GEO REPORT REVISED 1065318 Vista Del Mar Res Dev MukilteoNGA
Main Office
17311 — 135" Ave NE, A-500
Woodinville, WA 98072
(425) 486-1669 • FAX (425) 481-2510
December 20, 2018
Mr. Garth Hitchens
3380 — 126t1i Avenue NE
Bellevue, WA 98005
ghitchenskme.com
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
ASSOCIATES, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED
Hitchens Residence Development
17901 Vista Del Mar Drive
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 1065318
Dear Mr. Hitchens:
Engineering -Geology Branch
5526 Industry Lane, #2
East Wenatchee, WA 98802
(509) 665-7696 • FAX (509) 665-7692
We are pleased to submit the attached report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation — Hitchens
Residence Development — 17901 Vista Del Mar Drive — Edmonds, Washington." This report
summarizes our observations of the existing surface and subsurface conditions within the site, and
provides general recommendations for the proposed site development. Our services were completed in
general accordance with the proposal signed by you on October 15, 2018.
The site is currently occupied by a single-family residence within the east -central portion of the parcel.
The upper eastern portion of the parcel is relatively level to gently sloping from east to west. Just to the
west of the existing residence a steep west -facing bluff slope descends to the BNSF railroad tracks.
Vegetation within the upper portion of the site generally consists of grass -covered yard areas and
landscaping plants, while the slope below and to the west of the residence is generally heavily vegetated
with young to mature trees and underbrush. An existing sewer line easement runs north -south along the
top of slope area within the central portion of the site. We understand the proposed developments within
the site will consist of removing the existing site structures and constructing a new single-family
residence with an attached patio area along the western portion of the house. At the time this proposal
was prepared, specific construction plans were not available.
We explored the site subsurface soil conditions throughout the site with three geotechnical borings using
a limited access track -mounted drill rig. Our explorations indicated that the site was underlain by
competent, native outwash soils at relatively shallow depths, below a surficial layer of topsoil and/or
undocumented fill.
It is our opinion that the proposed residence development within the site is feasible from a geotechnical
standpoint, provided that our recommendations are incorporated into the design and construction of this
project. We have recommended that the new structures be founded on medium dense or better native
glacial soils for bearing capacity and settlement considerations. It is also our opinion that the soils that
underlie the site and form the core of the site slope should be stable with respect to deep-seated earth
movements, due to their inherent strength and slope geometry. However, there is a potential for shallow
sloughing and erosion events to occur on the steep slope below the proposed development area. We
recommend that any proposed structures be set back at least 35 feet from the top of the steep west -facing
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED NGA File No. 1065318
Hitchens Residence Development December 20, 2018
Edmonds, Washington Summary - Page 2
bluff slope. In addition to the proposed setback, we recommend that the downhill western structure
foundations be supported on drilled piers extending down a minimum of 30 feet below the existing grade.
In the attached report, we have included recommendations for site grading, foundation support, and site
drainage.
We should be retained to discuss our recommendations with your design team, and to review final plans
prior to construction. We also recommend that NGA be retained to provide monitoring and consultation
services during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated
in the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during
the work differ from these anticipated, and to evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation
installation activities comply with contract plans and specifications.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide service to you on this project. Please contact us if you have any
questions regarding this report or require further information.
Sincerely,
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
Khaled M. Shawish, PE
Principal
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1
SCOPE............................................................................................................................... 1
SITECONDITIONS......................................................................................................... 2
SurfaceConditions....................................................................................................... 2
SubsurfaceConditions.................................................................................................. 2
Hydrogeologic Conditions........................................................................................... 3
SENSITIVE AREA EVALUATION............................................................................... 4
SeismicHazard............................................................................................................. 4
ErosionHazard............................................................................................................. 4
Landslide Hazard/Slope Stability................................................................................. 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................... 6
General.........................................................................................................................
6
Erosion Control and Slope Protection Measures......................................................... 7
Site Preparation and Grading....................................................................................... 8
StructureSetbacks........................................................................................................ 9
Temporary and Permanent Slopes............................................................................... 9
FoundationSupport....................................................................................................
10
RetainingWalls..........................................................................................................
12
StructuralFill..............................................................................................................
13
Slab-on-Grade............................................................................................................
13
Pavements...................................................................................................................
14
Utilities.......................................................................................................................
14
SiteDrainage..............................................................................................................
14
CONSTRUCTION MONITORING............................................................................. 16
USEOF THIS REPORT................................................................................................ 16
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Site Plan
Figure 3 — Cross -Section A -A'
Figure 4 Soil Classification Chart
Figures 5 and 7 — Boring Logs
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED
Hitchens Residence Development
17901 Vista Del Mar Drive
Edmonds, Washington
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering investigation and evaluation of the
planned Hitchens Residence Development project in Edmonds, Washington. The project site is located at
the address of 17901 Vista Del Mar Drive, as shown on the Vicinity Map in Figure 1. The purpose of this
study is to explore and characterize the site's surface and subsurface conditions and to provide
geotechnical recommendations for the planned site development.
The site is currently occupied by a single-family residence within the east -central portion of the parcel.
The upper eastern portion of the parcel is relatively level to gently sloping from east to west. Just to the
west of the existing residence a steep west -facing bluff slope descends to the BNSF railroad tracks.
Vegetation within the upper portion of the site generally consists of grass -covered yard areas and
landscaping plants, while the slope below and to the west of the residence is generally heavily vegetated
with young to mature trees and underbrush. An existing sewer line easement runs north -south along the
top of slope area within the central portion of the site. We understand the proposed developments within
the site will consist of removing the existing site structures and constructing a new single-family
residence. At the time this proposal was prepared specific construction plans were not available. Final
development and stormwater plans have not been developed at the time this report was written. The
existing site layout is shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2.
SCOPE
The purpose of this study is to explore and characterize the site surface and subsurface conditions, and
provide general recommendations for site development. Specifically, our scope of services included the
following:
1. Review available soil and geologic maps of the area.
2. Explore the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions within the vicinity of the
proposed residence with up to three, as deep as 40-foot geotechnical borings. Drill rig
was subcontracted by NGA.
3. Map the conditions on the slope below the proposed addition, perform hand -tool
excavations, and evaluate current slope stability conditions.
4. Provide recommendations for foundation support for the proposed residence.
5. Provide recommendations for deep foundation support, as needed.
6. Provide recommendations for structure setback from the steep slope.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED
Hitchens Residence Development
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 1065318
December 20, 2018
Page 2
7. Provide recommendations for earthwork.
8. Provide recommendations for temporary and permanent slopes.
9. Provide recommendations for slab subgrade preparation.
10. Provide recommendations for drainage improvements.
11. Provide recommendations for long-term slope protection and maintenance.
12. Document the results of our findings, conclusions, and recommendations in a written
geotechnical report.
