Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout990400224 Geotech Assessment Addendum.06/08/2004 14:28 3604372805 LANDER CUSTOM HOMES PAGE 02 ~~]. >~ ASSoC~ATt:S,tN~ ~tAR~6 -- GEOTECFINICAL I:T1GlNE]:RING ENYIR4NMENTAt. i:NGiNEER1NG CON5TRUC'~ION TESTING a INSPI:CTtON March 23, 2Q04 KA Project Nv.: 102-OA,002 Newpol't Psrttters Attn: Mr. Ding Limb 9 Cushing Suite 200 lxv~ne, CA 92618 Sutlject; AIDA)<CNI)13M Td f''x~4'1'6~HNICAL neAlCitN1l~.'1F.R7<NG INVESTTGA,'1"tUNII~POIt'C FtROPOt~n Sumr.E ~,AIN~Af..r R~~avclt, CnrGDdN LAME, CIlxv~~' OtJTFLOw UNTO Sat,O~ AREA P4R't' Jt,TJDLOW, WASH1iNGTOI~t Re~'ereltcea: Geotoohnical Engineering tnveatigation, Report pxoposed Single Family Residence Condon LanO, Pozc Ludlow, Washangtan KA Project No.: 102-04042, Dated February 9, 2004 Dear Mr. Limb: tCrazan & Associates, [nc. has ptepartxl this addendum letter in ncspo~asc to concerns raised by Mr. R.. P. -~ Ragan a commissioner £or tkxe Port !<,udlow Drainage District with regard ro the referenced project. Mr. Regan's comments arc presented in italicized prixtt, below. The north houndary of this ,property is bounded hY a ~S foot (plus/minra) drainage reserve area fed by an ,t 8 Inch culvert located north of the .subject lot. There are no drainage facilities in the reserve arses to convey wtirter, Consequently all the x+~ter through the culvert spreads out eiv~l' the reserve and the ,suhjert lot. 7'!:e daschu-'ge from the culvert is approximated to be.• .9 efs for ,24 ho~rr z year storm, a.4 cfs for 24 hour 10 year ,rtarm, ana 3.1 afs for 24 I:our X QO year storm. ,L?oes this infivrmaHon e„Q'ect you _ _ copcluslonsT Do. you 4elleve. this lnfo~ahtvtt shpul~,L~e included d-a your repol't? _ , _ _.._. In our npinioi:'t, the additiopal information dons influence our conclusions and t~ecammenA,atioas ~. we have provided this addcadum letter to address those cor-cerns. In prdCr to provide a solution to the cotiCerns posed above, Ksazan revisited the lot on March 12, 2004 W observa the area in question. WC observed that the Culver. t, looatcd on the adjacent property to the north, was overgrown with Ivy. At tr-e time of the Bite visit, r~o stormwater discharge was observed Mowing from the culvert. The culvert's outfail was directed on the upper slaps area north of the lot and the culvert wras not tight lined to t#te bOtte:rtt o£tlte slope, In our origins,( geotecbmical xcpoxt, dated p'ebntary 9, 2004, we noted perched groundwater aonditians in 3 of the A excavated feet pits. Kraraq's rep~ettt~ttirvc obscrvod that groundwater water seepage ttppeared to Home from the northwest side o#' the subject $ite. At the time of our subsurface exploration, 'lean Utl<ices Serving 't'he Welltern United States 2073 4 State 1Xi~ay 3Ai Ns, $uita 3t; . ~ailabq WaBt~agton 9B37U ~ (3K0) i98-2x26 ^ Nt-x: (360} 598-21 ~7 • .06/08/2004 14:28 3604372805 LANDER CUSTOM HOMES PAGE 03 • K.4 No. 102-d4dd2 iVlarcb 18, 2004 Page No. 2 a representative of Lander Domes sl.rggeated a curtain drain should be placed to control the observed groundwater seepage. CONCI.US)<t]N AND RRtVt]MMEI~iDATIONi5 _ f:.J It is our opinion that a curtain drain installed during the early phase of constntctiom aion$ the west and , c' north sides of the property will aid in controlling potential subsurface drainage into the building pad {;~ area, which may result from the upslope outflow of water. a4s stated in out otxgiu~a] report, all surface ~ water runoff, roof gtrttl:rs and footing d>I•ains should be tightlined to discharge at the base of the slope to the east. Under no citcumstAnces should surFace runoff be alloared to flow uncontrolled over' the top portions of slopes. lucre: I£ rite discharge from the culvert starts to ravel the underlying slope areas, we recommend a tightline froth the culvert to tkte base of the slope. The outfall area of the tightline may require an Cnergy - -- dissipater.. .. __. _ .. _.w if the recommendations in this addettd,rrxt letter and referenced gootcehnical engineering report are incorporated into the consttuotion of the residency, we do not anticipate a significant irtcxeasc itJ slope instability along the bluff brnlrt Cpriaine l~t-aaaax recomrrteads that rite draixx ctcCl~iza trcrtch be deep cnouph to clear utilities . Subsurface drainage will be enhanced with a perforated 4 inch diameter drainpipe placed along the bottflm of the trench, and the trench should bt backfilled with a drain rock and wrapped with a Mirafi or cgtlivAlont fabric. The trench should be excavated into the dense underlying soil. The depth of the trench may range from 3 to b feat (dOponding on the gradient necessary fa provide positive drainage) and the trench should have a. width of 2 fact. The excavation cart be bacl~il.led with. a washed drain rock (no fines) with a particle size ranging ixorxt 1 to 2 inches. Clown outs should be provided for the subslttface draitx system. The collected groundwater seepage fkom tl~ curtaia~ drain will need to be tightlitted to the base of the slope along rho east sick of the pmperty.Prior to baclcf;lling the drain curtain, we rccomrmend ICrazext"s represerttativo observe the dtairr rock material, filter fabric and the excavated tench areas. If you helve any queagon8, ar if we trxay be of ftttther assistance, please da not hesitate to coet9uCt our office at (360) 5962126. -,• - ---- Reagect#'ul1X submitted, .