BLD20110757.pdfCr � OF E� O�
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020
o PHONE: (425) 771-0220 - FAX: (425) 771-0221
nc Ig9
Expiration Date:
Parcel No: 00513100002404
COWFAACTIOR
CHRIS A & KARYN C HAMMOND CHRIS A & KARYN C HAMMOND DOUCETTE ENTERPRISES LLC
15605 75TH PL W 15605 75TH PL W 6053 38Th Ave Ne
EDMONDS, WA 98026 EDMONDS, WA 98026 Seattle, WA 98115
( ) - EXT: ( ) - EXT: (206) 300-5461 EXT:
LICENSE #: DOUCEEL937DA EXP:3/3/2013
JOB 1 '
PERMIT TO COMPLETE BLD20090101. WORK INCLUDES ADD A HANDRAIL AND A LANDING AT THE STEPS OFF
THE SIDE DECK. CALL FOR FINAL INSPECTION.
VALUATION: $100.00
PERMIT TYPE: Residential
PERMIT GROUP: 18 - Complete Minor Work
GRADING: N CYDS: 0
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:
RETAINING WALL ROCKERY: N
OCCUPANT GROUP:
OCCUPANT LOAD:
FENCE: N ( 0 X 0 FT.)
CODE: 09
OTHER: N ------- OTHER DESC:
ZONE:
NUMBER OF STORIES: 0
VESTED DATE:
NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS: 0
LOT #.
EXISTINGAREA
BASEMENT: 0 1 ST FLOOR: 0 2ND FLOOR: 0
PROPOSED AREA
BASEMENT: 0 1 ST FLOOR: 0 2ND FLOOR: 0
3RD FLOOR: 0 GARAGE: 0 DECK: 0 OTHER: 0
13RD FLOOR: 0 GARAGE: 0 DECK: 0 OTHER: 0
FRONTSETBACK SIDESETBACK
REQUIRED: PROPOSED: RE UIRED: PROPOSED: RE UIRED: PROPOSED:
HEIGHT ALLOWED:0 PROPOSED:O REQUIRED: PROPOSED:
SETBACK NOTES:
I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUCTION AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO
PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO WORKMEN'S
COMPENSATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18:27.
THIS AP-PJ112ATION IS NOT A PERMIT UNTIL SIGNED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL OR HIS/HER DEPUTIY,,AND L FEES ARE PAID.
me Date
Date
ATTENTION
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTIFICATE OF
OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC1091 IBCI 10/ IRCI 10.
V
ONLINE APPLICANT ASSESSOR 0THER
T E D
STATUS: ISSUED BLD20110757
CONDrriONS
• 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 job card for all required City inspections including final project approval and final
occupancy inspections.
• 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.
• 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 official in accordance with the appropriate provision
of city code or state law does not approve any items not to code specification.
• Sound/Noise originating from temporary construction sites as a result of construction activity are exempt from the noise limits
of ECG 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 5.30.120.
• Applicant, on 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 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.
INSPECTIONS
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE
PUBLIC DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE SEPARATE PERMISSION.
PERMIT TIME LIMIT: SEE ECDC 19.00.005(A)(6)
BUILDING (425) 771-0220 EXT. 1333 1 ENGINEERING (425) 771-0220 EXT. 1326 1 FIRE (425) 775-7720 1
PUBLIC WORKS 425) 771-0235 1 PRE-TREATMENT 425) 672-5755 1 RECYCLING 425) 275-4801
When calling for an inspection please leave the following information: Permit Number, Job Site Address, Type of Inspection
being requested, Contact Name and Phone Number, Date Prefereed, and whether you prefer morning or afternoon.
• B -Building Final
oV E°Mo Inspection Comments
BLD20110757 18 - Complete Minor Work
Applied: 09/12/2011 Issued: 09/12/2011
Address: 15605 75TH PL W, EDMONDS
INSPECTION DATE
1158 - B -Building Final 09/06/2012
Comment:
Expires: 09/12/2012
INSPECTOR ACTION
LAWLER CMP
9/7/2012 7:17:36 AM 121 5th Ave, Edmonds Washington - Phone: (425) 771-0220 Page 1 of 1
l of ED�70
890
STATUS: ISSUED 9/1/2009
Expiration Date: 9/1/2011
CITY OF
EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH- EDMONDS,WA 98020
PHONE: (425) 771-0220 - FAX: (425) 771-0221
.0 Ju W
Parcel N o: 00513100002404
CHRIS A & KARYN C HAMMOND, , 1
CORNERSTONE ARCHITECTURAL
15605 75TH PL W GROUP DOUCETTE ENTERPRISES LLC
6161 NE 175TH STREET SUITE 101 6053 38TH AVE NE
EDMONDS, WA 98026 SEATTLE, WA 98115
KENMORE, WA 98028-
(206)682-5000 Ext. DOUCEEL937DA EXP. 03/03/2011
BEDROOM,
B 19H BUILDING CE,LOFT,
CLO ION: FIRST FLOOR, NEW KITCHEN & FAMILYROOM, SECOND FLOOR NEW MA
BIDROOM, BATH OFFICE, LOFT, CLOSETS,
BUILDING REMODEL: UPGRADE BUILDING STER
BEDROOM INTO BATH AND LAUNDRYROOM REMODEL WITH
EXTERIOR NTRY BATH WINDOWS, REMODEL ONE
VALUATION: $224,131 BUTLERS PANTRY.
1 IN 11
Released By
j
=ITIS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL AN O�PECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APP VAL OR A CERT7FICA-MOF
ARCMVE = APPLICANT = ASSESSOR
OTII[ER
f I
01'
W,
s.
STATUS: ISSUED BLD20090101
CONDITIONS
• Per ECDC 16.20.040.C, uncovered and unenclosed porches, steps, patios, and decks may project into a required setback not
more than one-third of the required setback, or four feet, whichever is less; provided, that they are no more than 30 inches
above ground level at any point. West and south decks and steps encroach 4', are less than 30", and shall not have guardrails
within the setback area.
• REQUIRED SPECIAL INSPECTIONS FOR THIS PROJECT':
1) Excavation, grading, & site preparation
2) Soil bearing verification
3) Placement of fill & compaction
4) Footing drain -sub surface drainage for entire site
5) Temporary Erosion Control
6) Final Erosion Control
7) Site retaining watV rockery construction.
8) General site monitoring
9) Final letter from geotechnical engineer of record
• Installer shall provide the manufacturees.installation, operating instructions, and a whole house ventilation system operation
description. A label shall be affixed to the whole house tuner control that reads "Whole House Ventilation" (see operating
instructions).
• Special inspections have been called for on this project and are noted on the approved construction plans and building permit.
It is the owner and/or contractors responsibility to assure that reports are provided to the City on a weekly basis. Be advised—
if special inspection reports are not forthcoming, the Building Official may issue a "Stop Work" and no City inspections will be
provided until such time as the reporting agency has complied and reports are reviewed and approved by the City.
• Obtain Electrical Permit from State Department of Labor & Industries. 425-290-1309
• Submit all special inspection reports to the City Building Inspector on a weekly basis.
• As required by Ordinance #3632 the geotechnical engineer of record shall monitor this site during construction for compliance
with the recommendations in the geotechnical report including: site excavation, shoring, soil support for foundation including
piles, soil bearing capacity, subdrainage installation, soil compactions, and other geotechnical aspects of the construction.
Specific recommendations contained in the approved geotechnical report must be implemented by the owner. The
geotechnical engineer shall make written, dated reports on the progress of the construction and submit the report to the
Building Official on a weekly basis until all site grading, drainage, foundation and associated ground work is complete.
Omissions or deviations fromthe approved geotechinical report and/or approved plans or specifications shall be highlighted
and immediately submitted in a seperate letter to the City for review. The City shall be advised in writing of work stoppages of
more than one week. In addition to the geotechnical monitoring, special inspections based on the provisions of IBC Section
1704 are required when specified on the approved plans. Other special inspections may also be required by the geotechnical
engineer, architect, or structural engineer of record (refer to approved plan set). At the completion of final site grading and all
pemutted structures, a final geotechnical report, prepared by the geotechnical engineer shall be submitted to the Building
Official. This report shall contain a statement that, based upon his/her professional opinion, site observations, and testing
during the monitoring of the construction, the completed development substantially complies with the recommendations in the
geotechnical report and with all geotechnical related permit requirements. Any deviations or omissions in the report, plans, or
specifications that occured during construction shall be addressed separately. Occupancy, final approval, or release of the
bond for the project shall not be granted until the report has been reviewed and accepted by the Building Official.
• 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 job card for all required City inspections including final project approval and final
occupancy inspections.
• 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.
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 official in accordance with the appropriate provision
of city code or state law does not approve any items not to code specification.
• 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/activites must comply with the
noise limits of Chapter 5.30, unless a variance has been granted pursuant to ECC 5.30.120.
• Applicant, on 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 damages of
whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the issuance fo this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to
modify, waive or reduce any requirements of any City ordinance not limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance
provision.
• New and e?dsting buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification
placed in a position that is plainly 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''/2 inch min. stroke
width on a contrasting background.
• Nothing in this permit approval process shall be interpreted as allowing or permitting the maintenance of any currently e2dsting
illegal, nonconforming or unpermitted building, structure or site condition which is outside the scope ofthe permit application,
regardless of whether such building, structure or condition is shown on the site plan or drawing. Such building, structure or
condition may be the subject of separate enforcement action.
INSPECTIONS
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE
PUBLIC DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE SEPARATE PERMISSION.
PERMIT TIME LIMIT. SEE ECDC 19.00.005(A)(6)
BUILDING (425) 771-0220 EXT. 1333 1 ENGINEERING (425) 771-0220 EXT. 1326 1 FIRE(425) 771-0215 1
PUBLIC WORKS 425) 771-0235 PRE-TREATMENT 425) 672-5755 RECYCLING 425 275-4801
When calling for an inspection please leave the following information: Permit Number, Job Site Address, Type of Inspection being
requested, Contact Name and Phone Number, Date Prefereed, and whether you prefer morning or afternoon.
• E Erosion Control/Mobilization
• E,StormTightline
• E Storm Connect to Stub
• E -Footing Drain Connection
• 11Footing Drain TL Conveyance
• E -Engineering Final
• B -Setbacks
• B -Footings
• B -Foundation Wall
• B -Foundation Drainage
B -First Floor Framing
• B -Plumb Rough In
B -Gas Test/Pipe
• B-Equipment-Mech
• B -Exterior Sheathing
• B -Shear Nailing
• B -Height Verification
• B -Framing
• B-WallInsulation/Caulk
• B -Floor Insulation/Caulk
• B -Ceiling Insulation/Caulk
• B-SheetrockNail
• B -Plumbing Final
• B -Mechanical Final
• B -Building Final
• X -Special Inspection
,e4 oJJwr
Date'
1
I I
1 I
1
Zone S Comeri,Fla&_
3EnNG
S h Re it d
Front
I
gSides S !o 12 5- Ilo ZS
1 I Rear ZS ZS
IOther
b \) I FO}1ND 1/2" RtBAR
II / CAP STAMPED \ \ I I I I \ \ I
47-
9435"-ONI�\
ST SW
—E�---FIsSD s°I —�'— to {p I-
1588'09'43'E zD.DD'(C)(D)
-r— - 129.5' o I I#XPP�#1
IjA-125.5 1 1 14------- I I I\
I • EXISTIN II f'
I EXISTING 1 I/ ,EX�S NG I I 1 1
I
CON C GARAGE 'COIN,/
WALL— I F. V
25.15
ILt'A EL
� h tIIIIII
11 \111\1 vi o I EXISTIN I ; ROOF I Sl7t \ I\ \\ 1 1 1 $I
CONC
N I WALL EXISTING ; 9�OVERHAN
v s BUILDING
F.F. ELEV
�IrI -128.52
EXISTING
=-�—DECK SHALL NOT BE GRAVEL j I I I I \ \D\NI $
MORE THAN 30' ABOVE
1 ADJACENT EXISTING II I i I I 11GRADE-
1
N I II I I I / it I II
Q. yii / I
ELEV/
tl
ICE31RIM-1 9.42
I FOUND 1/2"
i I I I REEBAR do CAP
L' �_J �1 STAMPED "G4
I
-i\. y I 30450"
\ � I
\ \\ \ III
I I I
SITE PLAN
I
SCALE: 1"= 30'-0"ftL ,A
i
HAMMOND RESIDENCE 2009
04/09/09
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
OV 01 AKWlAlr4 CITY OF EDMONDS
CITY COPY
j
Height Calculation Worksheet
Date . ?-- '?—w
Permit Number 2d d ! -0/0 �
Address l r /_ f ) ,r rat P/
Inspector cr
Average Grade %Z G -%
Max Height (25'+Ave.) /Sl�i�
Actual Height (A+B+C) /�(� 4
Elevation of transit above Datum (B).
Datum td Elevation (A)
1/temp/building/forms/height worksheet
El
CITY OF EDMONDS
SPECIAL INSPECTION AND TESTING AGREEMENT
Cjgp �Gc�tK�c�
MAY 0 8 2009
'4T
PERMIT # 3L2 Zn2 y0 h0 DATE: �62 12
of ON
L�s
PROJECT SITE ADDRESS: 15-6 05-M4'V()S G'U�
PROJECT NAME: . iL1!liln f-S%/.»NC's f4h17-16AI
SPECIAL INSPECTION AGENCY
*One form must be completed by each Special Inspection Agency or Inspector.
SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED: Special inspections are required for this project in accordance
with IBC Chapter 17 or in accordance with IRC R109.2 as applicable: IBC Section 1704.1 requires the
owner or the registered design professional in charge to employ an independent testing/inspection
agency/special inspector to perform required special inspections. The independent agency hired to
.perform the duties of special inspection is required to be a registered agency with WABO under the
Special Inspection Registration Program (SIRP). The special inspector shall be a qualified person with
competence for inspection of the particular type of construction or operation requiring special inspection
(SOQ may be required. by the Building Official). The owner, registered professional, contractor and
special inspector/agency shall complete the attached form and submit directly to the Building Division.
WORK REQURING SPECIAL INSPECTION: Special inspections will be required for the following
categories of work in accordance with IBC Chapter 17 and IRC R109.2: FOR SPECIFIC
INFORMATION REGARDING REQUIRED SPECIAL INSPECTIONS SEE THE STATEMENT OF
SPECIAL INSPECTION OATTACHED ❑APPROVED PLAN SKEET
o Fabrication (1704.2)
❑ Wood Construction 1704.6
o Steel Construction (1704.3)
2goils (1704.7
❑ Concrete 1704.4)
o Bolts installed'in Concrete (1704.13)
❑ Special Moment Resisting Concrete Frames (1704.4)
o Reinforcing Steel, Prestressing Steel Tendons 1704.4
o Structural Welding (1704.1. 1)
o High Strength Bolting 1704..3.3
o Masonry I704.5
o Reinforced GypsumConcrete (1704.4
o Structural Masonry for Seismic Resistance 1708.1
o Structural Observation 1709.
❑ Insulating Concrete Fill 1704.4
o Spray Applied Fire -Resistive Materials 1704.10
o Piling, Drilled Piers, and Caissons 1704.8, 1704.9
o Shotcrete 1704.4
❑ Pier Foundations 1707.5
❑ Structural Steel .1707.2
Gradin , Excavation, Fill, Proof Rollin 1704.7
o Smoke -Control Systems 17 04.14
o Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems 1704.12
o Designated Seismic Systems (1707.9)
❑ Mechanical Components 1707.8
o Cold Formed Steel Framing (1707.4
o Storage Racks (1707.6)
o Architectural Components (1707.7
o Structural Wood 1707.3
o Special Cases (1704.13
o Seismic Isolation System 1707.10
0 .
a Mastic, Intumescent Fire Resistant Coatings 1704.11
0
o High Load Diaphragms (1704.6. 1)
0
BEFORE A PERMIT CAN BE ISSUED: The owner and contractor and special inspector shall
complete this agreement and the attached Special Inspection Information Form, including the required
acknowledgements and return to the Building Division for approval prior to pgmL ,9 n, ei ON
L:\TEMPIBUILDING\SpecialInspectionAgreementIBCIREV. doc7/07 JAN 1Q 2u iU
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF EDMONDS
APPROVAL OF SPECIAL INSPECTORS: Each special inspector shall be approved by the Building
Official prior to performing any duties or inspections. The company performing inspections must be
WABO certified as well as the individual completing inspections. When required by the Building
Official, each special inspector shall submit Statement of Qualifications to the City for review. Special
inspectors shall display identification when performing special inspections on the project site. Special
inspection and testing shall meet the minimum requirements of IBC Chapter 17 and the following:
A.. Duties and Responsibilities of the Special Inspector
1. OBSERVE WORK
The special inspector shall observe the site work for conformance with the approved (stamped)
plans and specifications and applicable workmanship provisions of the IBC. Architect or
Engineer reviewed shop drawings may be used only as an aid to inspection. Special inspections
are to be performed on a continuous basis—meaning that the special inspector is on site at all
times observing the work requiring special inspection. Periodic inspections are permitted only as
specifically noted in the approved project plans in accordance with IBC Chapter 17, and as
approved by the Building Official.
Continuous Inspection means the same inspector is on site day to day to observe the work
requiring special inspection.
Periodic Inspection means some inspections may be performed on a periodic basis to satisfy the
requirements of continuous inspection, provided these periodic inspections are performed as
outlined in the project plans and specifications, and approved by the Building Official.
