HomeMy WebLinkAboutBLD2000-00226 Geotechnical Report 1
0o- oo o
1
1
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION, GEOLOGIC HAZARD,
1 AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
1
NORDSTROM PARCEL A
1 THORNDYKE ROAD
1 PORT LUDLOW, WASHINGTON
1.1 1
MAY 1 7 2000 _J
JEFFERSON COUNTY
DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
1 PREPARED FOR:
ERIK AND JULIE NORDSTROM
1
1
1 MAY 16, 2000
1 AESI PROJECT NO. BE00041A
1
BAINBRIDGE ISLAND OFFICE
' 179 Madrone Lane North ASSOCIATED
Bainbridge Island,WA 98110
(206) 780-9370 EARTH
FAX(206)780-9438 SCIENCES, INC
1 CORPORATE OFFICE
911 Fifth Avenue,Suite 100
Kirkland,Washington 98033
1 (425)827-7701
FAX (425)827-5424
1
' SUBSURFACE EXPL
ORATION GEOLOGIC HAZARD, AND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
NORDSTROM PARCEL A, THORNDYKE ROAD
PORT LUDLOW, WASHINGTON
May 16, 2000
Project No. BE00041A
I. PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic hazard and geotechnical
engineering study for the proposed Nordstrom parcel A residential project. The project location
and regional topographic features are presented on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. Existing site fea-
tures and the locations of the explorations accomplished for this study are presented on the Site
' and Exploration Plan, Figure 2. In the event that any changes occur in the nature of the project
on which this report is based, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report
should be reviewed and verified, or modified, as necessary.
t1.1 Purpose and Scope
' The purpose of this study was to provide subsurface data to be utilized in the design and devel-
opment of the project. Our study included a review of available geologic literature, review of
aerial photographs, and performing geologic studies to assess the type, thickness, distribution
' and physical properties of the subsurface soils and shallow ground water conditions. This report
summarizes our current field work and offers design recommendations based on our present
understanding of the project.
' 1.2 Authorization
' Written authorization to proceed with this study was granted by Mr. Jim Ray of the Reijnen
Company on April 11, 2000. Our study was accomplished in general accordance with our scope
of work letter dated April 7, 2000, and previous discussions with Mr. Ray. This report has been
prepared for the exclusive use of the Reijnen Company, and their agents, for specific application
to this project. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been per-
formed in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engineering geology
practices in effect in this area at the time our report was prepared. No other warranty, expressed
or implied is made. It must be understood that no recommendations or engineering design can
yield a guarantee of stable slopes. Our observations, findings, and opinions are a means to
t identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner.
' Page 1
1
' 2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION
This report was completed with an understanding of the project based on our site work and dis-
cussions with Mr. Ray. In addition, we met with representatives of Jefferson County to discuss
Jefferson County's requirements for development within landslide hazard areas.
' 2.1 Lot and Site Developments
The property is situated in the 2000 block of Thorndyke Road in Jefferson County, Washington.
' Parcel A is the southern parcel of a larger 34-acre property. The parcel is bordered by similar,
wooded, residential property to the west, Thorndyke Road to the north, Parcel B of the property
to the east (existing Nordstrom summer home), and the beach and waterfront of Hood Canal to
the south. A broad flood plain for an unnamed creek separates parcel A from parcel B to the
east. At the time of our field work, the parcel was undeveloped with the exception of a gravel
driveway and a recently installed water-supply well located north and east of the proposed resi-
dence. It is our understanding that flow volumes on the order of 20 gallons per minute were
encountered at depths of approximately 60 feet in the water supply well.
2.2 Topography
' The parcel consists of a broad, relatively flat bench at an elevation of approximately 45 feet
above the level of Hood Canal. The slopes below the bench were on the order of 40 vertical feet,
with overall slope inclinations ranging from 2H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical) to 3H:1V. Isolated
' areas typically less than approximately 10 vertical feet in height were as steep as 1H:1V. Slopes
above the bench were on the order of 100 vertical feet, with slope inclinations ranging from
1.5H:1 V to 2H:1 V. Slopes above and below the bench generally rise to the northwest from the
' waterfront of Hood Canal toward Thorndyke Road. Total elevation change from the waterfront
to Thorndyke Road, estimated from the U.S. Geological Survey 7-1/2 minute Lofall quadrangle
topographic map, is approximately 140 feet. The proposed residence is planned for the southern
' portion of the bench, approximately 25 horizontal feet from the top of the lower, 2H:1 V slope.
2.3 Site Drainage
No standing or flowing water was observed on the upland areas p of the site but is inferred to flow
during periods of extended heavy rain within the various topographic low areas on the bench.
The unnamed creek to the east of the parcel serves as the main drainage basin for the entire 34-
acre parcel. The creek (flow estimated at approximately 50 gallons per minute) flows within a
well-defined, incised channel upsiope of Thorndyke Road. Downslope of Thorndyke Road, the
stream channel widens into a broad, essentially flat, flood plain which opens south to Hood
Canal.
2.4 Area History
Ongoing subsidence and landsliding of the Thorndyke Road alignment approximately 1/2 mile
south of the site has been documented as recently as the 1998-99 winter season. In addition,
' Page 2
' 1(fence of recent, deep-seated, rotational landslide damage was documented below the road
toward the beach. Landslide activity was identified by offset cracking and lateral translation
' above the beach, and by the presence of a prominent toe bulge of landslide debris on the beach
several hundred yards southwest of the subject site.
' Several residences within the active portion of the slide southwest of the site had been "red
tagged" or marked by Jefferson County as uninhabitable during the 1998-99 winter season:
Jefferson County officials stated that the landslide problems along this section of Thorndyke
' Road have been ongoing for a number of years and that a moratorium on building is in effect in
that area.
' Parcel A lies within a landslide hazard area as designated by Jefferson County, but lies outside
the active portion of the landslide to the south.
2.5 Aerial Photograph Review
Five sets of stereo-pair aerial photographs from the period 1975 to 1997 were reviewed to
' observe regional topographic features in the general area, and to check for indications of land-
slides in the site area. The aerial photographs suggest that the hillsides west and south of the
subject site have a history of deep-seated rotational landslides. The geomorphology of the hill-
side suggests that the landslides are large and contain multiple levels of benches and scarps
(steep failure surfaces). The active portion of the slide affecting Thorndyke Road and private
properties below the road had experienced movement as recently as the 1998-99 winter season.
