Loading...
2005, 05-02 Permit App: 05001397 GradingProject Number: 05001397 Inv: 1 Application THIS IS NOT A PERMIT Penalties will be assessed for commencing work without a permit Date: 05/02/2005 Page 1 of 2 Project Information: Permit Use: GRADING FOR FUTURE RESIDENTIAL • CONSTRUCTION - 296 CU YDS Contact: COYLE, DAN J Address: PO BOX 412 C - S - Z: SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99037 Setbacks: Front Left: Right: Rear: Phone: (509) 290-0925 Group Name: Site Information: Project Name: GRADING Plat Key: Name: RANGE District: Sout Parcel Number: 45333.9163 Block: SiteAddress: 4115 S BOWDISH RD Location:: CSV Zoning: UR -3.5 Water District: Urban Residential 3.5 Lot: Owner: Name: COYLE, DAN J Address: PO BOX 412 SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99037 Hold: ❑ Area: .56 Acres Width: 0 Depth: 0 Right Of Way (ft): 0 Nbr of Bldgs: 0 Nbr of Dwellings: 0 Review Information Review Plan Review Flood plain Permits: Contractor: OWNER Item Description FLOOD PLAIN PERMIT Flood Plain Finn: OWNER Phone: (000) 000-0000 Units Unit Desc I NUMBER OF Operator: K_C Printed By: K_C Fee Amount $50.00 Permit Total Fees: $50.00 Print Date: 05/02/2005 Prdject Number: 05001397 Inv: 1 Application THIS IS NOT A PERMIT Penalties will be assessed for commencing work without a permit Date: 05/02/2005 Page 2 of 2 Grading Permit Contractor: OWNER Firm: OWNER Phone: (000) 000-0000 This Application: Total Project: Description Grp Type Notes Sq Ft Valuation Sq Ft Valuation GRADING NONE NONE 296 $296.00 296 $296.00 Totals: 296 $296.00 296 $296.00 Item Description Units Unit Desc Fee Amount PERMIT FEE - RESIDENTIAL 1 SELECT $27.00 REVIEW FEE - RESIDENTIAL 1 SELECT $20.00 Notes: Payment Summary: Permit Type Flood Plain Grading Permit Permit Total Fees: $47.00 Fee Amount Invoice Amount Amount Paid Amount Owing $0.00 $50.00 $0.00 $47.00 $50.00 $50.00 $47.00 $47.00 $97.00 $97.00 $0.00 $97.00 Disclaimer: Submittal of this application certifies the owner (or person(s) authorized by the owner) has both examined and finds the information contained within to be true and correct, and agrees that all provisions of laws and/or regulations governing this type of work will be complied with. Subsequent issuance of a permit shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of the code or of any other state or local laws or ordinances. Signature: Operator: K_C Printed By: K_C Print Date: 05/02/2005 BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION WORKSHEET Spikane City of Spoken Valley Community Development Department i�U) � � 9 Buildin Division 11707 E. Spr".° ?hue, Surte 106 Walley MAY 0 2 2005 REVIEV( • 99206 no !`'ne: (509�r'6 : +�; . cq ,-eh; X688-0037 aim () IV 1171 r��!�_ c -1 -OS REQUIRED SITE INFORMATION H 115 5 . 15o th ,, ( Street Aotdress: VACANT L A.va Etr Tec or SvrvDo✓ J ANo 73owa tsn Assessor's Tax Parcel Number(s): 45333. 9/62 Legal Description: 33 TN .25-44 Pof THE E RIOFT oFrwe E //2 of THcrSW f4oFSD SCC DAFT (t sr L.,✓E o.+cy) PERMIT DESCRIPTION: 2A7) //IC m 9 Gcr y 9 Building Permit ❑ Change in Use Q4Grading 9 Manufactured Home 9 Tenant Improvement 9 Fire Safety ❑ Other 9 Relocation OWNER/APPLICANT INFORMATION E3 Owner: ta'u Coyc- Phone: 4,290-0920 Fax: Address: P.O. Cox 412 V L aA7aL..E /,JA 19037 City State Zip Code R Applicant: S,a,n c Phone: Address: Fax: City State Zip Code 1W Contractor ('LAI r ZcterscHCL, /NC. 0 Architect: Phone: 979-6003 Fax: Phone: Fax: Address: ?.jy S. Zn -sr Address: VEaaz w -e /,JA 99037 City State Zip c6de City State Zip Code WA State Contractor License #:CTL.aic,ZTOl3/r12 Contact: CRAIG ZCccrscua Spokane Valley Bus. Liscense #: ON FILE Contact: Crux tq ZEurscf[Et PERMIT/BUILDING INFORMATION HEIGHT TO PEAK: DIMENSIONS: # OF STORIES: MAIN FLOOR TO SQ. FTG: 2"" FLOOR SQ. FTG: UNFIN BASEMENT SQ. FTG: FINISHED BASEMENT SQ. FTG: GARAGE SQ. FTG: DECK/COV. PATIO SQ. FTG: OCCUPANCY GROUP: CONSTRUCTION TYPE: HEAT SOURCE: # OF BEDROOMS: TOTAL HABITABLE SPACE: IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA: COST OF PROJECT: 30% SLOPES ON PROPERTY: SEWER OR ON-SITE SEPTIC SYSTEM? MANUFACTURED HOME Width: Manufacturer: Length: i;Year:t !r !f Pit Set: RELOCATION Previous Address: Proposed Use: FIRE SAFETY Fire Sprinkler: # of Heads: Fire Alarm: Paint Booth: Tent: • Fireworks Display: Blasting: Date/Time: Valuation: Above/Underground Storage Tank Size: WASHINGTON STATE NON-RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CODE Plans Examiner: Address: Phone: Fax: City State Inspector: Phone: Fax: Address: Zip City State Zip SPECIAL INSPECTIONS ❑ BOLTING ❑ CONCRETE ❑ REINFORCEMENT ❑ WELDING Firm Name: Phone: Fax: Inspector(s): DISCLAIMER The permitee verifies, acknowledges and agrees by their signature that: 1) If this permit is for construction of or on a dwelling, the dwelling is/will be served by potable water. 