BLD2002-0287FEB-14-02 THU 11'36; AN FA}{ N0. 0 P, 01
FACSIMILE COVER SHEET
'['n: Don 1-%j10W a Lily of Edmonds14"AXOP 42547-IwOO'2021 Ifelms
a ane Froma 1)
Robertson
114cl: 206-69,L)-4S41
Dq,k Lit
+ I•t•] cover:
Trans-mlission oils:
February 14, 2002 11:29 AN4
27
Receptionist (2006)695-4700
.
- RECEPJED
FEB 14 2002
ENGINEERING DIVISION
R IE C E I E D
FEB 1 9,- 2002'
BUILDING DEPT,
0 a n intoideet ont for thc fildilti(flial ma ciairy named
rivitc-ged and confidt-111601 h7f0i"'Intic Y
Thivfoesimitc vw-Y50 Ile (3 1) 1 rhis
-.1 • - ' I . , '1 J I J distribulioni 9 Qf
If you aric It I/tv illfc)ldrd 1' 1 i T,Youerr . dv i s th n
.I)I-ollibIled 1 11)(MI filevs.c apPrOvIal of life SCII(161% if You racilycrd atis fij error. please Call Mid
Thank-11 *
on ill r7L r��y}�*4
Y x! I OW 00695-4700. TZws. (106fi(M-4,701
. .... I S4.1 00-�, p1tone (2
Of) S 1� a
tool vil-kirth MIC11110, SOW 2.1 al % W A
. . ■. so.
�.- dp
r
i
FEB--I 4-02
1
THU 11 � 36 PM FAX NO, 0 P. 02
C E R rrIFICATION PAGI:
Edmonds Lift Station No. I
Structural Calculations
F,ciCY10nd5',Wash ingt4it
# .
'flicstruchiml C31CLOZ16011S WerC prepared thes'uporvision
iStel-C(I profeS.S1011al U11nincer are affixed below:
w1josesenlas rev
I
Clulielis
J.
Roa.jC
11 r b ai th& a
LI'LICALI rill l
JiLCKI1NC.
p. ,e
F);ivid A. Jochill-1)
Client S'
ices Dircaor
1,3,
0
2-o--
0�00
I'M
i
01
i o� wn.Vf�bt
W
L
■
20
X)RA ;i
*WTSIRV
EXP;IRE
C:gl'l'R[C;ll'1' 2UU2, Ito W.1RICI-iCK, INCP., ALL RIGHTS.LZF-,SFRNrr',,D'
CL'1t'l'1fICA'fIUN
0
■OMEN*��
� 3 4
0
FEB--14-02 THU 11'36 AN
I
FAX NOs 0 Ps 03
,,.Wk, --dW
0
c
f dP
I
coo
R EV. dW� -
00�
C0040YT CHKqp
c 0 hl P. di, 4p� b.. o ATE DATE
F., 1 r i.5. T..j
DATE J.il. 2
lkf -.0 to
loop 9
let
I a. .- ..— - 4p a .2 a 3 0 400 is Ito
3. 19" ft a %& %
w lk I � a
3mjcc%
tkw NO= l#4WUW LAP 91JCrL LJE)'C'"'S
Top OTHM
w
Ott
a-F
IRS 0 AL IL
*pip
4
AL
%3
#I JIL10
ago_
1p-
7-0 sip.
A
sqw v
v ok
4p
or jo
4,211 lff.� IL! q, dh k
eL
7611ML 4 NT Wt
16
or's
d?
Lit"
Al WJLLL:."
own
PROJECT 9 coop, —L'
FILE
PAGE ..me OF., PA GI E S
41
ML
sa
FEB-0114-02 THU 11�36 RM FAX NOm 0 P, 04
It
i
u
.
a LA 2L�
r� .wo�d
Abe -
comp, '.`
DATE
0T ---�0 ATE
-
u
* mmmmmbmr
dpw�P—w
omp
fVLAW
00%m= wm O&T-p�
m"c" om"
COLV" ws("TSm
po � T KM
3r,3e
a" HOW
a STM LAD"
L
r
Q
70 dD(TElt-K CF
r �
t
i
Wm
02 OQ
PROJECT
woo' 0'*m ro S7n
FILE a.i
..�
� PAGES
. f70000 ,r��
+
3
1
r
1
MAN
2CL
o
0
0
'
d
+ •
+ si
IL
# 4
FEB--14-02 THU 11'37 AM
FAX NO, 0 P. 05
0
i
........... #...
I
r
+
ruoeio ........... w'.w ............
CIA x R EVo
comps DATE mmfto-�
ATE
0 7
I
•
ECT.Ji..'Wo.-
FILE N00! NONE
GE
PAGE ,�,�� fwp S ..
1
0
.3
r
+
1
#
1
;
1
I
■
4
FEB-14-02 THU 11'37 AM FAX NO, 0 ps 06
1
t
8
■
■
■
r�ss
E. # f�
comp. ^ -++i 'ter♦ �""
cliKe.
l -o *OV DATE1) ATE
'-O-DATE
J3
_..�.
t
•
PAGE ,.�.0 r- . _&-4- PAGES
i
I
r
9 f +
I
FES-14-02 THU 11'37 AM
7
FAX NO, 0
P, 07
d
�.
6
. f�..i *
EV.
comp.C�')YL CHK.
-m' o, D
I *0z nATE
—�- .
It�-�pm1'IT 1 1
INTO
L �,� jwflr-s
(2
EA WE
watt
srjll�- I i /! .rl'
i
" Vft W A
LA
cc
rr sfewV
3
�r
•15 1 r
r
1 � �
..
PROJECT �_.... FILE N�_.
A ..— PAS, ES
501 E
! %L
_.. ..611114a
d WAvM MX
cm)
A . 0wo
x
i !
Y
s
s trx
�0
s
3/ir PA
ng" ir W, 19
i
i°!;iw � `
�l'1
x
� i 4
• f
#.r
s ��•L f '
FEB-14-02 THU 11'38 AM
FAX NO, 0
5
•
F
. ra•
moo
'm MEOW
i-Am. •• �
0 -Mmmmmmmmmm==Eh
�iF •
+arm # a.i�a■ �*
f 5 ti� •
c C H K
* �fi .��aaaaar�■
n otTr�,.� " DATE ... .�..
DATE
moo
I
a..
C'z P c fL qor4.,o
F.-:: I u U
bop
r
�
1
+
f
1
1
+
1
■
s'q•-
Q.p 'fJ�
4 a *7c.
I Ir-w
L'AL000 P
0
1
i
1
1
4 �
1
ti
PROJECY .�._.'
FILE N 0-------MRS
4. PAGES, ...........
PA G E lbow commmommommo 0 F....� West
( .13 �o f f
r 3 m psr-
� � Co��` = Sly PSF
wz f
2
0
9
i
3
i
4
■ do
Wa
...*4M4i dV
FES-14-02 THU 11'38 PM
FAX NO. 0
ps 09
I
i
t
1
cl
f
....��..s lwn lo�j
wmp
• #•
.• - •. . "��"..
i
Se
C�o
,,REV.
�--Po-
DATEVATE 0
�...
C:o v 4r"K,
In
Cie "oo&
G.ohj M .5 PJ
f o I r.1r
.D �'g I &drz�p r-,-o
PROJEC'T
FILE ...#� ..---�a-
A �. 0 PA GE
A ( s vw r
4NIIIIIIIIIII- 5 19 �'v )
G S9
pw L.11 0 p I
� l S n 2- L Y.� J i 4.,P { d-� J;�-c v D I24. C�C1 � ►-�
S'.e� ft*-o
4
L,P,) ts... b6s,
Le��
WryFOI
-C.��A`i'
y
t
+ r d '
1
MOM
J� WOW
T&
IL
• ` ■ # F
r
i � I
# - ■ 4
i
� 1
T
I
1
i
r
a. #
• +•�* era+•.si �a•, aw�'�#'� •
L
P
R E; OM
0 a 1:3 All
prolect No. do I
Tas
0
a
C "V o f E. d 7. , U-, n d- s
Ljf%L Sialian Nof 'dot
concreto. Co-ve-r Slab Loads
n Daramentersl
Dimensions
Concp..te;, S tel-e I
RMt h
Width
ve F'c Fy I
otal Eff e cti
S) (PSI) (psi)
(in r, h e s) (inches) (inche
4,000
12 j 6 518:.
ip
rs
_��qD 01 St I Facto
nslon- DisIribution
Cover Dime v_~ � - —
width Length Wi dth Length
ft)
13,100 0.70 0.30
Unit Loads
Dead Live 1 Total
(Ps�
(P-SO
8 . 2 c) o 250,00
0
v
(Ksi) (Kshi)
7.80
a
204o ,
530*0
mu
(Ks
12m02
601000
-max moments
Distributed Load
Width I Letlgth Width _F Length
Tr4l" b u ta rY
-r- P_
Width
04
(ft-K) (ft-K)
(Plf)
5.15-
87 7.80
369.13 1 163,
dF
V u
Ks't)
3.70
Page I
Max Shear
wi dth Length
K)
j
2.4o,
1029
Date: ZM 34102
&
Prepare blyb
cn-
Nw_
!WT 5w�'
CD
I
FEB— 14-02 THU 11 '39 AN
FAX NO, 0 % ps 11
R-W, Bcvske Inc.
P10juct No. 11-00695-10001
Tusk M) I
city of EdmondS
Lift Sta�on #i
Renwaton
0
Dato: 2113102
I
Preparod by: GJR 7)
In 1J, 1,1 1 1
-pow
Cover Slab Desinn
canor -Mmmmmmmm
VEMM &MI *--.
.............................
doe Paramenters . . . . . . . . . . . . M. ap 'M'
wimmmmmmm -0 ammmmo MENEM"
Steel pd'Ip dPQ
concrete
0epth M
Wid ff I W .4
T ta I EffectlVe F C .........
ry r, )
Jios (inches)._ Psi)
.(inc. 4h�
M ddd..b M or .1d.'p.II I . ...................... 4 ON 00 a 0 60.0M00 I mow j*
12 a ow. 0
4 wal.. 4 . P. -D Ift - dWqrG=W 4D M�
I r- t F '-�=mmmn am 0 .0 OOMI
,. � ft d" Do- � . p . n 0 M 4.0 am
M. W-9. w a w wv-w�� 0 4w ............. kd .. PP� 4PA 6mmw- p ------
qmmn.-W-M-�
am
b. DIstributed out-of-P ane Loads
t--of-P I an 21
Unit Lwid 4
s (10- . — - w u
'Total w Dead w Live w Total
Dead LIve - 14
0 d..b MM M M dp IMM Of) ------ *P-P
p
40
dp wld�
0 q�w. "MMMM ... mw, Mmommi pwoo 569
510 174 WMEMPS & -
%00
Y mnn�.
PI
9 1 &'W� 'W'" M Aft -mew
40 wu .0 MW *MmMm-wM&pM-.. ow~ M.0 M : L .a@
-0 IMF. W-00'�M V "'Ww— .0 M dpp
'Out-&-Planc Lo;id Forces 04h MMMMW 0. Ad' M
Y�irlbjjUid 04-00.
WW. qp Mmmmmimmimp a dft UMM
Vu -W.&_0A dPk Vu 1 4N 4 A deonmmmm
S Pan M * " 0 mmwqp*��&�- � .4
-P 1hp . "h h P
P Kts D ( K-s MMMMM 40 -
.0 jpMM ===mom& a In
MWA-d
IMMG
-M-0 0. *�MMM M MW 0 2.40 12.02. 3.7o
1-3,00 7.80 - "- I- - db4p 10 MEMO&~ -do dw
., is -W 0 44 MO-Mo sp�dw�� �' . Jr. dk'P�M— .......... . W. id,
MOMMM ...-Lip qpqp.� =jpF
Ib MdM6 Rb id.., I
IP . ...................... .
dq OMMMEMMMMonp
FZt1inforcemen . t .0 WW wommmmm MO -
(4 13 As Ast
As .......... . .
Phl K ....................
—A �JW .1.1 'Idl 11�mmn�`n
. �G � �* 'M ..,ft Id tempo.
