HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA-08-090_MiscGEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
SOUTHWEST 43rd STREET
AND OAKSDALE AVENUE SW
RENTON, WASHINGTON ~~
~vi~~
E-3000-3 ~~~ti.~O
.,~\.Q...O
~" c<;>o'
December 8, 1SS7 ~~ \ 'l. i
~ c~i
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
SOUTHWEST 43rd STREET
AND OAKSDALE AVENUE SW
RENTON, WASHINGTON
E-3000-3
December 8, 1997
PREPARED FOR
ZELMAN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
_ ....
'-l:,:;"r~·=:. l,/t$\'ib' ------
Kyle R. Campbell, P.E.
Manager of Geotechnical Service:5
Earth Consultants, Inc.
1805 -136th Place Northeast, Suite 201
Bellevue, Washington 98005
1425) 643-3780
IMPORTANT INFORMATION
ABOUT YOUR
GEOTEG-INICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
More construction problems are caused by site subsur-
face conditions than any other factor. As troublesome as
subsurface problems can be. their frequency and extent
have been lessened considerably in recent years. due in
large measure to 'programs and publications of ASFE/
The Association of Engineering Firms Practicing in
the Geosciences_
The following suggestions and observations are offered
to help you reduce the geotechnical-related delays,
cost-overruns and other costly headaches that can
occur during a construction project_
A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
REPORT IS BASED ON A UNIQUE SET
OF PROJECT~PECIFIC FACTORS
A geotechnical engineering report is based on a subsur-
face exploration plan designed to incorporate a unique
set of project-specific factors. These typically include,
the general nature of the structure involved. its size and
configuration, the location of the structure on the site
and its orientation: physical concomitants such as
access roads. parking lots. and underground utilities.
and the level of additional risk which the client assumed
by virtue of limitations imposed upon the exploratory
program. To help avoid costly problems. consult the
geotechnica\ engineer to determine how any factors
which change subsequent to the date or the report may
affect its recommendations.
Unless your consulting geotechnical engineer indicates
otherwise. your geoleclinica/ engineering report s~"ld not
be used:
• When the nature of the proposed structure is
changed. for example. if an office building will be
erected instead of a parking garage. or if a refriger-
ated warehouse will be built instead of an unre-
frigerated one:
• when the size or configuration of the proposed
structure is altered:
• when the location or orientation of the proposed
structure is modified:
• when there is a change of ownership. or
• for application to an adjacent site.
Geolechnical engineers cannol accept responsibility for problems
which may deoe/op if lhey are not consulled after factors consid-
eml in their report's development have ,hanged.
MOST GEOTECHNICAL "FINDINGS"
ARE PROFESSIONAL ESTIMATES
Site exploration identifies actual subsurface conditions
only at those points where samples are taken. when
they are taken. Data derived through sampling and sub-
sequent laboratory testing are extrapolated by geo-
.
technical engineers who then render an opinion about
overall subsurface conditions:their likely reaction to
proposed construction activity, and appropriate founda-
tion design. Even under optimal circumstances actual
conditions may differ from those inferred to exist.
because no geotechnical engineer, no matter how
qualified. and no subsurface exploration program. no
matter how comprehensive. can reveal what is hidden by
earth. rock and time. The actual Interface between mate-
rials may be far more gradual or abrupt than a report
indicates. Actual conditions in areas not sampled may
differ from predictions_ Nothing can be done to prevenl the
unanticipated, bul steps can be taken to help minimize !tteir
impact. For this reason. most experienced owners rruiln their
geoteclinical ,onsultants through the construction stage. to iden-
tify variances. conduct additional tests which may be
needed. and to recommend solutions to problems
encountered on site.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
CAN CHANGE
Subsurface conditions may be modified by constantly-
changing natural forces. Because a geotechnical engi-
neering report is based on conditions which existed at
the time of subsurface exploration, ,onstruction decisions
slaould not be based on a geotechnica/ engineering report whose
adequacy may hav, been affected by lime. Speak with the geo-
technlca\ consultant to learn if additional tests are
advisable before construction starts.
Construction operations at or adjacent to the site and
natural events such as floods. earthquakes or ground-
water fluctuations may also affect subsurface conditions
and. thus. the continuing adequacy of a geotechnical
report. The geotechnical engineer should be kept
apprised of any such events. and should be consulted to
determine if additional tests are necessary.
GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES ARE
PERFORMED FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES
AND PERSONS
Geotechnical engineers· reports are prepared to meet
the specific needs of specific individuals. A repcrt pre-
pared for a consulting civil engineer may not be ade-
quate for a construction contractor. or even some other
consulting civil engineer. Unless indicated otherwise.
this report was prepared expressly for the client involved
and expressly for purposes indicated by the diem. Use
by any other persons for any purpose. or by the client
for a different purpose. may result in problems. No indi-
vidual other titan !he client should apply 1/,Js report for Its
i•tended purpose without first conferring with the geotechnical
engineer. No pmoo should apply this report for any purpose
other titan that originally conttmf](ated w•ilhout first conferring
with lhe geolechnical enginee,
A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
REPORT IS SUBJECT TO
MISINTERPRETATION
Costly problems can occur when other design profes-
sionals develop their plans based on misinterpretations
of a geotechnical engineering report. 'lb help avoid
these problems, the_geotechnical engineer should be
retained to work with other appropriate design profes-
sionals to explain relevant geotechnical findings and to
review the adequacy of their plans and specifications
relative to geotechnical issues,
BORING LOGS SHOULD NOT BE
SEPARATED FROM 1HE
ENGINEERING REPORT
Final boring logs are developed by geotechnical engi-
neers based upon their Interpretation of field logs
!assembled by site personnel) and laboratory evaluation
of field samples. Only final boring logs customarily are
induded in geotechnical eJl€lneering reports_ These logs
should not under any circumstances he redrawn for lndusion in
architectural or other design drawings, because drafters
may commit errors or omissions In the transfer process.
Although photographic reproduction eliminates this
problem, It does nothing to minimize the possibility of
contractors misinterpreting the logs duriJl€ bid prepara-
tion. When this oocurs. delays, disputes and unantici-
pated costs are the all-too-frequent result.
1b minimize the likelihood of boring log misinterpreta-
tion, give contractors ready access to tfle complete geotechnical
engineering report prepared or authorized for their use,
Those who do not provide such aocess may proceed un-
der the mistaken impression that simply disclaiming re-
sponsibility for the accuracy of subsurface Information ·
always insulates them from attendant liability. Providing
the best available information to contractors helps pre-
vent costly construction problems and the adversarial
attitudes which aggravate them to disproportionate
scale,
READ RESPONSIBILITY
CLAUSES CLOSELY
Because geotechnical engineering is based extensively
on judgment and opinion, it is lar less exact than other
design disciplines. This situation has resulted in wholly
unwarranted daims being lodged against geotechnical
consultants. 'lb help prevent this problem. geotechnical
engineers have developed model clauses for use in writ-
ten transmittals. These are not exculpatory clauses
designed to foist geotechnical engineers' liabilities onto
someone else. Rather, they are definitive dauses which
identify where geotechnical engineers' responsibilities
begin and end. Theiruse helps all parties Involved rec-
ognize their individual responsibilities and take appro-
priate action. Some of these definitive clauses are likely
to appear in your geotechnical engineering report, and
you are encouraged to read them close!)( Your geo-
technical engineer will be pleased to give full and frank
answers to your questions.
01HER STEPS YOU CAN TAKE TO
RE;DUCE RISK
Your consulting geotechnical engineer will be pleased to
discuss other techniques which can be employed to mit-
igate risk. In addition. ASFE has developed a variety of
materials which may be beneficial. Contact ASFE for a
complimentary copy of its publications directory
Pu&lis/,ed by
A5FeTHEASSOCIATION
OF ENGINEERING FIRMS
PRACTICING IN THE GEOSCIENCES
8811 Cole!Nille Road/Suite G 106/Silver Spring. Maryland 20910/(301) 565-2733
.. 0788/'.iM
l
' t
!
I
1
l
December 8, 1997
Zelman Development Company
707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 3036
Los Angeles, California 90017
Attention: Sanford Kopelow
Dear Sanford:
E-3000-3
We are pleased to submit our report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Study, SW 43rd Street
and Oaksdale Avenue SW, Renton, Washington." This report presents the results of our field
exploration, selective laboratory tests, and engineering analyses. The purpose and scope of
our study was outlined in our October 7, 1997 proposal.
Based on the results of our study, it is our opinion the site can be developed generally as
planned. In our opinion, the proposed buildings can be supported on conventional spread and
continuous footing foundation systems bearing on at least two feet of structural fill following
the successful completion of a preload program, or surcharge program in areas where minimal
raising of site grades will be required. Slab-on-grade floors can be supported directly on the
fills required to bring the site to grade.
We appreciate this opportunity to have been of service to you. If you have any questions, or
if we can be of further assistance, please call.
Very truly yours,
EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Kyle R. Campbell, P. E.
Manager of Geotechnical Services
KRCJl<ml
1805-1361h Place N.E., Suite 201, Bellevue, Washington 98005
Bellevue (425) 643-3780 Seattle (206) 464-1584 FAX (425) 74-608-60 Tacoma (253) 272-6608
TABLE OF CONTENTS
E-3000-3
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . 1
General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . 1
Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
SITE CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Subsurface . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Groundwater . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . • . 2
Laboratory Testing . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
General ..•.......•..... .' ..... , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Site Preparation and General Earthwork • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Preload/Surcharge Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Foundations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Retaining and Foundation Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Slab-on-Grade Floors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . 8
Seismic Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Excavations and Slopes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 o
Site Drainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Pavement Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Utility Support and Backfill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • . . . . . . . . 13
LIMITATIONS .................................................. 13
Additional Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Appendix B
ILLUSTRATIONS
Plate 1
Plate 2
Plate 3
Plate 4
Plate 5
Plate A1
Plates A2 through A9
Plates A10 through A30
Plates A31 through A38
Plates 81 through B5
Plates 86 and B7
Field Exploration
Laboratory Test Results
Vicinity Map
Boring and Test Pit Location Plan
Typical Settlement Marker Detail
Typical Footing Subdrain Detail
Utility Trench Backfill
Legend
Boring Logs
Test Pit Logs
Previous Exploration Logs
Sieve Analysis
Atterberg Limits
Earth Coru;ultants, lne.
General
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
SOUTHWEST 43RD STREET AND OAKSDALE AVENUE SW
RENTON. WASHINGTON
E-3000-3
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the geotechnical engineering study completed by Earth
Consultants, Inc. (ECI} for the proposed development on the northwest corner of the
intersection between Southwest 43rd Street and Oaksdale Avenue Southwest in Renton,
Washington. The general location of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Plate 1 . The
purpose of this study was to explore the subsurface conditions at the site and based on the
conditions encountered to develop geotechnical recommendations for the proposed site
development.
Project Description
We understand the site is to be developed with several dock-high, tilt-up concrete warehouse
buildings, with associated parking and driveway areas. These structures will range in size
from approximately 7,000 to 170,000 square feet. The preliminary locations of the buildings
are shown on Plate 2. We understand some raising of site grades will be required to achieve
the dock-high floor elevations. At the time this report was written, design loads for the
proposed structures were not available. However, based on our experience with similar
structures, we anticipate wall loads will be in the range of three to five kips per lineal foot,
and column loads will range between approximately seventy five (75) to one hundred twenty
(120) kips. Floor loads for the warehouse and office areas will be in the range of three
hundred fifty (350) and one hundred (100) pounds per square foot (psf), respectively.
If any of the above design criteria are incorrect or change, we should be consulted to review
the recommendations contained in this report. In any case, ECI should be retained to perform
a general review of the final design.
SITE CONDITIONS
Surface
The subject property is approximately 48.0 acres in si:ze, and is located northwest of the
intersection of Oakesdale Avenue Southwest and Southwest 43rd Street in Renton,
Washington (see Vicinity Map, Plate 1 ). The most significant topographic feature on the
property is Springbrook Creek which approximately bisects the property in a southwest to
northeast direction. With the exception of the Springbrook Creek channel, the topography of
the property is relatively flat. The elevation of the Springbrook Creek stream channel ranges
between approximately eight to ten feet below the elevation of the surrounding site.
Earth Con11uftsnts, lnec.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company
December 8, 1997
E-3000-3
Page·2
Several abandpned one-and two-story structures are present on the site. These structures
were associated with the agricultural and industrial operations previously performed on the
property. An automobile wrecking yard and associated warehouse are still in operation at the
northeast portion of the site. Several stockpiles of automobile waste (auto fluff) are located
at the northwest corner of the site.
Subsurface
The site was explored by drilling four borings and excavating 21 test pits at the approximate
locations shown on Plate 2. In addition, we previously performed five borings and six test pits
for a preliminary geotechnical engineering study prepared for the site dated June 4, 1986.
Please refer to the Boring and Test Pit Logs, Plates A2 through A38, for a more detailed
description of the conditions encountered at each location explored. A description of the field
exploration methods Is included in Appendix A. The following is a generalized description of
the subsurface conditions encountered.
The borings and test pits generally encountered ten ( 10) to twenty (20) feet of loose to
medium dense, interbedded silt and silty sand. Varying amounts of fill were encountered in
the explorations. The upper compressible materials are generally underlain by medium dense
to dense silt, silty sand and poorly graded sand with varying amounts of silt.
Expansive soils were not encountered on the site.
Groundwater
Groundwater was observed in all four borings while drilling at depths of ten ( 10) to twelve and
one-half (12.5) feet below the existing ground surface. Groundwater was encountered in test
pits TP-102, TP-108, TP-118 and TP-121 at depths ranging from eight (8) to fourteen (14)
feet below existing grades.
Groundwater conditions are not static; thus, one may expect fluctuations in groundwater
conditions depending on the season, amount of rainfall, surface water runoff, and other
factors. Generally, the water level is higher in the wetter winter months (typically October
through May).
