REVIEWED RESUB1 BLD2023-1063+Geotechnical_Report+10.2.2023_12.31.10_PM+3815773Asece C t .REVIEWED
BY RESUB
Company CITY OF EDMONDS ? Oct 02 2023
BUILDING DEPARTMENT?
CITY OF EDMONDS
October 2, 2023 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
DEPARTMENT
Raphael Rodriguez
18418 Olympic View Drive
Edmonds, WA
Re: Response to City of Edmonds Review Comments
Project No. 230007
Dear Raphael:
BLD2023-1063
Aspect Consulting, LLC (Aspect) produced Geotechnical and Basis of Design reports for the slope
stabilization (Project) at 18418 Olympic View Way in Edmonds, Washington (Site; Figure 1), also
known as Snohomish County (County) parcel number 00565600200300 (Aspect, 2023a; 2023b).
The reports were submitted to the City of Edmonds (City) as parts of a building permit application.
The City responded with requests for comment that referred to specific sections of the Edmonds
Community Development Code (ECDC). This addendum to our reports presents each of the City's
comment requests followed by our response. Responses 1 through 7 address comments from the
City's Planning Division received in a letter dated September, 19, 2023; response 8 addresses a
comment from the City's Engineering Division received in a letter dated September 20, 2023; and
responses 9 through 11 address comments from the City's Building Division received in a letter
dated September 25, 2023.
Response to City Planning Division Comments
Comment 1 — Mitigation Sequencing (ECDC 23.40.090.D.5)
Response 1
Although the construction of the soldier pile wall in the critical area will temporarily increase
erosion hazard at the site, that temporary increase will be reduced with diligent attention to
temporary erosion and sedimentation control (TESC) measures. In the long term, construction of
the wall will mitigate, not exacerbate, erosion and slope instability hazard for the steep bluffs at the
site.
Comment 2 — Statement of Accuracy and Limitations (ECDC
23.40.090. D.7)
Response 2
The accuracy and limitations of our geotechnical report, building plans, and other products are
addressed in Appendix B of the Geotechnical Report. Appendix B is also attached to this
addendum.
Raphael Rodriguez
October 2, 2023
Project No. 230007
Comment 3 — Description of sewage disposal system(s) (ECDC
23.80.050.F.2.c)
Response 3
The sewage conveyance at the Site consists of a side -sewer connection that runs approximately
west to east between the house and the sewer main. The sewer main runs north -south on the east
side of the house, as shown on Sheet C-4 of the plan set.
The side sewer and main sewer lines will not be impacted by the construction of the wall.
Comment 4 — Recommendations for drainage improvements (ECDC
23.80.050. F.3. b)
Response 4
Some of the stormwater drainage infrastructure appears to have been damaged by the flood and
landslide that occurred in December 2022, as described in the Geotechnical Report. Some other
stormwater infrastructure may become disturbed or altered by construction of the wall.
After construction of the wall, we recommend repairing and restoring all damaged or disturbed
stormwater infrastructure and conveying stormwater to the bottom of the slope. All stormwater
collected on the site from roof drains, yard drains, footing drains, catch basins, or other collection
infrastructure should be conveyed in solid -wall PVC pipe (not flexible, corrugated polyethylene
pipe) to an anchor catch basin near the top of the steep slope close to the south edge of the parcel.
PVC drain lines should include cleanouts to allow periodic maintenance and inspection. General
recommended guidelines for the components of the stormwater improvements follow.
Anchor Catch Basin
The anchor catch basin should be buried at least 2 feet below existing ground surface and should be
positioned several feet back from the crest of the steep slope. From the anchor catch basin, fuse -
welded HDPE pipe should extend to an outfall at the bottom of the slope. The HDPE should be
secured to the anchor catch basin with a flange inside the outlet to the catch basin. Alternatively, a
cast -in -place concrete anchor block, placed just downstream of the catch basin, could be used in
combination with a fuse -welded flange. In either case, the attachment should be designed and
installed such that it will transmit axial tensile loads on the HDPE pipe to the anchor catch basin.
The catch basin or cast -in -place concrete anchor block should be sized to accommodate the axial
tensile loads imparted on it by the HDPE pipe. The designer should confirm that the passive soil
resistance and friction resistance on the anchor are greater than the anticipated static weight and
dynamic forces on the outlet pipe.
