include replacement of clean -out gates, catch basin lids, and rock in emergency spillways. • Ensure adequacy of storm sewer capacities and prevent heavy sediment discharges to the sewer system. • Regularly remove debris and sludge from BMPs used for peak -rate control, treatment, etc. and discharge to a sanitary sewer if approved by the sewer authority, or truck to an appropriate local or state government approved disposal site. • Clean catch basins when the depth of deposits reaches 60 percent of the sump depth as measured from the bottom of basin to the invert of the lowest pipe into or out of the basin. However, in no case should there be less than six inches clearance from the debris surface to the invert of the lowest pipe. Some catch basins (for example, WSDOT Type I L basins) may have as little as 12 inches sediment storage below the invert. These catch basins need frequent inspection and cleaning to prevent scouring. Where these catch basins are part of a stormwater collection and treatment system, the system Volume IV - Source Control BMPs - December 2014 2-37 owner/operator may choose to concentrate maintenance efforts on downstream control devices as part of a systems approach. Clean woody debris in a catch basin as frequently as needed to ensure proper operation of the catchbasin. Post warning signs; "Dump No Waste - Drains to Ground Water," "Streams ... .. Lakes," or emboss on or adjacent to all storm drain inlets where possible. Disposal of sediments and liquids from the catch basins must comply with "Recommendations for Management of Street Wastes" described in Appendix IV-G of this volume. Additional Applicable BY[Ps: Select additional applicable BMPs from this chapter depending on the pollutant sources and activities conducted at the facility. Those BMPs include: • S425 BM.Ps for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control at Industrial Sites • S427 BMPs for Storage of Liquid, Food Waste, or Dangerous Waste Containers • S406 BMPs for Spills of Oil and Hazardous Substances • S4 10 BMPs for Illicit Connections to Storm Drains 0 S430 BMPs for Urban Streets ,BMPs for Manufacturing Activities - Outside Description of Pollutant Sources: Manufacturing pollu sources 50�t include outside process areas, stack emissions, and alKs where manufacturing activity has taken place in the past,4d significant exposed "'Utant materials remain. P 11 _ n Control Approach: Cover an ontain outside manufacturing a 3rev s nd �i tormwater run-on and c amination, where feasible. Applicable 0'*'ation2 • Sweep paved "arei stormwat r. • Alter the acti - y by stormwat . BMP: y, as needed, to prevent contamination of or minimizing the contamination of ApgKable Structural Source Co?h�ol BMPs: Enclose the activity �pee Figure 2.2.6): If possible, enclose ufacturing activity in a ,40"'b'uilding. Cover the activity and connect floor drains to a shktary sewer, if approved by the local sewer authority. Berm or slopN4e floor as needed to prevent drainage of pollutants to outside area'sNCigure 2.2.7) Volume IV - Source Control BMPs — December 2014 2-38 Aw Residence January 18, 2019 9527 1901h Place SW Project #18102 Edmonds, Washington Strobl Design LLC iacob@strobldesign.com bLD20[90k,�' Attention: Jacob Strobl Subject: Design Infiltration Rate — Aw Residence Mr. Strobl: The purpose of this letter is to provide a design infiltration rate for stormwater infiltration for the proposed development of a single-family home on the subject property. Summary We recommend using a design infiltration rate of 2 inches per hour for the proposed infiltration trench. The following sections will provide support for our recommendation. Geologic/Hyd rogeo logic Setting Our referenced geotechnical report describes the geologic and hydrogeologic setting and soils encountered in more detail. For the purposes of the design infiltration rate, EP-2 was close to the proposed infiltration trench. In EP-2 Vashon advance outwash sediments were encountered from the ground surface to the total depth explored (5 feet). The soil log and location of this exploration pit is attached to this report. There was no groundwater seepage observed in any of the explorations performed for our previous geotechnical report. Soil conditions observed were generally dry for the time of year (winter), which is indicative of permeable soils. Also, there were no signs of poncling water or flowing water observed on the subject property. Groundwater conditions are subject to change depending on seasonal weather conditions but based on the permeable native advance outwash soils encountered at depth, we do not anticipate seasonal high groundwater of adverse groundwater conditions affecting infiltration facilities. Receptor Soil Horizon The soils present at the bottom elevation of the proposed infiltration trench consist of medium dense, light brown GRAVEL with fine to coarse sand (GP). These coarse -grained soils are well suited for stormwater infiltration. Based on our previous experience with in -situ infiltration testing of similar soils, measured rates range from approximately 20 to 100 inches per hour. Design Infiltration Rate Due to the coarse -grained soils present at the receptor horizon and the nature of the project (single-family residence) , we recommend using a design infiltration rate of 2 inches per hour. This rate is extremely conservative for the soils present and based on our previous experience, this design infiltration rate incoroporates an approximate factor of safety of 10 to 50 (Correction Factor = 0.1 to 0.02). It should also be noted that 2 inches per hour was the design infiltration rate used for infiltration facility design on the adjacent property to the north (Mione Short Plat), which South Fork Geosciences worked on as well. SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PLLC '4g1j, PO BOX 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFOPSFGEO.COM JAN 3 0 2019 BUILDING Aw Residence January 18, 2019 9527 1901h Place SW Project #18102 Edmonds, Washington Civil Engineering Plan Review We have reviewed referenced civil engineering plans (CG Engineering, January 17, 2019) and EP-2 was located near the proposed infiltration trench. The respective locations are shown on the attached Annotated Grading and Drainage Plan. Based on our recent correspondence with the civil engineer, it is our understanding that the infiltration trench was sized based on a design infiltration rate of 2 inches per hour. Also, upon review of the plans, we noted that the infiltration trench has an overflow to the storm system. Based on the coarse -grained receptor soils present and the geologic and topographic setting, we do not think the infiltration trench will ever overflow, but if it did, it would not adversely impact the subject or adjacent properties. As such, it is our opinion that the overflow feature of the design makes constant head infiltration testing and/or groundwater mounding analysis onerous and wasteful. Closure We have enjoyed working with you and we are confident that this letter will aid in the design and permijU ��our project. If there are any questions, please feel free to contact us. Since 9- 01 I b-2A I Andrew L. Glandon Anulluvv L %J1C111UU1 I, LL%J Engineering Geologist / Owner South Fork Geosciences, PLLC Attachments: Annotated Grading and Drainage Plan Exploration Pit Log (EP-2) References: "Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Geotechnical Engineering Report, Johnson Residence, Parcel # 00434600007901, 9527 190th Place SW, Edmonds, Washington", South Fork Geosciences, Project #12058, January 14, 2014 "Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Part of the Edmonds West Quadrangles, Washington", Minard, James P., 1983, United States Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Field Studies, Map MF-1541, Scale 1:24,000 "Aw Residence, 9527 1901h PI SW, Edmonds, WA 98020, Sheets C1.1, C2.1, C2.2, C3.1, C3.2, C4.1 & C4.2", CG Engineering, Job #18300.20, January 17, 2019 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PLLC Page 2 PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFO@SFGEO.COM Aw Residence January 18, 2019 9527 1901h Place SW Project #18102 Edmonds, Washington I T- EP-2 MAm I- A N oil. 1A 6 A A0 \0 Infiltration Trenc - 4 Location North is up T -4- Linear scale is valid 1901H PL SW Source: Grading and Drainage Plan CG Engineering Annotated Grading and Drainage Plan SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PLLC Page 3 PO BOx 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFOCO)SFGEO.COM .. Mki H Aw Residence January 18, 2019 9527 1901h Place SW Project #18102 Edmonds, Washington Johnson Residence Exploration 9527 1 901h Place SW, Edmonds, WA Pit Log Date: 1-1-2014 Depth .. . r- r% f% 0 Vashon Advance Outwash loose to medium dense, damp, brawn to reddish brown, fine SAND with gravel and sift 2 _I I medium dense, damp, light brown GRAVEL I Iwith fine to coarse sand (GP) 4 Total Depth = 5 feet No seepage observed 6 No caving observed 0-2ft weathered 8 10 12 14 The subsWace cm&--ons shown on ths field log represent oa obsmaWns at the tum and bcatm of excavaton, ffrdfied by geologc intarwelabon andludgawl, and wtwe noted, by angmaenng ana4sls and laboratory testng. The oordbons shown may not be rWesenfatwe ofconcibons at ottw &Tm- South FM Geosuences YWI not be responsible for use or interprotaf-un by oUffs of inforaoton presented on these logs. SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 Project 9 12058 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 SOUTH FORK GEosciENCES, PLLC PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 425-890-4858 1 INFO@SFGEO.COM Page 4 0 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 (425) 831-2023 AGLANDON@COMCAST.NET January 14, 2014 Project #: 12058 BLVWIq-oII(P Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Geotechnical Engineering Report Johnson Residence Parcel # 00434600007901 9527 1901h Place SW Edmonds, Washington Introduction The purpose of this study was to gain subsurface information to be utilized in the design and construction of a single-family residence on the subject property. The proposed construction will consist of grading, foundation subgrade preparation, home construction, utility installation, driveway construction, and retaining wall construction. Authorization to proceed with this study was provided by Mr. Chris Johnson via e-mail on December 10, 2013. This report was prepared for Mr. Johnson and his agents for specific use in support of this project. The location of the subject property is shown in the attached Vicinity Map. An excerptof the proposed site plan prepared by Architects Northwest and the approximate locations of the subsurface explorations logged for this study are shown on the attached Site and Exploration Plan. Site Conditions The subject property was located at 9527 1 q0th Place SW in Edmonds, Washington. The property was irregularly shaped and was approximately 150 feet in the east -west direction and ranged from approximately 90 to 100 feet in the north -south direction. Based on information from the Snohomish County Assessor website, the property was 0.32 acres in size. The property sloped gently to moderately from the east down to the west. Based on a review of the site survey, the slope on the west portion of the property was on the order of 5 to 10 percent, and some of the areas to the east had slopes up to approximately 50 percent. Based on our field observations, some of the steeper areas were associated with past grading. Based on the surveyed elevations, there is approximately 32 feet of total relief on the property. The property was bordered on the west by Olympic View Drive, to the south by I q0th Place SW, and to the north and east by existing residential properties. The property was marked with survey stakes at key points to delineate the property. The western portion of the property had been cleared and was covered with grass. Near the southern and central (E-W) portion of the lot, there was an area that appeared to have been filled to provikvehicle 177,, 7, SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045,(425) 831 0 2U19 BUILDING access to the property. An area near the north property line had not been cleared and was covered with typical second -growth forest vegetation. Vegetation in the forested portion of the property consisted of Douglas Fir and maple trees with underbrush consisting of blackberry vines and sallal. We did not observe any signs of accelerated soil erosion or soil movement during our site reconnaissance. Subsurface Conditions Subsurface conditions on the property were inferred from a visual reconnaissance of the property, a review of the referenced geologic map (Minard, 1983) and seven exploration pits excavated with a subcontracted track -mounted excavator provided by Northwest Excavating and Trucking Co., Inc. The explorations were logged by the undersigned licensed engineering geologist and were immediately backfilled. The approximate locations of the subsurface explorations are shown in the Site and Exploration Plan and the exploration logs are attached to this report. Our interpretation of the native soils found at depth as Vashon advance outwash is in agreement with the referenced geologic map. The detection of fill soils on the property is due to the site specific nature of our study. Stratigraphy Fill Soils Fill soils were encountered in all of the exploration pits perfon-ned for this study except for EP-2, which was located in an area that had not been cleared. The fill soils in the other exploration pits ranged in depth from the ground surface to 3.5 to 9 feet below the ground surface. As shown in the attached logs, the fill soils varied in grain size distribution and in relative density. The fill soils included construction rubble which primarily consisted of asphalt and concrete pieces, with small amounts of other manmade material (garbage). We presume that the fill soils were placed to provide better vehicle access to the property and possibly in association with filling a past topographic low. Due to their inconsistency, generally low relative density, and lack of knowledge of the means and methods used to place and compact the fill soils, proposed structures should not be founded on existing fill soils without mitigation measures, which are set forth in later sections of this report. Vashon Advance Outwash Vashon advance outwash sediments were encountered in all of the exploration pits logged for this study. In EP-2 these sediments were encountered from the ground surface to the total depth explored (5 feet). In the other exploration pits, the advance outwash sediments were encountered underlying the fill soils at a depth ranging from 3.5 to 9 feet below the ground surface to the maximum depth of each exploration pit. The advance outwash sediments generally consisted of medium dense, sand with gravel or gravel with sand. Vashon advance outwash sediments are alluvial and fluvial sediments that were deposited by meltwater streams and channels from the advancing Vashon glacial ice sheet. As the glacial ice advanced, the advance outwash sediments were overridden and consolidated by the glacial ice. As such, the advance outwash sediments are typically dense, relatively permeable, and moisture insensitive due to the past glacial 2 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045,(425) 831-2023 consolidation and the small amount of silt and clay present. Due to their relatively coarse grain size distribution, the advance outwash sediments are moderately resistant to erosion, except when subjected to concentrated water flows. Hydrology There was no groundwater seepage observed in any of the explorations performed for this study. Soil conditions observed were generally dry for the time of year, which is indicative of permeable soils. Also, there were no signs of ponding water or flowing water observed. Groundwater conditions are subject to change depending on seasonal weather conditions, but based on the permeable advance outwash soils encountered at depth, we do not anticipate encountering adverse groundwater conditions during construction. Geologic Hazards The following discussion of potential geologic hazards is based on the visual reconnaissance of the site, the subsurface explorations, reviews of aerial photographs and regional topographic and geologic maps of the area, and review of the applicable City of Edmonds Municipal Code and maps that are available online. Based on our comparison of the City of Edmonds Municipal Code to the topographic and geologic features of the subject property, the property does not fulfill the criteria for an erosion hazard area, landslide hazard area, or a seismic hazard area. The following two sections of this report will set forth some basic erosion control best management practices for use in construction and will address general seismic risks and design parameters associated with a seismic event. Erosion Concerns Though special mitigations are not necessary, a temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) plan should be created and implemented during site construction. It is our opinion that implementation of a relatively basic erosion control plan will prevent off site sediment transport. The proper use of "best management practices" (BMPs) should be utilized during earthwork activities to reduce the potential for erosion and sediment transport off of the property. The following is a partial list of BMPs that should be implemented: Phasing and scheduling earth work activities during dry conditions Rock construction entrances Straw mulch Plastic sheeting Silt fence Keeping exposed soils and stockpiles covered when not actively worked Establish temporary/permanent vegetation as soon as possible after foundation and utility installation 3 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 127 5, NORTH BEND, WA 98045, (425) 831-2023 Implementation of a TESC plan will likely be a requirement of the clearing and grading or building permit. South Fork Geosciences is available to design the TESC plan and to provide any required inspections during construction. Seismic Concerns Generally, there are four types of potential geologic hazards associated with large seismic events: 1) ground rupture; 2) seismically induced landslides; 3) liquefaction; and 4) ground motion. The potential for each of these to impact the site is discussed below. Ground Rupture Most large earthquakes in the Puget Sound area are sub -crustal events with epicenters ranging from 50 to 70 kilometers in depth. The subject property is approximately 5 to 6 miles south of the Southern Whidbey Island Fault Zone (SWIFZ). Though the subject property is near the SWIFZ, to our knowledge, there are no signs of past ground rupture in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. Based on the location of the subject property to the south of the known fault zone and the lack of sufficient information to infer a recurrence interval for earthquakes on the SWIFZ (Johnson, et al., 2004), it is our opinion that the probability of ground surface rupture impacting the subject property is low, and no mitigations are necessary. Seismically Induced Landslides Due the topography and absence of steep slopes on the subject property, it is our opinion that the potential for seismically induced slope failures on the site is low and no mitigations are necessary. Liquefaction Liquefaction is a condition where loose, saturated, fine sandy soils lose their shear strength due to rapid pore pressure build-up when subjected to high intensity cyclic loads, such as occur during earthquakes. Due to the medium dense, well -graded, native soils encountered in the subsurface explorations and the absence of adverse ground water conditions, the liquefaction potential of this site is very low, and no mitigations are necessary. Ground Motion Seismic hazards that will affect the structure would likely be due to the intensity and duration of the ground shaking. The structural design of the project should be consistent with 2009 International Building Code (2009 IBC) guidelines (Section 1613). Based on the results of our subsurface explorations and our estimation of soil properties at depth utilizing available geologic data, Site Class "C" as defined by Table 1613.5.2 of the IBC may be used for the design of the project. Geotechnical Engineering Recommendations Our exploration indicates that, from a geotechnical standpoint, the subject property is suitable for the proposed development, provided the risks discussed are accepted and the recommendations 4 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045,(425) 831-2023 contained herein are properly followed. Though the surficial fill soils encountered will need to be mitigated during site grading, the underlying medium dense, Vashon advance outwash sediments will be capable of providing support for the proposed structure or structural fill soil. To aid in the design of the project, the following general recommendations for site development are provided. South Fork Geosciences is available for further consultation with respect to specific design items, if needed. Site Preparation and Site Grading It is likely that structural fill soils will be required to establish grades for the project. Any fill soil placed beneath a foundation, retaining wall, or driveway/parking area must be constructed as a structural fill. In areas that will provide structural support, any existing fill soils or loose soils should be removed and replaced with structural fill as described below, or the fill soils should be mitigated as described in later sections for specific applications. Structural fill is defined as non -organic soil, placed in maximum 8-inch loose lifts, with each lift being compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density, using the modified Proctor test (ASTM: D1557) as the standard. Prior to placing any structural fill the exposed soils must either be undisturbed or be compacted to a dense, non -yielding condition and be approved for structural fill placement. In the case of utility trench filling, the backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with the applicable City of Edmonds or utility franchise standards. If fill soil will be imported to the site, it should be free of organics and other deleterious material. Mineral soils with more than 5 percent fines are considered to be moisture sensitive. The use of moisture sensitive soils should be confined to dry weather conditions. The moisture condition of the imported soil should be within a few percent