Earth CoMultl!lnte. Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company
December 8, 1997
Laboratory Testing
E-3000-3
Page 3
Laboratory tests were conducted on several representative soil samples to verify or modify
the field soil classification of the units encountered and to evaluate the general physical
properties and engineering characteristics of the soils encountered. Visual classifications were
supplemented by index tests, such as sieve analyses and Atterberg Limits on representative
samples. Moisture contents were performed on all samples. The results of laboratory tests
performed on specific samples are provided either at the appropriate sample depth on the
individual boring log or on a separate data sheet contained in Appendix B. However, it is
important to note that these test results may not accurately represent the overall in-situ soil
conditions. Our geotechnical recommendations are based on our interpretation of these test
results and their use in guiding our engineering judgement. Earth Consultants, Inc. {ECI)
cannot be responsible -for the interpretation of these data by others.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
In our opinion, the proposed buildings can be supported on conventional spread footings with
slab-on-grade floors after the successful completion of a preload and/or surcharge program.
A preload program involves placing the fill necessary to raise grades to the finish floor level
and allowing the settlement induced by the fill to occur before construction of the building
commences. A surcharge program involves placement of additional fill to elevations above
the finish floor elevation and allowing settlement to occur. The purpose of the pretoad and
surcharge programs is to reduce the amount of expected post-construction settlements from
fill and static building loads. Based on the soil conditions and our experience with similar
conditions, the estimated total post-construction settlements are in the range of one to one
and one-half inches, after successful completion of a preload and/or surcharge program.
In general, for this project, a preload program can be used provided the finish floor elevation
is a minimum of two feet above the existing grades. A surcharge program will be necessary
in areas were the existing grades are within two feet or less of the planned finish floor
elevation. Specific surcharge recommendations for individual buildings can be made once
building locations and finish floor elevations are available.
Foundation elements should bear on a minimum of two feet of structural fill. Depending on
grade modifications, this will require overexcavation of native soils. Slabs-on-grade should
be supported on a minimum of one foot of imported granular structural fill, or one foot of
cement treated on-site soil, or a combination thereof.
Eerth Con1ulter1ts, lrte.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company
December 8, 1997
E-3000-3
Page 4
We understand it is planned to utilize the on-site auto fluff as fill material after it is treated
with cement .. OHM Remediation Services Corporation prepared a Draft Engineering Design
Report dated August 1997 which provided site remediation recommendations. Included in
this report are laboratory test results for unconfined compression strength tests performed on
samples of the auto fluff mixed with various percentages of cement. The report indicates the
fluff will be mixed with 7.5 percent cement for remediation purposes. Based on the
unconfined compressive strength test results, in our opinion, the 7.5 percent cement/auto fluff
mixture would provide a material suitable for use as structural fill. Specific geotechnical
recommendations for use of the treated auto fluff will be presented in a supplemental report.
This report has been prepared for specific application to this project only and in a manner
consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the
profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area for the exclusive use of
Zelman Development Company and their representatives. No warranty, expressed or implied,
is made. This report, in its entirety, should be included in the project contract documents for
the information of the contractor.
Site Preparation and General Earthwork
The building and pavement areas should be stripped and cleared of surface vegetation, organic
material and other deleterious material. The root mat of the existing vegetation can be left
in place in fill areas, provided a minimum of two feet and one and one-half feet of structural
fill underlie foundations and pavements, respectively. The vegetation should be removed.
Following the clearing operations, the fill placement should commence. The ground surface
where structural fill, or slabs are to be placed should be proofrolled. Proofrolling should be
performed under the observation of a representative of ECI. Soil in loose or soft areas, if
recompacted and still excessively yielding, should be overexcavated and replaced with
structural fill or crushed rock to a depth that will provide a stable base beneath the general
structural fill, or will provide suitable support for slabs. A geotextile fabric could also be used
to aid in stabilizing the subgrade.
Structural fill is defined as compacted fill placed under buildings, roadways, slabs, pavements,
or other load-bearing areas. Structural fill under floor slabs and footings should be placed in
horizontal lifts not exceeding twelve {12) inches in loose thickness and compacted to a
minimum of 90 percent of its maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM
Test Designation D-1557-78 {Modified Proctor). The fill materials should be placed at or near
the optimum moisture content. Fill under pavements and walks should also be placed in
horizontal lifts and compacted to 90 percent of maximum density except for the top twelve
(12) inches which should be compacted to 95 percent of maximum density.
Eerth Con6ult.ents, 1ne.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company
December 8, 1997
E-3000-3
Page 5
The existing site soils are moisture sensitive due to their relatively high fines content. As
such, even after placement as structural fill, they will become disturbed from normal
construction activity during or after periods of wet weather. Once disturbed, in a wet
condition, they will be unsuitable for support of floor slabs and pavements. Therefore, the
upper foot of subgrade should consist of a granular material suitable for use during wet
weather or the upper foot of on-site fill soil could be cement treated.
If the earthwork operations are conducted during the dry weather season as planned, it is our
opinion that the on-site soils can be used as structural fill, including use as utility trench
backfill. However, it must be emphasized that the native soils must be aerated in order to
lower the moisture content to levels that will allow adequate compaction. Normal grading
operations will provide some aeration; however, additional working of the soil will be
necessary prior to or during grading in order to lower the moisture content to levels that will
allow adequate compaction.
If the on-site soil is exposed to moisture and cannot be adequately compacted then it may be
necessary to use an imported free draining granular fill. Fill for this purpose and for use in wet
weather should consist of a fairly well graded granular material having a maximum size of
three inches and no more than 5 percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve based on the minus
3/4-inch fraction. Samples of materials proposed for use as structural fill during wet weather
should be provided to us for testing in order to determine the suitability of the materials.
Preload/Surcharge Program
We estimate settlements of two to four inches could occur from the placement of dock high
fills and buildings loads. In order to induce the majority of this settlement prior to
construction, we recommend the use of a preload and/or surcharge program. We estimate
the preload/surcharge would remain in place for a time period <>f four to six weeks. A preload
program consists of placing structural fill to the finish floor elevation and allowing
consolidation of the compressible soil beneath the buildings to occur prior to constructing the
buildings. As mentioned previously, surcharge fills should be placed above finish floor
elevations in areas where building pad grades will be raised less than two feet above existing
site grades. We anticipate surcharges would be approximately two feet in height. More
detailed surcharge recommendations can be made when finish floor elevations tor individual
buildings have been established. In building areas where greater than two feet of fill is
required to achieve finish floor elevations, a preload can be used.
A surcharge program consists of placing structural fill to the finish floor elevation, and then
placing additional fill above the finish floor elevation as a surcharge, and allowing
consolidation of the compressible soil beneath the buildings to occur prior to constructing the
buildings. Based on the soil condrtions and our experience with similar conditions, the
estimated total post-construction settlements are in the range of one to one and one-half
inches, after successful completion of a preload and/or surcharge program.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company
December 8, 1997
E-3000-3
Page 6
The preload/surcharge fill should extend at least five feet beyond the building footprints. The
side slopes of the fill should be sloped at a gradient of 1 H:1 V or flatter. If future expansion
of any building is anticipated, the preload fill should extend at least twenty (20) feet in the
direction of the future addition. The purpose of extending the surcharge is to reduce the
possibility of settlement of the then-existing building from future building or surcharge loads.
Because the purpose of the preload/surcharge is to induce settlement, it is necessary to
monitor both the magnitude and rate of such settlement. To accomplish this, settlement
markers should be installed within the building pads. The number of settlement markers
placed will depend on the size of the building. As a general rule, one settlement marker
should be placed for every 10,000 to 15,000 square feet of floor area. The settlement
markers should be placed on the existing site subgrade before fill is placed. A typical
settlement marker is depicted on Plate 3, Typical Settlement Marker Detail. Once installed,
and while fill is being placed, the settlements caused by the filling operation should be
recorded daily.
For the first two weeks after the preload/surcharge fill is in place, readings should be acquired
at two to three day intervals. Subsequently, readings may be obtained on a weekly basis,
until either settlements cease, or the anticipated remaining settlements are within the
previously specified settlement ranges.
We should be retained to install the settlement markers and acquire the settlement readings.
Should the readings be made by another organization, the measurements must be provided
to us in a timely manner to allow for interpretation of the data. This will help avoid any
misinterpretation or misunderstanding regarding the success of the preload/surchargeprogram.
The settlement markers must be kept intact during earthwork.operations. In our experience,
earthwork equipment (dozers and trucks) often destroy or damage markers. This adds to the
project costs as the markers typically must be replaced and makes the settlement data
obtained less reliable. In order to attempt to avoid this scenario, we recommend the project
specifications include a requirement that the earthwork contractor is required to immediately
replace any damaged settlement markers and have the settlement readings re-obtained at his
own cost. This requirement makes the earthwork contractor more conscious of the
importance of the preload/surcharge program and will aid in maintaining the integrity of the
monitoring program.
Fill tor landscaping purposes should not be placed near the building since additional fill could
induce further settlements after the building is constructed. If such fill ls planned, the preload
fill should be extended to five feet beyond the planned landscape fill, or a lightweight fill
should be used.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company
December 8, 1997
Foundations
E-3000-3
Page 7
In our opinion, the proposed buildings can be supported on conventional spread and
continuous footing foundations bearing on a minimum of two feet of structural fill after
successful completion of the preload and/or surcharge program. Depending on grades it may
be necessary to overexcavate the existing soil in order to provide the two feet of structural
fill. If extremely soft soil is exposed in the foundation excavations, it may be necessary to
extend the excavation to provide additional structural fill beneath foundations.
Exterior footing should be bottomed at a minimum depth of eighteen (18) inches below the
lowest outside grades. Interior footings may be bottomed at a depth of twelve I 12) inches
below the top of the slab. Footings may be designed for an allowable bearing capacity of two
thousand five hundred (2,500) pounds per square foot (psf). Loading of this magnitude would
be provided with theoretical factor-of-safety in excess of three against actual shear failure.
For short-term dynamic loading conditions, a one-third increase In the above allowable bearing
capacities can be used. Continuous and individual spread footing should have minimum
widths of eighteen (18) and twenty-four (24) inches, respectively.
Lateral loads due to wind or seismic forces may be resisted by friction between the
foundations and the supporting subgrade or by passive earth pressure on the buried portions
of the foundations. For the latter, the foundations must be poured "neat" against the existing
soil or backfilled with compacted fill meeting the requirements of structural fill. A coefficient
of friction of 0.4 may be used between the foundation elements and the supporting subgrade.
The passive resistance of native soil or structural fill may be assumed to be equal to the
pressure exerted by a fluid having a unit weight of three hundred (300) pounds per cubic foot
(pcf). These lateral resistance values are allowable values, a factor-of-safety of 1.5 has been
included. As movement of the foundation element is required to mobilize full passive
resistance, the passive resistance should be neglected if such movement is not acceptable.
With structural loading as expected, total settlement in the range of one and one-half inches
is anticipated with differential movement of about one inch. Most of the anticipated
senlements should occur during construction as the dead loads are applied.
Footing excavations should be observed by a representative of ECI, prior to placing forms or
rebar, to verify that conditions are as anticipated in this report.
E6rth Coni.uftants, Inc:.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company
December 8, 1997
Retaining and Foundation Walls
E-3000-3
Page 8
Retaining and foundation walls should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures imposed
by the retained soils. Walls that are designed to yield can be designed to resist the lateral
earth pressures imposed by an equivalent fluid with a unit weight of thirty-five (35) pcf. For
walls that are restrained from free movement the equivalent fluid weight should be increased
to fifty (50) pcf. These values are based on horizontal backfill and that surcharges due to
backfill slopes, hydrostatic pressures, traffic, structural loads or other surcharge loads will not
act on the wall. If such surcharges are to apply, they should be added to the above design
lateral pressure. Calculation of lateral resistance should be based on the passive pressure and
coefficient of friction design parameters given in the previous foundation section.
If it is desired to include the effects of seismic loading in the design, a rectangular pressure
distribution equal to six times the wall height should be added to the above lateral earth
pressure values.
Retaining walls should be backfilled with a free-draining material conforming to the WSDOT
specification for gravel backfill for walls IWSDOT 9-03.12{2)). The free-draining material
should extend at least eighteen (18) inches behind the wall. The remainder of the backfill
should consist of structural fill. A perforated drain pipe should be placed at the base of the
wall. Drain pipes should be surrounded by a free-draining soil that functions as a filter in order
to reduce the potential for clogging. Drain pipes located in the free-draining backfill soil should
be perforated with holes less than one-quarter inch in diameter. The drain pipe should be
surrounded by a minimum of one cubic foot per lineal foot with three-eighths inch pea gravel.
Alternatively, retaining wall drainage systems such as Miradrain could be used. If any such
product is used, it should be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.
Slab-on-Grade Floors
Slabs-on-grade should be supported on a minimum of one foot of imported granular structural
fill, or one foot of cement treated on-site soil, or a combination thereof. Cement treatment
of the subgrade, if used, should consist of mixing a minimum of 8 percent cement by weight
into the upper twelve inches of subgrade soil.
Slab-on-grade floors supported on a minimum of one foot of imported granular structural fill,
or one foot of cement treated on-site soil, or a combination thereof may be designed for a
modulus of soil subgrade reaction of three hundred fifty (350) pounds per cubic inch (pci).
Earth Ccnaultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company
December 8, 1997
E-3000-3
Page 9
Concrete slabs resting on soil ultimately may cause the moisture content of the underlying
soils to rise.. This results from continued capillary rise and the ending of normal
evapotranspiration. As concrete is permeable, moisture will eventually penetrate the slab
resulting in a condition commonly known as a "wet slab", and poor adhesion of floor
coverings may result. In our experience, these conditions rarely occur in dock-high, open air
warehouses, except in areas were floor coverings are used.
To minimize the potential for a wet slab, in areas where floor coverings will be used, suitable
moisture protection measure should be used. Typically, such protection measures include
placement of a vapor barrier and a capillary break. A capillary break, if used, should consist
of a minimum of four inches of clean sand or washed rock. Samples of materials proposed
for use as a capillary break should be submitted to us for review and/or testing prior to their
use.
Seismic Design Considerations
The Puget Lowland is classified as a Seismic Zone 3 by the Uniform Building Code (UBC). The
largest earthquakes in the Puget Lowland are widespread and have been subcrustal events,
ranging in depth from thirty {30) to fifty-five (55) miles. Such deep events have exhibited no
surface faulting.
Structures are subject to damage from earthquakes due to direct or indirect action. Direct
action is represented by shaking. Indirect action is represented by movement of the soil
supporting foundations and is typified by ground failure (rupture), liquefaction, or slope failure.
Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which soils lose all shear strength for short periods of time
during an earthquake. The effects of liquefaction may be large total and/or differential
settlement for structures with foundations founded in the liquefying soils. Groundshaking of
sufficient duration results in the loss of grain to grain contact and rapid increase in pore water
pressure, causing the soil to behave as a fluid for short periods of time. To have a potential
for liquefaction, a soil must be cohesionless with a grain size distribution of a specified range
(generally sands and silt); it must be loose to medium dense; it must be below the
groundwater table; and It must be subject to sufficient magnitude and duration of
groundshaking.
Earth Consultan~. Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company
December 8, 1997
E-3000-3
Page 10
Based on the information obtain from our borings, the loose soils encountered during our field
exploration consist of interbedded silts and silty sands. Given this information, it is our
opinion that the potential for widespread liquefaction over the site during a seismic event is
low. Isolated areas may be subject to liquefaction; however, the effect on structures is
anticipated to be minimal if the recommendations contained in this report are followed.
Should liquefaction occur, the liquefying zones would be several feet below the footings of
the buildings. We estimate liquefaction induced settlement would be in the range of two
inches, which is slightly higher than the estimated post construction settlements (1.5 inches)
discussed earlier.
The UBC Earthquake regulations contain a static force procedure and a dynamic force
procedure for design base shear calculations. Based on the encountered soil conditions, in
our opinion a site coefficient of S 3 = 1 .5 should be used for the static force procedure as
outlined In Section 1634 of the 1994 USC. For the dynamic force procedure outlined in
Section 1629 of the 1994 UBC, the curve for Soft to Medium Clays and Sands (soil type 3)
should be used for Figure 3, Normalized Response Spectra Shapes.
Excavations and Slopes
The following information is provided solely as a service to our client. Under no
circumstances should this information be interpreted to mean that ECI is assuming
responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's activities; such responsibility is
not being implied and should not be inferred.
In no case should excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, state and
federal safety regulations. Based on the information obtained from our field exploration and
laboratory testing, the soils expected to be exposed in excavations can be classified Type C
as described in the current Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations.
Therefore, temporary cuts greater than four feet in height should be sloped at an inclination
no steeper than 1.5H:1V or they should be shored. Shoring will help protect against slope
or excavation collapse, and will provide protection to workmen in the excavation. If
temporary shoring is required, we will be available to provide shoring design criteria, if
requested.
If slopes of this inclination. or flatter, cannot be constructed, temporary shoring may be
necessary. Shoring wlll help protect against slope or excavation collapse, and will provide
protection to workers in the excavation. If temporary shoring is required, we will be available
to provide shoring design criteria.
Eer1;h Cons1.1ln1nl$. Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company
December 8, 1997
E-3000-3
Page 11
Permanent cut and fill slopes should be inclined no steeper than 2H:1 V. Cut slopes should
be observed by ECI during excavation to verify that conditions are as anticipated.
Supplementary recommendations can then be developed, if needed, to improve stability,
including flattening of slopes or installation of surface or subsurface drains. In any case,
water should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of any slopes. All permanently-
exposed slopes should be seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion
and improve stability of the surficial layer of soil.
Site Drainage
The site must be graded such that surface water is directed off the site. Water must not be
allowed to stand in any area where buildings, slabs or pavements are to be constructed.
During construction, loose surfaces should be sealed at night by compacting the surface to
reduce the potential for moisture infiltration into the soils. Final site grades must allow for
drainage away from the bullding foundations. We suggest that the ground be sloped at a
gradient of 3 percent for a distance of at least ten ( 10) feet away from the buildings, except
in areas that are to be paved, which can be sloped at a gradient of 2 percent.
If seepage is encountered in foundation or grade beam excavations during construction, the
bottom of the excavation should be sloped to one or more shallow sump pits. The collected
water can then be pumped from these pits to a positive and permanent discharge, such as a
nearby storm drain. Depending on the magnitude of such seepage, it may also be necessary
to interconnect the sump pits by a system of connector trenches.
Foundation drains should be installed where landscaped areas are immediately adjacent to non
dock-high portions the building. In our opinion, foundation drains are not necessary in areas
where pavements extend to the building walls. The drains should be installed at or Just below
the bottom of the footing, with a gradient sufficient to initiate flow. A typical detail is
provided on Plate 4.
Under no circumstances should roof downspout drain lines be connected to the foundation
drain system. Roof downspouts must be separately tightlined to discharge. Cleanouts should
be installed at strategic locations to allow for periodic maintenance of the foundation drain and
downspout tightline systems.
Elllrth Coruiultant&, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company
December 8, 1997
Pavement Areas
E-3000-3
Page 12
The adequacy of site pavements is related in part to the condltion of the underlying subgrade.
To provide a properly prepared subgrade for pavements, the subgrade should be treated and
prepared as described in the Site Preparation and General Earthwork section of this report.
At a minimum, the top twelve (12) Inches of the subgrade should consist of imported granular
structural fill suitable for use during wet weather conditions, compacted to 95 percent of the
maximum dry density (per ASTM D-1557-78). It is posslble that some localized areas of soft,
wet or unstable subgrade may still exist after this process. Therefore, a greater thickness of
structural fill or crushed rock may be needed to stabilize these localized areas. As an
alternative to placement of a minimum of one foot of imported granular structural fill,
consideration could be given to cement treating the subgrade soil. Specific recommendations
for cement treatment can be provided upon request.
The following pavement sections are suggested for lightly-loaded areas:
• Two inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over four inches of crushed rock base (CRB)
material, or
• Two inches of AC over three inches of asphalt treated base (ATB) material.
Heavier truck-traffic areas will require thicker sections depending upon site usage, pavement
life and site traffic. As a general rule the following sections can be considered for truck-
trafficked areas:
• Three inches AC over six inches of CRB
• Three inches of AC over four and one half inches of ATB
Asphalt concrete (AC), asphalt treated base (A TB), and crushed rock base (CRB) materials
should conform to WSDOT specifications. Rock base should be compacted to at least 95
percent of the ASTM D-1557-78 laboratory test standard. We suggest the use of Class B
asphalt.
Earth Cem1;uftanta. Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company
December 8, 1997
Utility Support and Backfill
.
E-3000-3
Page l3
The site soils should provide adequate support for utilities located above the groundwater
table. The soil that is located below the groundwater table may not provide adequate support
in their present condition. The inability of soils located below the groundwater table to
adequately support utilities would result from both the loose condition of the soil and the
effect of the groundwater table de-stabilizing the trench bottom as the trench is excavated.
Thus, If utilities will be located below the groundwater table, remedial measures will likely be
required in order to provide adequate support. Remedial measures could include dewatering
the trench, using steel sheeting to create a barrier of flow to the groundwater or placement
of quarry spalls in the bottom of the trench as it is excavated. Use of a geotextile to provide
separation between the native soils and quarry spoils may also be necessary If heaving soils
are encountered.
Utility trench backfill is a primary concern in reducing the potential for settlement along utility
alignments, particularly in pavement areas. It is important that each section of utility line be
adequately supported in the bedding material. The material should be hand tamped to ensure
support is provided around the pipe haunches. Fill should be carefully placed and hand
tamped to about twelve inches above the crown of the pipe before any heavy compaction
equipment is brought into use. The remainder of the trench backfill should be placed in lifts
having a loose thickness of less than twelve ( 12) inches. A typical trench backfill section and
compaction requirements for load supporting and non-load supporting areas is presented on
Plate 5.
Trench backfill beneath building, parking and roadway areas may consist of native soils or
imported materials provided they are near optimum moisture content as determined by our
field representative. Based on current conditions, the majority of the on-site soil would require
aeration to reduce the moisture content to near the optimum to allow compaction. During wet
weather, a granular fill, as described earlier, should be used.
LIMITATIONS
Our recommendations and conclusions are based on the site materials observed, selective
laboratory testing and engineering analyses, the design information provided to us by you, and
our experience and engineering judgement. The conclusions and recommendations are
professional opinions derived in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily
exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in
this area. No warranty is expressed or implied.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
Zelman Development Company
December 8, 1997
E-3000-3
Page 14
The recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the test
pits. Soil and groundwater conditions between test pits may vary from those encountered.
The nature arid extent of variations between our exploratory locations may not become
evident until construction. If variations do appear, ECI should be requested to reevaluate the
recommendations of this report and to modify or verify them in writing prior to proceeding
with the construction.
Additional Services
As the geotechnical engineer of record, ECI should be retained to perform a general review
of the final design and specifications to verify that the earthwork and foundation
recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in the design and in the
construction specifications.
ECI should also be retained to provide geotechnical services during construction. This is to
observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations and to allow
design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the
start of construction. We do not accept responsibility for the performance of the foundation
or earthwork unless we are retained to review the construction drawings and specifications,
and to provide construction observation and testing services.
Eerth Con•ultann. Inc.
I r·
Reference:
King County I Map 41
By Thomas Brothers Maps
Dated 1990
. ·,, ."•' ·-~-. ··~
--... :. --1---,-,..-,+.r."-":.:..""~· ··::;-~~-~·:..·-1.
· ::~.t/ 1. ·.~it:: ~~rfl.·~1:
··-• }:·; ij· n ... y~,i': ·.,cf,,·_ .. · .. ·· ...•..
. ···•·•·· .•..• ·-~ > ~i . i ,,,,,. ..... f., 'fr:~~ ~i,.
lWi• . . .. i,~.T-·'-'.··t-l-.,.a"'I .. ,.,..;;,v
71
~
.., ~ :., .;.i}f
<
· .. __ ·1-~·"
··(
.·.--.L,
rnw ·, .. :·../J
: .tr•
-~
\ ·: ~
. ,,
·: '.") .·.·:q
· .. ·: ~
.. ,.,
''•flt.
': }1:i
' ' ft'i:i::l'i'.I
d .(
::J_ r,_r __ ·-.·. \i . -~r··.•-
-~2,~.£~!2~~.t~U.!~~.!~.~.;
Vicinity Map
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
Drwn. GLS Date Oct. '97 Pro). No. 3000-3
Checked RAC Date 10/28/97 Plate 1
1-
TP--ti6~-"""-·
,1'
"
Rilirci8dTi:ack:II
~ +.;: +-rs= ~.,. ·~
..---•-I •B-3 . tJ :~
C,
[..-' -· 'TP-107
-·-TP-101' ' -•· TP-102'
S.W. 43rd STREET
' -•-TP-1051
~
"' w ::, z
~
' e-s -o-TP•104 r -•· '
\I
w
l
'ij ~
' ' ·•-TP-103'
Note:
Auto and Wire Fluff Areas Referenced from
Site Operations Area \ Fig 1•2
OHM ProJ. No. 20004
By OHM Remediation Services Corp.
Dated 8/5ft.¥7 -~~~.'!..~~-
0
Rf
~roxlmate Scale
0 100 200 400ft.
!.EG!ilill
B-1 ·*· Approximate Location of
ECI Boring, Proj. No.
E-3000-3, Oct. 1997
TP-101-ili-Approxlrnate Location of
' ECI Test Pit, Proj. No
E-3000-3, Oct. 1997
G-101 ..,
' S-1 ---r-
TP-1 -[?-
~
f!,1"l
l;:sJ
D
l---t
' ' I __ _J
Approximate Location of
ECI Grab Sample, Proj. No.
E-3000-3, Oct. 1997
Approximate Location of
ECI Boring, Proj, No.
E-3000, May 1986
Approximate Location of
ECI Test Pit, Proj. No.
E-3000, May 1986
Auto Fluff Area
Wire Fluff Area
Proposed Building
Existing Building
Boring and Test Pit Location Plan
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
ProJ Ne. 3000-3 I Drwa,, GLS Date Oct. '97 I Checked RAC I Date 10J30/!jl7 Plate 2
SCHEMATIC ONLY -NOT TO SCALE
NOT A CONSTRUCllON DRAWING
Surcharge or Preload
Fill
Surcharge or Preload
Fill
STANDARD NOTES
1) Base consists of 3/4 inch thick, 2 foot by 2 foot plywood with center drilled
5/8 inch diameter hole.
2) Bedding material, if required, should consist of Traction Sand.
3) Marker rod is 1 /2 Inch diameter steel rod threaded at both ends.
4) Marker rod Is attached to base by nut and washer on each side of base.
5) Protective sleeve surrounding marker rod should consist of 2 inch diameter
plastic tubing. Sleeve is NOT attached to rod or base.
6) Additional sections of steel rod can be connected with threaded couplings.
7) Additional sections of plastic sleeve can be connected with press-flt plastic
couplings.
8) Steel marker rod should extend at least 6 Inches above top of plastic
sleeve.
9) Marker should extend at least 2 feet above top of fill surface.
TYPICAL SETTLEMENT MARKER DETAIL
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
Prof. No. 3000-3 Drwn. GLS Date Oct. '97 Checked RAC Date 10/30/97 Plate 3
. . . • C,.: .,• t;;
•
0
0 o; it>
o ........... ..
18 inch mln.
41nc
Diameter
w!;:rai~~:inage ~-·-···· .. • Q • 0 • • •• 0 • ' •
, :ffln-/~4-ln_c_h_m_ax_. ~ ,,;:::~' :, ... •: • • _-. • • • •
0
LEGEND
mm.
SCHEMATIC ONLY -NOT TO SCALE
NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING
2 inch min.
Surface seal; native soil or other low penneability material.
Fine aggregate for Portland Cement Concrete; Section 9-03. 1 (2) of the
WSDOT Specfflcatlons.
Drain pipe; perforated or slotted rigid PVC pipe laid with perforations or
slots facing down; tight jointed; with a positive gradient. Do not use flexible
corrugated plastic pipe. Do not tie building downspout drains into footing
lines. Wrap with Mirafi 140 Filter Fabric or equivalent
TYPICAL FOOTING SUBDRAIN DETAIL
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 3000-3 Drwn. GLS Date Oct. '97 Checked RAC Date 10/30/97 Plate 4
Non-Load Supporting
Areas
Floor Slab or
Roadway Areas
Varies
1 Foot Minimum
Back!ITI
Varies
Bedding vanes
Proj. No. 3000-3 Drwn. GLS
LEGEND:
Asphalt or Concrete Pavement or Concrete Floor Slab
Base Material or Base Rock
Backfill; Compacted On-Site Soll or Imported Select Fill
Material as Described in the Site Preparation of the General
Earthwork Section of the Attached Report Text.
