Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
REVIEWED PLN_ENG BLD BLD2021-0886+Geotechnical_Report+6.25.2021_8.40.52_AM+2269244
mom I LW RILEYGROUP C"telVI :ICIDr—Amill10I01Mall W,I;c'l20,14Z9]:i1 PREPARED BY: THE RILEY GROUP, INC. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NORTHEAST BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 PREPARED FOR: EDDIE FALLON 1116 VISTA PLACE EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 RGI PROJECT No. 2021-177-1 FALLON RESIDENCE 1116 VISTA PLACE EDMONDS, WASHINGTON DUNE 8, 2021 Corporate Office 17522 Bothell Way Northeast Bothell, Washington 98011 Phone 425.415.0551 * Fax 425.415.0311 www.riley-group.com mom I L RILEYGROUP June 8, 2021 Eddie Fallon 1116 Vista Place Edmonds, Washington 98020 Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Report Fallon Residence 1116 Vista Place Edmonds, Washington RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 Dear Mr. Fallon: As requested, The Riley Group, Inc. (RGI) has performed a Geotechnical Engineering Report (GER) for the Fallon Residence located at 1116 Vista Place, Edmonds, Washington. Our services were completed in accordance with our proposal dated March 16, 2021 and authorized by you on March 20, 2021. The information in this GER is based on our understanding of the proposed construction, and the soil and groundwater conditions encountered in the test pits completed by RGI at the site on April 2, 2021. RGI reviewed the retaining wall plans and provided design of the walls included in Appendix B. recommends that a representative of our firm be present on site during portions of the project construction to confirm that the soil and groundwater conditions are consistent with those that form the basis for the engineering recommendations in this GER. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, NiARI � THE RILEY GROUP, INC. c�`�* Q� WAS�t 3�1$2 O 'FGISTE 0r0NAL��Gti' Eric L. Woods, LG Kristina M. Weller, PE Project Geologist Principal Geotechnical Engineer Corporate Office 17522 Bothell Way Northeast Bothell, Washington 98011 Phone 425.415.0551 ® Fax 425.415.0311 www. riley-group. corn Geotechnical Engineering Report i June 8, 2021 Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................... 1 3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING.......................................................... 1 3.1 FIELD EXPLORATION................................................................................................................................... 1 3.2 LABORATORY TESTING................................................................................................................................I 4.0 SITE CONDITIONS........................................................................................................................... 2 4.1 SURFACE..................................................................................................................................................2 4.2 GEOLOGY.................................................................................................................................................2 4.3 SOILS.......................................................................................................................................................2 4.4 GROUNDWATER........................................................................................................................................2 4.5 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS...........................................................................................................................3 4.6 GEOLOGIC HAZARD AREAS..........................................................................................................................4 4.6.1 Erosion Hazard Areas...................................................................................................................4 4.6.2 Landslide Hazard Areas................................................................................................................4 4.6.3 Seismic Hazard Areas...................................................................................................................4 5.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................. 4 5.1 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................................................................4 5.2 EARTHWORK.............................................................................................................................................5 5.2.1 Erosion and Sediment Control.....................................................................................................5 5.2.2 Stripping and Subgrade Preparation............................................................................................6 5.2.3 Excavations...................................................................................................................................6 5.2.4 Structural Fill................................................................................................................................7 5.2.5 Cut and Fill Slopes........................................................................................................................8 5.2.6 Wet Weather Construction Considerations.................................................................................8 5.3 FOUNDATIONS.......................................................................................................................................... 9 5.4 RETAINING WALLS...................................................................................................................................10 5.4.1 Cast-in-Place...............................................................................................................................10 5.4.2 Ultrablock° Walls.......................................................................................................................10 5.5 SLAB -ON -GRADE CONSTRUCTION............................................................................................................... 10 5.6 DRAINAGE..............................................................................................................................................11 5.6.1 Surface.......................................................................................................................................11 5.6.2 Subsurface..................................................................................................................................11 6.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES.............................................................................................................. 11 7.0 LIMITATIONS................................................................................................................................. 11 LIST OF FIGURES AND APPENDICES Figure1.....................................................................................................................Site Vicinity Map Figure 2............................................................................................... Geotechnical Exploration Plan Appendix A..........................................................................Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing AppendixB........................................................................................................................ Wall Design mom 1 LW RILEYGRDIIR Geotechnical Engineering Report ii June 8, 2021 Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 Executive Summary This Executive Summary should be used in conjunction with the entire Geotechnical Engineering Report (GER) for design and/or construction purposes. It should be recognized that specific details were not included or fully developed in this section, and the GER must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained herein. Section 7.0 should be read for an understanding of limitations. RGI's geotechnical scope of work included the advancement of three test pits to approximate depths of 2.5 to 8.5 feet below existing site grades. Based on the information obtained from our subsurface exploration, the site is suitable for development of the proposed project. The following geotechnical considerations were identified: Soil Conditions: The soils encountered during field exploration include loose to medium dense fill comprised of silty sand with trace gravel over native deposits of silty sand with varying amounts of gravel. Groundwater: No groundwater seepage was encountered during our subsurface exploration. 1 LM RILEYGROUP Geotechnical Engineering Report 1 June 8, 2021 Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 1.0 Introduction This Geotechnical Engineering Report (GER) presents the results of the geotechnical engineering services provided for the Fallon Residence in Edmonds, Washington. The purpose of this evaluation is to assess subsurface conditions and provide geotechnical recommendations for the construction of retaining walls for a pool, hot tub, cabana and associated hard surfaces. Our scope of services included field explorations, laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and preparation of this GER. The recommendations in the following sections of this GER are based upon our current understanding of the proposed site development as outlined below. If actual features vary or changes are made, RGI should review them in order to modify our recommendations as required. In addition, RGI requests to review the site grading plan, final design drawings and specifications when available to verify that our project understanding is correct and that our recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into the project design and construction. 2.0 Project description The project site is located at 1116 Vista Place in Edmonds, Washington. The approximate location of the site is shown on Figure 1. The site is currently occupied by a single family residence. RGI understands that a pool and deck are to be constructed in the southern portion of the site. A retaining wall will be constructed to support to support the grade changes associated with the improvements. 3.0 Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing 3.1 FIELD EXPLORATION On April 2, 2021, RGI observed the excavation of three test pits. The approximate exploration locations are shown on Figure 2. Field logs of each exploration were prepared by the geologist that continuously observed the excavating. These logs included visual classifications of the materials encountered during excavation as well as our interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. The test pit logs included in Appendix A represent an interpretation of the field logs and include modifications based on laboratory observation and analysis of the samples. 3.2 LABORATORY TESTING During the field exploration, a representative portion of each recovered sample was sealed in containers and transported to our laboratory for further visual and laboratory examination. Selected samples retrieved from the test pits were tested for moisture 1 LM RILEYGROUP Geotechnical Engineering Report 2 June 8, 2021 Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 content and grain size analysis to aid in soil classification and provide input for the recommendations provided in this GER. The results and descriptions of the laboratory tests are enclosed in Appendix A. 4.0 Site Conditions 4.1 SURFACE The subject site is a rectangular -shaped parcel of land approximately 0.34 acres in size. The site is bound to the north by Vista Place, and to the east, south , and west by single family residences. The site is occupied by a single family residence. The site slopes generally west with a total elevation change of about 23 feet across the site. Portions of the site slopes are terraced with rockeries, block walls, and wood walls. The site is vegetated with grass and decorative plants and shrubs. 4.2 GEOLOGY Review of the Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and part of the Edmonds West Quadrangles, Washington, by James P. Minard (1983) indicates that the soil in the project vicinity is mapped as advance outwash (Map Unit Qva), which is pebbly sand deposited by meltwater streams issuing from the advancing Vashon ice sheet. These descriptions are generally similar to the findings in our field explorations. 4.3 SOILS The soils encountered during field exploration include loose to medium dense fill comprised of silty sand with trace gravel over native deposits of silty sand with varying amounts of gravel. More detailed descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered are presented in the test pit logs included in Appendix A. Sieve analysis was performed on three selected soil samples. Grain size distribution curves are included in Appendix A. 4.4 GROUNDWATER No groundwater seepage was encountered during our subsurface exploration. It should be recognized that fluctuations of the groundwater table will occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff, and other factors not evident at the time the explorations were performed. In addition, perched water can develop within seams and layers contained in fill soils or higher permeability soils overlying less permeable soils following periods of heavy or prolonged precipitation. Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at other times in the future may be higher or lower than the levels 1 LW RILEYGROUP Geotechnical Engineering Report 3 June 8, 2021 Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 indicated on the logs. Groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the design and construction plans for the project. 4.5 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS Based on the International Building Code (IBC), RGI recommends the follow seismic parameters for design. Table 1 IBC Parameter 2018 Value Site Soil Class' D2 Site Latitude 47.8167 Site Longitude Short Period Spectral Response Acceleration, Ss (g) -122.3605 1.29 1-Second Period Spectral Response Acceleration, S1 (g) 0.455 Adjusted Short Period Spectral Response Acceleration, SMs (g) 1.29 Adjusted 1-Sec Period Spectral Response Acceleration, SM1 (g) 0.8393 Numeric seismic design value at 0.2 second; SDS(g) 0.86 Numeric seismic design value at 1.0 second; SD1(g) 0.5593 1. Note: In general accordance with Chapter 20 of ASCE 7-16. The Site Class is based on the average characteristics of the upper 100 feet of the subsurface profile. 2. Note: ASCE 7-16 require a site soil profile determination extending to a depth of 100 feet for seismic site classification. The current scope of our services does not include the required 100 foot soil profile determination. Test pits extended to a maximum depth of 8.5 feet, and this seismic site class definition considers that similar soil continues below the maximum depth of the subsurface exploration. Additional exploration to deeper depths would be required to confirm the conditions below the current depth of exploration. 