20050244.pdfFDATE �AECEIVED
CITY OF EDMONDS
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS
LM M41LING ADDRESS
u
0�
CITY ZIP TELEPHONE$�i>�- ;7;;T—/
dY 't �'g>'L) �7_ 4,0 '2eq(__
NAME
� - /_>> e,
ADDRESS
PERMIT EXPIRES
ZONE PERMIT
NUMBER'�A/
"KLZZ�1" /
JOB rjh
7 � I SI]ITF/APf#
CITY
ZIP
TELEPHONE
353 3
NAME
CC
Cein
-12 ern 19
ADDRESS
/L
'10
CITY
ZIP
TE4 ;NE/��
T;LEPHO
M1 YiQf
STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE
C, c <� 0 /1/ .9 0 /?)c
y
PROPERTY TAX ACCOUNT PARCEL NO.
C-7 0 �3 70 C 0 9 0 0 _5�00
91 NEW
RESIDE INITIAL
PLUMBING / MECH
ADDITION
COMMERCIAL
o COMPLIANCE OR
CHANGE OF USE
REMODEL
MULTIFAMILY
SIGN
REPAIR
GPlln-Nr. E:] FENCE
CYDS X FT)
DEMOLISH
TANK
1 0
T7HE�
c r-*,-`GARAGE
RETAINING WALL FIRE SPRINKLER
XJ CARPORT
ROCKERY
FIRE ALARM
NUMBER I NUMBER OF CRITICAl
OF t�Z DWELLING AREAS
STORIES UNITS NUMBER
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE
/1 e W
6 P. '49 ...... . 7"'
11 r � L' / i-) 6)
rvi K__)
PLAT UBDIVISION NO.
LOT NO.
LID NO.
LID FEE $
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP
TESCP Approved
RW Permit Required
Street Use Ponnit Roq"d
EXISTING 'e� PROPOSED
Inspection Required
Sidewalk Required
REQUIRED DEDICATION FT
Underground
Wiring required
MET�Q §IZE,
LINE SIZE
NO FIXTURES
PAV REQUIRED/
z
YES 13 NO C3
ui
REMARKS
z
z
OWNER/CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROL/DRAINAGE
8
96n I , T')Ir'4r1 ; to I-flif . 11 1 A f// 0_'l ,I. I ��A--ej r— 1141 1 & fv,--
z
LU
FIRE REVIEWED BY DATE LU
VARIANCE OR CU SHORELINE OR ADBI I INSPECTION I BOND
REQ'D POSTED
OYES WD s
SEPA REVIEW SIGN AREA HEIGHT
COMPLIMIr EXEMPT ALLOWED PROPOSED ALLOWED I PROPOSED
EXP
LOT COVERAGE REQUIRED SETBACKS 0
&:PROPOSED SETBACKS (Fr.)
ALLOWED PROPOSED FRONT SIDE R&Afq\ FRONT L/R SIDE REAR
9-s' 101 .2-S 'z-
;5510xn �1 z
PARKING LOT AREA IEWED BY DAT5 5
CL
-2— 21 (59"
RECI'D J�R�DVIDED PLANNING REV -.,e
)K- L b
r__ __r
L_g�
CMHE�PO BY TIPE OF tNSTRUCTION C( OCCUPAN
03 GROUP
SPECIAL INSPECTION JA EA OCCUPANT
REQUIRED 'D�YES LOAD
REMARKS
1PROGRESS INSPEC71ONS PER UBC 108/ ISC1109/1FIC1109 FINAL INSPECTION REO'D
V`110,011. I kl] L '07 V fit 1 Oflfll_ L_ P 'tw"'f( -01
VALUATION
WM
FEE FEE
Description Description
is Plan Check State Surcharge
HEAT SOURCE GLAZING % LOT SLOPE % Building Permit City Surcharge
PLAN CHECK NO: VESTED DATE Plumbing Base Fee
0.� - (P
Mechanical
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COV
ERS WORK TO
It= 13E DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC
2 DOMAIN (curies, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE Grading
SEPARATE PERMISSION.
a Engr. Review
PERMIT APPLICATION: 180 DAYS
PERMIT LIMIT I YEAR - PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN 180 DAYS Engr. Inspection ....
SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION
Fire Review
APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE, HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESORS Plan Chk. Deposit
IN INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF
9 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND Fire Inspection Receipt #
ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE, ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE
DEEMED TO MODIF4 WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENT OF ANY CITY ORDINANCE Landscapelnsp. Total Amt. Due
0 NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAY THE C11YS ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION.,
x I Receipt #
Recording Fee
1 HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION; THAT THE INFORMATION
GIVEN IS CORRECT, AND THAT I AM THE OWNER, OR THE DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT OF APPLICATION APPROVAL
THE OWNER. I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC- This application is not a permit until signed by the
TION; AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED CALL Building Official or his/her DopW.y: and Fees are paid, and
IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO FOR INSPECTION receipt is acknowledged in space provided,
WORKMEN'S Ca*"ATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18.27.
( 11�11_JA DATE
SIGNAT E I R R AUN DATE SIGNED (425)
43./ "'�" :?� 1P -jLk/\,
V42,6 ':/1�7 i � � � _//////o� 771-0220
R J?SE D B D4TEj
ATTENTION EXT 1333
IT IS UNLAWFULTO USE OR OCCUPYABUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTILAFINAL
INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADEAND APPROVALOR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCU-
PANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC109/IBC110/IRC110. ORIGINAL - FILE - YELLO6. INSPECTCA I
PINK -OWNER - GOLD -ASSESSOR
09/03 PRESS HARD -YOU ARE MAKING 4 COPIES
z
0
i
0
1111
-i -n
Cn
M
M
0
--1 0
0 C:
M
M Z
jo __l
C _z
o -n
n
M M
0-
0)
0 r'
0�11`n
C 0)
r, Cn
M 0
Z
X
z
W
z
0
4
0
M
0
MT
0
--io
�oc
-4
M Z
Ass I ociated E a r t h Sciences, Inc.
nniia
CITY COPY
Technical Memorandurn
Date: January 25, 2005
Z
To: CC Construction, Inc. Project Proposed Residence
01.
nd Name:, 18104 76' Avenue West
8415 192 Street SW
01
Edmonds, Washington 98026 Edmonds, Washington
Attention: Mr. Carl Clapp
CD
M.
C
From: Timothy J. Peter, P.G. Project No:. KE05019A 9-�
'�9
M
G. Aaron McMichael, P.E. 94,10
IVA
0
0
C,
Subject: Preliminary Findings Geotechnical Engineering Study
M rn
Z
r
This memorandum summarizes the findings of our recent subsurface exploration of the site and
0I.M.
discusses options for foundation support of the proposed home. Geotechnical design
recommendations will be provided in. our full geotechnical engineering report, currently in
M, M
preparation.
0 r
0
Subsurface Conditions
M CO)
M 0
Z r
Exploration pits EP-1 and EP-2 were excavated in the area of the. proposed home with a track
mounted excavator on* January 17, 2005. Both explorations encountered fill soils to the full depths
X.
explored of approximately 10 to 11,.5 feet. The fill soils generally consisted of loose, very moist to
wet, silty sand with scattered to abundant debris (predominantly wood and asphalt). Because th%.
Z
fill soils were not fully penetrated during our initial exploration, exploration borings EB -1 and EB-
2 were drilled in the area of the proposed house. Exploration borings EB-1 and EB 2 encountered
0)
Z
fill soils to depths of approximately 12 feet and 11 feet, respectively. At both boring locations the
.9
fill was underlain by alluvial sediments generally consisting.of peat with thin lenses of fine sand and
M
e alluvial sediments exteh
silt. At the locations of exploration borings EB-1. and EB-2, th ded to.
depths of approximately 14.5 feet and 12.5 feet, respectively. The existing fill soils and alluvial
sediments are not considered suitable for foundation support.
Sediments underlying the alluvial sediments at the locations of exploration borings EB -1 and EB-2
generally consisted of dense. to very dense sand with variable silt and gravel content. We interpret
these sediments to be representative of the Vashon advance outwash. The Vashon advance
outwash sediments were deposited by meltwater streams that emanated from the advancing glacial
ice during the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation approximately 12,500 to 15,000 years ago.
911 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 100 KIRKLAND, WA 98033 P:425/827-7701 F-.425/827-5424
The Vashon advance outwash sediments extended beyond the maximum depths explored of
approximately 31 to 31.5 feet. Copies of the exploration logs are attached. The location of the
site and the approximate locations of the explorations accomplished for this study are depicted in
Figures 1 and 2.
Thin zones of slow, spotty seepage were encountered within the fill at the locations of exploration
pits EP- 1 and EP-2 at depths of a proximately 1. 5 and 7 feet, respectively. Additional seepage was
p
encountered in exploration borings EB 4.and EB-2 within the alluvium and underlying Vashon
a . dvance outwash sediments. below a depth of approximately 12 feet. . Due to the very limited
Z
0
thickness of the seepage zone within the fill and.the variable depth at which it occurred, it is our
opinion that it is representative of perched ground water. It is unclear whether.the seepage
observed in the underlying native sediments in exploration borings EB-1 and EB72 is representative
of perched ground water or the regional aquifer. It should be noted that the occurren ce and depth
U5
-actors as season,
of ground water seepage below the site may vary in response. to changes in such f
C M
precipitation, and site use.
M a
0,
0
C
Foundations
M
The existing.fill soils and underlying alluvial sediments are not suitable for foundation support.
M Z
Z
Consequently, building loads'will need.to be supported on the underlying dense to very dense
r
t de imately
Vashon advance outwash sediments. These sediments were e ncountered a pths of approx
X
Co
14.5 feet and 12.5 feet in exploration borings EB-1 and EB-2, respectively. Fou r options are
0
presentedbelow for foundation. support. The first two options are suitable for construction of the,
new home at or near the existing grades. Options 3 and 4 involve substantial excavation and may
rn m
therefore be most practical for a home constructed with a full basement.
0 5
0
0 M
C V)
Option 1 Drilled Piers
C CD
M 0�
Z
Installation of drilled piers consists of placing concrete in pre7drilled, open holes. Use of this type
of pier system is best suited for areas where the soil will not -cave into the holes after auger
withdrawal and during concrete placement. If. the holes will not remain open, it may be necessary
>
Z
to either case them or install the piers using the augercast method. Due to the presence of seepage
below the 12-foot depth, we, anticipate that some caving may occur.. Exploration boring EB -1 was
observed to cave to within approximately 15 feet of the ground surface upon removal of the auger.
Z
0
As previously discussed, the fillsoils underlying the site contained substantial. quantities of debri S,
0
M
predominantly asphalt and wood debris, including some stumps. Acc ordingly, thecontractor
should come prepared with drilling equipment suitable for the site conditions.
Option 2 - Driven Pipe Piles
Another option would be to support the home on driven pipe piles. Pipe piles most commonly
used for support of lightly loaded structures such.as homes are either 3 inches or 4 inches. in.
diameter and are capable of providing allowable. axial capacities of 10 kips and 16 kips,
es
respectively. Recommended driving criteria for achieving these capaciti will be presented in ou * r
full geotechnical report (in progress). The debris present in the fill soils may cause deflection of
driven piles or prevent penetration to a suitable depth. For this reason we recommend that tile
2
piling contractor have an excavator standing by during pile installation to remove any obstructing
debris that may be encountered..