Minimum Percentage of Maximum Laboratory Dry Density as
Determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557-78 (Modified Proctor),
Unless Otheiwise Specified in the Attached Report Text.
Bedding Material; Material Type Depends on Type of Pipe and
laying Condttions. Bedding Should Conform to the Manufacturers
Recommendations for the Type at Pipe Selected.
TYPICAL UTILITY TRENCH FILL
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, ·Washington
Date Oct. '97 Checked RAC Date 10/30/97 Plate 5
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXPLORATION
E-3000-3
Our field exploration was performed on October 20 and 23, 1997. Subsurface conditions at
the site were explored by drilling four borings and 21 test pits. The borings were drilled by
Associated Drilling and the test pits were excavated by Northwest Excavating, using a track-
mounted excavator.
Approximate exploration locations were determined relative to existing landmarks.
Approximate locations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the
method used. These approximate locations are shown on the Boring and Test Pit Location
Plan, Plate 2. The locations of borings and test pits performed in 1986 are also shown on
Plate 2.
The field exploration was continuously monitored by an individual from our firm who classified
the soils encountered and maintained a log of each test pit, obtained representative samples,
measured groundwater levels, and observed pertinent site features.
All samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System
which is presented on Plate A 1, Legend.
Logs of the borings and test pits are presented in the Appendix on Plates A2 through A38.
The final logs represent our interpretations of the field logs and the results of the laboratory
examination and tests of field samples. The stratification lines on the logs represent the
approximate boundaries between soil types. In actuality, the transitions may be more gradual.
Representative soil samples were placed in closed containers and returned to our laboratory
for further examination and testing.
Earth CQnsultimta. Inc.
MAJOR DIVISIONS GRAPH
SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION
Coarse
Grained
Soils
More Than
50% Material
Larger Than
No.ioo Sieve
Si:.e
Frn,
Grained
Soils
More Than
50% Matl!(lal
Smaller lt-an
No-200 Sieve
Size
C
qu
w
p
•
pcf
LL
Pl
Gravel
And
Gra\lEIIIY
Sous
More Than
50% Coarse
Fracl10n
Retained On
No . .t. Siew
Sand
And
Sandy
Soil&
More Than
SO"!. coal'Se
rraction
Passing No. 4
Sieve
5111-s
And
Clays
Silts
And
Clays
Gravels With
Finu ( appreciable
aml)unt of lines l
Sands With
Fines ( apprec:lable
amounl ol Jines I
Uciufd limit
leisa Than 50
Liquid Limit
Greater Than
1-rtgtily Organic So1b.
Fill
Silt)' Gravels. Gravel-Sand -
Silt Mixtures
Cla)'&Y Gravels. Gtavel ~ Sand~
Clay Mixtures
Silty Sands, Sand -Sitt Mixtures
Cfayey Sands, Sand -Clay Mixtures
Inorganic Slits & Very Fine Sands, Flock Flow ,Silty-
Qayey Fine Sands;Clayey Slit$ 'NI Slight PIUtlclty
IIIOrganic Clays: or Low To Medium P1asticlty.
GraV!!'IIY Clays, Sanely Clays, ~Jty CfaY$, Lean
Organl.c: Silis And OrgJniC
Silly Clays Of t.ow P!asJlcity
lnol'Q;l.nlc Sills, Micaceous Or Diatomaceous Fll"E:
$and o, Silty Soils
Inorganic Clays Of High
PJU,icltY, Fal Clafli.
Organic Clays 01 MedrUm lo High
Plasticity' Orga.niC Sills
Peat. Humus. Swamp Soils
With High Organic con1e.n.&s
Humus And Dull Layer
Hi~y Vauiable Constl!uent.s
The discussion in the text of tn1s n•port is necessary to, a p,ope, unde,standing Of the md\Jre
of the material presented in the attached logs.
DUAL SYMBOLS are used to Indicate borderUne aoif claaall'lcm:ion.
TORVANE READING, tsf
PENETROMETER READING, tsf
MOISTURE, "' d,y weight
SAMPLER PUSHED
SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED
DRY DENSITY, lbs. per cubic ft.
uaum uMrr, %
PLAST1CINllEX
I l!' O.D. SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER
j[ 24" I.D. RING OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER
I WATER OBSERVATION WELL
lZ DEPTH OF ENCOUNTERED GROUNDWATER
DURING EXCAVATION
,: SUBSEQUENT GROUNDWATER l.EIIEl. W/ DATE
LEGEND
Proj. No.3000-3 Date Nov. '97 Plate Al
.... ..
' ...
'
M
"' ..
"' "'
..J
"'
Boring Log
Project Name: I Sheet Of .
Zelman Pron rtv Parcels A, B and C 1 2
Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completlon Date: Boring No.:
3(1@;3 RAC 10/23/97 10/23/97 B-1
Drilling Contaotor. Drllllng Method: SampRng Method:
Associated HSA SPT
Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Compl~tion:
±24' 0 MonltorinQ Well 0 Piezometer IXJ Abandoned sealed with bentonlte
0 -• -Surface Conditions: No. -0 .c " 0 w .c Jl +
Blows .. u .D ... .. + • "' • (%) Ft. . :,, • lL • ::, ,, ,;. "' Q ., .,
><;><; . 1--SM f};tfsoil to 4'~ __ • Gray sU fine SANO, loose, wet, considerable wood, plastic,
~ 1 1--glass debris, some slag
>i: r--
2 1--
;;: . ,__
ij 3 ,_,_
7.4 59 ~ ,__
-through debris at 3.5' to 4.0'
, ... 4 SM Brown silty fine to medium SAND with gravel, medium dense, wet ::; ;; . 1--
' ,,.
LL•35PL=29 5 >--
Pl=6 -f--6" coarse sand lense 12.9 18 6 --,_,_
7 ML Gray SILT, loose, saturated --
8 --40.0 5 --
9 ---
10 ---increasing sand and sandy slit, very lose, groundwater teble --encountered 39.7 2 11 --
f--
12 ,__
·--
13 26.1 8 ir-, ,P-SI Blacl poorly graded fine to medium SAND, loose, water bearing ~~ . ,..-
~4 14 >--
tm~ . ,__
~1 15 ---increasing silt, some silty sand ··:,;
;'t
.f-.f-
11.0 11 18 ,__ .. ,__
xi~ d: .__ ~Ji/· 17
l! i/i ·>--
.· 18 f--
f--
}'lf" ' 19 f--
•f--
\ ..
-~~~!~!!~-
Boring Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 3000-3 Own. Gl.S Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 I Plate A2
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by engineenng tests,
analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and looatioM. We cannot aocept responstbllity for the use or
interpretmton by othen;; of Information presented on thfs log,
.. ..
' ::
Boring Log
Project Name:
Zelman Pro BandC
Sheet
2
Of
2
Job No.
3000-3
Logged by: Start Date:
10 23 97
Complatlon Date:
10 23 7
Boring No.:
RAC
DriHing Contaetor:
Associated
Ground SUrface 8&vation:
±24' .
w No.
Blows
(%) A.
10
25.0 12
58.8 4
0 -
-0 .c .0 a. e . " Ii, ..
,:
+-...... ...
C
•
Df!Jffng Method:
HSA
Hole Completion:
0 Mcnltorin Well
-Ill 0
IL U .0 e ,. • • ::, >
Ill Ill
D Plezometer
ML Gra SILT, loose saturated
B-1
Sampling Method:
SPT
00 Abandoned, sealed wiU, bernonlte
1,ll~21
-l-'+-:-M""L+""G'ra_y_S=cla-cLT"',.,.loo-se-,-sa--,-tu-rat---,-ed-,--------------1
" '" ""' 22
PT PEAT layer and organic slit
23 1---k,,..,d-~B""la-ck-,-p-o-o"""'rl,...y_g_ra_d,..ed--,-,ll'"'n-e7to_m_ed~iu-m-_,sAN==o---c, l'oo-se_to,_m-ed"""l""u_m_d~e-n-se-.---4
water bearing
24
25
26
27
28
29
-10% fines
30 f--r+:-:-:-:+-::-----,---;-;--:;:,=--:---;---:::--;:--:----,:-;--:--c:-;--;-,-,----1 MH Brown elastic SILT and organic sfft, soft, saturated, lnterbedded
organic fragments
31
Boring terminated at 31.5 feet below exlsting grade. Groundwater
table encountered at 10.0 feet during drilling. Boring backfilled with
cuttings and bentonlte .
:!;1-----.._ _ _.___ ...... _ _,'---'--'--'-----,-----------------------1
Boring Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
U: Proj. No. 3000~ Own. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A3
Subsurface canditions. depicted repteSent out observation& a; the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by engineering tests..
analysis and judgment. They are not necessarUy representative of other times and locations. We cannot accept responsibiilty for the use or
interpretation by othera of information presented on this log.
,._ ..
' ..
'
" Ol
"' ..
"
--' al
Boring Log
Project Namij: I Sheet of.
Zelman Prooertv Parcels A B and C 1 2
Job No. Logged by: Start Date: ComplaUon Date: Boring No.:
3000-3 RAC 10/23/97 10/23/97 B-2
Dr1111ng Contactor: Drilling Method: Sampling Melhod:
Associated HSA SPT
Ground Surface Bavation: Hole COmplation:
±23' 0 Monitorlno Well D Piezometer IX] Abandoned, soeled wllh bentonlte
" -r. • -Surface Conditions: No. -Q -f/1 0 w r. Jl .. 0. 0 .Q Blows 0. • 0. +-E "' e (%) Fl . :,, ... • ::, :,, Ji f/1 0 "' u,
~ -SM AU.: ~rown sK% SAND with gravel, loose, moist . -contains organ s
1 >----becomes gray, no apparent organics -
@ 2 ---
13.3 3 SM ALL: Brown to black sUty SAND, medium dense, moist 1Q ---contains organic debris
4 ---copper wire
i~
-
5 ----34.4 10 6 ----
I Q'S
7 ---
8 ---no recovery 10 ---cuttings same as at 5'
9 --
~] -
10 -LL=37 PL=31
Pl=B 43.5 8 ML Gray SILT, loose, saturated (native) 11 ---contains organics --
12 1----
13 ---trace sand 41.5 5 -~-
14 -~ -15 ,__
-becomes very loose .,... ,--contains peat lnterbeds 44.3 2 16 --,__
17 1--
•I--
18 --
19 -
·I--
-Earth Consultants Inc.
Boring Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
~~~A~SC:lentl!U Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 3000·3 Own. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Dalo 11/3/97 I Plate M
Subsurface conditions d'eptcted represent our observations at tho tlme and location of this exploratory hale, modified by engineering tests 1 analysis and judgment. They are not necessarUv representative of other times and locations. We cannot accept. responslbllity for th& use or
intetpretatton by others of informatlon presented on this log.
,.. ..
' ..
' ~
~
M .. .. ..
M
-' Ill
Boring Log
Project Name: I Shoot of
Zelman ?rooertv Parcels A. B and C 2 2
Job No. Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Bering No.:
3000.(l RAC 10/23/97 10/23/97 8-2
DrUUng Contactor: Drilling Method: Sampling Method:
Associated HSA SPT
Ground Surtace Elevation: Hole Completion:
±23' 0 Mortltorinn Well D Plezometer 00 Abandoned. seeted with bentonite
u -,:; • -w No. :;: 0 .... -" 0 Blows .. .a .. + .. u .<I
(%) • • ... • " . Fl. L :,, • ::, " .. " C "' .. w ML Grav SILT, loose, saturated .
84.4 8 PT Layer of PEAT and organic snt
fl~~ 21 --
:::·
.. , 22 '--SM Gray silty SAND, medium dense, saturated
'--
23 '--' ~
/: 24 '--..__
25 1--
[ ,
~~
29.8 16 i· ?i 25 '-'-,
Boring terminated at 26.5 feet below existing irade. Groundwater
table encountered at 10.0 feet during drilling. oring backlnled with
cuttings and bentonlte.
-Earth Consultants Inc.
Boring Log
Zelman Property Parcels A. B and C
~~~ .. ~Sdo112sts Renton, Washington
Ptoj. No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 f Plate A5
Subsurface 1;:0ndltions depicted reptBsent cur observation$ at the time and location of this exPio,atory hole, modified by engineering tests,
analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of Qthe, times and jQcat{ons. We cannot accept responsibllity for the use or
interpretation by others of information preeented on thi!3. log.
Boring Log
Project Name:
Zelman Pro
Job No.
3000-3
Drilling Contactor.
Associated
Parcels A, B and C
Logged by:
RAC
Slart Date:
10 23 97
Dn16ng Method:
HSA
Hole Completion:
Completion Date:
10 23 97
Boring No.:
B-3
Sampling Method:
SPT
Sheet
1
of
2
Ground Surface B~on:
±24' D Monitarln Well 0 Piezometer 00 Abandoned, sealed wtth bentanlte
" ..
' ..
w No.
Blows (%) R.
33.3 11
35.3 7
16.3 16
15.6 13
30.8 6
44.7 10
0 -
:;; a .. .a • • L > ....
.c ... ..... ....
C
• -.. 0
.. 0 " S (I) E • ::, > .. "
SM
Surlace Conditions:
/4" Topsoil)
FILL Brown silty SANO with gravel, loose, moist
21-+~c-4-~-------~=-~-~------------1 ML Mottled brown and gray SILT, medium dense, moist
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
14
15
18
17
18
19
-trace fine sands
-contains small roots
-becomes loose
SM Mottled brown and gray silty fine SAND, medium dense, moist
SM Gray silty fine SAND, loose, saturated
-increase in silt content
-30% fines
-contains large (4') pieces of wood
-becomes medium dense
' ~1------'---'--....W
~ -Earth Consultants Inc. g ~~~·~~
t'1
Boring Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
.l ProJ. No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11 /3/97 Plate AS
SUbsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this explofatory hole, modified by engtneerlng tests,
analysjs and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other limes and Joca1ions. We cannot accept responsibifity for the use or
Interpretation by ethers of Information presente<t on this log.
.... ,,.
' ~
Boring Log
Project Name:
Zelman Pro e Parcels A. B and C
Job No.
3000--3
logged by:
RAC
Orlling Contaotor:
Associated
Ground Surf.ace Elavai.tion;
±24'
w No.
