CRA19950033.PDF•
Ell,
CA FILE NO.
-
` ` Critical Areas Checklist
Sit ,-Infortiatioi> (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation)
1� Site Address%Location: 8364 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, WA 98026
2. Property Tax Account Number: 182704-1-010-0001
3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): 1.3 Acres
4. Is this site currently developed? XX yes; no.
If yes; how is site developed? Single Family Residence
5. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply.
Flat: less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site.
Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a
horizontal distance of 66-feet).
XX Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% ( a vertical rise
of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet).
Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a
horizontal distance of less than 33-feet).
Other (please describe):
6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: None ; Approx. Depth: N/A
7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: None ; Approx. Depth: N/A
What season(s) of the year? N/A
8. Site is in the floodway No floodplain No of a water course.
9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year-
round? No Flows are seasonal? No (What time of yeao N/A ).
10. Site is primarily: forested ; meadow ; shrubs ; mixed XX
urban landscaped (lawn,shrubs etc)
11. Obvious wetland is present on site: None
c'g0_ig9
City of Edmonds
Critical Areas Checklist
The Critical Areas Checklist contained on
this form is to be filled out by any person
preparing a Development Permit
Application for the City of Edmonds prior
to his/her submittal of a development
permit to the City.
The purpose of the Checklist is to enable
City staff to determine whether any
potential Critical Areas are or may be
present on the subject property. The
information needed to complete the
Checklist should be easily available from
observations of the site or data available at
City Hall (Critical Areas inventories, maps,
or soil surveys).
An applicant, or his/her representative,
must fill out the checklist, sign and date it,
and submit it to the City. The City will
review the checklist, make a precursory site
visit, and make a determination of the
subsequent steps necessary to complete a
development permit application.
With a signed copy of this form, the
applicant should also submit a vicinity map
or plot plan for individual lots of the parcel
with enough detail that City staff can find
and identify the subject parcel(s). In
addition, the applicant shall include
other pertinent information (e.g. site
plan, topography map, etc.) or studies in
conjunction with this Checklist to assist
staff in completing their preliminary
assessment of the site.
I have completed the attached Critical Area Checklist and attest that the answers provided are
factual, to the best of my knowledge (fill out the appropriate column below).
Owner / Applicant:
Gerald E. Moffitt
Name
8364 Olympic View Drive
Street Address
Edmonds, WA 98026-5435 (206) 672-9565
Applicant Representative:
Name
Street Address
Phone City, State, ZIP Phone
02/21/95
Date Signature Date
C7
•
•
1-0
0
City of Edmonds
Critical Areas Determination
Applicant: Gerald E. Moffitt Determination #: CA 95-33
Project Name: Permit Number:
Site Location: 8364 Olympic View Dr. Property Tax Acct #: 182704-1-010-0001
Project Description:
Waiver Criteria (all criteria must be found to apply):
✓ There will be no alteration of the Critical Area or its required buffers;
✓ The development proposal will not impact the Critical Area in a manner contrary to
the goals, purposes, objectives and requirements of the Critical Areas ordinance;
✓ The development proposal meets the minimum standards of the Critical Areas
ordinance;
✓ The above findings are based on the following conditions of approval;
During review and inspection of the subject property it was found that the site contains a Steep
Slope Slope Hazard Area pursuant to Chapter 20.15B of the Edmonds Community
Development Code.
Based on these findings, prior to submission of any development permit, you will be required
to submit the following for review by the Planning Department:
1. Before any permit application may be applied for, submit to.the Planning Department a
topographic survey prepared by a Licensed Land Surveyor delineating Steep Slope
Areas. Any slope over 30% with more than 10 feet of rise will be classified as a Steep
Slope Hazard Area. A 50 foot buffer is required from both the top and toe of the
slope. A 15 foot building setback is required from the 50 foot buffer.
2. If the results of the above survey determine the lot unbuildable, any development which
is not identified as an exception per ECDC Chapter 20.1513 must receive a Reasonable
Use Exception or a Variance pursuant to ECDC 20.15B.180A and 20:15B.040C.
3. All proposed development of the subject lot must meet the requirements of Chapter
19.05 of the Edmonds Community Development Code.
If the property owner wishes to apply for a specific development permit which they feel
would not impact the Critical Areas located on the site, they may submit their proposal to
the Planning Department for review. If the Planning Department finds that the proposed
development permit will not adversely impact a Critical Area or its buffers, a conditional
waiver may be issued on a project by project basis.
Kirk J. Vinish .u/Z • 2--Z7— f S--
Planner SignaturF Date
0
#P20
•
`°c. 1 %9"
City of Edmonds
Development Services Department
Planning Division
Phone: 425.771.0220
Fax: 425.771.0221
The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is to
be filled outby any person preparing a Development
Permit Application for the City of Edmonds prior to
his/her submittal of the application to the City.
The purpose . of the Checklist is to enable City staff to
determine whether any potential Critical Areas are, or
may be, present on the subject property. The information
needed to complete the Checklist should be easily
available from observations of the site or data available at
City Hall (Critical areas inventories, maps, or soil
surveys).
Date Received:
City Receipt #: 2-+ If I
Critical Areas File #:
Critical Areas Checklist Fee: $135.00 .
Date Mailed to Applicant:
A property owner, or his/her authorized representative,
must fill out the checklist, sign and date it, and submit it
to the City. The City will review the checklist, make a
precursory site visit, and make a determination of the
subsequent steps necessary to complete a development
permit application.
Please submit a vicinity map, along with the signed copy
of this form to assist City staff in fording and locating the
specific piece of property described on this forma In
addition, the applicant. shall include other pertinent
information (e.g. site plan, topography map, etc.) or
studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assistant staff
in completing their preliminary assessment of the site.
The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees
to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable
ey's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or
lete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees.
