The URL can be used to link to this page

11-100548ILE CITY OF CITY HALL Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com March 22, 2011 Mr. David Fall Fall Architectural Studio 8600 Banner Road SE Port Orchard, WA 98367 Re: File #11-100548-00-PC; PREAPPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY Bradshaw / Harkness Addition, 3124 SW 302°d Place, Federal Way Dear Mr. Fall: Thank you for participating in the preapplication conference with the City of Federal Way's Development Review Committee (DRC) held March 10, 2011. We hope that the information discussed at that meeting was helpful in understanding the general requirements for your project as submitted. This letter summarizes comments given to you at the meeting by the members of the DRC. The members who reviewed your project and provided comments include staff from the City's Planning and Building Divisions and Public Works Department, and representatives from Lakehaven Utility District and South King Fire and Rescue. Some sections of the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) and relevant information handouts are enclosed with this letter. Please be advised, this letter does not represent all applicable codes. In preparing your formal application, please refer to the complete FWRC and other relevant codes for all additional requirements that may apply to your project. The key contact for your project is Senior Planner Janet Shull, 253-835-2644, janet.shull@cityoffederalway.com. For specific technical questions about your project, please contact the appropriate DRC representative as listed below. Otherwise, any general questions about the preapplication and permitting process can be referred to your key contact. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposal to construct an addition to an existing single-family home. The property is zoned RS 7.2 and is located on the Puget Sound shoreline at 3124 SW 302" Place. MAJOR ISSUES Outlined below is a summary of the major issues of your project based on the plans and information submitted for preapplication review. These issues can change due to modifications and revisions in the plans. These major issues only represent comments that the DRC consider most significant to your project and do not include the majority of the comments provided. The major issues section is only provided as a means to highlight critical requirements or issues. Please be sure to read the entire department comments made in the next section of this letter. r-" ... . w WwFall Page 2 March 22, 2011 • Planning Division 1. The property is located within the designated shoreline environment and is subject to the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). 2. The property is located within the designated floodplain and must comply with flood zone management requirements. 3. The property is located within a designated erosion hazard area. SEPA review and a geotechnical analysis is required. 4. The applicant should consult with the Muckleshoot and Puyallup Tribes as the tribes have recently required archeological analysis of construction sites in the Lakota Beach area. Public Works Development Services Division 1. The project, as currently configured, is exempt from Surface Water runoff control requirements; however, if the applicant chooses to provide Best Management Practices (BMPs) for roof drains and/or other impervious surfaces, those BMPs shall be shown on the building permit site plan. 2. Any BMPs, and all Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) measures shall be shown on the building permit site plan. ■ Building Division Health department approval required if project is staying on septic system. DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Outlined below are the comments made by the representatives of each department present at the preapplication conference. Each section should be read thoroughly. If you have questions, please contact the representative listed for that section. PLANNING DIVISION (Janet Shull, 253-835-2644, janet.shull@cityoffederalway.com) Shoreline Management Act (SAM) — The proposal is subject to the Washington State Shoreline Management Act, Federal Way Shoreline Master Program (SMP), and applicable Federal Way shoreline development regulations as adopted. In summary, pursuant to Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-27-040(2)(c), the construction of a single-family residence is exempt from the shoreline substantial development permit requirements. However, the applicant must request in writing an exemption from the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. The city will review the request and then issue a letter acknowledging the shoreline exemption. Exemption from the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit does not exempt the project from complying with the requirements of the SMP. The proposed addition must meet the residential requirements of FWRC 15.05.050(4). 2. Geologically Hazardous Areas — The subject property is located within a Geologically Hazardous Area as defined by the FWRC. The director may permit development activities normally associated with a residential use on or within 25 feet of a geologically hazardous area if no reasonable alternative exists and only if the development activity will not lead to or create any increased slide, seismic, or erosion hazard. In order to consider approving development activity within a geologically hazardous area, an analysis demonstrating these criteria have been met including a soils report prepared by a qualified professional engineer, licensed in the state must be submitted (FWRC 19.160.010(3). 11-100548 Doc. I.D. 56979 Mr. Fall Page 3 March 22, 2011 Designated Flood Hazard Area — The subject property is located within a designated flood hazard area as identified by the Federal Insurance Administration flood insurance rate map (FIRM) and is therefore subject to provisions in FWRC Chapter 19.142 "Flood Damage Prevention". At this time, staff is not able to determine if the elevation of the proposed structure is above flood hazard elevation. You will need to provide the elevation of the structure in relation to mean sea level (elevation certificate) as specified in FWRC 19.142.060 through FWRC 19.142.080 in order to determine if the structure is in the flood hazard area. If the structure is in the flood hazard area, then the structure is required to comply with the provisions of FWRC 19.142.110, 19.142.130, and 19.142.140. It is recommended that the applicant contact the Region X FEMA office to determine how to establish the base flood elevation and verify that the project is designed per FEMA requirements. 4. Accessory Dwelling Unit — At the preapplication meeting, it was disclosed that the owner would like to design the addition to accommodate a future accessory dwelling unit. Accessory dwelling units are allowed in the RS 7.2 zoning district subject to the provisions of FWRC 19.200.180 and 19.265.020. Applications for accessory dwelling units may be processed along with the building permit application. The owner(s) must submit a letter of application stating that the owner(s) shall occupy one' of the dwelling units on the premises. An ADU application shall also be filed as a deed restriction with the King County Department of Records and Elections to indicate the presence of an ADU and the requirement of owner occupancy. The ADU application may be reviewed and approved along with the building permit for the addition. However, building permits are only valid for one year, so the ADU construction would need to be completed within the one-year time frame. Application Process — The applicant shall complete the enclosed master land use application along With application materials. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) — The proposal is subject to environmental review, and an environmental checklist must be submitted and reviewed prior to the Director of Community and Economic Development issuing an environmental decision. The SEPA notification includes a 14-day comment and 14-day appeal period. SEPA review must be concluded before the shoreline exemption may be issued. 7. Public Notice — SEPA noticing provisions require the applicant to submit one set of mailing envelopes addressed to all owners of property within 300 feet of all property boundaries. All mailing envelopes must include postage and the City's return address. Along with the mailing envelopes, lists of owners and tenants addresses must be submitted, and an assessor's map showing the 300-foot radius from all property boundaries. A handout regarding procedures to obtain mailing labels is enclosed. 8. Fees — Fees for the applications are as follows: Shoreline Exemption $ 91.50 SEPA Review $1,750.50 Accessory Dwelling Unit $ 178.50 Total $2,020.50 Separate fees are required for building permits. 11-100548 Doe I.D. 56979 Mr. Fall Page 4 March 22, 2011 9. Other Agency Review and Permits — Other agencies may have permits and/or approvals required for the proposal. The City permit process is independent of other agency permits. The City is not responsible for determination of other applicable permits. Please note that the Puyallup Tribe and Muckleshoot Tribe have required archeological analysis of construction sites in the Lakota Beach area. The City will be providing notice of the proposed action to the Tribes during the SEPA comment period. In order to eliminate any potential delays in review of the proposal, we encourage you to consult tribal authorities prior to application with the City. PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION (Kevin Peterson, 253-835-2734, kevin.peterson@cityoffederalway.com) Land Use Issues — Stormwater Any surface water runoff control BMWs shall be designed to the criteria outlined in Appendix C of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and the City of Federal Way Addendum to the 2009 KCSWDM. Appendix C may be found on the King County Water and Land Resources web -site, or City staff can e-mail the applicant a .pdf file of the Appendix upon request. 2. If infiltration is proposed, soil logs prepared by a licensed geotechnical engineer or septic designer must be provided to verify infiltration suitability. If work is to be done below the ordinary high water mark, a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) permit may be required. Information regarding this permit can be obtained from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, at h4p:l/www.wa.ggv/wdfw/hab/hpapae/htm or by calling the office of Regulator Assistance at 360-407-7037. Right -of -Way Improvements Based on available records and the submitted materials, and as identified in FWRC 19.135.030, it appears that this proposal meets the 25 percent threshold criteria for requiring street frontage improvements along SW 302"d Place. The applicant may submit a Right -of -Way Modification Request to the Deputy Public Works Director to have the improvements modified, deferred, or waived. Each project is evaluated on a case -by -case basis. Building Permit Issues (Public Works) Show any Stormwater BMPs and all Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) measures on the permit site plan. When topographic survey information is shown on the plans, the vertical datum block shall include the phrase "DATUM: N.G.V.D.