No preview available
BLD20170068 (2)OF EDA.jO�G CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDM ONDS, W A 98020 ��e. 1890 PHONE: (425) 771-0220 - FAX: (425) 771-0221 STATUS: ISSUED 09/01/2017 Permit#: BLD201700-68 Expiration Date: 03/01/2018 Parcel No: 00565600200202 Project Address: 18500 OLYMPIC VIEW DR EDMO A -VATY OWNER APPLICANT CONTRACTOR CHESTER A TRUST NIESEL CHESTER A TRUST NIESEL LANDWORK ENTERPRISES INC 2959 W GULF DR UNIT 304 2959 W GULF DR UNIT 304 C/O RYAN KOLODEJCHUK SANIBE-L, FL 33957 SANIBEL, FL 33957 13814 457TH AVE SE NORTH BEND, WA 98045 (239)472-1353 (239)472-1353 (425)888-6950 LICENSE #: LANDWE1100P9 EXPA 1/01/2017 JOB DESCRIPTION REMOVE EXISTING RAILROAD TIETIMBER RETAINING WALLS AND REPLACE W/ TWO MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH WALLS FACED WITH STA CKA BLE CONCRETE BLOCKS. RE -GRADE SLOPE, REVEGETA TE - DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY WORK TO DWELLING UNIT FOUNDATION VALUATION: $0 FINAL PERMIT TYPE: Residential PERMIT GROUP: 58 - Retainin GRADING: N CYDS: 0 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: RETAINING WALL ROCKERY: OCCUPANT GROUP: U OCCUPANT LOAD: FENCE: ( 0 X 0 FT.) CODE: 2015 IBC OTHER: ------- OTHER DE -SC: ZONE: NUMBER OF STORIES: 0 JVFSTED DATE: NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS: 0 ILOT #: BASEMENT: 0 I ST FLOOR: 0 2ND FLOOR: 0 11BASEMENT: 0 1 ST FLOOR: 0 2ND FLOOR: 0 3RD FLOOR: 0 GARAGE: 0 DECK: 0 OTHER: 0 13RD FLOOR: 0 GARAGE: 0 DECK: 0 OTHER: 0 BEDROOMS:0 BATHROOMS:O BFDROOMS:0 BATHROOMS:0 FRONTSETBACK SIDESErRACK REQUIRED: PROPOSED: REQUIRED: PROPOSED: REQUIRED: PROPOSED: HEIGHT ALLOWED:0 PROPOSED:O REQUIRED: PROPOSED: SETBACK NOTES: I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUCTION AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO WORKMENS COMPENSATION INSURANCE AND RCW 18:27. THIS APPLICATION IS NOT A PERMIT UNTIL SIGNED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL OR HIS/HER DEPUTY AN3 ALL FEES ARE PAID. re j Print N@me I Date 'T/ Released ATTENTION Date ITIS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC109/ IBCI 10/ IRCI 10. FIFIRE APPLICANT ASSESSOR CITY 1 �s STATUS: ISSUED BLD20170068 CONDITIONS • Final approval on a project or final occupancy approval must be granted by the Building Official prior to use or occupancy of the building or structure. Check the job card for all required City inspections including final project approval and final occupancy inspections. • Any request for alternate design, modification, variance or other administrative deviation (hereinafter "variance") from adopted codes, ordinances or policies must be specifically requested in writing and be called out and identified. Processing fees for such request shall be established by Council and shall be paid upon submittal and are non-refundable. • Approval of any plat or plan containing provisions which do not comply with city code and for which a variance has not been specifically identified, requested and considered by the appropriate city official in accordance with the appropriate provision of city code or state law does not approve any items not to code specification. • Sound/Noise originating from temporary construction sites as a result of construction activity are exempt from the noise limits of ECC Chapter 5.30 only during the hours of 7:00am to 6:00pm on weekdays and 10:00am and 6:00pm on Saturdays, excluding Sundays and Federal Holidays. At all other times the noise originating from construction sites/activities must comply with the noise limits of Chapter 5.30, unless a variance has been granted pursuant to ECC 5.30.120. • Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns, and successors in interests, agrees to indemnify defend and hold harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials, employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the issuance for this permit. Issuance ofthis.permit shall not be deemed to modify, waive or reduce any requirements of any City ordinance nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance provision. • REQUIRED SPECIAL INSPECTIONS FOR THIS PROJECT: • 1) Excavation, grading, & site preparation • 2) Soil bearing verification • 3) Placement of fill & compaction • 4) Footing drain • 5) Temporary Erosion Control • 6) Final Erosion Control • 7) Site retaining wall/ rockery construction. • 8) General site monitoring • 9) Final letter from geotechnical engineer of record • Nothing in this permit approval process shall be interpreted as allowing or permitting the maintenance of any currently existing illegal, nonconforming or unpermitted building, structure or site condition which is outside the scope of the permit application, regardless of whether such building, structure or condition is shown on the site plan or drawing. Such building, structure or condition may be the subject of separate enforcement action. THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO BE DONE ON PRIVATEPROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRNEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE SEPARATE PERMISSION. PERMIT TIME LIMIT: SEE ECDC 19.00.005(A)(6) BUILDING ENGINEERING (425) 771-0220 EXT. 1326 1. Go to: www.edmondswa.gov Building Department Inspections 2. Then: Services are now scheduled online. If you FIRE (425) 775-7720 3. Then: Permits/Development have difficulties, please call the 4. Then: Online Permit Info Building Department front desk for PUBLIC WORKS (425) 771-0235 5: If you don't ha,.e one already, create a assistance during office hours. login (upper right hand comer) (425) 771-0220 RECYCLING (425) 275-4801 6: Schedule your inspection When calling for an inspection please leave the following information: Permit Number, Job Site Address, Type of Inspection being requested, Contact Name and Phone Number, Date Preferred, and whether you prefer morning or afternoon. • E-Erosion Control/Mobilization • E-Retaining Wall Drainage • E Engineering Final • B-Preconstruction meeting • B-Retaining Wall Drainage • B-Spec Insp-Retaining Wall Const • B-Building Final City of Edmonds DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION 121 51 Avenue N, Edmonds, WA 98020 Phone 425.771.0220 0 Fax 425.771.0221 PLEASE REFER TO THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING CHECKLIST FOR SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS PROJECT ADDRESS (Street, Suite #, City, State, Zip): Parcel #: 18500 Olynoc View Driw, Edmonds, WA 98020 00565600200202 Subdivision/Lot #: Project Valuation: —$ 14,000 Seahurst Plat - 1,02 Block 2 APPLICANT: Phone: Fax Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc., on behalf of Chet & Nancy Niesel 425486-1669 425-481-2510 Address (Street, City, State, Zip): E-Mail Address: 17311 - 135th Ave., # A-500, Woodinville, WA 98072 timh@nelsongetoech.com PROPERTY O WNER: Phone: Fax Chet & Nancy Niesel 239472-1353 239472-6430 Address (Street, City, State, Zip): E-Mail Address: 2959 West Gulf Dr., #304, Sanibel, Florida, 33957 chetniesel@aol.com LENDING AGENCY: Phone: Fax N/A Address (Street, City, State, Zip): E-Mail Address: CONTRACTOR:* Phone: Fax Landwork Enterprises Inc. 425-888-6950 Address (Street, City, State, Zip): E-Mail Address: 13814 457th Ave SE, North Bend, WA 98045 ryan@landworkenterpiises.com WA State license #/Exp. Date: *Contractor must have a valid City of Edmonds business license prior to LANDWEIl00P9 / 11-01-2017 doing work in the City. Contact the City Clerk's Office at 425.775.2525. City Business License #/Exp. Date: Pending DETAIL THE SCOPE OF WORK: Clear vegetation from slope. Remove one existing railroad tie timber retaining wall from slope below gravel path and replace with two mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls faced with stackable concrete blocks. Remove railroad tie pathway steps and wall between house and gravel path and replace with stackable concrete blocks. Excavate as required to construct walls. Use imported granular material to construct MSEwalls; supplemented with onsite soils. Regrade slope and disturbed areas. Revegetate slope. PROPOSED NEW SQUARE FOOTAGEFOR THIS PROJECT: Basement: N/A sq. ft. Select Basement Type: Finished ❑v Unfinished ❑ 1st Floor- N/A sq. ft. Garage/Carport: N/A sq. ft. 2nd Floor: N/A sq. ft. Deck/Cvrd Porch/Patio: N/A sq. ft. Bedrooms # Full-3/4 Bath # Half -Bath # Other. sq. ft. Fire Sprinklers: Yes ❑ No 0 Retaining Wall: Yes 0 No ❑ Grading: Cut —30 cu. yds. Fill —40 cu. yds. Cut/Fill in Critical Area: Yes No I declare underpenalty of perjury laws that the information I have provided on this fornVapplication is true, correct and complete, and that I ant the property owner or duly authorized agent of the property owner to submit a permit application to the City of Edmonds. Print Name: Thwth D. unttin fo et/Nanc Niesel Owner ❑Agent/Other Q (specify): Geotech Engineer . Signature: �, Date: v l — + 3 Zo 1-7 FORMA LABuilding New Folder 2010\DONE & x-ferred to L-Building-New driveTorm A2014.docx Updated: 1/17/2014 OF FDV DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RECEIVE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITpR 14 2017 APPLICATION 0 121511 Avenue N, Edmonds, WA 98020 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES C sr. 1 89 CITY Of EM/iONDS City of Edmonds Phone 425.771.0220 M Fax 425.771.0221 PLEASE REFER TO THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING CHECKLIST FOR SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS PROJECT ADDRESS (Street, Suite #, City, State, Zip): Parcel #: 18500 Olympic View Driw, Edmonds, WA 98020 00565600200202 Subdivision/Lot #: Project Valuation: —$ 14,000 SeahurstPlat -Lot2 Block 2 APPLICANT: Phone: Fax Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc., on behalf of Chet & NancyNiesel 425 48Cr1669 425 481-2510 Address (Street, City, State, Zip): E-Mail Address: 17311- 135th Ave., # A-500, Woodinville, WA 98072 timh@nelsongetoech.com PROPERTY O WNER: Phone: Fax Chet & Nancy Niesel 239-472-1353 239472-6430 Address (Street, City, State, Zip): E-Mail Address: 2959 West Gulf Dr., #304, Sanibel, Florida, 33957 chetniesel@aol.com LEINDING AGENCY: Phone: Fax N/A Address (Street, City, State, Zip): E-Mail Address: CONTRACTOR:* Phone: Fax Landwork Enterprises Inc. 425-888-6950 Address (Street, City, State, Zip): E-Mail Address: 13814 457th Ave SE, North Bend, WA 98045 ryan@landworkenterptises.com WA State License #/Exp. Date: *Contractor must have a valid City of Edmonds business license prior to LANDWE1100P9 / I1-01-2017 doing work in the City. Contact the City Clerk's Office at 425.775.2525. City Business License #/Exp. Date: Pending DETAIL THE SCOPE OF WORK Clear vegetation