18";rc b rcq =mm .0 - -
0 0 w4j,mmm�' A
41 Jnc h o s in (inn)mm.� n MMMMMMMM� *W" w
.'P� '� 6.&
w 0 wp-*.* or. a 'AWN mmmam� ...0mam innmwmp�-@� 9400HPIMEMEMEMMM now. ftlmmmml�*� dp MM MMM EMM WW
..... hbpnw� 117
0.42 0.56
------------
0.9 0 ^Go720 OL62
%IW-WWVWw.q mmhmIMPdP 4� M=dMMdMI
rho b al rho tn3X . PhMd=MWN .Wimw-wh& 40 M*A
A^ As max
�* a dr �J- 1, 00 0
coverns . ....... M&
=MWdP4 n� din GMENIMMO "4Lp
4W 9
d'. M nip �p -qp 0.0214
.85 0$0285
*070 mmmmft�-* 6 AIM—
aw �qw MO &
GP* M m-
............. . b
d" AMMMMM
......... A
A,& Ep db
ReInforc.em.p-nt Selection am ap mm mmmmm wp� rh 0 MInImum . .......
A rov rho 6j0&&IWWdd*W&JP *-
Asibar As Wwpdftho� �M 0 M d th
Bar HOS VVI
rho max
ovid ed I A d AsI(bd -,.h .....
IMMM rato ratio ches). dpOnmmmm MOW
ra6o -=m=m=Mw=mW"-
in 2.
4.75
0.44 1 04 0.00555706 -0,26.
12 o.44
—T—
- F-W
M-
h
;d)
Ln
0 j4
WAR
0
0
I
I L. . to 4pp 4L M - p % % 9 . ft - 0 . � 4 A, M�# , 'V L 'P� , , 0� - .. 0 MI* WNW - 0 �* 41
j
I FAX NOv 0 Pe 12
FEB-14-02 THU 11'39 AM
I
% Inc.
R.W.9 Bock,
p -t �j 0, 11 -00(j,,95-1 COO i
l �Gk%p
01 "
Task COOI
city of Edmonds
Lift Stafion 91
Renovabon
do� W*. m
'I'htiar chock Mpja� P IAP VS vrl*phl
Av S p_LC" �_q.J ....... wVC
uar No.
A�)
Cinchos)
ML
3.31
4 d
.V . , � d Ommo-W I
,.- M �. �ftlw . 0 � -W ]-=pm ..- %a .�w - V . i � W-m �._ -W i �. I
� *�GEEWPL . . . G.D
. __* _h. m S. 4 �
DOICCUOn
Check
E
...QN14)
jr
(-',0 E
�W* -
612
9 qp - V- 941t I fim a
we
I
m� GPM
A741
@a& �a A 40 � - � 0 � '& - ffi�m
C r ad Cectlon
Copercto
----Area
dEFEL I
a .).Wlw MPO
.......... h, dillm
1,71
on AR
� .0 % Mo.
Vt
4
..... � "m 1 . ..... � Ar 1 C', 06
..0, * 0 ............ ft. OW
I a I
Mer
4r
ma
40
(ft-K)
n
OF
..p ------- b.*dww
3.68 8.04
61 1—
steel
&,.� I I
W-As
OnA n
2L�
q�*~ Opmmvmppmmmmmmw a
1 3.55 1 106
page
Date: 2113102
Pro ared by: CJR
�Wmmmmmww U : dW� ff�-
Vuw Mai- -aw
&
6- - p
36 0
-." V -0 . � W.W. ��. "�d mw� 0. - * ea. I
-,
rho .MMW- n6rho
I I % � =or- pl,
k
,.b
4p_*
to kjwpw�d
i 0.04 0. 91
-00 ftoklo*` 1 4==W_00_�
—OM*
011,
Live Ld LJ d ell
pp�
gover" Daflectloni Ratlo
CW4)
................... OK
3: 632.013;
1,826,793 106 0.2932
.*&. IL 4w 1 p % 1�
L % .
4,0 0 " J,
Oate: 21,13"DZ
Srcha[:�ish Ccn•:} Prewired by. v.}K
ft.�'lj. 3eck, l�o_ 1 7r�^� Tmnsier S'atOn E5-"
--JO 2 0
project NO.- 2 - Fa C ist, Y D a si 9 71 m
.A
i
0
N
C
I i
Concrete Beam DnMn 1P
CO
Oesiqn.
P
aranenters 9
Dimensions � 3
� 1 VwhpepSlab Concrete � Steel
fJa� pescriptior.l I---------Fac Fy I
� Span t Flange j Web TotalEffective I � �
i
(Ft) I (inches) S (inches) i (inches) I (inches) I (inches) 1 (PSi) � (ps
� rzi � to
24 2z i4,000 � 600000 ; 1
Beam 1 M+ 4,00
� Distributed Loads �
Unit Loads Tributary
I Dead Live Tota I Load Wdih De7H Live Total �''`u
Ps� S (PS� (PSq (�) (Pl� (pin (P�� (Pin i
M+ 85 76 161 8200680 607 � 1,287 1.984'
BeaBeamMoViMLLoad
9
Widthth-..MMMMM� - -Axie Dist PM Design M Ma
(K)><
(ft-K) i eft) � (ft-K) (ft-K) z
0
Beam � tJ1+ 10.00 16,00 4.00 ' 4-.00 6680
I � �
V Width Design V Vu I
{ i (K) I ift) ' (K) (ft-� i I
16.,0014.00 ' 4600 6.80
.....
Beam
Ohm- 0'70
� � I
N
W
� Page 4
i
I
AP e.M
f a
avy
7 - 2 0 [le 0 2 - 0'7
proj
Beam
iB3earmn M+
P.._
aearn
Beam
4k
cno"OM0156 counN,
�er ti 0 r.
ra r. s. . Sta
Phase 2 - F-acllty Design
istr*buted Load Forces.
Spain
(Ft) (ft-K)
3
4.00
!Goveming Design Values
r
IL
Flexurat Reinforrement
P h'i K
.85f c b
0,90 1
Ars
Govems
(!nA2)
D,.26 I
v
�K)
t. I
-(inches) j-
------ O.loj
36,720
As. rn aX bethal
A47 1 0.
3. 8 0-85 j
Mu vu
(ft-K) (K)
4 4
Mu I vu
(ft-K) (K)
7
0
As rnin
T "d bd
vq 00OW
(tn'12) Cin'12)
0.07
rtlo bal 'a rti o m ax
0.0285 0.0214
Page 5
(443)As
OnA 2)
0 9
so
(112)Ast
temp.6
0 n A 2)
Oo26
I
t
TpBeam
a ftw
rl
0.01
I
2113102
Mff� CID
d b
E__j
C3
CD
R ^l. 6ec � i�c
4 .
pTr,ject t��. 1 i �oe;%IWv-20CO2-D2�
i
Beam M
Mp-
gram 1
Beam
T
i
IM+
+� CO,
,ty
�s&eav- Sin
10 11 a s e. 2 - F a r, I R-� D e si j; r".
Date: ZI-C
3102
prepared bT. GJR
e
Reinforcement Selection
Bar No. Spacing � quantity F- I As/bar As I As prov �o rho : Minimum
� of bars i provided I As req'd � As!(bd) � I rho max Widthl
Mn-
(in � (inA2) I raQo I ratio ratio (inches) I
(in)
61 2 j 0.44 � 0.88 ' 3.411,0,00327 I 0.15 ! 6463
i
l !
� t
COM3ression Reinio.rcement (not required for moment listed for.. d.efil Lion --c--- � phi'h7' rhos
Bar No. � Spacing quantity A sibar NS � i
'of 6acs --------- (in�Z� P-rovided
CinA2) (in) Cn) (ft-K) i
Ct n)
6 Z OA4 0.88 _ 1.88 20.63
i
- i
1
1
ShearCheek �/� Vs Vn*PhiMEP-W vu
Bar No. I Legs Av spacing (K)(K) (K)
(quantity) , (i�^Z) ;.(inches)(K1i
4 � 2 o,79 10.00 j 3415 106,03 119.15 6*80
l
Page 6
MU-M I
(ft-K)
Ratio
Calculated
/Allowable
Od,06
KNOR
CD
C
CD
CD
R,,V;I. Feck,
vrolect
earn
I
.Iow� - —
Beam 1
a
%j+
e a rn
e a rn
-r -u L
i - 2 0 2 'm `2 0"
e fi ect. C e c k
Ec
j (p Sam))
3.60E+06
.............
I
n
8.04
Width
(in)
S vs. c h C o% UrIt'l
o n
Faris StE
Phase 2 - Fa.dk."
fr
Y9 Ig
A
n 4) (psi
kin.) t
4741
13.13 1 111215 1
................ p .......... llllp.�
k
n* rh o
-rfio
0.20
0.00327 0,03
Flanqe section
1)
Ci n)
L
VE
fft (ft-K)
(in) K)
1.2
40.8
10 7i8i
0,93
Cracked Concrete Sedict,
Area
(in)
4.60 5503
..................... 12
Inertia Values
le
Ig Icr
' A 1 (in,14)
i n 4) (i nA4)
29667 1 3239E+08
Web Section
Now ------
D epth Area Area
Width I (inl%2)
0
In. I (in)' (infl2)
0
12 -------
e fl
Liv e Ld..- U d
ectj.�oTj Ratio
I governs
(inA4) C' n) 12
554 980 > 360 OK
05000
I i t215
Rage 7
0 1
5 5,3 "a,
i
-Y
(in)
Ma 3 FC2
*.o 2-11 1
PreDaTed b�)rft CJF%
19 a
Steel
Eq. Area
nftAs
Cin^2)
2530 tell
il
i
L
t
M
C=)
C=
CD
CD
r
I
FES-14-02 THU 11'40 AN
FAX NO, 0
ps 17
%woo o
C
Lo�
REV. ==mom
CO m pa c H K a -
000L DA-f E
# L DATE %....
DATE
u uo� f-**)A')
0-f
u'.00.
0i
uo h)D
3 f c
F"10 .000
j
6 6 %J ez (AV t I -IL
ITO
MOIFF
4pw
lk Tw
I�D
4A
�.A
eloo
PROJECT.!I.
FILE NO-@�'N&V&- mp-�—m ..... W.M.Wo aft" ftp�
o PAGES 4--d"
PA G E
vie, /I
r
"oppo
AdZ
1 ZF 5 f=�
it j (ZW'4'0
\tv. 6 e i:�k Cr_-
0orn I
wm%iftoj eet N o 'D C�6,9
Fqo. 0 ID
JL
Ib
C;j
Ity 4r
m
41�
g
46-4ft
Lo-ads
Concrete Wall I Ou-t Of P an
-------- Desiqn
par-amenters
Nmensions
I concrete S tee[ Tri.but���,
P===-. Width
V4*tdth e
F C I FY
Tot I Effectiv (psi) (psi)
-T (inches)
(inches)
cinches)
60,100{)
-------- 470DO I
i 107 9 112'9
12 12
Imensions Distribution Factors. -----------
Wal I D-
; VVIO d t h Height Wi dth Length
0
13,00 1
Dead
(pso
- — - — - - =Now
16,00 1
Unit Loads
r m
� S 'Carill
(pso _j
m
(KSD
7707792
919
0,70
Total
(pSf)
919
0,30 ---------
Distributed Load
Width Height
p =io
v mu vu
(Ksi) (Ksi
(Ksi) I
4.16
5.82
279
Page I
Max M
Width
oments
Height
ft.mK) (1140 M)
7.72
i
5-10
T
MaK Shear
Width I Height
WK) (ft-K)
4.15 2.23
S
rml r- 4 e: 2J I Zat 0 2
A,F C% %,
1014
a-eu by: CovR
Prepar%--�,
40t
vp
a
Sa
A-01
CD
M.)
.w m
CD
t
AAM%
Co
RY B �
F7rn:
1
Sic d ra n n c.-s
V ' : i
R- Dztn
concrete Wall
Re-Inforcement Desk
Del u Prter
Cairns �
i Concrete : Steel
Wth
tal * FIC
�� ■ 1
(inches)
n c hes ! 1 r
i
. I r
T 2 MAN
2 1 2 J
(1 Ft striP) -
•
•
I
Ol�ed 13-arLoads
tt
Dead soil
TotalUnIt Loads (OUt-Of-plane Dead I w S - G11 r ail � - •
-- (Pff) (Pff) ��(Pn!
(Psfl
64
919
i
EtesAn Moment
n Shear Value
•V Mu Vu
'
Span M'
(Ks! Ki
3.7.72 4A 6
i
T
Pag
a
' 2
1
I
•
ate::
r-:-1rd by-. CJIR
i
M
I
F -R,
jAef,
I r:�� -w
No.