2) Ownership of this City of Spokane Valley Permit inure to the property owner. 3) The signatory is the property owner or has permission to represent the property owner in this transaction. 4) All construction is to be done in full compliance with the City of Spokane Valley Development Code. Referenced codes are available for review at the City of Spokane Valley Permit Center. 5) This City of Spokane Valley Permit is not a permit or approval for any violation of federal, state or local laws, codes or ordinances. Ownership of resulting development rights granted by any issued permit inure to the property owner. Print Name (JM4 Coy�Q Signature Method of Payment: (Faxed permit applications will only be accepted with major bankcard) ❑ Cash ❑ Check ❑ Mastercard/%VISA ❑ Other Bankcard #: 480t91 6032 2 512 4L 57 Expires: Oe or VIN#: Authorized Signature: 2007.f' 1 .20/0.25 F(CL. A2taA 57214 cTuasrt foorpaJNr 2008' -2 06 • 2oog.S' // i = 25 FEB -23-2005 16:58 FROM:CUMMINGS FAX 59-466-419O T0:2289310 P.2z8 CUMM GS GEOTECHNO OGY, INC. • • • 1721 W. Euclid Ave. • Spokane Washington 99205 Phone 509-466-4350 • Fax 509-466-4190 • Email grant@cgeotech.com February 23, 2005 Mr. Dan Coyle P.O. Box 412 Veradale, Washington Invoice February 9 to February 23, 2005 05-009 For: Limited geotechnical engineering study, Coyle Lot, Bowdish Road and Sundown Drive, Spokane Valley, Washington. Report submitt February 23, 2005. Engineering Services Project preparation and planning Test pit logging, reconnaissance Travel Engineering analysis Report preparation and distribution Miscellaneous Utility Locate Vehicle Mileage Please pay this amount Thank you for your bu 0.5 hrs. 1.0 hrs. 1.75 hrs. 1.0 hrs. 4.5 hrs. 62 miles $ 44.00 $ 88.00 $ 154.00 $ 88.00 $ 396.00 $ 15.00 $ 31.00 $ 816.00 irj FEB -23-2005 16:58 FROM:CUMMINGS FAX 509-466-4190 TO:2289310 P.3/8 05-009 CUM GS GEOTECHNO OGY, INC. 1721 W. Euclid Ave. • Spokane Washington 99205 Phone 509-466-4350 • Fax 509-4684190 • Email grant@cgeotech.com February 23, 2005 Mr. Dan Coyle P.O. Box 412 Veradale, Washington RESULTS OF LIMITED GEOTECHNICAL EN elt ERING STUDY, COYLE LOT, BOWDISH ROAD AT SUNDOWN DRIVE, SPO NE VALLEY, WASHINGTON Dear Dan, This report presents the results of a limited geotechni study that I conducted at your lot located on the east side of Bowdish Road just east of i s intersection with Sundown Drive. The purpose of the study was to assess the subsurface con • tions at the project site and develop recommendations for design and construction of foun ' . ions, structural fill, and related earthwork. The work was conducted in accordance W h generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice common to this area. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS It is my understanding that you have purchased a resid Washington. Topographically, the ground surface at t You indicated that on this lot you plan to build a two - residential structure. In order to bring the site up abov you said that you will have structural fill brought in contractor. 1 understand from Mr. Zeutschel that the graded, gravelly sand material, typical of much of the SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION In order to investigate the subsurface conditions at the 2005, I directed the excavation of two backhoe test pi west side of the proposed house footprint, and the oth side of the proposed house footprint. The test pits we ntial lot in the City of Spokane Valley, e lot is gently sloping down to the east. ry, slab -on -grade, wood -frame floodplain elevation of Chester Creek, placed by Mr. Craig Zuetschel, a local ctural fill material will consist of a well i1 found in the Spokane Valley.. roposed house location, on February 15, , one (designated TP -101) located at the (designated TP -102) located at the east excavated by a backhoe and operator FEB -23-2005 16:59 FROM:CUMMINGS FAX 509-466-4190 TO:2289310 provided by Mr. Zeutschel. They ranged in depth fro the subsurface conditions in each test pit and have inc the test pits were logged and sampled, they were bac A . ESS u l & I : _ _1.1_ - At the end of the last Ice Age, the Spokane area was i catastrophic glacial flooding, and the bedrock was ero stages of flooding, a layer of medium -grained alluvial loess (wind blown silty soil) and volcanic ash added a surface layers of the alluvial soil. Observations of the test pit sidewalls indicate that the primarily of a thin layer of original topsoil, overlying silt. The very sandy silt was hard and cemented with could not be determined because it was not completel pits. Existing fill was also encountered