SITE CONDITIONS
Surface Conditions
The site consists of an irregular -shaped parcel covering approximately 0.53 acres. The site is currently
occupied by a single-family residence structure situated within the eastern portion of the property.
Topography within the eastern portion of the site consists of relatively level to gently sloping ground. A
steep west -facing bluff slope descends from the central portion of the site to the BNSF railroad tracks
near the western property line at gradients in the range of 35 to 50 degrees (70 to 119 percent) as shown
in Cross Section A -A' in Figure 3. The overall height of the steep slope below the upper bench area is
approximately 130 to 140 feet. The site is generally vegetated with grass -covered yard areas and
landscaping plants within the developed portions of the property and forested areas within the steep bluff
area. The site is bound to the north, south, and east by existing residential properties, and to the west by
the BNSF railroad tracks and the Puget Sound. We did not observe any surface water during our site visit
on October 31, 2018. We also did not observe any groundwater emitting from the site slopes or
indications of recent slope movement.
Subsurface Conditions
Geology: The geologic units for this site are shown on Geologic _ map of the Edmonds East and part of the
Edmonds West quadrangles, Washington by Minard, J.P. (USGS, 1983). The site is mapped as
recessional outwash (Qvr). Recessional outwash deposits were derived from the stagnating and receding
Vashon glacier (Fraser Glaciation). The deposit is generally described as stratified sand and gravel with
minor silt and clay layers, but include unstratified to poorly stratified ablation and melt -out deposits, all of
which lie on older sediments. Our explorations within the property generally encountered sand and gravel
with varying amounts of silt, consistent with the description of recessional outwash soils at depth.
Explorations: The subsurface conditions within the site were explored on October 31, 2018 by drilling
three geotechnical borings to depths in the range of 14.0 to 25.3 feet below the existing ground surface.
The approximate locations of our explorations are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. A geologist from
NGA was present during the explorations, examined the soils and geologic conditions encountered,
obtained samples of the different soil types, and maintained logs of the explorations.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED NGA File No. 1065318
Hitchens Residence Development December 20, 2018
Edmonds, Washington Page 3
A geologist from NGA was present during the explorations, examined the soils and geologic conditions
encountered, obtained samples of the different soil types, and maintained logs of the explorations. A
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) was performed on each of the samples during drilling to measure soil
consistency at depth. The SPT consists of driving a 2-inch outer -diameter, 18 Inches long, split -spoon
sampler using a 140-pound hammer with a drop of 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the
sampler the final 12 inches is referred to as the "N" value and is presented on the boring logs. The N
value is used to evaluate the strength and density of the deposit.
The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System,
presented in Figure 4. The logs of our borings are attached to this report and are presented as Figures 5
through 7. We present a brief summary of the subsurface conditions in the following paragraphs. For a
detailed description of the subsurface conditions, the logs of the borings should be reviewed.
At the surface of Borings 1, 2, and 3 we generally encountered approximately 4.0 to 5.0 feet of very loose
to loose, orange -brown to gray, fine to coarse sand with silt and varying amounts of roots, iron -oxide
staining, and gravel, which we interpreted as undocumented fill soils. Underlying the undocumented fill
soils we generally encountered orange -brown to gray -brown, fine to coarse sand with varying amounts of
silt, gravel, and iron -oxide staining, which we interpreted as native outwash deposits. Borings 1, 2, and 3
terminated at respective depths of 14.0, 21.5, and 25.3 feet below the existing ground surface,
respectively.
Hydrogeologic Conditions
Groundwater seepage was not encountered within our soil explorations. If groundwater is encountered
during construction we would interpret this water to be perched water. Perched water occurs when
surface water infiltrates through less dense, more permeable soils and accumulates on top of a relatively
low permeability material. Perched water does not represent a regional groundwater "table" within the
upper soil horizons. Perched water tends to vary spatially and is dependent upon the amount of rainfall.
We would expect the amount of perched groundwater to decrease during drier times of the year and
increase during wetter periods.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED
Hitchens Residence Development
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 1065318
December 20, 2018
Page 4
SENSITIVE AREA EVALUATION
Seismic Hazard
The 2018 International Building Code (IBC) seismic design section provides a basis for seismic design
of structures. Since medium stiff to hard soils were generally encountered underlying the site at depth,
the site conditions best fit the IBC description for Site Class D. Table 1 below provides seismic design
parameters for the site that are in conformance with the 2018 IBC, which specifies a design
earthquake having a 2% probability of occurrence in 50 years (return interval of 2,475 years), and the
2008 USGS seismic hazard maps.
Table 1 — 2018 IBC Seismic Design Parameters
Site Class
Spectral Acceleration
Spectral Acceleration
Site Coefficients
Design Spectral
at 0.2 sec. (g)
at 1.0 sec. (g)
Response
Ss
St
Parameters
Fa
Fv
SDS
SD1
r—D
1.290
0.506
1.00
1.500
0.860
0.506
The spectral response accelerations were obtained from the USGS Earthquake Hazards Program
Interpolated Probabilistic Ground Motion website (2008 data) for the project latitude and longitude.
Hazards associated with seismic activity include liquefaction potential and amplification of ground
motion. Liquefaction is caused by a rise in pore pressures in a loose, fine sand deposit beneath the
groundwater table. It is our opinion that the competent glacial material interpreted to underlie the site has
a low potential for liquefaction or amplification of ground motion.
The glacial soils interpreted to form the core of the steep slopes within the site are considered stable with
respect to deep-seated slope failures. All steep slopes have the potential for shallow sloughing failures
during seismic events. Such events should not affect planned developments provided that the foundations
are designed with the recommended setback values, and the slope and drainage systems are maintained as
described in this report.
Erosion Hazard
The criteria used for determination of the erosion hazard for affected areas include soil type, slope
gradient, vegetation cover, and groundwater conditions. The erosion sensitivity is related to vegetative
cover and the specific surface soil types, which are related to the underlying geologic soil units. The Soil
Survey of Snohomish County Area, Washing, by the Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS), was reviewed to determine the erosion hazard for the surficial soils found within the subject site.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED NGA File No. 1065318
Hitchens Residence Development December 20, 2018
Edmonds, Washington Page 5
The erosion hazard within the property is listed as Alderwood-Everett gravelly sandy loams for 25 to 70
percent slopes. The erosion hazard rating is listed as severe, however, based on our experience in the area
and our observations in the field, it is our opinion that the site would have a slight to moderate erosion
hazard for areas where the soils are exposed. It is our opinion that the erosion hazard for site soils should
be low in areas where vegetation is not disturbed.
Landslide Hazard/Slope Stability
The criteria used for evaluation of landslide hazards include soil type, slope gradient, and groundwater
conditions. The steep slopes descend from the relatively level to gently sloping upper yard area within
the eastern portion of the property to the BNSF railroad tracks on the western property line at inclinations
ranging from 35 to 50 degrees (70 to 119 percent). The overall height of the steep slope below the
residence is approximately 130 to 140 feet. We did not observe evidence of significant slope instability
within the immediate vicinity of the property during our investigation, such as deep-seated landsliding.
