Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
PRE 2010 DOCS
City ®f Fridley, NUnn.. No 10409 BUILDING PERMIT Date: Sept. 15, 1969 Owner: M- Aruett Builder Charles E. Johanson, Inc. Address 21_0 Rice Creek Blvd. Address 580 69th Ave. N. E. LOCATION OF BUILDING No. 254 _ Street Rice Creek Blvd. part of Lot Lot 8 _ Block 4 Addition or Sub -Division Rice Creek Plaza North Corner Lot Inside Lot —X Setback 35' _ Sideyard 101- 10' Sewer Elevation 828.00 (,Manhole Invert)_. 831.00 Top of Footing DESCRIPTION OF BUILDING To be Used as: 31' 26' 1326' Dwelling Front 42' Depth 20 Height 20' Sq. Ft. 2A*101& Ft 37,960 Front Depth Height Sq. Ft. Cu. Ft. Type of Construction _ Frame Est Cost _ $34, 000.00 __ To be Completed SEWER LOCATION - Service extended from manhole - WATER LOCATION - 51' N. from the S. W. lot corner 37' S. from the N. W. lot corner In consideration of the issuance to me of a permit to construct the building d , above, I agree to do the proposed work in accordance with the description above set fit co p ce�th all provisions of ordinances of the city of Fridley. // l/ 100.00 Sewer Connection Ch In consideration of the payment of a fee of $ 57. 00 , permit is he4y granted to Charles E. Johanson to construct the building or addition as described above. This permit is granted upon the express condition that the person to whom it is granted and his agents, employees and workmen, in all work done in, around and upon said building, or any part thereof, shall conform in all respects to the ordinances of Fridley, Minnesota regarding location, construction, alteration, maintenance, repair and moving of buildings within the city limits and this permit may be revoked at any time upon violation of any of the provisions of said ordinancm. 0 Clarence Belisle NOTICE: This pa mb does not cover the constroctioe, installation for wiring, phnubing, gas heating, sewer or water. Be acre to we the Building Inspector for separate permits for then Kama APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA OWNER'S NAME �r" BUILDER CHARLES F. _inUANIS ►N INC. 580 69th Avenue N. E. ADDRESS ® Co 81% t/ D ADDRESS Fridley, Minnacpfa 55432 LOCATION OF BUILDING A NO . ") ; /' STREET LOT 91 BLOCK ADDITION OR SUBDIVISION , CORNER LOT INSIDE LOT Ao— SETBACK SIDEYARD SEWER ELEVATION TOP OF FOOTING Applicant attach to this form Two Certificates of Survey of Lot and proposed building location drawn on these Certificates. DESCRIPTION OF BUILDING r To Be Used As: Front =Depth'" Height Square feet feet " �" Cubic Feet r Front Depth -72-'s Height Square feet �� g Cubic Feet Type of Construction RA AA AC Estimated Cost A:, To Be Completed/ ,/*+ '7 ,0 The undersigned hereby makes application for a permit for the work herein specified, agreeing to do all work in strict accordance with the City of Fridley Ordinances and rulings of the Department of Buildings, and hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this application are true and correct. DATE.� — $"" 41 SIGNATURE (Schedule of Fee Costs can be found on the Reverse Side. C /o e N V SOIL ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. 6800 S. COUNTY RD 18 MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. • PHONE 949-5600 September 30, 1969 MAILING ADDRESS P.O. BOX 35108 MPLS, MINN. 55435 Charles E. Johanson, Inc. 580 - 69th Avenue N. E. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55432 Re: 69-329OMPACTION TESTS 254 Rice Creek Boulevard Fridley, Minnesota Gentlemen - At your request, compaction testing services have been provided at the above referenced project. The purpose of the compaction tests was to indicate the density of the fill material placed for support of the proposed house. The tests were taken on September 24 at the locations and elevations shown on the attached tabulation. A representative sample of the fill material encountered was returned to the laboratory for determination of the maximum density and optimum moisture content in accordance with ASTM D1557 -66T (method A). The results of the modified Proctor test on the fine sand material indicates a maximum density of 111.6 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) at a corresponding optimum moisture content of 10.0 percent. The results of the density tests indicate relative compaction ranging from 91.5 to 98 percent, and averaging 94.5 percent, of the modified Proctor density. Based on the anticipated house footing loads, soils compacted to 90 percent of the modified Proctor density would adequately support the anticipated loadings. However, it should be noted that we did not have an opportunity to inspect the bottom of the excavation and penetration test borings to evaluate the strength of the underlying ndturai'�,soils were not authorized. OUR LETTERS AND REPORTS ARE FOF =USIVE USE OF THE CLIENT TO WHOM THEY ARE ADDRESSED, Al R COMMUNICATION TO ANY OTHERS, OR PUBLICATION OF STATEMENTS. CO....-JSIONS, OR EXTRACTS FROM OR REGARDING OUR REPORTS IS RESF: -0. PENDING OUR WRITTEN APPROVAL. BORINGS • TESTS • INSPECTION • ANALYSIS • REPORTS • RECOMMENDATIONS 69-329 Charles E. Jnhanson, Inc. -2- 9/30/69 If we may be of further assistance in evaluating these data, kindly contact us at your convenience. Very truly yours, SOIL ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. D. R. Monahan ' 'I E i er E I T raun, P. ils. Engineer JSB/DRM-mp Enc. SOIL ENO/NEER/NO SERV/CES, INC. M 69-329 COMPACTION TEST RESULTS Test # 1 2 3 4 Date 9/24/69 9/24 9/24 9/24 Project Proposed House, 254 Rice Creek Boulevard, Fridley, Minnesota Location: 3' S of 2' W of 30' E & NW Corner NE Corner SE Corner 10' N of SW Corner Depth Below Street Grade: 10' 10, 8' 8' U.S. Bureau of Soils Class. -------------------Fine Sand ------------------------------ Field Density Determination: ASTM:D1556-64 (-#4 Sieve Basis) Dry Density (pcf) 109.2 105.9 101.9 103.7 Moisture Content, % 5.1 6.6 4.9 5.1 +#4 Sieve Material, % none none none none Laboratory Moisture -Density Determination: ASTM:D1667-66T (method A) Maximum Dry Density (pcf) 111.6 111.6 111.6 111.6 Optimum Moisture Content, % 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 RESULTS Relative Compaction 98 95 91.5 lc Application for Power Plants and Heating, Cooling, Ventilation, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Systems and Devices PARTIAL RATE SCHEDULE GRAVITY WARM AIR: RATE TOTAL Furnace Shell & Duct Work ........................... $10.00 $ Replacement of Furnace ............................. 6.00 $ Repairs & Alterations—up to $500.00 .................. 6.00 $ Repairs & Alterations each add. $500.00 ............... 3.00 $ MECK. WARM AIR Furnace Shell & Duct Work to 120,000 BTU ............ $10.00 $ 119 CIO each add. 60,000 BTU ....................... 3.00 $ Replacement of Furnace ............................. 6.00 $ Repairs & Alterations—up to $500.00 6.00 $ Repairs & Alterations each add. $500.00 .............. 3.00 $ STEAM or HOT WATER SYSTEM Furnace Shell & Lines—to 400 sq. ft. EDR Steam ...... $10.00 $ Furnace Shell & Line—to 640 sq. ft. EDR Hot Water ... 10.00 $ Each add. 200 sq. ft. EDR Steam ...................... 3.00 $ Each add. 320 sq. ft. EDR Hot Water .................. 3.00 $ OIL BURNER—to 3 gal. per hour ........................ 6.00 $ over 3 gal. per hour—See Fee Schedule 1Z 1�11 GAS BURNER (up to 199,000 BTU) ....................... 5.00 $ over 199,000 BTU See Fee Schedule GAS FITTING FEES: NO RATE TOTAL 1st 3 Fixtures ...................... x$ 200 $ Additional Fixtures x .75 $ Gas Range to 199,000 ........... x$ 5.00 $ AIR CONDITIONING FAN HEATING SYSTEM VENTILATING SYSTEM ALTERATIONS & REPAIRS ROUGH FINAL 7 f See Fee Schedule $ TOTAL FEE $ Dept. of Bldgs. Phone 560-3450 o a City of Fridley: The undersigned hereby makes application for a permit for the work herein, specified, agreeing to do all work in strict accordance with the City Ordinances and ruling of the Department of Buildings, and hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this application are true and correct. Fridley, Minn- 19� Owner i®l� Kind of Building Used as v To be completed about Estimated Cost, $ ®�-® New. Building Permit No. Permit No. 7 DESCRIPTION OF WORK HEATING or POWER PLANTS --Steam, Hot Water, Warm Air—No Trade Name Size No �'1'k16 Capacity Sq. Ft. FJ:).R �e 00(2BTU / H.P. Total Connected Load_�4 0 1 �L9 Kind of Fue BURNER — Trade Name Size No z' Capacity Sq. Ft. E.D.R BTU H.P. (REMARKS -OVER) She % By �> C41100.42 Business Phone No- 7c Application for Power Plants and Heating, Cooling, Ventilation, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Systems and Devices G PARTIAL RATE SCHEDULE Dept. of Bldgs. Phone 560.3450 GRAVITY WARM AIR: RATE TOTAL Locations-�° Furnace Shell & Duct Work ...........................$10.00 $ Replacement of Furnace ............................. 6.00 $ Repairs & Alterations—up to $500.00 .................. 6.00 $ Repairs & Alterations each add. $500.00 ............... 3.00 $ MECH. WARM AIR Furnace Shell & Duct Work to 120,000 BTU ............ $10.00 $ each add. 60,000 BTU ....................... 3.00 $ Replacement of Furnace ............................. 6.00 $ Repairs & Alterations up to $500.00 ................. 6.00 $ Repairs & Alterations each add. $500.00 .............. 3.00 $ STEAM or HOT WATER SYSTEM Furnace Shell & Lines—to 400 sq. ft. EDR Steam ...... $10.00 $ Furnace Shell & Line—to 640 sq. ft. EDR Hot Water ... 10.00 $ Each add. 200 sq. ft. EDR Steam ...................... 3.00 $ Each add. 320 sq. ft. EDR Hot Water .................. 3.00 $ OIL BURNER—to 3 gal. per hour 6.00 $ over 3 gal. per hour—See Fee Schedule GAS BURNER (up to 199,000 BTU) ....................... 5.00 $ over 199,000 BTU See Fee Schedule GAS FITTING FEES: NO RATE TOTAL 1st 3 Fixtures ....... x$ 2.00 $ Additional Fixtures ................. x .75 $ Gas Range to 199,000 ........... x$ 5.00 $ AIR CONDITIONING FA7X HEATIN YSTEM See Fee Schedule VENTILATING SYSTEM $ ALTERATIONS & REPAIRS TOTAL FEE ROUGH FINAL City of Fridley: The undersigned hereby makes application for a permit for the work hereir. specified, agreeing to do all work in strict accordance with the City Ordinances and ruling of the Department of Buildings, and hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this application are true and correct. Mt Fridley, nn 19 Owner G R� ®ate Kind of Building Used as IZ To be completed about Estimated Cost, $ Old—New. Building Permit No. Permit No. 4110,16 DESCRIPTION OF WORN HEATING or POWER PLANTS—Steam, Hot Water, Warm Air—No Trade Name— Size No _ r Capacity Sq. Ft. E.D.R BTU H.P. Total Connected Load Kind of Fuel Ilud a.AA BURNER — Trade Name Size No Capacity Sq. Ft. E.D.R BTU H.P. (REMARKS—OVER) Signed_1 as Business Phone No_ S-2 Original PERMIT for Power ants and Heating, Cool- ing, Ventilation, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Systems and Devices DESCRIPTION OF WORK No. of J Heating Plants to be installed--altered—repaired Make ,Size i9d - 5-1 -14 0 ; Oil fired rj , Coal fired—, Gas fired_; Gas Authorization No - Remarks Remarks •l UALt ® (t) Ml- -7- d -e -U , 4T f -, - Approved by Final Inspection Date , 19_ Inspector Permit N° 4674 Fee $ .1s": Office of the Inspector of Buildings - City of Fridley City of Fridley, Minn., A , 19-9-0 Owner �� SFS J ddid-Ca Al Location �� R/ e L 64a Kind of Buildi�►Jg a'gme- How Occupied ELL 111161 Work to be Commenced—, 19— To be Completed ,19_ Estimated Cost, $ 1960,00 t -New, Building Permit No. Permission is hereby granted to �A • W a.1�� - 1 `�� C C..iJ --) �_to install—erect—use the material and devices described in the above statement. This permit is granted upon the express condition that the person to whom it is granted, and his agents, employees and workmen, in all the work done and materials used under this permit, and in the operation of the devices herein mentioned shall conform in all respects to the ordinances of the City of Fridley relating to or governing the work to be done and the operation of the devices herein named, and to the specifications set forth in the approved application for this permit on file in the office of the Inspector of Buildings. y Inspector of Buildings 4E 2M 11-87 N Oris i i PERMIT for Power Plants and Heating, Cool- ing, Ventilation, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Systems and Devices DESCRIPTION OF WORK No.® be s nhred—repaired Make , Size A/r?'�_ Oil fired—,- Coal fired—,- Gas fired—Z; Gas Authorization No. Remarks Approved Final Inspection Date , 19_ , Inspector _�_ C/5� Permit N° - 4810 Fee s A� Office of the Inspector of Buildino City of Fridley City of Fridley, Minn. -22 Owner � ha � c�� 0�, A aid ret Location Kind of Building How Occupied �� f Work to be Commenced , l9_ To be Completed ,19_ Estimated Cost, $�Jy d (122 Old -New, Building Permit N Permission is hereby granted to pd4, –1 E�') -p4� �- I % UAY L -2 to install—erect—use the material and devices described in the above statement. This permit is granted upon the express condition that the person to whom it is granted, and his agents, employees and workmen, in all the work done and materials used under this permit, and in the operation of the devices herein mentioned shall conform in all respects to the ordinances of the City of Fridley relating to or governing the work to be done and the operation of the devices herein named, and to the specifcca ' ns ft forth in the approved application for this permit on file in the office of the Inspector of Buildings. N )JLsLh .I t�: , Inspector of Buildings 4z 2M 11-67 V Origin Permit f®r MU ° RING AND GAS 1=1 i -TING N.B. When work covered by this permit is ready, the Plumbing Ordinance requires that request for inspection shall be phoned in to the plumbing Inspector, 560-3450 giving number of this permit., DESCRIPTION OF WORK Number, Sind and Location of Fixtures Stories3 J a z a Z' o °o n ? a m {� m m 3 t O LL LL p Basement / 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Connected with Sewer -Cesspool N? 503'7 Fee $ Permit G- 0 W WATER HTR. City of Fridley 0 o a o M I GAS I Exec. Gas Piping for Openings Permission is hereby granted 'to do the plumbing and gas fitting in the building described in the statement hereto attached, upoexpress condition that the person to whom this permit is granted, and his agents, employees and orkmen, in the plumbing or gas fitting of said building shall conform in all respects to ordinances of the City of Fridley, and this permit may be revoked at any time upon the violation of any of the provisions of said ordinances. By Order Of The Inspector Of Buildings Roughing in Inspection Date Inspector. Final Inspection Date Owner Location o2 6 --Il Ro C E— (� ktE- Kind of Building 69 �r Yl d Used as Au-) L L L i NC,& To be Completed A ee-, ,19-a Estimated Cost Old -New. Building Permit No. Date Inspector. Inspector of Buildings. 