Loading...
9204 OLYMPIC VIEW DR.PDF9204 OLYMPIC VIEW DR PROJECT VIEW CHECKLIST PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: PLAN CHECK #: 0 " 2 RECEIPT DATE: 2") ........... .. ......... .......... ..... ... .... . ...... ... ... .. . ... .. . . . . . . . .. . . . .... ... ............. .............. . r.W. ............ . . . ...... .......... ....... . ..... : ...... a EN WIM �, Setbacks/Variance/Setback Adjustment . . ..... .........•... Conditional Use Permit ... ........ - ADI3 Requirements . ... ....... Other Zoning Requirements Underground Wiring Required -JAR Lot Slope 15% 0 fc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . /71 N ..... SEPA Environmental Checklist/Hydraulics Permit Tree Cuffing Plan Plat/Subdivision Requirements Le dal Description Verification ............. —.— . . . . . . . . . . . Quit Claim/Street Dedications aa. Easements - Public/Private . . . . . . . ----- ....... . . . . . . . . . Engineering Storm Drain Review Fee 0 NK- Engineering 2.2 Inspection Fee . . .... al ).6. Drainage Plan (On -Site) Setback - Top of Bank, Stream, Water Courses ------ -•----- ----------- I NNER* Va t-97- Setback - Storm Drain Line Open Ditch - Existing AIU Culvert Required Culvert Size Shoulder Drainage/Shale Open Runoff Catch Basin Required p- Driveway Slope & Vehicle Access .. . . . . . ... Sidewalk Required Curb & Gutter Required Curb Cut For Driveway Required Street Paving Required Right -Of -Way Construction Permit Required — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Street Name Sign Required Other Signing Required Bond Required For Public Improvements FF,MA Map Check/Water Table Sidb Sewer Availability !j X. Calculate Sewer Connection Fee If No LID # Create Street File Existing Water Main Size WE Water Meter Size 3q" U., Service Line Size Water Meter Charge Required 375 q............ Hydrant Required Hydrant Size Existing Fire Line Charge Required - Sprinkler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ ......... IStreet Cut [Miscellaneous Reviewed By: FIRE PLANNING r Ij/ GINE RING LJ O �0 C0 V C� �J1 P• ty N a • O 9D 00 V C► V1 ? W N D D o v ba m m (7 m A m • +fir-,., Cl a rn v D rn m m O %00 00 V 00) CWfl � W N W O N l0 N O N V N 01 N C71 N •P N W NJ' N N � 3 rn to (A z m ;o m v rn N 3 3 z n � v m rni m (N m ►+ c m � v m v I 17 r m v O JQ ! I;o m 0 v 0 T n O Z D e•� Ln 91o^f 6-5 City of -,Edmonds To Whom .It May Concern: , This letter is to verify the fact that The Emerald Coast Group . will be having Cuz Concrete vacuum out the detention system that serves..9.204, 9206, and 9208 Olympic View Drive. This work is to take place- on September 28th, 1998. If you have .any questions please call me at 774-6098 or (206) 679-990.9; cellular phone. Sincerely, THE EMERALD COAST GROUP 9216 - 183rd -PI. S.W. ♦ Edmonds, WA 98020 ♦ (425) 774-6098 T 435-4969 19521 - Md Avenue N.E. Arlington, Washington 982.23 J Proposal No. J 4 ? Sheet No. Date Sewer 8 Oraln Cleaning • Pump Sales, Service 8 Inatallatlon MProposal Submitted To Work To Be Performed At Name p Street Street- City State City_ Date of Plans State Architect �- Telephone Number ATIS) 12 0-,) M-) yes 779-6 y/ We hereby propose to furnish the materials and perform the labor necessary for the completion of ----- .......,..,..........-----..._..._..,.,.:......._---------- ..._._..._..--- ...... ........ ............... -- ----�•-.., p OIL -- All. material is guaranteed to. bit as specified, and' the above work to be performed in accordance with the drawings and specifications submitted for. above work and completed in a substantial workmanlike manner for the sum of Dollars ($ . 1. with payments to be made as follows: Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving Respectfully submitted extra costs, will be executed only upon wrinen orders, end +vill become a.n extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements oontinpent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond Per )ur control, Owner to carry fire, tornado and Other necessary ;nsurance upon above work. Workmen's Compensation and ;'ubllc Liability Insurance on above work to be taken out by Note — This proposal may be withdrawn by us if not accepted within days ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL The above prices, specifications and conditions. are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above. Signature date Signature 17311.135th Avenue NE, A-500 Woodinville, WA 98072 (206) 486.1669 • Fax 481.2510 July 11, 1996 City of Edmonds Planning Department 250 - 5th Avenue Edmonds, Washington 98020 NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS Sao y o Vo Geotechnical Investigation Report Four Lot Short Plat Edmonds, Washington NCA File No. 178096 Snohomish County (206) 337.1669 Wenatchee/Chelan (509) 784.2756 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for the planned LSA/Echelbarger four lot short plat in Edmonds, Washington. The site is located on the south side of Olympic View Drive near the 9200 block. We have been retained to evaluate a critical area and provide recommendations for site development. For our use in preparing this report, we have been provided with a copy of the plans, dated May 1996, prepared by Lovell- Sauerland & Associates, Inc. (LSA). The project will consist of four residential lots that will be accessed along the western property line. The access road will have a few feet of fill with a planned rockery as high as 4 feet on the downhill side. An existing slope will be regraded on the east side of Lot 3. A rockery 4 to 6 feet in height is planned at the base of this slope. The excavated material from the slope regrading will be used as fill to raise the road grades and to fill a low area on the west side of Lots 1 and 2. A steep slope located in the southeast corner of the site is to remain undisturbed. The steep slope will be.within Lots 3 and 4, and we have been requested to provide setbacks from the toe of slope for these lots. Existing structures will be removed from the site during project development. The grading required to develop the lot areas will need to be accomplished during plat development as it incorporates building and roadway areas. I I I Geotechnical Investigation Report Four Lot Short Plat NCA File No. 178096 July 11, 1996 Page 2 SCOPE The purpose of this study is to explore the subsurface conditions and to provide recommendations for project development. Specifically, our scope of services includes the following: l . Review the geologic map for the area. 2. Explore the subsurface conditions with backhoe excavated test pits. 3. Evaluate the ground water conditions. 4. Provide recommendations for site preparation, grading and structural fill. 5. Provide recommendations for foundation design and setbacks from steep slopes. 6. Provide general information for on -site drainage considerations. 7. Prepare a written report to document our findings and recommendations. SITE CONDITIONS Surface The site is over 1.3 acres in size and has a residence, garage, shed, and fallout shelter. The site is accessed in the middle of the north property line from Olympic View Drive. A couple of short retaining walls and hedges exist along side of the driveway. The site slopes generally to the northwest with a total vertical relief of approximately 50 feet. We measured the slopes on site with a clinometer. These measurements were compared to the site plan provided to us. Our slope angles are similar to the grades shown on the topography map provided to us. A steep slope exists in southeastern portion of the site. The steep slope has angles up to 30 degrees (58 percent) with a vertical relief of approximately 15 feet. Near the top of the steep slope, the neighboring property owner has been using the area as a garden. Debris has been placed on the steep slope, in the approximate area shown on the site plan, creating a pile approximately 3 to 4 feet in height. A low area exists in the northwest portion of the site. The lowest point is approximately 5 to 6 feet below the road elevation. The area is covered with tall grass. We suspect that the area was previously used as a borrow pit. Vegetation consists of a few large evergreen and deciduous trees with a dense undergrowth in the southern portion of the site. The developed portion of the site is covered with grass, trees and small NELSON- CO UVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. 