of the optimum moisture content of the soil. Soils that are too dry or too wet of the optimum moisture content to achieve suitable compaction will need to be moisture conditioned prior to final compaction. The existing fill soils should be considered moisture sensitive. The native, Vashon advance outwash sediments are not moisture sensitive, but due to the dry soil conditions observed, may require the addition of water to be placed as structural fill. In the case that moisture sensitive soils are used in structural fills, this type of work should be limited to the summer months and good weather conditions. Placement and compaction of the structural fill should be monitored by a competent field technician. In situ density testing should be performed during fill placement to verify proper compaction of the fill soil. A sample of the planned structural fill soil will need to be available at least 48 hours prior to fill placement for laboratory analysis. Temporary cut slopes may be necessary to allow the installation of the foundations and for utility installation. Temporary cut slopes should be limited to 1 H: IV (Horizontal: Vertical) in the existing fill soils and 1/2H: IV in the Vashon advance outwash sediments. Stability of the cut slopes is the responsibility of the on -site contractor and a safe work environment should be maintained at all times. A trench shield or trench box should be used to install all utilities over 4 feet in depth or the sides of trenches and excavations should be sloped back per OSHAAVISHA standards. SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045, (425) 831-2023 Foundations Spread footings may be used for building support when founded on medium dense native soils, approved structural fill soils, or rock trenches. To limit differential settlements between footings that bear on both structural fill and medium dense to dense native soils, we recommend that an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be utilized for design purposes, including both dead and live loads. An increase of one-third may be used for short-term wind or seismic loading. Perimeter footings should be buried at least 18 inches into the surrounding soil for frost protection; interior footings require only 12 inches burial. However, all footings must penetrate to the prescribed bearing stratum, and no footing should be founded in or above loose, organic, or existing fill soils. It should be noted that the area bounded by lines extending downward at I H: IV from any footing must not intersect another footing or intersect a filled area that has not been compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D 1557. In addition, a I.5H: IV line extending down from any footing must not daylight because sloughing or raveling may eventually undermine the footing. Thus, footings should not be placed near the edge of steps or near vertical cuts in the bearing soils. Anticipated settlements of footings founded on the medium dense native soils or approved rock trenches should be less than 1 inch. Loose or disturbed surface soils, excessive moisture present or poor foundation subgrade preparation could result in larger settlements. South Fork Geosciences should perform a foundation bearing evaluation prior to concrete placement to verify that the design bearing capacity of the soil has been attained. A foundation bearing evaluation will likely be required by the City of Edmonds Building Department as a condition of the building permit. Perimeter footing drains should be provided as discussed under the section titled Drainage Considerations. Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the foundation and the supporting soils, and/or by passive earth pressure acting on the buried portions of the foundations. The spread footings must be backfilled. with structural fill compacted to a dense, non -yielding condition to achieve the passive resistance provided below. The structural fill must extend horizontally outward from the embedded portion of the foundation a distance equal to at least three times the embedment depth over which the passive resistance is applied. We recommend the following design parameters. • Passive equivalent fluid = 300 pcf • Coefficient of friction = 0.30 The above values are allowable and include a factor of safety of at least 1.5. Mitigation of Existing Fill Soils The existing fill soils are not suitable for structural support without mitigation measures. There are several options for mitigating the fill soils, but based on our observations and discussion with Mr. Johnson while onsite during the subsurface exploration, it appears that the basement floor elevation will be on native soils that are adequate for support of conventional spread footings. 6 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045,(425) 831-2023 The current plans provided by Architects Northwest indicated a step up to a structural/crawlspace type floor on the eastern portion of the proposed house. Since fill soils were encountered in the eastern portion of the building pad, we recommend constructing a full basement under the entire house, rather than having to extend crawlspace footings down to bearing soils, or reworking the existing fill soils. We explained this to Mr. Johnson while we were onsite and he said that the crawlspace area was originally designed as a full basement and a change was made to the home design to reduce cost. Due to the fill soils being present here, Mr. Johnson said that they will likely revert to the full basement design to reduce the amount of fill soil mitigation. Since the home will likely be built with a full basement, we presume that all spread footings will be constructed on medium dense, Vashon advance outwash soils. In the event that native soils are not encountered at the design foundation elevation, the footings will need to be extended down to native soils, or the fill soil will need to be removed and replaced with structural fill as explained in the preceding section titled Site Preparation and Site Grading. Lateral Earth Pressure Cast -in -place, concrete foundation walls or retaining walls should be designed to resist "at -rest" lateral soil pressure conditions if the concrete walls will not be free to yield laterally at the top. Restrained walls should be designed to resist an "at -rest" equivalent fluid pressure of 55 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). Concrete walls that are free to yield laterally at the top of the wall may be designed using an active soil pressure of 35 pcf. Surcharges from sloping backfill conditions or adjacent structural loads should be added to the above lateral soil pressures. Full height drainage of foundation walls will need to be installed to prevent hydrostatic pressures from acting on the walls. Rockeries The site plan provided by Architects Northwest indicates that rockeries will be utilized to face the cut slopes around the north and east sides of the building envelope. Rockeries should be limited to a maximum height of 8 feet when facing a native cut, and to 4 feet in height when facing a cut into fill soils. All rockeries should be built by experienced contractors and should be built in accordance with the Associated Rockery Contractors standards of practice. The City of Edmonds may require a detail and geotechnical engineering recommendation for rockeries. South Fork Geosciences can provide more extensive design recommendation, if required. Other Retaining Walls Rockeries, segmental block walls, or cast -in -place concrete walls may be used for grade separation between the upper and lower driveways. Segmental block walls should be limited to 30 inches in height without specific design of mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) fill and wall drainage. South Fork Geosciences is available to design the segmental block wall/MSE fill. Cast -in -place concrete 7 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045,(425) 831-2023 walls should be designed by a structural engineer using the soil bearing capacity, lateral resistance, and lateral earth pressure values in the preceding sections. Floor Support We anticipate that the single-family home built on the subject property will utilize slab -on -grade floors. Slab -on -grade concrete floors should be cast atop a prepared subgrade of structural fill soil compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. A capillary break with a minimum thickness of 4 inches should be placed atop the prepared subgrade. The capillary break material should be a gap graded material consisting of pea gravel, 3/4-inch washed drain rock, or clean crushed rock with less than 5 percent fines (material passing the No.200 sieve). The capillary break will reduce the potential for moisture wicking through the floor slab. A 10-mil thick plastic vapor barrier should also be placed atop the capillary break material. All concrete placement should follow the guidelines set forth by the American Concrete Institute (ACI). Driveway Support Our subsurface explorations indicate that there are fill soils of significant depth located under the proposed driveways. Full removal and replacement of the existing fill soils with structural fill would likely be very expensive and earthwork intensive. For driveway support, the whole fill column does not need to be removed and replaced, provided that there is some tolerance for future settlement. We recommend that a 2 foot thick pad of structural fill should be placed over the existing fill in the area that the driveway is to be constructed. The existing fill subgrade should be compacted to a firm and unyielding condition prior to placing the structural fill pad. The structural fill pad should extend horizontally beyond the area to be paved by 2 feet. Though the structural fill pad will not entirely eliminate the potential for settlement, it will reduce the potential for differential settlement, and as a result will reduce the potential for pavement cracking. We also recommend that the driveway should be paved with asphalt, since asphalt is somewhat flexible and can tolerate minor amounts of settlement. Asphalt can also be repaired or overlain more easily than concrete in the event that it becomes damaged due to cracking. Drainage Considerations A perimeter foundation drain should be established to protect the floor slab and internal crawlspace areas from ground water intrusion. The level of the foundation drain should be set at, or slightly below, the base of the footing elevation. The drain should consist of 4-inch diameter, rigid, perforated, PVC drain pipe and should be set to allow for gravity discharge. The drainpipe should be surrounded by a minimum of 6 inches of pea gravel or washed drain rock. Roof drains should not tie into the footing drain but should be collected in a separate, tightline drain. The drain lines should be set to discharge via gravity to a dispersion or infiltration area or to an approved storinwater drainage. In addition, all footing stem walls that enclose conditioned space should be lined with a minimum, 12-inch-thick, washed gravel blanket provided over the height of the wall that ties into the footing 8 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045,(425) 831-2023 drain. The washed gravel blanket should be ended one foot below the desired ground surface and the top of the gravel should be covered with filter fabric. The remaining one foot should be filled with compacted soil to reduce the amount of surface water entering the wall and footing drain system. Site Drainage We have not reviewed any plans for stormwater disposal at this time. The native, Vashon advance outwash sediments are well suited for infiltration methods due to their relatively coarse grain size distribution and lack of fine sediments. With the relatively large lot size and the relatively flat area on the western portion of the property, we presume that infiltration methods such as a series of drywells or infiltration trenches in the native sediments will be used to dispose of stormwater generated from the site. Based on our visual assessment of the native Vashon advance outwash soils, we believe that the soil would be classified as "sand" in the USDA Soil Textural Triangle. We obtained a grab sample from EP-2 for grain size analysis testing to verify this classification, if required for infiltration design. South Fork Geosciences is available for additional consultation with respect to site drainage, if necessary. 9 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045, (425) 831-2023 Conclusion Our findings and recommendations provided in this report were prepared in accordance with generally accepted principles of engineering geology and geotechnical engineering as practiced in the Puget Sound area at the time this report was submitted. We make no other warranty, either expressed or implied. Our observations, findings, and opinions are a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner. We are available to provide additional design recommendations and consultation throughout the development of this project. We should be contacted to review architectural and grading plans and to provide additional design team support, if needed. We are also available to provide construction monitoring services during the development of the project for earthwork quality control and to help ensure that the recommendations in this report are properly implemented. We have enjoyed working with you and we are confident that this report will aid in the design of your project. If there are any questions, please contact us at (425) 831-2023. Sincerely, Andrew L. Glandon, LEG, CPESC Geologist / Owner South Fork Geosciences Attachments: Vicinity Map Site and Exploration Plan Approximate Location of Fill Soils Exploration Pit Logs References: FA Jamey S. Battermann, PE Geotechnical Engineer Minard, James P., "Geologic map of the Edmonds East and Part of the Edmonds West Quadrangles, Washington" U. S. Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF- 154 1, scale 1:24,000,1983 10 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045,(425) 831-2023 Edmonds Municipal Code http://www.edmondswa.gov/govemment/rules-and-regulations.html City of Edmonds Maps http://www.edmondswa.gov/services/maps-a-gis-data/service�-maps-maps.html United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service, http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Snohomish County Assessor Property Summary https://www.snoco.org�proi)tax/(ujcvtcbfeggvolbi)gOq5xm45)/result.aspx USGS Quaternary Faults Web Mapping Application http://earthquake.usjzs.gov/hazards/qfaults/map/ Johnson, S.Y., Blakely, R.J., Brocher, T.M., Sherrod, B.L., Kelsey, H.M., and Lidke, D.J., compilers, 2004, Fault number 572, Southern Whidbey Island fault zone, in Quaternary fault and fold database of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey website, http://earthquakes.us,izs.govihazards/qfaults, accessed 01/10/2014 03:28 PM I I SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PO Box 1275, NORTH BEND, WA 98045,(425) 831-2023 -will' "ji 2. ti Tl; *4 all 7 t t7l ` IN TT. zi t Z I= ` Ij 4Z IAAVHUI' -NN J1111 .�Ii fill =!I`I —Oak 7 % 01 ILI j ;IJ I Q'I I tj.,NNN,Av 'r IN A S INN% J u F e jo. N, .40' jo U) T 40 cu 0 cl, 41 6 IJ 0- 40# (n III F_ u LO Ld Z 'I z w 0 o w (y) �: N 0 C)_ 0 0 X Z @ 0 W Z LL x (Y) 0 0 00 a ED z LO <� o 0 o U) 0- z 00 U-) C) C\l 0 0 U) _0 C: 0 C -o Z LLJ 2z� >N C 01) C\l LO 0') C) 70 (n (D 0 0 FNot to Scale e,17F— FL/,::,NN PCA= - I- - - . 6 -20 Source: Architects Northwest, Johnson Residence Site Plan, 4-10-13 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 (425) 831-2023 AGLANDONCaCOMCAST. NET Site and Exploration Plan Johnson Residence, 9527 1 901h PI SE, Edmonds, WA Locations are approximate Project #12058 IA4 a' 2* E V." % EP-5 Not to Scale 51 EP-3 Lu kJ 431 W. or EP-1 110TH P� SV� 151 -FE FILA%N Source: Architects Northwest, Johnson Residence Site Plan, 4-10-13 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES Locations are approximate PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 (425) 83 1-2023 AGLANDON(gCOMCAST.NET 1; 13 Approximate Location of Fill Soils Johnson Residence, 9527 1 901h PI SE, Edmonds, WA Project #12058 Johnson Residence 9527 1 q0th Place SW, Edmonds, WA Date: 1-1-2014 Depth Number: EP-1 (ft) 0 Fill loose, damp, brown to light brown, fine X* medium SAND, trace gravel, roots.p4sent (SP) 2 loose to medium dense, �Idmp, light brown, fine -SAND (SP) 4 � Iloose .16medium dense, damp, brown to light Pr-6`wn, fine SAND with silt (SP-SM) LI 8 101 Vashon Advance Outwash medium dense, damp, light brown, fine to coarse SAND with gravel (SW) Total Depth = 10 feet No seepage observed No caving observed 12 Measured from back of pit, surface slopes down to west (dashed line = ground surface) 14 Exploration Pit Log The subsurface conditions shown on this field log represent our observations at the time and location of excavation, modified by geologic interpretation andjudgment, and where noted, by engineering analysis and laboratory testing. The conditions shown may not be representative of conditions at other times. South Fork Geosciences will not be responsible for use or interpretation by others of information presented on these logs. SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 Project # 12058 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 Johnson Residence 9527 1 q0th Place SW, Edmonds, WA Date: 1-1-2014 Depth Number: EP-2 (ft) 0 Vashon Advance Outwash loose to medium dense, damp, brown to reddish brown, fine SAND with gravel and silt -SM, 2 medium dense, damp, light brown GRAVEL with fine to coarse sand (GP) .'SP 4 Total Depth = 5 feet No seepage observed 6 No caving observed 0-2ft weathered 8 10 M 14 Exploration Pit Log IThe subsurface conditions shown on this field log represent our observations at the time and location of excavation, modified by geologic interpretation I andjudgment, and where noted, by engineering analysis and laboratory testing. The conditions shown may not be representative of conditions at other times. South Fork Geosciences will not be responsible for use or interpretation by others of information presented on these logs. I Project # 12058 SoLffH FoRK GEOSCIENCES PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 4 Johnson Residence 9527 1 q0th Place SW, Edmonds, WA Date: 1-1-2014 Depth Number: EP-3 (ft) 0 Forest Duff (0-6") Fill medium dense, damp, light brow(i-g�ay, fine to medium SAND with gravel �nd"s**ilt, roots 2 present (SP-SM) 4 6 Vashon Advance Outwash medium dense, damp, light brown, fine to medium SAND with gravel, trace silt (SP) Total Depth = 9 feet No seepage observed 10 Minor caving in low cohesion soils Measured from back of pit, surface slopes down to NW (dashed line = ground surface) 12 14 Exploration Pit Log The subsurface conditions shown on this field log represent our observations at the time and location of excavation, modified by geologic interpretation andjudgment, and where noted, by engineering analysis and laboratory testing. The conditions shown may not be representative of conditions at other times. South Fork Geosciences will not be responsible for use or interpretation by others of information presented on these logs. SOLffH FORK GF-osciENcF-s PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 Project # 12058 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 a Johnson Residence 9527 1 q0th Place SW, Edmonds, WA Date: 1-1-2014 Depth Iffi Number: EP-4 0 Fill loose to medium dense, damp, gray to brown silty SAND with gravel and construction debris (asphalt and concrete rubble) (SM) 2 4 6 8 1 Vashon Advance Outwash loose to medium dense, damp, light brown, fine to medium SAND with gravel, trace silt (SP) Total Depth = 9 feet lo— No seepage observed Minor caving in fill soils Difficult digging due to rubble in fill soils Fill soils 0-8 feet 12-1 14 Exploration Pit Log IThe subsurface conditions shown on this field log represent our observations at the time and location of excavation, modified by geologic interpretation I and judgment, and where noted, by engineering analysis and laboratory testing. The conditions shown may not be representative of conditions at other times. South Fork Geosciences will not be responsible for use or interpretation by others of information presented on these logs. I Project # 12058 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 a Johnson Residence 9527 1 q0th Place SW, Edmonds, WA Date: 1-1-2014 Depth Iffi Number: EP-5 0 Fill loose to medium dense, damp, gray to brown silty SAND with gravel and construction debris (asphalt and concrete rubble) (SM) 2 4 1 Vashon Advance Outwash loose to medium dense, dry, light brown, fine to medium SAND with gravel, trace silt (SP) 6 Total Depth = 6 feet No seepage observed No caving observed Contact between fill and outwash ranges from 8 3 to 4 feet below ground surface -deeper to south 10 12 14 Exploration Pit Log IThe subsurface conditions shown on this field log represent our observations at the time and location of excavation, modified by geologic interpretation I and judgment, and where noted, by engineering analysis and laboratory testing. The conditions shown may not be representative of conditions at other times. South Fork Geosciences will not be responsible for use or interpretation by others of information presented on these logs. I Project # 12058 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 0 Johnson Residence 9527 1 q0th Place SW, Edmonds, WA Date: 1-1-2014 Depth Iftl Number: EP-6 0 Fill loose to medium dense, dry to damp, I.Vd brown, silty fine to medium SAND with gravel, occasional debris (SM) 6 8 _ Vashon Advance Outwash loose to medium dense, dry to damp, brown, fine to medium SAND with gravel and silt 10 (SP-SM) -medium dense@ 10 feet Total Depth = 11 feet No seepage observed 12 Very minor caving observed Measured from back of pit, surface slopes down to west (dashed line = ground surface) 14 Exploration Pit Log IThe subsurface conditions shown on this field log represent our observations at the time and location of excavation, modified by geologic interpretation andjudgment, and where noted, by engineering analysis and laboratory testing. The conditions shown may not be representative of conditions at other times. South Fork Geosclances will not be responsible for use or interpretation by others of information presented on these logs. I Project # 12058 SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES PO Box 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 a Johnson Residence 9527 1 q0th Place SW, Edmonds, WA Date: 