By my signature,. I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and that I am authorized to file this application on the behalf of the owner as listed below.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT
DATE
Property Owner's Authorization
By my signature, I certify that I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application,
and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the
purposes of inspection and pgsting attep9lant to thisAppli on ,
PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY
Owner/Applicant: --T�-�---\A%I 111 0H � t llev
Name
.7344 01 yMl�ic
Street Address
�CLM5 NJ S wq � 0L a,
State Zip
hone: Lf- 5- 6 7 3- 7 3 D a -
Applicant Representative:
Name
Street Address
City State Zip
Telephone:
Email address (optional): Email Address (optional):
J��(PI'/�&A- VkR5-- 0033
...... I / i 20 r� V
Critical Areas Checklist CA File No:.
Site Information (soils topography/hydrology/ vegetation) •
/
1. Site Address/Location 0 e d V
2. Property Tax Account Number: '� D 4 o b o 10/ OD d
1$ Z-ID 4161 .00M
3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): 3 7 a c "'5
4. is this site currently developed? )(yes; no.
If yes; how is, site developed? o N e. 4 vv s e n N T p mT
5. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply.
Flat: less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site.
Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal
distance of 66-feet).
Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% (a vertical rise of 10-feet
over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet).
Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal
distance of less than 33-feet).
Other (please describe):
6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: _jV6 ; Approx. Depth: •_
7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: N n ; Approx. Depth:
What season(s) of the year?
8. Site is in the floodway —N o floodplain N of a water course.
9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year-round?
IJ t, Flows are seasonal? (What time of year? ).
10. Site is primarily: forested X ; meadow ; shrubs ; mixed K ;
urban landscaped (lawn, shrubs etc)
11. Obvious wetland is present on site:
For City Staff Use Only
1. Plan Check Number, if applicable?
2. Site is Zoned?
3. SCS mapped soil type(s)?
4. Critical Areas inventory or C.A. map indicates Critical Area on site?
5. Site within designated earth subsidence landslide. hazard area?
DETERMINATION
STUDY REQUIRED
WAIVER
Reviewed
taz
i oaf
Qzz -
zcz —
f Aer
+ .. esz
•
ly k�«
�+a5�473--7
1+ 0-�5- ? 77' 09LA v
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
PROPOSED 3-LOT SHORT PLAT
8364 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
L&A Job No. 5A112
Date: September 26, 2005
Prepared for:
Mr. Bill Ritter
8364 Olympic View Drive
Edmonds, WA 98026
4f *>-5—&,73-730z
Prepared By:
Liu & Associates, Inc.
19213 Kenlake Place NE
Kenmore, Washington 98028
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Engineering Geology Earth Science
September 26, 2005
Mr. Bill Ritter
8364 Olympic View Drive
Edmonds, WA 98026
Dear Mr. Ritter:
Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Study
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
8364 Olympic View Drive
Edmonds, Washington
L&A Job No. 5A112
INTRODUCTION
We have completed a geotechnical engineering study for the subject plat site, located at the
(� above address in Edmonds, Washington. The general location of the project site is shown on
Plate I — Vicinity Map. We understand that the proposed development for the site is to plat it
into three single-family residential building lots. The purpose of this study is to characterize the
subsurface conditions of the site and provide geotechnical recommendations for grading, slope
stabilization, erosion mitigation, surface and ground water drainage control, foundation design
and construction, etc., for the proposed development. Presented in this report are our findings
and recommendations.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
For our use in this study, we were provided with an undated plat plan of the proposed
L development for the site. According to this plan, the proposed development for the site is to plat
it into three single-family residential lots. The existing house on the new Southern Lot will
f_
remain, and a new residence will be constructed on each of the two remaining new lots (the
Northeast and Northwest lots). The Northeast and Northwest Lots are on a moderate to steep
!_ 19213 Kenlake Place NE - Kenmore, Washington 98028
Phone (425) 483-9134 - Fax (425) 486-2746
�I
September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
Page 2
hillside. Although design plans for the new residences to be constructed on these lots are not yet
available, we anticipate the buildings will be wood -framed structures supported on concrete -
walled basement and interior bearing walls, columns and footing foundations. The footprint
excavation for these buildings will probably require cuts from a couple to 15 feet deep and
possibly less significant fill.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Our scope of services for this study comprises specifically the following:
1 Review the geologic and soil conditions at the site based on a published geologic map.
2. Explore the site for subsurface conditions with backhoe test pits to a firm bearing soil
stratum or to the maximum depth (about 12 feet) capable by the backhoe used for
excavating the test pits, whichever occurs first.
3. Perform necessary geotechnical analyses, and provide geotechnical recommendations for
site grading, erosion abatement, slope stabilization, surface and ground water control, and
foundation design and construction, based on subsurface conditions encountered in the
test pits and results of our geotechnical analyses.
4. Prepare a written report to present our findings, conclusions, and recommendations.
SITE CONDITIONS
SURFACE CONDITIONS
The site is an irregularly -shaped tract of land. It is bounded by Olympic View Drive and an
undeveloped city park land to the north, and adjoined by residential developments to the south,
east and west. The site is situated on the mid -slope of a broad, moderate to steep, northwesterly -
declining hillside. The southern portion of the site where the new South Lot is located has been
previously graded into a relatively level bench. The terrain within the new Northeast and
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
f�
September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A 112
Page 3
Northwest Lots of the site generally slopes down northerly to northwesterly at about 15 to 83
percent grade. The steeper portions are mostly along the south sides of these two lots and the
eastern half of the Northwest lot.
The existing residence on the South Lot is accessed by a paved driveway along the east side of
the site. The unpaved area around this existing residence is mostly landscaped with shrubs. The
area of the Northeast and Northwest Lots is heavily wooded, dotted by tall, mature evergreen and
deciduous trees and covered by dense underbrush.
GEOLOGIC SETTING
The Geologic Map of the Eastern Half and Part of the Western Half Quadrangles, Washington,
by James P. Minard, published by U. S. Geological Survey in 1983, was referenced for the
I_ geologic and soil conditions of the lot. According to this publication, the surficial soil units at
and in the vicinity of the lot are mapped as Vashon Till (Qvt) underlain by Advance Outwash
(Qva)•
The geology of the Puget Sound Lowland has been modified by the advance and retreat of
several glaciers in the past and subsequent deposits and erosion. The latest glacier advanced to
the Puget Sound Lowland is referred to as the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation, which has
occurred during the later stages of the Pleistocene Epoch and retreated from the region some
14,500 years ago.