The prehistoric head scarp for the slide area was well-defined along the southern extent, approxi-
mately 1 mile south of the site. The head scarp becomes more obscure toward the north, and is
' inferred to terminate within the un-named creek valley north of Parcel A. The project site is
inferred to lie within the northern extent of the currently, inactive, pre-historic landslide area.
' 3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
' Our field study included drilling two exploration borings in the vicinity of the proposed house
location, and conducting a geologic reconnaissance to obtain information about the soils, shallow
ground water, and slopes in the vicinity of the site. The various types of sediments, as well as
' the depths where characteristics of the sediments changed, are indicated on the exploration logs
presented at the back of this report. The depths indicated on the logs where conditions changed
may represent gradational variations between sediment types in the field. If changes occurred
between sample intervals in our explorations, they were interpreted. Soil was classified in
general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) procedure D-
2488, Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure).
' Our field explorations were approximately located by measuring from site features shown on
Figure 2.
' The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the geologic recon-
naissance and two exploration borings completed for this study. Because of the nature of explor-
atory work below ground, extrapolation of subsurface conditions between field explorations is
necessary. It should be noted that differing subsurface conditions may sometimes be present due
' Page 3
to the random nature of deposition and the alteration of topography by past grading and/or
filling.
I3.1 Exploration Borings
' The borings were drilled by Gregory Drilling from Bellevue, Washington, using a truck-mounted
drilling rig, operated under subcontract to Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI). The borings
were advanced through the soil using a 4-inch inside diameter (ID), 8-inch outside diameter
' (OD), hollow-stem auger. Soil samples were collected at 21/2- and 5-foot intervals.
Disturbed but representative samples were obtained from the soil boring using the Standard
' Penetration Test (SPT) procedure in accordance with ASTM D-1586. The SPT and sampling
method consist of driving a standard 2-inch outside diameter, split-barrel sampler a distance of
18 inches into the soil with a 140-pound hammer, free-falling a distance of 30 inches. The num-
' ber of blows for each 6-inch interval is recorded. The number of blows required to drive the
sampler the final 12 inches is known as the Standard Penetration Resistance ("N") or blow count.
If a total of 50 is recorded within one 6-inch interval, the blow count is recorded as 50 blows for
' the number of inches of penetration. The resistance, or N-value, provides a measure of the rela-
tive density of granular soils or the relative consistency of cohesive soils; these values are shown
on the boring logs in the appendix of this report.
' Materials encountered in the exploration borings gs were studied, sampled, and classified in the
field by an AESI geotechnical engineer. All explorations were backfilled immediately after
' examination and logging. Selected samples were then transported to our laboratory for further
visual classification and testing, as necessary.
4.0 SUBSURFACE CO
NDITIONS
' Subsurface conditions at the project site were inferred from the field explorations accomplished
for this study, visual reconnaissance of the site and vicinity, and review of applicable geologic
' literature. The geologic units in the project area have been mapped as Vashon advance glacial
outwash by Yount, Minard, and Glen (1993, U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 93-233).
However, our borings indicate that recessional outwash sediments were present above the
' advance outwash and advance glacio-lacustrine sediments. Our analysis suggests that the
predominant sands, silty sands, and silts of the advance outwash, as observed on the site, have
been affected by large-scale, pre-historic landslide activity. The fairly consistent nature of the
recessional outwash soils suggests that these sediments may be undisturbed.
As shown on the field logs, the exploration borings generally encountered recessional outwash
sands and silty sands overlying disturbed advance outwash and disturbed glacio-lacustrine silts
and clays. The soil disturbance within the advance outwash sediments is attributed to pre-
historic landslide activity in the area. The following section presents more detailed subsurface
information organized from the upper(youngest) to the lower(oldest) sediment types.
' Page 4
1
4.1 Stratigiaphy
' Recessional Outwash
The loose to medium dense sand, silty sand, and silt encountered in the upper 29 feet of
EB-1 and upper 27 feet of EB-2 were interpreted as recessional outwash. These sedi-
' ments were deposited at the end of the Vashon-age glaciation, during the retreat of the
Puget lobe ice sheet, approximately 10,000 years ago. During the retreat, sediments of
variable grain sizes were deposited randomly as the ice retreated to the north. Following
' deposition, the majority of these soils were eroded, leaving only remnants at the tops of
slopes, and within pre-existing drainage channels. The recessional soils encountered
appear to be erosional remnants of this unit within what may have been a pre-existing
' drainage channel now occupied by the creek. These soils may have been deposited after
early episodes of large-scale landslide activity.
' Disturbed Advance Outwash
The dense to very dense gravel, sand, and silty sand with interbeds of stiff silt, with
variable amounts of sand and clay, encountered between 29 and 42 feet in EB-1 and from
' 27 feet to the entire depth explored of 39.5 in EB-2, were interpreted as advance outwash.
Advance outwash sediments were deposited by pro-glacial streams exiting in front of the
' advancing ice sheet. While no direct evidence of disturbance was observed within the
samples collected, these sediments are inferred to have been moved en-mass by pre-
historic landslide activity.
' Disturbed Advance Glacio-Lacustrine Deposits
Very stiff to hard, gray and tan, moist, interbedded to laminated, silty, clayey silt, and
silty clay, was present between 42 feet and 66 feet in EB-1. These soils were interpreted
to have been deposited by settling of sediment transported with glacial meltwaters into a
glacial lake. Abundant evidence of disturbance in this unit was observed as prismatic
' fractures, shearing, inclined laminae, fractures in-filled with fine sand, and zones of struc-
tureless to chaotic texture. The relatively high sampler blow counts and moderate soil
moisture observed in samples from this unit suggest that the noted disturbance does not
' result from historic landslide activity, but likely was the result of initial landsliding
shortly after deglaciation of the area.
' Older, Non-Glacial Deposits
Very dense, wet, brown gravel with sand encountered in the lower 15 feet of EB-1 were
interpreted as older, non-glacial gravels deposited during a previous, non-glacial period.
Evidence of non-glacial origin was primarily the lithology of the gravels encountered that
suggested a source material from the Olympic Mountains instead of the glacial lithologies
derived primarily from the Canadian Cascades and coast mountain ranges.