from slope. Remove one existing railroad tie timber retaining wall from slope below gravel path and replace with two mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls faced with stackable concrete blocks. Remove railroad tie pathway steps and wall between house and gravel path and replace with stackable concrete blocks. Excavate as required to construct walls. Use imported granular material to construct MSE walls; supplemented with onsite soils. Regrade slope and disturbed areas. Revegetate slope. PROPOSED NEW SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THIS PROJECT: Basement: N/A sq. ft. Select Basement Type: Finished 0 Unfinished ❑ 1st Floor: N/A sq. ft. Garage/Carport: N/A sq. ft. 2nd Floor. N/A sq. ft. Deck/Cvrd Porch/Patio: N/A sq. ft. Bedrooms # Full-3/4 Bath # Half -Bath # Other. sq. ft. Fire Sprinklers: Yes ❑ No ❑� Retaining Wall: Yes R No ❑ Grading: Cut —30 cu. yds. Fill =40 cu. yds. Cut/Fill in Critical Area: Yes R No ❑ I declare underpenalty ofperjury laws that the information I have provided on this form application is true, correct and complete, and that I am the property owner or duly authorized agent of the property owner to submit a permit application to the City of Edmonds. Print Name: Timothy D. Huritting for Chet/Nancy Niesel Owner ❑ Agent/Other Q (specify): Geotech Engineer . Signature: Date: FORM A LABuilding New Folder 2010\DONE & x-ferred to L-Building-New driveTorm A2014.docx Updated: 1/17/2014 City of Edmonds Critical Area Notice of Decision41TY COPY Applicant: �` �� Property Owner: Critical Area File #: C-R D \ S-D © D Permit Number: 30) 7-01 O b 6 Site Location: o Pal Parcel Number:o- Project Description: J ❑ Conditional Waiver. No critical area report is required for the project described above. There will be no alteration of a Critical Area or its required buffer. The proposal is an allowed activity pursuant to ECDC 23.40.220, 23.50.020, and/or 23.80.040. The proposal is exempt pursuant to ECDC 23.40.230. ❑ Erosion Hazard. Project is within erosion hazard area. Applicant must prepare an erosion and sediment control plan in compliance with ECDC 18.30. ET -Critical Area Report Required. The proposed project is within a critical area and/or a critical area buffer and a critical area report is required. A critical area report has been submitted and evaluated for compliance with the following criteria pursuant to ECDC 23.40.160: 1. f The proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas in accordance with ECDC 23.40.120, Mitigation sequencing; 2. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare on or off the development proposal site; 3. f The proposal is consistent with the general purposes of this title and the public interest; 4. ✓ Any alterations permitted to the critical area are mitigated in accordance with ECDC 23.40.110, Mitigation requirements. 5. ✓/ The proposal protects the critical area functions and values consistent with the best available science and results in no net loss of critical functions and values; and 6. V The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards. ❑ Unfavorable Critical Area Decision. The proposed project is not exempt or does not adequately mitigate its impacts on critical areas and/or does not comply with the criteria in ECDC 23.40.160 and the provisions of the City of Edmonds critical area regulations. See attached findings of noncompliance. Favorable Critical Area Decision. The proposed project as described above and as shown on the attached site plan meets or is exempt from the criteria in ECDC 23.40.160, Review Criteria, and complies with the applicable provisions of the City of Edmonds critical area regulations. Any subsequent changes to the proposal shall void this decision pending re -review of the proposal. ❑ Conditions. Critical Area specific condition(s) have been applied to the permit number referenced above. See referenced permit number for specific condition(s). t Notice on Title. Critical area notice on title recorded under AFN ?-01� �ZZ d 1.% �r s `Q eviewer S ature dI2Z� 1 Date Appeals: Any decision to approve, condition, or deny a development proposal or other activity based on the requirements of critical area regulations may be appealed according to, and as part of, the appeal procedure, if any, for the permit or approval involved. Revised 1112912016 After Recording Return to: City Clerk City of Edmonds 121 5t' Avenue N Edmonds, WA 98020 201708220181 CONFORME D COPY PGS SNOHOMISH7COUNTY) NOTICE OF PRESENCE OF CRITICAL AREAS AND/OR CRITICAL AREAS BUFFERS ON PROPERTY GRANTOR: Chester Niesel GRANTEE: City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation CI�1' COPY Legal Description: Abbreviated Form: SEAHURST PLAT OF BLK 002 D-02 - LOT 2 BLK 2 EXC TH PTN THOF DAF - BEG AT SW COR SD LOT THN89*42 OOE ALG S IN SD LOT 246.23FT TO TPB OF TR HEREIN DESC TH N10* 13 03E 78.70FT TO INT N LN OF SD LOT 2 TH S86* 12 40E ALG SD N LN 153FT TO NE CORSD LOT 2 TH S15*51 OOW 69.20FT TO SE CORSD LOT 2 TH S89*42 OOW ALG S IN OF SD LOT 147.73FT TO TPB & EXC TH PTN THOF DAF - BEG AT SW COR SD LOT 2 TH N89*42 OOE ALG S IN OF SD LOT 103.95FTTH N62*13 OOW 69FT TH N75*43 44W 18.09FT TAP ON WLY IN OF SD LOT 45FT NELY OF SW COR OF SD LOT TH S34* 19 OOW ALG WLY IN 45FT TO POB PER CITY ED BLAS-94-6 REC AF NO 9404180612 Additional Legal is on.Exhibit .A attached to document Assessor's Tax Parcel ID No.: 00565600200202 Reference Nuuaber(s) of Related Documents(s): n/a NOTICE OF PRESENCE OF CRITICAL AREA(S) AND/OR CRITICAL AREA BUFFER(S) ON PROPERTY NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN this �S-f- day ofdond—s,`p­ur�sumt. 201 ' by Chester Niesel ("Grantor"), as required by Grantee, City of to Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 23.40.270.13, that at least one type of critical area and/or critical areas buffer has been found through field verification to be present on the Property described in Exhibit A hereto. This notice is being recorded as a condition of issuance for a development permit related to the property. As part of the permit application review process it was determined that the following type(s) of critical area and/or critical area buffer(s) were found to be present on the property: Slopes on the subject property exceed 40%. The steepness of these slopes classifies the site as a potential landslide hazard area pursuant to Chapter 23.80 ECDC. The City of Edmonds has adopted ordinances that regulate this type of critical area and/or buffer. Prospective purchasers are advised hereby that these regulations may limit the type and/or location of development or other use that may occur on the property. Please contact the City of Edmonds for specific information about the applicable critical area regulations. This notice shall remain on the title records of Snohomish County until released by the City of Edmonds, which shall only occur if the owner is able to submit a critical areas report to demonstrate to the City of Edmonds that the critical area designation no longer applies to the Property. Any release of this notice shall be subject to applicable procedural provisions of the ECDC. GRANTOR(S): By: Name: Title (if applicable): STATE OF c )SS. COUNTY OF Uhd ha In ) C ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he/she signed this instrument, on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as his/her free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Sr Dated: Notary Public _,ci•(�-�___�� Print Name h JM 1. 11P TITNTUUP $Nlic M commission expires �4_ � - Notary Public y p State of Washington My Appointment Expires Apr 6, 2020 space for In r k Exhibit A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Lot 2, Block 2, Plat of Seahurst, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 9 of Plats, page 90, record of Snohomish County, Washington; EXCEPT, that portion thereof, described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Lot 2, Thence North 89042'East, along the South line of said Lot2, a distance of 246.23 feet to the True Point of Beginning, Thence North 1093'03" East, a distance of 78.70 feet to an intersection with the North line of said Lot 2, Thence South 86012'40" East along said North line, a distance of 153.00 feet to the Northeast corner of said Lot 2, Thence South 15°5l'00" West, a distance of 69.20 feet to the Southeast corner of said Lot 2, Thence South 89042'00" West along the South line of said Lot 2, a distance of 147.73 feet to the true point of beginning, AND EXCEPT that portion thereof described as follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Lot 2, Thence North 89°42'00" East along the South line of said Lot 2, a distance of 103.95 feet, Thence North 62013'00" West a distance of 69.00 feet, Thence North 75143'44" West a distance of 18.09 feet to a point on the Westerly line of said Lot 2, 45.00 feet Northeasterly of the Southwest corner of said Lot 2, Thence South 34019'00" West, along the Westerly line, a distance of 45.00 feet to the point of beginning, (Also known as Parcel 2 of City of Edmonds Boundary Line Adjustment No 2-946, recorded under Recording No. 9404180612) Together with an easement for ingress and egress as set forth in instruments recorded under recording numbers 1130646, 1130647, 1130648 and 8301200195. Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington CITY Our, Ole SPECIAL LNSPECTION AND TESTING AGREEMENT Pernit BLD2#17.006§. REsus Project Niesel retai.ning wal!.v_, AVG U 1 2017 BUILDING DEP R"WEN7 Pmr to isguance qj'a pwrmil, jhj.1fnrw mvsf" be campit*d in kuwdrM and rt&rned hFIR ()NDS approval. The compleiedform M110 fifft skmxures of acknowledginew by all parties. DVTFF-5 ANT) RESPONSIBILITIES jmefffiArt Frt" and Spedal !Rmfctorm j — The SpMiat 1n5PCCtiO0f1FM Of ur-LSOPA OrIM-Tel:04 41C-A-A- special inspection fcv the fol lowing types of work (separate forms must be submitted if V , none inn S I be mor ths f i 0 employtd)- Generat Site monitutiag, Riaaining wait footing drain Placement of fill & convection • Excavation, piling. & site preparation Soil bearing verifiWion Reizioing wall construction lima erosion control A] i individual inspct-WM to EX c0Vf41YCd fin this projtict will be WA130 ctnificd for the typ e pe of work they uv to inspect- If inspection, is for work that is not coveTW by the WASO categories, of the j4%V ,Cfo 'ir i5 WA WADO ccrtifleti, a &-tidied resume of dbe inspectcw and Ann must he subti-Atted, 7111c resjulne must show that dir inspector and the firm arc qualified by cd%jjEi(j0 ajW ej;pCtjtjKe to perform the work .and leWng rcquifed by the pvc jccf design and The wulrk shall lac inspcetcd for cooforimnce with the plans and specifications aplwGvcd by the City- Revisions and addenda sheets wirt, wit be, usecl for inqx"jon, unless they havc beca approveA hey the City. Inspection neco 04 shall include: A daily record to he rnaint3inOl no situ, itcn&ing Lk inspections peTfbrmcd- Any vocconf4ming woO, shall he hmmetit 14) dw itnatediate attention of the contractor for rcw.lutior- A weekly repon shall be wbinitted to dw City; detailing the irwpecl-ions arks testing perftlnWd, li-Sting ai)y tionconkforming work and rewfution of naticon(oming ftea%. A final report shall be submitted to ft building & Orc ,paVtj)Ve(j$ r4jof to flie Certifirwc of upavcy being issued. I'hLq report will indicate that juspec6m, wW testing was completed in confomunce with the approved plArs , sNvlfications and appro*vd revisions or addcnd& Any urim.solved 4i14-ftXuWieS insist be dvittiled in the final report. The contractor shall provide the special in,;p"dor oragcftcy **irate roottrica6un, of work requiring in. pectints_ I'lic City approved plan and specifii;aiions must be made available, at the jobsitc fro L*W u.W of the "IP.C641 inspector and the City inspector. The contractor shall maintain all daily irtipoajoo repNli. 