The Vashon till soil unit is a very dense mixture of unsorted clay, silt, sand, gravel, and scattered
cobbles and boulders, often referred to as "hard pan". The Vashon till over the top two to four
feet is normally weathered to a medium -dense state, and is moderately permeable and
compressible. The underlying fresh till is very dense and practically impervious to stormwater
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
j� September 26, 2005
( Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
(� Page 4
infiltration. The Vashon till soil unit, however, was not encountered by the test pits excavated on
the site.
The advance outwash soil unit underlying the Vashon till is composed of stratified sand and
gravel with minor amounts of silt and clay, deposited by the meltwater of advancing glacial ice.
Due to its generally granular composition, the advance outwash is of moderate permeability and
generally drains well. The advance outwash is glacially overridden and is generally dense to very
dense in its natural, undisturbed state, except the top 3 to 5 feet where exposed on slopes which
may be eroded and weathered to a loose to medium -dense state. The advance outwash deposits
can stand in steep cuts or natural slopes for extended period of time when undisturbed. Where
exposed on slopes of poor vegetation cover and subjected to storm runoff, the advance outwash
deposits can be gradually eroded and may slough to a flatter inclination. The advance outwash
deposits in their native, undisturbed state can provide very good foundation support with little
Isettlement expected for light to moderate residential structures.
SOIL CONDITIONS
Subsurface conditions of the subject site were explored on September 6, 2005, with six test pits.
The test pits were excavated with a track -mounted backhoe to depths from 8.0 to 10.0 feet. The
approximate locations of the test pits are shown on Plate 2 - Site and Exploration Location Plan.
The test pits were located with either a tape measure or by visual reference to existing
topographic features in the field and on the topographic survey map, and their locations should be
considered only accurate to the measuring method used.
L A geotechnical engineer from our office was present during subsurface exploration, who
examined the soil and geologic conditions encountered and completed the logs of test pits. Soil
�L
samples obtained from each soil unit in the test pits were visually classified in general
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
Page 5
accordance with United Soil Classification System, a copy of which is presented on Plate 3.
Detailed descriptions of soil units encountered during site exploration are presented in the test pit
logs on Plates 4 through 6.
The test pits revealed that the site is mantled by a layer of loose, organic topsoil, from 0.8 to 2.7
feet thick. The topsoil is underlain by a layer of weathered soils of light -brown, loose to
medium -dense, silty fine sand with a trace of gravel, from 1.6 to 3.5 feet thick. Underlying this
layer of weathered soils is a brown -gray to light -brown to light -gray advance outwash deposit of
medium -dense, gravelly, clean to slightly silty, fine to medium sand with occasional cobble, from
1.8 to 3.2 feet thick. This medium -dense advance outwash deposit is underlain to the depths
explored by a light -gray advance outwash deposit of dense, gravelly, fine to coarse sand.
GROUNDWATER CONDITION
Groundwater was not encountered in any of the test pits. The advance outwash deposits
underlying the site are of moderately high permeability, and would allow stormwater to seep
through. Stormwater infiltrating into the advance outwash deposits would perch and accumulate
over an underlying impervious silt and clay layer at greater depth. We expect little impact on the
proposed development by this deeper groundwater.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
GENERAL
Based on the soil conditions encountered in our subsurface explorations, it is our opinion that the
site is suitable for the proposed development from the geotechnical engineering viewpoint,
provided that the recommendations in this report are fully implemented and observed during
construction. The topsoil, loose weathered soils and soils in the root zone should be completely
stripped within the driveways, the building pads and where the subgrade soils are to support
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
Page 6
structural or traffic load. The medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils are of fair to
moderately high shear strength and can provide good foundation support to the driveways and the
new buildings to constructed on the site.
Conventional footing foundations placed on or into the underlying medium -dense to dense
advance outwash soils may be used for supporting the new buildings to be constructed on the
site. Structural. fill, if required for site grading, should be constructed over the underlying
medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils following the stripping of surficial unsuitable
soils.
GRADING SEASON
Due to the sensitive nature of the steep slopes within the site, we recommend that grading and
foundation construction work for the residence be carried out and completed in the dryer period
from April 1 to October 30 of the year. The site should be stabilized with proper drainage and
erosion control measures in place beyond this dry season grading period.
GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND REMEDIATION
Landslide Hazards
The subject site is underlain at shallow depth by medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils
of fair to moderately -high shear strength. The advance outwash deposits are quite permeable,
and the impervious silty soils normally underlying the advance outwash soil unit is not exposed
within the site. Therefore, seepage of groundwater out of slopes from the interface of the
advance outwash deposits and the underlying silty soil unit should not occur within the site. The
competent advance outwash soils underlying the site and little potential of groundwater seepage
within the site would make it unlikely for deep-seated landslide to occur within the site.
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
Page 7
Erosion Hazard
The surficial topsoil and loose weathered soils over the steeper portion of the site can be easily
eroded when stripped of vegetation cover and overly saturated. Prolonged erosion can lead to
soil sloughing and shallow, skin -type mudflows on the steeper portion of the site. To mitigate
erosion potential, the vegetation cover outside of construction limits should not be disturbed.
Concentrated stormwater should not be discharged onto the ground anywhere within the site.
Spoil soils and yardwaste should not be disposed of within the site. Storm runoff over
impervious surfaces, such as roofs and paved driveways, should be captured with underground
drain line systems tied to roof downspouts and by catch basins installed in driveways, and should
be tightlined to discharge collected water into a storm sewer or a suitable stormwater disposal
facility. Unpaved, disturbed ground within the site should be re -vegetated as soon as possible to
provide erosion protection. Once the drainage control measures for the roadway and houses are
in place after the completion of the proposed development, the amount of surface runoff and
near -surface groundwater flow will be reduced, which would further reduce soil erosion and
enhance site stability.
