17-100139DEPARTMENT OF COMMITNITY DEVELOPMENT
RECEIVE] BY 33325 8" Avenue South
CITY OFVZ�:�& COMMUNITY & ECONC ,IC Federal Way, WA 98003-6325
-.FVELOPMENT DFPARTMENZ 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609
Federal Way www.cityoffederalway.com
JAN 0 � 2017
APPLICATION
CRITICAL AREA DIRECT SERVICES PROGRAM
Project Name:
Parcel No. 058755-0190 Robert and Karen Eager Single Family Residence
Project Description:
Please see attached project summary. Our objective is to build a single family residence
on the relatively level portion of parcel 058755-0190, which falls within an erosion and landslide hazard area, and
to abide by the setback from the buffer zone as well as the street setback and side setbacks.
Project Address:
3-xxxx 36th Avenue SW, Federal Way, WA 98023
Contact Name: Karen Eager / Robert Eager
Mailing Address (if different from above):
Parcel *
058755-0190
Phone: 253-365-7569
309 Manae St., Kailua, HI 96734
Email: eagertron@gmail.com
I am the owner of the above referenced property and I authorize the city to obtain an estimate of project cost. I recognize the
Direct Services Program is optional and that I may choose to utilize any qualified consultant of my choosing. I agree to
indemnify and release the city from all liability associated with the program or the worktreports of the consultant
ez
Signature:"` Date:
City Use Only
Consultant Name: '~xA,&" 1 `
Date Sent to Consultant:
Mated Sent to Consultant:
Vito Plan ❑ Landscape Plan
❑ S eclat Study(s)
Other.
di ac
Bulletin #078 — June 1, 2014 Page 1 of 1
(VCl7
❑ Other.
Folder #
Fee Estimate:
❑ Construction Drawings
k-MandoutsTritical Areas Optional Direct Services Application
,-)
Robert Eager and Karen Eager
309 Manae St.
Kailua, HI 96734
December 24, 2016
RE: Application for Critical Area Direct Services Program
Parcel No. 058755-0190, 052-014 SW Appraisal District, Residential Plat 19, NE-11-21-3
36th Avenue SW
Federal Way, WA
Project Summary
We would like to apply for the Critical Area Direct Services Program in order to streamline the
process of building a single family residence on parcel 058755-0190. The parcel falls within an
erosion hazard area and landslide hazard area. However, our objective is to build on the
relatively level portion of the lot [1], and to abide by the setback from the buffer zone as well as
the street setback and side setbacks. Our plan is to leave the majority of the lot completely
undisturbed [2].
Our goal is to follow all of the requirements for building a single family home in a critical
environmental area, while maintaining project feasibility in terms of time and cost. This lot is
situated along 36th Ave SW in such a way that the Westerly (street side) portion of the lot is
amenable to a residence, as is evident by the houses that line both sides of this street [3].
Project Timeframe
Once we are assigned a Geotechnical Consultant through the Critical Area Direct Services
Program, we would like to initiate the land assessment and topographical survey, as well as to
obtain the services of a structural engineer and architect in order to begin the site plan.
It is our goal to submit a more detailed project proposal during the Pre -Application meeting
once we have gathered the information above.
It is our aim to begin the land use permitting process in 2017. In 2018 we aim to begin the
construction permit process with the goal of completing construction by 2018 - 2019.
Attached Documentation
[1] Limited Geotechnical Feasibility Evaluation, provided by the previous parcel owner Oct 2016
f 1
[2] Representation of proposed single family residence footprint superimposed on parcel (to
serve as an unofficial visual representation, to scale)
[3] Bayview Country Estates, Residential Plat 19, NE-11-21-3, Parcel No. 058755-0190
Project Contacts
Karen Eager, Project Manager eagertron@gmail.com 253-365-7569
Robert Eager, Project Concept Design eager.rm@gmail.com 206-295-1994
Michael Eager, Architect mearch@att.net 903-235-1613
WA Licensed Architect, TBD
Geotechnical Engineer, TBD
Structural Engineer, TBD
Surveyor, TBD
Leila Willoughby -Oakes
From:
karen <eagertron@gmail.com>
Sent:
Thursday, October 27, 2016 3:12 PM
To:
Leila Willoughby -Oakes
Cc:
Eager, Robert M.; mearch
Subject:
parcel 058755 0190
Hello,
Thank you for the information you have provided to us for residential planning for parcel # 058755-0190.
The projected closing date for the purchase of this parcel is —Dec. 9th. Our "feasibility period" for the sales contract ends Nov. 1 Oth, and here
is our general plan for how we propose to proceed. If you have any recommendations for additions or changes to this timeline they would be
welcome.
-Karen Eager will act as project manager
-Michael Eager will act as architect, Robert Eager will act as concept designer
-Following completed purchase of parcel (-2nd week of Dec) we will submit the Critical Area Direct Services Program form and basic site
plan
-If approved, we will work with the Geotechnical Engineer and Surveyor to gather information on the proposed site plan and parcel (Jan/Feb
2017)
-We will compose a detailed project proposal and submit supporting documents for pre -application review (Feb/Mar 2017)
-We will receive a guiding letter and proceed accordingly (Apr/May 2017)
Due to the nature of the GHA on this parcel, the sellers contracted Landau Associates to conduct a Limited Geotechnical Feasibility
Evaluation on this parcel. The report concluded that it is feasible to build on a relatively level portion of this lot (the western side), leaving a
50 foot buffer zone from the GHA area of the lot.
We will propose a residential structure with a footprint that does not touch or cross the buffer zone, and also is placed with sufficient set -back
from the street and both sides of the parcel. The height will not exceed the maximum ABE.
Thank you!
Karen Eager
eagertron ia7gmai l .com
253-365-7569
309 Manae St.
Kailua, HI 96734
Robert Eager
eataenrm@:gmai I.com
206-295-1994
Leila Willoughby -Oakes
From: karen <eagertron@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, September 08, 2017 12:22 PM
To: Leila Willoughby -Oakes
Cc: Craig Jordan; Eager, Robert M.; mearch@att.net
Subject: Re: Eager Residence - Geotechnical Report
Attachments: Geotechnical Engineering Report Eager Residence_Stamped_Rev08Mayl7.pdf
Hi Leila!
Thank you for checking in. Yes, I do have a copy of the Geotechnical report, I'll attach it.
We are proceeding with the plans - here is our current status:
- Topographical survey with utilities located and tree ID complete, boundaries marked
- Structural engineering nearly complete
- Energy requirements met, finalizing documentation
- Tree retention plan by certified Arborist nearly complete
- We are currently working to finalize the site plan with erosion mitigation and drainage - do we need to hire a
civil engineer for this (if the plan is not complex), or could the Architect draft these plans?
Once we have all of the above complete we are planning to submit to Landau for review...
Thanks Leila! Karen
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 6:07 AM, Leila Willoughby -Oakes <Leila.Willoughby-Oakes@ciiyoffederalw".com>
wrote:
Hi Karen,
A quick check in on your project status so I do not forget about you! Do you have a pdf copy of the draft geo report in
your email? If so I will add it to the file.
Have a great fall,
Leila
L. Willoughby -Oakes
Associate Planner
Way Federal
33325 8`h Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003-6325
Phone:253/835-2644 Fax: 253/835-2609
w ww. c i tyoffederai way.corn
Land Use Applications : http://►►•ww.cityoffederalllraV.com/index.aspx?nid=481
Planner on Duty: 253-835-26551 PingInquiryr7a cil ffederalway.com
From: karen [mailto:eaa ertron@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2017 3:02 PM
To: Craig Jordan
Cc: Leila Willoughby -Oakes; Eager, Robert M.; mearch@att.net; Permit Center
Subject: Re: Eager Residence - Geotechnical Report
Hello Craig,
Thank you for the report! -Karen
On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Craig Jordan <CJordan@Iandauinc.corn> wrote:
Ka ren,
Attached is our geotechnical report for the proposed residence on 36th Ave SW in Federal Way. Please let us know if you
have any questions or will need hard copies of the report.
Thanks
Craig Jordan, PE
Senior Project Geotechnical Engineer
Landau Associates
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Eager Residence
36th Avenue SW
Federal Way, Washington
May 8, 2017
Prepared for
Robert and Karen Eager
350 Oneawa Street, Apartment A
Kailua, Hawaii
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
1115 West Bay Drive NW, Suite 201
Olympia, WA 98502
(360) 791-3178
Landau Associates
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Eager Residence
36th Avenue SW
Federal Way, Washington
This document was prepared by, or under the direct supervision of, the undersigned, whose seal is
affixed below.
Name: Craig A. Jordan
Washington/No. 50465
Date: May 8, 2017
11�
Document prepared by: ZCraig A. Jordan, PE
ProjedManager
<z
Document reviewed by: Steven Wright, PE
Quality Reviewer
Date: May 8, 2017
Project No.: 1665001.010.011
File path: Y:\1665\001.010\R\Signature Page.docx
Project Coordinator: MCS
LANDAU
14 ASSOCIATES
Landau Associates
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................1-1
1.1 Project Description.............................................................................................................1-1
1.2 Scope of Services.......................................................... ......................................................
1-1
2.0 SITE CONDITIONS...........................................................................................................................2-1
2.1 Surface Conditions..............................................................................................................2-1
2.2 Geologic Setting..................................................................................................................2-1
2.3 Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing Program............................................................2-2
2.4 Subsurface Soil Conditions.................................................................................................2-2
2.5 Groundwater........... .......................... ............................................................................2-2
3.0 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS............................................................................................................3-1
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................................. ...................................
4-1
4.1 Environmentally Critical Areas...........................................................................................4-1
4.1.1 Erosion Control..............................................................................................4-1
4.1.2 Permanent Surface Water Management.........................................................4-2
4.2 Earthwork...........................................................................................................................4-2
4.2.1 Site Preparation Activities ....... .......................................................................
4-2
4.2.2 Subgrade Preparation.....................................................................................4-2
4.2.3 Structural Fill.................................................................................................4-2
4.2.4 Backfill and Compaction Requirements...........................................................4-3
4.2.5 Wet Weather Earthwork Considerations.........................................................4-3
4.3 Structures...................................................... .....................................................................
4-4
4.3.1 Foundation Support........................................................................................4-4
4.3.2 Foundation Settlement ............. ......................................................................
4-6
4.3.3 Foundation and Site Drainage.........................................................................4-6
4.3.4 Slab -On -Grade Floors............................................................... ......................
4-6
4.3.5 Retaining Walls ............................. .................................................................
4-7
5.0 DESIGN REVIEW/CONSTRUCTION MONITORING..........................................................................5-1
6.0 USE OF THIS REPORT......................................................................................................................6-1
7.0 REFERENCES...................................................................................................................................7-1
Geotechnical Engineering Report 1665001.010.011
Eager Residence iii May 8, 2017
FIGURES
Figure Title
1 Vicinity Map
2 Site Plan
3 Critical Areas
TABLES
Table Title
1 2015 International Building Code Seismic Design Parameters
2 Summary of Design Parameters for Structural Engineer
APPENDICES
Appendix Title
A Field Explorations
B Laboratory Soil Testing
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Eager Residence
iv
Landau Associates
1665001.010.011
May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
ASTM.................................................................................................ASTM International
bgs................................................................................................. below ground surface
City....................................................................................................City of Federal Way
ft........................................................................................................................ foot/feet
g...............—,........................................................................................ force of gravity
H............................................................................................................................ height
IBC........................................................................................ International Building Code
LAI............................................................................................... Landau Associates, Inc.
pcf................................................................................................. pounds per cubic foot
psf.......................................................................................... pounds per square foot
WSDOT.......................... ..................... Washington State Department of Transportation
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Eager Residence
v
1665001.010.011
May 8, 2017
This page intentionally left blank.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Eager Residence
Landau Associates
1665001.010.011
May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our field investigation and provides geotechnical engineering
conclusions and recommendations for the Eager residence to be constructed at 36th Avenue SW,
Federal Way, Washington (site). The purpose of our investigation was to compile and review available
subsurface information regarding the project area, complete site investigations to characterize
subsurface soil and groundwater conditions, and develop geotechnical conclusions and
recommendations for design and construction of the proposed development.
The general project location is shown on Figure 1. Figure 2 presents the site plan, and Figure 3
illustrates the approximate location of an erosion and landslide hazard area. Appendix A includes a
description of our field explorations and presents summary logs of the conditions observed during our
investigation. Laboratory test results and a description of the laboratory testing program are provided
in Appendix B.
This report has been prepared based on our discussions with Robert and Karen Eager, information
provided by their architect and the City of Federal Way (City), data collected during our field
explorations and laboratory testing program, our familiarity with geologic conditions within the
vicinity of the project area, and our experience on similar projects.
1.1 Project Description
We understand that Robert and Karen Eager propose to construct a single-family residence on the
western portion of King County parcel number 058755-0190. The two-story residence will be wood
framed with an attached garage and no basement. An erosion and landslide hazard area, previously
identified by the City, occupies the eastern portion of the site. The proposed residence will be located
at least 50 feet (ft) from the hazard area.
1.2 Scope of Services
In keeping with the mandates of the City's Optional Direct Services Program, Robert and Karen Eager
retained Landau Associates, Inc.'s (LAI's) geotechnical engineering services to support design of their
proposed residence. Our services were provided in general accordance with the scope outlined in our
January 24, 2017 proposal, authorized by Karen Eager on February 10, 2017. Our scope of services
included the following tasks:
• Compiling and reviewing readily available geologic and geotechnical information and other
relevant data for the project area.
• Completing a geologic and slope reconnaissance to collect information on the general nature
and physical features of the project area.
■ Coordinating the clearance of underground utilities at our proposed exploration areas.
• Excavating two exploratory test pits to characterize the nature of the subsurface soil and
groundwater conditions at the project site.
Geotechnical Engineering Report 1665001.010.011
Eager Residence 1-1 May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
■ Monitoring the test pit excavation, collecting representative soil samples, and maintaining
detailed logs of the conditions encountered.
• Conducting limited geotechnical laboratory testing.
• Performing geotechnical engineering analyses and evaluating data derived from the
subsurface investigation and laboratory testing programs.