3. Note: In accordance with ASCE 11.4.8, a ground motion hazard analysis is not required for the following cases: • Structures on Site Class E sites with Ss greater than or equal to 1.0, provided the site coefficient Fa is taken as equal to that of Site Class C. • Structures on Site Class D sites with S, greater than or equal to 0.2, provided that the value of the seismic response coefficient Cs is determined by Eq. 12.8-2 for values of T < 1.5Ts and taken as equal to 1.5 times the value computed in accordance with either Eq. 12.8-3 for T, >_ T > 1.5T, or Eq. 12.8-4 for T > TL. • Structures on Site Class E sites with S, greater than or equal to 0.2, provided that T is less than or equal to T, and the equivalent static force procedure is used for design. The above exceptions do not apply to seismically isolated structures, structures with damping systems or structures designed using the response history procedures of Chapter 16. Liquefaction is a phenomenon where there is a reduction or complete loss of soil strength due to an increase in water pressure induced by vibrations from a seismic event. Liquefaction mainly affects geologically recent deposits of fine-grained sands that are below the groundwater table. Soils of this nature derive their strength from intergranular friction. The generated water pressure or pore pressure essentially separates the soil grains and eliminates this intergranular friction, thus reducing or eliminating the soil's strength. RGI reviewed the results of the field and laboratory testing and assessed the potential for liquefaction of the site's soil during an earthquake. Since the site is underlain by glacially now LW RILEYGROUP Geotechnical Engineering Report 4 June 8, 2021 Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 consolidated deposits without an established shallow groundwater table, RGI considers that the possibility of liquefaction during an earthquake is minimal. 4.6 GEOLOGIC HAZARD AREAS Regulated geologically hazardous areas include erosion, landslide, earthquake, or other geological hazards. 4.6.1 EROSION HAZARD AREAS Review of the Soil Survey of Snohomish County Area Washington by the USDA Soil Conservation Service (1983) indicates the site soils are mapped as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes (Map Unit 3). Review of Title 23.80.020.A of the Edmonds City Code indicates that sites with Alderwood soils containing slopes of 15 to 25 percent are considered an Erosion Hazard Area. RGI recommends that an erosion and sediment control plan be implemented as described in Section 5.2.1 of this report. 4.6.2 LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREAS Title 23.80.020.B of the Edmonds City Code establishes criteria for determining if a potential landslide hazard area is present on a site. Based on the site topographic survey, the site contains slopes that are greater than 40 percent, however, the slopes are less than 10 feet in height. Based on soil conditions observed in the test pit excavations, the advance outwash sand deposits are not underlain by an impermeable geologic contact that would pose a landslide risk. Based on our review, the site does not meet the criteria of a Landslide Hazard Area. There is a steep slope hazard area on the adjacent site, however; this area was created by grading on the adjacent site and a buffer or setback from this area is not necessary. 4.6.3 SEISMIC HAZARD AREAS Review of the Liquefaction Susceptibility Map of Snohomish County, Washington by Stephen P. Palmer, etc. (2004) indicates the site is mapped as having a very low to low susceptibility to liquefaction. Based on review of Title 23.80.020.0 of the Edmonds City Code, the site is not considered a Seismic Hazard Area. 5.0 Discussion and Recommendations 5.1 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS Based on our study, the site is suitable for the proposed construction from a geotechnical standpoint. Detailed recommendations regarding the above issues and other geotechnical design considerations are provided in the following sections. 1 LW RILEYGROUP Geotechnical Engineering Report 5 Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington June 8, 2021 RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 5.2 EARTHWORK The earthwork is expected to include excavating the pool, preparing slab subgrades, and excavating the retaining wall footings and backfilling the walls. 5.2.1 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Potential sources or causes of erosion and sedimentation depend on construction methods, slope length and gradient, amount of soil exposed and/or disturbed, soil type, construction sequencing and weather. The impacts on erosion -prone areas can be reduced by implementing an erosion and sedimentation control plan. The plan should be designed in accordance with applicable city and/or county standards. RGI recommends the following erosion control Best Management Practices (BMPs): ➢ Scheduling site preparation and grading for the drier summer and early fall months and undertaking activities that expose soil during periods of little or no rainfall ➢ Retaining existing vegetation whenever feasible ➢ Establishing a quarry spall construction entrance ➢ Installing siltation control fencing or anchored straw or coir wattles on the downhill side of work areas ➢ Covering soil stockpiles with anchored plastic sheeting ➢ Revegetating or mulching exposed soils with a minimum 3-inch thickness of straw if surfaces will be left undisturbed for more than one day during wet weather or one week in dry weather ➢ Directing runoff away from exposed soils and slopes ➢ Minimizing the length and steepness of slopes with exposed soils and cover excavation surfaces with anchored plastic sheeting ➢ Decreasing runoff velocities with check dams, straw bales or coir wattles ➢ Confining sediment to the project site ➢ Inspecting and maintaining erosion and sediment control measures frequently (The contractor should be aware that inspection and maintenance of erosion control BMPs is critical toward their satisfactory performance. Repair and/or replacement of dysfunctional erosion control elements should be anticipated.) Permanent erosion protection should be provided by reestablishing vegetation using hydroseeding and/or landscape planting. Until the permanent erosion protection is established, site monitoring should be performed by qualified personnel to evaluate the effectiveness of the erosion control measures. Provisions for modifications to the erosion control system based on monitoring observations should be included in the erosion and sedimentation control plan. 1 LW RILEYGROUP Geotechnical Engineering Report 6 Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington June 8, 2021 RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 5.2.2 STRIPPING AND SUBGRADE PREPARATION Stripping efforts should include removal of pavements, vegetation, organic materials, and deleterious debris from areas slated for building, pavement, and utility construction. The test pits encountered about 5 to 6 inches of topsoil and rootmass. Deeper areas of stripping may be required in heavily vegetated areas of the site. Subgrade soils that become disturbed due to elevated moisture conditions should be overexcavated to reveal firm, non -yielding, non -organic soils and backfilled with compacted structural fill. In order to maximize utilization of site soils as structural fill, RGI recommends that the earthwork portion of this project be completed during extended periods of warm and dry weather if possible. If earthwork is completed during the wet season (typically November through May) it will be necessary to take extra precautionary measures to protect subgrade soils. Wet season earthwork will require additional mitigative measures beyond that which would be expected during the drier summer and fall months. 