01-101137 a 1
S 4,,,,p it !'
I
Building Commercial Permit #:01 - 101137 - 00'.-. .:=.
U;�,ane•nry Development Services
33530 1st R'a>S
FederalWay.WA 98003-6210
Pia:253.661.4000 Fax:253.661.4129 Inspection request line: 253.835.3050
Project Name: NORTHWEST CHURCH
Project Address: 34800 21ST SW Parcel Number: 542350 0630
Project Description: COMM ADDN-Construct basement and main floor addition to existing church for gym,chapel,
storage and classrooms; Includes some plumbing fixtures,but no plans. Mechanical under separate
permit. C
Owner Applicant Contractor Lender
NORTHWEST CHURCH RONALD D.JOHNSON DONOVAN BROTHERS INC NORTHWEST CHURCH
34800 21ST AVE SW 19601 -23RD AVE NW DONOVBI094O5 exp 02/16/02 34800 21ST AVE SW
FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 SEATTLE WA 98177 P.O.BOX 818 FEDERAL WAY WA 98023
1501 W VALLEY HWY
Includes:
Census category: 437-Comm #1 #2 #3 #4
I
Occupancy Group: _—
Construction Type:
Floor Area(Sq.Ft.):Occu ane Load: 111MIMIM11117 -1--
1
1st Floor Proposed Sq.Feet 23568 Basement Proposed q. `eet 21788
Census Category 437-Commercial alt/add Mechanical No
Number of Stories 1 Permit for Building Shell Only No
Permit for Foundation Only No Plumbing Yes
Total Proposed Sq.Feet 45356 Will Certificate of Occupancy be Issued? Yes
Sensitive Areas? No Zoning Designation RS 7.2
Plumbing Fixtures '..... i.----'
esaI tI" 1 FQuantity a 1 Description %'' Quantityf,:-V-1,:''-'1:14c1700W __ _YI _nicht fy
Lavatories 12 Rain Water Systems 1 Drinking Fountains jf 2
Showers [ 5 Water Closets 15 Sinks JJII 5—1'
Urinals 5 4
CONDITIONS:
PLUMBING PERMIT REQUIRED FOR GROUND PLUMBING REQUIRED PRIOR TO START OF ANY
CONSTRUCTION.
Pre-con required with Public Works prior to start of work on right of way improvements.
Catalog cuts for all street lights,service cabinets and Traffic signal poles and equipment must be submitted,reviewed aild
;approved prior to installation.(note; delivery of traffic signal poles may take 6 months)
A Traffic control plan must be submitted and approved prior to work within the right of way.
Prior to occupancy,all frontage improvement along 21st Ave.and 348th,most be installed and approved,including street
lighting,traffic signals,street trees,paving and striping.
Frontage improvements will be installed under permit number 00-102525
PERMIT EXPIRES June 19,2002,IF NO WORK IS STARTED.
Permit issued on December 21,2001
-hereby certify that the above information is correct and that the construction on the above describ::cd prope and, it,11/
-cupancy a;:d the use . 'Ube in accordance with the laws,rules and regulations of the State of Wash' gton and
-,f Federal Way.
Date: t2I/2rL f
nt: ---
•
City of Federal Way •
Certificate of Occupancy •
This Certificate issued pursuant to the requirements of Section 109 of the Uniform Building Code certifying that at
the time of issuance,this structure was in compliance with the various ordinances of the City regulating building
construction or use. This certificate is valid ONLY when endorsed by City staff.
Tenant Name: NORTHWEST CHURCH Permit number: 01 - 101137-00
Address: 34800 21ST SW
#4
Occupancy Group:
Construction Type:
Occupancy Load:
Floor Area(Sq.Ft.):
. Owner NORTHWEST CHURCH
Name: 34800 21ST AVE SW
Address: FEDERAL WAY WA 98023
Buildin! Official D to
The priority focus in the review and inspection made by the City prior to issuance of this Certificate was on those matters which experience has shown most severely
affect the health and safety of the general public. Although the City has made as complete a review and inspection as is reasonably possible(within budgetary time
and personnel limitations),the City neither guarantees nor warrants to the owner/occupant or to any other person that this Certificate evidences strict compliance
with each and every ordinance or regulation of the City or the State of Washington affecting the construction or use of said structure or the land upon which it is
situated. Such compliance is the responsibility of the owner and/or occupant of the premises.
4
• r , PO�HIS CARD ON THE FRONT OF BUIL. 'F ,
BUILDING DIVISION
uv �FIZAL_ INSPECTION RECORD
INSPECTION REQUEST PHONE#: 253-835-3050
PERMIT #: 01-101137-00—CO
OWNER'S NAME: NORTHWEST CHURCH
SITE ADDRESS: 34800 21ST SW
O FOOTINGS/SETBACKS () FOUNDATION WALL
ADO NOT PbUR CONCRE 'E UNTIL THE ABOVE IS APPROVED
( ) DRAINAGE: Line ( ) Connection
mtILTHE OVEISAPPRO D ,"r
gF
FOUR'SL � , � �a . . m.. ��,
( ) UNDERFLOOR FRAMING
( ) ROUGH PLUMBING: DWV Water piping
( ) ROUGH MECHANICAL Gas piping
() SHEATHING Roof Floor
() SHEAR WALLS
() ELECTRICAL ROUGH-IN Ditch Cover
() FIRE/DRAFTSTOPS
BE AP"W*PRI—PRTO I� A [ING NSP-CTjON . .
( ) FRAMING/FIRESTOPPING
®� OVE IVIU T Y 1 1 : .,D>i 1UQ �` ULATING OAR SI EETRUCHING~z
( ) INSULATION: Floors Walls Attic .5//3 L 5`
HEETROC
�
( ) WALLBOARD NAILING ,e0/vZ SS ( ) SUSPENDED CEILING
q !! '0_611;W-4'
.:• 1 F TLEtI.IlG
() ELECTRICAL FINAL
() PLANNING FINAL
) PUBLIC WORKS FINAL
( ) FIRE FINAL
yM, ,--THFi� BOVE MUST BE APPRQYED PRI0 TO BUILDING,DEPARTMENT
( ) BUILDING FINAL 1.D
OCCUPY-4_ S UxT DING UNTIL BUILDING FINAL, S 4.4_4_ 1 D'.
4 . . ‘
INSPECTION LOG . .< `k
DATE IN ECT CORR/REJ AREA AND TYPE OF INSPECTION
'Y3c k i' Z. t---/ - /site4.,
ZL / 04a .i.r-
_,. # 7.s--- p 1,1)/44.<4,, tea.4 -c 4
h o „5--04-irv; A244./e....ii.,_
,1g71.v. ss 4 # -- G. s1^e.4- (4,,// Gam. r
4 L, z /--0 Z, . . .b - /3, 1 ,i - / --z="
. - ►-.. c/ ./( ‘t//3/io1,-- s 5 -- le 52`c / la7 u u`/c
L/--3- az cc.,,/ . - 2 , 2. A- I 6--,s— c- 6- 1_5
Li/I''baa- S'S ' $,Iear h/0a //' fai i Ja'n c "-F" 1Vorli
9 ', Wall'
W/, z/2Z Ah od ae ck, z . 7 - it/f - G, Z_ . 7- 3/8-T
�� � 55 >c o ��5 , s "c /
j . y veer, ,, ,
/y102 r' ,/,vl cg , 11/e ..Z
dES- C o 74%.
ri 7 — 4,5J, ,ti. 4f"eKr
V/744. 57 ra.x,sy I" 4(4 I Jyvf5.