Option 3 - Overexcavation and Replacement with Structural Fill
Another opti on would be to overexcavate the entire area below the proposed structure down to the
competent, Vashon adva nce outwash sediments. . As previously discussed, these sediments were
encountered in our explorations at depths of approximately 12.5 to 14.5 feet. The base of the
Z
excavation would then be brought up to the desired foundation subgrade elevation using structural
0
fill compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density (American Society
for Testing and Materials [ASTM]:D.1557). The home could then be founded upon conventional
M�
spread footings that bear on the struc tural fill mat. The structural fill mat would also be suitable for
elow the zone of ground
support of a.slab-on-grade floor. We recommend that fill material placed b ,
0 X
water seepa ge consist of 2- to 4-inch crushed roc k or recycled concrete. The structural fill mat
0 M
C
should extend horizontally outward from the footing edges a distance greater than or equal to the
M 0
thickness of the fill below the foundation.
0.
0 C
-enches
M M
Z
--i
Z
Struc tural treii�� ���es that extend down to competent, bearing sediments that are
backfilled w ith either compacted, crushed rock or controlleddensity fill (CDF). Spread footing
O.M
h
foundations may then be used for foundation support provided they are centered over t e structural
trenches. Rock -filled trenches should have a minimum width of 4 feet (or as designated by the
rn
field engineer/engineering geologist) and be excavated down to the competent. Vashon advance
M
06,
0 utwash sediments. If CDF is used for trench backfill, the minimum trench width may be reduced
0-
r
0 M
to 3 feet. Because of the potential for caving, the actual trench width may be greater than the
CO
minimum specified. T he use of a larger, track -mounted excavator will greatly speed trench
M
ZO
excavation over the use of a conventional, rubber -tired backhoe. In order to reduce disturbance of
the bearing soils exposed in the trench, it is strongly recommended that the teeth of the backhoe
bucket be covered with a smooth cutting edge. T he advantage of structural trenches over complete
>
overexcavation of the building area is that they can reduce the volume of excavation required. The
Z
reduction in excavation volume is dependant upon the footing layout and size of the building. For
a relatively small home with many footings, the volume of excavation saved may be, minimal. In
CO
Z
addition, because settlement -prone fill and alluvial sediments. will remai n between the structural.
0
trenches, slab -on -grade floors should be constructed With sufficient bar reinforcement to span
between the supporting structural trenches. Alternatively, the floors could be const ructed using
M
I space.between th
w e foundation stem walls.
ood floor joists spanning a craw
Drainage Considerations
At this time it is our understanding that consideration is being given to constructing the home with
a full basement. Given the relatively shallow depth of ground water seepage below the site,
waterproofing and drainage of the basement walls and floor slab area will be essential. if the home
..is constructed with a basement level.
3
a
All retaining and perimeter footing walls should be provided with a dr in at the base of the footing
elevation. Drains should consist of rigid, perforated, polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe surrounded
by washed pea gravel. The level of the perforations in the pip e should be set at the bottom of the
footings. In addition, all retaining walls should be lined with a minimum 12-inch-thick washed
gravel blanket that extends to within 1 foot of the ground surface and is continuous with the
footing drain. Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the footing drain o r subslab
drainage system, but should be handled by a separate, rigid, tightline drain. In planning, exterior
grades should be sloped downward away from the structure t o achieve surface drainage.
If ground water seepage is encountered or anticipated at floor. slab elevations, especially in the
Z
0
basement, then installation of a subslab drainage system is rec ornmended. Subslab drains should
0
M
consist of p arallel, rigid, perforated, PVC pipes placed below the floor slab. The drainpipes
should be embedded into the floor subgrade so that the perforations in the pipes are at least 6
inches below the base of the capillary break. The subgrade and the pipes should be slightly sloped
CO
3:
to provide gravity drainage toward the point of discharge. The pipes should be ftilly env eloped in
C
M 0
no more t
a filter fabric -lined trench with washed pea gravel and spaced han 10 feet apart. The
--I 0
0 0
pipes should discharge into a tightline drain that will convey the collected water to a n approved
C,
point of discharge.
m m
Z
Alternatively, subslab drainage could be provided by placing 2- to 4-inch-diameter crushed ro ck
Z
F -4,
below the entire floor slab area. The crushed rock should be at least 1 foot thick and extend below
Cn
the perimeter footings. Perforated piping should be placed in filter fabric -lined, pea g ravel -filled
to
0 -n
trenches as described above embedded at'least 6 inches below the base of the crushed rock
collect and convey water beyond the perimeter footings. From this point, the -collected water
m m -
should be tightlined to a suitable point of discharge.. The subgrade.below the crushed rock should
0 r
be sloped slightly to provide gravity flow toward the perforated pipe..
0
0)
The footprint of the proposed home is located a proximately 30 feet from a slope visually
p
M 0
Z
estimated to be approximately 20 feet in height. Consequently, it appears that gravity flow from a
;U
basement level drainage system could be achieved if discharge downslope is permitted. In order to
-mend that all discharge b e
avoid erosion and potential destabilization of the slope, we recom.
Z
I nt
tightlined to the bottom of the slope. We understand that a municipa drainage system is prese
east of the property in 7 6" Avenue West. Although this area would lie upslope of a basement level
Cn.
for the home, discharge to the municipal drainage system could be achieved throug h the use of a
Z
0
sump and pump drainage system. If this option is selected, the system should be equipped with
—
either a backup sump pump and generator and/or an emergency, gravity drainage overflow to the
0
m
downslope area to the west.
We trust this information meets your current n eeds. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you
require additional information or have any questions..
Attachments: Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Figure 2: Site Sketch
Exploration Logs.
TJP/sn — KE05019AI — Projects\200501MEMP
4
L
llo�
all
Nl
Emig m. ... 1=
S T
A%
4
"'I
Qj
lw
17 210 ST
iFbG� Tl 4: q, I YZ
o/-
r'-. !:7, ? R
r, ... -
p
L
s j;n
/*
Df)
—.4T li
ST
its
'I 75TH ST
PL 511
V-1 ___s'v('7 771 yll.
i 76TH __L___'_ST_ —r.' ir�
I 7'"F' T
_77
jm 'r�
176TH
'Rig Z'
, U7
_: z I'L SW ::x
ONT
ST S W IV
7 7[tj
-o 'Z.�
1/�o T i 76'm PL
u�
SU
J )d r H
,p PL
"i�' Y41,
PL sw
"ARK
�-PARK
A A < Lj
u 1 11
ST
":2 JTIL
MJ ,
181-ST* /ST
itt.1111 PL 5V W
c- SJT�,Eef-_li '
n <
PL eV Id', I ST r'L
00 PL IV -S T
iZ� A/ 1 2 M D, Sl' 182 0
—;7
A--
_W 1444D
-it Ji SV ILI Z 41', "RD
I , — I 1— 162 S*r
LL PL jV N . ICIA I .
I P. L SU,
rTl C. PL SV
I Cd PLj
Al-
4%
(I �'r' I - 3RD
ve,
6 L�
AL/'o
-7t
T.
44
�llt' All? Q) Q
L _-A
i-55TI I :.._l.j-5TII FL ,w
N
Til sw
P L
ST Sw
::c
1.57-nl
ST. Sl
18 7 TH
NO SCALE
FIGURE I
Earth Scienceso Inc. VICINITY MAP DATE 01/05
Associated 04 76th AVENUE WEST
181
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON PROJ. NO. KE05019A
ol
erms Describing Relative Density and Consistency
.0.0 Well -graded gravel and
0 (2)
0 GW Density SIPT bloWs/foot
0 0 gravel with sand, little to
u_ 0 to 4
no fines Very Loose
Coarse- Loose 41olO
2 u-
(a > z 0 0 0 a 0 Poorly -graded gravel Grained Soils Medium Dense 10 to 30 Test Symbols
> . 0
0 (D Ln 0 0 0
0 30 to 50
0 j5 WOOO o GP nd gravel with sand, Dense
Cn 00000 a G = Grain Size
C� 0 19T 00000 Very Dense >50
Cl 6 00000 little to no fines. M = Moisture Content
Z 00000 (2
0 0 Consist��c SPT )blows/foot A = Atterberg Limits
C:
C: Silty gravel and silty Very Soft
Z . . - 0 to 2 C = Chemical
C: 10 1.. 1
c: GM gravel with sand Fine- Soft to 4 OD = Dry Density
0
Grained Soils K Permeability
M r Medium Stiff 4lo8
a) D . - 1i
C ( 2 -6 jZ — I !.
0 stiff 8 to 15
2
15 to 30
Ln Clayey gravel and Very Stiff
w >30
6 All GC clayey gravel with sand Hard
V Definitions Z
Component
C) 1 0 .0
LO _q
C I Descriptive Term Size Range and Sieve Number
M C Well -graded sand and 0
X_ 0 Larger than 12"
s sand with gravel, little Boulders M
3" to 12w
0 ... to no fines Cobbles
2 LL Gravel X to No. 4 (4.75 mm)
UL
a v
Poorly -graded sand Co rse Gra el 3" to 3/4"
sp
0 z) and sand with gravel, Fine Gravel 3/4"to No. 4 (4.75 mm)
CO .- Q M
'0 U) m)
16 little to no fines Sand No. 4 (4.75 mm) to No. 200 (0,075 m
0 Nr C
a Q) . M
U Coarse Sand No. 4 (4.75 mm) to No. 10 (2.00 mm) 0
0 Z 0
0 M Silty sand and Medium Sand No. 1 o (2.00 mm) to No. 40 (0.425 mm)
C
m) to No. 200 (0.075 mm)
0 U) F sm No. 40 (0.425 m
U) silty sand with Fine Sand
M
0 g (L gravel Silt and Clay Smaller than No. 200 (0.075 mm) M
a Z
0 C:) 10
LO
Clayey sand and WEstimated Percentage Moisture Content
Z
'0 sc
N Dry - Absence of moisture,
c: clayey sand with gravel Percen!29f by- dusty, dry to the touch
Component x
U) Weight
Slightly Moist - Perceptible CA
ilt, gravelly silt, Trace <5 moisture 0 TI
Silt, sandy s Few 5 to 10 visible
C) ML silt viith sand or gravel 15 to 25 Moist - Damp but no
LO Uttle
>
4) C With Non -primary coarse water M M�
U) CO
onstituents: > 15% Very Moist - Water visible but
c CO)
ca edium
Clay of low to m Fines content not free draining 0
W between 0 r-
plasticity; silty, sandy, or
CL 5% and 15% Wet - Visible free water, usually M
0 C Cf)
Z CO gravelly clay, lean clay from below water table CO)
E
M
An U) Z 0
M organic clay or silt of low Symbols r
or Blows/6" or
0 L plasticity Sampler portion of 6"
Cement grout X
0 surface seat
0. Elastic ilt, la ey silt, silt 2. Sampler Type Bentonite >
with micaceous or Sp t oon is Desqjg!!M (4) seal Z
MH f
d) _+
diatomaceous fine sand or Sampler 3.0" OD Split -Spoon Sampler Filter pack with
Ul 0 X
M silt (SPT) blank casing
125" CID split -Spoon Ring Sampler section
lay of high plasticity,
0 — 0 C Bulk sample Screened casing Z
Cn 00
sandy or gravelly clay, fat 3.0" OD Thin -Wall Tube Sampler or Hydrolip 0
CH with filter pack
E clay with sand or gravel (including Shelby tube)
0
Grab Sample End cap M
0 Vj :25 0 Portion not recovered
cr organic clay or silt of
_j (4
OH medium to high (1) Percentage by dry weight Depth of groundwater
plasticity (2). (SPI) Standard Penetration Test ATD = At time of drilling
(ASTM 0-1586) Static water level (date)
ck and other (3) in General Accordance with
>;.9 Peat, mu (5) Combined USCS symbols used for
Z C
cn M 0 highly organic soils Standard Practice for Description een 5% and 15%
fines betw
:E Ecn and Identification of Soils (ASTM D-2488)
0
_PT moisture condition, grain size, and
C -issiric. on visual field andfor laboratory observations, which include density/consistency,
I, itions of soils in this report are based ld or laboratory testing unless presented herein. Visual -manual and/or laboratory classification
plasticity estimates and should not be construed to imply fie tific the Unified soil Classification System.
mulhads of ASTM 0-.2487 and 0-2488 were used as an iden ation guide for
FIGURE
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
ratioln Log Key
Explo A-1
------------ :-:-::
,,:ve' and T
ittle to
Coar'
rave� Grair
4)
.,used for]
LOG OF EXPLORATION PITNO. EP-1.