Outfall Pipe
Starting at the catch basin, the outfall pipe should consist of a fuse -welded, thick-walled HDPE
pipe. The HDPE outfall pipe should be mechanically secured to the catch basin or cast -in -place
concrete anchor block as described above. The outfall pipe should extend in a trench from the catch
basin to the top of the steep slope. Backfill for the trench between the catch basin and the top of the
slope should consist of relatively impermeable material such as bentonite-amended soil or
controlled density fill (CDF). Where the pipe daylights on the steep slope, an elbow fitting should
be installed that approximates the declination of the steep slope. From the elbow down to the toe of
the slope, the pipe should be placed on the surface of the steep slope, not in a trench.
Aspect Consulting, LLC Page 2
Raphael Rodriguez
October 2, 2023
Project No. 230007
All joints between lengths of HDPE pipe and fittings (including flanges, elbows, tees, etc.) should
be heat -fused. Solvent welds and mechanical connections are not recommended. At the outfall, the
diffuser tee should be "stapled" and secured to the ground using small diameter steel pipe sections
driven into the slope with a sledgehammer.
Diffuser Tee
We recommend the outfall discharges to a perforated diffuser tee. The diffuser should consist of
perforated pipe, oriented horizontally such that the discharge is evenly distributed onto the ground
surface. The ground surface should be covered with quarry spalls to dissipate the energy of the
outfall and reduce erosion.
Post -Construction Maintenance
Drainage pipes should be regularly inspected (at least once per year) and repaired immediately if
deficiencies or damage are observed. Inspection of the inlets for clogs and backed -up water can be
done visually, and proper flow and leaks can be checked with a garden hose at a cleanout, catch
basin, or at the base of the gutter near the ground surface. Screened inlets and cleanouts should be
maintained and used to keep the drain system free of debris and backups.
Comment 5 — Estimated Bluff Retreat Rate or Landslide Area
Expansion Risk (ECDC 23.80.050.F.2.e)
Response 5
The proposed soldier pile wall will greatly reduce the bluff retreat rate and the risk of landslide area
expansion. Bluff retreat and landslide area expansion will both be essentially stopped for the
lifetime of the wall, which is expected to be several decades.
Comment 6 — Consideration of Run -Out Hazard (ECDC
23.80.050.F.2.f)
Response 6
The landslide that occurred in December 2022 flowed down the steep slope and to the railroad
tracks at the bottom of the slope. The landslide was triggered by a flood and debris flow that
emitted from damaged stormwater infrastructure uphill from the property. Because of the high
water content in the debris flow, material from the top of the bluff was mobilized and entrained and
then flowed all the way to the bottom of the slope.
The damaged stormwater infrastructure has now reportedly been mitigated. Therefore, recurrence
of a landslide with similar water content and run -out is extremely unlikely. In addition, the
construction of the soldier pile wall will greatly reduce the rate of ravel and topple failures at the
top of the bluff and therefore greatly reduce deposition of bluff material onto the steep slope below
the bluff. The reduction of debris accumulation on the slope will further reducing potential run -out
hazard.
Comment 7 — Seasonal Restriction (ECDC 23.80.070.A.6)
Response 7
Construction of the soldier pile wall will occur after October 1. To reduce hazards associated with
construction in the wet season, temporary erosion and sedimentation control (TESC) measures and
site best management practices (BMPs) will be applied and monitored with extra diligence. TESC
measures are described on the plan set on Sheets G-1 and C-1. As conditions demand, additional
Aspect Consulting, LLC Page 3
Raphael Rodriguez
October 2, 2023 Project No. 230007
applicable TESC measures and BMPs from ECDC 18.30 and the Washington Department of
Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (Ecology, 2019) will be applied
at the work site. During construction, TESC and BMPs will be frequently monitored by Certified
Erosion and Sedimentation Control Leads (CESCLs) and modified or corrected when appropriate.
Response to City Engineering Division Comments
Comment 8 — Please show on -Site storm system on the plans.
