Loading...
41 PINE ST.PDFV- iiiiiiiiiiiiii 12744 41 PINE C, ",CtV3 PLANNING DATA STREET=FILE New Commercial / Multi -Family Projects Name: a14 ate: Site Add�ress: Plan Check #:'BLD -�2oo7oA!�o .7- 00 702- Project Description: Use(s) Proposed: -Allowed Use: (YES NO) CUP F '111,11:1��iiiii��iiii�lil:!I�ll���:�����������------�— To Legal Nonconforming Land Use Determination Issued: (YEtNV) Reduced Site Plan Provided: (YES / NO) Zoning: WJ_ - Map Page: L'�J� Comp Plan Designation: Corner Lot: (YES 19 Flag Lot: (YES ADI3 File Number (date waived): Plans Match ADB Approved: (YES NO) Shoreline Required: (YE Critical Areas Determination #- 0 Study Requlr_c� 11 W - r SEPA 13�&termination: El Exempt El Needed (for sites with 500 cubic yards of grading or within 200 feet of Puget Sound or Lake Ballinger. Requires: (1) Fee, (2) Environmental Checklist, and (3) APO List with notarized form). Re d Setbacks Street: Side: I Side: ActualSetbacks Street: Side: Side: Rear: Lot Coveraae/F ired: 4 1 ?,,1::!JJ --- 11111'� ro-v—ided-. Lot Cover It 1111!111:1111-c u lations: Building Height Datum Point: Datum Elevation:,-­ 07 1.- J7) Maximum Height: 4-215; A -fi lal Hnight: .1 & �. Subdivision: zt71-4 _� r:4 Ved Lot Aggregation Required: ebwp LandFkaping Lan=a �i�che�sADB�Approved: 60 7 -7 t VA" 1,4 7 1 Landscapin —�e - �(YE S / 7NO .,g.B B n I 122LdAm GW �k7 Plan Review By: STREET FILE PLANNING DATA STREET New Commercial I Multi -Family Projects . s # Bedrooms per DwellinXnit Parking Ratio # Uni Required Parking Studio 1.2/D.U. 1 B e d r/—Om 1.5/D.U. 2 Bedrooms 1.8/D.U. 3 /Bedrooms 2.0/D.U. Total Parking Required. - Total Parking Provided.- th,& ��Id6i -7 F- L Plan Review By: APPROVED AS NOTED Ll/Pl 86.17' L2 L 1/7 BY ENG EERING LA Date: . . . . . . . . . . . . --- - - ------ T PoDff EDWARM BUUDM 6 A 7 'b A7 "'LANNING A P P R 0'�� W�ys I /-SEE CIVIL TOEB OF ROOKERIES ANC ANING. UAALL6 SEE LAND&CA FWT PATH GNO. 9 G. GRADE 14 HGT. .0 R 174*107' 78.0' L 1610. 3 MIX) X, 51 L2 0 Y, v X Ll 14 .66' Pi I PAJWN DIM EIRIDGE OR KWAY EA 0 BLD fit arm PLA24 N r ----- ---- -------- — cm Zia, 1: r, MWPEWY LINE RECEIVED SlTr: FLAN AN A1.1 OCT — 5 2006 13UILDING DEPT. STREET FILE CITY OF EDMONDS BUILDING DEPARTMENT OWNE APPROVEDDATE: BLDG. OFFICIAL PERC,11T NUMBER STREET FILE From:UTILITY VAULT CO 2537354201 Recessed Lift Handle 03/23/2006 13:34 04 P-001/002 APPROVI�D 5106-LA FIRE DEPART&M T N TOP SECTION No. 5106-TL3-332 71 5,740 tbs. -.7 Full 180' Open v$ . . . . I I I . . . . . . T Imb 41 0.1 0, I U f., 7-2 VAULT 4'— 10" N6.5106-ML 6.560 tbs. T, BASE '.�_No�5106-131_ 41980 tbs. 6,- OPTIONAL TOP SECTIONS 42" Dia. Access 5'-8" 42" Dia. Access TOP SECTION No. 5106—TL-42E 5,260 tbs. 91-0. TOP SECTION No. 5106—TL-39 5,050 tbs. UTILITY VAULT T11 a division of C1 bldcastle Precasrim P-0. BOX 588. Auburn, Washington 98071-0588 Phone: 25�1-839-3500 Fax: 253-735-4201 ...... . a. Website: wvAv.oldeastleprecasLeamlaub6rnwa TI N TOP SEC 0 No. - 5106—TL-42C 5.260 tbs. ADJCISTABtE COVER SLAB STEEL COVERS No. 5tO6—AT-3-332P (Steel) VIGO tbs 8' LOCKING E L# No. 5106ETT,!_ -Vict-WED 5,920 tbs J U N 2 1 2007 DEPT. h Non -Skid Surface STREET FLE . . For Details See Reverse Side r- 33 Copyright @ 1970 0 Oldcastle, Precaskk� 01111111 1E R-W6 1M WAT-- R 5823 238th SE Woodinville, WA 98072 (425) 483-2724 FAX (425) 486-0981 CUSTOMER: SEWELL UTILITIES A TTN: JOE SEWELL DATE: 612012007 F PHONE: (425) 745-3089 COPIES 1 3 JOB NAME: POINTEDWARI 3 LOCATION: EDMONDS FROM. . Travis @ HD Supply Waterwo ITEM # DATED VENDOR PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 1 612012007 PACIFIC STATES 4�'C52 DUCTILE IRON PIPE 2 612012007 CLOW RESILIENT WEDGE GATE VALVES 3 612012007 TYLER / UNION DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS 4 612012007 FORD PIPE RESTRAINTS (MEGA -LUGS) 5 612012007 CLOW INDICATOR POST 6 612012007 CLOW ULFM SWING CHECK 7 612012007 WATTS D.D.C.V 8 612012007 HARRINGTON 30 DEG. STORZ ADAPTER 9 612012007 STANDON 6" S92 PIPE SUPPORTS 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 P! c I PCO x. s,;.-, r o n i e o m a n N OREM N®R 7m 0 N p I p ­.­ 1­ --.-. . I . I . . . I . . � . . . . . . . � . . . . . . . I . I I . � I . � . . . . I . .. .. . . . .: . .1 . . I . . . . � . w 1. . . .. . . I . . . � . i . .. I .. . 1. . . . . " . I .. . I . .. I . I ! .. I . . �.. .. w �, I i .. . . . . . � . . I . . . . . . � . . � . I . : . � i . � . � . . . . . . . . . . I . . � I . . . - . : . . . ­. � . . . . .- . . . I . I - . ,� . . . . I . I .. I . . . . . � . . . . . . I . . - � . - - - .. . . . . . . : ­ . .. � , � ... � P. I ­ ,� . I � . . � . I . . . . , _._ .. -, . I I . . � � . 7 I . I . . . . . � � , , � . . I . - . I . Z. ­ . . I . . I . � . . - : . . .. .. . — - . � . .. ., . .. -MECHANIM JOINT : , . . I . � . . . . I . ..-,.:..!. . 1. � .. .. . . . I... - . . . � . , ., .. � 1. .. . I . . I ­_ � � . . . . . � I . . I I I . . '., . . . . . * � I .. - ! ­ . . . ­ . I . . � � . . ,� .;.. . � I � I . : . � . . .. 1: 1%. I . . � I . . . � . I . ­: I . . . . . . I . . . I . � � . . . � � I . . . . .. . � . ' * ­ . . . . � I - I � . . . ' - ­ , . I � I I I., . - .. I I . I . . * , pive ..* � .-but' , . , . .:1 . 1. . .. � . . I : �,':-* '--Gl..�T . .. . . . I. .. � * . � - Size - 'Thic ,6ss . side . . Botts . , . . , B611 . olti I . .. . � . . I I I te es . __ A.1- - ­ . � ­.� . . - . .. ­ - � . . — ,,!!!!�n!io!! n!n�h . . I �. , - . , . . . . . �. - , . . . . � � , . , . I . . Inches - , ._ lni6s'- - b a-- - . - , , � , . ��_ . . , . . -I , , . ­ : . . . , � -I , - .� I 1. .. . � 1. I . #eight pq#�, I . I . . � I , . �. . .,., . , . 'i -, . - ,� . , - I , . I . . 0 . . .. � � I .., I -me or - -.1 - , ­ P 'Vngd' s-. ...' .. I . � � 1. .- I . , : � , Size * Length`P66nds We I - .. - I I .� I I - �' . '. ,� ." I . ., ., . . . I - i , I - I i El.: . .1 .�, I , . , . : I .� 11 ... a . - . . . .1 '_ .1 -'.'. From .: jo. ;, .,I6-.'-:,:, It''i .. K, ­: - ,K� -, . - No. -. �lrf- . An,".."' �.' A. ., p' �. . . . - - , _ " , , . � , , ", - . . - ' � , - ` , _7_! �. : , �,: I I I � *1' - � 1 4 . ;; , ,_ '. - . - . - 3' :-.: '�'.1.25:, :,,;40 -,%.�,­3:9C :. ,*��2 50 * -: �,63 9, -7.62 _' � 7.69 ,'� . -'.�' . 1A.* * . . �, � I - - , , I I . .. � I . . � �_ - . . � . . I _ � _: 1. 2 50, * �;7�� .1 ., '* I I -*'' __,�. . . > - � ­. I ' ' ' 4.$O - I ' 9.06 `4 ' : - .9.12 A ` -.�^.Y�, � :� k*:-7.; " -11� � I . . ... � - � ' ' **, - - � I 0 - "-'. �­ '. . . ,� �.-� I . �'. . - ...- - -6,.,* '_�­ " * " �' `t �- 2,50 ; �7 e9.50 ­ .1.1 06'�. -,I). 1 2 � . �- ' -_ - -3'h o, * , I ­ , I , �'. , . :--A.-- ,­ 4- ' - � . . � 0 1P 6 .-� -:,:..� �. - 0_,., , [2f � , .: , I : . L� 5 i'."_ �. � . � ­ . , ...� . _', �. �. 25 7� 71,4 .� I I . - .11: ..*, w� '. _!-13.37,':.' ;6.,--.. . AK .. ' .-4 -. 1% %. 24: . � '_25 -,"_ . � .� . . .. � . r.-'8 ' , -.-.-.27.:'r--::��45�;�'.�i-.9.05,."; . ..I'o,J 1,75 ­, ': 13.31 * , I .,- .- . � : - 1�- J ; . ­j ; .. I �..�i"-,-* .,. - v . 1 5V � �,-'.� * I 8 ', �,:'* '1/4 - .. ":, 4 - :1 I I - -. :, K2 i - 1. .. � . .�___ - ,�'�,­ - -'­�­ 0', -15'42',�' A ,., '. -;�31 .* ':..'� 3Q. � -- �z . I B _' . I.., .f.:-10' _­l­:29­,-. . � - - � - ___ ;_ :­.,�. � " ' - , � - . ; I . ,� *_ ._ .17 88 ' �§. I I . . 7 ­ .. . � ., .�l - - - - . ". �. - �:�� - � ". , , . . . . , �.. ' I � - `� -:*`�S, . . ' U4 . -% ., - - .. "9'*`��"� " - 788 . .. 1 -,..3 , *... I 1 . '. . I _nq -, � - - , , , , . -�:; -31' ,��:' � , . _. -.1025 * -1 ,.,.; I - -.' 40 71 . ; *"n . .. .. _.: ...,12'. �... :: � - - 32V'�:.,2,5D.;' .-_ I . I .- 7 -1*1, . � . ­ � - .:��..�­ �_ __ - - - � . - �-. , - . . , . � . - *_ , . ­._,-.' ;.144 -,*,�:t � - ,.'41.� .- IS�O .�-3,50 '' ,I 8 715' : `.90.25 � .- : 20.25 ,,_11io, :�:, - * ye� :,:_'--4'h ,"--. 01'.1 . � . I . , tv, __ ' - , . . . . - .. , � I ._ . I/ '. 7,4 � ' -55 � -. - � !, - ' � �, . �� � � _ �lr 11 _�:,. ., * - -�, .350 -', '.2 1.00 _ , .22 50* *..22.50 '- �: 12 , � ,. t `-- ', 4% - - f_ I . , � I . - 7�i,'�- -,- - � �:5�" . ,l 7.40-z- , . . , . . . I I I ., .. , I I . ­ , . .. � , - ,;1- ..., , ., - - . , . .1 _ - 1, ­3 50.- �`-Z3.25 *,,* -:.2. . . I .. - , � , -Y-'- 7-`;'4W�' * ;.. ' ' `85,` - , :,! --: '. 'r, - � --l".6, ? � * �. 65: . . . . �'; "'.1 ' _'­� 5�, . . 4-75 , '24 75 - 12 . t. . 7--i7=_` -1 I- v , . . ". . �-,­_,"!�,.;t-, , _,� - 1950 , . I - I ­ ' . . 1. .. .11 I . . .,�, �,� , j .; %�3.-$O r': tl,�$.50- -..;�, '_'_'.z;9�B_-;,.:,.. :05. ..; - -- - . - - � - 1-;�, . � ,...: *­4­r­:�, ,­ �._ .10:�'­­ I :.. . 17 ��� - . _ I ..., � -, . _"_�) � �� , - . , i�4�7 .,.'- ,� -'; �54 -.:'�.2-,,.*,l1.'60 `,�­ . . . � � , �tttl I " - �.. --V - , .31, , . "' Y. -�- _­ - ,�� . I ." . -, .1. � ­­ : . .:,. I . � .,;,� �pl.:­:`��,..:,, �'*�: ­�� -.,��2�.80.'.:'�,�-':3.50.'��N.�3000' .,� . � l_ . I ­ � I � , ��.,. I., . ­ ­ . . . � .. . - .50, e*_, � .4.1 6' -.'% - ,.:-S:`,��1�023*'_��j -lu!)­ , *. - , , � - .., . _ .. , . - - : "I - �,��, �.- ,:,l,.,l_,' 4�.`_ %',24'1;,5��j;.-�,��8 I . - .. j � . - , . , 0 . . - - � . _,". ..t ;_�,,�­,,­ ­ - A��.­, : -1-1.,­ ­­ . 7.7".: �: I .� , � . � *11 - '-l'o�:,"71%, "', �. I - . 41,10 ­q ,6�'tqlL6�g 'et,.-�' . . . . . . t­ . 11", - I ....... ; ., *'-', ­:"P . . - . '. "­... . � , , - . - � 6� 1� :;iQy'CdYli . - ". . ". . ; . , 11 . � , _ , , - �,�;:;.,.',�-��'%�:,����..�;-,�jW�"6�i'���ff _P!iiA�,'Zoifej�� BO� bnd,iobbO gaO " , :,::, . :, , - __ - 5 ,-__ , - - , , : - .:,� '... ,.!. . - . ., , I I , - - _* - �4--l;l-': . - P4� 1 .1 . - . : . � , . , .Z '. . .��',%4,;- - :,.�- ..," -I., - - � . . I . . e ...­t.l._. �,� .'-Z�,'%-�..'_,.'� .�. - . * I f�. �;._ ,.-..I,- I - -.1 ­ �,)�%,�I�.,:"_- 'iWi � . . , . ,-,, -.��.rw;'�--n- - ox % n. e - .r - -` - , `_'J*�"' �*761'--184:Act6ol,lbiingle�glh'bvirb�iesl8*.3 `&:� ikl*htu..*�� �� ` -', � � o � ­­ !.,�,�.�, �l . - .�F , . : .. ­� � , �!_,.�­,-Z, ,,�.�; .5f. , * - �:, � , � , ': . ". ­ �;­ - � � . � -, _,_ff on ryl�<9:w , i �bl : .qn,t P40Z hd� b'96iitptllil�j or th , * - - - " . - � * - I �l . ­ . ., _,, ";­ "", .,.-.,. ­ .".4," . . ., , " - : I - ­tt I � - � . k - X,S�j�4� * -,� - , - - ­ .." - , , `:.* � '�,, 7f, ­ .­--"�'_ �',��* ..;.; . -'7..-;�,..,!_ , " ';�' . , % , , '- ."'..., 4 : . :;�­­ � . : �-:.­-::.�­'� " , * * ­­ -, _;;7 . , . � -'�pj; ,j _. ., , �.. �, � -- � � ;, , _. �, - ,,�. y 1, , , ..'t" i.,.�, ,, � `41.!� ��,�".*J6'r:- _�lrl�.,:, _*,��.;',­',�'.,:' I I � . I ­­­! -1. ., '. � -.* *., ." , �3'. -'G � .�, z", , '!t -­ --,,- ­J,',��,% ­ - �� -*,­�*,' , - I .., . -,,f ­ �:.-_,.,� �­­­ -�,,, .:-_:,;�_r ,,,-..,�­ -_ -_ -.'�. � " .-;��t - , . lzilill�w ­,:­ , - I . � � ,­, ,_ �� ',j..-.�-J i - . ,-1 - 'I .: .. ".. - "-4. F', �,:_* , ,;,' -1.,-, _, . _ � -.� __ - ': .: %. � . - , . - ­. --, ­: -� - I - �., -..,. I .1-1.1. ".1, � ,%­ . , , " ­ , .. : -­ .,'-, ; ­­�, . .. _'.­­';;­ - , - - , ­f­ - - .. ": - � - I � � . ._I�., ,;.�:.t4�� , , I - t, �. , ­ . , � '-',31 .;.,., __. ., �, , -," ­, ' -, ­ �� '... , "... ,'!�' '* -'.*�__ . - . - . .- � �� - , '�, ` - --: , "'. ::�z _.� :�, �SL, � - " , - __ . , . .. . - ; , . . ��, . ,:.,:* ,�-_,-;,- -, ­­ - ,; �, ­,.'. - ,�, " . "I -.4. 't.:;4-��,�,t='­;��.tj�� -z,,,�,;..�-,*i.-..L.-�-.�.-�.". .;,i'. .�,2�_ , _*_l.,.,,.,_-,'�:' " , , , ., , ,;-, - . ...;,� " .t_ --,:-�f-,;F,. - ... *, - - - . . I - . ", . � . - . , , I '. .� , . . . . ..7_­�. . - -* .�.t. I �. - . - , -.� ­_ ..., - ,,-,:, .- -1..'% 1�'_ ,-,' . -, � ., ­:,:�,� ,:, ., .. ::_: � �._� . I ­11,11;.1 .,A "'.11 � . , ��,,.,;� S.. - -,� .�. . I � . , .�, : xl - C".. - . . .... - ,,_�U­�.`� " ,N_;�� .: I � t*-�-,,., - , 1. . - - - . , ,�.- .I I " ..1 ­ ­ .. , , . . . ., - ; . . - 1. I' 1. i.t."'. - __ " .. - ,.;.., �. .", ­ , : " " p , _!, - , �:, . - 1,-�',, . ", !� , , 1, ". 1_','..',� - . . , . _ ­;�;3;�f- -.­',�,`.��­�' ,­,.��­ - ., ­ � , , " _- -,�,-""T�._-�­ ;, , -_ -,, ,;.. , �� , "I " , -- ,-_,,:�'.11;, � I - �. - �,_­'�-.­ - . , . , , , -, � " t! I - - __ ". ,:�',��, - �.';,'�,-, �� - -_ _.*.��_:%,;.%,-f*�, , . .:. � - , , " . -, A ,­l, . 7 " -, � - ... :,�.,�__. 4�, � I., , , . .". 1, ,:�,­ "t _ .. - ,��, , �­. , . I .. .� . ,�.a � , , . �: `t*,,�":."',� .:, . . �_� - -. z: -,, �7'­ I.:,.*; ­,,­�.; ,,;eo � , ."t ". ­ _Zz.., � , ­4 _',Z�­ , ,,�, . , . - . t - ,,.�,-:�-,�i�� -­��­ ­,�. " �'; i,. - . - ­': � - , , - . . ; , . . � - , "" -i. , .., .;�., .:,�i,� , , ­­ ­-­ - . . *: ., , ! * �.�.,tl -L3� ­­. ­__ - . . , '. - - - .:. ? --l" 'r �­., ­ - I , - - ,:7�,,� .. - . , , . . . � . iy . .-. " - . . : - _ "-- '.s�.­. ­­ t ­r ... .­ �',­_ ,-,,�..:.;-_ ., .'�_­­­. .-,!,:.�,��. 1, �. - , .,� I �1. I , I 1_:_l:__Fl. 1* - , , ,;��.�, , . . , _.,..�; f, . . . . � , . , . - �, - .1 - .. ,� I ­­' . . - _�'7.:�l , , - It . . , . _�, ,,-,,.,: ­-_'. -,.-t � , . � �. �� " � . , -,, ---, ­­� ,,­" "'.. 11 -, ­r , .-.:, . ­­.,:_*,.*��--�;,:�.,. �� .,:* � .-. , . ." � '. - ­ - - ,., ­ - �`---�:�-`�:7� ;,;.,_��,,*,��,` , . , . � -- � ... . - -1 , - -.1. ., _�� . . .�. . . , I . , , ',,��U?�: �. !� ��-, '. - S4* � __"�_­ .71 - .',�.!- - ­:"-%. ._ , --,., I - �* . I ".; .'-t,-.-. , : �;**­ ,;t,,�i';i_� ­ '_�,,:t ,� , ;. �_ � , . ."w " _�,­.� .:. � .. ! _1 ,,� I . � I ­ - . ..... F;��. _� , . '..", ­,_,�.t�.�O.,: �*,��*.*,.'.�.,,�:*.'..;j;*�:�;,�,�.*.I'f�.,.,.��,,,%-',�,.-.1'�,, ;:.�..;:�l`­..,l_%\:�l_'Q . . - - - - - - ­:�. ­-, �. ,,, '. ."­..�� , . - , ,��.z�, - . � .�. ."'. � " _­­ - , � 1 I . , � - .g�.:"�;� 1_ .. ­ -;�!�-����7e",.-.'.�,7*",:;�.,,*-".--,-,.�l,-,-r-�, .,�.".�--,::���.".�,�-�:i�;-�lI I - �- _.__,:�, -, - , - P , O." 1 _.... . .�� ,*.�� 7- �a - . .. . - � - !�, . ��;�,�',. jt,:4, , ... .;��:,:";' �tgq 16-61- p �); . .. ;--, A, - ;." ,L4­­__l' .., ­.l.,.. , " 1, - , - '�l I , - � �,­ ­4-­ 11, - . 11-1* � . ,_­i., ­,­-, . ­ - - c -� - .-�j­ j . � �"­� ,. ".14. ­,_ 11.1 . . 11 - ­�-1 -, , ­ , !�, - � �� ,.-:., ;�.� - , - , - - . It'. .,� . ���-­_ -7�7 . .. , % . . '; , - �- �. �_* . - ;:-;T .. .... ,*­ ­­- *-"":�--'.��-."!.��-�,t#-7�,�, ­ , . -,,, " ,.,� - " - � - � . . . .1- ,Z\zi�-'.�,­ -� I ­ , .! - ­ -- - , , �! .. . �� - , . I ': ,­­ -,, " ; 'n" ,.,:­T�,-'Z , . , - . , " ,--- __ '. I , tY - ­�_-" .-,*-. 1. '_,.',;:: -. -�i-.,.�.�'�'�,-.,iv.-",�',�-frz"- ..�7�'-­ ,0-11 ...-:, ­ .14� " - j:��.��_ -_ 1�� - - - " . - - . , -�, I - _�! _,��': " 2 " ", �. ,Z' ,:,,,:�­ "" - '1� - * �_�� ,,�-, - . ­,4­­, =j:- - -�_ 7;-, -�t4�­,.. , - . . , 1: ;��,.: - , , - - -� - - - , " - , , . 3 ­� ':'. : , ­,��.�, '�,��­ ,.'-,,. I __ . .� I __ .. I ,.; . .. ".. , ,�­��,, i�._ . . - . I - -j -.., z"-.1.", - , .. � ti; %1�.� _��l _'l .* �� - , - I . .. , . .., - , ,� _,. ­ �v?­ -4 .- _. I . . I .- . . ­ I . . _ � � ��),?_-, ,�_ , . ". I . I I , ­ ., _Y� .­ , ­ , It - Z�� , . _- I , I . :�. f .* ,,��. -�..'�., . , .. . .. "., ­� ; � �- - - - - ­.'. ... , � - _ , -i--,A.. __;!�:_- tt�.;7-' I`�rl`��r,�I� ___�,� .� I.-- -il -1.1 1. �, -, - -�. .­-�m:.��,4�Z,-Z. F, - , - ,�)­,'t!�'��­_._ ;. ".­­. , I I . - .'_;", '.- V, - I ;:y* A". lz_ ,&;.. 1; �_�,��. .- -.1 ... .1 ,.- -, �..Izz,:�.,..'-t.'.�-�.,,�...:�I � I., . ­ -, 7-, " �', ',7��.:Z - ---,;�. *,,�,�V, " . I— I ` I 0 , ": 1, ,t�' * ,�, :*�,­�-�,�.��,%,:��_, : - ,_ - ,5 � ,� : - - ­ ­ . �_ ��t.� -jftIde,.w_li4��tll;::,;'ll�_ ,._� - � , - - yl I.:; �1. ,%,7­l­,-_­�ll­, .­­ - - I . . . � , ,��::--­�,--_'� 7, -ir��-� .,-��":--%,;_,�:,l w'�lii �'.. I - - _Uto�".II4,;�. zj .--:-A ��M, - "t a n . -il ., .", . _;-�­_ . . I : . �,_ ? ,-I.."", �` !�;. " -1. . .. � . I I . �. - _ - . 1. .. I -, , . __ _ - .1 -, � - ; . . . 11 I 7 . ­_,Z . � , , . I , ,.�� :�:4;,.*-, -,� . .. . , ­6 -�� --' '�":�,-­,�.:T",-,�;,/:,-� ,.",.".... - - .....- . ­ -_ I "'. . -­, I - , -iM ...... 5 -7- ­��!,V,F'­,.�, . M��r.l 1;-,��-1 -,-,:, �l - — ,v F& � .. . — .. ,­��.- _', ,�,-,,�l -1 - - .- � .. ". _- ,-.- -, ,'* ,: . ­.�,,­,�,:!-;.��.-*�r- !��-:'.�";,!'­­_l - F� � . :* - - .- -- , , I - , �­ , � - '. I ::W.% �,� -tz��-.--.'Y-�,��4�, _"'!-D�,n� - , , - , .. -, ­­­;!�� - ..: ,� ". --; .. ��F. , 4. .. - , .. _--�_ , , - ;� ... 1.11, *. . 1, i . % 1. - j. � ".,:: , --- t -- - -, "'.. � ..", I I ti7 .�.F,.".­ -11-Y " - -A ­" -:ZPOtinds,,.','.',�-F*�-',',�.' ". . :1 ..... . I . ,�,_`� %,:,�;, , 't��. . " � . _ , . . ., . . - - .; & � ., n. .. � . .. ,;� - ,---,. .. - * i . �. , � . , � ­.'. ... , :9.11 � , - - _ _. . . - %. -, � , ,_ .. I- ". . .;,, "', '. �l .'_�� - . ,z� ' , - . - , - - -7n:*n:- � ,�.. - � .-,,:;.,,.-. ; . . .... . ., 1`� .-: �.., � � - .. , .. : �7.,�,­;':--.�, .:_ � .... '!,***" -4�-��'�-1�9,--,� , ., . - . .. -� ,�.., 1­ .. �­ It'- � ri�::*-�,.,..:.�,-.4"")-,...3,,'-:-'3 -.�,-,�*..*�,�� . .- -,�, V ��.=7 �* -i-I I _ - tll�� ,�:�,�C . _;% I .. , , " . . ., :,. ­ x.� - 1, ** 5�`�tl�­jt#�d` "�-.`.`,!J,'96�'�--� -!�,�- N4_: ,;�,','­. '.7,- ;:- - . ...." 1. , ..- , .l.,­­.;Z ­ - , , - - � _. I- - ,�-_ - - 4-1.1.10 . . . . . . . . ,.:r 5:_ , , , . . . - , it . ;f , , - - , .11' . �, -!�5�5 , I . . I'..,:,. ; lt,' t . . ! -�srl -*',F-,;k , .,., �. �: ;�:-�,,,�-*2 1 I � 411 , ­%,� ..;'Y-. --.. - . I . ."-*. ... _._ ,�-� _,;;,,�l ­26'� Z �,�14_80� ,1�%74710,-_ - I - I � . . . . . v _: ___ �_ . -* ** - - % . . .� I -�t - t - " - 4_2 ilY, - ­ �-* ,'-, - " � 4-- �_ __ �i�_�-1 _!.'i��'-'.,�,�.,-�,�� ­ - , - �. � �.�_-,, _C`F,A�_ _4�1; . __ . . - , ", , .., . . -1.11-s-­ -.,-., '* I *t `4�� "! , -- -.- -�__7 �ti2-��-.:O - - - ` . ,� - I � .. 1­. - - - 4 - - 4*1��_7_7�f_� .,,�'. _ _�.��_. .,;4. 47," ­' - _-.-..�_ -YU2���4,�F�t$:OJ,,,-..�.-,�-,.�it7�'T..��.-:� ,�,'.U_,. ,',,; .F..t�� _ _ �13.r.r2o,rp * �", . - - ' __ � '2! - " " . , - - 3,_I� i� -�'..'.�'�-�3�Fg , . - . , j�...`�,.Y.,--.; lK - ' .,:�. , ­.-f -go' , n - .1 - - - ,`� - , - E _= . .- . ,__. - , _ " , ZnL�5_­� . �.',�F"-,,�.-j' , -.'��z,_­ =;l, ,�,� , r ., ; , '�,; t�'­'5­�V, -`,'��_I 8­ �', , - ?7 , ; 5 Z-,I;- ': r!�� - , " tL�'-, - , � . _0,'�.8_� - . - - 21 - .�, , n:� �;Z _`1 -1 __ I `� _� 1�� ,: , 8�.Z ,, _�,-_7_ = . 1109.41 .�� . . - . . ;. "'; � � ­ - . ,�, 'A' - * -! .,- i',-C` � -- 29--- ;Z�, __ I ", p;.. A.-,�7'.*- . � *IL -'A I',, .04 47.; ' , �', -3:`,13 32� .1 ,l. I * 1�22.- �� -, .--. . ; . , ,1, :'I-_j-j Dj:� 1. , I;- �_ , -11 - -' - ` ---,47 -`,,;�,--,;�,j I 1.10* � .-, L.,� .05'' I. - - � 335��,z�jt' .W ��-_�� ,----,';,' _t�.�*,�A7�,, �, _ : -j 0,� :. � , : . . �, i I 1. - m.�! sinad 7-- ._.'tl.-�_,,­'-` '� ­�, . .7��_�,*; :29 .'., .. . -,7.�. �JX .WZZ � , - ___ *_ -- � �,'. .- -&44!�:�P�3. _-�'.4��;l - . �, ,tt-,,�`i. . . C , , ;;;--- ­ ---I-- - - . --m- '12' .��--'-.f:�?�l,.,:�,.-'-.,;L��49-1�," :�,�;,w�vitq,­--.;;�,t A " *- - �'�, � I _, ,�%�,4��'.­_ - -0 j � -.. I " 13. _-75t 03:�w�) ... � . � +., _ .­., F ­ w + � l A 0� ,e.�F. 13.20,._.,_.,;_1500 88Z ,� ,2­­".-rt�A'll.;­ - � , ..­'� - � 6C- ,.�­­ t4­ I'll, ­­ . =_�� , ,e - ­9��­ ,- - � I . - ` -- . - . . _�� , . ' - _�' i�-��10" L I - . -1.1­ � I - ._`� 33 '�,-. + 1-:19, +!f:k:--i�,�il.Y4 �., 5 + ww;�! §, ---" - . �' L6 , �:-� ��,.! � -�;j ��:*+� - � �', � f.:� %­_'-_I4­--;:�, . -1 .,-i��l,'.,�,:.�§li','-,�'.,:�,�;.ISM?��,��1,17..80* -.','� !-,�.�-;a­+ ,At,,�� I I . ,.:�,' .-!.,,,,,. '�­­,,�,�-i­,,��'.-_,,: , � .:. - -i - - - � ... � :', : , , .5 , - - - '! I - .� __,Y=;�+�:�� - - � i�% �, '-!9,5�8 -7. �5PFM "-,' --Y, �§54j. - -;_�-+�� - .,:I.,, - - .I e�., ,4��.- �, ��%A.,�:; -. t;: - , -34 -- ',-'t '-�,5 ',',,' 7.40' � ­.;,.:T�l -WA]*i;, _�74. � ,+ _ ­+ -, -7- - '---+ -5�- ,t 4­` ­­A6` ' ­­�'�`;.. 7 � �,,, . , :.l.",�­­;'I Q ' +,+�.4,_ ,� _ , - � I - _ . - � I 1+ , .1 - - , .1 ,;� - - . , ttl - �� 1 . ­3 _, _1 ;�_ffEL-:�� * _ 13 8+'+,.'+'. KA? �4 " �-;Z. - �Xr- - 'Z _Zj,_.,���.;�_ .,.+ .,: - _. - � . ...... 1,14.��­�.­ ­,;,,�.'­ - - _,_` - - ^ , - -,-- V�,l � 50 ��.--�.,,��v I 8 +'+,.'+,- -A _ .�O( -� - !:�� -�f74.1&.- , . ­ . +�4 , - - � , ,+ ­­.� + - + ,:�; t:'. �'� *:,��` - -53.'. �-�s .- �_ - .1 ,"( _. _ .;�� M. , +:. : - , * - -1 -- � : (a `:- *. � '�'-` +, 1. -.�� , .� � . ''.: Z - - .� �, -__ � .��. I � - .J�.K'.�7,.'? . - , - _'�'��24 1 - - - ­ __ _ - - . I - - ­ *,-*- - - __ - �,�',�_ - 9 ,��.4!:!�&OD��­ . �!��,f,A�:�711�.�� .. . . .,!.*,7 ,22. . _.___ ­ � , - .a. , . 7 � -��­ -�­., - j�� -. ` , ,��­z�--,::,2474 . . I I .., , i;":�;-.�� +. -!,-'�';_12 1.0_*.7�� 'i .-P - , - � , + I , , ,_ - ,,, �� ;�7' `7; .�� - . . . . .31 _ ., V � ­ - : , + � . - t :�,��,,,­­,,.�, ­:,,,`,:'�,�,, RABEI-5- , ' I I 1L. .; . _�* 1� - + �.��Ai7t��%�, . ...l. -25.86 ;*.... ;:+2EC43'�-,,-:�'�,-�"1.25,�,��� "I . f��,.,:'127: 1�1�4�AI.7A* ­ - - �,_ ' +. v: ;,,Q5'94 , 1-41 -i- + �. .:. � + ,,� :_ ­ : ,- ; ,� ­­ - --- - +,�, , - , . �-.-,�.-,;:i��-14�-,'�:;�-,'4�-.,38z�r��-,�.,-�-1-5�6'-.i - I 4e�� �! +f� 5 00 :1 01,ui�. Z"'. -- � - +. '� .1 I ­"�::­.­_-:�;,:Z�­. . + .- . + - ,, . __ - ­­P­�­­ ., . � . , - , , - , -,,- . , - ,�­� -: .. - . � ... ­ + I + . : , . ." �,'w!-.,­,,ljl.j.'-;'­_�, . �-. � I 'I ,--.,-,�'� , ;�,; +, - "', �,,:� -, -�.-,`r,l:,! .,+,�% 't-z-;t":-�l, v_`;��`ti_! �.,��_ -T.:s -,:,: ': �, I ... - 1+ . I + .,.,. + .�­ ­ 2:,t%,64�g,a�s-:& W,++4t�*,X56,po � , lP_+-­­­,,_­,-_l , -,-, .:;�� !'�. ',� - -, � + - -, ­­ . e . �+:�t� " * . �;. -It , � .. j ;­­_ - ­.­'l._­+,­, :� _t_­, - � + ­,5.- ", , ; .­ + ',,­,,r­�­ ­�-- �. ,_ "I � f ­.� ,�+-­., �� +l-,­ A...., J'!�!,C:79� , I , 1�,z:a;,-"� .. � - - 1.1­11, , - - "' ; - -�.% + . .1 +,Z+ : - �. .. '. �+ zl� ­�. .;,-, ", , �:.,.�,i--:�'.4A.-,:*.,�.,,�.-��,,��:.",-�'L,�, :,'. t , l_9l;�%lV:�:;4,;Z�Z­,-,;:-, . _+ +, C� - ,�.-&�,­_i .1 - 4,.� .... ... , ,;�, -� , + � -, ­;51�­,�.7'­4 , - 11 - . ,�i", . . . -, -,X I . . , � �. - " J.- ':,-'..='+ : �� .� Z,�,'­;��.;­_­P,�­� - --*618�6al lax,r , - �, ­ -­ f.- -!�Z-�7-;li-F­.,7.��, - "..._­ . _4_,yf0a,46Ni. 6f.1 &W �cljal iq)�'rq lenqth.'b�e&pg6i 1 8 ft'll t . . . �.. Fq,p"_-jh,di,s. ,�-A'-fdr*-6jn.JiKiouq m+ , -, .- - -'i-i�.."", ­,, � a, - - + - - � . - - ..". � - . I - , � -.;��, I + -, -� �'­4 - t� q le6gth'.' - __!... _. , + . ­_,.',, r. , ___ __ - ;� *, ­-:1-1. . ­ - ___ ,+ .e _ _ ,_+ _ _ ,., � ­ , -_ 1-." ..,-. . + ;x - - f. �. , , I . .. 1� + - _1� - D � (-��,�.;, ;� ': ". ,:, . ­ _� ,� , V�L. -.10-�.­ - , I 'arid120" -- for.'4'K�-9 - *,', '&t-- 'f- Z.,"'I.-, � 1-v"! -: -_,� - t"',-, -, -�_­. . - ­* - ,.- �� _% +- I, ': ­­�r___, '� I '. , .. �,:, - --."-f , ­%�': ,"?, _��.,F, + . , , � , .t::�), . .� , . , ;,*, . ,,-.., - + I ?�" ­'_­r�` : 'V--:7-'�.�.-,-�.��A���;.4,F,.,4-�!,,�.i�",�.,',�,,�-,�'.f�-'�-+;.��-��,^,"+'.."..�.- ,,��-..:! +.,,, ,-+.., .. ,,� , ­;�'.,*,u - ... . -, - I" : "I, - . - ­­;i __-:;�+T ., , ,,-' T;,., ­­ :, , Z �!.7,; " ,­� , , . _;;�.­ , - t�-, 7 _�,.J_ -,, ,�_'.�, ­'_.. .. -.1.. , �' ', !3, , , *' - .:��-:­+ -­ I - " - � - I.-, - + ". .. .. .""... -1 ­....".., . ,� , � , , � 'f, .�� ":,� +�t : 1.� �- : .- +; �- � �� . Z'� +,�. ,_ " "�. - .. . - I. _� � .,,,,��.,-:�,.'?�-,-.',,.'.;-�z�,,'�,'�*.�L,� , ,�. . I ­; ,.-,.--.+ +. ..�_ . ,­_i ,; _', ". , . x _ �f,,­ --je" ­�-_ .. � I � . , , , ,C . , 1+ ., . 4 -1, ,��,��_;F�'t.z . , " .i. ­\ - � . �,:­-O�"`,j�-1 -�­,;,_,_­ ...*. �"-:.,:�::: , "'. "...- ,+ +'t ,+�+ _­ " ..'.,.+_+_ " _�. , --- "' -.' -,, - _t�,,,�� I I I;"-" I " , + I ;. ..t I.' ._::; 1-1-.1- �_ . -,_� - . , , , - . '. �+ V--,, ,, - . . + + -;;.,i, .+. ��, ­�.�..,'4.jj!3�ii:-, ,C�J,,.�_4, .+ � , -, , ­ I I "" . ". + �.:­ .. � .1', � ­ I ­ . . .�., . ... ­ - +- - - +_ - ,:� _� �e,,,----�,-, -_ . t,��­ -1, , C., � , � ,.,+. ­ '+, :: . �.+.'�*l I � 1, I _'�' :!­-,+Z':,�­�:,,�;'�;. ,2,-.-.f.,-,--_.-rt,t;.-�:; . - - + ,_�- . :.tw%+ � �: ��Ct'�-,�, + �-:.Y;�e . - ... - . " �,-, ,� � ;�,­ . , �.: + .4 f . : A V P­ " � - � , - , , . , 1. �l - , - , . '# , �­ " - , I ` 7 � . -� - . _�. t -11,�.,, - "t,�n­ ,� ,..i .�. . � .�l ,�­ �11. ., - ­­!­t�j �'.. � , I - �'. �,` �­:;,:A�,. -�g-,--'-'.�,-,?,.�.,���,7�i7L.�",+T- �L; Q'k,'A "' I.. , .. ­ ; ., I - - , - I- , ,;�� y ::1.,,, ­�:%�'�.+ !" I .. : . ;',%-;l � , t � ,�n - " I - 1�_" - - . .1 , �­ - ... - ;-,�,*,-+_',�­�.lt� � + 1�+, � � , `­i­:,'. mt,­ .�.,y.,,..,,�ti;"-,.,-,--,��,�--�i��,,�. ,� �Z,� , , ,+:* ��,+*­+�. __ _ - - ,. 1. . , - -11 .- - ZK - �... , , - - _ - - ­t­;4�;:77" . ­,C._.l­­+_l'4_%. ;1­fo�v ­ , . , .p_ r,. '. � . 1­, I - + , :��, - . - + -­lr­.A-'.__.­­ 7 ,,, . �� +. - -�::­.'� I . .. '. . ­*_.,;Z­��r-. +­+-�'..f� ,-,.,--. ,--,��.�111__ . � - . - - - �T �, r . � : � ­11. ­,t,::t:.,�l-. -�',�'. " . + f. - -,:. , -,,,.�A4ASTFIrE, �!_f*.�,��.',.,._z .. ...­�: 'A , , � ­-.1 ­+ . . � '. , ,.+ , :-�,.­��,. -_ h,�_,I-Y�K++,�_*,,�l -�­7z� -- ­­ - ',,j .i-�,.t�.,�.--z��,,;,,�,.,�",-.1 - .... -,'�' '-. * ..r�­__­&,-.-,­�� : �__ . __l'_l7r",+l�.._F_l.� ��, - I - .. I . � ­- + �: .'.,�.�. _-+!.�7_^� _. , . � .., -.-- ___ . ­,�-.­, -,-!:� ,.., -7:� , . - , , ­ - +� .� " --en�- ­ . , - ��P-,, Q�l- --G-g, ­--i-. �.� �­ - ,�;._ , %.- :: ,t , ! .:, .,��, - . , + . ... � . ZEx.'T '2 Z��&-2� �` � - , ­. ­ I . � , , , ,�� ,�I. ,?. , ,� , �� O... . �+ ,�.,;i -, ; - .1� _ 'I " - - . ,�I,'+ , , , _. - -,-... ­.,­ lv­/�­; 1* ­ I . � `-, ;,�,-��-,��.Mr, 4� " ��-'l ,:�:?-,�w -+ I ­:?" N� .C.--r ­__,�­. - - ; ,."�,,.'�---. I :. - , , - . ,:�,­ _- , :-t­"--�F+.++­ .. . . 1:", %�� ',,� � �'.-- '­'-��v", .-,-,, + Z , - ,­­;_�� =5. .", '. - 'i _w, .,. - - ­ - '"'. ., -, ��.; t?. i , , �� �. �... - * ,,,,,, � - � ,_'L. , , - — , - .7 � ­ � + . .11 � ­ ­ � A,_.,�Vl ­ , , ��_,.== M - .., . - ++7E-, �1­ + t�� -.4"�­­ e -, "W j � �:t . , "A lkz�'-�, Z - - " -,� :,­­�,,:&�_- -a ---c'- I . _*-V , .. ;,�_. ,.Z�,�, -.*.�t;� -�"7;-:,�j� ­�-­- lis-i% ,--VT-,�,-*!: - 7!'�:__ 1 - --- - - S.1-I..-, �,,�:+" _. � " * -,_;�+;. + . - I - WC - . I ;, - ,*!,-,, � . a�: . ­-, 3 , I I - — + + " * _� , , -,- � '. . if�� i'-��, . * ,�­, �', = %, ..�,. .: ��. . - "I �� — , : .b -j" . . + ­ _ - ��,+ S�,� c-, ,� — 7 1 - + — " *:Z1 .- I , , " , ,. -)I* --:�, �r -.1-11 .11. 11 �,o­ ;­,A�,t - . ,;�`41��?Z��__'�,�: _*:�l ­­�i,­;=7�,; , :-�,* I - - 11-f- 4 - M_w- - -g,4' :hf f '�' -,, I �.:I, - -11.1 " , -Pip.q'Th clifiess, -�66i�i ,,,, - !.� , __ :,:­ -­­., lt,': - �­ - " .... ...... ­'.'_T�r M,&�j ._g_� I ...L, J,_l ­ .l.+,_;, m . � , g. . . __ L "'�' fl- ,!,'-.��t�%e. . - P*­­,­_ ,,,.,_, !" ! I I M�11,� ,,, -.�-Z-,,�4 �,,. - - . 410,lriiq�wiions. Oln.� W�lll ... * I - . ,� . , ": -1 " . +Vtl.--'lL . 'Iff, . � . __ ..,,,._._ __ ,,_�Vidrl-1,-, -1I" ' _1�+_­,j­-_.f'. :_ ' - I - " ". , ­J.��++ . _X - ?47-Mz�:'­;i,k� slw­ ,,,,;­-Ia"��- ­"-+,� .�,: ­ , , -- - - ,­* " , - - I � . , _x, I " + -� r*_,��' A , ti � - ., ­ -�,, -.,7 " - " , " _­�. .. + - t, ,,:,a; �, _;� - � ­ � .,� S -�.4;' ­� "... �.+l . ?,-,-"I -r,r,j�,­,-j _.. 1, 11, ��-�.,���-,I,-.,.,,,2!�tit�,-�'�,-,�,, ,­ - - . '­ , ' " - . �F�Z'�q IZI, '.*Z�:. , ..; .;;.-',,+ �,f + - �.. -, i _,�. R���a _,.� riverter e '.' , "' -, � __ - ,_­ltk- - . . . . . . -1.1 .-;-",.I--, ...... "�� �, ­11­�. - . . . . .. .:-." - ,-Z_­t,, - . . . _ . _ e. . e. i, , � ".. ,.��. e. 1, 7 , .1 _ ,��. , ,��. , , , 1. - IM -.1 _�-­ , -,:k Ja . ­ - D-.,.. ' - - � � . I � .. ­�­,--- �� I - - -A: �,' �;,; � :,��41 , . " � - ...- - �- . I " , 'r - � �,,!�,,�, , , - - ,.. P - � - .. 11 I ___�fzt�. -� . . -; �- 1 1 E,-, 1 z 1 L": � -- ­ q 1;_-";�,­R�L_­ ­ .. I ­ S'�_ . . . i�_ � ­71. '. --l",: f�:!­­� " L, I, I I . �,+, - - -,�,,�,�;i . 1� ,!E­ - .1 - - I., +� . . - I , ���f:�;��"*.,o ll��:�* +, .'� .� . ,+ 9 1 n - - - - +� + ---�,,�+�-: � ­s, ,; , a - 'a' ` � + . + , , � _ I ,:, .+ ,,, , �. , ,-,g4j;* .�30_ 32-jka_-:!,�_�,QQ7r;:- - .'­.��. . � . '. ,,, �_*_" 51 - - - - ;��,. V_ - . -11 ­ __1 1, ­ ' 'Lay-ii - L__ �;�;+ +: , A' --I C�F t-4�r:-t�'�� V , -11 .I- ___!?:8-9�_1211i - � - _... ­­-, 1. I - I ­ , _�=Cxoi,­ N - �!91 _,�z ­ -I%,;!- a�;�l + .;�: �:_' ­��*.O_,'t­ !-t��!_.,. I - _jl� t. + . , - S -N .. : 1, - ­,�. �­_,�A - - g,�!-_!��­ 3, -,.,- .a:".;�;zz�!:�.,.--=AC��t�l-l"� "I ��-_,- _::­a_14E37 ��2�1----i��,i�L:�835��P-�F6�W,'-�-�- �0 + - -, I I-— ...T- I - - . . , _,.. "" 1111N�,;., - I — ­_,w'll*_,_ , . - - - I -- ," "', � � :. �� "' ; 1; ,. -, - -,, �. _�­­. " _­ I - � . _ � , I . ; --�­ ..,Yt .�l I . .. � I . '. � - �, %. .--,. �r',',o ,'l- e�_ . , , , " ,,* ': - - - �,_ Vl'__-',�: , . _�,, t — , I � I I ­ : - . +� - ;.,'-, '� ,�..k . ..�_ �_ + -�kl + - � .- +;. .. - ,�!�!,_� , " . �;-.'l Z�,�� l(,"l..l._Cl:..."­�', ..*t+l ll,�. `­ i - �­Azl,_-44 -,,�: ­­..2'�,W�,,*�_:::`­. ­ �4'- I: I 5 T X, llzrl �l � . - ­,-.1. "'.. : - ,... , , __ -­ - ­ , . -.t�,;,:. - ... ,,,, -, ".:', :,., , -, - ".-,.* -, .­+ .. 5' . . - ,,,T,�� ­,C � I., �.:.". � , +. �­ .. -i�. -,�-_ e _',., - , " � '. �'. - , , L , . . .. I . � ...... , �, , . .X--l.+ , " . ., + +, . , - '" , +. . - ; _ "I I + , ,,'- .. - _ ­­;�.��o e !��% - .. ;, . ".. * a . .. � - -:., - ,- - .f� �71* .--_,�4a? + . "�pf + , - " 1: - - -1 , � - - � + ­­-1,"N+*+ +'. .- �' ..' , , + . � I .* .,.!i '�!-,;; .. , .. 11 ; , � , ., � ,m - � , '�..+�_,.�,:?��­,�.. , Z ";,4 �.,.i; ­ - .. -+ "+-+,�- , ,+,, �'�_,. .-.�*� ,m�� + +, 1, ­ ��-,� :.:,� ", , : _,�`, �' I . ., ;l ll�% 11 . + � 11 ,�­;�t, . , . +, - " , + . +,+ �- , . - _�, , . .: i. - , . , - I -.+ .!;�� IZAM;F711 , , . :�n* ': . � , , " ;, ,,�-:�.,Zi­ _`;!,� . , .%� : . � , � - . -­.�, - -Z;* ---W ,� . , � : .;,., - ­ . . .. - � ,j., . . . I - . ,. V� I t . , - �� :t , _ . . .1 ­ , *, -, , !,�� ­_LM ,4 1. : , '. *1 . I" " + , 1. - - I % - �­ ;.. + ,;,i5r. . zlmr 0, � ­ - �. : --.-- :�_­.-Uf 11% ­a.,�, -�­ _. ". �l . . , :.. I . .. * - � .1 " . .1 :. , , ': J, - :. ­ �- :: 4. t `­ - - 41.� � �� + .. I . � " I ., + I ,­_ , -- + - ,:, � . �­ I .9 .1 ..+. �, " �, ".. 1: 6. I ..;� - ", . ,. , . ; - - , - - + , ­� _­_ .+,,,� __ . . �:P_ " 1* - - , .: ., -'� + - -. - I , 1: +� _ 7, -+, I � ��. g4. ., ., . `. . + �,:, .: �i-'�f:,.--�N'��.:,i�+-�,���,i4�:,'�PPK-lt;-�'Asu R-f 1: �",­l_,;.,-+"!,�+.;+ . '. ., . ",.l.,.- — I - - , - . -, I- +'.-;-­-..,.-_, '.., -­­�­'� , .� i , ..+. ",.;,"... " .. ...'. ! I 1. , I:., �.,e_ , - : . . � z­l " �4F,-�,­,-'tvl-* , ,��­­R­­r,M,- -­-Z-7 --, , * + . .11 . , , + .­­ 1-_�­ + ��' � , '. - ::� . 9" . I- .1- + - ... , ­ +-:+.... ­ . . - I _,; , _­ 1, . �+ +.-.. "�­­—l'- I%- . I : , ­, �� -�j­ - ,z , .+ I .. . . . I . - .+ 1+ - - . I " . 1, - ,���, _ I , _%;��Z�_,,��­ - + r"Wz- t�er, t " ;!� . ;.I + __ " M. . , , -� ."' 7, 1'.* � v � ` , , .:.. - � :_ � I � " � , .. , + , . � � . , . - . , 4�_ ��. - .��, : . ++ . , - ,.- . ., � __ - 1� .�;A + - �41 , '- ­ , .-.:. � - ,�� -1 - - , + � , . ., - .- . . - + ; -,-- M, . - . . - , :� , , . . ­ 1.1++ �. . - ­%. z , , 1. - I 1 + I.;, � .: . , - --,� ,�- .-.-: -�,-.Z - I . ._;,� - ­ , . .� , , . __ ­_,.�, _�­_ - . " _ � ."t . I . � ­w . -, .. . + . . ­ +l­ . - + ­ ..,*. �. - , , 'Ili, ,+ . .1 _�,� . - .�. . : ! , - , �`;­.-.�­ ;::s- . �; - + � , �17 . I ­ - li - - , - .. - , , , + , . - - - ! s� � . + ". � . , ,:�:,:�� , . . . - . . , w - ­`:74 ­.: ,�� -_ __ , - "... +_ -_,?�! -, .4 �, . � . -, , 1. - +:,�_ , I . - . � ., , �. + -, -----w - - . .. "', . - . I . - - ;: , I . - ya . - - , ! :; " . + ,^ I .� - �- �* �.-,'�'t';:-14._P�,f. " - � . - . 1 7 . ;­ , . 11 + .. � Z + . , , . .. . - , _� .�L . . . � � , . I -1 . ­t��­­ll - ­="X . . - - �,?,,� - - ��,.7 f- �;,� + ;,6,+,`Q 1�,; ,I- - +� ,�, �_ - � - . � 4­ .;-. 1-� .; _­t --­��*�, i . ­­14" - , - ­'.. . . + - , - I __­�,%Z;I,, ,zr,--. .1 . �l , - -,-,, �W.�,.-�4 . , ­,­- ,j� .,.- - ' gi, ke .ectIon_�-;-,+,-- "' � ' - . , _:,. +'.. I - � I . . - I . � ! - - _� , -'L,--+j "::. , , , -, :'-* - ._,",+ -L I __'. % . -,. . '_­g, .-, . , ­_ . - . , , ­ . L " , ccessoh�ji,.-,+�..:� -, - ::-;�; ! L . � . . - � , , 6i '­ 1� .. .1- , _ + I �_ - +jfgr '.. ,.;+, ;��.:_'!�.�7.-_ . . I . .. L- �- -,�`_,�e,,*��,-.,-,j _;=g=­�,�,_­ - ... ,�.. ,�� - L �� . - - , ,; , .., -Liww_.��,,�: .��LX%: � - . -ft .. � + . �.' + �: _ L 'ifjoF,� + , :L, -.:.- . � ; �Zm, . � . - , ;., . _. " , _ , .. I ­ - 1. - - - - . _ 6 - . - - - `4 - * 1�tll�­�� I - � *... �,;,. -:+,-;tet ., r.- + Nt ...t-:_�___:_­�, : " I --� . 1� - ;�Zt . + ­,:-�;--;�,, — 'yk-.',�..,_T­.,-, �__ L . r�- �, __ ri 1'��-fZNE4�2*��_ - -.,--'- .� �� Nl�..,. � I' t - 1. + .:J , " fa,5. - -.,_-- In � . . + . _': �_ I -­­_J,_7:�Ft�__�, 1 � k,.;.� � -, �.­, _. �L ­L '_1 �. 1_+ ..�'­;+�­ ­k�, �� "I � .- -; - - %S � ,,�!�`,t :+r.4) -_�. ��, , � ­ ... ": + : 1. -` - 1".V_ .- - - + . . - - �­ . I 2:� , � _ ,:­�%,,�.�:,. .. I , `� , '�`, - '�' - .1).' +j � � , . � � I " 7,� '-!�� _-��-.­P:R_, ,1; � � ", _ . - -., -,'_�,-.O. D I: : � � -0 ,' ilbs . ­: ,p , , I + LK ­ - �. z �. � . : ­� - ­ . . 0"" I + .. I ,�N - �+�.� �+F,��- - .... . 4�1 �1_14 ­w�-o'--Z _�+. � '_ I "i .. . I ,; .'�4� � �, - �,+ ._.� .1 ly, + �,�­ .-�,_.­�20­'-"­ I " �. --m �­ -++ , z _ - �, � �r�+_ +, I I ­:" ­l. ., ­1 - . +:_ -, '6.90 ,.*+� -, I' .I­:� ';f'.'�,, I , � f -1 + ". ­� lf��.� . - I 1�4-�,;.f,­4;wtr-,,F�� .,� .� - � :.. 1. .. : . t-On Lu tkt,7 ­ _- . 7;-,._.-- ­­1 ... .� � . .1.�. � ' .a �j��, . - . ... ., � + �-­­S­ 1� - : .. . -+ ;?.'05 --++ �-,-,,�tz�,� - ­135" ­­' `­��-;lf:4; ­ I -��;,`� ­.. . - Z, - _..-�.­4-- � - . `1 ­_ +7 *!= 1.,,.�, . + . ":7,�!,1_1�v�,r , , "I . "I. ... ?�A;�:+,"lw."-�, ,-,?+_%­.,­_­ .- ­ - . - , _n��'Ui� ' " � ­ +* ,� � . ­ -7 �- -7- 'r . .- 2. �. --.,. ,�.,��-�t..­­+ .:� _+%v *.I..- ,�, ,., ; - -1.1-+, v, , _-, , _ I - - - , ': 1, . -� , ,Y_i7,VA4�7-.� �­-4��710w,' _7��-,,tj,: - - ; , +�_.., ­,�, 7:t-_14=�, � ." � - � ,,;,�­- .� - .­- -';F!:z: . , . a . - - - .., - , 1 .: : , " I .11,0,,�'lt�-, _E+ I __ - �. - + �1,,,+L. �-_+.��,.,O­­­­ _­lt�,A ,��. " . , . -. ?.__.t�_! '. - I . _­,� � ,�,�:Lq"J.­..'�, ­­ , � ; i�� �� _ _ � + _ - I ­��_ ?-`­- -,�lcl,,M-��771 ' '4� ,,+ ' , ,` � �� ­ '. -, :-,+ ' + _ - .; .: - I .. � " , ,-, �:� ­:.; 1 3.20 " �+,'z�:`,,`�- I , . - , _., � . ; . - ! . � - - " . - ��t. ;�,_-_:�.!��-�� 1. . 1- . 2 .t�, , . . , , �� : I . � "'t ,-. . '�­�.Z tL�; - - 3E . - V­ I . � , +.r -- . ,--,,-,,,- , . , - ­Z, - -1 ; 1, ,.'I- - $,�&1,1­ - ,;.;-,: - Ij�.,. - 'L , .; t­­ ­ -C l;:: - - - ­1 .. U+ " � �­­ ,,, � ­ - , .� , "'' . 'L - 1: - ++,:L.'7 ,­� -, _­­�­­' :";, ��,+�'!'.'l _. _�, .1 ..;+4 -�.'­ + , �, l­ . __:� .� + -15 30'.�,i�,­ +_ ��7 ,:­:2ly4­ " .. . .� - :�-,+ .. _..'13*�I:�-7+`.��;.2;,�-;- - _* - --- + . A - . I _� -� , _ ., `,Y',;,`�'f"�`­'irwlt-�_ ,* .- lw�,�, -I. -iK, .,:;.� � 'I- +:.. . 7 ++: +1 ­�,­,tz�+r­l .. I ,��t­ ­,-,Y-i,'�`­� -- - ­ .. . 1� I .�."`�,�., , - .,?�'_�j,�r . ,,", t, A.- _ _ .. _ . -- , . �:. . , - , � ­_ ­ I � I 1. . " ­­_-­,'� - ' - ' " ' . ' ., , _� ; � � -:, 1 7.40 � -,:,. ­�+`­24;,-,` -,.',­-- " - - , I � . !-,. _��.�, � , .+ ..+ - : � :;.: Dia. .. % '. " IN " ""' � .1% + 6�'A-'��7­�,&;,__�'- 1� , - - .-�: ,-",-,lQ0;..;---�-*-- 1-1< .. ' " :!,' 1!!-­�­��yl. - :'- , - :7 :",.. f _+ .,_,_ >­­l ­ . Laii'Rin . , . . . .1.11. � � +:1 . __�� ;,L�",�',�t , 1'11.11_11­�,_ . � ".. ��; . -Tj GOA , ... - ­ .- . , -, , - - - -- . - . - "_� , ,4 L::- +? I . -...'.' - , `­ * "' � - 9 . + - " ��; - '-. t -19:50 : �-, -� . - - '+�. - z':,+?63/8 :_-l+ + �-� ': L " " - 1 4 5 .�, .. - ��_� - ,,-�;�,"-­� ­�� I , . :-`�,--�-,,-�"- �,., ­"� ­_. : . . . �L .' " - -,' . 1. - - - -,` , , ; �. , ­ �L­ 4-:ru- ". - I .1: f . . - . 11. + "- '..", _,. ­.,_ ­k:' " _ ­ ,�. ;:.'-. ,* - .. . - , .7", - -, . L '+ ""' �,, -- ,_ _ - I ­ + ­l!1*21.+60 ', ' ­��:­ " -,,.,l Zo �� �, - - t: .��l,', '+ ""' �,, -- '+ ""' �,, -- , 7 LLL ' . . . .,; '+ !!-:--.'.' �"."',++ -- , , I " +�, . . +:­ ++.,,+. . _ , V . - ' - ­ + . . . � . . _ I.: + +";'2_0_' 1 .;, .1. � 1. �' . ,..:;, . :+i, I -'; ­�­ ­�, +2" 1 . .71 _� � . ­ .I- . * ­ ,. �_,.._. '. _ � �zl _ - ,�! . ­- � .+­ . ,7 LL , .- . �-.;.r�';.-'�:�:;��, - ­ 1, - -- I EO [m - . 4- %—A, . I, - , - , , , - 1, �l I - I , �:"�. 'S". I �� �L- I ,I �11 - - � I I + i * � , � ; �. I . . L � . . L . I � - .­7f��-,--- � I... � :t I '. . - � ,;, - '; - _­ " + . ", -, - .. I , ­ + . �+: �� __� ", 11. - + - ". __�25�80­,--+:--` 1 .+:K.: -2, - -?,'�go.-"7.,:��.->;�,-,,-,;:��,,;:�;�:i, �. . _,. � 'L - I , '�2 �_'� i ­ ­ � - + � _., . Uj,��_ 4 _, ­ -',+"-' . ,, _%:�. .. L ., "I . , . q _L­­. ­ ," L ,.+ -;..33 -7, , . , * . _ , �,:,, . ., _�.. .:+,. ,_ L + I _... - :� .. ­ ,�_* ,-,: �+ �., . ,�,�!:�;,",��l L +, I ': - , ,,;� _2 , .- � , _� . . . �. I .+ +. "" - . ­ 0,' ­ " ­ ,"_ ­' '..... L495 -.� -t.- . ­ L ., + . . � .+ I : : � .�+ 0. . . . ,� + ,� '+. ' "' . I I .: .. % - -, -I,!- -*,-­30.'i�,,��:`,­'�' .,;%.- � � +.,.;, .�:. .�YC6*-. �,,,,i.a,�-, � , T, � . .1 :L� :j�_ - _ + : , . I ... � ., _ 17:�.l - - .'�.'.4 jj.�':'��,;,.-, :_-�-. :,-.., _.-­ _ ..Z:_�, + . . - ." _....., __.: - I I I ­+ - ,Z. .� _ _�,�,, 1-1 . � L I � . ­ 1+ I .. ;- -_ 'g'iilirilitdds81tle-0tl6g­ th"Ou + .Q4,-c)hd.30:jA,-liiz6S�'Pl -rd(36er,,'pfid.lQc _ .Y_�-� I * , "`.. �,,, . - -_�,�;,.�+; ��_�N I . I , . + ... � ' "�6�e R&I �.6,, �UjLg _Piesi"LOi�' i%,350 0si:;PresSui646fip e 20, � _ I 11 " I v -11 15�v,o . � , . . . . . 'A ipp * 6d-+ "' - 1. 1. nd "y�itl ' ' f�*_!,n_q,w&ld r. l' 0,16�e a - ( ­rGi - * "' t 0' d'- n F, , Ij I �h­ r - . T i�+w I - - - L . . + . . I I - I - .- . ! , . 1, , -a,�cjl,�_R(5i�.'PJJP� .ia. � , �-�p,d�i(J+�t.,;�,�lL��.1&�,,+-N",����,, -i-,:.f:-��z? I , : + I ' L ' , , I., - .- _ I _� , ,�Y_ . - � +1 .. . ".Q�l ­ , .,+ , . - ,��_,7_-�Z­­� . . I , + " . :_�. ­i 1. _ � :""'oPe'�h - eld " 360diol�QG�6,,�,, - " - 1. ++ - * tetoi6er. retalnedock,,ANI prm',bhd-6�sk�C t + ik& , u nc A ki�.VAU'joflphs. ypp, '�'C�, + + j , ., - . . L I ++ . . Z. - , ;ef mo - ,_ - L ' , - " ­;­- - r ,� + '. . " . 1� I ­­�.161­1, - - -) I � + � :+ � - - ` 7 - -, , - - 1, ,Z, -7:. 1� . . - .*.+, -.,-I.,. �:+ . tv ., ,­__,� _. +'. � e. I t �._- - ­4 '_i.��,_,�,­_ IR .. + I L . :,� � .'. . , ., ., "', +.'.� +�. .�*,� +; ,�:��, : ., ie, - - "': , �­. + :7:* +:I *:Z,� ,�,a, �� + .��, � , . , ,,, ,, L . . - - - - � : ; I . + + �i,._� , . .. � . .; . . - - ­­ '�%�L'­-_­_� . � ". + ."* - " � . ,�; . . . I., I , :+ I I , ;. , .; - � .� . . , - . - -�.-,��_� .� . , - ­ ... 1­ ­ � : .... .. r�.'� , , : 1, ." , , �� �_ � -� . - " - ��_ -:,,�:i: �_:�', .:". � + - "., + ": . , + 0, "' $­ : : - .� .�". , - + ;. - Z . . I , � I . . . . .­� I - - I . , , Z - " ':.+ . " L� * + I - dl I . , ,++L ­.. I � . - . - - L - - . ­, �) ­:",� , ,--,. _­_ '�_;­",., , ,��'� + - - L , �:�.. � : L .�'j, . I � + ­ . L . - + .+ . .+ � '�+ -5�. ;.,_._.,.. ..- -, +;� - " , * I - . %, , +. �:-, +: � , , . � _+ _, :1 , , ��. , , + + + I - . ' + - ,�� -; 7 ,,Z;7:�! + � + L . :-L � _ . . :_:; ­_ . _, L ,�� . � _ +. _ , , � , ��, . '�-� : I . .. . .7 , .: .:'% L:' . I : ,�* , �+ I L , .r - _ .. . - I �. , :: .1 I - 1, . , 1* . : � , : . - . - +1 I .­ �.lf +1 . . . _ . , � a , +­�+ - '­ '�­­ - + I . +L ' � - � . . + . , I ,.., . - .. _. + - .. + . . . - : I , . .. . .. . . �. . : _ �'. + . �, . I _A + :. : , � . .1. -, ++ . , + I , , : . I I + - '. :, -*' . Ilk - + I _� .-;: -1'-,".`�� �! . -,%::o .�" , . - . PACIFIC STXrFS CA-SnARON PIPE COMPANY DIVISION OF MCWANE. INC SELECTION TABLE FOR DUCTILE IRON PIPE 'I his lable shows thickness clas.s of pip(, necessary for the rated water workim ,I pressures and the rnaxiinufn dopth of cover. The thicknesses in this lablearo uqual to or iii excess ol those required to withst,-111d the raled working pressures plus a surge allowance of 100 psi. Ouctile Iron pipe, for working pressures higher than 350 psi is availablo. Pscipco V 0 BOX 1719. PROVO, UTAH 64603 III[PliON1. (AREA CODI 8011 313 6910 pipe LAYING CONDITION Size In. Maximum Depth of Cover, Feettt 51 .25 350 98 100* 100 .100. 100* 100, P100, 52 .28 350 100, 100, 100. 100. 100, 1 OD: 53 .31 350 160- 100, 100, 100, 100 54 .34 350 100, 100, 100, 100, 100* 55 .3/ 350 100, 100, 100, '100, 100* 56 .40 350 100, 100, 100* 100* 100, 51 —.26 350 76 86 96 100, 100* 52 .29 350 100. 