1-1-2014 Depth Number: EP-7 (ft) 0 Fill loose to medium dense, damp, light brown, silty SAND with gravel, roots present to t 6ft (SM) 4 6 Vashon Advance Outwash medium dense, damp, light brown -gray, fine to medium SAND with gravel and silt (SP-SM) 8 12 14 Total Depth = 9.5 feet No seepage observed No caving observed Exploration Pit Log The subsurface conditions shown an this field log represent our observations at the time and location of excavation, modified by geologic interpretation andjudgment, and where noted, by engineering analysis and laboratory testing. The conditions shown may not be representative of conditions at other times. South Fork Geosciences will not be responsible for use or interpretation by others of information presented on these logs. SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES PO BOX 1275 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 Project # 12058 PHONE: (425) 831-2023 civil & structural CENGINIECERING engineering & planning July 17, 2019 Robert English —City Engineer City of Edmonds 121 5th Avenue N, 2nd Floor Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Driveway Waiver Dear Mr. English, Application Number: Project Name: Project Address: TBD Aw Residence 9527 190th Place SW T�LD20 11�_ 0 1 k �� Due to the circumstances surrounding the site at 9527 1901h Place SW, our firm would like to submit this request to allow the project to waive the required sidewalk improvements indicated by the Comprehensive Sidewalk Plan. The proposed project is a new single-family residence, zoned RS-12, which per 18.90.030 typically would not require sidewalk. That being said, the City has a Comprehensive Sidewalk Plan dated 1/21/1985 which does indicate a sidewalk requirement for this street, and which typically overrules the requirements of the cited chapter. For the specific case of this project, due to some of the unique existing conditions described below, we would like to revisit this requirement. In Section 18.90.030,13 of the Edmonds Community Development Code it states that: With the approval of both the planning director and city engineer, the requirements of this chapter may be waived, if it can be demonstrated by the applicant that there are special circumstances related to topography or otherfactors which make the construction of the sidewalk economically unfeasible or practically impossible. The property is also at the intersection of 190th and Olympic View Dr. Olympic View Dr. does not have existing sidewalks on its east side, mainly due to the slope, which puts most of the houses high off of the street, with steep driveways into the properties. Topography varies along the 1901h frontage of the subject property, but for stretches is 14-15% grade, consistent with the various steep driveways on the east side of Olympic View Dr. (Figure 1). The property is also at the intersection of 1901h and Olympic View Dr. Olympic View Dr. does not have existing sidewalks on its east side, mainly due to the slope, which situates most of the houses higher than the street, with steep driveways into the properties. At the east edge of the property, there is a power pole aligned with the proposed sidewalk location which includes power lines from several directions and transformers (Figure 2). The proposed sidewalk required at this location seems to be too steep, cost prohibitive, and unlikely to be' continued further due to the existing power pole and current existing developed properties. The longitudinal slope of the road would be well over any ADA requirements. Further, the work tips the si VL over the Category 2 drainage thresholds, kicking the site into further requirements and civil engineerting"' design costs for the owner. For these reasons, it seems to be unnecessary for the development of this "-'' project. The Sidewalk Comprehensive plan proposes sidewalk all the way along 190th Place SW and Cherry Street (the road roughly aligning with 190th across Olympic View Dr), but there is not actually a sidewalk for at Ipasta h1ork in Pithpr Hirsortinn I U 20A 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 www.cgengineering.com Aw Residence Sidewalk Waiver 0 6 6 6 J-oi�-'[-O' 2 T 14,114 SO. FT. x M 0.324 ACRES 8 0 L 25- Set ;RASS S 1145.44, IE CM 161.0 "PLAT 0 R/ 157,6 EN' -INC 1 2 Pft 156,8 (� I I - 77, 44.3 / 1574- 0 1 S 79-07, -�42 (w 1 8 RIM=142.06 CB RIM=157.79 ----------- r - --r- 190TH 15-L S SPH/ I I I I \\\\ \\(\ - /,--I\ 11� \�\\\ SOWEPOMNE101' EXISTING ROADWAYZ:D_TM= 156,18 CQ RI Figure 1: 190" Place SWAlignment Figure 2: Power Pole alongside road. July 17, 2019 Page 3 of 3 4M 250 4th Avenue South, Suite 200 do Edmonds, WA 98020 CEMIN&RING ph. 425.778.8500 1 f. 425.778.5536 1 www.cgengineering.com PETERSON CUSTOM HOMES, INC 2114 120th PI SW * Hnit B * Pviora++ MIA QQOnA Ok An 0. / dy. I / I I * Fax 420. / 89.1680 Email: pchbuilder@msn.com 7/9/2019 ESTIMATE TO INSTALL SIDEWALK ON 190THPL SW ADJACENT TO 9527 — 190"' PL SW, EDMONDS, WA 1. Estimate, haul, dispose of approx. 100 cu ycls. of unsuitable existing fill Refer to Geotech report 4,500 2. Import and compact structural fill -sidewalk and driveway area 5,700 3. Import fill soils for remainder of right of way approx. 240 cu yds 9,600 4. Cut and replace asphalt for 11' lane 4,400 5. Curb, gutter, driveway, and sidewalk 11,850 6. Replace or relocate 2 catch basins along 1901h pl SW 5,400 7. Relocate power pole as quoted by Nathan Hawkinson, Engineer for the PUD. 22,000 8. Traffic Control 2,100 9. Contractors Supervision and percentage 9,800 10. S.S.T. 7,836 TOTAL NOTE: This estimate does not include any extra work along Olympic View Drive. L BUT01 q__ o I I (P GENERAL NOTES ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE CODES AND ORDINANCES INCLUDING THE 2015 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE AS WELL AS THE 2015 WASHINGTON STATE ENERGY CODE AS WELL AS THE CURRENT CITY OF EDMONDS CODE. STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS SHALL BE USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH DESIGN DRAWINGS FOR BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION. DRAWINGS INDICATE GENERAL AND TYPICAL DETAILS OF CONSTRUCTION. WHERE CONDITIONS ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY INDICATED BUT ARE OF A SIMILAR CHARACTER TO DETAILS SHOWN, SIMILAR DETAILS OF CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE USED, SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ARCHITECT. REFER TO DIMENSIONS AND NOTES FOR SIZES AND LOCATIONS; DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF STUD OR MASONRY WALL AND CENTERLINE OF COLUMNS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS FOR COMPATIBILITY BEFORE PROCEEDING, ANY DISCREPANCIES SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL SAFETY PRECAUTIONS AND THE METHODS, TECHNIQUES, SEQUENCES OR PROCEDURES REQUIRED TO PERFORM THE WORK. CONTRACTOR -INITIATED CHANGES SHALL BE SUBMITTED IN WRITNG TO THE ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO FABRICATION OR CONSTRUCTION. CHANGES SHOWN ON SHOP DRAWINGS ONLY WILL NOT SATISFY THIS REQUIREMENT. LIFE SAFETY GUARDRAILS OR HANDRAILS SHALL BE PROVIDED ON ALL OPEN SIDES OF STAIRS OR ELEVATED PLATFORMS. GUARDRAILS SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 361, HIGH. HANDRAILS SHALL BE BETWEEN 34" AND 38" ABOVE STAIR NOSING. OPENINGS SHALL RESTRICT A 4" DIAMETER SPHERE FROM PASSING THROUGH. HANDGRIPS SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 1 1/4" NOR MORE THAN 2" IN CROSS -SECTIONAL DIMENSION. RETURN HANDRAILS AT ENDS. DOOR AND WINDOW NOTES WINDOW SUPPLIER SHALL REFER TO EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS AND SCHEDULES FOR CONFIGURATION AND OPERATION OF ALL WINDOW AND DOOR UNITS. MAINTAIN ALIGNMENTS AND FORMATS TO MEET DESIGN INTENT; ADJUST ROUGH OPENINGS AS NECESSARY. SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS FOR APPROVAL. ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS TO BE INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER'S REQUIREMENTS. WINDOWS LABELED "EGRESS" ON DRAWINGS SHALL FULFILL FOLLOWING REQUIREMENT: 5.7 SF MIN. NET CLEAR OPEN AREA; 20" MIN. CLEAR OPEN WIDTH; 24" MIN. CLEAR OPEN HEIGHT; 44" MAX. SILL HEIGHT. EXTERIOR DOORS SHALL HAVE MIN. Y2" THROW ON DEAD BOLT OR DEAD LATCH AND VISITOR OBSERVATION PORT. WINDOWS WITHIN 10'OF GRADE OR ACCESSIBLE DECK MUST BE CAPABLE OF BEING LOCKED. ALL LOCKS, INCLUDING DOOR LOCKS, MUST BE ABLE TO BE OPENED WITHOUT THE USE OF A KEY OR SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE OR EFFORT. WINDOWS WITHIN 24" OF A DOOR AND WITHIN 60" OF FLOOR, WINDOWS WITHIN 18" OF FLOOR, GLAZED DOORS, AND ALL SHOWER OR TUB ENCLOSURES SHALL HAVE SAFETY GLAZING. MISCELLANEOUS INSTALL DRAFT STOPS IN FLOOR -CEILING ASSEMBLIES SO THAT CONCEALED SPACE DOES NOT EXCEED 1000 SF. FIRE BLOCK PER IRC R903. SOLID FUEL -BURNING APPLIANCES, INCLUDING FIREPLACES, SHALL HAVE TIGHT FITTING METAL OR GLASS DOORS AND OUTSIDE SOURCE OF COMBUSTION AIR, WITH AN OPERABLE DAMPER, DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO THE FIRE BOX, AND TIGHT-FiTTING, READILY OPERABLE FLUE DAMPER OR APPROVED AUTOMATIC CONTROL. METAL FIREPLACES AND CHIMNEYS MUST BE UL- OR ICC- APPROVED AND MUST BE INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURIER'S REQUIREMENTS. PROJECT INFORMATION OWNER NAME: CHAK YOON & I WEI AW SITE ADDRESS: 9527 190TH PL SW EDMONDS, WA 98020 PARCEL#: 00434600007901 ZONING: RS-12 BUILDING HEIGHT: 26-0" MAX LEGAL DISCRIPTION: Section 13 Township 27 Range 03 Quarter SE EDMONDS SEA VIEW TIRS BILK 000 D-01 - LOT 2 CITY OF ED LLA REC UND AFN 201211210469 & SURV REC UND AFN 201210195001 CORR BY NO 201211010497 BEING SWILY PTNLOT 79 SO PLAT HVAC SYSTEM: GAS FURNACE BUILDING AREA (HEATED SPACE): FINISHED BASEMENT LEVEL: 1,244 SF MAIN LEVEL: 2,452 SF TOTAL: 3,696 SF DRAWING INDEX Al GENERAL NOTES, PROJECT DATA, DRAWING INDEX, & LEGEND A2 SITE PLAN (INCLUDED AS INDIVIDUAL SHEET) SURVEY (INCLUDED AS INDIVIDUAL SHEET) CIVIL C1.1 COVER SHEET AND GENERAL NOTES C2.1 TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL PLAN C2.2 EROSION CONTROL DETAILS C3.1 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN C3.2 GRADING AND DRAINAGE DETAILS C4.1 WATER AND SEWER PLAN C4.2 WATER AND SEWER DETAILS ARCHITECTURAL A3 BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN& WINDOW DOOR SCHEDULE A4 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A5 ELEVATIONS & DETAILS A6 ELEVATIONS & SECTIONS STRUCTURAL SIA GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES S1.2 GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES S2.1 FOUNDATION PLAN _S2.2 MAIN FLOOR FRAMING PLAN S2.3 ROOF FRAMING PLAN S3.11 CONCRETE DETAILS S3.2 CONCRETE DETAILS S4.1 WOOD DETAILS S4.2 WOOD DETAILS ENERGY CODE NOTES REQUIREMENTS OF THE 2015 WASHINGTON STATE ENERGY CODE SHALL BE FOLLOWED. PRESCRIPTIVE ENERGY CODE COMPLIANCE CLIMATE ZONE 4C MARINE GLAZING U-VALUE, VERTICAL: MAX. ALLOWED: 0.30 PROPOSED: 0.30 GLAZING U-VALUE, OVERHEAD: MAX. ALLOWED: 0.50 PROPOSED: 0.50 DOOR U-VALUE: MAX. ALLOWED: 0.30 PROPOSED: 0.30 CEILING INSULATION: REQUIRED: R-49 PROPOSED: R-49 VAULTED CEILING INSULATION: REQUIRED: R-38 PROPOSED: R-38 ABOVE GRADE WALL INSULATION: REQUIRED: R-21 PROPOSED: R-21 INTERIOR WALL BELOW GRADE: REQUIRED: R-21 PROPOSED: R-21 EXTERIOR WALL BELOW GRADE: REQUIRED: R-10 PROPOSED: R-10 FLOOR ABOVE UNHEATED SPACE: REQUIRED: R-30 PROPOSED: R-38 SLAB ON GRADE. REQUIRED: R-10 PROPOSED: R-10 GLAZING U-VALUES ARE SHOWN ON THE WINDOW AND DOOR SCHEDULES. SEE SHEET A3. ENERGY INFORMATION TABLE WSEC R406.2 MEDIUM DWELLING UNIT: OPTIONS: 3a HIGH EFFICIENCY HVAC EQUIPMENT GAS FURNACE WITH MINIMUM AFUE OF 94 % =1.0 CREDITS 4 HIGH EFFICIENCY HVAC DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ALL WORK SUBJECT 1.0 CREDITS TO FIELD 5c EFFICIENT WATER HEATING INSPECTION FOR GAS WATER HEATER WITH MIN. EF OF 0.91 CODE COMPLIANCE =1.5 CREDITS TOTAL CREDITS REQUIRED: 3.5 TOTAL ACHIEVED: 3.5 VVSEC R401.3 INSULATON CERTIFICATE THE DESIGN PROFESSIONAL OR BUILDER SHALL COMPLETE AND POST A "INSULATION CERTIFICATE FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION" WITHIN TOF THE ELECTRICAL PANEL PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION. VVSEC R403.11.1 PROVIDE A PROGRAMMABLE THERMOSTAT FOR THE PRIMARY SPACE CONDITIONING SYSTEM WITHIN EACH DWELLING UNIT. WSEC R404.1 A MINIMUM OF 75 PERCENT OF PERMANENTLY INSTALLED LAMPS IN LIGHTING FIXTURES SHALL BE HIGH EFFICACY LAMPS. FANS SHALL VENT DIRECTLY TO EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING. FANS TO OPERATE CONTINUOUS. VAPOR RETARDERS SHALL BE INSTALLED AS SPECIFIED IN WSEC R502.1 EXTERIOR JOINTS SHALL BE SEALED, CAULKED, GASKETED, OR VVEATHERSTRIPPED. CUTDOOR AIR INLET/S TO BE PROVIDED BY USING EXHAUST FANS PER IRC MI 507.3.4.4. PER WSEC M1507.3.4.4, OUTDOOR AIR SHALL BE DISTRIBUTED TO EACH HABITABLE SPACE BY INDIVIDUAL OUTDOOR AIR INLETS. WHERE OUTDOOR AIR SUPPLIES ARE SEPARATED FROM EXHAUST POINTS BY DOORS, PROVISIONS SHALL BE MADE TO ENSURE AIR FLOW BY INSTALLATION OF DISTRIBUTION DUCTS, UNDERCUTTING DOORS, INTALLATION OF GRILLES, TRANSOMS, OR SIMILAR MEANS. DOORS SHALL BE UNDERCUT TO A MINIMUM OF 1/2 INCH (12.7MM) ABOVE THE SURFACE OF THE FINISH FLOOR COVERING. PER WSEC TABLE R402.1.1 - WINDOW & DOOR HEADERS SHALL BE INSULATED WITH A MINIMUM OF R-10 INSULATION. APPROVED P"LANS MUST BE ON JOB SITE LEGEND 7/2- _TL__ _Po_ -FF- ___0 Ds 1--� + 123.4 + F2�A Z�l A�1. G (D STROBL DESIGN LLC DESCRIPTION Residential Design 2 X 6 STUDS AT 16" ON CENTER P.O. BOX 20764 2 X 4 STUDS AT 16" ON CENTER Seaffle, WA 98102 Phone: (206) 661-3622 EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN 12358 REGISTERED RE'3'STERED FA EXISTING WALL TO BE REMOVED A TECT ECT �O BEARING WALL �JACOB A STIR J 0. T , ACOB A STIR I3L AT OF W S., r �T. E OF WASHINGTON POST OR POINT LOAD ABOVE BEAM OR HEADER POST DIRECTION OF JOIST OR TRUSS SPAN (CANTILEVER DASHED) EXTENT OF JOISTS OR TRUSSES CHANGE IN LEVEL DETAIL NUMBER/ SHEET ON WHICH DETAIL IS SHOWN SECTION NUMBER/ SHEET ON WHICH SECTION IS SHOWN ELEVAT�ON NUMBER/ SHEET ON WHICH Approved, A residential fire sprinkler system is ELEVAT ON IS SHOWN required. A recommended flow -through design SHEAR WALL PANEL TYPE PER SHEAR WALL will meet specifications and reduce equipment and continuing SCHEDULE/ SHEAR WALL NUMBER maintenance requirements. ECDC19.05.020B2. Provide a minimum WINDOW NUMBER - SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE combination water service of one inch IV') meter and one and one half (11/2") service line, DOOR NUMBER - SEE DOOR SCHEDULE or show that domestic and fire protection needs can be met with a smallerservice. SHOWER HEAD HOSE BIB 4" TIGHT LINE 4" PERFORATED DRAIN 4" PERFORATED FOUNDATION DRAIN FILTER FABRIC FENCE DOWNSPOUT EXISTING CONTOUR N PROPOSED CONTOUR EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION C� Z REVISION SMOKE DETECTOR T LU CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR I CITY OF EDMOND EXHAUSTFAN BUILDING DEPARTMI.: IT 0 W 'RK THERMOSTAT ADDRESS - OWNER APPROVED DATE: ABBREVIATIONS BLDG.OFFICIAL P B ' O.W. E30TTOIM OF WALL PERMIT �NL3MBE C.B. CATCH BASIN CIL CENTERLINE C.O. CLEAN OUT CONIC. CONCRETE CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNITS DN DOWN EL. ELEVATION PPROVIED BY L EQ. EQUAL E EW EXISTING EACH WAY EXTG EXISTING F.F.E. FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION O/C ON CENTER P/B PLANTING BED Sim SIMILAR Date 01/21/201ci T.O.W. TOP OF WALL TYP. U.N.O. TYPICAL UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE Scale V.I.F. W/ VERIFY IN FIELD WITH Drawn 01 U Job JUN 0 5 2( T -0 Sheet TFIVOF E PAR PERMIT SET 01/21/2019 Al W"_ -�EX15hNC, >rEX15TAr,10 FIR 16" HIR, ��Exl TINJ TP F�OPERT� 14" F LIJE -73.10, -- 1 11 - I " \ LI TOP: 142 0 \ - TOE: 141*0 TO'P: 1'0 0 EG: 141.0 TOE'-k58.o 1 1 9 )<- x 11 1 1 TOP: 156�O EG: 159.8,, \TOP: 142.0 LLJ TOE 15'41.0 EG: 1:56.!p -WINDOWWI�I_ j 0) TOP: 156.0 T�EG: 141.0 1 uh: 150.0 E \-- - - BUILDINC, WINDOW 36" FIR T VE -ro BE RE�y VED E�\ A TOP\147.0 TBACK W)NDO \14 OP-158.0 \,,TOP: 147.0 52.11 C WELL TOE: 150.0 TOE: TOEQ145 0 EX\171N \FJR- - TOP:141.75 1 .50 -Tcz. 1:S .0 TO T > BE TOE: 140.0 N WINDOWWE�l A TOE: 1 1,4 TOP: 164.0 'I CAL 51. t-RONT YARD 5'jH -IME-159.7�, SETBACK IQLINIS, ; F FIR I'X TRE154TO E ROOF A FOOTING IS 2 EX15TI D4 N IS PARATE� 40" F SEE�ETAJQ C3. To (N 44" FIR T EE REMO TO E REMO 5� T CAL.C. (E)6A5 TOP: 14175 0 LINE TOE: 139.5� SD�O E: BUIL No - 'K -4 -1 \ QD W�_ W" OL 7w� w PROPOEeD PROPOSL LATER LINE SEE CIVIL 61RADIN& SEE 6111L TOP: 141. 5 OE: 139.50 44'xS'X3' INFILTRATION TRENCL BUILE (5- (2) TOP: OF TRENCH: 142 SET K 1. Ay K/4 B IMPILfkl - - SEE ARCH PLANS T P: 147.6 -t' TOP: 141.50 T 0 FOR BASEMENT AE: 144.5 WAL LOCATIONS TOE: 140 0 AND HEIGHTS EG: 138.75 /(�A ORCH PROPERTY TOP 45.0 FP\,OPEPT*T' LINE TOE: 14 LINE\ EG: 1 TYPE I CATCH BASIN (SOLID LID RIM: 143.0 P POSED I/ EXISTIN6'1- _E - TR3F ED IE Iff 6" N ): i4l.50 D INA& 4' R IE OUT (6" NW): 141.0 EE Gi�k PONr= H (6� SW 1;� TNRO INb LINE OVERFLOW): 141.40 T C C\.. k "ON TO TOP: 145.0 TOE: 141.5 EG: 141.5 TOE: 144..50 EG: 145: TOP: 150. 157.96 IN 5'tv:i. TIE FOOTING DRAIN TOE: I INTO OVERFLOW PIPE ... ... ... ... EG: 15 0 TOP: 155.50 157.96 To _77-pz -�1,45 TOE: 154.0 PROPOSED 51 141611 PROPERTY P: Y49.0 EG: 155.0 EXISTA& RETAININ& KNLjZ5EE LINE TOE�148.0 . .......... Gj>AL, TYP EG: 149.0 TFZE� 0 T :152.50 .: ... . .. .. ...... _f! 152.0 N E �TIN XI�Tltq\rl EG. 154.50 PE -7- .............. 0 OINIS' P: 155 75 .. .. ... ... . IEXh�T .. ... .. .. E: 155.25 ro' DEG VSAWCUTIN �00 EG: 156.0 - ASPHALT. WIDEN WESTBOUND TRAVEL LANE TO 11'MIN_� 158.70 x WIDTH PROPOSED ASPHALT 3 DRIVEWAY 15870 BS 5.12 0811 F �EX15TIN& MNERMONTFIACTOR IS RES tHOSIONAONTROLAHO INAGE BSW 147.81 161, SW 15159 BSW/155 53 157.92 158. 8 4 /ExI 5TIN& DEC DE(V E Tn as- 47 TOC 151.51 TqC\155. 5 T C 157.5 ME4T - TRF DAM PT.-I-121A' VIMFY V4/PE ON MANHOLE COVER\ TOP PF 55 FOR �ElrHT CALGNLATION (HT. 6ALr-) 144.54� 157.34 147.23 S S ENGINEERING DNIW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i151.01 lS4.9%-/ S I S S /��1.5�7.t66 1%0.57 S AP G /TYPE I CATCH B IN P, _ _ D Y ALITI 1-:5 BY OTHERS NO RIM: 1 8 0+ R PLACE EXIST C13 16L30 (BRIN OFFOFEXISTING ZAp �OAS NDft 0 C U4 /1E OUT [8" S): 1 6'. LDW/SOLIDNON- UTI POLE) �LIP LID. ADJUST RIM , I (D!51TE PLAN NORTH PROJECT INFORMATION ZONING CALCULATIONS HEIGHT CALCULATIONS OWNER NAME: CHAK YOON & I WEI AW LOT AREA: 13,939 SIF A=+162.6 SITE ADDRESS: 9527 190TH PL SIN B = +160.0' 51TE PLAN NOTES (T EDMONDS, WA 98020 LOT COVERAGE: 26.2% PROPOSED (3,653 SF/ 13,939 SIF) C = +142.5' Setback Required At I 1.) PER Ewc, 15.40.020W(5) ROGKERIE5 ARE PROHIBITED IN PARCIELM 00434600007901 35% ALLOWABLE (4,879 SF) D = +147.5 Front a npz DEVONATED 6EOL061GALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS OTHER THAN ZONING: RS-12 Sides =11 tc� BUILDING HEIGHT: 25'-0" MAX IMPERVIOUS AREA CALCULATIONS AVERAGE GRADE = 153.125' ER05ION HAZARD AREAS AS DEFINED IN CHAPTER 23.0& ECDC. LEGAL DISCRIPTION: Section 13 Township 27 Range 03 Quarter SE TOTAL: 4,987 SF (SEE CIVIL) PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT 172.0' EDMONDS SEA VIEW TRS ELK 000 D-01 - LOT 2 CITY OF ED LLA REC MAXIMUM 78.125' Other UND AFN 201211210469 & SURV REC UND AFN 201210195001 CORR BY NO 201211010497 BEING SWLY PTNLOT 79 SO PLAT SLOPE LOT SLOPE = VARIES SEE CIVIL SHEET C3 PERMIT SET 01/21/2019 STROBL DESIGN LLC Residential Design P.O. BOX 20764 Seattle, WA 98102 Phonw. (206) 661-3622 RE'31STERED A _ECT 12358FRrGISTERED A ECT 1ACOB A STROBL T OF W"S.'..T.' �s A E OF �WASHINGTON I`i�� LU 0 z LU ,S) LU QL vy LU REVISIONS BY 5/3 �)/20 1 q _6 5/2(9/20lq J5 (C (Dry REsuB SEP 19 2019 BUILD NG D C14OF EpAORTMI EE)M No Date 01/21/201cl Scale Drawn 1/5" = P-O" Job Sheet A2 NINDON SCHEDULE NIDTH X HEIOHT 5'-0" X 5'-0", 5LIDIN& HINDOPq, TEMP., EGRE55,030 U-VALUE 5'-0" X 5'-0", 5LIDIN6 PqINDOV4, TEMP., ErRE55,030 U-VALUE 5--o" X 5'-0", PICTURE V411'-O" UNDER5LIDINC, PqINDOPq, 0.50 U-VALUE 5'-0" X 5'-0", PIGTURE N/I'-O" UNDER5LIDIN6 NINDOI/q, 0.30 U-VALUE 5'-0" X 5--0", PICTURE kq/l'-O" UNDERSILIDIN6 PqINDOkq, 0.30 U-VALUE 5'-0" X 5'-0", PICTURE I^V['-O" UNDER5LIDIN& NINDON, 0.50 U-VALUE 5'-0" X 2'-0", PICTURE NINDON, 0.30 U-VALUE 2-6' X 4'-0", 51LIDIN6 NINDON, 0.30 U-VALUE cl Co'-4" X 3--ro", XOX51-011,16 NINDOIN, 0.30 U-VALUE 1 2'-(g" X 5LIVIN6 HINVOIN, TEMP., 0.50 U-VALUE, OE35GUFRE RAIN &LA!55� 2 X XO N L' I IN OIN 0 '0' P*'O 5 0 U-v U 5 D N TEN 30 A 5 _V L A UE LUE' 055GUP 11 5'-0" X 5--b", 5LIDIN& NINDON, &RE55,030 U-VALUE D AL RE 12 5.70.'X 5--(q--,5LIDINr, V41NDOPq, (5RE55, 0.50 U-VALUE N N VAL 15 2' 0" X 5'-0", X CASEMENT V41N OV4, 0.30 U-VALUE, OBSCURE RAIN CLASS EM N , SC � 13 5'-0" X 5'-0", PICTURE NINDON TEMP., 0.50 U-VALUE, OBSCURE RAIN (5LA55 TURE TE �55 U-VALUE 14 5'-0" X 5-6", 5LIDIN& NPqINDON, ORE55, 0.30 U VALUE 2 0 Lu 5'-0" X PICTURE Wl'-O" UNDERSLIDIN& HINDOV4, 0.30 U-VALUE NOT L15ED 5'-0" X 5--b", PICTURE I^Vl'-O" UNDERSLIDIN6, NINDOK 030 U-VALUE 5'-0" X 5'-( 5", PICTURE N/1 --0" UNDERSLIDIN6 HINDOV4,0.30 U-VALUE 7'--7" X 5'-( b", PICTURE 1^1/1 --0" UNDERSILiniNS mlmDoN, o.3o u-VALUE T--V X W-6", PICTURE VVI'-O" UNDERSLIDIN& HINDOP4, 0.30 U-VALUE 2'-0" X 4'-0" OPERABLE SKYLIrzHT, TEMP., 0.45 U-VALUE, VELUX 2'-0" X 4'-0" OPERA13LE SKYL16HT, TEMP., 0.45 U-VALUE, VELUX 2'-0" X 4'-0" OPERABLE 5KYLI6HT, TEMP., 0.45 U-VALUE, VELUX (82-0" X 5'-0", X CASEMENT NINDOI/q, TEMP., 0.50 U-VALUE V41NDOPq NOTES: 1) NEV4 V41NDON5 TO BE INSULATED LOPq E, AR60N OAS FILLED, MINIMUM U-VALUE OF 0-30, 4 NFRC CERTIFIED, TYP. 2) CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL ROU6H OPENINO DIMENSIONS "ANUFACTUREIR PRIOR TO FRAMIN6. (Df3ASEMENT FLOOR PLAN 1/4" = I.-Ol. NORTH FIN15HED 1,244 5F STORAGE -15(9 5F GP,AI^L5PAGr= = 455 5F POOR 5rHEOULE HIDTH X HEI6HT E 1 (2) ro'-O" X 5'-0' SLIVINO DOORS, 6LAZED, TEMP., 0.50 U-\/ALvE 31-01, X V-011 511 E LITE, TEMP., 030 U-VALUE 2 3'-0" X b'-O" E 1145KNC, DOOR, TEMP., UNHEATED SPACE 3 (2) 3'-0" X &'-0" 1145V41146 DOOR, 6LAZED, TEMP., 0.30 U-VALUE (2) 2'-2" X 5'-0" SIDE LITE, TEMP., 0.30 U-VALUE 4 (4) 3'-0" X &'-0 IN5P41146 DOOR, 6LAZED, TEMP., 0.30 U-VALUE 3'-0" X 8'-0" 51 E LITE, TEMP., 0.30 U-VALUE f 5 5-0" X &-0" E . INSHIN6 DOOR, 6LAZED, TEMP., 0.30 U-VALUE (2) 1'-8" X &'-0" I IDE LITE, TEMP., 0.30 U-VALUE lb'-O" X &'-0" EXT. 6LAZED 6ARAOE DOOR, TEMP., UNHEATED SPACE DOOR NOTES 1) NEV4 DOORS TO BE INSULATED LON E, AR&ON OAS FILLED, MINIMUM U-vALUE OF 0.50, $ NFRG CERTIFIED, TYP. 2) CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL ROU6H OPENIN& DIMENSIONS K"ANUFACTURER PRIOR TO FRAMIN6. PLAN NOTE Id ALL DIMENSIONS TO FACE OF FRAMINr 2) Or- TO VERIFY LOCATION OF EXISTINO FRAMIN6 AND HEAVERS. 