HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOR-2018-40 Room Motel Requirements -907 30th St 40 room Motel
1. An 8" DI water main must be installed per city standards from Q Ave to Commercial Ave
2. The existing 6" AC water main must be replaced to valve 919 with the 8" DI
3. The service lines supplying 3001 Commercial Ave need to be reestablished to the new 8" DI
4. Hydrants need to be place per Fire Marshal
5. The building will have a premise DCVA backflow assembly installed for domestic water per
city standards
6. The water pressure in the area is 65psi
Cricchio, Kevin
From: Nemeth, Terry
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2018 7:44 AM
To: Cricchio, Kevin
Subject: RE: 40 Room Motel Building Permit Application, 907 30th Street, BLD-2018-0594
Attachments: 907 30th St40 room Motel.docx
Here you go Kevin
From: Cricchio, Kevin
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 10:58 AM
To: Development Review Group<DevelopmentReviewGroup@cityofanacortes.org>
Subject: 40 Room Motel Building Permit Application, 907 30th Street, BLD-2018-0594
RE: 40 Room Motel Building Permit Application, 907 30th Street, BLD-2018-0594
Good afternoon all. We recently received a building permit application to construct a 40-room motel at 907tn 30tn
Street. The subject application is still deemed incomplete. Nonetheless, for expediency sake please provide any
comments to be by 5:00 PM on Friday, October 5'. Please either email me your comments/ requirements or use the
attached comment form. The complete application including the respective plan -set can be found on the back counter
of the Planning Department. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks.
Kevin Cricchio, AICP, ISA, WPIT � Associate Planner � Certified Arborist
Planning, Community &Economic Development Dept.
City of Anacortes I P.O. Box 547 1 904 6'h Street I Anacortes, WA 98221
360,293,1937 (work) I kevinc@cityofanacortes.org I www.cityofanacortes.org
My incoming and outgoing email messages are subject to public disclosure requirements per RCW 42.56.
i
Cricchio, Kevin
From: Small, John
Sent. Friday, September 28, 2018 11:21 AM
To: Cricchio, Kevin
Subject: RE: 40 Room Motel Building Permit Application, 907 30th Street, BLD-2018-0594
Hi Kevin,
I don't have any issues with this as long as they have adequate parking.
John
chief all Police
acor ei PONZO Oepa.rtmant
i na ;2 & Stream
A.nacwtetx WA 982'2i
3 ) 34684
"`E�suri=s�� cru%lse safe'. �arrs�sa� ���i1� #ra�st.,�
From: Cricchio, Kevin
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 10:58 AM
To: Development Review Group<DevelopmentReviewGroup@cityofanacortes.org>
Subject: 40 Room Motel Building Permit Application, 907 30th Street, BLD-2018-0594
RE: 40 Room Motel Building Permit Application, 907 30th Street, BLD-2018-0594
Good afternoon all. We recently received a building permit application to construct a 40-room motel at 907tn 30cn
Street. The subject application is still deemed incomplete. Nonetheless, for expediency sake please provide any
comments to be by 5:00 PM on FridaV, October St'. Please either email me your comments/ requirements or use the
attached comment form. The complete application including the respective plan -set can be found on the back counter
of the Planning Department. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks.
Kevin Cricchio, AICP, ISA, WPIT � Associate Planner � Certified Arborist
Planning, Community &Economic Development Dept.
City of Anacortes I P.O. Box 547 1 904 6th Street I Anacortes, WA 98221
360.293.1937 (work) ( keviac@cityofanacortes.org www,cityofanacortes.org
My incoming and outgoing email messages are subject to public disclosure requirements per RCW 42.56.
vl
Cricchio, Kevin
From: Koegei, Matt
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 10:59 AM
To: Cricchio, Kevin
Subject: RE: 40 Room Motel Building Permit Application, 907 30th Street, BLD-2018-0594
Kevin,
Make sure they follow city dumpster pad specs for any &all dumpsters requested, thanks.
Matt Koegel
Solid 7aste Supen isor
Cit)T of Anacortes Operations Dept.
Ph. 360-293-1921
Fax 360-293-1931
From: Cricchio, Kevin
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 10:58 AM
To: Development Review Group<DevelopmentReviewGroup@cityofanacortes.org>
Subject: 40 Room Motel Building Permit Application, 907 30th Street, BLD-2018-0594
RE: 40 Room Motel Building Permit Application, 907 30th Street, BLD-2018-0594
Good afternoon all. We recently received a building permit application to construct a 40-room motel at 907tn 30cn
Street. The subject application is still deemed incomplete. Nonetheless, for expediency sake please provide any
comments to be by 5@00 PM on Friday. October 5`n. Please either email me your comments/ requirements or use the
attached comment form. The complete application including the respective plan -set can be found on the back counter
of the Planning Department. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks.
Kevin Cricchio, AICP, ISA, WPIT � Associate Planner � Certified Arborist
Planning, Community &Economic Development Dept.
City of Anacortes I P.O. Box 547 1 904 61h Street I Anacortes, WA 98221
360,293,1937 (work) I kevinc@cityofanacortes.org I www.cityofanocortes.ora
My incoming and outgoing email messages are subject to public disclosure requirements per RCW 42.56.
1
�aVUTv�T
May 73 2018
Job No. 18-0218
EK Tera Asara LLC
905 20th Street
Anacortes, Washington 98221
Attn: Ms. Kuljit Shoker
741 Marine Drive
Bellingham, WA 98225
2061 I'VI Avenue NE
Arlington, WA 98223
Re: Geotechnical EngineeriWg pep®rt
Proposed Hotel
3002 Q Avenue
Anacortes, Washington
Dear Ms. Shoker:
PHONE
360 733_7318
70LL FREE FAX
888 251_5276 360 7337418
SEP 2 0 2018
CI i Y OF ANACOR7itS
As requested, GeoTest Services, Inc. (GeoTest, GTS) is pleased to submit this report
summarizing the results of our geotechnical engineering evaluation for the proposed hotel to be
located at the above referenced address. The purpose of this evaluation was to establish general
subsurface conditions beneath the site from which conclusions and recommendations for
foundation design could be formulated. Specifically, our scope of services included the following
tasks:
• Exploration of soil and groundwater conditions underlying the site by drilling five test
borings with a track -mounted drill rig to evaluate subsurface conditions.
• Laboratory testing on representative samples in order to classify and evaluate the
engineering characteristics of the encountered soils.
• Provide this written report containing a description of subsurface conditions, boring logs,
findings and recommendations pertaining to site preparation and earthwork, fill and
compaction, wet weather earthwork, seismic design, foundation recommendations,
concrete slab -on -grade construction, foundation and site drainage, utilities, temporary and
permanent slopes, pavement structures, geotechnical consultation and construction
monitoring, and lateral earth pressures for retaining wall design.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
For this project, GTS was provided with preliminary drawings of the proposed hotel structure.
Bruce Rustad prepared these drawings, which were dated April 13, 2017. Based on these
drawings and discussions with Mr. Jim Schemmer of Schemmer Consulting Group and Ms.
Shoker, GTS understands that a new hotel building will be constructed at the center of the subject
property. The building will have an approximate footprint of 7,500 square feet. Although the latest
drawings that were provided to us show a three story hotel building surrounded with on -grade
parking, GTS understands that the proposed layout has recently changed and the proposed hotel
will now consist of three stories over a ground level open parking area. At the time that this report
was written, it was not known if the surrounding asphalt parking stalls will be included as part of
the new development, or if the proposed swimming pool will be either on grade or on the second
13age 1 o4 14
GeoTest Services, Inc. May 7, 2018
3002 Q Avenue, Anacortes, WA Job No. 18-0218
level. GTS expects that the proposed structure will be wood framed with shallow conventional
foundations and slab -on -grade floors.