A
c 0; 4pM a
ity
Tr
rne -a
r-(PxuTa! Relinforcement
As (413) A s As t
Phi K a ------ - - -1
a d
re-q ternp.
.&5VC b
- ----- lin'12)
(Mchas) ('n&2) ----L-
40�
034 o.2.6
'3431.12 0 0.38
-----------
rho bat r'hO max
As max hethal
As
Govems
Cl n A2) ------
(in A2)
. .........
g28s 0,0214
0. 2 2,44
tion
ReArtforcem.eTit.4-elec
............ ps pf a v rho I
Astbar As I As reil"d A-sl(tpd)
provIde-d I I-
0. ratio
(tn A2) - rato
(in) (in'12-)
5 12 0.31 u.31 o.002691
Shilear Check
BarTo, t Legs
4
spacing
AIV
A2) (I ncbes)
i n
4.751
rho
I rho Max
ral-5'o
lb
Vc V S
( (Kl� (K)
K)
14.42
Pagcftwk3
I
t
al 3 ;1
40
Minimum
�Vi d th
4.63
VIt
'n Ph I vu
1 Z2G..l
I
a
9
--% � Z, w
:JabRI: 2.1-110"110,12
Ir 0 IR
%w--ared L
,aft
Mir
ZE>
CD
CD
p Inc.
,,V,jF. Beck....,
VOMN M.- e
j NO. I
n 4
Tf-.,c t S1 r%. C u �jf j
a -,. ;W-f
49-
C -1 V I JPJS
T -w1FEdmo.ri;.A
,,,y L a
u Ift StZect 0 Wal N 1)
no Loads
Concrete Wall 2 Out of Pla
A6
Paramentersi-
':Des
Dimensions
concrete! St" I
Depth
Width
PC I Fy
Effective ..........
Total
Sd (psi)
(P
(inch,es) Onches)
'inches)
- 60,000
41000
91/2 -
12 12.
-----------
istribution -F—actors�
Wali oimensions D
Length
Width Height Wi dth
OW50
16.00 16000
Distributed Load
Unit Loads Total Width Height
Dead So.il
(PSO (P:sf) & f)
919 459 459
Vu
m V Mu mphp—
EE (Ksi)
I�Ksj) (Kq (Kso
...........
3.67 11.76 1 5j 4 1
8.40 1 -
Page I
i
qr
Tributary I
Width
S
Max Moments I
Width Height
(ft,K) _ I (ft- K�
Max Shear --
Width Height
(fto-K)--. (Ft-K)
-- 0 3,67
8.40 8.4
3.67
4 .6
P au arce. d by: CJFZ
a
""In
m
w
r-%,,$, .0n,*
0.0
a
i
C;
,tv 0�
ft F.'I
MP
n
concrete Mill Slab Des Sn
wmensions
Depth
VV id th 1
Total Effecthye
V"r,hCOSI i Cinches) (7nches)
c�eslcn Parameniers i
oncrete stee
Fy
(psi)
600
4 000 1
12
I Ft strip)
Out -of -Plane Loads
I
Mna, Distri 70;
UnIt Loads fout-Of.-Plaul
Total w Dead w SOAI w Total
Dead SDII
(pin
(PSf) - (p
.................. 4531
919 459
Moment and She3r Valu.es:
Design,
V Mu Vu
(K
span i (KSI) (Ksi)
F—i i6,
(1F441,) -(Ksi) ---------
w
5.141
11.76 't
sAu 3.67 1
N
Page 7-
viru
(p,if)
T�jj
I
0
CD
r MR
.)nv*.c,a 21,! V02
e 4k 4�
a, a Z. pare-, ci
Beck, I m
p rOj N o
3 k 0004!
C_75
Flexural Relryforeament =>
4J3)As Ast
A s
K I
Phi ern
mgsf%c b req'd
nA 2)
it in,
finches)
__Fffil -1 �.nc
1 0-37 0.26 1 -----------
1 0041 0.28
36720 _-mop---
0. 9no
bal rho max
thal rho
As-. As Max t�e
Govems
A A --
in 2) tn,%2)
I - 0.0295 0.0214
Z44 1 0.8
10.28
ReInto- Gement Se t1or' MInImUm
rho
rho
As As prov j
sar _N o. spacing Aslb�ar req'd Ast(bd) I rho max I Width
provided I AS lw.�
...Mp� v =>
A rato raqo ><
(in) On 2)
4.63 CD
0-31 1 LO. 3 1 1,09
CD
Shear Check Vs VnftPhI Vu
Vc
pa CIn a ..... (K)
'Bar Not ags -AV (K)
(K)
(h.1%2)
..... 5.14 i
14-42 1 42.25
4.75
A4
0
k�
1111��
P2ge 3
FEB-14-02 THU 11'43 AN
FAX NO, 0 Ps 24
s .4- L
cr......
00 . REV,
COW. e7 oil DATE
MEN
DATE
DAIE
T—yz,k uo D
Ir
'rbb
LA V
0
MOM
o
k-d �v
JAI
ol--p�
PROJECY.1 I—
f ILE
OF PA G E S
PAGE.,'Z�
fzp
d
4hp P'd. sm-4m,
up
Av
BC;.�, 1 017040 C
e
595.1 C 90
prer..aH2O tot
a
eft.qy ol" Edmonds
ift Si # I R P P. o v a t1c r,
U mtta n
rati ;I, u 13 0 1) T-t
Seam for G 'I C1
_MWE--�
qmw-
E S hort term. -
Fy
(Ks, Load factor
fKsl)
V
1 29sOOO
-4- istructural sleel
S -ucturat Elements
tr
d I tf A
b a
Section I I -
M ark I - v Cin'%2)
nche
Cinches) c 1i e s�) 0 S)
.............
IL -
0280 3255
Beam -SIMP!e Spani WW2
or beniding
Desian
W x Px Impact
Span
Mark I factor
(KIO
an
simple span
G reL B e2 rn
Mark L unsupp,
I I
41
Ofig Be% 13,00 1
Mark
rajing Beam
G
11,00
Lc
ft 1%
410 .1
--- dEE-
......
-simple Span 1
mw�
0#29
rt
1,05 1 148.57
DesLqn for she-ar
I fv I Fv
v
Ksi
Ips) (Ksj)
14.40
1487
Page
L
D a t
Ik r-
preo=red b CJR
f
rx- Av b It
ry
ry
A
(in-A4) (i n 2)
L(i rh e s) (i n 01 e s)
........
I 7A 4
22-10 a
Ap
IA
(ft.MKO')
6,06
Joao
tatio n
Allowable Bending StreSs COM
Cb U"ft I UnIvit 2
If It
119802 1
53.23 i
fv]Fv
ratio
--ZP
0.013
7.370
f-b
Ksi)
7531
Fb
(Ksl
7*70
I Fb 2 Fb 3
Fb I
(Ksi)
(KsO- (Ksi)-
*5,3 0 1 7,70 14036
L
fb/Fb
ratio
Govems
Fb
7.70
SISO
CD
rQ
FEB-14-02 THU 11'44 AN
FAX NO, 0
Ps 26
t
1
TI a- >iI-ha
i
tr �r ■ii
_....... ..�
4~
C o m P.
1 r DATE
.. #_ DAI
�.�
DAT E
a
.i • �
r
r
i
i
�Z I tLoo �6
V
r0 It-o"I r
IN
C�n p Goo
A
III
p C T
FILE .i,--#--�...w.._;
P A G E o P A (','E S
i
i
+ 1
w ,
1
� � 1
4.....
F
* 41 ; ■4 - .
tr�■r ■+ ��i�` y - 4
•
iz
I
FEB-14-02 THU 11'45 AN
w
-1
FAX NO, 0
Ps 27
4
R.W. 13(�CI Inc.
Prolec� No.:
Date% 2JI 03/02
0
Prepared by: ('0'JR
...... concrete Bmcket
ft dh. 41' __ --.b PI - - - - - - are
w
M_ I te rs
dw aw-PINI -M Design-Paramen
DinienslO rs S Mw 'embomw-w . � — �*
a& *won 0 Concrete steel ------- P,
Deptl
.I
Widtlimmuo ....... . .. ..........
Total Effective _I eve r �FIL- .0IIIIIIIIII
w Psi)
nches) M.MP -(PS)I MEMEMMER".
(41ches) 101� 4
a 'I ..... P ... v,s�
. .......... . .....
41000 60,000
20112
24 23
.. ........
...I .. MI T. b ...... PI jdp M U ft"EMftwe a ..ft ...... M.
MMMMI Nu
P U (Ks
P N .............. (K si) ............
4 4 611 - (KQ (Ksi) op ............. P .
FK) ddiv IF .0 4P==Mdhr4I
(K) .... W.AI
(.K). a
(K) NI
'p—__ft-fth 0 -1
2s60 4.42
4.42 121 Ap"
1.3
__' t ,
. . ........... -------
ModoodombI -------- 13 As (112 Ast
-ietit As min
.info rcen
Flexural P ..... . d'
44fth As
-4h An
4MW '!&I &� � "_ w . _90MMI ^� ft IMMENEIIIAMI
K Af 04Vclfy*bd
- �M �qp-
P III =Af +An
NIP. II 0IIIIII, _4IIIIII, d re q 1 d (in 1%2)
mqLa .040— � 2) (i n 2)
�M. kn
'985flc b 0 P__P - — - A& A2) Joan
I A n 2) (1 n %* -------
inches) (in - 2)
�Mmw 6 0,07 0*50
1.31
0 t05
0,00
% 9 13 6 0 04,04 0.05
0.85 ...................
RPM...
0� M� .� ............. hi ......... -------- --------- we
IIIIIIII�Mw -.0 bethal rho bal Th 0 max -------
Asmax ................. ........
A s ---------
....... 0I
Guvn.rns ..... ------
MI -0 -0 � -"
(i n A ..........
46 -P . . . . . .
qp� 4.h a
0.0285 0,0214 .......
10052 0 8 SIIIIIIIIIII� III, w
MMMMMI
"Mop., ....... . MMMMMp g"d ... . .
haMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIm ............. ....... .
MEMPft
W� 41- 4bodEMMI
-4pp, OP UM Spacing
GPM -------
election Minim
rho
R6 nf a rce. me nt IS
rho
j�;
A s Asyrov
MEMO 6 R e q!d w-EPI
Width
Asibar I rho M3X
11ti t Y OP—
Lia
ded I As req'd As/(b d)
rov I
Al (tnchesL Inc (3`��')
P 0 a 0 w w w r --- III
rabo
tio ratio ........... .........
A 2) Cin
n
. . . . . . . J%2)
mr"P'F�-p
8450
...........
00,13 P'I ........... ...
------ Pr_ 0.0026,94
0,044
d- le
Jj
or a —PI
.4LO
............
-w ........... PI
11PId" 1v n* h V U
in f orcerne nt am~
-1 r R e. Vs 4MI
4 . w V C dpmmmwp—
'Now Apr
acl
J'w .14 S (K) 4111-1
Av
4-
:w K)
I Legs Roo (K)
A S
n......
MI
O..4p_
_jMMMMMM=j
0
'r .-P 2.90 4,42
MM.I M
i-A. 62.23 --------
edp. 11 8 MI . '. 0
00 - 0 ...
4
.Mdp
M__I
'*MMMM=M& 26507ol
'71 0,441786
"III . ..... 2a25 875
0.. OMNI
:F
T.
�0-
i r F—
T.
4 A
A&
. _.. . , ".-I ** *j* IIIIIIIIIIIIo 00 " P-10
0 ... "..&% -vveft $0"I"S
t
9
%2cvrc%.f11 IIL.u1 . 1%;-PNv9 ti
Edmonds Lift Station No. 1
450 Sunset Avenue
Edmonds, Washington
1 s
V E O T E H I L AND D ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
+ ` � rr { i� t � � r • •R � � ' i1 Ri . 1 i • • T � � • �. a r � + � { R .+ a � � i + j ; i # � # ■ J/ � j +� f 1 ' w R - � ++ R r
Octole-%
o%J %J 1 '1
[ I..I
Submitted To:
R.W. Beck
2101 Fourth Avenue,, Suite 600
Seattle, Washington 98121-2375
By:
Shannon & Wilson, Inc.