We also did not observe groundwater seepage or signs of erosion or sloughing on the slope at the time of
our visit.
The site slopes are inferred to generally consist of sandy material. Slopes with a gradient of up to
approximately 50 degrees exist in the western side of the property. It is our opinion that there is not a
significant potential for large-scale, deep-seated slope instability within the development portion of this
site under the current conditions. However, steep slopes are naturally prone to surface sloughing and
even sizeable landslides over time. Slope activity results from weathering conditions and seasonal
surface saturation, especially after large storm events. The potential for these events could be reduced by
proper erosion and drainage control. The direct impact of the slope events on the proposed development
should be low if the building setback, site preparation and grading, surface water management, and long-
term slope maintenance are established as recommended in this report. It is our understanding that the
structure will be setback approximately 35 feet from the top of the steep slope. This setback distance
should be adequate provided that all the recommendations for site development and slope protection
found in this report are incorporated in the design and implemented during construction.
We observed that the existing house (which will be removed) appears to be setback as close as
approximately 5 to 6 feet from the slope and seems to be supported on conventional shallow footings.
Additionally, we observed some of the roof downspouts were disconnected, which during rainfall will
discharge water within the near vicinity to the top of bluff. As detailed in this report we have provided
recommendations that are intended to reduce the impact of the proposed development on slope stability
and protect the future residence from any natural recession of the slope within the lifespan of the
structure. Based on our observations of the existing conditions around the house and on the bluff slope
below, and thorough review of the proposed plans, it is our opinion that the proposed developments,
NELSON GEOTECHN/CAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED NGA File No. 1065318
Hitchens Residence Development December 20, 2018
Edmonds, Washington Page 6
which will be setback further away from the slope and result in no discharge onto the slope, should not
adversely impact the steep slopes within the property or in the near vicinity and will meet the general
requirements and specific hazards detailed in the Edmonds Community Development Codes 23.80.060
and 23.80.070.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
It is our opinion that the planned residence is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. Our explorations
and observations indicate that the site is underlain by dense to very dense glacial soils at depth. These
glacial soils should provide adequate support for foundation, slab, and pavement loads. To protect the
structure against potential failures on the slope and to limit impact to the slope, we recommend that the
western foundation line along with the western 10 feet of the northern and southern foundation lines be
supported on drilled piers. The piers should extend a minimum of 30 feet below existing grade to achieve
the recommended capacities. The piers should consist of a minimum of 16-inch diameter cast -in place
reinforced concrete piles. We recommend that the remaining foundations be designed utilizing shallow
foundations. Footings and slabs -on -grade should extend through any loose surficial soil or undocumented
fill and be founded on the underlying competent native bearing soils or structural fill extending to these
soils. These soils should be encountered roughly two to five feet below the existing ground surface.
However, deeper areas of unsuitable soils and/or undocumented fill could be encountered in the
unexplored areas of the site. Recommendations for design and installation of the deep and shallow
foundations are presented in the Foundation Support subsection of this report.
It is also our opinion that the soils that underlie the site and form the core of the site slope should be
stable with respect to deep-seated earth movements, due to their inherent strength and slope geometry.
However, there is a potential for shallow sloughing and erosion events, and even smaller scale slides, to
occur on the steeper portions of the slopes as we have recently observed. Proper erosion and drainage
control measures as recommended in this report should reduce this potential. We understand that the
residence is planned to be setback 35 feet from the top of the steep west -facing slope. Based on our site
observations and the soils encountered, it is our opinion that the setback distance along with supporting
the western portion of the residence on drilled piers should be adequate. We also understand a proposed
patio will extend 5 feet off the western portion of the residence. This should also be feasible given the
recommendations in this report are followed closely. A light weight patio setback of approximately 30
feet from the top of bluff should not adversely impact the existing slope stability conditions. We should
be retained to review the final plans.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED NGA File No. 1065318
Hitchens Residence Development December 20, 2018
Edmonds, Washington Page 7
All grading operations and drainage improvements planned as part of this development should be planned
and completed in a matter that enhances the stability of the steep slopes, not reduces it. Excavation spoils
associated with the building excavations should not be stockpiled near the slopes or be allowed to
encroach on the slopes. Also, runoff generated within the site should be collected and routed into a
permanent discharge system and not be allowed to flow over the slopes. Future vegetation management
on the slope should be the subject of a specific evaluation and a plan approved by City of Edmonds. In
general, vegetation removal below the top of slope is not recommended unless specifically evaluated and
addressed by NGA. Selective pruning and/or thinning of vegetation, along with removal of unhealthy
trees, may be allowed as part of a specific evaluation. The slope should be monitored on an ongoing
basis, especially during the wet season, for any signs of instability, and corrective actions promptly taken
should any signs of instability be observed. Lawn clipping and any other household trash or debris
should never be allowed to reach the slope.
The soils encountered on this site are considered moisture -sensitive and will disturb easily when wet. To
lessen the potential impacts of construction on the steep slope and to reduce cost overruns and delays, we
recommend that construction take place during the drier summer months. If construction takes place
during the rainy months, additional expenses and delays should be expected. Additional expenses could
include the need for placing erosion control and temporary drainage measures to protect the slopes, the
need for placing a blanket of rock spalls on exposed subgrades and construction traffic areas prior to
placing structural fill, and the need for importing all-weather material for structural fill.
Under no circumstances should water be allowed to flow over or concentrate on the site slopes, both
during construction, and after construction has been completed. We recommend that stormwater runoff
from the roof and yard drains be collected and tightlined to an approved discharge point. The slopes
should be protected from erosion. We recommend that all disturbed areas be replanted with vegetation to
re-establish vegetation cover as soon as possible. Specific recommendations for erosion control are
presented in the Erosion Control and Slope Protection Measures subsection of this report. With all of
the recommendations provided in this report being followed, the planned site improvements will meet the
ECD 23.80.060 and 23.80.070 codes.
Erosion Control and Slope Protection Measures
The erosion hazard for the on -site soils are interpreted to be severe for exposed soils, but the actual hazard
will be dependent on how the site is graded and how water is allowed to concentrate. Best Management
Practices (BMPs) should be used to control erosion. Areas disturbed during construction should be
protected from erosion. Erosion control measures may include diverting surface water away from the
stripped or disturbed areas. Silt fences and/or straw bales should be erected to prevent muddy water from
leaving the site or flowing over the slope. Stockpiles should be covered with plastic sheeting during wet
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED NGA File No. 1065318
Hitchens Residence Development December 20, 2018
Edmonds, Washington Page 8
weather and stockpiled material should be kept at least 50 feet away from the top of the steep slopes.
Disturbed areas should be planted as soon as practical and the vegetation should be maintained until it is
established. The erosion potential for areas not stripped of vegetation should be low.
Protection of the setback and steep slope areas should be performed as required by City of Edmonds.
