The URL can be used to link to this page

20020425.pdfDATA E RECEIVED PERMIT EXPIRES]) `may c p��'q / CITY OF EDMONDS ZONE I\- NUM®EIi CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION JOB SUITE/APT# ADDRESS i h Il.. )WIVES 1� � 1 � r NAMEINME OF DUSINESS V A.) PLAT NAME/SUBDIOSION NO. LOT LID NO. IV G RAILING ADDRESS LID FEE S PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MP TESCP Acp . a eevUve PPrt�nn Paq'O NTY ZIPp TE/LE/P�HjONE EXISTING PROPOSED IImpececa AN sa �e2. 7P•"�`(O 7�� l d0 v A.weae ` � REQUIRED DEDICATION FT a Wrengra O METER�Bill �JAc.K NE SIZE NO.OF FIXTURES f EONOECI 14 t cK 5 St�EL�C t YESR y3f','(i 10 E53 n .rsV., A ' REMARKS ' �I /•`. ft 1 vd rJ, 1 I 1 k { /I i( '� py� 1 OWNER/CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FO OSION CONTROL/DRAINAGE i • �o (/�/ �Y rl VC:i t� I/�•�+ v p�,� pVµp Ta 5P-33.Gd4 tilvi<IL e 311P T425E- Z9o-�54S I`vU I FIRE REVIEWED B� DATECa-%yj'�zSTATE T.X— LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE C ED BY VARIANCEOR CU SHORELINE OR ADS# INSPECTION IV /,yyyfffOYv• p�CCO�.UBUT PPAR EELL NO SEPA flEV1EW COMPLETE EXEMPT SIGN AREAPROPEgT�'TA�j( ALLOWED PROPOaED ALLOWED '.?(7 fi%(�y'—CJ.�I,,L/—•—V EXP ✓ i NEW O[{� RESIDENTIAL ` 'V/1 /PLUMBING / NEC.LOT COVERAGE ALLOWED PROPOSED REQUIRED SE:ACKG (FT FRONT SIDE RnEAy ROPOSED SET FROM US S! ADDITION %� COMMERCIAL r'd/ /❑ OR GD 60 / lO'`j/ ��'��+%•�,, ❑ ❑ CHANGECOMPLIANCE F USE / • ❑ REMODEL ❑ APARTMENT ❑ SIGN PARKING D PROVIDED LOT AREA I PLANNING REVIEWED BY .OAT /1 �. / p ❑ ONGS ❑ ;ENCE REPAIR X FI)AR ! ,—, kE �_ OTHER ❑ DEMOLISH ❑ TANK ❑ ARAGE AINING WALL AflPORT ❑ RENEWAL OCKEBY E OF USE, BUSINEGS OR ACT N: p CHECKED BY TYPE CTION OCCUPANT GROUP G NUMBER BE Z NUMBER OF DWELLING. CRITICAL p'-� AREAS .. / SPECIAL IN P TOR'> FA' OCCUPANT O STORIES UNITS NUMSER V REDUIRED YES LOAD DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE REO' i Q fl it _) S VALUATION $. 6U.1 ,y-;� P Description I FEE 41// Plan Check I tom-IY2 1. Mechanical jG t THIS PERMAUTHORIZES ONLtl THE WORK NOTED. THIS PGRMR COVERS WORK TO BE GONE ON P... PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLID Grading Recording F88 DOMAIN {CURBS,SIOEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS , MARQUEES, ETC.) WILLHEOUIRB t SEPARIITEPERMISSIOH. �.- a tee BAYS PE-PRVID Engr. Review � �! City Surcharge _ A. 0WORK 1000AYS PERMRUEEBACK YEAR OF PINKPER WORK MORE INFORMATION SEE BACK OF PINK PERMS FOR MORE INFORMATION EngL Inspection �,%Gy State Surcharge a� 'APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE, HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESORS Traffic Mitigation Plan Chk Deposit I,v IN INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF "—"""-- Receipt # / EDMONDS, W1111INGTON, ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGINTS FROM ANY AND A L CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES F WHATEVER NATURE. ARISING Y Oki RECTLY Fire eview nspection 9 THIS ONNOT DEEMEDFROM ? MODIIFY, WAIVE OR REDUCE RANYLCITY ANCE Fire otalA OUnt DU e i ARMIT NY REQUIREMENT ORERMIT NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAY THE C17YS ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION.' Landscape insp. Receipt # / G VENS COME VAUTHORIZED E KRRECT, AND THAT I NOWLEDGE THAT I VE READ THIS APPLICATION; INFORMATIONT THE T OWNER, OR THE DU AGENT OF APPLICATION APPROVAL THE OWNER. I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC. CALL This application Is not a permit will signed by the TION; AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHNGTON RELATING TO WORKMEN'S SATION INSURANCE AND RC1V 1327. W M FOR INSPECTION BVliding 0111clal or Mather Barely: and Fees are paid, a receipt in acknowledged in apace provided. (OW E R AGENT) DA�T^)E STONED (ARC) OFF IAL ; j / EEE J 771'OYLL� 0 ELEASED BY DATE ATTENTION EXT 1333 -, IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL -'-A 771-0221 �� f FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTIFI- TE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC 109 ORIGINAIFILE vELLowNSP crow SECTION FAX PINK . OWNER GOLD - ASSESSOR D z o w n m I C IT! M0 z oC mZ 1 7a DZ A a MM 0� r C c M 9 I rn- - I rPi XI 1 S D lit Z DO 0 i O m cr -` Y COPY P-U G le-, ,-"-_2LeS,/(t2�j j--fv-;�i t- CALCULATION: HEIGHT v�/� CIS i 2cr7 40, exceeG( A = 181.6 D =181.2 C = 188.3 D = 189.3 AVERAGE HEIGHT = 185.1 MAX. ALLOWABLE HIGHT= 210.1 ACTUAL DESIGN HEIGHT = 209.75 1 IN 67'05'0!' IN _L _ 196.§6' i ! y _ _ . .. PP r. O r wd, LetT , . fix% [9Ii.YlI I / 59(. ,_ Am 1' COxt. - 1 1 I 1 , i WL If r If tl am (( / MR" i i / I •% r i 1 i . . ; r — — [zsrxe emxu.r f a —%— X�--J%—%J— XI —t—%——ix 210.N 6T0500' —%—i—%—XT%— T-- r T" Wi T---T"—_\_-- RWt ROdMC [VL AIE1Wt db' , � 1 , \\ aeinsa[�s[mrtacr � , ! t t i \\ aaaaxi F/nmta�00.ACnuixa CIMAR j - / ! - 1 I 1 v� pp�it AfOF90MCWM6ttl � Elizabeth Nelson Resilience at 18318 Olvmnic View Drive APPROVED BY PLANNING . T r } WATER & SEWER INSPECTIONS REQ'D CALL IW71-=2 EXT'.1326 T i9 .' .. . E. . TEMRORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE REQUIRED DEVELOPMENT ITY C)F e ; IIAPERNOUS SURFACE CALCULATIONS: BUILDING HEIGHT O ER/�Y ` C7� IS �� QNSI �� EXISiiAD BUILDING ROOF ARE' 2070 S.F. (CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO 1962) CALCULATION: EROSION CONTRL�. AND DRAINAGE 09511NG COVERED PORCH: 6 S.F. (CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO 1962) A iM9i - EI0571NG QRIVEIYAY & GARAGE. 276 Sr, (CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO 1962) B = TDLO DISDNG PATIO/SIDEWALK'. 140 S.F. (CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO 1962) C = 188.3 TOTAL AREA. 2,486 S.E MADE T89.0 E AVERAGE HEIGHT = 184.95 GUTTERSOOWNSPOUTS PROPOSED RESIDENCE 8: GARAGE: 2,010 S.F. IIAX ALLOWABLE HIGHT = 209.95 TO CONNECT TO EXIST. SYST. PROPOSED DRIVEWAY: 1,360 SF. ACTUAL DESIGN HEIGHT = 209.83 PROPOSED DECK 8 STEPS' - 245 S.F. TOTAL ARE' 3,615 S.F. LOT ,OVERAGE 2,255 SF. r' LET AR�k `� 14,040 Sf. a SCALE: t" = 30' MIRAGE LET SLOPE, 140; (BUILDING AREA) l 1 y'E f EI SRDTP SWCi�, i l i'i IM/ �' ,YA ' ----r ' / 9• A!) IBIVY � ): ji, i � tN �YVA.�. iWt TG �(tA i PROVED A` td0 ELi i G 9 ` Date: 3 �r 8 �l f �[ sow S t L�rvl Gi ,-SGQLc ; % = 30 LI-Z � r 1, 1 APPROVED BY PLANNING IAIPERNDUS SURFACE CALCULAitON& BUILDING NgGN7 - - ;"� DOSTRTG BU tMG ROOF AREA: Z070 BY. (CONSTRUCTED MBOR T01962) CALCULATIUN: . EDSDNG COVERED PORCH:. 0 S.F. (CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO 1962) A . 16,.5 - �7 COSIDM. DMAY 3 GARA6F: 276 SF. (CONSTRUCTED M00R TO 1962) D m 161.0 /C• a DIS70M, PAlTQ/t WAtR; 140 SF. (CONSTRUCTED MOOR TO 1962) C • 16&3 TOiAI AREA Z486 SF. ry ' ANEMIC IIUOIT . 184.95 V, ' DEgcLOPMEN T SEM''iCES GTR. (�`\�V r �4.5 MPMM RESIDENCE A MACE 2A10 SF: WX ALLOWABLE HIGHT = 2092 CITY OF EDIAONOS MPM DRIVEWAY. 1,MO SF• ACTUAL DESO7 MGHT 209.83 , . .a1+ ♦/. PRO'M MIT A: SHPS; 245 SF TOTAL AREA, 3,615 SF. LOT C014RACE Z256 S. (16.1%) ^ A LOT AREA: 14,040 ST. - - S SCALE: f = 36 ! , ! A14 4 LOT 9.Ok 14.0% (EAMG AREA) - i "ROOF Asa ® a '10.00;w� PxmpsED ;- su. i v jOz, P OPOSE r: LOM � i i tIS g�M t i it JJai r , c t -- ----- 7�,-aa J: �zlii� ae�m}i RDOF� a ' IX CONC. REEARONG WALL TO RENAK CMTRACTOR NO CONTACT SMC GROW W PRIDE TO MAOU MN GWGE STRUCTURE TO VMY WALL COM TION AND FDODNG LOIENSON. CC.IZ-s4i3E-r� lVE1.SOJ�J �>v�J��NC� ! i 'OUG-09-2001 THU 04:47 PM 4 FAX NO, 425 827 5424 P, 01 Associated Earth Sciences, Inc, August 9, 2001; project No. fi1301 369A t. Ms. Elizabeth Nelson P.O. Box 404 r,1 pabnouds, Washington 98020.0404 11 E" Sel jest: Nelson Residence 18318 Olympic View Drive O Edmonds, Washington to ; .. �: licnrMs. Nelson: N�,. 1. As requested, Associ.•tred Garth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) has reviewed the subject geotechnicat report for am this project, This report was dated May 28, 1998 and was prepared by Geo Group Northwest, Inc. -4 i In genurnl, AGSI agrees with the findings and recommendations outlined in the GGN report. As " to dl=fised in ArSI's letter dated June 15, 2001, we recommend that the west portion of the new C a rusirlenco foundation may be situated on deepened spread footings. The augereast piling recommended p iu the Goo Group Northwest, Ina sport may therefore be eliminated. It you have any questions concerning this letter, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely ANSOi.'fATED IiARTJJ SCIENCES, INC. Kirklu on m t c? Bzk o�Jr o� was�,tic 8 Y AZ' ppv@itl (yam] PY1 ee% ® f V ' iYco �S7phAL�tc' p�Cl�ll�' {{ u•ra Si3oK RECEIVED .Senior Associate Engineer AUG 10 2001 cc: North Sound Drafting and Designi ['Ei�DAiT CJi:!vTktti . a1'22'2065i Sw } Urnonds, Waeehingion 98026 Attention: Kathi St. peter r pax: 425.714-6416 - Corporate O{Ace • 911 fifth twenue,5uite IDD • KirldandWA.98033 • Phona 425 8291'Pltll'• YMSatR$iV1Wt111A1- wtt i " .. Wert Sound C8&c • 179 Madrone Line North • BalnMidge Island, WA 981 to • Pnom 206 7W9370.7aY 206 7609418 r� Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ` 6 June 15, 2001 Project No. KE01369A JUN 2 2 2001 I z, r Ms. Elizabeth Nelson P.O. Box 4tkt PERMIT COUNTER I O � n Edmonds, Washington 98020-0404 m Subject: Proposed Foundation Recommendations in 18318 Olympic View Drive 10 Edmonds, Washington , 0 O Dear Ms. Nelson: Z . 1 Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) has completed a review of the geotechnical report �. 0 completed for the subject site. This report was titled "Geotechnicai Engineering Study, �. Proposed -Single Family Residence, 18318 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, Washington"- as prepared by Geo Group Northwest, Inc. and dated May 28', 1998, o 35 { Three 'exploration borings were drilled in conjunction with the report cited above. These . o borings encountered suitable bearing soils at relatively shallow depths in borings B-1 and B-3. However, on the west side of the property, boring B-2 encountered approximately 4.5 feet of j U�an { fill soil. No ground water was encountered during the field study. 1 Based on our review of the information contained in the May 1998 report, it is our opinion that the entire house may be supported on standard spread footings. On the west side of the house, the footings will have to be deepened to extend to the dense soil encountered at approximately Z 7 feet. By extending the footings to the dense, natural soils at this depth, the use of augercast 0 piles can be eliminated. It should be noted that the area bounded by lines extending downward at a 1H:1V V`- (Horizontal:Vertical) inclination from any footing must not intersect another footing or intersect a filled area that has not been compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D 1557. In addition, a 1.5H:IV line extending down from any footing must not daylight because sloughing or raveling may eventually undermine the footing. Thus, footings should not be placed near the edge of steps or cuts in the bearing soils. Corporate Office • 911 Filth Avenue, Suite 100 -Kirkland, WA 98033 • Phone 925 827-7701 -Fax 425 827-5424 Wert Sound Once • 179 Madrone Lane North • Bainbridge Island, WA 98110 • Phone 206 780-9370 • Fax 206 780.9438 I I All footing areas should.be inspected by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc, prior to placing concrete to verify that the design bearing capacity of the soils has been attained and that construction conforms with the recommendations contained in this letter and the May 1998; areport prepared by Geo Group Northwest, Inc. The governing municipality may require such . inspections. z, We have enjoyed working with you on this study and trust this letter will meet your current u needs. If you have any questions; or require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely z, Off, r, .ASSOCIATED EARTHSCIENCES, INC: Kirkland, Washington m l s _ a m a i . C WASp1/qC�O� C`, 268 ' I V"gES 5 131'U�1- d/l - n, Melissa A. Magn on, P.E. Bruce L. Blyton, P.E. Diu Senior Staff Engineer Senior Associate Engineer A n vi, . .. - Z 0� %r m; I r. t, 1�Anwp KED1369A1 ft D.%WPbp\6-01 - W2K 2. � + Gcofechnicai Engineers,Geologists �Y oup Northwest, Inc. i Group �.J 1 'L8 1 \ 1 i.lY ♦7 bti7 lil.