2. REPORT NONCONFORMING ITEMS
The special inspector shall bring non -conforming items to the immediate attention of the
contractor and note all such items in the daily field report. Any item not resolved in a timely
manner shall be immediate cause of the special inspector to notify the Building Official by
telephone at (425-771-0220) or in person at City Hall, of the plan deviation, error, change or
omission. It shall also be the duty of the special inspector to promptly notify the engineer or
architect of record.
3. DAILY REPORTS KEPT ON SITE WITH CONTRACTOR
Each special inspector shall complete and sign a daily report for each day's inspections. The daily
reports shall remain at the jobsite with the contractor for review by the City Building Inspector.
4. WEEKLY REPORTS TO CITY
The special inspector or inspection agency shall furnish the City with weekly reports of tests and
inspections. The project engineer or architect, and others as designated shall also .be copied on
reports. Weekly reports must include the following:
• Description and date of daily inspections and tests made with applicable locations
• List of all non -conforming items and locations
• Report on status of non -conforming items (how each was resolved or unresolved)
• Field changes authorized by the Architect, Engineer. or City Inspector if not included in
non-conformance items.
L:\TEMP\BUILDING\SpecialInspectionAgreementIBC 1REV.doc7/07
5. FINAL CONSTRUCTION REPORT
The special inspector or inspection agency shall submit a final signed report or Certificate of
Compliance to the City stating that all items requiring special inspection and testing were fulfilled
and reported. And, to the best of his/her knowledge the project is in conformance with the
approved plans and specifications, approved .change orders and the applicable workmanship
provisions of the IBC. Items not in conformance, unresolved items or any discrepancies in
inspection coverage (i.e., missed inspections, periodic inspection when continuous inspections were
required, etc.) shall be specifically addressed in this report.
B. Contractor Responsibilities
1. NOTIFY THE SPECIAL INSPECTOR OF ALL REQUIRED SPECIAL INSPECTIONS
It is the duty of the contractor to notify the special inspector when work is ready for special
inspection. Note, the items listed on the attached Special Inspection Information Form and as
noted on the approved plans and specifications are required to have special inspections. Adequate
notice shall be provided by the contractor so that the special inspector has time to become familiar
with the project. All work requiring special inspection must be approved prior to concealing or
covering said work.
2. PROVIDE ACCESS TO APPROVED PLANS
The contractor is responsible for providing the special inspector access to approved plans at the
jobsite.
3. RETAIN SPECIAL INSPECTION RECORDS
The contractor is responsible to retain at the jobsite all special inspection records submitted by the
special inspector. These records are to be provided to the City building inspector upon request.
C. City of Edmonds Buildinp, Division Responsibilities
1. APPROVE SPECIAL INSPECTION
The Building Division shall approve all Special Inspectors and special inspection requirements.
2. MONITOR SPECIAL INSPECTIONS AND APPROVE WEEKLY -REPORTS
Work requiring special inspection and the performance of special inspectors shall be monitored
by the City Building Inspector. Building Inspector approval must be obtained prior to placement
of concrete or other similar activities in addition. to that of the special inspector.
3. ISSUE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
The Building Official may issue a Certificate of Occupancy after all weekly special inspection
reports including the final report have been submitted and accepted by the City.
D. Owner Responsibilities
1. The project owner or the engineer or architect of record acting as the owner's agent shall fund
Special inspection services.
E. EnIlineer or Architect of Record Responsibilities
1. Prepare Statement of Special Inspections in accordance with IBC Section 1745.
2. Review the special inspection reports and provide corrective action for work that may not
conform to the approved plans.
L:\TEMP\BUILDING\SpeciaUnspectionAgreementlBC I REV.doc7/07
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I have read and ag a to comply with the terms and conditions of this agreement.
Owner name
(please print or type) (�
Signature Date
General ContractorCompany/Owner nam --,_gA4,qeS &I"r- LJA-t-V- '9Gngt-®p '"
(please print or type)
Signature Date --"t !
lei
64 "a3_of
Special. Inspector/Agency name S$CaC/f�Ti=(��i�'Ti��.J�C/N�FS, ,L�✓G,
(please pprint or type)
Signature ` Date Z Z, -An
Archit(
Return the original signed agreement to the Building Division
City of Edmonds Building Division
1215" Avenue North, City Hall Second Floor
Edmonds, WA 98020
ACCEPTED BY CITY OF EDMO�NDDS BUILDING DIVISION:
City Official Signature %? Date
Title:
lo��na�- Cw�o'�+C.TcafL .
L:ITEMPIBUILDING1SpecialInspectionAgreementlBCIREV.doc7/07
e_S
As required by Ordinance #3632 the geotechnical engineer of record shall monitor this site
during construction for compliance with the recommendations in the geotechnical report
including: site excavation, shoring, soil support for foundation including piles, soil bearing
capacity, subdrainage installation, soil compactions, and other geotechnical aspects of the
construction. Specific recommendations contained in the approved geotechnical report must
be implemented by the owner. The geotechnical engineer shall make written, dated reports on
the progress of the construction and submit the report to the Building Official on a weekly
basis until all site grading, drainage, foundation and associated ground work is complete.
Omissions or deviations from the approved geotechnical report and/or approved plans or
specifications shall be highlighted and immediately submitted in a separate letter to the City
for review. The City shall be advised in writing of work stoppages of more than one week. In
addition to the geotechnical monitoring, special inspections based on the provisions of IBC
Section 1704 are required when specified on the approved plans. Other special inspections
may also be required by the geotechnical engineer, architect, or structural engineer (refer to
approved plan set). At the completion of final site grading and all permitted structures, a final
geotechnical report, prepared by the. geotechnical engineer shall be submitted to the Building
Official. This report shall contain a statement that, based upon his/her professional opinion,
site observations, and testing during the monitoring of the construction, the completed
development substantially complies with the recommendations in the geotechnical report and
with all geotechnical related permit requirements. Any deviations or omissions in the report,
plans, or specifications that occurred during construction shall be addressed separately.
Occupancy, final approval or release of the bond for the project shall not be granted until the
report has been reviewed and accepted by the Building Official.
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
016166 a6n Over 25 Zfean, o f S'evcice
August 31, 2011
Project No. KE080287A
Mr. Chris Hammond
15605 75th Place West
Edmonds Washington, 98026
Subject: Final Letter
Construction Monitoring
Hammond Residence
15605 75�h Place West
Edmonds Washington
Dear Mr: Hammond:
As requested, Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) has prepared this letter summarizing our
construction monitoring observations during the renovation and expansion of your residence.
AESI's geotechnical services for the project included preparation of a "Subsurface Exploration,
Landslide Mitigation, and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report" for the site dated
August 1, 2008.. AESI was also on site during site excavation and foundation preparation.
Our site visits during began on. September 8, 2009 and ended on October 13, 2009. Please see
the attached field reports 1 through 7. Our visits included observation of the following:
• Site excavation and slope stability monitoring;
• Foundation subgrade preparation and bearing capacity observation;
• Observation and compaction testing of structural fill soil;
• Foundation drainage, and;
• Temporary site erosion control.
A final visit to' observe permanent erosion control was completed on August 31, 2011. During
this visit we noted that the site soils have been permanently stabilized against erosion by
placement of landscape plants,. grass sod, and crushed rock. Site drainage facilities appear to be
adequately controlling surface runoff and no areas of erosion were noted.
Kirkland Everett Tacoma
425-827-7701 425-259-0522 253-722-2992
www.aesgeo.com
To the.best of our knowledge, all work observed by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) was
completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Soils work on this project
now appears complete. We trust that this letter will meet your current needs. If you have any
questions or require additional information, please feel free to contact our office.
Sincerely,
ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
Kirkland, Washington
h- -
QQ,�N McM/cti
A.N/N�r0 �<
N J S
-O �l
9° s IsTE���c�` X131/2° l l
S/ON AL- l
G. Aaron McMichael, P.E.
Associate Engineer
Attachments: Daily Field Reports No..1 through 7
i
2
Associated Earth Sciences, Isle.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
425-827-7701 FAX 827-5424
TO:
Chris Hammond
15605 75"' Place West
Edmonds, Washington 98026.
ATTN:
AS REQUESTED BY John Nicholls
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
FIELD REPOR-di"
City of Edmonds Permit No. 20090101
Page 1 of 2
Date
Project Name
Project No.
9/8/09
Hammond Addition
KE080287A
Location
Weather
15605 751" Place West
Sunn 70 de
Municipality
Report Number
City of Edmonds
1
Engineer/Architect
Marc Stubbs/ Cornerstone Architeetural Group
Client/Owner
Hammond
General Contractor/Superintendent
Nicholls Construction/ John
Grading Contractor/Superintendent
Earthwise/Albert
Onsite this afternoon at the request of the general contractor, John Niccols. He informed us this morning that they would be
excavating the foundation area for the new addition and retaining wall and would like to come out this afternoon to snake some
observations of the exposed soils. He also said that he had reviewed our -soils report and was aware that the foundation areas had
to be over -excavated 2 feet below bottom of footing and backfilled with compacted structural fill. We planned to do a couple
shallow potholes to observe the exposed soils before they excavated all the footing areas. We called Chris Hammond to let him
know that we were starting our initial geotechnical observations today.
Excavation%'Temporary Cut Slope
At the time of our arrival, we observed that the contractor had excavated close to bottom of footing subgrade in the proposed
addition, including the new garage. In general, the excavation was on the order of 2 to 3 feet.below the surrounding grade.
However, the east end of the excavation was vertical and extended into the slope with a cut height of 6 feet. We recommended
that the temporary cut be benched above 4 feet. The contractor planned to -comply.
Foundation Over -excavation
The contractor excavated two spots on the perimeter of the proposed addition to a depth of 2 feet below bottom of footing. We
evaluated the exposed soils visually and with a'/z inch diameter, steel soil probe. The soils consisted of sand with some silt that
could be penetrated with a fair amount of effort to 4 feet deep with the soils probe.
We recommended to the contractor that they attach a vibratory plate (to be delivered to. the site tomorrow) to their Case 580
backhoe and re -compact the soils exposed in the bottom of the over -excavated footing areas to a firm and unyielding condition and
that we would like to be onsite to confirm. Once the exposed soils were re -compacted to a firm and unyielding condition, then
they could backfill with onsite soil or an import of choice. We discussed the re -use of the onsite sandy soil and whether it would
be acceptable (able to meet 95% compaction) for re -use as fill given the existing moisture content. At the time, we could not
determine whether the moisture content was close to optimum, so we suggested that they try to re -use the onsite soil in one area to
see if it could be properly re -compacted. Alternatively, a 2 to 4 inch quarry rock or similar concrete recycle could be used for
backfilling the footing areas. The contractor said he would discuss the use of an alternative material with the owner, if necessary.
We collected a sample of the onsite sandy material for a laboratory Proctor analysis, in case the material will be used.
Temporary Erosion Control
Silt fencing was installed and embedded along the southern and western margins of the work area where the potential for offsite
sediment transport was a potential.
The contractor requested that we return to the site tomorrow at 1pm.
COPIES TO:
FIELD REP.: Scott R. Hannah P.E.G.
C(7-_�D
DATE PRINCIPAL / PM: G. Aaron McMichael, P.E.
MAILED:
1did A 641X
_ I
EXISTING �i�D ,?D a -o A"
N I I II BUILDING
X156 TH ST SW 1.0
1 SD so�� \
_ so ---\ So — So — �� so
LINE FROM 1 ESTERN MOST POINT—
N OF ADJACENT HOUSES
--20.02' i
11S88-0 9'43_'E
I / 1 I I 20.00'(C)(D)
t Aj
. I I , — --- — 10' BUILDING SETBACIS--
I I }1 A-1215'
I
O
I 1 EXISTIN I EXISTING
CONIC ` GARAGE I
WALL I F.F. ELEV j
=125.15 I
C7
.-.I I I
I'� kl �I 1-T1 ---�
mll
` \n�l
m I J lo' EX�STINJII I R
o f I C0f4C I~ I p
0 I I T I WAI-L 11 EXISTING <
BUILDING I
a I 3 I F.F. ELEV
m i m I =128.52 j
3 I rn I N I t I' EXI
'In l �' a rT' GR
1
Z I N 1 11
� 1 I I
t -I
If
D-129 0
x1S If
/III I 1
/ ci§
I
�M I I \\ 11 II I\ I
o f
t IOOF I III \ \ \ \\ I\ I N
VERHAN
01
rn
STING VIII\\ \ �N1 0
AVEL ��I I I o
I I
II \ 1 j ADD TIO A Ad
II i jl Q. ELEV F,F. E(IEV If
ISO �
y1 I I i I =i 27.27 =12s
\ II I
B-12
k
121�
I 3 I ROOF OVERHANG
� I I
I I /1161 _ 1 0.00' C�D) I L
I�� � / %ONC�`�� 88'09'43"E=,�_`sf\✓'`\ \ \ \
I \ WALLS
EXISTINGBUILDING
SITE PLAN
1 1 I § z SITE SCALE. 1'e 10'-0'
'911FiftEiAvenue•Suite 100 . ,:ssoclated Earth Sclenc. :), Inc. 2911'2 Hewitt Avenue* Suite 2
Kirkland, WA 98033 EWt2W-052201
425-827-7701
FAX 425-827-5424 FIELD REPORT FAX 425-252-3408
FIELD REPORT # PAGE I OF 2
TO: . .i
i 91'_.f
AS REQUESTED BY'
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
bb A(m
G ik_ •
6`
Date
P
ject No
P o'ect N
Loc ti 6 0 C
J
Weather
Muni polity
Ci a rm.Urdr
Bldg. Permito.
4 DI
Engin r/Archil ct
re s
Client C►wner
`17-
d
Ge VRICo ctor/Sup
inten ent AJ
Earthwork Contractor/Su arintendent
`1
`t -
GSL /I `�//� �b 6 '1�. Tn� c f✓i`
ai
GCs424b a
&4 -zo, w7� �� G% GLS► /2Ce�
42
ccif �gkvm-d
A 1`1_ . n e Ne we i
COPIES TO:
DATE MAILED: c 4Z009
' Field Report subject to review by AESI Project Manager
FIELD REP: CPdz'
'PROJECT MANAGER:�P,
l f VL
AESI FRL rev 3/2006
'SEE Aw
9�g/oq
14 AT'Iz Oc % j
p NOSING BAR (m) / ` back � i l ra cf W /
14 UNDER EA RISER — " C(.a s 1S
00%1:1 HOII BARS DRO 3 " •� 1
ADJACENT WADS W/ 6' EMBED I I
I
I
2R
I 1
3 CONCRET STAIR DETAILS II
1 J r II I
EXTERIOR STAIR ON GRADE -SD SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0" 1 i lI RUN SLAB OVER i Fl
I Crl FOUNDATION WALL I I I A
Ip I 11 AT DOOR OPENING 11 I
R00 DR61J]) INTO
11 4+j. I IIr\--
11 1
4' SAB ON GRADE W/ 6.6 II 1
G� ATIOI WALL—�u / $Jr i WL9xWL9 VI 4ESi I I I
_D—DOWN TO EXIST. FDN I TCP OF SLABElEVATION,2G3� 1
Jd2
I I,
-I I --------------- 1 2
SCALE 1"= 1'-0" i - 1 1
1
` - - - - -----� I TIE REBAR TO ETISRNG WALL W/ #5 X 2'-6 DOWELS O 1 1 St
3 I FOOTING s HORIZONTAL WALL REINFORCING DRILL INTO I
S2I EIDSIING WALL AND SET W/ EPDXY, 4• EMBED TYP. I
I I
4
t i-6 I 1
' - I
REMOVE PORION OF FOUNDATION
WALL AS REQUIRED FOR NEW
EXISTWGOE_
GMAT£ EXISTING FOUNDATION WALLFr- __
I
- I
I I
' I
TIE REM TO EXISTWG WALL W/ 15 X T-6' DOWELS 0 I I
FOOTWG k HORRONTAL WALL REINFORCING DRILL INTO I
EXTSDNG WALL AND SET W/ EPDXY. 4' EMBED TTP. i
I`
I L
I
I E
I 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I St
----------------------------------------------------------------- T-D•x2•-6• WIDE W/ (2) a TOP & (3) I 1
JS BOTTOM W//4 TIES O 12- O.C. 1 r
EXISTING CONCRETE WALL EXISTING FOOTINGS BELOW I L
- BASEMENT BEARING WALLS -•
I
_____ - =
__ _____
- I
I
2X6 0 IC ac SND WALL 'I Sl
TIE REBAR TO EXISTING WALL W/ (3) 43
-X 2'-6'. DRILL INTO EXISTING WALL AND I I
I 1 SET W/ EPDXY. 4• EMBED 1
I I I I
tt I I
i
r`I 1
TIE RFBM TO EXISTING WALL W/ j3 X • •- .