Specifically, we recommend that the setback area and the top of slope not be disturbed or modified
through placement of any fill or removal of the existing vegetation. No additional material of any kind
should be placed on the slope or be allowed to reach the slope, such as excavation spoils, lawn clippings,
and other yard waste, trash, and soil stockpiles. Vegetation should not be removed from the slopes.
Replacement of vegetation should be performed in accordance with City of Edmonds code. Under no
circumstances should water be allowed to concentrate on the slopes.
Site Preparation and Grading
After erosion control measures are implemented, site preparation should consist of removing loose soils,
topsoil, and any undocumented fill from foundations, slab, and pavement areas, to expose medium dense
or better native bearing soils at depth. The stripped soil should be removed from the site or stockpiled for
later use as a landscaping fill. Based on our observations, we anticipate native, medium dense or better
soil to be encountered at approximately four to five feet across the site, but this depth could increase in
unexplored areas of the site. After site preparation, if the exposed subgrade is deemed loose, it should be
compacted to a non -yielding condition and then proof -rolled with a heavy rubber -tired piece of
equipment. Areas observed to pump or weave during the proof -roll test should be reworked to structural
fill specifications or over -excavated and replaced with properly compacted structural fill or rock spalls. If
loose soils are encountered in the foundation areas, the loose soils should be removed and replaced with
rock spalls. If significant surface water flow is encountered during construction, this flow should be
diverted around areas to be developed, and the exposed subgrades should be maintained in a semi -dry
condition.
If wet conditions are encountered, alternative site grading techniques might be necessary. These could
include using large excavators equipped with wide tracks and a smooth bucket to complete site grading,
and covering exposed subgrade with a layer of crushed rock for protection. If wet conditions are
encountered or construction is attempted in wet weather, the subgrade should not be compacted, as this
could cause further subgrade disturbance. In wet conditions, it may be necessary to cover the exposed
subgrade with a layer of crushed rock as soon as it is exposed to protect the moisture sensitive soils from
disturbance by machine or foot traffic during construction. The prepared subgrade should be protected
from construction traffic and surface water should be diverted around areas of prepared subgrade.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED NGA File No. 1065318
Hitchens Residence Development December 20, 2018
Edmonds, Washington Page 9
Structure Setbacks
Uncertainties related to building along steep slopes are typically addressed by the use of building
setbacks. The purpose of the setback is to establish a "buffer zone" between the structure and the top of
the slope so that ample room is allowed for normal slope recession during a reasonable life span of the
structure. In a general sense, the greater the setback distance, the lower the risk of slope failures
impacting the structure. From a geological standpoint, the setback dimension is based on the slope's
physical characteristics, such as slope height, surface angle, material composition, and hydrology. Other
factors such as historical slope activity, rate of regression, and the type and desired life span of the
development are important considerations as well.
We understand the proposed structure foundations will be set back 35 feet from the top of the steep west -
facing slopes with a cantilevered roof overhang of approximately 5-feet. Additionally, we understand a 5-
foot wide patio is to be constructed adjacent to the west side of the proposed residence. The proposed
foundation setback of 35 feet and patio setback of 30 feet from the top of bluff should be feasible given
that the western downhill foundation lines will be supported on drilled piers extending to a depth of 30
feet below the existing ground surface and the patio is constructed following the recommendations in the
site preparation and grading subsection of this report. We should be retained to review final residence
location and to observe foundation excavations prior to placing forms. Any proposed development within
the setback area, should be the subject of a specific geotechnical evaluation. Under no circumstances
should water be allowed to concentrate on the slopes, during or after construction.
Temporary and Permanent Slopes
Temporary cut slope stability is a function of many factors, including the type and consistency of soils,
depth of the cut, surcharge loads adjacent to the excavation, length of time a cut remains open, and the
presence of surface or groundwater. It is exceedingly difficult under these variable conditions to estimate
a stable, temporary, cut slope angle. Therefore, it should be the responsibility of the contractor to
maintain safe slope configurations at all times as indicated in OSHA guidelines for cut slopes.
The following information is provided solely for the benefit of the owner and other design consultants and
should not be construed to imply that Nelson Geotechnical Associates, Inc. assumes responsibility for job
site safety. Job site safety is the sole responsibility of the project contractor.
For planning purposes, we recommend that temporary cuts in the upper undocumented fill soils be no
steeper than 2 Horizontal to I Vertical (2.OH:IV). Temporary cuts in competent, native glacial soils at
depth should be no steeper than 1.5H:IV. If significant groundwater seepage or surface water flow were
encountered, we would expect that flatter inclinations would be necessary. We recommend that cut
slopes be protected from erosion. The slope protection measures may include covering cut slopes with
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED NGA File No. 1065318
Hitchens Residence Development December 20, 2018
Edmonds, Washington Page 10
plastic sheeting and diverting surface runoff away from the top of cut slopes. We do not recommend
vertical slopes for cuts deeper than four feet, if worker access is necessary. We recommend that cut slope
heights and inclinations conform to appropriate OSHA/WISHA regulations.
Permanent cut and fill slopes should be no steeper than 2H:1 V. However, flatter inclinations may be
required in areas where loose soils are encountered. Permanent slopes should be vegetated and the
vegetative cover maintained until established.
Foundation Support
Drilled Piers: We recommend that the western foundation line along with the western 10 feet of the
northern and southern foundation lines and all interior foundations found within this zone be supported on
16- to 24-inch diameter reinforced concrete piers, extending a minimum of 30 feet below existing ground
surface. The remainder of the foundations should be supported on native, competent bearing material or
structural fill extending to that material.
Our explorations did not advance the entire recommended depth of the drill piers; however, an open -hole
drilling method will likely be feasible based on our field observations and prior experience with the
overall site. If caving conditions are encountered, pile casing will be required. If large obstacles are
encountered or refusal is met before the minimum recommended pile depths, NGA should be contacted to
evaluate the existing conditions and provide alternative recommendations. The holes should be cleaned of
any slough or water prior to pouring concrete. We recommend that the concrete be readily available on
site at the time of drilling. The holes should not be left open for any extended period of time, as
sloughing debris and/or groundwater seepage into the excavations may hamper pier installation.
In the following table, we present design friction, end bearing, and total axial compression capacities for
16-, 18- and 24-inch drilled piers, installed as recommended above. The friction component should be
used to resist uplift forces only. The provided values do not include the weight of the piles. If the piles
weight will be utilized to resist uplift forces, the buoyant unit weight and adequate safety factors should
be used.