The mechanics of landslides of this magnitude are well documented. However, the causes of
these large scale slides are poorly understood. Popular hypotheses for the instigation of these
' slides include loss of side slope support as a result of deglaciation, and seismically-induced
landsliding. During rapid deglaciation of the Puget lowland at the end of the last major glacia-
tion, approximately 10,000 years ago, valley sidewalls, which would later become the banks of
Hood Canal and Puget Sound, were left unsupported, resulting in regional landslide activity.
' Page 5
i
' The other hypothesis suggests that seismic shaking from large, regional earthquakes instigated
many landslides.
4.2 Hydrology
' In general, two types of ground water may be encountered at the site. The first would be a
"perched" water table. Perched water occurs when surface water infiltrates down through
relatively permeable soils and becomes trapped or "perched" atop a comparatively impermeable
' barrier such as clay or silty soils. The second ground water horizon may be encountered in exca-
vations that penetrate into the underlying regional aquifer.
' Perched ground water was encountered in sandy soils at depths of approximately 13 and 34 feet
in EB-1 and at approximately 8 and 28 feet in EB-2. Interbeds of sand in the glacio-lacustrine
soils were also wet and represent a complex perched ground water system. The pre-Vashon
' gravels encountered at approximately 66 feet depth represents the upper-most regional aquifer in
the area. The water well on site is inferred to have been completed in these gravels.
' It should be noted that fluctuations in the level of the ground water may occur due to the time of
the year and variations in the amount of rainfall. Seepage may also occur at random depths and
locations in non-uniform fills and soils. Ground water levels observed during our site work may
' be lower than normal due to the mild winter season of 1999-2000. In addition, disturbed soils
within pre-historic landslide terrain can create highly complex and unpredictable ground water
flow.
' The unnamed creek to the east of the site
flows within a broad alluvial plain before exiting into
Hood Canal to the south. Ground water is typically shallow within the loose, alluvial sediments
' with a shallow gradient toward the outlet. Ground water encountered at 34 and 28 feet depth in
EB-1 and EB-2, respectively, may be in hydraulic communication with the inferred alluvial
' aquifer. However, due to the inferred difference of hydraulic properties between the types of
soils at the site and those within the valley, in our opinion these represent two distinct
hydrogeologic environments.
5.0 SLOPE STABILITY
5.1 Reconnaissance
The slope and bench topography observed at the site is consistent with large-scale, prehistoric
landslide terrain. The inferred direction of movement of the landslide mass is to the south and
east. These features are additional evidence that the site lies at the northeast edge of large, pre-
historic, regional landslide. During our limited reconnaissance, no active cracking, or signs of
recent landslide activity were observed on the subject property or adjacent property to the
southwest. We noted the presence of old-growth cedar stumps that appeared to be in place, and
mature, second-growth fir and cedar trees with no observable signs of distress. In addition, no
evidence of active landsliding was apparent on the beach. The prominent toe bulge associated
with the current, active portion of the slide was located approximately ''A mile to the southwest.
' Page 6
•
It should be noted that lack of observed evidence of landslides does not demonstrate that damage
has not occurred in those areas between the site and the documented active portion of the slide.
' The risk of landslides impacting the proposed project is difficult to assess based on the size and
nature of the landslide terrain. Significant damage has occurred to structures southwest of the
' property within the active portion of the slide. There was no evidence of recent landslide activity
at the site, as noted by the presence of mature, second-growth trees that were inferred to be
approximately 50 to 75 years old. The old-growth stumps may suggest that no significant
' landslide activity has occurred during the life span of the trees, which was inferred to be on the
order of 300 to 500 years.
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
Page 7
May 16, 2000
AESI Project No. BE00041A
II. GEOLO
GIC HAZARDS AND.MITIGATIONS
1
The following discussion of potential geologic hazards is based on the geologic, slope, and
' ground water/surface water conditions observed at the site. The discussion will be limited to
seismic, erosion and landslide hazards.
' 6.0 SEISMIC HAZARDS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION
' Earthquakes occur in the Puget Lowland with great regularity. The vast majority of these events
are small and are usually not felt. However, large earthquakes do occur, as evidenced by the
1949, 7.2-magnitude event and the 1965, 6.5-magnitude event. The 1949 earthquake appears to
' have been the largest in this area during recorded history.
Generally, there are four types of potential geologic hazards associated with large seismic events:
' 1) surficial ground rupture; 2) seismically-induced landslides; 3) liquefaction; and 4) ground
motion. The potential for each of these hazards to adversely impact the proposed project is
discussed below.
' 6.1 Surficial Ground Rupture
' The nearest known fault trace to the project is the Seattle fault. Recent studies by the U.S.
Geological Survey (e.g., Johnson et al., 1994, Origin and Evolution of the Seattle Fault and
Seattle Basin, Washington, Geology, v. 22, p.71-74 and Johnson et al., 1999, Active Tectonics of
the Seattle Fault and Central Puget Sound Washington-Implications for Earthquake Hazards,
Geological Society of America Bulletin, July 1999, v. 111, n. 7, p. 1042-1053) suggest that a
northern trace of an east-west trending thrust fault zone (Seattle fault) may project about 10
' miles south of the project site, in the vicinity of Bremerton. The recognition of this fault is
relatively new and data pertaining to it are limited, with the studies still ongoing. According to
' the U.S. Geological Survey studies, the latest movement of this fault was about 1,100 years ago,
resulting in about 20 feet of surficial displacement. This displacement can presently be seen in
the form of raised, wave-cut beach terraces along Alki Point in West Seattle and Restoration
Point at the south end of Bainbridge Island. The recurrence interval of movement along these
fault systems is still unknown, although it is hypothesized to be in excess of several thousand
years. Due to the suspected long recurrence interval, the potential for surficial ground rupture is
' considered to be low during the expected life of the structure.
6.2 Seismically-Induced Landslides and Liquefaction
' The area of the proposed house has a low risk of shallow liquefaction based on the lack of
adverse shallow ground water and soil conditions. Loose saturated soils inferred to lie within the
' Page 8
' flood plain of thc. reek and along the beach, however, have a high risk for lie,aciachon. It is our
understanding that current plans do not include the placement of structures in these areas.