Response 8
On -site storm system is shown on the plans, Rev 2, dated 9/29/2023, on Sheet C-1. The storm drain
line location is based on verbal report of inspection by The Drain Doctors, 9/26/2023, and has not
been field verified.
Some of the stormwater drainage infrastructure appears to have been damaged by the flood and
landslide that occurred in December 2022, as described in the Geotechnical Report. Some other
stormwater infrastructure may become disturbed or altered by construction of the wall. After
construction of the wall, we recommend repairing and restoring all damaged or disturbed
stormwater infrastructure and conveying stormwater to the bottom of the slope. A summary of our
recommendations for stormwater system restoration is above.
Response to City Building Division Comments
Comment 9 — Minimum buffer and setback recommendations (ECDC
23.80.050(C)6, 23.80.070(A)1, and 23.80.070(A)2)
Response 9
The soldier pile wall will be constructed within the buffer or setback for the erosion and landslide
hazard critical areas. During construction, diligent attention to TESC and BMPs, as described in the
previous section of this addendum, will reduce erosion and landslide hazards. After construction,
the wall will greatly reduce erosion and landslide hazard for the site, both within and outside
buffers and setbacks.
Comment 10 — Details about slope (ECDC 23.80.050(F)1)
Response 10
A text box on Sheet C-1 of Rev 2 of Project Plans shows the height of slope and slope gradient.
There are no springs, seeps, or other surface expressions of ground water on or within 200 feet of
the project area or that have the potential to be affected by the construction.
The location and description of surface water runoff features (stormwater infrastructure) are shown
on Sheet C-1 of Rev 2 of Project plans.
Aspect Consulting, LLC Page 4
Raphael Rodriguez
October 2, 2023
Comment 11 — Consideration of Run -Out Hazard (ECDC
23.80.050. F.2.f)
Response 11
See Response 6 above.
Project No. 230007
Comment 12 — Slope stability analysis with static and seismic factors
of safety (ECDC 23.80.050(F)2.d, 23.80.050(F)2.e, 23.80.060(A),
23.80.070(A)4.a)
Response 12
Slope Stability Analysis
Based upon the topography shown in LiDAR (DNR, 2023) and detailed surveying on the site (as
shown on the plan set) as well as observations from our Site reconnaissance, we conducted two-
dimensional limit equilibrium stability analyses using the Slide2 computer software program
(Rocscience, 2022). We assessed slope stability under static and seismic loading conditions for a
representative critical section in the location shown on Figure 1. Output from the computer analysis
is shown in Appendix A.
Soil Unit Engineering Properties
As previously discussed in our Basis of Design Report (Aspect, 2023b), we designated the
soil/material units and assigned the engineering parameters shown in Table 1 for our slope stability
analyses. The strength values assumed for the geologic units are roughly correlated with the site
exploration blow -count data and are based upon our experience with similar geologic units.
Table 1. Engineering Soil Parameters
Geologic Unit
Unit Weight (pcf)
Strength Parameters
Friction Angle
(deg)
Cohesion
(psf)
Fill
115
28
0
Transitional Beds
125
32
200
Olympia Gravels
130
36
500
Notes: pcf = pounds per cubic foot; psf = pounds per square foot; deg = degrees
These soil engineering parameters were back -calculated with a sensitivity analysis by modeling the
pre -failure slope using the subsurface data collected at the Site, and two-dimensional limit
equilibrium methods within Slide2. With these parameters and the pre -landslide slope conditions,
the calculated factor of safety (FS) was approximately 1.0, which indicates a marginally stable
slope conducive to failing.
Surcharge Loading from Structures
To represent structural loads exerted on the soils from the existing residence, we modeled a
surcharge load equal to 250 pounds per square foot (psf) over the footprint.
Aspect Consulting, LLC Page 5
Raphael Rodriguez
October 2, 2023 Project No. 230007
Groundwater
No groundwater was encountered in the subsurface explorations on the Site and there are no surface
expressions of groundwater (springs or seeps) on the steep slope. Therefore, groundwater level was
not included in the slope stability analysis.