~~---------- ~ ....` . --- ~ ~ ---• ~- • . ,_ . . KRAZAN & A8l34~t~'I'~$, INC. - - .~ vc arum, L,C3. '~esley R. Johnson, P.E. 3ce~ft'arologist Project Engineer DHJsew/wrj C.C. R.P. Regan -Part Eudidw Drainega District 1Krazan 8. Assor:Iates, Int. T®n t7frlcaa Sarvtnp Tho WAStem United Slates X1071011009.Ceneml.en68FRN02.OSDO2 /bOpMuma-rohnp.doc 4!P fiE.S /u GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE CONDON LANE PORT LUDLOW, WASHINGTON Project No. 102-04002 FEBRUARY 9, 2004 Prepared for: Mr. Jong Limb Newport Partners 9 Cushing Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92618 Prepared by: KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION 20714 STATE HIGHWAY 305, SUITE 3C POULSBO, WASHINGTON 98370 (360) 598-2126 ~v I~Y'`a ~l & ASSOCIATES. INC. SITE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERS ~1~a7_ a1Z & ASSOCIATES,INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION February 9, 2004 KA Project No. 102-04002 L- Newport Partners -- -- - - ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - -~ ATTN: Jong Limb ` ~~ ~~~ ~(~ ~~ I r' ` I~ ; 9 Cushing Suite 200 ~' Irvine, CA 92618 ~` ~ ~ ~ . RE: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION ~ ' PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE `-- Condon Lane ~~PT. OF G~~ r. ~ ~~ ti~E~O{'hip°~i -~ _ .. , Port Ludlow, Washington " ' ~` ~ ~ ~" - Dear Mr. Limb: In accordance with your request, we have completed a Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the proposed single-family residence. The results of our investigation are presented in the following report. If you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (360) 598-2126. Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. /~ < Shawn E. Williams, L.E.G. Senior Environmental Geologist Ten Offices Serving The Western United States 20714 State Highway 305 NE, Suite 3C • Poulsbo, Washington 98370 • (360) 598-2126 • Fax: (360) 598-2127 =~I~~~~ & ASSOCIATES,I ~ '~~ '; ~~ ~ ,E .~ GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL EN ~N~ER~~` G -~~~~ ~J' CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION ~ ~ - - TABLE OF CONTENTS ~cPT~ph G~`~_ r ;_Y ~ }-r.~0~'hf"_ a . INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................1 -, Site Location ....................................................................................................................................... .............1 Proposed Construction ........................................................................................................................ .............1 Purpose & Scope ..............................................................................................................................................1 SITE INVESTIGATION ...................................................................................................................................2 Site Description ................................................................................................................................... .............2 `y Geologic Setting .................................................................................................................................. .............2 Subsurface Exploration ....................................................................................................................... .............3 Soil ................................................................................................................................................... ............. 3 -- Groundwater .................................................................................................................................... ............. 3 Laboratory Testing .......................................................................................................................... .............3 Seismic Zone ....................................................................................................................................... .............3 ~J CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................. .............4 Earthwork Considerations ................................................................................................................... .............4 Site Preparation ................................................................................................................................ .............4 Foundation Support .............................................................. ............................................................... ............. 4 Shallow Foundations ....................................................................................................................... ............. 