-29" or "DATUM: K.C.A.S.," on all sheets where vertical elevations are called out. BUILDING DIVISION (Scott Sproul, 253-835-2633, scoff.sproul@cityoffederalway.com) International Building Code (IBC), 2009 edition Washington State Amendments WAC 51-50* International Mechanical Code (IMC), 2009 edition Washington State Amendments WAC 51-52* 11-100548 Doc. LD. 56979 Mr. Fall Page 5 March 22, 2011 Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC), 2009 edition Washington State Amendments WAC 51-56 & WAC 51-57* International Fire Code (IFC), 2009 Washington State Amendments* WAC 51 -54 National Electric Code (NEC), 2009 edition Accessibility Code ICC/ANSI A117.1-2003 International Residential Code 2009 Washington State Amendments* WAC 51-51 Washington State Energy Code 2009 WAC 51-11 Washington State Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality Code 2006 WAC 51-13* *Current State Amendments are dated: 06/01/2010 ** As of January 1, 2002, the State amendments now require arc -fault interrupters for 15-20 amp branch circuits serving sleeping rooms in dwelling units (R-l's). Building Criteria Occupancy Classification: R-3 Type of Construction: V-B Fire Protection: see fire department requirements Wind/Seismic: Basic wind speed 100 Mph, Exposure_, 25# Snow load, Seismic Zone D-1 A complete building permit application and commercial checklist. (Additional copies of application and checklists may be obtained on our web site at: www.cityoffederalway.com.) Submit 2 sets of drawings and specifications. Specifications shall include: x Soils report x Structural calculations x_Energy calculations x Ventilation calculations. Note: A Washington State Registered architects stamp is required for additions/alterations (new or existing) of 4,000 gross floor area or greater unless specifically listed as an "exempt" structure per the Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Energy code compliance worksheets are required to be completed and included with your permit application. A wet stamp and signature is required on all sheets of plans and on the cover page of any calculations submitted. Federal Way reviews plans on a first in first out basis; however, there are some small projects with inconsequential review requirements that may be reviewed out of order. Review Timing The first comment letter can be expected within 2 to 4 weeks of submittal date. Re -check of plans will occur in one to three weeks after re -submittal. 11-100548 Doc. 1D. 56979 Mr. Fall Page 6 March 22, 2011 Revised or resubmitted plans shall be provided in the same format, size, and amount as the originally submitted plans. Revised/resubmitted drawings shall indicate by means of clouding or written response, what changes have been made from the original drawings. Plans for all involved departments will be forwarded from Community Development Services. Federal Way has an expedited review process. Information is available at our front counter. Other Permits & Inspections Separate permits may be required for electrical, mechanical, plumbing, fire suppression systems, and signs. Applicants may apply for separate permits at any time prior to commencement of construction. When required, special inspections shall be performed by WABO approved agencies or by agencies approved by the building official prior to permit issuance. Construction must be approved by all reviewing departments prior to final building division inspection. All concerned departments (Planning, Public Works, Electrical, Fire) must sign off before the Building Department can final the structure for occupancy. Building final must be approved prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The City of Federal Way does not issue temporary Certificate of Occupancies. All construction projects may be required to have a pre -construction conference. If a pre -con meeting is required, all subs, the general or representative, the architect or _representative, the engineer or representative, electrical contractor and any other interested party, should attend this meeting. Meetings will occur at the Building Department and will be scheduled by the inspector of record for the project. Site -Specific Requirements • See 2009 IBC for wind zone requirements. ■ Separate electrical permit required. City of Federal Way provides it on electrical inspections. + Submit a geotechnical report with the single-family building permit application. • Engineering will be required for this project. • Separate building permits required for each structure. • Third party inspection required for the placement on the pin piles for the project. + The area for a possible ADU could be looked at like an unfinished basement. Permits may be taken out in the future for finishing the basement/ADU. Add notes to the plans as to your intention for the area. The information provided is based on limited plans and information. The comments provided are not intended to be a complete plan review and further comments are possible at time of building permit plan review. LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT (Brian Asbury, BAsbury@lakehaven.org) If sewer service is required by the Health Department or desired by the applicant, a separate sewer service connection permit is required for each new connection to the sanitary sewer system, in accordance with standards defined in Lakehaven's current `Fees and Charges Resolution' (contact Lakehaven for application form & details). Minimum slope for gravity sewer service connections is 2%. 11-100548 Doc. I.D. 56979 Mr. Fall Page 7 March 22, 2011 SOUTH KING FME AND RESCUE (Chris Ingham, 253-946-7244, chris.ingham@southkingfire.org) Fire apparatus access roadways shall be required for every building when any portion of an exterior wall of the first story is located more than 150 ft. from fire apparatus vehicle access. Exception: When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, these provisions may be modified by the chief. CLOSING This letter reflects the information provided at the preapplication meeting and is intended to assist you in preparing plans and materials for formal application. We hope you found the comments useful to your project. We have made every effort to identify major.issues to eliminate surprises during the City's review of the formal application. The completion of the preapplication process in the content of this letter does not vest any future project application. Comments in this letter are only valid for one year as per FWRC 19.40.070 (4). As you know, this is a preliminary review only and does not take the place of the full review that will follow submission of a formal application. Comments provided in this letter are based on preapplication materials submitted. Modifications and revisions to the project as presented for this preapplication may influence and modify information regarding development requirements outlined above. In addition to this preapplication letter, please examine the complete FWRC and other relevant codes carefully. Requirements that are found in the codes that are not addressed in this letter are still required for your project. If you have questions about an individual comment, please contact the appropriate department representative noted above. Any general questions can be directed towards the key project contact, Senior Planner Janet Shull, at 253-835-2644 orjanet.shull@cityoffederalway.com. We look forward to working with you. Sincerely, G64;;eA�`L' net Shull Senior Planner enc: Bulletin 003, Master Land Use Application Bulletin 002, Mailing Labels Bulletin 004, Critical Areas Bulletin 008, Geologically Hazardous Areas Bulletin 048, Accessory Dwelling Unit Information Bulletin 049, Accessory Dwelling Unit Application Bulletin 050, Environmental Checklist FEMA form 81-31 with instructions c: Scott Sproul, Plans Examiner Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer Chris Ingham, South King Fire and Rescue Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Utility District Kari Cimmer, Permit Center Supervisor Barbara Bradshaw, 12423 West Running Deer Trail, Peoria, AZ 85383 11-100548 Doc. LD 56979 Pre -application Conference Sign in Sheet City of Federal Way COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE March 10, 2011 9:00 a.m. City Hall Hylebos Room Project Name: Bradshaw/Harkness Single-family Residential Addition Address: 3124 SW 302nd Place Federal Way. WA File Number: 11-100548-00-PC NAME DEPARTMENT / DIVISION TELEPHONE NUMBER C-�3s-z� 2. 3. 4-wLv- 'i - earsow \d. DW W. v � S Z�3. $3S.2a3 4. 5 C�f1� �s /G(% G( So�i �� LNG ��t� 2r3 6 �� Chapin 7. -3,s5- ns -2 3 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.�� CITY OF FEDERAL WAY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 14, 2011 TO: Ann Dower, Senior Engineering Plans Reviewer Will Appleton, Surface Water Manager Scott Sproul, Assistant Building Official Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Utility District Chris Ingham, South King Fire & Rescue FROM: Janet Shull FOR DRC MTG. ON: March 3, 2011 - Internal March 10, 2011, 9:00 - with applicant FILE NUMBER(s): 11-100548-00-PC RELATED FILE NOS.: None PROJECT NAME: BRADSHAW / HARKNESS ADDITION PROJECT ADDRESS: ZONING DISTRICT: 3124 SW 302ND PL RS 7.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Meeting to determine required City processes for the addition to an existing residence located along Puget Sound. Shoreline Designation: Rural. Also located within 100 year floodplain and erosion hazard area. LAND USE PERMITS: SEPA PROJECT CONTACT: FALL ARCHITECTURAL STUDIO DAVID FALL 8600 BANNER RD SE MATERIALS SUBMITTED: Conceptual site plan and elevations. RECEIVED CITY OF 4:!k�FEB n 9 n' l Federal WwOF FEDERAL WAI CDs APPLICATION NO(S) Project Name MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION DEPARTMENT OF CommuNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8`s Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 www.citvoffederaiM.com / I_ I ti v 5 g U- OD - P V Date t 1&9t Property Address/Location ;, ( -L-4 cJ . 2j0 P � . PDCT"7 a Parcel Number(s) ©I Z 6 �j - 0/ o J56 Project Description ADD l?� 4 �� `�L © IFy<< 5� PLEASE PRINT Type of Permit Required Annexation Binding Site Plan Boundary Line Adjustment Comp Plan/Rezone Land Surface Modification Lot Line Elimination _7�LPreapphcation Conference Process I (Director's Approval) Process II (Site Plan Review) Process III (Project Approval) Process IV (Hearing Examiner's Decision) Process V (Quasi -Judicial Rezone) Process VI SEPA w/Project SEPA Only Shoreline: Variance/Conditional Use Short Subdivision Subdivision Variance: Commercial/Residential Required Information 9-5 -7• Z_ Zoning Designation 5F H t7 Comprehensive Plan Designation 1000, IfValue of Existing Improvements Value of Proposed Improvements International Building Code (1BC): 3 Occupancy Type Construction Type Applicant Name: �>Avt [7 {�-C- Address: 0676� F;Ia+J J�•�- City/State: �c�2� �2CUNe ,U/ 6&.A - Zip: Te, -z? G 7 Phone: Z9_�> , �'� P o c=, Fax: I diqq Email: c.1G{ f t� t / u i d � Signature: Agent (if different than Ap ican[) Name: Address: City/State: Zip: Phone: Fax: Email: Signature: Owner Name: e Address: 'zjoZas 4ji3 "'� > `7 City/State: 1^ V5��L4 t^ �� I Zip: Y' �7 Phone: Fax: Email: 5 � q!) Signature; Bulletin #003 —January 1, 2011 Page 1 of 1 k:\HandoutsWaster Land Use Application ♦ oA ♦♦ �� !