100, 100, 100, 100 53 .32 350 100, *100' 100, 100, —4p 54 .35 350 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 55 .38 350 100, 100* 1 W 100*' 100: 56 .41 350 100, '100, 100* 100, 100 50 .25 350 32 38 44 56 75 0 51 .28 350 49 57 64 80 100* 52 .31 350 6/ 77 86 100* 100* 53 .34 350 91 100* 100* 100* 100: 54 -37 350 100* 100* 100* 100, 100 55 .40 350 100, 100, 1 Do* 100* 100* 56 -43 350 100, '25 1 0W 100, 100* 100, 50 77 7 35'07 30 36 46 64 1 51 .30 350- 36 42 49 61 81 52 .33 350 47 54 62 77 99 53 .36 350 64 73 82 100* 100, 54 .39 350 80 91 100* 100* 100' 5� .42 350 98 100, 100, 100, 100: 56 .45 350 100, 100* 1 Do* 100, 100 50 .29 350 19 24 29 38 55 51 .32 350 27 32 38 49 66 52 .35 350 41 47 59 79 53 .38 350 45 52 59 14 95 54 .41 350 57 65 91 100, 55 .44 350 67 77 86 100* 100* 56 .47 350 11111M 81 92 100, 100, 100* 50 350 22 27 36 N 52 51 .34 350 23 28 33 43 60 52 .37 350 30 35 41 53 71 53 .40 350 36 42 49 61 81 54 .43 350 45 52 59 74 95 55 .46 350 54 62 '/l B7 100* 56 .49 350 �4 73 83 100, 100' !An all0wallco for ninc glo 11 20 truck willi 1 1�i(;10( IS 111CILSOCKI for all depilis of cover. CalCUlalod maximtjIll d0f)tl I of cover exceeds 1 oe 11 RE �77 st a Ofidinerl- @sets* In 1975 Clow recognized the increased requirements and escalating maintenance cost of water systems in the United States. Clow responded by'introducing the first R I W (Resilient Wedge) Valve in Amedca. This introduction revolutionized the valve market in the U.S. - - Clow is the first to introduce and still leads in the Design and Technology of the Bubble - Tight Resilient Seating Valve. The Clow Valve with its unique features and benefits is the first to be manufactured with both.AWWA and ULFM Approval for all water system requirements. RECOMMENDED SPECIRCATIONS FOR ' RESIUENT WEDGE GATE VALVES CLOW VALVE COMPANY Valves shall conform to the latest revision of AWWA Standard C-509 covering resilient seated gate valves and be approved by ULFM. The valves shall be either non -rising stem or rising stem, opening by turning stem left or right -and provided with 2 " square operating nut or handwheol with the word Open and an Arrow cast in the metal to indicate direction to open. The wedge shall be of cast iron completely encapsulated with rubber. The sealing rubber shall be permanently bonded to the cast iron wedge to meet ASTM tests for rubber metal bond ASTM D429. Stems for NRS assemblies shall be cast bronze with integral collars in full compliance with AWWA. OS & Y stems shall be bronze'. The NRS stem stuffing box shall be the o-ring seal type with two rings located above thrust collar The two rings shall be replaceable with valve fully open and subjected to full rated working pressure. 0 There shall be two low torque thrust bearings located above and below the stem collar The stem nut shall be independent of wedge and shall be made of solid bronze. There shall be a smooth, unobstructed waterway free of all pockets, cavities and depressions in the seat area. The body and bonnet shall be coated with fusion bonded epoxy both interior and exterior Each valve shall have maker's name, pressure rating and year in which manufactured cast on the. body Prior to shipment from factory, each valve shall be tested by hydrostatic pressure equal to requirement for both AWWA (twice the specified working pressure) and 400 PSI ULFM requirements. . k,__j Features and. Benefits DELRIN THRUST BEARINGS ABOVE AND BELOW THE THRUST COLLAR REDUCE FRICTION AND MINIMIZE OPERATING TORQUES. ELECTRO-PLATED NUTS AND BOLTS PROVIDE LONG -LIFE CORROSION PROTECTION. % LONG, TROUBLE FREE LIFE WITH HIGH STRENGTH, NON -CORRO- SIVE BRONZE STEM AND STEM NUT. 100% COATED WEDGE IN- SURES BUBBLE -TIGHT SEAL EVERY TIME UP TO 200 PSI. SMOOTH, UNOBSTRUCTED WATERWAY IS FREE OF POCKETS, CAVITIES, AND DEPRESSIONS ALLOWING FOR MINIMAL FLOW LOSS AND LOWER PUMPING COSTS. ALL VALVES ACCEPT FULL SIZE TAPPING CUTTER. - TWO 0- RING SEALS ARE REPLACEABLE WITH THE VALVE FULLY OPEN AND SUBJECTED TO FULL -RATED WORKING' PRESSURE. ALL VALVES HYDROSTATICALLY TESTED TO 400 PSI. O-RING SEALS AT STUFFING BOX -'AND BONNET TO BODY FLANGES TO INSURE THE BEST POSSIBLE SEAL 1 CLOW CORROSION RESISTANT FUSION - BONDED EPDXY COATING PROTECTS BOTH INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF VALVE. PADS ON THE BOTTOM OF ALL VALVES KEEP VALVE IN UPRIGHT POSITION FOR EASIER STORAGE AND PROTECTION FROM THE ELEMENTS E �- ; t4 F-6100 F-6102 F-6103 F-6104 F-MO6 MECHAWAJO(NT RANGED THREADED ENDS F24M RGD.&MECH.A. 2'-12' 2'-12' 2'-3- 4'-12' 3'-12' E E E d L-G -j r-6106 F-6110 F-6111 F-6112 F-6113 FLANGED&RINGTITE PUSHON FOR PVC MECHANICAL KISH-ON ENDS RANGED & PUSH -ON 4'.12- 2'.8- CUTT[NG4N JOWT FOR CAST IRON RPE 4'-12' 4'.8- 4'-12" 12' S F E E E 7:L1 U L K— L—A--j F-6114 F-6115 F-6116 F-6120 F-6136 MECH. JE FOR WPING KWON FOR WIPING RINGTITE FOR LAYPING WHAW-A.001INT RGD.O$& . YCONSTRUCTION 4"-12" 4--8- 4'.8- INDr—AM POST VALVE 24/2'-12' 2*-12' A B C D E G H J K I P Q R S U V w y No. of T� IoFu"Open 2' 7 3-1/4 5-1/4 10-7/8 — — 3 — — 7-1/4 — — 1 W 1 4 2-1/2' 7-W — 7 MH — — 3-114_ 16-318 13-71.8 7-1/4 — — .4- 3' 8 3-1/2 7-1/8 12,M — 5,V4 3-1/2 18-7/8. 15-5/8 10 — — 10 4- 9 4-112 — 14-34 4-1/2 6-3/4 .eM IM8 4-1/2 22,V4 18-1/4 10 ..6-3/4 9-3(4 M4 10. -1/4 p 6" 10-1/2 5 t6,3/4 7-7/8 — 19 5-1/4 7-N4 8--1/4 12 5 30-1/8 23-314 12 7-3/4 11-1/4 -7-314 11-1141 .*112 -1�112 8' 11--m 5-1r2 8-1/2 22-1/2 .J/ 5-5/8 8-1/2 BA/2 1 2-N4 5-1/2 37-X4 29-1/4 14 B-1/2 11-W 9-1/4 12,T4 25-1/2 10' 13 7 10 26-1/2 7 10 45,3/4 35,M 18 10 1 113-11/2� 31-1/2 121 14 .�8 30 8-1/2 11 53-1/8 40-5/8 18 11 "4 37-314 CLOW VALVE CO. 1375 Magnolia Avenue Corona, California 91719 Phone 714-735-5555 FAX 714-735-0837 VALVE COMPANY A Division., of MoWane, Incorporated CLOW VALVE CO. 902 South 2nd Street Oskaloosa, Iowa 52577 Phone 515-673-8611 FAX 515-673-8269 UNIX 0 " xr, A OR IP PC-U991 Dated May 10, 1999 ifolo" u UNION FOUNDRY COMPANY - Tyler Pipe/Utilities Division 0 P.O.Box 2027 * Tyler, Texas 75710 * (903) 882-5511 Union Foundry Company * P.O.Box 309 * Anniston, Alabama 36202 e (256) 236-7601 Tyler/Union ei� NT DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS shall be produced in the USA in accordance with all applicable terms and provisions of ANSI/AVYIWA C1 53/ A21.53 and ANSI/AWWA C 111 /A2 1.11. NOTE: Fittings are cement -lined and seal - coated in accordance with ANSI/AWWA C 1 04/A21.,4; also available double cement - lined or bare. See list price sheet for details. MECHANICAL JOINT C 153 DUCTILE IRON COMPACT FITTINGS Sizes 3" thru 12" UL Listed For Fire Main Equipment --i T _T K� I D C F A K' JOINT DIMENSIONS IN INCHES BOLTS Size A Die. B -, C Die. D Die. F Die. J Die. KI Die. K2 Die. L M S T X Die. -Size No. 3 3.96 2.50 4.84 4.94 A.06 6.19 7.62 7.69 .58 .62 .39 .33 3 /4 I/ax3 A 4 4.80 2.50 5.92 6.02 4.90 7.50 9.06 9.12 .60 .75 .39 -.34 7/8 3 /4x3'/2 4 6 6.90 2.50 8.02 8.12 7.00 9.50 11.06 11.12 .63 .88 .43 .36 7 /8 3 /401/2 6 8 9.05 2.50 10.17 10.27 9.15 11.75 12.31 13.37 .66 1.00 .45 .38 7/ a 3 /4x3'/2 6 10 11.10 2.50 12.22 12.34 11.20 14.00 15.62 15.62 .70 1.00 A7 7 /8 3 /4x3'/2 8 12 13.20 2.50 14.32 14." 13.30 16.25 17.88 17.88 .73 1.00 .49 .40 .42 7/, 3 /aV2 8 1 A 15.30 3.50 16.40 16.54 15.44 18.75 20.31 20.25 .79 1.25 .56 .47 7 /8 3/4x4 10 16 17.40 3.50 18.50 18.64 17.54 21.00 22.56 22.50 .85 1.31 .57 .50 7/, '/4x4 12 18 19.50 3.50 20.60 207A 19.64 23.25 24.83 24.75 1.00 1.38 .68 .54 7/, 3/ Ax4 12 20 21.60 3.50 22.70 22.84 21.74 25-50 27.08 27.08 1.02 1." .69 .57 7/, 3/4X4 14 24 25.80 3.50 26.90 27.OA 25.94 30.00 31.58 31.50 1.02 1.56 .75 .61 7/, '/4X4'/2 16 BENDS .R D 90' Bends (1 /4) 45' Bends (1 /8) 221/2' Bends (1/ 16) 111/40 (1/32) Size T Dimensions A R Weight Dimensions A R Weight Dimensions A R Weight Dimensions A R Weight 3 .34 A.5 A.0 20 2.00 3.62 16 1.50 4.98 15 1.25 7.62 15 4 .35 5.0 4.5 26 2.49 4.81 22 1.82 6.66 21 1.55 10.70 20 6 .37 6.5 6.0 48 3.50 7.25 40 2.59 10.50 37 1.81 13.26 33 8 .39 7.5 7.0 68 4.00 8.44 59 2.85 11.80 51 2.06 15.80 48 10 .41 9.5 9.0 136 5.01 10.88 86 3.35 1,41.35 67 2.32 18.36 61 12 .43 10.5 10.0 141 5.98 13.25 109 3.86 16.90 90 2.56 20.90 79 1A .51 12.0 11.5 220 5.50 12.06 164 3.93 17.25 148 2.59 21.25 133 16 .52 13.0 12.5 264 5.98 13.25 202 3.98 17.50 179 2.62 21.50 159 18 .59 15.5 14.0 410 7.50 1,4.50 325 7.50 30.19 292 7.50 60.9A 320 20 .60 17.0 15.5 505 8.00 16.88 368 8.50 35.19 364 8.50 71.07 346 24 .62 20.0 18.5 695 9.00 18.12 481 9.00 37.69 481 9.00 76.12 457 Tyler Pipe/Utilities Division * P.O. Box 2027 0 Tyler, Texas 75710 * (903) 882-5511 2 Union Foundry Company 9 P.O. Box 309 9 Anniston, Alabama 36202 * (256) 236-7601 5-10-99 Tyler/Union SAMPLE SPECIFICATIONS Y-1 2" Compact Flanged Fittings shall be ductile iron and shall be produced in accordance with laying lengths specified in ANSI/AWWA C1 10/ A2 1.10. Flange surface shall be faced and drilled in accordance with ANSI Class 125 BI 6. 1. Nomi- nal body thickness shall be Manufacturer's Stan- clard, but shall not be less than those specified in ANSI/AWWA C1 53/A21.53 "Standards for Ductile Iron Compact Fittings". Flange thickness shall be in accordance with the Manufacturer's Standards. Working Pressure Rating shall be 250 PSI for water. Fittings shall be made in the United States of America and shall not have been refur- bished or re -worked by anyone other than the manufacturer. Standard Class 125 template for drilling shall be used for all flanges. Drilling templates shall be in multiples of four, so that fittings may be made to face in any quarter. Bolt holes shall straddle the center line and shall be equally spaced. Misalign- ment of bolt holes of two opposing flanges shall not exceed 0. 12 inches. All fittings shall be in accordance with NSF-61. interiors shall be lined and seal coated in accor- dance with ANSI/AWWA C1 04/A2 1.04 "Cement - mortar Lining for Ductile Iron Pipe and Fittings for Water" unless otherwise specified by the user. Flanged Compact 90' (11 /4) Bend Dimensions In Inches Size T A R Weig�t 3 0.34 5.50 4.00 23 4 0.35 6.50 4.50 32 6 0.37 8.00 6.00 56 8 0.39 9.00 7.00 78 10 0.41 11.00 9.00 125 12 0.43 12.00 10.00 178 DUCTILE IRON COMPACT FLANGED FITTINGS, 250 P.S.I. RATING BC T O.D. T Joint Dimensions In Inches Nominal Flange Flange Bolt Bolt Hole Number Pipe Size O.D. Thickness T Circle Diameter of Bolt$ 3 7.5 0.60 6.00 3 /4 4 4 9.0 0.63 7.50 3 /4 8 6 11.0 .0.63 9.50 7 /8 8 8 13.5 0.70 11.75 7/8 81 10 16.0 0.75 14.25 1 12 12 19.0 0.81 17.00 1 12 Flanged Compact 45' (1 /8) Bend Dimensions In Inches Size T B R Weight A 0.35 4.00 4.81 28 6 0.37 5.00 7.25 41 8 0.39 5.50 8.44 69 10 0.41 6.50 10.88 98 12 0.43 7.50 13.25 139 Tyler Pipe/Utilities Division * P.O. Box 20V 0 Tyler, Texas 75710 * (903) 882-5511 5-10-99 Union Foundry Company * P.O. Box 309 - Anniston, Alabama 36202 - (256) 236-7601 27 Uni-Flangel Series 1400 WORKING PRESSURE - 3" THROUGH 16" 350 PSI - 18" THROUGH 36" 250 PSI Ductile iron wedge actuating screw, with the Auto-Tork(D break -away head design, insures proper torque during installation. I Gland body is of High Strength Ductile iron per ASTM A536, Grade 65-45-12. Compatible with all mechanical joints conforming to ANSI / AWWA C111 / A21.1 1. Color Code: Black for ductile iron pipe sh is shop coat that is suitable most field applied coatings. Wedges are ductile iron and heat treated to a hardness of 370 BHN minimum. Jni-Flange Series 1400 offers a i ium 2:1 safety factor at the full pressure of the device, in all when tested in dead-end Jons. 3"THROUGH 36" SIZES - 100% DUCTILE IRON CONSTRUCTITN MADE IN USA Uni-Flange Series 1400 Installation Instructions 1. Clean the socket and pipe end. Lubricate gasket and plain end with approved pipe lubricant meeting AWWAC111. Placethe gland on the plain end with,the lip extension toward the plain end, followed by the gasket with the tapered edge of the gasket toward the plain end. 4. Tighten the T-bolts to the same torque recommended in AWWA C1 11 (45-60 ft. lbs. on 3", 75-90 ft. lbs. in 4" - 24" sizes, 100- 120 ft. lbs. in 30" - 36" sizes). Tighten in an alternating manner, (12 o'clock, 6 o'clock, 9 o'clock, 3 o'clock) maintaining the same gap between the gland and the face of the MJ bell at all points around the socket. Repeat the process until all bolts are within the approximate torque range. Use of a torque wrench is recommended. 2. Insert the pipe into the socket and press the gasket firmly and evenly into the gasket recess. Keep the joint straight during assembly. 3. Push the gland toward the socket and center it around the pipe with the gland lip against the gasket. Hand tighten the Auto-TorkO actuating screws to center the gland around the pipe. Insert T-bolts and hand.tighten nuts. With the gland positioned and centered around the pipe, loosen the Auto-Tork@ actuating screws and continue to tighten the T-bolts. Set deflection after joint assembly but before tightening bolts (max. deflection is 5.). 5. After correct assembly of the 6. Tighten each Auto-TorkO actuating screw mechanical joint, bring all wedges by turning approximately 180 degrees (1/2 in contact with the pipe surface by turn), alternating among screws until the turning the Auto-TorkO actuating break away heads twist off. Never turn a screws in a clockwise direction single head over 180 degrees without until contact is made and screw is alternating to another screw. 'hand tight." 0 Note: The Series 1400 can be re -used or re -installed after the Auto -Tore screw heads have been twisted off. In this case, tighten the hex head of the wedge activating screw to 75 - 110 ft. lbs. Consult factory before attempting installation on plain end fittings. As W �FORE 52 3/ Fits 2" Square Operating Nut INDICATOR PO ST STYLE 2925 GENERAL DIMENSION LAYOUT I CLOW VALVE COMPANY I .. bq. 6" Dia. ��— 12" Dia. --� I F-5760 I Dund Line 2".Black Vinyl Tape -A- VALVE SIZE GATE VALVE RW VALVE 4" 1 9/16 1 9/16 6" 1 7/8 1 7/8 1 8 2 2 1091 2 1/8 2 1/8 1211 2 1/8 2 1/8 1411 8 1/4 NA Dia. 4 - 5/8 - 11 N.C. x 2 1/4" Hex Head Bolts 10 1/2" Dia. B.C. 0 Series 774 & 774DCDA (411-121� Corn , s cunles , gact t ' s steel double check and double che 'C detector backflow preventers • Designed to prevent the reverse flow of polluted water from entering into the potable water system. • Used, where approved by the local authority, for non -health hazard installations. The 774DCDA is the same as the 774 except with a hydraulically balanced meter bypass assembly to detect low flows. Specifications Size 4"- 12"(100 - 300mm), main valve body and internal metal parts are 300 series (lead free) stainless steel; check assembly, NorylO. For supply pressures up to 175 psi (12 bars). Water temperatures up to I I OOF (430C) continuous. Flange dimension in accordance with AWWA Class D. Options For 774, add Suffix: LF - less gate valves. NRS - with non -rising stem resilient seated flanged gate valves. OSY - LIUFM resilient seated outside stem and yoke gate valves. S - with cast iron strainer. 0 0 For 774DCDA, add Suffix: OC CFM - with cubic feet per minute meter. 0 ( 0 0 GPM - with gallons per minute meter. LF -,less gate valves P — OSY - with UUFM resilient seated outside stem and yoke gate valves. Flow Charts see page 46-47. 130irnension-SIVVgits. Features Short end -to - end dimensions make it ideal for retrofitting, • Patented 1111P torsion spring 1111mm" check module 7740SY provides lowest documented head loss available • Stainless steel body weighs half of that of competitive units, reducing installation and shipping costs • Stainless steel construction provides long term corrosion protection and maximum strength • Ease of maintenance via single top access cover • Trouble -free operation with thermoplastic and stainless steel check modules • Requires no special tools for servicing • Compact design permits use of smaller vaults and enclosures For detail model information, request ES-774, ES-774DCDA. For WattsBox Enclosures, request ES-WB and ES-WB-T Size .,Cod6 M N 77 1 §Order Strainer ON in. mm, 374OSY 4DCDA . in. mm in. mm 4 100 0438001 0438004 121/8 308 81/4 210 6 150 0438009 0438012 181/2 470 131/2 343 8 200 043�025 Ob8628 2 15/8 549 151/2 394 10 250 0438041 0438044 26 660 181/2 470 12 HO M8681 0438084 297/8 759 213/4 552 Net Weilihts Dimensions 774 714 774bCDA 774DCDA Sizejq.N). q A C-10,06n). -P G L P w/Gates Yj/d Gites */q#t �s w/0 Gates .in.,. mm-�. 'in..,. nifir. in. - mm, in. mm in. mm m. mm in.., mm. b. .:'kg� � 11J.. kg. Ib kg. 11J.- kg. 4 100 40 1016 223/4 5,78 41/2 114 10 250 22 559 141/2 368 225 102 58 26 240 109 73 33 6. 1'50 481h 12 8 2' 301/8. '765 51h 140 15 3.81 271/2 69.9 151/2 394 375 170 1,05 48 390 177 120 54 8 200 521/2 1334 371/4 959 63/4 171 15 381 291/2 749 181/4 464 561 254 169 77 572 259 180 82 1.0 250 551h 144 �45Y4 11.62 8 200 15 381 2 ' 91/2 749� 191/2 495 763 .346 179 81 774 351 190 86 12 300 571/2 1461 54 1372 91/2 241 15 3'81 291/2 749 21 533 1033 469 209 95 1044 474 220 100 Contact your local Watts Agent or call Customer Service (978) 689-6066 for other models and order numbers or refer to PL-WR watts regulator. e backflow products division 19 CLOW PRODUCT -DATA SHEET 011'. 01 a I Material L ASTLI Spec. 2 I to, LSILW bronze 2A Sleet A-307 3A I 4A I C.I. A-126 C1.6 SA 1 :111 C t. A-126 CfB $A I Mines pl. SS A-274 (304) 7AA I hinge -------------- wont. ir-71 !, 7A5 1 .1k.y..y 1.1 LSJLW 11, n. .536 wor) 4AA I 01iii Bell (4*.Ir)"* &AS I DI.0 Bell Bronze (lcr-ir) 9AA SAS I 2 Disc 8.11 G-Ring jiv, irl Disc 8.11 W.!.l S­ R.1ob., iQA I Disc held., Ore... (r-3-) C.I. A-126 C1.8 44'-12-1 11A I Ms. plate a — 12AA I ol.c Sm Pirble., IIAG­ I Disc ST" '7* r C.I. A-11. �2. (4-.12-) 13A 1 06. N.t A.iitpool SI-1 8—ir. IAA'* I Dlii� Rln2 (C-121 S­.. ISA I seat Aing Bronze ILA I Spring steel ITA I Pl. to, LSILW S 21 iJA 7 W S 111 19A I— Steel 20AA I L.— A— to, LS steel 70AS I L ... I A- to, LW steel 71A I 13'.0itt 51.0 ZIA 2 Ms. Head D—W 8.11 slitril 33A I Eye Bell -12 Me. N.I. St —I 24A t S1.111.0 so. B­. 2SA Gra Ito Filled ILA EP!'a;11q .;._ B,.n,. 27A I W.1ohl C.I. A-126 C1.11 ILA I Set si,­ st-1 Denotes Ina: parl is a.silablo o" as part of an assembly. r..,% imirig,ii (2,31. A LEVER AND WEIGHT ASSEMBLY, 27A 6A 19A 24A 28A-,a� I 26A 25A "a, I ��_&;_ 17A —1—V 20AA 18A 18A-, Q R-1-20AB LEVER AND ­SPRING % ASSEMBLY 2JA 22AP21A/ Disc Arrangement 2"-3" 12AB BRONZE 17AA DISC 7AB 13A 141A 1 5A 10A k7AA RESILIENT 7AB I DISC 11A 13A A, B —KEYWAYED FOR LSILW RESILIENT TO BRONZE SEATING ASSEMBLY- 9AAxu- SAA 2A 15A 7AA —KEYWAYED 12AB 7AB FOR LSILW 1A 14A BRONZE TO 9AB BRON7F: I 8AB SEATING 13A 0 _0 ASSEMBLY 9AB AlfflIfthh, AMPERMli CLOW VALVE CO. 2" - -1211 H'orz. Swing Check Valve AM DtV. OF WWANE W_ I " I Figure 106 902 SOUTH 2nd ST. AIN114A 200 WP OSKALOOSA, IOWA 52577 1106-1 Harrington Hydrant Storz 1/4 Turn, Cap Off 1/4 Turn, Hose On Quick connection of hose to hydrant saves time, lives and property. "Fight The Fire ... Not The Connectionsil Harrington, Inc. Hydrant Storz Specialists 2630 West 2 Ist Street, Erie, PA 16506 Phone: 1-800-553-0078 - Fax 814-838-7339 www.hydrantstorz.com - info: 0harrinc.corn 'w'w uARRINGTON PART S TORZ S PANNER WRENCHES HSSW-41-61 —"Single-End Spanner Wrench" HSSW TM NUMBERS 'HHSW- 100 —"Hydrant Spanner Wrench" HHSW TM 04" & 5" STORZ - HIHSTm —Integral Hydrant Storz w/Cap *HIHS-AMLOK-40-45 *HIHS-AVK-40-45 *HIHS-CLOW-40-45 OHIHS-EJIW-40-375 oHl14S-EJfW-40-45 *HIHS-KEN-40-4S *MHS-MLR-40-45 OHIHS-USPIPE-40-45 *HIHS-WAT-40-45 *HIHS-AMLOK-50-45 *HIHS-AVK-50-45 *HIHS-CLOW-50-45 'HIHS-EJIW-50-375 *HlHS-EJlW-50-45 *HIHS-KEN-50-45 OHIHS-MLR-50-45 OHIHS-USPIPE-50-45 ,HIHS-WAT-so-45 Note: Each OEM connection method is unique. *4" & 5" STORZ - HPHA T11 —Permanent Hydrant Adapter w/Cap *HPHA40-40 (special thread) , HPHASO-40 (Special thread) * EIPHA40-40NH (4"NST) * FlP11A50-40NFl (4"NST) *HPHA40-45NH (4.5'NST) *HPHA50-45NH (4.5"NST) Note: Rigid (non -swivel) Female Thread. *4" NST (National Standard Thread) � 5.010 (ODM) X 4tpi ,4.5" NST (National Standard Thread) = 5.760 (ODM) x 4tpi "ODM" = Outside Diameter of the Male 0411 & 511 STORZ --HPSS OHPSS40-40-001 (4"NPT) OHPSS40-50-001 (5'NPT) IHPSS40-60-001 (6"NPT) —Permanent Sprinkler Storz w/Cap OHPSSSO-40-001 (4"NPT) OHPSS50-50-001 (5"NPT) OHPSS50-60-001 (6'NPT) Note: Rigid (non-SWivel) NPT Female Thread. *4" NPT (National Pipe Thread, Tapered) = (approx) 4.470 (ODM) x 81pi *5" NPT (National Pipe Thread, Tapered) = (approx) 5.563 (ODM) x 6tpi *6" NPT (National Pipe Thread, Tapered) = (approx) 6.590 (ODM) x 8tpi 1�4" &5" STORZ,'31 I ` ELBOW H30E` —30'ElbOW w/Cap -H�0&40-40-002 (4"NPSH) -H30E-50-40-002 (4'NPSH) -H30E-40-50-002 (5"NPSH) -H30E-50-50-002 (5'NPSH) *H30E-40-60-002 (6"NPSH) -H30E-50-60-002 (6'NPSH) Note: Swivel NPSH Female Thread. ,4" NPSH (National Pipe Thread, Straight) = 4.470 (ODM) x 8tpi * 5" NPSH (National Pipe Thread, Straight) = 5.563 (ODM) x 6tpi * 6" NPSH (National Pipe Thread, Straight) = 6.590 (ODM) x 8tpi *4" & 5" Storz Permanent Cap- HBC111 —Storz Blind Cap, with aircraft cable. 4" & 5' StorZ Hose Couplings, Harrin on, Inc. NFPA/U.S. Standards: 9t *Storz Pressure Seal Hydrant Storz Specialists eStorz Locking Devise, 2630 West 21st Street, Erie, PA 16506 Phone: 1-800-553-0078 * Fax: 814-838-7339 *Hard -anodized aluminum ikwww-hydrantstorzcorn - info@harrinc.com -jixon Powhatan Double Clapper Siamese Connections - Y Type Back Outlet Page 1 of 2 ORDER ONLINE or Toll Free 1-800-: UA/E Q The John M. Ellsworth C-ompqny Fire Equipment Shopping Cart Search: L 90, Shop By Brand Home I Free Catalog I Order Status I My Account ALL PRODUCT DEPARTMENTS Home > Fire Department Connections > Siamese Clapper Fire Department Connections Fire Hose Fire Hose Couplings Fire Hydrant Adapters & Caps Fire Nozzles Fire Pumps Foam Equipment Hose Nipples & Swivels Powhatan Racks & Reels Rescue Equipment Sprinkler Equipment Storage Equipment Storz Fittings 4 Valves & Wyes 4 Wrenches & Tools CONTINUE SHOPPING Home See All Categories See All Brands Dixon Powhatan Double Clapper Siamese Connections - Y Type Ba Outlet Double drop clapper wirh (2) pin lug swivel inlet! J1# Enlarge Image Provides the required 500 GPM minimum to supplement the fire protection as an auxiliary inl connection to the water supply. (250 GPM minu: per inlet). Exposed Fire Department Connection ( FDC) provide an economical method of satisfy local fire codes. Not all configurations are stock( Other sizes and threads are also available. Call pricing and availability. Features Item # DCS4025F Manufacturer Dixon Powhatan Shipping Weight 11.5 lbs. Powhatan # 21-132-00016 Outlet NPT 4" Inlets 2-1/2" NH(NST) Branding AutoSprinkler Our Price: $281.65 Volume Pricing $267.56 2-5 $254.19 6 or more • Cast brass finish • U/L listed and FM approved • For use up to 175 PSI • -P (polished) • -C (polished chrome plated) http://www.jmefireequipment.conilitemlIO8799IDixon-Powhatan-Double-ClaDDer-Siames... 6/20/2007 Jixon Powhatan Double Clapper Siamese Connections - Y Type Back Outlet Page 2 of 2 Additional Double Clapper Siamese Connections - Y Type Back Outlet SKU Powhatan # Outlet NPT Inlets Branding Price DCS4025F 21-132-00016 4" 2-1/2" NH(NST) AutoSprinkler $281.E DCS4025F-P 21-132-00017 4" 2-1/2" NH(NST) AutoSprinkler $306.7 DCS4025F-C 21-132-00018 4" 2-1/2" NH(NST) AutoSprinkler $331.G DCS4025F-SP 21-132-00031 4" 2-1/2" NH(NST) Standpipe $281.E DCS4025F-NB 21-132-00037 4" 2-1/2" NH(NST) None $281.E DCS403ONYFD 21-132-00043 4" 3"NYFD AutoSprinkler $326.e DCS403OF 21-132-00048 4" 3' NH(NST) AutoSprinkler $326.G DCS6025F-SP 21-132-00055 6" 2-1/2" NH(NST) Standpipe $388.S DCS6025F 21-132-00061 6" 2-1/2" NH(NST) AutoSprinkler $388.9 Home I Contact Us I Ordering I Credit Application I Catalog Request I E-mail List I Categories I Petroleum Equipment I Sanitary Fittings I , ORDER ONLINE or Toll Free 1-800-563-8858 I—WIS—Al enEM @ 2007 John M. Ellsworth Co., Inc. httD://www.imefireeoUiDment.comlitemllO8799IDixon-Powhatan-Double-ClaDi)er-Siames... 6/20/2007 Stan- 0on Model S92 Saddle Pipe Support Specification Page 1 of 2 Home Page Standon Model S92 Adjustable Pipe Saddle Support Products The "Standon" model #S92 pipe support is ,cations Cif specifically designed to fit ductile iron pipe. A _ nearly 50% circumferential cradle, and a pipe to saddle gap of less than .125" guarantees excellent • S89 Flane performance. A neoprene liner is available for IPS Support size pipe for a perfect fit. • S92 Saddle Support Accepts standard IPS pipe - No threading • C92 Clg= required. Sqpport Comes complete with over -sized anchorable • S96 Flange base plate. Cradle Available in sizes 2" through 36". Sqpport Also available in 100% 304 Stainless Steel. • TP Thrust Plates Installation MATERIAL Guides Saddle Strap: ASTM A36 D�istdbutm Literature CAD Drawin2s Corporate Info Contact Us Collar/ Base Cups: ASTM A53 D.O.M. tubing Threaded Stud: ASTM A36; rolled thread Grade ASTM A307 BasePlate: ASTMA36 Sheet Steel -.25" plate Optional Material: 100% 304 Stainless Steel FABRICATION 100% MIG welding, electrode All welds: E70YX Saddles: Formed to ductile iron radius. FINISH All pipe supports have a corrosion resistant, galvanized finish. DIMENSIONS UPPORT11PIPE11STRAP11THREADI BASE [EXTENSIUN DIST. TO SIZE O.D. I SIZE 11 STUD I PLATE IIPIPERE( 11 FLOOR L_ - 21' 2.511 3/8' x 4"x6"x1/4J[2" SCH. 4 711 L 211 d I 11 11 3/8" x il htti)://www.standon.net/s92spec.html 6/20/2007 Stan.lon Model S92 Saddle Pipe Support Specification Page 2 of 2 311 3/8" x 4"x6lfx'/4 2" SCH. 40 711 211 1� 1411 811x8"xV2 I 1 3" SCH. 40 1 L9 V2 1611 F5/T —x 1 8 tI x8"xY2" ]1 3" SCH. 40 9Y2" L 3" 1 1� I http://www.standon.net/s92spec.html 6/20/2007 v. 'TERRA ASSOCIATES, Int, Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering' Geology and Environmental Earth SC'iences August 2, 2006 Project -NO. Tr4893 Mr. Ross Woods Point Edwards, LLC RESUB 2861 Alaskan Way, Suite 107 Seattle, Washington 98121 AUG -4,2006 Subject: Response to Plan Review Comments BUILDING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDMONDS Buildings 6 and 7 Foundation Plan Review Point Edwards'Condominiums Edmonds, Washington References: 1. Letter, City of Edmo'nds'Building Division Plan Review Comments, Poin't Edwards Building 6 & 7 Foundation Only, Plan Check # 2006-0705 & #2006-0706, dated July 11, 2006 2. Geotech,nica'l Consultation, Temporary Shoring — Buildings 6 and 7. Point Edwards Condominiums, Project No. T-4893, prepared, by Terra Associates, Inc., dated July,7, 2006 3. Grading Review, Buildings 6 and -7, Point Edwards Condominiums, Project No. T-4893, prepared by Terra.A§sociates, Inc., dated June 8, 2006 4. Supplementary Subsurface Exploration, Point Edwards Condominiums, Project No. T-4893,' prepared by Terra Associates, lnc.,'dated July 30, 2003 5. Geologically Hazardous Areas Review, Point Edwards Condominiums (UNOCA-L.Site), Project No. T4893, prepared by Terra Associates, Inc., dated January 20, 2003 6. Preliminary Geotechnical Report,,UNOCAL Site, Project No. T4893' prepared by Terra Associates, Inc., dated November 21, 2001 Dear Mr. Wo?ds: As requested, we reviewed City of Edmonds comments regarding the City's review of foundation, pla�s for Building 6 and 7 at the Point Edwards Condominiums project.. Specifically, we have been asked to respond to the following comments on Pages I and 2 of the. referenced.letter. STREET,FILE 12525 Willows Road, Suite'101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 Phone (425) 821-7777'9 Fax (425) 821-4334 Mr* Ross Woods August 2,2006 CoAfinent No. 3. Pa2e 1:. "Provide a letterfrom the geotechnical engineer of record 'that he has reviei�ed the prop'osedfou'ndation and rep shoring plans. and that they meet the recommendations in their ort. We have completed a review of the project's shoring plans in response to City of Edmonds Building .-Division Plan Review Comments (Plan Check #2006-0695) letter dated July 12, 2006. The results of our shoring plan' review'are provided separately in ourletter dated August L 2006..7 We, reviewed structural drawings for Buildings 6 and -7 to verify that the foundation, plans conform' to our geotec.hriical recommendations. We were. providod.thefollowing plans for our review: Sheets S 1. 1 and S 1.2, Structural and General Notes'.,, * Sheets S2.1 and S2.2, Structural -Foundation Plan and Plan Notes 9 Sheets S2. fand S21, Structural Youndation Plan -aind.Plan Notes -Sheets S3.1,and S3.2, StrticturAl Foundation and.i"-oncrete Details,.. All'plans were prepared by DO Engineers, and are dated Juno .13 2006.- The plans indicatew.that foundation support for Buildings 6 & 7 will be*provided by conventional spread footings: constriicted with top-gf-fo.oting elevations at E.Iev. 109' 2".and Elev'. I 10' 4." Design soil values outlined in:the Soils and Foundations Section* of,the. -Structural Gene'raf Notes 'on Sheet S,1.1- indicate' that structural design' incorporated allowable founda tion pressures of 5,000 ounds per's q*uare foot.osf) for -native soil and 3 *000 psf for - p structural. fill. We understand from' iour.conversations with DCI Engineers that footings located along. and north of Building Line M'(Lines M through R) were.designed based on an allowable bearing capac' ity value of 3,000 psf. The footings located south of Line M were designed b ased on an allowab le -bearing capacity value of 5,000 p sf. In our referenced preliminary geotechnidal report, we rd&ommended dimensioning foundations for a net allowable bearing capacity- of 5,000. psf w ' here supported by very dense -silt and hard clay soils. Based on,our site, - explorations and the planned footing elevations, we expect- that footing', excavations south- of Line M will expose very dense silt, and. hard clay soils suitable.for. support'of allowable 5,000 psf bean'ng.pressures. In most areas north of Line M, foundation excavationswill likely exposi"mediuni dense�to� dense native silty sand at planned foundation elevations. Accordingly,� footings located north of Line'M bearing on these native' soils can be, dimensioned as planned for an allowable bearing capacityof 3,000-0�f., Due to `�'ana,tions , in subgrade conditions, � it Js possible that structural fills placed during site:remedia'l work.'' perf6rined by Unocail,'or medium denseto aen's6mative silt�sand§ Will bepresent,in footing excavations' south of Y., Line. M. -,hi this. case, in order, to provide' maximum' allowable 5,000.. psf bearing support, we recommend excavating *into these soils 'a minimum of three (3) feet and restoring grade 'to base -of -footing elevation with compacted, clean I V4-inch: minus crushed.rock. The crushed rock pad should I es extend late'ra ly beyond -the edg' of the footing a minimum distance of 18 inches. Project No. T-4.893 Page No. 2 Mr: Ross Woods August 2, 2006 Based on our review with the above discussion, taken into consideration, it is our opinion that the foundation plans are in general c"con formance with Our geotechnical recommendations. General and Site Comments, Foundation and First Story Concrete-Frame'Work Comments, Comment No. Tbi. Page 2: "Section 1802.2.7 requires the report.togive the amount of-lateralpressure' on the retaining walls due to seismi . c movementforSDC D sites to be determined Section -1802. j. 7. 1. A review' of a' site grading- plan, Sheet 4F.-of 30 dated jun&l, 2006, indicates backslopes behind bu i . Iding walls will have a maximum inclination of approximately 3:l'(Horizontal:V6Aical). Our --anal' is of a'design seismic' �ys earth pressure value,*as completed using methods, "outlined :in "Design 'of E�arth J�etain'ing'..Sfructures For Dynamic' Loads,-." by' H..B*olton Seed' and Robert V. Whitman (1970). Based. on our analysis, a uniform - horizontally -Applied sei§riiie earth pressure value of 17H-psf can be.use d in wall des I ign, wh . ere H is the walf h6ight in feet. 'The seismic earth pressure: value was'calculated. based on a design horizontal seismi6 acceleration' value of 0.1�8g (provided by DC1 Engineers), We.trust the information presented is sufficient f5r your current needs. If you haveany questions or require ..additional information, please c�ll. R. Sincerely yours, 0 T-ERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. John C. Sadler, L.E.G., L.H.G. 00 Project Manager 32039 -T. A.61 �-_ Kevin P: Roberts, P.E. Senior Engineer cc: Mr. Jeff Brink, DO Engineers Ms. Valerie Sargent,- Weber+-Thompjson, PLLC Project No. T-48�.93 -Page No.. 3- I A A TERRA ASSOCIATES- lhc. Consultants in G.eotechnical Engineering, qeology and Environmental Earth Sciences June 8, 2006, Project No. T-4893 Mr. Ross Woods Point Edwards, LLC RESUB 2801 Alaskan Way, 'Suite 107 Seattle, Wash mgton 99121 JUL 24 2006 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Subject: Grading Review -CITY OF EDMONDS Buildings.6 and 7 Point Edwards Condominiums Edmonds, Washington References:',. I., Preliminary Geotechnical Report, UNOCAL Site, Project, No. T-4893, prepared by Terra Associaies,Inc-, dated November 21, 200 1, .2., Steep Slope Hazard Review, Point Edwards Condominiums (UNOCAL Site), Project No.' T-4893, pre'pared1by Terra Associates, Inc., dated Del cember, 13, 2002 3. Geologically. Hazardous Areas, Review, Point Edwards Condoniiniurns (UNOCAL Site), Project No.-T-4893, prepared by Terra Associates, Inc.,'dated January 20, 2003 Dear Mr. Woods: As requested,, we reviewed a plan sheet by Triad Associates titled Building 617 and.Amenity Building Fine Grading' and Excavation Cross Sections'dated June 1 2006. Tlie: plans indicate that excavations to accommodaf6 a portion of the daylight lower building levels in the northern portion *of Building 7:and il�e southern portion of Building 6 will extend from the western side of the building's to the existing steep slope at approximately Elev. .110.0. This' grading will lower the elevation of the top. of the slope by about four feet. The western side of both buildings will be setback approximately N to 35. feet fiorn. the modified top -of -slope.' Based on our review,'it is our opinion that the proposed grading At this location will not adversely impact stability of the stee' slope ro p p vided that,the recommendations for erosion prevention and site drainage presented in the. referenced documents are followed. The planned- grading -will enhance the existing stability of the,slope due to. unloading resulting from the' soil removal and, will result in improved surface drainage at the too of the slope by directing surface runoff away,from the slope crest to the'yardArainage system. STREET FILE. 12525 Willows Road,. Suito 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 Phone (425)-821-7777 - Fax (425) 821-4334, Mr., Ross Woods June 8, 2006 Alternative Keyway Drainage The plan,indicates a fill embankment having -a maximum thickness of about six feet will.be constructed in the yard area west of'the southern portion of Building 7. Much of the embankment fill will be constructed over existing grades, of about 20 percent. As 'discussed in Section 5.2 and'shown on Figure 3 (General Slope Fill Detail) of our referenced -preliminary geotechnical report, embankment fills placed on slopes exceeding a grade of 20 percent must be keyed and benched into competent native soils' and should be. constructed with toe drain in the excavation for the keyway cut at the toe of the fill slope. The keyway drain shown on Figure 3'of our referenced preliminary, report consists of a six-inch diameter perforated PVC pipe that is enveloped in washed drainage aggregate. Typically, the keyway drain is'connected to a tightline pipe that,da'ylights at an. approved point of controlled, discharge, such as the site storm sewer.system. However, due to site'elevations, a keyway drain constructed as:shown on this figure'cannot be connected to the site storm drainage system. Considering this, and because we do not expect-thafthe keyway drain will collect or discharge significant volumes of water, it I is our opinion that adequate keyway drainagd.can be provided by constructing several ballast - rock drainage windows I in the toe of the fill embankment in lieu of usin� a continuous -drain pipe. The rock drainage windows will provide adequate hydrostatic relief should any sub -fill seepage find its way to -the toe of p the'fill embankment. A detail showing - this alternative drainage option is attached as Figure 1. The need for additional or alternate sub -fill drainage should be based -on field conditions observed at the time of construction. Lightweight Fill The plans show the southeastern portion of the below -grade parking. garage for Building 7 will underlie up to about ten feet of landscape fill. We understand that lightweight polystyrene foam will be used for much of the fill over the parking garage ceiling slab. The planned grading indicates two rockeries with maximum heights of about seven to eight feet will be constructed against and supported by the polystyrene, foam -in' the northem. portion of the fill area. In our o . pinion, rockeries -built in accordance, with Associated Rockery Contractors (ARC) Standard Rockery Construction Guidelines may be constructed on and against the polystyrene foarh material. 'We recommend placing at least six inches of a crushed rock leveling course between the base -rocks. of the rockery and -the' polystyrene foam subgrade. Co - nceptual information provided by Mr. Jeff Brink of DCI Engineers indicates the product to be used, for. the lightweight fill is Type IX Insulfbam. R-TECH., However, our review of material properties for the Ins.ulfoarn products and analysis indicate that Type I Itisulfoam'R-TECH is an'acceptable alternative for the proposed application. Project No. T-4893' Page No. 2 ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE -(PREPARED PER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT-) STRUCTURAL FILL (SEE NOTE 1) GEOTEXTILE SEPARATION, LAYER (MI RAF[ 50OX OR EQUAL) N BALLAST ROCK DRAINAGE. ,WINDOW (SEE NOTE 2) ..C> 1.5' . . . . . . . . . . C>1� -77 2' (MIN.). KEYWAY EXCAVATION .61 (MIN.) STRUCTURAL FILL (SEE NOTE 1) NOT TO SCALE' NOTES: STRUCTURAL FILL SHALL BE COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 95% OF ASTM D 698 MAXIMUM DRY, DENSITY VALUE. .2) 2-INCH BALLAST ROCK DRAINAGE WINDOW; 1.5' THICK, SWIDE, CONSTRUCTED 30'(MAX.) ON CENTER ALONG TOE OF EMBANKMENT FILL. SPACING OF GRAVEL WINDOWS MAY BE ADJUSTED BASED ON CONDITIONS OBSERVED DURINGCONSTRUCTION. ALTERNATIVE KEYWAY DRAIN DETAIL iz-i 'Terra POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS. BUILDINGS 6 & 7 Associates, Inc. Consultant� in Geotechnical Engineering EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Geology and. Environmental Earth Scienc6 Proj. No. T4893'1 Date JUNE 2006.1 Figure 1 TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences August 2, 2006 Project No. T4893 0"IES11 1IB Mr. Ross Woods W Point Edwards, LLC AUG - 4 2006 2801 Alaskan Way, Suite 107 Seattle, Washington 99121 BUILDING DEPARTMENT C17Y OF EDMONDS Subject: Response to Plan Review Comments Buildings 6 and 7 Foundation Plan Review Point Edwards Condominiums Edmonds, Washington References: 1. Letter, City of Edmonds Building Division Plan Review Comments, Point Edwards Building 6 & 7 Foundation Only, Plan Check # 2006-0705 & #2006-0706, dated July 11, 2006 2. Geotechnical Consultation, Temporary Shoring —Buildings 6 and 7, Point Edwards Condominiums, Project No. T-4893, prepared by Terre Associates, hic., dated July 7, 2006 3. Grading Review, Buildings 6 and 7, Point Edwards Condominiums, Project No. T4893, prepared by Terra Associates, Inc., dated June 8, 2006 4, Supplementary Subsurface Exploration, Point Edwards Condominiums, Project No. T-4893, prepared by Terra Associates, Inc., dated July 30, 2003 5. Geologically Hazardous Areas Review, Point Edwards Condominiums (UNOCAL Site), Project No. T-4893, prepared by Terra Associates, lnc., dated January 20, 2003 6. Prelfininary Geoteclinical Repoil, UNOCAL Site, Project No. T-4893, prepared by Terra Associates, Inc., dated November 21, 2001 Dear Mr. Woods: As requested, we reviewed City of Edmonds comments regarding (lie City's review of foundation plans for Building 6 and 7 at the Point Edwards Condominiums project. Specifically, we have been asked to respond to the following comments on Pages I and 2 of the referenced letter. illows Roacl, SLlit('- 101, Kirldancl, Washington 98034 STREET FILYPhone (425) 821-7777 e Fax (425) 821-4334 �V% 9 FLI P M�. Ross Woods August 2, 2006 Comment No. 3, Pau 1: "Provide a lellerfi-oni the geolechnical engineei- of record that he has reviewed the proposedfoundation and shoring plans and that they ineel the recommendations ill 1heil- I-eporl. " We have completed a review of the project's shoring plans in response to City of Fchnonds Building Division Plan Review Comments (Plan Check #2006-0695) letter dated July 12, 2006. The results of our shoring plan review are provided separately in our letter dated August 1, 2006. We reviewed Structural drawings for Buildings 6 and 7 to verify that the foundation plans conform to our geolechnical recoininendat ions. We were provided tile following plans for our review: • Sheets S 1. 1 and S, 1.2, Structu ral and General Notes • Sheets S2.1 and S2.2, Structur-al Foundation Plan and Plan Notes • Sheets S2.1 and S2.2, Structural Foundation Plan and Plan Notes • Sheets S3.1 and S3.2, Structural Foundation and Concrete Details All plans were prepared by DC] Engineers, and are dated June 13, 2006, The plans indicate that foundafion support for Buildings 6 & 7 will be provided by conventional spread footings constructed with top -of -footing elevations at Eliev. 