._ 09L s - s-- e.515-,M._ I,V.. 10 1 lei
o A /o ;so./4 if _
6.1 SS r r so leasotp I gkjfj le..,..t/o - i
/ Mat' Js / /2�w 107,-0/
`<f/Z — , --cam k 11/0Sa(4)
_; -k; '6.- c ItS.{ 1 01.17. /-,i-t- 5 "7'‘
0,i2 ss' 40, .A74. 4 a //
w n " '�sL, 44.-- 6.#_5z
f hil ,.311 ti ` .,..73 rk everos4.44/4 7iow k/i/
3
• • .
INSPECTION LOG
w h m o `� fax F E
_,. . ACTOR, OK CO, R/RE x.. .. AREA.WitTAnKOF INSFECTlON
Z-2,- o z.c.-- J ii et, l 1 a 74 N, (-Jo, ( / ``-& Cryt,iI
2/442 <5 R c",437.5 L c- /14n>. APIA /21`44-1- ki JvS-
//� 5S GAY- /mss g.-,.- ..
• •
INSPECTION LOG
��'��� €E E��f � - �� ���'�€ � � .—max� _ 3 --�, '. � ', ' a a '. _ws ,�'`x
.. E,.. S' CTOR. ._, OK, COR JREJ . ��,.F :A'. EA ,ND's PE,,OF NSPECTION ::
1,,,/62— 55 4Z 5 c,41-1:%...!, --- ,6.40 i L gryL Ic.:1-,4<, y Jo c47/--e_
i i 7,41- 11147 --.7 5h ay tf 4 , -12- i't /--S -th 01, h .-F ,
Dry wa II ) 1-01 ci"r34 I apt r f OA F.) •2. --S
ri/A gi jc-k'el Oh 'al 1e',, --E10-Or
.?/2//0 2_ STS Ppa-4,//- 4// egn-,,,,..t. el, old 0 1/140-.. 44"
, i' ., •v//j 4'7 le e41 in,,.
,/ z,k, 41 ,4_ u.„//S ♦r//.
A7-.5, s// LSA ,vpv ,'4L .,." ; -.
, 4‘,‘2_ , S • --"--e. ,dye-/a s' a`1� ,�3,�An
,. ,c-ii s , /_ chyi. hs%&ce..A,
4 u,.// 4v11,1•s45 or l c%4s Flew odd -061il\,
SI97 Yb- tel/ — •
ark_
..71 /72-7,,, -°1 '- ,/, F,a ini,-/I cell iy ; :14 , 9 y 1-0
c 1,1 '
r wu- � 1��
ph 1 er
tity pt,/all s-o 0 M 5fef/11 $$ef carredf:m) .
P/ wain b760frerlor Ihse 41 stirl (e if of
0 .7-,..-
7:43v4143.7
,VX- 0 — - ht
75„/ -C�J , , ,e_.
74347- 5 may. c-..._//`).,_ y.
Ark 577) oze (,,--r-ic-e, #, 3y/4/1_ c-45/ L75/27
/3 sis G�f se-C 66,
/pi c5� -t
-eAal, ,sd'
*At s' ,- . /5/
��� ' -� `r
of-lo/67-0 co
SITE
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STU
Proposed Church Facility Expansion
34800 - 21st Avenue Southwest
Federal Way, Washington
v
61 46 r�r�rrw�,
r
This report presents the findings and recommendations of our geotechnical engineering
study for the site of the proposed addition to the Northwest Church located at 34800 - 21st
Avenue Southwest in Federal Way. The general location of the site is illustrated on the
Vicinity Map, Plate 1.
Based on conceptual plans provided to us, prepared by Kohler Associates - Architects and
Planners, we anticipate that the addition will have an area of approximately 135 feet by 180
feet. The addition will include an expanded sanctuary, a multipurpose gymnasium, a
kitchen, and classrooms on the first and second floors. Paved parking will be located east
of the new addition. Site grading plans were not available to us.
Based on a single field report that was prepared by GeoEngineers and dated January 20,
1987, it appears that the soft soils were removed from below the foundations for the original
church building. It is unclear whether or not the fill and topsoil were removed from below
the existing slabIT.
SITE CONDITIONS C.216'
Surface
The proposed expansion will be located immediately east of the existing church building.
This area is currently occupied primarily by a large grass yard, although a portable
classroom is situated on its northern end and gravel parking and drive areas extend north to
south through its eastern edge. Paved parking and driveways cover the ground north and
south of the expansion area. A large grass area is between the existing parking and drive
areas, east of the property line. A small detention pond occupies the northwestern corner of
this grass area.
The ground surface on most of the site is relatively level. The grass area on the eastern side
of the property slopes gently down to a low swale that extends north-south through the
locations of Test Pits 4 and 5.
Several depressions were noted in the grass areas during our site work. We understand
that at least one pavement failure has occurred to date. This failure was apparently caused
by saturation of the loose subgrade soils. The excavation and replacement of these
subgrade soils was necessary for the pavement repair.
GEO1ECI I CONSULTANTS,INC.
Northwest Church JN 94354
October 12, 1994 Page 2
Subsurface
The subsurface conditions east of the existing building were explored by excavating a total
of six test pits: three in the proposed building area, two in the proposed parking area, and
one in the proposed detention pond area. In the building area, approximately 5.5 to 7 feet
of fill soils and topsoil overlie weathered glacial till. The fill consists of a loose, wet, very silty
sand to sandy silt with gravel that contains some concrete rubble and varying amounts of
organics. This fill was not well-compacted. The native till soil becomes less weathered and
denser at a depth of 2 to 3 feet below the topsoil. Similar soil conditions were found in the
proposed parking and detention pond areas, where the fill was approximately 4 feet in
thickness. This fill overlays approximately 1 foot of topsoil. Caving occurred in the loose fill
soils in one of the test pits. The soils found in all of the test pits were very moist to wet.
The final logs represent our interpretations of the field logs. The stratification lines on the
logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types at the exploration locations.
The actual transition between soil types may be gradual, and subsurface conditions can
vary between exploration locations. The logs provide specific subsurface information only at
the locations tested. The relative densities and moisture descriptions indicated on the test
pit logs are interpretive descriptions based on the conditions observed during excavation.
The compaction of backfill was not in the scope of our services. Loose soils will therefore
be found in the area of the test pits. If this presents a problem, the backfill will need to be
removed and replaced with structural fill during construction.
Groundwater
Groundwater seepage was observed in only one of the test pits (TP-6). The test pits were
left open for only a short time period, which may not have allowed groundwater to
accumulate in the holes. The fill soils and the loose soils above the glacial till were relatively
wet at the time of our exploration. It is important to note that our explorations were
conducted following an unusually dry spring and summer. We anticipate that varying
amounts of groundwater seepage will likely be found during wet weather within the fill soils
and overlying the denser glacial till. We understand that groundwater presented problems
during the construction of the existing facility.
GEOTECFI CONSULTANTS,INC.
Northwest Church JN 94354
October 12, 1994 Page 3
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
The primarygeotechnical engineering consideration for the development of the addition and
its parking areas is the presence of loose, wet find and old topsoil to a significant depth.
Competent, native soils were found at a depth of 6 to 8 feet below the existing ground
surface, and the existing fills are not suitable for prviding foundation support. Also, slabs
placed on these soils could experience significant settlement and distress. For these
reasons, we recommend removing the existing fill and old topsoil from the entire building
footprint and from an area outside the building perimeter equal to the depth of the
excavation. The overexcavated area should be backfilled with imported, structural fill.