3) HHOLIE-HOU51E EXHAUST FAN IN THE MAIN FLOOR LAUNDRY ROOM 15 A CONTINUOU5LY-OPERATIN6 EXHAUST FAN PER IRG TABLE M150-1.5.5(1). HALL TYPES NEIN 2X6 HOOD STUD a 16" O.C. KALLS V41TH 1/211 &YP5UM VOLLBOARD ON INTERIOR 51DE (1/21, 6PEENBOARD IN NET AREA5), LEVEL FIVE FINISH, PAINT COLOR PER ONNER, INSULATION PER COVER SHEET At NEIq 2X4 PqOOD STUD a 16" O.G. K6,LLS NITH 1/2" 6YP5UM NALLSOARD ON EACH SIDE (1/2" 6REENBOARD IN NET AREAS), LEVEL FIVE FINISH, PAINT COLOR PER ONNER, INSULATION PER COVER SHEET At Oe, SMOKE DETECTOR (HARD-viiREE> W i3ATTERY E3AcKup) CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR EXHAUST FAN GRAKIL SPACE VENTILATION: 455 5F 150 5F = 3.03 SF 5.03 SF O-&q 5F PER VENT = 5.4 VENTS (4 PROVIDED) PERMIT SET 01/21/2019 STROBL DESIGN LLC Residential Design P.O. BOX 20764 Seattle, WA 98102 Phone: (206) 661-3622 REGSTERED eA ;'TECT AC B A STROB ITECT 12358 FIEGISTERED FA JAC T OF W.. I .T, ATE OF WASHINGTON LU 11) z Lu ks) Lu < CE u- Lu I REVISIONS I BY I Date 01/21/20[cl Scale Drawn 1/4" = 1'-0" Job M �--- 2 Sheet JUN 0 5 A3BUILDING DEI ..OF.5. 0 TEMP TEMP TEMP K�/ TEMP. DECK TEMP TEMP. ................ MASTER QFOROQ TV 01 R MANUFACTUI D rvA5 FIREPLACE T-11— Ov > --------------- Ily itidgOom 36' 1-116H OUARDRAIL,_/ v- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — T — — — — — — — - 0 11 3b.. HIr5H jj' 61JARDRAIL, TIrp. MAIN FLOOR PLAN MAIN FLOOR = 2,452 5F 6ARA&E = 6-7cl 5F ROOF VENTILATION CALCULATION: PROVIDED BY 2" GONTINUOU5 METAL VENT 4 CONTINUOUS RDOE VENT TYPICAL R506.2 MINIMUM VENT AREA. THE MINIMUM NET FREE VENTILATION AREA 5HALL BE 1/150 OF THE AREA OF THE VENTED 5PACE. ATTIC AREA = 3,151 5F (245 LINIAL FEET) TOTAL ATTIC AREA = 3,151 5F/150 = 20.8-7 5F REQUIRED TOTAL VENT AREA PROVIDED = (245 LINIAL FEET X 29/12 = 40.55 5F PROVIDED (96-v 4 m (IAZH 1, IMIL, 56" PEF — -I Typ. T- 24'L DININ& KITCHEN L I L - I --J I 100 GFM FAN MIN. 56" RANrE 2110 16- 14" .1, 17--T---T Dm - - - - - - - - - - P, 1> 2 NORTH PLAN NOTE 1) ALL DIMEN51ONS TO FACE OF FPAMiNr,. 2.) 6r- To VERIFY LOCATION OF EXISTIN& FRAMIN6 AND HEADER5. 5) NHOLE-HOU5E EXHAU5T FAN IN THE MAIN FLOOR LAUNDRY ROOM 15 A GONTINUOU51-Y-OPERATIN& EXHAU5T FAN PER IRC TABLE M150-133(l). NALL TYPES NFPq 2X(o NOOD STUD a 16" O.C. HALLS PqITH 1/2" rvYPSUM NALLBOARD ON INTERIOR 51DE (V2* 6REENBOARD IN NET AREAS), LEVEL FIVE FINISH, PAINT COLOR PER OINNER, INSULATION PER COVER SHEET Al Z== NEN 2X4 HOOD STUD a 16" O.C. HALLS V41TH 1/2" rYFSUM HALLE30ARD ON EACH 51DE (1/21, cREENBOARD IN NET ARE -AS), LEVEL FIVE FINISH, PAINT COLOR PER ONNER, INSULATION PER COVER SHEET Al i$e,, SMOKE DETEcToR (HARD-nRED kv BATTERY BACKUP) CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR EXHAUST FAN U3 12 1 LAUND v pq I 110 GFM cl.-1111 Lu IN r - — — — — — — — — — — — Je-'—�20 MIN. FIRE DOOR PV5ELF-CLOSIN& DEVICE ATT-I'C,, 66RAr 5E 20 \G Z— 5/a.. TrPE w 55,�b I L--J I �iALL5 4 GL /07 TEMP F— — — / — — — — — — — — — — — — — — --- 2 PERMIT SET 01/21/2019 STROBL DESIGN LLC Residential Design P.O. BOX 20764 Seatte,WARID2 Phone: (206) 661-3622 12358 � 5REGI�STERED MIT T C TECT JACOB A STROB r OF WA, ,.,..T, �TATE OF WASHINGTON lt!HE�d Lu 0 z Lu IS) !T: z T Lu I REVISIONS I BY I Date 01/2i/20iq Scale Drawnl/4" = 1'-0" Job Sheet A4 (D NORTH ELEVATION 1/4" = 11-o" — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - - - - - - - - --- g EAST ELEVATION 1/4" = 1.-0" 0004N5PCUT. TYR 2"DIA * GONT. I/qOOD HANDf;_ZAlL_ 1-1/2" C_LR. FROM kNqALL < z 5/4" PL < RISER, iyyNpD_ 1-1/4" PLYND. TREAD, C; TREAD (REFER T FLRPLAN) z L_2X4 THRUST E3LOGK STAIR DETAIL (2)-2X HEADER N/LED&ER OR JOIST H6R5. FOP, GARRIA6E SUPPORT ',_5/&"TYFE'X'6YP.E3D. a AREAS ACCE551BLE UNDER STAIRS _2x FIREBLOCKINO o MIDPT. OF EA. STAIR RUN 6 ALON& 5TRIN&ER o KALL BETH. EAr-H STUD (3)-2XI2 STRINGERS -EA. SIDE 4 G.L. PERMIT SET 01121/2019 STROBL DESIGN LLC Residential Design P.O. BOX 20764 Seatile, WA 98102 Phone: (206) 66W022 REGISTERED CT 12358 REGISTERED F�A ECT 11 U �!COB �AST OBL Tr OF WAS.,., 'Tr" S E OF WASHINGTON E!HF�l W kl) z (Z uj D- <T Lu I REVISIONS 113Y 1(5/_30'/2'0Ic'I LS) Date 01/21/201cl Scale Drawn 1/4" � 1'-0" Job R Sheet A5,3u6,pipwj,uNoNG;:DoEr�5pr,il� Zva DOHNSPOUT, TYP. (DSOUTH ELEVATION t OLA55 C-UARDRAIL nil m 1; F011, ni - I Lmrdr*,.N ID] 1/4" = 1.-0.. ------------ --------------- LES /, / 11 ]I\ /Tp \ Wimell NEST ELEVATION 1/4" = P-0" I �// �� // Ad BUILDIN6 SECTION KEYNOTE5 G SO CON'-I'Q JGTION COMPOSITE ROOF[Nr, 50# BUILDIN& PAPER 5/5" WX PLYHOOD (NAIL PER 5H 5CHEDULE) FRAM:Nr, PER PLAN R-41 INSULATION @ FLAT GEILINC-5 R-55 INSULATION a VAULTED CEILIN(55 GL05ED GELL INSULATION (NOT VENTED) CON5TRUCITIO Pili��%-L�ELEVATIONS, �5# BUILDIN& PAPER /2" CDX PLyyqOOV (MAIL PER 5H SCHEDULE) 2X6 STUDS a 1611 O.C. R-21 INSULATION. R-10 AT HEADERS. CONSTRUCTI 0 ING 5/4" PLYHOOD -rLVE 4 5GREN JOISTS PER FRAMIN(9 PLAN R-30 INSULATION OVER UNHEATED SPACE 'ETE SLAB (HEATED SPACE) S F"'m ��Rmr, �IL. VAF�QREIARR�IEP b" CRUSHED ROCK JYPICAL C-eONCEFTE SLAB (UNHEATED SPACE) — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1/4" = 1.-0.. PERMIT SET 0112112019 STROBL DESIGN LLC Residential Design P.O. BOX 20764 8 affle WA98102 P:one:'(206) 661-3622 REGISTERED lgff� Lu 0 z Lu IZ Lu Itz ul) u- LU I REVISIONS I BY I Date 01/21/20lq Scale Drawnl/4" = 1'-0" Job Sheet JUN 0 5 20119 A6SU,1-IN0G,D:P I_ ffij,,� CRITERIA 1. ALL MATERIALS, WORKMANSHIP, DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE (2015 EDITION). 2. DESIGN LOADING CRITERIA: GARAGES FLOOR LIVE LOAD (PASSENGER VEHICLES) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 PSF FLOOR CONCENTRATED LOAD (PASSENGER VEHICLES) . . . . . . . . . 3000 LEIS RESIDENTIAL - ONE AND TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS FLOOR LIVE LOAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 PSF MISCELLANEOUS LOADS DECKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5 x AREA SERVED DEFLECTION CRITERIA LIVE LOAD DEFLECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L/360 TOTAL LOAD DEFLECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L/240 ENVIRONMENTAL LOADS SNOW . . . . . . . . . . . Ce=1.0, ls=1.0, Ct=1.1, Pg=20 PSF, Pf=25 PSF WIND . . . . . . . GCpi=0.18, 110 MPH, RISK CATEGORY 11, EXPOSURE -8- EARTHQUAKE . ANALYSIS PROCEDURE: EQUIVALENT LATERAL FORCE PROCEDURE LATERAL SYSTEM: LIGHT FRAMED SHEAR WALLS 3. STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS SHALL BE USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION. ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS ARE THE PRIME CONTRACT DRAWINGS. ANY DISCREPANCIES FOUND AMONG THE DRAWINGS, THE SPECIFICATION, THESE GENERAL NOTES AND THE SITE CONDITIONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE ARCHITECT, WHO SHALL CORRECT SUCH DISCREPANCY IN WRITING. ANY WORK DONE BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AFTER DISCOVERY OF SUCH DISCREPANCY SHALL BE DONE AT THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR's RISK. 4. PRIMARY STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS NOT DIMENSIONED ON THE STRUCTURAL PLANS AND DETAILS SHALL BE LOCATED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS AND DETAILS. VERTICAL DIMENSION CONTROL IS DEFINED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL WALL SECTIONS, BUILDING SECTION, AND PLANS. DETAILING AND SHOP DRAWING PRODUCTION FOR STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS WILL REQUIRE DIMENSIONAL INFORMATION CONTAINED IN BOTH ARCHITECTURAL AND STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS. 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL SAFETY PRECAUTIONS AND THE METHODS, TECHNIQUES, SEQUENCES OR PROCEDURES REQUIRED TO PERFORM THE CONTRACTORS WORK. THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER HAS NO OVERALL SUPERVISORY AUTHORITY OR ACTUAL AND/OR DIRECT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE SPECIFIC WORKING CONDITIONS AT THE SITE AND/OR FOR ANY HAZARDS RESULTING FROM THE ACTIONS OF ANY TRADE CONTRACTOR. THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER HAS NO DUTY TO INSPECT, SUPERVISE, NOTE, CORRECT, OR REPORT ANY HEALTH OR SAFETY DEFICIENCIES TO THE OWNER, CONTRACTORS, OR OTHER ENTITIES OR PERSONS AT THE PROJECT SITE. 6. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TEMPORARY BRACING FOR THE STRUCTURE AND STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS UNTIL ALL FINAL CONNECTIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS. CONFORM TO ASCE 37-14 "DESIGN LOADS ON STRUCTURES DURING CONSTRUCTION". 7. CONTRACTOR -INITIATED CHANGES SHALL BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE ARCHITECT AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO FABRICATION OR CONSTRUCTION. CHANGES SHOWN ON SHOP DRAWINGS ONLY WILL NOT SATISFY THIS REQUIREMENT. 8. DRAWINGS INDICATE GENERAL AND TYPICAL DETAILS OF CONSTRUCTION. WHERE CONDITIONS ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY INDICATED BUT ARE OF SIMILAR CHARACTER TO DETAILS SHOWN, SIMILAR DETAILS OF CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE USED, SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ARCHITECT AND THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. ALL TYPICAL NOTES AND DETAILS SHOWN ON DRAWINGS SHALL APPLY, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. TYPICAL DETAILS MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE INDICATED ON THE PLANS BUT SHALL STILL APPLY AS SHOWN OR DESCRIBED IN THE DETAILS. WHERE TYPICAL DETAILS ARE NOTED ON THE PLANS, THE SPECIFIED TYPICAL DETAIL SHALL BE USED. WHERE NO TYPICAL DETAIL IS NOTED, IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR's RESPONSIBILITY TO CHOOSE THE APPROPRIATE TYPICAL DETAIL FROM THOSE PROVIDED OR REQUEST ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT ALL PROPOSED ALTERNATE TYPICAL DETAILS TO THOSE PROVIDED WITH RELATED CALCULATIONS TO THE ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO SHOP DRAWING PRODUCTION AND FIELD USE. 9. SHOP DRAWINGS FOR THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE ARCHITECT AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF THESE ITEMS. CONNECTOR PLATE WOOD ROOF TRUSSES GLUED LAMINATED MEMBERS MANUFACTURED LUMBER (PSL'S, LSL'S, LVL'S) PLYWOOD WEB JOISTS APPROVED SETS OF ALL SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL ALSO BE SUBMITTED TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. 10. SHOP DRAWING REVIEW., DIMENSIONS AND QUANTITIES ARE NOT REVIEWED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD, THEREFORE MUST BE VERIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND STAMP DRAWINGS PRIOR TO REVIEW BY ENGINEER OF RECORD. CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW DRAWINGS FOR CONFORMANCE WITH THE MEANS, METHODS, TECHNIQUES, SEQUENCES AND OPERATIONS OF CONSTRUCTION, AND ALL SAFETY PRECAUTIONS AND PROGRAMS INCIDENTAL THERETO. SUBMITTALS SHALL INCLUDE A REPRODUCIBLE AND ONE COPY; REPRODUCIBLE WILL BE MARKED AND RETURNED WITHIN TWO WEEKS OF RECEIPT WITH A NOTATION INDICATING THAT THE SUBMITTAL HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE IN GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING. THE SUBMITTED ITEMS SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED UNTIL THEY HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL. SHOP DRAWING SUBMITTALS PROCESSED BY THE ENGINEER ARE NOT CHANGE ORDERS. THE PURPOSE OF SHOP ORAIHNG SU6AffTTALS BY THE CONTRACTOR fS TO DEMONSTRATE TO THE ENGINEER THAT THE CONTRACTOR UNDERSTANDS THE DESIGN CONCEPT, BY INDICATING WHICH MATERIAL IS INTENDED TO BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED AND BY DETAILING THE INTENDED FABRICATION AND INSTALLATION METHODS. IF DEVIATIONS, DISCREPANCIES, OR CONFLICTS BETWEEN SHOP DRAWING SUBMITTALS AND THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS ARE DISCOVERED EITHER PRIOR TO OR AFTER SHOP DRAWING SUBMITTALS ARE PROCESSED BY THE ENGINEER, THE DESIGN DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHALL CONTROL AND SHALL BE FOLLOWED. THE FOLLOWING APPLY UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE ON THE DRAWINGS 11. SHOP DRAWINGS OF DESIGN BUILD COMPONENTS INCLUDING CANOPIES, BALCONIES, COLD FORM STEEL FRAMING, TEMPORARY SHORING, CURTAIN WALL SYSTEMS, SKYLIGHT FRAMES, PREFABRICATED STAIR SYSTEMS, EXTERIOR CLADDING, AND PRE-ENGINEERED SYSTEM SHALL BE STAMPED AND SIGNED BY A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER LICENSED IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON. SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE COMPONENT DESIGNER PRIOR TO REVIEW OF THE ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER OF RECORD FOR GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING. THE COMPONENT DESIGNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CODE CONFORMANCE AND ALL NECESSARY CONNECTIONS NOT SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT ON ARCHITECTURAL OR STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS. SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL INDICATE MAGNITUDE AND DIRECTION OF ALL LOADS IMPOSED ON BASIC STRUCTURE. DESIGN CALCULATIONS SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE SHOP DRAWINGS. 12. DEFERRED SUBMITTALS: SHOP DRAWINGS AND CALCULATIONS OF DEFERRED SUBMITTAL COMPONENTS SHALL BE STAMPED AND SIGNED BY A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER LICENSED IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON AND SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE COMPONENT DESIGNER PRIOR TO REVIEW BY THE ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER OF RECORD FOR GENERAL CONFORMANCE. ALL NECESSARY CONNECTIONS NOT SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT ON THE ARCHITECTURAL OR STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS SHALL BE INCLUDED. SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL INCLUDE THE MAGNITUDE AND DIRECTION OF ALL LOADS IMPOSED ON THE BASIC STRUCTURE. DESIGN CALCULATIONS SHALL ACCOMPANY ALL DEFERRED SUBMITTALS. THE ARCHITECT OR CONTRACTOR SHALL FORWARD DEFERRED SUBMITTALS TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WHERE REQUIRED. DEFERRED SUBMITTAL BUILDING COMPONENTS FOR THIS PROJECT SHALL INCLUDE: PREFABRICATED CONNECTOR PLATE WOOD ROOF TRUSSES GEOTECHNICAL 13. FOUNDATION NOTES: ALLOWABLE SOIL PRESSURE AND LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE ARE ASSUMED AND THEREFORE MUST BE VERIFIED BY A QUALIFIED SOILS ENGINEER OR APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL. IF SOILS ARE FOUND TO BE OTHER THAN ASSUMED, NOTIFY THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER FOR POSSIBLE FOUNDATION REDESIGN. FOOTINGS SHALL BEAR ON FIRM, UNDISTURBED EARTH AT LEAST 18" BELOW ADJACENT FINISHED GRADE. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, FOOTINGS SHALL BE CENTERED BELOW COLUMNS OR WALLS ABOVE. BACKFILL BEHIND ALL RETAINING WALLS WITH FREE DRAINING, GRANULAR FILL AND PROVIDE FOR SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE. ALLOWABLE SOIL PRESSURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1500 PSF LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE (RESTRAINEDMNRESTRAINED) . . . . . . . 55 PCF/35 PCF ALLOWABLE PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE (FS OF 1.5 INCLUDED) . . . . . . . 300 PCF COEFFICIENT OF FRICTION (FS OF 1.5 INCLUDED) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.3 SEISMIC SURCHARGE PRESSURE (UNIFORM LOAD) . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7H PSF CONCRETE 14. CONCRETE SHALL BE MIXED, PROPORTIONED, CONVEYED AND PLACED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACT 301, INCLUDING TESTING PROCEDURES. CONCRETE SHALL ATTAIN A 28-DAY STRENGTH OF Vc = 3,000 PSI AND MIX SHALL CONTAIN NOT LESS THAN 5-1/2 SACKS OF CEMENT PER CUBIC YARD AND SHALL BE PROPORTIONED TO PRODUCE A SLUMP OF 5" OR LESS. REQUIRED CONCRETE STRENGTH IS BASED ON THE DURABILITY REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 1904 OF THE IBC. DESIGN STRENGTH IS Vc = 2,500 PSI. 15. ALL CONCRETE WITH SURFACES EXPOSED TO WEATHER OR STANDING WATER SHALL BE AIR -ENTRAINED WITH AN AIR -ENTRAINING AGENT CONFORMING TO ASTM C260, C494, AND C618. TOTAL AIR CONTENT FOR FROST -RESISTANT CONCRETE SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN 318-14, TABLE 19.3.2.1 MODERATE EXPOSURE, FI. 16. REINFORCING STEEL SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A615 (INCLUDING SUPPLEMENT SI), GRADE 60, FY = 60,000 PSI. WELDED WIRE FABRIC SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A-185. 17. DETAILING OF REINFORCING STEEL (INCLUDING HOOKS AND BENDS) SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACI 315-99 AND 318-14. LAP ALL CONTINUOUS REINFORCEMENT #5 AND SMALLER 40 BAR DIAMETERS OR 2'-0' MINIMUM. PROVIDE CORNER BARS AT ALL WALL AND FOOTING INTERSECTIONS. LAP CORNER BARS 15 AND SMALLER 40 BAR DIAMETERS OR 2'-0" MINIMUM. LAPS OF LARGER BARS SHALL BE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACI 318-14, CLASS B. LAP ADJACENT MATS OF WELDED WIRE FABRIC A MINIMUM OF 8" AT SIDES AND ENDS. NO BARS PARTIALLY EMBEDDED IN HARDENED CONCRETE SHALL BE FIELD BENT UNLESS SPECIFICALLY SO DETAILED OR APPROVED BY THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. 18. DETAILING OF REINFORCING STEEL (INCLUDING HOOKS AND BENDS) SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACT 315-99 AND 318-14. LAP ALL REINFORCEMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH "THE REINFORCING SPLICE AND DEVELOPMENT LENGTH SCHEDULE." PROVIDE CORNER BARS AT ALL WALL AND FOOTING INTERSECTIONS. LAP ADJACENT MATS OF WELDED WIRE FABRIC A MINIMUM OF 8' AT SIDES AND ENDS. NO BARS PARTIALLY EMBEDDED IN HARDENED CONCRETE SHALL BE FIELD BENT UNLESS SPECIFICALLY SO DETAILED OR APPROVED BY THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. 19. CONCRETE PROTECTION (COVER) FOR REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: FOOTINGS AND OTHER UNFORMED SURFACES CAST AGAINST AND PERMANENTLY EXPOSED TO EARTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3- FORMED SURFACES EXPOSED TO EARTH OR WEATHER (#5 BARS OR SMALLER). . 1-1/2' COLUMN TIES OR SPIRALS AND BEAM STIRRUPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1/2' SLABS AND WALLS (INT. FACE). . . GREATER OF BAR DIAMETER PLUS 1/8' OR 3/4' 20. CONCRETE WALL REINFORCING --PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING UNLESS DETAILED OTHERWISE: 6" WALLS #4 @ 16 HORIZ. #4 @ 18 VERTICAL 1 CURTAIN 8" WALLS #4 @ 12 HORIZ. #4 @ 18 VERTICAL 1 CURTAIN 10" WALLS #4 @ 18 HORIZ. #4 @ 18 VERTICAL 2 CURTAINS 21. CAST -IN -PLACE CONCRETE: SEE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF DOOR AND WINDOW OPENINGS IN ALL CONCRETE WALLS. SEE MECHANICAL DRAWINGS FOR SIZE AND LOCATION OF MISCELLANEOUS MECHANICAL OPENINGS THROUGH CONCRETE WALLS. SEE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR ALL GROOVES, NOTCHES, CHAMFERS, FEATURE STRIPS, COLOR, TEXTURE, AND OTHER FINISH DETAILS AT ALL EXPOSED CONCRETE SURFACES, BOTH CAST -IN -PLACE AND PRECAST. STEEL 22. STRUCTURAL STEEL DESIGN, FABRICATION, AND ERECTION SHALL BE BASED ON: A. AISC 360 AND SECTION 2205.2 OF THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE. B. APRIL 14, 2010 AISC CODE OF STANDARD PRACTICE FOR STEEL BUILDINGS AND BRIDGES AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: AS NOTED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, BY THE DELETION OF PARAGRAPH 4.4.1, AND REVISE REFERENCE FROM "STRUCTURAL DESIGN DRAWINGS" TO 'CONTRACT DOCUMENTS" IN PARAGRAPH 3.1. 23. ROLLED SHAPES INCLUDING PLATES, SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A36, FY = 36 KSI. CONNECTION BOLTS SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A307. 24. ARCHITECTURALLY EXPOSED STRUCTURAL STEEL SHALL CONFORM TO SECTION 10 OF THE AISC CODE OF STANDARD PRACTICE FOR STEEL BUILDINGS AND BRIDGES. 25. ALL STEEL EXPOSED TO THE WEATHER OR IN CONTACT WITH GROUND SHALL BE CORROSION PROTECTED BY GALVANIZATION OR PROVIDED WITH EXTERIOR PAINT SYSTEM, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 26. SHOP PRIME ALL STEEL EXCEPT A. STEEL ENCASED IN CONCRETE. B. SURFACES TO BE WELDED. C. CONTACT SURFACES AT HIGH -STRENGTH BOLTS. D. MEMBERS TO BE GALVANIZED. E ' MEMBERS WHICH WILL BE CONCEALED BY INTERIOR FINISHES. F. SURFACES TO RECEIVE SPRAYED FIREPROOFING. G. SURFACES TO RECEIVE OTHER SPECIAL SHOP PRIMERS. Nyo =*k 27. FRAMING LUMBER SHALL BE S-DRY, KD, OR MC-19, AND GRADED AND MARKED IN CNFORMANCE WITH WCLIB STANDARD "GRADING RULES FOR WEST COAST LUMBER NO. 17", OR WWPA STANDARD, "WESTERN LUMBER GRADING RULES 2011*. FURNISH TO THE FOLLOWING MINIMUM STANDARDS: JOISTS (2X & 3X MEMBERS) HEM -FIR NO. 2 AND BEAMS MINIMUM BASE VALUE, Fb = 850 PSI (4X MEMBERS) DOUGLAS FIR -LARCH NO. I MINIMUM BASE VALUE, Fb = 1000 PSI BEAMS (INCL. 6X AND LARGER) DOUGLAS FIR -LARCH NO. 1 MINIMUM BASE VALUE, Fb = 1350 PSI POSTS (4X MEMBERS) DOUGLAS FIR -LARCH NO. 2 MINIMUM BASE VALUE, Fc 1350 PSI (6X AND LARGER) DOUGLAS FIR -LARCH NO. 1 MINIMUM BASE VALUE, Fc 1000 PSI STUDS, PLATES & MISC. FRAMING: DOUGLAS-FIR-LARCH OR HEM -FIR NO. 2 28. GLUED LAMINATED MEMBERS SHALL BE FABRICATED IN CONFORMANCE WITH ASTM AND AIISI/AITC STANDARDS. EACH MEMBER SHALL BEAR AN AITC OR APA-EWS IDENTIFICATION MARK AND SHALL BE ACCOMPANIED BY AN AITC OR APA-EWS CERTIFICATE OF CONFORMANCE. ALL SIMPLE SPAN BEAMS SHALL BE DOUGLAS FIR COMBINATION 24F-V4, Fb = 2,400 PSI, Fv =265 PSI. ALL CANTILEVERED BEAMS SHALL BE DOUGLAS FIR COMBINATION 24F-V8, Fb = 2400 PSI, Fv = 265 PSI. CAMBER ALL SIMPLE SPAN GLULAM BEAMS TO 3,500' RADIUS, UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE ON THE PLANS. 29. MANUFACTURED LUMBER, PSL, LVL, AND LSL SHOWN ON PLAN ARE BASED PRODUCTS MANUFACTURED BY THE WEYERHAEUSER CORPORATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ICC-ES REPORT ESR-1387. MEMBERS SHALL HAVE THE FOLLOWING MINIMUM PROPERTIES: PSL (2.OE) Fb = 2900 PSI, E = 2000 KSI, Fv = 290 PSI LYL (2.OE) Fb = 2600 PSI, E = 2000 KSI, Fv = 285 PSI LSL (1.55E) Fb = 2325 PSI, E = 1550 KSI, Fv = 310 PSI ALTERNATE MANUFACTURED LUMBER MANUFACTURERS MAY BE USED SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ARCHITECT AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. ALTERNATE MANUFACTURERZS PRODUCTS SHALL BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE JOIST HANGERS AND OTHER HARDWARE SPECIFIED ON PLANS, OR ALTERNATE HANGERS AND HARDWARE SHALL SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. SUBSTITUTED ITEMS SHALL HAVE ICC-ES REPORT APPROVAL FOR EQUAL OR GREATER LOAD CAPACITIES. MANUFACTURED LUMBER PRODUCTS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH A MOISTURE CONTENT OF 12% OR LESS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE PROVISIONS DURING CONSTRUCTION TO PREVENT THE MOISTURE CONTENT OF INSTALLED BEAMS FROM EXCEEDING 12%. EXCESSIVE DEFLECTIONS MAY OCCUR IF MOISTURE CONTENT EXCEEDS THIS VALUE. 