109' 2" and Elev. I 10' 4." Design soil values outlined in the Soils and Foundations Section of the Structural General Notes on Sheet S1.1 indicate that structural design incorporated allowable foundation pressures of 5,000 pounds per square foot (psf) for native soil and 3,000 psf for structural Fill. We understand from our conversations with DO Engineers that footings located along and north of Building Line M (Lines M through R) were designed based on all allowable bearing capacity value of 3,000 psf. Tile footings located south of Line M were designed based on an allowable bearing capacity value of 5,000 psf, Iii our referenced preliniinary geotechnical report, we reconu-nended dimensioning foundations for a net allowable bearing capacity of 5,000 psf where supported by very dense silt and hard clay soils. Based on our site explorations and the planned footing elevations, we expect that footing excavations south of Line M will expose very dense silt and hard clay soils suitable for support of allowable 5,000 psf bearing pressures. In most areas north of Line M, foundation excavations will likely expose medium dense to dense native silty sand at planned foundation elevations. Accordingly, footings located north of Line M bearing oil these native soils can be dimensioned as planned for all allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 psf. Due to variations in subgrade conditions, it is possible that structural fills placed during site remedial work performed by Unocal, or medium dense to dense native silty sands will be present in footing excavations south of Line M. In this case, in order to provide maxhuum allowable 5,000 psf bearing support, we recommend excavating into these soils a minimum of three (3) feet and restoring grade to base -of -footing elevation with compacted, clean I '/,-inch minus crushed rock, Tile crushed rock pad should extend laterally beyond the edges of the footing a ininimum distance of 18 inches. Project No. T-4893 Page No. 2 Mil. Ross Woods August 2, 2006 Based on our review with the above discussion taken into consideration, it is our opinion that the foundation plans are in general conformance wifli our geotecluiical recommendations. General and Site Comments, Foundation and First Story Concrete Framework Comments, Comment No. Lb., Page 2: "Section 1802.2.7 requi)-es the i-eport to give the aniount qf latei-al pressure on the i-etaining walls dite to seismic movementfibi- SDC D sites to be detei-mined. Section 1802.2.7. 1. " A review of a site grading plan, Sheet 4F of 30 dated June 1, 2006, indicates backslopes behind building walls will have a maximum incibiation of approximately 3:1 (Horizontal:Vertical). Our analysis of a design seismic earth pressure value was completed using methods outlined in "Design of Earth Retaining Siructin-es Foi- Dynamic Loacls, " by H. Bolton Seed and Robert V. Whitman (1970). Based on our analysis, a uniform horizontally -applied seismic earth pressure value of 1711 psf can be used in wall design, where H is the wall height in feet. The seismic earth pressure value was calculated based on a design horizontal seismic acceleration value of 0. 1 68g (provided by DCI Engineers). We trust the infon-nation presented is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any questions or require additional inforniation, please call. Sincerely yours, I'ERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. 4kt,(-c 4Z&"- John C. Sadler, L.E.G., L.H.G. Project Manager Kevin P. Roberts, P.E. Senior Engineer cc: Mr. Jeff Brink, DCI Engineers Ms. Valerie Sargent, Weber+Thompson, PLLC �-Z-0'6 Project No. T-4893 Page No. 3 TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Caum'111ants it- Goatechnir.11 1111"incering, Geology Fardi Sctunt. Mr. Ross Woods Point Edwards. LLC 2801 Alaskan Way. Suite i07 Seattle, Washington 98121 Subject: Gcotechnical Consultation Temporary Shoring -- Buildings 6 and 7 Point Edwards Condominiums Edmonds, Washington Dear Mr. Woods: June 7, 2006. Project No. T4893 RECEIVED J U N 2 8 2006 BUILDING DEPT. As requested. we perfornied supplertient3l stibsurface investigation at the site. Thc purpose of our work was to investigate subsurface conditions -in the areas where shoring is needed on the southern side of Building 7 and the northeastern side of Building 6 and to provide recommendations 14 design of the 0ioring. C, A plan sheet by Triad Associates tilled Building 6r7 and.4menity Building Fine Grading and Lixcovation Crosy Sections dated June 1, 2006, indicates the lower floor level of Buildings 6 and 7 will be constructed at Clev, 110.67. Based on the existing topography shown on this plan. excavation depths required for construe I ion of the lower building level %villapproach 3 Maximum of about 24 feet along the southern niargrin of Building 7 and about 20 feet on the northeastern side of Building 6. We understand that the shoring will include both cantilcvcrcd and tieback so!dier pile systetris, and that the shoring walls will be designed for temporary service. The recorpinendations presented in this report are based on Our unclLrstanding of the above design feature s, If actual features vary or changes are made, wc. should review them in order to modif), our recommendations, as requited. We should review final design drawrings and specifications to verify that our recommendations have been proper)y interpreted and incorponted into project design. FILE 12525 Willows Road, Sulte 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 Phone (425) 821-7777 * Nix (425) 821-4334 Y, Mr. Ross Woods June 7, 2006 SUBSUI&ACE CONDITIONS We investigated subsurface conditions on the southern side of Building 7 by excavating 4 test pits to maximum depths of 14,5 to 16 feet below existing surface grades using a track -mounted excavator. In addition, we excavated one test pit to a maximum depth of about 14.5 feet near the northeastern corner of Building 6. The approximate locations of the test pits are shown on Figure 1. The Test Pit Logs are included as Figures 3 through 5. The soils we observed in Test Pits TP-101 through TP-104, located near the southern margin of Building 7, consist of about 3.5 to 7.5 feet of loose uncontrolled fill overlying native, medium dense to dense silty sand with varying amounts of gravel. These soil conditions are generally consistent with soils we observed 'in previous site explorations in this porlion of the site. Test Pit TP-105 was excavated near the northeastern comer of Building 6. The soils we observed at this location consist of approximately I I feet of loose, wet fill overlying native, dense silty sand and sandy silt, and stiff clay to clayey silt. We observed light groundwater seepage approximately 10 to 12 feet below the ground surface in Test Pits TP-103 and TP-104. The seepage appeared to be perched and emerged from zones of predominantly sandy material within tile native silty sands. DISCUSSION We recommend that soldier piles have a maximuni center -to -center spacing of eight feet. Recommended design earth pressure diagrams are presented on Figures 6 and 7. For pile spacing of 8 feet and less, the lateral soil pressure uniformly distributed over the width of the lagging can be reduced by 50 percent to account for some soil arching between the soldier piles. Unshored excavation heights should not exceed four feet through the upper fill horizon and six feet in native soils. No excavations should remain unsupported for more than 24 hours. Tieback and cantilever soldier pile walls should be designed to resist lateral loads imposed by soils, as well as the vertical load component. Vertical loads may be carried by the soldier piles as end bearing and as pile shaft friction below the base of the excavation. Pile shaft friction above the base of the excavation should not be used to resist vertical downward loads. Tile following soil parameters can be used for soldier pile design: • Bearing soil: Dense silty sand • Minimum depth of embedment below excavation base: 10 feet • Allowable end -bearing capacities for soldier piles: 20 kips per square foot (kqf) (T,'S=2.5) • Allowable skin friction below excavation base: 1.5 ksf (FS=2) Caving or collapse of opened drilled shafts may occur when installing soldier piles in the relatively -loose existing fill soils. The contractor must be prepared to case the drilled shafts or use other appropriate means and methods during pile installation to prevent hole collapse and ground loss during pile construction. Because the shafts rMy be relied upon to carry large verlical components of the tieback anchor loading, the shaft bottoms must be clean of loose soil debris, prior to insertion of the soldier pile beam and pouring concrete. Project No. TA893 Page No. 2 Mr. Ross Woods Juric 7, 2006 Over -break or gaps between the excavated soil face and tile back of the lagging must be filled following each excavation lift. Filling with crushed rock or grouting with control density fill (CDF) is recommended. This will be an important consideration in limiting movement of the adjacent shored ground. Tieback Anchors Tieback anchors should be installed in the native soil behind the excavation to a sufficient distance to allow mobilizing the desired lateral load resistance. The reeommended configuration of the no load zone is shown on Figure S. The minimurn horizontal spacing between anchors should be four feet to ensure that group effects between adjacent ground anchors are minimized and that anchor intersection (due to drilling deviations) is avoided. Group effects xvill reduce the load -carrying capacity of individual ground anchors. We recommend designing tieback anchors that extend into the native, medium dense to dense silty sand soils using an allowable adhesion value of 1.5 kips per square foot (kso along the bonded length of the anchor. This allowable bond stress value is based on grout tTemied into smooth -walled shafts. Higher bond stress values will be developed if the anchors are constructed using pressure or secondary grouting techniques. The actual value should be based on the results of pullout tests conducted in the early phases of construction. All anchors should be tested to verify design capacities, As a minimuni, all anchors should be stressed to 130 percent of their design capacity and then locked off at the design load. At least 10 percent of the anchors, with a minimum of 2 anchors, should be prooftested and stressed to 200 percent of the design pullout capacity. The geotechnical engineer should select the locations of these test anchors. Groundwater seepage may be encountered during the installation of the anchors. The presence of water could result in some caving of the anchor holes. Drilling with continuous flight augers or the use of casing would reduce the potential for ground loss. Monilooing Progi-am A monitoring program must be implemented to verify the performance of the shoring system. Utilifies within a distance of 1.0 H (where H is the dept.h of excavation) from the shoring wall should be protected from damage due to the lateral and vertical movement occurring around the cxcavafion area. Monitoring of the shoring system should include measurements of horizontal and vertical movements at the top of soldier piles. All reference points on the existing ground surface should be installed and read prior to commencing the excavation. Monitoring of the shoring system should be performed twice a week as the excavation proceeds, and then every other %veek upon completion of the excavation. A registered land surveyor should be retained to perform the monitoring. Monitoring should continue until the basement walls are adequately braced at the ground surface level. The monitoring data should be reviewed weekly by the project's structural and geotechnical engineers. LIN111TATIONS This report is the property of Terra Associates, Inc. and was prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This report is intended for specific application to the Point Edwards Condominiums project and the exclusive use of Point Edwards, LLC and its authorized representatives. Project No. T-4893 Page No. 3 Mr. Ross Woods June 7, 2006 Tiie analyses and recommendafions presented in this report are based on data obtained from the on -site test pits. Variations in soil conditions can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until construcfion. If variations appear evident, Terra Associates, Inc. should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations in this report, prior to proceeding with construction. We trust die information presented is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call. Sincerely yours, TERRA ASSOCIATES, UNC. Project �' --) —tq, 4 1'ri e o d 6ik- J . '0 Princir)A, Encl r&O—on Location Plan Fi i ied Soil Classification System EXP1]RFPraYBa-hQ* 5 — T4t Pit Logs F r—'— '_' Figure 6 — EWP essure Diagram Figure 7 — Earth Pressure Diagram Figure 8 — Load/No Load Zone Diagram cc: Mr John Byrne, Ground Support Project No. T4893 Page No. 4 N�' . . . . . . . TWIN ,IN 'i", 0: ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . P-1 04 I.N 40 so NI APPRO)GMATE SCALE IN PEET NOTE: LEGEND: THIS SITE PLAN IS SCHEMATIC. ALL LOCATIONS AND INI APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF TEST PIT EXPLORATION LOCATION PLAN DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. IT IS INTENDED FOR Terra REFERENCE ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR TP-101 POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. Associates, Inc. BUILDINGS 6 & 7 REFERENCE: go Consultanu; in Geoteanical Englneerhg EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Geology e�d SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY TRIAD ASSOCIATES Emko—rital Eanh Scimces Pro]. No. T1893 I D.I. JUNE 2006 1 Fig.,. I MAJOR DIVISIONS LETTER -SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION Clean GW Well -graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, little or no GRAVELS Gravels fines. d) (less than GP Poorly -graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, little or W More than 5% fines) no fines. (n C6 50% of coarse fraction is GM Silty gravels, gravel -sand -sill mixtures, non -plastic r) — W a) > larger than No. Grave Is with fines fines. z E 4 sieve GC Clayey gravels, gravel -sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines. 0 0 C%j to - SANDS Clean Sands SW Well -graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. W 0 1= Z CU I (less than SP Poorly -graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no :S More than 5% fines) Ones. < 50% of coarse F_ 0 0 fraction is SM Silty sands, sand -silt mixtures, non -plastic fines. 0 smaller than Sands SIC Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines. No. 4 sieve with fines i ML Inorganic silts, rock flour, clayey silts with slight SILTS AND CLAYS plasticity. CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity. (lean clay). 0) C) 0 — C,4 fil M E Liquid limit is less than 50% Organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity. Z.N ­Q (n W . — OL z C:) C "I M C:S > MH Inorganic silts, elastic. a) SILTS AND CLAYS W E CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. z in Liquid limit is greater than 50% OH Organic clays of high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC Peat. DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS Standard Penetration Density Resistance in Blows/Foot 2" OUTSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT T W _j z 0 Very loose 04 SPOON SAMPLER 2.4" INSIDE DIAMETER RING SAMPLER (n Loose 4-10 OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER W Medium dense 10-30 3: 0 Dense 30-50 Y WATER LEVEL (DATE) Very dense >50 Tr TORVANE READINGS, tsf Pp PENETROMETER READING. tsf Standard Penetration W Consistenc Resistance in Blows/Foot DD DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot > (4) Very soft 0-2 LL LIQUID LIMIT, percent W Soft 2-4 0 Medium stiff 4-8 PI PLASTIC INDEX 0 stiff 8-16 Very stiff 16-32 N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot Hard >32 Terra UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS Associates, Inc. BUILDINGS 6 & 7 Consultants in GeotechnIcal Engineering EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-4893 I Date JUNE 2006 1 Figure 2 Logged by: DPL Date: 5/19/06 Depth (ft.) 0— R 10 15 20 Test Pit No. TP-101 Approximate Elev. 120 Moisture Soil Description Content FILL: brown sandy slit with some gravel, organics, old roots, loose, moist. 10.7 FILL: brown silly sand, disturbed appearance, trace gravel, occasional 10.4 roots, loose to medium dense, moist. 25.7 Brown to grayish -brown silty SAND with gravel to sanyd SILT with gravel, slightly mottled, medium dense to dense, moist. (SM/ML) 20.4 12.7 Gray silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense to dense, moist. (SM) 19.5 26.2 - Test pit terminated at 15 feet. - No groundwater seepage observed. Logged by: DPL Date: 5/19/06 Depth (ft.) 0- 10 15 20 Test Pit No. TP-102 Approximate Elev. 133 Soil Description Moisture Content - - FILL: dark brown to reddish -brown silty sand with gravel, organics, small sticks, loose, moist. 17.7 12.5 - Brown to grayish -brown silty SAND, trace to few gravel below 6 feet, fine 14.3 - grained, medium dense to dense, moist to wet below 12 feet. (SM) 19.4 16.0 - Test pit terminated at 15 feet. - No groundwater seepage observed. Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS BUILDINGS 6 & 7 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Proj. No. TA893 IDate JUNE 20061 Figure 3 Logged by: DPL Date: 5/19/06 Depth (ft.) 0- 5 10 15 20 Test Pit No. TP-103 Approximate Elev. 142 Moisture Soil Description Content - FILL: crushed rock and gray clayey silt, loose, wet. - FILL: dark brown to gray silty sand, loose, wet. Trace old topsoil layer at 4 feet. Tan to brown silty SAND to sandy SILT, mottled, medium dense, moist. 16.2 (SMIML) Brown silty SAND, trace to few gravel below 10 feet, fine grained, medium 20.4 dense to dense, wet. (SIVI) Gray to blue gray SAND with silt, fine grained, medium dense, wet. 23.5 (SP-SM) 20. Brown sandy SILT, dense to very dense, moist to wet. (ML) 35.5 Test pit terminated at 16 feet. Light groundwater seepage observed between 10 and *12 feet. Test Pit No. TP-1 04 Logged by: DPL Approximate Elev. 146 Date: 5/19/06 Depth Moisture (ft.) Soil Description Content 0— FILL: crushed rock, recyclod concrete, and gray to brown sandy silt, loose, wet. - FILL: brown sandy silt with gravel, organics, small sticks, loose, - wet. 16.8 5- - FILL: gray sand, and crushed rock overlaying geotextile fabric, loose, 7.1 - moist. 10— Brown silty SAND with gravel, fine grained, medium dense, moist 18.4 - to wet. (SIVI) 20.0 15— Test pit terminated at 14.5 feel. ILight to moderate groundwater seepage observed at 11 feet. ce TEST PIT LOGS Terra POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS Associates, Inc. BUILDINGS 6 & 7 Consultants in GeotechnIcal Engineering EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Geology and ---F Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-4893 Date JUNE 200 Figure 4 Logged by: DPL Date: 5/19/06 Depth (ft.) 0 --r— .1 Test Pit No. TP-105 Approximate Elev. 120 Moisture Content Soil Description (0/.1 FILL: gray to brown silt with gravel, orgaincs, small sticks, blue gray clay chunks, loose, we(. FILL: brown to gray silty sand with gravel, sticks, loose, wet. FILL: blue gray sandy silt with gravel, loose, wet. 10— Pea gravel layer at 11 feet. Brown interbedded silty SAND and sandy SILT, fine grained, dense, moist. (SIVI and ML).. - Blue CLAY to clayey SILT, stiff, moist. (CUML) 15— Test pit terminated at 14.5 feet. No groundwater seepage. 20 24.7 25.1 26.4 27.2 30.4 TEST PIT LOGS Terra POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS sociates, Inc. BUILDINGS 6 & 7 AS Consultants In Geatechnical Engineering EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-4893 �&,te JUNE 2006FIFigure 5 CANTILEVER SOLDIER PILE WALL OR SINGLE ROW TIEBACK WALL PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE = 350 pcf TAKEN OVER (2) PILE DMETERS NOTE - VALUE INCWDES SAFETY FACTOR OF 1.5 h EXISTING SLOPE GRADE (MAXIMUM 1:1 [H:V]) H 35 pcf + F m 35(H) psf (OVER PILE DIAMETER) NOT TO SCALE goTerra Associates, Inc. Consultants In Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences ---I- 7' + - 1 75 psf CONMUCTION TRAMC SURCHARGE (WHERE APPLICABLE) 16(h) psf SLOPE SURCHARGE (WHERE APPUCABLE) EARTH PRESSURE DIAGRAM POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS BUILDINGS 6 & 7 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-4891 e JUNE 2006 Figure 6 350 PRES NOTE VALLI FACT SOLDIER PILE WALL WITH TWO OR MORE TIEBACK ROWS D NOT TO SCALE 75 psf UNiFORM PRESSURE TRAFFIC SURCHARGE INHERE APPLICABLE -R PILE SPACING R PILE DIAMETER Terra EARTH PRESSURE DIAGRAM POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS BUILDINGS 6 & 7 Associates Inc EDMONDS, WASHINGTON im Consultants in Geatechrilcal Ingineerin; Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj, No. TA893 I Date JUNE 2006 Figure 7 TIEBACK SOLDIER PILEILAGGING SHORING WALL XV\ NO LOAD ZONE I 5'(TYPICAL) ANCHOR ZONE TIEBACKS NOT GROUTED IN THIS ZONE TIEBACKS GROUTED IN THIS ZONE H/5 ---I A/' 60- ALLOWABLE TIEBACK ADHESION CAPACITY IN ANCHOR ZONE: SEE REPORT NARRATIVE NOTE: TIEBACK CAPACITIES ARE BASE ON INSTALLATION' USING TREMIE GROUT METHOD NOT TO SCALE LOAD/NO LOAD ZONE DIAGRAM goTerra POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS Associates, Inc. BUILDINGS 6 & 7 Consultants In Geolechnical Engineering EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Geology and Envifunmental Earth Sciences Proi. No. T4893 I Date JUNE 2006 Figure 8 ERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc& Comultants in Geolechnical frigineering, Geology and Environmental ]Exih Sciences June 7.2W6 PfOj4V-t NO. T4 893 W. ROU Wods foini EdWattls. iLC 2801 Ak-j-=.-*AY�Sufte 1:07 sc,41do. W ba 98121 -4 SWJ= Geo1echnica1Qmsuh6o0 "-CEIVED T�MPOMY Slwihg!— blMdftigs 6 and 7 MntVAwirdxC'06daminiu= JUL 14 21 IH.modd% Wishing!On BUILDING DEPT. Dear Mr. Woods: As ielq4*d. WC-p-dAmitd spppleq=-htd subs .04r ",* U6Act fayogation ut the site. 17ho pwpoje of onditigns in *e -a' 5 M Oft -Shoeinl; is wded an ft soudt*M side Of RuiRding. 7 and die We nordieastern si g;6 andtio-Mvide recon=endakifts for deogn of the shoring, A plan sheet hymiad Associates tft1edgtdjdi11.. &7w1d,4MeJ1j0,&Wj14 *OG Fm rading and gzcmifen Cross Secfibns dated lime 1. 20%, indkmes ft lower ftOOr len! of Buildings - 6 and 7 will be conswwted at M1q. 110.67. Bwd on tho exWng topq&mphy. s�hown on this plan, exc4rationdepths rtqWmd for constmetion of ft low" building level wig approacb a =eowm of about 24 feet along the. soudltrn martil of SuOding 7 and obout 20 fm on the side of BOding 6. We understmd that qwsluxiiis xvill i=htcle both cantildweld and debuk soldict pik systow, and L�w the sboring walU %Q1 be ftignod for temporm.y service. The r=ommendations pr4sented in Ns report are based an ow under=ding bt de 'Above design feawm. if actual feafturs v - 6r cbmS mad6. we, sbould review' wy cs are tb= in ord to modify our recommendation--, as re * er quira We shoukil riftiow fma) design d-rourings and speoirications to wrify that Our mcomr.=dafiOns have ben PToperly imerpretcd and incorporated into project d*Mgn. STREET FILE 12525 Will-ows Road, Sulie 101 Kirkla t . nd, Washington 5803,1 Phone (425)'8'21-7777 * Fax. (425) 821-433 - 4 Mr. Ross Woods June 7, 2006 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS We investigated subsurface conditions on the southern side of Building 7 by excavating 4 test pits to maximum depths of 14-5 to 16 feet below existing surface grades using a track -mounted excavator. In addition, we excavated one test pit to a maximum depth of about 14.5 feet near the northeastern comer of Building 6. The approximate locations of the test pits are shown on Figure 1. The Test Pit Logs are included as Figures 3 through S. The soils ve observed in Test Pits TP-101 through TP-104, located near the southern margin of Building 7, consist of about 3.5 to 7.5 feet of loose uncontrolled fill overlying native, medium dense to dense silty sand with varying amourits of gravel. These soil conditions are generally consistent with soils we observed in previous site explorations in this portion of the site. Test Pit TP-105 was excavated near the northeastern comer of Building 6. The soils we observed at this location consist of approximately I I feet of loose, wet fill overlying native, dense silty sand and sandy silt, and sfiff clay to clayey silt. We observed light groundwater seepage approximately TO to 12 feet below the ground surface in Test Pits TP-1 03 and TP-104. The seepage appeared to be perched and emerged from zones of predominantly sandy material within the native silty sands. DISCUSSION We recommend that soldier piles have a maximum center -to -center spacing of eight feet. Recommended design earth pressure diagrams are presented on Figures 6 and 7. For pile spacing of 8 feet and less, the lateral soil pressure unirormly distributed over the width of the lagging can be reduced by 50 percent to account for some soil arching between the soldier piles. Unshored excavation heights should not exceed four feet through the upper fill horizon and six feet in native soils. No excavations should remain unsupported. for more than 24 hours. Tieback and cantilever soldier pile walls should be designed to resist lateral loads imposed by soils, as well as the vertical load component. Vertical loads may be carried by the soldier piles as end bearing and as pile shaft friction below the base of the excavation. Pile shaft friction above the base of the excavation should not be used to r6sist ver6cal downward loads. The following soil parameters can be used for soldier pile design: Bearing soil: Dense silty sand Minimum depth of embedment below excavation base: 10 feet Allowable end -bearing capacities for soldier piles: 20 kips per square foot (ksf) (FS=72.5) Allowable skin friction below excavation base: 1.5 ksf (r-S=2) Caving or collapse of opened drilled shafts may occur when installing soldier piles in the relatively -loose existing fill soils. The contractor must be prepared to case the drilled shafts or use other appropriate means and methods during pile'installation to prevent hole collapse and ground loss during pile construction. Because the shafts may be relied upon to carry large vertical components of the tieback anchor loading, the shaft bottoms must be clean of loose soil debris, prior to insertion of the soldier pile beam and pouring concrete. Project No. TA893 Page No. 2 Mr. Ross -Woods June 7, 2006 Over -break or gaps between the excavated soil face and the back of the lagging must be filled following each excavation lift. Filling with crushed rock or grouting with control density fill (CDF) is recommended. This will be an important consideration in limiting movement of the adjacent shored ground. Tieback Anchors Tieback anchors should be installed in the native soil behind the excavation to a sufficient distance to allow mobilizing the desired lateral load resistance, The recommended configuration of the no load zone is shown on Figure 8. The minimum horizontal spacing between anchors should be four feet to ensure that group effects between adjacent ground anchors are minimized and that anchor intersection (due to drilling deviations) is avoided. Group effects will reduce the load-canying capacity of individual ground anchors. We recorarrend designing tieback anchors that extend into the native, medium dense to dense silty sand soils using an allow2ble adhesion value of 1.5 kips per square foot (ksf) along the bonded length of the anchor. This allowable bond stress value is based on grout tremied into smooth -walled shafts. Higher bond stress values will be developed if the anchors are constructed using pressure or secondary grouting techniques. The actual value should be based on the results of pullout tests conducted in the early phases of construction. All anchors should be tested to verify'design capacities. As a minimum, all anchors should be stressed to 130 percent of their design capacity and then locked off at the design load. At least 10 percent of the anchors, with a minimum of 2 anchors, should be prooflested and stressed to 200 percent of the design pullout capacity. The geotechnicall engineer should select the locations of these test anchors. Groundwater seepage may be encountered during the installation of the anchors. The presence of water could result in some caving of the anchor holes. Drilling with continuous flight augers or the use of casing would reduce the potcntia I for ground loss. M0111101ilig,prograll, A monitoring program must be implemented to verify the performance of the shoring system. Utilities within a distance of 1.0 H (where H is the depth of excavation) from the shoring wall should be protected from dar4ge due to the lateral and vertical movement occurring around the excavation area. Monitoring of the shoring system should include measurements of horizontal and vertical movements at the top of soldier piles. All reference points. on the existing ground surface should be installed and read prior to commencing the excavation. Monitoring of the shoring system should be performed twice a week as the excavation proceeds, and then every other week upon completion of the excavation. A registered land surveyor should be retained to perform the monitoring. Monitoring should continue until the basement walls are adequately braced at the ground surface level. The monitoring data should be reviewed weekly by the project's structural and geotechnical engineers. LIMITATIONS This report is the property of Terra Associates, Inc. and was prepared in accordance with gene -rally accepted geotechni ' cal engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This report is intended for specific application to the Point Edwards Condominiums project and the exclusive use of Point Edwards, LLC and its authorized representatives. Project No. T-4893 Page No. 3 Mr. Ross Woods June 7, 2006 The analyses and recornmendations presented in this report are based on data obtained from the on -site test pits. Variations in soil condiflons can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until construcfion. If variations 2ppear evident, Terra Associates, Inc. should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations in this report, prior to proceeding with construction. We tmst the information presented is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call. Sincerely yours, TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. 160 �' -7 -,# � Encl a Ucation Plan Fi Vlewcffi�(j Classification System 5 — Tjt Pit Logs Figure — — iEffffe Diagram Figure 7 — Earth Pressure Diagram Figure 8 — Load/No Load Zone Diagram cc: Mr John Byrne, Ground Support Project No. TA893 Page No. 4 I'lult: LEGEND: THIS SITE PLAN IS SCHSMATIC. ALL LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. IT 15 INTENDED FOR N APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF TEST PIT REFERENCE ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR TF-101 DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. REFERENCE: SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY TRIAD ASSOCIATES MAJOR DIVISIONS LETTER TYPICAL DESCRIPTION SYMBOL Clean GW Well -graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, little or no GRAVELS Gravels fines. U) i P (less than GP Poorly-gra'ded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, liffle or ig CD More than 5%'fines) no Fines. .N CD W 50% of coar ' se Silty gravels, gravel -sand -silt mixtures, non -plastic fraction is rav GM Fines. els W larger than No. with fines z 4 sieve E Co GC Clayey gravels, gravel -sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines. -.,- cn, C:, C4 Clean to . SW Well -graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. 0 SANDS Sands W a Z CO M (less than sp Pqwl"raded sands or gravelly sands, little or no C More than 5% fines) anes, as 50% of coarse < "0 = 0 0 fraction is SM $Oty sands, sand -silt mixtures, non -plastic fines. .0 -5 smaller than Sands No. 4 sieve wfth fines SC Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines. CD ML jnoManic silts, tock flour, clayey silts with slight SILTS AND CLAYS 0 CV ca CL J*Panlc clays of low to medium plasticity, (loan clay), c') E - Liquid limit is less than 60% 0 a) a Z.N W Le OL Organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity. C3 C z Inor * arg MH c silts, elastic. 0 SILTS AND CLAYS W 2! CIS CH lri4 'filc clays of high plasticity, fat clays. E z 0 Liquid limit is greater than 50% OH Organic clays of high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT POL DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS co Standard Penetration co Density Resistance In Slows/Foot 2" OUTSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT W SPOON SAMPLER _j z 0 Very loose 0-4 2Aft INSIDE DIAMETER RING SAMPLER COD Loose 4-10 OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER Lu Medium dense 10-30 X Dense 30-50 _T WATER LEVEL (DATE) 0 0 Very dense >50 Tr TORVANE READINGS, Isf Standard Penetration Pp PENETROMETER READING, tsf Consisten Resistance in Blows/Foot DD DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot > Very soft 0-2 1 C13 LL LIQUID LIMIT, percent Lu soft 2-4 Medium stiff 4-8 PI PLASTIC INDEX 0 Stiff B-16 N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot Very sUff 16-32 Hard >32 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Terra POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS Associates, Inc. BUILDINGS 6 & 7 Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Geology and EnvironmentalEaM Sciences, Proj. No. T-4893 FDate JUNE 2006 1 Figure 2 LOV by: DPL Date 5119/06 Depth (ft.) 0_� 10 15 20 Test Pit No. TP-101 Approximate Elev. 120 Moisture Soil Description Content f%) FILL: brown sandy silt with some gravel, organics, old roots, loose, moist. 10.7 FILL: brown silty sand, disturbed appearance, [race gravel, occasional roots, loose to medium dense, moist. 10.4 25.7 20.4 Brown to grayish -brown slity SAND with gravel to sanyd SILT with gravel, slightly m6ttled, medium dense to dense, moist. (SM/ML) 12.7 Gray silty SAND, fine grained. medium dense to dense. moist. '(SIVI) 19.5 26.2 Test pit terminated at 15 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. Logged by: DPL Date: 5/19/06 Depth (ft.) 0- 1( 19. Test P it No. TP-1 02 Approximate Elev. 133 Moisture Content Soil Description 1%) FILL:* dark brown to reddish -brown silty sand with gravel, organics, small stIcks, loose, moist. 17.7 12-5 . Brown to grayish -brown silty SAND, trace to few gravel below 6 feet, fine 14.3 . grained, medium. dense to dense, moist to wet below 12 feet. (SM) 19.4 16.0 . Test pit terminated at 15 feet. . No groundwater seepage observed. 20 ------------- TEST PIT LOGS Terra POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS Associates, Inc. BUILDINGS 6 & 7 Consullants, In Cueotechnical Engineering EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Prol. No. TA893 IDate JUNE 20061 Figure 3 Test Pit No. TP-1 03 Log by: DPL Approximate Elev. 142 DateN'11 9106 Depth Moisture Soil Description Content N FILL: crushed rock and gray clayey silt, loose, wet, FILL: dark brown to gray silty sand, loose, wet. - Trace old topsoil layer at 4 feet. 5— Tan to brown silty SAND to sandy SILT, mottled, medium dense, moist. 16.2 (SM/M�) Brown silly SAND, trace to few gravel below 10 feet, fine grained, medium 20.4 dense to dense, wet. (SM) T Gray to blue gray SAND With silt, fine grained, medium dense, wet. 23.5 (SP-SM) 20.5 15— Brown sandy SILT, dense to very dense, moist to wet. (ML) 35.5 - Test pit terminated at 16 feet. 1 Light groundwater seepage observed between 10 and 12 feet. 20 Test Pit No. TP-104 Logged by: DPL Approximate Elev. 146 Date: 5/19/06 Depth Moisture S-0il Description Content FILL: crushed rock, recycled concrete, and gray to brown sandysilt, loose, wet. FILL: brown sandy silt with gravel, organics, small sticks, loose, wet. 16.8 FILL: gray sand. and --crushed rock overlaying geotexWe fabric. loose, 7.1 moist. 101 Brown silty SAND with gravel, fme grained. medium dense, moist 18.4 10 wet. (SIVI) -Y I 20 20.0 Test pit terminated at 14.5 feet. Light to moderate groundwater seepage observed at 11 feel. TEST PIT LOGS Terra POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS Associates, Inc. BUILDINGS 6 & 7 consultants in Geotech i nical Engineering EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Geology add Environmental Earth sciences Proj. No. T-4893 IDate JUNE 200d Figure 4 I Logged by: DPL Date: 5/19/06 Depth . (ft.) 0 —T-- 61 Test Pit No. TP-105 Approximate Elev. 120 Moisture Content Soil Description f o/- I FILL: gray to brown sill with gravel, orgaincs, small sticks, blue gray clay chunks, loose, wet. FILL: brown to gray sifly sand with gravel, iltIcks, loose, wet. FILL: blue gray sandy silt with gravel, loose, wet. 10 Pea gravel layer at 11 feet. Brown Interbedded silty SAND and sandy SILT, fine grained, mot L (SM and. ML)— Blue CLAY to clayey SILT, stiff, moist. (CUML) 'rest pit teffninated at 14.5 feel. No groundwater seepage. 20 Terra Associates, Inic. Z� Consultants In Geotachnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences t 24.7 25.1 26.4 27.2 30.4 TEST PIT LOGS POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS BUILDINGS 6 & 7 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-4893 jDate JUNE 2006� Figure 5 CANTILEVER SOLDIER PILE WALL OR SINGLE ROW TIEBACK WALL I I I h EXISTING SLOPE GRADE (MAXIMUM 1:1 (H.V]) H 35 pcf 12's PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE = 350 pcf WMi Me M PQ.E MWTERS NOTE- 35(H) psf VALUE INCLUDES SAFETY (OVER PILE DMM) FACTOR OF 1.5 NOT TO SCALE goTerra Associates, Inc. Consultants In Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sclencas 7' +t - 75 psf MNSTRUMON IPAMC SURCHARGE "E APPLICABLE) i rz(0 f 11 SLOPE SURCHARGE MOIE APPLEWLE) EARTH PRESSURE DIAGRAM POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS BUILDINGS 6 & 7 - EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-4893 I Date JUNE 2006 1 Figure 6 350 pcf/ft PASSIVE EARTH — PRESSURE APPLIED OVER 2(D) NOTE: VALLIE INCLUDES SAFETY FACTOR OF 1.5 SOLDIER PILE WALL WITH TWO OR MORE TIEBACK ROWS 0.2(H) 7 it 75 psf UNIFOR1%4 PRESSURE TRAFFIC SURCHARGE WHERE APPLICABLE H /— 23 (H)l psf APPLIED OVER PILE SPACING 2 ft. 23 (H'* psf APPLIED OVER PILE DIAMETER D NOT TO SCALE imTerra Associates Inc. Constillants in Geatechnical LgineerIng Geology and EnvIronmenfal Earth Sdences EARTH PRESSURE DIAGRAM POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS BUILDINGS 6 & 7 EDMONDS. WASHINGTON. Prol. No. TA893 I Date JUNE 2006 1 Figure 7 H TIEBACK SOLDIER PILEILAGGING SHORING WALL NO LOAD ZONE j 15'(TYPICAL) ANCHOR ZONE TIEBACKS —NOT GROUTED IN THIS ZONE TIEBACKS GROUTED IN THIS ZONE H/5 ----I AP' 60- ALLOWABLE TIEBACK ADHESION CAPACITY IN ANCHOR ZONE: SEE REPORT NARRATIVE NOTE: TIEBACK CAPACITIES ARE BASE ON INSTALLATION' USING TREMIE GROUT METHOD NOT TO SCALE goTerra Associates, Inc. Consullants In Geotechnical Engineering Geology and EmAronmental Earth Sciences LOAD/NO LOAD ZONE DIAGRAM POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS BUILDINGS 6 & 7 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-4893 I Date JUNE 2006 1 Figure 8 -4:1 . 