• & EnvlronmeNoi Sclonfisis t' ®. i March 5, 2001 G-0907 r" Ms. Elizabeth Nelson Z P.O. Box 404 0 i i Edmonds, WA 98020 0: m: 3 i SUBJECT: CORRECTION TO CROSS-SECTION A -A' m GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY RECEIVED cff S. PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE II o 1- { 18318 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE ,JUN 2 2 2001 O c f EDMONDS, WASHINGTON PERMIT COUNTER K m In Dear Ms. Nelson: We have prepared this letter and the attached Plate 3 - Cross Section A -A' to document the 0 n h; correction to our report dated May.28, 1998 and titled "Geotechnical Engineering Study, Proposed Single Family Residence, 18318 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, Washington."m m The original Plate 3 - Cross Section A -A', dated 5/6/98, incorrectly presented the depth to the dense O y gravelly SAND as 14 feet at boring B-2. On the attached and corrected plate we have indicated the m depth to the gravelly SAND at boring B-2 was 7 feet below the ground surface. Please incorporate this correction letter and attached plate into the original report and accept our apology for the n � inconvenience. i i Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call at (425) 649-8757._[ z, Sincerely, O GEO GROUP NORTHWEST, INC. m 14� Adam Gaston William Chang, P.E. A' Staff Engineer Principal attachment: Plate 3 - Cross Section A -A', 3/5/01 " 13240 NE.20th Street, Suite 12 "• Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone 425/649.8757 • fA`<425/649.8758 - " o a -73 r LA y tip III �IIIS d -, U 1n Wq H � — c py E l-) td b lt o oq`. �opo pN w L f y GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY _ PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 18318 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE EDMONDS, WASHINGTON G-0907 Prepared for Ms. Elizabeth Nelson c/o Mr. Galen D. Holmquist Paradise Construction, Inc. 23632 Highway 99, F-11 Edmonds, WA 98026 7 May 28, 1998 j i Geo Group Northwest, Inc. j 13240 NE 20th Street, Suite 12 R E C E I V E CO Bellevue, WA 98005 Phone: (425) 649-8757 SEP 2 9 2(100 PERM11 COUNTER 1 L c m. m 10 OC: '. m p DZ 1 Oy c Fni% U; Z & ;i r Z �4 O m ® Gr®u�T®��g IncGeotechnicel Engineers,Geologists Hp &Environmeniel SclenOsts k-, q,� l� a My 28, 1998 G-0907 ,- i Ms. Elizabeth Nelson c/o Mr. Galen D. Holmquist Paradise Construction, Inc. Z 23632 Highway 99, F-11 n' Edmonds, WA 98026 !TI' .a -n rn SUBJECT: Geotechnical Engineering Study Inin t Proposed Single Family Residence '� 0 18318 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington m I" cZ 0 Dear Mr. Holmquist: -n j { We are pleased to submit the report entitled "Geotechnical Engineering Study, Proposed Single mm i Family Residence, 18318 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, Washington." This report presents the - 0 m results of our site exploration, engineering analyses and our conclusions and recommendations for m Co { steep slope setbacks, earthwork, drainage, foundations and retaining wall design parameters. Z We understand that the existing one story house with a daylight basement at 18318 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, WA will be demolished and replaced with a two story house. At the time of this Z study. We were provided with an approximate footprint for the new house, as shown on Plate 2 - Site Plan. tn Z o The subject site was explored with three borings on April 7, 1998 in accordance with our proposal m dated Marcti 9, 1998. The subsurface soils encountered in B-1 and B-3 near the east side of the I i existing house consists of 2.5 to 4.5 feet of medium dense SAND with gravel, below which is a very dense gravelly SAND with pebbles and silt. The soils encountered in boring B-2 on the west side of the existing house consists of 7 feet of loose to medium dense soil which is underlain by dense to very dense gravelly SAND with pebbles and some silt. Groundwater was not encountered during drilling. Based on the results of our study, it is our opinion that the proposed single family residence foundations can be supported on conventional spread footing bearing on the very dense native soil. Due to the existence of loose soils up to 7 feet encountered in B-2, the western half of the proposed 13240 NE 20th Street, Suite 12 • Bellevue, Washington 98005 I' Phone 425/649-3757 • FAX 4251649.8758 I' i May 28, 1998 G-0907 A. Proposed Single Family Residence Page ii house be supported on a foundation system consisting of augered reinforced concrete piles bearing on the very dense native soil. As an alternative, the entire house could be supported on augered'x concrete piles. The proposed construction will resent a minimal risk ofinstability to the site during P P P P tY g tg i and after the construction, provided the recommendations contained in this report are implemented. S . If you have any questions, please call. 0 3, Sincerely, GEO GROUP NORTHWEST, INC. o m 1?'w sC�9 m o ip K � E�. A William Chang, PE. R 20114 2 —y -. - Principal-'s/oNAL 0 3 EXPIRES 2119t $ m m oy n mo z z O t' i m. j; Geo Group Northwest, Inc. is ■ TABLE OF CONTENTS { JOB NO. G-0907 page t 1.0 INTRODUCTION .......... Is Project i I ect Description..........., ............... i dz, 3 y 1.2 Scop e of Services ............... . .. ............. y 2.0 SITE CONDITIONS .. ... 2 0 2.1 Surface Condition......... Subsurface Conditions ......... ... g . m l 2.2 2.3 Groundwater ................ _'... . ,....... m t, 3.0 SEISMICITY • ... ' .... 3 0 ff m o .. t: 3.1 Seismic history .. • • • • • . • ' ` ' ' ' An t ^ 3,2 Soil Liquefaction Potential .............. • • • m n , IN 7� r, mj. 4.0 BUILDING SETBACK AND BUFFERS .............. . .. 5 N VALUATION ........... .. ....................... 5.0 SLOPE STABILITY E... mrn 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ... 6 orn z' 6.1 General.......... 6.2 Site Preparation and General Earthwork ....... .. 7 am m 6.3 Spread Footing Foundations ............... .. 8 C' 6.4 Augered Concrete Piles ......... 10 t 6,5 Slab -on -Grade Floors ............ .... Permanent Basement & Conventional Retaining Walls .. . ..... .. to 12 z 6.6 6.7 Excavations and Slopes .................. ..: . .... 13 y 6.8 Drainage ............... 13 0 i. 6.8.1 Surface Drainage .. ...:............. 13 �. , 6.8.2 Footing and Walt Drains . • • • • • • • , . • . • • • • . • ; t4 m -' 6.9 Driveway Area ........... 14 7.0 LIMITATIONS ................. . 15 S .............. 8.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES • • • • • • • • • ' ' o-: 1 Geo Group Northwest, Inc. l } �A k c ILLUSTRATIONS 1 a� Plate I - Vicinity Map Plate 2 - Site Plan z�. o.4 I th Plate 3 - Steep Slope Cross Section F': m t Plate 4 - Soil Legend rn, Plate 5 - through 7 Boring Log o m m 0: t, Plate 8 - Typical Basement Wall Backfill & Drainage Details Qn M'm 1 i Plate 4 - Typical Footing Subdrain r�'n I MR , C: M C) i z - Q h m i l Geo Group Northwest, Inc: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 18318 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE N EDMONDS, WASHINGTON G-0907 ' {w. 1.0 INTRODUCTION Z m t ... 1.1 Project Description and Understanding 4 "n The proposed single family residence is located at 18318 Olympic View Driver Edmonds, o in tt� Washington, as shown on Plate I -Vicinity Map. in o �n I Based on our site visits and discussions with you and Ms. Elizabeth Nelson, it is our O C in in K� understanding that the existing one story single family residence with a daylight basement at the A subject site will be demolished and replaced by a two story residence at the subject site. iWe also understand that the City of Edmonds requires a geotechnical study prior to issuing a n z: building permit due to the steep slope and building setback issues. Therefore, the purpose of the m geotechnical engineering study is to define the subsurface soil conditions in order to address slope o N i stability, setbacks from steep slopes, foundation support, lateral earth pressures, drainage and 0 F I earthwork considerations. �ch z 0 At the time of this study, the detail of the new house plan was not available. 1.2 Scope of Services Our scope of the work is outlined in our proposal dated March 9, 1998, and they are: Z 1. Perform a subsurface investigation by drilling 2 soil borings, one at the east and one at the n in west side of the proposed house. The borings will be drilled to a depth of 15 to 30 feet, and soil samples taken every 2.5 feet to detect any zones of weakness in the subsurface soils. The borings will be drilled using a portable drill rig; iI Gen Group Northwest, Inc. May 28, 1998 G-090 Proposed Single Family Residence page 2 2. Collect soil samples to perform laboratory tests and prepare boring logs; 3. Perform engineering analysis to evaluate slope stability, foundations and retaining wall design requirements; 4. Prepare a geotechnical report with the results of the analysis and prepare conclusions and 0 ! 3 recommendations for steep slope setbacks, earthwork, drainage, foundations and retaining wall design parameters. =t - i : C m my 2.0 SITE CONDITIONS 0 2.1 Surface Condition i� m mz A -t r c� The subject property is rectangular in shape and approximately 14,000 square feet in size. It is rn bordered to the east by Olympic View Drive, to the west by the Puget Sound and by two railway o a 5 lines at the bottom of a steep slope, to the north and south by single family houses, I m FI m According to the topographic site plan and our site observation, a steep slope with an average o r inclination of 46 degrees (103 percent slope) and a topographic relief of 100 feet is situated on the Coil 9 CO:o west half of the subject property. The backyard and the proposed building area are relatively flat -Z�, with an average inclination of 7 degrees (12.5 percent slope). Chain link fences were observed at the top of the steep slope and along both sides of the property line on the north and south. The existing one story single family house with a daylight basement is located on the east half of I .. the property with a detached one car garage at the southeast corner of the property at the street p level. -+ m 2.2 Subsurface Conditions According to the geologic map for the area, the site is underlain by Transitional Beds (Qtb) which in turn underlain by Olympia Gravel (Qog). Transitional Beds were deposited during the Fraser Glaciation to Pre -Fraser Glaciation, the glacial and non -glacial deposits consist mostly of massive, thick or thin beds and laminae of medium to dark gray clay, silt, and fine to very fine sand, i Geo Group Northwest, Inc. y i i` May 28, 1998 G-0907, Proposed Single Family Residence Page 3 sr Olympia Gravel was deposited during the Pre -Fraser Glaciation and consist of stratified, fluvial sand and gravel. Gravel is mostly pebble size and is locally oxidized. and weakly cemented so that it stands vertically in fresh exposure. The subsurface investigation was conducted by drilling three exploratory soil borings (B-1, B-2, 0 4 and B-3) on April 7, 1998. The borings were drilled using portable, low -profile hollow -stem auger equipment to a maximum depth of 13.5 feet below ground surface (bgs). The locations of m; j three soil borings are shown on Plate 2 - Site Plan. We estimated the location of our exploration n by using a measuring tape from the existing house. A geotechnical engineer logged the borings 65 ;1 and collected soil samples for further examination and testing at our office. . o mm mo` t' 00 s` The subsurface soils encountered in B-1 and B-3 consist of medium dense brown SAND with y gravel and a trace of silt from 2.5 to 4.5 feet below the ground surface. The medium dense m SAND was underlain by very dense gravelly SAND with pebbles and silt. Both borings were only y z a drilled to 6.5 feet below the ground surface due to the difficulty to drill through the gravel. Boring B-2 was drilled on the west side of the house in the lawn area. The soils encountered in n boring B-2 consists of 7 feet of loose to medium dense soil underlain by dense to very dense mm-' gravelly SAND with pebbles and some silt. 0 n i-n - 4 0 The soils encountered in the borings at the site match those for the Olympia Gravel (Qog) on the o E geologic map.: Z; S 2.3 Groundwater p ` Groundwater was not encountered during drilling. However, the ground water table can fluctuate z j seasonally, depending on rainfall, surface runoff and other factors. m �. i 3.0 SEISMICITY 3.1 Seismic History The project site is located on a bluff facing the Puget Sound and about 10 miles north of Seattle. { Geo Group Northwest, Inc. I' May 28, 1998 G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 4 The greater Seattle area has experienced a number of small to moderate earthquakes and occasionally strong shocks during the brief 155-year historical record in the Pacific Northwest. f The major earthquakes in the region are believed to be associated with deep-seated plate tectonic activity. Major faults within the region have not been active in the Holocene Age (geologic - period dating since the last glacial retreat 14,000 years ago), consequently, they are not known to z O be associated with historical seismicity. n r Via.. Historical records for the region indicate that the Olympia earthquake of April 13, 1949, with a t"K,, . Richter magnitude of 7.1, produced ground -shaking of intensity VIII near its epicenter; and the fn ; Seattle -Tacoma earthquake of April 29, 1965, with a Richter magnitude of 6.5, produced a pm m v ground -shaking of intensity IV to VIII on the Modified Mercalli Scale near its epicenter. This -1 0 level of ground -shaking is estimated to be the maximum that has occurred in the region during the m z 155 years of historic record. -i i C z i- s 3.2 Soil Liquefaction Potential # Although there may be subsurface variations from point to point, we expect the native soil 3 1- @@@ t underlying the subject site consists of dense gravelly SAND. Groundwater was not encountered m m o is • during subsurface investigation. Due to the dense nature of the native soil, it is our opinion that n rn the subsurface soils at the site are not susceptible to liquefaction- m ai 4.0 BUILDING SETBACK & BUFFERS i The City of Edmonds, Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC), Section 2015B, dated; z { August, 1996, sets restrictions on the development of sites with steep slopes (40 percent or z more). The ECDC 20.1513 requires a total building setback of 65 feet from the top of a steep o slope which includes 50 feet of buffer setback and 15 feet of building setback. The total building m setback may be reduced to 25 feet (10 foot nondisturbance vegetative buffer plus 15 foot building setback) if there is a special geotechnical study. Smaller setbacks, or construction on steep slopes requires an exception from a public hearing pursuant to ECDC 20.1000.010 from City of Edmonds. c„ Based on the review of the site plan provided to us, the current plans place the proposed two- Geo Group Northwest, Inc. G-0907 May 29, 1999 Page 5 Proposed Single Family Residence story house at least 25 feet east of top of the steep slope which is in agreement with our recommended 25 foot total building setback (10 foot buffer plus 15 foot building setback), as shown in Plate 2 - Site Plan. For the purposes of this report, provided that the recommendations herein are adhered to, it is our z opinion that the proposed single family house can be located closer than the required 65 feet from O m the top of the steep slope. Building near the top of any steeply sloped hillside always has some inherent risk. However, the 1. co �< risk can be minimized by incorporating a reasonable building setback from the top of the slope, c in mp preventing concentrated surface water runoff from eroding the slope, minimizing disturbance to -1 ; � �. the slope, and maintaining the native vegetation both on the slope and above the slope. To hazards, we recommend incorporating all these items into the C rn in mitigate landslide and erosion design of the subject project. > Z.. 0 in 5.0 SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION � m The subject lot is considered to be a geologic hazard area due to the existence of a greater than �r p I 40 percent steep slope with a topographic relief of 100 feet as shown in Plate 3 -Steep Slope N Cross Section. Based on the subsurface investigation, the undisturbed native soil on the top of the steep slope is A dense gravelly SAND with some pebbles and silt and in our opinion they are not susceptible to deep seated sliding. However, the surficial loose soil or fill may be susceptible to erosion on steep slopes, especially where vegetation is removed. Z o It is our professional opinion that the subject lot is currently stable and will be stable after the In i subject construction. The proposed single family house will present a minimal risk of instability to the adjacent property during or after the construction, provided the recommendations contained herein are implemented. 