5.2.3 EXCAVATIONS All temporary cut slopes associated with the site and utility excavations should be adequately inclined to prevent sloughing and collapse. The site soils consist of medium dense silty sand with trace gravel. Accordingly, for excavations more than 4 feet but less than 20 feet in depth, the temporary side slopes should be laid back with a minimum slope inclination of 1H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical). If there is insufficient room to complete the excavations in this manner, or excavations greater than 20 feet in depth are planned, using temporary shoring to support the excavations should be considered. For open cuts at the site, RGI recommends: ➢ No traffic, construction equipment, stockpiles or building supplies are allowed at the top of cut slopes within a distance of at least five feet from the top of the cut ➢ Exposed soil along the slope is protected from surface erosion using waterproof tarps and/or plastic sheeting ➢ Construction activities are scheduled so that the length of time the temporary cut is left open is minimized ➢ Surface water is diverted away from the excavation ➢ The general condition of slopes should be observed periodically by a geotechnical engineer to confirm adequate stability and erosion control measures In all cases, however, appropriate inclinations will depend on the actual soil and groundwater conditions encountered during earthwork. Ultimately, the site contractor must be responsible for maintaining safe excavation slopes that comply with applicable OSHA or WISHA guidelines. 1 LW RILEYGROUP Geotechnical Engineering Report 7 Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington June 8, 2021 RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 5.2.4 STRUCTURAL FILL RGI recommends fill below the foundation and floor slab, behind retaining walls, and below pavement and hardscape surfaces be placed in accordance with the following recommendations for structural fill. The structural fill should be placed after completion of site preparation procedures as described above. The suitability of excavated site soils and import soils for compacted structural fill use will depend on the gradation and moisture content of the soil when it is placed. As the amount of fines (that portion passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more difficult or impossible to achieve. Soils containing more than about 5 percent fines cannot be consistently compacted to a dense, non -yielding condition when the moisture content is more than 2 percent above or below optimum. Optimum moisture content is that moisture that results in the greatest compacted dry density with a specified compactive effort. Non -organic site soils are only considered suitable for structural fill provided that their moisture content is within about two percent of the optimum moisture level as determined by American Society of Testing and Materials D1557-09 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort (ASTM D1557). Excavated site soils may not be suitable for re -use as structural fill depending on the moisture content and weather conditions at the time of construction. If soils are stockpiled for future reuse and wet weather is anticipated, the stockpile should be protected with plastic sheeting that is securely anchored. Even during dry weather, moisture conditioning (such as, windrowing and drying) of site soils to be reused as structural fill may be required. The site soils are moisture sensitive and may require moisture conditioning prior to use as structural fill. If on -site soils are or become unusable, it may become necessary to import clean, granular soils to complete site work that meet the grading requirements listed in Table 2 to be used as structural fill. Table 2 Structural Fill Gradation U.S. Sieve Size 4 inches No. 4 sieve No. 200 sieve *Based on minus 3/4 inch fraction. Percent Passing 100 22 to 100 0to5* Prior to use, an RGI representative should observe and test all materials imported to the site for use as structural fill. Structural fill materials should be placed in uniform loose layers 1 LW RILEYGROUP Geotechnical Engineering Report 8 June 8, 2021 Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 not exceeding 12 inches and compacted as specified in Table 3. The soil's maximum density and optimum moisture should be determined by ASTM D1557. Table 3 Structural Fill Compaction ASTM D1557 Minimum Moisture Content Location Material Type Compaction Percentage Range Foundations On -site granular or approved 95 +2 -2 imported fill soils: Retaining Wall Backfill On -site granular or approved 92 +2 2 imported fill soils: Slab -on -grade On -site granular or approved 95 +2 -2 imported fill soils: General Fill (non- On -site soils or approved structural areas) imported fill soils: 90 +3 -2 Placement and compaction of structural fill should be observed by RGI. A representative number of in -place density tests should be performed as the fill is being placed to confirm that the recommended level of compaction is achieved. 5.2.5 CUT AND FILL SLOPES All permanent cut and fill slopes should be graded with a finished inclination no greater than 2H:1V. Upon completion of construction, the slope face should be compacted and vegetated, or provided with other physical means to guard against erosion. All fill placed for slope construction should meet the structural fill requirements as described this section. Final grades at the top of the slopes must promote surface drainage away from the slope crest. Water must not be allowed to flow in an uncontrolled fashion over the slope face. If it is necessary to direct surface runoff towards the slope, it should be controlled at the top of the slope, piped in a closed conduit installed on the slope face, and taken to an appropriate point of discharge beyond the toe of the slope. 5.2.6 WET WEATHER CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS RGI recommends that preparation for site grading and construction include procedures intended to drain ponded water, control surface water runoff, and to collect shallow subsurface seepage zones in excavations where encountered. It will not be possible to successfully compact the subgrade or utilize on -site soils as structural fill if accumulated water is not drained prior to grading or if drainage is not controlled during construction. Attempting to grade the site without adequate drainage control measures will reduce the amount of on -site soil effectively available for use, increase the amount of select import fill materials required, and ultimately increase the cost of the earthwork phases of the project. 1 LW RILEYGROUP Geotechnical Engineering Report 9 June 8, 2021 Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 Free water should not be allowed to pond on the subgrade soils. RGI anticipates that the use of berms and shallow drainage ditches, with sumps and pumps in utility trenches, will be required for surface water control during wet weather and/or wet site conditions. 