The URL can be used to link to this page

CANOD.pdfCity of Edmonds Critical Area Notice of Decision Applicant: co 11 �A Property Owner: . �a Critical Area FileI (,po #: —iS_ Permit Number: 2 i 6 0 70 2 Z� Site Location:— � Parcel Number: Location: -2-0 C9 V Y3Y6no aD93c( Project Description,, /4W ❑ Conditional Waiver. No critical area report is required for the project described above. 1. There will be no alteration of a Critical Area or its required buffer. 2. The proposal is an allowed activity pursuant to ECDC 23.40.220, 23.50.020, and/or 23.80.040. 3. 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. ritical Area Report Required. The proposed project is within a critical area and/or a critical area nl`ler 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. 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. 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. l 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. 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. ,;ravor ble Critical Area Decision. The proposed project as described above and as shown: on the attached site plan meets or is cxernpt from the criteria in ECDC 23.411.160, 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). p Notice on Title. Critical area notice on title recorded under AFN ZDI `%yq-1 02-4 (. C�cs Reviewer` *71 Signature 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 11/29/2016 HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. February 22, 2017 HWA Project No. 2016-042-21 �� CITY COPY MAR U b Dan & Shelly Crabtree , (` ,)t)jo. IDS 20512 82nd Avenue West Edmonds, Washington 98026 Attn: Dan & Shelly Crabtree Subject: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AND CRITICAL AREA REPORT Crabtree Residence, Parcel No 00434600008301 19205 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, Washington 98020 Dear Mrs. Crabtree: At your request, HWA GeoSciences Inc. (HWA) has undertaken and completed a geotechnical investigation within your existing residential lot, for your proposed single family development in Edmonds, Washington. This investigation has been performed in support of the application required to obtain a building permit from the City of Edmonds. Previously, HWA GeoSciences conducted a site assessment for a grading permit for the previous owner of the site in 2010, during which hand probing was undertaken to delineate depth of loose surface fill soils. The surficial probing was not intended to be used for developing foundation recommendations for either a house or walls, and additional explorations were recommended to provide design parameters consistent with the level of geotechnical design input needed at this time. For this investigation, HWA performed a review of the pertinent geologic maps, conducted a site reconnaissance to observe local topographic features, and performed 3 machine -drilled borings to assess subsurface conditions within the footprint of the proposed residential structure. PROJECT LOCATION The subject property consists of an undeveloped 0.22 -acre parcel approximately 120 feet long (west to east) and 80 feet wide (north to south), located within the SE 1/4, Section 13, Township 27 N, and Range 3 E. The municipal address is 19205 Olympic View Drive, in Edmonds, Washington (Snohomish County Parcel No. 00434600008301). The approximate location is shown on Figure 1, the Project Site & Vicinity Map, 21312 30th Drive Sr, Suite 110 Bothell, WA 98021.7010 February 22, 2017 HWA Project No. 2016-042-21 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT As currently proposed, the new, single family residence will consist of a one story to three story structure situated 15 feet south, 15 feet north and 33 feet west of the northern, southern and eastern property lines, respectively (Site Plan, Albert H. Cohen Design Company (AHC), 2017). The house will be set into the hill with the eastern 21 feet of the house consisting of one story with a footing elevation of approximately Elev. 161 feet. The remainder of the house will be three stories with a footing elevation of Elev. 151 feet. The house will be accessed by an approximately 14 -ft wide driveway cut into the existing slope situated within the 25 -ft setback along the west side of the lot, as shown on Figure 2, the Site & Exploration Plan. Based on the measurements depicted on the drawings, the structure will occupy roughly ± 2,300 square feet on the main level. SITE OBSERVATIONS Currently, the site is undeveloped and grass covered. The site generally slopes downward from east to west toward Olympic View Drive. Within the eastern third, the ground slopes upward at grades that vary from 15 to 35 percent. The central portion of the lot is relatively level and the western 30 feet slopes down to Olympic View Drive with grades ranging from 35 to 60 percent. Based on the topography it appears the upper (eastern) end of the site has been built up or graded with on-site cut materials; the center part of the site has been leveled; and the lower (western) end of the site above Olympic View Drive has been filled. GEOLOGY The Puget Lowland has repeatedly been occupied by a portion of the continental glaciers that developed during the ice ages of the Quaternary period. During at least four periods, portions of the ice sheet advanced south from British Columbia into the lowlands of western Washington. The southern extent of these glacial advances was near Olympia, Washington. Each major advance included numerous local advances and retreats, and each advance and retreat resulted in its own sequence of erosion and deposition of glacial lacustrine, outwash and drift deposits. Between and following these glacial advances, sediments from the Olympic and Cascade Mountains accumulated in the Puget Lowland. As the most recent glacier retreated, it uncovered a sculpted landscape of elongated, north -south trending hills and valleys between the Cascade and Olympic mountain ranges. This topography is composed of a complex sequence of glacial and interglacial deposits. Post -glacial deposits within the Puget Lowland include alluvium, lacustrine deposits, volcanic mudflow deposits, and landslide deposits. According to the DRAFT Composite Geologic Map of the Sno-King Area by Booth, Cox, Troost and Shimel, dated January 4, 2004, the project site is mapped as being underlain by Advance Outwash deposits. Advance outwash deposits consist primarily of gray, clean to slightly silty, fine to medium sand, with varying percentages of