• Preparing and submitting this geotechnical engineering report, which presents our
conclusions and recommendations along with supporting data for the project. This report
includes:
— a site plan showing the locations of the explorations completed;
— results of our laboratory testing program and summary logs of the conditions
observed during our explorations;
— a description of surface conditions and topography and a discussion of the near
surface soil and groundwater conditions observed on site;
— recommendations for site grading, including clearing and grubbing and stripping;
earthwork requirements; and fill placement and compaction criteria;
— recommendations for foundation support of the proposed structure, including
foundation preparation, maximum allowable soil bearing pressure, minimum footing
sizes (continuous and column footings), minimum depth of burial, and resistance to
lateral loads;
— estimated short-term and long-term settlements of foundations;
— static and dynamic lateral earth pressures on below grade walls;
— site and foundation drainage considerations;
— seismic design considerations, per the 2015 International Building Code (IBC);
— analysis of and recommendations for geotechnical construction in critical areas as
defined by the City in Chapter 19.145 of its Revised Code of General Ordinances for
Erosion, Landslide, and Seismic Hazard Areas; and
— recommendations for monitoring and testing during construction.
Geotechnical Engineering Report 1665001.010.011
Eager Residence 1-2 May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
2.0 SITE CONDITIONS
The following sections present a description of the surface conditions observed during field
explorations, a summary of the geologic setting of the project area, a brief description of our field
exploration and laboratory testing program, and a summary of the subsurface soil and groundwater
conditions observed in the test pits.
2.1 Surface Conditions
The project site is currently vacant and vegetated by trees and shrubs. The proposed building
footprint is located within the western portion of the site. The owner of the property north of the site
has constructed a rockery wall, 24 to 40 inches in height, as a grade separation for his driveway. From
the proposed location of the Eagers' new residence, site topography gently slopes 75 to 100 ft down
property's western edge before steepening to a moderate slope of about 20 percent for 40 ft. East of
the moderate slope, topography steepens to a maximum slope of approximately 60 percent, sloping
down to Joes Creek to the east.
On February 28, 2017, we performed a slope reconnaissance to evaluate the potential for slope
instability. All dimensions provided in this section are based on field measurements taken by an LAI
representative using a tape measure, handheld inclinometer, and handheld GPS. Please note that the
topography shown on Figures 2 and 3 is an approximation based on data from King County's
Geographic Information System; descriptions of setbacks and slope inclinations included in the
report's main text are more accurate.
Steep slopes are located east of the project site, about 115 ft east of the property's southwest corner.
The natural slope inclination is approximately 60 percent with a vertical relief of about 200 ft. We did
not observe obvious signs of recent slope instability along the steep slopes located within 300 ft of the
proposed development. No groundwater seeps or springs were observed on the steep slopes.
2.2 Geologic Setting
General geologic information for the project area was obtained from the Geologic Map of the Tacoma
1:100,000-Scale Quadrangle, Washington (Schuster 2015). According to Schuster, the project area is
underlain by recessional outwash and advance outwash soils. Soil defined as recessional outwash
typically consists of stratified sand and gravel deposited by glaciers receding from the Puget Sound
region. Unlike older deposits in the area, recessional outwash deposits have not been over -
consolidated by glacial ice and are typically loose to medium dense.
Soil defined as advance outwash typically consists of clean sand with an increasing gravel content in
the upper portion of the unit. Fine-grained sand and some silt are common in the lower part of the
unit. Sorting, cross and horizontal stratification, and cut -and -fill structures are distinctive features of
outwash. Advance outwash is transported by meltwater and deposited in streams and pools
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Eager Residence
2-1
1665001.010.011
May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
emanating from the face of an advancing glacier. This unit has been glacially overridden, typically
exhibits moderately high permeability, and is susceptible to erosion, especially when exposed on
steep slopes.
Though not shown on Schuster's map, fill associated with past grading activities should be anticipated.
2.3 Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing Program
Subsurface conditions were explored by excavating and sampling two test pits (TP-1 and TP-2) on
March 9, 2017. The exploratory test pits were excavated to about 9%: and 10%ft below ground surface
(bgs). The approximate locations of the test pits are shown on Figure 2. A discussion of field
exploration procedures along with edited logs of the exploratory test pits is presented in Appendix A.
The laboratory test results and a discussion of laboratory testing procedures are presented in
Appendix B.
2.4 Subsurface Soil Conditions
Subsurface conditions at the project site were observed to consist of about 6 to 12 inches of topsoil,
underlain by medium dense to dense native, recessional outwash soils. At the locations explored, the
recessional outwash soils consisted of sand with silt to with trace silt and were observed to extend to
the maximum depths of our test pits.
2.5 Groundwater
Groundwater was not observed in either TP-1 or TP-2 during our March 9, 2017 subsurface
investigation within the depths explored. Groundwater seeps were not observed during our slope
reconnaissance.
The groundwater conditions reported herein and on the test pit logs are for the specific locations and
date indicated and may not be indicative of other locations and/or times. Furthermore, it is
anticipated that groundwater conditions will vary depending on local subsurface conditions, the
weather, and other factors. It is likely that the highest groundwater levels will occur during late winter
and early spring. Regional groundwater is anticipated to be at the same elevation as Joes Creek, about
200 ft below the proposed building site.
Geotechnical Engineering Report 1665001.010.011
Eager Residence 2-2 May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
3.0 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS
We understand that seismic design will be performed using 2015 IBC standards (ICC 2014). The
parameters listed in Table 1 may be used to compute seismic base shear forces.
Table 1. 2015 International Building Code Seismic Design Parameters
Spectral response acceleration at short periods (SS) = 1.31g
Spectral response acceleration at 1-second periods (Sl) = 0.51g
Site class = D
Site coefficient (Fa) = 1.00
Site coefficient (F) = 1.50
g = force of gravity
The site is underlain by medium dense to dense recessional outwash, and the groundwater table is
anticipated to be more than 50 ft bgs. On this basis, it is our opinion that there is a very low risk for
seismically induced soil liquefaction or lateral spreading. Given the location of the site with respect to
the nearest known active crustal faults and the presence of a relatively thick layer of glacial soil
deposits, it is our opinion that the risk of ground rupture due to surface faulting is low.
Geotechnical Engineering Report 1665001.010.011
Eager Residence 3-1 May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based upon evaluation of the data collected during this investigation, it is our opinion that subsurface
conditions at the project site are suitable for the proposed project, provided the recommendations
contained herein are incorporated into the project design. The following sections present conclusions
and recommendations regarding environmentally critical areas, site preparation and earthwork, reuse
of onsite soils, wet weather earthwork, fill placement and compaction, shallow foundation support,
foundation settlement, foundation and site drainage, concrete slabs -on -grade, and earth pressures on
below -grade retaining walls.
4.1 Environmentally Critical Areas
It is our understanding that the presence of erosion and landslide hazards has led the City to identify
the eastern portion of the site as a geologically hazardous area. Based on our observations during the
field investigation, we concur that an erosion and landslide hazard area is present at the eastern
portion of the site as shown on Figure 3. The site of the proposed improvements is not within erosion
and landslide hazard area or its associated 50- ft buffer zone.
Provided the recommendations presented in this report are followed, it is our opinion that the
erosion hazard will not affect the proposed site development. From a slope stability perspective,
recessional outwash soil at the site is generally stable at the inclinations observed. The proposed
residence will sit more than 50 ft from the geologically hazardous area. This setback distance complies
with the 50-ft buffer required by the City's Revised Code of General Ordinances, Chapter 19.145.220.
As with all steep slopes adjacent to developed areas, the risk for long-term erosion and surficial sliding
can be reduced through installation and maintenance of proper vegetation, erosion controls, and
surface water -management features. Our recommendations for erosion control and permanent
surface water management are provided in the following sections.
4.1.1 Erosion Control
Temporary erosion control should be provided during construction activities and until permanent
erosion control measures can be implemented. Such measures include installing silt fences around
exposed soil areas, covering stockpiles with plastic sheeting, and directing runoff away from areas
that could be susceptible to erosion. Temporary erosion control measures should be completed in
accordance with local regulations. Permanent measures for erosion control should include reseeding
or replanting disturbed areas as soon as possible and protecting those areas until new vegetation has
been established. We recommend considering the use of native vegetation well established in nearby
areas.
Geotechnical Engineering Report 1665001.010.011
Eager Residence 4-1 May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
4.1.2 Permanent Surface Water Management
Surface water from roofs, hardscapes, or sparsely vegetated areas that could experience sheet flow
should be collected and controlled. Concentrated runoff should not be discharged to or along the top
of the erosion and landslide hazard area indicated on Figure 3.
4.2 Earthwork
Site grading activities are expected to consist of clearing, grubbing and stripping, subgrade
preparation, and import and compaction of structural fill to raise site grades.
4.2.1 Site Preparation Activities
Site preparation activities are expected to include clearing and removing trees and the existing
rockery wall. Large stumps should be overturned with a dozer or a similar piece of equipment to
remove the major portion of the root balls. Sod/topsoil located within the proposed structural areas
should be stripped to expose the underlying inorganic soil. The average sod/topsoil thickness at our
exploration locations is about 6 to 18 inches. Removal of the existing topsoil should extend beyond
the areas to be developed at a minimum of 4 ft laterally. Sod/topsoil generated during clearing,
grubbing, and stripping is not considered suitable for use as structural fill and should either be
stockpiled for potential use as topsoil or mulch in landscape areas or disposed at an approved location
off site.
Although not encountered in our test pits, cobbles and boulders may be encountered in the
recessional outwash deposits. The contractor should be prepared to deal with such oversized
material.
4.2.2 Subgrade Preparation
The prepared subgrade should be proof -rolled in the presence of a qualified civil or geotechnical
engineer, who is familiar with the site conditions and can check for the presence of soft and/or
disturbed areas. Areas of limited access that cannot be proof -rolled can be evaluated using a steel T-
probe. Loose and/or disturbed subgrades identified during the proof -roll should be repaired by
overexcavating the disturbed soil and replacing it with compacted structural fill meeting the
requirements described in this report. Disturbed soil also can be repaired with additional scarification,
moisture conditioning, and recompacting.
4.2.3 Structural Fill
The suitability of excavated soil or imported soil for use as structural fill will depend on the gradation
and moisture content of the soil when it is placed. As the amount of fines (material passing a U.S.
Standard No. 200 sieve) increases, the soil becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in
moisture content, and adequate compaction becomes more difficult to achieve. Soil containing more
than about 5 percent fines cannot be compacted consistently to a dense, non -yielding condition when
Geotechnical Engineering Report 1665001.010.011
Eager Residence 4-2 May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
its water content is more than 2 to 3 percent above the optimum moisture content. Optimum
moisture content is the moisture content at which the greatest compacted dry density can be
achieved.
With the exception of the top 6 to 12 inches, soil generated from cuts and/or excavations is expected
to consist primarily of recessional outwash containing sand with trace amounts of silt and gravel. This
soil type is not expected to be especially moisture sensitive and should be compactable under a
variety of weather conditions. However, if the optimum moisture content of the soil is exceeded,
moisture conditioning could be required. Soil from the top 6 to 12 inches is expected to consist of
loose, silty to very silty sand with organics. In general, this soil type is considered to be moisture
sensitive due to its relatively high fines content. Reuse of highly organic site soils is not recommended
beneath footings or behind retaining walls. If soil generated from cuts and/or excavations at the
project site is not suitable for use as fill, it should be disposed of at an offsite location or placed in
landscaped areas of the site, where several inches of postconstruction settlement would be tolerable.
If the onsite soil cannot be utilized for structural fill or if additional material is needed, import
structural fill will be required. Import structural fill should meet the requirements for Select Borrow
outlined in Section 9-03.14(2) of the Washington State Department of Transportation's 2016 Standard
Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction (WSDOT 2016 Standard Specifications;
WSDOT 2016). If wet weather construction is anticipated, the amount of fines should not exceed 5
percent, by dry weight, based on a wet sieve analysis of that portion passing the %-inch sieve.
4.2.4 Backfill and Compaction Requirements
In improved structural areas, such as beneath foundations, floor slabs, and pavements, structural fill
should be placed in relatively uniform horizontal lifts, not exceeding 12 inches loose thickness. If
hand -operated construction equipment is utilized, the maximum lift thickness should not exceed 6
inches. Each lift should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as
determined by ASTM International (ASTM) test method D1557. In unimproved (non-structural) areas,
such as landscaped areas, fill should be placed in relatively uniform horizontal lifts between 12 and 18
inches thick, loose measure and be compacted to at least 85 percent of the maximum dry density
(ASTM test method D1557).
4.2.5 Wet Weather Earthwork Considerations
If construction is accomplished during wet weather and it is not possible to properly compact the
onsite soil or if a sufficient amount of fill material is not available on site, we recommend that
structural fill consist of an imported, clean, well -graded sand or sand and gravel containing less than 5
percent passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve, based on a wet sieve analysis of that portion passing
the %-inch sieve. In addition, if fill is to be placed or earthwork is to be performed in wet weather or
under wet conditions, the contractor may reduce soil disturbance by:
• Accomplishing earthwork in small sections.
Geotechnical Engineering Report 1665001.010.011
Eager Residence 4-3 May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
• Sloping excavated surfaces to promote runoff.
• Limiting construction traffic over unprotected soil.
• Limiting the size and type of construction equipment used.
• Placing gravel working mats over areas of prepared subgrade.
• Removing wet surficial soil before commencing fill placement each day.
• Sealing the exposed ground surface by rolling with a smooth drum compactor or rubber -tired
roller at the end of each workday.
• Providing upgradient perimeter ditches or low earthen berms and using temporary sumps to
collect runoff and prevent water from ponding and damaging exposed subgrades.
• Stabilizing the soil with an additive, such as lime or cement kiln dust, to allow its use in wet
weather.
4.3 Structures
The following sections provide geotechnical engineering conclusions and recommendations for
foundation design of the proposed structure. Recommendations are provided for seismic design,
allowable bearing capacity and settlement, retaining walls, resistance to lateral loads, foundation
drainage considerations, and slab -on -grade floors. The following table provides a summary of design
parameters for the structural engineer. The design parameters should be used in conjunction with the
complete recommendations of this report.