1 -1. TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. al Engineering, Geology Consullants in Geolechnic, and Environniental Eailh Sciences Mr. Ross Woods Point Edwards, LLC 2801 Alaskan Way, Suite 107 Seattle, Washington 98121 Subject: Grading Review Buildings 6 and 7 Point Edwards Condominiums Edmonds, Washington June 8, 2006 RECEIVMect No. T4893 J U N 2 8 2006 BUILDING DEPT, References: 1. Preliminary Gcotechnical Report, UNOCAL Site, Project No. T4893, prepared by Terra Associates, Inc., dated November 21, 2001 2. Steep Slope Hazard Review, Point Edwards Condominiums (UNOCAL Site), Project No. T4893, prepared by Terra Associates, Inc., dated December 13, 2002 3. Geologically Hazardous Areas Review, Point Edwards Condominiums (UNOCAL Site), Project No. T4893, prepared by Terra Associates, Inc., dated January 20, 2003 Dear Mr. Woods: As requested, we reviewed a plan sheet by Triad Associates fitled Building 617 and Arneni4, Building Fine Grading and E-xcavalion Cross Secliom dated June 1, 2006. The plans indicate that excavations to accommodate a porfion of the daylight lower building levels in the northern portion of Building 7 and the southern portion of Building 6 will extend from the western side of the buildings to the exisfing steep slope at approximately Elev. I 10.0. This grading will lower the elevation of the top of the slope by about four feet. The western side of both buildings will be setback approximately 30 to 35 feet from the modified top -of -slope. Based on OLU- review, it is our opinion that the proposed grading at tl-�s location will not adversely impact stability of the steep slope provided that the recommendations for erosion prevention and site drainage presented in the referenced documents are followed. The planned grading will enhance die existing stability of the slope due to unloading resulting from the soil removal and will result "in improved surface drainage at the top of the slope by directing surface runoff away from the slope crest to the yard drainage system. 12525 Willows lZoad, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 Phone (425) 821-7777 * Fax (425) 821-4334 FILE Mr. Ross Woods June 8, 2006 Afternative Key)v(ty Drainage The plan indicates a fill embank:rnent having a maximum thickness of about six feet will be constructed in the yard area west of the southern portion of Building 7. Much of the embankment fill will be constructed over existing grades of about 20 percent. As discussed in Section 5.2 and shown on Figure 3 (General Slope Fill Detail) of our referenced preliminary geotechnical report, embankment fills placed on slopes exceeding a grade of 20 percent must be keyed and benched into competent native soils, and should be constructed with a toe drain in the excavation for the keyway cut at the toe of the fill slope. The keyway drain shown on Figure 3 of our referenced preliminary report consists of a six-inch diameter perforated PVC pipe that is enveloped in washed drainage aggregate. Typically, the keyway drain is connected to a fightline pipe dint daylights at an approved point of controlled discharge, such as the site storm sewcr system. However, due to site elevations, a keyway drain constructed as shown on this figure cannot be connected to the site storm drainage system. Considering this, and because we do not expect that the keyway drain will collect or discharge significant volumes of water, it is our opinion that adequate keyway drainage can be provided by constructing several ballast - rock drainage windows in the toe of the fill embanlunent in lieu of using a continuous drain pipe, The rock drainage windows will provide adequate hydrostatic relief should any sub -fill seepage find its way to the too of the fill embankment. A detail showing this alternative drainage option is attached as Figure 1. The need for additional or alternate sub -fill drainage should be based on field conditions observed at the time of construction. Lighippeighl Fill The plans show the southeastern pordon of the below -grade parking garage for Building 7 will underlie up to about ten feet of landscape fill. We understand that lightweight polystyrene foam will be used for much of the fill over the parking garage ceiling slab. The planned grading indicates two rockeiies with maximum heights of about seven to eight feet will be constructed against and supported by the polystyrene foam in the northern portion of the fill area. In our opinion, rockeries built in accordance with Associated Rockery Conti -actors (ARC) Standard Rockery Construction Guidelines may be constructed on and against the polystyrene foam material. We recommend placing at least six inches of a crushed rock leveling course between the base rocks of the rockery and the polystyrene foam subgrade. Conceptual information provided by Mr. Jeff Brink of DO Engineers indicates the product to be used for the lightweight rill is Type IX Insulfbam R-TECH. However, our review of material properties for the Insulfbarn products and analysis indicate that Type I Insulfbarn R-TECH is an acceptable alternative for the proposed application. Project No. 'F-4893 Page No. 2 C, � 1. Mr. Ross Woods June 8, 2006 We trust the information presented is sufficient for your cuiTent needs. If' you have any questions or require additional information, please call. Sincerely yours, TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. Princi Encl: cc: Drain Detail Project No. T4893 Page No. 3 ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE (PREPARED PER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT) STRUCTURAL FILL (SEE NOTE 1) GEOTEXTILE SEPARATION LAYER (MIRAFI 50OX OR EQUAL) BALLAST ROCK DRAINAGE WINDOW (SEE NOTE 2) 0!�" . 00 n C) C� p- C� C� 0 2'(MIN.) KEYWAY EXCAVATION STRUCTURAL FILL 6- (MIN.) (SEE NOTE 1) NOT TO SCALE NOTES: STRUCTURAL FILL SHALL BE COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 95% OF ASTM D 698 MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY VALUE. 2) 2-INCH BALLAST ROCK DRAINAGE WINDOW; 1.6' THICK, 6 WIDE, CONSTRUCTED 30'(MAX.) ON CENTER ALONG TOE OF EMBANKMENT FILL. SPACING OF GRAVEL WINDOWS MAY BE ADJUSTED BASED ON CONDITIONS OBSERVED DURING CONSTRUCTION, goTerra Associates, Inc. Consullants In GeotechnIcal Englneering Geolcgy and EnvIronmenial Earth Sciences ALTERNATIVE KEYWAY DRAIN DETAIL POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS BUILDINGS 6 & 7 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Proj. No. TA893 I Date JUNE 2006 Figure 1 TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences June 13,2006 Project No. T4893 Mr. Ross Woods Point Edwards, LLC 2801 Alaskan Way, Suite 107 Seattle, Washington 98121 Subject: Buildings 6 and 7 Rockeries Point Edwards Condominiums Echnonds, Washington Reference: Grading Review, Buildings 6 and 7, Point Edwards Condorniniums, Project No. T4893, prepared by Terra Associates, Inc., dated June 8, 2006 Dear Mr. Woods: A plan sheet by Tiiad Associates titled Buil&ng 617 and Amenity Building Fine Giading and Excavation Cross Sections dated June 1, 2006, indicates vertical breaks in grade in the yard area between Building 7 and the Ameni - ty Building will be faced with rockeries, ranging in height between about 2 and 10 feet. Approximately 70 lineal feet of rockery will be constructed on and against fill consisfing of rigid, lightweight polystyrene foam. As discussed in our referenced letter, rockeries built in accordance with Associated Rockery Contractors (ARC) Standard Rockery Construction Guidelines may be constructed on and against the polystyrene foam material. However, we recommend placing at least six inches of a crushed rock leveling course between the base rocks of the rockery and the polystyrene foam subgrade. A typical rockery detail that is applicable for rockeries constructed against cuts into competent native soil or the rigid polystyrene foam is attached as Figure 1. Approximately 140 lineal feet of rockery will be constructed against conventional mineral soil fill. These rockeries generally have a maximum height of about eight feet and wfll be surcharged by parking areas or a sloping grade above the rockcry. A rockcry is not intended to function as an engineered structure to resist lateral earth pressures as a retaining wall does. The primary function of a rockery is to cover the exposed excavated surface and reduce the potential for erosion. In order to use rockeries at these locations, we recommend that the fill immediately behind the facing be reinforced with geosynthetic reinforcement. A recommended detail for a reinforced fill wall with a rockery facing is attached as Figure 2. Wall design calculations are enclosed for building official review. 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 Phone (425) 821-7777 - Fax (425) 821-4334 U 7-7 K.- - FILE Mr. Ross Woods June 13, 2006 Grades below the rockeries range ftorn relatively flat to a maximum inclination of about 2.5:1 (Horizontal:Verfical). Wbere a sloping grade exists below the rockery, we recommend establishing the embedment depth of the base rock by maintaining a minimum lateral separation of five feet between the outside lower edge of the base rocks and the face of the adjacent slope grade. As shown on Figure 2, we recommend a minimum embedment depth of 1.5 feet. We trust the information presented is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call. Sincerely yours, TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. John C. Sa Project X Encl: "Y Detail ZFi,ure- with Reinforced Fill i�Ure Eirth (MSE) Wall Design Calculations JIW� 7ed cc: Mr. Mark Reeves, Triad Associates Project No. T-4893 Page No. ii I Maximum Slope: 2:1(H:V) 2 Swale for surface drainage control 1 12" compacted native soil 1p4m4IR41 .. 44A. 41C, U. — �' Competent undisturbed native soils C4% IV it '11110 4. 4W IN < Crushed rack filter material, between 2- and 44nch size with less than 2% fines. in In F4 in. I m gravemillidding Firm undisturbed 1 12 in. I soil to be verified Keyway I min. N-41n. minimum diameter by Soils Engineer drain pipe surrounded by 1i clean washed 3/4-Inch Keywa s ould be sloped gr�vel taken to approved d inwards the face point of discharge. being protected NOT TO SCALE Notes: 1) Rockery construction shall be completed In accordance with the Association of Rockery Contractors gudelines. 2) Rock used must meet the requirements for rock quality specified in Section 9-1 3.7(l of WSDOT Standard Specifications (2004). no Terra CUT ROCKERY DETAIL POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS Associates, Inc. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Consultants In Geolechnkal Engineering — -- I Geology and Pro]. No. T4893 Date JUNE 2006TFigure I Eny[ronmental Earth Sciences I I I COMPACTED STRUCTURAL FILL (SEE NOTE 7) SWALE FOR SURFACE DRAINAGE CONTROL PARKING LOT 12" ............... ......... GEOGRID REIN 0 REINF RONG SCHEDULE). �SEE 501 .. .. .................... ...... ........... ... ... . .... .... 2' HEIGHT ".4' 6 3' MIN."" ..... . . . . . .. ....... . (10 N. ..... . .......... . .. .. .. ........ .. . 'CRUSHFD ROCK ril-Tfw 'MATERIAL. BETWEEN 2.' -AND 4 INCH SIZE WITH . ...... . F(TYP.) c� H 0 5'-777 KEWIAY \-:4 IN. MIN. DIAMETER DRAIN PIPE SURROUNDED BY NATIVE FIRM UNDISTURBED SOILS -/ r% CLEAN WASHED 3/4" DRAIN OR COMPACTED STRUCTURAL 6VAY SHOULD BE SLOPED1 GRAVEL STRUCTURAL FILL TO BE VERIFIED WN TOWARDS THE FACE I BY CEOTECHNICAL E14GINEER BEING PROTECTED I NOT TO SCALE ROCKERY NOTES: 1. ROCKERY CONSTRUCTION S-ALL BE COVPLELTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ASSOCIATION OF ROOKERY CONTRACTORS (ARC) GUIDELINES. 2. ROCK USED MUST MEET IIHE REOUIREMENTS FOR ROCK DUALITY SPECIFIED IN SECTIONS 9-13.7(l) OF THE WSDCT STANDARDS SPECIF-CATIONS (2004). 3. ALL CAP ROCKS MUST BE SECURE AND NOT ABLE TO BE OSLODGED BY HAND. REINFORCING SCHEDULE WAl L HEiCHT, 'H" 'LAYER NO. (SyNT REINFORCEMENT EEN OR EoijivALr.N-,) LENGTH L (FE0') ELEV. (FEET) FEET 11 SF 55 0 :.0 05 .4 SF 55 2's I SF 55 7.0 0.5 6 FEE.- 2 S" 55 7.0 2.5 3 S, 55 7.0 4.5 SF 55 8.0 0.5 8 FEET 2 SF 55 0.0 2.5 3 SF 55 8.0 4.5 4 SF 55 8.0 6.5 I S� 55 0 05 2 SF 55 :-0 2'5 10 FEET 3 SF 55 9.0 4 * 5 4 SF 55 9.0 6.5 5 sr 55 9.0 815 GENEIRAL NOTES 1. REFER TO CML GRADING PLANS FOR WALL ALIGNMENTS AND ELEVARONS. 2. REFER TO REINFORCING SCHEDULE FOR GGEOCRID LENGTHS AND ELEVATIONS. 3. GEOGRID SHALL BE INSTALLED BEHIND WALL WITH MACHINE DIREC71ON (STRONGEST AXIS) PERPENDICULAR TO WALL. 4. GEOGRID SHALL BE INSTALLED ON HORIZONTAL SURFACE OF COMPACTED STRUCTURAL FILL. 5. GEOGRID SHALL BE PULLED TIGHT BEHIND WALL. STAXE END OF GEOGRID AS REOUIRED TO MAINTAIN TENSION BEFORE COVERING WITH STRUCTURAL FILL. 6. PROTECT GEOGRID FROM CONSTRUCTION DAMAGE PER MANUFACTURERS SPECIRCA-11ONS. CONSTRUCTION EOUIPMENT SHALL NOT MVEL DIRECTLY ON GEOGRID. ANY GEOGRID THAT IS DAMAGED SHALL BE REPLACED WITH NEW GEOGRID AT CONTRACTORS EXPENSE Z ALL STRUCTURAL FILL To BE COMPACTED TO 95% OF SOILS MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY PER ASTM D-698, STANDARD PROCTOR. LOOSE LIFT THICKNESS PRIOR TO COMPACTION SHALL NOT EXCEED 12 INCHES. STRUCTURAL FILL IN REINFORCED ZONE SHALL BE SELECT GRANULAR MATERIAL WITH A MAXIMUM AGGREGATE SIZE OF 3 INCHES AND A MAXIMUM OF 30 PERCENT PASSING THE NO. 200 SIEVE (FINES CONTWO BASED ON THE 3/4- GRAVEL FRACTION. B. HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT SUCH AS VIBRATORY DRUM ROLLERS, LOADED DUMP TRUCKS. FRON7-ENO LOADERS, ETC., SHALL NOT OPERATE WITHIN FNE FEET OF BACK OF WALLS. STRUCTURAL FILL PLACED IN THIS ZONE SHALL HAVE MAXIMUM LOOSE LIFT THICKNESS OF 12 INCHES AND SHALL BE COMPACTED USING HAND OPERATED COMPACTION EOUIPMENT. 4. REINFORCING SCHEDULE IS APPLICABLE FOR 2:1 (H:V) SLOPE SURCHARGE. Mr. Ross Woods - Point Edwards, LLC 2801 Alaskan Way, Suite 107 Seattle, Washington 98121 TERRA ASSOCIATES, Int. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geolop and Environmental Earth Sciences Janua ry. 20,2003 Project No. T-4893 RESUB AUG - 4 2006. Subject: Geologically Hazardous Areas Review BUILDING DEPARWENT CI-FY OF EDMONDS Point Edwards Condominiums (UNOCAL Site) Pine Street and Unoco Road Edmonds, Washington References: 1. Preliminary Geoteclinical Report, UNOCAL Site, Project No, T-4893, prepared by Terra Associates, Inc." dated November 21, 2001' 2.- Steep Slope Hazard Review, Point Edwards Condominiums (UNOCAL Site), Project No. T-4893, prepared by Terra Associates, Inc., dated December 13, 2002 Dear Mr. Woods: As request edl- we have conducted a review of geologically hazardous areas for the Point Edwards Condominiums site.. The. location of the site is shown on the attached Figure 1. Our scope of work included a visual site reconnaissance, the drilling of five test borings to depths ranging from about 31.5 feet -to 61.5 feet below t.he existing groundsurface, and review of the referenced reports. Our study specifically addresses erosion hazards, landslide-, hazards, and seismic hazards. We previously addressed steep slope hazards at. the site. Our current study include's analysis of -slo e. stability along five profiles on the steep slopes located downgradient from the P proposed develop . ment . The -results of these analyses 4re used 'to address potential steep. slope. hazards and landslide hazards. SITE CONDITIONS The. site is located. on the upper portion of a predominantly north -facing 4illside....The Preliminary Grading Plan indicates elevations in the planned development -area range from about Elev.' 1-70 in the sbuth-central portion to about -Eldv.. 70 in1he north�ai:stern portion. 'The western and northern margins of 'the planned development area Are., near the.iop of. a steep natural slope., The topographic information provided to- us indicates the,slope is a pr ximately-70 to 96-leet high,.'with. inclinations', ranging between ab6ut'50,and,901pd ent. The areas beyond 0 the'toe of the slope.to the'nofth-northwest.are:telativety. flat. Buylington Northern railio a*d'tiracks ru fi along the -toe of the-slope'to th6 west. May Zopy... fliv W I U %�Whma.0 I rtm I&Jwl P11'r 12525 Willo Road, Suite 10.1,.Kirkland WaskingbonYVMLLI WS Phone (425) 821-7777 - Fax-(425) 821.4334 Mr: Ross Woods January 20, 2003 We did not observe indications of deep-seated instability; however, portions of the slope have been subjected to, shallow erosion and localized sloughing'. These conditions are generally limited to the forest duff and relatively loose surficial soils mantling the underlying competent- soils, and are commonly associated. with natural weathering occurrences on steep slopes. All of the erosional features we observed on the steep. slopeappear to be a result of surface water runoff and shallow interflow from areas above the slope crest. We observed an area approximately 100 to 125 feet southwest of Boring B-1 where the top of the steep slope' has 9 sloughed, exposing dense to very dense silty sand with gravel in a 7- to 8-foot high, near-verti-cal face, just below the crest of the steep slope. Based on our observations, it appears that the sloughing at this location also occurred as a result of concentrated surfacewater runoff and shallow interflow from areas above the slope'crest. We observed a very light trickle of water flowing into this feature from the relatively: flat upland above the slope. Slope vegetation consists predominantly of young to mature deciduous trees and brush. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS The Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Part o s f the Edmonds West Quadrangles, Washington. by Jame'P. Minard, 1983, shows the soils at higher site elevations mapped as Vashon till, Vashon. advance outwash,,and Transitional,beds. Soils at lower site. elevations are.mapped as mediurn- to coarse-wgrained sand of the Whidbey Formation. Transitional bed sediments are described by this publication as massive'to bedded clay, silt, and fine to very, fine sand. Our recent test bbrings and the test pits performed as part of our referenced preliniinary.geotechnical study are generally consistent with the descriptions of, transitional bed deposits. The soils we observed on and immediately above the steep slope areas generally consist of silty sand, sandy siltsi- and laminated to massive, very dense'silt and/or hard clay. Native soils observed in the five test borings drilled near the top. of the steep slopes generally consist of dense to very dense fine-grained silty sand to sand with silt, and very stiff clay1dense silt.: The'silt and clay generally. appeared massive, with occasional very thin partings of very fine sand. The native soils are generally moist. below a.depth of about. five fe,6t. We observed wet'soils toa depth� of about ten feet in Boring B-'3. We did not observe indications, of sigmificant groundwater se.epageon, the slope'- however, we -observed wet surficial soils in one.isolated area,near the: top of the steep slope, west of the:'proposed -development. The 'Wet conditions at this location appear- to- he, from surface runoff from areas above the too of the stee slope, and p sibly from seasonal pe os rched groundwater emergi e P ng ri ar the: top of the _s e lop We also observed a very light flow of wateralong the axis of. several erosional channels running down the steep's,lope.. The water we observed in the erosional features'flows on,top of dense to very derise nati-ve soills posed on the ground surface or beneath approximately-..4 to 12 inches of duff and topsoil. The source, of the water in the erosional features appears to be surface runoff from areas above the crest.ofthd steep slqpe� Detailed descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered in thetest. pits and test boripgs are presented on the attach6diestpit logs. and boring logs. The approximate locations of the test pits and borings Are shown.'on the attached Fiiure 2. rr9ject NO.-. T4993 Page-N6.2 Mr: Ross Woods January 20, 2003 GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS : Section 20.15B.060 (A)(3) of the City of Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) defines geologically hazardous areas as those areas subject to potential erosion, landslide, and/or potential seismic instabilities, including the following: Erosioti Hazard Areas Section 20.15B.060 (A)(3)(a) of the ECDC defines erosion hazard areas (EHAs),as those Areas containing soils that may -experience severe to very severe erosion hazard. These soils include, but are not limited to, the following when they occur on slopes of 15 percent or greater: 1. Alderwood soils (15 to 25 percent slopes) 2. Alderwood-Everett Series (25 to 70 percent slopes) 3. Everett Series (15 to 25 percent slopes). The Soil Conservation, Service (SCS) has -mapped the site soas as Alderwood-Urban land complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes, and Kitsap silt loam, 8 to 25 percent slopes, in the upper southern portion of the site, and AlderWood- Everett gravelly sandy loam, 25 to 70 percent slopes, in the area of the former tank farm and the steep slope below the tank farm area. The soils we observed in the test pits generally conform with the SCS'Mapping; however, some of the very dense silt and hard clay we observed in the formertank areas would better correlat6 with Kitsap silt loam, M to 50 percent slopes, due to existing man-made slope' gradients. The erosion hazards for soils. classified as Alderwood-Urban land complex,: 2 to. 8 -percent slopes, and Kitsap.silt, loam, 8 lo 25 percent slopes, are classified as slight and moderate, respectively, and do not fall under the - classification of an erosion hazard area.. Alderwood-Everett gravelly sandy. loam, 2.5* -to 70 percent slopes,. is classified as having a moderate to high erosion hazard.. The erosion hazard� for soils classified as Kitsap silt loam, 25 to 50 percent slopes, is considered high. Based on the criteria presented above, the portions of the -site that are �sloped at inclinations greater -than 15 percent and are underlain by Alderwood-Everett gravelly, sandy loam would, be considered an EHA. Areas underlain by Kitsap silt loam that are inclined at agradient steeper than 25 percent would also b6,6orisideted EHAs. Based on.. observations, the vast majority of the site located downgradient . frorn Pine Street would be co'ns.idered An ERA. EHAs, based on the SCS mapping, are shown, on the attached Figure 3. Wedid not observe indications of significant active erosion in the plang�d development area; however, -the soils' will be ',susceptible to erosion when exposed during- construction. Inour opinion, Best Management Practices (BNTs) used during construction will provide adequate mitigation of the erosion hazard at the site. If the erosion control measures are properly -implementect and maintained,.. along with temporary and -,permanent drainage improvements, it is our opinion that the planned development willmot adversely impact the:,erosi6n potentialfor the' site or adjacent properties. All erosion And sediment c.o�ntrol.:BM.Ps.sh,ould.co,nf6rm to City of Edmonds -requirements. Project No. T-4903- P geN 0. 3 a Mr: Ross Woods January 20, 2003 L ndslide Hazard Areas Section 20.1513.060 (A)(3)(b) of the ECDC defines landslide hazard"areas (LHAs) as those areas of the city of Edmonds which, by reason of excessively ste ep . slopes, unsatisfactory foundation support, stability, or topography, have a risk- of earth subsidence and landslide. hazard in excess of:normal allowances. The ECDC specifies, field criteria for identifying LHAs. We used these criteria, listed. below, in our evaluation of LHAs at the subject site. 1. Any area with slopes.of 15 percent or greater,- I and impermeable soils (typically silt and clay) frequently interbedded with granular soils (predominantly sand. and gravel) and so rings or groundwater seepage. 2. . Any.- area that includes areas with significant visible evidence of groundwater seepage, and which also includes existing landslide deposits, regardless of slopes. 3. Any area that has shown movement -during the Holocene e och (from 10,000, 'to present) or is p years ago underlain by mass wastage debris of that epoch, as determined by a qualified geologist or geotechnical engineer. 4. Any area potentially unstable as a result of rapid'stream incision or stream bank erosion. 5. Any area located onian alluvial fan p*resently subject to,.or potentially subject to, inundation by debris flow or deposition of stream -transported sediments. During our site visit, we did not observe on -site indications of deep-seated instability, springs, or significant groundwater seepa g*e on- the steep slopes. - As discussed, we observed relatively shallow erosional features and localized shallow sloughing at isolated locations on the steep slope located below the pro osed development. p p Because shallow ground movements are associated- with these - erosional. features, and considering that ne ar- surfAce,interflow likely-, contributed to the soil loss, these areas, would be considered. LHAs pursuant to Items I and I All of the LR.As we identified -at the site exist*on the steep slope hazard area (SSHA) (slope inclinations greateuthan 40 percent) located west of Buildings 5, 6,. and 7'. Stability Analysis We performed our stability analyses using the -compute r program 'WINSTABL.- The soil. parameters used are shown- on, the attached analysis plots and. output text! These parameters. are based on, -field and laboratory data, and our past - experience with- sirnilar soils. Analyses of the sl6pe—wer6�perimmed .. along �.five section . lines identified on the attached Figure - 2 as Section, A -A` through Section E-E'... Our', analyses.-o f, these sections.� considered both static and pseudostatic, (seismic)'. conditions for the existing slopes; 4nd. for proposedgrading with assodiate& building loads at'grade. - This analysis is conservative, considering the. buildings located near the too of the steep slopewill be partially completel 'supported by doe 'fo y p undations. A horizontal. -acceleration of 0.20g wa:s.used in -the pseu'dostatic analysis to simulate slope p'drfoniianceunder k�arthquakeloading. Pr 'ect No. T-4893 01 Pagp'No. 4- M.r.-Ross-Woods January 20, 2003 The lowest safety factors for each condition are presented in the following -tab le: Section Analyzed. Mininium Safe ty. Factors Static I Pseudostatic Section A -A' exisfirig 1.72 1.18 Section A -A' proposed 1.70 1.21 Section B-B' existing 2.09. 1.42 Section 9-W Oroposed 1.56 1.1 Section C-C' existing 2.32 1.53 Section GO proposed. 1.67. 1.26 Section D-D'. existing 1.88 1.24 Section D-D' proposed 2.03 1.33 Section E-E'. existing 1.72 1.15 Section F�E', proposed 1.60 116 The results of the stability analyses indicate that existing and proposed slopes are stable with respect- to deep- seated failure under Static conditions. The existing and proposedslopes are indicated to be stable to marginally stable under severe seismic loading conditions. Potential impacts to the LHAS due to construction of the buildings And proposed yard grading include increasing the potential for erosion on and/or adjacent to the slope by exposing soils during. grading And allowing surface runoff to flow onto the steep slope, and impacts. to slope stability from building surcharges. In our opinion, potential erosion and sedimentation irnpactsto the LHAs due to the planned building locations and yard grading will be eliminated'or -significantly reduced by applying BMPs for. erosion prevention sedimentation containment. As discussed above,� analysis indicates the existing and proposed slope conditions are stable with regard to deep- seated failure. In our. opinionj supporting building loads with a: deep foundation system will further reduce potential impacts to the stability of the steep slopes due to building surcharges, and mitigate the landslide hazard. A deep foundation system will also eliminate the potential of adverse impacts to the stability of the buildings in the event of shallow soil loss. 'adjacent to the: buildings. Additiofially,.drai nage, systems associated with the finished buildings will improve theCurrent stability of the steep slope. Seismic ilakiird� Areas Section 20.1.5B.060 (A)(3)(d), of the ECDC defines seismic hazard a reas as those'areas subject *to severe ris k- of earthquake damage -as a result. of - seismically �ind.uced landsli,de&,--eArth. adjustments, Settlement, or soil, iliqu eifaction. Based on the Soil and grou'fidwaterconditi6ris we obsetv�d in our,on-site explorations, and the results of our stability analysis, it is our o inion.thAtthetiskfo P r severe damage resulting from seis.mically induced -landslides, earth adjustments, and settlement is- low. It is -also 'on that the,risk for. liquefaction to occur in potential out opim building areas at this site is.negli ible. Therefore, in our o c hazard areas, do not exist,on the subject 9 pinion, seisnu site., Pr J t No. T-4893 9J e c Page' No. 5.. Mr: Ross Woods January 20, 2003 DISCUSSION Section 20.15B.110 (B),of the ECDC (Development Standards — Erosion Hazard Areas). states that Alterations within identified EHAs -will n ot b6 authorized with . out.an approved erosion control plan pursuant to- Chapter 18.30 ECDC. A licensed engineer will prepare a. site-spe,cific erosion control plan conforming to the requirements of Chapter 18.30 ECDC. Section 20.15B. 110 (C) of the ECDC (Development Standards — Landslide Hazard Areas) states that LHAs.* located on slopes greater than40 percent shall'be regulated pursuant,to Section 20.15B.11 - 0 (D) of the ECDC (bevelopment Standards — Steep Slope Hazard Areas). As discussed, the-LHAs we identified at the site exist on the SSHA.(siope inclinations greater than 40 percent) located west of Buildings 5, 6, and 7. We previously addressed SSHAs in the,referenced report. In the'SSHA report, we opined that existing site cohditionsand applicable, projJect componen . ts gen eral ly meet,'the provis . ions,for a SSHA exemption detailed in -Section 20.1513.110(1))(2)(a — g). Specifically, this exemption- would apply to encroachment into SSHAs. by proposed Buildings 5 and 6, yaid grading associated with Buildings 2 and 6, and encroachment into the buffer within About 5 feet of the SSHA by* Building 7 and its associated yard grading. We also opined that a reduction in the buffer from 50 feet to 10 feet will hive no significant impact on the SSHA or adjacent slopes. In ouropinion, th e subsurface information.and analytical results presented herein support the findings presented in our SSHA report, And the request for a SSHA exemption and buffer reduction. We- trust the information presented is sufficient for your. current needs. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call. Sincerely yours,. TERRk ASSOCIATES, INC. . . If Y cc *���ZR1yWWZ—.09Fmity Map Ek loration Location Plan -7 IJV*0. Erosion Na24rd Area/Soils Map re :7. ni i :9oils Classification Syste I in Figures 5 through 9 7- 134ilig LO.gs� Figures 10 _through 18 — Test Pit Logs WINSTABL Output'Data . Mr: Greg Krabbq, Triad. Associates Mr.'Richard'E. Gifford Mi.. S. Jin Lee,Veber+Thompson hurr PK A M Za. I A 189TH Sw k kKF. PL R ST Sw Z 19M ST Sw CHERR' ST v al k* PE on 19 'ST p HELODY LN D BRW KINDL U El Vf EMWD'S A"6sp, S'T UNDEVA MR PARK , VISTA NO LN :8 VISTI WY ST W6 RMI BRACKETTS LANVIA11i S1 RA�Z MACH :�j 2.d U; ­4 ;t L id ST Eu Sw AIN). -19- ?_ ST DAYM 20M. KwkPLf MARINA 23. F V9TH P; —Sw ak WON 110' OIL C ST Vn r pw ST sw S ITE Z13M S V, n YL ST 21 M ZI Sw _q ima-m- ZISIX PL EDWAFOS FAIUFA PT BEACH POINT -b ;F MKAH �E lie 9: 217TH ST SW ;1.. 47 -T cis-- 218M ST' Sw ;E FIR F R T1 a 26 1. 8 - 8ELIA CDOLA V5 e5 �J- _) 1_1� ST 22( ST il MOD F. ZZIS7 ft DoGfti) S22 REFERENCE: Thomas Guide, King/Pierce/Snohomish'Countles, 1999, Page 454 NOT TO SCALE Terra' VICINITYNAP. -POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS Ass'ociates Inc. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON �C'�onsuftanfs in Gdotech�nlcal Ingineering, 'Geology and Proj. No. T-4893 Date JAN 2003 Figure 1 Environmental Earth Sciences NOTt' THIS SITE PLAN*IS SCHEMATIC�. ALL LOCATIONS AND -DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATEAT IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. REFERENCE: SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY TRIAD ASSOCIATES� LEGEND: A PROXIMATE LOCATION OF TEST PIT Pi 'IS l3ml APPROXIMATE LOCATION 6� 136RING lop, STEEP SLOPE HAZARD AREA �Op 150 .300 ApOk6xamATt SCALE IN FEET . LIgo. T-4893 TDate JAN 20C pr:oj. ---------- 7. 7- BLI o -,nr, i q A NOTE: THIS SITE PLAN IS SCHEMATIC., ALL LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. IT IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY AND SHOULD NOT ' -BE USED FOR '-DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. REFERENCE: - SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY TRIAD ASSOCIATES LEGEND:- 1) Aiderwood-Evereft gravelly sandy foams, 25 to 70% slopes 2) Alderwood-Urbanland complex, 2 to 8%.slopes 3) Kftap Silt loam, 8 to 25% slopes Erosion Hazard Area STEEP SLOPE HA2ARD AREA 4nsultants in Geotechnical Engindeft. Geolog - proj. No. T4893 Date JAN 2003 Fif� ,ay and Environmenta Earth Sciences MAJOR DIVISIONS LETTER SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION Clean GW Well -graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, little or no GRAVELS Gravels fines. GP Poorly -graded gravels, gravel -sand. mixtures, little or U) _j 0) (less than 0 N More than 5% fines) no fines. GM Silty gravels, gravel -sand -silt mixtures, non -plastic U) 50% of coarse fraction is .00 0 C: W a) > larger than No. Gravels with fines fines. C0.2? Z E 4 Sieve GC Clayey gravels, gravel -sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines. -0 0 C\j 0 Clean SW Well -graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. 06 SANDS Sands SP Poorly -graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no W C: Z U) cis (less than Er 6!' C_ C More than 5% fines) fines. ca < a) 50% of coarse 0 0 fraction is SM Silty sands, sand -silt mixtures, non -plastic fines. 0 smaller than Sands SC Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines. No. 4 sieve with fines ML Inorganic silts, rock flou r, clayey silts with slight _j T C:' SILTS AND CLAYS plasticity. CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, (lean clay). U) E 6.(D Liquid limit is less than 50% 0 o Z N W 0- Fn Z 0 C OL organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity. LO ca a) .0 > < C: � a) MH Inorganic silts, elastic. Cl cz 0 a) SILTS AND CLAYS = W C0 E CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. Z 0 U) Liquid limit is greater than 50% LL OH Organic clays of high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat. DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS U) U) W Standard Penetration Density Resistance in Blows/Foot 2" OUTSIDE DIAMETER,SPLIT, SPOON SAMPLER z 0, Very loose 0-4 2.4" INSIDE DIAMETER RING SAMPLER (0 Loose 4-;10 OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER W Medium dense 10-30 Den , se 30-50 T WATER LEVEL (DATE) 0 Very dense >50 Tr TORVANE READINGS, tsf Pp PENETROMETER READING� tsf Standard Penetration Consistenc Resistance in- Blows/Foot DD DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot W Very soft 0-2 LL LIQUID LIMIT, percent W Soft 2-4 a: 0 Medium stiff 4-8 PI PLASTIC INDEX stiff 8-16- Very stiff 16-32 N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot Hard _:�-32 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM k4ATerra Associates, Inc.- POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS . . EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ConsUltants in Geote'chnical Engineering Proj.-No. T-4893 Date JAN 2003 FiguLre4 Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Boring No. B-1 Logged by: JCS Date: 12/13/02 Approximate Elev. .110 Soil Description Consistency/ Relative Depth E (N). Blows/ Moisture Content Density (Z U). ft'. N Grayish -brown silty SAND, fine grained, with occasional fine gravel. (SM) Medium Dense 29 12 Occasi onal rusty brown stained partings. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dense —10 :L 43 14 Light brown SILT with sand, fine grained, moist, slightly mottled, (ML) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dense 42 21 Mottled light brown silty SAND to sandy SILT, fine grained, moist to wet. (SM/MQ Dense —20 - 38 .23 Light gray silty SAND to sandy SILT, fine grained, moist, with occasional fine gravel. ------------------------------ _(SM/M�) --------------------------------------------------- Very Dense T 60 18 Grayish-brown SAND with silt, fine to medium grained, moist, with occasional fine gravel. (SP-SM) Very Dense —30 T .82 8 Grayish -brown SAND with silt to silty SAND, fine grained, moist. (SR-SM/SM) Very Dense T_ 58 15 (Grayish -brown hard, moist SILT between 35.5 and 36.0 feet) Light gray silty SAND to SAND with silt, fine grained, Very —40 75. 10 moist. (SM/SP-SM) Dense Trace of gravel. Very Dense 80 8 Very Dense —50 .58 6 -------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- --------------------------- Brownish-gray SAND with silt to silty SAND, fine grained moist. (SP-SM/SM) With a trace of fine black organic inclusions. Very Dense 82 .16 No fine organic.inclusions. Very De6se 86, 8 Boring terminated at 60 feet. No significant groundwater encountered. Terra Associatesjnc. BORING LOG.. POINT EDWARDS CONDOM.INIUMS EDMONDS,. WASHINGTON Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences, Proj. N6. T-4893� Dat 003 e JA N 2 Figure Boring No. B-2 Logged by: JCS Date:. 12/13/02 Approximate Elev. 90 Soil Description Consistency/ Relative Depth a) cL E (N) Blows/ Moisture Content Density FILL: gray sandy sift, fine grained, moist, with occasional fine gravel. Loose 5 8 24 FILL: brown organic silty sand to sandy sift and bluish- gray silty sand, fine grained, moist to wet. Loose 0 4 12 With organics. Loose 15, 6 10 Very Loose —20 3 27 Bluish -gray to light brown SAND with silt to silty SAND, fine grained, moist. (SP-SM/SP) ----------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Medium Dense 05 - 20 13 Mottled gray sandy SILT, fine grained, moist. (ML) ------------------ --------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------- Medium Dense —30 - 23 20 bray SAND to SAND with silt, fine grained, moist. (SP/SP-SM) Medium Dense —35 27 10 Dense 40 36 8 Boring terminated at 41.5 feet. No.significant groundwater encountered. Terra Associates, Inc. BORING --LOG, - POINT EDWARDS. CONDOMINIUMS. EDMONDS WASHINGTON consultants in Gdote'chn-ical Engineering Geology and Environmental.Earth sciences Proj. No.. T-4893, Date JAU. 2003 Figure 6 Boring No.. B-3 Logged by: DPL Date: 12/16/02 Approximate Elev. 76 'Consistency/ (N) Moisture Soil Description Relative Depth E Blows/ Content Density ft. N Possible FILL: gray sand to silty sand, fine grained, wet, with occasional fine gravel. Possible FILL: grayish -brown silty sand, fine grained, wet, Medium 5 11 19 ---- slight -mottling ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dense ---------- T Gray silty SAND, fine grained, moist. (SM) Dense —10 - 31 22 Gray silt y SAND to sandy SILT, fine grained, moist. Dense —15 36 20. (SM/ML) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Grayish-brown SAND with silt, fine grained, dry to moist. Very 20 68 4 (SP-SM) Dense Very —25 '53 5 Dense Grayish-beown SAND, fine grained, dry to moist. (SP) Very —30. 51 5 Dense Boring terminated at 31.5 feet. Minor groundwater perched at 7 feet. Terra BORING. LOG . Associates, Inc. POINT EDWARDS- CONDOMINIUMS. EDMONS, WASHINGTON.. Consultants in Geotechnical, Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Prof., No. T-4803 Date. JAN 200 3, Fi gure.-'7 Boring No. B-4 Logged by: DPL Date: 12/16/02 Approximate Elev. 90 Soil Description Consistency/ Relative Depth E (N) Blows/ Moisture Content Density (ft.) Ca U) ft. N FILL (Old test pit): bluish -gray silty sand, fine grained, Loose wet, with a trace of wood particles. Appears disturbed. 7 27 FILL (Old test pit): mottled brown silty sand, fine grained, moist. Yedium Dense 10 - 17 21 31. FILL (Old test pit): brown silt and clay, moist, with a trace ---- of-b-rown-orqanic-material ------------------------------------------------- Very Stiff ----------- Bluish -gray SILT to CLAY, low to medium plasticity. Very 17 28 (MUCL) stiff Gray SILT to CLAY, moist, low to medium plasticity. (MUCL) Very .-20 stiff 30 23 LL = 35.5 PI = 11.5 Grayish -brown sandy SILT to clayey SILT, fine grained, moist. (ML) With thin partings of iron -stained, fine- grained Very stiff 35 23 sand. Grayish -brown clayey SILT to silty CLAY, moist.'(MUCL) With thin discontinuous lenses of gray to mottled gray .___!i_nft_g!ained sand Very stiff —30 30 24 Gray silty SAND, fine grained, moist. (SM) Dense 37% 15 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------- Gray sandy SILT to clayey SILT, fine grained, moist, low plasticity. (ML to MUCL) Hard 40 34 17 Gray clayey SILT, moist, low plasticity. (MUCL) Trace fin_e:gCgin9d_$AV_d, Hard 37 20 Gray sandy SILT to silty S . AND, fine grained, moist, Dense —50 32 19 (MUSM) 47' 18 .