00 lite,, for Mvk.lh' by 411 U130MVP k. --l;-4-1 r-r%A:; A -A n Thespecial inspection functions are considered to be in addition to the normal inspections perfortned by the City and the contractor is responsible for contacting the City to schedule regular inspections. No concrete shall be poured or other work covered until approval is given by the City inspector. Bujl#iym Depa rtment. The building department shall review any revisions and addenda. The City inspector will monitor the special inspection functions for compliance with the agreement and the approved plans. The City inspector shall be responsible for approving, various stages o'construct ion tt w be covered and for work r) pro-ced. Design Professionals: The architect and/or engineer will clearly indicate on the plans and specifications the specific types of special inspection required and shall include a schedule for inspection and testing. The architect and/or engineer will coordinate their revision and addenda, process in such a way as to ensure that all required City approvals are obtained, pd or to work shown on the revisions being performed in the field. Owner: The project owner. or the architect or engineer acting as the owners agent, shall employ the special inspector or agency. ENFORCEMENT A failure of the special inspector or firm to perform, in keeping with the requirements of the IBC, the approved plans and this document, may void this agreement and the Building Official's approval of the special inspwtor. In such a case a new special inspector and/or firm would need to beproposed for approval. A failureof the design and/or construction parties to perform in accordance with this agreement may result in a STOP WORK notice being posted on the project until nonconforming item-, have been resolved. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I have read and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of this agreement. OwnerSignatre Date Conti Arch PV Gr A Date: Z —,3L' --,' '7 Date: 3Z-,Z--f -Z121 Special Insp. rx'"Ory /-4-t-'64!rJAL0,—SigPatUTC Date: AA-ZIA/1 F 0 rz 'V Cr A Special hasp, Agency N&-d-S4,m ACCEPTE R THE CITY, EDMONDS BUILDING DEPT. By: Date: Infffmatim by ChucOx iii4Kvtion and 1eqing oinmcnwmt (cwM ('-yJEJix4J!7r2G17 N A Main Office l 7311- l 351Il Ave NE, A-500 Woodinville, WA 98072 (425) 486-1669 • FAX (425) 481-2510 July 14, 2017 Kernen Lien, Senior Planner City of Edmonds, Planning Division 121 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, Washington 98020 NELSON GEOTECHNICA.L ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL EtSIGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS Engineering -Geology Branch 5526 Industry lane, 42 East Wenatchee, WA 98802 (509) 665-7696 • FAX (509) 665-7692 CITY COPY RESIJB JUL 14 2017 City of Edmonds Review and Geotechnical Letter Addendum Niesel Residence Retaining Wall Project 18500 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington Application No.: BLD20170068 NGA File No. 9289B 16 moilcjasll Z • ;1 Dear Mr. Lien: As requested by Chet and Nancy Niesel, NELSON GEOTECHN/CAL ASSOCIATES, INC. (NGA) conducted a geotechnical engineering evaluation and developed design documents for the proposed project and submitted those documents for permit review. This letter responds to review comments from the City of Edmonds Planning and Development Services (PDS) regarding the subject project and accompanies our revised drawings. For ease of reference, we include each review comment followed by our response. PLANNING DIVISION COMMENTS 1) Geotechnical Report: The geotechnical report submitted with the building permit application does not address the requirements of ECDC 23.80.060 or ECDC 23.80.070. Please submit a geotechnical report addendum that addresses the required findings in ECDC 23.80.060.A and ECDC 23.80.070.A3 and A.4. The proposed mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls replace existing bulkheads formed of used, creosote -treated timber railroad ties. The railroad ties have extensive rot and provide virtually no support to the fill soils behind them. The deterioration of the timber bulkheads has increased the potential for small, surficial landslide events to occur and increases the risk of erosion should such a failure occur during the rainy season. From a structural viewpoint, the main purpose of replacing the current walls is to re-establish the nonexistent support. The existing retaining walls are located close to the residence and away from the steepest slopes within the landslide hazard area, which are located to the west, above the BNSF railroad tracks. It is intended that the locations of the replacement walls will occupy the same general footprint of the existing walls, avoiding Geotechnical Addendum Letter Niesel Residence Retaining Wall Project Edmonds, Washington NGA File No. 92891316 July 14, 2017 Page 2 extensive alterations to the existing ground surface and any activities in undisturbed areas located beyond the landscaped areas. The one exception is that the existing footpath adjacent to the house needs to be widened and releveled around the southwest corner and chimney of the residence where soil has been lost gradually over time. To compensate for this widening, and to facilitate construction, the one existing timber tie retaining wall below the pathway is being replaced by a two -tiered MSE wall. The stability analysis included in our geotechnical report demonstrated that the proposed wall design provides an adequate level of safety. A formal stability analysis of the current condition was not performed because, by inspection, it was clear that without the support of the timber tie retaining walls that the shallow surface soils were not stable. The project has been developed to re-establish support while keeping alterations to a minimum. The project was not intended to increase the impervious surface area. Recognizing that gravel -surfaced driveways are considered to be impervious for area calculations, we note that the impervious characteristic of gravel - surfaced driveways result from an accumulation of fine particles at the surface and over -compaction from vehicle traffic that clog the pore spaces. The walking path will be surfaced with relatively clean, imported granular material that will be somewhat permeable (depending on particle size distribution and provided it is not over -compacted), allowing water to infiltrate into the backfill materials and eventually into the native soil without increasing surface water discharge or long-term sedimentation risk. Short-term risk of sedimentation can be mitigated by properly protecting disturbed surfaces during construction and then restoring and maintaining landscaping after the project is completed. The existing ground surface is blanketed in a thick layer of English Ivy. Ivy within the construction area needs to be removed in order to remove the existing walls and to build the replacement walls. Although English Ivy creates an erosion -resistant ground cover, it is a non-native, invasive species. To enhance the local environment, removed vegetation will be replaced with native plants to re-establish a vegetative cover. NGA has recommended that revegetation be completed under guidance from a landscape architect or other qualified professional. Once the project is completed and the vegetation is re-established, the stability of the area will be equal to or greater than with the timber tie retaining walls with only slight modifications to the ground profile. There should be no adverse impact to the most critical portions of the site and its natural landforms and vegetation and does not result in greater risk or a need for increased buffers on neighboring properties. Accordingly, in response to meeting the requirements of ECDC 23.80.060 and .070, it is our opinion that the proposed replacement walls have been designed so that erosion and landslide hazards to the site will be mitigated to a level equal to or less than pre -project conditions and will not increase the threat of geological hazards to adjacent properties beyond pre -project conditions. Completion of the project should improve slope stability, reducing the risk of landslide hazard. Regrading and leveling of the pathway will eliminate the existing low spots that could be concentrating runoff and increasing local erosion potential. 2) Notice on Title: Pursuant to a new code section in the recently updated critical regulations (ECDC 23.40.270.B), sites with field -verified presence of critical areas and/or critical area buffers for which a permit application is submitted shall as a condition of permit issuance, record a notice of the existence of the critical area and/or critical area buffer against the property with the Snohomish County Auditor's Office. The Niesel will be completing this task in the near future. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Addendum Letter Niesel Residence Retaining Wall Project Edmonds, Washington ENGINEERING DIVISION COMMENTS 1) Include construction sequence. Refer to sample on City website. A construction sequence has been added to the Cover Sheet, Figure 1. NGA File No. 9289B16 July 14, 2017 Page 3 2) Show filter fence on the plans and incorporate and reference City standard detail ELL The filter fence has been added to the Cover Sheet, Figure 1 and the Site Plan, Figure 2. A generic reference that TESC measures shall be according to City of Edmonds Standard Details is included as General Note 19 on the Cover Sheet, Figure 1. 