Table 2. Summary of Design Parameters for Structural Engineer
Allowable soil bearing pressure = 2,500 psf
Friction coefficient (factored) = 0.30
Passive resistance (factored) = 250 pcf
Active earth pressure = 35 pcf
At -rest earth pressure = 55 pcf
Minimum foundation width = 18 inches (continuous), 24 inches (isolated)
Maximum foundation width (for settlement considerations) = 6 ft (continuous), 10 ft (isolated)
ft = feet
pcf = pounds per cubic foot
psf = pounds per square foot
4.3.1 Foundation Support
Foundation support for the proposed building may be provided by continuous or isolated spread
footings founded on medium dense to dense, undisturbed native soil. In areas where suitable
subgrade material is not exposed at the footing subgrade elevation, we recommend excavating down
to the medium dense to dense native soil and replacing the removed soil with properly compacted
structural fill. The purpose of removing the unsuitable fill is to provide uniform support for the
Geotechnical Engineering Report 1665001.010.011
Eager Residence 4-4 May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
proposed building. The limits of the overexcavation beneath the footings should extend laterally
beyond the edge of each side of the footing a distance equal to the depth of the excavation below the
base of the footing. Alternatively, overexcavations could be backfilled to the design footing elevation
with lean concrete, or foundations may be extended to bear on medium dense to dense, undisturbed
native soil. If lean concrete is used to backfill the overexcavation, the limits of the overexcavation do
not need to extend beyond the width of the footing.
Bearing soil disturbed during foundation excavation should be properly recompacted or removed. All
soil directly below footings should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density
(ASTM test method D1557) before placing forms, reinforcing steel, and concrete. All continuous and
isolated spread footings should have minimum widths of 18 and 24 inches, respectively, and should be
founded a minimum of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade.
Assuming the above foundation support criteriz are satisfied, continuous or isolated spread footings
founded directly on medium dense to dense, undisturbed native soil or properly compacted structural
fill extending to medium dense to dense, undisturbed native soil may be proportioned using a
maximum net allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf). The term "net
allowable bearing pressure" refers to the pressure that can be imposed on the soil at foundation level
resulting from the total of all dead plus live loads, exclusive of the weight of the footing or any backfill
placed above the footing. The net allowable bearing pressures may be increased by one-third for
transient wind or seismic loads.
Passive earth pressures that develop against the sides of the building foundations, in conjunction with
friction developed between the base of the footings and the supporting subgrade, will resist lateral
loads transmitted from the structure to its foundation. For design purposes, the passive resistance of
well -compacted fill placed against walls or the sides of foundations may be considered equivalent to a
fluid with a density of 250 pounds per cubic foot. The recommended value includes a safety factor of
about 1.5 and is based on the assumption that the ground surface adjacent to the structure is level in
the direction of movement for a distance equal to or greater than twice the embedment depth. The
recommended value also assumes drained conditions will prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure
in the compacted fill. In design computations, the upper 12 inches of passive resistance should be
neglected if the soil is not covered by floor slabs or pavement. If future plans call for the removal of
the soil providing resistance, the passive resistance should not be considered.
An allowable coefficient of friction between concrete and soil of 0.30, applied to vertical dead loads
only, may be used to calculate the resistance to sliding at the base of the foundation elements bearing
on undisturbed native soil or well -compacted granular fill. However, if passive and frictional resistance
are considered together, one-half of the recommended passive soil resistance value should be used
because larger strains are required to mobilize the passive soil resistance compared with frictional
resistance. A safety factor of about 1.5 is included in the base friction design value. We do not
recommend increasing the coefficient of friction to resist seismic or wind loads.
Geotechnical Engineering Report 1665001.010.011
Eager Residence 4-5 May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
4.3.2 Foundation Settlement
Settlement of shallow foundations depends on foundation size and bearing pressure as well as the
strength and compressibility characteristics of the underlying soil. Assuming construction is
accomplished as previously recommended and for the maximum allowable soil bearing pressure
recommended above, we estimate the total settlement of foundations should be less than about 1
inch, and differential settlement between two adjacent load -bearing components supported on
competent soil should be less than about %: inch. The soil response to applied stresses caused by
structural and other loads is expected to be predominately elastic in nature, with most of the
settlement occurring during construction as loads are applied.
4.3.3 Foundation and Site Drainage
To reduce the potential for groundwater to seep into interior spaces and prevent the buildup of
hydrostatic pressure against subterranean walls, we recommend that an exterior footing drain system
be constructed around the perimeter of the building foundation. The drain should consist of a
minimum 4-inch-diameter perforated pipe, surrounded by a minimum 12 inches of filtering media and
sloped to carry water to a suitable collection and discharge system. The filtering media may consist of
open -graded drain rock wrapped by a non -woven geotextile fabric, such as Mirafi® 140N, Synthetic
Industries 351 or equivalent. The drainage backfill should contain less than 3 percent by weight
passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 sieve, based on a wet sieve analysis of that portion passing the U.S.
Standard No. 4 sieve. The invert of the footing drain pipe should be placed at approximately the same
elevation as the bottom of the footing or 12 inches below the adjacent floor slab grade, whichever is
deeper, so water will not accumulate behind walls or seep through walls or floor slabs. The footing
drain should discharge to an approved drain system and include cleanouts to allow periodic
maintenance and inspection.
Positive surface gradients should be provided adjacent to the proposed structure to direct surface
water away from the foundation and toward suitable discharge facilities. Roof drainage should not be
introduced into the perimeter footing drains, but should be discharged directly to the stormwater
collection system or other appropriate outlet. Pavement and sidewalk areas should be sloped, and
drainage gradients should be maintained to carry all surface water away from the building toward the
local stormwater collection system. Surface water should not be allowed to pond and soak into the
ground surface near the building during or after construction.
4.3.4 Slab -On -Grade Floors
Proposed slabs -on -grade should be established on medium dense to dense undisturbed native soil or
structural fill extending to such soil. Slab -on -grade subgrades should be prepared as described in
Section 4.2.2 of this report.
A modulus of vertical subgrade reaction (subgrade modulus) can be used to design the slab. The
subgrade modulus varies based on the dimensions of the slab and the magnitude of applied loads on
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Eager Residence
4-6
1665001.010.011
May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
the slab surface; slabs with larger dimensions and loads are influenced by soils to a greater depth. We
recommend a subgrade modulus value of 250 pounds per cubic inch for the design of on -grade floor
slabs with floor loads up to 500 psf. This subgrade modulus is for a 1-ft by 1-ft square plate, and is not
the overall modulus of a larger area. We are available to provide alternate recommendations during
design, based on any specific loading information available at that time.
We recommend that proposed slabs -on -grade in interior spaces be underlain by a minimum 4-inch-
thick capillary break layer to reduce the potential for moisture migration into the slab. The capillary
break material should consist of well -graded sand and gravel containing less than 5 percent fines
based on the fraction passing the %-inch sieve. If dry slabs are required (e.g., where adhesives are
used to anchor carpet or tile to the slab), a waterproofing liner should be placed below the slab to act
as a vapor barrier.
4.3.5 Retaining Walls
The magnitude of lateral earth pressures that develop against subsurface building and retaining walls
will depend on the inclination of adjacent slopes, type of backfill, method of backfill placement,
degree of backfill compaction, magnitude and location of adjacent surcharge loads, and the degree to
which the wall can yield laterally during or after placement of backfill. When a subsurface wall is
restrained against lateral movement or tilting, the soil pressure exerted is the at -rest soil pressure.
Such wall restraint may develop if a rigid structural network is constructed prior to backfilling or if the
wall is inherently stiff or otherwise restrained from rotation. In contrast, active soil pressure will be
exerted on a subsurface wall if its top is allowed to rotate or yield a distance of at least 0.002 times its
height during placement of backfill.
We recommend that yielding walls with level backfill under drained conditions be designed for an
equivalent fluid density of 35 pcf for active soil conditions. If the wall is restrained from rotation
during backfilling, an equivalent fluid density of 55 pcf should be used for design, assuming level
backfill and drained conditions. Design of any subsurface walls should include appropriate lateral
earth pressures caused by any adjacent surface surcharge loads. For uniform surcharge pressures,
uniformly distributed lateral loads of 0.26 and 0.41 times the vertical surcharge pressure should be
added for yielding and non -yielding walls, respectively.
Dynamic lateral earth pressures should be included in the design of below grade walls. A lateral
equivalent fluid density of 12 pcf should be added to active soil load. The recommended lateral earth
pressure assumes that the wall will be free to rotate and translate a small amount during a strong
motion earthquake. If the wall is restrained from rotation during seismic event, an equivalent fluid
density of 25 pcf should be added to the active soil load. The earthquake -induced lateral earth
pressure described in this section is based on the Structural Engineers Association of California's 2010
Convention Proceedings. LAI should be contacted for additional recommendations if the project will
include a yielding or restrained wall with a non -level backslope.
Geotechnical Engineering Report 1665001.010.011
Eager Residence 4-7 May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
To provide drainage for below -grade walls, backfill within 3 ft of the back of the wall should be free -
draining, well -graded sand and gravel material with less than 5 percent fines and a maximum particle
size of less than 2 inches. Given its potential to run, pea gravel should not be used as wall backfill.
Wall backfill located greater than 3 ft from the back of the wall should consist of structural fill meeting
the requirements outlined in Section 4.2.3 of this report and be compacted in accordance with
Section 4.2.4. To avoid overstressing the wall during placement and compaction, backfill placed within
3 ft of the wall should be compacted utilizing hand -operated equipment. Additional recommendations
for wall drainage are provided in Section 4.3.3 of this report. Retaining wall foundations should be
designed in accordance with the recommendations of Section 4.3.1 of this report.
Geotechnical Engineering Report 1665001.010.011
Eager Residence 4-8 May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
5.0 DESIGN REVIEW/CONSTRUCTION MONITORING
As required by Chapter 19.145 of the City's Revised Code of General Ordinances, LAI is to have a
geotechnical engineer familiar with the project design review the earthwork and foundation portions
of the design drawings and specifications and provide a written statement verifying that the
recommendations presented in this report have been properly interpreted and implemented in the
design and specifications. This service is included in our current scope of work.
Chapter 19.145 also requires that geotechnical construction monitoring services be provided. All
building areas and footing excavations should be observed by a representative of the geotechnical
engineer. Observations should be conducted at footing excavations after steel reinforcement has
been placed, about 24 hours prior to placing concrete. Construction monitoring services are not
included in our current scope of work. LAI would be pleased to provide a proposal for the required
geotechnical construction monitoring services.
We recommend that a geotechnical field representative be present to confirm that design subgrade
conditions are obtained beneath building and paved areas and that appropriate drainage materials
are used and placed. We recommend that in -place density testing be performed on fills, backfills, and
finished subgrade surfaces. Conformance testing of imported materials may be needed to verify
compliance with project specifications and our recommendations.
The purpose of these services is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications, and
recommendations of this report and to simplify design or construction changes in the event
subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated before construction.
Geotechnical Engineering Report 1665001.010.011
Eager Residence 5-1 May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
6.0 USE OF THIS REPORT
Landau Associates, Inc. (LAI) prepared this report for the exclusive use of Robert and Karen Eager and
their consultants for specific application to the design of a single-family residence at 36th Avenue SW,
Federal Way, Washington. Use of this report by others or for another project is at the user's sole risk.
Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been conducted in
accordance with generally accepted practices of the geotechnical engineering profession; no other
warranty, either express or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this report.
The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based in part upon the subsurface
data obtained from the explorations completed for this study. There may be some variation in
subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at the site, and the nature and extent of the variations
may not become evident until construction. Accordingly, a contingency for unanticipated conditions
should be included in the construction budget and schedule.
If variations in subsurface conditions are encountered during construction, LAI should be asked to
review the recommendations in this report and revise as necessary. If there is a substantial lapse of
time between submission of this report and the start of construction or if conditions change due to
construction operations at or adjacent to the project site, we recommend that we review this report
to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations contained herein.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical services on this project and look forward to
assisting you during the construction phase. If you have any questions or comments regarding the
information contained in this report or if we may be of further service, please call us at (360) 791
3178.
Geotechnical Engineering Report 1665001.010.011
Eager Residence 6-1 May 8, 2017
Landau Associates
7.0 REFERENCES
ASTM. D1557-12e1: Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using
Modified Effort (56,000 ft-Ibf/ft3 (2,700 kN-m/m3)). West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International.
City of Federal Way. 2017. Title 14. Environmental Policy. In: Federal Way Revised Code: A
Codification of the General Ordinances of the City of Federal Way, Washington.
ICC. 2014. 2015 International Building Code. International Code Council. May 30.
Schuster, J.E., A.A Cabibbo, J.F. Schilter, and I.J. Hubert. 2015. Geologic Map of the Tacoma 1:100,000-
Scale Quadrangle, Washington. Map Series 2015-03. Division of Geology and Earth Resources,
Washington State Department of Natural Resources.
SEAOC. 2010. Annual Convention of the Structural Engineers Association of California 2010. Meeting
held Sept. 22-25, Indian Wells, Califcrnia. Structural Engineers Association of California.
WSDOT. 2016 M 41-10: Standard Specification for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction.
Washington State Department of Transportation.
Geotechnical Engineering Report 1665001.010.011
Eager Residence 7-1 May 8, 2017
I
Puget Sound
Dash P drit
ti
State Park
y� oas 7
a'
Dumas Say
Project Location
0
-------------------
,'v , w�xarsti:
M
project
Location
t!
Everett
Seattle Spokane
N 0 M 1 Federal Way
aroma
Oiympla
Miles Wa.shiagoC1
Data Source: Esri 2012
Eager Residence Figure
LANDAU Federal Way, Washington Vicinity Map '1
ASSOCIATES 1
apt 9DT-
v
k5 1
144
_
zsr
N
LL
�50
,153
163
'�53
165
0
Pg
M
179
SLT •
i'si
i
091
1SS
G.
�$s�
act
�g 1
kg3
N
�
ti
86.
t
7�2
135
`io
201
Lpa
202
92
*U2
vi
ITZ
z s '
C7
D
215
91Z
IZ
y
u
&rr
n.
ca
221
_
_
,l ..