5.3 FOUNDATIONS Following site preparation and grading, new foundations for structures and decks can be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on competent native soil or structural fill. Loose, organic, or other unsuitable soils may be encountered in the proposed building footprint. If unsuitable soils are encountered, they should be overexcavated and backfilled with structural fill. If loose soils are encountered, the soils should be moisture conditioned and compacted to a firm and unyielding condition. Perimeter foundations exposed to weather should be at a minimum depth of 18 inches below final exterior grades. Interior foundations can be constructed at any convenient depth below the floor slab. Finished grade is defined as the lowest adjacent grade within 5 feet of the foundation for perimeter (or exterior) footings and finished floor level for interior footings. Table 4 Foundation Design Design Parameter Allowable Bearing Capacity Friction Coefficient Passive pressure (equivalent fluid pressure) 1. psf = pounds per square foot 2. pcf = pounds per cubic foot Value 2,000 psfl 0.30 250 pcf2 The allowable foundation bearing pressures apply to dead loads plus design live load conditions. For short-term loads, such as wind and seismic, a 1/3 increase in this allowable capacity may be used. At perimeter locations, RGI recommends not including the upper 12 inches of soil in the computation of passive pressures because they can be affected by weather or disturbed by future grading activity. The passive pressure value assumes the foundation will be constructed neat against competent soil or backfilled with structural fill as described in Section 5.2.4. The recommended base friction and passive resistance value includes a safety factor of about 1.5. With spread footing foundations designed in accordance with the recommendations in this section, maximum total and differential post -construction settlements of 1 inch and 1/2 inch, respectively, should be expected. 1 LM RILEYGROUP Geotechnical Engineering Report 10 Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington June 8, 2021 RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 5.4 RETAINING WALLS The current plan includes using Ultrablock° block retaining walls on the west side of the site to provide grade changes for the improvements. 5.4.1 CAST -IN -PLACE If cast -in -place retaining walls will be used for the improvements, the following recommendations may be used. The magnitude of earth pressure development on retaining walls will partly depend on the quality of the wall backfill. RGI recommends placing and compacting wall backfill as structural fill. Wall drainage will be needed behind the wall face. With wall backfill placed and compacted as recommended, and drainage properly installed, RGI recommends using the values in the following table for design. Table 5 Retaining Wall Design Design Parameter Value Allowable Bearing Capacity I 2,000 psf Active Earth Pressure (unrestrained walls) I 35 pcf At -rest Earth Pressure (restrained walls) I 50 pcf For seismic design, an additional uniform load of 7 times the wall height (H) for unrestrained walls and 14H in psf for restrained walls should be applied to the wall surface. Friction at the base of foundations and passive earth pressure will provide resistance to these lateral loads. Values for these parameters are provided in Section 5.3. 5.4.2 ULTRABLOCK® WALLS The walls shall be installed in accordance with the provided design and installation recommendations in Appendix B. 5.5 SLAB -ON -GRADE CONSTRUCTION Once site preparation has been completed as described in Section 5.2, suitable support for slab -on -grade construction should be provided. RGI recommends that the concrete slab be placed on top of medium dense native soil or structural fill. Immediately below the floor slab in indoor areas, RGI recommends placing a four -inch thick capillary break layer of clean, free -draining sand or gravel that has less than five percent passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve. This material will reduce the potential for upward capillary movement of water through the underlying soil and subsequent wetting of the floor slab. Where moisture by vapor transmission is undesirable, an 8-to 10-millimeter thick plastic membrane should be placed on a 4-inch thick layer of clean gravel. For the anticipated floor slab loading, we estimate post -construction floor settlements of 1/4- to 1/2-inch. 1 LM RILEYGROUP Geotechnical Engineering Report 11 June 8, 2021 Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 5.6 DRAINAGE 5.6.1 SURFACE Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage away from the building area. Water must not be allowed to pond or collect adjacent to foundations or within the immediate building area. For non -pavement locations, RGI recommends providing a minimum drainage gradient of 3 percent for a minimum distance of 10 feet from the building perimeter. In paved locations, a minimum gradient of 1 percent should be provided unless provisions are included for collection and disposal of surface water adjacent to the structure. 5.6.2 SUBSURFACE RGI recommends installing drains for the retaining wall. Drains may be outlet below the wall and provided with a rock pad to reduce erosion. 6.0 Additional Services RGI is available to provide further geotechnical consultation throughout the design phase of the project. RGI should review the final design and specifications in order to verify that earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into project design and construction. RGI is also available to provide geotechnical engineering and construction monitoring services during construction. The integrity of the earthwork and construction depends on proper site preparation and procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may arise in the field in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring services are not part of this scope of work. If these services are desired, please let us know and we will prepare a cost proposal. 7.0 Limitations This GER is the property of RGI, Eddie Fallon, and his designated agents. Within the limits of the scope and budget, this GER was prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in the area at the time this GER was issued. This GER is intended for specific application to the Fallon Residence project in Edmonds, Washington, and for the exclusive use of Eddie Fallon and his authorized representatives. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (for example, mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the 1 LM RILEYGROUP Geotechnical Engineering Report 12 June 8, 2021 Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, we can provide a proposal for these services. The analyses and recommendations presented in this GER are based upon data obtained from the explorations performed on site. Variations in soil conditions can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, RGI should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations in this GER prior to proceeding with construction. It is the client's responsibility to see that all parties to the project, including the designers, contractors, subcontractors, are made aware of this GER in its entirety. The use of information contained in this GER for bidding purposes should be done at the contractor's option and risk. 1 LM RILEYGROUP 92ND'IS T 5 W l= EDMONDS - --I - - .Ca F� PUGET-DRI 5.24 AP;� jwr �� fi S• W Q { Ckk DALEY 5T OF B LbST( MAIN 5T j PAYTON SA I ,1 MAPLE 5T 'r ALDER ST --WALNUT 5T . CEDAR STD jJ 1 Q F _. oJ( r USGS, 2020, Edmonds East, Washington Approximate Scale: 1"=1000' A 7.5-Minute Quadrangle 0 500 1000 2000 N Corporate Office Fallon Residence Walls and Pool Figure 1 RGI Project Number: 2021-177-1 Site Vicinity Map Date Drawn: 04/2021 17522 Bothell Way Northeast -Bothell, Washington 98011 Phone: 425.415.0551 RILEYGROUP Fax: 425.415.0311 Address: 1116 Vista Place, Edmonds, Washington 98020 6M = Test pit by RGI, 04/02/21 = Site boundary • , - Corporate Of fice Northea - Bothell, Washington 98011 Phone: 425.415.0551 RILEYGROUP Fax:425.415.0311 Approximate Scale: 1"=30' 0 15 30 60 N Fallon Residence Walls and Pool Figure 2 RGI Project Number: Date Drawn: 2021-177-1 Geotechnical Exploration Plan 04/2021 Address: 1116 Vista Place, Edmonds, Washington 98020 Geotechnical Engineering Report June 8, 2021 Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING On April 2, 2021, RGI performed field explorations using mini excavator. We explored subsurface soil conditions at the site by