' Based on.the site stratigraphy and the inferred presence of pre-historic landslide activity
n the
area, the site is at risk for seismically-induced landslides. The risk of seismically-induced lland-
slides increases as duration and magnitude of ground motion increases. It should be noted that a
comprehensive stability analysis for the site under these conditions which would further quantify
this risk was beyond the scope of work for this study.
' 6.3 Ground Motion
' Based on the site stratigraphy encountered and visual reconnaissance of the site, it is our opinion
that earthquake damage to the proposed structure, if founded on a suitable bearing stratum,
would likely be caused by the intensity and horizontal ground acceleration associated with the
' event. Structural design of the building should follow current Uniform Building Code (UBC)
standards and take into consideration stress caused by seismically-induced earth shaking. The
site would be characterized in the UBC by a Seismic Zone Factor Z of 0.30 and Soil Profile of
Sc.
7.0 LANDSLIDE HAZARD AND MITIGATION
' Beyond the identified deep-seated pre-historic landslide activity observed at the site, we did not
observe evidence of landslide activity on the southern, 40-foot-high, 2H:1 V slope below the pro-
posed house location with the exception of isolated, surficial landslide activity. These slides
1 were generally less than 10 feet high and were most prevalent where subtle topographic differ-
ences resulted in slope angles approaching 1H:1V. These landslides were well vegetated and
appeared to have occurred prior to the 1998-99 winter season.
' Landslide risks are classified as high, moderate or low, depending uponthe p g probability of
occurrence and potential for damage of the structures. High landslide or mass-wasting risk areas
' are characterized by moderate (greater than 25 percent) to steep (greater than 40 percent) slopes
and the presence of known past or active landslides. Moderate landslide risk areas are charac-
terized by moderate to steep slopes and the absence of ongoing or known past landslides on the
site. Low risk areas are characterized by gentle to moderate slopes and no history of landslides.
The slopes south and east of the proposed residence are considered high risk by the slope
' geometry and the presence of past surficial landslide activity, based primarily on the probability
of recurrence during the expected life span of the structure. Based on past landslide activity, the
type of landslide to affect the site will likely be ongoing and incremental surficial type sliding.
' This type of landslide activity affects the upper 1 to 3 feet of soil on the slope and typically does
not extensively affect the overall "global" stability of the slope.
' To mitigate the risk of these shallow landslides damaging the proposed house, we recommend a
minimum horizontal setback of 25 feet from the top of the southeast slope. This setback distance
is from the top of slope at existing grades and is based on the intersection of a 2H:1V bearing
slope projected through the subsurface from the toe of the slopes, including the 18-inch deep
Page 9
i
minimum footing embedment. All recommendations provided in Section 8.0 of this report,
Erosion Hazards and Mitigation, should be implemented. p
' In addition, all surface drainage must be properly collected, controlled and tightlined to the
bottom of sloping areas. Downspouts from roofs, runoff from other impermeable surfaces
including driveways, and all footing/wall drains must be properly collected and tightlined into
suitable storm water drainage systems. With the removal of all storm water from impervious
surfaces, the effect of the planned, on-site development, including the septic system, will result
' in a net decrease in water input. As such, a properly designed, located, and maintained septic
system should not impact existing slope stability. We recommend a minimum 100 foot hori-
zontal setback for the septic system from the tops of any steep slope. Similarly, the overall
project will not decrease slope stability on adjacent properties.
We understand that tree removal on the site is expected to be minimal. The area was most likely
' logged sometime around the turn of the twentieth century, when most large trees inferred to have
been present in the vicinity of the proposed house were removed. Specific adverse impacts to
site slopes shortly after logging are difficult to define. Currently, the house site supports mature
' second-growth fir and deciduous trees and young third-growth fir trees. It is our understanding
that few of the large trees around the proposed residence are planned for removal and that
pruning and cutting will be generally limited to the young third-growth on the bench. We
' recommend against cutting significant amounts of trees located on the slopes without a predeter-
mined revegetation plan. In addition, we recommend against topping trees, as it reduces root ball
size and strength. Limbing is less damaging to root structures and is recommended in general
over removal and topping of large trees.
' Based on the geological conditions observed in the vicinity of the lower slope, and inferred
performance of the slope during past heavy rainfall events, it is our opinion that risk of damage
to the proposed structure from landslide events resulting from periods of extended heavy precipi-
tation is less than 1 in 100 in any given year. It should be noted that a regional or quantitative
slope stability analysis was beyond our scope of services for this project. It must also be under-
stood that the identification of landslide hazards on the site and providing geotechnical design
' recommendations for the project is not a guarantee of stable slopes, but is meant to provide a
means to reduce the risk of slope movement. Ongoing natural erosion and shallow surficial
landslides will continue to act on the steeper portions of the lower slopes during periods of
extended heavy rains.
' 8.0 EROSION HAZARDS AND MITIGATION
The loose nature of the near-surface soils encountered at the site suggests a moderate to high
' erosion potential where these soils will be exposed during construction. Areas outside of the
proposed construction area have a low erosion potential due to the well-established vegetation.
As such, only the areas necessary for construction should be stripped of vegetation.
To mitigate and reduce the erosion hazard potential and off-site sed
iment transport, we
recommend the following:
' Page 10
1
' • Surface water should n_; be allowed to flow across the site over unprotected surface;:.
• All storm water from impermeable surfaces, including driveways and roofs, should be
tightlined to a suitable temporary storm water collection system and tightlined down the
entire height of the lower slope, to an appropriate, low-gradient, rock-armored, discharge
' point.
• Silt fences should be placed and maintained around the perimeter of the proposed
construction area throughout the entire construction phase of the project until permanent
landscaping and permanent storm water collections facilities have been installed.
• Soils that are to be reused around the site should be stored in such a manner as to reduce
erosion from the stockpile. Protective measures may include, but are not necessarily
limited to, covering with plastic sheeting, the use of low stockpiles in flat areas, or the
' use of hay bales and/or additional silt fences around pile perimeters.
• In order to reduce potential erosion hazards, areas stripped of natural vegetation during
' construction should be replanted as soon as possible, or otherwise protected.
It should be noted that upslope development can have significant impact on the conditions at the
' project site. If off-site development occurs upslope (northwest) of the site, storm water control,
and erosion control measures for the site should be reviewed and modified as necessary.