Y
z�z
77
O
6ze
232
�g6
�
M
tID
230
u
VLCZ
D1 `�
240oll
w
oD —
243
w "
Zq5
245
_0
9bZ
r°
_ 248
ro
m
ii
u
p
W
N
;
C
C N.
I,
3
•`.t O ,6 a
x O '�
N
Y
N
2
i
a0.� r-
_
3aj
N
i
o
-=
u
!,
c �Y
F-
3 'r
✓
0-
rroo
C
O
a
N
o
o
W
LbZ
o Sd
StZ
E
i s
Q Q
0
N
O
O N
un
Q
u
d
C
Q
�Z
Q
U to
a` bb2
N
a
N
249
8�
a+ C
O j =
O U i+
O � n
it Ul a,
` V �
y V
v
3 `o
E c
m a
F
omov
�.r
z �4
4N
v
LOLO
M
LL
e
0
u
c
� C
O
L4 OD
u
is ❑ �
CU
N �
v •�
LL
O i
aD
u on —
N W
u v
7 -O
Li
m
m
0
m
LL
o c
v
V)
O
APPENDIX A
Field Explorations
Landau Associates
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXPLORATIONS
Subsurface conditions at the project site were explored on March 9, 2017. The exploration program
consisted of excavating and sampling two test pits (TP-1 and TP-2) at the approximate locations
illustrated on the Site Plan (Figure 2 of this report). A rubber -tracked excavator was used to advance
the test pits about 9% and 10%2 feet below ground surface. The test pits were excavated by Northwest
Excavating and Trucking, Inc. of Snohomish, Washington under contract to Landau Associates, Inc.
(LAI). The explorations were located in the field by hand taping distances from existing physical
features. The ground surface elevations at the test pit locations were determined using data from King
County's Geographic Information System.
The field exploration program was coordinated and monitored by an LAI representative, who also
obtained representative soil samples, maintained a detailed record of the observed subsurface soil
and groundwater conditions, and described the soil encountered by visual and textural examination.
Each representative soil type observed in our exploratory test pits was described using the soil
classification system shown on Figure A-1, in general accordance with ASTM International (ASTM) test
method D2488, Standard Recommended Practice for Description of Soils (Visual -Manual Procedure).
Logs of the explorations are presented on Figure A-2. These logs represent our interpretation of
subsurface conditions identified during the field exploration program. The stratigraphic contacts
shown on the summary logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types; actual
transitions may be more gradual. The soil and groundwater conditions depicted are for the specific
date and locations reported and are not representative of other locations and times. A further
discussion of the soil and groundwater conditions observed is contained in the main text of this
report.
Disturbed soil samples were collected from the test pits by a representative of LAI. Collected soil
samples were taken to our laboratory for further examination and testing. The laboratory test results
and a discussion of laboratory test procedures are presented in Appendix B. Upon completion of
excavation and sampling, the test pits were backfilled with the material that was excavated. The
backfill material was compacted as well as possible using the bucket of the rubber -tracked excavator.
Appendix A
Eager Residence
A-1
1665001.010.011
May 8, 2017
Soil Classification System
uscS
MAJOR GRAPHIC LETTER TYPICAL
DIVISIONS SYMBOL SYMBOL"' DESCRIPTIONS 121131
GRAVEL AND CLEAN GRAVEL
00 0 0 o
GW
Well -graded gravel; gravellsand mixture(s); little or no fines
1
O
GRAVELLY SOIL (Little or no fines)
Poorly graded ravel; ravellsand mixtures little or no fines
Y9 9 9 ()
o o
o 0 o
GP
❑ m
(More than 50% of f GRAVEL WITH FINES
Silty gravel; graveltsandlsilt mixture(s)
GM
ZE in
coarse fraction retained (Appreciable amount of
a $
on No. 4 sieve) fines)
GC
Clayey gravel; gravel/sand/clay mixture(s)
d d
C9
Well -graded sand; gravelly sand; little or no fines
Ifl m c
rn w
SANDY SOIL (Little or no fines)
Poorly graded sand; gravelly sand; little or no fines
SP
Q a
(More than50°/ of SAND WITH FINES
Silty sand; sand/silt mixture(s)
SM
aElcoarse
fraction passed (Appreciable amount of
sC
through No. 4 sieve) fines)
Clayey sand; sand/clay mixture(s)
J
MIL
Inorganic silt and very fine sand; rock flour; silty or clayey fine
sand or clayey silt Wfh slight
_
-
�j ° :H
SILT AND CLAY
plasticity
Inorganic clay of low to medium plasticity; gravelly clay; sandy
CL
❑ '�
ye a,
R
(Liquid limit less than 50)
clay; silty day; lean day
QL
Organic sift; organic, silty clay of low plasticity
MH
Inorganic silt; micaceous or diatomaceous fine sand
D 'E
� ro r4
>n
°
SILT AND CLAY
m o
�1 0 6
CH
Inorganic day of high plasticity; fat da
9 Y 9 P Y: Y
E
LL
(Liquid limit greater than 50)
OH
Organic day of medium to high plasticity; organic silt
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOIL
PT
Peat; humus; swamp soil with high organic content
GRAPHIC LETTER
OTHER MATERIALS SYMBOL SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS
PAVEMENT
'
C or PC
Asphalt concrete pavement or Portland cement pavement
ROCK
RK
Rock (See Rock Classification)
WOOD
WD
Wood, lumber, wood chips
DEBRIS
O
DB
Construction debris, garbage
Notes: 1. USCS letter symbols correspond to symbols used by the Unified Soil Classification System and ASTM classification methods. Dual letter symbols
(e.g., SP-SM for sand or gravel) indicate soil with an estimated 5-15% fines. Multiple letter symbols (e.g., ML/CL) indicate borderline or multiple soil
classifications.
2. Soil descriptions are based on the general approach presented in the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual -Manual
Procedure), outlined in ASTM D 2488. Where laboratory index testing has been conducted, soil classifications are based on the Standard Test
Method for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes, as outlined in ASTM D 2487.
3. Soil description terminology is based on visual estimates (in the absence of laboratory test data) of the percentages of each soil type and is defined
as follows:
Primary Constituent: > 50%- "GRAVEL," "SAND," "SILT," "CLAY," etc.
Secondary Constituents: > 30% and < 50%- "very gravelly," "very sandy," "very silty," etc.
> 15% and <30%- "gravelly," "sandy," "silty," etc.
Additional Constituents: > 5 % and < 15% - "with gravel," "with sand," "with sift," etc.
< 5% - "with trace gravel," "with trace sand," "with trace silt," etc., or not noted.
4. Soil density or consistency descriptions are based on judgement using a combination of sampler penetration blow counts, drilling or excavating
conditions, field tests, and laboratory tests, as appropriate.
Drilling and Sampling Key Field and Lab Test Data
SAMPLER TYPE SAMPLE NUMBER & INTERVAL
Code Description Code Description
a 3.25-inch O.D., 2.42-inch I.D. Split Spoon PP = 1.0 Pocket Penetrometer, tsf
b 2.00-inch O.D., 1.50•inch I.D. Split Spoon Sample Idenlifcalion Number TV = 0.5 Torvane, tsf
c Shelby Tube PID = 100 Photoionization Detector VOC screening, ppm
d Grab Sample Recovery Depth Interval W = 10 Moisture Content, %
a Single -Tube Core Barrel D = 120 Dry Density, pcf
7 F Sample Depth Interval
f Double -Tube Core Bartel -200 = 60 Material smaller than No. 200 sieve, %
g 2.50-inch O.D., 2.00-inch I.D. WSDOT Portion of Sample Retained GS Grain Size - See separate figure for data
h 3.00-inch O.D., 2.375-inch I.D. Mod. California for Archive or Analysis AL Atterberg Limits - See separate figure for data
1 Other - See text if applicable GT Other Geotechnical Testing
1 300-lb Hammer, 30-inch Drop CA Chemical Analysi8
2 140-lb Hammer, 30-inch Drop Groundwater
3 Pushed
4 Vibrocore (RotosoniclGeoprobe) Q Approximate water level at time of drilling (ATD)
5 Other - See text if applicable 1 Approximate water level at time other than ATD
Figure
LANDAU
Eager Residence
Federal Way, Washington
Soil Classification System and Key
A-1
ASSOCIATES
Z
I a)
0
0
2
—4
L�_1 tad,
a)
a
a)
E
CL
T
o Z
m a a)
> E c
a)
n
E
M
y
w in oa
rn
252
1= d W=14
GS
250
248
246
8
�244 z_ d W =13 _
10 Test Pit Completed 03/09/17
Total Depth of Test Pit = 9.5 ft.
12
TP-1
SOIL PROFILE
Excavation Method: Tracked Excavator
a
rn a Ground Elevation (ft): 253
U rn
d co
U) Logged By: SMG
SM
Dark brovm. sllty SAND wilh gravel and
organics (loose, moist)
(TOPSOIL)
SP-
SM
Brown, fine to medium SAND with silt (medium
dense, moist)
(RECESSIONAL OUTWASH)
-dense
-trace gravel
TP-2
SAMPLE DATA
SOIL PROFILE
Excavation Method: Tracked Excavator
z
z' —
Q
m
0
U) >
Ground Elevation (ft): 252.5
Cn
L
o
v)
in
Q
Logged By: SMG
L
w
od
tj
0
252
SM
Darn brown. very silty SAND w91h gravel and
SR
organics (loose, moist)
J
SM
(TOPSOIL)
3- 2
n
250
Brown, fine to medium SAND with silt (loose,
U
moist)
i
OUTWASH) Jy
4
248
1=
d
W = 8
_ n(RECESSIONAL
_ — _
Gray -brow, fine to medium SAND, trace silt
(medium dense, moist)
6
246
n
O
5 8 244 trace gravel
5
10 W-11
242 2 d GS
Test Pit Comple
Total Depth of Test Pit = 10.5 ft.
12
0
Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key' figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
0
0
Eager Residence
LANDAU Federal Way, Washington
LA ASSOCIATES
GROUNDWATER
Groundwater not encountered.
GROUNDWATER
Groundwater not encountered.
Log of Test Pits
Figure
A-2
APPENDIX B
Laboratory Soil Testing
Landau Associates
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY SOIL TESTING
Soil samples obtained from the exploratory test pits were taken to our laboratory for further
examination and testing. Laboratory tests were performed on representative soil samples to
characterize certain engineering and index properties of the soils at the project site. The laboratory
testing program, which was performed in general accordance with the ASTM International (ASTM)
standard test methods noted below, was limited to visual inspection to confirm our descriptions of
field soil and our determination of natural moisture content and grain size distribution. A brief
description of the testing performed is provided in the following paragraphs.
- Natural Moisture Content
The natural moisture content of select soil samples obtained from the exploratory test pits was
determined in general accordance with ASTM test method D2216. The results of the moisture content
determinations are indicated adjacent to the corresponding samples on the summary test pit logs
presented in Appendix A.
Grain Size Analysis
Grain size analyses were performed on select soil samples obtained from the exploratory test pits in
general accordance with ASTM test method D422. The results of the grain size analyses are presented
in the form of grain size distribution curves on Figure B-1. Samples selected for grain size analyses are
designated with a "GS" in the column labeled "Test Data" on the summary logs in Appendix A.
Appendix B
Eager Residence
B-1
1665001.010.011
May 8, 2017
r r
& �
cn
=2
m�
$
)
c
.g
�
�
)
\
�
\
$
$
CO
E
.§
�
5
°
m
$
\
_
k
£
j$
2/
\\CD
\
`
�
CD
E
\
\
co
2
CD�
AT
c
�®
)
E�
E�
/ \
)
w
E
(
)
2
\\
2\
��
2\
CZ)
}
e
§
w
)
]
o
A
e
\
)
E
$
/
\
/2
,
\ /
�
k°-m
E
[
_
x
\
o
�
k
e
H
W4
I
\
_
=
w
G
2
¥
m
m
°
*/
mbieM
k aug
meoi
e
7
�
�
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
January 24, 2017
Karen Eager
309 Manae Street
Kailua, Hawaii 96734
Re: Proposal for Geotechnical Engineering Services
Eager Residence
Parcel 058755-0190
36th Avenue SW
Federal Way, Washington
Dear Karen
Landau Associates, Inc. (LAI) is pleased to present this proposed scope of services and cost estimate
for geotechnical engineering services for the Eager Residence project in Federal Way, Washington.
The proposed scope of services presented in this letter is based on discussions with and information
provided by you, and telephone conversations with the City of Federal Way (City). Information
provided includes preliminary plan review comments by the City, a site drainage plan, and
architectural plan sheets. Presented below is a summary of our project understanding, and a
description of our proposed scope of services.
Project Understanding
We understand that Robert and Karen Eager have proposed to build a new residential structure on
the relatively level portion of parcel 058755-0190 on 36th Avenue SW. The project is located in Federal
Way, Washington. The new residence will consist of a 3-story home with no basement and an
attached garage, occupying approximately 1,011 square feet in plan area. Erosion and landslide
hazard areas previously identified by others occupy the site to the east of the proposed residence.
Based on information provided by the City of Federal Way, we understand that Robert and Karen
Eager requested that LAI be retained in accordance with the City of Federal Way's Critical Area Direct
Services Program to provide a Geotechnical Engineering Report for the project.
Scope of Services
The following sections define LAI's proposed tasks for geotechnical engineering services to support
design and construction of the project.
Geotechnical Data Compilation and Review: We will compile and review readily available geologic
and geotechnical information, and other relevant data for the project area. This information will be
used to gain a general understanding of past human activities (filling, construction, etc.), and the
underlying geology in the project area. Possible data sources include information obtained from the
Washington State Department of Ecology well log data base and published geologic and topographic
maps, in addition to previous site studies that are available and provided to us.
Field Investigation and Laboratory Testing Program: After reviewing readily available geotechnical
and geologic data, we will complete a geologic reconnaissance of the project area and collect
130 2nd Avenue South • Edmonds, Washington 98020 • (425) 778-0907 • www.landauinc.com
Eager Residence Geotechnical Proposal
Landau Associates
information on the general nature and physical features of the area surrounding the project site. This
reconnaissance will also include a visual assessment of the steep slope(s) located on the property.