SITE CONDITIONS
This section discusses the general surface and subsurface conons observed at the project site
at the time of our field investigation. Interpretations of the site conditions are based on the results
of our review of available information, site reconnaissance, subsurface explorations, laboratory
testing, and our experience in the project vicinity.
Surface Conditions
The generally rectangular -shaped property is located on the southwest corner of 30th Street and
Q Avenue in Anacortes, Washington. The subject property is bordered to the south and west by
businesses, to the north by the 30t" Street right-of-way, and to the east by Q Avenue. It occupies
approximately 150 feet of frontage along the southern side of the 30t" Street right-of-way and
approximately 100 feet of frontage along the western side of Q Avenue.
At the time of our site visits, the subject property was vacant and covered with tall grass and
brambles. Some standing water was observed in a small makeshift eco-block detention pond
within the southeast portion of the site, as shown in Figure 2 (Site and Exploration Plan). From
the southwest portion of the property, the ground generally slopes from southwest to northeast at
a gentle rate over approximately 5 to 10 feet of vertical relief. A drainage ditch parallels the
northern property line.
Subsurface Soil Conditions
Subsurface conditions were explored by drilling and sampling five exploratory borings (B-1
through 1:5-5) on April 11, 2018. The borings were advanced to depths of 11.5 to 41.5 feet below
ground surface (BGS) using a track -mounted drill rig subcontracted to GTS. See the attached Site
and Exploration Map (Figure 2) for the approximate locations of the borings.
Disturbed but representative samples were obtained during drilling by using the Standard
Penetration Test (SPT) procedure in accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials
ASTM D1586 during the explorations on January 19, 2018. This test and sampling method
consists of driving a standard 2-inch, outside -diameter, split -barrel sampler a distance of 18
inches into the soil with a 140-pound hammer free -falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of
blows for each 6-inch interval is recorded and the number of blows required to drive the sampler
the final 12 inches is known as the Standard Penetration Resistance ("N") or blow count. If a total
of 50 is recorded within one 6-inch interval, the blow count is recorded as the number of blows for
the corresponding number of inches of penetration. The resistance, or Wvalue, provides a
measure of the relative density of granular soils or the relative consistency of cohesive soils; these
values are reported on the attached boring logs.
The borings generally encountered approximately 2 to 2.5 feet of loose, organic topsoil underlying
the surface vegetation. Below the topsoil was a medium stiff to very stiff, mottled tan, moist, sandy,
lean clay interpreted to be native Glaciomarine Drift deposits. This clay extended to a depth of
approximately 37 feet BGS in boring 13-1, where it transitioned to a very dense/hard, grey, gravelly,
very silty sand interbedded with silt. This layer was interpreted to be representative of the native
Glaciomarine Outwash deposits and was encountered to the maximum explored depth of 13-1.
Page 2 of 14
GeoTest Services, Inc. May 7, 2018
3002 Q Avenue, Anacortes, WA Job No. 18-0218
For more details of our subsurface explorations, please refer to the attached boring logs (Figures
5 through 9).
General Geologic Conditions
Geologic information for the project site was obtained from the Geologic map of the Anacortes
South and La Conner 7.5-minute quadrangles, Skagit and Island Counties, Washington
(Dragovich et al., 2000), published by the Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources.
According to Dragovich, near surface soils in the vicinity of the project consist of Glaciomarine
Drift (Qgdme). Glaciomarine Drift is typically described as a clayey silt, silty clay, and clay rich
diamicton deposited by glacial ice in a marine environment.
The native soils encountered in our explorations appeared to be generally consistent with mapped
Glaciomarine Drift deposits.
Groundwater Seepage and Seasonal Groundwater
At the time of our investigation on April 11, 2017, no groundwater seepage was encountered in
any of our explorations. The groundwater conditions reported on the exploration logs are for the
specific locations and dates indicated, and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other
locations and/or times. Groundwater levels are not static and it is anticipated that groundwater
conditions will vary depending on local subsurface conditions, season, precipitation, changes in
land use both on- and off -site, and other factors. The wet weather season in western Washington
is typically considered to be from October through April.
Based on a review of nearby well logs on the Washington State Department of Ecology Well Log
Viewer website, it appears that near -surface groundwater is unlikely to be present underlying the
subject property.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the subsurface soil conditions observed at the site, it is our opinion that the subsurface
conditions at the site are suitable for the construction of the proposed hotel, provided the
recommendations contained in our geotechnical engineering report are incorporated into the
project design.
As discussed previously, the borings generally encountered native, medium -stiff to very stiff clay
(Glaciomarine Drift) within approximately 2 to 2.5 feet BGS. We recommend that the topsoil and
near -surface loose fill soils (if encountered) be removed from the proposed building footprint down
to the native Glaciomarine Drift soils. Once competent native soils have been exposed, we
recommend that the subgrade surface be compacted to a firm and unyielding condition with a
smooth -drum roller, hoe -pack, or other appropriate piece of construction equipment. The
foundations should then bear on a minimum of 2 feet of compacted structural fill placed atop these
soils. Further recommendations regarding the placement and compaction of structural fill can be
found in a subsequent section of this report.
Due to the high fines content of the native Glaciomarine Drift soils, it does not appear that the
native soils would be suitable for the conventional infiltration of stormwater.
Page 3 of 14
GeoTest Services, Inc.
3002 Q Avenue, Anacortes, WA
Site Preparation and Earthwork
May 7, 2018
Job No. 18-0218
The portions of the site to be occupied by proposed foundations and floor slabs should be
prepared by removing any existing topsoil, existing fill (if present), deleterious material and/or
significant accumulations of organics from the area to be developed. GTS expects that the depth
of soils to be removed to be on the order of 2 to 2.5 feet. Prior to the placement of tructural fill,
the exposed subgrade under all areas to be occupied by soil -supported floor slabs and spread or
continuous foundations should be recompacted to a firm and unyielding condition and proof rolled
with a loaded dump truck, large self-propelled vibrating roller, hoe -pack, or similar piece of
equipment applicable to the size of the excavation. The purpose of this effort is to identify possible
loose or soft soil deposits and recompact, if feasible, the soil disturbed during site excavation
activities.
Proof rolling should be carefully observed by qualified geotechnical personnel. Areas exhibiting
significant deflection, pumping, or over -saturation that cannot be readily compacted should be
overexcavated to firm soil. Overexcavated areas should be backfilled with compacted granular
materials placed in accordance with subsequent recommendations for structural fill. During
periods of wet weather, proof rolling could damage the exposed subgrade. Under these
conditions, qualified geotechnical personnel should observe subgrade conditions to determine if
proof rolling is feasible.
Fill and Compaction
Structural fill used to obtain final elevations for footings and soil -supported floor slabs must be
properly placed and compacted. In general, suitable, non -organic, predominantly granular soil
may be used for fill material provided the material is properly moisture conditioned prior to
placement and compaction, and the specified degree of compaction is obtained. Material
containing topsoil, wood, trash, organic material, or construction debris will not be suitable for
reuse as structural fill and should be properly disposed off -site or placed in non-structural areas.
Soils containing more than approximately 5 percent fines are considered moisture sensitive.
These soils are very difficult to compact to a firm and unyielding condition when over the optimum
moisture content by more than approximately 2 percent. The optimum moisture content is that
which allows the greatest dry density to be achieved at a given level of compactive effort.
Reuse of Onsite Soil
Due to the high fines content and moisture sensitivity of the native Glaciomarine Drift, it is GTS's
opinion that these soils should not be used as structural fill underneath foundation elements or
slabs. These soils could potentially be used for non-structural applications if they are moisture
conditioned, suitably compacted, and if they are allowed for use in the project plans and
specifications. Thus, GTS anticipates that all structural fill will need to be imported for this project.
During the wet winter and spring months, the contractor and owner should be prepared to manage
over -optimum moisture content soils and subgrade conditions. If feasible, earthwork construction
should occur during extended periods of dry weather.