Pile Diameter
(Inches)
Total Pile Depth (Feet)
Design Friction (Tons)
Design End Bearing (Tons)
16
30
15
25
18
30
17
30
24
30
23
50
Lateral resistance on the piers could be calculated based on an equivalent fluid density of 200 pounds per
cubic foot (pcf) applied to two pile diameters. The upper two feet should be neglected for the purpose of
calculating the lateral resistance. We should be retained to review pier design and observe drilled pier
installation.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED NGA File No. 1065318
Hitchens Residence Development December 20, 2018
Edmonds, Washington Page 11
Shallow Foundations: For the portions of the structure supported on shallow spread footings, these
footings should be placed on native medium dense or better soils, or structural fill extending to these
soils. The foundation subgrade should be prepared as described in the Site Preparation and Grading
subsection. If footings are supported on structural fill, the fill zone should extend outside the edges of the
footings a distance equal to one-half of the depth of the over -excavation below the bottom of the footings.
The transmission zone from pile -supported grade beams to regular foundations should be heavily
reinforced.
Footings should extend at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finished ground surface for frost
protection and bearing capacity considerations. Minimum foundation widths of 18 and 24 inches should
be used for continuous and isolated spread footings, respectively, but footings should also be sized based
on anticipated loads and allowable soil bearing pressure. Standing water should not be allowed to
accumulate in footing trenches. All loose or disturbed soil should be removed from the foundation
excavation prior to placing concrete.
For foundations constructed as outlined above, we recommend an allowable design bearing pressure of
not more than 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be used for the footing design for footings founded on
the medium dense or better glacial soils or structural fill extending to the native competent material. The
foundation bearing soil should be evaluated by a representative of NGA. We should be consulted if
higher bearing pressures are needed. Current International Building Code (IBC) guidelines should be
used when considering increased allowable bearing pressure for short-term transitory wind or seismic
loads. Potential foundation settlement using the recommended allowable bearing pressure is estimated to
be less than one inch total and 1/2 inch differential between adjacent footings or across a distance of about
30 feet, based on our experience with similar projects.
Lateral loads may be resisted by friction on the base of the footing and passive resistance against the
subsurface portions of the foundation. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used to calculate the base
friction and should be applied to the vertical dead load only. Passive resistance may be calculated as a
triangular equivalent fluid pressure distribution. An equivalent fluid density of 200 pcf should be used for
passive resistance design for a level ground surface adjacent to the footing. This level surface should
extend a distance equal to at least three times the footing depth. These recommended values incorporate
safety factors of 1.5 and 2.0 applied to the estimated ultimate values for frictional and passive resistance,
respectively. To achieve this value of passive resistance, the foundations should be poured "neat" against
the native medium dense soils, or compacted fill should be used as backfill against the front of the
footing. We recommend that the upper one foot of soil be neglected when calculating the passive
resistance. Frictional resistance should be neglected for footings supported on drilled piers.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED NGA File No. 1065318
Hitchens Residence Development December 20, 2018
Edmonds, Washington Page 12
Retaining Walls
Specific grading plans for this project were not available at the time this report was prepared, but
retaining walls may be incorporated into project plans. In general, the lateral pressure acting on
subsurface retaining walls is dependent on the nature and density of the soil behind the wall, the amount
of lateral wall movement which can occur as backfill is placed, wall drainage conditions, and the
inclination of the backfill. For walls that are free to yield at the top at least one thousandth of the height
of the wall (active condition), soil pressures will be less than if movement is limited by such factors as
wall stiffness or bracing (at -rest condition). We recommend that walls supporting horizontal backfill and
not subjected to hydrostatic forces, be designed using a triangular earth pressure distribution equivalent to
that exerted by a fluid with a density of 40 pcf for yielding (active condition) walls, and 60 pcf for non -
yielding (at -rest condition) walls.
These recommended lateral earth pressures are for a drained granular backfill and are based on the
assumption of a horizontal ground surface behind the wall for a distance of at least the subsurface height
of the wall, and do not account for surcharge loads. Additional lateral earth pressures should be
considered for surcharge loads acting adjacent to subsurface walls and within a distance equal to the
subsurface height of the wall. This would include the effects of surcharges such as traffic loads, floor slab
loads, slopes, or other surface loads. We could consult with the structural engineer regarding additional
loads on retaining walls during final design, if needed. A seismic design loading of 8H in psf should also
be included in the wall design where "H" is the total height of the wall.
The lateral pressures on walls may be resisted by friction between the foundation and subgrade soil, and
by passive resistance acting on the below -grade portion of the foundation. Recommendations for
frictional and passive resistance to lateral loads are presented in the Foundations subsection of this
report.
All wall backfill should be well compacted as outlined in the Structural Fill subsection of this report.
Care should be taken to prevent the buildup of excess lateral soil pressures due to over -compaction of the
wall backfill. This can be accomplished by placing wall backfill in 8-inch loose lifts and compacting the
backfill with small, hand -operated compactors within a distance behind the wall equal to at least one-half
the height of the wall. The thickness of the loose lifts should be reduced to accommodate the lower
compactive energy of the hand -operated equipment. The recommended level of compaction should still
be maintained.
Permanent drainage systems should be installed for retaining walls. Recommendations for these systems
are found in the Subsurface Drainage subsection of this report. We recommend that we be retained to
evaluate the proposed wall drain backfill material and observe installation of the drainage systems.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED NGA File No. 1065318
Hitchens Residence Development December 20, 2018
Edmonds, Washington Page 13
Structural Fill
General: Fill placed beneath foundations, pavement, or other settlement -sensitive structures should be
placed as structural fill. Structural fill, by definition, is placed in accordance with prescribed methods and
standards, and is monitored by an experienced geotechnical professional or soils technician. Field
monitoring procedures would include the performance of a representative number of in -place density tests
to document the attainment of the desired degree of relative compaction. The area to receive the fill
should be suitably prepared as described in the Site Preparation and Grading subsection prior to
beginning fill placement. Sloping areas to receive fill should be benched using a minimum 8-foot wide
horizontal benches into competent soils.
Materials: Structural fill should consist of a good quality, granular soil, free of organics and other
deleterious material, and be well graded to a maximum size of about three inches. All-weather fill should
contain no more than five -percent fines (soil finer than U.S. No. 200 sieve, based on that fraction passing
the U.S. 3/4-inch sieve). Some of the more granular on -site soils may be suitable for use as structural fill
depending on the moisture content of the soil during construction. We should be retained to evaluate all
proposed structural fill material prior to placement.
Fill Placement: Following subgrade preparation, placement of structural fill may proceed. All filling
should be accomplished in uniform lifts up to eight inches thick. Each lift should be spread evenly and be
thoroughly compacted prior to placement of subsequent lifts. All structural fill underlying building areas
and pavement subgrade should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its maximum dry density.
Maximum dry density, in this report, refers to that density as determined by the ASTM D-1557
Compaction Test procedure. The moisture content of the soils to be compacted should be within about
two percent of optimum so that a readily compactable condition exists. It may be necessary to over -
excavate and remove wet soils in cases where drying to a compactable condition is not feasible. All
compaction should be accomplished by equipment of a type and size sufficient to attain the desired degree
of compaction and should be tested.