Because the proposed structure is planned to abide by the setback from the buffer zone, exploratory
borings will not be necessary. Instead, we will excavate two test pits at the project site to characterize
soil and groundwater conditions. The test pits will be excavated to a depth of 8 to 10 ft below the
ground surface or upon encountering dense to very dense glacially consolidated soils, whichever
comes first. The test pit excavations will be terminated at shallower depths should practical refusal be
encountered. An excavating contractor working under subcontract to LAI will complete the test pits
using a rubber tired backhoe or a tracked excavator. We anticipate that soil conditions will consist of
dense to very dense silty sand with gravel and cobbles with depth.
In an effort to avoid buried utilities, we will arrange for underground utility location ("call before you
dig" or "One -Call' services) prior to performing field activities. Despite our best efforts to avoid
utilities, utility damage is sometimes unavoidable due to mismarked or unlocatable facilities. The cost
for utility repairs is not included in our cost estimate.
A representative from LAI will observe the explorations, obtain soil samples from the test pits, and
prepare field logs of conditions observed in the explorations. Soil samples will be obtained from the
test pits as deemed necessary by the LAI personnel on site, and will be delivered to our laboratory for
further examination and classification. Soil samples obtained from the explorations will be held in our
laboratory for 30 days after submittal of the geotechnical report. After that date, the soil samples will
be disposed of unless arrangements are made to retain them. Upon completion of sampling and
logging, the test pits will be backfilled and the ground surface will be returned to its original condition
as best as possible.
We will complete a geotechnical laboratory testing program consisting of natural moisture content
and grain size and/or Atterberg Limits determinations on selected soil samples to aid in classifying site
soils. We have budgeted for 4 moisture content and 2 grain size or Atterberg Limits determinations on
selected samples.
Engineering Analyses and Reporting: Information from the field investigation will be analyzed by a
geotechnical engineer from LAI to develop geotechnical engineering conclusions and
recommendations for design and construction of the project. The results of our field exploration,
laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and our geotechnical engineering conclusions and
recommendations will be summarized in a geotechnical engineering report. The geotechnical
engineering report will include:
• a figure showing the location of the explorations completed for this project
• results of laboratory testing and summary logs of the explorations
■ surface conditions, topographic information, and a discussion of the near -surface soil and
groundwater conditions observed on -site
• recommendations for site grading, including clearing, grubbing and stripping; earthwork
requirements; and fill placement and compaction criteria
• recommendations for foundation support of the structure, including foundation preparation,
maximum allowable soil bearing pressure, minimum footing sizes (continuous and column
footings), minimum depth of burial, and resistance to lateral loads
January 24, 2017
Eager Residence Geotechnical Proposal Landau Associates
• estimated short-term and long-term settlements of foundations
• static and dynamic lateral earth pressures on below grade walls
• site and foundation drainage considerations
• seismic design considerations per the 2012 International Building Code
• analysis and recommendations addressing geotechnical construction in critical areas as
defined in the City of Federal Way's revised code of general ordinances, for the following
geologic hazards:
— Erosion Hazard Areas
— Landslide Hazard Areas
— Seismic Hazard Areas
• recommendations for monitoring and testing during construction.
In order to meet the City of Federal Way's requirement that LAI perform a review of the construction
plans to verify that our geotechnical recommendations are included, we propose to do so and provide
a letter stating that the plans incorporate our geotechnical recommendations (once applicable). This
review will include one email to Robert and Karen Eager detailing the items we found to be
inconsistent with our report recommendations (if any), and one signed and stamped letter stating
that our recommendations have been incorporated into the plans.
Cost Estimate
We estimate the cost for our proposed scope of services to provide the Geotechnical Engineering
Report will not exceed $13,095 in general accordance with the following breakdown:
Excavation Subcontractor $ 780
Landau Associates Field Services $ 3,500
Laboratory Testing $ 265
Geotechnical Evaluation and Report $ 7,000
Plan Review and Letter $ 1,550
Estimated Total $ 13,095
We propose to provide the above -described services on a time -and -expenses basis according to the
budget set forth above and the attached fee determination summary sheets. In the event the project
requirements change, or unexpected conditions are disclosed that appear to require further field
effort, study, or analysis, we will bring these to your attention and seek your written approval for an
addendum to the scope of services and costs prior to performing additional services.
January 24, 2017
3
Eager Residence Geotechnical Proposal
Assumptions
Landau Associates
We have assumed the following as the basis for preparation of our scope of services and estimated
cost:
■ Robert and Karen Eager will provide LAI a current project base map and complete set of plans
in AutoCAD or PDF format. If a base map is not provided, LAI will produce figures showing the
location of the boring and project features using available maps or aerial photographs.
• The proposed field exploration program can be completed in 1 day.
• LAI's services are being provided in accordance with the City of Federal Way's Critical Area
Direct Services Program, eliminating the need for a third party review of our geotechnical
engineering report. Our scope and budget does not include response to comments if a third
party review is performed.
• The City of Federal Way will be copied on all written correspondence, including emails,
between LAI and Robert and Karen Eager.
• The proposed residential structure will be located more than 50 feet away from the defined
"top of slope" for the steep slope located on the east side of the property. If the structure is
located within 50 ft of the steep slope, additional subsurface exploration and slope stability
analyses will be required to satisfy the City of Federal Way's permit requirements. The cost for
additional subsurface exploration and slope stability analyses is not included in our cost
estimate.
Schedule
Field explorations will commence within two weeks after notice to proceed is received, depending on
subcontractor availability. Our geotechnical engineering report will be submitted within three to four
weeks of completion of the field explorations.
Authorization
Please provide us with written authorization by signing in the space provided below and returning one
signed original of this proposal. Due to Robert and Karen Eager not having a credit history with Landau
Associates, we require a retainer in the amount of $6,500 payable to LAI prior to beginning any work
on this project. We will also require payment of any outstanding invoices prior to issuing the final plan
review letter.
January 24, 2017
Eager Residence Geotechnical Proposal
Landau Associates
We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. Please contact me if you have any
questions about our proposed scope of services and budget for this project.
LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC.
Carlo Evangelisti, PE
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
CE/SMG/SZW/rgm
2017-4468
Attachments: 2017 Compensation Schedule
General Conditions
January 24, 2017
Eager Residence Geotechnical Proposal
AUTHORIZATION
Landau Associates
The scope of services and contractual conditions as described in this proposal and its attachments are
accepted and Landau Associates, Inc. is authorized to proceed.
By
Signature*
For
Karen Eager*
Printed
Date
*Name of person with contractual authority and firm responsible for payment of Landau Associates,
Inc. billing.
Eager Residence
Parcel 058755-0190
36th Avenue SW
Federal Way, Washington
January 24, 2017
COMPENSATION SCHEDULE - 2017
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
Personnel Labor Hourly Rate
Senior Principal 250
Principal 230
Senior Associate 210
Associate 190
Senior
170
Senior Project
155
Project
140
GIS Analyst
140
Senior Staff / CAD Designer
125
Staff/Senior Technician II
113
Data Specialist
113
CAD / GIS Technician
110
Project Coordinator
102
Assistant / Senior Technician 1
95
Technician
78
Support Staff
67
Expert professional testimony in court, deposition, declaration, arbitration, or public testimony is charged at
1.5 times the hourly rate.
Rates apply to all labor, including overtime.
Equipment
Field, laboratory, and office equipment used in the direct performance of authorized work is charged at unit rates.
A rate schedule will be provided on request.
Subcontractor Services and Other Expenses
Subcontractor billing and other project expenses incurred in the direct performance of authorized routine services
will normally be charged at a rate of cost plus a twelve percent (12%) handling charge. A higher handling charge for
technical subconsultants and for high -risk field operations may be negotiated on an individual project basis;
similarly, a lower handling charge may be negotiated on projects requiring disproportionally high subconsultant
involvement.
Invoices
Invoices for Landau Associates' services will be issued monthly. Interest of 1% percent per month (but not
exceeding the maximum rate allowable by law) will be payable on any amounts not paid within 30 days.
Term
Unless otherwise agreed, Landau Associates reserves the right to make reasonable adjustments to our compensation
rates overtime (e.g., long-term continuing projects).
T:Templates\Contracts\Compensation Schedule 2017A Landau Associates
GENERAL CONDITIONS
LANDAU
14 ASSOCIATES
SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED — Landau Associates agrees to provide Client, for Client's sole benefit and exclusive use, the consulting services
identified in Landau Associates' proposal (the Services). The proposal, together with these general conditions, form the Agreement under which the
Services will be performed and shall have control over any other forms or agreements unless expressly modified in writing and signed by Client and
Landau Associates. This Agreement gives no rights or benefits to anyone other than Client and Landau Associates. The Services are limited to those
expressly set forth in the proposal. If a service is not specifically identified, it is expressly excluded. Landau Associates shall have no other
obligations, duties, or responsibilities except as expressly provided in this Agreement. Client expressly agrees that Landau Associates shall have no
responsibility for construction means, methods, or safety.
DIFFERING CONDITIONS — Landau Associates shall be entitled to rely on the accuracy and completeness of all testing, services, reports, data, and
other information furnished by Client regarding the project site. If Landau Associates believes that any condition encountered at the site or during
the course of the project is inaccurate or differs materially from that indicated, reflected, or referred to at the time of Landau Associates' proposal,
Landau Associates shall notify Client within a reasonable time. Such differing conditions shall include but are not limited to: access, physical
conditions such as subsurface conditions or underground utilities, condition of existing structures, and the presence of asbestos or any substance
or material categorized as hazardous or toxic by federal, state, or local laws and regulations. Landau Associates shall not be required to continue
performing the Services until such time as a change in compensation, time for performance, and/or other resolution of the differing condition has
been mutually agreed to by Client and Landau Associates.
OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS — Unless otherwise agreed as evidenced by mutual written confirmation, all logs, notes, calculations, reports, and
other documents ("Work Product") prepared by Landau Associates are instruments of service and are the property of Landau Associates. Client is
responsible for appropriate use of the Work Product and recommendations by Landau Associates. Any and all such Work Product and
recommendations are provided for the specific project(s), as identified; any reuse of the same for extensions of a project, or disregard for or
deviation from Landau Associates' recommendations, or for use on any other project, shall be at Client's sole risk and without liability to Landau
Associates. Client shall not, absent prior written agreement, use any Landau Associates Work Product if Landau Associates' Services have been
terminated prior to completion or Landau Associates has not been paid in full. Client shall release, defend, indemnify, and hold Landau Associates
harmless from all claims, losses, liabilities, damages, expenses, and costs arising out of the unauthorized use or reuse of the Work Product.
STANDARD OF CARE — Landau Associates' services will be performed with the degree of skill and diligence normally employed by engineering or
other professionals performing similar services in the project area at the time Services are performed. No other warranty or representation, either
express or implied, is included or intended in our proposals, contracts, reports, and communications.
INSURANCE — Landau Associates, at its own expense, carries professional liability, workers' compensation, and employer's liability coverage as
required by applicable state law, and general liability insurance, including automobile liability. The amount of insurance available may vary from
year to year. The professional liability insurance is written on a claims -made basis. If Client desires insurance coverage in addition to that carried by
Landau Associates at the time of the Agreement, Landau Associates will cooperate to obtain such additional insurance, if available, at Client's
expense.
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY — Landau Associates shall not be liable for loss or damage occasioned by delays beyond its control, or for loss of earnings,
loss of use, or other incidental or consequential damages suffered by Client or others, however caused. Landau Associates' liability under this
Agreement shall be limited as follows: (a) for insured liabilities arising out of Landau Associates' negligence, to the amount of the insurance then
available to fund any settlement, award, or verdict; (b) for uninsured liabilities, to an amount not to exceed the total fee paid under this Agreement
or $50,000, whichever is greater.
For services involving subsurface explorations including excavations and drilled borings, Landau Associates will use good -faith efforts to identify
subsurface utilities and structures through the following methods: Review of Client -provided information (which Landau Associates shall be
entitled to rely on), notifying the Utility Notification Center to request the marking of public utilities, and contracting with private locating services
to mark private utilities and public utilities not marked on private property by utilities responding to the Utility Notification Center location request.
Landau Associates shall not be liable for damage to utilities or other subsurface structures not identified through its good -faith efforts, including,
but not limited to, non -conductible utilities that cannot generally be located using standard locating techniques.
PERSONAL LIABILITY— No employee of Landau Associates shall incur personal liability to Client related to the Services.
INDEMNIFICATIONS — Client acknowledges that Landau Associates is not responsible for the creation or presence of contamination or pollution, if
any, at the property. Client agrees to release, indemnify, and defend Landau Associates and any of its officers and employees from and against any
claim, suit, action, or liability due to or related to contamination conditions at the property except to the extent such claim, suit, action, or liability
is caused by the negligence of Landau Associates. For the purposes of this clause, contamination conditions shall mean the actual or alleged
existence, discharge, release, or escape of any irritant, pollutant, contaminant, or hazardous substance into or upon the atmosphere, land,
groundwater, surface water, or sediment of or near the property. Landau Associates will promptly notify Client of contamination conditions, if
identified.
SITE SUPERVISION — Landau Associates has no overall supervisory authority or actual and/or direct responsibility for the specific working
conditions at the site and/or for any hazards resulting from the actions of any trade contractor. Unless expressly provided in the scope of services,
Landau Associates has no duty to inspect, supervise, note, correct, or report any health or safety deficiencies of Client, contractors, or other
entities or persons at the project site not employed or subcontracted by Landau Associates.
T:Templates\Contracts\General Conditions November 1, 2016
Landau Associates
PAYMENT— Invoices for Landau Associates' services will be issued monthly, payable upon receipt. Interest of 1%: percent per month (but not
exceeding the maximum rate allowable by law) will be payable on any amounts not paid within 30 days, payment thereafter to be applied first to
accrued interest and then to the principal unpaid amount. Any attorney's fees or other costs incurred by Landau Associates in collecting any
delinquent amount shall be paid by Client. If the Client fails to pay any invoice within thirty (30) days of the invoice date and such failure continues
fifteen (15) days after Landau Associates gives Client notice of such failure, Landau Associates shall have the right to immediately terminate this
Agreement and the Services provided hereunder. The right to terminate shall be without liability to Landau Associates and shall be in addition to all
other legal, equitable, or contractual remedies available to Landau Associates. Client shall have no right of setoff against any billings of Landau
Associates for disputed claims or withholding of services.
SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION — If Client requests suspension or termination of our services prior to completion, Landau Associates reserves the
right to complete such analyses and records as are necessary to place the files in order, and, when necessary to protect our professional
reputation, to complete a report on the services provided to date. Client shall compensate Landau Associates for personnel time and all reasonable
expenses at current rates for work completed prior to suspension or termination and for work required to accomplish such closing.
TIME BAR TO LEGAL ACTION —The parties agree that all legal actions by either party against the other concerning the Services provided under this
Agreement shall be barred two (2) years after the completion of Services by Landau Associates.
GOVERNING LAW —This Agreement shall be governed by Washington law unless otherwise mutually agreed upon in writing.
SEVERABILITY AND SURVIVAL — In the event that any provision of this Agreement shall be held invalid and unenforceable by a decision of a court
of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall be valid and binding. All terms of this Agreement allocating or limiting liability shall survive
the completion of the Services hereunder and the termination of this Agreement.
T:Templates\Contracts\General Conditions November 1, 2016
COT 1ALANDAU
ASSOCIATES
.2lpeG1(
October 19, 2016
Ms. Mary Wendt
2821 2"d Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98121
Re: Limited Geotechnical Feasibility Evaluation
Parcel No. 0587SS-0190
36th Avenue SW
Federal Way, Washington
Dear Mary:
Landau Associates is pleased to present this technical letter providing a limited geotechnical feasibility
evaluation for Parcel #058755-0190, located on 36th Avenue SW, in Federal Way, Washington (Figure
1). The services, evaluation and recommendations presented in this letter are based on discussions
with and information provided by you, observations made during our recent site visit, and telephone
conversations with the City of Federal Way (City). Information provided includes preliminary review
comments by the City.
Project Description
We understand that you wish to sell a parcel of land located south of 31122 36th Avenue SW, in
Federal Way, Washington. Approximately 50 percent of the parcel is located within an erosion hazard
area and a landslide hazard area. Prior to the sale of the parcel, we understand that you would like a
letter that will be provided to potential buyers, that describes the results of a site reconnaissance, an
assessment of the City's geologically hazardous area ordinance described in the City of Federal Way
Revised Code, and a limited assessment of the feasibility of constructing a single family home with
associated improvements on the parcel.
Scope of Services
Our scope of services was outlined in our proposal letter dated July 29, 2016. Authorization to
proceed was provided by a written agreement between you and Landau Associates dated August 1,
2016. Our services for the project consisted of a limited geotechnical feasibility evaluation of the
parcel which includes the following:
Compile and review readily available geologic and geotechnical information, and other
relevant data for the project area
Complete a geologic reconnaissance of the project area and collect information on the
general nature and physical features of the area surrounding the project site (this was
performed during our site visit with you on July 25, 2016). This reconnaissance also
130 2nd Avenue South 9 Edmonds, Washington 98020 - (425) 778-0907 - www.landauinc.com
included a visual assessment of the steep siope(s) and erosion hazard areas located on
the property.
0 Prepare this technical letter that includes the following:
a figure showing the location of Parcel #058755-0190
a description of surface conditions, topographic information, and a discussion
of the near -surface soil and groundwater conditions anticipated from available
geotechnical and geologic data and observations made during our site
reconnaissance
an assessment of the feasibility of constructing a single family home on the
parcel with respect to the City's geologically hazardous area ordinance
verification of the geologically hazardous areas located on the parcel per the
City of Federal Way Revised Code Chapter 19.145
limited geotechnical recommendations for constructing a single family home
in relation to the geologically hazardous areas located on the parcel including
buffers
— recommendations for buffer reductions and additional geotechnical
evaluation that would be needed to reduce the buffers and satisfy the City's
geologically hazardous area code requirements.
October 19, 2016
Site Conditions
This section discusses the general surface conditions observed at the project site at the time of our
geologic reconnaissance. Interpretations of the site's subsurface conditions are based on our review
I
of available information, and the results of our site reconnaissance.
General Geologic Conditions
The geologic setting of the project area has been largely influenced by advancing and retreating
glacial ice. During the Pleistocene Epoch (early Quaternary), 2 million to 10,000 years before the
present (ybp), vast continental ice sheets advanced into the Puget Sound region. Evidence indicates
that there were at least six advances of the continental ice into the region during the Pleistocene
Epoch_
The latest glacial advance, referred to as the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation, occurred between
about 22,000 and 13,000 ybp and had the greatest effect on the present-day landscape. As the
continental glacier advanced into Puget Sound, the ice blocked the Strait of Juan de Fuca forming a
large fresh water lake. The lake drained to the south, out through the Black Hills south of Olympia and
to the Pacific Ocean through the ancestral Chehalis River. Fine-grained sediments (silt and clay) from
the glacier and from rivers and streams flowing from the Cascade and Olympic mountains were
deposited in the lake. As the glacier continued to advance, meltwater streams issuing from the glacier
laid down extensive deposits of chiefly sand and gravel (advance outwash), filling the lake and burying
much of the preglacial topography. The glacier advanced over the lake and outwash deposits, scouring
out some areas and depositing glacial till over the surface in other areas. The deposits were highly
consolidated by the weight of the overlying ice, resulting in highly compact soils. As the glacier
retreated (ablated), recessional deposits of sand and gravel outwash, along with ablation deposits of
silt, sand, and gravel, were laid down in some areas. Normal erosional and depositional processes
further modified the post -glacial landscape.
General geologic information for the project site was obtained from the Geologic Map of the Poverty
Bay 7.5 minute Quadrangle, King and Pierce Counties Washington (Booth et al. 2004), published by
the United States Geologic Survey (USGS). According to Booth, Waldron, and Troost, near -surface
deposits in the vicinity of Parcel #058755-0190 consist of Vashon (Pleistocene) age glacial deposits
consisting of recessional outwash, glacial till, and advance outwash.
Recessional outwash predominately consists of stratified sand and gravel and less commonly silty
sand and silt. Recessional outwash is deposited in outwash channels that were carried away from
retreating ice by south draining glacial meltwater. This unit was not glacially overridden and typically
exhibits moderate to low permeability depending on silt and clay content and moderate to high shear
strength.
October 19, 2016
Soil defined as glacial till consists of a dense to very dense, unsorted mixture of boulders, cobbles,
gravel, and sand in a matrix of silt and clay with some lenses of sorted, stratified sand and gravel. This
unit typically exhibits low -permeability and high -shear strength, characteristics resulting from
compaction by the weight of the overlying glacier.
Advance outwash predominately consists of stratified sand and less commonly gravel silt. Advance
outwash is deposited subauqueously or by streams and rivers in front of advancing glaciers. This unit
was glacially overridden and typically exhibits moderate to low permeability depending on silt and
clay content and high shear strength resulting from compaction by the weight of the overlying glacial
till deposits and glacial ice.
Surface Conditions
Within the parcel area, the topography is generally flat near 36th Avenue SW at an elevation of
approximately 250 ft. The parcel is relatively level on the western half with the eastern half sloping
steeply to the east down to about elevation 60 ft at Joes Creek located east of the parcel and
downslope. The parcel is moderately to heavily vegetated with a mixture of large evergreen and
deciduous trees and undergrowth typical of western Washington.
Subsurface Soil Conditions
Subsurface conditions are expected to match the mapped geology and generally consist of recessional
outwash deposits overlying glacial till deposits with advance outwash deposits encountered with
depth underlying the glacial till.
Groundwater Conditions
Groundwater conditions for the parcel are unknown. Based on a search of the Washington State
Department of Ecology Well Log Database (Ecology 2016), the nearest wells are located northwest of
the parcel on Dash Point Road at a ground surface of elevation 160 ft and southwest of the parcel on
39th Avenue SW at elevation 180 ft. These wells were advanced to depths of approximately 60 ft and
40 ft below site grades (bgs) on Dash Point Road and 39th Avenue SW, respectively. Groundwater was
not encountered in either well. Based on our knowledge of the anticipated subsurface conditions and
nearest wells, we anticipate that groundwater will likely be encountered at depths greater than 100 ft
bgs on the western half of the property where a single family residence will likely be constructed.
Geologic Hazards
We reviewed the City of Federal Way Revised Code Chapter I;r0_`and Chapter 19.05.070G, to
determine if the site meets the definition for critical areas and/or geologic hazards as defined by the
City of Federal Way. We offer the following comments.
October 19, 2016 4
Erosion Hazard Areas
Per the City of Federal Way Revised Code Chapter 19.05.070G(1), erosion hazard areas are those
areas identified by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resource Conservation Service as
having a moderate to severe or severe to very severe rill and inter -rill erosion hazard due to natural
agents such as wind, rain, splash, frost action or stream flow; those areas containing the following
group of soils when they occur on slopes of 15 percent or greater: Alderwood-Kitsap ("AkF"),
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam ("AgD"), Kitsap silt loam ("KpD"), Everett ("EvD"), and Indianola
("InD"); and those areas impacted by shore land and/or stream bank erosion (City of Federal Way
2015).
The USDA NRCS mapping tool (USDA 2016) indicates that the site soils consist of the Indianola Loamy
sand ("InC") on the western half of the parcel and upper portion of the steep slope and consists of
Alderwood-Kitsap ("AkF") soils on the eastern portion of the parcel on a slope greater than 15
percent. Although the Indianola Loamy sand ("InC") present on the western half of the parcel does not
qualify as an erosion hazard area, the parcel, as a whole, is classified as an Erosion Hazard Area as
defined by the City of Federal Way Revised Code in our opinion, based on the presence of Alderwood-
Kitsap ("AkF") soils on the eastern portion of the parcel on a slope greater than 15 percent.
Landslide Hazard Areas
Per the City of Federal Way Revised Code Chapter 19.05.070G(2), landslide hazard areas are those
areas potentially subject to episodic downslope movement of a mass of soil or rock including, but not
limited to, the following areas:
(a) Any area with a combination of:
+ (i) Slopes greater than 15 percent;
+ (ii) Permeable sediment, predominately sand and gravel, overlying relatively
impermeable sediment or bedrock, typically silt and clay; and
+ (iii) Springs or groundwater seepage.
(b) Any area that has shown movement during the Holocene epoch, from 10,000 years ago to the
present, or that is underlain by mass wastage debris of that epoch.
(c) Any area potentially unstable as a result of rapid stream incision, stream bank erosion or
undercutting by wave action.
(d) Any area located in a ravine or on an active alluvial fan, presently or potentially subject to
inundation by debris flows or flooding.
(e) Those areas mapped as Class U (unstable), UOS (unstable old slides), and URS (unstable recent
slides) by the Department of Ecology's Coastal Zone Atlas.
October 19, 2016
(f) Areas designated as quaternary slumps, earthflows, mudflows, lahars, or landslides on maps
published by the U.S. Geological Survey or Washington State Department of Natural Resources.
(g) Slopes having gradients greater than 80 percent subject to rock fall during seismic shaking.
(h) Any area with a slope of 40 percent or steeper and with a vertical relief of 10 or more feet except
areas composed of consolidated rock. A slope is delineated by establishing its toe and top and is
measured by averaging the inclination over at least 10 feet of vertical relief (City of Federal Way
2015).
In our opinion, the site likely meets the definition for a Landslide Hazard Area, due to the presence of
slopes greater than 15 percent and the potential for permeable recessional outwash deposits
overlying relatively impermeable glacial till which would likely result in springs or seeps in the wetter
winter months. Groundwater seepage and evidence of past landslides such as those evidenced by
topography indicative of head scarps and landslide debris masses, "pistol -butted" trees, etc., were not
observed during our site reconnaissance on July 18, 2016.
Seismic Hazard Areas
Per the City of Federal Way Revised Code Chapter 19.05.070G(3), seismic hazard areas are those areas
subject to severe risk of earthquake damage as a result of seismically induced ground shaking, slope
failure, settlement or soil liquefaction, or surface faulting. These conditions occur in areas underlain
by cohesionless soils of low density usually in association with a shallow groundwater table (City of
Federal Way 2015).
The Pacific Northwest is seismically active and the site could be subject to ground shaking from a
moderate to major earthquake. Consequently, earthquake shaking should be anticipated during the
design life of the proposed residential structure and the proposed improvements should be designed
to resist earthquake loading using appropriate design methodology. The site soil conditions are not
likely subject to seismic hazards such as soil liquefaction or seismically -induced settlement based on
the mapped geology, in our opinion.
October 19, 2016
Conclusions and Recommendations
In our opinion, a proposed residential structure located on Parcel #058755-0190, located on 36'
Avenue SW, in Federal Way, Washington is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. We offer the
following general recommendations for future development of the parcel and construction of a single
family residence.
Subsurface conditions at the site are generally conducive to site development.
Conventional shallow isolated and continuous footings and slab -on -grade floors are
expected to be appropriate based on our site observations and mapped geology.
A residential structure will not likely reduce the stability of the slope if constructed at
least 50 ft from the defined geologic hazard area in accordance with the City of
Federal Way Revised Code Chapter 19.145.220. It is our opinion, that a reduced buffer
of less than 50 ft can likely be successfully demonstrated. However, it should be noted
that in order to reduce the buffer to less than 50 ft, the City requires that a
geotechnical engineer licensed in the State of Washington determine that the
development and adjacent properties will not be at risk of damage due'to the geologic
hazards identified and will not lead to or create and increased slide, seismic or erosion
hazard. This will likely require subsurface exploration and engineering
recommendations and analysis including, but not limited to: slope stability analysis,
drainage analyses, seismic site class determination, determination of appropriate
foundation type and allowable bearing pressures, etc.
The erosion hazard can likely be mitigated through the use of best management
practices (BMPs) for controlling stormwater generated by site development of a single
family structure away from the slope, in our opinion. This may include diverting
stormwater to existing stormwater facilities owned and maintained by the City, if
present.
October 19, 2016
Use of This Letter
Landau Associates has prepared this technical letter for the exclusive use of Mary Wendt and her
consultants for specific application to the sale of #058755-0190, located on 36th Avenue SW, in
Federal Way, Washington. Use of this report by others or for another project is at the user's sole risk.
Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been conducted in
accordance with generally accepted practices of the geotechnical engineering profession; no other
warranty, express or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this letter.