♦ 1 EXISTING BULKHEADit I �► ; � St EXISTING TERRACED f YARD WITH 1 r ! SOME > 40% t1 SLOPE AREAS 0 1\ M, 23 EXISTING GARAGE NEIGHBOR a HOUSE & DECK PARTIAL SITE PLAN SCALE: 1" = 30' NEIGHBOR HOUSE & DECK VICINITY MAP; c XMAI,,NROF EXITING BASEMENT RAMBLER PROPOSED ADDITION OVER EXISTING PATIO EXISTING 3' �► LANDSCAPE WALL 5.50' PROPOSED PAVED DRI\ & PARKINC, PROPOSED DETACHED GARAGE M.H.WM 6"CONCRETE BULKHEAD EXISTING TERRACED YARD & ROCKERIES STRING LINE BETWEEN NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES SITE AREA: 37,496 sq ft BUILDING AREA COVERAGE ID Area BACKADDITION 800 CARPORT 183 DECK 675 DETACHED GARAGE 480 EXISTING GARAGE 357 EXISTING HOUSE 1,376 FRONT ADDITION 1618 4,489 sq ft PROPOSED DECK EXISTING 3 BEDROOM HOUSE _ PROPOSED ADDITION PROPOSED GARAGE �\ EXISTING • ? 'WAGON ` ' WHEEL' DRIVE WAY ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ SITE PLAN. SCALE: 1" =100' •;-t, rEB 09 1 3TY CAE FEDERAL W, BRADSHAW-HARKNESS REMODEL I ADDITION FALL ARCHITECTURAL`S'` ,D10 3124 SW 302nd PLACE Port Banner Road 9836 Port Orchard, Washington 9B367 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98023 David J. Fall, Architect Ata B r sruo�o OFl;ca 53) BSB--B 7 D 0 a LL ELUPORa ION RSHOW'ry i, THE PROPERTY OF raLL iO` 253BSB—B-00 CTURaL STUDIO ebla y�c�—��B3 1 OR u'a 1 ls)—E.— cu a' Jo.-of®C_il.OngarL c_r E P1 PRELIM. EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" PRELIM. NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" PRELIM. SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" GARAGE FLOOR AREAS ID Area GARAGE EXISTING 357 GARAGE NEW 480 837 sq ft tJ�I�IINU rLUUM^MC^O ID Area FLOOR E BSMT 883 FLOOR E MAIN 1,346 2,229 sq ft NEW FLOOR AREAS ID Area FLOOR N ADD 1 799 FLOOR N ADD 2 631 FLOOR N BSMT 253 1,683 sq ft TOTAL LIVING AREA; 3912 sq ft PRELIM. MAIN FLOOR SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" BRADSHAW-HARKNESS REMODEL / ADDITION 3124 SW 302nd PLACE FEDERAL WAY, WA 98023 � HT5 HERE veol STLOIo ILL FNF--i.LON nTu\ nSFu nu I.. TH6 PHOHeRT of PALL COM Hn CT F.-ALL ARCH IITECTURAL STUDIO B600 Banner Road S.E. Port Orchard, Vashington 98367 [)avid J. Fall, Ar chitect AIA •�lce -2531 35B-6700 1253/ -5B•-5ir"r -G9-3233 P2 that C !� N I V DTI! AV SW . RZ XI 8 0" ¢ 000T, sSON $3g� W €oj�t■� ;gym s66�. -�$gss s"s$ �rx f gp a I `Yi co 9 deyy GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION PROPOSED RENOVATION WORK 3124 SW 302ND PLACE FEDERAL WAY, WA 98023-2342 CLIENT: BARBARA BRADSHAW 3124 SW 302ND PLACE FEDERAL WAY, WA 98023-2342 PHONE: (253) 952 7011 BY: N.L. OLSON AND ASSOCIATESeINC. 2463 BETHEL AVE. SE PORT ORCHARD, WA 98366 (360) 876-2284. Project Number: 7603-10 pa% own Pho r yAT16-� �, . SUBJECT" O h - a 10N JANUARY 2011 RESUBMITTED MAR 0 2 2011 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CDS N.L. OLSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Engineering, Planning and Surveying 1-..J January 31, 2011 Project Number: 7603-10 Attn: Barbara Bradshaw 3124 SW 302nd Place Federal Way, WA 98023-2342 Phone: 253 952 7011 Subject: GEaTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION Proposed Building Renovation 3124 SW 302nd Place Federal Way, WA 98023-2342 King County Parcel Number: 0121039058 Dear Mrs. Bradshaw We are pleased to provide our Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, which provides the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical recommendations proposed addition and renovation work. Our services were completed in accordance with the scope of work outlined on page 6 of 6 of our Professional Services Agreement (PSA) between Barbara Bradshaw and NLO. Preliminary results of our subsurface investigation and geotechnical engineering analysis have been verbally provided to the project's Architecture prior to the completion of our geotechnical engineering investigation. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If we can be of further assistance or if you have any questions regarding this project, please contact our office. Sincerely, Wesley R. Johnson, P.E. Project Engineer P.O. Box 637o 2453 Bethel Avenue a Port Orchard, Washington 98366 Phone: 1(800) 755-1282 a Fax: (360) 876-1487 CADocumants and SettingslWJohnsonNy DocumentsTroject FoldeAT603 BradshawV603 Bradshaw Geo Raport.doc TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................1 SITELOCATION....................................................................................................................... 1 SITECONDITIONS.................................................................................................................... 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION..................................................................................................... 2 FIELD INVESTIGATION.............................................................................................................. 2 SiteSoil Conditions............................................................................................................ 2 SubsurfaceWater.............................................................................................................. 2 AVAILABLE GEOLOGIC AND SOILS INFORMATION....................................................................... 2 Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources...................................................... 2 Natural Resource Conservation Service............................................................................. 3 Federal Way Master Shoreline Program Geology Mapping ............................................... 3 LANDSLIDE HAZARD INDICATORS.............................................................................................. 3 SEISMICHAZARDS.................................................................................................................. 4 Federal Way Master Shoreline Program Geology Mapping ............................................... 5 HISTORICAL LANDSLIDE RESEARCH.......................................................................................... 5 SLOPERECONNAISSANCE....................................................................................................... 5 SEISMIC.................................................................................................................................. 5 Recommended Seismic Design Ground Shaking Parameters IBC — 2006/2009................ 6 SLOPESTABILITY.................................................................................................................... 6 SoilStrength Parameters.................................................................................................., 6 SlopeStability Results .................................... ....................................... ........ .,.................. 7 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................................. 7 AXIALSUPPORT SYSTEMS....................................................................................................... 8 PinPiles............................................................................................................................. 9 HelicalAnchors.................................................................................................................. 9 STRUCTURALFILL................................................................................................................ 10 GENERALFILL ............................... ................. ................... :................................................. 10 FLOORSLAB......................................................................................................................... 10 TEMPORARYSLOPES............................................................................................................ 10 SURFACE RUNOFF AND PERCHED GROUND WATER................................................................ 11 EROSIONCONTROL............................................................................................................... 11 REPORT LIMITATIONS.........................................................................................................12 LIST OF FIGURES VICINITYMAP............................................................................................................................. FIGURE 1 SITEPLAN................................................................................................................................... FIGURE 2 CROSSSECTION A-A................................................................................................................ FIGURE 3 NCRSMAPPING................................................................................................................ FIGURE 4 FEDERAL WAY MASTER SHORELINE PROGRAM (GEOLOGY) ........................................... FIGURE 5 FEDERAL WAY MASTER SHORELINE PROGRAM (GEOLOGIC HAZARD AREAS) ............. FIGURE 6 COASTALZONE ATLAS ..................................... ,...................................................................... FIGURE 7 APPENDIX A — Boring Logs APPENDIX B — Slope Stability Graphical Results GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION PROPOSED RENOVATION WORK 3124 SW 302ND PLACE FEDERAL WAY, WA 98023-2342 INTRODUCTION NLO's scope of work for the geotechnical engineering investigation included a site reconnaissance, review of available geologic site information, a subsurface exploration program, slope stability analysis, and our finding and conclusions summarized into this report. SITE LOCATION The property is located at the address of 3124 SW 302nd Place, Federal Way, WA 98023- 2342. Utilizing the Public Land Survey System (PLSS), the site is situated in the northeast quarter of Section 01, Township 21 North, and Range 3 East. The location of the property has been illustrated on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. SITE CONDITIONS The roughly 0.86 acre site is trapezoidal in shape with the long dimension of the site trending northwest to southeast. The property is bordered by single-family residences to the north and south, to the northwest by a steep descending slope that terminates into Dumas Bay and to the southeast by Southwest 302nd Place. The property has been previously developed with a single-family residence with an attached garage. The existing residence has a building footprint of about 1,750 square feet (sf). The client has informed NLO that a drain field has been installed immediately northwest of the single-family residence and south of the rock wall. The property has been illustrated on the Site Plan, Figure 2. The site's topography consists of relatively level lawn area and access road that descends from SW 302nd Place towards the residence with a slope gradient of about 5% to 10%. Between the existing residence and Dumas Bay, the slope increases in steepness and descends with gradients of about 15% to 80%. The slope height was on the order of 30 feet as measured along the base of the bulkhead to the existing residences lower finish floor elevation. NLO has provided a cross section that details the existing slope configuration on Cross Section A -A, Figure 3. For grade separation, an existing rock wall roughly centered on the residence extends towards the northwest a linear distance of about 55 to 60 feet. The rock wall has a max height of about 5 feet daylighting towards Dumas Bay. For shoreline protection, a 4 to 5 feet high bulkhead has been placed that extends across the width of the property. The site vegetation consists of lawn and landscaping. Along the northwest portion of the property, the vegetation along the slope has been maintained with a lawn area and low growing shrubs to provide an unobstructed view of Dumas Bay and beyond by the Puget Sound. P.O. Box 637. 