-60 42 15 Boring terminated at 61.5 feet. No significant groundwater encountered. Terra Associates jnc. BORING LOG. POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS EDMONDS,,WASHINGTON Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No T-4893 Date JAN 20031 Figure & Boring No. B-5 Logged by: DPL Date: 12/16/02 Approximate Elev. 105 Soil Description Consistency/ Relative Depth a) CL E (N) Blows/' Moisture Content Density (ft.) ca (n ft. N Brown to grayish -brown silty SAND, fine grained, wet, with faint mottling. (SM) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Medium Dense T 11 19 Gray SILT, medium to high plasticity, moist. (MH) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------- stiff —10 13 35 Gray CLAY and SILT, low plasticity, moist'. (CUML) Very stiff 25 26 40 Gray silty SAND, fine grained, moist to wet. (SM) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dense -------------------------- —20 31 26 Gray CLAY, low plasticity, moist. (CL) Very 22 27 stiff 42 Gray CLAY, low plasticity, moist.. (CL) Very —30 22 25 ------------------------------------------------------- ----------------- stiff -------------------------- Gray sandy SILT to silty SAND, fine grained, moist. Dense 46 25 (MUSM) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dense ------------------------ —40 - 43 .15 Gray sandy SILT to clayey SILT, non -plastic, moist. (ML to MUCL) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dense ----------------------- 31 20 Gray sandy SILT to silty SAND, fine grained, dry to moist Dense 46 18 Moist to wet. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Medium Dense 7 --------------------- 28 20 Brown silty SAND, fine grained, moist. (SM) Very — Dense 60 64 i3. Boring terminated at 60.5 feet. No significant groundwater encountered. Terra Associates, Inc. BORING LOG POINT.EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS EDMONDS, WASHINGTON- Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and - Environmental Earth Sciences ___�j Proj. No. T 489 Date JAN 20031 Figure.9 Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth - (ft.) 0 FILL: crus 5 10 15 20 Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth .M.) 0 FILL: crushe 10 15 Test Pit No. TP-1 Approximate Elev. 104 Moisture Soil Description Content hed rock surfacing over brown to gray silty sand to sandy silt, fine grained, firm, moist. (SIVI/IVIL) Rusty brown silty SAND fine grained, medium dense, moist, with occasional fine \gravel and fine roots. (W) Gray to mottled gray silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense to dense, moist, with,6ccasional fine gravel. (SM) Becomes light brown at approximately 6 feet. Gray CLAY, hard, moist, massive. (CL) 26 Pp 4.5+ tons/le. LL 35.8 PI 15 Test pit terminated at 14 feet. No groundwater seepage. Test Pit No. TP'2 Approximate Elev. 124 Moisture Content Soil Description. . (%) drocksurfacin over brown silty sand to sandy silt, fine grained, firm, - moist. 4-inch thick organic Payer at base. (SM/ML) (Old topsoil horizon) - Brown'silty SAND, fine grainedi medium dense� moist. (SM), Mottled grayish -brown silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense, moist. 20 (SM) Grayish -brown silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense to dense, moist. (SM) GrayCLAY,'hard, moist,.laminated with light gray silt partings. (CL) PP 4.5+ tonsift' 31 7(est pit te rrinihated at'l 4 feet. Nolgroundwater seepage. 20, 7. TEST- PIT LOGS Tbrra POINT EDWARDS, CONDOMINIUMS EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Associates' C. Geotechnical consultants Proj. No,.'Tm:4893 T Date JAN'20013] 'F igure 10 Logged by: JCS Date:. 10/18/01 Depth (ft.) 0. P11 I a hm 5 .10 15 Test Pit No. TP, 3 Approximate'Elev. 121 Moisture Content Soil Description . (%) wn silty sand, fine grained ' firm, moist, with occasional fine gravel and organic material. (SM)r (Hydrocarbon odor) - Dark brown organic Silty SAND, fine grained, soft, moist to wet. (OL) 7 \ (Old topsoil horizon) - 15 Tan to light gray silty CLAY to clayey SILT, hard, moist. (CUML) (Hydrocarbon odor) - Gray CLAYhard, moist, laminated with partings of light gray silt and gray - fine sand. (CL) P =4 5' 32 - ton /ft' I P s - Test pit terminated at 13 feet. Light groundwater seepage from point source. at 4.5 feet., U Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth (ft.) .0 FILL: light 5 Test Pit -No. TP-4 Approximate.Elev.-92 Moisture Soi . I Description Content brown silty sand a=irm, dry to moist. (SIVI) T-5-77 Eck tine gr organic layer at base. t6psoil n) 016 Light brown to tan silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense to dense, dry.. (SM) Mottled gtayish-brown silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense to dense, 291. moist., ISM). LL 42 T Light grayish -brown to light brown CLAY and SILT, hard,'moist, laminated 29 P1 10-1 With partings of dark gray fine sand. (CUML) Pp 4.5+ tonsIff 'G*CLAY, hard, moist. (CL) PP 4.5i- 29 1 ions/te Test pit. terminated tit 13 feet.. Trace groundwater seepage at 6 feet. TEST PIT, LOGS Tetra, POINT EDWARDS, CONDOMINIUMS E DMOND Si WASHI NGTON , Associates, -Inc. Geotechnical Consultants Proj...No.T-4803 -,Date JAN '200&. Figure 11 Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth (ft.) 0 5 15 20 Test -Pit No. TP-6 Logged by; JCS Approximate Elev. 15,0 Date: 10/18/01 Moisture Depth Content Soil Description N Test Pit No. TP-5 Approximate EleY. 110 Moisture Content Soil Description 6 inches DUFF and TOPSOIL. Light brown SAND with silt to silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense, moist. (SP-SM/SM) 23 Mottled grayish -brown SAND to SAND with silt, fine grained, medium dense to dense, moist. (SP/SP-SM) Becomes wet at approximately 9 feet. 26 34 LL 44�5 - Grayish -brown to gray CLAY, hard, moist, generally massive, with P1 21.3 - occasional thin laminations of gray silt. (CL) Pp 4.5+ tonsife - �Test pit terminated at 16 feet. - Light groundwater seepage between 9 and 10 feet. - FILL: brown to,grayish-brown SILT, CLAY, and fine grained SAND, firm - moist.to wet, with some fine gravel and occasional organic material. 32 FILL: gray to brownish gray silt, clay, and fine grained sand, firm, moist to wet, with moderate organic material (including wood debris) and,some' gravel. 12-inch thick organic layer at base. (Old top soil horizon) 'Gray silty SAND to sandy SILT, fine grained, dense; moist, with occasional.fine to coarse gravel. (SWML) (Glacial till -like) Test pit terminated at 16 feet. No]groundwater seepage. TEST PIT LOGS, -Terra POINT, EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Associa'tes, Inc. Geotechnical Consultants Proj.. No., T-48--93- Date'JAN­-.20.03 ,Figure,19 Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth 0- 5 10 15 Test Pit No.. TP Approximate Elev. 121 Moisture Content Soil Description (0/.) FILL: dark brown organic silty, sand, fine grained, firm, moist. - Mottled gray to.brown SAND with silt to silty SAND, fine medium - -grained, dense to dense,'moist. (SP-SM/SM) (Hydrocarbon odor) 20 Tan to light grayish -brown silty CLAY to CLAY, hard, mo.ist,.occasional 24 mottling. (CL) Pp - 4.6+ tons/fe 31 Test pit terminated at 15 feet. No groundwater seepage. 20 Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth .M.) 0- 5 10 Test Pit- No. TP-8 Approximate Elev. 191 Moisture Soil Description Content FILL: light brown to gray silty sand, firm, moist to wet, with organics. FILL: dark brown organic silty sand, loose, wet, with, significant wood debris (timbers and branches). 2.5-foot diameter boulder. Gray SILT to SILT with sand, fine grained, dense, moist to*wet. (MLY 25 Light gtayish-brown to tan sandy SILT, fine grained, very dense, m,oist, with occasional fine gravel. (ML) (Glacial till-likej 16 Test pit terminated- at. 15 feet. Light groundwater seepage at 6 feet. r- V TEST, PIT LOGS ..Terra POINT E.DWA.RDS'CONDOMINIUMS,' EDMONDS, WASHINGTON :.Associatesi,Int, Geotechnidal Consultants Pate JAN 2003 Figure 13 Proi. No.74893, Test Pit No. TP-9 Logged by: JCS Approximate Elev. 150: Date: 10/18/01 Moisture Depth Content (ft.) Soil Description N 0 5 10 15 20 Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 De pth 0- - FILL: crushed rock surfacing over grayish -brown sandy silt and clay, firm, - moist. 6-inch thick organic layer at base. (Oldtopsoilhorizon) Mottled grayish -brown sandy SILT to sandy CLAY, stiff, moist. (ML16L) Pp =A5+ 30 t6wft2 37 Grayish -brown CLAY, hard, moist, massive. (CH) LL 58.8 Pl,= 30.1 Gray SILT and CLAY, hard, moist, with occasional laminations of gray Pp 4.5+ fine sand. (MUCL) 1 22 1 tons/fe Test pit terminated at 15'feet. No groundwater seepage. Test Pit No.' TP-1 0 Approximate. Elev. 157 Moisture Soil Content 6 inches DUFF and TOPSOIL. Brown sandy SILT, fine grained, medium dense, moist. (ML) 40 Grayish -brown SILT and CLAY, hard, moist. (MUCL) -PP 4.5+ tonstfe 34 Gray SILT and CLAY, hard, moist. (MUCL) Test pit terminated at 15 feet. No groundwaterseepage. TEST PIT LOGS.. Tbrra POINT EDWARDS :CONDOMINIUMS EDIVIONDS, WASHINGTON -Associates,Inc Date�JAN,200 Geotechnical(jobsulta'nts, Proj� No. T7489 Figure 14 Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 ,Depth . (ft.) 0- 5 10 15 Test, Pit No... TP-1 1 Approximate Elev. 78 Moisture Content Soil Description. - 7 Mottled grayish7brown SAND to SAND with silt,, finegrained, medium dense, moist to wet. (SP/SP-SM) 25 15 - Light brown silty SAND to sandy SILT, fine grained, medium -dense to - dense, moist. (SM/ML) Increasing silt,with depth. 15 22 Test pit terminated at 15 feet. No groundwater seepage. 20 'Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth 0— Test Pit,, No. TP-1 2 Approximate Elev. 716 Moisture Content Soil Description 1 1%) nc es rushed -rock surfacing, Mottled grayish -brown SAND, fine to medium grained, medium d6nse, mo-ist, with, occasional fine dravel.—(SP) (Hydrocarbon odor) Gray SAND with silt to SAND, fine grained, medium dense to dense, 17 moist to wetj with occasional fine to coarse" gravel. (SP-SM/SP) Mottled grayish -brown silty SAND'with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, fine sand, fine gravel, dense. to very dense, moist. (SM/ML) (Glacial till -like between 8 And 10.feet) Increasing'gravel with depth. 20 Test pit terminated at 15 feet. Tr6ce.groundwater seepage at 8 feet.. - TEST PIT LOGS.:... POINT �EDWARDS. CONDOMINIUMS', Terra EDMONDS, WASHINGTON As'sociat.es:,inc. Geotechnical Consultants P No. T�4893,, DateJAN 20Q ],'Figure 1.5'.-. Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth (ft.) 0 — 5 10 15 20 Test Pit M.. TP-1 3 Approximate Elev. 86 Moisture Soil Description Content nc es crushed rock surfacing. Mottled grayish -brown silty SAND to sandy SILT, very dense, moist. (SM/ML) (Hyd ocarboh odor) 2.5 31 Bluish -gray CLAY, hard, moist, with partings of gray fine sand and light gray silt. (CL) Pp 4.5+ tons/ft' Test pit terminated at 14 feet. Trace groundwater seepage at 2.5 feet. Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth 0— R 1 C 15 Test 'Pit No. TP-1 4 Approximate Elev. 76 Moisture Content Soil Description (%) - - FILL: bluish -gray silty sand with gravel to sandy silt with gravel, fine sand, fine gravel, medium dense to dense, moist. -(SM/ML) 10 - Light brown sandy SILT, fine grained, dense; moist, with occasional - fine gravel -and:thih layers of fine grained silty sand. (ML) - 19 15, - jest pit.terminated at 15 feet. - No groundwater seepage. V TEST P.IT,LOGS erra POINT EDWARDS -CONDOMINIUMS T EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Associates, ffic. - Rio Geoteclin'ical donsilltarits P_r9j., No.'T-4893 DAte-JAN2003 Figure. 16. Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth (ft.) U 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP-1 5 Approximate, Elev. 86 Moisture Content Soil Description FILL: graysilty sand to sandy silt, fine gr��ined, medium dense, moist, with occasional fine grave . (SWIVIL) Dark brown organic sandy SILT, fine grained, firm, -moist, with occasional roots. (OL) (Old topsoil horizon) Mottled grayisfi-brown silty SAND with gravel to SAND with silt and gravel, fine sand, fine to coarse gravel, rnedium to dense, moist. 10 -dense (SWSP7SM) Becomes brownish. -gray and. moi st to wet at approximately 8 feet. V Brownish -gray silty SAND with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, fine sand, -fine gravel; dense, moist. (SM/ML) Glacial till -like) 18 Test pit terminated at, 15 feet. Trace groundwater seepage at 11 feet. 20 Test.Pit No. �TP-16 Logged by: JCS Approximate. Elev. 68 Date.- 10/18/01 Moisture Depth Content RY Soil- Description M - FILL: gray to brown silty sand with gravel, fine grain ed, firm to loose, - moist to wet. (sM) FILL: grayish -brown silty sand with grav I; fine grained, firm,.moist to wet, with significant organic,soils and wood debris. 23 19 Bluish-giray sit SAND, with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, -fine sand, fine gravel, TS-WIVIL). dense, moist (Glacial till -like) Light brow� SAND, fine grained, medium dense to dense, moist. (SIP) .15 Tqs�t: pit term ina�ted at -11� feet. No g.round.Water.seepage. TEST PIT LOGS. Terra-, �POINTEDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS A8*.so'-c­iates'-- h EDMONDS'- WASHINGTON - h-c. Geotechhical-Coinsultints Proj-.-No.-T-4899 Deite. JAR 2 03'1' 7 _Q Figure-17 Test Pit NO.- TP-1 7 Logged by: JCS Aoproximate-El ev. 82 Date: 10/18/01. Moisture Depth Cohtent Soil, Description N 0 brown silty P�MD with gravel, fine sand, fine to coarse gravel, =rn dense. moist. (SM) Mott -5-- a ish-brown silt� SAND with grav�l, fine sand, fine to coarse gravel, medluemgdrehyse to dense, M,oist- (SIVI) 13, - Grayjsh-brown silty SAND with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, fine sand, 5— fine to coarse gravel, dense to very.dense, moist. (SM/ML) (Glacial till4ike) Sand content increases with depth. 10 Test pit terminated at 9.5,feet. No groundwater seepage. 15 20— DESIGN CALCULATIONS MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH (MSE) WALL WITH RoCKE Ry FACING POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS EDMONDS, WASHINGTON TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. PROJECT No. T-4893 PRE, PARED FOR: POINT EDWARDS, LLC SEATTLE, WASHINGTON JUNE 12,2006 rii-UL, -41 ' MSEW — Meclianically Stabilized EaAh Walls Pic.= Djldrmc: Mon ko 12 0:_<4,31 -1006 Point Edwards Condominiums GAUSERSUSAIDLERWOMPoW 8d%6n1&UWaMAcryA=1)*4 ft%W1mWN AASHTO DESIGN' METHOD Point Edwards Condominiums PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Title: Point Edwards Condominiums Project Number. T4893 Client: Point Edwards, LLC Dcsirvier: ICS Station Number: N/A Description: 4-foot high geolextile wrap -face reinforced fill rockery; 2:1 slope surcbarge Companys information: Name: Terra Associates. Inc. Street: 12525 Willows Rd. Ste. 101 Kirkland, WA 98034 Telenhone fl: 425-821-7777 Fax It: 425-821-4334 E-Mail: joliii@term-associates.com Original file path and name: G:\USERS\JSADLER\4000\Point Edwards\Rcinf Rockery Analy ..... Original date and time of creating this file: May 12, 2006 PROGRAM MODE: ANALYSIS of a SIMPLE STRUCTUR-E using GEOGRID as reinforcing maierial. Point Ed%mrds Condoininiunu Page I of 4 C apyr ig] i I C 199 8 -2004 ADAMA E agi n ccr ing In c Lic cn s e numbei MSEW — Mechanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Point Edwards Condominiums . W ha 12 09:54:32 2006 Cj:tUSEflSVM.DLCRx40W;,Yaiw EdwankVtLid Rm&cryAj=fj-%W4 4 u:M.0FW —nc,tni Dittfrtw: % SOIL DATA REINFORCED SOIL Unit weipjIt. -V 125.0 lb/ft Design value of internal angle of fricfion, 34.00 RETAINED SOIL Unit weitilit, y 120.0 lb/ft Design value of internal angle of friction, 32.00 FOUNDATION SOIL (Considered as an equivalent uniform soil) Equivalent unit weiahl. v —i, 125.0 lb/ft 3 Equivalent internal angle of fficfion, 0,,j, 35.0 ' Equivalent coliesion, C,,,i,-. 200.0 lb/ft Water table does not affect bearing capacity LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENYS Ka (intemal stability) = 0.2827 (if batter is less than 10', Ka is calculated from eq. 15. Otherwise, eq. 38 is utilized) Inclination of internal sliE) plane. w = 62.00' (see Fig- 28 in DEMO 82). Ka (external slability) = 0.3737 (if batter is less than 10', Ka is calculated from eq. 16. Otherwise, eq. 17 is utilized) BEARING CAPACITY Bearing capacity coefficients (calculated by MSEW): Nc = 46.12 N y= 48.03 SEISFdICITY Max imum around acceleration coefficient, cL. = 0.150 Kac(a�>O)=0.8125 Kae(oL.=O) =0.3737 A Kne = 0.4388 (see eq. 37 in DEMO 82) Seismic soil-geogrid friction cocfficicn� F* is 80.0% of its specified static value, Point Edwirds Condominiums Pugc2 of 4 Copyri&t 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Enginecring. Inc. Licenst: numbu M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Prmcw Dmcn-w4; Mall Jrz I Z 0:54:32 _MN GAJSGRSMDL2R1A=ToiW EftxdL%Xck( Rockay A=��%4 It tlapv.004 INPUT DATA: Geometry and Surcharge loads (of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE) De -sign licight, Hd 5.50 (19t] Embedded depth is E = 1.50 fl, and height above top of finished bottoin grade is H = 4.00 F1 Batter, (1) 0.0 I'ded Backslope. 6 23.0 fdcgj Backs- lope rise 4.0 [ft] Broken back equivalent angle, I = 19.98' (see Fig. 25 in DEMO 82) UNIFORIVI SURCHARGE Uniformly distributed dead load is 0.0 [lb/ft 2) AMLYZED REINFORCEMENT LAYOUT - SCALE: 0 2 4 6 [ft] L- -_'— — . 7-- . -.7 ! - Point Ed%vards Condominiums Page 3 or 4 Copyzight 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engincaing, Inc. License nurnhcr M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Fickm D=M-w- Mm im ) 2 MUM 2006 G-WSfiKS%JSAi31.ER%40QQ�ri31= tdwudjtjRc:mfRockcry Azzly-wimW (I alm,—.IJEN ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Static conditions) Bearing capacity, Fs = 25.89. Meyerhof stress = 1002 lb/fil. Fotindation In(erfacc: Direct slidinu. Fs = 2,759. Eccentricily. eJJ.. = 10363. Fs-ovcrturning = 5.Z4 GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs -overall Fs -overall Fs -overall Geoprid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product it Elevation Length Type rpullout [connection [geogrid strength resistance sliding e/L riame [ft] Ift] resistancel break] strength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2,00 6.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 4.625 5.213 2.706 -0.0105 SviiteenSF.. 2 4.00 6.00 1 NIA N/A N/A 12.938 7,377 3.454 -0.0654 Synteen SF.. ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Seismic conditions) Bearinp capacity, Fs = 15.13, Meyerhot'stress = 1420 ll)/W. otindation Interface: Direct sliding. F5 = 1.,566. Eccentricity, c/L = .1.522. Fs-pvcMirnine = 2.54 GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs-ovcrall Fs -overall Fs -overall Geogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product I N Elevation LengtliT�pc [pullout [connection rgeogrid strength resistance sliding e/L name [ft] [Ft] 11 resistance] break] strength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 6.00 1 N/A N/A NIA 3.619 3.264 1.734 2 4.00 6.00 1 NIA N/A N/A 8.038 3.667 2.795 GLOBAL/COMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Bishop method and ROR = 0.0) STATIC CONDITIONS: For the sl&Qifi?,d,.Qearch-grid. the calculated minimum FS is 2.250 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = 0.55, Yc = 12. 10 and R = 12.40 [fi] ). SEISMIC CONDITIONS: For the specified scamL-gr4 the calculated minimum Fs is 1.713 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = 0.55, Yc --- 13.75 and R = 14.02 [fi] ). 0.0382 Synteen SF.. -0.0561 Synteen SF.. Nita Edwards Condominiums Page 4 of 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engiaccriug, Inc. Liccnscnujnbcr M-US-0534 MSEW — Meebanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Point Edwards Condominiums p1mm Dmelrcw: Mon Jun ) 1 09:S103 -W& Q�USERISUSAVLEXACMNY�M A=J)�iN R Traffi: BUN AASHTO DESIGN METHOD Point Edwards Condominiums PROJECT IDEN"FICATION Tifle: Point Edwards Condominiums Project Number: T4893 Clicnt- Point Edwards, LLC Desianer. ics Station Number: N/A Description: 4-foot high P-colextile wrap-facc reinforced Fill rockery; horizontal backslope, traffic surcharge Companys information: Name: Terrd'Associates, Inc. Street: 12525 Willows Rd. Ste. 101 Kirkland, WA 98034 Tclevhune It: 425-821-7777 Fax It: 425-821-4334 E-Mail: john@Ierra-associates.com Original file path and name: G-.\USERS\JSADLER\4000\Point Edwards\Reinf Rockery Analy..... Original date and time of creating this file: May 9, 2006 PROGRAM MODE - Point Ed%var& Condominiums Copyrighl,i) 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering, Inc. ANALYSIS of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE using GEOGRYD as reinforcing material. Page I of 4 License number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums _naml 1WcTmr_ Mi4 )" 12 09.S3.03 ZOM G_-1VSERSVSADLER,14&Wo'o1 Ed- wWkeakaduY M44SW4 R Trdr=11EN SOIL DATA REINFORCED SOIL Unit weight, y 125.0 lb/ft Design value of bilenial angle of friction, 34.00 RETAINED SOIL Unit weialit, -,r 120.0 Ib1f1:' Design value of internal augle of friction, 32.00 FOUNDATION SOIL (Considered as an equivalent uniform soil) Equivalent unit weight, V ­�' 125.0 lb/ft Equivalent internal angle of firicdon, 35.00 Equivalent cohesion, c,,i,. 200.0 lb/ft Water table does not affect bearing capacity LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS Ka (intemal slabilitv) = 0.2827 (if batter is less than 10'. Ka is calculaled from eq. 15. Otherwise, eq. 38 is utilized) Inciiiiation of internal sliv vlane. w = 62.00' (see Fig. 28 in DEMO 82). Kn (external stability) = 0.3073 (if batter is less than 10*, Ka is calculated froin eq. 16. Othenvise, eq. 17 is utilized) REAHING CAPACITV Bearing capacity coefficients (calculated by MSEW): Nc = 46.12 N y= 48.03 SEISMICITY Maximum around acceleration coefficient, (i � = 0.150 Kae ( oL� > 0) = 0.4368 Kne (ot,= 0) = 0.3073 A Kae = 0. 1295 (see eq. 37 in DEMO 82) Scismic soil-geogrid friction coefficient, F* is 80.0% of its specified static value. Point Edwanis Quidominiums Page 2 of 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering, luc. License number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Sinbili7ed.Earlb Walls Point Edwards Condoutiniunis Pr—H Dddr�� Wo J= 12 09:5103 NAU GAUSGRSVSADLGR%40MPa!;o r-4w"kFtz!%f?,*dtfy Ar%A�-jjj'A A Trjf6r-UEN INPUr DATA.- Geometry and Surcharge loads (of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE) Design height, Hd 5.50 [ft] Einbrdded depth is E = 1.50 fl, and height above top of f inished bottotn grade is H = 4.00 ft Batter. w 0.0 [deRl Backslove, B 23.0 [deg] Backslope rise 0.0 [ft] Broken back equivalent nngle, I = 0.00' (see Fig. 25 in DEMO 82) UN.IFORM SURCHARGE Unifonnly distributed dead load is 0.0 (lb!ft 'I, and live load is 250.0 [lb/ft ANALYZED REINFORCEMENY LAYOU17-. SCALE: 0 2 4 6 [ft] 1 1.11 1 1 . 1. . I Point Edwards Condominiums Page 3 of 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering, hie. Licrnsc nurnba M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums h=w DaWtV= Mon Jm 12 09:53:04 2W6 Ed-vld,'Reid H-Ltry Ar-44yWA fi Tmf&,.BL-W ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Static conditions) Bearing capacitv. Fs = 23.13. Meyerhof stress = 1077 lb/ft2. nundation Interface: Direct slidine, Es = 2.8.3-9. Eccentricity. cq. t ).0883- Fs-overmMing = 5.67 GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs -overall Fs -overall Fs -overall Gcoarid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product 0 Elevation LcnpdiType (Dullout [connection [geoluid strength resistance sliding e/L name resistance] break] strength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 6.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 3.712 2,931 2,863 0.0466 Svnteen SF.. 2 4.00 6.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 8.223 2.183 3.874 0.0159 Synteen SF.. ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Seismic conditions) Bearing car)acitv. Fs = 19.66, Meycrhof stress 1190 lb/111. nundation Interface: Direct sliding, Es = 1,9Q7, Eccgntricity, ell- 140, Fs-overWr7iina = 3.45 GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs -overall Fs -overall Fs -overall Geogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product Elevation Length Type foullout rconnection fgcogrid strength resistance slidbig efl, nanic 1111 Ift] 9 resistance] break] strength] Fs Fs Fs I 1 2.00 6.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 3.165 2.000 2.048 0.0695 Synteen SF.. 2 4.00 6.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 6,324 1.343 3.148 0.0201 Synteen SF-- 6LOBAL/COMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Bishop method and BOB � 0.0) STATIC CONDITIONS: For the sperifi d search gEid the calculated mhiimuni FS is 2.723 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = 0.00, Ye = 8.25 and R = 8.88 [ft] ). SEISMIC CONDITIONS: For tlj0_sl2ecified!&arch gdd. die calculated minimum Fs is 2.163 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = -0.55, Yc = 11.00 and R = 11.65 [ftj ). Paiin Edwards Condominiums Page 4 of 4 Copyright,L) 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering, Inc. License number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Poiot Edwards Condominiums Pimse Dwarrtme: M., Jun ) 2 09:53:1 D 2006 G:kUSER5USAJXFR14=kP*irj Ed�vd%kftTWRX%Cry AcAvWk 1'. W-v.,ULN AASHTO DESIGN METHOD Point Edwards Condominiums PROJECT IDEWIFICATION Title: Point Edwards Condominiums Proiect Number: T-4893 Client: Poiut Edwards, LLC Desigiier: JCS Station Nwnber: N/A Description: 6-foot hiph geotextile wrap -face reinforced fill rockery; 2:1 slope surcliarge Company's Information: Namic: Terra Associates, Inc. Stmet: 12525 Willows Rd. Ste. 101 Kirkland, WA 98034 Teleiihone 4: 425-821-7777 Fax fi: 425-8214334 E-Mad: jolui@tcrra-associates.com Original file path and name: GAUSERSVSADLER\4000\Point Edwards\Reinf Rockery Analy ..... Original date and time of creating this file: May 12,2006 PROGRAM MODE: ANALYSIS of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE using GEOGRID as reinforcing material, Point Edwards Condominiums ar P - L I of 4 CopyrighL 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engimeting, Inc. Licensu nuti MSEW — Mechanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Poiu( Edwards Condominiums Ymcrl CWc'fimr %bmIua 12 69:5SA0 2CO6 SOIL DATA REINFORCED SOIL Unit weighl, -Y 125.0 lbifl Design value of internal angle of ffiction, 34.00 ILEI'AINED SOIL Unit %veialit. y 120.0 lb/fl Design value of internal angle of friction, 32.00 FOUNDATION SOIL. (Considered as an equivalent uniform soil) Equivalent unit weight, y _j, 125.0 lb/ft Equivalent internal anple offficlion, 4k.— 35.0 ' Equivalent cohesion, c,4ui,. 200.0 lb/ft Water table does not affect bearing capacity LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS Ka (internal stability) = 0.2927 (if batter is less thiui 101, Ka is calculated from eq. 15. Otherwise, eq. 38 is utilized) Inclhiation of internal sliv Mane. w = 62,00' (see Fig. 28 in DEMO 82). Ka (external stability) = 0.3402 (if batter is less than 10', Ka is calculated from eq. 16. Oflierwise, eq. 17 is utilized) BEARING CAPACITY Bearing capacity coefficients (calculated by MSEW): Nc = 46.12 N 7= 48.03 SEISNIICITV Maximum ground acceleration coefficient, a � = 0. 150 Kne (ri,> 0) = 0.5871 Kne (oL,= 0) = 0.3402 A Kae = 0.2470 (see eq. 37 in DEMO 82) Seismic soil-geogrid friction coefficient, F* is 80.0% of its specified static value. Point Edwm-ds Condominiums Page 2 of 4 Copyright 10 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering, Inc. 1-icense number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Pohit Edwards Condominiums prc.mt Daleffmc. MO. kn 12 09:5311 .1005 GAUSEMSAULEXUD00191m Ud..fthXRh( ROC" AUVSiA 11 %!0PC'RDJ INPUT DATA: Geometry and Surcharge loads (of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE) Design height, Hd 7.50 [ftj Embedded derth is E = 1,50 ft, and height above top of finished bo ttom grade is H = 6.00 ft Batter, r,) 0.0 klea] Backslove. B 23.0 [deg] Backslope rise 4.0 [ft] Broken back equivalcrit angle, 14.93' (see Fig. 25 in DEMO 82) U N I F 0 R M SURCHARGE Uniforirdy distributed dead load is 0.0 [lb/ft ANALYZED REINFORCEMENY LAYOUT: SCALE: 0 2 4 6[ft] Poim Edwards Condominiums Page 3 of 4 Copyriglit 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engincaing. Inc. Licciescnumber M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Ew-di Walls Pobit Edwards Condominiums NcLm thfer�: Mactul 12 09:56:11 -,,M GAUSERSVSAVLEXV0TvV-LA 11 dqcH04 ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Static conditions) Bearing capacity. Fs = 19.64, Meyerhof stress = 1394 lb/f12. Friundation Intgrface: Direct slidinp. Fs = 2,634. Eccentricity. e/1, = 0.067R. Fs-overtu[Iiing = 4,39 GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs-ovcrall Fs -overall Fs-o%,crall Geogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product Elevation I-Lns,,thTVpe [pullout fconnect-ion fgeo2rid strength resistance sliding e/L narne resistance] break] strength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A NIA 3.131 6.122 2.477 0.0254 Syutccn SF.. 2 4.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 7.243 8.765 2.998 -0.0158 Syn(cenSF.. 3 6.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 11.314 7.205 3.725 -0.0682 Synteen SF.. ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Seismic Conditions) Bearing capacity. Fs = 10.71, Meyerhof stress = 2043 lb/ft'. ...... I.A.— v- - i c,2n -if - A I OA') C� - I I () GEOGRID CONN Ec,ri ON r-'s-overall Fs-ovemll Fs -overall Geozrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product I/ Elevation U=,th Type [pullout fconnection rgeogrid strength resistance sliding c/L naine "I resistance] break] strengthl Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 2.498 3.908 1.549 0.0929 Witeen SF.. 2 4.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A NIA 4.890 4.734 2.111 0.0107 Synteen SF.. 3 6.00 7,00 1 N/A N /A N/A 7.127 3.631 3.202 -0.0637 Synteen SF.. GLOBALICOMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Bishop method and BOB = 0.0) STATIC CONDITIONS: For the specified search grid die calculated juinimurn Fs is 2.010 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc � 0.00, Yc = 12.75 wid R � 13.17 [fil ). SEISMIC CONDITIONS: For flic-specifiedsearch grid the calculated mininium Fs is 1.572 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = -0.75, Yc = 17.25 and R = 17.71 Ifil ). Point Ed%rards Condominiums Page 4 or 4 CopyFigin 0 1998-2004 ADANIA Engineering, Inc. License number M-LIS-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabili7ed Eardi Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Picsa4 Dz%c/rvr= �fim, hm QMV,32 n;1U';EKS1JSADLMAQUQM= H43w.r&1X&W Roclry A.W)-�O�b A Tr41rr_-APV AASHTO DESIGN METHOD Point Edwards Condominiums PROJECT IDEA[nFICATION Title: Point Edwards Condominiums Proiect Number: T-4893 Client: Pohit Edwards, LLC Designer: ICS Station Number: N/A Descriplion: 6-foot high geotextile wrap-facc reinforced fill rockery; horizontal backslope, traffic surcharge Companys information: Naine: Terra Associates, Inc. Street: 12525 Willows Rd. Ste. 101 Kirid-and, WA .98034 Telephone M 425-821-7777 Fax #: 425-821-4334 E-Mail: john@terra-associates.com Original file path and name: G:\USERS\ISADLER�4000\Poin(Edwards\Rcbif Rock -cry Analy ..... Original date and time of creating this file: May 9, 2006 PROGRAM MODE: ANALYSIS of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE using GEOGRID as reinforcing material. Point Ed%vurds Condominiums Page I of 4 Copyright 0 1999-2004 ADAMA Engineering, Inc. License number M-US-0534 ... ... . ....... ....... MSEW — Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Pr.—V Dalnim: Mm A- 12 0914:13 7M C--q)SFUSUSADLEK14GWv6t Edan1jtRrinr%vawy Ar4�ios A Tmft.1104 SOIL DATA REINFORCED SOIL Unit weigbi, y 125.0 lb/ft:l Design value of internal angle of friction, 34,00 RETAINED SOIL Unit weight, y 120.0 lb/111 3 Design Value of internal angle of friction, 32.00 FOUNDATION SOIL (Consideredas an equivalent uniforni soil) Equivalent unit weight. V —4, 125.0 lb/fi Equivalent internal angle of fitiction, 35.00 Equivalent coliesion, c�q,j, 200.0 lb/ft Water (able does not affect bearing capacity LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS Ka (internal slabilitv) = 0.2327 (if batter is less than 10'. Ka is calculated Irom eq. 15, Otherwise, eq. 38 is ufilized) Inclination of intanial sliv plane. w = 62.00' (see Fig. 28 in DEMO 82). Ka (external stability) = 0.3073 (if batter is less than 10', Ka is calculated froin eq. 16. Otherwise, eq. 17 is utilized) BEARING CAPACITY Bearing capacity coefficients (calculated by MSEW): Ne --- 4& 12 N y= 48.03 SEISMICITY Max imum ground accelcrat ion coefficient, ot, = 0. 150 Kae (m,> 0) = 0.4368 Kae (ct,= 0) = 0.3073 AKic=0.1295 (seeeq.37inDEM082) Seismic soil-geogrid ftiction coefficient, F* is 80.0% of its specified static vilue. POinL Edwards Condominiums Pagc 2 of 4 Copyright D 19911-2004 ADAMA Engincerizir, Lac. Licemcnumbcr M-US-0534 MSEW — Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condontjniums Prc.-w Dife/Thne: Mw Im 12 09:j6:33 -IM GIUSERSUSADLER-401WOk-A Edwsw&qW01 Rockcry AmOis% 0 U4111MVEN INPUT DATA: Geometry and Surcharge loads (of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE) Design height, Hd 7.50 [ftj j Embedded depth is E = 1.50 and height above top of fuiislicd bottoin grade is H = 6.00 ft Batter, tij 0.0 fdcpl Backslove. B 23.0 [deg] Backslope rise 0.0 [ft] Broken back equivalentangle, I = 0.00' (see Fig. 25 in DEMO 82) UNIFORM SURC14ARGE Uniformly distributed dead load is 0.0 [lb/ft 1], and live load is 250.0 [lb/ft'] L ANALVZED REINFORCEMM LAYOU"Ir- SCALE: 0 2 4 6[ft] Point Edv,-jT& Condominiums Page 3 or 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering, [sic. U=iscrnsinber M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums I'mect "dr­ hinu Jn 1109:16:13 2006 G-.'OJSERSUSADLrftqCWoita.rh*u,dtUtchfRDck-cryAmiywWA ft rMffx.aEN U ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Static conditions) Bearing capacity. Fs = 18.88. Meyerhof stress = 1419 Ib/fV. T ------ -T:A..,- T.'� — ') '7AA -IT — n IMIC V, — A 21 GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs -overall Fs -overall I's-overall Geogrid Pullout Direct Eccenuicity Product 11 Elevation L4cnpth Type rpullout l"connectiou Faeogrid strength resistance sliding e/L name (ftl [ ft] a resi%tancel break] strength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 2.784 4.153 2.649 0.0648 Synteen SF.. 2 4.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 6.074 4.735 3.341 0.0342 Syn(cen SF.. 3 6.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 8.223 2.147 4.520 0.0117 SynteenSF.. ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Seismic conditions) Bearing capacity. Fs = 14.58. Meyerhof stress = 1662 lb/W. oundation Inferffice@ Daree ding. Fs = 1.758, Eccentricity, C/L = 0. 1808, Es-oveilliming = 2.76 GEOGRID CONNECTION I Fs -overall Fs -overall Fs -overall I Gcogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product it Elevation LcnathTvpc [pullout [connection [geogrid strength resistance sliding e/L name IN [ft] a resistance] break] strength] 1 Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 2.370 2.829 1.771 0. 1064 Synteen SF.. 2 4.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A NIA 4.627 2.896 2.390 0.0511 Symeen SF.. 3 6.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 6.179 1.291 3,672 0.0148 Syniecit SF.. GLOBAL/COMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Bishop method and BOB = 0.0) STATIC CONDITIONS: For the specified search gdd the calculated minfinum Fs is 2.313 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = -0.75, Yc = 12,00 and R = 12.66 [ft] ). SEISMIC CONDITIONS: For the specified search grid. the calculated minimum Fs is 1.859 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = -0.75, Yc = 12.75 and R = 13.37 [fi] ). Point Edwards Condominiums Page 4 of 4 Copyright,l) 1998-2004 ADAMA Eugin=ring, Inc. Liccitse nurnbcr M-IJS-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Fresal Wttq--=: Mm J= 12 09:59;47 2M GAUSERSUSADLER40WPotat EN-NdsUtAid %�Axry A-h361 (I TA�..BEN AASHTO DESIGN METHOD Point Edwards Condominiums PROJECT IDENITIFICATION Title: Point Edwards Condorn�iniuffvs Proiect Number: T-4893 Client: Point Edwards, LLC Dcsigncr ICS Station Number: N/A Description: 8-foot high peotextile wrai)-face rebtforced fill rockery; horizontal backslope, traffic surcharge Company's information: Name: Term Associates, Inc. Street: 12525 Willows Rd. Ste. 101 Kirkland, WA 98034 Telephouc ff: 425-821-7777 Fax fl: 425-821-4334 E-Mail: john@tcrm-associatcs.com Original file path and name: G:\USERS\JSADLER\4000\Poin( Edwards\Rein f Rockery Analy.,... Original date and time of creating this file: May 9,2006 PROGRAM MODE: Point Edwwds Candoininiurns Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering. Inc. ANALYSIS of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE using GEOGRID as reinforcing material. Page I af 4 Ucense munber M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mcchanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums h—m Mudrmr. %imi J- 12 01-39:47 20% 0:1USERSUSADLIER�t"PoirA rdawdskReinfitod-cry Ar.,zkishl it Tnd&,11EN SOIL DATA RErNFORCED SOIL Unit WcigI1(' V 125.0 lb/ft' DesiLm value of internal angle of friction, 34.011 RETAINED SOIL Unit weight. v 120.0 lb/fi Design value of internal angle of friction, 32.00 FOUNDATION SOIL (Considered as an equivalent uniform soil) Equivalent unit weight, v —i, 125.0 lb/ft Equivalent interrial angle orfHction, 35.00 Equivalent coliesion, cj.. 200.0 lb/ft Water table does not affect bearing capacity LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS Ka (internal stability) = 0.2827 (if batter is less than 10, Ka is calculated ftom eq. 15. Otherwise, eq. 38 is utilized) Inclination of intemal slip plane. w = 62.000 (see Fig. 28 in DEMO 82). Ka (external stability) = 0.3073 (if batter is less flian 10', Ka is calculated from eq. 16. Otherwisc, eq. 17 is utilized) BEARING CAPACITY Bearing capacity coefficients (calculated by MSEW): Nc = 46.12 N 7� 48.03 SEISMICITY Maximum ground acceleration coefficient, a. = 0. 150 Kae (a� > 0) = 0.4368 Kac (o�,= 0) = 0.3073 A Kae = 0. 1295 (see eq. 37 in DEMO 82) Seismic soil-geogrid friction coefficient, F* is 80.0% or its specified static value. Point Edwards Condominiums Page 2 of 4 CopyTigplit 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Enginecring, Inc. Licensenuinber M-US-OS34 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Point Edwards Condominiums PMCM M-CMW. M,-0.40 12 09:59.47 M E4,A-uxhkRc�XR*&uyA=J)1WA A T)MfrK�CIEN INPUT DATA: Geometry and Surcharge loads (of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE) Design height, Hd 9.50 [ft) Embedded depfli is E = 1.50 ft, and height above top of f-inished bottom grade is H = 8.00 ft Batter, 0.0 [dep-1 Backslope. 13 23.6 rdeg] Backslope rise 0.0 [ft] Broken back equivalent angle, I = 0.00' (see Fig. 25 in DEMO 82) UNIFORM SURCHARGE I " . � "I .. -1 Unifornily distributed dead load is 0.0 [lb/ft 2], and live load is 250.0 (lb/ft' ANALYZED REINFORCEMENT LAYOUT: 7 SCALE: 0 2 4 6 [ft] — 1. — � — � . . - I — -- . — '� — , — '. — � — � — . I — � . — I — . — I — . . � � — � — . , — . — � , — " — . — . — I — . — � I — . - . � , — '� — � — : . — , — , , — — . ' — , — � — � , — . — — I . PuinL Edwards Condominiums Pnge 3 of 4 Cuppight a 1998-2004 ADAMA EnginccTing, Inc. Licemscnumber M-US-0534 MSEW - Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums ft.,= rjnmfr== Mau )- 12 09.59.'41 2C*fi AtWyr�OS 111raffmHEN t,-Z �- t. nt�,� Lkr�,t-- tff --M-j V I -- ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Static conditions) Bearing capacity. Fs = 16.16, Meyerhof stress = 1774 lb/fil. 17-mint-Intimi Interfneg- Dirpett cliding Fq = 2 677 Feeentricitv- ell. = 0- 1149 F,-overturnim! = 4.35 GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs-overull I's-overall Fs -overall Geozrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product I/ Elevation Lenp-11i Type rVullout [connection fgcogrid strrngdi resistance sliding e/L name Ift] Ift] # resistance] break] strength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 2.227 5.295 2.509 0.0792 Syn(een SF.. 2 4.