1 Gen Group Northwest, Inc. May 28, 1998 G-0909 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 6 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 General 1 Based on the results of our study, it is out professional opinion that the site is geotechrkally Z ( suitable for the development of the proposed single family house, and that the proposed house can m; i be supported on conventional spread footing bearing on the very dense native soil. Due to the 7 feet of loose soils encountered in B-2, the western half of the proposed house should be Vi supported on a foundation system consisting of augered reinforced concrete piles bearing on the c m, r ; dense native soils. As an alternative, the entire house could be supported on.augered concrete m piles. o r m Specific recommendations regarding the site development are presented in the following sections. c z 6.2 Site Preparation and General Earthwork -n LD The proposed structure area should be stripped and cleared of surface vegetation and debris from m m_ the demolition of the existing house. Disturbance to the site should be kept to a minimum to o y' prevent erosion. Silt fences should be installed around areas disturbed by construction activity to C prevent sediment -laden surface runoff from being discharged off -site. z 0 All structural fill material used to achieve design site elevations below slabs, sidewalks, driveways, X etc. should meet the requirements for structural fill. Dining wet weather, material to be used as structural fill should have the following specifications: 1. Be free draining, granular material, which contains no more than five (5) percent fines (silt O. and clay -size particles passing the No. 200 mesh sieve); m; 2. Be free of organic and other deleterious substances; 3. Have a maximum size of three (3) inches. All fill material should be placed at or near the optimum moisture content. The optimum moisture content is the water content in soil that enables the soil to be compacted to the highest dry density Geo Group Northwest, Inc, May 28, 1998 G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 7 for a given compaction effort. Due to its silt content, some of the existing loose fill soils are considered to be moisture sensitive } and should not be used as fill material during wet weather conditions. During dry weather, any .' compactable non -organic soil meeting the above maximum size criteria may be used as structural fill, provided the material is near the optimum moisture content for compaction purposes. mi Structural fill should be placed in thin horizontal lifts not exceeding ten inches in loose thickness. 1 t. Structural fill under driveways, patios and sidewalks should be compacted to at least 90 percent o rn of maximum density, with the exception of the upper twelve (12) inches, 'the top twelve (12) m o0 inches should be compacted to at least 95 percent maximum density, as determined by ASTM p c Test Designation D-1557-91 (Modified Proctor). m ! We recommend that Geo Group Northwest, Inc. be retained to evaluate the suitability of 2 structural fill material and to monitor the compaction requirement during construction for quality assurance of the earthwork. .on , 6.3 Spread Footing Foundations mo 0Fn i1 It is our opinion that the eastern half of the house can be supported by conventional spread C CO footings bearing on the dense undisturbed native soils or compacted structural fill bearing on the Z 0 dense undisturbed native soils. The conventional spread footing foundations can be designed as follows:, - Allowable bearing pressure, including all dead and live loads on undisturbed dense gravelly sand = 2,000 psf 0 " on compacted structural fill = 2,000 psf m - Minimum depth to bottom of perimeter footing below adjacent final exterior grade = 18 inches - Minimum depth to bottom of interior footings below top of floor slab = l8 inches Geo Group Northwest, Inc. May 28, 1998 6-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 8' - Minimum width of wall footings = 16 inches - Minimum lateral dimension of column footings = 24 inches - Estimated post -construction settlement = 1/4 inch z S. m - Estimated post -construction differential settlement; across building width = 1/4 inch a5 A one-third increase in the above allowable bearing pressures can be used when considering short- ca -mi 0 term transitory wind or seismic loads. C i mZ Lateral loads can also be resisted by friction between the foundation and the supporting i C z compacted fill subgrade or by passive earth pressure acting on the buried portions of the y foundations. For the latter, the foundations must be poured "neat" against the existing 1 0 -n s undisturbed soil or backfilled with a compacted fill meeting the requirements of structural fill. �. Structural fill requirements can be found in Section 6.2 - Site Preparation and General m M Earthwork. It is our professional opinion that the following parameters can be used: ' r - Passive pressure = 300 pcf equivalent fluid weight 1 0 i - Coefficient of friction = 0.30 6.4 Angered Concrete Piles We recommend that the western half of the proposed house be supported on a foundation system z consisting of augered concrete piles. This recommendation is based on the loose soil conditions encountered in Boring B-2 down to a depth of 7 feet below the ground surface. m` The pile foundation should penetrate through the loose to medium dense zones, with a minimum embedment of five feet into the very dense gravelly SAND below. We estimate that the total length of each pile to be about 12 feet below the ground surface. We recommend that the diameter of the augered hole have a minimum diameter of 14 inches. For E augered reinforced concrete piles of 14 and 16 inches in diameter embedded into very dense Gen Group Northwest, Inc. May 28, 1998 G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 9 gravelly SAND with a minimum of 5 feet embedment, the following allowable bearing capacities may be used: 0 Pile Diameter Pile Embedment Allowable Bearing Allowable Uplift Inches Feet Tons Tons m 14 5 10 5` 'A 5i 16 5 12 6 m = v; c o: . Note: Pile Embedment Length based on the embedment depth below the top of the very. dense mO a p gravelly SAND, m m 10 No reduction in pile capacities is required if the pile spacing is at least three times the pile a Z diameter. A one-third increase in the above allowable pile capacities can be used when considering short-term transitory Co wind or seismic loads. m Lateral loads can also be resisted by using battered piles or by the passive earth pressures acting mm i v Vi on grade beams. To fully mobilize the passive pressure resistance, the grade beams must be c0i r- poured "neat" against compacted fill. Our recommended allowable passive soil pressure for C Ca lateral resistance is 300 pcf equivalent fluid weight. A coefficient of friction of 0.30 maybe used fn between the subgrade and the grade beam. We estimate that the maximum total post -construction settlement should be one -quarter (1/4) inch Z' or less, and the differential settlement across the building width should be one -quarter (1/4) inch N or less. Z O 0 The performance of piles depends on how and to what bearing stratum the piles are installed, Since a completed pile in the ground cannot be observed, it is critical that judgement and experience be used as a basis for determining 1 " the embedment length and acceptability of a pile. Therefore, we recommend that Geo Group Northwest, Inc. be retained to monitor the pile installation operation, collect and interpret installation data and verify suitable bearing stratum. We also suggest that the contractor's equipment and installation procedure be reviewed by Geo Group Northwest, Inc. prior to pile installation to help mitigate problems which may delay work A progress. structural engineer should be retained to"design the reinforced augered concrete " Geo Group Northwest, Inc. May 28, 1998 G-0901 tt Proposed Single Family Residence Page 10 1 piles. 6.5 Slab -on -Grade Floors ' Based on the encountered site conditions, we anticipate that the house will have supported floors, ` if slab on -grade floors are used, the slab -on -grade floors may bear on the dense undisturbed soil Or below the site, or on compacted structural fill; placed above the dense natural soils, compacted as specified in Section 6.2 - Site Preparation and General Earthwork of this report. All loose 1 .. in m soil should be removed, or replaced with engineered structural fill. c ; To avoid moisture build-up on the subgrade, slab -on -grade floors should be placed on a capillary moo O... O g m break, which is in turn placed on the prepared subgrade. The capillary break can consist of a z minimum of six (6) inches thick layer of free -draining gravel containing no more than five (5) D z percent finer than No. 4 sieve. A vapor barrier, such as a 6-mil plastic membrane, is t recommended to be placed over the capillary break beneath the slab to reduce water vapor o transmission through the slab. Two to four inches of sand may be placed over the barrier m membrane for protection during construction. m 11 $ In preparing the subgrade, native soils disturbed by construction activity should either be o `rn 0 Ill, 3 (A v F recompacted, or excavated and replaced with compacted, well -draining, structural fill or crushed M 0. rock. Prior to placing the capillary break, the barrier membrane and the concrete for slabs-on- R grade, we recommend the subgrade be proof -rolled with a piece of heavy construction equipment, fully X such as a loaded dump truck. Any soft spots or disturbed areas thus detected should be recompacted or excavated, replaced and compacted as described above. If groundwater seepage is encountered in the foundation slab area, we recommend that a CO 2 O geotextile fabric, such as Mirafi 500X, or equivalent, be placed on the wet subgrade, above which m a minimum six (6) inch layer of one and a half (1.5) inch minus gravel, or 2-inch crushed rock, no fines, be used as a capillary break, This will also eliminate the need for the 6-mil plastic membrane. 6.6 Permanent Basement and Conventional Retaining Walls Permanent basement walls restrained horizontally on top are considered unyielding and should be I,. Geo Group Northwest, Inc. Ah May 28, 1998 G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Page I I designed for a lateral soil pressure under the at -rest condition; while conventional reinforced concrete walls free to rotate on top should be designed for a active lateral soil pressure. Active Earth Pressure Conventional reinforced concrete walls that are designed to yield an amount equal to 0.002 times the wall height, should be designed to resist the lateral earth pressure imposed by an equivalent fluid with a unit weight of: • 35 pcf for level backfill behind yielding retaining walls; At -Rest Earth Pressure Walls supported horizontally by floor slabs are considered unyielding and should be designed for lateral soil pressure under the at -rest condition. The design lateral soil pressure should have an equivalent fluid pressure of • 60 pcf for level ground behind permanent unyielding retaining walls; Passive Earth Pressure and Base Friction I The available passive earth pressure that can be mobilized to resist lateral Forces maybe assumed to be equal to 300 pcf equivalent fluid weight for both undisturbed soils and engineered structural backfill. The base friction that can be generated between concrete and undisturbed bearing soils or engineered structural backfill may be based on an assumed 0.30 friction coefficient. We recommend that a vertical drain mat, Miradrain 6000 or equivalent, be used to facilitate drainage behind permanent concrete basement or conventional retaining walls. The drain mat' core is placed against the basement wall with the filter fabric side facing the backfill. The drain mat extends from the finished surface grade, down to the footing drain pipe. A minimum of 18 inches of clean, free -draining, washed rock, crushed rock, or pea gravel should be placed in the bottom of the footing trench. With the above exceptions, perimeter foundation drainage recommendations and installation procedures are in the - Footing and Wall Drains section of this report. Please also refer to Plate 8 - Typical Basement Wall Backfill and Drainage Details. If vertical drain mats are incorporated into the design, we recommend using the existing native Geo Group Northwest, Inc. o 9 _ 0, P" cm in OO mm p Az "n in in O y m0 O - n m I k, May 28, 1998 G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Pane 12 soils as structural backfill behind the walls, provided the native material can achieve the specified compaction. If the native soil cannot achieve the specified compaction, then we recommend {� placing a free draining granular backfill material. . " Alternatively, to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind permanent concrete basement or conventional retaining walls, a granular, free draining structural backfill material can be placed within a horizontal distance of 18 inches of the wall, in place of vertical drain mats. We recommend using a clean, granular, free -draining, structural fill material, free of organic or other deleterious substances, such as pea gravel, or washed rock, containing no more than five percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve based on the fraction of material passing the No. 4 sieve. The free -draining granular material should surround the wall subdrain system as described in the footing drain section of this report. The top twelve (12) inches of the fill should consist of compacted and relatively impermeable soil. This cap material can be separated from the underlying more granular drainage material by a layer of building paper or visqueen. The surface should be sloped to drain away from the building wall. Alternatively, the surface can be sealed with asphalt or concrete paving. Where backfill material behind permanent concrete basement or conventional retaining walls is not supporting slabs, or structural loads, the backfill should be compacted to 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557-91 (Modified Proctor Method). The top 12- inches should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density. The backfill in areas adjacent to basement or conventional retaining walls should be compacted with hand held equipment or a hoepack. Heavy compacting machines should not be allowed within a horizontal distance to the wall equivalent to one half the wall height, unless the walls are designed with the added surcharge. 