Seismic Hazard
The Puget Sound region is in an active seismic zone. The lot is underlain by medium -dense to
dense advance outwash soils of fair to moderately high shear strength. There is a lack of
continuous, extensive, static groundwater table at shallow depth under the lot. Therefore the
potential for seismic hazards, such as deep-seated landslides, liquefaction, lateral ,soil spreading,
to occur on the site should be minimal. The proposed building, however, should be designed for
seismic forces induced by strong earthquakes.. Based on the soil conditions encountered by the
test pits, it is our opinion that Seismic Use Group I and Site Class D should be used in the
seismic design of the proposed residences in accordance with the 2003 International Building
Code (IBC).
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
Page 8
SITE PREPARATION AND GENERAL GRADING
Site preparation for the proposed development should include clearing and grubbing within
construction limits. Topsoil, loose weathered soils, and unsuitable soils in the root zone should
be completely stripped within the driveways, the building pads of the proposed buildings and in
other areas subject to traffic and structural loads. The exposed soils should be compacted to a
non -yielding state with a vibratory compactor and proof -rolled with a piece of heavy earthwork
equipment operated on the site.
The on -site soils contain a high percentage of fines and are sensitive to moisture. A layer of
clean quarry spalls should be placed over excavated areas and areas of frequent traffic, as
required, to protect. the subgrade soils from disturbance by construction traffic. Silt fences
should be erected along the downslope boundaries of the site to prevent sediments being
transported by storm runoff onto adjoining properties or the street. The bottom edge of the silt
fence should be embedded in a trench and ballasted with crushed rock or gravel.
EXCAVATION AND FILL SLOPES
Under no circumstance should excavation slopes be steeper than the limits specified by local,
state and federal safety regulations if workers have to perform construction work in excavated
areas. Unsupported temporary cuts greater than 4 feet in height should be no steeper than 1-
1 /4H:1 V in the surficial topsoil and loose weathered soils, and no steeper than 1 H:1 V in the
underlying medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils. Permanent cuts should be no steeper
than 21 /2H:1 V in the surficial topsoil and loose weathered soils, and no steeper than 2H:1 V in
the underlying medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils. The soil units and the stability of
cut slopes should be observed and verified by a geotechnical engineer during excavation.
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
Page 9
Permanent fill embankments required to support structural or traffic loads should be constructed
with compacted structural fill placed over proof -rolled, undisturbed, medium -dense to dense
advance outwash soils after the unsuitable surficial soils are stripped. Permanent fill to be placed
on slopes steeper than 20 percent grade should be retained structurally. Sloping ground
exceeding 15 percent grade over which fill is to be placed should be benched with vertical steps
no more than 4 feet high after stripping of unsuitable surficial soils. The slope of permanent fill
embankments should be no steeper than 2H:IV. Upon completion, the sloping face of permanent
fill embankments should be thoroughly compacted to a non -yielding state with a hoe -pack.
The above recommended cut and fill slopes are under the assumption that groundwater seepage
will not be encountered during construction. If encountered, the construction work should be
immediately halted and the slope stability re-evaluated. The slopes may have to be flattened and
other measures taken to stabilize the slopes. Storm runoff should not be allowed to flow
uncontrolled over the top of cut or fill slopes. Permanent cut slopes or fill embankments should
be seeded and vegetated as soon as possible for erosion protection and long-term stability, and
should be covered with clear plastic sheets, as required, to protect them from erosion by
stormwater until the vegetation is fully established.
STRUCTURAL FILL
Structural fill is the fill that supports structural or traffic load. Structural fill should consist of
clean soils free of organic and other deleterious substances and with particles not larger than four
inches. Structural fill should have a moisture content within one percent of its optimum moisture
content at the time of placement. The optimum moisture content is the water content in the soils
that enable the soils to be compacted to the highest dry density for a given compaction effort.
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
C September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
Page 10
The on -site advance outwash soils contain a high percentage of fines, and may be used as
structural fill only under fair weather condition when their moisture content can be controlled to
Cclose to optimum moisture content. Imported material for structural fill should be clean, free -
draining, granular soils containing no more than 5% by weight finer than the No. 200 sieve based
on the fraction of the material passing No. 4 sieve, and should have individual particles not larger
than four inches. Imported structural fill should be stockpiled and covered separately from the
fl1 on -site soils.
Structural fill should be placed in lifts no more than 10 inches thick in loose state, with each lift
compacted to a minimum percentage of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D1557
(Modified Proctor Method) as follows:
Application
Within building pads
Roadway/driveway subgrade
Retaining wall backfill
Utility trench backfill
BUILDING SETBACK
% of Maximum Dry Density
95%
95% for top 2 feet and 90% below
90%
95% for top 4 feet and 90% below
The purpose of building setback from the top or toe or an overly steep portion of a slope is to
establish a safe buffer such that if a slope failure should occur the stability of the structure can be
maintained and damages to the structure minimized. To maintain stability of the buildings to be
construction on the new Northeast and Northwest Lots, we recommend that the buildings be set
back at least 20 feet from the crest or toe or any portion of 40% or steeper slopes. Reinforced
concrete or soldier pile retaining walls may be used to regrade the ground and enhance stability
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
Page 11
of 40% or steeper slopes. If retaining walls are used, the proposed building should be set back no
less than 10 feet from the retaining walls. The buildings should be also be set back sufficiently
such that an imaginary plane drawing from the edge of the footing foundations to the toe of
slopes 40% or steeper should be no steeper than 3H:1 V. Also, the footing foundations within 30
feet of the toe or top or any portion of 40% or steeper slopes should be embedded at least 1.5 foot
into the medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils. The footprint bearing soils should be
verified by a geotechnical engineer after the excavation of the building footprints are completed.
DEBRIS WALLS
If retaining walls are not constructed to enhance the stability of the steep slopes uphill of the
proposed new buildings, we recommend that the uphill -side basement walls of the buildings be
extended at least 3 feet above their adjacent finish grade to serve as debris blocking walls in case
a mudflow should occur on the uphill steep slope. The combined basement/debris walls should
be designed in accordance with the recommendations in the BASEMENT AND RETAINING
WALLS section of this report.