Slab -on -Grade
Slabs -on -grade should be supported on subgrade soils prepared as described in the Site Preparation and
Grading subsection of this report. We recommend that all floor slabs be underlain by at least six inches
of free -draining gravel with less than three percent by weight of the material passing Sieve #200 for use
as a capillary break. We recommend that the capillary break be hydraulically connected to the footing
drain system to allow free drainage from under the slab. A suitable vapor barrier, such as heavy plastic
sheeting (6-mil minimum), should be placed over the capillary break material. An additional 2-inch-thick
moist sand layer may be used to cover the vapor barrier. This sand layer is optional, and is intended to be
used to protect the vapor barrier membrane and to aid in curing the concrete.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED NGA File No. 1065318
Hitchens Residence Development December 20, 2018
Edmonds, Washington Page 14
Pavements
Pavement subgrade preparation and structural filling where required, should be completed as
recommended in the Site Preparation and Grading and Structural Fill subsections of this report. The
pavement subgrade should be proof -rolled with a heavy, rubber -tired piece of equipment, to identify soft
or yielding areas that require repair. The pavement section should be underlain by a minimum of six
inches of clean granular pit run or crushed rock. We should be retained to observe the proof -rolling and
recommend repairs prior to placement of the asphalt or hard surfaces.
Utilities
We recommend that underground utilities be bedded with a minimum 12 inches of pea gravel prior to
backfilling the trench with on -site or imported material. Trenches within settlement sensitive areas
should be compacted to 95% of the modified proctor as described in the Structural Fill subsection of this
report. Trenches located in non-structural areas should be compacted to a minimum 90% of the maximum
dry density. Trench backfill compaction should be tested.
Site Drainage
Surface Drainage: The control of surface water and near -surface groundwater is very important for the
long-term stability of the site slopes. We recommend that temporary and final site grading be designed to
direct surface water away from the structures and away from the steeper site slopes.
Roof drains should be installed around the site structures. The roof drains should consist of gutters and
downspouts to collect stormwater runoff from the roof. The downspouts should connect with 4-inch
diameter, rigid PVC tightline pipes to the main catch basin. The footing and roof drains should be routed
in separate tightlines into catch basins/cleanouts. Stormwater from the driveway and yard drains should
also be collected and directed through tightlines into the main catch basin and then through the controlled
drainage system.
In our opinion, due to the steep slopes and high erosion susceptibility of the onsite soils interpreted to
underlie the site, stormwater infiltration is not considered feasible for this project. Likewise, dispersion of
stormwater near the top of slopes may increase surface flow over the steep slope and is not considered a
feasible alternative for this project. In our opinion it may be most practical to install a tightline pipe down
the surface of the site slopes to direct runoff to an energy dissipator along the toe of the steep slope near
the western property line.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED NGA File No. 1065318
Hitchens Residence Development December 20, 2018
Edmonds, Washington Page 15
Runoff from proposed structures should be led through tightline pipes to catch basins. Water collected in
the footing drains of the structure should be separately tightlined to the catch basin. The footing drain
system should have a minimum of 12 inches of vertical fall before it is connected to the roof drain system.
The yard areas and any proposed driveway areas should be sloped to allow collection of runoff in yard
and driveway drains, and this water should be directed into the main catch basin via tightline pipes. The
number and locations of catch basins, cleanouts, and downspouts may be determined during site design,
and altered during construction provided the intent of the drainage mitigation system design is not
changed.
The water collected from the roof drains, footing drains, driveway and yard drains should be routed via
buried 4- to 6-inch minimum diameter PVC tightline pipes into catch basins. The outflows from these
catch basins are then routed to the main catch basin. The main catch basin should be anchored into
competent, native material.
From the main catch basin, the outfall pipe should be connected and constructed to maintain positive
water flow. We recommend a 4-inch minimum diameter solid HDPE pipe installed over the steep slope
and down to the toe of the slope near the western property line. The HDPE pipe should be anchored to
the main catch basin. The HDPE pipe should also be anchored with a flange encased in a concrete
deadman. The HDPE pipe draining the main catch basin should emerge from the slope and extend down
the surface of the site slopes to a suitable discharge point at the toe of the slope. The pipe should lie
directly on the ground surface and be anchored to minimize lateral movement. The anchors should be
placed at locations selected for optimum performance, preferably near the top and toe of slope.
A diffuser tee should be placed at the outfall of the HDPE drainpipe at the toe of the steep slope. The
diffuser tee is used to slow and spread out the flow from the HDPE drainpipe to dissipate the energy and
erosion potential of the flow. The diffuser tee should drain onto a diffuser pad constructed from 8- to 12-
inch rock spalls or into a level -spreader dispersion trench to further disperse the flow from the outlet,
armor the toe of the slope, further minimize erosion effects, and to hold the diffuser tee in place. We
should be retained during construction to provide consultation on the specific location of the diffuser tee
and outfall of the HDPE pipe.
Subsurface Drainage: If groundwater is encountered during construction, we recommend that the
contractor slope the bottom of the excavation and collect the water into ditches and small sump pits where
the water can be pumped out of the excavation and routed into an approved outlet.
We recommend that all existing and future down spouts and footing drains be tightlined to an approved
discharge location at the bottom of the slope or within the street. Stormwater systems within this site
should be designed in accordance with City of Edmonds regulations.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED NGA File No. 1065318
Hitchens Residence Development December 20, 2018
Edmonds, Washington Page 16
We recommend the use of footing drains around the structure foundations. Footing drains should be
installed at least one foot below planned finished floor elevation. The drains should consist of a
minimum four -inch -diameter, rigid, slotted or perforated, PVC pipe surrounded by free -draining material
wrapped in a filter fabric. We recommend that the free -draining material consist of an 18-inch-wide zone
of clean (less than three -percent fines), granular material placed along the back of walls. Washed rock is
an acceptable drain material, or a drainage composite may be used instead. The free -draining material
should extend up the wall to one foot below the finished surface. The top foot of soil should consist of
low permeability soil placed over plastic sheeting or building paper to minimize the migration of surface
water or silt into the footing drain. Footing drains should discharge into tightlines leading to an
appropriate collection and discharge point with convenient cleanouts to prolong the useful life of the
drains. Roof drains should not be connected to wall or footing drains. Under no circumstances should
runoff be allowed to flow over the steep slope.
CONSTRUCTION MONITORING
We should be retained to provide construction monitoring services during the earthwork phase of the
project to evaluate subgrade conditions, temporary cut conditions, fill compaction, and drainage system
installation.
USE OF THIS REPORT
NGA has prepared this report for Mr. Garth Hitchens and his agents, for use in the planning and design of
the development on this site only. The scope of our work does not include services related to construction
safety precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractors' methods,
techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in
design. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions between the explorations and also with
time. Our report, conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of subsurface
conditions. A contingency for unanticipated conditions should be included in the budget and schedule.