30. PREFABRICATED PLYWOOD WEB JOIST DESIGN SHOWN ON PLANS IS BASED ON JOISTS MANUFACTURED BY THE WEYERHAEUSER CORPORATION. ALTERNATE PLYWOOD WEB JOIST MANUFACTURERS MAY BE USED SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ARCHITECT AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. ALTERNATE MANUFACTURERZS PRODUCTS SHALL BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE JOIST HANGERS AND OTHER HARDWARE SPECIFIED ON PLANS, OR ALTERNATE HANGERS AND HARDWARE SHALL SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. SUBSTITUTED ITEMS SHALL HAVE ICC-ES REPORT APPROVAL FOR EQUAL OR GREATER LOAD CAPACITIES. 31. PREFABRICATED CONNECTOR PLATE WOOD ROOF TRUSSES SHALL BE DESIGNED BY THE MANUFACTURER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE "NATIONAL DESIGN STANDARD FOR METAL PLATE -CONNECTED WOOD TRUSS CONSTRUCTION, ANSI/TPI I- BY THE TRUSS PLATE INSTITUTE FOR THE SPANS AND CONDITIONS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. LOADING SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: TOP CHORD LIVE LOAD 25 PSF TOP CHORD DEAD LOAD 10 PSF BOTTOM CHORD DEAD LOAD 5 PSF TOTAL LOAD 40 PSF WIND UPLIFT (TOP CHORD) 5 PSF BOTTOM CHORD LIVE LOAD 10 PSF (BOTTOM CHORD LIVE LOAD DOES NOT ACT CONCURRENTLY WITH THE ROOF LIVE LOAD) WOOD TRUSSES SHALL UTILIZE APPROVED CONNECTOR PLATES (GANGNAIL OR EQUAL). SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS AND DESIGN CALCULATIONS TO THE ARCHITECT AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER FOR REV JEW PRIOR TO FABRICATION. SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS SHALL BE SIGNED AND STAMPED BY A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER REGISTERED IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON. PROVIDE FOR SHAPES, BEARING POINTS, INTERSECTIONS, HIPS, VALLEYS, ETC., SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. EXACT COMPOSITION OF SPECIAL HIP, VALLEY, AND INTERSECTION AREAS (USE OF GIRDER TRUSSES, JACK TRUSSES, STEP-DOWN TRUSSES, ETC. ) SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE MANUFACTURER UNLESS SPECIFICALLY INDICATED ON THE PLANS. PROVIDE ALL TRUSS TO TRUSS AND TRUSS TO GIRDER TRUSS CONNECTION DETAILS AND REQUIRED CONNECTION MATERIALS. PROVIDE FOR ALL TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT TRUSS BRACING AND BRIDGING. 32. PLYWOOD SHEATHING SHALL BE GRADE C-D, EXTERIOR GLUE OR STRUCTURAL 11, EXTERIOR GLUE IN CONFORMANCE WITH DOC PS 1 OR PS 2. ORIENTED STRAND BOARD OF EQUIVALENT THICKNESS, EXPOSURE RATING AND PANEL INDEX MAY BE USED IN LIEU OF PLYWOOD. ROOF SHEATHING SHALL BE 1/2' (NOMINAL) WITH SPAN RATING 32/16. FLOOR SHEATHING SHALL BE 3/4- (NOMINAL) WITH SPAN RATING 48/24. WALL SHEATHING SHALL BE I/t (NOMINAL) WITH SPAN RATING 24/0. PROVIDE APPROVED PLYWOOD EDGE CLIPS CENTERED BETWEEN JOISTS/TRUSSES AT UNBLOCKED ROOF SHEATHING EDGES. ALL FLOOR SHEATHING EDGES SHALL HAVE APPROVED TO JOINTS OR SHALL BE SUPPORTED WITH SOLID BLOCKING. ALLOWI/8" SPACING AT ALL PANEL EDGES AND ENDS OF FLOOR AND ROOF SHEATHING. REFER TO WOOD FRAMING NOTES BELOW FOR TYPICAL NAILING REQUIREMENTS. 33. ALL WOOD IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH CONCRETE OR MASONRY SHALL BE PRESSURE -TREATED WITH AN APPROVED PRESERVATIVE OR (2) LAYERS OF ASPHALT IMPREGNATED BUILDING PAPER SHALL BE PROVIDED BETWEEN UNTREATED WOOD AND CONCRETE OR MASONRY. 34. PRESERVATIVE TREATED WOOD SHALL BE TREATED PER AWPA STANDARD Ul TO THE USE CATEGORY EQUAL TO OR HIGHER THAN THE INTENDED APPLICATION. TREATED WOOD FOR ABOVE GROUND USE SHALL BE TREATED TO AWPA UC30. WOOD IN CONTINUOUS CONTACT WITH FRESH WATER OR SOIL SHALL BE TREATED TO AWPA UC4A. WOOD FOR USE IN PERMANENT FOUNDATIONS SHALL BE TREATED TO AWPA UC4B. 35. FASTENERS AND TIMBER CONNECTORS USED WITH TREATED WOOD SHALL HAVE CORROSION RESISTANCE AS INDICATED IN THE FOLLOWING TABLE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. WOOD TREATMENT CONDITION PROTECT ION HAS NO AMMONIA CARRIER INTERIOR DRY G90 GALVANIZED CONTAINS AMMONIA CARRIER INTERIOR DRY G185 OR A185 HOT DIPPED OR CONTINUOUS HOT -GALVANIZED PER ASTM A653 CONTAINS AMMONIA CARRIER INTERIOR WET TYPE 304 OR 316 STAINLESS CONTAINS AMMONIA CARRIER EXTERIOR TYPE 304 OR 316 STAINLESS AZCA ANY TYPE 304 OR 316 STAINLESS INTERIOR DRY CONDITIONS SHALL HAVE WOOD MOISTURE CONTENT LESS THAN 19%. WOOD MOISTURE CONTENT IN OTHER CONDITIONS (INTERIOR WET, EXTERIOR WET, AND EXTERIOR DRY) IS EXPECTED TO EXCEED 19%. CONNECTORS AND THEIR FASTENERS SHALL BE THE SAME MATERIAL. COMPLY WITH THE TREATMENT MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROTECTION OF METAL. STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 2124 Third Avenue - suite ioo - Seattle, WA g8r2i p: �.6443.6 ssfangineers.corn 934 Broadv,ay - Tacoma, WA 98402 P: 253-284-9470 ssfenginears.corn Colryfight, 2017 Swe- Say Fagdt - All Rights Reserved .Ae 41111 0 "Wrl: Pic DESIGN: RHR CHECKED: RHR APPROVED: RHR REVISIONS: Al Permit REwislons Match 26,2019 DPD: P1.1EITITI.E: Aw Residence 9527 190th PL SW Edmonds, WA 98020 ARCHITECT.- StobI Design LLC P.O. BOX 20764 Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 661-3622 ISSUE: Permit SHEETTMI: General Structural Notes SCALE: DAM March 26, 2019 PROJECT NO: 10963-2018-14 SHEET NO: S1 . I General Structural Notes THE FOLLOWING APPLY UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE ON THE DRAWINGS 36. TIMBER CONNECTORS CALLED OUT BY LETTERS AND NUMBERS SHALL BE "STRONG -TIE" BY C. FLOOR AND ROOF FRAMING: PROVIDE DOUBLE JOISTS UNDER ALL PARALLEL PARTITIONS SIMPSON COMPANY, AS SPECIFIED IN THEIR CATALOG NUMBER C-C-2017. EQUIVALENT THAT EXTEND OVER MORE THAN HALF THE JOIST LENGTH AND AROUND ALL OPENINGS IN DEVICES BY OTHER MANUFACTURERS MAY BE SUBSTITUTED, PROVIDED THEY HAVE ICC-ES FLOORS OR ROOFS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. PROVIDE SOLID BLOCKING AT ALL APPROVAL FOR EQUAL OR GREATER LOAD CAPACITIES. PROVIDE NUMBER AND SIZE OF BEARING POINTS. TOE -NAIL JOISTS TO SUPPORTS WITH TWO 16d NAILS. ATTACH FASTENERS AS SPECIFIED BY MANUFACTURER FOR MAXIMUM LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY. TIMBER JOISTS TO FLUSH HEADERS OR BEAMS WITH SIMPSON METAL JOIST HANGERS IN CONNECTORS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S ACCORDANCE WITH NOTES ABOVE. NAIL.ALL MULTI JOIST BEAMS TOGETHER WITH TWO RECOMMENDATIONS. ROWS l6d @ 12" ON -CENTER. ALL 2X JOISTS SHALL BE CONNECTED TO FLUSH BEAMS WITH *LUS* SERIES JOIST HANGERS. ALL TJI JOISTS SHALL BE CONNECTED TO FLUSH BEAMS WITH "ITS" SERIES JOIST HANGERS. ALL DOUBLE -JOIST BEAMS SHALL BE CONNECTED TO FLUSH BEAMS WITH "MIT" SERIES JOIST HANGERS. WHERE CONNECTOR STRAPS CONNECT TWO MEMBERS, PLACE ONE-HALF OF THE NAILS OR BOLTS IN EACH MEMBER. ALL SHIMS SHALL BE SEASONED AND DRIED AND THE SAME GRADE (MINIMUM)AS MEMBERS CONNECTED. 37. WOOD FASTENERS A. NAIL SIZES SPECIFIED ON DRAWINGS ARE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING SPECIFICATIONS: SIZE LENGTH DIAMETER 8d 2-1/2" 0.131" 10d 3- 0.148" 16d BOX 3-1/2" 0.135" IF CONTRACTOR PROPOSES THE USE OF ALTERNATE NAILS, THEY SHALL SUBMIT NAIL SPECIFICATIONS TO THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER (PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION) FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. NAILS - PLYWOOD (APA RATED SHEATHING) FASTENERS TO FRAMING SHALL BE DRIVEN FLUSH TO FACE OF SHEATHING WITH NO COUNTERSINKING PERMITTED. TOE -NAILS SHALL BE DRIVEN AT AN ANGLE OF 30 DEGREES WITH THE MEMBER AND STARTED 1/3 THE LENGTH OF THE NAIL FROM THE MEMBER END. B. ALL BOLTS IN WOOD MEMBERS SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A307. PROVIDE WASHERS UNDER THE HEADS AND NUTS OF ALL BOLTS AND LAG BOLTS BEARING ON WOOD. INSTALLATION OF LAG BOLTS SHALL CONFORM TO THE NATIONAL DESIGN SPECIFICATION FOR WOOD CONSTRUCTION WITH A LEAD BORE HOLE OF 60 TO 70 PERCENT OF THE SHAW DIAMETER. LEAD HOLES ARE NOT REQUIRED FOR 3/8' AND SMALLER LAG SCREWS. 38. NOTCHES AND HOLES IN WOOD FRAMING: A. NOTCHES ON THE ENDS OF SOLID SAWN JOISTS AND RAFTERS SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE-FOURTH THE JOIST DEPTH. NOTCHES IN THE TOP OR BOTTOM OF SOLID SAWN JOISTS SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE -SIXTH THE DEPTH AND SHALL NOT BE LOCATED IN THE MIDDLE THIRD OF THE SPAN. HOLES BORED IN SOLID SAWN JOISTS AND RAFTERS SHALL NOT BE WITHIN 2 INCHES OF THE TOP OR BOTTOM OF THE JOIST, AND THE DIAMETER OF ANY SUCH HOLE SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE-THIRD THE DEPTH OF THE JOIST. 8. IN EXTERIOR WALLS AND BEARING PARTITIONS, ANY WOOD STUD IS PERMITTED TO BE CUT OR NOTCHED TO A DEPTH NOT EXCEEDING 25 PERCENT OF ITS WIDTH. A HOLE NOT GREATER IN DIAMETER THAN 40 PERCENT OF THE STUD WIDTH IS PERMITTED TO BE BORED IN ANY WOOD STUD. IN NO CASE SHALL THE EDGE OF THE BORED HOLE BE NEARER THAN 5/8 INCH TO THE EDGE OF THE STUD. BORED HOLES SHALL NOT BE LOCATED AT THE SAME SECTION OF STUD AS A CUT OR NOTCH. C. NOTCHES AND HOLES IN MANUFACTURED LUMBER AND PREFABRICATED PLYWOOD WEB JOISTS SHALL BE PER THE MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 39. WOOD FRAMING NOTES --THE FOLLOWING APPLY UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE PLANS: A. ALL WOOD FRAMING DETAILS NOT SHOWN OTHERWISE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED TO THE MINIMUM STANDARDS OF THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE, THE AITC 'TIMBER CONSTRUCTION MANUAL" AND THE AF&PA "NATIONAL DESIGN SPECIFICATION FOR WOOD CONSTRUCTION". MINIMUM NAILING, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, SHALL CONFORM TO IBC TABLE 2304.10.1. COORDINATE THE SIZE AND LOCATION OF ALL OPENINGS WITH MECHANICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. B. WALL FRAMING: REFER ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR THE SIZE OF ALL WALLS. ALL STUDS SHALL BE SPACED AT 16' O.C. UNO. TWO STUDS MINIMUM SHALL BE PROVIDED AT THE END OF ALL WALLS AND AT EACH SIDE OF ALL OPENINGS. AND AT BEAM OR HEADER BEARING LOCATIONS. TWO 2x8 HEADERS SHALL BE PROVIDED OVER ALL OPENINGS NOT OTHERWISE NOTED. SOLID BLOCKING FOR WOOD COLUMNS SHALL BE PROVIDED THROUGH FLOORS TO SUPPORTS BELOW. PROVIDE CONTINUOUS SOLID BLOCKING AT MID -HEIGHT OF ALL STUD WALLS OVER 10'-0" IN HEIGHT. ALL WALLS SHALL HAVE A SINGLE BOTTOM PLATE AND A DOUBLE TOP PLATE. END NAIL TOP PLATE TO EACH STUD WITH TWO 16d NAILS, AND TOENAIL OR END NAIL EACH STUD TO BOTTOM PLATE WITH TWO 16d NAILS. FACE NAIL DOUBLE TOP PLATE WITH 16d @ 12* O.C. AND LAP MINIMUM 4'-0" AT JOINTS AND PROVIDE EIGHT 16d NAILS @ 4"oc EACH SIDE JOINT. ALL STUD WALLS SHALL HAVE THEIR LOWER WOOD PLATES ATTACHED TO WOOD FRAMING BELOW WITH TWO ROWS OF 16d NAILS @ 12" ON -CENTER, OR ATTACHED TO CONCRETE BELOW WITH 5/8' DIAMETER ANCHOR BOLTS @ 4'-0' ON -CENTER EMBEDDED 7- MINIMUM, UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE. INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF BUILT-UP POSTS SHALL BE NAILED TO EACH OTHER WITH TWO ROWS OF 16d @12" ON -CENTER. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, GYPSUM WALLBOARD SHALL BE FASTENED TO THE INTERIOR SURFACE OF ALL STUDS AND PLATES WITH NO. 6 X 1-1/4" TYPE S OR W SCREWS @ 8" ON -CENTER. UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE, 1/2' (NOMINAL)APA RATED SHEATHING (SPAN RATING 24/0) SHALL BE NAILED TO ALL EXTERIOR SURFACES WITH Bd NAILS @ 6' ON -CENTER AT PANEL EDGES AND TOP AND BOTTOM PLATES (BLOCK UN -SUPPORTED EDGES)AND TO ALL INTERMEDIATE STUDS AND BLOCKING WITH 8d NAILS 111 12" ON -CENTER ALLOW 1/8" SPACING AT ALL PANEL EDGES AND PANEL ENDS. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE PLANS, PLYWOOD ROOF AND FLOOR SHEATHING SHALL BE LAID UP WITH GRAIN PERPENDICULAR TO SUPPORTS AND NAILED AT 6' ON -CENTER WITH Bd NAILS TO FRAMED PANEL EDGES, STRUTS AND OVER STUD WALLS AS SHOWN ON PLANS AND @ 12" ON -CENTER TO INTERMEDIATE SUPPORTS. PROVIDE APPROVED PLYWOOD EDGE CLIPS CENTERED BETWEEN JOISTS/TRUSSES AT UNBLOCKED ROOF SHEATHING EDGES. ALL FLOOR SHEATHING EDGES SHALL HAVE APPROVED TAG JOINTS OR SHALL BE SUPPORTED WITH SOLID BLOCKING. ALLOW 1/8' SPACING AT ALL PANEL EDGES AND ENDS OF FLOOR AND ROOF SHEATHING. TOENAIL BLOCKING TO SUPPORTS WITH 16d @ 12- ON-CENTER UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. r2 I STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 2124 Third Avenue - suite - Seattle, WA 98121 P: 206.443.6212 %fenglneers.corn 934 Elt,oadway - Tacoma, WA 98402 P: 253.284-9470 ssf-gineen.com COPYright 2017 Swerenn Sq Failft - All Rights Reserved 42AI DRAWN: PIC DESIGN: RHR CHECKED: RHR APPROVED: RHR REVISIONS: Z� Permit Revisions March 26,2019 DPD: PROM CT TITLE: Aw Residence 9527 190th PIL SW Edmonds, WA 98020 ARCHrrECT: Stobl Design LLC P.O. BOX 20764 Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 661-3622 ISSUE: Permit SH EET nTLE' General Structural Notes SCALE: March 26, 2019 �ROJECT NO: 10963-2018-14 SHEU NO: S1.2 4/S3.2 )� F-1 - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C) ----------- J ------------------------------- 1- i ------------- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I L J F . . . . . Ell SxSxlO'dp. CONCR. FTG. wl (3) #4 E.W. BOT., typ. IL 7/S3.2 typ. III L- - - - - - - - - L - - - - - - - - 3/S3.2 )1, ---------------------------------------- ----------------------------------- AB ON GRADE PER P N NOTE 3 SLAB ON GR PLAN No -ELEVATION PER ARCH. F - - r 3/S3.2 - - - - - - - - - - - - j ---------- L— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — ----------------------------------------- ----------------------- ---------- 11/S3.1 3/S3.2 - - - - - �13/S3.2 - - - - - - ll/S3.1 ----- n:-:T -------------- 11/S3.1 )1, _F - - - - - - - - F- - - - - - - - - i - - - - - - - - - - L - - - - -------------------------------- - --------------------------------- --------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - L - - - - - - - - 44/S3.2 �__ I - - - - - - - - Plan Notes Legend Foundation Plan 1. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. REFER ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR ALL DIMENSIONS. CONC. WALL BELOW Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2. REFER GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. 3. SLAB ON GRADE SHALL BE 4" THICKNESS MINIMUM. REINFORCE WITH 6x6 WlAxWl.4 WWM STRUCTURAL WOOD WALL ABOVE CENTERED IN SLAB. PROVIDE VAPOR BARRIER PER ARCH. BELOW SLAB OVER 4" MIN. FREE DRAINING GRAVEL OVER FIRM NATIVE SOILS OR STRUCTURAL FILL COMPACTED TO 957 CONC. FOOTING BELOW DENSITY. 4. THE BOTTOM OF ALL NEW EXTERIOR FOOTINGS SHALL BE 18" MIN. BELOW GRADE. HD HOLDOWN PER HOLDOWN SCHEDULE - SEE DTL 4/S4.1 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 2124 Third Avenue - Suite - Seattle, WA 98121 P.- 2.6-443.6— ssfenginee-com 934 Broadway -Tacoma WA 98402 p: 253.284-9470 s�ienginaen.com =ht 2017 S-- Say F�gdt - All Rlght� R—d 42141 Pic N: RHR CHECKED: RHR APPROVED: RHR REVISIONS: Al Permit Revisions Nardi 26,2019 DPD. PROJECTTITLE: Aw Residence 9527 190th PL SW Edmonds, WA 98020 ARCHTTECI; Stobl Design LLC P.O. BOX 20764 Seattle, VIVA 98102 (206) 661-3622 ISSUE: Permit SHEErTITLE: Foundation Plan 1/4" = 1 -10" U.N.O. March 26, 2019 PROJECT NO: 10963-2018-14 SHEff NO: S2. i NO: OF SHEETS: R 2 0 ul D JUN 0 5 2019 HW W/ OFFSET P.T. 6x6 W/ ECCQ POS & ABU POST P.T. 6x6 POST W/ BC POST P.T. 2x1O @ 1 P.T. 6x6 POST W/ BC POST P.T. 6x6 W/ CCQ POSI & ABU POST HW W/ OFFSET P.T. 5x6 PO� W/ BC POS P.T. 6x6 W/ ECCQ POS & ABU POST At I C�DTAD WAI I C AM TA Dr CIAM 11 ki fl Plan Notes Legend Main Floor Framing Plan 2'-O"x2'-O"xlO"dp. CONCR. FTC. W/ (2) #4 EA SOT. 1. 00 NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. REFER ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR ALL DIMENSIONS. Scale: 1/4' = 1'-0" STRUCTURAL WOOD WALL BELOW 2. TYPICAL FLOOR FRAMING CONSISTS OF 3/4" T&G PLYWOOD, FACE GRAIN PERPENDICULAR TO SUPPORTS OVER JOISTS PER PLAN. NAIL SHEATHING WITH 8D @ 6" D.C. EDGES AND OVER CONCRETE WALL BELOW SHEARWALLS, 12" O.C. FIELD. STRUCTURAL WOOD WALL ABOVE 3. ALL HEADERS SHALL BE (2) 2XB!S UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. AT CONTRACTORS OPTIO - N ' (2) Beam Schedule 2X8'S MAY BE SUBSTITUTED WITH 4X8 OR 6X6. CONIC. FOOTING BELOW MARK SIZE HANGER 4. PROVIDE (2) BEARING STUDS AT EACH END OF ALL HEADERS AND BEAMS UNLESS NOTED L"4: X 117/8' LSL HU11 OTHERWISE. 4 NUMBER OF BUNDLED STUDS 11 //8- LSL HHUS410 5. "SVC INDICATES PLYWOOD SHEATHED SHEARWALL BELOW FRAMING SHOWN. REFER SHEARWALL SCHEDULE ON DETAIL 2/S4.1. ALL NEW EXTERIOR WALLS SHALL BE SWI UNLESS NOTED HD HOLDOWN PER HOUDOWN SCHEDULE - SEE DTL. 4/S4.1 OTHERWISE. 6. REFER GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. 7. SLAB ON GRADE SHALL BE 4" THICKNESS MINIMUM. REINFORCE WITH 6x6 WlAxW1.4 WWM CENTERED IN SLAB. PROVIDE 6 MIL VAPOR BARRIER BELOW SLAB OVER e MIN. FREE DRAINING GRAVEL OVER FIRM NATIVE SOILS OR STRUCTURAL FILL COMPACTED TO 95% DENSITY. 8. THE BOTTOM OF ALL NEW EXTERIOR FOOTINGS SHALL BE 18" MIN. BELOW GRADE. STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 2124 Third Avenue - Suite 100 . 5!aftl!, WA 98121 p: 2o6.443.6212 stfangine—com 934 Broadvvay - Tacoma, NA�A 98402 P: 253.284-947- ssfengineers.com GDPAht 2017 Sm— Say Fag6t - All Right Reserved FIC, 42141 AL DRAWN: Pic DESIGN: RHR CHECKED: RHR APPROVED: RHR REVISIONS: 11 Permit Revisions March 26, 2019 DPD: PROJECTTITL�: Aw Residence 9527 190th PL SW Edmonds, WA 98020 ARCHITECT: Stobf Design LLC P.O. BOX 20764 Seattle, VIA 98102 (206) 661-3622 ISSUE: Permit =TTTLE: Main Floor Framing Plan SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" U.N.O. March 26, 2019 PROJECT NO: 10963-2018-14 SHEET NO: S2.2 NO: OF SHEETS: Lz E 12 U D JUN 0 5 2019 --ul"IT-1701 P.T. 6x6 POST */ ECCQ P.T. 6x6 POST "/ CCQ POST P.T. 6x6 POST I/ ECCQ PC 1. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. REFER ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR ALL DIMENSIONS. 2. TYPICAL ROOF FRAMING CONSISTS OF ROOF FRAMING PER ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS OVER q COX PLYWOOD, FACE GRAIN PERPENDICULAR TO SUPPORTS OVER JOISTS PER PLAN. NAIL SHEATHING WITH 8D 0 6" D.C. EDGES AND OVER SHEARWALLS, 12" D.C. FIELD 3. ALL HEADERS SHALL BE (2) 2X8'S UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. AT CONTRACTORS OPTION, (2) 2XWS MAY BE SUBSTITUTED WITH 4X8 OR 6X6. 4. PROVIDE (2) BEARING STUDS AT EACH END OF ALL HEADERS AND BEAM UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. GEID& 5. *SW" INDICATES PLYWOOD SHEATHED SHEARWALL BELOW FRAMING SHOWN. REFER SHEARWALL SCHEDULE ON DETAIL 2/S4.1. ALL NEW EXTERIOR WALLS SHALL BE SWI UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 6. REFER lO/S4.1 FOR NAILING AT SHEARWALL INTERSECTIONS. 7. REFER GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. ing Plan jtliIII, STRUCTURAL WOOD WALL BELOW SCCle: 1/4" = l'-O" NUMBER OF BUNDLED STUDS ROOF OVERFRAMING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 2124 Third Avenue - Suite - Seattle, WA 98121 P: 206-443.6212 ssfengineers- 934 Broadway - Tacoma, WA 984o2 P: 253.284-9470 Wengine—com Qpyllght 2017 SAer- Say Faildt - All Rights Re—d 42141 DRAWN; Pic DESIGN: RHR CHECKED: RHR APPROVED: RHR REVISIONS: zh Permit Revisims Mardi 26, 2019 DPD: PROJECTTITIE: Aw Residence 9527 190th PL SW Edmonds, WA 98020 ARCHITECT: Stobl Design LLC P.O. BOX 20764 Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 661-3622 ISSUE: Permit S HEET UTLE: Roof Framing Plan SCALE: 1/4" = '-0" U.N.O. DATE, March 26, 2019 PROJECT NO: 10963-2018-14 SHEET NO: S2.3 NO: OF SHEETS: Q JUN 0 5 2019 t3U!LO'rqG D�RART COY OF f D CORNER BARS TO CORNER BARS TO W CORNER BARS TO MATCH CROSS WALL CORNER BARS TO MATCH CROSS WALL MATCH EXTERIOR HORIZ. REINF. MATCH HORIZ. REINF. HORIZ. REINF. HORI Z. REINF. (alt. hooks) CONCRETE WALL 2 "S' ADD DIAGONAL IN WALL ---------------- LIP4 4. TO MATCH WALL REINF. \--ADDITIONAL —TYP. CORNER �ADDITIONAL —TYP. CORNER PIPE SLEEVES de E VERT. BARS BARS: 24 F VERT. BARS BARS: 24 - F AS REOD. ............. tw CROSS WALL CROSS WALL ............ NORMAL REINFORCING ADD BARS TO 2'-0" min. EXCAVATION NOT MATCH NORMAL REINFORCING S2 ALLOWED BELOW Double Curtain- Single Curtain THIS LINE LINE OF EXCAVATION Typical Corner Bars at Concrete Walls and Footings N MAL FOOTIN REINFORCING Pipe and Trench Locations 2 3 Typical Stepped Footing 4 PANEL EDGE NAILING PANEL EDGE NAILING PANEL EDGE NAILING — OVER ALL HOLDOWN STUDS OVER ALL HOLDOWN STUDS OVER ALL HOLDOWN STUDS HOLDOWN (where occurs) A35 PER SHEARWALL HOLDOWN (where occurs) HOLDOWN (where occurs) A35 PER SHEARWALL TJI BLKG BETWEEN JOISTS PER PLAN W/ ALL -THREAD SCHEDULE PER PLAN W/ A.B. PER PER PLAN W/ ALL -THREAD SCHEDULE (4) 8d INTO EA. BLOCK TO MATCH A.B. SIZE I HOLDOWN SCHEDULE VERTICAL GRAIN BLKG. TO MATCH HOLDOWN STUDS HOLDOWN SCHEDULE P.T. 2x PLATE W/ A.B. PER SHEARWALL SCHEDULE TO MATCH A.B. SIZE IN HOLDOWN SCHEDULE VERTICAL GRAIN BLKG. TO MATCH HOLDOWN STUDS JOIST DIRECTION AND SHEATHING PER PLAN SHEARWALL PER PLAN (4) Bd INTO EA. BLOCK SHEARWALL PER PLAN (5/8"0 0 48"oc elsewhere) SHEARWALL PER PLAN (4) 8d INTO EA. BLOCK NAILING PER SHEARWALL JOIST DIRECTION AND (2) #4 CONT. TOP NAILING PER SHEARWALL --------- JOIST DIRECTION AND SCHEDULE (typ.) SHEATHING PER PLAN (1 ea. Side of a.b.) SCHEDULE (typ.) SHEATHING PER PLAN 13/4' LSL RIM JOIST 13/4* LSL RIM JOIST (2) #4 CONT. TOP (1 ea. side of a.b.) - ri E SLAB ON GRADE (2) f CONT. TOP (1 ea. side of a.b.) GARAGE s.o.G. @ WHERE JOISTS ARE PARALLEL PROVIDE TJI BLKG. @ 48"oc E (2) l6c] 1HRU EA. JOIST OR BLOCK PER PLAN (2) 16d THRU EA. JOIST OR BLOCK (2) 16d THRU EA. JOI ST OR BLOCK #4 @ 12"oc WHERE JOISTS ARE WHERE JOISTS ARE P.T. 2x6 PLATE W/ A.B. A PER SHE RWALL SCHEDULE HORIZ. PARALLEL, PROVIDE TJI BLKG. 0 48"oc U iA6, O�� SEE RETAINING WALL PARALLEL, PROVIDE TA BLKG. 0 48"oc REINFORCING PER RETAINING WALL (5/8"0 @ 48"oc elsewhere) 7, #4 @ 187oc "/"kRT.(alt. bends) SCHEDULE FOR REINF. SCHEDULE (U.N.O.) VERT.(olt. bends) r i P.T. 2x6 PLATE W/ A.B. PER P.T. 2x6 PLATE W/ A.B. PER (2) #4 CONT. TOP WSHEARWALL SCHEDULE (U.N.O.) (5/8"o 0 48"oc elsewhere) #4 0 12"oc HORIZ SHEARWALL SCHEDULE (U.N.O.) (5/8"0 @ 48"oc elsewhere) ALL FASTENERS INTO PRESSURE TREATED WOOD SHALL BE GALV. (I ea. side of o.b.) 11 1 /11� E ALL FASTENERS INTO PRESSURE TREATED WOOD SHALL BE GALV. (2) #4 CONT. BOT. ALL FASTENERS INTO PRESSURE ALL FASTENERS INTO PRESSURE TREATED WOOD SHALL BE GALV. OR STAINLESS STEEL PER GENERAL NOTES (2) #4 CONT. , BOT. 5" B" 5� OR STAINLESS STEEL PER SHALL BE GALV. 0. Z - OR STAINLESS STEEL PER GENERAL NOTES 5 TREATED WOOD OR STAINLESS STEEL PER 6 GENERAL NOTES 8" 5" GENERAL NOTES -7 Retaining Wall Schedule W/ Slab LEVEL BACKFILL Stem Reinforcing Footing Reinforcing H (ft.) B1 ts B2 tf #4 @ 12"oc VERT. Vert. Horiz. Top Longit. #4 @ 12'oc HORIZ. PROVIDE FREE -DRAINING— MATERIAL 3. -0. 