400 N 34'h Street, Suite 100
Seattle, Washington 98103
21-1-09487--001
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Lo 1
2*0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION q Q o9po poe 00 **GaGA0000-00 08064 0 60 0* owes me 0 Do** 00049 0.00.0 644,00 60 a 1
3*0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS
4,0 LABORATORY TESTING 3
5.0 SUBSURFACE COND IONS 3
6.0 GROUNDWATER MEASUREMENTS S...... **of 6.6 0 56#00.0 09 0WO&O6.0099 6*0 0*0 009 on 64 &a 00*0*000608 0*0406 a see sees on oo*4
7.0 ENGINEERING CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 00069 4
7al Slope Stability 0 Dona 0600*00 so* Dow*#*@ 0000000 6000606 an 606606**66 goo on 64 as*@ goo *a *6*8 @*goo* so 04 090 no* 5
7,2 Seismic Considerations 5
7.3 Vault Desicyn Considerations... 6.9 9 Iva* 000-mose 00 9 name 640000A a pool@ gone 040 6*0.0 0 am&* 006006*96 goo&@ a 09196 66
7.3.1 FoundationS .. on 0 voo*&**@ 0 0*16 SIR & 16004 so IDEA **&* a 0 a 0 0 W 0 a a Is a sk 0 IP a 0 a 40 a a 86
7*302 Lateral Earth Pressure.-51 10 bW*49*ffio6*s **see 6600*4 on meow**** me *a 66004, &**,040o 0066684 0 oono*0040000 be&@&* 7
7.3*3 Vault Sliding 02*0 am 606*84 *00006 so *see so ago ae9q0&o00**0 0090000 now***** POS060*69 amp* named 000 8
7.14 Estimated Settlements. Sao no *a **@won &boom 60 IPS040 8*8 0000600 6 090*90 0008*09 eve@@ 0"4& 06*0&6*00 so 9000416 9
74
.7,5
7,6
7o3*5 Buoyancy and Structure Upli ft a. 0 * 0 * 0 0 a 6 6 * 0 0 0 0 a 6 0 a 0 * 0 a 0 a 0 a a 0 a a a 0 * a 0 0 0 0 & 0 a 0 a * 0 0 0 9 0 6 6 a * 0 # 9 9 0 & a 0 !)
7.16 Drainage ..see we wee 8"'000,009 ft.q.668 16*0 so 0*060 64**Oa *60 6690006as*4 0*00080 goo&@ a 880606 so 10
Earthworkago go 0866418400606 @ease 999,9*846990 0#aV040e**Oq SOOM&6*4 of mq*&64s***ad 0*0064 @go 60*0 60004 0*00088 600409** Do*@* moves@ 10
74,4* 1
7.4.,2
7,43 -
7,4,4
7,0405
7..466
7o4o7
Aspha
Additi
Site Preparation and Excavation a*oe e 99 son &*a boo s*.*9 a&@ *eve 80*00 0*09mo* 10
Excavation Sloping and Shorincy 0 6 0 0 11
4:)
Fill Placement and Compaction 12
Reuse of On —site Soils. . a 0 0 0 a a 0 4 & a a 6 * 9 a 6 0 saso-Ima bosoms 960*6668 age 12
Wet Weather Earthwork bases we no* 006099904 a* 0*6*006 s 000*0000 6 60 13
090 0S**04 a *go 666*600086 @moos* 14
Erosion Control 14
It Pavement Recommendations 01 0 a 0 V a G. a r a 14
14
onal Services
8.0 15
21-1-094 87 - 00 1. R I /wp[LKD
i
21-1-09487-001
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)
Figure No.
i
2
Appendix
Vicinity Map
Site Plan
LIST or GURE S
LIST OF APPEl\'DICES
Subsurface Explorations and Laboratory Test Results
important Information About You-7 Geotechnical Report
ii
21-1-09487-001
■
a
hp
+ ! + i 1 • - F es• a • .�.. _# '. J f .. ; i X i
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
EDMoNDs LIFT STATION NO. 1
450 SUNSET AVENUES EDMONIDS� WASHINGTON
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of subsurface explorations and geotechnical engineering studies
for proposed construction of a concrete dry well 'vault beneath Sunset Avenue in Edmonds,
Washington. The purpose of our work was to evaluate soil and groundwater conditions at the
site and to provide recommendations to assist in design of the proposed structure.
Our work was authorized by R.W. Beck under a Subconsultant Agreement to their Contract No.
DC99087 with City of Edmonds, dated March 8,2001, amended August 10, 20019 We
countersigned this subconsultant agreement on September 6, 2001.
2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed vault would be buried beneath Sunset Avenue in the western half of the asphalt
p4*
aved roadway, at approximately 450 Sunset Avenue, Edmonds, Washington (see Figure 1).
The project consists of upgrading the existing Edmonds Lift Station No. I. The upgrade includes
converting the existing dry w
expanded vet well and const
existing vault (see Figure 2).
ruction of a new dry well (vault) adjacen
ell (vault) that is buried beneath the roadway at this location into an
t to the south side of the
The proposed vault would be approximately 16 feet by 15 feet in plan {in the north -south and
east -west directions, respectively}. The top of the vault floor and roof slabs would be
approximately 16 feet and 1.1 feet below the existing ground surface, respectively. The existing
and proposed top of pavement elevation at the proposed vault location is'approximately
28.3 feet. We understand that the floor slab elevation for the. proposed vault will be the same as
the floor slab elevation of the existing vault.
The west face of the vault would nearly coincide with the west curb of Sunset Avenue. West of
this curb the ground extends relatively horizontally for a few feet before sloping steeply down to
the west. The slope inclination varies from approximately 30 to 45 degrees and has a height of
approximately 14 to 15 feet. The slope is generally covered with vegetation. Two main -line
21-1-09487-001
I
I
railroad tracks, operated by Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF), are constructed
along the toe of the slope. These tracks generally parallel Sunset Avenue. Vest of the railroad
tracks the ground slopes down to a beach on Puget So
is protected from erosion by a riprap bulkhead,.
und. The slope west of the railroad tracks
3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS
Explorations at the site consisted of drilling a single soil boring, designated as B-1. This boring
was accomplished with truck -mounted drilling equipment on September 19, 2001, by Geo-Tech,
Inc. of Kent, Washington, using aMobile B-59 drill rig. A hollow -stem auger was used to
.ats,a 1-,nA,,� t n a rlpnth of annmxim7tPly 1i fPP-t_ Rec'aufie (�f Qi'Otlt'l(� heave. the remainder
remainder
L1l.:VQ1I\+li lll� L1V1111� 6V 4t <iVrlill vA
urriv��aaaa..«vaJ
...v
�......�. �-��-----._
__ �___
�
depth of about 51.5 feet. The location of this boring is indicated on Figure 2. This location was
obtained by tape measurement from nearby featu.-es and should be considered approximate. The
log for this boring is presented on Figure A-2 in Appendix A. A key to symbols and descriptions
used on the boring log is presented on Figure A-L
Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) were performed at 2.5- and 5-foot depth intervals. The SPT
consists of driving a 2--inch outside-diameter (O.D.) split -spoon sampler a distance of 1.8 inches
into the bottom of the borehole with a 140-pound hammer falling 30.1'nches. The number of
blows required to drive the sampler each of three 6-inch increments was recorded. The number
of blows required to cause the lash 12 inches of penetration is termed the Standard Penetration
Resistance (N-value
). This value
soils. Whenever 54 or more blow
is an indicator Df the relative density or consistency of the
s were required to cause 6 inches of penetration, driving was
stopped and the number of blows and corresponding penetration recorded. Samples recovered
from the split spoon sampler are disturbed but are representative of the soils encountered. The
samples were field classified and recorded on the logs by field personnel, sealed in j*ars and
returned to our laboratory for testing. The results of the SPTs are plotted on the boring log
(Figure A-2).
A groundwater monitoring well was installed in the boring. The monitoring well consists of
slotted and blank sections of 2-inch-diameter polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe. The annulus
surrounding the PVC pipe was backfilled with a sand filter to an elevation approximately 2 feet
above the top of the slotted portion. Bentonite chips were used to fill the annulus and to seal the
boring from the base of the hole to the. bottom of the sand pack and from the top of the sand filter
21-1-09487-001
2
I
to approximately 2 feet below trade. The uppermost approximately 2 feed of the boring was
backfilled with concrete. To protect the monitoring well from damage and vandalism, a flush -
mounted (flush with the ground surface) steel monument was concreted in mace over the ton of
the well. The water level was measured in this mon
of measurement and the water elevation r
1 L
it0finc,tP well on September 25, 200131,
this date
ecorded are indicated on the boring log (Fibure A-2).
4.0 LABORATORY TESTING
All samples obtained from the exploration were taken to our laboratory in Seattle where each
was visually classified and its water content determined. Classifications and moisture contents
were performed in general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
D 2487 and ASTM D 2216, respectively. Moisture contents and sample classifications are
shown on the exploration log {Figure A-2).
Soil grain -size determinations were made on two selected samples according to the procedures
outlined in ASTM D 422. The grain -size distribution curves are presented on Figure A-3.
5.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Medium dense to dense, slightly gravelly', silty sand to sandy silt underlies the asphalt at the
boring location to a depth of approximately 6.5 feet. In our opinion, this material is likely fill.
Very dense, naive soils were observed below 6.5 feet to the bottom of the boring at 51.5 feet.
Descriptions of the. soils and the approximate de
shown on the boring log, Figure A-29
pth to contacts between adjacent soil layers are
In our opinion, fill thickness and the elevation of the fill -native soil contact likely vanes across
the site. We have not performed explorations to better define the fill thickness or its variability.
Adjacent to the existing vault, fill material likely extends from just below the pavement to the
bottom of that vault. This fill would have been placed to backfill around the existing vault
during its construction. Material used to backfill. the existing vault may be different from the fill
material sampled in boring B-1. This backfill likely extends to the bottom of the existing vault.
Based on design drawings for the existing vault, a minimum of 4 inches of washed gravel was
planned to be placed under the bottom slab prior to concrete placement (Sewage Disposal
Facilities, Sunset Ave Lift Station, by James H. Reid and Associates, Sheets 17 and 18 of 19,
dated 2-28 57). Based on our understanding of common practice for this type of construction in
2 I -1- 094 87 - 00 1. R l wp/Li D
3
21-1-09487-001
u
the late 1950s and symbols shown on the referenced drawinors-) the existing vault is likely
backfilled with granular soil. We did not perform a boring that penetrated this backfill and have
no information about the density of this existing backfill material.
6.0 GROUNDWATER M[EASURE, MENTS
A higher soil moisture content was determined for the sample taken at 20 feet than was
determined for the soil samples at shallower depths. Wet soils were encountered during drilling
of boring B-I at a depth of 23 to 24 feet at approximately 9:10 a.m. on September 19, 2001. A
Shannon & Wilson representative returned to the site to develop the well on September 25. On
this date, the groundwater level in the. observation well was measured at approximately 19.8 feet
hPInxv the ground surface at about 9:11 a.m. To develop the well, approximately 7 gallons of
an approximately 80-minute period.
evel were then made to observe well recovery. At 11:30
a.m., approximateiy ou minutes aster pumping from the well stopped, the groundwater 1eve1
appeared to stabilize at a depth of approximately 22.2 feet below the ground surface,
water was nte ittentiv pumped from the well over
Measurements of the groundwater I
0 It
Groundwater levels observed at the time of drilling and measured soon after we arrived at the
site on September 25, 2001 (prior to well develoFment) are presented on the boring log (Figure
A-2)4
Groundwater levels below the site may be influenced by tidal fluctuations in the Puget Sound.
However, we have insufficient data to assess the relationship, if any, of groundwater level to
Puget Sound tides,. Multiple measurements made over a few days would be necessary to
determine if such a relationship exists. This monitoring could be performed manually or with an
automatic data recorder that could .be installed in the well.
7.0 ENGINEERING CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMiVIENDATIONS
The proposed project vwi11 consist of pavement removal, excavation to approximately 16 feet
below the pavement surface, construction of an approximately 16-foot by 15-foot concrete dry
well vault, backfll. placement around the vault, and paving of disturbed areas.
Based on the data obtained from our field explorations and our experience with similar projects,
engineering studies were performed to develop recommendations regarding the geotechnical.
aspects of this project. The following sections present our conclusions and recommendations.
21-1-09487-001
al
u
i � � 1 + # i! � i a � � ■ } y y � 4
7.1 Slope Stability
In general, the land surrounding the project area, including the residential area east of the site,
slopes gently to the west, toward Pucret Sound. Construction of roadways, houses, and the
railroad has resulted in the creation of a series of benches on this slope. Our scope of work did
not include evaluating the stability of this slope. We did not, however, observe any cracks in the
existing roadway pavement or offsets in the curb. We also note that the existing dry well has
reportedly performed satisfactorily since its construction in 1958.