Imported Granular Structural Fill
We recommend that imported granular structural fill consist of clean, well -graded sandy gravel,
gravelly sand, or other approved naturally occurring granular material (pit run) with at least 30
Page 4 of 14
GeoTest Services, Inc. May 7, 2018
3002 Q Avenue, Anacortes, WA Job No. 18-0218
percent retained on the No. 4 sieve, or a well -graded crushed rock. Structural fill for dry weather
construction may contain on the order of 10 percent fines (that portion passing the U.S. No. 200
sieve) based on the portion passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve. Soil containing more than about 5
percent fines cannot consistently be compacted to a dense, non -yielding condition when the water
content is greater than optimum. Accordingly, we recommend that imported structural fill with
less than 5 percent fines be used during wet weather conditions.
Due to wet weather or wet site conons, soil moisture contents could be high enough that it may
be very difficult to compact even "clean" imported select granular fill to a firm and unyielding
condition. Soils with over -optimum moisture contents should be either scarified and dried back
to more suitable moisture contents during periods of dry weather or removed and replaced with
fill soils at a more suitable range of moisture contents.
Backfill and Compaction
Structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts 8 to 10 inches in loose thickness and thoroughly
compacted. All structural fill placed under load bearing areas should be compacted to at least 95
percent of the maximum dry density, as determined using test method ASTM D1557. The top of
the compacted structural fill should extend outside all foundations and other structural
improvements a minimum distance equal to the thickness of the fill. We recommend that
compaction be tested periodically throughout the fill placement.
Wet Weather Earthwork
If construction is accomplished during wet weather, we recommend that structural fill consist of
imported, clean, well -graded sand or sand and gravel as described above. If fill is to be placed
or earthwork is to be performed in wet weather or under wet conditions, the contractor may reduce
soil disturbance by:
• Limiting the size of areas that are stripped of topsoil and left exposed
• Accomplishing earthwork in small sections
• Limiting construction traffic over unprotected soil
• Sloping excavated surfaces to promote runoff
• Limiting the size and type of construction equipment used
• Providing gravel "working mats" over areas of prepared subgrade
• Removing wet surficial soil prior to commencing fill placement each day
• Sealing the exposed ground surface by rolling with a smooth drum compactor or rubber -
tired roller at the end of each working day
• Providing up gradient perimeter ditches or low earthen berms and using temporary sumps
to collect runoff and prevent water from ponding and damaging exposed subgrades.
Seismic Design Considerations
The Pacific Northwest is seismically active and the site could be subject to ground shaking from
a moderate to major earthquake. Consequently, moderate levels of earthquake shaking should
be anticipated during the design life of the project, and the proposed structure should be designed
to resist earthquake loading using appropriate design methodology.
For structures designed using the seismic design provisions of the 2015 International Building
Code, the native soil interpreted to underlie the site within the upper 100 feet classifies as Site
Page 5 of 14
GeoTest Services, Inc. May 7, 2018
3002 Q Avenue, Anacortes, WA Job No. 18-0218
Class D, according to 2010 ASCE -7 Standard — Table 20.3-1, Site Class Definitions. The
corresponding values for calculating a design response spectrum for the assumed soil profile type
is considered appropriate for the site.
Please reference the following values for seismic structural design purposes:
Conterminous 48 States — 2015 International Building Code
Zip Code 98221
Central Latitude = 48.49775°N, Central Longitude =-122061133OW
Short Period (0.2 sec) Spectral Acceleration
Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) Value of Ss = 1.093(g)
Site Response Coefficient, Fa= 1.063 (Site Class D)
Adjusted spectral response acceleration for Site Class D, Sms = Ss x Fa = 1 A 62 (g)
Design spectral response acceleration for Site Class D, Sos = 2/3 x SMs = 0.774 (g)
One Second Period (1 sec) Spectral Acceleration
Maximum Considered Earthquake (M(E) Value of S,
Site Response Coefficient, Fv= 1.567 (Site Class D)
Adjusted spectral response acceleration for Site Class D, Smi = Si x Fv = 0.678 (g)
Design spectral response acceleration for Site Class D, So, = 2/3 x SM, = 0.452 (g)
Foundation Support System
Foundation support for the proposed hotel building may be provided by continuous or isolated
spread footings founded on a minimum 2 feet of compacted, structural fill placed over competent,
native Glaciomarine Drift soils. We recommend that qualified geotechnical personnel confirm that
suitable bearing conditions have been reached prior to placement of structural fill or foundation
formwork.
To provide proper support, we recommend that existing topsoil and fill if present) be removed
from beneath the building foundation areas down to the native soils. The surface should be
compacted to a firm and unyielding condition with a smooth -drum roller. hoe -pack, or a similar
piece of construction equipment. Once suitable bearing conditions have been confirmed, then
foundations can bear directly on the native soils, or the building pad constructed with properly
compacted structural fill as described elsewhere in this report.
Continuous and isolated spread footings should be founded a minimum of 18 inches below the
lowest adjacent final grade for freeze/thaw protection. The footings should be sized in accordance
with the structural engineer's prescribed design criteria and seismic considerations.
Allowable Bearing Capacity
Assuming the above foundation support criteria are satisfied, continuous and individual spread
footings founded on compacted structural fill placed atop suitably prepared, very stiff to hard,
Glaciomarine Drift soils, may be proportioned using a net allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,500
pounds per square foot (psf).
The term "net allowable bearing pressure" refers to the pressure that can be imposed on the soil
at foundation level resulting from the total of all dead plus live loads, exclusive of the weight of
Page 6 of 14
GeoTest Services, Inc. May 7, 2018
3002 Q Avenue, Anacortes, WA Job No. 18-0218
the footing or any backfill placed above the footing. The net allowable bearing pressure may be
increased by one-third for transient wind or seismic loads.
Foundation Settlement
Settlement of shallow foundations depends on foundation size and bearing pressure, as well as
the strength and compressibility characteristics of the underlying soil. Assuming construction is
accomplished as previously recommended and for the maximum allowable soil bearing pressure
recommended above, we estimate the total settlement of building foundations should be less than
about one inch and differential settlement between two adjacent load -bearing components
supported on competent soil should be less than one half the total settlement.
Floor Support
Conventional slab -on -grade floor construction is considered feasible for the planned site
improvements. Floor slabs may be supported on properly placed and compacted structural fill
placed over properly prepared native soil. Prior to placement of any new structural fill for slab
subgrade preparation, the native soil subgrade should be proof -rolled as recommended in the
Site Preparation and Earthwork section of this report and approved for continued construction.
We recommend that interior concrete slab -on -grade floors be underlain by a minimum of 6 inches
of compacted, clean, free -draining gravel with less than 3 percent passing the U.S. Standard No.
200 sieve (based on a wet sieve analysis of that portion passing the U.S. Standard No. 4 sieve).
The purpose of this layer is to provide uniform support for the slab, provide a capillary break, and
act as a drainage layer. If desired, additional protection against water intrusion below the slab
could include a slab underdrain system to collect and direct water, if present, toward an approved
discharge point.
To help reduce the potential for water vapor migration through floor slabs, a continuous 10-mil
minimum thickness polyethylene sheet with tape -sealed joints should be installed below the slab
to serve as an impermeable vapor barrier. The vapor barrier should be installed and sealed in
accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.
The American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines suggest that the slab may either be poured
directly on the vapor barrier or on a granular curing layer placed over the vapor barrier depending
on conditions anticipated during construction. We recommend that the architect or structural
engineer specify if a curing layer should be used. If moisture control within the building is critical,
we recommend that the vapor barrier be observed by a representative of GTS to confirm that
openings have been properly sealed. Use of a curing layer is generally only recommended during
drier months of the year and/or when limited rain is expected during the slab -on -grade
construction process. If the slab will be constructed during the wet season, exposed to rain after
construction or the site may be potentially wet, we do not recommend the use of curing layer as
excessive moisture emissions through the slab may occur.
