HomeMy WebLinkAboutABALONE ST, 4526I'll, 2""'
"al
KIM
"I M ... .... ...
Building Department Inspections Call:
(360) 473-5870
WATER - Public Works - Water:
(360) 473-5927
PW - Public Works - Engineering:
(360) 473-5270
HEALTH - Kltsap Co. Health District:
(360) 337-5285
Fire - Fire Department,
(360) 473-5386
L&I - Dept. of Labor and Industry:
(360) 4154000
I'Vy
v'�
51111'ral,
- Property lines shall be properly identified and marked before
foundation footing inspection. Setbacks are measured to the
finished wall structure.
- Reinspection fee may be assessed if inspection has been
requested when not ready or corrections are not completed.
- Permit, approved plans, engineering, and inspection card shall
be on site during construction or Reinspection Fee may be
assessed.
Inspection
. . . . . ................. .. .. .............. ..
Approved
.... ................
Date Notes
--- ------- - .....
Cie® Report for Structural Fill and Compaction, Soil
..... . .............Lw.
11,10
. . ........... ... ...........
. . . ..... . ...... .....
.B.Paring . ... . ................... ...... . . . . . .
Foundation Footings, Property lines shall be properly identified
. . . . ...... ......
— — ---- --- ----------- ------
Foundation Walls Hold downs
. . . ......
j&-
. .
... ...... .
L&I - Electrical Cover Inspection Before Framing (State of
— - — ------------------
Was"ton)
S h a ar Wall Panels/Braced Wall Panels
. . ... ..... ..... ........ ........
11111116
.. .. .......... . ......... . .................
� . . ..... . .. ....... . . ................ ............
........ - --- - --- . ......... .....
Framing Inspection (Mechanical & Plumb Rough -in, Elect Cover
_1__"�j';;, . . . . . . ............. .
2j.t
Completed) - - ----- ........... ....
Paved Driveway & parking aress
. . ...... .... . . . ..................
. ... ..
L - Electrical Final Inspection
7,`2% �i "'Z-
-------------
Final Inspection - Building
............... ..... ..... . . . — 11 "I . . . ...... . ...
. . . .......... . --- . . . ..... ... ...
FINAL B UIL IN (360) 473-5870
All oj'the above must be approved
Occup ands y approval fir SFR ori�y - Commercial
structures require as separate Certifcate of Occupancy.
DO NOT OCCUPY BUILDING WITHOUT BUILDING DEPARTMENTAPPROVAL
PROTECT THIS CARD FROM THE WEATHER
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BUILDING DIVISION
345 — 6th Street, Suite 600
Bremerton, Washington
(360) 473-5275
INSPECTION REPORT
PERMIT #: �.. ..`' �.....a_
leo
r
ADDRESS:
Date: Phone:
.,�
.._..�...............I�SPECTO.
R
RECEIVE]h
City of RremertkERMIT CENTER
. .. . ....... . .
NUG 2 3 201Z
RESIDENTIAL
(") (A ill
g pp
BuildinPermit pp
lication
DeparD�niern�915-
ent I ��
Do, artment of nimgit„Tcmcylb Street. 600 - Bremerton - WA - 98iii7,187�
(360) 473-5275 * Fax (360) 473-5278 * www.d.bremertonma.us
Site Address:
To apply for a property address, contact Public Works at (360) 473-5270
CONTRACTOR:
Zi
Cid ,State, Z
...........
.......... 7,s,/
License # & Ex . Date:
Contact Name:
Contact Phone #:
3$'!-v?i,
Email address: ",Aw,(`L eawsr5b'�A
Tax ID/Parcel
24ewer
septic
4V OWNER: JV-AvGdS�
Authorized Agent Name:
Address:
CitV, State, Zip.,
Phone #: (
Email address:
)E91LEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 0 RESIDENTIAL REBUILD
tj NEW DUPLEX Fj RESIDENTIAL ADDITION
NEW MANUFACTURED HOME F-1 RESIDENTIAL REPAIR
NEW GARAGE/CARPORT F-1 NEW ACCESSORY BUILDING
DEMOLITION sf Interior sf Exterior” sf Foundation Wall" sf Roof I Section"
** Separate demolition permit and fees required.
Contact Public Works for sewer cap permit (473-5270). Sewer must be capped prior to demolition permit issuance.
= OTHER:
IS THIS PROPERTY WITHIN 200 FEET OF A SHORELINE? YES NO 5�L
Scope of work proposed:
Square Footage: Building: 1st Floor Basement Garage: 1st Floor ;410
2nd Floor Other 2nd Floor-.
Deck(s):
Valuation Plan!ReviewFee Permit Fee Surcharge Total Fees
a following the date of application shall expire by limitation, and plans and other d
A plicafortin which no permli", t4 'hi 180dop/1",
ri within to o a data
submitted for review may the F efj,t(5, ihe applicant or destroyed by the building official. The building official may extend the time
for action by the licen 0 -a per! rri rOxceeding 180 days on request by the applicant, showing that circumstances beyond the control of
the applicant I v re d actio fro being taken. No applicant shall be extended more than once. In order to renew action on an
H,
applicationxpli he , a lipdnt shall resubmit plans and pay anew plan review fee.
I
Ap 1cant' ature Date
Rev. Oct, 2008 (Continued on back)
1. Site Address:
RESIDENTIAL SITE PLAN QUESTIONNAIREW
IZI-7a' i -A, --0
2. Are any areas being developed on the site within 200 feet of the shoreline? Ye
NOTE: If yes, please fill out a Shoreline Permit Submittal Checklist (WAC 173 -27 -
CRITICAL AREA CHECKLIST: -
3. Slope is calculated by dividing the vertical Check all that apply ' to the site and areas within 200 feet of the
distance by the horizontal distance and then site.
multiplying the result by 100, Example:
Flat: less than 5 -feet elevation change over entire site.
Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15%.
Vertical�
Distance = 20' Hilly: slopes present on site of more -than 15% and
.less than 30%.
Horizon -
tal Steep: grades of'greater than 3Q% present onsite.
Distance =100'Other (P , . describe): F
Vertical 20 feet
lease
Horizo0ta1100 feet= .2 X 100 = 20% slope
4. Does the site or properties within 200 feet of the site contain
areas of standing water, creek or an area
where water flows across the ground surface? Yes
5. Is there an apparent wetland present on the site or on properties within 200 feet of the site? Yes bo
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WORKSHEET:
6. What is the amount of grading proposed (in cubic yards), not including foundation area?
Fill amount Cut amount
Total grading.
NOTE: Grading over 50 cubic yards requires a separate permit.
Will the grading material be imported or exported? Yee
7. Please provide the following information. The setbacks are measured from the finished. exterior wall
of a structure to the lot line, not from the foundation. Accurately represent your setbacks on site plan.
*Use this as the second fronts yard setback
for corner lots and through lots.
**Development Coverage is defined as
that portion of a lot covered by impervious
surface areas of all structures, and
impervious paved areas; such as
driveways and walkways.
Residential Questionnaire Revision: October 2008
CITY OF BREMERTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
345 - 6th Street, Bremerton, WA 98337
(360) 473.5275 Fax: (360) 4735278
PERMIT NUMBER: BB12 00440
DATE ISSUED: 10/01/2012
ASSESSOR NUMBER:
5570-000-033-0000
ZONING:
WPSAP
SITE ADDRESS:
4526 ABALONE ST
APPLICANT NAME:
L.A. WILLIAMS CONST LTD
PHONE:
(253) 381-0292
ADDRESS:
PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
OWNER NAME:
L.A. WILLIAMS CONST LTD
PHONE:
(253) 381-0292
ADdRESS:.
PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
CONTRACTOR:
L A WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION LTC
PHONE.
(253) 381-0252
ADDRESS:
PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
LENDER NAME:
Setbacks:
PHONE:
0-
ADDRESS:
Sanitation Method:
SUBMITTED:
08/2312012
APPROVED: 09/40; \ EXPIRATION:
I..
03/30/2013 STATUS: ISSUED
.....__ �.
VALUATION:
$16,486.80
Building Permit • Nbg171echAKfal/Plumbing
Building Permit
$234.00 2211
NEW DETACHED GRAVE
50°% Plan Review Fee
$76.05 16-4580
Building Code Editidh
IRC 2009
State Surcharge
$4.50 0236
Occupancy Group:
U
TOTAL FEES:
$314.55
Type of Construction:
Type V, Unprotected
Flood Zone:
Setbacks:
(Front) (Side) (Rear) (Other)
Sanitation Method:
Number of Bedrooms:
Square Footage: U Utility/Private Garage, Type VB 440
Inspection Requests FIRE: Fire Inspections (360) 473.5386
DCD: Building Inspections (360) 473-5870 HEALTH: Kitsap County Health District (360) 337.5285
L&I: Department of Labor and industries (360) 415-4000 PW&U: Public Works - Engineering (360) 473-5270
This permit shall become null and void if the described work authorized by this permit has not commenced within 180 days from the date of issuance, or if the work is suspended or
abandoned at any time after the work is commenced for a period of 180 days. It is the responsibility of the permit holder to see that the required inspections are made. Failure to obtain
required inspections may result in stoppage of the work until such tin) -that,, The permit holder can susbstantiate to the City of Bremerton that the concealed work meets or exceeds code
requirements. Any demolition, testing, or financial burden shall be erne sjt rw,�Jy by the permit holder. Failure to substantiate code requirements will indemnify the City against any and all
responsibility or liability connected with the construction I hereby r �srthly tht II'h�ave read and examined this permit and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of laws and
ordinances governing this type of work will be complifpJ wito ref er spQeifiet9 herein or not. The granting of permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel provisions of
any Slate or local law regulating construction or th +(yc: 1cr enc f thrp i ongruction. If listing the owner as general contractor, I certify that I am exempt from the requirements of the State
Contractor's Registration Law under Section 3 : hmp)�
ei -t awi�gf"1967,: All revisions to an approved plan require DCD review and approval prior to performing work. All building and
tenant occupancy permits are required to pad n ple s f w4 7rw priq t2 hermit expiration and obtain a certificate of occupancy prior to use or occupancy.
I have read, and agree to abi
SIGNATURE OF OWNER OR
AGENT:
PRINTED NAME:
all conditions of zoning,
DATE:
codes, and State and Federal laws.
CONDITIONS
City of Bremerton's approval of this application pertains only to the City's regulatory jurisdiction, and thus compliance with
regulations does not necessarily ensure compliance with federal or state laws.
10. (DCD-50) Final Inspection Required: All building permits shall have a final inspection performed and
approved by the City of Bremerton Department of Community Development prior to permit
expiration. The failure to request a final inspection or failure to obtain final approval prior to
expiration may require a reactivation fee, or a new permit application if more than a year has
passed with no activity.
10. (DCD-14) DCD: Approved Plans, Engineering, Site Plan, Permit, and Conditions shall remain on site
and be available for inspection.
Any changes to plans shall be approved before construction is performed. Architect or
engineer of record shall approve the change before submitting a revision. A revision is
subject to a revision fee and additional fees for plan review and inspections.
10. (DCD-47) DCD: Reinspection Fee: All approved plans, the printed building permit, and the permit
inspection placard, are required to be on-site for inspection purposes, and work to be
inspected shall be complete and ready for inspection. If an inspection is called for and plans
are not available on site, or the work is not ready for inspection, approval will not be granted.
In addition, a re -inspection fee will be charged and must be collected by the Department of
Page 1 of 3
CITY OF BREMERTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
345 - 6th Street, Bremerton, WA 98337
(360)473-5275 Fax: (360) 473-5278
PERMIT NUMBER: BB12 00440
DATE ISSUED: 10/01/2012
ASSESSOR NUMBER:
5570-000-033-0000
ZONING:
WPSAP
SITE ADDRESS:
4526 ABALONE ST
APPLICANT NAME:
L.A. WILLIAMS CONST LTD
PHONE:
(253) 381-0292
ADDRESS:
PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
OWNER NAME:
L.A. WILLIAMS CONST LTD
PHONE:
(253) 381-0292
ADDRESS:
PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
CONTRACTOR:
L A WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION LTC
PHONE:
(253) 381-0252
ADDRESS:
PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
LENDER NAME:
PHONE.
0-
ADDRESS:
SUBMITTED:
08/23/2012
APPROVED:
09/27/2012
EXPIRATION:
03130/2013 STATUS: ISSUED
Community Development prior to any further inspections being performed or approvals
granted..
10. (DCD-02) DCD: Validity of permit. The issuance or granting of a permit shall not be construed to be a..,.
permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of the Washington State
Building code or of any other ordinance of the City of Bremerton. Permits presuming to give
authority to violate or cancel the provisions of the Washington State Building code or other
ordinances of the City of Bremerton shall not be valid. The issuance of a permit based on
construction documents and other data shall not prevent the building official from requiring
the correction of errors in the construction documents and other data. The building official is
also authorized to prevent occupancy or use of a structure where in violation of the 4�
Washington State Building code or of any other ordinances of the City of Bremerton.
...
10. (OTHER) Fire separation distance of less than 5 feet from the property line to an exterior wall requires �,F6(l
fire -rated construction of at least 1 hour with exposure from both sides with a design tested in
accordance with ASTM E 119 or UL 263 (IRC Table R302.1). Fire separation distance is
measured from the face of the stud to the property line at a right angle from the wall (See
IRC R202, amended, for definition).
Projections may be 1 -hour rated on the underside when fire separation distance is between 2
and 5 feet. Openings in walls are not allowed when fire separation distance is less than 3
feet, and up to 25% is allowed when the fire separation distance is 3 to 5 feet. Penetrations
of the fire -rated wall shall comply with R317.3 when fire separation distance is less than 5
feet. n I
11. (DCD-42) Geotechnical inspections and tests shall be performed in accordance with the geo-technical
engineer's requirement and recommendations. All inspection results or density tests shall be
provided to the Department of Community Development prior to requesting any soils related
inspections (such as footing or foundation inspections). Y
Required geotechnical inspections:
1. Soil bearing
12. (DCD-060) Property lines shall be properly marked. Setbacks are measured to the fnished wall of the t
structure.
13. (DCD-38) Shear Wali Inspection: Due to the complexity of the shear wall nailing patterns and hold- "
down requirements contained within the engineered lateral design, a separate shear wall
inspection is required for this project. This inspection should be requested and performed
prior to the installation of exterior wall coverings, prior to the framing inspection, such that all
shear -wall nailing patterns may be observed, and the installation of all required hold-down
devices and required straps, etc. are in place in accordance with the engineer's lateral
design.
14. (DCD-19) Engineered Woad Floor Trusses & Truss Roof Systems shall have a site specific engineered
design (Framing Pian) available at time of Under Floor and/or Framing Inspection.
15. (OTHER) Basic BS 11 00002 may be used during the current code cycle of the 2009 International
Residential Code. The current code cycle is expected to end on June 30, 2013. J
16. (LU9) All driveways and areas used for loading, parking, and maneuvering motorized vehicles shall,
have a paved surface.
17. (OTHER) Development must comply with BMC and the Bay Vista Sub -Area Plan. E, "
Page 2 of 3
CITY OF BREMERTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
345.6th Street, Bremerton, WA 98337
(360) 473-5275 Fax: (360) 473-5278
PERMIT NUMBER: BB12 00440
DATE ISSUED: 10/0112012
ASSESSOR NUMBER:
5570-000-033-0000
ZONING:
WPSAP
SITE ADDRESS:
4526 ABALONE ST
APPLICANT NAME:
L.A. WILLIAMS CONST LTD
PHONE:
(253) 381-0292
ADDRESS:
PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
OWNER NAME:
L.A. WILLIAMS CONST LTD
PHONE:
(253) 381-0292
ADDRESS:
PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
CONTRACTOR:
L A WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION LTC
PHONE:
(253) 381-0252
ADDRESS:
PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
LENDER NAME:
PHONE:
0-
ADDRESS:
SUBMITTED: 08/23/2012 APPROVED: 09/27/2012 EXPIRATION: 03/30/2013 STATUS: ISSUED
MINIMUM INSPECTIONS REQUIRED
To request an inspection, please call (360) 473-5870 and be sure to provide your permit number, name on permit, site address, contact phone
number, and inspection type. To register for on-line inspection access, visit the City's website at www.ci.bremerton.wa.us.
Geotechnical Report for Structural Fill and Compaction, Soil Bearing
Foundation Footings, Property lines shall be properly identified
Foundation Walls / Hold downs
L&I - Electrical Cover Inspection Before Framing (State of Washington)
Shear Wall Panels/Braced Wall Panels
Framing Inspection (Mechanical & Plumb Rough -In, Elect Cover Completed)
Paved Driveway & parking areas
L&I - Electrical Final Inspection
Final Inspection - Building
Page 3 of 3
AT THE TIME OF OUR SITE VISIT, THE BUILDING SUBGRADE WAS EXCAVATED AND
CONCRETE FORM WORK WAS IN-PLACE FOR 4525 ABALONE ST. NLO'S.
REPRESENTATIVE EVALUATED THE BUILDING'S FOUNDATION SUBGRADE WITH A 0.5
INCH DIAMETER STEEL T -PROBE WITH SOIL PENETRATIONS OF ROUGHLY 1 TO 2 INCHES
WAS GENERALLY OBSERVED. NLO HAS DETAILED THE FOUNDATION SUBGRADE AREA
THAT WAS EVALUATED TODAY, WHICH. AMOUNTS TO THE BUILDING SUBGRADE AREA
FOR THE GARAGE AND MAIN RESIDENCE. NLO HAS ALSO RE -OBSERVED SOME
ADDITIONAL OVEREXCAVATION, PER THE.RECOMMENDATIONS IN OUR EARLIER DAILY
FIELD REPORT DFR 2.
IN OUR OPINION, THE PROBED BUILDING FOUNDATION SUBGRADE AREAS SHOULD
PROVIDE ADEQUATE SUPPORT FOR THE NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
NLO HAS OBSERVED ADDITIONAL OVEREXCAVATION, PER THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN OUR EARLIER DAILY FIELD
REPORT DFR 2. IN OUR OPINION OVEREXCAVATED AREA IS SUITABLE AND SHOULD PROVIDE ADDUEQUATE
FOUNDATION SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE.
APPROXIMATE BUILDING
LAYOUT
GARAGE
MAIN RESIDENCE
SCALE 1" =12'
NLO WILL RETURN TO THE SITE AT THE CONTRACTOR'S REQUEST.
F�r'S
f �
C
A,. ptanarpermits on-sito YES Q NO
Project tb. Permit No
NLO's
2.
if N0, contact the bulicing aeWmentor a*ain:
Contractor
Lo99ed BY ..._,.�...
b NameA
.Job Na'nber
WRJ
jAbalone
7888 3
4! ` N.L.Olson&Associates,Inc.
a "
Engineering. Planning and Surveying
Time
1330
t d P r of "W
1345 10110/2012 Wed
2453 BETHEL AVENUE
�
P.O. BOX 637.
Atte time
mn iv " ......_..� 4t�ata7'tar
ORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON 98366-0637
CIOUdy 50's
(Daily Field Report)
TOtei lioixs
�w. . -
1 hr
....� .
Job Location
aty
CGentlOvmer
4525 Abalone ST
Bremerton
Toni lr\frllrams
Pile Contractor Gerterel GorWect er
SupeAntendent
crackedsy D
Williams Const. Tony Wrflrams ,......
._ .....,., IT..
_. ...
NLO WAS ON -.SITE AT THE REQUEST OF THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY THE
PROPOSED BUILDING'S SUBGRADE AREA.
AT THE TIME OF OUR SITE VISIT, THE BUILDING SUBGRADE WAS EXCAVATED AND
CONCRETE FORM WORK WAS IN-PLACE FOR 4525 ABALONE ST. NLO'S.
REPRESENTATIVE EVALUATED THE BUILDING'S FOUNDATION SUBGRADE WITH A 0.5
INCH DIAMETER STEEL T -PROBE WITH SOIL PENETRATIONS OF ROUGHLY 1 TO 2 INCHES
WAS GENERALLY OBSERVED. NLO HAS DETAILED THE FOUNDATION SUBGRADE AREA
THAT WAS EVALUATED TODAY, WHICH. AMOUNTS TO THE BUILDING SUBGRADE AREA
FOR THE GARAGE AND MAIN RESIDENCE. NLO HAS ALSO RE -OBSERVED SOME
ADDITIONAL OVEREXCAVATION, PER THE.RECOMMENDATIONS IN OUR EARLIER DAILY
FIELD REPORT DFR 2.
IN OUR OPINION, THE PROBED BUILDING FOUNDATION SUBGRADE AREAS SHOULD
PROVIDE ADEQUATE SUPPORT FOR THE NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
NLO HAS OBSERVED ADDITIONAL OVEREXCAVATION, PER THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN OUR EARLIER DAILY FIELD
REPORT DFR 2. IN OUR OPINION OVEREXCAVATED AREA IS SUITABLE AND SHOULD PROVIDE ADDUEQUATE
FOUNDATION SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE.
APPROXIMATE BUILDING
LAYOUT
GARAGE
MAIN RESIDENCE
SCALE 1" =12'
NLO WILL RETURN TO THE SITE AT THE CONTRACTOR'S REQUEST.
F�r'S
f �
C
A,. ptanarpermits on-sito YES Q NO
Project tb. Permit No
NLO's
2.
if N0, contact the bulicing aeWmentor a*ain:
Contractor
Logged By:---.�_ ......�
Job Number J
W m ob Name .__ Report #
SD 7888 Williams
-.'AN.L.Olson&Associates,Inc.
Engineering, Planning and Surveying Start Time End Time - gate _. _-... bay of Weik
2453 BETHEL AVENUE 0800 0815 10/5/12 Friday
P.O. BOX -637 -mw
_._ .. ,...,, ,
:�HEte Time Miles Weafher
PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON 98366-0637 0.25 hrs 18 miles Sunny, 60s
Drive Time DFR Total Hours
Daily Field Report 0.5 hr 0.25 hr 1 hr
Job Location
4526Abalone
..�.���_. ���_.�..���� _.......,� ��....�,�� �� ....�.�._.��......_._. _......_�.�.._.........�m_____�
Street, Bremerton (Lot 33) County Kitsap Client/Owner Tony Willams
cin orllams Const. Tony Contractor ams Superintendent ITITmm _._...... WRJ�.__,.
.....��. to
Y
......_ .... ............... � �--....._ _---_----..... Checked B a. .. .. .._.
NLO was onsite today to verify the foundation subgrade on lot 33 on Abalone Street.
At the time of our site visit, the building's subgrade area was excavated in the area of Lot 33. NLO's
representative evaluated the exposed portion of the building's foundation subgrade area with a half inch
diameter steel T -Probe. NLO observed soil penetrations of about 1 to 2 inches with the steel T -probe..
The soil that was verified was fill comprised of silty sand that was previously in place density tested by others.
However, deeper penetrations of about 3 to 4 inches were observed in the building's subgrade northwest
comer. NLO has illustrated the encountered loose soil condition in Figure 1 below. NLO recommends the
loose soil should be removed from below the foundation subgrade area down to the dense underlying soil
condition.
In our opinion and after our recommendation is implemented, the probed building foundation subgrade area
should provide adequate support for the new single family residences.
NLO's representative will return at the client's request.
Figure 1
North
Are approved plans/permits on-site ® YES ® NO if NO, contact the building department or explain: EQUIPMENT
Project No. Permit No.
NLO's Representative A� � Contractor
Cassandra DijstelbergewI /"
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BUILDING DIVISION
345 — 6th Street, Suite 600
Bremerton, Washington
(360) 473-5275
INSPECTION REPORT
I -R ft cl -
PERMIT #: ADDRESS: Z��'A.W lvi-t S
'S tep Sol
q73 -97g6 d,.g
Date: Phone:
INSPECTOR
91
4W L
4ln�.g
" v+b
A: —:A NMI
L. Olson& Assoco"
Engineering, Planning and Land Surveying. iatesAnc.1
January 11, 2012
LA Williams Construction
PO Box 111
Fox Island, WA 98333
RE: Site Specific Re -Use for Bay Vista Subdivision
Base Plan 20x22 garage
NL Olson and Associates prepared engineering for a 20x22 Garage Plan by MD
Designers. This base plan was set up for use in the Bay Vista Subdivision in Bremerton.
The engineering for this residential house plan was completed in December 2011 under
the 2009 International Building Code.
The design parameters used in my analysis of the base plan are as follows:
The lots within Bay Vista generally comply with the above design parameters. But due
to mass grading that has taken place on the site, I recommend that a special inspection to
verify soil bearing capacity be completed prior to placing the concrete for the footing (as
noted in the geotechnical report for the subdivision completed by AESI).
Please feel free to contact me with any questions.
Sincerely,
Matthew Zawlocki, PE, SE
2453 BETHEL AVENUE, P.O. BOX 637, PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON 98366
(360) 876-2284 FAX (360) 876-1487
0
Structural Calculations & Analysis
for
20x22 Garage Base Plan
Bay Vista
Bremerton, WA
for
LA Williams Construction
PO Box 111
Fox Island, WA 98333
by
N.L. Olson & Associates, Inc.
2453 Bethel Avenue
Port Orchard, WA 98366
360-876-2284
NLO Project #7852-11
SIpNAL
December -11
Sco a of Work:
Partial Lateral engineering for new 20x22 garage base plan in Bay Vista subdivision.
The garage meets requirements for conventional construction per IBC, except for the front
wall at the garage door. This engineering is for the 24" wide portal frame at the garage door
Materials:
Framing: HF #2 or better
Beams: DF #2 or better
Glulam: Douglas Fir 24F -V4 for simple supported and 24F -V8 for continuous or cantilevered beams
Reinforcing Steel: Grade 60 for #5
Concrete: fc = 2500 psi
r%g,"71''.IR aF4wTM.�
Soil Properties: 1500 psf Bearing Capacity, 150 psf/ft lateral capacity (assumed)
Design Wind: 85 MPH 3 sec gust
Seismic Zone D2
Ss = 150%
S, = 54.0%
Snow Load: 30 psf Ground
CONTENTS:
Page 1-2 Basic Design Criteria/Dimensions
Page 3-4 Lateral Loads
Page 5 Frame Analysis
11
Basic Desi rl Criteria
Basic Wind Speed = 85 mph
Seismic design category = D
Site Class = D
Ss = 150%
Sf = 54.0%
Ground Snow Load = 30 psf
Importance Factor, Seismic IE = 1.0
Importance Factor, Snow Is = 1.0
Importance Factor, Wind IW = 1.0
Dead Loads
Floor = 12 psf (2 psf joist, 2.5 psf sheathing, 0.5 psf insulation, 4.0 psf covering)
Wall = 10 psf (1.5 psf studs, 2.5 sheathing, 0.5 insulation, 3 paneling)
Roof = 15 psf (2 psf truss, 1 insulation, 3 ceiling, 5, roofing)
Live Loads
Floor Live Load, Lf = 40 psf
Roof Live Load, Lr = 25 psf
Snow Loads
Ce =
1.0 for Partially exposed roof in exposure B
Ct =
1.1 (ASCE 7-05 Table 7-3)
Pf = 0•7CeCtlsP9 =
23.1 psf (ASCE 7-05 Eq 7-1)
Cs =
1.0 (ASCE 7-05 Figure 7-2)
Ps = Cspf =
23.1 psf
Use
25 psf
Deflection Limits
(ASCE 7-05 Table 7-2)
Floor = L/ 240 Dead + Live and L / 360 dead
Roof = L / 240 Dead + Live and L / 360 dead
Check Footing
Footing Width =
Tributary roof =
Bearing Pressure =
12 in Footing Width = 12 in
16 ft Tributary Floor= 7 ft
720 psf Bearing Pressure = 444 psf
Both are < 1500 psf, therefore OK
Page 1
Basic Dimensions
5.333 ft
8 f
22 ft -
4 20 ft _.._ ..._
20 ft
front
Page 2
Roof Slope is 6:12
or 26.6 degrees
Side View
Front View
Plan View
22 ft
Assumed N
Wind Loads
Main Force resisting System - Simplified approach
Basic Wind Speed, V = 85 mph
Importance Factor, 1, = 1.0
Exposure Category = B
Height Exposure Coefficient, X = 1.00 IBC Table 1609.6.2.1(4)
End Zone distance, 2a = 6 ft
ps values shown below are based 6:12 Roof from ASCE 7-05 Figure 6-2
4.3 psf 1 2.81psf 6.7 psf
5.0 psf i 3.9 psf 7.8 psf
7.0 psf ,.