1
1
1
1
' Page 11
May 16, 000
AESI Project No. BE00041A
III. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
9.0 INTRODUCTION
' Our explorations indicate that, from a geotechnical standpoint, the proposed
provided the risks discussed are accepted and the recommendations contained herein are properly
' followed. The bearing soils (natural recessional outwash sands) are relatively shallow and
spread footing foundations may be utilized. We understand that the distribution of foundation
loads of the single-story, wood frame house will be typical; no concentrated loads are antici-
pated. Consequently, the loose, recessional outwash sands encountered in the upper portions of
our borings are capable of providing suitable foundation support when prepared according to the
recommendations given herein.
10.0 SITE PREPARATION
' Site preparation within the pr
oposed house footprint should include removal of all trees, brush,
debris and any other deleterious material. Additionally, the surficial, organic topsoil should be
' removed and any remaining roots grubbed. Within foundation areas, ALL fill must be removed
to expose the underlying natural sands. This includes the fill materials recently placed for the
driveway.
The near-surface, natural sand-bearing material contains a high percentage of fine-grained
' material, which makes it moisture-sensitive and subject to disturbance when wet. The contractor
must use care during site preparation and excavation operations so that the underlying loose
sands are not disturbed. If this occurs, the disturbed material should be removed to expose
competent, natural soils.
11.0 FOUNDATIONS
11.1 Spread Footings
' The near-surface loose sand in its current condition is not suitable for foundation support.
' recommend compaction of the upper 3 feet of sand (below footing subgrade) to a firm and none yielding condition. We recommend the use of a large vibratory hoe pack attached to a track-
mounted excavator. Smaller compaction equipment will not adequately compact the sand at the
36-inch depth. The perimeter footing excavations should be a minimum of 3 feet wide and ade-
quately compacted the full width. All interior column footing excavations should be a minimum
of 2 feet wider than the actual footing (in all directions) and compacted the full width. All
footings should be placed in the center of the excavation.
' Page 12
Spread footings may be used for building support when founded on suitab
ly compacted and
approved sand. We recommend an allowable foundation soil bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds
per square foot (psf) be utilized for design purposes including both dead and live loads. An
increase in the above-mentioned bearing pressures by one-third may be used for short-term wind
or seismic loading. Perimeter footings should be buried at least 18 inches into the surrounding
' soil for frost protection Interior footings, if applicable, require only 12 inches burial. However,
all footings must penetrate to the prescribed bearing stratum and no footing should be founded in
or above loose, organic, or existing fill soils.
' It should be noted that the area bounded bylines extendingdownward
at 1H:1V from any
footing must not intersect another footing, or a filled or loose area that has not been compacted to
' at least 95 percent maximum dry density in accordance with American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) test designation D-1557. In addition, a 2H:1V line extending down from any
footing must not daylight onto site slopes. Thus, in addition to the setback distances described in
' Section 7.0, footings should not be placed near the edge of steps or cuts in the bearing soils.
Anticipated total settlement of footings founded on properly prepared, compacted sand subgrade
should be on the order of 1 inch. However, disturbed soil not removed from footing excavations,
or soil not adequately compacted prior to footing placement, could result in increased settle-
ments. All footing areas should be inspected by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc., prior to placing
concrete, to verify that the design bearing capacity of the soil has been attained and that
construction conforms with the recommendations contained in this report. Perimeter footing
drains should be provided as discussed under Section 13.0 of this report.
12.0 FLOOR SUPPORT
It is our understanding that structural wood floors will be used for living space and concrete slab-
on-grade floors will be used for the garage. A slab-on-grade floor may be used over natural sand
provided the sand is compacted in the same manner as for footing subgrade. Where passage of
moisture through the slab is undesirable, the floor should be cast atop a minimum of 4 inches of
' washed pea gravel to act as a capillary break. It should also be protected from dampness by an
impervious moisture barrier or otherwise sealed.
' 13.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS
' All footings should be provided with a drain at the footing elevation. Drains should consist of
rigid, perforated, polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe surrounded by washed pea gravel. The level of
the perforations in the pipe should be set approximately 2 inches below the bottom of the footing
' and the drains should be constructed with sufficient gradient to allow gravity discharge away
from the structure. Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the footing drain system
but should be handled by a separate, rigid, tightline drain that safely discharges to a natural
drainage way and subsequently to Hood Canal. In planning, exterior grades adjacent to walls
should be sloped away from the structure to achieve surface drainage.
Page 13
1
14.0 PROJECT Di-SIGN AD CONSTRUCTION MONITORING
' We are available to provide additional geotechnical consultation as the project design develops
and possibly changes from that upon which this report is based. We recommend that AESI
review the final project design drawings to assure that the geotechnical criteria have been
' properly incorporated into the design. We are also available to provide geotechnical engineering
and monitoring services during the construction phase of the project. The integrity of the
foundation and slopes depends on proper site preparation and construction procedures. In addi-
tion, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field in the event that variations in
subsurface conditions become apparent.
We have enjoyed working with you on this studyand are confident
t that these recommendations
will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions, or
' require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES,INC.
West Sound Office
of WA
( 1rr0
' EXPIRES 6/22/*
aAraj
Robert F. Cousins, P.G. John L. Peterson, P.E.
' Project Geologist Senior Geotechnical Engineer
W:\Rfc\NorstromA.doc
i
i
' Page 14
i
t fT'� / �1f E 't v' .t'1Zf+C4 Gv[.'i$ i ri G ��-� Yj� 1�.4 1 77� i i ti I v vim,.
t 1 1M1t .��\ .f 1y\ 5ibi�`�•y,-,j7i•t 1 L{ { f � f /`� �) v f ' v
r I ,'V 'f I' ` 'r `'' �,I I Iff 1\
�.A: ttt i ) '• i ,�', ,, ,All i. ..A, -�-;. -' r11
! t AA 1 tI:
k \�` ,,ii \d n 1.ffe'74f � {4 .. A-`f-^�` - ? �i,�l I \\ � 1),\ °`\i al 4`M
, i (t r fi 1.
pg '", fQ a I ✓G '1x:t�\i.� r ti, 1 i t' v `)f Z
d �? �}, s i j j��i S C r Yt � v,k ...„-NA' _ Sn� I. M 4 f �+t
g 1 (( �a H - ffa,zl iyj/ i /i;id r a ferl t )'.�� `. " --- , }n r A �y y � i P }iti�tri
f F A ; J +,t •.�-• ��, I _t ' /J l �/( J
;y`1 i'' i N�—` 'i,, k'''.r.)7;47.. T# "f,1 t///t/ / ` f , �+�OS{ f lj r+1�1 is ! 1'.f r
I
( )�,11 '`, i ) r°ill JJs--- ,' i,! t / ' )) /fit" }"'z�r I� v/ � r,P,fipv `
b .