Exterior concrete slabs -on -grade, such as sidewalks, may be supported directly on undisturbed
native or on properly placed and compacted structural fill; however, long-term performance will
be enhanced if exterior slabs are placed on a layer of clean, durable, well -draining granular
material.
Page 7 of 14
Geo I est Services, Inc.
3002 Q Avenue, Anacortes, WA
Resistance to Lateral Loads
May
7,
2018
Job
No.
18-0218
The lateral earth pressures that develop against retaining walls will depend on the method of
backfill placement, degree of compaction, slope of backfill, type of backfill material, provisions for
drainage, magnitude and location of any adjacent surcharge loads, and the degree to which the
wall can yield laterally during or after placement of backfill. If the wall is allowed to rotate or yield
so the top of the wall moves an amount equal to or greater than about 0.001 to 0.002 times its
height (a yielding wall), the soil pressure exerted will be the active soil pressure. When a wall is
restrained against lateral movement or tilting (a nonyielding wall), the soil pressure exerted is the
at -rest soil pressure. Wall restraint may develop if a rigid structural network is constructed prior
to backfilling or if the wall is inherently stiff.
We recommend that yielding walls under drained conditions be designed for an equivalent fluid
density of 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) for structural fill (import pit run) in active soil
conditions. Nonyielding walls under drained conditions should be designed for an equivalent fluid
density of 55 pcf for structural fill in at -rest conditions. The design of walls should include
appropriate lateral pressures caused by surcharge loads located within a horizontal distance
equal to or less than the height of the wall. For uniform surcharge pressures, a uniformly
distributed lateral pressure equal to 35 percent and 50 percent of the vertical surcharge pressure
should be added to the lateral soil pressures for yielding and nonyielding walls, respectively. GTS
also recommends that a seismic surcharge pressure of 12H be included where H is the wall height
in feet. The seismic surcharge should be modeled as a rectangular distribution with the resultant
applied at the midpoint of the wall.
Passive earth pressures developed against the sides of building foundations, in conjunction with
friction developed between the base of the footings and the supporting subgrade, will resist lateral
loads transmitted from the structure to its foundation. For design purposes, the passive
resistance of well -compacted fill placed against the sides of foundations may be considered
equivalent to a fluid with a density of 250 pounds per cubic feet. The recommended value
includes a safety factor of about 1.5 and is based on the assumption that the ground surface
adjacent to the structure is level in the direction of movement for a distance equal to or greater
than twice the embedment depth. The recommended value also assumes drained conditions that
will prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure in the compacted fill. Retaining walls should
include a drain system constructed in general accordance with the recommendations presented
in the Foundation and Site Drainage section of this report. In design computations, the upper 12
inches of passive resistance should be neglected if the soil is not covered by floor slabs or
pavement. If future plans call for the removal of the soil providing resistance, the passive
resistance should not be considered.
An allowable coefficient of base friction of 0.30, applied to vertical dead loads only, may be used
between the base of the footing and the underlying imported granular structural fill and/or suitable
native deposits. If passive and frictional resistance are considered together, one half the
recommended passive soil resistance value should be used since larger strains are required to
mobilize the passive soil resistance as compared to frictional resistance. We do not recommend
increasing the coefficient of friction to resist seismic or wind loads.
Foundation and Site Drainage
To reduce the potential for perched groundwater and surface water to seep into interior spaces
we recommend that an exterior footing drain system be constructed around the perimeter of new
building foundations as shown in the Typical Footing and Wall Drain Section, Figure 3. The drain
Page 8 of 14
GeoTest Services, Inc. May 7, 2018
3002 Q Avenue, Anacortes, WA Job No. 18-0218
should consist of a minimum 4-inch diameter perforated PVC pipe, surrounded by a minimum 12
inches of filtering media with the discharge sloped to carry water to a suitable collection system.
The filtering media may consist of open -graded drain rock wrapped by a nonwoven geotextile
fabric (such as Mirafi 140N or equivalent) or a graded sand and gravel filter. The drainage backfill
should be carried up the back of wall and contain less than 3 percent by weight passing the U.S.
Standard No. 200 sieve (based on a wet sieve analysis of that portion passing the U.S. Standard
No. 4 sieve). The invert of the footing drain pipe should be placed slightly below the elevation of
the bottom of the footing or 12 inches below the adjacent floor slab grade, whichever is deeper,
so that water will not seep through walls or floor slabs. The footing drain should discharge to an
approved drain system and include cleanouts to allow periodic maintenance and inspection.
Positive surface gradients should be provided adjacent to the proposed building to direct surface
water away from the foundation and toward suitable drainage facilities. Roof drainage should not
be introduced into the perimeter footing drains, but should be separately discharged directly to
the stormwater collection system or other appropriate outlet. Pavement and sidewalk areas
should be sloped and drainage gradients should be maintained to carry all surface water away
from the building towards the local stormwater collection system. Surface water should not be
allowed to pond and soak into the ground surface near buildings or paved areas during or after
construction. Construction excavations should be sloped to drain to sumps where water from
seepage, rainfall, and runoff can be collected and pumped to a suitable discharge facility.
GTS understands that an elevator pit will be incorporated as part of the proposed development,
and potentially a swimming pool. Water could potentially collect below the elevator pit or
swimming pool, as these elements would be placed below existing site grades and in soils that
are considered low permeability. Where appropriate, GTS recommends that the elevator pit,
swimming pool, or similar below -grade element have adequate water stops and waterproofing to
resist the intrusion of water into these elements. Additional measures such as gravity drains or
sumps may also need to be incorporated into the drainage design for these elements. GTS should
be allowed to review the final drawings to confirm that adequate drainage measures are being
incorporated, and to revise our recommendations if required.
Temporary and Permanent Slopes
Actual construction slope configurations and maintenance of safe working conditions, including
temporary excavation stability, should be the responsty of the contractor, who is able to
monitor the construction activities and has direct control over the means and methods of
construction. All applicable local, state, and federal safety codes should be followed. All open
cuts should be monitored during and after excavation for any evidence of instability. If instability
is detected, the contractor should flatten the side slopes or install temporary shoring.
Temporary excavations in excess of 4 feet should be shored or sloped in accordance with Safety
Standards for Construction Work Part N, WAC 296-155-66403.
Temporary unsupported excavations in the native soils encountered at the project site are
classified as a Type B soil according to WAC 296-155-66403 and may be sloped as steep as 1 H:
1 V (Horizontal: Vertical). All soils encountered are classified as Type C soil in the presence of
groundwater seepage. Flatter slopes or temporary shoring may be required in areas where
groundwater flow is present and unstable conditions develop. Temporary slopes and excavations
should be protected as soon as possible using appropriate methods to prevent erosion from
occurring during periods of wet weather.
Page 9 of 14
GeoTest Services, Inc. May 7, 2018
3002 Q Avenue, Anacortes, WA Job No. 18-0218
We recommend that permanent cut or fill slopes be designed for inclinations of 2H:1 V or flatter.
If used for this project, slopes for detention ponds should be designed for inclinations of 3H:1 V or
flatter. All permanent cut slopes should be vegetated or otherwise protected to limit the potential
for erosion as soon as practical after construction. Permanent slopes requiring immediate
protection from the effects of erosion should be covered with either mulch or erosion control
netting/blankets. Areas requiring permanent stabilization should be seeded with an approved
grass seed mixture, or hydroseeded with an approved seed -mulch -fertilizer mixture.
Utilities
It is important that utility trenches be properly backfilled and compacted to reduce the risk of
cracking or localized loss of foundation, slab, or pavement support. It is anticipated that
excavations for new underground utilities will be in native Glaciomarine Drift.