gravel. They were deposited in pro -glacial streams as the Vashon Crabtree Residence — Revised Report 2 HWA GeoSciences Inc. February 22, 2017 HWA Project No. 2016-042-21 Stade ice advanced southward in Puget Sound. In general, the sediments are coarser at higher levels of the unit, as the streams deposited larger materials closer to the ice. Because these granular soils were overridden by the Vashon Stade ice, they are dense to very dense. They are quite permeable; however, they are not always water -bearing. Advance outwash is generally competent for support of structures, and excavates relatively easy with conventional excavating equipment. Although sideslopes in this sand stand near -vertical temporarily when dry, shoring is necessary for long-term support. Saturated advance outwash will cave profusely along trench sidewalls. At the lower portions of the unit, where the sands tend to fine, this deposit can be "quick" when it is wet. Beneath the advance outwash sands, fine-grained glaciolacustrine clays and silts are common in the lower part of the section, and can be associated with slope instability where they become saturated and weakened by infiltrating water. Hence, proper drainage of such soils is imperative. SOILS According to the Soil Conservation Map for Snohomish County (MRCS, online web soil survey, 2007), the site is overlain by Alderwood — Urban Land complex. The Alderwood — Urban Land complex soils formed on glacial till plains and contain at least 25% of Urban Land consisting of streets, buildings, parking lots and other structures that obscure or alter the soils so that identification is not possible. Although the site is mapped as Alderwood series, our explorations indicate that the site is underlain by weathered advance outwash (Everett series) soils. Both of these soil types have a moderate to severe potential for erosion; however, the site is vegetated so the existing erosion hazard is low. SITE EXPLORATIONS On March 29th, 2016, a geologist from HWA conducted an exploration program to evaluate subsurface conditions at the site. The explorations consisted of three, machine -drilled borings extending to depths ranging from 11.5 to 21.5 feet. The borings (BH -1 through BH -3) were drilled by CN Drilling, Inc. of Seattle, Washington, under subcontract to HWA. A portable drill rig, equipped with hollow -stem augers, was used to drill the borings. Site soil conditions were noted at each of the boring locations. The approximate locations of our borings are shown on Figure 2, the Site & Exploration Plan. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampling was performed in the boreholes using a 2 -inch outside diameter split -spoon sampler, which was advanced with a 140 -pound hammer using a rope and cathead. During the SPT, samples were obtained by driving the sampler 18 inches into the soil with the hammer free -falling 30 inches. The number of blows required for each 6 inches of penetration was recorded. The Standard Penetration Resistance ("N -value") of the soil was calculated as the number of blows required for the final 12 inches of penetration. This resistance, or N -value, provides an indication of relative density of granular soils and the relative consistency of cohesive soils; both indicators of soil strength and foundation bearing capacity. Crabtree Residence — Revised Report 3 HWA GeoSciences Inc. February 22, 2017 HWA Project No. 2016-042-21 A geologist from HWA logged each exploration and recorded all pertinent information. Soil samples obtained from the explorations were classified in the field and representative portions were placed in plastic bags. These soil samples were then taken to our Bothell, Washington laboratory for further examination and testing. Pertinent information including soil sample depths, stratigraphy, soil engineering characteristics, and ground water occurrence was recorded. The stratigraphic contacts shown on the individual exploration logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types; actual transitions may be more gradual. The soil and ground water conditions depicted are only for the specific date and locations reported, and are not necessarily representative of other locations and times. Boring logs were prepared and are presented on Figures 6 through 8. A legend of the terms and symbols used on the exploration logs is presented in Figure 5. SOIL PROFILE Typically, the near surface soils observed in the borings consisted of loose to medium dense fill overlying weathered and unweathered glacial soils. A generalized geologic cross-section that was constructed to depict subsurface conditions is shown on Figure 3. The soil conditions are described briefly as follows: Topsoil — Topsoil consisting of soft, dark brown, sandy silt, containing abundant rootlets and organic material, was encountered at the surface at each the borings. The topsoil layer encountered was 2.5 feet in thickness in each of our explorations. Undocumented Fill — Below the topsoil layer in all borings except BH -2, undocumented fill was encountered, consisting of loose, yellow to olive brown, silty sand with gravel. This soil unit was fully penetrated in BH -1 and BH -3 where it was 6.5 and 5 feet thick, respectively. The fill encountered in BH -3 contained land clearing debris such as wood fragments and charcoal pieces. We expect the fill was placed to level the yard of the lot to the east and to create a transitional slope down to Olympic View Drive. Weathered Advance Outwash — Weathered advance outwash, consisting of medium dense, olive brown to gray, slightly silty to silty sand with gravel was encountered below the fill at an approximate depth of 9 feet in BH -1; beneath topsoil at 2.5 feet in BH -2; and, beneath fill at 7.5 feet in BH -3. The thickness of this unit ranged from 2.5 to 7.5 feet thick. Advance Outwash — At each of the locations explored, the soils encountered immediately beneath the weathered advance outwash layer consisted of advance outwash deposits comprised of dense to very dense, olive to gray brown, medium to fine silty sand with varying amounts of fine to coarse gravel, and often containing beds of relatively clean, fine to medium sand. This soil unit appeared to be at least 5 feet thick where fully penetrated in BH -1. Borings BH -2 and BH -3 were terminated in this deposit. Glaciolacustrine — Beneath the advance outwash sands in BH -1, hard, dark gray, laminated to massive silt was encountered. Due to their fine-grained nature and laminated structure, these Crabtree Residence — Revised Report 4 HWA GeoSciences Inc. February 22, 2017 HWA Project No. 2016-042-21 soils are interpreted to have been deposited in a glacial lake setting. These soils were not fully penetrated, but may be tens of feet thick locally (Booth, et al, 2004). GROUND WATER Ground water seepage was observed in all three borings at depths ranging from 5 to 8 feet below the existing ground surface. Seepage was typically confined to the loose to medium dense, sandy soil layers overlying dense silty sand. During periods of wet weather, it is likely that ground water will also become perched within the dense silty sands overlying the low permeability deposits identified in BH -1. These observations were made during drilling and static water levels are often higher than the depth at which ground water is observed during drilling. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS In accordance with the criteria contained in the City of Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC), Title 23 -Natural Resources; Chapter 23.80 — Geologically Hazardous Areas, the subject site contains areas that are considered potential erosion and landslide hazard areas. The site does not contain areas that can be considered potential seismic hazards areas. Erosion Hazard Areas Based on the criteria contained in ECDC Section 23.80.020.A.1, local slope conditions exist along the western and eastern margins of the site that classify as potential erosion hazard areas due to the presence of Everett series soils on slopes of 15 percent or greater. We reviewed the erosion hazard areas mapped by the City of Edmonds, provided on Figure 4, and concur that the areas shown do classify as erosion hazard areas. Although erosion hazard areas exist at the site, the ground surface is vegetated and no indication of erosion was observed. Based on these observations we consider the risk of erosion at the site to be low. The largest threat of erosion will be at the onset of construction. Construction of the proposed improvements will not increase the erosion hazard provided the steps outlined in this report for work conducted during wet weather are followed, erosion control BMPs required by the City of Edmonds are implemented, and revegetation of the site is completed after construction. Landslide Hazard Area The western approximately 25 to 30 feet of the site consists of a slope with approximately 10 to 12 feet of vertical relief on 35 to 60 percent slopes. Per the ECDC Section 23.80.020.B.4 this portion of the site classifies as a landslide hazard area. This hazard area also extends southward onto the adjoining property as shown on Figure 4. Figure 4 also presents the potential landslide hazard areas mapped by the City of Edmonds. This data indicates that a small portion of the slope at the northeast corner of the property is a potential landslide hazard area. After our site visit and review of the existing contours, we conclude that this area does not classify as a Crabtree Residence — Revised Report 5 HWA GeoSciences Inc. February 22, 2017 HWA Project No. 2016-042-21 landslide hazard area because the height of the slope 40 percent or greater is less than 10 feet tall and does not meet any of the other criteria provided in ECDC Section 23.80.020.13. During our site investigation, no indications of slope sloughing or deep seated slope instability were observed. Although, the proposed development of the property will include modifications to the grade within a landslide hazard area, the modifications will create a gentler slope that does not meet the slope criteria of a landslide hazard area, thus eliminating the landslide hazard area on the site (except for the small portion of the slope that will match the existing steep slope on the adjoining property to the south). Provided construction follows the recommendations in this report, these modifications will not decrease slope stability or pose an unreasonable threat to persons or property either on or off site. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General In summary, the soil conditions within the subject site consist of medium dense to dense, granular, glacial outwash soils, overlain by loose fill and topsoil layers observed to be at least 2.5 to 9 feet thick. The actual depth to medium dense/dense, native soils at other locations within the development footprint will need to be verified in the field during construction. In our opinion, the medium dense, native, silty sand (weathered advance outwash) will provide adequate bearing for the residential foundation system. The topsoil and undocumented fill materials are not recommended for foundation and floor slab support, and should be excavated and replaced with structural fill. During construction, temporary shoring and dewatering will be required to construct the foundations and basement walls. Dewatering could consist of trench drains installed a few weeks prior to beginning excavation and may require a staged approach to allow dewatering to the full depth of the proposed excavations. The basement walls will retain up to 15 feet of soil and are currently shown on the project plans to be 15 feet from the property lines on the north and south sides of the house. Given this close proximity, shoring will be required to provide stable excavations that do not disturb the ground outside the property lines. Seismic Considerations Table 1 presents recommended seismic coefficients for use with the General Procedure described in Section 1613 of the 2015 International Building Code (IBC). The seismic ground motion procedure contained in 2015 IBC is based upon a Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) with a 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years (i.e., recurrence interval of approximately 2,475 years). The MCE corresponds to an earthquake with a 2% probability of exceedance (PE) in 50 years (approximately 2,475 year return period). The relevant probabilistic spectral response parameters were developed using the United States Geological Survey's website. Crabtree Residence — Revised Report 6 HWA GeoSciences Inc. February 22, 2017 HWA Project No. 2016-042-21 The IBC accounts for the effects of site-specific subsurface ground conditions on the response of structures in terms of site classes. Site classes are defined by the average density and stiffness of the soil profile underlying the site. The Site Class can be correlated to the average standard