An approximately 10- to IS -foot -high, reIatively steep slope, 30 to 45 deorC�reesdegrees,separates the west
side of Sunset Avenue and the east side of the BNSF tracks. This slope is generally covered with
vegetation. Our scope of work did not include performing a reconnaissance of this slope, nor did
we perform slope stability analyses. Shallow slides and sloughing may occur on the slope face.
Gradual erosion and eastward regression of this slope due to the forces of wind, rain,
�round`vater seepage, wettin�/drying, and freeze/haw
cycles may
occur and be expected
to
continue to occur. Erosion may also be accelerated bv
neonle and
animas traversing the
slope:
J 1 1 V 1
we observed one apparent path on the slope bclovi Sunset Avenue.
We recommend that the slope between Sunset Avenue and the Railroad be disturbed as little as
practical. Where this slope is disturbed, we recommend that it be reconstructed with compacted
granular soil to its approximate existinb confiburation or to a more stable configuration that
would result from flattening the slope. We recorrmend that areas disturbed by the proposed
construction and other areas where earth is exposed be vegetated to protect the slope from
erosion. Temporary erosion protection measures may be necessary during construction and until
vegetation is established following can
maintained to reduce slope erosion and
7*2 Seismic Considerations
struction. We recommend that vegetation on the slope be
the rate of eastward regression.
We have assumed that the seismic design of the proposed structure would be based on the
provisions of the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC). The site is located in UBC Seismic
Zone 3 (Z=0.3). Based on our explorations, the vault would be constructed on very dense soil.
In our opinion, these materials correspond to UBC Soil Profile Type S,
In our opinion, the medium dense to very dense soils observed in boring B-1 are not susceptible
to liquefaction during an earthquake. Consequently., no mitigation for liquefaction potential is
required.
21-1-09487-001
5
■
t
u
Thes,teenslone between Sunset Avenue and the BNSF railroad tracks may experience sloucrhincr
or shallow failures during a seis
� � v v
mic event. Sloughing and shallow failures are more likely to
occur 1t the grouncl is saturatea wnen one grounci shaking occurs. Hoti�ever, in our opinion, the
probability of these types of failures occurring is low. Furthermore, should sloughing and
shallow failures occur on the slope, in our opinion, they are unlikely to adversely impact the
proposed vault, as the, bottom of the vault would be set
elevation near the elevation o
f the railroad tracks. This
back from the face of the slope and at an
d1h
opinion is based on our observation of
seep slopes north and south of the project area and our experience
stability analyses.
7*3 Vault Design Considerations
7.3.1 Foundation
. We did not perform slope
The results of the field explorations indicate that below the elevation of the proposed
vault bottom, the site is generally underlain by very dense, glacially overridden, sandy silt and
silty sand. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered, we recommend that the vault be
constructed so that it bears uniformly on this soil across its base.
We recommend that an allowable bearing capacity.of 6 kips per square foot (ksf) be used
for design of the proposed vault. This recommendation is
_ 1 _
annlicable for a uniform elevation
bottom stab located greater than lu leet t)eiow tn� grouna suriace ana rounaea on very aense,
0
native silty sands and sandy slits. This recommendation is also contingent upon the following
considerations:
a} Foundation preparation should include clearing of all organics and loose, soft, wet, or
disturbed soil prior to reinforced concrete placement. If loose, soft, or unsuitable soil
is encountered or develops below the foundation level, the subbrade should be
overexcavated to suitable bearing soil. The overexcavated portion may be backfilled
with a compacted granular structural fill, controlled density fill (CDF), or lean
concrete.
b} After excavating to the desired depth and prior to placing the concrete bottom slab,
the foundation soils should be smoothed, graded, and well compacted to a minimum
of 95 percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557)0
c} If construction is to take place in wet weather, we recommend that a thin layer (2 to
3 inches) of lean concrete or at least 6 inches of compacted, well -graded, clean sand
and gravel {less than 5 percent by dry weight passing the Na. 200 standard sieve
based on the 3/a-inch minus fraction} be placed immediately after excavating to serve
1-1- 9 - 001_ R I p/LID
R
21-1-09487-001
I
- -* � # � + - - 4 � + � � # # ter` , � �� � - � i i• � �
as a working surface. Surface water should be directed away from the excavation and
the excavation should be kept free of water at all times.
d) The foundation excavation should be evaluated by a representative of our firm to
confirm suitable bearing conditions and to determine that all loose materials have
been removed. This should be accomplished immediately prior to the placement of
concrete or the working surface.
7.3.2 Lateral Earth Pressures
The vault walls should be designed to withstand external soil pressures and lateral loads
associated with traffic surcharge. Lateral earth pressure against buried walls is dependent on the
method of backfill placement and degree of compaction, backf�ll slope, type of backfill. material,
drainage provisions, and whether or not the wall can yield laterally after or during placement of
the backfill. The Proposed vault walls would be considered rigid walls, because they would be
restrained from moving at the top. Under this condition, at -rest lateral earth pressures will act on
the wall. If the wall were allowed to move horizontally, or to rotate so that the top of the wall
moves an amount equal to about 0.001 times its height, the soil pressures exerted against the wall
would decrease to active earth pressure values.
It is assumed that for the proposed vault walls, at -rest earth pressures will prevail (i.e., the
top of the wall is laterally restrained. For this condition we recommend an at -rest earth pressure
coefficient, K,,, equal to 0.51
(EFD) is 70 pounds per cubic
below the groundwater level.
The corresponding at -rest earth pressure equivalent fluid density
foot (pcf) for soil above the groundwater level and 36 pcf for soil
These parameters assume well -compacted moist soli with a
friction angle of 32 degrees and unit weight of 130 Pcf.
The lateral earth pressures presented in this section assume that groundwater pressure
does not act on the walls. Based on our groundwater measurements in boring B-1 and our
observation that the soil appears to be generally well drained, in our opinion, water pressures
would not be expected to act on the walls. However, if a higher groundwater condition is
anticipated, groundwater pressures should be included in the analyses.
Lateral loads associated with surcharges applied by vehicles operating on Sunset Avenue
may also act on the walls. We'recommend that a uniform vertical surcharge Toad equivalent to
260 pounds per square foot (psf), equivalent to 2 feet of fill over the area, be Is in
calculations of lateral pressures acting on the walls. The lateral forces associated with this
21-1-09487-001
7
I
surcharge load, i.e., 140 psf (2 ft x 70 pcf) should be added to those computed for lateral loads
applied by backfill. and groundwater.
In our opinion, vault walls desianed for the recommended at -rest lateral earth pressures,
including a 260 psf surcharge load, should be sufficient to withstand transient loading that may
occur during a seismic event. This opinion includes consideration that the vault would be
completely buried, the distance from one side of the vault to the other would be relatively short,
and transient surcharge loads would not normally be applied simultaneously with earthquake
loads for wall design.
7.3.3 Vault Sliding
Because the ground on the west side of the vault slopes down to the railroad tracks, earth
pressures acting on the east side of the vault could potentially cause the vault to slide to the west.
This potential for movement would be resisted bNP passive earth pressure of soil acting on the
west vault wall and fricti
.0
on between the vault bottom and walls and adiacent soil. We evaluated
the sliain� potent�ai using information presen
J
ted on preliminary vault plans provided to us and
assuming the base of the vault would be located 16 feet below the ground surface but above the
elevation of the railroad tracks. We also assumed that the north and south vault wails
15 feet wide and that the north wall would be dow
eied and bonded to the existing vau
compute vault weight, the walls and top and bottom slabs were assumed to be S inche
constructed of concrete having a unit weight of 155 pcf.
would be
I t. To
s thick and
For our evaluation, we assumed that under static conditions, active earth pressures of
40 pcf EFD would act on the east wall of the vault. This active earth pressure assumes a soil
effective friction angle of 32 degrees and unit weight of 130 pcf. We assumed a coefficient of
friction of 0.45 between the proposed cast -in -place concrete bottom slab and underlying native
soils or structural fill and a coefficient of friction of 0.35 between formed concrete walls and
compacted backfill. Normal forces acting on the north existing vault wall and south proposed
vault wall were computed using at -rest earth pressures of 70 pcf EFD. Passive pressure against
the west wail of the vault was assumed to be 73 pcf EFD. This value assumes the tap of the
slope coincides with the west face of the vault, that the slope has an inclination of 40 degrees,
and that the native soil has an effective friction angle of 44 degrees, and includes a factor of
safety of 1.5. For seismic conditions, we assumed the active lateral pressures would increase by
30 percent above the static loads.
21-1-09487-001
L:
•
Jam, +i 3 ry a •
For the above -stated conditions and assumptions, we computed afactor-of-safely against
the vault sliding of 4.0 for static conditions and 3.0 for seismic conditions. In general, for
retaining structures, minimum acceptable factors-af-safety against slidinb of 2.0 and 1.5 are
applied for static and seismic conditions, respectively. The project team should determine the
appropriate acceptable factors-of-safety for the proposed vault. if vault design and location
would be. different from the conditions and assumptions presented above
sliding resistance be reevaluated.
v
we recommend that the
Passive pressure acting on the west wall of the proposed vault provides substantial
resistance to vault sliding. After construction, soil on the west side of the vault should not be
removed and should be protected from erosion or removal by others.
7.3.4 Estimated Settlements
Construction of the proposed vault would remove weight equivalent to approximately
14 feet of soil and reduce the bearing stress on soils under the vault by approximately 1,700 psf.
This reduction in stress is based on removal of a soil volume slightly less than the inferior
volume of the completed vault (14.5 feet by 13 feed by 14 feet high). If the vault excavation and
foundation preparation are performed in accordance with recommendations presented in this
report, in our opinion, post -construction settlement of the vault would be insignificant.
In our opinion, backfill material placed around the vault would be expected to settle
approximately 0.5 percent to 1.5 percent of the depth of the backfilL This assumes the backfill
meets the requirements for structural fill presented in this report and that it is comt)acted to a
minimum of 95 pe
1 L L
rcent of its Modified Proctor dry density (ASTM D 1557). Thus,
approximately I to 3 inches of bround surface settlement would be expected for the 16 feet depth
of backfill adjacent to the vault. Most of this settlement would be expected to occur in about
three to six months following completion of backfill placement, although some Ionger-term
settlement may occur.
7.3.5 Buoyancy and Structure Uplift
Groundwater observations during drilling and measured in the observation well indicate
that the groundwater level may generally be below the proposed vault bottom slab. For this
condition, i.e., groundwater level below the bottom of the structure, buoyancy need not be
addressed in the -design and construction of the structure. If, however, there is reason to believe
21-1-09487-OO1.R1/wp/LKD
21-1-09487-001
i
that the groundwater level may rise along the hillside, provisions should be included in the vault
design to compensate for potential uplift associated ��ith higher water levels.
7.3.6 Drainage
Groundwater was not encountered above the proposed bottom elevation of the vault.
However, surface water may infiltrate into the ground dufing wet weather. In our opinion, based
on the observed apparently well -drained conditions at the site and the presence of pavement over
the vault, installation of a drainage system around the vault is not necessary. The vault designer
may consider sealing the exterior of the vault to reduce seepage through the vault walls.
If there is reason to believe that the groundwater bevel may rise to levels higher than the
bottom elevation of the vault, we recommend that a drainpipe be installed around the perimeter
of the vault, near the bottom elevation of the footing. Subdrains should consist of a 4-inch-
diameter {minimum} perforated or slotted pipe embedded in washed pea gravel. A minimum of
4 inches of pea gravel should be placed below the pipe and a minimum of S inches over the pipe.
We recommend that water collected in the drain system be suitably discharged at an appropriate
location andlor hP. connected to a sewer system. Water should not discharge on the slope west of
-required to discharge water
Sun
and
set Avenue. Permission fr
om a
M
ffected property owners may be
install pipes on adjacent property. We recommend that cleanauts be provided for the drain
pipes so tnat tney can vC 111MIMIined.
0
If a drainage system is installed and functions properly, in our opinion, other provisions
to resist potential uplift of the vault would not be required.