Trench backfill in improved areas (beneath structures, pavements, sidewalks, etc.) should consist
of structural fill as defined earlier in this report. As discussed previously, GTS does not
recommend the reuse of existing Glaciomarine Drift soils as structural fill. Thus, the use of
imported, granular soil should be anticipated for backfill in improved areas. Outside of improved
areas and where allowed for in the plans and specifications prepared for this project, non-
structural backfill may consist of onsite soil. Trench backfill should be placed and compacted in
general accordance with the recommendations presented in the Fill and Compaction section of
this report.
The native soil is fine-grained and is not expected to drain efficiently. It should be expected that
utility trench backfill is likely to be more permeable than the native soil. As such, up -gradient utility
trenches have the potential to route subsurface sources of water towards new construction. GTS
recommends that low -permeability trench dams and water stops be considered should utility
trenches be installed up -gradient of any planned structures. Prior to implementing these
mitigations, a review of the trench depth and gradients should be performed to determine if these
mitigations will be included in the final design.
Surcharge loads on trench support systems due to construction equipment, stockpiled material,
and vehicle traffic should be included in the design of any anticipated shoring system. The
contractor should implement measures to prevent surface water runoff from entering trenches
aInd excavations. In addition, vibration as a result of construction activities and traffic may cause
caving of the trench walls.
Actual trench configurations should be the responsibility of the contractor. All applicable local,
state, and federal safety codes should be followed. All open cuts should be monitored by the
contractor during excavation for any evidence of instability. If instability is detected, the contractor
should flatten the side slopes or install temporary shoring. If groundwater or groundwater
seepage is present, and the trench is not properly dewatered, the soil within the trench zone may
be prone to caving, channeling, and running. Trench widths may be substantially wider than
under dewatered conditions.
Pavement Subgrade Preparation
Selection of a pavement section is typically a choice relative to higher initial cost and lower long
term maintenance or lower initial cost and more frequent maintenance. For this reason, we
recommend that the owner participate in the selection of proposed pavement improvements
planned for the site. Site grading plans should include provisions for sloping of the subgrade soils
Page 10 of 14
GeoTest Services, Inc. May 7, 2018
3002 Q Avenue, Anacortes, WA Job No. 18-0218
in proposed pavement areas, so that passive drainage of the pavement sections) can proceed
uninterrupted during the life of the project. The proposed pavement areas should be prepared as
indicated in the Site Preparation and Earthwork section of this report.
Asphalt Pavement Sections
We anticipate that asphalt pavement will be used for new access drive and parking areas. We
recommend a standard, or "light duty", pavement section consist of 2.5 inches of 1/2-inch HMA
asphalt above 6 inches of crushed surfacing base course (CSBC) meeting criteria set forth in the
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Standard Specification 9-03.9[3].
Areas that will be accessed by more heavily loaded vehicles, semi and garbage trucks, etc. such
as the main drive paths, will require a thicker asphalt section and should be designed using a
paving section consisting 4 inches of Class 1/2-inch HMA asphalt surfacing above 8 inches of
CSBC meeting criteria set forth in the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT)
Standard Specification 9-03.9[3].
Concrete Pavement Sections
Concrete pavements could be used for access and parking areas. Design of concrete pavements
is a function of concrete strength, reinforcement steel, and the anticipated loading conditions for
the roads. For design purposes, a vertical modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic
inch (pci) should be expected for concrete roadways constructed over properly placed and
compacted Structural Fill. GTS expects that concrete pavement sections, if utilized, will be at
least 6 inches thick and be founded on a minimum of 8 inches of compacted CSBC. The design
of concrete access and parking areas will need to be performed by a structural engineer. GTS
recommends that subgrade soils supporting concrete pavement sections include minor grade
changes to allow for passive drainage away from the pavement.
Concrete Sidewalks and Hardscapes
We recommend a concrete sidewalk and hardscape section consisting of at least 4 inches of
concrete above a minimum of 4 inches of CSBC.
We are available to further consult, review and/or modify our pavement section recommendations
based on further discussion and/or analysis with the project team/owner. The above pavement
sections should be considered initial recommendations and may be accepted and/or modified by
the site civil engineer based on the actual finished site grading elevations and/or the owner's
preferences.
Stormwater Design Recommendations
The underlying native soil at the project site consists of very stiff, lean clay (Glaciomarine Drift).
In our experience, very stiff clay soils such as those seen on site typically behave as "restriction
layers" (Infiltration rates less than 0.3 inches per hour) per the 2012 Stormwater Management
Manual for Western Washington (amended 2014). Thus, it is our opinion that conventional
infiltration of stormwater, or the use of LID (low impact development) on this site is not feasible.
Alternative means of stormwater management will need to be carefully considered due to the
restrictive site soils. GTS can assist the design team with a peer review of finalized stormwater
design concepts, as necessary.
Page 11 of 14
GeoTest Services, Inc.
3002 Q Avenue, Anacortes, WA
Stormwater Pollutant Treatment
May
7,
2018
Job
No.
18-0218
Prior to offsite discharge, Stormwater may require some form of pollutant pre-treatment or
treatment with an amended soil. It is our opinion, based on past experience, that the re -use of
onsite topsoil is often the most sustainable and cost effective method for pollutant treatment
purposes. Cation exchange capacities and organic contents of site topsoil and shallow subsurface
soils were determined to establish their pollutant treatment suitability.
Cation Exchange Capacity and Organic Content Testing
Two composite samples were collected during our subsurface explorations for pollutant treatment
purposes. Cation exchange capacity (CEC) and organic content (LOI) tests were performed by
Northwest Agricultural Consultants. Laboratory test results are presented in Table 1.
TABLE 1
CEC & Organic Content Laboratory Test Results
Test Pit
Number
Sample
Depth (ft)
Cation Exchange Capacity
(meq/100 grams)
Organic Content (%)
pH
B-1
0.5
26A
10.94
6.3
B-1
2.5
2068
2.10
7.3
Based on the results listed in Table 1, the fine-grained, near -surface soil (topsoil and weathered
soils) appear be to be suitable for on -site pollutant treatment purposes based on the 2012
Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (amended December 2014). The
Manual also states that cation exchange capacity must be greater than equal to 5.0 meq/100
grams for treatment purposes. Thus, the fine-grained near -surface soils would also appear to be
suitable for this purpose, although low rates of infiltration can be expected if the on -site soils are
amended due to their fines contents.
Geotechnical Consultation and Construction Monitoring
GeoTest Services recommends that we be involved in the project design review process. The
purpose of the review is to verify that the recommendations presented in this report have been
properly interpreted and incorporated in the design and specifications.
We recommend that geotechnical construction monitoring services be provided. These services
should include observation by GeoTest personnel during fill placement/compaction activities and
subgrade preparation operations to verify that design subgrade conditions are obtained beneath
the proposed building. We recommend that periodic field density testing be performed to verify
that the appropriate degree of compaction is obtained for structural fill. The purpose of these
services would be to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications, and
recommendations of this report. In the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated
before the start of construction, GeoTest Services would be pleased to provide revised
recommendations appropriate to the conditions revealed during construction.
GeoTest Services is also available to provide a full range of materials testing and special
inspection during building construction as required by the local building department and the
International Building Code. This may include specific construction inspections on materials such
Page 12 of 14
GeoTest Services, Inc.
3002 Q Avenue, Anacortes, WA
May 7, 2018
Job No. 18-0218
as reinforced concrete, reinforced masonry, wood framing and structural steel. These services
are supported by our fully accredited materials testing laboratory.
USE OF THIS REPORT
GeoTest Services has prepared this report for the exclusive use of EK Tera Asara, LLC, and their
design consultants for specific application to the design of the proposed hotel project at 3002 Q
Avenue in Anacortes, Washington. Use of this report by others or for another project is at the
user's sole risk. Our services have been conducted in accordance with generally accepted
practices of the geotechnical engineering profession; no other warranty, either express or implied,
is made as to the professional advice included in this report.