Y-6' DOWELS O FOOTING 4 HORIZONTAL t -B• I I
WALL REINFORCING. DRILL INTO EXISTING I I T
WALL AND SEF W/ EPDXY. 4- EMBED TTP. , 1
I I
1E REBAR TO EXISTING WALL W/ (2) FS
ED U LE X Y-fi-. DRILL INTO EX151WG WALL AND
SET W/ EPDXY. 4- EMBED 51 TV. VENTS ; 1
I
ROOD SLrPPDRr I --- I I
POST
EX6NNG FOUNDATION MALL I I I I I I I I I I
2-ZL STUDS EXSTWG FOUNDATION WALLII II II II I________ ________________J
II II I I 11
II 11 ���5. I 1
I I
I 1.44 � I • I
2-2t SDUDS ♦ I l DECX SUPPORT ONLY, 964 IF I I ---------------- 1 I' -0'x1'-6' WIDE W/ (2) RI TOP &
2-2t_ STUDS b�0t• DEmNDAWI THE
DUE 70 L,w Bonou W//3 TEs a I2' ac
P fJ
F �0
2-2x- STUDS
8 £ t10W POST r I :1'-4.10• TH CK
JEW h 9MPSON CBO
3-2x_ STUDS
WOW
OEIHER W/ 15% AT 4.00
TO POSTS W/ IO44 PER
,rARs FOUNDATION PLAN NOTE BOTTOMS OF ALL FOOTINGS TO BE
,, LOCATED 1'-6' LIN. BELOW FIeSIED GRADE
SCALE 1/4•= 1'-0'
i°
'SEE Aw
9�g/oq
14 AT'Iz Oc % j
p NOSING BAR (m) / ` back � i l ra cf W /
14 UNDER EA RISER — " C(.a s 1S
00%1:1 HOII BARS DRO 3 " •� 1
ADJACENT WADS W/ 6' EMBED I I
I
I
2R
I 1
3 CONCRET STAIR DETAILS II
1 J r II I
EXTERIOR STAIR ON GRADE -SD SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0" 1 i lI RUN SLAB OVER i Fl
I Crl FOUNDATION WALL I I I A
Ip I 11 AT DOOR OPENING 11 I
R00 DR61J]) INTO
11 4+j. I IIr\--
11 1
4' SAB ON GRADE W/ 6.6 II 1
G� ATIOI WALL—�u / $Jr i WL9xWL9 VI 4ESi I I I
_D—DOWN TO EXIST. FDN I TCP OF SLABElEVATION,2G3� 1
Jd2
I I,
-I I --------------- 1 2
SCALE 1"= 1'-0" i - 1 1
1
` - - - - -----� I TIE REBAR TO ETISRNG WALL W/ #5 X 2'-6 DOWELS O 1 1 St
3 I FOOTING s HORIZONTAL WALL REINFORCING DRILL INTO I
S2I EIDSIING WALL AND SET W/ EPDXY, 4• EMBED TYP. I
I I
4
t i-6 I 1
' - I
REMOVE PORION OF FOUNDATION
WALL AS REQUIRED FOR NEW
EXISTWGOE_
GMAT£ EXISTING FOUNDATION WALLFr- __
I
- I
I I
' I
TIE REM TO EXISTWG WALL W/ 15 X T-6' DOWELS 0 I I
FOOTWG k HORRONTAL WALL REINFORCING DRILL INTO I
EXTSDNG WALL AND SET W/ EPDXY. 4' EMBED TTP. i
I`
I L
I
I E
I 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I St
----------------------------------------------------------------- T-D•x2•-6• WIDE W/ (2) a TOP & (3) I 1
JS BOTTOM W//4 TIES O 12- O.C. 1 r
EXISTING CONCRETE WALL EXISTING FOOTINGS BELOW I L
- BASEMENT BEARING WALLS -•
I
_____ - =
__ _____
- I
I
2X6 0 IC ac SND WALL 'I Sl
TIE REBAR TO EXISTING WALL W/ (3) 43
-X 2'-6'. DRILL INTO EXISTING WALL AND I I
I 1 SET W/ EPDXY. 4• EMBED 1
I I I I
tt I I
i
r`I 1
TIE RFBM TO EXISTING WALL W/ j3 X • •- .
Y-6' DOWELS O FOOTING 4 HORIZONTAL t -B• I I
WALL REINFORCING. DRILL INTO EXISTING I I T
WALL AND SEF W/ EPDXY. 4- EMBED TTP. , 1
I I
1E REBAR TO EXISTING WALL W/ (2) FS
ED U LE X Y-fi-. DRILL INTO EX151WG WALL AND
SET W/ EPDXY. 4- EMBED 51 TV. VENTS ; 1
I
ROOD SLrPPDRr I --- I I
POST
EX6NNG FOUNDATION MALL I I I I I I I I I I
2-ZL STUDS EXSTWG FOUNDATION WALLII II II II I________ ________________J
II II I I 11
II 11 ���5. I 1
I I
I 1.44 � I • I
2-2t SDUDS ♦ I l DECX SUPPORT ONLY, 964 IF I I ---------------- 1 I' -0'x1'-6' WIDE W/ (2) RI TOP &
2-2t_ STUDS b�0t• DEmNDAWI THE
DUE 70 L,w Bonou W//3 TEs a I2' ac
P fJ
F �0
2-2x- STUDS
8 £ t10W POST r I :1'-4.10• TH CK
JEW h 9MPSON CBO
3-2x_ STUDS
WOW
OEIHER W/ 15% AT 4.00
TO POSTS W/ IO44 PER
,rARs FOUNDATION PLAN NOTE BOTTOMS OF ALL FOOTINGS TO BE
,, LOCATED 1'-6' LIN. BELOW FIeSIED GRADE
SCALE 1/4•= 1'-0'
Inc. 2911'/i Hewitt Avenue • Suite
911 FiithAvenue • Suits 100 ssociated Earth Sciene
Kirkland, WA 98033 Everett, 5 59 052201
425-827-7701
FAX 425-827-5424 FIELD REPORT FAX 425-252-3408
FIELD REPORT # PAGE I OF
TO: -
156o5 -7,52 F (& Xe
ATTN: p
AS REQUESTED BY: c.j 4161 LR�U1
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
Date
ject Name
' G �� Gvct
P ject No.
o�.o '1
4
rr
Q Tyr
o
Location •
.r / o
l
Weather �r6
CCC' I/v'e�
S -a
A'f J
Mci a i
f I 1 1A le,
f C i ffa C!/, 'k i t_V;fi Li ! 47 6a
Bldg. P it No.
En in r/Arc ' g t
CMZ n e
Ge eral C ntractor
uperi tendg�+�
GlAt
/"c
% n
rawk
Earthwork Contractor/Su erintendent
wtSe
ac t," c, ' na_
h Lal EcL "v/ c Qc i /3c/<L & �a/'-
do 0
G01 V - ,
- A
FIELDCMPA ON
6 a .4,4, 7,01
�xf Jam, CzGun .
ADDITIONAL TESTS REQUIRED: ❑ YES ❑ NO WHERE?
<-C pvts, Y -fir 0 /t� FIELD REP:
COPIES TO:
DATE MAILED: nn .ci��� %��g -
/`ern AcAj
• Field Report subject to review by AESI Project Manager
AESI_FRL rev 3/2006
` 41
' G �� Gvct
c �l ion
rt ` t it
6, --i 'le P 2cy ail psu
Q Tyr
-fid
eKC��,u
.r / o
l
�2 2Ac{
S -a
f I 1 1A le,
f C i ffa C!/, 'k i t_V;fi Li ! 47 6a
FIELDCMPA ON
6 a .4,4, 7,01
�xf Jam, CzGun .
ADDITIONAL TESTS REQUIRED: ❑ YES ❑ NO WHERE?
<-C pvts, Y -fir 0 /t� FIELD REP:
COPIES TO:
DATE MAILED: nn .ci��� %��g -
/`ern AcAj
• Field Report subject to review by AESI Project Manager
AESI_FRL rev 3/2006
II
11
' RCO DRILlID N70 I I
C FOUNDARON WALL 1
EXISTING
GARAGE
UR
SCALE: 1"= 1'-0"
'- t�f d✓t��' ��uC��l 77JV1
14 AT 12"OC—' I
/3 NOSING BAR (TIP)
/4 UNDER EA RIM
DOWEL. HORR BARS INTO
ADUCONT WALLS W/ 6- FAIRED
2R
CONCIS T STAIR DETAIL � ;�
3 EXTERIOR STAIR ON GRADE -SD SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0"
I ISI
UeuI I
11
I
L I
III
RUN SLAB OVER
FOUNDATION WALL //�• I I I
AT DOOR CPEMNG
4' SLAB ON GRADE W/ 6.6'to/
OF WBSSN
S I
TIP OF
IOP SEAB IEYABON 126.5 -liJj `J 1 I I
I
1 I
I �
TIE RMAR To EXISTING WALL W/ 15 X 2'-6' DOWELS 0
} I I FOOTING 0 HORIZONTAL WALL REINFORCING. DRILL INTO I I
I
EXISTING WALL AND SET W/ EPDXY, !• EMBED IIP. i 1
i
4 •I I
1 tea; I
REMOVE ON OF FOUNDATION I I
WALL DUIRED FOR NEW DOOR --_______ ______
EXISTING FWMA71ON WALL - 1
I I
I I
1 1
1 I
i� TIE TING TO EXISTING WALL W/ /5 X IMG. DOWELS O I I
� (` FOOTING k HORIZONTAL WALL REINFORCING. DRILL INTO
' �1 ( E70mNG WALL AND SET N/ EPDXT, 4' EMBED TIP. I I
I I
I
I I
I I
I I
I I
____________________________________________________________________ I I
----------------------------------------------------------------- T'-o•s2'-6• VA. w/ (2) is Tot• a (3)
15 BOTTOM W//4 TIES 0 12. O.C. I I
--
EXISTING CONCRETE WALL EXISTING FOOTINGS BELOW i I
1
BASEMENT BEARING WAILS I I
_____________________________
____ 1
______________________ ____________ 1
Eli
' ZXG O 16" O.C. STUD WALL I
1
SI
'
TIE REBAR TO SVTING WALL W/ (3) 15
I
II
11
' RCO DRILlID N70 I I
C FOUNDARON WALL 1
EXISTING
GARAGE
UR
SCALE: 1"= 1'-0"
'- t�f d✓t��' ��uC��l 77JV1
14 AT 12"OC—' I
/3 NOSING BAR (TIP)
/4 UNDER EA RIM
DOWEL. HORR BARS INTO
ADUCONT WALLS W/ 6- FAIRED
2R
CONCIS T STAIR DETAIL � ;�
3 EXTERIOR STAIR ON GRADE -SD SCALE: 3/4"= 1'-0"
I ISI
UeuI I
11
I
L I
III
RUN SLAB OVER
FOUNDATION WALL //�• I I I
AT DOOR CPEMNG
4' SLAB ON GRADE W/ 6.6'to/
OF WBSSN
S I
TIP OF
IOP SEAB IEYABON 126.5 -liJj `J 1 I I
I
1 I
I �
TIE RMAR To EXISTING WALL W/ 15 X 2'-6' DOWELS 0
} I I FOOTING 0 HORIZONTAL WALL REINFORCING. DRILL INTO I I
I
EXISTING WALL AND SET W/ EPDXY, !• EMBED IIP. i 1
i
4 •I I
1 tea; I
REMOVE ON OF FOUNDATION I I
WALL DUIRED FOR NEW DOOR --_______ ______
EXISTING FWMA71ON WALL - 1
I I
I I
1 1
1 I
i� TIE TING TO EXISTING WALL W/ /5 X IMG. DOWELS O I I
� (` FOOTING k HORIZONTAL WALL REINFORCING. DRILL INTO
' �1 ( E70mNG WALL AND SET N/ EPDXT, 4' EMBED TIP. I I
I I
I
I I
I I
I I
I I
____________________________________________________________________ I I
----------------------------------------------------------------- T'-o•s2'-6• VA. w/ (2) is Tot• a (3)
15 BOTTOM W//4 TIES 0 12. O.C. I I
--
EXISTING CONCRETE WALL EXISTING FOOTINGS BELOW i I
1
BASEMENT BEARING WAILS I I
_____________________________
____ 1
______________________ ____________ 1
R
P
A
' ZXG O 16" O.C. STUD WALL I
1
SI
'
TIE REBAR TO SVTING WALL W/ (3) 15
I
. X 2'-6'. DRILL INTO EXISTING WALL AND
I
I
SET W/ EPDXY, 4' EMBED
I
I
I
I
I
'
I
' I
I
I
- I
r --------J
1
1
'
I
RE REBAR TO FASTING WALL w/ /S X
2'-6' DOWELS O FOOTING ! HORIZONTAL
I
WALL REINFORCING DRILL INTO EXISTING I
WALL AND SET W/ EPDXY. 4- EMBED TTP. I
I t
I I
.
.
TE REBAR TO EXISTING WAIL W (2) /5
SET W EPO 4 EMBED G W
I
1911a' LENA I
I
I
5t TYP'
I
EXISTING FOUNDATION WALLI
I I I
______ ________________J
I T
EXTSTNG FOUNDATION ALLI I I
II II II
I I 1 I
Il4e-
II
II
I
,6DECK
SUPPORT ONLY. 941M IF
I_____________J
I 1'-0b'-6' WIDE W/(2) R TOP 8
'BOTTOM W/13 TIES 0 12. O.C.
b AT'REWIRED
N THE FUTURE DUE
DIFFERENTIAL SEnLMENT
I
L
________________-_
I
J
r
t 1'-4'xl'-4'x10" THICK
I
I
1� W/ (2)H EW t SIMPSON Cao
J
�?�
��
•rJt ce -
FOUNDATION PLAN
6
MOTE: BOTTOMS OF ALL F001MCS TO BE '✓�+J J
ED 1'
LOCATED MIM. BELOW FINISHED GRADE J J
R
P
A
911 Fifth Avenue • Suite 100
Kirldand, WA 98033
425-827-7701
FAX 425-827-5424
e..ssociated Earth Scienc. - s, Inc.
MEN UM0
TO:
Im-M&kAnd
15&0a :75f,;P6,-P- V"peS+
E�&4yt,re u S UVJ� J&26,
ATTN•
AS REQUESTED BY -
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
FIELD REPORT
FIELD REPORT #
2911 lh Hewitt Avenue • Suite 2
Everett, WA 98201
425-259-0522
FAX 425-252-3408
PAGE—LOF J
D e�
P lett Nam
Pro ect No
Q�
LocationWeather
n/
.. o
r✓[
vAm
Municipality
Bldg. Pefmit No.
En ine /Arch'tect
i
Client wrier
rat S� rator/ dent
�c
f
JG
L
Earthwork Contractor/Superintendedt
FIELD COMPACTION EQUIPMENT UTILIZED:
AREAS OF ADDITIONAL CONCERN:
ADDITIONAL TESTS REQUIRED: ❑ YES ❑ NO WHERE?
j c ,
COPIES TO: 4 f 92 J Qci
DATE MAILED:
' Field Report subject to review by AESI Project Manager
FIELD REP:
'PROJECT MANAGER:
AESI FRL rev 3/2006
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
f
Ce�.9rn(r 2;-
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
425-827-7701 FAX 827-5424
"III
Chris Hammond
1560575 1h Place West
Edmonds, Washington 98026
ATTN:
AS REQUESTED BY John Nicholls
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
Drainage
FIELD REPOR.'
City of Edmonds Permit No. 20090101
Page 1 of I
Date
Project Name
1
Project No.
9/28/09
Hammond Addition
KE080287A
Location
Weather
1560575 1h Place West
Sunny 70 de -
Municipality
Report Number
City of Edmonds
5
Engineer/Architect
Marc Stubbs/ Cornerstone Architectural Group
Client/Owner
Hammond
General Contractor/Superintendent
Nicholls Construction/ John
Grading Contractor/Superintendent
Earthwise/Steve
Contractor informed us earlier today that they were backfilling with drain rock today over the footing drains. We
arrived onsite this afternoon. Contractor had placed drain rock over footing drains and enclosed with filter fabric. We
recommended that they place more rock behind the retaining wall, over the footing and part way up the wall currently
covered by MiraDrain. The contractor anticipates, only 5 feet of total backfill behind the garage retaining wall.
Placement and Compaction of Structural Fill
At the time of our arrival, the contractor was backfilling the new stairwell wall and the garage slab area to achieve up
to approximately 3 feet of fill. Fill was being placed and spread in less than 1 foot thick lifts with the excavator and
being compacted with a jumping jack. Soils consisted of brown sand with some silt and appeared to be close.to the
optimum moisture content. We informed the.contractor that the plans listed compaction as one of the items to be
inspected. The soils were in a firm and unyielding condition, based observations made visually and with a''/Z inch
diameter, steel soil probe. The current fill layer could be probed with some effort under full body weight to the
previously compacted layer. The contractor was only making one pass with the jumping jack so we recommended that
they start making two passes. They planned to remove the partially placed loose lift, recompact a second time and
then continue. I informed the contractor that we would collect a sample of the soil and come back another day to test
compaction at the subgrade elevation. We tentatively scheduled for Wednesday (in 2 days).
COPIES TO: FIELD REP.: Scott R. Hannah, P.E.G.
DATE OCT rl 200 PRINCIPAL / PM: G. Aaron McMichael, P.E.
MAILED: ��
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
'06-
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
425-827-7701 FAX 827-5424
TO:
Chris Hammond
15605 75`h Place West
Edmonds, Washington 98026
ATTN:
AS REQUESTED BY John Nicholls
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
Drainalie
FIELD REPORT'
City of Edmonds Permit No. 20090101
Page 1 of 2
DateProject
Name
Project No.
9/30/09
Hammond Addition
KE080287A
Location
Weather
15605 751h Place West
Overcast 60 de
Municipality
Report Number
City of Edmonds
6
Engineer/Architect
Marc Stubbs/ Cornerstone Architectural Group
Client/Owner
Hammond
General Contractor/Superintendent
Nicholls Construction/ John
Grading Contractor/Superintendent.
Earthwise/Steve
As recommended, the contractor placed more rock behind the garage retaining wall.
While onsite, he ran water from a garden hose into the existing slab drain outside the existing basement door on the
south side of the house. He said that he had already tested it for 45 minutes earlier in the week and never saw signs of
it back flowing. The water was run for 20 minutes this afternoon, but its destination could riot be determined. The
small volume of water already flowing in the existing street catch basin near the southwest property corner did not
appear to increase.