Alternatives to the complete removal of the unsuitable soils exist. The structure may be
supported on augercast piers with the floor structurally supported between the piers as
either awood-supported floor over a crawl space or a reinforced structural concrete slab.
The foundations could be overexcavated in trenches, and the trenches backfilled with lean
mix concrete. The slab would then be structurally supported between foundation grade
beams. We are available to discuss these options with you and your contractors. H ever
it is our opinion that the previously recommended solution of overexcavating the en Ire
footprint will be more cost effective, if a slab-on-grade floor system is desired.
The on-site soils are silty, highly moisture-sensitive, and easily disturbed. It would
advantageous to perform earthwork and foundation construction during the dry summer
and early fall months (typically July to October) to reduce the construction costs associated
with the increased need for granular fill in wet weather. In any case, the on-site soils cannot
be used as structural fill or utility backfill. Earthwork cost estimates should assume imported
fill for the entire project. Wet weather earthwork will require clean and course-grained
imported fill, and it may involve delays during heavy rains. Clean crushed rock or quarry
spalls may be needed where seepage is encountered or wet soils become disturbed.
Seepage may be encountered in the excavations depending on the time of year. This could
require temporary dewatering in the form of interceptor trenches and pumping from sumps.
Also, due to the relatively low permeability of the site soils, storm water infiltration systems
will not be effective and are therefore not recommended.
Geotech Consultants, Inc. should be allowed to review the final development plans to verify
that the recommendations presented in this report are adequately addressed in the design.
Such a plan review would be additional work beyond the current scope of work for this
study, and it may include revisions to our recommendations to accommodate site, develop-
ment, and geotechnical constraints that become more evident during the review process.
GGOIP.CI I CONSULTANTS,INC.
Northwest Church JN 94354
October 12, 1994 Page 4
Frequent monitoring of earthwork, foundation, drainage, and pavement construction by our
firm will be needed to verify that suitable results are being achieved. Unanticipated
conditions could then also be more readily addressed.
CQnyentional Founcjations
The proposed structure can be supported on conventional continuous and spread footings
bearing on structural fill placed over non-organic, native soils. See the later sub-section
entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill for recommendations regarding the
placement and compaction of structural fill beneath structures. We recommend that
continuous and individual spread footings have minimum widths of 12 and 16 inches,
respectively. They should be bottomed at least 12 inches below the lowest adjacent finish
ground surface for frost protection. The local building codes should be reviewed to
determine if different footing widths or embedment depths are required.
Overexcavation below the footings to expose competent, native soils is anticipated. Unless
lean concrete is used to fill the overexcavated hole, the overexcavation must be at least as
wide at the bottom as the sum of the depth of the overexcavation and the footing width. For
example, an overexcavation extending 2 feet below the bottom of a 3-foot-wide footing must
be at least 5 feet wide at the base of the excavation. If lean concrete is used, the
overexcavation need only extend 6 inches beyond the edges of the footing.
An allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) is appropriate for
footings constructed according to the above recommendations and supported on structural
fill placed above competent, native soils. A one-third increase in the above design bearing
pressure may be used when considering short-term wind or seismic loads. For the above
design criteria, it is anticipated that the total post-construction settlement of footings
founded on competent, native soils, or on structural fill up to 5 feet in thickness, will be
about one-half of an inch.
Lateral loads due to wind or seismic forces may be resisted by friction between the founda-
tions and the bearing soils, or by passive earth pressure acting on the vertical, embedded
portions of the foundations. For the latter condition, the foundations must be either poured
directly against relatively level, undisturbed soil, or surrounded by level structural fill. We
recommend the following design values be used for the foundation's resistance to lateral
loading:
Parameter Design_yake
Coefficient of Friction 0.40
Passive Earth Pressure 350 pcf
GEO1ECI I CONSULTANTS,INC.
Northwest Church JN 94354
October 12, 1994 Page 5
Where:
(1) pcf is pounds per cubic foot.
(2) Passive earth pressure is computed using the
equivalent fluid density.
We recommend a safety factor of at least 1.5 for the foundation's resistance to lateral
loading, when using the above design values.
Seismic Considerations
The site is located within Seismic' Zone 3 as illustrated on Figure No. 23-2 of the 1991
Uniform Building Code (UBC). In accordance with Table 23-J of the 1991 UBC, the site soil
profile is best represented by Profile Type S2. The competent till soils that underlie the
loose fill and topsoil are not susceptible to liquefaction or densification during an
earthquake, even when saturated.
Slabs-on-Grade
The building floors may be constructed as slabs-on-grade atop structural fill placed over
competent, native soils. The subgrade soils must be in a firm, non-yielding condition at the
time of slab construction or undersiab fill placement. Any soft areas encountered should be
excavated and replaced with select, imported, structural fill.
All slabs-on-grade should be underlain by a capillary break or drainage layer consisting of a
minimum 4-inch thickness of coarse, free-draining, structural fill with a gradation similar to
that discussed later in Permanent Foundation and Retaining Walls. In areas where
the passage of moisture through the slab is undesirable, a vapor barrier such as a 6-mil
plastic membrane should be placed beneath the slab. Additionally, sand should be used in
the fine-grading process to reduce damage to the vapor barrier, to provide uniform support
under the slab, and to reduce shrinkage cracking by improving the concrete curing process.
Permanent Foundation and Retaining Walls
Retaining walls backfilled on only one side should be designed to resist the lateral earth
pressures imposed by the soils they retain. The following recommended design parameters
are for walls less than 12 feet in height which restrain level backfill:
GEOTECII CONSULTANTS.INC.
Northwest Church JN 94354
October 12, 1994 Page 6
Parameter Design Value
Active Earth Pressure* 35 pcf
Passive Earth Pressure 350 pcf
Coefficient of Friction 0.40
Soil Unit Weight 130 pcf
Where:
(1) pcf is pounds per cubic foot.
(2) Active and passive earth pressures are
computed using the equivalent fluid densities.
* For restrained walls which cannot deflect at
least 0.002 times the wall height, a uniform
lateral pressure of 100 psf should be added to
the above active equivalent fluid pressure.
The valuesgiven above are to be used to design permanent foundation and retaining walls
only. These values assume that the entire excavation behind the walls will be backfilled with
imported, granular fill. We recommend a safety factor of at least 1.5 for overturning and
sliding, when using the above recommended values to design the walls.
The design values given above do not include the effects of any hydrostatic pressures
behind the walls and assume that no surcharge slopes or loads, such as vehicles, will be
placed behind the walls. If these conditions exist, those pressures should be added to the
above lateral soil pressures. Also, if sloping backfill is desired behind the walls, we will need
to be given the wall dimensions and the slope of the backfill in order to provide the
appropriate design earth pressures.
Heavy construction equipment should not be operated behind retaining and foundation
walls within a distance equal to the height of the wall, unless the walls are designed for the
additional lateral pressures resulting from the equipment. The compaction of backfill near
the wall should be accomplished with hand-operated equipment to prevent the wall from
being overloaded by the higher soil forces that occur during compaction.
Retaining Wall Backfill
Backfill placed behind retaining or foundation walls should be imported, coarse,
free-draining, structural fill containing no organics. This backfill should contain no
more than 5 percent silt or clay particles and have no gravel greater than 4 inches in
diameter. The percentage of particles passing the No. 4 sieve should be between 25
and 70 percent. For increased protection, a drainage composite should be placed
along the cut slope face, and the wall should be backfilled with pervious soil.
GEO1TCII CONSULTANTS,INC.