I
'� `�, ' !ff .�, ',_ u s " , ` 1 �C ,. ',)'if' . f/ir'' ,,,,,/(1 (� , . `\\\" ',� -. �t f( "
♦ ..`��..���' 4 ti"''Y fir,E.l C:l'.. �4�,�� ,A�1/,.,„''f / \1 "� J ''( ,c II'''', II 1. I - �// 0 - ..
',,.. 1,:f t. , •• �'>_.�..� .: ''_.J' dt. / "".., \f 1 11, s ! I €.-, t-f_.a -, •I. t
`t -` r' r'„(!p �. 4_)` / ,[i f --, / ' r ,/A/ i 1.17 k` It tit h . .'l z�'g 1.
' sc" - L.,. �.1 } 7 s /. ' I if f �1 �f t �, -v.� ( i' M,� LigFt
ti�v' 7 �� {1)`/ n''°-=. t 1 t \t r>)). -1--- f,/ /i S r'i { t y, i*at' hairt
E ,fi �� ,� , ` ti / 1 t , , --Ei'31� _J/t/s /!"`"dv
1 r f ri ,i‹, . I '.. �• �� i} f /// ,f( ,, 1 /s j,•
rf ,. � .r V` 1� -t"/,,,,,. /^ .may / y+!
I � a <, iiti �skv�� 'TI� -� PROJECT
' 2i <s,, ' . 'r--- _ ,-'t ''4\1 I�1,.}t ;f .!f/`r- /,�f LQCATI N
( • ->-:,'/a - ! . j /sue Y �l hi ) , ,' �(+'% � `'
It 'kc f<< i ''` yIt ``- //N 11r
r s r ,i�}' <� ,)� Estimated Extent of
� � ,?� t�"' � �'' � �` 'r `�''� �t �/�$ <�/ ��� •`�pl'el11St01'IC Landslide
j} r -� Ni\--1 kV..,"...1..";"
�!i Ifs
II,
f 1 1. Ifa YCt „lril , \ 4 4)h1.h,f tit tf //\ /
4 v', 1 .:''t,� "ry'y Jf Yi�*re! ti , } �i1,y- l f Active Landslide
of �l
JJ "i y�
S , �v 4 �7_, :` ` -� `.. -.) � 'fir ," // .` Landslide
tSjil v ,, 1 rt �j 1"31.E t �... t f''1 .:/ f
�I iv ', C'J'/ I
s a t n t _---- 1
fI \ t 0, i!1. ii;',,,•-.----
/
I
1 0
0 2000
n
0
I
Feet
E Source: Lofall 7-1/2 Minute Quadrange Map
I
ASSOCIATED VICINITY MAP FIGURE
EARTH
ojai
NORDSTROM E
SCIENCES, INC Jefferson CountyPARC, Washington
RESIDENCE
I
j
I Aral ASsBOCIATED Exploration Log
SCIENCES,INC Project Number Exploration Number Sheet
BE00041 EB-1 1 of 4
I Project Name Nords'u:m Property: AGround Surface Ele (ft) 48
Location Thorndike Road. Jefferson Couc', West end of cul-de-sac Datum MSL
Driller/Equipment Gregory Drilling/Hollow Stem Auger 4"ID/8"OD Date Start/Finish 4/1 7/2000-4/1 7/2000
Hammer Weight/Drop Automatic Hammer, 140 lb/30-inch Hole Diameter(in) 9-inch
o This logis part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences
co _ (AESI)•for the named project and should be read together only with that c
_ �, LEreport for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the
n a m E location of this exploration and at the time of exploration. Subsurface a�a� N Blows/Foot
aI
� S E >. conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The a occ
o T rn C. " data presented are a simplification of actual conditions encountered.DESCRIPTION o m" 10 20 30 40
Surface: crushed rock(driveway)
I
RECESSIONAL OUTWASH
Loose,damp, reddish brown SAND;trace silt,trace to few organics;sand
fine
I
_ i S1 . z
j5
G
Loose,damp,tan SAND;sand fine to medium i'0'•f•
I - 5 /7 S-2 . z
s ♦
I
I
— 10 5
S-3 grades wet;few silt
/� 4
,%� 5
12 I::
_ (4/17/00) iiiiiiE
I
— 15 S-4 Loose,wet, light brown to gray interbedded SILTY SAND and SANDY 4
ISILT;sand very fine,silt coarse; laminated with silty clay z
s
I -
I
— 20
S-5 Medium dense,damp,tan,fine SAND
10
1
10 •
i
IC
C
O
I
•
a .•
.
c,
a Sampler Type(Si): Lab tests:
z O No Recovery
C-Chemical Properties
P-Permeability Logged by: JBC
I
o /1 2"Split Spoon Sampler M-Moisture m Approved by: RFC
W
a r Grab Sample Q Static Water Level Figure No. A-2
1 Water Level at time of drilling (ATD)
a e
r
' iraimAssoc�ATEo Exploration Log
EARTH Project Number Exploration Number Sheet
SCIENCE®,INC BF00041 EB-1 2 of 4
I P,_;cnt Name Nordstror: operty: Parcel A Ground Surface ElevaJun(ft) 48
Location Thorndike ,\oad, Jefferson County: West end of cul-de-sac Datum MSI
Driller/Equipment Gregory Drilling/Hollow Stem Auger 4"ID/8"OD Date Start/Finish 4/17/2000-4/17/2000
Hammer Weight/Drop Automatic Hammer. 140 lb/30-inch Hole Diameter(in) 9-inch
I _ This logis part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences
(AESI)for the named project and should be read together only with that o m 's report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the
a n a E location of this exploration and at the time of exploration. Subsurface — Blows/Foot
S E > conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The fl• o io
I o T gn 0 Ci) data presented are a simplification of actual conditions encountered. o Ea
DESCRIPTION o 10 20 30 40
S-6 RECESSIONAL OUTWASH 6
10 .