This log Is part of the report repared by Associated Earth Sciences, !Inc. (AESI) for the named project a nd should be
read together with that repox for complete interpretation. This summary gplies only to the location of this trench at the
Subsurface conditions may change at this location w It the passage of time. The data presented are
0
time of excavation.
a simpification of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Sod
Fill
1
Medium dense, very moist, brown to gray, silt SAND with gravel with scattered asphalt and wood
y
z
2
debris (SM)
Wet at approximately 1 .1 /2', abundant wood, asphalt and some wire , below 5' including stumps and
asphalt chunks up to approximately 2' across; broken concrete pipe at base.
3
.4
M.
5
M 01
0
0 C
6
M.
M
7
C
> z
8
co
9
0 -n'
-n 'a'
IX
10
M M
0)
0 1Z
0 M
C CO)
ic C&
12
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 11.5 feet
M'O.
Z
Moderate caving. Slow, spotty seepage at approxima tely 1 1/2'.
13-
14
z
.15
C&
Z'
16
0�
M
17.
18
19
2--
18104 76th Avenue West
Edmonds, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE05019A
Logged by: TJP
1/17/05
Approved by:
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-2
%
CL
This log Is part of the report repared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be
read together with that repo for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the
Subsurface conditions may change at this location wit the passage of time. The data. presented are
time of excavation.
a simpification of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Sod
z
Fill
0
Medium dense, very moist, grayish brown, silty SAND with gravel (SM)- contains scattered debris.
d;
0:
M
2
3
C
4
Loose to medium dense, moist, tan, fine SAND, few silt (SP)
m
.0
5
0�
C'.
m m
Z''
6
C z
>
A,
7
co
Medium dense, very moist to wet, gray, silty SAND with gravel (SM); contains scattered wood and
0 -n,,
8
asphalt debris.
-n-
9
M M
0
10
0 m
C
Botic, f exploration pit at depth 10 feet
m 0
Moderatecaving. Slow,. spotty seepage at 7'.
M 0
r
12
13
z
14
15
z
0
k
16.
17
18
d
19
20-
18104 76th Avenue West
Edmonds, WA
Ass.ociated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE05019A
59.
Logged by: TJP
Approved
by:
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
Exploration L 0
Project Number
Exploration Number
Sheet
1 1
KE05019A
EB-1
of
Project
Name 18104 76th AvenueWest
Ground Surface Elevation (ft) 96
Location
Edmonds.
WA
Datum
_Unkriowri�
Driller/Equipment Boretec / HSA
SPI
Date Start/Finish
1 Jmr
—112
Hammer Weight/Dro 140# 13011
Hole Diameter (in)
711
0
a)
(n
Blows/Foot
CL
Q
S
E 12
E
>1
E
0
M
0
T
DESCRIPTION
10
20 30 40
Sod
Fill.
z
0
4
01
M
5
Very mols . t, gray and brown, silty SAND With gravel (SM); contains
S-1
abundant debris (wood, asphalt).
8
3
M
0
M
0
0
10
2
X M
M z
S-2
A3
—4.
Becomes very. moist to wet.
2
z
— — — — — — — — — — — — — --- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Welland Sediments
—
>
S-3
(Drilling stiffensat 12')
Very moist to wet, brown, PEAT with thin (<11" thick) lenses of silt and fine
9
6
A 23
M
sand.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — --- — — —
Vashon Advance outwash
—
17
0.M
X
15
Wet, gray, SAND, with gravel, few silt (SW).
16
21
A43
—4 X0
S-4
22
M
M
IT
0 ro
0 M
CO.
20
29
A
:M0
S-5
Becomes fine to medium grained with pebbly lenses (SP).
19
29
18
M
z
25
18
S-6
Becomes silty (SM); no gravel.
32
34
A66
ca
z
0
M
30
S-7
Silt presentin tip of sampler.
7
16
A39
23
Bottom of exploration boring at 31.5 feet
.35
cli
C14
Sampler Type (ST):
2" OD Split Spoon Sampler (SPT) E] No Recovery M -Moisture
Logged by:
TJP
3" OD Split Spoon Sampler (D & M) U Ring Sample Water Level
Approved by'
0
Grab Sample Z Shelby Tube Sample Water Level at time of drilling (ATD)
-_
L
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
Exploration Log
Emu
Project Number
Exploration Number
EB-2
Sheet
lofl
KE05019A
Project Name 18104 76th Avenue West
Ground Surface Elevation (ft) 97.5
Location
Edmonds,
WA
Datum
iinknown
Driller/Equipment Boretec / HSA. SPT
Date Start/Finish
.1121/1) 105
L
Hammer Weight/Drop 140# 30"
Hole Diameter (in)
711
a)
>
-J
U)
Blows/Foot
'EL
S
E
cL E
12 5,
�E .2
a)
CU
T
M (D
C/)
DESCRIPTION
0
M
10
2b 30 40
Sod
Fill
Zr
0
M
5
Very moist, gray and brown, silty SAND, with gravel (SM); contains
3
A4
S-1
scattered wood and asphalt debris.
2
2
M
M
0
0
C
10
S-2
2
I
A2.
M
Mz
Wetland Sediments
1
q
Very moist to wet, brown, PEAT, with lenses of fine sand.,
— — — — — — — — — — — - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
—
z
'3
)Taghon Advance Outwash
16
S -
Wet, gray, SAND, little silt, few gravel (SM).
22
25
0
15
12
-n
-n
S-4
Trace wood (probable slough from overlying fill).
8
38
30
M M,
CO)
— --- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— —
0
.7
0 M.
MAO,
20
Wet, gray, fine SAND, trace silt, trace gravel (SP).
A L50/f
M
z 01
-5
so/"
17
X
z
25
6
AW
S-6
(No recovery)
13
23
z
01
ee.,
-4
0
30
Heave in auger at 30'; driller flushed out prior to sampling.
M
S-7
Silt In tip of sampler.,
17
A L50/t
WE
Bottom of exploration boring at 31 feet
35
Sampler Type (ST):
2-.0D Split Spoon Sampler (SPT) No Recovery M - Moisture
Logged b y
TJP
3-1.013 Split Spoon Sampler (D & M) Ring sample Water Level()
Approved by:
7Z?J
Grab Sample Shelby Tube Sample T Water Level at time of drilling (ATD).
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION9 GEOLOGIC HAZARD9 AND
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
0i
th
1810476 AVENUE WEST
M,
CA
M''
Edmonds, Washington
M 0i,
0
0.
C�
M
M Z�'
> Z�
Prepared.for:
CC Construction, Inc.
0
8415 192"' Street SW
Edmonds, Washington 98026
M M.
'0
0 M�'
C 0Y.
Prepared by:
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
9115" Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
425-827-7701
Fax: 425-827-5424
0
February 8, 2005
Project No. KE05019A
ctl
Subsutface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, atid
18104 76" Avenue West Prelinihiary Geotechnical Etiginwing Report
Edmonds, Wdshinglon Project and Site Conditions
1. PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic hazard, and preliminary
Z
geotechnical' engineering study for the subject pr Ject. Our recommendations are preliminary
01
0
in that construction details have not been finalized at the time of this report. The, location of
0
the subject site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. Topographic contours, the locations
of the proposed home, and the approximate locations of the explorations accomplished for this,
CA
study are presented on the Site Sketch, Figure 2. In the event that any changes in the nature or
0 M
design of the proposed lot layout is planned, the con clusions and recommendations contained
C
M a
in this report should be reviewed and modified, or verified, as necessa ry.
—10
0 0
1.1 Purpose and Scope
M
The purpose of this study was to provide subsurface data to be used in the preliminary design
Z
and development of the subject. project. Our study included a review of available geologic
co
literature, excavating two exploration pits, drilling two exploration borings, and performing
0 -n
-n
geologic studies to assess the type, thickness, distribution, and physical properties of the
subsurface sediments and shallow ground water conditions. Geotechnical engineering studies
M M
were also conducted to assess the type. of suitable foundations, allowable foundation soil
0.
0 Cn
oF
bearing pressures, pile capacities, anticipated settleme nts, . cut slope recommendations,
n
C: 0
basement/retaining wall lateral pressures, floor support recommen dations and drainage
C Cn
M
considerations. This report summarizes our current fieldwork and offers development
Z
recommendations based on our present understanding of the project.
1.2 Authorization
Z
Authorization. to proceed with this study was granted by M r. Carl Clapp of CC Construction,
ca
Inc. (CC Construction). Our study was. accomplished in 'eneral accordance with our scope of .
9
Z
work letter dated January 7, 2005, and our subsequent conversations. This report has been
prepared for the exclusive use of CC Construction and their agents for specific application to,
0
M
this project. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been
performed in* accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engineering
geology practi c*es. in effe ct in this area at the time our report was prepared. No other warranty,
express or implied, is made.
-ARTH SCIENCES, INC.
Februaty 8, 2005 ASSO CIA TED E
TJP1sn - KE05019A2 - Projecls120050191KCIRIP Page 1
Subsur ace F_icploration, Geologic Hazat -d, and
f
18104 76" Avenue West A -elhninaq Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds, Washington Project and Site Conditions
2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION
Our understanding of the proposed project is based on review of a topographic site sketch
provided by CC Construction and on discussions with Mr' Carl Clapp of CC Construction. It
is our understanding that current plans call for construction of a single-family residence on the
site. The residence will consist of a two-story structure with an attached garage.
Z
The subject site is located at 1810 4 76"' Avenue West in Edmonds, Washington (Figure 1).
The proposed building area consists of an undeveloped, relatively flat -lying, grass -covered
0
M
area. Approximately 25 to 30 feet west and south of the proposed home, the topography
slopes steeply downward toward the west and south. The gradient of this slope was visually
estimated to be approximately 1.5H:lV (Horizontal: Vertical) over a vertical height of
0 M
approximately 20 feet. A small stream is located at the toe of the slope south of the home.
C:
rn a
0
The area at the toe of the steep slope west of the home consists of wetland, beyond which lies
00
Talbot Creek. The slope is vegetated by young, second -growth forest with thick brush. An
C
XM
existing detached garage and residence is.located on the north side of the subject site.
rn Z
C Z
>
3. 0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION.