8.8 ps
10
12
E -W
Diaphra ri Design Forces
Roof Shear = 1841 Ibs
Base Shear = 962 lbs
Shearwall Desin Forces
Second Floor Shear = 1841 lbs
Base Shear = 2804 lbs
10.2 psf
12.9 psf
N -S
Diapt_ra_qm_ Design Forces
Roof Shear= 1135 lbs
Base Shear = 881 lbs
Shearwall Desion Forces
Second Floor Shear = 1135 lbs
Base Shear = 2015 lbs
Resisting Moment, Mr = 119.9 k -ft
Overturning Moment, Mo = 32.25 k -ft
Safety Factor, Fo = 0.6D/W = 2.2
Page 3
Eguivalent lateral force method er ASCE 7-05
Base shear, V =CSW (ASCE 7-05 Eqn 12.8-1)
Ss =
150% Ct = 0.02
Fa =
1.000 (ASCE 7-05 Table 11.4-1) X = 0.75
SDs = 2/3Sms = 2/3FaSs =
1.000 Ta =Ct hnx = 0.095 sec
S, =
54.0%
Fv =
1.500 (ASCE 7-05 Table 11.4-2)
SD, = 2/3SM, = 2/3F„ S, =
0.540 Seismic Design Category = D
R =
6.5 (ASCE 7-05 Table 12.2-1) CS = SDs / (RI) = 0.154
Max CS = SD, /(T R/1) =
0.873 Min CS = 0.044SDs I = 0.044
W2 = 11991 lbs (dead load of roof + 1/2 walls)
W, = o lbs
Wtotai = 11.991 kips
Lateral Forces F. = C. V
F2 = 1845 lbs
F, = 0 lbs
Base Shear, V = 1.84 kips
Stability coefficient, 0 = PXA/Vxh.-Cd = 0.033 <0.1 threrefore no Pdelta calculated
Resisting Moment, Mr = 119.9 k -ft
Overturning Moment, Mo = 24.61 k -ft
Safety Factor, Fo = 0.6D/0.7E = 4.2
DI_ ?jhr_ar m Desi n Forces for ASD
E = 0.71=2 = 1291 lbs
E = 0.71=2 = 0 lbs
Shearwall Design Forces for ASD
E = 0.71=2 = 1291 lbs
E = 0.7F2 = 1291 lbs
........................
Base shear due to Seismic governs main lateral force resisting system in N -S
Base shear due to Wind governs main lateral force resisting system in E -W
Redundant - 1st Floor Shear walls
USE p = 1.3
Page 4
Protalw Frame analysis at Front of Garace
Full length = 3 ft Wall Height = 8 ft
Length of Full height wall = 3 ft Max Height of opening = 0
% of full height walls = 100%
Shear Resistance Adjustment Factor, Co = 1 (2008 NDS SDPWS Table 4.3.3.5)
V = 921 lbs (from Wind load)
Uplift Anchorage, T = Vh / C,EL; = 2148 lbs (2008 NDS SDPWS Eqn 4.3-8)
Unit shear force, v = WC,EL; = 307 pif (2008 NDS SDPWS Eqn 4.3-9)
7116 sheathing w/ 8d Nails @6" edge spacing = 360 pif (IBC Table 2306.3)
for HF framing multiply capacity (1 -(0.5 -SG)) = 335 pif (IBC Table 2306.3 footnote a)
dead load on walls = 140 plf
Net uplift is W -0.6D = 2022 lbs
Use MSTA30 Strap
Area of (2) 2x6 studs is 16.5 int; tension/compression stress is 130.2 psi
Use Double 2x6 studs at each end
Allowable load on 5/8" anchors bolt in 2x sill = 1424 lbs shear (NDS Table 11 E)
#of anchor bolts req'd = 1.0
Use 6/8" anchors at 6' on center
Check Storer Drift in N -S Direction
Shear Wall Deflection check 8vW vh dah
0 _-------- +------- + 0.75hen +--------
EAb Gt b
Assume double 2x6 HF Studs at ends E = 1300000 psi
Max shear, v = 921 plf wall height, h = 8 ft
Using 8d @ 6", en = 0.014
Using 24/16 rated OSB, Gt = 83500 Win
Assume deflection of 0.1 in
0 = 0.075 0.088 0.084 0.343 = 0.59 in
Actual a = e/Co = 0.59 in
Story drift ratio = Delta / height = 0.006 < 0.01 therefore OK
Total Drift= 0.59 in
Page 5
1
m
�.
r
C PLAN"eHk
"
Dev
Dev
Office Only
r
f � 1� tray PE4M T #
Will 00i PLAN
Y.
rovr
e 1schocklist, 1
� . _% � . � � r"ringt �� t el t
All_ 4 w.. i{".'r v . fen"' .. q
:"� ��.,,�.Ii �l�1T�t.. C�Jtlpq��.� art �° "x x� .
,b .�*r w, ;rF° _.�'04•' -,.s�
xr a ,h' •dux ? - �. _ .
+fcSW 'au r* " t"'
�s� ;a���5N > ��&N-mi, .a �� � � •�. � - .: �,� +:� � � Wim: g"� x. -.,.3- x - ., ,
x �r fc�tl�ri it i i lrr � r � f� � ed i���i ®�r'
s Y I�brrtltif ��rr�,t
_ s' as ,+.
.K: -g'4+a .ur�r.u-Y u-_.eg,'d 'e '"-, -
y'
ISP omp
E w. gra k i
.,•,4 F` ,s II 14C ._64 !Mp..�
qtz
1#q GAll
t 1� 1 �1 r seg.ge
�� i t I � :jli 1 r�P:' E t toriginly
-.5. '•�" + 1 n mss s fVP
N .. s �` .
VM` 4M
16 na Of
Q
rese� ti 3`� ww'a °EE E _ "e,w- ='°�s'- ye
g
ns
°�1E -f.w' a y- a' 'F* 1
1culd ion "'d
ra,-a.. F...�`. ` s !-3 °c.`. cr`�a a, - ':�S .;a�'+•2.ye g` `°x ,y*'.* h I -
1 1 tl t s
4 tys a s
�' I
3 y� * e
.: Ar.. t 1 IW
I -th
e
Figure 4:
Typical Prescriptive Braced Wall Panel
(per IRC Section R602.10.2, Method WSP)
a
R..... .... .. 4'-0" min. 2 - 2x Top plates.
Sta
Nail
16r joints oc. min.
Nail 16d at 16" oc.
...
� � u
2x studs spaced 24" o.c. max. End nail stud
to top plate with 2-16d nails. Nail stud to sill
plate with 4-8d toenails or 2-16d end nail.
�ro Wood structural panel sheathing
minimum 3/8" thick for studs 16" oc.
and minimum 7/16" thick for studs 24" oc.
Gypsum wallboard or other approved interior finish
material inside of wall
2x Blocking installed against sheathing and
� °��' nailed to studs with 16d nails at horizontal
01-011 panel edges (when sheathing is installed
�'� �,r ��iw horizontally. Nail sheathing at 6" o.c. at
Max. ��, ,^ �' "'" r -' panel edges and 12" o.c. in the panel
field with 6d for 3/8" and 8d for 7/16"
common or galvanized nails.
2x sill plate nailed to joist or blocking
with 3-16d nails per 16".
Approved floor system
2x Pressure treated mud sill
1/2" dia. anchor bolt with min. 7"
embedment spaced 4'-0" on center for
a two story building, 6'-0" on center for
a single story building. One bolt within
12" of each end of each piece of plate
material. 3"x3"x0.229" hot -dipped
galvanized plate washers are required.
Approved Foundation System,
Braced wall panels (BWP or ABP) must be located at each end of each braced wall line.
Or, IRC Section R602.10.1.4.1 allows the braced wall panel (BWP) to be located up to 8' from the end of
the braced wall line, provided there is a hold down device at the end of the BWP nearest the end of the
braced wall line. Additional options may also be available, See IRC 602.10 for more information.
CITY OF BREMERTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
RESIDENTIAL PLAN REVIEW CHECKLIST
21
M
aunpson wrong-1-ieW Wall -Bracing -Length Calculator Pagel of2
2009 IRC Required Braced -Wall -Line Length Calculations
PROJECT INFORMATION
NAME: 857100002 Garage Basic
ADDRESS: Bay Vista, Bremerton WA, 98312
WALL DIRECTION: Front to Back
SEISMIC DESIGIN CATBWW- DY
BASIC WIND SPEED: 86 mph
WIND EXPOSURE CATEGORY: B
STONE OR MASONRY WMEER: No
!_.......
Wall Lkw A4 • Wall Lits 13-1
Bnsoed.Wafi-Line l option
1st of 1-atrxy
------..-
- 1st or 1-saxy
Esys to R" H*M
Aft
;`
B tt... ..
wr
_Broad-WaM-Lms SpW
22 R
;22ft
BraOed'Wal-Line Lef"
:201t
20 ft
I —-:Hftht - -...
::aft
'aft
eeWSP
:Vys P
WS P
_
WA
'N/A
' Gypsum WillBoard on Inside
No
"pip
i Hor¢ortfal Joints Blocked
Yes
Yes
Holdom Device Used
No
No
.._..... Psf_
8 paf
RooNCakV Deed Load
s 15 psf
•s
s 15 psf
'Tabulated VWndO
`-- ----
It
3.8R
3.Sft
Exposure NOW FaOcr
,.. _
1
7
Eave-to-Ridps Heil;M Factor
0.76
.0.76
i Wind W1e11 Factor
_0.9
i Number of BWL Faclor
Holdown Fackm
1
! Blocked JcW Factor
:1
1
Gypsum on Inside Factor
1.5
1.5
Wind GB Coralruction Factor
'
1
Required_1Nind Bragg Amour
3.9 R
3.9 It
'.SEISMIC
Tabulated Seismic Bv Nnour
5-1
5 ft
Seismic WIN He" Factor
1
y
BWL Spm*V Factor
1
1
Blocked Joie Factor
1
1
;Gypsum on Inside Factor
1.5
1.5
Seismic GB Construction Factor
1
t
• , W1sti Dmd Load Factor
0.85
`0.85
Roof Daad Load Factor
1
1
Varier Factor
1
1
Required Sets_ mic Bra" Mrocsrt
6.384
6.38 ft
`RESULTS
-
Length of waw Bracfn
_.._...... 9 Required
6.38 ft
6.38 ft
http://www.strongtie.com/webapps/BracedWall/ 1/10/2012
M
. 11uyauii ouulig-i_iew wail-wacing-Length Calculator
o R ,
2009 IRC Required Braced -Wall -Line Length Calculations
PROJECT INFORMATION
NAPE: B31 100002 Garage Basic
ADDRESS: Bay Vista, Bremerton WA, 98312
WALL DWJVnDN. gide To We
SELUM DESIGN CATEGM. 02
BASIC WIND SPEED- 85 mph
WIND EXPOSURE CATEGORY: B
STONE OR MASONRY VENEER: No
WDM Una 1-1 WON Una 2-1 `
!Inputs
_.._.. ,._...... .
Braoad-Wal-Lino Location•
j lot of 1-sipry
- f y
' 1ss t of titory
Fave m Rklga Height
; 6 ft
6 it
• _..... _
Braced-YYYI-Lme Spacing
_. - .
20 ft
r- -...
20 g
Braoed-Yld{ Lme Lenylh
122 ft
22 8
V" Haight
aft--
.
:8ft
'. Braarg Method
- -
VVSP
ViiSP
_ _
GB Construdpn Type
WA
WA
;Gypsum Y11o1 Board an Imide
No
'No
Horimrrtal JoitMt BkxMced
Yea
. Yes
Hokbwn Devine Used
No
No
_ Load
S S psf
5 8 psf
`Roof/Celiny Dmd Load
515 psi
515 psf
'IMND
-
Tabulated Wind Bracing Amount
3.5 ft
1. ft
i Exposure Height Factor
� 1
' 1
i Eave-to-Ridge Height Factor
:0.76
0.76 "
Wnd Wag Heigh Factor
0.9
:0 9
Number of BVVL Factor
1
Hokk>wrr Factor
1
1
Blocked Joint Factor
1
1
Gypsum on Inside Factor
1.5
1.5
YVind G8 Conatruction Factor
' � --
.. _
1
._._ .. .
Required Wind _. Bracing
Braang Amourd
3.59
_ _ _ _
; ft
3.59 ft
SEISMIC
• Tatwrlatad Seismic Bra" Amount
5.5 ft
5.5 it
Seismic VW Height Factor
1
�
_._.. ...... .
j BWL Spacing Factor
�
1
1
Bkxticad Jokd Factor
'1
1
Gypsum on Inside Factor
1.5
1.5
' Sakmic GS Construction Factor
1
VWA_Dead Load Factor -0.85
0,85
R_cof Load Factor
-
_Dead
1
1
Wiser Factor
1
1
r Raquirad Seianre Bradrg Amount `7.01
ft
7.01 ft
;RESULTS
Length of Wag Bracing Required .7.01 ft 7.01 ft
httP://www.strongtie-com/webapps/]3racedWall/
Page 1 of 2
1/10/2012
December 16, 2011
Attn: City of Bremerton Building Department
Re: L.A. Williams Construction
MD Designs hereby acknowledges that L.A. Williams Constructions has exclusive
authority to submit the 20' x 22' Garage as a Base Plan for unlimited -use construction
for Bay Vista Development. L.A. Williams Construction is recognized as the Owner and
exclusive agent for the Plan for the purpose of submitting or receiving documents
related to the Base Plan.
Sincerely,
John P. De Loma
Principal/Project Designer
SE I BACKS
Side:
Flear:
�r,heeck
us nnieastaed fro
i,e pirc)
1 ;11
liirmadx:a �,tl!e finisf'r
ex-terir,�+r mia,R.
PERMIT # -3 1
BUILDING DIVISION
46th Street,Suite 600
Bremerton,
473-5275
ADDRESS: is 2 �, A b 4110 ilf 4 t -
c -)r , '!�'/ ) " �e-- a, � se"47"
cz, It
Date: / 0--L " Phone:
I' PECTOR
�. # # ♦ �, # I R # ♦ � 1� ► ', � • til � I ■ #.
....
APPROXIMATE .....� ._._......,�.,...,�.._ .......�_.. ...�..
BUILDING
LAYOUT
PAIN RESIDENCE
SCALE 1" - 12' -..
NLO WILL RETURN TO THE SITE AT THE CONTRACTOR'S REQUEST.
r.�
C
b
r.
Are Approved. Mn9perrrdts —SR. YES 0 NC If NO, wWaa,tl 'e bsuldN depaMa, P a
Pr.1w N.. P.nnit H. N
raxserr! dva .
NLO`S
! i°.x._...
0
...... �. Lu99m/95"
WRJ
Job KlWber JOD.Name ....._. ..... ,.,....,_._�..
7888 Abalone 3
e�-AL. Ison Assocla t��Jp��i...
.�"tartli�me" ...�..����. � ...... ___
"ime ����
Engineering, Planning and Summing
ng2453
TifltA Aay ofVYeek
BETHEL AVENUE
1330
1345 10110/2012 .'Wed
P.O.. 80X'637
PORTORCHARD,`WASNINGTON9336"637
Sherr e
...,, ...__.a..... .. � ....... _ .-
MIAO w cloudy
cfoudy50a
lo
j
(Daily Field port)
;1 hr°"a
_._.mm., _ ..-- ......
Looaf[on
4525 Abalone ST
_ .._..
clly
Bremerton
. .
a�entlOvme�
TDrr,$fFditams_......
G C.N.
entlAnl
''. GIaOHsd SY Date
Williams ...enerali�OnY Williams
,ITs .mm
....... ._—.._—. .,.w...,.._....,
NLO WAS ON-SITE AT THE REQUEST OF THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY THE
V
PROPOSED Bl11LI7ING'S SUBGRAIJE AREA,
�. # # ♦ �, # I R # ♦ � 1� ► ', � • til � I ■ #.
....
APPROXIMATE .....� ._._......,�.,...,�.._ .......�_.. ...�..
BUILDING
LAYOUT
PAIN RESIDENCE
SCALE 1" - 12' -..
NLO WILL RETURN TO THE SITE AT THE CONTRACTOR'S REQUEST.
r.�
C
b
r.
Are Approved. Mn9perrrdts —SR. YES 0 NC If NO, wWaa,tl 'e bsuldN depaMa, P a
Pr.1w N.. P.nnit H. N
raxserr! dva .
NLO`S
! i°.x._...
0
BUILDING PERMIT
`'
4526 ABALONE ST
NEW SFR
r
Building Plumbing Mechanical E] Alarm/Sprinkler
This Placard must be posted on or near building and the Permit & "Approved" plans must be at the site.
- - - - - - - - - -
Permit # BB12 00,441 POST ON SITE
Inspection
Property lines shall be properly identified and marked befor
Date Notes
--- ----- - --- — ---------- ... .. ..... .........
Geotechnical Report for Structural Fill and Compaction, Soil
foundation footing inspection. Setbacks are measured to the
Building Department Inspections Call:
(360) 473-5870
finished wall structure.
WATER - Public Works - Water:
(360) 473-5927
- Reinspection fee may be assessed if inspection has been
PW - Public Works - Engineering:
(360) 473-5270
requested when not ready or corrections are not completed.
HEALTH - Kitsap Co. Health District:
(360) 337-5285
- Permit, approved plans, engineering, and inspection card shl
Fire - Fire Department:
(360) 473-5386
be on site during construction or Reinspection Fee may be
L&I - Dept. of Labor and Industry:
(360) 415-4000
assessed.
Inspection
Approved
Date Notes
--- ----- - --- — ---------- ... .. ..... .........
Geotechnical Report for Structural Fill and Compaction, Soil
.. ........
oundationBeann . ...........
FFootings, Property lines shall be properly identifiedk
. .... . .. .. . ... . . ..................... . ....... . ................... - . . .....
........
. . ....... . .....
Foundation Walls / Hold downs
/1
j
....
. ... .... . .... . ... ...... . ......
Underfloor Framing Inspection/Anchor Bolts & Washers/Hold
Downs
--------- ---
.... . .
[Shear —Wall Panels/Braced —", "'... W all Panels -- -- - ----
Mechanical Rough -in
Cz
.............. .....
Plumbing Rough -in . . .......... . . . . . ......... . .. .......... . .
........ . ...... . . . _, ...... . ........ .
"FIRE Fire
" Sprinkler/Fire - - - - - Alarm - - -- Cover,
........ . ........ . ...... .. ...... ...... ........................... ................ ......
'
LI - Electrical Cover Inspection Before Framing (State of
�-
Washington) -1 1—, - ...... . . . ..................... . . . . . ... . . ................ . . ... . .............. .. ... . ................ .
. ........ . . . .................... . . . .....
. . .....
Framing Inspection (Mechanical & Plumb Rough -In, Elect Cover
7- ��
2
Comp!pted),_ - ...........
Insulation - Wall
VV
..... ........
Sheetrock Nailing
�2-
............ .......... . ...... . ...... . . .. . ..... ..... . ... . ........ ...
Paved Driveway & parking areas
- — - - - - ----------------- - ------- —
.. .. ...... . ............ . .
Insulation - Ceiling
Insulation - Underfloor
. . . ................ . .. . ....... . ........ . ..... ... ...
Eiwi gy" n,,dL%` Ouc adg Dept-
i°�'
Energy Code - Air Leakage ......... ............ . . . . .. ... ......... . ................... . . ................ . . . . . . ...................
. .....
. . ................. . . . ...... . . ........................................... . . .......
® . . . . .
L&I - Electrical Final Inspection . . . ... . ............................... . ............ . ...... . ............. . .. ......
PW - Sewer Lateral
. ........ ..... , . ..... . .....
........ ..
PW - Final Inspection - Utilities
. ...... . . . . ... . ................... - . . .. ........... ....... . .
.. ............. . ........ . .................... . .......
..... .
.. .. ...... ... . ...... ...... . . . .
Final Inspection - Building
..... ................. . . .. . ....................... .... . . ............... . . . . . . .............
�JNAL BUILDING (360) 473-5870
.411 oj'the above must be approved.
Occupancy approvalfor SFR only - Commercial
structures require a separate Certificate oj*Occupancy.
0 1 go I KIWI] tj 02 3 ROUT 2 1 ; I MAI I i 11INt
�gI
o
A
� s
a
0 0
w �r mw
I I
�A WILHAM5 FLAN 95OF
„o
4526 AP&M 5TF\fEf
$$
PURR
v �
i
g
e
13 EMUON, WA 95342
s
9�
�gI
o
A
� s
a
0 0
K
�A WILHAM5 FLAN 95OF
4526 AP&M 5TF\fEf
$$
i
g
e
13 EMUON, WA 95342
s
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BUILDING DIVISION
345 — 6th Street, Suite 600
Bremerton, Washington
(360) 473-5275
INSPECTION REPORT
PERMIT #:
0 11
......................... ..........ADDRESS: 'ce
.......- ..... S
------------ - - - -- --------
den -"f>-3
V44 -l -'Al -k -L (31 t'Lit �7 (1XIO(A-1) v) qfP4L
re,�3 U.1 4;'- cyl-.
. ...............
Date: Phone:
INSPECTOR
k1pt,pil BF12 001,38 11/01/2012
IFIRESPR 13Dr�u�:�.°�������u�in0710812013 Parc!e,l #p5570-000-033-0000
Part-init #'BB 1 1-21, 1 0.04411 Akirld:r,#!!ss 14526" ABALONE'ST
Date SuLiiiinditteiil 10/310/2012, )alte Mlosi,llfj: Illn'dieirit SFR -13D
'Ice CAAD iC "Al"J" coorn]"Jurte 1, as il,,� A clitnii 01/09/2013
4villilirtg
Date
taWs [)alte 01/07/2013 Stabins ISSUED
111P Uajjpdrii:.'? �- SWuijpjuress�'? fl'liwiir,?F
Nev, Application Quory pHirilit Follia Lefters C"py (") 11
I DetaM Puvob Contacts contmeters valuadom Fees A"romd Conditions hopoeflons wwattoms
CITY OF BREMERTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
345 - 6th Street, Bremerton, WA 98337
(360)473.5275 Fax: (360) 473-5278
PERMIT NUMBER: 131312 00441
DATE ISSUED: 10/01/2012
ASSESSOR NUMBER: 5570-000-033-0000 ZONING: WPSAP SITE ADDRESS: 4526 ABALONE ST
APPLICANT NAME: WILLIAMS LA CONSTRUCTION LTI PHONE: (253) 381-0252 ADDRESS: PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
OWNER NAME: WILLIAMS L A CONSTRUCTION LTC PHONE: (253) 381-0252 ADDRESS: PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
CONTRACTOR: L A WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION LTC PHONE: (253) 381-0252 ADDRESS: PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
LENDER NAME: PHONE: 0- ADDRESS:
SUBMITTED: 08/23/2012 APPROVED: 09/27/2012 EXPIRATION: 03/30/2013 STATUS: ISSUED
VALUATION:
$92,133.50
Residential Building Permit wl Mechanical/Plumbing
Plan Review Fee
$626.60 16-4580
NEW SFR
Building Permit
$964.00 2211
Building Code Edition: IBC 2009
Mechanical Fixture Fee
$66.55 2215
Occupancy Group:
State Surcharge
$4,50 0236
Type of Construction:
Plumbing Fixture Fee
$83.00 2213
Flood Zone:
State Energy Code
$50.00 16-4580
Setbacks: (Front) (Side) (Rear) (Other)
TOTAL FEES:
$1,794.65
Sanitation Method:
,
10. (DCD-02) DCD: Validity of permit. The issuance or granting of a permit shall not be construed to be a
Number of Bedrooms:
Square Footage: R-3 Residential, 1 & 2 Family, Type VB
U Utility/Deck Covered (All Types)
930
52
Inspection Requests FIRE: Fire Inspections (360) 473-5386
DCD: Building Inspections (360) 473-5870 HEALTH: Kitsap County Health District (360) 337-5285
L&I: Department of Labor and Industries (360) 418-4000 PW&U: Public Works - Engineering (360)473-5270
This permit shall become null and void if the described work authorized by this permit has not commenced within 180 days from the date of issuance, or if the work is suspended or
abandoned at any time after the work is commenced for a period of 180 days. It is the responsibility of the permit holder to see that the required inspections are made. Failure to obtain
required inspections may result in stoppage of the work until such time that the permit holder can susbstantiate to the City of Bremerton that the concealed work meets or exceeds code
requirements. Any demolition, testing, or financial burden shall be born di ectly by the permit holder. Failure to substantiate code requirements will indemnify the City against any and all
responsibility or liability connected with the construction. I hereby certi .trt I have read and examined this permit and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of laws and
ordinances goveming this type of work will be compir d with wheth or peci sd herein or not. The granting of a permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel provisions of
any State or local law regulating construction or than, �rforma ace,of ti ayro struction. if listing the owner as general contractor, I certify that i am exempt from the requirements of the State
Contractors Registration Law under Section 3 Catiaiter 1 6a .,ptivs of 1,9t"Y. All revisions to an approved plan require DCD review and approval prior to performing work. All building and
tenant occupancy permits are required to pass mai ihsgeyt1'4 prior t a r6ermit expiration and obtain a certificate of occupancy prior to use or occupancy.
I have read, and agree to abide b bye nditi J,% isP6T4tJncIud1ng all conditions of zoning, building codes, and State and Federal laws.
�
NER q
SIGNATURE OF OWOR
AGENT:
PRINTED NAME: DATE:
CONDITIONS
City of Bremerton's approval of this application pertains only to the City's regulatory jurisdiction, and thus compliance with City
regulations does not necessarily ensure compliance with federal or state laws.
r
Fee: All the building and the
10. (DCD-47} DCD: Reinspection approved plans, printed permit, permit
inspection placard, are required to be on-site for inspection purposes, and work to be
inspected shall be complete and ready for inspection. If an inspection is called for and plans
are not available on site, or the work is not ready for inspection, approval will not be granted.
In addition, a re -inspection fee will be charged and must be collected by the Department of
Community Development prior to any further inspections being performed or approvals
granted.r�
,
10. (DCD-02) DCD: Validity of permit. The issuance or granting of a permit shall not be construed to be a
permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of the Washington State
'
Building code or of any other ordinance of the City of Bremerton. Permits presuming to give
authority to violate or cancel the provisions of the Washington State Building code or other
ordinances of the City of Bremerton shall not be valid. The issuance of a permit based on
construction documents and other data shall not prevent the building official from requiring
the correction of errors in the construction documents and other data. The building official is
Page 1 of 4
CITY OF BREMERTON
345 - 6th Street, Bremerton, WA 98337
(360) 473-5275 Fax: (360) 473-5278
ASSESSOR NUMBER: 5570-000-033-0000 ZONING: WPSAP SITE ADDRESS: 4526 ABALONE ST
APPLICANT NAME:
WILLIAMS L A CONSTRUCTION LTI PHONE: (253) 381-0252 ADDRESS: PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
OWNER NAME:
WILLIAMS L A CONSTRUCTION LTC PHONE- (253) 381-0252 ADDRESS- PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
CONTRACTOR:
L A WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION LTC PHONE: (253) 381-0252 ADDRESS., PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
LENDER NAME,
PHONE: 0- ADDRESS:
SUBMITTED:
08/2312012 APPROVED09/27/2012 EXPIRATION: 03/3012013 STATUS: ISSUED
sw
Page 2 of 4
CITY OF BREMERTON
We-kI ik
345.6th Street, Bremerton, WA 98337
(360) 473-6275 Fax: (360) 473-5278
ASSESSOR NUMBER:
5570-000-033-0000
ZONING:
WPSAP
SITE ADDRESS:
4626 ABALONE ST
APPLICANT NAME:
WILLIAMS L A CONSTRUCTION LTI
PHONE.
(253) 381-0252
ADDRESS:
PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
OWNER NAME:
WILLIAMS L A CONSTRUCTION LTE
PHONE.
(253) 381-0252
ADDRESS:
PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
CONTRACTOR:
L A WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION LTC
PHONE:
(253) 381-0252
ADDRESS:
PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
LENDER NAME:
R -Tub and/or Shower Unit
PHONE.-
0-
ADDRESS:
R -Water Heater
SUBMITTED:
08/2312012
APPROVED: 09/27/2012
EXPIRATION:
03130/2013 STATUS- ISSUED
30. (LU9) All driveways and areas used for loading, parking, and maneuvering motorized vehicles shall
have a paved surface.