Northwest Church JN 94354
October 12, 1994 Page 7
The purpose of these backfill requirements is to ensure that the design criteria for the
retaining wall are not exceeded because of a build-up of hydrostatic pressure behind
the wall. The top 12 to 18 inches of the backfill should consist of a relatively imper-
meable soil or topsoil, or the surface should be paved. The sub-section entitled
General Earthwork and Structural Fill contains recommendations regarding the
placement and compaction of structural fill behind retaining and foundation walls.
The above recommendations are not intended to waterproof the below-grade walls.
If moist conditions or some seepage through the walls are not acceptable, then
damp-proofing or waterproofing should be provided. This could include limiting
cold-joints and wall penetrations, and possibly using bentonite panels or membranes
on the outside of the walls. Applying a thin coat of asphalt emulsion is not
considered waterproofing, but it will help to prevent moisture, generated from water
vapor or capillary action, from seeping through the concrete.
Excavations and Slopes
No significant excavated slopes are anticipated other than for utility trenches and
overexcavation in the building area. However, in no case should excavation slopes be
greater than the limits specified in local, state, and national government safety regulations.
Temporary cuts may be attempted vertically to a depth of about 4 feet in unsaturated soils.
Based upon Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 296, Part N, the near-surface soil type
at the subject site would be classified as Type B. Therefore, temporary cut slopes greater
than 4 feet in height cannot be excavated at an inclination steeper than 1:1 (Horizontal:
Vertical) extending continuously between the top and the bottom of the cut. If seepage is
encountered, flatter cuts may be necessary for safety.
The above recommended temporary slope inclination is based on what has been successful
at other sites with similar soil conditions. Temporary cuts are those that will remain unsup-
ported for a relatively short duration to allow for the construction of foundations, retaining
walls, or utilities. Temporary cut slopes should be protected with plastic sheeting during wet
weather. The cut slopes should also be backfilled or retained as soon as possible to reduce
the potential for instability.
All permanent cuts into native soils should be inclined no steeper than 2:1 (H:V). Fill slopes
also should not be constructed with an inclination greater than 2:1 (H:V). To reduce the
potential for shallow sloughing, fill must be compacted to the face of these slopes. This
could be accomplished by overbuilding the compacted fill, and then trimming it back to its
final inclination. Water should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of any
temporary or permanent slope. Also, all permanently exposed slopes should be seeded
with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve the stability of the
surficial layer of soil.
GEO1LCI I CONSULTANTS,INC.
Northwest Church JN 94354
October 12, 1994 Page 8
Drainage Considerations
We recommend the use of footing drains at the base of all perimeter footings. If a crawl
space is constructed under the addition, we also recommend placing a drain through the
approximate center of the crawl space and sloping the crawl space surface towards this
drain. Drains should also be placed at the base of all backfilled, earth-retaining walls.
These drains should be surrounded by at least 6 inches of 1-inch-minus washed rock and
then wrapped in non-woven, geotextile filter fabric (Mirafi 140N, Supac 4NP, or similar
material). At its highest point, the perforated pipe invert should be at least as low as the
bottom of the footing, and it should be sloped for drainage. All roof and surface water
drains must be kept separate from the foundation drain system. A typical drain detail is
attached to this report as Plate 6. For the best long-term performance, perforated PVC pipe
is recommended for the footing drains.
Seepage may be encountered in the excavations. If it is, it should be drained from the site
by directing it through drainage ditches, perforated pipe, or French drains, or by pumping it
from sumps interconnected by shallow connector trenches at the bottom of the excavation.
The excavation and site should be graded so that surface water is directed off the site and
away from the tops of slopes. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where
foundations, slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Final site grading in areas adjacent
to the building should slope away at least 2 percent, except where the area is paved. Water
from roof, stormwater, and foundation drains should not be discharged onto the slope; it
should be tightlined to a suitable outfall located away from the slope.
Pavement Areas and Utilities
We understand that there have been some failures in the existing pavement. These failures
are probably due to the poor subgrade conditions afforded by the loose fill soils. Ideally,
these fill soils should be removed and replaced with structural.fill. However, this is not
practical from an economic standpoint. Considering this, we offer that all pavement
sections may be supported on a minimum of 12 inches of structural fill. The fill should be
placed over a woven geotextile fabric, such as Mirafi 500X, or another woven fabric with
equivalent strength and permeability characteristics. The construction budget should
include a contingency for additional fill, which will be needed where unstable subgrade
conditions are encountered. The subgrade should be evaluated by Geotech Consultants,
Inc. after the site is stripped and cut to grade. Recommendations for compaction of
structural fill beneath pavements are given in a later sub-section entitled General
Earthwork and Structural Fill.
GEOTECII CONSULTANTS,INC.
Northwest Church JN 94354
October 12, 1994 Page 9
The pavement for lightly loaded traffic and parking areas should consist of 2 inches of
asphalt concrete (AC) over 4 inches of crushed rock base (CRB) or 3 inches of asphalt-
treated base (ATB). We recommend that heavily loaded areas be provided with 3 inches of
AC over 6 inches of CRB or 4 inches of ATB. Heavily loaded areas are typically main drive-
ways, or dumpster sites.
Where the subbase is composed of silty, water-sensitive soils and irrigated landscaping is
adjacent to, and at an elevation higher than, the pavement, we suggest installing perimeter
drains to intercept the water that would otherwise saturate the pavement subbase. The
pavement section recommendations and guidelines presented in this report are based on
our experience in the area and on what has been successful in similar situations. Some
maintenance and repair of limited areas can be expected, especially where water is allowed
to saturate the loose soils below the structural fill and geotextile fabric. All cracks in the
pavement surface should be caulked periodically to reduce surface water infiltration. To
provide for a design without the need for any repair would be uneconomical.
Adequate compaction of the imported utility backfill will be important to ensure good surface
drainage to the storm catch basins. Catch basins and control structures should be
supported on the competent, native soils beneath the fill and topsoil to prevent them from
settling excessively. This may require overexcavation.
General Earthwork and Structural Fill
Structural fill is defined as any fill placed under the building, behind permanent retaining or
foundation walls, or in other areas where the underlying soils need to support loads. All
structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts with a moisture content at, or near, the
optimum moisture content. The optimum moisture content is that moisture content that
results in the greatest compacted dry density. The moisture content of fill soils is very
important and must be closely controlled during the filling and compaction process.
The allowable thickness of the fill lift will depend on the material type selected, the compac-
tion equipment used, and the number of passes made to compact the lift. In no case should
the loose lift thickness exceed 12 inches. The following table presents recommended
relative compactions for structural fill:
GEOIECII CONSUI.TANTS.INC.
Northwest Church JN 94354
October 12, 1994 Page 10
Minimum Relative
Location of Fill Placement Compaction
Beneath footings, slabs, or 95%
walkways
Behind retaining walls 90%
Beneath pavements 95% for upper 12 inches
of subgrade, 90% below
that level
Where:
Minimum Relative Compaction is the ratio,
expressed in percentages, of the compacted dry
density to the maximum dry density, as determined
in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D
1557-78 (Modified Proctor).
The on-site native soils are highly moisture-sensitive. Moisture-sensitive soils are
susceptible to excessive softening and "pumping"from construction equipment, or even foot
traffic, when the moisture content is greater than the optimum moisture content. It may be
beneficial to protect subgrades with a layer of imported sand or crushed rock to limit
disturbance from traffic.