7.4
Earthwork
7.4.1 Site Preparation and Excavation
We recommend that all asphalt and vegetation and surficial soils containing significant
amounts of roots
excavation. Thes
the structure.
and organics be stripped from the area to be excavated prior to beginning
e materials should not be mixed with soils that maybe used as backfill around
Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in boring B-1, it is anticipated that the
excavation would encounter medium dense fill to very dense glacially overridden soils. In our
opinion, these materials can be excavated using conventional excavating equipment such as
excavators. Ripping may be required to break up some of the soils. Loaders and trucks may be
21-1-09487-001
"R]
. - . , A :- V I i
required for material handling. It should be noted that some of the sons at the site have a high
sift content and are therefore susceptible to moisture chanties. These soils can deteriorate
quickly when exposed to water and become difficult to handle.
7.4.2 Excavation Sloping and Shoring
The excavation required for construction may be made with sloped sides and/or
temporary sharing. For planning purposes we recommend that the excavation side slopes in
medium dense fill materials and very dense native materials should be at least 1.5 Horizontal to
1 Vertical (1.5H: IV) and IH: 1V, respectively. These recommendations are applicable to slopes
less than 15 feet in height and in areas where groundwater and/or groundwater seepage is not
present. Benching of slopes maybe necessary. Flatter slopes may be required if the soils
become wet and if clean, granular zones are encountered. We recommend that all exposed cut
slopes be protected with a waterproof coverinb during periods of wet weather to reduce
slouching and erosion. Excavated material should not be stockpiled near the top of the
excavation.
Temporary shoring may be required for the excavation to protect existing utilities and
structures, maintain access along Sunset Avenue, protect the slope, andlor to provide a work
environment that complies with applicable safety regulations. Excavation slopes and shoring
should be the responsibility of the Contractor since the Contractor will be at the job site to
observe and control work. All current and applicable safety regulations regarding excavation
slopes and shoring- should be followed.
Is
Based on the boring performed at the site, the soil that would be retained by the shoring
system consists of medium dense granular fill overlying very dense native granular soils. The
depth of fill is expected to vary across the width of the excavation. Within the fill soils, an EFD
of 40' P cf is recommended for active earth pressures actin; on temporary shoring. Within the
glacially overridden native soils, a lower active earth pressure of 35 pcf can be used. These
recommendations assume that the soil retained by the shoring system is drained, i.e., there is no
buildup of water pressure behind the shoring. Earth pressures due to surcharge loads generated
by construction equipment, vehicles on Sunset Avenue, utilities, structures, etc., should be added
to the earth pressures due to soil. Surcharge pressures can be calculated by assuming a uniform
pressure distribution equivalent to the surcharge pressure times the at -rest earth pressure
coefficient (K. = 0853)o
21-1-09487-001
n
Excavations should not undermine the existing vault.
7*493 Fill Placement and Compaction
All fill placed below the vault structure, pavements, and sidewalks, or other areas where
settlements are to berprl"rprl1and ail backfill that is to develop passive resistance should consist
-'sand and gravel, free of
of structural fill. Structural fill should consist of reasonamy weir-graaea
organics and debris, with a maximum particle size of about 3 inches. Smaller maximum particle
size may be specified depending on application. Structural fill for vault structure backfill should
contain not more than 15 percent fipassingby weight, based on wet -sieving the soil fraction
the 3/4-inch sieve.
If earthwork takes place in wet weather or wet conditions, no matter what time of the
year, the structural fill material should contain no more than 5 percent fines (see Section 7.4.5).
Fines should be non -plastic. Except for the 5 percent fines content limit, this soil should
othenvise conform to the quality and gradation characteristics of the soil outlined in
Section 9-03.14(l) (Gravel Borrow) of Washington Department of Transportation
(WSDOT)/American Public Works Association (APWA) 2000 edition or an approved
equivalent. This soli would need to be imported to the site, as the existing site soils that will be
excavated do not generally conform to these requirements.
Structural fill should be placed in uniform layers. The thickness of soil layers before
compaction should not exceed S inches for heavy compactors and Ho-Pacs and 4 inches for
hand --operated, mechanical compactors. All structural fill should be compacted to a dense,
unyielding condition. We recommend that all backfill around the vault and beneath the roadway
be compacted to at least 95 percent of its Modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM
D 1557). In order to protect walls from structural damage, heavy compactors should not be used
within 3 feed of vault walls. Backfill should be brought up relatively uniformly around the vault,
i.e., backfill on one side of the structure should not be significantly higher than backfill on other
sides of the structure.
7.4.4 Reuse of On -site Soils
In beneral, most of the excavated on -site native soils would not be suitable for reuse as
structural fill because of the anticipated high fines contend of the soil (see Figure A-3). Fill
material encountered in the upper 6.5 feet of boring B-1 and anticipated to be generally present
below the pavement and around the existing vault may be suitable for structural fill. However,
21-1- 9 -00I RI wp[LKD
12
21-1-09487-001
i
+ • ' w +ram
- # � . � r • x # f.�-r � + r r • � 7 1, `; � � � • rt "�
grain size analyses were not performed on this material. On -site soils used for structural fill
should meet the requirements for structural fill and meet the following criteria: (1) they are free
of organics; (2) their water content doe
s not sicynificantly exceed the optimum water consent
required to obtain the specxtied compaction; �.j) oversized particles, i.e., boulders and cobbles
greater than 3 inches in dimension, are removed
during dry weather. Moisture conditioning, i.e.,
adjust the moisture content of t�
from these soils; and (4) the work is performed
drying or adding water, may be required to
iese soils to an appropriate level for compaction. Moisture
content of soi1s obtainea in samples from boring B-1 is presented on the boring log, Figure A-2.
During wet weather, much of the on -site soils would generally not be suitable for reuse as
structural fill because of their high fines content. Excavated soil to be reused as backfill. should
be covered to protect it from rain.
7.4.5 Wet Weather Earthwork
Most existing on -site soils and structural fill soils containing more than 5 percent fines
are anticipated to be moisture -sensitive. If earthwork is done during wet weather or under wet
conditions, the soils could become muddy and difficult to place, proof roll, and compact, and the
soils' moisture content could significantly exceed the optimum. Therefore, if earthwork takes
place in wet weather or wet conditions, the followincr recommendations should be followed:
► Fill material should consist of clean, granular soil, and not more than S percent fines (by
weight) should pass the No. 200 sieve, based on wet -sieving the soil fraction passing the
3/4-inch sieve. Fines should be non -plastic. These soils would have to be imported to
the site.
► Earthwork should be accomplished in small sections and carried through to completion to
reduce exposure to wet weather. Soils that become too wet for compaction should be re-
moved and replaced with clean, granular material.
10. Runoff should be directed away from the excavation and construction area.
'h
► To prevent soil disturbance, the size or type of equipment may have to be limited.
Work areas and soil stockpiles should be covered with plastic. Bales of straw and/or
geotextile slit fences should be used as appropriate to control soli erosion.
Excavation and fill placement should be observed on afull-time basis by a geotechnical
engineer (or engineer's representative) experienced in wet weather earthwork to
determine that unsuitable materials are removed and that suitable compaction and site
drainagel"s achieved. 9
21-1-09487-001
13
0
We recommend that these recommendations be included in the contract specifications.
7.4.6 Dewatering
Groundwater was not encountered above the anticipated bottom elevation of the
excavation for the proposed vault. Prov*Ided the groundwater elevation remains more than 2 feet
below the bottom of the proposed excavation level, dewaterincy-C� of the soils prior t
o excavation
would generally not be required. In our opinion, groundwater that may seep into the excavation
and rainwater that falls into the excavation could be contr
installed in the bottom of the excavation. Berms or other
to redirect runoff away from the. excavation.
7.4.7 erasion Control
r ,
oiled by means of sumps and pumps
0
diversion systems maybe appropriate
The Contractor should employ proper erasion control measures during construction,
especially if construction takes place during wet weather. Covering work areas, soil stockpiles,
or slopes with plastic; sandbags; sumps; and oche- measure
s should be employed as necessary to
permit proper completion of the work. Bales of straw, geotextile silt fences, and drain inlet
sediment screens/collection systems, should be appropriately located to control soil movement
and erosion.
7e5 Asphalt Pavement Recommendations
Shannon & Wilson was not requested to provide recommendation
understand that pavement and pavement base preparation and con
of Edmonds' Design and Construction Standards.
s for pavement restoration. We
struction will conform to City
As stated above, the backfill material around the vault may experience some settlement after
construction. We recommend that temporary pavement be installed following completion of
vault backfill. To provide a relatively uniform roadway surface, this pavement would likely
require removal and reapplication or application of a pavement overlay after fill settlement is
complete; approximately 3 to 6 months after completion of vault backfill.
7.6 Additional Services
We recommend that Shannon & Nilson, Inc. be retained to review the geotechnical aspects of
plans and specifications to -dete ine that they are consistent with these recommendations. In
addition, we should be retained to monitor the geotechnical aspects of construction, particularly
21-1-09 8 -00 I . 1 %N p/L D
14
21-1-09487-001
IL
' i I • sii
foundation preparation and backfill. This monitoring would allow us to evaluate the s
conditions as they are exposed during construction and to determine that the work is
accomplished in accordance with our recommendations and the project specifications.
8.0 LIMITATIONS
ubsurface
This report was prepared for the exclusive use of R.W. Beck, Inc. and the City of Edmonds for
v,nPrif;r. qnr,l;marinr, to the, design of the. nroDosedLift Station No. 1. at this site as it relates to
geotechnical aspects discussed in the report. The data and report should be provided to
prospective contractors and/or the Contractor nor intormation only. However, our report,
conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of subsurface conditions.
The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report were prepared in
accordance with generally accepted professional creotechnical engineering principles and practice
in this area at this time.
No other warranty, either- express or implied, is made.
The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based on site
conditions as they existed at the time of our visits to the site, and further assume that the
explorations are representative of the subsurface conditions throughout the site; i.e., the
subsurface conditions everywhere are not significantly different from those disclosed by the
explorations. If subsurface conditions different from those described in this report are observed
or appear to be present during construction, we should be advised at once so that we can review
these conditions and reconsider our recommendations, where necessary.
-6
If there is a substantial lapse of time between the submission of this report and the start of work
at the site, or if conditions have changed because of natural forces or construction operations at
or adjacent to the site, we recommend that this report be reviewed to determine the applicability
of the conclusions and recommendations, considering the changed conditions and time lapse.
Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered and cannot be fully determined by
merely taking soil samples or completing test borings. Such unexpected conditions frequently
require that additional expenditures be made to again a properly constructed project. Therefore,
some contingency fund is recommended to accommodate such potential extra costs.
The scope of our services for this report did not include geologic or seismic hazard assessment,
or slope stability analysis or assessment. Nor did our scope include any environmental
21-1-09487-001
15
r
assessment or evaluation regarding the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous or toxic
materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater, or air, on or below or around the site.
Shannon & Wilson, Inc. has prepared the attached "Important Information About Your
Geotechnical Report" to assist you and others in understandincr the use and limitations of our
reports (Appendix B).
SHANNON & VVILSON, INC.
Stanley R. Boyle, P.E.
Associate
SRB:GJB/srb
21-1-09487-001
0
File: I:NDrafting\211\09487-001\21-1-09487-001 Fig. l.dwg Date: 09-27-2001 Author: SAC
73 C 8-1 ;U
CD =3 ::r (D
0 0
=3 CL
0
a 0 0
U) CL
0
CD 0
0-0 0
s q6< 0 =r
0 -0 -C)
CD CD
cn
CO�
. (D CO
(D "NO =
(n
CA
0 CD
CL ab
c: :3
::r 0 cr
0 CD
c W
(D 0 CD
0 m.
3 cr
cn >
�NNNNNNNN
0 a MO cl)
W
CU 0
> 0
CD
(n. 0 W
zr z-h c)
> C/)
CD CD
W rr >
(D CD -U
CD
0
z
0
d!
m
cn
0
cl)
..36
+
or
Jtv
*W&
ow dlillbb "q"*q*qkpd pk -I n rk ft 14 14-ft. NNNNNNNNNNNNWT
NWVWi.P
...P. A 40P h
op %dP 4i%P I % I
Pdor %4 40 P�P
1%
PIN 40
sib&
Fil 17 In""k
410
j T KA
CD6;
Gv IN S. Pi All
ell c %
> c.
1b,
C-r) # - .1 M
r d.
A
I t� 40
Not k
&dip
44.
d E D R0 N65
I X ;;..I .:. ..... 6 ... 4"...
WY I
AV ANN.
.4op .1 d?
AV s fri �;.