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 4.454 6.575 3.028 0.0496 Synteen SF.. 3 6.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A NIA 6.074 4.673 3.818 0.0262 Svnteen SF.. 4 8,00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 8,223 2A 11 5.165 0.0089 Synteen Sr.. ANALYSIS: CALCUIATED FACTORS (Seismic condilions) Bearing capacitv. Fs � 11.32. Meyerhof stress = 2201 lb/W. r-nitititfation 1nt.-.rfnrP- Diront ididing Fq =I 667 Ferentricitv, e/T.=0 2](10 F,-nvertnminf- 23R GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs -overall Fs -overall I's-overall Geogrid Puuout Direct Eccentricity Product d Elevation LengiliType [Pullout fconneefion rgeogrid strength resistance C/L name IN I N # resistance] break] strength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 1.889 3.592 1.608 0.1385 Synteen SF.. 2 4.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 3.418 4.036 2.024 0.0815 Synteen SF.- 3 6.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A NIA 4.537 2.793 2.731 0.0391 Synteen SF.. 4 8.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 6.059 1.244 4,197 0.0113 Synteen SF.. GLOBAL/COMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Bishop method and ROR = 0.0) STATIC CONDITIONS: For die specified search �,�d the calculated mininium Fs is 2.134 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xt; = 0.00, Ye = 14.25 and R = 14.62 [ftj ). SEISMIC CONDITIONS: Forthe specified se r-vh-gEA the calculated rnininiurn Fs is 1.696 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = -0.95, Yc = 17. 10 and R = 17.62 [ft] ). Point Fdww-ds Condontinituns Page 4 of 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering. Inc. Licetise number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Preum nwel-�: Mon J= 12 10:01: 1021ft Point Edwards Condomirtiums G.1U5E1kSU5A1)LEFtq0tX1ra;A Eabio4stftio(Rock�y A-b-.W$ 9 tWtBLN AASHTO DESIGN METHOD Point Edwards Condonu*niums PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Title: Pobit Edwards Condontiiiiums Proiect Number: T-4893 Client: Point Edwards, LLC Designer: ics Station Number: N/A Description: 8-foo(high geotextile wrap -face reinforced fill rockery; 2:1 slope surcharge Company's Information: Name: Terra Associates, Inc. Street; 12525 Willows Rd. Ste. 101 Kirkland, WA 98034 Telephone ft: 425-821-7777 Fax th 425-821-4334 E-Mail: john Civierra-associates.coui Original file path and name: GAUSERSVSADLERW000\Point Edwards\Reinf Rockery Analy ..... Original dale and time of creating this file: May 12,2006 PROGRAM MODE: ANALYSIS of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE using GEOGRID as reinforcing material. Point EdwaFds Condainiiiiums Pjj;: I ()f 4 CopyTight D 1999-2004 ADAMA Euginccrin& Inc, Licciise number M-US-0534 MSEW — Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Pvcmt Ibldr4w. Stoi Jun 12 10.01:10' ,Oft G:%USrRS1AADLEft'4&-',a,'.Paw U�WR&dRodccry An*iisl 0 zipp�PJUJ SOIL DATA RE-Wr-ORCEDSOIL Unit weight. v 125.0 lb/ft Design value of internal angle of friction, 34.00 RETAINED SOIL Unit weighl. v 120.0 lb1ft Design value of internal angle of friction, 32.00 FOUNDA-l-ION SOIL (Considered as an equivalent uniform soil) Equivalent unit weipjit. .1 _j� 125.0 lb/ft Equivalent internal angle of ffiction, 35.00 Equivalent cohesion, c,,,.i,. 200.0 lb/ft Water table does not affect bearing capacity LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS Ka (internal stability) = 0.2827 (if batter is less Vian 100. Ka is calculated from eq. 15. Otherwise, eq. 38 is utilized) Inclination of internal slip Plane. w � 62.00' (see Fig. 28 in DEMO 82). Ka (external stability) = 0.3271 (if batter is less than 10*, Ka is calculated from eq. 16. Othenvise, eq. 17 is utili7ed) REARING CAPACITY Bearing capacity coefficienis (calculated by MSEW): Nc=46.i2 NY=48.03 SEISMICITY Maximum ground acceleration cocfficient, a � = 0. 150 Kee (a.> 0) — 0.5305 Kee (a.= 0) =0.3271 A Kee = 0.2034 (see eq. 37 in DEMO 82) Seismic soil-geogrid ftict-ion coefficient, F* is 80.0% of its specified static value. Point Edmards Condominiums Page 2 of 4 copyrigtit i) i 99a-2004 ADAM A Engincering, Lic. Licensc nurnbcr M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Sinbilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums rh&M Dateru"C: slh�oh'112 1011,10 X:6 G:iVSEMSADLERi4000J%U E6&-m&%RcbfX2c1M Az0T%i3%5 It lbpr.1104 I I I, lt-Tx— Lin I INPUT DATA: Geonie(ry and Surcharge loads (or a SIMPLE STRUCTURE) Design height, Hd 9.50 [Ftj Embedded deTith is E = 1.50 wid height above top of finished bottom grade is H = 8.00 ft Batter. 0.0 [deg] Backslooe. B 23.0 I'deg] Back.slope rise 4.0 [ft] Broken back equivalent angle, I = 11.89' (see Fig. 25 in DEMO 82) UNIFORM SURCHARGE Uniformly distributed dead load is 0.0 [lb/ft 'I ANALVZED REINFORCEMENT LAVOUY.- SCALE: 0 2 4 6[ft] Poini Edwards Condominiums Page 3 of 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Enginuming, Inc. Ucensenuinbcr M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically S(abilizcd Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums hekaj WWT�-, M- km 12 10.01:10 2006 WUSERSUSADLEWOMIX-iw Cd.z&%em(RbCk0y Anty.&I 0 wlap..80; ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACYORS (Static conditions) Beariiia capacitv. Fs = 15.84. Meyerhof stress = 1819 lb/ft'. oundation Interflice: Direct slidine. Fs=2.509. Eccentricity,ell,=- .0923.1's-ovaturning=182 GEOGRID CONNECTION IFs-overall Fs -overall Fs -overall Gcoarid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product 1 rpunout rconuection raeogrid s1rength resistance sliding c/L name Elevation Lenszt-li Type Ift] [ft] It' resistance] break] strengdi] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 8.00 1 NIA N/A N/A 2.367 7.068 1292 0.0528 Synteen SF-. 2 4.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 4.835 9.922 2.672 0.0160 Svn(cenSF.. 3 6.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 6.805 8.782 3.189 -0.0217 Synteen Sr-.. 4 8.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A NIA 10.052 7.044 3.869 -0.0721 Synteen. SF.. ANALYSIS: CALCULATFD FACTORS (Seismic conditions) Bcarinp cavacity. Fs = 7.28, Meyerhof stress = 2951 lb/ft'. A -' I - - -r- - - I,:-- -, -I! A!- - r7- - I A A T U-- ---4 -;.-, - ff - A ')A 1 1 17� = 1 91 GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs -overall Fs -overall Fs -overall Geogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product 4 Elevation LengUiType IN f ft] it [Pullout fconnection faeogrid resistance] break] strength] strengdi resistance sliding c/L Fs Fs Fs naine 1 2.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 1.900 4.539 1.398 0.1444 Svntccn SF.. 2 4.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A NIA 3.393 5.570 1.748 0.0639 Svntceii SF.. 3 6.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 4.568 4.716 2.347 -0.0034 Synteen SF.- 4 8.00 8.00 1 NIA N/A NIA 6A29 3.604 3.419 -0.0692 Synteen SF.- GLOBAL/COMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Bishop method and ROR = 0.0) STATIC CONDITIONS: For die specified seamh-gEd the calculated minimum Fs is 1.868 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = -0.95, Yc = 17. 10 and R = 17.62 [fl) ), SEISMIC CONDITIONS: For the, specified search grid the calculated minimum Fs is 1.477 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = -1 .90, ye = 19,00 and R = 19.69 [ft] ). Point Edwards Condominiunis Page 4 of 4 Copyright Z) 1999-2004 ADANIA Eiiginmring. Inc. Licmsc number M-US-0534 j MSEW —Mlecluinically Slabilizmi Earth Wall-s Point Edwards Condominiums Pmmt VaIdTicnc: hitm Aw 12 M10236 1W, GAJSCRSUSADLEMA'�OaTnA AASHTO DESIGN METHOD Point Edwards Condominiums PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Title: Point Edwards Condominiums Project Nurnbcr: T-4893 Client: Poin(Edwards, LIX Desiwier: ics Station Number: N/A Description- 10-ficol high gcotcxtile wrap-facc reinforced fill rockery; horizontal backslope, traffic surcharge Companys information: Name: Terra Associates. Inc. Street: 12525 Willows Rd. Ste. 101 Kirkland, WA 98034 Telephone th 425-821-7777 Fax fl: 425-9214334 E-Mail: joilri@(crra-associates.com Original file path and name: GAUSERS�JSADLER\4000\Point Fdwards\Rcinf Rockery Analy ..... Original date and time of creating this Hie: May 9, 2006 PROGRAM MODE: Point Ed%v-.Lrds Condominiums Copyright t) 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering, Inc. ANALYSIS of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE using GEOGRID as reinforcing material. Page I of 4 License number M-US-0534 MSEW Mechanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Point Edwards Condominiums 1 10.02:36 2OD6 G-X1JSEASUSA0LEKq0W-FcW Ed.-w6kilinfilacktry Ac*"4%10 A Traffik.13e; .-�csm Vocrilmr. 6Lm SOIL DATA REINFORCED SOIL Ur�t weight, v 125.0 lb/ft Design value of internal angle of fricfion, 34.00 RETAINED SOIL Unit weight, v 120.0 lbift:' Design value of internal angle of firicfion, 32.00 FOUNDATION SOIL (Considered as an equivalent uniform soil) Equivalent unit weight. v —i, 125.0 lb/ft Equivalent internal angle of friction, 35.00 Equivalent colicsion, c,.i,, 200.0 lb/191 Water [able does not affect bearing capacity LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE coErFICIENTS Ka (internal stability) = 0.2827 (if batter is less than 10', Ka is calculated from eq. 15. Otherwise, eq, 38 is utilized) Inclination of bilernal sIiV Vlane. w = 62.00' (see Fig. 28 in DEMO 82). Ka (external stability) = 0.3073 (if batter is less than 10', Ka is calculated from eq. 16. Otherwise, eq. 17 is utilized) BEARING CAPACITY Bearing capacity coefficients (calculated by MSEW): Ne = 46.12 N j= 48.03 SEISMICITY Maximum ground acceicrationcoefficient, ot.� = 0. 150 Kae (m,> 0) = 0.4368 Kae(a�=O) =0.3073 A Kae = 0. 1295 (see eq. 37 in DEMO 92) Seismic soil-geogrid friction coefficient, F* is 80.0% of its specified static value. Point Edwards Condominiums Page 2 of 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering. Inc. Licensc number M-US-0534 MSEW — Meclianically Stabilized Eartli Walls Point Edwards Condominiums presal Mon Jun 11 10.01:16 ZD06 ft Taffi,-IIEN INPUT DATA: Geornetry and Surcharge loads (of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE) Design height, Hd 11.50 [ft] Embedded deoth is E = 1.50 ft. and height above top of finished bottom grade is 14 = 10.00 fi Batter. at 0.0 fdcgl Backslove, (1 23.0 [deg] Backslope rise 0.0 fft) Broken back equivalent angle, I = 0.00' (see Fig. 25 in DEMO 82) UNIFORM SURCHARGE Uni fornily d istribu led dead loud is 0.0 fibffi 21, and live load is 250.0 [lb/ft 1] ANALVZED REINFORCEMENT LAYOUT - SCALE: 0 2 4 6 8 10 (ft] I--- - - - .1. Poinj Edwards Condominiums page 3 or 4 Copyright -0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering, Inc. Ucensenumber M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Pram DoOrort: Mon P= I I I 002M ' XM Edw.4*R.VVd-.y Akywa%if) It Tr%Al--OEN ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Static conditions) Bearing capacity. Fs � 14.28. Meyerhof stress = 2139 IbIft2. oundation InlerfaceD Direct sliding, Fs = 2,627. Eccentricity, e/L 1239. Fs-overtumina = 4�04 GEOGRID 1 CONNECTION Fs -overall Fs -overall Fs -overall Geogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product It Elevation Length Type [Pullout [connection I gcouid strength resistance sliding c/L name IN (ftj H resistance] break-] strength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 1.856 6.395 2.409 0.0908 Synteen SF.. 2 4.00 9.00 1 NIA N/A N/A 3.516 8.283 2.823 0.0626 Synteen SF.. 3 6.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 4.454 6.503 3.406 0.0392 Synteen SF.. 4 8.00 9.00 1 NIA NIA N/A 6.074 4.609 4.295 0.0207 Svntecn SF.. 5 10.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 8.223 2.075 5.811 0.0071 Synteen SF.. ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Seismic conditions) Bearing capacity, Fs = 9.08, Meyerhof stress = 2806 lb/ft2. -I:A:-- 17- - I 4'n) -A - n '711n 17- - I T A GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs-overitl Fs -overall Fs -overall Geogrid Pullout Direct Ecceutricity Product fi Elevation LengthType [Pullout [connection [geogrid strength resistance sliding c/L narne Ift] (ft] if resistance] break] strwigt,h] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 1.567 4-321 1.500 0.1659 Synteen SF.. 2 4.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A NIA 2.701 5.089 1.809 0.1094 Synteen SF.. 3 6.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A NIA 3.366 3.931 2.277 0.0644 Synteen SF.. 4 8.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A NIA 4.465 2.711 3.072 0.0309 Synteen SF.. 5 10.00 9.00 1 N/A NIA N/A 5.965 1.204 4.721 0.0089 Synteen SF.. GLOBAL/COMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Bishop method and ROR = 0.0) STATIC CONDITIONS: For thespecifiedsenrch grid the calculated minirmun Fs is 2.049 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = - 1. IS, Yc = 21.85 and R = 22.29 ffl] ). SEISMIC CONDITIONS: For the specified searcb-gr4 the calculated minimum Fs is 1.605 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = - 1. 15, Yc = 21.85 and R = 22,29 [ft] ). Point Edwards Condominiums Page 4 of 4 Copyright 0 1998-204 ADAMA Engineering, Inc. License nuinbcr M-US-0534 MSEW — Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Nn.m tbldn� Men)- Q 10:04:10 101A Point Edwards Condominiums I Ed%rm&%PWufR*6cryAmbi4%10 e do;�,BM A A SHTO DESIGN METHOD f-I-I-x Point Edwards Condominiums PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Title: I I Point Edwards Condominiums Project Number: T-4893 Client: Point Edwards, LLC Desi=er: JCS Station Nuinber: N/A Description: 10-foot high geotextile wrap -face reinforced fill rockery; 2:1 slope surcharge Companys information: Name: Terra Associates. I nc. Street: 12525 Willows Rd. Ste, 101 Kirkland, WA 98034 Telephone #: 425-821-7777 Fax -#: 425-321-4334 E-Mail: jolui@terra-associates.coin Original file path and name: GAUS ERSV SAD LERA 000\Point E-dwardskReinf Rockery Analy ..... Original date and time of creating this file: May 12, 2006 PROGRAM MODE: ANALYSIS of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE using GEOGRID as reinforcing material. Point Edwards Condominitum Page I of 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering, Inc. Licensenumber M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earai Walls Pofiit Edwards Condominiums bom D.C.'rim: M.. I= 12 10.04:10 2005 G:WSM�3S.ADLER*40"6= Edw-Ar&IR�WRdy A-lysiOG 0 d�p---[JD4 Wm SOIL DATA R-ErNFORCED SOIL Unit weight, -., 125.0 lb/ft Design value of internal angle of ffiction, 34.00 R.ETAINED SOIL Unit weialit, v 120.0 IbIft Design value of internal angle of friction, 32.00 FOUNDATION SOIL (Considered as an equivalent uniform sail) Equivalent unit weight. y—,, 125.0 lb/ft Equivalent iniemal angle of friction, 35.0 " Equivalent cohesion, clm,iv. 200.0 lb/ft Water table does not affect bearing capacity ILATERAL EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS Ka (internal stabilitv) = 0.2827 (if batter is less than 10', Ka is calculated from eq. 15. Otherwise, eq. 38 is utilized) Inclination of internal slip plane. w = 62.00' (see Fig. 28 in DEMO 82). Ka (external stability) = 0.3206 (if batter is less than 10', Ka is calculated from eq. 16. Otlierwise, eq. 17 is utilized) BEARING CAPACITY Bearing capacity coefficients (calculated by MSEW): Nc = 46.12 N y= 48.03 SEISMICITY Maximum ground acceleration coefficient, a � = 0.150 Kae (cf, > 0) = 0. 5040 Kae(u-=O) =0.3206 A Kae = 0. 1834 (see eq. 37 in DEMO 82) Seismic soil-geogrid friction coefficient, F* is 80.0% of its specified static value. Point Edwards Condominiums Page 2 or 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAAMA Enginecring. Inc. License ntirnbm M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Point Edwards Condominiums PsncW.Dxtdr=: Wfan J= Q 10.04:10 2n,% G�USERSUSADLEEMOWWWftt Ed..dj!Rt:xrVckaj AjuhiiL%1fl,9 A-.T-DEN INPUT DATA: Geomelry and Surcharge loads (of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE) Design height, Hd 11.50 [ft] Embeddcd depth is E = 1.50 k and height above top of Finished bottom grade is H = 10.00 ft Batter. co 0.0 rdeg] Backslope. 0 23.6 rdeg] Backslopc rise 4.0 [ft] Broken back equivalent angle, I = 9.87' (see Fig. 25 in DEMO 82) UNIFORM SURCHARGE Uniformly distributed dead load is 0.0 [lb/ft 'I ANALYZED REINFORCEMENT LAYOUT. SCALE: 0 2 4 6 8 10 [ftl Point Edwanis Condominiums Page 3 of 4 Copyright 0 1999-2004 ADAM A Engineering, Inc. Ucensenumber M-US-0534 MSEW - Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Pment llaefime-� 161�A Im 12 10-04:10 IWS GAUSERSUSADLERWOD419im EewadAltddRa6cry Axal)-s�&110 it sive.11EN ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Static conditions) Bearing capacity. Fs = 13.30. Meyerhof stress = 2270 lb/fiz. oundation, Interface: Direct sliding, Fs - 2.407, Eccen(ricity, el = 0.1120, FS-overturnine = 3.44 1 1 G E 0 G R I D CONNECTION I i Fs -overall Fs -overall Fs-overalliGeogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity I Product Elevation LcaRth Type roullaut [conneefion [geogrid strength resistance sliding c/L i Baltic [ft] # resistance] break] strength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 1.903 8.026 2.156 0.0750 Syn(een SF.. 2 4.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 3.629 11.234 2.448 0.0407 Synteen SF.. 3 6.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 4.636 9.946 2.829 0.0077 Synteen SF.. 4 8.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 6.418 8.776 3.332 -0.0273 Synteen SF.. 5 10.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 9.043 6.894 3.960 -0.0761 Synteen SF.. ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Seismic condifions) Bearing capacity, Fs 5.03. Meyerhof stress = 4145 lb/ft'. V - - A I - I --r- - - n. 1M.- - 17. - I 'IX Q 1Z f9 /I - n I Q I a 17. _; � = I A A GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs -overall Fs -overall Fs -overall Geogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product N Elevation Length Type fpullout [connection rgeogrid strengdi resistance sliding e/L narne Ift] [ft] /I resistance] break] =cngflij Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 1.530 5.164 1.277 0.1895 Synteen SF.. 2 4.00 9.00 1 NIA NIA N/A 2.588 6.409 1.533 0.1105 Synteen SF.. 3 6.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 3.232 5.547 1.918 0.0438 Svntecn SF.. 4 8.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 4.303 4.708 2.537 -0.0139 Syntccn SF.. 5 10.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 5.883 3.588 3.569 -0.0741 Synteen SF.. GLOBAL/COMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Bishop method and ROB = 0.0) STATIC CONDITIONS: For the specified search grid the calculated minimum Fs is 1.816 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = - 1. 15, Yc = 21.85 and R = 22.29 [ft] ). SEISMIC CONDITIONS: For the spcpified searrLgrid. the calculated inirthnum Fs is 1.419 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = - 1. IS, Yc - 21.8 5 and R = 22.29 [ft] ). Point Edwards Condominiums Page 4 of 4 Copyright 0 1999-2004 ADAMA Engiuccring, Inr. Liccrtsenumber M-US-0534 DESIGN CALCULATIONS MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH (MSE) WALL WITH RoCKERY FACING POINT EDWARDS CONDOMINIUMS EDMONDS, WASHINGTON TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. PROJECT No. T-4893 PRE PARED FOR: POINT EDWARDs, LLC SEATTLE, WASHINGTON JUNE 1212006 STREET FILE MSEW — Meclianically Stabilized Earth Walls hc�j WIC/Nmr: Mon Jun 12 0:-q:31 2006. Point Edwards Condominiums QAUSEMSAVt.ER%4W_4%fo1vA F4%ud&Ut6ifffmdcry Anal)%isA It xbrmlit-N AASHTO DESIGN METHOD Point Edwards Condominiums PROJECT IDENFnF[CATION Title: Point Edwards Condominiums Proiect Number T4893 Client: Point Edwards, LLC Designer: JCS Station Number: N/A Description: 4-foot high geciexfile wrap -face rehiforced fill rockery; 2:1 slope surcbarge Company's information: Name: Terra Associates, Inc. Street: 12525 Willows Rd. Ste. 101 Kirkland, WA 98034 Teleohone fl: 425-821-7777 Fax 1/: 425-821-4334 E-Mail: joliii@terrn-associates.com Original rile path and name: G:\USERS\JSADLERAOOO\Point Edwards\Rcinf Rockery Analy..... Original date and time of creating this file: May 12, 2006 PROGRAM MODE: ANALYSIS of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE using GEOGRID as reinforcbig maierial. IPGini Ed%%mrds Condominiums pill; —,.*r 4 Copyrighl -0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering, inc. Lictnse number M — —.1— 1- ­ I MSEW — Mechanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Pobit Edwards Condominiums Ftwnt Dairfrom: Mm )un 13 09:34:32 2006 E&,&rdi1Jtr-WrR=kay Amfi�W4 ft &LpOIEN SOIL DATA REINFORCED SOIL Unit weiglit, y 125.0 lb/ft Design value of internal angle of friction, 34.00 RETAINED SOIL Unit weight, y 120.0 lb/ft:' Design value of intenial angle of fricdon, 32.00 FOUNDATION SOIL (Considered as an equivalent uniform soil) Equivalent unit weiglu. ,, -ni. 125.0 lb/ri Equivalent internal angle of Mcdon, �,.j, 35.00 Equivalent cohesion, C,.i.. 200.0 lb/ft Water table does not affect bearing capacity LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS Ka (intemal stabilitv) = 0.2827 (if batter is less than 10'. Ka is calculated from eq. 15. Otherwise, eq. 38 is utilized) Inclination of internal sfiD plane. w = 62.00' (see F4L 28 in DEMO 82). Ka (external stability) = 0.3737 (if batter is less than 10', Ka is calculated front eq. 16. Otherwise, eq. 17 is utilized) BEARING CAPACITY Bearing capacity coefficients (calculated by MSEW): Nc = 46.12 N -f= 48.03 SEISMICITY Maximum ground acceleration cocfficient, cc � = 0.150 Kae (ot, > 0) = 0.8 125 Kae(o�,=O) =0.3737 A Kne = 0.4388 (see eq. 37 in DEMO 82) Seismic soil-geogrid friction coefficient, F* is 80.0% of its specified static value. Point EdwarJs Condominiums Page 2 of 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering. hic. License nuinbt= M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums rrmut Bur/r=4. - Mon JM 11. 01:5-4:32 20M G;kUSGMSADLEWA061&Poivs Edw-dAlcid HockcryAw��W It &1qv.BEN INPUT DATA: Geornelry and Surcharge loads (of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE) Design height, Hd 5.50 (fil Embedded depth is E = 1.50 fl, and heightabove top of finished bottotn grade is I -I = 4.00 It Bauer. 0.0 fdev-1 Backslove. (3 23.0 Tdeg] Backslope rise 4.0 [ft] Broken back equivalcm angle, I = 19.98' (see Fig. 25 in DEMO 92) UNIFORM SURCHARGE Uniformly distributed dead load is 0.0 [lb/ft 1] AMLYZED REINFORCEMENT LAYOU­F- SCALE- 2 4 6 [ft] Point Edwards Condominiums Page 3 of 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engincering, Inc. Licensenurubcr M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically S(abilizcd Eardi Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Ncwm DW&frrW. Mon Am 12 0934:32 2006 G:kUSfi;LSJSA131-ERWL*'1ftL-j t:..'..Aj�R�zfK0dcjyAx.Jy'i.%4 Q4D;v-t1rN ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Static conditions) Bearing capacity, Fs = 25.89, Meyerhof stress -- 1002 lb/fil. otindation Interface: Direct sliding. Fs = 2.759. Eccentricity, ch. = 10363. Fs-ovourning- = 5.24 I G E 0 G R I D CONNECTION Fs -overall Fs -overall Fs -overall Geomrid Pullout Direct Eccentiricity Product 0 Elevation Leapth Type I [pullout [connection Iveouid strengdi resistance sliding e/L riame 1111 [fi) # j rpsistancel break] strengdi] Fs Fs Fs I 1 2.00 6.00 1 N/A NIA N/A 4.625 5.213 2.706 -0,0105 SvnteenSF.. 2 4.00 6.00 1 NIA N/A N/A 12.938 7.377 3.454 -0.0654 Synteen SF.. ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Seismic. conditions) Bearim-, capacitv. Fs = 15.13, Meyerhof'stress = 1420 fl)/W. 17--4.f— r�t—r-- F),*—,t �I;A;— Pe =I 'qAA �iT =(I I �')) Pc-t%%tPrtiimi— = I C.4 GEOGRID CONNECTION I's-overall Fs -overall. Fs -overall Geogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product N Elevation Length Type I'pullout leonnection fgcogrid strength resistance sliding e/L name Ift] [ ft] if resistance] break] stirength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 6.00 1 NIA N/A N/A 3.619 3.264 1.734 0.0382 Svnteen SF.. 2 4.00 6.00 1 NIA N/A N/A 8.038 3.667 2.795 -0.0561 Synteen SF.. GLOHAL/COMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Bishop method and ROB = 0.0) STATIC CONDITIONS; For th uiftd gearch gEid, the calculated minimum Fs is 2.250 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = 0.55, Yc = 12. 10 and R = 12.40 (fil ). SEISMIC CONDITIONS: For the specified scarch grid- the calculated minimum Fs is 1.713 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = 0.55, Yc = 13.75 and R = 14.02 [fij ). Point Edwards COILdominiums Pa.-c 4 of 4 Copyright 0 1998-2DO4 ADAMA Enginecring, Inc. Licoiscminbcr 4,A-US-0534 MStW — Mechanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Pic" DucTVIC: Mon Jug )2 09:5A:03 -VO& GAJ5EMV5AJDLEW,4CVV-1,/�M 11.wn1x%RinfRoekay &W)iWA R Tcirri: BUN AASHTO DESIGN METHOD Point Edwards Condominiums PROJECT IDENWICATION Title: Point Edwards Condominiums Project Number: T4893 Client: Point Edwards, LLC Designer. ics Station Number: N/A Description: 4-foot high gcolextile wrap-facc reinforced fill rockery; horizontal backslope, traffie surcharge Companys information: Name: Terra* Associates, Inc. SLrect: 12525 Willows Rd. Ste. 101 Kirkland, WA 98034 Telephone 9: 425-821-7777 Fax U: 425-821-4334 E-Mail: john@Ierra-associates.coin Original file path and name: GAUSERSVSA.DLER\4000\?oinI Edwards\Reinf Rockery Analy ..... Original date and time of creating this file: May 9, 2006 PROGRAM MODE: ANALYSIS of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE using GEOGRID as reinforcing material. Point Edwanis Condominiums Pope I or 4 Copyrigh(4) 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering, Inc. Lic ensc nu i nb cr M-US-0 534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums mc. N1.3 J= 17 09:s3:03 2WA G--1LJSERSU5ADLER14000;P6m1 Edw.&%kaltadcry Amb-sism a Trdr�DEN VWdr Ma SOIL DATA REMFORCED SOIL Unit weight. v 125.0 lb/ft 3 Design value of internal angle of friction, 34.00 RETAfNIED SOIL Unit weight. -,, 120.0 lb/ft 3 Design value of internal angle of firiction, 32.00 FOUNDATION SOIL (Considered as an equivalent uniform soil) Equivalent unit weight, V-6, 125.0 lb/111:1 Equivalent internal anale of fricdon, 35.00 Equivalent coliesion, c�,,j, 200.0 lb/ft Water (able does not affect bearing capacity LATERAL EARTH PHESSURE COEFFICIENTS Ka (internal stabilitv) = 0.2827 (if batler is less than 10'. Ka is calculated from eq. 15. Othenvise, eq. 38 is utilized) Inclination of internal slin plane. w = 62.00' (see Fig. 28 in DEMO 82). Ka (external stability) � 0.3073 (if batter is less than 10', Ka is calculated froin eq. 16. Otherwise, eq. 17 is Alized) BEAHING CAPACITV Bearing capacity coefficients (calculated by MSEW): Nc = 46.12 N,1=48.03 SEISMICATY Maximum ground acceleration coefficient, a. = 0.150 Kae (a,> 0) = 0.4368 Kne (a-= 0) =0.3073 A Kae = 0. 1295 (see eq. 37 in DEMO 82) Scisinic soil-geogrid friction coefficient, F* is 80.0% of its specified static value. Point Edivanis Condomhflums Page 2 of 4 Cnpyright 0 1998-2004 A DAMA Engineering, Inc. License number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilimd Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Prcm:w lhldr�� %tz. h-- 12 09:5j;03 "Um GAUSERSUSADLER4000,h�0 W�%M1R-,WX.'rktty Ars�-%6'4 A Trzffir-IIEN INPUT DATA- Geometry and Surcharge loads (of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE) Design height, Hd 5.50 [ft] Embedded depfli is E = 1.50 ft, and height above top of finished bottoin grade is H = 4.00 ft Batter. 0) 0.0 I'deel Backslove. a 23.0 [deg] Backslope rise 0.0 [ft] Broken back equivalent angle, I = 0.00' (see Fig. 25 in DEMO 82) UNIFORM SURCHARGE Uniforinly distributed dead load is 0.0 [lbift-], axid live load is 250.0 [lb/ft -1] ANALYZED REINFORCEMENT LAYOUT: I SCALE: 0 2 4 6[ftl I.— - - 1. .. --- — Point Edwirds Condurninituns Page 3 of 4 Copyright;D 1998-2004 ADAMA Engincedng, hic. License number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums 14m.w Dwdrn= NtonJ— 1209:33:04 GAJ5E1LS4SAUtX-W4,')3&J'oiM Edm-ad�1R6=1HmLtryArA-,pi$A 11 TMf U--.DEN ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Static conditions) Bearing capacitv. Fs = 23.13. Meyerhof stress = 1077 lb/112. nundstion IntcrFare: Direct slidine. Fq = 2.8.3-9. Eccentricity, efl. = 0.0893. Fs-overturnine =.5.67 GEOGR[D CONNECTION Fs -overall Fs -overall rs-overall Geogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product Elevation LcngthType foullout fcorinection (geogrid strength resistance sliding eJL name Ifil [ftj # resistance] brcakj strength] Fs Fs Fs I 1 2.00 6.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 3.712 2.931 2.863 0.0466 Svnteen SF.. 2 4.00 6.00 1 N/A NIA N/A 8.223 2.183 3.874 0.0159 Syntccn SF.. ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Seismic conditions) Bearing cavacity. Fs = 19.66, Meycrhof stress = H 90 Ib/ft2. Foundation Inwrface: 11-irectsliding. E�s = 1,997, Eccentricity. c/1- = 0,1449, Fs-oveLjUrnine = 3.45 G E 0 G R I D CONNECTION Fs -overall Fs -overall Fs -overall Geogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product r Elevation LengthType fpullout rcoftnection [geomrid strengdi resistance slidbig ell, name Ift] [ftj 9 resistance] break] strength] Fs Fs Fs, 1 2.00 6.00 1 N/A NIA NIA 3.165 2.000 2.048 0.0695 Synieen SF.. 2 4.00 6.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 6.324 1.343 3.148 0.0201 Symeen SF.. GLOBAL/COMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Hisliop method and ROR = 0.0) STATIC CONDITIONS: For thaA=Med -search gijd the calculated mhiimuni I's is 2.723 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = 0.00, Yc = 8.25 and R = 8.88 Lftl ). SEISMIC CONDITIONS: For tlie�specifiedscarch gcid. die calculated minimum Fs is 2.163 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = -0.55, Yc = 11.00 and R = 11.65 [ftj ). Point Edwards Condominiums Page 4 of 4 Copyright �) 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering, fnc. License number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums N� Datonunc: Moo Jun 12 09:53:1 D 2006 Avab-kieS A t�_—pz!ILN _t _,�. - %—I - — �_. _Id�_ Urn 3 AASHTO DESIGN METHOD Point Edwards Condominiums PROJECT IDENTIfICATION Title: Point Edwards Condominiums Proiect Number: T-4893 Client: Point Edwards, LLC Desiaiier: ics Station Number: N/A Description: 6-foot Itigh geotextile wrap -face reinforced fill rockery; 2:1 slope surcharge Company's Information: NEunc: Terra Associatcs. Inc. Street: 12525 Willows Rd. Ste. 101 Kirkland, WA 98034 Teleiihone #: 425-821-7777 Fax H: 425-8214334 E-Mail: jolui@terra-associa(es.com OrlOinal file path and name: G:\USERS\JSADLER\4000\Poiiit Edwards\Reinf Rockery Analy..... Original date and lime of creating this file: May 12,2006 PROGRAM MODE: ANALYSIS of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE using GEOGIUD as reinforcing material. Point Edwards Condominiums Page i of 4 Copyright,0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engimaing, Inc. Liccnst� nuti MSEW — Mechanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Poita Edwards Condominiums Fmcra oatcli-r %Ina lu" 1169:% W �Wfi E&,W%WRdafR"LcryA�-tbV-5 A shTa.PEN SOIL DATA REINFORCED SOIL Unit weight, v 125.0 lb/11 Design value of internal angle of friction, 34.0 REI'AINED SOIL Unit weight. V 120,0 lb/ft Design value of internal angle of friction, 32.00 FOUNDATION SOIL. (Considered as an equivalent uniform soil) Equivalent unit weight. y,,,i,. 125.0 lb/ft Equivalent internalanpleorfricoon, 35.0 ' Equivalent cohesion, c,,,,i,. 200.0 lb/ft Water table does not affect bearing capacity LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS Ka (internal stability) = 0.2827 (if batter is less than 10*. Ka is calculated front eq. 15. Otherwise, eq. 38 is utilized) Incifiiation. of internal sliv Wane, w = 62.00' (see Fig. 28 in DEMO 82). Ka (external stability) = 0.3402 (if batter is less than 10', Ka is calculated from eq. 16. Oflierwise, eq. 17 is utilized) BEARING CAPACITV Bearing capacity coefficients (calculated by MSEW): Nc = 46.12 N y= 48.03 SEISNtICFIrV Maximum ground acceleration coefficient, oL � = 0. 150 Kae (ct,> 0) = 0.5871 Kne (oL,= 0) = 0.3402 AKae=0.2470 (seecq. 37 in DEMO 82) Scisinic soil-geogrid friction coefficient, F* is 80.0% of its specified static value. Point Edww-ds Condarniiiiiinis rage 2 of 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering, Inc. Ljccn-,;r number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Poi�fit Edwards Condominiums Pmtcsd Dalcffim�:- Nflu kn C! 09:53-01 1005 GAUSEXSVSADLEX%4DUN h r-d-.-MR62f. ftoday Aubmi.16 8 tb4).,8LM 1&'�- — m rm�— t I L—�'— tf-- INPUT DATA: Geometry and Surcharge loads (of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE) Design height, Hd 7.50 [ft] Embedded denth is E = 1.50 ft, and height above top of finished bottom grade is H = 6.00 ft Batter. r,) 0.0 f(lej!l Backslove. B 23.0 [deg) Backslope rise 4.0 [ft] Broken back equivalent angle, I = 14.93' (see Fig. 25 in DEMO 82) UNIFORM SURCHARGE Unifom-dy distributed dead load is 0.0 [lb/ft'] ANALYZED REINFORCEMENT LAYOUT: SCALE: 0 2 4 6[ft] r-- . Paim Edwards Cmidominimm Page 3 of 4 Copyright i) 1998-2004 ADAM A Enginccrbig, Inc. Liccusenumber M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Pobit Edwards Condominiums I'mm Dzwr�: Moo 1" 12 09:58:11 "0 GAUSEJVW5ADL.EX%407AP*�d Ed�amh%Rcidltocktry Ana�x&-fi 0 tkicB04 ANALYSIS: CALCULAYED FACTORS (Static conditions) Bearing caDacity. Fs = 19.64. Meyerhof stress = 1394 lb/fil. nundation 1131grfacc- Direct -liding, Fs = 2,634. Eccentricity. ell, = 0.0678. Fs-overhiming = 4.39 G E 0 G R I D CONNECTION Fs-ovcrall Fs -overall Fs -overall GCogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product Elevation LLnmth'I*Vpe [oullout fconnecfion rgeogrid strength resistance sliding e/L name Ift] [ftj 0 resistance] break] streng-0)] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 7.00 1 NIA N/A N/A 3.131 6.122 2.477 0.0254 Switcen SF.. 2 4.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 7.243 8.765 2.998 -0.0158 SynteenSF.. 3 6.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A NIA 11.314 7.205 3.725 -0.0682 Synteen SF. ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Seismic Conditions) Bearing capacity, Fs = 10.71. Meyerhof stress = 2043 lb/ft". r- - i c,7n U ------ 4-:— -/1 - fA InAl r� - 1 10 GEOGRID CONN ECTI ON Fs -overall Fs -overall Fs -overall Geozrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product H Elevation LLrivdi Type 1pullout fconnection rgeowid s trength resistance sliding C/L naine Lftl [fl] I, resistance] break] strengdi] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 2.498 3.908 1.549 0.0929 Sviiteen SF.. 2 4.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 4,890 4.734 2.111 0.0107 Syn(cenSF.. 3 6.00 7,00 1 N/A N /A N/A 7.127 3.631 3.202 -0.0637 Syntcen SF,. GLOBAL/COMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Bishop method and HOR = 0.0) STATIC CONDITIONS: For the specified search -grid. the calculated ininimurn Fs is 2.010 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = 0.00, Yc = 12.75 and R = 13.17 [fil ). SEISMIC CONDITIONS: For the—sped&d search grid the calculated mininiumFs is 1.572 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = -0.75, Yc = 17.25 and R = 17.71 [ft] ). Point lidwards Condominiums Page 4 of 4 Copyirif)mt 0 1998-2004 ADANIA Enginocring, Inc. License number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condofffiniums; p4mad D2161,M= MOU hm UM14'Az 2006 Q.'VSEItSVSADLCWA"J%mL-t E"&rtU%X6dRAWAayAzWpi3,6 a Trafficar'.4 AASHTO DESIGN METHOD Point Edwards Condominiums PROJECT IDEKnFICATION Title: Point Edwards Condominiums Project Number: T-4893 Client: Point Edwards, LLC Designer: JCS Station Number: N/A Description: 6-foot high geotextile wrai)-face reinforced fill rockery; horizontal backslope, triffic surcharge Companys information: Name: Terra Associates, Inc. Street: 12525 Willows Rd. Ste. 101 Kirkland, WA 98034 Telcphonc 9: 425-821-7777 Fax fl: 425-821-4334 E-Mail: john@terra-associates.com Original file path and name: G:\USERSVSADLER\4000\PoinI Edwards\Rcinf Rock -cry Analy ..... Original date and time of creating this file: May 9, 2006 PROGRAM MODE: Point Eckvurd.s Condominiums Copyright 0 199H -2004 ADAMA Enginccring, Inc. ANALYSIS of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE using GEOGRID as reinforcing inalerial. Page I of 4 License number M-US-0534 MSEW — Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Vm�a D.1v-rvov: %I.n A. 12 091fo-13 2006 C,.11)SEKSUSADLEK14rX0V.ia AA'%WA A Tr6ft.90; SOIL DATA REINFORCED SOIL Unit weight, -v 125,0 lb/ft 3 Design value of internal angle of friction, 34.00 RETAINEDSOIL Unit weight, y 120.0 lb/ft 3 Design value of in(emal angle of fricfion, 32.00 FOUNDATION SOIL (Consideredas an equivalent unifann soil) Equivalent unit weight. y _';� t25.0 lb/ft 11 Equivalent internal angle of friction, 35.00 Equivalent coliesion, c�q,j,. 200.0 lb/ft 2 Water table does not affect bearing capacity LATERAL EARY[i PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS Ka (internal stabilitv) = 0.2827 (if batter is less than 10'. Ka is calculated from eq. 15, Otherwise, eq. 38 is utilized) Inclination of intentat slip plane. mi = 62.00' (see Fig. 28 in DEMO 82). Ka (external stability) = 0.3073 (if batter is less than 10', Ka is calculated from eq. 16. Oflier-wise, eq. 17 is udlized) HEARING CAPACITY Bearing capacity coefficients (calculated by MSEW): Nc = 46.12 N y= 48.03 SEISMICITY Maximum ground accelcration coefficient, ct � = 0.150 Kae (a�> 0) = 0.4368 Kae(a�=O) =0.3073 AKac=0.1295 (seeeq. 37 in DEMO 82) Seismic soil-geogrid friction coefficient, F* is 80.0% of its specified slatic value. Po�lt Edwarcts- Coudominiunis Pagc2 of 4 Copyright 0 199S-2004 ADAMA Engincedng. Inc. Liceme numbcr M-US-0534 MSEW — Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Prtwal Dalerrbe: him Jun 12 0'):S6i33 ZWG Q'1USERS%J5ADLM4WW9vC WWU&%RCi1L1 X�&ay Amblil'6 0 T49ir-UN INPUT DATA: 6eorne1rV and Surcharge loads (of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE) Design height, Hd 7.50 [ft] Embedded depth is E = 1.50 and height above top or fulishcd bot(om grade is H = 6.00 ft Batter. to 0.0 fdcpl Backslope. B 23.0 [deg] Backslope rise 0.0 [ft] Broken back equivalent angle, I = 0.00' (see Fig, 25 in DEMO 82) UNIFORM SURCHARGE Uniformly distributed dead load is 0.0 [lb/ft 11, and live load is 250.0 [lb/ft 2] ANALYZED REINFORCEMENT LAYOUT - SCALE: 0 2 4 6[ft] r--1--1-1.--.-- Poini Edv.-aT&- Condofniniurns page 3 or 4 Copyright,D 1998-2004 ADAMA Enginceiing. hic. ticensenumber M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Eirdi Walls Point Edwards Condominiums 11—a WWII— hina Im 12 09,1613 2006 G-AjSERSUSA0LEft9G0WLirU rd% w4fMcial'itna-M AmhmiOA ft T-ftffwAEN _Jkrt, — —1-1—.A—K—.�.—t-v-*— 11�. 1, —'� — ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Static conditions) Bearing cavacity. Fs = 18.88. Meyerhof stress = 1419 Ib/11-. -T:,4:-- 17- '7AA -fr - n 1111C 17,. - A 9'2 GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs -overall Fs -overall Fs -overall Gcoarid Pullout Direct Eccent6city Product It Elevation Length Type fpullout reoruiectiou faeoerid strength resistance sliding e/L name [ft] [ft] a resistance] break] strength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 7.00 1 NIA N/A N/A 2.784 4.153 2.649 0.0648 Synteen SF.. 2 4.00 7.00 1 NIA N/A N/A 6�074 4.735 3.341 0.0342 Synteen SF.. 3 6.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 8.223 2.147 4.520 0.0117 SyntecnSF.. ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Seismic conditions) Bearing cal)acitv. Fs = 14.58. Meyerhof stress = 1662 lb/fti. 'oundation Inferfilce* Dir ding. Fs = 1.758. Eccentricity, e/1- = 0. 1808, Fs-ovejjuLa"ng = 2.76 GEOGRID CONNECTION i I's-overall Fs -overall Fs -overall Gcoarid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product (f Elevation Length Type rpullout fconnection [geogrid strength resistance sliding C/L name Ift] [ft] a resistance] break] sLrength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 2.370 2.929 1.771 0.1064 Synteen SF.. 2 4.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 4.627 2.886 2.390 0,0511 Symeen SF.. 3 6.00 7.