3) It appears the construction entrance shown is not accessible as the neighboring house blocks the entrance. Please relocate the construction entrance and incorporate and reference City standard detail E1.2. If the existing driveway is to be used, elaborate on how construction stormwater will be mitigated. Driveway pavement extends around the east end of the house and to the north property line. Construction materials, small portable equipment, and demolition debris will be transported between the work area and paved area east of the construction entrance using a skid -steer loader. The pathway is wide enough to accommodate the skid -steer loader. No other types of motorized vehicles will be used during construction. In addition to the stabilized construction entrance, the entire access route (an existing pathway) has an erosion -resistant gravel surface. Work will be shut down during inclement weather if sediment -laden runoff is present. A generic reference that TESC measures shall be according to City of Edmonds Standard Details is included as General Note 19 on the Cover Sheet, Figure 1. 4) Please add a note to the plans that filter socks will be added to any catch basins downstream from the construction site. Incorporate and reference City standard detail E1.3. The ground immediately downslope from the work area is heavily -vegetated and undisturbed and ends at the cleared portion of the BNSF Right -of -Way. There are no downstream catch basins. The graphic in Detail 1 on Typical TESC Detail, Figure 4, has been replaced with the graphic from Standard Detail E1.3. A generic reference that TESC measures shall be according to City of Edmonds Standard Details is included as General Note 19 on Figure 1. 5) Please add a note to the plans that all disturbed soils will be compost amended per BMP T5.13. The note has been added to Detail 3 on Typical TESC Detail, Figure 4. 6) Add note: Install and maintain all TESC measures according to approved plans, City of Edmonds standard details, and all other measures that may be required during construction. This was added as Note 19 on the Cover Sheet, Figure 1. 7) The plans do not denote a footing drain for the retaining walls. If footing drains are to be installed, please include them in the retaining wall detail and show the discharge location. To avoid concentrating water flows, wall footing drains are not included in the design. Wall backfill will consist of relatively clean sand and gravel, allowing water to percolate down to the base of each tier and disperse into the native soils. Gaps between individual concrete units comprising the wall do not permit water to build up within the backfill. The existing timber tie retaining walls were constructed without a footing drain and no obvious signs (most of the walls were obscured beneath a layer of ivy) of surface erosion were observed during our site reconnaissance visits. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Addendum Letter Niesel Residence Retaining Wall Project Edmonds, Washington NGA File No. 9289B16 July 14, 2017 Page 4 CLOSURE NGA trusts that this letter and the revised drawings satisfactorily address the comments from the City of Edmonds PDS. If you have any questions or require further information, please call. Sincerely, NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Timothy D. Huntting, PE Senior Engineer TDH:dy Enclosure: Two sets revised drawings — four sheets each CC: Chet and Nancy Niesel (w/o enclosure) NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. c d NELSON GEozEcHNIC.A�. N A. AssociAT'Es, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS Main Office 17311-13V Ave NE, A-500 Woodinville, WA 98072 (425) 486-1669 • FAX (425) 481-2510 November 9, 2016 Chet and Nancy Niesel 18500 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington 98020 CITY COPY Geotechnical Engineering Letter Niesel Residence Settlement 18500 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington NGA File No. 92891316 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Niesel: Engineering -Geology Branch 5526 Industry Lane, #2 East Wenatchee, WA 98802 (509) 665-7696 , FAX (509) 665-7692 APR 14 2017 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR. C17Y OF EDMONDS This letter documents our observations and opinions regarding the design and construction of a retaining wall located near the top of a moderate slope at your residence located at 18500 Olympic View Drive in Edmonds, Washington. Our services were completed in general accordance with our proposal signed by you on October 21, 2016. INTRODUCTION The house sits on gently to moderately sloping ground overlooking a steep slope separating the upland area from the shores of Puget Sound. NGA conducted a geotechnical study at the site in June 2015 focused on evaluating settlement issues at the west end of the house and presented our results in a geotechnical engineering letter titled "Geotechnical Engineering Letter — Niesel Residence Settlement — 18500 Olympic View Drive — Edmonds, Washington," dated July 14, 2015. A copy of that letter is attached for reference. The 2015 letter includes a Vicinity Map (Figure 1) and a Schematic Site Plan (Figure 2). As part of that study, NGA observed two railroad timber -tie walls that were retaining some of the loose fill encountered in our explorations. We noted that they were in close proximity to the house, as shown in Figure 2, and that they were in serious disrepair. NGA concluded that further evaluations would likely result in a recommendation that they be replaced with engineered retaining walls. Geotechnical Engineering Letter NGA File No. 9289B 16 Niesel Residence Settlement November 9, 2016 Edmonds, Washington Page 2 Earlier this year, Landscapes Northwest was retained to design and construct new mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining walls to replace the failing timber -tie walls. The project was nearing completion when the City of Edmonds informed the Niesels that a geotechnical engineering evaluation of the retaining wall design was needed before their final inspection. The Niesel's have requested that NGA complete the needed evaluation. SCOPE The purpose of this study is to evaluate the design, stability, and as -built conditions of the replacement walls. Specifically, our scope of services includes the following: • Review existing soils and geologic maps of the area. • Examine any existing documents that may be available such as previous geotechnical reports, construction monitoring reports, project drawings, etc. • Visually assess the slope and constructed walls and collect survey data to map the slope and wall configuration and to develop representative cross -sections for analysis. • Perform slope stability analyses for the as -built condition. • Develop recommendations for any additional earthwork, slope grading, or other modifications that may necessary to enhance slope stability, if warranted based on the results of the stability analyses. • Provide recommendations for temporary and permanent sediment and erosion control and recommendations regarding site drainage and stormwater management, as may be required. • Document the results of our findings, analyses, conclusions, and recommendations in a written geotechnical letter. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions We visited the site on October 17, 2016 to observe the existing site conditions. The residence is situated on gently to moderately sloping ground within the central portion of the property. A moderate to steep west -facing slope descends from the western side of the existing residence to the western property line along the Burlington Northern railroad tracks and Puget Sound at gradients in the range of approximately 34 to 39 degrees (67 to 81 percent) as shown in Cross Section A -A' in Figure 3 of the 2015 letter. The site is bordered to the north, east, and south by single-family residence properties, and to the west by the Burlington Northern railroad tracks and Puget Sound. The site layout covering the area of interest is shown on the Schematic Site Plan in Figure 2 of this letter. A series of newly constructed, tiered retaining walls ranging from about 3 to 4 feet high are located immediately to the northwest, west and southwest of the existing residence immediately in front of the NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Letter NGA File No. 9289B 16 Niesel Residence Settlement November 9, 2016 Edmonds, Washington Page 3 residence foundations and a walkway along the top of the moderate to steep slope below the residence. The retaining walls to the southwest are structured in a three tier system, with the two lower tiers meeting one another on the southern side of the residence. . The new walls are constructed with Keystone® standard blocks with two layers of geogrid reinforcing per tier. At least some of the backfill consists of imported, crushed aggregate. Subsurface Conditions The following discussion of subsurface conditions is from the 2015 letter. No additional explorations were completed for this evaluation. -Geology: The geologic units for this area is shown on the Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Part of the Edmonds West Quadrangles, Washington, by James P. Minard (U.S.G.S., 1983). The site is mapped as Recessional Outwash (Qvr) and Transitional Beds (Qtb). The recessional outwash is described as a poorly- to moderately -sorted mixture of sand and gravel with minor amounts of silt and clay. The transitional beds are described as clay, silt, and fine to very fine sand. Soils consistent with the transitional beds were encountered in one exploration completed on the slope below the residence. ,tgplorations: The subsurface conditions within the vicinity of the residence and the steep slope below were previously explored with four hand auger explorations on June 19, 2015. The approximate locations of those explorations are shown on the Schematic Site Plan in Figure 2 of the attached 2015 letter. A The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System presented in Figure 4 and logs of the explorations are presented in Figure 5 of the attached 2015 letter . We present a brief summary of the subsurface conditions in the following paragraphs. For a detailed description of the subsurface conditions, the logs should be reviewed. Hand Augers 1 through 3 were performed along the exterior portion of the residence. Hand Augers 1 through 3, encountered loose to medium dense, dark gray brown to gray brown silty fine to medium sand with gravel and organics that we interpreted as undocumented fill soils. We encountered a corrugated plastic pipe interpreted to be the footing drain at 1.4 feet below the existing ground surface within Hand Auger 1. The bottom of the existing residence foundation was also exposed in Hand Auger 1 at approximately 3 feet below the existing ground surface. Hand Augers 1 through 3 met refusal within the undocumented fill soils at depths in the range of about 4 to 7 feet below the existing ground surface. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Letter NGA File No. 9289B 16 Niesel Residence Settlement November 9, 2016 Edmonds, Washington Page 4 Hand Auger 4 was performed within the sloping area to the west of the residence. Hand Auger 4 encountered medium dense to dense, brown gray silty fine to medium sand with gravel that we interpreted as native glacial soils. Hand Auger 4 was completed at 1.5 feet below the existing ground surface. 'ftydrologic Conditions Groundwater seepage was not encountered in our explorations. If groundwater were to be encountered, we would interpret this water to be perched water. Perched water occurs when surface water infiltrates through less dense, more permeable soils, and accumulates on top of a relatively low permeability material. Perched water does not represent a regional groundwater "table" within the upper soil horizons. Perched water tends to vary spatially and is dependent upon the amount of rainfall. We would expect the amount of perched groundwater to decrease during drier times of the year and increase during wetter periods. SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES Method of Analysis NGA performed slope stability analyses using the computer program Slope/W, one program in the GeoStudio 2007 suite of programs by Geo Slope International. Slope/W is a two-dimensional, limit equilibrium slope stability program that generates a multitude of random failure surfaces and analyzes their corresponding factors of safety with respect to failure. SLOPE/W is one of the more comprehensive and technically sophisticated slope stability analysis programs available commercially. For a given configuration (cross-section) to be analyzed, input parameters to Slope/W consists of the x-y coordinates of the ground surface, the groundwater surface, and the boundaries between layers of different materials within the profile; physical properties for each material of unit weight (density), and cohesion of fine grained soils and friction angle of noncohesive soils; and the location, magnitude, and direction of any exterior loads. Seismic forces are modeled as a pseudo -static load expressed as a percentage of the vertical gravity load. The primary output of stability analysis is a minimum factor of safety (FS) obtained from a multitude of trial failure surfaces. By generating an appropriately large number of surfaces, a failure surface with the minimum factor of safety can be obtained. An FS greater than one means the slope is stable and an FS equal to or less than one indicates incipient failure or that the configuration modeled is unstable. An FS much less than one for an intact slope is a sign that model parameters are not representative of actual conditions. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Letter Niesel Residence Settlement Edmonds, Washington Slope Stability Model NGA File No. 9289B 16 November 9, 2016 Page 5 Additional information was collected from the site on October 17, 2016 to use in developing representative cross -sections for modeling slope stability. The slope profile was mapped at two locations, A -A' and B-B', shown on Figure 1. Cross-section A -A' was located where the slope gradient is steepest and cross-section B-B' is located where the gradient is the gentlest. The cross-section views are provided on Figures 2 and 3. The current slope configuration was analyzed for stability at Cross Section A -A' using the computer program Slope/W, by Geo-Slope International. Slope/W is a two-dimensional, limit equilibrium slope stability program that generates random potential failure surfaces or specific failure surfaces and determines their corresponding factors of safety with respect to failure. By generating a large number of random surfaces, a critical failure surface with the minimum factor of safety can be identified. Basic information needed for the analyses consists of the surface profile; soil parameters of unit weight, friction angle, and cohesion; contact boundaries between soil layers; the water table profile, the location, magnitude, and direction of any surcharge loads; and for seismic loading conditions, a peak ground acceleration. The surface profile was created from field measurements. Because the true nature of subsurface conditions are unknown, and because soil properties are infinitely variable, the remaining input values need to be assumed. We assumed that the soil profile is composed of three soils: newly constructed reinforced fill, existing fill (placed when the house was constructed), and native glacial till. The location of the contact between native soil and the existing fill is based on conditions encountered in our previous explorations and assuming the fill zone extends from the north edge of the residence down to the property line. The reinforced fill configuration was assumed to extend horizontally into the slope from the base of the bottom wall a distance equal to the width of the terrace above that wall and duplicating that pattern at the second wall. Soil parameters were assigned to the native glacial till and existing fill based on typical values that reasonably reflect their engineering characteristics. Strength parameters for the reinforced fill were assigned high values thereby forcing trial failure surfaces below the walls and analyzing for the global stability of the slope. Soil Layer Unit Weight (pcf) Friction Angle (deg) Cohesion (psf) Reinforced Fill 128 65 5,000 Existing Fill 120 29 250 Native Glacial Till 1 132 1 38 1,000 NELSON GEOTECHN/CAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Letter NGA File No. 9289B 16 Niesel Residence Settlement November 9, 2016 Edmonds, Washington Page 6 The water table was assumed to be located well below the modeled area and is not a factor. We assumed the existing residence exerts a surcharge loading equivalent to a pressure of 1,000 pounds per square foot (psf). Any counteracting (beneficial) effects from the surcharge load imposed by the residence located about 10 feet south of the property line were ignored. A peak ground acceleration of 0.2g was used in the seismic analysis. The results of the analyses for the static and seismic loading conditions are presented in Figures 4 and 5, respectively. Our global slope stability analyses of the slope and retaining walls as discussed in this letter calculated the factors of safety at 1.52 for static conditions and at 1.28 for seismic loading. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General Appropriate minimum factors of safety are normally set at 1.5 for static conditions and at 1.2 for seismic loading. The results of our analyses indicate the recently re -constructed slope is stable, based on estimated and assumed input parameters. It is our opinion that soil parameters estimated and assumed by NGA are reasonable and consistent with typical values for the types of soils present at this site. As stated in our 2015 letter, the timber -tie walls were in serious disrepair and could be a contributing factor the house settling. We also noted the possibility that the deteriorating walls combined with the presence of undocumented fill could result in a slope failure that could undermine the house foundation. NGA believed that it would be prudent to replace the existing timber -tie walls with an engineered wall system. It is our understanding that Landscapes Northwest was retained to design and construct new MSE retaining walls and that they have installed numerous walls with similar configurations. Based on our observations and analyses, it is our opinion that the walls constructed by Landscapes Northwest have improved the stability of the slope and better confine the undocumented fill relative to the timber -tie walls. However, it is also our opinion that further effort is needed to complete the project. The needed work concerns protecting the slope and implementing temporary and permanent erosion control measures, which are discussed below. Erosion Control The erosion hazard for the on -site soils is interpreted to be high where exposed and/or disturbed. However, actual erosion potential will be dependent on how the site is graded and how water is allowed to concentrate. Best Management Practices (BMPs) should be used to control erosion. Areas disturbed during construction should be protected from erosion. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Letter NGA File No. 9289B 16 Niesel Residence Settlement November 9, 2016 Edmonds, Washington Page 7 Silt fences and/or straw bales should be erected below all disturbed areas to capture sediment from surface runoff before it leaves the site. Erosion control measures may include diverting surface water away from the stripped or disturbed areas. Areas susceptible to erosion were observed on October 17, 2016. We recommend that all exposed slopes be covered with erosion control fabric that is permeable but shields the soil from direct rainfall impacts. Ideally, the fabric should incorporate plastic netting to provide strength and biodegradable fibers, such as excelsior, straw, coir, or jute, to protect the soil and add nutrients as the fibers decompose. The Curlee Erosion Control Blanket, manufactured by American Excelsior Company (AEC) is an example of an appropriate product for this application. The erosion control blanket should be installed as soon as practical. Broadcast placement of straw, hay, or other loose material as a protective cover is not considered adequate due to the lack of any means of keeping the material in place. Exposed surfaces may be protected temporarily with plastic sheeting if the installation of erosion control blankets are delayed. However, regardless of the time of year, the erosion control blankets should be installed as protection until the slope is fully revegetated. We recommend that a landscape designer with experience working on steep slopes be consulted to develop a vegetation plan that incorporates appropriate ground cover species. New vegetation should be planted as soon as practical and maintained until it is fully established. Permanent Slopes The configuration of the slope below the residence, particularly on the south side of the house, should not be altered without further engineering evaluation. No additional soil or other materials, other than a thin layer of topsoil, should be placed on the slope. No excavations that have the effect of steepening the slope gradient should be allowed. Permanent slopes should be vegetated and the vegetative cover maintained until established. USE OF THIS LETTER NGA has prepared this letter for Chet and Nancy Niesel and their agents, for use to the specific retaining walls that were recently replaced on the slope below their residence. The scope of our work does not include services related to construction safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractors' methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described in our letter for consideration in design. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions between the explored and unexplored areas and also with time. Our letter, conclusions, and interpretations should not NELSON GEOTECHN/CAL ASSOCIATES, INC. l Geotechnical Engineering Letter Niesel Residence Settlement Edmonds, Washington NGA File No. 9289B16 November 9, 2016 Page 8 be construed as a warranty of subsurface conditions. A contingency for unanticipated conditions should be included in the budget and schedule. All people who own or occupy homes on or near hillsides should realize that landslide movements are always a possibility. The landowner should periodically inspect the slope, especially after a winter storm. If distress is evident, NGA should be contacted for advice on remedial/preventative measures. The probability that landsliding will occur is substantially reduced by the proper maintenance of drainage control measures at the site and neighboring properties. Therefore, the homeowner should take responsibility for performing such maintenance. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been performed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in effect in this area at the time this letter was prepared. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. Our observations, findings, and opinions are a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Letter Niesel Residence Settlement Edmonds, Washington NGA File No. 9289B 16 November 9, 2016 Paee 9 We appreciate the opportunity to provide service to you on this project. If you have any questions or require further information, please call. Sincerely, NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Eric A. Finley Staff Geologist rxp. marm zo, zu i i Timothy D. Huntting, PE Senior Engineer EAF:TDS:dy Attachments: Figures 1 — 5 June 14, 2015 Letter NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. z I o CV w I ° I t U C O I � C O O d �O In ca C6 U Y 3 N 03 C E N = Mn C6 I X O U L1J Q CD Y W N I O o. C x a� W a .— II X O � aa @ W /J� N s i � E m E U / CU 0 3 °° cn rn / 076 (D F Y C CIO u1 / Q 0 0 °t :? (D 9 X Z C co c w / W .X (,no O I_° o O ° a > 0°' OCL Q' C.) d / W a-Q O _mg m J -m U C Z I � N N� N Project NumberNELSON GEOTECHNICAL No. Date Revision By V CK 9289616 Niesel Residence NGA ASSOCIATES, INC. 2 RetainingWalls GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS &GEOLOGISTS 1 7/10/15 Original LSB KMs a 2 10125/16 Revision DPN TDH Figure 1 Schematic Site Plan 17311-135th A— NE A500 Snohomish county(425) 337-1669 Z W000lnvllle, WA 98072 (425)486-1668/ Fm 481-2510 Wenatchee/Chelan(509) 665-7696 www,nelson8eatech.mm N N C a� a� (I)ccin > CV) N O N M Zo E O z aoO d .0 Q �oai O U t6 V1 a7 E U O :. Q n ooJm O U C a) O Cc CID U L H 2 aoC uj`T°Qo uJ rn x _ N > z<nw � N O In C O O w N U N C Cn O to N L O Q M CM rz co CO ; C x C LU O O O O 7 et cM N — O 0 (1991) U011en913 atewixojddy t) FO N C1• O I = � a I C ~ N C�- MG T T O 0 a d o U m 0 U _ 3x .� x a o � s ° 5 n CL c7 0 s Project Number NELSON GEOTECHNICAL No. Date Revision By CK JZ 9289B16 Niesel Residence -___NG^ A ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 10/25816 Original DPN TDH Retaining Walls GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS Figure 2 Cross -Section A -A' 17311-1350N Ave. NE. A.5M e37 Ee51 Penn, Ro96 W-dinNle, WA 96072 Wewt Me. WA 96801 (426) 486-1669I F-481-2510 ISM) 665-7696 9 Ch m w 0 0 0 0 CD incoco N O (1991) U011BA913 a;ewlxojddy a� a� 0) z dcc N CO m E O co ac O �o c o ai O U � �nWE C 7 •x O U O Q � O a CL o C C6 U N U O COO cc ON to aoc p) .. w x N @ c0 > O w N N Ztnww � N O In O N O F C`. f c I � I C � OMID aa) 3 = d CU � c O N 1 ;r C i T o O c s C Qa U) _ m > — f0 u ^ p) rn J O C O O` W .O-. �- o 3w oo v� n c o a C z in H O Q d a O m 0 7 u 6 U Project Number 9289616 Niesel Residence Retaining Walls NELSON GEOTECHNICAL NGA ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS No. Date Revision By CK , 10/25816 Original DPN TDH Figure 3 Cross -Section 13-13' 17311-135MA.. NF A-5W 437 Ea51 Penn/ Reed WoodlmdAe. WA 88072 Wewldl , WA Ba801 (425)486.18887 F.481-2510 (509)665-7696 LL U a 0 0 0 d rn `m L V 7 N W? a) o 0 0 0 � o 0 0 0 CDIT 00 r- O-4 11 0 co Ow CDi� in V E o� f+ E (� u. o -N +' 41 �� O N C ,�i N p o (tJ /� 1 ljJ U ■� lJJ u v � L � p y Cal " W ::) o X DV W c� _ iL n n 2 W 2 •0 o V &o 0 0 Cp CD' Q O QLh C G.- O ■� A-0 (ALL . ' V C O o -CN c=U Z5 II ^^ VI 13 Ln c 0 o 00 Q d � o � � a d o t0 `D L ''i^ce V♦ 0 *0 o N In 3 CL AC, W o C �c 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 CD CDO d `m rt M (lJ 0 ON 00 r1_ C h o d +� �. z o w Z aa u010.nAa�� " v w 9 0 U. Z a O a` a Project Number NELSON GEOTECHNICAL No. Date Revision By CK z 9289B16 Niesel Residence N G A ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 1114116 Original DPN s LSB h Retaining Walls Existing Static Slope Stability GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS F i (� u re 4 `J Analysis 17311-135th A,e. NE, A5W Snohomish County (425) 337-1669 Woodirnilk. WA 96072 WenstMeeXhelam(509) 78a2756 _ (425)466-1669/Fn, 461-2510 —nelsongeotech.Wm — i LL I, a 0 0 0 a> rn (c t U 7 d U C D o o O CD p CD N � co h OCD kD O X o i U. LO N E C .— = O E ■� M Qi _ lL Cq n a co C N N rd �//�/� �✓ m —4 a ��sjj 1! M 8 O 0i W �✓ W Cc U � t W O G _ �r U Z . ■ f1 O O � 0 f0 ZTo�U IL C O .--I a a E «, o • �( vhi 0 co o 2 W w<L" ��o CDU W LL c C O fO -U o V/ ■— Ey U) O cg � O O tC� Q •G O y a }� ■y CDS •— a �a � a o M r c .3 oco 0 ♦-+ � to ai o CL 0 OCD o 0 0 0 0 0 0 GN 00 r\ 9 Q o /n O W _ Z C1 � Z on «aa j) U014-nna» " W v O LL Z at al Q a` a Project Number NELSON GEOTECHNICAL No. Date Revision By CK z 9289B16 Niesel Residence N G A ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 1v4n6 Original DPN LSB Retaining Walls Existing Seismic Slope Stability GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS c Figure 5 9 Analysis 17311-135th Ave. NE, MW Snohomlah County(425) 337-1669 W000in"lle, WA 98072 Wenatchee/Chelan(509) 764-2 56 s (425) 48&16691 Fa. 461-2510 v ww.rrelaonpeoteh— = GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING LETTER NIESEL RESIDENCE SETTLEMENT 18500 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE EDMONDS, WASHINGTON PREPARED FOR CHET AND NANCY NIESEL NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS Main Office 17311-1351 Ave NE, A-500 Woodinville, WA 98072 (425) 486.1669 - FAX (425) 481-2510 July 14, 2015 Chet and Nancy Niesel 18500 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington 98020 Geotechnical Engineering Letter Niesel Residence Settlement 18500 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington NGA File No. 928915 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Niesel: Enginec ring -Geology Branch 5526 Industry Lane, #2 East Wenatchee, WA 98802 (509) 665-7696 • FAX (509) 665-7692 This letter documents our observations and opinions regarding the observed settlement at your residence, and recommendations for the proposed foundation underpinning support of the affected portions of the structure. The site is located at 18500 Olympic View Drive in Edmonds, Washington, as shown on the Vicinity Map in Figure 1. Our services were completed in general accordance with our proposal signed by you on June 4, 2015. INTRODUCTION We understand that the western and southwestern portions of your residence have experienced settlement over the years. The on -going settling has caused apparent distress within the structural elements along these portions of the residence. You provided us an inspection report by CG Engineering dated July 10, 2014. In the report, they observed some cracking within some of the exterior foundation walls; cracks within the drywall in the pool table room; and their level survey indicated that the upper family room has settled to the southwest by roughly three inches. The report recommended that the western portion of the foundation be supported on 2-inch pin piles. Geotechnical Engineering Letter NGA File No. 928915 Niesel Residence Settlement July 14, 2015 Edmonds, Washington Page 2 SCOPE The purpose of this study is to explore and characterize the site surface and subsurface conditions, and provide general recommendations regarding the settlement and proposed foundation and underpinning support. Specifically, our scope of services includes the following: 1. Review available soil and geologic maps of the area, and any other provided documentation. 2. Explore the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions within the site with hand tools. 3. Evaluate current slope stability conditions and map the slope. 4. Perform laboratory testing on soil samples, as needed. 5. Provide our opinions regarding the potential causes of the settlement. 6. Provide recommendations for permanently stabilizing the residence utilizing deep foundations such as pin piles. 7. Document the results of our findings, conclusions, and recommendations in a written geotechnical letter. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions We visited the site on June 19, 2015 to observe the existing site conditions. The residence consists of a multi -story structure with a daylight basement located within the central portion of the property. The eastern and central portions of the site are situated on gently to moderately sloping ground that descends from the eastern property line to the west. A moderate to steep west -facing slope descends from the western side of the existing residence to the western property line along the Burlington Northern railroad tracks and Puget Sound at gradients in the range of approximately 34 to 39 degrees (67 to 81 percent) as shown in the Cross Section A -A' in Figure 3. A series of tiered railroad tie timber retaining walls ranging from 3.0 to 3.5 feet high are located immediately to the west and southwest of the existing residence supporting backfill immediately in front of the residence foundations and a walkway along the top of the moderate to steep slope below the residence. Portions of these walls appeared to be rotting and in serious disrepair. The site is bordered to the north, east and south by single-family residence properties, and to the west by the Burlington Northern railroad tracks and Puget Sound. The areas showing significant signs of settlement are generally located within the very western and southwestern portions of the residence. We observed some cracking within the foundations and uneven NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Letter NGA File No. 928915 Niesel Residence Settlement July 14, 2015 Edmonds, Washington Page 3 floors within this portion of the residence. We understand that a level survey, performed by CG Engineering, indicated that portions of the upper floor had settled up to 3.0 inches. We did not observe significant visual signs of distress in the remaining portions of the residence foundation. The site layout within the vicinity of the residence is shown on the Schematic Site Plan in Figure 2. Subsurface Conditions -Geology: The geologic units for this area is shown on the Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Part of the Edmonds West Quadrangles, Washing -ton, by James P. Minard (U.S.G.S., 1983). The site is mapped as Recessional Outwash (Qvr) and Transitional Beds (Qtb). The recessional outwash is described as a poorly- to moderately -sorted mixture of sand and gravel with minor amounts of silt and clay. The transitional beds are described as clay, silt and fine to very fine sand. Our explorations around the residence generally encountered undocumented fill soils to the depths explored. ,-Explorations: The subsurface conditions within the vicinity of the residence and the steep slope below were explored with four hand auger explorations. The approximate locations of our explorations are shown on the Schematic Site Plan in Figure 2. A geologist from Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. (NGA) was present during the explorations, examined the soils and geologic conditions encountered, obtained samples of the different soil types, and maintained logs of the explorations. The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System presented in Figure 4. The logs of our explorations are attached to this letter and presented as Figure 5. We present a brief summary of the subsurface conditions in the following paragraphs. For a detailed description of the subsurface conditions, the logs should be reviewed. Hand Augers 1 through 3 were performed along the exterior portion of the residence. Hand Augers 1 through 3, encountered loose to medium dense, dark gray brown to gray brown silty fine to medium sand with gravel and organics that we interpreted as undocumented fill soils. We encountered a corrugated plastic pipe interpreted to be the footing drain at 1.4 feet below the existing ground surface within Hand Auger 1. The bottom of the existing residence foundation was also exposed in Hand Auger 1 at approximately 3.0 feet below the existing ground surface. Hand Augers l through 3 met refusal within the undocumented fill soils at depths in the range of 4.0 to 7.0 feet below the existing ground surface. Hand Auger 4 was performed within the sloping area to the west of the residence. Hand Auger 4 NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Letter NGA File No. 928915 Niesel Residence Settlement July 14, 2015 Edmonds, Washington Page 4 encountered medium dense to dense, brown gray silty fine to medium sand with gravel that we interpreted as native glacial soils. Hand Auger 4 was completed at 1.5 feet below the existing ground surface. Hydrologic Conditions Groundwater seepage was not encountered in our explorations. if groundwater were to be encountered, we would interpret this water to be perched water. Perched water occurs when surface water infiltrates through less dense, more permeable soils, and accumulates on top of a relatively low permeability material. Perched water does not represent a regional groundwater "table" within the upper soil horizons. Perched water tends to vary spatially and is dependent upon the amount of rainfall. We would expect the amount of perched groundwater to decrease during drier times of the year and increase during wetter periods. SENSITIVE AREA EVALUATION Seismic Hazard We reviewed the 2012 International Building Code (IBC). Medium dense to dense soils are interpreted to underlie the site at depth, the site conditions best fit the IBC description for Soil Class D for native soils. Hazards associated with seismic activity include liquefaction potential and amplification of ground motion. Liquefaction is caused by a rise in pore pressures in a loose, fine sand deposit beneath the groundwater table. It is our opinion that the competent granular glacial deposits interpreted to underlie the site at depth have a low potential for liquefaction or amplification of ground motion. The medium dense or better soils interpreted to form the core of the site slope are considered stable with respect to deep-seated slope failures. However, the loose surficial materials and undocumented fill, especially behind the existing railroad retaining walls on the slope have the potential for shallow sloughing failures during seismic events. Such events should not directly affect the existing or proposed improvements provided the proposed stabilization measures are designed and implemented as described in this letter. Landslide Hazard/Slope Stability The criteria used for evaluation of landslide hazards include soil type, slope gradient, and groundwater conditions. Steep west- to southwest -facing slopes with gradients in the range of approximately 34 to 39 degrees (67 to 81 percent) are located below and to the west and southwest of the existing residence. The existing railroad tie retaining walls located immediately below the residence appear to be rotting and in NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Letter NGA File No. 928915 Niesel Residence Settlement July 14, 2015 Edmonds, Washington Page 5 serious disrepair. Some erosion of the soil retained by the retaining walls was observed. The majority of the slope below the residence and retaining walls remained covered with vegetation and we did not observe other areas of significant erosion or movement within the slope. The loose fill and retaining walls are considered only marginally stable. CONSLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General Based on our observations; our understanding of the existing foundation conditions; and the presence of loose undocumented fill soils underlying the foundations, it is our opinion that the settlement and distress to the residence is a direct result of on -going settling of the loose fill soils that exists within the vicinity and below the residence foundations to the southwestern and western portions of the residence. These soils will likely continue to experience settlement and subsidence under the current loads, and at an increased rate as a result of an earthquake or significant rainfall which could lead to more distress to the foundation and the structure. This continued settlement will also likely be acerbated by the continued deterioration of the existing railroad tie walls immediately below the existing residence and along the top of slope. To mitigate this condition and support the currently observed settling portions of the residence foundations, we recommend that at a minimum the western and southwestern portions of the residence foundation lines be supported on deep foundations consisting of driven pin piles to transfer building loads through the loose undocumented fill down to the underlying competent native soils. Your structural engineer should determine the extent of foundation areas to be underpinned and overall layout of the underpinning system. Portions of the residence may be able to be re -leveled during construction under the direction of the structural engineer. We should review underpinning plans prior to construction. It is also our opinion that the existing railroad -tie retaining walls located immediately along and below the western portion of the residence within the observed settlement area are in serious disrepair and may be contributing to some of the observed settlement issues. It appears that portions of these walls are directly supporting undocumented fill soils along and below the residence foundations. The proposed underpinning of the residence foundations should adequately support the residence foundation as a short- term measure, however if these walls were to continue to fail, such condition could lead to larger global failures of the undocumented fill soils that may further undermine the existing foundations and impact the underpinning elements. Due to the close proximity of the railroad -tie retaining walls to the existing residence foundation and their existing condition, we would recommend that these walls be evaluated further and likely replaced with an engineered wall system in conjunction with the proposed residence foundation underpinning to reduce the potential impacts of any failures on the slopes below the residence. NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Letter NGA File No. 928915 Niesel Residence Settlement July 14, 2015 Edmonds, Washington Page 6 We should be retained to further evaluate the existing walls with deep explorations and provide detailed recommendations regarding the replacement of the retaining walls. It is likely that portions of the residence not currently showing signs of distress are also underlain by the loose fill material encountered in our explorations. Under this scenario, underpinning only the currently distressed portions of the residence may create a situation where the remaining portions of the structure may start to settle shortly after the distressed portions are underpinned. We recommend that after the recommended underpinning is completed, the residence be monitored for any signs of further distress, and additional pin piles installed if signs of further distress are observed. We also recommend that all drainage features associated with this residence, such as roof downspouts, yard drains, footing drains, and runoff from any hard surfaces, be investigated and improved such that all runoff generated on site is tightlined into an approved system. This is key to maintaining long-term stability of the site and reducing the potential for further settling. Foundation Underpinning General: We recommend that, at a minimum, the western and southwestern foundation lines of the residence be supported on a deep foundation system