Seismic Slope Stability
The Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Sections 23.80.050(F)2.d and
23.80.050(F)2.e state that a hazard analysis should include an estimate of slope stability that
considers catastrophic events such as seismic activity. We evaluated seismic slope stability using a
pseudo -static analysis. This entails applying a constant horizontal acceleration in the downward
(de -stabilizing) direction to the two-dimensional slope model. The constant horizontal acceleration
used in this analysis, or pseudostatic coefficient, (kn) value, is taken as one half of the design
earthquake with peak ground acceleration (PGA; i.e., kh= 0.278g) for an earthquake ground motion
with a 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years, in accordance with the American Society of
Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7-16, Minimum Design Loads an Associated Criteria for Buildings and
Other Structures (ASCE, 2017).
Slope Stability Analysis Results
The Slide2 program performs slope stability computations based on the modeled slope conditions
and calculates a factor of safety against slope failure, which is defined as the ratio of resisting
forces to driving forces. A factor of safety of 1.0 indicates a "just -stable" condition, and a factor of
safety less than 1.0 would indicate unstable conditions. The ECDC Section 23.80.070(A)4.a
requires a minimum factor of safety of 1.5 for static conditions and 1.2 for seismic conditions. The
calculated factors of safety shown in Table 2 below meet the minimum values required.
Table 2. Summary of Slope Stability Analysis Results
Existing Conditions
Factor of Safety
Static Factor of
Safety
Seismic Factor of
Safety
1.15
1.98
1.23
We modelled the soldier piles with a shear strength of 104 kips. This value is equal to 0.4*Fy*A,
where Fy is the yield strength of steel (assumed to be 50 kips per square inch) and A is the cross -
sectional area of a W 14x61 section.
Sections 23.80.050(C)6, 23.80.070(A)1, and 23.80.070(A)2 of the ECDC indicate that minimum
setback recommendations for avoiding landslide hazard must be provided. For this Project, a
setback recommendation is not applicable due to the nature of the design. The purpose of the
designed soldier pile wall is to protect the existing residence and property immediately upland of
the wall by stabilizing the slope. By design, the wall is located at the crest of the slope with zero
setback to maximize the amount of property retained with the slope stabilization.
Aspect Consulting, LLC Page 6
Raphael Rodriguez
October 2, 2023
Project No. 230007
References
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2017, Minimum Design Loads and Associated
Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE Standard 7-16.
Aspect Consulting, LLC (Aspect), 2023a, Geotechnical Report — Rodriguez Residence — 18418
Olympic View Drive — Edmonds, WA, Prepared for: Raphael Rodriguez. Project No.
23007, August 28.
Aspect Consulting, LLC (Aspect), 2023b, Geotechnical Engineering Basis of Design Report —
Rodriguez Property Slope Stabilization, Edmonds, WA, Prepared for: Raphael Rodriguez.
Project No. 23007, August 30, 2023.
Rocscience, 2022, Slide2 9.024 Analysis Program, build date September 6, 2023.
Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR), 2023, Washington LiDAR Portal,
Division of Geology and Earth Resources, https://Iidarportal.dnr.wa.gov/, accessed
September 26, 2023.
Washington Department of Ecology, 2019, Stormwater Management Manual for Western
Washington, Publication Number 19-10-021.
Limitations
Work for this project was performed for Raphael Rodriguez (Client), and this report was prepared
consistent with recognized standards of professionals in the same locality and involving similar
conditions, at the time the work was performed. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made
by Aspect Consulting, LLC (Aspect).
Recommendations presented herein are based on our interpretation of site conditions, geotechnical
engineering calculations, and judgment in accordance with our mutually agreed -upon scope of
work. Our recommendations are unique and specific to the project, site, and Client. Application of
this report for any purpose other than the project should be done only after consultation with
Aspect.
Variations may exist between the soil and groundwater conditions reported and those actually
underlying the site. The nature and extent of such soil variations may change over time and may not
be evident before construction begins. If any soil conditions are encountered at the site that are
different from those described in this report, Aspect should be notified immediately to review the
applicability of our recommendations.
Risks are inherent with any site involving slopes and no recommendations, geologic analysis, or
engineering design can assure slope stability. Our observations, findings, and opinions are a means
to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the Client.