31. (OTHER) Development must comply with BMC and the Bay Vista Sub -Area Plan.
50. (DCD-50) Final Inspection Required: All building permits shall have a final inspection performed and
approved by the City of Bremerton Department of Community Development prior to permit
expiration. The failure to request a final inspection or failure to obtain final approval prior to
expiration may require a reactivation fee, or a new permit application more t an a year as
Dassed with no activitv.
MINIMUM INSPECTIONS REQUIRED
I *1011ftAIIAMINNOWN W.A.1i If, 610i:1"gol IAwv I r'Na"gitij I va-, I aywe"goi I q A 0H R,
Geotechnical Report for Structural Fill and Compaction, Soil Bearing
Foundation Footings, Property lines shall be property identified
Foundation Walls / Hold downs
Underfloor Framing Inspection/Anchor Bolts & Washers/Hold Downs
Shear Wall Panels/Braced Wall Panels
Mechanical Rough -in
Plumbing Rough -in
FIRE - Fire Sprinkler/Fire Alarm Cover
LI - Electrical Cover Inspection Before Framing (State of Washington)
Framing Inspection (Mechanical & Plumb Rough -in, Elect Cover Completed)
Insulation - Wall
Sheetrock Nailing
Paved Driveway & parking areas
Insulation - Ceiling
Insulation - Underfloor
Energy Code - Duct Testing - Provide signed affidavit to Bldg Dept
Energy Code - Air Leakage
L&I - Electrical Final Inspection
PW - Sewer Lateral
PW - Final Inspection - Utilities
Final Inspection - Building
Page 3 of 4
FIXTURE LIST
Qt
Description
2
R -Sink (Lavatory, Kitchen, Mop or Bar Sink)
1
R -Clothes Dryer with Exhaust
I
R -Water Closet and/or Urinal
I
R -Range Hood
I
R -Dish Washer
3
R -Bath Fan and/or Exhaust Fan
I
R -Clothes Washing Machine
I
R -Tub and/or Shower Unit
1
R -Water Heater
2
R -Hose Bibs
Page 3 of 4
CITY OF BREMERTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
345.6th Street, Bremerton, WA 98337
(360)473-5275 Fax: (360) 473-5278
PERMIT NUMBER: BB12 00441
DATE ISSUED: 10/01/2012
ASSESSOR NUMBER:
5570-000-033-0000
ZONING:
WPSAP
SITE ADDRESS:
4526 ABALONE ST
APPLICANT NAME:
WILLIAMS L A CONSTRUCTION LTI
PHONE:
(253) 381-0252
ADDRESS:
PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
OWNER NAME:
WILLIAMS L A CONSTRUCTION LTC
PHONE:
(253) 381-0252
ADDRESS:
PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
CONTRACTOR:
L A WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION LTC
PHONE:
(253) 381-0252
ADDRESS:
PO BOX 111, FOX ISLAND, WA 98333
LENDER NAME:
PHONE:
0-
ADDRESS:
SUBMITTED: 08/23/2012 APPROVED: 09/27/2012 EXPIRATION: 03/30/2013 STATUS: ISSUED
Page 4 of 4
M D
Designs
3220 North 26th Street
Tacoma, WA 98407
T 253.756.1652 F 253.756 2025
and@mdarchitects.net
August 22, 2012
Attn: City of Bremerton Building Department
Re: L.A. Williams Construction
Department of
C0111m° nity Dc-x-lasrpent
MD Designs hereby acknowledges that L.A. Williams Constructions has exclusive
authority to submit Plan # 930R as a Base Plan for unlimited -use construction for Bay
Vista Development. L.A. Williams Construction is recognized as the Owner and
exclusive agent for the Plan for the purpose of submitting or receiving documents
related to the Base Plan.
Sincerely,
John P. De Loma
Principal/Project Designer
W,
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
M [y] N 9J 0
046rafing Gwr25 'Yeats o[Samea
?M'sing — I TFUTUETS
110 Russell Road, P.O. Box 4460
Bremerton, Washington 98312
Subject: Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Sector 2A
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project
Bremerton, Washington
We are pleased to present the enclosed copies of the above -referenced report. This repo
summarizes the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic hazard, and geotechnic
engineering studies and offers recommendations for the preliminary design and development
the proposed Sector 2A phase of the project. Our recommendations are preliminary in th
definite building and construction details have not been finalized at the time of this report.
We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that the recommendations
yresented in this report will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should
have any questions or if we can be of additional help to you, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
CIMTF:)'
Kirkland, Washington
JSK/ld
KE090103A9
Projectsk20090103WEMP
Kirkland Everett s Tacoma
425-827-7701 425-259-0522 253-722-2992
www.aesLyeo.com
Environmental Assessments and
Remediation
Sustainable Development Services
Geologic Assessments
a
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
&01,wl,nw�F
SECTOR 2A
BAY VISTA
Prepared for
Housing Authority of the
City of Bremerton
Project No. KE090103A
November 18, 2009
Sector 24 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washin ton Pro'ect and Site Conditions
I. PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.'s (AESI's) subsurface
exploration, geologic hazard, and preliminary geotechnical engineering study for the Sector 2A
construction phase of the Bay Vista Redevelopment project in Bremerton, Washington. The
location of the site is shown on Figure 1 and a site map of the entire Bay Vista project is
provided on Figure 2. The approximate locations of the explorations accomplished for this
study are presented on the "Site and Exploration Plan," Figure 3. If any changes in the
nature, design, or locations of the site development improvements are planned, the conclusions
and recommendations in this report should be reviewed and modified, or verified.
Landau Associates (Landau, 2006) conducted a previous geotechnical assessment for the
Bay Vista site. Some of the explorations were located within Sector 2A and the logs are
provided in Appendix A. AESI prepared a previous geotechnical report for Section 213,
Iocated east of Sector 2A (AESI, 2009).
The recommendations in this report are preliminary because grading plans and construction
details were not finalized at the time of this report. Once development plans are substantially
complete, the conclusions and recommendations in this report should be reviewed and
modified, or verified, as appropriate.
1.1 Purose and Sco . e
The purpose of this study was to provide subsurface data and design recommendations for
design and development of the subject project. This study included a review of available
geologic literature, excavation of exploration pits, and performing geologic studies to assess
the type, thickness, distribution, and physical properties of the subsurface sediments and
shallow ground water conditions. Geologic studies were completed to identify geologic
hazards associated with the site. Where warranted, geologic hazard mitigations are
recommended. Geotechnical engineering studies were also conducted to recommend the type
of suitable foundation, allowable foundation soil bearing pressure, anticipated foundation
settlements, basement/retaining wall lateral pressures, floor support recommendations,
drainage considerations, and erosion mitigation recommendations. This report summarizes our
current fieldwork and offers development recommendations based on our present
understanding of the project.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK/!d - KE090103A9 - Project.s1100901031KEMP Page 1
N
SECTOR 2
Bremerton, Washington
Prepared for:
Housing Authority of the City of Bremerton
110 Russell Road, P.O. Box 4460
Bremerton, Washington 98312
Prepared by:
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
911 5`h Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
425-827-7701
Fax: 425-827-5424
November 18, 2009
Project No. KE090103A
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard anN
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engilneeining Repo
Sit CJ
itio
Bremerton, f�/ect and Site Ond
•
Our field study included excavating a series of exploration pits to gain subsurface information
about Sector 2A. The exploration pits were completed by Hos Bros. Construction Inc the
proiect construction contractor. The various types of sediments, as well as the �e where
characteristics of the sediments changed, are indicated on the exploration, logs presented in
Appendix B. The depths indicated on the logs where conditions changed may represent
gradational variations between sediment types. Our explorations were approximately located
11
an r - ided W from known site features shown on a 0"o ra3hkA1_tey1 p ov
by the client.
The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based, in part, on the
conditions encountered in the explorations completed for this study and previous studies. The
number, locations, and depths of the explorations were completed within site and budgetary
constraints. Because of the nature of exploratory work below ground, interpolation of
subsurface conditions between the field explorations is necessary. D iffering subsurface
conditions may be present outside of the area of the field explorations due to the random nature
of deposition and the alteration of topography by past grading and/or filling. The nature and
extent of any variations between the field explorations may not become fully evident until
construction. If variations are observed at that time, it may be necessary to re-evaluate specific
recommendations in this report and make appropriate changes.
Previous explorations shown on, Figure 3 were conducted by Landau and are labeled " B-" for
borings and "TP-" for exploration pits. Exploration pits conducted by AESI are labeled "EP-".
Exploration pits EP- 154 to EP- 159, were excavated on September 10, 2009. and exploration pits
EP -160 to EP -165 were excavated on November 4, 2009. Three exploration pits (EP -160,
EP -161, and EP -163) were excavated to depths of at least 16 feet to characterize subsurface
conditions below the deepest cuts for the planned buildings. The remaining exploration pits
were excavated to shallower depths and were intended to characterize the depth to unweathered
glacial till and the characteristics of the fill material above the glacial till.
The pits permitted direct, visual observation of subsurface conditions. Materials encountered in
the exploration pits were studied and classified in the field by geologists from our firm. All
exploration pits were backfilled immediately after examination and logging. Selected samples
were then transported to our laboratory for further visual classification and testing, as
d=1W,
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, IN
JSKIld - KEM103A9 - PrqJects1200W1031KE1WP Pagel
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Prelintinary Geotechnical Engineering Repoli
Bremerton, Washington , Project and Site Conditions
1.2 Authorization
Authorization to proceed with this study was granted by the Housing Authority of the City of
Bremerton. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the Housing Authority of
the City of Bremerton and their agents for specific application to this project. Within the
limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been performed in accordance
with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engineering geology practices in effect in
this area at the time our report was prepared. No other warranty, express or implied, is made.
Paolo -9110M 9M MIX go 11144
2.1 Site Description
The Bay Vista site is located in West Bremerton, Washington. The site is roughly ian la,
'r r
it
shape and is comprised of an area of approximately 83 acres. The site is bounded byTs
Way on the north, Oyster Bay Avenue North on the east, and State Route (SR) 3 on the wes
The existing Westpark public housing community was built for the U.S.-military in 1941 and
currently owned and operated by the Bremerton Housing Authority (BHA). The surroundi
area is a mixture of residential neighborhoods to the east, commercial and retail uses alo
Kitsap Way, and light industrial uses south of
As shown on Figure 2, Sector 2A is located in the center of the Bay Vista site abutting the
southwest boundary. The site is currently occupied by a number of multi -unit residential
structures with associated roads and landscaping. The buildings are in the process of being
demolished. There is a soil stockpile in the west comer of Sector 2A covered with plastic. It
is our understanding that this phase of work does not include any buildings in the soil stockpile
area. Therefore, no explorations were conducted in the soil stockpile.
The proposed master plan involves the redevelopment of the existing public housil'11M
community. The proposed project includes redevelopment into a mixed-use, mixed-incom
r!iedestrian-oriented community. We understand that the existing structures will be razed,
existing roads removed, the existing utilities will be removed and/or abandoned, and
existing landfill abandoned. The site will be regraded and new utilities installed. Ae"
residential structures will be built after the new infrastructure is in place. I
Current plans for redevelopment of Sector 2A include construction of a multi-level apartment
building with 83 units and surface parking. Office space will be included in the first level of
the building. No subsurface parking is currently included in the preliminary design. It is out
understanding that excavations of up to 12 feet will be required to achieve subgrade elevations.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK11d - KE090103A9 - Projects 120MI0.31KEI WP Page 2
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washington Project and Site Conditions
The fill soils are generally high in silt and are expected to be moisture -sensitive. If the fill
soils are wet or dry of optimum moisture at the time of construction, they will be difficult to
reuse as structural fill.
Vashon Lodgement Till
Sediments encountered below the topsoil/fill at the locations of all the explorations generally
consisted of medium dense to very dense, silty sand with gravel or gravelly sand with variable
amounts of silt, and scattered cobbles.. We interpret these sediments to be representative of
Vashon lodgement till. The Vashon lodgement till was deposited directly from basal, debris -
laden glacial ice during the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation approximately 12,500 to
15,000 years ago. The reduced density occasionally observed within 1 to 5 feet of the ground
surface is interpreted to be due to weathering. The high relative density of the unweathered till
is due to its consolidation by the massive weight of the glacial ice from which it was deposited.
As reported in AESI (2009), the lodgement till was observed to extend down to an elevation of
approximately 60 feet (100 to 120 feet below ground surface in Sector 2A).
The glacial till is high in silt and is expected to be moisture -sensitive. If the glacial till is wet
or dry of optimum moisture at the time of construction, it will be difficult to reuse as structural
fill.
Advance Outwash
Advance outwash has been encountered beneath the glacial till in explorations conducted
during previous assessments at the site. This material generally consists of dense to very dense
sand and gravel with generally trace to few silt and occasional little silt. These sediments are
interpreted to be Vashon-age advance outwash. Advance outwash was deposited by meltwater
streams emanating from the advancing Vashon-age glacial ice sheet and subsequently
overridden by several thousand feet of ice. Consequently, these materials are generally dense
and possess moderate to high shear strength and low -compressibility characteristics. The
advance outwash is suitable for, structural fill, foundation, and pavement support provided the
weathered zone is suitably compacted; however, the advance outwash deposits are not expected
to be encountered during grading due to their depth. Limited storm water infiltration may be
feasible in this deposit, and location -specific in-situ testing is recommended if infiltration is
considered.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK11d - KE090103A9 - Projects1200901031KEMP Page 5
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Ha=zard ann,
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Re
10
Bremerton, Wasli�4�on Prn;,Prt nndqiti ;011
3.2 Grain SizeAnalysis
Two samples of the glacial till soils were collected from EP -160 and EP -161 and submitted t*
AESI's soils laboratory for grain size analysis. The results are provided in Appendix C.
Subsurface conditions at the project site were inferred from the explorations accomplished for
this study and previous studies, visual reconnaissance of the site, and review of topography
provided on the topographic site plan.
As shown on the exploration logs, most of the exploration pits generally encountered varying
amounts of sediments interpreted to be fill (up to 6.5 feet thick) over glacial till sediments.
Where fill and other unsuitable materials are encountered, they should be excavated and
replaced with suitable fill. Table 4.1 below summarizes the depths of unsuitable fill and other
materials and depths to suitable bearing soils.
The following section presents more detailed subsurface information organized from the
youngest to the oldest sediment types.
IN&MMAM•
Sod and/or topsoil was present at the ground surface at a number of explorations and generall
ranged in thickness from 0.5 to 1.0 feet. Fill soils (those not naturally placed) we -
encountered in most of the explorations in Sector 2A. The fill ranged in thickness fTom zero a
6.5 feet thick (TP -10). As noted on the exploration logs, the fill generally consisted of loose s
medium dense, silty fine to coarse sand with various gravel, scattered debris, and organic.
The fill consisted of silt with trace to few sand in EP -158. Old utility pipes were encounter '
in a number of explorations, and it is expected that many old and recent utilities will
encountered during excavation. Any fill with high percentages of silt, organics, or debris
considered unsuitable for reuse as structural fill. Some of the fill may be suitable for reuse,
indicated in Table 4.1. The thicknesses shown in Table 4.1 are estimated based
observations at the exploration locations in November 2009. Condition and thickness of
fill may change and is expected to vary between our explorations. Other fill soils are assum
to be present in the areas of the existing structures. Since the quality, thic, ..... a
f t amn 6e fil is unsuitable for direct structural suT)Pcrm
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIAM0 EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSKIld - KE090103119 - Projects M090103MEI WP Page 4
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washington Project and Site Conditions
4.3 Hydrology
Shallow ground water seepage was not observed in the exploration pits in the Sector 2A area.
However, random areas of perched ground water are often encountered on top of dense to very
dense, low -permeability Iodgement till sediments and may be encountered during grading. It
should be noted that the occurrence and level of ground water seepage at the site may vary in
response to such factors as changes in season, precipitation, and site use.
Deep ground water was encountered in explorations MW -1 and MW -2 and will be addressed in
a hydrogeologic report by AESI under separate cover.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSKIld - KE090103A9 - Projects1200901031KERP Page 7
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bretherton, Washington Protect and Site Conditions
Table 4.1
Summary of Unsuitable Materials and Depths
Exploration
No.
Approx.
GS Elev.
(feet)
Fill Unsuitable
for Reuse
(feet)(feet)
_ _
Fill Suitable
for Reuse
0-0.5
Depth to
Weathered Till
(feet)
-
Depth to Dense
Lodgement Till
(feet)
0.5
B-5
174
TP -10
175
0-1 & 5.5-6.5
1-5.5
-
6.5
TP -11
168
0-1
i-4
_
4
TP -12
180
0-2.5-
-
2.5
TP -13
172
0-4
-
_
4
TP -14
155
01
-
1.0
4
EP -154
175
0-2.5
-
2.5
3
EP -1 55
179
0-1
-
—
1
EP -156
180
0-1
-
1
EP -157
170
0-1.5
-
-
1.5
EP -158
180
0-3
3
EP -159
176
0-4
-
-
4
EP -160
178
0-0.5
0.5-2
2
5
EP -161
177
0-0.5
-
0.5
1.5
EP -162
158
0-1
-
1
3.5
EP -163
174
0-3
-
3
5
EP -164
179
0-0.5
0
0.5
1.5
EP -165
178
0-1.5
-
1.5
3.5
GS = Ground Surface.
Elevations are approximate
and
based on topographic
map.
Suitability is based
on visual
assessment of organic
and debris content.
Suitability for reuse
will also depend on soil
moisture and weather
conditions
during grading and
construction. Experience
at Bay Vista has
shown that debris content,
moisture, gradation,
and depth
of fill soils can vary widely
over short distances.
4.2 Geologic Mapping
Review of the regional geologic map titled Geologic Map of Surficial Deposits in the Seattle
30' x 60' Quadrangle, Washington, compiled by Yount, Minard, and Demboff (1993),
indicates that the area of the subject site is underlain by Vashon lodgement till (Qvt). Our
interpretation of the sediments encountered at the subject site is in general agreement with the
regional geologic map.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK/1d - KEM103A9 - Project .s1200901031KE1WP Page 6
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repon
Bremerton, Washington Geologic Hazards and Mfti atiolis
Due to the proximity of the site to the suspected fault trace, the risk for surficial ground
rupture should be considered moderate to high during a significant seismic event connected to
the Seattle Fault. Mitigation should consist of complying with the 2006 International Building
Code (IBC) for this site.
5.2 Seismicallv Induced Landslides
There are steep slopes within Sector 2A. However, we understand that they will mostly be
flattened as a result of grading. Therefore, the potential for seismically induced landsliding is
low due to the lack of steep slopes on the final graded site. If steep areas remain after grading
or due to a change in the grading plan, we recommend that we assess the slope conditions at
that time.
5.3 Liquefaction
The encountered stratigraphy has a low potential for liquefaction due to its dense state and lack
of adverse ground water conditions. No mitigation of liquefaction hazards is necessary.
5.4 Ground Motion
The guidelines presented in the 2006 IBC Section 1613 should be used in the seismic design of
the project. The USGS Java Ground Motion Parameter Calculator, Version 5.0.91, was used
to determine interpolated probabilistic ground motion values in percent of gravity (g) for an
event with a return period of 2 percent exceedance in 50 years. Using the calculator, the
project area was submitted using latitude and longitude for mapped spectral accelerations of
Ss = 1.512 for short periods (0.2 seconds) and Si = 0.537 for a 1 -second period. Based on
the results of our subsurface exploration and our estimation of soil properties at depth utilizing
available geologic data, Site Class "C", in conformance with Table 1613.5.2 of the IBC, may
be used. These values, correspond to site coefficients Fa = 1.00 and Fv = 1.30 in conformance
with IBC Tables 1613.5.3(1) and 1613.5.3(2), respectively.
6.0 EROSION HAZARDS AND MITIGATION
As of October 1, 2008, the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) Construction
Storm Water General Permit (also known as the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System [NPDES] permit) requires weekly Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control
(TESC) inspections for all sites 1 or more acres in size that discharge storm water to surface
waters of the state. The TESC inspections must be completed by a Certified Erosion and
Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) for the duration of the construction. TESC reports do not
1 http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/hazmaps/design/
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
ISK/ld - KE090103A9 - Piojects1200901031KEI WP Page 9
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geoteclu:ical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washin ton Geolo is Hazards mid Miti ations
The following discussion of potential geologic hazards is based on the geologic, topographic,
and shallow ground water conditions as observed and discussed herein.
Earthquakes occur in the Puget Lowland with great regularity. The vast majority of these
events are small and are usually not felt by people. However, large earthquakes do occur, as
evidenced by the 1949, 7.2 -magnitude event; the 2001, 6.8 -magnitude event; and the 1965,
6.5 -magnitude event. The 1949 earthquake appears to have been the largest in this region
during recorded history and was centered in the Olympia area. Evaluation of earthquake
return rates indicates that an earthquake of the magnitude between 5.5 and 6.0 is likely within
a given 20 -year period.
Generally, there are four types of potential geologic hazards associated with large seismic
events: 1) surficial ground rupture, 2) seismically induced landslides, 3) liquefaction, and
4) ground motion. The potential for each of these hazards to adversely impact the proposed
project 1s discussed below.
5.1 Surficial Ground Rupture
The project site is located within the Seattle Fault Zone. Recent studies by the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) (e.g., Yount and Gower, 1991, Bedrock Geologic Map of the
Seattle 30'x 60' Quadrangle, Washington, USGS OFR 91-147; Johnson et al., 1994, Origin
and Evolution of the Seattle Fault and Seattle Basin, Washington, Geology, v. 22; Johnson et
al., 1999, Active Tectonics of the Seattle Fault and Central Puget Sound Washington -
Implications for Earthquake Hazards, Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 111, n. 7;
and Blakely et al., 2002, Location, Structure, and Seismicity of the Seattle Fault Zone,
Washington: Evidence from Aeromagnetic Anomalies, Geologic Mapping, and Seismic -
Reflection Data, GSA Bulletin, v. 114 n. 1) suggest that a portion of the east -west trending
thrust fault zone (Seattle Fault) may project approximately 1/z mile north of the site. The
recognition of this fault is relatively new, and data pertaining to it are limited, with the studies
still ongoing. According to the USGS studies, the latest movement of this fault was about
1,100 years ago when about 20 feet of surficial displacement took place. This displacement
can presently be seen in the form of raised, wave -cut beach terraces along Alki Point in West
Seattle and Restoration Point at the south end of Bainbridge Island. The recurrence interval of
movement along this fault system is still unknown, although it is hypothesized to be in excess
of several thousand years.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC
JSK11d - KE090I03A9 - Projec►s1200901031KEMP Page 8
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Truta Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washington Geologic Hazards and Miti ations
particles and can combine (flocculate) to form larger particles that will settle out of suspension.
The sediments produced during the recent glaciation of Puget Sound are, however, most
commonly the suspended soils that are carried by site storm water. The fine-grained fraction
of the glacially derived soil is referred to as "rock flout," which is primarily a silt -sized
particle with no electrical charge. These particles, once suspended in water, may require
months to settle out of suspension.
The flow length within a temporary sediment control trap or pond has virtually no effect on
discharge water quality because of the long settling time compared to the time it takes to flow
from one end of the pond to the other. Reduction of turbidity from a construction site is
almost entirely a function of cover measures and flow control. Temporary sediment traps and
ponds are necessary to control the release rate of the runoff and to provide a catchment for
sand -sized and larger soil particles, but are ineffective at reducing the turbidity of the runoff.
Silt fencing should be utilized as buffer protection and not as a flow -control measure. Silt
fencing should be placed parallel with topographic contours to prevent sediment -laden runoff
from leaving a work area or entering a sensitive area. Silt fences should not be placed across
contour lines without having separate flow control in front of the silt fence. A swale/berm
combination should be constructed to provide flow control rather than let the runoff build up
behind the silt fence and utilize the silt fence as the flow -control measure. Runoff flowing in
front of a silt fence will cause additional erosion and may cause a failure of the silt fence.
6.1 Erosion Hazard Mitigation
To mitigate the erosion hazards and potential for off-site sediment transport, we would
recommend the following:
1. The winter performance of a site is dependent on a well -conceived plan for control of
site erosion and storm water runoff. It is easier to keep the soil on the ground than to
remove it from storm water. The owner and the design team should include adequate
ground -cover measures, access roads, and staging areas in the project bid ..for a
workable site. The contractor must implement and maintain the required measures
throughout the project duration. A site maintenance plan should be in place in the
event storm water turbidity measurements are greater than the Ecology standards.
2. All TESC measures for a given area to be graded or otherwise worked should be
installed prior to any activity within an area other than installing the TESC features or
timber harvesting. The recommended sequence of . construction within a given area
after timber harvesting would be to install sediment traps and/or ponds and establish
perimeter flow control prior to starting mass grading.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK/1d - KE090103A9 - Projens1300901031KE1 WP Page 11
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washin8ton Geologic Hazards and !Utiations
need to be sent to Ecology, but should be logged into the project Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP). If the project does not require a SWPPP, the TESC reports should
be kept in a file on-site, or by the permit holder if there is no facility on-site. Ecology also
requires weekly turbidity monitoring by a CESCL of storm water leaving a site for all sites
5 acres or greater. Ecology requires a monthly summary report of the turbidity monitoring
results (if performed) signed by the NPDES permit holder. If the monitored turbidity equals
or exceeds 25 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) (Ecology benchmark standard), the project
best management practices (BMPs) should be modified to decrease the turbidity of storm water
leaving the site. Changes and upgrades to the BMPs should be continued until the weekly
turbidity reading is 25 NTU or lower. If the monitored turbidity exceeds 250 NTU, the results
rinust be reported to Ecology within 24 hours and corrective action taken. Daily turbidity
monitoring is continued until the corrective action lowers the turbidity to below 25 NTU.
In order to meet the current Ecology requirements, a properly developed, constructed,
maintained erosion control plan consistent with City of Bremerton standards and be
management erosion control practices will be required for this project. It is often necessary
make adjustments and provide additional measures to the TESC plan in order to optimize ii
effectiveness. Ultimately, the success of the TESC plan depends on a proactive approach
project planning and contractor implementation and maintenance. We understand that
earthwork contractor will use a proprietary flocculent treatment and filtration system and th
home builders will rely on temporary settling ponds. I
The erosion hazard of the site soils ranges from low to high, depending on the gradation of thM
soils and the slope. Maintaining cover measures atop disturbed ground provides the greate:
el
reduction to the potential generation of turbid runoff and sediment transport. During the loc
wet season (October I" through March 31'), exposed soil should not remain uncovered •
f
more than 2 days unless it is actively being worked. Ground -cover measures can inclu -
erosion control matting, plastic sheeting, straw mulch, crushed rock or recycled concrete,
mature hydroseed.
Flow -control measures are also essential for collecting and controlling the site runoff. Flow
paths across slopes should be kept to less than 50 feet in order to reduce the erosion and
sediment transport potential of concentrated flow. Ditch/swale spacing should be shortened
with increasing slope gradient. Ditches and swales that exceed a gradient of 10 percent should
include check dams to reduce the flow velocity and erosion potential within the ditch. Flow
[saths that are constructed on gradients between 10 to 15 percent should be placed in a riprap-
lined swale. Flow paths constructed on slope gradients steeper than 15 percent should be
114aced in a pipe slope drain.
Some fine-grained surface soils are the result of natural weathering processes that have broken
town parent materials into their mineral components. These mineral components can have an
inherent electrical charge. Electrically charged mineral fines will attract oppositely charged
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK11d - KE090103A9 - Projects1200901031KEMP Page 10
or 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, in ton Prefiminai2 Pfsi
qn Re,clommendations
Our exploration indicates that, from a geotechnical standpoint, the parcel is suitable for
proposed development provided the recommendations contained herein are properly follow
Previous grading on nearby Bay Vista Sector 2B encountered a highly variable thickness
unsuitable fill in randorn locations.' Similar conditions may also occur on Sector,2A and
contingency plan and budget should be included in the project grading phase to address zon
of unsuitable fill material. Soil moisture and weather conditions will also have a signific
impact on the suitability for reuse of the predominant moisture -sensitive soils at Sezctor 2
Wet season grading with moisture -sensitive soils increases costs for measures such as so
admixture treatment or use of imported granular fill. The foundation bearing stratum
relatively shallow in most areas, and conventional spread footing foundations may be utiliz
for the new structures. However, local areas of deeper fill containing debris and organics ha
been encountered and these fill soils will require selective removal and replacernen
Consequently, foundations bearing on either the medium dense to very dense, natur
lodgement till sediments, or on structural fill placed over these sediments, are capable
providing suitable building support.