0. M
Our field study included excavating two exploration pits with a track -mounted excavator. This
3:
rn
exploration was supplemented by two exploration borings drilled using a limited access, track-
M
mounted drill rig to gain additional subsurface information about the site. The vario us types o f
0 Vi
0 r
sediments, as well as the depths where characteristics of the sediments changed, are indicated
0 rn
C= CD
on the exploration logs presented in the Appendix. The depths indicated on the logs where
M
J M 0
conditions changed.may represent gradational variations between sediment types in the field.
Z
If changes occurred between sample intervals in our borings, they were interpreted.
The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the two exploration
>
Z
'pits and two exploration borings completed for this study. The number, locations, and depths
3:
of the explorations were completed within site and budgetary constraints.
Cn
Z:
0
Because of the nature of exploratory work below ground, interpolation of subsurface
conditions between field explorations is necessary. It should be noted that differing subsurface
rn
conditions may sometimes be present due to the random nature of deposition and the alteration
of topography by past grading and/or, filling.. The nature and extent of any variations betw een
the field explorations may not become fully evident until construc tion. If variations are
W,4
observed at that time, it may be necessary to re-evaluate specific recommendations in this
report and make appropriate changes.
February 8, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
TJP1sn'- KE05019A2 - Projects 120050191 KEI till' Page 2
Substaface Exploration, Geologic �ffazard, wid
18104 76" Avenue West Prelinzinaty Geolechnical Etigineering Report
Edinotids, Washington Project and Site Conditions
3.1 Exploration Pits
The exploration pits EP-1 and EP-2 were excavatedwith a track -mounted excavator. The pits
permitted direct, visual observation of subsurface conditions. Materials encountered in the
exploration pits were studied and classified in the field by an engineering geologist from our
firm. All exploration pits were backfilled immediately after examination . and logging.
z1%
0,
Selected samples were then transported to our laboratory. for further visual classification and
testing, as necessary.
M
3.2 Exploration Borings
_n
Ca
3:
M
Exploration borings EB-1 and EB-2 were completed by advancing a hollow -stem auger with a
M
limited access, track -mounted drill rig. During -the drilling process, samples were generally
0
__40 , !" I
0
obtained at 2.5- or 5-foot-depth intervals. The borings were continuously observed and logged
C
by an engineering geologist from our firm. The exploration logs presented in the Appendix
M
M z
are based on the field logs, drilling action, and inspection of the secured samples.
Z.
Disturbed but representative samples were obtained'by using the Standard Penetration Test
X
CO
(SPT) procedure in accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM):D
0 -n
'n
1586. This test and*sampling method consists of driving a standard 2-inch, outs ide-diameter,
split -barrel sampler a distance of 18 inches into the soil with a 140-pound hammer free -falling
M M
a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows for each 6-inch interval is recorded and the
V5
0
wn as the Sta
number of blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches is kno ndard
0 M
CO
Penetration Resistance ("N") or blow count. If a total of 50 blows are recorded within one 6-
i, Q 0
inch interval, the blow count is recorded as the number of blows for. the corresponding number
Z
of inches'of penetration. The resistance, or N-value, provides a measure of the relative density
of granular soils or the relative consistency of cohesive soils; these values are plotted on the
attached boring logs.
>
z
The samples obtained from the split -barrel sampler were. classi fled in the field and
representative portions placed in watertight containers. The samples were then transported, to
our laboratory for further visual classification and laboratory. testing, as necessary.
M
.4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface conditions at the project site were inferred from the field explorations accomplished
for this study, visual reconnaissance of the site, and review of applicable geologic literature.
As shown on the field logs, the exploration borings generally encountered fill soi Is underlain
by a thin layer of organic wetland sediments that were in turn underlain by granular, glacial
D EARTH S WCES, INC.
Februaty 8, 2005 A SSOCIA TL CIE
TJPlsti — KFO5019A2 — Projects12005019WEIM' Page 3
L
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
18104 76'Avenue West Prelin.iinary Geolechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds, Washington Project and Site Conditions
sediments. The following section presents more detailed subsurface information organized
from the upper (youngest) to the lower (oldest) sediment types.
4.1 Stratigraphy
Fill
Z!
0
Fill soils (those not naturally placed) were encountered at all four exploration locations. The
fill generally consisted of loose, very moist to wet, silty sand with scattered to abundant debris
(predominantly wood and asphalt). The fill extended beyond the maximum depths explored in
exploration pits* EP-1 and EP -2 of approximately 10 to 11.5 feet, respectively. The fill.
M
a
extended to depths of approximately 12 feet and 11 feet in exploration borings EB- 1 and EB-2,
rr
C.
M
s not considered suitable for ort.
respectively. The existing fill i foundation supp
--q 0
0
Q
;4A
Wetland Sediments
C
M M
Z'
Sediments, encountered directly below the existing fill soils in exploration borings EB -1 and
C Z
>
EB-2 generally consisted of soft peat with lenses of silt and fine sand. We: interpret these
Vi
sediments to have been deposited in a low -energy wetland environment subsequent to the most.
0 -n
recent glaciation of the region. At the locations of exploration borings EB -1 and EB-2, the
wetland sediments extended to depths -of Approximately 14.5 to 12.5 feet, respectively. Due to
M M.
their high organic content and low relative density, the wetland sediments are not considered
suitable for foundation support.
0 r
M
C M
CD
Vashon Advance Outwash
M 0.
Z r
Sediments encountered directly below the wetland sediments in exploration borings EB-1 and
M
EB-2 consisted of dense to very dense sand with variable silt and gravel content. We
generally
interpret these sediments to be representative of Vashon advance outwash. The Vashon
Z'
advance outwash sediments were deposited by meltwater streams that emanated from the
advancing glacial ice during the Vashon.Stade of the Fraser Glaciation approximately. 12,500
Z'
to 15,000 years ago. The high relative density characteristic ofthe Vashon advance outwash is
0
due to its consolidation by the massive weight of the glacial ice which overran these sediments
0
M
subsequent to their. deposition. At. the locations of exploration borings. EB-1 and EB-2, the
Vashon, advance outwash sediments extended beyond the maximum depths :explored of
approximately 31 to 31.5 feet.
Copies of the ex loration logs are included in the Appendix The approximate locations of the
p
explorations are shown on the Site Sketch, Figure 2.
-D EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
Februar ASSOCIATE
y 8, 2005
TMut - KE050119.42 - Projects120050191MM' Page 4
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
18104 76'Avenue West Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repot
Edinotids, Washitigton. Project and Site Conditions
f
Review of the regional geologic map titled Coniposite Geologic Map of the Sno-King Area,
Central. Puget Lowland, Washingtoli by Derek Booth, Brett Cox, Kathy Troost, and Scott .
Schimel (January 2004) indicates that the subject site is underlain by Vashon advance outwash.
VIA
Our interpretation of the sediments encountered in our explorations is in general agreement
with the regional geologic map.
0�
U,
Hydrolog
.4.2 y
M
Thin zones of slow, spotty. seepage were encountered within the fill at the locations of
;:q
exploration pits EP-1 and EP-2 at depths of approximately 1.5 and 7 feet, respectively.
CO, 3:
Additional seepage was encountered. in exploration borings EB-1 and EB-2 within the alluvium
M.
C ri
and underlying Vashon'advance outwash sediments below a depth of approximately 12 feet.
M -
01
Due to the very limited thickness of the.seepage zone within the fill and the variable depth At
.00
C�
which it occurred, it is our opinion that it is representative of perched ground water. It is
M
M Z
unclear whether the seepage observed in the underlying native sediments in exploration borings
EB-1 and EB-2 is representative of perched, ground water or the regional aquifer. It should be
CZ:
r
noted that the occurrence and depth of ground. water seepage -below the site. may vary in
response to changes in such factors and season, precipitation, and site use.
o -w
M Fn
0-
r
0 M
C
M 0.
Z
-AT
Z:,
Z,
0
0�_
M
�ARTH SCIENCES, INC.
February 8, 2005 A SSO CIA TED E
TJP/sn - KE05019A2- Projects I 120050191KEIIVP Page 5
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
18104 761 A venue West Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds, Washington Geologic Hazards and Mitigations
II. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND MITIGATIONS
The following discussion of potential geologic hazards is based on the geologic,, slope, and
shallow ground water conditions as, observed and discussed herein.
Z
0�
-4
5.0 SEISMIC HAZARDS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION
Earthquakes occur in the Puget Lowland with great regularity. The vast majority of these
events are sin�all and are usually not felt by people. However, large earthquakes do occur as
a M,
C
evidenced by the 1949, 7.2-magnitude event; the 2001, 6.8-magnitude event; and the 1965,
M 0.
6.5-magnitude event. The 1949 earthquake appears to have been the largest in this region
O-C
during recorded history and was centered in the Olympia area. Evaluation of earthquake
M'
return rates indicates that an earthquake of the magnitude between 5.5 and 6.0 is likely within
M Z
J0
a given 20- to 40-year period.
C Z
>
r
Generally, there are. four types of potential geologic hazards associated with large seismic
Vi
events: 1) surficial ground rupture; 2) seismically induced landslides; 3) liquefaction; and 4)
0 _n
_n
ground motion. The potential for eac of these hazards t adversely impact the proposed
h 0
project is discussed below.
�Mm
ca
0 r
.0 M
5_1 Surficial Ground Rtpture
C CA
9 Cn
+ M, 0
Z
The nearest known fault trace to the project, site is the South Whidbey Island — Lake Alice
Fault located approximately 1,to 2 miles northeast of the site., No surficial ground rupture
5
associated with the South Whidbey Island Lake Alice Fault has been documented in the
Snohomish County region.
Z
5.2 Seismically Induced Landslides
Z
0'
As previously discussed, a steep slope with a visually estimated gradient of L5H:1V over a
vertical height of approximately 20 feet is located approximately 25 to 30 feet west and south
M,
of the proposed building location. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered. in our
explorations, it appears likely that the upper portion of this slope, and possibly the entire steep
slope face, consists of fill. Given the gradient of this slope and the loose, debris -laden
condition of the fill encountered in our explorations,, some potential risk of landsliding on this
t
slope exists. However, given the slope gradient and its relatively low. height (approxima ely
20 feet)i it is our opinion that the risk of damage to the proposed structure is low under both
static and seismic conditions, provided that -the proposed building setback of 25 to 30 feet from
Febmary 8, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
TJP/sn - KE05019A2 - Projects i 20050191KE I IVP. Page 6
SubsuiJace Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
.18104 76" Avenue West Preliminary Geolechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds, Washington Geologt� Hazards and_���
the top of the steep, slope is maintained. It sh uld be.noted that discharge of water onto or
0
above steepl sloping areas can cause, erosion and reduce slo Accordingly,
y pe stability.
discharge of water onto or above the steep slope must be avoided.
5.3 Liquefaction
Z
s
Liquefaction is a process through which unconsolidated soil loses strength a a result of
vibratory shaking, such as occurs during a seismic event. During normal conditions, the
weight.O'f the soil is supported by both grain -to -grain contacts, and by the pressure within the
pore spaces of the soil below the water table. Extreme vibratory shaking can disrupt the grain -
to -grain contact, increase the pore pressure, and result, in a decrease in soil shear strength.