Structural fill that is to be placed in wet weather should consist of a coarse, granular soil
having a silt or clay content of no more than 5 percent. The percentage of particles passing
the No. 200 sieve should be measured from that portion of the soil passing the
three-quarter-inch sieve. We recommend using material that meets these recommendations
in the roadway and parking areas, regardless of the time of year. It is anticipated that the
on-site soils cannot be used as structural fill because of the amount of silt and organics in
them and their high moisture contents.
LIMITATIONS
The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based on site
conditions as they existed at the time of our exploration and assume that the soils encoun-
tered in the test pits are representative of subsurface conditions on the site. If the subsur-
face conditions encountered during construction are significantly different from those
observed in our explorations, we should be advised at once so that we can review these
conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. Unanticipated soil
conditions are commonly encountered on construction sites and cannot be fully anticipated
GEO ECII CONSULTANTS,INC.
•
Northwest Church JN 94354
October 12, 1994 Page 11
by merely taking soil samples in test pits. Subsurface conditions can also vary between
exploration locations. Such unexpected conditions frequently require that additional
expenditures be made to attain a properly constructed project. It is recommended that the
owner consider providing a contingency fund to accommodate such potential extra costs
and risks. This is a standard recommendation for all projects.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Northwest Church and its representa-
tives for specific application to this project and site. Our recommendations and conclusions
are based on observed site materials, and selective laboratory testing and engineering
analyses. Our conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in
accordance with current standards of practice within the scope of our services and within
budget and time constraints. No warranty is expressed or implied. The scope of our services
does not include services related to construction safety precautions, and our recommenda-
tions are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences, or
procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. We
recommend including this report, in its entirety, in the project contract documents so the
contractor may be aware of our findings.
ADDITIONAL SERVICES
Geotech Consultants, Inc. should be retained to provide geotechnical consultation, testing,
and observation services during construction. This is to confirm that subsurface conditions
are consistent with those indicated by our exploration, to evaluate whether earthwork and
foundation construction activities comply with the intent of contract plans and specifications,
and to provide recommendations for design changes in the event subsurface conditions
differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. However, our work would not
include supervision or direction of the actual work of the contractor and its employees or
agents. Also, job and site safety, and dimensional measurements, will be the responsibility
of the contractor. The scope of our work did not include an environmental assessment, but
we can provide this service, if requested.
The following plates are attached and complete this report:
Plate 1 Vicinity Map
Plate 2 Site Exploration Plan
Plates 3 -5 Test Pit Logs
Plate 6 Footing Drain Detail
GEOTECII CONSULTANTS,INC.
Northwest Church JN 94354
October 12, 1994 Page 12
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. If you have any questions, or
if we may be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Respectfully Submitted,
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
-a o WAS• L�
,;,i5 p 0A c-,
/ � o lora,v,1-
-o iF Iwo o w /0/4I
". .
[EXPIRES 8;-,?i .s."
James R. Finley, Jr., P.E.
Principal
Ma. I/c 6L-e, :a A F
Marc. R. McGinnis, P.E.
Associate
JRF/MRM:jcv
GEO"ITCI I CONSUL;l'ANIS,INC.
TEST PIT 1
4` `mac
0 CP USCS Description
Gray/brown, gravelly, very silty SAND, wet, loose(FILL)
FILL -becomes blue/gray/brown with wood debris, very mnist
5 — Dark brown, sandy SILT with organics (old Topsoil)
snt): Reddish brown, silty SAND, mottled, wet, loose (Weathered Glacial Till)
�-becomes gray with traces of gravel, moist, dense (Glacial Till)
10 _
Test pit terminated at 8 feet below grade on 9-29-9-1.
_ No groundwater encountered during excavation.
No caving.
15_
TEST PIT 2
•q!R 0 `cam
O G° USCS Description
FILL Brown, silty SAND, moist, loose (FILL)
Blue/gray/brown, gravelly, sandy SILT, very moist, loose (FILL)
FILL
5 —
Old Topsoil
_ Reddish brown, silty, fine-to medium-grained SAND with traces of
_ gravel and rootlets, moist, loose (Weathered Glacial Till)
10 _. •.sM -becomes loose to medium-dense
-becomes medium-dense to dense
Test pit terminated at 12 feet below grade on 9-29-9=1.
15_ No groundwater encountered during excavation.
No caving.
TEST PIT LOGS
GEOTECH 34800 21st AVENUE SW
CONSULTANTS, INC. FEDERAL WAY
Job No: ® Date: Lagged by: Plate:
94354 OCT 1994 JHS 3
TEST PIT 3
cejg O G°c
USCS Description
Reddish brown, silty SAND with traces of gravel, moist. loose to
— FILL medium-dense (FILL)
5 _ • Old Topsoil
sM Reddish brown, silty SAND with traces of gravel and roots, very moist,
loose to medium-dense (Weathered Glacial Till)
_ \ -becomes gray, dense (Glacial Till)
10 _ Test pit terminated at 7 feet below grade on 9-29-94.
No groundwater encountered during excavation.
— No caving.
15
TEST PIT 4
oyes.
0 4 G° USCS Description
Gray/brown, silty SAND with concrete rubble, moist, loose to
FILL medium-dense (FILL)
-becomes loose
5 _ Old Topsoil
ML Gray, slightly sandy SILT with iron stains, moist, loose
-becomes stiff
10 _ Test pit terminated at 6 feet below grade on 9-29-94.
No groundwater encountered during excavation.
No caving.
15__
TEST PIT LOGS
,441, GEOTECH 34800 21st AVENUE SW
CONSUI.T.ANTS, INC. FEDERAL WAY
Job No: Date: Logg"d by. Plate:
94354 OCT 1994 ; 4
TEST PIT 5
IQs ...
0 G°c
USCS Description
Tannish gray, silty SAND with gravel, wood debris, very moist,
loose to medium-dense (FILL)
FILL
_ -becomes loose
5 Old Topsoil with roots
SM,t i Reddish brown, silty SAND with gravel, very moist, loose
-becomes medium-dense to dense
Test pit terminated at 6 feet below grade on 9-29-94.
10 _ No groundwater encountered during excavation.
No caving.
15
TEST PIT 6
0 G° USCS Description
FILL Brown, silty SAND with gravel, wet, loose (FILL)
FILL Dark brown, very silty SAND with wood,debris, very moist, loose (FILL)
5 — Old Topsoil with grass and roots
-••+•F •• Reddish brown, very silty SAND with rootlets, very moist, loose
:Ism (Weathered Glacial Till)
till N-becomes gray/brown, dense (Glacial Till)
10 _
Test pit terminated at 8 feet below grade on 9-29-94.
Groundwater encountered at 2 feet during excavation.
No caving.
15._
TEST PIT LOGS
,4410 GEOTECH 34800 21st AVENUE SW
CONSULTANTS, INC. FEDERAL WAY
Job No: Date: Logged by: Plate:
94354 OCT 1994 JH; 5
•
Slope backfill away from
foundation.
` ` \
Gy-----
T/GHTL/NE ROOF DRA/N
c
Do not connect to footing drain.
• BACKFILL
See text for VAPOR BARR/ER
requirements. SLAB
WASHED ROCK o.° '.o i `"\ \ \;,�
s', 4"min.
•6 min.
\ FREE-DRA/N/NG
NONWOVEN GEOTEXT/LE SAND/GRAVEL
FILTER FABRIC
\-- 4"PERFORATED HARD PVC P/PE
Invert at /east os /ow as footing and/or
craw/ space. Slope to drain. P/ace
weepho/es downward.