We recommend that NGA be retained to provide monitoring and consultation services during
construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the
explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the
work differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation
activities comply with contract plans and specifications. We should be contacted a minimum of one week
prior to construction activities and could attend pre -construction meetings if requested.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED
Hitchens Residence Development
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 1065318
December 20, 2018
Page 17
All people who own or occupy homes on hillsides should realize that landslide movements are always a
possibility. The landowner should periodically inspect the slope, especially after a winter storm. If
distress is evident, a geotechnical engineer should be contacted for advice on remedial/preventative
measures. The probability that landsliding will occur is substantially reduced by the proper maintenance
of drainage systems at the site. Therefore, the homeowner should take responsibility for performing such
maintenance. Consequently, we recommend that a copy of our report be provided to any future
homeowners of the property if the home is sold.
Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been performed in accordance
with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in effect in this area at the time this report was
prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Our observations, findings, and opinions are
a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner.
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - REVISED
Hitchens Residence Development
Edmonds, Washington
NGA File No. 1065318
December 20, 2018
Page 18
It has been a pleasure to provide service to you on this project. If you have any questions or require
further information, please call.
Sincerely,
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
44 4-14�1
Alex B. Rinaldi, GIT
Staff Geologist II
J!9 M. Ste.
Q,y OF WA q
n
35215 w
-0 i s T ti�`�gG~
�IONAL
Khaled M. Shawish, PE
Principal
ABR:KMS:dy
Seven Figures Attached
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.
VICINITY MAP
N
Not to Scale
Project
Site
So(
�
cou
ae
P Olympic Yew Dr
6
s=
o
W
s
D
m
W �
S
s
<
3
Q1Sw <
184th St SW
W
W
'a
Seaview Park Q
m
f
t 85th PI SW
'01
Hutt Park
18eth St sv,
o
'O
1871h PI SW s
D
�
W
E
a
�
PERRI�
I nth St Sw
N
N
_ Seaview 0
0
N_
>
Edmonds, WA
0
N
N
0
O
lL
U
N
O
d
Q
C7
Project Number
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
No.
Date
Revision
By
CK
Vista Del Mar Drive
ASSOCIATES, INC.
N
1
11/8/18
Original
DPN
ABR
o.
1065318
Residence Development
r'
NGA
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
(�1
Figure 1
`�
Vicinity Map
W°35thA'e°E,Affice EasiWe°atcyLanehee 2
17311-135[h Ave. NE, A-500 552fi Industry Lane, tF2
Woodinville, WA 98072 East Wenatchee, WA 98802
E
�
(425) 486-1669 / Fax: 481-2510 www.nelsongeotech.com (509) 665-7696 / Fax: 665-7692
L
CD
cc M
_ CP z
CD CA)�
co3
07
CD
3�(n
CDC
RCD C
3.
C�
CDC
� 0 _
CD CD
o ZAV
•ar;
f1 j
3.
A r
Z m o
M n r L�
3 (1) a m
m N'm N Z zm
o
K 0
Z LEGEND
O
o — — Property line
B-1
Number and approximate
w y —�—
o location of boring
3
W A A' Approximate location
0 of cross-section
M 7 Reference: Site plan based on field measurem(
�\hill\comoanv\2018 NGA Proiect Folders\10653-18 Vista Del Mar Residential Development Muk
Schematic Site Plan
ns, and aerial parcel m
Vista Del Mar Dr
0 40 80
Approximate Scale: 1 inch = 40 feet
T
,o
0�
CDw
c
``'
00 07
Northwest
CD
160 T
m
n c. <
o Qc
D v
0CD p
07 m cm
0 0�
o m v
o p
D -0
D mm
m
o Z
m0 i >
Z
m
z >r
Z Uo
m O Z
3 N n m
ZI
in m
NE�,n m (1
o Z =
0 0 Z
0
>
N r
120
c
0
80
N
W
M
Q 40
1
M.,
Existing
House
I I Mil
A'
Southeast
160
0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320
Distance (feet)
Exploration
A�0.zo
120
40
m Boring Designation B_I
p 23
23 <-- SPT N-value
° y Groundwater Level 1 NOTES:
During Exploration 23 1) Stratigraphic conditions are interpolated between
23 the explorations. Actual conditions may vary.
0 00 Geologic Contact 2) Elevations are arbitrary.
U 1<
z (approximate)
> 0
A Reference: Cross Section is based on field measurements using a hand-held clinometer and 100-ft tape measure.
1. 11; 1-1 RA,,
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
GROUP
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GROUP NAME
SYMBOL
CLEAN
GW
WELL -GRADED, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL
COARSE-
GRAVEL
GRAVEL
GP
POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL
GRAINED
MORE THAN 50 %
GRAVEL
GM
SILTY GRAVEL
OF COARSE FRACTION
RETAINED ON
SOILS
NO.4 SIEVE
WITH FINES
GC
CLAYEY GRAVEL
SAND
CLEAN
SW
WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND
SAND
SP
POORLY GRADED SAND
MORE THAN 50 %
RETAINED ON
MORE THAN 50 %
NO. 200 SIEVE
OF COARSE FRACTION
SAND
SM
SILTY SAND
PASSES NO. 4 SIEVE
WITH FINES
SC
CLAYEY SAND
FINE -
SILT AND CLAY
ML
SILT
INORGANIC
GRAINED
LIQUID LIMIT
CL
CLAY
LESS THAN 50 %
SOILS
ORGANIC
OL
ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY
SILT AND CLAY
MH
SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT
INORGANIC
MORE THAN 50 %
PASSES
LIQUID LIMIT
CH
CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY
NO. 200 SIEVE
50 % OR MORE
ORGANIC
OH
ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
PT
PEAT
NOTES:
1) Field classification is based on visual SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS:
examination of soil in general
accordance with ASTM D 2488-93. Dry - Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to
the touch
2) Soil classification using laboratory tests
is based on ASTM D 2488-93. Moist - Damp, but no visible water.
3) Descriptions of soil density or Wet - Visible free water or saturated,
consistency are based on usually soil is obtained from
interpretation of blowcount data, below water table
visual appearance of soils, and/or
test data.
Project Number
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
No.
Date
Revision
By
CK
1065318
Vista Del Mar Drive
ASSOCIATES, INC.
NGA
Residence Development
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
1
11/8/18
Original
DPN
ABR
Figure 4
Soil Classification Chart
Woodinville�ce East Wenatchee Office
17311-135th Ave. NE, A-500 5526 Industry Lane, R2
Woodl twill,, WA98072 East Wenatchee, WA 98802
(425) 486-1669 / F_ 481-2510 www. nelsongeotech.eon, (509) 665-7696 1 Fax: 665-7692
BORING LOG
B-1
Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: ??