BUILDING FOUNDATIONS
Conventional footing foundations may be used for supporting the buildings to be constructed on
the site. The footing foundations should be placed on or into the underlying, medium -dense to
dense advance outwash soils, or on structural fill constructed over these undisturbed competent
basal soils. Water should not be allowed to accumulate in excavated footing trenches. Disturbed
soils in footing trenches should be completely removed down to firm native soils prior to pouring
concrete for the footings. The sandy advance outwash soils can be easily disturbed by
construction traffic. To protect the footing bearing soils, a 6-inch-minimum layer of 2-inch-
minus compacted crushed rock should be placed over the bearing soils. The footing foundations
may then be poured over the crushed rock base.
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
u
I
September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
Page 12
If the above recommendations are followed, our recommended design criteria for footing
foundations are as follows:
• The allowable soil bearing pressure for footing foundations, including dead and live
loads, should be no greater than 2,500 psf if supported on undisturbed medium -dense to
dense native soils and no greater than 2,000 psf if supported on structural fill placed over
firm undisturbed soils. The footing bearing soils should be verified on -site by a
geotechnical engineer after the footing trenches are excavated and before the footings
poured.
• The minimum depth to bottom of perimeter footings below adjacent final exterior grade
should be no less than 18 inches. The minimum depth to bottom of the interior footings
below top of floor slab should be no less than 12 inches.
• The minimum width should be no less than 16 inches for continuous footings, and no less
than 24 inches for individual footings.
A one-third increase in the above recommended allowable soil bearing pressure may be used
when considering short-term, transitory, wind or seismic loads. For footing foundations designed
and constructed per recommendations above, we estimate that the maximum total post -
construction settlement of the buildings should be 3/4 inch or less and the differential settlement
across building width should be 1/2 inch or less.
Lateral loads on buildings can be resisted by the friction force between the foundations and the
subgrade soils or the passive earth pressure acting on the below -grade portion of the foundations.
For the latter, the foundations must be poured "neat" against undisturbed soils or backfilled with
a clean, free -draining, compacted structural fill. We recommend that an equivalent fluid density
(EFD) of 300 pcf (pounds per cubic foot) for the passive earth pressure be used for lateral
resistance. The above passive pressure assumes that the backfill is level or inclines upward away
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
Page 13
from the foundations for a horizontal distance at least twice the depth of the foundations below
the final grade. A coefficient of friction of 0.60 between the foundations and the subgrade soils
may be used. The above soil parameters are unfactored values, and a proper factor of safety
should be used in calculating the resisting forces against lateral loads on the buildings.
BASEMENT AND RETAINING WALLS
Basement walls restrained horizontally at the top are considered unyielding and should be
designed for a lateral soil pressure under the at -rest condition; while retaining walls free to move
at the top should be designed for active lateral soil pressure. We recommend that a lateral soil
pressure of 45 and 70 pcf EFD be used for the design of foundation walls with level/descending
backslope and rising backslope, respectively; and 35 and 55 pcf EFD for retaining walls with
level/descending backslope and rising backslope, respectively. To counter the active soil or at -
rest pressure, a passive lateral soil pressure of 350 pcf EFD may be used, except that the passive
pressure within the top 12 inches of the finish subgrade should be ignored. The above passive
pressure assumes that the backfill is level or inclines upward away from the walls. The above
lateral soil pressures are under the assumption that groundwater behind the walls is fully drained.
To resist against sliding, the friction force between the footings and the subgrade soils may be
calculated based on a coefficient of friction of 0.60. The above soil parameters are ultimate
values, and proper factors of safety should be used in the design of the basement and retaining
walls against sliding and overturning failures. Basement walls or retaining walls may be
supported on footing foundations seated on or into the underlying very -dense fresh till or very -
hard transitional beds soils, with an allowable soil bearing pressure not to exceed 3,000 psf.
A vertical drainage blanket consisting of at least 12-inch-thick free -draining pea gravel or washed
gravel should be placed against foundation and retaining walls to prevent accumulation of
groundwater behind and buildup of hydrostatic pressure against the walls. The remaining
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
Page 14
backfill should consist of structural fill constructed per recommendations in the STRUCTURAL
FILL section of this report. The top 12 inches of backfill should consist of compacted, clean, on -
site soils. The backfill material for the foundation and retaining walls should be compacted with
a hand -operated compactor. Heavy compaction equipment should not be allowed closer to the
walls than a horizontal distance equal to the wall heights. A footing drain, as recommended in
the DRAINAGE CONTROL section of this report, should also be provided for foundation and
retaining walls.
SLAB -ON -GRADE FLOORS
Slab -on -grade floors, if used, should be placed on firm subgrade prepared as outlined in the SITE
PREPARATION AND GENERAL EARTHWORK and the STRUCTURAL FILL sections of
this report. Where moisture control is critical, the slab -on -grade floors should be placed on a
capillary break which is in turn placed on the compacted subgrade. The capillary break should
consist of a minimum four -inch -thick layer of clean, free -draining, 7/8-inch crushed rock,
containing no more than 5 percent by weight passing the No. 4 sieve. A vapor barrier, such as a
6-mil plastic membrane, may be placed over the capillary break, as required, to keep moisture
from migrating upwards.
PAVED DRIVEWAYS
Performance of paved driveways is critically related'to the conditions of the underlying subgrade
soils. We recommend that the subgrade soils within the driveways be treated and prepared as
described in the SITE PREPARATION AND GENERAL EARTHWORK section of this report.
Prior to placing base material, the subgrade soils should be compacted to a non -yielding state
with a vibratory roller compactor and proof -rolled with a piece of heavy construction equipment,
such as a fully -loaded dump truck. Any areas with excessive weaving or deflection should be
over -excavated and re -compacted or replaced with a structural fill or crushed rock placed and
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
(� Page 15
compacted in accordance with the recommendations provided in the STRUCTURAL FILL
section of this report.