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 6.179 1.291 3,672 0.0148 Syntecn SF.. GLOBAL/COMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Bishop method and ROR = 0.0) STATIC CONDITIONS: For thespeciflied gearch pdd the calculated minimorn Fs is 2.313 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xe = -0,75, Ye = 12.00 and R = 12.66 [ft] ). SEISMIC CONDITIONS; For the sliccefied scamh grid, tbe calculated minimum Fs is 1.859 (it corresponds to a crifical circle at Xc = -0.75, Yc = 12.75 and R = 13.37 [111 ). Point Edwards Condominiums Page 4 of 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Cisgincering, hic. Liccitsenurnbcr M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Frc�.f %In% Jw 12 09:59:47 M G-AJSERS1J5ADLER400GT0ia1 TrzftBEN AASHTO DESIGN METHOD Point Edwards Condominiums PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Title: Point Edwards CondorniniunLs Proiect Number* T4893 Client: Point Edwards, LLC Designcr JCS Station Number: N/A Description: 8-foot high geotextile wrap -face reinforced fill rockery; horizontal backslope, traffic surcharge Company's information: Name: Term. Associates, Inc. Street: 12525 Willows Rd. Sle. 101 Kirkland, WA 98034 Telephoue U: 425-821-7777 Fax 11: 425-821-4334 E-Mail: john@tcn-a-associates.com Original file path and name: GAUSERSVSADLER�4000\1?oint Edwards\Reinf Rockcry Analy.,... Original date and time of creating Ibis file: May 9, 2006 PROGRAM MODE: Point Edwards Condominiums CopyTip)tt 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Enginecring. Inc. ANALYSIS of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE using GEOGRID as reinforcing material. Page I af 4 Ucmse munber M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums ftam Mftlr�. Man Jm S 2 Or:59�47 2006 G:1USEMUSADLEK1A"J'0tk1 rd-vd1kR&i0fR,4-cry A-1-A014 R TmTlrBEN SOIL DATA P,EINFORCED SOIL Unit weigii(, v 125.0 lb/ft Desigm value of intemal angle of friction, 34.00 RETAINED SOIL Unit weight v 120.0 lb/ft Design value of internal angle of friction, 32.00 FOUNDATION SOIL (Considered as an equivalent uniform soil) Equivalent unit weight, -v _j, 125.0 th/ft Equivalent interrial angle or friction, 35.00 Equivalent coliesion, r.;,. 200.0 lb/ft Water table does not affect bea6ig capacity LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS Ka (internal stability) = 0.2827 (if batter is less than 10', Ka is calculated from eq. 15. 011icrtvise, eq. 38 is utilized) Inclination of intemal sliv plane. w = 62.00' (see Fia. 28 in DEMO 82). Ka (external stability) = 0.3073 (if batter is less flian 10", Ka is calculated from eq. 16. Oflierwise, eq. 17 is utilized) BEARING CAPACITY Bearing capacity coefficients (calculated by MSEW): Nc = 46.12 N 7 = 48.03 SEISMICITY Maximum ground acceleration coefficient, cL , = 0. 150 Kae (a� > 0) = 0.4368 Kac (oL,= 0) = 0.3073 A Kae = 0. 1295 (see eq. 37 in DEMO 82) Seismic soil-geogrid friction coefficient, F* is 80.0% ol'its specified static value. Point Edwards Condominiums Page 2 of 4 CopyTiebt 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering, Inc. License number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Point Edwards Condominiums PMCM M*dTirz,— Mv Jlua 13 09:59,,47 'WG WUSPRSUSADLEWADWPOW Ea*kjd&qtc�"*dCry Anablial 9 Trat&JIFN INPUT DATA: Geomelry and Surcharge loads (of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE) Design height, Hd 9.50 [ftj Embedded depth is E = 1.50 ft, and height above top of finished bottom grade is H = 8.00 ft Batter, 0.0 [dep-1 Backslope. f3 23.5 rdeg) Backslope rise 0.0 [ft] Broken back equivalent angle, I = 0.00' (see Fig. 25 in DEMO 82) UNIFORM SURCHARGE Unifornily distributed dead load is 0.0 [lb/ft 2], and live load is 250.0 [lb/ft] ANALYZED REINFORCEMENT LAYOUT: SCALE: 0 2 4 6 [ft] Point Edwards Condominiums Pagc 3 of 4 CapyFight 0 1998-2004 ADAM A Enginecring. Inc. Licenscumber M-US-0534 MSEW - Mechanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Point Edwards Condominiums NJOU �,.- 12 09-39:47 IC05 G�USHKSUL%DLERWAkft�ag V-3rbWcL1f;E0Ck07 AMAY7W 0 T=IUAIEN ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Static condiflons) Bearing capacity. Fs = 16.16, Meverhof stress = 1774 lb/fj2. oundation Interface: Direct slidina, Fs = 7,677, FccentriQitv, g/l, 1149. Fs-owmiming = 4.35 GEOGRID CONNECTION I's-overall I's-overall Fs -overall Geogrid Pullout Direct Eccen(ricity Product I/ Elevation LengUi Type fpullout [connection rp-cogrid strength resistancc sliding e/L name 11 resistance] break] strength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 2.227 5.295 2.509 0.0792 Svnteen SF.. 2 4.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 4.454 6,575 3.028 0.0496 Svnteen SF.. 3 6.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 6.074 4.673 3.818 0.0262 Svnteen SF.. 4 8.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A NIA 8.223 1111 5.165 0.0089 Synteen SF.. ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Seismic conditions) Bearing, capacity. Fs = 11.32, Meyerhof stress = 2201 lb/fil, U� - 1 44-7 -/T - Al InA C� -) 'IR I GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs -overall I's-overall Fs -overall Geogrid Pullout Direct Ecccntricity Product 11 Elevation LcngtiiType fpuliout fconnection. Fp-eogrid strength resistance sliding eJL narne Ift] I f�l 1i resistance] break) strength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 1.889 3.592 1.608 0.1385 Svnteen SF.. 2 4.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 3.418 4.036 2.024 0.0815 Svnteen SF.. 3 6.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 4.537 2.793 2.731 0.0391 Synteen SF.. 4 8.00 8.00 1 N/A NIA N/A 6.059 1.244 4.197 0.0113 Synteen SF.. GLOBAL/COMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Bishop method and ROR = 0.0) STATIC CONDITIONS: For die specified search giid- the calculated minintuni Fs is 2.134 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = 0.00, Yc = 14.25 and R = 14.62 [ftj ), SEISMIC CONDITIONS: For the specified se uh-pid. the calculated minimum Fs is L696 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = -0,95, Yc = 17. 10 and R = 17.62 [ft) ). Point Nlwwds Condorninittins Page 4 of 4 CopyriGht 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering. Inc. Licam number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums AASHTO DESIGN METHOD Point Edwards Condonu'niums PROJECT IDEIVFIFICATION Title: Pobit Edwards Condominiums Proicct Number: T4893 Client: Point Edwards, LLC Desi�rrter: JCS S(ation Number: N/A Description: 8-foot high geotextile wrap -face reinforced fill rockery; 2:1 slope surcliarge Compan)?s Information: Name: Terra Associates, Inc. Street: 12525 Willows Rd. Ste. 101 Kirkland, WA 98034 Telephone 0: 425-821-7777 Fax th 425-821-4334 E-Mail: jolin@lerra-associates.coui Original file path and name: G:kUSERS\JSADLERAOOO\Point Edwards\Rcinf Rockery Analy ..... Original date and time of creating this file: May 12, 2006 PROGRAM MODE: ANALYSIS of a SlIMPLE STRUCTURE usbig GEOGRID as reinforcing material. Point Edwards Condominiums P I of 4 Copyright 4) 1998-2004 ADAMA Enginccring, Inc. Licenscuumbrr M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Point Edwards Condominiums PTOCA 1hWrr-'1W. M9.1 Jun 12 10.01:10 -%6 An*-iiil 4 tbj,�WW SOIL DATA RE-I­NFORCED SOIL IJuit weight. V 125.0 lb/ft Design value of internal auglc of friction, 34,00 RETAINED SOIL Unit weight. -V 120.0 lbtft 3 Design value of internal angle of friction, 32.0 " FOLTNDATION SOIL (Considered as an equivalent uniform soil) Equivalent unit wcipjit, y_a, 125.0 lbfft:l Equivalent internal angle of ffiction, 35.0 " Equivalentcoliesion, ccpi�. 200.0 lb/ft Water table does not affcct bearing capacity LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS Ka (internal stability) = 0.2827 (if batter is less Vian 10'. Ka is calculated from eq. 15. Otherwise, eq, 38 is utilized) Inclination of internal slip plane. w = 62.00' (see Fig. 28 in DEMO 82). Ka (external stability) = 0.3271 (if batter is less than 10', Ka is calculated from eq. 16. Otherwise, eq. 17 is utilized) REARING CAPACITY Bearing capacity coefficients (calculated by MSEW): Nc = 46.12 N Y= 48.03 SEISMICITY Max imum ground acceleration coefficient, a, = 0. 150 Kae (o:�> 0) = 0.5305 Kde (a�= 0) = 0.3271 A Kae = 0.2034 (see eq. 37 in DEMO 82) Seismic soil-geogrid frict-ion coefficient, F* is 80.0% of its specified static, value. Point Edtwrds Condominiums Flige 2 of 4 copyrigm i) i 9ga-2004 ADAMA Engineering, hic. License number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums rnawi)"frul'r. hlmohn U 10.11:102G"6 (;A'SEVMSADLEM4W(r--rbiu Ed.-"MdMfRzc1cry Azi�6NS It thF�.DEN INPUT DATA: Geometry and Surcharge loads (of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE) Design height, Hd 9.50 [Ctl Embedded depth is E = 1.50 mid height above top of finished bottom grade is H = 8.00 ft Batter. 0.0 [deg] Backslove. 13 23.0 I'deg] Backslope rise 4.0 [ft) Broken back equivalent angle, I = 11.89' (see Fig. 25 in DEMO 82) UNIFORIM SURCHARGE Uniformly distributed dead load is 0.0 [lb/ft'] ANALVZED REINFORCEMENT LAVOUY. SCALE: 0 2 4 6[ft] 1 Point Edwards Condominiums Page 3 of 4 CopyTight 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering, Inc. Licenscrtuinbcr M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums hoo= Dawr== MW hm 12 10AII: I a 2006 (OUSERS9SADLERWOWaim Edw=WRrivfKbcAav Awh�� 0 slapc.H04 ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Static condilions) Bearine capacity. Fs = 15.84. Meyerhof stress = 1819 lb/ft'. 01111dation Interface; Direct slidine. Fs = 2,509, Fccentricit�,, e/3, = .0923. 17--ovatitming = 3.82 Cr E 0 G R I D C 0 N N E C TI 0 N Fs -overall Fs -over-all Fs -overall Gcoarid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product 'I Elevation Lcnpth Type rouitout [conuection rpeoprid strength resistance sliding c/L name [111 1 fil 11 resistance] break] strengdi] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 8.00 1 NIA NIA N/A 2.367 7.068 2,292 0.0528 Svnteen SF.. 2 4.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 4.835 9.922 2.672 0.0160 Svnteen SK. 3 6.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 6.805 8.782 3.189 -0.0217 Synteen SF.. 4 8.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 10.052 7.044 3.869 -0.0721 Synteen SF.. ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Seismic conditions) Bearine capacity. Fs = 7.28, Meyerhof stress = 2951 lb/ft'. 17- — I A AT —IF —A ')A I I 17� — 1 Q7 GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs -overall Fs -overall Fs -overall Geogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity . Product P Elevation LengthType foullout [connection [P-eoerid strength rcsistance sliding c/l, name Ifil [ft] a resistance] break] strength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 1.900 4.539 1.388 0. 1444 Svntcen SF.. 2 4.00 8.00 1 NIA N/A NIA 3.393 5.570 1.748 0.0639 Syntcen SF.. 3 6.00 8.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 4.568 4.716 2.347 -0.0034 SvnIecn SF.. 4 8.00 8.00 1 N/A NIA N/A 6.429 3.604 3.419 -0.0692 Synteen SF.. GLOBAL/COMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Bishop method and ROB = 0.0) STATIC CONDITIONS: For die specified search glid the calculated minimum Fs is 1.868 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = -0.95, Yc = 17. 10 and R = 17.62 [ft] ). SEISMIC CONDITIONS: For the specified search grid the calculated minimum Is is 1.477 (it correspon& to a critical circle at Xc = -1.90, Yc = 19.00 and R = 19.69 [ft] ). Point Edwards Condominiums Page 4 of 4 Copyright Z) 1998-2004 ADAMA Engimering, Inc. Liccnsc number M-US-0534 MSEW —Mleclianically StabilizLd Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums ftnnt 1341alime: 41" Ju. 12 10.02:36 -N06 G:"ERSUSAVLERAEr;rAP0*= C4v&rd&%XciafRorLcrV Awtj%iA%10fl Tra&.Dr-.N AASHTO DESIGN METHOD Point Edwards Condominiums PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Title: Point Edwards Condomfiduins Proiect Number: T-4893 Client: Point Edwards, LLC Desianer: ics Station Number N/A Description.- 104bot hip-li geolcxtile wrap -face reinforced fill rockery, horizontal backslope, traffic surcharge Compan3(s information: Name: Terra Associates, Inc. Street: 12525 Willows Rd. Ste. 101 Kirkland, WA 98034 Tcicvhone th 425-B21-7777 Fax th 425-8214334 E-Mail: jolln@(erTa-associates.com Original file path and name: G:\USERS\JSADLER\4000\Point Fdwards\RcinfRockcry Analy ..... Original date and time of creating this file: May 9, 2006 PR06RAM MODE: Point Ed%v-ajTls Condominiuing Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering. Inc. ANALYSIS of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE using GEOGRID as reinforcing inaterial. Page I of 4 License number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Ftcs= Dwarrimr. ta,m Am 12 1 OX-16 --OD6 G:%1L1SERS%JSADLEHqW01JSAU b1%'X1hUtdaF KOCLuy Acatirlukill 8 Tnark,1104 SOIL DATA REINFORCED SOIL Unit weight, V 125.0 lb/rt' Design value of iniernal angle of friction, 34.00 RETAINED SOIL Unit weight, v 120.0 lb/ft:1 Design value of internal angle of friction, 32.00 FOUNDATION SOIL (Considered a: an equivalent uniform soil) Equivalent unit weipht. y _i, 125.0 lb/ft Equivalent internal angle of friction, 4k,,j, 35.00 Equivalent colicsion, CW" 200.0 lb/ft 2 Water table does not affect bearing capacity LATERAL EARUI PRESSURE cofmams Ka (internal stabilitv) = 0.2827 (if batter is less than 10', Ka 'is calculated from eq. 15. Otherwise, eq. 38 is utilized) Inclination of inlernal sliv Diane. w = 62,00' (see Fig. 28 in DEMO 82). Ka (external stability) =- 0.3073 (if batter is less dian 10', Ka is calculated from eq. 16. Otherwise, eq. 17 is utilized) BEARING CAPACITY Bearing capacity coefficients (calculated by MSEW): Ne = 46,12 N y= 48.03 SEISMICITY Maximum ground ticcelcritioncocfficient, oL. = 0. 150 Kae (cx�> 0) = 0.4368 Kae (a�= 0) = 0.3073 5 Kae = 0. 1295 (see eq. 37 in DEMO 82) Seismic soil-geogrid ffiction coefficient, F* is 80.00/. of its specified static value, Point Edwards Condominiums Page 2 of 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering. Inc. Licensc nuinbcr M-US-0534 MSEW — Mechanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Point Edwards Condominiums riews Dmell-nne. Mon hm 12 10. "6 20% GAISERSVSADLERWOM-Pniv Vdw4rd&1J1v.WRackmJ%=Jpak10 R Trofr�HEN . �; I —I I A!!-%' � I I I U -�t�— I rtrn%--� u I �--- L.— INPUT DATA: Geometry and Surcharge loads (of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE) Design heigh(, Hd 11.50 (ft.] Embedded depth is E = 1.50 ft. and height above top of finished bottom grade is 14 = 10.00 ft Batter. w 0.0 [dep I Backslope. 11 23.0 [deg] Backslope rise 0.0 [ft] Broken back equivalent angle, I = 0.00' (see Fig. 25 in DEMO 82) UNIFORM SURCHARGE Unifornily distributed dead load is 0.0 fibift 21, and live load is 250.0 [lb/ft 11 ANALVZED REINFORCEMENT LAYOUT: SCALE: 0 2 4 6 8 10 (ft] Poinj Edwards Coadominiums Pagc 3 or 4 Copyright -0 1998-2004 ADAMA Enginecting. Inc. Ucensenuinbcr M-US-0534 MSEW - Mcclianically Stabilized Earth Walls Point Edwards Condominiums Ptacm Dv&qkr= P 12o jk- 32 10.01:% ' WX G.,WSFjtSkr-tDLErMW*ft!ta Edwn-tTkfacd-ay A=W%%10 0 TrO--004 ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Static conditions) Bearing capacitv. Fs � 14.28. Meyerhof stress = 2139 lb/ft'. Foundat ion Interface: Direct sild ing. Fs = 2.627, Eccennicity, e/l, = .1239.Fs-overturnipc!=4,04 GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs -overall Fs -overall Fs -overall Gcogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product 0 Elevation Length Type fpullout I connection I geogrid strength resistance sliding c/L name IN [ft] ft resistance] break] strength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 1.856 6.395 2.409 0.0908 Svnteen SF.. 2 4.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 3.516 8.283 2.823 0.0626 Sween SF.. 3 6.00 9.00 1 NIA N/A N/A 4.454 6.503 3.406 0,0392 Svnteen SF.. 4 8.00 9.00 1 N/A NIA N/A 6.074 4.609 4.295 0.0207 Sween SF.. 5 10.00 9.00 1 N/A NI/A N/A 8.223 2.075 5.811 0.0071 Synteen SF.. ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Seismic conditions) Bearing capacitv, Fs = 9.08. Meyerhof stress = 2806 lb/ft2. oundation Interface: Direct slidinv Fs = 1 602 Eccentricitv efJ, = 0 2339 Fs-oveMirnine = 2.14 GEOGRID CONNECTION rs-overill Fs -overall Fs -overall Geogfid Pullout Direct Ecceutricity Product 11 Elevation LwigthType fpullout [connection fgeogrid strength resistance sliding c/L name Ift] [ft] it resistance] break] strength] Fs Fs Fs 1 2-00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 1.567 4.321 1.500 0.1659 Syn(een SF.. 2 4.00 9.00 1 N/A NIA NIA 2.701 5.089 1.809 0.1094 Synteen SF.. 3 6.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A NIA 3.366 3.931 2.277 0.0644 Syn(een SF.. 4 8.00 9.00 1 NIA N/A N/A 4.465 2.711 3.072 0.0309 Synteen SF.. 5 10.00 9.00 1 N/A NIA Nj/A 5.965 1.204 4.721 0.0089 Symeen SF.. GLOBAL/COMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Bishop method and ROR = 0.0) STATIC CONDITIONS: For thespecified search grid the calculated minimum Fs is 2.049 (itcorresponds to a critical circle at Xc=-1.15, Yc = 21.85 and R=22.29 [11]). SEISMIC CONDITIONS: For dic -,pecified search grid the calculated minimum Fs is 1.605 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = -1. 15, Yc = 21.85 and R = 22,29 [ft] ). Poini Edwards Coridminiurmi Page 4 or 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAM A Engineering, Inc. License number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechnnically Stabilized Earth Walls Nmm ualen�. Man J=. 12 10:04:102(m Point Edwards Condominiums G:IUSERS\JSADLER%40OOkFoiciEdw2rdLkRclufR*dcryelrAI)i6%1OPtior.,UEN AASHTO DESIGN METHOD Point Edwards Condominiums PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Title: Point Edwards Condominiums Proiect Number: T-4893 Client: Point Edwards, LLC Designer: ics Station Nuinber: N/A Description: 10-foot high geotcxtile wrap -face reinforced fill rock -cry; 2:1 slope surcharge Companys information: Na.rne: Terra Associates. Inc. Strect: 12525 Willows Rd. Ste. 101 Kirkland, WA 98034 Telephone 425-821-7777 Fax 4: 425-821-4334 E-Mail: joiln@terra-associates.coin Original file path and name: GAUSERSNJSADLER\4000\Point Edwards�Rcinf Rockery Analy ..... Original date and time of creating this file: May 12, 2006 PROGRAM MODE: ANALYSIS of a SIMPLE STRUCTURE using GEOGRID as rcinforcing material. PuinL Edwards Condominium- P.18c I "r 4 Copyrighi 0 19984004 ADAMA Engineering,. Inc. ------ License ntimbei I MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Pobit Edwards Condominiums ft0cm clace'rim: NI" I= 12 10.04:10 20M G:uj!il' xS1JS.%DLrRA�Wehu rd%-u&1X=:fPckay AmtoiWO A dw.LIEK SOIL DATA R.EINFORCED SOIL Unit weight, -., 125.0 lb/ft Design value of hiternal angle of ftiction, 34.00 REI'AINED SOIL Unit weighl. v 120.0 Ib/ft Design value of inlemal angle of friction, 32.00 FOUNDATION SOIL (Considered as an equivalent uniform sail) Equivalent unit weight, 125.0 lb/fi Equivalent internal angle of friction, 35.00 Equivalent coliesion, Ce,..i.. 200.0 lb/ft Water table does not affect bearing capacity LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS Ka (intenuil stability) = 0.2827 (if batter is less than 10'. Ka is calculated from eq. 15. Othenvise, eq. 38 is utilized) Inclination of interrial slin vlane. w = 62.00' (see Fig. 28 in DEMO 82). Ka (exterrial stability) = 0.3206 (if batter is less than 10', Ka is Calculated from eq. 16. Otherwise, eq. 17 is utilized) BEARING CAPACFrV Bearing capacity coefficients (calculated by MSEW): Nc = 46.12 N Y= 48.03 SEISMICITY Maximum ground acceleration coefficient, oL . = 0.150 Kae (m, > 0) = 0. 5040 Kae (a-= 0) =0.3206 A Kne = 0. 1834 (see eq. 37 in DEMO 82) Seismic soil-geogrid friction coefficient, F* is 80.0% of its specified static value. Point Edwafds Condoininiuins Page 2 or 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engineering. Inc. License number M-US-0534 MSEW -- Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Paiul Edwards Condominiums N,�cd.nxtdr=: INPUr DATA: Geomelry and Surcharge loads (of a SIMPLE STRUGFURE) Design height, Hd I l.5D [ft] Embedded depth is E = 1.50 fL and height above lop of finished bottom grade is H = 10.00 ft Batter. o) 0.0 rdeal Backslope. B 23.0 rdeg] Backslope rise 4.0 [ft] Broken back equivalent angle, I = 9,87' (see Fig. 25 in DEMO 82) UN(FORM SURCHARGE Unifunnly distributed dead load is 0.0 [lb/ft 11 ANALYZED REINFORCEMENY LAYOU117: SCALE: 0 2 4 6 8 10 [ftj Paint Edwards Candaininiunru Pi@c 3 of 4 Copyright 0 1998-2004 ADAM A Engineering, Inc. licensenuinber M-US-0534 MSEW - Mechanically Stabilized Eardi Walls Point Edwards Condominiums J�Ment 0.11CIFUR&I j6j,�A J.Q 1110'0,1;10 'Mts G-31jSERSUSADMR4000,PVW AnalpiW10 A dtpe.11EN ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Stalic condiflons) Bearhig capacitv, Fs = 1130, Meyertiof stTess = 2270 lb/ft2. oundation Interface: Direct slidilIg. Fs = 2,407, Eccen(ricity, e/L = 0. 1120. Fs-ovemmine = 3.44 GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs -over-all Fs -overall Fs -overall Geogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity j Product ff Elevation LcagthType I rPullout fconneefion [veogrid strength resistance sliding c/L name Ift] [ft] # resistance) break] strengdi] Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 9.00 1 NIA N/A N/A 1.903 8.026 2.156 0.0750 Synteen SF.. 2 4.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 3.629 11.234 2.448 0.0407 Synteen SR. 3 6.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 4.636 9,946 2.829 0.0077 Synteen SF.. 4 8.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 6.418 8.776 3.332 -0.0273 Synteen SF.. 5 10.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 9.043 6.894 3.960 -0.0761 Synteen SF.. ANALYSIS: CALCULATED FACTORS (Seismic conditions) Bearing capacb, Fs = 5.03. Meyerhof stress = 4145 lb/ft'. .1;.4;-. r. = I IAR P .... t,4,;tu P/f = n IR 10 Pe-nuprtitmina = I AO; GEOGRID CONNECTION Fs -overall I's-overall I's-overall Geogrid Pullout Direct Eccentricity Product N Elevation LenathType [Pullout fconnection fgeogrid strengdi rcsistance sliding eAL name Ift] [ft] 11 resistance) break] strengflil Fs Fs Fs 1 2.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 1.530 5.164 1.277 0.1895 Synteen SF.. 2 4.00 9.00 1 NIA N/A N/A 2.588 6.409 1.533 0.1105 Synteen SF.. 3 6.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 3.232 5.547 1.918 0.0438 Synteen SF.. 4 8.00 9.00 1 NIA N/A N/A 4.303 4.708 2.537 -0.0139 SVntccn SF.. 5 10.00 9.00 1 N/A N/A N/A 5.883 3,588 3.569 -0.0741 Synteen SF- GLOBAL/COMPOUND STABILITY ANALYSIS (Using Bishop method and HOR = 0-0) STATIC CONDITIONS: For the specified search grid the calculated minimum Fs is 1.816 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = - 1. IS, Ye = 21.85 and R = 22.29 [ft] ). SEISMIC CONDITIONS: For the sl2rrified sear&gdd, the calculated minimum Fs is 1.419 (it corresponds to a critical circle at Xc = - 1. 15, Yc = 21.85 and R = 22.29 [ftj ). Point Edwards Condominiums Page 4 of 4 Copyright �0 1998-2004 ADAMA Engiuccring, Inc. License number M-US-0534 0i, PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT UNOCAL Site. Pine Street and Chinook Road Edmonds, Washington Project No., T-4893 Terra Associates, Inc. Triad Point.Edwards Seattle, W shington AUG 4 2006 lift, BUILDING DEPARTME14T CITY, OF EDMONDS' November 21,2001 STREET, FILE -CITY 00'Ty Ir /-7-7", 4 A TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences November 21, 2001' Project No. T4893. Mr. Ross Woods Triad Point Edwards 2801 Alaskan Way, Suite 107 Seattle, Washington 98121 Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Report UNOCAL Site Pine Street and Chinook Road Edmonds, Washington Dear Mr. Woods: As requested, we. have* conducted a preliminary geotechnical engineering study for the subject project. The attached report presents our findings and.recommendations for the geotechnical aspects of project- design and construction. Our field expiloration'indicates that the site isgene.rally underlain by medium dense'to very dense native sandi silty sand, sandy silt, and laminated to massive, very dense silt and/or hard . clay. Fill has been placed at locqtioris., across the site in thicknesses ranging from about I to .12 feet. The consistency of the fill soil is'variable, -but generally appears to have� been derived from the on -site soills. Much of the fill we observed contained organic material and/or debris. We. observed light seepage of perched groundwater in several test pits at depths ranging from about 2.5 to'l 1.0 feet below the ground surface. In our opinion, the. subsurface conditions at the �site are suitable. for the' propos, dl�e velopment. of the property. In general, conventional spread footings maybe used for sup orting the buildings bearing on undisturbed. native soil p or, compacted structural The slopes on, the site are generally stable, and the stability is not expected to.be aff.ected. by the proposed 'development. The -uncontrolled encountered on the site Willnot be -suitable for o ing structuralloads. or pavements'.� Concept4al:pldns fdr'developmerit indicate significant I cuts in, dir6ctly supp rt' the uphill part of the site, adjacent -to Pine.Street. 'These'excavations will most likely need to be,provided with temporary support during construction. .12525 Willows Road, Suite,-1 0.1, Kirkl.apd, Washington M034 Phone (425) 821-7777 Fa:x (425) 821-4334 November 21,.2001 Once project plans have been finalized, we will conduct additional deta iled analyses to evaluate impacts,on slope stability and prepare final recommendations for the geotechnical aspects of site development. We trust the'infori-hation presented is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any.questions,'or require additional information, please call. Sincerely yours, TERRA A-SSOCIATES, INC. John C. S Project I IQ /0 1 Anil tA P.0 Princi 17 ic :a .,a E�s K1191 C TABLE OF CONTENTS Page = � lDProject Description ._—..---.'—.---------^__-------_'_—.—..'..l � 2.0 Scope ofWork ......................................................... ....................................................... l � 3]} Site Conditions ................................ --------� ................... .................................... 2 � 9.1 Surface .................................................................................................... —...... 2 3.2 Soils ....................................................... ........... I .................................................... 3 � __________.___^__.____'.`------.---..3 . `4]J ------------------------'---'--'----' ' 4 4.1 Rromion.... `........................................................................................................ 4 ' 4.2 Steep Slope ............ .-----__--,.__---_--------.---_-4 ` ` 4� --------_---�---..----^--^—^—'---_---'--5 . � . 4�| ��cmz�u;----_-----------------'------.------'-- �' � � � 5.0 Discussion and Preliminary Recommendations ------------'---'----'5 5.1 General ............................-----------_------.--_—_—'—''5 � 5.2 Site Preparation and Grading --------_--,---^------..---_6 5.3 Excavations ..................................... .............................................................. —7 . ^ ` 5.4 -------------.------.--'-----. 8 ' ` ` 5.5 Basement and Retaining Walls ........................................................................... 9. `5/6 Floors ...................................................................................... l0 ' � 5.7 Drainage ........ ................................................................................................. lO � 5.8Utilities ............................................................................................................ ll � 5.9 Pavements .-.--------._-------_-----_-----.----..11 6.0 Additional Services ....................................................................................................... ll 7]} Liozdudmoo...................................................................................................................... l2 ` Figur6' ' ^ _ .. . . _'_. - -- ..----...�'.. '�--� ___-----------.+-' l -`~_' ExplorationLocation Plan ................................................................ ...... ...... -................. Figure 2 ` ,General. Slope Fill Detail .-----`.--.—�-._---._..—_—_._'_---.—.--`'_..'Figure 3 � ` - A�mei6numx ` `Field and —.-----_._---'-._—_--.---. � A ' Preliminary Geotech hical Report UNOCAL Site Pine Street and, Chinook Road Edmonds, Washington 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION We understand the project will consist of a residential development.' Detailed'building and site development plans are currently not available. However, a preliminary. site I plan, by GGLO indicates the development will' consist of 15 multi -unit buildings. We understand that the buildings'will be three to four stories, with daylight basements and attached garages., We expect that the buildings will be wood -framed, with lower floors constructed at grade. We expect structural loads will be about five to seven kips per linear foot. for continuous bearing walls. Column loads may be on the order of 200 kips. Our review of an unreferenced preli�ninary grading plan, dated February 20, 2001, indicates that the planned site development will require extensive grading with cuts and fills up to about 20 and 3.0 feet, respectively. In. additiori,- it appears that temporary construction cuts up to about 20 feet will be required- along the downgradient side' of Pine Street. Proposed permanent cut and fill slopes' are shown with an -M'clihation' 'of 2:1 (Horizontal: Vertical) The recommendations contained in the following sections of this report are preliminary and are based on the conceptual information described above. We should review design drawings a.s they become available in order to supplement or amend our recommendations, as required. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK On October 18 and 19, 2001, we- excavated 17 test pits to depths ranging from 9.5 to 16.0 &et below existing surface grades. In addition, we reviewed existing subsurface information from r' mental studies at previous env.i on the site to augment -the* information obtained in our subsurface investigation. Using this subsurface information, we performed, analyses to develop. preliminary, geotechnical . rec6nuilendations for project design and construction. Specifically, this report addresses the following:. Soil and groundwater conditions Geologic hazards and site stability Site preparation and grading Excavation- s Foundations e, i November 21, 2001 Project No. T-4893 a Basement and retaining walls Slab -on -grade floors Drainage Utilities Pavements 3.0 SITE.CONDITIONS 3.1 Surface The project site is the approximately 15-acre uppe ' r yard area, of the UNOCAL Edmonds Bulk Fuel Terminal located approximately between Unoco Road and Pine Street in Edmonds, Washington. The upper,yard area was fortnerly, used as a tank farm having 23 aboveground storage tanks (ASTs). All of the tanks and associated aboveground piping had been removed prior to our field investigation. The approximate location of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The site is situated on the upper portion- of a predominantly north -facing hillside. An undated site plan by Triad Associates indicates elevations in the planned development area range. from aboutElev. 170. in the south-central portion to about Elev.:70 in -the northeastern portion. Surface grades at the site have been significantly �altered for siting fuel tanks. In general, the fuel tanks were:construc.ted on large excavations cut into the hillside. 'The cut slopes are typically I I 510 1 20 feet in height with inclinations of about 60 to 70 perc . ent. The downgradient sides of several tank areas are enclosed by a containment berm constructed of fill. The heights of the berms are about 6 to .12 feet. above the bottom of the tank excavation. We observed a tar -like coating covering the surface of the. berms and most ofthe interior slopes of the tank areas. The western and northern margins of the planned development area are -near the top of a steep natural'slo e. The topographic information provided to us indicates' the, slope is. approximately 70 tq 90 'feet- high, with inclinations d 80 percent. :The are beyond the toe7 of the. sl pq to th� north -north est are ranging between about 50 an as w. relatively flat UNOCAL yard'.and parking areas. Burlington Northern railroad tracks run.along the toe of the -subj�e_ 1 0 howev slope to the West., Portions of -the slope have been cted to shallow etos on and 1. calized sloughing; er, -we did not'observe indications of deep-seated. instability. Slope vegetation consists predominantly of young to mature deciduous trees and brush. The portion of the site located south Of Pine Street is undeveloped -forest except, at the western end.. Which is�.. occupied by two small buildings located Within a fenced enclosure. This.portion of the site:slopes down -to the north 'and -northeast at grades of about 20 to -25 percent. �Vegetation� consists of predominantly of.mature coniferous and deciduous -trees and brush undergrowth. Tage No. .2 November 21, 2001 Project No. T-4893 3.2 Soils The native soils encountered in the test Pits consist of medium dense to very dense native- sand, silty sand, sandy silt, and'laminited to massive, very dense silt and/or hard clay. The soils- we observed in the test pits are generally consistent with those -described in the environmental studies :performed at the site -by others. We encountered the very dense silt/hard. clay underlyffig the medium dense to dense sand,silty sand, and sandy silt in. eight of the test pits at depths ranging from about 2.5 to 10.0 feet below the ground surface. Test Pits TP- 11, TP- 12, and TP-14 through TP-17 all terminated in medium dense to very dense sand', silty -sand, or sandy silt., These test pits are. all located at lower elevations in the'northeastern to eastern portion of the site. The very dense silty sand.and sandy silt occasionally contained fine gravel and appe a -red glacial till -like. We observed fill overlying the native soils. in I I of , the 17 test pits. The fill soils consist primarily of loose to firm silty sand, sandy silt, silt, and clay,. with varying amounts,of organic material.and debris. The thickness of the* fill is.generally less than' about three feet;:however, we observed fillslof 12 and.1 I feet it! Test Pits TP-6 and TP-16, respectively. Test Pit TP-6 was located on a berm between two large tank excavations. Test Pit TP-16 was located on the northeast -facing slope, below the two large tank areas in the eastern,portion of the site. In general, we observed the original topsoil horizon beneath the fill'soils. The Geologic Map of theEdmonds East and Part of the. Edmonds West Quadrangles, Washington by James P. Minard, 1983, shows the soils at higfter.site elevations mapped as Vashon -till,, Vashon advance outwash, and Transitional beds. Soils at lower site elevations are mapped as mediuni� I to coarse -grained sand of the Whidbey Formation. Transitional bed sediments are described by this publication as massive to bedded clay, silt, and fine to very fine sand. The soils encountered in the test pits are generally consistent with the. descriptions of transitional bed deposits. Detailed descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered -in the test pits are presented on the Test Pit Logs in Appendix A. The approximate test pit locations are shown on, Figiure 2., 3.3 Groundwater' We encountered light groundwater seepage in 7 of the 17 test,pits, at depths'ranging between About 15 and. 11.0' feet. The seepage was generally perched on the -very dense silt/hard clay, or -on. the dense. to very dense glacial till -like silty sand/sandy silt. -The groundwater conditions described above . are typical for sites -underlain by relatively impermeable materials,, such as glacialfill and glacially consolidated silts and clays.. Surface Water, will i0filtrato, through. the upper sandy or I weathered soils and become. perched on the underlying, -relatively irrip6mricabl.0 material: When corhbine.d with a positive gradient, � the, groundwater* will flow laterally along this, contact, e . merging -At lower elevations as seeps and springs. -Perched groundwater lev els and flow -rates will fluctuate, seasonally andiypidally"reach their hig hest. levels during and shortly.following the wet winter, months (October-iffiroifgh May). We, did -not obsery e indicaiions.6f significant groundwater seepage on the site slopes.' P No. 3 age, November 21, 2001 Project No. T4893 4.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 4.1 Erosion The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) has mapped the site, soils as Alderwood-Urban land complex, 2 to 8percent, slopes and Kitsap silt loam, 8 to. 25 percent.slopes in the upper southern portion of the site, and Alderwood- Everett gravelly sandy loams, 25 to 70 percent slopes in the area of the former tank farm and the. steep slope below the tank farm area. The soils we observed in, the test pit generally conform with the SCS mapping; however,'the very dense silt and hard clay observed in the former tank areas would better correlate with Kitsap silt loam, 25 to 50 percent slopes. The erosion hazards for soils classified as Alderwood-Urban land complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes and Kitsap, silt loam, 8, to 25 percent slopes are classified as slight and moderate, respectively. Alderwood-Everett gravelly sandy loams, 25 to 70 percent slopes is classified as having a moderate to high erosion hazard., The erosion hazard for soils classified as Kitsap silt loath., 25 to 50 percent slopes is considered high. The City of Edmonds defines erosion hazard areas as those areas containing soils that may experience severe to very severe erosion hazard. These soils' include, but are not limited to, the following when. they occur on slopes of 15 percent or greater., i. Alderwood soils (15 to 25 percent slopes) ii. Alderwood-Everett Series (25 to 10 percent slopes) iii. Everett Series (15 to 25 percent A I op�s) Based on the SCS mapping, much of the site would be considered an erosion hazard area. We did not observe indications, of significant active erosion in the planned development area; however, the soils will be susceptible to erosion when exposed during 'construction. Best Management Practices :(BMPs) must be used during construction to mitigate'the erosion hazard. If the. erosion control -measure:5 are properly implemented and maintained,it is our opinion that the planned development. will not adversely impact the erosion potential forthe site or adjacent- erties. All erosion and sediment control _BMPs should conform to City of Edmonds prop 1 requirements. 4.2 Steep Slop The City of Edmonds defines steep slope hazard areas as, any ground'that.rises at an, inclination of 40 percent or more within a vertical elevation change of at least'� 20 feet. ' 'Based_.-�on -this- definition and the topographic information provided tous, the -steep slope located below the development area and the cut slopes� on the up -hill side of several of the tank areas are, considered. steep slope hazard areas. The steep slopes located within the. former tank farm area.will be graded to inclinations of 2:1 or flatter.. It does not appear� that site grading will directly impact'the steep - slope located below the w'estern and northern portions of the development area. We will evaluate potential impacts-reg4rding the steep slope haz,ardareas once final site grading information is� developed. Page No.4 November 21, 200 t Project No. T4893 4.3 Landslide The City of Edmonds defines landslide hazard areas as follows:, I Any area with slopes of 15 percent or; greater and impermeable soils (typically silt and clay) frequently. interbedded with granular soils (predorninand sand and gravel) and springs or grounidw ter. y a 2. Any area that includes areas with significant visible evidence of groundwater seepage, which also includes existing landslide deposits, regardless of slopes. 