4 Geotechnical Investigation Report Four Lot Short Plat 'i NCA File No. 178096 t July 11, 1996 Page 3 1 underbrush or shrubs. Tall strands of hedges occur along side the existing driveway. Vegetation on the steep slope consists of brush, bent' vines, and scattered deciduous trees. The trees on the steep slope range up to 22 inches in diameter.. Geologic Conditions Landforms within this region comprise a system of glacially sculptured features, which have been exposed by post -glacial erosion. Locally, the terrain of this area is interpreted to have been glacially modified, and to have been placed during the latest glaciation of the Puget Lowland area. Glacial ice is thought to have last occupied the region during the late Pleistocene Epoch, some 11,000 to 13,000 years before present. The latest glacial advance over the area is referred to as the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation, of which the geologic materials on site are believed composed. The general stratigraphy within this area was observed and found to consist of advance glacial outwash, referred to as Esperance Sand (Qva/Qe). Advance outwash in this area is composed of a dense, fine sand, with trace silt and occasional gravel, which has been overridden and compacted by the weight of the thick glacial ice. The advance sands were observed in all of the test pits. It is not uncommon for more gravelly and/or silty zones to occur in these deposits. The Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Edmonds West Quadrangle Snohomish and King Counties. Washington by James P. Minard, published by U.S. Geological Survey in 1975, was referenced for the geologic and soil conditions at the site. The soil unit mapped at this site is classified as a Whidbey Formation (Qw), with glacial till (Qvt) and Esperance Sand in the near vicinity. We did not encounter l the Qw or Qvt in the subsurface conditions of the site. The Esperance Sand deposit is the geological unit which commonly lies between the Whidbey and till deposits. j Subsurface Conditions The subsurface conditions at the site were explored on June 8, 1996 by excavating ten test pits with .a tire -mounted backhoe. The depths of the backhoe test pits range from 4.0 to 7.5 feet. The approximate locations of the test pits are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. A representative from our firm was present during the explorations. He examined the soils and geologic conditions encountered and maintained logs of the test pits. The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System, a copy of which is presented as Figure 3. The logs of the test pits are presented in Figures 4 through 6. NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Investigation Report Four Lot Short Plat NCA File No. 178096 July 11, 1996 Page 4 5 Subsurface conditions found on site consist mostly of a fine sand with silt or trace silt that varied from loose at the surface, to medium dense to dense with depth. We have interpreted these soils to be the . i Esperance Sands. Test Pit 9, located on the east portion of Lot 2, encountered 4 feet of fill. The fill consists of similar native material with some organics and bottles. We also expect localized fills in areas behind structures and/or retaining walls. The site is covered with a thin layer of topsoil. The topsoil ranged up to 0.8 feet in depth. Hydrologic Conditions No obvious evidence of ground water, perched ground water or outcropping ground water along the slopes Was observed within this site. The advance outwash is considered fairly permeable and water is expected to infiltrate vertically in the deposit until it encounters a less permeable layer, such as the Whidbey Formation. We do not know the depths of these less permeable layers. The site appears to be well drained with the advance sands. SENSITIVE AREA EVALUATION Seismic Hazard The Puget Sound Region is classified as a Zone 3 by the Uniform Building Code. Seismic considerations for this type of site includes liquefaction potential and attenuation of ground motions by soft soil deposits. The liquefaction potential is highest for loose sand and silty sand with a high ground water table. The sand deposits at the site below a few feet were at least medium dense or better. These soils have a low potential of liquefaction. Seismically sensitive soft soils were not observed at this site. Erosion Hazard The erosion hazard criteria used for determination of affected areas include soil type, slope gradient, l vegetation cover, and ground water conditions. The erosion sensitivity is related to vegetative cover and the specific surface soil types (group classification),' which are related to the underlying geologic soil units. The soils have been classified in accordance with the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) classification system and have been grouped with respect to the corresponding geologic unit. The geologic unit is Esperance Sand which corresponds to the SCS classification of Everett soils. The erosion hazard is greatest when the on -site soils have been stripped of vegetation. Provided the surface water flowing over the exposed sands are properly controlled during construction, and vegetation is re- established after development, we do not expect a significant erosion concern. NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Investigation Report Four Lot Short Plat { NCA File No. 178096 1 July 11, 1996 Page 5 j Landslide Hazard An evaluation of potential landslide hazard was performed for this site. This evaluation includes soil type, underlying stratigraphy, slope gradient, ground water conditions, and vegetation cover. The soil conditions at the site commonly have high strengths and the slope angles are not excessively steep for these types of soils. We also did not observe any signs of instability such as shallow or deep-seated failures. Accordingly, it is our opinion that the native site slopes are stable and large scale failures are not expected. Localized slough events may occur in the steep portions depending on the area specific conditions. These would be expected to be shallow, involving the near -surface soils. The garden debris placed on the top of the steep slope is considered unstable may cause shallow sloughs of the steep slope. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General The site is suitable for the planned residential short plat. The underlying sand deposits have moderately high strength, and the existing slopes are considered stable with respect to deep-seated landslides or failures. Surficial sloughing and erosion can occur, however, we did not observe evidence of slope failures. The risk of these sloughs can be minimized by maintaining vegetation on the slopes and controlling any surface water that may exist. We consider that minimum setbacks from the toe of slope are considered appropriate to reduce the risk of future effects from surface sloughing. The outwash sand deposits should provide a good subgrade for support of the structure's foundations. The soil to be used as structural fill will be obtained from the east side of Lots 1, 2 and 3. Excavating these soils to be used as fill, will cause a portion of the trees and the existing structures to be removed during the initial development activities. The fill soil will be placed in the roadway area and also the low depression on the west side of Lot 1. Building Setbacks Uncertainties related to building along steep slopes are typically addressed by the use of building setbacks. The purpose of the setback is to establish a "buffer zone" between the dwelling areas and the