2453 Bethel Avenue s Port Orchard, Washington 98366 Phone: 1(800) 755-1282 • Fax: (360) 876-1487 CADocuments and SettingslWJohnsonVAy DocumentsTroject Folder17603 BredshaM7603 Bradshaw Goo Report.doe Project No. 7603-10 January31, 2011 Paae No. 2 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION As presently conceived, the site is proposed for development with new addition and renovation work on the existing building. The new addition will increase the current building footprint by about 760 square feet and incorporate a new foundation system beyond the existing residence to the northwest. The elevation of the new additions upper and lower floor are el x and el x respectively. NLO understands the building's existing foundation will be utilized for remodeled sections of the existing structure. Cuts and fills of about 5 feet are anticipated for the new addition. We have shown the new construction on the Site Plan, Figure 2. Cross section A -A, Figure 3, illustrates the proposed slope configuration in regards to the existing and proposed construction. FIELD INVESTIGATION The site soil conditions were explored on December 16, 2010, by drilling two borings. NLO had the drilling contractor advanced the borings down to about 15.5 feet and 26.5 feet below current site grades, which were both drilled with an Acker. Drilling was subcontracted through Geologic Drill. The approximate boring locations have been shown on the attached Site Plan, Figure 2. The boring logs have been included in Appendix A of this report. Site Soil Conditions - 1W In general, our subsurface exploration revealed ve loose to loose, poorly graded sand (SP) and poorly graded sand with silt (SP-SM) in the per 5 to 20 feet of our borings. The layer of sand was deeper near the r si e2,e,, d da ighted towards the shoreline. The sand was underlain by elastic silt (MH), a"efey F49 nd silt (ML). The elastic silt and lean clay had a relative density that ranged frorr soft to stiff. The silt encountered towards the termination depth of boring B-2 was a 4YReA4l.c4 ror a more detailed description of the subsurface conditions, please refer to our boring logs in Appendix A. Subsurface Water During drilling operations, subsurface water was encountered in boring B-1 at roughly 19 feet below ground surface (bgs) and in Boring B-2 at roughly 5 feet bgs. The subsurface water was perched in the sand above the clay and silt. AVAILABLE GEOLOGIC AND SOILS INFORMATION Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources The Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resource (WDGER), Geologic Map of Washington — Northwest Quadrant, dated 2002, indicates that the site is mapped as Quaternary sediments, dominantly glacial drift and includes alluvium. Glacial till consists of an unsorted, unstratified, highly compacted mixture of clay, silt, sand, gravel and boulders deposited by glacial ice. A review of the Department of Natural Resources "Geologic Map of Washington State" by Eric Schuster, dated 2005, indicates that the sites area is mapped as Pleistocene continental glacial drift (Qgd), which may have taken place 18,000 to 30,000 years ago. P.O. Box 637. 2453 Bethel Avenue + Port Orchard, Washington 98366 Phone: 1(800) 755-1282 • Fax: (360) 876-1487 Project No. 7603-10 January 31, 2011 Page No. 3 Natural Resource Conservation Service The USDA, Natural Resource Conservation Service (NCRS), Web Soil Survey, classifies the site's native soils as Indianola fine grained sands, 4 to 15 percent slopes and Coastal Beaches. For more detailed soils information of this area, please see the NCRS mapping illustrated on Figure 4. In the following, NLO has provided the NCRS soil descriptions of the property. (Inc) Indianola Fine Grained Sands, 4 to 15 percent slopes, the NCRS indicates that runoff of the soil is slow to medium and the hazard of erosion is slight to moderate. The soil is moderately well drained and permeability is rapid. (Cb) Coastal Beaches, These beaches are above the mean tide, but are swept by storm waves. Most areas have no vegetation, although some areas have a sparse cover of beach grasses. The NCRS has also classified the soils in this area as beach sand, which is a medium to course grained sand, pea to pebble size gravel with shell fragments. Federal Way Master Shoreline Pro ram Geoloply Mapping Federal Way Master Shoreline Program, Geology, Dated May 2006, Figure 5, indicates the property is comprised of both Vashon Recessional Outwash (Qvrs) and Mass Wastage deposits (Qmw). (Qvrs) Geology mapping for this area describes material as recessional course grained lucustrine deposits deposited during the Vashon Stade that took place roughly 13,000 to 20,000 years ago. (Qmw) A linear feature paralleling the shoreline has been described as an area of mass wasting that has or in the process of occurring during the Holocene and Pleistocene periods. Mass wasting generally occurs as material is redistribute down slope by past soil movement. During our field work, NLO did not observe evidence of slope instability consistent with previous soil movement or mass wasting. In our opinion, the slope area delineated on the geologic mapping as mass wasting appears stable. LANDSLIDE HAZARD INDICATORS Landslide hazards are identified as areas that present potential dangers to public health and safety, to prevent the acceleration of natural geological hazards, to address off site environmental impacts, and to minimize the risk to the property owner or adjacent property owners from development activities. These areas may be identified by the presence of any of the following indicators: A) Areas with any indications of earth movement suck as debris slides, earth flows, slumps and rock falls; B) Areas with artificial oversteepened or unengineered slopes, i.e. cuts or fills; C) Areas with slopes containing soft or potentially liquefiable soils; P.O. Box 637.2453 Bethel Avenue a Port Orchard, Washington 98366 Phone: 1(800) 755-1282 • Fax: (360) 876-1487 Project No. 7603-10 January 31, 2011 Page No. 4 D) Areas oversteepened or otherwise unstable as a result of stream incision, stream bank erosion, and undercutting by wave action; E) Slopes greater than fifteen percent and having the following: (i) Hillsides intersecting geologic contacts with a relatively permeable sediment overlying a relatively impermeable sediment or bedrock (e.g. sand overlying clay); and (ii) Springs or groundwater seepage. F) Any area with a slope of forty percent or steeper and with a vertical relief of ten or more feet except areas composed of consolidated rock. A slope is delineated by establishing its toe and top and measured by averaging the inclination over at least ten feet of vertical relief. G) The areas identified by the Coastal Zone Atlas, as: • Unstable — "U" • Unstable Old Slides — "UOS" • Unstable Recent Slides — "URS" ■ Intermediate Slopes — "I" • Modified Slopes — "M" Note: of the landslide hazard indicators listed above, NLO has observed sand overlying clay and a steep slope of 40 percent or greater with a vertical relief of 10 feet or more. NLO has addressed these landslide hazard indicators in the slope reconnaissance section of this report. SEISMIC HAZARDS General seismic hazards include: surface faulting; ground shaking; earthquake -related ground failure and landslides; lateral spreading; liquefaction; lurch cracks; rockfalls; differential settlement; regional uplift; seiches; and/or tsunamis. NLO has reviewed the following items identified below to determine if the property of interest could be classified as Seismic Hazard Areas or areas susceptible to ground failure: • Areas with geologic faults Deep road fills and areas of poorly compacted artificial fill Areas with artificially steepened slopes (i.e., old gravel pits) • Postglacial stream, lake or beach sediments River deltas • Areas designated as potential Landslide Hazard Areas • Bluff Areas • Areas underlain by potentially liquefiable soils USGS mapping of the area indicates the Seattle Fault resides roughly 2.5 miles to the north. This fault is capable of magnitude 7.1 seismic event with the most recent seismic event from this fault occurring about 1100 years ago. In our opinion, the potential for liquefaction during a seismic event appears low, based on the encountered soil and subsurface water conditions. NLO has provided further evaluation of slope stability later in this report. P.O. Box 637- 2453 Bethel Avenue • Port Orchard, Washington 98366 Phone: 1(800) 755-1282 + Fax: (360) 876-1487 Project No. 7603-10 January 31, 2011 Page No. 5 Federal Way Master Shoreline Program Geology Mapping Federal Way Master Shoreline Program, Geologic Hazardous Areas, (1 B) Dumas Bay and Part of (1A) Puget Sound Reach, Figure 6, indicates the property is an erosion hazard. Erosion hazard areas are described as, areas underlain by soils that are subject to severe erosion when disturbed. Such soils include, but are not limited to, those for which potential for erosion is identified in the Soil Survey performed by the USDA Natural Resource Conservation. The NCRS indicates the Indianola Fine Grained Sands, 4 to 15 percent slopes, as a slight to moderate erosion hazard for the property. It is our opinion that the footprint of the new addition, about 760 square feet and wood decks, will have a minor influence on the present potential for erosion along slope areas located between the shoreline and existing residence. It is our experience that this risk of erosion can be mitigated through normal landscaping and surface runoff control. NLO has discussed erosion control measures later in this report. HISTORICAL LANDSLIDE RESEARCH A review of 'Coastal Zone Atlas of King County, Washington" Department of Ecology, Web Based Mapping Services was performed in conjunction with preparing report. Based on mapping of this area, the property has been classified as stable (S). Stable slopes are generally less than 15 percent but can include areas of steeper slopes that are stable due to low groundwater concentration or competent bedrock. The stable slope designation also includes areas underlain by weak areas such as peat, which are stable because they have no significant slope. We have included a Coastal Zone Atlas mapping for this area as shown on Figure 7. SLOPE RECONNAISSANCE As part of our fieldwork, the slope areas comprising the areas both on an off the site were examined for indications of instability. NLO has observed the slope area for the previously referenced landslide hazard indicators mentioned on page 3 of this report. At the time of our December 16, 2010 slope reconnaissance, the slope area located between the existing residence and the shoreline of Dumas Bay appeared stable. Our findings of a stable slope condition are consistent with Coastal Zone Atlas mapping of this property that has designated this area as stable. NLO has provided further in depth evaluation of the slopes stability later in this report. SEISMIC NLO has reviewed the IBC for seismic design criteria for the proposed construction. The site's ground acceleration was determined from the 2002 USGS Earthquake Hazard Program for the Conterminous 48 States. The PGA was based on