Demolition of the buildings is currently underway and it is expected that site conditions will be
different at the time of construction. Consistent with development of Sector 2B, all building
debris, utilities, pavement, and foundations should be removed from the site.
MMMMM=511_�M
Site preparation of the planned building and pavement areas should include removal of all
trees, brush, debris, and any other deleterious materials. These unsuitable materials should be
properly disposed of. Additionally, any areas of organic forest duff/topsoil should be removed
and the remaining roots grubbed. Topsoil thicknesses in our exploration pits ranged from
6 inches to 12 inches, but may vary outside this range, particularly in the vicinity of any
previously disturbed/graded- areas. Topsoil should be expected to swell by approximately
25 percent relative to in-place volumes. Areas where loose surficial soils exist due to grubbing
operations should be considered as fill to the depth of disturbance and treated as subsequently
recommended for structural fill placement.
=017- I M*10=3
,2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC
ISKIld - KEW103A9 - Projects1200901031KEMP Page 13
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geolechnical Engineering Repon
Bremerton, Geologic Hazards and Mti
gations
0. During the wetter months of the year, or when large storm events are predicted during
the summer months, each work area should be stabilized so that if showers occur, the
• area can receive the rainfall without excessive erosion or sediment transport. The
required measures for an area to be "buttoned -up" will depend on the time of year and
the duration the area will be left un -worked. During the winter months, areas that are
to be left un -worked for more than 2 days should be mulched or covered with plastic.
During the summer months, stabilization will usually consist • seal -rolling the
subgrade. Such measures will aid in the contractor's ability to get back into a worlq
area after a storm event. The stabilization process also includes establishing temporary
storm water conveyance channels through work areas to route runoff to the approved
treatment facilities.
4. All disturbed areas should be revegetated as soon as possible. If it is outside of the
growing season, the disturbed areas should be covered with mulch, as recommended in
the erosion control plan. Straw mulch provides a cost-effective cover measure and can
be made wind -resistant with the application of a tackifier after it is placed.
5. Surface runoff and discharge should be controlled during and following development.
Uncontrolled discharge may promote erosion and sediment transport. Under no
circumstances should concentrated discharges be allowed to flow over the top of steep
slR1es.
6. Soils that are to be reused around the site should be stored in such a manner as to
reduce erosion from the stockpile. Protective measures may include, but are not
limited to, covering with plastic sheeting, the use of low stockpiles in flat areas, or the
use of straw bales/silt fences around pile perimeters. During the period between
October 1' and March 3 1', these measures are required.
7On-site erosion control inspections and turbidity monitoring should be performed in
accordance with Ecology requirements. Weekly and monthly reporting to Ecology
should be performed ♦ a regularly scheduled basis. TESC monitoring should be part
of the weekly construction team meetings. Temporary and permanent erosion control
and drainage measures should be aqjusted and maintained, as necessary, at the time of
construction.
It is our opinion that with the proper implementation of the TESC plans and by field-adjustim.
appropriate mitigation elements (BMPs) during construction, as recommended by the erosi
control inspector, the potential adverse impacts from erosion hazards on the project ml
be mitigated.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JsK11d - KE090103A9 - Projects1200901031KEMP Page 12
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washington
Prelimtna Diodon Recommendations
9.0 STRUCTURAL FILL
Structural fill will be necessary to establish desired grades in some areas and to re-establish
grade after unsuitable soils are removed. All references to structural fill in this report refer to
subgrade preparation, fill type, and placement and compaction of materials, as discussed in this
section. If a percentage of compaction is specified under another section of this report, the
value given in that section should be used.
9.1 Subrade Comaction
After overexcavation/stripping have been performed to the satisfaction of the geotechnical
engineer/engineering geologist, the upper 12 inches of exposed ground should be compacted to
a firm and unyielding condition. If the subgrade contains too much moisture, suitable
compaction may be difficult or impossible to obtain, and should probably not be attempted. In
lieu of compaction of the subgrade surface, the area to receive fill should be blanketed with
washed rock or quarry spalls to act as a capillary break between the new fill and the wet
subgrade. Where the exposed ground remains soft and further overexcavation is impractical,
placement of an engineering stabilization fabric may be necessary to prevent contamination of
the free -draining layer by silt migration from below.
After compaction of the exposed ground is tested and approved, or a free -draining rock course
is laid, structural fill may be placed to attain desired grades.
9.2 Structural Fill Compaction
Structural fill is defined as non-organic soil, acceptable to the geotechnical engineer, placed in
maximum 8 -inch loose lifts, with each lift being compacted to at least 95 percent of the
modified Proctor maximum dry density using American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM):D 1557 as the standard. Roadway and utility trench backfill should be placed and
compacted in accordance, with applicable municipal codes and standards. The top of the
compacted. fill should extend horizontally a minimum distance of 3 feet beyond the perimeter
footings or pavement edges before sloping down at an angle no steeper than 2H:1V. Fill
slopes should either be overbuilt and trimmed back to final grade or surface -compacted to the
specified density.
9.3 Moisture -Sensitive Fill
Soils in which the amount of fine-grained material (smaller than the No. 200 sieve) is greater
than approximately 5 percent (measured on the minus No. 4 sieve size) should be considered
moisture -sensitive. Use , of moisture -sensitive soil in structural fills should be limited to
favorable dry weather conditions and near -optimum subgrade and fill moisture. We
recommend that grading activities are conducted in the drier summer months to reduce the
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK/td - KE090103A9 - Projec►s1200901031KEMP Page 15
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, WasNP ton Prelitnina2 Desi n Recommendations
exposed subgrades should be compacted and backfilled with structural fill, which may consist
of the overexcavated material, if suitable. If the existing fill is not suitable for reuse, it should
be removed from the site and stockpiled and/or placed on the existing landfill.
After stripping of the organic topsoil layer, removal of roots, and overexcavation of existing
fill materials, we recommend that the soil exposed in the proposed roadway areas be
recompacted to a firm and unyielding condition. The recompacted area should then be proof -
rolled with a fully loaded, tandem -axle dump truck. Any soft or yielding areas identified
during proof -rolling should be overexcavated and backfilled with structural fill.
Following demolition of existing structures on the site, building and wall areas should be
delineated and additional exploration pits excavated to evaluate the subgrade. Any unsuitable
areas should be overexcavated and replaced with structural fill.
8.2 Tqmpor4Ky TemporaryCut Slopes
In our opinion, stable construction slopes should be the responsibility of the contractor and
should be determined during construction based on the local conditions encountered at that
time. For planning purposes, we anticipate that temporary, unsupported cut slopes in the loose
to medium dense, weathered till sediments can be made at a maximum slope of 1.5:1V
(Horizontal: Vertical). Temporary cut slopes within the dense to very dense, unweathered
lodgement till up to a 1H: IV inclination may be planned. As is typical with earthwork
operations, some sloughing and raveling may occur, and cut slopes may have to be adjusted in
the field. Flatter, temporary cut slopes should be anticipated in areas of ground water seepage.
In addition, WISHA/OSHA regulations should be followed at all times.
The shallow -depth site soils contain a high percentage of fine-grained material, which makes
them moisture -sensitive and subject to disturbance when wet. Conversely, dry soil cannot be
compacted to the specified density and is prone to wetting -induced settlement after the fill is
placed. The contractor must use care during site preparation and excavation operations so that
the underlying soils are not softened and that structural fill materials are moisture -conditioned
to within approximately 2 percent of optimum moisture prior to compaction or reuse. If
disturbance occurs, the softened soils should be removed and the area brought to grade with
structural fill. If crushed rock is considered for the access and staging areas, it should be
underlain by stabilization fabric (such as Mirafi 50OX or approved equivalent) to reduce the
potential of fine-grained materials pumping up through the rock and turning the area to mud.
The fabric will also aid in supporting construction equipment, thus reducing the amount of
crushed rock required. We recommend that at least 10 inches of rock be placed over the
fabric; however, due to the variable nature of the near -surface soils and differences in wheel
loads, this thickness may have to be adjusted by the contractor in the field.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK/td - KE090103A9 - Projec.s1200901031KE1Np page 14
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, nVftvon Preliminary Desion dations
footings; however, all footings must penetrate to the prescribed strata, and no footings shou
be founded in or above loose, organic, or existing fill soils. Footings should be at lea
14 inches wide for single -story structures, with 2 inches of width added for ea
additional story.
USE I , , 1 #
The area bounded by lines extending downward at IH: IV from any foot' Ing must not intersect
another footing or 'intersect a filled area that has not been compacted to at least 95 percent of
ASTM:D 1557. In addition, a 1.5H:IV line extending down from any footing must not
daylight because sloughing or raveling may eventually undermine the footing. Thus footings
should not be placed near the edges of steps or cuts in the bearing soils.
ago
Anticipated settlement of footings founded as described above should be on the order of
or less. However, disturbed soil not removed from footing excavations prior to food
placement could result in increased settlements. I
W:
. . .. . . ...... ....... . - ---- --
All footing areas should be observed by AESI prior to placing concrete to verify that ths
exposed soils can support the design foundation bearing capacity and that constructiom
conforms with the recommendations in this report. Foundation bearing verification may aIsM
be required by the governing munici
opality. This is particularly important on this site whe
numerous islated opooable beeod d be eod
znes / ckets f unsuitfill have n funanmay ncuntere
random locations. I
Perimeter footing drains should be provided, as discussed under the -p �g"Djrai�na
Considerations" section of this report. If gravity _ dra 0 e js iRqt ion of e, the port;
structure below the drain level must be designed for combined soil and hydrostatic/buoya
forces.
r 6 1 W, 10—OF ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
MIN - KE090103A9 - 1/'/ 1' Page 17
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repo
Bremerton, Washington PreliminaLy DEt�n Recommendatilo
potential for additional costs associated with over -optimum soils. It is likely that grading
during wet periods of the year will be more expensive due to wet soils.
Some of the on-site fill and lodgement till sediments are suitable for use as structural fill, but
contain significant amounts of silt and are considered highly moisture -sensitive. In addition,
construction equipment traversing the site when the soils are wet can cause considerable
disturbance. If fill is placed during wet weather or if proper compaction cannot be obtained, a
select material consisting of a clean, free -draining gravel and/or sand should be used. Free -
draining fill consists of non-organic soil with the amount of fine-grained material limited to 5
percent by weight when measured on the minus No. 4 sieve fraction.
RUMMMEME-MM
The contractor should note that any proposed fill soils must be evaluated by AESI prior to their
use in fills. This would require that we have a sample of the material at least 3 business days
in advance to perform a Proctor test and determine its field compaction standard.
A representative from our firm should inspect the stripped subgrade and be present durirm-
placement of structural fill to observe the work and perform a representative number of i
place density tests. In this way, the adequacy of the earthwork may be evaluated as fill*
progresses and any problem areas may be corrected at that time. It is important to understal
that taking random compaction tests on a part-time basis will not assure uniformity
acceptable performance of a fill. As such, we are available to aid the owner in developing
suitable monitoring and testing frequency.
i11JU1 ROM 017M
Spread footings may be used for building support when founded either directly on the medium
-tense to very dense, natural glacial sediments, or on structural fill placed over these materials,
,?s described under the "Site Preparation" and "Structural Fill" - sections of this report. For
footings founded either directly upon the medium dense to very dense glacial sediments, or on
structural fill as described above, we recommend that an allowable bearing pressure of
k,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be used for design purposes, including both dead and live
loads. An increase of one-third may be used for short-term wind or seismic loading.
1111,7M I I 10111 IM 1 1JUIL-111) IS 0) 1 1 C4Q t$JKjJ4
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK11d - KE090103A9 - ProjecIA200901031KEMP Page 16
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washin ron Preliminary Desi n Recommendations
Passive equivalent fluid = 250 pcf
Coefficient of friction = 0.30
Both of these values include a factor of safety of 1.5.
11.4 Walls with Footin Surchar . es
We are not aware of any retaining walls in Sector 2A that will be subject to loads from nearby
footings. If any footings will be located within a 111: IV line from the base of a retaining wall,
AESI should be contacted to review the design and provide additional recommendations.
12.0 ROCKERIES
Rockeries may be used to prevent erosion of cut slopes; however, they are not engineered
structures, and should not be used in place of retaining walls. Buildings and roads should be
set back from rockeries so that a 1H: IV line extending up from the rear base of the rockery
does not intersect the footing or pavement.
Rockery construction quality depends largely on the skill of the builder. Although rockeries
are commonly used, they should be considered a long-term maintenance item. Care must be
exercised in selecting a rock source since some of the material presently being supplied is soft
and disintegrates in a relatively short period of time. Samples of rock can be tested by AESI
prior to their use in rockeries.
The following notes present rockery design and construction considerations. In addition, the
contractor should confirm that his configuration conforms to current City of Bremerton
specifications.
1. The base of the rockery should be started by excavating a trench to a minimum depth of
12 inches below subgrade into firm, undisturbed ground. If loose, soft, or disturbed
materials exist at the base rock location, they should be removed and replaced with
free -draining sand and gravel or crushed rock. This backfill material should be
compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of ASTM:D 1557. The gradation of the sand
and gravel should be such that not more than 5 percent by weight should be finer than
the No. 200 sieve, based on the minus No. 4 sieve.
2. The base rock should have a minimum width (perpendicular to the line of the rockery)
of 40 percent of the height of the rockery. All rocks should also meet the following
weight requirements:
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK11d - KE090103A9 - Projects1200901031KEMP Page 19
Sector 2,4 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washington Preliminar Design Recommendations
horizontally backfilled, rigid walls that cannot yield should be designed for an equivalent fluid
of 50 pcf. Walls that retain sloping backfill at a maximum angle of 2H:1 V should be designed
for 55 pcf for yielding conditions and 75 pcf for restrained conditions. If parking areas are
adjacent to walls, a surcharge equivalent to 2 feet of soil should be added to the wall height in
determining lateral design forces. Undrained walls/structures must be designed for combined
soil and hydrostatic pressures (85 pcf for yielding walls, 100 pcf for unyielding walls with
horizontal backfill) and for buoyant/uplift forces.
11.1 Wall Backfill
The lateral pressures presented above are based on the conditions of a uniform backfill
consisting of either the on-site glacial sediments, or imported sand and gravel compacted to
92 percent of ASTM:D 1557. A higher degree of compaction is not recommended, as this will
increase the pressure acting on the walls. A lower compaction may result in unacceptable
settlement behind the walls. Thus, the compaction level is critical and must be tested by our
firm during placement. The recommended compaction of 92 percent of ASTM:D 1557 applies
to any structural fill placed behind the wall within a distance equal to the wall height and up to
the elevation of the top of the wall. Structural fill used to construct slopes behind retaining
walls should be compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D 1557 if the fill is placed above
the elevation of the top of the wall. Surcharges from adjacent footings, heavy construction
equipment, or sloping ground must be added to the above -recommended lateral pressures.
Footing drains should be provided for all retaining walls, as discussed under the "Drainage
Considerations" section of this report.
11.2 Wall Drainage
It is imperative that proper drainage be provided so that hydrostatic pressures do not develop
against the walls. This would involve installation of a minimum 1 -foot -wide blanket drain for
the full wall height (excluding the uppermost 1 foot of backfill) using imported washed gravel
against the walls. The wall drain material must be hydraulically connected to the footing drain
pipe. Wall foundation drains are discussed in Section 14.1 of this report.
11.3 Passive Resistance and Friction Factor
Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the foundation and the natural, medium dense
to dense glacial sediments or supporting structural fill soils, or by passive earth pressure acting
on the buried portions of the foundations. The foundations must be backfilled with compacted
structural fill to achieve the passive resistance provided below. We recommend the following
allowable design parameters:
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK/td - KE090103A9 - Projects1200901031KEMP Page 18
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washin ton Prelimina Desii Recommendations
If moisture intrusion through slab -on -grade floors is to be limited, the floors should be
constructed atop a capillary break consisting of a minimum thickness of 4 inches of washed pea
gravel or washed crushed rock (no fines). The pea gravel/washed rock should be overlain by a
10 -mil (minimum thickness) plastic vapor retarder. If a crushed or sharp aggregate is used, the
aggregate should be rolled with a smooth steel drum or plate compactor to reduce punctures in
the vapor retarder. Additional protection from the crushed aggregate should be provided by a
geotextile (such as Mirafi 140N) or use of a puncture -resistant membrane compliant with
ASTM,E 1345 Class A requirements for puncture resistance (such as StegoOWrap
15 millimeter vapor barrier).
14.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERAATIONS
The unweathered till sediments encountered in our explorations at depths up to 6.5 feet below
ground surface are relatively impermeable, and water will tend to perch atop this stratum.
Additionally, traffic across the till sediments when they are very moist or wet will result in
disturbance of the otherwise firm stratum. Therefore, prior to site work and construction, the
contractor should be prepared to provide drainage and subgrade protection, as necessary.
14.1 Wall/Foundation Drains
All retaining and perimeter footing walls should be provided with a drain at the footing
elevation. The drains should consist of rigid, perforated PVC pipe surrounded by washed pea
gravel. The level of the perforations in the pipe should be set approximately 2 inches below
the bottom of the footing, and the drains should be constructed with sufficient gradient to allow
gravity discharge away from the buildings. All retaining walls should be lined with a
minimum 12 -inch -thick washed gravel blanket provided to within 1 foot of finish grade, and
which ties into the footing drain. Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the footing
drain system, but should be handled by a separate, rigid, tightline drain.
Exterior grades adjacent to walls should be sloped downward away from the structures to
achieve surface drainage. Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage
away from the buildings at all times. Water must not be allowed to pond or to collect adjacent
to foundations or within the immediate building areas. It is recommended that a gradient of at
least 3 percent for a minimum distance of 10 feet from the building perimeters be provided,
except in paved locations. In paved locations, a minimum gradient of 1 percent should be
provided unless provisions are included for collection and disposal of surface water adjacent to
the structures. Additionally, pavement subgrades should be crowned to provide drainage
toward catch basins and pavement edges. Crawl -space areas should be provided with drains at
low points to prevent water from accumulating.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
!SK/1d - KE090103A9 - Projects1200901031KEMP Page 21
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washin ton Preliminary Desi n Recommendations
Mot ml ► '�
•,►r500/2,200• r .► ► top/bottom roe,
5 feet or i! 111 pounds, ,►,d top/b'ottom rocla
3. The rock material should all be as nearly rectangular as possible. No stone should be
used that does not extend through the wall. The rock material should be hard, sound,
durable, and free from weathered portions, seams, cracks, or other defects. The rock
density should be a minimum of 160 pcf.
4. Rock selection and placement should be such that there will be minimum voids and, in
the exposed face of the wall, no open voids over 8 inches across in any direction. The
rocks should be placed in a manner such that the longitudinal axis of the rock will be at
right angles or perpendicular to the rockery face. Each rock should be placed so as to
lock into two rocks in the lower tier. After setting each rock course, all voids between
the rocks should be chinked on the back with quarry rock to eliminate any void
sufficient to pass a 2 -inch square probe. The rockery should be limited to 8 feet
in height.
5. A drain consisting of rigid, perforated, polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe enclosed in a
12 -inch -wide pea gravel trench should be placed behind the lower course of rock to
remove water and prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. The
remainder of the wall backfill should consist of quarry spalls with a maximum size of
4 inches and a minimum size of 2 inches. This material should be placed to a
12 -inch -minimum thickness between the entire wall and the cut material. The backfill
material should be placed in lifts to an elevation approximately 6 inches below the top
of each course of rocks as they are placed until the uppermost course is placed. Any
backfill material falling onto the bearing surface of a rock course should be removed
before the setting of the next course.
6. Any asphalt paving should be sloped to drain away from the rockery. In addition, the
areas above rockeries should be planted with grass as soon as possible after rockery
construction to reduce erosion.
floorsbe constructed either directly on medium dense to very ►•[
natural sediments, or on structural fill placed over these materials. Areas of .► subgra
that are disturbed (loosened) during construction should be recompacted to an unyieldi
condition prior to placing the pea gravel, as described below.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK/ld - KE090103A9 - Projects 000901031KE1WP Page 20
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Ysta Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washin ton Preliminary Design Recommendations
We are also available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during
construction. The integrity of the foundations depends on proper site preparation and
construction procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field
in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring
services are not part of this current scope of work. If these services are desired, please let us
know, and we will prepare a proposal.
We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that these recommendations
will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions or
require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
Kirkland, Washington
Kindred, P.E.
Engineer
L. Bt
o WAS ,
cc
4U
9 36BEI o Z
Tsm
S�orvk Eck /#(06/437
Bruce L. Blyton, P.E.
Principal Engineer
Attachments: Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Figure 2: Bay Vista Site Plan
Figure 3: Site and Exploration Plan
Appendix A: Exploration Logs from Previous Assessments
Appendix B: Exploration Logs
Appendix C: Grain Size Analyses
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK/Id - M090103A9 - Projects1200901031KEMP Page 23
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Wash fn ;ton Preliminar n Recommendations
Portions of the site are underlain by a variable amount of fill that is generally unsuitable for
road support. Beneath the fill (when present) is native weathered or unweathered medium
dense to very dense lodgement till that is suitable for pavement support. AESI recommends
removal of topsoil, all fill, organic debris, roots, and other unsuitable materials from the
roadbed.
If required, structural fill may then be placed to achieve desired subbase grades. Structural
fills below proposed pavement areas should be compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D
1557. The subgrade should be crowned to drain toward the edges of the paved area with
grades of 2 percent.
Following installation of utilities and rough -grading of the subgrade, the exposed soils should
be compacted to a firm and unyielding condition, as determined by the geotechnical engineer
or their representative, with a density that is at least 95 percent of maximum dry density
determined using ASTM:D 1557. Given the high silt content of the native soils, moisture -
conditioning may be necessary to obtain a firm and unyielding condition. During winter and
spring months or following precipitation, the soils are likely to be too wet, and it may be
difficult to dry the soils and obtain suitable compaction. Suitable compaction is also difficult to
obtain if the soils are too dry, as generally occurs in the summer and fall. Dry soils can be
most problematic because they can appear firm and suitable during construction, but soften and
cause failure of the pavement when exposed to moisture.
Prior to placing pavement materials, the subgrade should be proof -rolled with a fully loaded,
tandem -axle dump truck. Any visibly yielding areas should be removed and replaced with
structure fill. All aggregates used in the pavement section should be compacted to 95 percent
of maximum dry density determined using ASTM:D 1557.
The recommendations in this report are preliminary because grading plans and construction
details were not finalized at the time of this report. We are available to provide additional
geotechnical consultation as the project design develops and possibly changes from that upon
which this report is based. If significant changes in grading are made, we recommend that
AESI perform a geotechnical review of the plans prior to final design completion. In this way,
our earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and implemented
in the design.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
!SK/1d - KE090103A9 - Projects 1200901031KE1WP Page 22
m
REP=
S
d
z
Sector 2A SubsurfaceGeologic Hazard and
Bay ,I Redevelopment Project Preliminary GeotechnicalReport
Bremerton, / f
------
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI), 2009, Subsurface exploration, geologic hazard, and
preliminary geotechnical engineering report, Sector 2B, Bay Vista redevelopment
project, Bremerton, Washington, dated July 31, 2009.
Landau Associates (Landau), 2006, Draft report, Westpark redevelopment, Bremerton,
Washington, dated April 28, 2006.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
.ISK/Id - KE090103A9 - Projects1200901031KEmP Page 24
S-1 b2 731 W=7
S-2 b2 831 grades gravelly
10 S3- � b2 6W � W-7
6.
is � 6W grades ally
S4 b2
CD
0
-j
20 501 W=6
0 plated D4106=
B dng
Total ltpth!B0 ® 20.3 IL
25
wo
K*171TOITINK Mi 11
Notes: 1. Straligraphic contacts are based on field . interpretations and we =ri subsurface conditions.
2. Reference to the text of this report Is necessary for a proper und
3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring B-5
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington
ASSOCIATES
Figure
A-6
B-5
SAMPLE DATA
SOIL PROFILE
-6
Drilling Meftd-
E
Z's
—0
0
E
>1
Ground Elevation (ft)- Not Measured
CL
0) 2t
01
E
U-
0- Q
E
Z
U)
I L)
Drilled By:
Cl
a) .5
w m 12
0
PC
cement concrete (6- thick)
--§M—
—Brown, very silty, fine to coarse SAND with
gravel (very dense, wet) (gladal 90)
S-1 b2 731 W=7
S-2 b2 831 grades gravelly
10 S3- � b2 6W � W-7
6.
is � 6W grades ally
S4 b2
CD
0
-j
20 501 W=6
0 plated D4106=
B dng
Total ltpth!B0 ® 20.3 IL
25
wo
K*171TOITINK Mi 11
Notes: 1. Straligraphic contacts are based on field . interpretations and we =ri subsurface conditions.
2. Reference to the text of this report Is necessary for a proper und
3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring B-5
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington
ASSOCIATES
Figure
A-6
GM Gray -brown, silty, very gravelly, fine to
4 coarse SAND (dense to very dense, moist)
(glacial till)
6
S-2 d =9• X,
A--12
[Ell
iD
Boring Completed 04/05/06
Total Depth of Boring = &0 R
Notes: 1. Strafigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are apprwdmate.
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key' figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log Of Boring TP -11
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington A.
ASSOCIATES
TP -11
SAMPLE DATA
SOIL PROFILE
GROUNDWATER
m
o
Drilling Method' Rubber -tired Backhoe
E o
a
o
:d
E
Ground Elevation (ft)' Not Measured
HZ
mZ m
E c
�
c
m
m
is
rn
t>0 '0
Drilled By: Custom Backhoe
ro m
C3r0ca m
to
H
tE
0
1
SM/
_ .......... .._..... .........
ML
Brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with
SM
gravel (medium dense, moist to wet) (fill)
Groundwater not encountered.
S-4, d
W=14
2
_ concrete debris on north face of pit
GM Gray -brown, silty, very gravelly, fine to
4 coarse SAND (dense to very dense, moist)
(glacial till)
6
S-2 d =9• X,
A--12
[Ell
iD
Boring Completed 04/05/06
Total Depth of Boring = &0 R
Notes: 1. Strafigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are apprwdmate.
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key' figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log Of Boring TP -11
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington A.
ASSOCIATES
2
S�l -
_Fj d W=14
4
6
6 S - W GS 6 .I
2 d
Boring Completed 04/05/06
Total Depth of Boring = 6.5 ft.
10
t--12
1--14
x-16
Brown, silty, fine to coarse SAND I
(medium dense, moist to wet) (fill)
- concrete pipe at 4'
- buried topsoil horizon with roots
3ray-6rown. silty, gravelly, fine to coarsi
SAND (dense, moist) (glacial till)
GROUNDWATER
Groundwater not encountered.
Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring TP -10 �_
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington
ASSOCIATES
TP -10
SAMPLE DATA
SOIL PROFILE
Drilling Method: Rubber -tired Backhoe
-� z
CL
}�
°o
E
E.
Ground Elevation (ft); Not Measured
,.a Z
t n. m
a
a
a
0
--
t
a
co
U
Drilled B Custom Backhoe
a rn .6
N ''
c
m
1,
E
U'
co
:D
2
S�l -
_Fj d W=14
4
6
6 S - W GS 6 .I
2 d
Boring Completed 04/05/06
Total Depth of Boring = 6.5 ft.
10
t--12
1--14
x-16
Brown, silty, fine to coarse SAND I
(medium dense, moist to wet) (fill)
- concrete pipe at 4'
- buried topsoil horizon with roots
3ray-6rown. silty, gravelly, fine to coarsi
SAND (dense, moist) (glacial till)
GROUNDWATER
Groundwater not encountered.
Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring TP -10 �_
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington
ASSOCIATES
I
4
6
S2 d W.9
8
Boring Completed 04106/05
Total Depth of Boring = 8.0 it.