The conclusions and recommendations contained in this letter are based in part upon the subsurface
data obtained from readily available geologic and geotechnical information, and other relevant data
for the project area. Subsurface explorations such as borings or test pits were not completed for this
study. There may be some variation in subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at the project site,
and the nature and extent of the variations may not become evident until further geotechnical study
is performed.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide limited geotechnical services on this project. If you have
any questions or comments regarding the information contained in this report, or if we may be of
further service, please call.
LANDAU ASSOCIATES, I
Oc�'1 (.0
Carlo Evangelisti, PE
Senior Geotechnical Engi
CE/SZW/rgm
Attachment: Figure 1
October 19, 2016
Puget
Sound
Dash Point
r.
State Park
loss
0
N Share ?*"
Damas
say
Project Location
is,
Q
.4F
pe5
Lfeek
SW 340th St
N 0 0.5 1
Miles
Data Source: Esri 2012
Limited Geotechnical
Feasibility Evaluation
LANDAU Parcel Number 058755-0190
ASSOCIATES Federal Way, Washington
SW 320th St
Lakota
Park
3.1
+n
SW campus d
r
Q
•y 1..,.. SP��.
Federal way
.-.rams
nf7'r,�
Was.hingtvn
Figure
Vicinity Map I
CD
N
1--r
1
1 /
I
1
1 '
1
1
I
1.L\ L\'.w\\\l\\\\\L\\ ♦.\y Itn
r\\\1\LtL\\tl\\Y\t\\l N
ILL\\\.\u•.LY \\L\\\]a?
TTY\\\YLYI\LLY\Y\
Y1aY\\\\\tit\1 � IV
z
m
= 7�UZQ_ Im
fAl OO�Z
ml fllmr0 1
�1 v �mm3 1
N1 om,- I
-=1 Z >000 1
mr m wR0 ,
<z
Nl om=
ml ME 1
ml X W 0 1
-u g
I �C2 I
1 � 0 1
I 0� I
1 c 1
1 m 1
1 - I
1
1 1
I I
1 1
1 I
1
1 1
1
1 I
1
L_------_—___----- —
EAST ao
I
it
17tv-
EXHOT 5
DRFVEWAY EASrMEMT
GRAPHIC DEPIC11ON
i
os
r rn v ��
y� r
CA
z == I
>Cl+7
(n;�
T' 1 A
nor
79
GRAPHIC SCALE
20 0 10 20
{ IN FEET )
1 inch = 20 ft.
DALEY-MORROW-POBLETE, WC.
726 AUBURN WAY NORTH
AUBURN, wASHiNGTON 98002
PHONE: (253)333--2200 (FAX)333-2206
ENGWEESIVNG - SUFNEYr
�I D LAND PLANNING
Inoorporv4od
Page X of X 75-200
I
I
r.•
BAYVZEW COUNTRY
ESTATES
A POR . OF GOVT . LOT i IN THE E . 1/2 OF SEC. i i, TWP . 21 N, ROE. 3 E. W. M't 's ,
}LING COUNTY,
WASHINGTON
OFdICATZdM
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
MNOM ALL PEBBLE By THESE PRESCA16 TWAT Me, THE QNQERSIeHE6 BNx6�a '4F
4,-
=T P TMO QF npV4W K-NT Lot 1 IX M17SZOH IS, TBNNBKV 24 NO"'. PAINSE
INTEHEst 10THE LAIC HEREBY fAND1Yi DED. IB'SILBT OrC1A0E Alfa PLFT 74_
W FPNSC A[PRESEXTaTSBX of lXE SpBOIYIaIpK N♦1QE NEREQY. T, pp;•NERFa,
EMT, K,M., IN KING vMwTY, MASH/NGTBN. MORE PMr1C1AfALY) A!
"
Fgyp�; -
WDICATE TD THE OM OF THE PW9.IC POW"A ALA, STRLCTS AND AVENUES tlCT SHWA
,
'
Aa 1R11VATE MEFWON Alm DTOICATE I Lit TNENLOF FOR ALL PUBLIC PumcmS Not
BWIUMIMB AT THE SOUTH EAST GG7VA OF CA10 fAYOlMIdl LOT L'
,--
11C0lBC 411wr WITH THE LSE. THMOF FOR PU669C MISNWAY PLV010 Eh. FOE ALSO THEf
'LOTS
•''-IND 64-R-27',M:•917. 21
R[DIIS TO MAKE ALL HCCESSART BLCPES FM WS ABC F1LLO UPON THPSHOWN
THTPCOW 1N THE OBI OTHLL FEASOMAptC WAOSNC OF RAM 4TiEETS AArS FVCnIES. A{E1
E ALWB Til BGQ7O L.IM OF BAITI o0WA0•017 LOT 4:X
$tXy To TIN: rOVTMICST COROM a THE WEST 1v0 F�T BF'71x QABT 974 AI OF
•#�BRBW
FORINER DEDICATE TO THE ME OF TIE PUBLIC ALL THE KAMM= AfID TRAM,
HIS
SMOMN IN THIS PLAT FaR ALL PUBLIC PLNVO ES AS fUd1CATE0 7NENEgN. iNCLt�INO ,.•
SAIO.00YBTDOEXT LOT r AS BROWN! ON A RELOAD WF 11URVET, NO '?DA.�
4 tr I1L AWIT00.4 FYI.E AKI. BD06ia.YGBL ••'•• ';-
BAT NOT TD PAM5, OPEN SPACE- VTILITTCW AWI PRRT-H+1� WAEOS 6VLN
OtINO
-
riQ"
EFSEKENTE UP TRACTS APE 79EC{FICALLY IDEWIFIEQ QN 'Hie KAT aS
C[AX"= 00 CO.YETEO TO A PERRON OR MTTTV OTHER THAN FIR PUBLIC.
7HENCL no NEST LICE OF "TO WEST SO* FgFr-JI Ol•11'Oir..X":'T9E.;F
FEET TO il�•Sgir1EILT R1BMT-vFwla'Y of S-M. OASII P6INT',lgl9 qIL BOl1 W /qk
•'..ASTASL Ismeo FA'•, mm FW m utmM sECUMV6 No. B70BLISMOO •• ;
FURTHER, YHE 11NflVR9IOMm OWNERS OF IM LAND NEREaT SUBDIVIDE; NAIVE FCII..
AL04"If BAIO IOLTTERLY Coumm B Altl
TTEILSELWES, THEIR ME FRe Arm FS83D/+S Fl$ ANY 901aPIU OR ETT11"fY DERLYSMa Ting,`
Di�I'AISYD: ": ;:= ••
FROM THR lBap[R33Bxm, ANY AATI ALL CLFINS FOP C+NAM ASAINET NF�COUNYT,
1T6 SUCCl8490.$ AND A$5 [BNS KNTCN MAY At OCCASIONBQ BY THE EBTA6L EMT,
••,
VAI'07'01' L 345JA MEET IO 007MT OF CLBAATIBLG':. •�'•�''''
CWTRLICTIDW, OR MAINtEWANCE OF ROADS AMIOR OR4IMABE 7�Y.'aatTxT WTIH TH15
0,1N0
•« "
4BATNEASTERLV .q►d��ly •pF A CQ0.YEt'O TW RISKY,
kARo ZVIQMON 07.0 IMAM CLAIMS AMULTINS "ON IXFDEDVATCTr.{IYEAMIC!
COUNTY"
2$8,M FEET &LOW AN
:HAVING A RAC IUS OF 6E7.14 NEWT, i1eNOQBk A CEN!"t ANGLIE of
"'y
,"t
• 92'6L'L1':
PUATHEP. TIE QNOERSTOWE! TINKERS OF THE LAND KF99iT W601WEEP -Qw2i'XOR •''f
6 34'E7'08' Q 10.Co FEET TO A"7VINT pi1:,A I TAIKMT a4em
TIEMNELVES, INFER MKIRT AND ASSSDNS TO INDEMNIFY Alm HOLD AP7JlF COIWIY, 16 S :....�: ::' ••,
SIICCCSSDRP AND ARIMM, MANHLE5S FROM ANT OAT40R iNG1.4QiKBi{y11Y bF NDRTHeXXTDD.Y BO.IO FEEL AL.OIm +JN ARC ci'8AI0 ROlk7ANFET[r CUAVC To
yc.oals
LETENSF- CLAIKF➢ BY PERSONS KIrMIN OR W{INONT TNT Sl00IYr51ON lV•MAVE BEE1t
THE AMT, HAVING a RADIUS DF I21-1a FC&---': TW NAOILO POINT of
CAUSED BY ALTEAIATIoX% DP THE oFGUND SUOVADC ENETATION- D219AOE• OP-
VRTCN WEAAS 8 44•BY'M' C SIYiOIIYfT A GENTRY. FSIRE OF O:W,st':
SURFACE OR BUSSUAFMOR WATER FLOM WITHIN ii}}11{p 9 Q8pp IYTSTOII:IIR BVL
EDt ApLIIX NEXT. CONSTRUCTION OR HA INTEMANCE D1r 7NE RQ'WS WITHIp 7XI4 l
N 6]'BP'R[' E, 10.42 FC5{,'•;
SYBDIVI7i Bx. PROVICEO, THIS WAIVER AND INBEKlF[F=GATT okk•SHAA,L X0T WE E.
COW.,, icQ RS REL&+t1W0 NI7:6 L011NTY, I•Ta aLCCEISORB ON F'5>f.S�N+: FROW ?
M iB'0o'70'N, SO"00 F;Ci;
LLWILTry FOR DIMMER, IRCULOINQ THE COST dF 0lFElL7E".RE!➢D.T iMB IK:}IIOLE ORT
- � •� ., •,•
IN PAW FnON 15E NEpLIDEHTi OF NEW CDIMTY', ITS 1KCEi3pj1l. OR -SBIONS.
M 03-wat' E, 9 .$ FSET TO 1XC*ST LINK OF [p-WYLMIOIT LOT
E-CCUTIVIN AFFILU1W A WF51a GOTFgLATIM
THENCE ALSO NAIO SALT LIME a Q1* EO' 1L ioa.m ftr To Tm POINT OF
%41.
•JA•. .APCs HCR]OA TI7
" Z
•`Sys
L
- �
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT,
_
;;�
STATE OF MASHIRG]DH .-:•..
i'n
Cd Ty OF MEMO
•19•19-+,
ON THE QFr of BEFORL.k- 'THE VNDMIOHED
MpTARY PUBLIC TN 4—
OR TriE pTwTt m •ArriiMi[T MONALLY FFTLARRO
Td:r} KNOKM 10 Oi• WATF Or ''4
DMM]1T eM THAT BE TM CC THE FVOLUVI
1 HBTRUM of Aly ACSAM RT BAIQ 1NB NF TO BE TM FREE AMP V714ERART Y
ACT ANB CECC OF S+SO CORPOAAT7DN FDR";IHE USla AIM PVAPB5E5 TNERC[M - •:'.
WEMTmNm Am .WLQA3rl STAVED'TlA!�T ��Ims auTMMIT" TO !:%ECIRE 9Fi6 � !F•t �.�'�
1N WITaT:m wfteS pf, I •IYYC./�IEiAUl'Q :SET %T MA7 AND aFFjAB MY OFFICIAL F
SEAL THE 9AV AND
_tiETJJ'PIRBTNTE M AETTER. •:-
F Y IAIBLTC IM AND rA STRTC dr
MASHIHOTON; •RE51a1N0 AT z:•• ...-
.My APB�IrBtT'rsrrlFriE�1Rp a[pe�W.
sw. of Ri !A mmt 1 : '
cuuNIT of TrIm i �'- 5.,URIB ORER1
1 1101EST CERTifY THAT •EMI!
.:• SASEEFIO(N A a T;Y EF, SE4t3
N. N.. ]HAT ALL CNNa AND•
OR THq- BAV of y,riSCT6�E! : IW py BEFORE W. THC LIKOU031WE0 .,,, 6w,
TAqY ppIALIiS AND rQR.TN' E ITAT�F OF MA'ININBT FER55NALLY APP£lA 0 $' "`�"'�'•M
!, ;. arisal "• Yp'J� IWONN TO BE = '+{5 COI+tIRQSTIOM {B TCTJ1 L6
—T,�I! CgRP'vRAT;ON THAT I.K.ITED THE FO RE00[MS PRot'IaaiioNs P K RJTTIrSB:
IH1T%1NtirT. AHp ACK Wq (DEC BR'jQ 1NSTPIWFAY TO TIC THE FREE AnO YG.UHTAIIY r� '�
ACT AND DEFp OF SAID CONPOR4X{OW FDR THE Q5ES AND PQPRCSES THCREIM:
MEHT IO!ICO ANQ m OATH BiATBo TNLT M,Y TAB AVrHmIREO To EXR"Ts BA3,�
TWAT. g0MlMl..,,.�..''LU.....- •• =•'•/; soon LINTpp��n,, NiDF C55L
•3N XItHE47 w.,.F�yCf:-.1 HAVE .MEp `EVMr13 SET MY HAND AND AFFIXED MY OFFID1iZI., CEFRIvic NO IiYWs
SEAL TRX DAY -7• • r T'T'Y•4 WRITTEN.
ry.,•:y
06
y ,17I�BS}IyY E; fy
11111hRr /Vr T+Iq,;D ix Alb FQR STAY r -
KF5HINBTCN. M o]OIWO AT A:
LyEIIG r PAY
AoppLArr/nwr M1alw /I�n�Jy, •." .
�EryGISAF'��
BALA:FM No, tdeB-21
lLAT.OF BAY VIEW COIFRDT "TATCB Sa
10 11. 7DVNSNIP �L NWTH. RAN �_ EF6T.
016iARCE9 FAQ; SNOW SoRIIECTLY n"KaR, 1K47 ALL
Owl V WILL Be 30 oP nmv ON TTE ,
YEB 7rD THAT I HAVE FULLY COMPLIED VITO 71rt
SEOIA.�T30k3. -07
p 06
rbob
oNAL LFIR1 SWYETpT
941. PONEI-L AVE. B.N.
RENTON. WASHINGTON BB06S
PROne.120B122B-362B
225-43
BAYVIEW COUNTRY ESTATES
GOVT. LOT A IN THE E.1/2 OF SEC. 11, TWP. 21 N. RGE. 3 E, W.H.