42 ��—�9-V s APPLICATION FOR PLUMBING AND GAS FITTING PERMIT Job Address o2 �.':'.,RTrP. j BFIY RT T -n - n,M-P Department of Buildings City of Fridley 1 Tel. #571-34SO PARTIAL RATE SCHEDULE PLUSIBIAG FIXTURE RATES: NO. RATE FA'� Nu--ber Fixtures x $3.00 m :0 j, 4 m g $ water Heater Ix $2.00 $ Catch Basin .� x $5.00 $ 14 n� $5.00 $ 100;000 BTU to 199,000 BTU x w $ Water Softener x $7.90 J ' x $5.00 � Electric water Heater - � � � $ ++ ul � In n n x $3.00 $ p p =u -4 a d� YI N 111 a a� v°ai O gg $5.00 o as lec $2.00 $ State Surcharge. $ , .50 TOTAL FEE 1st qp*ea ix di ior er A BLS 00 2ad 3rd Lth] (R) a Future Connection Opening Connected with Sewer (•) - IJew Fixture, Old Opening Water PARTIAL RATE SCHEDULE PLUSIBIAG FIXTURE RATES: NO. RATE TOTAL Nu--ber Fixtures x $3.00 $ Future Fixture Opening 1 $2.00 $ NOW Fixture, Old Opening ® Ix $2.00 $ Catch Basin .� x $5.00 $ Nater Heater • to 99,000 BTU, x $5.00 $ 100;000 BTU to 199,000 BTU x $10.00 $ Water Softener x $7.90 $ New Grourd'Ran Old Building x $5.00 $ ^_ Electric water Heater - x $5.00 $ GAS FITTING FEES: 1st 3 fixtures x $3.00 $ Additional Fixtures �� x $1.00 $ .Gas Range to 199,000 BTU x $10.00 $ REPAIRS $ ALTERATIONS ' First $100.00 $5.00 $ each add. $100.00 or fraction $2.00 $ State Surcharge. $ , .50 TOTAL FEE REINSPECTION FEE IPSa AA% _ The undersigned hereby makes application fora permit for the work her specified agreeing -to do all work in strict accordance with the City Cc( and rulings of the Department of Buildings, and hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this application are true and cc Fridley, Mn. 8-� -77 , 19 OWNER Marvin Artmannn' KIND OF BUILDING frame USED AS rA Sm TO BE COLLETED ABOUT 10.00 ESTIMATED COST OLD - NEW BUILDING PERMIT N0. PZFI41T NO. Com . • Signed By' M1NNMXffASC0 Tel. No. ROUGH INSP, Date FIN;RL INSP. Date APPROVAL FOR PERMIT 4, MINIMUM FEE FOR ANY PLUMBING PERMIT IS $7.50 01 SUBJECT P IT NO. City of Fridley o r 15585 AT THE TOP OF THE TWINS BUILDING P E R M I T rp RE • ______ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIV. �y PROTECTIVE INSPECTION SEC. l CITY HALL FRIDLEY 55432 NUMBER REV. DATE PAGE OF APPROVED BY j 612-571-3450 910-F15 12/13/79 / / JOB ADDRESS 254 Rice Creek Blvd. 1 LEGAL LOT NO. BLOCK TRACT OR ADDITION SEE ATTACHED DESCR. 8 4 Rice Creek Plaza North SHEET 2 PROPERTY OWNER MAIL ADDRESS ZIP PHONE Marvin Artman 254 Rice Creek Blvd. Fridley 55432 574-9592 3 CONTRACTOR MAIL ADDRESS ZIP PHONE LICENSE NO. Hearth and Hame Co. 219 W 90th St. Bloo,mi.ncrton 55420 884-415 4 ARCHITECT OR DESIGNER MAIL ADDRESS ZIP PHONE LICENSE NO. 5 ENGINEER MAIL ADDRESS ZIP PHONE LICENSE NO. 8 USE OF BUILDING 7 CLASS OF WORK NEW ❑ ADDITION ❑ ALTERATION ❑ REPAIR ❑ MOVE ❑ REMOVE 8 DESCRIBE WORK Install a built-in fire lace and frame in. 9 CHANGE OF USE FROM TO STIPULATIONS TYPE OF CONST: ' OCCUPANCY GROUP OCCUPANCY LOAD SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, HEATING, VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING. #ood & Metal THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION ZONING SQ. FT. CU. FT. AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 60 DAYS, OR IF CONSTRUCTION OR WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED FOR A PERIOD OF 120 DAYS AT R-1 ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COMMENCED. NO. DWLG. UNITS OFFSTREET PARKING I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION STALLS GARAGES AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS VALUATION SURTAX AND ORDINANCES GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT $1,300.00 $.65 DOES NOT PRESUME TO GIVE AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE PERMIT FEE SAC CHARGE PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REGULATING CON- STRUCTION OR THE PERFORMAN E OF CONSTRUCTION. $9.00 PLAN CHECK FEE TOTALFEE 9.6 5 SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR ORA THORIZED AGENT (DATE) WHENLID IS IS YOUR PERMIT BL P SATE SIGNATUREOF OWNERIIF OWNER BUILDER) (DATE) 01 CITY OF FRIDLEY APPLICATION FOR RESIDLNTIAL BUILDING PERMITS (New, Alterations, Additions, or Repairs) OWNER: ADDRESS: TEL NO: iL _ C��,Z STREET NO: LOT: BUILDER: - ADDRESS: I (� TEL NO:, Construction Location STREET: K I G VC9 BLOCK: ADDITION: Corner Lot: Inside Lot: Setback,: Sideyards: Applicant attach to this form two Certificates of SuL-vey of lot and proposed building location drawn on certificates to scale. DE CRIPTION OF CONSTRUCTION fnt: Depth: Height: Square. Feet: Cubic Feet: Front: Depth: Height: quare - Feet: Cubic Feet: Type of Co�istruction: Estimated Cost: $ To Be Completed: / 13 3 Alt. A Alt. B Proposed Driveway Width If New Opening Is Desired: $ $ SEE REVERSE SIDE OF SHEET The undersigned hereby makes application for a permit for the work herein specified, agreeing to do all work in strict accordance with the City of Fridley Ordinances and rulings of the Department of Buildings, and hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this application are true and coect. DATE: r vZ ff 3Z2!j SIGNATURE: Stipulations: 01 SUBJECT PERMIT Nja- City of Fridley 2 ..16 5 9 8 AT THE TOP OF THE TWINS BUILDING PERMIT r RECEIP COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIV. y &3 r PROTECTIVE INSPECTION SEC. / CITY HALL FRIDLEY 55432 NUMBER REV. DATE PAGE OF APPROVED BY J` 612-571-3450 910-F15 5/25/82 JOB ADDRESS 254 Rice Creek Boulevard N.E. 1 LEGAL LOT NO. BLOCK TRACT OR ADDITION SEE ATTACHED DESCR. 8 4 1 Rice Creek Plaza. North Addition SHEET 2 PROPERTY OWNER MAILADDRESS ZIP PHONE Marvin Artmann 254 Rice Creek Boulevard N.E. 574-9592 3 CONTRACTOR MAIL ADDRESS ZIP PHONE LICENSE NO. Ron Johnson Gen. Contractor 3724 Chandler Drive N.E. M is 781-0663 4 ARCHITECT OR DESIGNER MAIL ADDRESS ZIP PHONE LICENSE NO. 5 ENGINEER MAIL ADDRESS ZIP PHONE LICENSE NO, 6 USE OF BUILDING Residential 7 CLASS OF WORK ❑ NEW ❑ ADDITION ❑ ALTERATION ❑ REPAIR ❑ MOVE ❑ REMOVE x 8 DESCRIBE WORK P.emove two existing decks and replace with a 28' x 12' peck. Contruct a 11' x 16` Storage Shed 9 CHANGE OF USE FROM TO STIPULATIONS TYPE OF CONST. OCCUPANCY GROUP OCCUPANCY LOAD SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, HEATING., VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING. Wood Frame THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION ZONING SO. FT. CU. FT. AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 60 DAYS, OR IF CONSTRUCTION OR WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED FOR A PERIOD OF 120 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COMMENCED. NO. DWLG. UNITS OFFSTREET PARKING I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION 1 STALLS GARAGES AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS VALUATION SURTAX AND ORDINANCES GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED $3,650 $1.83 WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT PRESUME TO GIVE AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE PERMIT FEE SAC CHARGE PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE -DR --LOCAL LAW REGULATING CON - $50.50 NONE RUC THE PERFORM E OF C N RUCTION. PLAN CHECK FEE TOTAL FEE v $12.63 $64.96 SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR OR HORIZED AGENT t0 TEI WHEN PROPERL VALIDATED THIS IS YOUR PERMIT BLDG WSP - D E SIGNATURE OF OWNER IIF OWNER BUILDERI IDATEI 01 CITY OF FRIDLEY Effective Aug. 1, 1981 APPLICATIM FOR RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PE-IU41TS `New. Alterations, Additions, or Repairs) ADDRESS: ADDRESS: TEL Ii0: 21—? TEL NO: e,�'! Construction Location • STREET NO: zrxSTREET: IAT: BLOCK: '4pl_ ADDITION: �� � .%�.d * 2.4,e�C/ Corner Lot: Inside Lot: Setback: 3 —® Sideyards: Applicant attach to this form two Certificates of Survey of lot and proposed building location drawn on certificates to scale. ®UG'- Ex/s7 .ppe-c c-S.DESCRIPTIOi4 OF CONSTRUCTION IeWIA120�41 /02 Front: Depth: Height: Square. Feet: Cubic Feet: 63'VWgd�G_siT�Frot:X /4 rO Depth: Height: Square -Feet: Cubic Feet: _ Type of Construction: Estimated Cost: To Be Cbripleted: Alt. A Alt. B Proposed Driveway Width If New Opening Is Desired: $ $ SEE REVERSE SIDE OF SHEET Mie undersigned hereby makes application for a permit for the work herein specified, agreeing to do.all work in strict accordance with the City of Fridley Ordinances and rulings of the Department. of Buildings, and hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this applicatio true and coir SIGNATURE Stipulations: Land Planning 6875 H KS ME. tondSwYeyhy -sail k M, ENGINEERING, INC. avil Saysef,440" EqqineersSurvey rs certz"'ficate of suirvey forclIARLES IOWA*SOAOP % e ' `;�A rr\ ` .cif ,r LO, 61 Block. ure'ek 91 z lclorih M',"w,"ton Anoka ro;lniv, y *hue ad is iia hWref ol'a !wvey 40#x bp�btirs qr* a4iir Asa4hed lad, end -rite flvt "Qh;Oor w Amid la7d. As surveed hyw Ai__ aty y :A.D MD. SUBUR6AN ................... ENC71NEERIN6, INC. ev f- a PROJECT: REPORTED To: ® twin MY testinq cti orporaon 662 CROMWELL AVENUE ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE 612/6453601 FOUNDATION DISTRESS REVIEW AND SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION EXISTING RESIDENCE •254 RICE CREEK BOULEVARD March 16, 1988 FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA M ary Artmann 254 Rice Creek Blvd Fridley, Minnesota 55432 LABORATORY No. 4131 88-0336 This report concerns our recent observations, review and subsurface exploration performed relative to structural distress to the Artmann residence. Our work was performed in accordance with our written proposal, dated December 3, 19870 and your authorization to proceed. Our authorized work scope was limited to the following items: 1. Observe and review the distress which is currently visible to the residence. 2. Explore the subsurface soil conditions adjacent to distressed foundation walls by means of three or four standard penetration borings. 3. Review the available information including distress manifestations, soil boring and ground water data and prepare an engineering report which includes: a. A summary description of structural distress. b. The results of borings and ground water readings. c. Discussion of probable cause of the foundation distress and comments on appropriate remedial procedures. We initially met with you on November 24, 1987, to discuss the history of the structure and perform our observations and review of visible distress. The structure was a large custom built, single-family dwelling with full -depth walkout basement to the rear and attached garage on the north end. The property sloped downward rather noticeably from the street down to the rear, to Rice Creek. You indicated that earthwork for the house was performed in 1969 and that you occupied the house in 1970. You indicated that earthwork for the structure may have included removal of inferior organic layers and replacement with imported fill. You also indicated that, due to gradual distress•: development over the years, the house has been releveled on two separate occasions. This was done initially in about 1972-73 and again in 1981. This work apparently involved additional reconstruction of a portion of the rear concrete masonry foundation wall but did not include any correction of the soil conditions below the footings or footing reconstruction. You stated that the major cracks seemed to have widened noticeably during the past year. AS A MUTUAL P %C7=CTION TO CLMPfrM. T!N PLORLIC AND OURSELVES, ALL REPO,ITO ARE /UEMITTEO AR TME CONFIDENTIAL PROPERTY OP OLIEN". AND AUTH0FQ1- iCATION POR PNIELICATION CW STATEMENTE. CONCLM0IONE OR EXT,IACTS PROM DR REOAPMIN= OUR REPOLITS 10 RESERVED PENDING DMR WRITTEN APPROVAL LABORATORY No. ®F= ttuln CILV testinq motion 662 CROMWELL AVENUE ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE 612/645.3601 FOUNDATION DISTRESS REVIEW AND SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 4131 88-0336 March 16, 1988 2 Our observations indicated that most of the observed distress was towards the rear of the structure. You did point out to us, however, that some irregularities with the brick veneer existed along the front of the garage and off the north side of the front stoop. In these areas, the brick veneer was either tilted, or out of plumb, such as generally was the case at the front of the garage or bowed outward and cracked, at the front'stoop area. You also indicated that the front stoop had not been replaced but that the grade supported sidewalk slabs which extend from the front stoop to the driveway had been replaced since original construction. The major distress visible to the exterior was at the rear corners. Wide cracking of the masonry was readily evident at both the northeast and southeast corners. In addition, apparent rotation of the foundation wall had occurred at the northeast corner below the wide crack opening and just below the chimney construction. Although.much of this distress was visible at or adjacent to the chimney and fireplace, no distress was visible to the fireplace and chimney construction itself. You also pointed out various distress to the interior of the house. You indicated that perhaps the worst area on the interior was in the kitchen and family room zones, which were in the main level toward the central portion of the back wall. In this area, we confirmed the presence of a sloping floor and mismatches at intersections of construction such as walls and ceilings. You also pointed out a large diagonal crack in the sheetrock wall surface on the opposite side of the kitchen wall, facing the dining room area towards the south end of the house. Additionally, a long vertical crack in the interior sheetrock was visible in the upper portion of the south wall in the living room. The basement was basically finished off so, typically, any concrete blockwork above basement floor grade would not be visible. However, you did indicate where certain suspended ceiling construction had buckled and fallen due to the progressive distortion of the superstructure. Again, this was generally towards the rear of the structure and was centrally located. The adjacent doorway on the back outside wall was also distorted and the door was jamming in the frame, not opening properly. Three standard penetration borings were put down on March 2 and 30 1988, adjacent to the distressed corners of the structure, as shown on the attached sketch. Additionally, two secondary holes were put down adjacent to borings #1 and #2 for the purposes of obtaining Shelby Tube samples for possible laboratory testing. The surface elevations at the borings were referenced to the basement floor of the house, which was assumed as elevation 1001. AS A MUTUAL PROTRCTICN TO CLIRNTR, TME PUSUC A/= OLMOULVUB, AI.L n6PCM = AFM SWUPA T MO A8 TMi CCNPMEhMAL P"40-- — CURNTf, ANO AUTHMI- ZATION POR PIHWILICATION OA OTATRM;", CONCLUSIeNO QA EXTRACTO PROM OA RROAROINO OUR REPORTS 16 RE®WAVED PRNDINO OLM WRITTEN APPROVAL. !13a1; .NfelaAm [] to in city testtincl corpor>�on 662 CROMWELL AVENUE ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE 612/645.3601 FOUNDATION DISTRESS REYIEM AND SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 4131 88-0336 March 16, 1988 3 Soil sampling was performed in accordance with ASTM:D1586-84. Using this procedure, a 2" O.D. split barrel sampler is driven into the soil by a 140 lb weight falling 30". After an initial set of 6", the number of blows required to drive the sampler an additional 12" is known as the penetration resistance or N value. The N value is an index of the relative density of cohesionless soils and the consistency of cohesive soils. Thin wall tube samples were obtained according to ASTM:D1587-83 where indicated by the appropriate symbol on the boring logs. As the samples were obtained in the field, they were visually and manually classified by the crew chief in accordance with ASTM:D2487-85 and 2488. Representative portions of the samples were then returned to the laboratory for further examination and for verification of the field classification. In addition, selected samples were submitted to a program of laboratory tests. Logs of the borings indicating the depth and identification of the various strata, the N value, the laboratory test data, water level information and pertinent information regarding the method of maintaining and advancing the drill holes are attached. Charts illustrating the soil classification procedure, the descriptive terminology and symbols used on the boring logs are also attached. Soil boring locations were restricted somewhat by landscaping, surface slopes and roof eave overhang. Typically, our borings were put down as close as possible to the distressed corners of concern. At the boring locations, the grades were gently sloping towards the rear of the property. Fill soils were encountered at the surface of all borings, to depths ranging from 6.51 (boring #2) to as much as 9.51 (boring B). The fill was found to be comprised of mostly silty sands, although some clayey sand was encountered along with pieces of wood. The fill coloration ranged from brown to black. The depth of freezing towards the rear was 1.51. At boring #3, off the front garage corner, the fill was frozen to a depth of about 41 below the surface. Penetration values obtained in the unfrozen portions of the'fill indicated quite variable conditions, with N values ranging from 4 to 11 and values in the range of 3 to 5 being predominant. Organic layers were encountered directly below the fill at borings #1 and B. The most inferior condition was at boring #1 where a 11 thick layer of hemic peat was encountered between the fill and the underlying competent sand layer. At boring 3, the initial AS A MUTUAL PROTUCTMN TO CUEN". THE PU/LIC AND CURINILVEN, ALL REPORTS ARE SUSM/TTEO AX THE CONFIDENTIAL PROPERTY OP CLIENTS, ANO AUTMORI- XATtON POR PUSUCAT"M GP OTATEMENTO, CONCLUOIONS OP EXTRACTS PPOM OR RIt4OAROINO OUR REPORTO 10 PEOERVEO PENOINS OUR WRITTEN APPROVAL twin city testinq corporeaan 662 CROMWELL AVENUE v� PHONE 6121645.3601 +. FOUNDATION DISTRESS REVIEW AND SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION March 16, 1988 LABORATORY No. 4131 88-0336 4 SOIL BORINGS (cont.) contact was with a 1t thick layer of silty sand topsoil which in turn was underlain by a 0.51 thick layer of organic clay. Our boring data 'did suggest that both these thin organic layers in boring 13 were rather well consolidated and were not in a soft condition. The boring logs indicate that various coarse alluvial or glacial till layers were encountered below the fill and organic layers, to the depth of the borings. The coarse alluvium consisted typically of fine grained silty sands or sand with silt of variable density. The sands typically are found to be in a loose to dense condition. The glacial till layer encountered between coarse alluvial layers was found to be a reddish brown silty sand of variable density. At boring 11, the till layer encountered at a depth of 11.51 to 14.51 was found to be very loose. A 21 thick layer of sandy lean clay was encountered between coarse alluvium layers at boring #2, from 8.5' to 10.5' below the surface and this was identified as either mixed alluvium or glacial till. Based on penetration values and laboratory tests, this layer was found to be in a firm condition. Observations for subsurface water were made at each boring location during the drilling operations. The times and levels of the water readings are shown on the boring logs. It should be noted that ground water was encountered in each of the borings. Elevations of the ground water level ranged between approximately 81.71-84.31. Water levels on the site are probably influenced by the presence of Rice Creek. As the ground water was encountered within the free -draining granular soils, we anticipate the water levels shown on the boring logs are relatively accurate. It should be noted that ground water levels can and will fluctuate on a seasonal and yearly basis. Review of the boring logs indicates the presence of a marginal fill condition at the boring locations. Furthermore, it does appear that at the locations of borings #1 and #3, inferior organic layers were left in place prior to filling. Certainly, the peat layer encountered at boring #1 should have been totally removed in order to provide proper support for the fill and building loads. Additionally, we would normally suggest that the topsoil and organic clay layer encountered below the fill in boring #3 be removed as well, prior to filling. No such inferior soil layers were encountered below the fill at boring V. Based on the penetration values obtained in the fill, it did appear the fill was subject to only relatively light compaction and based on the presence of black inclusions and wood in the fill, it appears that much of this work was done in a relatively uncontrolled manner. As noted, N values ranging from 3 to 5 were commonly found in the fill below foundation grades. In a well compacted fill system consisting of mostly silty sand soils, we would anticipate N values not less than 10 blows per foot throughout. AN A MUTUAL FAOTVC770N TO CUSNTE, THE FM1,OLIC ANO OUAEULVEE, ALL PIUMM7E AIM EUEMITTIIO AE TFM CO"40MM"AL P "O"PTY OF CUENTE, AND ^UTWM1- ;ATtON FOA ►UIUCATtON OP STATEMENTS, CUMACLUEIONE OA Ex"ACTA FROM OA II\OAM"N0 OLA AtP'OATE 1E P aps"No ofN01N0 CUA WAITTfN APPA -VAI- ® twain city testinq 662 CROMWELL AVENUE ST. PAUL, MN 55114 y PHONE 6121645.3601 F HDATION DISTRESS REVIEW AND SUBSLRFACE EXPLORATION LABORATORY No. 4131 88-0336 5 March 16, 1988 Based on our observations, the soil boring and associated laboratory testing, it is our Judgment that the majority of the distress which was visible to the structure at and adjacent to the effected corners was due to gradual settlement of the fill soils and in some cases, underlying inferior organic layers found directly below the fill. Ordinarily, settlement due to loose or soft non-organic soil layers will occur and then virtually cease within a few years after construction. However, swamp deposit layers can consolidate indefinitely. Swamp deposits generally consolidate in two phases. The first phase consists of primary consolidation which normally occurs quite rapidly after loads are applied. The secondary phase, or secondary consolidation, can continue over a very long period of time. The available information suggests that primary consolidation of the swamp layer depicted on boring log 11 is completed and the layer should now be well into the secondary phase. You have reported recent movement of the structure based on opening of old cracking at the corners. It is possible that some of this additional movement is due to severe water infiltration into the loose fill which may sometimes consolidate loose layers and induce a damaging increment of settlement to the system. In our opinion, it is also possible that more recent movement might be due to seasonal effects of frost heaving. The build- up of ice lenses in backfill soils adjacent to residential structures which then results in damaging frost heave can be related to several factors: unheated garage configuration, the inherent frost susceptible and slow draining nature of the backfill soils and presence of poor surface drainage conditions adjacent to the affected walls. Where upheaval of foundation walls supported by code frost depth (42" deep) footings has occurred, it is possible that ice lenses are forming under the footing and forcing the upward movement from below the footing. At this time, based on the available information, there is no way to ascertain whether damaging ice lensing is occurring below footing grade, particularly adjacent to the garage where the greatest potential for such damage is present. However, it is perhaps more common, in cases were considerable amounts of water are present, that the distress is due to the adfreeze phenomena, which does not require frost lens formation below the footings. In the subject case, our boring adjacent to the garage did document the presence of frozen ground to a depth of 4' although actual ice lenses were not documented by our sampling. Adfreeze can develop if there is sufficient moisture to saturate unheated masonry block foundation wall. The freezing of soil moisture in the vicinity of the upper regions of the foundation wall is capable of developing a very strong bond with the wall -a bond capable of failing the mortar bond in the masonry joints. Further freezing of water forces the upward movement of the construction; i.e., causes the wall to be actually lifted off the footing and lower portions of the foundation wall construction. Water can either be drawn upward several feet into the frost zone by capillary action or might be present within the uncompacted backfill zone and actually contained within the concrete blockwork. AM A MUTUAL PAOTECTMN TO CUENTS, THE PUSILIC AMC OUANLVSS, ALL RSPORTE AAS SU1MITTSD A/ THE CONRIOIZNTIAL PROPSATY OF CUSNT{, ANO AUTMOAI- fATMN FOR PUSIUCATION OF StTATSMMMM, CONCLUMONE On 8XTAACTE FROM DA,ISOA=OIIVD OUR "UPDATE h AS®SRVRO PENDING OUA vmrrmN APPROVAL. twin city testim corporation 662 CROMWELL AVENUE ST. PAUL, MN 55114 4 PHONE 612/645-3601 EGMATION DISTRESS REVIEW AND SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION March 16, 1988 LABORATORY No. 4131 88-0336 6 As implied in the above discussion, variable amounts of differential settlement might be expected in the future lifetime of the house depending on the particular location. Adjacent to the area of boring 11, where the peat layer was encountered below the fill, we would anticipate the most potential for future settlement. At the other rear corner of the house, where the fill was found to be loose below the footing but then in contact with competent natural soils, we might anticipate the least future settlement. A similar condition was found towards the front of the garage, with loose fill overlying layers which were found to be organic but rather consolidated at this time and perhaps subject to minimal settlement. For best possible assurance against additional damaging settlement, it would be best to extend the foundation system through the fill and organic layers to the competent soils portrayed by the borings. Elevation of competent soils at the particular boring locations was as follows: Boring Elevation Number (ft) 1 90.7 2 92.3 3 95.7 If this underpinning or foundation extension system is employed, care should be taken particularly at the location of boring A to not extend the foundation deeper than suggested, in order to prevent bearing on or close to the very loose silty sand till layer encountered at a depth of 11.51 to 14.51. We would suggest limiting soil contact pressures for the new footings to 1500 psf. One potential problem with the concept of footing underpinning in this type of,situation is that, realistically, only the perimeter footings can be treated. If future settlement occurs to the untreated interior of the structure, this could result in some distortion similar to what you have reported to date. A possible alternative remedial procedure which may help firm up conditions in the interior would involve the usage of the intrusion grouting or compaction grouting process. This procedure involves introduction of probes into the fill and weak soils from the surface followed by pumping of the stiff grout into the loose and soft soil network. Ideally, the result of the compaction grouting process is densification and strengthening of the foundation soils. As the materials and methods used are somewhat proprietary, we would suggest that an intrusion grouting contractor be allowed to review the available information and provide an opinion as to the feasibility of this method. AS A MUTUAL PHOTeCTON TO CURNT/y THE PUSUC AND OUX"MI.Van. ALL PMPOAT1 AHA SLMWTT30 AS TI -M 007VRIOUMTIAL PHOPiHTY CP CUMN. . AND AI,TNOHI- ZATON PM PUOLMATMN OP.TATUMUNTS. CONCLUMONE, CH ®XTiACT1 M"31M CM HI30AX=f1M OUP PI®PCWM I® H®®®GVEIO Pf,NOINO C -MC WMITTEEN API.HOVAL. d wm+rr.or�r CQws3cxTmon ' 662 CROMWELL AVENUE ST. PAUL, MN 55114 Y j PHONE 612/6453601 FATION DISTRESS REVIEW AND SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION March 16, 1988 LABORATORY No. 4131 88-0336 7 A Another possible option which you may wish to employ would i vo v� underpinning only that portion of the exterior foundation which appears to be( effected by the peat layer at depth. In other areas such as the garage and opposi corner of the house, consideration might be given to rebuilding the foundation wall as needed, and constructing a more rigid foundation wall with a wider footing. This would probably involve a cast -in-place concrete wall or a fully reinforced concrete masonry foundation wall system. If this limited risk approach is employed, we would suggest the footing be cast 30" wide to reduce the soil contact pressure. If underpinning or any other foundation wall construction is to be considered, we would strongly suggest that you have a structural engineer and contractor review the existing condition of the distressed foundation walls. This would probably include having the foundation walls exposed by backhoe excavation for direct observation by the engineer and contractor. The details of typical residential underpinning systems are not particularly difficult to design but this work should still be done by a practicing structural engineer. The foregoing discussion brought up the possibility of seasonal frost heave damage to at least a portion of the structure; i.e., the front of the garage. We suggest that consideration be given to protecting this area against frost penetration or adfreeze build-up. As implied in the foregoing discussion, three conditions must be present for frost heaving to occur: (1) the presence of a frost susceptible soil (2) freezing temperatures and (3) sufficient available moisture. Heave will not occur if any of these three conditions are