10
—12
fq
14
16
I'M ,Nl. MIFIr-W-0�
Notes: 1. Stratigraphle contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface condifions.
3. Refer to "Sell Classification System and KW figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring TP -13
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington A-1 6'
ASSOCIATES
TP -13
SAMPLE DATA
SOIL PROFILE
GROUNDWATER
.0
-6
Drilling Method,, Rubber-Ored Backhoe
E
Z —
6 1
0
E
Ground Elevation (ft), Not Measured
CL_w
E a
0.
E
—0
=
0-
10
a)
0
Drilled By- Custom Backhoe
.0
wally, silly, fine to coarse SAND
with abundard mots (medwn dense, ffdsQ
(fill)
Grounclwater not encountered.
I
4
6
S2 d W.9
8
Boring Completed 04106/05
Total Depth of Boring = 8.0 it.
10
—12
fq
14
16
I'M ,Nl. MIFIr-W-0�
Notes: 1. Stratigraphle contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface condifions.
3. Refer to "Sell Classification System and KW figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring TP -13
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington A-1 6'
ASSOCIATES
Gray, silty, gravaity, fine to Coarse
(dense, damp) (glacial Hit)
4
6
GT
S-2 dW = 4
8 GS
Boring Completed 04/06/06
Total Depth of Boring = 8.6 ft -
10
t
10
t--12
F— 14
1-16
Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on fid interpretations and are approximate.
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
2 AL Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring TP -12
A
LAND U
Washington Bremerton,
[A ASSOC RTESg A 15
TP -12
SAMPLE DATA
SOIL PROFILE
GROUNDWATER
Em
E
Drilling Method- Rubber -tired Backhoe
z' 15
o
rn
a
T
Ground Elevation (tip Not Measured
v W 2 _m
X2 CL
e E
U.M
g
U
@
to
0
Drilled By: Custom Backhoe
m m
O C15 rad fn
m
m
H
(9
.0
SWW
T soli
ML
Brown, very silly, fine to medium SAND with
SM
gravel (medium dense, wet) (fill)
Groundwater not encountered.
S-1 d
W = 26
abandoned utility pipes at 1.6
.2
Gray, silty, gravaity, fine to Coarse
(dense, damp) (glacial Hit)
4
6
GT
S-2 dW = 4
8 GS
Boring Completed 04/06/06
Total Depth of Boring = 8.6 ft -
10
t
10
t--12
F— 14
1-16
Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on fid interpretations and are approximate.
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
2 AL Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring TP -12
A
LAND U
Washington Bremerton,
[A ASSOC RTESg A 15
Exploration Logs
1--12
1-14
1-16
Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to " Soll Classification System and Key'" for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring TP -14
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington "-1 6
14 ASSOCIATES
TP -14
SAMPLE
DATA
.�.
.
SOIL PROFILE
GROUNDWATER
E
Drilling Method:_, Rubber -tired Backhoe
Z —m
CL
o
1
-a
C
! E,
Ground Elevation (fty Not Measured
EE c
EE
c
W
U
Drilled By:, Custom Backhoe
m
C1 co 06
rn
m
F
C'3
in
=)
_... .
0
S
TopsoA -
ML
Groundwater not encountered.
SAA
Red-bro9 Y. �Y.wn, r�re�-dine to coarse
SAND (medium dense, moist to wet)
(ablation till)
..2
S-1
d
W=11
4
Sp-
Gray, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND with silt
SM
(dense, moist to wet) (glacial till)
,g
S2
d
W= t2
GS
it
.8
.._.._...... ......
Boring
Completed
04/06/06
Total
Depth
of
Boring = 8.0
ft.
1--12
1-14
1-16
Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to " Soll Classification System and Key'" for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring TP -14
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington "-1 6
14 ASSOCIATES
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -154
This log is part of the report repared by Assoclated Earth Sciences, Ina (AESI) for the named pproject and should be
a read together with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the locaEion of this trench at the
time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the only
of time. The data presented are
0 a simpification of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Loose to medium dense, dry, brown to grayish brown, silty fine to medium SAND, few to little gravel,
scattered trash and concrete rubble, occasional cobble.
2
3 ] Dense to very dense, dry, brownish gray to gray, fine to medium SAND, little silt, few fine to coarse
gravel (concrete -like diamict).
4 Few roots at 3'.
n
Bottom of exploration pit at 6 feet.
7 No seeps or sloughing. North end of pit intersects a -6° concrete storm sewer (?) pipe at 4.51, running east -west. HOS
determined pipe is abandoned storm - backfilled.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
E
Bay Vista Sector 2A
N
Bremerton, WA
6
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
Lagged by: SST project No. KE090103A
�
a o 9/10/09
Approved by:
Y
" °�o ,
GW
. . . . . ...... ......
Well -graded gravel and
I gravel with sand, little to
no fines
0 0 ,00
000a,
Boulders
Poorly -graded gravel
, 0 0 00 I
0 0 0 a
GIP
and gravel with sand,
0 0 0 0 0
4 to 10
little to no fines
?0?0-
Medium Dense
10 to 30
Test Symbols
5% and 15%
Silty gravel and silty
30 to 50
GIVII
gravel with sand
Very Dense
>50
G =Grain Size
3 O"OD Thin -Wall Tube i'
Clayey gravel and
1-44GC
(including Shelby tube)
clayey gravel with sand
V.%%%
I
Well -graded sand and
Very Soft
SW
sand with gravel, little
.....
Soft
to no fines
DD = Dry Density
Grained Soils
Poorly -graded sand
4 to 8
SP
and sand with gravel,
Stiff
8 to 15
little to no fines
Very Stiff
Silty sand and
sm
silty sand with
>30
gravel
Clayey sand and
liclayey
SC
sand With gravel
Sift, sandy silt, gravelly silt,
ML
silt with sand or gravel
Clay of low to medium
CL
plasticity; silty, sandy, or
gravelly clay, lean clay
Organic clay or silt of low
OL
plasticity
-ElaSti Silt, Clayey silt, silt
C
MN�
with micaceous or
diatomaceous line sand or
sit
Clay of high plasticity,
CH
sandy or gravelly clay, tat
clay With sand or gravel
Organic clay or silt of
ON
medium to high
plasticity
I Peat, muck and other
PT
highly organic soils
Sand
2ftq_Sl!y
SPT blows/foot
Size Range qd Sieve Number
Boulders
Very Loose
0 to 4
3" to 12'
Coarse-
Loose
4 to 10
31 to 3/4"
Grained Soils
Medium Dense
10 to 30
Test Symbols
5% and 15%
Dense
30 to 50
3 25"•D. Spoon Ring Sampler
-,blank casing
Very Dense
>50
G =Grain Size
3 O"OD Thin -Wall Tube i'
I.Screened casing
M = Moisture Content
(including Shelby tube)
Consistency
SPTt2lbIowsfibot
A = Atterberg Limits
Very Soft
0 to 2
C = Chemical
Fine-
Soft
2 to 4
DD = Dry Density
Grained Soils
Medium Stiff
4 to 8
K = Permeability
Stiff
8 to 15
Very Stiff
15 to 30
Hard
>30
Sand
Component Definitions
Desai tip ve Term
Size Range qd Sieve Number
Boulders
Larger than 12"
Cobbles
3" to 12'
Gravel
3" to No 4 (4 75 mm)
Coarse Gravel
31 to 3/4"
Fine Gravel
3/41 to No, 4 (4.75 mm)
Sand
No. 4 (4 75 mm) to No. 200 (0-075 mm)
Coarse Sand
No, 4 (4.75 mm) to No. 10 (2.00 mm)
Medium Sand
No 10 (2.00 mm) to No. 40 (0.425 mm)
Fine Sand
No. 40 (0,425 mm) to No. 200 (0.075 mm)
Silt and Clay
Smaller than No. 200 (0-075 mm)
(*3) Estimated Percentage
Moisture Content
Dry - Absence of moisture,
dusty, dry to the touch
Slightly Moist - Perceptible
moisture
Moist - Damp but no visible
water
Very Moist - Water visible but
not free draining
from below water table
Percentage by
Compqn��nt Weight
Trace
<5
Few
5 to 10
Little
15 to 25
With
- Non -primary coarse
Bentonite
constituents: > 15%
is Description
a
- Fines content between
Sampler
5% and 15%
Moisture Content
Dry - Absence of moisture,
dusty, dry to the touch
Slightly Moist - Perceptible
moisture
Moist - Damp but no visible
water
Very Moist - Water visible but
not free draining
from below water table
(1) Percentage by dry weight
(2) (SPT) Standard Penetration Test
(3) (ASTM D-1586)
In General Accordance with
Standard Practice for Description
and Identification of Soils (ASTM D-2488)
(4) Depth of ground water
Y_ ATD = At time of drilling
-7 Static water level (date)
b0§111 �Q'
Classificirtions of soils in this report are based on visual field and1or laboratory observations, which Include density/consistency, moisture condition, grain size. and
plasticity estimates and should not be construed to Imply field or laboratory testing unless presented herein. Visual -manual and/or laboratory classification
methods of ASTM D-2487 and D-2488 were used as an Identification guide for the Unified Soll Classification System.
0
>1
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG KEY
. ................ . ....
Blows/6"or
Sampler
., ,
iCement grout
Type
surface seat
2,"OD
0
Sampler Ty
M — pe
Bentonite
Split -Spoon
is Description
a
(4) seal
Sampler
3.0' OD Split -Spoon Sampler
Filter pack with
(SPT)
3 25"•D. Spoon Ring Sampler
-,blank casing
Bulk sample
SeCrKM
3 O"OD Thin -Wall Tube i'
I.Screened casing
(including Shelby tube)
or Hydrolip
i': with filter pack
Grab Sample
J.-'Endcap
Portion not recovered
(1) Percentage by dry weight
(2) (SPT) Standard Penetration Test
(3) (ASTM D-1586)
In General Accordance with
Standard Practice for Description
and Identification of Soils (ASTM D-2488)
(4) Depth of ground water
Y_ ATD = At time of drilling
-7 Static water level (date)
b0§111 �Q'
Classificirtions of soils in this report are based on visual field and1or laboratory observations, which Include density/consistency, moisture condition, grain size. and
plasticity estimates and should not be construed to Imply field or laboratory testing unless presented herein. Visual -manual and/or laboratory classification
methods of ASTM D-2487 and D-2488 were used as an Identification guide for the Unified Soll Classification System.
0
>1
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG KEY
. ................ . ....
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -156
$ This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be
a read together with that repori for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the logiion of this trench at the
time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are
o a simpification of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Grass over Topsoil/Fill
Loose to medium dense, dry, brown, silty fine to medium SAND, organic rich.
1 -
Vashon Lodgement Till
Dense to very dense, dry, light gray, fine to medium SAND, little silt, few to little fine to coarse
2 gravel, occasional cobble.
3
4 4
Bottom of exploration pit at 3 feet.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
NJ 19
y Bay Vista Sector 2A
Bremertoti, WA
ii
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE090103A
� Logged by: SST
CD
Approved by:
1 9/10/09
F-
a
P4
z
IM -M-1151 MA MR. -
0 '---r:... I I
ns enIgunt"Z.
I 11*4M ZA I a I Mok
urass over'iasnon LOUgement i in
v en e 91 li�'ht W4 fine to medium SAND. little silt. few to little fine to coarse qravel,
9
K
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
S
Z- U
E
Bay Vista Sector 2A
Bremerton, WA
A
A Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE090103A
Logged by: SST
Approved by: 9110109
1� M -W -7Y. [B SST,_
KE 0
t3
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -158
This log is part of the report prepared by Assoaated Earth Sciences, Inca (AESII for the named rolect and should be
read together with that report for �mplet� interpretation. Tttis summary applies only to the locatPon of this trench at the
io time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are
o a simpification of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Soft to medium stiff, dry, light brown, SILT, trace to few fine sand, few roots.
2
3
4 Very dense, dry, light gray, fine to medium SAND, little silt, little fine to coarse gravel, occasional
Bottom of exploration pit at 4 feet.
5 No seeps or sloughing. Trench is excavated southwest to northeast. 2" steel pipe in northeast end of pit, 2' deep. Pipe
was not damaged
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
E
, Bay Vista Sector 2A
CL
Bremerton, VSA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE090103A
Logged by: SST
�
Approved by:
f 9110109
MR ffi M9
Y
01MR, R" MI•... 1 . 11,
Spa .9
11111�pli=n olf ��cta`l �,,r�dKn-s
1!Jz&i4qvl;A11q7L'
urass over i -in
Loose to medium dense, dry, tan, fine to medium SAND, with silt, little fine to coarse gravel.
2 1 vasnon LOagement i in
Very dense, dry, light gray, fine to medium SAND, little silt, few to little fine to coarse gravel
3 (concrete -like diamict).
1H
M
Bottom of exploration pit at 5 feet.
No seeps or sloughing. Ditch line runs north -south at west end of pit, 1 1/4' PVC pipe at -3.5'. Pipe was not damaged.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
A 4U
Bay Vista Sector 2A
Bremerton, WA
9
A Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
Logged by: SST Project No. E090103A
CL MW R
Approved by: 9110109
M d KE 0
E
m
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -160
This log is part of the reportprepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be
read together with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the
time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are
a simplfication of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Asphalt over crushed base course.
Fill
Medium dense, dry, light brown, silty SAND, few gravel.
Dense, dry, tan -brown, silty SAND, with gravel.
Very dense, slightly moist to moist, olive -gray, gravelly SAND, with silt.
19 Bottom of exploration pit at depth 18.5 feet
No caving. No seepage.
m
E
z Bay Vista Sector 2A
CL
Bremerton, WA
9
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. project No. KE090103A
o Logged by: JSK
a Approved by: November 2009
U
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -159
This log Is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be
read together 1,1h that report complete interpretation. This summary agplies only to the location of this trench at the
c va
time Me
o ex a n. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are
o a simpification of actual conditions encountered.
IN] Z41 2 1 Lei k' I
Loose to medium dense, dry, tan, fine to medium SAND, with silt, little fine to coarse gravel,
includes concrete rubble (to 16"), rebar, glass bottles, old shoe.
2 -
3 d Root zone at 3'.
4 - Vashon Lodgement Till
5 Very dense, dry, light gray, fine to medium SAND, little silt, little fine to coarse gravel, occasional
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 5 feet
6 No seeps or sloughing.
7 -4
8 -4
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
2
E
0 Bay Vista Sector 2A
Z
a.
0 Bremerton, WA
;V
Logged by: SST Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE090103A
Approved by: �i�t; , J 9110/09
0. 0.
Q
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -162
L This log is part of the reportprepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be
w read :together with that report for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the
time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are
v a simpltication of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Sod over topsoil.
1 Loose, dark brown, silty SAND, few gravel.
Weathered Glacial Till
2 Dense, dry, brown, silty SAND, with gravel.
3
4 Very dense, slightly moist, olive -gray, silty SAND, with gravel.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 -
12 At 12' transition to gravelly SAND, little silt.
13
14
15
16
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 16 feet
17 No caving. No seepage.
18
m
E
z Bay Vista Sector 2A
Bremerton, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE090103A
Logged by. JSK
o Approved b
C9y: November 2009
U
v
0 1 z -0 zo 0 0
T—J
r. i'. of actual conditions encount'11�5
er . a
5707439MOMMIN
Weathered Glacial Till
_Dense, dry, tan -brown, silty SAND, with gravel.
... Glacial Till
Very dense, slightly moist to moist, olive -gray, gravelly SAND, with silt.
I.
M
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 � Bottom of exploration pit at depth 16 feet
No caving. No seepage.
18
19
E
I Bay Vista Sector 2A
Z
Bremerton, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
o Logged by: JSK Project No. KE090103A
r
a Approved by: November 2009
Y. . ...... . .. . ........
;11
F -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
iq
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -164
This I the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be
read together with that repo for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the
time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location VVI the passage of time. The data presented are
a simplfication of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
.00se, dark brown, silty SAND, few gravel.
Weathered Glacial Till
)ense, dry, tan -brown, silty SAND, with gravel.
Glacial Till
tery dense, slightly moist to moist, olive -gray, silty SAND, with gravel.
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 2 feet
No caving. No seepage.
Bay Vista Sector 2A
Bremerton, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
Logged by: JSK Project No. KE090103A
Approved by: November 2009
91 **4q;AiU I L01 ki
-ioa over topsoii.
1 Loose, dark brown, silty SAND, few gravel. Fill
2 Medium dense, slightly moist, light brown, silty SAND, few gravel. Bum layer at 2'.
L
Is Dense, dry, tan -brown, silty SAND, with grav I
9
A I Le W.- UT -a
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 5.5 feet
No caving. No seepage.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
z 0 Bay Vista Sector 2A
Bremerton, WA
9
Logged by: JSK Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. E090103A
Approved by: November 2009 T V -k
CL M
r
Grain Size Analyses
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10,
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
it-]
19
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -165
r'. 11, 130 1 IT
a 11
►
Yi9v
U.plWMicaUcn of actua conditions en=.
I DESCRIPTION
Loose, dark brown, silty SAND, few gravel.
IFIIf__ —
Medium dense, slightly moist, light brown, silty SAND, few gravel.
Weathered Glacial Till
Dense, dry, tan -brown, silty SAND, with gravel.
(ery dense, slightly moist to moist, olive -gray, silty SAND, with gravel.
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 4 feet
No caving. No seepage. Old -6" diameter concrete pipe on west side of pit at 2',
dl
E
ID
9 Bay Vista Sector 2A
z
IL
a Bremerton. WA
A
A Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
Logged by: JSK Project No. KE090103A
Approved by: November 2009
... ...... . . .... .. . . ..... . .....
PERIZINUT CZNTEIF,�,
Dtvl� of C,'O=l -I I - -.t - 7.`
tr-
Cl, mechanical Lil—I Plambing
-C)i I. pm Plin-E
IL
.. .........
_LT
ciry State Z' ctsta'�,t.l 2.1p:
LLk,anse Fll,: �Pi
i --Ll ........ ....
cmian phona,
ya,
. . . ... . . .
?
RECEIIUD AArTrP CENTER
City of RremertFj2jjLkjvjLJL JL
.. .. . ........ . . . . . . .. . ... ............. . .. .... jj,
AUG 2 3 201Z RESIDENTIAL
Department of Building Permit Application
De a�ierkt f C�gmnia�Ti'�",J]Vvtgy_�Po %'ee'oo'�115 - _6a, Street Suite 600 - Bremerton - WA. - !L8337-1873
I! L_ — _ _
(360) 473-5275 * Fax (360) 473-5278 * www.dbremerton.wa.us
Site Address:
To apply fora property address, contact Public Works at (360) 473-5270
' EW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE RESIDENTIAL REBUILD
NEW DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL ADDITION
NEW MANUFACTURED HOME RESIDENTIAL REPAIR
E] NEW GARAGE/CARPORT NEW ACCESSORY BUILDING
DEMOLITION sf Interior _sf Exterior- sf Foundation Wall** _sf Roof /Section**
** Separate demolition permit and fees required.
Contact Public Works for sewer cap permit (473-5270). Sewer must be capped prior to demolition permit issuance.
El OTHER:
Scope of work proposed: Iduzm--tcl e-jlA-
Square Footage: Building: 1st Floor
Basement Garage: 1st Floor -WO7
2nd Floor Other 2nd Floor
Deck(s):
Application for which no permit 0, within 180 days following the date of application shall expire by limitation, and plans and other data
submitted for review may the tc 'rl' turned to the applicant or destroyed by the building official. The building official may extend the time
for action by the " lican a pen n?t exceeding 180 days on request by the applicant, showing that circumstances beyond the control of
the applicant v -ii pre d froph being taken. No applicant shall be extended more than once. In order to renew action on an
t shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan review fee.
K /;Z2
Date
Rev. Oct. 2008 (Continued on back)
RESIDENTIAL SITE PLAN QUESTIONNAIRE
a
1. Site Address:.���.•
2. Are any areas being developed on the site within 200 feet of the shoreline? Ye// N,o
NOTE: If yes, please fill out a Shoreline Permit Submittal Checklist (WAC 173-27-180)
CRITICAL AREA CHECKLIST:
Slope is calculated by dividing the vertical
distance by the horizontal distance and then
multiplying the result by 100. Example:
,-, d
Vertical 1
Distance = 20# �� x
Horizontal
Distance = 100'
Vertical 20 feet
Horizontal 100 feet =.2 X 100 = 20% slope
Check all that apply to the site and areas within 200 feet of the
site.
Flat: less than 5 -feet elevation change over entire site.
Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15%.
Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and
less than 30%.
Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site.
Other (please describe):
4. Does the site or properties within 200 feet of the site contain
areas of standing water, creek or an area
where water flows across the ground surface? Yes Flo,/
5. Is there an apparent wetland present on the site or on properties within 200 feet of the site? Yes eo)
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WORKSHEET:
6. What is the amount of grading proposed (in cubic yards), not including foundation area?
Fill amount Cut amount
Total grading
NOTE: Grading over 50 cubic yards requires a separate permit.
Will the grading material be imported or exported? Ye No
7. Please provide the following information. The setbacks are measured from the finished, exterior wall
of a structure to the lot line, not from the foundation. Accurately represent your setbacks on site plan.
*Use this as the second front' yard setback
for corner lots and through lots.
**Development Coverage is defined as
that portion of a lot covered by impervious
surface areas of all structures, and
impervious paved areas,; such as
driveways and walkways.
Residential Questionnaire Revision: October 2008
Contractors or Tradespeople Printer Friendly Page
General/Specialty Contractor
A business registered as a construction contractor with Lftl to perform construction work within the scope of
its specialty. A General or Specialty construction Contractor must maintain a surety bond or assignment of
account and carry general liability insurance.
Business and Licensing Information
Name L A WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION LTD UBI No. 601042510
Phone 2533810252 Status Active
Address Po Box 111 License No. LAWILCL131RM
Suite/Apt. License Type Construction Contractor
City Fox Island Effective Date 12/14/1987
State WA Expiration Date 8/31/2014
Zip 983330111 Suspend Date
County Pierce Specialty 1 General
Business Type Corporation Specialty 2 Unused
Parent Company
Other Associated Licenses
License Name Type Specialty Specialty Effective Expiration Status
1 2 Date Date
WILLIC"148U WILLIAMS Construction General Unused 6/11/1986 _ �
CONSTRUCTION Cont ctor 12/1/1987 Archived
NMWPR•'148BU N M W PROPERTIES Constructron General Unused 1/31/1986 12/1/1986 Archived
Business Owner Information
Bond Information
inc umeEff� Date Expiration Date Cancel ..ate Impaired Date Bond7682-- 08/29/2001U
$1
Assignment of Savings Information No records found for the previous 6 year period
Insurance Information
Page 1 of 2
/31/2001
https:Hfortress.wa.gov/lni/bbip/Print.aspx
10/26/2012
Contractors or Tradespeople Printer Friendly Page
Page 2 of 2
`MARINE ISE p
IN72LP5002440 09/12/2006 09/12/2007 1$1,000,000.00109/11/2006
Summons/Complaint Information No unsatisfied complaints on file within prior 6 year period
Warrant Information No unsatisfied warrants on file within prior 6 year period
Infractions/Citations Information No records found for the previous 6 year period
https://fortress.wa.gov/lni/bbip/Print.aspx 10/26/2012
iC f ty (A
SEP 2
�ry�T:'S.a °.Ja1d:FhG ti:Y�
ySEE ACKS
the Di,c')�,r�ifi R�u��k No the fiuxus
wx WA
Permit Center 1
Dept. of Community Development
345 - 6th Street, Suite 600*Bremerton*WA*98337-1873 Department of
Community Do ielolsracr t
HOLE HOUSE VENTILATION USING THE PRESCRIPTIVE METHOD IN 2009 IRC
Purpose: We have all heard about office and school buildings which cause people to become ill. If improperly ventilated, our
homes can cause some of us to become ill too. With all of the new materials we use to construct and furnish our buildings,
it is very important that our homes are ventilated in such a way as to provide us with a method to get the stale air out and
fresh air in.
Please check the appropriate box to describe which of the four prescriptive Whole House Ventilation Systems you
will be using, and fill in any blanks or boxes under the system you choose.
Option 1. Whole house Ventilation Using Exhaust Fans (IRC Section M1508))
• CFM Exhaust Fan Flow Rating Per Table M1508.2 (attached). Location of whole house exhaust fan(s) must be shown on the
plans.
• Fan Controls: 24 hour clock timer with capability of continuous operation, manual and automatic control 8 accessible
• Whole house fans located 4 feet or less from the interior grille shall have a sone rating of 1.5 or less at 0.1 inches w.g.
Outdoor Air shall be distributed to each habitable room by individual Outdoor Air inlets.
Exception: Exhaust only ventilation systems do not require outdoor air inlets if the home has a"ducted forced air heating system that
communicates with all habitable rooms and the interior doors are undercut a minimum of'/ inch.
Option 2. Whole house Ventilation Integrated with a Forced Air Heating System (IRC Section M1508.5.1)
• inch Fresh air duct, connected to the furnace return plenum, sized Per Table M1508.6.2. (attached)
• Fresh Air inlet duct Damper Selection: (Choose one)
Motorized Damper (no testing of ventilation flow rates as long as the prescriptive duct sizing per Table M1508.6.2.are met
Manual Damper meeting Table 3-2 flow rates: CFM (see attached Table M1508.6.2.)
Automatic Flow -Regulated Device (Requires field testing or calculation.)
• Outdoor Air inlets shall be screened or otherwise protected from entry by leaves or other material and located
• All Ventilation supply ducts in the conditioned space shall be insulated to a minimum of R-4
Option 3. Whole house Ventilation Using a Supply Fan (IRC Section M1508)
• inch Outdoor air inlet duct, connected to the furnace supply air stream, sized Per Table M1508.6.2. (attached)
Fresh Air inlet duct Back -draft Damper Selection: (Choose one)
Calibrated manual volume damper installed and set to meet the measured flow rates in Table 3-2 (attached) by field testing with a
pressure gauge and/or following manufacturer's installation instructions.
13 A manual volume damper installed and set to meet the measured flow rates specified in Table M1508.6.2.by field testing with a flow
hood or flow measuring station.
nAn automatic flow -regulating device sized to the specified flow rate in Table M 1 508.6.2.which provides constant flow over a pressure
range of 0.20 to 0.60 inches water gauge.
• Outdoor Air inlets shall be screened or otherwise protected from entry by leaves or other material and located
• All Ventilation supply ducts in the conditioned space shall be insulated to a minimum of R-4
FlOption 4. Whole house Ventilation Using a Heat Recovery Ventilation System
• All duct work in heat recovery system shall be at least 6 inches in diameter
• Balancing dampers shall be installed on the inlet and exhaust side.
• Flow measurement grids shall be installed on the supply and return.
• System minimum flow rating shall not be less than specified in Table M1508.6.2.
• Outdoor air inlets shall be screened or otherwise protected from entry by leaves or other material and located
• Ventilation Supply Ducts in the conditioned space upstream of the heat exchanger shall be insulated to a minimum of R-4
THE FOLLOWING ARE REQUIRED IN ADDITION TO THE OPTION CHOSEN:
• At the time of final inspection, the automatic control time shall be set to operate the whole house fan for at least 8 hours per day,
• A label shall be affixed to the control that reads 'Whole House Ventilation" (see operating instructions)
• 24-hour clock timer installed with capability of continuous operation, manual and automatic control, readily accessible.
• Installer shall provide the manufacturer's installation, operating instructions, and a whole house ventilation system operation description.
.2•
Table M1508.2 Whole House Ventilaflon
Minimum Ventilation Rates:
Supply Fan Tested CFM at 0.40.
1� 11 111 1111 -7 lei M-
moffma -420000rommul
X Sm 6*1A
PRESCRIPTIVE HEATING SYSTEM SIZING
All heating equipment must be sized using a recognized engineering practice. Typical sources include:
• ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals.
• ACCA Manual J, 8th Edition- Residential Load Calculation.
• ACCA Manual N- Commercial Load Calculation.
WSEC: www.eneEgy.wsu.edu/code
PRESCRIPTIVE HEATING SYSTEM SIZING
All heating equipment must be sized using a recognized engineering practice. Typical sources include:
• ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals.
• ACCA Manual J, 8th Edition- Residential Load Calculation.
• ACCA Manual N- Commercial Load Calculation.