the following location 47.331593°N Latitude and 122.374452°W Longitude. The peak ground acceleration (PGA) for our slope stability analysis was derived from the United States Geologic Survey, Earthquake Hazards Program — National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project. P.O. Box 637o 2453 Bethel Avenue + Port Orchard, Washington 98366 Phone: 1(800) 755-1282 • Fax: (360) 876-1487 Project No. 7603-10 January 31, 2011 Paae No. 6 Seismic Ground Shaking Summa Probability Of Approximate Probabilistic Peak ground Spectral Acceleration (g) Exceedence Return Period motion values (PGA) Period (sec) 2% in 50 year event 2475 years 0.5m S. =1.258 S, =0.430 For the area located by 47.331593°N Latitude and-122.374452°W Longitude, the peak ground acceleration rate (PGA), PGA=0.5649g, was utilized for the 2 percent probability of exceedence in 50 year event. The maximum horizontal ground acceleration utilized for slope stability analysis was determined as indicated (Kh= PGA12.5) or Kh=0.664912.5=0.226. Recommended Seismic Desi n Ground Shakina Parameters IBC — 2006/2009 Seismic Parameters (2006/2009 Values Mapped Spectral Acceleration Short Period (Ss) 1.258 Mapped Spectral Acceleration For One Second (S,) 0.430 Site Class (Seismic Soil Profile) D Short period Site Coefficient (Fe) 1.000 1-second Site Coefficient (F„) 1.557 MCE Spectral Response Acceleration for short period (SMs=S5xFa) 1.258 MCE Spectral Response Acceleration for one second (SM,=S,xFv) 0.6751 Design Spectral Response Acceleration for Short Period (SnS=2/3xSMs) 0.8387 Design Spectral Response Acceleration for one second (SQ1=2/3xSM1) 0.4501 Design Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA=SDS x 0.4) 0,= SLOPE STABILITY Slope stability analyses were performed utilizing (PCSTABL7-Version 2.0) slope stability computer program. The slope stability method used was the Simplified Bishop Method of Slices, which provides failure surfaces and the associated factors -of -safety (FS) against slope movement. The FS is defined as the ratio of shear strength (the frictional resistance and soil cohesion resisting the down slope movement) to shear stress - (gravitational forces that initiate slope movement) or FS = Shear Strength/Shear Stress. A FS equal to 1.0 is considered equilibrium and a FS less than 1.0 indicates failure. Our slope stability analysis utilized the simplified bishop's method of circles. The minimum static factor of safety is 1.5. The minimum seismic factor of safety is 1.1. Soil Stren th Parameters The soil strength parameters were developed based on our experience with similar soil conditions, n-values from drilling operations, and published values for sand and glacially consolidated soils. The soil strength values utilized in our slope analysis for the cross section have been provided in the following. P.O. Box 637. 2453 Bethel Avenue • Port Orchard, Washington 98366 Phone: 1(800) 755-1282 • Fax: (360) 876-1487 Project No. 7603-10 January 31, 2011 Pane No. 7 SOIL STRENGTH PARAMETERS Material Typo Soil cCassification Cohesion Soil Friction D rses Density ` 1 Beach Area Sand and Gravel 0 35 135m) /1 135s 2 Silt ML 600 38 140 m /142 s 3 CI Lean Clay 350 35 135(m) /142 s 4 __f2g[VREaqt Sand SP and SP-SM 0 33 115(m) /135 s *The degree of soil moisture is indicated by Moist (m) and Saturated (s) for the slope stability analysis as shown above. Slope Stability Results For global stability concerns, NLO has analyzed the slope area between the existing residence and shoreline. NLO performed the slope stability analyses for the present slope configuration and with the new addition for both static and Quasi -static analysis. The wood decks were not modeled, we do not anticipate an adverse impact to the slope area if constructed. The results of our slope stability analyses have been presented in the slope stability results table presented below. Slope Stability Results Location Static FS >1.50 "Seismic FS>1.10 Cross Section A -A -(Existing Condition 1.840 1.06 Cross Section A -A New Addition with wall between levels 1.890 1.08 ultirs Cross Section A -A mle steps raded between floo 1.980 1.10 "NLO utilized the Quasi -static analyses with a horizontal coefficient of KP=0.226. NLO has provided our determination of the horizontal coefficient, Kh, previously discussed in this report. The overall slope stability under the present site conditions and proposed constructions appears sufficient for both static and Quasi -static analysis. Our slope stability analysis indicates an adequate factor of safety for the proposed addition. Based on the existing and proposed, the new addition will increase the slope overall stability. The cross section illustrating the slope and slope area utilized in our slope stability analysis is shown on Cross Section A -A, Figure 3. The graphical results for our slope stability have been presented in Appendix B. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS Following our review of City Of Federal Way's, Chapter 19,160, Geologic Hazardous Areas, we conclude that the slope area overlooking Dumas Bay is a landslide/erosion hazard area due to; • Geologic mapping for the area indicated steeper portions of the site as being an erosion hazard area. Geologic hazardous areas mapping indicates steep slopes of 40% or greater as a landslide hazard area. • Federal Way Master Shoreline Program, Geology, indicating Mass Wastage deposits along the shoreline as a potential landslide hazard area. P.O. Box 637■ 2453 Bethel Avenue a Port Orchard, Washington 98366 Phone: 1(800) 755-1282 . Fax: (360) 876-1487 Project No. 7603-10 January 31, 2011 Paae No. 8 Slopes greater than fifteen percent with geologic contacts comprised of a relatively permeable sediment overlying relatively impermeable sediment. NLO has addressed the previously identified landslide hazard indicators and provided an opinion that the slope area located between the existing residence and the shoreline of Dumas Bay appeared stable. Based on our fieldwork, slope stability analyses, and encountered glacial consolidated soil conditions, we conclude that large scale sliding or deep-seated rotational failures between the existing residence and Dumas Bay, resulting from the proposed addition and deck areas appears unlikely. Erosion or slope instability arising from construction of the proposed addition and decks on this property or adjacent properties, in our opinion, appears unlikely. NLO has concerns with potential differential settlement between of the new addition's foundation and existing residence's foundation based on the encountered loose sand soil conditions. In order, to minimize settlement between the existing and proposed structures, NLO has included recommendations for axial anchor support described in more detail below. In the event that the structural layout or grading information assumed in this report is inconsistent with the final design, the geotechnical engineer should be notified so that we may update this writing as applicable. NLO recommends the geotechnical engineer report should be implemented into the design plans and specification prepared by both the architect and structural engineering. AXIAL SUPPORT SYSTEMS NLO has performed a subsurface exploration with a boring roughly centered in the proposed area of the new addition to better define the underlying soil conditions. The boring revealed loose soil conditions down to 25 feet below current site. At roughly 27 feet, glacially consolidated soils were encountered. Based on the encountered loose saturated granular soil conditions that underlay the site. NLO has expressed concern about settlement and have recommended axial anchor support for the new addition. The new additions strip and interior columns loads can be carried via grade beam onto the pin piles. The pin piles load will transfer the building loads down to the underlying glacially consolidated soils. This method of foundation support should be able to mitigate settlement. Due to the slenderness of the pin piles or helical anchor, no lateral pile capacity should be assumed. Lateral loads can be resisted by passive soil pressures acting against the buried portion of the foundation and grade beams. This will require the foundation or grade beams to be backfilled with structural fill. For passive earth pressure, the available resistance can be computed using an equivalent fluid pressure of 250 PCF. The lateral resistance value is an allowable value with a factor of safety of 1.5. As movement of the foundation element is required to mobilize full passive resistance, the passive resistance should be neglected if such movement is not acceptable. We anticipate settlement with either the pin pile or helical anchor should be less than one inch if placed per our recommendations. If settlement occurs, it should be elastic in nature and should occur essentially as the loads are applied during construction, P.O. Box 637.2453 Bethel Avenue o Port Orchard, Washington 98366 Phone: 1(800) 755-1282 • Fax: (360) 876-1487 Project No. 7603-10 January 31, 2011 Paae No. 9 Pin Piles Based on the provided building floor plan, NLO is also recommending that the floor slab in the area of the new addition should be structurally supported on pin piles. In lieu of a structurally supported floor, a wood joist floor could also be implemented. Please note that pin pile and pipe pile are used interchangeably in this report. Based on the anticipated depths that may be required to embed the pin piles and buckling concerns, NLO is recommending 3 to 4 inch diameter pin piles for support of the new additions strip and column footing areas. NLO 'does not advice the use of 2 inch pin piles for the new additions foundation system or for use with the structurally support slab areas. However, 2-inch pin piles can be utilized for wood deck support. NLO will provide pin pile embedment and capacity for the 2-inch pin piles at the client's request. If the client is willing to tolerate deck settlement, Sonotube could be an alternative to pin piles. NLO advises against pier pads for the decks foundation support based on the loose sand soil conditions. Pin piles consist of 3 and 4 inch diameter pipe driven with a jack hammer. We have provided a chart below that provides the allowable capacity for the pin piles and hammer sizes. We recommend that the 3 and 4 inch pin piles should consist of schedule 40 galvanized pipe. Pin piles are typically cut in 5 to 10 feet lengths with the ends cut perpendicular to the pipe. As the pin pile is advanced slip couplers are added between the pipe sections. In order to achieve the pin piles allowable capacities please see the refusal criteria in the table below identified as Pin Pile Hammer Size and Refusal Criteria. Pin Pile Hammer Size and Refusal Criteria Hammer Allowable Pin Pile Diameter Size Refusal Criteria. Pile Pound Ca acit Less than one inch penetration for ten 3 inch 750 seconds of continuous driving at one 6 tons (Schedule 40) thousand blows a minute for three c cles Less than one inch penetration for ten 4 inch 850 seconds of continuous driving at one 10 tons (Schedule 40) thousand blows a minute for three cycles Based on previous experience with the fine-grained soils encountered below the outwash material, NLO is recommending that pile verifications test should be performed if refusal criteria cannot be achieved. NLO will provide testing procedures for pin pile placement at the time