6.7 Excavations and Slopes Under no circumstances should temporary excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, state and national government safety regulations. Temporary cuts greater than four feet in height should be sloped at an inclination no steeper than 1 H: I V (Horizontal : Vertical). A geotechnical engineer or geologist should determine the type of soil encountered in the excavation and determine the safe inclination of the excavation. Geo Group Northwest, Inc. m` k N-4 c m K. m0 K. .4o OC mrn m� az N O n m mm 0 c (a m N' M i z O a a in May 28, 1998 G-0967 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 13 Surface runoff should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of slopes into the excavated area. During wet weather exposed cut slopes should be covered with plastic sheets during construction to minimize erosion. ; To improve the surficial stability of the slope especially when doing excavation, we recommend z that the existing slope vegetation be maintained. Waste debris, such as lawn clippings and tree 0- i. limbs should not be discarded on the slope. m, _. All permanently exposed slopes should be planted with an appropriate species of vegetation to 4"n fy . in reduce erosion and improve the stability of the surficial layer of soil. Geo Group Northwest, Inc, m p 4. should be consulted if changes to the above plans are contemplated. o� 0 2 C m 6.8 Drainage i m i f6.8.1 Surface Drainage 6) CZ I The finished ground of the site should be graded such that surface water is directed away from the T-n structure and off the site. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where footings, slabs, m m EEE parking lot or pavements are to be constructed. During construction, loose surfaces should be sealed at night by compacting the surface to reduce the potential for moisture infiltration into the CC soils. Final site grades should allow drainage away from buildings. We suggest that the ground o { be sloped at a gradient of three (3) percent for a distance of at least tan feet away from buildings except in areas that are to be paved. i 6.8.2 Footing and Wall Drains We recommend that drains be installed around the foundation perimeters and behind concrete z. retaining walls. The drains should consist of a four (4) inch minimum diameter, perforated or m slotted, rigid drain pipe laid at or just below the invert of the footing with a gradient sufficient to generate flow (see, Plate 9 - Typical Footing Subdrain). The drain line should be bedded on, surrounded by, and covered with a free -draining rock, pea gravel, or other free -draining granular material. Geo Group Northwest, Inc. May 28, 1998 G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 14 Once the drains are installed, the excavation behind foundation walls should be backfilled with a compacted structural fill material. For structural backfill criteria behind walls, please refer to Section 6.5 - Permanent Basement and Conventional Retaining Walls. The surface should be sloped to drain away from the building wall or sealed with asphalt or concrete paving. Under no circumstances should roof downspout drain lines be connected directly to the footing Z o F; drain system. All roof downspouts must be separately tightlined to discharge into the storm water in i collection system. We recommend that sufficient cleanouts be installed at strategic locations to allow for periodic maintenance of the footing drains and downspout tightline systems. 53 r i C© IG 6.9 Driveway Area in n." O C r, It is anticipated that the driveway area is to support passenger cars and light trucks only, we in in recommend the pavement design to consist of the following: Z `g Two inches of Asphalt Concrete (AC) over four inches of Crushed Rock base (CRB) material, m The adequacy of site pavements is strictly related to the condition of the underlying subgrade: If m this is inadequate, no matter what pavement section is constructed, settlement or movement of the p �, Fa i subgrade will be reflected up through the paving. In order to avoid this situation, we recommend C the subgrade be treated and prepared as described in Section 6.2 - Site Preparation and in z & General Earthwork of this report. At least the top twelve (12) inches of the subgrade should be i compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density (per ASTM D-1557-91). It is possible that some localized areas of soft, wet or unstable subgrade may still exist after this process. If so, they may require overexcavation of the unsuitable materials and their replacement with a compacted _ {; structural fill or a crushed rock. ca Z o- m 7.0 LIMITATIONS This project has been prepared for the specific application to this site for the exclusive use of Ms. Elizabeth Nelson, and her representatives. We recommend that this report in its entirety be included in the project contract documents for use by the contractor. Geo Group Northwest, Inc. AML May 28, I998 G-0907 F- Proposed Single Family Residence Page 15 r" P ,L Our findings, conclusions and recommendations stated herein are based on site observations, subsurface conditions encountered in our field exploration, our experience and engineering judgement. The conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in a manner k; consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. No warranty, expressed or implied is z made. _ -t g kN, ''. Soil and groundwater conditions described herein may vary from those actually encountered during construction. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until o m r; construction. If variations appear then, Geo Group Northwest, Inc. should be requested to re- .0 *, evaluate the recommendations in this report and to verify or modify them in writing prior to p c ® �t N proceeding with construction. In p F, a z" r 8.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES CO 4 t We recommend that Gen Group Northwest, Inc. be retained to perform a genera] review of the �+ final design. This is to verify that our recommendations included herein are properly interpreted o m @ and implemented in the design and in the construction documents. c N We also recommend that Geo Group Northwest, Inc. be retained to provide monitoring and n testing services for geotechnically related work during construction. This is to observe s compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to and during the Z construction. Z i m( Gen Group Northwest, Inc. ©«m » z\ \M a m ? ©/ ¥c� . � � z � + M d10 » d o � :■f© © / \\ . Z VIEW ' va w R, { i PROJECT / � .uy��, ,•f°a; �� a "o MY PK ' fly. OK fats Ta1T SS Ste r� a • g` WITH 18 ST "4KiCR r 01?vS Pl ST SY 190TN ST w ' faf$ F 1 J 96oB g 192N0 I ST =7-" a� I Nc \`•° r 9:.. 1961N ST m SW I >! . MELODY tH ou,n PU6ET o i+ OR P I ti:r > 1. $: IT BMUW[ [ 5 S w aPAatrs 4C ,*CASP RP � ST ��s , , g✓�Nxe . ',2 r rxtet yr , ma a.. — .�; yr .tour T� sT su . s�"ewo: - 5`ERM t u'ws r� 5'•� 20iN0 z Si 1Q ®, �w Nlrt ar rr _ STm t,Y _ w " rirTm 20 ST $ Sum•.Yy ; i 8 m a e oST C ' "R e�ss 99 .q, zTen,n .—•_._ nd ^writer ' :.�.: Sr y > H H HAPLF : u m«o N HsT ,w q RIAC 9 m^ j` .3 ✓' - ALDE `^ H ' H PARK q vNiox i [ _ �, m uAINUi ^ ST / OltMAIM - CED/.R 57 u n y�QlN PAR,: Ro 5��, L y st �sv —TIED O R. v ,M¢r < xpc¢ n 6 ilr* �' , x how 215TX Sr 1 irx Si 21/TH -� VICINITY MAP • Group Northwest, Inc. ELIZABETH NELSON RESIDENCE GeoTecnnicel Engineers, caoloatBtT:, a 18318 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE Er,Ml —n1.I SIi.,YW: EDMONDS, WASHINGTON f z 0 m; i T � C m ¢ I', ma Oc —!i m m A_ >Z m III Oy mN zr z —4 c (F O I m 60 � V \ 22 • �gQ ��01. � fl w 5. `✓! d 90 d lQ \ w ` (J C \ \110 C �Aa LEGEND OF A CLASSIFICATION AND PENEIWAN TION TEST Z m' rn z m o' �. O C mz A i DZ C y' I..1 y mm O m Z� 1, Z—.(( T 2; O 1 n rn i UNIFIED SO[L CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (USCS) , .—__....—__._—. LABORATORY GROUP MAJOR DIVISION SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION CLASSIFICATION CRI7ERUl WELL GRADED GRAVELS. GRAYEL•SAND Cue(OBO20e%geeater Nand CLEAN GW MIX2UflE, LrtTLE OR NO FINES DETERMINE Gce(OJO.OJOf O10l08%betYreent and3 GRAVELS PERCENTAGES POORLY GRAOEDGRAVELS, ANDGRAVELSAND NOT MEEnNG ABOVE REQUIREMENTS GRAVELS (IiNe ano OF GRAVEL AND (Moro Than HaH fines) GP MIXTURES LRTLE OR NO FINES SAND FROM GRAIN SIZE ATTEROERG LIMR50ELOW Coarse Grains DISTAIBVTION COAgSE La DIRry. GM SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVELSANDSILT MIXNRE$ CURVE COMEM 'A'UNE. GRAINED dSievel� GRAVELS OF FINES a p.l, LE557HAN d SOILS COARSE GRAINEb EXCEEDS ATTERBERG UMRS ABOVE (wM sane CI-'sYE1'GRAVEIS, GRAVEL.iANDCLAY $OILS ARE Try �A'LINE. S^<>) GC MIXTURES GUSSIFIED A$ pr p.I. MORE MAN] FaLows. WELL GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS. Cu = (O60 / 01q prealer Nan e More Than Hatt - CLEAN SV LIRLE OR NO FINES > Sty Fine Gained C<e (D30' OJO20102 D80) beNveen 1 and J by Weight $ANDS GW, GP,6W, SP PUORLY GRADED SANQS,GMVELLY SAN0.5, NOT MEETING ABOVE REQUIREMENTS Larger Than Na. SANDS QHde«� >ipgy Finc � 5rew fines) SP LRTLE OR NO FINES Grained: (Moro Than Hatt Cwrse Grains SC; ATTERSERG LIMB$ BELOW SmNler Than DIFry $M SILTY SANDS, SANOSILT MLttURE$ Frne CONTENT 'A'LINE No. A Sieve) $AN0.5 6 tq 12% Gfi ned. use d WI OF FINE$ YAN P.I. LE55 THAN < ATTEROERG UMRS A00YE eYmOds EXCEEDS (wM some � CLAYEY SANDS. SANDCLAY MI%TVRES ti% 'A' UNE fines) wiN PI. MORE THAN ) SILTS L qwd Lrmil INORGANIC SILTS, ROCK FLOUR, SANDY SILTS ' (0e1 A L-ne ' 607E ML OF SLIGHT PLASf2CRY o0 S -'I—'PiryPLAST�Liqu,d IMHwNO Lrmil INORGANICSITS,MICACEOUSORFOR FINE SANDY OR SILTY SOIL_saLsFINOGANIC fINE�GRMNED>60%ATOMACEOUS. CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICTY— CLAYSLmudLrmrtRAVELLYSANDY, A.LneCLAeSZLqutl4mqINORGANIC OR Stry CLAYS. CLEAN�I(Abme ri CLAY$ Of HIGH PLASTN;ITY, FAT� �Waltp9anc)50'ACHCLAYSUI20 "'�Sieve ORANICORGPNIGSILTSANDORGANIGSILTYCLAYSOF.ISILTS 6 CLAY$LOW PLASTICITYI--(Beier I � A -Line PlacticyORGANIC Chart) CLAY50F HIGH PLASTGitt 0 10 2p w 40 w 60 ip BO SO IW LIQUID LINf1T (%) '_ _ HIGHLY ORGANIC SOIL$ Pt PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS SOIL PARTICLE SIZE GENERAL GUIDANCE OF SOIL ENGINEERING PROPERTIES FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT) U.S.STANDARD SIEVE asslnp Retained SANDY SOILS SILTY S CLAYEY SOILS SizeUngonbned Relative friction Vt(✓nT)81ow N%D.degreaN()o,M OnsryAnpb DeudPOon Counts $VengNCounb Descepeon 00 0.0]6� 0.4 0-T6 V<ry Loonr026 0 O.di6 s700 0.076 d.10 /6-J6 20-JO Loose 2.d026 �060 SoH 0 0 ad0 OA26 i0.30 J6.O6J6 Medium Dense n-8 O50-T00 Med,um Still4.76 a10 2 JO-60 66.66 J6-d2B-T5 36-a8 V<ry Dense 16.3D 1.00.200 t00•d0019I74 S•M I>SO&5•tOD d7$ 30d00 Hird PLATE 4 TB 19 COBBLES 76mm1g203mm _ ! Group Northwest Inc BQULDERS >20J mm G<ote<hn2nl Engine CeologhL,6 Environmental 5<f Illta 112d0 HE 20N Strout 5cd<t2 Bell e, WA BBDJ6 Pngn<(?J6)6d9d]ST car (I0%6a9S)58 ROOK FItAOMENTS -- POCx � >0 T6 cvbre meter raw ume BORING NO. B-1 Logged By: SH Date Drilled: 4/7198 Surface Elev. 189 feet +t- Depth Soil Description SAMPLE SPT Biows SPTK Blows Weier conienl Other T.I. & comments A. USCS -Type per Cinches per. foot % No. SPt Brown SAND with gravel and u <of silt, medium dense, moist. 'j- Si 2,5,7 12 7.8 _ SM Drill rig stuck ® 2.5 feet due to rock added water in hole to ease drilling 1 - I S2 10,11,35 46 5.9 Browulgray gravelly SAND with pebble and tram ofaih, very denu, damp 5 SPI to moisl. SM S3 30,32.33 55 5.9 10 Note: Total depth = 6.5 feet. There was no water seepage encountered. IS 20 zs 30 35 40 Using 6"O.D portable rig, standard 140 lbs hammer and 2"O.D. split- sampler BORING LOG ELIZABETH NELSON RESIDENCE 18318 OLYMPIC VEIW DRIVE EDMONDS, WASHINGTON M roueNorthwest, Plc. eeotecnnical E.0meara,Geologists, & Environmental Scientists DATE 4122/98 JOB NO. G-0907 PLATE 5 �2 I, Z` p.. .. 0., m, C m tV m o. 80 c r, m In f; E..� —AII O n -X Mm o go 71 Gl Z' O 1 n M BANG NO. B-2 Logged By: SH Date Drilled: 4/71998 Surface Elev. 180 feet thl s-PLE SAMPLE $pT $pT at— ".PIT.: Water ' h Tael. & USCS Soil Description Soil Description —... per 8 per % C--ft ft. . T'7 Zhes inches root SM gra V* Bru� SAND %vith sorne sift and gravel, loose, moia (Fill) Sg D 11.9 � Drilling gels at 4�5 fed S2 S 1,2,1 3 16.0 S3 3,4,10 14 8.7 Sw light brown SAND with sane gravel mW sill, rewditun dense, .to g gravel_ to eaza drilling Wed r4 Sp W ea _C.,:_ water at 7 to 8 f�--4 drill jig gets studc. ---- Sp/ �Ifioet ------------------ ; : Brown gravelly SAND with pebble and trace ofsilt, dense to very dense, able S4 15,21,24 45 11.5 0 110 am radial S, 13,13,17 30 16.4 S6 15,5013" 50/3' 12-6 15 Note: Total depth = 13.5 feet. 20 There was no Water seepage encountered. 