observing the excavation of three test pits to a maximum depth of 8.5 feet below existing grade. The test pit locations are shown on Figure 2. The test pit locations were approximately determined by measurements from existing property lines and paved roads. A geologist from our office conducted the field exploration and classified the soil conditions encountered, maintained a log of each test exploration, obtained representative soil samples, and observed pertinent site features. All soil samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Representative soil samples obtained from the explorations were placed in closed containers and taken to our laboratory for further examination and testing. As a part of the laboratory testing program, the soil samples were classified in our in house laboratory based on visual observation, texture, plasticity, and the limited laboratory testing described below. Moisture Content Determinations Moisture content determinations were performed in accordance with ASTM D2216-10 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass (ASTM D2216) on representative samples obtained from the exploration in order to aid in identification and correlation of soil types. The moisture content of typical sample was measured and is reported on the test pit logs. Grain Size Analysis A grain size analysis indicates the range in diameter of soil particles included in a particular sample. Grain size analyses was determined using D6913-04(2009) Standard Test Methods for Particle -Size Distribution (Gradation) of Soils Using Sieve Analysis (ASTM D6913) on three of the samples. 1 LW RILEYGROUP Project Name: Fallon Residence Test Pit No.: TP-1 Project Number: 2021-177-1 Client: Eddie Fallon RILEYGROUP Sheet 1 of 1 Date(s) Excavated: 4/2/2021 Logged By ELW Surface Conditions: Grass Excavation Method: Test Pit Bucket Size: N/A Total Depth of Excavation: 8.5 feet bgs Excavator Type: Mini Excavator Excavating Contractor: NW Excavating Approximate 215 Surface Elevation Groundwater Level: Not Encountered Sampling Grab Method(s) Compaction Method Bucket Test Pit Backfill: Cuttings Location 1116 Vista Place, Edmonds, Washington w C a E ° 0 C (D H Z >, —J O O N U) U_ > L Q E 1 E U) U L m w 0 in Un Z) O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 21s 0 TPSL 5" topsoil Fill Tan silty SAND with trace gravel, medium dense, moist (Fill) 12% moisture Contains organics SM Reddish brown silty SANS with trace gravel, medium dense, moist to wet 19% moisture Becomes tan, mottled 210 s Contains sand and silt interbeds Becomes wet 16% moisture, 16% fines Test Pit terminated at 8.5' � J The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Project Name: Fallon Residence Test Pit No.: TP-2 Project Number: 2021-177-1 Client: Eddie Fallon RILEYGROUP Sheet 1 of 1 Date(s) Excavated: 4/2/2021 Logged By ELW Surface Conditions: Grass Excavation Method: Test Pit Bucket Size: N/A Total Depth of Excavation: 6.5 feet bgs Excavator Type: Mini Excavator Excavating Contractor: NW Excavating Approximate 214 Surface Elevation Groundwater Level: Not Encountered Sampling Grab Method(s) Compaction Method Bucket Test Pit Backfill: Cuttings Location 1116 Vista Place, Edmonds, Washington w C a E ° 0 C (D H Z >, —J O O N U) U_ > L Q E fl E U) U L m w 0 in Cn Z) O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 214 0 TPSL 6" topsoil Fill Light brown silty SAND with trace gravel, loose to medium dense, moist (Fill) 6% moisture Trace organics and roots sM Gray mottled silty SAND with trace gravel, medium dense, moist to wet 13% moisture, 22% fines 209 s 18% moisture Test Pit terminated at 6.5' � J The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Project Name: Fallon Residence Test Pit No.: TP-3 Project Number: 2021-177-1 Client: Eddie Fallon RILEYGROUP Sheet 1 of 1 Date(s) Excavated: 4/2/2021 Logged By ELW Surface Conditions: Grass Excavation Method: Test Pit Bucket Size: N/A Total Depth of Excavation: 2.5 feet bgs Excavator Type: Mini Excavator Excavating Contractor: NW Excavating Approximate 218 Surface Elevation Groundwater Level: Not Encountered Sampling Grab Method(s) Compaction Method Bucket Test Pit Backfill: Cuttings Location 1116 Vista Place, Edmonds, Washington w C a E ° 0 C (D H Z >, —J O O N U) U_ > L Q E 1 E U) U L m w 0 in Cn Z) O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS 218 0 Fill Brown silty SAND with trace gravel, medium dense, moist (Fill) sM Tan mottled silty SAND, medium dense, moist to wet 14% moisture, 28%fines Test Pit terminated at 2.5' 213 5 � J The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Project Name: Fallon Residence Key to Logs Project Number: 2021-177-1 lk- Client: Eddie Fallon RILEYGROUP Sheet 1 of 1 w0. E 0 C w H Z >, O U N U U (6 L a C L > Q E E U m a) M co W 0 (n (n Z) 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION I REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS 1 Elevation (feet): Elevation (MSL, feet). 2 Depth (feet): Depth in feet below the ground surface. LIJ Sample Type: Type of soil sample collected at the depth interval shown. ® Sample Number: Sample identification number. FIELD AND LABORATORY TEST ABBREVIATIONS CHEM: Chemical tests to assess corrosivity COMP: Compaction test CONS: One-dimensional consolidation test LL: Liquid Limit, percent MATERIAL GRAPHIC SYMBOLS }�41� rxti AF TYPICAL SAMPLER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS Auger sampler CME Sampler Bulk Sample Grab Sample 3-inch-OD California w/ ' 2.5-inch-OD Modified brass rings California w/ brass liners GENERAL NOTES 55 USCS Symbol: USCS symbol of the subsurface material. 6 Graphic Log: Graphic depiction of the subsurface material encountered. �7 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Description of material encountered. May include consistency, moisture, color, and other descriptive text. ® REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS: Comments and observations regarding drilling or sampling made by driller or field personnel. PI: Plasticity Index, percent SA: Sieve analysis (percent passing No. 200 Sieve) UC: Unconfined compressive strength test, Qu, in ksf WA: Wash sieve (percent passing No. 200 Sieve) ® Silty SAND (SM) Topsoil Pitcher Sample 2-inch-OD unlined split spoon (SPT) Shelby Tube (Thin -walled, fixed head) OTHER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS Water level (at time of drilling, ATD) Water level (after waiting) Minor change in material properties within a stratum Inferred/gradational contact between strata —?— Queried contact between strata 1: Soil classifications are based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive, and actual lithologic changes may be gradual. Field descriptions may have been modified to reflect results of lab tests. 