We understand that the existing drain located outside the southern basement door will be within the crawlspace for the.
new construction. The contractor said that he planned to build a short concrete wall to confine the quarry rock
exposed under the new footing, which was above and near the existing south basement door. The short wall would also
help block potential seepages from the quarry rock. We suggested that he allow for a small drainage connection
between the quarry rock and the existing drain outside the -southern basement door.
Placement and Compaction of Structural Fill- South Garage
The compacted. soils for the southern garage slab and stairwell wall were at subgrade elevation and in a firm and
unyielding condition. Three densitytests were conducted with a nuclear, moisture -density gauge with compaction
results ranging between 91 and 92 percent. The test locations are shown on page 2.
COPIES TO:ykn N t L�WIt!S - �04n hl G 1- @ 6,kSm. C(^ FIELD REP
DATEOCT PRINCIPAL / PM
MAILED`. 2009
Scott R. Hannah, P.E.G.
G. Aaron McMichael, P.E. �j
IN
II
ROD DRILLED INTO
E 1
FM40AIlOI WALL1
elm
-D—DOWN TO I
d2
kR
913v f Oct Kf-0 ?0.1 2 2
ARCHT
J4 AT lYa
13 irosxG BAR (TYP)
/4 UNDER EA RISER 1 ` " f
DOWa HOW EARS NRI - � r --------------------------------------------
ADJACENT WAILS W/ 6" EXmFD I I
I I
_ I I
xR I
CONCRETE STAIR DETAIL
I
3 of
EXTERIOR STAIR ON GRADE—SD SCALE 3/4-= 1'-0" i i I MIN SUB OVER
I �I FOONDATCH WALL I I I A
I I I AT DOOR OPENNG 11 I A
I �I II 1
I
J 'Ib I I I C S.AB ON OWE W/ 6[6 I I I
W2.9.ng WRE WESH I I I
I I TOP OF SUB ELEVATION 1265 I I I
SCALE. 1"= 1'-0'
J
---------------------
- EXISTING CONOiEIE WALL
---------------------
EXIMG FOUNDATION WALL
r---------- ------4 O/ .1 I
I 1 ®
--1 I
FOOTNG A HORIZONTAL WALL
TIE REBAR TO EXSIWG WALL W/ 15 X Y-6' DOWELSO
J j ; REINFORCING. DRILL WTO
I I
$ 1 E105TING WALL AND SET W/ EPDXY. 4' EMBED T1P. I I
I 1 1
4 ,I I
$1
REMOTE PORMON.OF FOUNDATION
WALL AS REDJIRED FOR NEW DOOR ________________ ______ _________J 1
1
DOSOTG FOUNDATION WALL _-_S -------- I' _____-_
1
1 I
1 I
I 1
I I
I I
iC REBAR TO D050NG-WALL W/ 15 X 7-6' DOWELS 0 I I
FOOTING A HORIZONTAL WALL REINFORONG DRILL INI I
EXLSIM WALL AND SET W/ EPDXY. 4' ELBED TTP. TO
I I
� I
1 1
1 I
/ 1 I
------------------------------ ----------- 1'-0'a'-6' WwE w (xl H` TOP a (3)
15 BOTTOM W//4 TIES O IY D.C.
XIST1 I
ENG FOOTINGS BELOW I I
I
BASEMENT BEAPoNG WALLS I I
------------------------------------------- - - - - J
___________________________________________________________________
----
I
2X5 0 IIS" O.G STUD WNL I I
TIE REBAR TO EJOS ING WALL W/
X Y-6'. ORRL NTMI EXISTING MALL ANO
SET W/ EPDXY. 4' DABED� I I
1 I
qui ShNS S1 --------,
c&rnc-. u- Us -
Ii il
COSTING FOUNDATION WALL:
It 11
1 I
I I
I
I I
DECK SUPPORT ONLY. SHIM G I d
REWIRED N DHE FUTURE OLE TO I
DIFFERENTIALSET11AffNT \L• -
"V
t�
TIE REBAR TO MITING WALL W/ /5 X -
Y-6' DOWELS 0 F0017NG A HORIZONTAL I'6. I I
WALL RDNFORONG. DRILL INTO EXISTING I I T
WALL AND SET W/ EPDXY, 4' DIBED TYP. I I S1
TIE REBAR TO EXISTING WALL W/ (Z) J5
e�
X Y-6'. DRILL NM EXISTING WALL AND
4FHI5
SET W/ EPDXY. 4' DA D
P6'
L TYI 1
_
I
I I
II
II L_______ ________
II
II
IN
II
ROD DRILLED INTO
E 1
FM40AIlOI WALL1
elm
-D—DOWN TO I
d2
kR
913v f Oct Kf-0 ?0.1 2 2
ARCHT
J4 AT lYa
13 irosxG BAR (TYP)
/4 UNDER EA RISER 1 ` " f
DOWa HOW EARS NRI - � r --------------------------------------------
ADJACENT WAILS W/ 6" EXmFD I I
I I
_ I I
xR I
CONCRETE STAIR DETAIL
I
3 of
EXTERIOR STAIR ON GRADE—SD SCALE 3/4-= 1'-0" i i I MIN SUB OVER
I �I FOONDATCH WALL I I I A
I I I AT DOOR OPENNG 11 I A
I �I II 1
I
J 'Ib I I I C S.AB ON OWE W/ 6[6 I I I
W2.9.ng WRE WESH I I I
I I TOP OF SUB ELEVATION 1265 I I I
SCALE. 1"= 1'-0'
J
---------------------
- EXISTING CONOiEIE WALL
---------------------
EXIMG FOUNDATION WALL
r---------- ------4 O/ .1 I
I 1 ®
--1 I
FOOTNG A HORIZONTAL WALL
TIE REBAR TO EXSIWG WALL W/ 15 X Y-6' DOWELSO
J j ; REINFORCING. DRILL WTO
I I
$ 1 E105TING WALL AND SET W/ EPDXY. 4' EMBED T1P. I I
I 1 1
4 ,I I
$1
REMOTE PORMON.OF FOUNDATION
WALL AS REDJIRED FOR NEW DOOR ________________ ______ _________J 1
1
DOSOTG FOUNDATION WALL _-_S -------- I' _____-_
1
1 I
1 I
I 1
I I
I I
iC REBAR TO D050NG-WALL W/ 15 X 7-6' DOWELS 0 I I
FOOTING A HORIZONTAL WALL REINFORONG DRILL INI I
EXLSIM WALL AND SET W/ EPDXY. 4' ELBED TTP. TO
I I
� I
1 1
1 I
/ 1 I
------------------------------ ----------- 1'-0'a'-6' WwE w (xl H` TOP a (3)
15 BOTTOM W//4 TIES O IY D.C.
XIST1 I
ENG FOOTINGS BELOW I I
I
BASEMENT BEAPoNG WALLS I I
------------------------------------------- - - - - J
___________________________________________________________________
----
I
2X5 0 IIS" O.G STUD WNL I I
TIE REBAR TO EJOS ING WALL W/
X Y-6'. ORRL NTMI EXISTING MALL ANO
SET W/ EPDXY. 4' DABED� I I
1 I
qui ShNS S1 --------,
c&rnc-. u- Us -
Ii il
COSTING FOUNDATION WALL:
It 11
1 I
I I
I
I I
DECK SUPPORT ONLY. SHIM G I d
REWIRED N DHE FUTURE OLE TO I
DIFFERENTIALSET11AffNT \L• -
"V
t�
b�
1' -4'[I' -4'X10' 7MIX
W/ (x)µ EW A SIMPSOI MO
s FOUNDATION PLAN
SCALE: V*'- l' -o'
NOTE BOTTOMS OF ALL FOOTINGS TO BE
LOCATED 1'-6' WN. BELOW FNISHED GRADE
TIE REBAR TO MITING WALL W/ /5 X -
Y-6' DOWELS 0 F0017NG A HORIZONTAL I'6. I I
WALL RDNFORONG. DRILL INTO EXISTING I I T
WALL AND SET W/ EPDXY, 4' DIBED TYP. I I S1
TIE REBAR TO EXISTING WALL W/ (Z) J5
I I
X Y-6'. DRILL NM EXISTING WALL AND
4FHI5
SET W/ EPDXY. 4' DA D
P6'
L TYI 1
_
I
I I
II
II L_______ ________
II
II
` I
(4
i
I
4 0r I
I
I
I
I
_______________J
II / 1'-0'[1'-6' WIDE W/ (x) ES TOP A
Y BOTTOM W/f3 TIES O If O.O.
'---------------�- [ J
b�
1' -4'[I' -4'X10' 7MIX
W/ (x)µ EW A SIMPSOI MO
s FOUNDATION PLAN
SCALE: V*'- l' -o'
NOTE BOTTOMS OF ALL FOOTINGS TO BE
LOCATED 1'-6' WN. BELOW FNISHED GRADE
J FIELD REPOR
Associated. Earth Sciences, inc.
Z"
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland; Washington 98033
425 -827 -7701 -FAX 827-5424
TO:
Chris Hammond
15605 75"' Place West
Edmonds, Washington 98026
ATTN:
AS REQUESTED BY John Nicholls
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
Erosion Control
City of Edmonds Permit No. 20090101
Page 1 of 1
Date
Project Name '
Project No.
10/13/09
Hammond Addition
KE080287A
Location .
Weather
15605 75"' Place West
Overcast 55 de
Municipality
Report Number
City of Edmonds
7
Engineer/Architect
Marc Stubbs/ Cornerstone Architectural Group
Client/Owner
Hammond
General Contractor/Superintendent
Nicholls Construction/ John
Grading Contractor/Superintendent
Earthwise/Steve
Onsite this morning to check site erosion control measures. The owner, Chris Hammond was also onsite, but the
contractor was not. Perimeter foundation backfills (non-structural) were previously completed and bare soil was still.
exposed. The eastern retaining wall for the new garage was only partially backfilled with about 1 to 3 feet of soil. The
silt fencing is still up and the western portion (street side) of the disturbed yard area had been seeded and some new
grass was growing. The perimeter of the yard still contains a buffer of the original grass. A filter sock was still
present under the metal grate for the storm water catch basin located in the driveway. We observed the existing,
southeast roof down spout was tight -lined to a storm drain catch basin in the back of the house. No signs of erosion or
offsite sediment transport were observed.
We recommended to Chris the following erosion control measures be implemented:
• Place grass seed protected with a straw cover over the rest of the bare soil areas.
• Cover the small cut slope behind the house with plastic sheeting, anchored down for wind control, to protect it
from rain erosion and rilling.
Chris said they would follow up with the recommendations.
COPIES TO: J6 �'n n 1 C (.� }�ISYl. eaoq FIELD REP.:
DATE
MAILED: OCT 2 1 2009 PRINCIPAL / PM
Scott R. Hannah, P.E.G. SI�Ft"
G. Aaron McMichael, P.E.
CITY OF EDMONDS
SPECIAL INSPECTION AND TESTING AGREEMENT
"I"IZAJ
08 2nnQ
��,NQ
PERMIT# C3LD�D%D�6I DATE: N•�
PROJECT SITE ADDRESS: /,--4DS' 74—
���ll�/,P,
PROJECT NAME: MOLX4l/!? 011ie 9&6 d(?nGe
SPECIAL INSPECTION AGENCY - t-2/ z�Ileev
*One form must be completed by each Special Inspection Agency or Inspector.
SPECIAL. INSPECTIONS REQUIRED: Special inspections are required for this project in accordance
with IBC Chapter 17 or in accordance with IRC R109.2 as applicable. IBC Section 1704.1 requires the
owner or the registered design professional in charge to employ an independent testinglinspection
agency/special inspector to perform required special inspections. The independent agency hired to
perform the duties of special inspection is required to be a registered agency with WABO under the
Special Inspection Registration Program (SIRP). The special inspector shall be a qualified person with
competence for inspection of the particular type of construction or operation requiring special inspection
(SOQ may be required by the Building Official). The owner, registered professional, contractor and
special inspector/agency shall complete the attached form and submit directly to the Building Division,
WORK REQURING SPECIAL INSPECTION: Special inspections will be required for the following
categories of work in accordance with IBC Chapter 17 and IRC R109.2: FOR SPECIFIC
INFORMATION REGARDING REQUIRED SPECIAL INSPECTIONS SEE THE STATEMENT OF
SPECIAL INSPECTION ❑ATTACHED OAPPROVED PLAN SHEET
o Fabrication 1704.2)
o Wood. Construction (1704.6)
D Steel Construction 1704.3
o Soils 1704.7)
❑ Concrete (1704.4)
Bolts installed in Concrete (1704.13)
o Special Moment Resisting Concrete Frames (1704.4)
D Reinforcing Steel, Prestressing Steel Tendons (1704.4
❑ Structural Weldin 1704.3.1
❑ High Strength Bolting (1704.3.3
o Masonry 17045)
o Reinforced Gypsum Concrete (1704.4)
❑ Structural Masony for Seismic Resistance 1708.1
o Structural Observation 1709
o Insulating Concrete Fill 1704.4)
o Spray Applied Fire -Resistive Materials (1704.10
o Pilin , Drilled Piers, and Caissons (1704.8, 1704.9
o Shotcrete (1704.4)
❑ Pier Foundations 1707.5
o Structural Steel (1707.2
o Grading, Excavation, Fill, Proof Rollin 1704.7
o Smoke -Control Systems (1704.14)
o Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems (1704.12)
o Designated Seismic Systems 1707.9
❑ Mechanical Components (1707.8)
o Cold Formed Steel Framing 1707.4)
o Storage Racks 1707.6)
o Architectural Components 1707.7)
o Structural Wood (17073)
o Special Cases (1704.13
❑ Seismic Isolation System 1707.10
0
o Mastic, intumescent Fire Resistant Coatings (1704.11)
❑
o High Load Diaphragms (1704.6. 1)
0
BEFORE A PERMIT CAN BE ISSUED: The owner and contractor and special inspector shall
complete this agreement and the attached Special Inspection Information Form, including the required.
acknowledgements and return to the Building Division for approval prior to permit issuance.
0"EVISIO
W:\BuildingUiANDOUT ICODES\FORMSISPECIAL INSPECTION AGREEMENT FORM.doc7/07
JAS! 19 9-01b
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF EDMONDS
,APPROVAL OF SPECIAL INSPECTORS: Each special inspector shall be approved by the Building
Official prior to performing any duties or inspections. The company performing inspections must be
WABO certified as well as the individual completing inspections. When required by the Building
Official, each special inspector shall submit Statement of Qualifications to the City for review. Special
inspectors shall display identification when performing special inspections on the project site.. Special
inspection and testing shall meet the minimum requirements of IBC Chapter 17 and the following:
A. Duties and Responsibilities of the Special Inspector
1. OBSERVE WORK
The special inspector shall observe the site work for conformance with the approved (stamped)
plans and specifications and applicable workmanship provisions of the IBC. Architect or
Engineer reviewed shop drawings may be used only as an aid to inspection. Special inspections
are to be performed on a continuous basis—meaning that the special inspector.is on site at all
times observing the work requiring special inspection. Periodic inspections are permitted only as
specifically noted in the approved project plans in accordance with IBC Chapter 17, and as
approved by the Building Official.
Continuous Inspection means the same inspector is on site day to day to observe the work
requiring special inspection.
Periodic Inspection means some inspections may be performed on a periodic basis to satisfy the
requirements of continuous inspection, provided these periodic inspections are performed as
outlined in the project plans and specifications, and approved by the Building Official.
2. REPORT NONCONFORMING ITEMS
The special inspector shall bring non -conforming items to the immediate attention of the
contractor and note all such items in the daily field report. Any item not resolved in a timely
manner shall be immediate cause of the special inspector to notify the Building Official by
telephone at (425-771-0220) or in person at City Hall, of the plan deviation, error, change or
omission. It shall also be the duty of the special inspector to promptly notify the engineer or
architect of record.
3. DAILY REPORTS KEPT ON SITE WITH CONTRACTOR
Each special inspector shall complete and sign a daily report for each day's inspections. The daily
reports shall remain at the jobsite with the contractor for review by the City Building Inspector.
4. WEEKLY REPORTS TO CITY
The special inspector or inspection agency shall furnish the City with weekly reports of tests and
inspections. The project engineer or architect, and others as designated shall also be copied on
reports. Weekly reports must include the following: .
• Description and date of daily inspections and tests made with applicable locations
• List of all non -conforming items and locations
Report on status of non -conforming items (how each was resolved or unresolved)
Field changes authorized by the Architect, Engineer or City Inspector if not included in
non-conformance items.
W_\Building\HANDOUT 1CODES\FORMS\SPECIAL INSPECTION AGREEMENT F.ORM.doc7/07
5. FINAL CONSTRUCTION REPORT
The special inspector or inspection agency shall submit a final signed report or Certificate of
Compliance to the City stating that all items requiring special inspection and testing were fulfilled
and reported. And, to the -best of his/her knowledge the project is in conformance with the
approved plans and specifications, approved change orders and the applicable workmanship
provisions of the IBC. Items not in conformance, unresolved items or any discrepancies in
inspection coverage (i.e., missed inspections, periodic inspection when continuous inspections were
required, etc.) shall be specifically addressed in this report. .
B. Contractor Responsibilities
1. NOTIFY THE SPECIAL INSPECTOR OF ALL REQUIRED SPECIAL INSPECTIONS
It is the duty of the contractor to notify the special inspector when work is ready for special
'inspection. Note, the items listed on the attached Special Inspection Information Form and as
noted on the approved plans and specifications are required to have special inspections. Adequate
notice shall be provided by the contractor so that the special inspector has time to become familiar
with the project. All work requiring special inspection must be approved prior to concealing or
covering said work.