19.�.
RO Ido 2 �
3RD
AV'r'
P" 11"11411" P R s -P 4, k.
0, 'W k d "�7- %a..
W. 4d 4�
d. Pi �Nffiq
1`0 1
44": 1 1 4�
NNE
Ir. 40.1 AV
m
r'
0�;vvir
-U
CL
00
3
>"
0
:j
M
:3
09
CL
z
(n
=r
=3
(NO
r-+-
0
:3
1 4� I --W -.. - d% o"pliftak-Ossw #d -0 Rk
AV
k s %JR
11111W � 1� 7 hR
WI
'1% o.
4-:1
svi 0'
e em
b AV r
AV
V 6 TW V 4d
X-7. - f
rp,
AV
d
44 41 - m1wo 06 11 mil W.A.. A" LIP 0 --%.p
q'i
d
7TU AV S ki
rr, th I&
L "< :" �46.5 � r- '%� I%
7T11 ill-4 r.7. jr P'4
`hvj;1Q "tpl
Rip
AV
dlg.� doll* 7TH &A
AV N#**
T
'yl vp "")
t 4- 6 .
�de ip , I i n 0%, /19)
PON 410 10A
AVI ft ;,
41 T I i s L P;E
T J-% -1 - ;1"r- $1 � T?l
74 %%, 04606 two
I Np.
4P 4
v '04 %.. -% �i i L. ) (')t #I
P1 "I AtWA 1.
Lh 1%, 0 4 P: 4 ft:
ie 1A Vt 0.0 1410
011 1 14 ...'.P
9 TH
AV
*11" s 91Tm AV 1-� P" iis A,
do AAr -4 N
f A "Lip, v i top th 4" +hP
IfA VI.JF4 kA tA*N %. 4.b
*P '%:;x" FT W.
r jk 1
AV ck � I I Nil
*P. P ba V .5 1 '1 .
I Oi I I I (A j
-h ' -RkA 4- NO-- A sd
NO p rr �N %
P JPL j P1
NJ Ay V;"
r
W
PIFEMOT 4 PW OP 04
t 0' Rv,
Loll I I N /':
W-1 Or kip
Lr
N
vt
too
.4
G. v oft)
0 @' d1N *1 Av r
it i j%.j I N1
4f ft$ 0 6^6; .... ... Ala". 0.1.-
La *&0 .. . 11"..m 0. N. 0 " A.., * -
go Yj I
dP -P -0 dF,
�F
?lip 14 1 1 11,111
q5TH PL W
4
A. dP
Opp. 4%A
�1, P P
dL CA,
-2W- i ; 4P
I, AY
PL JdL W +q 4 1
44 P7, T% 6-60'. AV ..' ' u.
d.. i6ot I Y< , r. P".
Fm 4r 61% .14 1 IL
;r -- %.-
hD Vj-' W 4
"'4 dP
W EA
"Nillippliffil. IV WO
kAV W A
Milo 41N-�Npw I %�
de 'Tj NvW 1% 1%
P�A L -limpto *$%how dqlwm�" ftNlNllpNlN
ARP MR& - Oft.
P4 W.0 S' 1 0 "ONV � 1 '111
11Nb 4
-0 lid % % it st Loot
of-%% :'TO" "
't *I
L - """s d" I "N" s - -
N1 I r"-;� ii-" f-� � - - 7� -4
.4 a I. AV
9B
00%
'Op. 41 +)
kL, f% ry DR!1' .11 c� I * %% ko
m �v .. 4% IF - , dr L4.11Rd #I
Wb A - - 0. 4... 'T �10 7
Wit" MIN F11 W k% x 0 v I I I
ti Ol , % -) 'b", I . MWOO
v P J mp ks A W
�', il� JU -WP 6- N114PRIP-0-10 M
AV W n N� Poo, P dip
A ��4e- ;
ell, %
ir d . t"' i
=
% h i NMI N 4.01.6
jo L ��* .14441 ; - -
�41% L 0., alp P . it s-P
%,4 <'# O'l ik� eu m 04 *'OP j .1 P. I k
i:06TH 6 1 .0 AV 1A P40
V a'01. 4 "be W
4.4 L-) 1 #4 . r k CA V, -
FL W Nd.
�1]44 IT Ulf
c.
Av dF Ptr 1! % s t % . UL q6
ki %J W. �"-O +
No. 44 Ir 0. ,
60--4,- 1.0 Is r to,) Ob
F1 t" 4 Aur ;�. j ra 94
Ws I F 1-v W: r; %4
(10%) Ill. W fri 14
It W 1'.
pip A Ix
VA E�j [it Alp
841 H NP
AV X. CP ... 4.11H PIL
P P-04"k. P-8
P AV W
b ILO 1.
4F . 't
p AV W ;or 0 �; P.-L N
03r. J� r I.Jr-6
i 4 4.0 - �*600wl ;&�
7.1.110 1 x 0 -11 bi 01 lime
a - 'j I dc J Ali m W
"Oh- * , r"I
mode
%ff .9
OY
2. % , -I -dw
RZW) I ;P
A AV v
L V 14Y. il P� v � V: it
P.- .-NO P1. W V
fi PM d.. 4P.-P W 44�- P 4P*
-4P P? t- %r
W WPF
W lip k1m h.P
-.q. 0.4 9 d. AV op
W
IC Af 21. 14
-1-ft"J6 -%P MST AN -;�J' P, NO
VA d.
10 4P'4P s, NN mW "No PW'P�
T T 1.
a,
0 0
2 0
V�
CD
CD
04
LL
CD
co
%cr
co
CD
I
0
CD
C3
.Www�
qr�
CM
4ppoo'
& 0
16
LL
03
CL
0
0
CD
0
:3
U)
CL
co
2
0
0
%%&Or
0
N
CU
2
z
fn
I
Slope,
30'0 to 450
=3
A-1
Vent
Electrical '
Access
F— " — — — — — — I
I Z— Sanitary Se)ver Manhole
Dry Well Access Hatch
39-411 X 31'.011
Existing Wet Well
and Dry Well Vault
I Approximaie LOcaTion)
10" Forcemain
I L
Bwl
X k
I
1 0 100
LEGEND
B .1 Boring Designation and
Approximate Location
NOTE
Figure based on drawing prepared
by R.W. Beck, dated 10-2-2001.
Meter
PROPOSED DRY WELL VAULT
(APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
Scale in Feet
200
Meter
QY
co
LOA"
Edmonds Lift Station No. 1
450 Sunset Avenue
Edmonds, Washington
SITE PLAN
October 2001
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants
En
C:
M> M
". U)
opllft%
co
C/)
co
%%Now
21-1-09487-001
FlGe 2
S
APPENDIX A
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS AID LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
21-1-09487-001
r
APPENDIX A
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Figure No.
A-1
A-2
A-3
TABLE OF CONTENTS,
LIST OF FIGURES
Soli Classification and Log Key (2 sheets)
Log of Boring B-1
Grain Size Distribution
21-1-09487-001
A-1
s
Shannon & Wilson, Inc. (S& W).r uses a sot!
classification system modified from the Unified Soil
Classificafron System (USCS). Elements of the
USCS and other definitions are provided on this
and the following page. Soil descriptions are
based on visual -manual procedures (ASTM D
2488-93) unless otherwise noted.
S&W CLASSIFICATION
OF SOIL CONSTITUENTS
• MAJOR constituents compose more than 40
percent, by weight, of the soil. Major consituents
are capitalized (i.e., SAND).
. Minor constituents compose 12 to 50 percent
of the soil and precede the major constituents
(i.e., silty SAND). Minor constituents preceded
by "slightly" compose 5 to 12 percent of the soil
(i.e., slightly silty SAND).
� Trace constituents compose 0 to 5 percent of the
soil (i.e., slightly silty SAND, trace of gravel).
MOISTURE CONTENT DEFINITIONS
Dry Absence of moisture, dusty, dry
to the touch
Moist Damp but no visible water
Wet Visible free water, from below
water table
ABBREVIATIONS
ATD At Time of DdIling
Elev. Elevation
ft feet
FeO Iron Oxide
HSA Hollow Stem Auger
ID Inside Diameter
In inches
ibs pounds
Mon. Monument cover
N Blows for last two 64nch increments
NA Not applicable or not available
NP Non plastic
OD Outside diameter
OVA Organic vapor analyzer
PID Photo -ionization detector
PPM parts per million
PVC Polyvinyl Chloride
SS Split spoon sampler
SPT Standard penetration test
USC Unified soil classification
WLl Water level indicator
GRAIN SIZE DEFINITION
DESCRIPTION SIEVE NUMBER AND/OR SIZE
FINES < #200 (0.8 mm)
SAND'
- Fine 9200 to 440 (0.8 to 0.4 mm)
- Medium #40 to #i 0 (0.4 #0 2 mm)
Coarse #10 to #4 (2 to 5 mm)
GRAVEL*
- Fine #4 #0 314 inch (5 to 19 mm)
- Coarse 3/4 to 3 inches (19 to 76 mm)
COBBLES 3 to 12 inches (76 to 305 mm)
BOULDERS > 12 inches (305 mm)
' Unless otherwise noted, sands and gravels, when
present, range from dine to coarse in grain size.
RELATIVE DENSITY/ CONSISTENCY
COARSE -GRAINED SOILS
Nt SPT,
BLOWS/FT.
.
i
i
4
■
i
!
RELATIVE
DENSITY_
Very loose
Loose
Medium dense
Dense
Verydense
FINE-GRAINED SOILS
Nt SPT, RELATIVE
ffqN�* - 0 631:10M
Under 2
Very soft
2-4
Soft
4-8
Medium stiff
8 - i 5
Stiff
15 - 30
Very stiff
Over 30
Hard
WELL AND OTHER SYMBOLS
Cement/Concrete
Bentonite Grout
Bentonite Seal
Silica Sand
PVC Screen
Vibrafing Wire
Asphalt or Cap
Slough
Ash
Bedrock
Edmonds Lift Station No. 1
450 Sunset Avenue
Edmonds, Washington
SOIL CLASSIFICATION
AND LOG KEY
October 2001
SHANNON& WILSON3 INC.
Geotechnicai and Environmental Consultants
21-1-09487-001
FIGe Awl
Sheet 1 of 2
4
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (USCS)
(From ASTM D 2487-98 & 2488-93)
MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP/GRAPHIC TYPICAL DESCRIPTION
_-SYMBOL-
mqp W
GW &* Well-gra ed gravels, aravels,
6 gravel/sand mixtures,little or no ines
..dft�
Clean Gravels
(less than 5%
fines) GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel -sand
G ravels mixtures, little or no fines
(more than 50%
of coarse
fraction retained GM Silty gravels, gravel -sand -silt mixtures
on No. 4 sieve) Gravels with
Fines I
(more than 12% C�ayey gravels, gravel -sand -clay
COARSE- fines) GC mixtures
GRAINED
SOILS
(more than 50%
Well -graded sands, gravelly sands,
retained on No. SW little or no fines
200 sieve) Clean Sands
(less than 5%
fines) Poorly graded sand, gravelly sands,
SP 0 NF d- - -
Sands little or no fines
(50% or more of N' d, 0 ip 46
coarse fraction
passes the No. 4 SM Silty sands, sand -silt mixtures
sieve) Sands with
Fines
CV
(more than 1247
fines) SC Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures
0
Ino anic silts of low to medium
ML plaspicity, rock flour, sand Silts,
cjravgll silt% or clayey sil S with slight
plasticiry
Inorganic d
Silts and Clays Inoraanic clays of low to medium
(liquid limit less CL plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays,
than 50) silty clays, lean ciays
FINE-GRAINED Organic OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of
low plasticity
SOILS
(50% or more
passes the No. Inorganic silts, micaceous or
200 sieve) MH diatomaceous fine sands or silly soils,
elastic silt
Inorganic I I._- 0 -
Silts and Clays Ino ianic clays or medium to high
(liquid limit 50 or CH plas city, sandy fat clay, or gravelly fat
more) clay
Organic OH Organic clays of med lurn to high
P lasticity, organic silts
HIGHLY- Peat, humus, swamp soils with hi h
Primarily organic matter., dark in 0
ORGANIC color, and organic odor PT organic content (see ASTM D 44
SOILS
NOTES
Dual symbols (symbols separated by a hyphen, Le., SP-SM, slightly
silty fine SAND) are used for soils with between 5% and 12% fines
or when the liquid limit and plasticity index values plot in the CL-ML
area of the plasticity chart.