We recommend that an 4-inch-thick minimum, compacted, crushed rock base (CRB), consisting
of 7/8-inch-minus crushed rock, be used for the roadways. The crushed rock or subgrade base
should be topped with 2-inch asphalt treated base (ATB) topped by 1-1/2-inch-thick Class B
asphalt concrete (AC).
DRAINAGE CONTROL
Building Footprint Excavation
Groundwater is not expected within depth of excavation for the construction of the proposed
buildings. If encountered, the bottom of building footprint excavation should be sloped and
ditches excavated along the bases of the cut banks to direct runoff and groundwater into a sump
pit from which water can be pumped into a nearby storm sewer. The inlet of the storm sewer
should be covered by a.filter sack to keep sediments from entering the storm sewer system. A
layer of 2-inch crushed rock should be placed over undisturbed subgrade soils supporting
footings and on -grade slabs, as required, to protect the soils from disturbance by construction
traffic.
Surface Drainage
Water should not be allowed to stand in any areas where footings, slabs, or pavement is to be
constructed. Final site grades should allow storm runoff to flow away from the building. We
recommend the finish ground be sloped at a gradient of 3 percent minimum for a distance of at
least 10 feet away from the building, except in the areas to be paved.
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
Page 16
Runoff over Impervious Surfaces
Storm runoff over impervious surfaces, such as roofs and paved driveways, should be collected
by underground drain line systems connected to downspouts and by catch basins installed in the
driveways. Stormwater thus collected should be tightlined to discharge into a storm sewer or a
suitable stormwater disposal facility. Sufficient numbers of cleanouts at strategic locations
should be provided to the underground drain line systems to allow for periodical cleaning of the
drain lines.
Footing Drains
A subdrain should be installed around the perimeter footings of the proposed houses and along
the base of retaining walls. The subdrains should consist of a 4-inch-minimum-diameter,
perforated, rigid, drain pipe, laid a few inches below bottom of the building perimeter footings or
retaining wall footings. The trenches and the drain lines should have a sufficient gradient to
generate flow by gravity. The drain lines should be embedded in washed gravel completely
wrapped in non -woven filter fabric to within about 12 inches of finish grade. The remaining
trenches may be backfilled with clean on -site soils. Sufficient numbers of cleanouts at strategic
locations should be provided to the footing drain lines to allow for their periodical cleaning and
maintenance. Water collected by the footing drains should be tightlined, separately from the roof
and surface stormwater drain systems, to discharge into a storm sewer.
RISK EVALUATION STATEMENT
The site is underlain by medium -dense to dense advance outwash soils at shallow depth. These
soils are of fair to moderately -high shear strength and have good resistance against deep-seated
slope failures. The key to maintain stability of the site is to maintain stable temporary cut slopes
and to have proper and adequate erosion and drainage control during and after construction. It is
our opinion that if the recommendations in the report are fully implemented and observed during
construction and after the completion of the development, the areas disturbed by construction
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
Page 17
will remain stable and will not increase the potential for soil movement. In our opinion, the risk
of damage to the proposed development and from the development to adjacent properties from
soil instability should be minimal.
LIMITATIONS
This report has been prepared for the specific application to this project for the exclusive use by
Mr. Bill Ritter, and his associates, representatives, consultants and contractors. We recommend
that this report, in its entirety, be included in the project contract documents for the information
of the prospective contractors for their estimating and bidding purposes. The conclusions and
interpretations in this report, however, should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface
conditions. The scope of this study does not include services related to construction safety
precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods,
techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in this report for design
considerations.
Our recommendations and conclusions are based on the geologic and soil conditions encountered
in the test borings, and our experience and engineering judgment. The conclusions and
recommendations are professional opinions derived in a manner consistent with the level of care
and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under
similar conditions in this area. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made.
The actual subsurface conditions of the site may vary from those encountered by the test pits.
The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until construction starts. If
variations appear then, we should be retained to re-evaluate the recommendations of this report,
and to verify or modify them in writing prior to proceeding further with the construction.
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
September 26, 2005
Proposed 3-Lot Short Plat
L&A Job No. 5A112
Page 18
CLOSURE
We are pleased to be of service to you on this project. Please feel free to call us if you have any
questions regarding this report or need further consultation.
Six plates attached
27589
�'S10NAL�` -
EXPIRES -7117/d
Yours very truly,
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
qS((Juln) Liu, Ph.D., P.E.
Consulting Geotechnical Engineer
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
BERTOLA = d
K Sw i
�l byte VLHfAOnHCU LE
Chi
PLAYFIELDS
BROWNS
O
BAY
ST >
4 9� 8
SW 112N0�`
ST SW`
;z Q 3 �A 17
GS
ST Al N e 172 v
_ -RRI 0
PL 1731tD
sT m
F�
aD
p
7 174TH- ST
`a 174TH ST RO
j
FREDERICK PL
_ 175TH ST
W 1751N 7s"/ +
°l1w srly = O� ,,
176TN
- -'
PROJECT
176M
°L
= a
177TH ST SW
r sr
SITE
¢
178T1
9TH PL
''-'I'
�JPLHSW
<
119TH ST sv
178TN
PL sw
12 sW
�� :
ST
'
1
W
77
(_
4
'a 181S=T
MSE7 e9a
g 3 ��4
_ _
191sT
els
PL $II i
1821
= IBIST PL J
s
OVERLOOK {PK
r N
m 0'1w sw
ezm
1 3
I820
18
x
_
PL Sw
-0
18
a
P� Al 1- 183RD
r
<
><
a
c� ti
MD
00 IBIrN
><
a
r
>
O J
= lam
a
185TH
185TH
rl
=185TH
P SW
1 1e5711 PL Sr ST
s7 sv
P
HUTT
Sb
PL SW m
'<
1 >Sr SW
>
<
:
PK 8
86TH PL
187TH 186TH
ST SW
>
<
s
9
Cn O $
<to
PL SW s 187
ST SW
�,
rsST sP s
188TH m d18
ST SW 1eo =
sw
a
187TH PL SW 01 1
a
m
a
' e.00 a
_
lam SPL
T s11
_
18M PL SW FS 1
`
89TH S
SW
11
PL m d O
>
: -+
189TH
PENNY
ER T B
KE PL
1
ST SW
>
Q
190TH ST
SW
IBMS
Pl SWs
9
L
PL SW3
> ST SN
o g4
CHERR
ST
�� S?