Our site explorations indicate subsurface conditions at the dates and locations indicated. It is not
warranted that they are representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times. The
analyses, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions
to the limited depth of our explorations at the time of our exploration program, a brief geological
reconnaissance of the area, and review of published geological information for the site. We
assume that the explorations are representative of the subsurface conditions throughout the site
during the preparation of our recommendations. If variations in subsurface conditions are
encountered during construction, we should be notified for review of the recommendations of this
report, and revision of such if necessary. If there is a substantial lapse of time between
submission of this report and the start of construction, or if conditions change due to construction
operations at or adjacent to the project site, we recommend that we review this report to determine
the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations contained herein.
The earthwork contractor is responsible to perform all work in conformance with all applicable
WISHA/OSHA regulations. GeoTest Services, Inc. should not be assumed to be responsible for
job site safety on this project, and this responsibility is specifically disclaimed.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical services on this project and look forward
to assisting you during the final design phase. If you have any questions or comments regarding
the information contained in this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact the
undersigned.
Respectfully Submitted,
GeoTest Services, Inc.
Noah Griffin, G.I.T.
Staff Geologist
Gerry D. Bautista, Jr., P.E.
Project Geotechnical Engineer
Page 13 of 14
GeoTest Services, Inc.
3002 O Avenue, Anacortes, WA
Attachments: Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figures 5-9
Figure 10-11
Figure 12
Attachment:
Attachment:
REFERENCES
nity Map
Site and Exploration Plan
Typical Footing and Wall Drain Section
Soil Classification System and Key
Boring Logs
Grain Size Analysis
Atterberg Limits Analysis
Northwest Agriculture Test Results (1 page)
Report Limitations and Guidelines for its Use (3 pages)
May 7, 2018
Job No. 18-0218
Dragovich, J. D., et al., Geologic map of the Anacortes South and La Conner 7.5 minute quadrangles, Skagit and Island
Counties, Washington. Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources Open File Report 2000-6, scale
1:24,000,
Interactive Geologic Map of Washington State. Online interactive services provided by the Washington State
Department of Natural Resources,
Washington State Department of Ecology, 2012 (amended December 2014). Stormwater Management Manual for
Western Washington,
Well Log Viewer, Washington State Department of Ecology.
Page 14 of 14
s
All
Decatur
!if
i
N 3 Miles
GEOTEST SERVICES, INC.
741 Marine Drive
Bellingham, WA 98225
phone: (360) 733-7318
fax: (360)733-7418
PROJECT LOCATION
11emeS Isla rif f
Anaco s
Ale C-r
Beadi i , ,a
i Hovowds
t Corner
" 1 j"Fidalga7slan
I •:_- _, . 8eaefi, Sncc Desh
r T
field
Dal; Harb��r
4'ul7itney
1
Ji
Swinomish
lage
La C�nneT
Snelt��r Bay
Fish Town
T1
MAP REFERENCED FROM Acme
Date: 4-17-18 I BY� NG I Scale: As Shown
VICINITY MAP
PROPOSED HOTEL
3002 Q AVENUE
ANACORTES, WASHINGTON
r 2.1
Project
18-0218
Figure
1
�nN�nd 11
ytsviuic�Lxn
Y - �r ky
_�_,,,
n r A_
Kr0 'g RP.ga
v aZw
ntW
00
J � O
o
E N i N
O co m
Q
0)_
U)
t®Eiji U C
Lu U
a ~ N O a)
Oa�i�a'�
Z L N a o
N O
O SZ
K 0 N E
L
>� 0 N O
O
a) [2 O E
O :3 L
0
O O O N
U
ZQ
M
IN 00 W
W�♦ ui N v
`V z 0 r
/ coM
ICI. o
N Q Co M
0
H 0)(D
ci _
Cq — o
X
W Q Q. 4T
O �
WN
SHALLOW FOOTINGS WITH INTERIOR SLAB -ON -GRADE
Compacted Impervious Soil
(12 inch minimum)
or Pavement
(2 inch minimum)
Slope to drain away
from structure.
Suitable Soil
Approved Non -woven
Geotextile Filter Fabric
(18 inch minimum fabric lap)
Drainage Material
(Drain Rock or Clear
Crushed Rock w/no fines)
Typical Framing
Floor Slab
...............
Four Inch Diameter, Perforated, Rigid PVC Pipe
(Perforations oriented down, wrapped in non -woven
geotexule filter fabric, directed to suitable discharge)
Coarse Gravel Capillary Break
(6 inch minimum typically clear crushed)
Free Draining Sand
and Gravel Fill
Suitable Soil
Appropriate Waterproofing
Applied to Exterior of Wall
Notes:
Footings Should be properly buried for frost protection in accordance with
International Building Code or local building codes
(Typically 18 inches below exterior finished grades)
The footing drain will need to be modified from this typical drawing to fit the
dimensions of the planned monolithic footing and slab configuration
GEOTEST SERVICES, INC.
741 Marine Drive
Bellingham, WA 98225
phone: (360) 733-7318
fax: (360) 733-7418
Date:4-27-18 I BY� NG
Scale: None � Project
TYPICAL FOOTING &WALL DRAIN SECTION
PROPOSED HOTEL
3002 Q AVENUE
ANACORTES, WASHINGTON
18-0218
Figure
3
MAJOR
DIVISIONS
Soil Classification System
uscs
GRAPHIC LETTER
SYMBOL SYMBOL
TYPICAL
DES CRIPTIONSt11121
�.
GW
Well -graded gravel; gravel/sand mixture(s); little or no fines
GRAVEL AND
CLEAN GRAVEL
.o: pia:
GRAVELLY SOIL
(Little or no fines)
Uw
o o: o .d 0%
GP
Poorly graded gravel; gravel/sand mixture(s); little or no fines
m
w
.�
m
'm
(More than 50% of
GRAVEL WITH FINES
GM
Silty ravel; ravel/sand/silt mixture(s)
tY 9 9
o
W
m
E'
n
coarse fraction
(Appreciable amount of
Z
o
o
retained on No. 4
fines)
GC
Clayey gravel; gravel/sand/clay mixture(s)
a
sieve)
ag
"
ad
`°
Z
CLEAN SAND
SW
Well -graded sand; gravelly sand; little or no fines
cSAND
AND
Sp
U) °c
w .
SANDY SOIL
(Little or no fines)
Poorly graded sand; gravelly sand; little or no fines
Q
Rd
SM
(More than 50% of
Silty sand; sand/silt mixture(s)
coarse fraction passed
SAND WITH FINES
SC
through No. 4 sieve)
(Appreciable amount of
Clayey sand; sand/clay mixture(s)
fines)
ML
Inorganic silt and very fine sand; rock flour; silty or clayey fine
m
SILT AND CLAY
sand or clayey silt with slight plasticity
N
Inorganic clay of low to medium plasticity; gravelly clay; sandy
CL
u)
E
d
limit less than 50)
clay; silty clay; lean clay
W(Liquid
�Z
°
_
N
OL
Organic silt; organic, silty clay of low plasticity
Z
L
'FA
0
o
MH
Inorganic silt; micaceous or diatomaceous fine sand
SILT AND CLAY
W
2
CH
Inorganic clay of high plasticity; fat clay
Z
0
o0
w
(Liquid limit greater than 50)
OH
Organic clay of medium to high plasticity; organic silt
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOIL
PT
Peat; humus; swamp soil with high organic content
GRAPHIC LETTER
SYMBOL SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS
PAVEMENT
AC Of PC
Asphalt concrete pavement or Portland cement pavement
ROCK
RK
Rock (See Rock Classification)
WOOD
WD
Wood, lumber, wood chips
DEBRIS
C C C
DB
Construction debris, garbage
Notes: 1. Soil descriptions are based on the general approach presented in the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-
Manual
Procedure), as outlined in ASTM D 2488. Where laboratory index testing has been conducted, soil classifications are based on the Standard Test Method
forClassinuatton of Soils forEugineeringPurposes, as outlined in ASTM D 2487.