slope margin so that ample room is allowed for normal slope regression, or if a slope failure were to involvement would be minimized. In a general sense, the greater the occur, the likelihood of dwelling setback, the lower the risk. From a geological standpoint, the setback dimension is usually based on the i slope's physical characteristics, e.g., slope height, surface angle, material composition, hydrology, etc. Other factors such as historical slope activity, rate of regression, type, and desired life span of the development are important considerations as well. NELSON- CO UVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Investigation Report Four Lot Short Plat i NCA File No. 178096 + July 11, 1996 Page 6 Based upon our explorations, slope evaluation and observations, we recommend a minimum building setback of 10 feet for structures on Lots 3 and 4. Setbacks are not necessary on the other lots from the toe of the steep slope. Specifically, we recommend that the setback area not be used for placement or storage of fill materials, including "temporary' excavation spoils from building area preparation and excavation. The landscape debris on the upper portion of the steep slope should be removed. The area should be re-established with vegetation if the soil is exposed. Any development or encroachment into the setback areas should be evaluated by a specific geotechnical evaluation and report. Site Preparation and Grading Site preparation and grading should consist of stripping the vegetation and topsoil layer to the planned subgrade. The exposed surface should be compacted to a, non -yielding condition using 'a steel -drum vibratory compactor. The subgrade should be observed for indication of disturbance of the lower soils both during excavation and compaction. If the subgrade shows signs of disturbance, we should be retained to provide recommendations for repair or potentially alternate construction techniques. Tiie':'on=sitesoil pis :ekpected, to be only somewhat moisture sensitive with a uniform grain size, and may be difficult°to work and compact during periods of wet weather: Earthwork should be suspended during rainfall and,,for a•period of time afteto work the site during the wet time of the year�wall lie dependent on the .performance of the soils under load when wet.1k y `ese conditions should be r:.. x„ bserved' ' "d the site work adjusted accordingly. We recommend that all soil stock piles that are intended to be used as backfill be covered with plastic during rainy weather to help maintain a moisture content suitable for compaction. Sometimes a layer of crushed gravel or 2- to 4-inch spalls is used to provide wet season access and to improve pavement and foundation subgrade. The use of the.gravel and spalls should be based on conditions observed in the field. Excavation Slopes Temporary slopes greater than 4 feet in height should be sloped at an inclination no steeper than 1.5H:1V for the loose to medium dense sands, and 1H:1V for dense sands for cuts up to 12 feet in height. These slopes should be protected from rain by well secured plastic sheeting. If ground water or seepage is encountered, we should be retained to comment on the stability of the slopes in the excavation. The above cut slope angles should be considered preliminary in nature. The contractor should be ultimately responsible for the stability of the cut slopes, as he is continuously at the site and can observe the performance on a daily basis. All state and federal standards should be followed with respect to cut slopes and workman safety. NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Investigation Report Four Lot Short Plat NCA File No. 178096 July 11, 1996 Page 7 Structural Fill General: Fill will be placed with the current design. Fill to be placed beneath buildings, pavements or other settlement sensitive features, should be placed as structural. fill. Structural fill, by definition, is soil placed in accordance with prescribed methods and standards described in this report, and is monitored by an experienced geotechnical professional or soils technician. Field monitoring procedures would include a representative number of in -place density tests to document the attainment of the desired degree of relative compaction. Materials: Imported structural fill should consist of a good quality free draining granular soil, free of organic and other deleterious material, and be well graded to a maximum size of about 3 inches. Imported all weather fill should contain no more than about 5 percent fines (soil finer than a U.S. No. 200 sieve) based on that fraction passing the U.S. 3/4-inch sieve. The on -site outwash soil can be used as structural fill but these soils contain some fine-grained particles and are considered slightly moisture sensitive. The use of the soils as fill should be limited to extended periods of dry weather. These soils have a uniform grain size and are sometimes more difficult to compact than well graded soils. Depending on the moisture content of the soil, adding water may be necessary to achieve compaction. Soils with a high organic content should not be used as structural fill. Fill Placement: Following subgrade preparation, placement of the structural fill may proceed. All backfilling should be accomplished in 8- to 10-inch thick uniform lifts. Each lift should be spread evenly and be thoroughly compacted prior to placement of subsequent lifts. All structural fill underlying building areas, and within 2 feet of pavement subgrade, should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its maximum dry density. Maximum dry density in this report refers to that density as determined by the ASTM D 1557 compaction test procedure. Fills more than 2 feet beneath sidewalks and pavement subgtades should be compacted to at least 90 percent of their maximum dry density. The moisture content of the soils to be compacted should be within about 2 percent of optimum, so that a readily compactable condition exists. It may be necessary to overexcavate and remove wet soils in cases where drying to a compactable condition is not feasible. All compaction should be accomplished by equipment of a type and size sufficient to attain the desired degree of compaction. Care should be taken when compacting the soil condition near to adjacent houses. A photo documented survey of the neighboring structures is suggested prior to any heavy equipment arriving at the site. Sometimes the use of smaller compaction equipment and thinner lifts is better if adjacent structures are being impacted. NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Investigation Report Four Lot Short Plat NCA File No. 178096 i JuIy 11, 1996 Page 8 Foundations The foundations should be placed either on undisturbed medium dense or dense native sand or structural fill extending to these soils. If footings are to bear on structural fill, the fill zone should extend outside of the footing a distance equal to the depth of fill beneath the footing. The soil conditions should be evaluated for appropriate density and disturbance at the time of construction. Exterior footings should extend a minimum of 18 inches below the adjacent outside ground surface, with interior column footings a minimum of 12 inches below the bottom of the adjacent slab. All loose or disturbed soil should be removed from the foundation excavation prior to placing concrete. Standing water should not be allowed to accumulate in the building pad or footing trenches. For foundations constructed as outlined above, we recommend an allowable design bearing pressure of not more than 2,500 pounds per square foot-(psf) be used. Higher bearing values may be available based on specific soil conditions, footing size and settlement tolerance. This can be reviewed at the time that the structure is designed and foundation loads are determined. A one-third increase in the above allowable bearing pressure may be used when considering short-term transitory wind or seismic loads. Although structural