Blows (%) Ft
26.S 28
45.8 14
~-.c 0 .. ,, • • L :,, .. "
.c • +-.. +-~
• h. • " • "
Start Date:
10 23 97
OriHing Method:
HSA
Complettoo Date:
10 23 97
Boring No.:
B-3
SampHng Melhod:
SPT
Sheet
2
of
2
Hole Completion:
0 Monitorin Well D Piezomater 00 Abandoned, sealed with bentonlte -" 0
0 .n
" • :, " " Black poorly graded SAND with silt. medium dense, saturated
-sand Is fine to medium grained
-contains large piece of wood
~no recovery
Boring terminated at 31.5 feet below existing grade. Groundwater
table encountered at 12.5 feet during drilling. Boring backfUled with
cuttings and bentonite .
~1-----.L._.J..._-1._......Jl-.J.........J __ L_ ____ r----------------------l
Boring Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
;;I Proj. No. 3000--3 Own. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A7
Subsurtace conditions depleted represent our observatlans at the time and IQC:ation of this explorata,y hole, modified by engineering tests,
analysis and Judgment. Thay are not necessarily rE!p,esentative ot other times and locations. We cannot aoeept responsibility for the uw or
interpre1atlon by others of iofo,mation p,e$ented on th!S log.
... ..
' " '
Boring Log
Projeet Name:
ZelmanPro e Parcels A, B and C
Sheet
1
of
2
Job No.
30()()-3
Logged by:
RAC
Drilling Contactor:
Associated
Ground Surface Ele1JatJon:
±24'
w No.
Blows (%) Ft.
15.7 12
6.6 11
9.9 g
18.8 7
33.3 7
30.0 8
a -
-0 .r:: .a .. . . " iii "
.r:: • .. .... ..
E • IL • 0 "
1
2
3
4
Start Dato:
10 23 97
OrUlfng Method:
HSA
Hole Completlon:
0 Monttorin Woll
C.Ompletlon Date:
10 23 97
D Piezometer
-
" 0 u .a
Surface Conditions:
o, E :, :,,
Ill
Boring No.:
B-4
SampUng Method:
SPT
00 Abandoned, sealed with bentonite
GM All.: Sil GRAVEL, medium dense, moist
ML Brown SILT with fine sand, medium dense, moist
5h-!---1------------==-------------f SM Mottled brown and gray fine SAND, medium dense, moist
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
-37% fines
-becomes loose
SM Gray silty line SAND, loose, saturated·
151--.--1----1----------------------------e SM Black silty fine to medium SAND, loose, saturated
16 -14% fines
17
18
19
:::1-----.L-..L. _ _£1
Boring Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
j;l Proj. No. 3000-3 Own. GLS Date Nov.'97 Cheel<&d RAC Date 11 /3/97 Plate AS
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by engineering tests,
analysis and judgment. They ate not necessarily representative of other times and locations. Wet cannot aoeept 1asponslbillty for the use or
interpretation by others of information presented on this Jog.
...
0-
' ..
' --
"' .. .. ..
M
.J ..
Boring Log
Project Name: I Sheet of
Zelman Pro=rtv Parcels A. B and C 2 2
Job No. I logged by: Start Date:
I
Completion Date: Boring No.:
3000-3 RAC 10/23/97 10/23/97 8-4
Drilling Contaotoc. DrUIJng Method: Sampling Method:
Associated HSA $PT
Ground Surface Sevation: Hole Completion:
±24' 0 Monitorino Well 0 Piezometer [j) Abandoned, sealed wlth bentonile
o_
J: • -w No. :i: 0 ... -(I) 0
Blows .. .,, ..... .. (J .!I
(%) • • ... • ., .
Ft. L :,, C • :, "'
"'(I) .. (I)
I SP-$1 Black poorly graded SAND wtth sUt, medium dense, saturated >->--sand 1s fine to medium grained .26.9 22 ·.
21 >--
.
Boring terminated at 21.5 feet below existing irade. GroundWater
table encountered at 12.5 feet during drilling. oring backfilled with
cuttings and bentonite .
-Earth Consultants Inc.
Boring Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
~~~ .. ~scsentl9t9 Renton, Washington
Pro). No. 3000-3 I 0wn. GLS Oe .. Nov.'97 0,ec:1:ed RAC Date 11/3/97 I Plate A9
Subsurface conditions depicted ,epresent our observations at the time and location of lh,s exploratory hote, modified by engmeenng test$,
analysis and jl.ldgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We cannot accept responsibility for the use or
intetpu1taUon by otheri of information presented on this log.
... ..
' V
' " "
M
" " ..
M
.J .. ...
Test Pit Log
Project Name: I Sht of
Zelman Prot>ertv Parcels ,,. B and C 1
Job No. Logged by: I Oat0: Test Pit No.:
300()-3 DSL 10/20/97 TP-101
Excavation Contaclor: Ground Surlace 8evation:
N.W. Excavatlno
Notes:
u -• Surface Condltions; Grass -0 .c
"' Q w .c .., .... .. u "
(%) 0. E .... e "' . . ,, 0 LL d :::, :,
J; "' Q "' "'
-SM Fili.: Brown silty SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist
20.0 1--
2--
a~ .......
4-
·r--
5 ML Gray sandy SILT, medium dense, moist r--
22.1 5..--.,..,....
71---mottlings from 5'
1--
s~
•r--
9~ .........
10 r--21.6 r--
11 ,__
·-
12 1---
13 -
·-
14 Test pit terminated at 14.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater
encountered during excavation .
-Earth Consultants Inc.
Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
~~~t.,~SClentt!D Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 3000-3 I 0wn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checi<ed RAC Dato 11/3/97 I Plate A10
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the lime and location of this exploratory hole, modifl&d by englneel'ing tests,
analys!s and judgment. Tuey "'9 not necessarily representative of other lim8$ end locations. We cannot acoept respon&ibTHty for the use or
interpretation by ottiers. of Information J)(&Sented on this log.
,... ..
' ..,
' ~
.J
Test Pit Log
Project Name:
Zelman Pro e Parcels A S and C
Job No.
300()..3
Logged by:
DSL
Excavation Contactor:
N.W. Excavatin
Notes:
0
:;:; 0 L w .. Jl .. ....
('4) • e ... L :, 0 <!) ..
5.5
2
• --.. D .. " Jl • " • • :, :, .. ..
SM
Date:
10 20 97
Test Pit No.:
TP-102
Sheet
1
Ground Surface Seva.tion:
Surface Conditions: Grass
FILL: Brown silty SANO with gravel, dense, moist
-plastic
of
1
a 1--1--S~M,..,..i--(2-'-sod-)-----------------------1
Brown silty SAND, medium dense, moist
27.8
70.5
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-sloughing in sides
-fines content decreases
-slow Inflow of groundwater
Test It terminated at 13.5 feet below existing grade. Groundwater table
encountered at 13.0 feet during excavation.
Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
~ Pro]. No. 3000-3 Own. GLS Data Nov.'97 Chocked RAC Do.ta 11 /3/97 Plate A11
Subsurtace conditions depicted reptesent our obseMl.tlons at \he time and location of this exofcnatory hole1 modified by engineeflng tests,
analysis and judgrnent. They are not necessanly reptesentative of other timeia and locatloos. We cannot accept responS1billty for the use or
Interpretation Oy others of information presented on this log.
Test Pit log
Project Name:
Zelman Pro
Job No.
3000-3
E>ccavation Contactor:
N.W. Excavati
Notes:
u -.c +-• a. ... • u.
0
. --.. 0
.. 0 Jl . " . • ::, > "' ..
Date:
10 20 97
Surface Conditions: Grass
Test Pit No.;
TP-103
Sheet
1
Ground &irtace BevatiOfl:
of
1
w :c j
(%) 1 i :. ..
i-----t---t cr1-.--t--;:;S:;,M;-t--;:B:-:ro=w=n:-::;sil;;:ty=s'-"A::;N:;;D~.-:-1o=ose=710=-=med=1=um=-=d:-:e-=n=se:-,-::mo=1st::----------;
" ~ ..
' ~
12.9
32.3
40.9
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
ML Brown SILT, medium dense, moist
SM Gray silty fine SAND, loose to medium dense, moist
-becomes dense
-becomes wet
-6' diameter log
15
161----t----i--:,------c-,-----,-----,----,-"C"CC-=-c-..,.-.,.....-...,.-,.,----,--.,.,-----------l T est pa terminated at 16.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater
encountered during excavation.
~t-------~-~-~~-~-------,,------------------------l
Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington .,t-------"T"-------,--------11-------,--------...-------I l: ProJ. No. 3000-3 Own. GLS Dale Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A12
Subsurla.oo cond[tlons depicted represent our observatlons at the time and loca.Uon of this exploratory hole, modified by engineering te.stt.,
analysis arid jodgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and location$. We cannot accept fes.ponsibClity for the use or
interpfetation by others of Information presented on this log.
" ..
' ..
' ~
~
I')
" ..
" I')
-' a. ...
Test Pit Log
Project Name: I Sheet of
Zelman Pronertv Parcels A B and C 1 1
JobNa. T l..cgged by: I Oale: Test Ptt Noc
3000-3 OSL 10120/97 TP-104
Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface E!evation:
N.W. Excavatlnn
Notes:
0 -• -Surfaee Conditions: Grass -0 ..r:. -., 0 w .t: .a .. a. 0 .a a. e .... e Ill e (%) • :> . ... • :, :> .; ., 0 ., .,
'
'--SM ALI.: Dark brown/gray sHty SAND with gravel, medium dense to dense,
moist
16.6 1---concrete debris
2-
~
~ a-
'--
4~
-
5 ML Brown SILT, medium dense, moist '--34.1 a~
'--
7 '---12' diameter log
'--
a~
'---becomes dense
25.S 9 '--
'--
10 '--
·'--
11 Test pit terminated at 11.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater
encountered during excavation.
-~~~!~!1~-
Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
Proi No. 3000-3 I 0wn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Olecked RAC Date 11/3/97 I Plate A13
Subsurface conclitloni. deiiiO'ted repreaent our oburvauons at toe time and location of this ilXPloratOJY hole, modified by engineering telils,
analysis and judgment. Thay are not necessartty representative of other times aod locations. We cannot aocept respon.slbltity fer the use or
interpretattan by others of information presented cm this log.
" ..
' ~
' ~
Test Pit Log
Project Name:
Zelman Pro e Parcels A B and C
Sheet
1
of
1
Job No.
3000-3
Logged by: Date: Teot Pit No.:
TP-105 DSL
Excavation Contact«:
N.W. Excavatln
Notes:
0 -
w -0 .c: .<I ._ e
(%) • JI
cl;"'
23.4
21.8
11.4
10 20 97
Ground Surface Eleva.Uon:
.c: • .. -"' 0 .. 0 Jl .... e "' e 0 II. a • ::, "' "' ..
Surface Condi1lons: Grass
SM ALI.: Brown silly SAND with gravel, dense, moist
2
3
-4• layer of sod 41--1----4-----'"------------------------........f SM Brown silty SAND, dense, moist
5
6
7
8
g
10
11
-decrease in fines content
12f---+----+-'"""--,-----,----,---,--,,.,,--c-c--~~----c-~----c-----1 Test pit terminated al 12.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater
encountered during excavation.
~1-----'---'---'--'-...J...--'-------~----------------------1
Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
.J ~ Pro1.No. 3000-3 Own. GLS Dato Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A14
Subsurface conditions depicted represen1 our observations at the time and looation of this e)tploratory hole, modHfed by eogtneering tests,
analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily repre&entalive of other times and locatiOffli. We cannot accept responsibility for the use or
interpretetion by others of information p<esented on this log.
" ..
' ...
' ~
.., .. .. ..
I"!
.J .. ..
Test Pit Log
Project Name: I Sheet of
Zelman Prooertv Parcels A BandC 1 1
Job No. I logged by, I Date: Test Pit No.:
3000-3 DSL 10/20/97 TP-106
Excavation Conta.ctcr: Ground Surface Erevation:
N.W. Excavatlna
Notes:
o_ G -Surtace Conditions: Grass -D " -Ill D w
" .0
... .. 0 /J a. e .... 6 Ill & ('I,} • ll . ... • :, ,.
.; "' " "' (I)
a -SM All.: Brown silty SAND with gravel, medium dense. moist
23.7m 1-
21-ML Brown SILT/ sandy SILT, medium dense, moist
·-
a-
-·--becomes gray
4--roots (4'-6" diameter) -
00.4 5-·-s-
·I--
7-
I-
8>---91---decrease in fines +--
21.0 10 I--11 I-
·I-
12 I-
•I-
13
Test pit terminated at 13.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater
encountered during excavation.
-~!!~~!~~·
Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 3000-3 Own . GLS Date Nov. '97 Checi<od RAC Data 11/3/97 I Plate A15
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our obsesvaUons at the time and lor:a:tion of thls exploratory hole, modified by engineering tests,
analysis and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and looatlons. We cannot accept responsibility for the use o,
Interpretation by othM of information presented on this log.
,..
0-,
~ -
Test Pit Log
Project Name:
Zelman Pro e Parcels A B and C
Sheet
1
of
Job No.
3000"'3
Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.:
DSL
Excavation Contactor.
N.W. Excavatin
Notes:
0 -
-0 w .c ...
(%) a. E • :a
.\; Ill
10 20 97 TP-107
Ground Surface Elevation:
.c • -"' 0 .. a. u ii .... e "' E .... • ::, :a C " "'
Surface Conditions: Grass
SM AU.: Brown silty SAND with gravel
21-4---4------------------------------I ML Gray brown mottled SILT, medium dense, moist
31--+-=-+-~--~~~==-~~-,---'7C------------1 SM Brown silty fine SANO, medium dense, moist
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
-sit content decrease
151---l----l----------------,--.,----,..,---------1 Test pit terminated at 15.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater
encountered during excavation.
-·i-----..L.--L--1-..l--1--'-------~---------------------1
..J
Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
~ Proj. No. 3000-3 Own. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A16
Sub.surface conditions depleted represent our observatiOns at the t1me and location of this exploratory ho[e1 modified by engineering tests,
~ and Judgment They are not necessarily representative of othet ttmes and locatfons. We cannot accept responsibility for the use or
inte,pretation by others of informatton pre&ented on this log.
" ..
' ..
' ~
Test Pit Log
Proj<>ct Name:
Zelman Pro
Job No.