It is the Client's responsibility to see that all parties to this project, including the designer,
contractor, subcontractors, and agents, are made aware of this report in its entirety. If project
developments result in changes from the preliminary project information, Aspect should be
Aspect Consulting, LLC Page 7
Raphael Rodriguez
October 2, 2023
Project No. 230007
contacted to determine if our recommendations contained in this report should be revised and/or
expanded upon.
The scope of work does not include services related to construction safety precautions. Site safety is
typically the responsibility of the contractor, and our recommendations are not intended to direct
the contractor's site safety methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures. The scope of our work
also does not include the assessment of environmental characteristics, particularly those involving
potentially hazardous substances in soil or groundwater.
All reports prepared by Aspect for the Client apply only to the services described in the
Agreement(s) with the Client. Any use or reuse by any party other than the Client is at the sole risk
of that party, and without liability to Aspect. Aspect's original files/reports shall govern in the event
of any dispute regarding the content of electronic documents furnished to others.
Please refer to Appendix B titled "Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use" for additional
information governing the use of this report.
We appreciate the opportunity to perform these services.
Sincerely,
Aspect consulting, LLC
10/2/2023
Matthew A. von der Ahe
Matthew von der Ahe, LEG
Project Geologist
mvonderahe@aspectconsulting.com
10/2/2023
Erik O. Andersen, PE
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
eandersen@aspectconsulting.com
Attachments: Figure 1 — Site and Exploration Map
Appendix A — Slope Stability Analysis
Appendix B — Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use
V:\230007 Rodriguez Property Geotech\Deliverables\Addendum\Geotech report addend um_FINAL.docx
Aspect Consulting, LLC Page 8
FIGURES
r � 1
J
AB-01 -
t AB-02
c
* t, , U
c
A a,
, s t
f sM T
.yt v
...1, v
41v-
Approximate Boring Location
Cross Section
Subject Property
King County Property Parcel
0 50 100
Feet
Site and Exploration Map N
Geotechnical Engineering and Basis of Design Report Addendum
Rodriguez Residence
Edmonds, Washington
BY:
FIGURE NO.
Aspect SEP-2023 MH/SCC
PROJECT NO. REVISED BY:
CONSULTING 230007 MAV/SCC
Basemap Layer Credits I I EagleView Technologies, Inc.
APPENDIX A
Slope Stability Analysis
Material
Unit Weight
Strength
Cohesion
Phi
Water
Hu
Name
Color
(Ibs/ft3)
Type
(psf)
(deg)
Surface
Type
Hu
Mohr-
Water
Fill
❑
115
Coulomb
0
28
Surface
Custom
1
Transitional
Mohr-
Water
Beds
❑
125
Coulomb
200
32
Surface
Custom
1
Olympia
Mohr-
Water
Gravel
❑
130
Coulomb
500
36
I Surface
Custom
1
0
Legend
Search Grid
Search Limits
1Z Modeled Groundwater Level
IB-zl Boring Location and Depth
SLIDEINTERPRET 9.026
House
Ibs/ft2
W
20 40 60 80
Existing Conditions
Before Soldier Pile Wall
SCALE: 1:240
C:\Users\jmartz\Desktop\Rodriguez SSA 2023.09.28.slmd
100 120 140 160 180
Slope Stability Analysis
Geotechnical Engineering and Basis of Design Report Addendum
Rodriguez Soldier Pile Wall
18418 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, WA
BY
9/28/2023 APPENDIX:
%Aspect ,MM
PRe,Er Ne. RE1IEwED BY A-1
/CONSULTING 230007
Material
Unit Weight (Ibs/
Strength
Cohesion
Phi
Water
Hu
Name
Color
ft3)
Type
(psf)
(deg)
Surface
Type
Hu
Water
Fill
115
Coulomb
0
28
Surface
Custom
1
Transitional
Mohr-
Water
Beds
❑
125
Coulomb
200
32
Surface
Custom
1
Olympia
Mohr-
Water
Gravel
p
130
Coulomb
500
36
Surface
Custom
1
Structural
Mohr-
Water
Backfill
■
140
Coulomb
0
I
40
I
I Surface
Custom
1
1
-20 0 20
Legend
nSearch Grid
N Search Li-te
1Z Modeled Groundwater Level
B-z Boring Location and! Depth
SLIDEINTERPRET 9.026
House
00 Ibs/ft2
a
40 60 80
Static with Soldier
Pile Wall
Support
Force
Out -Of -Plane
Failure
Pile Shear Strength
Force
Name
Color
Type
Application
Spacing l
Mode
(Ibs)
Orientation
Pile/Micro
Active
Parallel to
Soldier Pile
■
Pile
(Method A)
$
Shcar
104000
surface
Soldier Pile Wall
SCALE: 1:240
C:\Users\jmartz\Desktop\Rodriguez SSA 2023.09.28.slmd
100 120 140 160 180
Slope Stability Analysis
Geotechnical Engineering and Basis of Design Report Addendum
Rodriguez Soldier Pile Wall