25 5 30 5 35 40 I t I Using 6"O,D portable fig, standard 140 lbs hammer and 2"O.D. split- sampler BORING LOG Group1To-ftb-w—e—st-,Fnc- ELIZABETH NELSON RESIDENCE 18318 OLyMPIC VIEW DRWE G-Ifthruc.1 Engineer., G-logidw, & EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Environmental Sclentlatt DATE 4/22/98 JOB NO. G-0907 PLATE 6 Z, 0 O 69 cm M 0 -4 a 0 M M 0 -n M M 0 M0 z V) z 2 0 M r BORING NO. B-3 Logged By: SH Date Drilled: 4/7/98 Surface Elev. 189 feet+l- Depth SAMPLE SPT SPT (M Water USCS Soil Description 6 Biws Content Ciher Tests par per % Comments Type No. fl 64nches foot I Sl 4,7,5 12 no SP/ Bin0s`'n SAND with gravel ail new ofsil4 medium dame, moist recover SM had to drill @ 2 feet due to rack T 1 S2 9,9,11 20 9.9 5 — .....—_...._...__.......—__ -------- SP/ - Light brown gravelly SAND with pebble and tram of silt, very dame, damp S3 14,17,39 11.t SM to moist 56 10 Note: Total depth = 6.5 feet: " 15 There was no water seepage encountered. 20 25 30 35 40 Using 6"O.D portable rig, standard 140lbs " haturner and 2"O.D, split- sampler Afth BORING LOG 18318 OLYMPIC VEtW DRIVE ELIZ.ABETH NELSON RESIDEN%A, EDMONDS, WASHINNGTON �a rollpa NOtthwest, Inc. Geotechnlcal Engine oeowwa, a Environmental Scientists DATE 4/21/99 JOB NO. G-0907 4; i. . t. F� Q C1 (¢ Cr M m 7. OC �� im` 1i M DZ i,.. MM Q ui Kca M O Z 0 m , M .Basement Wall to drain Vertical Drain Mat (Miradrain 6000 or equal) COMPACTED ONSM BACKFILL MATERIAL (IF USABLE) NOT TO SCALE NOTES: 1.) Do not replace rigid PVC pipe with flexible corrugated plastic Pipe. 2.) Perforated or slotted PVC pipe should be fight jointed and laid with perforations or slots down, with positive gradient to discharge. 3.) Do not connect roof downspout drains into the footing drain lines. 4.) Backfill should be compacted to 90% of maximum dry density based on Modified Proctor. The top one foot should be compacted to 95% of maximum dry density if backfill is to support sidewalks, driveway, etc. TYPICAL BASEMENT WALL BACKFULL RKI) Group Northwest, Inc. AND DRAINAGE DETAIL, SCALE NONE DATE n198 MADE SH CHKD _ WC I JOB NO. PLATE 8 _ I I - Z' 0 m m M 0 0 M m > 0 m m - 0 0 CaC M z (1) Z' m 1 ■ m, v, y' O 0n , A �z o mm ON M0 2 Vi Z O n m r § of j GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY a M F l� PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE .:1831,8 OLYMPIC-VIEW D1iYBrE `�� "EDMONDS, WASHINGTON y ` G-0907 cm o+; I rn n r� • � Prepared for ca yin r y' I IIo-n Ms. Elizabeth Nelson o in c/o Mr. Galen D. Holmquist . Paradise Construction, Inc. C� � w 23632 Highway 99, F-11 i Edmonds, WA 98026 3 4 Z � M Y j May 28,1998 - m j}� i M i j Gen Group Northwest, Inc. 13240 NE 20th Street, Suite 12 RECEIVED Bellevue, WA 98005 Phone: (425) 649-8757 SEP 2 9 2000 { � PERMIT COUNTER j a U 'may 28, 1998 Ms. Elizabeth Nelson c/o Mr. Galen D. Holmquist Paradise Construction, Inc. 23632 Highway 99, F-i 1 Edmonds, WA 98026 3 Geotechnical Engineers, Geologists & Environmental Scientists G-0907 SUBJECT: Geotechnical Engineering Study Proposed Single Family Residence 18318 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, Washington i Dear Mr: Holmquist: We are pleased to submit the report entitled "Geotechnical Engineering Study, Proposed Single Family Residence, 18318 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, Washington." This report presents the results of our site exploration, engineering analyses and our conclusions and recommendations for steep slope setbacks, earthwork, drainage, foundations and retaining wall. design parameters. f We understand that the existing one story house with a daylight basement at 18318 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, WA will be demolished and replaced with a two story house. At the time of this study. We were provided with an approximate footprint for the new house, as shown on Plate 2 Site Plan. The subject site was explored with three borings on April 7, 1998 in accordance with our proposal dated Marcli 9, 1998. The subsurface soils encountered in B-1 and B-3 near the east side of the existing house consists of 2.5 to 4.5 feet of medium dense SAND with gravel, below which is a very dense gravelly SAND with pebbles and silt. The soils encountered in boring B-2 on the west side of the existing house consists of 7 feet of loose to medium dense soil which is underlain by dense to very dense gravelly SAND with pebbles and some silt. Groundwater was not encountered during drilling. Based on the results of our study, it is our opinion that the proposed single family residence foundations can be supported on conventional spread footing bearing on the very dense native soil. Due to the existence of loose soils up to 7 feet encountered in B-2, the western half of the proposed 13240 NE 20th Street, Suits 12 • Bellevue, Washington 98005 l9 Phone 425/64"757 • FAX 4251649.8758 i i i f i 0 n. m• c °n mo On c �m mm mz m� mlmn D UD n in Cm r�n X 0 m (`. P. TABLE OF CONTENTS E, JOB N0. G-0907 page kj 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION i 1.1 Project Description ........... 1.2 Scope of Services ........ c.. i Z.. (; 2.0 SITE CONDITIONS2 o i j 2.1 Surface Condition ............. 2 mz l 2.2 Subsurface Conditions ..... . . ......... 3 �» 2.3 Groundwater ............... . 1 2 -9 1 o m y 3.0 SEISMICITY 3. mo 3.1 Seismic history q o k i 3.2 Soil Liquefaction Potential ............. A 4 C� # 4.0 BUILDING SETBACK AND BUFFERS ......... . Z 5 rn c' 5.0 SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION ....:........ . .. .. .. ..:..... 4"t Qy j 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMI4rENDATIONS 6` 6.1, General ............................... �? 6,2 Site Preparation and General Earthwork ...... 7 0 jjj 6.3 Spread Footing Foundations ............... 8 1 Mi 6.4 Augered Concrete Piles .................. 10 1; 6.5 Stab -on -Grade Floors ....................... 10, 6.6 Permanent Basement & Conventional Retaining Walls ....... 12 1 6.7 Excavations and Slopes ••...13 ............... � Drainage ..................... . z 13 6.8 0 i i 6.8.1 Surface Drainage .......... , . 13 m 6.9.2 Footing and Wall Drains ..... 14 i M- i 6.9 Driveway Area ........... . 1 .... 14 7.O LIMITATIONS ...:............ 15 8.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES ............ Geo Group Northwest, Inc. I ILLUSTRATIONSrS k Plate l - Vicinity Map .Plate 2 = Site Plan Plate 3 - Steep Slope Cross Section m Plate 4 - Soil Legend I m, W ! Plate 5 - through 7 ' Boring Log I 0 c Plate 8 • Typical Basement Wall Backfill & Drainage DetailsMis k _ Plate 9 - Typical Footing Subdrain CE mm 11 G N' C CO: C) q i � i 1.0 d 1.1 Th At Y e GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE X 18318 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ' r�• G-0907 ! O 0, n � INTRODUCTION m �m Project Description and Understanding N C O 4k proposed single family residence is located at 18318 Olympic View Driver Edmonds, to40 0 m shington, as shown on Plate 1 - Vicinity Map. 0 m ed on our site visits and discussions with you and Ms. Elizabeth Nelson, it is our C - z derstanding that the existing one story single family residence with a daylight basement at the site will be demolished and replaced by a two story residence at the subject site. " o�m e also understand that the City of Edmonds requires a geotechnical study prior to issuing a in inFil lding permit due to the steep slope and building setback issues. Therefore, the purpose of the p � )technical engineering study is to define the subsurface soil conditions in order to address slope C (a:. bility, setbacks from steep slopes, foundation support, lateral earth pressures, drainage and in n earthwork considerations.", the time of this study, the detail of the new house plan was not available.': 2 Scope of Services Z o> ur scope of the work is outlined in our proposal dated March 9, 1999, and they are: m; Perform a subsurface investigation by drilling 2 soil borings, one at the east and one at the 1 west side of the proposed house. The borings will be drilled to a depth of 15 to 30 feet, and soil samples taken every 2.5 feet to detect any zones of weakness in the subsurface soils. The borings will be drilled using a portable drill rig; May 28, 1998 G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 2 2. Collect soil samples to perform laboratory tests and prepare boring logs;' s 3. Perform engineering analysis to evaluate slope stability, foundations and retaining wall design requirements; Z Q 4. Prepare a geotechnical report with the results of the analysis and prepare conclusions and m recommendations for steep slope setbacks, earthwork, drainage, foundations and retaining wall design parameters. om C t 2.0 SITE CONDITIONS m ? oC F� 2.1 Surface Condition t The subject property is rectangular in shape and approximately 14,000 square feet in size. It is f ( I bordered to the east by Olympic View Drive, to the west by the Puget Sound and by two railway lines at the bottom of a steep slope, to the north and south by single family houses. According to the topographic site plan and our site observation, a steep slope with an average inclination of 46 degrees (103 percent slope) and a topographic relief of 100 feet is situated on the west half of the subject property. The backyard and the proposed building area are relatively flat with an average inclination of 7 degrees (12.5 percent slope). Chain link fences were observed at " the top of the steep slope and along both sides of the property line on the north and south. I The existing one story single family house with a daylight basement is located on the east half of the property with a detached one car garage at the southeast corner of the property at the street level. 2.2 Subsurface Conditions According to the geologic map for the area, the site is underlain by Transitional Beds (Qtb) which in turn underlain by Olympia Gravel (Qog). Transitional Beds were deposited during the Fraser Glaciation to Pre -Fraser Glaciation, the glacial and non -glacial deposits consist mostly of massive, thick or thin beds and laminae of medium to dark gray clay, silt, and fine to very fine sand. Geo Group Northwest, Inc, x bz - r ON mM O mm 0 nn A' �t m folk May 28, 1998 G-0907• i. Proposed Single Family Residence Page 3 Olympia Gravel was deposited during the Pre -Fraser Glaciation and consist of stratified, fluvial sand and gravel. Gravel is mostly pebble size and is locally oxidized.and weakly cemented so that {•, it stands vertically in fresh exposure. s; The subsurface investigation was conducted by drilling three exploratory soil borings (B-1, B-2, z O and B-3) on April 7, 1998. The borings were drilled using portable, low -profile hollow -stem auger equipment to a maximum depth of 13.5 feet below ground surface (bgs). The locations of m three soil borings are shown on Plate 2 - Site Plan. We estimated the location of our exploration by using a measuring tape from the existing house. A geotechnical engineer logged the borings m }" rJ ,., and collected soil samples for further examination and testing at our office. C O 4 0 0 The subsurface soils encountered in B-1 and B-3 consist of medium dense brown SAND with :0 K gravel and a trace of silt from 2.5 to 4.5 feet below the ground surface. The medium dense m� SAND was underlain by very dense gravelly SAND with pebbles and silt. Both borings were only x drilled to 6.5 feet below the ground surface due to the difficulbf to drill through the gravel. Boring B-2 was drilled on the west side of the house in the lawn area, The soils encountered in m . boring B-2 consists of 7 feet of loose to medium dense soil underlain by dense to very dense m gravelly SAND with pebbles and some silt. 0 3M The soils encountered in the borings at the site match those for the Olympia Gravel (Qog) on the z [o 1 - geologic map. M" 2.3 Groundwater z Groundwater was not encountered during drilling. However, the ground water table can fluctuate z` seasonally, depending on rainfall, surface runoff and other factors. 0 - m: 3.0 SEISMICITY 3.1 Seismic History The project site is located on a bluff facing the Puget Sound and about 10 miles north of Seattle. Geo Group Northwest, Inc. May 28, 1998 G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 4 The greater Seattle area has experienced a number of small to moderate earthquakes and occasionally strong shocks during the brief 155-year historical record in the Pacific Northwest. The major earthquakes in the region are believed to be associated with deep-seated plate tectonic activity. Major faults within the region have not been active in the Holocene Age (geologic period dating since the last glacial retreat 14,000 years ago), consequently, they are not known to be associated with historical seismicity. Historical records for the region indicate that the Olympia earthquake of April 13, 1949, with a Richter magnitude of 7.1, produced ground -shaking of intensity VIII near its epicenter; and the Seattle -Tacoma earthquake of April 29, 1965, with a Richter magnitude of 6.5, produced a ground -shaking of intensity IV to VIR on the Modified Mercalli Scale near its epicenter. This level of ground -shaking is estimated to be the maximum that has occurred in the region during the 155 years of historic record. 3.2 Soil Liquefaction Potential t fAlthough there may be subsurface variations from point to point, we expect the native soil underlying the subject site consists of dense gravelly SAND. Groundwater was not encountered during subsurface investigation. Due to the dense nature of the native soil, it is our opinion that the subsurface soils at the site are not susceptible to liquefaction. 