penetration resistance (NsPT) in the upper 100 feet of the soil profile. Based on our characterization of the subsurface conditions, the subject site classifies as IBC Site Class D. The design peak ground acceleration for use in computing lateral earth pressures was computed to be 0.34 g. Based on the SDs and SDI values, the site is considered as Seismic Design Category D. Table 1. Design Seismic Coefficients for 2015 IBC Code Based Evaluation Liquefaction Susceptibility Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon wherein loose, saturated, granular deposits temporarily lose strength and behave as a liquid in response to earthquake shaking. In accordance with 2015 IBC and ASCE 7, we evaluated liquefaction susceptibility using a design peak ground acceleration of 0.52 g. We used the simplified procedure originally developed by Seed and Idriss (1971), and updated by Idriss and Boulanger (2004) for evaluating whether a soil is expected to liquefy for a given peak ground acceleration. Based on SPT blow counts from our explorations, the saturated portions of the loose to medium dense fill and weathered advanced outwash observed in BH -1 from about 6 to 13 below the ground surface will likely liquefy during a design level earthquake event. Where saturated, the fill and weathered advance outwash materials observed to a depth of 10 feet in BH -3 will also likely liquefy. The materials observed immediately below the foundation in BH -2 are not likely to liquefy. Although some of the materials upslope and downslope of the proposed residence could liquefy, the potential for seismically induced liquefaction instability is not considered to be a major issue for development of a residential structure on this site. Nevertheless, a possibility exists that portions of the site outside the building footprint may experience some seismically -induced settlement or could move laterally a small amount during a moderate to severe seismic event. Foundations and Floor Slabs The proposed structure may be supported on footings bearing directly on undisturbed, medium dense to dense native soils or properly compacted structural fill. The recommended compaction Crabtree Residence — Revised Report 7 HWA GeoSciences Inc. Spectral Spectral Design Spectral Design Spectral Site Site Acceleration Acceleration at Acceleration at Acceleration at Coefficients Class at 0.2 sec. 1.0 sec 0.2 sec. 1.0 sec. Ss, g S1, g SDs, g SDI, g p.. D 1.281 0.502 0.854 0.502 1.00 1.50 Liquefaction Susceptibility Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon wherein loose, saturated, granular deposits temporarily lose strength and behave as a liquid in response to earthquake shaking. In accordance with 2015 IBC and ASCE 7, we evaluated liquefaction susceptibility using a design peak ground acceleration of 0.52 g. We used the simplified procedure originally developed by Seed and Idriss (1971), and updated by Idriss and Boulanger (2004) for evaluating whether a soil is expected to liquefy for a given peak ground acceleration. Based on SPT blow counts from our explorations, the saturated portions of the loose to medium dense fill and weathered advanced outwash observed in BH -1 from about 6 to 13 below the ground surface will likely liquefy during a design level earthquake event. Where saturated, the fill and weathered advance outwash materials observed to a depth of 10 feet in BH -3 will also likely liquefy. The materials observed immediately below the foundation in BH -2 are not likely to liquefy. Although some of the materials upslope and downslope of the proposed residence could liquefy, the potential for seismically induced liquefaction instability is not considered to be a major issue for development of a residential structure on this site. Nevertheless, a possibility exists that portions of the site outside the building footprint may experience some seismically -induced settlement or could move laterally a small amount during a moderate to severe seismic event. Foundations and Floor Slabs The proposed structure may be supported on footings bearing directly on undisturbed, medium dense to dense native soils or properly compacted structural fill. The recommended compaction Crabtree Residence — Revised Report 7 HWA GeoSciences Inc. February 22, 2017 HWA Project No. 2016-042-21 level for structural fill placed under footings and grade -supported slabs is 95% of the maximum dry density, as determined by Modified Proctor testing (ASTM D1557). Wall or column footings bearing on weathered advance outwash or structural fill placed over the medium dense to dense advance outwash could be designed for an allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf). This value may be increased by 1/3 for short-term loads such as wind and seismic effects. Continuous footings should have a minimum width of 16 inches, and coht:nn footings should have a minitinini width of 24 inches. Minimum footing widths may, therefore, govern footing design. Footings should bear at least 24 inches below the lowest adjacent exterior grade to provide for frost protection. If footings are supported by structural fill, this fill should extend beyond the outer edges of the footings a minimum distance equal to the fill thickness below the footing, measured at the level of the excavation base. If adjacent individual footings are located at different elevations, it is recommended that the horizontal distance between them be at least 1.5 times the elevation difference between their bases. Where adjoining continuous footings are at different elevations, the upper footing should be stepped down to the lower footing. Floor slabs may be supported at grade on structural fill compacted to the requirements indicated above. If grade -supported slabs are employed, they must be underlain by a capillary break layer comprised of clean, uniform, open -graded, washed rock or pea gravel, to prevent future slab dampness which could be detrimental to floor coverings. This capillary break layer should be at least 6 inches thick and should be in contact with, or provided with suitable drainage outlets to the perimeter foundation drain system. A plastic vapor barrier should be placed on top of the capillary break layer to isolate the slab concrete from this layer, and should consist of plastic sheathing such as Visqueen. Assuming construction is performed as recommended herein, we estimate that the total and differential settlements for foundations will be less than 1 -inch and % -inch, respectively. Foundation Drainage We recommend that perimeter footing drains consisting of 4 -inch diameter, rigid, perforated plastic pipe be placed at foundation level on the outside of the footings, and along the up-slope side of all retaining walls. The inverts of footing drains should be located at least 24 inches below the top of adjacent floor slabs. The pipe should be sloped to drain to an appropriate discharge location. The drain pipe should be bedded and backfilled in with clean washed drain rock, such as Gravel Backfill for Drains as specified in Section 9-03.12(4) of the 2016 Standard Specifications. The drain rock should completely surround the drain pipe by at least 6 inches. Crabtree Residence — Revised Report 8 HWA GeoSciences Inc.. February 22, 2017 HWA Project No. 2016-042-21 Design of Basement and Retaining Walls The present design for the proposed residential structure consists of the ground floor inset into the hillside. To accommodate the structure, cuts of about 14 feet deep are presently envisaged. Consequently, the north, south and east basement walls will serve as retaining walls. Lateral Earth Pressures The lateral earth pressures were computed based on the ground surface behind the walls being flat. Based on our evaluation that temporary excavations will be sloped, the walls of the structure are assumed to be backfilled with freely -draining granular backfill, consisting of properly compacted, granular on-site materials or imported structural fill. Properties for the retained materials were assigned a moist unit weight of 135 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) and an internal friction angle (0) of 32 degrees. For design of basement walls, we assume that the walls will be non -yielding and should be designed for at -rest pressures, with an equivalent fluid pressure of 63 pcf. For design of retaining walls that are able to experience yielding, an active pressure of 42 pcf should be used. Although basement walls are relatively rigid under static conditions, in our opinion, it is reasonable to assume that all walls will yield during a seismic event, allowing the use of the active seismic lateral earth pressure. For the seismic case, an active -plus -seismic equivalent fluid pressure of 56 pcf should be employed for computation of the lateral soil pressure. This seismic earth pressure was computed using the Mononobe-Okabe (M -O) method and a horizontal seismic coefficient of 0.17 g or one-half of the peak ground acceleration (PGA/2). Subgrade Preparation Subgrade preparation is important to limit differential settlement and maintain global stability of pavements, footings, walls and embankments. A geotechnical engineer, or qualified earthwork technician, should evaluate the subgrade soils before and after compaction to verify that organic - rich soils are removed and adequate compaction is achieved. Following removal of organic soils/fill soils, the subgrade surface should be thoroughly compacted with a suitably sized, vibratory roller compactor or an excavator -mounted vibrating plate compactor (hoepac). Loose or soft soil should be removed. A geotechnical engineer or inspector should observe and verify that all organics have been removed and that the subgrade is adequately prepared. Structural fill should be placed over the properly prepared subgrade, as needed. As currently proposed, it appears that the western portion of the residential footprint is underlain by a significant thickness (in excess of 6 feet) of loose, undocumented fill. The fill will have to be removed and replaced with properly compacted structural fill. Excavation and Temporary Shoring Requirements Based on the existing survey provided on the civil plans, provided to us on February 14, 2017, we conclude that construction of conventional foundations will require excavations of up to Crabtree Residence — Revised Report 9 HWA GeoSciences Inc. February 22, 2017 HWA Project No. 2016-042-21 15 feet below the existing ground surface. All excavations greater than 4 feet will require sloping and/or shoring to protect workers and adjacent properties in accordance with Part N of WAC (Washington Administrative Code) 296-155. The fill and outwash materials at the site classify as Type C soil. Unsupported excavations in Type C soils must be inclined no steeper than 1'/2H:1 V (horizontal to vertical). Flatter slopes maybe required where groundwater seepage occurs. Excavations conducted steeper than is allowed for by the WAC should be monitored daily by a licensed geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist. Along the north and south sides of the property, the basement walls of the house will be constructed approximately 15 feet from the property lines. Due to this proximity, temporary shoring will be required along north, and south sides of the excavation so as not to disturb the ground on the adjacent properties. Temporary shoring could consist of a block wall, such as an Ecology block wall, constructed in small sections to minimize the amount of unsupported area at any one time. Alternatively, shoring such as soldier piles and lagging could be used. The proposed shoring design should be designed and stamped by an engineer and be provided for review by the geotechnical engineer prior to beginning excavation. Temporary excavation slopes should be protected from erosion, as necessary, by covering the cut face with well -anchored plastic sheets. Maintenance of safe working conditions, including temporary excavation stability, is the responsibility of the contractor. Based on the soil conditions observed in our explorations, we anticipate that the on-site soils can be excavated with conventional equipment such as backhoes and loaders. Ground Water Seepage during Construction Ground water was observed within in each of our borings at depths ranging from 5 to 8 feet below the ground surface. Ground water seepage is expected over the depths of the proposed excavations and will likely occur primarily within the loose to medium dense, fill and outwash soils perched on top of the dense outwash soils. Seepage will also perch in the dense outwash overlying the low permeability layer observed in BH -1. The ground water elevation and seepage rates will vary with the time of year and are likely to be highest during the wet winter months. As such, we recommend that foundation excavations be performed during the drier summer months to reduce the quantity of ground water that must be intercepted and