2. PROVIDE ACCESS TO APPROVED PLANS
The contractor is responsible for providing the special inspector access to approved plans at the
jobsite.
3. RETAIN SPECIAL INSPECTION RECORDS
The contractor is responsible to retain at the jobsite all special inspection records submitted by the
special inspector. These records are to be provided to the City building inspector upon request.
C. City of Edmonds Building Division Responsibilities
1. APPROVE SPECIAL INSPECTION
The Building Division shall approve all Special Inspectors and special inspection requirements.
2. MONITOR SPECIAL INSPECTIONS AND APPROVE WEEKLY REPORTS
Work requiring special inspection and the performance of special inspectors shall be monitored
by the City Building Inspector. Building Inspector approval must be obtained prior to placement
of concrete or other similar activities in addition to that of the special inspector.
3.. ISSUE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
The Building Official may issue a Certificate of Occupancy after all weekly special inspection
reports including the final report have been submitted and accepted by the City.
D. Owner Responsibilities
1. The project owner or the engineer or architect of record acting as the owner's agent shall fund
special inspection services.
E. Engineer or Architect of Record Responsibilities
1. Prepare Statement of Special Inspections in accordance with IBC Section 1705.
2. Review the special inspection reports and provide corrective action for work that may not
conform to the approved plans.
W:1BuildingUiI NDOUT ICODESTORMSISPECIAL INSPECTION AGREEMENT FORM doc7/07
o�
Owner name
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I have read and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of this agreement.
%' z . /Z e
(please print or type)
Signature Date
General Contractor Comwnv/Owner name�:Svs-rt.{ bft"Rs DEVek-OPKIE
Signatu
Special Inspector/Agency name
Signature,
(please print or type)
Dat
Gj'-23-moi
(please print or type)
Date
,krPC61'r`a"S
name
(please print or type)
Return the original signed agreement to the Building Division
City of Edmonds Building Division
121 5th Avenue North, City Hall Second Floor
Edmonds, WA 98020
n
Date Li / — c c/
ACCEPTED BY CITY OF EDMON/DS BUILDING DIVISION:
City Official Signature �[_ Date
Title•Lci---�
i-rg�o
W:1BuildinglHANDOUT ICODESIFORMSISPECIAL INSPECTION AGREEMENT FORM.doc7/07
Gfc 77,vv(2:)
CASCADE TESTI"� _:j LABORATORY, INC.
TESTING & INSPECTION
PREVIOUS 13 g 516
12919 N.E. 126TH PLACE
REPORT NO. No
KIRKLAND. WASHINGTON 98034 (425) 823-9800
EVERETT (425) 259-0817
DATE CER�1T7rN0.,p�j
(/ �J
FIELD REPORT
PIaTLOCATION
i * jz�
TO: �d ` V l �S i✓l %l'YL
.5
BLDG. PERMIT NO. OWNER
PZ- IV/
16
WEATHER TEMP. AM
y)w. '�11
PM
RECEIVED//Mevc
ENR ,.
L�Sv��
AUG 1 .j 2010
ARC ITECT
ATTN:
r
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR.
RACTOR r
CITY OF EDMONDS
(2)
(3)
INSPECTION PERFORMED — LATERAL WOOD
ITEMS INSPECTED _ FOUNDATIONS
— RESTEEUCONCRETE — RESTEEL ONLY
_ FOOTINGS _ SLAB
—�RESTEEUMASONRY — STR.ST/WELDING
_ AUGER CAST PILES _ COLUMNS
JG EPDXY — STR.ST/BOLTING
r/WALLS
ORZlLLEDP!5p'
` /r BEAMS
OTHER
(LOCATION
A r
(AREAS) L
(5)
MIX NO.
�RY
7NSTRENGTH—(
PLACEDCHES)
7SUPPLIER
ST
ENT (%)
CYLINDER REPORT NO.
ITEMS INSPECTED WERE IN CONFORMANCE WITH BLDG. DEPT. APPROVED PLANS
YES NO ❑
TEST RESULTS APPLY ONLY TOTHE ITEMS 4 ` /j
HEREIN TESTED. THIS REPORT SHALL NOT INSPECTOR(S), NAMES) P ED ! �`� �v
BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL, WITH-
OUT THE WRITTEN APPROVAL OF CASCADE I�
TESTING LABORATORY, INC. INSPECTOR SIGNATURE
REVISED 3/09 I SIGNED BY
RETURN ADDRESS:
City of Edmonds, City Clerk
121 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
z�o�u-y
l5�05 `75 4a/ zv
11
COVENANT OF NOTIFICATION
AND INDEMNIFICATION/HOLD HARMLESS
Reference #:
Grantor(s): (1)Q-'jjPj S jj fiM.4j4. h(2Yf}AW a.41)7(WA b Additional on pg.,
Grantee(s): City of Edmonds
Legal Description (abbreviated): Sec f57 Twn Q? Rng_q G Qtr --5 _
OR Lot Block Piat ClbGtwdal&
Assessor's Tax Parcel ID#(s): (1) �i�$��QQ(Q� (2) Sea�h
Assessor's Tax Parcel ID# not yet assigned
.CITY OF EDMONDS
APPROVED FOR RECORDING.
BY: DATE PAGE -L OF
Under the review procedures established
pursuant to
the
State Building.Code,
incorporating amendments promulgated
by the City
of
Edmonds, and
as a
prerequisite to the issuance of a building permit for the eonstruction of a residential
structure and attendant facilities, the undersigned OWNERS of property do hereby
covenant, stipulate and promise as follows:
APPR V DF OR F
CPG:.l
BY: DA4
PAGE
1. Description of Subject Property. This covenant of notification and
indenification/hold harmless relatles, to a tract of land at the street address of
ISAOS 73-' p%j(,� LU (insert street
address), Edmonds Snohomii County, Washington and legally described as:
(PER STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED RECORDING NO.
200102230189)
ALL THAT PORTION OF TRACT 24, PLAT OF MEADOWDALE
BEACH, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN
VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 38, IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY,
WASHINGTON.. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS.
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THAT PORTION
OF TRACT 24 LYING EAST OF COUNTY ROAD,
THENCE IN A NORTHERLY DIRECTION ALONG. THE EASTERLY
MARGIN OF SAID ROAD 142 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING, "
THENCE CONTINUING NORTHERLY ALONG EAST MARGIN OF
COUNTY ROAD 122 FEET,
THENCE EASTERLY PARALLEL TO SOUTH BOUNDARY OF
TRACT 24 120 FEET;
THENCE SOUTHERLY PARALLEL TO THE COUNTY ROAD 122
FEET,
THENCE WESTERLY PARALLEL TO SOUTH BOUNDARY OF
TRACT 24 120 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING
2. Notification and Covenant of Notification. The above referenced site
(hereinafter "sdbjectaite") lie's within an area which has been identified by the City
of Edmonds as having a potential for earth subsidence or landslide hazard. The
risks associated with development of the site have been evaluated by technical
consultants and engineers engaged by the applicant as a part of the process to
obtain a building permit for the subject site. The results of the consultant's reports
and evaluations of the risks associated with development are contained in building
permit file number (insert number) on file with the City of
Edmonds Building. Department. Conditions, limitations, or prohibitions on
development may have been imposed in accordance with the recommendations of
APPROVED FOR RECO G:
BY: DATE: fj
PAGE OF
the consultants in the course of permit issuance. The conditions, limitations, or
- t
prohibitions may require ongoing maintenance on the part of any owner or lessee or
may require modifications to the structures and earth stabilization matters in order
to address future or anticipated changes in soil or other site conditions. The
statements and conditions proposed by the OWNERS' geotechnical engineer,
geologist, architect and/or structural engineer are hereby incorporated by reference
from the contents of the file as fully as if herein set forth. Any future purchaser,
lessee, lender or any other person acquiring or seeking to acquire an interest in the
property is put on notice of the existence of the content of the file and the City urges
review of its contents. The file may be reviewed during normal business hours or
copies obtained at the Building Department, City of Edmonds, 121 5th Avenue
North, Edmonds, Washington 98020.
3. Indemnification. and Hold Harmless. The undersigned OWNERS
hereby waive any and all liability associated with development, stating that they
have fully informed themselves of all risks associated with development of the
property and do therefore waive and relinquish any and all causes of action against
the.City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and employees arising from and out of such
development. In addition, the OWNERS on behalf of themselves, their successors in
interest, heirs. and assignees, do hereby promise to indemnify and hold harmless the
City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and employeesfrom any loss, claim, liability or
damage of any kind or nature to persons or property either on or off the site
resulting from or out of earth subsidence or landslide hazard, arising from or out of
the issuance of any permit(s) authorizing development of the site, or occurring or
APPROVED FOR RECO G:
BY. DATE:
PAGE OF
arising out of any false, misleading, or inaccurate information provided by the
OWNERS, their employees, or professional consultants in the course of issuance of
the building permit.
4. Insurance Requirement. In addition to any bonding which may be
required during the course of development, the Community Services Director .
has/has not (strike one) specifically required the maintenance of an insurance policy
for public liability coverage in the amount and for the time set forth below in order
to provide for the financial responsibilities established through the indemnification
and hold harmless agreement above:
5. Covenant to Touch and Concern the Land. This covenant of
notification and indemnification/hold harmless touches and concerns the subject
tract and shall run with the land; binding, obligating and%or inuring to the benefit, of
future owners, heirs, successorsand interests or any other person or entity
acquiring an interest in property, as their interest may appear. This provision shall
not be interpreted to require a mortgagor or lender to indemnify the City except to
the extent of their loss nor to obligate such persons to maintain the insurance above
required.
PPR R F_ ;I'
: DATE�IANAGE OF
DONE this day of . '199—.
OWNER(S)
By:
By:
By
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
ss:
COUNTYOF )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence thati t�
�iDrM(1/1(3(Vl� J signed this instrument and
acknowledged it to be (his/her) free and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned in
this instrument. �q
DATED this day of Sup�001
6h�
�
fir. �"x'A\\%%jkill Y
2o
O y ; NOTAR .P C
"_ -
G
My co ission expires: "L 1
6
OF. `W,
L.\TEMP\BUILDING\MEADOW\COVENANT
APPR VED FOR RECORDING:
BY: DATE:
PAG OF
STATE OF WASHINGTON , )
) ss:
COUNTY OF Y -A & )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
NOrM1�o(�t� signed this instrument and
acknowledged it to be (his/her) free and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned in
this instrument.
DATED this day of V
NOTAR UBLIC q
My co fission expires: c�i.�Yte- IEDO
6OOJ
ell W A,
,
L:\TEMP\BUELDING\MEADOVACOV ENANT
is }
�ETERSON .)TREHLE JARTINSON, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
January 14, 2009
Steve Barnes
Cornerstone Architectural Group
RE: Hammond Residence
156th Street SW
Edmonds, Washington
Steve:
Structural Engineer declaration:
fJ.SUB
MAY o a 2009
MT
guy„ D*c aaN s
We have reviewed the geotechnical report and understand its' recommendations, have explained to the
owner the risk of loss due to slides on this site and have,incorporated into the design the
recommendations of the geotechnical report and designed in measures to reduce the potential risk of
injury or damage that might be caused by any earth movement predicted in the report.
The soils report describes geologic hazards which go beyond the scope of structural engineering
associated with this project. The building has been designed to minimize hazards and potential problems
from earth movement to protect the structure and it's inhabitants as described in the geotechnical report.
Some risks will always remain inherent for properties located on or adjacent to steep slopes.
Sincerely,
PETERSON STREHLE MARTINSON, INC.
M. David Stubbs, PE, SE
Vice President
axptaFs 05/17
CITY Y C®Py
2200 SIXTH AVENUE, SUITE 601 PHONE 206-622-4580
SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98121 FAX 206-622-0422
January 15, 2009
City of Edmonds
Re: Hammond Residence
To Whom It May Concern:
Lead Design Professional Designation and Statement:
6161 NE 175th Street, Suite 101
Kenmo Vie, Washington 98028
206.682.5000
cornerstonearch.com
Steve Barnes with Cornerstone Architectural Group shall be the lead design professional for the
applicant. We have reviewed the geotechnical report and understand its' recommendations and
have incorporated into the design the established measures to reduce the potential risk of injury
or damage from any earth movement predicted in the report.
Sincerely,
Steve Barnes
RECEIVED
FEB - 61009
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR.
CITY OF EDMONDS
CITU CON
Cornerstone
ENARCHITECTURAL
GROUP
January 15, 2009
City of Edmonds
Re: Hammond Residence
To Whom It May Concern:
Lead Design Professional Designation and Statement:
6161 NE 175th Street, Suite 101
Kenmo Vie, Washington 98028
206.682.5000
cornerstonearch.com
Steve Barnes with Cornerstone Architectural Group shall be the lead design professional for the
applicant. We have reviewed the geotechnical report and understand its' recommendations and
have incorporated into the design the established measures to reduce the potential risk of injury
or damage from any earth movement predicted in the report.
Sincerely,
Steve Barnes
RECEIVED
FEB - 61009
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR.
CITY OF EDMONDS
CITU CON
Cornerstone
ARCH ITECTU RAL G ROU P
April 8, 2009
City of Edmonds
Re: Hammond Residence
To Whom It May Concern:
Applicant/Owner liability & landsclide acknowledgement:
6161 NE 175th Street, Suite 101
Kenmore, Washington 98028
206.682.5000
cornerstonearch.com
The accuracy of permit submittal information is warranted by the applicant and.relieves the City
and it's staff from any liability associated with reliance on such permit application submittals. All
conclusions referenced in submitted reports shall be those of the applicant and associated design
professionals. The applicant and owner understand and accept the risk of developing in an area
with potentially unstable soils and understand the required temporary and permanent erosion
control and site maintenance issues associated with specific geologic hazards or conditions of the
site that may affect slope stability over time. The owner will advise, in writing, any prospective
purchaser of the site, or any prospective lessees of structures on the site, of the slide potential
and on-going maintenance issues of the area on the property.
Sincerely,
Steve Barnes
Architect
APR - �) 2009
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF EC31l OND'S
CITY COPY
January.30, ;2009
Cityof,,Edrna rids
Re: Hammond Residence
To Whom It May Concern:
Applicant/Owner liability & landsclide acknowledgement:
The accuracy of permit submittal information is warranted by the applicant and relieves the City
and it's staff from any liability associated with reliance on such permit application submittals. All
conclusions referenced in submitted reports shall be those of the applicant and associated design
professionals. The applicant and owner understand and accept the risk of developing in an area
with potentially unstable soils and understand the re0uired temporary and permanent erosion
control and site maintenance issues associated with specific geologic hazards or conditions of the
site that may affect slope stability over time. The owner will advise, in writing, any prospective
purchaser of the site, or any prospective lessees of structures on the site, of the slide pctantial
and on-going maintenance issues of the area on the property.
Sincerely,
r
�7�'dFill �pr1i✓ �Grtl � ��
1/,o /�
,4-)A ggeo,�,
�acDrP�es: 07- Z Z • CO
FRECEIVED
FEB - 6 2009
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR.
CITY OF EDMONDS
r—
Sciences, Inc.
Associated Earth
C (e6ra inq Otvr25 Zfean, o f Sefflm
August 1, 2008
Project No. KE080287A
n
Mr. Chris Hammond
15605 75' Place West
Edmonds, Washington 98020
J
Subject: Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard,
i' and Geotechnical Engineering Study
L=� Hammond Residence Addition
15605 75`h Place West
Y
Edmonds, Washington
l.:
1
Parcel Number: 005 310 0002404
Dear Mr. Hammond:
We are pleased to present the enclosed copies of the above -referenced report. This report
summarizes the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic hazard, and geotechnical
engineering studies and offers recommendations for the preliminary design and development of
-J
the proposed project. Our recommendations are preliminary in that construction details have
not been finalized at the time of this report.
We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are ' confident that the recommendations
presented in this report will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should
have any questions or if we can be of additional help to you, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely, I
ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
Kirkland, Washington
G .
Jo D. Hansen
Senior Staff Geologist
l!
LT -1
JDHAb
KE080287A2
t' i Projects\20080287\KE\WP
Kirkland Everett Tacoma
425-827-7701 425-259-0522 253-722-2992
www.aesgeo.com
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION, GEOLOGIC HAZARD, AND
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
Hammond Residence Addition
Edmonds, Washington
Prepared for:
Chris Hammond
15605 75`" Place West
Edmonds, Washington
Prepared by:
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
9115' Avenue,Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
425-827-7701
Fax: 425-827-5424
August 1, 2008
Project No. KE080287A
I
- " Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds Washington Project and Site Conditions
I. PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.'s (AESI's) subsurface
exploration, geologic hazard, and geotechnical engineering study for the Hammond Residence
Addition, located in Edmonds, Washington (Figure 1). The existing site features, including
topographic contours and the approximate locations of the explorations accomplished for this
study are presented on the "Site and Exploration Plan," Figure 2. The Hammond Residence is
f located within the North Edmonds Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area (NEESLHA).
As such, this report has been completed to assess site landslide hazards and mitigation design
recommendations for the proposed addition.
The recommendations in this report are considered to be preliminary because grading plans and
construction details were not finalized at the time of this study. Once development plans are
substantially complete, the conclusions and recommendations in this report should be reviewed
and modified, or verified as appropriate.