C*
The soil is said to be liquefied when nearly all of the weight of the soil is supported by pore
M
�c
pressure alone.. Liquefaction can result in deformation of the sediment and settlement of
M
0
0
overlying structures. Areas most susceptible to liquefaction include those areas underlain by
C'
loose, clean sand accompanied by a shallow water table. The proposed structure will be
3: M
M Z
founded upon pilings driven into the Vashon advance outwash sediments. The Vashon adv ance.
outwash'has a low potential for liquefaction due to its high relative density. No mitigation of
C Z
liquefaction hazards is warranted.
F
CO
5.4 Ground Motion
0 -n
-n
M M
It is our opinion that any earthquake damage to the proposed structure when founded on piling
driven into the Vashon advance outwash sediments in accordance with the recommendations..
0
0 M
contained. herein will be caused by'the intensity and acceleration associated with the event and
C: ct)
not any of the above -discussed impacts. Structural design of the building should follow the
M 0
Z
1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) standards for Seismic Zone 3 (Z factor 0.3) and an SD
soil type.
>
Alternatively, guidelines presented in the 2003 International Building Code, (IBC) Section 1615
Z
may be used. Information presented by the United States Geological Survey (USGS)
Earthquake Hazards Program indicates a spectral acceleration for the project area for.short
C/)
Z
sed on the
periods (0.2 seconds) of Ss 1.26 and for a I second period of Si 0.42. Ba.
0
results of subsurface exploration and on an estimation of soil properties at depth utilizing
M.
available geologic data, Site Class D in conformance with'Table 1615. 1. 1 of the IBC may be
used.
February 8, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
TJP1sn - KFO5019A2 - Projecls120050191KEMP Page 7
11-7
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
18104 7611 Aveluie West Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds, Washington Geologic Hazards and Mit�gations
6.0 EROSION HAZARDS AND MITIGATIONS
The existin fill and natural sediments underlying the site contain a high percentage of silt and
9
fine sand and are highly sensitive to erosion. In order to control erosion and reduce the
amount of sediment transport off the site during construction, the following recommendations
should be followed.
Z
0
1 . Silt fencing should.be placed around the lower perimeter of the cleared area(s). The
fencing should be properly embedded and periodically inspected and maintained a's
necessary to ensure proper function.
-4 W
CO
0 M
C
2. If possible, construction should proceed during the drier periods of the year.
M U
—4 0
0 0
3. Areas stripped of vegetation during construction should be mulched and hydroseeded,
C
ij replanted as soon as possible, or otherwise protected. During winter construction,
M rn
hydroseeded areas should be covered. with clear plastic.to facilitate grass growth.
C Z
>
4. If excavated soil s are to be stockpiled on the site for reuse, measures should be taken to
reduce the potential for ero sion from the stockpile. These could include but are � not
fences
0 -n,
limited to, covering the pile with plastic sheeting and the use of straw bales/silt
:around pile perimeters.
MM,
0
0 r
M
C W
rn 0.
Z
Z
Ca
Z
0.
February 8, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
TJPlsn - KE05019A . 2 Projects120050191KEMP Page 8
Subsurface Exploralion, Geologic Hazard, and
18104 76Avenue West Prelintinmy Geotechnical Engineering Report
y D ndations
Edmonds, Washingloll Prelinzinar esign Recomine
111. PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
7.0 INTRODUCTION.
Our exploration indicates that,'from a geotechnical standpoint, the parcel is suitable for the
her rly followed.
proposed development provided the recommendations contained ein are prope
Z
The proposed building area is underlain by substantial thicknesses of existing fill and wetland
0
sediments that are unsuitable for foundation support. Consequently, some sort of deep
foundation system is recommended for foundation support. Based on our discussions, it is our
:q 9
understanding -the CC Construction would like to use a driven pipe pile foundation to transfer
building loads through the fill and wetland sediments into the underlying Vashon advance
M
C
outwash. Geotechnical. design recommendations for the proposed home, including
M
0
recommendations for a driven pipe pile foundation are provided below.
0 0
M rn
M
.8.0 SITE PREPARATION
- Z'
—4
Site preparation of the planned building area should include removal of all sod, brush,. surface
r
ra
debris, and any other deleterious materials. These unsuitable materials .*should be properly
0 -n
-n
disposed of off -site. Any buried utilities should be removed or relocated if they are under
building areas.
r-n rn
Cn
0
0 M
The proposed building area is relatively flat -lying, and we do, not anticipate that the
construction will involve extensive excavation., However, some minor excavation will likely
M 01
Z
be required to achieve building subgrade elevations. Significant new fill should not be pla ced
on site to prevent inducing settlement of the existing fill. In our opinion, stable temporary
construction slopes should be the responsibility of the contractor and should be determined
during construction. For estimating purposes, however, we anticipate that temporary,
Z
unsupported cut slopes, or utility trenches greater than 4 feet in height or depth, completed
within the unsaturated, loose to medium dense fill or native sediments can be planned at a
co
maximum slope of 1.5H: 1V. Temporary cut slopes in areas of ground water seepage will
Z
0
likely require flatter slopes to remain stable. As is typical with earthwork operations, some
0
sloughing and raveling may occur and cut slopes may have to be adjusted in. the field. In
M
addition, WISHA/OSHA. regulations should be followed at all times. Permanent, unsupported
cut or structural fill slopes should not exceed a gradient of 2H: IV.
The on -site soils contain a high percentage of fine-grained material which makes them
extremely mbisture-sensitive and subject to disturbance w hen wet. Consideration should be
given to protecting access and staging areas with an appropriate section of crushed rock or
F
February 8, 2005 ASSOCIA TED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
MAn - KE05619A2 - Projects120050191KEMP Page 9
L
Substuface Eyloratioit, Geologic Hazard, and
18104 76'Avenue West Prelindiiary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds, WashinRton Preliminary Desigit Recominvidations
asphalt treated base (ATB). If crushed rock is considered for the access and staging areas, it
should be underlain by engineering stabilization fabric to reduce the potential of fine -grained
kr,4 materials pumping up through the rock during wet weather and turning the area.to mud. The
fabric will also aid in supporting construction equipment, thus reducing the amount of crushed
rock required. We recommend that at least 10 inches of rock be placed over the fabric.
Z
0
9.0 STRUCTURAL FILL
.0
rn
We anticipate that structural fill placement for this project will be relatively minor and will be
primarily limited to backfilling around foundation elements and backfilling utility trenches..
Ui
All references to structural fill in this report refer to. subgrade preparation, fill type, placement,
M
C:
M 0
and compaction of materials as discussed in this section. If a percentage of compaction is,
—10
0
0C
specified under another section of this report, the value given in that section should b e used.
MZ
After. stripping, planned excavation, and any required overexcavation have been,performed to
the satisfaction of the geotechnic,al e ngineer/engineering geologist, the surface of the exposed
ground should be recompacted to at least 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density
J
using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard. If the subgrade contains too much moisture, adequate
0 -n
recompaction may be difficult or impossible to obtain and should probably'not be attempted.
.-n
In lieu of recompaction, the area to receive fill shouldbe blanketed with washed rock or quarry
M M
spalls to act as a capillary break between the new fill and the wet subgrade. Where the
0—
00,
r
exposed ground remains soft and further. overexcavation is impractical, placement of an
0 M
C CO
engineering stabilization fabric may be necessary to prevent contamination of the free -draining
C CO
layer by silt migration from below.
M 0.
Z
After recompaction of the exposed ground is tested and approved, or a free -draining rock
course is laid, structural fill may be placed to attain desired grades. Structural fill is defined as
non -organic soil, acceptable to the geotechnical engineer, placed in maximum 8-inch loose lifts
Z
with each lift being compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density
using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard. The, existing fill soils and underlying wetland sediments
CO
Z
are not suitable for use as structural fill. In the case of roadway and utility.trench backfill, the
0
c
structural fill should be placed and compacted in accordance with current lo al or county codes
0
M
and standards.
The contractor should note that any proposed fill soils must be evaluated by Associated Earth
Sciences, Inc. (AESI) prior to their use in fills. This would require that we have a sample of
the material at least 3 business days in advanceto perform a Proctor test and determ ine its field
compaction standard. Soils in which the amount of fine-gra ined material (smaller than the No.
200 sieve) is greater than approxim ately 5 percent (measured on the minus No. 4 sieve size)
February 8, 2005 A SSO CIA TED EA R TH SCIE NCES, INC.
Mlsn - KE05019A2 - ProjectsI20050191KEMP Page 10
L
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard,and
18104 76" Avenue West Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Ednionds, Washington Preliminary Design Recommendations
should be considered moisture -sensitive. Use of moisture -sensitive soils in structural fills
should be limited to favorable dry weather conditions. In addition, construction equipment
traversingthe site when the soils are wet can cause considerable disturbance.. If fill is placed
during wet weather, or if proper compaction can not be obtained, a select on -site and/or import
material consisting of a clean, free -draining gravel and/or sand should be used. Free -draining
fill consists of non -organic soil with the amount of fine-grained material limited to 5 percent by
weight when measured on the minus No. 4 sieve fraction.
z
0
A representative from our firm should observe the stripped subgrade and be present during
.0
placement of structural fill to observe the work and perform a representative number of in
=n
P lace density tests. In this way, the adequacy of the earthwork may be evaluated as filling
Co
progresses a nd any problem areas may be corrected at that time. It is important to understand
0 rn,
that taking random cornpaction tests on a part-time basis will not assure uniformity or
rn 0
0
acceptable performance of a fill. As such, we are available to aid the owner in developing a
0. 0
suitable monitoring and testing frequency.
C
M M
z
10.0 FOUNDATIONS
C z
r -4
Driven pipe piles may be used to transfer building founda tion- loads through the existing fill.
0, M
soils and wetland sedim. ents and into the underlying Vashon advance outwash. Allowable axial
capacities for driven pipe piles are provided in the table below.
M M
Allowable
vertical Pile
Capacity
Driving Time
(Seconds Per Inch)
[Nominal
Pipe
i pip t
[Diametelr
Wall Thickness*
Hammer
Energy
40
650 lbs.
10 kips
14-16
E. TY ]E�Schedule
S�41) Schedule 40
�50 lbs.
20
14-16
*Galvanized pipe is recommended for corrosion resistance.
3:
CA
efusal, which z
In order for the stated pile capacities to apply, the pipe piles should be driven to r
0
_q
is defined as less than 1 inch of penetration during the specified period of continuous driving.
No lateral capacity would be -provided by vertically installed, small -diameter pipe piles. M
ernatively, passive
Lateral capacity could be achieved by the. installation of batter piles. . Alt
soil resistance acting against the embedded portions of the pile caps and grade beams may be
used. An AESI representative must observe installation of all pipe piling.
ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
Februaty 8, 2005
Page 11
V111sn - KE05019A2 - Projects U0050191KO IVP
Sljbsud�ce F-yploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Preliminary Geoteclu ical Engineering Report
I
18104 76'Avenue West Preliminary Design Recommendations
Edmonds, Washingtoll
The existing fill Soils contain substantial quantities of debris. Although the debris consists
mall pieces of asphalt and wood debris, some fairly large pieces of
predominantly of fairly s repared to excavate
wood were encountered in our exploration pits. The contractor should be p
obstructions that prohibit proper pile installation. Use of a high energy
and remove any
uce the potential for debris obstructing pile installation.
hammer would likely red
oting drains should be provided at the base of all grade bearns as discussed in the Z
Perimeter fo
D itiage Considerations section of this report. 0
ra -4
M
11.0 LATERAL WALL PRESSURES
e placed as per our 0 rn
C
All backfill behind walls or around foundation units should b
ibed in this section of the report. Horizontally M 0,
nd as descr 0
recommendations for structural fill a t may be -40
eld laterally at least 0.1 percent of their heigh 0. C:
backfilled walls that are free to yi
cubic foot (pcf). Fully restrained,
M
designed using an equivalent fluid equal to 35 pounds per alent fluid MZ
for an equiv
backfilled rigid walls that cannot yield should be designed
horizontally
ct to vehicul r traffic are adjacent to C:
of 50 pef. If roadways, parking areas, or other areas subje a > Z
11 height in determining -4.
et of soil should be added to the wa
walls, a surcharge equivalent to 2 fe
tain sloping backfill at a maximum angle of 211: IV should C4
*Walls that re
lateral design forces. 0 _n
onditions or 75 pcf for -n
using an equivalent fluid pressure of 55 pcf for yielding q
be designed
ined condition
fully restra S. M M
0. U5
onditions of a uniform horizontal 0 r-
ove are based on the c
The lateral pressures presented ab 0 M
nd and gravel compacted to 90 percent of ASTM:D 1557. A. C co
backfill consisting of imported sa K Ch
e the pressure acting on M 0
tion is not recommended as this will increas
higher degree of compac Z
the walls.
M
ed under the section on
Footing. drains must be provided for all retaining walls as. discuss
vided so that hydrostatic
proper drainage be pro Z
Drainage Considerations. it is imperative that
ation of a minimum I -
he walls. This would involve install :r
do not develop against t
pressures.
Cn
ground surface using importedl washed gravel
foot -wide blanketdrain to within 1 foot of the
inuous with the footing drain. 0
against the walls placed to be, cont
M
11. 1 Passive Resistance
ive earth pressure acting
use of batter piles and/or by pass
Lateral loads can be resisted by the
ading provided by batter
caps and grade beams. Lateral lo
on the buried portions of the pile
ent of the allowable vertical axial capacity of the
ad
piles should be equal to the horizontal compbn s and gri e beams must
d pile batter is 1H:5V. The pile cap
ile. The maximum recommende
p
SCIENCES, INC.
ASSOCIATED EART11
Februaq 8, 2005 Page 12
TiPIsn - KE03019A2 - Projects12005019WEMP
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
18104 VAvenue West Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Edmonds, Washin ton Preliminary Desigan Recommendations
be backfilled with compacted structural fill (minimum compaction of 95 percent of ASTM:D
1557) to achieve.the passive resistance provided below. We recommend the following design
parameter
Passive equivalent fluid 200 pcf
The above value is allowable and includes a factor of safety of at least 1.5.
z
.0
M
12.0 FLOOR SUPPORT
Support of building and garage slab -on -grade floors directly atop the existing. fill soils could .
C M
result in excessive total and differential settlement and cracking of the floor slabs. For this
M 0
.
reason, we recommend that the slab -on-grade floors be supported on driven pipe piles. The
0
C
pipe piles should be constructed as discussed -under the Foundations section of this report. The
M M
z
spacing of the piles should. be determined by a structural engineer based on the amount of
reinforcement included in the floor slab design and the amount of acceptable deflection of the
C z
>
slab.
co
If moisture intrusion through slab -on -grade floors is to be limited, the floors should be
0
constructed atop a capillary break consisting of a mi nimurn thickness of 4 inches of washed pea
M M
gravel. The pea gravel should be overlain by a 10 -mil (minimum thickness) plastic vapor
0')
0
retarder.
0 M
To mitigate settlement of exterior. driveway and walkway slabs, we recommend overexcavation
M c)-
Z
of the upper .2 feet of subgrade soil and replacement with compacted structural fill. Further,
we recommend use of steel -mesh reinforcement and crack control joints to minimize potential
settlement damage.
Z
13.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS
Z�
All retaining and perimeter footin g walls should be provided with a drain at. the base of the
0
M
beam el gid, perforated, polyvinyl chloride (PVQ
evation. Drains should consist of ri
grade
pipe surrounded by washed pea gravel. The level of the perforations in the pipe should. be set
at or slightly below the bottom of the footing or grade beam and the dr ains should be
constructed With sufficient gradient to allow gravity discharge away from the building. In
addition, all retaining walls should be lined with a minimum 12-inch-thick washed gravel
blanket that extends to within I foot of the surface and is continuous with the fo oting drain.
Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the footing drain system but should be,
February 8, 2005 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
71P/in - KE05019A2 - Projecfs.12005WMEMP Page 13
..........
Subsinface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
.18104 76'Avenue West Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
-eliminar
Edmonds, Washington Pi y Design Recommendations
handled by a separate, rigid, tightline drain. In planning, exterior grades adjacent to walls
should be sloped downward away from the structure to achieve surface drainage.
14.0 PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING
5t.
We are available to provide additional geotechnical consultation as the project design develops Z
is report is based. If significant changes in
and possibly changes from that upon which th
grading are made, we recommend that AESI perform a geotechnical. review of the plans prior, M.
to final design completion. In this way,� our earthwork and foundation recommendations may
be properly interpreted and implemented in the design.
am
We are also available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during C
ma
r sit t 0
construction. The integrity of the foundations depends.on prope e prepara ion and i4'
0.
C
construction procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field*
in the event- that variations in, subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring. m M,
Z
10 -A
services are not partof this current scope of work. If these services are desired, please let us
Z:
know and we will prepare a proposal.-,
_4
V5
We have enjoyed working withyou on this study and are confident that these recommendations 0 -n .
'n
will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions or
require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. M m
0
Sincerely, Mc 0 M
C T:.
NN, S14-"' J.
ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES9 INC. C CD
M 0!
-7 Z
Kirkland, Washington
X
J
17
0 33222 0
Z
ISTV'V
.4
CO)
EXPIRES �ooS— Z
0
0:
m
Imot J. P. G., P. E. G. G. Aaron McMichael, P.E., P.E.G.
ssociate Engineer
Project Geologist A
Attachments: Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Figure 2: Site Sketch
Appendix: Exploration Logs
Febrfia?y 8, 2005 A SSO CIA TED EA R TH SCIENCE S, INC.
Page 14
TJPlsti - KE05019A2 - ProjectsI20050191KEIIVP
c4imot
11MIN 1,
'027 2;1?A4 Im =1 NAW
-----------
-j
-17 17 221-401 IS T SW C-
X e
'jj
'N� I—'
N-1
PL
R'
174TI-I si�;
N. s;
rj
L
YN
P L r7d
S W
Is.
vl� 0*
W .. ....
0�1
?-P
If 1-Z p-
HUI'
C.
0-
LL.
r
;I -v
CZ1
WON
CouvT;-)�%-":f)
CX
Lrt
lr;
S41
CZ)
PL SW
ST
CA
0 11
f- AlTil 181-ST /�ST Sl�-
00 t L.
00 6 Ir T P L F,T r'L
P L jA1 —W/ 18
1.6 2 N D' - I
.:J SI
I �2flLjf
T iv -�-2 t-IrD
LL. —K zi ny.
TT1 I— ld-tRj) S-r
162K PL SW co, --
So T
J P L
—77—,"�- 77 7T.7-M—,7
6 �LW 183RD
e 5 G
FL W
-5TI I rr?
�7,
p
L ST sw
N
Ir'. 6T I I ST sw I
ST SW C) -j -J
NO SCALE
Cn
FIGURE 1
w ted Earth Scienceso Inc. VICINITY MAP
> Associa
m
18104 76th AVENUE WEST DATE 01/05
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON PROJ. NO. KE05019A
C3
-'C
Vo�
C *0 Well -graded gravel and Terms Describing Relative Density and Consistency
0
l2
C>. o GW lblows/foot
0
_Z3 E gravel with sand, little to Density SPT
LL no fines Very Loose Olo4
d) S CD Coarse-
0
Cn Loose 41olO
A- (D Grained Sails
a) M > -.0,00000 Poorly -graded gravel Medium Dense 10 to 30 Test Symbols
> 0 (D Ln 00000
03 C) U5 VU 000,0 GP and gravel with sand, Dense 30 to 50
(n 00000 G = Grain Size
0 *qt 00000
C) 00000 Very Dense >50
0 6 0 0 little to no fines Ivi = Moisture Content
C14 Z 00000
Consistenqj SPT(2)blows/foot A = Atterberg Limits
0 C) C 0 0
Z Ln C Silty gravel and silty Very Soft 0 to 2 C =:Chemical
r 'a—
C ca (D GIVI gravel with sand Fine- DD = Dry Density
0 C U) Soft 2 to 4
Grained Soils Medium Stiff. 4 to 8 K Permeability
c: U. 8 to 15
0 stiff
:E 15 to 30
Ln Clayey gravel and Very Stiff
GC clayey gravel with sand Hard >30
Y�. 03
> Z
co Definitions
CD Component 0
Lo (9 Descriptive Term Size Range and Sieve Number
raded sand and
_9
(a C ... well .0
0
Boulders Larger than 12"
SwIsand with gravel, little M
ca Cobbles 3"to 124
0 oxx:
4) to no fines
LL C:
n
0) Gravel 3" to No. 4 (4.75 mm)
(n
co > tQ Poorly -graded sand Coarse Gravel 3" to 3/4m CD
0 0 CL) SP and sand with gravel, Fine Grave' 3/411 to No. 4 (4,75 mm)
V) 0 M
Fn
0 11 1 no fines C
itt e to Sand No. 4 (4.75 mm) to No. 200 (0.075 Mrn) 0
M
Cu 0 mm) 0
Coarse Sand No. 4 (4.75 mm) to No. 10 (2-0
0 Z W.
0
d and Medium Sand No. 10 (2.00 mm) to No. 40 (0.425 mm)
Silty san 0 C
CU s M 425 mm) to No. 200 (0.075 mm)
silty sand with Fine Sand No. 40 (0. -4
M
cc
Silt and Clay 200 (0.075 mm)
g (L grave Smaller than No.
a Z
b
LO LL
Cn Ln Clayey sand and (1) Estimated Percentage Moisture Content C: Z
*0 sc >
cc: All ravel Percentage b Dry - Absence of moisture,
clayey sand with g
dusty, dry to the touch 3:
Component Weight
Slightly Moist - Perceptible _n
Trace <5 0.