8. 5� 5� 10" #4 @ 18'oc #4 @ 12"oc - (2)#4 P x _j 0 18-oc FACE OF WALL BLTUMU 4!-0" 11-C 8' 5" 10" #4 @ 18"Ge #4 0 12"oc - (2)#4 #5 CONT. AT OPENINGS SEE PLAN FOR SLAB PLACE SLAB PRIOR TOI 6'-0" 2'-3- 9" 8. 10" #4 @ Woe #4 @ 12"cle - (4)#4 TH CKNES AND E BACKFILLING WALL 11/2' Or. @ #4's & #5's 8�-O" - 8. 2-9 1'-3' 12" #5 0 12"oc #4 0 12"oc #4 0 18"oc (6)#5 REINFORCISNIG (typ.) 2' chr. @ #6 6" CONC. WALL SLAB ON GRADE —A PER PLAN FOOTING DRAIN 10'-0" 3-9" 8. 11-9. 18" #7 0 12"cic #4 @ 12"oc #4 0 18"oc (8)#5 FBY OTHERS (2)#5 CONT. NMI 5" 6' 5" B1 9 12 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 2124 Third A�enue - Suite ioo - Seattle, WA 98121 p: 2o6.44312 ssfenoneers.com 934 Ehmadway - T—ma, WA 984o2 P: �53.284.9470 ssfengine--m Copyright 2017 S.— Say Fagdt - All Right R.d w"'l DRAWN: Pic N: RHR CHECKED: RHR APPROVED: RHR REVISIONS: Al Perinit Revisions March 26, 2019 DPD: PROJECT TITLE: Aw Residence 9527 190th PL SW Edmonds, VIA 98020 ARCHITECT: Stobl Design LLC P.O. BOX 20764 Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 661-3622 ISSUE: Permit SHEET TITLE: Concrete Details SCALE: `!4T' = 11�-O" U.N.O. March 26, 2019 PROJECT NO: 10963-2018-14 SHEEFT NO: S3.1 NO: OF SHEETS: R r_ 0- U M JUN 0 5 20119 BU-LOInG DCp,,FjTVriNT Uay OF EOL&OWDS PANEL EDGE NAILING PANEL EDGE NAILING OVER ALL HOLDOWN STUDS OVER ALL HOLDOWN STUDS HOLDOWN (where occurs) PER PLAN W1 A.B. PER HOLDOWN (where occurs) SHEATHING CAN BE HOLDOWN SCHEDULE PER PLAN W/ A.B. PER PLACED ON EITHER P.T. A PLATE W/ A.B. HOLDOWN SCHEDULE SIDE OF WALL SHEARWALL PER PLAN PER SHEARWALL SCHEDULE (5/8"0 @ 48'oc elsewhere) SHEARWALL PER PLAN P.T. 2x PLATE W/ A.B. 2) #4 CONT. TOP SLAB ON GRADE PER SHEARWALL SCHEDULE �l ea. side of a.b.) PER PLAN (5 /8"0 @ 48"oc elsewhere) SLAB ON GRADE PER PLAN H #4 0 18'oc VERT.(alL bends) #4 0 12"oc HORIZ. A LL FASTENER INTO PRESSURE TREATED WO SHALL BE GALV. (2) #4 CONT. ITCC R STAINLES STEEL PER TOP & BOT. (2) #4 CONT. BOT. l'-6- ALL FASTENERS INTO PR TREATED WOOD SHALL BE GALV. OR STAINLESS STEEL PER GENERAL NOTES Interior Wall w/ Thickened Slab Exterior Wall w/ Slab on Grade 4 PANEL EDGE NAILING— — P.T. 2x PLATE W/ A.B. OVER ALL HOLDOWN STUDS PER SHEARWALL SCHEDULE (5/8`0 0 48"oc elsewhere) HOLDOWN (where occurs) PER PLAN W/ A.B. PER HOLDOWN SCHEDULE POST, PLINTH, & FIG. SHEARWALL PER PLAN j . (2) #4 CONT. TOP 8d @6" oc POST PER PLAN (I ea. side of CA) H JOIST DIRECTION AND 10-dia. PLINTH REINF. N/ ABU SERIES POST BASE W/ SHEATHING PER PLAN ,(4)#4 x L VERT. & #3 x 5/8'00' A.B. @ Voc W/ (3)#3 x IN TOP 5" OF PLINTH RETAINING WALL PE R 12/S3.2 E d P.T. 2xI2 LEDGER w/ 3/4"0 EPDXY ANCHOR (EMBED 4- MIN.) @ 32' oc FOOTING SIZE & REINF. PER PLAN /—LEVEL BACKFILL Retaining Wall Schedule x H (ft.) B2 tf Stem Reinforcing Footing Reinforcing Vert. Horiz. Top Longit. PROVIDE FREE —DRAINING— S—O" 5- 8" #4 0 18"oc #4 @ 12"oc (2)#4 MATERIAL 5- #4 0 18"oc #4 0 12"oc #4 @ 18"oc (2)#4 11/2" dr. @ #4's #5's 61-0. 5- 8. 2'-3" 1T #4 0 12"oc #4 0 12*oc #4 @ 12"oc; (4)#4 2" dr. @ #6's 8'-0' I I -y' 8' 2'-9- 12" #5 @ 12"oc --- #4 0 12"oc #5 12"oe (5)#5 FOOTING DRAIN OTHERS -9. 9' S-9' 18" #7 0 ffoc #4 0 12"oc #6 12"oc (8)15 N qB1ts B2 10 12 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 2124Third Avenue - Suiw - Seatfl�, WA 98121 p: �o(5-443.62,' ssfeng.neers... 934 Broadway - Tacoma, VV.:�l 984.2 P: 253.28,4.9470 sstengineers.com Copyright 2D17 Sweawn Say Fack - All Rights Reserved E 421 1 DRAWN: PIC DESIGN: RHR CHECKED: RHR APPROVED: RHR REVISIONS: Z� Permit Revisions March 26, 2019 DPD: "OJECTTITLE: Aw Pesidence 9527 190th PL SW Edmonds, WA 98020 ARCHFI-ECT: Stobl Design LLC P.O. BOX 20764 Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 661-3622 ISSUE: Permit SHE11T11- Concrete Details 3/4" = 1'-0" U.N.O. oAM. March 26, 2019 PRCUECT NO: 10963-2018-14 SHEET NO: S3.2 NO: OF SHEETS: ULo JUN 0 5 2019 BUILDING IDEPA Crr., OF ED�", Shecirwall Schedule (1000@0 SAWN OR MFR.— IN NAILING PanelEdge Top Plate Connection Base Plate Connection LUMBER. 2x MIN. PER SCHEDULE Mark Sheathing SEE NOTES FOR Nailing if Til if Wood at Wood 0 at Concrete ANCHOR BOLT, TYP. ADDITIONAL 2x NAILER Corner 45* REQUIRE SWI 15/3f COX PLYWOOD 8d @ Voc IN @ Voc A35 0 24"oc; 16d 0 6"Dc 51ell A.B. 0 48"oc 1/2" MAX. TO Installation * �'-TER EDGE COX PLYWOOD 8d 0 4c, 16d 0 4c, A35 0 16*oc (2)rows 16d 0 Voc 5/8"0 A.B. @ 32"Gc OF CONCRETE, TV. 16d NAIU11171 EDGE OF SW2 15/32 (Install with arrow, NG on top of the bolt PER SCHEDULE - WASHER SW3(D 15/32- COX PLYWOOD 8d @ 3oc (2)rows l6d @ eoc A35 @ 12*oc (2)rows 16d 0 Voc 5/8"0 A.B. 0 24"oc oriented a. shown) L/�24 Detail A Detall C SW4(D,l 15/32" COX PLYWOOD 8d @ 2". (2)rows l6d @ 4"oc , A35 0 9"oc I (2)rows 16d 0 4"oc(D 5/8"0 A.B. 0 16*oc U., - , 0' 0 BLOCK PANEL EDGES WITH 2x MIN. LAID FLAT AND NAIL PANELS TO INTERMEDIATE SUPPORTS WITH 8d 0 12"o.c. 3/8" 1/2" 0 8d NAILS SHALL BE 0.131"0 x 2 1/2" (common) - 16d NAILS SHALL BE 0.135"0 x 3 11/2� (box) min typ. (D EMBED ANCHOR BOLTS AT LEAST 7'. EXPANSION BOLTS MAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR ANCHOR BOLTS WITH 4* EMBEDMENT. TITEN HD SCREW ANCHORS MAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR ANCHOR BOLTS W1 �' EMBEDMENT. ALL BOLTS SHALL HAVE 3" x 3" x 1/4' MIN. PLATE WASHERS. PLATE WASHERS SHALL EXTEND TO WITHIN 1/2' OF THE EDGE OF THE BOTTOM PLATE ON THE SIDE WITH SHEATHING. SEE DETAIL C. NAI PLYWOOD EDGE EDGE OVER Ek S D T 3x STUDS OR DOUBLE STUDS NAILED TOGETHER W/ BASE PLATE NAILING ARE REQUIRED AT ABUTTING PANEL EDGES OF SW3 AND SW2. SEE DETAIL B. WHERE 3x STUDS ARE USED FOR SW2, STAGGER NAILS AT ADJOINING PANEL EDGES. (D TWO STUDS MINIMUM ARE REQUIRED AT EACH END OF ALL SHEARWALLS AND ALL END STUDS SHALL RECEIVE PANEL EDGE NAILING. SEE PLANS AND HOLDOWN SCHEDULE FOR ALTERNATE REQUIREMENTS. 16d NAILING;7 PER SCHEDULE (D ALL EXTERIOR WALLS SHALL BE SWI, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. Detol B (2) 7/16' O.S.B. MAY BE SUBSITUTED FOR 15/32" COX. PLAN VIEW AT ABUTTING PANEL 0 LTPr. (HORIZIONTAL ORIENTATION) W1 8d COMMON MAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR A35!s AT CONTRACTORS OPTION. EDGES OF W3 & W2 RIM (D A 2x NAILER ATTACHED W/ BASE PLATE NAILING PER DETAIL A MAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR A35'. AT CONTRACTORS OPTION. Detail D 0 AT MULTI -ROW NAILING, MINIMUM OFFSET BETWEEN ROWS AND ROW SPACING 1/2-, SEE DETAIL D. (D PROVIDE (3) ROWS 16d 0 Coe AT LVI_ RIMS. BLOCKI BTWNL (2)16d EA. JOI MIL LUbr NAILINU ARWALL BELOW )VIDE 31/2' LSL JO BLKG. 0 SHEARWA EDGE NAILING CLI JI 4"oc PLATE CONNECTIi 16d NAILS OR i W/ LSL JOISTS PER PLAN Shearwall Schedule - (Sheathed One Side) 2 INTO LOCK I LOCK AST BAY LKG. 0 4�90FC A35 (a OMIT 1 - I _�_ PANEL EDGE NAILING _2x BLOCKING 2x BLOCKING SHEATHING PANEL JOINT BTWNL STUDS 0 ill/ PANEL EDGE NAILING BTWN. STUDS BOTTOM PLATE CONNECTION PANEL EDGE NAILING Bearing Wall Non -Bearing Wall �.,!Wjjj NOW== NOTE: SEE SHEARWALL SCHEDULE FOR ALL NAILING AND CONNECTIONS, NOT OTHERWISE NOTED /_ SHEARWALL PEF ii N ii on 'ANO—EMIN SHEARWALL PER PLAN IF SHEARWALL 16d 0 12'oc A' OTHER WALLS INTERSECTING (see left if she, (D PLYWOOD PANEL EDGE NAILING PER SHEARWALL SCHEDULE (Z BASE PLATE NAILING PER SHEARWALL SCHEDULE (3) 16d @ 8"oc Typical Shearwall Construction Typical Shearwall Intersections 10 (6)16d TYP. S' Non -Corner Installation (Bolt may be installed 0 45't� 13Y as shown) 4 T -M Corner Installation (IRst.11 with nnno. o� top of the bolt 91� onented as shown) ... - .if 0' Typical HDU Holdown HOLDOWN POST PER SCHEDULE HDU HOLDOWN SHEARWALL PER PLAN c-7 CONT. #4 EA. SIDE OF ANCHOR BOLT Holdown Schedule EDGE NAIL PER SWSCHEDULE FRAMING CONT. WHERE OCCURS SSTB PER SCHEDUIE Plan Mark Screws Anchor Bolt A.B. Embed Holdown Post 0 HDU2-SDS2.5 (6)SDS 1/421/2" SSTB20 165/8- (2) 2x6 HDU4-SDS2 5 (IO)SDS 1/4"x2l/2' SB5/8x24 18" 4A HDU5-SDS2.5 (14)SDS 1/4"x2l/2" SB5/8x24 18" US HDU8-SDS2.5 (20)SDS 1/421/2" SSTB28 247/8" US HDUll-SDS2.5 (30)SDS fl/ex2l/2" SBIX30 24" 6x8 MINIMUM SIZE OF POST AT END OF WALL UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON FRAMING PLANS. JULL iur rLAIL ! HEADER N (2) BEARING .O.N. Typical Header Support w/2 Bearing Studs (10)16d 0 4'oc STAGGERED (2) 16d 0 EA. STUD AT EACH SIDE OF SPLICE ELSEWHERE TOP CHORD SPLICE 6'-0" min. BETWEEN SPLICES SPLICE TO OCCUR AT OF VERT. STUD T`YP. Typical Top Plate Splice STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 4Third Avenue - Suite ino � S!attlq, WA 98- P: �-6.443-6 ssfengineers.corn 934 Broadway - Tacoma, WA 98402 P: 253.284-9470 ssfengineers.com 0,pyright, 2017 S— Sy Feg6t - All Rights Reserved Etc, �A 42141 DRAWN: PIC DE51GN: RHR CHECKED: RHR APPROVED: RHR REVISIONS: Al Permit Revisions March 26, 2019 RD DPD: 12 111110- PROJECTTITLE: Aw Residence 9527 190th PL SW Edmonds, WA 98020 M97 Stobl Design LLC P.O. BOX 20764 Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 661-3622 ISSUE: Permit =TITLE: Wood Details SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" U.N.O. DATEt March 26, 2019 PROIECT NO: 10963-2018-14 SHEET NO: S4. i NO: OF SHEETS: 21 17Z P3 JUN 0 5 2019 W.L.DING DEPAIMM.'PIT Cn"Y OF EDMONDS SHEATHING PER PLAN FULL DEPTH BLOCKING B LO ' FULL DEPTH BLOCKING - c may W/ 8d 0 6"oc (may be 6 "a ( be W/ 8d 0 6'oc (may be ven,ing) drilled for venting) drilled for venting) 4CKIN HI EA. TRUSS USS f Hl EA. TRUSS \—�—PRE—MANUF. FASCIA TRUSS FASCIA PER ARCH. PER PLAN PER ARCH. NAILING PER SHEARWALL SCHEDULE per ci-ch. HEADER/BEAM POST PER PLAN SHEARWALL PER PLA PER PLAN Exterior Bearing Wall R per arch. Beam & Post SHEATHING PER PLAN PANEL EDGE NAILING OF SHEARINALL BELOW SHEATHING PER PLAN — SHEATHE AND NAIL PRE—MANUF. TRUSS TRUSS TO MATCH PER PLAN SHEARWALL BELOW BEAM PER PLAN PRE—MANUF. TRUSSES — PER PLAN 30ST CAP PER PLAN SHEARWALL PER PLAN — 2 x BLKG. TO RECEIVE PANEL EDGE NAILING 20 STUDS 0 24"oc W/(2)16d TOE NAILS EA. END A35 PER SHEARWALL SCHEDULE WATERPROOFING PER PANEL EDGE NAILING A35 PER SHEARWALL ARCH. OVER ALL HOLDOWN STUDS SCHEDULE P.T. 2x LEDGER TO MATCH—\ FLOOR/FOUNDATION VERTICAL GRAIN BLKG. WS HOLDOWN PER PLAN DECK FRAMING (U.N.O.) FRAMING PER PLAN TO MATCH HOLDOWN STUDS W/ SDS1/4x4. 1/2" SCREWS @ 6"oc, STAGGERED NAILING PER (4)8d INTO EACH BLOCK DECKING PER ARCH — SHEARWALL SCHEDULE (typ) JOIST DIRECTION AND F/;�--SHEATHING PER PLAN . 0 13/4' LSL RIM JOIST OR - , MA 1 "16 1 BEAM PER PLAN P I. DECK JOISTS PER--/ E P'LAN (where joists are Elevation perpendicular provide I LEAVE ONE END OF (2) 16d THRU EA. LUS hanger @ledger) STRAP UNAILED JUST JOIST OR BLOCK �-E PRIOR TO COVERING WHERE JOISTS ARE F PARALLEL, PROVIDE DTTIZ AT (4) LOCATION 1 4� min. W TJI BLKG. 0 48"oc SHEARVIALL PER PLAN EVENLY DISTR. ALONG DECK _EJ AND (1) WITHIN 2� OF THE 5r max. -BEAM/HDR. PER PLAN (where occurs) END OF DECK LEDGER. PROVIDE LA SDS pacing Elevation 3/8"0 LAG BOLT. EMBED 3" INTO TOP P NOTE. LEDGER FASTENER SPACING MAY BE OFFSET UP TO 3" TO AVOID INTERFERENCE W/ JOIST ATTACHMENT Exterior Floor Framing 10 11 Typical Deck Ledger Detail 12 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 2124 Third Avenue - suite - Seattle, WA 98izi P: 2o6.443.6212 ssfangineers.com 934 Broadway - Tacoma, WA 98402 P: 253.284-9470 ssfengineerr.com, C-Might 2017 Sa..n SSY Fairk - All PightS Re—ed WAS 42141 DRAWN: PIC DESIGN: RHR CHECKED RHR APPROVED: RHR REVISIONS: Peraut Revisions March 26, 2019 DPD: PROJECT TITLE: Aw Residence 9527 190th Pl- SW Edmonds, WA 98020 ARCHrrECT: Stobl Design LLC P.O. BOX 20764 Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 661-3622 ISSUE: Permit SHEET TrrLE: Wood Details SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0* U.N.O. DATE, March 26, 2019 PRIMIECT NO: 10963-2018-14 SHEE r NO: S4.2 NO: OF SHEETS: F, rz- 3 U P13 JUN 0 5 2019 Duir-mom 2TINNT CIT Ign , ON, NE 1/4, SE 1/4, SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, AW RESIDENCE 9527 190TH PL SW EDMONDS, WA 98020 OWNER CONSULTANTS UTILITIES LEGAL DESCRIPTION CHAK AW ARCHITECT CIVIL ENGINEER WATER/SEWER/STORM NATURALGAS FIRE EDMONDS SEA VIEW TRS BUKOOOD-01-LOT2 9527 190TH PL SW STROBL DESIGN CG ENGINEERING CITY OF EDMONDS PUGET SOUND ENERGY EDMONDS FIRE STATION 16 CITY OF ED LLA REC U N D AFN 201211210469 & EDMONDS, WA 98020 SEATTLE, WA 98105 250 4TH AVE S, SUITE 200 121 STH AVE N RD BOX 91269 8429 196TH ST SW SURV REC LIND AFN 201210195001 CORR BY NO 425.78S.2038 206.661.3622 EDMONDS, WA 98020 EDMONDS, WA 98020 BELLEVUE, WA EDMONDS, WA 98026 201211010497 BEING SWLY PTNLOT 79 SO PLAT CONTACT: JACOB STROBL 425.778,8500 FAX 778.5536 425.551.1200 CONTACT: JARED UNDERBRINK APPLICANT PARCEL NUMBER STROBL DESIGN SURVEYOR SOIL/GEOTECH ENGINEER POWER TELEPHONE 004346-000-079-01 SEATTLE, WA 98105 GREENE LAND SURVEYING SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES, PLLC IS SNCIHOM SH COUNTY PUD COMCAST 206.661.3622 4708 164TH ST SW PO BOX 1275 PO'BOX 1107 15815 25TH AVE W DATUM- CONTACT: JACOB STROBL LYNNWOOD, WA 98087 NORTH BEND, WA 98045 EVERETT, WA 98206 LYNNWOOD, WA98087 206.498.0979 FAX: 497.1542 425.831.2023 425.783.1000 NAVD88 CONTACT: ROBERT GREENE CONTACT., ANDREW GLANDON GENERAL NOTES HAULROUTE RANGE 3 EAST. W.M. CAUTION1 CALL BEFORE YOU DIGII BUIE. UTILITIES EXIST IN THE AREA AND UTILITY INF IORMATION SHOWN MAY NOT BE COMPLETE. CONTACT THE NE- CALL UTILITY LOCATE SERVICE A MINIMUM OF 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION 1-800-424-555 FROM SITE: WEST ON 190TH PIL SW, SOUTH ON OLYMPIC VIEW DR, EAST ON PUGET DR, BECOMES 196TH ST SW, CONTINUE EAST ON 196TH ST SW TO 1-5. TO SITE: FROM 1-5, WEST ON 196TH ST SW, BECOMES PUGET DR, NORTH ON OLYMPIC VIEW DR, EAST ON 190TH PL SVV, SITE ON NORTH SIDE OF ROAD. NOTE: HAUL ROUTE NOT PERMITTED FOR A TRUCK AND TRAILER. GENERAL NOTES: CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE NOTES: 1. ALL MATERIALS AND WORK SHOWN ON THESE PLANS SHALL CONFORM TO THE CITY OF 21. A SEPARATE IRRIGATION PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY PUBLIC WORKS 1. SCHEDULE A PRE -CONSTRUCTION MEETING WITH CITY ENGINEERING DIVISION AT EDMONDS STANDARD PLANS AND DETAILS, THE FOLLOWING SPECIFICATIONS AND CODES, DEPARTMENT. PRIOR TO FINAL CONSTRUCTION ACCEPTANCE, PROVIDE TO THE CITY WATER 425-771-0220, EXT. 1326. TWO DAY (48 HR) NOTICE IS REQUIRED. AND ALL OTHER APPLICABLE LOCAL MUNICIPAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL CODES, RULES AND QUALITY TECHNICIAN, A COPY OF THE BACKFLOW TEST REPORT. TEST REPORTS CAN BE FAKED REGULATIONS: IL To 42S_744_6057 OR EMA LED TO LINDA.MCMURPHY@EDMONDSWA.GOV. BACKIFLOW 2. REVIEW TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES. CURRENT INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE (IBC) TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BYTHE OWNER ANNUALLY THEREAFTER. CURRENT WSDOT/APWA STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD, BRIDGE AND MUNICIPAL 3. CALL FOR UTILITY LOCATES. CONSTRUCTION 22. ASA MINIMUM REQUIREMENT, ALL DISTURBED AREAS ON AND OFF SITE SHALL BE RETURNED - WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL TO THE EQUIVALENT OF THEIR PRECONSTRUCTION CONDITION IN ACCORDANCE WITH 4. INSTALL TESC MEASURES AND MAINTAIN DUST CONTROL WHILE PREVENTING DISTURBANCE FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN (CURRENT EDITION) APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS. OF ANY AREAS OF VEGETATION OUTSIDE THE CONSTRUCTION ZONE. 2. STANDARD PLAN AND TYPE NUMBERS INDICATED ON THESE DRAWINGS REFER TO CITY OF 23. ALL DISTURBED SOIL AREAS SHALL BE COMPOST AMENDED AND SEEDED OR STABILIZED BY S. HAVE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES INSPECTED BY CITY OF EDMONDS CITY ENGINEERING EDMONDS STANDARD DETAILS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE OTHER ACCEPTABLE METHODS FOR THE PREVENTION OF ONSITE EROSION AFTER THE NSPECTOR. ALL TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MUST BE :N COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. SEE EROSION CONTROL PLANS FOR SPECIFIC GRADING AND PLACE AND INSPECTED PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION OR SITE CLEARING. EROSION AND 3. A COPY OF THESE APPROVED PLANS MUST BE ON THE JOBSITE WHENEVER CONSTRUCTION IS EROSION CDNTROL REQUIREMENTS. SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PRACTICES AND/OR DEVICES SHALL BE MAINTAINED UNTIL IN PROGRESS. PERMANENT VEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED. 24. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP OFF -SITE STREETS CLEAN AT ALL TIMES BY SWEEPING. 4. DEVIATIONS FROM THESE PLANS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD AND THE WASHI NG OF THESE STREETS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL. 6. CLEAR, GRUB & ROUGH GRADE SITE. REVEGETATE DISTURBED AREAS NOT SUBJECT TO LOCAL GOVERNING AUTHORITY. ADDITIONAL SURFACE DISTURBANCE IMMEDIATELY AFTER ROUGH GRADING. (OTHER EXPOSED 25. THIS PROJECT IS NOT A BALANCED EARTHWORK PROJECT. BOTH EXPORT AND I MPORT OF SOIL AREAS SHALL BE STABILIZED PER EROSION CONTROL NOTES BELOW). 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL RECORD ALL APPROVED DEVIATIONS FROM THESE PLANS ON A SET OF AND ROCK MATERIALS ARE REQUIRED. "AS -BUILT" DRAWINGS AND SHALL SUMMARIZE ALL ASBUILT CONDITIONS ON ONE SET OF 7. INSTALL UTILITIES AND OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS. REPRODUCIBLE DRAWINGS FOR SUBMITTAL TO THE OWNER PRIOR PROJECT COMPLETION 216. SLOPE OF FINISHED GRADE SHALL BE CONSTANT BETWEEN FINISHED CONTOURS OR SPOT AND ACCEPTANCE, A SET OF AS -BUILT DRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF ELEVATIONS SHOWN. 8. INSTALL INFILTRATION TRENCH. EXCAVATION OF INFILTRATION AREAS SHALL NOT BE EDMONDS PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL OF THE BUILDING OCCUPANCY/FINAL PROJECT ALLOWED DURING WET OR SATURATED CONDITIONS.THE BMP SHALL NOT BE MADE APPROVAL. 27. FINISHED GRADE SHALL SLOPE AWAY FROM 13UILDING WALLS AT MINIMUM 5% SLOPE FOR A OPERATIONAL UNTIL ALL EROSION -CAUSING PROJECTIMPROVEMENTS ARE COMPLETED AND MINIMUM DISTANCE OF 10 FEET. ALL EXPOSED GROUND SURFACES ARE STABILIZED. 6. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET. SEE SURVEY FOR BENCHMARK INFORMATION. . 28. CONTRACTOTSH ALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AND SHALL INSTALL AND MAINTAIN SHORING AND 9. STABILIZE AND COMPOST -AMEND ALL EXPOSED SOILSPRIOR TO REVEGETATION OF ENTIRE 7. THE LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND SITE FEATURES SHOWN HEREON HAVE BEEN BRACING AS NECESSARY TO PROTECT WORKERS, EXISTING BUILDINGS, STREETS, WALKWAYS, SITE. FURNISHED BY OTHERS BY FIELD SURVEY OR OBTAINED FROM AVAILABLE RECORDS AND UTILITIES ANUCITHER EXISTING AND PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND EXCAVATIONS AGAINST OF GtiOUNIFOR CAVING EMBANKMENTS. CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE SH ULD THEREFORE BE CONSIDERED APPROXIMATE ONLY AND NOT NECESSARILY COMPLETE. C) �Oss -FOR REMOVAL OF SHORING AND BRACING, AS REQUIRED. 10. ESTABLISH LANDSCAPING AND PERMANENT VEGETATION. ALL TEMPORARY EROSION I T IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF ALL UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN AND TO FURTHER DISCOVER AND PROTECT CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE REMOVED UPON FINALSITE STABILIZATION AND APPROVAL BY CITY INSPECTOR. ANY OTHER UTILITIES NOT SHOWN HEREON WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE 29. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN APPROVAL FROM THE CITY AND FOLLOW CITY PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS PLAN. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION, DEPTH, SIZE, TYPE ALL WATER SERVICE INTERRUPTIONS, HYDRANT SHUTOFFS, STREET CLOSURES OR OTHER AND CONDITION OF EXISTING UTILITY LINES AT CONNECTION OR CROSSING POINTS BEFORE ACCESS RESTRICTIONS. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT RELOCATE OR ELIMINATE ANY HYDRANTS TRENCHING FOR NEW UTIUTIES� ENGINEER ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE WITHOUTFIRST OBTAINING WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE FIRE MARSHAL. COMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY OF THE EXISTING UTILITIES AND SITE FEATURES PRESENTED ON THESE DRAWINGS. ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY OF CONFLICTS THAT ARISE. 30. COORDINATE AND ARRANGE FOR ALL UTILITY CONNECTIONS, UTILITY RELOCATIONS AND/Olt SERVICE HITERRUPTIONS WITH THE AFFECTED OWNERS AND APPROPRIATE UTILITY B. CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE AND PROTECT ALL UTILITIES DURING CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL COMPANIES. CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE MADE ONLY WITH ADVANCE CONTACT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES LOCATION SERVICE (1-800-424-5555) AT LEAST 48 WR17TENAPPROVAL OF THE AUTHORITIES GOVERNING SAID UTILITIES. HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 31, ALL UTILITIES SHALL BE PLACED UNDERGROUND. 9. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL CONDITIONS AND DIMENSIONS AT THE PROJECT SITE BEFORE STARTING WORK AND SHALL NOTIFY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. 32. EXISTINGUTILITY LINES IN SERVICE WHICH ARE DAMAGED DUE TO CONSTRUCTION WORK SHALL BEREPARRED AT CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE AND INSPECTED AND ACCEPTED BY CITY OF 10. PIPE LENGTHS WHERE SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE AND MAY CHANGE DUE TO FIELD EDMONDS AND OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO BACKIFILLING. CONDITIONS. 33. NEW UTRITY LOCATIONS ARE GENERALLY SHOWN BY DIMENSION, WHERE NO DIMENSIONS 11. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT (WHERE APPLICABLE) ARE INDICATED, LOCATIONS MAY BE SCALED FROM DRAWINGS. FIELD ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE AND SHALL THOROUGHLY FAMILIARIZE HIMSELF WITH THE CONTENTS THEREOF. ALL SITE APPROVED BY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE AND CITY. WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THIS 34. FIELD STAKE ALL UTILITY STUBS AT THE PROPERTY LINE. REPORT. 12, STRUCTURAL FILL MATERIAL AND PLACEMENT SHALL CONFORM TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS 35. TRENCH BACKFILL OF UTILITIES LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL BE OF THE PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL REPORT. COMPACTED TO 95%. COMPACTION TEST REPORTS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE CITY PRIOR TO PAVING. 