2. Soil description terminology is based on visual estimates (in the absence of laboratory test data) of the percentages of each soil type and is defined as
follows:
Primary Constituent: > 50%- "GRAVEL," "SAND; "'SILT; f "CLAY," etc.
Secondary Constituents: > 30% and < 50% - "very gravelly," "very sandy," "very silty," etc.
> 12% and < 30% - "gravelly," "sandy, "'silty," etc.
Additional Constituents: > 5% and < 12%- "slightly gravelly," "slightly sandy," "slightly silty," etc.
< 5% - "trace gravel," "trace sand, "trace silt," etc., or not noted.
Drilling and Sampling Key
SAMPLE NUMBER &INTERVAL SAMPLER TYPE
Code Description
Sample Identification Number a 3.25-inch O.D., 2.42-inch I.D. Split Spoon
b 2.00-inch O.D., 1.50-inch I.D. Split Spoon
Recovery Depth Interval
1�j 1 - Sample Depth Interval
Portion of Sample Retained
for Archive or Analysis
c Shelby Tube
d Grab Sample
e Other -See text if applicable
1 300-lb Hammer, 30-inch Drop
2 1404b Hammer, 30-inch Drop
3 Pushed
4 Other - See text if applicable
Groundwater
Q Approbmate water elevation at time of drilling (ATD) or on date noted. Groundwa
ATD levels can fluctuate due to precipitation, seasonal conditions, and other factors.
GG'OTC'ST
Field and Lab Test Data
Code Description
PP = 1.0 Pocket Penetrometer, tsf
TV = 0.5 Torvane, tsf
PID = 100 Photoionization Detector VOC screening, ppm
W = 10 Moisture Content,
D = 120 Dry Density, pcf
-200 = 60 Material smaller than No. 200 sieve, %
GS Grain Size - See separate figure for data
AL Atterberg Limits - See separate figure for data
GT Other Geotechnical Testing
CA Chemical Analysis
SAMPLE DATA
SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER
a
Drilling Method: Hollow -stem Auger
E
o
z
°o
c)
>,
Ground Elevation (ft): Undetermined
2
m I
(GO
0
U)
o. E c
E
v
Drilled By: Bortec1 Inc./Noah Griffin
o
n
m
to
0
W = 33
SW
Loose, dark brown, moist, gravelly, very
1 =
d
GS
OL
silty, SAND (Topsoil)
Groundwater not encountered.
Stiff to very stiff, mottled tan, moist, sandy,
CL
2�
b2 15
W = 17
lean CLAY, trace gravel (Glaciomarine
Drift)
5
3
b2 27
W=16
W=17
4
b2 21
GS
AL
10
5
b2 14
W=19
i
15
Grades to grey, no mottling, decreased
6
b2 11
W = 26
gravel content
i
i 20
7
b2 24
W = 29
i
i
Spoils extruding in wet ribbons
Grades to wet and medium stiff
25
=
W 28GS
8�
b2 7
cOOF
c
i
30
' 9
b2 6
W = 23
L
7
O
J
V
7
35
Grades to very stiff to hard
c 10
b2 37
W=11
Y
}
Very dense, grey, moist, gravelly, very silty,
SM
SAND (Glaciomarine Outwash)
40
2
n 11
b2 77
GS
L
Boring Completed 04/11/18
i Total Depth of Boring = 41.5 ft.
0
i(
45
Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
m 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions.
0 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Proposed Hotel
OeOTe5T 3002 Q Avenue Log of Boring B-1
Anacortes, Washington
c�
0
zz
FK
0
m
0
Y)
B=2
SAMPLE DATA
SOIL PROFILE
GROUNDWATER
Drilling Method: Hollow -stem Auger
.0
o
F��C�;LE
�
Ground Elevation (ft): Undetermined
o
m
3
U
Drilled By: Bortecl Inc./Noah Griffin
o
rn 06
in
m
H
(7
Z)
0
SM/
Loose, dark brown, moist, gravelly, very
OL
silty, SAND (Topsoil)
Groundwater not encountered.
2
CL
Stiff to very stiff, mottled tan, moist, sandy,
lean CLAY, trace gravel (Glaciomarine
12
b2
17
W = 19
Drift)
4
W - 19
13
b2
15
GS
6
i
8
14
b2
21
W=18
i
10
S 15
b2
15
W = 23
12
Grades to medium stiff to stiff
v
14
u
Grades to grey, no mottling, decreased
gravel content
16
b2
7
W = 28
16
kJ
Y
n 18
L
d
0
0
20
0
O
b2
13
U
w
0 22 Boring Completed 04/11/18
a Total Depth of Boring = 21.5 ft.
o_
X
m
N 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.
N 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key' figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
0
m
Figure
Proposed Hotel
GGOTe5T 3002 Q Avenue Log of Boring B-2 G
Anacortes, Washington V
Bm3
SAMPLE DATA
SOIL PROFILE
GROUNDWATER
CD
a
Drilling Method: Hollow -stem Auger
a
aD
a
E
o
m
z' —
°o
;.9
CO
a
Ground Elevation (ft): Undetermined
ZLL
f6
UCn
E
m
m
3
0
Drilled By: Bortec1 Inc./Noah Griffin
m
0
U)06
W
m
H
(9
0
SW
Loose, dark brown, moist, gravelly, very
OL
silty, SAND (Topsoil)
_
Groundwater not encountered.
2
CL
Stiff, mottled tan, moist, sandy, lean CLAY,
trace gravel (Glaciomarine Drift)
17
b2
11
W = 19
GS
4
W - 19
18
b2
13
GS
6
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
8
i 19
b2
12
W=19
)
i
i
S
S
J
7
J
10
c
L
J
20
b2
9
W = 24
u
9
u
r Boring Completed 04/11/18
L 12 Total Depth of Boring = 11.5 ft.
3
K
ID
Notes: 1. Stratigraphic contacts are based on field interpretations and are approximate.
b 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.
,o
Figure
Proposed Hotel
OeOTe5T 3002 Q Avenue Log of Boring B-3 7
Anacortes, Washington
D
0
D
Z
0
m
0
N
B-4
SAMPLE DATA
SOIL PROFILE
GROUNDWATER
a
a°
a
Drilling Method: Hollow -stem Auger
a)
a
E
z
~
°o
:9
r)
T
Ground Elevation (ft): Undetermined
� � Z
fl E
E
3
CL
v
Drilled By: Bortec1 Inc./Noah Griffin
0in
m
0
SW
Loose, dark brown, moist, gravelly, very
OL
silty, SAND (Topsoil)
Groundwater not encountered.
2
CL
Stiff to very stiff, mottled tan, moist, sandy,
lean CLAY, trace gravel (Glaciomarine
Drift)
b2
9
W=14
4
b2
13
W = 15
6
8
i
i
b2
11
W = 27
i
i
i
10
b2
9
W = 30
i
i
i
i
Boring Completed 04/11/18
12 Total Depth of Boring = 11,5 ft.
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.
S
Proposed Hotel Figure
C7eOTe5T 3002 Q Avenue Log of Boring B-4
Anacortes, Washington
0
0
z
z
E
0
m
0
w
B=5
SAMPLE DATA
SOIL PROFILE
GROUNDWATER
M
Drilling Method: Hollow -stem Auger
E
a
z —
U
�
Ground Elevation (ft): Undetermined
mZ
`m
L0
m
fl E
3
m
v
Drilled By: Bortecl Inc./Noah Griffin
o
cn
0 in 06
cn
m
H
0
0
SW
Loose, dark brown, moist, gravelly, very
OL
silty, SAND (Topsoil)
Groundwater not encountered.
2
CL
Stiff to very stiff, mottled tan, moist, sandy,
lean CLAY, trace gravel (Glaciomarine
Drift)
5
b2
19
G8
i
i
4
i
i
i
W = 16
b2
22
GS
6
L
8
b2
20
W = 22
J
J
L_
p
7
u
n
10
Y
3
0
g
b2
16
W = 24
0
w
H
U
W
o Boring Completed 04/11/18
a 12 Total Depth of Boring = 11.5 ft.