Medium dense,damp,tan,fine SAND 12
I
DISTURBED ADVANCE OUTWASH
I •30 Dense moist,tan SAND;few gravel trace silt sand fine;stratified with 1" 13
S-7 thick tan silty clayiiiiiiii 24
23 •
ff00 A`.
>co C 34' .
35 p°p° (4/17/00) iiiiiiii
I
S-8 ° 0 0 Very dense,wet,tan GRAVEL;with sand,trace silt;gravel fine to medium, 14
C)C sand medium to coarse 25 50+.
o°o° zs
o0
CJC
I
OCJ C
00. 0
>O C
I
OO C
— 40 9 S_9 °0°0
10
I
sv0 27
00�0 30 iiiiEgi 50+♦
DISTURBED ADVANCE GLACIO-LACUSTRINE `•_••-•
IHard,wet,brown to gray SANDY SILT;few clay;sand fine,silt coarse
I
- 45
S-10 T Very dense,wet,tan SAND with SILT;trace gravel;sand fine,gravel fine; 18
T slightly indurated 39 50+.
I
39
Hard, moist,greenish gray SILTY SAND;sand fine,silt coarse
IC :C
0
o Sampler Type(ST): Lab tests:
z O No Recovery
C-Chemical Properties
P-Permeability Logged by: JgC
I
o Z 2"Split Spoon Sampler M-Moisture Approvedy RFC
m b
W Grab Sample 2Static Water Level Figure No. A-2
a 1 Water Level at time of drilling(ATD)
I AS1 ASSOCIATED Exploration Log
EARTH Project Number Exploration Number Sheet
SCIENCES INC BE00041 EB-1 3 of 4
I
Project Name Nordstrom Property: Para:! A Ground Si race Elevation (ft) 48
Location Thorndike Road, Jefferson County: West end of cul-de-sac Datum
Driller/Equipment Gregory Drilling/Hollow Stem Auger 4"ID/8"OD Date Start/FinishMSL 4/17/2000-4/17/2000
Hammer Weight/Drop Automatic Hammer, 140 lb/30-inch Hole Diameter(in) 9-inch
I _ This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences
(AESI)for the named project and should be read together only with that a
reQ o the
a E location onrt oor f this explorlete interpretation.
tion and at the htime of exploration.is Sub onlysurface Ti Blows/Foot
o S E a conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The E oZo
I
cn 0() data presented are a simplification of actual conditions encountered. o m
DESCRIPTION " 10 20 30 40
S-11 DISTURBED ADVANCE GLACIO-LACUTSTRINE Air& 12
18 A
Very dense, moist, greenish gray SILTY SAND; sand fine, silt coarse 22
Hard,moist,dark gray CLAYEY SILT;irregular fractures with fine sand
infilling;chaotic texture with 2-3 mm fractured cubes
I55 ,,S-12 il 20
27 50+A
I
I
1 - 60 nez S 13 50/4" 50+A
IVery dense,wet,gray SILTY SAND;trace clay,trace gravel;sand fine
•
— 65 5-14 • — E 50/5" 50+♦
0 0, 0 PRE-VASHON DEPOSITS
>q •
p°p° Very dense,wet, brown GRAVEL with SAND;trace silt;gravel fine to
I . 0° 0 coarse,sand predominantly coarse
O�O�
q •
O�O�
, •
o,o,
70 S 15�o • c 50/6" 50+A
.0 Iiiii
O°O°
I > o .
O°O° EEEEE
q •
g . 0. 0
p •
o n n
o Sampler Type(ST): Lab tests:
z
0 No Recovery C-Chemical Properties
P-PermeabilityLogged by: JBC
m ® 2"Split Spoon Sampler M-Moisture Approved by: RFC
I
w Grab Sample SZ Static Water Level Figure No. A-2
a .t Water Level at time of drilling(ATD)
I
8 ABDOIATEo
Project Number Exploration Log
EARTH Exploration Number Sheet
-`- SCIENCES,INC BE00041 EB-1 4 of 4
' Project Na., , �! dstrom PropE 'r Parcel A Ground Surface Elevation(It) 48
Location 7norndike Road, Jefferson County; West end ui cul-de-sac Datum MSL
Driller/Equipment Gregory Drilling/Hollow Stem Auger 4"ID/8"OD Date Start/Finish 4/17/2000-4/17/2000
Hammer Weight/Drop Automatic Hammer, 140 lb/30-inch Hole Diameter(in) 9-inch
I N o_ This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences
(AESI)for the named project and should be read together only with that o
1.) :E oo report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the
aa @ E location of this exploration and at the time of exploration. Subsurface — �' Blows/Foot
N S E >, conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The c- oio
I p T in 0 v) data presented are a simplification of actual conditions encountered. o m
DESCRIPTION " 10 20 30 40
S-16;0 0 0 PRE-VASHON DEPOSITS 50/5" �'4 i A -
c c
I - p°p° Very dense,wet,brown GRAVEL with SAND;trace silt;gravel fine to
° 0° 0 coarse,sand predominantly coarse
)c C
0000
roc
I )OO C
8OQO
I - > CJC
o,o,
80 S 17 0000 gravel grades fine to medium 50/6" 50+-
pOpo
I -
I
Bottom of boring at 81.5 feet.