of installation. Helical Anchors In lieu of pin piles, helical anchors could also be considered. For preliminary design purposes, an allowable axial capacity of 25 kip can be used. NLO recommends that a proprietary contractor should be consulted to assist with selection of SS5 and SS150 helical anchor system to verify required axial capacity. NLO will provide additional information in regards to the helical anchors system at the client's request. P.O. Box 637- 2453 Bethel Avenue • Port Orchard, Washington 98366 Phone: 1(800) 755-1282 • Fax: (360) 876-1487 Project No. 7603-10 January31, 2011 Page No. 10 STRUCTURAL FILL Structural fill is defined as compacted fill placed under buildings, foundations or along grade beams that consist of free draining gravelly sand having a maximum size of 1-1/2 inches and With not more than 5.0% fines, material passing a U.S. No. 200 sieve. All imported fill material should conform to the above recommendations regardless of the weather. All structural fill should be placed on a firm, properly prepared subgrade. Structural fill should be placed in 8 inch thick layers, conditioned to a moisture content suitable for compaction, and compacted to 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D-1557. GENERAL FILL General fill consist of on -site granular soils such as sand with a fines content greater 5 percent. This material can be used in lieu of structural fill if compaction can be achieved typically during the dryer time of the year April through October. If fill is to be placed between November and March, NLO strongly recommends utilizing structural fill material. General fill shall be placed on a firm, properly prepared subgrade. The fill material should be placed in layers approximately 8 inches in thickness, conditioned to a moisture content suitable for compaction, and compacted to 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D-1557. FLOOR SLAB As proposed, the new additions perimeter foundation elements and interior columns will be axially supported on pin piles or helical anchors, which should minimize the associated settlement. However, the new additions floor slab if supported on native soil could be susceptible to the same movement the underlying ground undergoes. Based on the relatively small footprint of the new additions, NLO is recommending a floor slab supported on axial anchors or a wood joist floor or combination of both. TEMPORARY SLOPES As a preliminary guideline for temporary slopes less than 10 feet in height, we recommend temporary slopes be made no steeper than 1HAV for the dense or stiff to very stiff soil condition and no steeper than 1.5H:1 V in medium dense soils or structural fill placed in a manner described earlier in this report. For temporary cut slopes in existing fill, topsoil, or loose materials or over 10 feet in height we recommend temporary slopes no steeper than 1 1/2HAV for the full height of the cut. Temporary slopes or excavations should be benched as required by safety regulations in effect at the time of construction. The provided temporary slope recommendations are for native soils and fill materials; flatter slopes may be required in wet weather or if soil conditions other than those previously described are encountered. The contractor should be aware that slope height, slope inclination, and excavation depths (including utility trench excavations) should in no case exceed those specified in local, state, or federal safety regulations; e.g., OSHA Health and Safety Standards for Excavations, 29 CFR Part 1926, or successor regulations. Such regulations are strictly enforced and, if not followed, the owner, the contractor, or the earthwork or utility subcontractors could be liable for substantial penalties. The contractor should be made responsible for the stability of all excavations and slopes during construction because they are continually on site and can observe the stability of the exposed soils. In addition, the contractor should be prepared to shore unstable slope area and provide shoring as required by local, state, or federal laws or P.O. Box 637Q 2453 Bethel Avenue Y Port Orchard, Washington 98366 Phone: 1(800) 755-1282 . Fax: (360) 876-1487 Project No. 7603-10 January 31, 2011 Pane No. 11 codes. The provision of shoring design recommendations is beyond the authorized scope of this report. All temporary cuts and excavations should be sloped or shored in accordance with local, state and federal requirements. SURFACE RUNOFF AND PERCHED GROUND WATER Only minor storm water related problems are anticipated if site grading and preparation are undertaken during the normally drier portions of the year. If site work is undertaken during wet weather it should be expected that the near surface silty and fine-grained soils would become over -saturated and unworkable. If the site work is undertaken during wet weather the contractor should be fully prepared ,to deal with soil and water problems normally encountered in these materials during wet weather work, including the filtering of runoff, as needed to prevent the siltation of down slope areas. To aid in minimizing potential erosion, it is recommended that the site not be stripped and left without erosion protection for an extended period of time prior to the actual start of construction and/or landscaping. Silt fencing and other erosion control devices and measures may be required to control water runoff over slope areas and sediment transport off the site. It should be anticipated that perched water flows or water flows developed during periods of wet weather may occur in excavations as shallow as one to two feet below the existing site grades or atop siltier zones at deeper depths. Methods that can be utilized to control groundwater seepage into excavations include shallow drainage ditched excavated along the base of the excavation. The free flow of water toward or over steep slopes is to be avoided due to potential erosion and slope stability concerns. Additionally, all runoff from roofs, driveways, patios and hard surfaced areas should be intercepted, collected and disposed of away from structures and steep slopes, and discharged where the water will not effect down slope structures, walls, or properties. EROSION CONTROL It is our experience that this risk of erosion can be mitigated through normal landscaping and the control of surface runoff. During construction and until fully surfaced and/or landscaped, the exposed site soils may be subject to some erosion. Erosion of the exposed soils would be most noticeable during periods of intense rainfall and may be controlled by the use of normal erosion control measures, i.e., silt fences, hay bales, mulching, control ditches or diversion trenching, and contour furrowing. In a disturbed condition the site soils may be eroded by channelized water or storm runoff from sheet flow. Therefore, it is recommended that all site preparation and excavation work be completed during the normally drier portion of the year. During periods of heavy rainfall, ditching should be used to divert water away from stripped areas and visqueen should be used to cover the slopes and soil stockpiles to aid in preventing excessive surface erosion. This covering also aids in preventing infiltration of water into the unprotected soils. All disturbed soil areas and slopes should be replanted with fast-growing, deep-rooted grass, shrubs and other ground cover as soon after final grading as possible. If the vegetation is not fully established prior to the on set of wet weather, the slopes should be covered with visqueen to aid in preventing excessive erosion and water infiltration. P.O. Box 637• 2453 Bethel Avenue • Port Orchard, Washington 98366 Phone: 1(800) 755-1282 . Fax: (360) 876-1487 Project No. 7603-10 January 31, 2011 Paae No. 12 It should be anticipated that there could be a number of additional site development or construction problems, particularly if the earthwork has not been completed and the site properly protected at the onset of wet weather. It is recommended that a representative of the firm make periodic inspections of all excavations and slopes to provide early recognition of potential instability and erosion concerns and provide recommendations to mitigate those concerns. REPORT LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared for the client regarding the subject property. Information presented in this report has been collected and interpreted in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions, and in accordance with sound and generally accepted principles consistent with normal consulting practice. No other warranty, expressed or implied, including (but not limited to) any warranty or merchantability or fitness for a particular use has been made. In the event that change in the nature, design, or location of the proposed construction is made, or any physical changes to the site occur, recommendations are not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed by NLO and conclusions of this report are modified or verified in writing. NLO should be retained to provide geotechnical services during construction. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. We do not accept responsibility for the performance of the foundation or earthwork unless we are retained to review the construction drawings and specifications, and to provide construction observation. Any site involving sloping terrain has inherent risk of earth movement. As a result, the CLIENT agrees to accept full responsibility for all risks associated with steep slopes. The CLIENT acknowledges that this risk cannot be completely eliminated and that engineering and geologic analysis is intended to reduce the inherent risk associated with slopes. No amount of geotechnical engineering and geologic analysis can provide a guarantee of stable slopes. Geotechnical engineering and geologic analyses are based heavily on subjective interpretation, professional judgment, and opinion regarding the physical conditions at a specific site. Subsurface conditions are only documented at those points where samples were taken and interpolation and extrapolation is necessary between and around sample locations. Conditions can vary between samples and can change over time due to natural processes and/or human activity. Analyses and recommendations provided in this report are based in part upon the data obtained from the subsurface exploration. P.O. Box 6370 2453 Bethel Avenue + Port Orchard, Washington 98366 Phone: 1(800) 755-1282 9 Fax: (360) 876-1487 �M, ap of 3124 SW 302nd PI, Federal Way, WA 98023-2342 Page 1 of 1 Map of 3124 SW 302nd PI, Federal Way, WA 98023- 2342 When using any driving directions or map, it's a good idea to do a reality check and make sure the road still exists, watch out for construction, and follow all traffic safety precautions. This is only to be used as an aid in planning. l Ic)7 'IL m Af http://maps.yahoo.com/print?mvt=m&ioride=us&tp=1 &stx=&fcat=&frat=&clat=47.2985... 11/12/2010 --rl- SCALE 1 inch = 30 feet i°£ - 4a.6 yor" o O2 �9.9 1 Gs Q 11 S 1 � t 2�• Ct7 1 i cn C `y " T i4 �. ro Fir I m as Cr 1 a 3 En III]in �g� 19r 5 • \9' _ 1,H " R ;peat:..: Step Y 9 14 f2 D �Cbd p /� r `i? I�' _i'satltiRi'�li i!C` Sa{' f2 52 JIy �• a fr�y.b +S 7 ', il. pI _C(yU 190�i2 O 4t=_a.'SS! �1 1.0 3S- I h 1 f .... _ ,AiIstep� �4I � '• 'tiff - � [[[}}} jl0.