2. Borderline symbols (symbols separated by a slash, i.e., CLIML, silty
CLA Ylc layey S IL T; G WIS W, s a n dy G RA VEUg ra ve By SA N D)
indicate that the so'll may fall into one of two possible basic groups.
Edmonds Lift Station No. I
450 Sunset Avenue
Edmonds, Washington
SOIL CLASSIFICATION
AND LOG KEY
October 2001
SHANNON & WILSON, INCe
Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants
0
21-1-09487-001
FIGe Awl
Sheet 2 of 2
A
4
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Surface Elevation.- Approx. 28.3 Ft.
P
Medium dense to dense, reddish -brown,
slightly gravelly, silty SAND to sandy SILT;
moist; abundant iron -oxide staining; (Fill)
SM/ML,.
Very dense, gray -brown, gravelly, silty
SAND/sandy SILT; scattered pockets of clean,
fine to medium sand; scattered iron -oxide
staining; SM/ML.
11
Very dense, reddish -gray to brown, silty SAND
grading to slightly silty SAND, trace of gravel;
moist becoming wet at 23 to 24 feet;
SM/SP-SM.
Very dense, gray, trace to slightly silty SAND;
wet; gravelly 37.5 to 42.5 feet; becomes fine
to medium sand; trace of silt below 42.5 feet;
Spa
Very dense, gray and brown, interbedded, silty
fine SAND, fine sandy SILT; becoming
increasingly organic at 50.5 feet, grading to
organic silt or silty peat at 51 feet;
ml \SM/MUOUPT.
cc —
BO OM OF BORING
S:
40
0:1 COMPLETED 9119/2001
(n
;21
J
z
4b,7
CL
co
IV
cr)
0
0
0
�i
Cr
W
LEGEND
Sample Not Recovered
2-inch O.D. Split Spoon Sample
3-inch O.D. Shelby Tube Sample
T
W_h_�
Cn
orm-4.
0.
E
E
0
ca
0
0
6.5
18.5
30.5
51 MOIJ
6
16
IP q
dp dF
kF a
11 41
P d'
.19
0
0 dp
14D 16
40
dP
0.0
1
2
3T
4
5 ===
6 qw-
C)
7
C3
0
10
12
13 ==
14 1
Surface Sea[
Annular Sealant
Piezometer Screen
Bentonhe Grout
Ground Water Level ATD
Ground Water Level in Well
NOTIES
1. The stratification lines represent the approximate boundaries between soil types,
and the transition may be gradual.
2. The discussion in the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of
the nature of the subsurface materials.
3. Groundwater level., 'if indicated above, 'I's for the date specified and may vary.
4. Refer to KEY for explanation of *Symbolsw and definitions.
5. USCS designation is based on visual -manual classification and selected
laboratory ind ex testing.
�Zl_ I %V-
5
Standard Penetration Resistance
(140 1b. weight, 30-inch drop)
d& Blows per foot
20 40 60
....... 60 .........
k-
00 ....
5OT44-i
0 0 dr
100/11
P
10 W_ 50/5
. . . . . . . . . 0 ip 0 W 4
a . . . W 0
15 50/5
50/5 M
W W 4 . . .
20
W W 64
W W . . . . . . . . . . . . .
W M 0 0
25
W W . . . W M W W .8811.1
M W . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
M d 0 0 M .0
30
5 015 A
0
0 4 M W 0 . . .
35
. . . . . . . 9 M 0 0 W 0 63�
W W . . . .
W 0 0 0
40 50/4.5%
*4 'W '� *
9 W
4
M W 4 M
45 5 0/5
-9 . . . W 4 0 M
W W -P . . . . . . . . .
W 1p
50-
... W01 ........ 4 W ...A
55
0 20
0 IP V F & a 0 -0
40 60
0 % Water Content
Plastic Limit 11 --- - -- - I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
Edmonds Lift Station No,, 1
450 Sunset Avenue
Edmonds, Washington
LOG OF BORING B=1
October 2001
SHANNON & WILSON, INCa
Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants
21-1-09487-001
FIG., A=2
c%j
M
1*1
70
:c
0
W
60
03
cc
W
z 50
LL
z
W
0 40
cr
LIJ
CL
74M
10
�f
C3
C>
00
N
SIEVE
SIZE OF MESH OPENING IN INCHES
N
Z!
W cm ca
%4%� 14%. '11�
A � ffl-W%
ANALYSIS
NO. OF MESH OPENINGS PER INCH, U.S. STANDARD
o
0 C) 0 0
c\2 "cr to V�
c) 0 C) a C3 0 0 co CD qtr M c\j a (D 'Kr
0 ca W %q 03 N
Ir"
GRAIN S12E IN MILLIME
TERS
CO to
0 Q
BORING AND
DEPTH
U.S.C&SO
SAMPLE
FINES
NAT.
SAMPLE NO.
(feet)
SYMBOL
DESCRIPTION
%
W.C. %
0 B-I!t S-3
7.5
SM
Brown Slightly gravelly silty SAND
45.7
9.2
M B-1 I S-9
25.0
SP-SM
Gray brown slightly silty fine to med. SAND
7.8
19.5
"n
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
co (0
MT cn 04 a C3
0 0 a
c") c%j
C) 0
0 0
I
C> 0
C> a
10
*IN
CTIM
:-N
50
me]
70
W
1-Us
W
W
cf)
cr.
0
Q
z
W
0
(r
W
(L
LL PL pi Edmonds Lift Station No. 1
450 Sunset Avenue
Edmonds, Washington
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
October 2001
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Gootischnical and Environmental Consultants
L7.1
'a
21-1-09487-001
FIG. Aw3
0
z
-A
C3
(D
*b-
OD
-4
6
70
L.
(n
z
I
-� *a * +. fr'' �►'t.'• ice- r.�
APPENDIX B
i
lMiPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT
YOUR GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
i
21-1-09487-001
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants
Attachment to and part of Report 214-09487-001
Ir
or
0
Date: October 9, 2001
To: R.W. Beek
Attn: Mr. Ben Carr
Important Inflormafi'on About Your Geo-technical/Environmental Report
CONSULTING SERVIC ARE PERFORMED FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES AND FOR SPECIFIC C ENTS,
Consultants prepare reports to meet the specific needs of specific individuals. A report prepared for a civil engineer may not be adequate
for a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Unless 1 6 ndicated otherwise, your consultant re ared your report expressly
for you and expressly for the purposes you indicated. No one other than you should apply this report for its intended purpose without first
confeffing with the consultant. No party should apply this report for any purpose other than that originally contemplated without first
confeffing with the consultant.
THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT IS BASED ON PROJECTwSPECI C FACTORSO
A geotechnical/envirorumental report is based on a subsurface explorato'n plan designed to consider a ufflque set of project-speci fic factors.
Depending on the project, these may include: the general nature of the structure and property involved; its size and configuration; its
his orical use and practice; the location of the structure on the site and its orientation; other improvements such as access roads,'parking
lots, and underground utilities; and the additional ri�k created by scof-e-of-service limitations imposed by the clien't. To help avoid costly
problems, ask the consultant to evaluate how any factors that change mbsequent to the date of the report may affect the recommendations.
Unless your consultant indicates otherwise, your report should not Le used: (1) when the nature of the proposed project is changed (for
example, if an office building will be erected instead of a parking garage, or it a refrigerated warehouse will be built instead of an
unreffigerated one, or chemicals are discovered on or near the site); (2) when the size, elevation, or configuration of the proposed project
is altered; (3) when t.he location or orientation of the proposed project is modified; (4) when there is a change of ownership; or (5) for
application to an adjacent site. Consultants cannot accept responsibility for problems that may occur if they are not consulted after factors
which were considered in the development of the report have changed.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS CAN CHANGE.
Subsurface conditions may be affected as a result of natural processes or human activity. Because a geotechnical/envirommental report is
based on conditions that existed at the time of subsurface exploration, construction decisions should not be based on a report whose
adequacy may have been affected by time. Ask the consultant to advise if additional tests are desirable before construction starts; for
example, groundwater conditions commonly vary seasonally.
('ninctnirt;nn n Prnf;nine nt nr arUnrPnt fn thp e;tp nnrl nnhirnl PuAntc e"rb ne flnnAc Pnrfln "nVpc nr n&"inr1vtratjPr
r 1 4 1) 51 ILLO LLIUJ "am
subsurface conditions and, thus, the continuing adequacy of a geote-chnical/envirommental report. The consultant should be kept apprised
of any such events, and should be consulted to determine if additional tests are necessary.
41
ST RECOMMENDATIONS ARE PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENTS,
W.
exploration and testing identifies actual surface and subsurface conditions only at those points where samples are taken. The data were
..... . . . . . . . .
trapolated by your consultant, who then applied judgment to render an opinion about overall subsurface conditions. The actual interface
*�b-etween materials may be far more gradual or abrupt than your report indicates. Actual conditions in areas not sampled may differ from
ip Ate
1. &se predicted in your report. While nothing can be done to prevent such situations, you and your consultant can work together to help
j0':Fqduce their impacts. Retainin your consultant to observe subsurface construction operations can be particularly beneficial in ffiis respect
9W
we
A REP TIS CONCLUSIONS ARE PRELIMINARY
The colclusions contained in your consultant's report are preliminary because they must be based on the assumption that conditions revealed
througr�elecfive exploratory sampling are indicative of actual conditions throughout a site. Actual subsurface conditions can be discemed
only d7tkiqnog earthwork; therefore, you should retain your consultant to observe actual conditions and to provide conclusions. Only the
consultant who prepared the report is fully familiar with the background infor ation needed to determine whether or not the report's
Page I of 2 1/2001
recommendations based on those conclusions are valid and whether or not the contractor is abiding by applicable recommendations. The
consultant who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for the adequacy of the report's recommendations if another
party is retained to observe construction.
THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT IS SUBJECT TO MISINTERPRETATION.
Costly problems can occur when other design professionals develop their plans based on misinterpretation of a geotechnical/enviromnental w. .
report. To help avoid these problems, the consultant should be retained to work with other project design professionals to explain relevant
geotechnical, geological, hydrogeological, and environmental findings, and to review the adequacy of their plans and specifications relative
to these issues.
BORING LAGS AND/OR MONITORING WELL DATA SHOULD NUT BE SEPARALTED FROM THE REPORT.
Final boring logs developed by the consultant are based upon interpretation of field logs (assembled by site personnel), field test result's, and laboratory and/or office evaluation of field samples and data. Only final boring logs and data are customarily included in
geotechnical/environmental reports. These final togs should not, under any circumstances, be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other ` ?
design drawings, because drafters may commit errors or omissions in the transfer process., j
To reduce the likelihood of boring log or monitoring well misinterpretation, contractors should be given ready access to the complete
geotechnical engineering/environmental report prepared or authorized for their use. If access is provided only to the report prepared for
you, you should advise contractors of the report's limitations, assumin; that a contractor was not one of the specific persons for whom the
report was prepared, and that developing construction cost estimates was not one of the specific purposes- for which it was prepared. While
a contractor may gain important knowledge from a report prepared for another party, the contractor should discuss the report with your
consultant and perform the additional or alternative work believed necessary to obtain the data specifically appropriate for construction
cost estimating purposes. Some clients hold the mistaken impression that simply disclaiming responsibility for the accuracy of subsurface
information always insulates them from attendant liability. Providing the best available information to contractors helps prevent costly �
construction problems and the adversarial attitudes that aggravate them to a disproportionate scale. �
READ RESPONSIBILITY CLAUSES CLOSELY.
Because geotechnical/envirommental engineering is based extensively on judgment and opinion, it is far less exact than other design
disciplines. This situation has resulted in wholly unwarranted claims being dodged against consultants. To help prevent this problem,
consultants have developed a number of clauses for use in their contracts, reports and other documents. These responsibility clauses are
not exculpatory clauses designed to transfer the consultant's liabilities to other parties; rather, they are definitive causes that identify where
the consultant's responsibilities begin and end. Their use helps all ies involved recognize their individual res onsibilities and taIcePP
appropriate action. Some of these definitive clauses are likely to appear in your report, and you are encouraged to -read them closely. Your. �
consultant will be pleased to give full and frank answers to your questions. ,
The preceding paragraphs are based on information provided by the
ASFE/Association of Engineering Firms Practicing in the Geosciences, Silver Spring, Maryland :�
Page 2 of 2 1/2001