to transfer structure loads down into the underlying competent materials to limit future settlement and damage to the structure. Structural brackets should be used to attach the pin piles to the existing foundations. The structural engineer should design the new foundation supports and determine the location of the supports based on the recommendations provided in this letter. A qualified contractor specializing in foundation retrofit should be retained to complete the repairs. Considering the limited site access conditions, it is our opinion that the most feasible foundation underpinning systems are 2-inch diameter pin piles driven to refusal using a hand operated 140-pound jackhammer. Extreme care should be taken during the proposed repairs as to no impact existing utilities or foundation elements along the western side of the residence. For 2-inch diameter pipe piles driven to refusal using a hand-held, 140-pound jackhammer, we recommend a design axial compression capacity of two tons for each pile. The refusal criterion for this pile and hammer size is defined as less than one inch of movement during 60 seconds of continuous driving. We recommend using galvanized extra strong (Schedule 80) steel pipe. Our explorations encountered loose undocumented fills within the planned areas to be repaired. If large objects or debris are present within the fill, there is a possibility that this material may obstruct some piles NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Letter NGA File No. 928915 Niesel Residence Settlement July 14, 2015 Edmonds, Washington Page 7 at shallow depths. There should be contingencies in the budget and design for additional/relocated piles that may be obstructed by possible debris in the fill. Final pile depths should be expected to vary somewhat and will depend on the nature of the underlying soils. The pin piles should advance a minimum of 10 feet into the competent native glacial soils interpreted to underlie the site at depth and also meet the refusal criterion in order to provide the recommended design capacity. This should be determined in the field by the contractor under the supervision of NGA. Piles that do not meet this minimum embedment criterion should be rejected, and replacement piles should be driven after consulting with the structural engineer on the new pile locations. Due to the relatively small slenderness ratio of pin piles, maintaining pin pile confinement and lateral support is essential to preventing pile buckling. Due to the rigid pile support, friction between the foundation and subgrade soil should not be considered for resisting lateral pressures on this structure. Also, passive resistance acting on the below -grade portion of the foundation should not be used to resist lateral pressures. We recommend that all lateral loads be transferred to the remainder of the structure. We should be retained to review final plans and to monitor installation of the pin piles during construction. USE OF THIS LETTER NGA has prepared this letter for Chet and Nancy Niesel and their agents for use in the planning and design of the foundation repairs planned on this site only. This letter is a specific evaluation of the observed residence settlement area and should not be considered an in-depth evaluation of the entire site or site slopes. There is potential for failures to continue to occur on the slope near and below the residence. The scope of our work does not include services related to construction safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractors' methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described in our letter for consideration in design. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions between the explored and unexplored areas and also with time. Our letter, conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of subsurface conditions. A contingency for unanticipated conditions should be included in the budget and schedule. We recommend that we be retained to review final construction plans and to provide construction monitoring services to evaluate actual conditions encountered in the field with respect to anticipated NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Letter Niesel Residence Settlement Edmonds, Washington NGA File No. 928915 July 14, 2015 Page 8 conditions; to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions differ from anticipated; and to evaluate whether construction activities comply with contract plans and specifications. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been performed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in effect in this area at the time this letter was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Our observations, findings, and opinions are a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner. n•m NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Letter Niesel Residence Settlement Edmonds, Washington NGA File No. 928915 July 14, 2015 Page 9 We appreciate the opportunity to provide service to you on this project. If you have any questions or require further information, please call. Sincerely, NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. Washio 4 �(+P 2883 gsed Geo�o LEE S. BELLAH Lee S. Bellah, LG Project Geologist Exp. July 28, 2017 Khaled M. Shawish, PE Principal Five Figures Attached LSB:KMS:cja NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. 51 VICINITY MAP N Not to Scale C- Hamm 0�er" - ,_: 93 Project j Site .. Q ) + 1t35tti-1 ♦ a i i� ::. I S h P1 SW 7 87th PI lu _i 87th.St 5W.- 188th St SW, r' I . _ a qpq�i cad - p b 189th P! SIN Blake PI 140th St SW t � 5 1. d,4L 141 %t PI RW Edmonds, WA Project Number NELSON GEOTECHNICAL No. Date Revision By CK LL 928915 Niesel Residence Settlement NC7A ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 6/30/15 DAginal DIDa. Isa o Vicinity Map GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS Figure 1 17311-1350, Ae. NE. A500 Snot ombh County (425) 339-1669 Z W00"176,WA 96072 W�toM A Ckn(509) 9667696 'C (a25)a66-166b9/ru Aei-2510 N 0. AE W V co am a M O C" c4 E O � X N pl Q o c Q o Ow ect Number NELSON GEOTECHNICAL 928915 Niesel Residence Settlement NGA ASSOCIATES, INC. Schematic Site Plan GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS Figure 2 17311-135th Ave. NE. A-5W Snohomish County (425) 337-1669 WooCin"" WA 98072 Wenetehee/Chelen(509) 665-7696 (425) 486.1669 / Fox 481-2510 ww-lwlgeotech.00m ca E ) ma X O 21 N Q- (6 U Q m O 0 E OL 4) MQ. -0 _ N CU N c c — N p Em o O N O � O X N O p E OL E (C 0-0 L iL 0 Z !1 1� Q O C to mg 75 0 d 7 Q —®— ai to = U Z C O Q w 55 Nm IL' C d No. Date Revision By CK LL 1 1 7/10115 1 Original I LSB I KMS I o e a� a� 4)z a) CU > (DM m E 0 (n ao c =o O O N c`o 0 m cn W E U O �Q a a 0 c ca M CD v O N O rrT 71 o c 0 in O Ui w X N �mo> N N Zfn:EW O Z fV L y O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 O O O O : M N O O (1991) UOIJen913 atewixoaddy U) V, C�• v d 0 1 � Q m O _ ) C�. L o o 5 O CO > O U U) X N J (0 O 0 II a U M U `-' 3 w x < 'E o °a a aD y c 60 � � (D A O Project Number NELSON GEOTECHNICAL No. Date Revision By CK 928915 Niesel Residence Settlement ASSOCIATES, INC.N G A 1 7/10/15 Original LSB KMS 'o r GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS 11 Cross -Section A -A Figure 3 17311-135th Ave. NE, A-500 437 East Penny Road z Woodi'Ale, WA9a072 Wenatchee, WA 98a01 N (425)466-1669/Fax 461-2510 (509)665.7696 O N UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM GROUP MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP NAME SYMBOL CLEAN GW WELL -GRADED, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL COARSE- GRAVEL GRAVEL GP POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL GRAINED MORE THAN 50 % GRAVEL GM SILTY GRAVEL OF COARSE FRACTION RETAINED ON SOILS NO.4 SIEVE WITH FINES GC CLAYEY GRAVEL SAND CLEAN SW WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND SAND SP POORLY GRADED SAND MORE THAN 50 % RETAINED ON MORE THAN 50 % NO. 200 SIEVE OF COARSE FRACTION SAND SM SILTY SAND PASSES NO.4 SIEVE SC WITH FINES CLAYEY SAND FINE - SILT AND CLAY ML SILT INORGANIC GRAINED LIQUID LIMIT CL CLAY LESS THAN 50 % SOILS ORGANIC OL ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY SILT AND CLAY MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT INORGANIC MORE THAN 50 % PASSES LIQUID LIMIT CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FLAT CLAY NO. 200 SIEVE 50 % OR MORE ORGANIC OH ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT NOTES: 1) Field classification is based on visual SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS: examination of soil in general accordance with ASTM D 2488-93. Dry - Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch 2) Soil classification using laboratory tests is based on ASTM D 2488-93. Moist - Damp, but no visible water. 3) Descriptions of soil density or Wet - Visible free water or saturated, consistency are based on usually soil is obtained from interpretation of blowcount data, below water table visual appearance of soils, and/or test data. Project Number GEOTECHNICAL No. Date Revision By CK 928915 Niesel Residence Settlement Soil Classification Chart NELSON �NGA ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS 1 6/30/15 Original DPN LSB Figure 4 17311-135th Ave. NE. A-5°6 Snohomish County(425) 337-1669 wooain�Ole, WA 96072 wanatcnee1Cholen (509) 665-7696 (425) 486-IN91 Fax 461-2516 vnvw.nels Vootech. LOG OF EXPLORATION DEPTH (FEET) USC SOIL DESCRIPTION HAND AUGER ONE 0.0 - 7.0 GRAY -BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND ORGANICS (LOOSE, MOIST) TILL1 SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AT 5.0 FEET GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER MET REFUSAL AT 7.0 FEET ON 6/19/15 HAND AUGER TWO 0.0 -6.5 GRAY -BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND ORGANICS (LOOSE, MOIST) F( ILL) SAMPLE WAS NOT COLLECTED GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER MET REFUSAL AT 6.5 FEET ON 6/19/15 HAND AUGER THREE 0.0 - 4.0 DARK GRAY -BROWN, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUIM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND ORGANICS (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) F( ILL) SAMPLE WAS NOT COLLECTED GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER MET REFUSAL AT 4.0 FEET ON 6/19/15 HAND AUGER FOUR 0.0 -1.5 SM BROWN -GRAY, SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST) LSB:DPN SAMPLE WAS NOT COLLECTED GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED HAND AUGER MET REFUSAL AT 1.5 FEET ON 6/19/15 NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. FILE NO 928915 FIGURE 5