Soil Profile
Sample Data
Penetration Resistance
(glows/foot - ia)
10 20 30 40 50 50+
1 1 1 1S
0)
Piezometer
Installation -
Description
a
Q o
�-0
o
E m s
g
Ground Water
Data
Moisture Content
o
J
o f
o
In U
U r
(Percent - ■)
o
(Depth in Feet)
(�
U)
� 0
10 20 30 40 50 50+
m
J
Topsoil
Gray, fine to coarse sand with silt (very loose, moist)
(FILL)
2
-becomes medium dense, with iron -oxide staining, wood
5
5
debris, and organics
21
Orange -brown, fine to coarse sand with silt, gravel, and
iron -oxide staining (medium dense, moist)
16
-becomes gray -brown, dense, with no iron -oxide staining
SP-SM
40
I`I
-no recovery
47
IL -
-
Boring met refusal on a cobble below existing grade at
14.0 feet on 10/31 /18. Groundwater seepage was not
15
15
encountered during drilling.
20
....................................................
20
25
....................................................
25
LEGEND Solid PVC Pipe Concrete M Moisture Content
Slotted PVC Pipe Bentonite A Atterberg Limits
Depth Driven and Amount Recovered G Grain -size Analysis
with 2-inch O.D. Split -Spoon Sampler Monument/ Cap Native Soil DS Direct Shear
to Piezometer PP Pocket Penetrometer Readings, tons/ft
Depth Driven and Amount Recovered 0 Silica Sand
p �k Liquid Limit P Sample Pushed
with 3-inch Shelby Tube Sampler + Plastic Limit 1 Water Level T Triaxial
NOTE: Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by engineering tests, analysis and judgement. They are not necessarily
representative of other times and locations. We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
Project Number
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
No.
Date
Revision
By
CK
Vista Del Mar Drive
ASSOCIATES, INC.
1
11/8)18
Original
DPN
ABR
1065318
Residence Development
Boring Log
N A
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
Figure 5
Woodinville Office East Wenatchee Office
17311-135th Ave. NE, A-500 5526 Industry Lane, R2
Woodinville, WA 98072 East Wenatchee, WA 98802
Page1 of 1
g
(425) 486-16691 Fax:481-2510 www nelsongeotech com (509) 665-76961 Fax 665-7692
cO
0
0
J
BORING LOG
B-2
Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: ??
Soil Profile
Sample Data
Penetration Resistance
(glows/foot - ia)
10 20 30 40 50 50+
1 1 1 1S
0)
Piezometer
Installation -
Description
a
Q o
�-0
o
E m s
g
Ground Water
Data
Moisture Content
o
J
o f
o
In U
U r
(Percent - ■)
o
(Depth in Feet)
(�
U)
� 0
10 20 30 40 50 50+
m
J
Topsoil
Light brown, fine to medium sand with silt and trace roots
(loose, moist) (FILL)
9
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
light brown, fine to coarse sand with silt, gravel, and trace
— —
:, .:.
—
5
5
organics (medium dense, moist)
16
•
33
-becomes orange -brown, medium dense, with iron-oxide40
staining
19
'
SP-SM
:.,• : ..
15
...................................................
15
-becomes dense
49
-becomes very dense
:.
20
...................................................
20
83
Boring met refusal on a cobble below existing grade at
21.5 feet on 10/31 /18. Groundwater seepage was not
encountered during drilling.
25
....................................................
25
LEGEND Solid PVC Pipe Concrete M Moisture Content
Slotted PVC Pipe Bentonite A Atterberg Limits
Depth Driven and Amount Recovered G Grain -size Analysis
with 2-inch O.D. Split -Spoon Sampler Monument/ Cap Native Soil DS Direct Shear
to Piezometer PP Pocket Penetrometer Readings, tons/ft
Depth Driven and Amount Recovered 0 Silica Sand
p �k Liquid Limit P Sample Pushed
with 3-inch Shelby Tube Sampler + Plastic Limit 1 Water Level T Triaxial
NOTE: Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by engineering tests, analysis and judgement. They are not necessarily
representative of other times and locations. We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
Project Number
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
No.
Date
Revision
By
CK
Vista Del Mar Drive
ASSOCIATES, INC.
1
11/8)18
Original
DPN
ABR
1065318
Residence Development
Boring Log
N A
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
Figure 6
Woodinville Office East Wenatchee Office
17311-135th Ave. NE, A-500 5526 Industry Lane, R2
Woodinville, WA 98072 East Wenatchee, WA 98802
Page1 of 1
g
(425) 486-16691 Fax:481-2510 www nelsongeotech com (509) 665-76961 Fax 665-7692
cO
0
0
J
BORING LOG
B-3
Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: ??
Soil Profile
Sample Data
Penetration Resistance
(glows/foot - ia)
10 20 30 40 50 50+
1 1 1 1S
0)
Piezometer
Installation -
Description
a
Q o
�-0
o
E m s
g
Ground Water
Data
Moisture Content
o
J
o f
o
In U
U r
(Percent - ■)
o
(Depth in Feet)
(�
U)
� 0
10 20 30 40 50 50+
m
J
Topsoil
Orange -brown, fine to coarse sand with silt, gravel, and
iron -oxide staining (loose, moist) (FILL)
8
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Orange -brown, fine to coarse sand with gravel, silt, and
— —
:, .:.
—
5
5
iron -oxide staining (medium dense, moist)
SP-SM
15
Orange -brown, fine to coarse sand with gravel and
iron -oxide staining (medium dense, moist)
20
10
...............................
..................
10
-becomes orange -brown to gray -brown, dense
43
SP
..
15
...................................................
15
.....
48
Orange -brown, fine to coarse sand with silt, gravel, and
iron -oxide staining (very dense, moist)
50-6
20
1
...................................................
20
:.
SP-SM
:.
50-6
25
....................................................
25
Boring met refusal on a cobble below existing grade at
25.3 feet on 10/31 /18. Groundwater seepage was not
encountered during drilling.
LEGEND Solid PVC Pipe Concrete M Moisture Content
Slotted PVC Pipe Bentonite A Atterberg Limits
Depth Driven and Amount Recovered G Grain -size Analysis
with 2-inch O.D. Split -Spoon Sampler Monument/ Cap Native Soil DS Direct Shear
to Piezometer PP Pocket Penetrometer Readings, tons/ft
Depth Driven and Amount Recovered 0 Silica Sand
p �k Liquid Limit P Sample Pushed
with 3-inch Shelby Tube Sampler + Plastic Limit 1 Water Level T Triaxial
NOTE: Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by engineering tests, analysis and judgement. They are not necessarily
representative of other times and locations. We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
Project Number
NELSON GEOTECHNICAL
No.
Date
Revision
By
CK
Vista Del Mar Drive
ASSOCIATES, INC.
1
11/8)18
Original
DPN
ABR
1065318
Residence Development
Boring Log
N A
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS
Figure 7
Woodinville Office East Wenatchee Office
17311-135th Ave. NE, A-500 5526 Industry Lane, R2
Woodinville, WA 98072 East Wenatchee, WA 98802
Page1 of 1
g
(425) 486-16691 Fax:481-2510 www nelsongeotech com (509) 665-76961 Fax 665-7692
cO
0
0
J