present. Accordingly, remedial procedures are generally grouped as follows: (1) remove and restrict the movement of surface water to the heave zone (2) prevent the soil from freezing or lower the footings to a level below the frost zone (3) remove the frost susceptible soil to the maximum depth of freezing and (4) provide a bond breaker between the freezing soil and masonry wall. In the subject case, it may be advisable to provide positive downslopes at the surface, adjacent to the garage, in order to force surface water run-off away from the walls. In addition, an approach which is often effective in preventing or alleviating future heaving problems where heave is associated with adfreeze occurrence, involves placement of insulation board below -grade in the problem area. An attached sketch (sheet 1) depicts the features of this scheme. The insulation board used should be 2" thick at minimum and should be extruded polystyrene, not expanded polystyrene. This procedure provides the bond breaker between the backfill and the wall and also aids in limiting the depth of frost penetration. AS A MUTUAL PROTIC"ON TO CUZNM TTM PLMILM AND OUMZLVWO. ALL MPOATO AIM 0USMITTOO AN T1s CORPUMP TIAL PROPgRT'Y OF CURN". AND AUTHORI- ZATION POM PUZLICATON OF RTATIMINTp. CONCU WCWJN DA UXTRACTO PROM ON MQMAM MNO CUA RRPOMTZ 10 PQ®<AVHD P9NC/N0 OUra WRITTEN APPROVAL d' y LABORATORY No. ® tuAn city testlnq corporadon 662 CROMWELL AVENUE ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE FOUNDATION DISTRESS REVIEW AND SUBSURFACES -3601 EEXPLORATION 4131 88-0336 March 16, 1988 8 The recommendations contained in this report represent our professional opinions. These opinions were arrived at in accordance with currently accepted engineering practices at this time and location. Other than this, no warranty is implied or intended. LAR/ rjr 7INTY 7N6 OOWORATION Leonard A Rasmussen, P.E. 0 An A MUTUAL POMUCTMN TO OLMMM TMBI P MUC AND OURBB[LVan, ALL RBIPC.BTO ARQ OtIAMRTtO Aa TME CCNPB9BINTIAL PROPt;RTY OF CURN M, ANO AUTMOM- =ATION POR PUOUCATION CP STATWAUMT®. CONOLUBNGNR CM nXTRACTO FROM OR RBIOAROINO OUR RYPORTO Is FMIDRRV,10 PBINO/NO OUR WRITT$N APPROVAL. LOG OF TEST BORING JOB NO. 4131 88-0336 VERTICAL SCALE 1" 5' BORING NO. 1 PROJECT FXTSTTNG RFSTnFNCF - DEPTH IN FEET DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL rSURFACE ELEVATION 98.7 ' GEOLOGIC ORIGIN N WL SAMPLE LABORATORY TESTS NO. TYPE W D L.L. P.L. Gu FILL, MOSTLY SILTY SAND, black and FILL 1 HSA brown, frozen to 11' 2 HSA 3 3 SB 8 4 SB 8 6 210 6 7 SB SB 20 HEMIC PEAT, black, moist(See#1)(PT) SAND W/SILT, fine grained, brown, COARSE moist, loose to dense (SP -SM) ALLUVIUM 21 8 SB 11 SILTY SAND W/A LITTLE GRAVEL, TILL reddish brown, wet, very loose (SM) 4 9 SB 141 6 10 SB SAND W/SILT AND A LITTLE GRAVEL, fine to medium grained, brown, COARSE ALLUVIUM waterbearing, loose to medium dense (SP -SM) 13 11 SB 22 SAND, fine grained, brown, water - bearing, dense (SP) 27 12 SB 31 29 13 SB End of Boring #1 - a lens of gray fat clay at about 8' (PT) *Sample obtained from off -set borehole WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS START 3-2-88 COMPLETE 3-2-88 ATERHSA AMPLEDATE TIME SDEPTHD DEPITH DEPTH BAILED DEPTHS CASNG CAVE-IN ,LEVEL METHOD 0-14j' 12:05 DM 141-2911 3-2 9:55 T-61 14P 15, to 3-2 10:15 16 1411 151 to ' 3-2 12:05 1' 1411 +0 NMR CREW CHIEFNelson 3-212.40 _31 ' CI to 11� Ps ■ man --T A?--MP-5__A M-4MNL—_1'611P'40-0 _.W Va LOG OF TEST BORING JOB NO. 4131 88-0336 VERTICAL SCALE t" = 5' BORING NO. 2 PROJECT EXISTING RESIDENCE - FRIDLEY MINNESOTA DEPTH IN FEET DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL rSURFACE ELEVATION 98.8' GEOLOGIC ORIGIN N WL SAMPLE LABORATORY TESTS NO. I TYPEJ W D L. -L. P.L. Ou FILL, MOSTLY SILTY SAND, a little FILL 1 HSA wood at about 5', black and brown, moist, frozen to 1i' 3 2 SB 5 3 SB 1 6 -SAND 8 10 10 18 4 6 13 7 8 SB 36 T* SB SB 117 W/SILI, fine grained, brown moist, medium dense (SP -SM) COARSE ALLUVIUM SANDY LEAN CLAY W/A LITTLE GRAVEL brownish gray, rather stiff stiff ALLUVIUM SAND W/SILT AND A LITTLE GRAVEL, COARSE fine to medium grained, brown, ALLUVIUM moist to 14j' then waterbearing, dense to medium dense (SP -SM) 12 9 SB 11 10 SB 18 SAND W/A LITTLE GRAVEL, medium to fine grained, brown, waterbearing, dense (SP) 20 11 SB 22 SAND, fine grained, brown, water - bearing, dense to very dense (SP) 18 12 SB 31 34 13 SB End of Boring *Sample obtained from off -set borehol WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS START 3-2-88 COMPLETE - - ATER DATE TIME SDEPTHD DEPITH NG DEPTH BAILED DEPTHS ,LEVEL METHOD HSA -0-1411 DM 141-291' 3-2 1:30 1' 1 41L 15, to 1411 3-2 2 • t to NMR _ 2.151Nnnp-to __F AC:FIE:I�CIIEF Nelson to b.w � s��a rett►.t • �w�♦eww LOG OF TEST BORING Jos No. 4131 88-0336 VERTICAL SCALE 1" 5' BORING NO. 3 PROJECT EXISTING RESIDENCE-- FRIDLEY, LABORATORY TESTS DEPTH DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL SAMPLE NO. TYPE W I D L.L. P.L. Ou IN FEET rSURFACE ELEVATION 106.7' GEOLOGIC ORIGIN N WL FIL1_,_W0_SnY SILTY SAND, with a FILL 1 HS little clayey sand and gravel, black, dark brown and grayish brown, frozen to about 4' 2 HS 4 3 SB NSR 11 4 SB 91 i eraine , di TOPSOIL 5 SB 10 10 7 SB SILTY SAND fine a COARSE 12 17 13 SANDY LEAN CLAY W/A See#3 CL TILL OR** 9 SB SILTY SAND W/A LITTLE GRAVEL, TILL 10 SB brown to reddish brown, moist to wet, dense to very dense to dense 16 11 SB (SM) 31 12 SB 28 13 SB 26 End of Boring *ALLUVIUM #1 - grayish brown, moist, medium OR SWAMP dense (SM) DEPOSITS #2 - brown, moist, loose (SP -SM) **MIXED ALLUVIUM #3 - LITTLE GRAVEL, brownish gray, stiff (CL) WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS START 3-3-88 COMPLETE .1-3411B DATE TIME SAMPLEDCASING CAVE-IN ATER DEPTH DEPTH BAILED DEPTHS LEVEL METHOD HSA 0-24 9: 40 to - 9:40 26' 241' 26' to None - 24JI 25 to 25' CREW CHIEF Nelson - None 19 to None GENERAL NOTES DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS TEST SYMBOLS SYMBOL DEFINITION SYMBOL DEFINITION HSA 31/4" I.D. Hollow Stem Auger W Water Content - % of Dry Wt. - ASTM D 2216 _FA 4", 6" or 10" Diameter Flight Auger D Dry Density - Pounds Per Cubic Foot _HA 2", 4" or 6" Hand Auger LL, PL Liquid and Plastic Limit - ASTM D 4318 _DC 2 1/2", 4", 5" or 6" Steel Drive Casing Additional Insertions in Last Column _RC Size A. B, or N Rotary Casing PD Pipe Drill or Cleanout Tube Qu Unconfined Comp. Strength-psf - ASTM D 2166 CS Continuous Split Barrel Sampling Pq Penetrometer Reading - Tons/Square Foot DM Drilling Mud Ts Torvane Reading - Tons/Square Foot 1W Jetting -Water G Specific Gravity - ASTM D 854 SB 2" O.D. Split Barrel Sample SL Shrinkage Limits - ASTM D 427 _L 2 1/2" or 3 1/2" O.D. SB Liner Sample OC Organic Content - Combustion Method _T 2" or 3" Thin Walled Tube Sample SP Swell Pressure - Tons/Square Foot 3TP 3" Thin Walled Tube (Pitcher Sampler) PS Percent Swell _TO 2" or 3" Thin Walled Tube (Osterberg Sampler) FS Free Swell - Percent W Wash Sample pH Hydrogen Ion Content, Meter Method B Bag Sample SC Sulfate Content - Parts/Million, same as mg/L P Test Pit Sample CC Chloride Content - Parts/Million, same as mg/L _.Q BQ. NQ, or PQ Wireline System C. One Dimensional Consolidation - ASTM D 2435 _X AX, BX, or NX Double Tube Barrel Qc' Triaxial Compression CR Core Recovery - Percent D.S.' Direct Shear - ASTM D 3080 NSR No Sample Recovered, classification based on action of K' Coefficient of Permeability - cm/sec drilling equipment and/or material noted in drilling fluid D' Dispersion Test or on sampling bit. DH' Double Hydrometer - ASTM D 4221 NMR No Measurement Recorded, primarily due to presence MA' Particle Size Analysis - ASTM D 422 of drilling or coring fluid. R Laboratory Resistivity, in ohm - cm - ASTM G 57 E' Pressuremeter Deformation Modulus - TSF Water Level Symbol PM' Pressuremeter Test VS' Field Vane Shear - ASTM D 2573 IR' Infiltrometer Test - ASTM D 3385 RQD Rock Quality Designation - Percent • See attached data sheet or graph WATER LEVEL Water levels shown on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the time and under the conditions indicated. In sand, the indicated levels may be considered reliable ground water levels. In clay soil, it may not be possible to determinethe ground water level within the normal time required for test borings, except where lenses or layers of more pervious waterbearing soil are present. Even then, an extended period of time may be necessary to reach equilibrium. Therefore, the position of the water level symbol for cohesive or mixed texture soils may not indicate the true level of the ground water table. Perched water refers to water above an impervious layer, thus impeded in reaching the water table. The available water level information is given at the bottom of the log sheet. DESCRIPTIVE TERMINOLOGY DENSITY CONSISTENCY Lamination Up to 1/2" thick stratum TERM "N" VALUE TERM Layer 1/2" to 6" thick stratum Very Loose 0-4. Soft Lens 1/2" to 6" discontinous stratum, pocket Loose 5-8 Medium Varved Alternating laminations of clay, silt and /or fine Medium Dense 9.15 Rather Stiff grained sand, or colors thereof Dense 16.30 Stiff Dry Powdery, no noticeable water Very Dense Over 30 Very Stiff Moist Below saturation Standard "N" Penetration: Blows Per Foot of a 140 Pound Hammer Wet Saturated, above liquid limit Falling 30 inches on a 2 inch OD Split Waterbearing Pervious soil below water Barrel Sampler RELATIVE GRAVEL PROPORTIONS RELATIVE SIZES CONDITION TERM RANGE Boulder Over 12" Coarse Grained Soils A little gravel 2-14% Cobble 3" - 12" With gravel 15-49% Gravel Coarse 3/4" - 3" Fine Grained Soils Fine #4 - 3/4" 15-29% + No. 200 A little gravel 2- 7% Sand 15.29% + No. 200 With gravel 8-29% Coarse #4 - #10 30% + No. 200 A little gravel 2-14% Medium #10 - #40 30% + No. 200 With gravel 15 - 24% Fine #40 - #200 30% + No. 200 Gravelly 16-49% Silt & Clay — #200, Based on Plasticity * CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES ASTM Designation: D 2487 - 85 SOIL ENGINEERING (Based on Unified Soil Classification System) Soli Classification Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Taste" Symbol pGroup Names Coarse -Grained Soils Gravels Clean Gravels Cu24 and 1SCcs,3E GW Well graded gravelF More than 50% retained on More than 50% coarse Less than 5% fines° No. 200 sieve fraction retained on Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E GP Poorly graded gravelF No. 4 sieve Gravels with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silly gravelFAN More than 12% fines° Fines classfiy as CL or CH GC Clayey gravelF-Q•" Sands Clean Sands Cu 26 and 1SCcs3E SW Well -graded sand' 50% or more of coarse Less than 5% fines - fraction passes No. Cu < 6 and/or 1 > CC >3E SP Poorly graded Sandi 4 sieve Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sando•N-' More than 12% fines° Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey Sands-"-' Fine -Grained Soils Sifts and Clays inorganic PI >7 and plots on or above CL Lean clay' w 50% or more passes the Liquid limit less than 50 "A" fins° No. 200 sieve PI <4 or plots below "A" ML slew line'" organic Liquid limit - oven dried <0.75 OL Organic clay" u-11 Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt" LIwo Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above "A" One CH Fat clayKL-m Liquid limit 50 or more PI plots below "A" line MH Elastic SOCK" organic Liquid limit - oven dried (0.75 OH Organic dayKL M.P Liquid limit - not dried RL -M -O Organic affi Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat Fibric Peat > 67% Fibers Hemic Peat 33%-67% Fibers Sapric Peat < 33% Fibers Allotted on the material passing the 34n. (75 -mm) sieve. ICU JR Anerberg limits plot in hatched area, soil is a COAL, aO field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both. add Cu - Deo Aro Cc - Dto , 0e0 silty clay. 'With cobbles or boulders. or both" to group name. KII soll cords ins 15 to 20% pkat No. 200, add 'With sand" cGrovets with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: Fit Will Col. iru115% send, add 'With sand" to group or "with gravel," whidt"r is predominant. GW -GM wsll�graded gravel with sift nacre. Lit soll containsJ30% plus no. 200, predominantly sena, GW -GC well -graded gravel with clay atl tine$ ctassily as CL -ML. use dual symbol GC GM, or add "sandy" to to group name. GP -GM poorly graded gravel with sift SC -SM. s"N soil conlains130111, plus No. 200, predominantly GP -GC poorly graded gravel with clay NM firm ars organic, add 'With organic tires" to group gravel, add "gravely'• to group name. Osands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: Mme. NPIZI and plots on or above "A" One. SW -SM wellgraded send with 0 "a soli contains 215% gravel, add "with gravel" to group OPI C 4 or plots below "A" One. SW -SC wstl-graded send with clay name. PPI plots on or above "A" One. SP -SM poorly graded send with *III OPI plots below "A" One, SP -SC poorly graded send with clay SIEVE ANALYSIS IaCIIII--IM I *IIVI 110 I IOOA 21Yr M % 4 10 to AO 60 too to I I l,7 so to 0 Z I I W Z r�r" I Dw•Isnn e 60 �O /- IL I W Or r - W4J I 6o = V Db- t.emm V at 0 w dW 110 I s0 p 01 • too 1. ec Ic a ,0 ots 0.10 PARTICLE SIZE IN MILLIMETERS Iw•- -too cc- ver p-jS-es 6E•1 1166.0) Ise H Sc 6 X O 4C 2 r 1- Sc U P in 49 2C J Q. For clossiticotion of fine- rained soils .01 on fine-grained roc Ion o worse• Ire sol se. Equation of A7 -lint `�,� Horizontal of PI -4 to LL -25.5, 3�,/ �a then PI -0.73 (LL -20) / +p�' Equation of"W-line 000, Vertical at LL -16 to PI- 7 / G then P1 -0.9 (LL -8) ZZ / V MH OH Gv� - ML�+OL 10 0014 OO 10 Is 20 30 40 50 60 70 a0 !l,0 100 LIOUID LIMIT (LL) f n P tLLNI'7 city teitirm 110 w -fo✓N1 ' f et a- ., vle- / • r / • S HEET 1 Mary Artmann Residence Residence 254 Rice Creek Blvd '> u�''' Fridley, MN Pro Fridley MN 55432 r�....w J .