I - 85 —
I
— 90
I
I
— 95
I
0
0
>,
g
o Sampler Type(ST): Lab tests:
zC No Recovery C-Chemical Properties
P-Permeability Logged by: JBC
I
m Z 2"Split Spoon Sampler M-Moisture Approved by: RFC
a Grab Sample Q Static Water Level Figure No. A_2
1 Water Level at time of drilling(ATD)
t i
I iMIASSOCIATED Exploration Log
EARTH Project Number Exploration Number Sheet
SCIENCES,INC BE00041 EB-2 1 of 2
' Project Name Nordstrom Property_ Parcel A _ Ground Surface E anon(ft) 44
Location Thorndike Road, Jefferson County: Datum MSL
Driller/Equipment Gregory Drilling/Hollow Stem Auger 4"ID/8"OD Date StartFinish 4/17/2000-4/17/2000
Hammer Weight/Drop Automatic Hammer, 140 lb/30-inch Hole Diameter(in) 9-inch
I This log_is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences
$ _ (AESI)-for the named project and should be read together only with that c
c.) Ellreport for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the
a a m E location of this exploration and at the time of exploration. Subsurface —m N Blows/Foot
a' S E >. conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The °- o io
Ia T co 0 to data presented are a simplification of actual conditions encountered. o
DESCRIPTION " 10 20 30 40
RECESSIONAL OUTWASH
I
Loose,damp,tan-brown SAND;sand fine to medium
-
I � S
4 •
I
5
•
I C ,' 3
S-2 -grades medium dense,wet,few silt $,
some mottling/oxidation (4/17ioo) s •
I - 10
•
Medium dense,damp,tan SAND;sand fine;weakly stratified
I
r S-3
/ 8
A • B
— 15 Stiff,moist,tan mottled orange SILT;few clay; horizontally laminated with EliiEii
I
dark red oxidized fine SAND with silt;slightly cemented
I
S4 4
4
8
i
20 —
Medium dense, moist tan SAND;few silt;no visible stratification
I
Io o
N V. S-5
9
R 12
m
I a _
7
o Sampler Type(ST): Lab tests:
z ' No Recovery C-Chemical Properties
P-Permeability Logged by: JBC
I
o / 2"Split Spoon Sampler M-Moisture Approved by: RFC
W — Grab Sample a Static Water Level Figure No. A-3
a Y. Water Level at time of drilling (ATD)
ASSOCIATED Exploration Log
EARTH Project Number Exploration Number Sheet
Li SCIENCES,INC
BE00041 EB-2 2 of 2
I Project Name
Location
Driller/Equipment Norer/E ui ment Gregory` t f'�m Property: 'a cel A Ground Surface Elevation(ft) 44
dike Road, Jefferson County: Datum MSL
q p Drilling/Hollow Stem Auger 4"ID/8"OD Date StarUFinish 4/17/2000-4/17/2000
Hammer Weight/Drop Automatic Hammer, 140 lb/30-inch Hole Diameter(in) 9-inch
I This to is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences
N _ (AESI)for the named project and should be read together only with that o
a, i=�o report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the
w a a location of this exploration and at the time of exploration. Subsurface — �' Blows/Foot
aai a S E > conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The ao E0
I p T 0to data presented are a simplification of actual conditions encountered. o m
DESCRIPTION 10 20 30 40
RECESSIONAL OUTWASH
I
- Medium dense,moist,tan SAND;few silt
DISTURBED ADVANCE OUTWASH i`'0''
I % S-6 Very dense,wet,gray SAND;few gravel;sand coarse,gravel fine;2" ``` is
interbeds of SILT;few clay (4/17/00) 22 50+A
-sand grades fine to medium
I — 30 �-gravelly drilling from 30'-32'
I
S-7 - Dense,wet,brown SAND;sand fine to medium 16
zo
0 -8"layer of GRAVEL with SAND;gravel predominantly fine,sand coarse EiEiiii 20 •
I
35
.• .
S-8 Dense,wet,brown SAND;sand fine to coarse, predominantly medium
...•.
40
IlBottom of boring at 39.5 feet.
•
45 —
I
IC O
0
m
g
I 0.
o Sampler Type(ST):z Lab tests:
O No Recovery C-Chemical Properties
P-Permeability Logged by: JBC
m
Z 2"Split Spoon Sampler M-Moisture Approved by: RFC
I
W a t Grab Sample SZ Static Water Level
1 Figure No. A-3
Water Level at time of drilling(ATD)
Z uo}6uiys`eM'/4un\oo uo\sjejjer 1XH/od21 3N1 `S33N313S IMI
'ON 3bnOI� d i cmivd WOLi LS ThION :NMOI03N`JIS30 111Id3
d0v00039 Ndld NO11d21O1dX3 (NV 311S 00/60/s0 031d13OSSIo►
ON 10340tld '31Va
66/SZ/80'6uilamns puej 'DUI Aquomsppe''wepV w011 uopewlotui dewaseg :30N3N3d3b
09 0E 0
Id NI 81VOS
uopoo1 6uuog uol}eJoldx a}eualxoaddy S 4-93
aN3931
edo'S ;o eo,.
a;ewixoaddy /
r _\_. //
/
/
/ algeneneun
e;ea /Gains
ado1S _ �,91 �\ -Y�zt�--
;o dol. e,zt ____„_7__—_,
7 4 z``` --`---\
r --
,\--- ,—
07-
T—_ a
1, , i r / / `iiuirgs V,,ZI
1` Q" l,..r„ems/ „zl 7 zl \} �� '' 9c
1-'—*-( ( / i /(1—) ._,,,(
= --_ . ��
r„0t
Z e,el esnoj {{t �f //
�) b;_et
.„ K.
/� / I 85U.^,, Zy lapjP.
V„Zt f J ) ) 7 pesodoi4\ V'„9l i'` JPaNun�.l ��mL
/gi
x� t J l � 1 j ' j zt i—•- _4 z� / �; z
1 7/ , zo`I l r titi )
,-:/::
(% / ter°J ( J i: ` 9 \ `}Le— _9 >.,Zl y 1`!
7 r >l •` i ( I i 1 '1 . i n � M F`t`z—' 't �b° ,0ti4 \"` . Cis
i j 1 / G r' 9 /a,sn.$ s ,,j
,o,
----x . ,.,4911 * .1 \
JI f t / tv} j�noZ , _- q ! l
/ Z-83 I \ .../0„eti ,,,,,1 \ \
•tip
'/,,(�.1 �' JJ i,.f tt1rJ-� / t"„f:?_,.,..� dui—
.4.4„9� 4JS"r.*7/ PO `!
f
/
lelsnp aic7_r'l` i—q,
iv„hz i ,r4,
/
AeMeAua �,,,.,/ ,r-- ,,
anew .,�
6ugs!x3igcev„z
f ��:.,z J
/ " -
bZ. ., t:oc#1 7
Fl LlXll 00/60/90 6Mp'VZO-VOb00039
NM