directed away from the proposed excavations. Control of seepage during construction could consist of installing trench drains a few weeks in advance of the excavations to allow time for the drains to lower the ground water table. Depending on seepage rates and ground water depths encountered at the time of excavation, trench drains may need to be installed in stages if caving of the trenches does not permit excavation to the desired base of the final excavation in the first attempt. Contractors should also be prepared to augment these site drainage systems, with supplementary methods such as sumps and pumps. Crabtree Residence — Revised Report 10 HWA GeoSciences Inc. February 22, 2017 HWA Project No. 2016-042-21 Embankment/Structural Fill and Compaction For the purposes of this report, material used to replace loose fill or raise site grades should be considered structural fill. On-site granular materials, (i.e. sand, slightly silty sand, and silty sand) free of organics or other deleterious materials, where found to be at optimum moisture content for compaction, are considered suitable for use as structural fill. Imported structural fill should consist of clean, free -draining, granular soils free from organic matter or other deleterious materials. Such materials should be less than 4 inches in maximum particle dimension, with less than 7 percent fines (portion passing the U. S. Standard No. 200 sieve), as specified for "Gravel Borrow" in Section 9-03.14(1) of the WSDOT Standard Specifications (WSDOT, 2016). The fine-grained portion of structural fill soils should be non- plastic. Structural fill should be placed in loose, horizontal, lifts of not more than 8 inches in thickness and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined using test method ASTM D 1557 (Modified Proctor). At the time of placement, the moisture content of structural fill should be at or near optimum. The procedure required to achieve the specified minimum relative compaction depends on the size and type of compaction equipment, the number of passes, thickness of the layer being compacted, and the soil moisture -density properties. Excavation and Embankment Construction in Landslide Hazard Area Earthwork will be performed within the landslide hazard area at the front of the property. The majority of the area will be regraded once the project is complete so that it no longer meets the criteria as a landslide hazard area; therefore, the proposed modifications in this area will increase the overall slope stability. There is one small area at the southwest corner that has an approximately 60 percent slope that will remain as part of the landslide hazard area that extends onto the adjacent lot. Due to the location of the house footprint, the temporary excavation for the structure will likely extend into this area. If the embankment slope is reconstructed with suitable structural fill and is properly compacted and revegetated, the proposed modifications will not decrease the stability of the slope at this property nor the adjacent property. Wet Weather Earthwork As the on-site soils are moisture sensitive, and will be unworkable when wet, we do not recommend earthwork be performed in wet conditions. General recommendations relative to earthwork that must necessarily be performed during wet weather or in wet conditions are presented below. These recommendations should be incorporated into the contract specifications. Crabtree Residence — Revised Report 11 HWA GeoSciences Inc. February 22, 2017 HWA Project No. 2016-042-21 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service, and trust that this report meets with your requirements. However, if you have any questions regarding this report, or require further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact either of the undersigned at (425) 774-0106. Sincerely, HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. Steven E. Greene, L.G., L.E.G. Principal Engineering Geologist Attachments: Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 JoLyn Gillie, P.E. Geotechnical Engineer, Principal Project Site & Vicinity Map Site & Exploration Plan Generalized Geologic Cross -Section A — A' Geologic Hazard Areas Map Legend of Terms and Symbols Used on Exploration Logs Log of Boring: BH -1 Log of Boring: BH -2 Log of Boring: BH -3 Crabtree Residence —Revised Report 13 HWA GeoSciences Inc. February 22, 2017 HWA Project No. 2016-042-21 REFERENCES Booth, D.B, Cox, B.F., Troost, K.G., and S. A. Shimel, 2004, Composite Geologic Map of the Sno-King Area, University of Washington, Seattle Area Geologic Mapping Project. City of Edmonds, 2004, Title 23 -Natural Resources; Chapter 23.80 — Geologically Hazardous Areas. Idriss, I.M, and Boulanger, RW, 2004, Semi -Empirical Procedures for Evaluating Liquefaction Potential During Earthquakes, presented at the Joint 11th ISCDEE & 3rd ICEGE, January, 2004. NRCS, 1983, Soils Map of Snohomish County Area, WA661 (on-line version) Seed, HB and Idriss, IM, 1971, Simplified Procedure for Evaluating Soil Liquefaction Potential. Journal of Soil Mechanics Foundation Division, ASCE, Vol. 97, No. SM9, pp. 1249-1273. WSDOT, 2016, Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, M 41-10. Crabtree Residence — Revised Report 14 HWA GeoSciences Inc. PROJECT SITE & VICINITY MAP GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. CRABTREE RESIDENCE ' 19205 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE NORTH FIGURE N0, 2016-042 bLG---- ,T, :..9. .. \91r D uteri a�1 _ - _ 5 f v O° 0Q m-� „LL--------------------------- I . i� t I J 0 1I� ap N \ o Z o 0 wOw O� P a ti ms N m K O w o 0- N N v O> Y ° of \�• m to � N N C> Mlli z _ � 5 N v O° 0Q m-� I . i� t I J 0 1I� ap N \ ri N N O� P a ti ms N v O> Y ° of \�• m to � N N C> Mlli z _ � 5 N� 0Q m-� I . i� t I J N v O> Y ° of \�• m to � N N C> Mlli z a WU) N� 0Q I . i� t 0 1I� - —bM — — VM .. l SS— -`r- SS SS - t nn0-02 ri N N O� P a ti NIVIVJ]iVM „8 —VM _ _ b'M — — bM — — tlM — - ..VM — _.. —VM — — —VM _ ry a o SS— — — — SS - 3 ry N - —bM — — VM .. l SS— -`r- SS SS __9S__9_Y�\��ti�G.F•ry)..I...I—aI��IW°�LI'°S__—_°S_--.} OS _.. .... .... .... :__—_45—_— N Z O O LUQ 0 CL a Q Q O Z O Q 2 o U) W z m m - t nn0-02 ri N N W P a ti NIVIVJ]iVM „8 —VM _ _ b'M — — bM — — tlM — - ..VM — _.. —VM — — —VM _ 0 SSIL, ---"�- SS --SS----SS----SS----SS--.;✓—SS-- SS— — — — SS - __9S__9_Y�\��ti�G.F•ry)..I...I—aI��IW°�LI'°S__—_°S_--.