4.0 BUILDING SETBACK & BUFFERS The City of Edmonds, Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC), Section 20.15B, dated August, 1996, sets restrictions on the development of sites with steep slopes (40 percent or more). The ECDC 20.15B requires a total building setback of 65 feet from the top of a steep slope which includes 50 feet of buffer setback and 15 feet of building setback. The total building setback may be reduced to 25 feet (10 foot nondisturbance vegetative buffer plus 15 foot building setback) if there is a special geotechnical study. Smaller setbacks, or construction on steep slopes requires an exception from a public hearing pursuant to ECDC 20.1000.010 from City of Edmonds. Based on the review of the site plan provided to us, the current plans place the proposed two- Geo Group Northwest, Inc. m 74_ om i m0 Op O c m m t m� qz r r N off. mm ©N c Fnn 3� xb; z in z 0 m May 28, 1998 G-0907 Pro osed Sin le Famil Residence Page 5 story house at least 25 feet east of top of the steep slope which is in agreement with our recommended 25 foot total building setback (10 foot buffer plus 15 foot building setback), as shown in Plate 2 - Site Plan. For the purposes of this report, provided that the recommendations herein are adhered to, it is our opinion that the proposed single family house can be located closer than the required 65 feet from ! the top of the steep slope. Building near the top of any steeply sloped hillside always has some inherent risk. However, the risk can be minimized by incorporating a reasonable building setback from the top of the slope, preventing concentrated surface water runoff from eroding the slope, minimizing disturbance to the slope, and maintaining the native vegetation both on the slope and above the slope. To mitigate landslide and erosion hazards, we recommend incorporating all these items into the design of the subject project. 5.0 SLOPE STABIILITY EVALUATION The subject lot is considered to be a geologic hazard area due to the existence of a greater than 40 percent steep slope with a topographic relief of 100 feet as shown in Plate 3 - Steep Slope Cross Section. Based on the subsurface investigation, the undisturbed native soil on the top of the steep slope is R dense gravelly SAND with some pebbles and silt and in our opinion they are not susceptible to deep seated sliding. However, the --f cial loose soil or fill may be susceptible to erosion on steep slopes, especially where vegetation is removed. It is our professional opinion that the subject lot is currently stable and will be stable after the subject construction. The proposed single family house will present a minimal risk of instability to the adjacent property during or after the construction, provided the recommendations contained herein are implemented. Geo Croup Northwest, Inc. r z 0 m w cm m� On mZ 1 bz 0 "n . mm 0 Fn m� A a z z` o , n m C May 28, 1998 G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 6 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 General r Based on the results of our study, it is out professional opinion that the site is geotechnically Z. suitable for the development of the proposed single family house, and that the proposed house can n m.. be supported on conventional spread footing bearing on the very dense native soil. Due to the 7 feet of loose soils encountered in B-2, the western half of the house should be proposed :q -5 supported on a foundation system consisting of augered reinforced concrete piles bearing on the v m s dense native soils. As an alternative, the entire house could be supported on.augered concrete m p piles. � c. I rnm Specific recommendations regarding the site development are presented in the following sections. j _ D. r 6.2 Site Preparation and General Earthwork N. 0- The proposed structure area should be stripped and cleared of surface vegetation and debris from m m the demolition of the existing house. Disturbance to the site should be kept to a minimum to CO, prevent erosion. Silt fences should be installed around areas disturbed by construction activity to, prevent sediment -laden surface runoff from being discharged off -site. z o" All structural fill material used to achieve design site elevations below slabs, sidewalks, driveways, etc. should meet the requirements for structural fill. During wet weather, material to be used as structural fill should have the following specifications: z- 1. Be free draining, granular material, which contains no more than five (5) percent fines (silt O and clay -size particles passing the No. 200 mesh sieve); m' 2. Be free of organic and other deleterious substances; 3. Have a maximum size of three (3) inches. All fill material should be placed at or near the optimum moisture content. The optimum moisture content is the water content in soil that enables the soil to be compacted to the highest dry density Geo Group Northwest, Inc. May 28, 1998 G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 7 for a given compaction effort. Due to its silt content, some of the existing loose fill soils are considered to be moisture sensitive j and should not be used as fill material during wet weather conditions. During dry weather, any compactable non -organic soil meeting the above maximum size criteria may used as structural Z fill, provided the material is near the optimum moisture content for compaction purposes. m .. r=. ;.' Structural fill should be placed in thin horizontal lifts not exceeding ten inches in loose thickness. rn Structural fill under driveways, patios and sidewalks should be compacted to at least 90 percent in of maximum density, with the exception of the upper twelve (12) inches. 'The top twelve (12) 0' inches should be compacted to at least 95 percent maximum density, as determined by ASTM C ' Test Designation D- 1557-91 (Modified Proctor). inin f We recommend that Geo Group Northwest, Inc. be retained to evaluate the suitability of cZ structural fill material and to monitor the compaction requirement during construction for quality A assurance of the earthwork. -n i in in 6.3 Spread Footing Foundations O NQ 9 cFnn It is our opinion that the eastern half of the house can be supported by conventional spread in 0 footings bearing on the dense undisturbed native soils or compacted structural fill bearing on the dense undisturbed native soils. The conventional spread footing foundations can be designed as follows: z - Allowable bearing pressure, including all dead and live loads rn. on undisturbed dense gravelly sand = 2,000 psf o` on compacted structural fill = 2,000psf m - Minimum depth to bottom of perimeter footing below adjacent final exterior grade = 18 inches . - Minimum depth to bottom of interior footings below top of floor slab = 18 inches e, Geo Group Northwest, Inc. 0 I'� May 28, 1998 G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 8 - Minimum width of wall footings = 16 inches - Minimum lateral dimension of column footings = 24 inches - Estimated post -construction settlement = 1/4 inch z f, O 4: m - Estimated post -construction differential settlement; across building width = 1(4 inch Vim (' A one-third increase in the above allowable bearing pressures can be used when considering short- cv ` n+ 0 term transitory wind or seismic loads. o s mz Lateral loads can also be resisted by friction between the foundation and the supporting > z compacted fill subgrade or by passive earth pressure acting on the buried portions of the r " a foundations. For the latter, the foundations must be poured "neat" against the existing o -n -. undisturbed soil or backfilled with a compacted fill meeting the requirements of structural fill. Structural fill requirements can be found in Section 6.2 - Site Preparation and General in in P Earthwork: It is our professional opinion that the following parameters can be used: oy O r` Cm - Passive pressure = 300 pef equivalent fluid weight 1 F' - Coefficient of friction = 0.30 6.4 Angered Concrete Piles We recommend that the western half of the proposed house be supported on a foundation system z consisting of augered concrete piles. This recommendation is based on the loose soil conditions encountered in Boring B-2 down to a depth of 7 feet below the ground surface. m The pile foundation should penetrate through the loose to medium dense zones, with a minimum embedment of five feet into the very dense gravelly SAND below. We estimate that the total length of each pile to be about 12 feet below the ground surface. We recommend that the diameter of the augered hole have a minimum diameter of 14 inches. For 1s ( " augered reinforced concrete piles of 14 and 16 inches in diameter embedded into very dense Geo Group Northwest, Inc. May 28, 199g G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 9 gravelly SAND with a minimum of 5 feet embedment, the following allowable bearing capacities may be used: Pile Diameter Inches(Feet) Pile Embedment Allowable Bearing Allowable Uplift (Tons) 14 5 10 5 16 5 12 6 Note: Pile Embedment Length based on the embedment depth below the top of the very. dense gravelly SAND. No reduction in pile capacities is required if the pile spacing is at least three times the pile diameter. A one-third increase in the above allowable pile capacities can be used when considering short-term transitory wind or seismic loads. Lateral loads can also be resisted by using battered piles or by the passive earth pressures acting on grade beams. To fully mobilize the passive pressure resistance, the grade beams must be poured "neat" against compacted fill. Our recommended allowable passive soil pressure for lateral resistance is 300 pcf equivalent fluid weight. A coefficient of friction of 0.30 maybe used between the subgrade and the grade beam. We estimate that the maximum total post -construction settlement should be one -quarter (1/4) inch or less, and the differential settlement across the building width should be one -quarter (1/4) inch or less. The performance of piles depends on how and to what bearing stratum the piles are installed. Since a completed pile in the ground cannot be observed, it is critical that judgement and experience be used as a basis for determining the embedment length and acceptability of a pile. Therefore, we recommend that Gen Group Northwest, Inc. be retained to monitor the pile installation operation, collect and interpret installation data and verify suitable bearing stratum. We also suggest that the contractor's equipment and installation procedure be reviewed by Geo Group Northwest, Inc. prior to pile installation to help mitigate problems which may delay work progress. A structural engineer should be retained to design the reinforced augered concrete Geo Group Northwest, Inc. 1 May 28, 1998 G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 10 jj 1 piles. i 6.5 Slab -on -Grade Floors Based on the encountered site conditions, we anticipate that the house will have supported floors, p if slab on -grade floors are used, the slab -on -grade floors may bear on the dense undisturbed soil below the site, or on compacted structural fill, placed above the dense natural soils; compacted as m jI specified in Section 6.2 - Site Preparation and General Earthwork of this report. All loose A n soil should be removed, or replaced with engineered structural flit. N A cm m 0 To avoid moisture build-up on the subgrade, slab -on -grade floors should be placed on a capillary p O. c, break, which is in turn placed on the prepared subgrade. The capillary break can consist of a "ly m' m minimum of six (6) inches thick layer of free -draining gravel containing no more than five (5) percent finer than No. 4 sieve. A vapor barrier, such as a 6-mil plastic membrane, is a Z recommended to be placed over the capillary break beneath the slab to reduce water vapor transmission through the slab. Two to four inches of sand maybe placed over the barrier m membrane for protection during construction. m O Vi In preparing the subgrade, native soils disturbed by construction activity should either be 09 recompacted, or excavated and replaced with compacted, well -draining, structural fill or crushed m (b rock. Prior to placing the capillary break, the barrier membrane and the concrete for slabs -on - grade, we recommend the subgrade be proof -rolled with a piece of heavy construction equipment, ;V such as a fully loaded dump truck. Any soft spots or disturbed areas thus detected should be , recompacted or excavated, replaced and compacted as described above. z i If groundwater seepage is encountered in the foundation slab area, we recommend that a y o geotextile fabric, such as Mirafi 500X, or equivalent, be placed on the wet subgrade, above which Q a minimum six (6) inch layer of one and a half (1.5) inch minus gravel, or 2-inch crushed rock, no m fines, be used as a capillary break. This will also eliminate the need for the 6-mil plastic membrane. 