•
FOOTING DRAIN DETAIL
': GEOTECH 34800 21st AVENUE SW
CONSULTANTS FEDERAL WAY, WA
a
; — .— dot.No.: Dote: Sco/e: Plate:
94354 OCT 1994 N.T.S.
a
a
SSW 295TH ST
. ,
.1
•
SOUND . e • 11 *.. I � A.
., .
1...A .‘.;;.?vi
Gb1AY/r�.ti n I ,�
t, +:,o H St ' ! SW c 1
—1.— -----3/4 — -9/—W.-112::r.
�� 11
j 3p2 l..t:i.: -.S 511 301sT
.Yi
i` `, , , N •
� r SW 304TH ST 4 1 10 N a z is3°4 ST ,
Lmo
_ . ' ,
6'>,.(w ♦ 1 i I: t - 14*SSS t“Y a . Ar 305TH ST t �.M K
X511 ' • ++ Z ,„ • Sy"'S0 Th ,Pl Act 4"
itE: 1300 ♦ `r . R ^'.st,:F �.. '` SW N 30mi �I. ! +r 1
- . ' .
. ,
i.
•� sf�' 1:, 1�1�� O. 1 `i. y�lg.=y e� Lr srl, o.y -
/ , Si viii NI
MI
• T A iI " :r OTN
`,��� aH i `}, t � � +ropy a ! a 7!fi'" a
,3 t ••„rte t) 3� . ~� t t;
L� i
Y)))TN i
���3ur Ym 11 %I' - ': ' >4 °,a `31 ` ;Z.*.
6_ V f.1 r,µ7 s fi
f
I/5r 4 tl SW 314TH K -,,„4114,41,H ,: (
` • �j' �I f $ y ��v t �, a< �ISYtn ST,`_✓ ',al i Q 1.
\i•Q4 l: 4' ' J ,: ( 3 771 "2:
i 47,,.,„-i
S„-i yo l ._. r ?L�
11!y� �-. ��, .ct- ✓J �i � . r'• ' - > 1'� ��1:,-. 1� ■ � N n SH ]1(TH ,
livy r n.u �J .,,,ii!. is sT i 5 SH 31 TH 5557 I/ ]At' C JR RS i ., e 900
rer
iiii
•
Cith-
' rr•fl� � � II ---- 7j SW 317TH PL} I N n.�r-
E
S 1 1 0 iiSk t `0• r ate")',.T L1CAr Z 11 i34 SI ST y_.318TH ,"jy'_ 011 .9
t:ia SW 9 _ I A/-
3i 1 ylµ.' ivi.,:i 30 ” . .4 HPL HS 7- 1 1800 f lc) ,V
JamKil '
1Yfr, � Y7twaQQt � I. q;s r, ^Sbl s - ` .
'1:6
it �!" � �r� M 11.'14'1.,
mo s 7 1 4 ,'I Ji, ..: `'' ? SY ..1_ rN n 2100 1:1414'1:
A �tT >'�!•' r. gL 1 ;2 d *> :7M17Y ,1e W322ND ST Tt�+r, <g { T4 ,� I 1 1ryfy - 1 v` F cS�y111 .i4 ..rw al b'NO i.•• • . `'�'., ,�v117V sY . 'i'? -�� _ - Gr�'IIQ� F.
~ II ►� c1 OR I 23R0 5T ' �a:// �'3 LO s 1 � ;, _
I tAG:.PL. �. KC "s.1 LI `'7 Ad ; :e 3 .13'3-4
00 s '� 14,1‘,S1 tLi A )1ill IT!
p ALDER d
�i�' 14 .1-.:-'4* d >r -a -_ , •' ,rte..
lr+" �_t V r. L �' ' ' "' r SW 325 Pi-1- S-L - 4 3 H •
4
.r as a sW ,� ,; s1 sy �.,0. t% ,, COURSE y fh-447-,--
_ P
'� 'sr
v: 1 \• sJ 32g H ST ..,, I A 1300 l.
y sr Imp:.
I.' .13,30_.:--
a a� sW 318K t ' s' K6 • '1 •Itiy tgog .,�' tr'1' 90-•I 943261W: 5T i�Jw .;2 - -...
A G��'- - _ N 329TH ,e( 4.(.` I ..1._,-- / �y i
•rIR- • ,:"t :WIMP a.y 'S 3 i, r cry I > ,r irmipplgt
a .1:-
1
r
i 'S, a.sr ' r - r,sntuv1-n Or h-:;iq z 4`
_ v.� '< e�, �� ''? r0 5 `lam E T �.�J'i a ail w rnu Q
No 1i, t ,, .. t1 V. �� .it Y. R i •�.,. ,1SW C A1,1\1', n� .11, c1 /
j�-1-1 � � � ,/ � � !•]! ��o�rrlvT ,r �j '.---"34H-s\%1 ill!
I`-.L '� i
�,r ^ R - I:YIfY �,.. =SN 331T P -•i N K •..9�'icros• o a w333rmsr a ,, S�
X �o• tr y lana u y_ ] 9
"�s {4;:r.,,‘ a:,'r�• rs v.1 ie 'y,,>, .311 K ' INN Si---� 1 _ _.
N�: H /� 'k �i}'d '< ,�` m .. lee ". 'q---' l-V ILLI N� £A a
4000_ iR u' 1 ��s ;-
4✓ R is sigA,;___,L ..Fs I <
/ •,v, ,A I e . . ..4'.......
..h.+ see. t a SW 336TH 4ST
, �,1 }TL{.' f all r. j � '. 337M Y n7 �� t..,,,;"' PO
(.E 4F 'ill."'
e , _' \ • .O T sit 1 Le r-SSW 337TH n Q f ,.
s1. \) t I., 1, 't - :: 1r < SW 3 -ST \i„,4 1
�utN 1�_r .s�t % • - _ 3 r r ,lig, s SIJ 339 H__ ST
�/t,.t , < •j ii i.'"f$'d.✓ 151: •,: 0TH AtE
ix .� . -SW v. _�. .�a .SY 39157- i7--_-.___---— 4:
,t0 7 .•j} :, r 43RD ST NE_ rl1�1i� of inn sW T e n` _ �t
I,. _ ` r 2: 4<HO,ST �t Jl3 ar sW>< 1 19 c��
VICINITY MAP
GEOTECH 34800 21st AVENUE SW
CONSULTANTS FEDERAL WAY, WA
i
A.� ��� �` -� Job No. Dare Lopped By, /Note
94354 OCT 1994 1
SW 348th STREET •
(- .. I I
I I
I-- — -I I I
r.� I____,I
I I I QTP-3
EXISTING PARKING i I I
I
I N .
I- - - - - - - TP-2
I r----- �---- 0
T EXISTING , �%
I I I YOUTH ' Q
I PORTABLE I TP-4 \
() EXISTING PROPOSED
(_, ( CHURCH � TEMPORARY
BUILDINGS
I I TP- 1
I I Q PROPOSED PARKING
r---I
I r� j�
I I I PROPOSED---
I I COVERED I
I I I PORCH 1 Q
I I L- -_-- I - - TP-5
I I TP-6 0
II I-------
_J I PROPOSED FUTURE
I CHURCH EXPANSION
I
I EXISTING PARKING I
I
I I
L__ I
I- --------- I
•
SITE EXPLORATION PLAN
34800 21st AVENUE SW
EST FEDERAL WAY, WA
,--ti GEOTECH
CONSULTANTS
Job No. Dole, Sco/t P/oh -
94354 OCT 1994 2
4.A..-. - --- -
U)
W
2
W
Q
as
LEGEND:
O APPROXIMATE SITE EXPLORATION PLAN
34800 21st AVENUE SW
FEDERAL WAY, WA
No.� Dote: Scale: P/ott:
4354 OCT 1994 2
G E O T E C H August 13, 1998
CONSULTANTS, INC.