} OS _.. .... .... .... :__—_45—_— N Z O O LUQ 0 CL a Q Q O Z O Q 2 o U) W z m m 1334 NI NOLLVA313 (N X'T' 21 tj (N S 135330) T -HO 'n I Ln Ln 1333 NI NOL17VA313 -11 U 4 OZ; (N Ln (n 8 0 r- 70 (1) -0 Q) C o) < FU < _0 Z3 a) < V) z LU0 U u (N X'T' 21 tj (N S 135330) T -HO 'n I Ln Ln 1333 NI NOL17VA313 CJ gap w U OZ; < (n 0 r- 70 (1) -0 Q) C o) < FU < _0 Z3 a) < V) z LU0 U u U- < z 0 Ln E C: O < LU E 0 0 0 0 0� w @@C z 0 CL 0 < IW < >C) < 'Inu CL m 0 Wz 0 'o LD LO 0 0w = -o -E Ln (V 0 > Ilu U Ln (D-1 pl, X -HU D C: c > V) ru = >� (n -0 1 t fu U) C: 7. 0 c: Mn .0 u ro -0 CJ gap w 1-11:11:1 R 1-1 < (n 0 r- 70 (1) -0 Q) C o) < FU < _0 U0 "0 < V) z LU0 U u < z 0 Ln E < < LU E 0 0 0 0 0� w Lu. z CL 0 < IW < >C) < 1-11:11:1 R 1-1 RELATIVE DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY VERSUS SPT N—VALUE TEST SYMBOLS COHESIONLESS SOILS ..._._. .__--_ ..... COHESIVE --.OILS - .-...... VE SOILS %F Percent Fines ,,....,,.,,_ ..........._ ..... ....,,..... Approximate ................... AL Atterberg Limits: = Plastic Limit Density y Approximate N blows/ft Consistent ( ) y a N (blows/ft) Undrained Shear LL LL =Liquid Limit i Relative Densit / Strength (psf) m n CBR California Bearing Ratio Very Loose ...... 0 to 4 0 - 15 Very Soft 0 to 2 <250 CN Consolidation Loose 4 to 10 15 - 35 Soft 2 to 4 250 - 500 DD Dry Density (pcf) Medium Dense 10 to 30 35 - 65 Medium Stiff 4 to 8 500 - 1000 DS Direct Shear Dense 30 to 50 65 - 85 Stiff 8 to 15 1000 - 2000 GS Grain Size Distribution Very Dense over 50 85 - 100 Very Stiff 15 to 30 2000 - 4000 K Permeability Hard over 30 x4000 MD Moisture/Density Relationship (Proctor) Resilient Modulus USCS SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM PD PI Photoionization Device Reading ...-.,,,. R .....- PP Pocket Penetrometer MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP DESCRIPTIONS Approx. Compressive Strength (4sf) Gravel andGW Well -graded GRAVEL SG Specific Gravity Coarse Clean Gravel f a TC Triaxial Compression Grained Gravelly Soils (little or no fines) o GP Poorly graded GRAVEL TV Torvane Approx. Shear Strength (tsf) Soils More than Gravel witho, GM Silty GRAVEL UC Unconfined Compression 50% of Coarse Fraction Retained Fines (appreciable .. snes' of fines onNo.4Sieve } GC Clayey GRAVEL SAMPLE TYPE SYMBOLS Sand andClean Well -graded SAND ® 2.0' OD Split Spoon (SPT) '. Sand "# m W SP (140 Ib. hammer with 30 in. drop) More than Sandy Soils (little or no fines) Poorly -graded SAND Shelby Tube 50% Retained ........,, .� . - ....._,..', _..-....... on No. 50% or More Sand with of Coarse SM Silt SAND y Vary Split Spoon with Brass Rin 3-1/4" ODS s p P g 200 Fines ie L J SizeSieve Fraction Passing amount of fines) y SAND SC Clayey S Small Ba Sample g P No. 4 Sieve ML SILT® Large Bag (Bulk) Sample Fine Grained Silt Liquid Limit and Less than 50% . CL Lean CLAY mmmmm Care Run Soils Clay OL Organic SILT /Organic CLAY ® Non-standard Penetration Test ._....---- .. _ (3.0" OD split spoon) Silt 5o%or More and Liquid Limit GROUNDWATER SYMBOLS Passing 50% or MoreNo. 200 Sieve Cla y EFat -...------....-./Organic Groundwater Level (measured a4 Size CLAY time of drilling) - Groundwater Level (measured in well or Highly Organac Soils open hole after water level stabilized) COMPONENT DEFINITIONS COMPONENT PROPORTIONS COMPONENTmmmmm SIZE RANGE PROPORTION RANGE DESCRIPTIVE TERMS Boulders Larger than 12 in < 5% Clean Cobbles 3 in to 12 in Gravel 3 in to No 4 (4.5mm) 5-12% Slightly (Clayey, Silty, Sandy) Coarse gravel 3 in to 314 in Fine gravel 3/4 in to No 4 (4"5mm) 12-30% Clayey, Silty, Sandy, Gravelly Sand No, 4 (4.5 mm) to No. 200 (0.074 mm) Coarse sand No. 4 (4.5 mm) to No. 10 (2.0 mm) 30-50% Very (Clayey, Silty, Sandy, Gravelly) Medium sand No. 10 (2.0 mm) to No. 40 (0.42 mm) Fine sand No. 40 (0.42 mm) to No. 200 (0.074 mm) -•-----•-- -------••••• Silt and Clay Smaller than No. 200 (0.074mm) Components are arranged in order of increasing quantities. NOTES: Soil classifications presented on exploration logs are based on visual and laboratory observation. Soil descriptions are presented in the following general order: MOISTURE CONTENT Density/consistency, color, modifier (if any) GROUP NAME, atdatiflans to group name (if any), moisture DRY Absence of moisture, dusty, content. Proportion, gradation, and angularity of constituents, additional commentsdry to the touch. (GEOLOGIC INTERPRETATION) MOIST Damp but no visible water. WET Visible free water, usually Please refer to the discussion in the report text as well as the exploration logs for a more sail is below water table. complete description of subsurface conditions. LEGEND OF TERMS AND UfflGeotechnical Investigation - Crabtree Residence SYMBOLS USED ON , 19205 Olympic View Drive HMGMSMCHj[J�, Edmonds, WA EXPLORATION LOGS PROJECT NO..: 2015-042 Ri : 5 LEGEND 2016-042.GPJ 4/11/16 DRILLING COMPANY: CN Drilling, Inc. DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger SAMPLING METHOD: SPT with Cathead Hammer LOCATION: See Figure 2 5- 10- 1 15- 1 5- 1 20- 1 0- 1 25 - DESCRIPTION �, SM Loose, brown, silty, SAND with abundant fine or anics mm -1 r r; g ,moist Borehole was terminated at 21.5 feet below ground surface. Ground water seepage was observed at 6 feet below ground surface. Borehole was abandonded with bentonite chips. (TOPSOIL) DATE STARTED: 3/29/2016 SM_. ...... Loose, yellow brown, slightly silty to silty, fine to medium grained SAND with scattered fine subrounded gravel, moist. 0 (FILL) LOGGED BY: S. Pemble Loose, yellow brown, slightly silty to silty, fine to medium grained SAND with scattered fine subrounded gravel, moist. SURFACE ELEVATION: 173,0 t feet Becomes wet at 6 feet below ground surface. w Loose, olive brown, slightly silty to silty, fine to medium m as grained SAND with fine to medium subrounded gravel, wet SM ... r}- z.c A, 1, Medium dense, olive gray, slightly silty to silty, fine to coarse A Blows per foot z O grained SAND with fine subrounded gravel, moist to wet. w w Mottled brown and gray below 11 feet. d CL 0- N 2 2z (WEATHERED ADVANCE OUTWASH) x SM Dense, olive brown, slightly silty to silty, fine to medium uai � a grained SAND with medium grained SAND laminations and 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 w w fine to coarse subrounded gravel, moist. (ADVANCE OUTWASH) _ M Ssilt --. Dense, olive brown`, slightly._ y to silty, fine to medium grained SAND with subangular and subrounded fine to coarse gravel, moist. ML ........... ........ ..