5 Estimated Settlement ....................................................................................................................... .............5 ~, Floor Slabs ....................................................................................................................................................5 Groundwater Concerns ..................................................................................................................... ............ 6 Structural Fill .................................................................................................................................... ............6 Testing and Inspection .....................................................................................................................................7 LIMITATIONS ..................................................................................................................................................7 -- VICINITY MAP .................................................................................................................................... Figure 1 SITE SKETCH ...................................................................................................................................... Figure 2 ~~ FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS .................................................................. Appendix A ~, Ten Offices Serving The Western United States 20714 State Highway 305 NE, Suite 3C • Poulsbo, Washington 98370 • (360) 598-2126 • Fax: (360) 598-2127 r „~ _~ D n ~ ~-~~ =~~~~~ & ASSOCIATES,I ,(~; ~_r, !; GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL ENGI EERING ~ CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION ~ ! February 5, 2004 KA Project No. 102-04002 _, GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE CONDON LANE " PORT LUDLOW, WASHINGTON INTRODUCTION SITE LOCATION The site is located on the east side of Condon Lane north of Pope Way in Port Ludlow, Washington. According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS), 7.5 minute Port Ludlow, Washington topographic quadrangle map, the property is located in Section 9, Township 28 North, Range 1 East. The site location is shown on the Site Vicinity Map, Figure 1. ~J PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION We understand that on a preliminary basis the proposed construction consists of a two story single- family residence. The footprint will be approximately 2,900 square feet. The proposed residence will be of light wood frame construction. In the event the proposed construction information detailed in this ~_, report is inconsistent with the final design, we should be notified so that we may update this writing as applicable. ~~ PURPOSE & SCOPE This investigation was conducted to evaluate the soil and groundwater conditions at the site, to make -" geotechnical engineering recommendations for use in design of specific construction elements. Our scope of services was performed in general accordance with our proposal dated December 10, 2003 (KA Proposal No. PG03-256) which was signed by Mr. Jong Limb on December 20, 2003. The scope of `" work was as follows: • Investigation of the site soils and groundwater condition by excavating 4 test pits to a maximum --- depth of approximately 6 feet. Groundwater measurements were taken at the time of the excavation. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States 20714 State Highway 305 NE, Suite 3C • Poulsbo, Washington 98370 • (360) 598-2126 • Fax: (360) 598-2127 ~~ ~~~nr~~ ~~ I~~ ;4 , KA No. 102-04002 ~ , 'uj;'~ :/ .r ~. ~~;n~ ~ . February 9, 2004 i~ `~, Page No. 2 • Performance of alaboratory-testing pragr~~ap~ropri~te,~a~~h~-S~O~'eohditions encountered and _ the planned construction. Laboratory tests for moisture content and grain size distribution were performed. • Preparation of this report summarizing our conclusions and recommendations regarding site -~ grading requirements, setback requirements from slopes, foundation requirements, foundation settlement, drainage, soil compaction criteria, and suitability of the on-site soil for reuse as fill. SITE INVESTIGATION SITE DESCRIPTION The site is bound to the north and south by single-family residential developments, to the east by a steep slope to the Hood Canal, and to the west by Condon Lane with single-family residential developments beyond. The site is currently vacant, slopes moderately downward to the east, and is vegetated by grass -J and brush. There are scattered mature fir and cedar trees on the lot. There is a depressed area on the southeast portion of the lot with no visible evidence of standing water in this area. The east slope is J approximately 40 feet in height. GEOLOGIC SETTING The subject site lies within the central Puget Lowland. The lowland is part of a regional north-south trending trough that extends from southwestern British Columbia to near Eugene, Oregon. North of Olympia, Washington, this lowland is glacially carved with a depositional and erosional history including at least four separate glacial advance/retreats. The Puget Lowland is bounded on the west by the Olympic Mountains and on the east by the Cascade Range. The lowland is filled with glacial and nonglacial sediments