2: Descriptions on these logs apply only at the specific boring locations and at the time the borings were advanced. They are not warranted to be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations or times. The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 THE RILEY GROUP, INC. 17522 Bothell Way NE Bothell, WA 98011 PHONE: (425) 415-0551 FAX: (425)415-0311 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 II GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS II ASTM D421, D422, D1140, D2487, D6913 PROJECT TITLE Fallon Residence PROJECT NO. 2021-177-1 TECH/TEST DATE EW 4/3/20: WATER CONTENT (Delivered Moisture) Wt Wet Soil & Tare (gm) (w1) 691.7 Wt Dry Soil & Tare (gm) (w2) 597.6 Weight of Tare (gm) (w3) 15.6 Weight of Water (gm) (w4=w1-w2) 94.1 Weight of Dry Soil (gm) (w5=w2-w3) 582.0 Moisture Content (%) (w4/w5)*100 16 % COBBLES % C GRAVEL • F GRAVEL % C SAND % M SAND % F SAND • FINES % TOTAL D10 (mm) D30 (mm) D60 (mm) Cu Cc 0.0 12.0' 3.0' 2.5' 2.0' 1.5' 1.0' 0.75' 0.50' 0.375' #4 #1C #2C #4C #6C 4.4 6.4 4.5 32.7 35.8 16.3 100.0 P A S S I N G 1000 100 10 1 Grain size in millimeters DESCRIPTION Silty SAND with trace gravel USCS SM Prepared For: Eddie Fallon Reviewed By: KMW #10C #20C PAN SAMPLE ID/TYPE SAMPLE DEPTH DATE RECEIVED TP-1 8' 4/2/2021 Weight Of Sample (gm) Tare Weight (gm) (W6) Total Dry Weight (gm) SIEVE ANALYSIS Cumulative Wt Ret Wt-Tare (%Retained) % PASS +Tare Rwtret/wW1001 (100-%ret) 15.6 0.00 0.00 100.00 15.6 0.00 0.00 100.00 15.6 0.00 0.00 100.00 41.0 25.40 4.36 95.64 52.1 36.50 6.27 93.73 78.3 62.70 10.77 89.23 104.6 89.00 15.29 84.71 294.9 279.30 47.99 52.01 471.6 456.00 78.35 21.65 503.0 487.40 83.75 16.25 597.6 582.00 100.00 0.00 12" 3" 2" 1".75 .375" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 597.6 15.6 582.0 cobbles coarse gravel coarse gravel coarse gravel coarse gravel coarse gravel fine gravel fine gravel fine gravel coarse sand medium sand medium sand fine sand fine sand fine sand fines silt/clay 0.1 0.01 0.001 mom ,_ RILEYGROUP THE RILEY GROUP, INC. 17522 Bothell Way NE Bothell, WA 98011 PHONE: (425) 415-0551 FAX: (425)415-0311 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 II GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS II ASTM D421, D422, D1140, D2487, D6913 PROJECT TITLE Fallon Residence PROJECT NO. 2021-177-1 TECH/TEST DATE EW 4/3/20: WATER CONTENT (Delivered Moisture) Wt Wet Soil & Tare (gm) (w1) 667.9 Wt Dry Soil & Tare (gm) (w2) 591.6 Weight of Tare (gm) (w3) 15.6 Weight of Water (gm) (w4=w1-w2) 76.3 Weight of Dry Soil (gm) (w5=w2-w3) 576.0 Moisture Content (%) (w4/w5)*100 13 % COBBLES % C GRAVEL • F GRAVEL % C SAND % M SAND % F SAND • FINES % TOTAL D10 (mm) D30 (mm) D60 (mm) Cu Cc 0.0 12.0' 3.0' 2.5' 2.0' 1.5' 1.0' 0.75' 0.50' 0.375' #4 #1C #2C #4C #6C 5.2 6.8 2.4 18.0 46.0 21.5 100.0 P A S S I N G 1000 100 10 1 Grain size in millimeters DESCRIPTION Silty SAND with trace gravel USCS SM Prepared For: Eddie Fallon Reviewed By: KMW #10C #20C PAN SAMPLE ID/TYPE SAMPLE DEPTH DATE RECEIVED TP-2 3.5' 4/2/2021 Weight Of Sample (gm) Tare Weight (gm) (W6) Total Dry Weight (gm) SIEVE ANALYSIS Cumulative Wt Ret Wt-Tare (%Retained) % PASS +Tare Rwtret/wW1001 (100-%ret) 15.6 0.00 0.00 100.00 15.6 0.00 0.00 100.00 15.6 0.00 0.00 100.00 45.8 30.20 5.24 94.76 73.5 57.90 10.05 89.95 85.1 69.50 12.07 87.93 99.0 83.40 14.48 85.52 202.7 187.10 32.48 67.52 422.4 406.80 70.63 29.38 467.9 452.30 78.52 21.48 591.6 576.00 100.00 0.00 12" 3" 2" 1".75 .375" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 591.6 15.6 576.0 cobbles coarse gravel coarse gravel coarse gravel coarse gravel coarse gravel fine gravel fine gravel fine gravel coarse sand medium sand medium sand fine sand fine sand fine sand fines silt/clay 0.1 0.01 0.001 mom ,_ RILEYGROUP THE RILEY GROUP, INC. 17522 Bothell Way NE Bothell, WA 98011 PHONE: (425) 415-0551 FAX: (425)415-0311 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 II GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS II ASTM D421, D422, D1140, D2487, D6913 PROJECT TITLE Fallon Residence 2021-177-1 PROJECT NO. TECH/TEST DATE EW 4/3/20: WATER CONTENT (Delivered Moisture) Wt Wet Soil & Tare (gm) (w1) 736.9 Wt Dry Soil & Tare (gm) (w2) 648.0 Weight of Tare (gm) (w3) 15.6 Weight of Water (gm) (w4=w1-w2) 88.9 Weight of Dry Soil (gm) (w5=w2-w3) 632.4 Moisture Content (%) (w4/w5)*100 14 % COBBLES % C GRAVEL • F GRAVEL % C SAND % M SAND % F SAND • FINES % TOTAL D10 (mm) D30 (mm) D60 (mm) Cu Cc 0.0 12.0' 3.0' 2.5' 2.0' 1.5' 1.0' 0.75' 0.50' 0.375' #4 #1C #2C #4C #6C 0.0 3.1 2.0 22.7 44.0 28.2 100.0 P A S S I N G 1000 100 10 1 Grain size in millimeters DESCRIPTION Silty SAND USCS SM Prepared For: Eddie Fallon Reviewed By: KMW #10C #20C PAN SAMPLE ID/TYPE SAMPLE DEPTH DATE RECEIVED TP-3 2' 4/2/2021 Weight Of Sample (gm) Tare Weight (gm) (W6) Total Dry Weight (gm) SIEVE ANALYSIS Cumulative Wt Ret Wt-Tare (%Retained) % PASS +Tare Rwtret/wW1001 (100-%ret) 15.6 0.00 0.00 100.00 15.6 0.00 0.00 100.00 15.6 0.00 0.00 100.00 15.6 0.00 0.00 100.00 25.2 9.60 1.52 98.48 34.9 19.30 3.05 96.95 47.8 32.20 5.09 94.91 191.6 176.00 27.83 72.17 424.9 409.30 64.72 35.28 469.9 454.30 71.84 28.16 648.0 632.40 100.00 0.00 12" 3" 2" 1".75 .375" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 648.0 15.6 632.4 cobbles coarse gravel coarse gravel coarse gravel coarse gravel coarse gravel fine gravel fine gravel fine gravel coarse sand medium sand medium sand fine sand fine sand fine sand fines silt/clay 0.1 0.01 0.001 mom ,_ RILEYGROUP Geotechnical Engineering Report Fallon Residence, Edmonds, Washington June 8, 2021 RGI Project No. 2021-177-1 APPENDIX B WALL DESIGN The wall design is based on the plans provided from PRDG architecture and the choice of Ultrablock° blocks for the walls. 1 LM RILEYGROUP UltraWall Project: Fallon Walls Location: 1116 Vista Plave, Edmonds Designer: KMW Date: 5/27/2021 Section: Section 2 Design Method: NCMA_09_3rd_Ed, Ignore Vert. Force Design Unit: UltraBlock Seismic Acc: 0.200 SOIL PARAMETERS T coh y Retained Soil: 32 deg Opsf 120pcf Foundation Soil: 32 deg Opsf 120pcf Leveling Pad: 40 deg Opsf 135pcf Crushed Stone GEOMETRY Design Height: 4.92ft Live Load: Opsf Wall Batter/Tilt: 0.00/ 5.70 deg Live Load Offset: O.00ft Embedment: 1.07ft Live Load Width: Oft Leveling Pad Depth: 0.50ft Dead Load: Opsf Slope Angle: 20.0 deg Dead Load Offset: O.Oft Slope Length: 6.Oft Dead Load Width: Oft Slope Toe Offset: O.Oft Leveling Pad Width: 3.46ft Vert b on Single Dpth Toe Slope Angle: 15.00 Toe Slope Length: 10.00 Toe Slope Bench: 0.00 FACTORS OF SAFETY (Static / Seismic) Sliding: 1.50 / 1.125 Overturning: 1.50 / 1.125 Bearing: 2.00 / 1.5 UltraWall 5.1.24.19 1 RESULTS (Static / Seismic) FoS Sliding: Bearing: 2.89 (Ivlpd) / 1.49 FoS Overturning: 2.44 / 1.25 766.69 / 787.78 FoS Bearing: 11.48 / 9.84 Name Elev. ka kae Pa Pae Pir PaT 2.43 0.317 0.420 142 188 70 142 1 -0.01 0.318 0.412 511 663 141 511 Column Descriptions: ka: active earth pressure coefficient kae: active seismic earth pressure coefficient Pa: active earth pressure Pae: dynamic earth pressure Pir: inertia force Paq: live surcharge earth pressure Pag2: live load 2 surcharge earth pressure Paqd: dead surcharge earth pressure (PaC): reduction in load due to cohesion PaT: sum of all earth pressures FSsl(lvl Pad): factor of safety for sliding at each layer. FSot: factor of safety of overturning about the toe. FSsl FoS OT 135.21 9.15 _ 2.89(100.00] 2.44 siesFSsl FoS SeisOT 73.51 3.74 1.49(100.00] 1 1.25 (FS sliding below the leveling pad) UltraWall 5.1.24.19 2 UltraWall Project: Fallon Walls Location: 1116 Vista Piave, Edmonds Designer: KMW Date: 5/27/2021 Section: Section 1 Design Method: NCMA_09_3rd_Ed Design Unit: UltraBlock Seismic Acc: 0.200 SOIL PARAMETERS T coh y Retained Soil: 32 deg Opsf 120pcf Foundation Soil: 32 deg Opsf 120pcf Leveling Pad: 40 deg Opsf 135pcf Crushed Stone GEOMETRY Design Height: 7.35ft Live Load: Opsf Wall Batter/Tilt: 0.00/ 5.70 deg Live Load Offset: O.00ft Embedment: 1.07ft Live Load Width: Oft Leveling Pad Depth: 0.50ft Dead Load: Opsf Slope Angle: 20.0 deg Dead Load Offset: O.Oft Slope Length: 6.Oft Dead Load Width: Oft Slope Toe Offset: O.Oft Leveling Pad Width: 5.92ft Vert b on Single Dpth Toe Slope Angle: 15.00 Toe Slope Length: 10.00 Toe Slope Bench: 0.00 N FACTORS OF SAFETY (Static / Seismic) Sliding: 1.50 / 1.125 Overturning: 1.50 / 1.125 Bearing: 2.00 / 1.5 UltraWall 5.1.24.19 1 RESULTS (Static / Seismic) FoS Sliding: Bearing: N 2.70 (Ivlpd) / 1.67 FoS Overturning: 2.46 / 1.98 1231.87 / 1286.16 FoS Bearing: 10.00 / 9.81 Name Elev. ka kae Pa Pae Pir PaT 1 4.88 0.317 0.420 140 186 70 140 1 2.43 0.318 0.412 507 659 141 1 507 1 E-1 E -0.01 0.543 0.632 2007 2337 282 A Column Descriptions: ka: active