3000-3
Excavatfon Contactor:
N.W. Excavatin
Notes:
w
(%)
45.8
27.8
36.1
u -
-0 .c: .0 o. e . :,, .l; .,
• -.c: -., 0 +-.. 0 .0 .. +-e ., e D IL • ::, :,, C " "'
ML
2
Date:
10 20 97
Surfaoe Conditions: Grass
Test Pit No.:
TP-108
Sheet
1
Ground Surface Elevation:
Brown sandy SILT, medium dense, moist
of
1
3 f-+.S"M.+-G,_..-ra'd.ce-s -:-to"""'bccr--:o:-:w=n--=s"Hty=S"AN=o"'.-m'""e-d"'lu"'m-:-d,-eccn,-se:-,-m'""o,.,is""'t,------------1
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
-decrease in fines content
-becomes wet
-caving
-slit lenses, extremely slow in flow
1sf-+---l---cc=--r-,-----.,..-,--,;-,-...,.-c,--,-,,--_.,....._..,....,..----c---,,----,----,--,-----l Test pit terminated at 15.0 feet below existing grade. Groundwater table
encountered at 14.0 feet during excavation.
~ ...... ____ .,_ _ _,_ _ _,__.,__,_ _ _, ______ -ir----------------------l
M .. .. .. .., ~ Earth Consultants Inc. ~ ~~~~~Sdentl$$
Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A. B and C
Renton, Washington .,1-------.--------,--------t-------T""---------,-------1 e; ProJ. No. 300~ Own. GLS Oat• Nov. '97 Checked RAC Dato 11/3/97 Plato A17
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modlfled by &nglneertng tests,
analysis and .it:fdgment. They are not necessarily repr8$8ntative of other times and locations. We cannot accept respoos.ibHity for the use or
lnterprelatJon by others of lntonnation presented on this: log.
" ..
' " ' ~
Test Pit Log
Ptoject Name:
Zelman Pro Parcels A, B and C
Sheet
1
of
1
Job No.
3000-3
Logged by: Oaie: Test Pit No.:
DSL
Excavation Contac:tor:
N.W. Excavatln
Nctes:
0 -w .c 0 .. "' {%) • • L :,, .. (/)
15.3
LL=36 PL•28 33.4
Pl•8
29.2
30.7
.t: .. ....
• IL "
2
3
4
5
• -n. • • "'
(/) 0 u"' (I) • :, :> ..
SM
Ml
10 20 97 TP-109
Ground Surface Seva.tlon:
Surlace Conditions: Brush
ALL: Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose to medium dense, moist
.powdered brick, metal
Gray sandy SILT, loose to medium dense
sl-+=+-=-,------,,--==--::---:----,-,----------l SM Grades to gray silty SAND, medium dense, moist
7
a
g
10
11
12
13
14-
-caving
·becomes wet and mottled
151----+----f-~----------,---------,.,----------1 T est pit terminated at 15.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater
encountered during excavation.
~-1-------'---l..--'--"'-...J.-......JL.....------,----------------------l
Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington ..,,t--------,--------.-------1--------.--------.------1
i: ProJ. No. 3000-3 Dwn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checi<ed RAC Date 11 /3 97 Plate A18
Sub8urface conditions depicted represent our ohservations at the time and location of thla exploratory hote, modified by engineering tests,
ana.1)'$is and Judgment. They are not necessarily ,epresentative of other times and looaUons. We cannot accept responslblUty for 1he use or
interpretation by others of fnforma1lon presented on this tog.
•
I'
"' " ..
" ~
Test Pit Log
Ptojoct Name:
Zelman Pro BandC
Sheet
1
Of
1
Job No,
3000-3
Logoedby: Date: Test Pit No.:
OSL
Excavation Contactoc.
N.W. l::xcavatln
Notes:
" -w :i: 0 ~ .c
(%) -e L :,, ....
31.5
27.9
25.0
10 20 97 TP-110
Ground Surface Elevation:
.c • -
+ "' 0
" " J) ..... • .. • 0 ... • "' :,, 0 "' .,
Surlac<> Condmons: Brush
ML Brown sandy SILT, loose to medium dense, moist
2
41--+-=cc-:-i--=--:-----:::---::::-==---,,----,----;-:-----------i SM Grades to gray sUty $AND, medium dense, moist
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
-decrease in fines content
-becomes wet
-caving
141--+---;-~~-::-:----c---c--;--:-.,.,--:,-:,---:-:---:---...,.-.,,---.,---:-,-----,:--.,...------1 Test pit terminated at 14.0 feet below existing grade. No groundWater
encountered during excavation.
"·t-____ .._ _ _._ _ _._..__. __ ...__ ______ ~---------------------i
.., -Test Pit Log * ~~~}~~!1,.S:· Zelman Property Parcels A, Band C
• :1-------,--------,--------1-------,R_e_n_ton_,_w_a_s_h_in_gt_on_.,... _____ ;
,.. Proj. No. 3000-3 own. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11 /3 /!17 Plate A 19
Subsurface conditions ~picted represent our observations at the time and location of thls explora.tory hole, modlfled by engineer1ng tet:ts,
analysis and judgm~nt. Tuey S<e not neeessadly rept8$8ntaTive of other times and toca.ttons. We cannot acc;:ept responalbility for the use 01
interpretation by othors ot Information pA$8nted on this tog.
,... ..
' .,.
'
... .. .. ..
r,
.J
Q. ...
Test Pit Log
Project Name: I Sheet of
Zelman Prone"'• Parcels A, B and C 1 1
Job No. l Logged by; I O.te: Test Pit No.:
3000--3 DSL 1Q/20/97 TP-111
Exeavation Contactor: Ground Suri.ace 8evation: ·
N.W. Excavatlna
Noles:
0 -,: • -Surface Conditions: Brush w ,: 0 + -.. 0
-" Q. " -" (%) .. • ..... • .. ~ • "' . "-• ::, "' t. .. C .. .. .,
L..-ML Brown sandy SILT, loose to medium dense, moist
19.3 1'---...._
2...._
·'---
31--
~
4'---,,__
36.6
5...._
L--
IS...._
h-
7'---
.L--
8 .........
~
9 L--
L---becomes wet
10 ,__
-caving :r, JJ
L--
11 L..-
·'--
12 ~ -6" diameter log
L--
13 L--
L--
14 Test pit terminated at 14.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater
encountered during excavation.
-~~~~!1~· Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
Pro]. No. 3000-3 I awn • GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 I Plate A20
Subsurface conditions de~eted represent our cbservatioos at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by eng,neermg tests,
analysis and' Judgment. Yhey are not necessarffyrepresentatlve ol other ~mes and locations. We cannot accept n,spon.siblrrty for the use or
interpretation by others of lnfotmatfcn presented on this log.
,.. ..
' ...
' ~
Test Pit log
Project Name:
Zelman Pro Pa,cels A. B and C
Sheet
1
Qf
1
Job No.
3000-3
logged by: Date: Tm Pit No.:
DSL
CXcavation Contactor:
N.W. Excavatln
Notes:
~-w r. 0 .. ,,
('L) O E ~ :> .. "
32.2
33.0
31.4
s:. .. ..... . ...
C
2
3
4
• -.. e • "
-"' 0 0 ,,
"' E :, ,,
"' ML
10 20 97
Swface Condmons: . Blackberry Bushes
TP-112
Ground Surface Elevation:
±
Brown SILT, loose to medium dense, moist
5 1-+""s'"'M:+--:G""ra--=d-es-:-to_g __ r-ay-,sil""ty....,,SAN==o---. ,..loos--e .,..to_m_ed-::-iu_m_d.,.e_ns_e_, m-o..-ls7t ------1
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
-caving
-becomes wet
141--+--+--:..---c--::-:---:--:--:--:--:-:--=-a---:-,--..--.,.-,------,---,-;----.,----,-·----l Test pit terminated at 14.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater
encountered during excavation.
~·1-----.l--....L.._.....,__.,__,__.....1 ______ .....,,__ ___________________ --i
Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A. B and C
Renton, Washington .,i--------.-------,--------1-------,--------,--------i I!; ProJ. No. 3000-3 Own. GLS Date Nov. '97 Cllacked RAC Dote 11 3/97 Plate A21
Subsurface conditions depicted ,epresent our obs1KVations at the time anQ location of this exploratot'y hole, modified by engineering tests,
analysis and judgment. They are not necessas1ly representative of other times and locatioos. We cannot accept responsibility for the use or
interpretaUon by others of information p~sented on 1his log.
... ..
' ..
' ~
~
"' " " " "'
.J .. ...
Test Pit log
Project Name: I S!w,at of
Zelman Pron '1v Parcels A, B and C 1 1
Job No. Logged by: l Date: Test Pit No.:
3000-3 DSL 10120197 TP-113
Excavation Contactor: Ground Surface Beva.Uon:
N.W. Excavatino
Notes:
0 -• -Swfaoe Conditions: Grass :i: 0
,: ., 0 w .. .Q + .. " .a ..... • ., . (%) • E . ... • :, " L :,, 0
0) .. " " .,.._ ML Brown SILT, loose, wet
37.4 P--
Ll=42 PL=30
.,........
Pl=12 2 ,--,.._
3 I-
.. ,........
4 I--mottled
I-
s I-
_,__
6'-,__
39.7 7 >--
I-
8 SM Brown silty SAND, loose to medium dense, wet '·· ,__
; 91--28.5 -caving
I-
10 I-
i·'
I-
11
Test pit terminated at 11.0 feet below existing grade due to caving. No
groundwater encountered during excavatlori .
-~2~!~l':~·
Test Pit Log
2elman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, WashingtOn
Proj. No. 3000-3 Dwn . GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 I Pla1o A22 .. Subsurfaoe oond1t1ons depicted represent our observations at the tirne and location of this e,cpl~ratory hole, modlfled by engineering tests,
analY$is. and judgment They are not neoaasarity tapresentative of other times and locations. We cannot accept responsibllify for the use or
lnterpretauon by othen: of htfonnation presented on this 1og.
... ..
' ..,
' -
Test Pit Log
Project Name:
Zelman Prooertv Parcels A, B and C
Job No.
3000~
Logged by:
Excavation Contacto.-:
N.W. Excavatina
Note~
w
(%)
31.9
DSL
u -
-0 ,: .0 a. • . :,, .\; .,
,: • -... a. a. +-• . ... • 0 .,
·I-
1-·-2e---3>---4-
+---
5,---
6-
·-
7--
8-
·-
-.. 0
" .0 ., • :, :,,
" ML
I Date:
10/20/97
Surfaca Conditions: Blackbeny Bushes
Brown SILT with sand, loose, moist
-becomes sandy
Test Pit No.:
TP-114
Ground Surface 8evation:
ol
1
28.9 ;1111: ,_=_......,S_M-1--~B-ro_w_n_s_llty_S_A_N_D-.-,-00-s-e-to_m_ed_lu_m_d_e_n_se_,_m_ol_st_t_o_w_e_t ______ _.
';; ..
' ..
..
'
33..5
-
11 --
12 --
13 -14 --
15 ---16
ML
-caving
Gray sandy SILT, medium dense, wet
Test prt terminated at 16.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater
encountered during excavation •
-1-----'--..l...-..J..-.!--..J..--"-------,r----------------------1
~ Pro). No. 3000-3 I Own. GLS D•1• Nov. '97
Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 I Pta1• A2s
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the tame and location of this exl)foratoty hole, modified by engineenng tests,
analysis and judgment. Th&y are not necessarily r~ntative of other times and locatlons. We cannot aocept respooslbillty ior the use or
lntecpreta1ion by other& of information presented on this log.
... ..
' " ' -
Test Pit Log
Projoot Name:
Zelman Pro
JobNo.
3000-3
&cavation Contactor:
N.W. Excavatln
Notes:
w
(%)
38.1
PL=36 PL•Zl 38.4
Pl=7
37.3
Zl.4
0 -
-0 ,:; .,.
a. e • :> l;; .,
.r: .. .... ....
C
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
BandC
• .. 0
Cl 0 .tl e .. e • ::, JI ., .,
ML
Date:
10 20 97
Surface Conditions: Blackbeny Bushes
Brown SILT, loose, wet
-becomes mottled
Te$! Pit No.:
TP-115
Sh .. t
1
Ground Surface Bevatton:
or
1
101---+~~+-~-~~~-~---------------~-------I SM Gray silty SAND, loose, wet
11
12
13
14
-caving
1sf---+----f----c=---,---,.-.,---.,..--,---,---,--,----,--.---......,......,..,...---,-----l Test pit terminated at 15.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater
encountered during excavation .
-'1-------'---1--..L......Jl-..J..-.....Jl-------~-----------------------1
..J
Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
e, Pfoj.No. 3000-3 Own. GLS Oat• Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 Plate A24
Subsurface condffions depk:ted repr8680t our observations at the time and location of this explo<atory hole, modified by engineering tests,
analysis and iudgmant. They are not necessarity representative 01 other times and locations. We cannot accept responsibility 10< the use or
1nterpreta1ion by others of inlormadon presented on this log.
1') .. .. ..
M
.J
Test Pit Log
Project Namo: of
Zelman Pro e Parcels A, B and C
Sheel
1
JobNo.
3001).3
Logged by: Date: Test Pit No.:
DSL
Excavation Contactor:
N.W. Excavatln
Notes:
Q
,: 0 w ....
('X,) • e ~ ,. ., "
40.1
33.0
40.1
,::
+ a.+ ...
C
2
3
4
• -.. e • "'
10 20 97 TP-116
Ground Surlace Elevation:
-"' 0 Surface Conditions; Grass
" .0 " e :, ll
" ML Brown SILT, loose, moist
-becomes mottled
5!---1-~-1----------=----.,----------------1 SM Grades to brown silty SAND, loose, wet
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-becomes gray
-caving
-peat seams
131--..+---+---,.,,....----.,----,----,.-~.,----,--,-----,---,..,----~-----1
Test pit terminated at 13.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater
encountered during excavation.
~ Earth Consultants Inc. ~ ~~~·~SOcnl1sts
Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
~ Proj. No. 3000-3 Own. GLS Dato Nov. '97 Oieoked RAC Date 11 /3/97 Plato A25
Subsurface conditions d~lcted represent our observations at the time and location of thrS exploratory hole, modlfled by engineering teslS,
analysts and judgment. Tiley are not necessarily representative of other times and looatlons. We cannot aocept responslblllty for the use or
Interpretation by othafS of lnfonnatron pre:sE11nted. "" this log.