loading information was not available at the time of this study, based on our experience with similar structures supported on similar soil conditions and for the above allowable soil bearing pressures, we estimate that the maximum total post -construction settlement for medium dense sands should be 3/4 of an inch or less, and that the differential settlement across the building width should be 1/2 inch or less. We expect larger differential settlements may occur if the building is constructed part on fill and part on native soils. Lateral Pressures The lateral pressure acting on retaining walls is dependent on the nature and density of the soil behind the wall, the amount of lateral wall movement which can occur as backfill is placed and the inclination of the backfill. Soil pressures will be less for walls that are free to yield at the top at least one -thousandth of the height of the wall, than if movement is limited by such factors as wall stiffness or bracing. We recommend that yielding walls supporting horizontal backfill be .designed using an equivalent fluid density of 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). Non -yielding walls should be designed using an equivalent fluid density of 50 pcf. These lateral soil pressures do not include the effects of surcharges such as traffic loads or other surcharge loads. Surcharge effects should be considered, if appropriate. If desired, we can provide recommendations for surcharge loads as they become apparent. NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Investigation Report Four Lot Short Plat NCA File No. 178096 July 11, 1996 Page 9 All backfill for subgrade walls that will not act as structural'fill should be compacted to between 90 and 92 percent of the maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM D 1557. Care should be taken to prevent the buildup of excess lateral soil pressures due to overcompaction of the backfill behind the wall. This can be accomplished by placing the backfill within 18 to 24 inches of the wall in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness, and compacting this zone with hand -operated vibrating plate compactors. Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the foundation andsubgrade or the passive earth pressure acting on the below -grade foundation. For the latter, the foundation must be placed "neat" against the undisturbed soil, or backfilled with a clean, free draining, compacted structural fill. We recommend that lateral passive resistance be calculated by using an equivalent fluid weight of 250 pcf. An allowable coefficient of friction between footings and the subgrade of 0.40 may be used. These values include a factor of safety of 2.0 for lateral resistance and 1.5 for the coefficient of friction. The wall pressures, listed above, are based on the assumption that the soil directly behind the wall is free draining or a drainage composite is used. All of the on -site surface soils are not free draining. Some free draining soil may exist at depth. Wall drains are discussed in the Subsurface Drainage sub -section of this report. Site Drainage Surface Drainage: The finished ground surface should be graded such that storm water is directed off of the site. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where footings, slabs or pavements are to be constructed. Final site grades should allow for drainage away from the building. We suggest that the finished ground be sloped at a gradient of 3 percent minimum for a distance of at least 10 feet away from the building.- Surface water should be collected by permanent catch basins and drain line's, and be discharged into a storm drain system. The surficial soils are loose to medium dense, fine sand. These soil types erode easily, especially when directly exposed to precipitation and runoff. Surface water should be diverted away from the steep to moderate slopes. Stripped areas should be revegetaied to improve the stability of the near -surface slope soils. The vegetation should be maintained until it is established. Subsurface Drainage: Where slabs are located below the surrounding grades, a system of perimeter footing drains should be included in the design. The perimeter footing drains should consist of 4-inch diameter perforated smooth -walled PVC pipe surrounded by pea gravel. The footing drains should be NELSON- COU VRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 ) Geotechnical Investigation Report .Four Lot Short Plat NCA File No..178096 i July 11, 1996 Page 10 located at the elevation of the footing. The drains should be tightlined to the storm drain system. We do not consider foundation drains necessary for standard foundations construction. A drainage system should be planned behind all retaining walls. The drainage system should consist of an 18-inch wide blanket of free draining material. Pea gravel would be a suitable material. If 0.5-inch or larger washed rock is used, filter fabric may be required to surround the rock. A drainage composite approved by geotechnical engineer could be used in place of the rock blanket. A 4-inch diameter perforated pipe should be placed along the base of the wall within the free draining material. The drains should be routed to an appropriate discharge point. Slabs -on -Grade Slabs should be supported on native subgrade soils or structural fill prepared as described in the Site Preparation and Grading and Structural Fill sub -sections of this report. Where moisture control is important, we recommend that the floor slabs be underlain by 6 inches of free draining granular material, for use as.a capillary break. A suitable vapor barrier, such as heavy plastic sheeting, should be placed over the capillary break material. A 2-inch thick sand blanket may be placed over the vapor barrier to protect it during placement of the concrete and to help the concrete cure. Rockeries Rockeries are used in the Puget Sound region to face stable soil exposures to reduce weathering and slough type failures. Although it is not always common to consider a rockery as a retaining wall, in reality, the rockery can act as a gravity wall. The problems associated with using the rockery as a retaining wall is the quality. of the rockery construction and the compacted backfill. There is some risk associated with rockeries since the rocks are not tied together. Therefore, the methods in which they are stacked are very important. Rockeries should be designed and constructed in accordance with Association of Rockery Contractors (ARC) guidelines, unless otherwise recommended in this report. Inspection of the rockery construction by the geotechnical consultant is recommended. We consider the rockery at the base of the cut slope to be appropriate. However, we recommend that the rock sizes be increased to H/2 instead of the H/3 as recommended in the ARC manual. We recommend that the same standards be used for the rockery that retains the driveway fill. However, since the wall could be exposed to unknown wheel and traffic loads, it may be prudent to design it as a reinforced soil wall. The reinforcement could consist of either fabric or geogrid. NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Investigation Report Four Lot Short Plat } NCA File No. 178096 1 July 11, 1996 Page 11 USE OF THIS REPORT We have prepared this report for The City of Edmonds, Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc. and their agents, for use in planning and design of this project. The data and report should be provided to prospective contractors for their bidding .or estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. The scope of our services does "not include services related to construction safety precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures; except as specifically described in this report for consideration in design. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions between the explorations and also with time. A contingency for unanticipated conditions should be included in the budget and schedule. We should be retained 'to provide monitoring and consultation services during construction to confirm that the conditions .encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those anticipated;;:arid to evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation activities comply with contract plans and'specifications. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget for our services, we have strived to take care that our work has been completed in accordance with generally accepted practices followed in this area at the time this report was prepared. No other conditions, expressed or implied; should be understood. NELSON- COU VRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Investigation Report Four Lot Short Plat 1 NCA File No. 178096 July 11, 1996 Page 12 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you. If there are any questions concerning this report or if we can provide additional services, please call. Sincerely, NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Rick B. Powell, PE Project Engineer i EXPIRES Charles P. Couvrette, PE Principal Engineer Three Copies Submitted Six Figures s cc: Mr. Jurgen Sauerland - Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc. 3 } NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. r LOG OF EXPLORATION DEPTH USC SOIL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT ONE 0.0 -1.3 1.3 - 4.0 4.0 - 6.5 TEST PIT TWO 0.0 - 0.4 0.4 - 4.0 TEST PIT THREE 0.0 - 0.2 0.2 - 2.0 2.0 - 3.5 3.5 - 5.0 TEST PIT FOUR 0.0 - 0.2 0.2 - 2.0 2.0 - 4.0 SM DARK BROWN SILTY FINE SAND WITH ORGANICS (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, WET) (TOPSOIL) SP-SM RED -BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED Ova) SP-SM GRAY -BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (Ova) SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AT 6.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 6.5 FEET ON 6/15/96 SM DARK BROWN SILTY FINE SAND WITH SOME ORGANICS (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, WET) SP-SM GRAY -BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT AND ORGANICS (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (Ova) SAMPLES WERE NOT COLLECTED GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 4.0 FEET ON 6/15/96 TOPSOIL SP LIGHT BROWN FINE SAND (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST) Ff ILL1 SP-SM/SM BROWN TO DARK BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT TO SILTY FINE SAND (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (OLD TOPSOIL) SP LIGHT BROWN FINE SAND (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (Ova) SAMPLES WERE NOT COLLECTED GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 5.0 FEET ON 6/15/96 TOPSOIL SP-SM BROWN TO DARK BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT AND SOME ORGANICS (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (TOPSOIL/Qva) SP LIGHT BROWN TO BROWN FINE SAND (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (Ova) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 1.5 AND 4.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 4.0 FEET ON 6/15/96 NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. FILE NO. 178096 FIGURE 4 Reference: Site Plan was created from a d dated May 16,1996 Site Plan .6 0 40 so Scale V = 40' FIGURE LSA/Echelbarger 1 2 ILE NO. DATE 178096 June 1996 SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOL GROUP NAME COARSE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN50% RETAINED ON NO.200 SIEVE GRAVEL MORE THAN50%OFCOARSE FRACTION RETA NEO ON NO.4 SIEVE CLEAN GRAVEL GW WELL -GRADED GRAVEL, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL GRAVEL WITH FINES GP POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL GM SILTY GRAVEL GC CLAYEY GRAVEL SAND MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION PASSES NO.4 SIEVE CLEAN SAND SW WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND SP POORLY -GRADED SAND SAND WITH FINES SM SILTY SAND SC CLAYEY SAND FINE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN 50% PASSES NO.200 SIEVE SILT AND CLAY uovouMrr LESSTHAN'w% INORGANIC ML SILT CL CLAY ORGANIC OL ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY . SILT AND CLAY LKKAD UMrr50% OR MORE INORGANIC MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY ORGANIC OH ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT NOTES: SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS 1) Field classification is based on Dry - Absence of moisture, dusty, dry visual examination of soil In general to the touch accordance with ASTM D 2488 - 83. Moist - Damp, but no visible water 2) Soil classification using laboratory tests is based on ASTM D 2487 - 83. Wet - Visible free water or saturated, usually soil is obtained from 3) Descriptions of soil density or below water table consistency are based on Interpretation of blowcount data, visual appearance, of soils, and/or test data. NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FIGURE 3 LOG OF EXPLORATION DEPTH USC SOIL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT ONE 0.0 -1.3 SM DARK BROWN SILTY FINE SAND WITH ORGANICS (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, WET) (TOPSOIL) 1.3 - 4.0 SP-SM RED -BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED Ova) 4.076.5 SP-SM GRAY -BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (Ova) SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AT 6.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 6.5 FEET ON 6/15/96 TEST PIT TWO 0.0 - 0.4 SM DARK BROWN SILTY FINE SAND WITH SOME ORGANICS (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, WET) 0.4 - 4.0 SP-SM GRAY -BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT AND ORGANICS (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (Ova) SAMPLES WERE NOT COLLECTED GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 4.0 FEET ON 6/15/96 TEST PIT THREE 0.0 - 0.2 TOPSOIL 0.2 - 2.0 SP LIGHT BROWN FINE SAND (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST) (FILL) 2.0 - 3.5 SP-SM/SM BROWN TO DARK BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT TO SILTY FINE SAND (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (OLD TOPSOIL) 3.5 - 5.0 SP LIGHT BROWN FINE SAND (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (Ova) SAMPLES WERE NOT COLLECTED GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 5.0 FEET ON 6/15/96 TEST PIT FOUR 0.0 - 0.2 TOPSOIL 0.2 - 2.0 SP-SM BROWN TO DARK BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT AND SOME ORGANICS (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (TOPSOIL/Qva) 2.0 - 4.0 SP LIGHT BROWN TO BROWN FINE SAND (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (Ova) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 1.5 AND 4.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 4.0 FEET ON 6/15/96 NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. FILE NO. 178096 FIGURE 4 LOG OF EXPLORATION DEPTH 1 } TEST PIT FIVE 0.0 - 0.4 0.4 - 4.0 TEST PIT SIX 0.0 - 0.5 0.5 - 4.0 TEST PIT SEVEN 0.0 - 0.5 0.5 - 2.0 2.0 - 7.5 TEST PIT EIGHT 0.0 - 0.4 0.4 - 3.0 3.0 - 5.5 USC SOIL DESCRIPTION TOPSOIL SP LIGHT BROWN WITH SLIGHT RUST STAINING FINE SAND WITH TRACE SILT (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST) (Ova) SAMPLES WERE NOT COLLECTED GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 4.0 FEET ON 6/15/96 TOPSOIL SP-SM LIGHT BROWN TO BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (Ova) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED FROM 3.0 - 4.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 4.0 FEET ON 6115/96 TOPSOIL SP-SWSM BROWN TO RED -BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT TO SILTY FINE SAND (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (WEATHERED Ova) SP LIGHT BROWN TO BROWN FINE SAND WITH TRACE SILT (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST) (Ova) SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AT 6.