0
X
w
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.
m
0 3. Refer to "Soil Classification System and Key" figure for explanation of graphics and symbols.
Figure
Proposed Hotel
C7eOTe5T 3002 Q Avenue Log of Boring B-5
Anacortes, Washington
Point
Depth
Classification
LL
PL
PI
C�
C�
•
B-1
0,5
GRAVELLY,
VERY SILTY, SAND (SM)
m
B-1
7,5
SANDY, LEAN CLAY, TRACE GRAVEL (CL)
35PE
18
A
B-1
25,0
LEAN CLAY,
TRACE SAND AND GRAVEL (CL)
*
B-1
40,0
GRAVELLY,
VERY SILTY, SAND (SM)
Point
p
DepthE37,5
D so
D 50
D 30
D 10
%Coarse
Gravel
% Fine
Gravel
% Coarse
Sand
% Medium
Sand
% Fine
Sand
oho Fines
0
B-1
0,50,525
0,271
15,5
9,5
3,6
133
19.3
38A
m
B-1
7,50,056
0,0
2A
2A
7,6
24,2
63,7
A
B-1
25,0
0,0
0,6
0.1
0,8
5A
93,2
*
B-1
40,0
19
0,224
0,112
0,0
15A
5,3
11,9
233
43,7
Cc = D30 /(D60* D,o) To be well graded: 1 < C, < 3 and
C� = D60/D,o C� > 4 for GW or Cu > 6 for SW
Proposed Hotel Figure
G OTe5T 3002 Q Avenue Grain Size Test Data �I O
Anacortes, Washington I
Northwest Agricultural GeoTest Services Inc.
Consultants 741 Marine Drive
Bellingham, WA 98225
PAP -Accredited
2545 W Falls Avenue
Kennewick, WA 99336
509.783.7450 Report: 44574-1
Date: April 14, 2018
www,nwag.com Project No: 18-0218
lab@nwag.com Project Name: Proposed Hotel
Sample ID
pH
Organic Matter
Cation Exchange Capacity
61 @ 0.5'
6.3
10.94%
26.1 meq/100g
131 @ 2051
7.3
2.10%
20.8 meq/100g
Method
SM 4500-H+ B
ASTM D2974
EPA 9081
REPORT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES FOR ITS USE
Subsurface issues may cause construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. While
you cannot eliminate all such risks, you can manage them. The following information is
provided to help:
Geotechnical Services are Performed for Specc Purposes, Persons, and Projects
At GeoTest our geotechnical engineers and geologists structure their services to meet specific
needs of our clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engineer may not
fulfill the needs of an owner, a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Because
each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each geotechnical engineering report is unique,
prepared solely for the client. No one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineer
who prepared it. And no one — not even you — should apply the report for any purpose or project
except the one origi nally contemplated.
Read the Full Report
Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical engineering report did
not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only.
A Geotechnical Engineering Report is Based on a Unique Set of Project -Specific Factors
GeoTest's geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project -specific factors when
establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the clients goals, objectives, and risk
management preferences; the general nature of the structure involved its size, and
configuration; the location of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site
improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless GeoTest,
who conducted the study specifically states otherwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering
report that was:
• not prepared for you,
• not prepared for your project,
• not prepared for the specific site explored, or
• completed before important project changes were made.
Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical engineering report
include those that affect:
• the function of the proposed structure, as when it's changed, for example, from a parking
garage to an office building, or from a light industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse,
• elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed construction,
• alterations in drainage designs; or
• composition of the design team; the passage of time; man-made alterations and
construction whether on or adjacent to the site; or by natural alterations and events,
such as floods, earthquakes or groundwater fluctuations; or project ownership.
Always inform GeoTest's geotechnical engineer of project changes —even minor ones and
request an assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or
liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which
they were not informed.
'Information in this document is based upon material developed by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences(asfe.org)
GC'OT@5T
Subsurface Conditions Can Change
This geotechnical or geologic report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study
was performed. Do not rely on the findings and conclusions of this report, whose adequacy
may have been affected by: the passage of time; by man-made events, such as construction on
or adjacent to the site; or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater
fluctuations. Always contact GeoTest before applying the report to determine if it is still relevant.
A minor amount of additional testing or analysis will help determine if the report remains
applicable.
Most Geotechnical and Geologic Findings are Professional Opinions
Our site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests
are conducted or samples are taken. GeoTest's engineers and geologists review field and
laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion about
subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ — sometimes
significantly — from those indicated in your report. Retaining GeoTest who developed this report
to provide construction observation is the most effective method of managing the risks
associated with anticipated or unanticipated conditions.
A Report's Recommendations are Not Final
Do not over -rely on the construction recommendations included in this report. Those
recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engineers or geologists develop them
principally from judgment and opinion. GeoTest's geotechnical engineers or geologists can
finalize their recommendations only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during
construction. GeoTest cannot assume responsibility or liability for the report's
recommendations if our firm does not perform the construction observation.
A Geotechnical Engineering or Geologic Report may be Subject to Misinterpretation
Misinterpretation of this report by other design team members can result in costly problems.
Lower that risk by having GeoTest confer with appropriate members of the design team after
submitting the report. Also, we suggest retaining GeoTest to review pertinent elements of the
design teams plans and specifications. Contractors can also misinterpret a geotechnical
engineering report. Reduce that risk by having GeoTest participate in pre -bid and
preconstruction conferences, and by providing construction observation.
Do not Redraw the Exploration Logs
Our geotechnical engineers and geologists prepare final boring and testing logs based upon
their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors of omissions, the logs
included in this report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design
drawings. Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable; but recognizes that
separating logs from the report can elevate risk.
Give Contractors a Complete Report and Guidance
Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make contractors liable for
unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help
prevent costly problems, give contractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, but
preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letter, consider advising the
contractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the
report's accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with the GeoTest and/or to conduct
'Information in this document is based upon material developed by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences(asfe.org)
GCOTC'ST
additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. A pre -bid
conference can also be valuable. Be sure contractors have sufficient time to perform additional
study. Only then might you be in a position to give contractors the best information available,
while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from
unanticipated conditions. In addition, it is recommended that a contingency for unanticipated
conditions be included in your project budget and schedule.
Read Responsibility Provisions Closely
Some clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that geotechnical
engineering or geology is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. This lack of
understanding can create unrealistic expectations that can lead to disappointments, claims, and
disputes. To help reduce risk, GeoTest includes an explanatory limitations section in our
reports. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions and we encourage our clients or their
representative to contact our office if you are unclear as to how these provisions apply to your
project.
Environmental Concerns Are Not Covered in this Geotechnical or Geologic Report
The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform an environmental study differ
significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical or geologic study. For that reason, a
geotechnical engineering or geologic report does not usually relate any environmental findings,
conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground
storage tanks or regulated containments, etc. If you have not yet obtained your own
environmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk management guidance. Do
not rely on environmental report prepared for some one else.
Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with Biological Pollutants
Diverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction, operation, and
maintenance to prevent significant amounts biological pollutants from growing on indoor
surfaces. Biological pollutants includes but is not limited to molds, fungi, spores, bacteria and
viruses. To be effective, all such strategies should be devised for the express purpose of
prevention, integrated into a comprehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a
professional biological pollutant prevention consultant. Because just a small amount of water or
moisture can lead to the development of severe biological infestations, a number of prevention
strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry. While groundwater, water infiltration, and
similar issues may have been addressed as part of this study, the geotechnical engineer or
geologist in charge of this project is not a biological pollutant prevention consultant; none of the
services preformed in connection with this geotechnical engineering or geological study were
designed or conducted for the purpose of preventing biological infestations.
'Information in this document is based upon material developed by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences(asfe.org)
GC'OTCST