6.6 Permanent Basement and Conventional Retaining Walls Permanent basement walls restrained horizontally on top are considered unyielding and should be Geo Group Northwest, Inc. May 28, 1998 G-0907 Promised Single Family Residence Page I 1 designed for a lateral soil pressure under the at: rest condition; while conventional reinforced concrete walls free to rotate on top should be designed for a active lateral soil pressure. Active Earth Pressure Conventional reinforced concrete wails that, are designed to yield an amount equal to 0.002 i times the wall height, should be designed to, resist the lateral earth pressure imposed by an equivalent fluid with a unit weight of: • 35 pcf for level backfill behind yielding retaining walls; At -Rest Earth Pressure 1 Walls supported horizontally by floor slabs are considered unyielding and should be designed for lateral soil pressure under the at -rest condition. Tire design lateral soil pressure should have an equivalent fluid pressure of: • 60 pcf for level ground behind permanent unyielding retaining walls; 1 I Passive Earth Pressure and Base Friction The available passive earth pressure that can be mobilized to resist lateral forces may be assumed to be equal to 300 pcf equivalent fluid weight for both undisturbed soils and engineered structural backfill. The base friction that can be generated between concrete and undisturbed bearing soils or engineered structural backfill may be based on an assumed 0.30 friction coefficient. We recommend that a vertical drain mat, Miradrain 6000 or equivalent, be used to facilitate drainage behind permanent concrete basement or conventional retaining walls. The drain mat core is placed against the basement wall with the filter fabric side facing the backfill. The drain mat extends from the finished surface grade, down to the footing drain pipe. A minimum of 18 inches of clean, free -draining, washed rock, cnished rock, or pea gravel should be placed in the bottom of the footing trench. With the above exceptions, perimeter foundation drainage recommendations and installation procedures', are in the - Footing and Wall Drains section of this report. Please also refer to Plate 8 - Typical Basement Wall Backfill and Drainage Details. If vertical drain mats are incorporated into the design, we recommend using the existing native Geo Group Northwest, Inc. z Or I 0 in My om �' } Or 8 n Oc m m A _ az mm o CO in in 0 z o m May 28, 1998 G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Pale 12 soils as structural backfill behind the walls, provided the native material can achieve the specified compaction. If the native soil cannot achieve the specified compaction, then we recommend placing a free draining granular backfill material. Alternatively, to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind permanent concrete basement or zo, conventional retaining walls, a granular, free draining structural backfill material can be placed II i within a horizontal distance of 18 inches of the wall, in place of vertical drain mats. We rn recommend using a clean, granular, free -draining, structural fill material; free of organic or other deleterious substances, such as pea gravel, or washed rock, containing no more than five percent U5 fines passing the No: 200 sieve based on the fraction of material passing the No. 4 sieve. The , omm v free -draining granular material should surround the wall subdrain system as described in the o 0 footing drain section of this report. The top twelve (12) inches of the fill should consist of —ly m compacted and relatively impermeable soil. This cap material can be separated from the °n underlying more granular drainage material by a layer of building paper or visqueen. The surface be should sloped to drain away from the building wall. Alternatively. the surface can be sealed with asphalt or concrete paving. p Where backfill material behind permanent concrete basement or conventional retaining walls is not m m i supporting slabs, or structural loads, the backfill should be compacted to 90 percent of the n ! � maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557-91 (Modified Proctor Method). The top 12- � m inches should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density. z n The backfill in areas adjacent to basement or conventional retaining walls should be compacted z with hand held equipment or a hoepack. Heavy compacting machines should not be allowed within a horizontal distance to the wall equivalent to one half the wall height, unless the walls are designed with the added surcharge. z o_ 6.7 Excavations and Slopes m Under no circumstances should temporary excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, state and national government safety regulations. Temporary cuts greater than four feet in height should be sloped at an inclination no steeper than 1 H:I V (Horizontal : Vertical). A geotechnical engineer or geologist should determine the type of soil encountered in the excavation and determine the safe inclination of the excavation. j Geo Group Northwest, Inc. May 28,1998 G-o967 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 13 Surface runoff should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of slopes into the excavated area. During wet weather exposed cut slopes should be covered with plastic sheets i during construction to minimize erosion. To improve the surficial stability of the slope especially when doing excavation, we recommend that the existing slope vegetation be maintained. Waste debris, such as lawn clippings and tree limbs should not be discarded on the slope. All permanently exposed slopes should be planted with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve the stability of the surficial layer of soil. Geo Group Northwest, Inc. should be consulted if changes to the above plans are contemplated. 6.8 Drainage 6.8.1 Surface Drainage The finished ground of the site should be graded such that surface water is directed away from the structure and off the site. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where footings, slabs, j parking lot or pavements are to be constructed. During construction, loose surfaces should be sealed at night by compacting the surface to reduce the potential for moisture infiltration into the soils. Final site grades should allow drainage away from buildings. We suggest that the ground be sloped at a gradient of three (3) percent for a distance of at least ten feet away from buildings except in areas that are to be paved, 6.8.2 Footing and Wall Drains We recommend that drains be installed around the foundation perimeters and behind concrete ' retaining walls. The drains should consist of a four (4) inch minimum diameter, perforated or slotted, rigid drain pipe laid at or just below the invert of the footing with a gradient sufficient to generate flow (see, Plate 9 - Typical Footing Subdrain). The drain line should be bedded on, surrounded by, and covered with a free -draining rock, pea gravel, or other free -draining granular material. May 28, 1998 G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 14 t.' Once the drains are installed, the excavation behind foundation walls should be backfilled with a compacted structural fill material. For structural backfill criteria behind walls, please refer to Section 6.5 - Permanent Basement and Conventional Retaining Walls. The surface should ? be sloped to drain away from the building wall or sealed with asphalt or concrete paving. Under no circumstances should roof downspout drain lines be connected directly to the footing zo �. system. All roof downspouts must be separately tightlined to discharge into the storm water indrain collection system. We recommend that sufficient cleanouts be installed at strategic locations to :4 -n allow for periodic maintenance of the footing drains and downspout tightiine systems. 65 in 6.9 Driveway Area in 0 c It is anticipated that the driveway area is to support passenger cars and light trucks only, we -� —in A_ recommend the pavement design to consist of the following: r z; Two inches of Asphalt Concrete (AC) over four inches of Crushed Rock base (CRB) material, Vi 0,, 3: K adequacy of site pavements is strictly related to the condition of the underlying subgrade. If 0 in inThe U/ this is inadequate, no matter what pavement section is constructed, settlement or movement of the c subgrade will be reflected up through the paving. In order to avoid this situation, we recommend m rn 0 the subgrade be treated and prepared as described in Section 6.2 - Site Preparation and -Zi F General Earthwork ofthis report. At least the top twelve (12) inches ofthe subgrade should be X compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density (per ASTM D-1557-91). It is possible that some localized areas of soft, wet or unstable subgrade may still exist after this process. If so, they z may require overexcavation of the unsuitable materials and their replacement with a compacted structural fill or a crushed rock, o` - 0; in 7.0 LIMITATIONS This project has been prepared for the specific application to this site for the exclusive use of Ms. Elizabeth Nelson, and her representatives. We recommend that this report in its entirety be included in the project contract documents for use by the contractor. f May 28, 1998 G-0907 Proposed Single Family Residence Page 15 Our findings, conclusions and recommendations stated herein are based on site observations, subsurface conditions encountered in our field exploration, our experience and engineering I' judgement. The conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. No warranty, expressed or implied is made. Soil and groundwater conditions described herein may vary from those actually encountered during construction. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until construction. If variations appear then, Gen Group Northwest, Inc. should be requested to re- evaluate the recommendations in this report and to verify or modify them in writing prior to proceeding with construction. A 8.0 ADDTPIONAL SERVICES We recommend that Geo Group Northwest, Inc. be retained to perform a general review of the final design. This is to verify that our recommendations included herein are properly interpreted and implemented in the design and in the construction documents. !®I We also recommend that Geo Group Northwest, Inc. be retained to provide monitoring and testing services for geotechnically related work during construction. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations and to allow design t changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to and during the construction. 'i Geo Group Northwest, Inc. 1 1 - i 1 I PL s��Ype, ;{ry Y O I i2B I M m PROJECT n . _...- --- ___. I _ SITE Ne�Tt a m3 m` to .......... _ . - ----- � & tI IBSix �, ieSM Vqa 0 Jt PK BP IB] v I89T ST SV I I SY ZM a Pt ST SvY '< iMIM Si 54 m Z: ' IUTLR T �M< T C:2 .. �rraclP CHERRY ., iJ ST 9600 a 4M1 m . n 8 P _ 1'T°r s- 92ND ST K sw t2 m . r-1 2_ :. ;, ... '• �r Ir° <."'�s CASTiw *Pwn P,�4/o,,, .au9rP1¢ $W 7-,1- 196 �- PUGET (> :j UK m m i; MELODY LN w _ p (j� I190tx�"SI a PaI �.•;E' xixotFr = li - G - NfLG P O [— . 1 ��5 BWGxNERE Bx W BA(Ow=0.[ 51 �yj { C SY _� x 0 (Il " i aRAcxE7rs RW ` $T -- s, z in ,,ao- ..CA$P A nEuw* MO SA7C0. i$ @ mn_ti 2G2xD Ey!r SrtevA l�sJ°�•ala �` 9 Q GLEN_ 5i gg 1 a { a PINE z /�I . . n. • Bf E,LI STP ' Y _ _ tn' ] s 1 2G ST 54 •'Ai �F E N / �rYY E wM1 m O I " /•, 0H7DH j ot[ � • ' �NDE � O ! ��• r �IXum _ CEDAR NprELL >m� < ry garca < , xa¢OCa n < P qY NA'M= < tNIMe wu, .. $i SP0.C[Yr..Si @ 915M=@�' 4�ai'pOlN 1 W a PAaR @, a � �etmtta✓n�N�i = i15M 51 SI nPIF' n III - PtRP— ® is VICINITY MAP =Group Northwest, Inc. ELIZABETHNELSON RESIDENCE " GeoWl,mcm Ensmeere, reoPogISIS. a Environmental Saennsts 18315 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE EDMONDS, WASHINGTON - - N 'tJ w � d � a b o = a y �° s H �! X TI �— 790 D X rn n LEGEND OF St.— CLASSIFICATION AND PENE1 aITION TEST SOUL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (USCS) _ OROUPLABORATORY AJOR DIVISION SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA WELL GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVELSANO C—(DS0ID10)9r.ater eu.4 FUNIFIED CLEAN OW MIXTURE,IMLEOR NO FINES OETERMINE Cc=(DW-G3 1010f0W)boM ie.3 GRAVELS PERCENTAGES POORLYGRADEOGRAVELS,ANDGRAVELSAND GRAVELS OFGRAVELAND°PIXTURES (Moro Than NO QMM LITTLE OR NO FINES SAND FROM GRAIN SIZE NOT MEEnNG ABOVE REOUIREMENTS ATTERBERG LIMRS BELOW Coarse Grain. DISTRIBUTION Larger Th.n No. DIRTY GM SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVELSANDSILT MIXTURES CURVE. CONTENT 'A'LINE. t Se ei . GRAVELS OF FINES THAN w P.I. LESS-ANb SO COARBE GRAINED EXCEEDS ATTERBERG ABOVE CLAYEY GRAVELS, ORAVELSANDCLAY »mfa. SOILS ARE 12% 'A"LINE. RnH) GC MIXTURES CLASSIFIED AS FOLLOWS: w P.1. MORE THAN 7 WELL GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS. Co = (0507010) gnat.' than 6 Mwe Than H." CLEAN SW LITTLE OR NO FINES <5%fin. Grained Cc <(OW- D30 I DID I DW)bNroanlaM3 by Wei"' SANDS GW, GP, SW, SP POORLY GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS. NOT MEETING ABOVE REQUIREMENTS200 Larger Than No BANGS jlittbairo >12%Fina Se•e fi^°fl SP_ LITTLE OR NO FINES GnI— (Mom Than Half CoarseCmIns GM. GC, SM. SC', ATTERSERG LIMITS BELOW Smaller Than WRTY SM SILTY SANDS, SANDSILT MIXTURES S b 12%Fme CONTENT 'A'LINE No. t Sieve) BANDS Gmmed. use daal OF FINES EXCEEDS wdm P.I. LESS THAN 4 Be CLAYEY SANDS, SANOCLAY MIOURES ATTERSERG LIMITS ABOVE wLINE (worn° fYmbdf i2% finx) vliU P.I. MORE THAN 7 IS L Ruid Lima INORGANIC SILTS. ROCK FLOUR, SANDY SILTS (Below A.L n < 50% ML OF SLIGHT PLAST OTY d0 on Pl-fi.dy PLASTICITY CHART I Alin. -�,� Uouid Limit INORGANIC SILTS, MICAGEOUS OR ChAL N"Ilibl - w FOR SOIL PASSING FINE-GRAINED O1,I-10 +Sp% A1H DIATOMACEOUS.FNESANOYORSILTYSOIL NO 4051EVE SOILS C or O I - '---'— INORGANIC CLAYS PLASTICITY CLAYS LiRYId L,mM1 CL GRAVELLY. SANDY, OR SILK CLAYS, CLEAN R SIL C A (Above A -line CLAYS INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT Ne9"I. F- Lor L M by Tnan ht by Wel9^l Of9an c) Lll-L—1 > 5016 CH _ CLAYS U 1 - ORGANIC Li Id Umil ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF N or PH i Smaller Than No 200 S.ve SIITSE CLAYS `50% °L LOW PLASTICITY (Bek-A-L— OL r Liquid Limit ORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY on lactieiy P '.0 30 a W FA 10 80 W IOU LIQUID LIMIT (%) Chort) > we HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS R PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS SOIL PARTICLE SIZE GENERAL GUIDANCE OF SOIL ENGINEERING PROPERTIES FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPY) U.S. STANDARD SIEVE Passing Retained SANDY SOILS SILTY 8 CLAYEY SOILS FRACTION Size Size nS—FI, Sieve I —)Sieve (mm)-Mat— N DoI,.+a OsnfM % An91a AMIII D, d"— D.scdDbon qa,SAND DewdebonCoums SILT I CLAY a= 0.076 IT0.15<0.25 F4. Varywl FINE Mao 0,425 .200 0.075 4.10 15.35 26.M Loose 025. 050 SolMEDIUM M10 0 .0 0,425 10-30 35.65 28-35 Medium O.nse0'0 w Medium So COURSE W 4,75 M10 2 30. 50 >50 W-85 as-100 35.42 W.48 Dent. Very Dense 15.30 1.00.2,00 200-t00 SIM Very Sll ORAVEL FINE 19 4 4.7S > 30 > 4.W Hard (( PLATE COURSE 78 19� COBBLES 76 mm Io 203 mm }�j ,}{� 7 y�q (pLiy Gl>OU�T +TOI<i.laweSt IIII C. BOULDERS >203mm a Gmmchnieal Eneineen, G.InhU,A Envlronmentei Sclentbu 132Q HE 2pm St,-, Swle l2 Be/ewe, WA 00005 Ph— (205) 8495757 Fax (2051649.8758 ROCK FRAOMENTE D mm ROCK +0 ]8 coat meter in wlbme 0- n m (n � mO 80 xC D_ J mm ON O TO, r -1 m a1 1. Z. O) Z. 9 n . m f 1: I' 1 BORING NO. B-1 Logged By: SH Date Drilled: 4/7/98 Surface Elev. 189 feet Depth ft. USCS Soil Description SAMPLE SPT 81— Per 04.0has SPT " 81— per f..