(� E Oc- ik RetainingRetaining wall p3 LBrick All Retaining wall Rockery Yard light �a Fau_et•` Yard light r f I � lot Lo • i7 .. •� '.. fi., SITE PLAN DEVELOPED FROM DRAWING PROVIDED BY CLEINT AND KITSAP COUNTY LIDAR INFORMATION.y�� n'�'' •��'�' REwsfaNs BY DATE AFIGURE 2 - SITE PLAN eY DESCRIPTION DESIGNED, A=J N.L.01son&Associotes,Inc. 3124 SW 302ND PLACE GRA1hT4 Engineering. Planning and Surveying •,�.rox., CHECKED FEDERAL WAY, WA 98023 APPROVED (360) 876-2284 ACCEPTED 2453 Betlrel Juva, P.O. Box 637, Pat Ord" WA U366 FOR: BARBARA BRADSAW 3124 SW 302NO PLACE FEDERAL WAY, WA98023 SCALE AS VOW DATE. fE8 it. 2011 JOB NUMBER 7603 1 SCALE 1 inch = 10 feet 80 Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pier. Desc. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Surface _ No. (pcfl (pcO (PSO (deg) No. beach 1 135.0 135.0 0.0 35.0 0 Slit 2 140.0 142.0 500.0 38.0 0 C181 SNB 135.0 142.0 350.0 35.0 0 Sand 4 115.0 135.0 0.0 33.0 W1 .E 40 20 10.2 0_ 0 20 40 SITE PLAN DEVELOPED FROM DRAWING PROVIDED BY CLEINT. c REVISIONS ATE A BY aESMPTION DEIGNED -N.L.Olson&Associates,lnc. DRAM Engineering. Planning and Surveying(360) 876-2284 APPR0VE0 ACCEPTEO 2453 BACI kmw% P.O. Sox 637. Part Qdlald, WA WM 1 iNfe-4 V'L C" SAS ?l1a{.a W- X-5ec 75 Q � 0 m z 0 A .p Ci s D tAk1F44,eXJ--;*4 5 9 _ "oorly Graded SAND and poorly graded sand with 10 —10 'ilt wd7Wadad Swwd: 15 _ 9 ul h t 323 dsi �i 0 lb � w5m�z = 115 lbW3 Oily aid .id. Sit sal; friction 34.5 deg cult -1725 RON" 25 —27 Odes =d31 AsdP2 0 135lhs" Wt we lbboll G • 134lb&*-3 30 65 Gray S lit with sand, very dense, moist sit sa fik6m.3e ft Mill =3750 W&W2 cd-- W7 Wsdl^2 35 65 0-140lbs" 60 80 -3 x-se, -- FIGURE JV- 61% PhAN 3124 SW 302ND PLACE FEDERAL WAY, WA 98023 100 FOR: BARBARA BRADSAW 3124 SW 302ND PLACE FEDERAL WAY, WA 98023 120 SCAEE: AS WOW DAME FW It, pOli doe NUMBM 7603 .OZ .ZZ .ZU .ZC.ZZ .ZZL r M Y Y- .OZ.ZZ.ZZI 00 Y M N O1 r m 0- z sound e� II� _. -- j i X n, St r -' Oth - QVt Hart • s '� • - � W_ _ - •'�� - .. , "� " � Ito Key to Geologic Units: -_ Q -� -. af-Artificial fill -Gravel, sand, silt, concrete, other materials - m -Modified land (Holocene) st SU •_ `r ' Qal- Alluvium (Holocene) _ Qyt Qb- Beach deposits (Holocene) Of - Alluvial fan deposits (Holocene) = - [vt QIs- Landslide deposits (Holocene) 356t - Qmw- Mass -wastage deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene) - Goat -Alluvium (Holocene) _ Qob - Olympia beds of Minard and Booth (1988) (Pleistocene)-- - Qpf - Sedimentary deposits pre -Fraser glaciation age (Pleistooerte) + — -- — Qpfc - Sedimentary deposits pre -Fraser glaciation age (Pleistocene)__- ^ - Qpog - Glacial deposits • -- _ . _ Qpagc - Coarse-gralned deposits-- -- - 4� Qpogf - Fine-grained deposits Qpogt - Till deposits • _ Qpon - Nonglacial deposits p Qr - Reversely magnetized deposits (Pleistocene) k, Om - Reversely magnetized nonglacial deposits Ilrnrorpvrated Ova - Advance outwash deposits Plerce:Ca+irrfy -- Qva - Till Qvie - Eskers Qvr- Recessional outwash deposits Qvrt - Recessional lacustrine deposits Qvm - Recessional coarse -grained lacustrine deposits Qvt-Till _QVI Qw- Wetland deposits (Holocene) ` ,I I P Kent N. Fdpra/',Wq - jteniiar- ' • - -: - )r)W.4 or3 Rrep _ �••1r^`3 -• .. j � T 61 0 ,i N F o Five Mile. rnW ' Lake: � Figure 4 Federal Way Shoreline Master Program Geology General Legend: IQal/Qb/Qf/ QIs/Qmw/goal Qpf/Qpff/Qpfc []Qpog/Qpogcl Qpogf/Qpogt MQr/Qrn []Qva/Qvr/Qvrl/Qvrs E]Qvi/Qvie/Qvt JQW Eaf/m L Shorelines: Regulated ❑ Shoreline Puget Sound East Puget Sound - 0 Dumas Bay Puget Sound West Steel Lake Star Lake Lake Dolloff © Lake Geneva 0 North Lake 0 Lake Killarney 0 Five Mile Lake Scale: City of Federal Way 0 0.5 1 Mil �� 33325 8th Ave S PO Box 9718 N Federal Way, WA 98063 Map Date: May, 2006 (253) 835-7000 Map Source: USGS CITY OF Federal Way This map is accompanied by NO warranties, and is simply a graphic representation. For more information, visit us on ,the web: www.cityoffederalway.com 71 a m R leap Output Page 1 of 1 Rj 7 https://fortress.wa.gov/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=coastal atlas ov&... 1/28/2011 APPENDIX A DISCUSSION OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION METHODOLGY BORING LOG The site soil conditions were explored on December 16, 2010, by drilling two borings. NLO had the drilling contractor extend the borings down to about 15.5 feet and 26.5 feet below current site grades, which were both drilled with an Acker. Drilling was subcontracted through Geologic Drill. The approximate boring location has been shown on the attached Site Plan, Figure 2. The boring log has been included in the appendix. Standard Penetration Test: During drilling operation the split spoon sampler was used to determine soil strength parameters and recover soil samples. The dimension of the split tube sampler is 2" outside diameter x 1 3/8" inside diameter x 18" long. The sampler is driven into the soil with a 140 pound hammer dropped a vertical distance of 30 inches. Soil strength parameters are related to the cumulative number of blows (N-Value) necessary to drive the sampler tube one foot into the soil. Prior to determining the N value, the sampler is driven 6 inches into the undisturbed soil. The samples recovered from the split spoon are suitable for atterberg, gradation, and moisture content tests. Water Drill tube „rport /-rod 51 mm = 1 35 mm =1.38 in. 36 mm =1.42 In. (fo 38 mm) Check valve tin. , i t ([ i 76mm-31n. i 460mm-181n. 150mm=6in. Figure 1. Diagram of a typical split -spoon sampler used for a standard penetration test (Sowers, 1979). Stratification lines designating the interface between soil types in subsurface exploration logs represent approximate boundaries. The transition between materials may be gradual. The test pit logs and related information depicts conditions only at the specific locations and at the particular time designated on the logs. The depths represented on our logs were referenced to present site grades encountered during our subsurface exploration work. A Aii'='A N. L.Olson&ASSOCiaierS, Inc. Engineering, Planning and Surveying 2453 BETHEL AVENUE P.O. BOX 637 PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON 98366-0637 Job NIumbor Logged By Subsurface En 7603-10 1 WRJ start Date 12/1e12010 General 0r lif 2 USCS NOW SYMBOL 5P-SM 1 2 B1, 2.5 ft 3 .± 4 S B1,5.0ft L,' 6 t 7 B1, 7.5 ft` ,. 8 SP 10 B1, 10.0 ft 11 12 13 14 15 B1, 15.0 ft SP-5M 16 - 17 18 19 .. 20 61, 20.0 ftrEndTime CL Start Time 08001030 Dirt ng Contww Operdlors Name Geologic Drill wade Betlaf Equipment Acker Blow per (R) (N-vakie) 4 9 11 10 B/SING LOG BARBARA BRADSHAW 3124 SW 302ND PLACE FEDERAL WAY, WA 98023 Ioralf(M Drilling Gtoun3 Surleca Eievalicm Bodrg: - 1 1 End dale 1211t3l2010 35 Surface ConclMo s: SURFACE CONDITIONS LAWN AREA WITH A ROOT DEPTH MoistureContent OF ABOUT 2 TO 3 INCHES (`�) FILL?: Brownish Gray Poorly Graded SAND with trace silt & gravel, very loose, moist - Contains fine to medium grained sand - Encountered Muck From adjacent Drainfield Native?: Grayish brown Poorly Graded SAND with trace gravel, very loose, moist - Contains fine to medium grained sand - Relative soil density increases - Becomes Medium Dense - Medium grained sand - No recovery - Becomes Loose Grayish Brown Poorly Graded SAND with trace silt & gravel, 9 very loose, moist - Contains fine to medium grained sand - Perched groundwater conditions encountered 19 feet G t'(n ued Sorin B-1 Pa e 2 Of 2 - on Hammer Type Drawn By: Q2t9 Hole Completion 140lb Manual with cats head WRJ January 10, 2011 Monitoring Well Dnilmg aril sampling MrtP,od CYr6ciced By Da''e ❑ Piezometer Standard Split Spoon WRJ January 10.2011 Groundwater Elevation emsion By- Date ® Abanonded and backlilled 19 to 20 feet I Inclinometer - - Along Bay Street in Port Orchard, WA Remarlts- bgs = below grounds surface Sampling Method Standard split Spoon I�'r California Sampler ff General Notes o �, USCS SYMBOL z Si : n a Blow (N-Velue) t'-AN.L.Olson&Ass:-�ates,Inc. Page 2 2 -oi-- Moisture Content l°�) J00 Number Jab Name 780310 Bradshaw Logged BY WRJ Bafn9- B 1 LJ 1 20 2 B1. 20.0 ft CL 9 Gray Lean Clay, Stiff, moist 1 ;3 b 2 3 4 38 Gray Clayey Sand, Dense, water bearing - Contains fine to medium grained sand 25 6 13 17 •21 B1, 25.0 ft SC 7 END OF BORING 26.5 FEET 8 9 so 1 2 3 4 35 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 — 9 50 A k-'A N. L.Olson&Associates, Inc. Engineering, Planning and Surveying E "RING LOG BARBARA BRADSHAW 2453 BETHEL AVENUE 3124 SW 302ND PLACE P.O. BOX 637 PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON 98366-0637 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98023 Job Number 7603_10 Logged By WRJ Subsurrace EMplor-al on CnItfig Ground Surface Elevation 22 Boring B ' Page Start Date1211=010 Era Data 1V,W2010 I Surface Condtlons: General Notes 02 ti svMBDL BlowSURFACE {P ekie�> CONDITIONS LAWN AREA WITH A ROOT DEPTH OF ABOUT 2 TO 3 INCHES Molsk- Content Native?: Brown Poorly Graded SAND with trace gravel, very 1 loose, moist - Contains fine to medium grained sand z B2, 2.5 ft •' SIR 31 1 2 41 B2, 5.OA ft - Iron oxide stained and perched groundwater at 5 ft - Water bearing soil conditions encountered at 5 ft $ ,1 6 1 2 Gray Elastic Silt, very soft, moist - Pocket Pin Indicates PP=0.25 tsf B2, 5.OB ft MH 62, 7.5 ft SC 8 16 13 27 Gray Clayey Sand, Dense, moist - Contains fine to medium grained sand - Contains Silt 9 14 10 B2, 10.0 ft 20 27 .38 11 65 Gray Silt with sand, very dense, moist 12 - Drilling operator indicated gravels encountered between 11.5 B2,10.0 ft ML 13 and 15 feet 14 - pocket pin indicated PP= +4.5 tsf at 10 ft and 15 ft 15 B2 16-0 ft 15 16 35 29 64 END OF BORING 15.5 FEET Meet projects refusal requirements 17 18 19 20 Start Time 1100 End Time 1330 Hammer Type 140lb Manual with cals head Drawn By: WRJ Date Jan 10, 2011 Hole Completion ❑ Monitoring Well El Piezometer ® Abanonded and bacldilled Drilling Contractor Wit Operators Name Wade Betlaf Drilling and sampling Method Standard Split Spoon Checlfed By. WRJ Dale Equipment Groundwater Elevation rtevrsion by: hale Acker Perched growndwater conditions 5 ft Inclinometer Job Location Along Bay Street in Port Orchard, WA Remarks: bgs = below grounds surface Sampling Method Standard Split Spoon California Sampler H APPENDIX B SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS GRAPHICAL RESULTS a3z000 c LL¢aMMMfMr1 O a py o y C7 Q r — to lCl C7 U� � �0000 ULL'fNN�A ��0000 aui C 0 Uri Mvcn� -w-------------- tp y4,ZrNM� F- 00 m CO a � �0000MCD Lik (0.0 0 -0 N �- O co O N r 0 0 O a* t0 O IV O N O LL f' w R 2 0 0 0 2 (40 c -i .2 2 010 r 0 0 C c X lu LU VJ ............ ------ -------------------------- coo '18 1 Z6 0 _C)O GOO 0 Cp =csuC66v06 a) OLC) 0 0 LO Ci co) R3 la �OOOO of O 75 Lf) 0IT V) U') LO (f) 5 -------------- ---------- CLOC-4m vi U) pz CO 65 C,6 CO (D U) qtLc)a)c00000 0 otol r) LL CR cq C9 0o cq 0o (3� C� C� U M.0 013 W — M-C 0 LIO -------- -------------- . . ...... CD C) 0 4 .. ......... .................. CD co.......... 0 m co 0 C14 LL ........ ........ .. .............. ...... . ..... CD 'o C4 in > U) ........ .............. .......... . LL ........ . ................ Q N N t CN W I -a- co •—V1 i 1 CL — O S— 0 r -. .. co: r O L) M UO Q R 0 �— --.-------------•------ ...- H fA o O z V m i OBII CD 9- =mil K... . ...