consisting of interbedded gravel, sand, and silt, with till, and peat lenses. The Geologic Map of Washington -Northwest Quadrant, Geologic Map GM-50 (2002) published by the Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources indicates the site is mapped as Quaternary, continental glacial till. Till deposits generally consist of an unsorted, unstratified, highly compacted mixture of clay, silt, sand, gravel and boulders deposited by glacial ice. The deposits may contain interbedded stratified sand, silt and gravel. The United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Jefferson County, 1975 (SCS) indicates that the site soils are Swantown gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes, formed in glacial till. Swantown soils have moderate permeability above the cemented layer at 18 to 24 inches. Permeability in the cemented layer is very slow. The "Coastal Zone Atlas of Washington", Volume 11, Jefferson County, Washington Department of Ecology, 1979 identifies slopes in the site vicinity as Unstable (U) with Intermediate (I) upslope. Unstable slopes are considered unstable due to erosional, stratigraphic, slope gradient, or groundwater conditions. They may show indications of past or present movement. Intermediate slopes are generally steeper than 15 percent, but also include areas of lesser slopes with weak material or heavy groundwater Krazan & Associates, Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States P:\l02\04\002 -Condon Lane SFR\102.04002 Condon Lane SFR.doc ~ ---- ~ . .. ~~ ~~ ~~ ,~ ., ,, ~~ ~1. ~,,1}~ No. 102-04002 ~ i~ ~~ebruary 9, 2004 .. Page No. 3 concentration. This designation includes slopes without`kn©~ri'failures-of a=v°rety'of deposits (sand, gravel, and till) and thin soils over bedrock. There was no visible evidence of recent slide activity on the parcel at the time of the site visit. There was evidence of raveling on the slope face due to erosion and the steepness of the slope. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION The site's subsurface conditions were investigated by excavating 4 test pits to a maximum depth of 6 feet at the approximate locations shown on the attached Site Plan, Figure 2. The test pits were excavated utilizing a Trackhoe provided by Lander Homes through Hemley's excavation. Soil - ~ Loose possibly disturbed soil and topsoil consisting of silty sand and organic material was encountered to depths of 2 feet below the existing site grade and consisted predominantly of silty sand and organic material. Dense silty sand and poorly graded sand with silt (Glacial Till) was encountered underlying J the loose material. Please refer to the test pit logs in Appendix A for more information. Groundwater Groundwater seepage was encountered in each of the test pit excavations ranging from 0 to 4 feet below existing ground surface except for TP-4 where groundwater was not encountered. Water table elevations fluctuate with time, being dependent upon seasonal precipitation, irrigation, land use, and climatic conditions, as well as other factors. Therefore, water level observations at the time of the field investigation may vary from those encountered during the construction phase of the project. The evaluation of such factors is beyond the scope of this report. Laboratory Testing Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples to evaluate their physical characteristics and engineering properties. Details of the laboratory test program and results of the laboratory tests are summarized in Appendix A. This information, along with the field observations, was used to prepare the final test pit logs presented in Appendix A. SEISMIC ZONE According to the Seismic Zone Map of the United States contained in the 1997 Uniform Building Code, the project site lies within Seismic Risk Zone 3. The overall soil profile generally corresponds to seismic soil profile Se as defined by Table 16-J of the 1997 Uniform Building Code. Soil profile Se applies to a profile consisting primarily of dense soils within the upper 100 feet of the profile. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States P:\ I02\04\002 -Condon Lane SFR\ 102-04002 Condon Lane SFR.doc Ii ,. it ~ } ~,~ ~ ! ~~ _ ~ `~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~~~A No. 102-04002 February 9, 2004 ` - ~ Page No. 4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ~- - We have prepared this report for the construction of a 2-story residential structure on the subject parcel. The proposed set-back of 40 feet from the steep slope to the east appears to be suitable for the proposed development. The slope had no visible evidence of recent slide activity and appeared to be in relative stable condition at the time of the site visit. In addition, no observed or recorded springs appear to be within 1,000 feet of the subject site. Based on our investigation and a review of the Jefferson County Unified Development Code (UDC), it is our opinion that the site is a Landslide Hazard Area as defined in section 3.6.6 of the UDC. This designation is due to the site being within an area mapped as Unstable in the Coastal Zone