WSEC: www.eneEgy.wsu.edu/code
August 22, 2012
Attn: City of Bremerton Building Department
Re: L.A. Williams Construction
MD Designs hereby acknowledges that L.A. Williams Constructions has exclusive
authority to submit Plan # 930R as a Base Plan for unlimited -use construction for Bay
Vista Development. L.A. Williams Construction is recognized as the Owner and
exclusive agent for the Plan for the purpose of submitting or receiving documents
related to the Base Plan.
Sincerely,
John P. De Loma
Principal/Project Designer
Glazing Schedule Attached to Document
Does not apply. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS) gjjn���� All glazing and
doors meet maximum U -factor. Alternate heating size method submitted.
Option I or 11, Glazing to floor area limit (WSEC 602.7.2)
Area weighted window, skylight or door U -factor (WSEC 602.7.2)
E] As part of the heating system sizing calculation (IRC M1401.3 & WSEC 503.2.2)
Radiant slab:
0 -10 foam insulation, continuous with thermal break (WSEC 502. 1.4.9)
Chapter 9 Options j2jgLgLjSjjqjRjjcoirLd
RECIAVED
Department of
Conitnunity Dq,ichypinont
ME
WSEC Prescriptive Worksheet (2010 edition) Zone 1 WSUEEPIO-010 Copyright 2010
Prescriptive Energy Code Compliance for Single Family and Duplex Housing: one I
ProjklInforma n Contact Information
*;W'1775 7-le"1701;W11-11471?
4w��
This set of forms has been developed to assist permit applicants documenting compliance with the
Washington to Energy d® (2009 edition). This set is for structures built under the IRC and located
in Climate Zone 1.
The following forms provide much of the required documentation for plan review. The details noted here
must also be shown on the drawings (WSEC 104.2).
This form is not a substitute for the energy code itself. To obtain a copy of the energy code,
go to the following web address. hftp://www.energy.wsu.edu/code
Glazing 4
0. Glazing U -Factor Door 9 Vaulted Wall n a11.in e Wall- ext
7Bel low
6
TSIab
option Area' 2
Ceiling 3 Above Below FIoor5
0
on
U -Factor Ceiling
% of Floor Vertical Overhead" Grade Grade Grade
Grade]
R-49 or R-21 R-21
01 13% 0.34
R-10
0.50 0.20 R-38 R -38R-10 R-30
7
Adv. Int. TB
2?
R-49 or
R-21 R-21
25% 0.50 0.20 R-38 R-38 0.3� R-10 R-30
R-10
Int.7 TB
Adv.
T
R49 or R-21 R-21
�
R_'0
1II Unlimited 0.30 0.50 0.20 R-38 R-38 R-10 R]-30
lit.'TI3
Adv.
2?
See WSEC table 6-1 for footnotes
Glazing Schedule Attached to Document
Does not apply. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS) gjjn���� All glazing and
doors meet maximum U -factor. Alternate heating size method submitted.
Option I or 11, Glazing to floor area limit (WSEC 602.7.2)
Area weighted window, skylight or door U -factor (WSEC 602.7.2)
E] As part of the heating system sizing calculation (IRC M1401.3 & WSEC 503.2.2)
Radiant slab:
0 -10 foam insulation, continuous with thermal break (WSEC 502. 1.4.9)
Chapter 9 Options j2jgLgLjSjjqjRjjcoirLd
RECIAVED
Department of
Conitnunity Dq,ichypinont
ME
WSEC Prescriptive Worksheet (2010 edition) Zone 1 WSUEEPIO-010 Copyright 2010
TABLE_ -1
ENERGY CREDITS (DEBITS)
QP° "ION SCRIPTI4N
CREDIT(S)
1a HIGH EFFICIENCY HVAC EQUIPMENT 1.
Gas, propane or oil -fired furnace or boiler with minimum
AFUE of 92%,
or
Air -source heat um; with minimum HSPF of 8.5.
lb HIGH EF'FIC &NCX HVAC EQUIPMELff 2:
Closed-loop ground source heat pump; 2
with a minimum Co. of 3.3.
1 C HIGHU EFFICIENCY HVACEOUIPMENT 3:
DUCTLESS SPLIT SYSTEM HEAT P[JMPS, ZONAL
CONTROL:
In home where the primary space heating system is zonal 1
electric heating, a ductless heat pump system shall be
installed and provide heating to at least one zone of the
housing unit.
HIGH EEHEI ' NCY HVAC IST ' B N
All heating and cooling system components installed inside
the conditioned space. All combustion equipment shall be
direct vent or sealed combustion.
Locating system components in conditioned crawl spaces is 1
not permitted under this option.
Electric resistance heat is not permitted under this option.
Direct combustion heating equipment with AFUE less than
80% is not permitted under this option.
3a EFFI IENT BUIL ING NVE PE 1
Prescriptive compliance is based on Table 6-1 , Option III
with the following modifications: Window U .=.28 Ilir R-
38, slab on grade R-10 full, below grade slab-R_-101'ul"1. 0.5
r
Component performance compliance: Reduce the Target UA
from Table 5-1 by 5%, as determined using EQUATION 1.
3b (EFFICIENT BUILDINCG ENVELOPE 2:
Prescriptive compliance is based on Table 6-1, Option III
with the following modifications: Window U.=.25 and wall
R-21 plus R-4 and R-38 floor, slab on grade R-10 full, below
grade slab R-10 full, and R-21 plus R-5 below grade
basement walls.
or
Component performance compliance: Reduce the Target UA
from Table 5.1 by 15%, as determined using EQUATION 1.
3C SUPER -EFFICIENT BUILDING ENVELOPE 3:
'UWSEC Prescriptive Worksheet (2010 dffion) WSI"dEP10-010 Copyright 2010
0
RZ
6B
WIT
2
N
ptive compliance is based on Table 6-1, Option III
the following modifications: Window U.=.22 and wall
I plus R- 12 and R-3 8 floor, stab on grade R- 10 full,
tw grade slab R- 10 full and R-21 plus R- 12 below grade
ment walls and R-49 advanced ceiling and vault.
*f
gliall. be met with a heat recovery ventilation system in
iccordance with Section M 1508.7 o.. Code.
MU
Water heating system shall include one of the following:
Gas, propane or oil water heater with a minimum EF of 0.62.
or
Electric Water Heater with a minimum EF of .+,3.
and for both cases
All showerhead and kitchen sink faucets installed in the
house shall meet be rated at 1.75 GPM or less. All other
2
lavatory faucets shall be rated at 1.0 GPM or less.
Water heating system shall include one of the following:
Gas, propane or oil water heater with a minimum EF of 0.82.
or
a miniiw-m st?-i4s?t-wstc
heater. Solar water heating will provide a rated minimum
g;s of 85 &u.,ims
-7md Certification Corporation (SRCC) Annual Perforinance
*-f OG -300 Certified Solar Water Heating Systems.
M
heat rmn water heater with a minimum EF of 2.0.
Dwelling units less than 1500 square feet in floor area with
Less than 300 square feet of window.+ door area. Additions
.0 existing building that are less than 750 square feet of
4eated floor area.
assessed a deduction for purposes of complying with
,tion 901 of this Code.
IR
W
0
M
FW"
0
51
WSEC Prescvipfive Worksheet (2010 Edffion) WSUEP10-010 Copyright 2.010
D
Footnotes:
For each 1200 kWh of electrical generation provided
annually by on-site wind or solar equipment a 0.5 credit shall
be allowed, up to 3 credits. Generation shall be calculated as
follows:
For solar electric systems, the design shall be demonstrated toll)
meet this requirement using the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory calculator PVWATTs. Documentation noting 0.5
solar access shall be included on the plans.
wind generation projects designs shall document annual
ier generation based on the following factors:
: wind turbine power curve; average annual wind speed at
site; frequency distribution of the wind speed at the site
height of the tower.
1. Interior Duct Placement: Ducts included as Option 2 of
Table 9-1 shall be placed wholly within the heated envelope
of the housing unit. The placement shall be inspected and
certified to receive the credits associated with this option.
EXCEPTION:
Ducts complying with this section may have up to 5% of the
total linear feet of ducts located in the exterior cavities or
buffer spaces of the dwelling. If this exception is used the
ducts will be tested to the following standards:
Post -construction test: Leakage to outdoors shall be less than
or equal to I CFM per 100 ft2 of conditioned floor area when
tested at a pressure differential of 0.1 inches w.g. (25 Pa)
across the entire system, including the manufacturer's air
handler enclosure. All register boots shall be taped or
otherwise sealed during the test.
2. Plumbing Fixtures Flow Ratings. Low flow plumbing
fixtures (water closets and urinals) and fittings (faucets and
showerheads) shall comply with the following requirements:
(a) Residential bathroom lavatory sink faucets: Maximum
flow rate U 3.8 L/min (1.0 gal/min) when tested in
accordance with ASME A112.18.1/CSA B125.1.
(b) Residential kitchen faucets: Maximum flow rate l.) 6.6
L/min (1.75 gal/min) when tested in accordance with ASME
A112.18.1/CSA B125.1.
(c) Residential showerheads: Maximum flow rate i 6.6
L/min (1.75 gal/min) when tested in accordance with ASME
A112.18.1/CSA B125.1
SEC prescriptive: Worksheet (2010 ditiori)UEP10,,,.010 Copyright 2010
Glazing Schedule
Exterior Doors
Plan Component Door Percent Width Height Glazing Door Door
Sum of Glazing Area, Door Area, and UA (do not include exempt door)
Area Weighted U = UA/Area
Sum of Area and UA for Heating system size only (include exempt door)
Vertical Glazing (Windows, Glazed doors using Exception 603.6 #1)
Plan Component Glazing
WSEC Prescriptive Worksheet (2010 Edition)
Width Height
Qt. Feet Inch Feet Inch
Sum of Area and UA
Area Weighted U = UA/Area
WSUEEPIO-010 Copyright 2010
Overhead Glazing
Plan Component Glazing
Width height
Area Weighted U = UAIArea
Doube Glazed Garden Windowsti ®7®2 Exception
Plan Component Width Height
ID ®escri tion Ot. Feet 'n' Feet brach
I
I
Sum of Area
Sum of Area X 3 (This total is automatically included in the glazing area total.)
Glazing UA for Heating System Size Only = Area X 0.63
WSEC Prescriptive Worksheet (2010 Edition)
WSUEEP10-010 Copyright 2010
Simple Heating System Size- Climate Zon
Project, Information
Envelope Heat Load
Sum of UA X AT
((Volume X U) X AT) X .01 8))
Building Design Heat Load
Air Leakage + Envelope Heat Loss
Contact Information
[� Btu I Hour
[==Btu / Hour
Building and Duct Heat Load [:=13tu / Hour
If ducts are located in unconditioned space: Sum of Building Heat Loss X 1 15
If ducts are located in conditioned space: Sum of Building Heat Loss X 1
Maximum Heat Equipment Output 150% L-----3Btu / Hour
Building and Duct Heat Loss X 1.50
WSEC Prescriptive Worksheet (2010 Edition)
WSUEEPIO-010 Copyright 2010
..........
Envelope Heat Load
Sum of UA X AT
((Volume X U) X AT) X .01 8))
Building Design Heat Load
Air Leakage + Envelope Heat Loss
Contact Information
[� Btu I Hour
[==Btu / Hour
Building and Duct Heat Load [:=13tu / Hour
If ducts are located in unconditioned space: Sum of Building Heat Loss X 1 15
If ducts are located in conditioned space: Sum of Building Heat Loss X 1
Maximum Heat Equipment Output 150% L-----3Btu / Hour
Building and Duct Heat Loss X 1.50
WSEC Prescriptive Worksheet (2010 Edition)
WSUEEPIO-010 Copyright 2010
CL SEC Prescriptive. Worksheet (2010 Edition) WSUEP1 0-010 Copyright 2010
Heating
Heating
Design
Design
Temp
Temp
Aberdeen 20 NNE
25.0
Medical Lake
4.0
Anacortes
24,0
Medina
24.0
Anatone
-4.0
Mercer Island
25.0
Appleton
11,0
Metaline Falls
-1 a0
Auburn
25.0
Mathew 2 W
1.0
Battleground
19.0
Mountlake Terrace
22.0
Bellevue
24,0
Mt. Spokane Summit
-2.0
Bellingham 2N
19.0
Mount Vernon 3 WNW
20.0
Benton City 2 NW
111.0
Moxee City 10 E
8.0
Bickleton
CO
Mud Mtn. Dam
23.0
Blaine
17.0
Nespelern 2 S
-4.0
Bothell 2 N
17.0
Newhalem
19.0
Bremerton
29.0
Newport
-5.0
Brier
24.0
Normandy Park
24.0
Buckley 1 NE
26,0
Northport
2.0
Bumping Lake
-5.0
Oak Harbor
16.0
Burlington
19.0
Oakville
20.0
Camas
21.0
Odessa
7.0
Castle Rock
23.0
Olga 2 SE
24,0
Cedar Lake
20.0
Olympia, AP.
17.0
Centralia
21.0
Omak 2 NW
3.0
Central Park
27.0
Opportunity
8.0
Chehalis
21.0
Oroville
5.0
Chelan
10.0
Othello
9.0
Cheney
4.0
Packwood
16.0
Chesaw
-11.0
Palmer 3 SE
22.0
Chewalah 2 3
-9.0
Parkland
20.0
Chief Joseph Dam
6.0
Pasco
13.0
Clallarn Bay 1 NNE
28.0
Plain
-3.0
Clarkston
10.0
Pleasant View
16,0
Clearbrook
19.0
Pt. Grenville
27.0
Clearwater
26.0
Pomeroy
10
Cie Elum
1.0
Port Angeles
28.0
Clyde Hill
24.0
Port Orchard
29.0
Colfax I NW
2.0
Pon Townsend
25,0
College Place
6.0
Priest Rapids Dam
14.0
Colville AP
-2.0
Prosser
12.0
Conconully
-7.0
Pullman Exp. Sta.
1.0
Concrete
19.0
Puyallup
19.0
Connell 4 NNW
&0
Quilcene 2 SW
23.0
Cougar 5 E
25,0
Quillayute AP
23.0
Coulee Dam 1 SW
9.0
Quinault RS
25.0
Coupeville I S
21.0
Quincy I NE
4.0
Cushman Dam
22,0
Rainier, Longmire
15.0
Dallesport AP
14.0
Paradise RS
6.0
Darrington RS
110
Raymond
28.0
Davenport
5.0
Redmond
17.0
Dayton 1 WSW
5.0
Renton
24.0
Deer Park 2 E
-5.0
Republic
-9.0
Des Moines
25.0
Richland
11.0
Diablo Dam
15.0
Rimrock Tieton Dam
4.0
Dishman
9.0
Ritzville
6.0
East Bremerton
29.0
Rosalia
6.0
Edmonds
24.0
Ross Dam
14.0
Electron Headwks
16.0
St. John
15.0
CL SEC Prescriptive. Worksheet (2010 Edition) WSUEP1 0-010 Copyright 2010
Ellensburg AP
2.0
Sappho8 E
23.0
Elma
24.0
Satus Pass
10.0
Eltopia 6 W
9.0
Seattle: Sea -Tac AP
24,0
Elwha RS
24.0
Sedro Woolley I E
19,0
Enumclaw
26.0
Selah
11.0
Ephrata AP
7.0
Sequim
210
Everett JC
23.0
Shelton
23.0
Everett Paine AFB
21.0
Shoultes;
23.0
Fircrest
29.0
Skamania Fish Hatch.
24.0
Forks I E
23.0
Smyrna
8.0
Fort Lewis
24.0
Snohomish
21.0
Fruitvale
1.1
Snoqualmie Falls
22.0
Glacier IRS
13.0
Snoqualmie Pass
6.0
Glenoma (Kosmos)
18.0
South Broadway
11.0
Goldendale
7.0
So. Olympic Tree Farm
24.0
Grandview
12.0
Spanaway
20.0
Grapeview
30.0
Spokane AP
4.0
Grayland 2 S
28.0
Spokane CO
10.0
Grays River Hatchery
24.0
Spokane Fairchild AFB
4.0
Greenwater
1.4
Sprague
4,0
Grotto
21.0
Stampede Pass
7.0
Harrington 2 S
3.0
Startup 1 E
20.0
Hartline
7.0
Stehekin 3 NW
12.0
Hatton 8 E
1.0
Steilacoom
21.0
Holden Village
4,0
Stevens Pass
6.0
Hoquiam AP
26.0
Stockoill Ranch
-14.0
Ice Harbor Dam
17.0
Sumner
19.0
Inchelium 2 NW
0.0
Sunnyside
12.0
Issaquah
23.0
Tacoma McChord
21.0
John Day Dam
19.0
Tacoma CO
29.0
Kelso AP
24.0
Tatoosh Island
31.0
Kennewick 10 SW
13.0
Thompson Place
20.0
Kent
21.0
Tietort Intake
6.0
Kid Valley
20.0
Toledo AP
17.0
Kirkland
17.0
Toppenish
11.0
Lacey
17.0
Trinidad 2 SSE
13.0
Lacrosse 3 ESE
-3.0
Tukwila
24.0
La Grande
23.0
Tumwater
17.0
Lake Cie Elum
-4.0
University Place
29.0
Lake Forest Park
20.0
Upper Baker Dam
14.0
Lake Kachess
-2.0
Vancouver
22.0
Lake Keechelus
0.0
Vashon Island
28.0
Lakewood Center
23.0
Walla Walla AP
6.0
Landsburg
18.0
Walla Walla CO
13.0
Larson AFB
6.0
Wapato
10.0
Laurier
-8.0
Washougal 8 ENE
21.0
Leavenworth
-3.0
Waterville
1.0
Lemanasky Lake
-7.0
Wawawai 2 NW
14.0
Lind 3 NE
6.0
Wellpinit
1.0
Linwood
10.0
Wenatchee AP
13.0
Little Goose Dam
22.0
Wenatchee CO
10.0
Long Beach 3 NNE
25.0
West Clarkston
10.0
Longview
24.0
Whidbey Island
11.0
Lower Granite Dam
14.0
White River RS
12.0
Lower Monument Dam
18.0
White Swan RS
&0
Lynden
113.0
Whitman Mission
11.0
Lynnwood
24,0
Wilbur
4.0
Maloft
4,0
Willapa Harbor
26.0
Marietta 3 NNW
16.0
Wilson Creek
3.0
Marysville
210
Wind River
15,0
McMillin Res.
21.0
Winthrop 1 WSW
-12.0
McNary Dam
11.0
Yakima AP
11.0
WSEC Prescriptive Worksheet (2010 Edition) WSUEP10-010 Copyright 2010
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. ;S k4l,
aj EL 1� iio 0
C 4 6ra 6nj Ow r 25 Vea ry ofService
November 18, 2009
Project No. KE090103A
110 Russell Road, P.O. Box 4460
Bremerton, Washington 98312
Subject: Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Ha ' zard,
Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repo
Sector 2A
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project
Bremerton, Washington I
We are pleased to present the enclosed copies of the above -referenced report. This report
summarizes the results of our subsurface exploration, geologic hazard', and geotechnical
engineering studies and offers recornmendations for the preliminary design and development of
the proposed Sector 2A phase of the project. Our recommendations are preliminary in that
definite building and construction details have not been finalized at the time of this report.
We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that the recommendations
presented in this report will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should
have any questions or if we can be of additional help to you, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
,LJSOCJATED EARTH SCIENC INC—
Mffal'�,'
I
ISK/ld
KED90103A9
Kirkland Everett Tacoma
425-827-7701 425-259-0522 253-722-2992
www.aeszeo.com
Geotechnical Engineering
Water Resources
Environmental Assessments and
Remediation
Sustainable Development Services
Geologic Assessments
�e�r�rafJes��ice
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and
Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
SECTOR 2A
BAY VISTA
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Bremerton, Washington
Prepared for
Housing Authority of the
City of Bremerton
Project No. KE090103A
November 18, 2009
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washin tort Pro'ect and Site Conditions
I. PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.'s (AESI's) subsurface
exploration, geologic hazard, and preliminary geotechnical engineering study for the Sector 2A
construction phase of±e Bay, Vista Redevelopment project in Bremerton, Washington. The
location of the site is, shown on Figure 1 and a site map . of the entire Bay Vista project is
provided on Figure 2. The approximate locations of the explorations accomplished for this
study are presented on the "Site and Exploration Plan," Figure 3. If any changes in the
nature, design, or locations of the site development improvements are planned, the conclusions
and recommendations in this report should be reviewed and modified, or verified.
Landau Associates (Landau, 2006) conducted a previous geotechnical assessment for the
Bay Vista site. Some of the explorations were located within Sector 2A and the logs are
provided in Appendix A. AESI prepared a previous geotechnical report for Section 2B,
Iocated east of Sector 2A (AESI, 2009).
The recommendations in this report are preliminary because grading plans and construction
details were not finalized at the time of this report. Once development plans are substantially
complete, the conclusions and recommendations in this report should be reviewed and
modified, or verified, as appropriate.
1.1 PuMose and Scoe
The purpose of this study was to provide subsurface data and design recommendations for
design and development of the subject project. This study included a review of available
geologic literature, excavation of exploration pits, and performing geologic studies to assess
the type, thickness, distribution, and physical properties of the subsurface sediments and
shallow ground water conditions. Geologic studies were completed to identify geologic
hazards associated with the site. Where warranted, geologic hazard mitigations are
recommended. Geotechnical engineering studies were also conducted to recommend the type
of suitable foundation, allowable foundation soil bearing pressure, anticipated foundation
settlements, basement/retaining wall lateral pressures, floor support recommendations,
drainage considerations, and erosion mitigation recommendations. This report summarizes our
current fieldwork and offers development recommendations based on our present
understanding of the project.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
SKIMA;rc0o;o��s_D.;a.,.���„�,,,,��v��U,p Page 1
ME 10RIN R VAN Do 0.14 w Rol ' 1 MUM WeiMIS
,SECTOR 2A
BAY VISTA
PROJECT
Bremerton, Washington
Prepared for:
Housing Authority of the City of Bremerton
110 Russell Road, P.O. Box 4460
Bremerton, Washington 98312
Prepared by:
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
9115" Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
425-827-7701
Fax: 425-827-5424
November 18, 2009
Project No. KE090103A
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay VI,sta Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washn on Pro ect and Site Conditions
3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Our field study included excavating a series of exploration pits to gain subsurface information
about Sector 2A. The exploration pits were completed by Hos-Bros. -Construction, Inc:, the
project construction contractor. The various types of sediments, as well as the depths where
characteristics. of the sediments changed, are indicated on the exploration logs presented in
Appendix B. The depths indicated on the logs where conditions changed may represent
gradational variations between sediment types. Our explorations were approximately located
in the field by measuring from known site features shown on a topographic site plan provided
by the client.
The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based, in part,. on the
conditions encountered in the explorations completed for this study and previous studies. The
number, locations, and depths of the explorations were completed within site and budgetary
constraints. Because of the nature of exploratory work below ground, interpolation of
subsurface conditions between the field explorations is necessary. Differing subsurface
conditions may be present outside of the area of the field explorations due to the random nature
of deposition and the alteration of topography by past grading and/or filling. The nature and
extent of any variations between the field explorations may not become fully evident until
construction. If variations are observed at that time, it may be necessary to re-evaluate specific
recommendations in this report and make appropriate changes.
3.1 Exploration Pits
Previous explorations shown on. Figure 3 were conducted by Landau and are labeled "B-" for
borings and "TP-" for exploration pits. Exploration pits conducted by AESI are labeled "EP-".
Exploration pits EP -1.54 to EP -159, were excavated on September 10, 2009.. -and exploration pits
EP -160 to EP -165 were excavated on November 4, 2009. Three exploration pits (EP -160,
EP -161, and EP -163) were excavated to depths of at least 16 feet to characterize subsurface
conditions below the deepest cuts for the planned buildings. The remaining exploration pits
were excavated to shallower depths and were intended to characterize the depth to unweathered
glacial till and the characteristics of the fill material above the glacial till.
The pits permitted direct, visual observation of subsurface conditions. Materials encountered in
the exploration pits were studied and classified in the field by geologists from our firm. All
exploration pits were backfilled immediately after examination and logging. Selected samples
were then transported to our laboratory for further visual classification and testing, as
necessary..
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK11d - KEM103A9 - ProjectA200901031KEMP Page 3
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, 1�r µ r r and Site Conditions
Authorization to proceed with this study Was granted by the Housing Authority of the City of
Bremerton. Thisjeport has been prepared for the exclusive use of the Housing Authority of
the City of Bremerton and their agents for specific application to this project. Within the
limitations of scoD6. schetule. and, budgetour rvices have bperformed in accordance
, s,e een
with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engmeermig geology,practices in effect in
this area at the time our report was prepared. No other warranty, express . or implied, is made.
T40*00-1wo
0X*M - 60
The Bay Vista site is located in West Bremerton, Washington. The site is roughly triangular in
shape and is comprised of an area of approximately 83 acres. The site is bounded by Kitsap
Way on the north, Oyster Bay Avenue North on the east, and State Route (SR) 3 on the west.
The existing Westpark public housing community was built for the U.S. mary in 1941 and is.
currently owned and operated by the Bremerton Housing Authority (BHA). The surrounding
area is a mixture of residential neighborhoods to the east, commercial and retail uses along
Kitsap Way, and light industrial uses south of SR 3.
As shown on Figure 2, Sector 2A is located in the center of the Bay Vista site abutting the
southwest boundary. The site is, currently occupied by a number of multi -unit residential
structures with associated r I oads and landscaping. The buildings are in the process of being
demolished. There is a soil stockpile in the west comer of Sector 2A covered with plastic. It
kq irlva an;
% buildingg in the soil sto 1ile
area. Therefore, no explorations were conducted in the soil stockpile.
The proposed master plan involves the redevelopment of the existing public housing
community. The proposed project includes redevelopment into a mixed-use, mixed -income,
h
I.P.,edestrian-oriented community. We understand that the d
existing structures will be raze, t e
existing roads removed, the existing utilities will be removed and/or abandoned, and the
existing landfill abandoned. The site will be regraded and new utilities installed. New
residential structures will be built after the new infrastructure is in place.
Current plans for redevelopment of Sector 2A include construction of a multi-level apartment
building with 83 units and surface parking. Office space will be included in the first level of
the building. No subsurface parking is currently included in the preliminary design. It is out
understanding that excavations of up to 12 feet will be required to achieve subgrade elevations.
November 18, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC
JSKIld - KE090103A9 - ProjecI312009010.31KEMP Page 2
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repon
Bremerton, Washin ton Pro'ect:and Site Conditions
The fill soils are generally high in silt and are expected to be moisture -sensitive. If the fill
soils are wet or dry of optimum moisture at the time of construction, they will be difficult to
reuse as structural fill.
Vashon Lodgement 77111
Sediments encountered below the topsoil/fill at the locations of all the explorations generally
consisted of medium dense to very dense, silty sand with gravel or gravelly sand with variable
amounts of silt, and scattered cobbles. We interpret these sediments to be representative of
Vashon lodgement till. The Vashon lodgement till was deposited directly from basal, debris -
laden glacial ice during the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation approximately 12,500 to
15,000 years ago. The reduced density occasionally observed within 1 to 5 feet of the ground
surface is interpreted to be due to weathering. The high relative density of the unweathered till
is due to its consolidation by the massive weight of the glacial ice from which it was deposited.
As reported in AESI (2009), the lodgement till was observed to extend down to an elevation of
approximately 60 feet (100 to 120 feet below ground surface in Sector 2A).
The glacial till is high in silt and is expected to be moisture -sensitive. If the glacial till is wet
or dry of optimum moisture at the time of construction, it will be difficult to reuse as structural
fill.
Advance Outwash
Advance outwash has been encountered beneath the glacial till in explorations conducted
during previous assessments at the site. This material generally consists of dense to very dense
sand and gravel with generally trace to few silt and occasional little silt. These sediments are
interpreted to be Vashon-age advance outwash. Advance outwash was deposited by meltwater
streams emanating from the advancing Vashon-age glacial ice sheet and subsequently
overridden by several thousand feet of ice. Consequently, these materials are generally dense
and possess moderate to' high shear strength and low -compressibility characteristics. The
advance outwash is suitable for structural fill, foundation, and pavement support. provided the
weathered zone is suitably compacted; however, the advance outwash deposits are not expected
to be encountered during grading due to their depth. Limited storm water infiltration may be
feasible in this deposit, and location -specific in-situ testing is recommended if infiltration is
considered.