13256 NE 20th Street,Suite 16 JN 94354
Bellevue.WA 98005
(425)747-5618
FAX(425)747-8561
Northwest Church
P.O. Box 25110
Federal Way, Washington 98093
Attention: Steve Watt, Administrative Pastor
Subject: Supplemental Subsurface Investigation
Dear Mr. Watt:
Proposed Church Building Addition
34800 - 21st Avenue Southwest
Federal Way, Washington
In July 1998, Geotech Consultants, Inc. excavated two additional test pits in the proposed location
for your new building addition. Previously, Geotech Consultants, Inc. had conducted a
geotechnical engineering study of the property. Our report was dated October 12, 1994. At the
time of our previous site exploration, a slab-on-grade structure was planned. However, we found 6
to 7 feet of fill and topsoil in the proposed building location. Basement construction is now planned
since the fill and topsoil must be removed from below the building. The purpose of excavating
additional test pits in the basement area was to confirm soil conditions and to observe groundwater
conditions.
The location of the two additional test pits are illustrated on the attached site exploration plan which
also shows the location of the test holes previously excavated in 1994. Test Pit 1-98 encountered 7
to 8 feet of topsoil and fill overlying a sandy glacial till described as a gray, silty sand with some
gravel. This soil is very dense to a depth of approximately 8 feet below the ground surface. No
groundwater seepage was observed in the test pit which was left open for 35 minutes. Test Pit 2-
98, located at the northeast corner of the building site, encountered approximately 7 feet of fill and
topsoil overlying gray, silty sand which is fine- to medium-grained and medium-dense. The sand
became dense at approximately 10 feet. Concrete slab rubble was observed in Test Pit 2-98 within
the fill at a depth of approximately 4 feet. No groundwater was encountered
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
It is our opinion that in general, the recommendations given in our October 12. 1994 report remain
valid. Building foundations should to be placed on dense, native soils. It is our opinion that the
allowable foundation bearing capacity can be increased to 4,000 pounds per square foot (psf) with
a one-third increase for seismic loads. For seismic design, the soil profile type is Sc (very dense
as described in the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC).
The native glacial till soils are relatively impervious and often there is perched
il) d
groundwater between the near-surface soils and the native soils. Groundwater was not
encountered in one of the two test pit excavations. We recommend that drains be
placed around the perimeter of the basement excavation and under the basement slab.
•
Northwest Church JN 94354
August 13, 1998 Page 2
We recommend that at least three interior drains be constructed in an east-to-west direction.
These drains should consist of 4-inch perforated PVC pipe surrounded with washed rock. The
drains should be sloped towards the outside perimeter. We further recommend that at least 6
inches of clean pea-gravel or washed crushed rock be placed under the slab along with a 6-mil
plastic vapor barrier. The outside walls should be waterproofed using Bentonite panels or a
membrane waterproofing system. Simply spraying a thin layer of asphalt emulsion over the
perimeter wall is not considered waterproofing. The recommendations for foundation drain
construction and backfill of foundation walls are included in our October 1994 geotechnical report.
The following are attached and complete this letter report:
• Site Exploration Plan
• Test Pit Logs
If there are any questions, or if we can be of further service, please contact us.
Respectfully submitted,
GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC.
FIwAs
w� o N�•4'i.
ti �4 c .
.q'l. yitti iZ ?:i
SJONAL E\4
(EXPIRES 8/ 17/ 19 (
James R. Finley, P.E.
Principal •
JRF:mmm
GEOTECII CO.\SCLT-4.\TS, /.`C.
sz
t `s �� `aie TEST PIT 1-98
pQi -G,O c>` \S Description
2" Sod
— FILL Gray-brown, silty SAND with gravel and roots, moist, medium-dense (FILL)
- becomes dark gray
5 -- FILL Brown, highly organic SILT/SAND, moist, medium-dense (FILL)
-
ML TOPSOIL
I IGray, sandy SILT, very moist, medium-dense to dense with iron staining
10 -- SM 1 Light brown to gray, silty SAND with some gravel, moist, dense to very dense
(Sandy Phase Glacial Till)
* Test Pit was terminated at 11 feet on July 14, 1998.
* No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation.
* No caving was observed during excavation.
15—
A TEST PIT 2-98
0� ,Sc'G°�� ro` J`'G Description
— \2" Sod
Gray to dark gray, silty SAND with gravel, moist, dense to very dense (FILL)
FILL -with concrete slab rubble
5 —
TOPSOIL
Gray, silty SAND, fine-to medium-grained, very moist, medium-dense
— SM
10 —
- becomes light brown, dense
* Test Pit was terminated at 11 feet on July 14, 1998.
* No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation.
* Some caving was observed within fill during excavation.
15—
TEST PIT LOG
G E O T E C H 34800 - 21st Avenue Southwest
CONSULTANTS, INC.
Federal Way, Washington
Job No: I Date: Logged by: Plate:
9.135-1 July 1998 1 DB
G
21st AVENUE SW
r---J
LI___ _ 1f_ -1
r _'
I �
I I
I- --� -� -- -� m
�— x
f11E 1
x 1 . I 0m I
i
2 t o a � I 0
1 I nxi73 0 33 --I I
> I co = G) x
1 I v)
o
Z ......•• •4=•••
-- I
0 O� I w
j 1p r--1 A
I 13 m
I w
i 1 -► ixi 0-� 7
1 �C�( _i N
' t'==1 r -4
-1 -' i m 1 ,_; 7)
-0 v L__J I r---- m
0 iN t_-----___- - _- -i
O '
/el 0310
c .4 (.__ _ ___ ___ _ -
10
_ xi O c m 33
Co m - K0
033 "13 - 0 0
00 N z 330 Q
= U) m G) > m
020 v
mo o -( -V
-13m lil lo w
A C -{ 33 13
z -4 'V X i
V) C I - A1
— 77 Ut Z
O m C)
Z
:.r
It
• �•` "fit r �!�;a,
I ; I LOTS d DR
Iy WAYS
! , l
3 4 t h S--- T� T — + I— ---_ _ I — —
— U w • w a
44
EXISTpKs (=Xlsh CUPNa�falilllrKK• 23—
GAS IrALYE
�` It{ -- 44�1� C9 g;ol O`O.G.ss
/ ..• •........•.•..• -- --- —
■�1' /� .♦♦•: ♦.• .• • ••'♦ '•••••♦• • . • ♦•• .'• ••••••♦•♦'♦'♦'••,• ♦ • ♦ ••♦•♦•♦• •,♦•• • • • ♦ • ••♦•.••'•'••♦•♦ • , ♦• �' Y-•--r�.•-•Y--rr-,. Tom..—..�_- ._-._ -._-_
SIT po
!I i I ♦•:,•, •,• ••( i I.•.1:. I I I' rI •' �_-I�...I„ •� - I } ♦ • • f .♦',•.♦ l.,r f, ♦•f •• .'♦.: •♦ . .••••• •,% •♦ [ J p,3 II •,.�•♦r• h. .
�RSI t
. ..
• 1••�'�rtt•� NOTE: ALL PARKIt C, gRgCEg DRIVES, AND CUR8CUT5 I$ii ��jlp(b7 --C EXISTING STOf�1 DETENTION FOND ,','••
eo �I I ---'=- t ' ARE EXISTING UNLE�S.NOTED OTHERWISE I$ 3bl $1 G
r ♦ ♦ .