__......... W m 3 N m�z000 i f/i 3 0 o 'D c 0)0 Co Lo ri to LLQ�MCOMM m R s dc u s v aoouOo O ... IO CO w II a v0000 ` 7`—OM�VM I io c'''rrrr ' cq ui o to sri W I 0 fl.M�Mr . . ......... ..... O! (Z TZrNM� O � C CL L U 00 CD It O N 0 N V. O O T- E a N O CV 0 0 N M r U O N y Q C (6 C to U) 0 J Z U co w It O N O Pi O O W O w 0 V O N O Q U O co O O a a N IN CC, O N T Q O r 7` qr V R LL O N tL M r- O T 0 N M V Q �ZOdO� U] C O � �0000 LL Os U.) M co co CQ OL C +. O � �_4, G .........;........ u, d O ,G ao0LOo U� N �� 0000r aMvvco j v T T r T U) 00001 O - CLM OV tc) rl tO T�TNM� F- m � � U b0 0)QI T M v U') In isl u%0100)000OOOt7 U-rrr NNCV NRV ix 0.0 U-O W MAc � v I I I I I �L ..... I I I -------------------------- I I 1 1 .... ...-------------- 1 i i 1 CM iN I I ...... - i I i ..............a..... I a� 0 o O o tID to t} N 0 N r CD N U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY—) ELEVATION CERTIFICATE OMB No. 1660-0008 Federal Emergency Management Agency [Expires March 31, 2012 National Flood Insurance Program Important: Read the instructions on pages 1-9- SECTION A - PROPERTY INFORMATION For Insurance Company Use: Al Building Owner's Name Policy Number A2. Building Street Address (including Apt., Unit, Suite, and/or Bldg. No.) or P.O. Route and Box No. Company NAIL Number City State ZIP Code A3. Property Description (Lot and Block Numbers, Tax Parcel Number, Legal Description, etc.) A4. Building Use (e.g., Residential, Non -Residential, Addition, Accessory, etc.) A5. Latitude/Longitude: Lat. Long. Horizontal Datum: ❑ NAD 1927 ❑ NAD 1983 A6. Attach at least 2 photographs of the building if the Certificate is being used to obtain flood insurance. AT Building Diagram Number A8. For a building with a crawlspace or enclosure(s): A9. For a building with an attached garage: a) Square footage of crawlspace or enclosure(s) sq ft a) Square footage of attached garage sq ft b) No. of permanent flood openings in the crawlspace or b) No. of permanent flood openings in the attached garage enclosure(s) within 1.0 foot above adjacent grade within 1.0 foot above adjacent grade c) Total net area of flood openings in A8.b sq in c) Total net area of flood openings in A9.b sq in d) Engineered flood openings? ❑ Yes ❑ No d) Engineered flood openings? ❑ Yes ❑ No SECTION B - FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (FIRM) INFORMATION 61. B, B10. B11. B12. C1. C2. NFIP Community Name & Community Number B2. County Name I Map/Panel Number B5. Suffix B6. FIRM Index B7. FIRM Panel B8. Flood Date Effective/Revised Date Zone(s) Indicate the source of the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) data or base flood depth entered in Item B9. ❑ FIS Profile ❑ FIRM ❑ Community Determined ElOther (Describe) Indicate elevation datum used for BFE in Item 139: ❑ NGVD 1929 ❑ NAVD 1988 ❑ Other (Describe Is the building located in a Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS) area or Otherwise Protected Area (OPA)? Designation Date ❑ CBRS ❑ OPA B3. State 1 B9. Base Flood Elevations) (Zone AO, use base flood depth) SECTION C - BUILDING ELEVATION INFORMATION (SURVEY REQUIRED) ElYes ❑ No Building elevations are based on: [IConstruction Drawings* ❑ Building Under Construction' ❑ Finished Construction *A new Elevation Certificate will be required when construction of the building is complete. Elevations —Zones Al-A30, AE, AH, A (with BFE), VE, V1430, V (with BFE), AR, AR/A, AR/AE, AR/A1-A30, AR/AH, AR/AO. Complete Items C2.a-h below according to the building diagram specified in Item A7. Use the same datum as the BFE. Benchmark Utilized Vertical Datum Conversion/Comments Check the measurement used. a) Top of bottom floor (including basement, crawlspace, or enclosure floor) ❑ feet Elmeters (Puerto Rico only) b) Top of the next higher floor ❑ feet ❑ meters (Puerto Rico only) c) Bottom of the lowest horizontal structural member (V Zones only) Elfeet Elmeters (Puerto Rico only) d) Attached garage (top of slab) ❑ feet Elmeters (Puerto Rico only) e) Lowest elevation of machinery or equipment servicing the building ❑ feet Elmeters (Puerto Rico only) (Describe type of equipment and location in Comments) f) Lowest adjacent (finished) grade next to building (LAG) ❑ feet Elmeters (Puerto Rico only) g) Highest adjacent (finished) grade next to building (HAG) Elfeet Elmeters (Puerto Rico only) h) Lowest adjacent grade at lowest elevation of deck or stairs, including Elfeet Elmeters (Puerto Rico only) structural support SECTION D - SURVEYOR, ENGINEER, OR ARCHITECT CERTIFICATION This certification is to be signed and sealed by a land surveyor, engineer, or architect authorized by law to certify elevation information. l certify that the information on this Certificate represents my best efforts to interpret the data available.) understand that any false statement may be punishable by fine or imprisonment under 18 U.S. Code, Section 1001.0 Check here if comments are provided on back of form. Were latitude and longitude in Section A provided by a licensed land surveyor? ❑ Yes ❑ No Certifier's Name Title Address Signature FEMA Form 81-31, Mar09 License Number Company Name City State ZIP Code Date Telephone See reverse side for continuation. Replaces all previous editions IMPORTANT: In these spaces, copy the corf onding information from Section A. For Insufanoee-Company Use? Building Street Address (including Apt., Unit, Suite, anwor Bldg. No.) or P.O. Route and Box No. Policy Number City State ZIP Code Company NAIC Number SECTION D - SURVEYOR, ENGINEER, OR ARCHITECT CERTIFICATION (CONTINUED) Copy both sides of this Elevation Certificate for (1) community official, (2) insurance agent/company, and (3) building owner. Comments Signature uate Check here if attachments SECTION E - BUILDING ELEVATION INFORMATION (SURVEY NOT REQUIRED) FOR ZONE AO AND ZONE A (WITHOUT BFE) For Zones AO and A (without BFE), complete Items E1-E5. If the Certificate is intended to support a LOMA or LOMR-F request, complete Sections A, B, and C. For Items El-E4, use natural grade, if available. Check the measurement used. In Puerto Rico only, enter meters. El. Provide elevation information for the following and check the appropriate boxes to show whether the elevation is above or below the highest adjacent grade (HAG) and the lowest adjacent grade (LAG). a) Top of bottom floor (including basement, crawlspace, or enclosure) is ❑ feet ❑ meters ❑ above or ❑ below the HAG. b) Top of bottom floor (including basement, crawlspace, or enclosure) is ❑ feet ❑ meters ❑ above or ❑ below the LAG. E2. For Building Diagrams 6-9 with permanent flood openings provided in Section A Items 8 and/or 9 (see pages 8-9 of Instructions), the next higher floor (elevation C2.b in the diagrams) of the building is ❑ feet ❑ meters ❑ above or ❑ below the HAG. E3. Attached garage (top of slab) is ❑ feet ❑ meters ❑ above or ❑ below the HAG. E4. Top of platform of machinery and/or equipment servicing the building is ❑ feet ❑ meters ❑ above or ❑ below the HAG. E5. Zone AO only: If no flood depth number is available, is the top of the bottom floor elevated in accordance with the community's floodplain management ordinance? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown. The local official must certify this information in Section G. SECTION F - PROPERTY OWNER (OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE) CERTIFICATION The property owner or owner's authorized representative who completes Sections A, B, and E for Zone A (without a FEMA-issued or community -issued BFE) or Zone AO must sign here. The statements in Sections A, B, and E are correct to the best of my knowledge. Property Owner's or Owner's Authorized Representative's Name Address Signature Comments city Date State ZIP Code Telephone ❑ Check here if attachments SECTION G - COMMUNITY INFORMATION (OPTIONAL) The local official who is authorized by law or ordinance to administer the community's floodplain management ordinance can complete Sections A, B, C (or E), and G of this Elevation Certificate. Complete the applicable item(s) and sign below. Check the measurement used in Items G8 and G9. G1. ❑ The information in Section C was taken from other documentation that has been signed and sealed by a licensed surveyor, engineer, or architect who is authorized by law to certify elevation information. (Indicate the source and date of the elevation data in the Comments area below.) G2. ❑ A community official completed Section E for a building located in Zone A (without a FEMA-issued or community -issued BFE) or Zone AO. G3. ❑ The following information (Items G4-G9) is provided for community floodplain management purposes. fG4. Permit Number l _ G7. This permit has been issued for: G5. Date Permit Issued G6. Date Certificate Of Compliance/Occupancy Issued ❑ New Construction ❑ Substantial Improvement G8. Elevation of as -built lowest floor (including basement) of the building: ❑ feet ❑ meters (PR) Datum G9. BFE or (in Zone AO) depth of flooding at the building site: ❑ feet ❑ meters (PR) Datum G10. Community's design flood elevation ❑ feet ❑ meters (PR) Datum Local Official's Name Community Name Signature Comments Title Telephone uate ❑ Check here if attachments FEMA Form 81-31, Mar 09 Replaces all previous editions Building Photographs See Instructions for Item A6. For Insurance Company Use: Building Street Address (including Apt., Unit, Suite, and/or Bldg. No.) or P.O. Route and Box No. Policy Number — City State ZIP Code Company NAIL Number If using the Elevation Certificate to obtain NFIP flood insurance, affix at least two building photographs below according to the instructions for Item A6. Identify all photographs with: date taken; "Front View" and "Rear View"; and, if required, "Right Side View" and "Left Side View." If submitting more photographs than will fit on this page, use the Continuation Page, following. Building Photographs Continuation Page _ For Insurance Company Use: Building Street Address (including Apt., Unit, Suite, and/or Bldg. No.) or P.O. Route and Box No. Policy Number City State ZIP Code Company NAIC Number If submitting more photographs than will fit on the preceding page, affix the additional photographs below. Identify all photographs with: date taken; "Front View" and "Rear View"; and, if required, "Right Side View" and "Left Side View." CITY OF CITY HALL �.Way 33325 8tr Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718Fe araI Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com February 15, 2011 Mr. David Fall Fall Architectural Studio 8600 Banner Road SE 1:1LE Port Orchard, WA 98367 Re: File #11-100548-00-PC; NOTICE OF PREAPPLICATION CONFERENCE Bradshaw/Harkness Addition, 3124 SW 302"d Place, Federal Way Dear Mr. Fall: The Department of Community and Economic Development is in receipt of your preapplication conference request. The application has been routed to members of the Development Review Committee and a meeting With the project applicant has been scheduled as follows: 9:00 a.m_ — Thursday, 1VIarch 10, 2011 Hylebos Conference Room Federal Way City Hall, 2nd Floor 33325 8"' Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 We look forward to meeting with you. Please coordinate directly with anyone else you Would like to attend the meeting as this will be the only notice sent out by the department. If you have any questions regarding the meeting, please contact me at 253-835-2644, or j :iret_Fi3�ll.Ccr cityolFcclzral�� av,cctim_ Sincerely, .la ` et Shull, AICP CSBA nior Planner Kenneth C. Eckley, 3124 SW 302"" Place, Federal Way, WA 98023 Barbara Bradshaw, 3025 33"' AN cnue SW, Federal Way, WA 98023 I)- 1I) �6080