November 18, 2009 _ ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK/1d - KE090103A9- Projecrs1200901031KE1WP Page 5
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project preliminary Geoleclinical Engineering Report
Prniert Site Conditions
Bremerton, ��on
3.2 Grain Size Analysis
Two samples of theglacial till soils were collected from EP -160 and EP -161 and submitted
AESI's soils laboratory for grain size analysis. The results are provided in Appendix C.
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface conditions at the� 'ect site �were inferred from.the =plorations accomplished,for
. proi
this studnd previous studies, visual reconnaissance of the site, and review�of topography
provided on the topographic site. plan.
varvinp,
As shown on the exploration logs, most of the exploration pits generally encountered
amounts of sediments interpreted to be fill (up to 6.5 feet thick) over glacial till sediments.
Where fill and other unsuitable materials are �- encountered, they should be excavated and
replaced with suitable fill. Table 4.1 below summarizes the depths of unsuitable fill and other
materials and depths to suitable bearing soils.
The following section presents more detailed subsurface information organized from thco
youngest to the oldest sediment types.
Sod and/or topsoil was present at the ground surface at a number of explorations and generally
ranged in thickness from 0.5 to 1.0 feet. Fill soils (those not naturally placed) were
encountered in most of the explorations in Sector 2A. The fill ranged in thickness from zero to
6.5 feet thick (TP -10). As noted on the exploration logs, the fill generally consisted of loose to
medium dense, silty fine to coarse sand with various gravel, scattered debris, and organics.
The fill consisted of silt with trace to few sand in EP�-158. Old utility pipes were encountered
in a number of explorations, and it is expected that many old and recent utilities will be
encountered during excavation. Any fill with high percentages of silt, organics, or debris is
considered unsuitable for reuse as structural fill. Some of the fill may be suitable for reuse, as
indicated in Table 4.1. The thicknesses shown in Table 4.1 are estimated based on
observations at the exploration locations in November 2009. Condition and thickness of the
fill may change and is expected to vary between our explorations. Other fill soils are assumed
to be present in the areas of the existing structures. Since the quality. thickness, and
compaction of the fill materials are unknown, the fill is unsuitable for direct structural support.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIAMD EARTH SCIENCES, INI
JSK11d - KBD90103A9 - Projects 1200901031KEI WP Page M
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Wasill in ton Pro.ect and Site Conditions
4.3 Hydrology
Shallow ground water seepage was not observed in the exploration pits in the Sector 2A area.
However, random areas of perched ground water are often encountered on top of dense to very
dense, low permeability lodgement till sediments and may be encountered during grading. It
should be noted that the occurrence and level of ground water seepage at the site may vary in
response to such factors as changes in season, precipitation, and site use.
Deep groundwater was encountered in explorations MW -1 and MW -2 and will be addressed in
a hydrogeologic report by AESI under separate cover.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
MIN - KE090103A9 - Proiects1300901031KEMP Paae 7
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay >rsta Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washin ,ton Project and Site Conditions
Table 4.1
Summary of Unsuitable Materials and Depths
4.2 Geolois Ma in
Review of the regional geologic map titled Geologic Map of Surficial Deposits in the Seattle
30' x 60' Quadrangle, Washington, compiled by Yount, Minard, and Demboff (1993),
indicates that the area of the subject site is underlain by Vashon lodgement till (Qvt). Our
interpretation of the sediments encountered at the subject site is in general agreement with the
regional geologic map.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK11d - KE090103A9 - Project.s1200901031KElff Page 6
Approx.
Fill Unsuitable
bill Suitable Depth to Depth to Dense
Exploration
GS Elev.
for Reuse
for Reuse Weathered Till Lodgement Till
No.
(feet)
(feet)
(feet) (feet) (feet)
B-5
_
0-0.5 _ 0.5
TP -10
0-1 & 5.5-6.5
1-5.5 - 6.5
TP -11
0-1
1-4 _ 4
7? -12
0-2.5
_ _ 2.5
TP -13
0-4
_ _ 4
TP -14
g175
0-1.
- 1.0 4
EP -154
0-2.5
- 2.5 3
EP -155
0-1EP-156
0-1EP-157
0-1.5
1.5
EP -158
0-3
- _ 3
EP -159
176
0-4
- - 4
EP -160
178
0-0.5
0.5-2 2 5
EP -161
177
0-0.5
0.5 1.5
EP -162
158
0-1
- 1 3.5
EP -163
174
0.3
3 5
179
0-0.50.5
1.5
�EP-164
-165
178
0-1.5
- 1.5 3.5
GS = Ground Surface.
Elevations are approximate
and
based on topographic
map.
Suitability is based
on visual
assessment of organic
and debris content. Suitability for reuse will also depend on soil
moisture and weather
conditions
during grading and
construction. Experience at Bay Vista has shown that debris content,
moisture, gradation,
and depth
of fill soils can vary widely
over short distances.
4.2 Geolois Ma in
Review of the regional geologic map titled Geologic Map of Surficial Deposits in the Seattle
30' x 60' Quadrangle, Washington, compiled by Yount, Minard, and Demboff (1993),
indicates that the area of the subject site is underlain by Vashon lodgement till (Qvt). Our
interpretation of the sediments encountered at the subject site is in general agreement with the
regional geologic map.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK11d - KE090103A9 - Project.s1200901031KElff Page 6
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washin on Geolo is Hazards andMiti ations
Due to the proximity of the site to the suspected fault trace, the risk for surficial ground
rupture should be considered moderate to high during a significant seismic event connected to
the Seattle Fault. Mitigation should consist of complying with the 2006 International Building
Code (IBC) for this site.
5.2 Seismically Induced Landslides
There are steep slopes within Sector 2A. However, we understand that they will mostly be
flattened as a result of grading. Therefore, the potential for seismically induced landsliding is
low due to the lack of steep slopes on the final graded site. If steep areas remain after grading
or due to a change in the grading plan, we recommend that we assess the slope conditions at
that time.
5,3 Liquefaction
The encountered stratigraphy has a low potential for liquefaction due to its dense state and lack
of adverse ground water conditions. No mitigation of liquefaction hazards is necessary.
5.4 Ground Motion
The guidelines presented in the 2006 IBC Section 1613 should be used in the seismic design of
the project. The USGS Java Ground Motion Parameter Calculator, Version 5.0.9', was used
to determine interpolated probabilistic ground motion values in percent of gravity (g) for an
event with a return period of 2 percent exceedance in 50 years. Using the calculator, the
project area was submitted using latitude and longitude for mapped spectral accelerations of
Ss = 1.512 for short.periods (0.2 seconds) and Si = 0.537 for a 1 -second period. Based on
the results of our subsurface exploration and our estimation of soil properties at depth utilizing
available geologic data, Site Class "C", in conformance with Table 1613.5.2 of the IBC, may
be used. These values correspond to site coefficients Fa = 1.00 and FY = 1.30 in conformance
with IBC Tables 1613.5.3(1) and 1613.5.3(2), respectively.
6.0 EROSION HAZARDS AND MITIGATION
As of October 1, 2008, the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) Construction
Storm Water General Permit (also known as the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System [NPDES] permit) requires weekly Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control
(TESC) inspections for all sites I or more acres in size that discharge storm water to surface
waters of the state. The TESC inspections must be completed by a Certified Erosion and
Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) for the duration of the construction. TESC reports do not
' http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/hazmaps/design/
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK/!d - KE090103A9 - Projects1200901031MWP Page 9
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geoiechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, !��ic Hazards mid
. . . . . . . . . .
"AKOTfir, � Af-, -11,11 1 - I I I
The following discussion of potential geologic hazards is based on the geologic, topographic,
and shallow ground water conditions as observed and discussed herein.
OWN
Earthquakes occur in the Puget Lowland with great regularity. The vast majority of these
events are small and are usually not felt by people. However, large earthquakes do occur, as
evidenced by the 1949, 7.2 -magnitude event; the 2001, 6.8 -magnitude event; and the 1965,
6.5 -magnitude event. The 1949 earthquake appears to have been the largest in this region
during recorded history and was centered in the Olympia area. Evaluation of earthquake
return rates indicates that an earthquake of the magnitude between 5.5 and 6.0 is, likely within
a given 20 -year period.
Generally, there are four types of potential geologic hazards associated with large seismic
events: 1) surficial ground rupture, 2) seismically induced landslides, 3) liquefaction, ani
4) ground motion. The potential for each of these hazards to adversely impact the proposet
1iroject i's discussed below.
The project site is located within the Seattle Fault Zone. Recent studies by the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) (e.g., Yount and Gower, 1991, Bedrock Geologic Map of the
Seattle 30'x 60 Quadrangle,Washington, USGS OFR 91-147; Johnson ►et al., 1994, Origin
and Evolution ofthe Seattle Fault and Seattle Basin, Washington, Geology, v. 22; Johnson et
al., 1999, Active Tectonics of the Seattle Fault and Central Puget Sound Washington -
Implications for Earthquake Hazards, Geological Society of America Bulletin,
and Blakely et al., 2002, Location, Structure, and Seismicity of the Seattle Fault Zone,
Washington: Evidence finom Aeromagnetic Anomalies, Geologic Mapping, and Seismic -
Reflection Data, GSA Bulletin, v. 114 n. 1) suggest that a portion of the ea*st-west trending
thrust fault zone (Seattle Fault) may project approximately 1/2 mile north of the site. The
recognition of this fault is relatively new, and data pertaining to it are limited, with the studies
still ongoing. According to the USGS studies, the latest movement of this fault was about
1,100 years ago when about 20 feet of surficial displacement took place. This displacement
can presently be seen in the form of raised, wave -cut beach terraces along Alki:Point in West
Seattle and Restoration Point at the South end of Bainbridge Island. The recurrence interval of
movement along this fault system is still unknown, although it is hypothesized to be in excess
of several thousand years.
November 18, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
-ISKIld - KE090103A9 - Projects1200901031KEMP Page 8
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washin ton Geolo is Hazards and Miti ations
particles and can combine (flocculate) to form larger particles that will settle out of suspension.
The sediments produced during the recent glaciation of Puget Sound are, however, most
commonly the suspended soils that are carried by site storm water. The fine-grained fraction
of the'glacially derived soil is referred to as "rock flour," which is primarily a silt -sized
particle with no electrical charge. These particles, once ' suspended in ' water, may require
months to settle out of suspension.
The flow length within a temporary sediment control trap or pond has virtually no effect on
discharge water quality because of the long settling time compared to the time it takes to flow
from one end of the pond to the other. Reduction of turbidity from a construction site is
almost entirely a functionofcover measures and flow control. Temporary sediment traps and
ponds are necessary to control the release rate of the runoff and to provide a catchment for
sand -sized and larger soil particles, but are ineffective at reducing the turbidity of the runoff.
Silt fencing should be utilized as buffer protection and not as a flow -control measure. Silt
fencing should be placed parallel with topographic contours to prevent sediment -laden runoff
from leaving a work area or entering a sensitive area. Silt fences should not be placed across
contour lines without having separate flow control in front of the silt fence. A swale/berm
combination should be constructed to provide flow control rather than let the runoff build up
behind the silt fence and utilize the silt fence as the flow -control measure. Runoff flowing in
front of a silt fence will cause additional erosion and may cause a failure of the silt fence.
6.1 Erosion Hazard Miti gt 2p
To mitigate the erosion hazards and potential for off-site sediment transport, we would
recommend the following:
1. The winter performance of a site is dependent on a well -conceived plan for control of
site erosion and storm water runoff. It is easier to keep the soil on the ground than to
remove it from storm water. The owner and the design team should include adequate
ground -cover measures, access roads, and staging areas in the project bid .for a
workable site. The contractor must implement and maintain. the required measures
throughout the project duration. A site maintenance plan, should be in place in the
event storm water turbidity measurements are greater than the Ecology standards.
2. All TESC measures for a given area to be graded or otherwise worked should be
installed prior to any activity within an area other than installing the TESC features or
timber harvesting. The recommended sequence of construction within a given area
after timber harvesting would be to install sediment traps and/or ponds and establish
perimeter flow control prior to starting mass grading.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK/!d - KE090103A9 - ProjectsL00901031KEMP Page 11
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vsta Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washin 7ton Preliminary Design Recommendations
M. PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
7.0 INTRODUCTION
Our exploration indicates that, from a geotechnical standpoint,the parcel is suitable for the
proposed development provided the recommendations contained herein are properly followed.
Previous grading on nearby Bay Vista Sector 2B encountered a highly variable thickness of
unsuitable fill in random locations: Similar conditions may also occur on Sector 2A and a
contingency plan and budget should be included in the project grading phase to address zones
of unsuitable fill material. Soil moisture and weather conditions will also have a significant
impact on the suitability for reuse of the predominant moisture -sensitive soils at Sector 2A.
Wet season grading with moisture -sensitive soils increases costs for measures such as soil
admixture treatment or use of imported granular fill. The foundation bearing stratum is
relatively shallow in most areas, and conventional spread footing foundations may be utilized
for the new structures. However, local areas of deeper fill containing debris and organics have
been encountered and these fill soils will require selective removal and replacement.
Consequently, foundations bearing on either the medium dense to very dense, natural
lodgement till sediments, or on structural fill placed over these sediments, are capable of
providing suitable building support.
8.0 SITE PREPARATION
Demolition of the buildings is currently underway and it is expected that site conditions will be
different at the time of construction. Consistent with development of Sector 2B, all building
debris, utilities, pavement, and foundations should be removed from the site.
8.1 Clearing and Stri M in
Site preparation of the planned building and pavement areas should include removal of all
trees, brush, debris, and any other deleterious materials. These unsuitable materials should be
properly disposed of. Additionally, any areas of organic forest duff/topsoil should be removed
and the remaining roots grubbed. Topsoil thicknesses in our exploration pits ranged from
6 inches to 12 inches, but may vary outside this range, particularly in the vicinity of any
previously disturbed/graded areas. Topsoil should be expected to swell by approximately
25 percent relative to in-place volumes. Areas where loose surficial soils exist due to grubbing
operations should be considered as fill to the depth of disturbance and treated as subsequently
recommended for structural fill placement.
Existing utilities should be removed and/or abandoned and associated trenches and backfill
overexcavated down to suitable bearing soils, as determined by an AESI representative. The
�k
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK11d - KE090103A9 - Projecrs1200901031KEMP Page 13
Sector 2-4 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, 0 1 n rpnIna c Hazards and Mitigations
3. During the wetter months of the year, or when large storm events are predicted during
the summer months, each work area should be stabilized so that if showers occur, the
work area can receive the rainfall without excessive erosion or sediment transport. The
required measures for an area to be "buttoned -up" will depend on the time of year and
the duration the area will be, left un -worked. . During the winter months, areas that are
to be � left� un -worked, for more than 2 days should. be mulched or covered with plastic.
-rolling the
During the summer months, stabilization wil ; usually consist of seal.
subgrade. Such measures will.aid, in thecontrac . tor s ability to get back into, a work
area after a stont. I The i; ll process also includes establishing temporary
.storm: water conveyance channels through work areas to route runoff to the, approved
treatment facilities.
4. All disturbed areas should be revegetated as soon as possible. If it is outside of the
growing season, the disturbed areas should be covered with mulch, as recommended in
the erosion control plan. Straw mulch provides a cost-effective cover measure and can
be made wind -resistant with the application of a tackifier after, it is placed.
5. Surface runoff and discharge should be controlled during and following development.
Uncontrolled discharge may promote erosion and sediment transport. Under no
circumstances should concentrated discharges be allowed to flow over the top of steep
slopes.
6. Soils that are to be reused around the site should be stored in such a manner as to
reduce erosion from the stockpile. Protective measures;may include, but are not
limited to, covering with plastic sheeting, the use of low stockpiles in flat areas, or the
use of straw bales/silt fences around pile perimeters. During the period between
October 1" and March 31thes I e measures are required.
7. On-site erosion control inspections and turbidity monitoring should be performed in
accordance with Ecology requirements. Weekly and monthly reporting to Ecology
should be performed on a regularly scheduled basis. TESC monitoring should be part
of the weekly construction team meetings. Temporary and permanent erosion control
and drainage measures should be adjusted and maintained, as necessary, at the time of
construction.
fit is our opinion that with the proper implementation of the TESC plans and by field -adjusting
appropriate mitigation elements (BMPs) during construction, as recommended by the erosion
control inspector, the potential adverse impacts from- erosion hazards on the project may
be mitigated.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EAR TH SCIENCES, INC
JSK11d - KE090103A9 - Projects1200901031KEMP Page 12
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washington
Prelimtna Desi n Recommendations.
9.0 STRUCTURAL FILL
Structural fill will be necessary to establish desired grades in some areas and to re-establish
grade after unsuitable soils are removed. All references to structural fill in this report refer to
subgrade preparation, fill type, and placement and compaction of materials, as discussed in this
section. If a percentage of compaction is specified under another section of this report, the
value given in that section should be used.
9.1 Subgrade Com Faction
After overexcavation/stripping have been performed to the satisfaction of the geotechnical
engineer/engineering geologist, the upper 12 inches of exposed ground should be compacted to
a firm and unyielding condition. If the subgrade, contains too much moisture, suitable
compaction may be difficult or impossible to obtain, and should probably not be attempted. In
lieu of compaction of the subgrade surface, the area to receive fill should be blanketed with
washed rock or quarry spalls to act as a capillary break between the new fill and the wet
subgrade. Where the exposed ground remains soft and further overexcavation is impractical,
placement of an engineering stabilization fabric may be necessary to prevent contamination of
the free -draining layer by silt migration from below.
After compaction of the exposed ground is tested and approved, or a free -draining rock course
is laid, structural fill may be placed to attain desired grades.
9.2 Structural Fill Com action
Structural fill is defined as non-organic soil, acceptable to the geotechnical engineer, placed in
maximum 8 -inch loose lifts, with each lift being compacted to at least 95 percent of the
modified Proctor maximum dry density using American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM):D 1557 as the standard. Roadway and utility trench backfill should be placed and
compacted in accordance with applicable municipal codes and standards. The top of the
compacted. fill should extend horizontally a minimum distance of 3 feet beyond the perimeter
footings or pavement edges before sloping down at anangle no steeper than 211:1V. Fill
slopes should either be overbuilt and trimmed back to final grade or surface -compacted to the
specified. density.
9.3 Moisture -Sensitive Fill
Soils in which the amount of fine-grained material (smaller than the No. 200 sieve) is greater
than approximately 5 percent (measured on the minus No. 4 sieve size) should be considered
moisture -sensitive: Use, of moisture -sensitive soil in structural fills should be limited to
favorable dry weather conditions . and near -optimum subgrade and fill moisture.. We
recommend that grading activities are conducted in the drier summer months to reduce the
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
1S.Kfi-Y&fW!Q3�9 - P. i_'a_00_M1031KE!WP Page 15
Sector 24 Subsurface Erploration, Geologic Hazard
Bay 141sta Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering R
Bremerton, Wash#zgton Preliminary Design Recommendatiot
M WIWRMOM�M
The shallow -depth site soils contain a high percentage of fine-grained material, which make
them moisture -sensitive and subject to disturbance when wet. Conversely, dry soil cannot b
compacted to the specified density and is prone to wetting -induced settlement after the fill i
placed. The contract I or must use care during site preparation and excavation operations so
the underlying soils are not softened and that structural fill materials are moisturt-conditio
to within approximately 2 percent of optimum moisture prior to compaction or reuse.
disturbance occurs, the softened soils should be removed and the area brought to grade wi
structural fill. If crushed rock is considered for the access andstaging areas, it should
underlain by stabilization fabric (such as Mirafi 50OX or approved equivalent) to reduce
potential of fine-grained materials pumping up through the rock and turning the aarea to
The fabric will also aid in supporting construction equipment, thus reducing the amount
crushed rock required. We recommend that at least 10 inches of rock be placed over
fabric; however, due to the variable nature of the near -surface soils and differences in whe
loads, this thickness may have to be adjusted by the contractor in the field.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES,
JSK11d - KE090103A9 - ProjectsU00901031KEIVIT Page 14
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Georechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, 1,1' ! 11,11141,21on Prelimina � Desi On Recommendations
footings; however, all footings must penetrate to the prescribed strata, and no footings should
be founded in or above loose, organic, or existing fill soils. Footings should be at least
14 inches wide for single -story structures, with 2 inches of width added for each
additional story.
10.3 Footin s Ad'acent to Cuts
The area bounded by lines extending downward at IH: 1V from any footing must not intersect
another footing or "intersect a filled area that has not been compacted to at least 95 percent of
ASTM:D 1557. In addition, a 1.5H:1V line extending down from any footing must not
daylight because sloughing or raveling may eventually undermine the footing. Thus footings
should not be placed near the edges of steps or cuts in the bearing soils.
10.4 Footin Settlement
Anticipated settlement of footings founded as described above should be on the order of 1 inch
or less. However, disturbed soil not removed from footing excavations prior to footing
placement could result in increased settlements.
10.5 Footing Sub ,rade Bearin Verification
All footing areas should be observed by AESI prior to placing concrete to verify that the
exposed soils can support the design foundation bearing capacity and that construction
conforms with the recommendations in this report. Foundation bearing verification may also
be required by the governing municipality. This is particularly important on this site where
numerous isolated zones I pockets of unsuitable fill have been found and may be encountered at
random locations.
10.6 Foundation Draina e
Perimeter footing drains should be provided, as discussed under the "Drainage
i draina a is not ossible, the portion of the
structure below the drain level must be designed for combined soil and hydrostatic/buoyant
forces.
11.0 LATERAL WALL PRESSURES
All backfill behind walls or around foundations should be placed following our
recommendations for structural fill and as described in this section of the report. Horizontally
backfilled walls, which are free to yield laterally at least 0.1 percent of their height, may be
designed using an equivalent fluid equal to 35"pounds per cubic foot (pcf). Fully restrained,
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSKIld - KE090103A9 - Projectsi200901031KE1 WP Page 17
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geolechnical Engineefing Report
Bremerton, Washin,eton Prelimin�a� �endations
potential for additional costs associated' with over -optimum soils. It is likely that grading
during wet i)eriods of theyear will be more expensive due to Wet soils.
Some of the on-site fill and lodgement till sediments are suitable for use as structural fill, but
contain significant amounts of silt and are considered highly moisture -sensitive. In addition,
construction equipment traversing the site when the soils are wet can 'cause considerable
disturbance. If fill is placed. -during wet weather or if proper compaction cannot be obtained, a
select rhaterial consistin� of a clean, free-draming gravel and/or'sand should be used. Free -
draining fill consists of non-orgam'c soil with, the a.mount.-of fine-grained, material limited to, 5
p)ercent by weight when measured on the minus No. 4 sieve fraction.
The contractor should note that any proposed fill soils must be evaluated by AESI prior to their
use in fills. This would require that we have a sample of the mater al at least 3 business days
in advance to perform a Proctor test and determine its field compaction standard.
A representative from our firm should inspect the stripped subgrade and be present during
)dacement of structural fill to observe the work and perform a representative number of irr--
jJace density test i s. In this way, the adequacy of the earthwork may be evaluated as fillin&
progresses and any problem areas may be corrected at that time. It is important to understand
that taking random compaction tests on a part-time basis will not assure uniformity or
acceptable performance of a fill. As such, we are available to aid the owner in developing a
suitable monitoring and testing frequency.
11 11 I'll, I# I a3M.,
Spread footings may be used for building support when founded either directly on the medium
dense to very dense, natural glacial sediments, or on structural fill placed over these materials,
as described under the "Site Preparation" and "Structural Fill" -sections of this report. For
footings founded either directly upon the medium dense to very dense glacial sediments, or on
structural fill as described above, we recommend that an allowable bearing pressure of
2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be used for design purposes, including both dead and live
loads. An increase of one-third may be used for short-term wind or seismic, loading-
Perimeter footm*gs, for the,proposed buildings should be buried a minimum of 18 inches into
the surrounding soil for frost protection. No minimum burial depth is required for interior
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK11d - KE090103A9 - Projecls12fIKEMP Page 16
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washin ton Prelimina Desi, n Recommendations
• Passive equivalent fluid = 250 pcf
Coefficient of friction = 0.30
Both of these values include a factor of safety of 1.5.
11.4 Walls with Footin pSurchares
We are not aware of any retaining walls in Sector 2A that will be subject to loads from nearby
footings. If any footings will be located within a 1H: IV line from the base of a retaining wall,
AESI should be contacted to review the design and provide additional recommendations.
12.0 ROCKERIES
Rockeries may be used to prevent erosion of cut slopes; however, they are not engineered
structures, and should not be used in place of retaining walls. Buildings and roads should be
set back from rockeries so that a IH: IV line extending up from the rear base of the rockery
does not intersect the footing or pavement.
Rockery construction quality depends largely on the skill of the builder. Although rockeries
are commonly used, they should be considered a long-term maintenance item. Care must be
exercised in selecting a rock source since some of the material presently being supplied is soft
and disintegrates in a relatively short period of time. Samples of rock can be tested by AESI
prior to their use in rockeries.
The following notes present rockery design and construction considerations. In addition, the
contractor should confirm that his configuration conforms to current City of Bremerton
specifications.
1. The base of the rockery should be started by excavating a trench to a minimum depth of
12 inches below subgrade into firm, undisturbed ground. If loose, soft, or disturbed
materials exist at the base rock location, they should be removed and replaced with
free -draining sand and gravel or crushed rock. This backfill material should be
compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of ASTM:D 1557. The gradation of the sand
and gravel should be such that not more than 5 percent by weight should be finer than
the No. 200 sieve, based on the minus No. 4 sieve.
2. The base rock should have a minimum width (perpendicular to the line of the rockery)
of 40 percent of the height of the rockery. All rocks should also meet the following
weight requirements:
November 18, 2009 _ ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.,
JSK/Jd - KE090103A9 - Projecnsl?00901031KEMP Page 19
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard.and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Repon
Bremerton, Preliminary Design Recommendations
horizontally backfilled, rigid walls that.cannot yield should be designed for -an equivalent fluid
of 50 pcf. Walls that retain sloping backfill at a maximum angle of 211: IV should be designed
for 55 pcf for yielding conditions and 75 pcf for restrained conditions. If parking areas are
adjacent to walls, a surcharge equivalent to 2 feet, of soil should be added to the wall height in
determining lateral design forces. Undrained walls/structures must be designed for combined
soil and hydrostatic pressures (85 pcf for yielding walls, 100 pcf for unyielding walls with
horizontal backfill) � and for buoyant/uplift forces.
The lateral pressures presented above are based on the conditions of a uniform backfill
consisting of either the on-site glacial sediments, or imported sand and gravel compacted to
92 percent of ASTM:D 1557. A higher degree of compaction is not recommended, as this will
increase the pressure acting on the walls. A lower compaction may result in unacceptable
settlement behind the . I walls. Thus, the compaction level is critical and must be tested by our
firm during placement. The recommended compaction of 92 percent of ASTM:D 1557 applies
to any structural fill placed behind the wall within a distance equal to the wall height and up to
the elevation of the top of the wall. Structural fill used to construct slopes behind retaining
walls should be compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D 1557 if the fill is placed above
the elevation of the top of the wall. Surcharges from adjacent footings, heavy construction
equipment, #1 r slo ing ground must be added to the above -recommended lateral pressures.
Footing drains should be provided for all retaining walls, as discussed under the "Drainage
Considerations" section of this report.
I U -M -MM,
It is imperative that proper drainage be provided so that hydrostatic pressures do not develop
against the walls. This would involve installation of a minimum #> #' blanket drain for
the ftill wall height (excluding the uppermost 1 foot of backfill) using imported washed gravel
against the walls. The wall drain material must be hydraulically connected to the footing drain
pipe. Wall foundation drains are discussed in Section 14.1 of this report.
Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the foundation and the natural, medium dense
to dense glacial sediments or supporting structural fill soils, or by passive earth pressure acting
N n the buried portions of the foundations. The foundations must be backfilled with compacted
structural fill to achieve the passive resistance p I rovided below. We recommend the following
allowable design parameters:
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INI
JSK11d - KEM103,49 - Projects1200901031KEMP Page I
Sector 24 Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washin ton Preliminal, Recommendations
If moisture intrusion through slab -on -grade floors is to be limited., the floors should be
constructed atop a capillary break consisting of a minimum thickness of 4 inches of washed pea
gravel or washed crushed rock (no fines). The pea gravel/washed rock should be overlain by a
10 -mil (minimum thickness) plastic vapor retarder. If a crushed or sharp aggregate is used, the
aggregate should be rolled with a smooth steel drum or plate compactor to reduce punctures in
the vapor retarder. Additional protection from the crushed aggregate should be provided by a
geotextile (such as Mirafi 140N) or use of a puncture -resistant membrane compliant with
ASTM;E 1745 Class A requirements for puncture resistance (such as Stego®Wrap
15 millimeter vapor barrier).
14.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS
The unweathered till sediments encountered in our explorations at depths up to 6.5 feet below
ground surface are relatively impermeable, and water will tend to perch atop this stratum.
Additionally, traffic across the till sediments when they are very moist or wet will result in
disturbance of the otherwise firm stratum. Therefore, prior to site work and construction, the
contractor should be prepared to provide drainage and subgrade protection, as necessary.
14.1 Wall/Foundation Drains
All retaining and perimeter footing walls should be provided with a drain at the footing
elevation: The drains should consist of rigid, perforated PVC pipe surrounded by washed pea
gravel. The level of the perforations in the pipe should be set approximately 2 inches below
the bottom of the footing, and the drains should be constructed with sufficient gradient to allow
gravity discharge away from the buildings. All retaining walls should be lined with a
minimum 12 -inch -thick washed gravel blanket provided to within 1 foot of finish grade, and
which ties into the footing drain. Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the footing
drain system, but should be handled by a separate, rigid, tightline drain.
Exterior grades adjacent to walls should be sloped downward away from the structures to
achieve surface drainage. Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage
away from the buildings at all times. Water must not be allowed to pond or to collect adjacent
to foundations or within the immediate building areas. It is recommended that a gradient of at
least 3 percent for a minimum distance of 10 feet from the building perimeters be provided,
except in paved locations. In paved locations, a minimum gradient of 1 percent should be
provided unless provisions are included for collection and disposal of surface water adjacent to
the structures. Additionally, pavement subgrades should be crowned to provide drainage
toward catch basins and pavement edges. Crawl -space areas should be provided with drains at
low points to prevent water from accumulating.
November 181 2009 _vv ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
!SK/id- KE090103A9 - Projects1200901031KEMP Page 21
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay 142sta Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geolechnical Engineering Reporl
Preliminag Design Recommendations
Bremerton,
I; -MILM� ma��Mml
Above 5 feet 50012,200 pounds, graded, top/bottom rocks
5 f-et'or les' -s.' 5 i! 11 0 pounds, grade d top/b . ottom. rock s
3. The rockmaterial should all be as nearly rectangular as possible. No stone should be
used that does not. extend through the.wall. The rock material should be hard, sound,
durable, and free from weathered portions, seams, cracks, or other.defects. The rock
density should be a minimum of 160 pcf.
4. Rock selection and placement should be such that there will be minimum voids and, in
the exposed face of the wall, no open voids over 8 inches across in any direction. The
rocks should be. placed in a manner, such that the longitudinal axis of the rock will be at
right angles or perpendicular to the rockery. face. Each.rock should be placed so as to
lock into two rocks in the lower tier. After setting each rock course, all voids between
the rocks should be chinked on the back with quarry rock to eliminate any void
sufficient to pass a 2 -inch square probe. The rockery should be limited to 8 feet
in height.
5. A drain consisting of rigid, perforated, polvvinvl chloride (PVQ pie eclosed in a
IP n
.12 -inch -wide pea gravel trench. should be placed behind. the lower course of rock to
remove water and prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. The
remainder of the wall backfill should consist of quarry spalls with. a maximum, size of
4 inches and a minimum size of 2 inches. This, material should be placed to a
12 -inch -minimum thickness between the entire wall and the cut material. The backfill
material should be placed in lifts to an elevation approximately 6 inches below the top
of each course of rocks as they are placed until the uppermost course is placed. Any
backfill material falling onto the bearing surface of a rock course should be removed
before the setting of the next course.
6. Any asphalt paving should be sloped to drain away from the rockery. In addition, the
areas above rockeries should be planted with grass as soon as possible after rockery
construction to reduce erosion.
Slab -on -grade floors may be constructed eiiher directly on the medium dense to very dense
natural sediments, or on structural fill placed over these materials. Areas of the slab subgrade
that are disturbed (loosened) during construction should be recompacted to an unyielding
condition prior to placing the pea gravel, as described below,i
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSKIld— KE090103A9 - Projects1200901031KEMP Page 20
Sector 2A Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, Washin ton Prelimina Desi n Recommendations
We are also available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during
construction. The integrity of the foundations depends on proper site preparation and
construction procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field
in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring
services are not part of this current scope of work. If these services are desired, please let us
know, and we will prepare a proposal.
We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that these recommendations
will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions or
require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
Kirkland, Washington
Kindred, P.E.
Engineer
pF WAS
cc
9 68
FOISTEP� �1
SS/ONAL
Bruce L. Blyton, P.E.
Principal Engineer
Attachments: Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Figure 2: Bay Vista Site Plan
Figure 3: Site and Exploration Plan
Appendix A: Exploration Logs from Previous Assessments
Appendix B: Exploration Logs
Appendix C: Grain Size Analyses
November 18, 2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
JSK/!d - KE090103A9 - ProjeciA200901031KE1WP Page 23
Sector Z4 Subsurf"e Exploration, Geologic Hazard and
Bay Vista Redevelopment Project Preliminary Geolechnical Engineering Report
Bremerton, T Preliminan Design Recommendations
Portions of the site are underlain by a variable amount of fill-,thatis. generally unsuitable for
road support. Beneath the fill (when.present) is native weathered or unweathered medium
fense to very dense lodgement till that is suitable for pavement support. AESI recommends.
removal of topsoil, all fill, organic debris, roots, and other unsuitable materials from the
roadbed.
If required, structural fill may then be placed to achieve desired subbase grades.. Structural
fills below proposed pavement areas should be compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D
1557. The subgrade should be crowned to drain toward the edges of the paved area with
grades of 2 percent.
Following installation of utilities and rough -grading of the subgrade, the exposed soils should
be compacted to a firm and unyielding condition, as determined by the geotechnical engineer
or their representative, with a density that is at least 95 percent of maximum dry density
determined using ASTM:D 1557. Given the high silt content of the native soils, moisture -
conditioning may be necessary to obtain a firm and unyielding condition. During winter and
spring months or following I precipitation, the soils are likely to be too wet, and it may be
difficult to dry the soils and obtain suitable compaction. Suitable compaction is also difficult to
obtain if the soils are too dry, as generally occurs in the summer and fall. Dry soils can be
most problematic because they can appear firm and suitable during construction, but soften and
cause failure of the pavement when exposed to moisture.
Prior to placing pavement materials, the subgrade should be proof -rolled with a fully loaded,
tandem -axle dump truck. Any visibly yielding areas should be removed and replaced with
structure fill. All aggregates used in the pavement section should be compacted to 95 percent
of maximum dry density determined using ASTM:D 1557.
The recommendations in this report are preliminary because grading plans and construction
details were not finalized at the time of this report. We are available to provide additional
geotechnical consultation as the project design develops and possibly changes from that upon
which this report is based. If significant changes in grading are made, we recommend that
AESI perform a geotechnical review of the plans prior to final design completion. In this way,
our earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and implemented
in the design.
November 18, 2009 ASSOCL-17ED EARTH SCIENCES, IN
JSK11d — KE090103A9 — Projects1200901031KEMP Page I
ME
W
jpo.wtt Arm
LIM
I
November 18,2009 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
MIN - KE090103A9 - Projecr.t1 Z00901031KEMP Page 24
Z g
UW
g
m
Q
w m
a
am
a m
D
�Io
J ❑
O
Z�4/
Q
Az
S-1 b2 731 Ww7
9"
5 f 831 grades gravelly
S-2b2
10
S_3f b2 61 W=7
is - grades silly
S_4 � b2
SO/ -W=6
20 S-5.3oaLtzkx-i I LL
Boring Completed 04/06/06
Total Depth of Boring = 20.3 ft.
25
GROUNDWATER
Grouriftater not encountered.
Notes: 1. Strafigraphic contacts we based on field interpretations and are approximate.
2. Reference to the text of this report Is necessary for a proper understanding of subsawlece conditions.
3. Refer to 'Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boeing B-5
Bremerton, Washington A-6
LANDAUBremerton,
14 —i
B-5
SAMPLE DATA
SOIL PROFILE
-6
Drilling Method- —t!91-0"temhY0-r—,-,—
E
z eo
0
m
E
Ground Elevation (fty Not Measured
CL z a)
E
' 11 E
to
Drilled By.
V-;;
c-
--.!j
.0
PortlandWelt)
SM
�fir= coarse SAN6�
Brown, very
a0=,
gaV(.y, (glacialtill)
S-1 b2 731 Ww7
9"
5 f 831 grades gravelly
S-2b2
10
S_3f b2 61 W=7
is - grades silly
S_4 � b2
SO/ -W=6
20 S-5.3oaLtzkx-i I LL
Boring Completed 04/06/06
Total Depth of Boring = 20.3 ft.
25
GROUNDWATER
Grouriftater not encountered.
Notes: 1. Strafigraphic contacts we based on field interpretations and are approximate.
2. Reference to the text of this report Is necessary for a proper understanding of subsawlece conditions.
3. Refer to 'Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boeing B-5
Bremerton, Washington A-6
LANDAUBremerton,
14 —i
[VIII -IIIA -0
:.
Exploration Dogs from PreviousAssessments
S-1� d W= 14 ;
2
4
6
S•2 d W=9
GS
1E
Boring Completed 04/05/06
Total Depth of Boring = 8.0 ft.
- concrete debris on north fete of ph
Gray -Drown, sury, very gravelly, one to
coarse SAND (dense to very dense, moist)
(glacial till)
GROUNDWATER
Groundwater not encountered.
Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field Interpretations and are approximate_
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key' figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment
LAND?►U Lo
Bremerton, Washington g of Boring TP -11 A
�ASSOCIATES ti
TP -11
SAMPLE DATA
SOIL PROFILE
E
m
a
Drilling Method- Rubber -tired Backhoe
Z W
oo
)
.—aa
Ground Elevation (ft). Not Measured
CD Z
n E E
d
E
>;
3
w
is
CO
v
Drilled By: Custom Backhoe
C an e5
un I
0
m
►�-
C9
..p
TDwdl
L
Brown, stitY, flrte to medium SAND with
gravel (mum dense, moist to Wet) (ftil)
S-1� d W= 14 ;
2
4
6
S•2 d W=9
GS
1E
Boring Completed 04/05/06
Total Depth of Boring = 8.0 ft.
- concrete debris on north fete of ph
Gray -Drown, sury, very gravelly, one to
coarse SAND (dense to very dense, moist)
(glacial till)
GROUNDWATER
Groundwater not encountered.
Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field Interpretations and are approximate_
2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key' figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment
LAND?►U Lo
Bremerton, Washington g of Boring TP -11 A
�ASSOCIATES ti
MIME=
6
o S -2 1111d W GS = 6
_
Boring Completed 041=6
Total Depth of Boring= 6.5 ft.
-� 10
o-
z
Z
0
O -
m gy
--12
N
8
- buried topsoil horizon with roots
ray -brown. S- ty, gravelly, rine to coarse
SAND (dense. m6tst) (glacial tlll)
Groundwater encwrdered.
G ..
e --14 W
w.
O
16
�o
Notes: 1. Streagmphic contacts are based on field Interpretations and ere aproodrnate,
2Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a per � of subsurface cDndMwm
g 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
a
m
a
Figure
Westpark RedevelopmentLog of Boring TP -9 0 IA -14 4
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington
ASSOCIATES
S SAMPLE DATA
AMPLE
SOIL PROFILE
rillineth b r 4i a oeto
ffDATA
Ground Elevation (ft): of easure6
M-0
CL
ruled y: Custom a ®d
MIME=
6
o S -2 1111d W GS = 6
_
Boring Completed 041=6
Total Depth of Boring= 6.5 ft.
-� 10
o-
z
Z
0
O -
m gy
--12
N
8
- buried topsoil horizon with roots
ray -brown. S- ty, gravelly, rine to coarse
SAND (dense. m6tst) (glacial tlll)
Groundwater encwrdered.
G ..
e --14 W
w.
O
16
�o
Notes: 1. Streagmphic contacts are based on field Interpretations and ere aproodrnate,
2Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a per � of subsurface cDndMwm
g 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
a
m
a
Figure
Westpark RedevelopmentLog of Boring TP -9 0 IA -14 4
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington
ASSOCIATES
�1
4
6
8
P '-2kLLL-- -IW:!1L-
Boring Completed 04/06106
Total Depth of Boring = 8.01
10
12
14
very gravelly, 10 CDaMS
W) ( d., on)
Noter. 1. Stratigraphile contacts are based an field Interpretations and are approximate.
Z Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurfare.conditions.
e. 3. Refer to'Soil Classification System and Key' figure for exlAanation of lgraphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring TP -13
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington a-1 6
.
1A ASSOCLAnS
TP -13
SAMPLE DATA
SOIL PROFILE
GROUNDWATER
EJ0
-5
Drilling Method- Rubber4ired Backhoe
E
E
F-
Ground Elevation (ft).Aot Measured
E
LL W
E
V
CL
V)
Q
Drilled By. Custom Backhoe
D
CIO,
coo F3 9
E
(3
W
5
1
---TflTWF
W firm to coarse SMD
with abundard roots (medium dense, moist)
1
(111)
Groundwater not encountered.
�1
4
6
8
P '-2kLLL-- -IW:!1L-
Boring Completed 04/06106
Total Depth of Boring = 8.01
10
12
14
very gravelly, 10 CDaMS
W) ( d., on)
Noter. 1. Stratigraphile contacts are based an field Interpretations and are approximate.
Z Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurfare.conditions.
e. 3. Refer to'Soil Classification System and Key' figure for exlAanation of lgraphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring TP -13
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington a-1 6
.
1A ASSOCLAnS
6
S-2 d W=4
6 GS
Boring Completed 04/06/06
Total Depth of Boring = 8.5 ft.
10
0 12
n�
(dense, d ) (glacial )
8-14
U
W
O
tr
6
Q
P-16
Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on fid ederprefetions and are apprwdmete.
2. Reference to the text of this report is neoessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
$ 3. Refer to -Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
e
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring TP -12
L14ANDAU Bremerton, Washington �— 5
ASSOCIATES
SAMPLE DATA
SOIL
riling -ti dBackhoe
0
B
Ground Elevation (ft)' Not Measured
.®
0 !i
rill y: siren a
0
-6rn I to
1!
0
-0Sw
T
e
vW silty, to IO vft
grantSM ( t) (gyp
Groundwater not encountered.
-111],� d
W=26
-abandoned at 1.
2
6
S-2 d W=4
6 GS
Boring Completed 04/06/06
Total Depth of Boring = 8.5 ft.
10
0 12
n�
(dense, d ) (glacial )
8-14
U
W
O
tr
6
Q
P-16
Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on fid ederprefetions and are apprwdmete.
2. Reference to the text of this report is neoessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
$ 3. Refer to -Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
e
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring TP -12
L14ANDAU Bremerton, Washington �— 5
ASSOCIATES
/Im 11111
Exploration Logs
10
12
14
16
Notes: 1. stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
2 Reference to Ura text ofthis report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
& Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key` figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring TP -14
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington A_ 1 6
14 ASSOCi[ATES
TP -14
SAMPLF
DATA
SOIL PROFILE
GROUNDWATER
°'
m
°
Drilling Method; Rubber -tired Backhoe
m
E
Elevation (ft). Not Measured
CL m e
W
a
mGround
io
ca
N
Ddiled By: Custom Backhoe
o moa
m
m
m
F-
c!)
-0
SW
�
ML
Groundwater not encountered.
`.
SM
Y. silly, fine to coarse
SAND (medwm e. moist to wet)
dens
(ablation till)
.,2
S-1
d
W.11
..q
�I
sp-
Gray, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND with at
I
SM
(dense, moist to wet) (glacial UIQ
6
S•2
W= 12
_
d
GS
6
Boring
Completed
0410=6
Total
Depth
of
Boring = &0
ft.
10
12
14
16
Notes: 1. stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
2 Reference to Ura text ofthis report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
& Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key` figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Westpark Redevelopment Log of Boring TP -14
LANDAU Bremerton, Washington A_ 1 6
14 ASSOCi[ATES
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -154
This log Is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AES!) for the named project and should be
t read together with that report for complete Interpretation. This summary appplies only to the location of this trench at the
time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location witi� the passage of time. The data presented are
p a simpificetion of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Loose to medium dense, dry, brown to grayish brown, silty fine to medium SAND, few to little gravel,
scattered trash and concrete rubble, occasional cobble.
2
Vashon Lodgement Till
3 Dense to very dense, dry, brownish gray to gray, fine to medium SAND, little sift, few fine to coarse
gravel (concrete -like diamict).
4 Few roots at 3'.
5
6 .
Bottom of exploration pit at 6 feet.
7 No seeps or sloughing. North end of pit intersects a -6" concrete storm sewer (9) pipe at 45, running east -west. HOS
determined pipe Is abandoned storm = backfilled.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
m
E
Bay Vista Sector 2A
Bremerton; WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE090103A
Logged by: SST
�cj. 0
9110/09
�, Approved by: :,- n KE
Classifications of ,..lls In this report are +ss -r on visual field andlor laboratoryobservations,which « ._ density/consistency, moisture coneraon, grain size. arij:
Plasticity estimatesand should notbe construed to implyfield or-laboralory testing unless presented herein. Visual -manual and/or laboratory classification
4i methods of ASTM r and F identification - Classification
Associated Eat s, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG KEY
a
uw
r�.r,r ♦�. u
Terms ♦ . ,, r - r �. . .
gravel�Wth sand, little to
SPTOblowstfoot
no sLoose
► „ a,
Poorly -graded gravel
Loose 4 to 10
GrainedS MediumDense 10 to Symbols 30
Test
and gravel with sand,
Dense 30 to 50
little to no fines
MoistureG.= Grain Size
Very Dam >50; M = ♦,:
Condistengy , Afterberg Limits
nSilty
gravel and silty
very Soft 0 to 2 C = ca
'to
gravel a: :, ♦Fine
-, D1 = Dry Density
soft
Grained Soils
Stiff
rMedium
stiff i to 15
Clayey gravel�and
Very Stiff 15 to 30
clayey gravel Wth sand
Hard >310
Component 1 e r,
Well -graded d and
D ffive Term Size Ran le andSieve Number
sand virith M vel, little
Boulders Larger than, 12"
ILII
to no fines
�S.
Poorly -graded sand
o No
Coarse
and fWith gravel,'
ine Gravel 3/41 * No.
w
little to no fines
♦ No. M No. 10(0.075
,i
s
Silt ♦Clay Smallerthan ♦ 00 `
;.
Clayey •and
EstimatedPercentageContent
clayey sand With gravel
Dry - Absence of moisture,
go �on e ri�t dusty, dry to the touch,
`III t y
n y
,. .� ► ♦ : ♦ r '
moisture
Few 5 to 10
15 to 25 Moist - Damp but no visible
With Non -primary coarse water
Clayof low to medium
constituents:Little
,I ♦visible '�
sandy,ity; silty,
Fines content w,, ►,,_ r
gravelly �plastirl clay, I�
water, usually
♦ below� water table
s,
Organic lI . or silt of r
Symbols
►
r'
plasticity
►, + r,
w:
Sampler portion of 6" Cement grout
+t
Type surface seBl
-
iO
1 1 � *r ASampler
D f
BentorilleWith
micaceous or
* ..�
r, • :r`r fi fine :; ..
II
Sampler 3.0* OD Split-SpoonSampler Filter pack %%ith
-..
silt
Clay of high plasticity,'
Split -Spoon Ring Sampler (a) blankcasing
.
section
Sandy or gravelly clay, tat
ulk sample
3.0* OD Thin -Wall Tube Sampler Screened casing
clay vvith sand or gravel
or Hydrolip
(including Shelby tube) v64th filter pack
. Sample
.i
' + y +� of
Organic i
Portion ♦ recovered
rmedium
to I� g
plasticity
Peat, and other ..
highly organic soils
Classifications of ,..lls In this report are +ss -r on visual field andlor laboratoryobservations,which « ._ density/consistency, moisture coneraon, grain size. arij:
Plasticity estimatesand should notbe construed to implyfield or-laboralory testing unless presented herein. Visual -manual and/or laboratory classification
4i methods of ASTM r and F identification - Classification
Associated Eat s, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG KEY
a
F -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
N
t0
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -156.
This log is part of the report.prepared by Assoaated Firth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named project and should be
read together with that reporrtt for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the
time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are
a simpification of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Grass over Topsoil/Fill
Loose to medium dense; dry, brown, silty fine to medium SAND, organic rich.
Vashon Lodgement Till
Dense to very dense, dry, light gray, fine to medium SAND, Tittle silt, few to little fine to coarse
gravel, occasional cobble.
Bottom of exploration pit at 3 feet.
m ...... _. ....
Bay Vista Sector 2A
Bremerton, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Logged by: SST Project No. KE090103A
st
j EBa
Approved by: "'—" 9/10/09
r
U
4 a 0 0
MUM I
Ma.
04
1
n of a al condiflons encounF.
Grass over'i,asnon LGOgernent i m
fine to I medium SAND , little silt, few to little fine to coarse gravAl
occasional cobble (concrete -like diamict).
IN
KI
M, Ga 4 4 11 ' ' I ' ' ' t f
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
I ,- w
S
E
2
CL
N Bay Vista Sector 2A
Bremerton, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
Project No. KE090103A
o Logged by: SST
O Approved by: 9110109
� MW-
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -158
This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc {AES!) for the named project and should be
a read together with that report for co Igor
interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the
m time of excavation. Subsurface condltions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are
o a slmpification of actual conditions encountered.
2
3
DESCRIPTION
Soft to medium stiff, dry, light brown, SILT, trace to few fine sand, few roots.
Very dense, dry, light gray, fine to medium SAND, little silt, little fine to coarse gravel, occasional
Bottom of exploration pit at 4 feet.
5 No seeps or sloughing. Trench is excavated southwest to northeast. 2" steel pipe in northeast end of pit, 2' deep. Pipe
was not damaged.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
h
a
Bay Vista, Sector 2A
Bremerton, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE090103A
Logged by: SST
9!10109
Approved by: MA F+ s
i=
I Q 4.1101 :4 1 :A I [a] L,
wass over t7111
Loose to n-ediun de
2 Very dense, dry, light gray, fine to medium SAND, lile slit, few to little fine to coarse gravel
3 1 (concrete -like diamict).
El
VA
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
V
Bottom of exploration pit at 5 feet.
No seeps or sloughing. Ditch line runs north -south at west end of pit, 1 1/4" PVC pipe at -3.5'. Pipe was not damaged.
... .......
Bay Vista Sector 2A
Bremerton, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE090103A
Logged by: SST
g
a_519/10109
Approved by:
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -160
This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) for the named Project and should be
Tres' together with that n:port for compplete interpretation. This summary gpQes only to the lova for of this trench at the
a time of excavation. Subsurface condltions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are
o a simpitication of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Asphalt over crushed base course.
Fill
1 Medium dense, dry, light brown, silty SAND, few gravel.
Weathered Glacial Till
3 Dense, dry, tan -brown, silty SAND, with gravel.
4
5 Glacial TIII
6 Very dense, slightly moist to moist, olive -gray, gravelly SAND, with silt.
7 1
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19 Bottom of exploration pit at depth 18.5 feet
No caving. No seepage.
m
a
z Bay Vista Sector 2A
CL
Bremerton, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. project No. KE090103A
Logged by: JSK
M.�: .�.... w� t..... e
Ann
Approved by:� ��fivc�i�uc� awa
U
101=0 ifr;ml 0 1=0 MIT
111 *Dq N I
rin
ne to coarse oravel-
includes concrete rubble (to 16"), rebar, glass bottles, old shoe.
ig
ME R ". ".0 =
In
WVery dense, dry, light gray, fine to medium SAND, little silt, little fine to coarse gravel, occasional
--- L1-
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 5 feet
No seeps or sloughing -
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
E
Bay Vista Sector 2A
Z
Bremerton, WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE090103A
Logged by: SST
M
Approved by: 9110/09
�z
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT N0: EP -162
This log is part of the report�pptepar�ed by As da Earth Scienc�ss, Inc. (AESQ for the named project and should be
w read together with that reportfor complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the
a time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are
p a simpiflcation of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
boa over topsou.
Loose, dark brown, silty SAND, few gravel.
1 Weathered Glacial
2 Dense, dry, brown, silty SAND, with gravel.
3
4
Very dense, slightly moist, olive -gray, silty SAND, with gravel.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
At 12' transition to gravelly SAND, little silt.
13
14
15
16
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 16 feet
17
No caving. No seepage.
18
19
S
N
m
z
Bay Vista Sector 2A
a
Bremerton, A
o
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE090103A
S Logged by: JSK y
ANprovcd by: ��J N r: November 2009
Cq
L 1292-1U
v
e
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
m
a
E
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -161
This log is part of the report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI)'for the named project and should be
read together with thabreport for complete interpretation. This summary applies only to the location of this trench at the
time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may change at this location with the passage of time. The data presented are
a simpification of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
Aspnalt over crusnea ease course.
Weathered Glacial Till
Dense, dry, tan -brown, silty SAND, with gravel.
Glacial Till
Very dense, slightly moist to moist, olive -gray, gravelly SAND, with sift.
At 7' changes to little silt.
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 16 feet
No caving. No seepage.
Z BayVista Sector 2A
'Bremerton, SVA
N
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
Project No. KE090103A
o logged by. JSK
g oa Approved by: November 2009
U
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
LOG OF EXPLORATION PIT NO. EP -164
This log %p b Associated Earth Sciences; Inc. (AESI) for the named ro ect.and should be
is r =01 socl �eta the loca -
read together the
e4sinterp on. applies only to f gonj of this trench at the
time of excavation. Subsurface condi ons may change als,s Ma a the
0
C t is 1=11orrW passage firne. The data presented are
a simpMcalon'of actual conditions encountered.
DESCRIPTION
--Topsoil
.00se, dark brown, silty SAND, few gravel.
Weathered Glacial Till
)ense, dry, tan -brown, silty SAND, with gravel.
Glacial Till
(ery dense, slightly moist to moist, olive -gray, —Slity SAND, with gravel.
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 2 feet
No caving. No seepage.
Bay Vista Sector 2A
Bremerton WA
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE090103A
Logged by: JSK
/.....r.. -A 1 -
November 2009
—ppew—U
sod over topsoil.
Loose,dar�
M, l(Tiedium dense, slightly moist, light brown, silty SAND, few gravel. Bum layer at 2%
R
WDense, dry, tan -brown, silty SAND, with gravel.
61
Bottom of exploration pit at depth 5.5 feet
No caving. No seepage.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
-------- 20
.0
E
z Bav Vista Sector 2A
Bremerton, WA
Logged by: JSK Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE090103A
Approved 0by: November 2009 �1_ lid Ed Ka 0
L)
X_
APPENDIX C
Grain Size Analyses
M- I IM I il 6f; 7 .10 Is 4
NIP, I
- NA ,
Ification of actual conditions e
Loose, dark brown, silty SAND, few gravel.
Fill
M di Qa rlinhtlymr* ' light brown, silty SAND,, few Prav
Weathered Glacial Till
Dense, dry, tan -brown, silty SAND, with gravel.
Very dense.
.411
MORKo—nal
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
SII 19
.... .. . . . ................ . ........... ..... . ...
E
z Bay Vista Sector 2A
7:1 i i M d ii-STIXTITEM
F
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Project No. KE090103A
Logged by: JSK
Approved by:
November 2009
CL
'T
PERMIT #:
6) r'e,4vtep vc-,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BUILDING DIVISION
345 — 6th Street, Suite 600
Bremerton, Washington
(360) 473-5275
INSPECTION REPORT
0, L- axude
b.J &4'z',L p t4o&
j
4v-1
,11� 6 Z
ADDRESS:
4
ct)
p
Date: 1/"V-"Phone.4,/3-�'Zl6
........... ............... "I'll", ................. ...
INSPECTOR