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 7.5 FEET ON 6/15/96 TOPSOIL SP-SM TAN -BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (WEATHERED Ova) SP-SM GRAY -BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH SILT (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (Ova) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED FROM 4.0 - 5.0 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 5.5 FEET ON 6/15/96 NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. FILE NO. 178096 FIGURE 5 i DEPTH TEST PIT NINE 0.0 - 0.7 0.7 - 4.0 4.0 - 5.0 TEST PIT TEN 0.0 - 0.8 0.8 - 4.0 LOG OF EXPLORATION USC SOIL DESCRIPTION TOPSOIL SM/SP-SM BROWN TO DARK BROWN SILTY FINE SAND TO FINE SAND WITH SILT, ORGANICS AND A BOTTLE (LOOSE, MOIST) (FILL) SP-SM BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (Ova) SAMPLES WERE NOT COLLECTED GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 5.0 FEET ON 6/15/96 TOPSOIL SP-SM RED -BROWN TO LIGHT BROWN FINE SAND WITH SILT AND OCCASIONAL COBBLES (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (ova) SAMPLES WERE NOT COLLECTED GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 4.0 FEET ON 6/15/96 NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. FILE NO. 178096 FIGURE 6 CA FILE NO.'`ts�� Critical Areas Checklist Site Information'(soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation) w a 1. Site Address/Location: 2. Property Tax Account Number: 5 6 S -.00 - ac 5 ` 0007 3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): { S 0ca o s 4 { 1(,0010 S� (St,S�` 001-n13 �a ) 4. Is this site currently developed? X yes; no_ If yes; how is site developed? 5. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply. Flat: less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site. . Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of -10-feet over a horizontal distance of 66-feet). Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% ( a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet). Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of less than 33-feet). Other (please describe): 6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: NL d y ; Approx. Depth: ' 7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water. P1UwC ; Approx. Depth: What season(s) of the year? A 8. Site is in the floodway nd floodpiain ✓ c, of a water course. 9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year- round? h o K V Flows are seasonal? (What time of year? A . ). 10. Site is primarily: forested ;meadow ; shrubs ;mixed urban landscaped Qawn,shrubs etc) )C 11. Obvious wetland is present on site: _no the . 690-19,1— City of Edmonds Critical Areas Checklist The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is to be filled out by -any person preparing a Development Permit Application for the City of Edmonds pripr,_,., to his/her submittal of a development..,,. permit to the City. • I Aw The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to determine -whether any potential Critical Areas are or may be present on the subject property. The information needed to complete the Checklist should be easily available from.-," observations of the site or data availabli at City Hall (Critical Areas inventories, maps, or soil surveys). An applicant, or his/her representative, must fill out the checklist, sign and date it, RECIE1 & psi V DEC 0 7 31995 PERMIT COUNTER, and submitjtt6'the City. The City will review the checklist, make a precursory site -visit, and make a determination of the subsequent steps necessary to complete a development permit application. With a signed copy .of this form, the applicant should also submit a vicinity map or plot plan for individual lots of `the- parcel :.-,with enough detail that City staff can find .,and identify the subject parcel(s). In addition, the applicant shall include other pertinent information (e.g. siti-* plan, topography map, etc.) or. studies in coqjunction with this Checl&Est to assist staff in completing their preliminary, assessment of the site. 1 have completed the attached Critical Area Checklist and attest that the answers provided are factual, to the; ,best of my knowledge (fill out the appropriate column below). Owner / Applicant: Applicant Representative: clzt,o CLZLO C_ Street Address V Street Address to I E�" W k, 1�t lsp-zo City, State, ZIP • 'T1 j,� Phone * 6 9i Signature, Date CCX O.a -7 City, State, ZIP T ..,..Phone Q s 9S°r Signature IDate s rt 0 m a. 3 0 N r �Rm � i • EXPiRcS 9D OAKS - CITY OF EDMONDS 8g0.1q qz Address of Construction 91-11;,Lo SIDE SEWER PERMIT PERMIT N2 891,6 Property Legal Description (Include all easements): n i't 1 zC t J� C•T9 TREA MEONTOPLANT JAII PUBLIC vyOR Owner and/or Contractor: y - f " ' ` r I�ti > I p� State License No. t/ �5� L� Building Permit No. 0 / 16 Ste_ L Single Family ❑ Multi -Family (No. of Units ) ❑ Commercial ❑ Public -r Invasion into City Right -of -Way: C"No ❑ Yes RW Construction Permit No. Cross other Private Property: Lf No ❑ Yes Attach legal description and copy of recorded easement I certify that I have read and shall comply with all city requirements as indicated on the back of the Permit Card. �ZS Date * CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-424-5555) BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION * 'PERMIT MUST BE, POSTED ON JOB SITE ** White Copy: File Green Copy: Inspector Bull Copy: Applicant Revised 3'90 M :X) m < 1.9 4 9 O Lo 00 -OLP le- -% I (-Il n 0 0 z 0 "4 bd IN 0101- uo r-I tri 0 z t, 0 1 z 0 0 0 0 m CL 3 0 3 CL (A Cl) (D CA CD > 0 co M, MA w m .m+ B y dm a o F {{ A m ou Agag Ln ho 'd .w0++0, .p o m q •C -. . , - ' " 00 co w :0 t� ° ow 0w caLU �e Id �. h r � - W W �1 d' t ro o �m a •�o 'Si .. LLH a rts: mq qq 0 G W'o o �watim.�. ' a[ '� a�mK ' ,� ' �W/� r / �•1: '� W O w m r° m b .F (�i ..�'r qmg m _ W Gn 3 V Fy A oo F m° ' , � � ; - �} V � to oiy •y •!�" � o o O o o C z z z z z •( \� 1. V-�[ � STREET FILE CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771-3202 COMMUNITY SERVICES: Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation - Engineering 8go-lg9_ CERTIFIED MAIL April 4, 1991 W.B. Hastings 9204 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Problems with venting of your plumbing fixtures Dear Resident: The City's sewer cleaning records show that the home experiencing problems with the venting of some of when the City crew is conducting cleaning operations in front of this address. LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR at this address is your plumbing fixtures of the City sewer line The City's cleaning operation is essential for both you and your neighbors. It cleans debris in lines to prevent plugs, prevents corrosion and potential future collapse, and achieves a better flow characteristic in the public sewer lines. We need to do this often -- perhaps even 3 times a year -- in some critical areas. The City's cleaning operation typically involves the utilization of a high pressure water jet. The problem which occurs at the home is the result of a high pressure surge through your internal plumbing system. A properly constructed plumbing system is designed to easily vent this additional pressure without any visible impact at your residence. An undersized venting pipe (or not having enough vents) cannot handle the pressure surge, and the only release that's available is then through your toilet (or another fixture). The Uniform Plumbing Code typically requires a 2" vent, and further requires a separate vent for each plumbing fixture which is connected to the sewer (a toilet, a sink, a shower). Your home clearly does not have an adequate venting system (you either have a 1-1/4" vent, or not enough of them), and you therefore may continue to experience the pressure surges. The City does not have a choice as far as discharging its responsibility in cleaning the public sewer line. It is therefore up to you to take corrective measures as to how to properly vent your own plumbing system. The City has come up with two options that will remedy your problem: Option 1: Upgrade stack vents