A Pon. OF
KING COUNTY,
WASHINGTON
'S CERTIFICATE FINANCE DIRECTOR
APPROVALS
r..Fg ARE PAID. T1411 TIVEM AM
IS
PAWS. �SNO ND AESOUACES DEPART"T
3 ON
Dou"v" SPEC! "S:�KS -1 C "I' 'C'M� r 1.111 ALL 0 W7,Cm 0
;m
timmi'm AND
—UN CaNTAYNER alwfm SIR1115, -LOSS
p*)d 7H �L
or
E]GwIfEDFM THIS U� DAV OF jj4ffijb4
Afar
%
No cqk�rry ]or or rwmmx
6.
ti tLi i
KINDCOL"W OF AtMFSSHV�
77
� CMla) Amm Appsown THNaia -- DAW or -
CERTIFICATEZ,0,94�,'0 �O$4 Z
RECOROING
Oig AkM7� AT THE AEMAS, Or wItAggM., I.
to NIwa
COLIC"
-a- AUMPOS Z>
IN. rttum -j4jz-- OF
5
C&X-, VASNImayam.
lava cwAm coLwrL 1.
exAmImm AMC, �ym THIn DAY Or Lfihsw,� I
DpISIW W MCOFICS XLEOL"
ATTEST!
t a YODW
IL
C',
CDJMCTL
.—GSUR
qION
NATIVE GROWTH PRDTE�t
NOTES
STeNCIUS" FILL A� UWl"ffXaS jr.,DC '�;,RJHO OUT MOI` U0FW 70 MUNC
"VCHO AM Y
'015so ."GpW�5tT
I. SETmok. -HO CAP ff� RE
DTP A. ItTmect1w
PAT SUL OLflaUltO3 M051 S_oWR M46"�
=Jr PLAIT&
'Ill In toy A."
oge E 9 RAIL " C� At to S
PITH 71� 4uwlm LLHE_
P'W 4m ammjOw 70 PACIFIC
c -4 F"
c�
y1CM aoft�& TO %it
GESItATYM Of A 1=
A o=ICl.-NAKtlV I," =A�ll Z=,T;uw =lw
4.
=
KORTKKOT �z� 11-1, AND A&;aZGHlk �**M WO
,,M, TtXIC Pit
. ., '. I ewrriat,, OF $"Ace
"AT%W� UFV Ll&%=l= .0jalot.0 I" vpev
UP*% 7.e gAryWeAlag T. FCCT.
I'M 11 yLL !„Ora IN Wl"` In iMTAL AmY
VEMIFST � Mm�lc -IALTK =O'n re i
NATKA No CROSI or " 'AlIZI...p. AVO AjP.L
P�; 41"" A. 552r�",=
cm�mjmx M. I'll "lum-L m-oF
111=1�.
FRO"T %= " SEWA.6 -1s N�ovlvt_,A�
AMC IPHISMI .5.
PIE03
VM r Af eftor am%-pm5D 0" =99 HIM co�
FaCTLtTI09 AND OrTKKR '0A5 �l 01"
APO OTl�A "O*"E"Tv T.Y. AHM - ", TO,
lVt LOTS ALL TWLS'p. lw pu"Ou r
C.5"gntt THE G"j,11ON, LV_96 7EAANO ortan vapETAT10'
OR-,.r "HIM CA "a, @a OUT.
C�WFMR �Dp ,LT.
ET IN,
77ALMSIO LOT SMALL W�ILMIII 1)
OKI TO �r
9TATEaN EACH Tattrup Lv+ ;w
.*fk.UKL A 0 ^DJXC:rLWT To .&;L fM
RI To
- HOUT 154,QH FNn"
L PR VIT'SS.,, =TAINGA TO
P7 -a T I "XATZU
ffILSTICSS AM vMmFNAm-
I
KIE
COUNTY AMC HE OIVZS.� (C. ITS
gvlrSXa pmm
WMjr" In - ffAS04NT vwOw.![Na Cau." Aku*mpl�
lucce� *m 17
;Air
pe, iiisas-.
x4a fm WtOL UP FILL% -9 FILM
SECTIQ :BF; 2;
.1 ..
A GMACT TO M MIGHT 14
UrAwa KImQ COZY wcamcimo
, , ,
ANQ vc� U;-, • F&MWED IN �. A,
0.115 iw;tFARIMM Mew *?WM kv 't,_
6, THERE WALL W NO OiAt mkA% Ccael To &iv;mw P.Y. CAD" mi"?
FVA*0 LO 1. R�TO;D�Xnl
LOTS
riPD d" F@' 114' Mmmvm
tm BOIC
S.n potM .-V F Pr "I
9?0071NO OAASNCTIM=1
Na-
R. ALL PuriO1NO OPYN+FpliY go E
A ft.l�uol A" PAT
cpYVj=-F ON FILE
ypg Im AT Kr........
COVNIr =1 Vr. 1_. I I EST
H� ff"tow an Sma uxvcmm..
bv=�
TE.PUAADV TUSMARdVO EASEMEOTP t.ALL I'M
A
MwAsimp av Tpllekpouc Aawl"_
Uri
a, Al IAWMW rIvE Lin 10 U)"I W'4$WA= -A
FaR "s
II
STFWCIS = ELA
Cfa
O 0 T3% tol!; a-xv,
THI 15 fOA'WRW om
LOTS
S. to tim"VIVED "me'u."M.'s OF
MW;
CI A HAVINd ACCIL ""W"IEM"t KIN, . AURZO"A OR
,&RCEIG �,T COUKIV %T�AM
IL TRACT IW16DV
-1
aAIm YV= F'UN PA'M"'"MM
to. ais SLVH130 IV [N[�"JVC AFK LLj4jy= To TOKWMME VNIT5, ALL C7`KA
x
Latis !Px Ltmtllda:xg otrAL q inma-c !�-v.
Lt. ilk SWRT SLTBAM "WES 1D.S.ILL.1 APO THL
waStma i6nmMa vvd&m,fon Lora a Tkg-U Is L UGIVA.
t4xpj;�J't APPLICATION SNAIL IM AGUONPA�OCO TwOuRv SPRIFIcs".
"�. 'Wom sy A figaTOLmack- aIHvERI%a om"t
V ,t34 "lu-, TO SCSI ASO t*tNM ftILDINU A
,41
Fo-
V-4
J.
k
841 POWELL AVE- S-W-
RENTON,'WASHINGTON 98055
Phone� 12061 228-SG26
S
2 OF
e
DRAWN By P. HARD SHEET
225 —475 A
x
BAYVIEW COUNTRY ESTATES
POR. OF GOVT. LOT 1 IN THE E.i/2, SEC. 11. T. 21 N.. R. 3 E. W.M.
'Jvfrm'S.lw KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
52 DETAIL 'A' LEGEND
(R) Rmw GEARING •11
(Nat NOW WAM 4"-m CURVE DATA Tn
RAG/AL 86MN6 ro flRaV7'MWiW
=N17 5MIaM "NO"Wr R M�
-ea WILDING GET BACK LINE
ffAl
F.
F�•1
" FOR LOT5 0 TH.. 1
"IT POP —11-1 A..
N31PS73%'ff M)
lo.m.
SCALE, 0-100'
too
G 44
is I
kw"ll
.Imdw
3
N.
a.,
".Ad' 1
N. -
�-4AA'
&,v '!
.v
oy
w
Ar
91"'
An,
e-q
Lw
muff
'%w
•
car
0,
170,
1 ala-
f'&'
ZAP
n'v
zoo
C-4
''—wwn'
* I
vsw
X"'
4w
a, W.W0,
Asaw
X.f
-%**--w
mv&'
AR'"' I
sue
57' 1
ayU
Zp%w)5l'
rive'
'wv' F
rAr
blor-o'
mfr
"7w I
lxr
a M'0-
LL
45,
lad,
xv,
19
ram'
21.47'
4M
slay
W.",
49
4�h
p/x
097,
Aw
I&t
irmlir
Meg'
mov
&
-L*—
", -
1TmCe'
EGG'
mw
M�lu'
Jim-
n, z
Cx
4rx W,
-m4;r
ca
ow
m 16,
rx
=;:-�
ifa fr
mfl��
to
MAI,
na
AV
-em,271
M-241
So'
rY
to
&.4149,
ANAff
e°
fM
wjoll�
_w'r
Em
Rw
rM
Wff-"'
"w
m "'
em
"A
mm-
ev
jtr�-ffl'
W�'
MIN,
cy
A-m-
0,60,
e&
QNr�ur
04,
DWELL AVE. S.M.
%1ENPTON,WASHINGTON 98055
Ph a - liCS1 228-5828
=
A e �".0-w Oar
ORA.. BY C GAM-9 i I-W,
EET 3--.
2?.5-43B
SCALE - r' - 50'
.0 lw
BAYVIEW COUNTRY ESTATES 14 0
POR. OF GOVT. LOT I IN THE E.1/2. SEC. ii. T. 21 N.. R. 3E. W.M.
KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON
4
NOTES
1. FOR THESE NOTES. K.C.C. SHALL BE THE Aparihplow FOR kW
CO;NTT COM OATM QECE�EII 1006,
•Lk
2. PER K.C.C. SECTION 21.51.0-30. WHbi-*.7 NMDUIM Aa
LOT WITH AN R5 OR S ZONING. THERE AKALL St -.A SO Fool i"w
J 'LOWS T�. COW
W41DE LAND CAPINO STRIP WITHIN TLHEBTE&;;rffi E LD,.
P UF U.. To
0 EATv LINE, t"" MOTHWIL
fEET t5M WITH Of AN
0 �VCQTA Tm�=Ttt I.T%IO1 EST LINES Olt -.4OT 6 ANM Z57 N�
OP:Lw in- t. 1.
AS PART OF INC 001COM PERMAT JPXBAFA& 4A�MCIPJM SPUU-L.6-
IRE00 FOR LOTS 5 THOU to IKyrw1YA. 'A} t.&xuau I" SHA1,0 be
16TENT WITH THE K.C.C. BR7;M 21,*3
OKS C . 119073UN 7 1, tY- 090 STREET TAEE4 LIRE PLOGf17E0 FOR
LOTR a TWnu ja DMLwM� "USE
THE INSTALLATIO. or Ohio urp54,
5. PEP THE K.C.C. REM 60 mnvIKy Of Ta4NHOUMtfi WITH
THREE OR NOW UNI'lls A" 0 EACCACTIOTMM Mr"EqNO
T*ugvmLFL OR MEPARA7&Lv tt YWAVR A. LEA" A -rtw F%CONVENEDART VARIATION
" IN THE FoONT rACAO( ON AT LKVVWL'Twm t*IT. 116,11 FIVE FOOT
'ejH' EVENAM OF EACH CM9M-.!ALL IMTVlPA FRONT Va..
G. THE BUILDING LOCA7r1005 FOR "TA a I] ..LU;l. SMALL SE
L—WIM By THE 4—j.':p. GMUOLVZqw PRODUCT MCTpH AS "A' OF
iY
THE BUILDING PERMIT
A.
941 POWELL AVEWE ILK, SUM WO
R9rr0KVM5MMarOkM055
PtION& rAll no-NaB
45C
l
Leila Willoughby -Oakes
From: Eager, Robert M. <eager.rm@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 11:46 AM
To: Steve Wright; Craig Jordan
Cc: karen; mearch@att.net; Leila Willoughby -Oakes
Subject: Re: City of Federal Way -Eager Residence
Attachments: SITE 170327.pdf; 1st Floor Plan.pdf; 2nd Floor Plan.pdf
Hi Craig,
In order to keep the house below the city's height requirement and meet the HOA's square footage requirement
we have eliminated the 3rd floor and altered the foot print of the house. Please see the attached files. Please let
me know if you have any questions.
Robert Eager
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Steve Wright csrnrri ht landat inc.corn> wrote:
Karen,
Just a quick note to let you know that we did in fact receive the signed proposal and retainer fee on Thursday. Now that
we have a contract in place, we can get started on this work.
Steve Wright
Landau Associates
Ext. 190
Direct: (425) 329-0290
From: karen [mailto:ea ertron mail.comj
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 11:17 AM
To: Craig Jordan <CJordan landaulnc.com>; Eager, Robert M. <ea er.rm mail.com>
Cc: mearch att.net; Leila Willoughby -Oakes <Leila.Willou hb -Oakes cit offederalwa .corn>; Calvin McCaughan
<CMcCau an Iandauinc.com>; Steve Wright <swright landauinc.com>
Subject: Re: City of Federal Way -Eager Residence
Hi Craig,
Thank you for the information! We just sent the signed proposal and retainer fee to your office care of Steve, it
should arrive Thurs. by 3pm.
The proposed residence is for Robei ,Eager and Karen Eager, Michael Eager the architect. I copied Rob on
this e-mail, here is his email address:
eaaer.nn iail.com
Thank you again!
Karen
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Craig Jordan <QJordan a,,landauinc.com> wrote:
Karen and Michael,
I would like to introduce myself as the new Landau Associates contact person for the Eager Residence direct
services through City of Federal Way. Our previous contact, Carlo, is no longer with the firm, so I am taking
this opportunity to introduce myself and let you know that if you have any questions you could contact me at
the phone numbers below or via email.
Thanks
Craig Jordan, PE
Senior Project Geotechnical Engineer
Landau Associates
Direct: (360) 628-5 1l 1
Mobile: (360) '42-9541
1115 West Bay Drive NW, Suite 201, Olympia, WA 98502
www.landauiac.com
i._at�dltu Associates is ll:audl�- CARBON NF:[lr"T'f:: ?_ €l;I'(}uh eur stistaimble }lraclices and littancial support oi' C. S based carbon-icdueEion hrojecls.
Nal IC E: 1I11s wil'17'€Uniciltiort tnav contaill Privileged w wher 4 unfidential 111f6i'ntiltioll. II'►Ou have rrteivcd it In error, l)li ase A ise llle sender r,y TePly e-rrlail alul
€llwnth liawly delete The rltL''.s%9� and and' attachments withOut.l'UDYi€I£; (Y. (li',CI()siIK_I the t:f nturics. I?uu:k yom