�P N'191sr
PL r 191ST sr
o S< 9A
191ST PL SW
m �+
_
�96Do
Q� >
a
�y rn
_
I '<
_
192ND ST
r,
SW
m
191ST
s
^ 4
s
a
y sPL
e RSF a a
T
=
=
C
si�bw
� "
� ^ 192NO PL SW
> >
192ND
= PL S� d
1g2 p
w 4 LN �01
(�(!
T rn
1 94 I'm
PL Sw <
F
- aka
o.
193RD PL 21 yW
a
'<'93
a
PL SW
:
193R
g x
1�
` OV'
Bg7N
19!14 �
- Pt 511
ST'� a 3
1 7Wx
1911�j'
1
/
PL
=
, ^
1947H
ST 91
> e >
a
rn S
r
K
m
~
n
C
aJ
196TH
196T
ST
a
W
�SW
<�
� 196TH
kc
PmET PU E
11Y
p
_
a
DR
8
sT sw
8600
87�
197,N W
o a
196n+ PL sw '
x 7300
�-
197TH ST SW
6800
oI FI LB
INOLEY : V
o
EW
8
=
"
-
WY
=
H 198TH
sT SW
sr sy o 3
N
°D _d
= _
ii
I
1
^ HEINI� `Q\-
o .L
12
LN
1R BRDOKNERE
000
ST <
--- , z
o
�pL g
s
n PL
W:
1
198TH $T SW
;. 3 .,co s
z Z
T'
ST �1 r
---- t
711
o $�
'a
= 0
1 TH ST
SW
'
1 v1EWOM
-----
1
a $
<
200
•i
JO 1wr11M
u
VISTA
u
WY 200TH
o ST SWp 8300 '<'
g
' 20157 ST Sil
201ST ST Sit
r!1tT1v
N
iE
XI �+DL ': ORa
1
SI ERRA a> � uLscwE zour L
C7
N 202ND = �
_ r
� �
=
202ND 202N0
m,sr
$_ = m
2D1ST
�
FA 14
^'�
<
a'
><
fi
mzlo
I
'a
ST SW d ,;
2m PLSW
PL SW
v a
00
QGLEN
ST
E� SIERAA
+�
sr
sr
_
_ > ze» ,� ST
PL
s11
203RD ST sW
s
4 c
cm 2�
24 1
ST '�
a
_ d
coa
WITH ST
sr
19
zD4TH
r fr .
(� 1
In
c
8 C, 1
e
~ 8 �.
o
s 8
s
n sWM
pE
<
ST SW
6
ST o
1
rn
TM
a 0.
z
TN
a v
zom
K
:
sP
= H PK
5T
N
of Ln
a
NTH
=^
^
MID
. .
6�>
ST - -_-
N/
1
7o771/D
ST
$W
$ ST
OR11
YI
MA1
a 57 Sr
N
m
PLSMST
3
_
ST 900
1 PL SW
00
o
�97
Y
A
: �' zoen+
m
PL
PLSY
=
F-Z
p
s 6900 :
��
?
wr1[ > '"
i
209TH PL 9� c I d
❑
;
ST
VICINITY MAP
LIU & ASSOCIATES,
INC.
3-LOT SHORT PLAT
8364 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE
Geotechnical Engineering • Engineering Geology
- Earth Science
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
JOB NO.
5A112
I DATE 9/23/2005
1 PLATE 1
272
+
274
0.1
278
ol
286
288
290 10
292
294
296
na -
(0
0 0
a.A 'k
+
71
0i
SITE AND EXPLORATION LOCATION PLAN
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3-LOT SHORT PLAT
8364 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE
Geotechnical Engineering - Engineering Geology Earth Science EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
JOB NO. 5A1 12 DATE /23/2005
I PLATE 2
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GROUP
SYMBOL
GROUP NAME
COARSE-
GRAINED
SOILS
MORE THAN 50%
RETAINED ON THE
NO. 200 SIEVE
GRAVEL
MORE THAN 50% OF
COARSE FRACTION
RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE
CLEAN
GRAVEL
GW
WELL -GRADED GRAVEL, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL
GP
POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL
GRAVEL WITH
FINES
GM
SILTY GRAVEL
GC
CLAYEY GRAVEL
SAND
MORE THAN 50% OF
COARSE FRACTION
PASSING NO. 4 SIEVE
CLEAN
SAND
SW
WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND
SP
POORLY -GRADED SAND
SAND WITH
FINES
SM
SILTY SAND
SC
CLAYEY SAND
FINE-
GRAINED
SOILS
MORE THAN 50%
PASSING ON THE
NO. 200 SIEVE
SILT AND CLAY
LIQUID LIMIT
LESS THAN 50%
INORGANIC
ML
SILT
CL
CLAY
ORGANIC
OL
ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY
SILTY AND CLAY
LIQUID LIMIT
50% OR MORE
INORGANIC
MH
SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT
CH
CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY
ORGANIC
OH
ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC SILT
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
PT
PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
NOTES: SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS:
1. FIELD CLASSIFICATION IS BASED ON VISUAL EXAMINATION DRY - ABSENCE OF MOISTURE, DUSTY, DRY TO
OF SOIL IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D2488-83. THE TOUCH
2. SOIL CLASSIFICATION USING LABORATORY TESTS IS BASED SLIGHTLY MOIST - TRACE MOISTURE, NOT DUSTY
ON ASTM D2487-83. MOIST - DAMP, BUT NO VISIBLE WATER
3. DESCRIPTIONS OF SOIL DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY ARE VERY MOIST - VERY DAMP, MOISTURE FELT TO THE TOUCH
BASED ON INTERPRETATION OF BLOW -COUNT DATA, VISUAL WET - VISIBLE FREE WATER OR SATURATED,
APPEARANCE OF SOILS, AND/OR TEST DATA. USUALLY SOIL IS OBTAINED FROM BELOW
WATER TABLE
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Geotechnical Engineering • Engineering Geology Earth Science
PLATE 3
TEST PIT NO. 1
Logged By: JSL Date: 9/6/2005
Ground El. 283.0' ±
Depth
USCS
Sample
w
Other
ft.