Silt, sandy silt,.gravelly silt, moisture
Few 5 to 10 -n
C) ML silt with sand or gravel Moist - Damp but no Visible —1
to. Little 15 to 25
d) C water
With Non -primary coarse M M
Cn isible but
0 �:,.r_ constituents: > 15% Very Moist - Water v 0
co � Clay of low to medium
CC41, U) not free draining 0
(U lasticity; silty, sandy, or Fines content between 0 M
_j CIL p 5% and 15% Wet - Visible free, water, usually
Z :t! gravelly clay, lean clay from below water table C
U) E K. CD
Q0
Z
C0 Organic clay or silt of low Symbols
cr
'73 01L plasticity Blows/6w or
Sampler portion of 6"
0 Cement grout
:2 Type surface sea
0 ilt, clayey silt, silt Sampler Type X
Elastic S
2.0"OD 13entonite >
MH with micaceous or Split -Spoon Description (4) seal Z
LO 2 diatomaceous fine sand or Sampler
0 3.0"OD Split -Spoon Sampler Filter pack with
silt
cn (SPT) 3.25" OD Split -Spoon Ring Sampler (4) blank casing
section
h plasticity,
0 0 Clay of hig Z
(0 a Bulk sample Z Screened casing
*a sandy or gravelly clay, fat 3.0* OD Thin -Wall Tube Sampler 0
CH or Hydrotip
E clay with sand or gravel (including Shelby tube) with filter pack
(n n
Grab Sample
65 :9 End cap M
:3 Portion not recovered
Organic clay or silt of
H
_J (4)
OH medium to high (1) Percentage by dry weight Depth of ground water
plasticity (2) (SPT) Standard Penetration Test
I _T ATD = At time of drilling
(ASTM 0-1586) Static water level (date)
Peat, muck and other (3) In General Accordance with
C U) Combined USCS symbols used for
CU = . 1 11,
cn a PT highly organic soils Standard Practice for Description
21 u) fines between 5% and 15%
0 and Identification of Soils (ASTM D-2488)
r ondirion. grain size, and
Classifications of soils in this report are based on visual field and/or laboratory observations, which include density/consistency. maistu e c
plasticity estimates and should not be construed to imply field or laboratory testing unless presented herein. Visual -manual and/or laboratory classification
sirication System.
methods of ASTM D-2487 and D-2488 were used as an identification guide for the Unified Soil Clas
FIGURE
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
n
P A-1
V
L
i avel a d
GC vel with sand
j 2nc(
ed sand and _.jP
gan:lccla:y r silt 0"ow
sticity 0::
pla
I tir
'ilt clavev silt. silt
4)
0
M, —PTLI I I
Ex loratio: Log Key
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP-1
CL
This log Is part of the report reparec i by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be
read together with that repoxforcomplete interpretation. This summary agplies only to the location of this trench at the
Subsurface may change at this location wit the passage of time. The data presented are
time of excavation. conditions
a simplfication of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Sod
Fill
Medium dense, very moist, brown to gray, silty SAND with gravel with scattered asphalt and wood
"-J
debris (SM)
Z
0:'
2
Wet at a proximately 1 1/2', abundant wood, asphalt:and some wire below 5' including stumps and
p
asphalt chunks up to approximately 2' across; broken concrete pipe at base.
01
M
3
4
am
C
5
M 0
0
0 C
R
-4
3: M.
M
10
>
8
d.
9
0 -n
-r!
Cl)
0
0 M�
C 0),
12.
-
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 11.5 feet
M 0;
z r
Moderate caving. Slow, spotty seepage at approximately 1 1/2'.
13
14
>
Z:
15
C&
z
A'�
16
17
M
18
19
Ln
18104 76th Avenue West
Edmonds, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE05019A,
Logged by: UP
Approved by: 1117/05
This log is part of the report repared by Associated Earth Sciences; Inc. (AESI) for the named project a.nd should be
interpretation. This summary agplies only to the location of this trench at the
CL
read together with that repoXfor complete
I of time. The data presented are
time of excavation. Subsurface cond! ions may change at this location Wit the passage
a simplfication of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Sod
Fill
medium dense, very moist, grayish br6wn,.silty SAND with gravel (SM); contains scattered debris,.
.2
3
4
Loose to medium dense, moist, tan, fine SAND., few silt (SP).
5
6
.7
Medium dense, very moist to wet, gray, silty SAND with gravel (SM); contains scattered wood and
8
asphalt debris.
9
10
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 10 feet
Moderate caving. slow, spotty seepage at 7'.
12
13
14�-
15
16
17
18
19
z
0
-0�
Co
C
0
0 ci
X M
M Z�
C Z
:0-n:
n
MITI
-�o
0 M,
C(
4
0):
mot'
Z
:7q
.4,
Z,
iPt-
z
M,
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
Exploration
L 0C1
Project Number
Exploration Number
Sheet
KE05019A
EB-2
1 of 1
Project Name 18104 76th Avenue West
Ground Surface Elevation (ft) 97.5'
Location Edmonds.
WA
Datum.
-Unknown-
Driller/Equipment Boretec HSA,
SPT
Date Start/Finlsh
_JJ2.1M,112 U0 5
Hammer Weight/Drop 140#130
Hole Diameter (in)
711
0
a)
_J
rn
Blows/Foot
(D
CL
CD
T
S
E
T E
E
0
0
DESCRIPTION
10
20 30� 40
Sod
Fill
Zr
0
5
S-1
Very moist, gray and brown,'silty SAND, with gravel (SM); contains
3
A4
M!
scattered wood and asphalt debris.
2
2
X.
M;
�c
MU
0
2
0:
0�
-4
S-2
Wetland Sediments
1
A2
C
3: M
Very moist to ne sand.
Wet, brown, PEAT, with lensesof fi
-T
�'M Z
S-3
— — — — — — — — — --- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Vashon Advance Outwash
Wet, gray, SAND, little silt, few gravel (SM).
—
-
16
22
A47
C z
25
>
15
12
S74
Trace Wood (probable slough from overlying fill).
8
38
0
30
— — — — — — — --- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — 7
M M
0
0,
20
Weti gray, fine SAND, trace silt, trace gravel (SP).
40
A50/9'
0 M�
C co):
S-5
17
M 0i
n
25
S-6
(No recovery)
6
13
A35
3:
>
z
23
z
0
30
Heave In auger at 30'; driller flushed out prior to sampling.
S.
-7
Silt in tip of sampler.
17
01
10/9,
M
Bottom of exploration Wng at 31 feet
'35
Ln
00
CL
Sampler Type
(ST):
0
2" OD Split Spoon Sampler (SPT)
F1
No Recovery M - Moisture
Logged by:
TJP
Ln
3" OD Split Spoon Sampler (D & M)
Ring Sample �Z Water Level
Approved by:
TZP
0
Grab Sample
Shelby.Tube Sample Water Level at time of drilling (ATD)
Ui
L
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
425-827-7701 FAX 827-5424
TO: CC Construction
—iRl �5
192l" St SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
ATTN: Carl Clapp
AS REQUESTED BY:
Date
Project Name
Project No.
13 APR 05
18104 76th Ave W
KE05019
Location
Weather
1810476 1h Ave W -
Pt Cloudy
Municipality
Bldg. Permit No.
City of Edmonds
Engineer/Architect
McCann Engineering
ClientlOwner
CC Construction
General Contractor/Superintendent
CC Construction / Carl
Grading Contractor/Superintendent
Pearson Drilling / Terry
z
0,
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
I was on site for full time construction monitoring of pipe pile installation. While on site, I observed the
following.
:q:,q
P.Jiles
rn
C
Upon my arrival, I observed the contractor had a TB425 - .1100 pound hammer attached to a rail system
rn
--40
on an excavator. I also observed that the 4 inch diameter open ended pipe. piles were in 10. 5 and 21 feet length
-00
C
sections.
M
A total of 4 piles (piles 25, 28, 29 and 33) were driven today to a depth that ranged from 23.5 to 31.5
M z
feet The depths of piles driven were measured from the tip of the piles to the existing surface grade. The,
10-1
Z,
refusal criteria of 10 s/in was used in the' Hes driven today. Terry from Pearson informed me that the depth of
pl
piles driven today were deeper than he had anticipated; the contractor does not have enough pile lengths and
ca
couplers for pile depths driven below 21 feet. The contractor will spend the rest of the afternoon picking up
0 -n
additional pile lengths and welding couplers together.. Carl from CC informed me that pile 3 3 was ina dvertently
-4
staked and may not be used.
M M
co
0 r
Conclusion
0 M
I inf6rmed the contractor that the piles driven today has been suitably embedded, has met the refusal
C co
criteria of 10 s/in and is'suitable to support the maximum load of 20 kips. The contractor requested AESI return
M 0,
Z
at 800 AM tomorrow.
1>1
Pile No.
Depth (ft)
Approximate
Embedment (ft)
Comment
25
27.5
11.5
28
24.5
8.5
29
23.5
7.5
33
31.5
15.5
JPile may not be used.1
Cl)
Z:
-M
cy
O_n
mm
Fn
c V)
M 0
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
-3 r;7-Q
LA
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
425-827-7701 FAX 827-5424
TO: CC Construction
8415 192 no St SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
ATTN: Carl Clapp
AS REQUESTED BY:
Date 7Project
Name
Project No.
14 APR 05
18104 76th Ave W
KE05019
Location
Weather
1h
1810476 AveW
Pt Cloudy
Municipality
Bldg. Permit No.
City of Earrionds
Englneer/Architect
McCann EngineerinGi
Client/Owner
CC Construction
General Contractor/Superintendent
CC Construction I Carl
Grading Contractor/Superintendent
Pearson Drilling / Terry
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
Ri
I was on site for full time construction monitoring of pipe pile installation. While on site, I observed the.
following.
ca
C Mi.
Piles
M
0
Towards the morning, Carl from CC contacted me and requested AES1 show up on site at 900 AM. The
0 0
C
contractor is still welding the couplers and will not be ready until. then.
M
A total of 9 piles ( iles 21 to 23, 22A, 24B, 26, 27, 3 0 and 3 1 B) were driven today to a depth that ranged
p
M z
from 17 to 35 feet. The depths of piles driven were measured from the tip of the piles to the existing surface
10'.
C
grade. The refusal criteria of 10 S/in was used in the piles driven today. Piles 24B and 3 113 are 12V:3H
battered piles, driven towards the southwest and northwest, respectively.
3:
ca
Pile 22 was driven to a depth of about 17 feet; after observing the driving depths of the surrounding piles
0'r
-n
-rom AESI and Mike McCa nn with McCann Engineering, pile 22 was
and communicating with Bruce Blyton f
abandoned and another pile (pile 22A) was driven about 3 feet north of pile 22.
M M
0
0
Conclusion
I informed the contractor that the piles driven today has been suitably embedded, has met the refusal
0 M
C
C CD
criteria of 10 s/in and is suitable to support the maximum load. of 20 kips-. The contractor requested AESI return
M 0
z -
r
at 800 AM tomorrow.
5a
Pile No.
Depth (ft)
Approximate
Embedment (ft)
Comment
21.
22
6
22
17
1,
Pile abandoned due to obstruction.
22A
33.5
17.5
Pile driven 3 ft north of Pile 22.
23
3 0 * 5.
14.5
24B
27
11.
12V:3H battered piles driven towards the southwest,
.26
24.5--
8.5
27
25
9
30
24.5
8.5
t3l B
35
19
12V:3H battered piles driven towards the northwest.
Z
z
0
M
Associated Earth
S c i e n c e s 1.n c
Job File calculation
Phone Log El memo
El conference
info 0
Date LA A P o�s
Project No.
9
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
425 827-7701
Project
Kirkland,WA 98033
FAX 425 827-5424
DISTRIBUTION:
Incoming Call
Subject
Outgoing Call 0
Person/Company
File
Phone No.
Page of
z
0
M
C
M 0�
0�
C
.MM
z
z
-n
ITI
IT!
0 M
C oy
coy
mo�
Z
Z
M
w
FIELD REPORT
ield Report# 3 Page I of 2
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
425-827-7701 FAX 827-5424
TO: CC Construction
8415 192n" St SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
ATTN: Carl :;Iapp
Aq PIPMESTED BY:
Date
Project Name
Project No.