°� "�," . #7046 11�(qpjr INTRODUCTION This report concerns our observations of the construction at a single family residence in Fridley, Minnesota. The home was built for the Artmann family during the winter of 1969-70. Approximately one year after the home was occupied, some distress was observed in the construction. The builder returned to the site in 1971 or 1972 and made some repairs. Then in 1979 or 1980 the builder again returned and attempted to repair the east foundation wall of the home. Despite the repair attempts, distress has continued and even accelerated in the structure. We were recently requested by Mr. Mary Artmann to observe the construction and provide an opinion concerning identification of the problem and its cause. OBSERVATION On April 15, 1988, and on subsequent dates we visited the project. Our work consisted of a visual observation of the construction, securing certain measurements and evaluations, and obtaining hand auger borings in the soils behind the home. In addition, we took a set of photographs which will be retained in our project file. The house was an "L" shaped tri -level structure with attached two car garage. The property was on the end of a cul-de-sac street and sloped downward toward the east and the existing Rice Creek. The wood frame structure was built on a concrete masonry block foundation system and had a rear walk -out, to accomodate the slope toward this creek. The roof of the home utilized gable construction on the south wing and a modified hip design on the portion of the home behind the garage. Distress in the home consisted of the movement of the rear foundation wall and the south region of the garage. The west half of the garage floor revealed significant distress. In addition, the interior east -west construction between the south and the other wing had distress. A review of the distress was as follows: Mary Artmann Residence Fridley, Minnesota Proj. #7046 OBSERVATION -Cont. May 10, 1988 Page 2 Rear Wall - The masonry block wall extended beneath the basement floor elevation for a rear walk -out for the home. We could not review any construction documents, but assume that the rear wall extended below the floor to minimum frost depth (about 48" below exterior grade). This wall consisted of 8" wide block laid up in a running bond pattern. The block immediately beneath the floor had moved outward an estimated 3/4". Downward movement could not be ascertained from block observations because the units had been replaced at least once. Southwest Garage Corner - The construction consisted of wood frame construction with exterior face brick veneer. The brick were laid up in a common bond pattern and apparently used currogated metal ties. Both the brick and wood rested on a concrete block masonry wall which, we assume, extended to minimum frost depth. The brick construction was no longer in a plumb condition, but instead tilted outward at the soffit line of the overhead garage door. The south frame for this door tilted outward at the bottom, rotating about the lower plate. From our vantage point, it appeared that the top of the lower concrete block wall was moving outward, with some downward movement also occurring. Building Interior - Aside from the region of the junction between the south wing and the two story east -west wing, the remaining portion of the house was in relatively good condition. The west region of the garage floor slab had subsided as much as approximately 5 to 6 inches. The basement of the house had floor distress near the rear exit. In addition, an east -west wall showed that an estimated 3" downward movement of the rear wall of the house had occurred. The main floor dining area revealed downward movement of the east perimeter wall construction. Here, portions of the interior construction had been modified by redecorating over the past few years. Again, it appeared that at least 3" of downward movement of the original construction had occurred. Soil Test Borings - Three soil test borings were put down east of the central region of the house, since this location appeared to be the focus of the settling of the construction. The borings were put down by hand, since access to this location was somewhat difficult. An auger was used in lieu of standard penetration type boring because our main objective was to verify the soil profile at the boring locations. The first and second borings required coring initially, because of the presence of concrete slab construction. In boring #1, which was put down approximately 2' in from the rear door in the vestibule of the basement, we encountered a void of approximately 5" immediately beneath the concrete slab. From limited probing, it appeared that this had occurred from subsidence of the of the interior sand fill materials which had been placed during the foundation wall backfilling activity. The void appeared to taper to nothing further out toward the center of the room, but did increase toward the exterior wall. The soils at this location consisted of approximately nine feet of brown fine sand overlying similar brown fine natural sand. The line of demarcation between the fill and the natural soil was not clear, so the fill thickness could have been slightly less than this. Due to headroom limitations we terminated this boring at approximately 91' below top of slab. Mary Artmann Residence Fridley, Minnesota Project # 7046 OBSERVATIONS - Cont. May 10, 1988 Page 3 Boring #2 was put put down through the concrete patio immediately (2') east of the east foundation wall. Here, the 5" thick concrete slab rested directly on black topsoil material. Old fill material (brown and dark greyish brown sand) extended down to a 5z' depth. We encountered some gravel and what appeared to be small pieces of debris at about 48" depth. This supported our assumption of 48" footing depth along this perimeter wall line, but did not absolutely verify that footing depth. At 51' depth, we encountered black topsoil and peat extending down to approximately 82' depth. The next approximately 8" of soil consisted of a black and grey sand with some peat particles. We then encountered some gravel and then brown fine sand to a boring depth of about 10'. Soil test boring #3 was put down 15' out from the east wall just beyond the patio area. Old fill extended down about 511, at which point the organic soils were encountered. These soils extended to 811, at which point we encountered intermixed soils of clay, sand and silt, with some gravel and some organic. These soils would be considered an old stream deposit or a colluvium soil - a mixture of alluvium and material slope wash. Brown natural sands were encountered at approximately 12' depth and continued to end of boring (approximately 13' depth). A cross-section of the property was prepared, based on. our visual and soil information. The attached sheet shows the various deposits and their relationship to the nearby creek and the structure. The only item which could not be conclusively determined was the precise soil profile directly beneath the footing. The boring did indicate that an excavate -refill program was conducted prior to building construction. The upper region backfill zone of clean sand did appear to be slightly loose. However, the interior sand fill beneath the footings appeared to be very dense. Both the upper region interior and exterior backfill soils appeared to be desiccated. No saturated soils were found in any of the soil test borings. CONCLUSIONS Based on our observations at the site, it is our opinion that portions of the perimeter footing construction in the building have moved as a result of insufficient exterior lateral support. In the construction industry, this is known as the oversize area of excavate -refill soil correction work. For most projects, it is necessary to excavate out beyond the outside edge of footing at least one foot for every foot depth below footing excavated. In organic soils and particularly peat deposits, it is necessary to extend the oversize out two or even three times the vertical cut in order to maintain lateral stability of the foundation construction. It appears that this excavate -refill project had deficient oversize out beyond the east building wall and out beyond the southwest corner of the garage. The distress in the building can primarily be assigned to exterior wall movement. The movement had a significant downward component, but this all relates to insufficient lateral footing and/or wall support. Mary Artmann Residence Fridley, Minnesota Proj. #7046 CONCLUSIONS - Cont. May 10, 1988 Page 4 It is also possible that the original excavate -refill program left some organic soils in place beneath the distressed footing regions. However, considering the extent of apparent excavation which apparently was performed in the building area, it is less likely that this occurred. Sometimes an exterior backfill zone will offer lateral support to a foundation wall which has insufficient oversize support. This is not a long term reliable support method and is not prudent engineering. The poor exterior backfill soils encountered east of the building would not be considered as reliable for lateral support assistance. The owner of the structure related that movement in the construction has apparently accelerated over the last year or so. This does not relate to typical consolidation mechanisms of soils. However, it is more related to the wood and masonry materials of the structure. It is very common for the construction materials to assist one another for a period of time in a distress condition. It is exactly this phenomenon which allows successful temporary ' underpinning and other such activities to take place in a building. However, eventually the materials will fatigue and connections will loosen. The fact that acceleration of distress has been noted is a very important warning that remedial attention is required at this project. Based on our observations and review of investigative work by another firm (Twin City Testing report #4131 88-0336), it is our opinion that a buried buttress system would be the most reasonable method for arresting movement in the foundation construction. Considering the movement and subsequent remodeling which has taken place in the building, it might not be possible to regain all movement which has taken place. However, restoration could be addressed, once movement is arrested. In distress such as the garage area, there are two typical suspects for the floor slab distress: 1) poor soils left in place beneath interior fill materials or 2) the poor general fill. However, considering the apparent extent and relatively compact condition of the deep fill in boring #1, it is our opinion that poor backfilling procedures were responsible for the floor distress. In winter backfilling work, there is often less care and control in the foundation wall backfilling techniques. Based on our observations at boring location #1, we suspect that very little compactive effort was made in the garage region. We observed that a steel beam was installed across the center of the garage beneath the floor concrete placement. It appears that this beam anticipated problems but was simply the wrong approach at averting the difficulty. The garage floor should be removed and soils verified for our conclusion. Then remedial work in the form of surface compaction, beam removal & concrete replacement can commence. Mary Artmann Residence Fridley, MN Proj. #7046 May 10, 1988 Page 5 The extent corrective work required at the structure will be to some degree, dependent upon further conditions encountered during the actual field work. However, it is our opinion that the above described corrective approaches represent the most reasonable and cost efficient forms of achieving a long-lasting remedy to the persistent problems. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC Brian R Dobie, P.E. President BRD/fm d co co CA r O a z -a r a n m I co c m d W O DISTRESS ZONE 1 TCT #3 ARTMANN RESIDENCE rISTRESS A PEC ZONE # 11 TCT #� 1 PEC #2- TCT 2 PEC *3!+� i I1 I CREEK VALLEY RICE CREEK PLAN VIEW OF PROPERTY SCALE _ 1" :20' PEC 7046- .i (7f r O a z M r a n m t w c m INDICATED CROSS - SECTION AT A - A' LINE EAST WALL FINE SAND FILL #1 Aff *2 _ *3 BROWN & DARK BROWN SANDY FILL MATERIAL :'`` ".......................... .. _,..-,.. WITH SOME ORGANIC & SOME PIECES OF GRAVEL y.: - � 4 .Jp_ •N �y �..�'_ .�. ASH s ati �Qy. ��.y'�_ ��� .1W w'- v J�- - _ ORGANIC SWAMP DEPOSITS. COLLUVIUM - MIXTURE OF SILT, CLAY, GRAVEL, AND SAND, WITH SOME ORGANIC MATERIALS NATURAL SAND SOILS, BASED ON DEEP BORINGS WATER LEVEL RICE CREEK SCALE ISO : 10' PEC 7046 February 2, 1989 Mr. Mary Ar 254 Rice Creek vd)5432 Fridley, Minnesota Dear Mr. --wear Wall Underpinning On the attached sketch you will find the locations of the underpinning construction for the rear wall of the structure. We had anticipated that a maximum of seven buttresses would be required for the rear wall. During the construction work, it was observed that organic soils continued down the north wall line from the northeast corner of the building. Consequently, these organic soils were removed and a buttress installed, extending toward the north. All buttresses were extended down to a natural deposit of sand and gravel materials with some small boulders. This formation is referred to as the Des Moine Lobe of the Late Wisconsin Glaciation. Based on our observations during the underpinning work, it is our opinion the rear portion of the structure which had been in distress has now received proper foundation support. Respectfully, Professional Engineer' g Consultants, Inc. Brian R. Dobie P. E. President , BP.D/fm cc: City of Fridley Attn: Mr. Darrel Clark PROJECT CONSULTATION FAILURE FORENSIC ENGINEERING 1959 SLOAN PLACE • ST. PAUL, MN 55117 612-776-8802 BUTTRESS LOCATIONS ARTMANN RESIDENCE 254 RICE CREEK BLOND FRIDLEY, MN INIAL ENGINEffdNG CONSUM NIS, INC. 1959 SLOAN PLACE. - ST. PAUL. MN 53117.612.776-8802 EAR SCALE - 1"=10' o SUBJECT PE City of Fridley 19 7 6 5 AT THE TOP OF THE TWINS BUILDING PERMIT r RECEIP . COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIV. r i PROTECTIVE INSPECTION SEC. 1 i i CITY HALL FRIDLEY 55432 NUMBER REV. DATE PAGE OF APPROVED BY , L 612-571-3450 910-F15 11/30/88 JOB ADDRESS 254 Rice Creek Blvd N.E. 1 LEGAL LOT NO. BLOCK TRACT OR ADDITION SEE ATTACHED DESCR. $ 4 Rice Creek Plaza North Addition SHEET 2 PROPERTY OWNER MAIL ADDRESS ZIP PHONE Mary Artman 254 Rice Creek Blvd N4 .�E„ 3 CONTRACTOR ' y MAIL ADDRESS ZIP PHONE LICENSE NO. Northern Circle Systems LTD 1155 Highway #8, Moundsview, MN 55112 633-4541 4 ARCHITECT OR DESIGNER MAIL ADDRESS ZIP PHONE LICENSE NO. 5 ENGINEER MAIL ADDRESS ZIP PHONE LICENSE NO. 6 USE OF BUILDING Residential 7 CLASS OF WORK ❑ NEW ❑ ADDITION ❑ ALTERATION J7 REPAIR ❑ MOVE ❑ REMOVE 8 DESCRIBE WORK Repair Foundation See Professional Engineering Consultants Inca reports dated May 10, 1888 and Nov .r e . 9 CHANGE OF USE FROM TO STIPULATIONS Repairs to be completed per Professional Engineering Consultants Inca specifications-, SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, HEATING, TYPE OF CONST. OCCUPANCY GROUP OCCUPANCY LOAD VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING. THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION ZONING SQ. FT. CU. FT. AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 60 DAYS, OR IF CONSTRUCTION OR WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED FOR A PERIOD OF 120 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COMMENCED. NO. DWLG. UNITS OFFSTREET PARKING I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION I ISTALLS GARAGES AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS VALUATION SURTAX AND,ORDINANCES GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED $25 000 $12,50 WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT PRESUME TO GIVE AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE PERMIT FEE SAC CHARGE PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REGULATING CON- $ STRUCTION OR THE PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION. PLAN CHECK FEE TOTAL FEE $264.50 SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR OR AUTHORIZED AGENT (DATEI WHEN PROPERL VALIDATED THIS IS YOUR PERMIT 0/ - BLDG )NSP r)ATE SIGNATURE OF OWNER 0F OWNER BUILDER) (DATE) o NEW I ] City of Fridley Effective 5/1/88 ADDN I ] R-1 AND R-2 ALTER 411 Building Permit Application Address: Attach to this application, a Certificate of Survey of the lot, with the proposoed construction drawn on it to scale. LIVING AREA! Length Width Height Sq. Ft. CURAGE AREA: Length Width Height Sq. Ft. DECK AREA: Length Width Hgt/Ground Sq. Ft. arm:. FG& AJ0PJ- w�4paln ODrner Lot I ] Inside Lot I ] Ft. Yd Setback Type of Construction: CU4> Approx. Completion Date: Side Yard Setbacks Estimated Cost: $ 05600 40 Proposed Driveway Wises If New Opening Is Desired: 5, Width + 6' DATE: APPLICAU: Permit Flee $_�• State Surcharge $ (a .5O SAC Charge 5 Driveway Escrow 5 Park Flee 5 Sewer Main Charge 5 TOTAL $ STIPULLATIONS: 1st. 14.00 Z . so CITY USE ONLY Alt. A Alt. B See Back Page Tel. # Flee Schedule on Reverse Side $.50/51,000 Valuation $550 per SAC Unit Alt. 'A° or Alt. '!B" Above Fee Determined by Engineering Agreement Necessary I ] Not Neoessary [ ] Z.S,C GO -- ZSZ.o a H November 17, 1988 City of Fridley Attn: Mr. Darrel Clark, Bldg. Inspector 6431 University Ave NE Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Subj: Mary Artmann Resident 254 Rice Creek Blvd Fridley, Mn Dear Mr. Clark: This letter is in reference to the problems with the foundation construction at the Artmann Residence. Our firm had been retained previously this summer to investigate the problems with the foundation construction at the residence. The attached report is for your use and for your records. Essentially, we have concluded that the excavation oversize for the original excavate -refill. soil program for the building was deficient in lateral extent along the rear foundation wall line. The results of downward and outward movement of the rear foundation construction have been dramatic, particularly in the central region of the home. The resulting distortion in the frame construction is causing many other problems in the building at the present time - primarily floors out of level and the entire construction pulling toward the rear of the house. We have also included a copy of a previous investigation report by Twin City Testing, wherein several failure theories were presented and several repair possibilities noted. Based on our additional work, we have concluded that the rear wall construction definitely does need direct underpinning and that a mud jacking or soil solitification approach would not be appropriate in this instance. We have been retained by Mr. Artmann to supervise the restoration of the foundation construction. Mr. Artmann has contracted with Northern Circle Systems, Ltd., to perform underpinning work along the rear foundation wall of the structure. The underpinning will be in the form of sub -grade buttresses which extend from beneath the existing ground surface down to competent soils. The attached sketch shows a typical buttress as is presently contemplated. Once we open up one location and observe the existing footing construction, we can determine the adequacy of that existing foundation construction in terms of actual size of buttress, required extent of lateral underpinning, and determination of clear spacing between individual buttress edges for support of the rear foundation wall construction. It is our intention to work closely with your office on this serious foundation problem. PROJECT CONSULTATION FAILURE FORENSIC ENGINEERING 1959 SLOAN PLACE • ST. PAUL, MN 55117 612-776-8802 November 17, 1988 City of Fridley Page Two At the conclusion of the underpinning activity, we will provide your office and the property owner with a full report of underpinning, including location of underpinning construction and as -built foundation detail information. We look forward to working with you on this project. Respectfully, Professional Engineering Consultants, Inc. Brian R.bie, P.E. President BRD/fm PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC. 1959 SLOAN RACE - ST PAUL, MN 55117.612.776-8802 ARTMANN RES. TOP VIEW OF REAR WALL: TYPICAL BUTTRESS' 3000 psi CONCRETE (NO FORMS) 24" TWO MATS OF REIN. STEEL * 4 BARS AT 18" o.c. each m 8 - 41 4 cross ties 5' To 7' A - As 8' NO PERSON ALLOWED IN ANY COMPLETED BUTTRESS EXCAVATION (EXTREMELY DANGEROUS). EXCAVATIONS MUST NOT BE LEFT UNATTENDED OR OPEN OVER NIGHT. NO SCALE January 10, 1990 Northern Circle Systems, Ltd. Attn: Mr. Steve Dahlke 1155 Old Highway 8 St. Paul, Minnesota 55112 Subj: Artmann resi Fridley, Min Work Order # Dear Mr. Dahlke: , 254 Rice Creek Blvd. During the period ofober 25, present at the Mary ArResin of our, work at the site was construction activi ties. qyyOctober,30, 1989, our firm was ff Fridley, Minnesota. The purpose the soil conditions and direct your Previous underpinning work was performed by your firm in the Winter of 1988-89. In that work activity, a system of eight buttresses was placed beneath the rear foundation wall construction of the home. That work was performed as a recommended correction for severe distress occurring along the rear foundation wall construction and accompanying distress in the living quarters in the dwelling. Refer to our previous report to Mr.. Artmann of May 10, 1988 (W.O. #7046) and to a letter to your firm dated January 31, 1989 (W.O. #7128) for further background information on the foundation problems. Your previous work addressed the rear foundation wall and corrected conditions in that area. Since that time, Mr. Artmann has related that the southwest corner of his garage, which had shown evidence of serious distress, was apparently moving farther and causing additional cracking in this vicinity of the home. Furthermore, cracking and other movement was noted in the northwest corner of the garage. At your direction, our firm returned to the project and put down several additional hand auger borings next to the perimeter construction of the home. Please refer to the attached plan view of the property to note where additional borings were placed. Borings #PEC -4 through #PEC -9 were placed at the locations * shown on the attached sketch. These supplemental. borings numbers 4 and 5 and numbers 8 and 9 revealed reasonably stable soil conditions in the backfill zone for the building. However, borings numbers 6 and 7 both indicated approximately 11' of fill material overlying 2' to 3' of black topsoil and peat material. Beneath the peat, we encountered approximately 1/2' thickness of fat gray clay and then a dense zone of brown natural sand and large gravel beneath. PROJECT CONSULTATION FAILURE FORENSIC ENGINEERING 203 LITTLE CANADA ROAO, SUITE 280 • ST. PAUL, IVIN 55117 612-490-9266 Fax 612-490-9265 January 10, 1990 Northern Circle Systems, Ltd. Page Two Based on the soils information, and understanding that consolidation of peat organic soils can continue indefinitely, Mr. Artmann directed your company to install additional buttresses under our direction. We reviewed the construction and recommended that three additional buttresses be placed beneath the two front corners of the garage portion of the home. These buttresses are. identified on the attached sheet number 2. Both front corners of the garage were to receive a buttress. In addition, the foundation construction farther to the east on the south side of the garage was to receive a buttress, considering the configuration of the construction in this area and the extent of peat materials. Furthermore, the movement and damage in the southwest corner necessitated the additional buttress. Under our direct supervision, the three buttresses were installed at the property. Whereas the previous buttresses at the site were approximately 2' wide, these three additional buttresses were each approximately 4' in width beneath the footing construction. In addition, these three buttress' had a full extent beneath the footing, as opposed to a haunch configuration extending beneath the construction. This modification was made to direct all foundation loadings in an axial direction down to the bearing soils. In all three buttress locations, the bottom bearing soils consisted of brown natural sand with gravel and large cobbles. This was found to be very dense, as related to excavation resistance. Once again, we found that the original excavate -refill program for the foundation of the original home was deficient in the extent of oversize provided for the extent of fill material. located beneath the footing construction. In fact, the peat soils in both front garage corners did extend to approximately the interior edge of footing. All such organic soils were removed from the buttress area for concrete placement. Based on our observations and additional investigative work, it is our opinion that the foundation construction for the entire home has been sufficiently underpinned to provide a stable foundation system forthe structure. Therefore, the cracks which have become evident in the foundation wall system can now be tuck -pointed and the garage front brick work can be replaced. The brick construction on. the front of the home can likewise be tuck -pointed at this time. Respectfully, Professional Engineering Consultants, Inc. Brian k. Dobie, P.E. BRD/fm DISTRESS ZONE PEC #6� PEC #41 }PEC #5 DISTRESS ZONE TCT #3 P C #T PEC #8 ARTMANN RESIDENCE ` PEC #8 A DISTRESS F PEC ZONE # 1 � TCT# 1 PEC #2� - -TCT #2 PEC #3 i CREEK VALLEY 1 RICE CREEK PLAN VIEW OF PROPERTY SCALE _ V 20' SKETCH #1 BUTTRESS LOCATIONS ARTMANN RESIDENCE 254 RICE CREEK BLVD FRIDLEY, MN .EAR SCALE - 1" =10' Na I M.NG C umw"'r M SKETCH #2 .V CITY OF FRIDLEY Effective Date May 1, 1988 APPLICATION FOR POWER PLANTS AND HEATING, COOLING, VENTILATION, REFRIGERATION AND AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEMS AND DEVICES RATE SCHEDULE RESIDENTIAL RATE TOTAL Furnace Shell'and Duct Work, 1p!� Burner (Also replacement furnace) $ 20.00 $ Gas Piping $ 10.00 S (piping needed with new furnace) Gas Range S 1.0.00 S Gas Dryer $ 10.00 S * Air Conditioning (all sizes) $ 10.00 S All Others/Repairs and Alterations It of Value of Appliance or Work $ COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL 10 of Value of Appliance or Work State Surcharge TOTAL FEE Reinspection Fee ($15.00) Rough Insp. Date CCr• Final Insp. Date Approval for Permit MINIMUM FEE FOR ANY HEATING PERMIT IS $15.00 PLUS $.50 STATE SUACHARGE *Air Conditioners can not be placed in side yard without written permission from adjoining neighbor. $ $ .50 $ S Job Address €� T �P r 40a / '/,0 Department of Buildings, 6431 University Ave. N.E., Fridley, NN 55432 City of Fridley Tel. #571-3450 The undersigned hereby makes application for a permit for the work herein specified agreeing to do all work in strict accordance with the City Codes and rulings of the Department of Buildings, and hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this application are true and correct. � Fridley, Minn. 1 ® , 19 /{ ' OWNER f'y 1 +` A 7 4 y 1� Ar- f " i KIND OF BUILDING Owl -If USED AS TO BE COMPLETED ABOUT T 1 0 ESTIMATED COST OLD - NEW BUILDING PERMIT NO. PERMIT NO. DESCRIPTION OF FURNACE/BURNER HEATING or POWER PLANTS, Steam, Hot Water Yarm Air ------------ Trade Name AA Size No. 1 00 ' Capacity /. Sq. Pt. EDR BTU HP Total Connected Load 3 7 J Kind of Fuel BURNER - Trade Name Size No. Capacity Sq. Ft. EDR BTU HP Company Signed By i I Tel. No. Fill out back side for stack verification on replacement furnaces CHIM14EY AND STACK VERIFICATION The undersigned hereby verifies that the existing chimney or stack; 1. 'Has .been. careful ly Yes (,!J(' -No ( ) .examined `free 2. Is from rust or deterioration -Yes No ( ) 3. Has no foreign objects lodged within Yes No ( ) 4. Is securely supported Yes No ( ) 5. Meets all current Code requirements for size and total BTU connected Yes ( No 6. Has Total heating BTU's of All other BTU's TOTAL Rema rk s /0v VK Yo W q0 01 f(6 , / 0 �-- 5 d le -- Company _ Signed By Date 40 et tZQ;' iii pt. 1vaQ; l l a es one Flodr �llkirr r"`14�aa + ttaJetapffi�int;vk"'baarira�kme ad►r�. �fMiSB4 as a+t4}sak3, to Atalx :ct:pnaa" o4 Paas `.I/c#!O a@aoa zL tO*1 ! 1't 1 , " .k r sti R .P1.. K JY•. ,i7t��,,' -¢ ti w4,1y ' r�lsre 4 C ut IWa�I' Idle: SRiaFi �Jmbg loaf Fl/�or` kand $pay pndl w' . - S� ,d j "_'< 7 F L� rs..l P P '[Ar •tkt£ 'n � a��♦Sy 1p a. �'��rL r Qom) �1� —1 � O*n". Aai�At'Pa.' .d.req ' -. �. Pam* HO. MM Of Was 1@1 06e. eB erOelt !W. Pl ��bfsrs � , I F -... Fier �.-.6�.t^= ,h�. �{'�tT d�-��,�4�.i' � a5 '" [•"SV 3 G % . a . yes , ti, C"f Atu:.E C Ili`rt°atlf'ie In6teaa`t¢mn x ' d•r`det wail • ... - F. s ,i TI �5 3< s U 90q�r� 35%x` ?eve @' rerytizfF@i .sE D.Fi: iv,A vr ® Jape. Fl:j � s j R�r :cr► sW�r3th ,i ri5� raF' He $ht 0 Fd sen -i I ergttl �r"sdt 4i hw uSi N sr =+i3 S2.A i• F$ty�a@t ` ���sr�r•s[f6Y `1 '� �I°40t�Wr5l1'�. 1rIFUr'kf�I.�e O�!@ .Op'!G w,rea ?S.Ip. Of IMM'- bf t19M 1 PP 4r01Sl1 00, � � •, k; I 511y �" S i� yt� e, A ,4.®l7 tlOp,�.,�,x.��' � ,yY.� �'< .✓ � 4 � e Irn6ltrauap i, r 9 v i�., n .i, a t �:_' ... z .K ;, ctlG".r ;`: rk'. •�x i �2 1, �' ,� G !' JEW a et tZQ;' iii pt. 1vaQ; l l a es one Flodr �llkirr r"`14�aa + ttaJetapffi�int;vk"'baarira�kme ad►r�. �fMiSB4 as a+t4}sak3, to Atalx :ct:pnaa" o4 Paas `.I/c#!O a@aoa zL — Cod.. feat - � ��bfsrs � , I Fier gi r l`aq s �R ►f iiak Krtf FRi iit a$.'ft;' .D.R. ®r w. iws, `Q1aA 1.ou46r'*Iva CITY OF FRIDLEVISPECTION 6431 University Ave NE Fridley, MN 55432 (763) 572.3604 RATE SCHEDULE DIViSION APPLICATION FOR POWER PLANTS AND HEATING, COOLING, VENTILATION, REFRIGERATION AND AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEMS AND DEVICES Residential Furnace Shell and Duct Work, Burner - Also Replacement Furnace (Side Vent- Fill Out Back) Gas Piping (Needed with new furnace, but not replacement) Gas Range Gas Dryer *Air Conditioning - All Sizes All Others/Repairs & Alterations (LIST ON BACK) 1% of Value of Appliance or Work Commercial/Industrial 1.25% of Value of Appliance or Work Effective On January 1, 2002 JOB ADDRESS I Cf, Cref� OWNER YY%iul� A Rate TOTAL � � � BUILDING USED AS ICJ $ 30.00 $ ESTIMATED COST � � ° PERMIT NO. r $ 10.00 $ DESCRIPTION OF FURNACE AND OR BURNER $ 10.00 $ No. of Heating Units . Circle One (Steam) (Hot Water (Warm Air) $ 10.00 $ Trade Name Size No. BTU HP EDR� $ 25.00 $_rZ Fuel Total Connected Load Burner Trade Name Size No. $ BTU HP EDR State Surcharge TOTAL FEE MINIMUM FEE FOR ANY HEATING/COOLING/VENTILATION REFRIGERATION/AIR CONDITIONING PERMIT IS $25.00 PLUS THE $.50 STATE SURCHARGE REINSPECTION FEE $47.00/Hr *Air Conditioners can not be placed in a side yard without written permission from adjoining property owner. $ The undersigned hereby makes application for a permit for the work herein specified agreeing to do all work in strict accordance with the City Codes an $ .50 rulings of the Building Division, and hereby declares that all the facts and representations stated in this application are true and correct. DATE 'I I lda'?- HEATING CO DEPENDABLE INDOOR AIR QUALITY, ING. 2619 COON RAPIDS BOULEVARD Signed �/2 COON RAIDS, M 55, $ � # .,. —291 -7 L-1 Final Date THE BELOW MUST BE FILLED IN WHEN REPLACING FUEL BURNING APPLIANCES OR THE APPLICATION WILL BE RETURNED COMMON VFNT., VFNT CONNECTOR AND COMBUSTION AIR VFRIFICATION When ra In_acine an existing furance, the undersigned hereby verifies that the venting has been examined and is free from rust, deterioration, obstructions, and is securely supported and firestopped where required. Yes () No ( ) The venting system is plastic/PVC and meets all current codes and manufacturer specifications including sizing, length, number of elbows and termination. Yes () No ( ) The undersigned also verifies that the replacement unit is a listed assembly and meets the current codes and manufacturer's specifications. This does include AGA-GAMA Category I Central Furnace Venting Tables for fan assisted and natural draft appliances. Yes( ) No( ) The existing combustion air is sized and installed to meet the current codes and manufacturer's specifications. Yes () No ( ) When required to install a new combustion awL it will be sized and installed to meet the current codes and manufacturer's specifications. Yes( ) No( ) When installing a new venting saystem, the undersigned hereby verifies that it is a listed assembly and meets the current codes and manufacturer's specifications. This does include AGA-GAMA Category I Central Furnace Venting Tables for fan assisted and natural draft appliances. Yes () No ( ) Is the common vent and vent connectors sized and installed correctly after an appliance has been removed from the common vent and vented separately as per current codes. Yes( )No( ) Appliance #1 Type BTU Input Fan Assisted or Nat Appliance #2 Type BTU Input Fan Assisted or Nat Appliance #3 Type BTU Input Fan Assisted or Nat Total Appliances Total Btu Input Common Vent Type Vent Height Diameter inches Appliance #1 Vent Connector Height ft Length ft Diameter in Type Appliance #2 Vent Connector Height ft Length ft Diameter in Type Appliance #3 Vent Connector Height ft Length ft Diameter in Type HEATING CO: Signed By: Date : PLUMBING RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION City of Fridley Nu ber e Q Date Received NOTE: IF PROPERTY IS NOT OWNERIOCCUPIED- A LICENSED CONTRACTOR MUST OBTAIN THE PERMIT. DATE —IJ 4 YOUR -MAIL ADDR6iSS SITE ADDRESS THE APPLICANT IS: (CIRCLE ONE) OWNER NAME ,11 PROPERTY OWNER/ ADDRESS � e TENANT CITY P2 /alSTATE ZIP PHONE #�'ar�'w NAME LICENSE # ADDRESS fle CONTRACTOR CITYZ::3144j /&1'` ,'' STATE /I A) ZIP PHONE # ? g!!2 0 FAX# PERMIT TYPE SINGLE FAMILY TWO FAMILY TOWNHOUSE TYPE OF WORK ❑ NEW X REPLACEMENT DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF WORK FEES ARE BASED ON $10.00 PER FIXTURE, EXCEPT WHERE NOTED FIXTURES: (INDICATE TOTAL NUMBER OF EACH) BATH SINKILAV FLOOR DRAINS SHOWER WATER PIPING BATHTUB GAS PIPING (Need City License) SWIMMING POOL WATER SOFTENER ($35) CLOTHES WASHER KITCHEN SINK WATER CLOSET BACKFLOW PREY. ($15) DISHWASHER LAUNDRY TRAY WATER HTR ($35) FOR IRRIGATION WATER METER OTHER Permit Fee $� MINIMUM: $15.00 -or 5% of cost of the improvement -whichever is Plan Review $ greater on work less than $300 Surcharge $ .50 TOTAL DUE $ Make checks payable to: City of Fridley THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT — NOT VALID UNTIL PROCESSED I hereby apply for a plumbing permit and I acknowledge that the information above is complete and accurate; that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Fridley and with the Minnesota Construction Codes; that I understand this is not a permit but only an application for a permit and work is not to start without a permit; that work will be In al�G�� a approved plan in the case of all work which requires review and approval o an NAME OF APPLICANT / DATE16 Please type or rint SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT fz : s aFP � _' Wiz, -� �..��'•- � .spy � -�. � ��, a° ,�, �' � CITY OF FRIDLEY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 6431 UNIVESITY AVENUE NE, FRIDLEY, MN 55432 (763)572-3604 Building BUILDING Permit No.: ° XAo,- 9 a Inspections RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION Received By. 763-572-36 CITY OF FRIDLEY c • Date Re°d. DATE YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS v..ec��6Gon�f�e.�,^q ^t(� �go�^oo, C-6ryN SITE ADDRESS '' s -etc..E C e k( -K- -ELV.6 a f e- (b L N r" IQ THIS APPLICANT IS: ❑ QC-NTRACTOR PROPERTY OWNER/ AOWNER NAME: g v TENANT ADDRESS: LS L( 13 1-Vb CITY r-) 0 LA- STATEk'A✓ZIP S-Sf/ 3 Z. PHONE: _(al L - S5(a�l 11 CONTRACTOR NAME: � -e STATE LICENSE # -2--0 S LW -1 --7 EXP DATE o 3 ) O SUBMIT A COPY OF YOUR STATE LICENSE ADDRESS: e 1u .d P I A iC SJ . N+� CITY /A r-��t v� .A STATFr-A/ZIP 9S•3°L4 WITH APPLICATION PHONE l -?-Z-7 - d 9 o t.l FAX 1 b3 - 3 23 - l b b b PROPERTY TYPE GLE FAMILY/NEW CONSTRUCTION SIZE ❑ TWO FAMILY/NEW CONSTRUCTION STORIES PERMIT TYPE ❑ ADDITION ❑ GARAGE/SHED ❑ WINDOWS l BMEMENT FINISH ❑ ROOF ❑ DRAIN TILE ❑ DECK ❑ SIDING ❑ OTHER ❑ SWIMMING POOL TYPE OF WORK: ❑ NEw ❑ AD ION ❑ MAINTENANCEIREPAIR RIMMODELING DESCRIBE WORK BEING DONE: -?--t P 6!+ ; rmnU)-;� A 6o PL.(- 1^ -AUX, SIZE OF IMPROVEMENT -3 `I ' LENGTH 'z �-' �/ WIDTH vAr, Jr s HEIGHT Ft. ROOFING ❑ HOUSE ONLY NUMBER OF SQUARES ❑ HOUSE & GARAGE BASEMENT REMODELING SUBMIT: GARAGES ❑ ATTACHED GARAGE 1. Existing Floor Plan PROPOSED SIZE: ❑ DETACHED GARAGE 2• 3. Proposed floor plan List of structural members to be used PROPOSED HEIGHT: SIDING FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING DECKS, ❑ Vinyl ❑Soffit ADDITIONS. & PORCHES SUBMIT: ❑ Aluminum ❑ Trim 1. Site Plan/Survey showing the existing structures ❑ Other ❑ Fascia and proposed project. WINDOWS 2. Two sets of construction plans IN EXISTING OPENINGS ❑Yes ❑No LOCATION OF WINDOWS 3. Energy Calculations OR FOR NEW OPENINGS -DESCRIBE SIZE OF OPENING CHANGES & TYPE OF WINDOW TO BE INSTALLED NUMBER OF WINDOWS ALL FEES ARE BASED ON VALUATION, INCLUDING THE COST OF LABOR AND MATERIALS: (USING THE 1997 U.B.0 FEE SCHEDULE) TOTAL JOB VALUATION $_ / .�8 7 s• i- OCCUPANCY TYPE Permit Fee Plan Review Fire Surcharge Surcharge License Surcharge SAC Charge Curb Cut Escrow Erosion Control Park Fee Sewer Main Charge Total Due See Back Page for Fee Schedule 65% of Building Permit Fee .001 times the total job valuation .0005 x Permit Valuation Minimum $.50 $5.00 (State Licensed Residential Contractors) $1550 per SAC Unit (Plans to MWCC for determination) —ft +6ft= ftx$21=$ $450 Conservation Plan Review Fee Determined by Engineering Agreement necessary ( ) Non Necessary ( ) Make checks savable to: Citv of Fridlev Attach THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT -NOT VALID UNTIL PROCESSED I hereby apply for a building permit and I acknowledge that the information above is complete and accurate; that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Fridley and with the Minnesota Construction Codes; that I understand this is not a permit but only an application for a permit and work is not to start without a permit; that the work will be in accordance with the approved plan in the case of all work which requires r e and approval of plans. SIGNATURE OF APPLIC PRINT NAME l' f/�/i��:. ��J/✓ ✓L l s DATES -y 2 Z Z d C9 Building PLUMBING Permit No.: - Received By: Inspections RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION 763-572-3604 CITY OF FRIDLEY Date Rec'd: I� DATE r YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS SITE ADDRESS Zg c G �f l z W -VD _ THIS APPLICANT IS: ❑ OWNER 606NTMCTOR PROPERTY NAME: ADDRESS: CITY STATE ZIP OWNER/ TENANT PHONE: CONTRACTOR NAME: ��?' firms f'���''e"�a L STATE LICENSE �#- 15g-// PPI -1 EXP DATE l7- 'Gs i ,,��AA '7r l �i(o "� �°` STATdW-)ZTP TI SUBMIT A COPY OF YOUR STATE ADDRESS: L..) CITY LICENSE WrFH PHONE � �?`�fzi� FAX � S' `Z APPLICATION PERTYPE MIT GLE FAMILY 0 TWO FAMILY ❑ TOWNHOUSE D NEW PLACEMENT TYPE OF WORK: DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF WORK �G°'� �'"'e� P�%1j ='� ✓ e�`7� PER MS 1613.665 the permit fee is a minimum of $15.00 or 5% of the total cost up to $500.00, whichever is greater, for the improvement, installation or replacement of a residential fixture, excluding the fixtures. (This should reflect only the cost of labor ) Labor cost under $300 = $15.00. Labor cost between $300 to $500 = cost of labor x.05 = FOR PROJECTS WHERE LABOR EXCEEDS $500, FEES ARE BASED ON $10.00 PER FIXTURE, EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. FIXTURES: (INDICATE TOTAL IER OF EACH BELOW) — BATH SWKILAV FLOOR DRAINS L SHOWER WATER PIPING _ BATHTUB GAS PIPING (N=CmuCEAA _ SWIMMING POOL —WATER SOFTNER ($35) _ _ WASHER SINK WATER CLOSET _BACKFLOW PREV. ($15) _CLOTHES _KITCHEN DISHWASHER LAUNDRY TRAY _WATER HEATER ($35) FOR IRRIGATION _ WATER METER —OTHER PermitFee$ do .yc, Number of fixtures @ $10.00 x $10.00 = $ Surcharge .50 Number of fixtures @ $15.00 x $15.00 = $ �j�� TOTAL DUE $ �/ V �) Number of fixtures @ $35.00 x $35.00 = $ —l-- State Surcharge = $ .50 Total = $ THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT -NOT VALID UNTIL PROCESSED I hereby apply for a building permit and I acknowledge that the information above is complete and accurate; that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Fridley and with the Minnesota Construction Codes; that I understand this is not a permit but only an application for a pe . and work is not to start without a permit; that the work will be in accordance with the approved plan in the case of all work which equ' es review and approval of plans. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT PRINT NAME�Ae � ! ° �+�� DATE 6_(_06 City of Fridley Building Inspections Department 6431 University Avenue NE, Fridley, MN 55432 763-572-3604 FAX: 763-502-4977 �� Permit No.:�� �' v BuildingCAL Received By: inspections 1ESMENT IAL APPLICATION /Ou 763-572-3604 CITY OF �L]E Date R�'d: I1ATE e YOU ?It* E-�MAi34 RESS SI'M ADDRESS `! THIS APPLICANT 15: 0 OWNER CiQR OWNEW TENANT S'UBMI'T' A COPY OF YOUR STATE LICENSE WITH APPLICATION PHONE TXPE - INOLE FAMILY 17 TWO FAMILY 17 TOWNHOUSE PERMIT p W 13 REItACOAENT ;;, L T," EMODEL TypE o)r WORK. Drr,T4 BD DFSCFJMON OF WORK. 'I) PER 1 66S 5 the pemlit fee is A minimam of S'5.00 or 5% of We tt►tal e4st ag to �� should refted OnJY the rod of labor) improvement, installation or replacement of a residential fixture, exciudinS the fttm- I Labor cost under $300 - $15.04. Labor cost between $300 to $500 - cost Of labor _ x . 5 , IAEOR EXCEEDS SM I= ARE BASED ON SI0.00 PER Ft}CI'URE, E3LCi�'7 w1IER>z NOTED. FIKI'URBS: (II�ICATB TOTAL POR PROjWM NUMBER O MODEL: . SWYATti gquipmeniTnatalled Ro; - --- MODEL: _ SMMTU A/C SZ5.00 MODW, GAS RANGE0OVEN $10.00 Fl11PLACE (GAS)515.00 NEW GAS ORiLL SIO. ,AIR TO AIR EXCHANGEM $15 FOtEt Cn (WOOD) $3S.00 GAS VNrr trM 510.00 �1' M MACE $35.00 JPOOL HEATER $35.00 BOUM 535.00 =agWip"y UNER $10.00 CLAS DRYER $111.00 VFNTQ.ATOR 515.0 QAS PIPING $10.00 DUCT WORK $I (too Number of fttWW @ $10.00 x $10.00 - $^ - Permit Fee _ $ Ca •.e„ Number of blur" @ $15.00 _ x $15.00 = $_ surcharge Number of Mum Q $23.00 , x $25.00 = $� TOTAL DUE 5 • % Number of fixture& @ $35.00 x $35.00 = S State Surchame, $..,,�. -50 Total ® $- ngs Is AN AI'PI,CATIOTI FOR A PERM]T440T VALID UNTIL PROCESSBO will I hereby apply for a building permit and I acknowledge that the informatlan above as complete Codes-, did I underoand and accurate. that the wworkbi in s conformance with the ordinsncss a codes of the C not and with the without permit;OWCO t t woMcdoworkwill be in wish the not a permit but only an appllcati l� Val of lana. approved plan in the case of work which uires review and appm plans, SIGNATURE OF APPWUCANt City of Fridley Building Inspections Dep8rtlneOt 55432 6431 University Avenue NE, Frridley, MN 763-572-3604 FAX: 763-502-4977 trd WU60:80 900E LO 'unr L8ZTTL%%: "ON XU.J Falp1ij jo hlTo: WMW PLUMBING RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION City of Fridley Pe it umber Date Received I0tA'e6 NOTE: !E PROPERTY IS NOT OWNER/OCCUPIED- A LICENSED CONTRACTOR MUST OBTAIN THE PERMIT. 6 ` `® DATE YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS SITE ADDRESS ®Z,�"'`� C° THE APPLICANT IS: (CIRCLE ONE) OWNER C NTRACT NAME PROPERTY OWNER/ ADDRESSce �� TENANT CITY �i2,L0/ STATE,/2W ZIP r PHONE #®� }C NAME LICENSE #4=,9 ADDRESS c4e CONTRACTOR CITY STATE 0 ZIP _��33 PHONE # FAX# PERMIT TYPE _SINGLE FAMILY TWO FAMILY TOWNHOUSE TYPE OF WORK ❑ NEW P REPLACEMENT DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF WORK FEES ARE BASED ON $10.00 PER FIXTURE, EXCEPT WHERE NOTED FIXTURES: (INDICATE TOTAL NUMBER OF EACH) BATH SINK/LAV FLOOR DRAINS SHOWER WATER PIPING BATHTUB GAS PIPING (Need City license) SWIMMING POOL WATER SOFTENER ($35) CLOTHES WASHER KITCHEN SINK WATER CLOSET BACKFLOW PREY. ($15) DISHWASHER LAUNDRY TRAY WATER HTR ($3 FOR IRRIGATION WATER METER OTHER Permit Fee $ ,,5�- CJ ;� MINIMUM: $15.00 or 5% of cost of the Improvement -whichever is Plan Review $ greater on work less than $300 Surcharge $ .50 TOTAL DUE $ �s $" Make checks payable to: City of Fridley THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT — NOT VALID UNTIL PROCESSED I hereby apply for a plumbing permit and I acknowledge that the information above is complete and accurate; that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Fridley and with the Minnesota Construction Codes; that I understand this is not a permit but only an application for a permit and work Is not to start without a permit; that work will be in a2Trdance with the approved plan in the case of all work which requires review and approval o s NAME OF APPLICANT DATE lease a or p t SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT ..'{{ i ka ` T E1Ri B Ia CI? Irk I wy �I;+�i��p Tr i m Y,s„ 3 .,, !. CITY OF FKIDLEY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 6431 UNIVESITY AVENUE NE, FRIDLEY, MN 55432 (763)572-3604 Building BUILDING Permit No.:-0o51g Inspections RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION Received By: 763-572-3604 CITY OF FRIDLEY Dateff . APR 18 200 - ATE y 1 a O T YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS 1'0 d i s tv e !d c r L &F -b- C O o) s1TE ADDRESS -2,54 Rim Creek g l u d. :HIS APPLICANT IS: ❑ OWNER )CONTRACTOR -PROPERTY OWNER/ NAME: TENANT ADDRESS:_ 9,5'1 IS_ i C.Q. C r a y CITY f r l d 1.c t1 STATEP"�IP '5 PHONE: -IL it ca 0 ;l " / g i 0 CONTRACTOR NAME:_ The Home Depot A.H.S. Inc. Sod t a Fldt P JDAI S SUBMIT A COPY OF STATE LIC 3200 Cobb Galleria Pkwy. l 4 6194/ 3115 - L b k7 YOUR STATE LICENSE ADDRESS: Atlanta, GA 30339 CITY STATE ZIP WITH APPLICATION PHONE 763-542-8826 o License #20268257 .DRIES PROPERTY TYPE Two FA PERMIT TYPE QADDITION ❑ GARAGE/SHED ❑ WINDOWS ❑ BASEMENT FINISH ❑ ROOF ❑ DRAIN TILE ❑ DECK 'SIDING ❑ OTHER ❑ SWIIvIlvIDQG POOL TYPE OF WORK: ❑ NEW ❑ ADDITION ❑ MAINTENANCE/REPAIR `RREA QDE&WG i'C DESCRIBE WORK BEING DONE: R t,, t d; h d, Rt m p UQ l 0 t X I 1 S41 n d. Q.L p t b Lt, n Q'l t o d o 81`S 0 >IZE OF IMPROVEMENT LENGTH WIDTH HEIGHT Sq. Ft ZOOFING ❑ HOUSE ONLY CUMBER OF SQUARES ❑ HOUSE & GARAGE BASEMENT REMODELING SUBMIT: TARAGES PROPOSED ❑ ATTACHED GARAGE 1. Existing Floor Plan 2. Proposed floor plan SIZE: PROPOSED HEIGHT: ❑ DETACHED GARAGE 3. List of structural members to be used TIDING FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING DECKS, XVinyl 10soffit ADDITIONS. & PORCHES SUBMIT: 3 Aluminum ❑ Trim 1. Site Plan/Survey showing the existing structures I Other I*Fascia and proposed project. iIINDOWS 2. Two sets of construction plans d EXISTING OPENINGS D'i'es ❑No LOCATION OF W� 3. Energy Calculations >R FOR NEW OPENINGS -DESCRIBE SIZE OF / 1 W n t • ift) !y (gyp %) i l — JA P >PENING CHANGES & YPE OF WINDOW TO BE INSTALLED 10 J 60 f S NUMBER OF SOWS ALL FEES ARE BASED ON VALUATION, INCLUDING THE COST OF LABOR AND MATERIALS: (USING THE 1997 UAC FEE SCHEDULE) TOTAL JOB VALUATION $ , 2 , q00. Q® OCCUPANCY TYPE ' ermit Fee 'Ian Review �urcharge 'ire Surcharge .icense Surcharge AC Charge :urb Cut Escrow ,rosion Control 'ark Fee ewer Main Charge `otal Due See Back Page for Fee Schedule 65% of Building Permit Fee (.0005) times the total job valuation — Minimum $.50 .001 x Permit Valuation (1/10%) $5.00 (State Licensed Residential Contractors) $1450 per SAC Unit (Plans to MWCC for determination) ft+6ft= ftx$20=$ $450 Conservation Plan Review Fee Determined by Engineering Agreement necessary ( ) Non Necessary ( ) Make checks payable to: City of Fridley Attach THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT -NOT VALID UNTIL PROCESSED hereby apply for a building permit and I acknowledge that the information above is complete and accurate; that the work will be in onformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Fridley and with the Minnesota Construction Codes; that I understand this is not a ermit but only an application for a permit and work is not to start without a permit; that the work will be in accordance with the approved Ian in the case of all work which requires w and approval of plans. / CC[NATURE OF APPLICANT PRINT NAME Tim S e hR !1 DATE From: unknown Page: 1/4 Date: 9/6/2007 4:06:14 PM Building BUILDING (USING THE 1997 U.&C FEE SCHEDULE) F@TPTI;t No.;�% 75 Inspections $ RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION Received 13;d:W,� 763-572-3604 0% of Building Permit Fee CITY OF FRIDLEY aI MEP 6 20 2.5b .001 tinea the total job vaivation YOUR FrMA[t A` U,tRES3 `)^+ SLTGAnDR S rG� R/„Y. THIS APPLICANT i.4; _ ,ar�G�. ❑ OWNER 'CONTRACTOR (State Licensed Residential Contractors) PROPERTY OWNER/ NAMEJI _ $1675 per SAC Unit (Plans to MWCC for determination) TENANT ADDRCsSS: Q lc -e— 4.i@R . _ CITY '�`ii LPSTAT , _ ft + 6 ft = ft x $21 =S PHUNL: T_. Ca iitrl l CONTRACTOR NAME:,! +►t►aya. i..4?P , r, 60,0 x'r►t.. — suaMlr a COPY �r YOUR STA.TF 1.10ENSL� sTA1•u LiCENSF N 7.1y '-�'i � exp Lim 34 ADDRESS:, 1. a. 4., Crry �.V-iXQ: s 9Q.5 WITH APPLICATION PHONE b y '`ICS FAX _S'1'AT9161P % PROPERTY TYPEIN01,SFAMILYINEW C'ONSTRI)MON 917,.F, p'1 QFAMILY/1r1EWCONSTRIICTiON STORIES PERMIT TYPE ❑ ADDITION a GARAGFAHEDROWS [3 BASEMENT FINISH 0 ROOF ©DRAiN'11LL ❑ DECK t7 181DING ❑ OTMJR 13 SWIMMING PO01, TYPE OF WORK: ❑ NEW ❑ ADDITION ❑ MAiNTENANCUREPAiR RFMODLUNG DESCRIBE WORK BEiNG DONE:_ -�.�� SiZE OF IMPROVEMENT LCNGTH WiDTH HEIGHT S . Ft. -WO-OFING 10 I it)rAM MIX NUMi CR OF SQUARLS _ © HOUSL & GARAGE. BASEMENTK[ M.0D-R J V] Cr 311 IRM C: ❑ ATTACRED GARAOF 1. Gxiging Floor Pion 2. ofst floor plan PROPOSED SiZE: ❑ DL I'ACI IED GARAGE 3. List of srt�cwfal momtsaun to ba used Usi PROPOSED HEIGHT:_ m w. FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION iNCLUDINo nEcKS, ply ( MoiFrt ADDITIONS, d„.-ORCLrf.:SSIJE3MM- © Aluminum ❑ Trim 1. $ire Pian/5usvcy ahowmg the c xistinp struoturea C3 Oil In Fucia and puvpusod proloet. 2. Two sots of construction plana IDMM -WIN OPENINGS ❑Yes )(No LOCATION OF WINDOWS3. iN FncrgyCalculatiorts OR POR NEW OPENiNMDrSCRIBE Si7_11 OF OPLNINO CHANGES A TYPE OF WINDOW TO BE INSTALLISM NUMBEROF INDOWS ALL FEES ARE BASED ON VALUATION, INCLUDING THE COST OF LABOR AND MATERIALS: (USING THE 1997 U.&C FEE SCHEDULE) J OPV ALUATION$ $ 000 OCCUPANCY TVPE -DOTAL T Permit Fee $ �, �� See Back Page for Fee Schedule = Plan Review $ 0% of Building Permit Fee Fire Surcharge $ 2.5b .001 tinea the total job vaivation Surcharge $ .0005 x Permit Valuation Minimum $.50 License Surcharge S (State Licensed Residential Contractors) SAC Charge $ _ $1675 per SAC Unit (Plans to MWCC for determination) Curb Cut Escrow $ _ ft + 6 ft = ft x $21 =S Erosion Control $ $450 Conservation Plan Review Pak Fee $ Fee Determined by Engineering Sewer Main Charge $ Agreement necessary. ( ) Non Necessary ( } Total Due S 56 Make ebecks payable toI Clty of Fridley Attatl PHiS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT -NOT VALiD UNTIi. PROCESSED I hereby apply for a building permit and I acknowledge that the infarrnattion above is complete and accurate; that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Fridley and with tho Minnesota Construction Codes; that I understand this is not a permit but only an application for a. it 81119ork is not to start without a permit: that the work will be in accordance with the approved- plan pprovedplan in the case of all Worts whi r r and approval of plans. SIGNATUREOPAPPLICA _ �- PRINTNAMF /�iti�� �. -, e:�k +l� DAL-J3gJ POKUUU4.1^U Cil AN KU I VUr-bft CUUI•A I IUMAL FMAJU%f I 6 (U U1 O cu z L d �d L 0) 4-' S n QJ -P 73 O 4-> E 1 . r v I %AL% -2!^► nW MW &a rim-knnnu.4 Ad VV904, LOOZ/9/6 ABO q2 :a ed umouqun :wojj 4-' O z U60U ZW — 0 R A —LA I I CAL Ito 2 25 Xft Building $ BUILDING Plan Review Permit No.. Inspections Fire Surcharge RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION .001 times the total job valuation Received By: 763-572-3604 0005 x Permit Valuation Minimum $.50 CITY OF FRIDLEY $.64.'' Da d a ��� 763-502-3604 FAX $ y $1825 per SAC Unit (Plans to MWCC for determination) Curb Cut Escrow $ ft + 6 ft = ft x $21= $ EFFECTIVE 1-1-08 $ $450 Conservation Plan Review r� ((F�Aj DATE TO 0 D YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS Fee Determined by Engineering SITE ADD S -Z F)XV CA Agreement necessary ( ) Non Necessary ( ) THIS APPLICANT IS: ❑ OWNER ❑CONTRACTOR Make checks payable to: City of Fridley Attach Stipulations PROPERTY OWNER/ NAME: \ � �1Ck TENANT ADDRESS: 1 Q e Q., �f CITY E��� STATE�_ZIP 150-L PHONE: j � � 0 -L -I-1k NAME: atntaSsanLg VE3CT?'VT0V7' 1XV10ag ADDRESS: 51 06 *l CITY t7rov STATE ZIPJ�3L09 CONTRACTOR SUBMIT A COPY OF PHONE e TZ V —100 0 FAX '11Gc3 -730 'L;)LM 3 YOUR STATE LICENSE STATE LICENSE # 2,0 7'1 _ C') 9 EXP DATE -3/31 L`i PROPERTY TYPE ❑ SINGLE FAMILY/NEW CONSTRUCTION SIZE ❑ TWO FAMILY/NEW CONSTRUCTION STORIES PERMIT TYPE ❑ ADDITION ❑ GARAGE/SHED OWS ❑ BASEMENT FINISH ❑ ROOF ❑ DRAIN TILE ❑ DECK ❑ SIDING ❑ OTHER ❑ SWIMMING POOL TYPE OF WORK: ❑ NEW HOME CONSTRUCTION ❑ ADDITION ANCE/REPAIR ❑ REMODELING DESCRIBE WORK BEING DONE: Lai SIZE OF IMPROVEMENT LENGTH WIDTH HEI SQ FT ROOFING ❑ HOUSE ONLY BASEMENT REMODELING SUBMIT: NUMBER OF SQUARES ❑ HOUSE & GARAGE 1. Existing Floor Plan GARAGES ❑ ATTACHED GARAGE 2. Proposed floor plan PROPOSED SIZE: ❑ DETACHED GARAGE 3. List of structural members to be used PROPOSED HEIGHT: SIDING FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING DECKS, ❑ Vinyl ❑Soffit ADDITIONS. & PORCHES SUBMIT: 13 Aluminum ❑Trim I . Site Plan/Survey showing the existing structures E3 Other ❑ Fascia and proposed project 2. Two sets of construction plans WINDOWS 3. Energy Calculations IN EXISTING OPENINGSes ❑No L`OQATION OF S OR FOR NEW OPENINGS- SCRIBE SIZE OF OPENING CHANGES & TYPE OF WINDOW TO BE INSTALLED NUMBER OF WINDOWS ICJ ALL FEES ARE BASED ON VALUATION, INCLUDING THE COST OF LABOR AND MATERIALS: (USING THE 1997 UBC FEE SCHEDULE) TOTAL JOB VALUATION $ W- Mn OCCUPANCY TYPE Permit Fee $ See Back Page for Fee Schedule Plan Review $ 65% of Building Permit Fee Fire Surcharge $ 0 .001 times the total job valuation Surcharge $ A 0005 x Permit Valuation Minimum $.50 License Surcharge $.64.'' $5.00 (State Licensed Residential Contractors) SAC Charge $ y $1825 per SAC Unit (Plans to MWCC for determination) Curb Cut Escrow $ ft + 6 ft = ft x $21= $ Erosion Control $ $450 Conservation Plan Review Park Fee $ Fee Determined by Engineering Sewer Main Charge $ Agreement necessary ( ) Non Necessary ( ) Total Due $ Make checks payable to: City of Fridley Attach Stipulations THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT -NOT VALID UNTIL PROCESSED I hereby apply for a building permit and I acknowledge that the information above is complete and accurate; that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Fridley and with the Minnesota Construction Codes; that I understand this is not a permit but only an application for a permit and work is not to start without a permit on site; that the work will be in accordance with thepptoved plan n the case of all work which requires review an proval of plans. SIGNATURE OF APPLICA PRINT NAME ► Q, MQY, DATE10a-4 APPROVED BY DATE Building $ BUILDING Permit No.: 1-7 Inspections $ RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION Received By: 763-572-3604 $ 56 Date J U L 1.2009 'ire Surcharge $ CITY OF FRIDLEY .001 x Permit Valuation (1/10%) : DATE I YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS ,I b di 5 0' t l d.f f- 61-0A t s_ t 0 /Y? SITE ADDRESS o? S y I C.L C rt L t Blvd —� AC Charge T HIS APPLICANT IS: O OWNER 'CONTRACTOR $1450 per SAC Unit (Plans to MWCC for determination) PROPERTY OWNER/ NAME: AmIA,61i Am6iuffalj TENANT ADDRESS: ,/Z S 4 2I M fru L Q 1 u d CITY i- /` / C(hy—STATE_ZIP J � PHONE: � L 3 J 5 b 2 •/ q/ V ark Fee CONTRACTOR NAME:_ MD At- Home Services, Inc. Jtp d 1 ep Mrd c l J b n[ S ewer Main Charge STATE LI( 2690 Cumberland Pkwy, Ste 300 q.5 A � 3 Y5 - (. 0 y -7 SUBMIT A COPY Cumberland Office Park $ STATE LICENSE S ADDRESS STATE— CITY STATE ZIP ZIP WITH APPLICATION PHONE Atlanta, GA 30339-3913 11 SINGLE Lic# 20268257 Ph. 763/542-8826 ,E PROPERTY TYPE 0 TWO FA .ORIES PERMIT TYPE QADDTTION O GARAGE/SHED 0 WINDOWS 0 BASEMENT FINISH 0 ROOF O DRAIN TILE 0 DECK O SIDING --& OTHER O SWIMMING POOL TYPE OF WORK: I-CLMAINTEN 0 NEW 0 ADDITION 0 R/EMEODLING pANCE/REPAIR DESCRIBE WORK BEING DONE: 15 4,n 1� t^ f>�' A S / t 0 4 l V >IZE OF IMPROVEMENT LENGTH WIDTH HEIGHT Sq. Ft. ZOOFING 0 HOUSE ONLY DUMBER OF SQUARES 0 HOUSE & GARAGE BASEMENT REMODELING SUBMIT: ;ARAGES 0 ATTACHED GARAGE 1. Existing Floor Plan 'ROPOSED SIZE: 0 DETACHED GARAGE 2. Proposed floor plan 'ROPOSED HEIGHT: 3. List of structural members to be used TIDING FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING DECKS, 3 Vinyl []Soffit ADDITIONS. & PORCHES SUBMIT: I Aluminum 0 Trim 1. Site Plan/Survey showing the existing structures I Other `Fascia and proposed project. i'INDOWs 2. Two sets of construction plans 14 EXISTING OPENINGS OYes ONo LOCATION OF WINDOWS 3. Energy Calculations )R FOR NEW OPENINGS -DESCRIBE SIZE OF )PENING CHANGES & `YPE OF WINDOW TO BE INSTALLED NUMBER OF WINDOWS ALL FEES ARE BASED ON VALUATION, INCLUDING THE COST OF LABOR AND MATERIALS: TOTAL JOB VALUATION $ (UNG THE 1997 laU.B.0 FEE OCCUPANCY TYPE 'ermit Fee $ 5 0. Q IT See Back Page for Fee Schedule 'Ian Review $ 65% of Building Permit Fee surcharge $ 56 (.0005) times the total job valuation — Minimum $.50 'ire Surcharge $ 1-37 .001 x Permit Valuation (1/10%) .icense Surcharge $ S . 0 es $5.00 (State Licensed Residential Contractors) AC Charge $ $1450 per SAC Unit (Plans to MWCC for determination) :urb Cut Escrow $ ft + 6 ft = ft x $20 = $ .rosion Control $ $450 Conservation Plan Review ark Fee $ Fee Determined by Engineering ewer Main Charge $ Agreementttnecessary ( ) Non Necessary ( ) 'otal Due $ 'S Q , 0 O Make checks payable to: City of FridIev Attach Stipulations THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT -NOT VALID UNTIL PROCESSED hereby apply for a building permit and I acknowledge that the information above is complete and accurate; that the work will be in Dnformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Fridley and with the Minnesota Construction Codes; that I understand this is not a -rmit but only an application for a permit and work is not to start without a permit; that the work will be in accordance with the approved [an in the case of all work which revi nd. approval of plans. j-7/16,104 GNATURE OF APPLICANTc.►� PRINT NAME / (%I t 1 I i �i DATE 'BuildingMECHANICAL Permit No.:' InspectionsRESIDENTIAL APPLICATION Received By: 763-572-3604 DLEY Date ccr�rn 763-502-4977 FAX CITY OF F) 10 no acrc _ i o no DATE'j OUR E-MAIL ADDRESS SITE ADDRESS&,96qd`& L).d THIS APPLICANT IS: ❑ OWNER 1*0NTRACTOR PROPERTY NAME:6� L — (i1JA/ OWNER/ ADDRESS:�5q C!L�I V'8 CITY .Ot&1 STA ZIP R TENANT PHONE: ia3- 5Do`Z -14) O CONTRACTOR COMPANY NAME: O d� (.A -j.(1 700% SUBMIT A COPY OF CONTACT PERSON: n d --I YOUR STATE STATE LICENSE # S XP DATE LICENSE WITH ADDRESS, D/ CITY 4A 6"00 d-1 S STATE 1? APPLICATION PHONE �Pl%i'.�3 �'�it'sOir FAX lA - 339 PERMIT TYPE I�SINGLE FAMILY ❑ TWO FAMILY ❑ TOWNHOUSE TYPE OF WORK: ❑ NEW ❑ REPLACEMENT ❑ ALTERATION/REMODEL DETAILEPIDESCRIPTION OF WORK 1 (K -TW-"- ��y?_ --1391 r.�PW qL5 / nS6e-7- $ A ✓&"77 /I Ce ;17 M,4 -;f) f-1004 MAS07444 Fid to C FEES ARE BASED ON $18.00 PER FIXTURE, EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. FIXTURES: I5��OAL NUMBER OF EACH BELOW) VAIXt- MODEL: IEquipment Installed MFG: SIZEIBTU C MFG: MODEL: SIZE/BTU MFG: MOI?EL. SIZEIBTU AIC $25.00 FIREPLACE (GAS) $15.00 -�n5f _GAS RANGEIOVEN $10.00 _AIR TO AIR EXCHANGEER $15 FIREPLACE (WOOD) $35.00 NEW GAS GRILL $10.00 _BOILER $35.00 FURNACE $35.00 _GAS UNIT HTR $10.00 CHIMNEY LINER $10.00 GAS DRYER $10.00 _POOL HEATER $35.00 DUCT WORK $10.00 �IGAS PIPING $10.00 VENTILATOR $15.00 THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT -NOT VALID UNTIL PROCESSED I hereby apply for a building permit and I acknowledge that the information above is complete and accurate; that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Fridley and with the Minnesota Construction Codes; that I understand this is not a permit but only an application for a permit and work is not to start without a• permit; that the work will be in accordance with the approved plan in the case of work hich u' es reIew and approval of plan SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT PRINT NAME 1 n j8 y )a�%� DATE City of Fridley Building Inspections Department 6431 University Avenue NE, Fridley, MN 55432 763-572-3604 FAX: 763-502-4977