My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5114 33RD AVE W 2018-01-02 MF Import
>
Address Records
>
33RD AVE W
>
5114
>
5114 33RD AVE W 2018-01-02 MF Import
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/15/2021 3:08:35 PM
Creation date
4/1/2017 3:11:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Address Document
Street Name
33RD AVE W
Street Number
5114
Imported From Microfiche
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
101
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
GEOGESOX 1031 CAL &ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. <br />P. O. BOX 1031 EVERErT, WA 98206 FAX: (425) 338-71176 OR (360) 659-0197 <br />May 30, 2000 99-11-1t <br />A,& Omar Jensen <br />Omar Jensen Construction, Inc. <br />F.O. Box 104 <br />Mukilteo, Washington 98275 <br />RE: Review of Supplied Plan Set for Compliance with Geotechnical Report. <br />Address Top -of -Slope Buffer Requirement Concerns Stated in City <br />Community Development Letter Dated April 21, 2000. <br />Novac Property <br />51". Place Property <br />Everett, Washington <br />Dear Mr. Jensen; <br />of Everett Planning and <br />In response to your request that we respond to item 1 of the City of Everett's Planning and Community <br />Development letter dated April 21, 2000 concerning Plan Check No. C0002-018, we have reviewed the <br />supplied set of plans from Impression Design, pages I thru 7, for compliance with the recommendations <br />contained in the site Geotechnical and Geologic Report prepared by GES, Inc. dated Nov. 12, 1999 The <br />following are our comments regarding the supplied plan review. <br />1. There is no reference on the plans to the geotechnical report. A note needs to be added to the plans on <br />page 7 referencing the geotechnical report. <br />2. A note needs to be added referencing the geotechnical report section 4.1 Seasonal Working <br />Conditions, section 4.2 Site Preparation, section 4.4 Slope Stability Considerations and section 4.8 <br />Run-off, Drainage and Erosion Control Considerations so that the recommendations contained in <br />these sections of the report are followed at the time of construction. <br />3. Seismic design parameters as shown on the site plans, pg. 7 of 7, note 5 — do not appear to correspond <br />to the seismic recommendations contained in the geotechnical report. This may need to be checked b; <br />the structural engineer for compliance and consistency of design parameters and recommendations. <br />4. Typical Wall Section A/6 calls out maximum footing depth of 36". This detail needs to be changed to <br />reflect the depth of foundations located close to the slope or another detail added for foundation <br />located within 10 ft. of the top of the slope. The geotechnical report recommends that the depth of the <br />foundation shall be placed so that the base of the footing at its front edge will be a minimum 10 fee: <br />from the top edge of the slope at that same ei-vation. Foundation depth and distance to top of slope <br />should be confirmed and approved by GES, Inc. at the time of excavation. <br />GeatultnicaC, GeolaBicd & Enaronmentaf Engineering <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.