�r 1.1 Purpose and Scope
The purpose of this study was to provide subsurface data to be used in the preliminary design
and development of the subject project. Our study included a review of available geologic
literature, excavation of exploration pits and hand borings, and performing geologic studies to
assess the'type, thickness, distribution, and physical properties of the subsurface sediments and
shallow ground water conditions. Geotechnical engineering studies were also 'conducted to
assess the type of suitable foundation, allowable foundation soil bearing pressures, anticipated
settlements, basement/retaining wall lateral pressures, floor support recommendations,
geologic hazards (including the North Edmonds Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area),
and drainage considerations. This report summarizes our current fieldwork and offers
development recommendations based on our present understanding of the project.
1.2 Authorization
Written authorization to proceed with this study was granted by Mr.. Chris Hammond. Our
study was accomplished in general accordance with our proposal dated May 4, 2008. This
report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Chris Hammond and his agents, for specific
application to this project. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services
have been performed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
`-
jDH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projectsl200802871KEIWP Page 1
l
i �
" Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
i
: Z4Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
' Edmonds Washington Project and Site Conditions
engineering geology practices in effect in this area at the time our report was prepared. No
other warranty, express or implied, is made.
2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 Site Description
The subject site consists of a rectangular shaped parcel with an existing .one-story single family
residence located at 15605 75 Place West (Figure 1). The areas immediately surrounding the
existing home are relatively flat and vegetated by lawn and other landscaping. The property is
C bounded on the west by 75`h Place West, on the north by a vacant single-family lot, and on the
south by an existing single-family residence. The Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way
is located adjacent the shoreline of Puget Sound west of the project site and adjacent
properties. A steep, west facing slope runs north/south along the eastern margins of the
subject property. The slope is heavily vegetated with stands of both deciduous and coniferous
trees and thick underbrush. A site plan provided by the client includes topographic contours
over the proposed building site and adjacent steep slope area to the east. Review of the
topographic contours shown on this site plan indicate that slope gradients in the mapped
portion of the steeper, eastern area range from approximately 40 to 65 percent. A visual
reconnaissance of this portion of the site found that topographic gradients are similar (i.e.
approximately 40 to 60 percent). The parcels total area is approximately 0.34 acres.
2.2 Project Description
Our understanding of the project plans is based on discussions with Mr. Chris Hammond. It is
our understanding that conceptual plans call for the construction of a new, approximately 1,500
square foot, two-story addition to the south end of the existing residence, approximately where
shown in Figure 2. We understand that the location of the addition as shown is approximate
and construction details, such as the proposed shallow cut depths, are not known at this time.
2.3 Site Observations
Our site observations were made after the excavation of pits and hand auger borings during our
visit on the 13`h of June. The following sections describe our visual observations.
2.4 Geologic Reconnaissance
The existing house and proposed addition are located on a flat bench on the lower half of a
large slope system, the top of which is on the order of 100 feet above and 150 feet to the east.
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
!DH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects1200802871KEMP Page 2
j-- " Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds Washington Project and Site Conditions
The slope system drops down to the west from 75" Place West to the Puget Sound across a
vertical relief on the order of 100 feet. The steep slope near the eastern margins of the
property ranges from 40 to 60 percent inclinations, based on visual estimates. An over -
steepened area interpreted to be an old slide scarp was observed directly east of the project site
approximately 50 feet above. the existing dwelling. The scarp was visually estimated to be on
the order of 40 feet in length and 5 to 10 feet in height. The slope is densely vegetated with
ferns, shrubs, and stands of both deciduous and coniferous trees. Most of the deciduous trees
had bowed trunks indicating slope creep, but several coniferous trees higher up the slope
appeared relatively straight. An approximately 4 -foot -high concrete wall for the existing
home's carport is located at the toe of the slope near the northeast portions of the project site.
The toe of the steep slope is approximately 15 to 20 east of the existing dwelling.
On December 31, 1996, a slide occurred immediately east of the subject site, where a new
-;Jcistern structure and storm line have since been installed. The slide was observed as a shallow
slough event, on the order of 1 to 2 feet in thickness. In conversations with the property
owner, this failure was later found tied to the construction and/or draining of a swimming pool
located above the top of slope and exceptionally heavy precipitation the month prior. No
further signs of slope failure or sloughing were observed during our visit and the area has since
naturally revegetated with thick underbrush and vine maples.
This slope area and scarp are part of the North Edmonds Earth Subsidence and Landslide
Hazard Area (NEESLHA), formerly known as the Meadowdale Earth Subsidence Landslide
Hazard Area. This approximately 3,000 -foot long by 500- to 800 -foot -wide landslide complex
is comprised of large blocks of both Vashon-age glacial sediments (till and outwash soils
deposited during the Fraser glaciation) and pre-Vashon-age non -glacial sediments (generally
silts deposited before the Fraser glaciation) in conjunction with recent -shallow debris flow
failures comprised of colluvium. Studies by others have generally concluded that the deep-
seated movements have stopped or been minimal over the last few decades since the toe of the
slope system has been buttressed by the railroad ballast and drainage improvements have kept
u ground water levels relatively low. Shallow movements inthe lower, previously failed
portions of the slide complex and debris flows in the steep upper portions near the ancient slide
scarp continue to experience occasional failures in recent years. Since this landslide complex
is well-documented and studied by others over the last half century, a complete history is
beyond the scope of this report. Additional information regarding this slide complex can be
found in the studies by others listed in the "Literature Review" section of this letter.
In the streets and unimproved right-of-ways at the top of the slope, we observed asphalt berms
and catch basins that appeared designed to collect surface water from the streets and
easements. We understand that drainage improvements were completed near the upper,
` August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
!DH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects 1200802871KE1WP Page 3
i
.
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Flazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds, Washington Project and Site Conditions
developed portions of the slope in the late 1990s after some shallow slides were reported
adjacent to several surrounding properties.
2.5 Existing Structure Reconnaissance
During our visit, we did not observe signs of distress in the existing house structure or
adjacent roadway section, such as cracks in the existing houses brick fagade or slumped
roadway areas. The owner informed us that he was not aware of problems with sticking doors
or windows or other indicators of settlement.
3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Our field study included the observation of two exploration pits and two hand auger borings to
gain subsurface information about the site. The various types of sediments, as well as the
depths where characteristics of the sediments changed, are indicated on the exploration logs
presented in the Appendix. The depths indicated on the logs where conditions changed may
represent gradational variations between sediment types. Our explorations were approximately
located in the field relative to known site features shown on a topographic site plan provided
by the client. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown on the "Site and
�= Exploration Plan, " Figure 2.
The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based, in part, on the
conditions encountered in the exploration pits and hand auger borings completed for this' study.
The number, location, and depths of the explorations were completed within site and budgetary
constraints. Because of the nature of exploratory work below ground, extrapolation of
subsurface conditions beyond the field explorations is necessary. Differing subsurface
conditions may be present outside of the area of the field explorations due to the random nature
of deposition and the alteration of topography by past grading and/or filling. The nature and
extent of any variations between the field explorations may not become fully evident until
;= construction. If variations are observed at that time, it may be necessary to re-evaluate specific
recommendations in this report and make appropriate changes.
3.1 Exploration Pits
-J
Exploration pits were excavated with a client provided backhoe near south margins of the
proposed addition area (EP -1 and EP -2). The pits permitted direct, visual observation of
subsurface conditions. Materials encountered in the exploration pits were studied and
classified in the field by an engineering geologist from our firm. All exploration pits, were
i
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JDHRb - KE080287A2 - Projects1200802871KE1WP Page 4
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
y Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds Washington Project and Site Conditions
backfilled immediately after examination and logging. Selected samples were then transported
to our laboratory for further visual classification and testing, as necessary.
3.2 Hand Auger Borings
Hand auger exploration borings were performed in the steep slope area immediately east of the
existing homes concrete patio area (HB -3 and HB -4). The hand borings permitted direct,
visual observation of the subsurface conditions and relative thickness/distribution of slope
Icolluvium. Materials encountered in the hand auger exploration borings were studied and
classified in the field by an engineering geologist from our firm. All hand borings were
backfilled immediately after examination and logging. Selected samples were then transported
to our laboratory for further visual classification and testing, as necessary.
Literature Review
We reviewed our in-house files, select City of Edmonds reports within a 100 -foot radius of the
subject property, and publicly available exploration data from the GeoMapNW website
(http://geomapnw.ess.washington.edu/index.php) at the University of Washington for previous
geotechnical studies performed in the project vicinity. Our research revealed exploration logs
from the following studies:
• "Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering
Report, Aldridge Short Plat, Edmonds, Washington," dated October 24, 1997 by AESI
(from AESI in-house files). This study included the two lots directly across 751' Place
West from the project site (15604 75`h Place West). Three exploration borings and four
exploration pits were performed at the Aldridge .site, which generally encountered fill
over disturbed silts/clays over very dense fine sands. Slope inclinometers were
installed in two of the borings and were measured periodically over a period of
approximately 3 years. Measurements indicated shallow, downslope creep of the fill in
the upper 10 feet on the order of 1 inch or less over the measurement period, with the
majority of the movement occurring near the top of an uncontrolled fill slope on the
west side of the property. The site has remained undeveloped at the time of this
report.
• "Geotechnical Engineering Report, 156' Street Southwest, Edmonds, Washington,"
dated January 22, 2007 by Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. (provided by Cornerstone
Architectural Group). This study included the one undeveloped lot immediately north
of the project site (east side of 75`x' and 156'). Four exploration test pits were
performed at the site, which generally encountered loose to medium dense silty fine to
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JDH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects 1200802871KEIWP Page 5
1
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds Washington Project and Site Conditions
medium sand with trace gravel and organics (fill) over medium dense light brown to
gray silty fine sand with varying amounts of gravel.
• "Revised Geotechnical Report, Proposed Residence at Lots 1 and 2, 75`h Place West,
Edmonds, Washington," dated January 26, 1994 by Shannon and Wilson, Inc.
(GeomapNW excerpts only). This study included two lots across 75' Place West to the
southwest of the project site (15620 75`h Place West). One exploration boring was
performed at the site and two exploration pits by Earth Sciences were included in the
report, which generally encountered fill/slide debris over stiff to hard silts/clays.
(According to Snohomish County tax records, a two-story dwelling was constructed in
1997).
• "Geotechnical Engineering Study, Recent Landslide, 15620 - 72nd Avenue West,
Edmonds, Washington," dated February 24, 1997 by Geotech Consultants, Inc.
(provided by the City of Edmonds). This study included the lot upslope (east) and
provided. recommendations for stabilizing an adjacent slide scarp area. Three
exploration borings were performed at the site, which generally encountered dense,
gravelly sands over medium dense to dense, silty sands over very dense sands.
• "(Tentechnical Engineering Services. Landslide on 156` Street Richt of Wav Near 75'
[r�, Place West, Edmonds, Washington," dated January 27, 1997 by Landau Associates,
Inc. (provided by the City of Edmonds). This lettersummarized the observations and
rs •'
recommendations made by representatives of Landau Associates related to the landslide
that occurred east of the subject site. The study was inconclusive at the time in
determining the trigger event for the landslide as either recent heavy precipitation or
possible leakage from adjacent drain pipes.
• "Response to City of Edmonds Letter Dated January 2,1997, Mezich Residence Slide,
Edmonds, Washington," dated January 13,1997 by Geotechnical Inc. (provided by City
of Edmonds). This letter provided recommendations for the stabilization for a slide area
near an existing residence upslope of the subject property (7215 156`h Street SW). The
study included an observation of the slide scarp and found four feet of colluvium over
12 feet of very dense silty sand with gravel over dense fine to medium sand. Further,
the study observed two seepages emanating from within the City of Edmonds R.O.W.
• "Repair of Landlslide, Degan Residence, Edmonds Washington," dated August 9,1999
by Geotech Consultants, Inc. (provided by the City of Edmonds). This study included
recommendations for a closely spaced pier wall for a residence southwest of the subject
property based predominantly on literature review.
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
!DH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects1200802871KEI WP Page 6
._i�� a
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
" Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds Washington Project and Site Conditions
• "Geotechnical Engineering Study, Proposed Single Family Residence, Lot 1 Lunds
Meadowdale Tract, Edmonds, Washington," dated July 28, 1990 by Terra Associates,
Inc. (provided by the City of Edmonds). This study included the lot immediately west
of the subject site (west side of 156`h and 75' W).. One exploration boring and two
exploration test pits were performed at the site, . which generally encountered several
feet of loose medium to coarse grained silty sand (fill), over stiff to hard brown and
gray colored silt.
• "Mezich Lot -Addendum to November 13,1989 letter, Edmonds Washington," dated
April 13, 1990 by Cascade Geotechnical, Inc. (provided by the City of Edmonds). The
study included a lot uphill from the project site (7215 156th Street SW). Two borings
were performed at the site, which generally encountered several feet of brown silty
sand with gravel (fill), over dense to very dense gray silty sand with gravel, over dense
to very dense fine to medium grained silty sand.
• "Report of Geologic Evaluation, Meadowdale Area, Edmonds, Washington," dated
September 23, 1968 by Dames & Moore (provided by the City of Edmonds). This
study evaluated the overall stability of the area from a geologic standpoint based largely
on literature review and surface reconnaissance for installation of a proposed sanitary
(, sewer system.
• "Final Report, Landslide Hazards Investigation, Meadowdale Area, Edmonds,
Washington," dated October 16, 1979 by Roger Lowe Associates, Inc. (provided by the
City of Edmonds). This study analyzed the subsurface conditions and 'slope stability
based on previous studies and seven borings performed for the study. The study
provided a landside hazard map of the Meadowdale area, which quantified landslide
risk by type and probability of occurrence in a 25 -year period.
• "Report of Geotechnical Consultation, Property Value Appraisals and Assessments,-
Meadowdale
ssessments;Meadowdale Landslide Area, Edmonds, Washington," dated February 28, 1985 by
GeoEngineers, Inc. (provided by the City of Edmonds). This study updated the
probability of landslide occurrences as provided in the 1979 Lowe study after
installation of storm and sanitary sewers in the Meadowdale area.
• "North Edmonds Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area Summary Report,
Edmonds, Washington" dated March 14, 2007 by Landau Associates. This study
included review of the previous Meadowdale landslide area studies by Lowe and
GeoEngineers. Landau also recommended several revisions to critical areas ordinance
in earth subsidence and landslide hazard areas, including the designation of five hazard
zones based on relative location within the landslide complex. Furthermore,' the study
i;
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
J JDN/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects 1200802871KEIWP Page 7
1,1
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds Washington Project and Site Conditions
recommends specific report requirements, which will be discussed subsequently in this
letter. This study uses the name "North Edmonds Earth Subsidence and Landslide
Hazard Area" (NEESLHA) instead of the previous "Meadowdale" area name.
Pertinent information from these studies is discussed in subsequent sections of this letter,
F:i where appropriate. Relevant logs for the above -referenced explorations have been included in
the Appendix of this report.
r-
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface conditions at the project site were inferred from the exploration pits and hand auger
borings completed for this study, our visual reconnaissance of the site, and review of
applicable geologic literature. As shown on the exploration logs, we generally encountered
1 to 3 feet of medium dense fill sediments overlying consolidated glacial sediments of variable
textural composition. The following section presents more detailed subsurface information
organized from the youngest to the oldest sediment types. -
4.1 Stratigraphy
Fill
Fi
Material interpreted to be fill was encountered in both of the explorations pits on the project
site. The fill consisted predominantly of medium dense, gray silty sand with variable amounts
of gravel, and trace amounts of organic debris. The existing fill soils are not considered
suitable for foundation support.
Forest Duff/Topsoil
A buried organic topsoil layer was encountered in one of the exploration pits near the SW
corner of the proposed addition area (EP -1). The topsoil layer was approximately 6 inches
thick and was observed below approximately 3 feet of man -placed fill soils. The topsoil layer
is not considered suitable for foundation support or for use in a structural fill.
Old Landslide Block
Material interpreted to be old landslide soils were encountered in all the explorations on the
project site. The old landslide soils consisted chiefly of medium dense to dense, silty fine to
medium sand with variable amounts of gravel and a disturbed, blocky texture. Exploration pits
EP -1 and EP -2 showed signs of slight mottling from 1 to 5.5 feet below the surrounding
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
IDH/ib - KE080287A2 - Projects1200802871KEMP Page 8
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds Washington Project and Site Conditions
ground surface. The above noted soils are thought to represent Vashon age lodgement till
sediments from higher elevations east of the property. Explorations from the other studies
within a 100 foot radius of the project vicinity indicate similar landslide materials that extend
i well below existing grades in the project area on the order of 30 to 60 feet.
Review of the regional geologic map titled Preliminary Surficial Geologic Map.of the Edmonds
East and Edmonds West Quadrangles, Snohomish and King Counties, Washington (Smith,
1975) indicates that the site is underlain by the pre -Fraser geologic units of Whidbey and
Double Bluff Formations. Vashon Lodgment Till and Advance Outwash sediments are
mapped at higher elevations. Specifically, the site is mapped as being within a large landslide
feature with the delineation Qols (old landslide). Our interpretation of the sediments
encountered in our explorations is in general agreement with the regional geologic map.
4.2- Hydrology
Ground water seepage was not encountered in any of the exploration pits excavated for our
study. In addition, no seepages were observed daylighting on any of the steep slopes on the
property during our explorations. If ground water is encountered during construction, it would
most likely be found in pockets, perched on less permeable strata within the landslide debris,
or as "interflow" at the contact between colluvium and pre -Fraser sediments forming the steep
slope. It should, be noted that the occurrence and level of this perched ground water seepage
may vary in response to `such factors as changes in season, precipitation, and both on-site and
off-site use.