Atlas. Although, the site meets the definition of a Landslide Hazard Area from the UDC, it is our opinion that the proposed development can occur without adverse affects to the property or adjacent properties. EARTHWORK CONSIDERATIONS - - During wet weather conditions, typically October through April, subgrade stability problems and grading difficulties may develop due to high moisture content in the soil, disturbance of sensitive soils and/or the presence of perched groundwater. Site Preparation -~ General site clearing should include removal of vegetation, trees and associated root systems, wood, pavement, retaining walls, rubble, and rubbish. Site stripping should extend to a minimum depth of 4 to 12 inches, or until all organics in excess of 3 percent by volume are removed. Deeper stripping may be J required in localized areas. These materials will not be suitable for use as fill for parking or building areas. However, stripped topsoil may be stockpiled and reused in landscape or non-structural areas. Buried structures encountered during construction should be properly removed and backfilled. Excavations, depressions, or soft and pliant areas extending below planned finish subgrade level should be cleaned to firm undisturbed soil, and backfilled with structural fill to planned finish subgrade. In general, any septic tanks, underground storage tanks, debris pits, cesspools, or similar structures should be entirely removed. Concrete footings should be removed to an equivalent depth of at least 3 feet below proposed footing elevations or as recommended by the Geotechnical engineer. The resulting excavations should be backfilled with structural fill to planned finish subgrade. FOUNDATION SUPPORT It is our opinion that the proposed structure can be adequately supported on shallow foundation system bearing on the very dense native soils or properly compacted structural fill. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States P:\l02\04\002 -Condon Lane SFRU02-04002 Condon Lane SFR.doc r- .. e.._.~_ .F-. . ~ ~ ~ ; KA No. 102-04002 ! ~ : ~ ,;' ,`,' I ~- r- ~~ : { ~ Februa 9 2004 i u ~ ~.::,~; ~ rY ( Page No. 5 Shallow Foundations ~.~:~T. Oi- C'r r 0°t,:'. , ; . ~ ~:.. Due to the presence of loose or organic laden soil, in our opinion the existing near surface soil is not suitable for the support of shallow foundations. We recommend the removal of all loose topsoil below continuous and column footings. We anticipate that this will result in an over-excavation of 2 to 3 feet. However, it is our understanding that proposed excavation depths for the daylight basement of the residential structure will extend below the loose or organic laden soil. We recommend that all overexcavated areas be inspected by Krazan & Associates to verify that suitable material is reached. Deeper overexcavation or increasing the footing depth may be required if the ` ' conditions encountered warrant. All material proposed for use as structural fill should be approved by a representative of our firm. Structural fill should be placed and compacted in accordance with the recommendations presented in the Structural Fill Section of this report. For footings bearing on properly compacted structural fill overlying dense glacial till an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 psf may be used. A 1/3 increase in the above values may be used for short duration, wind, and seismic loads. Structural fill placed on bearing native subgrade should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. All footings should have a minimum embedment depth of 18 inches below adjacent grade and a minimum width of 16 inches. Resistance to lateral footing displacement can be computed using an ~~ allowable friction factor of 0.35 acting between the base of foundations and the supporting subgrade and allowable equivalent fluid passive pressure of 300 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) acting against the appropriate vertical footing faces for fill soils. The upper two feet of soil should be neglected when calculating the passive resistance. Estimated Settlement We estimate that settlements for the continuous and spread footings under the anticipated maximum loads of 2,500 psf for structural fill and dense native soils will be less than 1 inch. We anticipate differential settlements of no more than %2 the total settlement over the width of the building. The settlements will be elastic in nature and should occur essentially as the loads are applied. If the final design of the foundations results in footings with larger dimensions than those given above, we should be contacted so that we can revise our settlement estimates. Floor Slabs We recommend that, at a minimum, 1 foot of the existing fill be removed below the floor slab area. The subsequent floor slab subgrade area should be compacted and proof rolled prior to placing structural fill. The over-excavated area should be backfilled to the planned floor slab subgrade level with structural fill. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States P:\102\04\002 -Condon Lane SFR\102-04002 Condon Lane SFR.doc ~ ,, '' `'r' ~ ~;. ~;,1i; ~ . KANo.I02-04002 -~` February 9, 2004 Page No. 6 In areas where it is desired to reduce floor slab dampness, such as areas covered with moisture sensitive floor coverings, we recommend that concrete slab-on-grade floors should be underlain by a water vapor retarder system. The water vapor retarder system should be installed in accordance with ASTM Specification E1643-94 and Standard Specifications E1745-97. According to ASTM Guidelines, the water vapor retarder system should consist of a vapor retarder sheeting underlain by a minimum of fl- inches of compacted clean, open-graded coarse rock of 3/4-inch maximum size. Groundwater Concerns Groundwater seepage was encountered in the test pit excavations. Perched groundwater occurs where vertical infiltration of surface precipitation is impeded by a relatively impermeable soil layer, resulting in horizontal migration of the groundwater within overlying more permeable soils. The contractor should be prepared to deal with perched groundwater flowing into any excavations during wet weather. During construction monitoring at the existing home to the south groundwater seepage was addressed with the placement of railroad ballast. All surface water run-off and roof gutters should be tightlined to discharge at the base of the slope to the east. Tightlines from adjacent parcels were also observed at the time of the site visit. Structural Fill The upper one to three feet of topsoil and organic soil is not suitable for use as structural fill. This soil may be used in landscaping areas only. Both the native and fill soils are likely to be moisture sensitive and may not be compactabie during wet weather. Imported structural fill material should consist of well graded gravel or a sand and gravel mixture with a maximum grain size of 1'/2 inches and less than 5 percent fines. All Structural fill material should be -- submitted for approval to the Geotechnical Engineer at least 48 hours prior to delivery to the site. Structural fill should be placed in loose lifts no more than 12-inches thick, dried or wetted as necessary, (water content of soil should be within f2 percent of optimum water content) and compacted to 95 percent of the maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D-1557. Additional lifts should not be placed if the previous lift did not meet the required dry density or if soil conditions are not stable. Note that, although density testing of fill is frequently used as the primary criteria for acceptance of fill, it should not be the only criteria. If, in the judgment of the geotechnical engineer or his representative, placed fill is not suitable it should be rejected regardless of density test results. As an example, fill that is compacted wet of the optimum moisture content may exhibit "pumpy" behavior even if density test results indicate better than 95 percent compaction has been achieved. In such a situation, the fill should be removed and replaced with drier material. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States P:\102\04\002 -Condon Lane SFR\102-04002 Condon Lane SFR.doc ~ , ~ ` `~ " KA No. 102-04002 ~ ~ '. s' ~ February 9, 2004 ' Page No. 7 TESTING AND INSPECTION ~" '?` C.. _.~ .0~'f<<..I A representative of Krazan & Associates, Inc. should be present at the site during the earthwork activities to confirm that actual subsurface conditions are consistent with the exploratory fieldwork. _ . This activity is an integral part of our services as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction testing and stability of the material. This representative can also verify that the intent of these recommendations is incorporated into the project design and construction. J LIMITATIONS Geotechnical engineering is one of the newest divisions of Civil Engineering. This branch of Civil - Engineering is constantly improving as new technologies and understanding of earth sciences improves. Although your site was analyzed using the most appropriate current techniques and methods, undoubtedly there will be substantial future improvements in this branch of engineering. In addition to improvements in the field of Geotechnical engineering, physical changes in the site either due to excavation or fill placement, new agency regulations or possible changes in the proposed structure after the time of completion of the soils report may require the soils report to be professionally reviewed. In light of this, the Owner should be aware that there is a practical limit to the usefulness of this report without critical review. Foundation and earthwork construction is characterized by the presence of a calculated risk that soil and groundwater conditions have been fully revealed by the original foundation investigation. This risk is -J derived from the practical necessity of basing interpretations and design conclusions on limited sampling of the earth. The recommendations made in this report are based on the assumption that soil conditions do not vary significantly from those disclosed during our field investigation. If any variations or J undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, the