My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
204 E MAGNOLIA AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import
>
Address Records
>
E MAGNOLIA AVE
>
204
>
204 E MAGNOLIA AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/17/2017 2:41:17 PM
Creation date
2/17/2017 2:41:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Address Document
Street Name
E MAGNOLIA AVE
Street Number
204
Imported From Microfiche
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
76
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
,: �"�'" o+t;.e <br /> ..� - , �C�,sPP'ia-?i���Ys�,��.��?s:Y`'�'w�;.� 3�^.;,:i. �s�; ^^� � .. .. .��' . . <br /> . ., ... � . x ,%C'TF�ygo,�'•* _. y_ <br /> Allestad <br /> June 18, 1990 <br /> EVALUATION AND RECO?fliIItDATIONS <br /> ��eneral Site Evaluation <br /> aased on review of published geologic mapping and the soils <br /> observed on the site it appears that the site lies near a <br /> contact between glacial till deposits and advance g.lacial <br /> outwash deposits. These soils were deposited and <br /> consolidated during the Vashon glaciat:.on, the last glacial <br /> advance into the Puget Sound area appi•oximately 13,500 to <br /> 15,000 years ago. The natural soils encountered in our <br /> onsite explorations consisted of up to about 4.5 feet of <br /> medium dense weathered soils unc?=rlain by very dense less <br /> weathered till-like soils. <br /> The site is bordered by a steep slope on the east side. We <br /> did not observe any ground cracks or other indications of <br /> gross instability but considering the steepness of the <br /> slope, the granular nature of the subsoils and the presence <br /> of fill soils, the potential for shallow slope failure is <br /> considered to be high for the east slope in its existing <br /> condition. As with any hillside development the owner must <br /> be willing to accept some risk of possible future slope <br /> movement which could result in damage to improvements on the <br /> site or to neighboring properties. However a braced <br /> basement retaining wall will tend to buttres the slope and <br /> effectively reduce the unsupported slope height in the <br /> ; vicinty of the proposed residence. It is our opinion that <br /> no special toe-of-slope setback is required for the proposed <br /> ' structure location assuming that a basement retaining <br /> wall(s) designed and constructed in accordance with our <br /> recommendations is provided to support the slope. Existing <br /> slopes adjacent to the structure should also be buttresed to <br /> flatten them to gradients of 2:1 or flatte;:. <br /> Results of our explorations and observations of the site <br /> indicate that most of the building site is underlain by a <br /> varying thickness of existing fill containing organics and <br /> debris. In our opinion these fill soils are not suitable <br /> for structural support. Structural loads should be <br /> transferred through the fill and medium dense natural soils <br /> • to the dense/hard natural soils. This can be accomplished <br /> by simply deepening th�: footings or by a monolith of lean <br /> mix concrete where fills are deep. <br /> The following subsections present our recommendations for <br /> desiqn of foundations, retaining walls, site qrading, site <br /> drainage and erosion control. Also included are <br /> recommendations for plan review and obseraations and testing <br /> during construction. <br /> Page No. 4 <br /> Projact No. 90-122-01 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.