3. Any area, that has shown movement during the Holocene epoch (from 10,000 years ago to present), or is underlain by. mass wastage debris of that epoch, as determined by a qualified geologist or geotechnical engineer. 4. Any area potentially unstable as a result of rapid stream incision or stream bank erosion. 5. Anyarea. located on an alluvial fan, presently subject to or potentially subject to i undation by debris in flow or deposition of streamAransported sediments. Based'on our observations of site soil conditions- and the above definition, many of the site slopes would be considered landslide hazard areas.- We expec(that the steep slopes located below the western and northern. portions of the development area would also be considered a landslide. hazard area due to soil conditions. Based on our field observations, it does not appear that the site slopes h ave been subjected to deep-seated instability. An -evaluation of -potential- impact.s of development and any necessary mitigation -will be made after the site development plans have been finalized. These evaluations w*ill include additional subsurface exploration by deep test borings in areas of deep excavations and near the top of the slope. 4.4 Seismic The Puget Sound area falls within Seismic Zone 3, as classified by the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC). Based on the soil conditions encountered in our test pitsand. described in the-'e0vironmental report by others, a. soil profile type of Sc, from Table 16-Jof the 1997 UBC, should be used in design. Liquefaction is a phenomenon where there is a -.reduction or complete loss of soil strength due, to. an increase in water pressure - induced by vibrations. Liquefaction mainly' affects geologically recent deposits of, fine-grained sands that, are below the groundwater table. Based on the soil and groundwater conditions we encountered', it -is our opinion that the risk for liquefaction- to occur in potentiatbuilding areas at this site is negligible. ..5.0 DISCUSSIONAND-PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 -General. Based on our study, it is our opinion that the site is sultable*for the,,proposed development. Buildings can be supported on.6onventional spread footings , bearing on competent- native soils below.'the surficial topsoil layer uncootroll.ed fill', or on structural fill placed-andcompacted on the competent. native soils. Floor slabs and pavements -can be.similarly supported. Pn P Mn 5� 6� I f November 21, 2.001 Project No. T4893 The uncontrolled fill encountered should not'be considered suitable for directly supporting foundations or stab - on -grade floors. The.existing fill'wle observed in the northeastern portion of the site is at least I I feet thick in locations, contains a,significant amount of organic material, and does not appear to have been placed- *in a controlled manner on a properly prepared subgrade. To reduce. the potential of unacceptable, differential settlements -of the structures and to avoid impacting the stability of the fill slope in this portion of the site, we' recoftimend transferring building loads to competent native soils beneath the fill using deep foundations. In our opini 6n,-. a foundation system consisting of augercast piles or drilled piers will provide an economical and suitable building support system. Removing the uncontrolled fill and replacing it With an engineered, structural fill pad is an alternative to using a deep foundation system. Because of uncertainties in the consistency of the fill, -there are risks* that cannot be quantified associated with constructing pavements" over the existing. fill. Therefore, the existing fill soils should also be removed from pavement areas and replaced with structural fill. Much� of the. existing fill soils observed at. the site will not be suitable for reuse as structural fill' because of excessive organic material -And debris. The native silty sands, silts, and clays are moisture sensitive and will be difficult to compact as structural fill when,too Wet. The ability to use the soils from site excavation as structural fill will depend on the soils' moisture content and the prevailing weather conditions at the time of construction. If grading. activities will take place during the winter season, the owner should be prepared to import free- drainitig'grapular material for use as structural fill and backfill. The following recommendation's should.be incorporated into the project design drawings And construction specifications. These recommendations are preliminary and may be altered or augmented upon review of the final plans. 5.2' Site Preparation and Gradin2 To prepare the site for, construction, all vegetation,,organic surface soils, and other unsuitable materials including the existing fills'should be stripped and removed from the portions 'of the site to be developed. Once clearing and. grubbing operations are complete, cuts and fills can be made to establish design grades. Prior 9 to placing, fill, we recommend proofrolling all exposed surfaces to, determine if any isolated soft and yiel.dig Areas are;pfesent. . . Cut areas that, Will provide direct support for new constructiob.should also be proofrolled. It excessively yielding areas are 'observed -and cannot be stabilized in place b compaction, they should be cut to a 'Y firm bearing surface and filled to grade with structural fill. If the depth of excavation to. remove unstable soils is excessive, you can consider using a'geotextile- fabric, such. as,Mirafi 50OX or equivalent, in copi unction � with - sti-uctural. fill to limit the depth of removal. . hr general, a minimum of 18 inches of a clean granular structural fill placed,over..the.geotextile fabric should establish.a stable bearing surface. A representative of Terra Associates, Inc., should observe all- proofrbllin 6 erations at the time of construction to verify stable subgrades. �g op Excavations up to about 20 f�et below the existing ground surface are proposed along the northern side of Pine Street in the southern portion of the. site. Based on � our observations, and -considering the. time of- year �our inyestigatio.n was performed, � it Aoes not. appear that significant drainage efforts will be'required to corrlplete� the excavation as proposed. - However, this should be. verified by field. observations at the time. of construction. -Page No., 6 November 21, 2001 Project No. T-4893 Most of the granular site soils contain a moderate percentage of fines (silt and clay particles), which will make them sensitive to moisture. The' use of silt and clay soils as structural fill may be possible during dry weather. However, it will be extremely difficult to control their moisture content and to,place and compact them satisfactorily. Some of the site soils are wet and will require drying to reduce their moisture content and facilitate compaction.. Drying can be accomplished by aeration during dry weather conditions or by the use of an additive such as cement kiln dust or Portland cement. If fill activities must take place during wet weather or on, a wet subgrade, the owner should. be prepared to use wet weather structural fill. For this purpose, we recommend using a granular soil that meets the following grading requirements: U.S. Sieve Size Percent Passing 3 inches 100 No. 4 75 maximum No. 200 5 maximum* *Based o n the 3/4-inch ftaction. q Prior to- use* Terra Associates, Inc. should examine and test all on -site or i orted materials proposed for use as mp structural fill. Structural fill should be placed in uniform loose layers not exceeding 12 inches,and.thien compacted to a minimum of -95 percent of the soil's maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM Test Designation D-698 (Standard: Proctor). The. moisture content of the soil at the time. of compaction. should be Within two percent of its optimum, as determined by this same standard. In non-structural areas or for backfill in utility trenches below a depth of 4 feet, the degree of compaction could be reduced to 90 percent. Embankment fills placed on slopes -exceeding a grade of 20 percent must be. keyed and benched into competent native soils.'A general slope fill detail. is shown on.Figure 3. -Subsurface drains ma alsoberequired. The need for y subsurface drains shbu Id be evaluated in the field at the time of construction. The proposed fill areas should be stripped of topsoil, duff, existing fill soils, and soils. containing organic materialpriot to creating horizontal benches. forthe -placement of the'fill. 'All pernParien"t, cut and fill slopes should be graded with a finished inclination no greate6han1l. Upon completion of grading, the, slope fAce should. be appropriately vegetated or �provided- with other physical means to guard against erosion, Final grades at the top of the slope must promote surface'drainage away from the slope crest. 5.3 Eicav'ations All excavations. at -the site associated.- with confined spaces, such as -utility trenches and lower building levels, must be completed inaccordance with local,. State,,or Federal requirements. Based on current 06cup'ational Safety'and- Health Ad . ministration (QSHA) regulations, theupper medium dense to. dense granular soils would. be classified isPrOup C.soils. The very dense silt and hard clay soils fall into the Group, A category. Page No. 7 November 21, 2001 Project No. T-4893 Accordingly, for temporary excavations more than 4 feet and less than 20 feet deep, side slopes in Group C soils should be - laid: back at a. minimum slope inclination of 1.5: 1. Temporary slopes in'tbe, Group A soils can be completed with a gradient of 0.75: 1. 'If there is insufficient room to complete the excavations.in this manher, or -if excavations greater than.20 feet deep are planned, temporary shoring may need to be. used to support, the excavations. The above information is provided solely for the benefit ofthe' owner and other design consultants - and should not be -construed to imply that Terra Associates, Inc. assumes responsibility for job 'site safety. Job site safety is the sole responsibility of the project contractor. Based on the grading information provided to us, it appe ars that portion . s of the ternporar - y excavation along the northern'side of Pine Street will require shoring'. We recommendusing a cantilevered soldier -pile and timber lagging shoring system. We will provide design parameters for temporary shoring once more details are known regardin& final site grading. .5.4 Foundations Spread footings The buildin s ma be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on competent native soils or .9 y on structural fill,placed above competent native soils, as recommended in the Site Preparation and Grading section of, this report. Perimeter foundations should be placed at least 1.5 feet below final exterior grades for frost protection. Interior foundations can be constructedAt any convenient depth. On a'preliminary basis, foundation's can be dimensioned for a net allowable, bearing capacity of 3,000 pounds per squAre foot (psf) where supported by the medium dense to dense native soils and compacted structural fill. F ound I ations s . upported by the very dense silt and hard clay soils can be dimensioned for a. net allowable bearing capacity of 5,000 psf. For short-term loads, such as wind and seismic, a one-third increase. in this allowable capacity can be used. With structural lo�dinjz as anticipated and these -bearing stresses applied,, estimated total settlements, Are about one i 'half to. thre�-fburth inches differential in natui e*. . These settlements should be immediate in nature, inch, with one - occurring during and'shortly following application of building loads. For designing', foundations to resist lateral loads� a base friction. coefficient of 0.4 Can be used. Passive earth d orti ' -of the foundation stem. wd I an also'be considered. -pressures acting on thelside, of the. footing andburie p . on c we recommend calculating this lateral resistance- using an equivalent"Tuid -*eighf of 300 -.pounds per, cubic foot (pcf). We �recommend not including the iipper 12 inches of soil in this computation because it can be -affected.by. e y e weathei.or disturb d:b' Atur grading activity. This value assuines the foundation will be constructed neat against 'competent- native -soil or backfilled with gtr'uttural fill, as described in the Site Preparation and Gradin 9 The recommended friction and passive values include a safety factor of L5. section of this report. Page No. 8. November 21, 2001 Project No. T-4893 Drilled Piles Where footing elevations cannot be readily lowered,to the competent native soil, we recommend supporting building, wall, and floor loads, on augercast piles -or drilled pier foundations that penetrate a minimum of five feet into the native bearing stratum. Allowable axial and lateral pile capacities for.varying pile diameters are as follows: -Pile Diameter (inches) Allowable Axial Load (tons) Allowable Lateral Load (tons) 16 30 4 18 35 5 The above allowable,axial capacities include a safety factor of 2.0. Full single-�pile capacities can be used, provided pile spacing is at least three pile dianieters. For closer spacing, 'there will be a slight reduction 'in the allowable single -pile capacity due to group effects. The amount of this reduction will depend on the number of piles in the grouping and their spacing. We anticipate that settlements under the pile foundations will be less than one-fourth inch. For augercast piles, the pressure used to inject the grout and construct the pile column will compress the soils immediately adjacent to the pile. As a result, the amount of grout needed to form the pile may be gr eater than the theoretical grout volume. 'Also, piles should be constructed at a minimum spacing" of five diameters., Once the grout has achieved its initial set, installation between these locations can be completed. The auger should be extracted slowly and uniformly below a, S'ufficie* nt and consistent head of grout. If the auger is e ' xtracted too quickly, the pile may neck down and soil may collapse into the pile, reducing its structural integrity. At a point along the, injection line,. the piling contractor should use a pressure gauge to monitor the grout pressure during construction. The amount of grout used in'forming the pile should also be monitored. 5.5 . Basement and Retainine Walls ..The magnitude of earth.pressures developing_ on basement or retaining W-alls will depend on the quality and compaction of the -wall backfill. We -recommend placing and compacting wall backfill as structural fill. . Below improved areas, such as pavements or floor slabs' -the backfill should be 'compacted to a: minimum- of 95 percent of its maximum dry unit weight, as determined by American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Designation D-698 (Standard Proctor). In unimproved areas, the relative compaction can be reduced to 90 percent. stalled. Drainage behind basement walls T prevent ydrostatic: pressure development,. wall drainage must be iR can be provided byattaching prefabricated wAll drainage panels, such as Miradrain G10OW, to the,outerside of the wall� or by backfilling the Wall -with a clean granular material, such. as pea gravel. A foundation drain co I nsisti!ig of a -four-inch diameter perforated PVC pipe,'should be., installed �at the base of the wall f6r collection and, removal of the intercepted groundwater. The foundation drain should be surrounded by4t.least'-sLix inches of pea gravel extending two feet above the pipe., All. drains must be routed to -an approved.. point,of controlled., discha.Tgd. - Cleanouts :-should be installed at appropriate and easily 'accessible loc�atiolris. along the drain alignments. 'These cleanouts should be serviced at least once each year. Page No. 9 November 21, 2001 Project No. T4893 With wall backfill placed and compacted as recommended and drainage properly installed, we recommend designing unrestrained walls for an active earth pressure equivalent. to a fluid weighing. 35 pcf. For restrained walls, an additional uniform � lateral pressure of 100 psf should be added. These values assume a horizontal backfill condition and that no other surcharge loading, such as traffic, sloping 'embankments, or adjacent buildings, will act on the wall. If such conditions will exist, then the imposed loading should,be included in the wall design. Friction at the base of foundations andpassive earth pressure will provide resistance to these lateral loads. Values for these parameters are provided in the Foundations section of this report. 5.6 Slab -on -Grade Floors Slab. -on -grade floors may be supported on subgrades prep , ared as recommended in the. Site Preparation and Grading section of this report. hrimediately below the floor slab, we recommend placing a four -inch -thick capillary break layer of clean free -draining sand or gravel having less than three percent passing the No. 200 sieve. This material will reduce the potential for upward capillary movement of water through the underlying soil and subsequent wetting of the- floor slab; Where -moisture by Vapor transmission is undesirable, a durable, plastic membrane should be placed over the capillary break material. The membrane should be covered with two inches of clean moist sand to guard against damage Auring construction and to aid in curing the concrete. 5.7 Draina2e Surface Final exterior.grades should promote free and positive drainage, away from the building areas. We recommend providing a gradient of at least three percent for a minimurn�'distance of ten. fe 6t. from the building perimeter, except in paved locations., In paved locations, a minimum I gradient of one percent should be provided unless provisions are included for.collection and disposal of sur6ce water adjacent to the structure. Surface water must not be. allowed to flow uhcontrolled,.ov'er. the crest of the site slopes embankments'. ,..Surface water.should be directed away from the slope crests to a point of collection and controlled discharge. If site grades do not allow for directing surfdce water away frorn the slopes, then water should be collected and tightlined to the bottom of the slope mia controlled manner. Su&urface We -recommend installing acontinuous drain alon theoutsidelow edge of the perimeteibUilding foundations. 9 .The foundation drains and roof downspouts,should be tightlin6d separately to an. Approved point of controlled discharge. Subsurface drains must be laid,with a gradient sufficient toprornote positive flow to the discharge. point. All drains should be provided4ith cleanouts at easily accmible locations. These cleanouts, should, be serviced at least once each year. Page No. 10 November 21,-2001 Project No. T-4893 5.8 Utilities Utility -pipes should be bedded and-backfilled in accordancewith American Public Works Association (APWA) or City of Edmonds specifications. - Trench backfill should be placed and compacted as structural fill as described in the Site Preparation' and, Grading section of this report. If the granular soils excavated on -site are free of excessive deleterious material or debris, and are not excessively moist, they should be suitable for use as backfill material. The very dense.silt and hard clay will not be suitable for use as backfill. If the slit and/or clay soils are exposed in utility* trench excavations, or construction takes place during periods of wet weather, it may'be necessary to import structural,fill for backfilling purposes. 5.9 Pavements Pavements should be constructed on subgrades prepared as described. in the Site Preparation and Grading section of this report. Regardless of the relative compaction achieved,.the subgrade must be firm and relatively unyielding before paving. Proofrolling the subgrade with heavy construction equipment should be completed to verify this condition. The appropriate thicknesses of the various components of the pavement depend on the subgrade soils and the traffic conditions to which the pavement will be subjected. We expect traffic to mainly consist o f light passenger vehicles with only occasional heavy service vehicles. Based- on this information' and a properly prepared and stable subgrade, we recommend the following pavement sections- 0 Two inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over six inches of crushed rock base (CRB) 0 Two inches of AC overTour inches of asohalt-treated base (ATB) All paving materials should conform to the Washington -State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) specifications for Class � asphalt concrete, ATB, and CRB. Long-term pavement performan . ce- will -depend on surface drainage. A..poorly drained pavement section will,be subject to premature failure as a result of surface water infiltrating into the ;Subgrade soils and reducing their supporting capability. To improve performance, we recommend surface drainage gradients of at least two percent. Some longitudinal and transverse cracking of the pavement surface should be expected over time.. Regular maintenance should be planned to seal cracks when they occur.. 6.0 ADDITIONAL. SERVICES Terra Associates,� Inc. should review the final design and specifications in order to verify that earthwork and foundation recommendations � have been properly interpreted and incorporated into project design .and construction. We should also provide gdotechnic'al, services during construction in� order to observe compliance with the design concepts, 'specifications, and recommendations.'. This -will Also allow for design changes if subsurf�ce conditions -differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. Page No. 1. 1 November 21, 20.01 -Project No. T-4893 7.0 LINUTATIONS We prepared this report in.ac*cordance. with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. This report is the copyrighted property of Terra Associates, hic. and is intended for specific applicatioh.to the UNOCAL Site project.. This report is for t he exclusive use of Triad Point Edwards and their authorized representatives. No other warranty, ekpressed.�or implied,.Is made. The analyses and preliminary recommendations presented in this report- are based upon data obtained from the on -site -test pits. Variations in soil conditions can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident,,Terra Associates, Inc. should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations in this report prior.to proceeding with construction. WTF ph� !�. il - I 'IF a am il, I IT % PK 167TH PL SO ST Sid. 188TH ST SW 189TH Sw WE. FL Sw 90TMH ST SW w R ST *9 0I, 196T I w pW_ MELODY LH PU D p Im BROOKPFERE Lft V EWWM E04OND*S _�ST T ST UNDEWTER Sp E PARK IVA SS BRACKEM 18 9 SIERRA L �z "ING BEADI 'GLEN 24 ST -9 X SPRAGUE zw�6 W PK MA Emms ST Sw r IM/t N ST 1 4 IUYTONI -rA0AWT I PIL Lpt�i I KARIAM S, 23 "W UNION FS E OIL ILLY HOWELI. WY _A!K R4 RD S - w S ITE X4RSH I;,"j, z im M 09 s ST FOWAROS 216 3. PT ST MAKAM �7kj FIR PL rl ST K 26 I"w 30- E CD)LA 221 TH It ST Sw 71 DGWft PL 22 SOUkCE: Thomas Guide, Pierce, King and Snohomish Couinty,11999'. Page 454, NOT M SCALE VICINITY MAP Terra. UNOCALSITE EDMONDS, WASHINGTON A. Inc. w§ociates,. - 77 Geotec hnical Consu . Itants Proj. No. T4893* Date- NOV 209.j. , Figure.- I t;B-132& B P TP -A B-21 SE��l MYY-20 S 2 . . . .. ..... B-228 B-210 �B- 2 TP77 'z� SB-7-23 �B-2 6 -6 2224' 0 SB 4B-23­'5 -22 SB-2 -2�6 lo B SB B-264 n I - TP- cl r LEGEND NOTE: 19 TP-1 APPROXIMATE TEST PIT LOCATION (TERRA) THIS SITEPLAN IS FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES ONLY AND IT SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION OR DESIGN EMCON EXPLORATORY BORING PURPOSES. REFERENCE:. 0 200 400 SITE PLAN P ROVIDED BY TRIAD ASSOCIATES APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET multants Proj. NO. T-48.93 ate NOV 2001 Figure.'2 STRUCTURAL FILL REVERSE SLOPE TO DRAIN 2 B TOE OF NEW SLOP E 6- oo,� 0� 0.� 6' A 6- KEYWAY AND DRAIN (SEE NOTE 1) 1 6' —4 \--TYPICAL SLOPE BENCH (MAY REQUIRE SUBDRAIN IF SEEPAGE CONDITIONS ARE INDICATED) TOE BENCH CUT AND DRAIN (SEE NOTE 1) NOT TO SCALE NOTES: 1 DRAINS SHALL CONSIST OF 6- DIAMETER PERFORATED PVC PIPE ENVELOPED IN I cu. ft. OF WASHtb. 3/4- MINUS DRAINAGE GRAVEL. 2) TOPSOIL REMOVAL THICKNESS BETWEEN KEYWAY AND BENCHES. (IF NECESSARY) —7 VERTICAL ELEVATION DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TOP OF LOWER BENCH BACKCUT AND UPPER BENCH ELEVATION. GENERAL SLOPE FILLOETAIL. Terra UNOCAL SITE Agsociates, Inc. ED . MONDS, WASHINGTON. Geotechnical Consultants.. Proj.No. T-4893 Date NOV 2001' Fig4re, 3 APPENDIX, A FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING UNOCAL Site Edmonds, Washington .On October 18 and 19, 200 1, we performed our field exploration using a track -mounted excavator. We explored subsurface soil conditions at the site by excavating 17 test pits to a maximum depth.of about 16 f�et below .existing surface grades. The test pit'locations are shown on Figure 2. The test.pit locations were approximately determined by pacing from existing surface The Test Pit Logs are presented on Figures A72 through A- -10. An engineering geologist from our office maintained a log of e ach test pit as it was excavated' classified- the soil -conditions . encountered, and obtained representative samples. All soil samples were visually class ified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. A copy. of this classification is. presented As Figure A-1. Representative soil samples obtained from the,test pits were placed in seated plastic bags and takenjo our laboratory for further examination and testing. The moisture content of each.sample was measured and is -reported on the Test Pit Logs. The Att&rberg limits of four samples were determined and are reported on the Test. Pit Logs. Grain size analyses were performed on I I of the samples, the results of which are shown on Figures A- I I through A- 16. MAJOR DIVISIONS LE17ER SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRI PTION Clean GW Well -graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, little or no GRAVELS Gravels fines. (less than GP Poorly -graded gravelsi gravel -sand mixtures, little or a) (O.N More than 5% fines) no fines. rn 50% of coarse fraction is GM Silty gravels, gravel -sand -silt mixtures, non -plastic W > Z. 0 larger than No. Gravels with fines fines. z 0 o E.0 4 sieve GC Clayey gravels, gravel -sand -clay -mixtures, plastic fines. < ir 0 -� C) 0 04 U-) . SANDS Clean Sands SW littl Well -graded sands, gravelly . sands, e or no fines. W U) 0 a Z co (less than SP Poorly -graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no -r- C More than 5% fines) fines. ca T 50% of coarse 0 0 fraction is - Sands sm, Silty sands, sand -silt mixtu - res, non -plastic fines. 0 smaller than SC Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines. No. 4 sieve with fines KAL Inorganic Silts, Lrock fipur, clayey silts with slight co -r_ SILTS AND CLAYS plasticity. CL Inorganic clays of low to Medium plasticity, (lean clay). 0 — C\1 Co. E - 0 (D Liquid limit is less than 50% OL Organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity. in _0 Z.L4. W 0- C U) C) Z < Lo (a (1) .0) MH Inorganic silts, elastic. cc 0 6 10 SILTS AND CLAYS W ca E CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. z 0 Liquid limit is greater than 50% OH Organic clays of high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat. DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS co CO Standard Penetration Density Resistance in Blows/Foot 2" OUTSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT Lu SPOON SAMPLER z 0 Very loose 0-4 2.4" INSIDE DIAMETER -RING SAMPLER Cn - Loose 440 OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER Lu Medium dense 10-30 3: Dense 30-50 Y WATER LEVEL (DATE) .0 Ver.y dense >50 Tr TORVANE READINGS, tsf Pp PENETROMETER READINa tsf Standard Penetration W Consisteric Resistance in Blows/Foot, DID DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot co Very soft 0-2 LL LIQUID LIMIT, percent. W Soft 24 Medium stiff 4-8. PI PLASTIC JNDEX. stiff Very., stiff 8-16 16-32 N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot . Hard >32 Terra, UNIFIED. SOIL. CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM - ' UNOCAL SITE. , - Associates Inc., EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. 7-4893 bate'NOV 20, 1 07 Figu Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth (ft.) 0 FILL: crus 61 10 15 20 Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth (ft.) 0 FILL: cru 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TPw1. Approximate Elev. 104 Moisture Soil Description Content M hed rock surfacing over brown to gray silty sand to sandy Yilltflne grained, firm, moist. (SM/ML) Rusty brown silty SAND fine grained, medium dense, moist, with oocasional,fine \gravel and fine roots. (W) Gray to mottled gray silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense to dense, moist, with occasional fine gravel. - (SM) Becomes light brown at approximately 6 feet. Gray CLAY, hard, moist, massive . (CL) 26 PP 4.5+. tonsfie LL 35 * 8 PI 15. Test pit terminated at 14 feet. No groundwater seepage. Test Pit No. TP-2 Approximate Elev. 124 Moisture Content Soil Description shed rock surfacing over brown silty sand to sandy silt; fine grained, firm, - moist. 4-inch thick organic layer at base. (SM/ML) (Old.toVW1 horizon)' - Brown silty SAND, fine grained,mediurn dense, moist. (SM) Mottled grayish -brown silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense, moist. 20 (Sm.) Grayish -brown silty SAND, fine grained, mediurh dense to dense, moist. (sm) Gray CLAY, hard, moist, laminated with light gray silt partings. (CL)- Pp 4.5+ tonw .37 Test pit terminated at 14 feet. No g ro undwater.seepage. TEST PlT. LOW erra,. ..UNOCAL SITE EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Associates I nc. Geoikhnicai�c'onsultants T 4§69 Date. NOV . 2001 Prof. No. 8 31*, Figure A-2 Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth (ft.) U 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP-3 Approximate Elev. 121 Moisture Content Soil Description M FILL: brown silty sand, fine grained, firm,.moist, with occasional fine gravel and organic material. (SM) (Hydrocarbon odor) Dark brown organic silty SAND, fine grained, soft; moist to wet. (OL) (Old topsoil horizon) 15 Tan to light gray silty CLAY to clayey SILT, hard, moist. -(CUML) (Hydrocarbon odor) . Gray CLAY, hard, moist, laminated with partings of light gray silt and gray - fine sand. (CL) Pp 4.5+ . 32 tonsne - Test pit terminated at 13 feet. Light groundwater seepage from point source at 4.5 feet. Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth (ft.) 0 FILL: light organic I 5 10 15 Test Pit- No. TP-4 Approximate Elev._92 Moisture - Content Soil Description I (%) brown silty sand, fine grained, fir7rn7a—ry to moist. (SM) 2-inch thick ayer at base. (Old topsoil horizon) Light brown to tan silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense to dense, dry.- (SM) Mottled grayish -brown silty SAND, fine grained, medium densib-to dense, 29 moist. (SM) ILL - 42.7 Light grayish -brown to light brown CLAY.and SILT, hard, moist, laminated 29' PI = 19.7 with partings of dark gray fine sand. (CUML) Pp = 4:5+ Gray CLAY, hard, moist. (CL) Pp 4.5+ 29' 1 ionW. Test pit terminated at 13 feet. Trace groundwater seepage at 6 feet. TESTRIT LOGS erra U'NOCAL.SITE- EDMONDS,- WASHINGTON' Associates, nc, Geotechnical Consultants F Prqj-N - 0. T�4893 TDate NOV 2001 Figuire A Logged by: JCS Date: 10/1.8/01 Depth (ft.) 0- 5 10 15 ce Test Pit No.. TP-5 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 110 Moisture Content 6 inches DUFF and TOPSOIL. Light brown SAND with silt to silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense, moist. (SP-SM/SM) 23 Mottled groyish-brown SAND to SAND with s ilt, fine grained, medium dense to dense, moist.'(SP/SP-SM) Becomes wet at approximately 9 feet. 26 34 LL = 44.5 Grayish -brown to gray CLAY, hard,, moist, generally massive, with P1 = 21.3 occasional thin laminations of gray silt. (CL) Pp = 4.5+ tonsW - Test pit terminated at 16 feet. - Light groundwater seepage between 9 and 10 feet., Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth (ft.) 0— P 10 15 I Test Pit. No. TP76 Approximate Elev. 150 Moisture Content .Soil Description I (%) FILL* brown to grayish�brown SILT, CLAY, and fine grained SAND, firrn moist to wet, with some fine gravel and occasional organic material. 32 FILL: gray to brownish gray silt,,clay; add fine grained sand, firm, moist to - wet, with moderate organic material (including. wood debris) and some gravel. 12-inch thick organic layer at base. (Old top soil horizon) Gray silty SAND to sandy SILT,fine grained, denseii moist, with occasional fine to coarse gravel. (SM/MQ (Glacial till -like) - Test pit terminated at 16 feet. - No groundwater,seepage. 20 TEST PIT LOGS Terra UNOCAL 81TE EDMONDS,. WASHINGTON Associates, Ine, Geotechnical Consulftints+ Proj. No. T-4893- Date NOV 2601 Figure.A-4 Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/61 Depth 0- 5 10 15 20 Test, Pit No� TP-7 Approximate Elev. 121, Moisture Content Soil Description M FILL: dark brown organic silty sand, fine grained, firm, moist. Mottled gray to brown SAND with silt to silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense to dense, moist. (SP-SM/SM) (Hydrocart5on odor) 20 Tan* to light grayish -brown silty CLAY to CLAY, hard,.moist, occasional 24 mottling. (CL) PP - 4.5-+: tonsW 31 - Test pit terminated at 15 feet. - No groundwater seepage. Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth (ft.) 0- 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP-8 Approximate Elev. 121 Moisture. Content Soil Description (%) FILL: light brown to gray silty sand, firm, moist to Wet, With organics. FILL: dark brown organic silty sand,. loose, Wet, witK significa t wood debris (timbers and branches). 2.5-foot diameter boulder. Gray SILT to SILT witti sand, fine grained,. dense, moist to Wet. (ML) 25 - Light grayish-brown'to tan sandy SILT, fine.grained, very dense, moist, with occasional. fin& gravel. (ML) (Glacial till -like) 16 Test.. pit terminated at 15 feet. Light groundwater seepage at, 6 feet. 20 TEST, PIT LOGS Terra UNOCAL SITE 'EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Associates,. Inc. Gebtec.hOical. Consultants -48 No. T .93 15�te NOV 2001.1 gure A Test Pit No.. TP-9 Log �ejd %,ICS Approximate Elev. 1-50 Date 011 01. Depth Moisture Content (ft.) Soil Description N U 5 110 15 20 Test Pit No. TP-1 0 Logged by: JCS Approximate Elev. 157 Date: 10/18/01 Depth Moisture Content Soil Description N FILL: crushed rock surfacing over grayish -brown sandy silt and clay, firm, moist. 6-inch thick organic. layer at base.. (Old topsoil horizon) Mottled grayish -brown sandy SILT to sandy CLAY, stiff rnoist. (MUCL) Pp 4.5+ 30 tons/te 37 Grayish -brown CLAY, hard, moist, massive., (CH) LL = 58.8 P1 = 30.1 Gray SILT and CLAY, hard, moist, with occasional laminations of gray fine sand.. (MUCL) 22 Pp = 4.5+ torwiv Test pit terminated at. 15 feet. No.groundwater seepage. 6 inches DUFF and TOPSOIL. Brown sandy SILT, fine grained, medium dense, moist. (ML) 40 Grayish -brown SILT and CLAY,' hard; moist'. (MUCL) Pp 4.5+ tonsfie 34 .-Gray'SILT and+CLAYhard,moist. (MUCL) - Test pit terminated'at 15 feet. No groundwater seepage. r_ V S TEST PIT LOG Terea UNOCAL SITE EDMONDSV WASHINGTON Associatesln' C.+ Ge.otec.hnical-Co.ris.ul.ta.n.ts P -4893TDate,:N0V,20'0jT -6++ roj No. T Figure A. Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth (ft.) 0- - Mottled 10 15 Test Pit No. TP-1 1 Approximate Elev. 78 Moisture Soil Description Content grayish -brown SAND to SAND with sift, fine grained, medium dense, moist to wet. (SP/SP-SM) 25 15 Ught brown silty SAND to sandy SILT, fine grained, medium dense to dense, moist.-'(SM/ML) Increasing silt with depth. 15 22 - Test pit terminated at 15 feet. - No. groundwater seepage.' .20 Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth 0 R 10 15 Test Pit No. TP-1 2 Approximate Elev. 76 Moisture - Soil Description Content nc es crushed rock surfacing. Mottled gara ish-brown SAND, fine to mediumgrained, medium dense, moist, with n n occasio hegravel. (SP) (Hydrocarbon odor) Gray: SAND Withsilt to -SAND, finegrained, medium dense to -dense, 17 moist to wet, with occasional fine Wcoarse gravel. (SP-SM/SP) 15 Mottled grayish -brown silty SAND with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, 7 fine sand, fine gravel, dense to very dense, moist. (SM/ML) - (Glacial till -like between 8.and 10 feet) Increasing gravel with. depth. 20 Test pit terminated at 15Jeet. Trace -groundwater seepage, at 8 feet. - 20 TEST -PIT LOGS Te'r r ca UNOCAL SITE ..EDMONbs, WASHINGTON Associates, Inc., Geot6chnical Cbnsultants :Prbj.- No. T-4898 Date NOV 2001 [Figure A-7 Log �ed %,ICS Date .1011 01 Depth (ft.) 0— . 12 inche 5 10 15 20 Test Pit No. TP-1 3 Approximate Elev. 86 Moisture Soil Description Content s crushed rock surfacing. Mottled grayish -brown silty SAND to sandy SILT, very dense, moist. (SM/ML) (Hy rocarbon odor) .25 31 Bluish -gray CLAY, hard, moist, with partings of gray fine sand and light gray silt. (CL) PP 4.r>+ tonsH Test pit terminated at 14 feet. Trace groundwater seepage at 2.5 feet. Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth .0 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP-1 4 Approximate Elev. 76 Moisture Content Soil Description (%) - - FILL: bluish -gray silty sand with gravel to sandy silt with gravel, fine sand, fine gravel, medium dense to dense, moist. (SM/ML) 10 Light brown sandy SILT, fine grained, dense, moist, with occasional fine gravel and thin layers of fine grained silty sand. (ML) 19 15 test pit terminated at 15 feet. No Orguhdwaterseepage. TEST PIT- LOGS+; Terra, UNOCAL.'SITE EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Associates, Inc. Date NOV 2001-1 Figure.-A-8, GeotechnicAl consultants -4893 No. T. Proi, Log �ejd byjCS Date 011 01 Depth (ft.) 0 FILL: nra 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP-1 5 Approximate Elev. 86 Moisture Soil Description Content y sil sand to sandy silt, fine grained, medium dense, moist, wi th occasional It fine gravel. ( MIMIL) Dark brown organic sandy SILT, fine grained, firm, moist, with occasional roots. (OL) (Old soil hoNzon) Mottled grayish -brown silty SAND with gravel to SAND with silt and gravel, fine sand, fine to coarse gravel, medium dense to dense, moist. 10. (SWSP-SM) Becomes brownish -gray and moist to wet at approximately 8 feet. Brownish -gray silty SAND with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, fine sand, fine, gravel, dense, moist. (SM/MQ ( Glacial till -like) 18 Test pit terminated at 15 feet. Trace groundwater seepage at 11 feet. 20 Logged by: JCS Date: 10/18/01 Depth I . (ft.) 0- 15 Test Pit No. TP-1 6 Approximate Elev. 68 Moisture Content Soil Description (%) ' FILL- gray to brown silty sand with gravel, fine grained, firm to loose, moist to wet. (SM) FILL: grayish -brown silty sand with gravel, fine grained, firmi moist to wet, with signihcant organic soils and wood debris. 23 .16 -,"Bluish-graysil SAND with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, fine sand, fine gravel, dense, rno1St.WM/MQ (Glacial till -like) Light brown SAND, fine,grain6d. medium dense to dense. moist. (SPI 15 Test pit terminated at 13 feet. No groundwater seepage. V TEST PIT LOGS, Terra UNOCAL SITE EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Associates, Inc. Geotechnical Consultant No. T-4893 Date NOV 2001 Figure k-9 Test Pit No. TP-1 7 Log �ejd by: JCS Approximate Elev. 82 Date 0118/01 Depth Moisture Content Soil Descripti o*n 0— - brown silty SAND with gravel, fine sand, fine to coarse gravel, =m dense. moist. (SM) - Motd%grean 1, OSIA r-a—v7eji—ne sand, fine to coarse gravel, d Ysish-brown sil e m st�l) with g medi to dense; (SM) 13 Grayish -brown silty SAND with gravel to sandy SILT with gravel, fine sand, 5— fine to coarse gravel, dense to very dense, moist. (SWML) - (Glacial till -like) Sand content increases with depth. 10- - Test pit terminated at 9.5 feet. - No groundwater seepage. 15- 20 Terra TEST PIT LOGS UNOCAL'SITE Associates, Inc. EDMONDS, -WASHINGTON. Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. T-4893. Date' KOV -206 1 Fig'u're A-�l 0'