... ..
'\
" '\
~
" " " " "
.J ..
I-
Test Pit Log
Project Name: I Sh-,et of
Zelman Prooertv Parcels A B and C 1 1
Job No. I I.egged by: I Date: TOSI Pit No.:
3000-3 DSL 10/20/97 TP-117
Excavation Contactor; Ground Surface Elevation:
N.W. Excavatino
Notes:
u -s:. • Surface Conditions: Bare w :c 0 .. .. 0 .. .,, .. u .0 a. .. • 0) E (%) • • . ... • ::, :> L :> c· .... "' ..
·-SM ALL: Brown and gray silty SAND, loose, moist
1---appearance similar to car battery terminal
2--debris corrosion ·--brick
3--vibram shoe sole .-
4 ML Gray SILT, loose to medium dense, moist ·-
LL.m:38 ?L•31 39.4 5-
f'!-=7 'C--
a-,,...._,
1--s--strong acidic odor --becomes wet 9 ,__
41.7
.,--
10
Test pit terminated at 10.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater
encountered during excavation .
-~2!!,..U}~~-Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 3000-3 I 0wn . GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Oal9 11/3/97 I Plate A2f3
Subsurhtce <:onditions depicted represent our observations at the tlme and location of this exploratory hole, modified by engmeeriflg t88ts1 anafysls and }udgment. They are not neoessa,Uy representative of other times and locations. We cannot accept responsibility for the use or
Interpretation by othBfs of informa~on presented on this log.
Test Pit Log
Project Name:
Zelman ProM-· Parcels A. 8 and C
Job No. I logged by:
3000-3 DSL
Excavation Contactor:
N.W. Excavatlnn
Notes:
w
(%)
16.9
o_
-0
" .0 D. E . ::, .Ii ..
m
" • .. .. .... e ... • Q (/1
·'--, '--
~
2'--
·'--
3'--
. ·'--
4'--
·'--
5..__
L-
6'--
·'--
1~
'--
8
-~
9
"' 0 <.) Jl ... :, ::,
"' ML
SM
I 0
~
1
~120197
Test Pit No.:
TP-118
Ground Surface Elevation:
Surtace Cond!Uons: Bare, shredded wire pile
Gray sandy sf LT, medium dense, moist
-caving
Gray silty SAND, medium dense, wet
Test pit terminated at 9.0 feet below existing grade. Groundwater
seepage encountered at ao feet during excavation.
Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
ol
1
~ Proj. No. 3000-3 Own. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11 /3/97 I Plate A27
Subsutface conchtkms depicted represent our observations at the time and IQCation of this exploratory hole, mocUfied by engineering tests,
analysis and judgment. Thay al'8 not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We cannot accept responsibility for the use or
Interpretation by others of lnformation presant&d on this log.
,.. ..
' ..
'
I') .. .. ..
I')
.J .. ...
Test Pit Log
Projed Name: I Sheet of
Zelman Pron ,rtv Parcels A. B and C 1 1
Job No. Logged by: I Date: Test Pit No.:
3000-3 DSL 10/20/97 TP-119
Exca\18lion Contactor: Ground Surface Eleva1icn:
N.W. Excavatlnn
Notes:
0 -J; • -Surface Conditions: Bare w :;; 0 ..... "' 0 .. .a u .D
(%) • & ..... " . L :,, S IL • :, :,, ., .. 0 " ..
I
t--ALI..: Rubber upholstery, wires, metal debris
n--
+-
20--
t---minimal natural sou
31--
1---
41--
1--
5 Test pit terminated at 5.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater
encountered during excavation.
-~~~.1~~-Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
Ptoj. No. 3000-3 I ewn. GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 I Plate A28
Subsurface conditions. depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this expl9ratory hole, modified by e~lneenng tests,
analysis and judgment They are not necessarily representative of other times &r!d locations. We cannot accept responslbillty for the UH or
Interpretation by oUlers of information presented on this log.
.... ..
' ..
' " "
M .. .. ..
"' ... .. ...
Test Pit Log
Project Name: I Sheet of
Zelman Pron ,nv Parcels A, B and C 1 1
Job No. I.Dgged by: I Date: Test ?tt Ne.:
3000-3 DSL 10/20/97 TP-120
Excavation Contactor. Ground Surface Elevation:
N.W. Excavatirm
Notes:
0 -.c 0 Surface Conditions: Bare -0 -" 0 w .c .0 ...... u ll
(%) ... a.,_ E ., . . ,. .... ::, ,.
~ " a 0 " ~ "' ~
ALI..: Wood waste, rubber, metal, wires, upholstery
~ 1--~
I
2-r~ ·--minimal natural son s--·-~ 4-. ......_
~ 5 Test pit terminated at 5.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater
encountered during excavation •
-~~~.1~!1~· Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 3000-3 I 0wn . GLS Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC Date 11/3/97 I Plate A29
Subsurface conditions deflicted represent our observations at the time and locatiOn of this: exploratory hole, modified by engmee,ing tests,
anal}'$1S and Judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We cannot accept ,esponslblllty for the use or
interpretatJon by others of infonnation presented on this log.
.... ..
' V
' --
"' .. .. ..
I')
..I .. ,..
Test Pit Log
Project Name! I Sheet of
zeJman Pron nv Parcels A B and C , 1
Job No. Logged by: I Datfl: Test Pit No,:
3000-3 DSL 10/20/97 TP-121
Exeavation Contact.or: Ground Surfaoe Elevation:
N .W. Excavatioo
Notes:
u -L • -Surface Conditions: Grass w -0 .. "' 0 .c Jl .. u Jl
('>I) o. e .... • ., e . " . ... • :, :, i ., C, .. ·"'
ij :s -SM RU.: Muffler, metal debris, brown and gray silty SAND with gravel,
dense, moist
1--
2--coke cans
16.3 ~ -X
3 ,--·plastic .--I ·-·brick debris
Q~ -s-·pipe fitting --""""" 6
e-'-ML Gray SILT, medium dense, moist
U.=38 PL=30 36.8 7f---
Pl~s --
8'----
a-
'--
10 ---caving due to seepage -
11 -..i,ecomes wet and dense 3/l.7 --
12 --
'"' 13 -Test pit terminated at 13.0 feet below existing grade. Groundwater table
encountered at 13.0 feet during excavation .
-~~~U}~~-Test Pit Log
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
ProJ. No. 3000-3 I 0wn. GLS Da16 Nov. '97 Choolced RAC Dalli 11/3/97 l Plate A30
Subsudace conditions dePieted represent our observations at the time and loeation of this exploratory hole, mocftfied by enganeertng tests,
analysi$ and judgment. They are not necessarily representath,o of other times and locations. We cannot accept respoosibltity for the use or
interpretation by others of information presented on this tog.
Graph
BORING NO.
logged By RWB
Date
us cs
sm
Sp
0
0
sm
ml
sp
0
sm
5L10LB6
Soil Description
Silty SAND, brown, loose, moist
SAND, dark gray, medium to fine~ medium
dense, wet.
Silt% increases with depth grading to
sili:y sand
Sandy SILT, light gray, medium dense,
some organic fragments, wet
SAND, dark gray, medium to fine., dense
to very dense, wet
Total Depth= 58.S feet
(B) denotes bentonite pellets
Earth ·l!jl
Consultants Inc. 1
1
ELEV. +14±
Depth (N) w Sample Blows (ft.) Ft. (%)
I 5 22
52
I 3 28
10
I 13
15
-. 19 24 -L
20
I 15
25
I 10 30
30
...L 11
35
I 19
40
T 52 -1...
45
I 52
50
I 31
55
30
BORING LOG
STERNOFF l1ETALS PROPERTY
RENTOll, WASHINGTON
As -Built
Well
Diagram . ... • u •
;,(U. t, . ,...
• <J • .... g• ~
.. CJ: ...
. . . .
.... u·: .• · ... ·-·.o· : ·,·; . ~: ·•··
:-:':"'.;
GEOTIE:CHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Praj. Na. 3000 Date May' 86 Plate A31
BORING NO. _2L...._.....
Graph
Logged By RWB
Date 5/ 10/86
us
cs Soil Description
· .. :;:...ii. ... sm Topsoil, silty SAND, brown
Silty SAND, brown/mottled, medium to
fine, subangular to subrounded, loose,
wet
medium dense
dense
Total depth m 29 feet
(B) denotes bentonite pellets
Earth ~
Consultant:s Inc.~
Depth
(ft.)
s
10
2:
15
20
25
ELEV. +14±
Sample
I
I
I
I
I
(NJ
Blows
Ft.
5
6
4
10
9
35
w
(%)
32
30
22
BORING LOG
STERNOFF METALS PROPERTY
RENTON, WASHINGTON
As -Built
Well
Diogrom .. • •., ~ .. -"' . .. . " . " . ... .. .,. •.a . ., •:, .
"4 .Ghc .-; .....
• •O • ..0 • p.. ..... "' . c., . .
:>
<><
~~~:~:·::~
·::~=/·:=: i~,~
• ••ID•', ·:::~~;
lli~f
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 3000 Date May' 86 Plate A32
Graph
BORING NO. ___,,,3.___
Logged By RWB
Date 5/10/86
us
cs
sm
Soil Description
Silty SAND, bluish-gray, medium dense,
(fill), noticeable odor
Silty SAND, gray, looset wet, some odor
Total depth= 44 feet
(B) denotes bentonite pellets
Earth
Consultants Inc.
Depth
(ft.)
ELEV. _+'-'1~4~+'-----
(N)
Sample· Blows
Ft.
w
(%)
As-Built
Well
Diagram . . . . .
I 17 30 .. "' .... 4 . . .
"'~" 6 s
I 4
10
I 7
15
I 12
20
I 10
25
I 12
30
I 12 17
35
I 47
0
40
BORING LOG
STERXOFF ~!ET,>.LS PROPERTY
RENTON, WASHINGTON
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEEAING & GEOL.OGY Proj. No. 3000 Date May' 86 Plate A33
.
BORING NO. ___.4_
Logged By RWB
Date 5 /l 4 /86
Graph
I 'I!
::,..~J.. --:..
us
cs
ml
Soil Description
Sandy SILT, gray, some clay. Brick
rubble at surface, mottledi low
plasticity
~-=-:~=.:,:; pt PEAT; brown ~ibrous, very so£t 1 wet
~-=ti:ti"S --------.
JJ ··· sm If ... Silty SAND, gray, medium to fine,
medium dense1 wet
•• 11: ·::
Total depth= 49 feet
Earth ~
Depth
(ft.)
-10
' --
-
-20
-
'
f-25
'
' ~30
'
"
-35
~o
ELEV. +14~
Sample
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
(N)
Blows
Ft.
9
4
2
13
15
2
0
16
21
29
w
(%)
32
35
30
16
22
BORING LOG
STERNOFF METALS PROPERTY
RENTON, WASHINGTON
Consultants Inc~
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINE;ER1NG & GEOL.OG'f Proj. No. 3000 I Date May' 86 Plate A34
•
Graph
BORING NO. --""5"---
Logged By RWB
Date 51)4/86
us
cs Soil Description
Total depth -29 feet
fine sand,
Depth
(ft.)
.. .. ..
I
-5 .. 2 .. ..
-10 .. ..
r-15 ,.
.. ..
r-20 ..
c
r-25 c .. ..
ELEV. +14+
Sample
I
I
I
I
I
T
(N)
Blows
Ft .
5
3
2
24
24
25
w
(%)
30
25
22
28
BORING LOG
STERNOFF METALS PROPERTY
RENTON, WASHINGTON ~--· GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 8: G£0LOGY Proj. No. 3000 I Date May' 86 I Plate A35
Depth
Logged By RWB
Date 5/10/86
TEST PIT NO. _.._1 _
Elev. +14:t:
(ft.) USCS Soil Description
0 ....... =...----,----------'----------r--,----,
w
(%)
-lil44'a----FILL -------
N/A FILL, unit consists of shredded non-metalic auto
xx, parts in sand/silt matrix. Unit is gray and wet
-..... =~---------------l '1 ' -"flill~ f.c~:i:~t
sm Silty SAND, bluish gray1 medium to fine, loose,
occaSional clay-silt inc:::lusions
10 -Total depth= 9 feet
10
-
.
.
-
Logged By RWB
Date 5/10/86 TEST PIT NO. 2 Elev. +14/;
N/A FILL, mixture of steel slag mixed with native soilJ
traces of oil
ml/mh Clayey SILT, bluish gray, mottled, soft, medium
plasticity, moist
Total depth
Earth \,
8 feet
TEST PIT LOGS
STERNOFF METALS PROPERTY
RENTON, WASHINGTON
Consultants Inc. '
GEOTECHNICAL ENGlNEERlNG 8: GEOLOGY Proj. No. 3000 Date May' 86 Plate A36
Depth
(h.)
0
-
-
-
5-
-
-
-
-
10 -
-
-
-
-
15
-
-
--
10 -
-
-
-
-
15
TEST PIT NO. 3
Logged By E WB
Date 5/]Q/86
>
jl
uses Soil Description
><}I ~"'._-_::_L_:-:.__:~_:Y_ :'~d, black with some oil
ml SILT, tan with fine sand, loose, non-plastic,
moist
Total depth~ 6 feet
Logged By RWB
TEST PIT NO. 4 Date 5/10/86
ml/
sm
Sandy SILT, brown to tan, loose to medium dense,
some roots
Total depth• 5 feet
Elev. +14+
w
(%)
Elev. +l 4 ~
Earth ~
Consultants Inc~
TEST PIT LOGS
STERNOFF METALS PROPERTY
RENTON, WASHINGTON
Proj. No. 3000 I Date May' 86 GEOTECHNICAL E;N(i1N££FUNG & GE:OLOGY Plate A37
.