for toilets and other fixtures which are experiencing problems to required sizes. • Incorporated August 11, 1890 0 Sister Cities International — Hekinan. Japan v Page 2 Option 2: Install a clean -out outside of house per attached specifications. Enclose box so it can vent properly when excess pressure is put on house lines. This option would be the cheapest and simplest way of correcting this problem. At the same time, it would allow access to sanitary sewer lines if stoppage should occur. This vent clean -out would allow a place for backup in lines to go before entering your house and causing costly damage. The City would appreciate your expeditious cooperation in this matter. The City must continue proper maintenance of its sewer lines, but we obviously do not wish to see continued problems occurring on your property because of poorly designed vents. It is your responsibility to correct these deficiencies. We cannot keep notifying you each time we come out to clean the line. It's up to you to have a plumbing system that conforms to code. Option 2 is a relatively simple one to construct. Should you have any questions on these options, please call Everett Akau, Scott Highland or myself at 771-3202, extension 317 or 318. Sincerely, Z,,, kaj Ron Holland Water/Sewer Supervisor Enclosure SEWERVEN/TXTSEWER 'O .0 _D i M � n L a ° n n � � k H LE If J --21I232B/ 1 City of Edmonds RIGHT-OF-WAY • CONSTRUCTION ; PERMIT " Permit Numbe(p 0 Issue Date•' A. Address or Vicinity, of Construction: ' 8426 188th St SW I8 B. Type of Work (be specificustal 1 UG service & remove existing OH' service. 9. 0 1 9 bore 4" conduit under 188thtbpprox 390' of intersection of 188th St v, C. Contractor: Snnhnmi 0 fCjtlnty PlID No 1 Contact%lorrT l k 1 nTtAn Mailing Address: PO BOX 1107 Phone: 347=4414 State License #:t Everett. Washington 98206 Liability Insurance: Bond: $ D. Building Permit # (if applicable); Side Sewer Permit # (if applicable): NOTE: Replaces expired Permit # 95-296 E. ❑ Commercial ❑ Subdivision ❑ 'City Project Utility.(PUD,'GTE, WNG, CABLE,•WATER) i ❑ . Multi -Family ❑ Single Family ❑ Other , INSPECTOR:. INSPECTOR: wti,'�c✓ ROY S F. Pavement or Concrete Cut : ❑ Ye UM No G. Siie of Cut: �'�x H. Charge$ A ANT TO READ A . X GN' INDEMNITY. Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees to hold 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 or not limited to the defense of any legal proceedings including defense costa, and attorney fees by reason of granting this permit. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK. ESTIMATED RESTORATION FEES WILL BE HELD UNTIL THE FINAL._STREET PATCH IS COMPLETED BY CITY FORCES, AT WHICH TIME A DEBIT OR CREDIT WILL BE PROCESSED FOR ISSUANCE TO THE APPLICANT. Construction drawing of proposed work required with permit application. A 24 hour notice is required for inspection; Please call the Engineering. Division, 771-0220. Work and material is to be inspected during progress and at completion. Restoration is to be in accordance with City Codes. . Street shall be kept clean at all times. F Traffic Control and Public Safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City Engineer. All street cut ditches shall be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to the end of the working day; NO EXOEPTIONS. I have read the above statements and understand thepermit requirements and the pink copy of the permit will be available ;stat all times for inspection Purposes. Signature. Date: NnvemhPr 11, 1996 ( ntractor ent) CALL DIAL -A -DIG PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK NO WORK SHALL BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE `<,...'; Eng. Div. 1994 FIELD INSPECTION NOTES (Fund 111 - Route copy to Street Dept.) Comments• Diagram.: CONTRACTOR CALLED FOR INSPECTION Partial Work Inspection by P.W.: Work Disapproved By: FINAL APPROVAL BY: ❑ YES Date: Date: ❑ NO LAYOUT LEGEND: 0 PADMOUNT TRANSFORMER PRIMARY UNDERGROUND CABLE POLE AND OVERHEAD LINE — RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE SCHEMATIC LEGEND* 3 0 TRANSFORMER FUSE PRIMARY UNDERGROUND CABLE OVHD EXISTING OVERHEAD CONSTRUCTION NOTES: CUSTOMER INSTALLED FACILITIES: TRANSFORMER A-26492 DIST ZB- SER MAKE 500 KVA 12,470-480/277V -Y VAULT BY CUSTOMER A-26492 4'8" x 4-'8" x 3'6" CONCRETE VAULT AND 610" x 610" x 6" COVER W/A 15" x 40" ACCESS HOLE -CUSTOMER TO ADJUST THE LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES TO PROVIDE MINIMUM CLEARANCES REQUIRED IN THE PUD'S SPECIFICATIONS -ALL CUSTOMER INSTALLED FACILITIES SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL PUD SPECIFICATIONS -CUSTOMER TO PROVIDE TRENCH WITH A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3 FT TO TOP OF CONDUIT. MAXIMUM ALLOWED DEPTH IS 5 FT. -ALL CONDUITS, VAULTS, VAULT COVERS, GUARD POSTS, GROUNDS AND GROUNDING CONDUCTORS IN VAULTS SHALL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED BY THE CUSTOMER PER PUD SPECIFICATIONS -ALL CONDUITS SHALL ENTER THE VAULT PARALLEL TO THE FLOOR AT - 90 DEGREES TO THE VAULT WALL AND IN SUCH A WAY AS TO MAINTAIN CABLE ROTATION AND NOT INTERFERE WITH OTHER CONDUIT ENTRANCES -CONDUIT FOR PRIMARY CONDUCTORS SHALL USE THE LOWER KNOCK -OUTS ONLY -ALL PRIMARY CONDUIT BENDS. SHALL BE RIGID STEEL ELECTRICAL, CONDUIT WITH A MINIMUM' RADIUS OF 48" AS SPECIFIED IN THE PUD* SPECIFICATIONS. THE TOTAL OF BENDS SHALL NOT EXCEED 180 DEGREES. -ALL PRIMARY CONDDUIT SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF DIRECT BURIAL (DB) TYPE II -GRAY THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OUTLINED IN . THE PUD SPECII"ICAT'IONS -CUSTOMER SHALL FURNISH AND INSTALL ALL SECONDARY CONDUCTORS FROM THE TRANSFORMER TO THE BUILDING. THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SECONDARY CONDUCTOR CONNECTIONS AND CONDUCTOR SIZE SHALL BE COMPATIBLE WITH PUD STOCK CONNECTORS AND MUST BE APPROVED BY THE PUD PROJECT ENGINEER. -THE CUSTOMER SHALL PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 15 FT OF IDENTIFIED AND SEALED SECONDARY CONDUCTOR PER PHASE (LEG) INSIDE THE TRANSFORMER VAULT -ALL SECONDARY CONDUCTORS SHALL ENTER THE VAULT AND LIE IN THE SAME DIRECTION AND SHALL BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE ROTATION OF PUD INSTALLED CONDUCTORS -VAULTS SHALL BE SET SO THAT THE TOP OF THE LID IS TWO (2) INCHES ABOVE FINAL GRADE -A CONTINUOUS LENGTH OF KNOT -FREE 1/4" PULL ROPE SHALL BE INSTALLED BY THE CUSTOMER WITH A 2 FOOT TAIL AT EACH END FOR PRIMARY CONDUITS PUD INSTALLED FACILITIES: -ALL PRIMARY CONDUCTOR, PRIMARY DEVICES AND TRANSFORMERS TO BE SUPPLIED AND INSTALLED BY THE PUD -SECONDARY TERMINATIONS FOR CUSTOMER SECONDARY CONDUCTORS AT THE TRANSFORMER TO BE SUPPLIED AND INSTALLED BY THE PUD -TO BE WORKED WITH 30 PRIMARY OVERHEAD REMOVAL ON WO# 27195A/DWG# 113261 AT POLE 2-105 -INSTALL 30 PRIMARY TERMINAL POLE PER ASSY# 12U308 -FUSE AT 100 AMPS AT VAULT A-26492 -INSTALL 500 KVA 30 PADMOUNT. TRANSFORMER (277/480V SEC) SECONDARIES W/SPADE TERMINALS (T0992) PER ASSY# 12U605 BY CUSTOMEI -INSTALL (3) DE CAPS(T1701) ON UNUSED BUSHINGS -INSTALL (16) COMPRESSION TERMINAL LUGS (T0906) ON CUSTOMER INSTALLED SECONDARY CONDUCTORS - (4) 350 KCM CU PER LEG LAYOUT 1" = 30' a FROM POLE TO A-26492 310' OF (3) 1/0 AL CNCTRC NEUT DB JCKTD PRI IN 4" PVC MAKE PO REEL MAKE PO REEL MAKE PO REEL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES FOR SECONDARY CABLE DUCT 0A 60' OF 4" PVC BY PUD © 180' OF 4" PVC BY CUSTOMER OVHD 2-105 18� A-2649 ZB- SCHEMATIC NTS 2 1 SNOHOMISH COUNTY u- PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT NO I LOCATION 8426 188TH ST SW. EDMONDS 98026 AREA SO COUNTY POLE NO 2-105 NW I%4S 18 T 27 R 4 DATE 2/20/96 WO No 27332B REASON FOR WORK PROVIDE 30 PRIMARY ENGINEER GARDNER DWG NO' 113619 UNDERGROUND SERVICE FOR DRAFTER JCL UGND No: 8835 SEAVIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL APPROVED SCALE NOTED PRINTED DATE WORK COMPLETED FOREMAN ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS SUBSTATION PERRINVILLE FEES R E Q I D E EXEMPT 18 ❑ NOT EXEMPT