at the ground surfa variable in composition, it consisted primarily of loo containing fragments of asphalt concrete. It ranged in Groundwater was not encountered at either of the test the soils. (Soil mottling is a color and texture variatio groundwater levels.) Based on my knowledge of this groundwater level fluctuates with the surface level of CONCLUSIONS Based on my interpretations of the observed surface the proposed new residential structures can be safely conventional spread footings on compacted structural recommendations are incorporated into design and co conditions that must be dealt with in design and co of loose existing fill that could cause excessive setd founded on it. RECOMMENDATIONS Site Preparation Site preparation should consist of stripping off of the the existing fill and original topsoil. Before placem should be proof compacted with at least 6 complete at least 10 tons static weight. P. 4/8 05-009 2 5.0 to 6.5 feet. I examined and logged ded logs of the test pits as Table 1. After led with the excavated soil. undated by numerous episodes of ed to an irregular surface. During later 1 was deposited. Later deposition of ne-grained component to the near ive subsurface conditions consist edium dense, silty sand and very sandy epth. The true thickness of this unit penetrated at either of the backhoe test at both test pits. Although somewhat silty gravelly sand to silty sand, locally thickness from 1.4 to 2.0 feet. its, nor was any soil mottling observed in that can indicate seasonally fluctuating from other geotechnical studies, the e water in Chester Creek d subsurface conditions, I conclude that d economically supported on 11, as long as the following stnrction. Adverse geotechnical on of this project include the presence ent if structural fill or footings were egetation and shallow roots and removing of structural fill, the native soil surface slow passes of a vibratory compactor of FEB -23-2005 17:00 FROM:CUMMINGS FAX 509-466-4 Foundations 90 TO:2289310 Compacted structural fill that is placed on proof -comp be capable of supporting the structural Toads on conve constructing any foundations on existing fill, topsoil, unsuitable soils that may be encountered during excav Both exterior continuous and interior isolated footings bearing pressure of 2000 psf on proof compacted na continuous footings should be designed using a bearin pressure recommendations are based on the following continuous and isolated footings should be 1.5 and 2.5 embedment of exterior footings should be 2.5 feet bel minimum depth of embedment below slab grade for i recommended bearing pressures can be increased by a Based on the typical light loading for wood -frame resi bearing pressures widths, and embedment depths, 1 of footings constructed on the structural fill wilt be les settlement between adjacent footings could be about o settlement. The settlement will probably take place el proportional to the applied load. Most of the settlem time the construction is complete. The magnitude of and will be proportional to the live loads. The footing subgrade could become disturbed during subgrade should be well compacted to produce a stab! is left uncompacted below the footing could cause sett above. Excavations Excavations as deep as about 3 to 5 feet will be neces and site utilities. Site soils can be excavated with con backhoes, bulldozers and scrapers. The site soils classify as OSHA Type C soils, which r horizontal on 1.0 vertical for simple unsupported slop As a work -site safety issue, stability of excavation slo builder. At a minimum, excavations should be in co standards. Compacted Structural Fill and BacktW Compacted structural fill will be required to bring the P.5/8 05-009 3 cted native soil (excluding topsoil) will tional footings. I recommend against r any other loose, organic, or otherwise on. can be designed using an allowable net soil or compacted structural fill. Interior pressure of 1 500 psf. These bearing nditions. The minimum width for feet, respectively. The minimum depth of w the lowest adjacent exterior grade. The erior footings should 1 foot. The ut one third for wind or seismic loads. ential structures and the recommended mate that the maximum total settlement than about 3/8 inch. Differential e half of the estimated maximum 'rally and rapidly, approximately t will be built out of the structure by the ost-construction settlement will be small e excavating procedure. Any disturbed base for the footing. Disturbed soil that ements greater than those estimated for the existing fill removal, footings entional excavating equipment such as uire a maximum slope angle of 1.5 excavations that are 20 feet deep or less. should be the responsibility