-...... Ha rd, gray, SILT with light gray, fine sand laminations, moist. (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT) Borehole was terminated at 21.5 feet below ground surface. Ground water seepage was observed at 6 feet below ground surface. Borehole was abandonded with bentonite chips. S-1 1-1-1 S-2 1-1-1 S-3 2-1-2 S-4 4-5-9 S-5 6-20-30 S-6 13-19-30 S-7 13-21-28 S-8 8-16-25 NOTE: This log of subsurftace conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated and therefore may nrat necessarily be indicative of other times andlor locations. M A DATE STARTED: 3/29/2016 DATE COMPLETED: 3/29/2016 0 LOGGED BY: S. Pemble A SURFACE ELEVATION: 173,0 t feet wz w w Standard Penetration Test m as ¢ (140 Ib, weight, 30" drop) r}- z.c A, 1, w ~ A Blows per foot z O w w w w d CL 0- N 2 2z o x O w� uai � a O 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 w w S-1 1-1-1 S-2 1-1-1 S-3 2-1-2 S-4 4-5-9 S-5 6-20-30 S-6 13-19-30 S-7 13-21-28 S-8 8-16-25 NOTE: This log of subsurftace conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated and therefore may nrat necessarily be indicative of other times andlor locations. M A A 0 A A, 1, 0 20 40 60 80 10 Water Content (%) Plastic Limit 1 0 Liquid Limit Natural Water Content BORING: owGeotechnical Investigation - Crabtree Residence BH -1 l 19205 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA C. PAGE: 1 of 1 ft PROJECT NO.: 2016-042 FIGURF,', 6 BORING -DSM 2016-042.GPJ 2017 1701 165 1 1601 1551 1501 DRILLING COMPANY: CN Drilling, Inc. DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger SAMPLING METHOD: SPT with Cathead Hammer LOCATION: See Figure 2 DATE STARTED: 3/29/2016 DATE COMPLETED: 3/29/2016 LOGGED BY: S. Pemble SURFACE ELEVATION: 164.0 t feet Borehole was terminated at 11.5 feet below ground surface. Ground water seepage was observed at 5 feet below ground surface. Borehole was abandoned with bentonite chips. 1 15.. 1 20- 1 0- 1 25- NOTE: 5w NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only #it the specified location and on the date indicated and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times andfor locations. Standard Penetration Test (140 Ib. weight, 30" drop) z A Blows per foot 0 Q J 20 30 40 50 w AL 0' w U W U a � F 155 J } ~ z V) LEI U) L C/)Q o J O O V) 140 W J uJ J W � p N Q_' Z 0 t- .-• Co N CL o- o w O LU w C0 D DESCRIPTION W Cl)a O 0 0 SM _..... y, grained SAND With Loose, yellow brown, silt fine to ....ai S-1 2-2-1 scattered fine rounded gravel, moist. (TOPSOIL) SM Medium dense, olive brown, slightly silty to silty, fine to coarse S-2 5-9-12 grained SAND with fine to coarse subrounded gravel, moist. (WEATHERED ADVANCE OUTWASH) Q 5 -_ Medium dense, olive brown, silty, fine to medium grained S-3 6-10-13 SAND with medium grained SAND laminations and fine to coarse subrounded gravel, wet. SP Medium dense, olive brown, fine to _. medium, clean to slightly S-4 4-11-13 SM silty, SAND with scattered fine subrounded gravel, wet. Grades to silty fine grained SAND below 8.5 feet. 10 SM ....................... Verydense, olive gray, silty, fine to medium grained SAND S-5 17-30-50 with fine subrounded gravel, moist. (ADVANCE OUTWASH) Borehole was terminated at 11.5 feet below ground surface. Ground water seepage was observed at 5 feet below ground surface. Borehole was abandoned with bentonite chips. 1 15.. 1 20- 1 0- 1 25- NOTE: 5w NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only #it the specified location and on the date indicated and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times andfor locations. Standard Penetration Test (140 Ib. weight, 30" drop) z A Blows per foot 0 Q J 20 30 40 50 w AL 160 � dk 155 150 145 140 0 20 40 60 80 Water Content (%) Plastic Limit 1 0-1 Liquid Limit Natural Water Content 100 BORING: Geotechnical Investigation - Crabtree Residence BH -2 19205 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 1NC, PAGE: 1 of 1 PRi?J C T NO2015-042 F12URE 7 BORING -DSM 2016-042.GPJ 2/8/17 DRILLING COMPANY: CN Drilling, Inc. DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger SAMPLING METHOD: SPT with Cathead Hammer LOCATION: See Figure 2 0) W U O m W m � o m 0-11 SM .......... Loose brown, slightly silty to silty, fine to medium grained SAND with scattered fine subrounded gravel and fine organics, moist. (TOPSOIL) SM Loose, olive brown, silty, fine grained SAND with fine to coarse subrounded gravel, moist. (FILL) Loose, light brown, slightly silty, fine to medium grained SAND with fine to coarse subrounded to rounded gravel and scattered charcoal, moist. ._........... SP Loose, olive brown, slightly silty, fine to medium grained SM SAND with fine subrounded gravel, wet. (WEATHERED ADVANCE OUTWASH) SM Medium dense, yellow brown, clean to slightly silty, fine to medium grained SAND with scattered silty fine SAND laminations below 11 feet, wet. r! (ADVANCE OUTWAH) Dense, olive gray, clean to slightly silty, mediumr rained SAND with fine to meidum subrounded gravel, wet. Grades to siltv, fine qrained SAND below 13.5 feet, wet. DESCRIPTION 5- 1 10- 1 0- 1 15 - II 20- NOTE: 0- Borehole was terminated at 14 feet below ground surface. Ground water seepage was observed at 8 feet below ground surface. Borehole was abondoned with bentonite chips. DATE STARTED: 3/29/2016 DATE COMPLETED: 3/29/2016 LOGGED BY: S, Pemble SURFACE ELEVATION: 162.0 t feet NOTE: This log of subsurluce conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated and thererore inay not rnecerssarlly be indicative of other times andlor locations. Standard Penetration Test (140 Ib. weight, 30" drop) ® Blows per foot 0 20 40 60 80 100 Water Content (%) Plastic Limit 1-- w— 11, Liquid Limit Natural Water Content 155 II �I BORING: umGeotechnical Investigation - Crabtree Residence BH -3 ', 1 19205 Olympic View Drive PAGE: 1 of 1 HMGEOSCUNCH INC Edmonds, WA PROJECT NO.: 2016-042 Flrl iRF, 8 BORING -DSM 2016-042.GPJ 2/8/17 14511 W U W Co z w ta- U W U ~ Lu U -1Z d a LU D N w Z :5 z o x :D O of W U)i 0- -0 o S-1 1-2-2 S-2 1-2-2 S-3 1-33 n/ S-4 2-3-4 Q S-5 8-11-9 S-6 6-18-27 NOTE: This log of subsurluce conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated and thererore inay not rnecerssarlly be indicative of other times andlor locations. Standard Penetration Test (140 Ib. weight, 30" drop) ® Blows per foot 0 20 40 60 80 100 Water Content (%) Plastic Limit 1-- w— 11, Liquid Limit Natural Water Content 155 II �I BORING: umGeotechnical Investigation - Crabtree Residence BH -3 ', 1 19205 Olympic View Drive PAGE: 1 of 1 HMGEOSCUNCH INC Edmonds, WA PROJECT NO.: 2016-042 Flrl iRF, 8 BORING -DSM 2016-042.GPJ 2/8/17 14511