-t I W.1 r Content % Other Tests Commerl. Tvp. No. SP/ SM Brown SAND with gravel and one, 01754 medium deaWa, mist Drillrig stuck @ 2.5 too due to mek, added water in hot* to ease drilling T at 2,5,7 12 7.8 S2 10,11.35 46 5.9 Brown/gray gravelly SAND with pebble and "M Orgill, very dam, damp 5 SPI am to moist. S3 30,32,33 65 5.9 0 Note: Total depth = 6.5 feet. There was no water seepage encountered. 15 20 25 30 35 40 Using 610.1) portable rig, standard 140 lbs hummer and 2"O.D. split- sampler BORING LOG 19� ELM&BEM NEISON RESMENCE 18318 OLYWIC VErW DPJW EDMONDS, WASHNGTON uroup 6 Wes , tic. Geateelmleal Enometrai Claologlata, & E-memn-t-1 adenona DATE 4/22/98 1 JOB NO. G-0907 PLATE 5 z 0 0 M q — M a M C Mien CE 0 -n M M a5 0 0 C Co Q 0 z z O M BOMNG NO. B-2 Logged By: SH Date Drilled: 4/7 t998 Surface Elev. 180 feet +/- Depth - Soil Description SAMPLE SPT Blois SPT(N) Blows Water Content Other T.M. commeda R uses per 6lrwhea per toot Typo No. SM 13.m SAND with sane sift end gravel, base, moist (Fill) T St 11.9 Drilling gas slower at 4.5 fed 1 T. l S2 1.2.1 3 16.0 4 5 T 1 S3 3,4,10 14 8.7 SWLigtd brown SAND with —gravel and eArredium dense. moist SP a17to8feet, drill riggaaetnar.addodwatertoeaaadriwng ---- - -------------------------------------------- --- Bro"gmwlly SAND with and trace ofsill, derue to very dense, I s4 15.21,24 45 11.5 10 SP/ SM pebble =ia Ig5 13.13.17 30 16.4 IS6 15,5013" 50/3" 12.6 15 Note: Total depth = 13.5 feet. 20 There was no water seepage encountered. 25 30 35 40 Using 6.O.D portable rig, standard 140 lbs hatomer and 2"O.D. split- sampler BORING LOG ® roup O W@S s nd. ELIZABETHNELSON RESIDENCE 18318 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE Oeolechnicai Enol—ra, Geologists, a EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Environmental Sdemlats DATE 4/22/98_1 JOB NO. G-0907 PLATE 6 E: O t: rtl - c cm m0 1n : m 10 D Z.. CA E "n i An M m to O y ' t ; C mo r0) in Z: O 0 m I, BORING NO. B-3 Lagged By: SH Date Drilled: 4/7/98 Surface Elev. I89 feet +/- Depth USCS Soil Description SAMPLE SPT Blw,e SPT(M alo- Water conlem OIMrTastaa Der per % Comments. Type No. ft. &Inches .loot T SI 4,7,5 12 wro SP/ &own SAND with gravel and trace ofaih, meditan dersse, moist 1 recover SM ham to drill @ 2 feel doe to ruck. T S2 9,9,11 20 9.9 5 1 SP/ 'Light brown gravelly SAND with pebble a d trace of sih, very dace, demp� S3 14,17,39 SM to moiaL Z 36 ! Ll 10 Note: Total depth = 6.5 feet. There was no water seepage encountered. 15 20 25 30 3S 40 Using 6"0.D portable rig, standard 140 lbs hammer and 2"O.D. split- sampler BORING LOG ELIZABETIHNELSON RESIDENCE 18318 OLYMPIC VEIW DRIVE EDMONDS, WASIMGTON O weS a Inc. aeotechnlcal E.91..ra, aeologlata, a Environmental Scientists - DATF, 4/22199 1 JOB NO. G-0907 JPIATF 7 6` r, E, i} , m c m. mo -I O _. Mm m� CZ i --n rnm s; fr pOp Fn N z0. z z n. m r; Basement Wall Slope to drain .,..,..a.,h.. •: i ( (jj(( t ] 77yjj,, s st•iiti�i€i t, s s t t r Vertical Drain Mat �iil'`fi{Ij (Miradrain 6000 try :iSijii;,''•vrii7�izi,� t4 „(:..l.iriiL..:•.w� [ , E 1.,,,•3,,:t: or equal) Relative - - .Impermeable. Q �c 4' COMPACTED 'i ONSEMBACKMI, 11 >` Free draining material. MAT�L (Washed rock or Crushed OF USABLE) rock) —n1 O m mp h . Geotutile .... ..•.,. (mirafs 140 NL: 1':•X•x —IQ or equal) R¢t?S i:: t}jt: f r i .:... :.:.. - ` FODTING 4 or 6 inch diameter y' C Z slotted orperfomted pVC pipe 0m I, f v NOT TO SCALE o n� H TO NOTES: 1.) Do not replace rigid PVC pipe with flexible corrugated plastic pipe. z y. 2) Perforated or slotted PVC pipe should be tight jointed and laid with perforations or slots down, with positive gradient to discharge. o (' 3) Do not connect roof downspout drains into the footing drain lines. m I, 4.) Backfill should be compacted to 901/o of maximum dry density based on I Modified Proctor. The top one foot should be compacted to 95% of maximum dry density if backfill is to support sidewalks, driveway, etc. -+� TYPICAL BASEMENT WALL BACKFILL r i Group Northwest, Inc. AND DRAINAGE DETAIL Gaolechnkel Enpirwen, Oeoiopkte.8 EnvironmoMel Selonllele SCALE NONE DATE 5/7198 MADE SH OHKD WC JOB NO. G907 PLATE 8 C. m 80 C �m m� r r O3 i3 � Mm O o Fn -1 n M1 Z O 1 n m L` I< OBSERVATION FIELD REPORT Project 1"heNdsonResidence Job No. 02030.11 Field Rep. Chris Bernards RS ort No, E Date Au ust30, 2002 Location r wpose of Site Visit To verify that the 18318 Olympic view Drive footing reinforcement and dowels Edmonds, WA conform to the structural vlam Clientlowner General Contractor The Nelsons Dave Peterson X, ZO. m t` h,4 (!r K,t a m a NARRATIVE AI 0 O C << m m p 1,= A site observation of the Nelson Residence was performed on z r y August 30, 2002 to verify that the footing reinforcement was in i general conformance with the structural plans, Most reinforcing for the house was in place except for the vertical bats on the west n ; side of the house. These were still being placed at the time of the k; r)3q site visit, m m po! !! 4} The reinforcing for the continuous house footings were observers o fir" C } to be in conformance with details 5 through 8 on sheet S•2, Vertical bars were still being placed, however the size and spacingmzi of the completed work matched the details. The retaining wall footing reinforcement and dowel bars were observed to be in conformance with detail 6 on S•h and detail 6B z (faxed on August 26) for 60ksi rebar. The heel width of the retaining wall was less than required by the schedule for a portion W ; of the length of the wall, but the form was shifted out to meet the p �. dimensions required. n: T 4 2604thAve. SOLM StA0200 Ftimaxls,WAM020 Phans:426.779,0600 Fax. 426.778MG } In r i i 08/30/2002 06:59 4258275424 AESI PAGE 01/02 FIELD REPORT Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Pau I of I Wtt "to Nam P.J.t N.. anom Nelson Residence 911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 10D Lwflo, -=13"Al Wort" Kirkland, Washington 98033 __ 11311 Mple View Drive 1 Overcast 61) dtg 425-817-7701 VAX 827-5424 Wurt."?u' Bldg. Puft! N.. TO; Elizabeth Nelson cut gar amcnas P.O. Bwr 404 Edmonds, W35160mon M26404 Petertius Custom HomeafENzabsth Nelson Z ATrN: 1. AS EWQUMED BY Dme Peterson Paterson Custom Homes/ Due Peterson 9 Grnfiag Camawtsupoirtowun 0 In THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED; Otisite this morning to evaluate soils exposed in foundation excavation for the above referenced project. Upon my arrival I observed that the contractor had completed the main excavation for the new foundation. The excavation was on the order of 3 to 5 feet deep into the hillside towards the street and 2 to 3 feet deep m 0, towards the bluff. The contractor was in the process of hand excavating the final footing lines to achieve C 18 inches below grade. The excavator was gone since it could not finish all the excavation and still exit the m site. The foundation elevation closest to the street was on the order of 10 to 15 feet lower than the street due to the sloping nature of the lot and a temporary fin placed by the contractor for parking purposes. The the face the between the foundation excavation and contractor had placed rockery rocks to armor of slope the street. 3i by others) for this very dense sediments were encountered 0 n -4 According to the soils report (completed project, within 2-1/2 to 4 feet below the original ground surface within the street side of the property. Very dense, M frim beating sediments were also encountered at a depth of 7 feet below the ground surface towards the bluff 0 a F) after penetrating loose to medium dense fill and natural soil. In order to eliminate the previously 0 C recommended augercast piles along the western (bluff side) portion of the house the footings along the western margin are to be cast atop the very dense, natural sediments. Evaluation of the western footing area revealed loose, silty, sand and gravel sediments that could be easily M excavated by had. informed Dave that the western footing fine, plus approximately 5 feet of return on the adjacent footings, needed to deepened to encounter the dense sediments anticipated to be 7 feel deep below z the original grade. Dave was already down 2 to 3 feet but planned to order a small excavator to complete the job. I informed Dave that the rest of the footing areas exposed suitably firm sediments. Dave said he would call us to re -inspect the western footing area. Z 0 M COFIES To! DATE MAILED: FIELD REP.! Scott R. Hannah PRINCIPAL I FM: AL—__ - ( 911 Fifth Avenue. Suite 100 _ j Kirkland, Washington 9SD33 " ! i 425.827.7701 FAX 827-5424 TO: Eazabeth Nebon P.O. Box 404 ' i Edo ds. Wuldmon M20.4M " ATTN: AS REQUESTED M -Dav4 Pdaaon j i OiR Prato Nude Fraser Na. tN20/02 Netwn rteldenm KEK369A taaetn Wuger MIS O m c Via. Drin 70 Mwklfwkr Bldg, Fume No, CI or Edmonds Pnprxerurttdma akwo— Peterm Custom Homm/Efinbelh Nebm CtneM Cam+emr+gupulnaMent Pstae Custom Hanes/ Dave Pdcr Oradleg Cma+cbr/9rperinrcodeer 1= 2 i THE FOLLOMG WAS NOTED: G1 M t 4g jReturned to the site late this afternoon to reevaluate the foundation soils along the western footing. A o m . scootl excavator was just being loaded onto the back of a trailer upon my arrival. The western footing line had been excavated an additional 3 to 4 feet deep and encountered a very dense, t` (glacially consolidated) sand and gravel with varying silt content. Observations in the sidewall of the 12 inches lodgement till over outwash. Except for removing some O m trenches revealed approximately of z . surfacially disturbed soil, which Dave planned to do, the exposed soils were considered suitable for r i foundation support, as recommended. `n i0 -n While onsite, we discussed different options for baeltfitling the retaining wall planned at the toe of the m I temporary slope onthe street side of the excavation. Informed Dave that 2 to 4 inch quarry spalls would 171 m be the easiest to place and that we would still need to inspect placement but on a visual basis since the o V1 E spells can not be tested. I agreed with Dave that the quarry spells would also allow for good drainage. n The temporary steep slope was covered with plastic. N j 55 m 11 COPIES To: Dave Peterson a Fa:: 425-741.2449 FnU D REP.: Scott R. Hsamb $(Ltd DAZE MAR.ED: PRINCIPAL 1 PM: Bnra L. Blyton p , t: _ q; v ra ri p A t N:0,. m m O C . ItA c ' i(k 1! mm D� 0� 1 0 MO f _ j 4 { Lt7n/ �Dm ipaon �'r" r Ili S BY Datc . C/4 i { Checked Date ENG! R Gt?�j �S sco�o short No. 1gl3 Dc�AV r�tlO�_ 250 4th Ave. South Job No. projat suite 200 Edmonds, WA98020 »Of�^\ \:MM \[� . Fn \\§ \ \ �\ \\o �\ • tt} F„ Height Calculation Worksheet k Address. �5 i ° C� P s Date: 4yt a" t: Inspector(s): M", 3 .1. Datum Point: t 0 z m W 2. Datum Point Elevation: iL. $ 3. Average Grade: 1 m 65 1 c p 4. Maximum Elevation Allowed: ( 2S � (average grade) +25"=. a 3, ( m o € 5. Reference Point Elevation Shot to House: On m F s r1 aJ (datum elevation) + dr (grade to transit level line shot to house) _ z mYK D z Y `} 6. Measurements from line shot onto house to roof ridge: is r} O n e: C mm c i. z I Total; { 7. Actual ElevationO �'G5�- (reference point elevation) + 3' (measurements t, from= �oS- Conclusion: i 3S (actual) is greater / ess c��/� l (allowed); therefore the house is1 Is not over the height requiremen�CDC 16.20.30 requirements i FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL FORM TO: DATE: MEMO TO: PERMIT COORDINATOR, BUILDING DMSION FROM: FIRE DEPARTMENT DATE neesesron ENGINEERING DIVISION DATE 1` " - " z nrwseswa - "O PLANNING DIVISION DATE m =i -4 �_ PROJECT�tJ c m 2 r� SITE ADDRESS 'II� 6 V 1 ' MO 8 n 0 C PERMIT #?�6�G2� ADB# DATE INSPECTED mz DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE INSPECTED S.3 z A field inspection was conducted to determine final compliance with approved plans. Final approval co denotes that there are no objections from the above signed Department to the release of - PERFORMANCE BONDS and the granting of: i g mm_ 0 Fa r m GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL � ai Zr- GRANT PROJECT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS NOTED x D z A o Copy of CONDDITIONS given to owner/contractor by inspector I ca z o FAILED FINAL INSPECTION - OUTSTANDING ISSUES 0 m u Copy of CORRECTION NOTICE given to owner/contractor by inspector I 2. 3. RE -INSPECTED OUTSTANDING ISSUES - GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL Date Sign ocaprvl.doe.l:temp:bldg:fomis 10/Ol y RECORD OF INSPECTIONS INSPECTOR DATE APPROVED �. SETBACKS ..................... _ FOUNDATION: Footing .........:............ Wall ........................:. ... Pier/Porch .................. i Retaining Wail ........... . ' Slab Insulation........... } �.. PLUMBING:. - .... " I Underground ........... -.- Rough -In �( Commercial Final.:.... `. HEATING: ' Gas Test ............ Gas Piping ........... Equipment ................ Commercial Final ... - EXTERIOR SHEATHING - -' NAILING .......................... �p FRAMING .. FIRST FLOOR FRAMING.,. ' 9 "INSULATION ............ i Floor Insulation' - i Wall insulation ........... . Ceiling insulation ....... " i -✓a-�� " SHEETROCK NAILING"...� SPECIAL INSPECTION ... " MISCELLANEOUS ........... " FINAL APPROVAL FOR RECORD OF INSPECTIONS INSPECTOR DATE APPROVED SETBACKS YY\s A-UZ .................... FOUNDATION: Footing , %S Py D•p�. '�jgy;atc.-A. �u'., !�/l J —(' Wall .......................... i - Pier/Porch - ' .... Retaining Wail .......... .. Slab Insulation .......... PLUMBING: - ` - Underground - - P 1 s — Tj_-3 Rough -In ............ ..... i Commercial, Final - HEATING: k Gas Test t¢" \�'J 3'�•'+- b.3 i .. - Gas 01 J"t Piping. ....... ..Equipment. - " r Commercial Final EXTERIOR SHEATHINGI�..LP—f�Z,. NAILING .......................... FRAMING ......................:. 1 FIRST FLOOR FRAMING... `"•� f ©� " ;. INSULATION ................... - Floor Insulation ......... Wall Insulation ........... - sCeiling Insulation ....... " " SHEETROCK NAILING ... T ^ (5 S�\PE�CIIAL INSPECTION ... " " MISCELLANEOUS ..........- i " FINAL APPROVAL FOR ,l I O �_ TI N O C Q� C � y OCCUPANCY .................. M S l '• V Side Sewer 4b 2-7 I;L AmoutPaid$ �Itecetp6111-a-1' r� DateEssucd-?a�:res WaterWleterE* I Amount PaE3--Rc.:i.t?,I- I DateParch=d i i E -0:.nt raj.!