Geotechnical engineer should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be made. The conclusions of this report are based on the information provided regarding the proposed construction. If the proposed construction is relocated or redesigned, the conclusions in this report may not be valid. The Geotechnical engineer should be notified of any changes so the recommendations can be reviewed and reevaluated. . _. This report is a geotechnical engineering investigation with the purpose of evaluating the soil conditions in terms of foundation design. The scope of our services did not include any environmental site assessment for the presence or absence of hazardous and/or toxic materials in the soil, groundwater or atmosphere, or the presence of wetlands. Any statements, or absence of statements, in this report or on any test pits log regarding odors, unusual or suspicious items, or conditions observed are strictly for descriptive purposes and are not intended to convey engineering judgment regarding the presence of potentially hazardous materials. The geotechnical information presented herein is based upon professional interpretation utilizing standard engineering practices and a degree of conservatism deemed proper for this project. It is not Krazan & Associates, Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States P:\102\04\002 -Condon Lane SFR\]02-04002 Condon Lane SFR.doc KA No. 102-04002 February 9, 2004 _ , Page No. 8 warranted that such information and interpretation cannot be superseded by future geotechnical developments. We emphasize that this report is valid for this project as outlined above, and should not be used for any other site. . If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (360) 598-2126. Respectfully submitted, _ . -__~ ____ _ _- -~ KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. '! ~~ ((~'. `? '' ~''~ 3~ I~T \ r ••, / s ~ ~. ~ ~:,; 1, ~ ,~ Dave Hurum, L.G. Wesley R. Johnson, P.E. - Staff Geologist Project Engineer ~ ~ PT ~ = ~ ;•: ~ ~~~~,,;_ ~; ~~ . _d - .. _ _..__ ~_ . DH/sew/wrj f ~~ ~ ~4~ ". ANAL E~ -,$. , Krazan & Associates, Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States P:\102\04\002 -Condon Lane SFR\102-04002 Condon Lane SFR.doc ~`: i ~., !~ ~-;V i ~ ~ t r /5 ~I ~ . 1. ~. - j. ~ .. x fIK ~ r~` 1~1,\~ ~ ~ ~ ~` ~a~ ~ Bad ~1 ,`e~~ 6 !~ , r ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ , '~ ~ ~` ~~kt ` f. ~ ~"~~~ ~~'i' L, ht~ 1 - ~ /` r /~ c I _ ~~ \ (' ~ ~ -`~ !ht Yf ~ ~ ~ 'o i ~ :GolYos Rocks~~ ~\ ~, r , ~1' I _ ! l ` ~ ~~J `~ ~I '\ 1 '~~~ ~i ~~ lid ~ a~i¢bt ' ; 1 ,~~~ _ ,~ 1 ~ I ^~ s 1 ~ ~ r 1 ~1 ~ ~ ~ ! ~~J ~ ~ ~V : y. ~~~~ ~ 4 ~~ f~~j- - *Sr~ake Rock t i ~ e~, ~71~~ ~ ~ ~ _ !' •~~,, + ~, r! ! ~ ~ F ~ ~' "_ - i ~ ~ ~f ~ ~ ` l ` 1 r ~_ ~ ~ +t I f~ 1 i ~ , C dz't~.LutIl ..a {~j ~ r_ i 1 '] t, ~ i ` ~ ~"~~~ .A ,~°aea ~ n{ter ~~~~ l~l~~"w ~1 l V_ L ~• ~ ~~ e~ 1 t :~~ r 1 j l~t 'i I o ~~~~' f --~~ '~ , ~"~ ~ ,. o ; lr,~+ POPE WAY ~ ~~ -T8 __ ~{ f S~yansonville> I s ! t 1 , _~~5 ~° 11~r 1 /t~ ( ~~ti SITE Vi`i` ~ ; 1 x „ „, ~ ~ t \I .t l - c T 1 ~ F 1 ~ ~:\ ' n"~.l ~ , ~~~ ~ ~ . ~ -_~.. T~ r ~ .~ ~~~ ~"~~j r I CONDON r~ eovta ~,, . ~. ~' .u X11 \~--av ~-~ ~: ~ ~ ~'~. OAK BAY .~"; ~; ~ 'T t ,~itf~ ~ LANE ~ <~~'~ Tala, Point ~ \ /r ~'r, y - , ~ _ j ROAD 1!~ % ~/ i r~ ~~~' ~! 1 li i '~ NI u- ~ ~' ~~ f t I f' r ! ~_ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~`e c ~' i ~~ 7 c ~r r~ ~ wo ~ 1 it~- 4 ~ _ +//~/ (' ~^ j ~~~ n ' E'-- / t i' ~t ~ OE,eh{) Y ~ :~T~; }~It ~.1 1.; !. o `s Y r T ;~ ,tt, x J I /~, ~ _ ~lti' ~ ~ --~..- ~ ~' 'tl., ~" ' ~ ~U_fTl W///~ - ~F~f .... ~ ,~a~ ) i ~ r (I~ ~ '~ r(- _:~~~b-'`~_ ~~ _ f'~ --~ ~~n ~\Y n' 4x/fa k~~'~lt •~ ;) - 9 ,r "r4 f I ~, ~ iii ~~. n }, f i `:. `~ i ~ l'ti~ .+% ~-_~ q rc ~ ' V J ., ~ r % ~ -~ { f i ~~ ~ f ~' ! ! t /-~~ I: ~~~~~~~ v ~fl~~ `_' _r"~-~ 4~.ti`~: ~ ~ ~5~r 1 ~ ~ ! ~ (II f ;~'~~ 1` m ~ i } f ~'~ 7 ! -r"` r ~ e ~ I /'" r r v / ~ ,~ ~J ~ ~ ~, ~~ ~ ~~ .' ~~ \\~` ~tT f ~ .~~`c-`` -ter y .S. ' ~j -~ - _ i~ _ - +~ ._~` '~ T ~4i(~~ ~(~(~~ ~, o ! I i. ~'.~. ~I ~I, \ r- ~~-- ~`' ~t4o /r ~~~ ~ ` ,~` ,~S ,f t ~iTr ZC~ ~{i i li\~ I , ~ ' ~ t ~r r ~~ ct q~~~,_: / i J ._".r -.--F r - - ~ T / i~\ L~~~/~ i t '~~~{ ~ j~~t rte. 1~- --~'- ~-- ~ n C eoo 000 i f J T~ ~ J ~ ~ ` ~ 1' t f~f'3 r Tr jd' ~ .- ~ ~ggSPoles ~ noc i ~ f' 1 /~~ , 1Y t~) i ,/a' r,~lt ~l/ :~-~\-~1Yr1~ ~~ ~~sa t° [~\~ F l~i~i 1J ~'`)i '~1/ F~l (~ r,l _ ~~ f ~~ lj~ -. //--~~^'1 t~~.c~~i/ ~IYrPns ,~:,~-l _ ~;1 / ~ ~ i " y ~ ,,\ ~/: 1 r //~/'~' ~~~ ~ ~ ~ 1 I ~ ~ b L 12 r ~~ ~ ~/ t1 '""~~ ~ ! ~{ 1 ~ I " a f { ~ ~ . i ~ y~"1 Jf ` J ~ % ~ t_ f~j ' J ~ •~ ~ r (~~ .~~ 1 ~~ (~ k~ r ~ ~ 11 ( ~~ ~ ~I ~ ~ I %"'~~/ ~ /~~~ ~~(f 'fir Lam" c~~~E~TL/ ~ f:u t ~ ~~ ~ ~` ,t J' tCfi,~ I ~Jt1'O ~y~ r ~ ~ i ~ 1 ~ (I o ~ `~ G:. ~~ ~; ~ : ~~ ~ /1. ~t ! i asp 1/1111 /~ I . ~ , , _?~7 I a l ~' l,g \r ~~>ul q ,,, _' t~-~.-J -~% ~ ~ J j; , , 'r ~f / f~,f) ~~ ,j '; r- i, ,~a ~~ / ~r~ ioo ~1 f G / ~ an ~^~ ~ !i ~ y~j~ i` f +r 1l j ~ i 3 ~~//~` l~ ~ /~ - ~i f/r~T t - r'~ti. ~ ~# ~- ..i /-1` ~ ~r ~i- - 1 ~ fti ` (/a ,, Slr 4.~/1 { ~_ C~ t~ fihi-"--.- e ~ ~,-r/i ..~~~\~r~J/,/~'~ 4..r rt f'~7t~ t ~: r ~ j /.i! 7S1/ Fi r'~li,.