TEST PIT NO. 5
Logged By RWll
Date 51'.lOL86 Elev. +14±
Depth w (ft.) uses Soil Description (%)
0 _18& N/A FILL, debris includes ash-slag, brick, c.onc.rete
and scrap iron
------------ml SILT, bluish-gray, slightly mottled, occasional
5-organics, noticeable H2S odor -
-Total depth = 7 feet -
10 -
-
-
-
-
15
logged By RWB
6 TEST PIT NO. Elev. +14±
Date 5llOL~6
0 "i3J I -l· -,U I ml/ Sandy SILT, brown, f ioe, loose, moist
-J Sm
-:.. --------------5-1 ml Clayey SILT, brownish-gray, mottled, soft, moist
t.o wet
-Total depth = 7 feet -
10 -
-
-
-
-
15
Earth •
TEST PIT LOGS
STERNOFF METALS PROPERTY
RENTON, WASHINGTON .
Consultants Inc. I Date GEOTE;CHNICAL ENGJN!:ERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 3000 May'86 Plate A38
APPENDIX B
LABO RA TORY TEST RES UL TS
E-3000-3
EM'th C,onr.ultaot11, Inc.
PERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHT ..I I I I I a. I I I 1
0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N .. .. "' ., " ., m ~ -I I I I ~r-Loo· ..J 1 I I I wo·
..J
.
<n ZOO' zoo· ~~ en i3 ~ 0 00 "' 0 >-EOO" ~c
"' 0 "' 0 rocr ·-m ..J o~ N "' ,., <(:, POO' wo· :,.; 5 2:, u <(;;; 900' 900' "' a: w eoo· w wl~ socr 2 1-1« L<r LO' ;;: wz
:;;'<i:
0 a: zo· zo· 0 >-£0' co· :r: 1,{)' •o·
90' 90·
f-ooz so· ,-,-~ • i:,.· ... : .,. ~ , . 2 <( ... ~y ~y~ 0 0 ... ... ~ "' 1= z OOL a: .. ~ 0 <( 08 z·~ z ~
,_
u: 0: ~ .. . w (.) "' .; 09
£' ;'!§ "' "' ::i OS w Ul ;,,, ...J 0 .. :c 017 ~ t:,·~ t-'O .... z :,.; 0
., .... ,_
'O (/J 0 0£-9·~ z .. 0 ~ :, <( ... :'ii >, s·w ::, "' O' " "' ..
N Q "' ... :c .
I-L ;; w >, "' >, .. 9 :, .... >, .. 2 ... .. "' .... < ,-a .... " ....
& .... "' ., <n OL z 0: .. .. en"' Cl .,
i "' 8 a: >, >, " >-
£ <( .. .. 0 .. ..J 0 ... ... ... .... ~z • u Cl Cl "' "' " ,--<t:-
9 :e: ·~ U) "' w
8 w u I :e: :e: :e: > z U) "' "' "' "' w Bit OL ;;: ::, "' cno "'' ... :,: w "' ;;; .,. > t:; "' "' -<( N N "' ..... ;;; .,. oz a: w-.... CJ l w CJ 0-z o,: "' ~ ti 2 .,, a:
o• <( oz w Z,,L
0 .,,~ .... "' " " I& u c-I I I I z
·-0.. "' "' "' "' 09 ~~ u.
0 ~ 0
"' i! w £ 08 ,--N
OOL U) I '" " w ! ..J > I 9 a, w I I "' "' . ooz 0 0 <l 0 • u
r--?L 00£ -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ m .. " ., "' .. "' N
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
(N.t !:~l~.;,~12~~~!~~,::,} .. ~~.:"' GRAIN SIZE ANALYSES
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
Proj. No.3000-3 I Drwn. GLS I Date Nov. 1 97 Checked RAC I Date 11/4/97 Plate Bl
PERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHT ..J ' I I
11. I I I
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ N I') " "' "' " ., m
l I I --~00' r---' 1,1)()"
-' ' I I
en wo· ioo· ~~ in " ~ 0 "' "' >-too· ~ C too· .,, ~ 0 rl "' ..J o~ "' "' "' <( 1'00. too· :;; g z CJ <(;:; 900" -eoo· "' a:;w eoo· w w ~800' z I-., ur ,o· u.. w
:E
Oc,
ZO" zo· a::
Cl :,.. to· to· J:
t,Q" oo·
90· 90· -IC ooz eo· --a: !, 1· z .. 0 0 • "' ;: 00<: a; w 11. 08. z·~ ;:; a; " y w ~ CJ ~: 09 t· :§ "' OS w I -' Q :,: 01' t·:: t-u i :;; Q I!. 0 0£ ' 9·z z ;\j .. :i: <l ..., .. a·w :, ., "' H oi:
I !::! ;; "' "' w t' >, E< w 9L :i: :. I z ..... -g ..., .... H ~ ,, <l ,-" "' "' cno °' z cc w "' <ii a: (!I " " " 8 a: >-~ < :< >, ~ t D "' a ..J :E 0 .. .. ... <(:,
" " "' (!I "' zZ ,-t"" <(~
9 '• "' "' ..., ..., IJJ
8 w C.l "' "' "' > z "' IJJ .,
""' OL ii: ::, _w
cnz "· _,
w :c ;:; . > t:-:: 0 1!! r-<l rl rl rl .. , oz a: ~= 0 L w Cl z
Ot .,
-0 I~
>t,L a: .,,1 o• < 0 2: rl rl "' 0 "'~ 0 0 0 0 " ·= a: rl rl rl z
09 -~ ' I I 00 "' "' "' I~ £ 08 ,--a:, i!! .. .. ..
.; " OOL "' w
..J >-9 "' w "' " t-ooz 0 0 <I 0 u --ii 00£ -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,. m " "' .. .. M N ~ ~
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT ~-GRAIN SIZE ANALYSES
• I <~~,.~~ •• s.~~:~~!!~~:,.,:,~;,:"' Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 3000-31 Drwn. GLS I Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC I Date 11/4/97 I Plate B2
PERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHT ..I I I I
D.. I I I
0
;! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 N M ~ "' "' " .. '" ~
LOO' r--I I I ,__
..I l.00' ..I I I I
z:oo· e~ :!2 wa
"' " -.... <r "' >-EOO' _;; . &oa "" .... 0 ...J o-1100· :;; g "' .... "' <( :; voo·
z~ (.)
900" "' <( -900'
a:,::, 800" w
800' 2 W-10· u:: t:;; ,a
:a: ;l'
0" zo· a: zo·
Cl >-to· to·
::i: i,o· •o·
90· 90' ,_ .. :--,_ ooz so·
0: '. z
"' 0
0 "' i'.= ~ oo, a: w "-OB z·~ z ii: ... ~ ;;: "' w (.) :; 09 s· ;!: "' w OS ..I 0 :c Ot, : ~· ::::! t-
~ :;; 0 0
OE. 9' ~ z ~ ~ ~ :. "' Ul e·w =, " .. oz L ~ 0 >, :c .. w "" ., "' 9C "' :; .., .... ~ ~ u 2 .... .....
Cll .. .... ~ "' I-Cll CJ)O OL z a: w ~ " <i5 0: Cl "' 2 :,, 0: ll "' >-t "' ... 0 ...J :; " "' "' Cl
<(~ ... --
~L..
..
9 "' w •• (.) ~ :,;: ~ 8 w "' "' r;; "' OL ;', ::, % u.
"' ..., "' w :,::
% .... ~ :;::-. "' 0
!' oz w,!, .... "' 'It 0: "' '" " 0 L
Ot " -0 z '"' 0: o• "' oz "' "' "' w .,,,
0 0 0 0 .. .. -c., c-.... .... .... 0 z ·-D.. I I I u. 09 --0 ~ t "' 0. 0 .. I-.... CD ~ E< E< w t OB I-
N OOL "' I I ;;; • w
..I >-I 9 a, w I CD " ooz 0 0 <l 0 (.)
1-L. ZL OOt ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ;! "' .. " <O ., ., M N -
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
tfl! ' i1!l1 '
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSES
(~-I ,~:!,~,~~12:.::.'.!!~,~:,},~i~,;,,, Zelman J?roperty Parcels A, 8 and C
Renton, Washington
Proj. No.3000-31 Drwn. GLS I Date Nov.1 97 Checked RAC I Date ll/4/97 I Plate B3
.
I SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
"O I Sl7E r F OPENINt'~ 1ru LNr"fiS:S IN B"'R Of MESM PE"" INCH US ~TANnAR .... AIN E 'MM ~.
I
00 o.., " "'
., <D ~ §. s 8
N Ji;'~r~§~.f 0 ~ !<I 0 0 00 N q~ ~ z ~ "' v M ;,}! r I') ~ IOICI ., l2 ~q q C! q q
? 100 ..... -. 0
w
.... ...
0
... ... . .
0
....
0 90 10
I w
r-i {Tl
0 a o., -C 80
20
~ I ::\. ~ m -c
? ~ ::, :JJ m
! () ~ 70
30 :JJ
2
n
G) Jo -I
m
t" I' ::i
2
ti) :n 60 .__ 40 -I
~ (/J -IE 2 n
m 0 ....... :U 50 L..,_
)>
" § 50
0 ~.
:JJ .. ro en
~ ' ...... -< m .. ~ Cf> ~ 00
:JJ
z r -
GO
0 1 :J m ro
< -< l () G"l -t . ::C 30 ' ~
,!> 70
"
, -I m
G"l
() :r 20 "'
80 J:
-I
n "' 7C
"' .. -
C.
,...
~ 10 90
!:! " (1 "' ' ' ' ' l" ... Cl 0
100
.. 0 ;II 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 " .. .. "' ... -m"' .. "l N r 0, W ¢ M g r-co 10 ~ ~ ~ ---:, "' 0 0 " .. " M N r '~ 0 q 0 0 0 O 0
rt .. )> "' ... r GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS . ~ C! q
0 0 ... 2 .. :, rr
COBBLES : COARSE I FINE I COARSE I MEDIUM I FINE I
~ -'< FINES .. Cl) GRAVEL I SAND I
~ "' N
I-' I);~ m
I-'
" :r 0 )> Boring or DEPTH Moisture .. ~-" z KEY uses DESCRIPTION LL PL
" " ,... )> Test Pit No. /ft. I Content(%)
,!> "' "' ~ ..., g:,, "' ---::, -rn "O "' o--TP-109 l SM Brown silty SAND with gravel 15.3 ;; ----.. "' " 6---C. TP-111 l ML Brown sandy SlLT 19.3 ----
"' (1 ... O···· ....... TP-112 l ML Brown SlLT 32.2 ----
'
I
PERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHT _, I I
0.. I I
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 N ... .. "' "' ~ "' "' ~
1..00· ........-I I ~-_,
LOO" ..J I I
Cl) zoo· f~ zoo·
Cl) :, ~ "' "' >-wo· ,; :;
...J wo· o~ ..... "' ooo· le g (') ..... ~i j,()Q'
u
<(,; 900' eoo· "' 0: w 800· w
u.t !::! 800" z
I-~ LO' LO' ;;:
~-
0
0: zo· zo·
Cl >-£0' £0'
J: 170' .a·
90' 90'
~I-ooz 80'
,__
0 ,, L. 2 a: .. 0 0 "' i= z OOL 0: w ... <( OB i·~ ;,; 0: w ~ 0 ,~. 09 .-~ "' rn; w 1l " _, 0
:t 01' ··= I-"' ~ le 0 "' -0£ g·z z ;:: ~ a: ~ :, <( ... 1::' e·w :, "' .... H
:t m:
I-' ~ a 3' "' "' "' w
~ 9L :i; ~ :>, z "' ;;: I-H ~ C/llt "' OL z 0: w "' -~ a Cl "' C Cl) "' a: " :>, >-II) £ <( 2 "' ...J :, 0 ..
<( z • u "' " ~~ _,_
•,, 9 "' w a w 0 ..., 'il > ;,; "' "' w % OL :::,
ti; :t ~
"'• .J :c ~ w -> t-:: ..... .....
-<( ;,; .,. O< a: b~
I~ L w " 0£ "' -0 12 ~,L a: ... "' "i,L o, <( oz ..... ..... w 0 ..... ..... .. "'~ 0 u c·-I I z ·-0.. ~ "' OS -~ 0 ~ ...
,_ I-a, m
I!' C 08 I-
"11 17 001 "' I l w _, >-I 9 "' 111 I "' "' ~ Oil<! 0 0 <J u ..... ~ ZL 00£ .__
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e 0 e "' .. ~ "' "' q "' N
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
-,;~~~~.s~l2:!:1:~~'~: .. !.,,~:,~,,
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSES
Zelman Property Parcels A, B and C
Renton, Washington
Proj. No. 3000-3 J Drwn. GLS I Date Nov. '97 Checked RAC I Date 11/4/97 I Plate BS
100
80
X 60 w V 0
?; ,,
>-@ V I--g40 /.._A-Line
~ /
V
@ I V
20 ,,
V ~ V
,1
CL-ML / ~ I/ I
0 20 40 60 80 100
LIQUID LIMIT
Natural
Key Boring/ Depth Soil Clossificotion uses LL. P.L. P. I. Water lest Pit (ft) Content
• B-1 7.5 Gray SILT ML 35 29 6 34. 7
• B-2 10 Gray SILT ML 37 31 6 37.5
Atterberg Limits Test Data
-!;<1~~~~1!~~~~-Zelman Property Parcels A, Band C
Renton, Washington
Proj. No.3000-31 Date Nov. '97 I Plate B6
100
80
--·--
X 60 . Lu V 0 ~ ,,.
>-@ V I-
0
/.._A-Line i= 40
U) /,,,. .,:
_J a.
@ V
20 ,,.
V @1I0
/ • -~ CL-ML / -rQL) I/ -
0 20 40 60 80 100
LIQUID LIMIT
Boring/ Depth N<rtural
Key Soil Classification uses LL. P.L. P.L Water lest Pit (ft) Content
• TP-109 4 Gray SILT ML 36 28 8 37.1
• TP-113 1 Brown SILT ML 42 30 12 42.2
• TP-1.15 5 Bro'lttn SILT ML 36 29 7 35.4
0 TP-117 5 Gray SILT ML 38 31 7 39.5
6 TP-121. 7 Gray SILT ML 38 30 8 38.2
Atterberg Limits Test Doto
-~~~~~}~:!!:.~-Zelman Property Parcels A, Band C
Renton, Washington
Proj. No.3000-3r Date Nov. '97 I Plate 87
_A_ Copies
DISTRIBUTION
E-3000-3
Zelman Development Company
707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 3036
Los Angeles, California 90017
Attention: Sanford Kopelow
Earth Can1,ult-enw, Inc.