18418 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, WA
%Aspect9/28/2023 ay. JMM APPENDIX:
/CONSULTING/�
PROTECT NO. REVIEWED BY: 230007 A--/
0
► 0.278
0
House
1.23
250.00 Ibs/ft2
0
Soldier Pile Wall
CD
0
.0
0
o
0
0
-20 0
20
40 60 80 100
120 140 160
180
Legend
n Search Grid
Slope Stability Analysis
Seismic with Soldier
14 Search Limits
Geotechnical Engineering and Basis of Design Report Addendum
= Modeled Groundwater Level
Pile Wall
Rodriguez Soldier Pile Wall
Sri Locatien and.epth
18418 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, WA
9/28/2023
6V
IVM
APPENDIX:SCALE:1:240
9.026
'CONSULTING
speca8
A_3SLIDEINTERPRET
C:\Usersmaz\Desktop\Rodriguez SSA 2023.09.2S.slmd
230007
REVIEWED
APPENDIX B
Report Limitations and
Guidelines for Use
REPORT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES FOR USE
Geoscience is Not Exact
The geoscience practices (geotechnical engineering, geology, and environmental science) are far
less exact than other engineering and natural science disciplines. It is important to recognize this
limitation in evaluating the content of the report. If you are unclear how these "Report Limitations
and Guidelines for Use" apply to your project or property, you should contact Aspect Consulting,
LLC (Aspect).
This Report and Project -Specific Factors
Aspect's services are designed to meet the specific needs of our clients. Aspect has performed the
services in general accordance with our agreement (the Agreement) with the Client (defined under
the Limitations section of this project's work product). This report has been prepared for the
exclusive use of the Client. This report should not be applied for any purpose or project except the
purpose described in the Agreement.
Aspect considered many unique, project -specific factors when establishing the Scope of Work for
this project and report. You should not rely on this report if it was:
• Not prepared for you;
• Not prepared for the specific purpose identified in the Agreement;
• Not prepared for the specific subject property assessed; or
• Completed before important changes occurred concerning the subject property, project, or
governmental regulatory actions.
If changes are made to the project or subject property after the date of this report, Aspect should be
retained to assess the impact of the changes with respect to the conclusions contained in the report.
Reliance Conditions for Third Parties
This report was prepared for the exclusive use of the Client. No other party may rely on the product
of our services unless we agree in advance to such reliance in writing. This is to provide our firm
with reasonable protection against liability claims by third parties with whom there would
otherwise be no contractual limitations. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our
services have been executed in accordance with our Agreement with the Client and recognized
geoscience practices in the same locality and involving similar conditions at the time this report
was prepared.
Property Conditions Change Over Time
This report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. The findings
and conclusions of this report may be affected by the passage of time, by events such as a change in
property use or occupancy, or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, slope instability, or
groundwater fluctuations. If any of the described events may have occurred following the issuance
of the report, you should contact Aspect so that we may evaluate whether changed conditions affect
the continued reliability or applicability of our conclusions and recommendations.
ASPECT CONSULTING
Geotechnical, Geologic, and Environmental Reports Are Not
Interchangeable
The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform a geotechnical or geologic study differ
significantly from those used to perform an environmental study and vice versa. For that reason, a
geotechnical engineering or geologic report does not usually address any environmental findings,
conclusions, or recommendations (e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage
tanks or regulated contaminants). Similarly, environmental reports are not used to address
geotechnical or geologic concerns regarding the subject property.
We appreciate the opportunity to perform these services. If you have any questions, please contact
the Aspect Project Manager for this project.