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JDH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects1200802871KEMP Page 9
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic. Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering. Report
Edmonds Washington Geologic Hazards and Mitigations
II. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND MITIGATIONS
5.0 LANDSLIDE HAZARDS AND MITIGATION
The following discussion of potential geologic hazards is based on the geologic, slope, and
shallow ground water conditions as observed and discussed herein.
k; The 2007 Landau study divides the potential landsliding locations within the NEESLHA into
five zones, A through E. The subject site is located in Zones B and C, with the proposed two-
story addition located in Zone B only. Zone B in the vicinity of the subject site is the
relatively flat bench area between 75`h Avenue West and the steep slope area of Zone C to the
east. Zone B is described by Landau as including the majority of the landslide mass or
complex consisting of typically disturbed soils with occasional intact blocks, localized small-
scale failures, and potential for large-scale sliding of the slide complex. Zone C is described
by Landau as the area near the edge of the landslide complex that is most affected by slides that
initiate on the steep slopes on the east side of this zone. Small-scale failures are possible within
Zone C, and this zone is the highest risk to public safety. In our opinion, we concur. with
these generalized assessments and believe the primary risks of earth movement on the subject
�_,, site that may affect the proposed dwelling will be from debris flows initiating on the steep
E=i slopes above the house. Another risk with a much lower likelihood of occurrence would be
soil movement under the proposed foundation from reactivation of the main landslide mass.
} Risks of shallow and deep-seated slides, and the associated mitigations, are discussed further in
the following paragraphs._
The potential landside risk can be divided into two depth categories: shallow and deep. The
potential shallow (on the order of 1 to 10 feet thick) landslide risk includes slumps, debris
avalanches, and earth flows of the colluvial soils and trees on the steep slopes to the east of the
project . site. The potential deep landslide risks for the site have been identified by previous
studies in the site vicinity as continued movement.of the ancient landslide blocks.
The potential for shallow slides is moderate and will be greatest after extended periods of
heavy rainfall and/or snow events. Such weather events occurred during the winters of 1996
and 1997 and resulted in numerous shallow slides in the Meadowdale area and around Puget
Sound. Mitigation for such slides include proper handling and discharge of surface storm
water, reduction in ground water levels, and trimming or removal of large trees in the potential
slide zone. We understand that since the 1996 and 1997 events, City improvements to surface
water management of the right-of-ways above the slope to the east have been implemented,
including installation of street drainage berms,' catch basins, and prevention of storm water
discharges onto or near the slope. These improvements will reduce the potential for saturation
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JDHAb - KE080287A2 - Projects 1200802871KD WP Page 10
•f
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds Washington Geologic Hazards and Mitigations
of the colluvial soils and the contribution from upgradient surface water infiltration to ground
water levels and seepages. The moderate risk of earth and debris flow damaging the dwelling
was present for the existing structure and will not be increased by the proposed addition.
However, additional debris -flow mitigation is recommended. by extending the basement
foundation wall 3 feet above the outside finish ground surface to create a catchment wall.
(` ! Extension of the foundation wall would allow for debris -flow material to impact the back of the
residence without buckling wood framing and damaging the structure.
Deep-seated landslides risks at the project site would most likely be related to reactivation of
the ancient landslide blocks estimated to have occurred thousands of years ago after the retreat
of glacial ice and subsequent draining of glacial lakes. The large-scale lowering of regional
ground water levels and continued erosion of the toe of the slopes by wave action resulted in
unstable, oversteepened coastal bluff conditions. Mitigations for deep-seated slides at coastal
bluffs include armoring of the base of the bluff to prevent wave erosion. The riprap
embankment placed during the construction of the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks has
provided protection from wave -action erosion. To our knowledge, no evidence of recent
movement of the deep-seated slide planes has since been documented. The 1980s drainage
improvements in the 75`h Place West right-of-way and 1990s drainage improvements at the top
of the steep slope have also reduced the potential for reactivation of the deep-seated slide
planes. Mitigations for deep-seated landslides should include design and construction of a
relatively rigid, . grid -type shallow foundation system designed to mitigate differential
foundation soil displacement. The primary purpose of the rigid grid foundation will be to
create a monolithic foundation unit, which will be able to bridge potential, localized areas of
settlement or resist soil creep movement. Specific foundation recommendations are discussed
in the "Foundations" section of this letter.
It should be noted that no amount of engineering and mitigation measures can eliminate the
potential for earth movement. Some risks will always remain inherent for properties located
on or adjacent to steep slopes.
6.0 SEISMIC HAZARDS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION
Earthquakes occur in the Puget Lowland with great regularity. The vast majority of these
events are small and are usually not felt by people. However, large earthquakes do occur as
evidenced by the 1949, 7.2 -magnitude event, the 2001, 6.8 -magnitude event, and the 1965,
-1 6.5 -magnitude event. The 1949 earthquake appears to have been the largest in this region
—� during recorded history and was centered in the Olympia area. Evaluation of earthquake
return rates indicates that an earthquake of the magnitude between 5.5 and 6.0 is likely within
a given 20- to 40 -year period.
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JDH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects1200802871KEMP Page 11
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds, Washington Geologic Hazards and Mitigations
Generally, there are. four types of potential geologic. hazards associated with large seismic
events: 1) surficial ground rupture; 2) seismically induced landslides; 3) liquefaction; and .4)
ground motion. The potential for each of these hazards to adversely impact the proposed
project is discussed below.
6.1 Surficial Ground Rupture
Generally, the largest earthquakes that have occurred in the Puget Sound area are subcrustal
events with epicenters ranging from 50 to 70 kilometers in depth. The 1949 and 2001 Olympia
earthquakes are good examples of this type of seismic activity. Although the energy from deep
subcrustal earthquakes does propagate up to the ground surface, actual surficial faulting and
earth rupture features are rare. However, loose, wet soils may liquefy, move laterally,
landslide, or otherwise settle or move, causing cracks and ruptures in the surficial soils during
earthquakes. These types of damages are not related to actual fault rupture but are a result of
ground shaking and liquefaction (see below). To our knowledge, no surficial faulting or earth
rupture has been documented to date in the Lacey area. Therefore, it is our opinion, based on
the existing geologic data, that the risk of surface rupture impacting the proposed project -is
low.
.6.2 Seismically Induced Landslides
The project site is located in the North Edmonds Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area,
of which the risks of landslides have been discussed most recently in the 2007 Landau report
and are discussed above. In our opinion, the risks associated with the above-described hazards
are low to moderate under static conditions. Ground accelerations associated with a strong
earthquake may reactivate movement along the old slide planes and result in a higher potential
for landslides and ground displacements. This risk was present for the existing home under
which it was originally permitted. Further, the current proposed addition will extend
approximately 40 feet beyond the existing southern footing and will be placed on the same
level bench as the existing house. It is the opinion of AESI that the construction of the
proposed addition will not increase the. risk of seismic induced landslide. We recommend
mitigating damage to the proposed improvements by design and construction of a relatively
rigid, grid -type, shallow foundation system as described in the "Foundations" section of this
letter. The resulting foundation system will serve primarily to mitigate damage to the structure
during differential ground displacements.
i
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
!DH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects M08028MEIWP Page 12
" Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds Washington Geologic Hazards and Mitigations
6.3 Liquefaction
The encountered stratigraphy has a low potential for liquefaction due to its medium dense to
dense state and lack of adverse ground water conditions. No mitigation of liquefaction hazards
is warranted.
6.4 Ground Motion
.Based on the site stratigraphy and visual reconnaissance of the site, it is our opinion that any
earthquake damage to the proposed structures when founded on suitable bearing strata would
be caused by the intensity and acceleration associated with the event and not any of the above-
- discussed impacts. Structural design of buildings should follow 2006 International Building
Code (IBC) standards using Site Class "D" as defined in Table 1615.1.1. The 2006 IBC
seismic design parameters for short period (Ss) and 1 -second period (Si) spectral acceleration
values were determined by .the latitude and longitude of the project site using the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) National ' Seismic Hazard Mapping Project website
(hnp://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazmaps/). Based on the more current 2002 data, the USGS
website interpolated ground motions at the project site to be 1.24g and 0.44g for building
periods of 0.2 and 1.0 seconds, respectively, with a 2 percent chance of exceedance in 50
years.
7.0 Erosion Hazard Mitigation
To mitigate the erosion hazards and potential for off-site sediment transport, we would
recommend the following:
1. All disturbed areas should be revegetated as soon as possible. If it is outside of the
growing season, . the disturbed areas should be covered with mulch, as recommended in
the erosion control plan. Straw mulch provides the most cost-effective cover measure
and can be made wind -resistant with the application of a tackifier after it is placed.
2. Surface runoff and discharge should be controlled during and following development.
Uncontrolled discharge may promote erosion and sediment transport. Under no
circumstances should concentrated discharges be allowed to flow over the top of steep
slopes.
3. Soils that are'to be reused around the site should be stored in such a manner as to
reduce erosion from the stockpile. Protective measures may include, but are not
limited to, covering with plastic sheeting, the use of low stockpiles in flat areas, or the
�J
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
!DH/rb - KE080287A2 - Projects 1200802871KEI WP Page 13
•i
:J
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds, Washington Geologic Hazards and Mitigations
i
use of straw bales/silt fences around pile perimeters. During the period between
October ? and March 31", these measures are required.
It is our opinion that with the proper implementation of the TESC plans and by field -adjusting
appropriate mitigation elements (BMPs) during construction the potential adverse impacts from
erosion hazards on the -project may be mitigated.
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
!DH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects12008028711MWP Page 14
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations
III. PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
8.0 INTRODUCTION
The existing single-family residence is located within the North Edmonds Earth Subsidence
and Landslide Hazard Area. Therefore, the risks described above were already present for the
existing. structure. It is our understanding that the owner fully understands and accepts the
risks. of the landslide hazards as discussed in this report. We also understand that potential
future owners will be aware of the risks associated with owning property in the North
Edmonds Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area because such a notice is required on
the property title.
The purpose of our study was to assess these risks based on current, site-specific, slope and
soil conditions and provide recommendations for minimizing and mitigating adverse impacts to
the slope by the proposed improvements. Since the project chiefly involves adding an addition
to the south end of the existing residence, it 'is our opinion that the overall impact to the
stability of the slope will not be adversely affected provided our recommendations are
followed. Furthermore, the improvements will result in a safer structure since the
improvements will be constructed on a relatively rigid foundation system and built to current
building codes. The following sections present our recommendations for design and
construction of the proposed improvements.
9.0 SITE PREPARATION
9.1 Clearing and Stripping
Site preparation of the planned building area should include removal of all trees, brush, debris,
and any other deleterious materials. These unsuitable materials should be properly disposed of
off-site. Additionally, any areas of existing fill and organic topsoil should be removed from
footing and slab on grade areas until the underlying native medium dense to dense native
sediments are exposed. Areas where loose surficial soils exist due to grubbing operations
should be considered as fill to the depth of disturbance and treated as subsequently
recommended for structural fill placement. Any buried utilities should be removed or
relocated if they are under the proposed building area. The resulting depressions should be
backfilled with structural fill as discussed under the "Structural Fill" section of this report.
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JDH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects1200802871KDWP Page 15
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds, Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations
After stripping and grubbing operations have been completed, we recommend that the soil
exposed in the proposed foundation, driveway, and any other pavement areas be recompacted .
to a firm and unyielding conditions. Any soft or yielding areas identified during compaction
should be overexcavated and backfilled with structural fill.
9.2 Temporary Cut Slopes
In our opinion, stable construction slopes should be the responsibility of the contractor and
' should be determined during construction based on the local conditions encountered at that
rd�
time. For planning purposes, we anticipate that temporary, unsupported cut slopes over 4 feet
high made in the medium dense to dense, landslide sediments can be made at a maximum
slope of 1.5H:1V (Horizontal: Vertical). As is typical with earthwork operations, some
sloughing and raveling may occur and cut slopes may have to be adjusted in the field. If
ground water seepage is encountered, the cut slopes should be further laid back at a shallower
angle and/or temporarily shored. In. addition, WISHA/OSHA regulations should be followed
at all times.
9.3 Site Disturbance
�Y: The site soils contain a high percentage of fine-grained material, which makes there moisture-
sensitive and subject to disturbance when wet. The contractor, must use care during site
preparation and excavation operations so that the underlying soils are not softened. If
' disturbance occurs, the softened soils should be removed and the area brought to grade with
structural fill. If crushed rock is considered for the access and staging areas, it should be
underlain by stabilization fabric (such as Mirafi 50OX or approved equivalent) to reduce the
Potential of fine-grained materials pumping up through the rock and turning the area to mud.
The fabric will also aid in supporting .construction equipment, thus reducing the amount of
crushed rock required. We recommend .that at least 10 inches of rock be placed over the
-J
fabric; however, due to the variable nature of the near -surface soils and differences in wheel
loads, this thickness may have to be adjusted by the contractor in the field. Crushed rock used
for access and staging areas should be of at least 2 -inch size.
10.0 STRUCTURAL FILL
Although grading plans were not available to AESI at the time of this study, we anticipate that
structural fill may be necessary to establish desired grades in some areas. All references to
structural fill in this report refer to subgrade preparation, fill type, and placement and
compaction of materials as discussed in this section. If a percentage of compaction is specified
under another section of this report, the value given in that section should be used.
- i
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JDH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects1200802871KE1WP Page 16
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic_ Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds, Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations
10.1 Subgrade Compaction
After overexcavation/stripping has been performed to the satisfaction. of the geotechnical
engineer/engineering geologist, the upper 12 inches of exposed ground should be recompacted
to at least 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density using American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM):D 1557 as the standard. If the subgrade contains too much
moisture, suitable recompaction may be difficult or impossible to obtain and should probably
not be attempted. In lieu of recompaction, the area to receive. fill should be blanketed with
washed rock or quarry spalls to act as a capillary break between the new fill and the wet
subgrade. Where the exposed ground remains soft and further overexcavation is impractical,
placement of an engineering stabilization fabric may be necessary to prevent contamination of
the free -draining layer by silt migration from below.
After recompaction of the exposed ground is tested and approved, or a free -draining rock
course is laid, structural fill may be placed to attain desired grades.
10.2 Structural Fill Compaction
Structural fill is defined as non-organic soil, acceptable to the geotechnical engineer, placed in
maximum 8 -inch loose lifts, with each lift being compacted to at least 95 percent of the
modified Proctor maximum dry density using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard. The top of the
compacted fill should extend horizontally a minimum distance of 3 feet beyond footings or
pavement edges before sloping down at an angle no stedper than 2H:1V. Fill slopes should
either be overbuilt and trimmed back to final grade or surface -compacted to the specified
density.
10.3 Moisture -Sensitive Fill
Soils in which the amount of fine-grained material (smaller than No. 200 sieve) is greater than
approximately 5 percent (measured on the minus No. 4 sieve size) should be considered
moisture -sensitive. Use of moisture -sensitive soil in structural fills should be limited to
favorable dry weather conditions. The on-site, landslide sediments are suitable for use as
structural fill but generally contain significant amounts of silt and are considered moisture -
sensitive. At the time of our exploration, portions of these soils exhibited moisture contents in
excess of the optimum for achieving maximum compaction. These soils are described on the
attached explorations logs as "very moist". Construction equipment traversing the site when
the soils are very moist or wet can cause considerable disturbance. If fill is placed during wet
weather or if proper compaction cannot be obtained, a select import material consisting of a
clean, free -draining gravel and/or sand should be used. Free -draining fill consists of non -
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
!DH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects1200802871KDWP Page 17
W,. Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations
organic soil with the amount of fine-grained material limited to 5 percent by weight when
.measured on the minus No. 4 sieve fraction.
10.4 Structural Fill Testing
The contractor should note that any proposed fill soils must be evaluated by AESI prior to their
use in fills. This would require that we have a sample of the material at least 3 business days
in advance to perform a Proctor test and determine its field compaction standard.
A representative from our firm should inspect the stripped subgrade and be present during
placement of structural fill to observe the work and perform a representative number of in-
place density tests. In this way, the adequacy of the earthwork may be evaluated as filling
progresses and any problem areas may be corrected at that time. It is important to understand
that taking random compaction tests on a part-time basis will not assure uniformity or
acceptable performance of a fill. As such, we are available to aid the owner, in developing a
suitable monitoring and testing frequency.
11.0 FOUNDATIONS
11.1 Allowable Soil Bearing Pressure
Due to the variations in old landslide soils present at the anticipated bottom of footing
elevations, we recommend that all new footings bear on a minimum, 2 -foot -thick layer of
structural fill. The width of the structural fill pad should be 2 feet wider than the width of the
footing. Structural fill type, placement, and compaction recommendations are provided in the
"Structural Fill" section of this letter. The existing fill soils must be removed under new
foundations or overexcavated and recompacted as structural fill if moisture conditions allow.
All organics, debris, and soft/loosened soil must be removed from the footing areas prior to
placement of structural fill, and be confirmed by a representative from AESI. During wet
weather, it is highly recommended that footing subgrades be protected from disturbance with
several inches of compacted crushed rock.
F Continuous and column pad spread footings may be.used for building support when founded on
--- the approved 2 -foot -thick layer of structural fill discussed above. Column pad footings should
be structurally tied together in two directions in a grid -type formation to mitigate excessive
J;
ground displacements. The foundation system should be designed to span a loss of support of
10 feet. The owner should be aware that the primary purpose of tying together foundation
elements is to mitigate or lessen damage to the structure due to potential soil displacements, as
discussed .previously. We recommend that a maximum allowable foundation soil bearing
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JDH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects 1200802871KEIWP Page 18
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations
pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be utilized for design purposes, including both
dead and live loads, for footing subgrades prepared as described herein. An increase of one-
third may be used for short-term wind or seismic loading.