of the rmance with OSHA, W1SHA, and local ite up above floodplain elevation and to FEB -23-2005 17:00 FROM:CUMMINGS FAX 509-466-4190 support the building foundations. I also recommend t driveways, sidewalks, or other structures be compact In my opinion, the imported gravelly sand material de suitable for use as compacted structural fill, as long as in diameter, are removed. Existing on-site soils shoul Before structural fill and backfill placement, the soil s approximately 2% of optimum moisture. It should be original uncompacted thickness and then compacted t maximum dry unit weight as determined by the Mod Site Drainage and Erosion Protection During construction, the ground surface should be slo accumulating m any of the excavations. When con surface should be graded to facilitate drainage away fr drainage should be collected in gutters and downspou new house. I recommend that permanent soil slopes be graded no new or disturbed soil slopes should be seeded or sodd construction to decrease erosion. Slopes that are pot flooding of Chester Creek should be armored by ripr LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared for your exclusive use f proposed new house. The conclusions and recommen on data obtained from two backhoe test pits, and my u as described in the section entitled Site and Project D This report is not intended to provide sufficient data project. If it were, an expanded scope of work would detailed information to assist in cost estimating. Th contained in this report for estimating purposes is you I have endeavored to comply with generally accepted common to this area for a limited geotechnical study, implied. This report should not be considered a certifi slope stability, or a warranty of interpreted subsurface This report does not address environmental issues contamination or the presence or absence of bazar TO:2289310 P.6-8 05-009 4 at exterior wall backfill that is to support in lifts as structural fill. cribed to me by Mr. Zuetschel will be oversize fragments, greater than 6 inches only be used in landscaping areas. ould be dried or moistened to within laced in lifts not exceeding 10 inches in a unit weight of at least 93% of the Proctor method (ASTM D-1557). ed to prevent storm runoff from ction is completed the final ground m the new house and driveway. Roof and discharged at least 6 feet from the eeper than 2 horizontal on 1 vertical. All d within the first growing season after ly at risk of erosion by seasonal r the design and construction of the ations contained in this report are based derstanding of the proposed construction riptions. estimate the cost of constructing the ve been accomplished to provide more fore, interpretation of the information risk and option. cal engineering practice that is make no other warranty, express or ion of foundation bearing conditions or nditions. c as existing or future soil or groundwater erials or chemicals. FEB -23-2005 17:01 FROM:CUMMINGS FAX 509-466-4190 TO:2289310 P.7/8 1 The explorations indicate subsurface conditions only s to the depths penetrated. They do not necessarily refl adjacent to such locations. If significant variations or during construction, it may be necessary to reassess th Additionally, if the nature of the project changes from the section entitled Site and Project Descriptions, I she recommendations should be revised. 05-009 5 the specific locations and tunes, and only ct strata variations that exist between or ether latent conditions become evident recommendations of this report. my understanding and the description in uld be notified to assess whether the Thank you for the opportunity to assist you with this p'-ojcct. If you have any questions or comments concerning the observations, conclusions, o recommendations contained in this letter, please contact me. Sincerely / /Grant . Cummings, P.E., P.G. Encl: Table I FEB -23-2005 17:01 FROM:CUMMINGS FAX 509-466-4190 TO:2289310 P.8/8 Table 1 Test Pit February 15, 005 TP -101 05-009 0.0-2.0 ft. Loose, brown, silty gravelly sand FILL; moist, well graded. 2.0-3.0 ft. Loose, brownish gray, sligh ly organic, sandy silt (topsoil); moist. 3.0-5.0 ft. Medium dense, tan, very dy silt; moist. Note: no. groundwater enco ntered, no soil mottling observed. TP -102 0.0-0.5 ft. Loose, brown, silty gravelly sand FILL with fragments of asphalt concrete; moist, well grad 0.5-1.4 ft. Loose, dark brown, slightly .rganic silty sand FILL; moist, poorly graded (fine to medium s 1.4-2.7 ft. Medium dense, gray-bro silty sand; moist, poorly graded (medium sand). 2.7-5.8 ft. Medium dense, tan, very s+ ' dy silt; moist. 5.8-6.5 ft. Dense, tan, cemented sandy silt; moist Note: no groundwater enco ntered, no soil mottling observed.