CA S
1
CI' --cbl9 I d -
•° C C C C I
I c cic c —_c
Ultf �''` NSW 4•lQl f�r0! !I I •'•:8x17C 'Pl•: ( ry'�t� _
n W� l S n! I I° .. 5 .IH C 15 1i4 I`f G<°tRs I l
tltl Nam• .'.W rt�11 1*IW a � { vN U••i`v' Si � ` .5. #Vv t J��. �I ,•:. _ � /� c'I I 9�c19 H C C G G C IG _ _G �', p�V�St1�l�IJ .. [[ 8. x18 � ��
/t �+ J
�, Wttti•r ��. 22' � 32� �� I ,•, -- ,. I� r� WAW �dR� C {
8x 9 � 11 uo
`•'.IVtii x�o NtG `�[`
O! ,I.,,, p I w 36ZA0
♦ •/: / . ; , , , ; ' •: <' �,+ - ri • ,
Q I I 7 ; . •.' 83x18 ffi ; ','!, ,,, , ; `_ MQWUVI' Of . W..,
..
_., h _ G
F'ROF'05 C� N V Q �0 �'t14t11�m I t c EXISTING
8xl — G axi Alga
ED BUILDING I 5
SLOPE
�L1L� EXISTING TYPE IV LANDSCAPING 0l1VVA�I• ` ;3 II �'` .•.'-C-_/._ I ,! �\ — �-
`} : •
® PROPOSED FOUNDATION AND SCREENING LANDSCAPING all HC
A
.. o \3 S
EXISTING FOUNDATION
d
r
�—
2
0
C)
t, i
C
t=i
z
0
Ir
a
AND SCREENING LANDSCAPING --^^ LI --•— WC -� `° PII� RpiH `\ 8 --j p
fit" W (-(1C � dUt1 Upa I ' • �� s
•+•.•.♦.• EXISTING TYPE III LANDSCAPING I '♦'. SIB G N
6xL1' Zy"
MM I I I I, '� r. fU IIG�i. -� z
EX157JNG TYPE I LANDSCAPING I • I � ® o
•�' • ' �� ri izr! w
�'°I•', '', •, • • •�iSClt.`'v t 41' \ Q rn
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER g$ r � �J pp V" / ` ` ( � . .:
EXISTING STORM SEWER gp I (` ` �• �J I v� l } r. I I •' • — rU �WI �CQ }}" ' 1! �`1 i i //y C ....
EXISTING WATER --..-.._..
EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT W : / / �j Z I >' I
�s I NCI •. --� � I - 1
I ' ' '''• --�' 372lI (Mn'tt �istt�t ; 1 - `;
I n � •. :':' He � MAW
a - �,!� a
nKlIX C.It
IAI�uL
III
I I I . ♦ .y •.. _._...,.....,.' �� k 141= o to
21±
, �o I ♦ • 0 [ +V
I
`�-/2► �9 Kv. 5�11111, I •.�: _II- ARS 8 .IHG�C. . Y r I -ICJ '� �" ./lI.
T •'Val.
;1 r ti'T 7` I I J m411 got,i !(tN�t:iJI5T a0S
X IN
- ._ I _
S
+•••!'
♦ + G �a , , 311•� SID hM.U-'lU tlb. - xlydR
- �-„�/ �, � � `"' � �' rJ �� .-- -_--_ ..__ _ �-' I I . •: • ♦ • ♦ - \ - _ .. � ; , , , 1 � Ai '�U�7t•-•. 6 CARS' 2� GAI@�3
tutu/ 3 '
�+ 1 _
SW 9t a�I I •••�.�. G / /, i, s� '�0 -4x16 t3xi6-- 8x16A1 9 .13"A om I
c 1% l.•t. ` lh��l.. 11,� 'K, a, •. •. G '';'; ; ; %,;' ;-; - r — u1: C� l
�101
Saoue
I
�'
!it tlT���i CAI?g
I 1 � I Jj' -----__.. - J I �i/' .•+P I
I�I
lJL
,
5
• CstlNb �Mt=uC• ra�j , i �C,ISI" tZ..K.•11�Ca r T �� �t�It�
ac5nm ". ...y. ��/�j/' y j'
' 6���� 1 lit 11 S•�• Q • p I I I ' • ' .� // �/�1 �� I .I n1...._.......-......,.. ....,� .....__�G,l ,. ._�_ t♦fiWu1. 1 W
SI. UG141
)1 , , it I �I� II '.•:.•: r _ g
I A g �`o r
II' +
8bxl9HUN Z3l,Qs
21 SIG914
�I N
f
I �;
.. .�{/� j�J'� � • • �I�'Y ~ � ♦1/ V.. O .. _.. _._ _ [ ♦ •♦ • � `v..:Y...... Mir } •' _—+_� _' I
�vYIfV`L-.1Mi/ .. �� �i '.• •.•.•.•� ! I I '3�
_ - II I l •• .•. I o EXIST _
A I . . • .
9x 0 RS I TRASH U`r
.!(�S'�"I�II'. (K1di�f?l ��tJ(�•�.— F 1*,lIW• l�l (I Extst• t�►>4�uJ r li .•,'♦••••• �t I I ( I ENG, a
t-Vo1' prtvEMly►at' I'�5,��y rE�aatn>,�OKV 6a,C)55V•F• L1 , I II ..•.•. •.• �v. I 1. I I
���' �M�VIOU`� SU ct✓. - �W e�,il.k�� 2'j ti'I.b c, . +� I ' ! C I / % _d � I I I � I I
• • • • • • • i • i i � i ♦ ♦ ♦ e ♦ � ♦ � e ��� ♦ e eeDOe00e0ee� � ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ eeeeeeeeeeeeeeee��eeeeeeeeeee��e�e����eeee�e���e���ee�eeeee�e�eee�e�eee-..+- ,,♦�e�e��/f///���``� e /��//�J/�/ /'{J///�//J• J//%� i /////�/�e���1
I � t ! ,� a � # � � . r • • • • • • • • n • � • •.a � • • •eie eDi�i�iei�i�ie�e ewe ♦ ei�i�i�i�i�ieaeee eae eee��.ht�A?���?e�0ee eeeeeee��.e.e.e.e �.%i.%i.%e.e� i e i.i.i.i.i I.i.i � i e.i e.� � ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ 1 ♦ ♦ ♦ J ��
♦eee�ee�eeeeeeeeeeiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiei�ieieieiei�ieieiiei0'i�♦e►6i�4i
� , r ~ � e ee.e.e.e,e e..e eeeee.e.eee.e.� ee e. ♦ e. s � ,
d
• +a# ��WIN
ING - ,?l, ; 31o•ob� Mn�i. ({edit 4ppo'
Accessible parking spaces shall conform to WAC
51-20 in dimension and construction. "Standard"
accessible spaces shall have the following minimum
dimensions: 98" wide, 60" wide aisle. "Van Accessible" I 51
ti spaces shall have the following dimensions: 98" wide, I
96" =-.__
wide access aisle. Maximum slope of accessible
areas shall be 1" to 48
l t<I^o d 'Ci �aCt;t1 ON ! TMq t �I I h'E M OWS Or PkOeK (AM 41
DEPT. OF COM ` UNiTV DEVELOPMENT
34800 21 st Avenue SW 01_101137_CO
COMM AIDD
NORTHWEST CHURCH 03/23/01
Q
DATE SUBMITTED_ _ pATC APPRQVED� APPROVED BY,D���
SHEET NO.
�, I ,]
!
MaIT 1 ED
212001