It should be noted that the area bounded by lines extending downward at MAV from any
footing must not intersect another footing. In addition, a 1.5H:1V line extending down from
any footing must not daylight because sloughing or raveling mayeventually undermine the
footing. Thus, footings should not be placed near the edge of steps or cuts in the bearing soils
unless adequately embedded.
11.2 Footing Depths
Perimeter footings for the proposed building should be buried a minimum of 18 inches into the
surrounding soil for frost protection. No minimum burial depth is required for interior
footings; however, all footings must penetrate to the prescribed stratum, and no footings
should be founded in or above loose, organic, or existing fill soils. At the location of
exploration pits 1 and 2, located in the area of the proposed addition, sediments suitable for
foundation support were encountered at a depth of approximately 1 to 3.5 feet below the
existing.ground surface.
11.3 Footing Subgrade. Bearing Verification
Disturbed soil not removed from footing excavations prior to footing placement could result in
increased settlements. All footing areas should be inspected by AESI prior to placing concrete
to verify that the design bearing capacity of the soil has been attained and that construction
conforms to the recommendations contained in this report. Such inspections may be required
by the City. Perimeter footing drains should be provided as discussed under the section on
"Drainage Considerations."
11.4 Foundation Drainage
Perimeter footing drains should be provided as discussed under the section on "Drainage
Considerations. "
12.0 LATERAL WALL PRESSURES
All backfill behind walls or around foundations should be placed following our
recommendations for structural fill and as described in this section of the report. Horizontally
backfilled walls, which are free to yield laterally at least 0.1 percent of their height, may be
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
!DH/tb - KE080287A2 - ProjectA200802871KEIWP Page 19
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations
designed using an equivalent fluid equal to 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). Fully restrained,
horizontally backfilled, rigid walls that cannot yield should be designed for an equivalent fluid
of 50 pcf. Walls that retain sloping backfill at a maximum angle of 211: 1V should be designed
for 55 pcf for yielding conditions and 75 pcf for restrained conditions. If parking areas or
driveways are adjacent to walls, a surcharge equivalent to 2 feet of soil should be added to the
i' wall height in determining lateral design forces. Due to the potential for landslide soils to rest
=� against the back of foundation stem walls, the east stem wall should be designed to resist at
least 3 feet of soil pressure above the outside finish ground elevation.
12.1 Wall Backfill
The lateral -pressures presented above are based on the conditions of a uniform backfill
consisting of either the on-site glacial sediments or imported sand and gravel compacted to 90
to 92 percent of ASTM:D 1557. A higher degree of compaction is not recommended, as this
will increase the pressure acting on the walls. A lower compaction may result in unacceptable
settlement behind the walls. Thus, the compaction level is critical and must be tested by our
firm during placement. The recommended compaction of 90 to 92 percent of ASTM:D 1557
applies to any structural fill placed behind the wall. within a distance equal to the wall height
and up to the elevation of the top .of the wall. In addition, only hand -operated or walk -behind
compaction equipment should be used within 5 feet of the walls to prevent excessive surcharge
loads from heavy equipment.
Structural fill used to construct slopes above retaining walls should be compacted to at least 95
percent of ASTM:D 1557 if the fill is placed above the elevation of the top of the wall.
Surcharges from adjacent footings, heavy construction equipment, or sloping ground must be
added to the above recommended lateral pressures. Footing drains should be provided for all
retaining walls, as discussed under the section on "Drainage Considerations."
12.2 Wall Drainage
It is imperative that proper drainage be provided so that hydrostatic pressures do not develop
against the walls. This would involve installation of a minimum 1 -foot -wide blanket drain
extending fo within 1 foot of the top of wall using imported, washed gravel against the walls.
The blanket drain and wall backfill should be capped with 1 foot of relatively impermeable
soils that are sloped away from the walls to prevent surface water intrusion directly into the
drain system.
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
1DH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects1200802871KEMP Mage 20
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds, Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations
12.3 Passive Resistance and Friction Factor
r-� Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the .foundation and the natural, medium dense
to dense glacial sediments or supporting structural fill soils, or by passive earth pressure acting
on the buried portions of the foundations. The foundations must be backfilled with compacted
r -
structural fill to achieve the passive resistance provided below. We recommend the following
design parameters.
• Passive equivalent fluid = 250 pcf
• Coefficient of friction = 0.30
The above values are allowable and include a factor of safety of at least 2.0.
13.0 FLOOR SUPPORT
Slab -on -grade floors may be constructed on a minimum 12 -inch -thick layer of approved
structural fill compacted to a firm and unyielding condition.
' If moisture intrusion through slab -on -grade floors is to be limited, the floors should be
{ constructed atop a capillary break consisting of a minimum thickness of 4 inches of washed pea
gravel or 5/8 -inch clean crushed rock (no fines). The pea gravel should be overlain by a 10-
j j mil (minimum. thickness) plastic vapor retarder.
14.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS
The natural glacial sediments encountered in our explorations generally contained significant
amounts of silt and are considered to be highly moisture sensitive. Traffic from vehicles,
construction equipment, and even foot traffic across these sediments when they are very moist
or wet will result in disturbance of the otherwise firm stratum. Therefore, prior to site work
and construction, the contractor should .be prepared to provide drainage and subgrade
protection, as necessary.
14.1 Wall/Foundation Drains
All retaining and perimeter footing walls should be provided with a drain at the footing
elevation. The drains should consist of rigid, perforated, polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe
surrounded by washed pea gravel. The level of the perforations in the pipe should be set
approximately 2. inches below the bottom of the footing, and the drains should be constructed
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JDHA'b - KE080287A2 - Projects1200802871KEMP Page 21
..i
I
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds, Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations
with sufficient gradient to allow gravity discharge away from the building. All retaining walls
should be lined with a minimum, 12 -inch -thick, washed gravel blanket provided to within 1
foot of finish grade, and which ties into the footing drain. Roof and surface runoff should not
discharge into the footing drain system, but should be handled by a separate, rigid, tightline
drain.
Exterior grades adjacent to walls should be sloped downward away from the structure to
achieve surface drainage. Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage
away from the building at all times. Water must not be allowed to pond or to collect adjacent
to the foundation or within the immediate building area. It is recommended that a gradient of
at least 3 percent for a minimum distance of 10 feet from the building perimeter be provided,
except in paved locations. In paved locations, a minimum gradient of 1 percent should be
provided unless provisions are included for collection and disposal of surface water adjacent to
the structure. Additionally, pavement subgrades should be crowned to provide drainage
toward catch basins and pavement edges.
14.2 Utility Connections
Due ' to the potential for differential soil displacement at the project site, we recommend the
[ contractor install flexible connections between all utilities and the. proposed residential
addition. The connections should allow up to 6 inches -of ground movement.
r 7,1
15.0 PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING
(-
j:..j. We are available to provide additional geotechnical consultation as the project design develops
- and possibly changes from that upon which this report is based. If significant changes in
grading are made, we recommend that AESI perform a geotechnical review of the plans prior
! to final design completion. In this way, our earthwork and foundation recommendations may
Y be properly interpreted and implemented in the design.
We are also available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during
construction. The integrity of the foundations depends on proper site preparation and
construction procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field
in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring
services are not part of this current scope of work. If these services are desired, please let us
know and we will prepare a proposal.
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
!DH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects 1200802871KE1WP Page 22
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Hammond Residence Addition Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations
We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that these recommendations
will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions, or
require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
Kirkland, Washington
Jon 6. Hansen
Senior Staff Geologist.
Attachments: Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Figure 2: Site and Exploration Plan
Figure 3: Schematic Cross Section A -A'
Appendix: Exploration Logs
1
ON Mctijl
Q`aF WAsytic'yy�
9/Zc08
� ,9 33222 O �
FGISTEP�
SS/ONAL
Aaron McMichael, P.E.
Associate Geotechnical Engineer
0
August 1, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
!DH/tb - KE080287A2 - Projects1200802871JMWP Page 23
Ji
'IJ
M ltd Alfl7.-.
Ell
Lb
Jr
m 14 J;, -?
1--(-{-
� Kit
A
—T7-
,fv
4~�'
- qt -
N
bb
74
7
AV
s�
M ld
u I CtJL-
:!7!
x
c"
PL Il ;j
M Us�,
mf. KIS9J''AV ,a i_
J
44,
7-
J
lir:3
F-
J 1"'." N109 I
'R
wD
0 -
FL ��g-
ZX- ..2, _5
w
MxUv
1-4 M 0
44 CA
AV ��-M
ft M AV
r _4l'CG,�;---,ej'
UCO
Al
AC
4
'fal,
V)
IN JM5
M A
q9
PL
11 IiZ
V,
AV' P.
4�11
tp
P.�
41� 1d;
AV
AV _T
lw�I R
I . _ld QQ
AM..
4L
g;
�J
PL
P
. Me
, 7-c-cl
L
ki
w
to
0
z
PID'na!
JPO 14!UPV\ LOZO90 1 UO!I!PPV SOH PUOWWBH SPO LOZ090
WAP-JIdx3 Pue e8S L9MM \ ua!BPPV Sea PL
Z
z
� O
H
Z
00Q
Q U Z
0� Z
0WQ
J �
W Z
Q Z 0
O
Z p
Q�w
W Q
AN
Qi
0
W.
1
V
tl� '•
owweH SPO LSZ080
of4 .
ozL
OM
9
TO
-j
< w
X
�-
Z < -j
0(-)
N
0 w
< I I I I I I I I I I M>
COO C) C) \0 0 0 0
CY) C14 00
(1333) NOUVA3-13
BMP*UO!139S L9Z090UOQ!PPV SO -8 Pu
CO co <
w Q r-
1- 00
W
< w 0
Oz
w
0
cc
CL
< z
Z 0
0 0
z
< Q
W w Z
Z U)
Cb w <
C/) 3:O
3:
o U) U) -
w
� Of
0
z 0
C) 0 C)7—>
w
0 <
i
0
W
(D
MORE,,
u
(U
CU
u
0
M.
)WWLH SPO LSZOSO
0
0
0
COO00
!
7rn
�2
co
of4 .
ozL
OM
9
TO
-j
< w
X
�-
Z < -j
0(-)
N
0 w
< I I I I I I I I I I M>
COO C) C) \0 0 0 0
CY) C14 00
(1333) NOUVA3-13
BMP*UO!139S L9Z090UOQ!PPV SO -8 Pu
CO co <
w Q r-
1- 00
W
< w 0
Oz
w
0
cc
CL
< z
Z 0
0 0
z
< Q
W w Z
Z U)
Cb w <
C/) 3:O
3:
o U) U) -
w
� Of
0
z 0
C) 0 C)7—>
w
0 <
i
0
W
(D
MORE,,
u
(U
CU
u
0
M.
)WWLH SPO LSZOSO
APPENDIX
I '7
I�
i
.1
ECJ
n
f'.
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -1
20
N Hammond Residence Addition
IV
Edmonds, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
co
Logged by: JDH Project No. KE080287A
_> -._ .
co
Approved by: #'`"•�" � � ' � ,r 6/13/08
(_I U
Y
This log is part of the reportprepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be
together that for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the
a
read with report
time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are
p
a simplfication of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Sod
1
Fill
Medium dense to dense, moist, gray, silty fine to medium SAND, few gravel, trace organic debris.
2
3
Topsoil
Medium dense, moist, dark brown, silty SAND, few gravel, trace to few organics.
4
Old Landslide Block
Medium dense to dense, moist (light gray to gray, silty fine to medium. SAND), few to little gravel,
5
trace cobbles (slightly mottled from 3.5' to 6).
6
Blocky during excavation.
7
8
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 7.5 feet
No caving or seepage noted.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
N Hammond Residence Addition
IV
Edmonds, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
co
Logged by: JDH Project No. KE080287A
_> -._ .
co
Approved by: #'`"•�" � � ' � ,r 6/13/08
(_I U
Y
j_
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -2
L
This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be
read together with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the
CL
time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented.are
o
a simplfication of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Topsoil/Fill
Loose to medium dense, moist, dark brown to dark gray, silty SAND, little gravel, trace organics
1
(sticks and roots).
Old Landslide Block
2
Medium dense to dense, moist, gray, silty fine to medium SAND, little gravel (slightly mottled from 1'
to 3.5').
3
4
Blocky during excavation.
5
6
7
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 7 feet
8
No caving or seepage observed.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
0Hammond Residence Addition
C
Edmonds, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE080287A
g Logged by: JDH
Approved by: `= N,-qY` 6/13/08
CL
_ Y
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. HB -3
L
This log is part of the reportprepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be
read together with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the
time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are
o
a simplfication of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Colluvium
Loose, moist, gray, silty SAND, few to little gravel, trace organic debris.
1
2
Old Landslide Block
3
Medium dense to dense, moist, gray, silty fine to medium SAND, few to little gravel.
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 3 feet
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
.18
19
N Hammond Residence Addition
N
Edmonds, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE080287A
g Logged by: JDH
Approved by: �" ;f`` `' 6113108
a
U
Y
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. HB -4
Hammond Residence Addition
Edmonds, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
Logged by: JDH
Approved by: x- c,e n �.
Project No. KE080287A
6113/08
This log is part of the reportprepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be
L
a
read together with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the
time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are
o
a simplfication of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Colluvium
Loose, moist, gray to dark gray, silty SAND, few gravel, trace organics, trace cobbles.
1
2
Old Landslide Block
Medium dense to dense, moist, gray, silty fine to medium SAND, few to little gravel.
3
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 2.5 feet
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Hammond Residence Addition
Edmonds, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
Logged by: JDH
Approved by: x- c,e n �.
Project No. KE080287A
6113/08
y°v E°M� Inspection Comments,
BLD20090101
2 - Addition
Applied: 02/26/2009
Issued: 09/01/2009
Expires:
09/02/2011
/�c. 1890
Address: 15605 75TH PL W, EDMONDS
INSPECTION _
DATE
INSPECTOR E'
ACTION
_
1000 - E -Pre -Con
09/04/2009
STEINKE/MCCON
CMP
NELL .
Comment: Met with contractor and owner on site.
Informed of parking issues on street. Shed cannot be relocated
.on site as it would fall within setbacks.
String line prop'lines or survey. Will call for TESC
inspection.
Broken d/w area to be fixed prior to final.
1001 - E -Erosion Control/Mobilization
09/08/2009
MCCONNELL
PAR
Comment: Adequate at this time
1001 - E -Erosion Control/Mobilization
08/29/2011
LAMBERTJ
CMP
Comment: Final Approved
1013 - E -Storm Tightline
09/30/2009
LAMBERTJ
CMP
Comment: Verified connection to storm on southwest corner of property - OK
to backfill
1014 - E -Storm Connect to Stub
09/30/2009
LAMBERTJ
CMP
Comment: Verified connection to storm on southwest corner of property - OK
to backfill
1017 - E -Footing Drain Connection
09/30/2009
LAMBERTJ
CMP
Comment: Verified connection to storm on southwest corner of property - OK
to backfill
1019 - E -Footing Drain TL Conveyance
09/30/2009
LAMBERTJ
CMP
Comment: OK to backfill
1077 - E -Engineering Final
08/29/2011
LAMBERTJ
CMP
Comment: Final Approved
1106 - B -Setbacks
09/18/2009
steinike
CMP
Comment:
1108 - B -Footings
09/18/2009
steinike
CMP
Comment:
1110 - B -Foundation Wall
09/23/2009
steinike
CMP
Comment:
1126 - B -Plumb Rough In
09/02/2010
LAWLER
INC
Comment: No test
1126 - B -Plumb Rough In
09/08/2010
LAWLER
CMP
Comment:
1128 - 13- Gas Test/Pipe
05/06/2010
STEINIKE
CMP
Comment:
1130 - B-Equipment-Mech
09/08/2010
LAWLER
CMP
Comment:
1132 - B -Exterior Sheathing
02/02/2010
steinike
CMP
Comment:
8/30/2012 11:55:48 AM 121 5th Ave, Edmonds Washington - Phone:
(425) 771-0220
Page 1 of 2
I
!IN$PCTION
DATE_ INSPECTOR
ACTION -
1136 - B -Shear Nailing
02/02/2010
steinike
INC
Comment: Exterior Shear OK!
1136 - B -Shear Nailing
09/08/2010
LAWLER
CMP
Comment:
1140 - B -Height Verification
09/08/2010
LAWLER
CMP
Comment:
1142 - B -Framing '
09/01/2010
LAWLER
INC
Comment: holdowns okay to cover
1142 - B -Framing
09/08/2010
LAWLER
CMP
Comment:
1144 - B -Wall Insulation/Caulk
09/13/2010
LAWLER
INC
Comment: not ready
1144 - B -Wall Insulation/Caulk
09/16/2010
BJORBACK
CMP
Comment:
1148 - B -Ceiling Insulation/Caulk
09/16/2010
BJORBACK
CMP
Comment:
1150 - B-Sheetrock Nail
09/24/2010
LAWLER
CMP
Comment:
1158 - B -Building Final
08/30/2011
STEINIKE
COR
Comment: Left door tag!
1158 - B -Building Final
09/01/2011
STEINIKE
COR
Comment: Provide.landing at rear deck min, 36" and as
wide as the stairs.
_
Rise cannot be more than 7 3/4" high, and cannot very more than 3/8" from highest to lowest.
Provide handrail on one side 34-38" high.
Advised permit is expired.
1158 - B -Building Final 02/06/2012 HARRISON COM
Comment: EXPIRED PERMIT SEE BLD20110757
8/30/2012 11:55:48 AM 121 5th Ave,Edmonds Washington - Phone: (425) 771-0220 Page 2 of 2
r