15 APR 05
18104 76th Ave W
KE05019
Location
Weather
18104 76" Ave W
Rain
Municipality
Bldg. Permit No.
City of Edmonds
I
Engineer/Architect
McCann Engineering
Client/Owner
CC Construction
General Contractor/superintendent
CC Construction / Carl
-Grading Contractor/Superintendent
Pearson Drilling / Terry
z
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
0
I was on site for full time construction monitoring of pipe pile installation. While on site, I observed the M
following.
n
Piles -4
A total of 19 piles (piles I B, 2, 3, 4, 5B, 7 -to 10, 11 B, 12 to 15, 16B, 17 to 20) were driven today to a M.
epths of piles driven were measured from the tip of the piles to the
depth that ranged from 2 1 to 3 5 feet. The d M
--10
n today. Piles I B and I I B are 0
existing surface grade. The refusal criteria of 10 shn was used in the piles drive 0
C
12V:3H battered piles driven towards the southeast,. and piles. 5B and 16B are 12V:3H battered piles driven __4
M M
M Z.
towards the northeast. Piles 1B, 2 to 4, 5B, 6 and 32 were moved about 5 feet to the west due to the piles being
-iout anymore
toocloseto76th. Pile 3 was driven but the coupler broke. before obtaining the refusal criteria, witl
C
couplers, the contractor will redrive the pile tomorrow.
Conclusion
day has been suitably embedded, has met the refusal 0 _n'
I informed the contractor that the piles driven to
criteria of 10 s/in and is suitable to support the maximum load of 20 kips. The contractor requested AESI return -n
IVI L0111VLJLUVV-
PileNo.—_[l
�hft
Approximate
Embedmentjf�
Comment
1B
25.5
9.5
12V:3H battered piles driven towards the southeast.
2
224
6
3
21
5
Not at refusal criteria when coupler broke, will redrive tomorrow.
23
7
.4
5B
25
9
12V:3H battered piles driven towards the northeast.
7
22.5
6.5
22.
6.5
9
23
P5
7
10
11B
26.5
10.5
12V:3H battered piles driven towards the southeast.
12-.
26
10
13
21
.5
14
24
8
15
21.5
16B
23.5
7.5
12V:3H battered piles driven towards the northeast.
17
35
19
18
22
6
19
22
6
20
21
5
Q
M
M
OE.
m Z�
z
mm�
0 C-1)
Om
c
CA
mo�
z
z
3:
z
m
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
F:
F
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
425..827-7701 FAX 827-5424
TO: CC Construction
n
8415 192 13 St Sw
Edmonds, WA 98026
ATTN: Carl Clapp
AS REQUESTED BY:
Date I
Project Name
Project No.
16 APR 05
18104 76th Ave W
KE05019
Location
Weather
th
18104 76 Ave W
Rain
Municipality
Bldg. Permit No.
City of Edmonds
Engineer/Architect
McCann Engineering
Client/Owner
CC Construction
General Contractor/superintendent
CC Construction I Carl,
Grading Contractor/Superintendent
Pearson Drilling / Terry
z
THE FOLLOWING WAS NOTED:
0
Rio
v
I was on site for part time construction monitoring of pipe pile installation. While on site, I obser ed the
q-6,
following.
M
Piles
A total of 3 piles (piles 3, 6 and 32) were driven today to a depth that, ranged from 22.5 to 28.5 feet. The
M a
0
—10
0
depths of piles driven were measured from the tip of the piles to the existing surface grade. The refusal criteria
C
of 10 s/in was used in the piles driven today. Pile 3, driven yesterday but the coupler broke before obtaining the
MM
MZ
refusal criteria, was redriven to the refusal criteria.
Z;
Conclusion
.1 informed the contractor that the piles driven today has.been suitably embedded, has met the refusal
0 -n
inished driving
criteria of 10 s/in and is suitable to support the maximum load of 20 kips., The contractor has f
n�
the piles for the proposed house.
M
cc)
Pile No.
De th ft
F28.5
Approximate
Embedment
Comment
3
22.5
6.5
Pile not comr)leted yesterday.
6
12.5
.32
24 .
8
M
A:jj
V)
N7 S
M:
Ic
M
ic
M,
MZ.
r6)
Z.
mm
11Z
M�
c ch
M 01
z ff
L o c-4
.AA4, A r
e
rn.
Lo
Signature
Reviewed by
Height Calculation Worksheet
7
Address: 0 60 1-7Lpdt AU, W
Date:
hispector(sj,): N(n%
1. Datum Point:
2. Datum Point Elevation:,
ZI
3. Average Grade: Ci
M
4. Maximum Elevation Allowed: Ck (-e 6veragib giude):+ 2'5
6
5. Reference Point Elevation Shot to House:
C M
M
C*I I'll
(datum elevation) +�O (grade to transit level line'shot to house)
0,
0
ca,
M Mz
..6.- Measurements from line shot onto house to roof ridge:'
:10
C
>Z.
rl
M,
M
0
0 '17n
C CO
M
Z
2;
X
Total.
Cn
Z.
0 0 (measurements
7. Actual Elevati n. (reference point elevatio
M
from #6)
conclusion,
ctual) is greate<
OLc5 -9 3 (a (allowed); therefore the house W
riess tUll) 0
Is not over the height requiremedtp'er ECDC 16.20.30 requirements
A I A
A IT A A' '4'
I I. All III A T. I
.4 .1 . A A It 0 1 o I %
A
A To lif
6
Of a kill I -,A jl I A, A
loo I I of I I I . I I I
l A,,
I of to I At . I . l to; I of
A I Ilk 4l I A 4 1
A It
If4
t4 1 FINALPROJE CYAPPROVAL F01M.4 I lotIT4 ... . . . TO. lottoIIt4k I4
4 lDATE'
% AIT AI I F 44 Itr A 0 loCP6 or It It oits 4,��"PERIqITN,�CO,ORDINATOR;7BUILDING:'PIV.
[ON Poll It I P I tkd AI000IRE -DEPARTMEN F T DATE!,.
1AIP I I. I
LEASE SIGN AIofI Ilk 7 f otoIV
A1 olISION'
ENGWEERI NG D 1IfIoIAooI I+ A, IttotUNG-DIVISIOND I ItoIk%k, I I1Vtrno�E SIGN IIVk. I I .. ...... ItTo 1 22 TIAofAIIIP. I It11 1. AID SS IIRE 1 1to IN I I IAIP 4
Id Ido ATAIM I3 I-QAT E 'IN I ATAD4 IM SPECTE
P
Art Vol I ooI I 4 all tAIA �A do tVIC IFWWO: RKTO BFINSPECTED yA`vWqt7k I11" 1 1L t of I tP 4N bTONr
0
II I "Ll L -, 1 1. I , I A I toto4 L' 1 4 .4 1 et; A 'r r L Lr ItI + I ro, ALI r 'd -e ok 1I oI r r.- I+ 1 1.
+ Itd nce +:w ans a lermine 000 Good, L, I m,p ia ap
tprove
L ' " I I I - 1. 1 , . t 'j o1c. III I r itIootLift L I toib st Alons - co' Ove; -signi d kn kj L
I ere. Are.;.e-imo I lotre
CRO e of
AIIIto-B --al e gr2 L
IE CK ONDS' d th 111 Ug Of ;,, L . 1 11 1 AII + ItooI A . otAIIIIIAit+ I itooIIotItIE FROJ C;Te+.- PDkIR I IRANTy A X.I.-MOVAL.
G1 I A'd .1 At I. "4f, I. A
AI
4 1Ak. 4 4kjo tio' t of
; wk�%( I I ILL A&, I L tIAA 4 + 'I of4 AT oL 0 1k L L I I Ik I A1. 14,
I To I IIJL' ItToI It o4 I.d ITAI + .4
T IP TED:Ak
FPROMF A NDITY1 NO.
PROV I4
I. ..... Y+ AAI. I I I . I , i a r I t Ak I A 1% o
L +1 oNPITIONN lye ndt* edfitrAibtQ1L )yinspector ofIlk I, . . I . . . . I Wi I 0 09 A 1 Ittrq L L Iot, r kL
I AoAI I itIf Al L Ike 1.1 P L I L
itI I4 I toNK At1 4 to "of AIlk -.1,
ItoIIIofIo-1' .4 1 3 1 AAotII1o'VLr 4 1
d oToIk toofAI 14P UTSTANDING; 18R. Sol IL IF IIIk`e L of',g I' I0 6 ItoAALA. PI
ITI 6;4, ;kill ItWE" ;'kby. AIAA19 IA I 1 .1 1 k, I I I I"k .1, 1. 11 1 1 . I
f. 0 10TIONNOT 1vieft:10:0owneff.contractOr or Id + It
Ait4 1 1 t ., .— o of I I I 1 -4 1 . . _. I A.
1' 1 to PAT AT I I I .� I I AIIoI . IT oofto- t I I I I +1 II
toP. itooI 1if00% I AI I I P 1Y,
do I d IVd IIoI j Ilk I t1.4 1 1 P 4 , L, II I II A % A1I d to r of It A I , IT, A, A I I tk� 4 1 or lt4
4 ofoAoeI.A, IAtIAtIIAo1 -41 at a . AIAof AII1I otIoIT-d itIoIAit do IV + oAAootIIof ItoP .1 1 TTOITI od IIt + I L IIAT A LAI AI.1 1 Io. IAtAAtoIII I f ri r I ItP W. of 4.1 1IL7 I I . 0 . I f I oI ;L 6 — P IT1 1 _P E
ATE
FIN
C 0
4
AI . . . I I I "L I A IIIAL 'AT) I T Is WI'D GISISi U le. 4 1% k" .11%. L.* I IIIIT"T 'A feil to
AIS otojokkk I look + %.j A' AI" I o .1 ot7 It. kofoli AIL u I AIke
td L P, I 14 r dr AtoIoT 01 '3125/0,4:j� :i� It ff. I. .1 1 1 -kkkA -1 T tAItAI I Iof4
NA1ToitII oI1, 1 0 A I I Ir 4 Ij ToIIt I .1 .1 I of I or A, AIT I L III I
z
0
_AAAA1
0
m
Aton
tookook,
C/) Itil
m
M
m . 0
0
-A-1 0
0 c:
,AAAj K
2: M
M Z
%D kkAAAA1
c
r- AAAAk1
a: I
cn
0 -n
n ;u
>
M M
0 �U)
0 r� I
0 m
cl)
cl)
M (A-)
Z r- 1
M
>
x
AAAAAA1
:1 1
>
z
cl)
z
0
0
m
ENGINEERING -INPSECTION
FEE RECONCILIATION
Z
Permit Fees Collected at Perm it Issuance C
# of Inspections: X $50.00 $
Cn
0 -n
Receipt M 2,� Receipt Copy Attached: Yes No -n
Only required if refund is due
M M
0
0 M
Cl)
Total Inspections Performed 9 cn
M 0
Z
# of Inspections: x $50.00
M
3:
Inspection Fees TO BE PAID $
Contact notified offees due: El by phone correction notice given
Date Paid:
Receipt#:
Collected By:
El Engineering Notified of Payment Received
REFUND Due: $
Reconciled By: Date
Origina Permit File 'Copy to: F� Engineering Admin (refunds only)
Revised 3/2/06
1 to: