My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4704 HARBOR LN 2018-01-02 MF Import
>
Address Records
>
HARBOR LN
>
4704
>
4704 HARBOR LN 2018-01-02 MF Import
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/10/2022 3:06:50 PM
Creation date
2/20/2017 10:23:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Address Document
Street Name
HARBOR LN
Street Number
4704
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.
/
460
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
f <br />Engineers/Consultants <br />lob# 4057 <br />180ct09 <br />To: Chris & Todd Chase / Everett, WA <br />From: Frank Pita, PE / Geotechnical & Civil Engineer <br />RE: Engineering Comments / Concerns After Reviewing the Four Sheet Retaining <br />Wall Design by CG Engineering (dated 24Sep09 /.lob#09117.10) for the Anderson's <br />at 4704 Harbor Lane, Everett. WA / Everett Plan Check No. 80910-019 <br />I will comment orf caul: chec! in order and summarize at the end. <br />Sheet S0.1 <br />1 In the Scope of Work section; the designer states that his work will '...stabilize <br />the existing slope.' I disagree with this statement. This soldier pile wall will <br />ONLY prevent the top few feet of the hillside from eroding or failing but in will <br />NOT make the hillside stable. Much more work is needed to do that. The scope <br />of work should be rc-written to he more specific to what they are actually doing. <br />2 On the Site Plan there are several un-answered issues: <br />o The surveyed pile of yard waste; is it to remain? Is it being placed there <br />illegally in that it is dumping of material that is on the side slope of creek <br />and could easily create a landslide onto adjacent property? <br />o The north end of the wall is not detailed in contours of existing or new to <br />show how the wall is tied into the existing ground. <br />o No elevations are given for the property of the southeast side of the house. <br />Sheet S1.1 <br />First column; <br />I Code: designer refers to IBC, but does not the City of Everett use WSDOT specs <br />as there standard design code? <br />2 Design Loads.... 31d paragraph: indicates that '...lessor of 2 pile diameters...' <br />the question is did the .lesign use the pile steel or the diameter of the drilled hole? <br />3 Allowable grout to soil adhesion.... Where did value come from? <br />Second column; <br />I Erosion...: this designer refers to the geotech report for specifications but the <br />geotech report is NOT complete and refers to the 'wetland' Finn, which is not <br />complete either. Therefore, the conclusion has to be that Erosion and <br />Sedimentation is NOT being control properly. The recommendation to carry the <br />water to the bottom of the ravine still requires an agreement with the adjacent <br />property owner which is not discussed. <br />2 Temporary Shoring: if this is needed, there must be a submittal by the contractor <br />for review. JA recommends that an access plan by the contractor be submitted for <br />review. <br />3 Soldier Pile Grout: 1 ha-c no problem with the strength of the concrete or CDF, <br />but there is NO discussion of time. Lean concrete takes time to achieve its <br />Z/16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.