$~.~. , f. .,n „~-:~-c?~~t. ~~: 5~... '~ ;'t . ~-~ :~ r~zw~~ 1 r ~-~ . - !- T L,.1, i r Pxmted hom TOPOI 01997 Wildflower Pmductiom (wvnw.topo.coxn) - Note: Ma ada ted from TOPO! ©1997, Wildflower Productions. - FIGURE 1-SITE VICINITY MAP N KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Job name: Condon Lane SFR '-' 20714 State Route 305-Suite 3C Location: Port Ludlow, Washington Poulsbo, WA 98370 Job No.: 102-04002 360-598-2126 Client: Newport Partners y Date: 1/8/04 ~~ ~~ ~ _ ~ ~ r 3~ , ~~ Appendix A Page A.1 APPENDIX A FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS Field Investigation The field investigation consisted of a surface reconnaissance and a subsurface exploratory program. The subsurface exploratory program consisted of the excavation of four test pits. The test pit locations are shown on the site plan (Figure 2). The depths shown on the attached logs are from the existing ground surface at the time the test pits were excavated. The soils encountered were logged in the field during the exploration and, with supplementary laboratory test data, are described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. All samples were returned to our Poulsbo laboratory for evaluation. Laboratory Investigation The laboratory investigation was used to estimate the physical and mechanical properties of the foundation soil underlying the site. In situ moisture contents and sieve analysis tests were determined for the samples representative of the subsurface material. These tests, supplemented by visual observation, comprised the basis for our evaluation of the site material. -- The logs of the test pits and laboratory determinations are presented in this Appendix. ...~ :I `j ,~ ,' .. _. ~ ~, L. ` ~ Ir~ I . r--- 1 Project: Condon Lane SFR ~ Log of Test Pit TP~~1 ~' Project No: 102-04002 Client: Newport Partners f i ~~ Figure No.: A-1 Location: Port Ludlow, WA _ Logged By: D.H. Depth to Water: Seepage 0 to 3 feet. ~~ ~ " ' - ~ ~ ~ ` Elevation: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE DATA s ~ Description ~, ~ o ~ Water Content (%) °- E E E m ~ ~ o cn ~ z ~ ~ ~ 10 20 30 40 50 ~ Ground Surface SILTY SAND (SM) Loose to medium dense, fine grained sand, brown, i wet. (TOPSOIL) ' 1 I 2 --------------- ~ ~ ! ~ I I -------------------- SILTY SAND (SM) i ~ i ~ dense, fine grained sand, brown, moist to wet. i (GLACIAL TILL) , ~ 3 S-1 Grab , j ~ ~ i 4 End of Test Pit I 5 Minor sloughing of test pit sidewalls at 3 feet. 6 I ~ 7 8 I ~ ~ s I i 10 Krazan and Associates Method: Mini Trackhoe 20714 State Highway 305 N.E. Excavator: Hemley's SUlte 3C Operator: Poulsbo, Washington 98370 Excavation Date: 1112104 Sheet: 1 of 1 I'`~ - i Project: Condon Lane SFR ~ ! ~ i ' Log of;Te~t~ P~t~TP-2 ); Project No: 102-04002 Client: Newport Partners ~ ~. Figure No.: A-2 1 Location: Port Ludlow, WA ~=PT. Or C';'t , :. ,-~ ~ 0~~,.,;_-~ l ~ Logged By: D.H. Depth to Water: Seepage at 4 feet. ~ _ ` Elevation: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE DATA s ~ Description ~, ~ o ~ Water Content (%) °- E ~ E a ~ in o cn ~ z ~ ~ ~ 10 20 30 40 50 0 Ground Surface iri s SOD ------------- ------------------ SILTY SAND (SM) j ~ Loose to medium dense, medium grained sand, j i ~ 1 brown to gray, moist to wet. Contains roots to 2 feet I deep. i ~ I 2 ~ Becomes dense at 3 feet. I i ~ 3 S-1 Grab i i Becomes light gray and weakly cemented at 4 feet. i 4 (GLACIAL TILL) 5 I i I i ! ~ I End of Test Pit 6 Minor sloughing of test pit i sidewalls at 4 feet. i 7 8 I i i 9 ~ 10 Krazan and Associates Method: Mini Trackhoe 20714 State Highway 305 N.E. Excavator: Hemley's Suite 3C Operator: Poulsbo, Washington 98370 Excavation Date: 1/12/04 Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: Condon Lane SFR Client: Newport Partners Location: Port Ludlow, WA Depth to Water: Seepage 1 to 3 feet. =~~ ~ { , ' '`~ ~~~.. Lag of Test,P?~t ~T;P-3 ~ ~ Project No: 1a2-o4o02 _a. ' Figure No.: A-3 - '?. t}r t ~ w.:~r._0!'~,i_-~I~Logged By: D.H. Elevation: Krazan and Associates Method: Mini Trackhoe 20714 State Highway 305 N.E. Excavator: Hemley's Suite 3C Operator: Poulsbo, Washington 98370 Excavation Date: 1/12/04 Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: Condon Lane SFR ~ Log of Test Pit TP-4! Project No: 102-04002 Client: New ort Partners ~--~7 r~= ,-; ~- ~„~i.,. i, p ~- ..._ ; `'~~ Figure No.: A-4 Location: Port Ludlow, WA Lo ed B gg y: D.H. Depth to Water: Not encountered Elevation: SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE DATA L Description ~, ~ o ? Water Content (%) ~ E E a °' N o cn ~ z ~ ~ ~ 10 20 30 40 50 0 Ground Surface SILTY SAND (SM) Lo _s_`finey_aln_d_andibro_n~ moist _(TOPSOILZ SILTY SAND (SM) 1 Medium dense, fine grained sand, brown to gray, I moist. i ~ 2 S-1 Grab i ~ i I I Becomes dense at 3 feet. (GLACIAL TILL) i 3 Mottled and increased silt at 5 feet. 4 ~ ' 5 i I j j 6 End of Test Pit 7 No sloughing of test pit sidewalls. I I I ~ 8 I 9 10 Krazan and Associates Method: Mini Trackhoe 20714 State Highway 305 N.E. Excavation Date: 1112/04 Excavator: Hemley's ~ $Ulte 3C Operator: Poulsbo, Washington 98370 Sheet: 1 of 1