CLASS.
Soil Description
No.
%
Test
OIL
Brush and duff on surface
1
Dark -brown, lose, organic, silty fine SAND, with fine roots, dry
TOPSOIL_
2
SM
Light -brown, loose, silty fine SAND, trace gravel, dry
3
4
SP
Brown -gray, medium -dense, gravelly, fine to medium SAND, dry to
5
slightly moist (fresh ADVANCE OUTWASH)
6
Gray, dense, fine to medium SAND, trace to some gravel, slightly
SP
moist (fresh ADVANCE OUTWASH)
7
8
9
Test pit terminated @ 9.0 ft, groundwater not encountered.
10
TEST PIT NO. 2
Logged By: JSL Date: 9/6/2005
Ground El. 297.0' ±
Depth
USCS
Sample
W
Other
ft.
CLASS.
Soil Description
No.
%
Test
OL
Brush and duff on surface
1
Dark -brown, lose, organic, silty fine SAND, with roots to 1-inch-
diameter, dry (TOPSOIL)
2
SM
Light -brown, loose, silty fine SAND, trace to some gravel, dry
3
4
5
SP
6
Brown -gray, medium -dense, gravelly, fine to medium SAND,
occasional cobble, dry (fresh ADVANCE OUTWASH)
7
8
Light -brown, dense, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND, slightly moist
SW
9
(fresh ADVANCE OUTWASH)
10
Test pit terminated @ 10.0 ft, groundwater not encountered.
tt
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering - Engineering Geology • Earth Science
TEST PIT LOGS
3-LOT SHORT PLAT
8364 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
JOB NO. 5A112 DATE 9/24/05 1 PLATE 4
Logged By: JSL
TEST PIT NO. 3
Date: 9/6/2005
Ground El. 285.0' ±
Depth
USCS
Sample
W
Other
ft.
CLASS.
Soil Description
No.
%
Test
OL
Brush and duff on surface
1
Dark -brown, lose, organic, silty fine SAND, with roots to 1-inch-
diameter, dry (TOPSOIL)
2
SM
Light -brown, loose to medium -dense, silty fine SAND, trace gravel,
dry
3
Light -brown to gray, medium -dense, slightly silty, fine to medium
SM/SP
4
SAND, trace to some gravel, slightly moist
(fresh ADVANCE OUTWASH)
5
6
Light -gray, dense, fine to coarse SAND, trace to some gravel,
SW
7
slightly moist (fresh ADVANCE OUTWASH)
8
9
Test pit terminated @ 9.0 ft, groundwater not encountered.
10
Logged By: JSL
TEST PIT NO. 4
Date: 9/6/2005
Ground El. 291.0' ±
Depth
USCS
Sample
W
Other
ft.
CLASS.
Soil Description
No.
%
Test
OL
Brush and duff on surface
1
Dark -brown, lose, organic, silty fine SAND, with roots to 2-inch-
diameter, dry (TOPSOIL)
2
SM
Light -brown, loose, silty fine SAND, trace gravel, dry
3
4
Light -brown to light -gray, medium -dense, fine to medium SAND,
SP
trace gravel, slightly moist (fresh ADVANCE OUTWASH)
5
6
7
Light -gray, dense, fine to coarse SAND, trace to some gravel,
SW
slightly moist (fresh ADVANCE OUTWASH)
8
9
Test pit terminated @ 8.5 ft, groundwater not encountered.
10
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering • Engineering Geology Earth Science
TEST PIT LOGS
3-LOT SHORT PLAT
8364 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
JOB NO. 5A112 DATE 9/24/05 1 PLATE 5
Logged By: JSL
TEST PIT NO.
Date: 9/6/2005
Ground El. 272.6' ±
Depth
USCS
Sample
W
Other
ft.
CLASS.
Soil Description
No.
%
Test
OL
Brush and duff on surface
1
Dark -brown, lose, organic, silty fine SAND, with roots to 1.25-inch-
diameter, dry (TOPSOIL)
2
3
SM
Light -brown, loose, silty fine SAND, trace gravel, and occasional
4
boulder to 12 inches in size, dry
5
SP
Light -brown to light -gray, medium -dense, fine to medium, trace
6
gravel, slightly moist (fresh ADVANCE OUTWASH)
7
8
Light -gray, dense, fine to coarse SAND, trace to some gravel,
SW
slightly moist (fresh ADVANCE OUTWASH)
9
10
Test pit terminated @ 10.0 ft, groundwater not encountered.
11
TEST PIT NO. 6
Logged By: JSL Date: 9/6/2005
Ground El. 277.5' ±
Depth
USCS
Sample
W
Other
ft.
CLASS.
Soil Description
No.
%
Test
OL
Brush and duff on surface
1
Dark -brown, lose, organic, silty fine SAND, with roots to 1.5-inch-
diameter, dry (TOPSOIL)
2
SM
Light -brown, loose, silty fine SAND, trace gravel and occasional
3
boulder to 12 inches in size, dry
4
SP
Light -brown to light -gray, medium -dense, fine to medium SAND,
5
trace to some gravel, slightly moist (fresh ADVANCE OUTWASH)
6
Light -gray, dense to very -dense, fine to coarse SAND, trace to
SW
7
some gravel, moist (fresh ADVANCE OUTWASH)
8
9
Test pit terminated @ 8.0 ft, groundwater not encountered.
10
LIU & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering - Engineering Geology • Earth Science
TEST PIT LOGS
3-LOT SHORT PLAT
8364 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
JOB NO. 5A112 DATE 9/24/05 1 PLATE 6