13. SUBGRADE SOILS IN ALL AREAS WHERE RAIN GARDENS, INFILTRATION OR PERVIOUS PAVEMENT IS TO BE PLACED SHALL BE DELINEATED AND PROTECTED AT ALL TIMES FROM 36. WHERE NEW PIPE CLEARS AN EXISTING OR NEW UTILITY BY 6" OR LESS, PLACE POLYETHYLENE COMPACTIVE ACTIVITIES (i.e. HEAVY EQUIPMENT, STOCKPILING). PLASTIC FOAMAS A CUSHION BETWEEN THE UTILITIES. 14. MANHOLES, CATCH BASINS, UTILITIES AND PAVEMENT SHALL BEAR ON MEDIUM DENSE TO 37. SEE MECHANICAL DRAWINGS (WHERE APPLICABLE) FOR CONTINUATION OF SITE UTILITIES VERY DENSE NATIVE SOIL OR COMPACTED STRUCTURAL FILL. IF SOIL IS DISTURBED, SOFT, WITHIN THE BUILDING. LOOSE, WET OR IF ORGANIC MATERIAL IS PRESENT AT SUBGRADE ELEVATION, REMOVE AND 38. SEE DRAWINGS (WHERE APPLICABLE) FOR EXTERIOR ELECTRICAL WORK. REPLACE WI TH COMPACTED STRUCTURAL FILL PER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT. �UiErfiC �k 15. SEE SURVEY AND ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR DIMENSIONS AND LOCATIONS OF 39. SEE LANDSCAFE DRAWINGS (WHERE APPLICABLE) FOR SITE IRRIGATION SYSTEM. BUILDINGS, LANDSCAPED AREAS AND OTHER PROPOSED OR EXISTING SITE FEATURES. 40. PIPE MAiERIAL AND SIGNAGE SUBMITTALS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO CITY ENGINEERING 16. SEE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR PERIMETER FOUNDATION DRAINS. FOUNDATION DRAINS DIVISION FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. SHALL BE INDEPENDENT OF OTHER SITE DRAIN LINES AN D SHALL BE TIGHTLINED TO THE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM WHERE INDICATED ON THE PLANS. 41. EXISTING AILING, DAMAGED OR NON-ADA COMPLIANT FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE REMOVEVAND REPLACED AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY ENGINEERING INSPECTOR. 17. ALL REQUIRED STORMWATER FACILITIES MUST BE CONSTRUCTED AND IN OPERATION PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY PAVEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. 42. UTILITY PPFCHES SHALL BE COMBINED AND FULL WIDTH OR HALF WIDTH OVERLAY WILL BE REQUIRECDEPENDING ON THE EXTENT OF DISTURBANCE. WHERE UTILITY PATCHES FALL 18. ALL ROOF DRAINS, PERIMETER FOUNDATION DRAINS, CATCH BASINS AND OTHER EXTERNAL ENTIRELY VITHIN ONE TRAVEL LANE, THE OVERLAY SHALL EXTEND TO THE CENTERLINE OF ROADWAI WHERE UTILITY PATCHES EXTEND INTO BOTH TRAVEL LANES THEN A FULL WIDTH DRAINSSHAL BE CONNECTED M THE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. OVERLAYS REQUIRED. 19. ALL FOOTING DRAINS SERVING BUILDINGS, WALLS, ROCKERIES, ETC. SHALL CONNECFTO THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM DOWNSTREAM OF THE SITE'S STORMWATER INFILTRATION SYSTEM. 20. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AND PAY FOR ALL PERMITS REQUIRED FOR INSTALLATION OF ALL SITE IMPROVEMENTS INDICATED ON THESE DRAWINGS. SHEETINDEX C1.1 COVER SHEET& GENERAL NOTES C2.1 TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL PLAN C2.2 EROSION CONTROL DETAILS C3.1 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN .S3.2 GRADING & DRAINAGE DETAILS & ENLARGED GRADING PLAN C4.1 WATER & SEWER PLAN C4.2 WATER &SEWER DETAILS IMPROVEM ENT AN D TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN IMPROVEMENT DETAILS I NTROL DETAILS Ai VICINITY MAP FITS a LEGEND DESCRIPTION EXISTING PROPOSED ABN BLDG BOW q OR CIMP CO CONIC CONST Op CUYD DDCVA DI DIA DIP ABBREVIATIONS PROPERTY LINE ABANDONED MIN IVU MON NIS OC PC PI PIV Frr PVC P,I PVMT PVT R REINF FU RET FIT SO SECT MINIMUM ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE BUILDING MECHANICALJOINT CENTERLINE BOTTOM OF WALL MONUMENT CLEARING LIMITS CENTERLINE NOT TO SCALE SILT FENCE X- X- - x- X- CATCH BA -SIN ON CENTER CONTOUR LINE - 100 - - - - - (�� CORRUGATED METAL PIPE POINT OF CURVATURE FENCE -11-� 0 CLEANOUT POINT OF INTERSECTION SANITARY SEWER LINE ss - ss - �ss�ss_ CONCRETE POST INDI CATORVALVE MANHOLE CONSTRUCTION PROPERTY LINE STORM DRAIN MAIN SD - SD - -SD-SD- CONCRETE PIPE POINTOFTANGENCY _STORM DRAIN PIPE - - - - - - - - - - - - CUBICYARD, POLYVINYL CHLORIDE PIPE ROOF DRAIN R - - - R - - - R - -R-R� DOUBLE DETECTOR CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY POINTOFVERTICAL INTERSEC'nON FOOTING DRAIN F - - - F - - - F - F-F- DUCTILE IRON PIPE PAVEMENT PRESSURE LINE P - - - P - - - p - -p-p DIAMETER POINT OF VERTICAL TANG. CATCH BASIN (TYPE 1) 0 0 DUCTILE IRON PIPE RADIUS CATCH BASIN (TYPE 2) EA EJ ELEV EDP EX FDC FFE EACH REINFORCEMENT CLEANOUT EXPANSION JOINT RESTRAINED JOINT CLEANOUT AND WYE ELEVATION RETAINING GRADE BREAK - - - - - - - - - - - - EDGE OF PAVEMENT RIGHT STORM DRAIN SURFACE SWALE EXISTING DRAINAGE ARROW FIRE DEPT. CONNECTION SECTION WATER LINE --WA� FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION SOMH SIM SQ SS SSMH STORM DRAIN MANHOLE WATER METER a] FH FL FT GV HP HT ID IE L LOPE UP LP LT MAX FIRE HYDRANT SIMILAR FIRE HYDRANT FLANGE SQUARE FOC 'or FEET/FOOT SANITARY SEWER PIV 0 GATE VALVE SANI[TARY SEWER MANHOLE GATE VALVE x x HIGH POINT STA STI3 STL TB TOC TOW STATION TEE IT. T. HEIGHT STANDARD 90'BEND INSIDE DIAMETER STEEL THRUST BLOCKING INVERT ELEVATION THRUST BLOCK CAP UENGTH/LINE TOP OF CURB CONCRETE PAVEMENT 4 LINED CORRUG ATED POLYETHYLENE PIPE_ TOP OF WALL ASPHALT PAVEMENT LINEAL FOOT TOP TYP Vc TOP ELEVATION CRUSHED SURFACING LOW POINT TYPICAL ROCKERY LEFT VERTICAL CURVE SPOT ELEVATION /-20.0 20.0 MAXIMUM W/ WITH - TELEPHONE LINE T - - - T - T- T-�' MECH MECHANICAL WM WATER METER POWER LINE E - - - E - -E-E . L �M�AH GAS LINE G - - - IGN COMPLIES WITH APPLICABLE lXCITY TO WATE�� t5:TPk,ll /\PPROVED FOR CONS-VRUC71ON CITY OF EDMONDS DA7E.. Br CITY�664EERING�g[VISION A� 4mi mraWeRING 250 47H AVE. S., SUITE 200 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 PHONE (425) 778-8500 FAX (425) 778-5536 09116119 AM U, cc I= cc c Him 2 c ca �i DESIGN: TAF DRAWN: ATD CHECK: ipu JOB NO: 18300.20 DATE: 01/21/19 19%lrlea 0 z 0 C'4 < Lo 0 LLJ 00 1-- _j a) LLI 0 LLI 0 < Ld Z z LLI V) < V) ct cl:f ILLI z 0 w Ld > :z 04 M Ln C:�� 0 L'i 0) L'i 0 0 SHEET: KESUIP SEP 19 2019 BUILDING DEPA MENT OR OFEDMONDS cl .1 BLP 2co n- NE 1/4, SE 1/4, SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. ASPHALT SIDEWALK NO MON. FND. FOUND CASE N 0.7 E 1.8 IE IN 18"E): 136.33 ENGIN&RING 250 4TH AVE. S., SUITE 200 EDMONDS , WASHINGTON 98020 PHONE (425) 778-8500 FAX (425) 778-5536 om6lig 1 co m m m Ln V) V) w cc w w w w - (L fL (L o. wj;�4 1,�i 1;�4 �;�4 �;�41 Ln 0 a 0 c) of tj ESIGN: 7AF DRAWN: ATID CHECK: -OB Jpu J N 0: 1830020 DATE: z CL CE 0 0 -ISMH RIM=172.73 V) C,:) z CY) _j LLI CL 0 L) z F- < Z 0 X 0 �-) o 20 Li z CL r�' 0 0 ,ONSTRUCTION C-4 M Lo m Q'- < CY) w LLJ I )MONDS SHEET: RESUB SEP 19 2019 J FIT PUILDING.IDEPMA0 ED NDS C2.1 NE 1/4, SE 1/4, SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. = 4mi 2' x 2" WOOD/STEEL FILTER FABR C SECURED-\ TO 2' WIRE Full"C EQUAL NATIVE loft, ,ILL -T L L, /lILTE lABlIC MATERIAL IN CDlGlNlUl ROLLS USE STAPLES OR WIRE RINGS TO ATTACH FABRIC TO WIRE 2* . Z* WOOD/STEEL POSTS /-WIRE MESH FENCE M SUPPORT FILTER -111, I "BURY OBOTIl.. III MIL.1 MATERIAL 8' TO 12" 6' MAX NOTES* 1. CONTRACIFOR/DEVELOPER SHALL MAINTAIN AND ENSURE PROPER EROSION CONTROL THROUGHOUT PROJECT. CITY INSPECTION REQUIRED ON 2. SILT FENCE TO BE PLACED DOWNSLOPE OF COMSTRUC�ION ALL EROSION CONTROL METHODS ACTMTY- BEFORE OTHER WORK C, R�SON DAT FILTER FABRIC FENCE JANUARY 2018 CITY OF EDMONDS FILTRATION SYSTEMS PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD DEPARTMENT D ETA] L APPROVED BY R. ENGLISH ER-900 FU WIDTH 551 DETAIL NOTES THE MINIMUM LENGTH SHALL BE EXTENDED AS NECESSARY TO ENSURE MATERIAL IS NOT TRACKED OFF SITE AND/OR INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. ATE DRIVEWAY RAMP AND/OR SITE ACCESS ROAD 15' WIDE MIN. SEE TABLE BELOW FOR REQUIRED LENGTH. NOTES: 1. SURFACE WATER - ALL SURFACE WATER FLOWING OR OVERTED TOWARD CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHALL BE PIPED ACROSS THE ENTRANCE. IF PIPING IS IMPRACTCAL A MOUNTABLE BERM WITH 5:1 SLOPES WILL BE PERMITTED. 2. MANTENANCE - THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT TRACKING OR FLOWING OF SEDIMENT OFF SITE AND/OR ONTO PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY , THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING WfTH ADDITIONAL QUARRY SPILLS AS CONDITIONS DEMAND AND REPAIR AND/OR CLEAROUT OF ANY MEASURES USED TO TRAP SEDIMENT. ALL SEDIMENT SPILLED, DROPPED, WASHED OR TRACKED OFF SITE AND/OR ONTO PUBLIC RIOHT-OF-WAY MUST BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY. 3. WHEELS SHALL BE CUEANIM TO REMOVE SEDIMENT PRIOR TO LEAVING THE SITE. WHEN WASHING IS USED. IT SHALL BE DONE ON AN AREA STABILIZED WITH QUARRY SPILLS AND WHICH DRAINS INTO AN APPROVED SEDIMENT TRAPPING DEVICE. 4. INSPECTOR AND NEEDED MAINTENANCE SHALL BE PROVIDED AFTER EACH RAJN. PROJECT SIZE MIN LENGTH OF (FELT) QUARRY $PALLS* 1/4 ACRE 30 < 1 ACRE so 3 ACRE 100 3 ACRE 100 PROVIDE OR ASPHALT TRANS ON WHERE FRONTAGE ROM IS AN AN II LEN TO BE DETERMINED BY CITY INSPECTOR. CITY INSPECTION REQUIRED ON7 ALL EROSION CONTROL METHODS BEFORE OTHER WORK CAN RI REV310 DAT Y STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION JANUARN 2019 CITY OF EDMONDS ENTRANCE PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD DEPARTMENT D ETAI L IPPROVED BY R. ENGLISH ER-901 r GRATE -FILTER SOC WfTH OVER FLOW HOLES (TYP) ATCH BASIN 1- COnCTOPR/DOENVELO ER SKILL MAINTAIN THS PU �M AT ALL TIMES DURING CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. 2. ANY SEDIMENT IN CATCH WIN INSERT SHALL BE REMOVED WHEN INSERT IS ONI FUU. 3.CrTY INSPECTION REQUIRED ON ALL EROSION CONTROL METHODS BEFORE OTHER WORK CAN BEGIN. REVISIO DATE TEMPORARY JANUARY 2018 CITY OF EDMOND SEDIMENT TRAP PUBLIC WORKS FOR CATCH BASINS STANDARD DEPARTMENT DETAIL P'"'o, I A ER-902 CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAIL CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAIL (—o'\—CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAIL SCALE: INTS kZj_S_C_AL_E.T.1 APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION CITY OF EDMONDS DATE - BY. CITY N&LERING DII C-NGIN66RING 250 4TH AVE. S., SUITE 200 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 PHONE (425) 778-8500 FAX (425) 778-5536 09116119 1 GO co m BE, Go cc w w cc CL DESIGN: TAF DRAWN: ATID CHECK: JPU JOB NO: 18300.20 DATE: 01/21/19 V) F- Ld 0 —i 0 C-4 0 0 Do _j 0) 0 LLj (L 0 L) z m LLI I 00 V) z in— �2 0 0 LLI z r- 0 V) 04 m cy < a) LLI Ld SHEET: RESUB SEP 19 2019 BUILDING DEPA CITY OF EDMRTmEN, ONDS C2.2 NE 1/4, SE 1/4, SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. 1 6. 4 x 16" TOP: 142.0 2- x 30" X �'4 TOE .0 EG:: 114411.0 \T.,: L.- .1�1 00 1 14.1 TOP' 1 60.0 OE�S�5.8 ET 60 rE: 141,00 EG: 141.0 :156. WINDOW ALL TOP 156.0 p TOE: 150.0 �ELL z TOF\ 147.0 TOP: 147.0 W Do N x WINDOW \TOP: 158.0 11 11 To E: 150.0 X TOP: 141.75 TOE: 1 4.50 TOE.. 1 .0 r- VIEL b TOP: - . X WINDOW WELL r O� TOE 140.0 TOP: 164.0 RDT'A ME-159.75 \ 170 67.09' ID N S= SEE DETAIL) C3. \ 11%P.So 0 TOP: 141.75 To E: 139.50 TOP: 1T407- & TOE"k47.0 E NT (MAIN FLOOR TO 30" Ld I \� 06 ASPHALT. SIDEWALK NO MON. FND. FOUND CASE N 0.7 E 1.8 IE IN (8" E): 136.33 SDCO .50 COVERE ROVE) WA j WK-- WA- W� W w z ROOF FROO' NEW Sl MILY RiSIDENCE ERHANG . . \ I 1�1 EI.A.G ENTRY' 15� 0 JAIN FNF%EUAO =FL 0 S., , ARAGE: 157.38 EDo.%KA El BSTT FFE' 147.� BSMT ENTRY: �7.0 TOP: 141.75 CONNECTROQF CONN�Cr FOOTING TOE: 139.50 DRAINS ONLY I DRAINS�NLY 0 7.13 (M X IE: 143 4WXS'X3' INFILTRATION TRENCH T E; t4 .0 Al� ENTRY: 158.� z TOP: OF TRENCH: 142.0 T 0, ! CH. !I�D Q BOTTOMOFTRENCH 1390 ZI TR N Ti INSTALL PUSH -ON w : (a '.S. ON TEE SEE ARCH PLANS K, OBSERVATION PORT PER 3 TOP: 147.0 7.41 z TOP: 141.5 TOE: 144.50 2.'IMAX HT CONCRETE OR ASEMENT Q 140.00 RETAINING WALL FVALBL LOCATIONS Ld Ld TOE: p EG: 138.75 ISO GAAGE ENTRY: .57.3 AND HEIGHTS 0 PE: 14 1 TOP: 64 . TO :162 1-71 r 3 4=-4m ENGIMERING 250 4TH AVE. S., SUITE 200 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 PHONE (425) 778-8500 FAX (425) 778-5536 dffi 09116119 TYPE I IN (SOLID LID) 0) 0) 0) 1 m I c) CATCH BAS RIM 143 * 0 w -` -1 -` � /-]E f1N(Ei'5E-)'. 1MISO 4" TRi 5 �ar -ar -I 11QU1R('6'.NW 141,0 TRENCH D S. 'E L - 1. "A0 C, '�:r 13� '0 )'14 -MtO RO DRAINS) '�IF 0 TOP: 145 0 < 0 157.96 EG: 141.5 TOE: 141.5 TOE: 14"4.. . .250. H TOE-z 1 EG: 145.. 0 TOP. TIE FOOTING DRAIN _46'57f' E DESIGN: TAF INTO OVERFLOW PIPE 7, EG: 1 1. TOP: 155.50 TOE: 154.0 DRAWN: ATD r EG: 155.0 161.0 A 4 CHECK: JPU RAMP GRA.ES(& 6:149.0 JOB NO: 18300.20 o/ DATE: 01/21/19 152.0 EG: :154.50 0 �OP: 155.75 1' SAWCUT IN TOE: 155.25 EG: 156.0 77.8,, 0. 5 WES. T.-BZ0'6ND T'RAVEL LANE TO I 1 158.70 PROPOSEDASPHALT 79-07'42- DRIVEWAY 45.12 242. i'M 0 BS 147.81 B RIN .06 SW 15 59 BS 158.08 OIL11=1410.06 1 .92 co IN= 40.V4 TO 45. 1.51 1/4" LLJ "If I I 1 0 IE OUT (8"/W): 162.73 SMH RIM=! .3 144.541 15734 < .14723 A J154.95 - q S - 15 .66 1 0. z 162.31 /TYPE I CATCH BASIN RlM 157.79 DR*4111TIES BY OTHERS RIM: 158.0± R LrPLACE EX CB D W/ SOLIIDSTNON_ (BRING( )FFbFEX1&ZWQ IRE OUT (8" S): 156 0 $LIP LID. ADJUST RIM UTILI�Y POLE) CB RIM 190TH PL SW �S K-EdESSARY 3: C'4 SMH RIM=172.73 v) ASPH. DO LLJ =�D\ SO IM=171.42 0 z GRAD G DRAINAGE PLAN SCALE: I" = 101 GRADING QUANTITIES TOTAL EXCAVATION (CUT) - 1120 CU YDS TOTAL PAVfNG LEGEND EMBANKMENT (FILL) - 850 CU YDS NEWASPHALT TOTAL 1970 CU YDS THE QUANTITIES SHOWN ABOVE ARE FOR THE PERMIT PROCESS OVERLAY EXISTING ASPHALT ONLY, THESE VALUES ARE APPROXIMATE. DO NOT USE FOR NEWCONCRETE BIDDING, PAYMENT, OR ESTIMATING PURPOSES. 0 0) - %-t 0., V) NOTES: INOTE: -0 z 1. TSEPARATION IS REQUIRED BETWEEN THE DRY UTILITIES (POWER, GAS, PHONE, CABLE, ETC.) AND - 10 6 5 10 2L)a LLI Z SEWER, WATER, AND STORM AND 5'FROM ANY CITY MAIN LINES I EG: EXISTING GRADE 10:� r" 2. SITE WALLS PER STRUCTURAL. TOP: F NISH GRADE AT TOP OF WALL 3. DRIVEWAY SLOPES SHALL NOT EXCEED 14% SLOPE. TOE: FINISH GRADE AT BOTTnM Q9 WALL 4. CONTRACTOR To VERIFY EXISTING ELEVATIONS PRIOR TO CONNECTING PROPOSED DRAINAGE SYSTEM. 5. FOR TRENCHING, SEE DETAIL 4/C4.2. K 6 T GHTLINE PIPES UNDER DRIVABLE SURFACES SHALL HAVE TMINIMUM COVER. SOILS REPORTS: 7 NEW/REPLACED IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: 6,050 SF ROOF: 4,OODSF 1. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT DECK/WALKWAYS (UNCOVERED): 256SF REPORT NUMBER: 12058 DRIVEWAY (ON -SITE, UNCOVERED): 418 SF PREPARED BY: SOUTH FORK GEOSCIENCES DRIVEWAY (ROW, UNCOVERED): 309 SF DATED: JANUARY 14, 2014 190TH ROAD WIDENING: 264 SF 2. STORMWATER INFILTRATION LETTER S IDEWALK: 803 SF REPORT NUMBER: 110SO19 8. ALL DISTURBED AREAS ON AND OFF -SITE SHALL BE COMPOSTAMENDED PER REQUIREMENTS OF BM P TS-13 IN THE STORMWATER MANUAL, VOLUME V, CHAPTERS.(see 5D-64z) 4 All FINAI RFMRATInKIWAll RFrnmPjrTFnRVTWFrnNTRA�nR P REPARED BY: NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES DATED: MAY 24,2019 C'4 M --L . Ln m I < 01) LAJ 0 p SHEET: R 2 8 U S SEP 19 2019 BUILDING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDMOND�� C3.1 NE 1/4, SE 1/4, SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. 4= 1 4" DIA PERFORATED PVC PIPE WITH 6" OF 1" MINUS GRAVEL MIN FROM WOOD. S" ALL AROUND, WRAPPED IN SEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS NON_WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, SLOPE AT 0.5% MIN. TURN DOWN P ERFORATIONS AS SHOWN 6'. DOWNSPOUT TIGHTLINE TO FINISHED GRADE CONVEYANCE SYSTEM @ 0.5% MIN. PLACE NEXT TO FOOTING DRAIN OR AS SHOWN ON GRADING 8, DRAINAGE PLAN (CONTRACTOR MAY LOCATE ON EITHER SIDE OF FOOTING DRAIN) 0 0 0 0 00 00 -0 o �oq LINE OF MAX EXCAVATION. o .06 4 4 0 F SOIL IS OVEREXCAVATED, oo .�6 REPLACE WITH LEAN MIX 0 olo CONCRETE / / FOOTING z 1 FOOTING AND ROOF DRAIN SECTION Z�� WE rA 140.76 140.66 ,k, TYPE 1 1 L CATCH UNDERDRPJN PI C 0" / ILID LID PER GUTTER W S, CITY STANVA'. DETAIL SQ-303 OR J.) L TRE ........... -7- V.E 5, (MIN) L-10' N)- (MI PROPERTY UNE/EA.SEMENT PLAN 4 (MIN) DIX OBSE- 10-N LLS INTS SPACE 25' APART (MAX), 1 D 'ELL (MIN) PER TRENCH vi WNSPOUT - CLE&NOU .......... 4- (MIN) PVC DRAIN 6' iV'N) PIPE PER WSDOT SPED. 9-05.1p. (MIN) MAINTAI POSITIVE 4- (MIN) PERFORATE PVC J REMOVABLE PUSLCPE UNDERDRAIN PIPE PER WSDOT SH-ON PVC TEE 5PEC� 9-05 .2(5), LAID LEVEL PVC DRAIN PIPE �100' (MAX) — PROFILE P TIC BOX NTS GENERAL NOTES; MARKED "DRAIN" TEST PLUO i. REFER TO THE 2017 OTY OF EDMONDS STORMWATER ADDENDUM FOR SETBACK (MIN) (CHECKLIST 13) AND INFEASIBILITI REQUIREMENTS, E OBSERVATION tlCGA"CKFlLL' MIN COVER DEPTIS, AS11J.E N. -.1DU— WELL, SEE NOTE 3 LOADING. DESIGNER TO SPECIFY COVER DEPTHS IF VEHICULAR TRAFFIC ANTICIPATED. WASHED DRAIN ROCK, SEE 4 NOTE 2 NOTES: GEOTEXTILE SEE NOTE I . PLACE OEOTEXTILE FABRIC ALONG WALLS AND TOP OF WASHED ROCK- GEOTEXTILE SHALL CONFORM TO (MIN) WSDOT SPEC. 9-33.2(1). GEOTEXnUE FOR LLx SEPARATI ON, NON-WOVEM TYPE. (MIN) S ABOVE FASONAL 2. WASHED DRAIN ROCK SHALL CONFORM TO WSDOT UNCOMPACTED NATIVE 0110 HIGH R SPEC. 9-03.12(5). GRAVEL SACKFILL FOR DRI MATERIAL SCARIff 3" 11DWATE N� (MIN) ECToN TA13LE OR 3. OBSERVATION WELL SHALL CONFORM TO WSOOT HYDRAULICALLY SPEC 9-05,21(t), PERFORATED PVC UNDERDRAIN RESTRICTIVE PIPE.' LATER REMS ON DATE TYPICAL DOWNSPOUT DECEMIDER 2Ot7 CITY OF EDMONDS INFILTRATION TRENCH PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD DEPARTMENT DETAIL APPROVED BY: R. ENGLISH SD-636 ASPHALT CONCRETE WEARING COURSE HMA CLASS 1/2" PG 64-22 (WSDOT STD SPEC 5-04.1) CRUSHED SURFACING BASE COURSE (WSDOT STD SPEC 9-03.9(3)) SUITABLE NATIVE MATERIAL FILL; TOP 12" COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 95% RELATIVE COMPACTION USING AASHTO T-180 (ASTM D1557). UNSUITABLE NATIVE MATERIAL SHALL BE REPLACED CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAIL /� TYPICAL PAVEMENT SECTION —EITYX k,.f ) SCALE: V'=l'-lll 7 o B 142.45 o BSW 140.74 143.18 p T�'C 1"" TOC 143.10 141.8 A G G r,'� ENLARGED GRADING PLAN U4 SCALE. -V = S' "I I I I =1 a 5 0 2.5 5 10 APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION7 CITY OF EDMONDS DAM- C) LILVI, By. — v&x j � arf Waka itioN CENGINeeRING 250 4TH AVE. S., SUITE 200 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 PHONE (425) 778-8500 FAX (425) 778-5536 09116119 1 V) LA 0 w w w F- 2 2 2 DESIGN: TAF DRAWN: ATD CHECK: JPU JOB NO: 18300.20 DATE: 01/21/191 V) z Lj -j co- Z Z 0 04 0 op Ld Z Lj CL C-) < - z < Lj 0 0) V) — a Z z — Ld Lj.j z w r�, 0 0 < C) 04 m >1 Ln n < a) Lu SHEET: RESUS SEP 19 2019 BUILDING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDMONDS C3.2 ASPHALT 31DEWALK NO MON. FND. FOUND CASE N 0.7 E 1.8 1 IE 1. (8" E): 136.33 NE 1/4, SE 1/4, SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. 301, 0 x '7 I , I x . / I 1 8" x 30' . 2' E �73,1 14"\ z x O� 170 0 67.09' 30" —W WA-WA-W A-� W NEW SI ILY RIESIDENCE I AIN FiE.�OM I IARAGE: 157 3 NEW V. WATER BS�AT FFE: 147. 1-1/2" 1 / j� METER AND COPPER SERVICE L LINE(@ Li I C I -CX'L IR111NrION D 'I x L- VALVE z A w L) LL I v ssco zf 1\ SSCO 2 1 , ' -- — 1\ I I IE: 144.84 :4. s -2�-_46'57f' E 0 6" SS 0 W/ 12" CAST IRON PHOLE COVERW/1 HEX BOLTS .14' IE: 144.02± 1610 END CONP 1/2 PIPE 1 0 NEW SIDE SEWER W 7- 77.821, CO CTION W/ 8"x6!'WYE W �e�IE! 143.02 7ft7' 2 do f -T- 42.a-y ,CB RIN .2.06 E OU, 0.06 E IN= 140[74 IE OUT (8"IW): 162.73 MH RIM=l 0.33 S S S S S M 157.79 /* CB RI L U) 190TH PL SW SPH 1: — \\,\\ \\\\k \ / \\\\ / \\\\ N\\\ WAILRANDSi ERPLAN NOTES: 1. PIPE BEDDING AND TRENCHING PER DETAIL 41C4.2. 2 ' HMA & UTILITY PATCHING PER DETAIL S/C4.2. 3. A MINIMUM OF S'OF HORIZONTAL SEPARATION IS REQUIRED BETWEEN WATER AND STORM LINES. A4 . CITY SHALL TV SEWER MAIN PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE. S. ALL FINAL RESTORATION SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE CONTRACTO R, NOT TH E CITY OF EDMONDS. OFA LN 5 10 J" " APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION CITY OF EDMONDS DATE; BY. = 4ml ENGINGGRING 250 4TH AVE. S., SUITE 200 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 PHONE (425) 778-8500 FAX (425) 778-5536 09116119 1 co co ca ca co =) =) n In In cc F- oo� o0z I lm= C�� a= DESIGN: TAF DRAWN: ATID CHECK: JPU JOB NO: 18300.20 DATE: 01/21/19 a_ w Ljj 04 Ld U) 0 00 Lj a- z LLI F- < V� Ld z LLJ 0 C-4 M U) 0 < < a) 1-161 SHEET: RESUB SEP 19 2019 BUILDING CITY OFDEEDPMAOTNfvDlENT S C4.1 NE 1/4, SE 1/4, SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. PROPERTY LIME R.O.W IRINISHED GRADE-\ -'-.-'TYBZ3P-EC BALL VALVE A 4e. �L - - J z DIRECTION '411_� (IF FLOW WATER WIN MATERIAL USI ALL I" SERVICES TO BE TYPE "K" SOFT COPPER TUBING I. BALL CORP, MR WFFA CC THEM INLET AND COPPER (CTS) GRIP OUTLET (FORD OR MUELLER) DUAL PURPOSE UNION MIPT X CTS GRIP 13ALL VALVE: CURB STOP EQUAL TO FORD 384-4440 FOR 1 @Mn�M ��Sft�MI I" METER SEDER WITH ANGLE BALL METER VALVE 15- HIGH WITH DUAL A D OUTLET. HORIZOWAL IN HORIZONTAL, OUTLET EQUAL TO FORD VB74-15W-11-4+ I. USE SAME AS ABOVE AND AVID A SINGLE CHECK, EQUAL TO FORD VEHI 1-44 I" CO TAP SERVICE SADDLE EQUAL TO ROMAC 101S IN UNPAVED AREAS: CAR-H 1314 MS11CF WITH DUCTILE IRON COVER AMID CAST IRON READER GOOR; ,I PAYED AREAS; ARMOR CAST A6001946PGK12 BOX W1 A600196969 RGI LD FOR VACANT LOT (FUTURE USE) LOCATION MARKED WITH PAINTED 2- X 4- WAKE WITH -WATER- STENCILED ON IT 14 CA. VINYL COATED WIRE TRACER (TAPED TO PLASTIC PIPE EVERY 10') TO BE GROUNDED AT METER AND HOUSE S111111LE 11 1/4" OR I" PLUI REMOVE WHE14 CONNECTION IS MADE TO CUSTOMER LIME WITH COMPRESSION '17TING. WATER SEHVICE TO HOUSE, INSTALLED BY OWNER/CDNTRAGTOR (PER PLUMBING CODE) P OPERTY OWNER RESPONSIBLE FOR PURCHASING 3/4" OR 1- METER THROUGH THE CITY AT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CEPARTMENI CITY WILL SUPPLY AND INSTALL METER AFIIER PURCHASE, IF USING 3/4- METER, CONTRACTOR WILL PROVIDE REDUCERS BACK SIDE OF MEFER OX SHALL BE SET AT THE PROPERTY LINE UNLESS APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. METER BOXES SHALL OT BE SET IN DRIVEWAY AREAS UNLESS TRAFFIC RATED BOX IS APPROVED 13Y CITY ENGINEER. REVISIO DATE 3/4" - 1 JAMIJARNY 2018 CITY OF EDMONDS WATER SERVICE ilo PUBLIC WORKS INSTALLATION 777ANDARD DEPARTMENT DETAIL APPROVED BY: R. ENGLISH WA- 130 RESIDENCE CLEANOU WITH 45' BE 0 AND CAP CLEANOLrr (MAX) (Ty?) OT TO EXCEED OC' BETWEEN CLEANOUT� CLEANOUT (WE WITH W AND C"OUT COVER) AND CONCRETE LEVELING COLLAR LOCKING COVER F'2'± f-FINISHED GRADE /12- SEE NOTE 3 ENO or ROPER GRIPPER PLUG (CHERN 27061 OR APPROVED EQUAL) 5 7 WATER TIGHT CAP 45' RISER A LEVELING COUT/ SEE NOTE 4 45, 12" PVC SLEEVE a' RISER 4� OR 6' SIDE SEWER WYE AND 6* CITY STUB V Or GEI,16�L TLEANDUT QUAIL 4,5' SEND D 4*OR6*7 12" LOCKING COVER SIDE SEWER CLEANOUT DETAIL SEE NCTE.1 AT PROPERTY LINE/C[1Y EASEME 5 LEVELING COLLAR SEE NOTE 4 NOTES6 ASPHALT SURFACE 1. SEWER PIPE SHALL BE SDR-35 AND JOINTS SHALL BE CASKETED, 12*1 2. PIP SLOPE TO BE 2% MIN AND UP 70 509 MAX. 3. SEWER CLEANOUr COVER TO BE CAST JORDAN IRON WORKS 1 FOOT LONG 12' PVC PRODUCT 000366102 STAR PIPE COSP48L OR APPROVED SLEEVE 7RISERENDEOF EQUAL, 6" PIPE GRIPPER 4. LFVEUNG COLLAR SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS FOLLOWS! PLUG (CMERNE 270261 PLUG (.H� 0 CIR R APPR(WED EQUAL) IN ROADWAYS PER COE SID DWG GU-424 TYPICAL CLEANOUT IN SIDEWALK/LANDSCAPED ARM. EITHER 24"a4'4' NCR BEEF CONCRETE COLLAR OR 24' DIAMETER . 