CIRCUIT NO 12-93 PHASE 1,2,3 ®YES ❑ NO PARA. ITEM C ROAD CROSSINGS ONLY PRIMARY OVERHEAD ❑ RESIDENTIAL OVHD CONDUCTOR KV ADD CKT FT PH APPR DATE DESCRIPTION ❑ COMMERCIAL REM CKT FT PH LEOi� NET CKT FT @ g g REVISIONS UGND CONDUCTOR 12.47 KV ADD 240 CKT FT 3 PH REM _ CKT FT PH NET 240 CKT FT SECONDARY OVERHEAD BASIC FEE g APPR NO. DATE DESCRIPTION METER/CONV POLE g PERMITS (DATE GRANTED) PRIMARY UNDERGROUND ❑ TREE TRIM ❑ RESIDENTIAL ❑ STATE ❑ COMMERCIAL ❑ COUNTY BASIC FEE g LEU-w ® EDMONDS 1/4/96 #95-296 EASEMENTS ® REQUIRED E* 30864 ❑ NOT REQUIRED SECONDARY UNDERGROUND BASIC FEE g DATE SENT TO R/W 12/20/95 UNDERGROUND PLAT BASIC FEE g k FT @ S = g STREET LIGHTING t FT @ g = g DATE APPROVED 4/11/96 FOREIGN CONTACTS ❑ GTNW JPN4� ❑ CATV JPN* ❑ JOINT TRENCH GTNW & CATV WORK IN RIGHT OF WAY ❑PRIMARY ❑ SECONADARY t FT @ g = g ❑ JOINT BORE GTNW & CATV ❑ AS -BUILT POLE STENCILING FROM TO APPR NO. DATE DESCRIPTION MISCELLANEOUS FEES TAKE OFF POLE VAULT g PRE-CONSTR REQUIREMENTS PERMIT g ❑ TREE TRIM 0 PUD LOCATOR COST ESTIMATE g 9,300.00 ❑ BACKHOE ❑ g 0 ONE CALL DATE 4 g INDEX POLES TOTAL DUE g 9,300.00 DATE PAID 2/8/96 RECEIPT# PO# 090174 NEW SVCE APPLICATION# LOGS U-MAP XFMR C-MAP LOCATION MAP PAGE ENGINEER KENT GARDNER PHONE (206)347-4419 BEEPER/ CELLULAR 513:731><i6/:388-1368--I, CUSTOMER EDMONDS SCHOOL DIST. CONTACT ROGER SCHULTZ PHONE 670-7169 :..._ _ :.------==-- PRINTED VICINITY MAP TAGS VAULT: A-26492 CABLE: 53670 THRU 53672 PLAT LO ff ) 3 coo 00 0 rn Q c i 0 59G i • O $fn10MQ�v11SM CQUNTV ',` PUCLIC Uric�Tv DMTRiCT h0. 1.' Facsimile Corer Sheet pEC ate 1996 ENGiN�!". To: �C Company: Phone: Fax: From: Company: Phone: Fax; Date: Pages inoluding this cover page: Comments: Q 14 Xc� I Rich Afdom, Sr. CUSTOMER ENGINEER SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUD 41. 21018 Hwy 99 EDMONDS WA 98026 206-670-3208 OR 1-800-662-9142 EXTENSION 3208 206-670-3210 4 Ci-ty-of 'Edmonds � RIGHT-OF=WAY :CONSTRUCTION t PERMIT Permit Number. 3 O `l Issue Date: A. Address or,V9204 O1icinity of Construction: ympi c li ew Dr. B. T� of work (be specific): Construct a si ngl In phase underground 8 9 0 dis�tribution' system for Echelbarger. Short Plat C. Contractor: SAohomi'sh% County PUD No. 1 Contact: Jerry E1 ki ngton/Gary McLaury Mailing Address: PO Box 1106 Everett, Washi ngi4e: 3474414/514=5628 State License #: s Liability Insurance: Bond: $ D. Building Permit # (if applicable): Side Sewer Permit # (if applicable): E: ❑ Commercial ❑ Subdivision ❑ City Project Xw Utility (PUD, GTE, WNG, CABLE; WATER) ❑ ` Multi -Family ❑ Single Family ❑ Other INSPECTOR: INSPECTOR: L *.*.4c tl F. Pavement or Concrete Cut : ❑ Yes X%(MNo G. Size of Cut: x H., Charge APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees to h6ld t#e 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 or not limited to the defense of any legal proceedings including defense coats, and attorney fees by reason of granting this permit. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS,FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK. ESTIMATED RESTORATION FEES�WILL BE HELD UNTIL TIDE 1ZINAL�TREET PATCH IS COMPLETED BY CITY FORCES, AT WHICH TIME A DEBIT OR CREDIT WILL BE PROCESSED FOR ISSUANCE TO THE AP LICANT. Construction drawing of proposed'work required with permit application. A 24 hour notice is required for inspection; Please call the Engineering Division, 771-0220. Work and material is to be inspected during progress and at completion. Restoration is to be in accordance with City Codes. Street shall be kept clean at all times. Traffic Control and Public Safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by -the City Engineer. All street cut ditches shall be patched with asphalt or City approved material'prior to the end of the working day; NO EXCEPTIONS. I have read the above statements and understand the permit requirements and the pink copy of the permit will be available n slt at all times for ' spectio purposes. Signatur . Date: December 11, 1996 (Contractor Agent) CALL DIAL -A -DIG PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK ' «FOR CITY' USEMNLY , ,. APPROVED BY ��� RIGHT OFWAY DEPOSIT T' WIf TIME AUTHORIZED; VOID AFTER ` � � � DAYS_* DISRUPTION FEE/FUND 111 � r 1 T✓ &� $.. �g f' �1`, f.�,_ �3'''�i i SPECIAL CONDITIONS .�'t RESTORATION FEE; COMMENTS: RECEIPT FEE' Y. DATE ISSUED BY r a„ 10 NO WORK SHALL BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE Eng. Div. 1994 FIELD INSPECTION NOTES (Fund 111 - Route copy to Street Dept.) Comments : 1 Diagram; CONTRACTOR CALLED FOR INSPECTION ❑ YES ❑ NO Partial Work Inspection by P.W.: Work Disapproved By: Date: FINAL APPROVAL BY: Date: UR .01 f., r _ - c Zi'' Ste"' N. 42 V � \ \ \ t _ \\ _ --'/ .,j�,' % ---_� - �� - \ �� .. _ ... � � - Via:•. — >, / �2 _ _ •L�Q \ J - Y Iwmm 1 l' .�•-- .. i! .:l ,i' / - ..\ •� 'Sly+'f •�' - �r: � = / -• r _ - ram• .� - / •�;:-:, _ - / ,� '. n r - : T�T t. -t - ^t T� w — O vw•,.,nii• . Vo- - \�- "AGES✓ f - - - its a. 7. - .- - a ... .. _ ._ . ... .... .. •. . _ ,...i - ... � — �� �� �• � ... - .. ._ ... _ _ --YET _ . ....- • ._ .. .. 1. .. .. _ —_ . ..31 _ S. Op t - •-iii�. 4" — 8 _ A P.. T - W - i -4+ E A NG EV _ P . ... .. _.. .... ,. • .._., .:. .. � 'pry t Si y t _ - _ .. .. . ... . \ - \ � t • . - y ``,:sue , - - / : ';WATERNOTES =' ` :. �,• \ — . � •..� ems. - 1. .` APPROXIMATE y _ • ."�` .- .. E LOCATIONS. OF. EXISTING-UTIUTIES HAVE.�BEEN •OBTAINED ••FROM-'': �°=•-•�.:••;�'.�.::: \\ \ AVAILABLE RECORDS AND ARE SHOWN .FOR CONVENIENCE- THE:.CONTRACTOR __ r b' •.":� ' Lam_ :\\ 't\ \ `• SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFICATION OF THE LOCATIONS SHOWN "AND FOR _ �,�,.•_. ; :- \ DISCOVERY OF POSSIBLE .ADDITIONAL UTILITIES NOT SHOWN DSO AS 'TO AVOID �;, -; �� ,x•; SHALL -BE CONTACTED FIELD LOCATION PRIOR DAMAGE OR .DISTURBANCE. THE UNDERGROUND UTILITY: LOCATION SERVICE \ \ \ a.. . I. •• ;FOR .TO •ANY' CONSTRUCTION. THE OWNER OR .HIS . REPRESENTATIVE SHALL .BE CONTACTED IF A -.UTILITY CONFLICT EXISTS. ' FOR UTILITY. LOCATION IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY, CALL '.1-800- \ 424-5555. :. F//eE\ \ , • '.. ;,..:.. : • '. '• ..- ..'.::::.':;• • -.'; ': �: :.: :::.� .• •• ,:-�.'" �• HvoR/4/t/T .4 ssY� .2• .- ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM 'TO THE "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR . ,. MUNICIPAL PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION* AND STANDARD PLANS AS••ADOPTEO \ BY THE CITY OF EDMONDS, AND ANY REQUIREMENTS ESTABLISHED. AT CITY : 1 \ j HEARINGS ON THIS PLAT, 3. ALL CONSTRUCTION IS SUBJECT TO THE INSPECTION BY'THE CITY OF EDMONDS " �•�.� AND THE CONTRACTOR SHALL • NOTIFY THE CITY • OF HIS SCHEDULE IN p \\ SUFFICIENT .TIME .Td: PERMIT INSPECTION PRIOR TO AND DURING THE WORK. - ALL WORK WITHIN THE PLAT AND CITY RIGHT OF WAY CUAI t CC et,D .Cl- \ \\ - f - ----------------------- aimEt T FILE - \ '9sr � � �` `y � �6IK,e9 O•v jd/U I.v .S,�Fi ,(c - \ 94 94 r,e r _�q� 1 54. D14, TYPE ZZ y �� �� al {N W/ %lykU CU,-B /ll/L ERA �NG1( - r a W1 Tf 7k l- V k p,4YLIGHT - —• .._`__ .�`_+�_.... r:- v.'--- ,...- ram- . ,r. �� l� Q,rj 1.1 : . PLANNING DATA NAME: rI SITE ADDRESS: 520J, yy� DATE: 2 � 17 7 ZONING: ��' (Z PLAN CHK#: 97-- z� 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: *el 5 Fl-z- CORNER LOT .' (Yes/No) SETBACKS: 1S Required Setbacks: Front: 25 Left Side: /a Right Side: 1° Rear: 2S Actual Setbacks: Front: 51 Left Side:�_Right Side: ARear: �5 Street map checked for additional setback required? �- (Yes/No) LEGAL NONCONFORMING LAND USE DETERMINATION ISSUED (Y/N) LOT COVERAGE: G.1 Maximum Allowed: / Actual: I /,, BUILDING HEIGHT: Z5 Maximum Allowed: Actual Height: Datum Point: ('-1 0 • /- /,p Datum Elevation: A.D.U. CREATED?: SUBDIVISION: CRITICAL AREAS #:_ q5 ` Z L43— UAMIA SEPA DETERMINATION: dye/ iP'f' LOT AREA: I I, Z -� I OTHER: Plan Review By: :J Wo x/ i ove-rezu,-7 75, 9 X Ofi leAperm i r\^plandat. doc .G o T z S• S 9S-4202 ,'XZ�5r . !a ei,s �� as AppROVED AS NOD LL,:5v ............................ r 1 -7-J v 8a �4e. T