earth pressure coefficient kae: active seismic earth pressure coefficient Pa: active earth pressure Pae: dynamic earth pressure Pir: inertia force Paq: live surcharge earth pressure Pag2: live load 2 surcharge earth pressure Paqd: dead surcharge earth pressure (PaC): reduction in load due to cohesion PaT: sum of all earth pressures FSsl(lvl Pad): factor of safety for sliding at each layer FSot: factor of safety of overturning about the toe. FSsl FoS OT 136.83 9.32 39.20 2.46 '0000.007 2.99 (FS sliding below the leveling pad) 4.,Pj9 .11 24.74 1 1.26 UltraWall 5.1.24.19 2 ULTRABLOCK, INC. Retaining Wall Systems 815 N.E. 172n1 Ave, Vancouver, WA. 98684 Office: 360-694-0141 Toll Free: 800-377-3877 Fax: 360-694-0281 www.ultrablock.com r; r; ��', FIELD CONSTRUCTION MANUAL Table of Contents GRAVITY WALLS: 1-5 © 2016 ULTRABLOCK, INC. www.ultrablock.com FIELD CONSTRUCTION MANUAL - GRAVITY EXCAVATION Confirm location and elevation of walls. Width of excavation should allow for width of wall base and drainpipe. Note: all excavation should follow OHSA guidelines. If the wall steps up one block in height, the base should be installed at the lowest level in order to establish grade and face location of the second level. BASE PREPARATION Consult engineer's wall design for base material specification including type, width, depth and compaction. It is recommended to start at the lowest wall level. Locate the front face of the wall and run a string line one (1) inch in front of the face-- two (2) inches above the base. Use 2x6 or 2x8 pieces of wood, with stakes nailed to each end, for forming up the base (See Diagram 1). DIAGRAM Stringlin :.. rBase . ElevationBoard v'r:r:s- Fil Base Depth . , .. - Compacted Base Materia r - Set front board in line with string and at base elevation of wall. Locate the back board at the base width (of wall) distance from the front board. Set elevation of back board to give the proper wall batter. For example, if the wall has a 6:1 batter, and the base of the wall is 30 inches wide (2.5 ft) then the back board should be five (5) inches lower than the front board (See DIAGRAM 2). 0 Page 1 30"/6=5" Make sure the base material is well compacted. Test if necessary. Be careful not to push out boards during compaction. After compacting, screed off base material, fill in low spots, and screed again. Repeat procedure as necessary to achieve firm, compacted base. Without moving the string line, start leap -frogging the base boards further on down the wall line and continue preparing the base. Do not disturb string line. It is best to prepare the entire base before setting the blocks. CURVED WALLS BASE PREPARATION Curved walls require many more location points to define the curve (the tighter the curve, the more location points). Use bender boards to the back width and batter the wall. Fill, compact and screed base material as required. SETTING BLOCKS Before placing blocks, make sure the top and bottom surfaces of the respective blocks are clean. At one end of the wall, or at one end of the lowest base elevation, start the wall. At the start of the wall, mark a line perpendicular to the face of the wall. This line will help place the first block square to the wall face. Place the first block one inch from the string line. Set the next block beside the first block, taking care to align the face. If the base width of the wall requires 2 or more blocks, place the blocks at the back of the wall first (it may help to run a temporary string line). Always place best face of the blocks on the outside of the wall (See DIAGRAM 3). 0 Page 2 DIAGRAM 3 Set blocks back of --------------------------------- I 'u�lE, I II=� 1=11=lI '1[�i1-1�111=11'= Il =11 [�111=11=111=11.-II=pW_ _ _ —11=,11 11=11— =11=11-1 Do not set any more than 25 to 30 feet of blocks along the length of base before starting the second or third row. The block keyways have a limited amount of play, which could lead to binding if installed incorrectly. Blocks are poured facedown with the side of the block form being open. This means that the width of blocks may vary and care must be taken when placing block side by side. It is always best when setting blocks in this configuration to measure from a point on one block to the same point on the adjacent block ensuring the dimension is within keyway tolerance. There is a half inch of mating tolerance around each key where the center of the tolerance is approximately 29.5" (See DIAGRAM 3A). 29.5" Width may vary due to -ma n ufacturi ng process`~ Measure distance between same point on each block. Tolerance dimension of 295" in mind there is }" clearance around keys. DIAGRAM 3A If binding does occur between the first and second row of blocks, leave a 1/4" gap when placing the next base block. Another suggestion to reduce the binding is as follows: When building the base going left to right, after placing each second row block, push the second row block right to left until it no longer slides along base block. Make sure the upper blocks do not slide up on the keys of lower row blocks (See DIAGRAM 4). 0 Page 3 DIAGRAM 4 Eck Building Direction If building walls with geogrid, make sure geogrid is extended through to the front face of the block. Geogrid reinforced walls require that the backfill and geogrid be compacted and stretched as the wall goes up. Make sure drainpipe, filter fabric, and drain mats (if required) are installed before backfilling. Backfill material and compaction must meet engineer's requirements. Test as necessary. Continue placing blocks being careful to align the face. EQUIPMENT FOR PLACING BLOCKS A track mounted excavator is the ideal piece of equipment for setting blocks. A wire rigging with swivel hooks, OSHA approved and rated for the weight of the blocks, can be attached to the excavator and used for lifting and moving blocks. SAFETY FACTORS 1. Never stand underneath a block 2. Never accept or install blocks with a cold joint (LEAVE ON DELIVERY TRUCK) 3. Avoid getting any part of the body between pinch points while installing blocks (either between two blocks or between a block and the open excavation). 4. Always inspect rigging for lifting the block. Replace all worn out or broken parts. DO NOT USE INFERIOR, INADEQUATE OR UNAPPROVED EQUIPMENT. USEFUL TOOLS 1. Transit- to lay out a level base. 2. Shovels and rakes- for use by the base prep person. 3. A lifting jig- to hold the blocks at the correct batter. 4. A broom- to clean the keyways before placing the next layer. 5. One or more 5 foot pry bars- for jostling the blocks into position. CORNERS 1. Vertical walls can be locked at 90 degree corners. 2. Battered walls at 90 degree corners are constructed as follows: Stack a vertical column to fill the corner. Adjust tow of battered wall to meet with corners of vertical stack (ie: kick toe out for outside corner, meet toe at edge for inside corner). For walls higher than 75, you may use a stack of full-size, interlocked blocks to make a 5x5' vertical stack, rather than a 2.5x2.5' stack with single half blocks (See below). 0 Page 4 Use geogrid between the vertical blocks, extending back into the fill. Make the corner stack the same width as the wall base (2.5' / 5' / 7.5' etc.) EXCAVATION If the radius of the wall is less than the allowable radius then contact the manufacturer and see if arrangements can be made for special block. WALL WIDTH 2.5 5' 7.5' 10, Only true when walls have no batter MINIMUM RADIUS OF CURVE 100, 200' 300' 400' FINAL LEVELING OF THE WALL Imperfect or disturbed bases cause a wall to not run straight and level. It is recommended to shim (asphalt shingle) wall if necessary or place a 4x6 on top of the wall at the high points and pound down with the excavator bucket. 0 Page 5