6' DEEP CONCRETE COLLAR REVISION DATE OAT CITY OF EDMONDS SEWER CLEANOUT DETAILS JANUARY 2018 0 a PUBLIC WORKS HM STANDARD ST DEPARTMENT , f. IBSQ T IL DETAIL SS-200 SS_ 00 APPROVED BY: R. ENGLISH (IF STUB FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT) SEWER STUB SHALL BE LOCATED 10' INSIDE PROPERTY LINE & STAKED. PLACE 2-�4' TIMBER AT END OF SIDE SEWER STUB AND CUT TO LENGTH TO ENSURE Z FEET EXTENDS ABOVE GRADE. PAINT TOP IS INCHES WHITE, IN I INCH HIGH LEITERS, STENCIL THE NUMBER OF EVEN FEET FROM GROUND ELEVATION TO THE SEWER STUB INVERT. 8 GAUGE WIRE TO BE DOUBLE WRAPPED AROUND PIPE AND 2 x 4 STAKE AT OR ABOVE FINISHED GRADE, rLOCKING CLEANOUT COVER PER COE STE) OrL 5S_200 ..0 22�V OR 45' SEND 6" TEST TEE r6' LATERAL SEWER SLOPE - 2% MIN TO 50% MAX 6 " WE/6- ROMAC SADDLE SEE NOTES I AND 2 10, POSSIBLE SEWER MAIN LOCATION 22.5' OR 45� 13END 6' TE TEE 6" TEE P SSIBLE SEWER MAN LOCATION NOTES, 1. WHEN TAPPING INTO EXISTING MAN A ROMAC STYLE OR SADDLE SHALL BE USED PLACEMENT OF TEE SHALL DEPEND ON DEPTH OF SEWER MAIN. AS A MINIMUM. THE TEE SHALL BE PLACED AT A 45 DESIRES ANGLE FROM PIPE SPRINGLINE. 2�11` NEW 14AIN IS BEING INSTALLED OR MAJN 15 BEING REPLACED. SERVICE CONNECTION TO THE MAIN SHALL BE DONE WITH A WYE. WYE SHALL BE AT A 45 DEGREE ANGLE FROM PIPE SPRINGLINE. 3. IF CONNECTI NO EXISTING PRIVATE SIDE SEWER TO NEW CITY LATERAL, A CONCRETE/PVC STRONCEIACK FERNCO SO SERIES OR ROMAC COUPLING SHALL BE USED AND SECURED PER IMER'S INSTRUCTIONS. 4. BORING OF SERVICES WITHIN RIGHT OF WAY IS NOT ALLOWED. 5. SEWER PIPE SHALL BE SDR-35 AND JOINTS SHALL BE GASKETED. 6. IF STUB FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. USE RUBBER JOINT BISCUIT PLUG OR OTHER APPROVED WATERE HT PLUG. REVISION DATE MAY 2018 CITY OF EDMONDS NEW LATERAL SEWER PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD DEPARTMENT DETAIL '. 4''S APPROVED BY: R. ENGLISH SS-202 F-0 7t-ICI Y,�I- tUIVIUIMU,) Zo I /AIN UAKLJ Ut I AIL LIIY UI I:UIVIUNIJ�) blANUAKU ULIAIL CA _ ('m )I_ CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAIL E: SCALE: NTS SCALE: NTS SEE COE SID OTL GU-410 v! >.EDDNIQ.'A�-R'- (5/.' MINUS) MIN G�U" , ;.r. MOD 9-03. 1 6A2 OR SUITABLE EXCAVATED VATERIAL AS APPROVED By CITY ENGINEER (SEE NOTE 2 BELOW) 6' MIN __-FOUNDATION (IF REQUIRED) SEE NOTE 4 8, MI 8, MIN SEE NOTE 1 NOTESm 1. MAXIMUM WIDTH OF TRENCH AT TOP OF PIPE 36' FOR PIPE UP TO AND INCLUDING 12" DIAMETER O.D. PLUS 18" FOR PIPE LARGER T14AN 12" NOMINAL DIAMETER 2. REFER TO CITY OF EDMONDS MODIFICATIONS TO DNISION 9 OF WSDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR MATERIAL GRADATION AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 3. TRENCH 3ACXFfU_ SHALL MEET A MINIMUM COMPACTION OF 95% DENSITY PER ASTM D 1557. 4. IF UNSTABLE, MATERIAL IS ENCOUNTERED BELOW PIPE ZONE, CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE AND REPLACE AS REQUIRED BY C17Y ENGNEER, REVISION DATE CITY OF EDMONDS TYPICAL TRENCH SECTION JANUARY Zola PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD DEPARTMENT DETAIL L-i;' w, APPROVED BY: R, ENGLISH GU-400 r/1"At. JOINT INAIL 11 A NEAT STRAIGHT -11. CLASS 1/2- LINE - ALL EXPOSED VERTICAL EDGES SHALL IG 64-22 BE TACKED NEATLY PER WSDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS 5-04.3(5)A APPROVED TACK (SEE NOTES 4 5) OR APPROVED EQUAL AND SEALED PER I. WSDOT STD 5-04.3(5)C. SLOPE EXCAVATION TO AVOID UNDERMINING EXISTING PAVEMENT, ri ............. ...... ............. - ............ EXIS No ...... HMA ............ ........... ............... . . . ................. ...... .............. 4 EXISTING MATERI A CRU-11 - SURFACE S, ZE IMPORT OR NATIVE MATERIAL J. CC BACKFILL SHALL BE COMPACTED URSi PER WSDOT STO TO 95% MAXIMUM DENSITY SPEC 9-039(3) (SEE NOTE 2) (SEE NOTE 'i) TRENCH MDTH NOTES� 1. SEE CITY OF EDMONDS MODIFICATIONS TO DIVISION 9 OF THE CURRENT WSDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR BACKFILLING REQUIRDAENTS. 2. SU MIT PROCTOR AND DENSITY TESTS FROM CERTIFIED TESTING COMPANIES DOCUMENTING THAT THE BACKFILL MEETS A MINIMUM OF 95% DENSITY PER ASTM D 1557, 3. C55 DEPTH SHALL BE A MINIMUM 6' OR MATCH EXISTING WHICHEVER 15 GREATER, WHEN MATCHING EXISTING CSSC DEPTH GREATER THEN 6*. THEN C513C SHAU BE INSTALLED IN MULTIPLE EQUAL THICKNESS LETS NOT EXCEEDING 6-1 4. ROADWAY HIM DEPTH SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4" THICK. UNLESS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER, ANY DEPTH GREATER THAN 4" SHALL MATCH EXISTIND. S� ALLEY HMA DEPTH SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 2- THICK. UNLESS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER, ANY DEPTH GREATER THAN 2* SHALL MATCH EXISTING. 6. UNLESS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. THE HMA SHALL BE INSTALLED IN MULTIPLE EQUAL THICKNESS LIFTS NOT EXCEEDING 2"% 7. FINAL PAVEMENT JOINTS SHALL BE NEATLY AND UNIFORMLY SEALED WITH WSOOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS 5-04.3(5)C APPROVED JOINT SEALANT OR APPROVED EQUAL, REVISION DATE CITY OF EDMONDS TYPICAL HMA AND JANUARY 2018 UTILITY PATCH PUBLIC RKS STANDARD DEPARTMENT DETAIL 1 890 APPROVED BY: R. ENGLISH GU-410 r') CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAIL rg�_ CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAIL SCALE: NTS APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION CITY OF EDMONDS DATE, 'IwAv� BY. CITY ENQWXAING DIMS'& 1111CM 1 ENGINGeRING 250 4TH "E. S., SUITE 200 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 PHONE (425) 778-8500 FAX (425) 778-5536 09116119 .0 co m m co Z> Z) =) Z) 0 LA 0 Lu w CC w cc ca DESIGN: TAF DRAWN: ATD CHECK: ipu JOB NO: 18300.20 DATE: 01/21/191 Ln _j w Lij 0 3:: 3:: C14 0 LAJ 00 0) LLI CL < 0 0 z m 3:: z Lj F- < 0 (Ij CF)a Of LLI z 1" 0 Ld C14 M tn E < 0) Ld SHEET: R23us SEP 19 2019 BUILDING DEPART ENT CITY OF EDMOOMVI DS C4.2 NE 1/4, SE 1/4, SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. O� 170 67.09' "J,/ 30" WA- W� A- w NEW SAeMILY 116IDENCE C JARIN FFE: 0 'A 77 AGE: 157 3 \X Bl� T FFE: 14�.k NL zi c Of z A __7 5s El v 1 0 30- ASPHALT 0 Rl'qq SIDEWALK F I llq �W�e Y_�_4b �D7 E/ PARALLEL TYPE B T 161.0 14' CURBRAMP ol RELOCATE STR Sim AINTCROSSWALK SIGN 6� 0 7 PER CITY DETAIL RELOCATE 7- 7 82 STOP SIGN rE� NO MON. F C S FOUND , Aj2E N 0.7 4.2: 1. C..CRE_-�. 242. 2 8 /,o Q.06 iZ;ING 0.06 IE IN (8" E): 136.33 IN= 4074 (2% MAX) - C4 �All 5. G IE OUT (8"/W)! 162.73 MH IM=l .33 '4; S S CEI RIM 157.79 Cl :.0 RET�TECURB WORK ZONE 1: PE C NC C A SHOULDER RK 3 0 1 C5. N 90TH ,.TT 190TH PL SW .C3 ERU REMOVE EXIST OGLINE, REALIGN ASPH. & PAINT NEW FOGLINE, R = 20'-,, L SO 7 C8 RIM=171.42 CUEXISTING C2 WORK ZONE 2: RBRAMP 5. LANE CLOSURE ON 190TH SDMH CENTERLINE OF EXISTING ROADWAY CB RIM=156.18 WORK ZONE 2: EXIST CROSSWALK SHALL 4'x4' LANE CLOSURE ON 190TH BE REMOVED. LANDING WORK ZONE 3: /1�,N Sim 4 PAINT & REALIGN LANE CLOSURE ON OSS 5.. R WALK PER CITY OLYMPICVIEWDR DETAIL SCALE: I" = IENGIMIERING 250 4TH AVE. S., SUITE 200 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 \L PHONE (425) 778-8500 FAX (425) 778-5536 w co X i �SMH RIM �172.73 Et APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION CITY OF EDMONDS DAVE BY. sw— ariAN�NEEIRINdjDIVISION 09116119 1 z m co co co co 2 cO 5n) :�) =Ln) :) - Lu w Lu �n CE cc w cc ix Ed Lu cn (n o cn c3) w o Z:; o o o & DESIGN: TAF DRAWN: ATD CHECK: JPU JOB NO: 18300.20 Z IL _j 0 z cj:� Ld :2 z o LLJ 0 04 > v) c) 00 0 0) cK C) LLI a- z LLI < 0 V� 0 LLi z 0 Ld 0 :2 W In 2: al < w V) < 61 SHEET: R E 19 u s SEP 19 2019 BUILDING DEPARTMENT INDS C6.1 2' MIN SAWCUr 5-1/2- SEE NOTE 10 HMA I' OR MATCH EXISTING. WHICH.R 11 'ST GR oos rr/FT I- NOTE 4 STANDARD MINUS CSTC 21"E NOTE " _I MINUS CSIRC STANDARD Typr *A" CURR/GuITER (NOT TO SCALP NOTES: 1. CITY INSPECl"ON REQUIRED ON FORM WORK PRIOR TO POUR, 2. FORMS SHALL. BE TRUE TO UNE AND GRADE AND SECURELY STAKED. 3. EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL BE PLACED ADJACENT TO ANY STRUCTURE. 4. EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL BE EVERY 10 FEET. 5. EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL HAVE 1/2- TO 5/8' NOE PREMOUDED JOINT MILLER. S. CONCRETE SHALL. BE CLASS 3000. 7. FINISH SHALL BE UGHT BROOM. 8. C FIR SHALL BE SPRAYED WITH C CURING COMPOUND OR SHALL BE COVERED AND KEPT MOIST FOR 72 HOURS. 9. REMOVAL/ OPLACEMENT OF CONCRETE CURB S� BE FROM EXPANSION TO EXPANSION JOINT, UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY CITY ENGINEER. 10. A 2-FT MINIMUM ASPHALT SAWCUR MAY BE REQUIRED AS DETERMINED By CITY ENGINEER. 11. CURB/GVTTER SHALL BE 18' OR AS DIRECTED BY CITY ENGINEER. 12. ALL VERTCAL EDGES SHALL BE KED. REVISION DATE CONCRETE CURB DECEMBER 2017 qjlTY OF EDMONDS AND GUTTER PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD DEPARTMENT DETAIL '� 4'' " , , APPROVED BY: R_ ENGLISH TR-520 NE 1/4, SE 1/4, SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M. EXPAN N DUN JOIN- MINT 4 4.. A 4 11 D.C. 5' 0.0. PLAN IAEW (NOT TO SCALE) 5. MIN FULL DEPTH 1/2- EXPANSION I OURB/oUTTIER JOINT MATERML SEE COE SM MAX DTL TR-521 _2% 4 1�2" F47 4:J404 AF 2' MIN 5/8- MINUS CSTO ON NATIVE B RING SOIL SEE NOTE 9 NOTES: (NOT TO SCALE) 1. CITY INSPECTION REQUIRED ON FORM WORK PRIOR TO POUR. 2. CONCRETE SHALL BE CLASS 3000. 3. FINISH SHALL BE LIGHT BROOM, 4. SIDEWALK THICKNESS SHALL BE 4". 5. SIDEWALK THICKNESS AT DRIVEWAYS SHALL BE e THICK. 6* CUR AND 6010? INA BE POURED SEPARA�TELY MOM SIDEWALK. LOS FOR JUNCTION BOXES AND UTILITY VAULTS SHALL BE NON-SKID AS SPECIFIED By ENGINEER. SEE CO STI DTL TR-530 FOR POSSIBLE ROOT BARRIER INSTAIUM"O", SUBI SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 95X MAXIMUM DENSITY. CITY OF EDMONDS CONCRETE SIDEWALK PUBLIC WORKS 0 -T STANDARD] DEPARTMENT :DETAIL TR-53:1 APPROVED ETY R ENGUSH 9 a EXPANSION U SION JOINT JOINT SEE DRIVEWAY CURB jo. TRANSMONAL GETAL BELOW G c A D GUTTER. SEE COE BID DTL FULL DEPTH-1 TR-520 EXISTING PAVEMENT 1/2- EXPAN E, 2j" 2% MAX 2 A_ A DRIV CURB TRANSITIONAL DETAIL FOR CURB (DO RB AND GUTTER SHALL BE POURED SEPARATELY FROM THE SIDEWALK. CITY INSPECTION REQUIRED ON FORM WORK P IOR 70 POUR. 0 D IVEWAY APRON INCLUDING WHO RAMPS SHALL BE A MINNUM OF 6' THICK AND SHALL BE PLACED ON 2- OF 5/8- C COMPAC7ED TO 95X MAXIMUM DENSITY. 0 1 BGRADE SHALL BE COMPACTIED TO 95X MAkXlMUM DENSITY. (1) 2 ASPHALT SAWCUT MAY BE REQUIRED WITH CURB/GUff`rER INSTALLATION. REFER TO COE SID DTL TR-520. CONCRETE SHALL BE CLASS 30DO. CURB TRANSITION SHOULD MAINTAIN A SLOPE NO GREATER THAN 8.3X. IF THE SLOPE REQUIREMENT CANNOT BE ACHIEVED ' MAX MUM CURB THE I'RANSMON LENGTH SHALL BE I 5-FEET. MAINTAIN 1 /2' UP AT GUTTER. IF DRIVEWAY WIDTH EXCEEDS 15'. INSTALL A FULL DEPTH EXPANSION JOINT AT CENTER OF DRIVEWAY. INSTALL MINIMUM 5-Fr TRANSITION PANEL BETWEEN DRIVRAY$ AND WHEN CONNECTING TO EXISTING SIDEWALK. @FINISH SHALL BE UGHT BROOM. R SION DATE DRIVEWAY APPROACH JA ARY =18 CITY OF EDMONDS TYPE I PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD DEPARTMENT DETAIL Al. 'T"Q AlF1.1 BY� R. ENGLISH - TR-541 12' THERMOPLASTIC blDP BAR (TYPICAL AT CONTROL INTERSECTIONS ONLY) -1 ES I. I. AND BE CENTEDtEID ON THE ROAD IENTEIUNE STRIPES SHALL ALIO BE CENTER D ON LANE DELINEATORS OF MULTILANE ROADS A- MP[ �1' , ' THERMOPLASTIC STRIPES; '�-PUEAR - BETWEEN 'I" (SEE NOTE 1) -V CLEAR SPAZE BETWIFEN STRIPE AND CURB OYP) N07-S, 1. DIMENSION MAY MARY DEPENDING ON ROAD WON (COORDINATE ACTUAL SPACING WITH ENGINEER) CITY OF-EDMONDS CROSSWALK DETAIL TV REVISION DATE BY JANUARY 2013 STANDARD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT DIETAIL TR-562 APPROVED BY. R ENGLISH CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAIL CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAIL CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAIL A I , CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAIL ��SCAL'.Ts SCALE: NTS SCALE: NITS k,7 \lr� _j SCALF� NTS NOTES, • THE ADDRESS NU..ERS 9802 1 OULD BE 3" HIGH REFLECTIVE WHrrE V1 L SET ON A GREEN VINYL BACKGRO MD. - ADDRESS SIGN REQUIRED WHEN ADOR CAN NOT BE S FROM THE STREET AND PLACED ON ".4" TREATED WOOD POST. • HEIGHT TO 8070M OF SIGN 12' MIN R=1.0" Mp)� gnni.(ZT -4ZIAl 0 (TYP) i ��- -0�) A- 4 c Bmima cZUmAR BIG LONG LOCK SERIES OR EQUAL) CAP (ZUMAR 850 LONG LOCK SERIES OR EQUAL) SIGN ML A 1 8 a D E F G - POST MOUNTED 25 & 30 MPH 30" MIN 9. - 5" 11 .5- . 11.5 MIN CI MOUNTED 35 MPH VAR 1 .5' 12.5-1 4' MIN S� Cl S' C. MOUNTED STATE ROUTE .5- 12.5-151,3- MIN 1 6' C 1 11- C OVERHEAD(SIGN MASIT ARMS) I VAR 116- .5" 13.5-1 6- MIN IS' 0112- C I NOTES, 1. MATTER- - .0110 FLAT ALUMINUM UNDED CORNERS WITH ENGINEER GRADE FLOURESCENT OMONO GRADE SHEETH4G. 2. COLOR - GREEN BACKGROUND %TTB WHITE LETTERS. NUMBERS AND BORDER ON BOT14 SIDES OF TliE SIGN. 3. � SHALL BE FHWA D SERIES AND LAID CUT AS 1. - STANDARD HIGHWAY I -I AND MANKIND (SHIM) BOOK 3. ALL LETTERING SHALL BE COMPOS OF UPPER CASE LETTERS. 4. ALL POST MOUNTED SIGNS FACING TRAFFIC ON 25 MPH AND 30 MPH STREETS SHALL HAVE ALL 4- LETTERING. S, ALL MOUNTED SIGNS FACING TRAFFIC ON 35 MPH STREETS SHALL HAVE THE NAME OF THE STREET IN 6- LETTERING. 6. ALL MOUNTED SIGNS FACING TRAFFIC ON STATE ROUTE SHALL NAME THE NAME OF THE STREET IN 6' LETTERING INCLUDING. TYPE ABBREVIATED AS (ST. AVE. DR. PL. WAY. OR. ETC) AND GEOGRAPHIC DEUN�MRS (W AND SW). 7. AU. OVERHEAD MOUNTED (TRAFFIC SIGNAL LAST ARMS) SIGNS SHAJ_L HAIE THE NAME OF THE STR IN 12" LETTERING. - VARIABLE LENGTHS REQUIRED FOR NAMED SERI REVS' I "A" STREET NAME SIGN AND llR:LO .0117 CITY OF EDMONDS FIRE -AID ADDRESS AND PUBLIC WORKS POST MOUNTING DETAIL STANDARD DEPARTMENT DETAIL TR-570 APPROVED BY- R. ENGLISH 0 LOTH cowc-RIETE - NOTES4 SIGN POST: SIGN POST SHALL BE 2*.2" SQUARE STEEL POF- MINIMUM 14 GAUGE, WITH 7/16- VIE-PUNCHED KNOCKOUTS ON 1' CENTERS FULL. LENGTH FOUR SIDES COMPLYING W/ ASTIM SPEC M53 AND BE HIM DIPPED GALVANIZED. POST S14ALL BE ROLLED CARBON SHEET STEEL AND I U. BE HOT DIPPED GAI.NANIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM AS53, 090, STRUCTURAL O� GRADE 50. (D ANCHOR SHALL HAVE FOUR 7/16" DAN. HOLES. 3' ABOVE GRADE SHALL WElEr THE REG REMENTS, OF ASTM A500 GRADE 8 AND SHALL E HOT DIPPED GALVANIZED. INSTALL TWO CORNER BOLTS ZUMAR TUO70. 4.,E� WOOD PI MAY BE USED WHEN POST IS MORE THAN 10' FROM MOE OF TRAVEL LANE (OR APPROVED BY ENGINEER). I SM TRAFFIC STREET SION DETAIL M-575 FOR GUIDANCE ON SIGN INSTALLATIONS. SIGN POST INSTALLATION 1ESISo. %T'Es CITY OF EDMONDS IN NON -SIDEWALK AREA PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD DEPARTMENT DETAIL APPROVED BY. R. ENGLISH TR-571 _.- Iklft (�T A- B 12 -1. .AA M.- 7. CIt R'� i� 15 A� I-- _pl TYPE PARALLEL A "",p ...... TYPE PAX- B 7 A A "t, 1, ....RE. 2.1 RF lop -M-E.J -.-%2�U U.".M.- _c. A`- P' 01.1.11".Tall p @ - - - AT— AENCRp y PARALLEL CURB RAMP STANDARD P F40.112-041 P-1-A PAI -IT PA'I IT CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAIL 7 SCALE: NTS SIDEWALK PROPOSED LANE WIDTH 1 O't 10.01± ADDITION EXIST LANE WIDTH MIN � 1SA.-W-CUT 'T 1.5% /- r.--N CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAIL CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAIL 190TH PL SW SECTION �!) SCALE: NTS SCALE: NITS US SCALE: 1-1- EXISTING LANE WIDTH APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION CITY OF EDMONDS DATE. ar CITY ENGIN&ERING DIVISION 4= 4m IENGIN&RING 250 4TH AVE. S.. SUITE 200 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 PHONE (425) 778-8500 FAX (425) 778-5536 09116119 DO PC DO CID GO M m L"I In UJ w UJ U.1 w w = = t= t t= 0: cc ca M, ALL! w U.1 m c, C. CL 0. DESIGN: TAF DRAWN: ATD CHECK: JPU JOB NO: 18300.20 DATE: 01/21/19 V) 0 z Ld m 0 Li C'4 > 0 00 0 _j ICY) Qf LLI IL IL 0 z LAJ F- 00 Cr) V) F_ 0 LLI z Ld 0 Ld Ln n < 0) LLj V) SHEET: 3 u B SEP 19 2019 BUILDING F PIT TIT Or Y 0 =PAO M C5.2 Table 61-1-2. Meaning of Symbols on Typical Application Diagrams Arrow board Shadmvehicle 00 Arrow board support or trailer (shown facing down) Sign (shown facing left) Chargeable message sign or support trailer surveyor 13 ChannelizIng device Temporary barrier Crash well Temporary barrier with warning light Direction of temporary traffic detour —1. or I.d..rl.n signal Direction of traffic Tru&-mounted afteuruator Flagger Type 3 barricade High-level warning device (Flag free) 17'� Warning light Longitudinal chanselizing device M Work space Luminaire Pavement markings that should be Worl,vehicle removed for a long-term project Table 6H-3. Meaning of Letter Codes on Typical Application Diagrams Road Type Disree Bmtwoon Sig ne*- A I c 10-to I Oct.., U.b. (high ap..d)' 350 f. at 350 feet 350 feet Fkaal Boo feet 506 1- Boo feet,! E.p..—y Freeway 1,000 feet 1,500 f,,t 2.840 feet S��m�g,,yob.d.�.inedbyhighW,gmW The oolunnn heading, A, B, and C on, he charier... ahmn in Rgue, SH-1 Mr,ugh 31-1-46. The A dim—lon 1. the 0. tarailion or point of rritrid- b the Fiat man. The B dira—ion is the dietanoo baWaon the first and =dmM'gn,,'hTsh,Cdi,m.i,,i,th.di.�,.��.M...c.�d.dthi,d�gn,. (Th,Trign`i,thg,v, Table 6H-4. Formulas for Determining Taper Length Speed (S) Taper Length (L) In feet WS' 60- L= WS where: L rep"Hangth in %at W Adthofolffeatin feet S =�,ted,,se,dinit, roff-p,�95h-paramfl, ,pmdpd,,t,-rk,tm,Eng,orthe,nbd�tad fin,.,ed I. raph MUTCD TABLES SCALE: NTS (a Figure 6H-11 1. Lane Closure on a Two -Lane Road with Low Traffic Volumes (TA-1 1) M W " -1 C (optional) ptional) z (optional) 50 to 10oft (Optioned) =ace (opficial) Butte pace (optional) 50 to 100 It Tables 6H-2 ard 6H-3 he meaning of the 5111 bola and(or letter TO as used in this figure. ONCOMING A (optional) — see Section 38.16) B (optional) < (Optional) M-1 (options (optional) Note Sea ,.It Gym cod (�,_) �nMUT��CDDETAIL Typical Application 11 0- IENGINErERING 250 4TH AVE. S., SUITE 200 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 PHONE (425) 778-8500 Figure 61-1-3. Work on the Shoulders (TA-3) FAX (425) 778-5536 IN xx lx3N affou ROAD WORK., Shoulder taper (see Note 7) J_ Gut 1/3L T 14 6. 4 q� a 09116119 T?A L Shouldertaper Shouldertaper 'see Note 7) (see Note 7) M L z 0 [L L) M DO 1:1:1 Lu Cc ce W Co .01 W W cc Co L:1:11 CC cc cc oc a Note., Se Tables 611-2 and 611-3 I., the meaning of the symbols anftr letter 1 codes used in this figure. I A 0) Cn Ln Ch 0) 00 (If < Typical Application 3 DESIGN: TAF DRAWN: ATD MUTCD DETAIL CHECK: JRU JOB NO: 18300.20 SCALE: NTS DATE: 01/21/19 TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN NOTES: 1. REFERENCE DETAIL I/CS.3 FORTYPICAL TRAFFIC CONTROL SYMBOLS, SIGN SPACING, ETC. 2. WORK EXPECTED TO OCCUR DURING THE CITY APPROVED WORK HOURS. 3. ONLY (1) WORK ZONE MAY BE WORKED ON AT ONCE. WORK ZONE 1; 190TH SHOULDER WORK (DETAIL #3/C5.3). WORKZONE3: LANE CLOSURE ON 190TH (DETAIL 2/CS.3). CLOSE ONLY ONE LAME AT ONCE. WORK ZONE 3: LANE CLOSURE ON OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE (DETAIL 2/C53). CLOSE ONLY ONE LANE AT ONCE. APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION CITY OF EDMONDS DAM By. CITY EkiNdERING DIVI&ON -1 0 0 C'4 C:) 00 _J z LLj CL 0 0 LLJ 0 0 0 LIJ z 0 LL. C14 :2 to M < 0:: SHEET- ZL'-- ��5 U 0 SEP 19 2019 BUILDING DEPARTM CITY OF EDMONDENT S C5.3 EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION: TAX ACCT 004346-000-078-00 (TRACT 78) AND 004346-000-079-01 (TRACT 79) PER CHICAGO TITLE CO. ORDER NO. 5255651 BLAKE PL TRACT 78 AND TRACT 79, EXCEPT THE EAST 75 FEET THEREOF, EDMONDS SEA\lEW TRACTS ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 3 OF PLATS, PAGES 75 AND 76, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY. WASHINGTON. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. 1 LEGEND I 30'. 3" BRASS SURFACE MONUMENT -.3 FEET BELOW ASPH NO CASE 0i I x SET TACK IN LEAD WITH SHINER LS 29539 W < < 0. c6 FOUND CASED MONUMENT co cl SET 1/2' REBAR WITH CAP LS 29539 N I 0 CATCH BASIN C4 c1l La -6- FIRE HYDRANT Ill GAS VALVE C, m HOSE BIB 0 C) WOOD FENCE z LIGHT MAIL BOX EQUIPMENT AND SMH RI 6 44 n PROCEDURES ROCKERY SAN. SEWER MANHOLE ALL MEASUREMENTS WERE MADE WITH N 88*32',38" W 1299.13' MEAS. SP S-17-84 LOT 2 SP S-17-84 FND 1/2" REBAR WICAP LS N 89'15'23" W 330.00' PLAT AN ELECTRONIC THEODOLITE WITH A SIGN ONE SECOND HORIZONTAL AND 0 10' VERTICAL DISPLAY AND MANUFACTURES @ STORM DRAIN MANHOLE STANDARD POINTING DEVIATION OF -0- UTILITY POLE THREE SECONDS AND AN ELECTRONIC DISTANCE MEASUREMENT DEVICE WITH VALVE A STANDARD DEVIATION OF 3MM± 7* 3PPM ED WATER METER I Ld m I I . 11-7- ASPH ASPHALT FIELD TRAVERSE METHOD IN L T COMPLIANCE WITH W.A.C. 3,32-1�0-090 14W CALC CALCULATED ALL POINTS INDICATED FOUND WERE DW DRIVEWAY VISITED IN 3-2012 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. G GAS IE INVERT ELEVATION 0— MEAS. MEASURED OHP&T OVERHEAD POWER AND TELEPHONE NO MON. FND. SO STORM DRAIN FOUND CASE N 0.7 E 1.8 S SEWER I W WATER ISMH M=14 3N I DECIDUOUS OR ORNAMENTAL EVERGREEN TREE TRUE EXTENT OF CANOPY NOT SHOWN CONIFEROUS TREE TRUE CANOPY NOT SHOWN ui � 'n 200.0 SPOT ELEVATION IS LOCATED AT THE DECIMAL POINT OF ELEVATION UNLESS NOTED WITH LEADER OR X 191 ST ST SW LAND SURVEYORS CERTIFICATE p THIS MAP CORRECTLY REPRESENTS A SURVEY MADE BY ME OR UNDER MY 6 DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SURVEY RECORDING z ACT AT THE REQUEST OF CHRIS MIONE IN MARCH, 2012 N 01*02'17" E 1321.08' MON. 2064 '_196TH ST SW U Y'R-TIFICATE NO. 29539 N 88-32'38- W-j 2-9-9—.2r--Y-7w "n REVISIONS GENERAL NOTES SURVEYED BY RGG 4/11/19 UPDATE TOPO LOT 2 HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD 83/96 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY z WA. STATE COORD. SYS. N. 95 ZONE - R.T.K. APPROVED BY VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 1988 PER NETWORK CHECK MON 2064 DATE PRINTED 4/06/ - SCALE 1 30, F.B. NO. OPEN CB RIM=171.42 ZONED RS-12 NOTE: lb FOUND 1/2 " REBAR AT 30' OFFSET TO EXISTING ROADWAY CE MON AT 92ND AVE W. AND 188TH ST SW LOT 3 SP S-17-84 UJI c'j p BRUSH E; z �'-'06.28 34 ioe 4a sog JOB NO. GREENE LAND SURVEYING TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEy 2012.03 "f ANDSOAPLAKE, WA 98026198861 FOR DRAWING NO. lq� DAVE PEDERSON 03Mione PHONE (206) 498-0979 FAX (206) 497-1542 PTN: N.E. 1/4 S.E. 1/4, SEC. 13, T 27 N, R 3 E, W.M.1 SHEET 1 OF FD (_2 (f) r)uDD01q-o'l(p - - (C111117,111 (c 0111 RESUB JUN 0 5 2019 BUILDING DE CITY PAO OF EDMRTmENi No,